•YJkLH"¥lMWHI&SflTY- • IUlIBIB^Br •

Gift of
Samuel H, Chittenden
1908

LECTURES ON THEOLOGY.

BY THE LATE

REV. JOHN DICK, D.D.
MINISTER OF THE UNITED ASSOCIATE CONGREGATION, GREYFRIARS,
GLASGOW; AND PROFESSOR OF THEOLOGY TO THE
UNITED SESSION CHURCH.

PUBLISHED UNDER THE SUPERINTENDENCE OF HIS SON

A PREFACE, MEMOIR, &c.

BY THE AMERICAN EDITOR.

IN TWO VOLUMES.
VOL. II.

PHILADELPHIA:
W. G. W A R D L E.
144 CHESTNUT STREET.
1844.

Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1836, by
Edward C. Biddle,
in the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the Eastern District of Pennsylvanlu.

\i)^

STEREOTYPED BY L. JOHNSON.
PRINTED BY T. K. &. P. O. COLLINS, PHILADELPHIA.

CONTENTS

OF THE SECOND VOLUME.

lecture Page
LII. The Messiah  11
LHI. The Person of Christ, .  15
LIV. The Prophetical Office of Christ,  26
LV. The same subject,  . 36
LVI. The Priestly Office of Christ,  .46
LVII.  ¦  His Sacrifice, .... 56
LVIII.  The same subject, ... 68
LIX.  His Intercession, ... 80
LX. Christ's State of Humiliation,  91
LXI. Christ's State of Exaltation : His Resurrection, . . . 100
LXII.  His Ascension to Heaven : His Seat
in Heaven  Ill
LXm.  His Judging the World, . . 121
LXTV. The Kingdom of Christ  131
LXV. The Application of Redemption: Effectual Calling, . . 144
LXVI.  ¦ — Effectual Calling: Regeneration, 154
LXVII.  ¦ Union to Christ, ... 164
LXVIII.  Faith,  173
LXIX. The Privileges of Believers : Justification, .... 184
LXX.  ¦ The same subject  194
LXXI.  The same subject, . . . 205
LXXII.  ¦ The same subject, .... 215
LXXIII.  ;  Adoption, 224
LXXIV.  Sanctification, . . . .233
LXXV.  The same subject, . . . 242
LXXVI. On Good Works,  252
LXXVII. On Conscience,  262
LXXVni.  Peace of Conscience : Spiritual Joy, . . . 272
LXXIX. The Perseverance ofthe Saints,  282
LXXX. The Death of the Saints, and its Consequences, .... 292
LXXXI. The same subject  301
LXXXII. The Resurrection of the Dead  311
LXXXin. The Final State of the Righteous,  321
iii

iv CONTENTS.
1ECTT7RE Page
LXXXIV. The External Means of Grace : The Word of God, . . -332
LXXXV.  The same subject, ... 342
LXXXV1.  The Sacraments, . . .352
LXXXVII.  The same subject, ... 362
LXXXVIII.  The Sacrament of Baptism, . 372
LXXXIX.  The same subject, ... 382
XC.  The Sacrament of the Lord's Supper, 392
XCI. ¦  The same subject, ... 403
XCI1.  The same subject, . . . 413
XCIII.  Prayer,  423
XCIV.  The same subject, . . .434
XCV.  The same subject, ... 444
XCVI. The Church,  454
XC VII. The Government of the Church : Popish form ; Episcopacy, . 463
XCVIII.  Episcopacy; Independency and
Presbytery,  472
XCIX. •  Independency and Presbytery, 483
C.  Office-bearers  492
CI.  :  Church Power, ... 502
Cn. The Law of God : The Decalogue,  513
CIII.  The First, Second, and Third Commandments, 523
CIV.  The Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Commandments, 533
CV.  The Seventh, Eighth, and Ninth Command-
ments; Conclusion,  544
Appendix,  555
Index,  559

LECTURES ON THEOLOGY.

LECTURE LII.
ON THE MESSIAH.

Predictions of the Messiah prior to the Appearance of Christ — Their Import — Evidence that
Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah.
We have seen that Jesus Christ is the Surety and Mediator of the New
Covenant ; and, in speaking of him in these characters, it was impossible to
avoid references to the mysterious constitution of his person. This, however,
is a subject so important, as to be entitled to distinct consideration, both be
cause it is the foundation upon which the whole scheme of redemption de
pends, and because some men of corrupt minds have, in all ages, and in various
forms, exerted themselves to overthrow it. But, before we enter upon it, it
will be proper to attend to the notices which were given of the Saviour to
the church prior to his manifestation in the flesh, and then to show that Jesus
of Nazareth is the promised Messiah.
As God was not pleased to send his Son into the world immediately after
the fall of our first parents, but to defer his mission till the fulness of time, it
seemed good to his wisdom to give before-hand such information respecting
him, as would support the faith and hope of his people, and enable them to
know him when he should actually appear. It could not have been supposed
that, in the ancient Scriptures, which record the divine dispensations to the
descendants of the patriarchs, and the other nations of the world, there would
be no mention of an event more wonderful and interesting than the rise and
fall of kingdoms and empires. We find, accordingly, that, as he is brought
forward to view almost at the commencement of the sacred volume of the
Jews, so it closes with a renewed prediction of his approach, and a delight
ful picture of the happiness which awaited our race, when "the Sun of
righteousness should- arise upon them with healing in his wings."*
The first notice of the Saviour was given on the afternoon of the day on which
our first parents transgressed, and before they were expelled from paradise.
It was included in the sentence pronounced upon their seducer ; and while it
foretold his destruction, implied a promise of their deliverance from his
power. " I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy
seed and her seed ; it shall bruise thy head and thou shalt bruise his heel."t
It is plain, that the person here announced was to be the adversary and the
conqueror of the serpent, or the devil, who, by the instrumentality of that
animal, successfully tempted our first parents, and that he was to be a par
taker of their nature. It would be absurd to consider the passage as relating
to the enmity which literally subsists between the serpentine race and ours ;
* Mai. iv. 2. j- Gen. iii. 15.
5 a2

6 THE MESSIAH.
nor is there any reason to understand it generally of a hostility which
would afterwards arise between them and the devil, with whom they had
now joined in a confederacy against God. The seed of the woman denotes
an individual, namely, our Lord Jesus Christ, to whom this designation is
peculiarly applicable, because he has descended from her in a different man
ner from all her other posterity. In reference to him, an equivalent expres
sion is used, when it is said, that, "In the fulness of the time, God sent
forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law.'"5 To be made of a
woman, and to be the seed of the woman, evidently signify the same thing ;
and hence, we may conclude this to be the import of the prediction, that the
future antagonist of the serpent would be conceived and born in a miraculous
manner. He is not called the seed of the man, although he was as much a
descendant of Adam as of Eve, and his genealogy is traced up to him in the
third chapter of Luke, because he was not derived from him in the ordinary
way. He is the seed of the woman in an exclusive sense, because his mother
was a virgin.
The next notice of the Messiah was given to Abraham, when God said to
him, " In thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed."t It may be
supposed that this promise may be understood in a lower sense, as foretelling
the benefit which mankind would derive from his posterity, who were destined
to be the original depositories of divine revelation, and from whom it was to
be afterwards diffused over the various regions of the earth. But an apostle
has shown us that it should be applied principally or solely to the Messiah.
" Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And
to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ."! By
this second notice, the people of God obtained some new information. It not
only repeated what was already known, that the Messiah would be a man, a
partaker of the same nature with the patriarch, but it farther taught, that he
should be a Jew ; because it was expressly said, that " in Isaac this seed
should be called," or that he should spring from Abraham, not by Ishmael,
but by Isaac. The nation was specified, in which he should appear ; and as
they were thus excited to look for him, his relation to them was the ground on
which that system of typical services was established, which was afterwards
introduced by the ministry of Moses.
The next prediction to which I shall direct your attention, is contained in the
following words : " The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver
from between his feet, until Shiloh come ; and unto him shall the gathering of
the people be."§ Although it is agreed among Christians, that the Messiah
is the person to whom this prophecy refers, yet there is a difference of opinion
with, respect to the import of the name or title by which he is described. Some
suppose that n'w, Schiloh, is derived from rbv, which signifies to send, the
final n, heth, being changed into n, he, and, consequently, that rbiv, signifies
He that is sent. In the Vulgate, it is translated Qui mittendus est, he who
is to be sent. Our Saviour is elsewhere termed the angel or messenger of
Jehovah, and often speaks of his mission in the New Testament : " Say ye
of him whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blas-
phemest ; because I said, I am the Son of God ?"|| Others are of opinion,
that it is a derivative of rhw, which signifies to be quiet or tranquil ; and that
i^», Schiloh, is the peaceable one, or the giver of peace ; a character which
is, with the greatest propriety, given to our Saviour, on account not only of the
gentle virtues by which he was distinguished, but of the peace which he has
happily effected between God and man by?his mediation. It may be added,
that, as his religion inculcates brotherly love, so it actually creates it in the
* Gal. iv 4. f Gen. xxii. 18. i Gal. iii. 16. § (Jen. xlix. 10. | John x. 36.

THE MESSIAH. 7
hearts of his genuine disciples. Under its influence, in the figurative language
of prophecy, " The wolf dwells with the lamb, and the leopard lies«down with
the kid; and the calf, and the young lion, and the fatling together."* But,
whatever is the true import of the title, as there is no doubt respecting the '
person to whom it belongs, the words now under consideration convey this
additional information with regard to the Messiah, that he was to arise from
the tribe of Judah, which should subsist as a distinct political body, till the
time of his appearance. This prophecy will again come under review, in the
subsequent part of the lecture.
I proceed to lay before you another passage in which the family is pointed
out, which should have the honour of claiming him as one of its members.
" The Lord hath sworn in truth unto David ; he will not turn from it : Of the
fruit of thy body will I set upon thy throne."! I acknowledge, that there is
nothing in these words themselves which would justify us in applying them
to the Messiah, and that, without bringing the light of other partsftf Scripture
to bear upon them, they might be considered merely as a promise, that the
royal authority, with which David had been invested, should descend to his
children in a long succession. But, in the mind of a person who is acquainted
with the Scripture, no doubt will remain that the fruit of David's body is that
illustrious descendant, whom the Jews welcomed when he entered Jerusalem
with this acclamation, " Hosanna to the Son of David : Blessed is he that
cometh in the name of the Lord."J There is- a manifest allusion to the pas
sage in the words of the angel who announced the birth of our Saviour to his
mother. " He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest ; and
the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David : And he
shall reign over the house of David for ever ; and of his kingdom there shall
be no end."§ I may add the prediction of Isaiah., " Of the increase of his
government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and
upon his kingdom, to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with
justice from henceforth even for ever."|| The seventy-second Psalm begins
with a prayer of David for himself and his son ; but Solomon, if he thought
of him at all, immediately vanishes from his mind, and he goes on to describe,
in the sublimest strains, the future glories of the Messiah's reign. This is
the king to whose manifestation the prophecies directed the attention of the
Jews, and under whose administration they were taught to expect that* sub
stantial and unfading felicity, of which earthly things were only a shadow.
And as he was the Son of David by way of eminence, and was appointed to
sit upon his throne, he sometimes receives in prophecy the name of that
monarch, of whom he is the antitype. " Afterward shall the children of Israel
return, and seek the Lord their God, and David their king ; and shall fear the
Lord and his goodness in the latter days. "If
Having seen that, in his human nature, the Messiah was to be a member of
the family of David, we shall find, in the following prophecy, something still
more specific. " Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall
call his name Immanuel."** The Messiah would be a miraculous child, born
of one of the daughters of David, according to a peculiar law. The miracle
consisted, not in the exertion of extraordinary power, but in the manner of
his conception ; for the difference between a miracle and a common event is,
that in the latter the hand of God is concealed from superficial observers by
the means which it employs, whereas, in the former it is openly revealed.
The birth of every child is effected by the same power which formed the 'body
of our Saviour in the womb of the Virgin Mary ; but in the latter case, it strikes
* Is. xi. 6. f Ps- oxxxii. 11. * Matt. xxi. 9. § Luke i. 32, 33.
| Is. ix. 7. if Hos. iii. 5. ** Is. vii. 14.

8 THE MESSIAH.
us more, because it is unaccompanied with the usual circumstances. Omnipo
tence appeals unveiled, and admiration is excited by the naked display of it.
It will be proper to inquire into the reason of' this miracle ; and we feel
desirous to know how it came to pass, that the human nature of our Saviour
was so different from that of all other men, in its perfect exemption from moral
impurity. The common opinion is, that its holiness was the consequence of
his being born of a virgin ; and it is explained in the following manner. Let
us look back to the introduction of sin, and attend to the way in which it is
propagated. In consequence of the federal relation between Adam and his
posterity, his sin is chargeable upon them, and is transmitted to them as they
successively come into existence. The nature which they derive from him is
corrupt. They are at once guilty and polluted. From this law of transmission
there has been no exception since the beginning of the world. The individuals
of the human race have been distinguished by important differences in their
talents, theh*dispositions, and their actions ; but all have been tainted with sin,
because they have all borne the same relation to that one man, with whom
they were1 appointed to stand or fall. He was the representative of his natural
posterity, or of all who should descend from him in consequence of the blessing
pronounced upon the man and the woman : " Be fruitful and multiply, and re
plenish the earth." In the representation of Adam every person was included,
who was to be born according to the law of generation then established. Had
our blessed Lord been born according to the same law, he also would have
partaken of the general corruption ; and being himself a sinner, would have
been disqualified to be the Saviour of sinners. Now, the design of his mira
culous conception w^s, to secure the innocence of his human nature, that it
might be fitted for the high honour of union to his divine person, and for the
holy services which were to be performed for the salvation of men. He was
born of a virgin, that he might be an immaculate child. He was derived from
Adam in a new channel, by which depravity could not be transmitted.
But it is a more satisfactory view of the subject to consider, that the miracu
lous birth of our Saviour was the consequence of a promise made after Adam
had ceased to be a federal head, the promise, namely, respecting " the seed
of the woman." He was not related to Adam while he continued the re
presentative of his descendants, and was not, therefore, subject to the effects
of his fall. His relation to him, if I may speak so, was incidental and con
ditional, depending upon the failure of Adam to fulfil the terms of the covenant.
Christ was one added to the human race, after it had been brought into new
circumstances, and he was not therefore bound by the law under which it was
originally placed. It was not by an act of power in his miraculous conception,
but by an act of justice, that he was exempted from the common depravity.
He had no connexion with its cause ; he was not more included in the repre
sentation of Adam than the angels of heaven ; he would not have been born
at all, if the covenant had not been broken ; and that it is not our simple
descent from Adam, which is the reason of the corruption of our nature, but
our relation to him as our federal head, is evident from this consideration, that
only his first sin is imputed to us, and all his subsequent sins were charged
upon himself alone.
This I consider as the true account of the purity of the human nature of
our Saviour. It was not owing simply to his being born of a virgin, although
this is commonly assigned as the cause, but to his not being included in the
representation of Adam. But all were included in it who were derived from
him by the ordinary mode of continuing the species; and hence it was
necessary that, in order to distinguish him, our Lord, who never was in Adam
as a federal head, should descend from him in a miraculous manner.
We have seen that the notices of the Messiah in his human character, be

THE MESSIAH. g
came clearer and more particular in every stage ; but the ancient church was
favoured with still more ample information. His divinity was the subject of
revelation, as well as his humanity, in a variety of passages. I shall men
tion, in the first place, the prophecy which we have just now considered, and
in which, after it is foretold that he should be born of a virgin, it is added that
his name should be called Immanuel. This is a compound Hebrew word,
which signifies " God' with us." It is not meant that he should actually bear
this name, but that he should be what it imports. Accordingly, he never was
called Immanuel by any evangelist or apostle ; but he truly was God in our
nature, manifested for our salvation. His divinity was also declared in the
following words : " Unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given ; and the
government shall be upon his shoulder : and his name shall be called Won
derful, Counsellor, the Mighty God, the Everlasting Father, the Prince of
Peace."* He is a child, and the mighty God ; born, yet possessed of eternal
existence. To the same purpose is this other prediction ; " Behold, the days
come, saith the Lord, that I will raise unto David a righteous branch, and a
King shall reign and prosper, and shall execute justice and judgment in the
earth. In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely ; and
this is the name whereby he shall be called, The Lord our righteousness. "t
The original word is Jehovah, which is the incommunicable name, and, be
ing applied to our Saviour, intimates that he is the living, self-existent one.
Let it be observed that, while this passage asserts his divinity, it points out
the inestimable benefit which would accrue to mankind from his manifestation
in their nature, as through him they should obtain the blessing of justification,
and by his obedience many should be made righteous.
It would be tedious to refer to all the notices of the Messiah which are
contained in the Old Testament. As I have laid before you predictions and
declarations respecting his person, so I might proceed to collect testimonies to
the whole work which he would perform, to his humiliation, his sufferings,
his death, his resurrection, his ascension, his power, the progress and final
triumph of his religion. But, passing these, I observe, that an expectation
was excited of a great deliverer, who would appear in a future age to accom
plish the redemption of the people of God. He was known by various titles,
as the Redeemer, the Messenger of the Lord of Hosts, He that should come,
and the Messiah. This last title signifies the anointed one, as Christ does in
Greek ; and was given to him to denote his divine appointment to his office,
and his qualifications for it. In ancient times, the pouring of oil upon them
was a rite used in the consecration of kings, priests, and prophets. In allu
sion to it he is called the Messiah, because he was set apart to the office of
Mediator by God himself, and was endowed with all the gifts and graces
which were necessary to the performance of its duties. Hence he is said to
have been anointed with the Holy Ghost, whom God gave not to him by
measure. The notions entertained by the Jews at the time of his manifesta
tion, were exceedingly erroneous. They seem to have lost sight of his di
vinity, and to have imagined that he would be a mere man. They had over
looked the prophetic descriptions of his sufferings, and fixed their attention
upon the splendid imagery in which his triumph was announced ; they waited
with impatience for the advent of a great temporal monarch, and were ready
to march under his banners to victory and glory. Their misapprehension of
his character was not owing to the obscurity or ambiguity of prophecy, but to
their own carnal minds, which dwelt with fondness upon those parts of the
description which flattered their passions and sordid views, and turned away
with disgust from the lowly scenes amidst which his career was to commence.
* Is. ix. 6. f Jer. xxiii. 5, 6.

10 THE MESSIAH.
They had no wish to be saved from any enemies, but those by whose power
their nation was oppressed ; and set no value upon any blessings, but such as
would minister to their sensuality and ambition. Hence, when the Messiah
did come, they rejected him. Rulers and people, learned and unlearned,
joined in an outcry against him as guilty of presumption in claiming this cha
racter ; and the false charge has been transmitted from father to son during a long
series of years. The mention of his name still kindles the rage of the Jews ;
and, with itnpious lips, they pour curses upon him, leaving it to the Gentiles to
hail him in the language of. their fathers, " Blessed be he that cometh in the
name of the Lord."
Let us, therefore, proceed to show that Jesus of Nazareth is the promised
Messiah. It is evident that the Messiah must have long since appeared, since the time
fixed by prophecy for his manifestation is past, as even the Jews are con
strained to acknowledge. It is a pitiful evasion to allege, as they do, that his
coming has been delayed on account of their sins. In what place of scrip
ture is it suspended upon their repentance and obedience ? Can any thing be
more absurd than to assign, as a reason for not sending him, the only cause
for which God promised to send him at all, namely, the sins of men, which
were to be expiated by his immaculate sacrifice ? " The sceptre shall not de
part from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come."*
But the sceptre has departed from Judah, the civil constitution of the Jews has
been overthrown, and for many ages they have remained without a priest or
a king. At the time when he whom we call the Messiah was born, they
were under the dominion of Herod, an Idumean, but a proselyte to their re
ligion, and therefore accounted one of themselves ; their ancient forms were
retained, they were governed by their own laws, and had rulers of their own
nation. The sceptre had not departed, but it was at the point of departing;
and this, therefore, was the critical moment at which the prophecies must
either be fulfilled, or fail for ever ; for, before the century expired, Jerusalem
was taken and destroyed by the Romans, the people were expelled from their
country, and scattered over the face of the earth. The dispersion of the
Jews, which has lasted for more than seventeen hundred years, might convince
them that the Messiah is come, and that they look in vain for another.
It was foretold that he should come while the second temple was standing.
" The glory of this latter house shall be greater than of the former, saith the
Lord of Hosts : and in this place will I give peace, saith the Lord of Hosts."t
These words were addressed to the Jews, who, after their return from the
Babylonian captivity, were much discouraged by the difficulties which they
experienced in building the temple, and by its inferiority to that which was
erected by Solomon. It is predicted that it should be more glorious, not, how
ever, by its external magnificence, but by the personal presence of Him, of
whom the Schechinah, or the bright cloud which rested on the propitiatory,
was a figure. " The Lord, whom ye seek," said another prophet, " shall
suddenly come to his temple, even the messenger of the covenant, whom ye
delight in; behold, he shall come, saith the Lord of Hosts.";): The house
which the Jews, after their restoration, constructed for the solemn worship of
God, was repaired, and in a manner rebuilt, by Herod the Great, in whose
reign our Saviour was born ; but it was never called or accounted a new tem
ple, because the work was carried on by degrees, arid the regular service was
not interrupted. Ages have elapsed since it was laid in ruins. It perished
in the overthrow of the city by the Romans, its walls were levelled with the
ground, its very foundation was turned up, and the prediction was literally ful.
* Gen. xlix. 10. f Hag. ii. 9. $ Mai. iii. 1.

THE MESSIAH. 11
filled, that not one stone should be left upon another. The Messiah, there
fore, is come ; and what the prophets had announced was accomplished, when
the Son of Mary was presented to God in the temple, and afterwards in that
place published the tidings of peace and salvation. The Jews saw only a
man in homely attire, and without any worldly pretensions ; but never was
the temple the scene of such glory as now, when the God of the temple stood
within its walls.
There is a prophecy in the book of Daniel, which fixes the time of his ap
pearance with greater exactness. " Seventy weeks are determined upon thy
people, and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an
end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlast
ing righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the
most holy. Know, therefore, and understand, that from the going forth of
the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem, unto the Messiah the
Prince, shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks : the street
shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times. And after three
score and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself. — And he
shall confirm the covenant with many for one week : and in the midst of the
week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease."* Different
opinions have been entertained with respect to the commencement of these
seventy weeks of years. According to Prideaux, who supports his opinion
by many learned arguments, they are to be dated from the seventh year of
Artaxerxes Longimanus, when a decree went forth from that monarch to Ezra,
to restore the nation and church of the Jews ; and the seven weeks, or forty-
nine years, extend from that period to the time of Nehemiah, when the walls
of Jerusalem were finished, and the affairs of the nation were settled. The
sixty-two weeks, or four hundred and thirty-four years, fill up the interval be
tween Nehemiah and the appearance of the Baptist ; and the one week, or
the last seven years, were employed in the ministration of John and our Sa
viour. In the course of that week, or rather in the latter half of it, he made
the sacrifice and the oblation to cease by his own death, which fulfilled the
types, and was followed by the abolition of the ceremonial law. It is evident
from this prophecy, that the Messiah is come ; and the evidence is so clear,
that the Jews are thrown into the utmost perplexity by it, and not know
ing what answer to give to the arguments of Christians, wish to preserve si
lence on the subject, and pronounce a curse upon the man who shall presume
to calculate the weeks of Daniel.
That the Messiah, whose advent is past, is Jesus of Nazareth, may be
proved by the exact correspondence between his character and history, and
the particulars mentioned in prophecy. He was of the tribe of Judah and
the family of David, as we learn from his genealogy in Matthew and Luke ;
and these points, I believe, have not been disputed. In legal reckoning he
was the son of Joseph, but in reality he was the son of Mary. The descent
of Joseph from David is traced in Matthew, and of Mary in Luke, although
her name does not occur in it. In this way we account for the difference in
the two genealogical tables, which, while both point out David as his pro
genitor, do not agree in one particular with respect to the intermediate per
sons. Now, unless we were to suppose the evangelists to have written at
random, this difference is a proof that, having the same object in view, namely,
to show that he was of the royal family, they prove it, the one by the lineage
of his reputed father, and the other by that of his mother.
The place of his birth was Bethlehem, according to the prediction of
Micah : " But thou, Beth-lehem Ephratah, though thou be little among the
* Dan. ix. 24—27.

12 THE MESSIAH.
thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall He come forth unto me that is to be
Ruler in Israel ; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting."*
And how was this prophecy fulfilled ? Joseph and Mary had taken up their
residence in Nazareth of Galilee, which lay at least seventy miles north from
Jerusalem, while Bethlehem was situated some miles to the south. Had the
pious pair, when the time drew near that Mary should be delivered, gone in
tentionally to the appointed place, th.e truth of prophecy would have been
established by their voluntary agency. But it does not appear that they had
formed such a design, or that the propriety of it had ever occurred to them.
God had purposed to accomplish his word, not by the instrumentality of per
sons who should knowingly co-operate with him, but by a man who was ig
norant of prophecy, and had never heard of the Messiah. Augustus, sitting
on the throne of the Roman world, issues a decree that all his subjects should
be taxed or enrolled. The design of Caesar is to replenish his treasury with
their silver and gold, or to ascertain their number and wealth, that he may be
acquainted with his resources against any future emergency. The design of
God is to bring Joseph and Mary to Bethlehem, to which the descendants of
David were commanded to repair, that their names might he inserted in the
family register. Augustus thought only of gratifying his avarice or ambition :
God thought of fulfilling his word. We see the whole empire in motion, and
thousands hastening, every man to his own city, at the command of their sove
reign, and we are apt to look upon this mighty bustle merely as a political
movement. But God is the prime mover, and his object is to conduct, with
out noise and without a miracle, two of the humblest of the emperor's subjects
to a small city, in a distant province, because he had determined, and by the
mouths of his prophets had foretold, that there the Messiah should be born.
As his birth corresponded, in all its circumstances, with the ancient predic
tions, so did every other particular in his history. Our limits will not per
mit me to enter into a minute detail. According to the descriptions of the
prophets, there 'would be a wonderful mixture in his character, of humiliation
and greatness, of suffering and triumph. To the Jews, who have adopted
false notions respecting his person and work, the language of the Old Testa
ment is a riddle which they are sadly puzzled to explain ; and hence some of
their doctors have had recourse to the supposition of two Messiahs, to wh«m
they assign the different parts of the description, as it seems impossible that
they should admit of an application to the same individual. The one will be
of the tribe of Ephraim, and will suffer and die ; the other will be of the
tribe of Judah, and will conquer and reign. I need not spend a single moment
in refuting an hypothesis which is supported solely by the authority of men,
whose comments on Scripture furnish the most pitiable display of ignorance
(and stupidity) which- the world ever saw. The character of Jesus of Nazareth
affords a full solution of the difficulty, which has compelled them to have re
course to this wretched expedient. In his human nature, which, like ours,
existed at first in the feebleness of infancy, and when it grew up to manhood
was placed in circumstances of poverty and degradation, we see the fulfilment
of what had been spoken concerning his humiliation ; and the predictions of
his greatness are accomplished in the dignity of his person, which, although
made flesh, and concealed, in a great measure, from the eyes of men, retained
the glory which it had with the Father before the world began. The incom
patibility of his sufferings with his triumph, exists only in the dreams of the
Jews. They were not simultaneous, but successive ; his course commenced
in darkness, and ended in light ; he first became obedient to death, even the
death of the cross, and then he obtained a name above every name, which all
* Micah v. 2.

THE MESSIAH. 13
the powers of earth and heaven adore. He sits at the right hand of his Father,
and his enemies are made his footstool. It were easy to show, by a reference
to the prophecies, that there is not one particular of his sufferings recorded b?
the evangelists, which had not been pointed put beforehand ; so that there is
not a mere resemblance between the character of Jesus Christ, and that of the
Messiah, but an exact coincidence ; a coincidence in so many minute circum
stances, that it could not have taken place by accident, and can be explained
only by the identity of the person. It could not happen "by chance that,
agreeably to the ancient predictions, he was betrayed by one of his own fol
lowers, sold for thirty pieces of silver, buffeted, scourged, and spit upon ; that
he was condemned by the common consent of his own countrymen and the
Gentiles ; that he was put to death by crucifixion, which was not a Jewish
punishment, and in company with criminals ; that vinegar was given to him
during his last sufferings, and his clothes were partly divided, and partly dis
posed of by lot ; that he was insulted by his enemies, and, in particular,
derided for his faith ; that he was pierced with a spear ; and finally, that,
although it was intended to bury him along with his fellow-sufferers, his body
was deposited in the sepulchre of a rich man. It would have required the
co-operation of many persons to bring all these circumstances together by
design; but as the agents had nothing in view, except to gratify their own
feelings, we perceive the hand of God pointing out his own Son as the object
of our faith, by fulfilling whatsoever his counsel had determined before to
be done.
The messiahship of Jesus is farther manifest from the wonderful works
which he performed. These prove that he was the expected Redeemer, be
cause it was foretold that his advent should be signalized by works at once
beneficent and divine : "Behold, your God will come with vengeance, even
God with a recompence ; he will come and save you. Then the eyes of the
blind shall be opened, and the ears of the deaf shall be unstopped : then shall
the lame man leap as an hart, and the tongue of the dumb sing."* Hence
the Jews expected such signs to be exhibited by the Messiah, as we learn
from the words of some of them who believed in him, and said, " When
Christ cometh, will he do more miracles than these which this man hath
done ?"t But farther, these miracles prove him to be the Messiah, because
they were express attestations to his character by his Father, in concurrence
with whom he performed them. Hence he appeals to them as such : " The
works which the Father hath given me to finish, the same works that I do,
bear witness of me, that the Father hath sent me. And the Father himself,
which hath sent me, hath borne witness of me. "J And again, when the Jews
were filled with indignation, and threatened to stone him, because he called
himself the Son of God, he said to them, " If I do not the works of my Father,
believe me not. But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the i works ;
that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him."§
The argument from miracles is well understood. Whether we consider those
of our Saviour as performed by his own power, or by that of his Father, we
arrive at the same conclusion. If they were performed by his own power,
they prove that he was a divine person, to whose declarations concerning
himself, implicit confidence is due. If they were performed by the power of
his Father, they were his solemn attestation to the mission and doctrine of
Christ. The allegation of the Jews, that his miracles were wrought by the
assistance of evil spirits, had no better foundation than their ignorance and ma
lignity ; their ignorance — in supposing that those spirits could perform real
miracles, and particularly such miracles as displayed an uncontrolled dominion
* Is. xxxv. 4—6. + John vii. 31. i Ib. v. 36, 37. § Ib. x. 37, 38.
B

14 THE MESSIAH.
over all nature ; their malignity — in ascribing to them, in opposition to the
clearest dictates of reason and religion, works confessedly benevolent and
holy. Certainly they would not have changed the course of nature to ad
vance the glory of God, and the best interests of the human race. The an
swer of our Saviour must have carried conviction to any candid mind : " Every
kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation ; and a house divided
against a house falleth. If Satan also be divided against himself, how shall
his kingdom stand? because ye say that I cast out devils through Beelzebub."*
The last argument by which we prove that Jesus of Nazareth is the Mes
siah, is founded on the success of his religion. Let us reflect upon the cir
cumstances in which it was promulgated. The Author of it was a person
rejected by the only nation which expected the Messiah, and knew anything
about his character ; and^ by that nation, he was not only pronounced to be
a deceiver, but subjected to an ignominious death ; so that there was every
human probability that his name would be soon forgotten, or be remembered
only as an object of reproach. No person could have dreamed, that a man
who had been crucified as a malefactor in a distant province, would acquire
such posthumous fame, as to be acknowledged and adored in the proud capital
of Rome, and throughout the whole extent of the empire : whether we con
sider the nature of his doctrine, the persons who were employed in preaching
it, or the opposition which it had to encounter, there was no likelihood that
it would ever attain a footing in the world ; and still less, that it would be
come the dominant religion. His doctrine was offensive to all classes of men,
because it interfered with their opinions and usages, and called upon them,
not only to adopt a new creed, but to engage in a new course of life to which
they felt the utmost repugnance. The preachers could not give it the recom
mendation which a system derives from the rank and authority of its patrons,
and the eloquence and learning which they enlist in its service ; for they
were of a low rank, and wanted all the qualifications which attract the notice
and admiration of mankind. These were its only or its chief friends, when
it appeared ; all other men were leagued together as its enemies ; the high,
the mighty, and the wise ; the rulers of states, and the interested ministers
of the various superstitions which were established on the earth. In what
ever way we may account for its wonderful success in circumstances which
foreboded a certain failure, it supplies a new evidence in support of the claim
of Jesus of Nazareth to the character of Messiah. If its success should be
attributed to its intrinsic excellence, what but truth could take such hold of
the minds and consciences of men, as to command their assent, notwithstand
ing strong motives to reject it? If we say that it was the effect of Divine,
power, exerted not only in miracles, but in secret influences upon the hearts
of men, we acknowledge that the gospel is authenticated by the seal of God,
and that he who preached it was his Son.
It deserves, in particular, to be considered, that the doctrine of Christ has
been embraced by the Gentiles, and has caused a great revolution in the reli
gious state of the world. The law of Moses was confined to the Jews, and
a few proselytes who occasionally submitted to it ; it was not intended to be
universal, and its peculiar usages rendered it impossible that it should ever
become the religion of mankind. But it was foretold of the Messiah, that he
should be " a light to enlighten the Gentiles, as well as the glory of his people
Israel ;"t " the heathen would be given to him for his inheritance, and the
uttermost parts of the earth for his possession ;"f " the isles would wait for
his law ;"§ and, " from the rising of the sun, to the going down of the same,
the name of God would be great among the Gentiles."|| Of the fulfilment of
* Luke xi. 17, 18. f Luke ii. 32. j Ps. ii. 8. % Is. xiii. 4. R Mai. i. 11.

THE PERSON OF CHRIST. 15
these predictions, there was no appearance for many centuries after they were
uttered ; but they have been fulfilled since the coming of our Saviour. As he
gave a commission to the apostles to preach the gospel to every creature, and
they extended their labours beyond the limits of Judea, so his religion has ever
since been professed by nations converted from heathenism. By the propa
gation of the gospel, the ancient idolatry has been overthrown, the knowledge
of thetrue God has been diffused, and his worship established; his law has
been promulgated as the only standard of right and wrong, and men have
been taught to expect salvation only through his crucified Son. His kingdom
does not yet extend "from sea to sea, and from the river to the ends of the
earth ;" but what has been accomplished, encourages us to hope for greater
things ; and we look forward to the time when he shall achieve the conquest
of the whole earth, and be acknowledged and honoured as universal Lord.
These are the principal arguments by which we prove, against the Jews,
that Jesus of Nazareth is the promised Messiah. I have omitted many par
ticulars which might have been introduced under the general heads, and given
you only a superficial view of the subject. What has been said, is sufficient
to confirm our faith in this fundamental article of religion. The character of
Messiah includes several offices to which our Saviour was anointed, and by
the execution of which he accomplishes the salvation of his people. These
we shall afterwards consider ; but, in the mean time, it is necessary to inquire
into the mysterious constitution of his person, by which he was qualified for
those offices, and which is intimately connected with his messiahship, in the
creed and confession of the Church. " We believe and are sure that thou art
the Christ, the Son of the living God."* This important point will be the
subject of the next lecture.

LECTURE LIII.
ON THE PERSON OF CHRIST.

The human nature of Christ — Heretical opinions respecting it — Integrity of it — Its sinlessness
— Necessity of his assumption of human nature — The constitution of his person, by the
union of the divine and human natures — Effects of this hypostatical union.
Having proved that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah promised to the
Fathers, I proceed to speak of,his person, before I enter upon the consideration
of his particular offices. To a Jew, it would seem that this inquiry is unne
cessary, or may be reduced to narrow limits, it being enough to know his
human descent, as there is no distinction between him and other men, except
in his high destination, his superior endowments, and his splendid achieve
ments. Some professed Christians are of the same opinion, and maintain,
that he who was born in the fulness of time, was in every respect a man like
ourselves. It is certain, however, that the expectations of the ancient people
of God pointed to a nobler object, in consequence of the declarations of the
prophets, that the Redeemer of Israel should be one who might " be called
Jehovah our righteousness," and " Immanuel," which signifies " God with
us." Our own Scriptures are still more explicit, and, in language which does
not admit of a figurative interpretation, inform us, that it was the Word who
"was God," and "by whom all things were created," that was " made flesh
* John vi. 69.

16 THE PERSON OF CHRIST.
and dwelt among us ;" that it was the Son of God who was made of a woman ;
and that he who came of the Jews, according to the flesh, was " God over all,
blessed for ever." These, Ind many other passages, import that in him the
divine and the human nature were united ; so that of the same person it may
be affirmed with truth, that he is the fellow or the equal of the Lord of hosts,
and the kinsman and brother of the children of the dust.
This article of our religion has been opposed with great violence in every
age, and by heretics of various descriptions. It is the rock on which the
Church is built, and the powers of darkness have exerted their utmost efforts
to overthrow it. It is not necessary to review those opinions, which aimed
at subverting the foundations of our faith by denying the divinity of Christ,
whether he was affirmed by the Ebionites, and others, to be a mere man,
4«i«c «6{ara-«, or at a later period by the Arians, to be a secondary deity ; be
cause we have formerly proved that he is God, equal to the Father. Our
present design only requires that we should take notice of the errors which
immediately related to the constitution of his person as Bm&tums, God and man.
Let us begin with the consideration of the nature which he assumed. And
here we are met by two opinions which were vented in the primitive times,
in opposition to the common faith of Christians, founded on the authority of
Scripture. The first is that of the Docetae, who were so called on account of
their distinguishing tenet, that our Saviour was not a man in reality, but in
appearance only. It was held by different individuals and sects ; but, as they
concurred in this opinion with respect to the Christ, they received in ancient
times this common designation. According to them, what was supposed to
be the man Christ Jesus, was a mere phantom, and his crucifixion was a
scenical representation, by which the senses of the spectators were imposed
upon. It surely is not necessary to attempt an elaborate refutation of a heresy
so manifestly contrary to the most explicit declarations of Scripture. " For
asmuch," says an apostle, " as the children were partakers of flesh and blood,
he also himself took part of the same."* There is no reason why we should
listen for a moment to men who give the lie direct to an inspired writer, and
would persuade us that, for the space of more than thirty years, God, for no
conceivable end, deceived the Jewish nation by a series of miracles, (for it
was only by miracle that they could be made for so long a time to thi'nk that
a shadow was a solid substance ;) and that our hope of salvation by the death
of our Redeemer is vain, as he did not shed his blood for us, and, in truth,
had no blood to shed. The second opinion, destructive of the human nature
of Christ, is said to have been maintained by Arius and Eunomius, who
affirmed that he had a body, but not a soul, and that the Logos, or his superior
nature, supplied its place. Apollinaris, or Apollinarius, also taught that the
Son of God assumed manhood without a soul, ^»( ara/, as Socrates relates;
but afterwards, changing his mind, he said that he assumed a soul but that it
did not possess the intelligent or. rational principle, nm Ss w* *Xm ctvrm • and
that the *»« was instead of that principle, m Ku.\ Human nature he con
ceived to consist of three parts, a body, a soul, and a mind, of which the
latter was wanting in our Saviour. The contrariety of both opinions to
Scripture is apparent, and particularly of the former, which affirms that he
had no soul. Besides that it is expressly mentioned by himself, when he said
in his agony, " My soul is exceeding sorrowful, even unto death,"* and when
on the cross, he committed it to his Father, there is the same evidence that he
possessed this essential part of our nature, as there is that it belong to anv
other man; his thoughts, Ins reasonings, his feelings, his affections: his joys
and sorrows, his hopes and fears, being all indications ofthe existence of that
•Heb.ii.14. tSocrat.Hist.Eccles.lib.U.c.44. * Matt. xxvi. 38.

THE PERSON OF CHRIST. 17
living and intelligent principle, of the operation of which we are conscious in
ourselves, and to which we give the name of the soul. It was impossible that
the Divine nature was in him instead of a soul, because it is omniscient, and
there were some things of which he declared himself to be ignorant ; and be
cause his sufferings, and fears, and sorrows, were incompatible with the
perfect felicity of which it is immutably possessed. Can we conceive the
Divine nature to have been in an agony, and to have exclaimed, "My God,
my God, why hast thou forsaken me ?"*
We conclude, therefore, in opposition to those heresies, that our Redeemer
assumed a complete human nature ; or, as our Catechism expresses it, with its
usual accuracy, that he took to himself " a true body and a reasonable soul."
In the ancient creed, which goes under the name of Athanasius, he is said to
have " not only been perfect God, but perfect man, of a reasonable soul and
human flesh subsisting."
While we maintain the integrity of his human nature, we admit that he
assumed it with all its sinless infirmities. These may be comprehended in
the word flesh, which is used by the evangelist John, in speaking of his in
carnation ; at least the word suggests this idea in other places where it occurs.
" My Spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh. "t
" He remembered that they were but flesh ; a wind that passeth away, and
cometh not again."! In both passages the term seems to represent man as
a being frail and mortal. Our Redeemer was not subject to any of the sinful
infirmities of our nature, to sensual appetites and transports of passion ; nor
was there any stimulus or incentive to sin in the constitution or temperament
of his body. The Scripture is careful, when it asserts his conformity to us
in other things, to make this important exception. " He was in all things
tempted like as we are, yet without sin."§ He was subject to none of those
diseases which are the portion of man, who is born to trouble as the sparks
fly upwards. Infirmities of this kind would have discommoded him in the
discharge of his duty, and he was exempted from them on account of his per
sonal purity. But he was subject to hunger and thirst, to cold and heat, and
weariness, to pain of body arising from external injuries, and to distress of
mind from the experience or apprehension of evil, and from the effects pro
duced upon his feelings by the scenes with which he was surrounded. Although
living in our world, he might have been defended against every annoyance by
the order of Omnipotence, as an angel of heaven would be, were he to descend
to the earth, and sojourn in it for a season ; but such a state would not have
accorded with the design of his mission. He submitted to our infirmities,
that he might acquire an experimental knowledge of our sufferings, corporeal
and mental, and we might be more fully assured of his sympathy ; besides
that it was only by his tears, and agony, and death, that the great work of our
redemption could be accomplished. " We have not a high priest that cannot
be touched with a feeling of our infirmities, but was in all things tempted like
as we are. "||
Before we proceed farther, the question occurs, What was the reason that
the Son of God assumed the nature of man ? Some of the Schoolmen were
so bold as to affirm, that he would have assumed it although man had not sin
ned. I do not know what arguments they advanced in support of this opinion,
nor is it necessary to inquire, because, without hearing them, we may confi
dently pronounce that they are unsatisfactory and false. Their philosophy,
such as it was, could give them no assistance in a matter of pure revelation ;
and every thing which the Scriptures say upon the subject, directly tends to
the opposite conclusion. He became man for the redemption of men, the as-
• Matt, xxvii. 46. \ Gen. vi. 3. * Ps. lxxviii. 39. § Heb. iv. 15. | Idem.
Vm TT  3 B 2

18 THE PERSON OF CHRIST.
sumption of our nature being necessary to prepare him for those services and
sufferings by which alone we could be redeemed. " Verily," says Paul, " he
took not on him the nature of angels, but he took on him the seed of Abra
ham."* The word which we translate, took on him, or assumed, signifies to
take hold of, to assist, or to help, and was so understood by the Greek com
mentators, the most competent judges. The true sense of the passage, I ap
prehend, is, that the Son of God interposed for the deliverance, not of angels,
but of men ; and the nature of his interposition is stated in the preceding
verses. " Forasmuch as the children were partakers of flesh and blood, he
also himself likewise took part of the same ;"t that is, he helped man by be
coming a man. It is related by Caesar, that it was an opinion of the Gauls,
" that unless the life of man was given for the life of man, the immortal gods
eould not be appeased."* It would be absurd to quote their sentiments in
support of a doctrine of revelation, especially as they founded upon them the
cruel and detestable practice of human sacrifices ; but it is worthy of attention
that they had adopted an idea which in general was true, and was the reason
ofthe great mystery which we are at present considering, the incarnation of
our Saviour. If an atonement was necessary, we cannot conceive it to have
been made by the sufferings of any other nature than that which had incurred
the penalty of sin. No such relation could have been established between
two beings of totally different natures, between a man and an angel, that, in
consequence of it, what was done by the latter, should have been accepted, as
if it had been done by the former. We can understand how the services of an
individual may be admitted as an equivalent for the services ofthe whole class
to which he belongs ; but there is no principle on which we could account for
the same mode of estimating the services of an individual of a different class.
If an angel had suffered, there would have been no display of the righteous
ness of God; as, in that case, the nature which had sinned would have escaped
with impunity. It behoved the surety, in this case, to be closely allied to the
debtors, bone of their bone, and flesh of their flesh, that he might be identified
with them in legal reckoning.
To this argument for the incarnation of our Saviour it may be objected,
that God might have saved us without satisfaction to his justice, and conse
quently, that there was no absolute necessity for the manifestation of his Son
in the flesh. He might have freely pardoned our sins, bestowed blessings
upon us unbought and unsolicited, and admitted us to communion without a
mediator. Some have hazarded this opinion, which is as little distinguished
by modesty as by reverence for Scripture. It imports that the mission of Je
sus Christ was gratuitous in every sense ; that without any sufficient reason
he was subjected to sorrow and death ; that there has been' a theatrical display
of the severity of divine justice, to persuade us that it is inflexible and inexora
ble, while it would not have been dishonoured, although sin had been permit
ted to pass with impunity ; and that the love of God is not so wonderful as
we were wont to believe, because its greatest gift might have been withheld
without at'all hindering our salvation. Such consequences will justify us in
rejecting this opinion, especially when we consider that it does not find the
shadow of support in the Scriptures, and rests on no more solid basis than the
speculations of presumptuous men.
The necessity of the incarnation farther appears from the nature of the suf
ferings which our Redeemer had to endure. They were sufferings which
would atone for the guilt of the people of God from the beginning to the end
of the world. These were not easy to be borne. Human nature, unsupported
by superior power, would have sunk under them. They would have crushed
* Heb. ii. 16. j- Ib. 14. $ De Bell. Gall. lib. vi.

THE PERSON OF CHRIST. 19
the mightiest of our race ; they would have overwhelmed the highest angel in
irretrievable misery. As it was necessary, therefore, mat the penalty of the
law should be inflicted on the nature which had sinned, so it was necessary
that that nature should be so sustained in the dreadful enterprise, as, although
bruised and broken, not to be utterly destroyed. The Son of God united it to
himself; he was present with it more intimately than he is with the angels of
heaven ; he upheld it by the power of his divinity ; and hence, although the
man Christ Jesus was in such an agony, that his sweat was as it were great
drops of blood falling to the ground, he bore all his woes with invincible for
titude, and closed the scene with the words of triumph on his expiring' lips :
" It is finished."
The assumption of our nature by the Son of God is expressed in the Scrip
tures, by his " partaking of our flesh and blood," by his " being made flesh,"
and by his "being manifested in the flesh." The Greek writers call it
wJltwjm<j-K, w*.v8fum<ric, aruftx.rwK, and furt^nuTK ¦ of which last term, the ecclesiasti
cal Latin word incamatio, which we have adopted into our language, is a
literal translation. The act by which the union was formed, we cannot ex
plain ; but it constituted such a relation between him and our nature, that it is
now as really his nature as is the divine. He is as truly man as he is God.
This peculiar relation was indispensably necessary to the unity of the Media
tor. Had the two natures, however intimately connected, not been personally
united, their actions would not have been referrible to one agent ; there would
have been two agents, perfectly distinct, whereas now the person of Christ, if
I may so express myself, is one principle of operation in the accomplishment
of our redemption.
To illustrate this point more fully, I remark that it was not a human person
which our Saviour' assumed, but a human nature. The distinction between
these is important, and should be carefully considered. By a person, we un
derstand an intelligent being subsisting by himself,, and not dependent upon
any other. This is the meaning of the word when it is used in reference to
men ; when applied to the Trinity, it expresses a distinction which we cannot
explain. To say that the Son of God assumed a human person, would be an
express contradiction, because there is an idea imported in the word assumed,
with which the personality of his human nature is absolutely inconsistent ;
for it imports that he made if his own ; and besides, on this supposition, as
we have already remarked, the acts of the man would not have been the acts
of the Son of God, and consequently would not have been available for our
salvation. He assumed a human nature, or, in other words, made it his own
nature, by giving it a subsistence in his divine person. The term personality
merely imports, that the nature of which we are speaking, subsists by itself.
To deny, therefore, the personality of the human nature of Christ, takes no
thing from it that is essential ; it simply represents it as standing in a peculiar
relation to another nature. It would have been a person, if it had not been
united to the Son of God; but, being united to him, it cannot be called a per
son, because it does not subsist by itself, as other men do ; each of whom has
an independent existence. "The Son of God," says our church, " became
man, and so was, and contiriueth to be, God and man, in one person for ever."
And the Athanasian creed affirms, that, " although he be God and man, yet
he is not two, but one Christ."
When, in speaking upon this subject, we use the phrase, the constitution of
the person of Christ, it is necessary to guard against a misapprehension of the
meaning. It is not that his person is made up of two constituent parts, the
divine and the human nature ; for this would imply that the Son of God was
not a person before the union, or that he became a different person after it.
The union of the soul and the body is the object in nature which most resem.-

20 THE PERSON OF CHRIST.
bles it, particularly in Ahis respect, that as these compose one individual, what
is said of either of them may be predicted of that individual ; and, in like man
ner, what is affirmed of either of the natures of Christ, may be affirmed of
Christ himself. But the resemblance is not exact ; for neither the soul nor
the body is a person by itself, but the divine nature of our Saviour had a per
sonal subsistence prior to its union to the human. His person is not a com
pound person ; the personality belongs to his Godhead, and the human nature
subsists in it by a peculiar dispensation. The assumption of our nature caused
no change in his person ; it added nothing to it ; and the only difference is,
that the same person, who was always possessed of divinity, has now taken
humanity. It was the second person of the Trinity who alone was incarnate, as is
evident from the Scriptures. It was the "Word" who " was made flesh,"
the " Son" who was " sent forth in the fulness of time, made of a woman."
The incarnation was a personal act, and was therefore limited to the person
whose act it was. We say, indeed, that the divine nature was incarnate ;
but we speak of it not immediately, to adopt the language of scholastic Theo
logy, and as it is considered absolutely and in itself, but mediately in the
person of the Son, or as far as it is determined and characterised in the person
of the Son. The incarnation was not an act of the divine nature, but of a
person in that nature, and therefore terminated upon that person alone. The
whole divine nature may be said to have been incarnate ; but this is true only
because the whole divine nature is in the second person of the Godhead. In
this way we may explain our meaning ; but I am not sure that any distinct
idea will be conveyed into the mind of the hearer. If the divine nature is in
all the persons of the Trinity, we cannot understand how the incarnation was
the act of one, and not of all ; and the reason is, that we do not understand in
what their personal distinction consists : yet we are certain that there is such
a distinction, in consequence of which some acts are ascribed to one person,
and others to another ; andpin particular, that it was the Son who assumed
our nature, and not the Father, or the Holy Ghost, although both concurred
in this act ; the Father by his appointment and approbation, and the Holy
Ghost by his immediate agency in the miraculous conception.
This doctrine concerning the person of Christ was opposed by two here
sies, which were broached in the fifth century, and after much disputation and
confusion, terminated in the separation of their respective adherents from the
communion of the catholic church. The first was the heresy of Nestorius,
bishop of Constantinople, who is said to have taught that there are two per
sons in Christ, a divine and a human. It originated in the conduct of one of
his presbyters named Anastasius, who publicly condemned the title of flm-ates,
or Mother of God, which was frequently given to the Virgin Mary, because,
as he said, she was a woman, and of a woman God could not be born. He
was supported by Nestorius, who zealously taught the same doctrine, and
maintained that she should be called only xfermaui, 0r the Mother of Christ,
A great clamour was immediately raised ; suspicions were entertained, that he
denied the divinity of Christ ; his enemies eagerly laid hold of the opportuni
ty to humble and overwhelm him ; and the affair having been brought before
a council assembled at Ephesus, a. d. 431, his heresy was condemned, and it
was declared, " that Christ was one divine person, in whom two natures were
most closely united, but without being mixed or confounded together." Not
a few of the moderns are of opinion, that his sentiments were misunderstood
and misrepresented during the violence of the controversy. Men do not
always admit all the consequences which others draw from their opinions,
nor even all which may be legitimately deduced. It is acknowledged by
some ancient writers, and particularly by the historian Socrates, that he was

THE PERSON OF CHRIST. 21
sound in his views of the Trinity, and consequently of the divinity of Christ.*
He himself denied the charges which were fixed upon him by his enemies,
and in one of his epistles virtually maintains the doctrine of his opponents,
when he says, that Christ is a name significant of an impassible and a pas
sible essence in one person, and that he acknowledged in him » irfimimi.
Hence it is not improbable that he and his opponents agreed in sentiment,
and differed only in words. The controversy, however, gave rise to a sect
called by his name, which held this unscriptural doctrine, " that there were
two persons in our Saviour, the one divine and the other human ; that a union
was formed between the Son of God, and the Son of man, in the moment of
the virgin's conception, and will never be dissolved ; that it was not, however,
a union of nature or of person, but only of will and affection ; that Christ was
therefore to be carefully distinguished from God, who dwelt in him as in his
temple ; and that Mary was to be called the mother of Christ, and not the
mother of God."
It is not necessary to engage in a formal confutation of this heresy, which
expressly contradicts the passages formerly quoted, and others which affirm
that the " Word was made flesh ;" that he who was " in the form of God
took upon him the form of a servant, and was found in fashion as a man ;"
that the Son of God was " made of a woman ;" and that her child was " God
with us ;" all which assert, as clearly as words can do, the unity of his per
son. Were the doctrine of the Nestorians true, the hope of the church
founded on the divinity of the Saviour would be vain ; for he who died upon
the cross was a man, more highly exalted indeed than other men, but still a
creature only, whose blood could not have atoned for the sins of the world.
The author of the other heresy was Eutyches, the abbot of a monastery in
Constantinople, who expressed himself thus ; " I acknowledge two natures
in Christ before the union, but after the union I acknowledge only one na
ture." He did not specify the time when the union took place ; but some
of his followers said, that it took place at the conception, some at the resur
rection, and some at the ascension. His opinion seems to have been, that
his human nature was absorbed by the Divine, and that the divine nature
alone remained. It underwent modifications by those who succeeded him,
some of whom chose to say, " that in the Son of God there was one nature,
which, notwithstanding its unity, was double and compounded ;" while others,
who assumed the name of Monophysites, laid down this proposition, " that
the divine and human nature of Christ were so united as to form only one
nature, yet without any change, confusion, or mixture of the two natures."
The heresy of Eutyches was condemned by the council of Chalcedon, a. d.
451, which promulgated the following decree, as expressive ofthe faith which
all Christians should hold, " that in Christ two distinct natures were united in
one person, without any change, mixture, or confusion."
The distinction of the two natures in Christ was manifest while he lived
upon earth. As God, he knew all things, but as man, there were some things
which he did not know ; as God, he was blessed for ever; but as man, he was
acquainted with grief ; as God, he was the living One ; but as man, he died
upon the cross. That the distinction is continued in the heavenly state is
certain from this fact, that " he will so come in like manner as he was seen
to go into heaven ;"t that is, will return in the human nature, and that he is
the ordained man, by whom God will judge the world in righteousness. The
absorption of the human nature by the divine, or the mixture of the two na
tures, is perfectly unintelligible.
The ancient church maintained that the two natures of our Saviour were
* Socrat. Hist. Eccles. Lib. vii. c. 32. j- Acts. i. 11.

22 THE PERSON OF CHRIST.
united, aiuu^rtm and "¦xa'i"rra" indivisibly and inseparably, against the Nestori-
ans, and weenm and tovyxv"* without change and confusion, against the Euty-
chians. In opposition to both, it is declared in the Athanasian creed, that
" though our Saviour be God and man, yet he is not two, but one Christ,
one, not by conversion ofthe godhead into flesh, but by taking of the man
hood into God, one altogether, not by confusion of substance, but by unity of
person ; for, as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man, so God and man is
one Christ." Our own church teaches, " that two whole, perfect, and dis
tinct natures, the Godhead and the manhood, were inseparably joined together
in one person, without conversion, composition, or confusion. Which person
is very God and very man, yet one Christ, the only Mediator between God
and man."*
Let us now attend to the effects of the constitution of his person. The first
effect which demands our attention, has been already noticed, namely, that by
the union of our nature to his divine person, it was qualified to accomplish our
salvation. It was not like our nature in Adam, which, although perfectly in
nocent, and endowed with all holy dispositions, was fallible, and might be
overcome by temptation ; but it was supported by the divine, and could not
fail or be discouraged. While it was thus enabled to endure the arduous trial,
a value accrued to its acts, which would not have belonged to them, although
they had been performed by the highest creature in the universe ; for they
were the acts, not of the man alone, but of the Son of God, who was united
to the man. When God says, " I have laid help upon one that is mighty;
I have exalted one chosen out of the people, "t he refers to the constitution
of the Messiah's person ; and the might which is ascribed to him, was not
inherent in his human nature, but in the divinity. This is evident, even to
the adversaries of his Godhead, who, aware that upon their hypothesis he
could not have performed the work which we assign to him, deny that he did
perform it, or that he offered an atonement for sin ; and even proceed so far
as to affirm, that he was subject, not only to the sinless, but to the sinful in
firmities of our nature. Indeed, a human Saviour might have taught us our
duty, and communicated such revelations as God had empowered him to
make ; but he could not have averted the wrath of God from us, nor have re»
stored us to his favour. Such a Saviour could not have been proposed as the
object of religious confidence. " Cursed is the man that trusteth in man, and
maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the Lord. — Blessed is
the man that trusteth in the Lord, and whose hope the Lord is."± The ob
ject ofthe faith ofthe ancient Church was the same divine Redeemer who
is exhibited to us as." the brightness of the Father's glory, and the express
image of his person, who by himself purged our sins."§ " Surely, shall one
say, in Jehovah have I righteousness and strength ; even to him shall men
come, and all that are incensed against him shall be ashamed. In Jehovah
shall all the seed of Israel be justified, and shall glory."||
The second effect of the constitution of his person is what the Greeks called
xmmia. itrnfjuttm, and frequently mrili^K tSia>/nuTa,v. In our language, it is the
communication of properties, by which Theologians mean, that, in conse
quence of the union of the two natures, the properties of both are ascribed to
his person ; or the properties of one nature are ascribed to his person, when
it is denominated from the other. It will make the matter more distinct
to say, that the properties of one nature are predicated of the other, be
cause both belong to his person. One of the Fathers gives the following ex
ample : " We may say concerning Christ, He who is our God, was seen by
• Westm. Conf. c. viii. §. 2. f Ps. Ixxxix. 19. $ Jer. xvii. 5, 7. § Heb. i. 3.
i Is. xiv. 24, 25.

THE PERSON OF CHRIST. 23
men, and conversed with them ; and, This man was uncreated, impassible,
and incomprehensible." The Scripture furnishes a variety of examples. The
properties of the divine nature are ascribed to the human, or to him in the
human, when Peter said to him, " Lord, thou knowest all things, thou know-
est that I love thee;"* and Thomas, "My Lord and my God."t Human
properties are ascribed to the divine nature, 'or to him as possessing the divine,
when it was said that " the Lord of glory was crucified,"* and that God pur
chased the Church with his own blood ;"§ for, after all that Griesbach ha»
alleged against it, the word God, in this last verse, is probably the true read
ing, and, as such, is retained by some eminent writers. The reason that, in
both cases, the properties of one nature are attributed to another, is the identity
of the person to whom they equally belong, and who may be described by the
one or the other, as occasion requires.
This is the sense in which we speak of the communication of properties,
as an effect of the hypostatical union. We do not mean, that the properties
of one nature were really communicated to the other ; but that, all being the
properties of one person, they are predicated of him, as denominated some
times by the one nature, and sometimes by the other. The subject, however,
is not always so understood. The Lutherans maintain a real communication
of properties from the one nature to the other, or, at least, from the divine to
the human. This opinion they have been led to adopt, with a view to sup
port their peculiar ideas of the presence of Christ in the Eucharist. Re
nouncing transubstantiation, or the conversion of the bread' and wine into the
body and blood of Christ, as held by the Church of Rome, they have em
braced a dogma equally unintelligible, but more harmless in its consequences,
namely, consubstantiation ; which imports, according to the meaning of the
term, that, although the elements are not changed into the substance of Christ,
he is literally present in, with, and under them. Against this notion, it was
an obvious objection, that such presence was impossible, as his human nature
is in heaven. In attempting to evade this difficulty, they have furnished an
illustration of the remark, that, if a man has told a lie, he must tell another
to cover it, lest it should rain through ; and they fairly admonish us to be
cautious in adopting opinions, lest, finding ourselves involved in one absurdity,
we be led into another, and then into a third, and all for the purpose of de
fending the first. Consubstantiation cannot be true, unless the human nature
of our Saviour be present in all places ; but we know that a man cannot be
in two places at the same time ; that he is a local being, necessarily confined
to a particular spot, which he must leave, when he wishes to be in another.
The Lutherans remove this impossibility by supposing another, namely, that
the human nature of Christ is endowed, in consequence of the personal union,
with the property of ubiquity, or that his divine nature has communicated to
it the attribute of omnipresence. It is the first step, as we say, in some cases,
which is difficult ; the rest are easy. We are not, therefore,' surprised that,
having bestowed one divine perfection upon the human nature of our Saviour,
they should make a donation of others, and affirm, as some of them do, that
it is also possessed of omniscience and omnipotence. I am not aware that
it is necessary to discuss this strange and irrational doctrine. There are
some opinions which confute themselves simply by being stated, and this, I
apprehend, is one of them. It confounds the divine and human nature of
Christ, by assigning the same properties to both. It deifies the man Christ
Jesus, and, consequently, makes him cease to be man ; it, in fact, represents
him to be as truly God as the Second Person of the Trinity. The Scripture
points out, most clearly, the distinction between his natures ; and if in any
• John xxi. 17. f Ib. xx. 28. $ 1 Cor. ii. 8. § Acts xx. 28.

24 THE PERSON OF CHRIST.
case it seems, upon a superficial view, to confound them, the passages will be
easily understood, by the principle of the communication of properties, in the
sense already explained. The truth is, that it was neither the sense nor the
sound of Scripture which led the Lutherans to adopt their opinion ; it was, if
I may speak so, a second thought, and was forced out of the Scripture, by
perverting and torturing it, to support their foolish hypothesis respecting the
sacrament. Were they asked, What they mean by the ubiquity of the human
fiature of Christ ? I am persuaded that every intelligent person among them,
speaking without prejudice, would acknowledge that he could not tell. A body
can be present every where, only by being infinitely or indefinitely extended
Do they imagine that the body of our Saviour is commensurate with the uni
verse, or even with this world ? If they say so, do they affix any idea to their
words ; or can any person affix an idea to them ?
The last effect of the hypostatical union, which I shall mention, is the
honour which results from it to the human nature of our Saviour. This con
sists, primarily and chiefly, in the relation which it bears to the divine nature.
God is said to dwell in the saints, but not as he dwells in the man Christ
Jesus. The union, in this case, is of a peculiar kind ; no other man ever
was, or ever will be, so united to the Godhead. He who is God, has made
our nature his own. This is the highest honour which could be conferred
upon a creature, and would be incredible, were we not assured of it by the
Word himself, who was made flesh. By the assumption of our nature, it was
exalted above all created beings. Angels were originally greater than man ;
but man is now elevated above them ; that is, his nature has obtained a rank,
which leaves the loftiest of the heavenly host at an immeasurable distance.
" Thou madest him a little lower than the angels ; thou crowhedst him with
glory and honour, and didst set him over the works of thy hands."* A man
now sits upon the throne of the universe, and exercises dominion over all
things in heaven, in earth, and in hell ; a man is appointed to be the Judge of
the world. It is evident, however, that he could not have been invested with
this authority, if he had not been also God ; for the government and final
judgment of the universe manifestly require divine perfections, the knowledge
of all things, unerring wisdom, and almighty power.
It has been inquired, Whether the human nature of Christ is the object of
religious worship ? but I apprehend this question is not attended with much
difficulty. We do, indeed, find the Church in heaven and on earth, and
the angels who surround the throne, worshipping the Lamb that was slain,
and ascribing to him blessing, and honour, and glory and power; but we know
that there is just ground for this homage in the divine nature which he pos
sessed with the Father before the world began. The formal reason of reli
gious worship is the infinite excellence of him to whom it is addressed. It is
the want of this excellence which renders the worship of saints and angels
idolatry. " Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only thou shalt
serve."t It follows, therefore, that the human nature of Christ, although glo
rified above all conception, cannot be the formal object of worship, because it
is a creature. The personal union did not deify it, but merely gave it a sub
sistence in the Second Person of the Trinity. We worship him who is God
and man, but we worship him because he is God. We pray to him, because,
as God, he hears and can help us ; we wait on him, and obey him, because
he is possessed of divine power and authority. This is the proper reason of
those acts of worship which we perform to the Son ; but the consideration
that he still wears our nature, in which he died upon the cross, and ascended
to heaven, is a powerful motive to serve him, and our great encouragement to
* Heb. ii. 7. •(¦ Matt. iv. 10.

THE PERSON OF CHRIST. 25
hope for acceptance. While we look up to him as one who is bone of our
bone, and flesh of our flesh, and has a fellow-feeling of our infirmities, the awe
with which the contemplation of his uncreated greatness would have inspired
us, is abated, and we are emboldened to commit ourselves to his care, and
confidently to expect his gracious aid in every time of need.
There is another question connected with the person of Christ, namely,
Whether he is the object of worship as mediator ? Divines commonly an
swer this question in the negative ; because, in this character, he is inferior to
the Father, and because he is the medium through which our prayers are offered
up, and our services are accepted. His inferiority is, perhaps, not a sufficient
reason for excluding the Mediator from divine honours, because it is merely
economical, and is consistent with his equality in all other respects. In think
ing of his official character, we must not lose sight of his essential dignity.
It is acknowledged, however, that the ordinary method of Christian worship
is, to address the Father by the Son ; to pray to the Father for blessings, and
to plead the merit of the Son as the argument for obtaining them. " Through
him, we both (Jews and Gentiles) have access by one Spirit unto the Father."*
We come to the Father through the mediation of the Son, and by the assist
ance of the Spirit. We do not usually pray to the Son, but to the Father in
his name ; yet prayers may be addressed to the Son, because he also is God,
and ought, by the express command of the Father, to receive the same honour
from men with himself; and although, to speak accurately, we pray in the
name of the Mediator, and not to him, yet I am not sure that exact attention
to this distinction is absolutely necessary in practice, or that it is always ob
served by the people of God. There is no doubt that they often address him
as their Saviour and Intercessor, and there are passages of Scripture which
seem to set them an example. Did not John think of him as mediator when
he uttered this doxology, " Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our
sins in his own blood ; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever ?"t
And is he not viewed in the same character by the Church, when it says,
" Worthy is the Lamb that was slain, to receive power, and riches, and
wisdom, and strength, and honour, and glory, and blessing ?"* In a word,
when we pronounce these words, " The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and
the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all ;
Amen :"§ do we not address him as a distinct person from the Father, and a
distinct agent in the work of our salvation, and, consequently, as the mediator,
to whom is committed the dispensation of the grace of the new covenant ?
It is surprising that there should have been any dispute on this subject,
while certain principles are granted by all parties, which are fully sufficient to
terminate the controversy. It is acknowledged that we ought to love the
Mediator with religious affection, that we should confide in him, and commit
our souls to his care, and that we should bow to his authority, and yield im
plicit obedience to his law. How, then, can there be any hesitation about the
propriety of addressing our prayers to him 1 Are not faith and love the es
sence of religious worship ? and is there any thing more sacred and solemn in
prayer, than in the dedication of our souls and bodies to our Redeemer, that
they may be protected by his power and saved by his grace ? He to whom
this homage may be justly paid, is entitled to every other honour ; and our
ingenuity in making nice distinctions is very unwarrantably employed, if it
lead us to defraud him of any of his claims. Certainly we shall not err, if,
laying aside unprofitable speculations, we humbly and devoutly obey the
command which was long ago given to the Church respecting the Messiah,
" He is thy Lord : worship thou him."||
* Eph. ii. 18. f Rev. i. 5, 6. t Rev. v. 12. § 2 Cor. xiii. 14. | Psalm xiv. 11.
Vol. II.— 4 C

26 THE PROPHETICAL OFFICE OF CHRIST.

LECTURE LIV.
ON THE PROPHETICAL OFFICE OF CHRIST.
The particular offices of Prophet, Priest, and King, included in that of Mediator — Christ's
investiture with them — Their respective provinces, and mutual relations — The prophetical
office of Christ — Different periods and modes of administering it — View of Christ's instruc
tions as a Prophet.
The general office with which our Redeemer was invested, is that of media
tor between God and man. The nature of that office has been explained, and
his qualifications for it have been pointed out. There are some particular of
fices comprehended in it, which I shall consider in their order.
Before we enter upon them, it will be necessary to attend to the manner in
which he was invested with them, and fitted for the performance of their re
spective duties. We have seen that the fundamental qualification for his me
diatorial office, was the assumption of our nature into personal union with the
divine ; but this important fact does not include all that the Scriptures say
upon the subject. Something farther was done to the assumed nature, to pre
pare it for the high and arduous part which it was appointed to act.
Our Saviour is called in the Old Testament the Messiah, and in the New
Testament the Christ ; and both words import that he was the Anointed One.
This designation is given to him, in allusion to the rite by which persons were
consecrated to their offices under the former dispensation, namely, by being
anointed with oil. This rite was observed in the case of the three offices
which were most celebrated, those of prophet, priest, and king. With regard
to the prophets, we have, I believe, the solitary instance of Elisha ; but it is
enough to establish the fact that it was occasionally, if not uniformly, used in
setting them apart. The anointing of Aaron and his sons is expressly men
tioned in the thirtieth chapter of Exodus ; and particular directions are given
with regard to the composition of the oil. Of the anointing of kings, we have
examples in David and Solomon. In allusion to this rite, our Redeemer was
called the Messiah or the Christ, to signify, not that he was consecrated by
the same rite, but that he was solemnly appointed to his office by his Father,
and furnished with all the requisite qualifications. The Father says concern
ing him, as is evident from the context, "I have found David my servant;
with my holy oil have I anointed him."* Material oil could confer no power,
and impart no qualifications, and was merely a sign, of which the meaning
was understood. In the present case, the sign was not used, but the thing
signified was communicated in perfection. " He was anointed," says the
Scripture, " with the Holy Ghost. "t
There are two periods at which this anointing took place. The first was
his conception, when he was sanctified by the Holy Ghost, endowed with all
the graces which can adorn human nature, and with those faculties which, be
ing afterwards developed, excited admiration even in his youth ; for at the age
of twelve he astonished the doctors of Jerusalem by his wisdom, both in ask-
ing and answering questions. The second was his baptism, when "the
heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the spirit of God descending like
a dove, and lighting upon him."* The Spirit coming down from the opened
heavens in a visible form rested upon him, to signify, in conjunction with the
* Psalm Ixxxix. 20. -j- Acts x. 38. * Matt. iii. 16.

THE PROPHETICAL OFFICE OF CHRIST. 27
>oice which proceeded from the excellent glory, to all who were present, that
God recognized him as his Son, and bestowed upon him an abundant measure
of heavenly influences. In this manner he was publicly installed in his office,
and fitted for the discharge of its duties. And thus the prophecy was fulfilled,
" The spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and under
standing, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of the
fear of the Lord : and shall make him of quick understanding in the fear of
the Lord : and he shall not judge after the sight of his eyes, nor reprove after
the hearing of his ears : but with righteousness shall he judge the poor, and
reprove with equity for the meek of the earth : and he shall smite the earth
with the rod of his mouth, and with the breath of his lips shall he slay the
wicked. And righteousness shall be the girdle of his loins, and faithfulness
the girdle of his reins."*
This anointing relates to the human nature of our Saviour. I should have
deemed this remark unnecessary, had I not found that even some professed
theologians have entertained confused notions of the subject,, arid have hesi
tated to admit the plain proposition which has now been laid down. They
seem to have been led into a mistake, by supposing that, because he was
anointed as mediator, the unction extended to both his natures, forgetting that,
in consequence of the hypostatical union, what is done to or by either of them,
is done to or by his person. We say that the BavOfamt, the God-man, died for
us upon the cross ; but we mean that he died only as a man. In like manner
we say, that our Mediator was anointed to his office ; but we mean that he
was anointed only in his human nature, unless we refer simply to his appoint
ment to office, &c. And that we ought to mean nothing more, it requires very
little reflection to perceive. The anointing is the communication of the Holy
Ghost to qualify him for the duties of his office ; but his divine .nature stood
in need of no new qualification, and could receive no accession of gifts and
graces ; whereas, his human nature possessed no excellence which had not
been imparted to it, was capable of progressive improvement, and actually
grew in wisdom as well as in stature, and in favour with God and with men.
The particular offices to which our Saviour was anointed, were the three
which have been already mentioned as existing among the Jews, and which
were conferred by the ceremony of pouring or sprinkling oil upon the persons
set apart to them, the prpphetical, the sacerdotal, and the regal. The first is
ascribed to our Saviour in the following passage, which the use of it in the
New Testament authorises us to apply to him, " The Lord thy God will raise
up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me ;
unto him shall ye hearken ;"t the second in these words, " The Lord hath
sworn, and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Mel-
chizedek ;"* and the third, when God says to him, " Yet have I set my King
upon my holy hill of Zion."§ It is unnecessary to bring any quotations from
the Christian Scriptures to prove, that all these offices belong to Jesus Christ.
It has been remarked that, under the ancient economy, they were held by
separate individuals, or at least that never more than two of them were united
in the same person. There were kings and priests as Melchizedek; kings and
prophets as David ; and perhaps, too, prophets and priests in the case of some
of the family of Aaron ; but no person occurs who was invested with them all.
This honour was reserved to>our Redeemer, who alone could realize in him
self what was prefigured by the various types. Moses, however, may be con
sidered as an exception, who was at once the prophet of the Lord, the leader
of the people, or " king in Jeshurun,"|| as he is termed ; and a priest, or one
who at least performed the duties of a priest prior to the inauguration of Aaron.
* Is. xi. 2—5. f Deut. xviii. 15. $ Ps. ex. 4. § Ps. ii. 6. || Deut. xxxiii. 5.

28 THE PROPHETICAL OFFICE OF CHRIST.
But this, it is said, was an extraordinary case, admitted only for a time, and
not intended to be an example. This instance, however, seems to abate the
force of the remark, as does likewise that of Samuel, although I do not find
that it has been noticed, who was at once the judge of Israel, a prophet,
and a priest. As, however, neither he nor Moses was high-priest, and both
ministered occasionally only at the altar, it may be true that no person but our
Saviour permanently possessed all these offices.
It was necessary that he should be a prophet, a priest, and a king, because
the duties of all those offices were requisite to the complete deliverance of his
people from the circumstances in which they were placed. The moral condi
tion of mankind shows, that not one of them could be dispensed with. They
were involved in ignorance, guilt, and pollution. Their ignorance is removed
by his prophetical office, their guilt by his priestly office, and their pollution
by his kingly office. As a prophet, he dispels the darkness of ignorance ; as
a priest, he atones for our sins ; as a king, he delivers us from the bondage of
depravity. He reveals God to us as a prophet ; he brings us near to God as
a priest ; he renews us after the image of God as a king. As a prophet he il
luminates our minds by the spirit of truth ; as a priest, he tranquillizes out
hearts and consciences by the spirit of peace ; as a king, he sanctifies the
whole man by the spirit of holiness. The necessity of all his offices for the
complete and final salvation of men, is pointed out in these words of Paul ;
" Of God he is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and
redemption."* As these offices relate to both God and man, God being the
immediate object of the priestly, and man of the prophetical and kingly office,
our Lord realizes the character of a mediator by performing their duties ; for
he establishes peace between heaven and earth, and binds them together in in
timate and inviolable friendship.
In the relation of his offices to one another, the priestly office must be con
sidered as the foundation of the other two. If Christ had not been a priest,
he would not have been a prophet and a king ; it being evident that, unless
salvation had been obtained for us, it could not be revealed and applied. All
his acts towards sinners for their deliverance from sin, and their restoration to
the favour of God, pre-suppose an atonement by which Divine justice was sa
tisfied. It was necessary that, as a priest, he should fulfil the condition of the
new covenant, before he could administer it as a prophet and a king, for the
communication of its blessings. But the order of the execution of his offices
towards us is different. In the salvation ofthe soul, as in the creation of our
world, he commences with the diffusion of light. The knowledge of our
selves and of the Saviour, is necessary to the production of faith, by which
his righteousness is embraced as the only foundation of our acceptance with
God. Conversion consists in " the opening of the blind eyes, and the turning
of the soul from darkness to light ;" and this is the work of his prophetical
office. When our Prophet manifests himself to us by his word and spirit in
his mediatorial character, we come to him as our priest, whose sacrifice has
expiated our guilt, and submit to him as our king, whose service is perfect
liberty, and whose power will defend us from every evil.
I omitted to mention, in the proper place, that the elder Socinians, who be
lieved that Christ was a mere man, and at first was ignorant of the doctrine
which he was appointed to publish to the world, maintained that, before he
entered upon his ministry, he was taken up into heaven, and there received
all necessary instructions. Thus the Racovian Catechism, which is a sum
mary of their creed, in answer to the question, How Jesus Christ came to the
knowledge of the Divine will 1 says, " He ascended into heaven, and there
saw his Father, and that life and blessedness which he has announced to us,
and heard from his Father all the things which he ought to teach ; and being

THE PROPHETICAL OFFICE OF CHRIST. 29
afterwards let down from heaven to earth, he was anointed with an immense
effusion of the Holy Spirit, by "whose afflatus he delivered all the things which
he had learned from the Father." The time when this is supposed to have
happened, was soon after his baptism, and during his abode in the wilderness.
It is enough to have stated this opinion, concerning which the Scripture pre
serves a profound silence, and which rests solely upon the confident and
groundless assertion of those heretics. It was manifestly unnecessary that he
should be taken up into heaven, because the will of God could have been as
fully revealed to him upon earth. This fancy originated neither in Scripture
nor in reason, but was a dishonest expedient resorted to for the purpose of
supporting their favourite dogma concerning the simple humanity of our Sa
viour, by evading the argument for his pre-existence, founded on those pas
sages of the New Testament which declare that he came down from heaven.
The word prophet, is commonly understood to mean a person who foretells
future events ; and in this sense it frequently occurs. But it also signifies a
person who speaks by divine inspiration, whether the subject relate to the fu
ture, the past, or the present ; a person who speaks in an eminent and extraor
dinary manner ; and even a person who speaks in the name of another like
himself. Indeed, the Greek word nepo/mw, and the Hebrew word mi, are used
with a considerable variety of meaning. By some of the Jews, the latter term
is interpreted an orator, or eloquent preacher ; and by others, a man to whom
God has revealed secret things. In the following words of God to Moses
concerning Aaron his brother, it simply denotes one who speaks in the name
of another: " Thou shalt speak unto him, and put words in his mouth ; and
I will be with thy mouth, and with his mouth, and will teach you what ye
shall do. And he shall be thy spokesman unto the people ; and he shall be,
even he shall be to thee instead of a mouth, and thou shalt be to him instead
of a God."* This passage is to be taken in connexion with what is after
wards said: " See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh, and Aaron thy bro
ther shall be thy prophet."t
It is not with the usual limitation of the term that we call Jesus Christ a
prophet. We use it in its utmost latitude, to denote that he is the great mes
senger of God, the revealer of his counsels and will, who has not only fore
told future events, but made known to us Divine truths to be believed, pro
mises to be embraced, ordinances to be observed, and laws to be obeyed.
When we contemplate Jesus Christ simply as a divine person, we must
consider him as the uncreated source of all intelligence and wisdom : He is
" the true Light that lighteneth every man that cometh into the world. '* In
his mediatorial character, however, he speaks not properly in his own name,
but in the name of him who gave him his commission, and brings to us his
Father's message. Hence we say, that he was invested with the prophetical
office ; the term, office, implying that he acted a subordinate part, and by the
authority of another. What has been now stated is conformable to his own
declarations, of which the following are a specimen : " My doctrine is not
mine, but his that sent me. vIf any man will do his will, he shall know of the
doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself." " I have not
spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a command
ment what I should say, and what I should speak. "§ In the first verse of the
Revelation of John, his intermediate agency in the communication of know
ledge to the church is distinctly expressed: " The revelation of Jesus Christ,
which God gave unto him, to show unto his servants things which must shortly
come to pass ; and he sent and signified it by his angel to his servant John."||
Having made these preliminary observations, I proceed to treat directly 'of
* Exod. iv. 15, 16. * Ib. vii. 1. * John i. 9. § Ib. vii. 16, 17. xii. 49. flRev.i. 1.
c2

30 THE PROPHETICAL OFFICE OF CHRIST.
his prophetical office. The exercise of it may be considered in three distinct
periods. The first reaches from the fall to his incarnation ; the second from
that era, or from his baptism, to his death ; and the third from his resurrec
tion, and particularly from the day of Pentecost to the end of the world.
The first period extends from the fall to his birth ; for, although he was
not incarnate, he was the appointed Saviour of his people ; and, as far as was
consistent with his present state, he acted the part of a mediator. The as
sumption of our nature was not indispensably necessary to prepare him for
giving instruction to mankind, although every gracious communication to the
world pre-supposed that event as afterwards to take place, and was made in
the view of it. There were frequent appearances of a divine person in the
human form, who delivered commands and promises to the patriarchs ; 'and it
seems reasonable to conclude, that it was the same person who proposed ac
tually to take our nature in a future age. It is highly probable, that it was he
who promulgated from Sinai the system of laws which served as the founda
tion of religion for so many ages ; and, indeed, by whom can we so naturally
conceive sacrifices to have been instituted, and the knowledge of future events
to have been communicated, as by him in whose person, and manifestation,
and life, and death, and resurrection, and subsequent glory, the types and
predictions were to be fulfilled ? But there is no necessity to have recourse
to conjectures and probabilities, when we are in possession of explicit and au
thentic information. The following words of Peter deserve particular atten
tion : " Of which salvation the prophets have inquired and searched diligently,
who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you ; searching what, or
what manner of time, the spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when
it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should fol
low."* The remarkable expression in this passage is, the " Spirit of Christ,"
or of the Messiah ; which evidently signifies not merely, as the Socinians af
firm, that he predicted the Messiah, but that he was sent by him ; and, con
sequently, teaches us that the prophets were his ministers, commissioned and
qualified by him to give instructions suited to that age of the church. Hence
it appears, that he executed his prophetical office prior to his coming in the
flesh, and that the books of the Old Testament contain the Revelation of
Christ, as well as those of the New. It is not an objection against this state
ment, that God is said to have spoken to the fathers by the prophets, and in
these last days to have spoken to us by his Son ;t words which seem to im
port that till the last days the ministry of the Son did not commence ; because
their design is merely to point out the difference in the external and visible
agency under the two dispensations. Under the first, God made known his
will by the medium of the prophets ; under the second, by the medium of his
Son in our nature. But the same person who, in the fulness of time, declared
the will of God in person, revealed it before his incarnation by human mes
sengers, as he continued to do after his ascension. The difference between
the former and the present dispensation consisted chiefly in this, that the pre
sent commenced with the personal ministry of the Messiah ; and hence the
Gospel is called, the word " which began to be spoken by the Lord."*
The second period extends from the birth of Christ, or more properly from
his baptism, when he entered upon his public ministry, to his death. During
this period, the only-begotten Son who is in the bosom of the Father, declared
him to men with his own lips. The privilege which his contemporaries en
joyed, who heard his discourses, so full of wisdom and grace, was invaluable,
although few of them understood and improved it. " Blessed," he said to his
disciples, " are your eyes, for they see ; and your ears, for they hear. For
• lPeti. 10, 11. f Heb. i. 1,2.' * Ib. ii. 3.

THE PROPHETICAL OFFICE OF CHRIST. 31
verily I say unto you, that many prophets and righteous men Lave desired to
see those things which ye see, and have not seen them ; and to hear those
things which ye hear, and have not heard them."* Were I to attempt to give
an account of the instructions which he delivered to his disciples and others,
it would be r.ecessary to transcribe, or at least to lay before you, a summary of
the Gospels. In general, it may be observed, that, while he corrected the
false notions of religion, and the perverse interpretations of the law of Moses,
which prevailed among the Jews, he unfolded the character of God in all its
perfection, called the attention of men to the cultivation of piety and holiness
as alone acceptable to him, exhibited himself as the Messiah whom they ex
pected, and gave intimations of the design of his mission, and the nature of
the salvation which he had come to accomplish. At present I shall not speak
more particularly of his doctrine, because it will come under review in the
sequel of this lecture.
There is a question, however, which this is the proper place to consider,
Whether Christ corrected and perfected the moral law, which was delivered
to the Jews ? It has been maintained, that the moral precepts of Christ were
in some instances different from those of Moses, and that our Saviour has
enlarged the law, by prescribing new duties, and has even prohibited certain
actions which were formerly permitted. It is a favourite tenet of Socinians,
that the moral system delivered to the Church before the coming of Christ,
was imperfect, and needed correction or supplement, and they have been led
to adopt it by their peculiar views with respect to the design of the mission
of Christ. As they do not admit, with the Catholic church, that he came
into the world to expiate our sins, it was necessary to find something for him
to do, which should be worthy of the great expectations that were excited,
and the mighty preparations that were introductory to his appearance. With
this view they are anxious to prove, that the rule of morality which had been
previously given to the Jews, laboured under many defects, that he might have
the glory of having published to mankind a law clear and full, in which our
whole duty to God and to man is explained. In the Racovian Catechism,
which first appeared about the beginning of the seventeenth century, we find
this question, " What are the perfect commandments of God, comprehended
in the New Testament ?" to which this answer is returned — " A part of them
is contained in the precepts delivered by Moses, together with those which
were added by Christ and his apostles ; and a part is contained in those which
were peculiarly prescribed by the same Christ and his apostles. "t By the
latter, I apprehend they mean precepts entirely new, and by the former old
precepts improved. They go on to show, under the several precepts of the
decalogue, the supposed additions and improvements, in a manner by no means
satisfactory, and sometimes exceedingly trifling and silly. On the contrary,
those whom we call orthodox, affirm that the law was absolutely perfect from
the beginning ; that Christ came not to destroy it, or any part of it, but to fulfil
it ; and that all the duties enjoined by him, which have been supposed to be
new, may be resolved into love to God, or love to man. The right answer to
this question depends upon the manner in which it is stated. In the Socinian
sense, I have no hesitation in saying, that it leads to a conclusion which ought
not to be admitted. If it were asked, Whether Jesus Christ enjoined greater
love to -God and our neighbour than was enjoined by the law of Moses? no
man who had considered the subject, could hesitate to give a negative answer
But if it were asked, Whether he has prescribed new modes of expressing
our love to both ? I cannot conceive that there could be any heresy in saying,
that he may have done so. Divines have endeavoured to prove, that faith in
* Matt. xiii. 16, 17. f Catech. Eccl. Pol. Sect. vi. Cap. i.

32 THE PROPHETICAL OFFICE OF CHRIST.
Christ, and repentance, are duties inculcated by the law which was given to
Adam in innocence. This position requires explanation. Faith and repent
ance could not be duties incumbent upon man, while he retained his integrity,
and consequently they can be referred to the moral law as originally given, only
in the same sense in which all possible duties of all possible intelligent creatures
might be referred to it, because it enjoins supreme love to God, from which uni
versal obedience will flow. In strict language, they are new modifications of this
principle, or new duties founded on new relations between man and his Creator.
At the same time it should be observed that, whether we call them new or
old, they were not prescribed for the first time by our Saviour, but were en
joined under the former dispensation. The arguments commonly advanced
to prove that the moral law was corrected and improved by our Saviour, are
of little or no force ; either because the new duties which he is supposed to
have enjoined, were binding before his coming, or because his design has
been totally misapprehended, as if he was correcting the law itself, when he
was only exposing and rejecting the corrupt glosses and traditionary maxims
of the rabbies.
The third period extends from the accession of Christ, or rather from the
day of Pentecost, when he poured out the Holy Ghost on his disciples, to the
end of the world. But this period may be divided into two portions, accord
ing to the difference in the mode of administration. In the first he instructed
the Church by extraordinary means. The apostles were inspired men, and
delivered to the world the revelations which were made to them by the Spirit.
And as it was the spirit of Christ who filled them with knowledge and wis
dom, our Saviour continued to execute his prophetical office by their ministry,
as much as when he declared the mysteries of the kingdom to his immediate
followers with his own lips. This is also evident from his words to them on
the evening before his death : "I have yet many things to say unto you, but
ye cannot hear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of Truth is come,
he will guide you into all truth ; for he shall not speak of himself ; but what
soever he shall hear, that shall he speak : and he will show you things to
come. He shall glorify me ; for he shall receive of mine, and shall show it
unto you. All things that the Father hath are mine ; therefore said I, that
he shall take of mine, and show it unto you."* There is no difference
in respect of authority between the doctrines of his apostles, and those
delivered by himself. They are equally his doctrines, and are entitled to
be received with the same submission of mind, and the same undoubting
confidence. Hence we perceive how groundless is the distinction which
has been made between the gospels and the epistles, as if the former were
a more certain rule of faith than the latter. As those who chiefly insist on
this distinction, affirm that^our Saviour was a mere man, peccable and fal
lible, there is no proper foundation for it in their system, because such a
person could not be so much superior to the apostles, as to entitle his testi
mony to a decided preference to theirs, especially as theirs was confirmed
by miracles as great and numerous as those which he performed. We have
always reason to suspect those who depreciate one part of Scripture to en
hance the value of another. This expedient has not been resorted to from a
conviction of its truth, but to serve a particular purpose. Certain doctrines
which its authors are unwilling to receive, are more fully and explicitly taught
in the epistles ; and the insinuations thrown out respecting their obscurity,
the perplexeckiess of the reasoning, the abruptness of the style, and the infe
riority of the writers, are designed to set aside their evidence in favour of
those doctrines ; as in a legal process, the imputations on the character of a
* John xvi. 12—15.

THE PROPHETICAL OFFICE OF CHRIST. 33
witness, are intended to weaken the force of his testimony. The shift is as
unavailing as it is dishonest, for it were easy to show that the contested doc»
trines, as the divinity and atonement of Christ, election and justification by
grace, are plainly delivered in the gospels ; and that the only respect in
which the epistles differ from them is, that there they receive a more ample
illustration, and the objections against them are considered and refuted. The
epistles are the word of Christ, as much as the gospels, for the writers were
assisted by his spirit in composing them. When conjoined with the Gospels,
they fill up or complete what we call the Christian revelation, because it was
communicated to the world by Christ himself, and his accredited messengers.
The second portion into which we have divided the last period of the
ministry of Christ as a prophet, reaches from the close of revelation to the
end of time. During this interval, he executes his office by ordinary means ;
that is, by the Scriptures, which it is his will that men should read and under
stand ; by his ministers, who are appointed to explain and apply them ; and by
his Spirit, of whose agency, in the illumination of the mind, we shall after
wards speak. Jesus Christ, in his state of exaltation, continues to be the in
structor of the ignorant, and of them that are out of the way ; and his work
will not cease, till all who are to be saved have been brought to the acknow
ledgment of the truth. Hence, he is represented as still speaking to us by
his word, written and preached : " See that ye refuse not him that speak
eth ; for, if they escaped not, who refused him that spake on earth, much
more shall not we escape, if we turn away from him that speaketh from
heaven."* The system of ordinances, and ministers, and laws, instituted for
the conversion and salvation of men, has emanated from his authority, and
will be maintained by his providence, till its design is accomplished, in the
perfection of every member of the Church. " And he gave some, apostles ;
and some, prophets ; and some, evangelists ; and some, pastors and teachers ;
for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying
of the body of Christ : till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the
knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the
stature ofthe fulness of Christ: that we henceforth be no more children, tossed
to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the sleight of men<
and cunning craftiness, whereby they lie in wait to deceive ; but speaking the
truth in love, may grow up into him in all things, which is the head, even
Christ."* Whatever knowledge of God and his will, of the purposes of
grace, and the realities of the world to come, is found among men, it has
been derived from the instructions of Christ ; and his word will continue to
impart wisdom to his disciples, till they have entered into the world above,
where their faculties will be fully expanded, and vision will succeed to faith.
He is the sun of the spiritual world, whose rays, penetrating into our benighted
souls, diffuse a divine light, and make them shine with reflected glory. In
short, as there is but one sun in the heavens, from which light has flowed to
irradiate every region of the earth, throughout the successive generations of
mankind ; so, our Redeemer is the one source of all the spiritual wisdom
which has enlightened them from the beginning of the world, in whatever
form it has been communicated ; whether as a record of the past, or § predic
tion of the future ; a disclosure of mysteries which reason could not discover,
or an authoritative publication of the will of the Supreme. And hence ori
ginates the unity of revelation, the harmony that binds together the Jewish
and Christian Scriptures, the identity, in respect of substance, of the religions
of the antediluvians and the men of the present age ; for, great as the differ
ence seems to be upon a superficial view, it is reduced to this single point,
* Heb. xiL 25. f Eph. iv. 11—15.
Vol. IL— 5

34 THE PROPHETICAL OFFICE OF CHRIST.
that the germ contained in the first notices of it has now developed itself, and
yields fruit in abundance.
If you now ask, what Jesus Christ, as a prophet, has taught us ? I might, in
answer to the question, refer you to the Scriptures. These contain his in
structions under both dispensations, and are the only rule of faith and obe
dience. I shall not attempt to give you a summary of his doctrine, which
would occupy too much time; and, besides, would be improper, as it would
necessarily lead to a repetition of topics, which have been already considered,
and an anticipation of others, which will afterwards be discussed. I shall
confine myself to a few general remarks.
First, He has illustrated certain truths of which men already possessed
some knowledge, such as the existence of God, his providence and moral go
vernment, and the law which he has given for the regulation of our conduct.
Of these, some notions were found among nations which had not been favoured
with revelation ; but they were imperfect, and mingled with errors, as we have
seen in a former part of this course. It was in consequence of his teaching by
the prophets, that the Jews were so distinguished by their creed, that, in mat
ters of religion, the wisest nations of antiquity, when compared with them,
were as children and fools. No philosopher could ever venture to pronounce,
with unhesitating confidence, the proposition which was in the mouth of every
rustic in Canaan, that God is one. It is owing to his teaching by the Apos
tles, that the polytheism, the idolatry, the gross superstition, the licentious
maxims and barbarous usuages of Greece and Rome, and other nations less
civilized, have been supplanted by the pure and simple creed, which is adopted
in Christian countries, or, at least, in such of them as acknowledge the Scrip
ture alone as their standard. Those truths, which were once dimly seen, now
shine with the light of day. The knowledge of them is facilitated, and is
within the reach of the most common capacity, because they are not to be
sought out by laborious investigation, but to be received upon authority. The
voice of Jesus Christ has decided all controversies, and terminated all doubts
respecting them. " No man hath seen God at any time ; the only begotten
Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him."*
Secondly, He has established as certain, some points which were the sub
ject of conjecture, or of fluctuating opinion. I refer particularly to the im
mortality of the soul, and a future state of rewards and punishments. On these
topics much was talked and written, and, perhaps, they were not called in
question by the common people, who did not reason about them, but gave
credit to tradition. That the belief of the wisest among the heathens rested
upon no solid foundation, is evident from this fact, that when they proceed to
bring arguments, some of them are inconclusive and fanciful ; and those which
are of more weight, failed to produce conviction, as we see from the doubts ex
pressed by the most eminent philosophers. If at one time they seem to have
attained to certainty, at another they hesitated and wavered, and ended in leav
ing the matter to be determined by the event. "But Jesus Christ hath
abolished death, and brought life and immortality to light by the gospel."
Coming from the invisible state, he has so far disclosed its secrets, as to assure
us that the soul shall survive the death of the body, and will be consigned to
bliss or woe by the sentence of its Judge. Although this truth may have little
practical effect upon many of his followers ; they never call it in question ;
and they alone doubt and disbelieve, who, having renounced him as their
Teacher, commit themselves to the guidance of their erring reason, and the
blinding influence of unholy passions. In the creed of his followers, it is a
primary article, that the present is only the introductory stage of our existence ;
* John i. 18.

THE PROPHETICAL OFFICE OF CHRIST. 35
that at death we shall enter upon a new state of being ; and that, through him,
they who believe, shall enjoy perpetual felicity in heaven.
Thirdly, He has made known truths of which men were completely igno
rant. I refer to the scheme of redemption in all its parts, which, having its
origin in the sovereign will of God, is a matter of pure revelation. Some
notions were entertained by heathen nations of the placability of the divine
nature, and sacrifices were offered to appease the anger of the gods, and to
conciliate their favour. But they could assign no satisfactory reason for their
opinion or their practice. Their fathers had believed and acted in this man
ner before them, and they followed them without being able to show that their
hope had any solid foundation. The truth is, that it was not from reason that
they derived their ideas of the mercy of the Supreme Being, and the efficacy
of sacrifices, but from revelation, of which some fragments, encrusted with
superstition, had been handed down to them by tradition. Those faint rays,
which glimmered amidst the darkness of heathenism, proceeded from the Sun
of righteousness, but had been deprived of their splendor and their influence,
by the grossness of the medium through which they were transmitted. All
our knowledge of the gracious purposes of God, whether more or less exten
sive ; whether consisting in hopes and conjectures, or in the full assurance of
faith, must be traced to this source : " For who hath known the mind of the
Lord? or who hath been his counsellor?"* No one was present with him
but his Son, when the plan was formed for the salvation of our guilty race.
There is nothing in his external works to suggest the idea of it ; there is no
impression of heavenly mysteries upon visible objects. Providence displays
his beneficence and his patience ; but it gives no intimation of his purpose to
bestow final felicity upon sinners, of an atonement to expiate their guilt, or of
the communication of supernatural grace to purify their nature. " Eye hath
not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things
which God hath prepared for them that love him. But God hath revealed
them to us by his spirit ; for the spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things
of God."t It is the glory of Jesus Christ as a prophet, that he has not only
shed new light upon subjects of which men possessed some previous know-
ledgei but has disclosed a scene, in grandeur and interest, surpassing the won
ders of creation. It is chiefly on this account that there was a necessity for
his prophetical office. It is chiefly on this account that he is the Light of the
world. And, indeed, all the other knowledge which he has communicated to
mankind would have been of no avail, if he had not revealed his Father to us
as the God of love, and himself in the character of a Saviour. What we
wanted to know, was not merely that there is one God, but that he is propi
tious to his fallen creatiires ; not merely that we should worship him, but that
our services shall be acceptable to him ; not merely that there is a state beyond
the grave, but by what means we shall obtain possession of its blessedness.
On these important subjects, he has given us full satisfaction. How welcome
to us should be a teacher, who speaks the words of truth and grace, and in the
execution of his office, has realized the following interesting description :*
" The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me ; because the Lord hath anointed
me to preach good tidings unto the meek : he hath sent me to bind up the
broken-hearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives,/ and the opening of the
prison to them that are bound ; to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord,
and the day of vengeance of our God ; to comfort all that mourn ; to appoint
unto them that mourn in Zion, to give unto them beauty for ashes, the oil of
joy for mourning, the garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness ; that they
might be called trees of righteousness, the planting of the Lord, that he might
*Rom.xi. 34. * l Cor- "• 9~ 10- * Is. lxi. I— 3

36 THE PROPHETICAL OFFICE OF CHRIST.
be glorified." This is the jubilee of the human race, and the Messiah, in
the character of our prophet, has announced it by the Gospel.
*I shall resume the subject in the next Lecture.

LECTURE LV.
ON THE PROPHETICAL OFFICE OF CHRIST.
View of Christ's instructions as a Prophet continued — Superiority of Christ to all other
Teachers, in the completeness, perspicuity, authority, and efficacy of his instructions —
Agency of the Holy Ghost in the execution of Christ's Prophetical office ; its necessity
and effects.
In the preceding Lecture, I pointed out the qualifications of Jesus Christ
for the prophetical office, the time during which it is executed, and the sub
jects of his instructions, of which only a very general account was attempted.
You would observe, that the subjects to which I referred were all of a reli
gious nature, and to these his instructions were confined.
Jesus Christ has said nothing concerning some topics to which the atten
tion of men is earnestly directed, and which are intimately connected with
their temporal interests ; as science, politics, and the various arts by which
life is sustained and adorned. Of these he took no notice ; not because they
are unimportant ; for, in their own sphere, they are of great utility ; but because
they bore no relation to the purpose of his mission. In the business of the
present life, reason and experience are sufficient guides. We needed no reve
lation to assist us in the study of nature, in the operations of husbandry and
commerce, in the constitution of civil government, and the enactment of laws
for the security of our persons and property. The degree of knowledge which
is necessary for purposes of practical use, may be obtained on these subjects
by the exercise of the faculties with which our Creator .has endowed us.
There was no reason, therefore, why Jesus should have interrupted his more
important labours to descend to details about these inferior matters. He was
something higher than a philosopher or statesman ; he was a teachar of sub
lime mysteries, which it had not entered into the mind of man to conceive.
He has not given us so full and particular an account of a future state as
some men may deem desirable, and they may, therefore, look upon the want
of it as a defect. Curiosity is a very powerful principle, and every thing
which promises to gratify it meets with eager attention. How welcome to
some persons would be graphical descriptions of heaven, and such a detail of
the state of the inhabitants and their employments, as we receive, of the places
which they have visited, from travellers on their return from a foreign country !
Enthusiasts indulge in such descriptions. Mistaking the visions of fancy for
realities, they retail them as authentic, and sometimes obtain for their fables
the credit which is due only to truth. You might imagine that one of them
had been in the celestial paradise, and had lately descended to the earth with
the impressions of its scenes of magnificence and felicity fresh in his memory;
while, in fact, he is the dupe of his own sleeping or waking dreams. Ma
homet has portrayed his paradise with the bright colours of oriental imagery ;
and while it rises to the view of his deluded followers, with its groves of per
petual verdure, and its cooling streams, and its houris, and all its other sensual
delights, they feel their hearts glow with augmented zeal for his religion, and
new fervour of desire. Our Prophet, who alone could have given a faithful

THE PROPHETICAL OFFICE OF CHRIST. 37
description of the invisible state, has abstained from it. He has contented him
self with informing us, that there is a place of rest for his followers beyond
the limits of this visible diurnal sphere, and with a general account of the ex
ercises and enjoyments of those who are admitted into it. There is nothing
to please the imagination ; but there is enough to support faith, and animate
hope, and minister consolation amidst the ills of life ; and if these purposes
are. accomplished, his end is gained. If men will not be excited to a life of
piety and holiness, by the simple knowledge that there is another world in
which the followers of Christ shall receive a recompence of incalculable value
and everlasting duration, they would have continued equally insensible, and as
much attached to earthly vanities, although by the particularity of the descrip
tion, the veil had been drawn aside, and it had stood disclosed, as it were, to
the eye.
Having taken a general view of the instructions of Christ, I proceed to lay
before you some characters or properties by which they are distinguished,
and he is proved to be superior to all other teachers.
The first particular to which I request your attention, is their fulness or
completeness ; for, although there are some points, as we have shown, which
he has passed over in silence, there is nothing wanting in his instructions as
a system of religious truth. To be convinced of this fact, we must take into
consideration the Scriptures of the Old and the New Testament as constituting
a whole ; for such they are, having been dictated by one Spirit, and intended
to promote one design. When we call them two revelations, we express our
selves inaccurately if we mean that they are different in the subject of which
they treat ; for it is one religion, varying only in its external form, which is
taught from the beginning to the end of the Bible. Were we to separate the
Old and the New Testament, and to examine them as distinct and independent
revelations, we might find defects in the former ; but what is wanting in the
one is supplied in the other, and both taken together constitute the word of
Christ. In like manner, if we were to consider by itself the revelation made
by our Saviour in person, it also might appear to us deficient, for he had many
things to say to his disciples which they were not then able to bear, of which,
however, they were afterwards informed when the Spirit came and led them
into all the truth. I have no doubt that the New Testament alone is sufficient
for salvation, as it contains the whole gospel, or all that can be known con
cerning the gracious purposes of God ; but when I speak of the fulness of our
Saviour's instructions, I refer also to the Old Testament, of which the his
tories and prophecies and devotional compositions are so useful and edifying
to the church. What I affirm is, that he has made a perfect revelation of the
will of God, using the term perfect in a relative sense, as importing that it is
fully adapted to its design. As much light is let in upon the mind as is suited
to its present capacity and circumstances. We may learn from the Scriptures
all the truths which we ought to know, and all the duties which we are bound
to perform ; we may find the way to heaven, and receive all the directions and
assistance which we need in pursuing our journey to it. While vain curiosity
is checked, humble inquiries are encouraged, and the means of satisfying them
are provided. Whosoever sits down at the feet of Christ and receives his law,
shall be made wise unto salvation.
" I know that Messias cometh, which is called Christ ; when he is come,
he will tell us all things."* These words have no authority in themselves, as
they were spoken by an ignorant, heretical woman ; but they prove the state
of opinion among the Samaritans, and no doubt also ofthe Jews. There was
a general expectation that the Messiah would solve all questions in religion,
* John iv. 25.
D

38 THE PROPHETICAL OFFICE OF CHRIST.
and make a clearer and more perfect revelation than was then enjoyed. When
Moses, by the order of God, had given laws and ordinances to his country
men to regulate their worship and obedience, he added, " The Lord thy God
will raise up unto thee a prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like
unto me."* Whether we conceive Jesus Christ alone to be meant, or the
words to have a double sense, and to refer, in the first instance to a succession
of prophets, and ultimately to him, they manifestly implied, that new commu
nications ofthe Divine will would be made. When the ministry of the pro
phets came to a close, the Jews received a commandment to adhere steadfastly
to the law which was published from Sinai, but at the same time were directed
to look for a dispensation of greater light. Hence the last of them closes his
book with a prediction of the appearance of the Sun of Righteousness, and of
his forerunner who would prepare the people for the day of the Lord. When
the Baptist came, and the eyes of all men were turned to him, he told them
of another, whose shoes he was not worthy to unloose, and who would excel
him in doctrine, as well as in dignity of person. " He that cometh from
above, is above all ; he that is of the earth is earthly, and speaketh of the
earth : he that cometh from heaven is above all. And what he hath seen and
heard, that he testifieth. "t But there is no intimation of another divine mes
senger after Jesus Christ, to supply what may be wanting, or to illuminate
what may be dark in his revelation. By the books of the New Testament
the canon is completed. God, when he spoke to us by his Son, spoke for the
last time. The spirit of inspiration is withdrawn from the church, and men
must henceforth walk by the rule of the written word. This is a proof of the
fulness of revelation. It is not because God is less .attentive than in former
times to the interests of mankind, that he no longer sends extraordinary mes
sengers, but because the revelation which he has already given is sufficient.
The Scriptures are " profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for in
struction in righteousness," and are able to make us " perfect, and thoroughly
to furnish us unto all good works."*
It is on the ground of the fulness or perfection of the instructions of Jesus
Christ as prophet, that we are commanded to hear him alone, and to call no
man master or teacher. If there were any defect in revelation, it would not
be a crime to endeavour to supply it by the efforts of our own reason, or by
having recourse to the superior wisdom of others. The undue stress which is
sometimes laid upon human authority in religion, betrays the want of proper
respect for the claims of our Saviour to the implicit and unreserved confidence
of his professed disciples. The church of Rome, by admitting traditions as a
part of the rule of faith, and placing them on a level with the dictates of inspi
ration, pronounces the Scriptures to be imperfect, and is as manifestly guilty
of setting aside the prophetical office of Christ, as she is of setting aside his
priestly office when she exalts the glorified saints to the rank of intercessors
with God.
'The second particular which is worthy of attention, is the perspicuity of his"
instructions. In ascribing this property to them, I wish it to be understood
that I do not apply it to every part of them, but to the Scriptures considered
as a whole. The revelation of Jesus Christ, taken as a whole, is perspicuous ;
that is, it communicates distinct and satisfactory information respecting all the
subjects which it interests us to know% Some parts of it, when viewed by
themselves, are obscure. This is the general character of the Old Testament,
so far as it speaks of future things, whether they relate to Christ himself and
his work, or to the events which were to befal his church to the end of the
world. This obscurity may be said to have been intentional, it being the de-
* Deut. xviii. 15. f John iii. 31, 32. * 2 Tim. iii. 16, 17.

THE PROPHETICAL OFFICE OF CHRIST. 39
sign of God not to give more light than was adapted to the circumstances of
mankind. You will perceive that his wisdom required that a clear and minute
statement of future things should not be given, for various reasons, and parti
cularly that there might be no interference with the free agency of men, who
were to be instruments, and, in many cases, the unconscious instruments, of
fulfilling his will. But these obscurities, and particularly those which relate
to the Messiah, are cleared up in other parts of revelation ; for what was for
merly the subject of prediction, is now the subject of history. The incongrui
ties which seemed to be in his character, while at one time he was described
as a man of sorrows, and at another as a mighty conqueror ; at one time as
dying, and at another as enjoying immortal life, are explained in the gospels,
and are seen to harmonize in the person of Jesus of Nazareth. " These are
the words which I spake unto you while I was yet 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."* There are obscurities, too, which arise
from the nature of the subject. We cannot understand the doctrine of the
Trinity, of the union of two natures in Christy and of the operations of the
Holy Ghost upon the soul ; we cannot give an answer to several questions
which are proposed with respect to the divine decrees, the agency of Provi
dence, and the origin of evil. But before we make our ignorance an objection
against the perfection of revelation, we should be certain that it proceeds from
the suppression of information which might have been communicated, and not
from our want of capacity. Of this, however, we are not certain ; or rather,
we have reason to believe that some of those subjects are beyond the compre
hension of any created intellect, and that none of them could have been ren
dered intelligible to us in the present state of our faculties. The obscurity,
therefore', which attends them, is no reproach to our Teacher, who has adapted
his lessons to the ability of his scholars. He could have given a full explana
tion of them, for to him they are not mysteries ; but to whom should he have
addressed it ? Not, surely, to us, in whose minds his words would have ex
cited no ideas, and who should have been in the same situation with the pro
phet Daniel, who said, when in answer to his question the man clothed in
linen declared the time of the end of the wonders, " I heard, but I under
stood not."
It is worthy of attention, that although in such cases the interior of the doc
trines is enveloped in darkness which no eye can penetrate, the doctrines
themselves are clearly revealed. No person who reads the Scriptures with
attention and candour can doubt that there is a plurality of persons in the God
head ; that our nature and the divine are united in our Saviour ; that God has
fore-ordained all things which come to pass ; and that men and all their ac
tions are subject to the controul of his providence. It is not necessary that
we should be able to show how these things are, nor is it possible to conceive
any moral purpose which such knowledge would promote; religion is con
cerned only with the facts ; and these are stated in such a manner, that inge
nuity is required, not to find, but to avoid finding them in the Scriptures. If
it be true that the facts alone are of practical utility, and that a more intimate
acquaintance with them would contribute nothing to their effect, our Lord has
been sufficiently explicit ; and, with respect even to these points, has fulfilled
his duty as a prophet.
With regard to revelation, considered as a whole, and as intended to instruct
us in religion, no man can reasonably complain of want of perspicuity. What
is more plain, than that there is one God, possessed of every natural and mo
ral perfection ? — that he is the Creator, and Governor, and Judge of the hu-
* Luke xxiv. 44.

40 THE PROPHETICAL OFFICE OF CHRIST.
man race U that we are sinners, and his Son is our Saviour ?— that Jesus
Christ died for our sins, and now intercedes for us in heaven ?— that we arc
justified through faith in his blood, and sanctified by his Spirit ?— that we are
bound to yield obedience to his law ?— that he will raise the dead, pronounce
sentence upon the righteous and the wicked, and receive his faithful followers
into his everlasting kingdom ? These, and similar topics, which constitute the
essence of religion, are expressed in the plainest manner, and are level to the
lowest capacity. The unlearned may understand them — and even children
may attain such a measure of knowledge as shall awaken the feelings and
exercises of piety. No man can be a scholar or philosopher without superior
talents, and many years spent in reading, and observation, and reflection ; but
to a disciple of Christ, nothing more is required than attention, humility, and
prayer. A third character of the instructions of Christ, is the authority with which
they are delivered. The manner is not that of an ordinary teacher, who feels
it incumbent upon him to prove what he says, but of a legislator, who com
mands. The first chapter of the Bible (for you will remember that the whole
Scripture is the revelation of Christ, as I showed in my last lecture) furnishes
a specimen. An event is there recorded, of which there could be no human
witness, and about which, therefore, the ingenuity of men has displayed itself
in the invention of a variety of theories. The history of the creation is not
submitted by Moses to the judgment of the learned, but propounded as un
questionably true ; not a single argument is advanced in support of the nar
rative ; coming from the Creator himself, who revealed it to his servant, it
demands the assent of all to whom it is published. " In the beginning, God
created the heavens and the earth." The same authoritative manner is appa
rent throughout the whole Scripture. It is seen in the ministry of the suc
ceeding prophets. No hesitation is expressed, whether they foretell future
events, or tender reproofs, or denounce threatenings, or inculcate duties.
Their personal authority, indeed, was nothing, but they speak in the name of
God ; bearing his commission, they demand implicit obedience ; and, if they
ever condescend to reason, it is solely with a view to give greater force to
their admonitions and intreaties. The Scriptures every where suggest the idea
-of a law, accompanied with many manifestations of grace, but speaking in
the tone of command, and requiring submission as our duty.
The authoritative manner, however, is more fully displayed in the personal
instructions of our Lord. There was necessarily some abatement in those of
the prophets, who, being only his messengers, were under the necessity of
appealing to their commission ; but, in him, authority assumed its most dig
nified character. While they spake in the name of God, he spake in his own
name. It is true, that he also was the messenger of the Lord of Hosts ; but he
was of a different rank from all who had preceded him. He was the Son, as
well as the servant of Jehovah, and, therefore, entitled to address mankind in
a style which would have been unbecoming and presumptuous in a mere mor
tal ; and, accordingly, if on some occasions he referred to his commission as
attested by miracles, on others he spake as the oracle of truth. "Verily,
verily, I say unto you," was the only argument which he usually assigned. for
his doctrines — the only reason which he alleged for demanding the assent and
obedience of his hearers. " The people," we are told, " were astonished at
his doctrine ; for he taught them as one having authority, and not as the
Scribes."* This remark is made at the close of his sermon on the mount,
throughout which he had spoken in a strain which might well astonish the
hearers, because it was different from any thing to which they had been ac-
* Matt. vii. 28, 29.

THE PROPHETICAL OFFICE OF CHRIST. 41
customed. The Scribes were regarded as persons of superior wisdom, and
the people listened with reverence to these expounders of the law. He treated
them as his inferiors, and, without hesitation or ceremony, set aside their
maxims as false and licentious. ' To their instructions, supported as they
were by the traditions of the elders, which they pretended to be of equal
weight with the written word ; to their instructions, which no man hitherto
ventured to dispute, he opposed his simple affirmation : " It hath been said,"
or, " ye have heard that it was said to them of old," but ' I tell you the
contrary.' It is in consequence of the authority with which the instructions of Christ
are delivered, that faith is prescribed as a duty. They are not exhibited as
matters of speculation, to which we may assent or not, as we feel ourselves
disposed. We are bound to believe them and to act upon them, from respect
for him, as well as from a regard to our own interest. The gospel is called a
law, because it is the will of a superior, and faith is called the obedience of
faith. Unbelievers are guilty, not only of rejecting his proffered grace, but
also of despising his authority. Hence, the commission which he gives to
his apostles, and which authorises the ministry of the word to the end of the
world, was enforced by this awful sanction : " He that believeth shall be
saved, and he that believeth not shall be damned."*
The last particular which I shall mention, is the efficacy of his instructions.
A power accompanies them which was never exerted by human eloquence.
" Is not my word as a fire ? saith the Lord ; and like a hammer that breaketh
the rock in pieces ?"t We have a remarkable instance, in the effect produced
upon the servants of the Jewish Sanhedrim, who were sent to apprehend our
Saviour. They had, no doubt, imbibed the prejudices of their employers
against him, and, at any rate, would have executed their commission in order
to please them. When they came to the place, Jesus was addressing the
people. But their attention was arrested by the sound of his voice ; as they
listened, their admiration was excited, and, forgetting the purpose for which
they had come, they returned, exclaiming, to the no small mortification of the
rulers, " Never man spake like this man !"* The efficacy of his instructions
appears in the success which attended the preaching of his gospel in the
primitive ages. Notwithstanding the obstacles which were opposed to it, it
spread with such rapidity during the lives of the apostles, that it reached
almost every part of the Roman empire, an4 even some nations lying beyond
its frontiers ; and, after their decease, it continued to make progress, although
its path was marked with blood, till the whole civilized world submitted to its
sway. The historian Gibbon has assigned five secondary causes, as he calls
them, of its success ; meaning, however, that they are the primary or only
causes. His causes are obviously inadequate to the production of the effect,
and every Christian must view, with triumph, this abortive attempt to rob his
religion of the honour of having established its dominion solely by the power
of the truth. Its success is a fulfilment of the prophecy : " The Lord shall
send the rod of thy strength out of Zion : rule thou in the midst of thine ene
mies. Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power."§
Human -eloquence, by moving the passions, may lead men to adopt new
resolutions, and rouse them to sudden efforts of vigour; it may produce per
manent effects in politics, in religious profession, and moral conduct, although.
in the latter case, it must be acknowledged, that it has few triumphs to boast.
The history of ancient times furnishes only one or two instances, which, if
examined by a proper standard, would be found to be of no value. Shall
these be brought into comparison with the innumerable trophies which the
* Mark. xvi. 16. + Jer. xxiii. 29. $ John vii. 46. § Ps. ex 2, 3.
yor TT — R n 2

42 THE PROPHETICAL OFFICE OF CHRIST.
eloquence of our Divine Teacher has won? — with the thousands who, in
obedience to his command, have renounced their prejudices, their pleasures,
their gains, and their honours, and have submitted to a life of self-denial and
suffering ? Let us remember, that the word of Christ has prevailed to induce
men, not only to embrace a new system of opinions, but to adopt a new man
ner of living ; that it has purified them from their sins, and from sins which
once seemed to be essential to their happiness ; that it has effected such a re
volution in their hearts, that the objects of their love and hatred are exchanged,
and new tastes, and tempers, and feelings are displayed, as if they had been
created again. As in the days of his flesh, when he said to any man, " Fol
low thou me," he forsook all and became his disciple, so it is now ; the
proudest humbly bow to his command ; the most abject slave of the world,
bursting his fetters, enters into his service ; even the dead hear him and live ;
for the following words are verified in every age of the Church : " The hour
is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God ;
and they that hear shall live. For, as the Father hath life in himself; so hath
he given to the Son to have life in himself."*
The efficacy of the instructions of Christ is connected with the operations
of grace ; and this naturally leads me to remark, that as he teaches men by his
word, so he also executes his prophetical office by the agency of the Holy
Ghost on their minds. " He reveals to us," our Church says, " by his word
and Spirit, the will of God for our salvation."* Of this double teaching there is
an illustrious promise in the Old Testament: "As for me, this is my covenant
with them, saith the Lord : My Spirit that is upon thee, and my words which
I have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the
mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed's seed, saith the Lord,
from henceforth and for ever."* The promise of the Spirit which our Lord
made to his disciples, relates primarily to them, but authorises the expectation
of his presence and gracious operation in every age of the Church. Hence
he is called the Spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of Christ ;§
and the example of. Paul, in the Epistle to the Ephesians, encourages others
to pray for his enlightening influences.
But if the Scriptures are a perfect rule of faith and manners, and are ex
pressed with such perspicuity on all subjects essential to salvation, that eves
the illiterate may understand them, of what use is the Spirit ?
In the first place, I remark, tha^it is not the office of the Spirit to give new
revelations. Some, from mere ignorance conceiving that this is understood to
be his office, and judging rightly that he is not wanted for any such purpose,
have rejected the common doctrine of his operation in the soul. They .may
have been encouraged in their error by enthusiasts, who, boasting of the Spirit,
have pretended to be favoured with supernatural discoveries, and have retailed
their extravagant fancies as heavenly visions. But we expressly disclaim this
view of the subject, and maintain that he is not sent to teach any thing new,
but to enable us to understand in a spiritual manner the truths which are already
revealed. In fact, we could hold no other opinion consistently with the prin
ciple which we avow, that the canon of Scripture is completed, and that all
things are taught in it which are necessary to salvation. Whether God may
not, for some important purpose, make known to individuals by his Spirit
things secret and future, is a question which we presume not to decide ; but
such revelations are appropriated to the use of those individuals, and have no
claim to the attention of others, unless they were authenticated by miracles;
and wanting this attestation, are no more a part of the rule of faith and obedi
ence than any mere human speculation.
•John v. 25,26. * Shorter Cat. Q. 24. $ Is. fix. 21. § Eph. i. 17.

THE PROPHETICAL OFFICE OF CHRIST. 43
In the second place, It is not the office of the Spirit to discover to us mys
teries and recondite meanings of Scripture, which would have eluded the re
search of our unassisted faculties. I acknowledge that a man who has
received the Holy Ghost, will understand many parts of the Scriptures better
than those who have not received him ; that he will perceive a beauty, and
glory, and goodness in subjects which others regard with the greatest indiffer
ence; but I affirm at the same time, that there is no doctrine of religion, of
which an unregenerafed man may not acquire a speculative notion, by the ex
ercise of his natural understanding. The practice of allegorizing the Scrip
tures, and affixing senses to them which do not present themselves to ordinary
readers, have resulted rather from an affectation of ingenuity, than from any
pretension to supernatural illumination. But some persons, mistaking the
wild reveries of imagination for the motions of the Divine Spirit, have pre
tended to sublime discoveries, and brought to light concealed wonders ; so that,
if any credit were due to them, we should conclude, that truth indeed lies at
the bottom of a well, dark and deep, where it must have for ever remained, if
they had not been furnished with extraordinary means for drawing it up.
There are mysteries in the Scriptures, which no man can explain ; there are
passages which it requires acuteness of intellect to explore ; but in general
they are expressed in simple terms, which are to be understood in their usual
sense ; and the only requisites for the successful study of them are attention
and a moderate capacity.
The Holy Ghost teaches, by enabling the mind to perceive the truth, and
excellence, and interesting nature of the doctrines of revelation. That his
agency is needed for this purpose, none will deny but those who choose to
give the lie direct to the Scriptures, and entertain an extravagant idea of the
power of reason, which is at variance with the experience of all ages ; for,
whatever perspicacity reason has discovered in matters of science, it has shown
itself to be blind as a mole in religion. " The natural man receiveth not the
things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness unto him ; neither can he
know them, because they are spiritually discerned."* There has been much
disputing about the true sense of " the natural man,"— !*"£«« «8/»w« ; — and an
evident wish has been sometimes discovered to give such an explanation as
should not represent the mind as wholly incapable, without divine assistance, of
forming just views of supernatural truths. The man, of whom the Apostle
speaks, has been called the sensual man, the animal man, the man who makes
his senses, and passions, and prejudices the standard of judgment ; and the
character has been supposed to be realized in the heathen philosophers, who
rejected the Gospel because it did not accord with their speculations. What
ever English term we may use in translating -r"X'K°;> the meaning is obvious
to every person who is willing to see it. The natural is opposed to the spi
ritual man in the next verse ; 4vXm<" to mafuitrmis. The same contrast is stated
in the epistle of Jude, who says of some, that they are 4w°'i " having not
the Spirit."t The natural man and the spiritual man are opposed to each
other. They belong to different classes, and are distinguished by different
qualities. The former has only the powers of nature, improved, it may be,
by culture ; the latter has received a supernatural gift. If you inquire, then,
why the natural man cannot discover the things of the Spirit, or the truths of
religion ? the reason is, that he has not received the Spirit ; whence it follows,
that the agency of the Holy Ghost is necessary to the illumination of the mind ;
and this the Apostle plainly signifies when he adds, that the things of the
Spirit are spiritually discerned, or can be rightly perceived only by a spiritual
m*n. This single passage is sufficient to prove the necessity of the teaching
* 1 Cor. ii. 14. f Jude 19.

44 THE PROPHETICAL OFFICE OF CHRIST.
of the Holy Ghost. The Scriptures, indeed, are said to be able to make ng
wise unto salvation ; but their sufficiency consists solely in a complete exhibi
tion of truth. Notwithstanding their fulness and clearness, they will make no
man savingly wise, unless his understanding be opened to understand them,
by the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of Christ.
The manner in which the Spirit acts upon the mind when he illuminates it,
is unknown, as is the manner in which our Maker acts upon us, when he as
sists us in the natural exercise of our mental powers. The one is a mystery
of grace, and the other a mystery of nature : " The wind bloweth 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."*
It is impossible to describe, except in general terms, the knowledge which
believers acquire by the teaching of the Spirit, or to show, so as to make the
distinction perfectly intelligible, the difference between this knowledge and
that which is obtained by the unassisted exercise of our rational faculties.
" No words," as I have elsewhere observed, " however carefully and copiously
selected, could make a man, who had been born blind, form an idea of light.
The views of divine things, which are obtained by the internal revelation, are
clear and impressive. Hence, believers are said to " discern" spiritual things,
to " behold with open or unveiled face the glory of the Lord, and to be
changed into his image." Such evidence accompanies the truth, and such a
manifestation is made of its excellence, that the mind feels the highest assur
ance, and embraces it with ardour and ineffable delight. The Christian enters
upon a new scene, and sees around him objects, the grandest and most inter
esting, which awaken a train of feelings and affections never experienced be
fore. The words of Scripture are the same which he had often read without
any emotion, but the thoughts which they excite are exceedingly different.
There is a living virtue in the language of inspiration which penetrates into
the inmost recesses of his soul ; exerts a commanding, transforming influence
upon it, and fills it with light, and love, and hope, and activity. A similar
change would take place if a man of a gross uncultivated mind were suddenly
inspired with those refined perceptions, and that delicate sensibility, which are
the foundation of taste. A new light would be poured upon the face of nature.
The scenery at which he lately looked with a languid and careless eye, would
present features of sublimity and beauty, by which his soul would be alter
nately filled with awe and delight. Where nothing formerly appeared but a
variety of objects, distinguished only by their place and their form, he would
now discover order, proportion, harmony, and grace."*
The degree of knowledge is different in different individuals. This is, no
doubt, partly owing to a difference in mental capacity ; for, without a miracle,
a weak illiterate peasant could not take the same comprehensive view of the
truths of religion as a scholar and a philosopher. It is not the intention, nor
the effect of the operations of the Spirit, to equalize our natural faculties. We
might assign, as another cause, the different degrees of diligence, with which
the study of the Scriptures is pursued ; for this is the promise : " Then shall
we know, if we follow on to know the Lord."* We must remember, too,
that the Spirit distributes his gifts according to his own will ; that there is a
sovereignty exercised with respect to the measures of grace, as well as the
persons to whom it is communicated ; and that this is the primary cause, that
some so much excel others in all spiritual endowments. But the nature of this
illumination is the same in all, in the lowest as in the highest believer. It im
parts certainty to the mind ; it discovers the excellence and goodness of the
truths which are perceived ; it is the foundation of faith and holiness, and con-
* John iii. 8. f Sermons by the Author, Glasg. 1816, pp. 287—9. * Hos. vi. 3.

THE PROPHETICAL OFFICE OF CHRIST. 45
sequently of final salvation. It is in this way, I apprehend, that we must ac
count for the assurance which all Christians feel of the divine origin and
authority of the Scriptures. The arguments by which we prove their inspira
tion are not generally known. Many have no opportunity of being acquainted
with them ; nor is every person capable of entering into a train of reasoning
by which the several topics are illustrated and confirmed. Yet every believer
regards the word of God with unsuspecting confidence as the ground of his
hope, and is borne up under all his trials, and in the view of eternity, by its
promises. Shall we charge the illiterate christian with implicit faith ? No ;
he has the witness in himself that the Scriptures are true. The marks of di
vinity which his enlightened mind perceives upon them, and the effects which
they produce upon his conscience and heart, convince him that they are what
they claim to be, as the sun manifests himself by his own light to every man
who has eyes. They have come to him in demonstration of the Spirit, and
with power. Such was the conviction of the martyr, who declared that he
could not reason for Christ, but could die for him.
The degree of knowledge which is necessary to salvation, it would be pre
sumptuous to attempt to determine. We may say safely, that no man will be
saved in ignorance ; for the first effect of the gracious operations of the Spirit,
is "to open the eyes ;" that he must know himself to be a sinner, and Christ
to be the Saviour ; but farther we do not venture to proceed. It belongs not
to us to fix the standard, and as, should we do so, there would be danger of its
being too high or too low, so it would want all authority, because there is no
determination of this kind in the Scriptures. In children whose faculties are
beginning to open, and in adults who labour under mental imbecility, the mea
sure of knowledge must be necessarily small. But a faint ray, imparted to
the mind from the eternal source of wisdom, is of more value than the full
blaze of reason and learning. The revelation vouchsafed to babes, and often
denied to the wise and prudent, is sufficient to show the way to eternal life,
and to guide them in it, notwithstanding "insidious endeavours to draw them
aside. " The way-faring man, though a fool, shall not err in it."
As the knowledge which the Spirit communicates is distinguished from
other knowledge by its nature, so it is also by its effects. Other knowledge
puffs up the mind with a vain conceit of its attainments ; but this knowledge
creates humility, not only by convincing us how little we know, but by giving
a discovery of the guilt and vileness of our natural character. It likewise
purifies the soul ; for, while other knowledge is a mere exercise of intellect,
this affects the heart, awakens new feelings, and tastes, and desires, inspires
the love of God, and the noble ambition to be like him. It is a perception
and relish of true excellence, consisting in the conformity of the creature to
the moral image of its Maker. Hence our Saviour prayed, that his Father
would " sanctify" his disciples " through the truth ;"* and an apostle says,
" that beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, they are changed into the
same image from glory to glory, as by the Spirit of the Lord."* It imparts
consolation and joy to the soul, while the enlightened man is fully persuaded
of the precious promises of the Gospel, and regards its blessings as his own.
And when we think of the ineffable satisfaction, the divine peace, the bright
and animating hope, which are inspired by the contemplation of the wonders
of redemption, we understand the reason that Paul " counted all things but
loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus his Lord ;" and that
other holy men have expressed the highest esteem for this word, and a decided
preference of it to the wealth, and pleasures, and glory of the world. In a
word, this knowledge is introductory to the more sublime discoveries of the
• John xvii. 17. * 2 Cor- m< 18,

46 THE PRIESTLY OFFICE OF CHRIST.
future state. The objects which will be contemplated there, are the same
which are exhibited in the Gospel ; and, so far as any man is enabled, by su
pernatural illumination, to form just conceptions of them, he anticipates the
knowledge which will flow from the beatific vision. The difference is not in
kind, but in degree. The one is the knowledge of a child ; the other is the
knowledge of a man. Wherever the light of heaven has once appeared, it
will " shine more and more unto the perfect day," when the mists and clouds
which now obscure our prospects will be dispelled, and we shall "know even
as we are known :" " And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the
moon, to shine in it ; for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the
light thereof. And the nations of them that are saved shall walk in the light
of it."*

LECTURE LVI.
ON THE PRIESTLY OFFICE OF CHRIST.
The office of Priest — Necessity of this office of our Redeemer — Christ's call to, and inves
titure with it — Duties of the office ; sacrifice, intercession, and blessing of the people-
General observations on Christ's execution of these duties, and on his pre-eminence as
a Priest.
Ever since the fall, the hopes of the. human race have centred in the Mes
siah. He is the restorer of our fallen nature, the conqueror of our formidable
adversary, the mediator by whose ministry peace with God is procured, the
second Adam who has removed the curse pronounced upon us for the sin of
the first, and opened the gates of paradise, that we might have access to the
tree of life.
The design of the ceremonial institutions and the prophecies of the ancient
law was, to make known this illustrious person, to describe his character, and
to give notice of the purpose for which he would afterwards appear upon
earth. Hence a general expectation of a great deliverer was excited ; but the
ideas which many entertained of him were the most distant imaginable from
the truth. They believed indeed that he would be a prophet ; for the words
of Moses, and of other inspired men, were too express to be mistaken. They
believed also that he would be a king, who, marching forth in the terror of
his power, would subjugate the nations, and restore the kingdom to Israel.
But they seem not to have believed that he would be a priest ; or, if they
allowed the title, they explained it in such a manner, as rendered it perfectly
nugatory ; nothing appearing to them more inconsistent with the office of the
Messiah, than the proper work of such a priest, which was to redeem us to
God by the sacrifice of himself. He was, however, not only to sit upon a
throne, but also to minister at the altar ; not only to exert his power for the
destruction of his enemies, but to employ his interest with God in our behalf.
He was to draw near to the Divine Majesty in our name, and to mediate a
peace between us and our offended Creator.
That Jesus Christ is a priest, is plain from many passages of Scripture
which it is unnecessary to quote ; because, whatever difference of opinion
there is among his professed followers with respect to the import of the title
when given to him, they all acknowledge that there is a sense in which the
* Rev. xxi. 23.

THE PRIESTLY OFFICE OF CHRIST. 47
office belongs to him. What we mean by calling him a priest, may be learned
from the following definition of the character, although it does not comprehend
every particular of the office. " Every high priest taken from among men, is
ordained for men in things pertaining to God, that he may offer both gifts and
sacrifices for sins."* It is to the last part of the definition that I at present
request your attention. A priest is a person officiating in the name of others,
who approaches to God to make atonement for them by sacrifice. The design
of his ministration is to render the object of worship propitious, to avert his
wrath from men, and to procure their restoration to his favour. He differs
from a prophet, who treats with men in the name of God, making known to
them his counsels and commands ; while a priest treats with God in the name
of men, to prevail upon him to admit them into friendship. It was in this
sense of the word, that Aaron and his successors were priests. Their proper
work was not to instruct the people, but to serve at the altar, and lay those
oblations upon it which the law required for the expiation of sins. It cannot
be denied that the title of priest is sometimes given to men not in a literal
but in a figurative sense. Thus Christians are called a " royal priesthood,"t
and are said to be " made priests" as well as " kings to God."* It is evi
dent, however, that in this case there is merely an accommodation of the title,
because they minister to> God in the duties of religious worship, and present
the spiritual sacrifices of prayer and praise, which ascend with acceptance to
his throne, like the smoke of rams and bullocks, and of the incense which
was burnt in the sanctuary. A proper priest offers a proper sacrifice.
A question here demands our attention, because it has been the subject of
much and vehement discussion among Christians, Whether it was necessary
that our Redeemer should sustain this office ? The negative is held by those
who believe that God might have pardoned sin without a satisfaction ; and the
affirmative, by those who are persuaded that it would have been inconsistent
with the purity and rectitude of his nature, to permit sin to pass with impunity.
It is certain that God is represented as a Holy Being, as necessarily and infi
nitely holy, so that in the strong language of Scripture, " He is of purer eyes
than to behold evil, and cannot look upon iniquity."§ There is here an allu
sion to men, to whom some objects are so disgusting, that they avert their
eyes and find it impossible to look at them without doing violence to their
feelings. The divine abhorrence of sin could not be more emphatically stated
than by this mode of expression. God can do every thing which is consist
ent with his essential perfections ; he can do nothing which is contrary to
them, and he cannot because he will not. It is not the want of physical but
of moral power which is ascribed to him. Now, if it is impossible that God
should ever regard sin with favour, it is impossible that he should suffer it to
go unpunished ; his nature forbids such an act of sovereign, unconditional
mercy. To impress this idea, his holiness is represented as his "jealousy,"
or as accompanied with it. "He is a holy God; he is a jealous God; he
will not forgive your transgressions nor your sins."|| It is the nature of jea
lousy not to spare, and nothing but the execution of vengeance will satisfy its
demands. This awful truth is declared in the solemn proclamation of his
name, when he said that " He will by no means clear the guilty,"^ — that is,
the guilty for whom no atonement has been made. " God is jealous," says the
prophet Nahum, " and the Lord revengeth ; the Lord revengeth, and is furious.
The Lord will take vengeance on his adversaries, and he reserveth wrath for his
enemies."** It is tq represent the punishment of the wicked as the consequence
of his holiness, that our God is said to be a " consuming fire."*f Fire, indeed,
• Heb. v. 1. f 1 Pet. ii. 9. * Rev. i. 6. § Hab. i. 13. || Josh. xxiv. 19.
T Exod. xxxiv. 7. ** Nahum i, 2 ** Deut. iv. 24.

48 THE PRIESTLY OFFICE OF CHRIST.
burns by necessity of nature — God does not so act in any external operation
His dispensations originate in his will ; but his will is always conformable to
his essential perfections. Is it not then plainly signified by this figurative de
scription, that as fire consumes every combustible substance which it reaches,
so the nature of God requires that the transgression of his law should be
punished, unless some expedient be devised to reconcile the exercise of his
mercy with the honour of his holiness ?
Again, the necessity of the priesthood of Christ may be inferred from the
justice of God. As there is an essential rectitude of his nature, in conse
quence of which every thing which he does is right, sustaining the character
of the moral Governor of the universe, he will render to all his creatures their
due. Justice is ascribed to him in many passages of Scripture ; and reason
perceives so clearly that it belongs to him, that the question may be proposed
as admitting only one answer, " Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?"*
What it is right for him to do in the character of a Judge, we learn from the
law which he has given to men, and in which death is denounced as the
penalty of sin. Let it not be imagined that this is an arbitrary penalty ; for,
since it would be a reproach to a human legislator to subject crimes to a se
verer punishment than they deserved, or than was necessary to maintain the
authority of his law, we could not impute such procedure to God without a
direct impeachment of his benignity and clemency. It is right, therefore,
that transgressors should suffer to the extent threatened in the law. There is
something in their conduct which deserves this punishment ; and it is suitable
to the moral perfections of God to inflict it. Now, let us consider what is
implied in the supposition that God might have pardoned sin without an atone
ment. It is implied, either that it was not right that sin should be punished,
that is, that it was not absolutely right, that it was not agreeable to the nature
of God, that justice did not demand it ; or that, in order to exercise his mercy,
he might do what was not right. It is impossible to maintain that sin might
have been pardoned without an atonement, unless we at the same time affirm
that punishment was not necessarily due to sin, or that God was not bounu
to recompense it according to its desert. If any man shall adopt the' latter
opinion, he must say, that what we call the justice of God is not justice, or
that, when attributed to him and attributed to men, it has a different meaning.
We always conceive justice, in a private or public person, to consist in treat
ing others exactly according to their desert : and, consequently, it is equally
contrary to justice to let merit go without reward, and demerit without punish
ment. If it be alleged that, although justice requires that the penalty of his
law should be executed, he may set aside its claims by an act of authority, I
would request you to consider attentively the import of this assumption. If
justice has a claim, to dispense with it is to do something which, if justice
would have been permitted to take its course, would not have been done,
This is plain. Justice demands the punishment of sin — but the demand is
not complied with, and therefore justice does not receive what is due to it.
It follows, that to suppose that God may dispense with the claims of justice,
is to suppose that he may cease to be just. Some men may not be alarmed
at this consequence ; but let it be observed that, if God may set aside in any
case the demands of justice, justice is not essential to him ; we can no longer
have confidence in the rectitude of his moral administration ; nor can his laws
be regarded with the same reverence as when they were understood to be
guarded by the immutable sanction of death. As the moral Governor of the
universe, God is bound, if I may speak so, to maintain the respect due to
himself by the strict distribution of rewards and punishments, and to hold
• Gen. xviii. 25.

THE PRIESTLY OFFICE OF CHRIST. 49
out the most powerful motives to obey his law, which is not an arbitrary
institution, but is founded on the relations subsisting between him and his
creatures. The inference from the preceding reasoning is, that the priesthood of Jesus
Christ was necessary, if God was to pardon sinners, and receive them into
favour. It is this hypothetical necessity alone which we assert ; as his sus-
ception of the office was voluntary, so his investiture with it by his Father
was an act of his sovereign grace. God was under no obligation to renew the
intercourse between himself and man, which had ceased at the fall.
" No man," says Paul in the Epistle to the Hebrews, " taketh this honour
unto himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron."* The necessity
of a divine call is manifest from the nature of the case. A priest ministers
before God' in the name of men, to effect a reconciliation between them.
Now, although it is their interest which is connected with the office, and no
advantage can redound from it to God, yet they have not the power of ap
pointing the priest, for two reasons ; first, because it depends solely upon the
will of God whether a priest shall be admitted at all ; and secondly, because
it is his prerogative to declare who is acceptable to him, and proper to be en
trusted with so important a work. " So also," the apostle adds, " Christ
glorified not himself to be made an high priest, but he that said unto him,
Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee."t Great as his love was to
sinners, he interposed in their behalf only in concurrence with his Father, and
in obedience to his will.
With respect to the time of his investiture with this office, it was coinci
dent with his appointment to the general office of mediator. At that time, he
was constituted the prophet, the priest, and the king of his Church. The
manner of his consecration has been explained in different ways. He was
consecrated, it has been said, at his baptism ; and this is so far true, because
he was then solemnly dedicated to the service of his Father ; but he possessed
the office before, and performed its duties, both by bearing our griefs1 and car
rying our infirmities, while yet, in a private character, he led a life of poverty,
labour and suffering of various kinds, and by the intercessory prayers which
he no doubt offered up for the salvation of his people. It is the opinion of
that eminent and learned divine, Dr. Owen, that he was consecrated by the
shedding of his own blood, as Aaron and his sons were by the blood of the
sacrifices ; and this he conceives to be the import of the expression, " made
perfect through sufferings."* But this notion we can by no means admit, be
cause it seems to be absurd to suppose a person to be consecrated to an office,
by doing the duties of it ; to hold it, and proceed to perform its most import
ant functions, before he is properly invested with it. His being " perfected
through sufferings" evidently means, that, by his death upon the cross, he
became the Captain or the Author of our salvation, having offered that atoning
sacrifice, which obtained eternal redemption for us. It appears that he was
consecrated by the oath of God, of which we shall afterwards speak, because
it is an important fact in the history of his priesthood, and, as such, is men
tioned in Scripture. " The law maketh men high priests, which have in
firmity ; but the word of the oath, which was since the law, maketh the Son,
who is consecrated for evermore. "§
The two great duties of the sacerdotal office, are sacrifice and intercession ;
to which may be added a third, the blessing of the people, as Aaron and his
sons were commanded to do. I do not think it necessary to take any farther
notice of the last in relation to our Saviour's office, because it does not appear
that, as a priest, he blesses us in any other way than by dying to procure, and
* Heb. v. 4. f Ib. 5. $ Heb. ii. 10. Owen on Heb. in loco. § Heb. vii. 28.
Vol. IL— 7 E

50 THE PRIESTLY OFFICE OF CHRIST.
by obtaining, through his intercession, the communication of blessings to us
It is properly in the character of a king that he bestows them.
The first duty of his office he performed upon earth, when he presented to
God the immaculate oblation of himself upon the cross. " He that loved us,
and hath given himself for us, an offering and a sacrifice to God, for a sweet
smelling savour."* This would be the place to prove that the death of Christ
was a true and proper sacrifice for sin ; but I shall postpone this discussion tG
another occasion, as my design, in this lecture, is merely to give you a genera)
view of his priesthood. There are some who deny that he offered a sacrifice
for sin, namely, those who were formerly called Socinians, but now have taker
the name of Unitarians. The doctrine of that heretical sect is, in substance.
the following : — that Jesus Christ is called a priest, but is not such in reality;
that he receives this title, on account of some resemblance between what he
does, and the ministration of the priests under the law ; that he is a priest, in
the same metaphorical sense in which all Christians are said to be priests ;
and, that his priesthood solely consists in the good offices which he performs
towards us, and on our account. He properly entered upon it when he
ascended to heaven, and received power from his Father to assist men in
working out their salvation ; his death upon the cross was no part of his duty,
but merely a preparation for the ¦ services of the heavenly sanctuary ; his
priestly office is virtually the same with the kingly, both implying authority
and ability to bestow blessings upon men, and differing only in this respect,
that, as a king, he has power to help us, and, as a priest, he is willing. —
This was the doctrine of the elder Socinians, and has been generally adopted
by their successors. I know not well what are the sentiments of the Unita
rians of the present day ; but some of them, " waxing worse and worse," like
other " evil men and seducers," are actively employed in reducing the character
of our Saviour lower and lower, and seem not to be able to tell where he now
is, or what he is doing. I content myself, at present, with simply stating
their doctrine, as an opportunity will afterwards occur, of showing its con
trariety to Scripture.
There is another Socinian notion, which, however, has been adopted by
some who are not Socinians, but believe that the death of Christ was a sacri
fice for sin, namely, that he did not offer his sacrifice on earth, but in heaven,
by appearing before God in the body in which he suffered on the cross. You
will find this notion stated and defended by Dr. Macknight, in the notes on the
epistle to the Hebrews ; an author, I may take this opportunity of saying,
from whose work on the Epistles a cautious and discerning reader may derive
considerable advantage, but who is a dangerous guide to young students, not
only because he dogmatises in rather an unusual manner in matters of great
importance, giving only his own affirmation for proof, but also, because many
of his principles are false, and there are few who have distinguished them
selves more by wresting and misinterpreting the Scriptures. This notion is
at direct variance with the language of Scripture, which uniformly speaks of
the sacrifice of Christ as having been offered before he entered into heaven.
" Christ was once offered," says Paul, " to bear the sins of many,"* evidently
meaning, that he was offered, upon earth, because he contrasts this act with
his future revelation from heaven, " When he had by himself purged our
sins, he sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high."* His sitting
down at the right hand of God was immediately consequent upon his entrance
into heaven, before which he had purged our sins by his sacrifice. " By his
own blood he entered once into the holy place, having obtained eternal re
demption.'^ The obtaining of eternal redemption is put in the past tense,—
• Eph. v. 2. * Heb. ix. 28. t Heb.'i. 3. § Heb. ix. 12.

THE PROPHETICAL OFFICE OF CHRIST. 51
iipitfans, — and preceded his entrance into the holy place. But he obtained it,
as all will acknowledge, by his 'sacrifice, which, therefore, was offered not in
heaven, but upon earth. Great stress is laid upon these words of Paul, " If
he were on earth, he should not be a priest."* But, if they furnish any evi
dence in favour of the present opinion, they prove more than its patrons would
be willing to grant, namely, that while our Saviour was in this world, he was
not a priest at all. This no man who believes the Scriptures would affirm.
The meaning certainly is, that, if his office had been of the same kind with
the priesthood which already existed upon earth, he could not have been a
priest, because the office was vested in a family of which he was not a mem
ber ; or that, if his whole office was to be executed upon earth, he must have
been excluded, because, not belonging to the family of Aaron, he had no ac
cess to the holy of holies in the temple, in which alone his blood could be
presented. The notion, that Christ offered his sacrifice in heaven, is one of
those niceties which are sometimes brought forward as mighty discoveries,
but which, although they were founded on truth, are of no practical utility.
As it is, it overturns the ideas respecting sacrifices which men have entertained
in all ages and nations, making them consist, not in the death of the victim, as
has been always believed, but in the sprinkling of its blood ; and it furnishes
a pretext for those who are so minded, to deny that Christ offered any proper
sacrifice, and to affirm that his whole work consists in intercession.
The second duty of his office is intercession. It was typified by the en
trance of the high priest into the most holy place, where he sprinkled the
blood of the sacrifices, and burned incense before the mercy-seat ; and it is
carried on in heaven, of which that place was a figure. What is the nature of
his intercession, how it is conducted, who are its subjects, and what is its de
sign, are points, the consideration of which I shall reserve for another occa
sion.* According to the scheme of the elder Socinians, his priestly office was
executed in heaven alone ; but, although they could not deny that intercession
belonged to his office, they explained even it away, as well as his sacrifice,
and affirmed, that it signified merely that he obtained from God the power by
which he is able to help us, as if he had prayed for it. A similar scheme has
been contrived by some modern Socinians, which may be stated in the words
of a celebrated writer. " Jesus Christ has not only taught the pure doctrines
of the gospel ; manifested, by rising from the dead, the certainty of a future
state, and proposed to mankind a pattern for imitation ; but has, by the me
rits of his obedience, obtained, through his intercession, as a reward, a king
dom or government over the world, whereby he is enabled to bestow pardon
and final happiness upon all who will accept them on the terms of sincere re
pentance. That is, in other words, we receive salvation through a mediator ;
the mediation conducted through intercession ; and that intercession success
ful, in recompence of the meritorius obedience of our Redeemer."* In this
scheme, the atonement is left out, and our salvation is owing to the death of
Christ only remotely, as it constituted the ground on which he obtained, by
his prayers, power to save such as should sincerely embrace his religion.
But his intercession has a different object, as we shall afterwards show.
Our Lord was made a priest " after the order of Melchisedec."§ The
apostle Paul explains what is meant, when he says of Melchisedec, that he
was " without father, without mother, without descent," and that " having
neither beginning of days, nor end of life, he abideth a priest continually."])
It is certain that, being a man, he was born and died like other men, and had
a genealogy which was known to his contemporaries ; but Paul refers to his
* Heb. viii. 4. + See Lecture iix. $ Magee on Atonement, vol. i. p. 20.
§ Heb. v. 6. J Heb. vii. 3.

52 THE PRIESTLY OFFICE OF CHRIST.
history, which on these subjects preserves profound silence, and speaks of
him only in his public character, and in relation to his office. He is an insu
lated individual, like a man fallen from the clouds, who had no earthly con
nexions, except that, as he was a priest and a king, there must have been per
sons for whom he ministered, and over whom he reigned. The similitude be
tween our Saviour and Melchisedec may be traced in the two following par
ticulars. First, He had no predecessor in office. He was indeed made a priest after
the order of Melchisedec ; but you are not to understand that he was a priest
of the same order, because, on this supposition, the resemblance between them
would be destroyed in an essential particular. Christ did not succeed Mel-
chisedek, but he is like him ; and like him in this respect, that none was be
fore him. Aaron and his sons were not his predecessors ; for he could not
have succeeded them unless he had belonged to the family to which the legal
priesthood was confined by the express commandment of God. " It is evi
dent," says Paul, " that our Lord sprang out of Judah, of which tribe Moses
spake nothing concerning priesthood."* He succeeded them, indeed, as the
antitype succeeds the type ; but his priesthood was of a different kind. Theirs
was a shadow, but his was the truth ; theirs consisted in offering animals upon
the altar, but his in offering himself; theirs averted temporal punishments from
the Israelites, but his has delivered mankind from the guilt of sin, and from
eternal perdition.
Secondly, Jesus Christ has no successor in the priesthood. It is in the per
petuity of his office that the resemblance between him and Melchisedek prin
cipally consists. When Aaron died, Eleazar his son stood up in his room;
and all the high-priests of that family were succeeded by their sons and rela
tions, till the second temple was destroyed ; but no person will ever succeed
our Saviour : and this difference between him and the priests of the law, was
founded on two important circumstances : —
In the first place, " They truly were many priests," as P,aul says, " because
they were not suffered to continue by reason of death."* Notwithstanding
the great dignity of their office, and the solemnities with which they were in
stalled in it, they were but men, subject to infirmity and dissolution, like the
persons for whom they ministered. " But this man, because he continueth
ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood."* He likewise died ; but the cases
were totally dissimilar. The legal priests died, if I may speak so, out of
office ; but he died in it. Death was no part of their work, whereas to die
was the chief duty incumbent upon him. When they fell under the power
of death, they could not extricate themselves from it, and return to life and
the service of the sanctuary ; but he had power to lay down his life and to
take it again. Death was so far from putting an end to his priesthood, that it
did not even interrupt the exercise of it.
In the second place, A succession of the legal priests was necessary, be
cause the sacrifices which they offered could not expiate sin. Notwithstand
ing their mortality, if any of them could have appeased divine justice by his
oblations, there would have been no necessity that another should rise up in
his stead. But the legal sacrifices could not atone for past sins, and still less
for those which were future ; the blood of an irrational animal was not equiva
lent to the blood and life of the transgressor himself. Our Lord Jesus Christ
" hath by one offering for ever perfected them that were sanctified."§ His
sacrifice removed the sins of his people in one day ; it established, upon a
solid basis, peace between God and his offending creatures ; it is the ground
of an everlasting dispensation of pardon and mercy. Hence it appears that
* Heb. vii. 14. * lb. vii. 23. j lb. vii. 24. § lb. x. 14.

THE PRIESTLY OFFICE OF CHRIST. 53
there was no reason why another priest should succeed him, and that no place
was left for the ministrations of another, which could serve no valuable pur
pose, as the great design of the office had been already accomplished, namely,
the expiation of sin.
The death of Christ was a sacrifice, not for one generation alone, but for
men in every age. He ever lives to make intercession in the heavenly sanc
tuary ; and hence he is " able to save to the uttermost all them that come unto
God by him."* No other priest, therefore, can arise. There remains no
thing for him to do. Christ has made sacrifice and oblation to cease, and has
gone into heaven to appear in the presence of God for us.
It is derogatory to the honour of Christ, and subversive of the doctrine of
the Scripture concerning his priesthood, to maintain that any person is now
invested with the priestly office, and performs its proper work. It implies
that he did not fully accomplish the design of his office, and destroys the re
semblance between him and Melchizedec, Yet the church of Rome calls her
ministers priests ; (and so likewise does the church of England, from an imi
tation which is the more inexcusable, as she rejects the doctrine upon which
alone an argument could be founded for giving them this title ;) — the church
of Rome calls her ministers priests; and affirms that they perform the proper
work of the priesthood by offering sacrifice. Jesus Christ, into whose body
and blood the bread and wine in the eucharist are transubstantiated, is offered
up in the mass by the officiating minister, as a sacrifice for the dead and the
living. If this opinion were true, the ministers of antichrist would be more
truly priests than Aaron and his sons ; because the latter offered only typical
sacrifices, while the former daily repeat the great sacrifice which procures
eternal redemption. But this superstructure rests upon a foundation of sand.
The sacred supper is merely a commemorative ordinance. " Christ was once
offered to bear the sins of many."* The Christian religion acknowledges
only one priest, who was consecrated by God himself, and is exalted to hea
ven. Those who assume this character encroach upon his prerogative ; and
to suppose them to be what they pretend, would be to consider our Redeemer
as a priest, not after the order of Melchizedec, but after the order of Aaron,
which admitted successors.
Jesus Christ excelled all that were before him in respect of the order of his
priesthood. There are other points of difference, from which it appears that,
according to the words of an apostle, "he has obtained a more excellent mi
nistry,"* and of which I shall briefly take notice in the sequel of this lecture.
First, He was superior to all other priests in personal dignity. They were
"men having infirmity," subject to disease and death, and not to these alone,
but also to error and sin ; and therefore they needed to offer for themselves as
well as for the people. How much superior is our High-priest! Considered
as a man, he is distinguished from all other men, not only by his miraculous
conception, his sublime wisdom, and his stupendous works, but by his im
maculate purity, which he retained amidst the strongest temptations. But be
sides his pre-eminence in moral worth, he was still more exalted above all
who might be compared with him, by the dignity of his nature, for in conse
quence of his mysterious union to the second person of the Trinity, he was
truly the Son of God. While he is said to have " purged our sins," he is
described as " the brightness of the Father's glory, and the express image of
his person, and as upholding all things by the word of his power."§ Surely,
he is the most glorious of all the ministers of God ! and the office derives a
lustre from him who sustained it.
Secondly, the manner in which he was invested with his office was pecu
Heb. vii. 25. * Ibid. ix. 28. * Ibid. viii. 6. § Ibid. i. 3.
e2

54 THE PRIESTLY OFFICE OF. CHRIST.
liar ; and it is expressly mentioned in order to demonstrate his superiority.
" And inasmuch as not without an oath he was made a priest, (for those priests
were made without an oath, but this with an oath, by him that said unto him,
The Lord sware and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order
of Melchizedec,) by so much was Jesus made a surety of a better covenant."*
This circumstance alone is sufficient to prove the pre-eminence of his priest
hood. It is not upon slight occasions that God interposes by an oath ; and
if he did not swear when Aaron and his sons were set apart to the service of
the altar, but observed this unusual solemnity in the consecration of his Son,
may we not conclude that there were interests of far greater importance de
pending upon his ministry ? The design of the priesthood of Aaron was to
prevent the dissolution of the covenant, which God had made with the
Israelites. The design of the priesthood of Christ was the establishment of
a better covenant, by whicri God would be glorified, and our lost world re
deemed. The oath was intended to assure us that God himself invested him
with the office ; that as a priest he is the object of his highest approbation;
that he will never take the priesthood from him, nor cease to be pleased
with the atonement which he made by the effusion of his blood. '( The Lord
hath sworn, and will not repent."
Thirdly, The oblation which he presented was far more valuable than the
ancient sacrifices. He offered not the firstlings of the flock, and the choicest
of the herd, but himself. He was at once the priest and the sacrifice. What
raised the worth of his sacrifice above all calculation was his personal dignity,
of which we have already spoken. He who was crucified without the gates
of Jerusalem was the Lord of glory, although the princes of this world did not
recognise him in such profound humiliation ; the blood with which the church
was redeemed was the blood of God, although the priests and rulers of the
Jews, who saw it streaming from his wounds, despised it as the blood of an
impious malefactor. The Godhead, it is acknowledged, is impassible ; but
from the union ofthe two natures of Christ, there resulted a communication
of properties, in consequence of which the acts of both belonged to the same
person, and are predicated of each other. That nature died which alone could
die ; but it was the nature of him who was higher than the kings of the earth
and the angels of heaven, because he and his Father are one. Compared with
this oblation, those which were offered with such pomp in the temple of Jeru
salem were weak and childish things, and would be altogether unworthy of
notice, were it not that God himself appointed them, and that they derived a
borrowed importance from their typical relation to the sacrifice of Christ, the
only sacrifice which God ever accepted for its own sake, and which satisfied
the demands of his justice. Accordingly, the legal sacrifices are declared to
be inefficient, and are laid aside, while the sacrifice of Christ is substituted in
their room. " Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice
and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me : in burnt-
offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure. Then said I, Lo !
1 come (in the volume of the book it is written of me) to do thy will, 0
God. He taketh away the first," says the apostle, " that he may establish
the second."t
Fourthly, Let us observe for whom Jesus Christ officiated as a priest. The
sacrifices of the Mosaic law were appointed for the Israelites ; the annual
atonement was made for none but the twelve tribes, and their names alone
were engraven on the breastplate which the High-priest wore when he went
into the holy of holies. Jesus Christ is the High-priest of the human race,
and his blood was shed for the Gentiles as well as the Jews. " He is a pro-
* Heb. vii. 20—22. ¦)- Ibid. x. 5—9.

THE PRIESTLY OFFICE OF CHRIST. 55
pitiation for the sins of the whole world."* He suffered, therefore, not in the
temple which was the sanctuary of the Jews, nor within the precincts of Jeru
salem, the capital of their country, lest it should be imagined that they were
the sole objects of redemption, but without the gates of the city, to signify
that he was the Saviour of mankind, and that there was salvation through his
cross to those who should turn their eyes to him from the ends of the earth.
We do not affirm that he died for every individual of the human race. This
extent some have assigned to his atonement ; but, although it is their design
to give a magnificent idea of its efficacy, their doctrine is really derogatory to
its excellence. For upon this supposition it will follow, that as every indi
vidual is not saved, his sacrifice has failed of its end in the case of those who
perish in guilt, and his blood has been shed in vain. He died for those whom
his Father gave to him ; but how great their number is, no man can tell. All
ages have experienced the benefit of his death, the influence of which was re
trospective and prospective, extending backward to the beginning of time, and
forward to its close. For his sake God was merciful to those who lived be
fore his coming in the flesh, pardoning them in the view of the satisfaction to
be afterwards made ; and now we know that there is salvation in no other,
and that there is not another name under heaven given among men, by which
they can be saved.
Lastly, The effect of his sacrifice demonstrates its transcendent excellence.
No person, who has just notions of the evil and demerit of sin, can believe
that the sacrifices of the law could appease the justice of God, and obtain his
favour to the guilty. Reason gives a ready assent to the declaration of an
apostle, that " it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should
take away sins."* Their sole effect was to deliver the offerer from temporal
punishment, whether to be inflicted by the civil magistrate or by the hand of
God himself. He was permitted to live, and to enjoy his privileges, although
he deserved to be cut off for his transgression from among his people. But
he had no security against eternal condemnation, and fell under it at death, if
he had not an interest by faith in that better sacrifice, of which those which
he had presented were merely shadows. The oblation of Christ satisfied
every demand of justice, and cancelled the sentence pronounced by the moral
law upon all who have violated its precepts : " He finished the transgression,
and made an end of sins, and made reconciliation for iniquity, and brought in
everlasting righteousness."* Hence forgiveness is preached through him ;
and those who believe " are justified from all things, from which they could
not be justified by the law of Moses. "§ Nothing is necessary to our full par
don, but faith in the great propitiation ; no supplementary penances of our own,
no kind of satisfactory works. A foundation is thus laid for perfect peace of
mind ; and the only reason that believers do not always enjoy it, is the weak
ness and unsteadiness of tlieir faith. No purpose of vengeance against them
ever arises in the mind of God,. however great are their provocations. He
may frown upon. them ; but it is the frown of a father, who will not cast off
his son, although he is displeased with his conduct ; he may chasten, but it is
the hand of love which wields the rod, and the design of every stroke is the
good of the sufferer.
It appears from what has been said, that the priesthood of Christ is not a
speculative point, but a doctrine intimately connected with our duties and our
hopes. It is the foundation of all acceptable religion ; and had he not sustain
ed this office, intercourse between heaven and earth would have been for ever
suspended, and God and men would have been separated by irreconcilable
hostility. The religion of man in a state of innocence was founded on the
* 1 John ii. 2. * Heb. x. 4. t Dan. ix. 24. § Acts xiii. 39.

56 THE PRIESTLY OFFICE OF CHRIST :
natural relations subsisting between him and his Creator, to whom, as the au
thor of his being, he owed obedience, and from whose goodness he was au
thorized to hope for felicity continued through an endless duration. But
when sin had introduced mutual alienation, the interposition of a third party
was necessary to adjust their opposing interests, and to unite them in the bond
of friendship. As God can thus be merciful without ceasing to be. just, so the
way is prepared for the acceptance of our duties, notwithstanding the imper
fections with which they are attended. Coming from us, who are so polluted
that every thing is tainted which we touch, they are unworthy of the divine
regard ; but they are purified by passing through the hands of " the Minister
of the true tabernacle, which the Lord hath pitched, and not men."* This is
an unspeakable advantage which Christians derive from the priesthood of
Christ ; for, although they should multiply their services, and perform them
with assiduity and earnestness, they would not be pleasing to God, if he did
not recommend them. As, while the sword of the cherubim waved dreadfully
before the gate of paradise, our first parents could not have forced their way
to the tree of life, the seat of immortality ; so, the curse of the broken law
rendered access to the throne of grace equally impossible to us their descend
ants ; but Christ is "the way, the truth, and the life," or the true and living
way ; and " having him as our High-priest over the house of God, we may
draw near with true hearts in the full assurance of faith."

LECTURE LVII.
ON THE PRIESTLY OFFICE OF CHRIST.
Death of Christ, a propitiatory Sacrifice — Socinian View of his Death ; Its Defects — The
middle Scheme : Objections to it — Proof of the catholic Doctrine — The Idea of sacrificial
Atonement prevalent among the Heathen — Sacrifices of Atonement, a Part of the Jew
ish Worship — Import of the Language of Scripture respecting the Death of Christ.
The death of Christ is one of the most remarkable events recorded in his
tory. Many ages before it happened, it was foretold by those men whom
God raised up to uphold the authority of his law among his chosen people,
and to direct their thoughts and expectations to a future and more perfect dis
pensation. David, Isaiah, and Daniel described the Messiah not only as a
person of high dignity, and the Author of the most glorious works, but also as
one who should lead a lowly and afflicted life, and terminate his labours and
sorrows by a painful and violent death. ^ The cause or occasion of it was sin
gular ; for it was not the effect of accident, or disease, or the decay of nature,
but was inflicted by a judicial sentence pronounced upon him for the supposed
crimes of imposture and blasphemy. The obscuration of the sun at mid-day
without any natural cause, the earthquake which clove asunder the rocks and
laid open the graves, and the rending of the veil of the temple from top to
bottom, proclaimed that he who was hanging on the cross was no ordinary
sufferer. He had not lain three full days in the grave, when he was restored
to life by the power of God ; and, after an interval of a few weeks, he ascend
ed to heaven in presence of his disciples. Ten days after, he poured out the
Holy Ghost, by whom they were enabled to publish to men of every nation,
* Heb. viii. 2.

HIS SACRIFICE. 57
m their respective languages, the wonders of his death and resurrection ; and
the effect was not less surprising than the means employed to accomplish it.
The attention of Jews and Gentiles was excited ; multitudes were prevailed
upon to acknowledge him to be the Son of God, and the Messiah ; and a
church was formed, which, notwithstanding powerful opposition and cruel
persecution, subsists at the present hour. The death of Christ was the great
subject on which the apostles were commanded to preach, although it was
known beforehand, that it would be offensive to all classes of men ; and they
actually made it the chosen theme of their discourses. " I determined," Paul
says, " not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and him cruci
fied."* An ordinance was appointed by our Saviour himself on the night
preceding his crucifixion, for the express purpose of being a memorial of it
to the end of the world. In the New Testament, his death is represented as
an event of the greatest importance, — as a fact on which Christianity rests,
— as the Xtrily ground of hope to the guilty, — as the only source of peace and
consolation, — as, of all motives, the most powerful, to excite us to mortify sin,
and to devote ourselves to the service of God. It is remembered in heaven,
and we have reason to believe that it now is, and ever will be, the theme of
the songs both of the redeemed and of angels : " Worthy is the Lamb that
was slain, to receive power, and riches, and strength, and glory, and
blessing, "t
It is evident from this detail, that there is something peculiar in the death
of Christ, something which distinguishes it from all other events of the same
kind, and renders it more worthy of attention. It is necessary, therefore, that
we should entertain just conceptions of it ; by which I do not merely mean,
that we should know when it happened, and with what circumstances it was
attended, but that we should endeavour to ascertain from the Scriptures what
was our Saviour's design in submitting to die upon the cross. From the ear
liest ages Christians have believed that his death was an atonement for sin, a
sacrifice offered to God to satisfy his justice, and avert his wrath from the
guilty; that it was the means of reconciling us to our offended Creator, the
procuring cause of pardon and eternal life. In this view of it, all the great
bodies into which professed Christians are divided are agreed, — the Eastern
and the Western Church, Papists and Protestants, Calvinists and Arminians.
They may differ in their explanation of the nature of the atonement, its extent,
and the means of its application ; but with regard to the general truth, that the
death of Christ was propitiatory, there is no conflict of opinion. This may be
considered as a presumption in favour qf the doctrine, and at least shows that
there is an apparent foundation for it in the Scriptures ; because if there were
no trace of it there, we could not well account for the consent of so many
parties, separated on other points by so wide an interval. It will hardly be
denied, that the Scriptures seem to favour this view, by using language, in
speaking of his death, which was appropriated to the sacrificial institutions of
the law ; and those whose interest it is to evade this evidence, confess its ex
istence by their anxious and violent endeavours to bring the style of the New
Testament to a consistency with their system.
The doctrine, which has been received by the Catholic church, is contro
verted by one class of nominal Christians, by the same persons who deny the
divinity of our Saviour, and maintain his simple humanity. Those two arti
cles of their creed harmonize, for if Jesus Christ was a mere man, it is impos
sible to believe that his death possessed such merit as to redeem that great
multitude, which no man can number, of all nations, and kindreds, and peo
ple, and tongues. They alone can with any appearance of reason consider
* 1 Cor. ii. 2. * Rev. v. 12.
Vol. II.— 8

58 THE PRIESTLY OFFICE OF CHRIST
his death as an expiation of sin, who are persuaded that, the blood shed upon
Calvary was divine. It would be absurd to suppose, that the sufferings of a
common descendant of Adam, who was himself not exempt from human frail
ties and imperfections, were accepted as a full compensation for myriads of
transgressions. The following is a summary of the sentiments of Unitarians.
" The great 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 motive 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 advantage the gospel reforms the world, and the remis
sion 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 considera
tion of the suffering, the merits, the resurrection, the life or the obedience of
Christ, we cannot but conclude, upon a careful examination, that all those
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 man's personal virtue, a penitent upright heart,
and a reformed exemplary life, without regard to the sufferings or merit of
any being whatever." Thus the propitiatory nature of the death of Christ is
discarded ; and, according to them, when 'the Scripture says, that he gave
himself for us, that he died for our sins, that we have redemption through his
blood, — all that is intended is, that his doctrine, confirmed by his death, is
the means of leading us to repentance and amendment of life, in consequence
of which we are pardoned, and entitled to a happy immortality. It is a
thought which will naturally occur to you, that if this is the actual amount ot
what the Scriptures teach upon this subject, the terms which the sacred writers
have employed, serve only to encumber and darken the sense ; and that it
would have been better to have expressed the simple truth in plain terms not
liable to be misunderstood, and not to have enveloped it in metaphors and
allusions, by which thousands have been misled.
Let us attend more particularly to the account which is given of the death
of Christ by those who deny the atonement, that having found their reasons
to be inadequate, we may be the better prepared to receive the catholic doc
trine, which alone accords with the statements of the sacred writers.
Sometimes they speak of his death as an accidental event, as having taken
place in consequence of the wickedness and perverseness of the age in which
he appeared, and thus insinuate that among a different people he might have
escaped without persecution. How contrary this opinion is to truth, and to
the belief of a particular providence, they need not to be told, who remember
that he was delivered up by the determinate council and foreknowledge of
God, and that his death was predicted by the prophets, and prefigured by the
institutions of the law. If it was accidental, it is evident that no stress can be
laid upon it, that it could not be an essential part of the scheme of religion
which God was carrying on, and that, in itself, it was of no greater moment
than the death of any other good man who has fallen a victim to calumny and
malignity. There is a notion entertained by Socinians, which if true would militate
against the supposition that the death of Christ ought to be considered as ah
atonement for sin, or that any merit attached to it ; for they hold that death is
not the penalty of transgression, but the consequence of the original law of
our nature. Man would have died, or might have died, although he had con
tinued in innocence. When Jesus Christ therefore expired, we may apply to
him the expression, which however common is very inaccurate, that he paid
the last debt to nature : and since he was originally mortal, his death was not
an act of choice, and could not be a voluntary sacrifice. I need not stop to

HIS SACRIFICE. 5g
refute this opinion, the falsity of which was demonstrated when we pointed
out the effects of Adam's transgression. It is sufficient to repeat the well
known words of the Apostle, " By one man sin entered into the world, and
death by sin ; and sb death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned ;"*
and the words of our Lord, " No man taketh my life from me, but I lay it
down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it
again, "t
But although Socinians have sometimes talked in this loose manner, that the
death of Christ might excite as little attention as possible, yet they have found
it necessary from the general tenor of Scripture, to admit that it had some im
portant end, and have racked their invention in order to give a plausible ac
count of it.
In the first place, They tell us that he died to give us an example of patience,
resignation, faith and hope ; and thus far they are countenanced by Scripture,
which says, " Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example that we
should follow his steps ;"* and addresses this exhortation to us : " Forasmuch
then as Christ hath suffered for us in the flesh, arm yourselves likewise with
the same mind."§ But the question is, Was this the only design of his suf
ferings ? Does the giving of an example exhaust the meaning of the language
of Scripture on this subject ? We grant that he has left us an example, but
we deny that this was the only object which he had in view ; and we pro
nounce it to be false reasoning to hold any single end which is gained, to be
the only end contemplated by the person who employed the means. Every
man knows the distinction between a subordinate and an ultimate end, and is
aware that, unless both be considered, we do not understand the design of the
agent. If it was the sole purpose of the death of Christ, to give us an ex
ample, we cannot avoid thinking that the means were disproportionate to the
end ; and it seems incredible that a just and good Being would have subjected
a person so excellent as Unitarians acknowledge him to have been, pure and
spotless in his life, and richly furnished with supernatural gifts, to the most
cruel torments, solely that we might learn how to behave under our afflictions.
We might have been taught this lesson at less expence ; and it does not ap
pear to be a happy expedient for recommending submission, to place before
us the spectacle of a person enduring the severest sufferings, although he had
neither sinned himself, nor become responsible for the sins of others. The
moral efficacy which is ascribed to the example, is destroyed by the nature
of the case. Nothing will induce us to acquiesce in the will of God, when
its operations are painful to our feelings, but a full conviction of his justice and
benevolence. But the agony and blood of one who had never offended, are
calculated to create fear and distrust, and to represent the Ruler of the uni
verse, rather as a despot than as the Father of the human race.
In the second place, they tell us that he died to attest the truth of his doc
trine. I grant that this is true, but in a sense which they will not allow. He
died to confirm the promises of God, by paying the price of the blessings ex
hibited in them, and securing the enjoyment of them to believers. " All the
promises of God in him are yea, and in him amen, to the glory of God."||
But his death had this effect, because it was an atonement for sin, by which the
anger of God was appeased, and his favour was restored. I deny that he was a
simple martyr for the truth, and is to be classed with Stephen, and James, and
Antipas, and other holy men, who have sealed their testimony to religion with
their blood. Considered in itself, his death would not have proved the truth
of his doctrine ; it would have proved only that he was fully persuaded of its
truth. This is all that we can justly infer from the sacrifice which a man
* Rom. v. 12. * John x. 18. $ 1 Pet. ii. 21. § Ib. iv. 1. | 2 Cor. i. 20.

60 THE PRIESTLY OFFICE OF CHRIST.
makes for his principles ; if we go any farther, as there have been martyrs
for different religions, we should be compelled to conclude, that they are
all equally true. It was not necessary that he should die to confirm his doc
trine, because he had already established it upon the solid basis of his mi
racles. To these he appealed, saying, "Believe me for the very work's
sake."* They demonstrate that he was a messenger from God, and conse
quently,- that whatever he delivered in the name of God, was to be received
without murmuring and disputing. They were admitted as evidence by all
persons of candour, and with respect to those who were dissatisfied, we may
say, that they would not have believed, although one had risen from the dead.
' Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God, for no man can do
these miracles which thou doest, except God be with him."t Hence we
conclude, that this was not the design of his death. His dying for the truth
could not have afforded clearer evidence than his miracles, nor considered in
itself, evidence so clear. What followed it, indeed, namely his resurrection,
is the grand demonstration, that he was the object ofthe divine approbation;
but it is so, because he was put to death as an impostor and blasphemer, and
was not at all necessary, independently of these charges against him, to vin
dicate his claim to" the character of a messenger from God. The proof was
so complete before his last sufferings, that those who rejected him were with
out excuse, as we learn from his own words : " If I had not come and spoken
unto them, they had not had sin ; but now they have no cloak for their sin. "J
Once more, They tell us that he died to give us the assurance of eternal
life, that we might be led to faith and obedience, through which we obtain the
remission of sin. At first sight, it seems strange and far from the truth, that
the painful and ignominious death of an innocent person should avail to per
suade us, that a recompence is prepared in a future state for those who lead a
holy life upon earth. Appearances are directly in the face of such an expec
tation. Aware of this difficulty, Socinus said that this hope, which exerts so
happy an influence upon us, is not properly the effect of the death, but of the
resurrection of Christ, and is ascribed to his death, because it necessarily pre
ceded his resurrection. But if this were the truth, the Scripture would have
made mention of his resurrection, or rather of his ascension to heaven, and his
sitting at the right hand of God, when it speaks of the remission of sin, and not
of his death and sufferings, at least not so often, and in such significant terms.
The frequent, and almost constant, conjunction of his "blood" with remission,
indicates that the latter is not a remote, but the proximate effect of it. To
what purpose is this circuitous method ? Remission is granted to those only
who obey the commandments of God ; faith, and the hope of a reward, as
Socinus affirms, are motives and excitements to obedience ; this faith is gene
rated by the consideration of Christ raised from the dead, and exalted to glory
on account of his holiness ; but death preceded his resurrection, and therefore
remission is fitly said to be obtained by his death. That which is near, or
separated by a moderate interval, is not assigned as the cause, but that which
is removed to a great distance from the effect ; the first step in the process is
given as the cause of the result, while it ought to be ascribed to the last step,
which goes immediately before it ; and this is done not once, but uniformly.
Who can believe that the Scripture expresses itself so inaccurately and ob
scurely ? To speak of his death when it means his resurrection, of which his
• death was not the cause but the antecedent, is just as proper as to speak of
night when we mean day. A slight perusal of the sacred writings will con
vince any man who is not prejudiced, that this is not the true account. He will
find that the remission of sin is not attributed to the resurrection and exaltation
* John xiv. 11. * lb. Ui. 2. $ lb. xv. 22.

HIS SACRIFICE. 61
of Christ, or to the effect which these events are calculated to produce upon
our minds, but expressly to his death ; and that his death, as distinguished
from his resurrection and exaltation, is stated to be the procuring cause of our
redemption. " If, when we were enemies, we were reconciled to God by the
death of his Son ; much more, being reconciled, we shall be saved by his
life."* Our reconciliaton, which implies the pardon of sin, was effected by
his death, and not by the life which he now leads in heaven.
In a word, they tell us that Christ died in order to obtain the power of for
giving sin. But to this assertion we oppose the fact, that he possessed this
power before his death ; and it is absurd to suppose him to have died for the
purpose of acquiring what was already his own. He repeatedly said, " Thy
sins are forgiven thee." It is observable that, on one occasion, he used these
words, " The Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins ;"t as if he had
meant to provide for the refutation of those who affirm that this power was
subsequent to his ascension. He had power to forgive sins while he was on
earth, in his state of humiliation ; and that it does not signify, as some pre
tend, simply the power of healing diseases, will appear on consulting the pas
sage, where there is a clear distinction between the pardon and the cure of
the paralytic ; the one having taken place before the other, and the cure being
expressly declared to be the sign and confirmation of the pardon. ,
This view of the death of Christ, as the means of obtaining the power of
forgiving sin, leads me to take notice of another theory, which has been called
the middle scheme, because it admits more than the Socinian, and less than
the Catholic system. This statement, however, is not perfectly accurate ;
because Socinus himself, and his immediate followers, who allowed to Jesus
Christ supreme authority over men, held in substance the doctrine which has
been supposed to be peculiar to the scheme now to be considered.
The middle scheme agrees with the Socinian in rejecting the atonement, but
it accords thus far with the Catholic, that it maintains the intervention or media
tion of Christ in a qualified sense, as necessary, or at least as appointed, for the
restoration of the guilty to the favour of God. It proceeds upon this principle,
that God, who is infinitely merciful, may pardon the transgressions of his
creatures freely, and might have pardoned them upon repentance, but that it
appeared expedient to his wisdom, and conducive to the interests of his moral
government, to exercise his mercy to them, not immediately, but through the
interposition of another person. This friendly office was performed by Jesus
Christ, whom the abettors of this system do not consider as the eternal and
consubstantial Son of God, but as the first and most glorious of created beings,
by whom the world was made. Pitying our fallen race, he generously engaged
to assume our nature, to submit to poverty and persecution, and to suffer cru
cifixion, that he might acquire the right and power to carry into effect his
benevolent design. His services were highly acceptable to God; and in
consideration of them, there has been granted to him, upon his intercession, a
.kingdom or government over men, authorising him to bestow pardon and
Eternal life upon those who repent and obey. In confirmation of their scheme,
they appeal to certain cases mentioned in Scripture, as being analogous, and as
evincing its conformity to the manner in which the Divine administration is
conducted ; to cases in which the sins of others were pardoned at the request of
good men, and from respect to their virtues. Thus, great privileges were con
ferred upon the Israelites, to reward the piety .and obedience of Abraham ; the
idolatry ofthe people in the wilderness was pardoned when Moses interceded for
them ; and God heard the prayer of Job for his three friends, against whom his
anger was kindled, because they had not spoken of him the thing that was right.
* Rom. v. 10. f Matt. ix. 6.
F

62 THE PRIESTLY OFFICE OF CHRIST.
As this system admits a Mediator, although it confines his duty to intercession
founded on his previous sufferings, it enables its advocates to make a plausible
use of the language of Scripture, and to say with truth, according to their
limited views, that we are saved by the blood of Christ, that we are forgiven
for his sake, that we are redeemed to God by the death of his Son. It seems
also to guard the honour of the Divine government amidst the exercise of mercy,
by not treating the sins of men as light and venial, and pardoning only from
respect to the merits of a being of a higher order, through whom their repentance
is accepted. It will occur, however, to your minds, that the Scriptural phrases
concerning the death of Christ must be interpreted in" a low sense, that they
^ay be brought to accord with the scheme now under consideration. We are
saved by the death of Christ, not as an atonement, for this idea is expressly
excluded ; but as a preliminary step to our salvation, or as the appointed means
of obtaining the power to save us, or rather the power to prescribe the terms
of our salvation. If it be said that this power was merited by his sufferings, and,
consequently, that they are in truth the primary cause of salvation, we remark
that, after all, no more is ascribed to them than might be ascribed to the suffer
ings of a mere man, on whose account some favour should be conferred upon
his family and friends. He has received wounds or lost his life in the service
of his country, and his country testifies its gratitude by rewarding those who
are related to him. All the arguments drawn from the terms in which the death
of Christ is spoken of, to prove its propitiatory nature against the Socinians, bear
with equal force against the scheme of intercession. It is true, according to both
systems, that he did not die as our Surety, and bear our sins in his own body
ou the tree. This scheme, in short, is an expedient which has been devised,
not to interpret Scripture according to the genuine sense, but to explain it
away; to evade, on the one hand, the obnoxious idea of atonement, and to
seem, on the other hand, to attribute to our Saviour's death some powerful
efficacy in our redemption from sin. It is liable to the objection against the
Socinian system, that it does not satisfactorily account for the sufferings of an
innocent person, as on all hands he is acknowledged to have been. It may
display the goodness of God, but it reflects upon his justice, with which it is
impossible to reconcile the sufferings which Christ underwent by Divine ap
pointment, although he was free from personal or imputed guilt. In short, air
though it has been called a beautiful theory, it will not appear in this light to,
the man who thinks, and thinks justly, that the beauty of a moral system de
pends upon its truth ; and to a person who has studied and understood his
Bible, it will not have even the merit of speciousness, because, before it could
impose upon him for a moment, he must have forgotten all tb\t he had read.
I have said that it is an objection against this and the Socinian system, that
they do not satisfactorily account for the death of an innocent person. That
our Saviour was without sin, we may assume as an incontrovertible fact, upon
the testimony of Scripture ; and we reject with abhorrence the insinuation of
modern Unitarians, who have dared to insinuate that, although his public life
was blameless, he might not be exempt in private from the imperfections in
cident to humanity. " He did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth."*
According to all our ideas of justice, an innocent person has a right to live
in peace under the protection of the laws, and we should exclaim against the
government which should molest him, as oppressive and tyrannical. Yet we
are not surprised when such a person is persecuted by men, because we know
by experience what are the fatal effects of calumny and envy, and how often
power is abused from caprice, and ignorance, and passion. But, in heaven
we look for a pure administration, and it is a principle of reason and religion,
* 1 Pet. ii. 22.

HIS SACRIFICE. 63
that the righteous are acceptable to the Ruler of the world, and are the objects
of his peculiar care. The sufferings of our Lord did not originate solely from
men ; the agency of God was concerned in them, and they all, indeed, befel
him either by his immediate interposition, or by his appointment and
permission: " It pleased the Lord to bruise him, and to put him to grief."*
Some tell us that, in virtue of his sovereignty and supreme dominion, God
may subject his creatures to sufferings without a cause ; that he is not bound
to give an account of his proceedings to us ; that, if an angel in heaven, or the
holiest man upon earth, were severely afflicted, it would be sufficient to say,
that such is his will. Were this doctrine admitted, our antagonists could explain
the mystery of the cross without any difficulty. But those who hold it, have
forgotten that the Lord of the universe is not a despot, but a righteous and
beneficent Governor; they take a partial view of his character, and sink all
his other perfections in that of his power. Theyhaye forgotten, too, that
he has prescribed a law to himself, from which he will never deviate; a law
expressly declaring that he will render to every man according to his deeds.
Hence we conclude, with the utmost certainty, that when any being suffers
there is a just cause. We are at no loss to account for the sufferings of men,
whatever are their attainments in piety and virtue, knowing, as we do, that
each of them is a sinner ; but what reason shall we assign for the sufferings
of Him, who was proclaimed by a voice from heaven to be the Son of God,
in whom he was well pleased ? Here both the systems which we have
reviewed entirely fail. They give no explanation in which a well instructed
mind can acquiesce. To say that Christ was subjected to sufferings for the
benevolent purpose of conferring important benefits upon mankind, is to
give the highest sanction to the principle, which is so strongly reprobated in
the Scriptures, that evil may be done that good may come. ' To say that,
although his sufferings were great, he has been amply rewarded for them, is to
set up the plea, that a person may be treated unjustly in the mean time,
provided that justice shall be done to him at last, and to vindicate any arbitrary
exercise of power, if the victim of it is not an ultimate loser. Such a
procedure would be condemned in a human governor, and is not to be
attributed to Him who is the archetype of justice to kings and princes.
You have heard the reasons which are assigned for the death of Christ, by
those who deny that it was an atonement for sin. If they have proved
unsatisfactory, the doctrine of the catholic church remains unshaken ; and it
is a presumption in its favour, that all the attempts to substitute something
better in its place have failed of success. Before, however, we are authorised
to pronounce it to be true, we must ascertain that it is not only preferable to
other views of the subject, but that it is agreeable to Scripture, from which
only the real design of the death of Christ can be learned. It is not our busi
ness to contrive a variety of hypotheses, and try which of them is most suitable,
but to inquire what our Saviour himself and his disciples have said upon this
important subject.
I begin by observing, That the idea of atonement has prevailed among all
nations and in every age of the world, and that, accordingly, sacrifices have
been offered with the view of propitiating the Deity. From what source the
idea and the practice were derived, is a question about which learned men
have been divided in sentiment. Some have maintained that sacrifices were
an invention of men, who hoped, by the offering of something valuable, to
gain the favour ofthe Being whom they worshipped, as we seek to conciliate
the good will of our superiors by gifts ; and others contend that they origi
nated in the command of God to our first parents after the fall. Without en
* Is. liii. 10.

64 THE PRIESTLY OFFICE OF CHRIST.
gaging in this controversy at present, I simply remark upon the improbability
that a thought, apparently so extravagant, should have ever occurred to the
human mind by its own suggestion, as that the wrath of Heaven would be
appeased by the slaughter of unoffending animals. Whatever gave rise to this
service, it is certain that such sacrifices held an important place in the religion
of the heathens, and continue to be offered in one form or another, by idola
trous nations. Nay, in some cases, a nobler sacrifice was deemed necessary;
a human victim was dragged to the altar ; and the guilty hoped to wash away
their own sins with the blood of one of their brethren. These things are
mentioned to show, that a sense of guilt has been universally felt, accompa
nied with the fear of punishment, and that a persuasion has obtained, that
there was no. possibility of escaping with impunity, except by the suffering
of another in the room of the transgressors. They are a proof that notwith
standing the loud exclamations against the atonement of Christ, as an im
peachment of both the goodness and the justice of God, the human mind has
with great uniformity, approved of the idea of substitution, and has found in
it the best resource against the terrors of conscience.
But this statement has been controverted, and it has been confidently affirm-.
ed, that, from a review of the religions of all nations, ancient and modern,
they appear to be utterly destitute of any thing like a doctrine of proper atone
ment ; that a general belief has prevailed of the benevolence of the Deity;
and that nothing has been deemed necessary to conciliate his favour but re
pentance and the practice of virtue. The power of prejudice is great. It
hides from the mind the plainest truths, and leads it to draw the most illogical
conclusions ; it reconciles it to palpable absurdities, and renders it impenetra
ble to the most cogent arguments. But there are some cases in which the
utmost stretch of charity cannot admit the power of prejudice as an apology.
It is impossible to believe, that a man of learning and good sense has been so
blinded by its influence, as to mistake the whole history of mankind upon a
particular point, and not to see what, to every other person, presents itself
with the brightness of a sun-beam. Either Dr. Priestley, who has made the
strange assertion which I am now considering, had never read the history of
the various religions of the human race, and in this case was guilty of
presumption and dishonesty in pronouncing positively concerning their tenets ;
or, he has published to the world, with a view to support his own system,
what he must have known to be utterly false. It would disgrace a school-boy
to say, that the heathens knew nothing of expiatory sacrifices. Dr. Magee
has refuted his assertion by an induction of particulars, which show that it is
destitute of the slightest foundation. He has proved, that " a great part of the
religion of the Pagan nations consisted in rites of deprecation ; that fear of the
Divine displeasure seems to have been the leading feature in their religious
impressions ; and that, in the diversity, the costliness, and the cruelty of their
sacrifices, they sought to appease gods, to whose wrath they felt themselves
exposed, from a consciousness of sin, unrelieved by any information respecting
the means of escaping its effects.* Hence the practice of human sacrifices
among, not only the Phenicians, the Persians, the Egyptians, and the
Carthaginians, but also the learned Greeks, and the civilized Romans ; and
hence the doctrine of the Druids, as related by Caesar in his Commentaries,
that, unless the life of men were given for the life of men, the immortal gods
would not be appeased.t The gods are often represented as angry, and the
idea of propitiating them is expressed by a variety of terms. To turn away
the wrath of another, was signified among the Greeks by the verbs iM-wbu,
wymmm, k«t«wt3i», xjrata.i-*uur<rm, and among the Latins, by the words placart,
* Magee on Atonement, Vol. i. No. 5. * De Bello Gall. lib. vi.

HIS SACRIFICE. 65
pacare, conciliare, reconciliare, and propitiare. The act and the effect were
called by a single word in both languages ; in the one ixne-po;, and in the other
placamen. I observe again, that prior to the coming of Christ, sacrifices were offered,
not only of thanksgivimg, but of atonement, by the worshippers of the true God,
in obedience to his command. Such appears to have been the sacrifice of
Abel, because it consisted of the firstlings of his flock; and that he had
authority for what he did, we infer from the words of the apostle, who says,
that he offered by faith,* which pre-supposes a Divine revelation. This sin
gle passage, independently of other considerations, might decide the question
respecting the origin of sacrifices. Such are the sacrifices of Job for his sons,
lest they should have sinned during the days of feasting ; and for his friends, who
had sinned in their speeches, and were directed by God himself to adopt this
method of averting his anger. When the Israelites were delivered from Egypt,
a law was given to them, enjoining sacrifices, appointing a particular family
to the priesthood, ordering an altar to be built, and specifying the animals to be
used, and the time and manner of offering them. When any of them had
transgressed, a sacrifice was prescribed, upon offering which his sin was par
doned, \and the penalty was remitted. There were sacrifices also for the
whole congregation, in the morning and evening of every day, and on the an
niversary of expiation, when the high priest officiated, and entered into tlfe holy
place with the blood of the victim, which he sprinkled before the mercy-seat,
signifying that it was only through an atonement that God would continue to
be gracious to the people. In a word, the whole system proclaimed and
illustrated this truth, that " without the shedding of blood, there was no
remission of sins."* No hope was given to the Israelites of the protection
and blessing of the Almighty, unless they were purified by sacrifices. If it
be said, that the death of animals without reason, could not satisfy Divine
justice for the sins of men, we grant, that although they freed the offerer from
ceremonial, they could not free him from moral guilt ; but hence we infer, that
the sacrifices of the law were shadows and figures of a nobler oblation, by
which eternal redemption has been obtained.
We should have thought it so clear, that sacrifices were enjoined by the
ancient law, and were of a propitiatory nature, that no person would have
ventured to dispute it ; but it has been asserted, that the Jews had no notion of
expiatory sacrifices ; or that, if they had any such notion, it was derived from
the heathens, contrary to the common opinion, that the heathens derived the
notion from them. Nothing is more plainly taught in the Old and the New
Testament, than that sacrifices were piaculiar. The idea is unavoidably
suggested by the language of the law, and by the nature of the rites which it
prescribed; and it is still retained by the Jews, although they are aware of the
argument drawn from thence for the true and proper sacrifice of Christ, and
would for this reason have been strongly tempted to renounce it. It is the doc
trine of the modern Jews, that the mercy of God accepted the sacrifice of the
animal in the room of the offerer, and appointed that in offering it, he should
lay his hands upon it, to remind him that the victim was received as his vica
rious substitute. In order to prove that the ancient sacrifices were not of an
expiatory nature, it is alleged, that they were required in cases where no guilt
could be supposed. In the cases of the high priest, the ruler, private individuals,
and the whole congregation, a sacrifice was enjoined, when they had sinned
through ignorance ; and ignorance, it is insinuated, must have exempted them
from criminality. Ignorance, however, may not signify the absolute want of
knowledge, but inattention and inconsiderateness, which, being itself culpable,
* Heb. xi. 4. + Ib. ix. 22.
Vol. II.— 9 f 2

66 THE PRIESTLY OFFICE OF CHRIST.
would not excuse the conduct to which it gave rise ; or, if they were really ig.
norant, they were still to be blamed, because it was their duty to have made
themselves thoroughly acquainted with the law which God had given them,
and to have kept it constantly in mind. The truth seems to be, that the sins
spoken of did not proceed ex ignorantia juris, but from want of reflection,
from the sudden assaults of temptation, and the violence of passion; and
they are opposed to presumptuous sins, sins committed with a high hand,
that is, deliberately, against knowledge, and the present conviction of the
mind. The former are called sins as well as the latter ; but this difference
is made between them, that those were expiated by a sacrifice, whereas for
these no atonement was provided. " If a soul sin, and commit any of these
things which are forbidden to be done by the commandments of the Lord;
though he wist it not, yet is he guilty, and shall bear his iniquity. And he
shall bring a ram without blemish out of the flock, with thy estimation, for a
trespass-offering, unto the priest : and the priest shall make an atonement for
him concerning his ignorance wherein he erred and wist it not, and it shall be
forgiven him."* Again, sacrifices were required from those who had been
cured of leprosy, and from women after child-bearing, and, in neither case, it
has been said, can sin be supposed. It is the observation of a Jewish writer,!
that " without committing sin, no person is ever exposed to suffering; that it
is a principle with the Jewish doctors, that there is no pain without crime;
and that for this reason, she who had endured the pains of child-birth, was
required to offer a piacular sacrifice." With regard to the leper, it has been
remarked by the same person, that " a sin-offering was enjoined, because the
whole Mosaic law being founded on this principle, that whatever befals any
human creature, is the result of Providential appointment, the leper must consi
der his malady as a judicial infliction for some transgression."* And certainly
the loathsome disease of his body was an emblem of the natural pollution of
the soul, and reminded him how necessary it was to seek the favour of that
Being who had smitten him once, and might smite him again. But, although
a case had occurred, in which we could not discover any vestige of guilt,
manifest or implied, it would not, in the judgment of any reasonable man, fur
nish an objection against the general import of the legal institutions, which so
clearly teach, that an atonement is necessary to avert the anger of God.
I observe farther, That the Scriptures affirm, in the most express terms,
that the death of Christ was a propitiatory sacrifice. They use the same lan
guage in speaking of that event, which is used concerning the piacular services
of the law. He is called a priest, and the work of a priest is assigned to him,
" Every high priest is ordained to offer gifts and sacrifices ; wherefore, it is
of necessity that this man have somewhat also to offer. "§ It is said, that " he
gave himself for us an offering and a sacrifice to God, for a sweet-smelling
savour ;"|| and the same thing is asserted in many other passages. It is af
firmed, that "he died for our sins according to the Scriptures;"! that "he
bore our sins in his own body on the tree ;"** that " he is the propitiation for
our sins ;"*t that " he was made a sin-offering for us ;"** that " by his death
we are reconciled to God;"§§ that he has redeemed us to God by his blood."||
This is the general strain of the New Testament, and I am not aware of a sin
gle expression which has a different meaning. One should think, that lan
guage so express, and occurring in so many places, would be sufficient to set
tle the question, whether the death of Christ was of an expiatory nature, and
that no man who feels any reverence for the word of God, and submits to it
* Lev. v. 17, 18. * Abarbanel. $ See Magee, vol. i. Note 33
§ Heb. viu. 3. || Eph. v. 2. <[ l Cor. xv. 3.
** 1 Pet. u. 24. -f* 1 John ii. 2. }* 2 Cor. v. 21.
§§ Rom. v. 10. J] Rev. v. 9.

HIS SACRIFICE. 67
as the rule of his faith, would venture to controvert this position, or allow a
doubt to remain in his mind. But some persons are not so easily satisfied.
They have conceived a prejudice against the doctrine, and will not be con
vinced by any evidence. Hence they have recourse to the same expedient,
by which they endeavour to set aside the proofs of the divinity of Christ,
namely, the pretence that the words are not to be understood according to their
usual import. They cannot deny that he is called a priest, and his death a
sacrifice ; but they allege that the literal sense must be rejected, for no reason
which I can discover, except that it is at variance with their system. Christ,
they say, was a metaphorical priest ; his death was a metaphorical sacrifice ;
and what follows, but that he has obtained for us a metaphorical redemption,
that is, no redemption at all ?
As the Scriptures were given to instruct us in religion, it may be presumed
that they are written in language which all may understand. To suppose
that the style is highly figurative even in the didactic parts, that plain truths
are wrapt up in metaphors, that the real is often different from the apparent
sense, is to throw a most injurious reflection upon the word of God, and
would justify the church of Rome in withholding it from the common people
as a book liable to be abused by them. No person who has read the Old
Testament, can be ignorant what is meant by a sacrifice. He understands it
to have been a victim slain and offered upon the altar, in order to avert the
anger and procure the favour of God. When he finds that, in the New
Testament, the death of Christ is called a sacrifice, and considers that both
parts of revelation proceeded from the same Author, he is necessarily led te
believe that the word retains its ancient sense, and that Christ died in oui
room to reconcile us to God. We account him a blundering writer, who uses
the same word upon the same occasion in different senses ; and we call him
an unfair writer, who, by changing the meaning without warning, seeks to
impose upon his readers. To tell us that we ought to beware of being misled
by the sound of words, and that, in the passages which speak of the death of
Christ as a propitiatory oblation, nothing is intended but an allusion to the
sacrifices of the law, is to tell us that we may seek truth where we please, but
we shall not find it in the Scriptures.
If a person is honestly inquiring after truth, he will have recourse to no
shifts — no far-fetched and overstrained methods of establishing a particular
point. There will be no prejudices admitted in favour of one opinion, and
against another ; there will be no reluctance to receive evidence, on whatever
side it present itself; there will be a cautious and diligent use of all the means,
by which a correct view of the subject is most likely to be obtained. Truth
alone being his object, there will be no temptation to step out of the way
which leads to it. When the question regards the sense of a particular author,
he will proceed according to the plan pursued on all such occasions, and un
derstand the terms in their common acceptation, unless it clearly appear that
the author has designedly deviated from the established usage. He will not
attempt to make him express sentiments different from those which he seems
to express, if he is writing historically or didactically, without assigning a
reason sufficient to satisfy any competent judge. If we see a person taking a
different method, wresting words from their obvious import, talking of meta
phors when the literal sense is perfectly intelligible and spontaneously presents
itself to the mind, trying to find out, not what they naturally signify, but what
they may be made to signify by the dexterity of bold and unprincipled criti
cism, and converting the text into an enigma, the recondite meaning of which
can be discovered only by conjecture and not by any rational rules of inter
pretation, we have ground to suspect that he is not honest, and that his aim
is, not to come at the truth, but to establish a doctrine of his own. Such is

68 THE PROPHETICAL OFFICE OF CHRIST.
the procedure of Socinians, with respect to the atonement and the divinity of
Christ. It is itself sufficient to put every man upon his guard, and betrays a
conviction, on their part, that the Scriptures, as we have them, and their sys
tem, cannot stand together. Socinianism requires a new Bible, or, what
amounts to the same thing, an improved version ; that is, a corrupted text, and
an equally corrupt interpretation.

LECTURE LVIII.
ON THE PRIESTLY OFFICE OF CHRIST.
The Correspondence between the atoning Sacrifices of the Levitical Law and the Death of
Christ, traced and proved — Christ a Substitute, and his Death an Atonement — Notice of
Objections to the Doctrine.
We have ground for believing that the death of Christ was an atonement
for sin, in the language of Scripture, which, being borrowed from the sacri
ficial rites of the law, is applied to that event in such a manner, as to leave
no doubt that his death was considered by the sacred writers as having the*
same nature, and the same design, with the ancient oblations. But, in order
more fully to establish the doctrine, let us take a closer view of the legal sa
crifices, and observe how exact is the correspondence between them and the
death of Christ in every thing essential. If we find that it has all the charac
ters of a true and proper sacrifice for sin, we cannot hesitate to view it in this
light, and to regard it as the procuring cause of pardon and eternal life.
The first point of resemblance is found in the substitution of the sacrifice.
It was p.ut in the place of the person who offered it, and was called an offer
ing for his sin, or for his soul. It was not a free gift, a token of gratitude, or
a tribute paid by a subject to his sovereign, but a vicarious oblation, which
was slain to signify the death which he deserved, and to save him from per
sonally undergoing the penalty. As this notion of a sacrifice is obviously
taught by the law, so it was adopted by the Jews and by the Gentiles, who
both considered the victim as given for them, as occupying their place. This
was signified by the act of laying his hands upon the head of the victim, by
which the offerer transferred his guilt from himself to the devoted animal, that
it might be punished in his stead. Jesus Christ was substituted in the room
of sinners ; and hence he is called s»f«, " the surety of a better covenant."*
A surety is one who gives security for another, that the other will fulfil his
engagements, or, in the case of failure, that he will fulfil them for him. Some
say that he was surety to us for God, having engaged that God would per
form his promises ; or surety for us to God, having engaged to him that we
should perform the condition of the covenant. Both ideas are inadmissible,
and the true meaning is explained by the apostle in another place, when he
says, that Christ was " the Mediator of the new covenant, that by means of
death, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance."!
He was a surety who undertook to die for those whom he represented.
The substitution is evident from those passages in which he is said to have
died/or us, fay iyav. It is acknowledged that the preposition ™? sometimes
signifies merely on account of, or with a view to the advantage of; but it
* Heb. vii. 22. -j- lb. ix. 15.

HIS SACRIFICE. 69
does not follow that, in reference to the death of Christ, it imports only that
he died for our good, to confirm his doctrine, and to set us an example. It is
beyond doubt that it also signifies in the room of, and bears this sense when
it occurs in connexion "with the verb mWui, both in the Scriptures and in
the classics. " The Socinians," says Raphelius, " will not find one Greek
writer to support a different interpretation."* In this sense it occurs repeat-
ly in the writings of Xenophon: h k*i AtMii av imf ™™ aTo8ava»;* " would you
be willing to die for this boy?" that is, as is evident from the context, " Will
you die in his stead ? save his life by parting with your own ?" Ano^x't T0«
;r*rgoc wrejora-oSstrav — *" Antilochus dying for his father" obtained such glory, that
he alone among the Greeks was called <m.«*™§. The preposition retains the
same sense in the New Testament. When Caiaphas, the high priest, said,
that it was expedient 'V* «c «tv8ga>ff'o? uttoQuvh fat^ tov \mv, «=u ,«« qkw to etfW ccn-oyoiTut, he
manifestly signified that our Lord should be put to death as a victim for the
Jews, that by his death they might be saved from the vengeance of the Ro
mans. He was to be like the myfytMna. and mitymAaiixara. of the Greeks, men
who were taken from the multitude and slain, that the anger of the gods
might be appeased. " Scarcely — v*% Jmmov, — for a righteous man will one die,
but for a good man, — wng imi ayaBm — some would even dare to die."§ Persons
might be found to lay down their lives for such a man. The apostle is un
questionably speaking of a case of substitution, of the voluntary sacrifice of
one life for another. The preposition, therefore, must, by all the laws of
criticism, have the same import, in the words which immediately follow: —
" But God commendeth his love towards us, in that, while we were yet sin
ners, Christ died for us,— w«s "f*m <«re8*«-"||
The same inference may be drawn from the use of the preposition am,
which conveys the idea of commutation and substitution. The law says,
cp8*tye« uni (xpS^ftsv, oSk ami iJovtk, requiring that the man who had put out the
eye or the tooth of another, should lose one of his own. To render «««o» ami
x.mwv, is to do any injury to our neighbour, because he has done an injury to
us. In these cases, the general idea is that of commutation. The preposi
tion also denotes substitution and succession, or coming in the room of another.
Thus, Archelaus reigned over Judea, — avrt "a^Sw ™ woneps «w«/ — » in the room
of Herod his father."1[ And irtwhat other sense but this of substitution can
we understand it in the following words ? " The Son of man came not to be
ministered unto but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for many — "
iwi-M im 4w tonai w/Tgw suit/ m\\u>v."* The preposition ascertains the action to be
vicarious, to be an action performed by one person, not only for the benefit,
but in the room of another, as a benevolent man would lay down the price
demanded for the liberty of a captive, which the captive himself was unable
to pay. The life of sinners was forfeited, and it was redeemed by the life of
the Saviour. The word >an^i signifies a price of any kind, but is limited to
the sense of a ransom by the occasion, being wwjov ami mxjjw, for the deliver
ance of many. There is a compound noun, <cni*m$>>, whieh is used by Paul,
when he says, that Christ gave himself a " ransom for all, to be testified in
due time ;"tt intimating, in the most intelligible manner, that his death was
not merely the means, but the price of our redemption, and, consequently,
that his sufferings were vicarious.
When we affirm the substitution of Christ, we suppose that our guilt was
legally transferred to him, so that he was made answerable for it ; and, in this
respect, there is a resemblance between him and the ancient sacrifices. They
were called sin-offerings, and simply man, sin, — the same term being em-
* Raphelii Annot. torn. ii. p. 253, 254. * De Cyri Exped. * De Venat.
§ Rom. v. 7. || Ib. 8. IT Matt. ii. 22. ** Ib. xx. 28. ** l Tim- "• 6l

70 THE PRIESTLY OFFICE OF CHRIST.
ployed to denote the transgression and the oblation for it, because there was a
translation of the one to the other, or the latter was considered as bearing the
former. This translation was represented by a significant rite. When the
priest, the ruler, or any one of the common people, brought for a sin-offering
a bullock, a goat, or a kid, or a lamb, each was commanded to lay his hand
upon its head ; and the meaning of the rite is evident from what was done
on the great day of atonement. Two goats were then presented, of which
the one was to be slain and offered for a sin-offering ; but the other was to be
sent by the hand of a fit person into the wilderness, in order to represent the
removal of guilt as the effect of the sacrifice. That the design might be un
derstood, and might make a proper impression upon the spectators, "Aaron,"
says the law, " shall lay both his hands upon the head of the live goat, and
confess over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their trans
gressions in all their sins, putting them upon the head of the goat, and shall
send him away by the hand of a fit man into the wilderness. And the goat
shall bear upon him all their iniquities unto a land not inhabited : and he shall
let go the goat in the wilderness."* There seems to be an allusion to this
rite, and certainly the same thing is expressed by the prophet, when he says,
" All we, like sheep, have gone astray ; we have turned every one to his own
way; and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all."* They were laid
upon him as the sins of the Israelites were laid upon the scape-goat. To the
same purpose are the words of the Apostle, " He hath made him to be sin for
us, who knew no sin ; that we might be made the righteousness of God in
him."* I add the testimony of Peter: " Who his own self bare our sins in
his body on the tree: by whose stripes ye were healed. "§ The sins which
he bore on the cross were not his own, but ours ; and " his bearing them"
implies, that they had been laid upon him as a burden under which we were
sinking into perdition, and from which he was graciously pleased to relieve us,
It is an obvious inference from 'these passages, that there was a transference
of the sins of men to our Saviour, as the sins of the Israelite were transferred
to the animal which he brought to the altar. Christ having voluntarily en
gaged to give satisfaction to the Divine justice for us, they were reckoned to
him, as a debt is reckoned to a surety when the debtor himself is insolvent,
and the creditor looks to the surety for payment. God dealt with him as if
the sins had been his own ; he inflicted punishment upon him as if he had
been the offender. This is what we mean by saying that our sins were im
puted to him ; he came under an obligation to bear the penalty. They were
only imputed to him, but not accounted really his own. This was impossi
ble ; for God, who always judges according to truth, would not charge one
person with having committed the sins of another. Such a charge would be
false, and never was, nor never will be, made. We cannot, therefore, read
without disgust and detestation the language in which some high-flyers have
indulged, — men who carried every thing to excess, and exposed important
doctrines to reproach, by the unguarded and presumptuous manner in which
they expressed them ; not hesitating to call our blessed Lord a sinner, and
the greatest of sinners ; and to maintain that, during his last sufferings, he was
separated from God and disowned by him, and was odious and abominable in
his sight. These are not the words of truth and soberness, but the ravings
of impiety or insanity. Such men did not understand the translation of guilt,
which merely implies an obligation to punishment, but no moral taint, and
was so far from rendering our Lord an object of the displeasure of his Father,
that he never was the object of higher approbation than when he was expiring
on the cross. The voluntary susception of our guilt, while in himself he was
* Lev. xvi. 21, 22. * Is. liii. 6. $ 2 Cor. v. 21. § 1 Peter ii. 24.

HIS SACRIFICE. 71
perfectly pure, could not for one moment change the sentiment of entire com
placency with which his heavenly Father had always regarded him. Without
sin, he was a sin-offering, bearing the iniquities of those whom he had under
taken to redeem. He owed nothing to justice for himself, but he owed much
as the surety of men. His death was accompanied with such circumstances
as showed that it was a penal act; for, besides its shame and its torments, it
was that kind of death which the law had pronounced to be accursed ; and the
preternatural darkness at his crucifixion, was a visible symbol of the frown of
the invisible Creator. •
The animal which was substituted in the room of the offending Israelite,
and over which he had confessed his sin, was slain, and laid upon the altar.
Life was given for life ; the life of the animal, which God was pleased to ac
cept, instead of the life of the man. " The life of the flesh is in the blood ;
and I have given it unto you upon the altar, to make an atonement for your
souls ; for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul."* That
Jesus Christ died, is a'fact about which there is no dispute ; but, with respect
to the design of his death, we have, seen that his professed followers are far
from being agreed. It is granted that he died for our good, that he submitted
to crucifixion to attest his doctrine, and give us an example ; but that his death
was a sacrifice of atonement, some men confidently deny. Upon their hypo
thesis, there was no material difference between his death and that of many
other holy men, who laid down their lives for the truth, and at the same time,
were admirable patterns of faith, and patience, and hope. We assert, that he
died as the substitute of the guilty ; that death was a punishment inflicted
upon him for our sins, which were the impulsive cause of his sufferings, and,
in this sense, he was made a curse for us ; and that the great design was, to
give satisfaction to Divine justice. This view is founded upon the passages
formerLy quoted to prove his substitution, passages which assert, that " he
gave himself for us ;" that " he was made sin," or a sin-offering, " for us ;"
that " he died for all ;" that " he bore our sins in his own body on the tree ;"
that " he suffered, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God." In
a case where the defence of a particular system was not concerned, it would
be acknowledged to be contrary to the laws of sound interpretation to under
stand, by such expressions, merely that the death of Christ has been produc
tive of some benefit to mankind. I should wish to know, from those who
wrest them from their obvious sense — the sense which they have suggested to
all men but themselves — in what stronger terms the inspired writers could
have expressed themselves, if it had been really their design to inform us that
Christ died, not only for our good, but to atone for our sins ; and whether the
usage of the language, and the prevailing sentiments of those for whose in
struction they wrote, would have led them to employ other terms than those
which they have actually employed. If their words do not teach that the
death of Christ was a true and proper sacrifice for sin, we must say that this
is an idea which human language is incapable of communicating. Is it pos
sible to be more explicit than Peter is, when he affirms, that Christ suffered
for sin, or as a sin-offering, the just for the unjust ? Surely every man must
see, who has not wilfully shut his eyes, that the just One suffered in the room
of the unjust ; suffered that they might not suffer ; that his death was vicarious,
and he submitted to it that he might bring us to God, or effect a reconciliation
between us and our offended Creator. There is no perceptible difference be
tween his death and the legal sacrifices but this — that, in the one case, it was
an animal without reason which was slain, and in the other, it was a man, the
Son of the living God, who was the victim. His death was called a sacrifice,
* Lev. xvii. 11.

72 THE PRIESTLY OFFICE OF CHRIST.
without the slightest hint of a metaphor. " He offered himself," as the Le-
vitical priest offered the goats, and lambs, and bullocks, which were required
by the law, " he offered himself without spot to God ;" " reappeared in the
end of the world, to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself;"* to accomplish
at once what was typified by the legal oblations. He was a "Lamb slain;"
the " Lamb of God, which took away the sins of the world."*
Attempts have been made to neutralize the evidence furnished by these pas
sages in favour of the doctrine of atonement. When Christ is said to have
borne our sins, we are told that this does not mean that he bore the punish
ment of them, but that he bore them away ; and that he bore them away by
procuring the offer of pardon upon repentance, or by presenting motives fit to
turn us from our sins, in consequence of which we are forgiven. In the fifty-
third chapter of Isaiah, it is said, " Surely he hath borne our griefs, and car
ried our sorrows."* In order to prove, from this verse, the propitiatory
nature of the sufferings of Christ, the two words which express what he has
done in reference to our sins, — niso and hx, translated borne and carried,—
have been carefully examined, and their import has been ascertained by a
comparison of other passages in which they occur. The result is given by
Dr. Magee in the forty-second note.§ Both signify, not to bear away, but to
bear or sustain, as a person bears a burden, and this is evidently the sense in
all cases where sin is spoken of ; " the suffering, or being liable to suffer,
some infliction on account of sin, which, in the case of the offender himself,
would be properly called punishment." "We are told that God made. the
iniquities of us all to fall upon him, who is said to have borne the iniquities
of many : thus is the bearing of our iniquities explained to be the bearing
them laid on as a burden ; and though a reference is undoubtedly intended to
the laying the iniquities of the Jewish people on the head of the scape-goat,
which was done, (as is urged by Socinus, Crellius, Taylor, and other writers
who adopt their notions,) that they might be borne, or carried away; yet this
does not prevent them from being borne as a burden. The great object in
bearing our sins, was certainly to bear them away ; but the manner in which
they were borne, so as to be ultimately borne away by him who died for us,
was by his enduring the afflictions and sufferings which were due to them ;
by his being " numbered with transgressors," treated as if he had been an
actual transgressor, and made answerable for us, and consequently wounded
for our transgressions and smitten for our iniquities, in such a manner that
our peace was effected by his chastisement, and we healed by his bruises; he
having borne our iniquities, having suffered that which was the penalty due
to them on our part, and having offered himself a sacrifice for sin on out
account."|| Peter alludes to this passage in Isaiah, when he says, "that
Christ — raj i^TW ifiuw aumc aimf^mi ev w oyojUcct; bxmv &ri to fytot, — bore OUT sins
in his own body on the tree."l It has been contended, that- the verb «"«•
here signifies to bear away ; but literally it means to carry up from a lower to
a higher place, and is used to express the act of sacrificing : " Who needeth
not daily, like the high priest — sh^w 8wi«, — to offer sacrifices for sins."** I'
does not seem to occur in the sense of bearing away. In the passage under
consideration, if it convey any idea beyond simple bearing, it signifies to
carry up, and intimates that Christ carried up our sins to the cross, having
previously taken them upon him, that he might there bear the punishment of
them, as the legal sacrifices were carried up to the altar, and laid upon it,
that they might be consumed.
It has been objected to the vicarious nature of the death of Christ, which
• Heb. ix. 14, 26. * Rev. v. 6, &c. John i. 29. $ Is. liii. 4. § Magee on Aton.voU
|. | Magee, vol. i. p. 461. f l pet. ii. 24. ** Heb. vii. 27.

HIS SACRIFICE. 73
imports that he endured the punishment due to our sins, that he did not actu
ally suffer the punishment to which we were liable, for his sufferings were
temporary, whereas eternal death is the doom of transgressors. The objec
tion comes with an ill grace from Socinians, who deny the eternity of future
punishment, unless they mean to refute us from our own principles, or to use
the argumentum ad hominem ; but from whatever quarter it comes, it involves
a difficulty which may occur to the attentive inquirer. It has been frequently
said, that eternity is not a necessary adjunct of the punishment of sin, but arises
from the limited capacity of creatures, who could not endure, in a definite
time, the full execution of the penalty. I am disposed to call in question the
accuracy of this statement, and to believe that it is not from the weakness of
the subject that suffering will be perpetual, but because the penalty implies
the final forfeiture of happiness ; and that, by the constitution of things, the
loss incurred is a total and irretrievable loss. Sin separates the creature from
the Creator, without the possibility of reunion. Be this as it may, I remark,
that, in considering the atonement of Christ, we are not to inquire what was
the quantum of suffering, in order to ascertain whether it bore an exact pro
portion to the sufferings which would have fallen to the lot of those whom he
died to redeem. Some men have allowed themselves to go into estimates of
this kind, and have presumptuously, and, in my opinion, nonsensically main
tained, that the sum of suffering was so nicely adjusted between our Saviour
and the objects of his love, that, if there had been a single person more to be
saved, his sufferings would have been proportionably augmented. They seem
to have imagined, that he actually endured all the pain which the millions of
the redeemed were doomed to endure throughout the whole of their being. —
We should scarcely have expected arithmetical calculations to be introduced
into a subject so little connected with them ; but human speculations are some
times pushed to an extravagant and ridiculous length. This comes from un
derstanding our sins to be debts in a literal sense, and the sufferings of Christ
to be such a payment as a surety makes in pounds, shillings, pence, and
farthings. I remark by the way, that they have gone to the opposite extreme,
who have ventured to affirm, that one drop of the blood of Christ would have
been sufficient to redeem the world. They might be asked to tell us, why he
shed so many drops, and even poured out his soul unto death, and whether
they seriously believe that he suffered more than was necessary for the salva
tion of mankind ? To return to the first calculators, they entirely overlook
the personal dignity of our Saviour, which must have given an unspeakable
value to his sufferings ; for had this been taken into the account, they would
have seen, that such an accumulation of pain as they imagine was unneces
sary. According to their hypothesis, the dignity of his person added nothing
to the value of his sufferings, nor did they need to be enhanced by it, as they
were equal in degree to the appointed sufferings of his people. We can hardly
speak, without presumption, upon a subject so mysterious and awful. His
sufferings were great, beyond the power of language to express, or of imagi
nation to conceive ; but if we admit that all the acts of his human nature were
finite, we cannot consistently say that his sufferings were infinite in degree,
and must consequently admit that their transcendent worth was owing to the
union of that nature to the divine. He did not, therefore, suffer all the pains
and sorrows of sinners, but he suffered what was equivalent. It was the
blood of the Son of God which was shed ; it was the Lord of glory who was
crucified. Hence, although his sufferings were temporary, they satisfied the
demands of justice, and were a valid ground upon which God might pardon
the sins of believers. It was not necessary that the sacrifice should remain
for ever upon the altar, because it was so superior in worth to all former sa-
Vol. IL— 10 G

74 THE PRIESTLY OFFICE OF CHRIST.
crifices, so precious in itself, that, in the language of Scripture, God " smelled
a savour of rest."
Perhaps our ideas are not always distinct, when we speak of the death of
Christ as a satisfaction for sin. That word, indeed, is used to signify any
thing with which the person having a claim is contented, whether he receive
the whole that he claims, or only a part of it, or something instead of it. In
law, it strictly signifies a payment which may or may not be admitted, accord
ing to the pleasure of him to whom it is due ; and it takes place when not the
very thing is done which he had a right to 'demand, but something which he
is pleased to accept as an equivalent. In the present case, what the law de
manded was the death of the transgressors themselves ; it was, therefore, a re
laxation of the law, to admit another to die for them ; and, on this account, the
death of Christ was properly a satisfaction to justice ; something with which it
was content, although not the very thing which it originally required. It is
on this ground that sinners were not ipso facto set free from guilt and con
demnation, but continue under them till they believe. The reason is, that
they did not themselves undergo the penalty, but another underwent it in their
room ; and the Lawgiver had a right to settle the terms of their actual deliver
ance. We need not, therefore, puzzle ourselves with inquiring how much
Christ suffered ; for, besides that this is a question which we are not compe
tent to decide, it is enough to know, that he suffered all that was necessary to
demonstrate the Divine abhorrence of sin, to maintain the authority of the law,
and to exclude the impenitent from the hope of impunity.
The same effect is ascribed to the death of Christ, as to the ancient sacri
fices, and both are said to have averted the anger of God, and procured his
good will and favour to man. Upon offering the appointed sacrifice, an
Israelite was exempted from the penalty incurred by transgression, and was
permitted to retain his place in the congregation, and to enjoy his political
and ecclesiastical privileges. This expression is frequently subjoined to the
precept respecting offerings to be made on particular occasions : " The
priest shall make atonement for his sin, and it shall be forgiven him."* This
is the prayer to be presented on the occasion of offering a heifer when a
person had been slain, and the murderer could not be discovered : — " Be
merciful, 0 Lord, unto thy people Israel, whom thou hast redeemed, and
lay not innocent blood unto thy people of Israel's charge. And the blood
shall be forgiven them."t If, then, the death of Christ has accomplished the
design of sacrifices, we may justly conclude, that it was a sacrifice in the true
and proper sense. The blessings which we enjoy by it are, pardon, peace,
and the favour of God. " He was delivered for our offences, and was raised
again for our justification. 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 the hope of the glory of
God."* " We have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins,
according to the riches of his grace. "§ " Be it known unto you, men and
brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins:
and by him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could
not be justified by the law of Moses. "|| There were some sins for which
that law provided no sacrifice, and the transgressor died without'mercy : the
superior excellence of this sacrifice appears from its unbounded efficacy, there
being no sin, however aggravated, which will be not remitted to him who be
lieves. In a word, Christ is said to have made peace by the blood of his
* Lev. iv. 26, 31, 35. vi 7. xii. 8, &c. * Deut. xxi. 8. $ Rom. iv. 25. v. 1, 2.
§ Ephes. i. 7. | Acts. xiii. 38, 39.

HIS SACRIFICE. 75
cross, to have redeemed us to God with his blood, to have redeemed us from
the curse, to have delivered us from the wrath to come, to have made us kings
and priests unto God, even our Father. It is plain, from these and many
other passages which it is unnecessary to quote, that the removal of guilt, the
repeal of the condemnatory sentence, and the hope of eternal life, are attri
buted to his death as the procuring cause.
The design of sacrifices was to appease the anger of the Deity ; Jews and
Gentiles agreed in this idea. Jesus Christ is called a " merciful and faithful
high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of
the people,"* — ae n hjunai-u t« afjut%Ti*s ra/ xacu, — literally, to propitiate the sins
of the people; but the expression is evidently elliptical, and is put for «t to
iKanKti%*i 8ev -n-e^t t» i/Aa^riaiv, to propitiate God for the sins of the people. The
design of his death was to make God propitious to men, to avert his anger,
and to procure his favour. This is what we mean by making atonement for
sin. Such an atonement as consists in the destruction of sin by repentance,
and the acquisition of habits of holiness, (and this is the only atonement which
Socinus would admit), could not be expressed by tKao-iaixat, or its derivative
ihao-ftoc. It is well known that i\*o-fj.os signifies an atonement, something done
or suffered to reconcile an offended person ; and it is repeatedly applied to
our Saviour, obviously for the purpose of informing us what was the design
and the effect of his death. " He is — iVaoyw — the propitiation for our sins."t
" Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his
Son to be— iw/w — a. propitiation for our sins."* Paul makes use of a differ
ent word, but of the same derivation, — " Whom God hath set forth to be a
propitiation — i\*<rm£Kv.% It is the word employed by the Seventy, to express
the covering of the ark of the covenant, which was called the mercy-seat ;
and they have joined with it the word vntii/j.*. 'iasm-t^w vriBif**,, is the propitia
tory covering^ Hence, some read the passage, " Whom God hath set forth
a mercy-seat." ' Christ, say the Unitarians, ' is what the mercy-seat was
under the former dispensation. In him God shows himself merciful. Here he
takes his stand, and declares his gracious purposes.' Their meaning is, that
Christ is the messenger of Divine mercy, the medium of Divine communi
cation ; and thus they get rid of the idea of atonement. Grotius supposes
ihao-r^iev to be a noun, and says, that all words of this termination import an
efficient power, and are improperly understood as merely declarative, and,
consequently, that iVawregw here signifies, that Christ has made God propitious.
Others, regarding it as an adjective, think that a noun is understood, either
K$aov or fofta, and that the meaning is, God hath set him forth as a propitiatory
sacrifice ; Hiao-T«£«t the adjective signifying having the force or power to pro
pitiate or expiate. And, that this is the true sense of the word, is plain from
two considerations : First, The Apostle calls him iA«o-T»g«v, » a propitiation
through faith in his blood," intimating, that it was the effusion of his blood
which propitiated, as under the law it was the blood of the devoted animal
which made an atonement. Secondly, Something more than a declaration of
mercy must be intended, because the design of setting him forth as a propitia
tion was, " to declare the justice of God in the remission of sin, that he might
be just, and the justifier of him that believeth in Jesus. "f We can understand
how Divine justice was displayed, if Christ died for sin, or suffered the punish
ment of it ; but there is nothing like justice in a simple declaration of mercy.
The atoning nature of the death of Christ is signified, when its effect is
said to be " our reconciliation to God," and is expressed by the verbs x*.TaK*<ro-w
and omnvraKM-nn, and by the noun x&raxkayn. " When we were enemies —
* Heb. ii. 17. * 1 John ii. 2. $ lb. iv. 10. § Rom. iii. 25.
I Exod. xxv. 17. 1 Rom. iii. 26.

76 THE PRIESTLY OFFICE OF CHRIST.
*.am*\a.y»ftsi, — we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son."* " We
joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have received — ™
n*T**>,*ym — the reconciliation.'"^ It is objected, that it is no wheie said that
God was reconciled to us, but that we are reconciled to him ; and such a re
conciliation does not signify the averting of his anger against us, but the laying
aside our enmity against him. We may ask those who advance the objection,
whether they believe that God was not offended at the sins of men ? If they
say that he was not, they give the lie to innumerable passages, in which his
abhorrence of sin, and his determination to punish the sinner, are declared ;
and they virtually maintain, that holiness and justice are not perfections of
his nature. If they admit that sin is displeasing to him, and vengeance is
proclaimed against the sinner, they must also admit, that not only we are re
conciled to God, but he is reconciled to us ; that having been once angry, he
is now pacified. Whether they will allow that this change was effected by
the death of Christ or not, they can neither deny that it does-take place, and
is owing to some cause, nor object to the idea itself with appearance of reason.
He who once threatened to punish another, but has since pardoned him, and
now treats him with kindness, has certainly been reconciled to him. If his
sentiments towards him were always the same, his appearances of displeasure
were a dramatic show, inconsistent with sincerity. The argument that God
is not said, in express terms, to have been reconciled to us, is of no weight,
while his reconciliation is implied in other phrases ; as that he hath made
peace by the blood of his cross, and reconciled those who were once alienated,
and enemies in their mind by wicked works, and that Christ is a propitiation
for sin, or has made God propitious to us, with whom, on account of sin, he
was formerly displeased. The objectors have been misled by not attending to,
the true import of x.-j-TaxKainno-fiai and Jia\arrTio-dai, which is also used in the New
Testament. Such words are employed in the classics to signify, the removing
of the anger of the gods, and bear the same sense in the sacred writings. —
They signify, to return to a state of peace with a person whom we had of
fended, to pacify him and render him friendly. Thus, when our Lord says
in the Gospel of Matthew, if " thy brother hath aught against thee," has
some ground of offence, " go and — haxxaySi ™ *fsxp» nv — be reconciled to thy
brother,"* nothing can be plainer, than that the offender is not exhorted to lay
aside his enmity to his brother, although this is understood ; and that the pur
pose of going to the offended person is, to reconcile him by confession and
reparation, to appease his anger, and persuade him to be at peace with the
offender. Here then the phrase, be reconciled to another, signifies to recon
cile the other to us ; and why should not the word have the same meaning,
when it is used in reference to God ? We are reconciled to him, as we are
reconciled to our injured brother ; something is done which disposes him to
receive us into favour. Now, the cause of the reconciliation which the Scrip
ture assigns is, the death of Christ, and, consequently, his death was a propi
tiatory sacrifice. The Apostle explains our being saved from wrath, by " our
receiving the reconciliation.'^ To receive the reconciliation is to obtain the
remission of our sins ; but to receive our conversion, which is the sense of
Socinians, is a form of speech altogether unprecedented. The two reconcilia
tions of God to sinners and of sinners to God, are mentioned in the fifth
chapter of the second Epistle to the Corinthians. Of the first the apostle
says, " God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing
their trespasses unto them."|| Thus, reconciliation consisted in forgiving
them, that is, in ceasing to be angry with them, and receiving them into favour;
and how it was effected we learn in general from the mention of Christ as a
" Rom. v. 10. fib. v. 11. \ Matt v. 24. § Rom. v. 9, 11. ] 2 Cor. v. 19

HIS SACRIFICE. » 77
person by whom the world was reconciled, and in particular from the words
subjoined for explanation. " For he made'him to be sin," or " a sin-offering
for us, who knew no sin, that we might be made the righteousness of God in
him."* This reconciliation was evidently on the part of God, who, by the me
diation of Christ, opened the way for the exercise of his mercy in pardoning
the guilty. It cannot mean our personal reconciliation to God, or our con
version, for this follows as a consequence of the former. On the ground of
God's reconciliation to us, we are exhorted to be reconciled to him, and the
great motive or encouragement is his previous reconciliation. " He hath com*
mitted unto us the ministry of reconciliation. 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 unto God;"* ' Since God has given Christ to be a
propitiation for sin, and has sent us to proclaim the joyful tidings, do you ac
cept the offer of peace, and enter into covenant with him.' We are reconciled
to God when we are justified by faith.
It is false to affirm, that God is never said to be reconciled to us ; and, con
sequently, this argument against the propitiatory nature of the death of Christ
falls to the ground. It is equally false to affirm, that God was reconciled be
fore he sent his Son into the world, and that therefore Christ did not die to
reconcile him. We acknowledge that it was because he loved the world, that
he gave his only begotten Son. But vthis love was merely a benevolent pur
pose to deliver us by proper means, and proceeded no farther than to provide
those means. He had not actually forgiven us, but was willing to forgive us,
if a sufficient atonement was made. He appointed Christ to die for trans
gressors, that he might receive them into favour in perfect consistency with his
threatenings against sin, and the righteousness of his administration. He was
content — nay he willed — that the grounds of his displeasure against us should
be removed ; but, till they were removed, he was not actually reconciled ; and
hence our pardon and restoration are not represented as the immediate effects
of his original purpose to save us, but are ascribed to the vicarious sufferings
of the Saviour. " The chastisement of our peace," or by which our peace
was procured, " was upon him, and with his stripes we are healed." God was
reconciled when that was done, which made justice cease to demand our
punishment. The general ground on which we maintain the doctrine of atonement is, the
necessity arising from the nature and the revealed will of God, that the trans
gressors of the law should be subjected to the penalty. We think that the
transgressors can be allowed to escape only by a gracious dispensation, ad
mitting a surety to suffer in their room. We cannot see how the honour of
the Divine character and government could be otherwise maintained. Believ
ing that avenging justice is essential to God, we conclude that free pardon, or
pardon upon the simple condition of repentance, was impossible. But, al
though abstract reasoning from the Divine perfections may be auxiliary to our
belief of any particular doctrine, the proper foundation of faith is the express
testimony of Scripture ; and I have therefore endeavoured to lay before you a
part of the evidence which it supplies on this most important subject. The
argument drawn from the justice of God in support of this doctrine, was con
sidered when I endeavoured to illustrate his perfections.
I shall close this discussion, by calling your attention to the objections which
are advanced against this doctrine.
First,, It is objected, that the doctrine of the atonement is repugnant to all
our notions of justice ; for, what is more manifestly unjust, than that the in
nocent should suffer for the guilty ? But the assumed maxim, that it is con-
* 2 Cor. v. 21. * 2 Cor. v. 19, 20.
o 2

78 THE PRIESTLY OFFICE OF CHRIST.
trary to justice that a person should suffer except for his own sins, is too
sweeping, and is not agreeable to the common sentiments of mankind. It is
acknowledged that, in eertain cases, one-man may put himself in the place of
another, and bear the consequences of such substitution. We have an exam
ple in cases of suretiship, when the surety is compelled to do what the prin
cipal has failed to perform. There are even instances in the matter of life
and death, of one man engaging to save the life of another by the sacrifice of
his own. Here, however, suretiship is extended beyond its due limits, because
no man has power to give away his own life, and therefore no government has
a right to accept it. But the principle of substitution is recognised and acted
upon among men, and cannot consistently be condemned, when adopted as a
part of the Divine administration. We cannot reasonably find fault with God
for doing what is done by ourselves, is sanctioned by our laws, and is ac
knowledged by all to be fair and equitable. There are several considerations
which show that, in the present case, it was perfectly justifiable. Christ pos
sessed the necessary qualification of freedom from the obligation upon all other
men to suffer death ; if he had had sins of his own, for which to make satisfac
tion, he could not have been admitted as a substitute. He was master of his own
life as Lord of all, could make a free gift of it, had power to lay it down, and
power to take it again. No man could take it from him ; he gave it freely,
and the law says Volenti nulla Jit injuria; he is not injured, when that is
done to him, to which he has given his deliberate and cordial consent. God,
who might have demanded the death of the guilty themselves, being the su
preme Lawgiver, was pleased so far to relax the law, as to allow another to
die for them. We see that all things concur to make this transaction accordant
with justice. Christ might give his life for us ; he gave it freely, and his
Father accepted it. God certainly knew what was proper to be done, what
became his character, what would most effectually uphold the authority and
honour of his government ; and what man or angel will presume to arraign
the dispensation ? In truth, the proper question is, whether the Scriptures
teach that Christ was a propitiatory sacrifice ; and, if they do, objections to
the justice of the proceeding are vain and impious, because it is past all doubt,
that whatever God does is right.
In the second place, it is objected, that this doctrine represents God as furious
and revengeful, delighting in the miseries of his creatures, and contented only
with torments and blood. He would not be appeased, and permit sinners to
escape, till his Son offered the dreadful sacrifice of himself. This is an un
fair, irreverent, and malignant representation of a holy and awful truth of re
vealed religion. The Scriptures do indeed ascribe wrath, jealousy, and
revenge to God, by anthropopathy, or the figurative attribution of human sen
timents and feelings, and even of human members, to him ; but every person
is aware, that the design of such forms of speech would be perverted, and
great dishonour would be done to him by supposing that there is any thing in
his nature analogous to the commotions and infirmities of ours. Far be it
from us to conceive so unworthily of Him who is all-perfect. Such terms are
employed solely to assist us in forming an idea of the contrariety of sin to his
nature and will, of the strong disapprobation with which he regards it, and of
his fixed determination to render the recompense of their deeds to the trans
gressors of his law. He has no pleasure in the misery of his creatures, ab
stractly considered, as he has assured us with an oath ; he is naturally good
to all, and his tender mercies are over all his works. But having given a
righteous law to man, he will maintain his authority, by executing the penalty
upon those who violate it: being the Ruler of the world, he will not permit
the disobedient and rebellious to escape with impunity. When we affirm,
that avenging justice is essential to God, we do not mean to represent him as

HIS SACRIFICE. 70
cruel and unrelenting, but as one who must do what is right, and will abide
- by his original law, which denounced death upon transgressors. When we
affirm, that he would not pardon sin without an atonement, we do not impute
to him any want of mercy, but ascribe to him the perfection of justice, which
required that compensation should be made for the wrong which he had sus
tained, and security should be given for the preservation of his rights and pre
rogatives. In the third place, ,It is objected, that the doctrine of the atonement suppo
ses God to be liable to change, to be first angry, and then pacified. But this
objection might be made to every system of religion which admits that sin is
displeasing to God : for the same change must take place, when a sinner re
pents. It might be made to prayer, the professed design of which is, to obtain
blessings from him, which he would not otherwise have bestowed. The
atonement did not make God hate sin less than he did before, or excite, feel
ings of compassion towards us, which did not formerly exist. He loved us
before he gave his Son ; and sin still is, and ever will be, the object of his
utmost aversion. The effect of the atonement was a change of dispensation,
which is consistent with immutability of nature. He could now extend mercy
to those whom he was always willing to pardon, but could not pardon honour
ably, till his justice was satisfied. In fact, he demanded an atonement, because
he does not change ; and, therefore, would not revoke his threatening, nor
lay aside his abhorrence of sin. They represent him as mutable, who assert,
that he pardons sin without satisfaction to his justice.
In the fourth place, It is objected, that this doctrine supposes a price to
have been paid for our redemption, whereas it is represented in the Scriptures
as free. This objection does not bear particularly upon the doctrine, as stated
and maintained by us, but it is applicable to the Scripture itself, which says,
that we are bought with a price, and yet declares, that we are saved by grace.
It is true that the blood of Christ was shed as the ransom of our souls ; but
still, in respect to us, redemption is free, because nothing is given by us
in exchange for it, and it is enjoyed by every man who receives it with hu
mility and gratitude. It is farther evident, that our redemption is of grace,
although the death of Christ was the indispensable condition of it, because it
originated in the free purpose of God, who might have left us in a state of
guilt and misery ; because, in this scheme, a surety was admitted instead of
sinners themselves, whom the law had marked out as the objects of the penal
ty ; because the surety was chosen and appointed by God, on whose part all
the advances were made ; and because the office" of redeeming us was devolved
upon a person so high in dignity, and so closely related to God, that his mis
sion will for ever remain a proof of unmerited and ineffable love. " Herein
is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be
the propitiation for our sins."*
In the fifth place, It is objected, that to suppose Christ to have died for our
sins, is to suppose him to have made an atonement of himself ; because, if he
is God, he was offended as well as his Father. The objection is founded on
our imperfect knowledge of the doctrine of the Trinity ; and it is surely ab
surd to oppose to a truth clearly revealed, arguments drawn from a subject
which surpasses our comprehension. Assuming the doctrine of the Trinity,
we must pronounce it to be presumptuous to say that a thing was impossible,
although Scripture has told us that it was done, solely because we cannot con
ceive how it was done. If there is a plurality of persons in the Godhead,
the union and distinctions of whom we do not understand, shall we venture to
say, that one of them could not act economically in the character of Supreme
• 1 John iv. 10.

80 THE PRIESTLY .OFFICE OF CHRIST.
Lawgiver and Judge, and another, in a different nature assumed for the pur-
pose, do what was necessary to display his justice, and prepare the way for
the exercise of his mercy ? There have been many instances of human legis
lators, who, in a private character, gave satisfaction to their own laws. That
such cases can be considered as strictly analogous to the present, I will not say;
it is certain, however, that in Scripture our Redeemer is represented, during
his sufferings, not as the Lawgiver, but as the subject of the law,— not as the
equal of the Father, but as his servant. The difficulty of conceiving this ar
rangement, is not a reason why we should call in question the fact, that he
was made under the law, and fulfilled it by his obedience and death.
In the sixth place, An objection is founded on the sufferings and death of
believers ; for how could they be subject to these evils, if he fully expiated
their guilt ? When a debt is paid by a surety, the debtor is completely and
instantly released, because the surety was included, as well as the debtor, m
the original obligation. But, in a case of punishment, where the offender
alone was the object of the penalty, the admission of a substitute, being an
act of grace, may be accompanied with such conditions as the Lawgiver shall
choose to prescribe. It was not, therefore, inconsistent with justice, that in
the present case it should be stipulated, that sinners should be pardoned, not
immediately after they had offended, but at some period during their lives ; and
that, although from that moment they should be freed from the sentence of eter-
nabdeath, they should remain under the original law of mortality. It was cer
tainly in the power of the Supreme Legislator to determine, whether the whole
penalty, or only a part of it, should be remitted. And the efficacy of the atone
ment appears from the removal of the principal part of the penalty, in com
parison with which, the evil which is inflicted is as nothing, yea, less than
nothing. Besides, that evil, in consequence of the atonement, has virtually
the nature of a blessing, being corrective and not properly penal, subservient
to the good of the soul, affording scope for the exercise of many virtues, and
contributing to prepare the people of God for a happier and more perfect state.
Death itself proves to be the gate of life.
With regard to the objection, that the doctrine of vicarious punishment is
calculated to remove the restraint of salutary fear, and to encourage men to
go on in sin that grace may abound, it is so stale, and so fully refuted by
Scripture and experience, that I deem it unworthy of any farther notice.

LECTURE LIX.
ON THE PRIESTLY OFFICE OF CHRIST.
The Intercession of Christ— Place of Intercession — Its Objects, the Elect — Mode of Interces
sion, Prayer — The subject of it — Its Cause or Reason — Christ the only Intercessor — The
Popish Doctrine of the Intercession of Saints and Angels, contrary to Scripture and Reason.
We have proved that Jesus Christ is the priest, as well as the prophet of
his church, and that there were two important duties incumbent on him in this
character, sacrifice and intercession. The first he performed upon earth, when
he died upon the cross ; for it has appeared that his death was a true and pro
per sacrifice offered to God, to appease his justice, and to obtain our eternal
redemption. It was, in truth, the sacrifice by way of eminence, all others
being merely types of it, and having no efficacy in themselves to expiate guilt.
We now proceed to speak of his intercession, which signifies in general those

HIS INTERCESSION. 81
acts of his priestly office, the object of which is to obtain the communication
of the benefits of his sacrifice to men, for their pardon and final salvation. —
The proper place of his intercession is heaven, into which he entered not
long after his resurrection, and where he will continue to minister till all the
ends of his office are accomplished. But it is not confined to heaven, for we
find him interceding in his state of humiliation. In this sense some under
stand that passage in the Epistle to the Hebrews, in which it is said, that, " in
the days of his flesh he offered up prayers and supplications to God, with
strong crying and tears."* I doubt the propriety of this application of it, be
cause the apostle expressly declares, that he offered his supplication " to Him
that was able to save him from death," representing them as supplications for
himself, that he might be supported under his severe afflictions, and ultimately
delivered from them. The intercession of Christ signifies his prayer for us.
His prayer on the cross for his enemies has also been referred to his interces
sion, " Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do."* Here, how
ever, there is equal reason to doubt. If his intercession is prevalent, or if he
always obtains what he asks in the character of our High Priest, it would fol
low, that all the persons who were concerned in his death will be forgiven. —
But, although it is certain that many of them did afterwards repent, and ac
knowledge him to be the Son of God and the Redeemer of Israel, we are not
warranted by Scripture to say, that mercy was extended to the whole multi
tude that demanded his crucifixion, to all the members of the Sanhedrim
who pronounced him to be worthy of death, to Pilate who condemned him,
to the Roman soldiers who executed the sentence, and to every individual
who consented to the nefarious deed. We must, therefore, consider this
prayer as expressive of the spirit of charity, which he has enjoined upon
his followers, and of which his own conduct has afforded a perfect exam
ple. As a man, he forgave his persecutors, and it was his desire that his
Father would forgive them. His official prayers are founded on his know
ledge of the purpose of God with respect to individuals ; his private prayers
on the law, which commands every man to desire the good of others, and
to promote it by all lawful means in his power. But, while we leave out
these cases, there remains enough to show that Christ acted as an intercessor
in his state of humiliation. As he was often engaged in prayer, and some
times spent whole nights in it, there is no doubt that the subject of his sup
plications was not himself alone, but his disciples and his church in every age
of the world. He told Peter that he had prayed for him that his faith might
not fail ; and on the evening before his crucifixion, he presented a solemn ad
dress to his Father for all his followers, which is recorded in the seventeenth
chapter of John : " Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which
shall believe on me through their word."* Although he had not yet died as
a propitiation for sin, yet he commenced the work of intercession, because he
was already invested with the priestly office, and the atonement would be soon
made, from which all the efficacy of his prayers is derived. It was allowed
him to anticipate the work of heaven, because it was certain that he would
not fail to satisfy the demands of justice, and to pay the price of spiritual
blessings. The Scripture represents the intercession of Christ as consisting in his
appearance for us in the heavenly sanctuary. " Christ is not entered into the
holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true ; but into
heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us."§ When he had
risen from the dead, he ascended to the celestial temple, the seat of the glo
rious presence of God ; and he entered in the character which he had sustained
* Heb. v. 7. * Luke xxiii. 34. $ John xvii. 20. § Heb. ix. 24.
Vol. IL— 11

82 THE PRIESTLY OFFICE OF CHRIST.
upon earth, namely, that of our representative. After his resurrection he
showed himself to his' disciples, with the wounds in his hands, and feet, and
side, which his enemies had inflicted, and, as nothing is said which implies
that they afterwards disappeared, it may be supposed that they remained when
he returned to heaven. This may seem to be confirmed by one of the visions
of John : " I beheld, and lo, in the midst of the throne and of the four beasts,
and in the midst of the elders, stood a lamb as it had been slain ;"* that is,
bearing the marks of a violent death. Hence it has been conjectured, that he
appears before God with the visible tokens of his sufferings in his body, as the
Jewish high priest carried into the holy of holies a part of the blood of the
animal sacrifices, in testimony that they had been slain. It is certain, how
ever, that this exhibition is not necessary to remind his Father of his merits,
nor is it for this purpose that it can be conceived to be made. Since it will
be acknowledged not to be essential to the design of his ministrations in heaven,
it may be questioned whether it be consistent with the present state of his
body; and although it would be presumptuous to speak decidedly on a subject
of which we know so little, it may be said, with some appearance of truth,
that it is not suitable to our conceptions of a glorified body, that it should re
tain any vestige of infirmity, any mark, however honourable from the manner
in which it was acquired, which might in any degree impair its beauty. Laying
aside, therefore, this notion, which is more fanciful than solid, we understand
his " appearance for us in heaven" to signify, that he presents himself before
God in the body which was crucified for our sins, and in the character of our
High Priest, to plead his atonement as the ground on which the blessings of
salvation should be communicated to men. It signifies, not the simple pre
sentation of his human nature ; for although God manifests himself in a pe
culiar manner in the upper world, we are as really, though not as sensibly,
present with him on earth as in heaven ; but an official presentation of it, or,
in other words, a ministration by which the design of his office is accomplished.
Jesus Christ has left this world, but he has not ceased to act as our High Priest.
He retains his office, and performs its duties in his state of exaltation.
Before I proceed to point out more distinctly the nature of his intercession,
it will be proper to inquire for whom he intercedes. We may say, then, that
he intercedes for the elect, whether they are, or are not in a state of grace. —
With regard to those who are not converted, he does not pray, that, continuing
as they are, they should be saved, or that their state should be immediately
changed ; but that, at the appointed time, they should be brought to the know
ledge of the truth : " Other sheep I have, which are not of this fold ; them
also must I bring, and they shall hear my voice ; and there shall be one fold,
and one shepherd."* These words he spake upon earth, and we cannot doubt
that he is still as mindful of those who have not yet entered into the fellow
ship of his Church. Although living in ignorance and sin, they are dear to
him as persons for whom he shed his blood. He looks forward to their conver
sion as the reward of his sufferings ; and it is owing to his appearance in their
behalf, that the Holy Spirit is sent to " open their eyes, and to turn them from
darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may re
ceive forgiveness of their sins, and inheritance among them which are sancti
fied by faith."* Faith is the gift of God, and is bestowed upon those alone
for whom our Saviour prays ; " for in him we are blessed with all spiritual
blessings."§ Enough has been said with respect to this class of the objects
of his intercession.
' The other class comprehends those who are in a state of grace, and of his
prayers for them we shall afterwards speak. He does not pray for all men who
* Rev. v. 6. * John x. 16. $ Acts xxvi. 18. § Eph. i. 3.

HIS INTERCESSION. 83
are at present alive, or shall hereafter come into existence. His intercession
is not more extensive than his sacrifice ; and he has told us, that, " as the
good Shepherd, he has given his life for the sheep."* He has pointed out its
limits in the following words : " I pray for them : I pray not for the world, but
for them which thou hast given me ; for they are thine." " Neither pray I for
these alone," — the few disciples who had attached themselves to him during
his public ministry, — " but for them also which shall believe on me through
their word."* Under the Mosaic economy, the names of the twelve tribes of
Israel were engraven upon twelve precious stones in the breast-plate which the
high priest wore when he appeared before God in the most holy place, and in
this manner it was signified that he was the representative of the whole nation.
The twelve tribes were typical of believers under the gospel, who are the
spiritual Israel ; and Jesus Christ, their representative, bears them upon his
heart in the heavenly sanctuary. He remembers them with the most tender
affection, and manages their affairs with wisdom and fidelity. He did not
shed his blood at random, as would have been the case if the sole design of
his death had been to render God placable to sinners, and to pave the way for
the salvation of those who should comply with the terms upon which it was
offered. " The Lord knoweth them that are his," for they, were given to him
by his Father, and he has taken them under his protection. They live in dis
tant ages ; they are scattered over the face of the earth ; they are placed in
different circumstances ; and some of them are so obscure, such solitary and
disregarded sojourners in the vale of tears, that their nearest neighbours know
little of their character, and still less of their wants and sorrows. But he is
as fully acquainted with the case of each individual as if he were the sole ob
ject of his care ; and hence, as he is a merciful, so he is a faithful High Priest,
who does not neglect the interest of the poorest and meanest of his followers.
He observes them all, who said to Nathanael, " When thou wast under the
fig-tree, I saw thee."*
In his intercession, Jesus Christ expresses his desire for the salvation of
his people. We have seen that he appears for them in the presence of God ;
but that something more is implied than the simple presentation of himself in
our nature, we may infer from his own information: "I will pray the Father,
and he will send you another Comforter." We know that, in reference to
men, prayer is the offering up of their desires to God for the blessings which
they need ; and we have no reason to think that, in the present case, the
meaning is materially different.
Prayer is not inconsistent with the dignity of the human nature of our
Saviour, as united to the second Person of the Trinity, and at present in a
state of exaltation. In that nature he executed his offices during his residence
upon earth, and in the same nature he continues to perform the duties of his
priesthood. It is now glorified ; but it is essentially the same as it was in its
state of humiliation. It then was, and it still is, a creature, and consequently
is dependent upon God, and cannot therefore be dishonoured or degraded by
an act which flows from that dependence, or belongs to any office with which
it is invested. We have seen that it was not deified when it became the
nature of him who is God ; and although, being now above all want, the man
Christ Jesus does not stand in need of prayers for himself, as related to men,
who are encompassed with sins and infirmities, and have no resources in them
selves, he may be conceived to pray for them without any diminution of his
dignity. What, indeed, can be more honourable to him than to interpose be
tween God and the human race, and to obtain, by his requests, the supplies of
the Holy Spirit, by which thousands and millions are sanctified and comforted ?
* John x. 11. * John xvii. 9, 20. t John i. 48.

84 THE PRIESTLY OFFICE OF CHRIST.
Prayer, among men, signifies not only mental desire, but also the use of
words in which the desire is expressed. Whether it has the same meaning
when it is ascribed to our Intercessor in heaven, we are unable to determine.
We are certain that, even upon earth, words are not necessary to inform God
of our desires, although, in respect of ourselves and others, they serve a variety
of valuable purposes. It is possible, therefore, that they are not employed in
the intercession of Christ, and that it is represented as consisting in praying
to the Father, solely in accommodation to our ideas and usages, while nothing
more is meant than that he desires the salvation of his people, and his desire
is known to his Father. But we do not venture to deliver a positive opinion
upon a point so obscure, and the determination of which would contribute no
thing to our edification.
But although the prayer of Christ, in his present state, is materially the
same with that of men, we must separate from our notion of his intercession
every adjunct which arises from human infirmity, and conceive of it as differ
ent from the prayers which he offered up upon earth, " with strong crying
and tears."* At the same time, we must beware of going to the opposite ex
treme, as some Divines have done, who talk of his intercession as authorita
tive. They do not mean that his prayers are commands, peremptory orders
that what he asks should be done, but that he speaks as one who has a right
to be heard. Yet, although it be true that he has a title to receive the bless
ings of salvation for his people, because he purchased them with his blood, it
would be altogether improper to suppose, that the knowledge of this right
gives such a tone to his prayers as would change them into simple volitions.
This would be improper, because they are the prayers of one who, whatever
is his present dignity, and how great soever is his merit, still sustains the cha
racter of a minister or servant, and because it would destroy the nature of in
tercession, by substituting for desire an intimation of will. To intercede, is
to ask something from another. Now, although our Redeemer does not ask
like us, who ought to be humble from a consciousness of unworthiness, yet he
undoubtedly continues to feel, and to express, the same reverence for the ma
jesty and authority of his Father, by which he was distinguished upon earth.
The passage upon which this view of his intercession is founded, gives coun
tenance to it only as it appears in translations, and particularly in our own:
" Father, I will that they also whom thou hast given me be with me where I
am, that they may behold my glory, which thou hast given me."* Some
critics have supposed that the word 6ei», / will, is expressive of authority. It
is acknowledged that it does sometimes convey this idea ; but it is only from
the circumstances in which it is used that this sense can be inferred ; because,
in other cases, and, I may add, most frequently, it merely imports simple vo
lition, or desire. When our Lord said to the Syrophenician woman, ya^ma
a-oitrU flaw, " Be it unto thee even as thou wilt,"* 6tku can admit the sense only
of desiring or wishing. The meaning is evidently the same, when he said
to the two sons of Zebedee, t; Sam iroiwm Cyn ; " What would ye that I should
do for you ?"§ It would be easy to make a large collection of examples. The
common' interpretation of the word, therefore, should be retained, unless there
be a good reason for deviating from it ; and in the present case there is none,
except the mistaken idea that, by introducing the notion of authority, we shall
add dignity to the intercession of Christ, and more clearly discriminate be
tween his prayers and those of sinful men. But critics and commentators
should beware of forming doctrines, however plausible, and even although
true, from passages and words in which they are not contained. They have
committed this error, I apprehend, in the case before us. They have affixed
• Heb. v. 7. f John xvii. 24. * Matt. xv. 28. § Mark x. 36.

HIS INTERCESSION. 85
an arbitrary sense to the verb fisno, and, in doing so, have missed their own
end; for, in attempting to give a more exalted idea of the intercession of
Christ, they have destroyed its nature, as was formerly observed, by re
presenting it, not as prayer, which he himself calls it, but as an authoritative
volition. The proper translation of the word is not volo, but velim, in Latin ;
and in English, not I will, but J would; that is, ' I desire that those whom
thou hast given me may be with me.'
I shall now point out, in some particulars, the subject of his intercession.
First, He prays that his disciples may be preserved in a state of grace :
" Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given
me." " I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world, but that
thou shouldest keep them from the evil."* The blessing for which he prays
is protection, not from the violence of men, but from the evil of sin, or the
evil one, " who, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may de
vour." One great design of his intercession is, to prevent his followers from
being overcome by temptation, from yielding to the terrors and allurements by
which their constancy is tried, and to cherish the principle of grace in their
souls, exposed as it is to the operation of causes which are hostile to its
growth, and threaten its very existence. " Simon, Simon, Satan hath desired
to have you, that he may sift you as wheat ; but I have prayed for thee, that
thy faith fail not."* We learn from the example of Peter, to what length a
believer would go, if he were left to himself. In the moment of peril, he de
nied his Lord ; and, adding profaneness to treachery, he denied him with
oaths and imprecations. What restrained him from a total renunciation of his
connexion with Christ, and from becoming a final apostate, like Judas ? It
was the prayer of our Intercessor which upheld his wavering faith, as his arm
had once saved him from sinking in the water, and rekindled the dying flame
of love in his breast. It is a consoling truth, that believers cannot fall from a
state of grace ; but their stability is not owing to their own wisdom, and vigi
lance, and activity. " Because I live," says their Redeemer, " ye shall live
also."* By seasonable but imperceptible communications of grace, the ten
dency of their hearts to evil is checked before it has carried them beyond a
state of salvation ; their holy dispositions, however faint and languid they may
become, are preserved from expiring ; and they live on, amidst fears, and dan
gers, and failures, till the feeble germ of life burst forth into immortal vigour
and luxuriance.
Secondly, He prays that their persons and services may be accepted.
When they first believed, they were received into the favour of God ; but
they could not long retain themselves in this happy state. Every day they
commit sin ; which implies the same moral turpitude, and the same guilt, in
the case of a believer as of an unbeliever. Every day, therefore, the fellow
ship between God and them would be broken, if Christ did not continue
to officiate in their name, and obtain, by his intercession, the pardon of their
transgressions. His appearance before the throne of God secures, that, al
though they may incur the displeasure and chastisement of their heavenly
Father, they shall not fall under his curse ; that, although the comfortable
sense of his love may be suspended, it shall not be utterly taken from them.
" If any man sin, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the
righteous. "§ Their duties are holy, being performed under the influence of
the Spirit of grace ; but they are imperfect. There is often a mixture of im
proper motives. There is a want of intenseness of feeling and affection. The
mind wanders in devotional exercises ; and love is, in some degree, divided
between God and the world. But the law requires absolute perfection, and its
• John xvii. 11, 15. * Luke xxii. 31. t John xir. 19. § 1 John ii. 1
H

86 THE PRIESTLY OFFICE OF CHRIST.
demands are not abated in consequence of the mediation of Christ. Hence,
if the best duties of the saints were weighed in the balance of the sanctuary,
they would be found not to be of standard weight. If God should act accord
ing to justice, — and this is his rule of procedure towards those who presume
to approach to him in their own name, — they would be rejected. But this
consequence, which would be fatal to the hopes of believers, is prevented by
the interposition of our Saviour, who intercedes for their acceptance on the
ground of his own merits. What is good in their works, God approves, be
cause it is the effect of his own grace. What is evil he forgives, in consider
ation of the atonement which he offered for them, who now ministers con
tinually before him. We are commanded " to offer to God the sacrifice of
praise," and all our sacrifices, " by him ;"* because they will be pleasing to
God only when presented by his Son, who can so powerfully recommend
them. The object of his intercession is, that the Holy Spirit may be given,
to enable believers to walk in the path of obedience, and so to assist their
humble endeavours to serve God that they shall find favour in his sight. We
are " accepted in the Beloved." " O Lord God of hosts, hear my prayer:
give ear, O God of Jacob. Behold, 0 God our shield, and look upon the
face of thine anointed."* It has been supposed, with much probability, that
the following passage is a figurative description of this part of his intercession,
and that he is the angel who is represented as ministering at the altar : " And
another angel came and stood at the altar, having a golden censer ; and there
was given unto him much incense, that he should offer it with the prayers of
all saints upon the golden altar which was before the throne. And the smoke
of the incense, which came with the prayers of the saints, ascended up before
God out of the angel's hand."*
In the third place, He answers the charges which are brought against bis
disciples. Satan is called " the accuser of the brethren," and is said " to ac-
cuse them before God day and night."§ These are not words without mean
ing. We cannot give a distinct account of his proceedings ; but it is evident
that he does advance charges against the people of God, some of which are
false, and require no refutation, as was the charge of hypocrisy against Job ;
but some also are true, being founded upon the sins which they have actually
committed. If their consciences at the same time bear testimony against them,
their minds must be in great distress, and they will feel the necessity of an
advocate to plead their cause, and to prevent the sentence of condemnation
from being pronounced, which they so justly deserve. Such an advocate is
Jesus Christ, who replies to every accusation, and assigns valid reasons why
his clients should be acquitted. "Who shall lay any thing to the charge of
God's elect? It is God that justifieth ; who is he that condemneth ? It is
Christ that died, yea, rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand
of God, who also maketh intercession for us."|| When Satan stood at the
right hand of Joshua, the high priest, to resist him, " The Lord said unto Sa
tan, The Lord rebuke thee, O Satan ; even the Lord that hath chosen Jerusa
lem, rebuke thee : is not this a brand plucked out of the fire ?" And the Angel
said, the Angel of the covenant, who is here called Jehovah, " Take away
the filthy garments from him. And unto him he said, Behold, I haye caused
thine iniquity to pass from thee, and I will clothe thee with change of rai
ment."! Lastly, He prays for the eternal happiness of his followers in heaven. "I
will that they also whom thou hast given me may be with me where I am, to
behold my glory."** Our faithful High Priest will not desist from his work
* Heb. xiii. 15. * Eph. i. 6. Ps. Ixxxiv. 8, 9. * Rev. viii. 3, 4. § Ib. xii. 10.
i Rom. viii. 33, 34. 1[ Zech. iii. 2, 4. ** John xvii. 24.

HIS INTERCESSION. 87
till it be finished. As he died, so he lives for his followers, and will continue
to intercede for them till they come to the perfect enjoyment of salvation.
Having gone into heaven, he will draw them to himself. Every man will
follow in his order ; and the mansions which he has prepared for them, will
be filled with a glorious and happy company, redeemed with his blood, " out
of all nations, and kindreds, and peoples, and tongues." When the righteous
die, we lament the loss which the church has sustained by the removal of per
sons whose wisdom and virtues edified and adorned it, and we regret that they
have not been permitted to remain longer upon earth. When our pious
friends are taken from us, we are apt to give way to the violence of our feel
ings, and to mourn as if a sad calamity had befallen them. But should we
not consider, that the event which we deplore is to them unspeakable gain,
the end of their faith, and the completion of their hope ? They have gone to
behold him whom they love, and to rejoice for ever in his presence. Should
we not remember that, in this case, the prayers of Christ have prevailed over
our wishes and entreaties ? For why have they died at this time ? Has death
come by chance, or by the blind operation of natural causes ? Have they fal
len without special appointment ? Had heaven no concern in what has taken
place upon earth ? If not a sparrow perishes without the knowledge of God,
still less can it be supposed that a good man leaves the world without his call.
His death is the answer of the Father to the prayer of his Son. It is the
means of introducing into the presence of the Saviour, and into the embraces
of his love, his dear disciples, for whom he shed his precious blood. He de
sires that they should be with him, and this messenger is sent to conduct
them to their home. This is the reason that our tears, and sighs, and fervent
supplications, were of no avail; for how could they succeed in opposition to
the prayer of the all-powerful Intercessor ! This is a pleasing view of the
death of believers. It shows us that it is indeed a blessing to them ; and, as
it is calculated to moderate our sorrow, so it should make us pray for their life,
with entire resignation to the will of the Head of the Church.
There is a passage which, at first sight, may seem to contradict what has
been said concerning the intercession of Christ in the heavenly state : " At
that day ye shall ask in my name : and I say not unto you, that I will pray
the Father for you."* But, as in other passages he expressly affirms that he
would pray for them, we must attempt to reconcile them with that now quoted ;
and the task is not difficult. His intention in the words before us was, not
to deny that he would intercede for his followers, but to guard them against
mistaking the design of his intercession, and thinking that there is some re
luctance on the part of his Father to bestow blessings upon them, which his
prayers were necessary to overcome. Accordingly, he adds — " For the Fa
ther himself loveth you ; because ye have loved me, and believed that I came
out from God."t ' He would have us know, and remember, that the love of
the Father is the source of all spiritual blessings, and that his intercession is
necessary only as the channel in which they are conveyed.
The Scripture speaks of the intercession of the Holy Ghost ; but we must
beware of conceiving of it as if it were of the same nature with the interces
sion of Christ. " Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities ; for we
know not what we should pray for as we ought ; but the Spirit itself maketh
intercession for us, with groanings which cannot be uttered."* The Holy
Ghost is not a mediator between us and God, for there is only one, the man
Christ Jesus. He intercedes for believers not personally, but by his influen
ces ; not without them, but within them. Their prayers are not presented by
him to the Father ; but he enables them to intercede for themselves, by teach
* John xvi. 26. * Ib. 27. i Rom. viii. 26.

88 THE PRIESTLY OFFICE OF CHRIST.
ing them what they should pray for, and by exciting them to pray with im
portunity, and in the exercise of faith.
The intercession of Christ was typified by the entrance of the Jewish high
priest into the most holy place, where he sprinkled the blood of the sacrifices,
and burnt incense before the mercy-seat. It is not, however, enough to saj
that such was the procedure under the legal economy, when we are inquiring
into the reason of the intercession of our Saviour. It is certain that a type
and a prophecy must be fulfilled ; but neither the one nor the -other is the
cause of the event to which it relates. An event does not take place because
it was prefigured or foretold ; but the type was instituted and the prediction
was delivered, because the event was predetermined. Jesus Christ does not
intercede because the high priest of the law went into the holy of holies, after
he had offered the anniversary atonement ; but the high priest was appointed
to appear before the propitiatory, to represent the ascension of our Redeemer,
and his ministry in heaven.
The true reason of his intercession appears from some things which have
been already said. The imperfection of the services of the saints requires
that he should recommend them to God, because in themselves, even although
they proceed from a principle of grace, they would not bear a strict examina
tion, and according to the rules of justice would be rejected. There could be
no acceptable religion without the intercession of Christ. His sacrifice upon
the cross laid the foundation of religion ; but it could not be maintained if he
did not continue to mediate, and by the presentation of himself and his merits,
to secure the covenant of peace from being broken. The dispensation of
grace must be so conducted in every part of it, that the holiness of God shall
shine with unclouded splendour. With this view he avoids immediate com
merce with men, in the best of whom there are remains of sin. Between
himself and them, he has placed our Redeemer, by whom all his perfections
have been glorified, that, bestowing every favour upon men, and accepting
their services solely for his sake, he may appear in the communications of
his grace to be the Holy One, who is " of purer eyes than to behold iniquity,
and cannot look upon evil." Contemplating an awful Being who has pub
lished a law which demands perfection, and denounced punishment against ,
every violation of it, the most eminent saints would be alarmed, and say, We
cannot serve him. But the interposition of a person nearly related to them,
who is a partaker of their nature, and has a feeling of their infirmities, au
thorises their humble confidence, and revives their expiring hopes. Conscious
of defects in their best services, they yet venture to engage in them, because
by him they are presented with acceptance to the Father. His intercession
is necessary for the glory of God, and the encouragement of his people ; and
this is the reason that it constitutes an essential part of his priestly office.
" Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God
by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them. For such a
high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners,
and made higher than the heavens."*
It is acknowledged by Christians of all denominations, if Unitarians ate
excepted, whose claim to the Christian name we do not admit, that our exalted
Redeemer intercedes for us in the heavenly sanctuary ; but by a large class
of them, a doctrine is maintained which entrenches upon this part of his sacerdo
tal office. You will perceive that I refer to the church of Rome, which teaches
that there are other intercessors with God, namely, angels and glorified saints.
The council of Trent " commands all bishops and others, who are employed
in instructing the people, to teach the faithful, according to the practice ofthe
* Heb. vii. 25, 26.

HIS INTERCESSION. 89
Catholic and Apostolic church from the earliest times, the consent of the Fa
thers, and the decrees of Holy Councils, that the saints reigning with Christ
offer prayers to God for men ; that it is good and useful to invoke them, and
to betake ourselves to their prayers and assistance in order to obtain blessings
from God through his Son ; that those who deny that the saints, enjoying
eternal felicity in heaven, ought to be invoked, or who assert either that they do
not pray for men, or that the invocation of them is idolatry, and is contrary to
the word of God, and injurious to the honour of Jesus Christ, the only Me
diator between God and man, hold an impious opinion."* To prove that to
employ the saints as intercessors, is not derogatory to the honour of Christ, or
inconsistent with the acknowledgment that he is the only mediator, a distinc
tion has been coined, of which there is not a vestige in the Scriptures, between
a mediator of redemption and a mediator of intercession. The former cha
racter belongs exclusively to him ; the latter is shared by the saints. The
books of devotion in the Church of Rome, are full, not only of prayers to God
that, for the merits and prayers of the saints, he would save the worshippers
from guilt and eternal damnation, but also of prayers to them, that they would
pray to God in behalf of those who call upon them. How often is the blessed
Vigin in particular thus addressed, " Sancta Maria, orapro nobis." " Sancta
Dei genetrix, ora pro nobis." "Virgo virginum, ora pro nobis." Similar
prayers are offered up to all the apostles, and to all the saints in the calendar,
and likewise to the angels who are also advanced to the dignity of mediators.
*' Sancte Michael, ora pro nobis." " Sancte Gabriel, ora pro nobis."
" Omnes sancti angeli et archangeli, orate pro nobis."
In the primitive times, those who had died for religion were held in great
veneration. Their names were mentioned with honour : the day of their
martyrdom, which was called their birth-day, because they then entered into
glory, was celebrated, and the Christians assembled at their tombs to offer up
prayers to God, and to excite themselves to faith and patience by the solemn
recollection of their virtues. But they did not worship the saints, nor for the
first three centuries was any mediator acknowledged but Jesus Christ alone.
In process of time, however, men began to give high titles to the departed
saints, and to address them, at first, it may be, after the manner of an orator
apostrophising those who are absent ; but those addresses grew into prayers,
the object of which was to obtain their good offices in heaven, where their
interest was supposed to be great. " Those who are well," says Theodorit,
" ask the preservation of their health, and those who are struggling with any
disease, deliverance from their sufferings ; the childless ask children, and such
as are sent upon a journey entreat the saints to be their companions and" their
guides on the way ; not approaching to them as gods, but supplicating them
as divine men, and beseeching them to be intercessors for them." Thus the
foundation was laid, upon which an immense fabric of idolatry was reared by
the church of Rome, where the worship of saints is established by law.
These are such persons as the pope has canonized, or declared by a solemn
act to be proper objects of worship. Some of them were unquestionably good
men, although unworthy of this honour, which is due only to God and his Son ;
but others are doubtful characters, or ruffians and impostors, whose names
should not be mentioned but in terms of execration, or imaginary beings who
never existed but in fabulous legends.
Protestants have, with good reason, rejected the notion of angelical and hu
man intercessors. There i3 not one word in the Scriptures to favour it, or
rather it is expressly condemned by them. The worship of angels is one of
the corruptionsagainst which Paul warns us, in the Epistle to the Colossians ;
* Concil. Trident Decreta, Sesa. xxv. de invocations, Z$c.
Vol. II.— 12 h 2

90 THE PROPHETICAL OFFICE OF CHRIST.
and still less, surely, is religious honour to be given to the saints, who are of
an inferior nature. The pretended practice of the church from the earliest
ages, (I call it pretended, because the practice was unknown in the primitive
times,) the consent of fathers and the decrees of councils, are lighter than
vanity in the estimation of those who consider human authority as of no value
in matters of religion, and weigh all doctrines in the balance of the sanctuary.
" To the law and to the testimony ; if they speak not according to this word,
it is because there is no light in them."
It is unnecessary to add any other argument against this doctrine, besides
the want of scriptural authority ; but we may observe, that the intercession of
the saints presupposes that they hear our prayers, and are acquainted with our
circumstances. But this is a gratuitous assumption. How can Papists prove
that the saints in heaven know what is passing upon earth ? To us it should
seem, that being creatures limited in their powers, and confined to a particular
place, they cannot, in a world so distant from ours, see what is done and hear
what is spoken by men. The doctrine under consideration imports that they
are omnipresent or omniscient ; for how could the blessed virgin, for example,
otherwise have any knowledge of the prayers which are addressed to her at
the same time in ten thousand places, and it may be by millions of individuals?
To say that the saints see all things in God, must mean, if it have any mean
ing, that they are endowed with the gift of omniscience, or at least that God
reveals to them what he knows ; that is, when men pray to the saints, God
informs them that they are praying, and what are their desires, and thus quali
fies them to be their intercessors. But where is the proof ? For all this we
have no evidence, except the authority of the infallible church, the mother of
lies and all abominations.
It has been said, that it is as lawful to ask the saints in heaven, as tho
saints upon earth, to pray for us. Between the two cases, however, there is
this difference, that we have a command in the one case, but none in the other;
that the saints on earth hear us, while we have reason to think that those in
heaven do not ; that we do not pray to the saints upon earth, but merely re
quest them ; and that we do not consider them as intercessors in the sense of
the Roman church, but simply as friends who will join with us in supplication
to him who is the hearer of prayer. We use no such form as the following,
but look upon it as in the highest degree impious, although it is found among
the prayers ofthe Antichristian church : " Let the intercession of such a per
son, we beseech thee, O Lord, recommend us, that what we cannot obtain by
our own merits, we may procure by his patronage."
I would ask the abettors of this idolatrous worship, Why should the saints
intercede for us ? Is it because Jesus Christ has not interest enough with his
Father to obtain for us the blessings which we need ? This, I presume, they will
not dare to affirm, in the face of the express declaration, that he is able, by his
intercession, to save us to the uttermost ? Is it because he is so great that we
may not venture upon an immediate approach to him ? This notion is con
trary to his own invitation to come to him, which is accompanied with a pro
mise of rest to our souls. Is it because the saints are more nearly allied to us,
being men like ourselves ? The supposition is false, because our High Priest
is also a man, bone of our bone, and flesh of our flesh, and has had full ex
perience of our infirmities. Is it because the saints are more disposed to
sympathise with us ? Here also they err to their own ruin, and the dis
honour of our Redeemer, who as much excels all angels and all men in love
and pity, as in dignity. " We have not a High Priest who cannot be touched
with a feeling of our infirmities, but was in all points tempted as we are."*
* Heb. iv. 15.

THE HUMILIATION OF CHRIST. 91
Upon him alone, therefore, we will depend, and say, in opposition both to
Popish and to Pagan idolatry, which are indeed substantially the same, with
- only a change of names, " Though there be that are called gods, whether in
heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,) but to us there
is one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him ; and one
Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by him."* And if some,
men will still put their trust in beings, great in power, it is acknowledged, and
elevated to the highest honours, but less than nothing when compared with
Him upon whom we rely, we will add, " Their rock is not as our Rock, even
our enemies themselves being judges. "t

LECTURE LX.
CHRIST'S STATE OF HUMILIATION.
Distinction between the Condescension and Humiliation of Christ. — Circumstances of Humi
liation; in his Birth, his Subjection to the Law, the Events of his Life, his Death, and his
Burial. — Opinions respecting his " Descent into Hell."
There are two states in which our Redeemer may be viewed, very different
in themselves, but both necessary to the execution of his offices. The one
exhibits him humbled and abased ; the other exhibits him exalted and glorified.
The first was not expected by the Jews, for reasons well known, and formerly
mentioned. Their notions were natural to men who, disregarding the Scrip
tures, or attending to those parts of them alone which were congenial to their
feelings and inclinations, permitted imagination to fill up the general outline
of the character of the Messiah, as the deliverer of the people of God. What,
indeed, should any man have expected when he first heard of the descent of
the Son of God to the earth, but that he would appear in circumstances cor
responding to his native dignity, and be revealed to mortal eyes by the rays
of his Godhead, giving splendor to the veil of humanity which attempered his
glory to our weakness? Might it not have been expected that his advent
would be signalised by signs in heaven, and signs on earth ; that the celestial
spirits would wait upon him in a visible form ; that princes and kings would
lay their crowns and sceptres at his feet ; that all the tribes of mankind, and
in particular the nation of the Jews, would welcome him with shouts of joy
and triumph ; and that now, if upon any occasion, the words of prophecy
would receive a literal fulfilment, that seas, and mountains, and forests, would
break out into a universal chorus of praise ? " But God's thoughts are not as
our thoughts." Our Saviour did not come unnoticed to all the world, though
but few were apprised of the arrival of the illustrious visitant. A great part
of his life was spent in privacy and obscurity ; when he came forward upon
the public stage, he had to encounter the contempt and ridicule of the majority
of his countrymen, and his short career terminated in ignominy and blood.
All this, although foretold by the prophets, had been overlooked by the Jews,
and hence the bitter disappointment which they felt, and the scorn with which
they rejected his claims : " How can this man save us !"
The design of this Lecture is to trace the several steps of his humiliation '
A distinction has been made between the condescension and the humiliation
• 1 Cor. viii. 5, 6. f Deut. xxxii. 31.

92 THE HUMILIATION OF CHRIST.
of Christ ; the former consisting in the assumption of our nature, and the lat.
ter in his subsequent abasement and sufferings. The reason why the assump.
tion of our nature is not accounted a part of his humiliation, is, that he retains
it in his state of exaltation. The distinction seems to be favoured by Paul,
who represents him as first " being made in the likeness of men," and then
" when he was found in fashion as a man, humbling himself, and becoming
obedient to the death of the cross."* Perhaps this is a more accurate view of
the subject ; but it has not been always attended to by Theological writers,
some of whom have considered the incarnation as a part of his humiliation.
As we have already spoken of the incarnation, it is not necessary to settle the
propriety of introducing it at present.
Jesus Christ did not bring his assumed nature from heaven, as some have
dreamed, affirming that the Virgin was merely the conduit or channel through
which it passed ; nor was it formed like the body of Adam, out of the dust of
the ground. It was, indeed, miraculously conceived ; but it was composed,
like the body of every human being, of the substance of his mother. He was
literally " bone of our bone, and flesh of our flesh." Had his nature not been
derived from the same stock with ours, but only resembled it, there would not
have been such a relation between us as should have rendered his mediation
available for our good. If it was necessary that the precepts of the law,
which we had violated, should be fulfilled, and its penalty should be executed,
the surety must be one of ourselves, that his obedience and sufferings might
be so far accounted ours, as to be imputed to us for our justification. Now,
there was only one way in which he could be a partaker of our nature, namely,
by being conceived and born of a woman ; and surely it was the first step of
his humiliation, that he submitted to a. process by which, though all things
were created by him, he was placed upon a level with his own creatures. He
thus became a child, which, although it possesses all the elements of our na
ture, is considered as an imperfect being, because its faculties are in a dormant
state ; and, although destined afterwards to display the powers of intellect, it
differs only in shape from the young of the irrational tribes. As we have no
reason to suppose that, at this period, there was any other distinction between
him and other infants, except his exemption from the taint of original sin, we
may say that, when he was born, he knew not into what place he had come,
was capable only of those sensations which every living being must feel as
soon as it comes into contact with external objects, without being able to re
flect upon them, and was helpless and entirely dependent upon others. Let
us remember, that we are describing the state of him who is now " King of
kings," and " Lord of lords," and was then " God over all blessed for ever."
The apostle Paul, when speaking of this subject, makes use of a very strong
expression, \amov mmm, which our translators have rendered with a licence in
which they have rarely indulged: "He made himself of no reputation;"
while they ought to have said, " He emptied himself."* It is evident that
Paul does not mean that he divested himself of his glory literally, but only
economically ; that is, he as effectually concealed it as if he had laid it entirely
aside. No trace of Divine perfections could be seen in a new-born child. He
who is greater than all, appeared in the lowest stage of human existence.
In addition to the circumstance of his birth, let us attend to the meanness
of his condition. Judging according to our ideas of fitness, we might have,
expected that he would be the son of a mighty princess ; that the place of his
birth would be a magnificent palace ; and that the king and the nobles of Judea
would be assembled to receive, with every demonstration of reverence and joy,
this wonderful child, whose career would be so glorious, and whose future
• Phil. ii. 7, 8. -(¦ lb. ii. 7.

THE HUMILIATION OF CHRIST. 93
empire would extend over heaven and earth. But this expectation was not
realised in a single particular. There were, indeed, some circumstances
which shed a transient splendour on his birth, as the appearance of angels,
who announced it to the shepherds in the fields of Bethlehem, and the visit
of the eastern Magi, who, conducted by a miraculous star, came to adore him,
and to present their gifts. God would not permit his Son to come into the
world altogether unnoticed ; and, in his deepest abasement, he bore testimony
to him whom men despised, by signs and wonders. But, in every other re
spect, nothing could be more lowly than his entrance upon this earthly scene.
His mother, indeed, was a descendant from the family which once swayed the
sceptre in Jerusalem ; but this was only a nominal honour, which did not
protect her and her offspring from the contempt with which poverty, is regard
ed by the world. It is an empty homage which is paid to the children of
kings, who, for ages, have ceased to reign ; and the honours of blood are for
gotten when all their former glory is obscured by the meanness of their present
condition. Mary was a woman in the most humble rank of society ; and her
husband was a mechanic, who earned his bread by the labour of his hands.
The most illustrious female, it is true, was unworthy to be the mother of the
Son of God, and her station would have reflected no dignity upon him ; but
we must judge, at present, by a human standard, and, in this view, he hum
bled himself, when he stooped to be born of the wife of a carpenter.
Conformable to the lowly station of his mother, was the place where he
first drew the breath of life. He was born in Bethlehem, that prophecy might
be fulfilled ; but Bethlehem was not the chief city of the kingdom. It was
little among the thousands of Judah, celebrated, indeed, as the city of David,
but a small town at some distance from the capital. In Bethlehem, although
the city of David, his illustrious Son did not meet with an honourable reception.
When Joseph and Mary arrived there, it was so crowded with strangers, who
had assembled in obedience to the decree of the emperor, to be enrolled, thai
there was no room for them in the inn. They, therefore, took up their residence
in a stable ; and there was he brought forth who was to rule over the house of
Jacob for ever. In this obscure manner did he make his appearance upon
earth. No person knew who he was but his parents, and a few shepherds
who had received information from a heavenly messenger. Others, who
might accidentally hear of the event, would consider him as the lowest of the
low, on account of the humble circumstances of his parents, and the unusual
place of his nativity. Who would have thought of searching for the Redeemer
of Israel, and the Son of the Most High, in an out-house appropriated to the
use of cattle ? Who would have supposed, if he had by chance seen an infant
lying in a manger, and attended by two unknown individuals, that this was he
of whose advent and glory prophets had spoken in strains of enraptured elo
quence ? Who could have recognised in this unpromising form, the Saviour of
the human race, the future Judge of angels and men ?
" When the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of
a woman, made under the law."* Attend to the important fact, that he was
made under the law, for it was an eminent part of his humiliation, and, at the
same time, accounts for the other particulars in which it consisted. You will
perhaps ask, how he could be humbled by subjection to the law, since this is
the necessary condition of all men, and all angels ; and it is the glory as well
as the happiness of a creature, to obey his Creator ? It is not enough to say,
that his humiliation appears from the consideration, that he of whom we speak
was more than a creature, and, in his Divine person, was above the law ; for,
although his subjection to it was the act of his person, as were all his media-
* Gal. iv. 4.

94 THE HUMILIATION OF CHRIST.
torial acts, yet it was only as a man that he was or could be under its autho
rity. Let it be observed, that when Christ is said to be under the' law, we do
not consider it simply as the standard of duty, but as possessing that form
which it acquired when God converted it into a covenant with men. He was
made under the law, in all the obligations which it imposed upon us, both in
requiring obedience to its precepts as the condition of life, and denouncing its
penalty as the recompense of our transgressions. The law regarded him as
the representative of sinners, and demanded the unabated fulfilment of its
terms. It was enjoined upon him, who, in consequence of his relation to the
second Person of the Trinity, had a title to the highest honour and felicity, and
might have ascended to reign in heaven as soon as he was born upon earth, to
go through a course of obedience amidst toil and sorrow, in order to obtain
eternal glory for himself, as well as eternal life for his followers. Notwith
standing his unspotted purity, he was treated by the law as if he had been a
sinner. It arraigned him before its tribunal, and condemned him to bear the
punishment which it had pronounced upon the guilty. By being made under
the law, he was made under the curse. The curse is the sentence by which
the transgressor is doomed to suffer ; and he was subjected to it, by becoming
our surety. " Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made
a curse for us."* A more humiliating situation cannot be conceived. The
Son of God is confounded with the meanest and vilest of mankind. The law
made no concession to his dignity ; it waived none of its rights in his favour.
It spoke to him with the same high tone of authority in which it addresses a
mere mortal ; it was equally strict and unrelenting in its demands ; nothing
less would satisfy it than his blood, as a compensation for the wrongs which
it had sustained from those whom he had undertaken to befriend.
The subjection of our Saviour to the law, accounts for all the other parts
of his humiliation. As it would not have been fitting, that he who stood in
the room of sinners, should have spent his days in ease and splendour, so his
degradation and sorrows were necessary to fulfil the demands of the law. The
Deliverer of mankind must submit to the labour, and suffering, and death to
which they were doomed, because it was not by an exertion of physical
strength that his design should be accomplished, but by such moral acts as
should uphold the authority and honour of the law, although those who had
transgressed it were forgiven. You perceive, then, that the humiliation of
Christ was not the consequence of an arbitrary appointment. It was an es
sential part of a great plan, originating in the wisdom and justice of God, for
the manifestation ofthe glory of his attributes in the redemption ofthe world.
" Although he was rich, yet, for our sakes, he became poor, that we, through
his poverty, might be rich."*
We know little about our Saviour in the early part of his life, till, at twelve
years of age, he appeared in the temple, and astonished the doctors by his
wisdom ; except that, for the preservation of his life from the murderous de
signs of Herod, he was carried by his parents into Egypt, and brought back
to Galilee when the danger was past. Many stories, indeed, are to be found
in an ancient composition, called the Gospel of the Infancy ; but they rest en
tirely upon the authority of the anonymous author, and are too silly and absurd
to deserve a moment's attention. While a child, he was dependent, like other
children, upon others ; and, although there is no doubt that the blessed Virgin
treated him with the most tender affection, it was impossible that he should
not have suffered through the inattention, and neglect, and awkwardness of
those to whose care he was occasionally committed. Living among imperfect
mortals, he must have experienced the effect of their ignorance and irregular
* Gal. iii. 13. -j- 2 Cor. viii. 9.

THE HUMILIATION OF CHRIST. 95
tempers, especially while his mental faculties, not being sufficiently matured,
nor his bodily strength confirmed, he was not yet qualified to manage himself.
His food might be withheld, when his appetite craved it; his rest might be
disturbed by unseasonable intrusions ; his mind might be vexed by the pee
vishness and frowardness of those with whom he associated. These things
are only matters of conjecture ; but they are by no means improbable, as he
was placed in circumstances exactly similar to those in which we find our
selves. It may be thought, indeed, that, as the Son of God, he would always
command profound reverence, and uninterrupted attention to his comfort ; but
amidst the familiarity of daily intercourse, even his parents might sometimes
think of him only as a child ; and to his fellow-creatures and neighbours, per
haps, his dignity was unknown. Of this there can be no doubt, that it was
humiliating to such a person, to be found in a situation in which he was indebted
to others for the necessaries of life, and for instruction and protection, and was
exposed to the rudeness of the young and the caprice of the old. When he grew
up, it is probable that he was engaged in the same occupation with Joseph,
his reputed father, whose circumstances might render it necessary that Jesus
should contribute his labour for the maintainance of the family. Thus the
Lord of all was reduced to a level with the lowest of the human race, and
literally underwent that part of the curse, which doomed man " to eat bread
in the sweat of his face." He is called not only ° ™ ran-wot wot,* the carpen
ter's son, but 0 tsctw,* the carpenter. The word is equivalent to the Latin
term faber, which signifies a workman, the nature of whose employment is
specified by the adjectives, f err arius, xrarius, ligneus, denoting respectively
a blacksmith, a brazier or coppersmith, a carpenter or worker in wood. The
last is the occupation in which our Saviour is commonly supposed to have
been engaged.*
Of his public life, there is a more ample detail in the Gospels, from the nar
rative in which it appears, that he was " a man of sorrows, and acquainted
with grief." We have no reason to think that he was subject to disease. We
never read that he was sick, or that he suffered any of those pains which are
inflicted upon us by alterations in the state of our bodies. As he was per
fectly holy, there were no seeds of decay and dissolution in his frame. But
he experienced all the other sinless infirmities of our nature. He was hungry,
and thirsty, and weary ; he felt the inconvenience of excessive cold and heat ;
and, as he was endowed with the common passions and feelings of human
nature, he was not a stranger to disappointment, and vexation, and sorrow,
and the pangs of unrequited kindness and violated friendship.
To those evils were added the hardships of poverty. He became literally
poor when he assumed our nature ; and, in doing so, he humbled himself,
because he was originally rich. The Possessor of heaven and earth had not
where to lay his head; he could not call the lowliest cottage in Judea his own.
Women ministered to him ; he was often indebted for his daily bread to the
hospitality of others ; and, when the tribute for the use of the temple was de
manded from him, he found it necessary to work a miracle to obtain the small
sum of a stater, equal in value to half-a-crown, for himself and Peter.
x During his public ministry, if he was admired and followed by some, he
was hated and persecuted by others. The indignation of the proud rulers,
and worldly-minded Pharisees, was caused by the loftiness of his pretensions,
and the lowliness of his condition. His doctrine gave them particular offence,
because it was levelled against their corruptions of religion, and exposed to
public view their base dispositions, and the crimes in which they secretly in
dulged. Their rage and malice were vented in terms of obloquy, and every
* Matt. xiii. 55. * Mark. vi. 3. $ Justin Mart. Dial, cum Trypho.

96 THE HUMILIATION OF CHRIST.
opprobrious name was applied to him, to stain his reputation, and render him
odious in the eyes of the people. He was called a glutton, and a drunkard, a
friend of publicans and sinners, and an emissary of Satan, who, in concert
with that spirit, and aided by his power, was carrying on a nefarious design
of blasphemy and wickedness. To these efforts of malignity he was not in
sensible, notwithstanding his consciousness of perfect innocence. Hence he
" Reproach hath
some to take

pity, but there was none ; ana tor comioriers, uui i iuuuu «uuc. *
Men of flesh and blood were not the only enemies with whom he had to
contend. The hostility of the old serpent was awakened by the appearance
of the seed of the woman,' against whom he directed his malicious, but inef
fectual efforts. Immediately after his baptism, he was carried into the wilder
ness by the devil, where, for forty days, he was exposed to his temptations,
and overcame them ; not, however, we may be certain, without enduring much
mental uneasiness, arising from the importunate and impudent solicitations of
his adversary, and from the abhorrence which his impious suggestions excited.
No subsequent opportunity of harassing him would be neglected by the vigi
lant and unwearied malignity of the alarmed and enraged spirit, whose king
dom he had come to overthrow. Of his final assault upon him at the close
of his life, we have a hint, and only a hint, so that we cannot explain in what
manner it was conducted, nor tell what trouble it caused to his illustrious op
ponent : " The prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me."t And
again, " This is your hour, and the power of darkness."* This, however,
we know, that, by his immediate temptations, and by stirring up wicked men
to betray and crucify him, he accomplished what had been foretold from the
beginning, that the heel of our Saviour should be bruised.
All these sufferings were severe ; but they were light when compared with
the sorrow which he felt from a sense of Divine wrath. The wrath of God
does not signify furious anger, as in the case of men, but calm displeasure
against sin, expressed in the punishment of offenders. Our Lord Jesus Christ
was the object of it, not considered in himself, for he was the beloved Son of
God, but as the representative of the guilty, who had engaged to " bear their
griefs, and carry their sorrows." It was with our sins that his Father was
displeased ; and as our Saviour had made them his own in a legal sense, by
the voluntary susception of the office of our surety, he experienced the effects
of the Divine anger, not only in bodily pain, but also in mental anguish. The
scene exhibited in the garden of Gethsemane was awful : " Being in agony,
he prayed more earnestly, and his sweat was as it were great drops of blood
faUing down to the ground."§ An agony signifies, in this case, a violent agi
tation of the mind, in which every excruciating feeling was mingled, except
remorse and despair. The intensity of his anguish was demonstrated by the
effect upon his corporeal frame. It has been questioned, whether this was lite
rally a bloody sweat, or only resembled blood in the largeness of the drops. On
the one hand, we may conceive his body to have been agitated to such a degree
by the commotion of his mind, that a part of the blood was forced from the
veins, and mingled with the other moisture which exuded from his pores. On
the other, we may plead that the expression used by the evangelist necessarily
implies no more than resemblance, Ws S^/So/ 'ajjjutrm, which is rendered in our
version, as it were great drops of blood. Without venturing upon a positive
decision of this question, although the latter opinion seems to be more proba
ble, we observe that the agony of his mind must have been dreadful ; fori
even upon the lowest supposition, what could have produced such profuse
• Ps. Ixix. 20. * John xiv. 30. $ Luke xxii. 53. § Ib. xxii- 44.

THE HUMILIATION OF CHRIST. 97
perspiration in the open air, at a season when the night may be presumed to
have been cold, and in a person of so much fortitude and self-command, but
an intensity of mental feeling, which cannot be accounted for by any natural
cause ? The causes of his agony which some men have assigned, with a view
to evade the evidence which it affords of the expiatory nature of his sufferings,
are manifestly inadequate. To talk of its arising from the foresight of the
treachery of Judas, the desertion of his disciples, the unbelief of the Jews, and
the wickedness of mankind, is to say any thing rather than acknowledge the
truth ; and to suppose that it arose from the fear of death, would be to degrade
him below his own followers, many of whom encountered death in as terrible
a form, not only with composure, but with triumph. Nothing but the burden
of our guilt could have made him lie prostrate on the ground ; nothing but an
appalling sense of Almighty vengeance could have extorted from him the
thrice-repeated prayer: "Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me."
Bitter must have been the ingredients of a cup, which he would have put away
from his lips, although it was presented to him by the hand of his Father, and he
had long purposed to drink it. How profound was his humiliation ! We see
him in extreme anguish, giving signs of ineffable distress by the agitation of his
body ; shedding tears, and uttering vehement cries ; kneeling in the posture
of a suppliant, and sinking to the earth under the dreadful pressure of his woes.
But his sorrows were not yet at an end. The solemnity of this scene was .
disturbed by the intrusion of a band of ruffians, who, in obedience to the com
mand of their masters, rudely laid hold upon him, and dragged him as a felon
to the tribunal of the high-priest, where he was accused of the foulest crimes,
and subjected to every indignity. He was reviled and insulted in all the forms
which inveterate and unmanly hostility could invent : " I gave my back to the
smiters, and my cheeks to them that plucked off the hair. I hid not my face
from shame and spitting."* There, at the judgment-seat of Pilate, and in the
presence of Herod and his courtiers, he was treated as the vilest of mankind,
and at last was delivered up as a victim to the clamour of the rabble. We then
see him led forth to Calvary, and nailed to a cross, on which he hung for some
hours, till he bowed his head, and gave up the ghost.
Of the various modes of taking away life by violence, crucifixion is probably
the most tormenting. It is one of the many contrivances of barbarity, the
object of which is to make the unhappy sufferer feel himself dying. He was
fixed to the cross with nails driven through his hands and his feet. Besides
the exquisite pain caused by the perforation of so many parts full of nerves,
which are the instruments of sensation, great torment must have arisen from
the distension of his body, the forcible stretching of its joints and sinews by
its own weight. To this circumstance he alludes in the twenty-second Psalm :
" I may tell all my bones." " All my bones are out of joint."* There are
some kinds of torture, which, by their severity, bring speedy relief. Nature
sinks under them, and is released. As, in crucifixion, no vitalpart was touched,
life was sometimes protracted for days. Our Lord expired sooner than the
malefactors on his right hand and on his left, perhaps because he was partly
exhausted by his previous agony ; but even his sufferings lasted for six tedious
hours ; for they began at nine in the morning, and did not end till three in the
afternoon. Some modes of putting persons to death are deemed more honourable than
others, although it is the merest fiction of imagination to attach an idea of
honour to what is in its own nature a disgrace as well as a punishment. The
most ignominious was reserved for our Saviour, who suffered the death of a
slave. Crucifixion was a Roman punishment, but was accounted so infamous
* Is. i. 6. f p"- **"• 17> 14-
Vol. II.—.13. I

98 THE HUMILIATION OF CHRIST.
that it could not be inflicted on a Roman citizen; only the offscouring of man
kind were nailed to the cross. The very manner, therefore, of our Saviour's
death was a part of his humiliation. He was exhibited on Calvary as a man
who had no civil rights, who was protected by no law, whom society regarded
as an outcast ; as one who had not only forfeited his life by his crimes, but
deserved to be associated with the lowest and most worthless of our species.
Accordingly, to add to the ignominy of his sufferings, and to express the ut
most contempt for him, two malefactors were led forth to be crucified along
with him : two robbers, as the word signifies which we have translated thieves,
who, by their daring outrages, had called down upon their heads the just
vengeance of the laws. In the midst of these he was crucified, as if he had
been the worst of the three ; and thus the prophecy was fulfilled, " And he
was numbered with the transgressors."*
The last circumstance which demands our attention, is, that he suffered an
accursed death ; for the law of Moses had said, " Cursed is every one that
hangeth on a tree."* There is some difficulty in settling the meaning of this
denunciation. It cannot signify that every person who was hanged upon a
tree, was doomed to eternal perdition ; because the sentence which fixes the
future state of men, depends no more upon the manner of their death than
upon any other trivial circumstance. But whatever be its import, it is applied
to our Saviour ; and we are taught to consider the manner of his death as an
indication that he died under the curse of the law. It was Pilate who con
demned him to the cross ; but the sentence was ratified at a higher tribunal,
and with aggravations which the power of the Roman governor could not add
to it. He died by the sentence of his Father acting as a righteous judge, and
subjecting him to the punishment of sin. Great, therefore, as were his bodily
torments, there were unseen sorrows which were far more severe ; sorrows of
the same kind with those which caused his agony in the garden, and the ex
tremity of which drew from him that mournful complaint, " My God, my God!
why hast thou forsaken me ?"*
How great was his humiliation ! The Lord of life and glory appeared like
a common mortal and was distinguished only by the intensity of his suffer-1
ings, and the state of complete dereliction in which he expired. The multi
tude looked on with unpitying eyes : heaven frowned in preternatural darkness,
and all consolation was withheld from him.
We shall have finished this view of the humiliation of Christ when we
have added, that his body being taken down from the cross, was committed to
the tomb, where it remained in a state of insensibility for at least thirty-six
hours. Had it been immediately restored to life, it would have been said that
it did not die, but only fainted on the cross ; and the evidence of his messiah-
ship, which his resurrection affords, would have been weakened. Had it con
tinued longer under the power of death, the natural process of corruption
would have commenced, unless preserved by a miracle. But the Scripture
had foretold that the Holy One of God should not see corruption ;"§ and, ac
cordingly, the time was abridged ; and on the morning of the third day he
arose in triumph from the grave.
When Joseph had taken down his body from the cross, he laid it in his own
sepulchre, which he had hewn out of a rock. May we not observe in this
circumstance an illustration of the poor and destitute condition to which he
had descended ? Although it was his own world in which he sojourned, yet
he was in it, not as a Lord, but as a servant — not as a possessor, but as a
stranger who has no interest in any thing around him. His entrance into it
was humiliating ; his passage through it was comfortless ; and when at last it
* Is. Iiii. 12. * Gal. iii. 13. * Matt, xxvii 46. § Ps. xvi. 10.

THE HUMILIATION OF CHRIST. 99
cast him out as one unworthy to breathe the air, and see the light of the sun,
there was no place to receive him save a tomb which one of his disciples had
prepared for himself. It was the sepulchre of a rich man — but its present
tenant was poor indeed. Yet why, we may say, should he have had a sepul
chre of his own ? Other men may provide a solitary dwelling for their
bodies, for the sleep of the grave is long. It is their last abode, of which they
will keep possession for ages ; for " man lieth down, and riseth not ; till the
heavens be no more, they shall not awake, nor be raised out of their sleep."*
But our blessed Lofd was like a way-faring man, who tarries only for a night
in some resting-place which he finds On the road. The next morning he
hastens away from it, and pursues his journey to his home.
Our Redeemer stooped low indeed when he assumed our nature, but lower
still when he submitted to be laid in the grave. This is the last degree of
humiliation. All the glory of man is extinguished in the tomb. If we viewed
his prosperity with an eye of indifference, we now pity him ; if his splendour
excited our envy, the feeling dies away and hostility relents, when he, who,
like a flourishing tree, spread his branches around, now lies prostrate in the
dust. Who is this that occupies the sepulchre of Joseph ? Is it a prophet
or a king ? No ; it is one greater than all prophets and kings, the Son of the
living God, the Lord of heaven and earth ; but there is now nothing to dis
tinguish him from the meanest of the human race ; the tongue which charmed
thousands with its eloquence is mute, and the hand which controlled the
powers of the visible and invisible world is unnerved. The shades of death
have enveloped him, and silence reigns in his lonely abode.
In the Apostles' Creed, it is said that " Christ descended into hell." With
respect to the meaning of this article, there has been a great diversity of opinion.
Some have supposed it to signify his burial ; and, at first, when his descent
into hell was mentioned, his burial was omitted : but both are now found in
the creed. Others, again, have interpreted it of the state of the dead, or
death itself, and of the place of souls, which is divided into two regions, the
one in which the patriarchs and saints who died before his coming were de
tained, and the other the receptacle of the souls of the damned. Some sup
posed that he went to the former to carry the patriarchs and saints with him
to heaven ; and others, that he went to the latter place to triumph over Satan,
and by preaching the Gospel, to deliver such of his captives as should believe.
These are notions which do not receive the least countenance from Scripture,
and may be dismissed without wasting time in refuting them.
It would not be incumbent upon us to take notice of the article under consi
deration, as the creed in which it occurs, although bearing the name ofthe Apos
tles, is a composition long posterior to their age, were it not that its language
is borrowed from the Scriptures, into the meaning of every part of which it is
our duty to inquire. The following words are found in the sixteenth Psalm,
and are applied to our Saviour by Peter, in the second chapter of the Acts :
" Thou w^lt not leave my soul in hell ; neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy
One to see corruption."* "AJV, which is the word used in the New Testament,
is derived from a privative and &/», I see, or ttw, the infinitive of the second
aorist. It signifies, therefore, the invisible state of the dead ; and, although
it may sometimes denote the grave, it admits of a more extensive sense,
and comprehends the place of the soul. The same is the meaning of the
Hebrew word, h-wv, in the Old Testament. It is derived from hxv, to ask;
and denotes the place concerning which inquiry is made, because it is unseen
and unknown. The word hell, is now used for the place of the damned ; but
originally it signified something obscure and concealed, and is of much the
* Job xiv. 12. * Acts ii. 27.

100 THE HUMILIATION OF CHRIST.
same import with Simp and M»c- This, therefore, is the sense of the passage
in the Psalms : " Thou wilt not leave my soul in the invisible state ; nor suf
fer thy Holy One to see corruption." Our Saviour is speaking of his death,
hy which his soul and body would be separated ; the one going into the un
seen state, the other being laid in the grave. The words are a prediction of
his resurrection, and are applied to this event by the apostle : " David, seeing
this before, spake of the Resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in
hell, neither his flesh did see corruption."* God would bring back his soul
from the invisible state, and reunite it to his body, before it was corrupted  .
This explanation frees the passage from the perplexity in which it has been
involved by those who, supposing Sins' and ^s to signify only the grave, un
derstood icbj and i"X"< which we translate soul, to mean the hody ; and thus,
besides affixing an unusual and unnatural meaning to these words, represented
the two parts of the verse as tautological. The view which we have given,
preserves them distinct, and retains the common sense of the terms. The
receptacle of our Saviour's soul was the invisible state, and the place of his
body was the grave.
The humiliation of Christ manifests the greatness of his love, the riches of
his grace. It was for us, men, and for our salvation, that he assumed human
nature, and abased himself to the dust of death. He drew a veil over his
glory, that he might remove our reproach, and raise us to heavenly honours;
he groaned and died, that we might obtain immortal felicity. He has acquired
a title to our everlasting gratitude, by the most astonishing sacrifices.
Let us learn humility from his example. Pride should be for ever re
nounced by the followers of a lowly Saviour. Every part of his conduct,
during his abode upon earth, is calculated to put it to shame ; and we have in
vain traced his progress from the manger of Bethlehem to the cross of Cal
vary and the sepulchre of Joseph, if we retain our unbending attitude, and
refuse to stoop to our brethren at the call of charity. The scene which we.
have contemplated should dispose us to condescend to the meanest, and to
divest ourselves of every worldly honour, when we are called upon to do so
for the glory of God. " Learn of me, for I am meek and lowly in heart, and
ye shall find rest unto your souls."*

LECTURE LXI.
CHRIST'S STATE OF EXALTATION.
The Resurrection of Christ — Preliminary Remarks Respecting it — Statement of the Evidence
of his Resurrection.
Although, during the humiliation of our Saviour, a veil was drawn ovei
his glory, yet some rays occasionally broke through, which manifested, to at
tentive spectators, his essential and official dignity. The sublime doctrines
which he taught, the astonishing miracles which he performed, and the testi
monies of the Divine approbation which were given to him, by voices and
signs from heaven, proclaimed that he was the only-begotten Son of God, and
the promised Redeemer of Israel. The dark scene of his death was illustrated
by prodigies, which signified that he was no ordinary sufferer ; for, at a time
when there could be no natural eclipse of the sun, because the moon was ia
*Actsii. 31. *Matt.xi. 29.

HIS RESURRECTION. 101
full opposition, there was darkness over all the land, from the sixth to the
ninth hour ; and when he expired there was a great earthquake, which splitted
the rocks, arid laid open the tombs, and the veil which concealed the holy of
holies in the temple was torn, by invisible hands, from the top to the bottom.
Even his burial was not without honour ; for, although he had been put to
death in the most ignominious manner, and under the imputation of the great
est crimes, his body was wrapped in fine linen and precious spices, by two
persons of high rank, and was deposited in a magnificent sepulchre.
These circumstances, however, gave only a partial relief to the deep gloom
which had settled upon him. His life, from the manger to the tomb, was a course
of profound abasement. It was not till his resurrection that the glory which
was to follow his sufferings commenced. That event, which removed the
ignominy of his cross, revived the hopes of his disciples, and is the sure
foundation of our faith in him, it is the design of this lecture to consider.
It is related by the four evangelists, and referred to in innumerable places
by the other writers of the New Testament, as a fact, of which no doubt was
entertained among Christians ; insomuch that, assuming it as a first principle uni
versally acknowledged, they reason from it in support of the doctrines ofthe gos
pel, and for the confutation of errors. In the narratives of the evangelists there
are some discrepancies, which have been represented by infidels as affecting their
credibility. Learned men have taken great pains to remove the apparent con
tradictions, and to show how the different accounts may be reconciled. I shall
not enter upon this discussion at present, but shall content myself with refer
ring you to those who have treated directly of this subject, and of whom I
shall mention two, to whose writings you have easy access, — West's Obser
vations on the History and Evidences of the Resurrection of Jesus Christ ;
and the seventh preliminary Observation, and the one hundred and fiftieth sec
tion of Macknight's Harmony of the Four Gospels. Were we at present
considering the Evangelists as inspired writers, it would be necessary to
examine every thing in the account which they have left us that might seem
to indicate that they are as fajlible as other authors, and have actually erred ;
at present, however, we appeal to them, not in this character, but merely as
persons who have related a fact of which they were competent witnesses. — ,
Now, although we should allow that they are at variance in some particulars,
this would not invalidate their testimony in the opinion of any reasonable
man, as they all agree in the main fact, and differ only in some matters which
are not of much importance. In other cases, we deem the evidence sufficient,
when we find substantial truth with circumstantial variety ; that is, when a
number of witnesses positively attest the same fact, but disagree in some infe
rior points, which do not materially affect the truth of the general statement.
Minute accordance rather awakens a suspicion of previous concert, while oc
casional discrepancy affords a strong presumption that the witnesses are inde
pendent, and that every man speaks from personal knowledge. The testi
mony of the Evangelists would, I have no doubt, be received as consistent
and credible by any civil court, as not one of them has denied the great fact
of the resurrection, or discovered the slightest hesitation in affirming it ; and
the differences among them, even although they were real, and not merely
apparent, as has been satisfactorily shown, consist only in circumstances upon
which the general truth of the history does not depend ; as the precise time in
the morning when the event took place, and the number of individuals who
were present at a particular moment. It is manifest, that they did not write
with a design to obviate objections ; and that each of them, without consider
ing what had been said, or might be said by others, recorded the event in the
manner which occurred to his own mind. It is by comparing all their narra
tives, that we come to know the whole circumstances of the case, and are
12

102 THE EXALTATION OF CHRIST.
able to show how one account may be reconciled with another. There are
some parts of profane history, the general truth of which no person calls in
question, although the testimony of those who have recorded them, is far from
agreeing, in a variety of points. Let any of you read the history of Cyrus,
by Herodotus and Xenophon, and you will find not only a diversity, but &
contradiction, in several important particulars ; yet it was never doubted that
there was such a man, who conquered Babylon, and performed the other ex
ploits which antiquity has ascribed to him. There is a case more to our pre
sent purpose, because it is recent, and is related by eye-witnesses, and others
who are supposed to have received information from eye-witnesses. Tea
narratives have been published, of the attempt made by the late king of France*
to escape, not long after the commencement of the revolution, which, in several
points, contradict each other in the most wonderful and inexplicable manner,
and furnish, it has been observed, a striking proof ofthe inaccuracy of human
observation, and the infirmity of memory. Yet, notwithstanding the discre
pancy among the witnesses with regard to the details, nothing is more firmly
believed, than that the attempt was made, and did not succeed. We should
have no reason to call in question the fact of the resurrection, although the
differences in the narratives of the Evangelists were such, that we could not
reconcile them, as they relate only to subordinate circumstances.
The account of the resurrection of our Saviour in the gospel of Matthew,
which I shall quote, because it is the first, is as follows : " In the end of the
Sabbath, as it began to dawn towards the first day of the week, came Mary
Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre. And behold, there was a
great earthquake ; for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came
and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it. His countenance
was like lightning, and his raiment white as snow. And for fear of him the
keepers did shake, and became as dead men. And the angel answered and
said unto the women, Fear not ye ; for I know that ye seek Jesus which was
crucified. He is not here ; for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place
where the Lord lay. And go quickly and tell his disciples that he is risen
from the dead ; and behold he goeth before you into Galilee ; there shall ye
see him ; lo, I have told you."t There is subjoined an account of the ap
pearance of Christ to the women, and of his subsequent appearance in Gali
lee, which it is unnecessary to recite.
I shall make some preliminary observations, before I proceed to lay before
you the evidence of our Saviour's resurrection. First, the event was not im
possible, and, consequently, if sufficient evidence be produced, we ought to
give credit to the narrative, however- extraordinary it may appear. We indeed
have not experienced such an event, having never seen any person raised from
the dead ; but as it would be a most irrational conclusion, that nothing is pos
sible which we have not witnessed, so it cannot be denied that the cause as
signed for the resurrection of Jesus was adequate. To a Theist, a man who
believes the existence and almighty power of God, it will not seem incredible
that he should raise the dead ; there being no greater difficulty in the restora
tion of a body to life, than there was in originally forming it, and endowing it
with a sentient and intelligent soul.
My second observation is, That if Jesus was the Messiah, his resurrection
was necessary to vindicate his character from the charges with which it was
loaded. The alleged crimes for which he was condemned to die, were impos
ture and blasphemy. The Jews, full of carnal ideas and expectations, did not
believe that a man of an appearance so mean, and a condition so humble, could
be the Son of God, and the great deliverer of their nation, whom their imagi-
* Louis XVI. j Matt, xxviii. 1—7.

HIS RESURRECTION. 103
nations had invested with the attributes of worldly grandeur : it seemed to
them that his claim to these dignities was arrogant and impious. As Provi
dence had permitted him to fall into their hands, it might have been supposed
that it sanctioned their proceedings ; and this conclusion would have been
fully confirmed, if he had remained in the state of the dead. It would then
have appeared that they had acted with laudable zeal for the honour of the
Most High, who will not give his glory to another, and had been ministers of
divine justice in awarding due punishment to one whom their law pronounced
to be unworthy to live. It would have appeared that, instead of purposing
to save mankind from ignorance and sin, Jesus had come to deceive them with
false pretences, to amuse them with delusive hopes, and to lead them to final
perdition, by persuading them to apostatise from the living God, and commit
, themselves to him as their guide. But his return to life prevented the unfa
vourable inferences, which either friends or enemies might have drawn from
his tragical end. His resurrection, by the power of his Father, demonstrated
that he acknowledged him as his Son and his servant. He had permitted his
life to be taken away, because he required it as a sacrifice for the sin of his
people ; he restored it, to show that the demands of justice were satisfied.
Hence, the Scripture says, that " he was declared to be the Son of God with
power," by the resurrection from the dead,"* and that " the God of peace
brought him again from the dead through the blood of the everlasting cove
nant, "t By this event, God acknowledged him to be his Son, and gave a
solemn assurance that he is reconciled to guilty men.
A third observation is suggested by what has been how said, that our
Saviour was raised by the power of his Father. Upon this fact depends the
evidence, that he truly was what he affirmed himself to be. If God raised
him from the dead, the sentence pronounced upon him by the Jews was re
versed, and he who had expired in ignominy and torment was proved to be
the Lord of glory. Sometimes, indeed, the New Testament ascribes the re
surrection to Our Saviour himself. Thus, we find him saying, " I have power
to lay down my life, and I have power to take it up again ;"* and when he
speaks of his body under the image of a temple, he represents its restoration
as his own work: "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it
up."§ In both passages, the resurrection is attributed to him, because his
power was exerted in this, as it is in other external acts, in concurrence with
that of his Father ; for as they are one in nature, they are united in operation ;
" My Father worketh hitherto, and I work."|| But it is the Father who is
usually represented as the agent in this event; and this 'is so frequently done,
that it is unnecessary to refer to particular passages. According to the order
established in the plan of redemption, the resurrection was not properly the
work of the Son, but of the Father. Jesus died in obedience to his will ; he
offered himself upon the cross, to appease his justice; and, to speak in the
figurative style which has been employed on this subject, as he had engaged,
in the character of our surety, to pay the debt which we owed to God, it was
fit and necessary that, from the hand of God, he should openly receive a dis
charge. I observe, in the last place, that he was raised on the third day after his
death. This was the time fixed by himself, and it was so well known, that
his enemies were apprised of it. " Sir," the Jews said to Pilate, " we re
member that that deceiver said, while he was yet alive, After three days I will
rise again."f He died on the afternoon of Friday, and was buried before sun
set, when the day ended according to the Jewish reckoning. This was the
» Rom. i. 4. 1 Heb. xiii. 20. * John x. 18. § Ib. ii. 19. I IK v. 17.
II Matt, xxvii. 63.

104 THE EXALTATION OF CHRIST.
first day. At sunset the Jewish Sabbath commenced, during the whole of
which he rested in the grave. This is the second day. When the sun set
again, the third day commenced. On the ensuing morning, most probably
between the dawn and sunrise, the soul of our Redeemer was re-united to his
body, and he left the sepulchre of Joseph, the glorious conqueror of the king
of terrors. It is common, in ordinary conversation, when we do not attend to
logical accuracy, to put a whole day for only a part of it. According to this
mode of speaking, Christ was three days in the grave. It would seem, that a
revolution of the earth around its axis, which we call a day, the Jews some
times called a day and a night. Retaining this form of expression, they would
say of an event which took up a part of three days, that it was three days and
three nights in accomplishing. It is in this way that we reconcile with the
fact our Lord's own assertion, that " as Jonah was three days and three nights
in the whale's belly, so should the Son of man be three days and three nights
in theheart ofthe earth."* He used the language of his country ; and his
words were fulfilled, although he was not more than six or seven and thirty
hours in the sepulchre, because these hours were made up of one whole day,
and parts of two of those divisions of time, which the Jews called a day and
a night. The time was long enough to show that he was really dead, but not
so long as to permit his disciples to sink into despair. Their dejection was
great, and their hopes were ready to expire, when he appeared to them, and
turned their sorrow into jov: "Then were the disciples glad when they saw
the Lord."* '
But how do we know that Jesus Christ rose from the dead ? The fact is
denied by the Jews, and by infidels. Do we, who believe it, follow a cun
ningly devised fable, or does our faith rest upon a solid foundation ? Persist
ing as we do, in maintaining the fact in the face of opposition, we should be
able to give a reason of our hope to every man who asks us. We find an ac
count of the resurrection in the Scriptures ; but how do we know it to be true 1
on what grounds do we give credit to it ? and what are the arguments by
which we can demonstrate the reasonableness of our own faith, and repel the
objections and cavils of unbelievers ? I shall endeavour to lay before you a
summary of the evidence upon which this important article of our religion de
pends. First, The fact that the body of Jesus, which had been deposited in the se
pulchre of Joseph, was missing, is undisputed. It has been acknowledged by
all classes of men, by enemies as well as by friends, that by some means it
was removed. Had it been in the power of the Jews to show it after the third
day, the report of his resurrection would not have obtained circulation ; or if
it had gone abroad among the credulous vulgar, who remembered his predic
tion, it would have been instantly quashed. The story which was contrived
to prevent the people from believing it, and which will be afterwards con
sidered, was a confession that the body could not be found. This is the first
step in the proof. Jesus, having been taken down from the cross, was buried,
but when the sepulchre was examined on the third day, it was empty.
In the second place, The body was not carried away by the disciples. They
were so alarmed and terrified when they saw him seized by the emissaries of
the priests and rulers, that they cannot be conceived to have engaged in such
an enterprise, which was manifestly full of danger; for it would be absurd to
suppose that their fears had been allayed by his death, which was obviously
calculated to increase them. But although, from some unaccountable cause,
they had resumed their courage, and become bold at a moment when other
men would have sunk into absolute despondency, the thing itself was imp'os-
• Matt. xii. 40. -j- John „, 20.

HIS RESURRECTION. 105
sible, because the sepulchre was strictly guarded by a band of soldiers, whom
the unarmed disciples, unaccustomed to violence and blood, would not have
ventured to encounter ; not to say that forcible means would have completely
defeated their design, even if they had been successful, as it would then have
been known that there had not been a resurrection, but merely a removal of
the body by his friends. To evade the argument from the disappearance of
the body, notwithstanding the guard upon the sepulchre, the Jews industri
ously circulated a report that it was stolen by the disciples while the soldiers
were asleep. Nothing, however, is more improbable than that a whole guard
of soldiers should be asleep at their post, and especially of Roman soldiers,
who were under the strictest discipline, knew that a severe punishment awaited
them if they should neglect their duty, and in the present case, had received
particular orders to be vigilant. In these circumstances, it is incr-edible that
they should have aU fallen asleep, and slept so soundly as not to be awakened
by the rolling of the stone which closed the door of the sepulchre, and to give
an opportunity to the disciples to accomplish their design in the most deliber
ate manner ; for the body was not carried away in haste, but was stripped of
the grave clothes, which were not scattered up and down, but regularly de
posited in the tomb. The soldiers had not endured any uncommon fatigue by
which they might have been overpowered. The watch had continued only
about thirty-six hours ; and during that period the guard had no doubt been
changed. The story clumsily contrived by the Jewish rulers, contains inter
nal evidence of falsehood. It makes the soldiers confess that they were asleep,
and at the same time affirm what they could only have known if they had
been awake. If all their senses were closed, how could they know thai the
disciples had stolen the body ? For aught that they could tell, the theft had
been committed by some other persons. How could they know that it had
been stolen at all ? The only fact which they were competent to attest, if
they were really asleep, was, that when they awoke, the stone was rolled
away and the body was gone. Whether it had been restored to life and had
removed itself, or had been removed by the agency of others, they were mani
festly unqualified to say. The story therefore, although that, part of it had
been true, which supposed the soldiers to be asleep, proves nothing against
the solemn declaration of the disciples, that their Master was raised by the
power of God.
In the third place, Although it had been possible for the disciples to remove
the body of our Saviour, we cannot conceive what should have induced them
to make the attempt. The transference of his body from one place to another
would not have restored him to life ; and if he had continued under the power
of death, it was of no importance to them in what spot his mortal remains
were deposited. No place would have been more honourable than the sepul-
ehre of Joseph. He was no longer their master, he was not the Son of God,
he was not the messiah. He had excited hopes which he was not able to
realize ; he had completely deceived them, and was no. more worthy of their
attention. Why should they have put themselves to any trouble, or have ex
posed themselves to any danger on his account ? Why should they have in
curred the risk of being detected and punished by the Jews ? It appears from
the evangelical history, that the intention of taking him away had never en
tered into their minds. Several women visited the sepulchre early in the
morning of the third day, when the Sabbath was past ; but they came to weep
over the body of their Lord, and to lay new spices upon it ; and when they
found that the body was not there, they were thrown into the greatest distress,
considering its removal, perhaps, as the deed of his enemies, who envied him
this honourable tomb. " Sir," said one of them to Jesus himself, whom in
Vol. IL— 14

106 THE EXALTATION OF CHRIST.
her confusion she supposed to be the gardener, " if thou have borne him hence,
tell me where thou hast laid him, and I will take him away."*
In the fourth place, If Jesus did no? rise from the dead, and the whole was
a fraud contrived by the disciples to save themselves from the reproach of
having been the dupes of an impostor, it is astonishing that it was never dis
covered. It is astonishing that a few simple and uneducated men should have
been able to devise and execute a plan, which has eluded all search, and has
obtained credit among the wise and learned, as well as among the vulgar, for
the space of eighteen hundred years. No person is able to produce a similar
instance. How has it happened that the secret has not transpired ? Was
there no Judas among the disciples, who would go and tell the chief priests
and rulers all that he knew ? Was there not one honest man among them,
who was compelled by his conscience to make a disclosure for the glory of
God and the best interests of mankind ? The disciples were strictly examined,
and punished for preaching the resurrection, and threatened with severer treat
ment if they would not be silent ; but they persisted in their original testi
mony. No flaw was ever discovered in the evidence, no contradiction, no
hesitation. There was a boldness in their manner which confounded their
adversaries, who, unable to refute their allegations, were compelled to supply
the want of argument by violence and intimidation. Is this the character of
false witnesses ? Nay, there were traitors among them, men whom the fear
of suffering and the love of the world prevailed upon to apostatise from the
gospel ; but not one of them was able to reveal a single circumstance, tending
to impeach the truth of the resurrection. Had any such discovery been made,
it would have been triumphantly published to check the progress of Chris
tianity ; but not a surmise of this kind is found in the records of antiquity J
Many slanderous reports against the followers of Jesus were propagated ; but
there is not so much as a hint that the secret had been blabbed out, and the
story of the resurrection had been proved to be an imposture.
In the fifth place, If Christ did not rise from the dead, it is impossible to
account for the conduct of his disciples, who endeavoured to persuade the
world that he had risen. Men, we know, may be very zealous in propagating
a false opinion, which they themselves believe ; there have been martyrs for
error, as well as for truth. But who ever heard of a set of men, who devoted
their time and talents, and exposed their life to hazard, with a view to establish
a fact, of the falsity of which they were fully convinced ? If Christ did not
rise from the dead, the disciples knew that the story of his resurrection was
an invention of their own. Why should they have been anxious to make
others believe it? It appears, from what was formerly said, that it could not
be from regard to their Master. The attachment to him, which they felt
during his life, could not continue after his death, which had terminated his
projects and their hopes, and proved irresistibly that in whatever way his mi
racles might be accounted for, he was not the Messiah. The natural tendency
of this discovery, and of their bitter disappointment, was, by a violent revul
sion, to turn their former love into fixed hatred, and, when the first emotions
of surprise and shame were over, to make them the loudest in exclaiming
against the deception which he had practised upon them. It could not be
from a wish to support their own credit by perpetuating the imposture, for
how could they expect to succeed in their design ? Was the authority of fish
ermen and publicans so great, that their countrymen would be persuaded by
their simple affirmation, of so great a miracle as the restoration of a dead body
to life 1 Mankind are not commonly so credulous ; and, in the present case,
they were the less ready to give their assent upon insufficient evidence, because'
* John xx. IS

HIS RESURRECTIO'N. 107
they were strongly prejudiced against our Saviour, on account of his humble
appearance and his ignominious sufferings, which were at variance with all
their ideas of the character and state of the messiah. It could not be from the
expectation of worldly advantages, of which there was no prospect. Wealth
and honours could not be looked for, till they had gained a number of prose
lytes ; and no man in his senses could have calculated on a single proselyte,
except among the dregs of the people, to a cause so unpopular in itself, and
supported by advocates so ill qualified to recommend it. Toil, and reproach,
and perils, and death, stared them in the face. The world would rise up in
arms against them. They would be derided and despised by the Gentiles, to
whom the resurrection of the body seemed incredible and impossible. They
would be persecuted by the Jews, who would transfer their hatred from Jesus
himself, to those who were endeavouring to rescue his name from infamy, and
to uphold the error which they were so eager to crush. In the absence of all
the usual motives of action, we must attribute their conduct to a full convic
tion of the fact, " We cannot but speak the things which we have seen and
heard."* In the sixth place, Since it must be admitted, that there is no evidence of a
design, on the part of the apostles, to impose upon the world by a fabricated
story, it may be insinuated, that they were themselves deceived by the power
of imagination, whieh, it is known, has sometimes subjected individuals to the
most extraordinary delusions. They have fancied that they distinctly saw
objects, which were mere phantoms of the brain. But there is not a single
circumstance, in the present ease, which will authorise us to account, in this
way, for the eonduct of the disciples. Their minds were not in that state of
eager expectation which is favourable to the workings of fancy ; for it appears
that they were not looking for his resurrection, both from the visit of the wo
men to the sepulchre, to see his body, and to lay fresh spices upon it, as if it
had been to continue in the state of the dead ; and from the incredulity of the
rest, to whom, when they told them that he had risen, their words seemed as
" idle tales."* The two disciples, on the road to Emmaus, expressed them
selves in the language of despondency, " We trusted that it had been he which
should have redeemed Israel ;"* and, although they added, that some women
who had been at the sepulchre, had reported that he was risen, they appear
not to have believed them. In such a state of mind, there was no room for
imagination to operate. It will be still more evident that they were not mis
led by it, if we consider that the appearances of Christ were frequent, not less
than eight being recorded ; besides, that many more may be supposed during
the forty days between his resurrection and ascension ; that some of them
were made, not to a solitary individual, but to several of the disciples in com
pany, — in one instance, to five hundred, who could not all be deceived ; that
the appearances were not transient, but lasted for a considerable time, so that
the spectators had full leisure to examine them ; that, while some of them
were sudden, or without warning, others were the consequence of previous
appointment ; that they took place, for the most part at least, not in the night,
when the mind is more subject to illusion, but in the day, when the disciples
were composed, and their senses were awake ; and, that the interviews were
not distant and silent, but intimate and familiar, — Jesus having mingled with
his followers, conversed freely with them, and gave them all the satisfaction
which the most incredulous could demand, saying to one of them in particular,
who was slow in giving his assent, " Reach hither thy finger, and behold my
hands ; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side ; and be not
faithless, but believing."§ When all these circumstances are considered, we
•Actsiv. 20. * Luke xxiv. 11. j Ib. 21. § John xx. 27.

108 THE EXALTATION OF CHRIST.
may pronounce it to have been impossible that they should be deceived. The
supposition, indeed, is so palpably absurd, that it would hardly be worth while
to reason with a person who should seriously maintain it.
In the last place, To these arguments for the resurrection of Christ, founded
on the competency and honesty of the apostles as witnesses, we may add the
success of their preaching, which is inexplicable on any other hypothesis but
the truth of their testimony. To what cause was it owing, that multitudes of
Jews and Gentiles gave credit to their report, acknowledged a crucified man
to be a Divine Person, and the Saviour of the world ; embraced his religion,
with its humiliating doctrines and holy discipline, made a sacrifice of ease,
and honour, and life, in his service, and trusted in the promises of one whom
they had never seen, for a recompense in the world to come ? The apostles
had no personal authority to overcome those whom they addressed ; no
learning to mislead, or eloquence to persuade them ; no rewards to tempt
their cupidity ; no punishments to inflict on the incredulous. As men, they
were contemptible in the eyes of the world ; and the doctrine which they
taught had no charms which might atone for the defects of the publishers. It
is unnecessary to speak of their success, because it is universally acknowledged.
They effected a mighty revolution in the state of human affairs, and established
a religion which superceded all the ancient systems, and has been professed,
for seventeen centuries, by all the enlightened nations of the earth. Every
effect must have an adequate cause. The first missionaries of Christianity
possessed no natural means of insuring its reception ; they must, therefore,
have been assisted by supernatural power. Unless they had been able to
bring forward to view a higher authority than their own, the world would not
have listened to them.
Now, the only way in which this could be done, was by the performance
of such miracles as are ascribed to them in the New Testament ; works evi
dently exceeding human ability, and wrought by the immediate interposition
of Heaven. If a man should come and publish a new religion, and at the
same time should give sight to the blind, hearing to the deaf, and the use of
their limbs to the lame, and life to the dead, we should be authorised to con
clude that it was not an invention of his own, but was a revelation from the
Lord of Nature, who alone could controul its laws. The apostles were in
vested with the power of working miracles. Their Master had therefore risen
from the dead, for they performed the miracles in his name, or referred to him
as their author ; and, consequently, he was alive, and had supernatural gifts
at his disposal.
It is astonishing that any person who saw diseases cured, and demons dis
possessed, by the name of Jesus of Nazareth, should have refused to give
credit to the report of his resurrection. Yet we know that there were men so
obstinate in unbelief; and there is proof in the Scriptures, that the evidence
of miracles is not irresistible. We must therefore proceed a step farther in
accounting for the success of the disciples, in prevailing upon mankind to be
lieve in their crucified Master. We must acknowledge an exertion of Divine
power, in working internal as well as external miracles ; in subduing their
prejudices, fixing their attention seriously upon the subject, and disposing
them to give their assent to the fact, notwithstanding the painful sacrifices
which their conversion might require. We are thus presented with a new
proof of the resurrection of Christ. If he had been in the state of the dead,
he could have employed no power in favour of his religion. He could not
have sent the Spirit, « to convince the world of sin, and of righteousness, and
ot judgment. * The general success of the gospel, which, extending beyond
* John xvi. 8.

HIS RESURRECTION. 109
the limits of Judea, established itself throughout the Eoman empire, and
among nations which never submitted to its sway, and its effects in our own
age, upon individuals whom it sanctifies, and inspires with peace and hope of
immortality, furnish satisfactory evidence that the apostles spake the words of
truth and soberness, when they confidently affirmed that their Lord, having
been crucified and buried, rose again on the third day, and showed himself
alive by many infallible proofs. " We are witnesses of these things, and so
is also the Holy Ghost, whom God hath given to those that obey him."*
It has been said, that if Christ really rose from the dead, he should have
6hown himself to the priests and rulers of the Jews, that they might be con
vinced, and become witnesses of the fact. Their testimony, it is insinuated,
would have had much greater weight than that of his disciples, being the tes
timony of enemies. This objection is not worthy of much attention. It is a
demand for a degree of evidence which has not been given, and it would be
of force only if the evidence which has been given were defective. But if it
is sufficient, it is plain that the demand is capricious and unreasonable, and,
consequently, that its being withheld affords no ground of suspicion or com
plaint, and will not excuse the unbelief of those who deny this fundamental
article of our holy religion.
Had Jesus appeared. to the priests and rulers ofthe Jews, they would either
have acknowledged him to be the messiah, or they would have persisted in
rejecting him. If they had not believed in him, the evidence, instead of being
strengthened, would have been, weakened ; for it would then have been tri
umphantly said, that, although a few obscure and illiterate persons had been
deceived! by the artifice 'of his followers, others were more sagacious, had exa
mined the matter with greater care, and had discovered it to be an imposture.
We should have been told by infidels, that the pretended resurrection was a
trick of the disciples ; that it was a different person whom they endeavoured
to pass off as their Master returned from the grave ; and that the cheat had
been found out by the great men of Judea, whom they would have adorned
with the high-sounding titles of learned, prudent, and intelligent. It is ob
vious that, although their unbelief might not have entirely invalidated the
evidence, it would have encumbered it with difficulties, which might have
greatly disqiyeted our minds. If, on the other hand, they had believed in
Christ, it does not follow that the evidence would have acquired additional
strength. Consider how, upon this supposition, the matter would have stood.
Instead of a few witnesses, we should have had many ; the whole Jewish
nation, or the greater part of it, instead of five hundred disciples. But the
value of the testimony is to be estimated by the character, not by the number
of the witnesses. At present, we have a competent number of "persons, who
delivered their testimony in such circumstances as afford security for its truth ;
in the presence of enemies, who possessed the means" of detection, if there
was any fraud, and in the face of the most formidable opposition, and who
sealed it with their blood. If the whole Jewish nation had been converted,
we should have been deprived of these proofs of veracity. There would have
been no trial of the witnesses, no conflict of opinion, no parties to watch each
other's proceedings ; the voice of the nation would have beeji unanimous ; but
for this reason it would not have been so convincing, because it might have
been alleged, and infidels would not have failed to bring forward the objection,
that it was a contrivance of the Jews, who were ready to give credit to
any story which seemed to realise their hopes of the messiah. We should
have heard them loaded with abuse, as an illiterate, credulous, superstitious
people, whose testimony was utterly unworthy of attention. The story, it
* Acts v. 32.

110 THE EXALTATION OF CHRIST.
would have been said, was promulgated where it was sure to be received, and
no person had power or inclination to detect it. You will all agree with me
I trust, that the evidence, as it stands, is more conclusive than it would have
been if the proposal of infidels had been complied with. I shall only add
that it is not made by them from a wish that Jesus had appeared to his ene
mies, and thus furnished irresistible demonstration of the truth of his religion
but with a design to prove that this want destroys all the other evidence, and
that the story of the resurrection is a fable.
There is an objection against the resurrection of our Saviour, founded on
the narrative of the Evangelist John, which, however, is hardly worthy of
notice, and may be speedily dismissed. He relates that, on two occasions
when the doors were shut, Jesus came and stood in the midst of the disciples.*
As one solid substance cannot pass through another solid substance without
dividing it, either what John relates did not happen, and consequently the
narrative is false, or Christ did not appear in a real body, and it was only a
phantom which the disciples saw. The simple answer to this trifling objec
tion is, that, although the evangelist plainly signifies that he entered in a mi
raculous manner, he does not determine the nature of the miracle. The doors
were shut, and no doubt locked, for fear of the Jews ; but Jesus might have
opened them without being perceived. It is childish to cavil at a circumstance
which can be so easily explained, especially as all the other facts of the nar
rative clearly show that the disciples believed that he was appearing in a true
body, and that they fully ascertained the fact during their personal intercourse
with him.
The resurrection of Christ vindicated his character from the aspersions of
his enemies. It demonstrated, at the same time, that he had accomplished
.the -work which his Father appointed him to perform, and had obtained eternal
redemption for his people. It gives an assurance to those who believe in
him, of a future triumph over death and the grave. He rose as their repre
sentative, and they shall also rise after his example, and through his merits
and power. " Now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the first-fruits
of them that slept. For since by man came death, by man came also the re
surrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be
made alive. But every man in his own order : Christ the first-fruits ; after
ward they that are Christ's at his coming."* We cannot move properly con
clude this lecture than with the following words : — " Blessed be the God and
Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who, according to his abundant mercy, hath
begotten us again unto a lively hope, by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from
the dead, to an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not
away, reserved in heaven for them who are kept by the power of God through
faith unto salvation, ready to be revealed in the last time."*
* John xx. 19, 26. f 1 Cor. xv. 20—23. * l pet. i. 3—5.

THE EXALTATION OF CHRIST. Ill
LECTURE LXII.
CHRIST'S STATE OF EXALTATION.
Ascension of Christ ; its Time ; the Nature in which, and the Place to which, he ascended ;
its Witnesses, and his Attendants. — his Seat in Heaven, at "God's Right Hand." —
Opinions respecting this Phrase. — It implies the possession of supreme Honour, Felicity,
and Power.
Jesus Christ having finished the work assigned to him by his Father, it
was not necessary that he should prolong his stay upon earth. It was rather
necessary that he should leave it in "order to perform those benevolent offices
by which the benefits of his humiliation and death would be communicated to
his followers ; and, in particular, to make way for the coming of another Di
vine Person, not in a visible form, but in a powerful dispensation of light and
holiness, and consolation. " But now I go my way to him that sent me ; and
none of you asketh me, Whither goest thou ? But because I have said these
things unto you, sorrow hath filled your heart. Nevertheless I tell you the
truth : It is expedient for you that I go away ; for if I go not away, the Com
forter will not come unto you ; but if I depart, I will send him unto you."*
Accordingly, we read, that after he had given all necessary instructions to his
disciples, he led them forth to Bethany, where he was parted from them, and
received up into heaven.
First, The ascension took place forty days after his resurrection. " To the
apostles," Luke says, " he showed himself alive after his passion by many
infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things
pertaining to the kingdom of heaven. "t During this interval, he denied him
self the full possession of his glorious reward, for the benefit of his disciples,
and of the world, to whom they were to minister. The instruction which he
imparted to them, they greatly needed, and it was adapted to their present
circumstances. From the opportunities which they enjoyed of hearing his
public discourses, and conversing with him in private, they had undoubtedly
derived much advantage ; but their progress was not such as it ought to have
been. In consequence of the influence of the national prejudices upon their
minds, although they were forewarned of his death, it came upon them by
surprise and almost drove them to despair ; so inconsistent was it with their
preconceived notions of the character and work of the Messiah. It was ne
cessary, therefore, to rectify their misconceptions, and to show them that his
sufferings were an essential part of the plan which he had undertaken to exe
cute ; and that, although nothing was less expected by them, they had been
expressly announced by the prophets. That he was thus employed in the in
terval between his resurrection and ascension, we are informed by the evange
lists : " He said unto them, These are the words .which I spake unto you,
while I was yet 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.
Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the Scrip
tures, and said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to
suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day."* This exposition of the
Scriptures was calculated to give relief to their minds, which, although com
forted by the return of their Master from the grave, must have been perplexed
* John xvi. 5 — 7. * Acts i. 3. $ Luke xxiv. 44 — 46.

112 THE EXALTATION OF CHRIST.
and confounded by the unexpected events which had befallen him. For this
reason it was now given ; bu* their full instruction in the nature of his king
dom, or of the new dispensation which he designed to establish, was deferred
to the day of Pentecost, when, according to his promise, he sent the Spirit to
lead them into all the truth. This was not the only reason why our Lord did
not immediately return to heaven. He continued upon earth, to give his dis
ciples a full opportunity to be assured of the truth of his resurrection, as they
were to be the witnesses of it to the world. To qualify them for this office,
it was necessary that he should not merely pay them a transient visit, lest
unbelievers should have said, that they were deceived by the force of imagi
nation ; but that he should appear so often, and in such circumstances, as not
to leave the slightest ground for suspicion or cavil. Accordingly, he showed
himself not once only, but many times ; not to separate individuals alone, but
to several in company, and on one occasion, to more than five hundred per
sons ; he conversed with them, allowed them to touch him, ate and drank
with them. In any ordinary case, the evidence would have been deemed
sufficient, even by the most sceptical, to establish the most important fact.
So far therefore, as respects their opportunities of being acquainted with this
fact, the testimony of the apostles cannot be reasonably called in question.
They could all say, with the beloved disciple, " That which was from the
beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which
we have looked upon, and our hands have handled, of the Word of life ; that
which we have seen and heard, declare we unto you, that ye also may have
fellowship with us."*
Secondly, Our Lord ascended in human nature. The man Christ Jesus has
left the earth, and entered into that invisible region of the universe where God
sits on the throne of his Majesty. To his followers, it is a source of high
consolation to know, that he has not laid aside their nature, but retains it
amidst his glory ; because they can look up to him with confidence, in the
full assurance of his sympathy, and see, in his exaltation, an earnest of then-
future glory. But this is not the principal idea to which I request your atten
tion. The point to be considered at present is, that it was solely in human
nature that he ascended to heaven ; or that, like his death, burial, and resurrec
tion, the ascension can be predicated of him only as a man. As God, he could
neither descend nor ascend, because his Divine essence, filling heaven and
earth, cannot change its place, and does not admit of that exaltation, or that
accession of glory which the ascension implies. It is acknowledged, indeed,
that his divine glory, which, during his residence among mortals, had been
concealed, was then unveiled, although even this concession requires to be ex
plained, to make it consistent with truth ; the obscuration and manifestation
of his glory properly referring to his human nature, and to men, not to the in
habitants of heaven, in whose eyes it always shone with undiminished lustre.
But because, in a certain sense, it may be said to have been revealed when
he ascended, some have maintained, that the ascension may be considered as
relative to his divine nature, as well as his human. But, in doing so, they are
chargeable, when speaking of a plain fact, with substituting figurative for literal
language, and thus confounding two things, which are distinct, and should be
carefully separated. The subject of discussion at present is, not a change of
state, but a change of place, which was competent to that nature alone, which,
being finite, could exist only in a certain portion of space, and might be atone
time on earth, and at another in heaven. The words of our Lord are worthy
of attention : " No man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down
from heaven, even the Son of man, which is in heaven."* There is an appa-
* 1 John i. 1—3 -j. John j;;, 13_

HIS ASCENSION TO HEAVEN. 113
rent confusion and contradiction in this passage ; and, had it related to any
other person, it might have been pronounced to be unintelligible. Of the Son
of man it is said, that he has come down from heaven, and yet was in heaven.
To those who are convinced of his Divinity, the passage presents no difficulty.
His two natures being personally united, that is justly affirmed of the one,
which is strictly true only of the other. The existence of his human nature
commenced upon earth, and it had never been in heaven ; for the opinion of
the elder Socinians, that he was taken up to , it before he entered upon his
ministry, to be instructed in the doctrines of the gospel, is a dream, or a dis
honest figment, devised with a view to evade the evidence, arising from this
and other passages, of his pre-existence and divinity ; but he had come down
from it, by the manifestation of himself in human flesh, yet was still in it, by
the immensity of his essence. Of a literal change of place, as God, he was
incapable ; it was in his assumed nature, that he who had first descended, af
terwards ascended, " that he might fill all things," heaven with his glory, and
the earth with the blessings of his grace.
Thirdly, The place to which he ascended was heaven, as the Scriptures de
clare, in many passages. One apostle affirms, that he ascended " above all
heavens ;" but his meaning is ascertained by a reference to the prevailing
opinion of his age. According to the system of the Jews, there were three
heavens ; — the aerial heaven, which is the region of clouds and meteors ; the
starry heaven, in which the celestial luminaries are fixed ; and the heaven of
heavens, in which the throne of God is erected. Our Redeemer ascended
above the two former, or the visible heavens, and entered into the latter, which
is concealed from mortal eyes by an impenetrable veil. Where the highest
heaven is seated we cannot tell ; but, agreeably to an idea which seems to be
natural because it is common, it is' said to be above us ; and hence his passage
to it from this world is called an ascent. It is the place in which the glory of
God, which' is partially seen in his works, is fully revealed, angels and the de
parted spirits of the just at present reside, and the redeemed, after the resur
rection, will have their everlasting habitation.
Heaven may be considered under the two different notions of a palace and
a temple. In the one view it is the seat of power and majesty, in the other it
is the place of solemn worship. -Into heaven, considered as a palace, Jesus
entered in the character of a king, who, having vanquished his enemies, and
established his title to the crown, went to take possession of his kingdom.
To this event the following passage is applicable, although, in the first instance,
it may be understood to have referred to the entrance of the ark into the taber
nacle : " Lift up your heads, O ye gates ; and be ye lifted up, ye everlasting
doors, and the King of glory shall come in. Who is this King of glory ?
The Lord strong and mighty, the Lord mighty in battle. Lift up your heads,
O ye gates ; even lift them up, ye everlasting doors, and the King of glory
shall come in. Who is this King of glory ? The Lord of hosts, he is the
King of glory."* Into heaven considered as a temple, he entered in the cha
racter of a priest ; and his ascension was prefigured by the entrance of Aaron,
and his successors in office, into the most holy place, to sprinkle the blood of
the sacrifices, and to burn incense before the mercy-seat. The first and fun
damental duty of the priesthood he performed upon earth, by offering that im
maculate and invaluable sacrifice, which appeased divine justice, and obtained
eternal redemption for his people ; it remained to plead the merits of his
death, and obtain, by his intercession, the blessings for which he had paid the
price of his blood. For this purpose he ascended, as we are informed by an
apostle in the following words : " Christ is not entered into the holy places
• Ps. xxiv. 7— 10.
Vol. IL— 15 k 2

114 THE EXALTATION OF CHRIST.
made' with hands,- which are the figures of the true ; but into heaven itself
now to appear in the presence of God for us."*
Fourthly, The witnesses of his ascension were his disciples, whom he had
assembled for this purpose. We are not informed, how many of them were
together at this time. On one occasion he was seen by more than five hun
dred brethren ; but whether it was at his ascension, or when he met with his
followers in Galilee, we cannot certainly say. But although we should sup
pose, what, however, is not very probable, that none were present but the
twelve apostles, the number was more than sufficient to attest the fact. They
were witnesses qualified in every respect ; and as their testimony would be .
readily received by the other disciples, who had full confidence in their vera
city, so it is entitled to credit among all other men, confirmed as it is by
miracles, which they performed by the assistance of the Holy Spirit, whom
their master promised to give them after his ascension, and whom he did actu
ally send on the day of Pentecost. Jesus did not withdraw secretly from
our world, lest it should have been said by unbelievers, that we know not
what is become of him, and there is no reason why we should take any far
ther concern in him. As his entrance, although obscure in respect of his
parentage, and the place where he first saw the light, was illustrated by a
vision of angels, who proclaimed it to the shepherds of Bethlehem ; so his
departure, although unknown to the great men of Jerusalem, and the inhabi
tants in general, was an object of attention to his chosen friends. It might
have been afterwards revealed to them by the Spirit, who instructed them in
many other secret things ; but the importance of the fact required, that it
should take place in such a manner as to be attested by ocular witnesses. It
appears that he was not carried away by a sudden rapture, but slowly rose
from the earth, and that the disciples had leisure to follow him with their
eyes, till he had ascended to a considerable height, when a clou4 received him
out of their sight, or intervened between him and the earth. Their wistful
looks were fixed upon the spot, where they had caught the last glimpse of
their beloved Master ; ,and they would have stood in the same posture, till
night had enveloped the heavens in its shade, in the vain expectation of see
ing him again, had not two angels appeared to them and said, "Ye men of
Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven ? This same Jesus which is
taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen
him go into heaven. "t
The place from which he ascended was the Mount of Olives, and in the
vicinity of Bethany. Gethsemane was also on the Mount of Olives. On
this coincidence it has been remarked, that the place was chosen, that as he
had there given a proof of human weakness, while he endured the wrath of
his Father, and his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling to the
ground, so he might there, by rising to heaven, display the power and glory
of his divinity ; that his exaltation might commence on the same spot where
he had been in the lowest state of abasement and sorrow ; and that from the
scene in which he had struggled with the powers of darkness, he might soar
above principalities and powers. And hence, it has been said, we should learn
that we are not to expect a triumph, till we have encountered the toils and perils
of the contest, and that we should not despair of obtaining the kingdom when
our warfare is accomplished. These are pious reflections ; but their solidity
depends upon the fact, that he ascended from the very spot which had witnessed
his agony. Of this, however, we have no certainty. The Mount of Olives
was of some extent ; and for aught that we can tell, the place of the ascension
might be at a considerable distance from Gethsemane. If this should be the
•Heb. ix. 24. tA^i-11-

HIS SEAT IN HEAVEN. 115
truth, the reflections founded on the presumed identity of the places, however
good in themselves, must be classed with many other suggestions of fancy.
Our Lord was attended at his ascension by the glorious inhabitants of
heaven. Only two of them, according to the Scriptures, were seen; but we
have reason to believe, that thousands were present, although invisible to
human eyes: "The chariots of God," says the Psalmist, "are twenty thou
sand, even thousands of angels : the Lord is among them, as in Sinai, in the
holy place. Thou hast ascended on high, thou hast led ' captivity captive :
thou hast received gifts for men ; yea, for the rebellious also, that the Lord
God might dwell among them."* They were present not like the Roman
soldiers, who followed their victorious general as having a share in his triumph,
because by their valour his battles had been won ; but, to add to the splendour
of the scene, and to celebrate his mighty achievements. The thrones, and
dominions, and principalities, and powers of heaven, were put in subjection
to him ; and they came, on this occasion, to do homage to their Lord, and to
swell his train when he took' possession of his kingdom.
His leading captivity captive when he ascended, denotes his triumph over
the infernal powers. They who had made men captives by their successful
stratagems, saw the spoils wrested from their hands, and were themselves
made captives by our Almighty Redeemer. Whether they were compelled
to be present, and were exhibited as vanquished foes, disgraced and ruined,
and reserved to everlasting punishment, we are not warranted by a single
expression, of which no explanation is given, to affirm. There is no doubt
that our Saviour triumphed over them while he ascended ; that in his exalta
tion to the throne of heaven, they beheld a fearful presage of the final overthrow
of their kingdom.
Let us now proceed to consider what folio wed. the ascension of Christ:
" So then," says the Evangelist Mark, " after the Lord had spoken unto them,
he was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God."*
Every person is sensible that this language is figurative. Neither the right
hand of God, nor the posture ascribed to our Saviour, can be literally under
stood. God is a pure Spirit, and has no bodily members. The Scriptures
expressly forbid us to make any visible representations of him, because they
must be false and degrading; and the Israelites were particularly reminded,
that, in the day God spoke to their fathers, they saw no similitude. When
mention, therefore, is made of the eyes, the ears, the feet, and the hands of
God, it is evident that we ought to explain them in consistency with the
spirituality of his essence, and to consider them as metaphors, employed to
assist us in conceiving his perfections and operations. Hence, although our
Redeemer, in his state of exaltation, has a material body, which is capable of
corporeal actions and postures, it requires little reflection to perceive that
" his sitting" is figurative, as well as " the right hand," at which he is said to
sit. We are as ignorant of the nature and employments of glorified bodies,
as we are of the nature and employments of spirits. Besides, the Scriptures
are not uniform with respect to the posture which they assign to our Redeemer ;
for as at one time he is said to sit, he is at another said to stand, at the right
hand of God. We are, therefore, under the necessity of supposing, that their
design is not to fix our attention upon the posture itself, but upon the state of
which it is expressive. Instead, then, of inquiring separately, what is meant
by the right hand of God, and what by sitting at it, I shall consider them con
junctly, and point out their united import.
Before I proceed, however, I shall make a remark or two upon the othe„
posture which is sometimes assigned to him. When the blessed martyr Ste-
• Ps. lxviii. 17, 18. f Mark xvi 19.

116 THE EXALTATION OF CHRIST.
phen was surrounded by his infuriated enemies, being full of the Holy Ghost,
he looked up steadfastly into heaven, and saw Jesus " standing at the right
hand of God."* If you bear in mind that it is not the posture, but the state,
which, in both cases, should be considered, you will perceive that the differ
ent representations are not contradictory. Sitting is the posture of a sovereign,
or a judge, or a person who has finished his labours, and is enjoying ease;
standing is the posture of a man who waits to receive a friend, or is prepared
to defend him. On the present occasion, when a holy man was undergoing a
dreadful trial of his faith, Jesus rose, if we may speak so, from his throne to
send to him the necessary succours of his grace, to meet and welcome his
spirit as soon as it should escape from its persecutors, and to introduce him
into the presence of his Father, that he might receive from his hand the recom
pense of an unfading crown. To Stephen the sight was consoling. It sus
tained his courage amidst the terrors of a violent death, and enabled him to
resign his mortal life in the joyful hope of a better : " Lord Jesus, receive
my spirit." Having subjoined another petition for his murderers, " he fell
asleep." There is scarcely a doctrine or fact in Scripture, which folly or malignity
has not perverted, when it happened to stand in the way of some favourite
opinion. The sitting of Christ at the right hand of God, instead of being con
sidered as expressive of his exaltation, has been converted into a proof of his
inferiority to the Father, because the left hand was the place of honour, as the
abettors of this notion endeavour to show by quotations from ancient writers.
It might be said to such men, that, as our Saviour ascended to heaven in the
character of mediator, nothing is gained by proving his inferiority to the
Father in that character ; for we readily acknowledge it, but at the same time
maintain, that it is not inconsistent with his essential equality. But the argu
ment on which they found their conclusion is false. Whatever may have been
the practice of some other nations, as the Scriptures were written by Jews,
and addressed to them in the first instance, it is by their usages that we must
explain this expression, and others of a similar nature. Now, among them
the right hand was the place of honour. " The man of God's right hand,"t
is the man whom God delights to honour. " A wise man's heart" is said to
be "at his right hand," because he engages in honourable pursuits ; but "a
fool's heart" to be " at his left" hand, because he acts imprudently and shame
fully.* When Joseph presented his two sons to his father, he set the elder
on his right hand and the younger on his left ; but Jacob, to show his prefer
ence of the younger, laid his right hand on his head.§ Nothing is more deci
sive of the point, than the order in which men will be arranged on the day of
judgment, when " some shall awake to everlasting life, and some to shame
and everlasting contempt ;" for then the judge will set the former on his right
hand, and the latter on his left. Enough has been said to expose this abor
tive attempt to wrest the expression which we are now considering, to serve
the purposes of a party.||
There is another opinion still more strange, that Christ's sitting at the
right hand of God, denotes that, in a certain sense, he is higher than the
Father. It is so extravagant, and in fact so unintelligible, that it would be a
waste of time to attempt to refute it. He is superior, it is said, to the Father,
not in reality, but in the administration of his kingdom. It is sufficient to
oppose to this impious assertion the words of an apostle ; " The Father hath
put all things under his feet. But when he saith, all things are put under
him, it is manifest that he is excepted, which did put all things under him."H
* Acts vii. 55. * Ps. lxxx. 17. * Ecc. x. 2. § Gen. xlviii. 14.
] Vide Witsius, in Symb. Apost. Exer. xxi. § 5. ^ 1 Cor. xv. 27.

HIS SEAT IN HEAVEN. 117
The right hand is the place of honour. It is so esteemed among us, and
was so accounted by the Jews. When Solomon's mother came to him, " he
sat down upon his throne, and caused a seat to be set for the king's mother,
and she sat on his right hand."* It is implied, therefore, in the position
assigned to our Saviour in heaven, that he is invested with great dignity and
glory. I showed, in the former part of this Lecture, that the ascension related
solely to his human nature, because his Divine was incapable of change of
place, being always in heaven as well as upon earth. I now observe, that it
was equally incapable of any accession of glory,, because it was already infi
nitely glorious, in the possession of all possible perfection. But its glory
was veiled during his humiliation, and only a few rays of it were seen in the
miraculous works which he performed, and the sublime doctrines which he
published. As the sun, having scattered the clouds which covered his face,
pours his bright effulgence upon the earth, so our Redeemer, upon his exalta
tion to heaven, appeared in all the majesty of his character, and showed to all
its blessed inhabitants, that the Son of man is also the Son of God, and the
equal of the Father. To this manifestation of his original dignity, after the
temporary obscuration which it had suffered, these words of his intercessory
prayer may be referred : " And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thine
own self, with the glory which I had with thee before the world was."*
But there was honour conferred upon our Saviour in human nature, and in
the character of Mediator ; and to this there is a particular reference, when he
is said to be seated at the right hand of God. It is elevated above men and
angels ; it is the highest of the works of God. Even in its state of humilia
tion, its powers surpassed those of the most richly gifted creature ; no wisdom,
for example, equal to that which he displayed, being found among the inhabit*
ants of heaven ; and now, we may presume, its faculties are expanded to the
utmost limit of which they are susceptible. Of the external glory of his
human nature, we can form no idea, because we have received no information
on the subject ; but this we may venture to say, that in him is displayed tha
perfection of majesty and beauty. His appearance to J6hn, in the isle of
Patmos, was awful and majestic, but, partly at least, symbolical, like the
visions of the prophets. On the mount of transfiguration, his countenance
shone as the sun, and his raiment was white as the light. Without entering
into particulars, the Scriptures declare that his body is glorious, and is the
pattern according to which the bodies of the saints will be fashioned. It is
not inconsistent with the ascription of transcendent honour to him, that he
promises to give his saints to sit down with him upon his throne. They will
share in his glory, but not in equal measure ; their glory will be similar, but
not in the same degree. He is " the first-born among many brethren ;"* enti
tled to a double portion; the heir and the lord of the family. Hence, not
withstanding their elevation, they will acknowledge him as their superior, and
do him homage. While the angels adore him, the saints will cast down their
crowns before his throne, and both will join in expressions of admiration,
and gratitude, and praise. " And I beheld, and I heard the voice of many
angels round about the throne, and the beasts, and the elders : and the num
ber of them was ten thousand times ten thousand, and thousands of thousands ;
saying with a loud voice, Worthy is the Lamb that was slain to receive power,
and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honour, and glory, and blessing."§
It is unnecessary to refer to a distinction formerly made, and to remark, that
he is not the object of worship as man, nor properly as Mediator ; because, as
he is in this character the servant of the Father, so it is by him that our prayers
* 1 Kings ii. 19. * John xvii. 5. * Rom. viii. 29. § Rev. v. 11, 12.

118 THE EXALTATION OF CHRIST:
and praises are presented. It is enough to know, that it is the incarnate
God who is worshipped by the heavenly congregation, and that, although the
foundation of this worship is the divine perfections of which he is possessed,
the great motive to it is his redeeming love, and it is addressed to him without
distinction of natures. " We see Jesus crowned with glory and honour."*
But this is not the only idea suggested by his sitting at the right hand of
God. It imports the possession of happiness ; but whether this idea is founded,
as some suppose, on the fact that gifts are usually conferred by the right hand,
or is derived from some other source, it is not material to inquire. That the
expression admits of this sense, is evident from the following passage : ',' In
thy presence is fulness of joy; at thy right hand there are pleasures for
evermore."* It is to be particularly noticed, that these words are spoken by
the Messiah, and with a view to his exaltation. They follow the declaration
of his confident hope, that God " would not leave his soul in hell, nor suffer
him to see corruption, but would show him the path of life," or raise him
from the grave.
For the joy which was set before him he endured the cross, and despised
the shame ; and he has now entered into it. Sitting at the right hand of God,
he is nearer to him than any man or angel ; and his nearness implies not only
a closer relation, resulting from the union of his human nature to the divine,
hut also more intimate fellowship. The presence of God is a source of feli
city. The place which we call heaven, would not be happier than the most
desolate spot upon earth, if he did not there impart the fulness of his love;
and a day in the sanctuary would not be preferable to a day of bodily rest at
home, were it not the chosen scene on which he displays the wonders of his
grace. The light of his countenance awakens emotions of joy in the souls
of the righteous, with which the most intense sensations of worldly pleasure
are not to be compared. If the meanest saint is destined to enjoy a degree of
felicity which it has not entered into the human mind to conceive, what must
oe the communication of divine love to him, who is nearer to God than all
the saints, is the object of his infinite approbation and delight, and has glori
fied him in the highest in the work of redemption ! What shall be done to the
man whom he delights to honour ? The reward is proportioned to his merit,
the height of his joy may be estimated by the depth of his previous sorrow.
" The king shall joy in thy strength, 0 Lord; and in thy salvation how greatly
shall he rejoice ! Thou hast given him his heart's desire, and hast not with-
holden the request of his lips. For thou preventest him with the blessings
of goodness ; thou settest a crown of pure gold on his head. He asked life
of thee, and thou gavest it him, even length of days for ever and ever. His
glory is great in thy salvation ; honour and majesty hast thou laid upon him.
For thou hast made him most blessed for ever ; thou hast made him exceeding
glad with thy countenance."* While he partakes of all the pleasures which
are at the right hand of God, he rejoices to reflect that his great undertaking
is accomplished, to behold around him the fruits of his labours, and to know
that in due time heaven will be filled with millions of the redeemed, who will
for ever praise him as the author of their happiness. " He sees of the travail
of his soul, and is satisfied."§
A o-ain, the right hand is an emblem of power. This is the general idea
which is suggested, when hands and arms are attributed to God, because it is
with our arms and hands that we exert our strength. The right hand is most
commonly used, and whatever cause may be assigned for this curious fact, is a
more powerful instrument than the left hand. The sitting of our Saviour at the
•Heb. ii. 9. * Ps. xvi. 11. * Ps. xxi. 1— 6. § Is. liii. 11.

HIS SEAT IN HEAVEN. 119
right hand of God, signifies on this account that he is exalted to authority and
dominion. " Hereafter," he said to the Jewish council, " shall ye see the Son
of man sitting on the right hand of power."*
The psalmist, refers to the power of the Messiah in his state of exaltation
in these words : " The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand,
until I make thine enemies thy footstool."* It was exhibited to Daniel in the
night yisions, when " he saw, and behold, one like the Son of man came with
the clouds of heaven, and came to the ancient of days, and they brought him
near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a king
dom, that all people, nations, and languages should serve him : his dominion
is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that
which shall not be destroyed."* Our Saviour announced it to his disciples
after his resurrection : "All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth ;"§
and Paul speaks thus of it in his epistle to the Philippians: "Wherefore God
also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name that is above every name ;
that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and
things in earth, and things under the earth; and that every tongue should
confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father."|| There
is a distinction to be observed between his essential and his mediatorial king
dom. The former he always possessed, and since it belonged to him as God
the Creator of all things, he could not lay it aside even during his humiliation.
The latter he received when he ascended ; for although he had a right to it,
when he rose from the dead, and therefore told his disciples, that it was already
given to him, it was upon his entrance into heaven, that he sat down upon
his throne. His mediatorial kingdom comprehends power to establish, and
govern, and defend, and bestow eternal salvation upon his church, and power
to render all other things subservient to its interests. He ought to be con
sidered not only as the King of Zion, but as the Lord of the Universe. Hence,
when we say that the world is under the government of God, we should
reflect, that properly it is not the Father of whom we speak, except in this
sense, that he always acts in concurrence with the Son ; but that the declara
tion of our Saviour, that " the Father judgeth no man, but hath committed all
judgment unto the Son, "If is true of the whole administration of affairs. Our
Redeemer holds the sceptre, and sways it over angels and men. He hath put
all things under his feet.
There is one other idea connected with his sitting at the right hand of God,
which it may be proper to mention, as it is suggested by the following con
trast between him and the priests of the law : " Every priest standeth daily
ministering, and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take
away sins ; but this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins, for ever
sat down on the right hand of God, from henceforth expecting tilt his enemies
be made his footstool."** The posture ofthe legal priests imported that they
were constantly engaged in the service of the altar, and, consequently, had not
accomplished the design of their office, by the perfect reconciliation of the
people to God. The high-priest never sat down in the most holy place, but
having stood for some time before the mercy-seat, he retired to offer new
sacrifices, and again to go the round of the sacred offices. But Jesus Christ,
when he entered into heaven, sat down at the right hand of God, and is " a
priest upon his throne." His posture signifies that his work is finished. His
one oblation has satisfied the demands of justice, and his Father has testified
his approbation of it, by conferring upon him honour and authority.
The present exaltation of Jesus Christ is a source of great consolation to
•Matt xxvi. 64 * Ps. ex. 1. * Dan. vii. 1 3, 14. § Matt, xxviii 18
| PhiL ii. 9—1 1. 1 John v. 22. ** Heb. x. 1 1—13.

120 THE EXALTATION OF CHRIST:
his followers. It was not solely for his personal glory that he ascended, but
also for the good of his people, in promoting which he employs all the interest
and power which he possesses. His intercession ensures the acceptance of
their duties, not as the condition of salvation, but as testimonies of their love
to God, and their filial subjection to him. His government is calculated to
tranquillize and comfort their minds amidst the vicissitudes of life. As they
are assured that nothing can happen to themselves without his appointment,
and that every word will be overruled for their final welfare, so they may
look upon all the dangers in the world as under the control of his power,
and the direction of his wisdom, as constituting parts of his plan, working for
ends worthy of him, and subservient to the establishment of his kingdom.
Affairs may not proceed in a train agreeable to our views and expectations ;
but it will repress every murmur and every wish for a different order, to reflect
that he presides over them, who is the patron of truth and righteousness, and
the faithful guardian of those who love him : " The Lord reigneth ; let the
earth rejoice : let the multitude of isles be glad thereof."*
The security of the church depends upon the exercise of the power with
which Christ was invested at his ascension. The gates of hell shall not pre
vail against it, because it is defended by his omnipotent arm. It has been
deemed a proof of Caesar's greatness of mind, although, in truth, it proved
nothing but his presumption and impiety, that he said to the sailors in a storm,
" Fear not, this ship carries Caesar ;" as if the elements would have done
homage to that ambitious spirit. The wind and waves did indeed respect him
on that occasion, but only as they have since respected, and will always re
pect, the meanest and most worthless of mankind, whose hour is not come
The ocean will not swallow up those who are doomed to perish by the sword.
But the church may assume the attitude and the language of confidence and
defiance when she is menaced by the powers of earth and hell, because He is
her protector, who can render their councils and efforts abortive, and scatter
them with his breath: " God is our refuge and strength, a very present help
in trouble : Therefore will we not fear, though the earth be removed, and
though the mountains be carried into the midst of the sea ; though the waters
thereof roar and be troubled, though the mountains shake with the swelling
thereof."t To him who is exalted above principalities and powers, profound reverence
and prompt obedience are due. This is the command of the church: "He
is thy Lord, and worship thou him." We are under law to Jesus Christ;
and as our consciences should recognise his authority, and bow to it, so it
will render our obedience the homage of the heart, devoutly to remember, that
his right to demand it is founded on the deep humiliation and exquisite suffer
ings to which he submitted for our salvation. Although we have not seen his
glory with our eyes, as the beloved disciple did in the isle of Patmos, yet,
being admitted to contemplate it through the medium of revelation, which
gives such descriptions of it as are fitted to excite mingled emotions of reve
rence and confidence, let us, like him, fall at his feet, and say with another
saint, " Truly, we are thy servants ; we are thy servants, thou hast loosed
our bonds : we will offer to thee the sacrifice of thanksgiving, and will call
upon the name of the Lord."*
* Ps. xcvii. 1. * Ps- xlvi. 1, 2. $ Ps. cxvi. 16, 17.

HIS JUDGING THE WORLD. 181

LECTURE LXIII.
CHRIST'S STATE OF EXALTATION.
The General Judgment, a Doctrine of Revelation — The Time and Duration of it — The Place
of Judgment — The Parties — Christ the Judge : his Fitness for the Office — Circumstances
of his appearing — -Standards of Judgment — The Sentences, and their Execution.
" Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven ? This same
Jesus, who is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as
ye have seen him go into heaven."* These were the words ofthe two angels
who appeared on Mount Olivet to the disciples, while they were wistfully
looking after their Lord, who had ascended in their sight, and was now con
cealed by a cloud. He will come again at the appointed time ; and it will be*
the purpose of his coming to close the administration which he is at present
carrying on at the right hand of his Father, by the public distribution of re
wards and punishments. To this consummating act of his royal authority, I
shall, in this lecture, direct your attention.
In treating this subject, it is usual to bring forward arguments suggested by
reason, in support of the declarations of Scripture respecting the future judg
ment of the human race. Were we to deny that justice is essential to the
Supreme Governor of the universe, we should divest him of all moral excel
lence, and leave only those physical attributes which distinguish him from
men, as almighty power, perpetual duration, and immensity of essence. We
should transform him, whom even the heathens called Optimus Maximus, into
the Arimanes of the Persians, a being of malignant dispositions, the author
of darkness and confusion, and every evil work. But we find that, at present,
justice is only partially exercised, and 'the common course of things is con
ducted without any marked regard to the character and actions of men. Those
whom we call good, because their actions are conformable to moral distinctions,
are often left to struggle with poverty, and to pine in affliction ; while bold
transgressors, men who set their mouths against the heavens, and give loose
reins to their appetites and passions, not seldom enjoy outward peace, and
pass their days amidst affluence, and a succession of delights. The excep
tions serve the more clearly to illustrate the imperfection of the present sys
tem ; to show us more distinctly what, in our apprehension, might be, and
ought to be : and call more loudly for a different order of things. Human laws,
which, in so far as they are just, may be considered as making a part of the
moral administration of the universe, because they are sanctioned by Heaven,
supply this defect in part, but only in part. Besides that, in general, they
afford no reward to the obedient, but simple protection, there are innumerable
cases of delinquency which they cannot reach, in consequence of the limited
knowledge and power of those who execute them, and of other causes which
obstruct the exercise of authority. Many crimes are secret, unknown to all
but the guilty ; and, of public crimes, the authors are not always discovered,
or they escape from justice by flight, or they set it at defiance ; or, what is
worst of all, they find means to prevent it by bribery and perjury. What then
is the result of this view of the state of human affairs ? Shall we conclude,
in opposition to the clear dictates of reason, and the consent of all nations,
• Actei. 11.
Vol. 11—16 L

182 THE EXALTATION OF CHRIST
hat there is no God ? Or shall we say, with some impious philosophers, that
he is regardless of the actions of men ; and that, instead of a wise and right
eous Providence, blind fortune presides ? Or rather, compelled by the best
sentiments of our minds, which recognise a Deity, and invest him with every
moral perfection, shall we not rest in this obvious inference, that, since justice
s not at present fully displayed, another dispensation will follow, under which
•here will be an exact retribution ; that a time will come when the wrongs of
the injured shall be redressed, when the proud transgressors shall stoop to a
superior power, when every work shall be brought into judgment, and every
secret thing shall be revealed ?
To this reasoning no person of candour will object, so far as it goes to
prove a future retribution. If there is a just God, it must ultimately be well
with the righteous, and ill with the wicked. Accordingly, a recompense in
another state was expected by those who did not enjoy the benefit of Divine
revelation, and the expectation was founded partly upon traditional authority,
and partly also upon argument. They believed, that, when the souls of men
ieft their bodies, they appeared before certain judges appointed to take cog
nizance of human actions, Minos, Rhadamanthus, and jEacus, who, after an
impartial investigation, pronounced sentence upon them, and consigned them
to the fields of bliss, or to the region of torment But the judgment which
the Gentiles anticipated at the close of their mortal course, was individual and
private, like the sentence which Christians believe will be pronounced upon
every man immediately after his death ; and this is all that the reasoning
proves. Divines, therefore, are chargeable with inaccuracy, when they em
ploy it in support of the doctrine now under consideration, since it serves
only to establish the fact, that men will be recompensed, not that they will be
recompensed by a procedure carried on in the presence of assembled genera
tions. Having convinced ourselves that God will render to every man accord
ing to his works, we can advance no farther by the light of reason than the
heathens did, who held that men appeared individually before the infernal
judges, or at most along with those who happened to arrive in the other world
at the same time, and, that they were dismissed, without any farther solemnity,
each to his proper place.
It is to revelation alone that we are indebted for the knowledge of a general
judgment, in which the proceedings will take place in the sight of angels and
men ; the righteous and the wicked will be arranged in separate classes, and
all will be witnesses of the Divine justice in the reward of the good, and the
punishment of the bad. I shall content myself with a few passages in which
it is announced. " He hath appointed a day, in the which he will judge the
world in righteousness by that man whom he hath ordained ; whereof he hath
given assurance unto all men in that he hath raised him from the dead."*
" We must all appear before the judgment-seat of Christ, that every one may
receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be
good or bad."* " When the Son of man shall come in his glory, and all the
holy angels with him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory : and be
fore him shall be gathered all nations ; and he shall separate them one from
another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats."*
It may be thought that the ends of justice are answered when individuals
are treated according to their desert, and as this is done immediately after
death, that no further procedure is necessary. Justice, as it respects private
persons, consists in regulating their conduct by its dictates, in their transac
tions with friends, neighbours, and mankind in general ; and if they uniformly
preserve inviolate the rights of others, all its demands are fulfilled. But the
• Acts xvii. 31. * 2 Cor. v. 10. t Matt. xxv. 31, 32.

HIS JUDGING THE WORLD. 123
justice of a governor belongs to the public, who claim not only that it should
impartially execute the laws, but that it should be exercised in such a manner
as is most conducive to the general interests. The rewards to which merito
rious individuals are entitled ought not to be conferred, and the punishment
which transgressors have incurred ought not to be inflicted, in silence and se
crecy, but both should be openly dispensed for the honour of the governor's
character, and the advantage which will redound to the community from the
salutary influence of example. As God is the governor of the world, it is not
sufficient that he is just, unless he also appear to be just. The retribution
which takes place after death is unknown. We see men of different charac
ters die ; but we cannot trace the flight of their souls into the invisible world,
nor hear the sentence pronounced from the tribunal before which they appear ;
and our conjectures upon the subject may often be very far from the truth.
Hence a general judgment, at which all the descendants of Adam will be pre
sent, seems necessary to the display of the justice of God, to such a manifes
tation of it as will vindicate his government from all the charges which impiety
has brought against it, satisfy all doubts, and leave a conviction in the minds
of all intelligent creatures, that he is righteous in all his ways, and holy in
all his works. It is expedient that at the winding up of the scheme, all its
parts should be seen to be worthy of Him by whom it was arranged and con
ducted. In this way, those who have witnessed, with many disquieting
thoughts, the irregularity and disorder in the present system, will have ocular
evidence that there never was the slightest deviation from the principles of
equity, and that the cause of perplexity, was the delay of their full operation.
They will see the good and the bad no longer mingled together, and apparent
ly treated alike, but separated into two classes, the one on the right hand of
the Judge, and the other on his left, and distinguished as much at least by
their respective sentences, as by the places which they occupy. We perceive,
then, the reason that the judgment passed upon each individual at the termi
nation of his life, will be solemnly ratified at the end of the world. There
may be another reason for the public exercise of justice in the final allotment
of the human race. It may be intended to be a spectacle to the universe ; it
may be an act of the divine administration, which will extend its influence to
all the provinces of his empire. We are sure that angels will witness it ; and
if there are other orders of rational creatures, it may be a solemn lesson to
them, by which they will be confirmed in fidelity to their Creator, and filled
with more profound veneration of his infinite excellences.
The time of the general judgment is a secret which God has reserved to
himself. " Of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of hea
ven."* An opinion seems to have been entertained by some persons in the
primitive church, that the awful event was not distant ; but only the lying lips
of such a man as Gibbon could dare to say " that its near approach had been
predicted by the apostles ; the tradition of it was preserved by their earliest
disciples ; and those who understood in their literal sense the discourses of
Christ himself, were obliged to expect the second and glorious coming of the
Son of man in the clouds, before that generation was totally extinguished,
which had beheld his humble condition upon earth."t The prophecy of our
Saviour to which he refers, evidently relates to the destruction of Jerusalem,
and is interspersed with several circumstances which clearly prove, that, al
though the style is bold and highly figurative, it is a local calamity which is
announced, a desolation beyond the limits of which it was possible to escape,
an event which would be followed by other events in a long succession ; in a
word, that the prophecy does not foretell the end of the world. It is so far
* Matt xxiv. 36. -\ Gibbon's Decline and Fall, chap. xv.

124 THE EXALTATION OF CHRIST.
from being true that its near approach was predicted by the apostles, that,
when the notion began to prevail, they set themselves to oppose it, as we lean
from the second Epistle to the Thessalonians, in which Paul beseeches them
in the most solemn terms, not to be shaken in mind or troubled, as if the day
af Christ were at hand, and proceeds to inform them of other events which
would precede it, and consequently proved that it was still remote. It is
commonly said that the design of keeping it secret, is to excite us to watch
and to be always prepared. This is the improvement which we should make
of the fact that there is a future judgment ; but it will not seem to an accurate
thinker to arise properly from the uncertainty of the time, because amidst our
total ignorance of the day and the hour, we are assured, as men in past gene
rations might have been, that it will not take place during our lives. There
"s a long series of prophecies which will be fulfilled before the coming of
Christ, and by the details of which ages will be consumed. This may be a
topic of popular declamation, but it will not bear exact inquiry. Some things
in Scripture which are understood to favour the idea, relate to the destruction
of Jerusalem. It may operate in this way upon the men who shall live after
the prophecies are fulfilled, and who, if they rightly discern the signs of the
times, may justly conclude that the end of all things is at hand. In our age,
the immediate motive to vigilance and activity, is the uncertainty of the time
of our death, which will be precisely the same to us in its effects as the second
eoming of Christ ; for after death is the judgment, when the state of every
man will be immutably fixed.
As we have no means of ascertaining the time of the general judgment, so it
is impossible to say any thing respecting its duration. It is called a day; but
the use of this term in the Scriptures is indefinite, and it marks at one time a
shorter, and at another a longer period. There is no doubt that the Judge
could in a moment separate the righteous from the wicked, and having then
passed sentence upon them, send them immediately away to their respective
abodes ; but we cannot conceive that this summary process would answer the
end of the judgment, which we apprehend to be not simply the reward of the
good, and the punishment of the bad, but the display of justice in particular
cases. If our notion of a detailed procedure is correct, as the design of it
will be to convey just ideas of the divine character to the minds of creatures,
whose thoughts follow in a train, a natural day seems to us too short for the
disclosure of so many secrets, the correction of so many apparent irregularities,
the solution of so many perplexities, the determination of so many cases. But
we speculate in ignorance, and it is wiser to rest in the general conclusion,
that the business will be so conducted, as to produce in every mind a full con
viction of the consummate rectitude of the divine government.
" Tell us, when shall these things be ? and what shall be the sign of thy
coming, and of the end of the world ?"* This question of the disciples re
lated to our Saviour's prediction of the destruction of the temple, and his an
swer must be considered as bearing upon that point. It is a great mistake,
therefore, to bring forward the circumstances enumerated by him as signs of
his second coming, because they were to precede the fall of Jerusalem ; and
he expressly told his disciples that the generation then existing should not
pass away till all these things were fulfilled. We know of no signs but the
fulfilment of prophecy. The Gospel will be preached to all nations ; antichrist
will fall ; the Jews will be converted ; the millennium will succeed, or the
thousand years of his spiritual reign upon earth ; and, it should seem, will be
followed by a period of impiety, when the wicked will go up on the breadth
of the earth, to compass the camp of the saints about, and the beloved city.
* Matt, xxiv a. * ReT- "• 9-

. HIS JUDGING THE WORLD. 125
Then the Judge will appear upon his throne ; but, in the order of events, the
intervals are not marked, and the whole is expressed in such figurative and
general terms as to convey no definite information respecting the time. Past
prophecies have been gradually, and sometimes insensibly fulfilled. We may,
therefore, presume that, although those who shall live towards the end of the
world, when the predictions are accomplished, may know that the end of all
things is approaching, they will be as incapable as we are of calculating the
time ; and that, even to them, the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the
night, suddenly, and without previous warning.
The place where the judgment will be held is this world ; and as it is said
that the saints shall be caught up in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air, it
should seem that the wicked will be left standing upon the earth. What region
of it will be chosen for the last and solemn scene, it would be presumptuous
to conjecture. The following passage in Joel has no relation to the subject:
" Let the heathen be wakened, and come up to the valley of Jehoshaphat ; for
there will I sit to judge all the heathen round about."* The valley of Jeho
shaphat, lying between Jerusalem and the Mount of Olives, is of small extent ;
but the scene ofthe last judgment will afford ample space for the countless
millions who will be assembled upon it to hear their final doom. All nations
shall be gathered before the Son of man. The judgment, therefore, presup
poses the resurrection, of which, however, I shall not at present speak, as it will
occur in another part of this course. The whole order of angles was created
at once ; it has received no increase, and sustained no diminution since its
commencement. The human race consisted, at first, of a single pair, from
whom successive generations are derived, according to the peculiar law of
their nature ; and as they were made subject to death in consequence of sin,
they have passed along the stage of life, and after a short display, vanished
from sight. It is but a small portion of mankind that is alive at any particular
period. Multitudes have retired into the land of darkness and oblivion ; mul
titudes will yet be raised up by the creating power of God, to spend their
transient day in the light of the sun, and then descend into the shades of death
When the Son of man shall be revealed in his glory, he will call upon the
earth and the sea to give up their dead, and all who ever breathed the breath
of life from Adam to his last son, who, like him, returned to the dusti shall
arise, and, together with those who are then alive, shall stand in their lot at
the end of their days. The men of the present age will be mingled in the
same crowd with the antediluvians, and with those who shall be summoned
from their dwellings and their occupations by the voice of the archangel. All
ranks and conditions will be confounded. Those whom birth, and office, and
wealth, and talents placed at a distance from each other, will stand upon the
same level ; the great without their ensigns of dignity, and the poor without
their marks of abasement, for then only moral distinctions will be regarded.
The oppressor and the oppressed will be there, the one to obtain the redress
of his wrongs, and the other to have his violence returned upon his own head.
Statesmen, whose avarice or profusion impoverished nations, and whose in
trigues involved them in wars ; princes, who imagined that mankind were
made for them ; and blood-stained heroes, who acquired an illustrious name
by desolating the earth, will stand before the tribunal, amidst the cries and
execrations of millions whom they ruined with impunity. Jews and Gentiles,
Mahometans and Christians, the learned and the unlearned, the bond and the
free, the high and the low, will appear divested of all adventitious circumstan
ces, to render an account to Him who is no respecter of persons, and whose
omniscient eye will distinguish each individual in the immense throng as
• Joel iii. 12.
L2

126 THE EXALTATION OF CHRIST.
easily as if he were alone. Not one of the righteous shall be forgotten, and
not one of the wicked shall find a hiding-place from the justice pf the Judge.
The Judge is Jesus Christ, as we are informed in the passages formerly
quoted. As sustaining this character, he is to be considered, .not simply as
the second Person ofthe Trinity, to whom, in common with the other per
sons, the government of the moral and natural world belongs but as mediator.
His divinity is presupposed, as we shall afterwards see ; but, in the final re
tribution, he will act as the Father's delegate, and exercise official power.
For this statement we have his own authority : " The Father judgeth no man,
but hath committed all judgment unto the Son. As the Father hath life in
himself, so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself; and hath given
him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of man."*
The communication of power to him is expressly asserted ; and the reason
assigned, " because he is the Son of man," imports that it is imparted to him
in his mediatorial character to reward his humiliation and sufferings, and to
qualify him to accomplish all the ends of his office. Hence he will appear
not only in his own glory, but in the glory of his Father, bearing this honour
able commission which will exalt him so highly in the eyes of angels and
men. There is a manifest congruity in appointing him, who was the Saviour, to
be the judge of the human race. It was fit that the promises which he had
made, and the threatenings which he had denounced, should be carried into
effect by himself; that, from his hand, those who had submitted to his law
should receive their reward, and those who had been disobedient their pun
ishment. It was fit that he should bring to a close the dispensation which
he had established by his personal interposition, and should fulfil, in his eter-
lal state, the destinies of those for whom its benefits were intended. Besides,
as the judgment is appointed for the public manifestation of the righteousness
of the divine government, it was necessary that there should be a visible
judge, whose proceedings all should witness, and whose voice all should hear.
The proper person, therefore, is Jesus Christ, who, having assumed our
nature, will appear in it unchanged in essence, although invested with glory
suitable to the dignity of his person and the rank which it holds as the head
of the creation of God. On Sinai the Israelites beheld the awful tokens of
the divine presence ; but they only heard the voice of their law-giver. When
Jesus Christ comes with clouds, " every eye shall see him, and they also that
pierced him ; and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him."t
It is a man who will be revealed from heaven as the Judge of men ; but that
man being also the Son of God, is possessed of all the attributes of divinity.
These are necessary to the execution of his office. The decision of so many
cases involving innumerable particulars, in themselves intricate and perplexed,
and connected with other cases by multiplied aspects and relations, will mani
festly require knowledge not inferior to omniscience. Who but God could
distinguish every individual in this vast assembly ? Who but God could
remember, if I may be permitted to use this term, all the incidents of their
lives ? Who but God could form a just estimate of their actions, by a direct
and unerring reference to the circumstances in which they were performed,
and the motives from which they proceeded ? Who but God could bring to
light the secrets of the heart, upon which the sentence will be founded in all
cases, but more particularly in those where the external conduct was a super
ficial show ; and where it is only by a disclosure of principles carefully con
cealed, that the persons will appear to be deserving of their doom? No
created mind is capable of comprehending all the details of this multifarious
• John v. 22, 26, 27. * Rev. i. 7.

HIS JUDGING THE WORLD. 127
transaction, or of attaining to the prerogative of God, who says, " I search the
heart and the reins." Upon the adequate knowledge of the judge will be
founded the rectitude of his decisions. He cannot err in judgment; and
besides, he is essentially just. As he loves righteousness, loves it as necessa
rily as he exists, so he is exposed to no influence which might counteract the
dictates of equity. He is subject to no partialities ; he feels not the disturbing
effects of pity or anger ; he proceeds calmly, but steadily, tov his purpose ;
and every sentence which he pronounces, rests upon the immutable basis of
law. Among the multitude of the condemned, however severe may be their
punishment, and however impatiently they may bear it, there will not be one
who will dare to accuse his judge of injustice. In the mind of every man a
consciousness of guilt will be deeply fixed ; he will be compelled to blame
himself alone, and to justify the sentence which has rendered him for ever
miserable. The power of Jesus Christ is infinite, as well as his knowledge
and his justice. The works which will signalize the great day, are opera
tions of omnipotence. Omnipotence only could raise the dead from their
graves, bring all nations to the tribunal, however reluctant to obey the sum
mons, cast the ungodly into the flames of hell, and open the gates of heaven,
to give admission to the righteous. " The Lord Jesus shall be revealed from
heaven with his mighty angels, in flaming fire, taking vengeance on them that
know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ : who
shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord,
and from the glory of his power."*
Several circumstances are mentioned in Scripture, which will attend the
coming of our Saviour to judgment. " Behold he cometh with clouds. "t
There seems to be no reason why these words should not be literally under
stood, as the coming is not figurative, and the manifestation of Christ will be
made to the bodily eyes. When God descended to publish the law to the
Israelites, there was a thick cloud upon the mountain, from which issued
peals of thunder and flashes of lightning. It may be the design of the apostle
to signify, that something similar will take place on the day of the Lord. He
will be surrounded with clouds, in form and magnitude, and dazzling splen
dour, corresponding to the grandeur of the occasien, and the majesty of the
person who will come on them as his magnificent chariot. Among these
clouds his throne will be erected. It is called in Scripture, a great white
throne ; and, as there will be a real representation to the senses, this may be
understood to signify the appearance of a seat, on which he will sit, as human
judges do, when causes are tried before them. He will be elevated above the
assembly, and all eyes will be raised to him, in solemn expectation of his final
award. " The Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice
of the archangel, and with the trump of God."* Three sounds are distinctly
mentioned, but I do not pretend to know what they are. There is probably
an allusion to an important circumstance in the awful appearance of God upon
Sinai : " On the third day, in the morning, there were thunders, and light
nings, and a thick cloud upon the mount, and the voice of the trumpet exceed
ing loud." " And when the voice of the trumpet sounded long, and waxed
louder and louder, Moses spake, and God answered him by a voice ;"§ that is,
Moses said, as we are informed by the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews,
" I exceedingly fear and quake. "|| Those will be terrible sounds, which will
shake the hearts of the guilty with fear, and be a solemn prelude to that more
terrible voice, which will consign them to everlasting woe. I may remark in
* 2 Thess. i. 7—9. * Rev. i. 7. * 1 Thess. iv. 16.
t Exod. xix. 16, 19. J Heb. xii. 21.

128 THE EXALTATION OF CHRIST.
passing, that the opinion of those who affirm, that there is no such creature
as an archangel, and that under this title, our Lord himself is described, is
refuted by this passage, in which the Lord is plainly distinguished from the
archangel ; the most blundering writer meaning to say that, in the descent of
Christ, his own voice will be heard, would not have changed the designation
from Lord to archangel, and thus have led his readers to think of two persons,
instead of one. It is certain that the judge will be attended by the heavenly
host. He will come with his holy angels, perhaps in a visible form, who will
not only increase the pomp and splendour of his appearance, and be spectators
of a scene so interesting to the whole intelligent creation, but will have high
and honourable offices to perform, both to the righteous and the wicked. "The
Son of Man shall send forth his angels, and they shall gather out of his king
dom all things that offend, and them that do iniquity, and shall cast them into
a furnace of fire." These are the tares growing in the field of the world;
but the wheat shall be also gathered into the barn by the same ministry, and
" then shall the righteous shine forth as the sun, in the kingdom of their
Father."* The saints being caught up into the clouds, by the ministry of the angels,
to meet the Lord in the air, and the wicked being left upon the earth, the
judgment will proceed. Into the details we cannot enter, because our informa
tion is very general, and some things are expressed in figurative language.
It is evidently the design of the following passage to teach us, that an exact
inquiry will be made, and the judgment will be conducted with a strict regard
to justice. "And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God; and
the books were open : and another book was opened, which is the book of
life : and the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the
books, according to their works."* No person can suppose that books will
be literally used on this occasion. The books, therefore, seem to signify the
different laws under which men have been placed, and by which justice
requires that they should be tried : and the correctness of this idea may be
inferred from the statement, that they will be "judged out of the books,
according to their works " importing that there will be a comparison of their
actions with a standard, and that the sentence will be founded upon the result.
First, Those who were not favoured with divine revelation, will be judged
by the law of nature, or the law originally given to man as the rule of his con
duct. Some portion of this law has been preserved among the Gentiles, partly
by reason and partly by tradition ; and although the traces of it are in some
instances obliterated, and in others obscured, yet so much remains as to ren
der them accountable beings, and to be the foundation of a judicial trial. Men
have not lost all sense of justice, of truth, of humanity, of the duties arising
from the various relations which they bear to one another. The Apostle Paul
refers to their knowledge of morality, in these words : " When the Gentiles
which have not the law," that is, the law in writing as the Jews had, " do by
nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law
unto themselves : Which show the work of the law written in their hearts,
their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the meanwhile accu
sing or else excusing one another."* How far their ignorance will exempt
them from responsibility, is a question of some difficulty, which is rashly de
cided when ignorance is pronounced to be a complete excuse. If the ancient
Gentiles become so vain in their imaginations as to worship the creature in
stead of the Creator, and so blind in moral distinctions as to account gross
sensuality no crime, and to practise unnatural lusts without a blush, does it
follow that their idolatry and abandoned profligacy were not sins ? To this
• Matt. xiii. 41, 43. * Rev. xx. 12. * Rom. ii. 14, 15.

HIS JUDGING THE WORLD. 129
conclusion the plea set up by some men in behalf of ignorance would lead
us, but it receives no countenance from Scripture, which speaks of the conduct
of those Gentiles in the strongest terms of reprobation. Ignorance may pro
cure an alleviation of punishment, but unless absolutely invincible will not en
title any man to exemption from it. I have no doubt, however, that if we
should fix the standard for the Gentiles by what they actually knew, not one
of them would escape condemnation ; not even their most celebrated teachers
of morality, who were accused in their own time of indulging the vices against
which they loudly declaimed. " As many as have sinned without law, shall
also perish without law."*
Secondly, The Jews will be judged by the law of Moses and the prophets,
which placed them in much more favourable circumstances than the Gentiles,
for the knowledge of their duty ; and vain will be their boast of the law, if
they are at last found to be transgressors. " As many as have sinned in the
law, shall be judged by the law."t They are the servants who knew their
master's will ; and if they neglected to do it, they " shall be beaten with many
stripes." Thirdly, Christians in general will be judged by the Scriptures of the Old
and New Testament, and will be subjected to a heavier doom than either
Heathens or Jews, in consequence of their superior privileges. The igno
rance of individuals will not excuse them, because they might have known
their duty in all its details ; and equally unavailing will be the usual pleas of
the infirmity of human nature, and the strength of temptation. In revelation
there is every enforcement of duty which is fitted to operate upon the reason
and conscience of intelligent beings ; and the means are provided by which
the guilty may obtain the favour of God, and the weak may be enabled to per
form acceptable service. " This is the condemnation, that light is come into
the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were
evil."* Lastly, The saints will be judged out of the book of life, which some un
derstand to be the decree of God appointing them to salvation ; but it seems
rather to be the gospel, or the law of faith, which says, " He that believeth
shall be saved, and he that believeth not shall be damned."§ On comparing
their exercise and conduct with this law, it will be found that they are
believers, and consequently that they have a claim to the glorious recompense
promised to faith. Their title will be made manifest by their works, for ac
cording to their works all the dead will be judged. They will be produced
as evidences of the genuineness of their faith ; and it is on this ground that
our Lord represents himself as saying to them, " I was hungry, and ye gave
me meat." " I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink." I shall afterwards have
an opportunity to consider more fully the judgment as it respects the righteous,
and shall therefore pass over at present some important particulars.
The declaration of the Judge concerning those on his right hand that they
are righteous, and concerning those on his left hand that they are wicked, will
be sufficient to convince all in the immense assembly, that the sentence pro
nounced upon each individual is just. There will be no need of witnesses as
in human courts, because the Judge is omniscient and unerring in his decisions.
There will be a testimony to their rectitude, as it respects himself, in the
bosom of every man. All his past actions will be recalled, and with all their
circumstances will pass before his mind in rapid succession ; his conscience
will then be faithful, and it will re-echo the voice of the Judge, and draw from
every tongue an acknowledgment that he is " a God of knowledge, by whom
actions are weighed."
* Rom. ii. 12. f lb. t John iii. 19. § Mark xvi. 16.
Vol. IL— 17

130 THE EXALTATION OF CHRIST.
When the investigation is finished, and every man is prepared to hear his
doom, the Judge will say to those on his right hand, " Come, ye blessed of
my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the
world ." And to those on his left, " Depart from me, ye cursed, into ever
lasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels."* The execution of these
sentences will take place in an inverse order, if we are to understand the fol
lowing words, as stating the succession of events : " These shall go away
into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into life eternal."t The wicked
will be driven from the place of judgment, by the power of the Judge and the
ministry of angels ; while the saints will witness this awful display of justice
and wrath, and then, in the train of the Redeemer, enter into the mansions of
glory. As I shall have another opportunity to direct your attention to the
state of the righteous in the world to come, I shall reserve till then the re
marks which may be made upon this interesting subject.
The punishment of the wicked will consist, in the first place, in being driven
from the presence of Christ, which will be a far heavier doom than to be ex
cluded for ever from the light of the sun. It is to be deprived of happiness
and of hope. Whatever connexion may have subsisted between him and
them in this world, where many of them were members of his church, he
will hold no more intercourse with them : " I know you not, ye workers of
iniquity." It is represented, in the second place, as punishment by fire ; but
it is doubtful whether this ought to be literally understood. It is certain that
another description of their doom admits of a figurative explanation, — when
it is said that their worm shall never die ; and as the worm and the fire are
Coupled together, the same mode of interpretation may be applied to both.
The design probably is, by this terrible image, to give us an idea of the ex
cruciating nature of the sufferings which they will endure in body and soul.
It is a punishment in which they will be associated with the devil and his
angels. The place was prepared for those apostate spirits, and will be the
common receptacle of them and of wicked men, who joined the standard of
revolt which they raised against the government of God. Throughout the
whole extent of his mighty empire, purity and bliss will prevail, except one
dark and remote region, the prison of the universe, the accursed spot to which
rebels and outcasts are exiled. In a word, it will be everlasting punishment.
By some, its eternity is denied ; and their hypothesis is maintained by a train
of reasoning founded on ignorance and presumption," and by violent perversion
of Scripture. To every man who reads his Bible with attention and submis
sion of mind, their arguing proves nothing but the earnestness of their wishes
to obscure the evidence of truth. They would have it that future punishment
is temporary, and therefore it must be so. The same word is used by our
Lord to express the duration of the life of the righteous and the punishment
of the wicked ; and if the one is eternal, so must be the other.
Time having run its course, eternity will commence. The earth, on which
men were appointed to act the preparatory part, will pass away, or be changed,
for the precise import of the passages which relate to this subject is doubtful.
This chosen theatre of the moral administration of God towards the human
race, seems to be no longer wanted, when all his designs are accomplished.
The event is announced in terms suitable to its grandeur, which awaken in the
mind an indistinct but awful idea of a tremendous display of almighty power.
" The day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night ; in the which the
heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with
fervent heat, the earth also, and the works that are therein, shall be burnt
up."* The impression which the breaking up of the present system should
• Matt xxv. 34, 41. -\Tb. 46. * 2 Pet. iii. 10.

THE KINGDOM OF CHRIST. 131
make upon us, is at the same time pointed out, and a prospect is opened to us
of a new order of things, of a regenerated system, of an earth which will
never be polluted by sin, and of heavens whose brightness no clouds will ob
scure, and whose serenity no storms will disturb. " Seeing then that all
these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all
holy conversation and godliness ; looking for and hasting unto the coming of
the day of God, wherein the heavens, being on fire shall be dissolved, and the
elements shall melt with fervent heat ? Nevertheless we, according to his pro
mise, look for new heavens and a new earth wherein dwelleth righteousness."*
" The angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation,
he hath reserved in everlasting chains, under darkness, unto the judgment of
the great day."t I have said nothing respecting them, because the Scripture
has furnished us with no details. They will then be deprived of their present
liberty, and shut up for ever in Tartarus. Their punishment will be aug
mented, and the end of the world is the time of torment, to which they now
look forward with dread. " Art thou come to torment us before the time ?"*

LECTURE LXIV.
THE KINGDOM OF CHRIST.
The Kingdom conferred on the Mediator — Distinguished from Christ's natural Kingdom — In
what Nature he administers its Affairs — Its Universality — View of it in Reference to the
Church — Inquiry into the Duration of the mediatorial Kingdom and Office.
Having seen that our Lord, after his resurrection, ascended to heaven, and
sat down at the right hand of God, let us inquire into the nature of the king
dom which was conferred upon him. Before he left the world, he said to his
disciples, " All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. "§ David thus
addressed him, by the spirit of prophecy, " Thy throne, O God, is for ever
and ever : the sceptre of thy kingdom is a right sceptre. Thou lovest right
eousness, and hatest wickedness : therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee
with the oil of gladness above thy fellows. "|| His kingdom is expressly men
tioned in this passage ; and it is described by the usual ensigns of royalty — a
throne, on which the Monarch sits, and a sceptre, which he holds in his hand
as an emblem of authority. The design of the sacred writer in using these
figures — for in the present case the words cannot be literally understood — is
to lead our thoughts to the thing signified by them, the Sovereign dominion of
Christ. It is his mediatorial kingdom of which I am at present speaking, or the
kingdom which belongs to him, considered not simply as the Son of God, but
as mediator. Upon due attention to the words already quoted, and others of
a similar import, it appears to be a kingdom given to him, a kingdom to which
he was anointed, a kingdom held by gift and delegation from God his God, or
the Father, who engaged in the eternal covenant to reward his obedience with
the empire ofthe Universe. As the Son of God, he does not reign by gift or
delegation, but by original right ; for, being the Creator of all things, he is by
necessary consequence their Governor, possessing absolute authority over his
* 2 Pet. iii. 11—13. * Jude 6. * Matt. viii. 29. § Matt xxviii. 1.
» Ps. xiv. 6, 7.

132 THE KINGDOM OF CHRIST.
own works, a power to continue, to change, to annihilate them according to
his pleasure, and for the manifestation of his glory. Creatures are essentially
dependent upon him who made them, for the act of creation gave them being,
but did not render them self-existent ; and this truth will be evident whether
we consider them as inanimate, or as endowed with life and activity. As mat
ter is known from experience to be inert, incapable of changing its state, the
movements and arrangements which we observe in the material system, must
be attributed to an external cause, namely, the power of its Author. Living
beings, and particularly men, who are possessed of understanding and will,
often act capriciously and perversely, so that no steady plan could be pursued,
no design worthy of his Maker could be accomplished, if he did not constantly
interpose to restrain them within certain bounds, and to overrule their actions
to an end very different from that which they contemplate. " He doeth ac
cording to his will in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the
earth."* " He maketh the wrath of man to praise him, and the remainder
of it he restraineth."* Such is the natural government of the Son of God over
the works of his hands, visible and invisible, on earth and in heaven.
His mediatorial kingdom is not different in respect, if I may speak so, of
its territory and its subjects. When we say that he received a kingdom from
the Father, we do not compare him to an earthly monarch, who, reigning over
one country by original right, acquires dominion over another by inheritance
or by conquest. A new kingdom in this sense was impossible ; for where
should it have been found, since already every region of space acknowledged
his sway ? In order to prevent confusion of ideas, and to avoid perplexing
ourselves with the inquiry, how Jesus Christ could receive a kingdom, if he
was from the beginning Lord of all, we have only to consider his mediatorial
kingdom as being his original kingdom, invested with a new form, wearing a
new aspect, administered for a new end. The proper view of the subject is this:
that our Saviour being, as — mediator, the servant of the Father, was authorised
by him to conduct, in siibservience to the design of his office, the affairs of the
universe, which had always been under his direction. Strictly, his investiture
with a kingdom was his investiture with a right to exert the power which he had
always possessed, for a specific purpose, namely, the salvation of the church;
and it may be imperfectly illustrated by supposing a son, who was conjoined
with his father in the kingdom, to begin by his consent a new system of adminis
tration, with a view to the good of his subjects. In this case his power would
not be augmented, but it would be exerted in a different series of operations. In
consequence of his advancement to this kingdom, the mediator makes all things
directly or indirectly, by a more remote or a nearer influence, work together
for the establishment, the trial, the purification, the increase, the final triumph
and perfection of that select society, which he redeemed with his blood, and
which is placed under his immediate care. He is "head over all things to
the church which is his body."* Hence we perceive that they err, who con
fine his mediatorial kingdom to the church, not considering that, while it is
the chief object of his attention, the whole system of things is so managed as
to be subservient to its interests ; in the same way as, by the constitution of
nature, the earth, with its mountains and valleys, its springs and rivers, and
various productions, was designed to minister to man. " All things are yours:
whether Paul or Apollos, or Cephas, or the world, or life, or death, or things
present, or things to come ; all are yours, and ye are Christ's, and Christ is
God's.* In consequence of this constitution, the course of events is changed, not
sensibly, but in respect of the influence which they exert, and the point in
• Dan. iv. 35. * Ps. Iixvi. 10. * Eph. i. 22, 23. § 1 Cor. iii 21—23.

THE KINGDOM OF CHRIST. 133
which they will terminate. While the providence of our exalted Redeemer
extends its vigilance and care to every being and every occurrence, there is
one design which is contemplated and pursued amidst the ever-varying scenes
of the world. There is a plan within a plan ; and that which is least consi
dered, and by many is entirely overlooked, is first in his intention, and will
be most glorious in its completion. When this plan is finished, the compli
cated machinery by which it was carried on will be demolished ; the succes
sion of generations will stop ; the frame of society will be dissolved ; and the
heavens and the earth which now are, will be annihilated or changed. Jesus
Christ reigns as the King of his church ; and that he may afford all the pro
tection and advantage to his people which they need and expect, he is also
King of the world. Empires rise and fall, individuals are born and die, the
Gospel visits one country and retires from another, under his superintendence
and agency. Angels descend from their bright abodes to minister to the heirs
of salvation, and grace falls gently like the dew upon the souls of his people,
to prepare them for a more perfect state. As a King, he distributes royal
gifts : " Therefore, being by the right hand of God exalted, and having
received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this
which ye now see and hear."* To his kingdom, as it respects the church,
your attention will be afterwards more particularly directed.
The mediatorial kingdom is administered by our incarnate Redeemer. This
is a view of the subject, which demands particular attention. The kingdom
is administered by Jesus Christ, considered not simply as a divine person, but
as a divine person united to human nature, which shares in the dignity and
glory of his state of exaltation. Human nature was the organ by which he
manifested his love to our race. Having assumed it, he humbled himself, en
dured the contradiction of sinners and the evils of life, and submitted to the
ignominious death of the cross. May we not conceive that our nature is the
organ, by which he manifests the glory which the Father has conferred upon
him, as the reward of his voluntary and meritorious sufferings ? Let me not
be understood to insinuate, that it is now endowed with divine perfections. I
know that, as it is a created nature, its powers must always be comparatively
limited, although enlarged beyond calculation, so as to leave the loftiest angel
at an inconceivable distance. It is in human nature that he is contemplated
and acknowledged by angels and men in heaven, as the Lord of all worlds.
In the symbolical descriptions of his exaltation, he appears as " a lamb that
had been slain," that is, in his assumed nature, which alone was capable of
suffering and dying, and is hailed by- the voices of ten thousand times ten
thousand around the throne, and by a chorus of praise from every part of the
creation. According to the Psalmist, it is man whom God " has crowned with
glory and honour:" it is man whom he has " set over the works of his hands ;"
it is under the feet of man that he has put the " fowl of the air and the fish of
the sea, and whatsoever passeth through the paths of the seas."* From the
commentary of an apostle, we learn, that these things are spoken of pur
Saviour.* It is by man that the last and solemn act of the divine government
will be performed, when the millions of mankind shall be assembled before
the tribunal, and judged according to their works. " As the Father hath life
in himself, so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself; and hath given
him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of man. Marvel
not at this ; for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in their graves
shall hear his voice, and shall come forth ; they that have done good, unto the
resurrection of life ; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of
damnation. "§
• Acts ii. 33. * Ps, viii. 4. $ Heb. ii. 6. § John v. 26—29.
M

134 THE KINGDOM OF CHRIST.
Revelation unfolds to our wondering eyes, a view of tho state of the universe
altogether new. The conclusion to which reason conducts us, is, that He who
created all things, upholds them by his power, and guides them by his wis
dom. This conclusion is not contradicted, but rather is confirmed by the
Scriptures, which throw new light upon this as well as other truths which
were formerly known, and extricate it from the obscurity and perplexity in
which it was involved by the speculations of science falsely so called. We
still say that men and angels, beings visible and invisible, animate and inani
mate, are sustained by the almighty arm which gave them existence, and are
subject to its controul. But instructed in the personal distinctions of the
godhead, which unaided reason could not have discovered, we learn that the
administration of universal nature is the peculiar province of Him, who, on
the ground of a mysterious relation, is called the Son ; and that he exercises
this high office in human nature, which, by an act equally mysterious, he has
made his own. To this wonderful fact we reverently give our assent ; but
perhaps it is not so often, and so distinctly present to our minds as it ought to
be, when its importance is considered ; and we are apt to forget, when we are
surveying the diversified scenes of creation, that every movement is effected
by him who died upon the cross, as a sacrifice for our sins. What an interest
ing thought, that heaven and earth are obedient to the voice of one who is
bone of our bone, and flesh of our flesh, and who retains amidst his glory the
feelings of a friend and brother ! What honour has God conferred upon our
nature, by setting it far above all principalities, and power, and might, and
dominion, and every name that is named, both in this world and that which
is to come. It was this instance of the divine goodness, which excited the
admiration and gratitude of the holy Psalmist, when, contemplating 'the
heavens, he burst out into this devout exclamation, " What is man, that thou
art mindful of him, and the Son of man that thou visitest him ?"* This is the
true system of the universe, full of consolation and hope to believers, although
philosophers may be ignorant of it, or may treat it with scorn. " The Lord
reigneth, let the earth rejoice ; let the multitude of the isles be glad thereof.
Clouds and darkness are round about him ; righteousness and judgment are
the habitation of his throne."*
I have already said, that the mediatorial kingdom of Christ is a gift of the
Father, and properly ought to be considered as the recompense of his humi
liation and sufferings. This connexion is stated in the following passage,
which at the same time gives a sublime view of the exalted state of our Re
deemer, and shows the unlimited extent of his dominions. " Let this mind he
in you, which was also in Christ Jesus : who being in the form of God,
thought it not robbery to be. equal with God ; but made himself of no reputa
tion, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness
of men : And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and be
came obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. Wherefore God also
hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which' is above every name ;
that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and
things in earth, and things under the earth ; and that every tongue should con
fess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father."* It appears
from this and other passages, that nothing is exempt from his authority. He
gives law to matter, and to the irrational tribes ; he commands the armies of
heaven ; he claims the inhabitants of the earth as his subjects ; he rules over
the spirits of darkness ; he is the Lord of the dead and of the living. But it
is not necessary to our present purpose to take a minute survey of his mediato
rial kingdom in all its extent. Let us view it in relation to the church, which
* Ps. viii. 4. f Ps- xcvii. h 2. t Phil. ii. 5—11.

THE KINGDOM OF CHRIST. 133
is the peculiar object of his care, and for the sake of which all power in
heaven and on earth was given to him. The proper object of his mediatorial
kingdom is the church, although it embraces many other things ; the world
engages his attention no farther than it is subservient to the present good and
final salvation of the church : " Yet have I set my King upon my holy hill
of Zion."*
I remark,1 in the first place, That, having ascended to heaven, and sat down
at the right hand of the Father, he founded the church by the ministry of his
apostles. During his personal ministry, he announced that the kingdom of
heaven was at hand. The disciples, imbued with Jewish prejudices, asked,
after his resurrection, "Wilt thou at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?"*
dreaming of a temporal monarchy. It commenced on the day of Pentecost,
when he poured out the Holy Ghost upon his disciples, to qualify them for
the work of preaching the gospel, and erecting the church. Peter, referring
to what they had witnessed, called upon the Jews to consider it as a proof of
the great authority with which our Redeemer was invested : " He heing by
the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise
of the Holy Ghost, hath shed forth this which ye now see and hear. There
fore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same
Jesus whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ."* Having vanquished
on the cross the god of this world, he proceeded to rescue from his power
unhappy men whom he had long held in bondage, and to make them the sub
jects of his own kingdom. The difficulties with which the enterprise of the
apostles was attended, were many and formidable ; sufficient, it might have
been thought, to render their endeavours abortive. There never was an under
taking, the failure of which might have been more confidently predicted. Were
twelve fishermen to convert the world to a religion repugnant to their former
notions, and habits, and tastes, and to unite the most hostile sects in one
society of love ? What folly in uneducated men to make an attempt which
would have been too arduous for the learned and the eloquent ! Yet they did
succeed ; and Christianity obtained such an interest in the minds and affections
of thousands, as paved the way for its subsequent diffusion over a considerable
part of the earth. Jews and Gentiles were brought together in holy fellowship ;
and a community of faith, and worship, and interest, was established among
men of different countries and languages. The design of employing instru
ments so inadequate, in respect of natural talents and accomplishments, was
to illustrate the power of Jesus Christ, and to show that he is the author of
the second as well as of the first creation. " The Lord shall send the rod of
thy strength out of Zion : rule thou in the midst of thine enemies. Thy people
shall be willing in the day of thy power."§ The first act of royal authority
which he performed after ascending his throne, was to establish his kingdom
upon earth ; and the means corresponded to its nature. It is a spiritual king
dom ; and was not erected by force of arms, but by the persuasive influence
of the truth, and the invisible operations of grace. " He shall come down as
rain on the mown grass, and as showers that water the earth."|| The kingdom
of heaven came not with observation, with noise and external pomp ; but its
progress was silent and gradual, and was illustrated by the apt similitude of
seed cast into the ground, which springs and grows up, a man knows not how.
On the day of Pentecost, a train of events commenced, which will ultimately
realize the vision and the prophecy. A stone, cut out without hands, brake in
pieces the image which Nebuchadnezzar saw ; and it became a great mountain,
and filled the whole earth. This is the interpretation : — " In the days of these
kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed :
* Ps. ii. 6. * Acts i. 6. * Ib. ii. 33—36. § Ps. ex. 2. J Ib. lxxii. 6

136 THE KINGDOM OF CHRIST.
and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces
and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever."*
In the second place, He prescribed the form and order of his church, enact
ing laws and ordinances to be observed in it, and claiming absolute authority
over the souls and consciences of the members. Before he ascended to
heaven — for even then he possessed regal power, although he had not been
formally invested with it — he appointed baptism and the sacred supper, and
commanded the Gospel to be preached ; and afterwards he enabled the apos
tles, by the spirit of wisdom, to arrange all the parts of the system. The
church is a voluntary society in this sense, that no person is compelled by
force to enter into it, and he only is a genuine member who has joined it from
conviction and choice ; but there is this important difference between it and
other voluntary societies, that the members have no right to settle the terms
of their union, but must implicitly submit to its original constitution. Strictly
human legislation has no place here ; the proper province of the rulers is to
execute the laws already made by the sovereign ; their decrees possess only
subordinate authority, and are not binding, except as they are declarative of
his will. "One is our Master, even Christ." "He is thy Lord, and wor
ship thou him."* The duty of the church is to submit to his authority; and
it is not performed unless his word be received as the only rule of faith
and practice, and every thing which is done in religion be exactly conform
able to his commands. In the world, his law may be disregarded and violated;
but it should be held sacred in the church, which is his kingdom. In the
exercise of his authority, he abrogated the law of Moses,' which had been
binding for fifteen hundred years, and was fondly supposed by the Jews to be
of perpetual obligation. He published a new and spiritual law, which will
continue in force till the end of time ; he removed the priests and Levites
from the altar, and established in their room apostles, prophets, evangelists,
pastors, and teachers ; he changed the nature of the society, by associating
the Gentiles with the Jews ; he made all places sacred as well as Jerusalem,
and ordained that, from the rising to the setting of the sun, incense should be
offered to his name, and a pure offering. As soon as he had announced to
his disciples that all power was given to him in heaven and in earth, he said,
" Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the
Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost ; teaching them to observe
all things whatsoever I have commanded you : and, lo, I am with you alway,
even unto the end of the world."*
The authority of Jesus Christ over the church, is exclusive ofthe authority
of man. Councils may be assembled to declare the truth, and condemn here
sies, but they can make no new article of faith ; they may regulate subordi
nate matters, the determination of which lies within the sphere of experience
and prudence ; but they can neither increase nor diminish the sum of our
moral obligations. The supremacy claimed by the Pope, is an invasion of
the royal prerogative of Christ, although he calls himself his vicar or substi
tute. He has intruded into this office, and assumes a paramount power;
pretending to forgive sins, changing the ordinances, and repealing the laws of
heaven, and extending his jurisdiction over the visible and the invisible world.
" He exalts himself above all that is called God, and is worshipped ; and, as
God, he sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God." Hence,
instead of being the vicar of Christ, he is justly called Antichrist, his rival
and antagonist, who has usurped dominion over the church, and supplanted
the authority of its only lawful head by his own. The connexion between
church and state has been generally, and, as some think, uniformly productive
*Dan. ii. 44. * Matt, xxiii. 8. Ps. xiv, 11. * Matt xxviii. 19, 20.

THE KINGDOM OF CHRIST. 137
of the same evil, in a greater or a less degree. The alliance is formed on this
principle, that the church shall yield something in return for the favour and
protection of the state. Without entering upon the question respecting the
lawfulness of civil establishments, I content myself with remarking, that, if
an earthly sovereign is constituted head of the church, and its affairs are con
ducted according to acts of parliament, a foreign power is admitted, which, to
a certain extent, secularizes his kingdom, and intrenches upon his paramount
authority. The form of the church, under the present dispensation, is not delineated
with the same minuteness which we observe in the law of Moses. There
every thing is prescribed, the place, and the times, and the ministers of wor
ship, the oblations to be presented, and the rites to be performed in public and
in private ; nothing is left to human discretion. The New Testament furnishes
only an outline, or general principles deduced from occasional hints, and the
example of the primitive times. We are fully satisfied with the constitution of
our own church, as agreeable to the Scriptural model ; but, finding that wise
and good men adopt different views, and are equally confident that they are
conformable to the apostolical standard, we should beware of contending about
the subject with the vehemence and bitterness of zeal, which it has too often
elicited ; and should cultivate charitable sentiments towards those who hold
the same faith, although they do not, in all things, walk according to the same
rule. Above all, let us guard against the narrow, unchristian idea, that we
alone are the true church, and consequently, that the kingdom of Christ is
confined to our little society. All belong to it, who sincerely acknowledge
him as their Lord; and are willing to be guided by his word ; mistakes about
inferior points, and occasional deviations, through ignorance, from the rule
which he has prescribed, will not hinder them from being owned as faithful
subjects. The kingdom of Christ is catholic. As it is universal by right, so
it comprehends within its boundaries all wjho believe and obey the truth, how
ever diversified by external profession. Some of them may be found even in
that pretended church, which is in reality a synagogue of Satan, although it
is not easy to conceive how they can retain their allegiance to Christ within
the dominions of his adversary ; but it is supposed that a remnant will be left
there to the last ; for immediately before the fall of the mystical Babylon, this
warning is given: " Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of
her sins, and that ye receive hot of her plagues ; for her sins have reached
unto heaven, and God hath remembered her iniquities."*
In the third place, He upholds the church throughout all generations, by a
constant succession of members. The great promise of eternal life, which he
has made to his followers, will be performed in another world ; their interest
in his salvation secures them against the sting of death, but not against death
itself; each in his order, when he has completed his term of obedience and trial,
lies down in the grave. When we observe the havock which is daily made
among the ranks of his disciples, and see those, who professed the truth, and
evinced their sincerity by the stedfastness of their faith and the devoted zeal
with which they served him, removed, one after another, into the house of
silence, where there is no work, or wisdom, or device, we might be tempted
to prognosticate the most gloomy result ; and we naturally exclaim, " Help,
Lord, for the godly man ceaseth ; for the faithful fail from among the children
of men." But, while the individuals perish, the race remains : genus immor-
tale manet. "Instead of the fathers, he takes the children ;" the places of
those who have fallen, are supplied by their own families, and more frequently
by strangers ; and thus his promise is fulfilled, that the gates of hell, of M»t,
* Rev. xviii. 4, 5.
Voi "

138 THE KINGDOM OF CHRIST.
the invisible world, into which the souls of the departed enter, and the grave,
which may be considered as its portal, shall not prevail against the church.
In falfilling this promise, several acts of his royal authority and power are
exerted. Having received from his Father, after his ascension, the gifts of
the Spirit, he bestows them upon those persons whom he is pleased to employ,
to qualify them for preaching the Gospel, which is the grand means of gather-
ing subjects into his kingdom of grace; or, in the words of an apostle, "for
the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of
the body of Christ ; till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the
knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the
stature of the fulness of Christ."* Papists, and- some Protestants, boast of
the regular succession of their clergy from the apostles ; but the latter must
acknowledge that, as the Church of Rome was the medium of communication,
it is a very corrupt channel in which power has been conveyed to them.
This we know, that, in every age, men have been found, who willingly con
secrated themselves to his service, and their labours have been crowned with
a blessing. Notwithstanding the opposition which it may encounter, he pre
serves the Gospel in a particular place, till all the elect there are converted;
and he sends it into any country, where he has designs of mercy to accom
plish, in spite of the efforts of men and devils to exclude it. The power of
Rome, which had conquered the world, could not hinder the propagation and
triumph of the truth ; and the obstacles to its entrance, or its progress, in India,
in China, in Turkey, will give way when the time to favour those regions is
come. The words of God respecting the temple, are equally applicable to the
opposition with which the spiritual kingdom of the Messiah has to contend:
" Who art thou, 0 great mountain ? before Zerubbabel thou shalt become a
plain : and he shall bring forth the head-stone thereof with shoutings, crying,
Grace, grace unto it."t He exerts a secret power upon the heart, which the
strongest prejudices and the most inveterate habits of sin are notable to resist.
As the kingdom of Christ is not of this world, his servants do not fight for
him; and it is only in a figure that' the church is represented as "terrible,
like an army with banners." Our religion forbids the employment of exter
nal force in its propagation and defence, and leaves it to Antichrist, who, in
the want of arguments, has recourse to the sword, and terrifies into compli
ance those whom he has failed to persuade. The weapons of our warfare are
not carnal, but they are not therefore ineffectual. They are mighty, through
God, to pull down the strongholds of sin, to cast down lofty imaginations, and
to bring every thought into captivity to Christ. There is no man who may
not become a subject of this kingdom. However remote he may now be from
this character, however hostile may be his sentiments and feelings, he may
undergo a change as sudden and wonderful as that of Paul, who, from being
a persecutor, became an apostle, and a preacher of the faith which once he
destroyed. The grace of our exalted Redeemer operates silently, but surely;
it always gains its end; and there are daily added to the church such as shall
be saved. "All they that be fat upon earth, shall eat and worship: all they
that go down to the dust shall bow before him ; and none can keep alive his
own soul. A seed shall serve him ; it shall be accounted to the Lord for a
generation. They shall come, and shall declare his righteousness unto a peo
ple that shall be born, that he hath done this."*
In the fourth place, He defends the church against her enemies. These
may be considered as invisible and visible. By the former, we mean the
spirits of darkness, who have a kingdom of their own to maintain, the over
throw of which will be the sure consequence of the establishment of the king-
* Eph. iv. 12, 13. *Zech. iv. 7. * Ps. xxii. 29— 31.

THE KINGDOM OF CHRIST. 139
dom of Christ. Besides the efforts which they make, by the instrumentality
of men who too readily concur with them, they labour immediately to accom
plish their designs, by temptations so contrived as to disquiet the faith of
Christians, and allure them into the paths of sin. How they are fitted for the
conflict, and by what means, although the struggle be severe and injuries be
sometimes sustained, they prove ultimately victorious, we learn from the fol
lowing exhortation ; " Take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye may
be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all, to stand. Stand
therefore, having your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breast
plate of righteousness ; and your feet shod with the preparation of the gospel
of peace ; above all, taking the shield of faith, wherewith ye shall be able to
quench all the fiery darts of the wicked. And take the helmet of salvation,
and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God."* The truth, couched
under this figurative language, is, that grace is communicated to believers, by
which, if skilfully and actively employed, they shall render abortive the at
tempts of their spiritual adversaries. The power by which they conquer, is
not their own, but the power of Jesus Christ, and to him the glory of the
victory is due. The visible enemies of the Church are ungodly men, and
especially such of them as are possessed of secular authority, or can boast ot
talents and learning, who, in many instances, have united to arrest the progress
of the truth by the terrors of the sword, and to bring it into discredit by
argument, misrepresentation, and ridicule. Hitherto they have not prevailed ;
and experience shows us, as well as the word of God, that we have nothing to
fear from the greatest efforts which they may yet make. The repeated perse
cutions to which the Church was subjected in the first three centuries, are re
corded in history. Every thing was done by the combined wisdom and power
of the Roman empire, to crush the rising religion ; and hopes were entertained
and expressed, that the Christian superstition, so it was called, would be ex
tirpated from the earth. But it emerged from the scene of suffering and
blood, with increased stature and renovated strength, still contending with
paganism for the victory ; and the struggle was closed by the conversion of
Constantine, who planted the cross upon the capital of Rome. We have
heard of the dreadful conflict which the church had to sustain with the anti-
christian power, of the cruelties which were inflicted upon the friends of truth,
and the torrents of blood which were shed ; and how the faithful were driven
into obscure retreats, and compelled for a long season to " prophesy in sack
cloth." But at the Reformation, the church rose from her ashes more glorious
than ever. Now, what has protected the feeble ? what has given power to the
faint ? what has enabled the minority to maintain a contest so alarming to flesh
and blood, and in which no human glory would7 be gained ? It was the grace
of Jesus Christ which supported the faith and patience of his followers ; it
was his Providence which counteracted the designs of their enemies, and
marked the boundary beyond which their violence should not pass. " Ye are
of God, little children, and have overcome them ; because greater is he that is
in you, than he that is in the world."t This is the declaration of him who sits
at the right hand of the Father: " No weapon that is formed against thee
shall prosper ; and every tongue that shall rise against thee in judgment, thou
shalt condemn."* The adversaries of Zion have successively fallen, and, if
their memorial has not perished from the earth, their names are branded with
infamy ; but the ehurch has survived the revolutions of empire, and will con
tinue a monument of the power and love of her exalted Head, till he shall
appear in the clouds of heaven, to terminate the warfare, and to receive his
* Eph. vi. 13— 16. fJohniv.4. * Isa. liv. 17.

140 THE KINGDOM OF CHRIST.
people into his eternal kingdom. " He must reign, till all his enemies be put
under his feet."*
Having taken a view of the Mediatorial kingdom of Christ upon earth,
chiefly in its relation to the church, I observe, in the last place, that he reigns
in the kingdom of glory. He is the Lord of the invisible, as well as of the
visible world, and nothing is done in either but according to his will. Heaven
was purchased with his blood, and it is fit that to him should be committed
the uncontrolled disposal of its glories and joys. He ascended to take pos
session of it as the reward due to his obedience and death, and to prepare it
for his followers. Seated upon the throne, he sways the sceptre of universal
dominion, and wears a crown which will never fade away. Upon earth his
right to rule is disputed, and his authority is resisted by men of corrupt minds,
who do not choose to submit their licentious liberty to the restraints of his
law ; but, in heaven, every tongue acknowledges him to be Lord, and every heart
rejoices to obey him. To him it belongs to admit into the kingdom of glory,
or to exclude from it ; for he opens, and no man can shut ; he shuts, and no
man can open. When the saints die, he receives their spirits into the man
sions of rest, and assigns his place to each individual ; for the rank which
they hold, and the degree of felicity which they enjoy, are apportioned by
his wisdom and love. Accordingly, they are represented as prostrating them
selves, and casting down their crowns, in humble acknowledgment that they
hold them as the gifts of his bounty, not as the reward of their personal merit,
or of the services which they performed to him upon earth : " Thou art
worthy, O Lord, to receive glory, and honour, and power."t The angels join
with them in adoration and homage : " Worthy is the Lamb that was slain,
to receive power, and riches, and wisdom, and strength, and honour, and glory,
and blessing."* We know little of the invisible state ; the revelation is partial,
and the notices are obscure ; but we are assured that it is under the adminis
tration of our Saviour, and that its inhabitants are happy under his care. His
glory will not be always concealed. At the destined hour, he will appear in
the clouds, and display his power in pronouncing sentence upon the assembled
human race ; and every knee shall bow before him, and every tongue shall
confess that he is Lord.
There is a passage which is confessedly obscure, and has exercised the
diligence of commentators, upon which, on account of its close connexion
with the present subject, it will be proper to bestow some observations:
" Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God,
even the Father ; when-he shall have put down all rule, and all authority and
power. For he must reign, till he hath put all enemies under his feet. The
last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. And when all things shall be
subdued unto him, then shall the Son also himself be subject unto him that
put all things under him, that God may be all in all."§-
It is evident that nothing in this passage can be understood to import, that
the time will come when the Son, considered as the second Person of the
Trinity, shall be reduced to a state of inferiority to the Father. If he is at
present equal, the equality will ever continue, because it is not founded on
favour or temporary arrangement, but on the possession of the same essence
and the same infinite perfections. Between persons to whom the same nature
belongs, there may be a distinction of order, but there can be no difference of
rank and dignity. In what sense, then, is it said that the1 Son himself shall
De subject to the Father ?
In order to obtain some light upon this point, it is necessary to refer to wha'
• 1 Cor. xv. 25. f Rev. iv. 1 ] . * Ib. v. 12. § 1 Cor. xv. 24—26, 28.

THE KINGDOM OF CHRIST. 141
is said before : " Then cometh the end, when he shall have delivered up the
kingdom to God, even the Father." The words in the one place serve to
explain those in the other ; for what is first called the delivering up of the
kingdom to the Father, is afterwards expressed by the subjection of the Son
to him.
The kingdom which he will deliver up to the Father, is not the kingdom
pertaining to him as a Divine person having an original and indefeasible right
to govern his own works, to reign over his own creation. This dominion is
founded in the relation between him and his creatures, and could be conceived
to cease only by their ceasing to exist. While they continue to be, he cannot
be divested of JnVauthority either by the authority of another, or by his own
voluntary act; not by the authority of another, because he has no superior;
not by his own act, because he could not renounce the essential prerogative of
Godhead. We have seen that there is another kingdom which he possesses by gift,
and which was conferred upon him for a particular purpose, namely, that by
his power he might accomplish the design of his death upon the cross, in the
conversion and final salvation of his people. He rules, if I may speak so, in
the Father's place, and by delegated authority ; and this arrangement is founded
on their mutual counsels for the redemption of the church. To the eye of
faith, guided in its researches into the economy of the universe by the light of
revelation, Jesus Christ appears seated upon the throne, and exercising his
mighty sway over all its provinces.
From this view of the mediatorial kingdom of Christ, it is evident that the
purpose for which it was established was temporary. Hence we perceive
what may be understood to be the meaning of " delivering up the kingdom to
God, even the Father." The kingdom will end when its design is accom
plished ; he will cease to exercise an authority which has no longer an object.
When all the elect are converted by the truth, and being collected into one
body, are presented to the Father a glorious church, not having spot or
wrinkle, or any such thing ; when idolatry, superstition and heresy are over
thrown, and all evil is expelled from the kingdom of God ; when the plans
and efforts of evil spirits are defeated, and they are shut up in their prison,
from which there is no escape ; when death has yielded up his spoils, and laid
his sceptre at the feet of his conqueror ; when the grand assize has been held,
his impartial sentence has pronounced the doom of the human race, and their
everlasting abodes are allotted to the righteous and the ungodly, nothing will
remain to be done by the power with which our Saviour was invested at his
ascension ; and his work being finished, his commission will expire.
On this subject we cannot speak with certainty, and are in great danger of
error, because the event is future, and our information is imperfect. Here
analogy fails, apd the utmost caution is necessary in borrowing an illustration
from human affairs ; but, without insinuating that the two cases are exactly
similar, may we not say that, as a regent or vicegerent of a king, to whom
the royal authority has been intrusted for a time, resigns it at the close, and
the sovereign himself resumes the reins of government ; so our Redeemer,
who now sways the sceptre of the universe, will return his delegated power
to him from whom he received it, and a new order of things will commence,
under which the dependence of men upon the Godhead will be immediate ;
and Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, one in essence, counsel, and operation, will
reign for ever over the inhabitants of heaven. This is the probable meaning
of the words, " Then shall the Son himself be subject unto him that put all
things under him."
It may be objected, that what has been now said concerning the termination
of the mediatorial kingdom of Christ, is contrary to those passages of Scripture

142 THE KINGDOM OF CHRIST.
which represent it as an everlasting kingdom. But, although the objection is
worthy of attention, it is not unanswerable. The terms everlasting and for
ever do not always import absolute eternity, but sometimes signify only a long
duration. The ordinances of the ceremonial law are called " statutes for ever,"
although they have for centuries been abolished, because they were to continue
throughout all the generations of Israel. The kingdom of the Messiah is con
trasted with the kingdoms of men ; and in the book of Daniel, where the epithet
everlasting is applied to it, it is opposed to the four great monarchies of ancient
times, and notice is given that, while they should disappear in succession, it
would survive all civil commotions and political changes, and be commensurate
with the world itself. It will not cease till the frame of nature is dissolved,
and then it will merge in the eternal kingdom of God. The glory of having
once possessed this kingdom, and administered it with wisdom and righteous
ness, will ever remain to him, and will call forth a tribute of praise from the
countless myriads of his subjects.
Perhaps the words of the apostle may be understood to import the termination
not only of the mediatorial kingdom, but of the mediatorial office ; for he says,
that the Son will be subject to the Father, that " God may be all in all ;" that
a new mode of intercourse with the divine nature may commence, and the
communion be immediate and complete.
In the present state, we have not immediate access to the Father; our fel
lowship is carried on through the mediation of the Son. Even after men have
been reconciled to him, the interposition of the third person is necessary, that
their friendship may not be broken by their daily transgressions, and that the
purity of his nature may be unsullied by his intercourse with the frail and
guilty children of the dust. Hence it was necessary, that Jesus Christ should
continue a priest after he had died upon the cross, and should enter into heaven
with his own blood, to make intercession for us. When the present dispen
sation has come to an end, this necessity will no longer exist. The design
of the mediation of Christ, was to bring men back to God, by sacrifice and
intercession. It is accomplished, when pardoned, purified, and translated from
earth to heaven, they are so holy that their Maker can look with unqualified
approbation upon his own work, and, as in the beginning, pronounce it to be
good. May we not, therefore, conceive the mediation to terminate like any
other plan, in the execution of which the intention of the contriver has been
fulfilled ? Why should intercession continue, when there are no sins to be for
given, and no wants to be supplied, and when the objects of redeeming love
are established in a state of perfection beyond the possibility of failure ?
It will still be true, that Jesus Christ did once sustain, and gloriously exe
cute, the high office of mediator between God and man. He will still be the
object of the love, and gratitude, and praise of the saints. He will still shine
as the sun of the celestial world. The millions of the redeemed around the
throne will still be the monuments of his triumph. The exercise of his office
will cease for the most honourable of all reasons, because its end has been
fully gained ; but the glory of it will be for ever celebrated in the songs of
the blessed: " Thou hast redeemed us to God by thy blood."
What has now been said, is proposed solely as a probable opinion ; it would
be presumptuous to speak confidently upon a subject so obscure. There are
some passages of Scripture which seem to militate against the idea of the ter
mination of the mediatorial office of our Saviour. His continued agency in
this character, may be inferred from the declaration, that the Lamb will be the
light of the heavenly city.* But the apparent discrepance -will be removed by
conceding, as we most willingly do, that he will retain all the honours due to
* Rev. xxi. 23.

THE KINGDOM OF CHRIST. U3
him as the person who achieved the redemption of the church ; ana that the
great manifestation of the divine glory which will engage the attention of the
saints, will be that which is made in him as the incarnate Son and servant of
the Father.
Again, it is said, that " the Lamb who is in the midst of the throne shall
feed them, and shall lead them unto living fountains of waters ;"* and hence
it may be inferred, that he will continue the exercise of his office as the me
dium through which the happiness of the saints will be communicated. But
the words admit of an interpretation in perfect unison with our doctrine ; for
the felicity of the world to come will be the exclusive effect of his mediation,
and it will be owing solely to him, that they who were reconciled to God
upon earth, have immediate access to his throne, and know even as they are
known. Once more, it is said of him as mediator, that he ever liveth to make inter
cession.* But the word for ever, as we have already said, does not always
denote eternity ; for the ordinances of the Mosaic dispensation are called
statutes for ever, although they were abolished by the death of Christ. The
passage now quoted may therefore be understood to signify nothing more,
than that his intercession will last till its designs are accomplished. He ever
lives to make intercession, and does not die like the sacrificing and interceding
priests of the law ; as he reigns for ever, or from age to age, and does not,
like earthly princes, descend from the throne and lie down in the grave.
" When this work is finished," says Dr. Owen, " then shall all the media
tory actings of Christ cease for evermore ; for God will then have completely
finished the whole design of his wisdom and grace in the constitution of his
person and offices." He adds, " I would extend this no farther than as to
what concerneth the exercise of Christ's mediatory office with respect to the
church below, and the enemies of it. But there are some things which belong
to the essence of this state which shall continue unto all eternity."* I sub
join the words of Dr. Smith : " When all the designs (of the kingdom of
Christ) are accomplished, the mediatorial system as to all these (its present)
modes of exercise shall cease ; Christ will no longer have to act as a redeemer
and saviour, the number of his elect will have been accomplished, and his
church presented perfect and complete to himself, and to his Divine Father ;
as a faithful ambassador, whose commission is finished, he will honourably
give it back to him who appointed him, and will return to his own personal
station, as the Divine and Eternal Son ; and then will a new order of the
moral universe commence, and the unspeakably vast assemblage of holy crea
tures, delivered and for ever secured from sin and misery, shall possess the
immediate fruition of the Father. In his sovereign love the scheme of me
diatorial redemption originated, and its blessed completion shall be, in the most
sublime and eternally admirable manner, "unto the praise of his glory." God
will be all things in all to those happy beings. "§
* Rev. vii. 17. * Heb. vii. 25. $ Owen on the Person of Christ, chap. xix. xx
§ Smith's Scripture Testimony, Book iv. chap. 4.

144 THE APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION.

LECTURE LXV.
ON THE APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION.
The Application of Redemption: its Necessity, and what it implies — External Means of if.
the Word and Ordinances — Difference between the External and Internal Call of the
Gospel — The latter the work of the Holy Spirit — Proof that Conversion is the Effect of
Divine Grace.
The purchase of salvation was made by Jesus Christ in the character of
high priest, when he paid the price of his precious blood. But although it
was the consequence of this transaction, that the salvation of his people was
certain, yet something farther was necessary to make them actual partakers of
it. Notwithstanding the propitiatory sacrifice of the cross, they come into the
world in a state of guilt and depravity, and often remain in that state for a
considerable time. It might seem to us consonant to justice, that the atone
ment having been made, the benefit of it should be enjoyed by every indivi
dual for whom it was offered, as soon as he is in a capable state ; or that, in
the first moment of his existence, he should be set free from the curse of the
law, and regenerated by the Spirit even in the womb of his mother. We find,
however, that such is not the case ; and in order to account for it, we should
reflect, that God is not bound by our notions of fitness and propriety, which
are often founded on narrow views ; that reasons are manifest to his under
standing, which give rise to a procedure different from what we should have
expected ; that he had an undoubted right, when he purposed the redemption
of mankind, to settle according to his own will the season and order of ils
application ; and that the demands of justice will be fully satisfied, if all the
elect are delivered from condemnation and misery, whether the event take
place at an earlier or a later period. It is enough, that the terms of the cove
nant which was made with Christ are ultimately fulfilled. The grand stipu
lation was, that if " he would make his soul an offering for sin," he should
" see of the travail of his soul and be satisfied ;"* and all the circumstances
relative to the communication of its benefits, were the subject of subordinate
arrangements. The sovereignty of God in the dispensation of grace is dis
played, not only in the selection of the persons, to whom it is exercised without
any reason on their part, and often with a disregard of the grounds of human
preference ; but als& an calling1 souse of them at the first hour, and others not
till the last. With respect to the tinw , nothing that we know of is necessary,
but that they should be called during the course of their life, beyond which
the season of mercy does not extend.
The purchase of redemption by Christ in the character of our Priest, secures
the salvation of his people. But, as they are by nature children of wrath even
as others, they must undergo a change both relative and real ; relative in re
spect of the law, by being acquitted from its charges, and real in respect of
their views and dispositions. In the language of Scripture, " their blind eyes
must be opened, and they must be turned from darkness to light, and from the
power of Satan to God, that they may receive the remission of their sins,
and an inheritance among them that are sanctified through faith which is in
Christ. "t Accordingly, the divine procedure towards them is represented in
* Is. liii. 10, 11. * Acts xxvi. 18.

THE APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION. 145
the following order : " Whom he did predestinate, them he also called ; and
whom he called, them he also justified ;" and these are preliminary steps to
their final salvation : for, " whom he justified, them also he glorified."*
The external means which God employs in the application of redemption,
are his ordinances, and particularly his Word, read and heard. " It is the
power of God unto salvation to every one that believes. "t Some, indeed, have
supposed, that there is a revelation of grace, (which, however, they acknow
ledge to be obscure) in the dispensations of providence. They can only mean,
that there are such appearances in the course of the moral government of God,
as may lead to the conclusion that he is placable, and will pardon sinners who
repent. It is enough to say that, with respect to this revelation, the Scrip
tures are silent, or rather they virtually deny it, while they declare that it is from
themselves alone that we derive authentic information of his gracious designs.
We see his goodness and patience in providence ; but, although thoughtless
men may infer, that he is an easy indulgent Being, and such a one as them
selves, the indications of nature will not relieve from its fears, a mind con
scious of guilt and deeply sensible of demerit. By a person under a conviction
of sin, the anxious question will be asked, " Wherewith shall I come before the
Lord, and bow myself before the Most High God ?"* and ignorant of the effec
tual means of appeasing his wrath, he will be ready to offer his flocks and herds
as an atonement, and even his first-born son, as men have sometimes done in
the madness of despair. If there is a revelation of grace in the dispensations
of providence, the abettors of this opinion may be called upon to produce
instances in which it has been effectual to turn sinners to God. Nothing is
more vain than speculations concerning what may be ; let it be shown that the
thing has actually happened. Where shall we find those converts of natural
light ? Is it among the ancient philosophers who talked of virtue, but did not
practise it ? Is it among modern heathens, who, amidst the dreadful penances
.to which some of them submit for the expiation of their sins, discover gross
ignorance of the character of God, and of the genuine nature and spirit of
religion ?
This opinion has been adopted by a late writer in his New Literal Trans
lation of the Epistles, with this difference, that he traces the notions enter
tained by heathens of the placability of the divine nature, to the source of
revelation. " The heathens in general," says Dr. Macknight, " believed their
deities placable, and, in that persuasion, offered to them propitiatory sacrifices,
and expected to be pardoned and blessed by them even in a future state. But
these hopes they did not derive from the law or light of nature, but from the
promise which God made to the first parents of mankind. For that promise
being handed down by tradition to Noah and his sons, they communicated the
knowledge thereof, together with the use of sacrifices, to all their descendants.
So that the hope of pardon and immortality, which the pious heathen enter
tained, was the very hope which the gospel hath now clearly brought to light,
and was derived from the same source, namely, from divine revelation. "§ It
seems from this statement, that the heathens have the means of salvation with
out the written Word. It may be objected that Paul expressly affirms, that
men are justified by faith, which implies a revelation of the Saviour, and
seems to exclude those who have not been favoured with it ; for he tells us
that it comes by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God. But, fatal as this
objection may be deemed to his hypothesis, this writer removes it with great
ease by a definition of faith contrived for the purpose. " Faith does not con
sist in the belief of particular doctrines, far less in the belief of doctrines which
men never had an opportunity of knowing, but in such an earnest desire to
* Rom. viii. 29, 30. j Ib. i. 16. tMicvi. 6. § Com. on Romans, chap. i. View.
Vol. IL— 19 wr

146 THE APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION.
know and do the will of God, as leads them conscientiously to use such means
as they have for gaining the knowledge of his will, and for doing it when
found. And inasmuch as the influences of the Spirit of God are not confined
to them who enjoy revelation, but are promised in the gracious covenant made
with mankind at the fall to all who are sincere, a heathen by these influences
may attain the faith just now described, and thereby may please God. For
faith is more a work of the heart than of the understanding. So that, although
the persons to whom revelation is denied, may not have the same objects of
belief with those who enjoy revelation, they may have the same spirit of
faith."* Nothing is wanting to this scheme but evidence of its truth, proof
that the influences of the Spirit are communicated to heathens, and that faith
consists in a sincere desire to know, and a disposition to do, the will of God.
Such proof this celebrated theologian has neglected to give. He asserts these
things, and then reasons from them, as if they were self-evident, or had been
established by a prior demonstration. It is curious to observe, how, having
laid down his arbitrary definition of faith, he proceeds with as much confidence
as if it were an axiom, to explain by it the Epistle to the Romans, and other
passages in the writings of Paul. If you peruse his works with attention,
you will find many instances of gratuitous assumption ; and indeed there is
hardly any author who more freely deals out his ipse dixit as argument both
in doctrine and in criticism, or who is more remarkable for wresting and mis
interpreting the Scriptures. The present hypothesis is a baseless fabric; it
is false in all its parts, and is such a barefaced contradiction of the doctrine of
the Apostle, as is not surpassed by the most perverse commentary upon his
writings. While I deny, that there is any revelation of grace but in the Scriptures,
and any external means of salvation but the word and the ordinances of the
Christian religion, I admit, that the dispensations of providence are subservient
to God's merciful designs. They can be considered, however, only as subor
dinate means, operating in concurrence with the word, and having no efficacy
without it. By calamities, and dangers, and the prospect of death, men may
be awakened to a concern for their souls ; but they will not return to God,
and obtain the well-grounded hope of future happiness, till their minds are
directed to the Scriptures, in which pardon is promised to believers. " Faith
cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God."* " The grace of faith,"
says our Confession, " whereby the elect are enabled to believe to the saving
of their souls, is the work of the Spirit of Christ in their hearts, and is ordi
narily wrought by the ministry of the word ; by which also, and by the ad
ministration of the sacraments, and prayer, it is increased and strengthened. "\
The Word of God consists of two principal parts, the Law and the Gospel,
which are both employed in the conversion of sinners. " By the law is the
knowledge of sin."§ When it is applied to the conscience, it shows the sin
ner his depravity and guilt, makes him sensible of his danger while he 'is
under its curse, and convinces him of his utter inability to relieve himself,
because he is incapable of obeying its precepts, and of satisfying for his mani
fold violations of them. These discoveries create an earnest desire for deliver
ance from the wretchedness of his natural state, and prepare him to accept it
when offered to him ; but they are calculated in themselves to drive him to
despair, and would have this effect if they were alone. But the Gospel comes
with its proclamation of mercy, exhibits the Saviour in his fulness of merit
and grace, makes a free offer of his salvation to sinners, and calls upon every
man to accept the gift of God with gratitude, and in the exercise of faith. It
• Com. on Romans, chap. ii. View. * Rom. x. 17. i Conf. xiv. 1.
§ Rom. iii. 20.

THE APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION. 147
is evident that it is the Gospel which is properly the instrument of conversion,
and that the law is only subsidiary, by producing that state of mind in which
salvation becomes desirable, and without which it will be regarded with in
difference, and the preference given to the transitory interests of the present
life. It is by the Gospel that true penitence is awakened, which implies not
only the fear of wrath, but the hatred of sin arising from the love of God.
The mind is enlightened, the heart is changed, and all those exercises which
are called the graces of the Spirit, as faith, and love, and hope, and submission,
and a desire for perfection, are excited by its doctrines and promises.
God externally calls men by his word, which is addressed to persons of
every nation, of every condition, and of every character. " Unto you, O men,
I call ; and my voice is to the sons of men." " Go into all the world, and
preach the Gospel to every creature."* It has been affirmed, indeed, that all
men are not the objects' of this call, but that it is confined to sensible sinners ;
by whom are meant persons who have been awakened, and are serious in
their desire for salvation. So far, indeed, has this idea been carried, that
some have denied that the Gospel should be preached to sinners, as such, in
the common acceptation of the word. They will preach it before them, but
not to them ; that is, they will not offer salvation to them, and invite them
to believe. The plainest points of theology have been made the subjects of
controversy and misrepresentation. This is one of the refinements of ortho
doxy, and has been deduced from high notions respecting the decrees ; but it
happens to be in direct opposition to many passages of Scripture, and particu
larly to the commission of Christ to the apostles, which was quoted above.
I do not approve of the method of some divines, who have endeavoured to
explain away those passages of Scripture in which sensible sinners are sup
posed to be addressed, and to show that the characters by which they are
described are applicable to sinners in general. It is the way of disputants,
who are more zealous than wise, to make every thing bend to their favourite
opinion. Surely we may grant, that awakened sinners are sometimes the ob
jects of the invitations of Scripture, as it would be surprising indeed if no
particular notice were taken of them ; and, at the same time, we 'may believe
that the offer of salvation is universal. It was a mixed congregation, or rather
a congregation composed entirely of unbelievers, (for they were all Jews and
proselytes, who then for the first time heard the Gospel,) whom Paul addressed
in the following words : — "'Be it known unto you, men and brethren, that
through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins."* After the
cure of the lame man in the temple, Peter did not inquire whether those who
crowded around him were the elect, or sensible sinners, but said, without
hesitation, to the whole multitude, " Repent ye, and be converted, that your
sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the
presence of the Lord."* To preach the Gospel, is to proclaim pardon through'
Jesus Christ, to every man who shall believe ; and as this is the sense in
which it is commonly understood among us, so it will appear, I am persuaded,
to every unprejudiced person, to be the Scriptural meaning of it. " Whoso
ever will, let him come, and take of the water of life freely."§
God calls men externally by his word. But as the word is preached to
all men without distinction, it follows, that he calls- many to whom he has
purposed not to give salvation. A question, therefore, naturally arises, What
is the reason of this procedure, and how can it be reconciled with his sin
cerity ? The difficulty is substantially the same in the system of those who
admit that God had a certain knowledg of future events,' whether they are
followers of Calvin or Arminius. For how shall we account for his conduct,
• Prov viii. 4. Mark xvi. 15. * Acts xiii. 38. * Ib. iii. 19. § Rev. xxii. 17.

148 THE APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION
in not only offering salvation to men who he knows will not accept it, but iu
using the most earnest entreaties, and cogent arguments, to persuade them ?
I acknowledge that the difficulty, although it presses upon both systems, is
greater in that of those who hold the doctrine of absolute and unconditional
decrees ; because it follows from this doctrine, that God does not intend to
bestow salvation on the reprobate ; while the others are at liberty to ascribe to
him the intention, if they can only reconcile it with the foresight of the event,
and explain how, in innumerable cases, it should fail of the effect. Several
distinctions have been proposed, in order to throw some light on this dark
subject. The external call, it has been said, is extended to the elect and the
reprobate in a different manner. It is addressed to the elect primarily and
directly, the ministry of the Gospel having been instituted for their sake, to
gather them into the church, insomuch that, if none of them remained to be
saved, it would cease. It respects the reprobate secondarily and indirectly,
because they are mixed with the elect, who are known to God alone, and
consequently it could not be addressed to them, without the reprobate being
included. This dispensation has been illustrated by rain, which descending
upon the earth according to a general law, the final cause of which is the fruc
tification qf the soil, falls upon places where it is of no use, as rocks and sandy
deserts. Again, it has been said, that the end of the external call may be
viewed in a twofold light, as it respects God, and as it respects the call ; and
these may be distinguished as the end of the worker, and the end of the work.
The end of the work, or of the external call, is the salvation of men, because
it is the natural tendency of the preaching of the Gospel to lead them to faith
and repentance. But this is not the end of the Worker, or God, who does
not intend to save all who are called, but those alone to whom he has decreed
to give effectual grace. I shall not be surprised to find that these distinctions
have not lessened the difficulty in your apprehension. While they promise
to give a solution of it, they are neither more nor less than a repetition of it
in different words. I shall subjoin only another observation, which has been
frequently made, that, although God does not intend to save the reprobate, he
is serious in calling them by the Gospel ; for he declares to them what would
be agreeable to him, namely, that they should repent and believe, and he pro
mises, most sincerely, eternal life to all who shall comply. The call of the
Gospel does not show what he has purposed to do, but what he wills men to do.
From his promises, his threatenings, and his invitations, it only appears that
it would be agreeable to him that men should do their duty, because he ne
cessarily approves of the obedience of his creatures, and that it is his design
to save some of them ; but the event demonstrates that he had no intention to
save them all ; and this should not seem strange, as he was under no obliga
tion to do so.
Mr. Burke, in his treatise concerning the sublime and beautiful, has observed,
when speaking of the attempt of Sir Isaac Newton to account for gravitation,
by the supposition of a subtle elastic ether, that " when we go but one step
beyond the immediately sensible qualities of things, we go out of our depth.
All we do after, is but a faint struggle, that shows we are in an element which
does not belong to us." We may pronounce, I think, these attempts, to recon
cile the universal call of the Gospel with the sincerity of God, to be a faint
struggle to extricate ourselves from the profundities of theology. They are
far indeed from removing the difficulty. We believe, on the authority of
Scripture, that God has decreed to give salvation to some, and to withhold it
from others. We know, at the same time, that he offers salvation to all in the
Gospel ; and to suppose that he is not sincere, would be to deny him to be
God. It may be right to endeavour to reconcile these things, because know
ledge is always desirable, and it is our duty to seek it as far as it can be at-

THE APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION. 149
tained. But if we find that beyond a certain limit we cannot go, let us be con
tent to remain in ignorance. Let us reflect, however, that we are ignorant in
the present case only of the connexion between two truths, and not of the
truths themselves, for these are clearly stated in the Scriptures. We ought
therefore to believe both, although we cannot reconcile them. Perhaps the
subject is too high for the human intellect in its present state. It may be, that
however correct our notions of the Divine purposes seem, there is some mis
apprehension which gives rise to the difficulty. In the study of theology,
we are admonished at every step to be humble, and feel the necessity of faith,
or an implicit dependence upon the testimony of Him who alone perfectly
knows himself, and will not deceive us.
When we say that the Word of God is the external instrument of conver
sion, we must be understood to speak of persons who are capable of knowing
and believing it. As infants are not fit subjects of instruction, their regenera '
tion must be effected without means, by the immediate agency of the Holy
Spirit on their souls. There are adult persons, too, to whom the use of reason
has been denied. It would be harsh and unwarrantable to suppose that they
are, on this account, excluded from salvation ; and to such of them as God has
chosen, it may be applied in the same manner as to infants. This is the doc
trine of our church : " Elect infants, dying in infancy, are regenerated and
saved by Christ through the Spirit, who worketh when, and where, and how
he pleaseth ; so also are all other elect persons, who are incapable of being
outwardly called by the ministry of the word."*
The word of God, which reveals truths so great and interesting, is calcu
lated to illuminate the minds of men, to impress their consciences, and to ex
cite their affections. But often it either entirely fails to produce these effects,
or produces them only in such a degree, that no radical and permanent change
ensues. We affirm that the Word is the ordinary instrument, but we deny
that it is the efficient cause of conversion. We are borne out in this assertion
by the express and repeated declarations of Scripture, from which we learn
that Paul may plant, and Apollos may water, but God gives the increase.t
Hence we distinguish between the external and the internal call, of which the
former extends to all to whom the Gospel is preached, while the latter takes
place only in case of the elect. The cause of the difference which we ob
serve in the hearers of the Gospel, of whom some believe, and others reject it,
is not free-will, but Divine grace, which works effectually in the former, to
will and to do.
This is the doctrine of our church, and, as we shall endeavour to show, is
also the doctrine of Scripture. But, as it directly tends to humble the pride
of man, to annihilate his pretensions to merit, and to appropriate to God the
whole glory of his salvation, it is not palatable to his vitiated taste, and hence
it has met with much opposition in ancient and modern times.
Pelagius and his followers maintained that our nature was, not corrupted by
the fall ; that we come into the world in the same state of innocence in which
Adam was created ; that we have free-will, and are able to do good if we please.
According to this system, such a change as we mean by regeneration or con
version is unnecessary. They did, indeed, talk of grace, and Divine assistance
jn the performance of good works ; but these words were used solely in com
pliment to the phraseology of Scripture, and to impose upon those who might
be so simple as to be satisfied with sounds, without inquiring into the sense.
When they explained their own meaning, the illusion vanished. " The grace
of God, and trie assistance which he affords us to preserve us from sinning,"
says Augustine, " they place either in nature and free-will, or in the law and
• Conf. chap. x. §.3. * 1 Cor. iii. 6.
n2

150 THE APPLICATON OF REDEMPTION.
doctrine ; so that when God is said to assist men to shun evil, and to do good,
nothing more is meant than that he shows them by revelation what they
should do." Thus they admitted only the external call. Men were indebted
to God solely for the knowledge communicated by his word, and the exhorta
tions addressed to them in it ; the use which was made of these depended
entirely on themselves.
In modern times, the doctrine of Pelagius has been adopted by Socinians,
and some of the followers of Arminius, who have carried the principles of the
sect to the utmost length. With respect to the necessity of Divine grace, and
the degree in which it is necessary, there has been a variety of opinions, dis
tinguished by slight shades of difference, which it would be tedious and use
less to enumerate. An opinion which has been maintained by many, both
Papists and Protestants, is that of sufficient grace, which has been defined to
be " grace by which God so calls, excites, and is ready to assist men, in direct
ing, protecting, and co-operating with them, that they are, indeed, able to will,
to believe, and be converted, and do good works, although they do not actually
will it." It is the same with universal grace, which is so called because it is
given to all men. God, who is willing to save all men, has given them suffi
cient means of faith and repentance ; but these means are subject to free-will,
which has the power to use this grace or not, to believe or not to believe.
Some have gone so far as to maintain, that God was bound by the new
covenant to furnish every man with this grace, because otherwise he would
have been chargeable with demanding from us what we had not strength to
perform. Similar sentiments are general, and are entertained by many who have not
studied the systems in which they are defended, and do not arrange themselves
under the standard of Pelagius, or Arminius, or any other heresiarch. They
are agreeable to human nature ; they seem to arise spontaneously in the mind.
It is supposed that we have a power to convert ourselves, not so strong perhaps
as it originally was, but still sufficient, especially if we are favoured with pro
per means and opportunities ; that God is ready to assist our sincere endea
vours ; that, although we must be indebted, in some degree, to his grace, our
conversion depends chiefly upon ourselves ; and that, if we will only reflect
seriously on the subject of religion, and resolve in earnest to forsake our sins,
the purposed change will be effected. This doctrine is taught from the press
and the pulpit ; is received in its most unqualified form, without any doubt of
its truth, by the grossly ignorant, who, almost in every place, constitute the
majority ; and, by some who affect to be more wise, is regarded, when set
out in proper phrases, as the pure Gospel of Christ.
In opposition to all the modifications of error upon this subject, we affirm,
that conversion is effected by the almighty grace of God ; that, although man
does not concur in it, he is in the first instance passive, and his concurrence is
the consequence of supernatural power communicated to him ; and that he
does not come to God till he is effectually called by the operations of the Holy
Spirit in his soul.
The truth of this doctrine appears from the accounts given in Scripture, of
the corrupt state of mankind by nature. They are said to be not only dis
eased and weak, but " to be dead in trespasses and sins ;"* to be not only
blind, hut "darkness" itself ;t to be "natural" or animal men, who " do not
receive, and cannot know, the things of the Spirit ;"* to be " the servants ot
sin ;"§ to be " the enemies of God,"|| who are not and cannot be subject to his
law.f Now, if these things are true, how is it possible that men have free-
* Eph. ii. 1. * lb. v. 8, etc. * 1 Cor. ii. 14.
§ Rom. vi. 17. D Col. i. 21. i Rom. viii. 7.

THE APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION. 151
will to good as well as to evil ; that they possess a degree of moral power,
which, by culture, may increase in strength, so as to change the current of
their affections and actions ; that with some assistance they can work out their
salvation ? It is not sufficient to open the eyelids of a blind person, to pour
the full blaze of light upon his face ; you must remove the impediment of
vision, or form the organ anew. It is not sufficient to go to the grave of a dead
man, and with a loud voice call upon him to arise ; you must bring back his
spirit from the invisible regions, and unite it again to his body. It is not suf
ficient to tell the slave, that his condition is wretched and degraded, and to
awaken his natural desire for liberty ; you must break his fetters, and rescue
him from the power of his oppressor. The situation of the sinner is more
hopeless than that of this man ; for he is a willing slave, he hugs his chains,
he thinks himself already free, and despises the liberty which the Gospel of
fers, as the most grievous bondage. There is, indeed, a difference between a
person physically, and one morally dead. The body in the grave is destitute ol
all life, and has lost all its energies ; while the sinner is still a rational being,
and is capable of acts of understanding and will. But he is divested of every
moral habit ; he cannot discern spiritual things in a spiritual manner, nor choose
what is spiritually good, till his natural powers be renovated and invigorated.
Hence, " the light shines in darkness, and the darkness comprehends it not."*
Hence, although commanded and exhorted, and addressed by every argument,
to return to the service of God, he refuses, till he be roused and persuaded by
something of greater efficacy than the clearest demonstration, and the most
impressive oratory which men can employ.
The necessity of almighty grace to the conversion of the soul, is farther
evident from the terms which are used to describe its operations, as a creation,
a resurrection, a new birth, the taking away of the heart of stone, and the giving
of a heart of flesh. Surely something more is implied in such terms, than an
external proposal of the truth, or such faint assistance, that it remains in our
power to accept or reject it at our pleasure. If the words and phrases em
ployed by the Holy Ghost have any meaning, they import such an exertion
of Divine power as was made in bringing all things at first out of nothing, and
in raising Lazarus or Christ from the grave ; or is still made in the production
of organized bodies out of pre-existing materials, and infusing info them a
principle of life. How do such expressions agree with the notion, that God
merely persuades us, as one man persuades another, by rational arguments ;
or, that he merely affords us a little help, as we give our arm to a person who
is able to walk, but, labouring under a certain degree of weakness, might stag
ger and fall if he were left alone ? How could he be said, upon this supposi
tion, to create us, to raise us from a state of death, to give us a heart en
tirely new ? It would not comport with the wisdom of God, whose design
in the Scriptures is to give us just and accurate notions of his dispensations,
to use expressions which obviously signify, that the work of converting sin
ners is wholly his own, while something very different is intended, and the
truth is, that they convert themselves. If we would not cast a reflection upon
him, as having spoken loosely, and in such a manner as to mislead us, we
must conclude that a mighty and uncontrollable power is displayed in the re
generation of the soul. It is no objection, that sinners are commanded to
" make" to themselves " a new heart, and a new spirit," to " repent and turn"
to the Lord.t One passage of Scripture should be compared and explained in
consistency with another; and we must therefore infer, that such commands
do not suppose any power in man to obey them, but are intended to point out
his duty, to declare, not what he can do, but what he ought to do, and what ho
* John i. 5. * Ezek. xviii. 30, 31.

152 THE APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION.
will do when God enables him by his grace. Upon this view of such com
mands, is founded the celebrated saying of Augustine in his Confessions : Da
quod jubes, et jube quod vis, " Give what thou commandest, and command
what thou wilt."
I may mention, as another proof, all those passages of Scripture which
represent divine grace as necessary to the reception of the world ; and conse
quently, the external call as insufficient to accomplish the end. The Psalmist
prays, that God would open his eyes, to see wondrous things out of his law;*
and Paul, that God would give to the Ephesians the spirit of " wisdom and
revelation in the knowledge of Christ."t These prayers suppose something
more than an external proposal of the truth, which David and the Ephesians
already enjoyed, and would have been superfluous, if they had possessed, in
their own minds, the power of spiritual discernment. Our Saviour is said to
have opened "the understandings" of the disciples "to understand the Scrip
tures ;"* not only to have explained the Scriptures to them, but to have enabled
them to apprehend their meaning, by an internal operation on their minds.
Lest, however, this passage should be supposed to refer to a miraculous illu
mination, intended to qualify them for the apostolical office, let me remind
you of what is said of Lydia, that the "Lord opened her heart, that she
attended to the things which were spoken of Paul."§ There was nothing in her
case, which required a peculiar interposition, and we must therefore consider
what was done to her, as done to all who are converted. The opening of
the heart, or an exertion of divine power upon the understanding and the will,
is necessary to dispose men to attend to the Gospel, and to receive it with faith.
It is not the word itself which opens the heart, as if nothing more were neces
sary to conversion than the use of external means ; but this is a work of God,
distinct from the exhibition of the truth. The opening of the heart "signifies
the removal of the obstructions, whether arising from the prejudices or the in
fluence of corrupt inclinations, and can be effected only by him, who "makes
old things pass away, and all things become new." The distinction between
the preaching of the word, and the application of it by divine power, is stated
in other passages. " Our gospel came not unto you in word only, but in power,
and in the Holy Ghost."|| "I have planted, Apollos watered ; but God gave
the increase. So then, neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that
watereth ; but God that giveth the increase. "If If ministers are said to be
workers together with God, it is only because they perform the external and
subordinate office of preaching the word, and administering the other ordi
nances of religion. It is the Spirit of God who has access to the soul, and
" turns it as the rivers of water."
In the last place, I may refer you to those passages of Scripture, which
attribute to God an internal and immediate agency upon the soul in conver
sion, as when he is said to work in us "both to will and to do;"** "to fulfil
in us the work of faith with power ;"t* to work in us " that which is well
pleasing in his sight ;"** to put his laws within us, and write them in our
hearts ;§§ to give us a new heart, and to put a right spirit within us, that we
may walk in his statutes, and keep his judgments. |||| These expressions can
not be softened down, to mean only that he presents sufficient motives to in
cline our hearts to obey ; or that he affords us such a degree of assistance,
as may prove altogether ineffectual. There is an implied contrast between
the mode in which men operate upon one another, and the action of God.
They propose objects, and endeavour to fix the attention upon them, and to
• Ps. cxix 18. * Eph. i. 17. $ Luke xxiv. 45. § Acts xvi. 14.
| 1 Thess. i. 5. 1 1 Cor. iii. 6, 7. ** Phil. ii. 13. ** 2 Thess.i. 11.
4$ Heb. xiii. 21. §§ Ib. viii. 10. \\ Ezek. xxxvi. 26, 27.

EFFECTUAL CALLING. 153
awaken activity by arguments and persuasives ; but he moves and changes
the heart.
We conclude, from these arguments, that as the external call is by the Word,
the internal call is by the Spirit. The persons of the Godhead have each a
peculiar province in the work of redemption. As it originated with the Father,
on whose love the eternal purpose of saving sinners was founded, and was
obtained by the obedience and death of the Son, so it is applied by the Holy
Ghost, the author of spiritual wisdom, and faith, and holiness, and consola
tion. Hence, this office is expressly ascribed to him. He is called " the
Spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of Christ."* God promises,
as we have already heard, to " put his spirit within us, that we may walk in
his statutes, and keep his judgments, and do them."t In a word, we are
said to be born of the Spirit. " Except a man be born of water, and of the
Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God."*
When our Lord taught this doctrine to Nicodemus, he did not understand
it, and seems to have totally misapprehended the subject, so great was his
ignorance of one of the first principles of religion, although he was a teacher
among the Jews, or, the teacher, by way of eminence, as the original imports,
in which he is called ° SJxa-x.ixo;. " How can a man be born when he is old ?
Can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born ?"§ There
is not the same gross misconception among Christians ; but many of them
wonder as much, when the necessity of regeneration is asserted, and may be
addressed in the words of our Saviour, — " Marvel not that I said unto thee,
ye must be born again. "|| No man will wonder at the doctrine, who believes
upon the authority of Scripture, and is convinced by experience, that human
nature is wholly depraved. Admitting this principle, he will perceive that
men must undergo a radical change, to qualify them for entering into the king
dom of heaven, and that it can be effected only by the almighty power of God.
The doctrine gives rise to no dispute among those who are awakened to a just
sense of their moral condition by nature. As they rejoice that God has
promised to renew us after his image, and has for this purpose sent the
spirit of grace, so it is their earnest prayer, that they may be the subjects of
his operations, and thus be enabled to love and serve their Creator and Re
deemer. The doctrine is opposed by cold hearted speculatists, by men full
of prejudice and lofty notions of the dignity of human nature, who will hot
stoop to be absolute debtors to divine grace. Hence they make every effort,
by wresting the Scriptures, and by an apparatus of sophistical arguments, to
reserve to themselves, wholly, or in part, the glory of conversion, if they ad
mit that there is such a thing. But all things are of God in redemption, as
well as in creation. Every good thought, every devout emotion, every holy
action, is the effect of his grace ; for " we are his workmanship, created in
Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should
walk in them."f
Nothing is a clearer proof of the alienation of man from God, than his reluc
tance to receive this doctrine, and others of a similar nature. The idea which
we should naturally form of a holy and devout creature is, that he would feel
his obligations to his Maker as benefits ; that, with ineffable pleasure, he would
render the due return of gratitude and praise for favours already conferred ;
and that, if I may speak so, he would open his soul to receive new communi
cations of his goodness. But man, blinded by prejudices, elated with pride.
admiring himself, and seeking his own glory, would break all the ties of de
pendence, and be the artificer of his own fortune in this world, and in the

* Eph. i. 17.

* Ezek. xxxvi. 27.

4 John iii. 5.

§ John iii. 4.

0 Ib. 7.

1 Eph. ii. 10,

Vol. IL— 20

154 THE APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION.
next. We cannot conceive an angel in heaven to be actuated by such senti
ments and feelings ; to balance accounts with his Creator, and to settle how
much he owes to himself, and how much to the author of his being. This
strange procedure is reserved for our world where the most helpless of all
creatures, through a singular infatuation, boast of their powers ; and, when the
arm of Omnipotence is stretched out to assist them, deem their honour engaged
scornfully to reject its aid. Such is the conduct of those who cavil at the doc
trine of regenerating grace, and labour to prove, by an array of what they
deem rational arguments, that man can attain, by his own efforts, the moral
excellence which the Scripture pronounces to be the gift of Heaven.

LECTURE LXVI.
ON THE APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION.
Farther Observations on the Spirit's Agency in Conversion — Divine Grace, its Mode of
Operation and its Invincibility — Its Effect, Regeneration — The Change Implied in Regene
ration, Illumination of the Mind and Renovation of the Will — Consequences.
The application of redemption commences with the call of God, by which
sinners are brought from a state of nature into a state of grace. This call is
external by, the gospel, in which salvation is offered to them, and they are
invited and commanded to receive it ; and internal by the Spirit, who per
suades and enables them to comply. The former is ineffectual without the
latter, as we showed from the corruption of human nature, which has sunk
into a state of complete spiritual disability, and from the express and varied
language of Scripture, which ascribes our conversion to the power of God,
and represents its influence upon our minds and hearts as indispensably neces
sary to our cordial reception of the truth.
The many passages to which we referred obviously teach, that the true
cause of the efficacy of the external means is, the invisible power of God
silently influencing the soul. Unless the Scriptures were intended to mislead
us by the use of figurative and hyperbolical language, which means much less
than meets the ear, or means something very different from what the terms
naturally suggest, there can be no doubt that our doctrine is legitimately de
duced from them. It may be asked in what other manner the inspired writers
would have expressed themselves, if it had been their acknowledged intention
to teach that, besides the external call of the word, there is necessary the
internal call of the Spirit, and that this consists in an exertion of power, the
object of which is not merely to assist us, as if we possessed a certain degree
of strength, but to perform the whole work, and to leave us only the office of
concurring in its progress ? Would they have made use of any other terms,
or, in the whole compass of their vocabulary, could they have found terms
more appropriate to their design, or which would have more definitely pointed
out the exclusive operation of Omnipotence ? What more could any person
have said, who intended to signify that the spiritual change of the soul is the
work, not of himself, but of God, than to call this change a creation out of
nothing, and a resurrection from the dead?
We have seen that, notwithstanding the explicit testimony of Scripture,
many attempts have been made to assign to men an important agency in the
application of redemption. Pelagius, who denied original sin, attributed it

EFFECTUAL CALLING. 155
wholly to ourselves, and spoke of Divine grace only in deference to the
phraseology of Scripture, and in compliance with the common language of
Christians. When he said that God enlightens us by his heavenly grace, he
meant nothing more than that he has given an external revelation. All are
followers of Pelagius, who maintain that man is by nature possessed of a
power to comply with the call of the gospel. Some talk of sufficient grace,
and others of concursive grace, understanding in fact the same thing, namely,
an ability given to all men to believe, so that those who do actually believe are
not more indebted to God than unbelievers, but may take praise to themselves
for having made a better use of their power; in direct opposition to Scripture,
which declares that it is not of him that willeth, but of God that showeth mercy.
We shall not be surprised at the attempts which have been made to bring
forward man, as in whole or in part, the author of his salvation, if we reflect
upon the pride of his heart, which prompts him, like our first parents, to aspire
to be a God, possessing not only the knowledge of good and evil, but also the
power to do the one as well as the other. To gratify this principle, Scripture
is tortured and perverted, and is made to speak a language most foreign to its
obvious design, and to the unquestionable sentiments of the writers. We may
remark also in this, as in other cases, the unhappy influence of philosophy,
falsely so called, upon the doctrines of revelation. The sentiments of the
ancient sects of philosophers have been introduced into Christianity, and have
produced the unhallowed compound of what is called rational theology. The
power of man to make himself virtuous was held by them all : many professed
disciples of Christ have chosen rather to adopt their proud and presumptuous
conclusions, than to acquiesce in his humiliating lessons. When some divines
talk of the human heart as the true source of virtue, and of the necessity of
its originating in our independent choice, that it may possess the nature of
virtue, we seem to be listening to a philosopher of the Porch, who described
his good man as superior to the gods, because the latter were virtuous by
nature, while the virtue of the former was derived from himself.
When we ascribe conversion to the grace of God, it is necessary to ascer
tain the meaning of the term grace, which, in Scripture, bears a variety of
senses. It sometimes signifies the free favour of God, or his unmerited love,
considered as the source of our salvation, and of all our blessings and privi
leges : " Who hath saved us, and called us according to his own purpose and
grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began."* It sig
nifies again the gospel, in which the love of God is revealed, and by which
the blessings flowing from it are communicated. This is the saving grace
of God, which " hath appeared to all men,"t and the grace of God, which we
are exhorted " not to receive in vain."* Lastly, the term is used to denote
the operation of Divine love upon the soul, as when Paul says, " By the grace
of God I am what I am, and his grace which was bestowed upon me was not
in vain."§ It is in this sense that we speak of the grace of God, when we
call it the efficient cause of the conversion of sinners.
In speaking of spiritual things, we are often under the necessity of employ
ing terms originally intended to express material objects, and we are always
in danger of transferring to the former, ideas borrowed from the latter. The
grace of God is sometimes spoken of, and sometimes probably conceived, as
if it were something substantial, something distinct from, and inherent in the
soul, like a portion of matter mingled with another, by which its qualities are
corrected or changed. But it is manifest, upon the slightest reflection, that
such notions are improper when applied to a spiritual subject. The grace of
God must be understood to signify simply his power freely exerted to produce
«2Tim.i. 9. * Tit ii. 11. $ 2 Cor. vi. 1. § 1 Cor. xv. 10.

156 THE APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION.
a change in the moral state of the soul, or, by a metonymy, the change itself,
the name of the cause being given to the effect.
" It is not contrary to the analogy of nature, that the grace of God, as de
noting the exertion of his power upon thq soul, should be employed in the
conversion of sinners. It is certain, from reason as well as from the express
declarations of Scripture, that creatures are dependent upon their Maker for
the continuance of their existence, and the exercise of their faculties. As the
various parts of creation are linked together, and afford each other mutual sup
port ; as the heavens fertilize the earth, the earth supplies its inhabitants with
food, its inhabitants propagate their kind, rear their offspring, and co-operate
for the purposes of society ; so the whole system is supported by the provi
dence of God, as the Heathens acknowledged, when they represented it as sus
pended from the throne of Jupiter by a golden chain, and his energy as the
primary cause of its movements. It is no objection that we cannot explain
the manner in which God acts upon his creatures, if the fact is certain, that it
is owing to his constant influence that we live, and think, and will, and move
our limbs, and perform all our bodily and mental functions. " In him we live,
and move, and have our being." There is no such difference between this case
and the conversion of sinners, that we should hesitate to concede in the one
what we admit in the other. If the influence of Providence in upholding, ex
citing, and directing us, is not destructive of our rational nature, I should wish
to know upon what ground the influence of grace, in giving us new moral
inclinations and habits, is supposed to be subversive of it. The operation of
the power of God in regeneration, may be considered as of the same kind with
its operation in providence, although it is exerted for a different purpose.
Some, indeed, may choose to say that it is of a different kind, lest we should
confound nature and grace, and represent grace only as nature carried to a
higher degree of perfection. But this danger is imaginary. There are two
powers in God ; but his energy is one, and is distinguished by the objects on
which, and the ends for which, it is exerted. It is the same power which
creates, and upholds in existence : the same power which forms a stone and a
sunbeam : the same power which gives vegetable life to a tree, animal life to a
brute, and rational life to a man. In like manner, it is the same power which
assists us in the natural exercise of our faculties, and enables us to exercise
them in a spiritual manner. Hence it does not appear that there is any
reasonable ground on which we should reject the doctrine of regenerating grace,
any more than the doctrine of providential influence.
That the grace of God, in the application of redemption, is mighty, may be
inferred from the effect. It is a change of the whole man, of his views, and
principles, and inclinations, and pursuits. Now, this is a change which no
means merely human have ever been able to accomplish. Not to mention the
total failure of philosophy to reform mankind, or even in a single instance to
inspire true virtue, we may remark, that the superior instructions, and precepts,
and motives of Christianity, although employed with great diligence and earnest
ness, prove so often ineffectual, as to convince every person of reflection, that
when they do take effect, their success should be attributed to a higher cause
than their intrinsic excellence, or the eloquence of the teachers. The hand of
God is clearly seen in the sudden, commanding, and lasting impressions which
are often made upon the mind. When the thoughtless are compelled to think,
and to think with an intenseness and seriousness which they never formerly
felt ; when the careless are in a moment affected with a sense of their most
important interests; when the lips which were accustomed to blaspheme,
learn to pray ; when the proud assume the lowly attitude and language of the
penitent ; when those who were devoted to the world, give evidence that now
the object of their desires and pursuits is a heavenly inheritance ; and when

EFFECTUAL CALLING. 157
this revolution, so wonderful, has been effected by the simple word of God,
and by the word which the subjects of this change had often heard before un
moved, we must be convinced that some mighty influence has been exerted,
and that that influence is divine. Here, if anywhere, we perceive the finger
of God. Hence his power is represented as displayed in the success of the
Gospel: "The Lord shall send the rod of thy strength out of ' Zion : rule
thou in the midst of thine enemies. Thy people shall be willing in the day
of thy power."*
The power of God, exerted in the regeneration and conversion of sinners, is in
vincible. I make use of this term rather than the word irresistible, because, when
the latter is taken in its natural import, it does not express what is the fact. Re
sistance is made to the grace of God, not only by the finally impenitent, but also
by those who ultimately yield to it. In particular, when they begin to feel con
victions of sin, they often endeavour to suppress them, or resort to improper ex
pedients for relief ; "going about" for example, "to establish their own righte
ousness, and not submitting to the righteousness of God."* In these instances,
they are chargeable with opposition to grace. Those, therefore, who speak of ir
resistible grace, mean that it cannot be finally resisted ; that it will overcome all
the efforts of corrupt nature to counteract its design ; and that it will ultimately
render sinners obedient to the faith. But this idea is more properly expressed
by the term, invincible. Man must submit in the end to the power of God;
and this will be more evident, if we consider that his power is not only suf
ficient to compel the most refractory to yield, although with the greatest reluc
tance, but that it can take away the spirit of opposition, and so influence the
hearts of men, that this submission shall be voluntary.
Were we to say that the grace of God is not invincible, we should be un
der the necessity of adopting the opinion, which we have already proved to be
unscriptural, that there is a power in man to comply or not to comply with the
call of the Gospel. We should take the work of conversion out of the hand
of God, and commit it to man himself. After God had done all that he could
do for our salvation, it would depend upon ourselves whether the intended
effect should follow. Hence the result of the dispensation of the Gospel
would be altogether uncertain. It would not be known beforehand whether
all would believe, or all would disobey. If the grace of God was effectually
resisted in one case, it might be effectually resisted in every case ; and, con
sequently, although Christ shed his blood that he might bring sinners to God,
and the whole economy of grace has been instituted with a view to carry the
design of his death into effect, it might happen that not an individual of the
human race would be saved. The very possibility of such an issue, by which
the scheme of redemption would be frustrated, furnishes a strong presumption
in favour of the doctrine, that the grace exercised in the conversion of sinners
is not of such an equivocal character, that it may or may not accomplish its
design, but that its operation is mighty and efficacious, bearing down all opposi
tion, and " bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ.
The great objection against the invincibility of Divine grace is, that it is sub
versive of the liberty of the will. It seems inconceivable to some, that a man
should be free, and at the same time should be infallibly determined to a par
ticular purpose. But, the objection proceeds upon a misapprehension of the
mode of operation. The idea occurs of external force, by which a man is
compelled to do something to which he is averse. It is not considered that
the power of grace is not compulsive ; that it puts no force upon our minds ;
that, instead of disturbing our mental constitution, it goes along with it ; and
that, in a manner at once natural and supernatural, it secures the concurrence
* Ps. ex. 2, 3. * Rom. x. 3.
O

158 THE APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION.
of the will. True liberty consists in doing what we do, with knowledge and
from choice ; and such liberty is not only consistent with conversion, but es
sential to it ; for if a man turn to God at all, he must turn with his heart. God
does not lead us to salvation without consciousness, like stones transported
from one place to another ; nor without our consent, like slaves who are driven
to their task by the terror of punishment. He conducts us in a manner
suitable to our rational and moral nature. He so illuminates our minds, as we
shall afterwards see, that we most cordially concur with his design. His
power, although able to subdue opposition, is of the mildest and most gentle
kind. While he commands, he persuades ; while he draws, the sinner comes
without reluctance : and never in his life is there a freer act of volition than
when he believes in Christ, and accepts of his salvation.
It is an important question on this subject, whether a sinner is merely pas
sive , in the first moment of his conversion, or his will co-operates with the
grace of God ? It will facilitate the answer to it, if we distinguish between
regeneration and conversion. Those who, with Pelagius, deny original sin,
and maintain that there is no depravity in us, but what has been contracted by
our own acts, make regeneration to consist in a voluntary change and reforma
tion of life ; and therefore hold that man is a worker with God from the com
mencement of it. Indeed, according to this scheme, God merely commands
him to reform, and he obeys by his own power. But, according to the Scrip
tures, regeneration is a change effected by divine grace in the state of the
soul, the supernatural renovation of its faculties, the infusion of a principle of
spiritual life. It is evident that, if this is a just definition, the sinner is pas
sive ; for, till divine grace is exerted upon him, he is incapable of moral acti
vity, and, in the language of inspiration, is " dead in trespasses and sins." He
is in the same situation with a man who is literally dead, and who, when
lying in the grave, cannot contribute in any degree to the restoration of his life.
He is like Lazarus, who had no concern in his own resurrection, knew not
that our Saviour had come to his sepulchre to deliver him from death, and
could not have obeyed the voice which called upon him to come forth, if the
power which accompanied it had not brought back his spirit from the invisible
world, and re-united it to his body. Regeneration is the effect of preventing
grace, or of grace which precedes our endeavours, and operates alone. Com
version is the turning of the soul to God, and is expressed by our seeking the
Lord, our coming to him, our forsaking our evil ways, and turning to him, and
by other phrases which import activity, and allude to the motion of the body
in changing its place. It obviously implies the exercise of repentance and
faith, the love of God, and the choice of his service ; and these are positive
acts of the soul. In this view, the sinner co-operates with the grace of God.
He does not aid grace or render it effectual by the exertion of his own natural
power, but he yields to it, goes along with it, and works under its influence. '
Let it be carefully observed that, while we say that the sinner, although pas
sive in regeneration, is active in conversion, we do not ascribe to him any
independent activity, or represent any part of the work as properly his own.
His province consists solely in concurrence. He acts because he has been acted
upon. The motion of his soul towards God is the effect of the Spirit of life,
who has entered into him, as the motion of the body is the effect of his inward
thoughts and volitions. His conversion is, therefore, wholly of grace, that is,
to grace are owing both the power to turn to God, and the actual exercise of
that power ; and his own convictions on this subject accord with the senti
ments of Paul, who says, " I laboured more abundantly than they all ; yet not
I, but the grace of God which was in me.!'*
* 1 Cot. xv. 10.

REGENERATION. 159
Regeneration, I have said, is a change of the moral state ofthe soul, a reno
vation of all its faculties. It constitutes the sinner a new creature, not in
respect of his essence, but of his views, and habits, and inclinations. It is
the introduction of a new and powerful principle into the soul, under the in
fluence of which its natural faculties are exerted in a different manner from
that in which they were formerly employed ; and in this sense, " old things
pass away, and all things become new."* Its thoughts are new, the objects of
its choice are new, its aims and motives are new ; and by this internal revolu
tion, the external deportment is affected. The infusion of divine grace, like
the ingrafting of a tree, alters, if I may speak so, the quality of the soul; so
that, instead of the sour and crabbed fruits which it formerly produced, it now
yields fruit of the most excellent kind, acceptable to God and to men. The
instrument of the change, as we have already observed, is the Word of God ;
and the agent is his Spirit, who, moving as in the beginning of time upon the
dark and turbulent mass, reduces it to order.
The first effect of divine power in the new, as in the old creation, is light.
The regeneration of the soul commences with the illumination of the mind.
" God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our
hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of
Jesus Christ. "t When our Saviour gave Paul a commission to the Gentiles, he
sent him " to open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from
the power of Satan unto God."* By the same means his own conversion was
accomplished ; for he tells us, that " when it pleased God to reveal his Son
in him, immediately he conferred not with flesh and blood."§ This, indeed,
must be the mode of procedure in every conversion, because God will always
act upon us according to the nature which he has given us ; and his purpose
being to make us willing and obedient, there is no way in which it can be
accomplished, but by the communication of clear and impressive views of
truth to the mind. The Scriptures are a perfect revelation of the will of God,
containing all the doctrines which we are required to believe, and all the pre
cepts which we are bound to obey. But, although their instructions are full,
plain, at least with respect to every essential point, and admirably fitted to
arrest the attention and engage the heart, yet the human mind is so blinded
by prejudices, so captivated and misled by the illusions of sense, and the
maxims of worldly wisdom, that it either rejects the information which they
bring, or contents itself with a cold and careless assent to it. An unrenewed
man may have perused the Scriptures, and may have acquired such distinct
notions of the subjects of which they treat, as to be qualified to be a teacher
of others, but at the same time he does not perceive their real excellence, nor
experience their spiritual efficacy. Hence it is evident that, while he remains
under this mental incapacity, the intended effect of the word will not be pro
duced, and that an operation is necessary, analogous to that performed upon
the eyes of a blind man to admit the rays of light, or upon the eyes of a man
whose vision is imperfect, to enable him to see objects distinctly.
The illumination of the mind does not consist in the discovery of unknown
truths. To represent this as the design of it, would be derogatory to the ful
ness of the Scriptures, and would furnish those who are not converted, with
the apology, that they do not possess adequate means, if there were some
truths necessary to be known, which are not contained in written revelation.
" The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul ;"|| that is, it is sufficient
for conversion as an external mean, and there is no defect which needs to be
supplied. Enthusiasts may talk of dreams and visions, and revelations, but
* 2 Cor. v. 17. *Ib. iv. 6. $ Acts xxvi. 18. § Gal. i. 16. J Ps. xix. 7.

160 THE APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION.
every sober-minded Christian can trace all his spiritual perceptions, and holy
tempers, and devout feelings, to the records of the apostles and prophets; and
if he was first awakened, or has been since impressed by the words of men,
the sentiments which they conveyed were agreeable to the Scriptures, and
were derived from them.
The illumination, therefore, of which we speak, consists in enabling those
who are the subjects of it, to apprehend, in their true sense and importance,
truths which they find in their Bibles, and which they may have often read
before, without being affected by them, because there was " a veil upon their
hearts." It is impossible to explain how this change of views is effected, be
cause we know not the way of the Spirit; and impossible to make it intelligi
ble to any man who has not experienced it. No person ever succeeded in an
attempt to give a blind man an idea of colours. The regenerated themselves
cannot tell how they were illuminated, or make others understand the specific
difference between their present and their former conceptions. They may
assure them that their views of truth were once obscure and uninteresting, and
now are clear and enlivening ; but such information is general and, indefinite.
One thing, however, they know, that whereas they were blind, now they see.
The sinner is enlightened in the knowledge of his own character and state;
that, sensible of his guilt, and wretchedness, and danger, he may be prepared
to accept the offers of mercy ; in the knowledge of the love, and grace, and
compassion of God, that he may be disposed to return to him, instead of hating,
and dreading, and avoiding his presence ; in the knowledge of Christ, of his
substitution, and righteousness, and fulness, that he may trust in him for the
supply of his wants, and, believing in him, may be restored to the favour of
God. His views, indeed, upon all subjects are changed. He now is con
vinced of the evil of sin ; he now feels the vanity of the world ; he now
appreciates the value of time ; he now perceives the excellence of holiness;
he now forms a just estimate of the realities of the invisible state. Divine
illumination leads him to view things as they are, whereas he formerly con
templated them through the false medium of prejudice and misconception.
He awakes, as from a dream, and finds himself surrounded with the solemn
and interesting objects of religion. All Christians are " renewed in know
ledge after the image of him who created them." " Ye were sometimes dark
ness, but now are ye light in the Lord."*
Having seen the effect of divine grace upon the intellectual part of our
nature, let us proceed to consider the change on our moral and active princi
ples. In giving an account of regeneration, it is usually observed, that the
illumination of the understanding is followed by the renovation of the will.
To renew the will is to incline it to good, to render it conformable to the will
of God. This change is necessary, because the will is naturally rebellious,
and its practical language is, " Who is the Lord, that I should obey him ?" It
is, therefore, said, that " thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power ;"t
and how this is done we learn from an apostle : " It is God that worketh in
us, both to will and to do of his good pleasure."*
The renovation of the will may be considered as the natural consequence
of the illumination of the understanding. While we speak of different faculties
of the soul, we should reflect that, strictly, these are only different modes in
which the soul exerts itself. The understanding is the soul apprehending and
contemplating ; the will is the soul choosing or refusing : good is the object
of its choice ; and in order to secure a right determination, nothing more
seems to be necessary than that the object should be presented in such a light,
• Col. iii. 10. Eph. v. 8. * Ps. ex. 3. * Phil. ii. 13.

REGENERATION. 161
as to obtain the deliberate and final decision of the understanding in its favour.
Yet we remember the words of the poet, and their truth is too often confirmed
by our personal experience. Video meliora proboque,
Deteriora sequor.
But although the heart may oppose, and often does oppose, slight and transient
convictions of truth and duty, it does not follow that it will act the same part,
when the evidence is full and irresistible, or when the word comes " in
demonstration of the Spirit, and with power." As the understanding was in
tended to be the leading faculty of the soul, it may be conceived, when illu
minated by divine grace, actually to lead it in that train and order which is
pleasing to God. However, since we do,, not know how he acts upon the
soul, nor to what extent his influence is necessary, it is more modest to avoid
determining whether his agency upon the will is mediate or immediate, and to
rest in the declarations of Scripture, that " he puts his spirit within us, and
gives us a new heart, a heart of flesh."*
The effect of regenerating grace extends to every power of the soul, and
all its movements are controlled by it. The affections have been considered
fey some as various modifications of the will ; but whatever philosophical
theory we adopt with respect to them, they are all influenced by the change.
They are .refined, regulated, and directed to their proper objects. New* feel
ings and emotions, new tendencies and exercises, are the native consequences
of the new views of divine things, which have been communicated to the
mind. The revelation of the Saviour in his righteousness and grace, accom
panied as it is with a heartfelt sense of guilt, and wretchedness, and helpless
ness, gives rise to faith, or that act of the soul by which it receives his offered
salvation, trusts in him for acceptance with God, and finds peace, and hope,
and joy, in the contemplation of his character and work. Repentance is the
effect of a clear and impressive apprehension of the infinite purity of the
Divine nature, "to which sin stands opposed as darkness is to light; of the
goodness of God whom it has offended and dishonoured ; and of his mercy in
Christ, the serious consideration of which is sufficient to melt the hardest, and
to subdue the most stubborn heart. Godly sorrow for sin, hatred of it, prayers
for deliverance from it, a purpose instantly to forsake it, and the commence
ment of a course of resistance and mortification, are the ingredients or the
fruits of repentance. The dislike of the human heart to God flows partly
from misconceptions of his character, and partly from its own corrupt inclina
tions. Both are removed in regeneration, when the mind is enlightened, and
the will is renewed. How is it possible that that man should not love God,
to whom he appears the most amiable of all beings, and who is tasting that he
is gracious ? It would be tedious to give an enumeration of the emotions and
affections which are excited in the heaven-born soul. All the fruits of the
Spirit are produced, all his graces are imparted, and the heart of man, which
was lately like a wilderness, overgrown with briers and thorns, is transformed
into the garden of the Lord.
In treating of regeneration, it is strictly necessary to direct our attention
only to the change which takes place in the state of the mind. It is here that
grace operates, and here that the holy principles which it produces reside.
But the seed being sown, the fruit will speedily appear. Reformation is not
regeneration, but it will always be the result of it, when the conduct has been
previously irregular: for "whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin;
• Ezek. xxxvi. 26.
Vol. IL— 21 o 2

162 APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION.
for his seed remaineth in him ; and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.''*
The Corinthians were, adulterers, fornicators, idolaters, covetous, and extor
tioners, before God called them by his grace; but they were " washed, and
sanctified, and justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of
our God."* A change will even take place in the deportment of the most
moral unconverted man, as soon as he is born from above. There are no
gross sins, we will suppose, from which he needs to be purified ; but he will
become more spiritual in his conversation, more attentive to religious and re
lative duties, less eager in pursuit of the world, more scrupulous in the selec
tion of his company, more cautious in avoiding the occasions of sin and ap
pearances of evil. The eye of an attentive and practised spec.taJ.or will perceive,
notwithstanding his former fair show, that even he is become a new man.
But it is in the secret recesses of his breast that he will be himself deeply
conscious of the spiritual revolution. He will be sensible of a new temper of
mind, or a new feeling as it may be called, in the performance of his duty ;
for whereas it was formerly a drudgery, it will now constitute his highest
pleasure. Engaged in the service of God, he will find himself in his' proper
element ; and instead of confining himself to the narrow round of duties in
which he moved, while his sole aim was to maintain a decent appearance, or
to silence the clamours of conscience, he will labour to be extensively useful
to others, and unweariedly active for the glory of God. The praise of man
is no longer the motive which stimulates his activity ; another, of a purer and
more exalted kind, has assumed its place ; a desire for the approbation of his
Maker. A reference to God in all his thoughts and actions, a regard to his
authority, and love, compounded of esteem, gratitude, and desire for his favour
and presence, are the principles by which he is governed. There is a lofty
elevation of sentiment and affection above the standard of nature, however
carefully improved. He is still in the world, but he is no longer of it ; and
although he attends to its affairs, and feels joy or sorrow from its changes, he
gives the decided and habitual preference to nobler objects, and, like the ancient
sojourners in Canaan, whose faith we are exhorted to follow, declares plainly,
that he is seeking a country, even a heavenly one.*
Regeneration is specifically the same in all who are the subjects of it; a
spiritual change, the transformation of the soul into the image of God: "That
which is born of the Spirit, is spirit."§ But, although every regenerated per
son is a new creature, and possesses all the constituent parts of the new nature,
it is not necessary to maintain that, to all, the same measure of grace is com
municated. They may differ from each other as children do at their natural
birth, some of whom are much more lively and vigorous than others. Even
at the commencement, God, according to his sovereign pleasure, may give
more ample knowledge, stronger faith, and all the other virtues in a maturer
state, to this man than to that. But there is no difference in respect of their
state ; the same work has been performed in them all, and they are all par
takers of " that one Spirit."
A change from darkness to light, and from sin to holiness, is necessary, not
only to those who, having been educated in a false religion, must adopt new
views and principles of action before they can be received into the communion
of the church, and to those who, having lived long in the practice of vice, and
acquired depraved habits, must reform before they can be acknowledged as
Christians, but to all the descendants of Adam, whatever may have been their
external advantages, and their previous character. No opinion is more un
scriptural, than that there are some men who do not need to be regenerated.
They may be well instructed in the principles of religion, and may be devout
* 1 John iii. 9. * 1 Cor- vi- n- * Heb- ™- 13—16, § John iii. 6.

REGENERATION. 163
and virtuous in the estimation of the world ; they may observe divine ordi
nances, be just in their dealings, sober in their personal deportment, and distin
guished by their deeds of beneficence. Such, however, were the Pharisees,
whom our Saviour condemned with severity ; and it was in reference to them,
and to other persons who resemble them, that he reminded us that the outside
of the cup may be clean, while within it is full of impurity. Human nature
is the same in all men, although it is subject to various modifications from
education, and temper, and the circumstances in which individuals are placed.
Whether gentle or fierce, placable or unmerciful, licentious or temperate, selfish
or benevolent, it is, according to the testimony of Scripture, carnal, alienated
from God, and full of enmity against his law. The mildest and most amiable
of mankind, therefore, stands in need of regenerating grace ; and if he has not
experienced its influence, is only a nominal Christian. With the aid of ex
ternal advantages, he himself may change his conduct, but Divine grace alone
can change his heart. Strange as this doctrine may seem to those who have
studied the writings of philosophers more than the Bible, and mortifying as it
is to our pride, it is unquestionably true. Our Lord made no exception when
he said, " Except a man be born of water, and of the Spirit, he cannot enter
into the kingdom of God."* It is worthy of attention, that these words were
addressed to a man who had received the circumcision of the flesh, had been
brought up in the true religion, and was of so respectable a character, that he
had been elevated to the rank of a ruler of the Jews. Hence it follows, that
no man can be a disciple of Christ, unless he have undergone this spiritual
change : " If any man be in Christ Jesus, he is a new creature ;"* but, " if any
man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his."*
The change effected in the souls of men by regenerating grace, is the foun
dation of all their subsequent attainments in religion. I mean, that they are
effects or consequences of it, as the growth of a vegetable, the rising of the
stem, the formation of the buds and flowers, the opening of the leaves and
blossoms, and the concoction of the fruit, are the effects or consequences of
the living principle in the seed. Hence an apostle, having represented true
Christians as the circumcision, or the regenerated, proceeds to state, that " they
worship God in the Spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence
in the flesh. "§ To the performance of certain functions, certain powers are
necessary ; and there are properties belonging to one nature which no man
expects to find in another. An animal without wings could not fly, without
legs could not walk, without eyes could not see, without intellect could not
understand. We never look for the peculiar properties of one species of ani
mals in another ; we never look, for example, for speech and reasoning among
brutes. All the actions of a living being, and all its improvements, bear a
relation to the nature originally given to it by its Maker. These things are
obvious, not only to philosophers, but to every person of common sense ; yet,
although just reasoning requires that we should transfer them to religion, men
often proceed in a different manner. Religion manifestly implies a different
train of sentiments, and feelings, and actions, from those which are brought
into operation by the ordinary business of life. Yet many imagine that, be
cause man has understanding, and will, and affections, is capable of managing
his worldly affairs, and of performing the duties incumbent upon him as a
member of society, he is fully qualified to answer the demands of religion,
and requires only to have his attention directed to it, and to be roused to the
exercise of his powers. It is taken for granted, that religion is one of the
original principles of our nature, which it is sufficient to direct and strengthen
by discipline. It is supposed that men have a natural capacity or disposition
* John iii. 5. f 2 Cor. v. 17. * Rom. viii. 9. § Phil. iii. 3.

164 THE APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION.
for religion, and may be trained to habits of piety and virtue by external means.
Amidst these speculations, the doctrine of human depravity is forgotten or
denied, and hence it is not considered that, to attempt to educe religion from
our nature as it is, is as absurd as to attempt to elicit the operations of intellect
from an irrational animal. Holy actions must proceed from holy principles,
and these must be created in the soul, which, since the fall, is barren of all
good. Men must be regenerated before they can make progress in religion,
or perform a single action which the Searcher of hearts will approve.
There are two states, in either of which every man is, — the one carnal,
and the other spiritual ; and his actions correspond to his state. The know
ledge of a carnal man, is a cold light glimmering in his mind; his prayers
are the service ofthe lips, or have only such animation as they derive from his
natural fears and hopes ; his praises are equally defective ; his hearing of the
G\ospel is without faith, and his communicating without penitence and love;
his obedience is a form without the substance. Every thing is the reverse in
the case of the spiritual man ; into whose duties, at least when his frame is
good, there are infused the energies of a heart sanctified and moved by the
spirit of grace. He prays and praises, and does all things in the Holy Ghost;
he makes advances in holiness, and "his path is as the shining light, which
shineth more and more unto the perfect day."*
These two states are essentially different; there is not a single point in
which they meet, or touch each other. They are both predicable of human
beings ; but while the natural endowments of their respective subjects are the
same in kind, their moral qualities are of opposite classes. The one is repre
sented as in a state of non-existence, the other is in a state of being ; and the
change which has been effected upon the latter is called a creation. In the
one state, men are dead, like those who are lying in the grave ; in the other,
they are alive, like those who were re-animated by our Saviour in the land of
Judea, or like the saints at the last day, who will exchange corruption forin-
corruption. There may be an error in the conclusion which individuals
draw with respect to themselves, and, from various causes, they may be unable
to ascertain their own character with exactness ; but between those who have,
and those who have not, experienced regenerating grace, there is a radical dis
tinction, and by the omniscient Judge they are never confounded. " We know
that we are of God, and that the whole world lieth in wickedness."*

LECTURE LXVII.
ON THE UNION OF BELIEVERS TO CHRIST.
Union of Believers to Christ formed in Regeneration — Its Nature illustrated — It is real;
spiritual ; without confusion of persons ; and indissoluble — Its Effects.
The design of God in calling sinners by his word and spirit, is to bring
them to himself by Jesus Christ, who is the only mediator between God and
men, " the way, the truth, and the life." As it is for his sake that God
bestows the blessings of salvation upon us, so, according to his constitution,
they can be enjoyed only in a state of connexion with him. This connexion,
•which is formed in regeneration, it shall be the business of the present lecture
to explain. • Prov. iv. 18. * J Jolm v- 19<

UNION TO CHRIST. 165
There are two kinds of union between Christ and his people — a legal union,
and a spiritual, or, as it is sometimes called, a mystical union. The reason
of the latter denomination is, that the union is obscure or mysterious ; but the
term is not discriminative, because there are other unions to which it may be
applied with equal propriety, as the union of the three persons in the God
head, and the union of the .two natures of our Saviour. Notwithstanding,
however, the generality of the term, its meaning is understood in theology,
and it may continue to be used as custom has denned and limited it.
The legal union is that which was formed between Christ and his people,
when he was appointed their federal head. It is a union in law, in conse
quence of which he represented them, and was responsible for them ; and the
benefit of his transactions redounds to them. It may be illustrated by the
case of suretyship among men. A relation is formed between a surety and
the person for whom he engages, by which they are thus far considered as
one, that the surety is liable for the debt which the other has contracted, and
his payment is held as the payment of the debtor, who is ipso facto absolved
from all obligation to the creditor. A similar connexion was established be
tween our Redeemer and those who are given to him by his Father. He
became answerable for them to the justice of God ; and it was stipulated that,
on account of his satisfaction to its demands, they should receive the pardon
of their sins. Neither could their sins have been imputed to him, nor could
his righteousness have been imputed to them, if they had not been one in the
eye of the law.
But something farther was necessary to the actual enjoyment of the benefits
of his representation. God, on whose sovereign will the whole economy of
grace is founded, had determined not only that his Son should sustain the
character of their surety, but that a real, as well as a legal, relation should take
place between them, as the foundation of communion with him in the bless
ings of his purchase. It was his will that, as they were one in law, they
should be also one morally or spiritually; that his merit and grace might be
imparted to them, as the holy oil poured on the head of Aaron descended to
the skirts of his garments.
There are many passages of Scripture in which this connexion with Christ
is represented as the foundation of our fellowship with him in spiritual and
heavenly blessings. Thus, it is said that, as we were " chosen in him,'-' so
we are " accepted in the beloved ;" that in him we " obtain an inheritance,"
and in him " are sealed with the holy spirit of promise;" that the church is
his body, "and that we are baptized into Christ;" "that we are all buried
with him in baptism," " and are planted in the likeness of his death and resur
rection; that "we are crucified with him," and "live with him," and that
" he lives in us ;" and that the earnest desire of every believer is to be found
in him.* These, and many similar expressions, denote a close relation be
tween the Saviour and his genuine disciples ; a relation more intimate than
any which may be formed by external bonds.
This will be more evident, if we attend to some of the similitudes by which
it is illustrated in Scripture. It is compared to the union between a tree and
its branches, which constitute one whole, and possess the same principle of
vegetable life : " I am the vine, ye are the branches. He that abideth in me,
and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do
nothing."! — It is compared to the union between the building and the founda
tion by which it is supported: "To whom coming as unto a living stone,
disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of God, and precious, ye also, as living
* Eph. i. 4, 6, 1 1, 13. Col. i. 24. Rom. vi. 3, 4. Col. ii. 12. Rom. vi. 5, 6, 8 Gal. it
20. Phil. iii. 9. * John xv. 5.

166 THE APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION.
stones are built up a spiritual house."* — It is compared to the union between
husband and wife, who are one in the eye of the law, and have a mutual in
terest in the person and property of each other : " For this cause shall a man
leave his father and mother, and shall be joined unto his wife, and they
two shall be one flesh. This is a great mystery; but I speak concerning
Christ and the church;"* that is there is a relation between Christ and the
church, of which marriage is a figure. This similitude occurs in the forty-
fifth Psalm, where our Saviour is represented as the king, and the church as
the queen, standing at his right hand, in gold of Ophir.* — It is compared to
the connexion of the head and the members of the body, which receive life
and nourishment from the head, and are directed and governed by it. " But
speaking the truth in love, we may grow up into him in all things, which is
the head, even Christ: from whom the whole body, fitly joined together and
compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual
working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body, unto the
edifying of itself in love."§ In these similitudes, not only is there a representa
tion of the union of Christ and believers, and of the communion which takes
place between them, but it is imported, that he is the primary source of their
life, and strength, and perfection.
There are three great unions mentioned in Scripture, which are totally dif
ferent in kind, and should therefore be carefully distinguished. The first is
the union of the persons of the Trinity ; but, although the union of which we
are now speaking, is compared to it in the following words of our Saviour's
prayer, " that they all may be one, as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that
they also may be one in us,"||yet it is only a general resemblance, consisting
in the unity of the members or the body of Christ. The persons of the God
head have one numerical essence; whereas Christ and believers, in respect of
nature, are distinct individuals. The second great union is that which sub
sists between the two natures of our Redeemer. They are not blended toge
ther, but are so closely conjoined, that there is only one person of Christ, and
it may be said with truth, that the man is God, and God is man. But there
is no such union between him and his people. And this leads me to remark,
that the mystical union does not consist in community of essence, or in one
ness of person, but in a close relation between different persons. It may be
illustrated, but not fully, by the union between a chief or leader, and his faith
ful and devoted followers, who, although distinct individuals, are engaged in
the same pursuits, and are animated by the same spirit, or by the same senti
ments and feelings.
It is not fully illustrated, I say, by this, or by any other comparison of a
similar kind. Thus, it would be a great mistake to suppose that there is no
closer relation between Jesus Christ and his church, than that which subsists
between a king and his subjects. This is the only relation which some per
sons admit. He gives his word, and ordinances, and laws to his people, and
they acknowledge his right to govern them, and obey him. But although it
should be added, that they feel all the warmth of a sincere attachment to him,
yet, according to this opinion, he would be only the political head of the
church ; and the difference between its relation to him, and that of subjects to
their sovereign, would consist solely in the nature of the sentiments and feel
ings of his followers, which are of a religious kind, and in the superior value
of the benefits which they expect to receive from him. The doctrine of
Scripture is, that he is the head, not only of government, but of influence;
that the ties which connect him and his people are invisible a*nd spiritual ; and
that the conjunction is so intimate, that he lives in them, and they live in him.
• 1 Pet ii. 4, 6. * Eph. v. 31, 32. * Ps.xlv. 9. § Eph. iv. 15, 16. J John xvjl SI

UNION TO CHRIST. 167
The bonds of this union are, the Spirit and faith. The Spirit being in hiin
and in them, makes them truly one. The distance between Christ who is in
heaven, and believers who are upon earth, is no obstacle, because the Spirit is
omnipresent. Through his intervention, not merely a figurative, but a real
union is effected ; there is one living principle in the head and the members :
" He that is joined to the Lord is one spirit" with him. — " By one Spirit are
we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Greeks, whether we be
bond or free ; and have all been made to drink of that one Spirit." — " Hereby
we know that he abideth in us, by the spirit which he hath given us." " Hereby
know we that we dwell in him, and he in us, because he has given us of his
Spirit."* There is much more implied in these words than the reception of
the gospel, and the formation of a heavenly temper. They import the actual
presence and inhabitation of the Spirit himself. The fact is plainly asserted ;
but it is mysterious, and cannot be distinctly explained. It may be observed,
in order to prevent misconception, that the presence of the Spirit with any in
dividual, is not analogous to the presence of one man with another. He who
is willing to give his company to another, goes to the place where the other
is, and, while associating with him, separates himself from those whom he
does not choose to admit to the same intimacy. The coming and inhabitation
of the Spirit must be understood in a different manner, because, being a Divine
Person, he is omnipresent ; and, consequently, as he is incapable of change
of place, he cannot withdraw from one man, and approach to another, i In
respect of his essence, he is as much present with unbelievers as with be
lievers. His dwelling in the latter must therefore signify, that he manifests
himself in their souls in a peculiar manner ; that he exerts there his gracious
power, and produces effects which other men do not experience. Without
knowing him, or being aware of his influence, other men are sustained by his
power, and enabled to exercise their natural faculties ; for we must conceive
him to be the source of life and activity throughout the whole intelligent crea
tion ; but the regenerated are the subjects of a peculiar work, by which they
are transformed into the image of God. We may illustrate his presence with
them, as distinguished from his presence with men in general, by supposing
the vegetative power of the earth to produce, in the surrounding region, only
common and worthless plants, but to throw out, in a select spot, all the riches
and beauty of a cultivated garden. By the fruits of the Spirit in the heart and
life of an individual, it is known that he is working silently, but powerfully,
within him. Where love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness,
meekness, faith, and temperance are found, there he has taken up his abode.
In this way we may understand the inhabitation of the Spirit, and it seems to
be the only rational idea which we can form of it. It is impossible to conceive
any peculiarity in respect of his essential presence in the case of the regene
rated, for he necessarily fills all places and all persons. But he works when
and where he will, and is said to enter into the soul, when he begins to exert
his gracious operations in it, as God is said to come to the assemblies of his
people, and to dwell in Zion, because he there manifests his glory, and dis
penses the blessings of his grace.
The principal bond of union between Christ and his people, is the Spirit.
But, as the union is mutual, something is necessary on their part to complete
it ; and this is faith. Hence, Christ is said to dwell in our hearts by faith
This faith is not merely a natural act of the mind, assenting to the truth of
the gospel, as it assents to any other truth, upon credible testimony ; but it is
a supernatural act, an effect produced by the power of the Spirit of grace, and
is such a persuasion of the truth concerning the Saviour, as calls forth exercises
* 1 Cor. vi. 17. xii. 13. 1 John iii. 24. iv. 13.

168 THE APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION.
suitable to the nature of its object. It is a cordial approbation ofthe Sayiour
a hearty consent to his offers, an acceptance of him in his entire character, as
" made of God unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification and re
demption."* Strictly, faith is an act of the understanding alone, and thus
logicians would define it ; but whatever is the abstract meaning of a term, we
should observe whether it is used by a writer in a peculiar sense, and accom
modate ourselves to his ideas, instead of rigidly adhering to our own. Here
some expounders of the sacred oracles err, and explain them according to the
standard of philosophy, instead of allowing them to explain themselves. If
we carefully attend to the use of the word faith, in the Scriptures, we shall
find that it often signifies more than an assent of the mind, and implies the con
currence of the will, or an exercise of the heart, embracing the truth believed,
and trusting in the object revealed. When thus understood, it will appear to
be a fit instrument for completing our union to Christ, although it might be
difficult to perceive how it could have this effect, if it were merely an assent.
The Scriptures, in describing faith, represent it by a variety of bodily motions
and actions, to expness its activity. It is called " a coming to Christ,"—
" a receiving of him," — " an eating of his flesh, and a drinking of his blood."
When man believes with the heart, he obtains an interest in the object of his
faith. Christ becomes his, according to the constitution and promise of God.
He enters into covenant with him ; and while he takes him as his Saviour, he
devotes himself to him as one of his people. Thus the union is formed by
mutual consent. Our Redeemer expresses his consent, not only in his gracious
offers and declarations, but also by sending the Spirit to dwell in his heart,
and the Christian expresses consent by his faith. " My Lord and my God,"
is its language. "Lord, I am thine; save thou me." If we consider the
Song of Solomon, as intended to describe this union, and the intercourse
founded upon it, the following words of the church are apposite to the present
subject — " I am my beloved's, and my beloved is mine."t
From this account, it appears that it is in truth, and not merely by a figure
of speech, that Jesus Christ and his disciples are said to be one. They are
one, not only in sentiment and affection, by consent of mind and heart, as
Nestorius is reported to have explained the union of the two natures of our
Saviour, and Socinians the union of the Father and the Son, but by a real
conjunction, their persons being united to his person. The reality of the union
is manifest from the similitudes by which it is illustrated; for the stones are a
part of the building, the branches a part of the vine, and the members a part
of the body. The Spirit of Christ actually dwells in the souls of believers,
and, by faith, they receive not only the benefits of Christ, but himself. Hence
he is said to live in them, and they are said to abide in him. Some men treat
the idea of such a union with ridicule ; in their opinion, it is a dream of en
thusiasm ; and they confound it with the wild notions of the mystics, pro
nouncing what they do not see, and cannot feel, and have not experienced, to
be the baseless fabric of a vision. But the humble Christian is content to
believe the testimony of Scripture, and cannot withhold his assent to a fact, of
which, although he is unable to explain it, the evidence which he finds in
himself is conclusive. He who is led by the Spirit, enlightened, assisted, and
comforted by him, cannot doubt that Christ dwells in his heart.
Let it be observed, in the next place, that it is a spiritual union. It is on
this account that it is difficult to conceive it, and by some it is rejected as
imaginary. Influenced as we are by our senses, we are apt to think of it as
being like the union of two material substances, by juxta-position, or by com
mixture ; or, if we study more refinement, we may suppose it to be only like
* 1 Cor. i. 30. * Sol. Song. vi. 3.

UNION TO CHRIST. If9
the union of two friends, in mind and affection- But, as the former union is
too gross, so the latter, as we have seen, falls short of the truth. As every
corporeal idea should be carefully excluded, so we must elevate our conceptions
higher than the most intimate connexion which can be formed between two
individuals, by the operations of intellect and will. The same Spirit lives* in
our exalted Redeemer, and in his people upon earth ; and hence, although
separated from him, and from one another, they are but one. It may seem
strange to illustrate a fact by a mere creation of fancy; but if you should con
ceive a body composed of many parts, and those parts to be disposed of in
different and distant places, but to be animated and moved by the same princi
ple of life, you would have some idea of the union of the members of the
church to Christ, and to one another, although dispersed over the face of
the earth. In this case, the union would not be local, but spiritual, as it is
in the other.
I remark again, that this union is without confusion. It is a union of per
sons, which imports, that the parties concerned in it, continues as much dis
tinct individuals as before. There is no communication of the properties of
one to another ; they are, in every respect, what they were, except that the
Spirit of Christ, who is in the souls of his people, exerts an influence upon
them, by which their moral nature is renewed. Incautious language has been
sometimes used in speaking upon this subject. Gregory Nazianzen has em
ployed the two terms ienrum and xgmanm, as if the saints were deified, or
christified. What his meaning was, I pretend not to say ; perhaps he intended
only to express strongly the closeness of the relation, and the intimacy of the
communion founded upon it ; but when we do not rigidly adhere to the words
of truth and soberness, they mislead others, and suggest false notions to them,
into which they were in no danger of falling themselves. Such language pre
pared the way for the extravagancies of the mystics, who, in more modern
times, have not scrupled to use the phrases of being " godded in God," and
other expressions equally wild. But, although the union is stricter than any
human relation, it has its limits, necessarily arising from, the nature of the
parties. As our Saviour cannot participate in the infirmities of his people,
except by sympathy, so they cannot participate in his divine excellencies,
which are incommunicable. Christ and they are truly united, but there does
not result a unity of essence, or of person ; for it is not effected immediately,
but through the intervention of the Spirit, and, consequently, there is no con
fusion of nature or persons, so that Christ is incarnate in believers, or they
are deified in him.
Lastly, this union is indissoluble. We must not imagine that a man may
be in Christ to-day, and out of Christ to-morrow. The union could be dis
solved only by his act or by ours. There is no reason to apprehend that he
will dissolve it ; because he is not fickle in his attachments, apt to be disgusted,
and easily irritated, but having a gracious design to accomplish, will persevere
till it be completed. Those whom he loves, he loves to the end. It will not
be dissolved by any act of his people. They, indeed, have inconstant hearts,
and, from their own ehangeableness, or from the influence of external tempta
tions, they might renounce their connexion with him : but, as he prays that
their faith may not fail, so the Spirit, dwelling in their hearts, preserves it
amidst the dangers to which it is exposed. There may, indeed, be a tempo
rary apostacy from Christ, in consequence of the decline of grace, or the sus
pension of the activity of the spiritual principle. We have an example in
Peter, who disowned his Master, and disclaimed, with the most solemn asse
verations, the character of his disciple. But even then he had not utterly lost
faith ; and the impressive look by which he was awakened to repentance, as
well as the affectionate treatment which he afterwards experienced, showed
Vol. IL— 22 P

170 THE APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION.
that, notwithstanding his unworthy conduct, Jesus had not rejected him. We
are borne out by the Scripture in maintaining, that the saints cannot fall totally
or finally from grace. " Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall
tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or
sword ? Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him
that loved us."* The design of the apostle is not to inform us, that external
violence cannot dissolve the union of believers to Christ, for on this point there
is no ground of apprehension ; but to give an assurance, that it never shall have
such influence upon the minds of the saints as to prevail upon them to forsake
him. His grace will keep them in the evil hour, and enable them to hold out
to the end. " They shall never perish, neither shall any pluck them out of
my hand."* Death will break all other ties, and separate the soul from the
body ; but this union will not be affected by the fatal stroke. The soul will
rise to heaven, and enter into the immediate presence of Christ, to enjoy more
intimate fellowship with him, than was permitted in this sublunary state. The
body, although lifeless, and corrupted, and reduced to dust, will still be a part
of his mystical body. It is united to him even in the grave, as his human
nature was united to the divine, notwithstanding the temporary separation of
his soul and his body. The saints are said to " die in the Lord," and to
" sleep in Jesus ;" and ages after their death, God announced himself as the
God of Abraham, of Isaac, and of Jacob.*
The sacraments of the new covenant are signs and seals of this union. With
respect to baptism, this is evident from the words formerly quoted : " By one
Spirit are we all baptised into one body."§ The subject of which the apostle
is speaking, is the union of believers to the body of Christ, and consequently
to Christ himself; and while he represents it as effected by the baptism ofthe
Spirit, he unquestionably alludes to the baptism of water as the sign. There
is the same reference to this ordinance, when we are said to be " baptised into
Christ."|| The sprinkling of water in his name and by his authority, imports
the application of his blood, and the communication of his spirit to the soul;
in other words, it imports that we are brought into such a relation to him, that
we have fellowship with him in the benefits of his death ; and of this fellow
ship union is the basis. We must first be in Christ, before we can be blessed
with all spiritual blessings, as the branch must be in the vine, before it can
partake of the juice which ascends from the root. The Lord's supper has the
same signification. " We are one body," Paul says to Christians, "for we
are all partakers of that one bread. "f Their joint participation of that bread
is an emblem of their union, or shows that they compose one holy society
having common feelings and interests. Now, if their fellowship with one
another in this ordinance is a token of their union among themselves, it still
more clearly demonstrates their union to Christ, as he is exhibited under the
sacred symbols, which they take and use. " The bread which we break, is
it not the communion of the body of Christ? The cup of blessing which we
bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ ?"** The acts of taking
and using the elements, are expressive of certain acts of the mind. They are
expressive of faith, by which Christ is received, and which we have seen is
the bond, on the part of the believer, by which he is united to him. The
symbols of the incarnate suffering Redeemer are incorporated with our bodies
by the process of digestion ; and although this is not an exact representation
of the union, in which it has been shown there is no confusion or commixture
of the parties, yet it is undoubtedly intended to remind us of the closeness
of the connexion, by which those who were originally separate are brought
• Rom viii. 35, 37. * John x. 28. * Rev. xiv. 13. 1 Thess. iv. 14. Exod.iii. 6.
§ 1 Cor. xii. 13. B Gal. iii. 27. H 1 Cor. x. 17. '** 1 Cor. xi. 16.

UNION TO CHRIST. 171
together, and conjoined in the most intimate bonds. To the eye tef a careless
spectator, the sacraments of the church may appear mere ceremonies, which
are of little use, and have little meaning. But they are emblematic of one of
the most important facts in the Christian religion. They are visible signs of
an invisible relation, upon which the enjoyment of all spiritual privileges and
blessings depend. They attest that, although Jesus Christ is in heaven, and
his followers are upon earth, yet distance of place does not divide them : for
that he is present with them as he is not present with the world ; that he is as
near to them as are the elements which are applied or received into their bodies,
and that he works as efficaciously in their souls as these do in their bodies.
Among the consequences or effects of this union, we may mention, in the
first place, that all who belong to Christ are possessed of spiritual life. He
said to his disciples, " Because I live, ye shall live also,"* and he fulfils his
word by the inhabitation of the Holy Ghost. By nature they " are dead in
sin ;" but they are " quickened together with him,"* that is, in connexion
with him, and after the example of his resurrection. As in the natural body
the head is the seat of sensation, and feeling and motion are communicated to
all the members by means of the nerves, which have their origin in the brain ;
so from him flow those influences, by which believers are endowed with moral
sensibility, and perform the various functions of the Christian life. " I live,"
says Paul, " and yet not I, but Christ liveth in me ; and the life which I now
live in the flesh, is by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave
himself for me."* Observe how careful he is, when he represents himself as
living, to put us on our guard against supposing that this state was owing to
himself, and to refer his spiritual power and activity to the Saviour, who dwelt
in him, and from whom he derived constant assistance by the exercise of faith.
Grace in the most eminent state, if it were left alone, would fail, like the water
of a stream which is supplied only by occasional showers ; but connected as
it is with Christ as its source, it is like a stream from a perennial spring which
always flows, although it may sometimes swell, and at other times sink. " The
water that I shall give him, shall be in him a well of living water, springing
up unto everlasting life."§
The second effect of their union to Christ, is their communion with him in
all the benefits which he purchased. " Ye are complete in him, who is the
head of all principality and power."|| Being united in him, they enjoy an in
terest in his righteousness, by which he fulfilled the law in their room, and
are thus entitled to the blessings of justification. " There is no condemnation
to them which are in Christ Jesus."^f Hence Paul " counted all things but
dung that he might win Christ, and be found in him, not having his own
righteousness which is of the law, but that which is by the faith of Jesus
Christ, even the righteousness which is of God by faith."** They are adopted
into the family of heaven, and made heirs of God, and joint-heirs with his
Son Jesus Christ. " To as many as received him, to them gave he power to
become the sons of God, even to them who believe on his name."*t They are
sanctified in soul, body, and spirit, being enabled by his grace to die more and
more unto sin, and to live unto righteousness. " Ye are washed, ye are sancti
fied in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God."** The
outlines of the divine image, which were drawn upon their hearts in regenera
tion, are gradually filled up, or, in the language of an apostle, " they are
changed into it from glory to glory, as by the Spirit of the Lord."§§ Lastly.
they are glorified together with him, in whom, as their head, they now sit in
•John xiv. 19. * Eph. ii. 5. * Gal. ii. 20. § John iv. 1*.
8 Col. ii. 10. f Rom. viii. 1. ** Phil. iii. 8, 9. ** John i. 12.
*t 1 Cor. vi. 11. §§2 Cor. iii. 18.

172 THE APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION.
heavenly plates. Of God he is made to them redemption, which imports
deliverance from every evil, and introduction into a state of perfect and eternal
felicity. The last effect of their union to Christ which I shall mention, is their union
to one another. They are one body, because they are partakers of that one
Spirit. They compose a society closer and more compact than can be formed
by civil institutions, or a community of interests, or the endearments of friend
ship. They were born in different countries, they speak different languages,
they are engaged in different temporal pursuits, and are distinguished from
each other by natural temper, education, condition, and other particulars ; but
they are like the parts of a complicated machine, which are not only exter
nally joined together, but are acted upon by one mainspring, and perform one
harmonious movement. They are united in their views of divine truth. They
all believe the depravity of human nature, the divine character and atonement
of the Saviour, the necessity of supernatural grace to renew and sanctify the
soul. Their modes of expression on certain points may be different, but their
faith is substantially the same. If there are some particulars in which they
do not agree, they are inferior matters, (although unenlightened zeal may mag
nify their importance,) of which a man may be ignorant, and not only be safe,
but enjoy uninterrupted communion with God. As they have one baptism, so
they, have also one faith. They are united in love. We sometimes see, it must
be acknowledged, persons of whom we entertain a favourable opinion, keeping
at a distance from, and even opposing one another. In certain cases there may
be good reasons for this conduct, because one of the parties is not walking ac
cording to the gospel ; but it does not always admit of this apology. Being
imperfect, even saints sometimes fall out by the way without any sufficient
cause, and sometimes their disputes originate in mistake. They do not know
one another ; they contend in the dark ; they suppose the friends to be the
enemies of truth. But one saint never hates another knowing him to be a
saint. He loves the image of Christ wherever he perceives it, and loves every
man in whom it appears. So far as the disciples of Christ do know one an
other, they dwell together as brethren in unity, overlooking minor differences
for the sake of great points on which they are agreed, and their common rela
tion to the Saviour. In a word, they are united in design. Animated by one
Spirit, they have the same end in view, the glory of their Saviour, who died
that they should not live to themselves, but to him. Hence we see their zeal
awakened, and their powers called into action, by any object which will con
duce to accomplish this design. If a spark be struck out, it increases into a
flame, which spreads with rapidity from breast to breast, and from country to
country, till the whole Christian world is illuminated and warmed by it. We
have an example in the schemes which are at present carried on for the circu
lation of the Scriptures, and the propagation of the gospel ; and in which
Christians of all denominations, laying aside party feelings, most cordially
combine their counsels and their efforts. Thus, the prayer of Christ is an
swered, that his disciples may be one ; and we look forward to the time when
the union will be more complete, and more widely extended ; when " there
shall be one Lord, and his name shall be one," and when this prophecy shall
be fulfilled, " Thy watchmen shall lift up the voice, with the voice together
shall they sing, when the Lord shall bring again Zion."*
The honour to which believers have been admitted by their union to Christ
should excite their gratitude and their admiration of his condescension and
grace. " What is man that thou art mindful of him ? and the son of man that
thou visitest him ?"t "Will God in very deed dwell with man upon the earth ?"J
- is. m. 8. * Ps. viii. 4. * 2 Chron vi. 18.

FAITH. 173
They should firmly and constantly adhere to him by faith, for he is their life
and strength ; and their peace, comfort, and progressive sanctification depend
upon the continuance of their relation, and the assiduity of this fellowship with
him. " Be strong in the grace which is in Christ Jesus."* In a word, they
should walk worthily of their high privilege, and guard against everything
which has a tendency to separate them from him, and to impede their inter
course with him. Sin is infinitely offensive to him, and is contrary to the
design with which he has united them to himself. As he who hath called
them is holy, so they should be holy in all manner of conversation. " What !
know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you,
which ye have of God, and ye are not your own: For ye are bought with
a price; therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit which are
God's."t

LECTURE LXVIII.
ON FAITH.

Faith the Bond of Union to Christ — Different kinds of Faith — Saving Faith; its nature
and qualities — Justifying Faith defined and explained— Is Assurance of the Essence of
Faith? In illustrating union to Christ, I have shown that the bond on our part, by
which we are connected with him, is faith. It is a fruit of the spirit of regene
ration ; and although the soul which he has quickened begins immediately to
exert itself in all the acts of spiritual life, yet faith is eminently entitled to
attention, because it receives Christ, and has a direct and powerful influence
upon our peace, and comfort, and sanctification. Much as it is undervalued
by many, it is of indispensable necessity in religion ; and while the question
has been foolishly proposed, whether faith or morality is preferable, the truth
is, that the idea of separating them should not be admitted for a moment ; and
that, as faith without morality is a mere pretence, so morality without faith is
worth nothing.
Different kinds of faith are enumerated by theological writers, and are men
tioned in Scripture. The first is called historical faith, which is a simple
assent to the truths of revelation, and may be found in unregenerated men,
who are sometimes said to believe. It receives this denomination, not because
its object is limited to the histories of Scripture, for it comprehends also the
doetrines, but because it is an assent of the same kind which we give to any
credible history, and is a simple act of the understanding. This is the only
faith which is produced by a rational demonstration of the truth of revelation :
and hence we may observe by the way, that those ministers who dwell much
upon the evidences of religion, are chargeable with misspending their time ; be
cause, in the first place, those whom they usually labour to convince, entertain
no doubt of Christianity ; and, in the second place, although they should suc
ceed in establishing conviction in the minds of their sceptical hearers, they
would make them only such believers as were Simon Magus and many others,
who perished in their sins. The second, which is called temporary faith,
consists in such a persuasion of the truths of religion as is accompanied with
some impression upon the conscience and affections. Of this kind is the faith
* 2 Tim. ii. 1. * 1 Pet. i. 15. 1 Cor. vi. 19, 20.
p2

174 THE APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION.
of those whom our Lord compares to the seed which fell upon stony ground,
and hastily sprang up, but soon withered away. It- has no root; it does not
proceed from a mind enlightened, and a heart renewed by the spirit ; and
hence, when it is exposed to a severe trial, it fails. " When tribulation or
persecution ariseth because of the truth, by and by they are offended."* On
this account it is called temporary faith, although in some instances it may last
long, and, like the hope of the hypocrite, perish only at death, because, during
the course of life, no cause occurred of sufficient force to extinguish it. The
third kind of faith is called the faith of miracles ; by which is meant, a per
suasion supernaturally wrought in the mind of the person, that God would
perform some miracle by him, or for him. Of the former persuasion our
Lord speaks, when he says to his disciples, " If ye have faith as a gram of
mustard-seed, ye shall say to this mountain, Remove hence to yonder piace,
and it shall remove ; and nothing shall be impossible unto you."* To the lat
ter persuasion he refers, when he said to two blind men, who besought him to
have mercy on them, " Believe ye that I am ahle to do this ?"* and it was
found in the cripple at Lystra, of whom it is related, that Paul " perceived that
he had faith to be healed. "§ It is evident that this kind of faith was confined
to particular persons, and a particular period of the church, and consequently
is not a Subject of general interest. The last kind of faith is called saving faith,
because by it the salvation offered in the Gospel is received and enjoyed. It
is the design of this lecture to explain it, — first, in general, as it respects the
whole pf divine revelation ; and, secondly, in particular, as it respects the offer
of pardon and eternal life through the Saviour. In this view, it is commonly
called justifying faith.
In speaking of faith in general, I shall direct your attention to the definition
of it, which is given by Paul in the first verse of the eleventh chapter of the
Epistle to the Hebrews : " Now, faith is the substance of things hoped for,
the evidence of things not seen." Faith, whether human or, divine, is the be
lief of a testimony. The faith which we are now considering, is the belief of
the testimony of God. How it operates in reference to the subjects of this
testimony, whether they be considered simply as invisible, or as both invisible
and future, the apostle explains in the words which we have quoted. Of things
hoped for, or future good, it is the substance. Concerning the import of the
original term— iwovtao-K — translated substance, there has been a good deal of
discussion, and it has been understood to signify confidence or subsistence.
Faith is the confidence of things hoped for ; because it assures us not only that
there are such things, but that, through the power and faithfulness of God, we
shall enjoy them. It is the substance of things hoped for ; because it gives
them, although future, a present subsistence in the minds of believers, so that
they are influenced by them as if they were actually present. Thus the word
was understood by some of the Greek commentators, who were the most com
petent judges of its meaning. " Since things which we hope for," says Chry
sostom, " seem not to subsist, faith gives them subsistence, or rather it does
not give it, but is itself their substance. Thus, the resurrection of the dead
is not past, nor does it subsist, but faith gives it subsistence, in our souls."
" Faith," says another, " gives subsistence to the resurrection of the dead, and
places it before our eyes." In human hopes there is a mixture of uncertainty ;
and reason itself will, in many cases, justify anxiety ; but the foundation of
Christian hope being the word and promise of God, the doubts which may
arise in our minds are the consequences of the weakness of our faith ; for, if
our faith corresponded with the nature of the testimony, we should be as fully
assured of what is future, as we are of what is present or past.
* Matt. xiii. 21. * Ib. xvii. 20. * Ib. ix. 28. § Acts. xiv. 9.

FAITH. 175
The objects of faith are not only future good, but invisible things, both good
and evil, which are made known by divine revelation ; and of these it is the
evidence, &*yx't, the demonstration or 'conviction. By our senses we become
acquainted with the material world ; by consciousness we are assured of the
existence of our souls and their various faculties ; and by reasoning we deduce
one truth from another. But, besides these sources of information, a great
part of our knowledge is derived from testimony. Thus, we know that there
are cities and countries which we never saw ; that- events have happened at
which we were not present ; that certain persons lived in former ages, and
performed certain actions ; and that there are persons now alive who have
not come within the sphere of our observation. Although there is a dif
ference between the evidence of demonstration and the evidence of testimony,
yet, in particular circumstances, there is no difference in the conviction pro
duced ; for no person in his senses entertains any more doubt that there is such
a country as Greece or Italy, although he has not travelled from home, than
he does of a proposition in mathematics which he fully comprehends. We
depend upon testimony in matters of commerce and science, in all our ordinary
transactions, and even in the important concerns of life and death. " If then
we receive the testimony of men, the testimony of God is greater."* In the
latter case, there is no possibility of mistake or deception. Besides, his testi
mony relates to many things of the utmost importance, with respect to which
man could give us no information, — things which eye had not seen, ear had
not heard, and it had not entered into the heart of man to conceive. Of these,
faith is the evidence or demonstration. Being past, and future, and invisible
on account of their distance from us, or the spirituality of their nature, they
cannot be discovered by our senses ; but the conviction of their reality is as
strong in the mind of a believer, as if they were placed before his eyes.
This is a general account of faith, according to the definition of Paul; but,
with a view to illustrate its nature more fully and distinctly, I request your at
tention to the following observations.
First, The objects of religion are invisible and future, and hence arises the in
dispensable necessity of faith. The objects with which worldly men are conver
sant, are present, or are considered not very distant ; they are, or are expected
soon to come, under the cognizance of their senses. Nothing seems to them to be
important, which may not be seen, and felt, and enjoyed, in this sublunary state.
If there be any thing which does not fall under this description, anything which
cannot be made subservient to the purposes of the present life, they regard it as a
nonentity, or as a matter with which they have nothing to do. Christians are
deemed enthusiasts or fools, who neglect the substance, and grasp at a shadow,
dreaming of another world, which no man ever saw, instead of labouring to
make themselves comfortable in this. In a certain sense, indeed, the things of
this world are the objects of religion, because it regulates our conduct and af
fections in reference to them ; but the motives by which it influences our
minds, are derived from the invisible state, and the reward, to which it teaches
us to aspire, lies beyond the narrow boundary of time and sense. A Christian
is a citizen ofthe Jerusalem above ; his conversation is in heaven ; he looks at the
things which are not seen, and eternal ; he declares plainly, that he is seeking
a country, even a heavenly one ; he obeys the exhortation, " Set your affection
on things above, not on things on the earth ; for ye are dead, and your life is
hid with Christ in God."*
In the second place, Of those objects with which religion is conversant, we
can have no knowledge but by Divine revelation. It is on this account that
they are objects of faith. We believe that they exist, upon the testimony of God.
* 1 John v. 9. * Col. iii. 2, 3.

176 THE APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION.
It may be supposed that this statement of the source of religious knowledge
is not strictly true, for that some parts of it, at least, are discoverable
by reason. By reason, we demonstrate the existence of God and infer
a future state, in which men will be rewarded according to their works ;
but, without inquiring how far unassisted reason would advance in its
researches, it is certain that, with respect even to these fundamental truths, it
is to revelation alone that we are indebted for those views of them, which are
the proper objects of religion. It is from revelation that we have derived the
knowledge of that character of God, with which we, as sinners, are concerned.
It is revelation which informs us that he is love ; that he is merciful, and ready
to forgive ; that he has given his only-begotten Son for the salvation of the
world ; and that whosoever believes in him, shall not perish, but shall have
everlasting life. On these important subjects nature is silent ; reason says
nothing, because it is profoundly ignorant : they were so far from being sug
gested by meditations of the human mind, or according with its natural con
ceptions, that when they were first proposed, they were derided as folly.
With respect to a future state, although the heathens entertained some obscure
notions of it, for which, however, it is probable they were indebted more to
tradition than to reasoning, it does not admit of a doubt that, without revelation,
we should not have had the faintest idea of the heaven of Christianity, and
should have known nothing concerning the means by which admission into it
is obtained. It is the unrivalled glory of Jesus Christ, that " he hath abolished
death, and brought life and immortality to light through the Gospel."* Our
religion is a free gift of God to our sinful race. It originated in the purpose
which he purposed in himself before the beginning of time, and into which no
man or angel could have pried ; it is delivered to us in the Scriptures, which
were not written by the will of man, but at the suggestion, and with the assist
ance of the Holy Spirit ; and like some other gifts of God, it has not yet been
imparted to all men, but, in the exercise of his sovereignty, has been granted
to one nation, and withheld from another.
In the third place, Faith is an assent to the revelation which God has made
of the truths of religion. We assent to a testimony, when we are persuaded of
the veracity of the testifier, into which our faith is resolved. But, while this
is a general definition of faith, it varies its aspect, if I may speak so, according
to the subject of the testimony. When the testimony relates to a matter of in
difference, a fact in which we take no interest, the assent is very slight, and
may be called simple belief. But if the subject come home to our business
and bosoms, a stronger impression is made. When a person, for example, is
in distress or danger, and the testimony informs him of some generous friend,
who is both able and willing to deliver him, and is exerting his power for his
relief, the act ofthe mind rises higher than simple belief, and is properly deno
minated trust or confidence. If we are looking forward with desire to an ob
ject, the possession of which will make us happy, and the testimony assures
us that we shall obtain it, expectation is added to desire, and both united con
stitute hope. When we attend to the nature of the Christian religion, and
consider that the subjects of which it treats are of infinite importance, that it
exhibits the character of God in its grandest and most interesting features, dis
plays all the miracles and blessings of redemption, and directs our views to the
realities of eternity, we perceive that the faith which it demands must be very
different from a cold naked assent. It being admitted, that a faith correspond
ing to the nature of the things revealed, implies the concurrence of the heart,
as well as the conviction of the understanding, it will be easily conceded that its
existence is rare. There are many who profess to believe the Gospel, and who do
* 2 Tim. i.

FAITH. 177
believe it in this sense, that they entertain a vague and confused notion of its truth ;
but their faith is merely a careless passive assent. They have been told that it is
true, and perhaps have given attention to the evidences by which its truth is estab
lished, and they feel no disposition to call it in question. There is no particular
reason why they should controvert the evidence, because they regarded the
subject as a mere speculation, which they are under no necessity of reducing
to practice ; there are several reasons which incline them to yield to it, as the
prejudices of education, the wishes of their friends, a regard to character and
to their worldly interests. They dc^not enter into a close examination of the
subject, nor institute an inquiry whether their assent be sincere and cordial.
They are not infidels in the common acceptation of the word, and therefore
they are believers. But their faith is totally different from a practical con
viction. It has no influence upon their hearts ; and were they tried by the
standard of Scripture, or even by the laws of reason and common sense, it
would be found that they do not really believe those truths, of which they pro
bably think that they never entertained a doubt.
In the fourth place, Faith conveys to the mind a full conviction of the truths
of religion. It is the substance, or Confident expectation of things, hoped for,
the evidence or demonstration of things not seen. The ground of this con
viction of the existence, and nature, and importance of its objects, is the
infallible testimony on which it depends. What God has attested must be
true, because, being omniscient, he cannot be mistaken, and being holy, he
will not deceive. It may be objected, that this assurance, which is said to be
long to faith, is not always found in believers, and that they are sometimes
disturbed with doubts. . The fact cannot be denied ; but it is not at variance
with the definition formerly given, which merely describes what faith is in
itself, and what it ought to be in our experience. We should reflect that, like
other graces, it subsists in imperfect beings, and has to contend with difficulties,
by which its full exercise is impeded. Consciousness of personal demerit, and
of the remains of sin in the heart, the appearances of Providence which seem
to be opposed to the declarations and promises of Scripture, the temptations of
Satan, and the suspension of Divine influences for the sins into which they
have fallen, may involve Christians in mental distress, and lead them to call in
question truths to which, in their happier hours, they yielded an unwavering
assent. " O thou of little faith, wherefore didst thou doubt ?"* When these
obstacles are removed, and the believer fixes his undivided attention upon the
faithfulness of God, he feels the same assurance of the truths of religion, how
ever myterious, and however contrary to the natural suggestions of the mind,
which he does of his own existence, or of that of the material world. No con
viction could be stronger than that of Abraham, when, without hesitation, he
offered up Isaac, upon whose life the promises depended, and yet continued to
hope for the blessings exhibited in them ; and when he confidently expected
a son, although he himself was old, and his wife was barren, and the time ol'
child-bearing was past. This was faith in its highest state. It is proposed for
our imitation ; and as it is implied, that the same trust in God is attainable by
others, so there is no reason to doubt that many have trodden, and are still
treading in the steps of that illustrious man, and are glorifying God by an un
qualified dependence on his word.
Lastly, Through faith, the truths of religion exert influence upon the mind,
as if they were perceived by the senses. It considers them as realities, and is
suitably affected by them. It has been said that, if the solemn and awful
scenes which revelation describes were actually disclosed to view, the sight
would overwhelm us, and all worldly affairs would be suspended as too in-
* Matt. xvi. 31.

178 THE APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION.
significant to engage our attention. This may be true ; and it may have been
for this reason the will of God, that, in this sublunary state, we should walk
by faith and not by sight. Yet such is the assurance of the existence and
magnitude of invisible things which faith produces, that they not only excite
powerful emotions in the hearts of believers, and give a new direction to their
conduct, but they often make a stronger impression upon them than is made
by the things which are visible and present. Hence, they renounce the plea
sures of sin for the happiness promised by religion ; and abandon the world as
their portion, in the expectation of the heavenly inheritance. The sacrifices
which a Christian has often made, of his will, his ease, his honour, his wealth,
his friends, and even of his life, are proofs of the mighty power of faith. These
are the trophies which adorn its triumphs. " This is the victory that over-
cometh the world, even our faith."*
Thus far I have given you an account of faith in general, as it respects the
whole revelation contained in the Scriptures, and makes all the doctrines and
facts recorded in them bear upon the mind, so as to promote our conformity
to the will of God, and our final salvation. Being founded upon his testimony,
it respects every thing which he has attested, and improves it for the purpose
which it was intended to serve. It is conversant with things past as well as
with things to come, with things awful and alarming, as well as with those
which are calculated to impart peace and consolation to the soul. By faith,
we are assured of the threatenings of the law, as well as of the promises of the
Gospel ; we are moved with fear, as well as animated with hope. It is of
great utility and indispensable necessity to the Christian, in the present life ;
it excites him to the performance of his duty, and supports him in adversity,
and fortifies his mind against temptation. " The people that know their God,
are strong, and do exploits."! They resist the assaults of Satan whether
violent or insidious, overcome the allurements and terrors of the world, and
persevere to the end in a course of holy obedience.
I now proceed to speak of justifying faith, or the faith by which a sinner
obtains an interest in Jesus Christ, and the blessings of salvation. Let it be
observed, that it is not different in its nature from the faith already described,
for it is the same grace which operates in the believer, whatever is the object
upon which it is fixed. It is called justifying faith, on account of the design
to which it is subservient; and, in this view, its exclusive object is that part
of revelation which relates to the Saviour, or the Gospel, strictly so called.
The first remark which I make is, that the object of justifying faith is Jesus
Christ, and redemption through his blood. Paul said to the jailor of Philippi,
" Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved."* The person
addressed was a sinner, convinced and alarmed, dreading the vengeance of his
Maker, and anxiously inquiring how he might be delivered from it. The words
are an answer to his question, and must, therefore, point out the object which
alone could dispel his fears, and inspire him with hope. This design can be
accomplished only by the revelation of a Saviour, or by the Gospel as dis
tinguished from the Law. The faith of the law an awakened sinner already
possesses, for his fears proceed from his belief that it is holy and just, and
that its threatenings will be executed upon those who have transgressed it, un
less they find out some method of escaping its penalty. Nothing will relieve
the mind of a criminal condemned to die, but authentic information that his
sovereign is willing to pardon him ; and nothing will set free the convinced
sinner from the terror which he feels, but the knowledge of the mercy of God,
through the mediation of his Son. The object, then, of justifying faith is
Christ crucified, — Christ lifted up on the cross, like the brazen serpent in the
* 1 John v. 4. * Dan. xi. 32. $ Acts xvi. 31.

FAITH. 179
wilderness, — Christ as having borne our sins in his own body on the tree, his
blood shed as a propitiation for sin, and the everlasting righteousness which
he brought in as the foundation of hope to those who had no hope in them
selves. It is false and foolish to suppose, that men may be saved by faith in
God as their Creator, and Preserver, and Lawgiver. If they considered him
in no other light, and understood the full import of these characters, they
would perceive that he is inaccessible to the guilty, a consuming fire, the
avenger of such as do evil. It is in the Gospel only, that a sinner will find
those views of his character which will quiet the agitation of his mind, and
hold out encouragement to return to him. He will never look to his Maker
with comfort and hope, till he behold him in Christ, reconciling the world un
to himself, not imputing their trespasses to men. There is no other refuge
from his wrath but the atonement.
Secondly, To the revelation of the Saviour in the Gospel, the awakened sin
ner, under the influence of the Spirit, yields a cordial assent ; and this act of
his mind is therefore denominated faith. Faith is the belief of a testimony ;
and it is called human faith, when its object is the testimony of man : divine
faith, when its object is the testimony of God. The cold and listless assent
which is every day given to the Gospel, by thousands who take no interest in
it, and are in no degree influenced by it in their practice, if it be called faith at
all, is evidently inferior to the faith of devils, who "believe and tremble,"
while those persons believe and disregard. The awakened sinner is under the
conduct of the Spirit, who presents the Gospel to his mind with an evidence
which has all the force of demonstration. To this internal revelation, this illu
mination 'of the mind by supernatural grace, the Scriptures refer, when they
speak of " the opening of the blind eyes," and of the coming of the Gospel
" in power, and in the Holy Ghost, and in much assurance."* It is impossi
ble to describe the operations of the mind, so as to render them intelligible to
those by whom they have not been experienced ; but we can all conceive the
difference between the assent that we give to a truth, which we have not
properly considered and about which we feel no concern, and our assent to a
truth whicrTwe understand, and know to be intimately connected with our
interests. Such is the difference between the faith of nominal Christians, and
the faith by which we are saved. The latter is founded on clear perceptions
of the truth, and excellence and infinite importance of the Gospel. An evidence
~ accompanies it, which dispels all doubts, removes all objections, and creates
the highest assurance ; Christ crucified is seen to be the power of God and the
wisdom of God unto salvation. The Gospel appears to be worthy of all ac
ceptation, because it is so admirably adapted to the circumstances of men, and
redounds so much to the glory of God. It bears upon it the signature of
Heaven. It is the truth, and in the judgment of the enlightened sinner, the
only truth which deserves his attention. This is the " excellent knowledge
of Christ," for which he is willing to count all things loss.t
Thirdly, Faith implies the reliance or dependence of the soul upon Jesus
Christ for salvation. The sinner not only assents to the testimony of God
concerning his Son as true, but regards it as worthy of all acceptation Some
indeed, as I remarked in a former lecture, make faith consist in simple assent,
because this is the strict and logical definition of the term, and consequently
consider it as an act of the understanding alone. But as the Scriptures make
use of new words and phrases to express new ideas, so they employ some old
words in a sense peculiar to themselves ; and we should proceed with them as
we do with any other book, when we endeavour, by comparing one passage
with another, to ascertain the meaning of a particular term which occurs in it
* Acts xxvi. 18. 1 Thess. i. 5. f Phil. iii. 8.

180 THE APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION.
That, in the phraseology of Scripture, faith is not simply an assent of the un
derstanding, but implies an act of volition accepting the Saviour and confiding
in him, is evident from the metaphorical terms by which it is described. It is
called a receiving of Christ, a coming to him, a fleeing for refuge to lay hold
upon the hope set before us, an eating of his flesh, and a drinking of his blood.
These terms import such motion or activity as the soul exerts, when it not
only contemplates, but desires and embraces the good which is presented to
it. In the Old Testament, faith is called trusting in the Lord. Now we know
that to trust in a person, is not merely to believe that he is able and willing to
deliver us from danger and distress, and to bestow favours upon us, but to ac
cept his proffered assistance, and to commit our interest to his care and dis-
osal. If we reflect upon the situation of a sinner when he believes, we
hall more distinctly perceive what is, and naturally must be, the exercise of
his mind. Finding himself condemned by the law of God and his own con
science, and disappointed in his endeavours to relieve himself, by his prayers,
and tears, and fasts, and good works, how is he affected when Jesus Christ is
revealed as the only Saviour from sin 1 . Is he not like the drowning man, who
eagerly grasps the plank thrown out to support him ; or like the manslayer,
who, seeing the avenger of blood close at his heels, ran for safety into tho
city of refuge ? He does not content himself with saying, ' the blood of Christ
is infinitely meritorious, and happy should I be, if I could share in the bless
ings procured by it.' This, we need not doubt, devils could say ; for they aro
aware of the efficacy of his sacrifice, and would rejoice if it were possible to
be delivered by it from torment. He farther says, ' I desire to be sprinkled
with his blood, that, like the Israelites in Egypt, I may escape, when the
wrath of God shall go forth against his enemies. I place my hope upon the
great Atonement, by which the justice of heaven has been appeased; I will
draw near to God, pleading the merit of his Son ; I will present to him his
all-perfect righteousness, of which he has testified his high approbation.' It
remains, that faith is an acquiescence in the plan of redemption through the
mediation of Christ, a reliance upon him as our Saviour, and consequently,
that, if there has not been a concurrence of mind and heart in receiving the
testimony ofthe Gospel, our faith is vain, we are yet in our sins.
Lastly, Faith implies the renunciation of our own righteousness as the foun
dation of our hope. This is an obvious inference from the preceding remarks,
without attention to which the nature of faith will not be understood. It is
not a partial, but an unreserved reliance upon Christ for salvation. To believe,
is not to call upon him to' assist us in what we have commenced and carried
on to a certain extent, but from a consciousness of our utter inability even to
begin, to commit the work of our salvation wholly to him. This is the test
of genuine faith. That is the faith of God's elect; which leads away the sin
ner from himself to the Saviour, fixes his undivided attention upon the cross,
and derives his peace and hope solely from the sacrifice which was offered
upon it. It is a spurious faith, which, forming a treacherous alliance with
good works, attempts to introduce them as a partial cause of our acceptance
with God. '• To him that worketh," says Paul, "the reward is not reckoned
of grace, but of debt. But to him that worketh not, but believeth in him that
justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness."* These words
are worthy of attention. To work and to believe are opposed to each other.
He who believes does not work, that is, he does not work that he may live,
perform duties with a view to obtain the divine favour, associate his own obe
dience with that of our Redeemer as the ground of his justification. He sim
ply believes ; that is, he receives the testimony of God concerning his Son, and
* Rom. iv. 4, 5.

FAITH. 181
expects salvation through him alone. It is on this account that true faiih is
so rare. Men would not object to the aid of Jesus Christ, so far as their own
power is insufficient to save them : but to depend upon him to the exclusion
of all their own qualifications and good deeds, to owe every thing to him, and
to have nothing left of which they may boast as their own, — all this is so con
trary to the natural bias of the heart, so mortifying to pride, so destructive of
our schemes for appearing respectable in our own eyes, and maintaining what
we falsely call the dignity of human nature, that at first we all revolt from it
with secret indignation, and will not submit to the humiliating plan, till we
have been prepared by the discipline of the law, and the grace of the Gospel.
It is the office of faith to receive Christ, as he is revealed in the Scriptures.
He is offered freely, and we must receive him without presenting any price in
exchange. He is exhibited as the only Saviour ; and to receive him as such,
is to trust, neither in the merits of any saint, nor in the intercession of any
angel, nor in our own repentance and obedience, but in him whose arm brought
us salvation, and who claims the undivided glory of a work, which he accom
plished without an associate. To believe, is to submit to the righteousness
of God ; it is to desist from our vain attempts to establish our own righteous
ness, and to say, " In the Lord have \ve righteousness and strength."*
What has been said concerning faith in general, and justifying faith in par
ticular, is conformable to the doctrine of our church. " By this faith," says
our Confession, " a Christian believeth to be true whatsoever is revealed in
the word, for the authority of God himself speaking therein ; and acteth dif
ferently upon that which each particular passage thereof containeth ; yielding
obedience to the commands, trembling at the threatenings, and embracing the
promises of God for this life, and that which is to come. But the principal
acts of saving faith are accepting, receiving, and resting upon Christ alone
for justification, sanctification, and eternal life, by virtue of the covenant of
grace."* When the question is proposed, whether assurance is of the essence of faith,
it is necessary, before we return an answer, to know what is meant by assur
ance. If it mean a full persuasion of the truth of the divine testimony, to
whatever subject it relates, we answer, that it is essential to faith. Faith is
not a doubting, hesitating assent, but " the substance of things hoped for, the
evidence of things not seen." The Christian is firmly persuaded of every
doctrine and fact which God has attested, and of every promise which he has
made. He believes that Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the Saviour of
sinners ; that his death was an atonement for guilt ; that there is redemption
through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins ; that he is freely offered to
him and others in the Gospel, and that every man who trusts in him shall be
saved. But if assurance mean an explicit assurance of our own salvation, we
deny that it is of the essence of faith.
In opposition to Papists, who made faith consist in an assent to the truth
of the Scriptures in general, and denied that any man could be certain of his
final salvation, the Reformers represented it as a firm persuasion, that Christ
died for us in particular, and that our sins are forgiven. The founders of our
religious society adopted this notion, and in one of their public deeds,* have
defined raith to be a persuasion on the part of the sinner, that Christ is his ;
that what he did and suffered he did and suffered for him, and that he shall
have life and salvation by him. It may be questioned whether in avoiding
one extreme, they have not run into another ; or, at least, have not employed
language, which must be explained and qualified, in order to make it accord
with the truth. A sinner cannot say, in the first instance, Christ is mine in
•Is. xiv. 24. f Confess, ch. xiv. $ 2. $ Act of Assoc Pres. 21st Oct. 1742.
O

182 THE APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION.
possession ; because this becomes true, only when he has believed, and cannot
belong to the nature of faith, as it is a consequence of it. If the words mean
only, that Christ is his in the offer of the Gospel, or is offered to him in par
ticular, we allow it, but have a right to complain, that a fact about which there
is no dispute, should be expressed in terms which are apt to suggest a quite
different sense. The sinner cannot say, till he have believed, that Christ died
for him, unless he died for all men without exception ; but, consistently with
the doctrine of particular redemption, no man can be assured that he was one
ofthe objects ofthe sacrifice ofthe cross, unless he have first obtained an in
terest in it by faith. Neither can every sinner say, in the first moment of
faith, that he shall certainly have eternal salvation. He desires salvation no
doubt, and his faith implies an expectation of it ; but how many believers have
been harassed with doubts at first, and during the whole course of their lives
have rarely been able to use the language of confidence ! This the advo
cates of this definition are compelled to admit ; and it is curious to observe
how, in attempting to reconcile it with their system, they shift and shuffle,
and almost retract, and involve themselves in perplexity and contradiction, as
those must do who are labouring to prove that, although it is a fact that many
believers are not assured of their salvation, yet assurance is of the essence of
faith. It is manifest that, if assurance is of the essence of faith, it can never
be separated from it.-— The exercise of faith is regulated by the word of God,
and its object is there defined. But it is nowhere revealed in the Scriptures,
that Christ died for any particular person, and that his sins are forgiven. How,
then, can an assurance of these things belong to the nature of faith ? How
can it be our duty to believe what is not in the testimony ? It is an objection
against this definition, that it makes faith consist rather in the belief of some
thing regarding ourselves, than in the belief of the testimony of God ; in the
belief of the goodness of our state, rather than of the all-sufficiency and will
ingness of Christ. It may be farther objected, that it confounds the inferences
from faith with faith itself; nothing being plainer than that these propositions,
' Christ died for me,' ' my sins are forgiven,' are conclusions to which the
mind comes, from the previous belief of the doctrines and promises of the
Gospel. Farther, it is chargeable with this error, that it defines faith in its
* highest and most perfect state, and excludes the lower degrees of it, and thus
lays a stumbling-block before thousands of the people of God, who, not find
ing in themselves this assurance, are distressed with the melancholy thought
that they are unbelievers. Although adopted by our fathers, it is contrary to
the doctrine of our standards, to which only we are bound to conform, and in
which it is expressly said, " This infallible assurance doth not so belong to
the essence of faith, but that a true believer may wait long, and conflict with
many difficulties, before" he be a partaker of it."* In a word, this definition
of faith has been rejected by many of the greatest divines. I shall mention
only one, the learned and pious Bishop Davenant, who observes, in his
work entitled Determinationes Quxstionem quarundam Theologicarum, that
the word confidence or assurance has two meanings. It signifies the act of
resting upon, and adhering to Jesus Christ, by which we embrace him as with
both our arms, and seek to obtain pardon, grace, and glory from the Father.
Justification follows this act, whether the sinner be fully persuaded of the re
mission of his sins or not. But sometimes it denotes an effect consequent to
justification, namely, the full persuasion and lively sense of pardon, and the
favour of God. We confess, he says, that this confidence or assurance is not
justifying faith, but its daughter, and that the justified soul is not wont to
obtain it, but after many exercises of faith and holiness.
• Conf. ch. xviii. § 3.

FAITH. 183
It is admitted, that an assurance of salvation is attainable in the present life,
A.n apostle exhorts Christians "to make their calling and election sure."* The
exhortation implies that they may not be assured of the goodness of their
state, for no man would be exhorted to seek what he already possesses, and,
consequently, that this persuasion is not found in every believer, as it would
be if it belonged to the nature of faith. They are called upon to examine
themselves, whether they be in the faith ; but this would be unnecessary, ii
there were an evidence in faith itself which satisfied the mind. The assurance
of which we speak, is not obtained by the direct act of faith, but by reflection.
It is the result of evidence, collected by observation and inquiry, that the pet-
son is possessed of the faith to which salvation is promised. It is "founded,"
our Church says, " upon the divine truth of the promises of salvation, the in
ward evidence of those graces unto which these promises are made, the testi
mony of the Spirit of adoption witnessing with our spirits that we are the
children of God ; which Spirit is the earnest of our inheritance, whereby we
are sealed to the day of redemption. "t By many theological writers this as
surance has been called the reflex act of faith, but with manifest impropriety.
It is not an act of faith, but a process of reasoning founded upon faith, and
may be reduced to a regular syllogism : Every man who believes in Jesus
Christ shall be saved ; but I have believed in Christ, as is proved by the ope
rations of divine grace in my heart ; therefore I shall be saved. The major
of this proposition is a matter of faith, because it is a revealed truth ; the mi
nor is a matter of experience ; and the conclusion is of a mixed nature, par
taking of the character of both. It is more accurate to call it the assurance of
sense, because it is founded on our feelings and dispositions. " We know
that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren."
" Hereby we know that we are of the truth, and shall assure our hearts before
him. For if our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart, and know
eth all things. Beloved, if our heart condemn us not, then have we confidence
toward God."*
It is evident, from the preceding account, that " faith is not of ourselves,
but is the gift of God."§ Without particular assistance, we may assent to the
Gospel, upon perceiving the evidence of its truth ; but, unless our minds be
enlightened, and. our hearts be renewed by almighty grace, we will not cordi
ally embrace it, and comply with its design, by placing our whole dependance
upon Christ and renouncing every other foundation of hope. Faith is an act,
not of the carnal, but of the regenerated man. This important truth we should
always bear in mind, that we may seek faith from Him who only can bestow
it ; and, if we have obtained it, may give all the praise and glory to God. It
is explicitly laid down by our Lord in the following words : " No man can
come to me, except the Father, which hath sent me, draw him : and I will
raise him up at the last day. It is written- in the prophets, And they shall be
all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of
the Father, cometh unto me."|| i
* 2 Pet. i. 10. * Conf. chap, xviii. § 2. +1 John iii. 14, 19—21. § Eph. ii. 8.
S John vi. 44.

184 THE PRIVILEGES CF BELIEVERS.
LECTURE LXIX.
ON THE PRIVILEGES OF BELIEVERS :— JUSTIFICATION.
Importance of the Doctrine — Meaning of the term Justification — The Author and Subjects of
Justification — Implies that a Sinner is pardoned, and accounted righteous — Ground of
Justification, not the Works of the Law.
The subject which we are now to consider is entitled to the most serious
attention, on account of the important place which it holds in the system of
religion. To a man who acknowledges himself to be a sinner, no inquiry is
60 interesting as that which relates to the means of his restoration to the favour
of God ; and, if he is thoroughly convinced of his guilt and danger, he will
find no rest till he has obtained a satisfactory answer to it. Till this point is
decided, all other information respecting religion will be unavailing. De
monstrations of the existence of God will only serve to confirm, and more
deeply impress upon his mind, the awful truth which he already believes, that
there is a righteous Judge, before whom he must appear, and by whose sen
tence his final doom will be fixed. To explain the moral law to him, and
inculcate the obligations to obey it, will be to act the part of a public accuser,
when he quotes the statutes of the land in order to show that the charges which
he has brought against the criminals at the bar are well founded, and, conse
quently, that he is worthy of punishment. The stronger the arguments are by
which you evince the immortality of the soul, the more clearly do you prove
that his punishment will not be temporary, and that there is another state of
existence, in which he will be fully recompensed according to his desert.
Hence you perceive how defective is not only natural religion, but that spuri
ous Christianity, the publication of which Unitarians affirm to have been the sole
design of the mission of our Saviour. There is nothing in a pure morality, and
the doctrine ofthe resurrection and a future state, to relieve the mind of a sinner.
It is the glory of the gospel, that it reveals the method according to which
a sinner may obtain peace with his Maker, and may rise to the possession
of eternal life. It resolves the important question, how a man may be just
with God. But although the information which he gives on this subject is
sufficiently clear, it may be misapprehended, through carelessness and preju
dice ; and, accordingly, we find that there has been, and still is, a diversity of
opinion among professed Christians with respect to the ground of acceptance.
An error upon this point is fundamental ; for, as there is only one way to
heaven, if we miss it. and take another, it is certain that we shall not arrive at
that happy place. If we entertain right views of the doctrine of justification,
we cannot go far wrong with respect to any other essential truth of Christianity ;
but a mistake here will affect the whole system, and give rise to false concep
tions of the character of God, of the mediation of Christ, of the law, of the
gospel, of grace, and of works. It was justly termed by Luther, articulus
stantis vel cadentis ecclesias, the article of a standing or falling church ; be
cause, according to the views which are adopted in any church with respect to
the means of regaining the favour of God, true piety and holiness will flourish
or decline in it. I may add, that it was eminently through the preachino- of
the scriptural doctrine of justification, that the reformation from Popery was
effected. The light of this truth discovered to men the abominations of Anti
christ, and made them renounce the merit of good works, the efficacy of fasts,

JUSTIFICATION. 185
and pilgrimages, and penances, the intercession of saints and angels, the sacri
fice of the mass, and all the other tenets by which the mediation of Christ had
been virtually set aside, and sinners had been led to rest their hope upon a
foundation of sand.
It is necessary, in the first place, to ascertain the meaning of the term justi
fication. It is a Latin word, which, however, is not of classical authority, and
is found, I believe, only in the works of ecclesiastical writers. If we explain
it according to the laws of etymology, it will signify the making of a person
just, as sanctification signifies the making of a person holy. Hence some of
the ancients were misled with regard to the meaning of the term, and con
founded justification with sanctification. The church of Rome has fallen into
this same error. The justification of a sinner is declared by the council of
Trent to be not only the remission of sin, but also sanctification and the reno
vation of the inward man, by which a person who was unjust is made just,
and instead of an enemy becomes a friend, so that he is an heir according to
the hope of eternal life. — The formal cause of it is the righteousness of God,
not that by which he is himself righteous, but that by which he makes us
righteous ; and by which, bestowed upon us as his gift, we are renewed in the
spirit of our mind, and are not only accounted, but are truly called, and are
righteous, receiving each of us righteousness in ourselves according to our
measure, which the Spirit distributes lo every man as he wills, and according
to the peculiar disposition and co-operation of every man." The council then
proceeds to enact the following decree : — " If any man shall say that men are
justified solely by the imputation of the righteousness of Christ, or solely by
the remission of sins to the exclusion of grace and charity which is shed
abroad in our hearts by the Spirit, and is inherent in them, or even that the
grace by which we are justified is only the favour of God, let him be ac
cursed."* This is called the first justification, and it is said to be by faith, in
a sense, however, which does not altogether exclude merit and predisposing
qualifications. The second justification is said to be by works, performed by
the aid of the grace which was infused in the first.
Justification is a forensic term, which denotes not a change of a person's
dispositions, but a change of his state in relation to the law. It does not make
him righteous by an infusion of holy habits, but pronounces him righteous on
valid grounds. This appears from many passages to be the meaning of the
Hebrew word p-$, and the Greek word Sixaiu*. " If there be a controversy among
men, and they come into judgment that the judges may judge them, then they
shall justify tjie righteous and condemn the wicked. "t To justify the righteous
is not to make him, but to pronounce him, righteous upon proof of his innocence,
and of the goodness of his cause. For this alone is the office of a judge. " To
justify the wicked," signifies to pronounce him just, or to acquit him in judg
ment, and is declared to be an " abomination to the Lord,"* as it is to condemn
the righteous, or pronounce him to be guilty. " He is near that justifieth
me ; and who is he that will contend with me ?"§ These are the words of our
Saviour, and refer to the sentence of his Father, by which he was acquitted
from every false charge brought against him by his enemies, as well as from
the demands of law and justice which he had fully satisfied. The word is
evidently used in the same sense when the Psalmist says, " Enter not into
judgment with thy servant ; for in thy sight shall no man living be justified."!)
He is speaking to God as his Judge, and he intreats him that he may not be
brought to trial ; because neither he nor any other person could expect a sen
tence in his favour.
* Concil. Trident,' Sess. vi. Decret et Canon, de juatificatione.
* Deut. xxv. 1. i Prov. xvii. 15. § Is. 1. 8. \ Ps. cxliii. 2.
Vol. II.— 24 q 2

186 THE PRIVILEGES OF BELIEVERS.
In the New Testament, the word J«suot always bears a forensic sense, or
a sense closely connected with it, importing not to make, but to pronounce
righteous. When wisdom is said to be "justified of her children,"* the
meaning is, that she is approved or vindicated by them, exhibited in her true
character, and cleared from the aspersions of her enemies. The man who
is desirous to justify himself, is a man. who is eager to prove that there
is no defect in his obedience. Of this description were the Pharisees, who
maintained that men were accepted by God on the ground of their good works,
and made a show of righteousness before the world. " Ye are they that jus
tify yourselves before men."t The publican went down to his house "justi
fied,"* that is, acquitted and pardoned by God, whose mercy he had humbly
implored. " The doers of the law shall be justified, § that is, they, and they
alone, shall be esteemed righteous by the law, or rather by the Lawgiver. The
forensic sense of justification is manifest from its being opposed to condemna
tion. " It is God that justifieth ; who is he that condemneth?" " Judgment
was by one to condemnation ; but the free gift is of many offences unto justi
fication." ||
It is unnecessary to multiply proofs, as the matter is abundantly plain.
Justification is a change, not of our nature, but of our state. Those who are
justified are also regenerated ; but the two privileges, although inseparable, are
perfectly distinct.
The Author of justification is God. " It is God that justifieth." The
person to be justified is accountable to him as his Creator and Lawgiver, and
by his sentence he must stand or fall. In this transaction he sustains the
character of the guardian of the law, who will take care, if I may speak so,
that its authority shall not be subverted, and its rights be violated by any sen
tence which he may pronounce in favour of its subjects ; and of the God of
grace, who receives into favour those whom he might have justly excluded
from his presence. It is said, indeed, in the Book of Daniel, that " they who
turn many to righteousness," or literally, who justify many, " shall shine as
the stars for ever and ever."^[ But their justification of others is merely minis
terial, and must be understood of their agency under God in bringing men to
that faith through which they are justified. In the same way we must explain
those words of Christ, which seem to put the power of eternal life and death
into the hands of his apostles : " Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remit
ted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained."** If there
is no reference to the miraculous gift of discerning spirits, by which they could
certainly judge of the state of individuals, and pronounce a sentence upon
them which would be ratified in heaven, nothing further can be intended than
that, as preachers of the word, they were authorised to declare the characters
of those who should be justified, and of those who should be condemned, to
assure believers of eternal life, and unbelievers of eternal death.
The person who is justified is a sinner. God "justifieth the ungodly."*f
He is considered as one who has violated the law, and the design of the sen
tence is to set him free from the consequences of transgression. If he were
not a sinner, he would be under no necessity to make anxious inquiries re
specting the means of restoration to the favour of the Lawgiver. He would
be already justified, for God always beholds the righteous with a pleasant
countenance. "Those whom God effectually calleth," says our confession of Faith, "he
also freely justifieth, not by infusing righteousness into them, but by pardoning
their sins, and by accounting and accepting their persons as righteous."**
* Matt. xi. 19. * Luke xvi. 15. $ Ib. xviii. 14. § Rom. ii. 13. ] Ib. viii. 33, 34. v. 16.
1 Dan. xii. 3. **Johnxx.23. **Rom.iv. 5. $$ Westm. Conf. ch. xi. § 1.

JUSTIFICATION. 187
Although justification is represented as a single act, and is commonly spoken of
as a single blessing, yet it consists, according to this definition, of more parts
than one, to which, when attempting to explain its nature, we must separately
direct our attention. The person to be justified is a sinner; and justification
is a sentence declaring him to be just in the eye ofthe law. Two things are
necessarily involved in this sentence ; first, that he is acquitted from every
charge of transgression which is brought against him by the law ; and secondly,
that he is accounted to have fulfilled, or on some ground treated as if he had
fulfilled, its demands.
Justification implies the acquittal of the justified person from the charges
of the law. It may here be observed, that the person in whose favour a legal
sentence is pronounced, may be viewed as innocent or guilty. If he is inno
cent, the law acquits him, by declaring the charge to be unfounded, or, in the
language of Scripture, by " bringing forth his righteousness as the noon-day."
It is impossible that a trial on false grounds can take place at the tribunal of
God ; but cases of this kind frequently occur in human courts of justice. If
he is guilty, as all those are who obtain the blessing of which we are'speaking,
the law grants him a pardon, or, to express myself more accurately, as pardon
is not the act of the law, he is forgiven by the Lawgiver, or the person in
whose hands the administration of justice and mercy is lodged.
The pardon of sin consists in the absolution of the sinner from the obliga
tion to punishment under which he was lying. This is the nature of remis
sion, whether it refer to crimes committed against the law of God, or to crimes
committed against the laws of men. Obedience is not merely recommended
to us in the way of counsel, which leaves a person to act as he may think
proper, but is enjoined by authority, and enforced by the most solemn sanc
tions : " Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are writ
ten in the book of the law to do them."* As soon, therefore, as a man
transgresses the commandment, he becomes guilty ; or, in other words, he is
liable to the penalty, and bound to suffer it by the sentence of the Lawgiver.
To pardon this man, is to declare, upon grounds which will be afterwards
specified, that, although he has violated the law, it shall not have its course
upon him ; that he shall be exempted from the fatal effects of his transgres
sions, and be treated as if he were innocent. Remission places him in the
same relation to the law as if he had not sinned. He is no more under a sen
tence of condemnation than Adam was before his fall. As one sin subjects the
offender to the penalty, if God should enter into judgment with him, it would
be impossible that he could escape, since his sins are numerous as the stars of
heaven, or the sand upon the sea-shore. But God will not enter into judgment
with him, nor listen to any of the charges which the law or his conscience
may advance, because his justice has received full satisfaction for all his acts
of disobedience. Hence the Scriptures employ a variety of metaphorical ex
pressions to show that the guilt of pardoned sin is completely cancelled, and
that those who are forgiven are secured against every penal evil. God is said
to have " blotted out their sins ;" " not to remember them ;" to have " cast
them behind his back ;" to have " cast them into the depths of the sea ;" " not
to impute them ;" and they are represented as so hidden, that when they are
•' sought for, they shall not be found."* It is evident that these things must
be understood, not literally, but as alluding to the various ways in which an
object may be concealed from the eyes of men, or banished from their minds.
They intimate that, although the sins are ever present to the knowledge of
God, who, being infinitely holy, must always view them with abhorrence, yet
he will deal with believers in the same gracious manner as if he had forgotten
* Gal. iii. 10. f Is. xliv. 22. xliii.25. xxxviii. 17. Micah vii. 19. Ps.xxxii.2. Jer.1.20.

188 THE PRIVILEGES OF BELIEVERS.
their offences, and they were actually removed out of his sight. Hence, it haa
been said that God beholds no sin in believers. The proposition gave rise to
controversy, and we cannot wonder that it did so, as it is expressed in a para
doxical form. If it mean that, literally, God sees no sin in them, it would be
false, because he knows them to be chargeable with many transgressions ; but
nothing more is intended than that he sees in them no obligation to punish
ment, no ground on which he may proceed against them as a judge. This is
a Scriptural truth, which ought to have been expressed in plain and simple
terms ; no good purpose could be gained by throwing it into a form calculated
to surprise and perplex. We may say of this and some other paradoxes relative
to the same subject, which caused much discussion more than a hundred years
ago, — such as, that believers contract no new guilt by new crimes ; that God
is not offended by their sins ; that confession, and repentance, and prayer, are
not necessary to pardon ; we may say of them that, if not altogether false,
they are a pitiful play upon words ; and that, while the sentiments which they
were meant to convey, so far as agreeable to Scripture, might be defended, the
language ought to have been universally condemned. It is a poor employment
to turn the doctrines of religion into riddles.
Such, then, is the nature of remission. It delivers the guilty from the curse
of the law ; it places those who were devoted to destruction in a state of safety ;
it averts the judgments which were hanging over their heads, and threatened
to overwhelm them for ever. They may confidently say, " O Lord, we will
praise thee: though thou wast angry with us, yet thine anger is turned away,
and thou hast comforted us."* Sin, although a deadly poison, cannot now
destroy them, because an effectual antidote has been administered. Its influence,
indeed, is pernicious, and they should guard against it with the utmost circum
spection, because it will pollute their souls, disturb their peace, and displease
their heavenly Father; but, although it may subject them to chastisements, it
will never expose them to his avenging wrath : " There is now no condemna
tion to them that are in Christ Jesus. "t
The pardon which is granted in justification is full, extending to all the
transgressions of the guilty persons : " All manner of sin and blasphemy shall
be forgiven unto men." By him, all that believe are justified from all things,
from which they could not be justified by the law of Moses."* That law ap
pointed sacrifices for many offences, but there were some for which no atone
ment was provided. The sacrifice of Christ was an atonement for sins of
every kind and degree. Hence, in the Gospel a promise of pardon is made
to every man who believes, without any exception ; and if there is no sin
which shall not be forgiven, it is excepted, not because there was not suf
ficient virtue in the blood of Christ to expiate it, but because it consists in a
deliberate and wilful rejection of his sacrifice; so that the unhappy man is in
the same condition with the patient under a dangerous disease, who will not
take the only medicine which could cure him, and is therefore abandoned by
his physician. With respect to past and present sins, there is no doubt that
they are immediately remitted, so that the only question relates to those of
which the believer may be afterwards guilty. To some it has appeared im
proper to say, that they also are forgiven as soon as he believes ; because there
is an absurdity, they think, in supposing a debt to be cancelled before it is
contracted. To this objection it may be replied, that there is no more ground
for the charge of absurdity in this case than in that of our Saviour, to whom all
the sins of his people, past, present, and to come, were at once imputed ; for
"the Lord laid upon him the iniquity of us all ;"§ and who consequently made
satisfaction for millions of sins which had not yet been committed. There is
* Is. xii. 1. f Rom. viii. 1. $ Matt. xii. 31. Acts xiii. 39. § Is. liii. 6.

, JUSTIFICATION. 189
no difficulty in the pardon, which does not occur in the expiation, of future
sins. It should be considered that we are speaking of a Divine transaction;
and that, to him whose prerogative it is to justify the ungodly, the future is as
the past, as fully known and equally the subject of his purposes and proceed
ings. When a sinner believes, he obtains an interest in the atonement which
was made for all his sins. It is not conceivable, therefore, that only a part of
his sins should be pardoned ; the blood of Christ, which secures him against
condemnation for those which are past and present, must secure him, at the
same time, with respect to those which are future. This is all that is meant
by the pardon of these sins. He is placed in such a situation, that they shall
not be imputed to him. He is delivered from the curse, or the sentence pro
nounced upon the transgressors of the law ; so that, although he may after
wards transgress, the sentence shall not pass upon him. He may daily offend,
for there is no man that " liveth and sinneth not;" but whatever his own ap
prehensions may be, God is at peace with him : " I will be merciful to their
unrighteousness ; their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more."*
Hence it appears, that the pardon granted in justification is irrevocable.
The man whom his sovereign has forgiven for one act of rebellion, may revolt
from his allegiance a second time, and again fall under his displeasure. But
" the gifts and the calling of God are without repentance." We must not
imagine that, like an earthly prince, he frequently changes the objects of his
love, and that those who are his favourites to-day, may incur his hatred to
morrow. A foundation is laid for the permanent exercise of his mercy and
good-will towards believers, in the never-failing efficacy of the atonement of
his Son. His blood answers every charge, covers every sin, enforces every
plea, and itself pleads with irresistible eloquence in behalf of those for whom
it was shed. The sins into which the believer may fall through the treachery
of his heart and the influence of temptation, are not a reason why his pardon
should be revoked. Conscious of demerit, he may dread the consequence and
be alarmed when he thinks of divine justice, which he has offended and cannot
appease ; but while repentance and humiliation are his duty, his fears of final con
demnation are unfounded, because the sin which disquiets him was expiated
on the cross, and the justice before which he trembles requires his absolution.
" Blessed is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered.
Blessed is the man to whom the Lord imputeth not iniquity."t Man would
have been blessed if he had never sinned, and, continuing to obey his Creator,
had enjoyed the happiness which would have flowed from his favour. Since
he has fallen, he can now only be blessed when the anger of God is averted
from him, and he is treated as if he were innocent.
The forgiveness of sins is not the only blessing which is implied in justifi
cation. Although a criminal were fully pardoned, yet, if nothing more were
done, he would have no title to the privileges and rewards which were pro
mised to obedient subjects. It is necessary that the sinner should not only be
delivered from guilt, but should also be accounted righteous, or treated, on
some valid ground, as if he had fulfilled the demands of the law.
Some indeed maintain, that justification consists solely in the remission of
sins ; but it may be easily shown that this is a mistake. The Scripture de
scribes this privilege as comprehending the imputation of righteousness to us,
and as the constituting of us righteous before God, when it speaks of the
"blessedness ofthe man to whom the Lord imputeth righteousness without
works."* " As by one man's disobedience many were made sinners ; so by
the obedience of one shall many be made righteous. "§ The term, to justify,
• Heb. viii. 12. * Ps. xxxii. 1, 2. $ Rom. iv. 6. § Rom. v. 19.

190 THE PRIVILEGES OF BELIEVERS.
implies something more than the pardon of sin, for it signifies to pronounce a
person to be just ; and the criminal is not just in the eye of the law, merely
because he is pardoned. There is, indeed, now no charge which can be al
leged against him as the reason why he should be condemned and punished ;
but there is a great difference between simple innocence and righteousness.
Righteousness supposes that the whole law has been fulfilled ; innocence im
ports only that it has not been transgressed. I may remark by the way, that
even innocence is not the effect of pardon, because pardon pre-supposes that
the law has been violated ; and the only effect of it in respect of a believer, is
to place him in the same situation with an innocent person in so far that the
penalty will not be executed any more upon the one than upon the other.
No man can be pronounced just by him who judges according to truth, unless
he be possessed of justice or righteousness. In the case of a sinner, there
fore, the imputation of righteousness is pre-supposed as the ground of his justi
fication, which, consequently, implies something more than simple remission.
Besides, let it be considered that, although the remission of sins is a blessing
of incalculable value, it does not fully answer the design of the substitution of
Christ in our room, or the expectations and desires of the sinner. The object
of his suretyship and sacrifice was, not only to reconcile us to God, but to
restore the happiness which we had forfeited by disobedience ; and the sinner
who believes, aims at the enjoyment of a complete and everlasting salvation.
But the whole effect of pardon is to deliver a criminal from punishment ; it
does not reinstate him in the favour of his prince. Were nothing more, there
fore, included in justification than the pardon of sin, this privilege might be
enjoyed, while at the same time the person was destitute of a title to heaven.
Perhaps the reason that some theological writers are so eager to confine justi
fication to the remission of sins is, that a right to future felicity being still
wanting, room may be left for the introduction of works as the procuring
cause of it. But Jesus Christ will not share his glory with those whom he
saves, nor does he bestow his blessings by halves. Those who are forgiven,
are made heirs according to the hope of eternal life, and a righteousness is
imparted to them which is the foundation of their claim to it. Were a sinner
merely pardoned, he would be acquitted, but not properly justified. The law
of God would still have a demand upon him, because, although he did not owe
the debt of suffering, he would still owe the debt of obedience. The privilege
would be incomplete ; his state would be imperfect ; and although secured
against the danger of being cast into hell, he would be in the utmost uncer
tainty whether he should ever be admitted to the happiness of heaven.
There are two ways in which a man may become righteous. First, he may
become righteous by his personal obedience. " He that doeth righteousness,"
says John, " is righteous."* In this way, Adam would have been righteous,
if he had faithfully exerted in the service of God the moral power with which
he was endowed. In this way, those angels are righteous who kept their first
estate when many of their fellows apostatized, and who ake now confirmed in
holiness beyond the possibility of failure. In this way, some imagine that
fallen man may become righteous, because, in their opinion, he has not lost
his original ability to obey ; or, if it is in some degree impaired, God has
lowered his demands to meet our infirmity. Secondly, a man may become
righteous by imputation. If he cannot himself fulfil the law, another, taking
his place, and coming under his obligations, may fulfil it in his name ; and the
obedience of this surety may be placed to his account. Jesus Christ, for
example, might become the representative of all mankind, or of a portion of
* John iii. 7.

JUSTIFICATION. 191
mankind, and, by obeying the precepts of the law in their stead, might bring
an everlasting righteousness, which should be reckoned to them as the ground
of their justification.
The justification of a sinner must be founded, either upon his personal
righteousness, or upon the righteousness of Christ. The grand question is, to
which of these is he indebted for acceptance with God ?
The Apostle Paul repeatedly declares, " that by the works of the law shall
no flesh be justified." I have no doubt that his meaning was distinctly ap
prehended by those whom he addressed ; but the spirit of controversy has
endeavoured to involve it in obscurity, and even to put a sense upon his words
directly contrary to what he certainly intended. It has been asked, of what law
does he speak ? and what are the works which he excludes from justification ?
By the law, some understand the ceremonial law : and their design in so limiting
it, is to prove that, notwithstanding the express exclusion of works, we may
be justified, in part, at least, by our obedience to the moral precepts. But to
suppose Paul to have used so many arguments as are brought forward in his
epistles, to show that we are not justified by the works of the ceremonial law,
is to represent him as having spent much time and labour in vain ; for there is
no evidence that there were any persons in his days, who imagined that eter
nal life could be obtained by ceremonial observances alone. . It is plain, from
several parts of his writings, that, by the law, he meant the ten commandments
which were • engraven upon two tables of stone ; but, in the more extensive
acceptation of the term, it signified the law of Moses, comprehending moral
as well as ceremonial precepts, and was the name for the whole system of
duties which God had enjoined upon his people by the ministry of that illus
trious man. Admitting, then, that the apostle refers to the law of Moses, we
have an answer ready to the second question, What works are excluded from
justification ? All works are excluded, without exception ; the works of the
first and the second table ; moral and ceremonial works ; every act of man,
performed in obedience to a commandment of God. Nothing is more absurd
and perverse, than to ask what works are meant to be excluded, when Paul
in twenty places has excluded works in general, without once hinting that he
intended only those of a particular kind. The subject is perfectly intelligible
to those who are willing to understand ; and all the difficulties and objections
which have been started, arise from aversion to his doctrine.
In proving that a man cannot be justified by the works of the law, we may
begin by observing, that the point is determined by this single consideration,
that he is a sinner, and that his present conduct, however dutiful, cannot com
pensate for his past disobedience. He is bound to obey, every moment of his
life ; and consequently, the obedience which he now performs, being due by
a prior obligation, cannot, as if it were a free gift or gratuitous service, cam-el
the debt which he had formerly contracted. There is not a single sentence
of Scripture which authorises us to think, that, if a man who has transgressed
shall return to his duty, his past offences will be overlooked. Such an idea
is contrary to common sense, and to the express sanction of the law. " The
soul that sinneth it shall die."* Hence we see, that by works alone justifica
tion is impossible. The utmost which the opponents of our doctrine can plead
for, is, that our justification is in part owing to our works. The fact, that all
men are guilty, demonstrates that some expedient must be found to appease
our offended Creator, and that we must be indebted to something more effica
cious than our repentance and amendment of life for the pardon of our sins
But, passing this difficulty which meets us at the outset, I observe, that the
obedience which the law of God demands is so high, that he must be miser?
* Ezek. xviii. 20.

192 THE APPLICATION OF REDEMPTION.
ably ignorant of the present state of human nature, who imagines that any of
the descendants of Adam is able to perform it.
First, The law demands obedience to all its precepts. — " Cursed is every
one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law
to do them." It is thus that Paul quotes these words of Moses, " Cursed is
he that confirmeth not the words of this law, to do them."* The chief dif
ference is, that the word " all" is inserted by the apostle ; but the original
passage implies universal obedience, as well as the quotation. The law is a
declaration of the will of the supreme Lord, and the authority which enacted
it, extends alike to all its precepts. Whatever duty is enjoined in the law,
there is the same reason for performing it as for performing any other, name
ly, the command of the lawgiver. If a single duty is omitted the law is not
fulfilled ; and so high is this matter carried, that the Scripture declares, that
" he who offendeth in one point, is guilty of all."* He virtually subverts all
the precepts by the violation of one ; for, by disowning the Divine authority
in this instance, he in fact disowns it in every instance. All the precepts de
pend upon the will ofthe Lawgiver; and, if his will is not a sufficient reason
for obedience in one case, it cannot be a sufficient reason in another. Our
claim, then, to the favour of God will be invalidated by omission, as well as
by positive transgression ; and it is preposterous to dream of making one duty
a compensation for another. The law admits of no lower terms. We must
give all or nothing. We may now ask the man who seeks to be justified by
works, whether he thinks himself able to comply with this demand ? whether
he has always performed his duty in its full extent ? whether he has never
neglected it, or forgotten it, or omitted it through ignorance ; for ignorance,
let it be remembered, is not an excuse unless it be invincible. .If God has
published his law, and we through inattention and carelessness are unacquainted
with its contents, our ignorance is voluntary, and we shall in vain hope for
impunity. Although a man may have done many things, yet, if he have not
done every thing, his plea is lost; for, to justify him in such circumstances
would be to declare falsely, that he has fulfilled the whole law, while in truth
he had fulfilled only a part of it.
Secondly, The law demands obedience absolutely perfect. " Thou shalt
love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all
thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like
unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself."* This is the sum of the
law, and the standard of our duty. It requires such love to God as is worthy
of him who is infinitely excellent and good ; the highest love of which our
nature is capable ; love not merely sincere, but perfect ; love which not only
prevails over opposite affections, but extinguishes them, and reigns alone in
the heart. It is inconsistent with the perfection of this love, that it should
ever lean towards any rival, that it should be suspended for a single moment,
that it should abate and languish in its exercise. The law is violated by the
slightest remission of its intensity, or by the temporary cessation of its activity
in producing the proper fruits and expressions of it. The love to our fellow
men which is required, is equally perfect. We must love our neighbour as
ourselves ; if not with a love exactly of the same degree, yet certainly of
equal sincerity ; desiring his welfare as we desire our own, and willingly exert
ing ourselves to promote it. A regard to our own interests is not to be laid
aside ; but it must be so moderated as not to degenerate into selfishness. Not
only hatred and malice are transgressions of the law, but even indifference to
our brethren ; nay, it is violated not only by indifference, but by a love not
sufficiently ardent, and by efforts not sufficiently vigorous for their good. In
• Gal. iii. 10. Deut. xxvii 26. f James ii. 10. * Matt. xxii. 37—39

JUSTIFICATION. 193
short, the law demands not only the form, but the spirit of obedience. It de
mands, in every act of obedience, the full exertion of all the moral power with
which we were originally endowed by our Creator. There must be no lan
guid endeavours, no cold and feeble services. No motives must influence our
minds but the right ones ; no ultimate end must be proposed but the glory of
God. . Nothing must be wanting in matter or in manner, in external actions
or in internal principles ; for a deficiency in the measure or degree of our
obedience, would prove fatal to our hopes. Enough, I presume, has been
said to show that no man can be justified by the works of the law.
I shall add, however, in the last place, that the law demands an uninter
rupted course of obedience to the end of our lives. In the case of Adam, the
time of trial was limited and probably would have soon terminated. But in
our case, I know of no limitation ; there is no period within the bounds of
our mortal existence at which we might claim the reward. Every day calls
for new labour ; every year extends the term of our service, and multiplies
the probabilities of a failure ; it is only when the shades of evening descend,
that man finishes his task and retires to rest. We must not therefore think
that we have attained, and are already perfect ; but, forgetting the things which
are behind, and reaching forth to those which are before, we must press to
wards the mark, if we would bear away the prize of immortality. This we
must do, notwithstanding our natural disposition to grow weary of every exer
cise which is long continued, and in the face of many discouragements and
temptations, calculated to divert our attention from our duty, to seduce our af
fections, and to create impatience of restraint. Should these causes overcome
our resolution ; should we suspend our services for a time ever so short ;
should we begin to faint, or even admit a wish to be released from our obliga
tions, we should immediately become criminal in the eye of the law, and forfeit
all claim to the expected recompence. He who runs a race will not be
crowned, although he run well, unless he reach the goal.
The plan of justification by works appears to be absolutely impracticable.
The labour is difficult, and man is weak and inconstant. If we take into the
account the strength and waywardness of his passions, his liableness to error,
the obstacles which lie in his way, and the numerous causes by which his at
tention may be diverted from his duty, disgust and weariness may be created,
and opposite considerations may obtain a predominant influence upon his
mind, we shall be convinced of the probability, or rather the certainty, that he
will fail, not in one instance only, but in a thousand. There is no man that
Iiveth and sinneth not in deed, or word, or thought. Besides the invincible
difficulties attendant upon this plan of justification, it is in itself comfortless,
and a source of continual anxiety to every person who in earnest attempts it.
No such thing is possible as the assurance of hope ; his mind is a stranger to
the peace and joy which arise from the belief of the record of the Gospel,
because a fear must always haunt him, that, after all his pains, he shall in
some unpropitious hour lose his labour. " When I shall say to the righteous, that
he shall surely live ; if he trust to his own righteousness, and commit iniquity,
all his righteousness shall not be remembered ; out for his iniquity that he hath
committed, he shall die for it."* The spirit, therefore, by which he is neces
sarily animated, is a spirit of bondage, which from its nature destroys the
value of his obedience by converting it into the task of a slave, who toils under
the dread of the lash.
In an inquiry, whether it is possible to be justified by works, it was neces
sary to ascertain what are the requisitions of the law. The law is the standard
of works ; and if they are not conformable to it, the hopes founded upon
* Ezek. xxxiii. 13.
Vol. II.— 25 R

194 THE PRIVILEGES OF BELIEVERS:
them are vain. The question is not, What measure of obedience we are dis
posed- to yield, or what measure we are capable of yielding ? but, What is the
obedience which God requires from us ? This we learn from his precepts,
fairly and honestly interpreted ; and so high is the demand, that every man
may justly despair of being able to fulfil it.
But will God be satisfied with nothing less than perfect obedience ? Yes,
some reply ; he has had compassion upon his frail and erring creatures, and
is willing to receive them into favour upon easier terms. He has given them
a milder law, more suitable to their present condition, which, through the as
sistance of his grace, they are enabled to obey. This notion, which is exceed
ingly prevalent, and by which the scriptural doctrine of justification is sub
verted, will be examined, in the next lecture.

LECTURE LXX.
JUSTIFICATION.

ground of Justification continued ; not Repentance and Sincere Obedience — Righteousness
of Christ, the sole ground — Observations on the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness
to Believers.
In the preceding lecture, I showed you that justification is a legal term, and
denotes the sentence pronounced by a judge upon a person who has been
brought before him for judgment. If the person is righteous in himself, the
sentence merely ascertains and declares in a judicial manner what he is ; but
in the case of men who are standing before the tribunal of God, a different
process is necessary. As they are unquestionably guilty, an act of grace must
be passed in their favour, cancelling the obligation to punishment ; and, ac
cordingly, the remission of sins is an essential part of our justification. But
this is not all. The acquitted criminal is not necessarily restored to the favour
of his prince, and entitled to the reward which was promised to an obedient
subject. Pardon frees the sinner from the pains of hell, but gives him no right
to the happiness of heaven. He must somehow be possessed of a complete
righteousness, which shall answer all the demands of the law, that he may be
accepted by his Maker, and obtain the eternal inheritance.
It may be proper by the way to remark, that our common language on this
subject may give rise to misapprehension. We often speak of the pardon of
sin, and the possession of a justifying righteousness, as if they were distinct ;
and hence it may be supposed, that the one might be enjoyed without the
other. This is the inference suggested, when it is sometimes inaccurately
stated, that justification consists in the forgiveness of sin and the imputation
of righteousness. But the truth is, that the imputation of righteousness is the
foundation of pardon, as well as of restoration to the favour of God. The
righteousness of Christ, although it is strictly one and cannot be divided, is
distinguished, for the sake of explanation, into active and passive ; the former
denoting his obedience to the precepts, and the latter his endurance of the pe
nalty. There is an imputation of his whole righteousness to the believer, and,
in the language of scholastic theology, it is the material cause of our justifica
tion. These remarks have led me to anticipate a subsequent department of
the doctrine ; but I deemed it necessary to make them at this time, to guard
against any misapprehension of what I have said, that more than pardon is

JUSTIFICATION. 195
necessary to the sinner, and that he must be possessed of a complete righteous
ness, a righteousness corresponding to the precept, as well as to the penalty,
in order to his being accepted by his Maker.
It is therefore an important question, how this righteousness may be obtain
ed ; and there are only two ways in which it can be conceived to be acquired ;
by our personal obedience, or by the imputation of the righteousness of another.
I have endeavoured to prove, that the attainment of it in the first way is pos
sible, by showing you that the demands of the law are so extensive that no
man living can comply" with them. It requires obedience to all its precepts,
without a single exception ; obedience absolutely perfect, a failure in one act,
or in the motive from which it is performed, being sufficient to invalidate the
whole ; and obedience continued to the end of life, because no prior term is
fixed, and it is after death that the final judgment will take place. To every
person who considers the extent of these demands, it will appear as impossible
for the descendants of Adam, in their present state of weakness and depravity,
to fulfil them, as it is to remove mountains by a word, or to ascend to heaven
by a wish. The notion of sinless perfection as attainable in this life, which
has been broached in modern times, could arise only in minds disordered by
enthusiasm, or blinded by profound ignorance of human nature, and the Divine
law. I might therefore proceed to show you that we are justified by the righteous
ness of another, did not a new obstacle present itself, which it is necessary to
remove out ofthe way. The pride of the human heart, unwilling to forego its
claims to the favour of God, has exerted its ingenuity in devising a method of
evading the force of the argument founded on the high demands of the law. It
is granted, we are told, that we are unable to fulfil them ; but it is added, that
the original terms upon which eternal life was promised are relaxed. God has
been graciously pleased, for the sake of Christ, to make a new covenant with
us, in which he promises to pardon our sins upon repentance, and since we
cannot perform perfect, to accept of sincere obedience as the ground of our
justification* This doctrine is laid down in a variety of terms, and with greater
or less degrees of plainness ; but I have stated the substance of what is main
tained by Divines of a particular class. To give it the more plausibility, it is
acknowledged, that still our salvation is of grace, because there is grace dis
played in lowering the demands of the law, and grace is communicated to
assist us ; although it turns out to be such aid as we may use or not as we
please, and as will be of little avail without vigorous exertions of our own. It
is also acknowledged, that we are under high obligations to our Saviour, in
consequence of whose, mediation this new law has been given, and what may
be wanting in our obedience is supplied by his merit. The scheme, how
ever, is manifestly an attempt to establish our own righteousness, from a re
luctance to submit to the righteousness of God. It is a miserable mixture of
the law and the gospel, an illicit association of the righteousness of Christ and
that of the sinner, an abortive effort to defend the doctrine of justification by
works against the solemn denunciations of Scripture. Upon this scheme I
make the following remarks.
First, There is not the slightest vestige of it to be found in the Scriptures.
I challenge any man to point out a passage in which it is declared, that Christ
merited that we might merit; that since we cannot be justified by perfect, we
shall be justified by imperfect obedience ; or that God has given an easier law,
adapted to the present condition of human nature. These are dogmas of very
great importance, as they relate to our everlasting concerns, and they would
need to be supported by evidence perfectly satisfactory ; but when we call for
it, we are put off with bold assertions and sophistical arguments. We read of
our being constituted righteous, but it is by a righteousness which is not our

196 THE PRIVILEGES OF BELIEVERS:
own, nor of the law, but the righteousness of another, namely Christ. " By
the obedience of one shall many be made righteous."* We read of a new
covenant which God has made with men, but it is truly a covenant of grace,
for it is a covenant of promise. "I will put my laws into their mind, and
write them in their hearts ; and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to
me a people. For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins
and their iniquities will I remember no more."* Where do we read of a new
covenant of works, in which sincere obedience is the condition, and eternal
life is the recompence? It exists only in the writings of spme men, who
cannot or will not understand the gospel of Christ.
Secondly, The idea of such a new law as has been described, is fraught
with absurd and impious consequences. It reflects the greatest dishonour upon
the law which was originally given to man. It sets aside its demands, although
they were not arbitrary, but were founded on the nature of God and man, and
the relations subsisting between them ; it pronounces them to be unreasonable
in the present circumstances of human nature, and makes the authority of the
law give way for the accommodation of the criminal. It is in fact an abroga
tion of the law, than which a greater dishonour cannot be conceived ; for the
new law of which we speak is totally different from the original law, no two
things being more different than a law which requires perfect, and a law which
is fully satisfied with sincere obedience. The supposed change implies a re
flection not only upon the law, but upon the Lawgiver. When first delivered
to man, the law was a representation of the holiness of his Maker, a glass
which brightly reflected the infinite purity of his nature ; and his language by
it was, "Be thou holy, for I am holy." How can we conceive a change to
have taken place in its requisitions, and at the same time believe that its Author
continues the same 1 Must we not conclude, that if he demands less holiness
from his creatures he is himself less holy ? He can bear now certain imper
fections which he formerly condemned ; he is pleased if we love him in some
degree, although we do not love him with all our strength and soul ; he is con
tent if we have some portion of good-will to our neighbour, although we do
not love him exactly as ourselves. If we really wish to do our duty, it is
enough ; we shall obtain his approbation should we fail in the performance,
and the intention will be accepted for the deed. That strictness which called
for " good measure, pressed down, and shaken together, and running over,"
no longer exists ; that opposition to sin which rejected an action upon which
the slightest stain was found, has given place to a more accomodating temper.
In short, we do not recognise in the Author of this milder law, the Being who
published the decalogue from Sinai. Besides, the doctrine which we are con
sidering, gives a false and unfavourable view of the mediation of Christ.
" Think not," he said, " that I am come to destroy the law or the prophets. 1
am not come to destroy, but to fulfil."* That it was not the ceremonial law
which he meant, or the ceremonial law alone, is evident from his subsequent
vindication ofthe moral precepts from the corruptions of tradition. "Whoso
ever, therefore, shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach
men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven."§ But notwith
standing this solemn admonition, we must conclude that he did come to destroy
the law, if we give credit to those who affirm, that in consequence of his
mediation, a lower degree of obedience is accepted. The first law would not
be pleased with our obedience unless it were absolutely perfect; the second is
satisfied if it is simply sincere. The first therefore has been set aside to make
room for the second, as the edict of an absolute prince claiming the whole
property of his subjects, would be repealed by the publication of another, in
* Rom. v. 19. t Heb. viii. 10—12. 1 Matt. v. 17. § Ib. 19.

JUSTIFICATION. 197
which he asserted his right only to the half. Jesus Christ, according to this
hypothesis, has made that which was once duty to be no longer duty, and that
which was once sin to be no longer sin. What is this in the opinion of every
man, who believes that the law of God, being founded in the nature of things,
is immutable, but to represent Jesus Christ as the minister of unrighteousness ?
We may conclude from these reflections, that the doctrine of a new law, which
accepts of sincere obedience as the ground of our justification, is a vain and
unhallowed attempt to build again what the gospel had destroyed.
In the last place, The sincere obedience of believers is expressly excluded
from being the ground of their justification. If all works are rejected, sincere
but imperfect works must share the common fate ; for we are not at liberty to
make a distinction in their favour. When the Apostle Paul rejects the works
of the law without limitation, he certainly rejects sincere obedience, which
consists in works of the law, or it would not be obedience at all. This argu
ment is decisive till it be proved that there are two laws, the one requiring
perfect, and the other imperfect obedience, and that only the works of the
former are discarded. But the truth is, that the works, concerning which the
Scripture affirms that a man cannot be justified by them, are the very works
for which some men so strenuously contend. It is a palpable absurdity to
suppose that they are perfect works, for these are the works which were ori
ginally required, and they would now undoubtedly be as acceptable to God
and beneficial to the performer as ever. Unless we conceive them to be such
works as man may be supposed able to perform, all the elaborate reasoning on
the subject is a mere waste of time and labour. Now, no man expects to be
justified by perfect obedience to the law, for no man in his senses imagines
himself to be capable of such obedience. It is what is called sincere obedience,
which Paul had in view in the declaration so often repeated, that "by the
works ofthe law shall no flesh living be justified." Such was the obedience
m which the Galatians trusted. Imperfectly as they understood the dispensa
tion of grace, they were not so ignorant as to dream that they could fulfil the
high demands of the law : and they must have rested their hope upon such
works as were understood to be within the compass of their ability, upon their
honest and persevering endeavours to do their duty. What were the works
which Paul renounced, when, in reference to his present as well as his past
attainments, he said, "Yea, doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the
excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord ; for whom I have suf
fered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung that I may win Christ,
and be found in him, not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law,
but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of
God by faith?"* And what were the works to which he referred when he
said, "for I know nothing by myself; yet am I not hereby justified?"* They
were manifestly all his works without exception, and consequently works
performed in faith and love, works performed with the assistance of grace ; or
in other words, that sincere obedience which some men would obtrude upon
us as our justifying righteousness, but in which he was so far from confiding,
that he utterly disclaimed it, and earnestly desired to be found in the righteous
ness of Christ.
We see, then, that the notion of a new law, which requires only sincere
obedience as the ground of our acceptance with God, is utterly untenable. It
would have been long since exploded, if the Scriptures had been understood.
and admitted as the supreme judge of religious controversies ; and its preva
lence is owing to the ignorance of those who teach, and those who receive it,
* Philip, iii. 8, 9. 1 1 Cor. iv. 4.
r2

198 THE PRIVILEGES OF BELIEVERS.
and to the strong disposition, which only almighty grace can subdue, to arro
gate to ourselves the glory of our salvation.
I shall subjoin two or three general remarks in corroboration of the pre-
ceding reasoning, before I leave this part of the subject.
First, If men are justified by works, no adequate reason can be assigned for
the mission of Christ. It is acknowledged that we are indebted to him for
paving the way for our acceptance with our Maker, and facilitating the attain
ment of his favour ; but surely some less costly expedient might have been
devised to give efficacy to our repentance and our duties, if this was all that
was wanted. If man could have fulfilled the demands of the law, Christ would
not have been sent to yield obedience to its precepts ; and to suppose it to
have been his design to lower its terms, and to render a less degree of holi
ness sufficient, as the condition of ^future happiness, is to represent the effect
of his mission to have been the virtual subversion of the moral government of
God. Was this the purpose for which he descended to the earth ? The doc
trine which lessens the necessity of the mediation of Christ, or would lead us
to consider it as only supplementary to human exertions, is manifestly contrary
to the Scriptures, in which his mediation is represented as the foundation that
supports the whole superstructure of the religion of sinners. This argument
is employed by Paul — " If righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead
in vain."*
In the second place, The doctrine of justification by works, in any form,
obscures the glory of the grace of God. This argument also is used by the
Apostle — "If it be of works, then it is no more grace; otherwise work is no
more work."* It is strange that some men should labour, with so much inge
nuity and perseverance, to reconcile two things which are declared to be irre-
concileable, and destructive of each other. The glory of grace consists in
giving freely, or, as it is expressed in the prophet — "without money and
without price;" what is obtained by works, is granted in consideration of pre
vious service, and is the payment of a debt. According to the doctrine of
justification by the old or the new law, the question which Paul presumed
would put all men to silence, may be answered by thousands : " Who hath
first given to him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again?"* 'I have
given to God,' every justified person might say, 'and I am entitled to the re
ward which I enjoy.' Few, perhaps, would venture to express themselves in
a manner so ill befitting creatures and sinners ; but this is the language of the
system. How contrary are the sentiments and feelings of which it is a faith
ful interpreter to the design of God in our redemption, "that he might show
the exceeding riches of his grace, in his kindness towards us through Christ
Jesus !"§
In the last place, Justification by works lays the foundation of boasting.
"If Abraham," says Paul, "were justified by works, he hath whereof to
glory;" and although he adds, "but not before God,"|| yet the human heart
does not stop at this limit, but proceeds to glory even in his presence. We
have an example in the self-righteous Pharisee, who, standing by himself, had
the presumption to say, " God, I thank thee that I am not as other men;" and
followed this boast with a catalogue of his good deeds. He who had been
justified by works, might say, ' My own arm has achieved my salvation.' He
might, indeed, with the Pharisee, thank God, acknowledging in words that he
was indebted to his assistance for his virtuous actions ; but we know that,
when man atttempts to divide the honour with his Maker, he always takes the
larger share to himself. To suppose that, in delivering us from the misery in
which pride had involved us, God would adopt a method calculated to foster
* Gal. ii. 21. t Rom. xi. 6. } Ib. 35. § Epl^ ii. 7 || Rom. iv. 2.

JUSTIFICATION. 199
that odious principle, is to represent him as having acted with less caution
than one would ascribe to a man of ordinary prudence. The design of redemp
tion is to stain the pride of human glory, to bring man to the throne of grace
as a humble supplicant, to make him feel and acknowledge that he owes every
thing to unmerited goodness. " Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By
what law? of works? Nay; but by the law of faith."* As it is evident
from these words, that the law of works encourages boasting, it follows, that
we are not justified by that law in any form, and that the ground of our justifi
cation is neither our perfect nor our imperfect obedience.
Having proved that our own works have no place in our justification
before God, we have prepared the way for showing that we owe this import
ant privilege to the righteousness of Christ. This is the doctrine of our church ;
and that it is agreeable to Scripture, we can demonstrate by a multiplicity of
proofs. In the Old Testament, the name under which the Messiah was fore
told is, "the Lord our Righteousness." It was predicted by Daniel, that he
was " to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sin, and to make re
conciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness." And in
another prophet, we find these words, " Surely, shall one say, in the Lord
have I righteousness and strength." "In the Lord shall all the seed of Israel
be justified, and shall glory." Once more, Isaiah says, " By his knowledge
shall my righteous Servant justify many; for he shall bear their iniquities ;"*
plainly intimating that, in consequence of his atonement for their sins, they
should be pardoned and restored to the Divine favour, through faith founded
on the revelation of him in the Gospel. In the New Testament, the doctrine
is delivered with still greater clearness. It is there declared, that "he was
made sin for us, that we might be made the righteousness of God in him;"
that "he is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth;"
that, in the Gospel, " the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith :
as it is written, The just shall live by faith;" that, "to him that worketh not,
but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righte
ousness;" that, "by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous;"
that, "by the righteousness of one, the free gift comes upon all men unto
justification of life;" that "we are forgiven for his sake;" and that "we are
accepted in the Beloved."* The same doctrine is taught by Paul, in the
words formerly quoted, when he expresses his earnest desire "to be found in
Christ, not having his own righteousness, which was of the law; but that
which is by the faith of Christ;" and in all the passages which affirm that "we
are not justified by works, but by faith;" for the object of that faith is Christ,
as having obeyed and suffered in our room.
What the righteousness of Christ is, I explained in my lectures on the
Covenant of Grace,§ of which it was shown to be the condition. Our own
righteousness signifies our conformity to the law of God, and the word has the
same meaning when used in reference to him. He was made under the law
which we had violated, and by which we were condemned, that as our Surety
he might fulfil its demands. From us it required perfect obedience to its pre
cepts, for this was its enactment, "If thou wilt enter into life, keep the com
mandments ;"|| and such obedience he yielded from the commencement to the
close of his life. No man could convict him of sin, and the all-seeing eye of
his Father beheld him with unqualified approbation: "This is my beloved
Son, in whom I am well pleased." Although he owed obedience to the moral
law for himself as a man, because his human nature, being a creature, was ne-
* Rom. iii. 27. t Jer. xxiii. 6. Dan. ix. 24. Isa. xiv. 24, 25. lsa. liii. 11.
t 2 Cor. v. 21. Rom. x. 4. i. 17. iv. 5. v. 18, 19. Eph. iv. 32. i. 6.
§ Vol. I. Lecture 49. || Matt. xix. 17.

200 THE PRIVILEGES OF BELIEVERS.
cessarily subject to the authority of God, yet he did not owe obedience to it in
the form of a covenant prescribing it as the condition of life, and in the circum
stances of humiliation and affliction in which it was performed. Besides, we
might say, that on the same ground on which the obedience of Adam, although
he owed it for himself, would have been available to procure eternal happiness
to his posterity, the obedience of Christ was available to obtain a right to the
promised reward to all whom he represented. We must, indeed, ascribe a
far greater value to it than to the obedience of Adam, when we recollect that
the merit of an action increases in proportion to the dignity of the person who
performs it, and that he who obeyed in our room was not only a holy man,
but the Son of the living God.
But the consideration which more satisfactorily shows how the obedience
of Christ could be imputed to men, is this, that it was strictly gratuitous.
Having become a creature, he was necessarily subject to the law, which binds
all the inhabitants of heaven and earth ; but then it should be remembered that
his becoming a creature was a matter of choice. We come into being and are
placed under the law without our consent ; but Jesus Christ existed before his
incarnation, and assumed our nature by his own spontaneous act. "Lo, I
come; I delight to do thy will."* Such language no other person could have
used, because it implies a liberty to act or not to act, which no mere man
possesses. He placed himself under the law ; but although the law had hence
forth a right to demand his obedience, yet its claim was founded solely on his
own voluntary deed. If he had not consented, it could not have reckoned him
among its subjects. He was made under the law by being made of a woman ;
but we know, that while we are passively partakers of flesh and blood, he
actively took part of the same. His obedience was, therefore, a free-will
offering. It was an offering which he might have withheld, by declining to
come into those circumstances in which only obedience could be expected from
him. As he did not owe it by any prior obligation, you perceive that it pos
sessed positive merit, and that, as it was not at all necessary for himself, it
could be imputed to others, or so reckoned to them, that they should be re
warded for it. But the law required something more than obedience from him.
Those for whom he acted were sinners, and it was necessary that he should
expiate their guilt by enduring the penalty, because, till this were done, the
demands of the law would not be satisfied, and consequently its righteousness
would not be fulfilled. He therefore submitted to be born in a humble condi
tion, to lead a life of poverty and sorrow, and to close his course by a painful,
ignominious, and accursed death. As death was the penalty demanded by the
law, our redemption is ascribed to his sufferings on the cross. " He bore our
sins in his own body on the tree."* " Thou hast redeemed us to God by thy
"blood."* Thus the law obtained from him all that it demanded from us. Its
precepts were obeyed, and its penalty was executed. The obedience and suf
ferings of Christ constitute its righteousness. By both he satisfied the claims
of the law, and there remained nothing to be exacted from him, or from those
to whom he stood in the relation of a Surety.
As our Lord fulfilled this righteousness not for himself but for sinners, we
perceive upon what ground it is imputed or reckoned to them, so that they are
justified on account of it. The reckoning of it to them is the application of
it to its proper purpose, the accomplishment of the design which he had in
view in obeying and suffering. It is not in every case warrantable to illustrate
the Divine procedure by human transactions : " God's ways are often not as
our ways, neither are his thoughts as our thoughts." Yet, when we are think
ing of his moral attributes, we must conceive of them as analogous to the cor-
* Ps. xl. 7, 8. t 1 Pet. ii. 24 t Rev. ». 9.

JUSTIFICATION. 201
responding qualities in ourselves, free, however, from the limitations and im
perfections with which all our virtues are attended. Justice in him must
resemble justice in us, although its proceedings may sometimes be above our
comprehension, as it is exercised under the direction of an infinite understand
ing. Now, it is acknowledged to be consistent with justice, that one man
should, in certain circumstances, sustain the person of another, act in his name,
and procure benefits to him by his services. We cannot, therefore, charge
God with injustice for doing what is frequently done by ourselves, is sanctioned
by our laws, and is admitted by all men to be perfectly fair and right. Nothing
is more common than suretyship ; and the actions of the surety are rendered
to the person for whom he is bound, as if they had been performed by the per
son himself. If, then, one man may pay a debt for another, and be punished for
another, as happens in the forfeiture of bail or security for the appearance of a per
son in a civil or criminal process, and may perform a service of which another
is to reap the advantage, on what ground can an objection be raised against the
interposition of our Saviour to satisfy the demands of the law, which we were
unable to answer ? If the Supreme Lawgiver, who alone knows what is fit
to be done, what is suitable to his character and the relation in which he stands
to his creatures, what will most effectually secure the honour and authority of
his government ; if he shall be pleased to accept the obedience and death of
his own Son, invested with the character of our surety, instead of our obe
dience and death, who will presume to arraign this dispensation ? And how
does substitution, with which no person finds fault in human affairs, become
unjust as soon as it is adopted in the Divine administration ? It is acknow
ledged that the sin of Adam is imputed to us ; for, whatever wrangling there
may be with respect to the extent in which we are affected by it, there are
stubborn facts, besides the testimony of Scripture, which will not permit us
to deny that it has had some influence upon lis, as our moral and 'physical
weakness, our diseases and mortality. And who 'will have the audacity to
say that this imputation is unjust? It is surely, then, equally agreeable to
justice, that the righteousness of Christ should be imputed to us for our de
liverance from the guilt, and all the fatal consequences of the sin, of the first
man ; that, as death came by the one, so life should come by the other.
The imputation of righteousness to a sinner, is the act of God as a judge :
" It is God that justifieth." " Blessed is the man to whom the Lord imputeth
righteousness without works."* The sinner who appears before his tribunal
might be condemned, since he is destitute of the righteousness which the law
requires ; but by an act of grace, God gives him this righteousness which an
swers its demands, and on this ground pronounces him to be just. It was
by his appointment that the surety fulfilled this righteousness for him ; and it
is by his judicial act that it is so reckoned to him, that he enjoys the full par
don of his sins, and a right to eternal life.
The imputation of the righteousness of Christ is founded in union to him.
It is the consequence of the legal relation which was established between
him and his people in the covenant of grace, by which he was constituted
their surety, and his acts in this character were made referrible to them. His
righteousness thus became imputable to them ; and it is actually imputed when
a real union is formed between them by the Spirit, and by faith. They thus
acquire an interest in every thing which belongs to him as their surety, as a
woman acquires a right to the privileges and property of her husband by mar
riage. It is with a view to this union, which was formerly explained, that we
are said to be blessed in him with all spiritual blessings.*
The Hebrew word 3BTI and the Greek word Koyi^o/tai sometimes signify
* Roni. viii. 33. iv. 6, 8. t Eph. i. 3.
Vol. IL— £6

202 THE PRIVILEGES OF BELIEVERS.
the reckoning to a person of what really is his own. Thus, Shimei prayed
that David would not " impute iniquity" to him ; that is,* would not lay the
sin which he had committed to his charge, and punish him for it. In like man
ner, it is said concerning a summary act of justice, which Phinehas had per
formed, that "it was counted unto him for righteousness."* The meaning
plainly is, that it was esteemed a righteous act, for which he was commended
and rewarded with "the covenant of an everlasting priesthood." But the
word also signifies to reckon something to a person which he has not done, as
if he had done it. Thus, Paul says to Philemon concerning Onesimus, " If
he hath wronged thee, or oweth thee ought," — t«/to spot oj,oyti — " put that on
mine account ;"i; impute it to me ; hold me responsible for it, as if it were my
own deed. It is in this sense that the word is used in reference to the justifi
cation of a sinner.
It is certain, from the passages formerly quoted, that the righteousness of
Christ is placed to the account of the believing sinner, so that he is pardoned
and accepted. Now, it is evident, that it is only by imputation that his righ
teousness can become ours. No such thing is possible, as the transference
of moral qualities from one person to another, or the communication of holi
ness from one who is pure to one who is impure. We cannot be made honest
by the honesty of another, or benevolent by the benevolence of another, or
patient by the patience of another. These are personal qualities ; and unless
they be formed in our own minds, unless they have their root and growth there,
we must remain dishonest, selfish, and fretful. The virtues which an indivi
dual possesses can have no influence upon those around him except by the
force of example. But we may be freed from a debt by the payment of a
surety, and entitled to a reward for the meritorious services which a friend has
performed for us ; and when a discharge is granted in the one case, and a re
compense is bestowed in the other, it may be said that the deed of the surety,
or ofthe friend, is imputefl to us. The acts are theirs ; but as they were per
formed on our account, we enjoy the benefits of them.
From these remarks, you will perceive how Jesus Christ is " made of God
unto us righteousness. "§ It is not by the transfusion of his holiness into our
souls, for we have already shown that justification does not change our nature,
but our state ; but by such an assignation of his merit to us as avails to procure
the pardon of our sins, and our restoration to the favour of God. In speaking
upon this subject, it is common to say that his righteousness is reckoned to us
as if it were our own ; that it as truly accounted ours as if we ourselves had
performed it; that we are as righteous as if we had fulfilled the whole law.
These are popular expressions, which require to be properly explained, or
there is a danger that we shall be led into error. They are apt to suggest the
idea of an actual transference of the righteousness of Christ to believers, in
consequence of which it becomes literally theirs, as the garment of one man
becomes, by his gift, the property of another. They may suggest the idea
that his righteousness passes from himself to the sinner ; and hence the in
ference seems to be, that he has parted with it, as a man does not retain what
he has given away. But a little attention will convince us that this is not an
accurate notion of imputation ; and the reflection, that we are speaking of a
spiritual transaction, will be a preservative from gross and material conceptions.
The righteousness of Christ must ever be inherent in himself, and it can be
imparted to others only in a legal sense. Imputation is the act of God, whose
judgment is according to truth ; and who cannot, therefore, account those to
be personally righteous whom he knows to be personally guilty. But he may
treat them as if they were righteous, in consideration of the righteousness of
* 2 Sam. xix. 19. t Ps. cvi, 31. X Philem. 18. § 1 Cor. i. 30.

JUSTIFICATION. 203
another. He may pardon their sins, and receive them into favour, and give
them a title to eternal life ; and in these things justification consists. This is
all that can be distinctly understood to be implied in imputation ; if you pa
tiently and attentively meditate on the subject, you will find that this is the
only sense in which the righteousness of the Redeemer becomes ours. It is
ours, because, on account of it, God deals with us as if we were righteous in
ourselves ; but he cannot look upon us as really righteous, because the con
trary is true, any more than we can look on a person as really meritorious,
who is rewarded for the merit of another. When a surety pays a debt, the
debtor is discharged, but he is not rendered personally solvent. The sole ef
fect of the deed of his surety is to place him in the same situation, in respect
of his creditor, in which he would have stood if he had been able with his
own property to fulfil his obligations. Considered in himself, and in the
eyes of all around him, he is a bankrupt. To be really righteous, and to be
righteous by imputation, or, in the language of our church, to be accepted as
righteous, are, I presume, two things exceedingly different. Jesus Christ him
self is truly, and in the strictest sense, righteous ; but those who believe in
him are only accounted righteous.
I believe, indeed, that this distinction has not been always attended to ; and
that, by many, something more is understood to be implied in imputation,
although they are unable to give a satisfactory explanation of their meaning.
An idea seems to be entertained, that the righteousness of Christ is so attached
to the persons of believers, that it is as truly their own property as is a man's
personal righteousness. Justification is a legal act, and must be conceived as
analogous to other legal acts of a similar nature. But there is no imputation
in law of the deed of one man to another, except in the sense already ex
plained. Having been performed for him, it is so accounted to him, that he
enjoys all the advantages which would have accrued to him if it had been per
formed by himself. The law never supposes that he actually performed it,
but accepts the performance by another, as equivalent to his own. Now, ap
ply these things to the subject before us, and you will perceive that the impu
tation of the righteousness of Christ does not consist in accounting us in any
sense righteous in ourselves, but in treating us, for his sake, as if we were
righteous. What he did and suffered, he did and suffered for his people ; and
when they claim an interest by faith in his vicarious acts, they are dealt with,
from respect to those acts, as if they had themselves obeyed the precepts and
satisfied the penalty. In this sense they are righteous, that their surety has
fulfilled all the demands of the law, and left nothing to be demanded from them.
It has received from him every thing which it might have exacted from them.
I have endeavoured to prove, that the meritorious cause of our justification
before God is not our own righteousness, but the righteousness of Christ.
Works are excluded in every form. No qualification is sought for or regarded
in the sinner ; God looks upon him as utterly unworthy in himself, and shows
favour to him solely for the sake of Christ, in whom he believes. Thus his
design is accomplished, that " no flesh should glory in his presence."* There
is not left to the justified person the shadow of a ground on which he might
claim any honour to himself, or pretence that he had acted a subordinate part
in his salvation, as we shall see more fully in the next lecture, when we con
sider faith as the appointed means of obtaining this privilege.
The scripture declares, that we are "justified freely by grace, through the
redemption that is in Jesus Christ."* It would be granted, it might be said,
that we are justified by grace, if God pardoned our sins upon our repentance
without an atonement, and accepted our imperfect instead of perfect obedience.
* 1 Cor. i. 29. t Rom. iii. 24. '

204 THE PRIVILEGES OF BELIEVERS.
But how does grace appear according to the doctrine which has now been de
livered ? The blessing is strictly due to us ; the full price has been paid for
it; and, properly, justification should be considered as an act of justice. But
to this objection the answer is easy. In one view, God is just when he justi
fies the ungodly man who believes in Jesus ; for every demand upon him has
been satisfied, and, consequently, the privilege could no more be withheld from
him, than a discharge can be withheld from a debtor after his surety has made
full payment of his debt. But, let it be remembered, that those who are
justified possess in themselves no claim to the blessing. They have made no
atonement for their sins, and performed no obedience to entitle them to the
reward. They did not even provide a surety to do for them what they could
not do for themselves ; but God called him to the office. In every view, they
are utterly unworthy of his favour ; and hence, although their justification may
be an act of justice in respect of the Saviour, it is an act of pure grace in re
spect of them. They are merely recipients of a privilege, which was obtained
for them without their concurrence, and for which they give nothing in exchange.
They are freely forgiven and accepted, and are thus laid under eternal obliga
tions. Of this they are deeply sensible ; and, accordingly, say with the
Psalmist, " Not unto us, 0 Lord, not unto us ; but unto thy name give glory,
for thy mercy, and for thy truth's sake."*
A question has been proposed, which is of no practical use, and has been
dictated by idle speculation and vain curiosity, Whether the whole righteous
ness of Christ is imputed to every believer, or only so much of it as will an
swer all the demands of the law upon him ? If we must answer this question,
we may do so by asking another : Whether, when a surety pays the debt of
twenty persons at the same time, the whole sum is reckoned to each individual,
or only that part of it which corresponds to the sum which he owed to his
creditor ? It is possible that this question might be perplexed with a variety
of refinements and subtile distinctions ; but it would not be worth while to be
stow a moment's attention upon them. It is of no consequence what senti
ments men adopt upon a point of this nature. It is not in such niceties that
true wisdom consists. The inquiry will appear exceedingly uninteresting to
a sinner who is anxious to learn how he may obtain peace with his offended
Creator ; and he will be content to know in general, that, if he believe in Jesus
Christ, he shall enjoy the full benefit of his mediation.
I conclude with two quotations from the fathers. The first is taken from the
writings of Justin Martyr ; and in the following words, from his epistle to
Diognetus, the doctrine of justification through the righteousness of Christ is
concisely and perspicuously delivered : " God gave his own Son a ransom for
us, the holy one for the transgressors, the innocent for the wicked, the righteous
for the unrighteous, the incorruptible for the corruptible, the immortal for the
mortal. For what else could cover our sins but his righteousness ? In whom
could we transgressors and ungodly be justified, but only in the Son of God 1
0 sweet exchange ! O unsearchable contrivance ! that the transgressions of
many should be hidden in one righteous person, and the righteousness of one
should justify many transgressors !"
I shall add a quotation from Chrysostom on the fifth chapter of the second
epistle to the Corinthians. " He hath made him to be sin for us, who knew
no sin, that we might be made the righteousness of God in him." " What
mind can represent these things ? He made the righteous one a sinner, that
he might make the sinners righteous. Rather this is not what he says, but
something much greater. He does not say he made him a sinner, but sin ;
not only him who had not sinned, but who did not know sin, that we might
* Ps. cxv. 1.

JUSTIFICATION. 205
be made, not righteous, but righteousness, and the righteousness of God. For
this is the righteousness of God, when we are justified not by works, for in this
case it is necessary that there should be no spot in them, but by grace, in the
blotting out of all sin. This does not permit us to be lifted up, because God
freely gives us all, and teaches us the greatness of the gift ; for the former right
eousness is that of the law and of works, but this is the righteousness of God."
From these passages it appears, that, although the fathers do not always express
themselves with the same accuracy as modern theologians, whom controversial
discussion has led to a more careful selection of language, yet the scriptural
doctrine of justification was understood and taught, long before the days of
Luther and Calvin.

LECTURE LXXI.
JUSTIFICATION.

Office of Faith in Justification — Whether it precedes or follows Justification — Definition
of it — Faith not the Ground or Condition of Justification, but the Instrument of Partaking
of it — The Relation of Repentance and Good Works to Justification.
Although Jesus Christ fulfilled the righteousness of the law during his
abode upon earth, yet those for whom he acted as a surety, are not imme
diately delivered from the guilt of their sins, and restored to the favour of God.
They are born children of wrath as well as others, and they sometimes con
tinue for many years in a state of condemnation. The righteousness of the
Redeemer is not of avail to them till it is applied. I proceed to speak of its
application, and remark that, while it is revealed and brought near to us in the
Gospel, faith is the means by which it is received, or by which we obtain
such an interest in it as to be accepted in the sight of God. God "justifieth
the ungodly that believeth in Jesus."
But before I consider the office of faith in justification, it is necessary to
attend to the question, whether we are justified before faith or after it ; or,
" whether the act of God imputing the righteousness of Christ to us, or our
receiving it by faith, be first in the order of nature." The question will pro
bably astonish you ; but it has actually engaged the attention of some theolo
gians, and given rise to much discussion 'and metaphysical argumentation.
Those who aim at being exceedingly accurate and consummately orthodox,
maintain, " that justification, as it is the act of God, is, in the order of nature,
antecedent to our faith ; and, that our faith is antecedent to it, as it is passively
received into, and terminated on, our conscience." The last words I do not
well understand ; but, if they have any meaning it must be, that the assurance
of our justification, and the peace of conscience which flows from it, are pos
terior to faith. But surely, if men would allow themselves to, think, they
would see that this assurance is not justification, but a fruit or consequence of
it. It follows from this theory, that what has been always understood by jus
tification is not that which is spoken of in the Scriptures when we are said to
be justified by faith, but a certain state of mind closely connected with it. It
is not the sentence of God pronounced upon the sinner, but his knowledge
and experience of the sentence. It would seem, then, that we have been all
alono1 in an error ; and that, while we supposed that we became righteous by
faith, and gave credit to the Scriptures, which told us that righteousness would
S

206 THE PRIVILEGES OF BELIEVERS.
be imputed to us if we believed, the matter is transacted in a different manner.
We become righteous without faith ; righteousness is imputed to us before we
believe. The principal argument by which this opinion is supported, is, that faith is
a fruit of the Spirit, and that the Spirit cannot be given to men while they are
under the curse of the law, which is not repealed till they are actually justi
fied. The curse is an impenetrable barrier in the way of all gracious commu
nications. But although this seems to be logical reasoning, there are two rea
sons why I deem it inconclusive. The first is, that, notwithstanding their
subjection to the curse, God did love men, and bestow upon them the unspeak
able gift of his Son. I should wish to know what there is peculiar in the
gift of the Spirit, which should hinder God from giving him till the curse is
removed ; or how it comes to pass that, while men were under the guilt of sin,
God might send his Son to die for them, but cannot send his Spirit to infuse
life into their souls. The second reason is, that no reasoning, however plausi
ble, can support any Iheory in opposition to Scripture. If the Scripture
declares, that we are "justified by faith;" that righteousness is imputed to
those who believe ; and calls the righteousness of Christ, " the righteousness
which is by faith," plainly signifying that faith is antecedent; what right has
any man to come forward and tell me, that I should beware of being misled
by this language, for that this is not the true order of things ? God stands in
no need of the counsels of men to direct him how to proceed. He knows
what he may do consistently with his own character, and the moral constitu
tion of the universe. If he has said, that he justifies a sinner by faith, what
signify all the minute reasonings of puny mortals, which go to prove that
this is impossible, because there is a sentence against the sinner which must
be reversed before the Spirit is given? Did not God know of this difficulty?
or, knowing it, did he express himself as if it did not exist? It were well if,
in such matters, the interpreters of Scripture would lay aside their logic, and
exercise a humble faith, assenting to what is revealed without obtruding their
corrections and twisting every thing into an agreement with their systems.
And let us all learn to derive our sentiments in religion, not from the subtilties
of scholastic divines and their imitators in modern times, but from the writings
of the prophets and apostles, whose language, if it should appear to some
men not properly guarded, is, however, such as they were directed to use by
the Spirit of inspiration.
The opinion which I have endeavoured to expose, is hyperorthodoxy. As
it is contrary to the uniform language of the Scriptures, so it is at variance
with the doctrine of our church, which teaches us, that the righteousness of
Christ is received by faith; that "faith is the instrument of justification ;"*
and that, although "God did, from all eternity, decree to justify the elect; and
Christ did, in the fulness of time, die for their sins, and rise again for^their
justification ; nevertheless, they are not justified, until the Holy Spirit doth in
due time actually apply Christ unto them."*
Of the faith by which we are justified, such a definition has been sometimes
given as entirely overthrows the doctrine which we have laboured to establish.
It is represented not only as a living faith which works by love, but as formally
comprehending good works. It justifies us not as faith, or a reliance upon
Christ, but as operative in the performance of our duty, and is another name
for believing obedience. As this definition is inconsistent with the known and
established use of the term, so it confounds faith and works, which the Scrip
tures most carefully distinguish and oppose to each other in justification, and it
renders some of their declarations on the subject unmeaning and absurd. If
» Conf. Ch. xi. §. 1, 2. t Ib. §. 4.

JUSTIFICATION. 207
faith signifies believing obedience, they are convertible terms, and the one
may therefore be substituted for the other. Let us then make the exchange in
the following passage from the Epistle of James, and observe what is the
result: "Show me thy faith without thy works, and I will show thee my faith
by my works."* Observe how the sentence runs. ' Show me thy obedience
without thy obedience, and I will show thee my obedience by my obedience.'
A most wonderful species of demonstration, surely! and worthy to be pro
posed with great solemnity by an inspired apostle ! In other passages, the
substitution of obedience for faith, would produce an equally ridiculous effect.
Justifying faith has been defined to be a persuasion that Christ died for us
in particular, and that our sins are forgiven. I have already shown that this
view of it is a mistake. Nothing is the object of faith but what is revealed.
But there is no revelation in the Scriptures that Christ died for any man in
particular, and that his sins are forgiven ; and, therefore, to believe these pro
positions in the first instance, would be downright presumption. Besides, if
this were a just definition of faith, if this persuasion entered into its essence,
every man would be an unbeliever who never possessed this persuasion, and
the moment he lost it would fall from faith. How many of the people of God
would be thus excluded from his favour ! how few would be in a state of grace !
It is not a fair way to evade this difficulty, to say, that faith, like all the
other graces, is imperfect, and that the exercise of it may be suspended. How
ever imperfect any thing may be, its essence always remains ; and to talk of
suspending what is essential to it, is in fact to say that it is annihilated.
I have shown you, in a former lecture, * that justifying faith is not only an
assent to the testimony of God concerning his Son, but the reliance of the soul
upon his atonement and righteousness as the only ground of acceptance with
God. " With the heart man believeth unto righteousness. "^ I shall not re
sume the illustration of this point, but shall proceed to state what is the office
of faith in the justification of a sinner. Now, faith may be considered as
itself our justifying righteousness; or as the condition of our justification; or
as the means, and, as it has been often called, the instrument, by which we
become partakers of this blessing.
To suppose that faith itself is our justifying righteousness, would be to
contradict the language of Scripture, in which we are said to be justified by,
or through, faith ; an expression which merely imports, that it is somehow
connected with the enjoyment of the privilege. None, indeed, will maintain
that faith is our justifying righteousness, but those who, contrary to the obvious
meaning of the word and its constant distinction from works, have first as
sumed that is comprehensive of obedience. It may seem to favour this opinion,
that it is said of Abraham, that he " believed God, and it was counted unto
him for righteousness. "§ The expression is remarkable, and is not without
difficulty. The meaning of it, we are confidently told, is, that his faith was
accepted as his justifying righteousness ; that, " by mere favour, Ggd valued
it as equal to a complete performance of his duties, and rewarded him as if he
had been a righteous person."|| It would be well if those who use this lan
guage, would tell us plainly what they mean by faith ; whether it is a simple
reliance upon the merit of Christ to the exclusion of works, or such a belief
in him as is accompanied with works and derives its efficacy from them. If
they speak of faith in the latter sense, as their sentiments on other occasions
would lead us to think, their doctrine is refuted by the arguments by which it-
was formerly proved, that we are not justified by sincere obedience to a new
law of grace which God is supposed to have given to us. But if they refer
* James ii. 18. t Lect. lviii. t Rom. a. 10.
§ Rom. iv. 3. II Dr. M'Knight, Note 2. in loco.

208 THE PRIVILEGES OF BELIEVERS.
to faith alone, and, at the same time, deny that the righteousness of Christ is
imputed, they must maintain that this single act is accepted instead of obe
dience in general, and on the ground of it a sinner is pronounced to be right
eous. Is it possible that any man really believes that faith, thus disjointed
from all works, is equivalent, in the Divine estimation, to the whole obedience
which we originally owed ? Whatever some may believe, it is certain that
this faith is the act of the sinner. It is his obedience to a law requiring faith,
and is therefore a work as much as any other duty. How, then, are we to
understand the words of the Apostle, " To him that worketh not, but believeth
on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness."*
He evidently speaks of faith and works as directly opposed to each other in
our justification. According to this opinion, however, they are not opposed,
but while all other works are excluded, one work, namely faith, is retained ;
60 that Paul should have said, " To him who omits all works but one, that
work is counted for righteousness." But he has said no such thing, and we
are certain never intended to say it ; for his design was to prove, that all works
are excluded, without a single exception, and that we are justified by faith, not
as constituting our righteousness, but as receiving the righteousness of Christ.
No unprejudiced man who had read his writings, ever doubted that this was
his design. When we reflect, that he expressly declares that Christ is made
righteousness to us, that we are made righteous by his obedience, and that
righteousness is imputed to us without works, we cannot suppose for a moment
that the true meaning of the passage before us is, that faith itself is our justi
fying righteousness. Fair criticism requires, that a singular expression should
be explained in consistency with the general sentiments of the book in which
it occurs. By this rule, we must understand the words, " faith is imputed for
righteousness," in consistency with Paul's uniform doctrine, that a sinner is just
before God only in the righteousness of Christ, and must admit that here he
uses a metonymy by which the efficient is put for the effect, or the instrument
for the end accomplished by it. Abraham's faith was imputed for righteousness ;
that is, he obtained by it a righteousness, on the ground of which God justifies
the ungodly. We are sure that this was the fact ; and we are sure, therefore,
that this is what the apostle intended to express.
Again, Faith may be considered as the condition of our justification, as it
has been sometimes called ; but whether with propriety, may be doubted. If,
by condition, is meant that which is required to the enjoyment of a blessing,
that which must precede it in the order of time or of nature, it may be truly
said, that faith is the condition of justification, because nothing more is in
tended than to express, in different words, the uniform doctrine of Scripture, that
we are justified by faith. But the "condition" of any thing usually signifies
that which, being done, gives us a right or title to it, because it possesses either
intrinsic or conventional merit. To call faith, in this sense, the condition of
our justification, would be worse than inaccurate ; it would introduce human
merit to the dishonour of Divine grace, and overthrow the doctrine so clearly
taught in the New Testament. The term, condition, should therefore be avoided,
because it is calculated to mislead the ignorant by suggesting ideas contrary to
the truth of the gospel.
In the last place, Faith may be considered as the means or instrument of
justification. The latter term especially has been frequently employed ; and
as both are of human origin, they have no other claim to be preferred but
what arises from their fitness to express the office of faith. As a certain in
fluence is ascribed to it in the justification of a sinner, and, at the same time,
it is not the meritorious cause nor properly the condition, either of the terms
* Rom. iv. 5.

JUSTIFICATION. 209
conveys the idea of the part which it acts in this important affair. Those who
believe in Christ are said to receive him, and faith is the instrument by which
he is received. It is the hand with which we take the gift, which God freely
bestows. Whatever term we use, the sole office of faith is to put us in pos
session of the righteousness of our Redeemer, not in the way of merit, but
by a simple acceptance of it as presented and offered to us in the gospel.
It was the will of God that we should not be immediately justified on the
ground of the obedience and death of his Son in our room, but that some act
of our minds should precede the application of his merits to us. In a case of
suretyship, the three following things are necessary ; first, that the surety be
willing to engage ; secondly, that the person to whom the debt or service is
owing be willing to accept of him instead of the principal ; and thirdly, that
the person for whom he becomes bound, consent that he should act for him.
God was willing to accept of Christ as the substitute of sinners ; Christ was
willing to come under our obligations ; and all that was farther necessary, was,
that we should consent to his undertaking them. Our consent, indeed, was not
necessary to his entering upon his office, nor was it possible that it could be
given, as he assumed it before we existed ; but it was necessary to our parti-
, cipation of the benefits of his suretyship. This consent is given by faith,
which is our cordial approbation of his substitution and vicarious righteous
ness. And the reason of requiring faith will be evident, if we reflect, that,
without this act of our minds, we could not conceive the effect of his surety
ship to be communicated to us ; for, how could a righteousness be imputed to
us, or accounted ours, which we did not desire, and which we refused to
accept ?
We may observe how well adapted faith is to promote the great design of
God in the justification of sinners, the glory of his grace. Between grace and
works, there is an irreconcileable opposition, and the admission of the one in
volves the exclusion of the other. If we are justified by works, we are not
justified freely ; and the honour of grace, which gives without money and
without price, is impaired. This would have been the effect if any act of
ours had been made the condition of our justification, if we had been par
doned on account of our repentance and reformation, and restored to the fa
vour of God on account of our love to him and sincere obedience to his law.
But by the appointment of faith, the glory of grace is fully displayed. It
cannot be supposed, that a poor man has any merit in taking the alms which
are presented to him without his solicitation. It is not his acceptance which
gives him a right to enjoy them, but the offer made by his charitable neighbour.
It cannot be supposed, that there is any merit in consenting that Christ should
perform for us what we could not perform for ourselves; any merit in relying
on his obedience and sufferings, and acknowledging that there is nothing in
ourselves which could recommend us to God. This consent to the suretyship
of Christ, this* dependence on his righteousness, is the essence of justifying
faith. The wisdom of God is manifest' in this constitution, which takes away
from man every ground of boasting, abases his pride, and leads him to give all
the praise to the true Author of salvation. Having saved us by his own arm,
he makes it bare, if I may speak so, stretches it out openly, to make all men
see that by it alone the mighty work was achieved. To the sinner nothing is
left but to receive, with profound humility and gratitude, the precious gift
which God most freely bestows. There is an express acknowledgment in the
exercise of faith, that there is no goodness in himself for which God should be
favourable to him ; and he says, " Surely in the Lord have I righteousness and
strength."* * Is. xiv. 24.
Vol. IL— 27 s 2

210 THE PRIVILEGES OF BELIEVERS.
It may be added, that faith is not of ourselves, but "is the gift of God."*
As if it were not enough to exclude works of every kind, and to appoint faith
to be the means of obtaining an interest in Christ, lest we should boast of faith
itself, through our strong natural disposition to set an undue value upon every
thing which belongs to us, it is declared to be a gift, to the acquisition of
which we contribute nothing, in the communication of which to us we are pas
sive, and in exercising which we do not exert our own strength, but act in
consequence of being acted upon by supernatural power. The glory of our
salvation is thus appropriated to God without any deduction. It is his province
to give all, and ours to receive all.
It remains to inquire whether any place should be assigned to repentance in
our justification; and the inquiry is the more necessary, because nothing is
more common than to speak of it as if it were the condition upon which the
enjoyment of this blessing is suspended. It is supposed that Christ died " to
give our sorrows weight," or to render our repentance efficacious ; language
which imports, that through his mediation repentance is accepted as a sort of
satisfaction for our sins, or as a reason why they should be pardoned. All our
former reasoning tends to show that this opinion is erroneous. If all works
are excluded from being the ground of our justification, repentance is not to be
exempted. In refuting this opinion some make use of this argument, that repent
ance cannot be the condition of pardon, because the former does not go before
but follows the latter ; they think, that till a man believe in Christ and conse
quently be justified, he cannot truly repent. I shall not enter at present into
the controversy respecting the order of these two graces, although it would be
easy to show that those, who place justifying faith first, are encountered by
difficulties and objections, which are not sufficiently removed by a hypothesis
founded on what they conceive to be the necessary arrangement of the Divine
operations in the application of redemption. Some men, while they profess
the highest veneration for the standards of our Church, do not always conform
to their language,, but take the liberty in particular instances, to make use of a
corrected, and, in their judgment, a more accurate phraseology. Let our stand
ards be altered if they are wrong, but let not those who are most zealous to
maintain their integrity, and reject any proposal of change, practise, without
avowing it, what they openly denounce as a crime. "Although repentance,"
says our Confession of Faith, "be not to be rested in, as any satisfaction for
sin, or any cause of the pardon thereof, which is the act of God's free grace in
Christ, yet is it of such necessity to all sinners, that none may expect pardon
without it."* Not only is it asserted in general, that an impenitent sinner
cannot be pardoned, but it is expressly stated that before he is pardoned he
must cease to be impenitent. Whatever may be the order of faith and repent
ance, both must exist in the mind of the sinner who is justified ; and indeed it
is impossible to conceive any man to believe in Christ, without being duly
affected with a sense of sin, of its vileness as well as of its guilt. He who
is pardoned is a penitent like the publican in the parable, who said, " God be
merciful to me a sinner ;" he is not pardoned, however, for his repentance,
but, as our Confession affirms, by an "act of God's free grace in Christ."
God has no respect to his penitence as the cause for which he receives him
into favour, but solely to the atonement and obedience of his Surety.
It may be objected, that, although the Scriptures do in many places speak
as if we were justified by faith alone, yet there are other passages which ap
pear to favour the doctrine of justification by works. It is said for example,
that men shall be finally judged " according to their works ;"j) and our Lord re
presents the general judgment as proceeding upon this ground, when to the
» Eph. ii. 8. t Conf. ch. xv. §. 3. t Rev. xx. 12.

JUSTIFICATION. 211
sentence pronounced upon the righteous he subjoins an enumeration of their
deeds of charity as the reason of it : " For I was an hungred and ye gave me
meat; I was thirsty and ye gave me drink,"* fee. But, besides that one part
of Scripture should be explained consistently with another, and particular occa
sional expressions should be understood according to the general tenor of its
doctrine, the apparent difficulty will vanish if we reflect upon the design of the
judgment. Had nothing been intended except the distribution of rewards and
punishments, this might have been accomplished without the publicity and
solemnity of the grand assize ; but the purpose of an assembly of the human
race, of their arrangement in two divisions, and ofthe other proceedings of the
great day, is to reveal the righteousness of God. It is to convince all, that the
Judge of all the earth does right, by an open display of his justice. For this
end, it is necessary that the works of the righteous should be brought forward
to view, as well as those of the wicked; for something would be wanting to
complete the transaction, if the sentence in the case of the latter were proved
to be just by a detail of their crimes, but in the case of the former were found
ed only on their faith. The foundation, indeed, would be valid ; but as faith
is an act of the mind, although known to God it is unknown to all other beings,
unless it be made manifest by its fruits. Now, as the object of the judgment
is not merely to exercise justice, but to convince all the spectators of the awful
scene that it is exercised, it is necessary that some sensible proof should be
produced, which shall leave no doubt in their minds that those on the right
hand were entitled to the happiness to which they are adjudged. Their good
works will constitute this proof, not as being the ground of their title, but as
the evidence that they are possessed of that faith to which eternal life was pro
mised, because it was the appointed means of uniting them to the Saviour.
This is the true reason why their works will be referred to in the judgment;
and in this way we must account for the fact, if we would not set one part of
Scripture at variance with another. Men will be judged according to their
works ; or a sentence will be passed upon them according to their state and
character, of which their works will be the evidence.
There is another passage in which good works may seem to be represented
as the foundation of our title to heaven. "Blessed are they that do his com
mandments, that — "* — they may have right — fyvrta — to the tree of life, and
may enter in through the gates into the city."* Egcwi*, which is rendered
right, is a word which bears a variety of senses, and may be translated power,
authority, liberty, privilege. It does not necessarily convey the idea of right,
in the common acceptation of the term ; it may be understood simply to mean,
that those who do the commandments shall have access to the tree of life, or
shall enjoy the privilege of access to it. The meaning of the conjunction «a,
translated that, are also numerous. It denotes the final cause, or that for
which any thing is done, or merely the event and issue of a thing, or it is used
for the simple purpose of explanation : " Blessed are they that do his command
ments." How does this appear? " They shall have access to the tree of life."
Blessed arc they who obey in the hope of eternal life, for eternal life shall be
their gracious reward. This shall be the happy result. In the preceding con
text, our Lord declares, " that he will come quickly, and that his reward is
with him, to give every man according as his work shall be."* Then follows
the illustration. The righteous shall be admitted into the celestial city and
partake of all its delights; but the wicked shall be excluded from it, "dogs,
and sorcerers, and whoremongers, and murderers, and idolaters, and whoso
ever loveth and maketh a lie."§ When the passage is thus explained, there
is no difficulty in it. It merely states the happiness of those who obey in the
* Matth. xxv. 35. t Rev. xxii. 14. t Ib. 12. § lb. 15.

212 THE PRIVILEGES OF BELIEVERS.
hope of eternal life, the great motive proposed in the gospel to excite and en
courage us, for their labour shall not be in vain. It points out the character of
the persons for whom future felicity is reserved.
The principal difficulty arises from the Epistle of James, who seems to
teach a different doctrine from that of Paul, when he says, "Ye see how that
by works a man is justified, and not by faith only."* But that the contradic
tion is real, we cannot admit, without supposing that one of them was a false
teacher ; and we must therefore use our endeavours to reconcile them ; as we
are certain that the Spirit of God, by whom both were inspired, could not deli
ver contradictory oracles. Some pretend that Paul is an obscure writer, and
that on this account we should give the preference to James. We know the
cause of the complaints against the style and reasoning of the former. His
doctrine is peculiarly offensive to self-righteous men ; and they are eager to
invalidate the authority of a teacher, who tells many plain and mortifying
truths concerning the depravity of human nature, the insufficiency of our works,
and the absolute necessity of an entire dependence upon the righteousness of
Christ. In order to show that the difference between the two Apostles is only appa
rent, and that their writings perfectly harmonize, I request your attention to
the following remarks.
First, Paul and James had not the same design in view. From the Epistles
of Paul to the Romans and Galatians, it appears to have been his design to
show, that a sinner is pardoned, and accepted, and entitled to heaven, not on
account of his works, but through faith in the blood of Christ and the imputa
tion of his righteousness. And the reason why he insisted so much upon this
doctrine, was, that it is a fundamental article of the Christian religion, and was
strenuously opposed by certain teachers, who affirmed that men are saved by
the righteousness ofthe law. James had a different object in view. He does
not enter upon the consideration of the plan, by which a sinner is justified
before God, but sets himself to oppose the improper use which has been made
of the doctrine of salvation by grace. It appears that some, misunderstanding
what was said concerning faith, had imagined that we are justified by a bare
assent to the gospel, or that faith consisted in an orthodox belief. To the
carnally minded this was a very acceptable notion, as it followed, that they
might hope for eternal life although they continued in sin. Thus they turned
the grace of God into lasciviousness. In opposition to a system which was
subversive of all religion, the apostle maintains that good works are required
from every disciple of Christ ; and that nothing was more vain than for men
to pretend that they were justified, while their faith was manifestly of such a
nature as to leave them in a state of alienation from God. In a word, his de
sign is not to inform a man how he shall obtain the favour of God, but to con
vince him, that if his faith is barren and dead he is in a state of condemnation,
notwithstanding his profession and his hopes.
I remark, in the second place, That Paul and James do not speak of the
same faith. Hence, although they ascribe different things to faith, although
by the one it is represented as alone the instrument of our justification, and by
the other as ineffectual without works, there is no contradiction in their writings,
because they do not refer to the same subject. The faith which, according to
Paul, is the instrument of our justification, is a fruit of the Spirit, the faith
which is elsewhere termed " the faith of God's elect," " precious faith,"*
wrought in us by the power which raised Jesus Christ from the grave ; a living
and active principle which purifies the heart and excites to universal obedience.
But to the faith of which James speaks, these characters and exercises cannot
» James ii. 24. + Tit. i. 1. 2 Pet i. 2.

JUSTIFICATION. 213
be ascribed. The reason, indeed, why he affirms that men cannot be saved by
it, is, that these properties do not belong to it. It is a dead faith, a body with
out the soul, a faith which is exhausted in an empty profession, and which he
therefore compares to the inefficient charity which entertains the hungry and
naked with compassionate words, but neither feeds nor clothes them. Such
being the marked and essential difference between these two kinds of faith,
there is no inconsistency in ascribing justification to the one, and denying it to
the other. " If one," says an eminent divine, " affirms that fire will bum, and
another denies it, there is no contradiction between them, whilst one intends
real fire, and the other only that which is painted."
The last remark which I shall make, is still more conclusive, namely, that
Paul and James do not speak of the same justification. Paul, as we have
seen, discusses the important question, How we are justified before God, how
we obtain the pardon of our sins, and acceptance ? and he assigns these privi
leges "to grace reigning through righteousness unto eternal life, by Jesus
Christ our Lord."* The inquiry of James relates to the kind oi faith by
which we are justified, and to the way in which it is evinced to be genuine.
It does not treat of justification before God, but of justification before men.
He asks, How other men shall know that we are justified? and answers, that
they will know it by our works. That this is not a gratuitous assumption for
the purpose of evading a difficulty, but is the true meaning of justification in
the Epistle of James, is evident from the instances to which he appeals. The
first is Abraham; concerning whom he says, "Was not Abraham our father
justified by works, when he had offered Isaac his son upon the altar? Seest
thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect?
And the Scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it
was imputed unto him for righteousness ; and he was called the friend of God."t
It deserves attention, that, while Abraham is said to have been justified by
works, the Scripture is represented as fulfilled which affirms, that faith was
imputed unto him for righteousness. These things seem to be contradictory ;
and they would be so if the apostle were speaking of his justification before
God, because it would be attributed to two opposite causes, to works and to
faith. But, if we consider him as referring to the justification of Abraham
before men, the apparent contradiction will be removed, and this will be the
meaning of the passage :." When Abraham believed in God, righteousness
was imputed to him, and he was justified. This, however, was a secret
transaction, known only to God and to his own conscience. But when he
offered Isaac upon the altar, it was manifested to others ; for this high act of
obedience demonstrated that he was possessed of the living faith, to which the
promise of salvation is made." To confirm this interpretation of the passage,
let it be observed, that this justification of Abraham is said to have taken place
at the time when he obeyed the command of God, to offer up in sacrifice his
only-begotten son. Yet the Scripture declares that, thirty years before, as we
learn from the fifteenth chapter of Genesis, he was justified by faith. But
men are not twice justified by faith ; and the inference is therefore unavoidable,
that this second justification must relate to a different transaction, — his justifi
cation before men, the manifestation of the sincerity of his faith, and, conse
quently, of his acceptance with God; for faith can be shown only by our
works. And thus you perceive in what sense his faith was made perfect by
works. They did not supply any defect in it, and concur with it to recom
mend him to the favour of God ; but they proved it to be perfect, or to be not
a speculative opinion or listless assent, but a full and practical persuasion of the
truth The second instance which he produces, is Rahab : "Likewise also
* Rom. v. 21. t James ii. 21, 22.

214 THE PRIVILEGES OF BELIEVERS.
was not Rahab the harlot justified by works, when she had received the mes
sengers, and had sent them out another way?"* In the Epistle to the He
brews, we are informed that she received them by faith, f How she came to
the knowledge of Jehovah, the sacred historian has not told us; but it is cer
tain that she did believe in him ; and, because she believed in him, received the
Tsraelitish spies into her house. She was therefore justified before their arrival.
Hence, her justification by works must signify, as in the case of Abraham, the
manifestation of her faith. By them she was justified before men, or proved
to be a believer ; but she was justified before God prior to the performance of
them. When we consider that Paul and James had different designs, and that they
speak of different kinds of faith and justification, we perceive that, notwith
standing an apparent discrepancy, the doctrine of the one perfectly harmonizes
with that of the other. When James affirms, that " by works a man is justi
fied, and not by faith only,"! he does not contradict Paul, who asserts, that
"we are justified by faith without the deeds of the law;"§ he simply lays
down this important proposition, that it is not by a simple profession of faith
that we can know a man to be in a state of favour with God, but by a profes
sion accompanied with such good works as evince its sincerity. " Yea, a man
may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works : show me thy faith without thy
works, and I will show thee my faith by my works. "|| No person of common
understanding, and common candour, would charge two modern Divines with
contradicting each other, if to the question, How are we justified before God ?
the one should answer, By faith ; and to the question, How are we justified
before men, or proved to be genuine believers ? the other should answer, By
works. It requires little sagacity to perceive, and only a little honesty to ac
knowledge, that, if Paul and James speak of the same subject, it is utterly im
possible to reconcile them. The one or the other must be in an error; and,
consequently, the one or the other must be erased from the list of the apostles,
unless, with Unitarians, we will venture to deny their inspiration, and boldly
maintain that they were liable to mistakes like other men. Had Paul and
James been understood by the primitive Christians to treat of the same justifi
cation, their Epistles would not have been both received as divine. The one
or the other would have been rejected. If two writings had appeared, in one
of which it was affirmed that there are three persons in the Godhead, and in
the other that there is only one person, both could not have been admitted into
the canon, but the latter would have been pronounced to be the work of a
heretic. Doubts were entertained of the Epistle of James by some individuals,
probably because it seemed to be at variance with the doctrines of Paul ; but it
was received by the Jewish believers to whom it was addressed, as we learn
from its insertion in the Syriac version, made, it is supposed, in the first or
the beginning of the second century ; and it has long been acknowledged by
the whole Church as the genuine production of the apostle whose name it
bears.
: * James ii. 25. t Heb. xii. 31. t James ii. 24. §'Rom. iii. 28. || James ii. 18.

JUSTIFICATION. 215

I LECTURE LXXII.
JUSTIFICATION.
Refutation of the Objection, that the Doctrine of Justification by Faith is injurious to
Morality.
Against the doctrine of justification by faith without the works of the law,
objections have been advanced, some of which have been already considered.
It might have been previously expected, that it would not have been quietly
received ; and that, mortifying as it is to the pride of man, it would call forth
many attempts to set it aside, and to secure to him, if not the whole honour,
at least some share in the glory of his salvation. Accordingly, no article of
faith has given rise to more violent controversies, and been exhibited in a more
odious light; endeavours having been used, not only to disprove it by direct
argument, but to load it with consequences from which it may appear that it
cannot be true. The consequences, indeed, which are adduced from a
doctrine, ought not to be always admitted as a test of its truth, for they may
be unfairly drawn, and may be false even when to us they seem to be legiti
mate, because the subject may be obscure, and we may take only a partial view
of it ; but if it could be clearly shown that a doctrine leads to vice and impiety,
the proof would be complete that it did not emanate from the source of all
purity, but that it was an invention of men, or a suggestion of the father of lies.
There is an objection which has been frequently urged against justification
by grace, and which Paul, anticipating from his knowledge of the light in
which the doctrine would be viewed by men of corrupt minds, has stated and
refuted. The doctrine seems to wear an unfriendly aspect to holiness, for
which some men profess great zeal, and would persuade us that they are deeply
concerned for its interests. In many cases, the sincerity of this profession
may be called in question without a breach of charity ; because we find that
those who are, most eloquent in their declamations in favour of good works,
are not distinguished by the practice of them ; and that frequently the only
proof which they give of attachment to them, consists in violent invectives
against those who hold a different creed. At present, however, we shall con
fine our attention to their reasoning. If we are freely pardoned, they say, and if
nothing is required of us that we should enjoy this blessing but to believe,
this easy method of obtaining forgiveness will be an incitement to repeat our
offences. May we not also be tempted to sin from the notion that, the more
numerous our transgressions are, divine grace will be the more glorified in
passing them by? If good works are not the condition of our restoration to
the favour of God, and he is accepted who does not work, but believes, the
most powerful inducement to perform them is taken away. It is the hope of
being benefited by his labours, which rouses a person to active exertion. No
consideration can be conceived more effectual to excite us to obedience, than
the prospect of recommending ourselves to our Maker, and of being rewarded
with a blessed immortality ; but, if the prize is secured to us by the merit of
another, nothing can be expected to follow but total remissness. Men, per
suading themselves that they are justified by faith, will naturally conclude that
good works are unnecessary, every purpose which they were intended to ac
complish being effected by a different expedient. They will think that there.
is no hazard in neglecting them ; and perhaps they will deem it their duty to
neglect them, lest they should interfere with the righteousness of Christ, weaken

216 THE PRIVILEGES OF BELIEVERS.
their feelings of dependence upon him, and create in their minds an idea ot
merit, by which his honour would be impaired.
This is the objection against our doctrine ; and it is stated, I apprehend, in
all its force. Justification by faith, without the works of the law, is injurious
to the interests of morality, by weakening or destroying the motives to it. If
the objection were well founded, if there were such an opposition between free
justification and the necessity of holiness, as some men pretend, it would fol
low that our views are erroneous, and that what we call the Gospel of the
grace of God is a licentious perversion of the truth. Paul, as we have
already remarked, anticipated this objection; and it is not improbable that it
was brought forward by some disputers in his days. Hence arises a strong
presumption, that his doctrine and ours, in reference to this important article
of religion, agree. There would have been no room for the objection, if he
had taught that men are in any sense justified by works. Whatever other
faults might have been found with his doctrine, it could not have been alleged
that it had a tendency to set aside the obligations to duty ; and if any person
had been so stupid as to urge this objection, Paul would not have entered into
an elaborate train of reasoning with a view to show that it was inapplicable,
but would have thought it sufficient to state anew, that, according to him,
good works were the condition of our restoration to the favour of God. After
having declared that, " as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men
to condemnation ; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came Upon
all men unto justification of life. For as by one man's disobedience many
were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made right
eous;"* after having given the same view of justification which we have ex
hibited, he adds, "What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that
grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any
longer therein ? Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus
Christ were baptized into his death ? Therefore we are buried with him by
b.aptism into death ; that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the
glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if
we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in
the likeness of his resurrection : knowing this, that our old man is crucified
with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should
not serve sin. For he that is dead is freed from sin."*
Decisive, however, as this objection is accounted, and triumphantly as it is
displayed as a complete refutation of our doctrine, it is easy to show that it
discovers rather the ignorance of those who advance it, than the strength of
their cause. Three things are taken for granted, which are grossly and palpa
bly false. It is presumed, that, if good works are not necessary to the justifi
cation of a sinner, they are not necessary for any other purpose, and are alto
gether useless ; that justification and sanctification may be separated, or that a
man may be received into the favour of God and yet continue unholy ; and
that the doctrine of justification by grace does not supply motives of sufficient
efficacy to insure our obedience. If the reverse of these assumptions can be
proved, the objection falls to the ground ; and although we be justified by faith,
the interests of holiness are effectually secured.
First, It is assumed that, unless good works are the condition of justification,
there is no other reason of sufficient efficacy to induce us to perform them.
It is not a little strange that this idea should be adopted, especially by persons
who have much to tell us concerning eternal and immutable morality, by
which they mean, that morality is founded in the nature of things, is indepen
dent of time, and place, and circumstances, and is of perpetual obligation,
« Rom. v. 18, 19. t Rom. vi. 1—7.

JUSTIFICATION. 217
whatever may be the condition of intelligent beings. It does not well accord
with their fine declamations concerning the intrinsic beauty of virtue, the satis
faction which it imparts to the mind, and which more than compensates the
difficulties and sacrifices attending the practice of it, and the disinterested cha
racter of a good man, who will cultivate virtue for its own sake. These specu
lations have vanished into air, and it is confessed by the authors of them
that virtue requires a more substantial recommendation than its own charms ;
that it is in fact a calculation of interest; and that unless it hold out the pros
pect of solid advantage, it will have no authority upon our consciences, no
attractions for our hearts. Hence we learn what are the real sentiments and
feelings of the objectors, for they virtually acknowledge, that notwithstanding
their pretended zeal for good works, they would not hold them in estimation
were it not for their consequences ; that they do not set a value upon them for
their intrinsic worth, but solely because they are the means by which their
own happiness will be promoted. This is a fair inference from their objec
tion ; for they unquestionably judge from themselves, when they say, that, if
men are once persuaded that works are not the condition of eternal life, they
will consider themselves as loosed from any obligation to perform them. They
conclude that other men would act in this manner, because they are conscious
that such would be their own conduct.
But although they can perceive no reason for the performance of good
works, if they are not the meritorious cause of our justification, those who
have studied the Scriptures, and imbibed their spirit, entertain a different
opinion. Obedience to the divine law is our indispensable duty, without any reference
to our own interest. Nothing is more contrary to reason and piety than to
suppose, that moral obligation is founded on a contract between us' and our
Maker, by which we engage to fulfil certain services in consideration of cer
tain advantages. The idea assumes what is false — that we are independent
beings, and voluntarily enter into an engagement to give what we might with
hold. If God is the author of our existence and faculties, he has undoubted
right to prescribe the purpose for which we should use those faculties, and his
will constitutes a permanent obligation. The reason why we should obey is
not that we expect a recompense from him, but that being our Creator he is
our Sovereign Lord, to whose commands we should implicitly bow. There is
no doubt that a creature would be bound to obey, although he knew that next
moment he should be annihilated. The truth is, that what we do is not obe
dience, unless it be done from respect to his will ; for to obey is to execute the
orders of a superior because they are his orders, and not because they will be
productive of some advantage to ourselves. And this is in fact the considera
tion by which true Christians are influenced. They think principally of their
duty, regarding their interest as a subordinate consideration, and conform to
the precepts of the law because the authority which enjoins them is sacred in
their eyes. Hence it appears, that, although good works should not be the
condition of justification, the reason for performing them remains in all its
force. By them we discharge the debt of obedience which we owe to the
Author of our being.
Again, obedience is the return which is due to God for his innumerable fa
vours. The objectors seem to think that the expectation of new blessings is
a powerful excitement to duty, but that the remembrance of past blessings will
have no such effect. It is acknowledged that men are very apt to forget the
kindness of a benefactor; but bad as human nature is, instances of gratitude
are not uncommon, and many a willing service is performed under the influence
of this feeling. In particular, we might calculate upon its powerful operation
in those who have received from God the remission of their sins, and a right
Vol. IL— 28 T

218 THE PRIVILEGES OF BELIEVERS.
to eternal life, and whose hearts have been softened and made susceptible .of
every good impression by the Spirit of grace. " What shall I render to the
Lord for all his benefits ?" is a question which a justified man will naturally
ask; and knowing that obedience is the most acceptable return, "he will
make haste, and not delay to keep his commandments." The objection makes
no allowance for the operation of gratitude, and supposes men, even when
brought under the power of religion, to be entirely governed by selfishness.
But true believers enter into the spirit of the apostolic exhortation, " Ye are
not your own ; ye are bought with a price ; therefore glorify God in your body,
and in your spirit, which are God's."*
In the next place, by obedience we glorify God, and recommend religion to
our fellow-men: "Herein is my Father glorified, that ye bear much fruit;
so shall ye be my disciples."* While we thus pay to God the homage which
he claims, and recognise him as a Being of essential purity, which is the
glory of his nature, our conduct is calculated to make an impression upon
others, and to induce them seriously to consider their obligations, and to en
deavour, through Divine assistance, to fulfil them,: " Let your light so shine
before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father
which is in heaven."* These are reasons which will influence those who reflect,
that the end of all the works of God is his glory ; and that as it is passively
promoted by the inferior parts of the creation, in which his perfections are dis
played, so it is the sacred duty of intelligent beings to contribute to it actively,
by the dedication of their faculties to his service. In answering the objection,
we are perpetually reminded of the narrow contracted views from which it has
proceeded. What is not immediately related to themselves, does not fall under
the contemplation of the objectors. Why should they glorify God, unless it
can be shown that some benefit will accrue to them? They who reason in
this manner, furnish the clearest evidence that they do not, understand the en
lightened and liberal principles of genuine piety, and are actuated by the mer
cenary spirit of slaves. It is certain that the spirit of a Christian would not
have dictated the objection which we are at present refuting.
I remark, in the last place, that the consideration which appears to the ob
jectors to be alone of any force to excite men to obedience, a regard to their
own interest, is not wanting, according to the doctrine of justification by faith.
Although good works are not the foundation of our title to eternal life, yet
they are intimately connected with our happiness, and contribute to promote
it. To a believer, holiness is an evidence of the existence of Divine grace in
his heart, of the sincerity of his faith, and consequently of his interest in the
favour of God. " Hereby perceive we that we are of the truth, and shall as
sure our hearts before him."§ It is his qualification for communion with God,
between whom and a creature polluted with sin there can be no comfortable
intercourse. " If we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellow
ship one with another."|| If the joys of fellowship with God will not excite
men to their duty, the promise of heaven itself, as their reward, would have
as little effect ; for heaven, rightly understood, is a continuation of the plea
sures of devotion, and cannot be an object of desire unless those pleasures are
prized above all earthly delights. And this leads me to state, that when we
have abandoned the idea of good works being the condition of future happi
ness, there remains this strong reason for performing them, that they are indis
pensably necessary to prepare us for it ; for this is the law, from which there
is no exemption, that, " without holiness, no man shall see the Lord."^f He
who trusts in the merit of the Saviour, feels himself impelled to the cultivation
" f OW. vi. 20. + John xv. 8. t Matt. v. 16.
» t John iii. 19. || 1 John i. 7. Tt Heb. xii. 14.

JUSTIFICATION. 219
of holiness as powerfully as if his title to heaven had depended upon it. What
would a right to it avail if he were incapable of enjoying it? and what joy
would the presence of God give to a man who was not assimilated to him by
the renovation of his soul? Sin, which is the source of our disquietudes and
sorrows upon earth, would render us miserable even in the region of blessed
ness If, then, there are so many purposes which holiness serves, and which are,
consequently, reasons for practising it, we do not set aside good works by ex
cluding them from our justification. We are not so foolish as to think that
they are useful for nothing, because they are not useful for every thing. This,
however, is the import and the strength of the objection which is advanced
against our doctrine with so much confidence. If we are not justified by
works, they may be dismissed as superfluous.
In the second place, it is taken for granted by those who urge the objection,
that justification and sanctification may be separated, or that a man, who is
received into the favour of God, may continue unholy. If it can be shown
that this supposition is false, the objection falls to the ground. In reasoning
concerning the Divine dispensations, we ought not to admit arbitrary hypo
theses, but should endeavour to ascertain what is the established order of
things. Men may conceive, through ignorance, a sinner to be justified without
being sanctified, or his state to be changed while there is no change in his cha
racter, and on this ground may prove the dangerous consequences of maintain
ing the doctrine of justification by grace. Here is a man who is the object of
the love of God, but is in an unregenerated state, and possesses a right to a
blessed immortality, although he is living in sin. Were this the true state of
the case, it might be justly said of our doctrine, that it leads to licentiousness,
and must therefore have originated in human ignorance or depravity. But the
separation exists only in theory, and affords an instance of the false alarms
which men frequently experience from phantoms of their own imagination.
The Scriptures represent the two blessings as closely connected, and as en
joyed at the, same time : " Ye are washed, ye are sanctified, ye are justified,
in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God."* When they
draw the character of justified persons, the description points, not only to
their interest in the Divine favour, but also to the holy exercises in which they
are engaged: "There is no condemnation to them that are in Christ Jesus,
who walk not after the flesh, but after the spirit ;"* that is, they are not carnal,
but spiritual; they are not governed by the desires and volitions of corrupt
nature, but by the principles of grace. It was not the intention of the apostle
to state the ground on which they are exempt from condemnation, but to in
form us of the moral qualities of the persons to whom this privilege belongs.
To be under grace, and not under the law, or, in other words, to be delivered
from the curse of the law and restored to the favour of God, is represented as
a state which secures us from the reigning power of sin: " Sin shall not have
the dominion over you; for ye are not under the law, but under grace."* The
faith by which we are justified is said to be a living faith, which manifests
itself in holiness of life, while the faith which is alone, the faith which is not
productive of good works as its native fruit, is pronounced to be useless to its
possessor: "As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is
dead also."§
The inseparable connection between justification and sanctification, is farther
manifest from the consideration, that a sinner cannot be justified till he be
lieve ; and that as faith is a supernatural grace, it cannot exist without the com
munication of the Spirit to the soul. But the Spirit, if I may be allowed to
* 1 Cor. vi. 11. t Rom. viii. 1. } Ib. vi. 14. § JameB ii. 26.

220 THE PRIVILEGES OF BELIEVERS.
use figurative language, does not come alone ; he brings all his graces, or as
the Scripture calls them, his fruits along with him, infusing not only faith,
but also hope and love ; and thus he sows the seeds of holiness, which imme
diately spring up and yield a rich harvest of good works. Those who
maintain that the doctrine of justification by faith is unfriendly to holiness,
have adopted unscriptural ideas of faith. They suppose it to be a mere assent
of the understanding to a proposition supported by evidence, and do not
seem to know, that the faith of which we speak, is an act which proceeds from
a principle of spiritual life in the heart. The justified person was dead in
trespasses and sins, but is now alive ; his nature is changed as well as his
state ; he is delivered from the power as well as from the guilt of sin ; and his
faith, which embraces the righteousness of Christ, works by love to God and
man, as naturally as a tree puts forth buds, and leaves, and blossoms, and
fruit. The objection which we are considering betrays deplorable ignorance
of the operations of grate ; and those who have derived their ideas of faith,
its origin and efficacy, from the Scriptures, will hardly consider it as worthy
of a serious refutation. What method can be conceived more effectual to
secure the performance of good works, than the communication of the Spirit
of holiness ?
Hence, we perceive how false it is to charge the doctrine of justification by
faith, with giving encouragement to the neglect of our duty. According to the
immutable law of heaven, he who is justified, is also sanctified; and he can
not be justified, because he cannot believe, till he receive the Holy Ghost, by
whom he is enabled "to put off the old man, which is corrupt, according to
the deceitful lusts, and to put on the new man, which after God is created in
righteousness and true holiness."*
In the third place, It is presumed that the doctrine of justification by faith,
does not supply any motive of sufficient efficacy to restrain us from sin, and, to
excite us to obedience. Nothing, however, is more easy than to show that
the idea is unfounded.
First, This doctrine furnishes a most powerful motive to restrain us from
sin, by exhibiting it in such a light as is calculated to inspire the utmost abhor
rence of it. The pardon of sin is granted in justification ; but it is granted
solely on the ground of the atonement of Christ. We are thus reminded that
sin is offensive to God in the highest possible degree, since nothing could in
duce him to forgive it but the dreadful sacrifice of his only-begotten Son. His
^ wrath could not be appeased but by the shedding of his precious blood. Were
God to pardon us upon repentance, it would appear, indeed, that he had been
displeased ; but we should naturally conclude, that he was not much offended ;
since, on so slight a ground as our sorrow, and confession, and amendment,
he was willing to cancel what is past. It is not a very aggravated fault for
which repentance will atone. But now, when death is demanded, and that
the death not of a mere man, but of the Lord of glory, what can we infer but
that the Divine detestation of sin is infinite ? And can we believe this awful
truth, and at the same time persist in the love and practice of sin ? It is im
possible. Men may sin when the scene of the crucifixion is forgotten ; but
they will not sin when it is fresh in their remembrance. Upon a regenerated
heart its power is irresistible. A believer will not transgress while the terrors
of Divine wrath are displayed before his eyes, and a most impressive demon
stration is given of the contrariety of sin to the will and nature of God. He is
delivered, indeed, from its penal effects ; but he is delivered by such means as
must inspire him with abhorrence of its vileness and dread of its consequences.
Secondly, This doctrine supplies a strong motive to obedience, by remind-
* Eph. iv. 22, 24.

JUSTIFICATION. 221
ing us that- the obligation to it is immutable, and can, upon no account, be dis
pensed with. Justification by faith proceeds upon the ground of the previous
fulfilment of the law by Jesus Christ in the character of our Surety. Although
to us the gift of eternal life is free, and nothing is required but that we should
accept it with humble gratitude, yet, in respect of our Redeemer, it is the re
ward of the fulfilment of the condition upon which it was originally promised.
The plan of justifying a sinner, according to the Gospel, does not set aside the
moral law or abate its demands ; but, on the contrary, it recognises its authority,
and magnifies it by a righteousness commensurate to its requisitions. The
dispensation of grace is not intended to throw any reflection upon the dispen
sation of the law ; but, while it provides a remedy for the evil caused by the
violation ofthe law, it gives a full sanction to its claims, and exhibits the origi
nal constitution as worthy of its Author, a bright display of his justice and
holiness. From the terms prescribed to our Saviour we learn, that God could
not dispense with obedience, even in favour of those whom he loved. How
then is it supposed that our doctrine is unfavourable to holiness? Does it
teach us to disregard the precepts of the law, by carrying its authority to the
greatest possible height? Does it present a temptation to withhold obedience,
by showing that God loves it as much as he loves the exercise of. mercy ; and
that, full of compassion as he is, he would not relieve mankind from their
misery, unless the rights of his law were respected and established ? By re
minding us that obedience was required from our Surety as the condition of
our restoration to the favour of God, does it authorize us to conclude that, when
we are admitted into a justified state, the obligation to it is dissolved, and we
may safely trample the precept under foot ? These certainly are inferences
which cannot be logically deduced from the premises; but in this manner they
must reason who affirm, that the doctrine of justification by grace tends to
licentiousness. In the third place, The doctrine of free justification is calculated to awaken
gratitude and love to the Author of our Salvation. The value of the blessing is
inestimable, and it is bestowed without money and without price. No condi
tion, properly so called, is prescribed ; but all that is required is, that we should
believe in him, "who suffered the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to
God."* Had some condition been enjoined, our sense ofthe Divine goodness
would have been weaker, as less grace would have appeared in conferring the
blessing ; and the selfish idea of merit would have shed its paralysing influence
upon the emotions of the heart. But now, when grace shines with undiminish
ed lustre, and the sinner knows that he is indebted to it alone for the remission
of his manifold offences, and the hope of a blessed immortality, will not all
that is within him be stirred up to glorify his Divine Benefactor ? God will
appear to him worthy of the most ardent love, and of the best return which he
can make for his wonderful and unmerited kindness. He will not dream of
recompensing him ; for, in this respect, our goodness extends not to God ; but
the principle of his condubt will be a desire to express the gratitude which he
feels, and to do what he can for the honour of him who has done all for his
salvation. When gratitude is excited, and the feeling is strong, compliance
with the will of a benefactor is secured. On this ground we affirm, that the
doctrine of justification by grace, directly tends to advance the interests of holi
ness. " What shall I render to the Lord for all his benefits ?" The pardoned
sinner will say, ' I owe every thing to him ; and I am willing to do any thing
for him.' "If a man love me, he will keep my words."* Those who have
no love to God, can he impelled to obey him only by love to themselves. But
a Christian acts upon a more generous plan. He loves God, because God has
* 1 Pet iii. 18. t John xiv. 23.
t2

222 THE PRIVILEGES OF BELIEVERS.
loved him ; and hence, like his Lord and Master, he delights to do his will,
and his law is in his heart. That doctrine which is best fitted to beget and
cherish love to God, is best calculated to promote the interests of holiness.
There is no doctrine, therefore, so favourable to good works, as that of justifi
cation by grace.
Lastly, The doctrine of justification by faith encourages us to obey, by
giving us the sure hope of acceptance. Men will not engage in vain labour,
knowing it to be vain. If success be doubtful, their spirits will flag, and their
exertions will be languid ; but hope will give life, and vigour, and perseverance
in their efforts. According to the doctrine of justification by works, we obey
in great uncertainty ; we know not what will be the result ; our endeavours
may prove abortive, our services may be found defective, and be rejected on
trial. But according to the doctrine of justification by faith, we obey in the
full confidence of gracious acceptance. Believers already enjoy the favour of
God through the Saviour, in whom they trust. They do not work for a prize
that may be lost, for their title to it is secure ; but from gratitude, because it is
secure, and they know that their hopes will be realized in the eternal posses
sion of it. They know that the curse of the law is repealed, and consequently,
that the great obstacle to the acceptance of their persons and services is re
moved. They know that, although their works, being imperfect, would he re
jected if performed as the condition ofthe favour of God and future happiness,
they will be pleasing to him as testimonies of filial duty and of love without
dissimulation. They know that Jesus Christ intercedes for them in the hea
venly sanctuary, and recommends their services to his Father by perfuming
them with the incense of his merit. By these considerations their hearts are
enlarged, and they go forward with ease and delight in the way of the com
mandments. " They therefore so run, not as uncertainly ; they so fight not as
one that beateth the air."* They are under the eye of an approving witness
and a gracious rewarder. They are " steadfast, unmoveable, always abounding
in the work of the Lord, forasmuch as they know that their labour is not in
vain in the Lord."*
It may be thought that an objection so manifestly unfounded, as every perspn
perceives who has carefully and dispassionately studied the subject, is not
worthy of a serious refutation. But as it has a plausible sound, is often
brought forward, and is calculated to make an impression upon the ignorant
and superficial, it is proper that we should be furnished with arguments in reply
to it, for the vindication of truth and the removal of prejudice.
The question concerning the tendency of the two opposite systems, might
be submitted to the decision of experience. The most imposing speculations
turn out to be the dreams of fancy, when they are contradicted by facts. I do
not say that all those who maintain justification by works are careless of them ;
but it is certain, that where this doctrine is taught and believed there is com
monly a deplorable want of morality ; there is little or no appearance of per
sonal and family religion ; and the law of God, although magnified in words, is
generally disregarded in practice. I would not say, that all who hold justifica
tion by faith abound in good works, for men may profess the doctrine without
cordially believing it and feeling its power ; but it cannot be denied, that where
the doctrine is sincerely embraced there is much serious concern for the salva
tion of the soul, great diligence in observing the ordinances of grace, and atten
tion to personal and relative duties. The result is exactly the reverse of what
some men had calculated, and on some occasions, they have been unable to
conceal their surprise and mortification. It is a good remark, that worldly
men trust in good works without doing them, and believers do good works
* 1 Cor. ix. 26. t lb. xv. 58.

JUSTIFICATION. 223
without trusting in them. However strange the fact may appear, those who
understand the Scriptures are at no loss to account for it. The one system
cannot purify the heart, becailse it is false ; the other being true, is the powei
of God unto salvation. "Talk they of morals? O thou bleeding Love!
The grand morality is love of thee."*
So speaks the poet, and he expresses the feeling of every Christian. That
doctrine which eminently displays the love of God to the unworthy, creates a
deep sense of our high obligations to the Saviour, and fixes our attention upon
him as our hope and our life as well as our great exemplar, is the most power
ful engine which ever was contrived for rousing the energies of the soul. You
may expect every thing from a willing mind ; and there is no reason to fear
that they will fail to perform their duty, punctually, cheerfully, and steadily,
who can say, "The Love of Christ constraineth us."*
In the days of the apostle James there were men, as we have seen in a
former lecture,!: who imagined that they should be saved by faith without
works, from a gross misapprehension of the doctrine of grace ; and there have
not been wanting successors to them, who have not only imitated their exam
ple by trampling upon the precepts of religion, but have adopted the fallacious
principle, that the obligations of holiness are superseded by the plan of justi
fying sinners which the gospel reveals. The strong inclination of the human
heart to sin, eagerly lays hold of every pretext to indulge itself, and proceeds
to such a degree of impiety as to claim a sanction even from God himself, and
to shelter itself under the patronage of religion, thus setting God at variance
with himself, and introducing war between the different parts of his word, as
if the good news by Jesus Christ were a repeal of the law promulgated from
the beginning as the rule of righteousness to mankind. The abusers of divine
grace have been called Antinomians, or opponents of the law, which, accord
ing to them, has lost its power to bind believers to obedience. The name has
been ignorantly or malignantly given to those who abhorred the tenet of which
it is expressive ; and nothing is more common than to call men Antinomians,
because they affirm that we are justified by faith without works, although
they openly maintain, and prove by their conduct, that they are sincere in main
taining, that believers are bound to yield obedience to the precepts, and are far
more zealous of the law in practice than their adversaries. But'it is to be
lamented, that there have been, and at this moment are, professed Christians
who dare openly to teach, that believers are exempted from the law in every
sense. On this point, we are as much opposed to them as Arminians are, and
have cause to complain of injustice, when we are confounded under the same
denomination. We have satisfactorily shown, that our doctrine leads to no
such consequence ; and publicly declare, that while we expect to be saved
only by grace, this grace teaches "us to deny ungodliness and worldly lusts,
and to live soberly, righteously, and godly in this present world ; looking for
that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour
Jesus Christ, who gave himself for us, that he might redeem us from all ini
quity, and purify unto himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works. "§
* Young's Night Thoughts, N. iv. t 2 Cor. v. 14.
X Lect. lxxi. § Titus ii. 12—14.

224 THE PRIVILEGES OF BELIEVERS.
LECTURE LXXIII.
ON ADOPTION
Adoption, a part of Justification — Meaning of the term, "Sons of God" — The Practice an!
Nature of Adoption among Men — Definition and Explanation of the Spiritual Privilege of
Adoption — The Benefits flowing from it.
Having illustrated at considerable length, the doctrine of justification, I pro
ceed to consider another privilege of believers in Christ, namely, Adoption.
There are two reasons why I shall direct your attention to it : first, because it
is expressly mentioned in the Scriptures as one of the blessings of redemption ;
and secondly, because a place is commonly assigned to it in systems of Theo
logy. At the same time, it appears to me to be virtually the same with justi
fication, and to differ from it merely in the new view which it gives of the
relation of believers to God, and in the peculiar form in which it exhibits the
blessings to which they are entitled. As it implies a change of state, it must
be the same ; for this change can take place but once ; and whether we say that
a sinner passes from a state of guilt and condemnation into a state of favour
with God, or that he is translated from the family of Satan into the family of
heaven, we express the same fact, and only diversify the terms. He who is
justified is adopted, and he who is adopted is justified. But as the Scriptures
make use of the term adoption, to denote the change of relation which takes
place when we are effectually called, and believers are often exhibited in the
character of the children of God, the subject is well worthy of our attention
and has a claim to a separate illustration.
There are different grounds on which men receive the designation of the
Sons of God. First, they are so called on account of their relation to him as
their Maker. "Have we not all one Father? and hath not one God created
us ?"* It is for this reason that, in the third chapter of Luke, where the gene
alogy of our Saviour is recorded, the Evangelist having traced it up to the pro
genitor of the human race, by stating in the usual form that such a man was
the son of such another man, concludes by saying of Adam, "which was the
son of God."* And for the same reason, angels are called his sons. "Where
wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth ; when the morning stars
sang together, and all the sons of God shouted for joy?"* Again, the desig
nation of sons of God is given to men in consequence of the external relation
in which they stand to him as his people, and the favour with which he regards
them. This is obviously the import of the message which God commanded
Moses to deliver to Pharaoh. " Thou shalt say unto Pharaoh, thus saith the
Lord, Israel is my son, even my first-born."§ It is intimated in these words,
that he had chosen the Israelites to be his peculiar people ; that he regarded
them with peculiar affection, and purposed to bestow upon them distinguished
marks of his favour ; and that this was the reason why he commanded the
king of Egypt to give them liberty to depart, and why he would himself in
terpose by miracles to effect their deliverance. In the New Testament they
are described as the children of the kingdom ; and on the same ground the
character of the sons of God may now be given to the members of the visible
church, who are externally in covenant with him, and have been symbolically
admitted into his family by baptism. There remains another mode in which
men are constituted the sons of God, namely, by adoption. The term is ap-
* Mai. ii. 10. t Luke iii. 38. X Job xxxviii. 4. 7. § Exod. iv. 22.

ADOPTION. 225
olied indeed to the son-ship ofthe Israelites, "to whi-..," as Paul says, "per
tained the adoption,"* because God took them into a relation to himself, in
which they did not naturally stand ; but it is used in its proper sense and full
import, in reference only to believers in Christ. " When the fulness of the
time was come, God sent forth his Son made of a woman, made under the
law, to redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adop
tion of sons."* And the same apostle says in another place, " He hath
chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy
and without blame before him in love, having predestinated us unto the adop
tion of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of (
his will, to the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us ac
cepted in the Beloved.":):
"To adopt a person," as Kennet says in his Roman Antiquities, "was to
take him in the room of a son, and to give him a right to all the privileges
which accompanied that title. Now the wisdom of the Roman constitution
made this matter a public concern. When a man had a mind to adopt another
into his family, he was obliged to draw up his reasons, and to offer them to
the college of the Pontifices for their approbation. If this was obtained, on
the motion of the Pontifices, the consul, or some other prime magistrate, brought
in a bill at the Comitia Curiata, to make the adoption valid. The private
ceremony consisted in buying the person to be adopted, of his parents, for
such a sum of money formally given and taken ; and Suetonius tells us, that
Augustus purchased his grandsons Caius and Lucius of their father Agrippa."
.It may be added to this account, that the parties appeared before the praetor,
when the intended father said, "Art thou willing to become my son?" and the
son answered, "I am willing." The relation was thus formed according to
law, and the adopted son entered into the family of his new father, assumed
his name, became subject to his authority, and was entitled to the whole of the
inheritance, or to a share of it if there were any other sons.
I have referred to this practice as existing among the Romans, and sanction
ed by the laws of the state ; but it was not peculiar to them. It appears to
have prevailed among the Greeks, the Egyptians, and, I believe, some other
nations. We have an example of adoption among the Egyptians in the case
of the daughter of Pharaoh the king, concerning whom it is related that, having
accidentally found the infant Moses exposed on the banks of the Nile, she gave
him to his mother to be nursed ; and that when the child grew, his mother
brought him to her, "and he became her son."§ He was thus admitted a
member of the royal family, and it is mentioned as a proof of the power of his
faith, that he renounced this high honour, and chose to take part with his own
nation in their afflictions, because they were the people of God: "By faith
Moses, when he was come to years, refused to be called the son of Pharaoh's
daughter ;|| sacrificed the glory and the advantages which he already possessed,
and had the prospect of enjoying, in consequence of his adoption. It is the
opinion of some, that the term adoption in the New Testament, is not borrowed
from the Greeks and Romans, but is founded on the style of the Old Testa
ment, in which, as we have seen, the Israelites are called the sons of God.
But it is more probable that, as the New Testament was intended for the use
of the Gentiles as well as the Jews, it was the design of the writers, when they
employed a word familiar to the latter, to refer to the thing denoted by it as it
was practised among them, and thus to convey to them an intelligible idea of
the spiritual relation between God and the objects of his favour.
Adoption, according to the scriptural sense of the term, is an act of God, by
which he pronounces sinful men to be his sons, admits them into his family,
* Rom. ix. 4. t Gal. iv. 4, 5. t Eph. i. 4—6. § Exod. ii. 10. |] Heb. xi. 24.
Vol. IL— 29

226 THE PRIVILEGES OF BELIEVERS.
and gives them a right to the privileges of his children. With a view to illus
trate this general definition, 1 request your attention to the following particulars.
First, As an adopted son originally belonged to a different family from that
into which he was admitted, we must inquire from what family the children of
God are taken. We might say, then, that they are of the family of Adam,
understanding by this expression, not merely that they are his natural offspring,
his sons and daughters by lineal descent, but that they were born in his image,
and after his likeness, and derive from him the guilt, the pollution, and the
curse, which he hath bequeathed to them as a fatal inheritance. We might
accommodate to our present purpose the words of God to his ancient people,
" Look unto the rock whence ye were hewn, and to the hole of the pit whence
ye were digged."* 'Look unto Adam your father, and unto Eve that con
ceived you in sin, and brought you forth in iniquity.' The Scriptures give
another view of the subject; and pronounce all men in their fallen state to be
the children not only of Adam, but of him by whose artifice they were reduced
to their present condition; "Ye are of your father the devil,"* said our Lord
to the Jews. . "Ye boast of your connexion with Abraham, and found upon
it the hope of acceptance with God ; but your conduct proves you to be the
genuine offspring of the enemy of all righteousness;' for he adds, "the works
of your father ye do." Lest, however, we should suppose that this character
is applicable to them alone on account of their peculiar depravity manifested in
the rejection of the Messiah, the Scripture is careful to comprehend all unre-
generated men under the same denomination: "He that committeth sin is of
the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning." "In this the children of.
God are manifest, and the children of the devil ; whosoever doeth not right
eousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother."!. To the just
ness of this description in reference to notorious transgressors, few will be dis
posed to object. In their blasphemy, their profaneness, their malice, their
envy, their violence and cruelty, we distinctly perceive the horrid features of
the spirit of darkness. But pride, self-confidence, a dislike of the divine cha
racter and laws, repugnance to the will of our Maker, and a constant inclina
tion to sin, which are found in every man who has not been born again, are
indications not less certain, that we are guided by the counsels and actuated
by the temper of the first rebel against the righteous government of God.
" He is the spirit that worketh in the children of disobedience. "§ All the
children of disobedience, therefore, are his sons. Although they may disown
their relation, they daily recognise it by their unholy thoughts and actions, and
unless divine mercy interpose, will receive the inheritance of wrath, which is
their allotted portion.
Secondly, as an adopted son became a member of a new family, so he upon
whom this spiritual privilege is conferred, is enrolled among the children of
God. Like the prodigal, who had gone into a far country, and, having there
wasted his substance in riotous living, was reduced to extreme distress, he re
turns, or rather by Divine Grace is brought back, to the house of his heavenly
Father; and his father, to adopt the language of the parable, falling on his
neck and embracing him in the arms of his love, does not place him in the
condition of a servant, but restores him to the name and the right of a son.
And, how glorious is this family to which we are re-united ! First in dignity
and honour is Jesus Christ himself, who, in his Divine Person, is the eternal
Son of God, and, in his mediatorial character, stands in a particular relation to
believers. The Scripture calls him " the first born among many brethren,"
intimating, that he belongs to the heavenly family, in which he claims prece
dence, and holds the most distinguished place He is the Elder Brother ; for
* Is. Ii. 1. t John viii. 44. t Uohn iii. 8, 10. § Eph. ii 2.

ADOPTION. 227
he and the other children, or those of them who are taken from among men
are partakers of a common nature; and for this cause " he is not ashamed to
call them brethren, saying, I will declare thy name unto my brethren ; in the
midst of the church will I sing praise unto thee."* Next in order are those
glorious beings, who, having retained their purity and fidelity, have continued,
without interruption, to enjoy the honour and felicity of their primeval state.
A.ngels are the sons of God, as we formerly remarked, and constitute an illus
trious portion of the family, distinguished by the excellence of their nature, the
superiority of their endowments, the ardour of their love, and their unwearied
activity. To them we are united by adoption ; for the inhabitants of heaven,
and the saints upon earth, compose one holy society, under the protection and
government of him in whom all things are gathered together. Lastly, There
are the saints triumphant and militant, who, although separated from one an
other in place, a part being in a etate of manhood wh.ile the other part can be
considered as only in infancy, are all invested with the same high character,
and stand in the same relation to God. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the pro
phets and apostles, the martyrs and confessors, and believers of every age and
nation, are associated in one great brotherhood. Taken by sovereign grace
from the degraded and ruined family to which we naturally belonged, we are
introduced into the fellowship of the most glorious creatures in the universe,
the bright spirits who minister before the throne of the Eternal in heaven, and
the happy men upon whom his own hand has impressed the image of his per
fection. " Ye are come unto mount Zion, and unto the city of the living God,
the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels, to the gene
ral assembly and church of the first-born, which are written in heaven, and to
God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect, and to Jesus
the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh
better things than that of Abel."* How wonderful the change which takes
place in adoption, whether we consider it in itself, or in its consequences !
"Behold what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, that we
should be called the sons of God."*
We have seen that spiritual, like civil adoption, consists in translating a per
son from the family in which he was born, into that of a stranger.
In the case of civil adoption, the translation was made at the desire, and by
the authority, of the person who, having no children of his own, had recourse
to this expedient to supply the want. In like manner, the admission of sin
ners into the family of heaven, is the act of God, by whom we are blessed
with all spiritual blessings. It is an act of his grace and authority ; of his
grace, in choosing persons so unworthy to enjoy this high honour; of his au
thority, in dissolving their original connexion, and constituting a new relation
between them and himself. Birth, external privileges, corporeal and mental
accomplishments, and the suffrages of others, cannot elevate us to this dignity.
" We are born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man,
but of God."§ The same sentence which acquits us from guilt and restores
us to favour, invests us with the privilege of sonship and all the blessings
attached to it. "It shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto
them, Ye are not my people, there it shall be said unto them, Ye are the sons
of the living God."||
The meritorious cause of adoption, is the mediation of Christ, as we learn
from the words formerly quoted: "God sent forth his Son to redeem them
that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons."** By
taking our nature, Jesus has raised it from its fallen state, in which it was di-
* Heb. ii. 11, 12. t Ib. xii. 22—24 X 1 John iii. 1.
$ John i. 13. || Hos. i. 10. ** Gal. iv. 5.

228 THE PRIVILEGES OF BELIEVERS.
vested of its glory, and so depraved that its Maker could not hold communion
with it. Its dignity is restored in the person of our Saviour ; and, through
him, it is now worthy to stand in the presence of God, and to be distinguished
by the tokens of his love. But this is not all. He has redeemed us from the
curse of the law, and procured that the forfeiture of our sonship should be re
versed. He has made satisfaction for our sins, and not only appeased the anger
of God, but, by his infinitely valuable obedience, obtained for us all the bless
ings of salvation. "But now, in Christ Jesus, ye who sometime were afar
off, are made nigh by the blood of Christ." "Now therefore ye are no more
strangers and foreigners, but fellow-citizens with the saints, and of the house
hold of God."* His righteousness, imputed to believers, gives them a title to
the precious fruits of his death ; and the union with him, which is formed by
the Spirit, places them in the same relation to God with himself. " Go to my
brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto ray Father, and your Father; and
to my God, and your God."*
The last remark which I shall make, relates to the means by which we
obtain the actual possession of the privilege of adoption. We have seen that,
in civil adoption, the consent of the person to be adopted was demanded, and
publicly expressed. Something similar takes place in spiritual adoption. The
privilege is offered to us in the Gospel ; but it does not become ours till we
accept of it. Although we do not, and cannot merit it, yet our consent is re
quired, and is indispensably necessary. Now, this consent consists in faith,
which implies our cordial acceptance of the blessings which Christ purchased
for us, and of which God makes a free gift to us in the Gospel. Hence, to
believe in Christ, and to receive him, are used in the Scriptures as equivalent
terms. 'Art thou willing,' God says, 'that I shall be thy Father?' The be
lieving sinner answers, 'I am willing.' "As many as received him, to them
gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his
name."* Now, they are no longer aliens and outcasts, but the members of
his family, the objects of his affection and care, and heirs of the glory which
shall be revealed. "They are called by a new name, which the mouth of the
Lord hath named."§
We have traced some points of resemblance between human adoption and
our admission into the family of God ; but there are some respects in which
they differ, and to these I shall now direct your attention.
First, It is scarcely necessary to remark, that the primary cause of adoption
among men does not exist in the present case. It was the want of children
which gave rise to the practice, and the object in view was to provide, by this
expedient, what nature had denied. But this reason cannot for a moment be
supposed to have had an influence in procuring our adoption by our heavenly
Father ; for, besides that he is self-sufficient, and had always a Son, who is his
perfect image, and with whom he maintains an intercourse of love, which is
the source of ineffable and infinite blessedness ; all the creatures in the universe
could make no addition to his felicity, and have nothing to present but what
they have first received from his bounty. The Divine nature, although single,
is not solitary, and possesses in its own fulness the materials of perfect and
perpetual bliss.
Secondly, Human adoption was founded on good qualities, real or supposed,
in the object; for we cannot conceive any man to have chosen another to be
his son, who did not appear to him worthy of this honour. The Scriptures
are careful to impress upon our minds the difference with respect to spiritual
adoption, by drawing, with the darkest colours, the original character of those
upon whom the blessings of salvation are bestowed. It was necessary, as we
* Ej>h. ii. 13, 19. t John xx. 17. X Ib. i. 12. § Isa. lxii. 2.

ADOPTION. . 229
learn from a passage already quoted, that men should be redeemed from the
curse, in order to receive the adoption of sons. They were under a sentence
of condemnation for their sins ; and appearing to the eye of God guilty and pol
luted, what could they present to attract his regard ? Like the prodigal, they
were covered with rags and bloated with crimes, when he was pleased, in his
infinite goodness, to receive them into his family. It is on this account that the
Apostle John breaks out into the language of admiration when meditating upon
the subject : " Behold what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us,
that we should be called the sons of God."*
In the third place, adoption among men commonly extended only to a single
person, or, at most, to a very limited number, for obvious reasons. But
spiritual adoption is a privilege enjoyed by thousands and millions. It was
the design of God, in appointing Jesus Christ to be the author of our salva
tion, to bring many sons to glory. To the question, " Are there few that be
saved ?"f our Lord declined to return a direct answer, because it was dictated
by a spirit of curiosity, which he would not encourage ; but when we consult
the Scriptures, we find they are not few, but a great multitude which no man
can number ; how contrary soever this view of the subject may be to the ideas
of bigots, who shut the gates of heaven against all but their own little party.
If there was a blank made in the celestial society by the fall of the apostate
angels, it will be filled up from the human race ; the many mansions in our
Father's house will be peopled, and the extent of his family will be propor
tioned to the invaluable price which was paid for its redemption.
Other points of difference might be mentioned ; but passing them, I proceed
to inquire what blessings believers enjoy in consequence of their adoption.
First, God sustains the relation of a Father to them : " I will be a Father
unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty."*
It will be thought, perhaps, that this is so obvious, that there was no necessity
to mention it, as a father and son are correlative terms, and the one suggests
the other. But what I mean to fix your attention upon, is not the title, but its
import, and to remind you that, in consequence of this relation, God is to
believers all that is implied in the character of a Father. He bears the most
tender love to them ; he watches over them with unwearied care ; he attends
to their interests, and they may repose entire confidence upon his wisdom
and goodness. He is a Father who knows their wants, who is never mistaken
in his judgment of what will be for their good, who is able to do every thing
for them, who is always near to succour and protect them, and who will not
abandon them even when provoked by their misconduct. The name of Father
dispels every fear, and invites respectful familiarity. We feel ourselves em
boldened to tell him our sorrows and desires ; to apply to him for counsel, to
flee to him as our refuge. If his greatness seems to forbid our approach, if
his justice and purity are calculated to repress the fervour of our affection and
the eagerness of our hopes, the recollection of the condescension and tender
ness of a Father re-animates our hearts, and gives us a confidence to draw
near to his throne. Who can tell us how great a privilege it is, to have the
God of heaven and earth for a Father ?
Secondly, The children of God receive the Spirit of adoption. " Because
ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts. "§
The purposes for which he is given, are various. The primary design is to
inspire them with the temper, as they are now invested with the character, of
sons. Human adoption had no effect of this kind. It changed the estate of
the person adopted, by translating him from one family to another, and making
a person, who was formerly a stranger, his father ; but it produced no change
* 1 John iii. 1. t Luke xiii. 23. X 2 Cor. vi. 18 § Gal. iv. 6,
U

230 THE PRIVILEGES OF BELIEVERS.
inhis dispositions. Hence it might happen, and we presume that it did some
times happen, that he who, misled by specious appearances, had adopted him,
was disappointed in his expectations, and had reason to repent that he had ad
mitted an unworthy member into his family. But all the members of the
spiritual family are distinguished by the resemblance which they bear to their
Father. They receive a new nature, as well as a new name. To express
this change, they are represented in the Scriptures as begotten again, and
born again, to signify that they receive a new spiritual being, and have new
views, and feelings, and desires. They are transformed into the image of
Christ, and therefore are made like their Father; for Christ is the express
image of his person. This change is the work of the Spirit. If the water of
baptism is the sign, the efficient cause is the Spirit, whose province it is to
beautify the new, as well as the old, creation. But this is not the only office
which he is appointed to perform. There is another of the utmost importance,
which is indispensably necessary to their comfort, namely, to enable them to
ascertain their relation to God, which is not self-evident, and the reality of
which they could not establish without his assistance. Hence he is represented
in the Scriptures as giving testimony to the fact. " The Spirit itself beareth
witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God."* In what manner
this testimony is given, has been the subject of dispute. It is not, we may
venture to say, by a voice, or something equivalent to a voice, announcing to
the man this proposition, ' Thou art a son of God ;' or by unaccountable im
pressions on his mind ; but in a way consonant to the Scriptures, and to the
regular exercise of our faculties. The expression " the Spirit beareth witness
with our spirits," imports that there is a double testimony, by our own hearts
and by him. The one is not given without the other. Now, we may under
stand how the two witnesses concur, if we conceive the Holy Ghost to give
testimony by enabling the saints to embrace the promises with a particular ap
plication to themselves, and to exercise distinctly the various Christian graces,
so that their existence and genuineness shall be unquestionable. By this pro
cess they are assured of their sonship ; for the fact is placed beyond doubt,
when they perceive in themselves the certain marks of regeneration. " We
know that we have passed from death unto life, because we love the brethren."
" Hereby we know that we are of the truth, and shall assure our hearts be
fore him."* The Spirit? bears testimony to the sonship of believers, when he
brings to light, by his operations upon their souls, the evidences of their adop
tion ; and thus makes their relation to God as manifest as if he assured them
of it with an audible voice. Hence they are enabled to call God their Father;
not with the presumption of hypocrites, and the indifference of formalists, but
with the confidence of faith, and the ardour of filial affection. They call him
Father, not only when his providence smiles upon them and even the sinner
persuades himself of his love, but in the dark hour of trouble and sorrow ;
like our Saviour, who still claimed him in the endearing relation, even when
he complained that he had forsaken him. In a word, the hope which sustains
the heart of the Christian, the joy which arises within him, the secret refresh
ment which he experiences in devotional exercises, and the enlargement of his
soul in prayer ; these are the blessed fruits of the presence and agency of the
Spirit of adoption.
Thirdly, Their heavenly Father provides for all their wants. To care for
his children, to supply them, according to his ability, with such things as they
need, to feed, and clothe, and educate them; these are duties which religion
and natural affection prescribe to every parent. He who adopted a son, came
under an engagement to act in every respect the part of a father. Certainly,
* Rom. viii. 16. t 1 John iii. 14, 19.

ADOPTION. 231
then, they who have been admitted into the family of God, may expect all
blessings from his goodness, whether pertaining to this world or to the next.
A controversy has been agitated, (and what point, great or little, trifling or im
portant, has not been the subject of dispute ?) Whether Christ purchased tem
poral benefits for believers ? Those who adopt the negative side of the ques
tion, will allow that the blessing which accompanies them is owing to his
mediation, and only contend, that the things themselves are not the fruits of
his death. It is not easy to conceive what valuable purpose can be served by
this discussion, except that it affords an opportunity of displaying nice dis
crimination in separating two things which common apprehension had blended
together. It was not necessary to put us on our guard against ascribing too
much to our Saviour, and to count and reckon with him, that we might ascer
tain the precise extent of our obligations ; our grateful feelings towards him
have not so strong a tendency to excess, as to stand in need of a check. When
we consider that the faithfulness of God is expressly pledged for the temporal
provision of his children ; that godliness has the promise of the life that now
is, as well as of that which is to come ; that our heavenly Father is represented
as knowing that we have need of food and raiment, and therefore as bestow
ing them ; and that our Saviour has taught his disciples to pray for their daily
bread, and, consequently, to ask it in his name and for his sake, we seem to be
authorized to rank common benefits among the blessings of the new covenant,
and, consequently, to say, that we are indebted for them to the same price
which was paid for the salvation of our souls.
As nothing on this obscure controversy has ever come under my notice, I
know not exactly the grounds on which the purchase of temporal blessings is
denied, but presume that it is because they are bestowed upon unbelievers as
well as upon believers. This, however, is an argument of no force. The
point at issue is, not whether there is any difference between those two classes
in the receipt of these blessings, for it is acknowledged that there is none ; but,
whether there is any difference in respect of right. It is certain that wicked
men have no more a right to temporal good things, than a condemned criminal
has to the food by which he is sustained till the day of execution. Undoubt
edly, he has no claim to it, as he is dead in law, and it is accorded to him
solely for the purpose of prolonging his life, till the proper time arrive for sub
jecting him to the appointed punishment. But believers have a right to the
benefits which they enjoy; "for all things," says an apostle, "are yours,
whether things present, or things to come." They have a right to them,
from the promise that their bread shall be given them, and their water shall be
sure. And how did they obtain this promise ? For whose sake was it made
to them? "In Christ are all the promises yea and amen, to the glory of God."
It is through him that a distinction is made between them and other men, that
they can look up to God for their daily bread, white others have no ground for
any such expectation. In a word, their right to this world, or to an adequate
portion of it, which is enumerated among the things which belong to them —
"for the world is yours," says Paul — their right to this world is placed upon
its proper basis by the apostle, when he says, "All things are yours; for ye
are Christ's, and Christ is God's;"* thus referring temporal, as well as spi
ritual benefits to his mediation, as the cause for which they are communicated
to the saints.
If any person should still think that Christ has procured for us, not the bene
fits themselves, but the blessing which attends them, he is at full liberty to
indulge his opinion ; but it may be questioned, whether it will contribute in
any degree to his piety. " They that fear the Lord shall not lack any good
* 1 Cor. iii. 21. 23.

232 THE PRIVILEGES OF BELIEVERS.
thing." Riches may be denied to them, or may be taken from them, but food
convenient may be confidently expected. The blessing of heaven is in their
portion, however scanty it may be ; and " a little which a righteous man hath,
is better than the riches of many wicked." "Trust in the Lord, and do good;
so shalt thou dwell in the land, and verily thou shalt be fed."* With respect
to the provision which he makes for the souls of his children, we are all agreed.
As he gave manna to the Israelites in the wilderness, so he gives them his
Word, to be the mean of communicating spiritual good- things ; and it is some
times compared to milk, and sometimes to strong meat, to intimate that it is
adapted to the diversified circumstances and states of the members of his
family, to the babe in Christ, and to the full-grown man. His care of them is
represented in a solemn and impressive manner in the Sacred Supper, when
they are assembled at his table to eat bread and drink wine, as the symbols of
heavenly blessings, and all are reminded that he nourishes their souls by his
invisible grace. The design of all his institutions is, that they may come, "in
the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect
man, unto the measure ofthe stature ofthe fulness of Christ."*
In the fourth place, The children of God are subjected to paternal discipline.
When we judge according to our feelings, this may seem to be a punishment
rather than a privilege, for "no chastening for the present is joyous, but
grievous." But as in a human family, he that spares the rod hates his son,
because, through mistaken tenderness, he suffers him to escape with impunity
when he has committed a fault, and thus permits his wayward inclinations to
gather strength, and vicious habits to be formed which will entail misery upon
him here and hereafter ; so, in the family of God, the want of discipline would
be an evidence, not of love, but of neglect and indifference to the interests of
the members. The Scripture therefore says, " Whom the Lord loveth, he
chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth."* He chastises him
because he loves him; and, however paradoxical this may appear upon a super
ficial view, its truth will be manifest to those who consider the end proposed
and the effect produced. God chastises his children, that they may be par
takers of his holiness ; and holiness is not only the dress and ornament, of the
members of his family, but is indispensably necessary to their peace and hap
piness, both in this world and in the next. Men may think, and even the
saints themselves may suspect, when their trials are manifold and severe, that
their heavenly Father has disowned and forsaken them. But this is not the
only instance in which human reason egregiously errs. What seems to our
hasty and limited observation to betoken ill, is the surest proof of his favour ;
and a state of uninterrupted ease and enjoyment, which we would prefer, would
furnish a more solid ground of apprehension. "If ye endure chastening, God
dealeth with you as sons; for what son is he whom the father chasteneth not?
But if ye be without chastisement, whereof all are partakers, then are ye bas
tards, and not "sons. "§
Lastly, God will bestow upon his children an eternal inheritance. "If
children, then heirs; heirs of God, and joint heirs with Christ."|( Children,
by the law of nature and nations, inherit the property of their father; and an
adopted son possessed all the rights and privileges of a son by descent. At the
death of the person who adopted him, he was legally entitled to his property.
There is an inheritance which belongs to the family of God, and every man
who is received into it is an heir. The expression, "joint heirs with Christ,"
imports that the inheritance originally pertains to our Redeemer, who obtained
it for himself and those whom he calls his brethren by his meritorious obedience.
* Ps. xxxvii. 16. 3. + Eph. iv. 13. ] Heb. xii. 6,
§ Heb. xii. 7, 8. || Rom. viii. 17.

ADOPTION. 233
ana that their right to it is founded on their connexion with him. It is an in
heritance of glory and felicity, "incorruptible, undefiled, and which fadeth not
away, reserved in heaven" for them. Whatever God now is to angels and
glorified saints, and whatever he will be to them through an endless duration, in
which their faculties will be continually expanding, and they will be filled
with bliss to the utmost extent of their capacity; — for all this, "which eye
hath not seen, ear hath not heard, nor hath it entered into the mind of man to
conceive," the adopted sons of God are authorized to hope. Even in this
world, how happy does the earnest of the inheritance make them! How
divine the peace which sheds its influence upon their souls ! How pure and
elevating the joy which, in some select hours, springs up in their bosoms !
How are they raised above the pains and the pleasures of life, while, in the
contemplations of faith, they anticipate their future abode in the higher regions
of the universe ! But these are only an earnest. Their hearts beat high with
the expectation of something too sublime to be uttered or adequately conceived ;
and, while their breasts heave with the vehemence of desire, they breathe out,
in broken and impassioned accents, their longings for the time when they shall
be delivered from the infirmities of the flesh and the imperfections of the pre
sent state, which prevent the full enjoyment of infinite good. "We know
that the whole creation groaneth and travaileth in pain together until now : and
not only they, but ourselves also, which have the first fruits of the Spirit, even
we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the re
demption of our body. For we are saved by hope : but hope that is seen is
not hope ; for what a man seeth, why doth he yet hope for? But if we hope
for that we see not, then do we with patience wait for it."*

LECTURE LXXIV.
ON SANCTIFICATION.

Scriptural meaning of the term, Sanctification — Difference between Justification and Sanc
tification — Sanctification viewed as a Privilege, and as a Duty — Implies the Mortification
of Sin, and the Increase of Positive Holiness — Extent of Holiness attainable in this Life.
The blessing which in the next place claims our attention, is Sanctification.
But before I proceed to explain its nature, it is necessary to ascertain the
Scriptural meaning of the term.
The word, fo sanctify, bears a variety of senses which are considerably dif
ferent. It sometimes signifies to separate a person or thing from its common
use to some particular purpose, even when there is no reference to religion.
Thus, in the seventh verse of the twenty-second chapter of Jeremiah, God
says, in our translation, " I will prepare," but according to the original, " I
will sanctify destroyers against thee, every one with his weapons ; and they
shall cut down the choice cedars, and cast them into the fire." Again, to
sanctify, often signifies to separate from a common to a sacred use, or to dedi
cate to the service of God. In this sense, the tabernacle and all the vessels
of the ministry were holy ; the priests and Levites were holy ; the temple
erected on Mount Zion was holy ; and Jerusalem was called the holy city.
* Rom. viii. 22. 25.
Vox. IL— 30 n 2

234 THE PRIVILEGES OF BELIEVERS.
Considered in themselves, these persons and things had no more sanctity than
other persons and things ; their holiness was merely relative, and arose from
their consecration to religious uses. God sanctified our Saviour when he set
him apart to the mediatorial office, and sent him into the world to execute it ;
and Christ sanctified himself when he assumed that office, and devoted him
self to the performance of its duties. It is worthy of observation, with respect
to the words xaS^m and i.yia£ot, which signify to cleanse and to purify, that,
when used to express the effect of the sacrifice of Christ upon his people,
they do not denote internal purification, but dedication to God : " Jesus, that
he might sanctify — ha ayiao-ii — the people with his own blood, suffered without
the gate."* Now, the effect of blood shed as an atonement for sin is, not to
cleanse us from pollution, but to free us from guilt, and to restore us to the fa
vour of God : " If the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer
sprinkling the unclean,— ayid^u — sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh ; how
much more shall the blood of Christ, who, through the eternal Spirit, offered
himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works, to serve
the living God ?"* The effect of the legal sacrifices is compared to that of the
death of Christ. The effect of the legal sacrifices was to absolve the offerer
from the guilt of his sins, so far that he escaped the temporal penalty which he
had incurred, and was admitted into the sanctuary. This is called " sanctify
ing to the purifying of the flesh." The effect of the death of Christ is to
purify the conscience, to obtain for us full pardon, and thus to give us boldness
to enter into the holiest of all. There are several other senses of the word,
to sanctify. We sanctify the Sabbath when we regard it as more sacred than
other days, and perform its appropriate duties. We sanctify the Lord our God,
when we treat him with that reverence which is due to him on account of the
transcendent excellence of his nature, by which he is distinguished or separated
from all other beings. And God sanctifies himself when he manifests his
glory. This discussion will not appear unnecessary to any of you who wish
to acquire an accurate knowledge ofthe language of Scripture ; and I conclude
with remarking, that the idea of separation is implied in all these uses of the
term. I proceed to the last sense of the word, in which it is to be at present under
stood. When we say, that those who are justified by faith, are also sancti
fied, our meaning is, that they are made holy, not merely by consecration to
the service of God, but by the infusion of his grace, which purifies them from
the pollution of sin, and renews them in the whole man after his image. It is
plain, from the following passage itself, as well as from the connection in
which it is introduced, that, in this sense, the word to sanctify is used. It is
a prayer of the apostle, subjoined to an exhortation to abstain from all appear
ance of evil : " And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly ; and I pray
God, your whole spirit, and soul, and body, be preserved blameless unto the
coming of our Lord Jesus Christ.":): When the same apostle says, " This is
the will of God, even your sanctification, that ye should abstain from fornica
tion,'^ he evidently refers to purity of heart and conduct. It is unnecessary
to multiply quotations, as it is acknowledged by all, that there is an internal
holiness by which true Christians are characterized, and that the regularity of
the life does not alone answer the demands of religion: "As he which hath
called you is holy, so be ye holy, in all manner of conversation ; because it is
written, Be ye holy, for I am holy."||
As justification and sanctification are blessings inseparably connected, it will
assist us in forming correct ideas of both, to mark carefully the points in which
* Heb. xiii. 12. t Heb. ix. 13, 14. } 1 Thess. ,. 23.
f> 1 Thess. iv. 3 || 1 Pet. i. 15, 16.

SANCTIFICATION. 235
they differ. They differ in their order : justification precedes, and sanctifica
tion follows ; a sinner is pardoned and restored to the favour of God, before
the Spirit is given to renew him more and more after his image. They differ
in their object : justification takes away the guilt of sin, or the obligation to
punishment ; sanctification cleanses us from its stain or pollution. They differ
in their form : justification is a judicial act, by which the sinner is pronounced
righteous ; sanctification is a physical or moral act, or rather a series of such
acts, by which a change is effected in the qualities of the soul. The one,
therefore, is called an act, to signify that it is perfected at once ; the other is
called a work, to signify that it is progressive. Justification being an act
passed in a moment, is equal in all believers ; sanctification exists in different
degrees of advancement in different individuals. In a word, the one changes
our state, translating us from a state of condemnation into a state of acceptance ;
the other changes our nature, or makes those holy who were unholy. I shall
add only one difference more, which relates to tlieir matter. In justification,
the righteousness of Christ is imputed to us; in sanctification, an inherent
righteousness is communicated ; and upon the whole it appears, that in justifi
cation we receive a title to heaven, and by sanctification we are prepared for
it, or "made meet to be partakers of the inheritance of the saints in light."*
It is worthy of notice, that, in the well known enumeration of the privi
leges of Christians, when Paul represents the series as a chain stretching from
eternity, sanctification is not specified as one of the links. " Moreover, whom
he did predestinate, them he also called ; and whom he called, them he also
justified; and whom he justified, them he also glorified."* We account for
the omission by supposing, either that the apostle intended only to state the
process according to which a right to eternal life, and the consequent enjoy
ment of it, are obtained, (and the right depends solely upon justification, which
ensues upon the faith wrought in the heart when the sinner is effectually called ;)
or that sanctification is virtually included in the privileges which are explicitly
stated. It is implied in effectual calling, in which the soul undergoes a spiritual
change, or is regenerated, and the foundation is laid of its future progress in
holiness ; or it is implied in glorification, which will consist in the perfect state
of the soul as well as of the body, and may be said to be begun in the present
life, because so far as the soul is conformed to the image of God it is already
glorified, and hence believers are said to be "changed," even in this world,
" into the same image, from glory to glory, as by the Spirit of the Lord."*
The difference between sanctification and regeneration is not a difference in
nature and kind, like the difference between it and justification. They are, if
I may speak so, parts of one whole. In regeneration there is an infusion of
spiritual life into the soul, in which life all the graces or all the holy tempers
of the Christian are virtually included. In sanctification those graces are un
folded and matured, and exert their native influence upon the conduct. In
regeneration the living seed is sown, and begins to germinate and show itself
above ground: in sanctification it grows up, and yields fruit, according to the
parable in some thirty, in some sixty, and in some a hundred fold. In rege
neration the new creature is formed, but although no member or feature is
wanting, they are diminutive and feeble, and it is yet but a babe : in sanctifica
tion the body grows in all its parts, acquires vigour and activity, and advances
towards the full stature of a perfect man in Christ. In short, it is the same
work which is carried on in regeneration and sanctification, according to the
words of an apostle, " He which hath begun a good work in you, will perform
it until the day of Jesus Christ."§
Sanctification may be considered as a privilege, and as a duty. In the one
*Col. i. 12. t Rom. viii. 30. J 2 Cor. iii. 18. $ PhiL i. 6.

236 THE PRIVILEGES OF BELIEVERS.
view it is the work of God, and in the other it is the work of man, assisted by
supernatural grace. As a privilege it is the subject of promise and of prayer.
It is promised in the following words, " Then will I sprinkle clean water upon
you, and ye shall be clean ; from all your filthiness and from all your idols
will I cleanse you. A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I
put within you ; and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I
will give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my Spirit within you, and
cause you to walk in my statutes ; and ye shall keep my judgments, and do
them."* It was the subject of our Lord's intercessory prayer for his disciples,
"Sanctify them through thy truth; thy word is truth ;"t and it should be the
subject of the prayers of Christians for themselves. " Give me understanding,
and I shall keep thy law."* We may afterwards have an opportunity to speak
of sanctification as a privilege, when we come to consider its advantages ; and
I shall only observe, that as it is indispensably necessary to our admission into
the immediate presence of God, so it is the source of great happiness upon
earth. The foundation of a Christian's peace is the atonement and interces
sion of the Saviour, in whom God is reconciled ; but there is a peace which
flows from holiness, and is the natural effect of the cessation of the tumultuary
motions of sin, and of the influence ofthe mild virtues which religion inspires.
" Great peace have they that love thy law, and nothing shall offend them."§ I
may add, that it is the high privilege of a creature to be conformed to the image
of his Maker. As He is the first and most excellent of all beings, they stand
highest in the scale who bear the nearest resemblance to him. If holiness is .
the glory of God, it is also the glory of man.
Sanctification, considered as a duty, is our work. In this light it is repre
sented in the Scriptures, when we are called to "be holy," to "make" to our
selves "a new heart," and to "cleanse ourselves from all filthiness ofthe flesh
and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God."|| But as I remarked be
fore, in this work man is assisted by grace ; for we can do nothing of ourselves,
and it is God " who works in us both to will and to do of his good pleasure."
It is called the work of man, not as if he could change his heart, or when the
change is effected could carry it forward to perfection, but as he diligently uses
the means, trusting in the divine blessing which renders them effectual.
Although in regeneration holy principles are infused into the soul, yet the
change produced is only partial. No Christian grace is wanting in the regene
rated man, and no sin or sinful inclination retains sovereign power; but the
graces are imperfect, and remaining depravity continues to operate, and some
times prevails. The truth of this statement is manifest from the seventh chap
ter of the Epistle to the Romans, in which we find that in Paul, who is a
specimen of other believers, there were two principles, the one of sin and the
other of holiness, between which there was a perpetual conflict; and the vic
tory was sometimes on the one side, and sometimes on the other. Two ihings,
therefore, are implied in sanctification, the mortification of sin, and the increase
of positive holiness. These are not so distinct that they can go on at different
times, for the one necessarily accompanies the other; but in explaining the
nature of sanctification, they require to be separately illustrated.
The mortification of sin does not consist solely in abstinence from outward
transgressions in which we had previously indulged, but have abandoned by
an effort upon ourselves. Of such an effort, any man is capable by his natural
powers, and without the influence of any moral consideration, when he is ex
cited solely by a regard to reputation, to health, and. to his secular interests.
External purity, as our Lord has shown by the example of the Pharisees, may
* Ezek. xxxvi. 25—27. t John xvii. 17. X Ps. cxix. 34, &c.
$ Ps. cxix. 165. || 1 Pet i. 15. Ezek. xviii. 31. 2 Cor. vii. 1.

SANCTIFICATION. 237
exist, while the heart is foul with the deepest stains of pollution. Nor should
it be supposed, that the mortification of sin has taken place, because some sin
ful inclination which formerly predominated is weakened, or perhaps has dis
appeared, if other inclinations survive, or if in the room of that which has
ceased a new disposition has sprung up, different in form but in its general
nature equally criminal. A man who was once a profligate is become sober ;
but then he is now slavishly devoted to the world, and his heart which was
debased by sensuality, is narrowed and hardened by avarice ; or it may be
that, although no new vice should show itself in his character, he is puffed up
with pride, and glories in his virtue. In these and similar cases, sin retains
its original strength, but works in a more concealed manner, or accomplishes
its purpose in a different way. The mortification of the body has been often
mistaken for the mortification of sin. Men who have withdrawn from society
and retired into deserts, and there submitted to the most painful privations, and
performed with determined perseverance a tedious round of religious duties,
have imagined that they had attained a degree of sanctity, to which no man
could pretend, who was living amidst the commerce of the world. They did
not consider, that in their solitudes where they were not exposed to external
temptations, sinful propensities which were supposed to be eradicated, might
have only lain dormant for want of excitement, and might have revived if they
had been brought back to society, like the weeds which disappear in winter,
but show themselves again at the return of spring. I would by no means
affirm, that such men were all hypocrites, or that they were all deceived, for
from the little that I know of their history and their writings, I believe that
some of them were truly pious ; but I have no doubt that many of them, if
they had told the truth, would have confessed that they often cast a longing
• look towards the world which they had forsaken, like Jerome, who honestly
acknowledged, that during his seclusion in Palestine, his thoughts frequently
wandered after the pleasures of Rome.
The mortification of sin is founded in hatred of it, and not simply in fear of
its consequences. It is connected with the love of God, who holds sin in ab
horrence, and whose will it is that we should purify ourselves from it. It
aims at subduing and extirpating riot only those sins which are particularly
odious, on account of their grossness and their contrariety to the general sen
timents and feelings of mankind, but every known sin, however venial the
world may esteem it ; and if there is any sin about a believer of which he is
not aware, it also is included, in this sense, that he will be content with nothing
less than universal purification, and is earnestly desirous that not a single stain
should be left. It is carried on not in his own strength, but by the means
which God has appointed, and the assistance which he graciously affords ; by
faith, and prayer, and watchfulness, and determined resistance. It is not the
work of a day, but of life. Sin is like a man who has received a wound which
has enfeebled him, but has not entirely deprived him of strength. He is not
dead but dying; he is still capable of action, and even of vigorous efforts; and
his antagonist must therefore be upon his guard, and watch for an opportunity
to inflict new wounds which will terminate the struggle. " Mortify your mem
bers which are upon the earth."* In consequence of the interest which the
believer has obtained in the death of Christ, the power of sin is broken, and
it will be reduced more and more, by the grace which God is ready to com
municate, if he humbly ask and diligently improve it. In this way only can
he hope for success ; and, accordingly, Paul concludes the account of his internal
conflict with thanksgiving to God, who had enabled him to resist and in some
degree to overcome. "I thank God," he says, "through Jesus Christ our
* Col. iii. 5.

238 THE PRIVILEGES OF BELIEVERS.
Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God, and with the
flesh the law of sin;"* intimating that, although depravity still lurked in him
and made efforts to regain the mastery, yet it existed only in the lower part
of his nature, and the superior principles, the understanding, the conscience,
and the will, were elevated to the service of God.
The mortification of sin does not imply its utter extirpation, but the reduc
tion of its influence within narrower limits ; for however earnestly a Christian
may wish that it should cease to exist in his soul, complete exemption from it,
as we shall afterwards see, is unattainable in the present state. It is mortified
when his views of its vileness are clearer and more affecting, and, conse
quently, his hatred of it is more intense ; when he becomes more quick in
detecting it under its most specious forms, as well as more active in searching
it out; when he is excited to more frequent and fervent prayer for deliverance
from it; when, from increased aversion, he is more vigilant in observing its
motions, and using precautions against its attacks ; when its efforts become
less frequent and more faint, like those of a man who is languishing under his
wounds ; when he is more deeply humbled for the remains of it which he still
perceives ; and when for having consented to it on any occasion, he feels more
profound grief, and is more speedily recovered by repentance. When David
was guilty of a great transgression in the affair of Bathsheba, he gave a melan
choly proof that the power of depravity was strong within him ; but we can
not doubt that this event ultimately contributed to weaken its interests, when
we reflect upon his bitter repentance, his humiliating confessions, and his
earnest supplications.
Thus, by the grace of God, the Christian dies to sin, and sin dies in him;
or, in other words, he hates it more, and its influence over him is diminished.
' He lays aside every weight, and the sin which doth most easily beset him.'
The natural consequence is, that his conduct is purer, is more free from acts
of sin, as the fruit falls off from a tree when the root is destroyed or injured.
Let us proceed to the second division of the subject, namely, the increase
of positive holiness. This our Church expresses by "living unto righteous
ness," and the Scripture, by "having our fruit unto holiness." In proportion
as the power of sin is circumscribed, there is more ample space for the Chris
tian graces to grow and flourish. The vigour of the new man will advance,
as that of the old man declines. Let us consider the progress of sanctification,
in relation to the different powers of the soul.
First, The understanding is more and more illuminated by the word and
Spirit of truth. The first illumination takes place in regeneration, when the
blind eyes of the sinner are opened, and he who, while he was a natural man,
could not receive the things of the Spirit of God, having become a spiritual
man, is enabled to discern them. But there is much room for improvement;
and hence, we find an apostle praying in behalf even of those who were savingly
acquainted with the Gospel, that "the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the
Father of glory, would give to them the Spirit of wisdom and revelation in the
knowledge of him, that the eyes of their understanding might be enlightened."*
Their apprehensions of divine things become more distinct, and steady, and
comprehensive, and affecting. Their views are enlarged of God, of Christ,
of themselves, of their duty, of sin, of the world, of future and invisible things.
As knowledge was communicated to the mind of man in his creation, the resto
ration of it is necessary that he may be renewed after the image of his Maker.
I do not mean speculative knowledge, of which depraved men and infernal
spirits are possessed-; but knowledge accompanied with suitable affections to
wards the things unknown. As natural light not only renders objects visible,
* Rom. vii. 25. t Eph. i. 17, 18.

SANCTIFICATION. 239
but beautifies the face of nature with a variety of colours, so the knowledge
communicated to the people of God does not merely expand and improve the
intellect, but gives a new moral aspect to the whole soul. And the necessity
of supernatural illumination will be manifest, if we reflect that the understand
ing is the leading faculty, which not only, if I may speak so, points out the
path to be pursued by the other powers of the soul, but excites them by the
attractive and interesting views which it presents. Complete ignorance would
be followed by a death-like torpor of the soul, and man would remain in a
state of inaction, except so far as he was stimulated by his bodily appetites.
Knowledge awakens his dormant faculties. It exhibits objects of love and
fear, of hope and aversion, and gives rise to active exertions, with a view to
obtain what is good, and to avoid what is evil. As God begins, so he carries
on to perfection, the work of the new creation, by the communication of light.
" The new man is renewed in knowledge, after the image of him who created
him."* Secondly, In sanctification the will of the believer is rendered more and
more conformable to the will of God. In this the essence of holiness consists.
As Cicero says, that to have the same desires and aversions, is the consum
mation of friendship ; so we may say, that to be like minded with God, to be
entirely resigned to him, to choose what he chooses, and to refuse what he
refuses, is the highest moral perfection of a creature. Absolute conformity to
the will of God is not attainable in this world, and exists only in heaven, where
his will is so done by its blessed inhabitants, that they are proposed as a pat
tern to us. But it is the effect of regenerating grace to subdue our rebellious
hearts, and to bring them under subjection to the authority of our Maker.
This is their predominant state ; but it is often disturbed by the wayward
movements of the will ; and it is the design of the Holy Spirit, in his opera
tions upon it, to correct and restrain its aberrations, and to reduce it to a state
of habitual submission. The object proposed is, to establish a complete moral
dependence upon God; and, with this view, to make the subjects of his in
fluence cease more and more from their own views, and desires, and pursuits.
Without pretending to explain what power the Holy Ghost secretly exerts
upon the soul, we may say that the effect is produced by means of the light
that he gives to the mind ; in which, the will of God appears not only supreme
and sacred, but so just, and wise, and good, that nothing is more consonant to
the dictates of reason, as well as to the commands of religion, than that we
should acquiesce in it without reserve and without a murmur. Thus are the
people of God led to submission, not only when his will is enforced and recom
mended by the nature of the duty which it enjoins; but when, naked and un
supported, it demands our obedience, solely because it is his will. In this
abstract form it was exhibited to Adam, when the injunction was given to him,
to abstain from the fruit of a particular tree in the garden, there being no reason
for abstinence but the simple prohibition. It appears equally absolute still in
many of the dispensations of Providence, of which no other account can be
given, than that such is the decree of heaven ; and it is a proof of no incon
siderable progress in holiness, when the person who is tried in this manner,
bows to his sovereign Lord, and says, ' God is his will.' Job is an example,
whose submission amidst the greatest afflictions, was expressed in these remark
able words: "The Lord gave, and the Lord hath taken away; blessed be the
name of the Lord."* When a Christian finds that he is less disposed to con
sult with flesh and blood, and more to consult the Scriptures ; that he is sin
cerely desirous to know what is his duty, and more diligent than before to
ascertain it; that every intimation of the Divine pleasure commands his atten-
» CoL iii. 10. t Job i. 21.

240 THE PRIVILEGES OF BELIEVERS.
tion, and inspires him with holy reverence ; that he is more ready, and cheerful,
and determined in obedience ; and that his supreme desire is to glorify God
and to be accepted of him : when this is the prevailing state of his mind, it is
evident that God has made him willing in a day of power, and that the work
of sanctification is advancing in his soul towards perfection.
Thirdly, In sanctification, all the holy principles or habits, as they are some
times called, of believers are strengthened. If the affections are considered as
modifications of the will, they are purified in proportion to its conformity to
the standard of rectitude. The love and hatred, the fear and hope of the be
liever, will be excited by proper objects, and be regulated with respect to their
degree. While the soul is thus affected by proper objects, the lower appetites
will be restrained and subjugated, and, although not eradicated, as they are
essential principles of our nature, will be directed and retained within due
bounds by the light of the understanding and the authority of conscience.
The change effected by sanctifying grace may be ascertained by the different
feelings with which external things are now regarded. Once, they alone were
deemed to be important, but now they are considered as insignificant, or, at
least, as subordinate ; once, they stirred up strong and impetuous desire, but
now they awaken comparatively faint emotions ; once, under their influence,
the soul was degraded and brutified, as if it had lost its nature and were merely
the principle of animal life and feeling ; but now they are counteracted by the
spirituality of the mind, which, surrounded with earthly things, soars aloft and
holds high intercourse with heaven: "By the cross of Christ," says Paul,
"the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world."* In proportion to the
increasing vigour of holy habits, the moral connexion of the soul with this
world will be dissolved, and the impression diminished which the latter was
accustomed to make. The illumination of the mind has a powerful effect upon
our active powers. Faith is strengthened by clear apprehensions of the truth
as it is in Christ Jesus. Love grows warmer, as the love of God is more
steadily contemplated and more sensibly felt. Hope brightens at the glorious
prospect of life and immortality which the Gospel displays. Repentance
melts into more copious tears, while it looks at the cross, where the vileness
of sin is exhibited with an evidence which the heart feels, but words cannot
express. All the graces grow under the influence of the truth, which first
gave them birth, and now rears them up to manhood. When the Christian
"is adding to his faith virtue, and to virtue knowledge, and to knowledge tem
perance, and to temperance patience, and to patience godliness, and to godli
ness brotherly-kindness, and to brotherly-kindness charity," he is "neither
barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ."* The work
of sanctification is not only begun, but is going on to perfection. If we inquire
how far the work of sanctification extends, we answer, in the language of our
church, that it extends to "the whole man."* The apostle Paul says that God
sanctifies his people " wholly in soul, body, and spirit."§ Man is a compound
being, and, according to the opinion of the moderns, learned and unlearned,
consists of two parts, a body and a soul. But a different system was held by
the ancients, who called man — TfiyifK Ca-omao-K — a three-fold person or sub
stance; affirming that, besides the body, there were two internal principles, the
soul and the spirit, or, as it was sometimes called, the mind. The soul —
i tyx* — they defined to be the principle of life, or that which distinguishes
animate from inanimate things, and they considered it as in itself irrational, as
the seat of the appetites and passions, as affected by the body, and as the
medium by which the body affects the spirit. The spirit, to mm/no, 0r ° nut, the
mind, was rational, and acted with reason; and it was its office to contend
* GaL vi. 14 1 2 Pet i. 5—8. X Conf. xiii. 2. § 1 Thess. v. 23.

SANCTIF1 ;ATION. 24 .
with the body, and to regulate the movements of the inferior principle. I
would be foreign to our purpose to inquire whether this, or the modern theory
of human nature, is true. The question is not decided by the words of the
apostle ; for, as it was not his business to teach philosophy but theology, he
might adopt, without intending to give his sanction to a particular system,
language familiar to those whom he addressed, and, at the same time, well
fitted to convey the informaton which he meant to communicate. He explains
his meaning by the word oWimk, which is translated "wholly," and subjoins
the words soul, body, and spirit, to signify, in the style of the age, that the
work of sanctification is universal, or that every part of human nature is the
subject of it; the soul in all its faculties, understanding, will, and affections or
passions, and also the body. Strictly, indeed, the body is not the subject of
sanctification, because, being a material substance, it is susceptible neither of
virtue nor of vice ; but it is sanctified in this sense, that it is dedicated to the
service of God; and its organs and members, which were formerly employed
in sinful actions, and were excitements to them, are converted into the instru
ments of righteousness. It is called in Scripture, " the temple of the Holy
Ghost."* But while sanctification extends to our whole nature, and leaves no part of
it unrenewed, we must not imagine the work to be so complete, as to restore
us to a state of perfect purity. There have been men, and there still are, who
maintain that sinless perfection is attainable in the present life. This was the
doctrine of the founder of the Methodists, and I presume it is still held by
his followers. It is acknowledged that the Scriptures call upon us to aim at
perfection, and speak of some individuals in such a manner as may lead super
ficial readers to conclude that they had fully succeeded. They call upon us
*o " behold the perfect man," and give this as the character of certain indi
viduals. But, one part of Scripture should be explained in consistency with
another ; and it is contrary to the laws of legitimate interpretation, to wrest a
particular expression to a sense at variance with the known and avowed senti
ments of the author. If we take this rule along with us, we shall immediately
perceive that, in the cases before us, perfection can mean nothing more than
integrity or sincerity. He is perfect who unfeignedly loves God, and has a
respect to all his commands.
That the most eminent saints mentioned in Scripture, e*'en some of those to
whom the epithet, perfect, is applied, were not free from sin, is evident from
the defects and blemishes which are discovered in their conduct. The praise
of high attainments will undoubtedly be conceded to the apostle of the Gen
tiles, and it is not easy to conceive upon what principle any man could per
suade himself that he or others have excelled him ; but, as he expressly dis
claims any pretension to perfection, so the relation which he has given of his
experience, demonstrates that he uses, on this occasion, the language not only
of humility but of truth. " I see," he says, " a law in my members, warring
against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin
which is in my members."* Not to confine our attention to a particular case, let
us recollect the words of the wise man, " There is not a just man upon the
earth, that doeth good, and sinneth not."* And observe in what strong terms
an apostle rejects the doctrine of sinless perfection, " If we say that we have
no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us."§ It is a doctrine, you
see, which will be maintained only by ignorant presumption. Were any per
son truly perfect, he would not stand in need of those institutions or means
of grace, which God has provided for the perfecting of the saints. In par
ticular, daily prayer for the forgiveness of sin would not be his duty ; he would
« 1 Cor. vi. 19. t Rom. vii. 23. t Eccl. vii. 20. § 1 John i. 8.
vm. IL— 31 X

242 THE PRIVILEGES OF BELIEVERS.
enjoy uninterrupted communion with God ; would not be subject to discipline,
which presupposes errors and failings ; and, having spent a life undisturbed by
pain and sorrow, would be translated, we may presume, into a better world
without suffering death.
The possibility of perfection in the present state, could be conceived only
by men who were ignorant of Scripture and of themselves. They must have
first lowered the standard of holiness. They must have narrowed and abated
the demands of the divine law, to meet their fancied attainments. It is im
possible that any person in his senses, could suppose himself capable of per
forming that high obedience which the law, uncorrupted by human interpreta
tion, evidently requires. We might justly call in question the veracity, or the
understanding, of the man who should seriously assure us that he loved God
with all his strength, and soul, and mind, and heart, and loved his neighboui
as himself. At any rate, we may call in question his Christianity; for his
sentiments are as contrary to those of a genuine believer, as darkness is t.o
light. The latter is distinguished by a humble estimate of himself. He ac
knowledges that he fails more or less in every duty, that he is daily guilty of
sin, that he could not stand if God should enter into judgment with him, and
that he has no hope of acceptance but through the mediation of Christ As
these acknowledgments are dictated by his feelings, so they are in exact ac
cordance with the Scriptures. The perfectionist belongs to a different class ;
and his arrogance and self-confidence manifests that, while he boasts of occu
pying the first form, he is a mere tyro in the school of Christ, and has need
that some one should teach him what are the first principles of the oracles ol
God.

LECTURE LXXV.
ON SANCTIFICATION.

Sanctification the Work of the Three Persons of the Godhead — Their Several Offices —
Nature and Effect of the Spirit's Operations on the Souls of Believers in Sanctification —
Christ, the Pattern of Sanctification — Rule of Sanctification, the Word — External Means
of Sanctification — Faith as a Means of Sanctification.
Having in the preceding lecture explained the nature of Sanctification, I
proceed to take notice of several particulars, the consideration of which is ne
cessary to give us a complete view ofthe subject.
I shall speak, in the first place, of the Author of sanctification ; and here we
shall see that, like other divine works, it is ascribed to all the Persons of the
Trinity. I would remark, in general, that there is no inaccuracy or confusio
in attributing the same work sometimes to one Person and sometimes to an
other ; because, although the Persons are distinct, the Essence is one and indi
visible; and because the same work is said to be performed by one, in one
view, and by another, in another. In relation to the present case, all the Per
sons in the Godhead are concerned in the sanctification of the soul; but a
different office is assigned to each.
First, This work is ascribed to the Father in those passages in which praye.
is orfered up to him, that he would sanctify us, and make us perfect in every
good work, and in which he promises to circumcise our hearts to love and

SANCTIFICATION. 243
fear him, and to give us a new heart and a right spirit.* In the economy of
redemption, he is exhibited as the fountain of grace. All spiritual blessings are
his gifts ; they originate in his goodness, and are bestowed according to his
will. To this blessing he predestinated his people before the foundation of
the world ; and he appointed and prepared the means by which it was attained
and is actually communicated. As " this is the will of God, even our sancti
fication," so it is by his power, (exerted in the manner which will be after
wards pointed out, when we come to speak of the agency of the Spirit,) that
the renovation of the soul after his image is begun, and advanced, and per
fected. Secondly, The work is ascribed to Jesus Christ, "who gave himself for us,
that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar
people, zealous of good works. "t He is the Author of this work, as he has
obtained for us the privilege of sanctification, by his obedience unto death.
This may be explained in two ways. First, He has done that, in considera
tion of which God bestows so great a blessing upon us. In ourselves, we
were unquestionably unworthy of it; and in creatures guilty and polluted,
there was nothing to induce God to restore his image, which they had impi
ously defaced. As the whole obedience of our Saviour was performed not
for himself but for us, and as it was meritorious in the highest degree, not
simply because it was perfect, but because he was a person of infinite dignity,
his righteousness is to be considered as the procuring cause of those superna
tural influences by which we regain that holiness in which man was created,
and which was the chief glory of his nature. " For their sakes I sanctify my
self, that they also might be sanctified through the truth." He " loved the
church, and gave himself for it, that he might sanctify and cleanse it with the
washing of water by the word ; that he might present it to himself a glorious
church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing ; but that it should be
holy, and without blemish."* Secondly, Jesus Christ has removed the curse,
which retained men under the dominion of sin by keeping them at a distance
from God; and has brought them into a state in which they may receive those
influences by which the purification of their nature will be effected. That you
may understand this point, let me remind you that the guilt of sin, or the curse
of the law, which is founded upon it, is a mighty and insurmountable obstacle
in the way of any gracious communication from God to the sinner. Hence
the law is said to be "the strength of sin."§ It is its strength, as it protects
it, if I may speak so, against any power which could overthrow or weaken its
dominion, and leaves it at full liberty to exert itself in enslaving more and
more its unhappy subjects. While men remain in this state, all the arguments
which are employed to convince their understandings, to awaken their con
sciences, and to interest their affections, and all the dispensations of Providence,
whether calculated to alarm or to allure, have no permanent effect. The divine
blessing, without which Paul plants and Apollos waters in vain, does not ac
company them. By the removal of 'guilt, a channel is opened in which the
grace of God flows into the soul ; and thus you perceive the connexion between
the death of Christ and our sanctification. " Jesus, that he might sanctify the
people with his own blood, suffered without the gate."|| The sanctification
which was the immediate design of his death, is not moral but legal sanctifica
tion ; and it signifies, I apprehend, in this place, our dedication to the service
of God by the removal of the guilt of sin, which was the great impediment to
our acceptance; but moral sanctification is the certain consequence. "Our old
man," says the same apostle, in another Epistle, " is crucified with Christ,
* 1 Thess. v. 23. Heb. xiii. 21. Deut xxx. 6. Ezek. xxxvi. 26, &c. t Tit. ii. 14.
* John xvii. 19. Eph. v. 25—27. § 1 Cor. xv. 56. || Heb. xiii. 12

244 THE PRIVILEGES OF BELIEVERS.
that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve
sin."* The language is highly figurative, but is not difficult to be understood.
Our old man is our corrupt nature ; and it is said to be crucified with Christ,
to signify that, in virtue of his deatli upon the cross, the power of sin is broken.
The proper effect of an atonement is not purification from the pollution of sin,
but deliverance from guilt ; but the former is ascribed to the sacrifice of Christ
as well as the latter, because it brings us under the operation of grace, because
it consecrates us to God, who gives the Holy Spirit to qualify us for his ser
vice. This remark is necessary to enable you to understand several passages
of Scripture which speak of this subject, and to prevent you from misappre
hending the language of Theologians, who sometimes express themselves in
such a manner as might lead you to think, that the death of Christ is not only
the meritorious, but the efficient cause of, sanctification. This impression is
made, when we are told that we are sanctified "by receiving the atonement
into our hearts," and by "having the blood of Christ conveyed into our hearts ;"
and even when such Scriptural expressions as have been quoted are used with
out explanation. The language of Scripture, with respect to the effect of the
death of Christ, was better understood in the apostolic age than it is now, be
cause sacrifices were then offered by both Jews and Gentiles, and every person
knew their design, and the efficacy which they were supposed to exert. The
language of Scripture is always proper and emphatic ; but when metaphors
occur, if we wish to convey distinct ideas into the minds of others, we must
give the literal sense ; and, if there is any danger of mistake, we should guard
against it by the use of plain and appropriate terms. He who contents him
self with telling us that we are sanctified by the death of Christ, or by the
sprinkling of his blood, explains nothing; and, by dealing much in such
phraseology, is apt to mislead.
In the third place, This work is ascribed to the Holy Ghost. Hence we
read of the renovation and sanctification of the Spirit,*, and our walking in
God's statutes is said to be the effect of the inhabitation of the Spirit in our
hearts. The grace by which we are sanctified, proceeds from the Father by
the Son, and is applied by the Spirit. Thus all the Persons of the Trinity are
concerned in our restoration. The part which each acts is important and
necessary, and the office of the third Person is not less glorious than that of
the second. Our attention is peculiarly directed to our Lord Jesus Christ;
and it is right that it should be so, for he appears with great prominence in the
scheme of our salvation, and offered the atonement by which all the divine
perfections were glorified in the highest, and the everlasting covenant was con
firmed. But without the co-operation of the Spirit, his labours and sufferings
would have been in vain. In a state of moral insensibility, with blinded minds
and unfeeling consciences, men would have made no use of the atonement for
their reconciliation to God, and continuing in the pollution of sin, which ren
ders them loathsome in his sight, they must have been excluded from his pre
sence, and the blessedness of communion with him. Christ purchased redemp
tion, but the Spirit applies it. The work of Christ was accomplished by his
humiliation, and sorrows, and death ; it, as it were, strikes our senses, and on
this account makes a more powerful impression. But if we attentively con
sider the work of the Spirit, we shall perceive that it also displays grace, and
love, and power, worthy of the highest admiration. To enter into a human
soul foul with the deepest stains, in which every thing revolting to the holiness
of his nature is exhibited, and' to exert his influence there to purify it, and
render it capable ofthe refined and exalted joys of religion, is a proof of con
descension and benevolence surpassing conception. He meets with resistance.
* Rom. vi. 6. +2 Thess. ii. 13. 1 Peter i. 2. Tit iii. 5, &c

SANCTIFICATION. 245
btit he does not retire ; the resistance is strong, all the power of corrupt nature
being called forth to oppose his design ; but he subdues it by the same Almighty
energy which reduced the elemental chaos into order. In his plastic hands,
man, an outcast from his Maker, so vile as to be the object of abhorrence, and
so helpless as to be given over as irrecoverably lost, is transformed into a being
adorned with the similitude of his Creator, devoted to his service, and destined
to live in the happy seats of the spirits of light. Let us remember that we are
under infinite obligations to our Sanctifier, as well as our Redeemer; and let
his love be the subject pf our devout meditations, and awaken our grateful
praises. That the sanctification of the soul is the work of the Spirit we certainly
know ; but the manner in which it is effected, we are not able to explain. We
know also that all things were created by God, but cannot, tell how he created
them ; that in him we live and move and have our being, but are ignorant of
the mode in which his power is exerted to sustain us. Our Lord signifies
that there is something mysterious in this matter. " The wind bloweth 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."*
Means are employed, but their efficacy depends solely upon him. It is his
power which begins and carries on the change that takes place in the senti
ments and affections of the soul. We cannot call it merely a moral power,
consisting in the presentation of arguments and motives to the mind, because
upon this supposition, it would differ in no respect from the means themselves,
or from the part which one man may act in persuading and exciting another to
the love and practice of virtue. If we call it a physical power, we must mean
that the soul is endowed with new faculties of perception and feeling, or that
its natural faculties are rendered capable of certain acts, for which they were
previously unfit. The truth is, although this term has been sometimes applied
to the power exerted in regeneration and sanctification, we cannot affix any
distinct idea to it ; and it is questionable whether those who use it, can explain
what they mean to their own satisfaction or that of others. It would seem
therefore to be the wisest and most modest plan, instead of attempting to de
scribe the nature of this power, and the mode of exercising it, to content our
selves with the general knowledge of the fact, that it is owing to the operation
of the Divine Spirit upon the soul — that it is sanctified.
A question has been agitated among divines, whether there is a formation
of holy habits in the soul, or sanctification consists solely in the influence of
the word upon its several faculties, upon the conscience, will, and affections,
through the medium of the understanding. The controversy is somewhat
obscure, and perhaps the parties have, occasionally at least, contended in the
dark, and they were not always distinguished by metaphysical acumen. The
point at issue seems to be, whether there is a real change effected in the soul
itself, or it is only morally acted upon by the word of God, coming in demon
stration of the Spirit and with power. Habit commonly signifies a disposition
to act, or a power of acting acquired by previous acts. In the present case it
signifies merely the disposition or power without a reference to previous acts,
as it is acknowledged that the power or disposition is not the effect of our
prior efforts, but of a divine operation. But if this is a just definition of habit,
it must also be acknowledged that gracious habits are infused into the soul ;
for in saying so, we mean nothing more than that the subject of sanctification
possesses certain dispositions, or inclinations? to act according to the rule laid
down in the Scriptures. We may not be able to understand what constitutes
a disposition or habit of the mind, but the fact is certain that there are habits,
* John iii. 8.
x2

246 THE PRIVILEGES OF BELIEVERS.
intellectual and moral ; and there is no more difficulty in conceiving them to
be formed by supernatural than by natural means. The great objection to the
denial of habits, and the attribution of the holiness of Christians exclusively
to the influence of the word, is that it represents them as not permanently but
transiently holy, as having no indelible character impressed upon them, as
holy only when they feel the influence of the word. This view of the matter
supposes a change not in their state, but in their exercise ; for if the word
were not acting upon them, they would be in all respects like other men who
have never experienced its power. But it is implied in the idea of a saint,
that he is possessed of holy dispositions when they are lying dormant, and all
his faculties are in a state of inactivity; and that there remains something
which distinguishes him from the unregenerate, even when he has fallen into
sin. It must be acknowledged that this objection to the denial of holy habits
is strong ; and that, if what is called the grace of God in the heart is reduced
to the direct or immediate operation of the word in exciting our faculties, it is
not easy to see how a man can be a saint when he is asleep, or has his thoughts
wholly engrossed by something different from religion ; or is for a time under
the prevailing power of temptation, like David or Peter. At the same time,
there is a mode of speaking about habits which is unguarded, and has perhaps
led to the opposite extreme of denying their existence, such language being
used as imports that they are something distinct from the soul in which they
reside ; that the grace of God is a substance within a substance, and not merely
an effect produced upon the soul or its faculties. We cannot speak of spiritual
things without making use of terms which primarily relate to external objects ;
but some writers, from want of judgment and taste, indulging in an unneces
sary grossness of language, materialize subjects, in conceiving which the senses
and the imagination can give no assistance. Discarding such phraseology, we
maintain that a change is produced in the soul by the mysterious operation of
the Spirit, through which it acquires an inclination to act, or a power of acting
in a particular manner; that this inclination or power is not occasional but
habitual ; that it remains when it is not in exercise, as any natural disposition
is in the soul although it should not be excited by the presence of its proper
object; and that mere is at all times a specific difference between the renewed
and the unrenewed man. "Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin:
for his seed remaineth in him."*
The pattern according to which believers are sanctified, is the holiness of tha
divine nature. " Be ye holy, for I also am holy." " Be ye perfect, as your
Father which is in heaven is perfect."* Man was created in the image of
God, and the design of sanctification is- to restore him to his original state
We are like our Maker in the spiritual essence of our souls, we are like him
in power; that is, our rational and active nature exhibits some traces of those
attributes ; but our perfection and glory consists in our resemblance to his holi
ness. It is to the holiness of God as manifested in Christ, that believers are
conformed by the agency of the Spirit ; and hence Christ may also be consi
dered as the pattern after which believers are sanctified. I speak of him, not
as the second Person of the Trinity, although in this character he is the bright
ness of the Father's glory, and the express image of his person, but as incar
nate or clothed with our nature, and in it exhibiting all the graces and virtues
which constitute our assimilation to God. We see in him what human nature
was, when it was formed by the hand of the Creator and he looked upon it
with approbation ; and what it nmst become that it may be pleasing in his eyes,
and may be admitted into his glorious presence. Christ should be contem
plated in two lights, as an atonement and as an example. In the one character
* 1 John iii. 9. 1 1 Pet i. 16. Matt. v. 48.

SANCTIFICATION. 247
he has made peace between us and our offended Maker ; in the other he has
shown us what our Maker is, in respect of his moral attributes, and what he
requires us to be ; how we should think, and feel, and act, so as to be imitators
of God. That he is the pattern according to which those who are the subjects
of divine grace are formed, is evident, from his own command to follow him ;
from the description of true Christians, as "having Christ dwelling in them;"
from the purpose of God that all the members of his family should be conformed
to the image of his Son; and from the effect of the Gospel upon believers,
who are changed by it into " the same image from glory to glory." He is
the " first-born among many brethren," superior in dignity, and the model after
which they are fashioned. We are exhorted to be " followers of the saints ;"
and from the contemplation of their character and conduct, we may derive
much valuable instruction with respect to our duty, and powerful excitement
to the performance of it. But we must not follow them implicitly, because we
know that they were liable to error and infirmity, and that some of the most
distinguished among them have given melancholy proofs of weakness and de
pravity. The apostle Paul has pointed out the limits within which they should
be imitated. " Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ."* Thus far
we tread upon sure ground ; but when we can trace no correspondence between
them and him, it is our duty to forsake them. In him alone we can safely
confide, in whose conduct the eye of omniscience did not perceive a single
flaw, and whom the voice of the Father proclaimed to be "his beloved Son, in
whom he was well pleased." Let us look to him when we are " running the
race set before us."
The rule of sanctification is the word of God. I mean, that this is the rule
according to which the Spirit works, forming in us those dispositions which it
promises or requires, and the rule according to which we should work in the
whole course of our Christian profession. Those who have been emancipated
from the service of sin, obey, according to an apostle, that form of doctrine
which has been delivered to them ; they walk in the light of the Lord and keep
his testimonies and statutes. Without multiplying Scriptural references, it is
evident to every attentive reader of the sacred writings, that the soul is sanc
tified by being brought under the illuminating and commanding influence of
the word of God. Holiness is our conformity to what it enjoins ; and when
our thoughts, volitions, and aims, our words and actions, correspond with its
letter and its spirit, we are saints in its estimation. No human rule has any
right to interfere with our obedience, or should be permitted to dictate to us.
Men have devised a variety of observances and practices, in which they have
supposed holiness to consist; and, by punctual attention to them, have appeared
to themselves and to others to have attained a high degree of sanctity. The
Pharisees received with sacred respect the traditions of the elders, fasted often,
gave more tithes than the law enjoined, frequently washed their hands and the
vessels which they used, that they might avoid every kind of defilement. In
imitation of them, many Christians have distinguished themselves by supersti
tious usages. They have withdrawn from human society, and spent their lives
in deserts and monasteries. They have abstained from the flesh of animals,
and confined themselves to a vegetable diet ; they have macerated their bodies
by frequent fasts and severe penances ; they have gone on toilsome pilgrimages
to visit holy places ; they have bound themselves to devote a certain portion of
their time to the repetition of prayers ; they have entered into vows of poverty,
celibacy, and blind obedience to their religious1 superiors. The professed de
sign of these observances, was to promote the interests of piety and holiness ;
but they have uniformly failed, because they were not of Divine institution.
* 1 Cor. xi. 1.

248 THE PRIVILEGES OF BELIEVERS.
As we cannot serve God by doing what he has not commanded, and still less
by doing what he has forbidden, so it is presumptuous to expect his blessing
upon means which, being introduced as supplementary to his ordinances, very
plainly import that, in this respect, man is wiser than he. Even when used
only as auxiliaries to holiness, they must be equally ineffectual, because the
communication of grace depending absolutely upon his will, there is no reason
to believe that human interference, whatever may be the motive, with a matter
which it is his province to regulate, will induce him to deviate from his plan,
and to give countenance to the idea, that we know better than our Maker
what are the most proper expedients for our moral improvement. He who
would please God and obtain his blessing, must adhere closely to his word,
"which is the only rule to direct us how we may glorify him, and enjoy him
for ever."
As there is a pattern and a rule of our sanctification, so there are means ap
pointed for carrying it on, to the consideration of which I am naturally led by
the preceding observation. Those suggested by human wisdom, we have re
jected ; let us attend to those which God himself has ordained.
First, It is evident that, as the word of God is the rule of holiness, so it is
a mean admirably adapted to promote its own design ; because it not only
points out and inculcates our duty, but presents many considerations calculated
to work powerfully upon the will and the affections. It not only delivers
naked precepts, which recommend themselves to us by our perception of their
conformity to reason and truth ; but it exhibits them in all the loveliness of
example, in the history of the saints, and particularly in that of our Redeemer.
Holiness, if I may speak so, appears in an animated form, and, displaying all
its graces before us, fixes our attention, and engages our love. The idea of
the ancient philosopher is realized by the incarnation of virtue ; and although
his prediction is not fulfilled, that all men would fall down and adore it, yet
this is the effect upon those whose hearts are made, by Divine grace, to feel
its attractions. The word of God holds out the greatest encouragements to the
study of holiness, in the promises of Divine assistance with which it is re
plenished. How well calculated these are to promote the design, will be mani
fest to every person who has seriously reflected upon his own moral weakness,
«nd has felt the paralyzing effect of such meditation. ' How is it possible for
me,' the sinner is apt to exclaim, when he is called to purify his heart, ' how
is it possible for me to cleanse myself from the pollution of sin? Can the
Ethiopian change his skin, and the leopard his spots ? Then may I, who am
accustomed to do evil, learn to do well.' In this state of despondency, the
word of God affords us relief by assurances of supernatural grace. When it
says, "Work out your salvation with fear and trembling," it adds, "For it is
God which worketh in you, both to will and to do of his good pleasure."* It
places before us the most interesting motives — the love of God, and the love of
Christ; the invaluable benefits which have already been bestowed upon us,
and the new blessings which we may expect to obtain ; the peace, the conso
lation, the joy, the hope with which our heavenly Father refreshes the souls,
and recompenses, in this world, the services of his obedient children. In short,
it displays before the eyes of the runner in the Christian race, the glorious
prize which awaits him at the end of his course, the immortal crown which
the righteous Judge will bestow upon him. We know, from experience, the
efficacy of hope in stimulating and sustaining our exertion. The Scriptures
enlist this principle of human nature in the service of religion, and exhort us
to be " steadfast, unmoveable, always abounding in the work of the Lord ; for
asmuch as we know that our labour shall not be in vain in the Lord."*
* Phil. ii. 12, 13. 1 1 Co', xv. 5S.

SANCTIFICATION. 249
In the, second place, All the other ordinances are means of sanctification. I
shall take notice of these two, Prayer, and the Lord's Supper. Prayer, be
sides its direct tendency to impress the mind with a sense of divine things, to
heighten our reverence and esteem for the object of worship, to increase our
desire for the blessings which we ask, and our abhorrence of the evils from
which we implore deliverance; prayer, besides these effects, which it is
morally fitted to produce, has, for its direct object, the obtaining of the com
munications of grace. It consists, not. only of adoration and thanksgiving, but
also of petition. It is the application of a sinful creature, conscious of guilt,
wants, and wretchedness, to the infinite mercy and beneficence of the Creator ;
and, as it is authorized by his command, it never fails, when it is presented in
the name of the Mediator, to bring down the blessing. Its effect is similar to
that produced upon the face of Moses by his intercourse with God. The soul,
returning from the sanctuary, shines "with spiritual glory. By strength not his
own, the Christian overcomes difficulties, repels temptations, and advances
with a steady progress in the path of obedience : " Let us come boldly to the
throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help us in time
of need."* The connexion of the Lord's Supper with the sanctification of the
soul is equally manifest. The very emblems which are used, point it out as
an institution adapted to the purpose of invigorating the graces of the Christian.
As bread and wine furnish nutriment to the body, so the body and blood of
Christ, or, in other words, his atonement and its benefits, contribute to the
nourishment of the soul. While the ordinance powerfully impresses upon the
mind the unspeakable love of Christ and the great evil of sin, and thus excites
two principles of mighty efficacy in the purification of the soul, — gratitude to
him and abhorrence of it, — it is the medium of communication between the
Saviour and his faithful disciples, in whom he works anew by his Spirit, to
carry on to perfection the good work which he has begun. Sitting at his table,
and partaking of his bounty, they renew their baptismal vows in humble de
pendence upon his grace, by which only they shall be enabled to perform them.
They devote themselves to his service, not from necessity, but from choice ;
not merely because they are bound to do so, but because they prefer him to
every other master. A deep sense of what they have enjoyed, and what they
have done, remains. Their faith is more confident; their love is more ardenf;
their resolution is more firm ; their state of mind is more spiritual and heavenly.
Like a way-faring man, who has rested and been refreshed at a place of enter
tainment, and then resumes his journey with renovated vigour, they go from
strength to strength, till they appear before God in Zion." "As the living
Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father, so he that eateth me, even he
shall live by me."*
In the third place, The dispensations of Providence are means of sanctifica
tion: " We know that all things work together for good to them that love God,
to them who are called according to his purpose."* The apostle makes use
of the universal term " all," to signify that nothing is excluded, and that there
is a co-operation of events to promote the spiritual interests of believers. And
here we must admire the infinite wisdom and Almighty power of God, who
renders subservient to his merciful designs, things which are not only consi
dered as evil, btit are evil in themselves, have a tendency to evil, and were
they not controlled and regulated by his superintending care, would be produc
tive of the most injurious effects upon the bodies and the souls, the present and
the future well-being of his people. But, as in medical treatment, substances
which are nauseous to our senses, substances which, when received into the
system, cause in the first instance pain, and substmees which are delrterious>
* Heb. iv. 16. t John vi 57. I Rom. riii. 28.
Vol. II — 32

250 THE PRIVILEGES OF BELIEVERS.
are administered in such quantities and with such mixtures, that the ultimate
effect is the removal of the disease and the confirmation of health ; so it is in
the economy of heaven. The object aimed at, is the spiritual health of the
patient ; and this is the result of the bitter draughts which he is compelled to
swallow, and of the pain of amputation to which he is sometimes subjected
The Scriptures frequently speak of affliction as contributing to the progress of
holiness : " Tribulation worketh patience, and patience experience, and expe
rience hope : and hope maketh not ashamed, because the love of God is shed
abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us."* You ob
serve the process. Affliction calls into exercise, and strengthens the graces of
the Christian, and terminates in the more powerful diffusion of Divine love in
the soul, in a more powerful impression of the love of God to us, or a stronger
emotion of love on our part to God ; by either of which our promptitude and
sincerity in serving him will be increased. The sanctifying effect of affliction
is pointed out in many passages of Scripture, and it was experienced by the
Psalmist, who says, "Before I was afflicted I went astray, but now I have
learned thy law."* It is the discipline which our heavenly Father adminis
ters to the members of his family, and it is so necessary and so salutary that
none of them is exempted. It is a proof of his love, because his design in cor
recting them is, that they may be partakers of his holiness. How blessed are
the fruits of sanctified affliction ! They are the fruits of righteousness, and are
of far greater value than the most esteemed temporal blessings. They humble
the pride of the people of God, awaken their vigilance, make them feel their
own weakness, create a stronger abhorrence of sin, and an increasing indiffer
ence to earthly things ; inspire a meek submission to the will of God, and,
leading the thoughts to heaven, stir up longing desires for the peace which
awaits them there, and for the pure joys of religion, which are earnests of its
felicity. I have confined the illustration to the effects of adversity, but all the
dispensations of Providence, under the direction of Divine wisdom and good
ness, have the same tendency, and are included in that comprehensive plan of
benevolence, which God is carrying on for the final happiness of the objects of
his love.
These are the means which God employs in sanctifying his people ; but as
many who are exposed to their influence manifestly derive no benefit from
them, it is evident that their efficacy does not arise from their fitness to the
end, but from the operation of the Spirit. Besides the external means, there
are certain exercises of the soul itself, which are subservient to the great de
sign, and which, as they are the effects of the Spirit, may be considered as
internal means by which the work is carried on. The following things are
necessary to the sanctification of a sinner ; that he be in a state in which he
can partake of divine influences, that those influences be actually communicated
to him, and that his views and feelings be such as shall make holiness the
object of his choice, and carry him forward in the practice of it with delight.
I shall show you that these pre-requisites are obtained by faith, to which as a
secondary cause our sanctification is ascribed.
First, By faith we are united to Christ, and thus are delivered from the curse
of the law, which prevented the communications of divine grace to the soul,
as we formerly showed. To those who believe, his righteousness is imputed.
in consequence of which they are reconciled to God, and are the subjects of
his favour. Thus the way is prepared for the restoration of his image.
"Wherefore," says Paul to the Romans, "ye also are become dead to the law
by the body of Christ, that ye should be married to another, even to him who
is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.":): Stript
* Rom. v. 3—5. t Ps. cxix. 67. X Rom. vii. 4.

SANCTIFICATION. 251
of figures these words signify, that, through the atonement of Christ received
by faith, our connexion with the law or covenant of works is dissolved, and
being united to him as our living Head, we are enabled to perform those holy
duties by which God is glorified. ' The body of Christ,' is the sacrifice of his
body on the cross ; our ' death to the law,' is our redemption from the curse ;
our ' marriage to Christ,' is our union to him, and ' the fruit which we bring
forth to God, is the acceptable obedience of the heart and the life.
Secondly, By faith we receive sanctifying grace from the fulness of Christ.
God has constituted him the source of spiritual influences, and faith the mean
by which they are derived from him. Human reason may inquire what pecu
liar virtue in faith has procured its appointment to this office, and may conceive
that other means were better adapted to the end. To us it is sufficient to know
the will of God, that his Spirit shall be given to those alone who look to his
Son, and trust in him for assistance in the great work of their salvation. When
the believer lives, it is Christ who lives in him. He is exhorted to " be strong
in the grace which is in Christ Jesus,"* who has said, " My grace is sufficient
for thee, for my strength is made perfect in weakness. "t Christians are kept
in a state of absolute dependence upon him, so that the good qualities which
they possess, and the good actions which they perform, are more properly his
than theirs. " Abide in me, and I in you ; as the branch cannot bear fruit of
itself, except it abide in the vine, no more can ye, except ye abide in me."*
Thirdly, Faith produces a state of mind which is itself holy, and tends to
the increase of holiness. The reasons and motives which the Scripture em
ploys to promote the study of holiness, have no effect till by means of faith
they make an impression upon the conscience and heart. In vain do we con
template the perfect and attractive example of our Saviour, unless by the me
dium of this grace a living virtue flow from him into our souls, to transform
them into his image. In particular, it is by faith that we obtain a comfortable
sense of the love of God ; and it is this which enlarges our hearts to run in the
way of his commandments. It is the opinion of many, that nothing will so
powerfully stimulate us to diligence as a state of uncertainty with respect to
the issue, and that our activity would be relaxed by the confident belief that
we already enjoy the favour of God. But those who think so, betray igno
rance of the gospel plan of sanctification. In the economy of grace, privileges
are the foundation of duty. Doubts and fears damp the ardour of the soul,
and enervate its exertions. When the mind takes such views of the character
of God as create a spirit of bondage, it is disqualified for performing accept
able service to him. The temper in which we do serve him is offensive, be
cause it is founded in disbelief of his word, and the works done under its in
fluence must be rejected as a corrupt thing. He who obeys in the spirit of a
slave, will do his duty reluctantly and tremblingly, and is incapable of the zeal,
the promptitude, the strenuous efforts, which characterize the man who is'born
from above. Our obedience to God will not be cheerful and uniform, and
continued from year to year amidst discouragements and difficulties, unless
we love him ; and we cannot love him, unless we have some hope at least,
that we are the objects of his love. Hence we perceive how necessary faith
is, by which this hope or persuasion is attained. Never will the exercises of
the Christian harmonize more fully with the will of God, never will his desire
of holiness be stronger, and his efforts to make progress in it be more vigorous
and successful, than when he is looking up to him as his gracious Father in
Christ, contemplating the wonders of his love in redemption, and rejoicing in
the present sense of his favour, and in the hope of infinite and ever-enduring
* 2 Tim. ii. 1. t 2 Cor. xii. 9. t John xv. 4.

Z&2 THE PRIVILEGES OF BELIEVERS-
blessedness in the world to come. " Lord, I have hoped for thy salvation,
and done thy commandments."*
There are several other particulars connected with the subject of sanctifica
tion, which I would have introduced if time had permitted. I might have
shown you that the work is progressive, like the shining light which shineth
more and more to the perfect day ; that it is sometimes suspended, but never
totally destroyed ; and that it is completed at death, when the souls of be
lievers are made perfect in holiness. I might have also pointed out its ad
vantages, and its tendency to glorify God, and adorn our profession; but 1
shall leave these topics to your own meditations.

LECTURE LXXVI.
ON GOOD WORKS.

Good Works, the Fruits of Regeneration — Meaning of this Phrase — Nature of Good Works-
Necessary that they should be Conformable to the Law of God ; be Performed from Re
speet for his Authority, from Love to Him, and with a View to his Glory — Possible only
to Believers — General Remarks respecting them.
Having explained the privilege of sanctification, I proceed to speak of good
works, which are the fruits of the change effected by divine grace in the soul.
We have already seen, that they are not the condition of justification, which is
obtained solely by faith, but that they are not therefore unnecessary, because
there are many reasons why a believer should perform them, and many im
portant purposes which they serve. I do not intend to resume these topics,
but in this lecture shall confine myself to an illustration of their nature, and
some remarks of a general kind.
The phrase, Good Works, is often understood in a sense too limited, and
which gives an imperfect view of the effect of supernatural grace, and of the
duty of a Christian. If you attend to the manner in which the expression is
frequently used, you will find, that it comprehends only a part of the works to
which " believers are created again in Christ Jesus," and that the most import-
mt part is omitted. Many seem to have no idea of any good works, but those
which are enjoined by the second table of the law; and their morality is sum
med up in sobriety, justice, and benevolence, of which the principal or sole
object is the temporal welfare of our brethren. The great design of Christianity
as they represent it, is to render us temperate, kind, and charitable. It is thus
that the natural aversion of the heart to God discovers itself, even when it is,
professedly inculcating obedience to his law. The duties of which he is the
immediate object are overlooked, or treated as of inferior importance. We are
not surprised to find this mutilated morality taught by infidels, who are Atheists
or not much different, and consider all religion towards God as superfluous
and absurd; it being their opinion that it is not by prayers, and praises, and
other exercises of piety, that we are to please him, if there is such a Being and
he takes any notice of our conduct, but by acting properly in the various rela
tions subsisting between us and our brethren. But it is lamentable, that the
* Ps. cxix. 166.

GOOD WORKS. 253
• Jinguage of Christian teachers should so often show, that they have studied in
the same school. When some of them talk of good works, we hear much of
meekness, and candour, and beneficence, and the forgiveness of injuries, but
little or nothing of faith, and love to God, and the dedication of the heart to
him, and zeal for his glory. It is not a false charge which has been brought
against such men, that they preach heathen morality ; for it is separated in a
great measure from piety, and chiefly consists in the social virtues. When we
speak of good works, we understand the words in the most extensive sense, as
comprehending the whole duty of man, prescribed in both tables of the law;
and we remember the declaration of Him, whom alone we call our Master,
that " to love the Lord our God with all our heart, and soul, and mind, and
strength, is the first and great commandment."
I would observe farther, that there is often a very incautious way of speak
ing concerning the relative value of good works. They are not only contrasted
with faith to the depreciation of the latter, from ignorance, it may be presumed,
of what faith is, of which I know not a more notable specimen than may be
found in a well-known paper of the Spectator concerning faith and morality ,*
but they are represented as the ultimate end of religion, as the terminating point
of its wonderful apparatus of contrivances and means. Thus, other important
matters are thrown into the shade. Faith is undervalued ; the atonement is
overlooked, or regarded only as an expedient for advancing the interests of
"¦tue ; nothing is heard of but eternal and immutable morality ; and so large a
•race does it fill in the understandings or imaginations of some men, that all
Tier points of religion dwindle into insignificance, and they adopt the cele
brated but senseless maxim, that it matters not what is our creed, if our life is
orthodox. The ultimate end of religion is the glory of God in the salvation
of sinners ; and his glory is manifested not only by their obedience to his law,
but by every part of the scheme of redemption ; by the process, so far above
the ideas and calculations of reason, which has reconciled his justice and
mercy, and restored his lost image in the soul of man. But, although it were
granted that the object to which the several steps in the plan of redemption are
subservient, is the sanctification of our nature, which puts it again into a capa
city to serve and enjoy its Creator, we should still object to the extravagant
importance which is assigned to good works ; for this reason, that by good
works, those who speak of them in this manner, principally or exclusively
mean the common duties of life ; and were they honestly to state their senti
ments, it would appear that the design of religion is accomplished, in making
us good members of families, good neighbours, and good subjects of the state ;
not too strict and scrupulous, however, but attentive to decorum, and free from
any gross and habitual vice. But all this might have been effected, without
the circuitous method which has been adopted ; without the death of a divine
Redeemer, and the descent of the heavenly Spirit ; by a plain rule of duty, and
the operation of natural sentiments and affections. The design of Christianity
is nobler and more extensive, namely, to make man holy in heart, as well as
in life ; to inspire him with the love of God ; to give God the supreme place
in his affections, that he may love his fellow creatures only in subordination to
him, and for his sake ; to establish the empire of the Divine will in his con
science, and to secure the prompt and cheerful performance of all the duties, oi
those which respect God, in the first place, and of those which respect man,
in the second. Good works, as commonly understood, are only a branch, and,
to speak still more correctly, are only fruits, of the holiness which religion in
fuses into those who are subject to its influence. The design is to make all
hings new ; to fill the mind with light, and the heart with love ; to form beings
* No. 459.
Y

254 GOOD WORKS.
on whom their Maker can look with unmixed complacency ; and, when this
great moral change is completed, religion may be said to have attained its end.
I now proceed to inquire into the nature of good works. Here it is proper
to observe, that something is necessary to make a work good in itself; and
that other things are necessary to make it good as performed by us.
That a work may be good in itself, it must be enjoined by the law of God,
the sole rule of obedience. The command of man cannot make a work good.
unless it be, at the same time, virtually or explicitly commanded by God: the
suggestions of reason do not possess sufficient authority, because it is not our
supreme guide, and is liable to error. He who created us, has alone a right
to prescribe the mode in which we should exert our faculties, and fulfil the
purposes of our being. We find the sinful practices of the Jews sometimes
condemned, simply on the ground that they were not commanded, and without
a reference to their obvious pravity. " The children of Judah have done evil
in my sight, saith the Lord; they have set their abominations in the house
which is called by my name, to pollute it. And they have built the high places
of Tophet, which is in the valley of the son of Hinnom, to burn their sons and
their daughters in the fire ; which I commanded them not, neither came it into
my heart." And God says, " In vain do they worship me, teaching for doc
trines the commandments of men."* On this ground, all those worlis are re
jected, which are enjoined by superstition, and are supposed to possess so
much merit, as to recommend the performer in a particular manner to the
favour of God. The Papist undertakes pilgrimages to places fancied to be
holy, submits to penances and frequent fasts, repeats appointed prayers in a
given number and at stated times, and presents offerings to the church, in the
full persuasion that his acts of piety are pleasing to God, and will procure a
reward ; but, as he proceeds solely upon the ground of human authority, he
loses his labour, and his services are set aside by the simple question, "Who
hath required this at your hands ?" It is plain that duty is a relative term, and
implies obligation ; but the source of all moral obligation is the will of God.
This is the reason why some things should be done, and other things should
not be done. Our own opinion will not give goodness to our works ; for, on
this supposition, we should be a law to ourselves, and independent of the Sove
reign of the universe : their goodness can arise solely from Iheir conformity to
the standard which the Divine authority has established.
Some moralists have maintained that the character of an action depends upon
the intention of the agent, insomuch that, if a man have a good design, it will
justify the means which he employs to accomplish it. This is the meaning
of the celebrated maxim of certain casuists in the church of Rome, that the
end sanctifies the means ; and practically it is adopted by others who excuse
themselves, and even claim praise, when they have erred, on account of the
alleged purity of their motives. It is acknowledged that an action good in itself
may become bad through intention ; or in other words, it may be divested of
all moral worth by being performed with an unlawful design, and the agent
may be guilty of sin in the divine estimation. The giving of alms is not a
virtue when it flows from ostentation ; nor zeal for truth when it originates in
pride and passion ; nor prayer when the object is to be seen of men. But
although intention may convert good into evil, it does not possess the opposite
power of turning evil into good. To ascribe to it such power is to deny that
there is any essential difference of actions, to render morality entirely an arbi
trary thing, to represent it as continually changing its character, so that what
is vicious to-day may be virtuous to-morrow, and what is vice in one man may
be virtue in another, according to the views by which they are respectively
* Jer. vii. 30, 31. Matt xv. 9.

GOOD WORKS. 155
influenced. It sets aside the law of God, and substitutes, in the room of a
permanent standard, the ever-varying decisions of the human mind, blinded by
prejudice, warped by passion, and forming its judgments upon deceitful appear
ances and short-sighted calculations. The only province which ought to be
assigned to intention in morality, is to give value to such actions as are con
formable to the law of God, to the goodness of which it is indispensably neces
sary that the state of the mind be right. Men may think that they are doing
God good service, but this idea will not exculpate them, if they are like the
Jews, who sought to promote his glory by opposing the truth and persecuting
its friends. It is sufficient to explode the doctrine of intention to consider the
extent to which it would carry us ; for upon this principle many of the greatest
crimes might be justified, because those who committed them imagined that
they were doing their duty.
No work, therefore, is good in itself unless it be commanded. The Church
of Rome teaches, that there are works of supererogation, meaning by these,
works which men are not bound to perform by any positive command, and
which therefore exceed the measure of their duty, and create a superfluous
legree of merit that may be transferred to others for their benefit. They are
lot required from any man; but they are recommended by what they call
"ounsels of perfection, counsels to aim at higher attainments in holiness than
•ire necessary to our salvation. They found this doctrine upon the advice or
counsel of Paul to the Corinthians, not to marry;* and particularly upon th'e
words of our Lord to the young man, " If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that
thou hast, and give to the poor."* With respect to the first, it is plain that
abstinence from marriage was not recommended as a higher degree of holiness,
but as good " for the present distress ;" that is, as a matter of prudence, because
it was a time of persecution, when those who were encumbered with families
would be exposed to particular inconvenience and danger ; and hence it ap
pears that it is not a counsel addressed to Christians in general. With respect
to the second, it was not a counsel, but a command to an individual, of whose
sincerity our Lord was pleased to make trial, by demanding the sacrifice of all
his earthly possessions. The perfection of which he speaks is not a higher
degree of holiness than others had attained, but the perfection of sincerity ; ' if
thou wilt prove thyself sincere in seeking eternal life, go and sell all that thou
hast.' It is a proof of deplorable blindness, of unaccountable stupidity, for
any man to imagine that it is possible to exceed the measure of our. duty ;
for what more can be conceived than is implied in these two commandments,
" Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul,
and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength; and thou shalt love thy
neighbour as thyself?" This is a summary of the whole duty of man. The
highest possible love to God, and the highest possible love to our neighbour
are already required ; and our love to both is to be manifested in every way
which Scripture and Providence may point out. Works of supererogation
have no existence but in the vain imaginations of ignorant and self-righteous
men. The Church of England says well in her fourteenth article, " Volun
tary works, besides, over, and above God's commandments, which they call
works of supererogation, cannot be taught without arrogancy and pride. For
by them men do declare, that they not only render unto God as much as they
are bound to do, but that they do more for his sake than of bounden duty is
required. Whereas, Christ saith plainly, 'When ye have done all that ye are
tommanded to do, say, We are unprofitable servants.' "
Having seen what is necessary to render an action materially, let us next
inquire how it becomes formally, good. An action may be good in its own
; Cor. vii. * Matt xix. 21.

256 GOOD WORKS.
nature, and yet may be so vitiated by the state of mind in which it is perform
ed, as to be of no value in the Divine estimation.
I observe, then, that it is requisite to the moral goodness of an action, that
it be performed from respect for the authority of God. Its abstract nature is
the same, when we are influenced by any other principle ; but, then, it is not
an act of obedience, and cannot therefore be acceptable to God, as our Lawgiver
and Judge. Philosophers have inquired into the foundation of morality, and,
as we might have expected, have come to different conclusions. They have
told us, that it is agreeable to the fitness of things ; that it is conformable to
' nature ; that it is conformable to reason ; that it is conformable to truth ; that
it is productive of good. But whatever theory we adopt, none of them proves
any thing more than that there is a propriety, a decency, an order, an utility,
in doing some things and not doing others. No proper obligation results
from any of these systems ; they do not take hold of conscience, and create
the idea of duty. The Scriptures, disregarding all metaphysical speculations,
go directly to the point, and lay down the only intelligible and practical founda
tion of morality, namely, the will of God. In reading them, you do not find
that particular actions are enjoined upon the principles of philosophy, but on
the stronger grounds of religion. It is the will of God, that we should do this
or that ; it is his law, by which we should regulate our conduct. To do our
duty, is not to satisfy the dictates of our own minds, but to express our rever
ence for him. Virtue is obedience, that is, conformity to the will of a superior ;
and the great example proposed to us, is that of our Saviour, who came " not
to do his own will, but the will of him who sent him."
From these observations it follows, that to constitute a work formally good,
it must be done, not because it will please ourselves or others, but because it
is commanded by God. Hence you perceive the reason that some works,
which have a specious appearance, and excite the admiration of men, are re
jected by the Searcher of hearts. The true principle of obedience is wanting.
While the persons are acting in literal conformity to the law, the Lawgiver is
not in all their thoughts. Hence also you may see whence that persuasion is
necessary, of which the apostle speaks when he says, " Whatsoever is not of
faith, is sin."* This is not justifying faith, or faith in Christ, as has some
times been imagined; and hence the words have been improperly quoted, to
prove that none but believers can perform works acceptable to God ; but it is
an assurance in our minds, that what we are doing is right, founded upon the
careful study of the law. If we should do what is lawful in itself, thinking it
to be unlawful, to us it would be a sin ; if we should do it without knowing any
thing respecting its nature, the best that could be said of it is, that it is neithei
good nor evil. Then only are our works right, when we know them to be
commanded, and do them because they are commanded.
I observe once more, That to the goodness of our works, it is necessary
that they flow from love to God. Love to him is stated to be the sum of the
first table of the law ; and, although love to our neighbour is represented to be
the sum of the second, yet, unless it be founded on love to God, it will not be
a religious affection. It is conceivable that a man may perform a variety of
duties because God has commanded them, and at the same time perform them
unwillingly. Conscience may force him to act contrary to his inclinations.
The principle which predominates may be fear ; under the influence of which
a person will earnestly and diligently do what is necessary to ward off the dan
ger which he dreads ; but he is only submitting to a less, in order to escape a
greater evil. The works which he performs, are not his choice ; he is impelled
K them by a very different principle from that of obedience. Now, although
* Rom. xiv. 23.

GOOD WORKS. 257
his outward actions may be strictly conformable to the standard of duty, and
much benefit may result from them to others and to the cause of religion, yet
their moral worth is completely destroyed by the state of his feelings. No
such service from a son would be pleasing to his father ; nor would a master
approve of a servant, however punctually he might execute his orders, whom
he knew to be under the influence of a secret dislike to his duty. We see,
then, that love to holiness is indispensably requisite. To the all-seeing eye
of God the heart is manifest; and he looks more to its movements, than to the
professions of the mouth and the sanctity of the conduct. So peremptorily does
he demand the heart, and so necessarily does it enter into the essence of ac
ceptable obedience, that nothing can atone for the want of its concurrence. It
is vain to think that we shall please God, while we entertain no friendly senti
ments arid dispositions towards him ; and these, you know, are the native fruits
of love. Love is the soul of duties, and the external action is the body. It is
but the half, and the inferior half, which he gives who obeys without love.
This point is so plain as to stand in need of no farther illustration ; and I shall
only add, that a single duty emanating from love to God, is of greater account
in his estimation than the multiplied services of the hypocrite, who courts the
applause of men, or is stimulated by the servile principle of fear.
Lastly, It is necessary that our works be done for the glory of God ; for, as
all things were made for him as well as by him, we do not fulfil the end of our
existence, unless we constantly refer to his honour as our ultimate end. When
men make themselves their end, when they aim at the gratification of their
vanity, and the advancement of their temporal interests, or even at their eter
nal happiness independently of the glory of- God, they serve themselves and
not him. The character of actions is fixed by their motives ; and there must
be an essential moral difference between actions which proceed from a regard
to ourselves, and those which are influenced by a regard to our Maker. " Whe
ther ye eat or drink, or whatever ye do, do all to the glory of God."* The
doing of all things to the glory of God, is an expression of frequent occurrence,
but often, perhaps, it is not distinctly understood. It suggests the idea of act
ing with a design to acknowledge him before our fellow-men, as a glorious
Being, and to excite them to reverence, admire, and praise him ; and this un
questionably is the tendency of those good actions which are of a public nature.
But, as this should be the end of all our actions, even of those which our bre
thren have no opportunity to observe, to do all things to the glory of God, pro
perly signifies, to do them from love to him and respect for his authority, and
is therefore virtually included in the qualifications of good works which have
been already mentioned. A Christian can have no intention to display the glory
of God before others in his secret devotion ; but he does give him due honour,
even in his closet, by the pious emotions of his soul, by adoration, confession,
and thanksgiving, by reverence and gratitude, and the exercises of faith and
hope. Now, if we understand nothing more to be meant, than that we should
do all things in obedience to his command, and from a profound regard to his
character and perfections, we shall see that there is no occasion to agitate the
question, Whether there should be, in each action, a distinct reference to his
glory, or a general purpose to glorify him be sufficient? because it will be
evident, that all our actions should be performed in the spirit of religion, and
that every action so performed is good. If we are not impressed at that mo
ment with his authority, and have no desire to please him, the action is no part
of acceptable obedience.
It is so evident from what has been said, that good works can be performed
only by such as have been translated into a state of grace, that it is unnecessary
* 1 Cor. x. 31.
Vol. IL— 33 * 2

258 GOOD WORKS.
to mention it distinctly ; and besides, this important point was fully considered
when we were explaining the subjects of regeneration and sanctification. In
man, prior to his conversion, there dwells no good thing; and the fruit will be
corrupt, till the nature of the tree is changed: "We are created" in Christ
Jesus unto good works ;* that is, good works are the effect of the renovation
of the soul by the Spirit of God. "I am the vine, ye are the branches. As
the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine, no more can
ye, except ye abide in me."*
It is an obvious inference from the preceding discussion, that works truly
good can be performed only by those who believe and live under the influence
of the Gospel. There is no difficulty, therefore, in determining what estimate
we should form of the boasted virtues of the heathens. They have been pro
nounced to be splendida peccata ; but, by many, this has been deemed a harsh
and uncharitable judgment. It would be a satisfactory mode of settling the
dispute, or, at least, it might make a stronger impression upon some, if, instead
of dwelling on vague generalities, we would come to particulars; and, having
demanded a specification of the virtues in question, should then proceed to
subject them to the test of Scripture and sound reason. I believe that the impos
ing display which is made to pass before us, by the power of declamation and
loose panegyric, would thus lose much of its splendour, and would be reduced
within a narrow compass ; and that certain actions, when brought near and
strictly examined, would not appear in the same light as when viewed at a
distance, and surrounded with the false glory which ignorant admiration and
prostituted eloquence have bestowed upon them. Instead of assuming it as a
fact capable of demonstration, that some of the heathens were eminently vir
tuous, their advocates should show us what their virtues were; and then, I am
confident, we should find that they were few in number and of a dubious cha
racter, if not altogether unworthy of the name. It is intolerable to hear Chris
tians giving the name of virtue to the mere exercise of the natural affections
without any religious motive ; to acts of natural courage; to patriotism, as it is
commonly understood and was exemplified among the Greeks and Romans ;
to a proud morality, which elated the possessors with self-conceit, and led
them to claim an equality, or a superiority to the gods. If it be true that a
work is not good unless it be performed from respect for the authority of
God, the works of heathens were not good ; because they could not have an
intention to obey him whom they did not know, and their virtues were founded
solely upon self-respect, or a sense of propriety, or views of utility. If it be
true, that no work is good unless it is done with a view to please God, and
from love to him, the works of the heathens were not good; for, as a cele
brated authoi has observed, "before the Christian religion had, as it were,
humanized the idea of the Divinity, and brought it somewhat nearer to us,
there was very little said of the love of God. The followers of Plato have
something of it, and only something; the other writers of pagan antiquity,
whether poets or philosophers, nothing at all." The popular deities could
not be the objects of love ; and the true God, whom some are supposed to have
known, removed from common apprehension and wrapt up in the obscurity of
his nature, was regarded with distant reverence, and furnished only a subject
of speculation. If it be true that no work is good which is not performed for
the glory of God, the works of heathens were not good ; because we are as
sured by an apostle, concerning the wisest and best of them, that they did
"not glorify him;" and we know that the great design of their virtues was to
gratify their own feelings, and to gain the admiration of their countrymen.
Why should it be deemed harsh to pronounce this sentence upon the virtues
« Eph. ii. 10. t John xv. 4, 5.

GOOD WORKS. 259
of the heathens, even although they had been more numerous and more per
fect than they are ? What makes some men so feelingly alive to their reputa
tion, while, without scruple, they accuse of hypocrisy persons around them, who
are far more virtuous even than Socrates ; and, in support of this charge, are
ready enough to tell us that the external appearance is of no avail, if the mo
tives are corrupt ? It is easy to assert that the motives of heathens were pure ;
but it is as easy to prove that they were not and could not be pure, ignorant,
as they were, of the true religion and destitute of the grace of God. The
words of Peter to Cornelius have been often quoted, to prove that the works
of heathens are pleasing to God, as well as those of Christians ; but they are
grossly perverted. " Of a truth, I perceive that God is no respecter of persons ;
but, in every nation, he that feareth him and worketh righteousness, is accept
ed of him."* Any person who considers the context, will see that they do
not teach that men of every nation may work righteousness ; but that, to what
ever nation those who work righteousness belong, they are accepted. No two
things can be more different ; and that the latter is the true meaning is evident,
because the apostle is speaking in reference to the prejudices of the Jews, who
believed that they were the objects of the Divine favour, to the exclusion of
every other people. This he now discovered to be an error; for, in the case
of Cornelius, God had shown, that if there were any righteous Gentiles, they
also were acceptable to him. But Cornelius, let it be remembered, was not
such a Gentile as Socrates, or Cato, or Aristides, but one who knew the true
God, and worshipped him.
There is one qualification remaining, which maybe thought necessary to the
goodness of our works, namely, that they should be perfect; for it may be said,
that since the law of God requires them to be perfect, any defect will change
their character, and render them sins rather than duties. Now, it is acknow
ledged that all the works of the saints are imperfect. There is not one of them
who can truly say, that he loves God with all his heart; or that, in the full
sense of the expression, he loves his neighbour as himself. The flesh lusts
against the spirit, and impedes its operations. The regenerated have been
compared to a man lately recovered from sickness, whose motions are feeble
and languid ; and hence, there is something in their best works for which
they might be rejected. But let it be observed, that although the works of the
saints do not exactly correspond with the demands of the law, they do not
labour under any essential defect. The principle is right, and the motive is
right. The defect lies only in degree. They are not perfectly good, but still
they are good. They are so far conformable to the requisitions of the law, but
not to the full extent : they are acts of obedience to the will of the Lawgiver.
The metal is not free from alloy, but it is gold. Imperfect works would be
certainly rejected, if offered as the ground of justification, because, in this case,
a righteousness without a single flaw is the indispensable condition ; but, when
viewed in another light they are approved, because there is much in them
which is pleasing to God. To this should be added, that they are presented
to him through the mediation of his Son. For his sake, what is evil is for
given ; and what is good, being recommended by his merit and intercession,
comes up before the throne of heaven as incense, and as the evening sacrifice.
Good works are incumbent upon the followers of Christ without distinction.
From some civil duties persons of certain orders and professions are exempted,
in compliment to them or from the necessity of the case ; but the authority
of the law of God has no limits, and none are too high or too low to be sub
ject to its operation : " This is a faithful saying, and these things I will that
thou affirm constantly, that they who have believed in God be careful to main-
* Acts x. 34, 35.

260 GOOD WORKS.
tain good works ; these things are good and profitable unto men."* It may
be observed, however, that all good works are not formally incumbent upon
all ; but that, while some are universally obligatory, others are binding only in
particular circumstances. Works of justice, temperance, and piety, are re
quired from all without exception, because no situation can occur in which it
could be justifiable to refrain from worshipping our Maker, to indulge irregular
appetite, or to defraud and injure our neighbour. But every man is not bound
to give alms, because some are so poor as to be themselves the objects of
charity ; and there are many duties which arise out of the relations of men to
one another, and which therefore cannot be demanded from those who do not
stand in such relations. He fulfils his duty, who endeavours to glorify God
and to do good to men, by the faithful exertion of the powers conferred upon
him and the diligent improvement of the opportunities which he enjoys, by
moving in his own sphere and performing the particular service which the
Master of the household has assigned to him.
Every person has it in his power to perform good works. I do not mean
that he has by nature moral ability, but that he has means and opportunities.
Of possible things there are some which one man can do, and another cannot ;
and of duties, as we have seen, some are not incumbent upon all, but are
required only in particular circumstances ; but there is no person, however
obscure his station and limited his powers, who is under the necessity of re
maining inactive. Every man may practise self-command, and every man
ought to cultivate piety towards God, and charity towards his brethren. There
is not an individual who is not somehow connected with others, and is not
called to some relative duties. If he has nothing to bestow in the form of
alms, and no influence to exert in behalf of the temporal interests of his bre
thren, he can give them his good offices and good counsels; and these are
comprehended under the denomination of good works as well as more substan
tial deeds ; for what we speak, as well as what we do, falls under the prescrip
tion of the law, and God is glorified both by our words and by our actions.
Where is the man who may not speak a word in commendation of religion,
or for the instruction and consolation of his acquaintance and strangers ? It is
surely a good work to communicate knowledge to the ignorant, to silence the
gainsayer, to reclaim the backslider, to, warn the tempted, to cheer the melan
choly, and to encourage the dying. If a man were living in a solitude, he might
still perform acceptable works ; for he could there mortify his appetites and
passions, improve his graces, carry on his necessary labours in the spirit of
religion, meditate plans for the good of his fellow-men if he should ever again
mix with society, and make the desert resound with the voice of prayer and
praise. This leads me to remark, that there are many good works existing in their
first principles which are never brought to perfection, -but which the eye of
God beholds with approbation. Such are the benevolent purposes and pious
wishes of the saints, springing from love to God and to man, which are not
matured from the want of circumstances favourable to their development and
growth. As there is much evil which never assumes a sensible form, so there
is much good which never attracts human observation. But He sees it who
searches the heart ; and as in some cases he has taken public notice of it in his
word, so we may believe that it will be made known in the day when all secrets
shall be revealed, as no small part of the goodness by which his people will
then be distinguished. " The Lord said to David my father, Forasmuch as it
was in thine heart to build an house for my name, thou didst well in that it
was in thine heart."* Good intentions, although they should fail to accom
* Tit iii. 8. t 2 Chron. vi. 8.

GOOD WORKS. 261
plish their object, are not lost. They are treasured up in heaven, and will
receive their reward. " If there be first a willing mind, it is accepted, accord
ing to that a man hath, and not according to that he hath not."*
There are two extremes with respect to good works, into which men have
been betrayed through the perverseness of their hearts, and ignorance of the
truth. Some have ascribed merit to them, and represented them as the pro
curing cause of justification and eternal life ; and others, totally mistaking the
design of those passages which declare them to be useless for a particular pur
pose, have rejected them as altogether unnecessary, and pronounced it to be
dangerous to inculcate theih. In the days of the apostle James there were
persons of this description, who trusted in an unproductive faith ; and even our
own age has given birth to Antinomian teachers, who, in their injudicious zeal
against those who oppose the law to grace, exalt grace upon the ruins of the
lawr. These men give great countenance to the objection against justification
by faith, that it weakens the obligations to- holiness, and supersedes the neces
sity of it. They are appealed to as living proofs that the objection is true.
But we have formerly seen that there is no foundation for it in the doctrine
when scripturally stated.
Antinomianism is indignantly exploded by all the enlightened friends of the
gospel, and their due place is assigned to good works in the system of religion.
But it seems to have tainted the minds of not a few who in words disavow it,
as we may infer from the suspicion or dislike with which they view exposi
tions of moral duties, and the desire which they discover to be always enter
tained with discourses on the peculiar doctrines of Christianity. The time
was, when the minister who explained and enforced relative duties in detail
was heard with a jealous ear, and was in danger of being assailed with the
accusation of legalism. This unfounded prejudice, I believe, is passing away;
but it still retains its influence upon the weak and ignorant. Good works
should always be inculcated upon Christian principles; and when they are
placed upon a proper foundation, and enjoined for the ends which the Scrip
tures point out, they are an important and necessary part of public instruction.
Ministers should " affirm constantly, that they which have believed in God
should be careful to maintain good works."* This is the command of Paul,
and he does not act in his spirit, who, intimidated by popular clamour, always
insists on doctrinal topics. In this case he pleases not God but man. The
ignorance which finds fault with him is entitled to no respect, and if the cen
sure is dictated, as in some cases we have reason to suspect, by a worse prin
ciple — the disinclination of the human heart to holiness, and the presumptuous
hope of salvation without it — it should be treated with the contempt which it
deserves. When men would separate what Christ has joined together, and
set one part of his religion in opposition to another, the audacious attempt
should rouse the holy zeal of all the friends and defenders of the truth. By
the same authority which explodes or throws into the shade one part of the
system, the other may be subjected to the same dishonourable usage. If one
class of men demand faith to the exclusion of works, another may as reason
ably demand works to the exclusion of faith. He is a wise steward, who
arranges every thing in its proper place, and brings it forth in its order and
season. He is a faithful minister, who inquires not what are the fancies and
tastes of his audience, but what is the truth ; and regardless of human censure
or applause, fearlessly teaches men " to observe all things whatsoever Christ
has commanded them."
It has been sometimes said, that it is unnecessary to be particular in incul
cating good works, because if men are brought to believe in Christ, obedience
* 2 Cor. viii. 12. t Tit iii. 8.

262 CONSCIENCE.
will certainly follow. This sage remark supposes that divine grace operates
upon believers, not agreeably to their rational nature, by instruction, exhorta
tion and admonition, but instinctively, and contrary to the plan which is actu
ally adopted in the dispensation of religion, where there is an ample provision
of means for promoting the sanctification of the soul ; and what is more, it
represents those parts of Scripture as useless in which1 duties are detailed and
enforced, our Lord as having spent his strength in vain while he was preach
ing his sermon on the mount, and the apostles as having filled up with moral
lessons a considerable space in their Epistles, which would have been more
usefully occupied with doctrinal discussions. The opinion which leads to
such conclusions is worse than absurd.

LECTURE LXXVII.
ON CONSCIENCE.

Connexion of this Subject with the Preceding Lectures — Nature of Conscience — Its Office —
Its Fallibility— The Rule of Conscience, the Will of God— The Scriptures the only Rule
to Believers — Their Adequacy and Supremacy as such — Authority of an Erring Con
science — God alone the Lord of Conscience.
Having finished what I intended to say on the three great privileges of be
lievers in Christ, justification, adoption, and sanctification, I deem this the
proper place to introduce some observations on Conscience, which is intimately
connected with those privileges. Two things are necessary with regard to it:
that it should be freed from a sense of guilt, which is the cause of great dis
quietude and alarm ; and that it should be purified from the errors and corrup
tions by which its right exercise is impeded. The first effect is produced in
justification, when the sinner is pardoned, and, through faith, is filled with
peace and joy; the second is the work of sanctification, in which the illumina
tion of the mind, and the mortification of unholy appetites and passions, give
it new ability and new liberty to execute its functions with fidelity.
Let us begin with inquiring into the import of the term. Conscience is the
Latin word in an English form, and conscientia is a literal translation of the
Greek word o-wuimtt. Both terms evidently import something more than sim
ple knowledge, which would have been expressed by scientia and aS-,mt. Com
pounded as they are with prepositions which signify with, they suggest the
idea of conjunct knowledge; and this has been explained in various ways.
This power, say some, is called conscience, because it conjoins knowledge
with knowledge — universal knowledge, namely, of the law, with particular
knowledge, namely, of the fact, by applying the one to the other. Thus, after
a man has done a certain action, he reasons in the following manner : ' I know
that such an action is forbidden by the law of God ; I know that I have done
this action, and therefore I have committed a sin.' This process is an opera
tion of conscience ; and it consists in bringing together our knowledge of the
law and our knowledge of our own conduct. Others explain the matter, or at
least express it, somewhat differently, calling conscience the knowledge which
a man has with himself as with another ; by which they mean, I presume — for
their language is awkward and obscure — that conscience consists in the know
ledge of our actions, and a comparison of them with the standard of duty in our

CONSCIENCE. 263
own minds. Another mode of explaining the term, is to consider the conjunct
knowledge of which it is expressive, as referring to the knowlege of men and
the knowledge of God, and intimating that both are employed about our actions.
While we know,. God knows them ; and of this important fact it is the office
of conscience to remind us. There are two witnesses of every thing we do,
our own consciousness, and the Great Being in whose presence we always
are. Conscience ought not to be confounded with consciousness. The latter
term denotes our knowledge of what is passing in our minds, and does not
relate to external things. I am conscious of my own existence, but am not
conscious of the existence of any other person, however firmly I may believe
it. Conscience is conversant not only with what is passing in our minds, but
also with our external actions ; with our thoughts and actions which are past,
as well as with those which are present; and with the actions of other men,
so far as they are the subject of moral judgment. It is different also from the
understanding, the province of which is to acquire the knowledge of the nature,
and qualities, and relations of objects, and to pronounce what is proposed to it
to be true or false, by means of its intuitive perceptions, or by a process of
reasoning; while the objects of conscience are more limited in number, and
present themselves under a different aspect. They are considered, not as true
or false, but as good or evil, morally good and morally evil.
Among Scholastic Divines, and some more modern authors who have trans
planted their barbarous terms and distinctions into their writings, it has been
a subject of discussion, whether conscience is an act, a habit, or a faculty. If
I apprehend the meaning rightly, those who call it only an act, deny that con
science is a distinct power of the mind, and conceive it to be merely an occa
sional application of our knowledge of right and wrong to our actions. Those
who call it a habit, seem to hold that it is not natural to men, but is the effect
of instruction and discipline. Conscience, they say, is knowledge, and know
ledge is a habit, or something acquired; thus confounding the improvement
of a faculty with the faculty itself. If, because our knowledge of right and
wrong is acquired by education and reflection, it follows that conscience is not
an original principle of our nature, it would be easy to prove, by the same
kind of reasoning, that there is no such original principle as intellect. Some
attempt to evade this difficulty, by distinguishing habits into innate and ac
quired, and telling you that conscience is something between these, and par
takes of the nature of both ; and then ending with such an explanation as, if it
have any meaning, amounts to this, that after all, conscience is a faculty,
although they choose to call it a habit. Such is the useless trash, under the
name of Logic or Metaphysics, with which many theological volumes are
filled. It has been disputed, among men of more correct and luminous modes of
thinking, whether conscience should be considered as a distinct faculty of the
mind; or merely as the exercise of its other faculties upon a particular subject,
and in a particular form. Conscience has been pronounced to be an operation
of the judgment, comparing one thing with another — our actions with the
standard of duty — and pronouncing their agreement or disagreement. But
there is no reason for excessive simplification. We have only to go a step
farther, and deny that the soul has any distinct faculties, and that what we call
such, are only different modes in which it exerts itself; but, although this were
true, it would serve no purpose but to introduce a change in. human language,
and to set aside as useless many of the speculations of philosophy. If we say
that the soul has understanding, because it is capable of knowledge ; that it has
judgment, because it compares'; that it has will, because it chooses and refuses;
there seems to be no reason why we should not say also, that it has con

264 CONSCIENCE.
science, because it distinguishes right and wrong, and approves or disapproves
of our actions. There seems to be a particular reason why we should account
it something more than an operation of the understanding, namely, that there
is not a simple perception of agreement and disagreement between the standard
of duty and our actions, but an approbation or disapprobation of them, with
an anticipation, pleasant or painful, of the consequences. By philosophers,
it has been sometimes called the moral sense. They have given it the desig
nation of a sense, to signify that it perceives right and wrong, as the taste per
ceives sweet and bitter; and of moral sense, to specify the objects about which
it is conversant. But, although the term, sense, is sometimes applied to our
internal feelings, yet I look upon the phrase, moral sense, as an incongruous
combination of terms, and prefer conscience, not only because it occurs in the
Scriptures, and is adopted by theologians, but because it is free from ambiguity,
and, from association at least, reminds us of an authoritative rule of action,
and of a supreme Judge; while the moral sense implies a reference to neither.
Besides, to call conscience a sense, implies, that we have instinctive moral
perceptions ; a supposition which does not accord with experience, and pro
ceeds upon the gratuitous assumption, that this faculty is different from all
our other mental faculties, which remain in a dormant state till they are excited,
and require culture to fit them for the performance of their functions.
It has been objected against considering conscience as an original power of
the mind, not only that it seems to be wanting in some individuals, but that its
operations are not uniform. What is esteemed virtuous at one time, becomes
vicious at another, and conscience is found to pronounce opposite sentences
upon the same action. What the ancient Greeks, for example, practised with
out shame, is now held in universal abhorrence ; and, even in modern times,
if you only pass a river, a mountain, or an imaginary line, you shall find dif
ferent ideas of morality prevailing upon the one side and the other. Hence,
conscience appears to be a factitious thing ; the result, not of the constitution
of our nature, but of education and custom. Having been taught to look upon
one action as criminal, we refrain from it, and upon another as good, we prac
tise it; but a different training would have inverted our ideas, and made us
regard the former as laudable or harmless, and the latter as infamous or un
becoming. But this reasoning against the existence of a moral principle, is
more specious than solid, and might be employed with equal success to dis
prove any other of our mental faculties. Might it not be shown in the same
way, that we have not the power of perceiving truth, because some individuals
are born idiots, and men in all ages have been subject to the strangest illu
sions, and have embraced innumerable errors ; and what has been admitted as
unquestionably true at one time, has been rejected as manifestly false at an
other. Did we mean by conscience, an instinctive perception of the moral
qualities of actions, it would be a conclusive argument against it, that men's
perceptions have been so various and contradictory ; but as we mean only a
power in the human mind of perceiving them, the modifications to which it is
subject from external circumstances, will not appear to any sound reasoner to
be a proof of its non-existence.
I have not given a formal definition of conscience ; but from the preceding
observations you will perceive what I understand by it. It is that faculty
which perceives right and wrong in actions, approves or disapproves of them,
anticipates their consequences under the moral administration of God, and is
thus the cause of peace or disquietude of mind.
A question has been proposed, whether it is possible for conscience to err;
and, although it seems to be a plain one, yet it has not received a uniform an
swer. Some have adopted the negative, affirming that conscience cannot err.
They distinguish between a judgment of the mind, and a judgment of con-

CONSCIENCE. 205
science, and say, that the former may be false, but that the latter is always
true ; not reflecting that, if conscience has any connexion with the understand
ing, as it must have if it is founded on knowledge, it must be subject to the
same errors with the understanding. To. support their opinion, they define
conscience to be a clear and certain knowledge of the objects with which it is
conversant. Now, there is no doubt that, if this definition is admitted, the
inference which they draw from it is undeniable ; for it is manifest, that, if
our conceptions of any subject are distinct and adequate, our judgments con
cerning it must be conformable to truth. The amount, therefore, of what they
say, is, that we cannot be mistaken when we are certainly right; but, for this
profound discovery, no man, I presume, will think himself obliged to its authors.
We may affirm any thing of any thing, if we are allowed to give an arbitrary
definition of it. And this definition of conscience is undoubtedly arbitrary ;
for conscience, so far as it implies knowledge, is not perfect and infallible
knowledge, but that degree of it which we have obtained by the exercise of
our intellectual faculties, and with which many errors may be blended.
But some maintain the infallibility of conscience upon a different ground.
If conscience may err, they say, it follows that God has deceived us ; for he
gave us this faculty, and it is his candle shining within us. If God had given
conscience as the only rule of our conduct, if he had commanded us to rely
with implicit confidence upon its dictates, and if it were still as perfect as it
ever was, we might say that the errors into which we are led by it are imput
able to its Author. But not one of these pre-requisites is true. Conscience is
not our only rule, as we shall afterwards see ; its dictates are not therefore to
be implicitly obeyed, and it has not continued uninjured amidst the ruin of our
moral nature. Conscience, which derives all its light from the understand
ing, must receive it, if I may speak so, obscured and discoloured as it flows
from its source. Does any man say, that, when our understandings err, God
has deceived us ? No ; and let no man say that he has deceived us when
conscience errs ; for, what is conscience but the application of the knowledge
of the understanding to our practice, as a test to examine it? By what law
was God bound to preserve conscience from being tainted by sin, any more
than our other faculties ? It was, indeed, impossible to have preserved it in
purity, when the understanding, upon which it depends, was perverted and
blinded. It is inconceivable how this notion of the infallibility of conscience
could have been adopted by any man who had read his Bible, had reflected
upon his own experience, had observed the conduct of others, and, in a word,
was possessed of an ordinary portion of common sense. Such is a specimen
of the absurd opinions which Theologians of great name have sometimes ad
vanced. As they come in our way, we must take notice of them ; but in doing
so, there is a waste of precious time.
Let us now proceed to the rules of conscience. It is evident that conscience
is not a rule to itself. Man comes into the world entirely destitute of know
ledge, and gradually acquires it as his faculties expand ; but in his state of
greatest improvement, he is too ignorant of God and himself to be qualified to
be his own guide. It is not enough that his intention is good. If he had been
created without power to distinguish between right and wrong, or had been
left without the means of ascertaining his duty, there might have appeared
to be a reason for saying, that to mean well would be sufficient to recommend
him to his Maker. But, since there are moral distinctions, and the knowledge
of them is confessedly not beyond the reach of the human faculties, it is not
to be imagined that our conduct can be acceptable to God, unless it be con
formable to them. Those distinctions are founded in the nature of things, or
in the will of the Creator, and must therefore be a law to all reasonable crea
tures. To suppose the intention to sanctify our actions, is to suppose that
Vol. II — 34 Z

266 CONSCIENCE.
virtue and vice are not essentially different ; that actions themselves are no
thing in a moral estimate, and that the only thing to be considered is the
motive or the end. Thus man would, indeed, be a law to himself, and would
be accountable only for his designs ; every other thing would be exempt from
the Divine jurisdiction. Conscience, then, must have a rule. It is plain that
the rule is not the example of others, although wise and good, because the best
of men are imperfect, and are liable to errors and infirmities ; because, even
their virtuous actions are not to be imitated, unless we be in similar circum
stances, and in the application great mistakes may be committed ; and because,
without another rule, we could not know whether they were right or wrong.
It is implied in the proposal to imitate them, that their actions are good ; and
this supposition further implies, that there is a standard to which they are
conformable. Thus-we are led, at the second step beyond them, to that stand
ard as the rule ; and exhortations to imitate them, whether delivered in the
Scriptures, or by our fellow-men, can only be understood as a call to do what
they have done, when we know it to be right from some other source.
I may add, that the opinion of men is not the rule of conscience, any more
than their example, because they may mislead us, either from design or from
their own previous error. Hence we are commanded to call no man master,
and to give this honour to Christ alone ; and it is said in reference to the dog
mas and commands of men, "To the law and to the testimony; if they speak
not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them."* In the-
church of Rome, the doctrine of probability is maintained, or the doctrine that
a man may safely do any thing for which there is a probable reason. And
how is this probability to be obtained? Not by searching the Scriptures, but
by consulting the Doctors ; and if a few of them concur in sentiment, nay, if
even one of them pronounce that a thing may be safely done, the person whom
he advises may do it, whatever it is, without incurring guilt. Thus the whole
law of God has been disannulled, and a sanction has been given to every
abomination; for doctors have been found in that Church, who have patronized
by their authority every conceivable vice. This is an extreme case; but it
shows us the danger of submitting to be guided by the opinions of men. As
they and we are subject to the same standard of duty, their opinions can be
considered only as their interpretations of the law, which are not authoritative,
and ought to be compared with the law itself before they are received.
Casuistical writers distinguish the rules of conscience into two classes.
The first is the original, supreme, and independent rule, namely, the will of
God, by whatever means it is made known to us. The second class compre
hends the laws of men, and our own voluntary engagements, as vows, oaths,
promises, and covenants. Now, there is no doubt that a man is bound in
conscience to fulfil the engagements into which he has entered to God, and to
his fellow-men ; that they lay him under an obligation which he cannot vio
late without guilt, it being always presupposed that they are lawful, and that
they constitute rules by which his conduct should be regulated. It is equally
certain that we are subject to the authority of others, as parents, masters, and
magistrates, whose commands we ought to obey ; and their commands may be
called rules of conscience, as by them different classes of relative duties are
pointed out and enjoined; yet they are only subordinate rules, and in fact are
no rules at all, if we understand by a rule, a regulation possessing intrinsic
authority. Whatever power our superiors may have to enforce obedience.
conscience duly enlightened does not recognise their authority, unless it per
ceive an agreement between their commands and the law of God. In truth,
the commands of our superiors stand in the same relation to conscience, in
* Isa. viii. 20.

CONSCIENCE. 267
which the sentences of inferior magistrates stand to the subjects of a state. The
latter have no authority in themselves, and all their authority is derived from
the law of the land ; insomuch that, if they are not conformable to it, they
may be treated with contempt, and the magistrate would be punished if he
should proceed to enforce them. The power of our superiors over us is found
ed in the law of God, made known by the light of nature or by revelation;
their commands are binding only when that law gives them its sanction ; and
even our own engagements are not obligatory unless they accord with it, for
a promise, a covenant, an oath, a vow to do what is sinful, is in itself null and
void, and guilt will be incurred, not by violating but performing it. It follows
that the moral obligation of our own engagements, and the moral obligation of
the commands of our superiors, are resolvable into the will of God. Here,
as in the former cases, our reasoning ends ; and therefore, in strict language,
his will is the only rule. There is danger in assigning this office to the com
mands of men, however much we may qualify it. The ignorant and the care
less may be led to ascribe more to human authority than its due ; and if they
should not go so far as to maintain, with the infidel philosopher,* that virtue
and vice are created by the will of the civil magistrate, may however imagine
that rulers in church and state have the power of dictating to conscience, of
subjecting our civil and religious liberty to restraints to which it would be sin
ful to refuse to submit, and of making things indifferent, to be duties as sacred
as the most express injunctions of the divine law. The apostle Paul, when
giving direction to Christians with respect to their civil duties, calls upon them
to be subject to their rulers, "not only for wrath, but also for conscience sake."
But does he mean to insinuate that any new obligation upon conscience arises
from their commands ? No ; his own reasoning shows that the obligation re
sults entirely from the authority of God. " Wherefore ye must needs be sub
ject," that is, as stated in the preceding verse, because " he is the minister of
God ;" and he thus expresses himself in the beginning of the chapter. " Let
every soul be subject unto the higher powers, for there is no power but of God ;
the powers that be are ordained of God."* Magistrates, being armed with the
power of the state, may compel their subjects either to do what they please,
or to suffer ; but their moral power is derived from, and limited by the law of
God; and it is only when they are considered as acting by his authority, that
conscience calls upon us to obey them.
It appears, then, that the rule of conscience is the will of God, or his com
mand which prescribes our duty. This will is the rule of obedience to all in
telligent creatures ; it is the rule to angels, as we learn from these words of
the Psalmist, " Bless the Lord, ye his angels, that excel in strength, that do
his commandments, hearkening unto the voice of his word."* It was the rule
to our Saviour when he sojourned among men. " My meat," he said, " is to
do the will of him that sent me, and to finish his work."§ To the rule which
directs angels, and directed our Redeemer, it is right that we should conform.
This will of God is wise and just, and there would be impiety in supposing
that there could be any obliquity or irregularity in the conduct which it pre
scribes. As it is wise and righteous, so it is good and beneficent, always aim
ing at our welfare, as well as the glory of our Maker ; for the tendency of all
the commands which it issues is to promote the order and happiness of the
universe. It is the will of the Creator, to which creatures should bow with
profound reverence. It is the will of a Master, whom his servants ought to
obey. It is the will of a Father, which his children should regard not only
with respect, but with gratitude.
The will of God is known by the light of nature. Some notions of morality
* Hobbes. t Rom. xiii. 1. 4, 5. t Ps. ciii. 20. $ John iv. 34.

268 CONSCIENCE.
are found among those who do not enjoy the advantages of revelation ; and
these are accompanied with a sense of obligation ; that is, there is a conviction
in the minds of men that they ought to do some things, and ought not to do
other things. There remain treatises on morals drawn up by the Greeks and
Romans, in perusing which, while we observe many defects, we cannot but
admire the progress which they had made in the investigation of the various
classes of relative duties. It is evident too, that conscience performed its
office among them, not only from particular instances of its power in disquiet
ing and alarming certain distinguished transgressors, but from express refer
ences to it, and their recorded declarations, that some actions were pleasing,
and others were offensive to the gods. Mens sibi conscia recti, was a good
conscience, and convictus conscientia, was a man condemned by his own
mind. This is expressed by the apostle Paul in the following words : " For
when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained
in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves ; which show
the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing wit
ness, and their thoughts the meanwhile accusing or else excusing one an
other."* To Christians the rule of conscience is the word of God, in which his will
is fully and clearly expressed. It is " profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for
correction, for instruction in righteousness," and is able to make us " perfect,
and thoroughly to furnish us for every good work."* To those who enjoy it,
reason is only necessary to enable them to understand the propositions con
tained in it, to collect together the precepts which are scattered here and there,
and to apply them to the various cases which occur in the progress of life.
Sometimes the Scriptures enter into detail ; but had they attempted to point
out all the minutiae of duty, they would have swelled to such a size as would
have defeated their design, because few Could have found leisure to peruse them,
and still fewer would have been accurately acquainted with their multifarious
contents. In studying them, therefore, with a view to the direction of con
science, it is necessary to attend to such particulars as the following. They
sometimes content themselves with laying down principles, and leave it to us
to deduce the consequences. They forbid the species, in forbidding the genus
under which it is included. Thus, when they condemn injustice in general,
they condemn its endless modifications. At other times, by condemning one
species, they condemn all the other species which are comprehended under
the same genus. The prohibition of adultery in the seventh commandment,
extends to every kind of uncleanness. When an external action is commanded
or forbidden, the law is applicable to the disposition or principle from which
it proceeds. When alms are enjoined, charity or love to our neighbour is
required ; and hatred is prohibited when it is said, " Thou shalt not kill."
When a duty is prescribed, the means of performing it are also prescribed ;
and when a sin is forbidden, every thing leading to that sin is also forbidden.
In a word, when the Scriptures condemn a particular vice, they recommend
the opposite virtue ; and vice versa, when they recommend a particular virtue,
they condemn the opposite vice. Thus, there is no sin which the word of
God does not condemn, and no duty which it does not enjoin, in one or other
of these ways. There are, indeed, few sins or duties which it does not
specify with more or less particularity, by express precepts, by threatenings,
by promises, by exhortations, by commendations, or by examples. It is there
fore a perfect rule. There are no deficiencies which the doctrines and com
mandments of men might supply. " The law of the Lord is perfect, converting
the soul : the testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple : the
* Rom. ii. 14, 15. t 2 Tim. iii. 16, 17.

CONSCIENCE. 269
statutes of the Lord are right, rejoicing the heart : the commandment of the
Lord is pure, enlightening the eyes : the fear of the Lord is clean, enduring
for ever : the judgments of the Lord are true, and righteous altogether. More
to be desired are they than gold, yea, than much fine gold; sweeter also than
honey, and the honey-comb. Moreover, by them is thy servant warned : and
in keeping of them there is great reward."*
After this account of the Scriptures, the general truth of which has not been
disputed among Protestants, you will be surprised to be told that they are not
an adequate rule of conscience. So bishop Sanderson asserts, in his celebrated
treatise De Obligatione Conscientim ; and I know not how many others. The
word, adequate, signifies in English, and in Latin from which it is derived,
equal; proportioned, and conveys the idea of something fully adapted to its end.
It therefore sounds strangely in our ears to affirm, that the Scriptures are not
an adequate rule, and we are curious to learn the reasons. The first is, that
an adequate rule supersedes the necessity of any other ; but there is another
rule, namely, the light of nature, which is a law to the heathens. According
to this wonderful reasoning, no system of rules, however perfect, can be ade
quate to direct us in practising an art, if there shovfld happen to be another
system, although greatly inferior to it. Perhaps this writer affixed a new and
unusual meaning to the term, or rather, he seems to have confounded two
words which are totally distinct — only and adequate. It is not true that the
Scriptures are the only rule of conscience, because those " who have not the
written law, are a law to themselves ;" but it is true that they are an adequate
rule, because they contain a perfect revelation of the will of God respecting our
duty. Another reason is taken from the design of the Scriptures, which is to
make us wise unto salvation ; to direct us to spiritual ends ; to excite us to per
form those things which nature dictates, from the higher principles of love to
God, and faith in Christ ; whereas the office of conscience, it is said, is to con
sider actions, not as spiritual, but as moral ; and to inquire, not whether they
are performed from charity, and to a spiritual end, but whether they are good
or evil, lawful or unlawful. From the latter part of this argument, it would
appear that conscience has to do with our actions, but not with our motives,
than which nothing is more manifestly false ; and the former part of it, although
brought forward with an opposite design, actually proves that the Scriptures
are an adequate rule, because they carry morality to the greatest possible per
fection. It is unnecessary to attend to his other reasons, as you are, I pre
sume, satisfied with the specimen which you have heard. It will naturally
occur to you, that there must have been some cause which led a man esteemed
wise and learned, to argue so inconclusively ; and he has not been at pains to
conceal it. If the Scriptures are the adequate rule of conscience, it will fol
low, that nothing is binding upon conscience which is not expressly or virtually
enjoined in them. But this limitation would not have answered the purposes
of his Church, which claims authority to decree rites and ceremonies in reli
gion. If the Scriptures are an adequate, and consequently the only rule of
conscience to those who enjoy them, these decrees will not be binding; but,
if you can contrive to show that the Scriptures are sufficient only for certain
ends, and that there are other things for which a different rule is wanted, you
may succeed in subjecting Christians to the doctrines and commandments of
men. Thus even great men, under the influence of prejudice and self-interest,
do not regulate their opinions by the Scriptures, but pervert and misrepresent
them to favour their opinions. And thus, even among Protestants there re
mains not a little of the spirit of Popery ; for the steps which make way for the
admission of the authority of the Church to enjoin any thing as necessary in
* Ps. xix. 7—11.
z2

270 CONSCIENCE.
religion, which God has not commanded, led by degrees to the establishment
of the antichristian system, under which the traditions of the fathers, the de
crees of councils, and the bulls of the Popes, were exalted to a level with the
commands of Christ and his apostles.
The word of God is a rule, and, to speak properly, the only rule of con
science to Christians ; other rules, which are obligatory, deriving all their au
thority from it. To this rule we are bound to yield unhesitating obedience ;
and when we comply with its duties, we do what is acceptable to God. But
here a question arises, Whether the commands of conscience are binding, not
only when it is enlightened by the Scriptures, but when it errs, and calls good
evil, and evil good? This point requires to be treated with great caution;
but, however strange it may at first appear, we do not see how we can come
to any other conclusion but this, that men ought to act according to its dic
tates at all times, when there is no doubt or suspense in their minds ; if the
case is not clear, it is evident that they should wait till, by the due use of
means, they have ascertained what is their duty. If conscience should pro
nounce any thing to be a sin which is not a sin, they ought to abstain, because
they do not know the judgment to be erroneous, and would not be guiltless if
they should act in opposition to it. The reason is, that supposing, as they do,
the voice of conscience to be the voice of God, they could not transgress its
orders, without expressly rebelling against what appeared to them to be the
authority of God. " I know and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there
is nothing unclean of itself; but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean,
to him it is unclean."* The apostle is speaking of an action which was not
sinful in itself, and yet he declares that it was sinful to the man whose con
science pronounced it to be such. The judgment of conscience does not change
the nature of actions, but it changes them to us ; because the authority of God
seems to us to be interposed either to command or to forbid. In the case to
which Paul referred, the sin did not consist properly in the action itself, but in
doing it in the persuasion that it was sinful. The judgment of conscience
may be false, but we think it true ; and in disregarding it, we disregard the
Lord of conscience.
The observation, that the judgment of conscience does not change the nature
of actions, paves the way for the resolution of the question, whether the gene
ral obligation to obey the dictates of conscience, will exculpate us, when the
action which conscience enjoins is in itself unlawful. Conscience, let it be
remembered, is only a subordinate rule, to which we are properly under a
moral obligation to yield obedience, only when it is conformable to the supreme
rule ; and the obligation of which we speak, results solely from the supposi
tion of its conformity. It is not, as has been said, regula regulans, but re-
gula regulata. An appeal may be always made from its decisions to the
word of God ; and as soon as a difference is discovered between its dictates
and those of Scripture, the sentence which it has pronounced is made void.
Hence it is plain, that the plea of conscience will not avail to exempt us from
guilt and punishment. And this, we may observe, is the unhappy situation
of those whose consciences are not duly enlightened, that they sin whatever
they do, in disregarding the voice of conscience and in obeying it; a consider
ation which should excite every man to use the greatest diligence to ascertain
what is his duty, and to pray for the Divine Spirit, who is promised to lead
us into all truth. If I have made use of the word, obligation, in the present
case, from the remarks connected with it there is no danger of mistaking its
import. It does not, and cannot mean, that an erring conscience will justify
us in doing what is morally wrong. The law of God is immutable. Our views
* Rom. xiv. 14.

CONSCIENCE. 271
of it may be incorrect ; but no man would suppose, in any similar case, that
misapprehension of the law could exempt a transgressor from the penalty.
Paul, before his conversion, " verily thought that he ought lo do many thino-s
contrary to the name of Jesus," being persuaded that Jesus was an impostor,
and his disciples were apostates from the true religion. What he did, he did
from conscience; yet he declares that he was a "blasphemer, a persecutor,
and an injurious person," who needed forgiveness, and was pardoned only
through the mercy of God.*
There are persons to whom what has now been said would appear highly
objectionable. What, they would ask, should a man act according to the dic
tates of an erring conscience ? No ; he ought to disobey it, and to regulate
his conduct by the law of God. There are, however, some sayings which
have an imposing sound, but when they come to be examined, are found to
have little or no meaning, and this, I apprehend, is one of them. Those who
have it most frequently in their mouths, it is to be presumed have never con
sidered it. If they have any meaning, which is questionable, it must be this,
that, if a man knows that his conscience is in an error, he ought not to obey
it. But here they have no antagonists, and the case supposed is impossible,
because, as soon as the error is discovered, it is corrected. To suppose a
man's conscience to prescribe to him any action, after he knows it to be wrong,
is absurd. What else do they mean ? Is it that a man ought not to obey his
conscience, although he believes its dictates to be right? What is this, but
entirely to subvert its authority ? No ; they will reply, we only assert that it
should not be obeyed when it is contrary to the law of God. But, in the
mean time, we are persuaded that it is agreeable to the law, andN yet we are
told that we should pay no respect to its commands. We entertain no doubt,
and yet should refrain from acting. We believe that God is speaking to us,
but should sit still and fold our hands, because, in reality, he is not speaking,
and we have mistaken another voice for his. But, if this reasoning, which is
in reality devoid of meaning, be admitted, I am at a loss to conceive in what
case we should obey conscience ; for we never can be more sure of our duty
than we at present are, although we maybe sure on better grounds. The con
viction, however, is the same, and must therefore either bind, or leave us at
liberty in both cases.
Upon the whole, it appears that " God alone is Lord of the conscience, and
hath left it free from the doctrines and commandments of men which are in
every thing contrary to his word, or beside it, in matters of faith and worship."*
Such is the doctrine of our Confession of Faith, and of sound reason ; for no
thing can be sin or duty, with which alone conscience is concerned, but what
is such in virtue of the law of the moral Governor of the universe. It may be
questioned, whether the Confession is consistent with itself, when it ascribes to
the civil magistrate a power " to call to account, and proceed against those
who publish opinions contrary to the known principles of Christianity,"§ and
" to take order that all blasphemies and heresies be suppressed, all corruptions
»and abuses in worship and discipline prevented or reformed, and all the ordi
nances of God be duly settled, administered, and observed."|| These pass
ages would require an ample commentary ; but, in the close of this lecture, I
have only time to remark, that a power is given to the magistrate to restrain
and puiush not only crimes against the peace of society, but opinions contrary
to the truth, that is, to what he conceives to be the truth. What then can be
plainer, than that he is constituted Lord of the consciences of his subjects? It
belongs to him to tell them what they should believe and profess. If it be said
* Acts xxvi. 9. t Tim. i. 13. } Conf. chap. xx. $ 2.
v Conf. chap. xx. 6. 4. || Ib. chap, xxiii. §. 3.

272 CONSCIENCE.
that he is to exercise this power according to the word of God, I answer, that
it is according to the word interpreted by himself and his advisers ; and con
sequently, their dogmas are the rule of our faith. If it be said again, that he
does not interfere with conscience itself, but with our profession and practice,
I answer, in the first place, that he cannot interfere directly with conscience
itself, which, being an internal principle, is beyond his reach, and we owe him
no thanks for not doing what is impossible ; and, in the second place, that, to
interfere with our profession is to interfere with conscience, because conscience
calls us to avow what we believe to be true, and to act conformably to it ; and
this he will not allow. Such is a specimen of the shuffling methods .by which
it'has been attempted to defend the Confession of Faith against the charge of
contradicting itself, and taking away with the one hand what it has given with
the other. I must add, however, that while the Church of Scotland holds the
Confession, without explanation, the Church to which we belong has cleared
herself from this inconsistency, by expunging from her creed every expression
which imports the power of using compulsory measures in religion. We can
honestly maintain, that God alone is Lord of the conscience, while we hold
that our faith, and worship, and obedience, are to be regulated, not by the de
crees of councils, and the edicts of magistrates, but by the supreme and infal
lible standard of Scripture.

LECTURE LXXVIII.
ON CONSCIENCE; PEACE OF CONSCIENCE; AND SPIRITUAL JOY.
Different States in which Conscience may Exist — Peace of Conscience, distinguished from
mere Security, founded on Justification, and proportioned to the growth of Sanctification
-^-Spiritual Joy: its sources; means of securing it.
My remarks upon conscience have extended farther than I expected, and I
am therefore under the necessity of resuming the subject in this lecture, as
there are several things not yet noticed, which are worthy of attention. Con
science is essentially the same in all men ; but, like our other faculties, it exists
in different states, and under a variety of modifications. I shall proceed to
point out the distinctions which are commonly mentioned.
First, Conscience is distinguished into antecedent and consequent. Ante
cedent conscience is this faculty exercising its office in reference to actions to
be performed, and pronouncing them to be lawful or unlawful. In this view,
it is called a light within us, a law engraven on the heart, an impression made
by the hand of God. Consequent conscience is the faculty exercising its office
in reference to actions when they are past. It then pronounces them to be
good or bad, worthy of praise or of blame, of reward or of punishment. In
this view it is called an accuser, a witness, a judge. The design of the two
epithets is to specify the two provinces assigned to conscience in the soul of
man ; namely, to warn him against sin, and excite him to his duty ; and to
approve of him or condemn him, according as he has regarded or disregarded
its voice.
Secondly, Conscience is distinguished into enlightened or right, and erring.
A right or enlightened conscience is properly instructed in the nature and ex
tent of our duty, and its judgments are conformable to truth. I need hardly

CONSCIENCE. 273
remark, that the source of the light which shines in it, is the Word of God.
An erring conscience is mistaken in its judgments, and calls good evil and evil
good. We have an example of an erring conscience in Paul before his con
version, who, "verily thought," or whose conscience dictated to him, that he
should oppose the religion and persecute the disciples of Jesus of Nazareth ;
and an example also in all the unbelieving Jews, who had " a zeal for God, but
not according to knowledge."* The errors of conscience arise from ignorance
of Scripture, from misapprehension of its meaning, from the adoption of
human opinions as the standard of conduct, and from the influence of the ap
petites and passions, by which the understanding is blinded and perverted.
To this subject the following words of our Saviour refer : "If the light which
is in thee be darkness, how great is that darkness !"* The light which is in
us, is conscience ; and if it be darkened by error, our condition is truly pitiable,
as we shall then wander into devious paths, and at the same time proceed with
the greatest confidence, being fully persuaded that it is directing us aright.
In the third place, Conscience is distinguished into firm or assured, and
doubting. By the former, we understand a conscience which has a clear per
ception of duty, and is embarrassed with no difficulties respecting the decision
to which it ought to come. We have seen, indeed, that an erring conscience
may be fully assured, and it often happens that men are never more confident
than when they are egregiously wrong ; but we are speaking at present of a
conscience which proceeds upon the footing of clear, unquestionable evidence.
There is no room for doubt, whether we should sanctify the Sabbath, obey our
parents, pay our just debts, and relieve the necessities of the poor. But occa
sions occur when the mind has nothing to guide its decisions but conjectures.
and probabilities ; occasions, when the equality of the reasons on both sides of
a question leaves it in a state of suspense ; occasions, when the arguments on
one side preponderate, but some little difficulty, to which greater importance is
attached than it deserves, hinders the mind from coming to a satisfactory con
clusion. In all these cases, conscience is subject to doubt, more or less strong,
according to the degree of the evidence for and against. And here I may take
notice of what is called a scrupulous conscience, or a conscience which is in
constant perplexity, making objections to every thing, startling at shadows,
suspecting evil in what is perfectly innocent, and never able to decide whether
what it does is lawful or unlawful. It arises from weakness of intellect, from
melancholy of temperament, from gloomy ideas of religion, from the spirit of
superstition, from the prejudices of education which have established an arbi
trary standard of morality, and from associating with the timid and narrow-
minded. It is a cause of torment to the person himself, and a plague to those
around him, who are perpetually in danger of offending him, and upon whose
liberty he is incessantly endeavouring to encroach.
In the fourth place, Conscience may be distinguished into timid and delicate.
These terms are sometimes confounded, but they convey different ideas. A
timid conscience is easily alarmed, acts with hesitation, and is full of suspi
cions that there is something wrong in our actions. It must therefore dis
quiet the bosom in which it resides. A delicate, or tender conscience, is not
a troublesome inmate, but a vigilant guide amidst the snares and dangers of
life. It is feelingly alive to the calls of duty, and recoils even from the ap
pearance of evil. It shrinks with instinctive sensibility from the touch of pol
lution. It is like a polished surface, on which the slightest breath is seen ; it
is like the eye, which is hurt by a mote, and makes an instantaneous effort to
eject it. Tenderness of conscience does not resemble the soreness of a dis
eased part, but the nice discrimination of those organs which are most amply
* Acts xxvi. 9. Rom. x. 2. t Matt vi. 23.
Vol. IL— 35

274 CONSCIENCE.
furnished with nerves. It is easily distinguishable from a scrupulous con
science ; for they are real sins by which the former is offended, whereas those
which the latter dreads are imaginary. This often strains at a gnat, and swal
lows a camel; but a tender conscience holds sin in abhorrence, when it pre
sents itself in its most specious forms. Such was the conscience ofthe Psalm
ist, when he hated every false and wicked way, and esteemed God's precepts
concerning all things to be right.*
In the fifth place, Conscience may be distinguished into awakened and har
dened. When we speak of an awakened conscience, the epithet supposes it
to have been previously asleep, and such is its state in a great part of mankind.
I do not mean that its powers are absolutely dormant, for there are few who
are not occasionally at least admonished and reproved by it ; but that in gene
ral it does not perform its office with firmness and fidelity, but leaves the sin
ner in a great measure ignorant of his own character. It is said to be awaken
ed, when it is roused, by the word of God or the dispensations of Providence,
to the faithful performance of its duty ; when it not only remonstrates against
our present sins, but recals the past to remembrance ; when it accuses and con
demns the guilty man, and anticipates the ratification of its sentences at the tri
bunal of God. A hardened conscience is without feeling. It has lost its power
through a long course of transgression, so that it opposes no obstacle to the
sinner, gives no warning, denounces no threatening, but permits him to do as
he pleases. The mind is so blinded, that it does not perceive the difference
between good and evil, or the heart is so callous, that the perception makes no
impression upon it. In this state conscience is sometimes said to be cau
terized, from the Greek word x*wntpia£ai, which signifies, to brand or burn with
a hot iron. It is used in the First Epistle to Timothy, and is translated
"seared with a hot iron,"* the metaphor being founded upon the effect of hot
iron, in rendering the part of the body insensible to which it has been applied.
Some, however, understand it to mean that the consciences of the persons
spoken of are spotted or marked with sin, as if they had been branded. Be
this as it may, the idea commonly suggested by a seared conscience is, that it
has lost all feeling.
In the last place, not to multiply particulars, Conscience may be distin
guished into good and bad. The first has been defined to be a conscience, the
judgments of which are conformable to the standard of duty, and which
approves of our conduct. The epithet, however, is sometimes used, not to
express the conformity of its judgments to the standard, but simply its approba
tion. In this sense, although a man should be in an error, he has a good
conscience when he has acted according to his ideas of duty. It is probable
that Paul affixed this meaning to the term, when he said to the Jewish Council,
" Men and brethren, I have lived in all good conscience before God until this
day,"* for his words seem to refer to his whole past life; and in that part of
it which preceded his conversion, he could be said to have had a good con
science, only because he was then sincere, and faithfully obeyed its dictates,
however erroneous. By a bad conscience is sometimes meant a conscience
which judges falsely, pronouncing sin to be duty and duty to be sin, and
which consequently absolves when it should condemn, and condemns when
it should absolve. But at present a bad conscience signifies an accusing con
science, and it is called bad, not because its judgments are erroneous, but be
cause it torments the sinner, and inflicts upon him the agonies of remorse.
Such a conscience disquiets a man in the midst of profound external peace ;
it makes him tremble when there is no visible danger; it covers him with
shame by his own reflections, although to all around him his guilt is unknown.
* Ps. cxix. 128. t 1 Tim. iv. 2. X Acts xxiii. I.

PEACE OF CONSCIENCE. 275
A look, which perhaps means nothing, but which he interprets as significant,
quells his confidence ; he is discomposed by an accidental word, which seems
to glance at his secret crimes. Conscience has made, many cowards.
I now proceed to speak of peace of conscience. I begin with observing,
that there is a state of mind which resembles it, but ought not to be confounded
with it, because it is totally different in its nature and its consequences. I
mean a state of security, which excludes fear and disquietude, and may there
fore be called peace, but differs from the peace which I am about to con
sider, as it rests upon jno solid foundation, and is the effect, not of religion,
but of confirmed habits of sin, and misconceptions of the character of God.
. In some cases it is the effect of atheistical principles, or of principles which
are equivalent to atheism. If a man has persuaded himself that there is no
God, or that the Being whom we call God pays no regard to the actions of
his creatures ; that the soul is mortal as well as the body ; and that there is no
state of retribution beyond the grave ; it is easy to see that this man will be
exempt from the apprehensions which agitate other men, and will enjoy a
kind of peace very different from the peace of religion.
Another cause of security is the power of sin, by which the voice of con
science has been silenced, and the mind fixed solely upon the business and
the pleasures of the world, so that other subjects engage no share of its atten
tion. The law of God and the future state, death and judgment, are entirely
forgotten; or, if they should accidentally occur' to the mind, they produce no
effect, or an effect so slight, that it is instantly obliterated.
Sometimes security is the consequence of false ideas of the mercy of God;
of a persuasion that he is so merciful, that he will not animadvert upon the
failings of his creatures, and that, if they only pray to him now and then to
forgive them, they shall undoubtedly be pardoned.
At other times, security arises from a false estimate of their own character ;
and this may take place in two different ways. Men may imagine that they
have fulfilled the demands of the law perfectly, or at least to such an extent as
is necessary to their acceptance with God. Many a self-righteous man has
lived and died without fear, in the flattering thought that he had made peace
with his Maker by his obedience. Of this description was the Pharisee in
the parable, who "thanked God that he was not like other men." Again,
men who profess to believe that we cannot be justified by works, may be
secure, through the groundless persuasion that they are possessed of the faith
by which an interest is obtained in the righteousness and salvation of Christ.
They have faith, but it is dead while they suppose it to be living. Hence,
they conclude that they are in favour with God, and have nothing to fear from
the dreadful threatenings denounced against sinners.
From these causes, a great part of mankind pass their time in complete
apathy, or experience only occasional misgivings of mind.
Is there no such thing as true peace of conscience ? Yes ; it is a precious
blessing which God bestows upon his people, and which flows from the pri
vileges formerly considered. There is a peace which Jesus Christ has be
queathed as an invaluable legacy to his disciples ; there is a peace with which
the God of peace " fills them in believing ;"* there is a peace which " passes
all understanding, and "keeps their minds and hearts through Jesus Christ;"*
there is a peace which the world can neither give nor take away. It consists
in an assurance that God is no longer angry with them ; that he will not reckon
with them for their sins ; that he has freely pardoned them ; that he has re
ceived them into favour ; that he will protect and bless them, and give them
* Rom. xv. 13. t Phil. iv. 7.

276 PEACE OF CONSCIENCE.
eternal rest in the world to come. None can estimate the value of this blessing
but those who enjoy it. It is a continual feast; it is the joy and sunshine of
the soul. Although we could claim the whole world as our heritage ; although
its crowns of glory were ours, and its delights crowded around to minister to
our wishes, without this peace we should be miserable ; but it is the solace of
the soul, amidst the external evils which are so much dreaded, poverty, afflic
tion, persecution, and contempt. To him who enjoys this privilege, we may
justly apply the vain boast of the poet concerning his just man, that the rage
of the multitude, the threatenings of tyrants, the commotions of the elements,
the fall of the world itself, could not dismay him. Impavidum ferient ruinx.*
With an approving conscience, and God as his friend, what has he to fear ?
Peace of conscience is founded upon peace with God. Now, peace with
God is inseparably connected with the blessings of justification and adoption,
which, in one point of view, may be considered as the same privilege under
different aspects. As we are naturally enemies to God, so he is an enemy to
us, for "he is angry with the wicked every day." A reconciliation, therefore,
is necessary, and it has been effected by the atonement of Christ. When the
pardon of sin, and restoration to the Divine favour, which are offered in the
Gospel, are humbly and thankfully received by the sinner; when he draws
near to God through Jesus Christ, confessing his guilt and unworthiness, and
imploring his mercy ; the reconciliation of which the foundation was laid by
the blood of the cross, is completed. God enters into covenant with the sin
ner, and assures him that " he will be no more wroth with him, nor rebuke
him." When this important fact is known to the believer, peace of mind ensues.
Who shall lay any thing to his charge ? Justice is appeased ; the demands of
the law are satisfied; God has forgiven him, and conscience has therefore no
accusation to bring. The memory of his past sins is not obliterated, and
when he thinks of them, he is overwhelmed with shame and sorrow ; but the
reflection does not alarm him. He has nothing to fear. Conscience summoned
him to the tribunal of the Sovereign Judge ; but there he was acquitted, and it
is henceforth silent. The believer obtains this peace by the contemplation of
the mercy of God, of the all-sufficient merit and prevalent intercession of
Christ, and of the promises confirmed with an oath ; in all which, he sees an
inviolable security that he shall not " come into condemnation." He obtains it
by the assistance of the Spirit, " bearing witness with his spirit that he is a son
of God," forming in him the characters by which the members of the heavenly
family are distinguished.
This leads me to remark, that peace of conscience is also connected with
the privilege of sanctification. Although God has fully pardoned believers,
and will never cast them off, yet he sometimes suspends the sense of his favour,
for the chastisement of their sins. In such cases they are disquieted and dis
tressed, as we learn from the history of the saints, David, and Asaph, and He-
man, who says, " While I suffer thy terrors, I am distracted."* Their guilt,
which was cancelled, presents itself again ; and, having lost for a time an as
surance of the love of God, they experience their former fears. Hence, it
appears that their peace will bear a proportion to their diligence and success in
the cultivation of holiness. I do not mean that any of their good works are so
perfect that conscience will find nothing to accuse ; but that the more believers
abound in them, the evidence will be clearer of the sincerity of their faith, and
God will testify his approbation of them by manifestations of his love. This
is obviously imported in the following exhortation : " Be perfect, be of good
comfort, be of one mind, live in peace ; and the God of love and peace shall be
* Horat. Cann. iii. 3. t Ps. lxxxviii. 15.

SPIRITUAL JOY. 277
with you."* The apostle John teaches the same doctrine in several passages
of his first Epistle, and particularly in the following words : "My little chil
dren, let us not love in word, neither in tongue, but in deed and in truth.
And hereby we know that we are of the truth, and shall assure our hearts be
fore him. For if our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart, and
knoweth all things. Beloved, if our heart condemn us not," — that is, if it
bear testimony to the sincerity of our love and obedience, — " then have we
confidence toward God."* Paul points out the connexion between holiness
and peace of mind, when he says, "Our rejoicing is this, the testimony of our
conscience, that in simplicity and godly sincerity, not with fleshly wisdom, but
by the grace of God, we have had our conversation in the world.":):
Peace of conscience flows from peace with God. It is maintained by faith
in Christ, whose blood will cleanse us from our daily sins, and by a careful
study to please God in doing his will. " Great peace have they that love thy
law, and nothing shall offend them."§ This is the reward which God bestows
at present upon the righteous. They find that there is profit in serving him.
The heavenly calm within is a more precious recompense than outward pros
perity, which smiles deceitfully, and is often followed by a storm. " The
work of righteousness shall be peace ; and the effect of righteousness, quiet
ness and assurance for ever."||
From what has been now said, it appears that religion is not that gloomy
anxious service which it is frequently conceived to be. If it imposes restraints
and demands sacrifices, it compensates these by the happy state of mind which
it excites. In order more fully to illustrate this point, I proceed to speak of
spiritual joy, which is another native consequence of the privileges which have
been considered. The Scriptures make frequent mention of it ; and it is re
presented as distinct from peace, although closely connected with it. "Being
justified by faith, we have peace with God, through our Lord Jesus Christ.
And not only so, but we also joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by
whom we have received the atonement," or reconciliation.**
Joy is that delighted, elevated state of mind, which arises from the posses
sion of present, and the anticipation of future good. Both these causes con
tribute to the joy of Christians.
First, They have an interest in Christ, to whom they are united by faith,
as the branches are united to the vine, and the members of the body to the
head. He is the source of their privileges and hopes, and hence they are
sometimes represented as rejoicing in him alone. " Whom having not seen,
ye love, and in whom, though now ye see him not, yet believing, ye rejoice
with joy unspeakable and full of glory."tt The state into which they have
been admitted by divine grace, is safe and honourable, for they are justified by
the sentence of the Supreme Judge, and sanctified by the Spirit of holiness ;
but they are men compassed with infirmities, carrying about with them the
remains of depravity, often falling into sin, and chargeable with defects in all
their duties. It seems impossible, therefore, that their minds should be tran
quil and cheerful, because conscience, which in them is faithful and tender,
must cause disquiet by its accusations and remonstrances. And certainly their
peace would be liable to perpetual disturbance, and their joy would soon give
place to sorrow, if its continuance depended upon themselves. It is their con
nexion with Jesus Christ, which realizes what might otherwise be pronounced
to be impracticable, and accounts for what at first view appears utter y in
credible, — that they who are daily offending may yet daily rejoice. The view
* 2 Cor. xiii. 11. t 1 John iii. 18—21. X 2 Cor. i. 12. § Ps. cxix. 165.
|| Is. xxxii. 17. ** Rom. v. 11. tt 1 Pet i. 8.
2 A

278 SPIRITUAL JOY.
of his atonement, as we formerly remarked, brings relief to their minds, and
for the sake of their Redeemer, God continues to behold them with a pleasant
countenance. No interruption takes place of the friendly intercourse between
him and them ; and it is maintained with ineffable kindness on his part, and
with the highest delight upon theirs. When they sin, their Advocate appears
for them before the throne of heaven, and pleading his own merits in their be
half, preserves the reconciliation unbroken. Looking to themselves, they find
innumerable causes of fear and despondency ; but looking to him, they per
ceive solid grounds of confidence and joy. " If we walk in the light, as he is
in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ
his Son cleanseth us from all sin."*
Secondly, Another source ofthe joy of believers is the relation in which God
stands to them. Upon his favour the happiness of intelligent creatures obvi
ously depends God is the most glorious Being in the universe, in whom
every possible perfection resides, all that is great and fair is assembled. The
contemplation of his character, therefore, as exhibited in the Gospel, in which
condescension is associated with majesty, grace to the unworthy with unspot
ted purity and inflexible justice ; — the contemplation of a character so amiable
and so august, which displays the harmony of qualities which seemed to be for
ever opposed, looking with a benignant aspect upon man, is calculated to
awaken high emotions of admiration and delight. Accordingly, we find the
saints earnestly requesting a manifestation of it, in preference to all the splen
did shows and bewitching pleasures of the world. " One thing have I desired
of the Lord, that will I seek after, that I may dwell in the house of the Lord
all the days of my life, to behold the beauty of the Lord, and to inquire in his
temple."* How transporting the thought to believers, that this glorious Being
is their own by a peculiar and intimate relation; is not only the object of their
worship and love, but the inexhaustible and everlasting source of their felicity!
" The Lord is my portion, saith my soul, therefore will I hope in him."* There
they possess all that their hearts can desire, and more than tongue can express.
" They are satisfied as with marrow and fatness, and their mouths praise him
with joyful lips."§ There is no good thing which they may despair of obtain
ing; for the riches of his goodness are pledged to supply their wants, and the
fulness of heaven itself is but a part of what he is able to bestow. Are they in
solitude, forsaken by the world and by their friends ? God is always near, to
cheer their lonely hours with sweeter enjoyments than those of friendship and
love. Do the afflictions of the present life come upon them ? While they are
assured that these shall not separate them from his love, they can trace the foot
steps of their Father in the darkness and the tempest, and discern wisdom and
goodness in apparent disorder and severity ; they kiss the rod which is wielded
by his gracious hand, and welcome the stripes which promote the health of
their souls. As soon as a man can look upon the God of salvation as his own,
and this is the privilege of those who have been admitted into a state of grace —
the scenery around assumes a new aspect, and displays charms which never
before met the eye. He beholds every where objects of pleasing admiration,
and causes of heart-melting gratitude. Nature shines with the glory of its
Maker. Mercies acquire a sweeter relish; afflictions lose half their bitterness;
life rises in value, as the gift of love for purposes of infinite importance ; death
is divested of its terrors ; the present is the seed-time of grace, and the future
is the harvest of glory. In short, he enjoys God in every thing, and every
thing in God.
A third source of joy to believers, who have been reconciled to God by the
death of his Son, is the inhabitation of the Spirit of grace. I must not stop to
* 1 John i. 7. t Ps. xxvii. 4. X Lam. iii. 24 § Ps. lxiii. 5.

SPIRITUAL JOY. 279
prove that the Holy Ghost dwells in their souls, but shall assume a truth ac
knowledged by all who are worthy to be called Christians, and illustrated in
the preceding part of this Course, when we were treating of regeneration and
sanctification. It is of importance to consider the character in which he is pre
sent with believers, or the office which he is appointed to perform. As a Divine
Person, he inhabits the temple of the universe, and heaven and earth are sus
tained, and beautified, and enlivened by his influence ; but he selects the souls
of believers as the scene of his gracious operations. There he is present as the
Spirit of truth and consolation ; and it is his office to diffuse the cheering and
tranquillizing light of heaven; to shed a divine serenity over the thoughts and
feelings; to inspire and strengthen good principles; to elevate the affections
above secular objects ; to give a taste of the sweetness of spiritual things ; to
awaken hope, with all its blissful anticipations. To what can he be so fitly com- '
pared, as " to a well of living water, springing up to everlasting life?"* It is
our Saviour's own similitude, and is alike worthy of notice for its expressive
ness and its beauty. Like a fountain which is in perpetual motion, and pours
out its stream in summer and in winter, he exerts his gracious power in youth,
in manhood, and in old age, to promote the growth of grace, and to give them
a foretaste of celestial bliss. The joy of the Christian is therefore not only
pure, but permanent. No man can take it from him. He is satisfied from
himself; not from his own virtue and the resources of his own mind, as the
old philosophers were wont vainly and presumptuously to boast ; but from the
communications of this Divine inmate in his bosom, whose presence is life, and
whose favour is the sunshine of the soul. Omnia mea mecum porto, said one
of the self-sufficient wise men of antiquity ; but it was a poor stock, and he
must have starved upon it without the assistance of pride. The Christian who
has the Holy Ghost dwelling in his heart, can say with truth that he " carries
all his treasures with him ;" for whithersoever he goes, and in whatever situa
tion he is placed, his joy remains, and is full. " The kingdom of God is not
meat and drink, but righteousness and peace, and,joy in the Holy Ghost."*
In connexion with this particular, I may mention, in the fourth place, the
doctrines and promises of the word of God, as a source of spiritual joy; for
although the operations of the Spirit are distinct from these, they are always
carried on in concurrence with them. It is by his application of them to their
hearts that Christians are filled with joy and peace in believing. It is from the
word of God that they learn the nature and extent of the privileges which the
mediation of Christ has procured for them, and the securities that they shall
hold them in perpetual succession. Hence we can account for the high value
which they set upon it, the interest with which they peruse its contents, and
the inexpressible satisfaction which, according to their own testimony, it im
parts to their minds. " More to be desired are thy testimonies than gold, yea
than much fine gold ; sweeter also than honey, and the honey comb."^ Let
us attend to its influence in communicating joy to them in the season of afflic
tion. Pain is as uneasy to them as to other men ; they feel disappointments
as severely, and are equally apt to despond and to sink under the burden of
calamity. On such occasions the efficacy of the word of God is experienced.
It enables believers to adopt that consoling train of reasoning which Paul pur
sues, in the eighth chapter of the Epistle to the Romans, and to infer from the
death, resurrection, and intercession of Christ, not only their present justifica
tion before God, but their uninterrupted interest in his love. " Who shall
separate us from the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or distress, or famine, or
persecution, or nakedness, or peril, or sword ? Nay, in all these things we are
more than conquerors through him that loved us. For I am. persuaded that
» John iv. 14. t Rom. xiv. 17. X Ps. xix. 10.

280 SPIRITUAL JOY.
neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor thing*
present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall
be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our
Lord."* Thus the word of God illuminates the darkest events ; and faith, re
lying upon its assurances, keeps alive hope in circumstances which seem to
justify despair, and turns the complaints and waitings of nature into songs of
salvation. The people of God can rejoice in tribulation, because they know
that it is sent with a benevolent design, and that it will terminate in their pre
sent and eternal good. With the staff of the promises in their hands, they fear
no evil when they are pursuing their lonely journey in the valley and shadow
of death. Providence sometimes speaks the language of wrath ; but the word
always speaks the language of love. Providence is sometimes like the stormy
sky, in which neither sun nor star appears for many days ; but the word is like
the serene atmosphere of summer, illuminated by the solar rays, and showing
on all sides agreeable objects. Hence it has been " the song of the saints in
the house of their pilgrimage;" and we have their testimony, that "unless it
had quickened them, they should have perished in their affliction."
The last source of spiritual joy which I shall mention, is hope, the influence
of which we have all experienced. It exerts a sort of magic power, by which
distant objects are brought near, and the future is made present, and we enjoy
beforehand the good of which we cannot immediately obtain the actual posses-
• sion. He whose bosom is animated by hope, is transported from the scene
around him, to another fairer and more blissful ; and, tasting its delights by
anticipation, he is sometimes raised above the painful sense of his actual cir
cumstances. If such is ifs effect when it is only an illusion of fancy, and at
best its objects are confined to this diurnal sphere, what must be its power
when it brings to bear upon the heart the surpassing glories of the world to
come ! The hope of the Christian conducts him by its light beyond the bounda
ries of time, and fixes his views and desires upon the realities of eternity.
When his eye is steadily directed to heaven, and catches a glimpse of its scenes,
of the magnificence of which no terrestrial splendour can furnish even a faint
image, how light must the evils of life appear, and how diminutive its plea
sures ! We do not wonder to hear that believers rejoice, when it is added,
" that they rejoice in hope of the glory of God ;" a hope sufficient to warm the
coldest heart, and to elevate the most depressed. This hope is founded on the
righteousness of Christ, which was imputed to them when they believed. It
is cherished by the Spirit of adoption, sent forth into their hearts as the earnest
of the future inheritance ; and it is strengthened by their progress in holiness,
from which it appears that they are destined to possess that inheritance, and
are now in a train of preparation for it. And hence we see to what cause it
is owing that they are reconciled to a very hard lot in this world, and are con
tent and happy in circumstances which would overwhelm others with dejection.
Their minds are busy in making comparisons, not between their own condition
and that of others who are more prosperous, — for such comparisons are the
food and the fuel of discontent, — but between their present and their future
state, between what they now suffer and what they shall hereafter enjoy. Thus
the Christian is elevated in a great measure above the influence of temporal
things. They affect him but little when his faith and hope are strong. L
they are disagreeable, they are of short duration; and his prospects are so con
soling and Interesting, that he has neither leisure nor inclination to give himself
much concern about his temporary accommodation. He who is hastening to
take possession of a kingdom, will not be made unhappy by being uncomforta
bly lodged for a single night on the road. " I reckon that the sufferings of this
• Rom. viii. 35—39.

SPIRITUAL JOY. 281
present time are not worthy to.be compared with the glory which shall be re
vealed in us." *
Such are -the sources of the joy of believers in Christ. We see on what
grounds the Scripture pronounces them to be blessed, and can enter into the
spirit of the song of praise and thanksgiving which is sung by the church :
" In that day thou shalt say, O Lord, I will praise thee : though thou wast
angry with me, thine anger is turned away, and thou comfortedst me. Behold,
God is my salvation : I will trust and not be afraid ; for the Lord Jehovah is
my strength and ray song; he also is become my salvation. Therefore with
joy shall ye draw water out ofthe wells of salvation." *
Let not the doctrine concerning the joy which flows from faith be misunder
stood. It is not meant to assert, that those who have been justified, and adopted
into the family of God, always feel transports and ecstacies. No such thing is
implied, even in the exhortation to " rejoice evermore ;" J nor would a state of
perpetual rapture be consistent with their present condition, and their business
in this world. If, in some happy moments, they are elevated to the mount of
God, and, holding fellowship with him, lose the remembrance of sublunary
things, they must again descend into the plain, and walk with men in the ordi
nary duties of life. For these, I think, they would be disqualified, were their
minds powerfully affected at all times by bright visions of the glory of God and
of heaven, and by such an overpowering sense of his love as the saints have
sometimes experienced. The lively foretaste of future felicity is only occa
sional ; and, in the usual train of life, they can expect nothing more than that
tranquillity of mind, that placid frame, that calm cheerfulness and sober joy,
which flow from the faith and hope of the Gospel. These may be compared
to their daily food ; but the former are delicacies and cordials, by which their
exhausted strength is restored, and the injuries which sorrow has inflicted are
repaired. Still less should it be supposed, that Christians experience joy without in
terruption, because the sources of it are unfailing. Their state is always safe,
but their feelings are not always comfortable. It is certain, however, that, if
their joy suffers interruptions, and they live in fear, perplexity, and dejection,
the fault is their own. They must co-operate with God, both by avoiding
whatever would counteract his gracious designs, and by a diligent use of the
means appointed to give them effect.
They must live by faith, for their peace and joy will be in proportion to it.
A man would not be delighted by the most beautiful objects in nature which he
did not see, nor relieved from the apprehension of want by great riches which
he did not know himself to possess : " Faith is the substance of things hoped
for, the evidence of things not seen." When Paul triumphed in affliction, it was
through faith : "lam persuaded that nothing shall separate us from the love
of God." § When Asaph was dejected, unbelief was the cause : " I said, this
is mine infirmity." ||
They must beware of " forsaking the fountain of living waters, and hewing
out to themselves broken cisterns which can hold no water." In other words,
they must beware of setting their affections upon any other than God, and of
seeking happiness from any inferior source. It is their folly in doing so which
is the cause of all their disquietudes. If Ave hold up a dark body between us
and the sun, must we not be in the shade ? How can they rejoice who, with
their own hands, shut out joy from their souls ? If we wish God to remain
in his temple, and to fill it with his glory, we must not permit any rival to usurp
his place, nor erect an altar for unhallowed sacrifices. When sin in any form
is indulged, the most fatal consequences ensue ; as we learn from the earnest
* Rom. viii. 18. * Isa. xii. 1—3. $ 1 Thess. v. 16.
§ Rom. viii. 38. I Ps. lxxvii. 10.
Vol. IL— 36 2 a 1

282 PERSEVERANCE.
prayer of David, after God had been provoked to withdraw a sense of his love,
and was testifying his displeasure against him : " Make me to hear joy and
gladness, that the bones which thou hast broken may rejoice. Cast me not
away from thy presence, and take not thy Holy Spirit from me. Restore
unto me the joy of thy salvation, and uphold me with thy free Spirit." *
Once more, They must be diligent, zealous, and constant in obedience, for
thus the soul is maintained in a healthy vigorous state, and is capable of re
ceiving and relishing spiritual joy : whereas by remissness, it becomes relaxed
and languid. It is not to be expected that God will smile upon his disobedient
children ; but, to the dutiful, he will give unequivocal proofs of his approbation:
" Thou meetest him that rejoiceth and worketh righteousness, those that re
member thee in thy ways." | Christians have always found, that when they
walked with God in the exercise of faith, and the practical study of holiness,
they were visited with the light of his countenance ; but that darkness and dis
tress were the never-failing consequences of the omission and careless perform
ance of their duty.
Such are the methods by which Christians will secure to themselves the
happiness which God has provided for them : " If they do these things, they
shall never fall." J Life will flow on in the pure tranquil pleasures of religion;
and their death will come to fill up the measure of their bliss in the heavenly
world, where there shall be no more death, nor sorrow, nor crying, nor any
more pain, because the former things shall have passed away.

LECTURE LXXIX.
ON THE PERSEVERANCE OF THE SAINTS.
Different opinions respecting the Perseverance ofthe Saints. — Their total or final fall impossi
ble. — Their perseverance inferred from the Immutable Decree and the Covenant of God, the
Mediation of Christ, and the Indwelling and Offices of the Spirit. — Examination of the
Passages of Scripture alleged against this Doctrine.
We have seen, that sinners are brought into a state of favour with God
through faith in Jesus Christ ; and that the Holy Spirit is given to them, by
whom they are sanctified, that they may serve God in this world, and may be
qualified for being admitted into his immediate presence in the next. The hap
piness which they enjoy in consequence of these privileges is great. At peace
with their Maker, they have peace in their own minds, and look forward to the
future state with the anticipations of hope. There is only one thing wanting to
complete their happiness, so far as it can be perfect in the present life ; and
that is, the certain knowledge that their present state is stable and immutable,
and that those anticipations will be realized. If their interest in the salvation
of Christ is secured beyond the possibility of change, they may, with the
Apostle, triumphantly bid defiance to all the powers of earth and hell ; if, how
ever, they may fall from a state of grace, there is not only a call for vigilance,
but ground of anxiety, and their prospect will often be darkened by fearful
forebodings. The question, therefore, respecting the perseverance of the saints,
is not a mere speculation, but is intimately connected with their peace and con
solation ; and, according as it is decided, will have a powerful influence in
rendering their religion cheerful or gloomy.
* Ps. Ii. 8, 1 1, 12. * Is. Ixiv. 5. $3 Pet i. 10.

PERSEVERANCE. 283
Upon this subject, professed Christians are divided in sentiment, as indeed
they are upon almost every article of faith. The doctrine of our Church, in
which, I believe, all the Reformed Churches concurred, is expressed in the fol
lowing words. " They whom God hath accepted in his Beloved, effectually
called and sanctified by his Spirit, can neither totally nor finally fall away from
the state of grace ; but shall certainly persevere therein to the end, and be eter
nally saved." * The Church of England, which has a Calvinistic creed, al
though, as the great Lord Chatham said, her liturgy is Popish, and her clergy,
many of them at least, are Arminian, teaches us the same doctrine in the sev
enteenth article. " They which be endued with so excellent a benefit of God,"
namely election, " be called according to God's purpose, by his Spirit working
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."
It is well known to you all, I presume, that the followers of Arminius main
tain a very different doctrine, and that this is one of the articles by which their
creed is distinguished from that of the followers of Calvin. Their sentiments
are thus expressed by themselves. " True believers may apostatize from the
true faith, and fall into such sins as are inconsistent with true and justifying
faith ; nay, it is not only possible for them to do so, but it frequently comes to
pass. True believers may by their own fault become guilty of great and abomi
nable crimes, and may continue and die in the same,and consequently may finally
fall into perdition." t After this authoritative statement, it may be deemed super
fluous to subjoin the sentiments of an individual, but I shall quote the words
of Limborch, their celebrated Professor of Theology. " We maintain that,
notwithstanding divine grace, by which a believer may persevere in faith, therd
remains in man a power of falling away, and, therefore, that a believer may to
tally lose his faith and regeneration, and may continue in apostasy to the end
of his life, and so eternally perish." * The Remonstrants are supported inthig
article of their creed by Papists, for the Council of Trent has decreed that " if
any person shall say that a man who has been justified, cannot lose grace, and
that therefore he who falls and sins was never truly justified, he shall be ac
cursed." §
It is granted that believers, under the influence of temptation, may commit
great sins, which are highly offensive to men and provoking to God. We have
two remarkable examples in Scripture. The first is David, who seduced the
wife of his neighbour, and then devised the murder of her husband. The
atrocity of both actions is manifest ; but the latter implied deeper guilt on seve
ral accounts, and particularly because it was the result of deliberation and con
trivance ; and being posterior to the other, it showed that he continued for a
considerable time in a state of moral insensibility. The second is Peter, who
denied his Lord, and whose crime was aggravated, because it was committed
although he had been forewarned ; because it was repeated a second and a third
time ; and because it was accompanied with oaths and imprecations, in them
selves profane, and which changed his false affirmation into perjury. There is
no doubt, that other saints have been guilty of the same sins, or of others
equally heinous. It is not to be supposed, indeed, that such cases are of fre
quent occurrence, because then there would be no visible difference between
those who have, and those who want the grace of God. There would then be
no answer to the prayer of our Saviour for the former, that his Father would
keep them from the evil of the world ; and to their own prayer, that he would
* Conf. chap. xvii. §. i. * Confession of Remonstrants, as quoted in Brandt's
History ofthe Reformation in the Low Countrines, vol. iii. p. 89.
i Limborch, Theol. Lib. v. cap. Ixxx. § Decret De Justificatione, canon xxiii.

284 PERSEVERANCE.
keep them back form presumptuous sins, and not suffer them to have do
minion over them. Believers, living by faith in the Son of God from whom
their strength is derived, and diligently using the appointed means, are enabled
to walk in holiness and righteousness, and to be blameless, and harmless, and
without rebuke. But as such cases do sometimes occur, the adversaries of the
doctrine of perseverance eagerly lay hold of them as an argument against it.
How could those persons, continuing saints, have acted such a part ? Where
was their faith, when they denied the Lord that bought them ? Where was
their love to God, when in the most daring manner they trampled on his law ?
Concerning these two examples, I would remark, before I prodeed to the gen
eral argument, that, strong as they seem, they are by no means conclusive
against the doctrine which I mean to establish. Great as appears to have been
the insensibility of David till he was awakened by the reproof of Nathan, we
cannot consider him as having totally lost all religious principle. The seed was
in the ground although it gave no signs of vegetation. This may be inferred
from his prayer: " Cast me not away from thy presence, and take not thy
Holy Spirit from me ;" * in which it is implied, that the Spirit had not utterly
withdrawn from him, although it was a punishment which he deserved and
earnestly deprecated. The same remark may be made upon Peter ; in whom
we are assured by the prayer of our Saviour for him, that faith remained even
at the time when he had renounced it in words. " Simon, Simon, Satan hath
desired to have you, that he might sift you as wheat ; but I have prayed for
thee, that thy faith fail not." * Observe the particularity of this prayer. All
the disciples were to be exposed to temptation, and no doubt our Lord interce
ded for them all ; but he speaks of Peter alone, because he was to fall more
foully than his brethern ; and if the prayer was answered, his faith did not ut
terly fail.
We assert, then, that true believers cannot fall totally or finally from grace.
It may seem that the use of both these words is unnecessary, because if they
cannot fall totally, it follows that they cannot fall finally ; but they are intend
ed to oppose the doctrine of Arminians, who affirm, that although a saint may
fall totally from grace, he may be restored by repentance ; but that since this
is uncertain, and does not always take place, he may also fall finally, and die
in his sins. Now, we affirm, that the total apostacy of believers, is impossible,
not in the nature of things, but by the divine constitution ; and consequently,
that no man who has been once received into the divine favour can be ultimately
deprived of salvation. ,
The doctrine of our church respecting the perseverance of the saints, is sup
ported by a variety of arguments.
First, it is proved from the decree of God concerning them, which was for
merly shewn to be immutable. They were predestinated to life, and shall
infallibly obtain it, if the purposes of God are not changeable like those of men,
and liable to be frustrated by opposition which he did not foresee and could not
prevent. But the counsel of the Lord shall stand, and he will do all his plea
sure. " He worketh all things according to the counsel of his will ;" and the
design of the economy of providence and grace is to carry his purposes into
effect. Accordingly, the Scriptures exhibit a chain of events stretching from
eternity to eternity, not one of the links of which can be broken. " Moreover,
whom he did predestinate, them he also called ; and whom he called, them he
also justified ; and whom he justified, them he also glorified." J Predestina
tion and eternal glory are connected by the intermediate links of vocation and
justification , each follows the other in regular succession ; the second is as
certain as the first, the third as the second, and the fourth'as the third ; they are
all expressed in the past time, probably to signify that, although the last is fu-
* Ps. Ii. 1 1. * Luke xxii. 31. * Rom. viii. 30.

PERSEVERANCE. 285
ture, it is as certain as if it had already taken place. Those who deny the
perseverance of the saints break this chain, and affirm that the decree of pre
destination may prove abortive, that our calling may be made void, and that
the sentence of pardon pronounced upon a believer may be revoked. But how
contrary is this doctrine to the general tenor of Scripture, which proclaims the
security of believers, and calls upon them to rejoice in hope of the glory of
God! How contrary to these words of our Lord! " There shall arise false
Christs, and false prophets; and shall shew great signs and wonders ; insomuch
that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect." * To say that the
words, " if it were possible," imply only the great difficulty of the thing, be
cause the same phrase is used in some cases when an absolute impossibility
cannot be understood, is to wrest them from their natural meaning to serve a
particular purpose. Our Saviour foretells a time of trial in which none should
escape except the elect ; but this interpretation makes him say that many should
be seduced, and perhaps the elect too, but with greater difficulty. And for what
purpose did he s,ay so ? It was not surely to encourage his disciples, for this
view of the matter would give them no consolation, as the difficulty might be over
come, and they also might apostatize. And how does this comment agree
with his own words in a preceding verse ? " Except those days should be
shortened, there should no flesh be saved ; but for the elect's sake those days
shall be shortened ;" or with his words in the parallel passage in Luke, " But
there shall not a hair of your head perish." * Why all this care of the elect,
expressed by shortening the days, if still they might be deceived ? And why
so solemnly assure them of their preservation from bodily harm, if still they
were in danger of losing their souls ? Taking all the passages together, we
confidently conclude, that the words under consideration import not merely a
difficulty, but an absolute impossibility. And whence this impossibility arose,
we are informed by another sacred writer, who tells us that the saints " are
kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation."*.
The next argument is taken from the nature of the covenant which God has
made with his people. It is not transitory, like the first covenant, but is ever
lasting ; and hence its blessings are promised, not for a time, but for ever. —
" And I will make an everlasting covenant with them, that I will not turn
away from them, to do them good ; but I will put my fear in their hearts, that
they shall not depart from me." § There are two engagements in this single
promise, both which God has pledged himself to fulfil. He promises not to
turn away from his people to do them good ; and he promises to put his fear
in their hearts, that they may not depart from him. The second engagement
is necessary to the fulfilment of the first. Were they to depart from God, to
break off all connexion with him, and to return to the service of Satan, he
could not continue to do them good, consistently with the holiness of his cha
racter ; but he will preserve them in such a state that he may hold fellowship
with them, without any impeachment of his honour. Let it not, in defiance of
the promise itself, which makes no mention of any condition, be said that the
promise is conditional ; and that it is only understood that God will continue
to be gracious to them, if they continue to fear him, which, however, they may
cease to do. It is true, indeed, that they are fallible and changeable ; but the
danger to be apprehended from this quarter is effectually guarded against ; for,
in the new covenant, the perseverance of the saints is secured by the provision
of the means. God has pledged himself to put his fear in their hearts, or to
grant to them such communications of his grace as shall preserve them from
falling away. To the same purport are the following words of our Saviour :
" My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all, and none is able to
* Matth. xxiv. 24. *Matth. xxiv. 22. Luke xxi. -8.
i 1 Pet i. 5. 4 Jer. xxxii. 40.

286 PERSEVERANCE.
pluck them out of my Father's hand."* We shall more fully understand the
import of these words, if we compare them with the preceding verse:
" I give unto them eternal life, and they shall never perish, neither shall any
pluck them out of my hand." Both taken together, contain a solemn assu
rance that the sheep of Christ, or those who hear his voice, and know and
follow him, shall be eternally saved. Yes, say our adversaries ; none can pluck
them out of the hand of God, and they shall not perish through any want of
power on his part ; but they may withdraw themselves from his hand by their
own voluntary act. Let us see, then, what is the sense of the words upon
this supposition. Our Lord solemnly assures his followers, that no created
power shall wrest them out of his hand, or that of his Father. It is quite evi
dent that physical force is here out of the question, and that it could never
enter into the mind of any man in his senses, that this could have any success
in a struggle with Omnipotence. It is a moral power of which he must be
understood to speak ; by which, I mean the power of arguments, and promi
ses, and threatenings, to induce them to apostatize from the faith. What then
does he tell his disciples ? He tells them, that neither man nor devil should
succeed in tempting them to apostacy, unless they gave their consent ; a piece
of information not new nor necessary, as all his disciples, and every person
of common sense, knew it before ; for it is as clear as, sunshine, that tempta
tion will do us no harm, if we do not comply with it. This silly truism, it
seems, is the amount of our Lord's solemn declaration, twice delivered, con
cerning the safety of believers. No person can draw them into apostasy unless
they yield to seduction. With such downright nonsense, as we might call it
did it not deserve to be branded as an impious perversion of Scripture, is the
hypothesis of Arminians supported ; and an attempt is made to wrest from the
people of God one of the best sources of their consolation. By the same
miserable expedient, they endeavour to evade the evidence of other declarations
and ¦ promises which teach the perseverance of the saints. There is implied
in them this condition, — that they shall obtain eternal salvation, if they are
not wanting to themselves ; or, in other words, the Scriptures tell us that the
saints arrive at the end of their journey, if they continue to walk in the way,
and do not turn aside into a by-path.
The Apostle Paul plainly teaches the perseverance of the saints, when he
asks, " Who shall separate us from the love of Christ ?" and goes on to shew,
that no change or trouble which may befal them can effect a separation : " Shall
tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or. peril, or
sword ? Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors, through him
that loved us." * To this subject we may also apply the following passage :
" For this is as the waters of Noah unto me : for as I have sworn that the
waters of Noah should no more go over the earth ; so have I sworn that I
would not be wroth with thee, nor rebuke thee. For the mountains shall de
part, and the hills be removed ; but my kindness shall not depart from thee,
neither shall the covenant of my peace be removed, saith the Lord that hath
mercy on thee." J
I shall now lay before you some other arguments for the perseverance of
the saints, which are founded on the mediation of Christ.
The first argument is, that those for whom he laid down his life shall cer
tainly be saved, because he has paid the full price of their redemption. —
Some, indeed, tell us that the design of his death was merely to render God
placable, that thus there might be no obstacle to the restoration of sinners to
his favour if they should comply with the terms, and to their final salvation
if they should continue faithful and obedient to the end of their lives. It is
evident that the perseverance of the saints has no necessary connexion with
• John x, 29. * Rom. viii. 35, 37. $ Is. liv. 9, 10.

PERSEVERANCE. 287
the hypothesis. When God was rendered placable, the design of our Sa
viour's death was fully accomplished, although not one individual of the human
race had been actually reconciled to him. But the hypothesis is false. God
was placable without any respect to the death of his Son : and of this he
has assured us, by declaring that he freely loved the world, and that the mis
sion of his Son was the^ consequence of this love. It amounts to the same
thing to say, as others do, that Christ died for all men, oi, that his death so
pleased God that he has established a dispensation of grace, by which all men
have an opportunity of obtaining salvation. According to this scheme, nothing
is fixed with respect to individuals, and the final perdition of those who once
believed does not interfere with its arrangements. The view which the Scrip
tures give of the design of the death of Christ is totally different. They in
form us that it was a sacrifice of atonement offered for us ; that our " iniqui
ties were laid upon him," and " he bore them in his own body on the tree ;"
and they plainly teach the doctrine of substitution. Now, as a surety stands
in the room of the person whom he represents, the latter reaps all the benefit
of what the surety has done in his name ; so that, if his debt has been paid
by the surety, the creditor cannot demand the payment of it from him. Let
us apply this illustration to the subject before us. If Christ made satisfaction
on the cross for the sins of his people, not for some of them only but for them
all, as we are expressly assured, it would be contrary to justice to subject them
also, to the punishment. But, if the saints may fall from a state of grace,
and perish in their sins, satisfaction will be twice exacted, first, from the surety,
and secondly, from them. Either Christ did, or did not, make an atonement
for the sins of his people. If he did not make an atonement for theni, they
must satisfy for themselves ; if he did answer the demands of justice in their
room, it is impossible that, under the righteous administration of Heaven, they
should, by any cause, or for any reason, come into condemnation. Accord
ingly, the new covenant promises to believers complete and irrevocable pardon.
I will "be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities
will I remember no more."* But if the doctrine of the defectibility of the
saints is true, the promise is false, for their sins may be remembered again.
Nay, if this doctrine is true, Christ might have died in vain ; for as one saint
may fall from a state of grace as well as another, it might happen that not a
single sinner should be actually redeemed by his blood from everlasting
destruction. The next argument is founded on the intercession of Christ. Those in whose
behalf he prays that they may be preserved from evil, and may finally be
brought to the place where he is, shall certainly be saved, " for him the Father
hears always." Such is his prayer for his followers : " Holy Father, keep
through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be
one, as we are." " I pray not that thou shouldest take them out of the world,
but that thou shouldest keep them from the evil." It is obviously false to say, that
this is a prayer for his immediate disciples alone, for he himself has extended it
to all believers : " Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall
believe on me through their word."t It is a manifest evasion to say, that it
is a prayer solely for their preservation from afflictions and temptations; because,
in the first place, if this was his prayer, it has not been answered, as his disci
ples, in the beginning and in all subsequent ages, have been exposed to both ;
and because, in the second place, we know it to be his will that they should be
exposed to them for their trial and improvement. And how absurd is it to sup
pose, that our Lord would pray that they might be kept from such things as
might give them uneasiness, and might eventually lead them into sin, but ne
glected to pray that they might be kept from sin itself! It is still more daring
* Heb. viii. 1 2. * John xvii. 11,15,20.

288 PERSEVERANCE.
to say, that the perseverance of the saints does not follow from this prayer, be
cause his prayers have not always been answered. Thus, he prayed for his
murderers, many of whom persisted in unbelief. But we should distinguish
between the prayers of Christ as a man, and as a Mediator. As a man, he
prayed, in obedience to the law of love, for his enemies, leaving it to God to
deal with them according to his sovereign pleasure. We have no reason to
think that he prayed on the cross as Mediator ; or, if we should take this view
of it, we may be certain that his prayer was answered in the case of all to
whom it extended, by the conversion of thousands of the men who with wick
ed hands crucified and slew him. The prayer in the seventeenth chapter of
John, was evidently offered up by him in the character of the High Priest and
Intercessor of the church, who, for the sake of his people, had sanctified or
dedicated himself to this office. Shall our Saviour intercede in vain ? Shall
any of those for whom he shed his blood fall away and perish, although he has
requested that their faith should not fail ? No; it is impossible. " Because I
live," he said, " ye shall live also." " Who is he that condemneth ? It is
Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand
of God, who also maketh intercession for us."* He does not pray in the un
meaning strain of our adversaries : ' Keep them from evil, if they will keep
themselves ; bring them to glory, if they do not stop in the way.' He prays
that Divine grace may be sufficient for them, and enable them to go from
strength to strength, till they appear before God in the heavenly Zion.
Other arguments in support of the doctrine of perseverance are derived from
the inhabitation of the Spirit. That the Holy Ghost is given to believers, is a
truth so plainly taught, and so generally acknowledged, that it may at present
be taken for granted. It is certain that men are in a state of grace only while
they enjoy his presence, and that, if he should be taken away, they would
return to a state of nature. To decide the question, therefore, respecting the
perseverance of the saints, it is only necessary to ascertain whether he is a
transient visitant, or a constant inmate in their souls. Let us hear, then, the
words of our Lord to his disciples : "I will pray the Father, and he shall give
you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever." * This is a
virtual promise of the Spirit in perpetuum, and, consequently, an assurance to
the disciples that they should be guided, and assisted, and protected by him, to
the end of their lives. Here, then, is one instance, in which the perseverance
of some saints was secured by supernatural grace. But perhaps our adversa
ries will say, that this promise respected the disciples only in their official char
acter, and implied nothing more than that they should always enjoy the assist
ance of the Spirit in their apostolical labours. The whole context shows that
such an interpretation is totally unfounded ; but that every ground of doubt with
respect to the constant inhabitation of the Spirit in believers may be removed,
let me quote another passage against which the plea of particular or exclusive
application cannot be alleged : " Whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall
give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him, shall be in him
a well of water springing up into everlasting life."*. We know from other
places that this water signifies the Spirit. Now, observe that he who drinks
of this water*shall never thirst. It is a poor, pitiful commentary on the words
to say, that he shall not thirst while he is drinking, but that if he gives over
using this water he shall thirst again ; for this was true of the water of Tacob's
well, as well as of this living water which is contrasted with it, and preferred to it.
It is plainly meant that he shall never thirst, because he shall have an unfailing
supply ; and accordingly it is added, that "this water shall be in him a well of
water springing up into everlasting life." The water shall never cease, or the
Spirit shall never be withdrawn, but shall continue with those to whom he has
* John xiv. 19. Rom. viii. 34. * John xiv. 16. *Johniv. 14.

PERSEVERANCE. 289
been given till the work of their salvation is completed. I do not conceive it
to be possible to express more explicily the perseverance ofthe saints. If the
"Holy Spirit shall never be taken from them, then they shall never fall from a
state of grace.
There are two offices assigned to the Spirit, from which we may draw the
same conclusion. He is- sent to seal believers, and to be the earnest of the fu
ture inheritance. They are both mentioned in the following passage: " Now
he which stablisheth us with you in Christ, and hath anointed us, is God ;
who hath also sealed us, and given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts."*
A seal was used for different purposes ; — to mark a person's property, to se
cure his treasures, or to authenticate a deed. In the first sense, the Spirit dis
tinguishes believers as the peculiar people of God ; in the second, he guards
them as his precious jewels ; in the third, he confirms or ratifies their title to
salvation. And can we suppose that this work of the Spirit may be counter
acted, and rendered of no effect; that those whom he has separated to God may
be again confounded with the mass of sinners ; that the treasures over which he
watches may be scattered and lost ; and that the title of the saints, although
authenticated by his signature, may be reversed ? With the gift of the Spirit
for the purpose of sealing, the Apostle connects the idea of establishment ; but
according to the hypothesis of our adversaries, they are not connected, and he
who has been ^sealed may stumble and fall. We know, however, whom it
will be our wisdom to believe. — Again, the Spirit is represented as "an earnest."
An earnest is a part given as a security for the future possession of the whole.
The Holy Ghost is the earnest of the heavenly inheritance, because he begins
that holiness in the soul which will be perfected in heaven, and imparts those
joys which are foretastes of its blessedness. A work may be begun, but not
finished, because the workman has desisted from a change of views, or has met
with obstacles which made it impossible to proceed. Those with whom we
contend are of opinion that, from the latter cause, the work of grace in the heart
of man may be stopped, namely, from his waywardness and obstinacy. But
if the workman has pledged himself to execute his plan, and is possessed of
sufficient resources to fulfill his engagement, the work will go on, and in due
time will be completed. Now, the design of representing the Spirit as an
earnest, is manifestly to assure us that the work which he has begun in the
soul of believers, he will " perform to the day of Jesus Christ." The desig
nation given to him is an assurance that he will not desist. He could not be
an earnest, if it might happen that those who had received him should not
obtain the inheritance. To call him so in this case, would create false expec
tations. But, let God be true, and every man who contradicts him a liar. If
he has granted his people the earnest of the Spirit in their hearts^ he will not
fail to bestow all the blessedness for which he has given them reason to hope.
" If children, they are heirs, heirs of God, and joint heirs with his Son Jesus
Christ."t Some of the arguments by which our opponents support their doctrine, have
been occasionally mentioned. I shall now take notice of their reasoning from
certain passages of Scripture.
The first argument is founded upon the following words in the eighteenth
chapter of Ezekiel : " When the righteous turneth away from his righteous
ness, and committeth iniquity, and doeth according to all the abominations that
the wicked man doeth, shall he live ? All his righteousness that he hath done
shall not be mentioned : in his trespass that he hath trespassed, and in his
sin that he hath sinned, in them shall he die."| Here it is supposed, they
say, that a righteous man may fall from holiness, and perish in guilt. There is
an answer to this argument, which they treat with contempt as a mere evasion,
* 3 Cor. i. 21,22. *Rom. viii. 1?. $ Ezek. xviii. 24.
Vol. IL— 37. 2 B

290 PERSEVERANCE.
namely, that the person here mentioned is not a saint, but a man of a good
moral character, and that the life and death spoken of in the passage are of a
temporal nature. It is justified, however, by the context ; and whoever ex
amines it with attention will find, that nothing is said of him which may not
be affirmed of many who have a form of godliness, but have not experienced
its power ; and that the prophet is describing the treatment of different charac
ters in the course of God's providential government. We grant that such a
man may fall from his righteousness ; while at theTsame time, with perfect con
sistency, we affirm the perseverance of the saints. But there is another an
swer, — that this is a hypothetical statement, the design of which is to point out
the connexion, under the Divine administration,between righteousness and happi
ness, and between unrighteousness and misery. We have a similar statement in
another place, where an Apostle says to believers, " If ye live after the flesh, ye
shall die ;"* although we know, from the principles of Paul, that he did not con
ceive it possible that a true saint should perish. The import of such statements is
simply this, that if one thing happen another will follow. But they do not affirm
the actual existence of either the one or the other. When a philosopher says,
If a comet should impinge upon the earth, or come too near it, the earth would
be shattered into pieces, or burnt up, or driven from its orbit, — he does not
suppose or fear that his hypothetical case will be realized. What, then, it
may be asked, is the use of such statements ? I answer, that, while they
point out the necessity of continuance in holiness to the attainment of final sal
vation, they are a mean of exciting believers to watchfulness, and diligence, and
prayer, and thus contribute to their perseverance in grace ; for God deals with
them as rational creatures, and works upon them by motives addressed to their
hopes and their fears.
Another argument is founded on the parable of the sower : " He that re
ceived the seed into stony places, the same is he that heareth the word, and anon
with joy receiveth it : Yet hath he not root in himself, but dureth for a while ;
for when tribulation or persecution ariseth because of the word, by and by he
is offended."! It is not a little surprising, that this passage should be quoted
by our opponents in support of their doctrine. It speaks evidently of a man
who receives the word of God and continues for a time, and then falls away;
and thus far it is quite to their purpose. But unhappily for them, our Saviour
gives us the reason of failure, that he has no root in himself; plainly imply
ing that, if he had had root in himself, he would have withstood every tempta
tion. The passage, instead of militating against our doctrine, plainly teaches
the perseverance of the saints, by signifying that the cause why some do not
persevere is, -that they are not saints, or have not the grace of God in their
hearts ; for this is the only root which can preserve the plant from withering
away. Our Lord distinguishes such hearers of the word from believers, when
he describes the former as stony ground, and the latter as good ground. He
thus points out an essential difference between them. They are not of the
same species ; and it is altogether illogical to conclude, that what may be
affirmed of the one may also be affirmed of the other.
The next argument is deduced from these words in the Epistle to the He
brews : "For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have
tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, and
have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, if they
shall fall away," or, " having fallen away, to renew them again unto repent
ance ; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him
to an open shame "J This passage is eagerly laid hold of by those who deny
the perseverance of the saints, as decisive in their favour ; for, are not the
persons described manifestly possessed of the characteristic qualifications of
* Rom. viii. 13. * Matth. xiii. 20, 21. $ Heb. vi. 4—6.

PERSEVERANCE. 291
the saints, and yet it is supposed that they may irrecoverably apostatize . Let
us examine the qualifications, and see whether they imply any thing which
may not be found in the unregenerated. " They were once enlightened ;"
but so may, all be said to be to whom the Gospel is preached, and who are
acquainted with its doctrines. They have " received the knowledge of the
truth," as the Apostle expresses himself in another part of this epistle ; or, as
Peter says, they have " known the way of righteousness."* In this manner,
the unbelieving Jews were enlightened, and for this reason their sin was highly
aggravated : " If I had not come and spoken unto them, they had not had sin ;
but now they have no cloak for their sin."t — " They were made partakers of
the Holy Ghost;" but so are all those who experience his common influ
ences, by which they are impressed under the dispensation of the Gospel ; and
so were those in the primitive times who were endowed with miraculous powers,
which were given to them by the Spirit. But that such persons were not all
true believers, is evident from the words of our Lord to some of them : " Then
will I profess unto them, I never knew you. "J He never acknowledged them
as genuine disciples. — " They have tasted the good word of God ;" so had
the hearers in the parable of the sower, whose case we considered above, and
concerning whom, it is plain that they never were possessed of saving faith,
for they had no root in themselves. Concerning the other two particulars,
" their partaking of the heavenly gift," and " tasting the powers of the world
to come," I shall say nothing, because it is doubtful what they mean, and
consequently no use can legitimately be made of them in this argument. A
conjectural interpretation proves nothing. We may presume, however, from
the connexion in which they appear, that they imply no higher qualifications
than those which have been already considered. The passage supposes the
apostasy of persons who had advanced as far, it may be, as unconverted men
could advance, but were destitute of true grace, which never fails.
Another passage is in the second Epistle of Peter ; but after what has been
said, the solution must be so obvious, that it is unnecessary to point it out.
It speaks of those who, through " the knowledge of Christ, have escaped the
pollutions of the world," and " whose latter end is worse than their begin
ning.'^ But, what were those but the temporary hearers of the Gospel of
whom we have already spoken ? It would require a long time, and much
repetition, to follow our adversaries in their comments upon Scripture ; and I
shall therefore desist, as the specimen which has been given is sufficient.
They produce examples also in support of their system, as of David, Solo
mon, Hymeneus, Philetus, and Demas. Our answer is, that, with respect to
such of them as were saints, we affirm that they might fall into great sins
without losing the principle of grace ; as Jeter did, who retained faith,
although he denied his Master; and with respect to the rest, their case has
been already disposed of. The fall of mere professors of religion is nothing
to the purpose.
A general argument is founded on the exhortations of Scripture, in which
the saints are called to watch and labour, and work out their salvation with
fear and trembling ; in which exhortations it is implied, that the event is
uncertain. It may be remarked that, being addressed to societies of Chris
tians in which there was a mixture of believers and hypocrites, they were
properly expressed in such a manner as to imply that the result was problem
atical. But, not to insist upon this answer, it ought to be considered, that
the purpose of God does not supercede the use of means, nor is grace given
to render our own exertions superfluous. God will certainly save those whom
he has chosen, but he will save them by his word and ordinances, and by a
diligent improvement of opportunities and privileges. If this is the instituted
*Heb. x. 26. 2Petii. 21. *John xv. 22. * Matth. vii. 23. § Pet. ii. 20.

292 THE DEATH OF THE SAINTS,
plan of effecting his purpose, exhortations and admonitions do not necessarily
imply the uncertainty of the issue, but merely point out the manner and order
in which the design will be accomplished. A man will not die before the
appointed time, and yet there is no inconsistency in telling him, that unless he
avoid dangers, and take food and medicine, ne cannot live. His knowledge
that upon such conditions life depends, leads him to use those precautions by
which the number of his days is completed, and the Divine purpose respecting
him is executed. Believers are not merely passive subjects of Divine grace,
but God works in them and by them, and requires that they should do their
part while he is doing his.
It is objected, that the doctrine of the perseverance of the saints is unfa
vourable to the interests of holiness. But how it can have this effect, it is not
easy to perceive. It is perseverance in holiness which we maintain ; or, in
other words, we maintain that believers will persevere in holiness to the end ;
and it will require, I presume, more discernment than any of you possesses,
to discover the tendency of this opinion to make men fall into sin. Our doc
trine holds out no hope of final salvation to those who are living in sin. No
man can have this hope unless he is walking in the way of God. It is another
doctrine which is unfavourable to holiness, namely, that men shall be saved if
they have once believed, although they live as they please. The objection has
no relation to the genuine doctrine of the perseverance of the saints, and is
altogether unworthy of notice.

LECTURE LXXX.
ON THE DEATH OF THE SAINTS, AND ITS CONSEQUENCES.
Reason why Death befalls Believers. — Its effect upon them. — The Survivance of the Soul. —
Its Immortality deduced from its Immateriality, the Nature of its Powers, the anticipations of
Conscience, the present irregular distribution of Good and Evil, and from Universal Belief.
" He thatendureth to the end shall be saved."* That every genuine believer
shall thus endure, we have endeavoured to prove by a variety of arguments
from Scripture ; and are persuaded that although temporary professors of reli
gion may apostatize, and the most flattering hopes may be disappointed, yet,
wherever the work of grace has been begun, it will be carried oh and completed.
The salvation which is reserved for believers at the end of their course, com
prehends the perfection and felicity of the whole man, of soul and body. I
proceed to consider the subject in its several parts, and shall speak, in the first
place, of the death of the saints and its consequences.
" It is -appointed unto men once to die."t The sentence of death was
pronounced upon Adam after the fall, and his posterity were included in it,
because he was their federal head. Accordingly, " death has passed upon all
men, because all have sinned;" and that it is not their personal sin which is
the cause of their mortality, is evident from the fact of which the Scriptures
take notice, that " death reigned from Adam to Moses," and we may add, reigns
to this hour, " over them who have not sinned after the similitude of Adam's
transgression ;"| that is, over infants who are not capable of actual disobedience.
Some affirm that death was natural to man, or that he was mortal by the con
stitution of his nature, and that it is therefore no proof of original guilt. But,
* Matth. x. 22. * Heb. ix. 27. * Rom. v. 12, 14.

AND ITS CONSEQUENCES. 293
besides that this objection has been already considered, and that there is no
necessity to discuss it again, it is almost superfluous labour at any time to enter
into an elaborate refutation of an opinion, which does not even possess the
slightest degree of plausibility, as it directly contradicts the. most explicit and
solemn declarations of Scripture.
It cannot therefore excite surprise, that all men are subject to the law of
mortality, the rich and the poor, the high and the low, the young and the old.
We are ignorant of the reasons for which some are cut off as soon as they see
the light, while others arrive at extreme old age, and men fall at every period
of life ; but we are in no uncertainty with respect to the cause of the general
doom. Death is the execution ofthe righteous sentence, appointing the sinful
inhabitants of this earth to return to the dust from which they were taken.
The guilty are brought forward according to the will of the Supreme Judge,
to suffer in their order the penalty of the law. Melancholy as is the spectacle
of a race of rational beings, wasted by disease, and swallowed up by the grave,
we can account for it consistently with the goodness of the Creator, because
their fate is not an arbitrary exercise of his power, but is demanded by his
justice. He has no pleasure in the mere destruction of his creatures, and
would neither effect it by his own agency, nor permit it to be effected by
second causes, if it were not required by the law of his moral administration.
Thus far all is plain ; but when we proceed to observe, that from the law of
mortality even the righteous are not exempted, the question arises, how we
shall account for the indiscriminate execution of the sentence ? For the righ
teous an atonement has been made, by which their guilt was expiated ; and
consequently it might be presumed that they would be delivered from all the
effects of the curse. How, then, comes it to pass that they are subject to
death, which is acknowledged to be the penalty of sin ?
Great as this difficulty may seem, it is not the only one which occurs in the
history ofthe saints. It is not, indeed, a solution of one difficulty, to point out
others connected with the subject of inquiry ; but they suggest to us, that if
notwithstanding these, we could quietly retain our belief, we should not allow
it to be disturbed by an additional objection, which in itself is not more formi
dable. If we ask, why believers undergo temporal death, although Christ has
atoned for their sins ? may we not with equal reason ask,why they are not com
pletely delivered from the pollution of sin as well as from its guilt, as soon as they
believe ? Why does it remain in them to taint their duties, and to impede their
consolation ? Why are they still exposed to the malignity of Satan ? Why
are they compelled to carry a heavy burden of affliction ? These things are as
inconsistent with our notions of the effect of a perfect expiation of sin, as their
subjection to temporal death ; for it would seem to us, that, as soon as the bene
fit of the atonement is applied to them, they should not only be restored to the
favour of God, but completely relieved from every evil, physical and moral.
But this is not the only instance, in which our notions of what is just and
fit are found not to accord with the Divine dispensations. It is certain that, if
justice required, when an atonement had been made for sin, that the guilty
should be fully pardoned, thus far its demands are satisfied. " There is no con
demnation to them which are in Christ Jesus;"* and consequently, we are sure that
whatever may be the proceedings of Providence towards them, they are not
to be considered as effects or indications of wrath. God, in stipulating with
his Son the remission of those for whom he was to shed his blood, might make
a reservation of some of the temporal consequences of sin, for reasons worthy
of his wisdom. To these he might judge it expedient to subject them, but
with a merciful design ; and, with this exception, might promise to exempt
them from the operation ofthe penalty, as a man may stipulate with the repre-
* Rom. viii. 1.
2b2

294 THE DEATH OF THE SAINTS,
sentative of another, with respect to the time and the degree in which the ex
pected benefit shall be conferred.
The procedure of God towards the saint has been compared to the manner
of proceeding under the ceremonial law, in reference to a house infected with
leprosy. " The priest shall break down the house, the stones of it, and the
timber thereof, and all the mortar of the house ; and he shall carry them forth
out of the city into an unclean place."* In like manner God destroys the earthly
house of our tabernacle, which is polluted with sin, and commands it to be carried
to the grave. It has been remarked too, that under the ancient economy earthen
vessels which had been defiled were broken, but those which were formed of
a more solid or a more precious substance, were only washed with water, or
purified by fire. Our souls are vessels of gold, and for this reason, although
polluted, he does not destroy them, but he reduces our sinful bodies to dust.
These, however, are merely illustrations, and I believe fanciful illustrations, of
the fact, and they give us no assistance in discovering the reasons of it.
The death of the body is sometimes represented as necessary to the complete
sanctification of the soul. To do so, however, is to commit the mistake of
confounding the conjunction of two events with the relation of cause and effect.
We acknowledge that the saints are not made perfect in holiness till they die ;
but although God has established a connexion between these two things, there
is no reason to think that it is a necessary connexion. It does not follow, be
cause he usually produces a certain effect in a particular way, that he could
not produce it in a different way. What should hinder him from sanctifying
believers wholly in the present life ? You say, perhaps, that the present con
stitution of the body is an obstacle. It would not be easy, however, to explain
this point satisfactorily or intelligibly ; to show that, great as is the influence of
the body upon the mind, almighty grace could not fully counteract it, so far as
it is unfriendly to holiness. But, supposing that there is something in the
present state of the body which renders perfect holiness unattainable, we may
ask again, what should hinder God from now effecting such a change as would
fit the body for co-operating with the soul in its purest exercises ? That the
separation of the soul from the body, and the dissolution of the latter in the
grave, are not necessary to the complete purification of the soul, is evident
from the cases of those who were translated to heaven without undergoing tem
poral death. There have been only two who enjoyed this privilege, Enoch and
Elijah ; but two examples establish the conclusion as fully as a thousand would
do. They show, that it is not from any necessary connexion between the
death of the body and the perfection of the soul, that believers are not exempted
from the former. This position is farther corroborated by what we know will
take place at the second coming of Christ. " Behold, I show you a mystery,
we shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twink
ling of an eye, at the last trump ; for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall
be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed."! It is commonly said, that
although some of the saints shall not die, they will undergo a change equiva
lent to death. I suspect that these are words without any distinct meaning ;
but if they do mean any thing, it is this, that upon those saints the same effect
will be produced by the immediate power of God, which is produced upon the
saints at present by temporal death. But this is to give up the point ; it is to
acknowledge that men may be fully sanctified without undergoing dissolution,
for such will be the fact with respect to the last generation of the saints.
These remarks are intended to show you, that we are not able properly to
assign the reason why the sentence of temporal death is not revoked in favour
of the righteous. It has been said, that the design is to inspire them with ab
horrence of sin, which is followed by such fatal effects ; to keep them humble,.
* Lev. xiv. 46. * 1 Cor. xv. 51, 52.

AND ITS CONSEQUENCES. 295
and to give them an opportunity to display their faith, and patience, and hope.
Without inquiring whether these purposes are sufficient to account for the fact,
we remark that there is one thing which, if it should not solve the difficulty,
will at least show that an end is accomplished which is in unison with the
general tenor of the moral administration of God. In the present state, we
must walk by faith and not by sight, or, in other words, we are to be regulated
in the choice and practice of religion, not by the evidence of sense, but by the
evidence of testimony. It is not given to us to see the realities of the world
to come ; to have ocular demonstration of the glorious reward of piety, and
the terrible punishment of ungodliness. Although these are subjects of infinite
importance, and our whole conduct, should be influenced by them, all our know
ledge comes through the medium of revelation. This, as some would say,
places us in a state of trial. We are put to the test, whether we will reppse
such confidence in the word of God, as to enter upon that course of conduct,
with all its privations and difficulties, which he has assured us will lead to a
happy result. What is said on this subject would require to be guarded and
qualified ; _ and therefore, laying it aside for the present, I observe, that it
appears to'be the will of God, that faith should be our guide in the pilgrimage
of life. But it would be subversive of this design to give an open and regular
declaration in favour ofthe good, and against the bad, in the dispensations of
Providence. Were it known, exactly, who are the objects of the love, and
who of the hatred of God, that is, were it known in any other way than by
the testimony of Scripture, the province of faith would be greatly circum
scribed, and we should then see, what we are now called to believe. Had the
righteous been exempted from temporal death, it would have been known to
all who they were, and that their piety was recompensed, when they were
openly translated to heaven. No person could have doubted of a future state,
when he saw his acquaintances and neighbours removed to it ; or have called
in question the truth and advantages of religion, when he was himself a witness
of the performance of its promises. Hence we perceive the reason, why God
has admitted into his plan the temporal death of those who are interested in the
atonement of his Son. It is to preserve the consistency of his administration,
to exclude any thing which would have broken in upon its uniformity, and de
feated its design. He leaves them apparently in the same situation with other
men. Like them they are afflicted, and like them they die.
But, although one event happens to all, there is a great difference between
the death of a righteous, and that of a wicked man ; a difference not in the na
ture of the event considered as a physical fact, but in its design and its conse
quences. In the case of the saint, it terminates, as we shall afterwards more
fully see, his long and painful struggle with sin, and completes his restoration
to the image of God, which has been carrying on, since the hour of his conver
sion, by the ordinances nf religion and the dispensations of Providence. It
closes also the scene of his sorrows ; it releases the weary sufferer, and dis
misses him to rest ; it removes the veil whieh conceals the glories of the
eternal world ; it breaks down the partition-wall which separated him from his
God. This moment he feels the agonies of expiring nature, or is lying in a
state of insensibility ; the next, he is full of life, and joy, and activity. We
behold an heir of glory entering upon the possession of his inheritance ; and
death, which appears so dreadful to the by-stander, is to him the gate of life.
" Mark the perfect man, and behold the upright ; for the end of that man is
peace."* Often his latter end is peace in respect of his own feelings. His
body may suffer pain, but his mind is tranquil, for he knows in whom he has
believed, and is assured that he is able to keep the trust which he has committed
to him. He is parting with those who have long been dear to him in the bonds
* Ps. xxxvii. 37.

296 THE DEATH OF THE SAINTS,
of nature and friendship ; but he is going home to his Father, and to the family
of the first-born ; and he leaves the objects of his affection to the care of Him
who has led him all his life, and will take them under his protection. Natura.
affection remains in the bosom of a good man to the last, for it is the work of
God, and his grace has refined and strengthened it; but he is actuated by a
higher principle of heavenly love, and his soul longs for the enjoyment of his
God : " Whom have I in'heaven but thee ? and there is none upon earth whom
I desire beside thee."* But it may happen that the Christian shall not leave
the world in the full assurance of hope. Death and fears may haunt his mind,
and a cloud may rest upon his closing scene ; yet still his latter end is peace,
because it is safe. To him death has lost its sting ; for its sting was sin, but
through the blood of Christ his guilt is cancelled, and will not appear against
him in judgment. Through the weakness of his faith, the king of terrors may
wear an alarming aspect. But he is the messenger of his Father, and comes
upon an errand of mercy. Angels are waiting to receive him, and as soon as
his spirit has escaped from its frail and falling tabernacle, his fears will be ex
changed for everlasting triumph.
The death of the righteous is sometimes described as a sleep. This is an
example of euphonism, or that figure of rhetoric by which a thing unpleasant
in itself is expressed by an agreeable name. It is not peculiar to the Scrip
tures, but was used by 'heathen writers, who not only call sleep, mortis simillima
imago, but speak of death under the notion of sleep itself: —
— itpov vrtvov
Kotjuar'at' 6vr\6xnv ^vrj Jigye -tov$ _o/ya6ovs, \
It is proper, however, to remark, that the metaphor is sometimes employed to
denote the state of the dead, without any reference to their character, as in the
following passage : " And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth
shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting con
tempt.";); Yet tne more frequent use of the term in relation to the righteous,
and the connection in which it is introduced, justify us in considering it as
significant of the peaceful nature of their end. Speaking of the five hundred
disciples to whom our Saviour appeared after his resurrection, Paul says, " of
whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep. "§
Luke thus describes the death ofthe first Christian martyr : " And he kneeled
down, and cried with a loud voice, Lord, lay not this sin to their charge ; and
when he said this, he fell asleep. "|| And those in general who have died in
the faith, are represented as sleeping in Jesus : " Them that sleep in Jesus,
will God bring with him."1T Thus the weary labourer, when evening comes,
lies down upon his bed, and enjoys profound repose till the return of day.
Before I proceed to consider the state of the righteous in the grave, or the
state of their bodies, I shall inquire what change takes place in their souls, and
how they are disposed of. What makes death so terrible, is not simply the
termination of the present life, although, even from this event, nature instinc
tively recoils ; but the consequences in another state of being, the apprehension
of a future reckoning, and of the punishment which conscience anticipates as
the just recompense of our guilty deeds. When this fear is removed, death
appears in a totally different light; and a man may calmly and even joyfully
submit to it, if he has the hope of exchanging this frail and troubled life for a
state of endless blessedness. But it is presupposed in this hope, that the soul
survives the death of the body, and carries along with it, into the new region
which it is appointed to inhabit, its consciousness and it's capacity for happiness.
* Ps. lxxiii. 25. * Kallimachi Epigramm. cura Blomfield, p. 56. $ Dan. xii. 2.
§ 1 Cor. xv. 6. j Acts vii. 60. 1 1 Thess. iv. 14.

AND ITS CONSEQUENCES. 297
It is necessary, therefore, to begin this part of the subject with the considera
tion of its immortality.
You all know the doubts entertained by the ancient heathens upon this
subject, and especially by the learned and speculative among them. It is from
them, indeed, that we know the opinion of the vulgar ; but I think it probable
that, as the latter felt greater reverence for the established mythology, so they
were more steady in the belief of the future existence of the soul. We find
that almost in every nation this belief prevails ; and it is less likely to be
called in question by those who do not indulge in vain reasonings, and who
rest satisfied with the authority of tradition. I do not mean, that the more the
subject is discussed the weaker the evidence will appear ; but that, in conse
quence of the disadvantage under which unassisted reason labours in investi •
gations of this kind, the result of its exertions has been rather an increase of
doubt, than a settled persuasion. It is owing to this cause that the most cele
brated philosophers of antiquity express themselves with hesitation, or vary
their tone, using at one time the language of confidence, and at another that
of uncertainty. The arguments brought forward by modern philosophers, in
favour of the immortality of the soul, are better than those of their predeces
sors ; but we shall greatly err, if we suppose that their superiority is the
consequence of the gradual improvement of reason. It is true, indeed, that
reason is improved ; the advances, however, which it has made are not the
fruits of its own unaided efforts, but of the assistance which it has derived from
revelation. There can be no greater imposition attempted upon mankind, than
when Christian divines, or Christian laymen, pretend to give a system of
natural religion deduced from the principles of reason. What they call reason,
is a compound of the natural suggestions of the mind and the truths of reve
lation ; but they are not at pains to separate them, nor is it properly in their
power, as men in general are not able to determine how much they owe to
nature, and how much to education. It is sufficient to remind you, that such
a system of natural religion as is now commonly exhibited, was never drawn
up by a heathen. Christian countries give birth to the authors, and Christian
instruction furnished them with the most valuable materials.
The first argument for the immortality of the soul is founded on its imma
teriality. It is not a material substance ; and, as it does not consist of parts,
it is not subject to dissolution. We learn by experience what are the qualities
of matter, which is extended, divisible, inert ; and we are led to believe that
thought is not one of its properties, because we observe every where around
us, that it exists without intelligence and without feeling. If thought essen
tially belonged to matter every part of it would think. There are only two
ways in which it can be imagined to acquire the property of thinking ; by a
new modification of its parts, or by having the quality superadded to it. With.
regard to the latter hypothesis, although it has been adopted by some persons
of great name, it is questionable whether they did or could affix any distinct
idea to it. To endow matter with the faculty of thought, is to give it a new
power, different from and contrary to all its original properties. We do not
know the nature of substances, and can observe only their qualities ; but,
having ascertained these, we naturally conclude, that the substance to which
they belong does not admit properties generically different from them. It
seems to be as contrary to reason to suppose matter to be made capable of
thought, as to suppose spirit to be made capable of figure and division. It
avails nothing to appeal to the almighty power of God ; because his power
cannot work contradictions, or make a substance susceptible of qualities which
do not essentially belong to it. He could change the nature of things ; but
while their nature continues, their properties are fixed and immutable. From
all that we know of matter, it appears to be a substance on which the power
Vol. IL— 38.

298 THE DEATH OF THE SAINTS,
of thinking could not be superinduced. The supposition that it is superadded
to matter is absurd. If, then, matter could not be the substratum of a property
essentially different from all its known qualities, we are necessarily led to the
conclusion that where the power of thinking exists, there is a substance, dif
ferent from matter, in which it inheres, or, in other words, a soul.
This reasoning is equally conclusive against the hypothesis that thought is
the result of some modification of matter. " Matter," says Dr. Johnson,
' can differ from matter only in form, density, bulk, motion, and direction of
motion. To which of these, however varied or combined, can consciousness
be annexed? To be round or square, to be solid or fluid, to be great or little,
to be moved slowly or swiftly, one way or another, are modes of material
existence, all equally alien from the nature of cogitation. If matter be once
without thought, it can only be made to think by some new modification ; but
all the modifications which it can admit are equally unconnected with cogita
tive powers."*
The argument for the immortality of the soul from its immaterial nature, is
thus stated by the same celebrated writer. " Immateriality seems to imply a
natural power of perpetual duration as a consequence of exemption from all
causes of decay ; whatever perishes is destroyed by the solution of its contex
ture, and separation of its parts ; nor can we conceive how that which has no
parts, and therefore admits no solution, can be naturally corrupted or impair
ed. — He who made the soul can destroy it, since, however imperishable, it
receives from a superior nature its power of duration. That it will not perish
by any inherent cause of decay, or principle of corruption, may be shewn by
philosophy ; but philosophy can tell no more. That it will not be annihilated
by Him that made it, we must learn from higher authority."*
Such is the amount of the first argument. The soul may live, and will live
lor ever, if such be the will of the Creator.
The second argument for the immortality of the soul, is founded on its
powers, which are not only different from those that we observe in matter, but
are superior to the powers of all the other inhabitants of this world. Man not
only perceives what is present by means of his senses, as the lower animals
do, and recollects the past, but stretches his views into the future, anticipates
events to come, with greater or less certainty according to the grounds of
expectation, and regulates his conduct with a reference to objects which he
has not seen. His mind takes a wider range than this earth, to which his
bodily presence is assigned, contemplates the phenomena of nature in the
remote regions of the universe, and discovers the laws by which other worlds
are governed. By a process of reasoning he rises from the effect to the cause,
and ascends in thought to that mysterious Being, who, himself invisible, is
seen by the reflection of his glory in his works. He traces the relations in
which he stands to that Being and to his fellow creatures, ascertains the duties
arising from these relations, and feels that he was made for a nobler purpose
than the lower animals, which are ignorant of all those truths, and have no
guide but their appetites and instincts. Is it conceivable that these high
powers were conferred upon him solely for a temporary use ; that these lights
were kindled only to enable him to look around him during the short journey
of life ; that after having blazed for a few years, they are to be extinguished
for ever ; and that the being on whose path they shed so much brightness, and
to whose eye they disclosed such sublime and interesting prospects, is to lie
down in everlasting darkness, and mingle with the clods of the valley ? In
surveying the system of created things, we do not observe in any instance
such a disproportion of means to the end. The inferior animals fulfill the
purpose of their existence by their senses and instincts. Why was man made
* Rasselas, chap, xlviii.

AND ITS CONSEQUENCES. 399
capable of attaining so much knowledge, which, on the supposition that death
terminates his career, is manifestly useless to him ? For useless certainly is
the knowledge of religious and moral truths, of his Maker, and of his duty,
if there is no state beyond the grave, in which the consequences of that know
ledge will be experienced, and He who is now dimly perceived in his works,
shall be clearly seen and fully enjoyed.' We observe too, that the powers of
man are progressive, while those of the lower animals are stationary. It is
not found that, among them, the species is more improved in one age than in
another, or that the individual ever advances beyond a certain point. But the
faculties of man are gradually unfolded from infancy to manhood, and in some
cases continue vigorous and active to extreme old age. Yet we can never say
that they have reached perfection, or that man has made the highest possible
intellectual effort, and attained all the knowledge of which he is capable
Were the soul to die with the body, the fate of man would be an instance of
an abortive work of God, a work made for no intelligible purpose ; and it is
therefore more consonant to our ideas of Divne wisdom to believe, that, as it
is capable from its nature of perpetual duration, and its powers admit of no
limit which we know, it will pass into another state of conscious existence,
and advance in an interminable career of improvement. Whether the argu
ment be considered as conclusive or not, it undoubtedly affords a strong
presumption in favour of the immortality of the soul ; and as such we find it
brought forward by the heathen philosophers. " I am persuaded," says
Cicero, in his treatise de Senectute, " since such is the activity of the soul,
such is the memory of the past and the foresight of the future, such are its
arts and sciences, and inventions, that the nature which comprehends these
things cannot be mortal."
The third argument for the immortality of the soul, is founded upon the
operations of conscience, the office of which is to judge of right and wrong,
as the understanding judges of truth and error; to enjoin the one and forbid
the other; to acquit or condemn us according to our conduct; to summon us
to the higher tribunal of our Maker ; and to anticipate the consequences of his
sentence in another state of existence. To evade this argument, conscience
has been represented as a factitious faculty, as the effect of education ; and
hence, it has been said, it is not uniform in its dictates, but commands and
prohibits according to the notions of morality which prevail in a particular
country. But the only inference which should be deduced from this fact is,
that conscience is liable to be perverted as well as the understanding. If it
would be absurd to deny that our minds possess the power of distinguishing
between truth and falsehood, because we are subject to innumerable errors, and
the wildest opinions have been believed, not only by the vulgar, but by philoso
phers ; it would be equally absurd to conclude, that there is no such principle
as conscience, because virtue has been sometimes called vice, and vice virtue.
The operations of conscience, amidst the manifold errors into which it has
been betrayed, are a proof that it is natural to the mind. It may be misled,
but it still exists. It is found in all ages, in all nations, and under all religions ;
and we must therefore conclude, that it is an essential principle of our nature.
It was planted in our bosom by the hand of the Creator, and its clear unbiassed
dictates must be regarded as his commands. If it point to a future state, it is
He who is reminding us that this is only the first and probationary stage of
our being ; that the consequences of our moral actions will not be limited to
our present circumstances ; and that, when our course is finished, a retribution
will take place. In short, the anticipations of conscience, which are common
to heathens and to Christians, are an evidence that the soul will pass into
another state, where those anticipations will be realized.
In corroboration of this argument, I proceed to mention a fourth, which is

300 THE DEATH OF THE SAINTS,
drawn from the unequal distribution of good and evil in the present life. That
God is the moral Governor of the world, we may assume as a truth, because
it has been already proved, and is denied by none but atheists. We have
a witness to it within us, in the operations of conscience, which not only
reminds us that he has given us a law for the regulation of our conduct, but
acquits and condemns us in his name, and refers us to his future judgment
for the ratification and execution of the sentence. But the present state of things,
as we all acknowledge, does not accord with our ideas of a perfect moral
administration. It is an ancient complaint, that " all things come alike to all :
there is one event to the righteous and to the wicked ; to the good and to the
clean, and to the unclean ; to him that sacrificeth, and to him that sacrificeth
not : as is the good, so is the sinner ; and he that sweareth, as he that feareth
an oath."* The promiscuous manner in which men of different characters are
treated, seems to confound all moral distinctions. But great as this disorder
may be accounted, there still is a greater. " There is ar vanity which is done
upon the earth ; that there be just men, unto whom it happeneth according to
the work of the wicked : again, there be wicked men, to whom it happeneth
according to the work of the righteous."! The lot of the righteous is such
as that of the wicked should be, and the lot of the wicked as that of the
righteous. Exceptions there are in the course of the Divine government ; and
righteousness is sometimes rewarded, and unrighteousness punished in the
present life. But a few examples of this nature can only be set in opposition
to innumerable examples of a different character, in order to show that not
withstanding the latter, there is such a principle in the Divine nature as
justice, and consequently, that there is ground to expect its full development
under another dispensation. It may be objected, that, although virtue and vice
are not visibly recompensed, yet there is a secret retribution in the satisfaction
which flows from virtue, and the uneasiness which is the consequence of vice.
But, besides that the want of visibility in this retribution does not answer the
ends of God's moral government, by vindicating his character and upholding
the authority of his law ; it may be remarked that, if a future state were left
out of the question, both the pleasure and the pain would be greatly diminish
ed, if not annihilated. Many a wicked man would feel no uneasiness, if he
were freed from the forebodings of conscience ; and in many cases at least,
the pleasure arising from virtuous dispositions and actions would not coun
terbalance the evils with which they are accompanied. The state of the case
then, is this, that God has given a law to the human race, and announced his
intention to reward obedience, and punish disobedience ; yet we find that there
is no regular distribution of rewards and punishments ; that there is no regular
plan according to which affiairs are conducted ; that sometimes the righteous
and the wicked are placed in the same circumstances, both enduring the evils
of life, or both enjoying its good things ; and that at other times, their condi
tion exhibits an unexpected contrast, while those who should have been happy
are involved in affliction, and those who should have been miserable are sur
rounded with earthly blessings. If we believe that there is a God, and that
he is just and good, we must conclude that this life is not the whole of man ;
we must believe that it is only a state of discipline and trial, and that his
treatment according to his desert, is with manifest propriety deferred till he have
finished his course. We must believe that after death is the judgment, when
he shall receive according to the deeds done in the body, whether they have been
good or evil. Reason assents to the doctrine of revelation, and has led men
in every age and nation to expect a future state of happiness or misery. But
this belief implies the immortality of the soul. It implies that it will survive
the death of the body ; and, in the language of an inspired writer, that when
* Eccles.ix. 2. * lb. viii. 14.

AND ITS CONSEQUENCES. 301
" the dust returns to the earth as it was, the spirit will return to God who
gave it."*
The last argument is derived from the universal belief of the immortality of
the soul. Another argument has, indeed, been founded upon the desire of
immortality which prevails among mankind ; but it is questionable whether it
possesses much solidity. The desire has been considered as instinctive, and
consequently, as an indication by our Creator himself of our continued exist
ence ; but it does not appear to be different from the love of life, which is
common to us and the inferior animals. It is simply a^lesire that we may
not be deprived of the precious blessing of life ; and we may say the same
desire is virtually felt by every living creature. But because God has im
planted in us a strong love of life, it does not follow, in our case more than in
theirs, that our life will not come to an end. — The belief of the immortality
of the soul can be traced in the history of all civilized nations, and even among
savage tribes. It prevailed among the Greeks and Romans, the Egyptians, the
Chaldeans, the Persians, the Indians, and the Gauls ; and wherever modern
travellers have gone, and have had an opportunity to inquire into the opinions
of the nations, it has been found that an idea was entertained, more or less
distinct, of a state beyond the grave. "The immortality of the sou*," as
Cicero said long ago, " is established by the consent of all nations." The
argument founded upon it is this : — Either this consent results from the uniform
suggestions of reason, in every country and in every age, and ought therefore
to be considered as the voice of God himself giving notice of our destiny ;
or, it is the consequence of a tradition descending from the first parents of
mankind, who were taught by their Creator that their souls should never die.
I acknowledge that the universality of an opinion is not, of itself, a proof of
its truth, because there are some notions of religion in which men have agreed,
and when without supernatural instruction, still agree, but which we know to
be erroneous. But when an opinion is neither contradicted by reason nor
revelation, its prevalence among nations separated by time and place, and
between whom there was no communication, necessarily leads us to the hypo
thesis of a common origin, and demonstrates, that as it is congenial to the
wishes, so it is consonant to the natural dictates of the mind. And although
the maxim, Vox populi est vox Dei, is so far from being uniformly true that it
is very frequently false, yet in the present case it may be admitted ; and there
seems reason to think that it was the Creator himself who taught man to be
lieve that he is made for immortality. -

LECTURE LXXXI. '
ON THE DEATH OF THE SAINTS, AND ITS CONSEQUENCES.
The Doctrine of the Immortality of the soul, founded on the testimony of Christ — C ompletion
of Sanctification at Death. — Doctrine of an Intermediate State : of the sleep of the Soul : of
Purgatory. — Arguments against Purgatory. — The best argument for it.
The arguments for the immortality of the soul which were stated in the pre
ceding lecture, have been considered as conclusive ; and, although they do not
all possess the same strength, yet their united evidence has been deemed suffi
cient to be the ground of a rational conviction. But I must remind you again,
* Eccles. xii. 7.
2C

302 THE DEATH OF THE SAINTS,
that, although they were known in substance to the wise men of the Heathen
world, they failed to give satisfaction. Let us not be surprised at this fact, and
wonder that they did not clearly perceive, and confidently embrace, a truth of
which the proof seems to us to be complete. Not to say that it is more fully
and luminously exhibited by Christian Divines than by Heathen philosophers,
I would remark, that the connection between the premises and the conclusion
appears more certain to us, because we know the conclusion beforehand, and
are persuaded of it on other grounds. The demonstrations of reason are
brought forward in favour of a point of which we entertain no doubt, and the
arguments come home to us with full force, because we are prepared to acqui
esce in them. They accord with our previous sentiments, carry us forward in
a train in which we have been accustomed to move, and terminate in a point
which has long been the resting-place of our thoughts. But it would be folly
to suppose, that the reasoning would impart the same conviction to a man who
had long sought in vain for satisfaction, and, having viewed the subject on all
sides, and been tossed up and down between hope and fear, had finally aban
doned the expectation of arriving at certainty.
The truth is, that to Christians these arguments are not necessary, except
when they are contending with such as deny revelation ; and then they are of
use, not to satisfy their own minds, but to prove to their opponents that, in
maintaining the immortality of the soul, they are supported by reason, and that
none offend against reason but those by whom the doctrine is impugned. Our
faith in this fundamental article of religion does not rest upon arguments, but
upon authority. The ground on which we are assured of the future existence
of the soul, is the testimony of our Saviour, — one sentence from whose lips is
of greater weight than all the reasonings of philosophers, whether heathen or
Christian. Why should we follow a circuitous and uncertain path, when the
highway is before us ? or why should we light a torch, when the sun is pouring
around us the full splendour of his beams ?
"Jesus Christ hath abolished death, and brought life and.immortality to light
through the Gospel."* To bring any thing to light, is to draw it from its
place of concealment into open day. The words now quoted may be there
fore understood tq^ import, that our Saviour was the first who discovered, or
made known to the world, the doctrine of immortality ; and hence the accuracy
of the Apostle's statement may be questioned, because even the heathens were
in some degree acquainted with it, and the Jews unquestionably entertained
the hope of a life beyond the grave. But the word, $ati,£<j>, signifies not only
to give light, and to make manifest, but to render luminous, by shedding greater
lustre upon an object already seen ; and in this sense, I apprehend, it is used
on this occasion by the Apostle. Jesus Christ has illuminated, or rendered
plain and perspicuous, the doctrine of immortality.
He has given the most explicit assurances of the future existence of the soul.
He has spoken of it as a subject which is not only probable, but absolutely
certain. He has assumed it as a fact about which there could not be any
question, and which those whom he addressed were understood to believe.
The object which he had in view was not to prove it, but to give such informa
tion respecting it as should have a practical influence upon the minds of his
followers. His aim was not properly to convince them that there is a future
state, but to exhibit it as an object of hope, as the state in which his promises
of perfect and eternal felicity would be performed. There is only one occa
sion on which we find him reasoning in support of this doctrine, namely, when
he was contending with the infidel sect of the Sadducees, who denied the im
mortality of the soul ; and even then he did not appeal to the dictates of reason,
but to higher authority, the writings of Moses, which they acknowledged to be
* 2 Tim. i. 10.

AND ITS CONSEQUENCES. 303
divine. It would not have become him to have spoken of it in a different man
ner ; to have treated it as a matter of speculation ; to have seemed for a moment
to admit that the evidence was not complete ; to have entered into a train of
argumentation, as the heathen philosophers had done, and Christian Divines
still dp, in their treatises on Natural Theology. He was the Son of God, who
had descended to the earth for the instruction of mankind ; and his words were
oracles. All his sayings were to be received on his own authority ; and, to
those who believed that he came from God, his authority was sufficient. The
Lord of the invisible world was acquainted with its secrets, and a hint from
him was more satisfactory than the pretended discoveries of all the wise and
learned. Now, Jesus Christ has assured us that man has a soul distinct from the
body ; that it is not annihilated by the stroke which lays the body in the grave ;
that after its separation it enters upon a new state of being ; and that, as those
who die in impenitence shall be plunged into darkness and misery, so his faith
ful followers shall be admitted into the realms of light, and enjoy there ever
lasting felicity. " I give unto them eternal life, and they shall never perish,
neither shall any pluck them out pf my hand." " I go to prepare a place for
you. And if I go away, I will come again, and receive you to myself, that where
I am, there ye may be also." "Then shall the righteous shine forth as the
sun, in the kingdom of their Father."*
I have laid before you the evidence which reason can produce for the ex
istence of the soul after death, and have shown you that, whatever force may
be assigned to it, it is upon the doctrines and promises of the Gospel that the
hope of Christians rests.
When we speak of the immortality of the soul in reference to believers, we
mean not only the continuance of its consciousness and activity, but its exist
ence in a state of perfection and felicity. As it is subject to imperfection and
infirmity to the last hour of life, as the believer, even when he is standing on
the vei'ge of the eternal world, is still sinful as well as mortal, a change must
take place immediately after its separation from the body, to qualify it for the
new state into which it is introduced. This change our Church expresses by
its being " made perfect in holiness ;" and it proceeds upon the authority of
Scripture, for the souls in heaven are called " the spirits of just men made
perfect."! There are different reasons which render the change necessary. First,
Although God is pleased in the present state to hold communion with men,
who are not perfect, through the mediation of his Son, yet it is his will that
every stain of impurity ^should be removed from those who are admitted into his
immediate presence. The inhabitants of the heavenly paradise must be holy, as
Adam was in the garden of Eden. The image of their Maker, which was defaced
by sin, must be fully restored, and shine with its original lustre, that he may
r again look with complacency upon the work of his hands. Were there any
remains of sin in heaven, it might seem that his own purity was not absolutely
perfect, and that evil might dwell with him ; but the complete redemption of
the objects of his love from the slighest moral taint, will demonstrate his holi
ness as well as his goodness. In the place where he is manifested in the full
splendour of his infinite excellencies, there is not a corner which is not illumi
nated. " There shall in no wise enter into it any thing that denleth, neither
whatsoever worketh abomination or maketh a lie ; but they which are written
in the Lamb's book of life. "J Secondly, Unless the souls of the saints were
perfectly pure, they would be unfit for the society into which they are admit
ted in the other world. Heaven is the original abode of the angels ; but, in
consequence of redemption, it is destined to be the habitation also of men,
* John x. 28. John xiv. 2. Matth. xiii. 34, 43. * Heb. xii. 23. * Rev. xxi. 27.

304 THE DEATH OF THE SAINTS,
united in one family with angels. At present there is a connection between them,
for the angels minister to the saints ; but what passes is silent and unseen. It
is not properly a correspondence, but a series of good offices performed by the
one party to the other ; and to this general intercourse the imperfection by the
saints presents no obstacles. But, were the disembodied spirits of the latter to
mingle with the holy spirits around the throne, while they retained the dark
ness, and infirmity, and irregular affections to which they were subject upon
earth, we cannot conceive that the intercourse could be cordial and agreeable
upon either side. The celestial spirits would be often offended, and the human
spirits would be abashed and dismayed. There would be an overwhelming
superiority on the one hand, and a humiliating sense of inferiority on the
other. There would be wanting an entire congeniality of sentiment and feel
ing. It is necessary, therefore, that men should be as the angels, by possess
ing faculties, if not equal in strength, yet equally free from the pollution of
sin, and equally prompt to engage in the sublime and fervent devotions of the
heavenly sanctuary. This leads me to remark, in the third place, That, unless
the souls of the saints were rendered perfectly holy at death, they could notfully
enjoy the felicity of the future state. They could not enter with the whole
heart into the service, and might occasionally feel a reluctance to it, when the
unrenewed part of their nature shed its malignant influence upon them. Their
love might at one time burn with an ardent flame, and at other times might be
faint and languid. For the diversity in their state of feeling during the present
life, we may, in some measure, account by the influence of the body, and we
are totally incapable of conceiving the operations of the soul, when freed from
this incumbrance. But, although it might be exempt from some affections
whieh it at present experiences by means of the body, yet its temper would
still be subject to fluctuation while it was actuated by two different and opposite
principles, and it could not feel that fervent, sustained, undivided love to God,
which is at once the duty and the felicity of every rational creature. Wherever
sin exists, there cannot be pure enjoyment. Even when its influence'is cir
cumscribed, it is still a cloud which intercepts some portion of the rays of the
sun, a foreign ingredient which infuses bitterness into the cup of pleasure.
The saint, whose most delightful hours on earth are spent in fellowship with
God, would indeed feel himself at home in heaven ; but the faintest trace of sin
would cause an abatement of his bliss.
The work of sanctification is completed, at the separation of the soul from the
body. We have reason to think that the soul does not remain a moment longer
tainted with sin. Angels carry it into the presence of God, and it appears
before him in a state of unsullied purity. If to the question, how this sudden
change is effected ? we are not able to return an answer, there is no cause for
surprise ; because we are equally ignorant of the mode of its initial and pro
gressive change in the present life. We may think that we know more about
it, because we are acquainted with the means which are employed ; but the
truth is, that the means are the limit of our knowledge ; and this will be mani
fest when we reflect, that there is a general application of them, an application
where, in many instances, no effect is produced, and no man can perceive the
reason of their success in one case, and of their failure in another. We are
compelled to have recourse to a supernatural cause, the agency of the Holy
Ghost, which is exerted or suspended from motives which we cannot assign.
It is not from want of power that he does not perfect his work in an instant,
but because he acts conformably to a plan settled by divine wisdom ; and when
the time comes to change the plan, he can let forth at once such a measure of
his influences as shall ensure its immediate completion. In this world be
lievers are " sanctified through the truth," that is, the power which sanctifies
them is exerted by means of the truth, agreeably to the constitution of our

AND ITS CONSEQUENCES. 305
rational nature. The soul, on its entrance into the other world, will see God
as he is, and by the contemplation of his glory, will be perfectly transformed
into his image.
Perfect holiness Implies, that there are no errors in the understanding, no
waywardness in the will,' no irregularity in the affections ; that the mind is filled
with light, and the heart with love ; that the whole soul is such as God requires
it to be, and presents a spectacle on which he can look with unqualified appro
bation. At present the saints cannot form a distinct idea of this state, because
they have not experienced it; but they may judge of it by analogy, because
they are already the subjects ofthe sanctifying operations of the Spirit, as we
judge of any object by seeing an outline of it. The nearest approach to it is
made in those moments of elevated devotion, when the Christian, abstracted
from external things and absorbed in the contemplation of the Divine glory,
can say with the Psalmist, " Whom have I in heaven but thee ? and there is
none in earth whom I desire besides thee ;" when the motions of sin are sus
pended, and he is conscious only of love, and joy, and holy desires.
I have only one remark more to make, that the perfect holiness which the
soul attains at its separation from the body, is not mutable like the holiness
of Adam, but fixed and permanent. The saints are made " pillars in the
temple of their God, and shall go no more out." All creatures are mutable in
themselves, but the poweT of the Creator can establish men, as it has established
angels. The saints will retain freedom of will in the heavenly world, but liberty
is not inconsistent with an immutable state. God is a free agent, but he cannot
change ; angels are free agents, but they cannot fall into sin ; and the saints will
be free, although their inclinations are directed to one object, and their choice
is forever fixed. Such will be their love of holiness and their hatred of sin,
that a transition from the one to the other will be morally impossible. Besides,
in the heavenly state, they will be exposed to no temptation. There will be
nothing in external objects to allure the senses, for there only righteousness
dwells ; and _u',o the new paradise no seducing spirit can enter to make trial of
its inhabitants. The season of trial will be past, and the state which succeeds
it is a state of repose and enjoyment. The present administration of the
divine government, so far as they are concerned, will then be at an end ; and
rewards and punishments will be finally distributed. There will be no call,
therefore, for the anxious vigilance which is now indispensably necessary, for
precautions are not requisite when there is no danger. They will rejoice in
their perfect security, and serve God without fear.
To the doctrine which has now been laid down respecting the state of the
soul after death, different theories are opposed, less or more remote from the
truth, but all concurring in this general position, that the disembodied spirit
does not immediately pass into its ultimate abode.
The first theory is founded upon the terms used in Scripture to express
the state of the soul subsequent to temporal death, and not a little critical
ingenuity has been displayed in supporting it. On the subject of the future
state, a variety of terms are employed in the New Testament, as, a&vs, 6
jscaitoj Afipaa/i, itapaSueof, faptfapos, ye.iwa, and ovptwof. 'AStjs, which corres
ponds with the Hebrew word ViNiy, signifies according to its etymology, (from a
privative, and nSm, to see), tke invisible state, and is understood to be the
general name of the region into which human spirits pass on leaving the body.
It consists of two provinces, separated from each other by a great gulf or wide
interval — 5 xo\7to( A(3paaft or itaoaSeiaof, and faptfapos — the one the receptacle
of the righteous, and the other the receptacle of the wicked. While in these
receptacles, they are in an intermediate state ; for when the final judgment takes
place, the righteous will enter into oupavos, or heaven, properly so called, and
the wicked into ycivva, or liell. It is supposed, according to this theory, that
Vol. II.— 39. 2 c 2

306 THE DEATH OF THE SAINTS,
the souls of men possess consciousness and activity in this intermediate state,
and experience happiness or misery ; and thus far it is not at variance with
the doctrine which we hold. If it farther implies, that they are not as happy
or as miserable as they will be in heaven and in hell, it accords even here with
the common belief, that the reward of the righteous, and the punishment of
guilty souls, will not be consummated till they have been reunited to their respec
tive bodies, and sentence have been pronounced upon them at the final judg
ment. All the difference seems to consist in the places assigned to them
during the interval between death and the resurrection. But, in speaking of
places in the invisible world, we can affix no distinct ideas to our words, as
they are all equally unknown to us. The hypothesis, therefore, of an interme
diate state, although it were satisfactorily established, would be no real acces
sion to our knowledge ; it would merely make us acquainted with a fact which
we could not understand or apply to any practical use, and which would be to
us a matter of pure speculation. This, indeed, would not be a reason
for rejecting it, if it were clearly taught in the Scriptures ; but, however
plausible is the reasoning in favour of it, I think that it is not reconcileable to
the passages which represent believers, when they die, as entering into heaven,
and into the place where Christ is ; and it rests in a great measure upon criti
cism, the value of which scholars alone can appreciate, and upon descriptions
of the future state, which are confessedly figurative. I shall therefore dismiss
it without farther notice.
I proceed to consider another theory, which is directly opposed to our doc
trine concerning the state of the soul after death. Some modern Divines have
contended that it is asleep or unconscious, and will remain so till the resur
rection. It may be objected, that it is impossible to conceive a spirit to be in
this state, as the idea which is always entertained of it is, that it is a living,
thinking, active substance ; and that its separation from the body, instead of
being an argument for its insensibility, as if it could not act without bodily
organs, is rather an argument against it ; because, being no longer fettered and
impeded by a substance dull and inert, it is at full liberty to exert its native ener
gies, as smothered fire breaks out into a flame, when it obtains a free commu
nication with the atmosphere. To such reasoning they reply, by appealing
to passages of Scripture which appear to favour their hypothesis, and quote
those which speak of the dead as asleep, as knowing nothing, as incapable of
praising God, and lying in darkness and silence. '
The first answer is, that such language is to be considered as figurative, and
may be explained by metaphor and synecdoche. When the dead are said to
be asleep, a metaphor is used, founded upon the striking resemblance between
death and sleep, which is called by the poet, mortis simillima imago ; and, at
the same time, in this as in other instances, by another trope, a part is spoken
of as the whole. The dead are said to sleep, and to be unconscious and inac
tive, because these things are true of their bodies. It is worthy of attention,
that similar language has been adopted by other nations besides the Jews, and
is in common use among us, although we believe, as well as they did, that
souls are active in the invisible state. We should think that the man reasoned
very inconclusively, who, when he heard us saying of the dead, that they are
ignorant of all that is passing on the earth, that they are motionless and without
feeling, and are no longer capable of good or evil, inferred, that we supposed,
either that their souls had died with their bodies, or that their faculties were
dormant and their consciousness was gone. Every man would perceive, in
this case, the folly of making common language, founded as it evidently is
upon appearances, the standard of our philosophical or metaphysical opinions.
It is equally improper to interpret thus the language of Scripture, which adopts

AND ITS CONSEQUENCES. 307
on this occasion the style of common conversation, as it is acknowledged to
do in speaking of the apparent motion of the sun around the earth.
The second answer to the conclusion drawn from the passages cited above,
is, that to understand them as importing the insensibility of the soul in its
separate state, is contrary to other passages in which its conscious existence is
most explicitly affirmed. When Stephen said with his dying breath, " Lord
Jesus, receive my spirit,"* he manifestly supposed that his soul should im
mediately pass into the presence of his Saviour. Our Lord's promise to
the penitent thief, " To-day thou shalt be with me in paradise,"t implies, if
words have any meaning, that ere that day was finished, his soul should be in
the same place with the soul of Christ, and should enjoy the blessedness
which the word " paradise" suggests. In the fifth chapter of the second
Epistle to the Corinthians, Paul proceeds upon the supposition, that believers,
as soon as they leave this world, enter upon a happier state : " For we know,
that, if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building
of God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens. "J The one
event immediately follows the other, — the entrance into the heavenly house,
the removal from the earthly. The same thing is implied when he says, that
he was " in a strait betwixt two," whether to remain upon earth, or " to de
part and to be with Christ, which was far better,"§ Certainly he believed,
that as soon as he departed he should be with Christ, as is clear both from the
words themselves, and from his strait ; for, if he had known that he was to
remain in a state of insensibility for thousands of years, he could not have
hesitated, for a moment, whether it would be better to sink into that state, or to
continue 'in life, engaged in the most important services, and enjoying the
delights of communion with God. To evade this argument, a distinction is
made between absolute and relative time ; the former meaning time consider
ed in itself, independently of human perceptions ; the latter, time as perceived
by us. In respect of absolute time, it is granted that the saints are not with
Christ as soon as they depart from this world ; but they are so in respect of
relative time, for however long the interval may be, they are not conscious of
it, and it will seem to them but a moment. "But does the Apostle," to adopt
the words of Dr. Campbell, " any where give a hint that this is his meaning ?
or is it what any man would naturally discover from his words ? That it is
exceedingly remote from the common use of language, I believe hardly any
of those who favour this scheme will be partial enough to deny. Did the
sacred penmen then mean to put a cheat upon the world, and by the help of
an equivocal expression, to flatter men with the hope of entering, the moment
they expire, on a state of felicity, when in fact they knew that it would be
many ages before it would take place ? But, were the hypothesis about the
extinction of the mind between death and the resurrection well founded, the
apparent coincidence they speak of is not so clear as they seem to think it.
For my part, I cannot regard it as an axiom, and I never heard of any who
attempted to demonstrate it. To me it appears merely a corollary from Mr.
Locke's doetrine, which derives our conceptions of time from the succession of
our ideas ; which, whether true or false, is a doctrine to be found only among
certain philosophers, and which, we may reasonably believe, never came into the
heads of those to whom the Gospel in the apostolic age was announced." II
The distinction between absolute and relative time is totally inapplicable to
the following words : " We are confident, and willing rather to be absent from
the body, and to be present with the Lord."1T He had said before, " Therefore
we are always confident, knowing that whilst we are at home in the body, we
are absent from the Lord." IT I do not conceive it possible to express, in a
* Acts vii. 59. * Luke xxiii. 43. * Verse 1. § Phil. i. 23.
| Campbell on the Gospels, Diss. vi. part ii. §. 23. 1 2 Cor. v. 8. & 6.

308 THE DEATH OF THE SAINTS,
clearer manner, the immediate transition of the soul from its present habitation
into the presence of Christ. What detains us from his presence, is our con
tinuance in the body ; what introduces us into it, is our departure from the body.
Our absence from the body, and our presence with him, are closely con
nected ; the latter succeeds the former without any interval. Would it have
ever entered into the mind of any person of common sense, if there had been
no theory to support, that, after all, hundreds and thousands of years might
intervene ? and would the Apostle have said, with any regard to truth, that,
when "absent from the body, we should be present with the Lord," if he had
believed that the soul, in a state of separation, is insensible, and does not
recover its consciousness till it is reunited to the body, and consequently can
then only be with Christ ? It is evident to every reader, that the doctrine
which he lays down in this passage, is exactly the reverse of the theory which
we are combating.
On the whole, the Scriptures proceed on the supposition, that, as soul and
body are distinct, the former is capable of happiness or misery in a separate
state. The story of the rich man and Lazarus is a proof of it. So are those
passages which speak of the spirits of just men as made perfect ; of the souls
of the martyrs as alive ; and of the departed saints as assembled in heaven.
and engaged in the worship of God. Parables and prophetic visions are not
to be literally interpreted ; but the substance of them must be true, that is to
say, the general instructions which they convey must be conformable to fact,
or they would be no better than fables. It is unnecessary to trouble you with
any more quotations, as, I presume, you are all satisfied that the hypothesis of
the sleep of the soul is a wild fancy, founded on a misapprehension of some
passages of Scripture, and directly contrary to its most explicit declarations.
I have only to add, that some of the passages to which we have appealed, are
equally conclusive against an intermediate state, as they teach the immediate
entrance of the soul into the place whepe Christ now is, which all will acknow
ledge, is the heaven of heavens ; for he ascended far above " all heavens, that
he might fill all things."
We come now to the last hypothesis respecting the state of departed souls.
It is the doctrine of the Church of Rome, that the saints do not immediately
pass into glory, but first go into a place called purgatory, where they are puri
fied by fire from the stains of sin, which had not been washed out during the
present life. This doctrine, Protestants affirm, was unknown to the Church
till the days of Gregory the Great, as he is called, about the end of the sixth,
or the beginning of the seventh century ; but the way seems to have been pre
pared for it by certain opinions, which prevailed prior to that period, as we
learn from the writings of the Fathers. A strange notion was entertained by
some respecting the fire which will burn up the earth and its works ; that all
should pass through it, that it would completely purify the bodies of those who
were to be glorified, and that the more holy any person had been, he should
feel the less pain from this process. With regard to the souls of the righteous,
they believed, that they were in a place of rest and enjoyment, but that they
should not be admitted to the beatific vision till the resurrection was past.
Hence arose the practice of praying for the dead. Conceiving that they had
not yet attained full felicity, the ancients thought that they might be benefited
by their prayers, which would procure to them a greater degree of enjoy
ment. You will observe that, although these opinions were fit materials for
fancy and superstition to work up into a still more extravagant form, they
were widely different from the doctrine afterwards established by the Church
of Rome as an article of faith.
The prototype of the doctrine of Papists on this subject is to be found in
heathenism, from which they have borrowed their cumbersome apparatus of

AND ITS CONSEQUENCES. 309
ceremonies, and many of their religious opinions. The existence of a purga
tory is plainly taught in the writings of both poets and philosophers. In the
sixth book of the iEneid, Anchises explains to his son, who had visited him
in the Shades, the process which souls were doomed to undergo, before they
could be admitted into the Elysian fields, that they might be freed from the
stains of sin which adhered to them at death :
" Ergo exercentur pcenis, veterumque malorum
Suplicia expendunt."*
Some, he says, are stretched out to the winds ; others are purified by being
plunged into an immense whirlpool or lake ; and others are subjected to the
operation of fire — " Infectum scelus exuritur igni."*
In his dialogue entitled Phaedo, Plato informs us that when men enter into
the invisible state, they are judged. Those who are neither truly virtuous,
nor consummately wicked, are carried away to the Acherusian lake, where,
having suffered the punishment of their unjust deeds, they are dismissed, and
then receive the reward of their good actions. Those who, on account of
the greatness of their sins, are incurable, are cast into Tartarus, from which
they shall never escape. Those who have committed curable sins — laetfia
a/j-ap-ttifm-ia — and have repented, must also fall into Tartarus, but after a certain
period they will be delivered from it.
In rjoth these passages, we have a very exact description of the Popish pur
gatory ; and, as there is no trace of it in the Bible, we conclude that this is the
source from which it has been derived. The resemblance will appear more
striking, if you reflect that, in both cases, it rests precisely upon the same
\ foundation, the curable and incurable sins of Plato answering exactly to the
venial and mortal sins of Papists. By mortal sins, they understand those
which alienate men entirely from God, and are worthy of eternal death ; and
they may be compared to those bodily wounds which, by their own nature,
cause the destruction of life. Venial sins do not turn away the sinner altogether
from God, although they impede his approach to him ; and they may be
expiated, because their nature is so light that they do not exclude a person from
grace, or render him an enemy to God. Mortal sins are few, if I rightly
remember, only seven, and even these are so explained away by their casuists,
the most unblushingly profligate that the world ever saw, that the number is
still farther reduced, and scarcely one is left upon the list. All other sins are
venial, or pardonable ; or, in the language of Plato, apapttjtiata laut^a. They
are expiated partly by penances in this life, and partly by the pains of purga
tory, the place appointed for completing the atonement.
Another distinction has been contrived by the Church of Rome, with a view
to support its doctrine concerning satisfaction for sin in the future state. The
pardon of sin we understand to consist in the full remission of guilt or of the
obligation to punishment, so that to the pardoned man there is no condemna
tion ; but they take a different view. They affirm that there are two kinds of
guilt, reatus cvlpee, the guilt of the fault, and reatus panes, the guilt of the
punishment. The former is remitted, and the latter is retained ; or in other
words, the penitent sinner is absolved from the sentence of eternal death, but is
still subject to temporal punishment. Thus -speaks the Council of Trent :
" If any man shall say, that after justification the fault is so remitted to a peni
tent sinner, or the guilt of eternal punishment is so blotted out, that there
remains no guilt of temporal punishment to be endured, in this life or in the
* ^Eneid. vi. 739, 740. * Ib. 743.

310 THE DEATH OF THE SAINTS,
future life in purgatory, before he can be admitted into the kingdom of heaven .
let him be accursed."* Now, Purgatory has been fitted up as a great peni
tentiary, into which the half-pardoned culprits are sent, that they may undergo
the painful but wholesome discipline, by which they will be qualified for full
restoration to the favour of God.
The notion of purgatory is so gross and palpably false, that the common
sense of every man would reject it, where it is not perverted and overpowered
by authority and prejudice. Can a person have any idea in his mind, when he
talks of souls being purified by fire ? Might he not, with equal propriety,
speak of a spirit being nourished with bread and wine ? The soul is supposed
to be a material substance, (upon which alone fire can act,) contrary to the be
lief even of the abettors of purgatory, who admit, as well as we, the spirituality
of its essence. This single remark is sufficient. The whole fabric tumbles to
the ground. Purgatory, as explained by the followers of Antichrist, is physi
cally impossible.
It is unnecessary to enter into a minute refutation of an opinion which refutes
itself, and is at variance with the dictates of reason as well as of revelation.
It were easy to show that it is subversive of the atonement of Christ, of the
doctrine of justification by faith, ofthe peace, and consolation, and hope ofthe
people of God. The testimonies from Scripture, which have been already
produced to prove that the souls of believers immediately pass into the presence
of Christ, are all arguments against the purgatory of Papists. Yet, as those
who profess to be Christians find it necessary, or at least expedient, to have
some appearance of support from Scripture, they allege certain quotations from
it, the sound of which seems to favour their sentiments.
They appeal, for example, to the words of our Lord concerning the sin against
the Holy Ghost, that "it shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, neither in
the world to come ;"t from which it is inferred, that some sins are forgiven in the
world to come. It is, however, a little hazardous to build a theory upon the
slender foundation of a solitary expression, especially when it admits of a dif
ferent interpretation. Our Lord may be conceived to have adopted the current
language of the Jews, who called their own state, the present world, and that
under the Messiah, the world to come ; and in this view he asserts, that the sin
against the Holy Ghost shall not be forgiven under any dispensation of religion.
It is plain that his design is to assert the unpardonable nature of the sin ; and
for this purpose he uses a phraseology which excluded all hope, as we say,
that a thing will not be done either now or hereafter. It shall never be done.
Another passage, which is brought forward to support the notion of purgatory,
is in the first Epistle to the Corinthians, where the Apostle, speaking of the
different superstructures which men might erect upon the true foundation, says,
" Every man's work shall be made manifest, for the day shall declare it, because
it shall be revealed by fire ; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort
it is." " If any man's work shall be burnt he shall suffer loss : but he himself
shall be saved ; yet so as by fire."| But nothing more can be gained from this
passage in favour of the doctrine than an empty sound. This fire is for trial ;
the fire of purgatory is for punishment. This fire tries the works of men ; the
fire of purgatory purifies their persons. This fire tries all works whether
good or bad ; the fire of purgatory is kindled only for the latter. It is a figura
tive description ofthe effects of divine judgments, in sweeping away the false
opinions which even good men may hold and publish in connexion with the
great truths of the gospel ; or, of the future judgment, when every work shall
be made manifest, and some of the views and practices even of genuine be
lievers, into which, although they hold Christ the head, they were betrayed
through ignorance and prejudice, will be disapproved, although they themselves
* De Justifiqatione, Canon, xxx. * Matth. xii. 32. $ 1 Cor. iii. 13, 15.

THE RESURRECTION. 3<1
shall receive the end of their faith, even the salvation of their souls. The fire
will consume the wood, hay, and stubble, but will not touch their persons.
Other passages which are referred to are still less to the purpose.
The best argument for purgatory is the immense gain which it brings to the
worthless church that patronizes it. The satisfaction of Jesus Christ, and
the surplus satisfaction of the saints who suffered more than their sins deserved,
are dealt out by the Pope and his underlings for the benefit of the living and
the dead. But, although freely they have received, they are not disposed
freely to give. They, no doubt, think it reasonable, that a treasure so precious
should not be thrown away, and that, if souls are to be relieved from excrucia
ting sufferings, their friends on earth should pay for so valuable a favour. Great
efficacy is ascribed to masses and prayers said for them ; but if there are no
wages, there will be no work. The miserable beings in prison may remain
there, and be tormented for ever, for aught that the vicar of Christ and his
servants will do in their behalf, if there is not a more powerful motive than
charity. Great sums of money have therefore been given, and rich endow
ments have been founded, to secure the prayers and masses of the priests ; and
such was their influence in past ages, that, if the civil power had not arrested
their progress, they would have engrossed the greater part of the property of
Christendom. The delusion was supported by a train of false miracles, and
visions, and revelations, with which the legends of the Church of Rome are
filled, and which one does not know, whether to despise for their silliness, or
to abhor for their impiety.

LECTURE LXXXIL
ON THE RESURRECTION OF THE DEAD.
State of the Body after Death. — The Resurrection. — Proofs of it. — Believed by the Jews. —
Universality ofthe Resurrection. — Identity of our Present and Future Bodies. — Resurrec
tion, the work of Divine Power. — Connexion between the Resurrection of Christ and
that of the Saints. — The Nature of the Bodies of the Saints. — Opinion respecting a Partial
Resurrection. ,,
We have seen that all must die, the righteous as well as the wicked, for the
grave is the house appointed for all living. Confining our attention to the
former, we have inquired what becomes of their souls ; and it has appeared,
that as, being distinct from the body, they survive their separation from it, so
they neither sink into sleep, nor enter into an intermediate state, but are made
perfect in holiness, and immediately pass into heaven. Besides the explicit
assurances which are contained in the Scriptures, we are led to this conclusion
by the consideration, that the sleep of a disembodied spirit is inconceivable ;
that the purgation of it by fire is physically impossible ; and that to suppose a
process of expiatory discipline, is derogatory to the perfection of the atonement
of Christ.
The next subject of inquiry is the state of the body after death. It may
seem sufficient to say, that it is committed to the1 grave, in which it putrefies,
and after a certain time is reduced to dust. This is the popular view of the
subject; and as the language commonly used is founded upon the words of
Scripture, " Dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return,"* so it is sufficiently
accurate for ordinary purposes. It is certain that all that is earthy in the
* Gen. iii. 19.

312 THE RESURRECTION.
human body is reduced to earth ; but this is only an inconsiderable part of it.
It is a vulgar error to suppose that the body is a solid mass of matter. On
being subjected to an analysis, it is found to be a compound of different sub
stances ; and, when the air involved in it is extricated, and the fluids are evapo
rated, the residuum is much less than is commonly imagined. It is enough
to have adverted to this subject in passing. At death, the body is committed to
the grave, or is disposed of in some other way ; and what of man is mortal per
ishes to our apprehension.
When speaking of the death of the saints, the Scriptures say that they " die
in the Lord," and "sleep in Jesus;"* and from these expressions it has been
inferred, that, as there subsisted an intimate relation between him and them
during life, the union is not dissolved by the separation of the two constituent
parts of their nature. As the relation extended to their whole persons, to the
body as well as to the soul, it is supposed to continue in reference to both.
There is no difficulty in conceiving the continuance of the union of the soul,
because it is still animated by the Spirit of Christ ; but it is not so easy to un
derstand the union of a piece of dead matter, of a heap of dust, of particles
scattered hither and thither, to the living Saviour in heaven. Yet the notion
is manifestly favoured by the expressions formerly quoted, and, perhaps too,
by the assertion in another place, that the bodies of believers are " the temples
of" the Holy Ghost."! If they once belonged to Christ, they do not cease in
their new state to be a part of his property. He claims them as his own, be
cause he shed his blood to redeem them : they are a part of his mystical body,
the church, which is made up not of separate spirits, but of human beings ; and
they are therefore objects of his care, at the time when they most seem to be
forsaken. It is a wonderful thought, that what to us is so disgusting that we
cannot bear to look upon it, what is so worthless that we care not perhaps
where it is laid, or to what use it is applied, what is confounded with the
common earth, and accounted the vilest of all things, should be precious in
the eyes of that great Being who looks upon ten thousand worlds as nothing !
, To the bodies of believers, the grave is a place of rest. So far, indeed, as
this rest implies exemption from toil, and pain, and weariness, it is equally so
to the bodies of the wicked. Both have lain down, like the traveller at the
end of his journey, and the hireling when he has fulfilled his day. In calling
the grave a place of rest to the righteous, we unconsciously associate with the
state of their bodies that of their souls, which are truly at rest in the peaceful
abode of heaven ; or we anticipate the result, when, awakened as from a long
refreshing sleep, they shall rise with renovated life and vigour, to enjoy ever
lasting felicity.
" Go thou thy way till the end be : for thou shalt rest, and stand in thy lot
at the end of the days."*. In these words, death is presented to Daniel under
the emblem of a state of repose ; and, at the same time, he is cheered with the
hope of a happier lot, which will succeed at a distant period. Having consid
ered at some length the death of the righteous and its consequences, we are led,
in the next place, to speak of their resurrection.
I begin with remarking, That the resurrection of the body is a matter of
pure revelation. Reason does not suggest it ; or rather, to reason it seems in
credible ; and to those who have no other teacher, it is unknown, or when
proposed, is rejected by them. Two or three passages, indeed have been
found in the writings of heathens, from which it appears that some of them
had an idea of a resurrection ; but their knowledge must have been derived from
revelation, incidentally or in the channel of tradition, and their belief was con
fined to themselves. With a few exceptions, the wise men among the Gentiles
were either ignorant of the resurrection, or derided it. In the dialogue oi
* Rev. xiv. 13. 1 Thess. iv. 14. * 1 Cor. vi. 19. $ Dan. xii. 13.

THE RESURRECTION. 313
Minucius Felix which is entitled Octavius, Ca?cilius, who personates a heathen,
reproaches the Christians with contriving aniles fabulas, old wives' fables.
" They tell us," he says, " that they shall be reproduced after death and the
ashes of the funeral pile ; and believe their own lies, so that you might think
that they had already revived. O twofold madness ! to denounce destruction
to the heaven and the stars, which we leave as we found them, but to promise
eternity to themselves, when dead and extinguished !" When Paul in Athens
spoke of the resurrection of the dead, some of the philosophers mocked.*
In the church of Corinth, there were persons who, influenced by their original
opinions, affirmed that there was no resurrection of the dead ;| and, in the
second Epistle to Timothy, mention is made of Hymeneus and Philetus,
who affirmed that the resurrection was already past; J that is, finding that the
doctrine was explicitly taught by the Gospel, and that they could not retain
the Christian name if they should flatly deny it, they explained it away, as
expressive only of a resurrection from a state of ignorance and sin.
Since the resurrection of the dead has been made known by revelation, it has
been attempted to establish it by the principles of reason ; and an argument has
been founded on the justice of God, which requires, that as men have obeyed
or disobeyed him in their whole person, so, in their whole person they should
be rewarded or punished. And it does seem agreeable to justice, that the
body, which in this life is associated with the soul in all its actions, should share
in its future recompense. But, whatever force there may be in this argument to
us, who already believe the point which it is intended to prove, there is no reason
to think that it would have led any man to the conclusion, who had no other means
of arriving at it. Without revelation, our ideas of Divine justice would have
been very imperfect. We could not have ascertained exactly what were its de
mands ; nor do I see that reason could have objected if it had been said, that
justice would be satisfied with the infliction of such punishment as the soul
was capable of enduring in a separate state. The argument ascribed to the
ancient philosopher Phocylides, one of the few who are understood to have
entertained the idea of a resurrection, seems to be better : " It is not good that
the admirable harmony which appears in the constitution of men, should be en
tirely dissolved. We hope, therefore, that the remains of the dead will come
forth from the earth, and return to the light." What views led him to this
observation, I cannot tell ; but it may be turned into an argument from the
wisdom of God, who it is not to be supposed will destroy a species of crea
tures, after having been induced by sufficient reasons to create it. Were the
body of man to remain forever in the grave, the human species would be de
stroyed ; for there would be then no specific difference, that we know of,
between men and angels, both being pure spirits unconnected with matter.
That peculiar race, which united the visible and invisible worlds, was allied
to earth ,by one part of its nature and to heaven by another, would disappear,
and a link in the chain of being would be broken. We might conceive God to
annihilate a species, in the exercise of his sovereignty, or in the exercise of his
justice ; but we could not so easily conceive him to change a species, or, in
translating the inhabitants of this globe to a higher region, to retain only one
half of their original nature, and consign the other to the unconscious elements
for ever. What, it might be asked, could be the reason for this change ?
Why did he give them bodies, and then take them away ?' I do not know that
this argument, as I have now stated it, has been attended to before, nor do I
affirm that it has any force. It is, however, fully as convincing as the argu
ment from the justice of God ; but it does not amount to demonstration, and, at
the best, can afford only a degree of probability.
There are some analogies in the natural world, by which the subject has
* Acts xvii. 32. * 1 Cor. xv. * 2 Tim. u. 17, 18.
Vol. IL— 40. 2 D

314 THE RESURRECTION.
been illustrated ; but they are merely illustrations, and prove nothing. The
revival of all things at the return of spring, is one of the most common as well
as the most beautiful. Trees, and shrubs, and herbs, and flowers, which
seemed to be dead, and some of which lay hidden in the earth like the body
in the grave, burst forth with new life, and delight our senses with their verdure
and their fragrance. But the analogy fails in the most important point. They
were not dead ; there was merely a suspension of their functions ; but from the
body in the grave the vital principle has totally departed, and its very texture is
dissolved. To make the similitude perfect, we should see an instance of the
reviviscence of a plant, torn from its bed, deprived of its roots, reduced to ashes
by fire, or consumed by air and moisture. On such a plant Spring would shed
its genial influences in vain.
There is a supposed fact in natural history, which, being credited by the
early Christians, and not by them alone, but even by wise men among the
Gentiles, was frequently appealed to as a proof or illustration of the resurrection
of the body. It is the story of the phoenix, and is thus related in his Epistle
to the Corinthians by Clement, the first Christian in whose writings it occurs.
" Let us contemplate the wonderful sign which takes place in the eastern re
gions, namely, in Arabia. It is the bird called the phoenix, and being the only
one of its species, it lives five hundred years. When it is about to die, it prepares
a place for itself of frankincense and myrrh, and other aromatic substances, and
entering into it at the appointed time, expires. The flesh being corrupted, a
worm is produced, which, being nourished by the moisture of the dead animal,
pushes forth wings, and growing strong carries away the nest containing the
bones of its predecessor,, and places it upon the altar of the sun in Heliopolis,
and then departs. Can it then seem wonderful that the Maker of all things
should raise those who have served him in holiness and faith?"
The point which I have been hitherto endeavouring to establish is, that the
resurrection of the body is a fact which unassisted reason could not discover,
and of which the natural world can furnish only some images or similitudes.
It is so clearly revealed in the New Testament, that it is unnecessary to refer
to particular passages ; and I shall therefore at present mention only a few from
the Old Testament, to show that it was known before the advent of our Saviour.
The following words of Job have been the subject of much discussion; but the
circumstances in which they were spoken, the solemnity of the introduction,
and the elevated tone of the language, evidently point to something greater than
a temporal deliverance. " Oh that my words were now written! Oh that they
were printed in a book ! that they were graven with an iron pen and lead in
the rock forever ! For I know that my Redeemer liveth, and that he shall
stand at the latter day upon the earth : And though after my skin worms
destroy this body, yet in my flesh shall I see God ; whom I shall see for my
self, and mine eyes shall behold, and not another ; though my reins be con
sumed within me."* It is plainly taught in these words of Isaiah: " He will
swallow up death in victory, and the Lord God will wipe away tears from off
all faces ;" and again, " Thy dead men shall live, together with my dead body
shall they arise. Awake and sing, ye that dwell in dust ; for thy dew is as
the dew of herbs, and the earth shall cast out the dead."t I shall add only
one passage more, from the prophecies of Daniel. " And many of them that
sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to
shame and everlasting contempt."! A strange notion has been broached, that
the Jews were ignorant of a future state, because there is no express mention
of it in the law of Moses. But, our Lord has proved it and the resurrection of
the body from the words of God prior to the giving of the law, " I am the God
of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob ;"§ and we see that
* Job xix. 23—27. * Is. xxv. 8. xxvi. 19. i Dan. xii. 2. § Matth. xxii. 32.

THE RESURRECTION. 315
it is plainly foretold in their subsequent sacred books. In the Epistle to the
Hebrews it is affirmed, that it was the hope of it which supported the martyrs
for the Jewish religion. " And others were tortured, not accepting deliverance,
that they might obtain a better resurrection."* While the writer may be
understood to refer to all the holy men who laid down their lives for the law,
he had probably in his eye the sufferers under Antiochus Epiphanes, and par
ticularly a mother and her seven sons ; of whom it is related in the second
book of the Maccabees, that they endured the most cruel torments with patience,
and died in the assured hope of a glorious immortality. " Thou, like a fury,"
said one of the sons, " takest us out of this present life, but the King of the
world shall raise us up, who have died for his laws, unto everlasting life."*
Reason confirms the dictates of revelation by reminding us, that the power
of God is able to execute the purposes of his will. " Why should it seem an
incredible thing that God should raise the dead?" is a question which may put
to silence all infidel objectors. As the event does not imply a contradiction, it
is possible, and may therefore be effected by that power to which no limits can
be assigned. He who made all things out of nothing, can unquestionably
restore any portion of matter to the form and organization which he gave it at
first. If he fashioned the human body out of the dust, it would be absurd to
suppose that there is any greater difficulty in raising it from the dust again.
To hesitate for a moment about the possibility of an event which God has sig
nified his intention to accomplish, because we do not understand how it can be
effected, is a proof of atheism, or, at least, of stupidity, for it proceeds upon an
assumption, which, to say nothing of its impiety, is unworthy of a being pos
sessed of any portion of reason, that the weakness of creatures is the measure
of the strength of the Creator.
A question has been proposed, whether the Scriptures teach a universal re
surrection, or the resurrection only of the righteous ? I do not know that any
in modern times have confined it to the righteous, but some of the followers of
Socinus. Dr. Macknight adopted the strange opinion, that the bodies of the
wicked will be destroyed in the general conflagration ; but he believed that they
would be previously raised from the grave.| The notion of a partial resurrec
tion has been triumphantly refuted ; but this was an easy task, as there was
no occasion for elaborate argumentation, and nothing more was necessary than
to appeal to the explicit declarations of Scripture. Some heresies have an air
of plausibility, by which they may impose upon the unwary ; and a regard to
the honour of the truth, and the souls of men, requires that we should enter
into a formal confutation of them. But, when certain corruptors of the truth
have the audacity to give the lie to the testimony of God, delivered in terms
which are free from ambiguity, and are the plainest which it is possible to use,
it is quite sufficient to return a simple negative to their unfounded affirmations,
or to treat them with silent contempt. , If Paul had hope towards God, that
there would be a resurrection, "both of the just and ofthe unjust ;"§ and if our
Saviour has told us, that " all that are in their graves shall come forth ; they that
have done good, unto the resurrection of life ; and they that have done evil,
unto the resurrection of damnation ;"|] we may surely give ourselves very
little concern about what any follower of Socinus may say to the contrary.
The question, whether the dead will be raised with the same bodies which
were laid in the grave, or with different bodies, would not have occurred to a
plain, simple-minded man, who was disposed implicitly to receive the testi
mony of God. It has arisen from the propensity of the human mind to specu
late about every thing, and to philosophize where we ought to believe. It has
been asked at those who assert the resurrection of the same body, whether they
•Heb. xi. 35. *2Mac. vii. 9. i Macknight on the Epistles, 1 Thess. iv. 16.
§ Acts xxiv. 15. || John v. 29.

316 THE RESURRECTION.
mean the body which died, or the body at any former period, as it is known
to be in a perpetual flux, and few of the particles which belonged to it in youth
remain in old age ? It has been asked, whether, as all those particles equally
belonged to the individual, they are all to be restored to him, or only a part ;
and, in the latter supposition, what part ? Now, although we cannot return a
satisfactory answer to such questions, our ignorance is not a reason why we
should entertain any doubt of the identity of the body ; because we have re
ceived assurances of the fact, and should be content, as we must be in many
other cases, with this general knowledge, while the mode and circumstances
are enveloped in mystery. The very word, resurrection, and the correspond
ing term avo.a-ta.aii, both signify the rising or standing up of something which
had fallen or lain down ; and if it is a different body from their present with
which men will hereafter be domed, a word has been chosen by the inspired
writers which conveys a fallacious idea. This single argument, I think, is
conclusive. The formation of a different body for the separate spirit would
not be a resurrection but a creation, — in the secondary sense of the term, if it
was formed out of pre-existing materials. In corroboration of this argument,
I observe, that the sameness of the body is implied in the reasonings of Paul in
the fifteenth chapter of the first Epistle to the Corinthians. Some, indeed,
have drawn the contrary conclusion from his words : " That which thou sowest,
thou sowest not that body that shall be, but bare grain, it may chance of wheat,
or of some other grain. But God giveth it a body as it hath pleased him, and
to every seed his own body."* But his meaning will be obvious, if you reflect
upon his design, which is to show, that the bodies of the saints, of whom alone
he is speaking, will undergo a great and glorious change, and will not be the
same as they now are in respect of their qualities, as the plant which rises
from the earth is different from the bare grain, the homely-looking seed from
which it springs. It is a physical fact, that the plant is not different from the
seed, as the new bodies are supposed to be from the old ; for, it is derived
from the seed, and contains a part of its substance ; and the Apostle himself
proceeds upon this idea, when he says, "Thou fool, that which thou sowest is
not quickened, except it die ;"| plainly supposing, that that which is quickened
is the same substance which died; and consequently, that the body ofthe saints,
at the resurrection, is the same body which underwent putrefaction. He ex
presses his meaning in the clearest manner, when he afterwards contrasts the
present and the future state of the body ; for he assumes it as a fact, that it is
the same material substance which is now corruptible, mean, and weak, but is
afterwards to be incorruptible, glorious, and powerful ; and he sums up his dis
course by saying, " This corruptible must put on incbrruption, and this mortal
must put on immortality."!
It has been said that the resurrection of the same body is not necessary ;
for, although the new body is not numerically the same, "the body is truly
raised, because, what is raised being united to the soul, there will arise in the
man thus completed, a consciousness of his identity, by which he will be sen
sible of the justice of the recompense rendered to him for his deeds." The
consciousness of identity, as far as it respects the soul, is never suspended,
and remains while it is in a separate state. What, then, is this new conscious
ness which is to arise when it is again embodied ? If it mean any thing, it
must mean a consciousness of identity in the whole person, and, consequentlv,
a consciousness of what is not true ; for, if the consciousness refers to the soul
alone, it does not begin at the resurrection, and the word " arise" is used
merely to impose upon us, and to make us believe that this new body, although
totally different, will somehow he considered as the same with the former body.
With regard to the idea, that this consciousness of identity is sufficient for all
* 1 Cor. xv. 37, 38. * Ib. 36. $ lb. 53.

THE RESURRECTION. 317
the ends of justice, the question is not, whether it is true or false, but whether
God our judge will account it sufficient; and if he has declared his intention o
raise the same body to be rewarded or punished, speculations about what might
have been are not worthy of notice.
Against the resurrection ofthe same body, it is objected, that the bodies of
men often enter into the composition of other substances ; that they not only
serve for the nutrition of vegetables, and are the food of carnivorous animals,
but that they are occasionally devoured by cannibals, and converted into a part
of their bodies. It is easy to conceive them to be reclaimed from animals and
vegetables ; but what shall be d<me in those cases in which the same particles
happen to belong to different men? — Two things are supposed in this objection.
First, that all the particles which have ever belonged to an individual will be
united in the composition of his future body ; and secondly, that a part of the
substance of one man may become part of the substance of another. It is evi
dent that, if the first supposition is true, the second is false ; and that, if the
second is true, the first is false ; but we cannot affirm any thing certainly con
cerning either. The objection is addressed to our ignorance ; but the objectors
themselves are equally ignorant ; and as, on this account, they have no right
to advance the objection, so we are under no obligation to put ourselves to the
trouble of answering it. It is enough for us to know that God, all-wise and
almighty, is able to perform what he has promised.
Some have supposed that there is " a germ or seminal principle in the human
body, which is not destroyed by death ; and which, at the appointed time, will
reproduce the body in a more excellent form than before, through the quicken
ing influence of Divine power." But, we may ask, Is the human body a
vegetable ? Does it resemble a plant, which, when its leaves and stem are
destroyed, retains life in the root, and will shoot forth again at the return of
spring? Will the reproduction of the body, which we have been taught to
consider as miraculous, be the result of a natural process ? How is this germ or
seminal principle preserved, when the body is reduced to ashes by fire, or un
dergoes a complete dissolution in the grave ? Has any person seen it? Does any
person understand what it means ? Has it any existence but in the region of
fancy and conjecture? We have frequently cause to complain that we meet
with gratuitous assumptions and unintelligible propositions ; and they occur in
the writings of the learned, as well as in the conversation ofj the illiterate. Let
no man talk of a germ or seminal principle of the body, till he has first, after
patient thinking, assured himself that he affixes a distinct idea to his words. I
consider the assertion, that there is such a principle, to be words and nothing
more. Besides other absurdities, that is implied in it, that the body is not
entirely dead ; that there is a part of it, however small, in which life remains ;
for a dead germ or seed could not reproduce ; and how there can be life in any
particle of it, after the vital principle has forsaken it, we leave to the authors
of this foolish hypothesis to explain. In our progress through the system of
Divine truth, our way is impeded, not only by the blunders of vulgar ignorance,
but by the unfounded speculations of false wisdom and philosophy.
The resurrection of the dead is the work of God. Yet it is ascribed to
Jesus Christ without any inconsistency, because he is a Divine Person, and to
him as Mediator the administration of the moral government of the Universe is
committed " The hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves
shall hear his voice, and shall come forth."* The resurrection will be a prepara
tory step to the judgment, which will immediately follow, and in which, sen
tence will be pronounced upon all the individuals of the human race, according
to their works. " The Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout,
with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God ; and the dead in
* John v. 28.
2 d 2

318 THE RESURRECTION.
Christ shall rise first."* We do not understand the circumstances mentioned
in these words ; but, if they refer to the ministry of created beings on this
occasion, we are sure that it is not by their agency that the dead will be restored
to life. This is a work appropriated to divine power, which only is able to
effect it. No voice will raise the dead but the voice of Jesus Christ. The
office of angels will be subordinate ; and as their presence will add to the
grandeur of the scene, so they will be sent to convey the righteous from the
earth to the right hand of their Saviour. " He shall send his angels with a
great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect, from one
end of heaven to the other."t
I have already stated, that there will be a resurrection of all men, good and
bad, and that the justice of God seems to require, that as men have served him
or sinned against him in the body, so in the body, they should be rewarded or
punished. With regard to the wicked, the Scripture contents itself with in
forming us, that they shall be raised, and afterwards judged and cast into hell.
It does not enter into a detailed account of the state and qualities of their bodies.
All that we learn is, that they shall rise " to shame and everlasting contempt;"
and hence we may probably infer, that their external appearance will be such
as is befitting the character of criminals, and will exhibit marks of the curse, by
which their whole person is devoted to irretrievable perdition.
In the subsequent part of this lecture, I shall confine your attention to the
resurrection of the saints.
I begin with remarking, that there is an intimate connexion between their
resurrection, and that of Jesus Christ. The simple re-union of their souls and
bodies, is not to be considered as the effect of his mediation, because the same
thing will take place with respect to the wicked ; and of all opinions none is
more absurd than that of certain Divines, who have maintained, that the gen
eral resurrection is a privilege which Christ has procured for mankind in
general by his death. To the wicked the resurrection is not a privilege, but a
curse ; it is not the effect of the goodness, but of the avenging justice of God.
What the saints owe to his mediation is a happy resurrection, the change of a
tremendous evil into an unspeakable blessing. As he died not for himself, but
for them, he has taken away the sting of death, or made it cease to be a penal
evil to them ; and rising in the character of their surety, he secured that they
also shall rise, to enjoy the immortal life which is the recompense of his' merit.
"Since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection ofthe dead."!
Death came by the first man, because through his sin, his descendants, to
whom its guilt is imputed, are rendered obnoxious to death ; and the resurrec
tion of the dead, must therefore come by the second man in a similar way.
Through his righteousness imputed to them, they are made heirs of eternal
life. It is perhaps on this account, that God is said " to have raised us up
together with him, and made us sit together in heavenly places ;"§ words which
seem to import, that the resurrection of the saints is past, but which can only
mean, that it is infallibly secured by that of Jesus Christ as their Head and
Representative. " Now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the first fruits of them
that slept."!! The first fruits were by the command of God presented to him
at a stated season, not only as a token of the gratitude of the Israelites for his
bounty, but as an earnest of the approaching harvest. In this sense, he ia
called the first fruits of the dead. He was the first in order of time, for,
although some were restored to life by the prophets and by himself during his
personal ministry, none came out of their graves to return to them no more till
after his resurrection ; and as he was the first in respect of time, so he was the
* 1 Thess. iv. 16. * Mat xxiv. 31. $ 1 Cor. xv. 21.
§ Eph. ii. 6. | 1 Cor. xv. 20.

THE RESURRECTION. 319
first in order of succession ; all the saints following him, as the harvest follow
ed the presentation of the first fruits of the temple. The interval is long, and
the dreary sterility of the grave might justify the thought that the seed com
mitted to it has perished for ever. But our hope rests upon his power, which
can make the wilderness blossom as the rose ; and we wait till heavenly influ
ences descend as the dew of herbs, when the barren soil shall display all the
luxuriance of vegetation, and death itself shall teem with life.
Of the change which will take place in the bodies of the saints, Paul speaks
in his first Epistle to the Corinthians ; but his words are too general to con
vey a distinct idea of the subject. ' " It is sown in corruption, it is raised in
incorruption ; it is sown in dishonour, it is raised in glory ; it is sown in
weakness, it is raised in power ; it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiri
tual body."* We may, however, draw from them some conclusions respecting
the state of the glorified body.
First, It will be incorruptible and immortal. In the present state, the human
body is liable to dissolution, and contains in itself the principles of decay.
It is subject to acute and chronic diseases, by which life is suddenly or slowly
extinguished; and then the process of putrefaction begins, which terminates
in the destruction of its organization, and the separation of its parts. In the
future state it will be sound and healthy, and probably be so constituted as not
to be naturally capable of disease and waste, while the penal cause of its dis
orders will no longer exist. " There shall be no more death, neither sorrow,
nor crying, nor any more pain."t The body will be immortal as the soul.
Although things on earth, even the firmest and most solid substances, are
wasted away ; yet this appears to be the effect of the circumstances in which
they are placed, — of the action, for example, of air and moisture. We do not
know that all matter experiences decay. We are ignorant of its state beyond
our own world; but we have reason to believe that the sun and stars are of the
same magnitude, and emit the same splendour, as at the beginning ; and can
find no difficulty in conceiving any portion of matter to be made, by the will of
God, immutable and eternal.
Secondly, The bodies of the saints will be glorious ; but in what this glory
will consist, we are not able to say. The word, glory, when applied to the
body, suggests the idea of brightness or splendour ; and in this sense we
speak of the glory of the sun and the stars. It may seem to favour this
meaning of the term in reference to the present subject, that at the transfiguration
of our Lord, his face shone as the sun, and his raiment was white as the
light ;! and that when John saw him in Patmos, his face was like the mid-day
sun, and his eyes as a flame of fire, and his feet as burning brass ,|| and we
are told that the bodies of the saints will be fashioned like unto his glorious
body.§ It is certain, however, with respect to the latter description, that some
parts of it are emblematical ; and we cannot therefore consider it as a true
representation of the appearance of his body in heaven. We are equally un
certain with regard to the other appearance ; because it does not follow, that
the form in which our Saviour shewed himself to his disciples, living upon
earth, and entertaining the common notion of corporeal glory is the form
which he wears in a state so different from the present. There is no doubt
that, in symmetry, and beauty, and dignity, the glorified body will be perfect.
It will be finished after the highest pattern in the universe. Man will then be
fair as in paradise, and fairer still than in that happy place. Of all the visible
works of God, the most exquisite will be those bodies which his own Son has
redeemed from death with his precious blood.
Thirdly, The bodies of the saints will be powerful. At present, they are
* 1 Cor. xv. 42. — 44. * Rev. xxi. 4. $ Matth*. xvii. 2.
I Rev. i. 14—16. § Phil. iii. 21.

320 THE RESURRECTION.
subject to many infirmities ; their strength is soon exhausted and they need
food, and rest, and cordials, to restore them. In the future state, languor and
weariness will be unknown. We have no means of estimating the strength
of the glorified body, as we know of no resistance which it will have to over
come ; but we may perhaps judge of it from a circumstance which is revealed
concerning the righteous in heaven, that they will be uninterruptedly engaged
in the service of God. Constant employment will cause no fatigue, and sleep
will not be necessary to renovate their powers. It is plain, therefore, that
their bodies will possess a degree of vigour and activity of which we can form
no conception.
Lastly, The bodies of the saints will be spiritual. It is a remark which
must occur to every person, that a spiritual body is an apparent contradiction ;
and we are therefore under the necessity of understanding the word, spiritual,
in an unusual sense. It seems to signify refined, in opposition to the grossness
of the present body, composed, as it is, of flesh, blood, and bones ; and to this
meaning we are led by the following words, which the Apostle subjoins as an
explanation of his account of the glorified body, or as the reason of the change
which it will undergo : " Now tnis I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot
inherit the kingdom of God ; neither can corruption inherit incorruption."*
Corruption is the present corruptible body, which, it is intimated, remaining
as it is, or retaining its present constitution, cannot become incorruptible. It
must undergo a new modification ; in consequence of which, although still
material, it will be very different from what it now is. We see matter existing
in different states, composing a metal, and composing a sunbeam ; and hence,
it is easy to conceive the power of God so to refine the bodies of the saints,
that they may be comparatively said to be spiritual. How pure, I had almost
said etherial, must those bodies be, which will need neither food nor rest,
and will never experience pain or fatigue ! It would be folly and presumption
to speculate upon a subject of which we have so little information ; but it is
evident that certain parts of the body will no longer be necessary, — those, for
example, which serve for the concoction and digestion of our food ; and if the
future body is not to be sustained by other substances, the use of the blood
which circulates through the veins and arteries, to convey nourishment to
every part, will be superseded. I might carry this reasoning farther ; but after
all we could arrive at no certain conclusion : and why should we seek to know
what the Scriptures have concealed ?
Some have entertained the idea that, before the general resurrection, there
will be a partial resurrection of the saints, or of the martyrs ; and found it
upon the following words : " And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and
judgment was given unto them ; and I saw the souls of them that were
beheaded for the witness of Jesus, and for the word of God, and which had
not worshipped the beast, neither his image, neither had received his mark
upon their foreheads, or in their hands ; and they lived and reigned with Christ
a thousand years. But the rest of the dead lived not again until the thousand
years were finished. This is the first resurrection."! This passage has given
rise to the notion of the personal reign of Christ upon the earth ; and those
by whom it has been espoused are called Millenarians. It is, however, too
obscure to be made the foundation of a positive opinion. It probably refers
to a spiritual resurrection, — a resurrection of the cause for which the martyrs
suffered ; which will then be triumphant ; and while their names will be held
in honour, persons of the same spirit will arise and reign with Christ, in the
undisturbed enjoyment of religion and its privileges, Satan being bound, and
his agents reduced to inactivity and silence. Some such interpretation is
favoured by this circumstance, that John speaks not of the bodies, but of the
* 1 Cor. xv. 50. * Rev. xx. 4, 6.

THE FINAL STATE OF THE RIGHTEOUS. 321
souls of those who had been slain. No wise man would oppose a vision, in
which the description is professedly figurative, to the plain declaration of
Scripture, that the resurrection will take place at the second coming of Christ.
It is worthy of attention that, when speaking of that event, Paul makes men
tion of two classes of persons, the dead in the grave, and those who will be alive ;
and says concerning the latter, that they shall be changed, or undergo the same
change with those who are raised. But, if some of the saints had been pre
viously raised, such a change would not be necessary to them ; and we may
therefore conclude that there will be no persons of this description among the
last generation of mankind.
" Behold, I show you a mystery: we shall not all sleep, but we shall all be
changed."* The law of mortality admits of exceptions, and an entire gene
ration will be exempted from its operation. I formerly showed you that
death is not necessary to the complete sanctification of the soul ; although, in
the case of those who die, that is the period when it is completed. The
bodies of those who are alive when Christ comes, will be as unfit for the
heavenly state as the bodies lying in the grave, and will therefore un
dergo the same change ; with this difference only, that there will be no recom-
position, but a sudden transformation of them. This moment, they will be
weary, hungry, faint, diseased, and racked with pain ; the next, they will be
invested with the glories of immortality. "In a moment, in the twinkling of
an eye, at the last trump ; for the trumpet shall sound, the dead shall be raised
incorruptible, and we shall be changed."* But, in the first place, as we are in
formed, the dead saints shall be raised. What a wonderful sight ! mortals
changed into immortals ! the earth and the sea yielding up their treasures, and
men mingling with angels who have descended to convey them to their own
blessed abodes ! " Then we which are alive and remain, shall be caught up
together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air ; and so shall we
be ever with the Lord."*

LECTURE LXXXIIL
ON THE FINAL STATE OF THE RIGHTEOUS.
The Final Judgment of the Saint3. — Their Acquittal and Entrance into Heaven. — Their Su
preme Felicity : its Nature and Sources.
The resurrection of the dead will be followed by the general judgment, in
which small and great shall stand before God to receive their final sentence.
There will be a visible appearance of Jesus Christ, who will come with great
power and glory, and will erect his throne in the clouds. His ministers will
be the angles, who will be sent forth to gather together his elect from all parts
of the earth in which they are dwelling, or in which their bodies are deposi
ted. Saints and sinners are now mingled together in the common offices of
life, and are connected by various ties ; but then they will be parted for ever.
" Before him snail be gathered all nations ; and he shall separate them one
from another, as a shepherd divideth his sheep from the goats ; and he shall
set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left."§ These words are
commonly understood in a literal sense, as if the places mentioned would be
respectively occupied by the two opposite classes of mankind ; but perhaps a little
• 1 Cor. xv. 51. * 1 Cor.xv. 52. $ 1 Thess. iv. 17. § Matth. xxv. 32, 33.
Vol. IL— 41.

322 THE FINAL STATE OF THE RIGHTEOUS.
reflection will show us that this interpretation cannot be admitted, and does not
accord with our other conceptions of the grand assize. If the Son of Man is
to sit on his throne in the clouds, and the saints are to be caught up to meet
him in the air, the position of the two parties on the right and left hand cannot
be so easily imagined, and it may be presumed to be a figurative description.
The place at the right hand, which will be assigned to the righteous, may sig
nify the station of honour which they will occupy ; for this is the general idea
which that situation suggests in Scripture, particularly when our Saviour him
self is said to sit at the right hand of his Father, who has no right hand, but
has exalted him " far above all principalities and powers."
In the figurative description of the transactions of the last day, in the Reve
lation of John, we are informed that " the books were opened ; and another
book was opened, which is the book of life."* It is out of this book that the
saints will be judged, whether we understand by it the Gospel, or the divine
decree by which they were appointed to salvation. To the law, as the rule
of justification and condemnation, they are not amenable ; for they have been
delivered from it by Jesus Christ, and when they believed in him, they declar
ed that they ceased to seek righteousness by it. The question, therefore, will
not be, whether they have fulfilled or transgressed this law ; but, whether they
possess the precious faith which God has appointed to be the only means of
obtaining salvation. No inquiry will be necessary for the satisfaction of the
Judge, who knows their hearts, and by his grace produced all the good which
will be found in them ; but it will be necessary for the great design of the
general judgment, which is, the manifestation of his righteousness in the final
allotment of the human race. To convince all that it is not by an arbitrary
decision that heaven is assigned to them in preference to others, and that the
sentence is founded in reasons which accord with the rectitude of Divine
administration, evidence will be exhibited of the validity of their title ; and this
evidence will be furnished by their works : " Then shall the King say unto
them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom
prepared for you from the foundation of the world : For I was an hungered,
and ye gave me meat : I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink ; I was a stranger,
and ye took me in ; naked, and ye clothed me ; I was sick, and ye visited me ;
I was in prison, and ye came unto me."t It is evident to every person who under
stands his Bible, that the works of the saints are here mentioned, not as the foun
dation, but as the evidence of their title. If men are not justified by works but, by
faith ; if they are not saved by their merit, but by grace ; it is certain, that the
final sentence can refer to their works only as proofs, to all who shall witness
the decision, that they are the persons to whom the promise of eternal life belongs,
or believers, whose faith wrought by love and thus demonstrated its genuineness.
It appears that the good works of the saints will be mentioned in the judg
ment, and for what purpose they will be produced. But will any mention be
made of their sins ? This is a question about which those who have deemed
it worthy of attention are divided in sentiment. It has been said by such as
maintain that they will not be mentioned, that there is no reference to them in
the account which our Lord gives of the general judgment, in the Gospel of
Matthew ; that the remission of them is expressed in such terms- as imply that
they are henceforth to be for ever concealed, for they are " cast into the depths
of the sea, and are to be remembered no more ;" that it is not consonant to
the character of the Judge, who is also the propitiation for their sins, to sup
pose that he will bring them to light in a manner so public ; and that, notwith
standing their full acquittal, we could not conceive the saints not to be affected
with shame, if their crimes, the recollection of which has often made them
blush and hang down their heads, were exposed to the view of the universe
* Rev. xx. 12. * Matth. xxv. 34—36.

THE FINAL STATE OF THE RIGHTEOUS. 323
But, in opposition to these arguments, it is said that, according to Scripture,
" God will bring every work into judgment, with every secret thing, whether
it be good, or whether it be evil ;"* that justice seems to require that there
should be an impartial review of the conduct of each individual ; that to recall
the memory of the sins of the saints, will display the virtue of the atoning
blood of Christ, and the riches of the grace of God, through which they have
been pardoned ; that, in many cases, the sins of the wicked could not be pub
lished without the publication of theirs, as they were associated in the same
deeds ; that some of them are already made public in the Scriptures, and are
held up as a spectacle to all generations ; and that no feeling of shame would
oe excited, because God has fully remitted their trespasses, and they glory in
the righteousness of Christ, with which they are adorned.
There is some force in the arguments on both sides, and it is not easy to
determine which preponderates ; but we need not perplex ourselves about the
matter, as in truth the question is more curious than profitable, and nothing
will be gained or lost by a decision in either way.
But, whether the particular sins of the saints will or will not be mentioned
in the judgment, there can be no doubt that there will be a general reference
to them. Glorious as their appearance will be, it will be understood that they
were once sinners, who deserved to be placed on the left hand of the Judge,
but were pardoned through Divine mercy ; and it will be an important part of
the transactions of the last day, to publish the sentence of acquittal in the ears
of angels and men. If their title to the favour of God is often a subject of doubt
to themselves amidst the darkness of the present state, their fears are dispelled,
either before they die, or immediately after their spirits enter into the presence of
God. But by others it is disputed, and the grounds on which it rests are ac
counted imaginary, while their faith is derided as a foolish presumptuous fancy,
and the doctrine of imputed righteousness is pronounced to be the dream of a
shadow. The decision of the last day will put an end for ever to these sus
picions and accusations. Who shall condemn those whom God has justified ?
There are, besides, many calumnious charges advanced against the people of
God, through ignorance or malice, which, indeed are in this case very nearly
allied ; for although they may sometimes originate in mistake, yet there is a
disposition on the part of the ungodly to adopt the charges, from prejudice
against religion, and a wish to hold up to contempt and detestation men
whose persons they hate, because they hate their principles. We know what
were the slanders of the Jews and Gentiles against the Christians in the prim
itive times ; it appears from history, that these have been repeated, or new ones
have been invented in succeeding ages ; and the same hostility subsists, and dis
covers itself in the opprobrious names with which the genuine disciples of Jesus
are branded. Precisians, puritans, methodists, enthusiasts, fanatics, hypocrites,
are some of the terms of contempt in the world's copious vocabulary ; and
they are applied to them because they have imbibed the spirit, and act under
the influence, of the religion which even their enemies profess to respect. But
the final sentence will vindicate the character of the righteous, and make the
infamy light upon those with whom it originated. Then shall these words be
fulfilled in all their extent : " No weapon that is formed against thee shall
prosper ; and every tongue that shall rise against thee in judgment, thou shalt
condemn. This is the heritage of the servants of the Lord ; and their right
eousness is of me, saith the Lord,"!
The saints having been openly acknowledged and acquitted in the day of
judgment, will make their triumphant entry into the place destined for their
reception: " These shall go away into everlasting life." The place is called
heaven, by which we understand that region of the universe in which angels and
* Ecc. xii. 14. * Isa. liv. 17.

324 THE FINAL STATE OF THE RIGHTEOUS
the spirits of the just now dwell, and all the righteous shall be finally assenv
bled. Where it is situated, we do not know. We speak of it as above us ;
but the phrase is used in conformity to a notion founded upon the appearance
of the visible heavens. What is above us at this moment, will be beneath us
twelve hours hence, in consequence of the revolution of the earth ; and what
is beneath us, seems to be above to those who are on the opposite side
of the globe. Our ideas of its situation are therefore vague ; and there
is only one thing, which it seems warrantable to conclude, that it lies beyond
the limits of the visible creation ; for Jesus Christ, who is now in it, is said to
have ascended "above all heavens," that is, above the aerial and starry hea
vens, according to the Jewish division of the superior regions. That it is a
place, we have no reason to doubt, and it is an imaginary refinement to consider
it only as a state. It is undeniable that God can make any place heaven by
there revealing himself, and communicating the fulness of his love ; but this
is nothing to the purpose. Our business is not with speculations about his
power, but with the declarations of his word ; and Scripture uniformly sup
poses that there is a particular place, which is appointed to be the final abode
of the righteous. There have been curious and idle discussions respecting the
ubi of Spirits, and whether, as they are not material, and cannot like body be
confined within definite limits, places can be predicated of them ; but there is
no occasion at present to perplex ourselves with the arguments on either side,
because the saints in the future state will be clothed with a material frame. It
must be a material place which is inhabited by our blessed Saviour, and
Enoch, and Elijah, and the saints who came out of their graves after the re
surrection of Christ, and will be inhabited hereafter by the thousands and mil
lions whom he will raise to life at his second coming.
Concerning the nature of the place we can form no conjectures. The de
scriptions of it are undoubtedly figurative. Some parts of our earth display
scenes of astonishing grandeur and consummate beauty ; but heaven will be
inconceivably superior to what the earth was, even before its loveliness had
been impaired by the curse. It seems reasonable to suppose that it will be
totally different from the earth, because the beings who inhabit it, although
men, will be entirely changed in respect of the constitution of their bodies.
We are indeed told in the book of Revelation, that a river flows in it, and that
trees grow upon its banks ;* but who does not perceive, that the subject would
be degraded by a literal interpretation, and that the ideas suggested are those
of beauty, refreshment, and abundance ? It is presented to us under the image
of a city of pure gold, the foundation and gates of which are composed of
precious stones. * " And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon,
to shine in it ; for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light
thereof. And the nations of them that are saved shall walk in the light of it ;
and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it. And the
gates of it shall not be shut at all by day ; for there shall be no night there."*
All that we can say is, that in heaven there will he visible tokens of the pre
sence of God. Upon earth he manifests himself, not only by impressions
upon the minds of his intelligent creatures, but by displays of his perfections
m the splendour of the heavens, and the various processes which are going on
above us and around us. We may believe, therefore, that he will manifest
himself in heaven, both by a secret intercourse with the souls of the saints
and by such external signs as will show that he is near, and that this is his
temple and his palace. Who can conceive the majesty and glory of the place
which he has chosen for his peculiar residence. Here all the magnificence and
beauty, which we admire in the universe, will be united with beauty and mag
* Rev. xxii. 1,2. * Ib. xxi. 19, 21. $ lb. 23—25.

THE FINAL STATE OF THE RIGHTEOUS. 325
nificence of which we can form no idea. It will be the noblest work of his
almighty hand.
It has been asked, whether, in this blessed abode, the saints will know one
another? One should think that the question was unnecessary, as the answer
naturally presents itself to every man's mind ; and it could only have occurred
to some dreaming Theologian, who, in his airy speculations, has soared far
beyond the sphere of reason and common sense. Who can doubt whether
the saints will know one another ? What reason can be given why they should
not ? Would it be any part of their perfection to have all their former ideas
obliterated, and to meet as strangers in the other world ? Would it give us a
more favourable notion of the assembly in heaven, to suppose it to consist
of a multitude of unknown individuals, who never hold communication with
each other; or by some inexplicable restraint are prevented, amidst an intimate
intercourse, from making mutual discoveries ? Or have they forgotten what
they themselves were, so that they cannot reveal it to their associates ? What
would be gained by this ignorance no man can tell ; but we can tell what
would be lost by it. They would lose all the happiness of meeting again on
the peaceful shore, those from whom they were separated by the storms of
life ; of seeing among the trophies of Divine grace, many of whom they had
despaired, and for whose sakes they had gone down with sorrow to the grave ;
of knowing the good which they had been honoured to do, and being sur
rounded with the individuals who had been saved by means of their prayers,
and instructions, and labours. How could those whom he had been the instru
ment of converting, and building up in the holy faith, be to the minister of the
gospel a crown of joy and rejoicing in the day of the Lord, if he did not
recognize them when standing at his side ? The saints will be free from the
turbulence of passion, but their innocent affections will remain ; and could
they spend eternal ages without asking, Are our children here ? Are our still
dearer relatives here ? Have our friends, with whom we took sweet counsel
together, found their way to this country, to which we travelled in company
till death parted us ? And, if to these questions no answer could be returned,
would they be happy ?
The same mode of thinking which suggested this question, has led to
another strange notion of heaven, as if it would be a state of solitary enjoyment.
It has been glossed over, too, with the appearance of piety ; andithas been said,
that the saints will be so absorbed in the contemplation and enjoyment of God,
that they will not need the society of others, and will be insensible to their pres
ence. But, while we acknowledge that God alone is sufficient to the hap
piness of his creatures, and cordially concur in the sentiment that he is the
chief good, we must not permit ourselves to be carried away by imposing
sounds, and follow even piety in its fanciful wanderings. What some mystic,
or some good but enthusiastic man may have said, is nothing to us, whose
ideas of future and invisible things should rest on a more solid foundation. The
question is, what kind of heaven has God promised to his people, and what
kind of heaven is suitable to the nature of man ? With respect to the latter
question, I remark, that, although the present relations among mankind, of
father and son, husband and wife, which are dissolved at death, will not be
renewed, yet the general relation of a common descent, and a common nature,
strengthened by the relation arising from a common redemption, will remain ;
and the love, too, will remain which is implied in those relations, and leads to
the performance of their duties. Human nature will be purified and exalted,
but will not be essentially changed. Without such a change, however, we
could not conceive its present tendency to union and fellowship with others
to cease. Unless man should become a totally different being, he could not be
perfectly happy in absolute solitude. It is true, indeed, that, according to the
2E f

326 THE FINAL STATE OF THE RIGHTEOUS.
hypothesis, all his desires will be concentrated upon his Maker ; but before we
can admit this assumption, we must be assured that his instinctive desire for
communion with his equals will be extinguished, or in other words, that he
will receive a new constitution. If love to his fellow-men should remain, it
would, according to the hypothesis be superfluous and useless ; a power pre
served but never to be exercised. What idea can any person form of the fami
ly of heaven, consisting of insulated individuals, of brothers connected in the
most intimate bonds, but holding no correspondence ? With regard to the
other part of the question, which relates to the heaven which God has promised
to his people ; you know that it is positively represented as a state of society.
And how could it enter into any sound mind to conceive of it otherwise ?
Are not its inhabitants the identical persons, who were congregated into one
body upon earth, and united in the same faith, and love, and worship ; and
why, when they are assembled again in the celestial sanctuary, should they be
supposed immediately to separate, that each may dwell in his own recess,
through an eternal duration, like the solitaries of the desert ? It is not thus
that revelation describes the world to come. " In my Father's house are
many mansions."* What a wild imagination must it be which would sup
pose that those mansions are to be tenanted by individuals living in a state of
seclusion from the family ? No ,• the natural suggestion is, that heaven is fur
nished with every accommodation ; that there all those comforts will be found
which we usually enjoy in a house — rest, peace, society, and friendship ; that
it is the place of final meeting to the children of God, as the members of a
human family, who were separated during the day, and scattered abroad in
pursuit of their respective employments, assemble in the evening in their com
mon habitation. In the revelation of John, they are represented as " standing"
before the throne ; but that we may not imagine that they stand there as units
composing the aggregate number, without any other tie but juxta-position,
they are farther represented as engaged in the same service of adoration and
thanksgiving. It is not the song of each man for himself, but the song of the
multitude ofthe redeemed, which will be heard in the celestial temple. " After this
I beheld, and lo, a great multitude, which no man could number, of all nations
and kindreds, and people, and tongues stood before the throne, and before the
Lamb, clothed with white robes, and palms in their hands ; and cried with a
loud voice, saying, Salvation unto our God which sitteth upon the throne, and
unto the Lamb."t There, they will meet, and rejoice, who upon earth went to the
house of God in company ; and there, they will meet who never met before,
and will hail one another as brethren.
Praise is represented to be the employment of the saints in heaven ; and
who can doubt that the representation is just? Every individual will feel his
infinite obligations to Divine grace, and will experience ineffable delight in
expressing them. Whether there will be vocal praise in heaven, cannot be
ascertained from the figurative descriptions of it; but that it will be vocal does
not seem improbable, as the saints, having bodies, may be conceived to have
also organs of speech. Yet, on reflection it cannot be supposed, that praise
will be their only and perpetual exercise. They will serve God day and night
in his temple ; but there are other ways in which this service may be perform
ed They will have minds to contemplate, as well as hearts to love him ; and
why may we not presume that a portion of their happy existence will be devoted
to the survey of the glorious manifestations of his attributes, and the review of
his wonderful works ? They will be surrounded with their redeemed breth
ren; and will they not enter into conversation with them upon subjects in
which they are all equally interested ? Will they not listen with delight to one
another's history, and feel their hearts glow with admiration and love, while
* John xiv. 2. * Rev. vii. 9, 10.

THE FINAL STATE OF THE RIGHTEOUS. 327
in every new tale there are new displays of Divine wisdom and goodness ? But
we speak as children do of the actions of men, and with still less knowledge.
We are ignorant whether language will be used in heaven as the vehicle of
thought, or some new medium of communication will be established. We
understand still less the manner in which intercourse will be maintained be
tween men who have bodily senses and organs, and angels who are incorporeal
beings. But one thing we know, that angels and men will be united in one
holy society, and will dwell together in perfect friendship, loving one another,
receiving and communicating happiness.
But the felicity of the saints in the heavenly world, will not arise solely
from the nature of the place which they inhabit, and from the company with
which they are associated. As the chief end of man is the glory of God, so
his supreme happiness consists in the enjoyment of him. This is the judg
ment of all regenerated men ; and heaven is the object of their hope, because
in that place their desires for his presence and the full communication of his
love, will be gratified. " Whom have I in heaven but thee ? and there is
none on earth whom I desire besides thee."*
Our Saviour pronounces the pure in heart to be blessed, " for they shall see
God."| There is only an apparent contradiction between his words and those
of Paul, who says of the blessed and only Potentate, that " no man hath seen,
or can see him ;"| for the one speaks of mental, and the other of corporeal
vision. As God is a spiritual being, he has never been seen by mortal eyes ;
the appearances of him which are mentioned in Scripture having been symbols
and sensible forms assumed for a time. For the same reason, no man will see
him, even in the future state ; for it should be remembered that, although the
bodies of the saints will be highly refined, it is physically impossible that a
spirit should be perceived by material organs. Jesus Christ will be seen, be
cause he is clothed with human nature ; but the Father dwells amidst inacces
sible light. It is not inconsistent with what is now stated, to suppose,
a visible manifestation of his glory, similar to the symbol which ap
peared in the most holy place, or the representation made to Moses, when
the Lord passed by him, and proclaimed his name ; because, this would not be
God himself, but only a sign of his presence.
The saints will see God with their minds, or attain knowledge clear and
comprehensive, when compared with the obscure and imperfect knowledge which
they at present derive from his works and his word. " Now," says Paul, " we
know in part, and prophesy in part. But when that which is perfect is come,
then that which is in part shall be done away. For now we see through a glass
darkly ; but then face to face : now I know in part ; but then shall I know
even as also I am known."§ Strong as this language is, it must not be un
derstood of an adequate knowledge ; for an infinite being can be comprehended
only by an infinite understanding. The knowledge of the future state will be
comparatively perfect, free from doubts and errors*, and much more extensive
than it is at present possible to acquire. Here, our progress is slow, and im
peded by obstacles. There, knowledge will be infused into the mind without
the operose process of instruction and inquiry. Here, our views are limited,
and we see only the skirts of his glory ; there, the revelation will be as ample
as our finite faculties will permit. What the saints already know, will shine
with new light, and present itself to their minds with an evidence and a satis
faction which they never formerly experienced ; and many things will be disclo
sed to them, which it had not entered into their hearts to conceive : mysteries will
be explained, difficulties will be solved, and excellencies will rise to view in
the Divine nature, of which no vestige was discoverable in his works. How
glorious will he appear, when every veil is removed, and he is contemplated
• Ps. lxxiii. 25. *Matth. v. 8. $ 1 Tim. vi. 15. § 1 Cor. xiii. 9—12.

328 THE FINAL STATE OF THE RIGHTEOUS.
in the fulness of his attributes ! The sight will be transporting, and will ex
cite the highest admiration and joy.
As the Almighty cannot be sought out to perfection by any finite mind, we
do not conceive the knowledge of the saints in heaven to be stationary. It is
possible, indeed, that although it is now progressive, it may arrive at a point be
yond which it is destined not to proceed ; at least, we could not prove this suppo
sition to be absurd. The soul might acquire, on its first entrance into heaven,
or on its re-union to the body at the last day, all the knowledge of which it
was capable ; and this being sufficient for its happiness, there might be no
further expansion of its faculties. But we naturally judge of the future state
by the present ; and finding that the soul now advances from step to step, we
are led to anticipate its perpetual progression. There is no doubt that the will
of the Creator can indefinitely enlarge its powers, and that, in the infinitude
of his nature, there will be new discoveries to be made for ever and ever. In
the course of an eternal duration, all the wonders of creation may be survey
ed, however wide its extent, and however numerous its parts ; but He, in
comparison of whom it is as nothing, can never be fully understood.
The knowledge of God in the future state will be accompanied with love ;
for it is impossible to contemplate infinite excellence without loving it, without
loving it intensely and supremely. In this world, the saints prefer God to
their chief joy ; and there are seasons when their hearts go out to him with
an ardour which no created object can excite, with vehement desire for the
closest union and the most intimate fellowship. But this flame will glow more
ardently in the pure atmosphere of heaven. Here, love struggles with the
infirmity of the flesh, the reluctance of corrupt nature, the operations of sel
fishness, the opposing influence of visible things, by which the senses and the
imagination are so powerfully affected; but there, free and unconfined, it will
be concentrated upon its object with ineffable delight. Brought back from his
wanderings into the immediate presence of his Father, man will indeed love
him with all his heart, and soul, and mind, and strength. The fervour of his
affection will never abate, nor will any thing occur to suspend it, or to turn it
into a different channel. God will always maintain the pre-eminence, and
appear infinitely greater and better than all other beings ; and his love to other
beings will be in perfect harmony with supreme love to God, will flow from
this exalted source and will be attracted by his image, as impressed upon them
in all its loveliness and glory. Some ancient philosophers imagined, that,
after death, the souls of men were absorbed by the Divine essence, from which
they had originally emanated; and mystics have talked of being identified with
God, and deified in him. These are the dreams of ignorance, and the ravings
of insanity. But there will be a union of the most intimate kind between
God and the soul in the future state ; such a union as is effected by the purest
and most active mutual love ; and the saints will be one with him in a higher
sense than we are able to conceive. There will not be a momentary opposition
of desires and interests. They will rejoice in God as he is, and every power
will be devoted to him alone. Upon him their thoughts will be constantly
fixed, and in communion with him their never-failing joy will consist.
" Whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues,
they shall cease : whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away."* But
love never fails. It is adapted to every condition of our nature, and consti
tutes its moral perfection. " Now abideth faith, hope, love, these three : but
the greatest of these is love."t In the world to come, faith will be unneces
sary, because its object is seen ; and hope because its object is possessed. Faith
wilfterminate in vision, and hope, in enjoyment; but love will remain, and
join all hearts in one. • 1 Cor. xiii. 8. *Ib. 13.

THE FINAL STATE OF THE RIGHTEOUS. 329
From the observations already made, the happiness of the saints in the ce
lestial regions is unquestionable ; but for a more full illustration of it, we may
consider that it will arise from the absence of all the causes of pain and sorrow,
to the operation of which they are at present exposed ; from the presence of
the highest possible good, and from the certainty of the perpetual posses
sion of it.
t " There shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall
there be any more pain, for the former things are passed away."* Sin
and suffering are connected as cause and effect. But all the inhabitants of
heaven will be sinless, and consequently will no longer be subjected to those
sufferings which are now the just punishment or chastisements of their offen
ces, and are necessary to check their wayward dispositions, and to awaken
them to repentance. There will be no disease, or pain of body, no anxiety
of mind, no fear, no regret, no disappointment, no unsatisfied wishes, no rest
lessness and discontent, no seasons of melancholy and depression, no broken
friendships, no envy and jealousy, no distressing sympathies, no separation
from those whom we love. Affliction, when it now passes over the mind,
sometimes makes deep furrows, which time does not erase. But there will be
no trace of past sorrows in the heart of the saints ; no wounds still bleeding,
or so slightly healed that a touch opens them again. Remembering all the
evils which befell them in this sublunary state, all the sad scenes which they
witnessed, all the losses which they sustained, all the agonies which they en
dured, their minds will be smooth and placid as the bosom of a lake when not
an air breathes upon it. Reflection upon the past will serve only to heighten
the contrast, and to give them a more lively feeling of their present enjoyments.
Who can conceive the calm of the heavenly regions, where no tempest blows,
and the sound of lamentation is never heard ; where no qualms of conscience
are felt, and not a transient thought disturbs the serenity of the soul ; where
every emotion and every reflection is delightful, and all within and without is
bliss ! They to whom death made this world a blank, and who went down
into the grave mourning because they were bereaved, mourn no more, having
found those whom they bewailed, or far better friends. They have no will but
the will of God ; and those whom he does not love, have ceased to be the ob
jects of their regard. " God himself shall wipe away all tears from their
eyes."t But this is not the sole cause of their felicity. They are not only exempt
from all evil, but are put in possession of the greatest possible good ; and the
good is not the perfection of their own nature, or the resources of their en
lightened and holy minds, but God himself, who is their everlasting reward.
The soul having wandered from him, finds no rest upon earth ; nor would it
find it in heaven, if he were not there. The happiness of man in paradise,
was the favour of his maker ; and this alone will be his happiness when he is
recovered from the effects of the fall. How could he be happy in a state of
separation from God ? Can a tree live and flourish, wheti cut off from all
communication with the elements which are appointed to nourish it ? The ra
tional creation, abandoned by him, would wither and die ; like the vegetable
creation, when the rain and dew of heaven are withheld. The wicked will
be miserable, not so much on account of the place to which they are consign
ed, — for the Divine favour could change a prison into a palace, — as because
they will see God afar off, being banished from his gracious presence, and
separated from him by an impassable gulf. It is the presence of God which
makes heaven, the asylum of the saints, the seat of perfect joy. There they see
him as he is, and hold communion with him, intimate, uninterrupted, and ever
lasting. Surely he who made the soul of man has access to it, and is able to
* Rev. xxi. 4. -J- Rev. xxi. 4.
Vol. II. — 42. 2 e 2

330 THE FINAL STATE OF THE RIGHTEOUS.
impress such a sense of his love as will fill it with ineffable satisfaction. The
pleasure which we at present experience from pious meditation, or from the
contemplation of nature, and the participation of the blessings which it sup
plies, is referrible to him as its Author; and shows us that he can make the facul
ties of our souls, and the organs of our bodies, vehicles of bliss. When he
shall no longer withhold his hand, but pour out upon the objects of his favour
blessings in profusion, their most ample desires will be gratified, and their high
est expectations surpassed. If the saints upon earth triumph, because they
can say, " The Lord is the portion of our inheritance ;"* how much greater
will be their exultation, when they know the full value of their portion, the
boundless extent of their inheritance ! God himself will be their God. He
who is all fair and all good, to whom all perfection belongs, and of whose
transcendent excellence this glorious universe is only a shadow, — he will be
theirs, and will bless them for ever; he will be all in all, around them and
within them, the light of their understandings, the joy of their hearts, the object
of their perpetual praise.
Let it be observed once more, that this felicity will be heightened by the
knowledge that it is everlasting. In heaven there is no apprehensiou of evil,
which disturbs our best hours upon earth, and is excited partly by the sugges
tions of conscience, and partly by our experience of the vicissitudes of human
affairs. Here we ought to rejoice with trembling ; and often in our most cheerful
moments we are visited with the unwelcome forebodings of a change, Who
can say without presumption, " To-morrow shall be as this day, and much
more abundant ?" The joys of religion are equally subject to mutation as those
of a temporal nature ; either because the saints are not at all times disposed to
receive them, and by the unhappy influence of unbelief they are excluded from
their souls ; or, because God is pleased to suspend them for the trial of their
faith and the chastisement of their sins. The state of heaven is totally dif
ferent. The duration of all created beings is progressive, and is made up of
moments following each other in perpetual succession ; but that of the saints
will bring no change of circumstances, and may be compared to the duration
of the sun and the stars, which, from age to age, are fixed in the same
point of space, and shine with undiminished splendour. Eternity will
then have commenced, which, as it flows on, carries all tilings along in a uni
form uninterrupted stream of bliss or wo. The very possibility of an end
would mar the felicity of the righteous. It would be suspended while the
question was asked, Will our joy last for ever? and the doubt implied in that
question would make fear pass over the mind as the shadow of a cloud, and
dim the lustre of the surrounding scenery. Still more fatal would be the
effect, if there were positive ground to suspect that their joy would come to an
end. The idea of annihilation, from which nature recoils, would be doubly
terrible. Who could bear the thought of losing life in its highest perfection ;
of closing his eyes on this transcendent glory to behold it no more ; of sinking
into eternal insensibility after ages of rapturous bliss ? But it is an eternal
redemption of which Jesus Christ is the Author. The last change which his
followers experience is death ; or, if you will, the resurrection, when the sepa
rate spirits will be again embodied. They then enter upon a career which
will never be finished. Ages will run on more rapidly than hours among
mortals : but thousands of ages will take nothing from their felicity. God has
made them by his gift, what he himself is in his own nature ; and of them,
as well as of him, it may be said, that their years shall have no end. " There
is no night there." " The sun shall no more light by day ; neither for bright
ness shall the moon give light unto thee : but the Lord shall be unto thee an
everlasting light, and thy God thy glory. They sun shall no more go down ;
* Psalm xvi. 5.

THE FINAL STATE OF THE RIGHTEOUS. 331
neither shall the moon withdraw itself: for the Lord shall be thine everlasting
light, and the days of thy mourning shall be ended."*
Whether there will be different degrees of glory in heaven, is a question
more curious than, useful. Those who adopt the negative allege a variety of
reasons, — as, that all the saints are clothed with the righteousness of Christ,
and being equal in this respect, have a title to an equal reward ; that they all
stand in the same relation to God, as his children are all the first-born, and
will therefore receive the same inheritance ; that it would seem an imperfec
tion, if one of them had less glory than another, and the former might con
ceive something better than he actually possessed, and be disturbed by an
anxious desire for it ; that our Saviour has promised to all a kingdom, and has
said that they shall all shine forth as the sun ; and that, while we speak of a
difference among them, we use words to which no distinct meaning can be
annexed, as it is granted that all will be perfect. Those who adopt the positive
side of the question, appeal to the different degrees of grace in this world,
from which they infer that there will be different degrees of glory in the next.
They grant that all saints will be perfectly happy, but compare them to vessels
of different sizes, which are all full, although some contain a greater quantity
than others ; and they support themselves by several passages of Scripture,
as the parable of the talents,! in which the servants are recompensed accord
ing to their diligence ; the declaration of Paul, that " he who soweth sparingly
shall reap also sparingly ; and he who soweth bountifully, shall reap also boun
tifully ;"! and of Daniel, that " they that be wise shall shine as the brightness
of the firmament ; and they that turn many to righteousness, as the stars for
ever and ever."|| With respect to the last passage, the supposed difference in
the degree of splendour must be considered as imaginary, till it is shown
what is meant by the " brightness of the firmament," and that it is inferior to
the brightness of the stars ; and till it be proved that something more is intend
ed, than simply to convey, by a variety of phrase, the general idea of glory.
The passage in the Epistle to the Corinthians, which says that one star differs
" from another in glory, "§ has been also quoted in favour of this opinion, by
those who attended to the sound, without thinking of the sense. Any intelli
gent person who reads the passage, will perceive that the Apostle is speaking
of a totally different subject, — the difference between the present and the future
bodies of the saints ; and is illustrating it by the different appearances which
matter assumes in the plastic hands of the Almighty.
It is of no consequence what view you take of the question ; and to discuss
it either here or elsewhere, would serve no valuable purpose. The prize
proposed to all is of incalculable value, and is worthy of the highest efforts
which are made to obtain it. Whether the final allotment of the saints shall
be equal or unequal, they will all be content, and will all rejoice with joy
unspeakable. * Is. Ix. 19, 20. f Matth. xxv. 15. i 2 Cor. ix. 6.
| Dan. xii. 3. § 1 Cor. xv. 41.

332 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE i
LECTURE LXXXIV.
ON THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE.— THE WORD OF GOD.
External Means of Grace Necessary to all but Infants. — The Word of God the Earliest and
Principal Means. — Division of the Word into the Law and the Gospel. — Different Senses
of the term Gospel — Its Proper Meaning as Distinguished from the Law. — The Gospel
not a New Law of Grace. — Its Efficacy as a Means.
In the preceding lectures, we have surveyed the scheme of redemption in
its contrivance, its execution, and its application. Originating in the love of
God before the world began, it was carried into effect by the mission and death
of his Son; and its blessings are communicated to us by the agency of his
Spirit. In this wonderful economy all the persons of the Godhead are con
cerned, and each performs his appropriate part. It is the work of God alone ;
and, in one view, resembles the creation of the universe, in which he had no
assistant, and accomplished all things by the immediate exertion of his power.
But in another view, it may be compared to the work of providence, in which
he is the great Agent, but his designs are carried on by the instrumentality of
means ; bv second causes, physical and moral ; by the laws of gravitation, and
motion, and light; by the activity of men, and the ministry of angels.
In considering the external means which he employs for the salvation of
those whom his Son died to redeem, we must direct our attention in the first
place to his Word, in which his will is revealed, and by which the intellectual
and moral powers of man are influenced in subservience to his purpose ; for
God deals with him in religion as a rational being. The effect must be ascri
bed to his power, acting upon the soul in a manner unknown to us : but in
ordinary cases it does not operate immediately. I say in ordinary cases, be
cause we must except from this rule infants, who being born in sin, need to be
regenerated as well as adults, but are not the proper subjects of that process
by which the latter are renewed. Of the change which they undergo we can
form no idea, as it is not accompanied with any external effects by which it
might be distinguished, not even by a new train of thoughts, and volitions,
and affections, of which thev are incapable ; but whatever it is, it is produced
without means, by the direct agency of the Spirit. In this case means are
excluded, because they cannot be used ; for infants, not being yet moral agents,
are not the proper subjects of conviction,. illumination, and conversion, in the
established sense of the terms. In the economy of grace, as well as in that
of nature, divine wisdom connects variety with regularity, and changes its
modes of procedure according to circumstances ; being equally wonderful in
deviating from its general laws as in adhering lo them.
The exclusion of means, as far as we know, is confined to infants. We
have no reason to think that men are sometimes illuminated by inspiration, and
that good impressions are made upon their minds independently of any exter
nal cause. It has been supposed, indeed, that God may make known his will,
and communicate the benefits of redemption to pious heathens, without his
word and ordinances. Who those heathens are that may be called pious, with
out an abuse of the term, I do not understand ; nor could any man, whose
notions of piety were formed upon Scripture and sound reason, ever find them
out- and till it is proved that there are such persons, we may save ourselves
the trouble of inquiring how they will be disposed of ; but every thing that is
said concerning the possibility of a revelation to them, without the word,
written or preached, is a gratuitous assumption, and besides, appears to be at
variance with revelation itself: " Whosoever shall call upon the name of the

THE WORD OF GOD. 333
Lord, shall be saved. How then shall they call on him in whom they have
not believed ? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not
heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? and how shall they
preach except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them
that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things ? So,
then, faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God."* These
words comprehend all that we are authorized to believe on this subject ; that
salvation is connected in the Divine constitution with the means of grace ; ano
that, without these, the end is not to be expected. If God ever sets aside this
constitution in particular cases, he has not told us of it ; and to affirm that he
does so, is downright presumption.
From the beginning, the application of redemption has been conducted by
external means, or by the revelation of the will of God, and ordinances found
ed upon that revelation. Immediately after the fall, God was pleased to make
known his purpose of grace to our first parents not by a direct address, but by
conveying a notice of it in the threatening pronounced upon the serpent who
had deceived them. As the threatening, while it foreboded evil to him, beto
kened good to them, it had in this respect the nature of a promise, and has
therefore been so called. It is not to be supposed, however, that this is all
the information which was given them concerning the Redeemer. Something
more explicit and ample was necessary to relieve their minds from the fears
of guilt, and to direct them in the new system of worship adapted to their
circumstances ; of which sacrifices were an important part. Of the additional
intimations which might be made to the patriarchs, the Scriptures have given
only a partial account ; but partly by tradition, and partly by occasional com
munications, the knowledge of Divine mercy, and the future Saviour, was
maintained till the days of Moses, who flourished fifteen hundred years be
fore the Christian era. But although, between him and Adam, there was a
long interval of two thousand and five hundred years, the intermediate steps
were few, in consequence of the longevity of the early inhabitants of the
world. From the creation to the present moment, there have not been a hun
dred and fifty individuals in a line ; from the creation to Moses, there were not
twenty. Hence it appears, that, without new revelations to revive and enlarge
the original revelation, the communication made to our first parents, which,
concise as it was, could be easily remembered, might have been transmitted
pure and entire to the lawgiver of the Jews, by whom it was committed to
writing. Revelation was greatly enlarged by the ministry of Moses, and additions
were made to it till the days of Malachi, when the canon of the Old Testa
ment was completed. After a long interval, the Baptist appeared, to prepare
the way for our Saviour ; who, being in the bosom of the Father, and acquaint
ed with his counsels, declared him to the world, and empowered his disciples
to perfect revelation by their writings, which were composed under the direction
and assistance of his Spirit. The whole Scriptures are delivered to us as the
rule of our faith and obedience, and are the instrument which God employs
for the conversion of sinners, and the advancement of the divine life in their
souls. They are the light which conducts them to the Saviour, and guides
them in the way of Salvation. This important office we assign to the whole,
and not exclusively to a part, on the authority of the Apostle Paul ; who.
having said concerning Timothy, that " from a child he had known the Holy
Scriptures, which were able to make him wise unto salvation through faith
which is in Christ Jesus," adds, " All Scripture is given by inspiration of
God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in
righteousness ; that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto
* Rom. x. 13—17.

334 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
all good works."* The Word is the principal means which God has appoint
ed for the application of redemption. There are indeed other religious insti
tutions ; but as they are founded on the Word, so, as far as they contribute to
accomplish this end, their efficacy is derived from it. Prayer is an eminent
means of obtaining spiritual blessings ; but the directory of prayer is the word,
from which alone we learn what blessings we should ask, and what are the
grounds on which we may hope for success. The sacraments also are means
of salvation ; but they would be unintelligible, unless their design, and the im
port of the symbols and actions, had been explained ; and we should have no
encouragement to use them, if we had not been assured that they are seals of
the new covenant, and the Holy Spirit had been promised to render them
effectual. The word of God consists of many parts, histories, doctrines, promises,
threatenings, reproofs, exhortations. 1 shall perhaps speak of these particu
larly afterwards ; but, in the mean time I observe, there is not one of them
which is not conducive to the great design of saving the soul. There are two
great divisions of the word of God, which have been made by Theologians,
and which, as they have a foundation in the word itself, are entitled to par
ticular attention. These are, the Law and the Gospel. I shall begin with the
latter, and in the first plaee, inquire what is the import of the term.
The word, Gospel, is used in our language to express the Greek word
tvayyeuov, which signifies good news. Without losing this idea, it admits of
different applications, and is employed in a more general, or in a more restricted
sense. First, It signifies the history-of Christ; and, accordingly, is the title pre
fixed to each of the four narratives of his birth, doctrine, miracles, death, resur
rection, and ascension, which were composed by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and
John. These received this name at a very early period, and it is retained in
all Christian churches. Sometimes they were called Memoirs of Christ ; but
this designation does not seem to have been ever generally adopted. The other
was suggested, not only by the nature of the narratives, which contain the
best news that ever reached the ears of men, but by one of the inspired writers,
who has prefixed it to his account of our Saviour ; namely Mark, who com
mences with these words, " The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, the
Son of God." This is evidently the title of his book, as the words of Mat
thew, " The book of the generation of Jesus Christ," are the title of the
subjoined genealogy. Mark calls his narrative a Gospel, and by his authority
the same name is given to the compositions of the other Evangelists.
Secondly, The Gospel signifies the Christian revelation, or the system of
doctrines, ordinances, and laws, which Jesus Christ has delivered to us, and
which is justly called good news ; because the great subject of which it treats
is salvation, and the design of all its subordinate parts is to conduct us to the
enjoyment of it. This is its meaning in the commission which he gave to his
Apostles, " to go into all the world, and preach the Gospel to every crea
ture."! They were sent, not merely to proclaim pardon and eternal life
through him, but to instruct men in all the details of his religion ; as is plain
from the parallel passage in Matthew, " Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations,
baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy
Ghost; teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded
you."* The same extensive sense is given to the word, when Paul says, that
"God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ, according to my Gos
pel -"6 meaning, either that the future judgment is announced by the Gospel
which he preached, or that the Gospel is the rule by which those who have
lived under the dispensation of it will be judged. In both cases, the Gospel
•2 Tim. iii. 15  17. * Mark xvi. 15. * Matth. xxviii. 19, 20. §Rom. ii. 16.

THE WORD OF GOD. 335
comprehends more than a revelation and promise of salvation through Christ.
If you read the Scriptures attentively, you will find that there are many pas
sages which require to be interpreted in this liberal manner. According to this
view, the Gospel contains, not only doctrines and promises, but also precepts
and threatenings. This is generally acknowledged ; and, at the same time, a
strange inconsistency may be observed in the conduct of some men. While
they cannot deny that the Gospel signifies the whole institute of Jesus Christ,
they will not allow you to speak of it as such, and without scruple charge you
with heresy, if your language deviate a hairs-breadth from their arbitrary stand
ard. There is another and restricted sense of the Gospel, which will be
afterwards considered, according to which you must always regulate your
phraseology. It has no commands or threatenings; and therefore, to mention
the precepts of the Gospel, is to betray your ignorance, to borrupt the truth,
and to turn the new covenant into a covenant of works. — But, with the leave
of those zealots, we might remind them that they are now retracting what
they formerly granted, and binding us to one view of a subject, after their own
acknowledgment that it admits of more views than one. The Gospel largely
taken has, and strictly taken has not, precepts. Speaking of it in the latter
sense, I should err if I said that it had precepts ; and speaking of it in the
former, I should equally err if I said that it had not precepts. None but An
tinomians will deny that the religion of Christ comprehends a law to be obey
ed, as well as doctrines to be believed. If the phrase, precepts of the Gospel,
has been improperly used, that is not a reason why it should be condemned,
since it expresses a scriptural truth, bul, a reason why it should be used cau
tiously, and in such a manner as not to mislead. Let us study, with all possi
ble care, to be orthodox in sentiments and language; but let us remember,
that when we go beyond Scripture, we fall into the heterodoxy which we are
solicitious to avoid. When the Apostle Paul speaks of the Gospel, he is
careful to remind us that, while it manifests the grace of God, it also incul
cates the duties of morality : " The grace of God that bringeth salvation hath
appeared to all men, teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts,
we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world."*
In the third place, The Gospel signifies the revelation of the grace and
mercy of God to sinners, or the joyful tidings of salvation through Christ. In
this view, it answers exactly to its name, nothing being proclaimed by it but
what is good news to our fallen and guilty race ; and it is when the Gospel is
thus limited, that it is distinguished by Divines from the Law, considered not
only as a covenant of works, but even as a rule of life. That this is some
times the meaning of the word, although not so often as some may imagine,
is evident from the following passages. " The Spirit of the Lord is upon me,
because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor ; he hath sent
me to heal the broken-hearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and reco
vering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, to preach
the acceptable year of the Lord."f "lam not ashamed of the gospel of
Christ, for it is the power of God unto salvation, to every one that believeth,
to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. For therein is the righteousness of
God revealed from faith to faith; as it is written, The just shall live by faith."!
In the first passage, the gospel offers pardon, liberty, and consolation to sin
ners ; and in the second, it exhibits the righteousness of Christ as the founda
tion of their hope. The word occurs in the same sense when the Scriptures
speak of testifying " the gospel of the grace of God,"§ and of the " light of
the glorious gospel shining into the mind;"|| and when Paul says, "I marvel
that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ,
• Tit. ii. 11. * Luke iv. 18. * Rom. i. 16, 17.
§ Acts xx. 24. 1 2 Cor. iv. 4.

336 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE :
unto another gospel ;"* designating that as the Gospel which reveals grace in the
free justification of sinners, in opposition to the doctrine which suspends this
blessing upon our personal obedience.
First, The Gospel, strictly understood, comprehends the peculiar doctrines
of Christianity, and the gracious declarations founded upon them. It is the
Gospel which informs us, that in relation to us God is love ; that he thought
upon us from eternity, and purposed to save us from destruction and to restore
us to happiness ; that with this view he appointed his only-begotten Son to be
our Saviour, and entered into a covenant with him, by performing the condition
of which, he should obtain all blessings for his people ; that in the fulness of
time, he sent him into the world to be the messenger of his mercy, laid our
sins upon him, and exacted an atonement for them ; that in consequence of
the sacrifice upon the cross he is pacified, and is ready to receive us into
favour ; that he has also sent the Holy Spirit to illuminate our minds, and to
sanctify our souls ; and that pardon, grace, comfort, and eternal life, are given
freely to those who believe. It is evident, that these doctrines and declarations
may be justly called " good tidings of great joy." Nothing can be more
acceptable news to a sinner, who is sensible of his guilt, and alarmed at the
consequences ; nothing can be more consoling than to hear that the God whom
he has offended is reconciled, and that he shall find a refuge from his justice
in the arms of his mercy. You will observe, that in these declarations and
doctrines God appears working out salvation for us, without our assistance
or interference ; and that he appears solely in the character of the God of
grace, his justice being appeased, and opposing no obstacle to the emanation
of his love.
Secondly, The Gospel strictly taken, comprehends the great and precious
promises. "This is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel;
after those days, saith the Lord ; I will put my laws into their mind, and write
them in their hearts ; and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a
people : and they shall not teach every man his neighbour, and every man his
brother, saying, Know the Lord ; for all shall know me, from the least to the
greatest. For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and
their iniquities will I remember no more."t To these we may add the pro
mises of assistance, consolation, protection, deliverance, and eternal life. They
all breathe love. They are all expressive of the good will of God towards
men. They exhibit under various aspects, his grace accommodated to our
necessities. They bless us at present, and give the hope of blessedness here
after. It should also be considered, that the promises are free in this sense,
that nothing is required but that we should embrace them ; and that if a certain
state of mind must precede the performance of some promises, which in this
view may be considered as conditional, it is produced in us by the grace which
is held out to us in others.
Thirdly, The Gospel strictly taken, comprehends the free offer of Christ
and salvation. As God gave him in his incarnation and mission, so he still
gives him to all in the gospel ; that is, he. exhibits him as a Saviour, and
authorizes sinners to believe in him. There is no exception made of persons
on account of their country, their parentage, their profession, their rank in
society, or even on account of the number and degree of their sins. Every
descendant of Adam is at liberty to claim an interest in the common salvation,
the most illiterate, the meanest, the most unworthy. All are made welcome to
Christ, both by himself and by his Father. " My Father giveth you the true
bread from heaven. For the bread of God is he which cometh down from
heaven, and giveth life unto the world."! " Come unto me, all ye that labour
and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest."§ The universality of the offer
* Gal. i. 6. * Heb. viii. 10—12. * John vi. 32, 33. § Matth. xi. 28.

THE WORD OF GOD. 337
is a proof of its freeness ; which is further manifest from the consideration that
no conditions are prescribed, no equivalent is demanded, nothing is required,
but our acceptance of the gift. " Ho ! every one that thirsteth, come ye to the
waters, and he that hath no money; come ye, buy, and eat; yea come, buy
wine and milk without money and without price."* God appears hi the char
acter of a generous benefactor, who gives all and receives nothing in return,
except such expressions of our gratitude as are prompted by his own Spirit.
Lastly, The Gospel strictly taken, comprehends the earnest and affectionate
invitations addressed to sinners. Some of these have been quoted. The Bible
is full of them, and we find them alone or intermixed with other subjects.
"Unto you, O men, I call; and my voice is to the sons of men."f The
object of them is to persuade men to accept the gift which God presents to
them, to awaken their attention, to excite their affections, to make them per
ceive and feel that it is their interest and their duty to comply. So far as they
have the nature of commands, or constitute a moral obligation upon those to
whom they are addressed, they do not belong to the gospel in the strict sense
in which the term is at present used ; but, as expressive of God's regard to sin
ners, and of the sincerity of his desire for their salvation, they are a part of
the gospel, and an amiable display of its grace.
The design of thus accurately defining the Gospel, is not to distinguish
words but things, to fix the boundaries of the two great divisions ofthe word
of God, and to guard against the danger of confounding them together. It may
happen that a person who clearly perceives the difference of the things, does
not with equal care distinguish them in words ; or that, knowing that the reve
lation of Jesus Christ contains doctrines of grace and free promises, and that
these constitute a different class from its precepts, does not assign a distinct
name to each, but sums them all up under the general denomination of the
Gospel. Shall we therefore condemn him as ignorant, and a corrupter of the
truth? There are persons who make no scruple to do so, not knowing that
they at the same time pronounce a sweeping sentence upon the Church of
God, from the earliest times down to a very recent date. Our modern defini
tions were little known, I believe, till the Reformation ; and those who lived
before it, back to a very remote period, expressed themselves on this subject
in language which seems to us to be loose ; yet we are not to suppose, that till
a century or two ago, no Christian understood the Gospel, properly so called,
and that all were in an error with respect to the true nature of the dispensation
of grace. Let us retain our more correct phraseology ; but let us remember
that things are of more importance than words, and not hastily make a man
an offender for a word, whose views are perhaps as scriptural as our own.
There are however some modes of expression which should not be passed
over without animadversion, because they evidently are founded in mistaken
views of the subject, and mix things together which ought not to be confound
ed. There are many who represent, the gospel as a new law of grace. It is a
law, they say, because it prescribes certain duties to be performed by us, as
the condition of salvation ; and it is a law of graee, because the condition is
comparatively easy, faith and sincere obedience being accepted, instead of the
perfect obedience which the first covenant required. I had occasion formerly
to speak of this system, and to show that it is contrary to Scripture ; and I
now refer to it, not with a view to refutation, but to lay before you an instance
in which gross ignorance of the gospel is betrayed. Those who teach this
system, preach another gospel, that new gospel against which Paul declaims
with so much vehemence in his Epistle to the Galatians. It is plain that the
Galatians had not renounced Christianity, but that they had been tempted, or
at least some of them, by false teachers, to conjoin their own works with
* Is. Iv. 1. + Prov. viii. 4.
Vol. IL— 43. 2 F

338 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
faith, as the ground of their acceptance, exactly according to the plan of Neo-
nomians. Now, observe what he says of them : " Christ is become of no
effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law ; ye are fallen from
grace."* They had fallen from grace, or abandoned the gospel while they
professed to adhere to it, by embracing a doctrine which was not the gospel.
The gospel is corrupted by every attempt to introduce works, either as the
sole or the concomitant cause of our justification ; by representing faith as ef
fectual to justify us, because it produces good works ; by teaching that any
personal qualifications are requisite to recommend us to the favour of God ;
by resting our right to Christ, or our warrant to believe in him, upon certain
previous exercises and affections of our minds ; by proposing any foundation
of hope but his atonement and obedience. By these expedients, you convert
the gospel which is a pure declaration and offer of grace, into a law which pre
scribes duties and rewards them. The gospel indeed is sometimes represented
as a law, the law which has come out of Zion, the law of faith ;* but in those
cases a law signifies simply the will of a superior, a declaration of the will of
God; or the designation is given to the gospel in its more enlarged sense,
according to which it contains precepts as well as promises, and in particular,
requires faith as the means which God has appointed for giving an interest in
the offered salvation. It is on this account that faith is sometimes described
as obedience ; for example, when the gospel is said to be preached to all nations
"for the obedience of faith;" when the Apostle remarks concerning the Jews,
that "they had not all obeyed the gospel," and when he says of our Saviour,
that " being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all
them that obey him."!
To sum up what has been said, in the words of a celebrated foreign Divine,
"If we take the Gospel in a strict sense, as consisting of mere promises, or
an absolute exhibition of salvation in Christ, then it properly prescribes no
duty, exacts nothing, orders nothing, not even this, — believe, trust, hope in
the Lord ; but it relates, tells, signifies to us what God promises in Christ, what
he wills to do, and is about to do. Every prescription of duty pertains to the
law ; and this must be held, if we would with constancy maintain, with all the
Reformed, the perfection of the law, as containing all virtues, and all the duties
of holiness. But the law, accommodated to the covenant of grace, and,
according to it, written on the hearts of the elect, commands us to embrace all
those things which are proposed in the Gospel with unfeigned faith, and to
regulate our life suitably to its grace. When God, therefore, promises, in trie
covenant of grace, to the elect sinner, faith, repentance, and consequently
eternal life ; the law, the obligation of which can never be dissolved, and
which extends to every duty, binds the man to assent to that truth ; to set a
hio-h value upon those promises ; to desire them earnestly ; to seek them and
embrace them. Moreover, since the admirable providence of God has disposed
the promises in such an order, that faith and repentance"" precede, salvation
follows, a man is bound by the same law to approve and love this arrange
ment, and to expect salvation in no other way. He who accepts the promises
of the covenant in the order in which they are proposed, binds himself by that
acceptance, first to perform the duties contained in prior promises, before he
can hope to come to the enjoyment of those which are -posterior. In this
respect the covenant is mutual. God proposes his promises in the Gospel in
a certain order. Man is bound by the force of the law, acting in subservience
to the covenant of grace, to embrace the promises in that order. While faith
does so, the believer binds himself at the same time to the study of a new
* Gal. v. 4. * Is. ii. 3. Rom. iii. 27.
t Rom. xvi. 26. x. 16. Heb. v. 9.

THE WORD OF GOD. 339
life, before he can expect a happy life ; and in this manner the convention is
on both sides."*
Thus it appears that, when we understand the word Gospel in what is con
ceived to be its proper sense, it does not enjoin, but merely declares and pro
mises. Even those precepts which may be peculiarly called evangelical, do not
belong to it; as, to believe, to repent, to hope for salvation; and they can be
called evangelical only on account of their object, which is the grace of God
revealed and offered in the Gospel. In truth, they emanate from the law. It
follows that, when a minister inculcates these and other duties, he preaches
the law ; and then only preaches the Gospel, according to this definition of it,
when he proclaims the love of God in Christ, and the blessings and privileges
of believers. But I have shown you that the Gospel has a more extensive
meaning ; and consequently, that we may be said to preach the Gospel, when
we inculcate the institutions and laws of Christ upon evangelical principles.
Every part of the word of God, as we have already remarked, is subservient
to the application of redemption, but this office belongs in a particular manner
to the Gospel, which is the only means of beginning the work in the soul, and
holds the principal place in carrying it on. Every faithful minister, therefore,
will preach it ; not only because it is his duty to declare all the counsel of God,
but because he knows that upon a faithful exhibition of the Gospel depends
the success of his labours. It will not be the sole subject of his discourses;
but he wiU'give it the pre-eminence to which it is entitled; like Paul, who said
to the Corinthians, " I determined not to know any thing among you, save
Jesus Christ, and him crucified ;"t and he will teach all the other part of Di
vine truth in connexion with it.
First, It is by the Gospel that men are converted. From their state of in
sensibility and security, they may be raised by the doctrine of the law ; but it
is the Gospel alone which will turn them from sin to God. Mere terror would
drive them, if possible, farther from God ; while it increased their fear, it would
increase their hatred, and create such a desire as our first parents felt, to retire
from his presence, and to conceal themselves from his eyes. Nothing will pre
vail upon a man, conscious of guilt, and direading deserved punishment, to
draw near to his offended Creator, but the assurance that he is disposed to be
merciful, that something effectual has been done to appease his anger, and that
he will receive and pardon those who, in sincerity, supplicate his favour. Such
an assurance is obtained only by the Gospel, which makes known his gracious
design, and points to the atonement of Christ, which has reconciled the exer
cise of his mercy with the claims of his justice. Hence it is evident that the
Gospel, considered simply as a moral means, and independently of the Divine
constitution, which has connected the influences of the Spirit with the preach
ing of it, possesses a fitness, an adaptation to the end proposed, which is not to
be found in any other part of the Word. The character of God, notwith
standing its intrinsic excellence, will appear repulsive to the transgressors of
his law, unless there be added to it the amiableness and the attractions which
it derives from the mediation of Christ. Accordingly, the Gospel has, in
every age, proved the power of God unto salvation. It was by the preaching
of it that three thousand were converted on the day of Pentecost, and myriads
were afterwards induced to renounce Judaism and heathenism, and to embrace
the religion of Christ with the full consent of their hearts. By the same doc
trine the great spiritual revolution was effected at the Reformation. Men,
indeed, had long perceived some of the corruptions and abuses of the Church
of Rome; and when the light of Divine truth began to shine, they saw them
more fully and distinctly ; but what had the most powerful effect of all, was
ihe doctrine of the cross, the offer of salvation, without the intercession of
* Witsii. Animad. Irenics, cap. xv. §.9. -J- 1 Cor. ii. 2.

340 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
saints, and without penance and the merit of good works, through the atoning
blood and vicarious obedience of the Redeemer. When the Moravians estab
lished themselves in Greenland, they endeavoured to reclaim the rude nations
of that inhospitable region from idolatry and superstition, by teaching the doc
trines of natural religion ; but they laboured for several years, without excit
ing attention, or gaining a single convert. As soon, however, as they changed
their system, and began to preach Christ crucified, the poor savages listened
with wonder, eagerly inquired whether what they now heard was true, and
believing with the heart, were baptised. For a long period a Church has
flourished in that frozen clime, and the dreary desert has been enlivened by
the songs of salvation. It is still by the same doctrine that the human heart
is impressed. The preaching of the law, or of morality, without the Gospel,
is a cold and unprofitable exercise ; and what every man who knows the
truth must have expected a priori, is realized in experience. Virtue is disre
garded, and vice is practised, by those in whose ears lessons of duty are
sounded from Sabbath to Sabbath. Astonishment has been sometimes express
ed, that such preaching should prove totally useless, while the preaching of
salvation by grace, which in the opinion of the disputers of this world, tends
to licentiousness, should produce a quite contrary effect. But there is no cause
for such astonishment. Every man who calmly considers the nature of the
Gospel, will perceive that it is calculated to excite love to God, and to engage
our active powers in his service ; and every man who understands* his Bible,
knows that it is this doctrine alone which God has promised to accompany
with his blessing.
Secondly, It is by the Gospel that peace of conscience is obtained. It is
called the Gospel of peace, because it brings tidings to us of the reconciliation
effected between God and men by the blood of Christ; and when believed, it
dispels our fears^ and enables us to look up to him with confidence. Men may
talk of peace of mind to be procured by the performance of their duty, of the
calm recollections of virtue, and the serenity which they diffuse over the soul ;
but their ignorance and insensibility are truly pitiable. If they knew their
duty, they would feel that they could not perform it so perfectly as to satisfy
the demands of an enlightened conscience, and that their best works are at
tended with such defects as might be made the ground of their condemnation
at the tribunal of the Omniscient. It is his voice alone which stills the tumult
of the souL How would it be agitated by the sense of past and present sins,
if it had no other refuge than it may find in itself! When conscious of innu
merable transgressions and infirmities, and condemned by its own impartial
sentence, it is relieved solely by a view of the atonement, and the promise of
pardon. It will be found, I presume, that the state of a person's mind is regu
lated by his views of the Gospel. Those who mingle faith and works together,
cannot rise to the confidence of hope but by the aid of presumption ; and if
their consciences are in any degree faithful, they must be liable to be disturbed
and alarmed by every failure. But when a Christian steadfastly contemplates
the propitiatory sacrifice of Christ, and the evidence that it was perfectly ac
ceptable to his Father, he enjoys peace, notwithstanding his feeling of utter
unworthiness ; peace which nothing can interrupt, but the suspension of his
faith: " Being justified by faith, we have peace with God, through our Lord
Jesus Christ"*
Thirdly, It is from the Gospel that the consolation of Christians flows.
Ask them, what soothes their sorrow, sustains their patience, brightens their
hopes, and cheers their lonely hours, and they refer to some doctrine or pro
mise of the Gospel. The view which it gives of the character of God is con
soling ; for it exhibits him as wise, affectionate, faithful, and constant in his
Bom. v. 1.

THE WORD OF GOD. 341
love as a Father, in whose hands they may trust their best and dearest interests,
3nd of whose attention and regard they are never permitted to doubt. In con
nexion with this view is the equally comfortable one which it gives of his dis
pensations. Our fearful and foreboding minds are apt to suspect evil in adverse
events, to see tokens of wrath in the surrounding scene, to apprehend the most
alarming consequences, to think that we are abandoned for ever. But the
Gospel sheds light upon the darkest events ; and, although it does not explain
every difficulty, and substitute knowledge in the room of faith, yet it enables us
to anticipate with confidence a glorious and happy result, for it assures us that
the reign of God is the reign of love. In one word, the great remedy for the
pains and disappointments ofthe present life, is the hope of a better. Reason
speculates about it, and nature desires immortality ; but the Gospel reveals it,
and gives the certain hope that our future existence will be happy. Its pro
mises are our charter to the heavenly inheritance, which is rendered valid and
unalterable by the death and resurrection of Christ.
Lastly, It is the Gospel alone which purifies the heart. I have already re
marked that experience has proved, and is daily proving, the preaching of
morality without the Gospel to be fruitless labour. The Gospel alone gives
such views of the character, and dispensations, and designs of God, as will
make a lasting impression upon that part of our constitution which is the seat
of holiness ; namely, the heart, or the affections and active principles of our
nature. If love is the fulfilling of the law, obedience will be best secured
by that system which is best adapted to inspire love. The outcry which has
been raised against the doctrine of salvation by grace, 'is often sounding in our
ears ; and you know that such representations have been given of its tendency
and consequences as might lead us to believe, that licentiousness must abound
wherever it is embraced ; or, if facts extort an acknowledgment that such is not
always the effect, it is insinuated, either that the holiness of its abettors is hy
pocritical, or that it is owing to some accidental cause, which counteracts the
influence of their creed. Nothing, it is pretended, is so effectual to secure
obedience, as to suspend our hope of eternal life upon it. This is to make reli
gion a calculation of interest, so that they alone will attend to its injunctions
who prefer the happiness of the world to come, to the pleasures of sin. But,
if there should be persons who prefer the pleasures of sin because they are
present, to the happiness of heaven which is future, this scheme can do nothing
for them. It has no other expedient by which it might prevail upon them to
make a wiser choice. We know that there are many in whose eyes earthly
pleasures possess superior attractions, and have so completely gained the as
cendancy, that the strongest arguments can produce no change of inclination ;
and hence it appears, that this plan, which depends for its success upon an ac
curate comparison, and a fair estimate of consequences, is, in their case, an
airy speculation. In this, as in every other instance, the foolishness of God is
wiser than men. The Gospel, by inspiring the love of God, creates the love
of holiness, from which obedience flows spontaneously, and does not waittill
it is extorted by the consideration of interest. It thus gives a charm to obedi
ence, infuses into it a feeling of delight, and ensures our perseverance ; for the
pleasures of sin will not, for any length of time, draw the Christian aside from
a course of life in which he has experienced greater happiness than they could
ever impart. The question is not, whether he shall consent to suffer for a
time, in the hope of a recompense hereafter ; but whether he shall make a pre
sent sacrifice, which no sublunary gain could compensate ; whether he shall
forsake the fountain of living water, and hew out to himself a broken cistern
which can hold no water. As no holiness is genuine but that which springs
from the faith of the Gospel, so no other is steady in its principle, and will
stand the test of temptation. They alone will serve God with fidelity, who
2f2

342 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
look upon him as their Father, and confide in the promises of assistance and ac
ceptance ; and they alone will follow Christ through good report and bad report,
who feel the constraining influence of his love.

LECTURE LXXXV.
ON THE WORD OF GOD.
On Preaching the Gospel. — The Law as distinguished from the Gospel. — Its use in awaken
ing Sinners and as a rule of life to Believers. — Connexion ofthe Law and Gospel as means
of Salvation. — Use of the other portions of Scripture. — Observations on the Reading and
Preaching of the Word. — Necessity of the accompaniment of the Spirit
In the preceding lecture, I endeavoured to ascertain the various senses
which the word Gospel bears in Scripture. It has appeared that, besides being
the title of the four inspired narratives of our Saviour, and being used also to
denote the whole revelation which was published to the world by him and his
Apostles, it is sometimes restricted to that part of it which contains the doc
trines of grace, and the promises of salvation. It is contrary to Scripture itself
to call this alone the Gospel, as this name, belongs to the whole Christian system ;
but this is exclusively its meaning when we speak of the Gospel as distin
guished from the Law.
It is of importance to be accurate in our language on this subject ; but it is
still more important to be accurate in our ideas. Much confusion prevails, not
only among private Christians, whose mistakes can be accounted for from want
of instruction or from the neglect of inquiry, but also among those who, being
appointed teachers of others in faith and verity, prove blind leaders of the blind.
There are not a few of the latter class who are as ignorant of the true distinction
between the Law and the Gospel as any of their hearers ; who, accordingly,
confound them together, and while they profess to preach Christ, teach a doc
trine in which he holds only a subordinate place. It is necessary that a
minister should be able rightly to divide the word of truth, to distinguish
things which in themselves are different, to state them in their order and con
nexion, and to apply them to the purposes which they are respectively intended
to serve. Nothing is more disgraceful to him, than to mistake one thing for
another, and by his bungling manner of handling the word of God, to render it
of no effect.
Men may preach the grace of God, but not preach the Gospel. The phrase
may occur often in their discourses and writings ; and thus the simple may be
led to believe that they are reading and hearing evangelical doctrine, while
those declaimers are in truth labouring to subvert the Gospel of Christ. How
ever loud and eloquent may be his praise of Divine grace, if a person make it
consist in giving us a milder law, in lowering the terms of acceptance, and
admitting our sincere endeavours, instead of perfect obedience, as the condition
of future happiness ; if he represents it as grace given to all indiscriminately, to
enable them to work out their salvation ; or a grace which it is left to ourselves
to receive or reject at our pleasure, which may he lost, and will prove ineffectual
unless we lend our aid to it ; it is evident, that he knows neither what he says, '
nor whereof he affirms.
Again, A man may preach salvation by faith, and not preach the Gospel of

THE WORD OF GOD. 343
Christ. His doctrine is orthodox in sound, but is erroneous in sense. For
what is the faith which he teaches ? Is it a humble dependance upon the
righteousness of Christ, to the exclusion of our own? No; it is what he calls
believing obedience ; not faith alone, but faith and obedience conjoined ; the
name of the cause being given not only to itself, but to its effect, out of compli
ment to Scripture, and to please fastidious ears. You will find that, in this
mariner, some teachers of faith explain their own meaning. We are saved by
faith, not solely as it receives Christ, but as it works by love ; or, in other
words, we are saved not simply by a living faith, which proves its genuineness
by good works, but by faith which includes good works, and derives its effi
cacy from them. And thus, while sinners are told that they are justified by
faith, and so far the doctrine seems to be Scriptural, they are in reality led to
believe that they are justified by works.
Farther, Ministers may preach the atonement, and yet not preach the Gospel
of Christ. They may admit that Christ died for our sins ; that his sacrifice
was acceptable to God ; that, for his sake, he pardons us ; and that to his me
diation we are indebted for all the blessings of salvation : but, while they give
goodly words, they may hold sentiments which render them in a great measure
nugatory. If they teach that our Redeemer died, not actually to reconcile
God to us, but to render him rec ncilable ; that he died to procure the making
of a new covenant with us, the terms of which are to be fulfilled by ourselves ;
that he died to give efficacy to our repentance, meaning that somehow it be
comes, through his death, a sort of satisfaction for our sins ; in all these cases,
they misrepresent the nature, and extenuate the value, of the atonement of the
cross. They take away with the one hand what they had given with the
other. According to their doctrine, it is not true that the blood of Christ
cleanses us from all sin, that through it we have redemption, that by it he has
made peace ; because there still remains something to be done by us, to render
his blood effectual for our deliverance from something to be added to it as the
conjunct cause of our pardon.
In the next place, Men may preach the privileges of believers, and not preach
the Gospel of Christ. They may talk of justification, without referring to the
Scriptural faith by which alone it is enjoyed ; of sanctification, without assign
ing the grace of the Divine Spirit as its only efficient cause ; of protection by
the power of God, and peace and joy; while the protection depends upon our
own dutiful conduct, and may be forfeited if we are not careful to deserve its
continuance ; the peace arises, not from the application of the blood of Christ
to the conscience, but from our own fidelity in the performance of our duty ; and
the hope is not founded on the promises of God, and the righteousness of
Christ, but on the recollection of our own meritorious deeds. The privileges
enumerated are conferred by the Gospel, and are exhibited in its declarations ;
but as soon as you disjoin them from Christ, and ascribe the enjoyment of
them to any other cause than his mediation, they cease to be gifts of grace, and
are changed into the rewards of the law. It is in Christ, in a state of union to
him, and solely for his sake, that Qod blesses us with all spiritual blessings.
Lastly, Men may preach the happiness of heaven, and yet not preach the
Gospel of Christ. They may be chargeable with doing so on two accounts,
either because they misrepresent the nature of that happiness, or because they
do not truly state the means of obtaining it. To affirm that we are indeed
pardoned through the atonement of Christ, but that we must ourselves estab
lish a right to eternal life by our obedience, is to preach something very differ
ent from the Gospel ; although an attempt should be made to qualify the doc
trine, and to give it an evangelical form, by subjoining that it is the grace of God
which enables us to obey. This is plainly to set even grace in opposition to
Christ, as if it were intended to help us to perform a part of the work of sal-

344 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
vation, which he claims as exclusively his own. Nor is the Gospel preached
when heaven is described as a place of rest and enjoyment, without a reference
to the presence of Christ in it, as constituting the chief source of its glory and
blessedness. We all condemn the grossness of the Mahometans, who expect a
sensual paradise ; but even professed Christians are by no means united in
their views of the world to come. The notions of many are altogether unde
fined ; but, if it is not considered as a holy as well as a happy place, and if its
happiness is contemplated under any view which excludes the love and service
of the Saviour, or allows to these only a subordinate place, it is a heaven of
imagination, and not of the Scriptures. As Christ is the life and glory of the
Gospel, so he is associated with all just conceptions of future felicity. He is
the sun of the celestial world.
It is of the utmost importance that private Christians, and especially minis
ters of religion, should have accurate notions of the Gospel. Truth is one,
but error is multifarious. It is truth alone which will promote the salvation
of the soul ; every modification of error is injurious in a greater or less degree
" If ye know the truth, the truth shall make you free."*
I have said that there are two great divisions of the Word of God, the Gos
pel and the Law. Having spoken of the first, I now proceed to the second.
The Law, as distinguished from the Gospel comprehends the preceptive
part of the will of God, and the denunciations of his wrath against transgres
sors. There is a twofold view in which the law may be contemplated — as a
covenant of works, and as a rule of life ; and in both it is conducive to the
general design of the Word, which is the application of redemption.
The Scriptures give an account of the covenant of works, not indeed undeT
this name, but in terms which imply all that it signifies. Considered in
itself, this covenant is opposed to our salvation. It prescribes terms which we
are utterly incapable of performing, and denounces a curse upon every trans
gressor. But this is not all. So far as it proves to any the occasion of endea
vours to seek justification by their own works, it stands in the way of their
final happiness, for it is certain that the attainment of it by such means is im
possible. When men, reading in the Scriptures that he who doth these things
shall live by them, conceive that this is not merely the statement of a hypo
thetical case, but the proposal of a plan to be acted upon, and hence, commence
a course of obedience in the expectation of success; they turn aside from
the grace of the gospel and involve themselves in all the difficulties and
perplexities of a hopeless undertaking. They wrest the Scriptures to their
own destruction. They convert the information, which, wisely used, might
have led them to the Saviour, into the means of blinding their minds, and
alienating their hearts from him. This is not the purpose for which the law
as a covenant is made known to them in the Scriptures. God did not intend
that they should attempt to repair what is broken, and to re-establish what is
set aside. The design is altogether of a different nature. It is to rouse men
from a state of security, and to apprise them of their danger, that they may
flee for refuge to lay hold upon the hope set before them in the gospel. " By the
law is the knowledge of sin." It shows us that we have transgressed, and what
are the consequences of unpardoned guilt according to the divine constitution.
This is the office which it is appointed to serve, or the relation which it bears
to the revelation of Christ. This revelation and the law are distinct; but they
are associated for a general purpose, the one being preparatory to the other,
and paving the way for the cordial reception of it. The declaration of human
guilt, and of the dreadful recompense which awaits it, is intended, not only
to vindicate the holiness and justice of God as the moral Governor of the
world, but to impress upon his offending subjects a sense of their perilous situ-
* John viii. 32.

THE WORD OF GOD. 345
nation, that they be excited to escape from it by embracing the offers of his
mercy. As this is the aim of the threatenings in the word of God where they
do not stand alone, but appear in connexion with the promises of pardon and
salvation ; so it is the design of the strict injunctions of obedience, and of the
occasional representation of it as the original term of our acceptance with God.
It is a fatal error to suppose, that the design is to encourage us to attempt the
obtaining of the divine favour by our feeble endeavours. It is to convince us
that the terms are so high, that we ought to despair of fulfilling them ; so that
we may no longer "go about to establish our own righteousness," and may
" submit to the righteousness of God." The Scriptures speak to us in the
same manner as our Lord addressed the young man, who proposed this ques
tion, " What good thing shall I do, that I may inherit eternal life?" To sup
pose that, when Jesus said to him, " If thou wilt enter into life, keep the
commandments,"* he seriously meant to signify to him, that he might so keep
them as to attain the reward of immortality, is to suppose that, on this occasion,
he contradicted himself, and taught a doctrine which himself and his Apostles
have expressly condemned. He adapted the answer to the question ; and as
the young man was seeking salvation by the law, he told him what he must
do, not to encourage him in his error, but to correct it; and accordingly he
proceeded to bring his obedience, in which he trusted, to the test, and to show
him that it was sadly defective.
Thus you perceive the subservience of the covenant of works, and conse
quently of those parts of the word in which it is announced, to the gracious
designs of God towards sinners. The covenant itself is disannulled, as every
agreement is by the failure of one of the parties. The other party ceases to
be. bound by his stipulations, and has a right to demand that the penalty be
inflicted. God does not now deal with men according to this covenant, except
in the way of punishment for the breach of it ; and the only character which
he sustains in relation to those who are under it, is that of a Judge. He pro
mises life to no man upon its terms ; but, still demanding obedience as naturally
due to him, he threatens death because it has not been performed. Its original
sanctions are published, to show us what we owe to our Maker, what we have
failed to perform, and what evil we have brought upon ourselves, that we may
feel the necessity of another plan of salvation, and may believe in Him who is
"the end of the law for righteousness."
Let us now consider the law as a rule of life ; and first, let us ascertain what
it signifies under this designation. The law, as a rule of life, is the law divested
of its federal form, and considered simply as an authoritative declaration of the
duty which God requires from his people. It enjoins obedience ; not, however,
as the condition upon which their future happiness is suspended, but as the
homage which they owe to God as the supreme Governor of the world, and
the Father of those who believe. I acknowledge that there are connected with
it promises of spiritual blessings ; but it should be observed, that obedience is
not the procuring cause of those blessings, but merely the qualification which
must precede the enjoyment of them, and that the reward is wholly of grace. I
acknowledge too, that even eternal life is sometimes represented as a recompense
of the obedience of the saints ; but it is plain to every person who understands
the Scriptures, that it is a recompense only in an improper sense, and is so
called because it will follow their obedience, and compensate every labour to
which they have submitted, and every sacrifice which they have made for the
glory of God. We must beware of imagining that, having set aside the old
covenant, God has made a new one with man under the Gospel ; and that the
law of works is revived under a different name, and with some abatement of
;ts rigour, in accommodation to human infirmity. The true situation of be
• Matth. xix. 16, 17.
Vol. II.— 44.

346 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
lievers does not resemble that of servants who obey their masters for hire, but
that of men who obey their Father from love, and who although they know
that the inheritance is secured to them, expect in the mean time to be treated
kindly and liberally according to their dutiful conduct.
The law, as a rule of life, is subservient to the salvation of believers in
various ways. It is the directory of their conduct, their guide in their whole
course. It is of the utmost importance to know what is pleasing to God,
and we learn it from the law, which is a summary of all our duties. Heathens
have no means of ascertaining their duty, except by reasoning and the dictates
of conscience ; and hence their systems of morality have always been imper
fect. It is an inestimable advantage which Christians enjoy, that they have
only to look into the "perfect law of liberty," as an Apostie calls it; not to
engage in lengthened discussions, but to read ; simply to ask, What is written ?
What says the law ? and, whatever obscurity may attend some parts of revela
tion, whatever difficulties may present themselves to the mind when contem
plating them, in consequence of the limited nature of our faculties, and the
impossibility of perceiving the link which connects them with other things the
truth of which must be admitted, — the moral precepts are plain to every capa
city, and nothing hinders any man from perceiving them, but carelessness or
corrupt inclinations, by which his judgment is perverted. With respect to
some other points, Christians differ from one another ; but in their views of
the duties of holiness, all conscientious inquirers are agreed. The law serves
also to excite them to their duty. Its instructions are authoritative. It not
only tells them what they should do, but it commands them. They hear the
voice of God-, in its precepts. A sense of obligation is created ; conscience
re-echoes his voice, or republishes the command, and exacts instant and cheer
ful obedience. It accompanies them as a monitor, who speaks although they
alone hear, in the midst of company as well as in the solitude of retirement,
and says, This you ought to do ; that you must not do. God promises to
write his law upon the hearts of his people; and the promise is performed
when their minds are so enlightened by it, their consciences are so impressed,
and their wills are so controlled by its authority, that they make it the rule by
which their whole conduct is governed.
Unholy men set no value upon this part of the word of God. The law
they regard as a restraint, because they wish to live without any rule except
their own inclinations. It appears in a different light to those whose aim it is to
please and glorify God, and they are thankful that he has himself instructed
them so clearly and particularly. The words of the Psalmist are expressive
of the sentiments of all the saints: "More to be desired are thy statutes
than gold, yea, than much fine gold; sweeter also than honey and the
honey-comb. Moreover, by them is thy servant warned, and in keeping of
them there is great reward."* The commands of the law, its admonitions,
and even its reproofs, are acceptable to him who is desirous that nothing may
be found in him, on which God would look with disapprobation.
If holiness is an essential part of salvation, the utility of the law is manifest. It
is the standard of holiness. It shows what the saints ought to be, and what God
has purposed to make them. _ It is the pattern according to which his Spirit fash
ions them ; and its prescriptions are the means of exciting them to make progress
in holiness, to go from strength to strength, to press towards the goal of per
fection. Its purity, which to others is a formidable objection, is the reason
why the saints so highly esteem it. They love it because it is without a flaw ;
because it is a true image of the moral excellence of its Author ; because it
urges them on in their course, and will not permit them to stop, till their heart
and conduct exhibits its exact counterpart. Hence they offer up such prayers
*Ps. xix. 10,11.

THE WORD OF GOD. 347
as these : " Teach me, O Lord, the way of thy statutes ; and I shall keep it
unto the end. Give me understanding, and I shall keep thy law ; yea, I shall
observe it with my whole heart. Make me to go in the path of thy com
mandments ; for therein do I delight. Incline my heart unto thy testimonies,
and not to covetousness. Turn away mine eyes from beholding vanity, and
quicken thou me in thy way."*
It is necessary, in speaking of the law as a rule of life to believers, carefully
to consider its connexion with the gospel. It is founded upon the gospel ; that
is, it is given to them as persons who by the gospel have been brought into a
state of favour with God, and are in possession of great spiritual privileges.
This is supposed to be taught by the preface to the ten commandments which
were promulgated to the Israelites from Sinai ; " I am the Lord thy God, which
have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage."!
The fact, it has been observed, brought forward as the reason or motive of our
obedience, is that the Lawgiver is our Lord and Redeemer, or stands in a saving
relation to us.! Thus the preface is explained by our Church; but to estab
lish this view of the words, it would be necessary to ascertain the precise
nature of the transaction at Sinai ; a subject of difficult discussion, and in de
termining which, even those who are called orthodox are by no means agreed.
The difficulty is certainly not lessened by a passage in the writings of Paul,
which imports that the law given at that time, might be conceived to have set
aside the promise made to Abraham of salvation through his illustrious seed ;§
a supposition for which it does not appear that there would have been any
ground, if it had been known to be a publication of the covenant of grace.
The words under consideration may be understood simply to import, that,
since God had revealed himself to the Israelites in preference to other nations,
and had rescued them from the hands of their enemies, they should pay a sa
cred regard to his commands. Whatever view we may take of the preface to
the law, we are certain that, as a rule of life, it emanates from the God of
love, and calls upon believers to perfom obedience in testimony of their grati
tude for his goodness. A distinction which has been often made may be men
tioned, because it expresses an important truth, that the law is not given to
believers that they may live by it, but that they are to obey it, because they already
live. When more plainly and fully expressed, the sentiment is, that obedience
is not enjoined upon believers, that they may obtain the favour of God and
eternal life ; but they are required to obey, because he has " accepted them in
the beloved," and they have the Holy Spirit, who dwells in their hearts to
assist them.
The law commands, and the gospel promises. Now, there is a perfect ac
cordance between the promises of the one, and the commands of the other.
The promises exhibit the grace by which we are enabled to obey the com
mands; and we see in the connexion between them, the fulfilment of the
humble and pious request of Augustine, "Da quod jubes, et jube quod vis."
The believer is fully furnished for every good work. If the law commands us
to love the Lord our God with all our heart, the gospel promises that he will
" circumcise our hearts to love him."|| If the law commands us to repent, the
gospel promises " the spirit of grace and of supplications, that we may mourn
as for an only son, and be in bitterness as for a first-born." IT If the law com
mands us " to make to ourselves a new heart," God promises in the gospel " to
take away the heart of stone, and to give us a heart of flesh."** If the law re
quires us to " walk in all the ordinances and commandments of the Lord," this
is the promise of the gospel, " I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you
to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them."ft It
• Ps. cxix. 33—37. * Exod. xx. 2. $ Shorter Catechism, Q. 44. § Gal. iii. 17.
I Deut xxx. 6. 1 Zech. xii. 10. ** Ez. xi. 19. **Ib. xxxvi. 27.

348 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE :
Would be easy to go into a long detail, but the specimen which I have given is
sufficient, and will direct you in your inquiries into the subject.
The law and the gospel are the two grand divisions of the word of God ;
but they do not exhaust its contents. It comprehends other subjects, which
contribute to the general design, and are entitled to our attention at present.
"All Scripture is profitable."
The word of God contains a history of the human race from the creation
to the flood, and a more particular history of the Israelites, and of other nations
who were settled in their vicinity, and with whom they were connected in
various ways. The history of the Israelites is the history of the Church, till
the canon of the ancient Scriptures was completed ; and in the New Testament
the subject is resumed. It therefore affords illustrious displays, of the wis
dom, and power, and grace, and faithfulness, and holiness of God. The his
tory of the Israelites, and of other nations, is the history of Providence ; and
is interesting, not only as a detail of ancient facts, in which view it gratifies
curiosity, but as an illustration of the character and conduct of God as the
moral Governor of the world, and in this view it is conducive to piety. There
are other authentic histories from which much useful instruction may be de
rived ; but from the manner in which they are conducted, our attention is fixed
almost exclusively upon the operations of men, their schemes of policy, the
achievements of their power, and the vicissitudes of their fortune ; while the
histories which we find in the Bible lead us directly to God. The revolutions
in the state of things are the effects of his will and agency ; nations rise and
fall according to his pleasure ; the passions of men are instruments wielded by
his arm ; he permits their wrath to go forth, and sets bounds to it which it can
not pass. This representation of the course of events is new ; the affairs of
mankind are exhibited to us in the light of religion ; and from the signatures
of Divine agency upon them, they are calculated to awaken sentiments of
reverence for God, confidence in his care, and submission to his will. When,
in reading the Scriptures, the mind is directed to him, its histories prove highly
edifying ; and pious impressions are made upon those who had perused other
histories with indifference, or solely with the interest which was created by
the nature of the events, and the eloquence of the writers.
The word of God presents also examples of goodness and wickedness in
the conduct of individuals. With respect to the latter, they are warnings to
us ; beacons erected to point out the rocks upon which others have been ship
wrecked, as well as testimonies borne to the power and justice of God in their
punishment, that others may hear and fear. I refer only to a single instance,
that of Pharaoh, because particular notice is taken of it by an Apostle. " The
Scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee
up, that I might show my power in thee, and that my name might be declared
throughout all the earth."* The examples of conversion, and of faith, pa
tience, and obedience, are intended to encourage both sinners and saints. They
display the riches of Divine mercy in the pardon of transgressors, that those
who are awakened may not despair ; and they show that the grace of God
has been sufficient for his people in past ages, that by its aid they have resist
ed powerful temptations, and have been enabled to perform difficult duties that
others may be excited to tread in their steps. In the Epistle to the Hebrews
a short account of the ancient worthies who by their faith and their works had
glorified God, is concluded with this exhortation: " Wherefore, seeino- we also
are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every
weight, and the sin which doth so easily beset us, and let us run with patience
the race that is set before us."t
The miracles recorded in Scripture tend to exalt our ideas of the power of
*Rom.ix. 17. * Heb. xii. 1.

THE WORD OF GOD. 349
God, and to confirm our faith. It is by them that the Scriptures are proved
to be his word ; for they are the attestation which he gave to the divine mis
sion of Moses and the Prophets, of Christ and his Apostles. The same pur
pose is served by the prophecies, as it is manifest that the Prophets were
his inspired messengers, who foretold, long before they happened, events
which no human sagacity could have foreseen, and which depended upon the
free agency of men. They serve also to confirm our belief of the moral ad
ministration of God, when we see the system of human affairs conducted
according to a plan previously revealed by him; and they minister to the
encouragement and consolation of the saints, by throwing a cheering light
upon the future, and unfolding the prospect of the reign of righteousness and
truth in the earth, and of the final deliverance of the Church from the power
of her enemies.
The utility of the devotional parts of Scripture is obvious. They present
models to be imitated by the saints in their pious exercises, and excitements
to cultivate communion with God. The Psalms of David, in particular, have
been held in high estimation in every age. There, we are presented with an
example of faith and love, soaring to a height which few have reached, even
with all the advantages of the superior light and grace of the Gospel. We
see the ardent longings of his soul for God; his deep distress when sin had
interrupted his fellowship with him, or the violence of men had excluded him
from the sanctuary; and his joy when God again made the light qf his coun
tenance shine upon his soul. We see how he, and the other holy men whose
compositions are found in the same collection, trusted in God amidst affliction,
and persecution, and desertion, adored his judgments, embraced his promises,
obeyed his commandments, and prayed for his favour. These things are ex
amples to us; " They are written for our learning, that we through patience
and comfort of the Scriptures might have hope."* They are a specimen of
the manner in which God deals with his people ; they show us how spiritual
joy is gained and lost ; what is the exercise suitable to the particular circum
stances in which we are placed ; how we should wait upon God ; and what
are the advantages of perseverance in prayer and supplication. They are the
means of infusing the same spirit into others ; and often has the devotion of
Christians been kindled by the flame which glowed in the bosom of these holy
Jews. The word is to be used by reading and hearing it, both being appointed to be*
means of salvation: "The Spirit of God," says our Church, "maketh the
reading, but especially the preaching of the word, an effectual means of con
vincing and converting sinners, and of building them up in holiness and comfort
through faith unto salvation."! I shall not call in question this proposition, so
far as it respects the pre-eminence of preaching ; although I must say, that the
Scriptures quoted in proof, do not appear to me to establish the point, but when
fairly interpreted, to imply nothing more than that God accomplishes his gra
cious designs by the word, whether read or heard ; for some of them relate to
the one mode of dispensing it, and some to the other, and none of them gives
the preference to either. I acknowledge that more is said concerning the ef
fects of the pireaching, than of the reading of the word ; although nothing can
be stronger than the assertion of Paul, that the Scriptures read " are able to
make us wise unto salvation ;"\ but for the more frequent mention of the
former, it is easy to account without the supposition of its superior efficacy.
For some time after Christ gave a commission to the Apostles, no part of the
New Testament was written ; and when its books were published, they existed
only in manuscripts, which could not be transcribed without much time and
expense, and to which therefore comparatively few could have access. From
* Rom. xv. 4. * Shorter Catechism, Q. 89. * 2 Tim. iii. 15.
2G

350 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
the nature of the case, the Gospel was chiefly propagated by preaching, and
the references to this mode of dispensing it are consequently frequent. Preach
ing was necessarily the principal means by which the world was converted,
and the primitive church was established ; and it must have continued so, till
copies of the Scriptures were multiplied, in consequence of the invention of
printing. There is no doubt that God has, in every age, blessed the reading
of the word for illuminating the minds of men, and changing their hearts ; and
that many a conversion has been affected, in private dwellings as well as in the
Church, by the silent perusal of the Scriptures as well as by the living voice
of the ambassadors of Christ. The benefit which the saints derive from the
study of them is the subject of daily experience ; and they can tell how Divine
light has shined into their minds, and their hearts have been filled with peace
and joy; how their drooping spirits have been revived, and their impaired
strength has been recruited, while they turned over the sacred pages, and de
voutly meditated upon their contents. In our own times, the Scriptures have
proved effectual to open the eyes of not a few Heathens, and Mahometans, and
Jews, and Roman Catholics, and nominal Christians in the Protestant Churches;
and from the unexampled zeal to circulate them, which has been recently dis
played, and which, there can be no question, is under the direction of Provi
dence, there is reason to believe that it is the Divine intention to make
eminent use of them in accomplishing the great spiritual revolution which is
approaching. These observations are not designed to impugn the common doctrine of the
superior efficacy of preaching ; although, at the same time, I would say,
that unless it can be established by scriptural proofs, it is no article of faith,
and must be considered merely as a deduction of experience. There can be
no dispute that the preaching of the Gospel has been productive of mighty
effects, not only at the commencement of the present dispensation, but in all
the subsequent ages. The promise which our Lord made to the Apostles has
been continued to their successors in the ministry : " Lo, I am with you alway,
even unto the end of the world."* It is an ordinance of Christ, which he will
accompany with his blessing. It has been, and it will be, the effectual means
of awakening the careless, of leading the convinced sinner to the Saviour, of
comforting the dejected, of confirming the wavering, of conducting the saints
from one degree of faith and holiness to another, till they " come to the measure
t>f the stature of the fulness of Christ."
There are some peculiar advantages in the mode of dispensing the word by
preaching. A minister may be compared to a guide, who points out to the
traveller objects which might have escaped his notice, and explains things
which he might not have otherwise understood. It is not my meaning that
the Scriptures are so dark as to need a commentary, and to be a sealed book to
the unlearned. In all matters necessary to salvation, they are plain to every
person of common capacity. But the truths of revelation, although they com
pose a regular system, all the parts of which are closely connected, are not
delivered in a systematic form. They are scattered up and down in the Bible ;
and it requires attention and time to bring them together, and arrange them,
that they may throw light upon one another, and exhibit in one view all the
information communicated to us on the subject of religion. Besides, there are
in the Scriptures things hard to be understood, subjects which are obscure from
their own nature, or from their relation to other things, which no longer exist,
or are not generally known, and which thus require learned and laborious
research. Hence, it is necessary that there should be persons, who are fitted
by their education, and bound by their profession, to engage in those inquiries ;
and at the same time enjoy leisure and retirement from the bustle of the world.
* Matth. xxviii. 20.

THE WORD OF GOD. 35 1
Such a class of men is provided by the institution of the ministry; and as in the
primitive times they were qualified for their office by the extraordinary gifts of
the Spirit, the want of these must now be supplied by diligent study. Thus
the preachers of the word are enabled to bring " out of their treasures things
new and old;" to lay open the whole scheme of revelation; to illustrate what
is dark ; to solve what is difficult ; to reconcile what seems contradictory ; to
display the connexion and harmony of Scripture ; and to render every part of it
subservient to the design of making the Christian perfect. The utility of the
ministry does not absolutely depend upon the superior talents of the persons
by whom its duties are performed. Suppose that their abilities should not be
greater than those of some of their hearers, or should not even be equal, yet the
latter may be benefitted by their instructions ; because their attention' has been
more directed to the subject, and they may be well conceived to understand
better than others, a book which is their daily and principal study.
The preaching of the word possesses also this advantage, that the occasion,
the place, the voice of the speaker, the solemnity and earnestness of his delivery,
are calculated to make an impression. Ministers, indeed, however eloquent
they may be, can operate only on the natural affections, and move them in
various ways; but the circumstances already mentioned have an obvious
tendency to excite attention to the truths of religion ; and this state of mind is
more favourable than the listlessness with which men often peruse their Bibles
at home. This, however, is a secondary consideration, which will not account
for the success with which the preaching of the word is attended.
. It should be remembered, that, when we represent the word, read and heard,
as contributing to accomplish the salvation of sinners, we consider it only as a
mean, the success of which is owing to a power that works unseen. Rational
arguments will convince the understanding, and the descriptions and appeals
of eloquence will move the affections ; but the heart, even the word of God,
when left alone, is not able to change. There is no virtue in its terms more
than in those of ordinary language. Its subjects, indeed, are the most interest
ing that were ever presented to human contemplation ; but the mind is so blind
that it does not perceive their excellence, and the heart is so corrupt that it
cannot relish them. " The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit
of God ; for they are foolishness unto him ; neither can he know them, because
they are spiritually discerned."* ,
To ensure the success of his word, God has promised the Holy Spirit to
accompany it ; and it is his office to remove the veil which hides its glories
from our eyes, and the obstacles which prevent its entrance into our hearts.
If there is an incapacity in men to discern spiritual things, it canrtot be remedied
but by supernatural influence ; as a man born blind cannot be made to see but
by the same power which created the light and the eye. Whence is it that
men who have been trained to accurate thinking, and are capable of perceiving
the evidence and estimating the importance of religion, do often disregard its
truths, and even treat them with contempt ; while others of far inferior ability
discover the marks of a Divine origin in the Gospel, and gave it a cordial re
ception ? Whence is it that it fixes the attention of the giddy, but escapes the
notice of the thoughtful ; and that of the members of a family who have been
educated in reverence for it, and upon whom its lessons have been frequently
and solemnly inculcated, one, it may be, believes, while the rest continue indif
ferent to its truths ? These things, I think, cannot be accounted for, but by
the Scripture doctrine of grace, which operates according to its sovereign will ;
for if the word possessed a power in itself to convert the soul, we might expect
the change to be accomplished in every case where the means were, used with
equal diligence, and the effect to be greatest in those who were predisposed by
* 1 Cor. ii. 14.

352 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
the superior cultivation of their faculties. Upon no other principle can we
explain other facts in the history of religion ; as, that the word of God should
at last engage the serious attention of a person who had, for a long series of
years, discovered the utmost indifference to it ; and that it should make a
sudden impression, like a flash of lightning betokened by no appearance of the
sky, but an impression which ever after remains. It is evident that now the
time of gracious visitation is come. The man is the same as he ever was, and
the truths are the same which he has repeatedly heard ; but a new power
attends them, by which his attention is arrested, and his mind is convinced.
While the word was left to work by its own power, it effected nothing;
but now it proves mighty through God, and brings every thought into captivity
to Christ/ When Paul preached to the women of Philippi, who were assem
bled for prayer, they all heard ; but of one the historian says, — " A certain
woman named Lydia heard us : whose heart the Lord opened, that she attended
unto the things which were spoken of Paul."* And this is the true account
of every conversion. The change is secretly effected, by the Spirit of God
concurring with the word. Paul may plant and Apollos water, but it is God
that giveth the increase.!

LECTURE LXXXVI.
ON THE SACRAMENTS.
Definition of the Term. — Their Nature and Design. — Account of them. — Observations on
their Origin; their Significancy ; how they are to be Used, and by Whom; and the Source
of their Efficacy , not Affected by the Intention of the Administrator.
The word of God read and heard, is the principal mean which is employed
for the salvation of men. We have spoken of it at some length in the preced
ing lectures, and shall now proceed to consider the other means which concur
with the word, to accomplish the gracious designs of heaven with respect to
believers. However beneficial they are, they are not all of equal necessity
with the word, and are to be viewed as auxiliaries to it. It is by the word
alone that faith is produced, and the seeds of holiness are sown in the heart:
The office of the other ordinances to which I refer, is to assist in maintaining
and strengthening faith, and in rearing the Christian graces to maturity. There
is no doubt that men might be saved without the sacraments, if they were
placed in such circumstances that they could not enjoy them ; but we have no
authority to say that they might be saved without, the word.
As I am now to enter upon the consideration of the Sacraments, it is
proper to begin with a definition of the term. A Sacrament is defined to be
" the visible form of invisible grace." Others have called it " a sign and seal
of the grace of God in Christ ;" or more fully, " a visible sign and seal,
divinely instituted, to signify and seal to our consciences the promises of grace
in Christ, and to engage us to faith and obedience to God." The Church of
England says, in the twenty-fifth Article, " Sacraments ordained of Christ, be
not onlv badges and tokens of Christian men's profession ; but rather, they be
certain sure witnesses and effectual signs of grace, and God's good-will towards
us, by the which he doth work invisibly in us, and doth not only quicken, but
* Acts xvi 14. * 1 Cor. iii. 7.

THE SACRAMENTS. 353
also strengthen and confirm our faith in him." The doctrine of our own Church
on this subject, is thus expressed in the Confession of Faith : — " Sacraments
are holy signs and seals of the covenant of grace, immediately instituted by
God, to represent Christ and his benefits, and to confirm our interest in him ;
as also to put a visible difference between those that belong unto the church
and the rest of the world ; and solemnly to engage them to the service of God
in Christ according to his word."* There is a more concise definition in the
Shorter Catechism : " A sacrament is a holy ordinance instituted by Christ,
wherein by sensible signs, Christ and the benefits of the new covenant are
represented, sealed, and applied to believers."! These definitions, which are
virtually the same, are substantially true ; but are objectionable on this ground,
that they are founded on too limited a view of the subject. As definitions of
the sacraments of the New Testament, they are right ; but their particularity
renders them not strictly applicable to sacraments in general. It will after
wards appear that there are other Divine institutions to which the name of
sacrament may be given, besides baptism and the Lord's supper, and even cir
cumcision and the passover. I would therefore prefer a more general definition,
and say, that a sacrament is a sign and seal of the promises of God, a visible
institution, by which we are assured that the blessing promised will be bestowed
upon those to whom the promise is made.
The word Sacrament, which has been adopted into the language of the
church, is not found in the Scriptures. Use has rendered it sacred, insomuch
that if any person should object to it, he would run the risk of being accounted
profane. He might with propriety be called scrupulous and whimsical, or
might be suspected of affecting singularity, but for the charge of profane-
ness there would be no foundation ; because the term, being of human origin,
might be set aside at any time, if another more convenient were discovered.
Sacrament is a word borrowed from the Latin language, in which it bears dif
ferent significations. First, it denotes the sum of money which each of the
parties in a law-suit was required to lay down at the commencement, and which,
being forfeited by the party who was cast, was devoted to sacred uses, and
hence was called sacramentum. Secondly, it signifies an oath, on account of
its sacred nature ; and particularly the oath by which the Roman soldiers
bound themselves " to obey their commanders in all things to the utmost of
their power, to be ready to attend whenever he ordered their appearance, and
never to leave the army but with his consent." It is supposed that in this
sense it was anciently applied to the symbolical institutions of the church,
because in these, we, as it were, enlist under the banner of Jesus Christ, and
engage to follow him whithersoever he leads us ; and this idea is brought for
ward almost in every book and every sermon on the subject of the sacraments.
I have long been disposed to doubt whether this is the true account of the
ecclesiastical application of the term. In the writings of the early Christians
it received a new meaning, of which I believe there is no example in the
classics. It signifies a mystery, as every person knows who is conversant with
the ancient records of the church, and as any of you may learn by looking into
the Vulgate translation. To give you a few examples : " Great is the mystery
of godliness,"! is there rendered, " Great is the sacrament of godliness" —
" magnum est pietatis sacramentum;" for the words of Paul subjoined to the
account ofthe institution of marriage, " This is a great mystery, but I speak
of Christ and the church ;"§ we have, "This is a great sacrament," — sacra
mentum hoc magnum est ; and in the Revelation, " The mystery of the seven
stars, which thou sawest in my right hand," is " the sacrament of the seven
stars,"!! — sacramentum septem stellarum. This is the translation of the word
* Conf. xxvii. 1. * Quest 92. i 1 Tim. iii. 16.
§ Eph. v. 32. | Rev. i. 20.
Vol. II. — 45. 2 g 2

354 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
tma-tTjpwv, which was used by the Greeks to denote not only the profound and
incomprehensible doctrines of the Trinity, and the incarnation, but also baptism
and the Lord's supper, and especially the latter, which was called dy«/»
ItvettipuHi ; partly no doubt because under external symbols spiritual blessings
were veiled, but partly also on account of the secret manner in which it was
celebrated. As the heathens had their mysteries, to which none but the
initiated were admitted; so the church came at an early period to allow none
to be present when the Lord's supper was administered, but the baptised; and
Heathens, Jews, excommunicated persons, and catechumens, were excluded.
Now, I think it probable that the word mystery having been used by the
Greeks to express baptism and the Lord's supper, and the word sacrament
having been used by the Latins as synonymous with mystery, it is in this way
that we are to account for its application to those symbolical institutions. The
sacraments are the mysteries of our religion. I do not deny at the same time,
that the other sense of the word may have had some influence, as there are
occasional allusions in the writings of the ancients to the military oath in
speaking of the sacraments.
Before leaving this topic I would observe, that what has been said concerning
the meaning of the word Sacrament, will throw light upon a passage in the
celebrated letter of the younger Pliny to the Emperor Trajan.* Speaking of
the Christians, who are the subject of the letter, he says, that they were
accustomed to meet on a stated day, and sing a hymn to Christ as God, — seqve
sacramento obstringere, — to bind themselves by an oath, (according to the
common translation,) not to commit any crime, &c. I have no doubt that the
word was used by Pliny to signify an oath ; but I suspect that he was led into
an error by taking it in its usual acceptation, and not knowing the peculiar
sense which it had received among the Christians, from some of whom he had
derived his information. When they told him that in their meetings they were
wont se sacramento obstringere, he understood sacramentum to be an oath,
while they used it to express the sacred supper, in which the disciples of Christ
engage to renounce the works of wickedness, and to follow after righteousness
and godliness. This interpretation is the more probable, as no other writer
has made mention of an oath sworn by the Christians in their religious assem
blies ; but we learn from Justin Martyr, that on a stated day, or the first day of
the week, they did assemble to observe the ordinances of the Gospel, and in
particular to commemorate the death of Christ in obedience to his command.!
This was the sacramentum of which Pliny had heard, without knowing what it
meant ; and if I am right in thus explaining it, we have here an early example
of this peculiar sense of the term.
It is probable then, that the symbolic ordinances of our religion were called
sacraments, not as is commonly supposed, in allusion to the oath which the
Roman soldiers took to be obedient to their general, but because they were
considered as mysteries, on account either of the recondite sense of the
symbols, or ofthe air of mystery with which the sacred supper was celebrated
in the ancient church.
In a Sacrament, two things are to be considered ; the sign, and the thing
signified. The sign is something material and visible, something addressed to
the senses ; and by this a sacrament is distinguished from other religious insti
tutions. There is no such sign in prayer and praise, and the preaching of the
gospel; but these consist in the use of words as expressive of certain truths,
and certain sentiments and affections of the mind. The thing signified is the
privilege or blessing, of which the sign reminds and assures us, and which it
represents by its nature, its use, the form of administering it, or by positive
institution, in consequence of which both are associated in our thoughts. The
* Plin. Epist Lib. ii. 10. * Justin. Mart. Apolog. Secund.

THE SACRAMENTS. 355
typical ordinances of the law thus far resembled sacraments, that they exhibited
a sign by which something spiritual was signified ; but they differed from them
in this respect, that they were not confirmations ofthe promises, but adumbra
tions of future events, figurative representations of the future ratification of the
covenant by the sufferings and death of the Messiah. The form of a sacrament
is by some made to consist in the words which accompany the administration
of it, but seems to be more accurately stated by others to consist in the union
established between the sign and the thing signified, by the divine institution
or promise. This union implies three things ; that the sign becomes signifi
cant, whereas it would otherwise have conveyed no idea of any thing but itself;
that it assures us of the blessing or privilege which it represents ; and that it
actually exhibits the blessing to be enjoyed by those who rightly use the sacra-
me'nt. From this union arises what has been called sacramental phraseology,
or, certain expressions in which the names of the sign and the thing signified
are exchanged. Thus, the name of the sign is given to the thing signified, when
Christ is called " our passover;"* and the name of the thing signified is given
to the sign, when the bread is called the body of Christ. The foundation of
this interchange is the sacramental union, which so couples them together that
the one may be predicated of the other. In the same manner the union of the
two natures in the person of Christ gives rise to those propositions, in which
the properties of one nature are affirmed of his whole person, or even of the
other nature, without implying any mixture or confusion of the natures them
selves. The reason \vhy God has instituted sacraments, is his condescension to our
infirmity. " He knows our frame, and remembers that we are dust." Although
it is the design of religion to withdraw us from the government of our senses,
yet since it does not propose to make us totally different creatures, and since,
from our natural constitution, our senses have a powerful and necessary in
fluence upon us, he has been pleased to render them subservient to the purposes
of religion. What we hear does often awaken very strong emotions in our
minds ; but it is an old remark, that the impressions of the eye are more vivid
than those of the ear Segnius irritant animos demissa per aurem,
Quam quae sunt oculis subjecta fidelibus.*
" If thou wert an incorporeal being," says Chrysostom, " God would have
delivered his gifts to thee naked and incorporeal ; but since thy soul is con
nected with a body, he has delivered things intellectual by sensible signs."
When we are disposed to doubt what we hear, the sacraments present them
selves to our eyes, and are put into our hands, to assure us by our sight, and
touch, and taste, that what the word has told us is true. The word speaks to
all ; but the sacraments single out individuals, and assure them that, if they are
used aright, the blessings which they represent belong to them in particular.
In contracts or covenants between man and man, it has been an ancient practice
for the parties to ratify them with their respective seals. God entering into
covenant with us, has added sacraments as seals for the confirmation of it, not
to bind himself more strongly, as if it had been possible that he should retract;
but to give a pledge of the performance of the promises, which should be satis
factory to us, because conformable to our usages. If our faith were perfect,
we may presume that sacraments would not be necessary. They are therefore,
as I have said, an accommodation to our infirmity.
Before I proceed to make other observations upon the nature and design of
sacraments, I shall briefly give an account of those which God has annexed to
the covenants into which he has entered with mankind.
• I Cor. v. 7. * Horat Ars Poet

356 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
. A learned author has supposed that there were four seals or sacraments of the
covenant made with our first parent, and that these were the tree of the know
ledge of good and evil, paradise, the Sabbath, and the tree of life.* I appre
hend that in representing them as so many, he has consulted imagination more
than judgment. The tree of the knowledge of good and evil is entirely out of
the question, because it was the subject of the condition of the covenant, which
is manifestly a thing totally different from a seal. Paradise and the Sabbath
are equally objectionable, because Adam enjoyed both while he was performing
the condition; and it would be absurd to suppose his right to the promised
reward to have been confirmed by a sacrament, before his course of obedience
was completed. If there was a seal of the covenant, Adam, while the trial was
going on, could only be permitted to look at it as a pledge that the blessing
would be bestowed when the trial was finished. But he was in possession of
paradise; and the Sabbath, with its holy exercises and heavenly delights, was
made for him. It remains, therefore, that the tree of life alone can be consi
dered as a sacrament or seal; and that it may be viewed in this light, we may
infer from the reason assigned for his expulsion from the garden, " lest he put
forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever;"!
words which import that the tree was an emblem of the life which he should
have enjoyed had he completed his course of obedience, and that by eating its
fruit his title would have been confirmed. Having transgressed the covenant,
he had no right to the seal, and he was removed from its vicinity, lest he should
have dared to profane it.
The next covenant of God with the human race was made after the flood,
when he promised that water should not again cover the earth. Strictly this
was not a covenant, because there was no stipulation; nothing was prescribed
to man to be done, and the performance of the promise depended solely upon
the faithfulness of God. But the original word is used with considerable
latitude, to denote not only a covenant, properly so called, but a promise or a
divine institution even when it relates to inanimate things. Thus God speaks
of his " covenant of the day and of the night."! " I w^ establish my covenant
with you, neither shall all flesh be cut off anymore by the waters of aflood, neither
shall there any more be a flood to destroy the earth. And God said, This is
the token" or sign " of the covenant: I do set my bow in the cloud, and it
shall be for a token of a covenant between me and the earth. "§ The rainbow
was the sign, or seal, or sacrament, of this covenant, for these words mean the
same thing. Some have very unnecessarily perplexed themselves with in
quiring how the rainbow could be a sign, if Noah had formerly seen it; and if
he had never seen it before, how we shall account for it not having appeared,
as the natural causes of it must having existed from the beginning. There is
no doubt, that if there were clouds before the deluge, there must have been
rainbows, unless they had been prevented by a miracle, the supposition of
which is absurd. But there was no reason for preventing them from being
formed at an earlier period; because it is not necessary to constitute any thing a
sign, that it should be new. We may presume that the tree of life stood in the
garden of Eden before God made a covenant with Adam, that it existed before
it was a seal; so likewise did the rainbow; but while formerly it was only a
natural phenomenon, it henceforth was appropriated to a sacred use and
acquired a new signification. When we see it in the heavens, we ought to
remember that it ratifies the ancient promise, that mankind shall not again
suffer the punishment which was inflicted upon the inhabitants of the antedilu
vian world.
The covenant which God made with Abraham and his posterity was con
* Witsius de GEconom. Fed. Lib. I. cap. vi. * Gen. iii. 22.
$ Jer. xxxiii. 20. § Gen. ix. 11—13.

THE SACRAMENTS. 357
firmed by circumcision. "Ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin, and
it shall be a token of the covenant betwixt me and you."* To this the passover
was afterwards added at the time of the deliverance of the Israelites from
Egypt, if, as it is commonly accounted, it was a seal of the covenant of God
with them as his peculiar people. " It shall be for a sign unto thee upon thine
hand, and for a memorial between thine eyes, that the Lord's law may be in
thy mouth; for with a strong hand hath the Lord brought thee out of Egypt.
Thou shalt therefore keep this ordinance in his season from year to year."!
The particular consideration of these I shall reserve to another opportunity.
They were abolished with the system to which they belonged; but the new
dispensation is not destitute of the usual appendage of sacraments. They are
equally necessary as formerly to confirm the promises of God, and to promote
the consolation of his people; and they constitute a part of the system of reli
gious worship which Jesus Christ has given to his church. The two sacra
ments of the New Testament are baptism and the Lord's Supper, which will
be afterwards considered. An explanation of their nature, and the discussion
of the controversies to which they have given rise, will lead us into a detail
which will occupy several lectures.
In the remainder of this lecture, I shall lay before you some general observa
tions upon sacraments, with a view to illustrate their origin, nature, and design.
First, All sacraments are of divine institution. The Tainbow, as I have
already remarked, must have been often seen prior to the flood; but then it was
merely an object of wonder to the ignorant, and of curious inquiry to men of
science. Nothing was indicated by it, but that the sun was shining in one
quarter of the heavens, and in the opposite region there were clouds, which
refracted and reflected his rays. It was the divine institution which made it
significant, and converted it into an assurance of protection by almighty power
from a universal inundation. From the same source, the tree of life, and the
sacraments of the Old and the New Testament, derived their symbolical mean
ing and their authority. Had not God set them apart to a religious use, the
tree of life would have conveyed no more information to Adam, than any other
tree in the garden; and the elements in the Christian sacraments would have
afforded as little support to our faith, as the water with which we daily wash
our hands, and the bread and wine which we use at our ordinary meals. And
here I may mention -by the way, what I omitted in its proper place, and the
sacraments of the Christian Church, furnish a proof that the sign or seal of a
covenant is not necessarily a new thing; for nothing is more common than the
substances employed as figures or emblems, and they are used in the same
manner as in the ordinary occasions of life. In every covenant between God
and man he makes the promise, and therefore he only can confirm it. It would
be high presumption in any person to come forward with his devices in aid of
the divine faithfulness; because his interposition would imply, either that the
word of God was not worthy of credit in itself, or that he was acquainted with
an expedient to make its truth more apparent, and to remove the doubts and
suspicions which the human mind is too apt to entertain. Hence we condemn
the conduct of the Church of Rome, which has multiplied the number of the
sacraments to seven, while no man, who takes the Scripture as his guide, can
find any more than two. The authority of man has here intruded into the
exclusive province of God. However august and sacred these additional sacra
ments may be in the eyes of the deluded votaries of ignorance and superstition,
it is certain that they represent no grace, and can convey no blessing, and
ought to be considered as bold corruptions of the purity and simplicity of the
Christian ritual. N
Secondly, The signs which God has appointed to ratify his covenant are
* Gen. xvii. 11. * Exod. xiii. 9, 10.

358 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE: \
significant; that is, they are fitted by their nature and qualities to represent the
blessings which he has promised to bestow. The bow is never seen but in the
time of rain, or when there are watery clouds in the sky; and it is a sure sign
that the clouds, which have overspread the heavens, are passing away, and that
the sun is again looking forth upon the earth. Thus it is naturally adapted to
the purpose of its constitution, which is to declare that a second deluge is not
to be apprehended. The tree of life, whatever it was, no doubt produced ex
cellent fruit; and although, amidst the ravings of folly, nothing is more absurd
than the supposition that it possessed a virtue to make men immortal, yet, from
its nutritious and invigorating quality, it was an expressive emblem of the
immortality which Adam would have enjoyed through the will and power of
his Creator. Water, which purifies our bodies and our garments from the filth
which they have contracted, is a lively figure in baptism of the influences of
the Holy Spirit, which wash our souls from sin, so often represented under the
image of uncleanness. Nothing could have been more properly chosen to
signify the efficacy of our Saviour's atonement, in giving life and joy to our
souls, than bread, the staff of life, and wine, the exhilarating and strengthening
quality of which was expressed in an ancient parable, where it is said " to
cheer God and men." Hence you see with what wisdom the signs and seals
of God's covenants have been selected. They are not altogether arbitrary, so
that no connexion subsists between them and the things which they signify,
but what arises from positive institution. There is an analogy or resemblance,
in consequence of which the signs remind us of the blessings exhibited by
them, without any effort of ingenuity on our part. Thus our senses minister
to our salvation. We are necessarily conversant with material objects, and it
is a gracious provision which has given them a meaning and a use, by which
our thoughts are led to heavenly objects. Nature becomes the image of grace;
and the impressions of external things, under the plastic power of religion,
spiritualize our minds, and promote the interests of the divine life in our souls.
Thirdly, ' The signs or seals which God has annexed to his covenants, are
assurances on his part that the blessings promised in them shall be enjoyed.
This is their proper design. They are intended for the satisfaction of those
with whom the covenants are made. God speaks thus of the rainbow, " And
the bow shall be in the clouds ; and I will look upon it, that I may remember
the everlasting covenant between God and every living creature of all flesh
that is upon the earth."* Accommodating his language to our conceptions, he
represents the bow as a token which would remind him of his covenant, while
the meaning evidently is , that the bow would remind us of it ; and that, as
long as it appears in the sky, we have no reason to fear that his promise will
fail. Baptism and the Lord's Supper are securities to those who have a right
to them, that they shall enjoy the privileges which the ordinances respectively
exhibit. The one declares that God gives them his Spirit as a purifier, to
cleanse their souls from sin, and to prepare them for the kingdom of heaven ;
and the other seals their interest in the death of Christ, and their title to its
precious fruits. We may remark by the way, that the doctrine of the Church of
Rome, according to which there is a conversion of the bread and wine in the
Eucharist into the body and blood of our Saviour, destroys the essence of a sacra
ment, which is a visible sign of an invisible grace. Transubstantiation gives us
the thing signified, and leaves only a false appearance of the sign. The Lord's
Supper, in the Church of Rome, is therefore no sacrament at all. The sacraments
of the new covenant are not the promised blessings themselves, but symbolical
representations of them ; nor does it appear, although the common opinion and
the common way of explaining them are different, that they are properly de
signed to communicate the blessings of the covenant, but that their office is to
* Gen. ix. 16.

THE SACRAMENTS. 359
assure us that they shall be communicated. The intention of them may be
explained by the following words : " God, willing more abundantly to show
unto the heirs of promise the immutability of his counsel, confirmed it by an
oath ; that by two immutable things in which it was impossible for God. to lie,
we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold
on the hope set before us."* His simple promise is worthy of implicit
credit. He might have refused to give us any other security, and it would have
been impious on our part to demand it, because, by doing so, we should have
impeached his veracity ; yet, placing himself as it were, on a level with us,
he has voluntarily given the highest confirmation of his word which we could
ask from one of our fellow-men, of whose integrity we entertained a suspicion.
He has not only promised, but sworn. In like manner, and with the same
design, he has first declared his good will to us through Jesus Christ in the
Gospel, and then has exhibited his grace to us in sacraments, applying it to
us in external signs, and so binding himself to communicate it to our souls.
Fourthly, While all sacraments are intended to be used for the ends of the
institution, the mode of using them is not always the same. Some are only
to be looked at ; some are externally applied to the body ; and some are de
signed for its nourishment. The seal of the covenant with Noah is used by look
ing at it ; and as the covenant was made with all men, in whatever region of
the earth they reside, it is placed in the heavens that all may have an oppoi>
tunity to observe it. In baptism, water is not only exhibited, but sprinkled or
poured upon the person ; and in circumcision, the sign of the covenant was
impressed upon the body. In the Lord's Supper, bread and wine are pre
sented, not to be gazed at with distant reverence, but to be eaten and drank;
and in the passover, a lamb was killed and roasted with fire, and the Israelites
feasted upon it. It follows that those are highly culpable who are disqualified for
using sacraments to their proper ends, by ignorance of their nature and design.
Such are they who regard them as mere ceremonies, of little importance, in
themselves, although entitled to a respectful observance as institutions of re
ligion ; and they who ascribe to them a purpose which was not contemplated
by their Author. To this censure those are subject, who imagine that baptism
is effectual by the simple application, and regenerates every child to whom it
is administered ; and those who substitute the Lord's Supper in the room of
the sacrifice of the cross, and trust in it as a sort of atonement for their sins.
They, too, cannot be excused, who, knowing that the sacraments are intended
for use, live in the habitual neglect of them, or at least, of the sacrament of
the Supper. Does not their conduct imply that this ordinance is superfluous ?
or is it a virtual declaration that they do not consider themselves as having an
interest in the covenant of which it is a seal ? The common apology is, that
they are destitute of the necessary qualifications ; and in the case of many, it
may be true. It is a fact, however, not to be rested on as an excuse, but to be
deplored ; and it is calculated to excite serious alarm, for they who have not
a right to the seal, have not a right to the blessings of redemption.
Fifthly, Sacraments are intended for the use of those alone with whom the
covenants to which they are appended are made. The covenant of preserva
tion from a second deluge was made with all mankind, and the sign of it ap
pears in the clouds, where every eye may see it. Circumcision was the dis
tinguishing mark of the seed of Abraham, whom God had chosen to be his
peculiar people; and, if the passover be considered as another seal of that
covenant, we know that no stranger was permitted to eat of it. Baptism and
the Eucharist exclusively belong to the disciples of Christ, as distinguished
from heathens; Mahometans, and Jews. Infants receive baptism, as having
been admitted into the covenant with their parents ; and both ordinances are to
* Heb. vi. 17, 18.

360 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
he administered to such adults alone as, by a credible profession of faith,
appear to be the people of God. But it is necessary to proceed farther, and to
state that a credible profession gives a right to the sacraments only in the
judgment of the Church; and that, in the sight of God, none have a right to
them but believers and holy persons. Hence, the members of the Church are
exhorted to examine themselves, to ascertain their stale and character before
they go to the holy table, "lest, coming unworthily, they eat and drink judg
ment to themselves."* As the sacraments of the new covenant ought not to
be administered to any person who may not be presumed to be a saint; so,
however, favourable the appearances are, if he who receives them is not a
genuine Christian, he is an usurper of privileges to which he has no title. In
all such cases, the sacraments are like seals affixed to a blank. Their declared
meaning is unaltered ; but in their present application they signify nothing.
They do not, and cannot, confirm the blessings of salvation to the man who
does not believe. What have they to do with the securities that the promises
shall be performed, by whom the promises have not been embraced? What
have they to do with the pledges of our Saviour's love, and of eternal redemp
tion, whose affections are engaged by the pleasures of sin, and whose days
are spent in the pursuits of the world ?
Lastly, The efficacy of sacraments depends solely upon the Divine bless
ing, whether we consider them as channels in which grace is conveyed, or as
means appointed to confirm the faith and promote the consolation of the peo
ple of God. This concluding observation relates to the Christian sacraments,
with respect to which strange notions are maintained by the Church of Rome,
in direct contradiction to the proposition now laid down. There are two
opinions to which it is opposed; that the sacraments, when rightly adminis
tered, are effectual in themselves; and that, to the right administration, the
intention of the administrator is necessary. Thus the Council of Trent has
decreed: "If any man shall say, that the sacraments of the new law do not
contain the grace which they signify, or do not confer grace upon those who do
not oppose an obstacle lo it, as if they were only external signs of grace or
righteousness received by faith: let him be accursed." f Again, "If any
man shall say, that grace is not conferred by the sacraments of the new law
themselves, ex opere operato, but that faith alone in the Divine promise is suf
ficient to obtain grace : let him be accursed."! This barbarous phrase, opus
operatum, which is utterly unintelligible without an explanation, signifies the
external celebration of the sacraments. It has been defined by Popish writers
to be the performance of the external work, without any internal motion ; and
sacraments have been said to confer grace ex opere operato, because, besides
the exhibition and application of the sign, no good motion is necessary in the
receiver. All that is required is, that no obstacle shall be opposed to the re
ception of grace, and the only obstacle is mortal sin. But as sins of this class
are reduced by the Roman casuists to a very small number, — all others being
accounted venial, — the exceptions to the efficacy of the sacraments which are
made by this negative qualification, are quite inconsiderable. Thus the sacra
ments are converted into a species of magical charms, which work in some
mysterious way, without the concurrence of the patient ; and the exercise of
the intellect and the will, of the rational and moral faculties of man, is excluded.
I should think that, according to this doctrine, they would do as much
good to the receiver when he is asleep as when he is awake. It is vain to
ask any proof of this doctrine from Scripture, for none is to be found. It is
vain to ask how its abettors can reconcile to philosophy and common sense
the idea, that a material substance, by a particular mode of application, shall
produce a spiritual effect upon the soul. It is one of the mysteries of the
* 1 Cor. xi. 29. * Sessio vii. De Sacramentis in genere, Canon vi. i Ibid. Canon viii

THE SACRAMENTS. 361
church which she cannot explain. If it shall be said, that God has so connect
ed his grace with the sacraments, that it shall be infallibly communicated
when they are administered ; we have a right to demand some more proof than
an assertion, that he has in this instance divested himself of his sovereign
power over his own gifts, and committed the absolute disposal of them to the
ministers of religion ; or, that he has introduced into this part of religion a me
chanical process, instead of the moral economy which prevails in all the other
parts of it. The Gospel does not produce its effects ex opere operato, or by
the mere sound of the words in our ears, but by the power of the Spirit open
ing the understanding and heart to receive it. What ground is there for sup
posing that the mode of operation is different in the sacraments ? or, that here
alone these words are not true, " Neither is he that planteth any thing, nor he
that watereth, but God that giveth the increase ?"* In opposition to this ab
surd and impious tenet, we maintain that sacraments do not work grace physi
cally, as if they possessed some intrinsic energy ; but morally and hyper-physi-
cally, as signs and seals which God accompanies with his blessing. The doc
trine of our Church, as declared in its standards, is, that " the grace which is
exhibited in or by the sacraments rightly used, is not conferred by any power
in them," but " by the blessing of Christ, and the working of his Spirit."!
There is another error opposed to the proposition, that the efficacy of sa
craments depends upon the blessing of God, which makes their efficacy and
validity depend upon the intention of the administrator. The Church of Rome
pronounces a curse upon any man who shall say, that " there is not required
in the ministers who celebrate them, an intention to do what the church
does."* Now, the church not only goes through the external forms of the
sacraments, but means that they should be true sacraments and should com
municate grace to the receivers. If a priest have not this intention, the form
only of a sacrament exists ; the essence is wanting. Great disputes have
arisen in the Church of Rome with respect to this intention ; whether it should
be an actual intention ; formally arising in the mind at the time ; whether a
habitual intention will not suffice ; or, whether it is not enough that it is vir
tual, that is, that the priest have formerly had this intention, and is disposed to
have it, although from some cause he has it not actually at present. In one
thing all are agreed, that, if the intention is wholly wanting, if the priest posi
tively intends that the sacrament which he is celebrating shall not be a sacra
ment, it has no validity, — is a mere sign without the substance. In this case
the child is not regenerated in baptism, as Papists suppose all children rightly
baptized to be ; and the bread and wine in the Eucharist are not converted
into the body and blood of Christ, but continue what they were. It is not
necessary that I should point out the gross impiety of a doctrine which sub
jects Divine institutions to the arbitrary pleasure of men, who have power to
defeat the design of Jesus Chri3t in giving them to the church, and are consti
tuted the sovereign dispensers of his grace. The priests of Rome have an
absolute control over Omnipotence, and can exert it in the miracle of transub-
stantiation, or restrain it, according to their perverse inclinations. It was never
pretended that the intention of the preacher is necessary to give efficacy to the
word; and it is altogether arbitrary to suppose it to be necessary to the
efficacy of the sacraments. As the latter were instituted by God and
not by men, nothing besides his blessing can rationally be conceived to be
requisite to accomplish their design, but the administration of them according
to the prescribed form. The intention of the administrator has as little to do
with the effect, as the intention of the physician has with the success of the
medicine which he gives to his patient, or the intention of the husbandman
* 1 Cor. iii. 7. * Conf. xxvu. 3. Sh. Cat. Q. 91.
\ Con. Trid. Ses. vii. de Sac. in gen. can. xi.
Vol. II. — 46. 2 H

362 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
with the fertility of the soil. God has not suspended our salvation upon the
precarious volition of other men, over whom we have no power.
The consequences of this doctrine are perplexing and alarming in the highest
degree to the members of the Church of Rome. As it is impossible to know
the intention of their priests, they can never be certain that they have received
any of the sacraments. It is possible that they have not been baptized and
therefore cannot be saved. If an unbaptized person is made a priest, all his
actions in that character are invalid ; all the sacraments which he administers
are vain ceremony. If he is a bishop, those whom he ordains are not priests ;
and if he is Pope, the bishops whom he consecrates have no more power than
laymen. No Papist can tell whether the elements in the Eucharist have been
transubstantiated or not ; and, for aught that he knows, they are simple bread
and wine, and in adoring them, he is upon his own principle guilty of idola
try. In short, according to the doctrine of intention, the Church of Rome
may be no Church, and the Pope, the bishops, and the priests, may all be
usurpers of offices to which they have no title. Let them relieve themselves
from this difficulty as they can ; they have made the snare in which they are
caught. We believe that " the efficacy of a sacrament does not depend upon
the piety or intention of him that doth administer it, but upon the work of the
Spirit and the word of institution."*

LECTURE LXXXVII.
ON THE SACRAMENTS.
Consequences of the Popish Doctrine concerning the Intention of the Priest in Sacraments. —
The Sacraments of the Mosaic Dispensation. — Circumcision, its Origin, From and Import.
— The passover, Proof that it was a Sacrament ; its Form and Significancy. — The Jewish
Superseded by the Christian Sacraments of Baptism and the Lord's Supper. — The Five
Spurious Sacraments of the Church of Rome.
¦ In the last lecture, I explained the nature of sacraments, and made some
general observations upon them. My last observation was, that the efficacy
of sacraments depends upon the blessing of God, and it was opposed to two
errors of the Church of Rome, that sacraments communicate grace ex opere
operato, or by the mere administration of them, without any exercise of mind
oh the part of the receiver, if he is not in mortal sin ; and that the intention of the
priest to do what the church does, is indispensably necessary to give them va
lidity. We have seen, that as the latter opinion is unscriptural and impious,
so it involves its abettors in the most painful uncertainty, and is an engine
powerful enough to overturn the whole fabric of their church. It is possible
that, from the want of intention in their present priests, they have no sacra
ments ; and that, from the same want in a former race of them, their present
priests are not priests, their bishops are not bishops, their pope is not the vicar
of Christ. Their religious offices may be performed by men who have not
been baptized, and therefore are not Christians ; and they may be daily guilty
of the grossest idolatry in worshipping bread and wine, which they suppose
to be the body and blood of our Saviour. If it should be said that it is alto
gether incredible, that a whole generation of priests should conspire to defeat
the design of the sacraments, still, the uncertainty remains with respect to in-
* Conf. xxvii. 3.

.THE SACRAMENTS. 353
dividual cases. How does any man know, that the priest who baptized him
had the proper intention, or that the priest had it, by whom that priest was
baptized? If there was a single failure in the line of succession, from the
Apostles down to the present time, all that followed were unchristianized. Men
of different characters may be supposed to have existed in that succession, and
if some were upright, others were wicked. There may have belonged to it
such priests as Luther met with at Rome before he appeared as a reformer; men
who made a jest of sacred things, and annulled the sacraments with a deliberate
design. He tells us that, in celebrating the Lord's Supper, some of them,
instead of repeating the words of institution, hoc est corpus meum, by which,
transubstantiation is supposed to be effected, said with a low voice, Panis es, et
panis eris. Bread thou art, and bread thou shalt be.
It may surprise us that the Church of Rome should have adopted an opinion
clogged with such difficulties, and leading to such consequences; and it may
be thought that she has been drawn into it inadvertently. But whether or not
the matter was well considered when it was first made an article of faith, it
was not re-enacted by the Council of Trent without opposition. Yet, although
the inferences deducible from it were represented to the fathers, they passed
the decree formerly quoted, not choosing to acknowledge the fallibility of the
church, by revoking one of its dogmas, nor to abandon a tenet so well calcula
ted to increase the power and influence of the clergy. This is probably
the origin of the doctrine of intention, and is certainly the reason why
it is retained. The great object of the Church of Rome is, to create a
sacred reverenee for its ministers, and to establish their uncontrolled domin
ion over the people ; and nothing can be conceived more effectual for this
purpose, than the belief that they can make or not make sacraments at their
pleasure ; that they can communicate or withhold the grace of God ; that, in ¦
short, the salvation of the people is subject to their disposal. Join the two
opinions which we have considered together, and you will perceive in both an
artful but wicked contrivance, to reduce the minds of men to a state of spiritual
slavery under their yoke. The sacraments are effectual ex opere operato, or,
by simple application convey grace to the receiver ; and the priest can make
them sacraments or empty ceremonies as he chooses. How august, in the
eyes of the ignorant and superstitious, must those men appear, who can open
or shut the treasury of heaven ; who have power to turn material substancesr
into the body, blood, and divinity of Christ, by a few words, muttered like a
magical incantation !
In the preceding lecture, I gave a short account of the signs or sacraments
appointed to confirm the covenants which God has made with men. I then
mentioned those of the Old Testament, which have been superseded by
the seals of the Christian dispensation. The brief notice which was taken of
them was sufficient at that time ; but it will be now proper to attend to them
more particularly.
The first in order is circumcision, which is called the token or sign of the
covenant with Abraham.* It was then first instituted, or at least it then first
became significant, and it was enjoined upon the Israelites as a rite to be ob^
served in all their generations. Hence our Lord said to the Jews, " Moses.
therefore gave unto you circumcision, not because it is of Moses, but of the
fathers."! Herodotus affirms that the Colchians, and Egyptians, and Ethio
pians, alone of all men practise circumcision. The Phenicians and Syrians
in Palestine acknowledge that they learned it from the Egyptians-! It is not
surprising, that infidels should eagerly lay hold of this account to contradict
the relation of Moses; but it is surprising, that persons, professing to be
Christians should have discovered a disposition to give credit to the profane,
* Gen. xvii. 11. * John vii. 22. $ Herodot lib. ii. a. 104.

864 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
in preference to the inspired historian. The account of Herodotus is mani
festly false ; for, first, he asserts that the Phenicians practised circumcision,
contrary to a well known fact, that all the inhabitants of Palestine except the
Jews were uncircumcised ; and secondly, he says that they owned that they
had received it from the Egyptians, whereas it is certain, that the Jews never
acknowledged any such thing. Laying aside the divine authority of ihe
history of Moses, it is astonishing that any man should have ever lent an ear
to Herodotus on this subject. For what, I ask, did he know about the matter ?
Nothing but some idle tales, which he had heard from persons as ignorant as
himself. It should be remembered, that Herodotus wrote about fourteen hundred
years after the institution of circumcision according to the Scriptures, and
was therefore totally incompetent to decide concerning its origin.
The circumcision of a child took place on the eighth day after his birth, and
was performed by the father of the family, or by any other person whom he
chose to employ. While it constituted a visible proof that the person was one
of the descendants of Abraham, and consequently was comprehended in the
covenant which God h'd made with that patriarch and his seed, it was signifi
cant of certain spiritual blessings, to which those who, like him, believed in
God, were admitted. To Abraham, it was " a seal of the righteousness of faith
which he had, yet being uncircumcised."* Before this rite was instituted,
Abraham had " believed in God, and it was counted unto him for righteous
ness;"! and circumcision was a confirmation of the righteousness which he
had obtained by faith, or of his justified state, and of the blessings and privi
leges connected with it. God had promised the Messiah to him and his seed,
and, along with the Messiah, not only temporal, but spiritual and heavenly
blessings; and Abraham, embracing this promise, had engaged to walk before
God, and to be perfect. Of this covenant, the sign and seal was circumcision;
a declaration to his believing descendants, as well as to himself, that to them
the promises belonged, while it implied a profession on their part of their trust
in the illustrious seed, in whom all the families of the earth should be blessed;
and hence to them, as well as to him, it was a seal of the righteousness of
faith. We could not conceive the Most High to have enjoined this rite solely
for the purpose of displaying his authority. We may not be able to explain
satisfactorily why he fixed upon it in preference to any other; but we must
believe that something more was intended than merely to set a mark upon the
Israelites. Like all his other signs, it was significant, if not by its own
nature, yet in consequence of his institution.
I proceed to observe, that as it was a seal of the righteousness of faith, so it
was also a sign of the renovation of the heart. This is evident, on the one
hand, from those passages which speak of the "circumcision of the heart" as
the work of God, and as necessary to our loving him; and, on the other hand,
from those which call depravity the " foreskin of the heart," and represent the
wicked as " uncircumcised in heart."! In these passages, we have examples
of what is called sacramental language, according to which the sign is put for
the thing .signified, and the thing signified, for the sign. The expressions quo
ted would have been unintelligible, if circumcision had been simply a mark on
the body, to distinguish one nation from another. It is plain that it was insti
tuted for another purpose, and that the Israelites understood that a spiritual
meaning was couched under it. There was an internal circumcision necessary
to render them the seed of Abraham according to the promise, and full heirs
of the blessings of the covenant. The New Testament confirms this view of
the rite, when describing believers in Christ as having undergone the change
which it signified, it says, "In whom also," that is, in Christ, " ye are cir-
* Rom. iv. 1 1 . * Gen. x v. 6.
i Lev. xxvi. 41. Deut x. 16. xxx. 6. Jei. iv. 4. Acts. vii. 51.

THE SACRAMENTS. 365
cumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body
of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ."* To the same pur
pose are the words of Paul in the Epistle to the Romans: " For he is not a
Jew that is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision which is outward in the
flesh : but he is a Jew, which is one inwardly: and circumcision is that of the
heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of
God."! While circumcision was a sign and seal of the righteousness of faith, and
of the regeneration of the heart, it laid those to whom it was administered, un
der an obligation to live according to the law of the covenant, into which they
had been admitted. They became bound to observe all the ordinances of God,
and to obey all the commands which he had given to his people: " Circum
cision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law; but if thou be a breaker of the law,
thy circumcision is made uncircumcision."! The circumcised were engaged
to cultivate purity of heart and conduct; to mortify the flesh with its affections
and lusts; to keep at a distance from the world lying in wickedness, from which
they were separated by a visible mark of distinction; and as they always car
ried about the sign of the covenant, to behave in every place, and on every
occasion, like persons dedicated to the service of Jehovah.
Circumcision was a temporary ordinance, and was abolished with the other
institutions of Moses. Although a sign and seal of the covenant of grace, it
was adapted only to a particular dispensation of it, and therefore ceased when
another economy was introduced. The council of Jerusalem, after a solemn
discussion of the question, pronounced that it ought not to be enjoined upon
the converted Gentiles,§ It was not, at the same time, forbidden to the Jews;
but it ought to be observed, that it was permitted, and not commanded. For
this permission the same reason may be assigned, which accounts for the liberty
to practice for a time other rites of the ceremonial law; a concession to the
strong prejudices of the Jews in favour of them, which it pleased God to sub
due by gradual means. If, however, any converted Jew insisted upon the
necessity of circumcision to salvation, the Apostles were no longer tolerant,
but condemned the dangerous error in unqualified terms : " Behold, I Paul say
unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing."!! Hence
you perceive, that there is no contradiction between those passages of Scrip
ture in which circumcision is permitted, and those in which it is condemned;
for, in the former, it is considered merely as a rite to which the Jews had been
long accustomed, and which they might retain from innocent motives; and, in
the latter, it is viewed as usurping the place of the righteousness of Christ,
and made by the ignorant the foundation of their hope.
The question, whether circumcision will be retained by the Jews after their
conversion to Christianity,. is not worthy of attention. Some have been so
foolish as to affirm that it will, and to argue in favour of it from Scripture
misunderstood. They might have proceeded a step farther, and from the latter
part of Ezekiel's prophecies have concluded, as I believe some wrong-head
ed persons have done, that the temple of Jerusalem will be rebuilt, and the
ancient system of worship will be restored.
The passover is usually accounted the other seal of the covenant, under the
former dispensation. It must be acknowledged, that we have not the same
evidence that it stood in this relation to the covenant which we have with re
gard to circumcision; and it is rather by inference that this rank is assigned to
it, than by positive explicit institution. It is said, indeed, to have been to the
Israelites " for a sign upon their hands, and for a memorial between their
eyes;" IT but this seems to be a proverbial expression, importing that it was de-
* Col. ii. 11. * Rom. ii. 28, 29. + Rom. ii. 25.
§ Acts xv. | Gal. v. 2. <i Exod, xiii. 9.
2 H 2

366 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
signed to commemorate their deliverance from Egypt. It was, in the first
place, a commemorative ordinance; and, in the second place, it was typical of
our redemption from a worse bondage than that under which the Israelites
groaned. For this view of it, we have the authority of an Apostle, when he
says, that " Christ our passover is sacrificed for us."*
The reasons for which it may be considered as a sign or seal of the coven
ant, are the following. It is acknowledged that it was an eminent type of
Christ. Now, as the Israelites were commanded to make a feast of the paschal
lamb, their eating it may be considered as an external representation of the
communion of believers in the benefits of his death; and thus it will appear to
correspond with the Eucharist, which is confessedly a sacrament. Again, the
sprinkling of the blood upon the door-posts and lintels of their houses, is call
ed a sign in the following words : " And the blood shall be to you for a token
upon the houses where ye are; and when I see the blood, I will pass over you,
and the plague shall not be upon you to destroy you, when I smite the land of
Egypt."! Although God said, that when he saw the blood, he would pass by
their houses, it is not to be supposed that this mark was necessary to enable him
to distinguish them from the houses of the Egyptians; and the meaning obvi
ously is, that it would be an assurance to them that they should be safe amidst
the general destruction. The passover, therefore, served the same purpose
with all other seals or sacraments; namely, to attest the promise of God, to
give the Israelites a visible pledge that the promise would be performed. The
last argument for the sacramental nature of the passover, is the substitution of
the Lord's Supper in its room; for immediately after the celebration of the one,
our Saviour instituted the other. This circumstance appears to authorize us
to look upon both as ordinances of the same kind, and to conclude that the
passover was a seal of the old dispensation, as the Eucharist is of the new.
The following is a short account of the passover. On the tenth day of the
first month, the Israelites were commanded to take for each family a lamb of
the first year without blemish, and to keep it to the fourteenth day. In the
evening of the fourteenth, it was to be killed, and its blood was to be sprink
led upon the two side-posts; and the upper door-post of their houses. The
flesh was to be roasted with fire, and wholly eaten with bitter herbs; or if any
of it remained till the morning, it was to be burnt with fire. The bread used
on that occasion was to be unleavened; and for seven days, they were not to
allow any leaven in their houses. They were farther commanded to eat it with
their loins girded, their shoes on their feet, and their staves in their hands; and
to eat it in haste, because they were immediately to set out on their journey
from Egypt to the promised land. Such was the original institution, from
which the subsequent observance differed in some particulars. The passover
was first eaten by the Israelites in the ordinary places of their residence, but
afterwards in Jerusalem; the blood was not sprinkled upon their houses, but
upon the altar; and, instead of being in the dress and posture of persons who
were about to set out upon a journey, they celebrated this feast in their or
dinary habits, and reclining at their ease. This is evident from the account of
the celebration of the passover by our Saviour and his disciples.
That this ordinance was significant, like all other seals, partly appears from
what has been already said, and may be more fully shown by the following
particulars.  First, The animal which was to be used on this occasion was a
lamb; by which our Saviour was prefigured, who was called by John the
Baptist, " the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world."! There
may be an allusion to other sacrificial lambs, and particularly to those which
were daily offered in the evening and the morning; but we cannot doubt that
there is a reference also to the paschal lamb, since we know from the highest
• i Cor. v.. 7. + Exod. xii. 13. $ John i. 29.

THE SACRAMENTS. 367
authority, that it was typical of Christ. Not to dwell upon the resemblance of
temper between the type and the Antitype, which is commonly mentioned, and
is spoken of by the prophet, when he says, " he is led as a lamb to the slaugh
ter,"* but which, I believe, was not in the contemplation of the Baptist, who,
in the words quoted above, referred to his substitution and vicarious sufferings;
there is a circumstance worthy of particular attention, that the lamb of the
passover was without blemish, free from any disease or defect. In this respect,
it was a figure of Jesus Christ, who was holy, harmless, and undefiled, and
separate from sinners. As his human nature, when born of the virgin, was a
holy thing, so his whole life was distinguished by the exact performance of his
duty; and he would challenge the most sharp-sighted of his enemies to discover
a single flaw in his conduct: " Which of you convinceth me of sin?"! Only a
pure and spotless oblation could be acceptable to God, and available to expiate
the offences of others.
Secondly, The paschal lamb was slain, and thus prefigured our Redeemer,
who " poured out his soul unto death." He is called not simply a Lamb, but
" a Lamb slain from the foundation of the world;"! because his death had been
adumbrated from the earliest ages by the sacrifice of lambs. Why were altars
erected, and priests consecrated, and the bodies of animals consumed with fire?
Had God any pleasure in such services, considered in themselves? Was his
eye delighted with the sight of blood? or, Were his nostrils gratified with the
smell of burning carcases? Notions so gross must be left to the heathens, who
supposed that their gods were corporeal beings, and had senses like those of
men. The design of all the oblations of the flock and the herd, was to teach
the important truth, that Divine justice could not be appeased, and punishment
averted from the guilty, but by the effusion of blood. The paschal lamb was
a type; and it was slain to prefigure the death ofthe Messiah, as the only mean
of delivering mankind from a greater evil than the bondage of Egypt.
Thirdly, The blood of the paschal lamb was sprinkled on the door-posts and
lintels of the houses of the Israelites, and represented the application of the
great atonement to be afterwards made, to the consciences of men. The
ultimate design of this rite was symbolically to teach an important truth, which
is clearly revealed in the Gospel, that the blood of Christ, although shed as a
sacrifice for sin, will not avail unless it be applied. Had the blood of the
paschal lamb been permitted to flow upon the ground, it would not have pre
served the Israelites from the destroying angel; his safety depended upon his
using it according to the commandment. There were various aspersions of
blood under the former dispensation; but there is no reason to doubt that the
Apostle refers to that at the passover, as well as to others, when he calls the
blood of Christ, " the blood of sprinkling." " Ye are come to the blood of
sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel."§ We may apply
what was spoken at the institution ofthe passover, to" the subject of the salva
tion of sinners. As God promised that he would pass by every house on
which he should see the blood of the paschal lamb, so he now averts his
wrath from every sinner upon whom he sees the blood of Christ; that is, every
man who appropriates the atonement to himself by faith, is secure from the
effects of his avenging justice. " There is no condemnation to them that are
in Christ Jesus."
Having given you a short account of the sacraments of the Jewish Church,
I proceed to observe, that they have been superseded by the Christian sacra
ments. This is plain with respect to the passover; for we have already seen,
that immediately after the celebration of it, the Lord's supper was instituted;
and an intimation was thus given, that the latter was henceforth to supply the
place of the former. Besides, the Apostle Paul obviously refers to the change,
* Is. liii. 7. * John viii. 46. + Rev. xiii. 8. § Heb. xii. 24.

368 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
when he describes the new ordinance by terms borrowed from the old: " Purge
out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened.
For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us: therefore let us keep the
feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness;
but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth."* So far as the passover
was commemorative of the redemption from Egypt, there was no reason why
it should be continued when the church ceased to be national, and was to com
prehend the Gentiles as well as the Jews; and, so far as it was typical, it was
laid aside as useless when that which it prefigured was accomplished. That
baptism has come in the room of circumcision, may be inferred from two con
siderations; that, like circumcision, it signifies our purification from sin; and,
that it is the ordinance by which we are admitted into the communion of the
visible church. As Paul connects the passover and the Lord's supper, so he
connects circumcision and baptism; leading us to conclude, that there is a
change or substitution in the one case as well as in the other. " In whom also
ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off
the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ; buried with him
in baptism."! It is evident from these words, that baptism is " the circum
cision of Christ;" that is, it is the ordinance which he has given to the church
instead of circumcision, and which, when rendered effectual by his Spirit, is
accompanied with the internal purification, of which circumcision was a sign.
As God said to Abraham, " Every man-child among you shall be circumcised;"
so Christ said to his Apostles, " Go and teach all nations, baptizing them."
I should now proceed to speak of the Christian sacraments in the order of
their institution; but before entering upon the consideration of them, it will be
proper to give you a short account of the spurious sacraments of the Church
of Rome. While we acknowledge only two, that church maintains that there
are seven; having added to Baptism and the Lord's Supper, the five following:
confirmation, penance or penitence, orders, marriage, and extreme unction.
The first is confirmation. In the primitive church, the imposition of hands
was practised as a religious rite, and it is mentioned in the Epistle to the He
brews, among the first principles of the doctrine of Christ-! ^ was use(* m
setting persons apart to a sacred office, in working miracles, and in communi
cating supernatural gifts. After the Samaritans were converted and baptized
by Philip the Evangelist, Peter and John, who had been sent to them by the
other Apostles, laid their hands upon them, that they might receive the Holy
Ghost.§ The rite continued to be observed after the days of the Apostles, not
only in ordaining the ministers of religion, but in the case of the baptized; and
it was supposed that, by the imposition of hands, the influences of the Spirit
were communicated to them. It was performed, however, immediately after
baptism, and not as at present in those churches which keep up the practice,
after an interval of several years, when young persons, having been previously
examined, are presented to the bishop. Upon this ancient ceremony is founded
the pretended sacrament of confirmation; and in order to render it complete,
the Church of Rome has made certain additions to the primitive mode. Two
things are acknowledged to be necessary to constitute a sacrament: matter, and
a form. In order to find matter, which was wanting in the simple imposition
of hands, they have invented a chrism or ointment, composed of olive oil and
Dajm  the former signifying clearness of conscience, and the latter the savour
of a 'good reputation; and it is blessed by the bishop, who alone has power to
perform this ceremony. The form of the sacrament consists in the application
of this chrism to the forehead of the person, while at the same time these words
are pronounced, " I sign thee with the sign of the cross, and confirm thee with
the chrism of salvation, in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy
* 1 Cor. v. 7, 8. * Col. ii. 1 1, 12. * Heb. vi. 2. § Acts viii. 17.

THE SACRAMENTS. 369
Ghost." I need not say that not a vestige of this mummery is to be found in
the New Testament. Confirmation is retained in the Church of England, but
it is divested of these superstitious additions, and is not considered as a sacra
ment. At a certain period children who have learned the catechism, appear
before the bishop, and renew their baptismal engagements; when the bishop
prays, that God, who has regenerated them by water and the Holy Ghost, and
given unto them the forgiveness of all their sins, would strengthen them, and
increase hi them the manifold gifts of his grace. He then lays his hands upon
them, and offers up another prayer to the same effect. It may be justly ob
jected, that the ceremony itself is superstitious, being entirely of human insti
tution; that the qualifications are superficial, as any person may see by perusing
the trifling catechism which the young people are required to learn; that it
proceeds upon the supposition that they are all already the children of God;
that while it assumes what in many cases is false, it is calculated to foster an
ill-founded persuasion of the favour of God; and that, having been so grossly
abused in the Church of Rome, it should have been entirely laid aside by a
Protestant Church, as it has manifestly no claim to an apostolical origin. Un
happily, the Church of England thinks herself adorned, when she wears some
of the rags of popery.
The second spurious sacrament, is penance or penitence. In the New
Testament, Christians are commanded to " confess their faults one to another;"*
but not a word-is said about confession to a priest. In the early ages of the
church, a public confession of their sins was required from those who were
guilty of great offences, particularly of apostasy; and this was a necessary step
to their restoration to the fellowship of the church, from which they had been
excluded. This practice being found inconvenient, private confession was
introduced; and penitents were required to come to the bishop, or to a priest
appointed for the purpose. It would be tedious to trace all the changes which
took place in this part of ecclesiastical discipline; and to show how the penance
enjoined upon offenders was made private, as well as their confessions; how
instead of penance prayers were substituted, so many prayers for example,
instead of so many days of fasting; and how the rich were permitted to pur
chase an exemption, by giving alms to the poor and the church. It is sufficient
to observe, that in the Church of Rome auricular confession is established; that
is, every member of that church is required to make confession to a priest at
least once a year. In doing so, he is bound to act candidly and freely, to
conceal nothing, but to make known to the confessor all the sins which he has
committed since he last appeared before him, and even the secret thoughts of
his heart. It is easy to see that this institution invests the clergy with an
uncontrolled power over the laity; for nothing gives one man a firmer hold of
another, than his knowledge of such parts of the conduct of the other as he
should most anxiously wish to conceal. There is a security, indeed, provided
in the secrecy which is enjoined upon confessors, who are forbidden under the
severest penalty to reveal any thing which has been disclosed to them; but still
the reflection that the penitent has deposited in the bosom of the priest matters
upon which his honour, and perhaps his life, depends, must retain him in a
state of absolute subjection to him. It is the business ofthe priest to ascertain
whether the person is penitent; and here a distinction is made between con
trition, or sorrow for sin arising from the love of God, and attrition, arising
from an inferior cause, as the loss which he has sustained, the shame which he
has incurred, or the danger to which he has exposed himself.! To a man who
takes the Scripture as his guide, it would seem that the latter was not repent
ance at all; but in the Church of Rome, either the one or the other is sufficient.
There remains the satisfaction or penance enjoined upon the penitent, which
* James v. 16. * Concil. Trident. Sessio xiv. He Pemtentia, cap. iv.
Vol. IL— 47.

370 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
consists in fasting, but rendered as easy as possible; in repeating a number of
prayers, which it seems Papists consider as a punishment; or in some other
thing which may be performed without a single sentiment or feeling of piety
The sacrament of penitence consists, like every other sacrament, of two parts,
the matter and the form. The matter is the confession of the penitent to the
priest, his contrition, and his satisfaction. The form is in these words pro
nounced by the priest, " I absolve thee," &c* You will observe to what a
wretched shift Papists are driven to make out a sacrament. There is no visible
sign in this sacrament, but words and feelings of the mind; and the per
formance of certain acts is, with palpable absurdity, converted into the matter of
it. Prayer might be made the matter of a sacrament with equal propriety. The
form is impious and blasphemous; and when a worthless priest presumes to give
absolution, we may indignantly say, " Who can forgive sins but God?" The
whole is comparatively a modern invention, and is no more entitled to be account
ed an ordinance of Christ, than the feat of a mountebank, or the trick of a juggler.
The third sacrament is called the sacrament of orders, because it relates to
the consecration of the different orders of office-bearers in the church. Of
those in the Roman hierarchy there are seven, — porters or door-keepers,
readers, exorcists, acolytes, sub-deacons, deacons, and priests. To these some
add an- eighth, the order of bishops ; but others consider it not as a distinct order,
but as a higher degree of the priesthood. As Jesus Christ has appointed certain
persons to perform the public offices of religion, so there is a prescribed
form of setting them apart, which we learn from the practice of the
Apostles. They ordained ministers and deacons by prayer, and the im
position of hands. This was the simple . form used by them, and it con
tinued for a long time to be observed without any superstitious addition.
If, in the first age, the imposition of hands was accompanied with the com
munication of the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit, it simply denoted, after
miracles had ceased, the designation of the person; and prayer was offered up
for the divine blessing upon him and his labours. In this manner he was de
voted to God, and received authority to preach the gospel and administer the
sacraments, or to care for the poor and take part in the government of the
church, according to the nature of the office with which he was invested. In
process of time, when men began to corrupt the ordinances of the gospel, un
der the pretext of adorning them and rendering them more august, various
ceremonies were introduced, by which the original simplicity of the form was
destroyed. In the Church of Rome, the plan was adopted of delivering to a
priest the sacred vessels, — the paten and the chalice, or the plate and the cup,
 and accompanying this action with certain words empowering him to cele
brate mass, and offer sacrifice to God; and thus they have contrived what they
deem the essential parts of a sacrament. In the ordination of a priest, the
matter is the vessels which are delivered to him, and the form is the pro
nouncing of these words, " Take thou authority to offer up sacrifices to God,
and to celebrate masses both for the dead and for the living, in the name of
the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." You will observe that
this sacrament is wholly a human invention; men have contrived both the
matter and the form, for of neither is there the slightest vestige in the New Tes
tament. It iosts entirely upon the decrees of popes and popish councils, who have
no more power to appoint new means of grace, and new seals of the covenant,
than the first person whom we shall meet in the str"eets. There is nothing
which bears any resemblance to a sacrament in the apostolical form of ordina
tion. Prayer is a simple act of religious worship; and the imposition of hands is
no more a sacramental action in this case, than it was in the performance of
miracles, when it was occasionally, but not uniformly used.
* Conoil. Trident Sess. xiv. cap. iii.

THE SACRAMENTS. 371
The fourth spurious sacrament is marriage. It may excite surprise that any
person, possessed of common sense, should have ever thought of giving this
name and office to a civil contract; for in this light it may surely be considered,
although it was instituted by God himself. Civil government is also his insti
tution, but we do not therefore look upon it as a religious ordinance. The
celebration of marriage in this country, by the ministers of religion, does not
alter its nature. This is an accidental circumstance, not at all necessary to its
validity; and the union would be as firm and as holy, if the law, to which it
belongs to regulate the form, should appoint marriage to be celebrated by the
magistrate. You may also be curious to know how Papists have contrived to
make a sacrament out of marriage, as it does not readily occur to us that it
furnishes the essential parts. This business has caused no little perplexity to
them; but they have finally rested in this determination, that the matter of the
sacrament is the consent of the parties, and the form, the words or sign by which
their consent is expressed. Here, then, is a sacrament, in which something
that cannot be seen or felt or heard, is the matter, namely, the inward consent
of the mind; and consequently an external sign, which is indispensable to
every sacrament, is wanting. With respect to the form, it consists in words, as
in the other sacraments; but, whereas in those they are pronounced by the priest,
in this they are pronounced by the parties. Marriage is therefore an anomalous
sacrament, for it is made and celebrated exclusively by the persons who receive
it. It is impossible to conceive a more complete mass of absurdity. That
cannot be a sacrament which is not even an ordinance of religion, and is not
peculiar to the members of the church. It was originally instituted for the
human race in general, and all men have an equal right to it. The marriages
of Jews, and Heathens, and Mahometans, are as valid as those of Christians.
Papists plead that the Scripture calls marriage a sacrament ; for, where Paul,
speaking of it, says, " This is a great mystery,"* the Vulgate reads, " This is
a great sacrament." But I have accounted for this translation, by showing
you, that anciently sacramentum was used as equivalent to ixmatripiov. It is
evident that nothing more can be inferred from the passage, than that marriage
is an emblem of the union between our Saviour and his followers; and perhaps
not even so much is intended, for the Apostle seems to confine the words to
this union alone, and to put us on our guard against thinking that he is speak
ing of marriage, when he immediately adds, " But I speak of Christ and the
church." The mystery is the mystical union.
The last spurious sacrament of the Church of Rome is extreme unction.
It is called unction, because the person who receives this sacrament is anointed
with oil; and extreme unction, because it is administered in articulo mortis,
when he is understood to be at the point of death. The matter is olive oil,
which has been blessed by a bishop; and the form consists in the application
of this oil to the five senses, with these words : " By this sacred unction, and
his most tender mercy, may God pardon every sin which thou hast committed,
by seeing, hearing, smelling, tasting, and touching."! The oil is put upon the
different parts of the body, as the name of each is enunciated. The person
is understood to receive the remission of his sins, and to be prepared to enter
into heaven, after having undergone a complete purification in purgatory. If
extreme unction were, indeed, an institution of Christ, it would be invaluable
as a sure passport to immortality; but if it be a human device, what can we
say, but that, to those who depend upon it, it must prove a passport to the
place of darkness and sorrow? For this sacrament, as well as for marriage,
Papists plead Scripture, but with equal want of success. The. passage to which
they appeal, is in the Epistle of James: "Is any sick among you? let him
call for the elders of the church; and let them pray, over him, anointing him
* Ephes. v. 32. * Concil. Trident. Sessio xiv. de Extrema Uhctione, cap. i

372 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
with oil in the name of the Lord: and the prayer of faith shall save the
sick."* Those who imagine that these words favour the sacrament of extreme
unction, allow themselves to be carried away by a sound without any regard to
the sense. It is obvious that the two things are totally different. The anoint
ing of James was miraculous, or a sign accompanying a miracle, which, from
the following words concerning the twelve disciples when they were sent forth
by our Lord, seems to have been frequently used in the apostolic age : " And
they cast out many devils, and anointed with oil many that were sick, and
healed them."! But, although the Church of Rome still claims the power of
working miracles, we know that the pretension is absolutely false; and besides,
it is not alleged that there is any miracle in the present case. The design of
anointing a sick person in the days of the Apostles, was to restore him to
health; the design of the popish anointing, is to prepare him for death. The
one, when accompanied with faith, saved the sick; but the other is not admin
istered till all hope of recovery is gone. It is certain that, although oil was
used after the days of the Apostles on various occasions, and was, in particu
lar, applied to the sick, it was not till a late period that the sacrament of ex
treme unction was devised by the Schoolmen, and the Council of Trent estab
lished it by law : " If any man shall say that extreme unction is not truly and
properly a sacrament, instituted by Christ our Lord, and promulgated by the
blessed Apostle James, but is only a rite received from the Fathers, or a hu
man figment; let him be accursed."!
Regardless of the fulminations of the antichristian church, we reject all
these sacraments as the devices of impious men; and adhering to the word of
God as the sole rule of our faith and practice, we receive only the two sa
craments which our Lord and Saviour has instituted, Baptism and the Holy
Supper.

LECTURE LXXXVIII.
ON THE SACRAMENT OF BAPTISM.
Baptism, the Rite of Admission to the Church. — Difference between the Baptisms of John
and Christ. — Application of Water Necessary. — Certain Popish additions to the Rite. —
Mode of Applying the Symbol. — Immersion not Necessary. — Who may be Baptised. —
Baptism of Infants Vindicated.
I now proceed to consider the two sacraments of the Christian Church,
which alone are worthy of attention and have a claim to be observed with de
vout reverence, because they alone are of Divine institution. I begin with
Baptism, by which we are initiated into the fellowship of the Church, and
which, in the order of dispensation, precedes the Lord's Supper; none having
a right to the holy table but those who have been previously purified by the
washing of water and by the word.
It has pleased God, under both dispensations, to institute an external sign
of admission into the church, and of the participation of the blessings of the
covenant. From the days of Abraham to the coming of Christ, the sign was
circumcision; but as it implied an obligation to obey the law of Moses, which
is now repealed, it is laid aside, and baptism is substituted in its room. After
his resurrection, Jesus gave the following commission to his disciples : " Go
* James v. 14. * Mark vi. 13. t Sessio xiv. de Extrema Unctione, can. L

BAPTISM. 373
ye therefore, and teach" or make disciples of " all nations — /jaeij-eevaa-ec Ttavto,
•to, tBvn — baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the
Holy Ghost; teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded
you : and lo ! I am with you alway , even unto the end of the world."* Bap
tism had been previously administered to those who acknowledged him as
the Messiah, and desired to be admitted into the number of his followers; not,
however, by himself, but by his disciples, as we learn from this passage in
John : " When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that
Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John, (though Jesus himself bap
tized not, but his disciples,) he left Judea, and departed again into Galilee."!
We cannot, therefore, consider the ordinance as new, when he gave a commis
sion to the Apostles prior to his ascension; but it then received a more exten
sive application, as they were authorized to administer it to men of every
nation. Baptism was administered also by John his forerunner; and that
which is now practised is commonly accounted a continuation of it. But
although they resemble each other in the external sign, and the mode of ap
plying it, there are some respects in which they materially differ. " John
baptized his disciples into the faith of the Messiah as to come; we are baptized
into the faith of him as actually come. The baptism of John was evidently
designed to serve a temporary purpose, in common with all the other parts of
his ministry; the baptism of Christ is to continue to the end of the world.
The one did not properly belong to the Christian dispensation, but was pre
paratory to it; the other is an ordinance given by our Saviour to his church, to
supply the place of circumcision. Christian baptism is administered in the
name of the persons of the Trinity; whereas we have no evidence that the
Divine Persons were explicitly recognized in the baptism of John. From these
considerations, it appears that the two ordinances differ so much in their form,
in their design, and in their relation to the present dispensation, that they may be
regarded as perfectly distinct, and consequently, that a person who had been
baptized by John might have been baptized again by an Apostle."! If this
reasoning is just, we are at no loss to understand a passage in the Acts, which
has caused no small perplexity to commentators, and about which they have
been much divided in sentiment. Speaking of some men who had received
only the baptism of John, it says, that when they were more fully instructed
by Paul, " they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. "§ It seems
unquestionable that they were rebaptized, and the reason was, that the baptism
of John, and that of Christ, were different ordinances.
It is an opinion adopted by not a few, that our Lord borrowed this rite from
the Jews, among whom it was customary to baptize proselytes, whether male
or female, by immersing the whole body in water. Men view subjects in
different lights, according to their habits of thinking; but I confess, that to me
it seems highly improbable that he would adopt one of the most solemn ordi
nances of his religion from the corrupt church of Judea, and found it upon a
practice manifestly superstitious, which they had added without authority to
the commandment of God. It is altogether incredible that, while he con
demned their vain traditions and observances, he would embody one of these in
his own institute, and thus counteract the effect of his reproofs. No mention
is made of the baptism of proselytes in the works of Philo and Josephus, and
the first notice of it is found in the Mishna and Gemara; of which the one was
composed at the earliest date in the second century, although learned men in
general bring it much farther down, and the latter is so late as the seventh.
There is no evidence that the practice existed in the time of our Saviour, and
* Matth. xxviii. 1 9, 20. * John iv. 1—3.
± Dick's Lectures on the Acts, p. 406. 2d Edit § Acts xix. 5.
21

374 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
it is much more likely that, among the Jews, it was an acknowledged imitation
pf his institution, than that he was indebted for it to them.
Baptism is performed by the application of water to the body. This is a
point which it may be judged altogether superfluous to prove, because it seems
to admit of no dispute; but there have been found fools and perverse controvert-
ists to call in question the plainest facts. Some have maintained that Christ
did not enjoin the baptism of water, but of doctrine; and argue that, as Chris
tianity is a spiritual religion, all external rites are excluded from it. It is quite
sufficient to answer, that the Apostles did actually baptize with water. But it
has been alleged by some who could not deny this fact, that the baptism of
water was only a temporary institution, and that it is superseded by the baptism
of the Spirit. Let them prove their allegation, for this burden lies upon them.
It happens unfortunately for their hypothesis, that the baptism of water was
used after the dispensation of the spirit had commenced, and in an age when
the influences of the Holy Ghost were most abundantly communicated; and
it is a complete refutation of it, that, when our Lord instituted this rite, he
promised to be with his disciples in executing his order, not only to the end of
that age, but to the end of the Christian dispensation, or " of the world," as
we have translated the word.
In the Church of Rome, baptism is celebrated with several other rites besides
the application of water. Not only is the sign of the cross made, and the
person exorcised to drive out evil spirits, but salt is put into his mouth, to
signify that by grace he is freed from the corruption of sin; spittle is applied to
his nostrils and ears, to intimate that the Holy Spirit gives light to the mind to
perceive the heavenly truth; he is anointed with oil on the crown of his head,
that he may understand that he is henceforth joined to Christ as a member of his
body, and is called a Christian from Christ the anointed one: if he be an adult,
he is clothed with a white garment, or if a child, a white handkerchief is given
to him, to represent the glory of the resurrection of which he is an heir, the
beauty with which his soul now purified from sin is adorned, and the innocence
which he should study to maintain during his whole life. Lastly, a burning
wax candle is put into his hand, to show that faith, being inflamed with charity
which he received in baptism, is to be nourished and increased by the study of
good works. It is well that Papists have explained the various parts of this
exhibition, which would have otherwise puzzled every human understanding.
Some of these rites were introduced at an early period; but they are all human
inventions, which disfigure the simple ordinance of Christ, and have been
rejected by our Church in its just zeal for the purity of his institution.
The'manner in which water should be applied to the body, whether by affu
sion or aspersion, or by immersion, is a question which has divided Christians
into different parties, and has been discussed with great vehemence of conten
tion. An attempt has been made to decide the controversy by an appeal to the
meaning of the original terms. Bajtti£a, it is commonly said, signifies to immerse
or plunge into water, and consequently $aiftiaij.a, and pcwi-Kj/toj, are properly
translated immersion. Bartr^u is derived from paxta, which has the same
signification, and is used to express the action of dipping and dyeing. Ex
amples, however, have been produced from which it appears, that the idea
sometimes conveyed even by this verb, which it is commonly admitted signifies
to dip, is that of sprinkling, rather than of dipping. In the Revelation our
Saviour is described as clothed with a garment — {Sipafiiiivov aina-ei, — dipped in
blood,* says our translation, but rather sprinkled or stained; for he is repre
sented as a warrior and a conqueror, and the garments of such a person after a
battle are not dipped in blood, but stained or sprinkled with the blood of his
enemies, which has spouted from their wounds. This is the image presented
* Rev. xix. 13. ,

BAPTISM. 375
o us in the parallel passage of Isaiah, where in the same character he says,
"Their blood shall be sprinkled on my garments, and I will stain all my
raiment."* The sentence pronounced upon Nebuchadnezzar was, that his
body should be " wet with the dew of heaven;"! and it is thus translated in the
Greek version, Amo i^s opoaou tov oupcwou *o sapo, ewtou if$a$w- Here the word
signifies to sprinkle, or moisten by sprinkling, for his body was not wetted by
being dipped in dew, but by its falling upon him.
I do not intend to deny that parttu ever means to dip, but that this is its only
sense; and hence we may fairly conclude, that although its derivative fiajt-t i£u
also means to immerse, it does not follow that this is its only signification.
Two examples have been quoted from the Apocryphal writings, in one of
which it denotes washing without specifying the form, and in the other it seems
to be synonymous with sprinkling. Judith is said to have washed herself in
the camp, or by the camp at a fountain of water, tjlart-ti^ct o utt tys rojyrji tov
iSa-tos-X The place, a fountain or spring, naturally excludes the idea of im
mersion, and the phrase is uti -trjs rt^yjyj, at the fountain, not sv ty itiryyi as it
would have been if she had bathed in it. The son of Sirach, speaking of a
person who has been purified from the pollution contracted by touching a dead
body, calls him |3a7ttfi£o(uf»/os a*o »fxpou.§ But when we consult the law of
Moses to which he refers, we find that he was purified by aspersion. That his
uncleanness might be removed, the water of separation was sprinkled upon
him, as you will see in the nineteenth chapter of Numbers.il If then the word
was so understood by Jewish writers in Greek, we may presume that it retains
the same in the New Testament, or that this meaning may be assigned to it
when circumstances do not forbid; and that it is unwarrantable to affirm, from
the simple use of the term in reference to this ordinance of Christ, that we are
bound to administer it only by immersion. "The Pharisees and all the Jews,
except they wash their hands oft, eat not, holding the tradition of the elders.
And when they come from the market, except they wash," or baptize them
selves, " they eat not. And many other things there be which they have
received to hold, as the washing" or baptisms " of cups and pots, brazen vessels,
and of tables." IT The washing of the hands was performed among the Jews
by pouring water upon them, as appears from the express testimony of Scrip
ture: " Elisha the son of Shaphat poured water on the hands of Elijah."** The
"baptizing" after their return from market, probably signifies the same thing
with washing their hands, as it is very improbable that on every such occasion
they washed the whole body; and at any rate, if they put themselves to this
trouble,' the body would be washed in the same manner with the hands, by
pouring water upon it. There is no reason to think that this baptism consisted
in immersion. Cups and pots and brazen vessels may have been " baptized"
by being plunged into water; but as the operation could have been performed
equally well by pouring water into them, and upon them, we can draw no
certain conclusion re'specting the mode, and the words f3o,7tti£tiv and 00,** nrjios,
convey nothing more than the general idea of washing. The last word in
this passage, xjuvav, is improperly rendered tables in our version, and the proper
translation is beds or couches. These were the couches on which they reclined
at their meals. They were so large as to hold several persons at the same
time; and from their size it seems reasonable to suppose that they were " bap
tized," not by being immersed in water, but by being washed with the hand or
sprinkled, to. remove any real or fancied impurity.
Hitherto we have found nothing to justify the confidence with which it has
been asserted, that pajt*<£u necessarily signifies to immerse. But to supply
what may be wanting in the evidence arising from the word itself, it is alleged
* Is. lxiii. 33. * Dan. iv. 23. $ Judith xii. 7. § Ecclus. xxxiv. 25.
} Num. xix. 13. 1 Mark vii. 3, 4. ** 2 Kingsiii. 11.

376 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
that such phrases are joined with it, as clearly show that it was by dipping or
plunging that baptism was originally administered. For example, John is said
to have baptized in Jordan* — tv -co, Iopoavg — standing, no doubt, in the water,
and successively dipping his disciples. That the preposition tv often denotes
the place in which any thing is done, cannot be denied; but among its many
senses, it signifies also at, or nigh lo. " Now, in the place — tv ty toitq —
where he was crucified, there was a garden,"! not in the identical spot, but in
its immediate vicinity. In like manner — o itvpyos tv tcj> 2aua,u — is " the tower,"
not "in the pool of Siloam,"! but d°se °V *'• It has been remarked, that
while Matthew says that John baptized " in Jordan," the Evangelist John tells
us that he was baptizing " beyond Jordan;"§ and as we cannot suppose a con
tradiction between their statements, we must reconcile them by understanding
Matthew to mean close by Jordan, and the other Evangelist, that the place
was on the opposite bank of the -river. Besides, although John had actually
taken his station in the river, it does not follow that he immersed his disciples,
because he might have chosen it for convenience, as the number to be baptized
was great, that there might be a sufficient supply of water at hand to pour upon
their heads or faces.
The use of the preposition u; and tx or e|, in reference to baptism, is sup-,
posed to furnish an argument equally conclusive in favour of immersion. It is
related in the history of the Ethiopian eunuch, that he and Philip " went down
both into the water — m$ to ¦£6'<op — and he baptized him. And when they came
up out of the water — ix -tov iSato; — the Spirit of the Lord caught away
Philip. "|| Here it is said is an instance of baptism by immersion, as it could
only be for that purpose that the Evangelist and his convert went into the
water. It is eertain that ti^ does sometimes signify into, and tx out of; but it
is equally certain that at other times the proper translation of the one is to, and
of the other is from. When Jesus came — n$ -to jj.mjiJ.Eiov — to the sepulchre of
Lazarus,** we know that he did not enter into it; and when ships came from
Tiberias,!! — tx TifitpiaSos, — we do not suppose that they sailed out of the midst
of the city, but that that was the place from which their voyage commenced.
The preposition tx simply signifies the point, from which, and n$, the point to
which a movement is made. In the present case nothing more is intimated by
the sacred historian, than that Philip and the eunuch went to the place where
they saw water, and that after baptism they both left it. A different preposition
is used in the narrative of our Saviour's baptism, and our translators have im
properly rendered avtjiv arto tov itiatos, " he went up straightway out of the
water,"!! because the true sense of a*o is from, not out of, and it marks the
place from which he went up, without at all suggesting the idea that he had
been in the water.
There is an expression on which Baptists lay much stress as favouring their
practice of immersion, which occurs in two passages. In both we are said to
be " buried with Christ in baptism;" and hence it is inferred that we ought to
be baptized by immersion, which only is emblematical of a burial. You will
find the one passage in the sixth chapter of the Romans, and the other in the
second chapter of the Colossians. §§ There is an appearance of childishness in
thus explaining the expression, which is manifestly figurative. In the Epistle
to the Romans the Apostle first says, that we are baptized into the death of
Christ, and then adds, that " we are buried with him in baptism;" referring not
to the form, but to the import of the ordinance, by which it is signified, that
through his death we become dead to sin, or are delivered from its power. In
the very next verse he expresses the same idea by another figure, when he
* Matth. iii. 6. * John xix. 41. i Luke xiii. 4. § John i. 28.
J Acts viii. 38, 39. ** John ix. 38. f* Ib. vi. 23.
H Matth. iii. 16. Mark i. 10. §§ Rom. vi. 4. Col. ii. 12.

BAPTISM. 877
says, that " we have been planted together in the likeness of his death." How
comes it to be supposed that the one figure refers to the mode of baptism rather
than the other? Why should it resemble burying more than planting? What
reason can be assigned for laying hold of the one expression in preference to
the other, but the desire to support a hypothesis? Would it not have been
more suitable to the character of honest and intelligent interpreters of Scripture,
to conclude that as there is a mixture of figures, the Apostle did not allude to
any external rite, and merely intended by both to signify that baptism is a
sign of our fellowship with Christ in his death? Besides, Baptists proceed
upon an erroneous idea of our Saviour's burial, into which it is strange that
any person should have fallen, who had read the New Testament with any
degree of attention. They seem to think that he was buried after the manner
of our country, where a dead body may be said to be immersed in the earth,
because it is let down into a grave and covered with mould. Had his
body been interred, we might have fancied a resemblance between its burial
and the plunging of the baptized into water. But nothing is more remote from
the truth. The sepulchre of Christ was an apartment hewn out of a rock, the
floor of which was on a level with the ground, or depressed only a little below
the surface, and which was so capacious that a person could sit and stand
upright in it. Here his body was deposited, and was covered only with the
grave-clothes. Let Baptists now point out the resemblance between the plung
ing of the baptized into water, and the burial of Christ. No two things in the
world are more unlike, and this silly argument vanishes into smoke.
We have seen that nothing certain can be learned from the original term
fiaTtti£iw, because it has different meanings, signifying sometimes to immerse,
and sometimes to wash. When a word is used to denote an action which is
figurative, it seems a fair way of determining its sense, to observe how the
thing which the action represents is in other places expressed. As the water
in baptism is emblematical of the influences of the Spirit, we may bring to the
illustration of the term to baptize, the passages of Scripture which speak of the
communication of those influences; and there is not one of them which alludes
to immersion. The Holy Ghost is said " to fall" upon men, to be " poured
out" upon them; and in reference to the same subject, God promises " to
sprinkle clean water upon us," " to be as the dew unto Israel,"" and that his
grace shall " come down as rain upon the mown grass, and as showers which
water the earth."! If water is a significant emblem of the Spirit, because it
purifies, is it not reasonable to suppose that a resemblance was intended between
the application of the water and the manner in which the communication of the
Spirit is described? It is by no means probable that God should speak of his
own operations in one way, and symbolically represent them in a different
way; that he should promise to sprinkle or pour out his Spirit upon us, and to
confirm this promise would command us to be plunged into water. There
would be no analogy in this case between the promise and the seal; and the
discrepance would give rise to a confusion of ideas. This I conceive to be an
argument of considerable force in favour of our mode of administering baptism*
and an objection against immersion which cannot be easily evaded.
I may add, that there is little probability that the baptisms recorded in the
New Testament were performed by immersion. We have already considered
the case of John, and shown that he did not baptize in Jordan itself, but on its
banks. It is not very credible, that the three thousand converts on the day of
Penticost were dipped. There was a pool in Jerusalem, called the pool of
Siloam; but we do not know whether from its size and situation it could have
been fit for the purpose. Besides the gross indecency of it, it would have
been a tedious process, if all this multitude had put off and put on their clothes
* Acts x. 44. Zech. xii. 10. Ezek. xxxvi. 25. Hos. xiv. 5. * Ps. lxxii. 6.
Vol IL— 48. 2i2

378 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
in public; and it is very unlikely that they were plunged with their garments
upon them. When whole families were baptized in their own houses, there
is no reason to think that, on every occasion, a sufficient quantity of water
could be found for immersion. We are certain, that in very few of our houses
the baptism of immersion could be practised; and the houses of Ihe Jews and
Greeks, we presume, were not better accommodated. Some men seem to
believe that, in the Apostolic age, every house had a font or bath; but why they
believe this no man can tell, except that it suits their hypothesis. The Apos
tles could not administer baptism by immersion in every place; so that if this
had been the mode, when they had made converts they must have often been
under the necessity of leading them away to a pond or river, and, in many
regions of the east, must sometimes have made long journeys in order to find
one. But there is not a single fact in the New Testament which gives counte
nance to this idea. The narrative implies that they baptized converts on the
spot, and, consequently, that only a small quantity of water was necessary,
which could be always procured.
The argument for immersion fails, upon a careful examination. It is founded
upon the assumption that /Sow* tfu has only one meaning, while it has more,
upon a mistake of the import of two propositions, ti( and tx; and upon a fanciful
analogy; it is contrary to the usual language of Scripture respecting the thing
signified by baptism, and to the general strain of the history, which relates
instances of baptism when immersion could not be practised. With whatever
confidence this has been pronounced to be the only scriptural mode, the evidence
preponderates on the opposite side. We may therefore persevere in our own
practice, and assure ourselves that they are lawfully baptized upon whom
water has been only sprinkled or poured.
There is a point of still greater importance than the mode of baptism, about
which Christians are divided in sentiment. A controversy has arisen with
respect to the persons to whom it should be administered; those who are called
Pffidobaptists maintaining that, in certain circumstances, children have a right
to the ordinance, while Antipsedobaptists confine it to adults.
There is but one opinion with regard to grown up persons not baptized in
infancy, who profess faith in Christ and a desire to be received into the com
munion of the Church. In this case the command is explicit; and it is because
they are so distinctly mentioned, while nothing is said concerning infants, that
baptism has been supposed to belong exclusively to the former. "Go into all
the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is
baptized shall be saved."* The qualification in the sight of God, who searches
the heart, is faith unfeigned; and in the sight of men, who can judge only by
moral evidence, is a credible profession of it, or such a profession as appears
to them to be sincere. Accordingly, the Apostles acted upon this principle, as
we learn from the history of their proceedings. I select the instance of the
Ethiopian eunuch. When this man had heard the gospel from the mouth of
Philip, he said to him, " See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be
baptized? And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest.
And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God."!
The Apostles were sent to teach or make disciples of all nations, by instructing
them in the religion of Christ; and when those whom they had addressed had
acquired a .competent measure of knowledge, and recognized Jesus Christ as
their Lord and Saviour, they were then to baptize them. Baptism is not to be
administered to a Jew, a Mahometan, or a heathen, who still adheres to his
original creed, nor to a man who may ignorantly express a wish for it. It is a
badge of Christianity, which would be absurdly and profanely attached to a
* Mark xvi. 15, 16. * Acts viii. 37.

BAPTISM. 379
person who retained the principles of another religion, or gave a blind assent
to a system which he did not understand.
Upon the connexion of faith with baptism, Antipaedobaptists found what they
consider as an unanswerable argument against the baptism of infants. If it is
required that he who is baptized should believe, it follows that children ought
not to be baptized, because they are not capable of faith. The argument has a
specious appearance, which imposes on superficial thinkers; but when it is
thoroughly canvassed, it will be found, I trust, to be destitute of force. When
our Lord says, " He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved," he no
doubt teaches that baptism should be administered to a believer; but if we infer
that none but a believer should be baptized, let us observe the consequence
which will follow from his words. Faith is made as necessary to salvation as
to baptism; and it is as fairly deducible from his words that none can be saved,
as that none should be baptized but believers. Thus, children are excluded from
heaven, as well as from this initiatory rite. This, however, our adversaries will
not allow. They admit, as well as we, that many children are saved; and,
consequently, admit that what is required from adults in order to their eternal
happiness, is not required from infants. If they will be consistent, they must
further admit that this text speaks of adults alone; and, consequently, that the
argument drawn from it against the baptism of infants is a sophism, more being
contained in the conclusion than in the premises. It evidently speaks of adults,
for it supposes them to be capable of faith. But because faith is made neces
sary to their baptism, it is not made necessary to the baptism of infants, any
more than it is necessary to the salvation of infants, because it is necessary to the
salvation of adults. And with respect to infants, since, according to our an
tagonists, the thing signified is granted to them, it will not be easy to assign a
good reason why the sign should be denied.
Infants were proper subjects of circumcision. Circumcision implied an
obligation to observe the ordinances and commandments of God; and hence the
circumcised person is pronounced to be " a debtor to do the whole law."* If,
under the ancient economy, there had been some persons of similar views to
those of Antipaedobaptists, they might have brought forward as specious reason
ing against the circumcision, as is now produced against the baptism, of chil
dren. They might have said, ' Children have not yet attained the use of reason,
and are therefore disqualified for coming under a moral obligation. How can
they be bound to obey a law which they do not understand? They know not
what is going on when circumcision is administered to them; and, with respect
to them, it is mere mockery, a rite without a meaning. Let it be reserved for
grown up persons, to whom its design can be explained, and who can ration
ally and voluntarily accede to the covenant of which it is a seal.' Yet the
male children of the Israelites were circumcised on the eighth day after their
birth; and why then may not the children of Christians be dedicated at as
early a period to the service of God? The objection might have been strength
ened by the remark which an Apostle has made, that,' in the case of Abraham, in
whom circumcision commenced, it was " a seal of the righteousness of faith."!
Here it might have been said, faith preceded circumcision. It not only pre
ceded, but was pre-supposed as the indispensable qualification of the person to
be circumcised; and as this took place in the case of Abraham, the father of the
Jews, it was certainly intended to signi^ that the rite should not be performed
upon any of his posterity, unless they possessed the same qualification. This
is exactly the argument of our antagonists against the baptism of children; but
we see at once how little it avails. The children of Christian parents may as
well be baptized, as the children of Jewish parents were circumcised, without
faith. •Gal. v. 3. *Rom. iv. 11.

380 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE.
Had it been the will of God that the religion of Moses should become
universal, the persons sent forth to promulgate it would have received a com
mission similar to that of the Apostles, and would have been commanded, first
to teach all nations, and then to circumcise them. If any person had inferred,
from the terms of their commission, that none should be circumcised without
being previously taught, we know that the conclusion would have been wrong,
because there was a previous command to administer this rite to children; and
hence we perceive the fallacy of inferring from the Apostolical commission,
that believers only should be baptized, ft may be said that the two cases are
different, because there is an express law for the circumcision of children, but
no precept for their baptism. We answer, that, as there is a precept for cir
cumcising them, and admitting them into the church, it appears that their age
is no obstacle to the participation of the seal of the covenant; and that, as this
privilege was once conceded to children, we presume that it is continued to
them, and demand, not assertion, but proof, that it is revoked. In this case, the
onus.probandi lies upon our antagonists.
It is in vain to tell us that " circumcision was a sign of carnal descent, a
mark of national distinction, and a token of interest in those temporal blessings
that were promised to Abraham." All this may be true; but it is also true that
it was a sign of spiritual blessings, a seal of the righteousness of faith, and
was therefore precisely of the same import with Christian baptism. The pas
sages of Scripture which speak of " circumcising the foreskin ofthe heart," of
"circumcising the heart to love the Lord," and of the regenerated " as the true
circumcision," demonstrate that it was a seal of the covenant of grace; and
consequently, that the new seal, which has displaced it but bears the same sig
nification, may, with equal propriety, be administered to infants. It is the
interest of Antipaedobaptists to show that baptism has not come in the room of
circumcision; but, however necessary it may be to their scheme, they cannot
proceed in the attempt without setting aside the express declaration of Scrip
ture. Attend to the following words of the Apostle: " In whom also ye are
circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body
of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ; buried with him in baptism,
wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God."*
The subject of discourse is regeneration, orthe puttingoff of the body of sins; and
of this change, it is intimated circumcision was formerly a sign. The blessing
is continued under the new dispensation; but is it now without a sign? Is
there no representation of it to our senses under the Gospel? Yes; it is still
adumbrated by a new ordinance, and we are circumcised with the circumcision
of Christ, when we are buried with him in baptism. The mention of baptism
in the same sentence with circumcision as equivalent to it, and as significant of
the same spiritual change in the state of the soul, cannot fail to suggest to any
person, who is not prejudiced, that the one is the substitute ofthe other. Cir
cumcision has ceased; but there is another initiatory rite given for the same
purpose, which ought, therefore, to be administered to the same persons for
whom circumcision was designed.
There was no occasion to specify children in the commission given to the
Apostles; because they and all the Jews would understand that, since baptism
had come in the room of circumcision, their children had the same right to it
as themselves. Both having been comprehended in the covenant made with
Abraham, they would naturally conclude that the new covenant or dispensation
was of equal extent. If a change had been made to the exclusion of infants,
it would have excited surprise, and given rise to inquiries, and called forth
explanations on the part of the Apostles, to satisfy the new converts, that they
might acquiesce in this unexpected limitation of their privileges. We cannct
• Col. ii. 11,12.

BAPTISM. 381
suppose that an alteration so important, and so deeply affecting the interest of
their families, would have passed in silence. Yet we do not find a single hint,
that the ordinance which had come in the room of circumcision was to be ad
ministered to adults alone, and that their children must' wait till they were
capable of making a profession of faith. The language in which the Jews
were addressed on the day of Pentecost, instead of suggesting a repeal of the
law, seems rather to import that it was to continue in force : " Repent, and be
baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins,
and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. For the promise is to you,
and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our
God shall call."* In what other light could the audience understand these
words, than that the promise of salvation through Christ was made, not to
those alone who believed, but to their seed: that their families were to be
admitted to the privileges of the new dispensation as well as themselves; and
that baptism was to both a sign and seal of their interest in the covenant.
They would naturally and unavoidably judge this to be the meaning of , the
declaration, especially as it was expressed in the same terms which had been
used at the institution of circumcision : " I will establish my covenant between
me and thee, and thy seed after thee, in their generations, for an everlasting
covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee." " This is my
covenant which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee :
Every man-child among you. shall be circumcised."! God made a covenant
with Abraham and his seed, and the promise is to believers of every nation,
and their children. There is no difference in these two cases; seed and
children have the same signification; and the plain inference is, that the chil
dren of Christians are to be baptized, as the children of Jews were circum
cised. Our Lord said on a certain occasion, " Suffer little children, and forbid them
not to come unto me, for of such is the kingdom of heaven."! The kingdom
of heaven frequently signifies the new dispensation, or the church upon earth;
and if this is the meaning here, children are pronounced to belong to it, and
have an undoubted right to the sign of admission. If, however, as some con
tend, it is the state of glory, the inference is still good, that being heirs of
eternal life they ought not to be denied the ordinance which is the seal of their
title to it. It is more probable, that " the kingdom of heaven" is in this pas
sage the church, and our Lord assigns as the reason why children should
be suffered to come to him, that he recognized them as members of it. It is a
pitiful evasion to say that toiwtav, suck, signifies not children, but persons of
child-like dispositions. It makes our Lord reason inconclusively; for how could it
be a reason that parents should bring their children to him to be blessed, that
persons resembling children in humility and teachableness, are members of
his church ? If this interpretation of the passage did not favour their own
hypothesis, Antipaedobaptists themselves would exclaim against it as forced and
unnatural. Passing other arguments from Scripture in favour of infant baptism, I shall
conclude by calling your attention to the fact, that in the Apdstolic age, not only
believers themselves were baptized, but their households. Lydia was baptized,
" and her household." The jailor of Philippi was baptized, " and all his;"§
and Paul baptized " the household of Stephanas. "|| These are only a sample
of the hundreds and thousands of families, to whom this rite was administered
upon the faith of their parents. A household comprehends all the individuals
living together under the same roof, and subject to the same domestic govern
ment; and certainly children are not excluded. This would be an arbitrary
and most unwarrantable limitation of the term. When it is used on any other
* Acts ii. 38, 39. * Gen. xvii. 7, 10. * Matth. xix. 14. § Acts xvi. 15, 33. J 1 Cor. i. 16.

382 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
occasion, it always suggests the idea not only of servants but of children, and,
in the first place, of the latter; and it would suggest this idea to all the readers
of the New Testament, if their minds were free from prejudice, and had
nothing in view but to discover the truth. Were we told now that a certain
man had been baptized, and his family, there is not one of us who would not
immediately think of his children, and conclude that they had all been washed
with water in the name of the Trinity. It may be objected to this view, that
we have no certainty that there were children in the families mentioned; but
this is a miserable subterfuge. What was done in the cases specified, was
done in many other instances; for they are recorded as a specimen of the mode
of procedure, and it would be truly wonderful, if among all the converts in the
primitive times, there was not one who had children; so wonderful indeed that
no man in his sober senses could believe it. As the existence of children in
families is so common that the exceptions are rare, we are authorized to con
clude, that they were often found in the houses of the early disciples; and the
argument from the baptism of households is obviously on our side. We have
satisfactory evidence that the Apostles baptized infants; and unless they were
considered as belonging to the church, and proper subjects of this seal of their
admission into it, we can affix no meaning to these words of Paul, "The un
believing husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sancti
fied by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they
holy."* The holiness of children which they derive from the faith of their
parents, can signify nothing but their separation from the world, and their
dedication to the service of Christ, of which their baptism is a sign.
It appears now that we have a better warrant for the baptism of children
than human authority; that it is not a corruption of a divine institution; and
that they who confine it to adults are chargeable with wresting from believing
parents and their offspring, a privilege which God has granted to the spiritual,
as well as to the natural posterity of Abraham.

LECTURE LXXXIX.
ON THE SACRAMENT OF BAPTISM.
Baptism Administered in Name of the Trinity.— Meaning and Import of the Words Used.
 Who may Baptize. — Lay Baptism; Baptism by Heretics. — Place of Baptism. — Spon
sors.  The Blessings of Regeneration; Pardon, Adoption, and Resurrection to Life, Signi
fied by Baptism. — Duties of the Baptized.
The symbol in baptism is water, which is applied to the body by aspersion
or affusion, and has been chosen, as will afterwards appear, as an expressive
sign of internal purification. I proceed to state that the ordinance is to be
administered in the name of the Father, of the Son and of the Holy Ghost.
At our reception into the communion of the church, there is a solemn recogni
tion of the blessed Trinity, and a distinct mention of the three persons of the
Godhead, as one in essence and equal in power and authority. The order in
which they are enumerated, corresponds to the order of subsistence, which we
do not understand, but according to which the Father is the first, the Son be
gotten of the Father is the second, and the Spirit proceeding from both is the
'hird. This is not the proper place for demonstrating the divinity of the
«1 Cor. vii. 14.

BAPTISM. 383
second and the third persons of the Trinity, but we cannot pass on without
remarking, that one proof is furnished by baptism. They are associated with
the first person in the same religious ordinance. We are called to look up to
them all with equal reverence, to expect the blessings signified and sealed from
them all, and to consider ourselves as brought under obligations to give to them
all the same homage and obedience. Can it be believed, that, as some affirm,
the Son is only a man like ourselves, and the Holy Ghost is an angel or merely
a name for a divine operation upon the mind ? Has our Lord commanded
us to be baptized in the name of God, of a creature, and of a manifestation
1 of divine power?
It may be deemed questionable, whether the express mention of all the per
sons of the Trinity is essential to baptism; because in the Acts, when Paul
baptized some of the disciples of John, he is said to have baptized them " in
the name of the Lord Jesus."* It may, however, be supposed that the histo
rian gives only an abbreviated form; and it is probable, that the Apostles would
adhere to the terms of their original commission. There was no reason why
they should deviate from it; and we take the course which becomes us, when
we literally follow the instructions of Him who gave this ordinance to his
church. The expression in the original is not tv t<? ovouatt, but u; to owyto. It has
been remarked, that these two forms of expression are of different import;
that the former denotes the impulsive cause of an action, and the latter the
object, or final cause of it. Whether tv, and si; should be thus distinguished,
when they are joined with the noun ovofia, I will not pretend to determine; but
it is certain that the one preposition is sometimes used for the other, or that t is
is used when tv would have expressed the meaning eqully well. If we adopt
the common translation of the phrase, it will signify that we are baptized by
the authority of the persons of the Trinity. It is worthy of attention, that
when ovo/ia occurs in connexion with baptism, the expression commonly is sis
to ovo/jaj,; and the words of the Apostolic commission may be rendered, " bap
tizing them to the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."
The meaning may be collected by a reference to the words of Paul to the
Corinthians : " Was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized to the name
of Paul? I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius,
lest any of you should say, that I baptized to my own name."! These ques
tions were suggested by the schism among the Corinthians, of whom some said,
" I am of Paul, and others, I am of Apollos;" and to convince them of the
folly and sinfulness of their conduct, the Apostle reminds them that they were
not baptized to his name, initiated by that ordinance into the faith and profes
sion of his religion, but into the service of Christ, who alone should for this
reason be acknowledged as their Master. There is, however, one instance of
a different form of expression, which may give rise to a suspicion that us to
ovo/ta, and ev tip ovofiati, are equivalent, and that the alleged distinction between
them is rather fanciful than real. When the Holy Ghost had fallen upon Cor
nelius and his company, Peter " commanded them to be baptized in the name
of the Lord,"! ev tip ovoixati tov Kvpiov. It is possible, however, that there
was a design in using both expressions, and that they were intended to convey
different ideas; ev tq ovoiiovti denoting the authority from which the ordinance
has proceeded, and tis -to ovoiw,, the object to whom we are dedicated in it.
The administration of baptism in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and
of the Holy Ghost, signifies that we are baptized by the authority of the per
sons of the Holy Trinity. They all concurred in giving this institution to the
church, as they all co-operated in our salvation, of which it is a sign. I
is a memorial of the love of the Father, in sending his Son to be the
* Acts xix. 5. * 1 Cor. L 13—15. i Acts x. 48.

384 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
Saviour of the world, of the love of the Son in assuming our nature and
dying for our sins, and of the love of the Spirit in coming forth to purify our
souls. The united wisdom, and power, and grace of the subsistences in the
Divine essence, were displayed in the redemption of fallen man, and our ad
mission to the new covenant is their conjunct 'act.
Again, the administration of baptism in the name of the Father, and of the
Son, and of the Holy Ghost, signifies that we are baptized into the faith and
profession of the Holy Trinity. We are baptized to their name. This
mysterious doctrine of our religion, that there are three Persons in one undi
vided essence, equal in power and glory, is explicitly and solemnly recognised;
and it follows, that whoever afterwards denies this fundamental truth under
whatever pretext, whoever ascribes divinity to the Father alone, and pronoun
ces the Son and the Spirit to be inferior to him, renounces the faith which he
was bound by the most sacred engagements to maintain. But a simple ac
knowledgment of the Trinity does not fulfil the design of our baptism. We
are required to regard the persons of the Godhead with devout affections, cor
responding to the manifestations of them in redemption; to look up with reve
rence and love to the Father as our Father; to feel our obligations to the Son,
and depend upon him alone for pardon and eternal life; and to expect from the
Holy Ghost those gracious operations and aids, by which we shall be sanctified
and prepared for heaven, and those consolations which will, be a source of
peace and transcendent happiness, amidst the difficulties and distresses of life.
In a word, the administration of baptism in the name of the Father, and of
the Son, and of the Holy Ghost; imports that we are dedicated to the service
of those Divine persons; that we are engaged to offer religious worship to
them, as separately and conjunctly the proper objects of it, and to yield unre
served and unintermitted obedience to their law, as revealed in the Scriptures.
Baptism, which is denominated a seal of the covenant, ought to be viewed in
the light of a federal transaction. On the one hand the Father, Son, and Holy
Ghost, promise to bestow upon the baptized the blessings of salvation, of which
water is a symbol; and on the other hand, they come under an engagement " to
observe all things whatsoever Christ has commanded us."
Before I proceed to speak of the blessings which are signified and sealed by
baptism, it may be proper to inquire to whom it belongs by right to administer
this ordinance. The catechism of the Council of Trent, having stated that
bishops and priests have a right to baptize, and that deacons may baptize with
their consent, goes on to say, "that the lowest rank is of those, who on an
urgent necessity may baptize, but without the use of the solemn ceremonies.
Of this sort are "all persons, yea even of the lay-people, whether men or women,
what sect soever they profess; for this power is permitted even to Jews, infidels,
and heretics, when necessity compels, provided that in doing so they intend to
do what the catholic church does in that kind of administration."* In particu
lar this office is assigned to midwives, " who are allowed to baptize in the
presence of a man who is unskilful in the performance of this sacrament,
although such liberty is not granted to other females."! This is what is called
obstetrical baptism, from the Latin word obstetrix, which signifies a midwife.
In the ancient church lay -baptism was held valid although irregular; but the
baptism of women, and of Jews and infidels, was rejected.
The admission of persons not invested with the sacred office to baptize,
originated in the notion of the absolute necessity of this rite to salvation
Hence, the above catechism says, " We may admire the exceeding wisdom and
goodness of our Lord in admitting these to baptize; for, seeing this sacrament
must necessarily be received of all, as he appointed water to be the matter of it,
than which nothing can be more common, so also would he have no one ex
* Cat Concil. Trid. Pars ii. de Sacram. %. 22. * R>. §. 24.

BAPTISM. 385
e-uided from the administration of it, although it be not lawful for all to use the
solemn ceremonies; not as though the rights and ceremonies are of more dignity,
but that they are of less necessity than the sacrament."* This inducement
to such a disorderly practice, does not exist among us, who believe, that although
baptism being a Divine institution, no adult person could safely neglect it; yet it
is not so connected with salvation, that unbaptized children are excluded from the
kingdom of heaven. We cannot persuade ourselves that the salvation of infants
is so much in the power of their parents, that they can deprive them of eternal
life by their carelessness or deliberate wickedness. Baptism is only a sign
- of the communication of spiritual blessings; and we entertain no doubt, that as
the sign is not always accompanied with the thing signified, so the thing signi
fied is often enjoyed without the sign. We do not, with Papists and too many
Protestants, and particularly with some half-popish Divines of the Church of
England, hold the strange and unscriptural opinion, which is too much counte
nanced by the language of their liturgy, that baptism is regeneration. In the
office of baptism, the priest prays that God would give " his Holy Spirit to
this infant, that he may be born again:" and after baptism says, " Seeing now,
dearly beloved brethren, that this child is regenerate, and grafted into the body
of Christ's church, let us give thanks unto Almighty God for these benefits."
" We yield thee hearty thanks, most merciful Father, that it hath pleased thee
to regenerate this infant with thy Holy Spirit, to receive him for thine own
child by adoption, and to incorporate him into thy holy church." We main
tain that, as many of the Jews were uncircumcised in heart, so many children
of Christians are unbaptized in heart; and we see melancholy and irresistible
proof of the fact in their subsequent conduct. We are convinced, that there is
a baptism of the Spirit distinct from the baptism of water; that the former does
not always accompany the latter; and that God gives the Spirit to whom he
pleases, without limiting the gift to the use of the sign. " Although it be a
great sin to contemn or neglect this ordinance," says our Confession of Faith,
" yet grace and salvation are not so inseparably annexed unto it, as that no
person can be regenerated or saved without it, or that all that are baptized are
undoubtedly regenerated."!
If it were once admitted, that baptism is not absolutely neeessary to salva
tion, the practice of allowing laymen, women, Jews, and infidels, to baptize,
would be given up without reluctance. In this, as in many other cases, one
error has led to another. But we object to the practice on another ground,
namely, that it is an inv.asion of the right of the ministers of religion, to whom
alone it belongs to conduct the worship of the church, and dispense the ordi
nances. They only have authority to administer baptism, who have received
a commission from Christ to preach the Gospel. These two parts of the office
are joined together, and should be exercised by the sa'me persons: " Go and
make disciples of all nations, baptizing and teaching them." Such were the
words of Christ to the Apostles; and he addressed them as the first in a long
succession of individuals, who, although not endowed with miraculous powers,
were to be employed in performing the ordinary functions of religion. The
work of the ministry in all its departments, is committed to pastors and teach
ers, by whom it has been carried on since Apostles, and Prophets, and Evan
gelists ceased. There seems to be no reason, except the unscriptural idea that
baptism regenerates ex opere operato, and is consequently of absolute necessity
to salvation, — there seems to be no reason why laymen should be permitted to
baptize, and not be permitted also to celebrate the Eucharist; a liberty which,
so far as I know, no church ever conceded to them. Lay-baptism ought to be
held invalid; and, were a case of this kind to occur, the person should be bap
tized again by a lawful minister of Christ.
* Cat Concil. Trid. Pars ii. de Sacram. §. 23. * Conf. xxviii. §. S.
Vol. IL— 49. 2K

386 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
There is a more intricate question respecting baptism by heretics, which
gave rise to a keen controversy in the primitive church. Doubts of its validity
had been for some time entertained; but, in the third century, the Christians in
Asia came to a decision, in more than one Council, that all heretics should be
re-baptized before their admission into the communion of the Catholic Church.
Stephen, who was then bishop of Rome, was filled with indignation, and pro
ceeded to ex-communicate the Asiatics; but their cause was espoused by Cyprian
and the other bishops of Africa, who, in defiance of the threatenings of Stephen,
pronounced baptism administered by heretics to be void of all efficacy and
validity. It was finally determined by the Council of Nice, that those who
had been baptized by heretics, should be received into the church simply by
the imposition of hands; with the exception of the followers of Paul of Samo-
sata, whom the Council commanded to be re-baptized, because his sect did not
acknowledge the Trinity. Those who maintained the invalidity of the baptism
of heretics, comprehended under this denomination all the sects which had
separated from the great body of Christians; for the character was applied in
those times with great latitude, and was sometimes given to worthy persons,
who opposed prevailing errors and superstitions. The decree of the Council
gave a sanction to the baptism of all the different societies of professed Chris
tians, and excepted those alone by whom the ordinance was essentially cor
rupted. Some are said to have baptized " in the name of the uncreated God,
and in the name of the created Son, and in the name of the sanctifying Spirit,
who was created by the created Son; others, " in the name of the Father the
only true God, of Jesus Christ the Saviour and a creature, and of the Holy
Ghost the servant of both;" and others, " in the name of the Father, by the Son,
and in the Holy Ghost."
It is evident that baptism administered in such forms, is not Christian bap
tism. It is essentially defective, because it sets aside the doctrine of the
Trinity, into the profession of which our Lord commanded his disciples to be
baptized. There is, however, considerable difficulty in settling the general
question respecting the validity of baptism. Where the form is exactly ob
served, may it not be vitiated by the administrator, although he bear the cha
racter of a minister of Christ? Is every man to be recognized as a minister of
Christ, having authority to officiate in his name, who is called such? the man
who errs in the fundamental doctrines of religion, the man who holds the
Trinity, but is guilty of idolatry, and is tainted with all the pollutions of the
Romish Church? It seems to be generally agreed not to scrutinize this matter
too minutely, and to admit baptism administered by any person who holds the
office of the ministry in the church to which he belongs, and who observes the
form prescribed by our Saviour, although it may be encumbered with supersti
tious rites. ' . .
With respect to the place of baptism, it may be observed, that as soon as
the Christians had churches, it was administered in them, before the congre
gation of the faithful, and the practice of baptizing in private houses was con
demned. The law, however, was remitted in favour of the sick and infirm,
and might be dispensed with by the authority of the bishop. Our Church
retains this law; and private baptism is one of the five articles of Perth, which
were abjured by our fathers at the renovation ofthe National Covenant. The
Scripture gives no direction relative to this matter; but it is more consonant to
the design of the ordinance, which is a recognition of the baptized as members
of the church, that it should be publicly celebrated. It has been alleged, as an
argument for the public administration of baptism, that it should be -preceded
bv the preaching ofthe word; and an appeal is made to the commission of the
Apostles " Go and teach all nations, baptizing them." I would advise you,
for the credit of your understandings, never to make use of this argument.

BAPTISM. 387
The word translated to teach, signifies, to make disciples. As men can be made
disciples of Christ only by teaching, it is certainly implied that they should be
taught before they are baptized: but the sense of the passage is totally misap
prehended, when it is understood to mean that baptism must be accompanied
with the preaching of a sermon. Christ commands his Apostles to instruct
men, before they receive them into his Church; and some sage commentators
conclude that we must preach to adults when we baptize children! This is
undoubtedly admirable reasoning.
There is no fixed time for the administration of baptism. In ancient times,
some maintained, that as children were circumcised, so they should be baptized,
on the eighth day after their birth. It was proposed by others, that it should
be deferred for three years; and many put it off to old age, and to their last
illness, from an idea that they should obtain at once the forgiveness of all their
sins. It became the common practice to baptize at Easter all who had been
born since the last return of that festival, except in cases of necessity, when
baptism was performed at any season of the year. I shall only observe, that
as, on the one hand, indecent haste should be avoided, which would seem to
imply a belief that baptism is absolutely necessary to salvation; so, on the other
hand, parents should beware of unnecessary delay, and should embrace an early
opportunity of dedicating their offspring to God.
The persons by whom children should be presented in baptism, are tlieir
parents, and not sponsors, who in the ancient church were called cwaSo^ot, sus-
ceptores, and are known in the Church of England by the names of godfathers
and godmothers. It is in the right of their parents that children are baptized;
parents are their natural guardians, and upon them the law of God imposes the
duty of bringing them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. Spon
sors are unknown to the Scriptures, and the part which they perform is truly
ridiculous. Nothing can be more inconsistent with common sense, than to
make them answer in the name of the speechless child. " Dost thou, in the
name of this child, renounce the devil and all his works?" " I renounce them
all." " Dost thou believe in God the Father Almighty, and in Jesus Christ
his only-begotten Son?" " All this I steadfastly believe." " Wilt thou then
obediently keep God's holy will and commandments, and walk in the same all
the days of thy life?" "I will."
I now proceed to inquire into the import of baptism, or what blessings it
signifies and seals.
The first blessing signified by baptism, as it is the first blessing promised in
the new covenant, is regeneration. I call your attention to the following pas
sage in the Epistle to Titus: — " But after that the kindness and love of God
our Saviour toward man appeared, not by works of righteousness which we
have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of rege
neration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost; which he shed on us abundantly
through Jesus Christ our Saviour."* Here mention is made of the thing sig
nified by baptism, and in such a manner as manifestly to allude to the ordi
nance itself. Not only is the Holy Ghost said to be " shed upon us," in
reference to the description of his influences by the metaphor of water, but we
are farther said to be saved by the " washing of regeneration." The original
term, %ovtpov signifies a batk and the water contained in it, and must be under
stood to refer to baptism, the only washing with water which is known in the
Christian church; and the expression, the washing of regeneration, conjoined
with the " renewing of the Holy Ghost," obviously teaches what baptism im
ports, namely, the purification of the soul from sin. I quote also the words
of our Lord to Nicodemus, "Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be"
born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot see the kingdom of God."! The
• Tit. iii. 4—6. * John iii. 5.

388 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
change which is declared to be necessary to qualify us for admission into the
spiritual and heavenly kingdom of God, is called a second birth. The expres
sion was not understood by Nicodemus, and still excites the surprise, and even
the ridicule of some who profess to be like him, masters in Israel; but its
meaning is easily apprehended by those who have studied the Scriptures with
attention and humility. It signifies a moral change effected in the soul by the
Spirit of God, who infuses into it a principle of divine life, rectifies the disor
der of its faculties, and enables it to fulfil the purpose of its being by glorify
ing its Maker. It seems to be designated a new birth, to intimate that the sub
ject of the change enters upon a new mode of existence, is introduced as it
were into a new world, becomes a part of the new creation : " If any man be
in Christ, he is a new creature; old things are passed away, behold all things
are become new."* The agent is the Holy Ghost; but our Lord speaks "of
water," as well as " of the Spirit." It is the opinion of some, that the same
thing is expressed by different terms, agreeably to a phraseology not unfrequent
in the scriptural style; but it is more probable that water is mentioned because
it is the emblem of the influences of the Spirit. It has been objected, that
there cannot be an allusion to baptism, because the institution of it was poste
rior to the interview with Nicodemus. But this is a mistake, originating in the
supposition that it took its rise from the commission given to the Apostles after
the resurrection, while it is to be dated from the commencement of our
Saviour's ministry, and only received a new enactment prior to his ascension.
To the conversation with Nicodemus, this remark is subjoined by the Evan
gelist : " After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of
Judea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized." f From the passages
now cited, it appears that baptism is significant of the regenerating influences
of the Spirit.
A second blessing signified by baptism, is the forgiveness of sin. Peter
said to the Jews, who were awakened by his sermon on the day of Pentecost,
" Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for
the remission of sins;"! and when Ananias was sent to Paul, after he had met
the Lord in the way, he addressed him in the following words : " And now
why tarriest thou? Arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins."|| It is
not to be inferred from these passages, that remission is inseparably connected
with baptism any more than regeneration, so that every person to whom it is
administered, is immediately delivered from a state of condemnation. The
idea is unscriptural, and is adopted only by those who are grossly ignorant of
the economy of grace, in which God reserves to himself a right to give or
withhold spiritual blessings according to his pleasure. But we are plainly taught,
that it is a sign of remission, or that the application of water to the body, is a
symbol of the purification of the soul from guilt, by the atoning blood of
Christ. It holds out in figure, the means by which children are delivered from
original sin, and adults from both original and actual. In the ark, " a few,
that is, eight souls, were saved by water; the like figure whereunto," says
Peter, " even baptism doth also now save us, not the putting away of the filth
of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience towards God, by the resur
rection of Jesus Christ."§ It is the symbol of salvation; and those to whom
the blessing signified by it is imparted, shall as certainly escape the avenging
wrath of God, as Noah and his family escaped the destruction of the flood.
A third blessing signified by baptism, is admission into the family of God;
for it represents our fellowship with Christ, through whom we become his chil
dren. It is the sign of our reception into the church, the part of the family
which is upon earth; the other part, consisting of the spirits of just men made
* 2 Cor. v. 17. * John iii. 22. * Acts ii. 38. '
j Acts xxii. 16, §1 Pet iii. 21.

BAPTISM. 389
perfect, being in heaven. The visible church, comprehending a great propor
tion of ignorant and worldly-minded men, cannot be considered as entitled to
this high character; but, according to the constitution of its Founder, the true
church is an assembly of persons who know and obey the truth, and in bap
tism we are enrolled among them. The voice of God says from heaven, " I will
be a father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters." As an Israel-
itish male child was recognized by circumcision to be a descendant of Abraham,
and one of the chosen people, so we are declared by baptism to be disciples
of Christ, and members of the household of God : " By one Spirit we are all
baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Greeks, whether we be bond
or free, and have all been made to drink into one Spirit."* As the baptism of
water is the external sign of the baptism of the Spirit, it must represent what
this internal baptism effects; and the Apostle teaches us, that by partaking of
the Spirit, we are incorporated with the people of God of all nations and con
ditions. Baptism is therefore a recognition of our right to the privileges of
adoption, which unquestionably belong to the members of his family, and, in
particular, of our right to the external privileges of the church. In these,
Jews, Mahometans, and Heathens, have no interest. They are strangers and
foreigners; but the baptized are fellow citizens with the saints. They are placed
under the care of the ministers and rulers of the church, should be regarded
by the members as brethren, and have an interest in their love and their prayers;
they are admitted to the benefit of public and private instruction; they may
claim, if adults, a place at the table of the Lord; and if children, are entitled
to this other seal of the covenant as soon as they show themselves qualified for
it by their attainments in knowledge, and the general propriety of their con
duct. It has been objected against the administration of baptism to infants,
that it can be of no advantage to them, because they are incapable of under
standing, or even perceiving the transaction. But, besides that it may be pro
ductive of the most beneficial effects at a future period, when they come to
know its meaning, and reflect upon its solemn obligations; it is of no small
moment that it introduces them into the society of the people of God. If
the effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much, we ought to set
some value upon the prayers which are offered up by ministers and people for
the young, who are to succeed them in the profession of the truth. If a re
ligious education is of unspeakable benefit, it is one of the happy fruits of
their baptism, in which their parents engaged to instil into their minds the
principles of piety and morality. If the company of good men, their counsels,
. their admonitions, their example, are calculated to be useful, they enjoy these
in consequence of their adoption into an association separated from the world
lying in wickedness.
The last blessing signified by baptism, is a resurrection to eternal life. Some
have supposed that there is a symbolical representation of this event in the
rising of the baptized person from the water; but as it has appeared that this
is not the scriptural mode of administering the ordinance, we may pronounce
this idea to be altogether fanciful. Paul refers to a connexion between bap
tism and the resurrection of Christ, when, having said that we are buried with
him by baptism into death, he adds, " If we have been planted in the likeness
of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection."! He is speak
ing of our death to sin, and our life to righteousness, or of the spiritual change
in the present state, of which baptism is a sign; but if it is expressive of one
great effect of the resurrection of Christ, it may be very naturally considered
as a pledge of all its blessed fruits, and, in particular, of a glorious immortal
ity. The same Apostle says to the Colossians, " Ye are buried with him in
baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him, through the faith of the operation
* 1 Cor. xii. 13. * Rom. vi. 5.
2k2

390 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
of God, who hath raised him from the dead,"* still signifying, that baptism
imports our interest in the resurrection of Christ, and its consequences. It
was called by the ancients, the earnest of good things to come, and the type
of the future resurrection. May not this be the meaning of that passage
in the fifteenth chapter of the First Epistle to the Corinthians, concerning
which there has been such a diversity of opinion ? " Else what shall they do
which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not ? why are they then bap
tized for the dead ?"! Some of the Fathers understood the expression ijtto
tov vtxpuv, to mean to be baptized into ihe hope cf the resurrection of tke dead;
or, what amounts to the same thing, to submit to baptism that they might fill
up the places of those who had died, thus declaring their belief that they had
not perished, but were alive in a better world, and their hope that, through
Jesus Christ, to whom they dedicated themselves in baptism, they also should
be raised again to enjoy the same glorious recompense. According to this
view of the passage, a resurrection to life is one of the blessings signified and
sealed by this institution. It assures us of a triumph over death and the
grave, through the redeeming blood of Christ, with which we are sprinkled;
and of admission into heaven, for which we are qualified by the washing of
regeneration. It is the seal of God impressed upon the members of his fami- ,
ly, to distinguish them from the heirs of perdition. Like the blood of the pas
chal lamb on the houses of the Israelites, it is a pledge of the safety of believers
on that awful day, when sinners shall rise to shame and everlasting con
tempt, and, were it possible, would hide themselves again in the grave from
the wrath of the Judge.
Let us inquire what are the obligations of baptism, or what are the duties
incumbent upon those to whom it has been administered.
We have already remarked, that it is a federal rite, in which God promises
to bestow upon men the blessings of the covenant of grace, and they come
under an engagement to obey the law of the covenant. When an Israelite was
circumcised, he was bound to keep the whole law, "for circumcision," says
Paul, "verily profiteth if thou keep the law; but if thou be a breaker of the
law, thy circumcision is made uncircumcision."! Baptism is of the same im
port, and ratifies our subjection to the authority of Christ, whose disciples we
profess to be, and into the communion of whose church we are admitted. The
commission to baptize all nations was connected with an injunction " to teach
them to observe all things whatsoever he had commanded them." To this federal
transaction Peter alludes, when he says, that " baptism doth now save us, not
the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer qf a good conscience
toward God," — gweiStiataf ayaStjs trt£pu*9j^o.§ Ejt* pattjua signifies an interro
gation, and likewise an answer to an interrogation, and refers in the present
case to the questions proposed to the candidates for baptism, of which we have
a specimen in the words of Philip to the eunuch of Ethiopia, " If thou be-
lievest with all thine heart thou mayest." When an adult person could an
swer this question and others of a similar nature with a good conscience,
baptism was to him an assurance of salvation. He had entered with an up
right heart into the service of Christ, and should certainly receive the promised
recompense. First, Baptism implies an engagement to believe all the truths which Christ
has revealed. It imports, as we have seen, a profession of our faith in the
Trinity, a doctrine which, when, viewed in its connexions and consequences,
is found to involve all the other doctrines of Christianity. Being recognized
as the disciples of Jesus, we publicly own him as our teacher, and place our
selves under his care, to receive his instructions without murmuring or dis
puting. Full confidence must be placed in his wisdom as infallible, and
•Colli. 12. *1 Cor. xv. 29. *Rom.ii. 25. § 1 Pet iii. 21.

BAPTISM. 3gi
obedience must be yielded to his authority without hesitation. The baptized
ought to believe without demanding any other evidence but his testimony; to
embrace every doctrine which he delivers, although its truth be not manifest to
reason, nor deducible from its principles. The man who makes his own un
derstanding the measure of his creed, who admits into it only what he deems
plain and perspicuous articles, and rejects such as are mysterious, disregards
the command which came from the excellent glory, and retracts the submission
which he pledged in his baptism. In the early ages of the church, when con
verts from Judaism and Heathenism sought admission into it, the candidates
for baptism were previously instructed in the principles of the Christian reli
gion, and were required to make a public profession of their faith. Certain
questions were proposed, to which satisfactory answers were expected. The
formulary was different in different places; but the subject was the same, and is
contained in the creed, which goes under the name of the Apostles, although
it was not composed by them. It is. a summary of what was considered to
be the doctrine of the Apostles, and of the faith which the members of the
church were bound to profess and maintain.
Secondly, Baptism implies an engagement to observe the ordinances of
Christ. When we enter into a new society, we pledge ourselves to conform
to its laws and usages. When a Heathen was baptized, he renounced poly
theism and idolatry, and bound himself henceforth to worship the living and
true God, through his Son the only Mediator. When a Jew was baptized, he
renounced the altar, the priesthood, and the obligations of the law, that he might
offer spiritual sacrifices, in the name and through the intercession of the High
Priest of our profession. As Christ is the Supreme Lord of the church, it
belongs to him only to appoint religious ordinances; and consequently, the en
gagement of which we are speaking, extends no farther than his will as ex
pressed in the Scriptures; it imposes no obligation upon us to observe any of
the inventions of men in religion. Baptism does not introduce us into the
particular society of Christians by whose ministers it is dispensed, but into
the Catholic church; and the duties arising from it are exclusively those which
are incumbent upon all the followers of Christ, without any reference to the
peculiarities of a party. We are not baptized into the observance of the rites
and ceremonies, or into the belief of the erroneous dogmas of the church in
which we happen to be born. Baptism is our dedication to Christ; and its
design is fulfilled, when, adhering closely to his institutions, we worship the
Father in Spirit and in truth.
Lastly, Baptism implies an engagement to obey the commandments of Christ.
In the primitive church the candidate was solemnly asked, " Dost thou re
nounce the devil, and his pomp and his service, and dost thou join thyself to
Christ?" and upon his returning an affirmative answer to these' questions, bap
tism was administered to him. After having reminded Christians of their
baptism, as expressive of communion with Christ in his death and resurrection,
Paul addresses the following exhortations to them: " Likewise reckon ye also
yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ
our Lord. Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should
obey it in the lusts thereof: neither yield ye your members as instruments of
unrighteousness unto sin; but yield yourselves unto God, as those that are alive
from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness unto God."*
As the ear of the Hebrew servant who loved his master was bored, to denote
that he was to remain in his house during life, so, by the command of Christ,
water is sprinkled or poured upon us, to signify that we are dedicated to his
service for ever.
Baptism, like circumcision, is administered but once; not, as Papists main-
•Rom.vi. 11— 13.

392 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
tain, because it impresses an indelible character upon the soul, or a mystical
quality by which the baptized are fitted for the service of God, conformed to
Christ, and distinguished from others; but because regeneration, of which it is
significant, is not repeated, and the obligations under which it places us can
never be disannulled.
Although children are insensible of the transaction, and can therefore at the
time derive no moral benefit from it, yet reflection upon it at a subsequent
period may be productive of the happiest effects. To a mind seriously dis
posed, it must be an affecting consideration, that almost as soon as we entered
upon life, we were received into the church of the living God, placed under the
dispensation of grace, and consecrated to our Creator and Redeemer. The
' situation is evidently calculated to awaken sentiments of gratitude, and to call
forth our most fervent wishes and diligent endeavours, that the merciful in
tention of Heaven with respect to us may be accomplished. If a young person
attend to the circumstances in which he is placed, he will feel that he is not at
liberty to choose his own manner of life, to dispose of himself according to his
own pleasure; but is under engagements which it will be his interest to fulfil,
and which he cannot violate without great guilt and inexpressible danger.
The baptism of children is calculated to produce the best effects upon parents.
It places their children in a new relation to them, and presents them under a
new aspect. Parents are now their spiritual guardians, appointed to superin
tend their eternal as well as their temporal interests. Their children are a
sacred deposit, and are not so much theirs as the Lord's, for whose service it is
their chief business to prepare them. Their own concern in the solemn trans
action, is a powerful appeal to their consciences, and calls for their active en
deavours to accomplish the design with which they presented them to be
baptized. Some disapprove of exacting any vow or promise from parents, and
administer the ordinance with a simple declaration of their duty. It is not a
matter of much moment whether they come under a verbal engagement or not,
because the law of God previously binds them, and their appearance is a recog
nition of their obligations. In the act of giving their children to the Lord,
they virtually promise to educate them for his service, and to make their souls,
still more than their bodies, the objects of solicitude.

LECTURE XC.
ON THE
SACRAMENT OF THE LORD'S SUPPER.
Institution and Primitive Simplicity of the Rite.— Its Gradual Corruption.— Transubstantia-
tion —Meaning of the Words of Institution.— Its Contrariety to the Language of Scripture,
to Reason, and to Common Sense.— Pascal's Defence of it Examined.
Qtjr Lord, having eaten the passover with his disciples the evening on which
he was betrayed, instituted the sacred supper, to be a memorial of his suffer-
m s a gigri 0f his presence with the church, and a seal of the new covenant
which he was to confirm the next day with his blood. An account of it is
given by the Evangelists; but that which I shall lay before you, as the most

THE LORD'S SUPPER. 393
distinct and complete, is found in one of the Epistles of Paul, to whom it had
been communicated by our Saviour himself. " I have received of the Lord
that which also I delivered unto you, That the Lord Jesus, the same night on
which he was betrayed, took bread; and when he had given thanks he brake it,
and said, Take, eat; this is my body which is broken for you; this do in re
membrance of me. After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had
supped, saying, This cup is the New Testament in my blood; this do ye, as
oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. For as oft as ye eat this bread, and
drink this cup, ye do show the Lord's death till he come."*
It is evident from the words of institution, that it was intended to be a per
petual ordinance. Accordingly we learn from the Scriptures that it was ob
served in the Apostolical church; and we know that from those days down to the
present time, it has been celebrated by his professed disciples without inter
ruption. In the primitive church, the original institution was retained in its
simplicity, as we see from the second apology of Justin Martyr, who wrote
early in the second century. No ceremonies were added to render it more
sacred and venerable in the eyes of the people; no false notions were enter
tained of its design; no mystery was supposed to be concealed under the sym
bols and the prescribed actions; the words of Christ were understood according
to the meaning which common sense would put upon them, and the ordinance
was regarded as a memorial of his passion, and a means of strengthening the
faith and increasing the love of his followers. That Father, indeed, informs
us, that they did not receive the bread i; xoww aptov and the cup, i$ xaivov rtoua,
?' as common bread and wine;" but it is plain that he did not consider them as
sacred in consequence of any change which they had undergone in their nature,
but solely on account of the purpose to which they were applied, and their sa
cramental relation to our Saviour. That he looked upon them, although not
common, as still bread and wine, appears from his calling them expressly
" nourishment," by which our flesh and blood are nourished through their
conversion into our substance.
In this light the elements were received for several ages after the days of
Justin Martyr, as is manifest from many passages which have been quoted
from the Fathers, and which show, that they considered them as still bread and
wine, and as having acquired the names of the body and blood of the Lord only
in consequence of his appointment, and their sanctification by the offices of the
ministers of religion. In process of time highly figurative language began to
be used, which, if literally understood, imported a corporeal presence of Christ;
and such modes of expression were employed to excite the greater reverence
for the institution, and it may be, in some cases, to display the eloquence of
the speaker or writer. A notion was adopted by some, and brought forward in
the controversy with the Eutychians, that there was a union between Christ
and the elements, similar to that between the divine and human nature in his
person. Now, although this notion supposed the elements to remain unchanged,
to be bread and wine after as well as before consecration, as the human nature
retains its essence and properties notwithstanding its personal subsistence in
the divine; yet, it manifestly prepared the way, in connexion with the rhetori
cal language mentioned above, for the idea of a real transmutation which was
afterwards broached. Ignorance was fast spreading over the Eastern, and par
ticularly the Western church. Men without learning, and with only a form of
religion, were the fit subjects of delusion, and would receive with little hesita
tion the most absurd and incredible opinions, if they were recommended by an
air of mystery, and enjoined by the authority of priests.
It was in the ninth century that a real change of the substance of the elements
in the Lord's Supper, was first openly and explicitly maintained. The author
* 1 Cor. xi. 23—26.
Vol. IL— 50.

394 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
of this heresy was Pascasius Radbert, abbot of Corbey in France, who, in a
treatise concerning the sacrament of the body and blood of Christ, taught " that
after the consecration of the bread and wine, nothing remained of these symbols
but the outward figure, under which the body and blood of Christ were really
and locally present; and that the body of Christ thus present in the eucharist,
was the same body which was born of the virgin, suffered on the cross, and '
was raised from the dead."* This novel' opinion met with powerful opposi
tion from many distinguished persons of the age. In particular, by the com
mand of the emperor Charles the Bold, Johannes Scotus, and Ratramn or Ber
tram, composed treatises with a view to state the true doctrine ofthe eucharist.
The work of Scotus has perished; but that of Ratramn is preserved, and gives
the same view of the subject which is adopted by the Protestant churches.!
But the monstrous notion of Radbert accorded with the love of mystery, which
has so powerful an influence upon a great part of mankind; and it was so well
calculated to increase veneration for the clergy, and to consolidate their do-
" minion over the people, that although clearly refuted, it would not be easily
abandoned by those whose interest it was to maintain it. Revolting as it is to
common sense, as well as contrary to the faith of the church in the preceding
ages, it obtained powerful patronage, was gradually diffused among the nations
of the west, and was finally established as an article of faith in the Church of
Rome, under the name of Transubstantiation. It received its final sanction
from the Council of Trent, which enacted the two following decrees. " If any
man shall deny that in the sacrament of the most holy Eucharist, there are
contained truly, really, and substantially the body and blood, together with the
soul and divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ; and therefore a whole Christ; and
shall say that they are only in it as in a sign, or by a figure, or virtually; let
him be accursed." Again, "If any man shall say that in the holy sacrament
of the Eucharist, there remains the substance of the bread and wine, together
with the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, and shall deny the wonder
ful and singular conversion of the whole substance of the bread into the body,
and the whole substance of the wine into the blood, the species of bread and
wine only remaining, which conversion the catholic church most fitly calls
Transubstantiation; let him be accursed."!
The doctrine of transubstantiation, which was at first rudely exhibited, re
quired time, and labour, and ingenuity, to mould it into its present form. In
order to explain it more distinctly, let me request your attention to the following
particulars. First, The Church of Rome teaches that the sacrament of the body and blood
of Christ is not a sign or figure, as is the case in other sacraments, and par
ticularly in baptism, in which water represents the influences of the Holy
Ghost; but that the true body and blood of Christ are really and substantially
present. Communicants receive not the sign, but the thing signified, for here
they are identified.
Secondly, Whereas the eye sees nothing but bread and wine, Papists farther
teach, that the substance of the elements is annihilated, and only the species
remain. There is merely an appearance of bread and wine. The accidents
namely, the colour, the taste, the smell, the shape, are miraculously retained,
while that which supported them is taken away. Our senses assure us that
bread and wine are before us; but faith tells us that these are the incarnate Re
deemer himself. We have accidents without a substance.
Thirdly, The Church of Rome teaches another mystery with respect to the
corporeal presence of Christ. It has been always understood to be an essential
property of body to be extended, as it consists of parts placed beyond parts,
* Mosheim, Cent. ix. chap. iii. §. 19. * Lib. de Corpore, 224, 284, et passim.
i Concil. Trid. Sess. 13. de Euchar. cap. viii. can. 1, 2.

THE LORD'S SUPPER. 395
which must occupy a certain portion of space; and such, therefore, it is ac
knowledged, is the body of our Saviour in heaven. But in the Eucharist, as
they suppose, his body is present without extension. As we have seen that
accidents may subsist without matter, so, it seems, matter may subsist without
accidents; or, in other words, although extension is a property of body, there
may be a body which is not extended. The body of Christ is present in the
Eucharist, after the manner of a spirit; it does not fill up the space left vacant
by the annihilation of the substance of the elements; that space is a pure va
cuum, or is filled only by the accidents. Hence it follows, that the division of
the elements does not divide the body and blood of Christ, for that which is
not extended is not frangible and separable; but, in every particle of the bread,
and in every drop of the wine, the whole body and blood of Christ are con
tained. If you should not comprehend all this, I cannot help it. It is enough
to have stated fairly the doctrine of the Church. I am not obliged to make
you understand whaf is absolutely unintelligible.
Fourthly, The change is effected when the following words are pro
nounced: " This is my body" — " This is my blood." Till this moment the
elements were truly what they appeared to be, bread and wine; but as soon as
the words are finished, they are transubstantiated. The wofds are evidently
declarative; but Papists consider them as productive or creative. A virtue goes
forth with them to effect the wonderful change, as it accompanied the words of
the Apostles when they commanded the diseased to be whole; but the miracle is
far more extraordinary than any which they performed, because nobody sees
it, and still all are bound to believe it. When a common juggler performs his
feats, one substance vanishes, and another appears in its place; but this is the
wonder of wonders, that here there is a change of substances, yet no change is
, perceived, and all things continue exactly as they were. This is a happy cir
cumstance for the Popish jugglers, as no dexterity is necessary to impose upon
the senses, and all that is required is a sufficient degree of credulity in the
spectators. In defence of this doctrine, Papists appeal to the words of institution,
and affirm that they must be understood in their obvious and literal sense.
" This is my body," must mean, " This is truly my body;" and " This is my
blood," " This is truly my blood." Yet, even they will not contend that
other passages of Scripture, in which the phraseology is similar, should be
subjected to the same rigid interpretation. They never suppose that, when
our Lord said, "I am the vine," "I am the way," "I am the door," he meant
us to understand that he is literally a vine, a way, and a door; but readily
concede that we should put a spiritual sense upon such passages. It belongs,
therefore, to them to assign a satisfactory reason why the same liberty should
not be granted in explaining the words of institution. It may, indeed, be
more justly claimed in the present than in any other case, because the words
confessedly relate to a sacrament, in which symbols are employed; and nothing
is more natural than to give the name of the thing signified to the sign.
It has been remarked, that, in the Hebrew and the Syriac, a dialect of which
was spoken by our Lord, there is no word which expresses to denote, signify,
or represent, and that its place is supplied by the verb of existence. When
we would say, this thing signifies another thing, the Jews said, this thing is
another thing. Thus the seven good kine and the seven ill-favoured kine in
Pharaoh's dream, " are seven years,"* that is, signify seven years of fertility
or barrenness; the ten horns in Daniel, " are ten kings,"! or, are emblems of
them; "the seven stars are the angels of the seven churches, and the seven
candlesticks are the seven churches,"! me stars and the candlesticks being
representatives of the angels and the churches. There is one passage in par-
* Gen. xii. 26, 27. * Dan. vii. 24. i Rev. i. 20.

396 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
ticular which exactly resembles the words under consideration, and is a sure
guide in the interpretation of them, as it expressly refers to that ordinance, in
the room of which the Loid's Supper has succeeded. Moses said of the
paschal lamb, " It is the Lord's passover,"* just as our Saviour said of the
bread, " This is my body." The passover was the act of God, who passed
over the houses of the Israelites; the lamb was only a memorial of it, and was
so understood by every Israelite. Now, if we reflect that the Jews were ac
customed, in this case to call the sign by the name of the thing signified, we
shall perceive that the disciples were in no danger of mistaking their Master's
meaning, when he called the bread, his body; that they must have instantly
understood his design, and known that nothing more was intended than to
constitute the bread a sign or memorial of his body, especially as he added,
" This do in remembrance of me." The two expressions are so perfectly
alike, that it is impossible to put any sense upon the one which may not be
put upon the other; and it would be as rational to infer from the former, that
the paschal lamb was God himself in the act of passing over the houses of the
Israelites, as it would be to infer from the latter, that the bread is the very body
of Christ which was born of the virgin, and nailed to the cross. It is evident
that the disciples understood him simply to mean, that the bread was a sign and
memorial of his body, from the circumstance that they expressed no surprise,
and stated no objection, as they would have done if the doctrine of transub
stantiation had occurred to them; and as the Jews did on another occasion,
when they interpreted literally what he had said about eating his flesh and
drinking his blood. " The Jews, therefore strove among themselves, saying,
How can this man give us his flesh to eat?"! The Jews in modern times re
tain their ancient idiom, and say that a thing is, when it only signifies or re
presents. At the celebration of the passover, they speak thus of the unleavened
cakes which they use on that occasion: " This is the bread," that is, a memo
rial of the bread, " of poverty and affliction, which our fathers did eat in
Egypt." The language of the New Testament, in other places where the Lord's
Supper is mentioned, is so far from favouring the doctrine of transubstantia
tion, that it expressly overthrows it. It is synecdochically called the breaking
of bread; but this designation would be improper and false if there was a
change of the substance, because then it would not be bread which was broken,
but the true body of Christ. The Apostle Paul calls the symbol of our
Saviour's bodv, bread, not only before but also after consecration.! Papists
will allow that it is properly called bread before, but how can they account for
the retaining of the name after the substance of bread is annihilated ? Would
they allow any member of their Church to call the consecrated wafer, bread?
I presume that if he should dare to speak the language of the Apostle, he
would be suspected of heresy, and compelled by threats and punishment to
recant; and hence we may conclude, that Paul's ideas on this subject were
very different from those of the Pope and his priests. He has explained
himself in another place, in such a manner as to satisfy any reasonable man.
"The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood
of Christ ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of
Christ ?"§ The manifest import of these words is, that by partaking of the
symbols of his body and blood, we have fellowship with him in his atoning
sacrifice, and all its precious fruits.
Papists draw an argument for transubstantiation from the words of our Lord,
in the sixth chapter of John, where he speaks of himself under the figure of
bread which had come down from heaven, and then adds, " The bread that I
will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world." || " When,
•Exod. xii. 11. *Johnvi. 52. i 1 Cor. xi. 26— 28. §Ib.x. 16. | John vi 51.

THE LORD'S SUPPER. 397
therefore," says the Catechism of Pius the Fifth, " in so plain and clear words
he called his flesh, bread, and true meat, and his blood, true drink, it might
well seeni sufficient to declare thai there remains no substance of bread and
wine in the sacrament."* But the compilers of that catechism, and all Papists
who make use of this argument, should have read the whole discourse, and
read it attentively, and considered the occasion on which it was delivered: and
they would have found that ilj has no relation to the Eucharist, and that instead
of upholding, it overthrows their doctrine. It was delivered before the institution
of the Eucharist; and to suppose that he spoke of it by anticipation, is to represent
him as speaking unintelligibly from design, as he must have known that it was
impossible for any person present to understand him. It is plain that he spoke
of the benefits which were to result to the human race from his death, and of
the spiritual participation of them by faith; for he says, " He that cometh to
me shall never hunger, and he that believeth on me shall never thirst."! It is
farther evident, that the Eucharist is not the subject of discourse, from two
passages, of which the one declares, that " unless we eat his flesh, and drink
his blood, we have no life in us;" and the other says, " Whoso eateth my
flesh and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last
day."! If these passages refer to the sacrament of the Supper, it follows, that
no man can be saved unless he partake of it, and that every person who does
partake of it, shall be raised to immortal life. I do not know whether Papists
will admit the first of these inferences, but the last they will reject; and if
they would therefore explain Scripture, not by detached expressions, but ac
cording to its connexion and harmony, they must allow that our Saviour does
not intend the sacramental eating of his flesh, but the cordial belief of his doc
trine, which is frequently represented by the metaphors of eating and drinking.
The Jews, it appears, understood what he had said in the same carnal sense
which the Church of Rome annexes to the words of institution. Like the
members of that Church, they took all grossly and literally, being equally
incapable as they of apprehending the spiritual meaning. Misled by their
own error, they were astonished, and no doubt shocked; as they well might
be if theirs had been the just interpretation of his words. But our Lord told
them that they were mistaken; and, as if with a view to reprove such of his
professed followers as should afterwards dream of a real manducation of his
body, he said, "It is the Spirit that quickeneth, the flesh profiteth nothing:
the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life." || The
meaning obviously is, that his words, which had given so much offence, were
to be understood in a spiritual sense; that he did not speak of a literal eating
of his body; and that, although such a thing had been practicable, it would have
been productive of no salutary effect. Thus he overturns the whole fabric
of transubstantiation, so far as it is founded upon this, and consequently upon
any other passage; for his words must be spiritually understood elsewhere as
well as here, the reason being always the same. As the supposed change of
the elements is false, so it is pronounced by him to be useless. " The flesh
profiteth nothing."
It is sufficient to show, that transubstantiation receives no support from
Scripture, and is founded on such a perversion of its language as can be
accounted for, only by the ignorance and superstition of the age when this
monstrous opinion was invented. But there are several other objections
against this doctrine, which fully justify the Protestant churches in rejecting it.
First, It destroys the nature of a sacrament. Two things are necessary to a
sacrament, a sign and a thing signified, an object presented to our senses and
some promised blessing which is represented and sealed by it. This definition is
• Cat Concil. Trident. Pars ii. De Euch. Sacram. § 37. * John vi. 35.
tJohnvi.53,54. (Ib. 63.
2L

398 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE
admitted by the Church of Rome. The catechism of Pope Pius says, that, ac
cording to the Latin doctors, sacraments might conveniently be called " sensible
signs, which work or effect that grace which at the same time they signify;" and
it adopts the definition of Augustine, which has been universally followed, that
" a sacrament is a visible sign of a holy thing," or " a visible sign of an invisible
grace."* Baptism accords with this definition, for water represents the purifying
influences of the Spirit, and the sign is distinct from the thing signified. But by
transubstantiation the sign is miraculously taken away, and the thing signified is
put in its place. We say that the bread is a sign of the body of Christ; but Papists
affirm that it is his body itself. It is true that there is still an appearance of bread,
but it is only an appearance; and, besides that it would be strange and harsh to
maintain, that a fallacious appearance is a sign given by God himself to his
church, it would be absurd to make a thing the sign of itself. But this Pa
pists do, while they hold that there is nothing real before us but the very body
of Christ. Thus the Lord's Supper is no sacrament at all. The symbols
are annihilated, and the substance occupies their place.
Secondly, Transubstantiation implies some things which are contrary to the
clearest notions of all mankind, founded upon experience. It is by experience that
we come to know what are the properties of body. Now there are three things
respecting it, about which no doubt was ever entertained by any philosopher who
was possessed of common sense. The first is, that a body is confined to a par
ticular place. It has figure, and is bounded by lines describing the portion of
space which it occupies. It may be transported from one place to another; but it
appears to us as impossible that it should be in two places at the same time, in
Europe and in America, in heaven and on earth, as that two and two should
make five. The second thing concerning body, of which reason informs us,
is; that it is extended. It consists of parts, each of which fills a certain por
tion of space; and the portion is greater or less, according to the aggregate of
parts. To suppose matter to exist without extension, is as intelligible as to
suppose it to exist without divisibility. The third thing, which is equally
evident with the other two, is, that the qualities of matter are dependent upon
matter. We know indeed only the qualities of matter; but we necessarily con
clude that there is something to which they belong, a substratum by which
they are supported. We can form no conception of whiteness, if there is
nothing white; of roundness, if there is nothing round; of extension, if there
is nothing extended. To imagine that there may be accidents without a sub
stance, is not more rational than to imagine that there may be thought without
a thinking being, and would lead us into the ideal philosophy, which affirms
that there is no external world, and that the objects which appear to be without
us, are only sensations or perceptions of the mind excited by some unknown
cause. Transubstantiation is at variance with these dictates of reason. First, It
supposes a body to be, at the same time, in more places than one. It is in
heaven at the right hand of God, and it is on earth on the altars of the Romish
Church. It does not come down from heaven to earth; but it remains in
heaven, and yet is upon earth. It is present, not in one place on earth only,
but in a thousand places, in the east and the west, the north and the south;
wherever a priest has, with a due intention, pronounced the words of institu
tion. It is not present, as a piece of matter may be, by being divided into
different parts, and carried hither and thither; but it is wholly present in Rome,
wholly present in Paris, wholly present in this city, wholly present wherever
mass is celebrated. I may add, that the human nature of Christ, according
to this doctrine, exists at the same moment in very different states. It is glo
rified on the throne of heaven, and humbled on the altar; it is seen and adored
• Pars ii. de Sacrum. § 3, 5.

THE LORD'S SUPPER. 399
by the blessed spirits above, and concealed from men under the species of the
elements. This simple statement is itself sufficient to show, that the wildest
dream of a madman is not more absurd than the doctrine of transubstantiation.
Secondly, It supposes, as I showed when giving you an account of the doc
trine, that matter may subsist without extension. The body and blood of
Christ are really and substantially present in the Eucharist; but they occupy
no portion of space. It would have been natural to conclude, that when the
elements are annihilated, their place was filled up with that into which they
are changed; but wonderful as this would have been, we are required to believe
something still more extraordinary. Here is the mystery of mysteries ! We
touch the bread, and feel that it is a solid substance; but let us not mistake. It
is not bread; it is not flesh; what is it? It is an assemblage of accidents,
which have no substance, and are mere appearances. There is flesh indeed
present; but it cannot be touched, for it is present after the manner of a
spirit. You may divide this bread, or this flesh, or this assemblage of acci
dents, into a thousand parts; but in each of these parts the whole of Christ is
contained. Now, what is this but to say, that there is matter which is not
matter; that is, to assert, without disguise, the most palpable contradiction ? A
man may say that he believes it; but to do so is as impossible as to believe that
a thing may be and not be at the same time. Lastly, The doctrine supposes
that the properties of matter may be separated from it, and may subsist by
themselves. Our senses tell us that the consecrated wafer is bread. It looks
like bread, it tastes like bread, it smells like bread; but still it is not bread, but
both flesh and blood, according to the doctrine of concomitance, which will be
afterwards explained. What is more, the space which the bread originally
occupied is a vacuum, for the body of Christ is present without extension.
Here, then, we have extension where there is nothing extended; colour
where there is nothing coloured; taste and smell where there is nothing
saporific or fragrant. If any person should affirm it to be possible that a man's
shape and features might continue to be visible, after he had been removed
out of sight, even Papists would pronounce him to be a fool or a madman;
but they are unquestionably subject to the same charge, when they teach that
all the properties of bread may remain after the bread itself is annihilated.
But Papists have recourse to a miracle, and tell us, that although these things
respecting matter and its properties are true, according to the ordinary course
of nature, God acts in this case, by his almighty power, in an extraordinary
manner. We acknowledge that his power is infinite, that it can do many things
which to us are inconceivable, that it is able to accomplish events in a manner
different from, and contrary to, the course of nature. But observe, that it is
one thing to be contrary to the course of nature, and another to be contrary to
the nature of things. When God preserved the three Jewish confessors in a
furnace, he did not change the nature of fire, or make it cold, but merely de
fended their bodies, in some way unknown to us, from its influence. When
he made a piece of iron swim upon water, he did not render water solid or
iron light, but supported it by his power, as a man might have done with his
hand. There was no alteration of the essence and qualities of the substances
which were the subjects of those miracles, but a suspension of the laws by
which they are usually governed. The pretended miracle of transubstantiation
is of a totally different description. It supposes a complete change of the
nature of things. It supposes effects to be produced which are manifestly
impossible, and which it is therefore no limitation even of Divine power to
affirm that even it cannot perform. The just definition of almighty power is,
that it can do every thing possible; things impossible are not the objects of
power, any more than things which do not exist are the objects of sight.
Now, it is contrary to the nature of body, that it should be in different places

400 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
at the same time; for it necessarily enters into the idea of it, that it occupies a
particular portion of space. It is contrary to its nature, that it should exist
after the manner of a spirit, or without filling any portion of space; for exten
sion is as essential to it as life is to a living being. It is contrary to its nature,
that its properties should remain after it is annihilated; for its properties are
modifications which as necessarily exist with their subject, as the shadow
disappears with the body which projected it. The ubiquity of a particular
body, is want of extension, and the continuance of its qualities after its de
struction, are things absolutely impossible; and to appeal to the power of
God, serves only to confound the minds of those who are too ignorant or
too indolent to examine the subject with accuracy. These things even the
power of God cannot do, because they cannot be done. They imply a contra
diction; and we might with equal reason say, that although two and two are
four, yet divine power could make them five. To every mind but that of a
Papist, the contradiction is as manifest in -the one case as in the other.
Thirdly, Transubstantiation contradicts the testimony of our senses, which
assure us, as we have repeatedly observed, that there is no change of
the elements. Our senses are the means by which we become acquainted
with external things and their properties; and as we are instinctively led to
confide in their evidence, so we find from experience, that the notices which
they give us are true. The offices which they perform are of the most im
portant nature. They are not only our guides in providing for the welfare
of our bodies, and guarding against the dangers to which they are ex
posed; but it is by them that we perceive the proofs of the existence and
perfections of God, in creation and providence; and to them were address
ed the proofs of the supernatural communications which he has made to
us concerning his gracious purposes, and the realities of the invisible
world. If it be said, that our senses frequently deceive us, we acknowledge
the fact, but deny that on this account their evidence should be suspected.
They deceive us when they are in a diseased state, when their functions are
carelessly performed, when the object is in such a situation as not to be fully
subjected to their test; but, in other circumstances, their testimony is infallible
No man whose eye is sound, supposes an object which is green to be red, or
mistakes a bush for an animal, when it is near; no man in health calls sugar
sour, or vinegar swee^ About these things there is no question, except among
sceptical philosophers, who do not believe, or at least pretend not to believe,
the evidence of their senses, while they rely upon it as implicitly as any of
the vulgar.
The doctrine of transubstantiation subverts the evidence of our senses. We
see bread and wine in the Eucharist; we smell them, and we taste them; and
yet we are told that they are not bread and wine, but a collection of unsubstan
tial accidents, under which the body and blood of Christ are concealed. Here,
then, is one case in which our senses deceive us, and how can we depend upon
their testimony in any other case ? If they have misled us once, they may
mislead us a thousand times. Should it be said that the deception, for such we
must call it, is in this instance effected by a miracle, it may be asked, How are
we certain that we shall not be imposed upon by a miracle on other occasions ?
How shall we know when the notices of our senses are true, and when they
are fallacious? If God had told us, that in this case alone he would impose
upon our senses, but in all others would leave them to their natural operations,
we might have been satisfied. But he has told us no such thing, and conse
quently we are reduced to the greatest perplexity. We can never be abso
lutely sure that objects are as they appear to us. What we imagine to be a tree
may be a man; what we suppose to be earth, may be water. We can have no
certainty that the miracles of Christ and his Apostles were really performed

TnE LORD'S SUPPER. 401
Those who are said to have witnessed them, may have been the subjects of
illusion; and it would not have been more wonderful if they had mistaken
common occurrences for supernatural events, than it is that every time when
the holy Supper is celebrated, the incarnate Son of God should seem to be a
piece of bread. Transubstantiation leads to downright scepticism. We can
neither believe our own eyes and ears, nor give credit to the testimony of
others. But a doctrine which leads to scepticism must be false. A doctrine
cannot be true which contradicts the evidence of sense, any more than a doc
trine which contradicts the dictates of reason. Both are from God, as well as
revelation; by both God speaks to us; and what is contrary to their testimony
in their proper sphere, cannot proceed from Him who is never at variance
with himself.
For this imposition upon our senses, the Church of Rome accounts in the
following manner: " Since it is the most horrid thing in the world to the nature
of men," says the catechism of the council of Trent, " to be fed with man's
flesh, or to drink his blood, God has most wisely ordered, that his most holy
body and blood should be administered to us under the species of those things,
bread and wine, by whose common and daily use and nourishment we are
mostly delighted. And there are adjoined these two conveniences, whereof
the first is, that we are freed from the reproach of infidels, which we could not
easily have avoided, if we should be seen to eat our Lord under his own spe
cies. The other is, that while we thus take the body and blood of the Lord,
in such a manner, that notwithstanding what is truly done cannot be perceived
by the senses, this avails very much to increase faith in our souls."* The
amount of this reasoning is, that transubstantiation is a miracle which God has
found it expedient to conceal, lest Christians should be disgusted, and infidels
should laugh; although it is not easy to see how its concealment can hinder the
ridicule of infidels, as they are solemnly assured by the infallible church, that
this shocking transmutation does actually take place, and that flesh and blood
are really swallowed under a different form.
It was impossible that a doctrine so contrary to Scripture, to reason, and to
our senses, should have been adopted but by slow degrees, and in an age of
gross ignorance and superstition. It is astonishing that it should be retained
amidst the increase of knowledge which distinguishes modern times, and after
its impiety and absurdity have been so successfully exposed; and that not only
should it obtain credit among the vulgar of the church of Rome, but men of
genius and learning should be implicit believers of it. Where can we find a
stronger proof of the power of prejudice in blinding the mind, than when we
observe such a man as Pascal, not to mention many others, adopting and de
fending an opinion, the absurdity of which he would, in different circumstances,
have been the first to perceive, and to expose with unrivalled eloquence. " We
should go out of the state in which we are," he says in his Lettres Provin
ciates,! "which is a state of faith, and is opposed by Paul as much to the law
as to clear vision, if we possessed only the figures without Jesus Christ, be
cause it is the property of the law to have only the shadow, and not the sub
stance of things; and we should go out of it also, if we possessed him visibly,
because faith, as the same Apostle says, is not of things which are seen. Thus
the Eucharist is perfectly proportioned to our state of faith, because it truly
includes Jesus Christ, but under a veil; so that this state would be destroyed,
if Jesus Christ were not really under the species of bread and wine, as heretics
pretend; and it would be also destroyed, if we received him openly as in
heaven, since this would confound our state with the state ofthe Jews, or with
that of glory. This is the reason of this divine mystery. This makes us
abhor the Calvinists as reducing us to the condition of the Jews, and aspire to
• Pars ii. de Euch. Sac. § 46. * Let xvi.
ir„» TT  si 2 1. 2

402 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
the glory of the blessed, which will give us the full and eternal enjoyment of
Jesus Christ. Hence we see that there are many differences between the
manner in which he is communicated to Christians and to the blessed, and that
among others, he is received here by the mouth, and not so in heaven; but
that all the differences depend solely upon the difference between the state of
faith in which we are, and the state of clear vision in which they are."
Whatever ingenuity may be displayed in this passage, it is liable to this
objection, that it assumes the doctrine of transubstantiation to be true, and then
proceeds to prove its truth by a mistaken view of its adaptation to the present
condition of the church. The argument entirely fails. The difference between
us and the Jews does not consist in our having Christ really and corporeally
under a veil, while they had the figure without the substance; but in the fulfil
ment of the types in the incarnation and sacrifice of Christ, by which the full
enjoyment of all spiritual blessings has been obtained. The superior excel
lence of the Christian dispensation does not arise from the bodily presence of
the Saviour, but from the clear revelation of him in the gospel, and the abun
dant communication of grace, in consequence of his ascension into heaven.
Any person who reads the Scriptures without prejudice will perceive, that these
are expressly mentioned as the privileges of the present church, while there is
not a single hint concerning such a presence of Christ as Papists imagine.
When the Apostle Paul represents him as a High Priest of good things to come,
or in whom the figures of the law have been realized, he, at the same time,
describes him as a High Priest who has passed into the heavens. It is equally
a mistake to suppose the difference between the militant and the triumphant
church to be, that although both are favoured with his bodily presence, he is
veiled from the saints on earth, but manifested to the saints in heaven. This
statement is directly opposed to that of Paul, who expressly affirms this to be
the difference, that on earth we are absent from the Lord, and in heaven we
shall be present with him. " Knowing that, whilst we are at home in the body,
we are absent from the Lord; we are willing rather to be absent from the body,
and to be present with the Lord."* This single passage overthrows the idea,
that in the Eucharist he is present with us, but under a veil.
Transubstantiation is not only contrary to Scripture, and reason, and common
sense, but it leads and has led to other dangerous errors. A view of these will
tend more fully to expose the doctrine, and to show that it is not a harmless
absurdity. It has polluted the Church of Rome with idolatry, obscured the
glory of the sacrifice of Christ, and given rise to the audacious mutilation of the
sacred institution of the Supper. These consequences will be considered in the
next lecture. * 2 Cor. v. 6, 8.

THE LORD'S SUPPER. 403

LECTURE XCI.

SACRAMENT OF THE LORD'S SUPPER
Errors Consequent on Transubstantiation ; Idolatry ; Sacrifice of the Mass ; Mutilation of the
Sacrament. — Lutheran Doctrine of Consubstantiation. — Objections to it. — Doctrine of
Zuinglius Respecting this Rite, and of Calvin.
Transubstantiation is not a speculative opinion, which, although erroneous
in itself, leads to no practical consequences of an objectionable nature. While
there is sufficient reason to reject it for its contrariety to Scripture, and reason,
and common sense, it will appear worthy of reprobation to every person who
considers the other dangerous errors to which it has given rise.
The first which I shall point out to you, is the idolatry which is founded on
the doctrine of transubstantiation. When the priest has changed the bread into
the body of Christ, by pronouncing the words, "Hoc est corpus meum," he
adores it with bended knee, and rising, elevates it, that it may be seen and
adored by the people. The same forms are observed after he has consecrated
the wine. Such is the order of procedure in the Roman missal; and it is found
ed upon the doctrine of the church as declared by the Council of Trent.
" There is no room for doubt, that all believers in Christ, according to the
custom always received in the catholic church, should offer to this most holy
sacrament the worship of Latria, which is due to the true God, for it is not to
be the less adored, because it was instituted by Christ our Lord to be taken.
For we believe that the same God is present in it, whom the eternal Father,
introducing into the world, says, " Let all the angels of God worship him."
This declaration is supported by the following canon. " If any man shall say,
that in the holy sacrament of the Eucharist, Christ, the only begotten Son of
God, is not to be adored, even with the external worship of Latria; and there
fore that it is not to be venerated by a peculiar festival, nor carried about in
processions, according to the laudable rite and custom of the universal church,
nor to be publicly exhibited to the people that it may be adored, and that those
who worship it are idolaters; let him be accursed."*
Notwithstanding this dreadful denunciation, we do not hesitate to affirm that
the worship of the elements is idolatry. One argument might suffice to estab
lish this charge, namely, that we have proved that there is no such thing as
transubstantiation, to the satisfaction of every person whom God has not given
up to strong delusion to believe a lie. If our former reasonings are conclusive,
the elements are simple bread and wine; and those who worship them are as
gross idolaters as the heathens, who adored a naked sword or a shapeless stone.
It may be thought that, although Christ should not be present in the elements,
yet, as they suppose him to be present, and direct their worship to him, their
mistake will excuse them. But it is not our intention, it is the law of God
which is the rule of our conduct; and to suppose our intention to be a valid
apology for our transgression of it, is to set aside the authority of the law, and
make man a law to himself. In no part of Scripture are we commanded to
worship the elements; nor are we commanded to worship God in every thing,
or in any thing in which he is present. We are to worship himself, but not the ob
jects around us, under the pretext that we worship God himself, who is in them.
It may be said that there is a difference in the present case, because what we see is
* Sessio xiii. de Euch. cap. v. et can. 6.

404 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
Christ himself in his body, and blood, and Divinity. But, granting that it is
Christ, we may still question whether, as he does not manifest himself to us,
we are authorized to worship him here, any more than in the sun, in which
we are certain that his Divinity, the proper object of worship, is as truly
present as in the sacrament. Besides, the Church of Rome commands us to
worship the " sacrament," which undoubtedly signifies not only Christ corpo
really present, but the species which remain. Now, if the accidents can sub
sist by themselves, as they suppose that they do, they are created things,
however shadowy; and he, therefore, who adores the whole sacrament, worships
them together with Christ, or the creature together with the Creator; the veil,
as well as the thing veiled; the dress, as well as the person who wears it; and
how can he escape the charge of idolatry? Although the doctrine of transub
stantiation were true, no Papist can be certain that Christ is in the sacrament;
and consequently, upon his own principles, he may be guilty of idolatry every
time that he partakes of it. If the intention of the priest is wanting, the
elements remain simple bread and wine. But this is not the only ground of
apprehension. " If the bread is not of wheat," says the Roman missal, " or
if, being of wheat, it is mixed with grain of another kind, in such quantity that
it is not wheaten bread, or is otherwise corrupted, the sacrament is not effected.
If it is made of rose water, or of any other distillation, it is doubtful whether it
is effected." Again. " If the wine is turned into vinegar, or is wholly putrid,
or is made of sour or unripe grapes, or is mixed with so much water that
the wine is corrupted, the sacrament is not effected." Once more, " If any.
man shall diminish, or change any thing in the form of consecration, and by
the change of the • words, the words have not the same signification, the sa
crament will not be effected."* This mighty miracle, it seems, depends upon
many pre-requisites, the omission of which will completely prevent it. Here,
as in the incantation of magic, unless the ipsissima verba are repeated, the ex
pected effect will not follow. It appears, too, that there are some substances
which cannot be converted into the body and blood of our Saviour, as, sour
wine, and bread made of barley or oats; but how they happen to be so stubborn
as to retain their nature, in spite of all the power of the priest, we must leave
to the abettors of this mystery to explain. ~It is evident that, according to their
own ideas, they are in constant danger of idolatry. It is their concern to ex
tricate themselves as they can.
The second error founded on transubstantiation, is the notion that the Eu
charist is a true and proper sacrifice for the sins of the living and the dead, or
the souls in purgatory; Christ who is corporeally present, is not only given to
the communicants, but is offered to God as a propitiation for them. The
Council of Trent expressly affirms that this sacrament is a sacrifice by which
God is appeased, and that its benefit extends not only to men upon earth, but
to the departed saints who are not yet fully purified; and in the usual manner,
anathematizes every man who shall dare to controvert its decision. " If any
man shall say that, in the mass, a true and proper sacrifice is not offered to
God;" or shall say, " that in these words, 'This do in remembrance of me,'
Christ did not constitute the Apostles priests, or did not ordain that they and
other priests should offer his body and blood;" or shall say, " that the sacrifice
of the mass is only a sacrifice of praise and thanksgiving, or a naked commemo
ration of the sacrifice made upon the cross, but not propitiatory: let him be ac
cursed."! The subject is farther explained in the catechism which was pub
lished by order of the council. " The Eucharist was instituted, that the church
might have a perpetual sacrifice, whereby our sins might be expiated, and our
heavenly Father, who has oftentimes been grievously offended by our wicked-
* De Defect, circa Missam occurrentibus, iii, iv, et v.
* Sess. xxii. de Sacrif. Missae, can. 1, 2, & 3.

THE LORD'S SUPPER. 405
ness, might be turned from his anger to mercy, and from the severity of his
just revenge to pity. We may observe the figure and resemblance of this thing
in the paschal lamb, which was used to be offered as a sacrifice, and eaten as a
sacrament by the children of Israel."*
The great argument for the sacrifice of the mass, is apostolical tradition, by
which they mean any thing which was said or done by some dreaming dotard
or superstitious fool in remote ages, and which other dotards and fools were
pleased to admire, and to retain as wise and good. But as, notwithstanding the
high authority which they ascribe to tradition, they are well pleased when they
can find any appearance of support from Scripture, they have drawn from it
some new arguments to confirm the faithful, and to confound heretics. Melchi-
zedek brought forth bread and wine to Abraham, when he was returning from
the slaughter of the kings. This is a very simple fact, which it might be sup
posed, has no relation to the subject before us; but, if we lack ingenuity, Pa
pists have it in perfection, and have discovered in this transaction the whole
mystery of the sacrifice of the Eucharist.! How they know, we cannot tell;
but Melchizedek, it seems, offered the bread and wine to God, before he pre
sented them to Abraham. Now, Melchizedek was a priest, and Christ is a
priest after his order; and therefore he must have instituted an unbloody sacri
fice, under the species of bread and wine. Some of us, perhaps, do not per
ceive the connexion between the premises and the conclusion; but this is owing
to our blindness. If we had lived in the days of the power and triumph of
antichrist, the inquisition would have opened our eyes. To be serious, it is
plain, beyond all reasonable dispute, that, although Melchizedek was a priest,
and in this character blessed Abraham, his giving him bread and wine was a
mere act of hospitality. — Again, it is said, in the prophecies of Malachi, "From
the rising of the sun even unto the going down of the same, my name shall be
great among the Gentiles; and in every place incense shall be offered unto my
name, and a pure offering."! Now, what can this pure offering be but the
sacrifice of the mass, which is presented to God on a thousand altars, in the
east and in the west? But, if these blundering interpreters, who seem totally
incapable of distinguishing when a passage should be understood literally, and
when figuratively, would adhere uniformly to their plan, they would maintain
that the whole Mosaic ritual should be revived; for the worship of the Gentiles
in the times of the gospel, is described in language borrowed from it, and they
are represented as bringing their burnt-offerings and sacrifices to the sanctuary. §
If, in such passages, the literal sense is rejected by all, what reason can be
given for retaining it on this occasion? Why should we suppose that the
"pure offering" of Malachi is a real sacrifice any more than the " burnt-offer
ings" of Isaiah? Why should we not admit that, in the one case as well as in
the other, there is only a metaphorical application of the religious terms of the
Old Testament to the New, and that the peace-offering and the incense are the
holy sacrifices of prayer and praise? This is beyond all question the meaning;
and the Church of Rome is driven lo the most wretched shifts, when it seeks
support from a solitary passage, which the laws of sound criticism require to
be explained in conformity to other similar passages. — A third argument is
founded on the declaration, that Christ is " a priest for ever;"|| which they
cannot conceive to be true, unless he continue to offer sacrifice for sin. And
here they give a curious account of the mass, making it, although we should
naturally suppose it to be a new sacrifice, in fact the very sacrifice which was
offered upon the cross; and, at the same time, that, while they say that this
sacrifice is offered by their priests, they may not seem to destroy the perpetuity
of his priesthood by giving him successors in office, they identify the priests
* Pars ii. de Euch. Sac. § 75. * Cat. frrid. Pars ii. de Euch. Sac. § 80.
* Mai. i. 11. §Is. lvi.7 j Heb. vii. 21.

406 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
of the Romish Church with the High Priest of our profession. " We ac
knowledge it to be, and it ought to be accounted, but one and the same sacrifice,
which is done in the mass, and was offered on the cross." " There is one
and the same priest, Christ the Lord: for the ministers who make this sacrifice,
sustain not their own but the person of Christ, when they consecrate his body
and blood, as is evident from the words of consecration; for the priest says not,
' This is Christ's body,' but, ' This is my body:' bearing the person of Christ
our Lord, he changes the substance of the bread and wine into the true sub
stance of his body and blood."* But this is a mere shift; for, as the ministers
of antichrist are supposed to be real priests, and to offer a real sacrifice, although
they represent Christ, and act in his name, they are unquestionably as much
distinct priests as were the successors of Aaron; and if it should be said that
there is only one priesthood, namely, that of Christ, which they as his ministers
exercise, the same thing might be said of the Levitical priesthood, which was
one, although its functions were performed by many individuals. According
to the doctrine of the Church of Rome, Christ has successors in office, and
therefore is not a Priest for ever, in the sense ofthe Scriptures, which compare
him to Melchizedek, because no person comes after him. Thus the argument
which they advance to support the sacrifice of the mass, condemns it, since
the priesthood of Christ is not perpetual if its functions are committed to other
hands. It is an astonishing blunder to suppose that the perpetuity of his priesthood
requires the uninterrupted repetition of his sacrifice. Is sacrificing the only
duty of a priest ? Is not intercession an essential part of his office ? And
if our Lord Jesus Christ offered a sacrifice once, which fully accomplished its
design by appeasing Divine justice, and obtaining eternal redemption, and has
gone into the celestial sanctuary to intercede for his people upon earth, is it
not true that he is made a priest " after the power of an endless life ?"! Why
should his sacrifice be repeated ? Was there any defect in the first oblation,
which is supplied by the ministrations of the priests of Rome ? The sacrifice
of the mass is derogatory to our Saviour in the character of our High Priest,
and is directly opposed to the reasoning of Paul on this subject, in the Epistle
to the Hebrews. His manifest design is to demonstrate the superiority of
Christ to the priests of the law in every respect, and particularly in this, that
they offered many sacrifices, but he offered only one, which does not need to
be repeated: " He offered himself once." " By one offering he has for ever
perfected them that are sanctified;" and " having, by himself, purged our sins,
he sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high."!
The third error arising from transubstantiation, is the mutilation of the sa
crament, by the withholding of the cup from the laity. Hear the Council of
Trent ! " The holy synod, taught by the Holy Ghost, who is the Spirit of
wisdom and understanding, the Spirit of counsel and piety, and following the
judgment and practice of the church, declares and teaches, that the laity, and
the clergy when not officiating, are not bound, by any Divine precept, to re
ceive the sacrament of the Eucharist under both kinds.''* It goes on to state,
that the church has authority to make such changes in the dispensation of the
sacraments as shall be found expedient. " Wherefore," it is added, " the holy
mother, the church, acknowledging this her authority in the administration of
the sacraments, although, from the beginning of the Christian religion, the use
of both kinds was not unfrequent, being induced by weighty and just causes,
in consequence of the extensive change of practice in the progress of time,
has approved this practice of communicating under one kind, and decreed that
it should be a law:" " And farther declares, that, although our Redeemer, in
the last supper, instituted this sacrament in two kinds, and so delivered it to
* Cat Trid. Pars ii. De Euch. Sac. $ 81, 82. * Heb. vii. 16. i Heb. vii. 29. x. 14. i. 3

THE LORD'S SUPPER. 407
the Apostles, yet under one kind only, whole and entire Christ, and the true
sacrament, are taken; and that, therefore, those who receive only one kind, are
deprived of no grace necessary to salvation."* It is worthy of particular
attention, that the Council does not plead, on this occasion, either Scripture or
apostolical tradition; that it acknowledges both kinds, the bread and the wine,
to have been instituted by Christ, and the ordinance to have been thus cele
brated in the primitive times; and yet, that it has the effrontery to declare, that
one kind constitutes a perfect sacrament, and that thus only it should be obser
ved. In all the proceedings of the apostate church, there is not an instance
of more undisguised and avowed opposition to the authority of Christ. It
might have gone on with no greater impiety to abolish baptism, or the Sabbath,
or any other ordinance. Yet, without pretending any authority but that of
" the church," the holy synod, as it calls itself, pronounces a curse upon every
man who shall affirm, that, by the command of God, both kinds should be
received; that the Holy Catholic Church has not sufficient reasons for denying
the cup to the laity; and that whole and entire Christ is not received under the
species of bread alone.!
You will be curious to know what are the weighty reasons by which the
church has been induced to make this essential change in the original insti
tution. You shall hear them. " First, Great care was to be taken lest the
blood of our Lord should be spilt upon the ground, and this did not seem easy
to be avoided if it should be administered among a great multitude of people.
Secondly, Since the sacred Eucharist ought to be in readiness for the sick, it
was much to be feared that, if the species' of wine were to be kept somewhat
longer, it might become sour." The catechism of Pope Pius, from which
these reasons are extracted, does not tell us what would be the consequence;
but as, if the wine is sour at first, it is not changed into the blood of Christ
by the words of consecration, the danger to be apprehended probably is, that,
if the species, that is, the accidents, should become sour, the blood would be
turned again into wjine. " Thirdly, There are very many who can by no
means endure the taste, nor so much, indeed, as the very smell of wine.
Fourthly, Wherefore, lest that which was given for the sake of spiritual
health might hurt the health of the body, it was very wisely established by the
church that the faithful should receive only the species of bread. Fifthly.
This may be added to the other reasons, that in very many countries they have
a verv great scarcity of wine, nor can they procure it from other places, but
with "great charges, and with tedious and difficult journies. Lastly, What is
most of all to the purpose, the heresy of those was to be rooted up who de
nied, that whole Christ is in each species, and asserted that the body only,
without the blood, is contained in the species of bread, and that the blood was
contained under that of wine. Now, therefore, that the truth of the Catholic
faith might be more evidently placed before our eyes, the communion of one
species, that is, of bread, was wisely introduced."!
This last reason is founded on the doctrine of concomitance. This term is
used by the Popish Church to signify that whole Christ is present under either
of the species. § Although the bread is said to be changed into his body, and
the wine into his blood, yet his body and blood are not to be considered as in
a state of separation. Wherever his body is, there is his blood; and wherever
his blood is, there is his body. Both are present under each of the species;
and if you divide the species of bread into particles, and the wine into drops,
Christ is in every one of them, in his body, soul, and Divinity, as much as in
the whole bread and the whole wine. Hence you perceive how the denial of
the cup to the laity has originated in transubstantiation. It was first supposed
* Sessio. xxi. de Com. sub utraq. spec. cap. 1, 2, 3. *lb. can. 1, 2, 3.
i Cat. Con. Trid. Pars ii. de Euch. Sac. § 70. § lb. § 33.

408 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
that he was corporeally present in the Eucharist; and then it followed, as
Christ cannot be divided, that whoever received one species, was as fully a
partaker of him as if he had received both species. The cup was superflu
ous; nothing was lost by its being withheld. By the same reasoning it might
have been given to the laity, and the bread been denied.
As the Church of Rome believes the doctrine of concomitance to be true, it
should have the same effect in relation to the priests as to the people; and as
the priests receive a whole Christ under the species of bread, there is no good
reason why the cup should be given to them any more than to others. It
was necessary, however, to make a distinction between them and the laity, and
to secure that profound veneration for their persons as sacred, which it is the
great object of the whole system to maintain. But the doctrine of concomi
tance is false, because its foundation is false. There is a peculiar absurdity in
it; for the Church of Rome exhibits separately the signs of the body and
blood of Christ, and at the same time assures us that they are not separate but
conjoined. For what purpose were separate symbols instituted, if the things
which they signify are blended together, or the one is included in the other ?
Whatever papists may affirm, as the Lord's Supper is a memorial of his
death, he is represented in it as dead, and his blood as poured out from his
body as an atonement for sin. They exist separately in the signs, and are
given separately to the communicants. To affirm, therefore, that they are
concomitant, or that either of the symbols comprehends both, is to destroy the
meaning, and to defeat the design of the institution. As they do not plead
Scripture or apostolical tradition for taking away the cup from the people, there
is no occasion to bring forward arguments in refutation of their practice. They
are self-condemned; they acknowledge that the word of God, and the primitive
church, are against them. We are fully warranted to affirm, that the Eucharist,
as administered by them, is no sacrament, an essential part being wanting.
The command to drink the wine is as express as the command to eat the bread;
and with respect to the former, our Saviour has been more explicit, as he fore
saw the daring impiety of the followers of Antichrist. Of the bread,- he sim
ply said, according to Matthew's account, " Take, eat;" but when he gave the
cup, he said "drink ye all of it."*
I proceed to lay before you the opinions of Protestants respecting the Lord's
Supper; and I shall begin with that of the Lutheran Church.
Although Luther perceived the absurdity of transubstantiation, and renounc
ed it, yet the literal interpretation of our Saviour's words, to which he had so
long been accustomed, retained a firm hold of his mind, and led him to adopt
an opinion equally unintelligible and unscriptural. He believed, that although
the bread and wine are not c ged into tne body and blood of Christ, yet
that his real body and blood are received by the communicants along with the
symbols. This is called consubstantiation, to signify that the substance of the
body and blood of Christ is present in, with, or under the substance of the
elements; and sometimes impanation, a word which imports that he is in the
bread. Papists say that the substance of the elements is annihilated, and only
the accidents remain; Lutherans affirm that they retain their proper nature,
and that the human nature of Christ is mysteriously conjoined with them.
Luther indeed pretended to give an explanation of his doctrine by saying, that as
fire and iron are united, so the body of Christ is joined to the bread in the
Eucharist. His followers, however, acknowledge that it is a mystery which
we cannot comprehend, but which we are bound to believe on the authority of
Scripture, and however incredible this union may seem to us, the almighty
power of God is able to effect it.
Luther supported his doctrine by this argument, that Christ is at the right
* Matth. xxvi. 27.

THE LORD'S SUPPER. 409
kdnd of God, and the right hand of God is everywhere; but he afterwards
abandoned it, and with good reason. The right hand of God does not signify
his power, which is omnipresent as his essence is, but the highest glory and
authority. It is a figurative expression, which when interpreted according to
the laws of sound criticism, appears not to have the most remote connexion
with the subject in question; for by no species of reasoning does it follow, that
the human nature of our Saviour is omnipresent, because it is exalted above
all principalities and powers. If the "right hand of God" has any relation to
place, it is in the higher regions of the universe; and Christ " sitting at it,"
overthrows the doctrine of consubstantiation, for God is said to have " set him
at his right hand in the heavenly places."* The argument was revived by
some of the followers of Luther, who maintained the ubiquity of the human
nature of Christ, and accounted for it by the power of God,, which they al
leged, could render it omnipresent; or by the personal union between it and
his divine nature, in consequence of which the properties of the latter were
communicated to the former. An appeal to the power of God overawes the
mind, and there is an appearance of presumption and impiety in calling in
question the possibility of any thing which is said to be done by it. But as
it is no limitation of the divine omniscience, that it does not know what is
unknowable, so it is no limitation of omnipotence, to say that it cannot perform
what is impossible. God cannot make a circle square, because it would then
cease to be a circle; or a rod strait and crooked at the same time, because the
thing implies a contradiction. In like manner, he cannot make the body of
Christ omnipresent, because place or locality is an attribute of body, and to
ascribe omnipresence to it is to destroy its essence. Lutherans indeed have
assigned a double presence to it, the one circumscribed and local, and the other
celestial, supernatural, and divine. But this is an arbitrary distinction con
trived to support their hypothesis, and besides it destroys itself; for if the hu
man nature of Christ have a local presence, it cannot also have ubiquity; and
if it have ubiquity, it cannot at the same time be confined to a place. The
communication of the properties of the divine to the human nature is incon
ceivable, and would not have been admitted, but as an expedient to extricate
them from a difficulty. The doctrine of the church in all ages,. — and it is
agreeable to Scripture, — has been that the two natures of Christ, although
hypostatically united, continue distinct; that each retains its peculiar attributes;
that omnipotence, omniscience, and omnipresence, although predicated of the
person, belong to him only as God; and that the sole effect of the union with
respect to the human nature, is to enhance the value of its actions, which are
truly the actions of the only-begotten of the Father. To suppose that divine
properties are communicated to the human nature, is to confound the Creator
with the creature; and it may be confidently affirmed to be impossible even for
omnipotence to make that infinite which is finite.
Consubstantiation is liable to many of the same objections which may be
advanced against transubstantiation. It supposes the body of Christ to be at
the same time in heaven and on earth, in Europe and in America; it supposes
it to be in a state of glory, and in a state of humiliation; it supposes it to be
present, and yet to be imperceptible to any of our senses, and therefore to be
present after the manner of a spirit; it supposes it to be taken into the mouths
of the communicants, and chewed, and swallowed, and digested; it supposes
that at the last supper, Christ sat at table with his disciples, and was at the
same time in the bread; that he held himself in his hand, and then transferred
himself from his own hand into the hands of the Apostles; and that while they
saw him at some distance from them, he was in their mouths. How strong is
the power of prejudice, which can make any man believe, or imagine that he
* Eph. i. 20.
Vnr.. II  52. 2 M

410 ,THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
believes such absurdities ! After this, there is nothing so monstrous and in
credible which he might not be prevailed upon to acknowledge, if he were
first persuaded that it is taught in the Scriptures.
That consubstantiation is not taught in the Scriptures, might be proved by
all the arguments which have been adduced to show, that the literal interpreta
tion of the words, "This is my body," "This is my blood," is false. These
it is unnecessary to go over again, as they were so lately laid before you. It
deserves attention, that the interpretation of the Lutheran church is more
forced and unnatural than that of the Romish church. The Papist, suspecting
no figure in the case, with childish simplicity takes the words as they -stand,
" this bread is my body," and believes that the one is miraculously changed
into the other. The Lutheran employs some thought, and exercises a little
ingenuity, and finds that the words signify, not " This bread is my body,"
but " This bread contains my body." By what law does he deviate from the
strict interpretation ? Where does he find, that the verb of existence, is, sig
nifies in, with, or under? Not in any of the canons of criticism, but in
the necessity of his system, which cannot be supported without this explana
tion. Hence it is evident, that the Papist has the advantage of the Lutheran:
and that, if the words are to be literally understood, they favour transubstan
tiation, and consubstantiation is founded on a perversion of them. Both doc
trines are contrary to Scripture, as well as to reason and common sense; but
that of Lutherans offers more direct violence to the words of inspiration.
However objectionable consubstantiation may be, it is, when compared with
the favourite dogma of Papists, a harmless absurdity, as it is not clogged with
the impious consequences which are deduced from transubstantiation. Although
Lutherans believe the corporeal presence of Christ in the sacrament, they con
demn the worship of it as idolatrous; they do not maintain the sacrifice of the
mass, nor withhold the cup from the laity. It is an opinion which has no in
fluence upon their practice, and does not lead them into error respecting other
doctrines of religion. On this account, it has been regarded by the Reformed
churches with less displeasure than the Popish tenet, and has been considered
by many as not constituting an insurmountable obstacle to the communion be
tween them.
The opinion of Zuinglius comes next to be considered. Although he does
not hold so distinguished a place as Luther in the history of the Protestant
Churches, yet it is certain that he preceded him in openly opposing the errors
and corruptions of the Church of Rome, made earlier and more rapid progress
in the knowledge of the truth, and entertained far more enlightened views on
the subject ofthe Eucharist than the German Reformer. He began to preach
the gospel, as we are informed by himself, the year before Luther first de
claimed against indulgences, and while the name of the latter was unknown
in Switzerland. " He saw," as Melchior Adam relates in his life, " the error
of transubstantiation, or of the substantial conversion of bread and wine into
the body and blood of Christ, the accidents only remaining; he saw that the
dogma of consubstantiation, or impanation, that is, of the corporeal presence
of Christ in the bread and wine, their substance remaining, which Luther em
braced, agreed neither with the words of our Lord, nor with the analogy of
Christian faith, nor with the consent of orthodox antiquity; for he saw that it
had not been said by Christ, 'Let this be or become my body,' nor even,
' Under this, or in this, my body is, or is contained.' Yet he did not see what
he should safely adopt, till having weighed many similar passages of Scrip
ture, and consulted orthodox antiquity, as Tertullian, Ambrose, Augustine,
Theodoret, Bertram, and others, he at length determined, that in the words
of our Lord, ' This is my body,' or, ' This bread is my body,' there is a me
tonymy peculiar to the Hebrew language, and that metonymically the name of

THE LORD'S SUPPER. 411
the thing signified is transferred to the sign; that the bread is called the body
of the Lord, and the wine the blood of the New Testament, because they are
symbols of the body and blood of the Lord, or because they signify the body
and blood of the Lord sacramentally. Before he published this opinion, he
not only communicated it to his faithful friends, but took care that it should be
made known to all persons in Germany and France who were distinguished for
learning and authority; for he foresaw that the opposite opinion, which for so
many ages had taken deep root in the minds of men, would with great diffi
culty be eradicated."* The opinion which he finally adopted was this, —
"That the bread and wine were no more than a representation of the body
and blood of Christ; or, in other words, the signs appointed to denote the bene
fits that were conferred upon mankind in consequence of the death of Christ;
that, therefore, Christians derived no other fruit from the participation of the
Lord's Supper, than a mere commemoration and remembrance of the merits
of Christ, and that there was nothing in the ordinance but a memorial of
Christ." That both Papists and Lutherans should have exclaimed against this simple
view of the sacred institution, can excite no surprise. To some who had re
nounced the errors of both, he appeared to have gone to the opposite extreme.
Those, therefore, who did not choose to condemn his opinion in express terms,
deemed it necessary to make an apology for it. Thus Bucer, his contemporary,
having remarked that in the epistles of Zuinglius concerning the sacraments,
some things are found, from which it may be inferred that he did not attribute
as much to the sacraments as ought to be ascribed to them, admonishes the
reader, that Zuinglius did not deny that the sacraments are symbols of grace,
and in their own way are auxiliary to faith; and goes on to state, that his object
in speaking of them as he did, was, to guard men against putting confidence in
the external work, not to evacuate the sacraments of Christ. " For he had to
do with those who defended the vulgar impiety by which some men are led to
seek salvation from the opus operatum, as they call it, that is, from the cere
mony itself externally performed, being altogether careless of faith in the
promises. Against these he justly contended, that Christ our Lord restores us
to the favour of his Father; and not the sacraments, or the external action of the
priests in the administration of the sacraments. Whatever therefore you shall
read in these epistles which shall seem to detract something from the sacra
ments, understand all that to be said concerning the external action, to the ex
clusion of the Spirit of Christ."!
It had appeared to some that Zuinglius denied the efficacy of the sacraments,
and reduced them to mere signs which work solely by a moral influence; and
this apology was undertaken to show that this was not his intention. To have
represented them as naked signs, would no doubt have been improper; because,
if they .were instituted for the confirmation of our faith, they could not have
accomplished this design without the communication of grace; but there seems
to have been a disposition in that age, to believe, that there was a presence of
Christ in the Eucharist different from his presence in the other ordinances of
the gospel; an undefined something, which corresponded to the strong language
used at the institution of the Supper, " This is my body, — this is my blood."
Acknowledging it to be figurative, many still thought that a mystery was
couched under it. It was not, indeed, easy for those who had long been ac
customed to the notion of the bodily presence of Christ, at once to simplify
their ideas; and perhaps, too, they were induced to express themselves as they
did, with a view to give less offence to the Lutherans. Whatever was their
motive, their language is not always sufficiently guarded. Hence Bucer adds,
1 * Melch. Adami Vite Germ. Theol. Vita ZuingUi, p. 39, 40.
* Buceri Epist in Melch. Adami Vita Zuinglii, p. 41, 42.

412 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
" When it is said that Christ, having left'this world and carried his body to
heaven, cannot be consubstantiated with the bread, do not think that in our
churches he is excluded from the sacred Supper, and that bread and wine
alone are administered as empty symbols. As the passage of our Lord Jesus
Christ into heaven, implies only that he is not here after the manner of this
world; so we do not deny that he is united to the bread, or locally included in
the bread; but not naturally, and after the manner of this world. We acknow
ledge that the true body and the true blood of Christ, true Christ himself, God and
man, is preseut to us in the Supper; that by the words and symbols he is ex
hibited not for the perishing food of the flesh, but for the eternal food of the
soul, and on that account is not perceived by sense and reason, but by true
faith."* These words are very unguarded. While they deny, they seem also to
affirm, the real presence of Christ in the sacrament in some mysterious manner,
and are calculated to mislead and to confound the mind. Had it been said that
the bread and wine are merely signs of his body and blood, but that he is con
templated and enjoyed by the communicants in the exercises of meditation and
faith, we could have understood it; but what idea can we affix to the presence
of the true body and the true blood of Christ, "not naturally, and after the
manner of this world?" Would not Papists and Lutherans say the same
thing? The name of Calvin ought always to be mentioned with respect. He was
one of the brightest ornaments of the Reformation, and in learning, genius, and
zeal, had few equals, and no superior. His opposition both to transubstantia
tion and to consubstantiation is well known; and yet, in speaking of the Lord's
Supper, he has expressed himself in the following manner: "The sum is, that
our souls are not otherwise fed with the flesh and blood of Christ, than bread
and wine sustain our corporeal life. Nor would the analogy of the sign other
wise agree, unless souls found their nourishment in Christ; which cannot be,
unless Christ truly coalesce with us into one, and restore us by the eating of
his flesh and the drinking of his blood. But although it seems incredible that,
the places being so distant, the flesh of Christ should penetrate to us so as to
be our food,' let us remember how much the secret power of the Spirit exceeds
our senses, and how foolish it is to attempt to measure his immensity by our
standard. What our mind does not comprehend, let faith conceive, that the
Spirit truly unites things which are disjoined in place. That sacred commu
nication of his flesh and blood, by which Christ transfuses his life into us, no
otherwise than if he penetrated into our bones and marrow, he attests and seals
in the Supper; not indeed in a vain and empty sign, but there exerting the effi
cacy of his Spirit, by which he fulfils what he promises."!
I confess that I do not understand this passage. It supposes a communion
of believers in the human nature of our Saviour in the Eucharist; aild endea
vours to remove the objection arising from the distance of place, by a reference
to the almighty power of the Spirit, much in the same way as Papists and
Lutherans solve the difficulty attending their respective systems. If Calvin
had meant only that, in the Sacred Supper, believers have fellowship with
Christ in his death, he would have asserted an important truth, attested by the
experience of the people of God in every age; but why did he obscure it, and
destroy its simplicity, by involving it in ambiguous language? If he had any
thing different in view; if he meant that there is some mysterious communica
tion with his human nature, we must be permitted to say that the notion was
as incomprehensible to himself as it is to his readers. The error into which
he and others have fallen is this, that while they acknowledge the words of
institution to be figurative, they speak of them occasionally in such terms as
* Buceri Epist.ubi supra. * Calvini Instit. lib. iv. cap. xvii. sect 10.

THE LORD'S SUPPER. 413
import the literal sense; not attending to this obvious canon of interpretation,
that, in explaining a figure, we should give the true sense in other terms, and
uniformly adhere to it; and that to mix together the figure and the literal sense,
sometimes bringing forward the one and sometimes the other, creates confusion
in the minds of others, and, instead of illustrating the subject, involves it in
obscurity.

LECTURE XCII.

SACRAMENT OF THE LORD'S SUPPER.
True Nature of the Eucharist. — In what Manner Christ is Present in It. — Observations on
the Time of Institution; The Symbols; The Mode of Administration. — What is Implied
in Partaking of it. — Who may Partake. — Periods of Celebrating it.
We have reviewed the opinions of different denominations of Christians
concerning the Lord's Supper, and have seen that even some of those who
denied the real presence, have not always expressed themselves with sufficient
clearness and simplicity. The words of institution have impressed them with
an idea, that, although there is no change of the. elements, and the true body
tod blood of our Redeemer are not contained in them, yet something myste
rious is implied. This charge, at least, may be fairly advanced against those
whom we find, even although they profess to explain the subject, making use
of figurative language. It is true that, since our Lord calls the bread and wine
his body and blood, we maybe said to. eat his body when we eat the bread, and
to drink his blood when we drink the wine; but then it should be considered,
that we can only eat the one and drink the other, in the same sense in which
the former is called his body, and the latter his blood, that is, figuratively.
Stript of all metaphorical terms, the action must mean that, in the believing and
grateful commemoration of his death, we enjoy the blessings which were pur
chased by it, in the same manner in which we enjoy them when we exercise
faith in hearing the Gospel. Why, then, should any man talk, as Calvin does,
of some inexplicable communion in this ordinance with the human nature of
Christ; and tell us that, although it seems impossible, on account of the
distance to which he is removed from us, we are not to measure the power of
the Divine Spirit by our standard? I am sure that the person who speaks so,
conveys no idea into the minds of those whom he addresses; and I am equally
certain that he does not understand himself. When our Lord speaks, in the
Gospel of John, of eating his flesh and drinking his blood, all Protestants will
acknowledge that he simply means our reception of him and his benefits by-
faith. Why should it be supposed that any other thing is signified by the
Lord's Supper, in which the language is virtually the same? What rule of in
terpretation will justify us in entertaining the idea of something more mysteri
ous in the one case than in the other? There is an absurdity in the notion,
that there is any communion with the body and blood of Christ, considered in
themselves; that he intended any such thing; or that it could be of any advan
tage to us. There is an absurdity in imagining that, by calling the symbols
2 m2

414 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
his body and blood, he meant to fix our attention upon these, materially con
sidered; and in not acknowledging that his design was to direct our thoughts
to himself, as our incarnate Redeemer, who was substituted in our room, ex
piated our sins, and has obtained a perfect salvation for us. The ordinance is
misunderstood, when it gives rise to carnal meditations; and is then only ob
served aright, when our minds are employed in the spiritual contemplation of
his atonement, and its effects. When our Church, therefore, says that " the
body and blood are as really, but spiritually, present to the faith of believers in
that ordinance, as the elements themselves are to their outward senses,"* and,
that they " feed upon his body and blood, to their spiritual nourishment and
growth in grace,"! it can mean only, that our incarnate suffering Saviour is ap
prehended by their minds, through the instituted signs; and that, by faith, they
enjoy peace and hope; or it means something unintelligible and unscriptural.
Plain, literal language is best, especially on spiritual subjects, and should have
been employed by Protestant Churches with the utmost care, as the figurative
terms of Scripture have been so grossly mistaken. On this ground, I object to
the following words in the Confession of Faith of the Reformed Churches of
France: " We confess that, in the Holy Supper, Jesus Christ feeds and nou
rishes us truly with his flesh and blood, that we may be one with him, and
that his life may be communicated to us. For, although he is in heaven till
he come to judge the world, yet we believe that, by the secret and incompre
hensible virtue of his Spirit, he nourishes and quickens us with the substance
of his body and blood. We hold that this is done spiritually, not to put ima
ginations and thoughts in the place of the effect and the truth, but inasmuch as
this mystery surmounts, by its height, the measure of our senses, and the whole
order of nature."!
It is not the design of these observations to deny, or call in question, the
presence of Christ in the Eucharist. I should not hesitate to affirm a real, in
opposition to an imaginary, and in distinction from a symbolical, presence,
had not the phrase been abused to express a doctrine inconsistent with Scrip
ture and common sense. But the doctrine of his presence I would not found,
as others do, upon the words of institution, which, when justly interpreted,
merely import that the elements are signs of his body and blood. Now, a sign
is very far from implying that the thing signified is present. It is rather un
derstood to represent an absent object, and is put in its place to remind us of
it, because it is removed to a distance from us. Instead of being a fair conclu
sion from the words of institution, that there is a peculiar, mysterious presence
of our Saviour, which can be accounted for only by the miraculous power of
the Spirit, it might rather be inferred that he is not present at all, and. that the
design of the symbols is to call him to remembrance in his absence. The doc
trine of his presence in the Sacred Supper, is legitimately deduced from his
general promise, which relates to all his ordinances without any special re
spect to the Supper: " Where two or three are gathered together in my name,
there I am in the midst of them."§ It is this promise which gives us ground
to consider him as present in the Eucharist, in baptism, in prayer, in the
preaching of the Gospel. In all these ordinances he is present; and he is pre
sent in the same manner in them all, namely, by his Spirit, who renders them
effectual means of salvation. This sentiment would be pronounced heretical
by the Church of Rome, and by the followers, of Luther; and would even incur
the disapprobation of many Protestants, who have been accustomed to think
that Christ is somehow in the Eucharist, as he is not in any other ordinance.
But their belief and their confident affirmation are of no value, if they are not
supported by Scripture. And where do they find any ground for their opinion
• Conf. ch. xxix. § 7. * Larger Cat. Q. 168.
i Art xxxvi. Vide Quick's Synodicon, vol. i. p. 14. § Matth. xviii. 20.

THE LORD'S SUPPER. 415
but in human systems? It is indeed said, that " the bread which we break is the
communion of the body of Christ, and the cup which we drink is the commu
nion of his blood."* No man who admits that the bread and wine are only
signs and figures, can consistently suppose the words now quoted to have any
other meaning, than that we have communion with Christ in the fruits of his
sufferings and death; or that, receiving the symbols, we receive by faith the
benefits procured by the pains of his body, and the effusion of his blood. If
it should still be thought that the strong terms used by our Lord imply some
thing peculiar to this ordinance, I would remind you that the same language is
employed in reference to the Gospel; for our Saviour is speaking of it, and not
of the Eucharist, when he says, " Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of Man,
and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.'"! Now, as the man who believes
the Gospel, eats the flesh and drinks the- blood of Christ, as well as he who
partakes of the sacred Supper, it follows, that in both communion with him is
of the same kind, and that there is no reason to imagine my presence of our
Saviour in the Eucharist which is not in the word.
What has been now said, has no tendency to diminish our reverence for the
Eucharist. It is no true respect for it, which is founded on a mistaken view
of its nature. It is still a holy institution, in which believers enjoy intimate
fellowship with Christ; and is guarded by an awful sanction, 'that none may
dare to engage in the service unprepared: " He that eateth and drinketh un
worthily, eateth and drinketh condemnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's
body."! I shall now proceed to give you an account of the Lord's Supper.
The occasion on which it was instituted by Christ, was the celebration of
the passover with his disciples. Having sent some of them to procure a place,
and to make ready all things for the feast, " when the even was come, he sat
down with the twelve. And as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and' blessed
it, and break it, and gave it to his disciples," &c.§ You will observe that it
was during the time of the passover, while they were eating, and probably to
wards the end of the feast, that our Lord instituted the Eucharist. The one
was not finished when the other commenced; and, by this continuity, it was
intimated that the one was changed into the other, and that the latter was hence ¦
forth to supply the place of the former.
The time of the institution was the night on which he was betrayed. He
was to be put to deatli the next day; and, in the view of that event, he appointed
the Supper to be a perpetual memorial of it. The time was calculated to invest
it with a particular interest, as his disciples would connect with the celebration
of it the recollection of the awful scenes which immediately ensued. To his
followers in every age, it is a proof of his singular love to them, that while his
own dreadful sufferings were so near, he thought of them with the most tender
regard, and provided for their encouragement and consolation amidst the evils
of life. They are excited to remember him, by this testimony that he remem
bers them.
The symbols which he selected were bread and wine, of which the former
represents his body, and the latter his blood. The bread and wine were such
as had been placed on the.table for the purpose of celebrating the passover. A
dispute arose, in former times, between the Eastern and the Western Church,
whether the bread should be leavened or unleavened. The Greeks maintain
that it should be leavened, because our Lord, they think, ate the passover the
day before it was eaten by the Jews, and consequently, before the use of un
leavened bread had begun. On the other hand, the Latins affirm that he ob
served the passover at the usual time, and, of course, used unleavened bread,
according to the law* This controversy contributed, w\th other causes, to the
* 1 Cor. X. 16. * John vi. 53. i 1 Cor. xi. 29. § Matt xxvi. 20, 26.

416 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
schism between the Churches, which has lasted for many centuries. It is m
the highest degree insignificant, as the use of either the one kind or the other
was purely accidental, and the quality of the bread has no connexion with the
nature and design of the ordinance. The practice of dividing the bread into
small pieces, called wafers, and putting them into the mouths of the communi*
cants, is a corruption of the Church of Rome, which takes away the significant
action of breaking the bread, and the emblem of the union and fellowship of'
Christians, expressed by their partaking of one bread, or one loaf, according to
the words of the Apostle: " For we, being many, are one body, and one bread:
for we are all partakers of that one bread. "*. With respect to the wine, it has
been inquired, whether it should be mingled with water, or exhibited pure?
We are told that the Jews were accustomed to mix water with their wine, and
that they did so particularly at the passover; and it has been inferred that our
Saviour complied with the custom of his country. There is little doubt that
he would do so in a matter so indifferent; but we do not know what was the
custom in his days, except from Jewish tradition, on which no dependence can
be placed. This practice generally obtained in Christian churches, and, as is
usual, mystical reasons were assigned for it; that the wine and water signified
the blood and water which flowed from our Saviour's side; that they denoted
the union of his two natures in one person; and that, as nations are called
waters in the visions of the Apocalypse, the mixture was expressive of the
union of believers to Christ. Such fancies are childish and contemptible. As
nothing is said of any mixture in the Scriptures, it is natural to conclude that
the wine should be pure. It has been farther inquired, whether in cases where
bread and wine cannot be procured, it would be lawful to make use of corres
ponding substances? To us the question is a mere speculation, on which we
are not called to decide; but, as necessity supersedes positive law, it would be
hard to affirm that the Lord's Supper should not be celebrated, where the
identical materials could not be found which were used at the original in
stitution. Our Lord took the bread, and after supper the cup. This has been sup
posed to be a significant action, and has been explained in different ways; some
making it import, that God took his own Son to be mediator between him
and us, and a propitiation for our sins; and others conceiving it to mean, that
Christ assumed our nature to die in it. The other actions are understood from
their own nature, or from the words of Scripture; but the meaning of this
action is the subject only of conjecture, and hence there are different views of
its import. In other words, it is explained according to every man's fancy.
As the Scripture relates the fact, but subjoins no observation upon it, we are at
liberty to reject human commentaries. I am disposed to think, that the taking
of the bread and wine was not a sacramental action, but merely a preliminary
step to the institution. Bread and wine were upon the table for the purpose
of the passover, which Jesus, as Master of the family, had already sanctified
by prayer and thanksgiving. It was necessary, as he was to commence a new
feast, that he should take them again and distribute them, in order to show the
disciples that this was a new feast, and not a continution of the former. The
taking of the elements by the minister before prayer, appears to me to be a mat
ter of indifference. I should not blame him who omitted, or him who observed
it; but I could not go along with the latter, if he considered it as an essential
part of the ordinance.
Let us now attend to the first action of our Lord, with respect to the bread
and the wine, after he had taken them. Two words are employed, which sig
nify to bless, and to give thanks. The latter alone is used in reference to the
sup, but both are used in reference to the bread, and hence it appears that they
* 1 Cor. x. 17.

THE LORD'S SUPPER. 417
have virtually the same meaning, as one writer has chosen the one, and another
writer the other. We read in our translation that Jesus " blessed the bread;"
and hence it has been inferred that he consecrated it, or set it apart from a
common to a sacred use. The term, consecration, has found its way even
into Protestant churches, in relation to the sacraments; and ministers often
speak of setting apart the elements from a common to a holy use. I presume that
they are consecrated or set apart, not by the actions of men, but by the institution
of Christ, or become sacred by being devoted to a sacred use. Be this as it
may, the inference from the words of Scripture is groundless; because the ori
ginal says simply, that our Saviour " blessed," not that he blessed the bread,
for the pronoun it is a supplement. The meaning is, that he blessed God, as
the substitution of the word, to give thanks,* by some of the Evangelists,
plainly shows. He blessed, or gave thanks to his Father, we may presume,
for his love in sending him into the world to save our fallen race, by his obe
dience unto death. It may be questionable whether we should venture to imi
tate him in the consecration of the elements, the right to do which seems to
be exclusively vested in him, as the Head of the church, to whom it belongs to
separate persons and things to the service of God; but there can be no doubt,
that it is our duty to imitate him in his thanksgiving. We should never reflect
upon his death without emotions of gratitude; and these should be particularly
strong when the memorial of it is before our eyes, and we are assembled
to receive a token of our interest in his atonement, and of our title to the pre
cious blessings which it has procured. There is no occasion on which the
words of the Psalmist may be adopted with greater propriety, " Bless the
Lord, 0 my soul, and forget not all his benefits."
Having blessed or given thanks, he constituted the bread and wine signs of
his body and blood. This is the proper place to take notice of this important
fact, although the elements were made significant in the act of giving them to
the disciples. He said of the bread, "This is my body;" and of the wine,
"This is my blood." Thus, what is called a sacramental union was es
tablished; by which nothing more is meant, than that the elements become
signs or figures of his body and blood, and bear the names of the things which
thej' represent. I have already shown you that the notion of some mystical union,
which cannot be explained or understood, is unscriptural and superstitious. The
relation of the symbols to the realities is the same as was the relation of the
paschal lamb to our Redeemer, or as is the relation of the water in baptism to
the influences of the Spirit. In all these cases, something distant and invisible
is represented by another thing which is placed within the range of our senses.
It does not belong to man to appoint signs of Christ's body and blood. This has
been already done by his institution, and bread and wine become such signs to
us, when, with prayer to God, we set them apart for this purpose. The mut
tering of the words of institution over the elements, to consecrate them, or
transubstantiate them, more resembles, as we have said, a charm than an act
of rr';ginus worship, and falsely supposes that this makes the sacrament, while
it is made by the appointment of Christ.
Jesus brake the bread. It has been inquired, whether this circumstance is
essential to the ordinance, or may be omitted; as it is in the Church of Rome,
where the bread is exhibited in small separate pieces, called wafers, one of which
is put into the mouth of each communicant. We have no hesitation in saying
that it is essential; that, when it is wanting, the sacrament is not celebrated ac
cording to the original institution; and that all the reasons which require other
parts of the ordinance to be retained, may be alleged with equal justice for the
retention of this. It is, indeed, so essential, that the Lord's Supper is some
times designated from it alone, and is called "the breaking of bread." The
* Mark xvi. 23. Luke xxii. 19.
Vol. IL— 53.

418 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
rite is significant, and is appropriate- to the design of the institution, which is
to commemorate our Saviour's death. He himself explained it, when he said,
" This is my body which is broken for you," intimating that the broken bread
is a figure of his body as wounded and lacerated for our salvation. But of this
important fact there is no representation, when a small morsel of bread, in its
entire form, is distributed to the communicants. We are reminded by the break
ing of the bread, of the severe suffering which our Lord endured, when his
back was torn with a scourge, his hands and feet were pierced with nails, and his
head was crowned with thorns; and our minds are naturally led to contemplate
the sorrows of his soul, which had almost overwhelmed him, — sorrows which
no man can comprehend, but which undoubtedly arose from a sense of Divine
wrath, on account of the sins of his people which he had undertaken to expi
ate. I may remark, before leaving this particular, that as, in this ordinance,
Christ is represented as dead for our salvation, not only is the bread broken,
but the sign of his blood is separately exhibited, with an obvious intention to
signify that he died by the effusion of his blood, or by its separation from his
body. It is the practice in some of the Eastern churches to give the bread
dipped in wine. But, as this is an unauthorized innovation, so it quite sub
verts the design of the ordinance, so far as it is figurative; because it exhibits
his blood as remaining in his body, or conjoined with it, instead of representing
it as shed, according to the express words of our Lord: "This is my blood
which is shed for the remission of sins."
Lastly, Our Saviour gave the bread and the cup to his disciples. I formerly
showed you, that the seals of covenants are intended to be used in different
ways; to be looked at, as the rainbow in the clouds; to be applied externally
to the body, as water in baptism; to be taken for food, as the bread and wine
in the Eucharist. With regard to a seal of the last description, it was evi
dently necessary that it should be put into our hands, to denote the divine grant
of it, and our right to make use of it. By giving the bread and wine to the
disciples, we may conceive our Lord to have signified, — and the rite is still of
the same import, — that he and his Father freely and irrevocably give the bless
ings of redemption to believers. His atonement, with all its precious fruits, is as
truly theirs, as the bread and wine which have been put into their hands. The
Eucharist is therefore with propriety denominated a seal, the purpose of which
is to authenticate a deed. Christ gives to worthy communicants, not his real
Oody and blood, from which they could derive no advantage, but the invaluable
benefits which were purchased by the sufferings of his body and the effusion
of his blood; and by the external action ratifies the gift.
Let us next attend to the actions of the disciples. The design of the Lord's
Supper being to confirm the covenant of God with his people, it was neces
sary, on the one hand, that the ordinance should be instituted by our Saviour,
and on the other, that something should be done by us to signify our consent
to the covenant. With this view, we are commanded to take the bread and
eat it, and to take the cup and drink it. This is all that is enjoined upon
the communicants. Various observances are prescribed by the Church of
Rome, which being inventions of her own are unworthy of notice; and in the
Church of England, the communicants are required to receive the sacrament
kneeling. It is a vestige of Popery, which it is a dishonour to a Protestan
church to retain. We can understand the reason why a Papist kneels, for he
believes that what he sees is the real body of Christ, which he is bound to
adore; but we may be justly surprised to find a person of a different faith com
plying with the usage, when the reason of it is gone. He symbolizes with
idolaters; and if a silly love of pomp and form, and an unscriptural reverence
for antiquity, had not prevailed at the Reformation in England, this and other
superstitious practices would have been swept as rubbish out of the temple of

THE LORD'S SUPPER. 4 19
God. It might move our indignation to hear that church requiring kneeling
from greater respect for the sacrament, although till lately she was accustomed
to profane it in the grossest manner, by administering it to the most notorious
profligates, as a qualification for office. Kneeling is a manifest deviation from
the original institution. The disciples celebrated the supper in the posture
which they observed at their ordinary meals. They were reclining upon
couches, according to the custom of their country; and we imitate their exam
ple when we sit at the Lord's table, as we do at our own tables.
In the early periods of society, when language is not copious, men express
their sentiments by actions as well as by words. This mode was adopted by
the prophets, who sometimes accompanied their revelations with significant
signs. It is retained in symbolical ordinances, and some traces of it are seen
in the daily intercourse of life. When a proposal is made by one man to ano
ther, or a question is asked, which requires an answer in the affirmative, he is
understood to consent to the proposal, or to answer the question, by bowing his
head, without uttering a syllable. Our silent actions at the table of the Lord
are a declaration of our sentiments, as distinct and intelligible as if we had
clothed them in words. The crucified Saviour is presented to us under the
figures of bread and wine; and by taking and using these we plainly signify,
that we cordially receive him as our Saviour. God gives us sensible signs, to
assure us that his covenant is immutable, and his promises shall be performed;
and we, by accepting the signs, express our confidence in his faithfulness, and
our certain expectation of the blessings which, he has engaged to bestow.
Hence we perceive the import of the words of the Apostle, which have been
repeatedly quoted : ',' The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the com
munion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the
communion of the body of Christ ?"* They signify that believers enjoy fel
lowship with their Saviour in the holy supper. His death is exhibited as the
meritorious cause of their reconciliation to God; and it is exhibited in so im
pressive a manner, as to strengthen their faith, and to fill them with joy and
peace in believing. But this is the privilege of those alone who are possessed
of the faith of which the actions performed by them are expressive. When it
is wanting, the actions are hypocritical; the symbols are received, but the Sa
viour is rejected; and the unworthy communicant is guilty of the body and
blood of the Lord; that is, the irreverence with which he uses the symbols ter
minates upon him whom they represent, and he, as it were, crucifies the Son
of God afresh, and puts him to open shame.
From this view of the actions enjoined upon Christians in the celebration of
the Eucharist, it appears, that it is intended to be a public declaration of our
faith in Christ. When he instituted the ordinance, he said, " Do this in re
membrance of me." It is a memorial of his death, which serves not only to
perpetuate the knowledge of that event, but to signify in what esteem it is
held, and what importance is attached to it by his followers. It is commemo
rated not merely as the death of a friend and benefactor, of a teacher distin
guished by his wisdom, or of a saint illustrious for his virtues; but of a Re
deemer who laid down his life as a ransom for our souls. Every man who
partakes of the sacred symbols is understood to declare, whatever may be his
secret sentiments, that he acknowledges Jesus Christ in the character of his
Saviour, and founds his hope of salvation upon his sacrifice. He presents to
God the death of his Son, as his only plea for his favour; and avows to the
world, that however lightly they may esteem the salvation of Christ, he pre
fers it to every sublunary enjoyment.
Again, in the Lord's Supper we enter into a solemn engagement to serve
him, who loved us, and gave himself for us. I formerly remarked, that it is
• 1 Cor. x. 16,

420 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
commonly supposed to have been called a sacrament, in allusion to the military
oath of the Romans to be obedient to their general. I assigned my reason for
thinking that this is a mistake; and that the word, sacrament, was used as
equivalent to mystery. Be this however as it may, the celebrated passage in
the epistle of the younger Pliny to Trajan, which represents the primitive
Christians as binding themselves by an oath not to commit murder, theft, adul
tery, or any other crime, and which I have no doubt refers to ihe Lord's sup
per, points out the view which was then entertained of that ordinance. While
It was a commemoration of the death of Christ, it was understood to be an
engagement to duty. It is an acknowledgment that we are not our own, but
are bought with a price, and that we are therefore bound to glorify our Saviour,
with our bodies and our spirits which are his. And as there is no communion
between light and darkness, those are guilty of the vilest hypocrisy, and of a
daring profanation of the ordinance, who observe it while they are living in
known and deliberate sin, and are resolved to continue any practice which is
forbidden by the law of Christ, or to omit any duty which it enjoins.
Once more, the celebration of the Eucharist is an expressive sign of the
communion of Christians with one another in love; for they meet at the table
of the Lord as brethren and children of the same family, to partake of the
same spiritual feast. The Apostle authorizes this view of the subject by the
words formerly quoted. " For we being many, are one body, and one bread,"
or one loaf, " for we are all partakers of that one loaf."* It seems to have
been the custom to provide a loaf of bread, which was broken, and distributed
to the communicants; and the Apostle observes, that they were one like the
loaf of which they all shared; their participation of it being a symbol of their
union to one another, as well as to Christ, the head of his mystical body. In
testimony of their mutual love, the primitive Christians were wont, at least in
the second century, before they proceeded to celebrate the Eucharist, to give
each other the kiss of charity; and immediately after, as we likewise learn from
Justin Martyr, " they contributed according to their ability and inclination; and
what was collected was delivered to the bishop or president of the assembly,
who relieved with it widows and orphans, the sick, and those who were in
want from any other cause, prisoners, travellers, and strangers, and in a word,
all that had need."! Paul exhorts the Corinthians to " keep the feast, not
with the leaven of malice and wickedness;"! intimating that envy, resent
ment, hatred, and revenge, which so ill accord with the Christian character at
any time, are particularly incongruous on this occasion, when no affection to
wards our brethren should be entertained but the purest charity. There are
several considerations, which will naturally occur, and are calculated to draw
Christians together in the strictest bonds of friendship. Their character is the
same, for they are all professed disciples of one Master; their privileges are the
same, for they are admitted to the same holy communion with him; they are
all, if they are genuine believers, equally dear to the Saviour; and they have the
hope of meeting in their Father's house, and spending eternity in the most de
lightful intercourse.
Our Lord has shown for whose use this ordinance is intended, by adminis
tering it to his disciples; and a conclusion may be deduced from the passover,
to which the Israelites alone had access, and those who had joined themselves
to them by submitting to circumcision. "This is the ordinance of the pass-
over; There shall no stranger eat thereof. And when a stranger shall sojourn
with thee, and will keep the passover to the Lord, let all his males be circum
cised, and then let him come near and keep it; and he shall be as one that is
born in the land: for no uncircumcised person shall eat thereof."§ Since circum
cision was an indispensable qualification for eating the passover, it follows that
•lCor.x. 17. * Just Mart Apol. 2. * 1 Cor. v. 8. § Exod. xii. 43, 48.

THE LORD'S SUPPER. 421
baptism, which has succeeded to it, is requisite to entitle a person to a seat at
the table of the Lord. I do not know that this was ever called in question till
lately, that a controversy has arisen among the English Baptists, whether per
sons of other Christian denominations may not be occasionally admitted to the
holy communion with them; and it became necessary for those who adopted
the affirmative, to maintain that baptism is not a previous condition. This as
sertion arose out of their peculiar system, which denies the validity of infant
baptism. But to every man who contents himself with a plain view of the
subject, and has no purpose to serve by subtleties and refinements, it will appear
that baptism is as much the initiating ordinance bf the Christian, as circum
cision was of the Jewish, dispensation. An uncircumcised man was not per
mitted to eat the passover, and an unbaptised man should not be permitted to
partake of the Eucharist.
But baptism is not the only qualification. We learn from the law of Moses,
that when any of the Israelites had contracted ceremonial uncleanness, they
were not allowed to join with their brethren in the paschal solemnity; and for
their accommodation, a second passover was appointed at the distance of a
month, during which they would be purified.* Every person who has been
baptized does not possess the moral qualifications which would entitle him to
be accounted a disciple of Christ. He may be an open apostate from the
faith; or he may be so ignorant of religion, and so irregular in his conduct, that
it would be an abuse of charity to consider him as a Christian. Hence we
demand, in candidates for the Lord's table, a competent measure of knowledge,
a profession of faith in Christ, and a behaviour which will justify us in believ
ing them to be sincere. " All ignorant and ungodly persons," says our Church,
" as they are unfit to enjoy communion with him, so are they unworthy of the
Lord's table, and cannot without great sin against Christ while they remain such,
partake of these holy mysteries, or be admitted thereunto."! <
Hitherto I have spoken of those who have a right of admission in the judg
ment of the Church. But its judgment is fallible, as the state of the heart
cannot be certainly known, and it rests solely upon external evidence. If it be
inquired, Who have a right before God? we must answer, that believers are the
only persons; and for this obvious reason, that the Eucharist is a seal of the
covenant of grace, an interest in which is obtained by faith. But even believers
are not always prepared to engage in this spiritual service. If their faith has
declined; if their consciences are wounded by sin; if they have incurred the
displeasure of God; they are not worthy to appear before him, nor capable of
the holy exercises which the ordinance calls for, till they are renewed by re
pentance. The reason why the exhortation of Paul to the Corinthians, " Let a man
examine himself," is still brought forward by the ministers of religion, is the
mixed nature of the societies over which they preside, and the imperfect state
even of genuine Christians. An investigation of their character by the light
of Scripture, may discover to some an unworthiness which they did not sus
pect, and to others a fitness of which they were in doubt. It is a mistake,
however, to suppose that self-examination must preeede the participation of
the Lord's Supper, in the case of every man upon every occasion. There can
be no reason for instituting an inquiry respecting a point which is fully ascer
tained. He who possesses the assurance of faith, and walks in the light of
God's countenance ; he who loves the law of God, and whose conscience bears
testimony to his sincerity, knows his right, and may exercise it when he has
an opportunity. The exhortation of Paul primarily respected a society of pro
fessed Christians, among whom great irregularities prevailed, and to whom a
• Numb. ix. 6—12. + Conf. xxix. § 8.
2N

422 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE :
call to sit in judgment upon themselves was seasonably and properly ad
dressed. *
To assist Christians in this inquiry, is the design of that part of the service
in our Church which is commonly called Fencing the Tables. You will re
member, however, that it is merely an expedient suggested by human prudence,
and that it is not supported by scriptural precept, or apostolical example. It is
therefore a vulgar prejudice to account it essential to the ordinance, and to ima
gine that it adds any thing to its perfection or solemnity. The truth is, that to
aid his people in examining themselves, should be the object of a minister from
the beginning to the end of the year; and that he should study so to divide the
word of truth, that all may be furnished with the means of ascertaining their state
and character before they assemble to celebrate the Supper. But although this
part of the service is not necessary, is not adopted in many Christian societies,
and might be laid aside without in any degree impairing the original institution,
at which it was not observed; yet there is no doubt that it has been productive
of good, and might have produced more, if it had been judiciously conducted.
Ministers should beware of the two extremes, of being too easy or too severe; of
being too easy, lest they embolden the profane; and of being too severe, lestthey
discourage the pious. There is danger to be apprehended from their boundless
charity, and from their gloominess and narrow-mindedness. The word of God
is the only standard of character; and as it excludes all who are living in sin,
so it invites all who love the Saviour, although their love should be as a grain
of mustard-seed. The plan at present pursued in our Church is preferable to
that of our predecessors, who, taking the decalogue as their standard, excom
municated sinners of every description and degree, many of whom were known
not to be present, and would have disclaimed the privilege which was publicly
denied to them. What had they to do to judge those who were without; ought
they not to have judged those alone who were within?*
How often the Lord's Supper should be celebrated, is a question which has
undergone much discussion. Some contend that it should be administered
every Sabbath; but in my opinion, the proof from Scripture completely fails.
Nothing can be inferred from the words of Luke concerning the primitive
disciples, that "they continued steadfastly in the Apostles' doctrine and fellow
ship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers,"! unless it should be said, that
they ate the Lord's Supper as often as they prayed, which no man in his senses
ever affirmed. The case of the disciples at Troas is as little to the purpose;
for when we read, that " on the first day of the week, when they came together
to break bread, Paul preached unto them,"! i* would be a strange fancy to sup
pose, that to break bread was the uniform design of their meetings on the Sab
bath. We should thus suppose, contrary to Scripture, and to the history of
the primitive church, that this was the main object of all their religious assem
blies, that for which their meetings were held, and to which the preaching of
the gospel was secondary and subservient; whereas the narrative plainly imports
that it was an occasional design, suggested by the incidental presence of the
Apostle. From the words of Paul to the Corinthians, "ye come together not
for the better, but for the worse," compared with what he afterwards says,
" when ye come together, this is not to eat the Lord's Supper,"§ it has been
concluded, that always when they came together they observed this ordinance;
because, otherwise, there could be no force in the argument, that they came
together for the worse, which refers to the disorders of which they were guilty
in communicating. This is truly wonderful logic, which the initiated may
understand, but to every other person it is unintelligible. All that the Apostle
affirms is, that when the Corinthians celebrated the Lord's Supper in a riotous
manner, they came together for the worse. He says not one word about the
* 1 Cor. v. 12. * Acts ii. 42. i Ib. xx. 7. § 1 Cor. xi. 17. 20.

PRAYER. 423
frequency or the rareness of their meetings. The stupidity of this criticism is
almost equalled by that which is founded on the words, " As often as ye eat
this bread and drink this cup," and represents our Lord as enjoining a frequent
celebration of the Supper; whereas every person knows that we use the phrase,
as often, in reference to an action which we perform only once a year, as well
as to an action which we perform once a day. As often as I take a meal, I ask
the Divine blessing upon it. This happens three or four times a day. As often
as I go to Edinburgh, I go by a particular road. This happens once or twice
a year. Both expressions are equally proper, and imply only, that when the
one thing takes place, the other always accompanies it.
Were we to judge of the Eucharist by human commemorative institutions,
we should suppose it to return at distant intervals; or, were we to judge of it
by similar institutions of Divine appointment, as the Passover, Pentecost, and
the Feast of Tabernacles, we should conclude that it was to be observed once a
year. There is no precept of Scripture, no apostolical example, to regulate
our practice. Churches are left at liberty to order their procedure according to
their own views of expedience and utility. The sacred feast should not be
treated as if it were of no value, and so rarely celebrated as to be almost for
gotten; nor should it be magnified above other ordinances, and represented as
of indispensable necessity on every occasion. And it is arrogance in any de
nomination of Christians to imagine that they excel other Christians, merely
because this ordinance is more frequently dispensed among them.

LECTURE XCIII.
ON PRAYER.

Prayer Natural to Man. — Definition of Prayer ; Comprehensive of Adoration, Thanksgiving,
Confession, and Petition. — Object of Prayer, God. — Connexion Between the Character of
God and the Duty of Prayer. — Addressed to God the Father. — Notice of Objections to
Prayer. — The Word of God, the Rule of Prayer. — Blessings to be implored.
In the Gospel, Jesus Christ addresses us in the name of his Father, de
claring his gracious counsels, and presenting to us the blessings of salvation,
accompanied with an invitation and command to receive them. In the sacra
ments, the same subjects are exhibited by symbols; and as they are signs of
redemption, so they are seals for the confirmation of the promises, that the
faith of true Christians may be strengthened, and they may abound in consola
tion and hope. This external dispensation of religion requires, on their part,
certain sentiments and affections of the mind, corresponding to the nature of
the truths proclaimed, and the facts brought under their view; and certain ac
tions significant of their internal emotions, and of their consent to the covenant
into which. God has admitted them. But the whole of religion is not compre
hended in the manifestations of his good-will towards them, and the silent ex
pressions of their faith; as he speaks to them, it is their duty to speak to him
in the humble and animated language of devotion. Nor does their duty consist
solely in accepting the gifts which he is pleased to bestow; they are enjoined
not to wait supinely for the visitations of his favour, but to solicit them, and to
present their requests in every season of need.

424 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
Man is so constituted, that the movements of his mind give an impulse to his
body, and discover themselves by external signs. The contemplation of high
degrees of excellence, the reception of valuable benefits, the apprehension of
change, and. the feeling of distress, give rise to involuntary exclamations, to
gestures, and to modifications of the features. Thus a foundation is laid in
human nature for the outward signs of devotion, whether they consist in words
or in postures of the body. When the Scripture commands us to bow down
and kneel before God, and to " lift our eyes and our hands" to his oracle, to
"make known our requests" to him in words, and "to call upon his name,"
" to cry with a loud voice," and "to praise him in songs," it merely calls upon
us, in our intercourse with him, to give scope to propensities or tendencies of
our nature, which are called forth on other occasions, when our sentiments and
feelings are powerfully excited. Religion does not consist solely in silent
meditation. It demands the service of the whole man; and there are moments .
when the tongue must be employed to give utterance to the varied affections
of the heart.
The subject to which I purpose now to direct your attention is Prayer. It
may be strictly defined to be the supplicatory address of a creature to his
Creator, in which he humbly entreats him to confer some blessing, to remove
some present evil, or to defend him from future danger, which he has reason to
fear. It is usually understood, however, with greater latitude; and compre
hends, according to the definition of our Church, petition, confession, and
thanksgiving, to which may be added adoration.*
Adoration is the devout celebration of the perfections of God, and of his
works, in which they are displayed. It is incumbent upon us to admire the
transcendent excellence of his character, to acknowledge him as the first and
the greatest of all beings, and to record to his honour the wonderful manifesta
tions of himself which he has made in creation, providence, and redemption.
The Scriptures are full of examples which it would be endless to cite: " O Lord
my God, thou art very great: thou art clothed with honour and majesty; who
coverest thyself with light as with a garment; who stretchest out the heavens
like a curtain."! We, indeed, can add nothing to his glory and felicity, nor,
in our highest elevation, can we think of him in a manner at all worthy of his
greatness; but sentiments of reverence and admiration necessarily arise in the
mind which contemplates him, and adoration is the tribute which we owe to
the Author of our existence, who has revealed himself to our eyes. This act
of devotion is expressed by praising and blessing God. We bless him, or
pronounce him to be blessed, in whom there is an assemblage of every thing
great, and good, and lovely, and who, independent of his creatures, possesses
all his resources in himself; and we praise him as the model of perfection, the
eternal source of life, and beauty, and felicity, the incomparable One, before
whom the universe is less than nothing, and vanity: " Of him, and through
him, and to him, are all things : to whom be glory for ever. Amen."
Thanksgiving is the expression of our gratitude for the favours which we have
received from him. They are bestowed without the expectation of a recom
pense; and, indeed, as he stands in need of nothing, so we have nothing to
give; but nature itself dictates, and religion demands, that we should entertain
a lively sense of his goodness, and should give utterance to our feelings on ap
propriate occasions. Devout men of former times have set us an example:
"'Bless the Lord, 0 my soul," says the Psalmist, " and all that is within me,
bless his holy name. Bless the Lord, O my soul, and forget not all his bene
fits: who forgiveth all thine iniquities; who healeth all thy diseases; who re
deemed! thy life from destruction; who crowneth thee with loving-kindness
and tender mercies."! Thanksgivings naturally are associated with petitions;
* Larger Cat. Q. 178. Shorter Cat. Q. 98. * Ps. civ. 1, 2. i Ps. ciii. 1—4.

PRAYER. 425
for it is impossible, when we present ourselves before a benefactor to solicit him
tp befriend us again, not to recall former tokens of his kindness; and we shall
have the surer hope of success in our new application, when we show that we
have been duly impressed by the past. We find the Apostle Paul repeatedly
mingling thanksgivings with his prayers.
Confession is the acknowledgment of our sins to God, whom we have of
fended. It is the natural expression of genuine repentance, which so affects us
with a sense of our baseness and demerit, that we cannot refrain from accusing
and condemning ourselves. With many of our sins, our fellow-men have
nothing to do; and if they are secret, we are under no obligation to publish them.
They have no right to call us to account, and no power to pardon us. God
knows them all; and we confess them to him, not to give him information, but
to own our guilt, to abase ourselves in his presence, to glorify his holiness and
justice, and to signify that we are worthy of punishment, and hope to be for
given and restored to favour only through his mercy. Of this description was
the prayer of David: " Have mercy upon me, O God, according to thy loving-
kindness; according unto the multitude of thy tender mercies, blot out my
transgressions. For I acknowledge my transgressions, and my sin is ever
before me. Against thee, thee only, have I sinned, and done this evil in thy
sight; that thou mightest be justified when thou speakest, and be clear when
thou judgest."* The prayer of the Pharisee was rejected, because it consisted
of thanksgiving alone; the formal, hypocritical thanksgiving of a man who
gloried in his fancied superiority to others, but for the sake of decorum paid a
passing compliment to God for having helped him to attain this pre-eminence:
" God, I thank thee, that I am not as other men are."!
Petition is the request of some favours from God. I have already observed
that prayer, in the proper sense of the word, consists in petition alone. We
ask blessings from God, because he is the sole fountain of good; and we ask
Dlessings of every kind, because they are all at his disposal. " Every good
gift, and every perfect gift, is from above, and cometh down from the Father of
lights, with whom there is no variableness, neither shadow of turning."! Our
state of constant dependence and constant want, renders it necessary that we
should be always presenting petitions. We have no permanent source of
supply at our command, and even what we possess we cannot call our own.
He who has received grace, should pray that it may be continued and increas
ed; he who possesses a competent portion of this world's goods, should still
pray for his daily bread, because, without the Divine blessing, his riches will
make to themselves wings, and fly away as an eagle towards heaven; his food
will not nourish, and his garments will not warm him.
Prayer should be addressed to God alone: " Thou shalt worship the Lord
thy God, and him only shalt thou serve. "§ Nothing can be more explicit than
this declaration, which should have precluded, among those who acknowledge
the Divine authority of the Scriptures, all deviations from the path of duty so
clearly marked out in them. It is sufficient to justify us in rejecting the
worship which is given in the Church of Rome to saints and angels, and in
pronouncing it to be idolatrous. As the statute is express, so the reasons on
which it is founded are obvious.
First, God alone can hear all our requests. He is present with us wherever
we are, and not only listens to our words, but understands our thoughts and the
desires of our hearts. In vain should we address ourselves to a being, with
respect to whom we were in doubt whether our voice could reach him, and he'
were able to look beyond the exterior, and to judge of our sincerity. This
consideration alone demonstrates the folly, as well as the impiety, of address
ing prayers to creatures. High as is the rank of glorified spirits,and great as is
* Ps. Ii. 1, 3, 4. * Luke xviii. 11. i James i. 17. § Matth. iv. 10.
Vol. IL— 54. 2n2

426 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
the enlargement of their powers, we have no authentic information that they
are acquainted with the affairs of men upon the earth. It is not improbable
that, except so far as God may be pleased to make discoveries to them for
particular purposes, they are ignorant of our affairs; and to suppose them to
know all things, and especially to know the heart, would be to suppose them to
be gods. The ironical words of Elijah to the priests of Baal, may be address
ed with the utmost propriety to the man who pray3 to a saint: " Cry aloud,
for either he is talking, or he is pursuing, or peradventure he sleepeth, and
must be awaked."* But all things are " naked and manifest to him with
whom we have to do;" and we pray to him, because we are assured that Iris
ear is always open to our cry. Besides the simple knowledge of our requests,
his unerring wisdom can decide upon every case which comes under his no
tice. None of those mistakes will happen, which result from the short-sighted
benevolence of human benefactors; he perceives what will be for our good, and
what would be prejudicial to us, and we may implicitly resign ourselves to his
disposal. Secondly, God alone can grant our requests. There is nothing at the abso
lute disposal of creatures. As there are many things which they cannot do at
all, so those things which are understood to lie within the sphere of their
ability, they can do only when God permits, and assists them by his provi
dence or grace. Why then should we apply to saints, or even to angels, who
are dependent as well as we, and, although superior to us, are subject to simi
lar restraints? An angel, could not deliver us from death, for he does not hold
the keys of the grave and the invisible world; an angel could not pardon our
sins, for he is not the Supreme Lawgiver, and the dispenser of mercy. A
saint, a glorified saint, has no grace to communicate to us, for he has not more
than he needs for himself; he could not, by his own power, relieve us for a
single moment from pain, or procure for us a draught of water in the parched
and thirsty wilderness. To the worshippers of such beings we may apply the
words of the prophet, " They have no knowledge that pray unto a god that
cannot save;"! and we may add, that they would not save although they could,
for the blessed inhabitants of heaven are too zealous for the Divine glory, to
appropriate any part of it to themselves, or to sympathize with the impious
men who attempt to raise them to an equal rank with the Most High. To him
the earth belongs, and the fulness thereof; the heaven also is his, with all its
treasures, and what good thing can his creatures ask which he is not able to
bestow? " My God shall supply all your need, according to his riches in
glory by Christ Jesus."! ^e eome, in prayer, to a fountain which is pour
ing out a copious and overflowing stream of blessings, and yet is always full.
As withholding doth not enrich, so giving doth not impoverish him; and we
have no reason, therefore, to fear lest our frequent demands should exhaust his
beneficence, or our importunity, should displease him. The benevolence of
creatures may be restrained by the apprehension that, by giving much to others,
they shall not have enough for themselves; but God is all sufficient, and his
favour is never solicited in vain.
This leads me to remark, in the third place, that God is willing to grant our
requests. Prayer proceeds upon the idea of the benevolence of his nature.
Were we to conceive of him as a malevolent or a selfish Being; were we to
imagine even that he is indifferent, or that he would deem it beneath his dig
nity to take notice of such insignificant creatures and their petty affairs, there
would be no inducement to present our petitions to him, and our labour would
be bestowed in vain. On such views of the Deity, the Epicureans pronounced
all religion to be vain; and some modern philosophers place him at such a dis
tance from men, that every tie which seemed to unite them is broken; and shut
• 1 Kings xviii. 27. + Isa.xlv. 20. i Phil. iv. 19.

PRAYER. 427
up in the mysteriousness of his essence, he is only an object of uninteresting
speculation. The Divine Being is communicative, not however necessarily, as
the sun gives out his rays, or the fountain its streams, for then the universe
should have existed from eternity, and all its inhabitants would be happy, and
happy in the highest degree. But there is a principle in God which disposes
him to diffuse felicity, according to the dictates of his wisdom, and in accord
ance with his other perfections; and in this principle originated the creation of
heaven and earth, and the dispensations of providence and grace. It is the
knowledge of this feature in the Divine character, which encourages us to pre
sent our supplications. He is good, and does good, and for this reason we
pray to him. And surely, when we reflect upon the infinite fulness of God,
to which the goodness of the most perfect creature bears a less proportion than
a drop bears to all the waters on the surface and in the bowels of the globe; and
upon his willingness to exercise it, which the Scriptures labour to express by
the selection of a variety of terms, calling it his love, grace, mercy, good
pleasure, and compassion; we may say of those who address their prayers to
the angels or the saints, in the words of God concerning the Israelites, who
transferred their homage from him to the gods of the surrounding nations,
" My people have committed two evils : they have forsaken the fountain of
living waters, and hewed them out cisterns, broken cisterns that can hold no
water."* It were easy to show that all the other parts of prayer, when taken in its
most extensive sense, are founded on the character and perfections of God;
adoration on his transcendent excellence and unrivalled greatness; thanksgiving
on the numerous and valuable benefits which he confers; confession on the re
lation in which he stands to us, as our offended Maker and Judge. But I have
confined myself to prayer, properly so called, or petition; and in this light it
will be viewed, in what I have farther to say upon the subject.
The reasons which have been now stated, hold out encouragement to pray,
and prove that our prayers should be addressed to God alone. But in conse
quence of the situation in which we are placed as sinful creatures, something
further is necessary to be known with' respect to the object of worship.
The conclusions which innocent beings may legitimately deduce from his char
acter, are not applicable to the case of the guilty; who, if they reasoned justly,
would infer that from his goodness they have nothing to expect, and that his
perfect knowledge supplies the evidence on which his power will be justly ex
erted in subjecting them to punishment. The criminal may venture to solicit
the favour of his judge; but what would be the foundation of his hope, if there
were no indication that he is mercifully disposed ?
The prayers which sinners offer up to God are founded, or should be found
ed, on the dispensation of grace. The important question whether God is
placable, upon which the religion of the guilty depends, is answered by the
gospel, which declares that he is not only willing to be appeased, but that he is
actually reconciled to us by the atonement of his Son. The obstacle to the
reception of fallen men, and the communication of blessings to them, is re
moved. The demands of justice have been satisfied; the law which they had
broken, has been honoured by the fulfilment of its precepts, and the estab
lishment of its authority; and consistently with the holiness and righteousness
of his character and administration, God may extend his favour to those who
in themselves deserved condemnation and wrath. Spiritual and heavenly bless
ings have been obtained for them, and exhibited in the promises; and these are
ratified with the blood of our Saviour. Hence you perceive, that all our prayers
should have a respect to his mediation. God should be contemplated as
manifested in him, and the displays of his perfections in creation and provi-
* Jer. ii. 13.

428 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
dence can give encouragement to us, only when they are viewed in connexion
with the work of redemption, in which they assume an aspect of benevolence
to man, and are engaged, if I may speak so, to co-operate for our good. The
Maker of heaven and earth will appear to the person who is apprised of his
natural condition, to be an object of confidence and hope, only when he is con
sidered at the same time as the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, and
in him the Father of mercies, and the God of all grace and consolation. The
mediation of Christ furnishes the sole ground on which we can expect success;
it supplies the arguments with which we should enforce our petitions; and
when we do receive a favourable answer, it is granted in consideration, not of
our sincerity and fervour, but of his merit and intercession. Hence you per
ceive for what reason our Saviour has commanded us to ask all things in his
name, and also when we do comply with this injunction. The mere mention
of his name is not sufficient; for it is introduced into many a prayer, which
breathes a spirit the most adverse to the Gospel, into the prayers of the self-right
eous, who trust much more to themselves than to him. They alone pray in
his name, who, fully convinced of their own unworthiness, depend on him
alone for acceptance. " We are the circumcision, who worship God in the
Spirit, rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh."* There
is then an essential difference between the prayers of a Christian, and those of
the professor of any other religion. The latter addresses God as the Creator; but
the former as the Redeemer of the human race. Both may appeal to the divine
mercy; but the one contemplates it under the vague and general notion of be
nevolence awakened by the spectacle of misery, leaving the idea of justice or
moral rectitude out of sight; while the other fixes his attention upon the spe
cific manifestation of it in harmony with all the attributes of the Deity. The
Christian approaches God by an intercessor, whose merits will secure the ac
ceptance of his requests; but the Mahometan and the philosopher appears for
himself, and trusts that the naked representation of his case will prevail upon
the Almighty to regard him with a propitious eye. We are not left in doubt
which of these modes of prayer is pleasing to God, and will draw down his
blessing upon us. "I am the way, the truth, and the life, and no man cometh
unto the Father but by me."!
As God is revealed to us in a plurality of persons, when we say that he is the
object of prayer, we must be understood to mean, that prayer should be ad
dressed to each of those persons. A title to religious worship is not peculiar
to any of them, but is common to them all. There is the same ground of
honour in each, namely, the possession of the divine essence and perfections.
The Father is the first in order; but we must not add with some, in dignity
also, lest we destroy the equality and undeify the other persons of the Trin
ity. There is no perfection in the Father, which is not also in the Son and
in the Poly Ghost. Examples of religious worship addressed to them as well
as to the Father occur in the Scriptures, which are the standard of our faith and
practice. In his last moments, the blessed martyr Stephen prayed to Jesus
Christ, whom he saw standing at the right hand of God: " Lord Jesus, receive
my spirit."! Equal honour is given to the Holy Ghost. He is understood
to be signified by the seven Spirits before the throne, to whom John prayed
for grace to the churches, § as well as the eternal Father, and his Son the only-
begotten from the dead, and we continue to pray to him in our public assem
blies, when in the language of an Apostle, we say, " The grace of the Lord
Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be
with you. Amen."ll Thus we have a full warrant to call upon any of* the
sacred persons of the Godhead. They are all present to hear and to help us;
• Phil. iii. 3. * John xiv. 6. i Acts vii. 69.
§ Rev. i. 4, 12 Cor. xiii. 14.

PRAYER. 429
and the part which each sustains in the economy of redemption, holds out the
highest encouragement to make known our requests to him. AVe may with all
confidence draw near to the Father who loved us, to the Son who died for us
and to the Spirit who sanctifies and comforts us.
But the ordinary mode of worship, which is established by the Christian
dispensation, is to address the Father, in the name of the Son, and by the as
sistance of the Holy Ghost: and it is pointed out by the Apostle in the follow
ing words. " Through him," that is, Christ, " we both have access by one
Spirit unto the Father."* To the Father a place of eminence and dignity is
assigned in redemption. He is, if I may express myself so, the representative
of the Godhead, who asserts its rights, and demands satisfaction to its justice;
and hence, although all the persons were equally dishonoured by the sins
of men, and the scheme of salvation originated in their common consent,
it was his anger which the sacrifice of the cross was offered to avert, and it is
his favour which we are directed to implore. The love of the divine nature is
manifested and exercised towards us in the person of the Father. On this
account, although not to the exclusion of the other persons, — who, as we have
seen, may be directly addressed, — he is the object of those devotional duties,
in which the feelings excited in our souls by the contemplation and experience
of divine goodness are expressed. In him the infinite glory, the unbounded
perfection, the transcendent benevolence of the Godhead, are manifested; and
we look to him as our refuge, and our strength, and our present help in trouble.
Through Christ we believe in God, who raised him from the dead. Christ
was constituted the way, the truth, and the life, that we might come to the
Father; his blood was shed that we might have boldness to enter into the
holiest of all. Since then it appears from the New Testament, and from the
remarks which have been made, that the Father is the ordinary object of
Christian worship, it will be proper to inquire distinctly in what light he should
be viewed when we pray to him.
First, We must beware of considering him as alone, or as exclusively en
titled to our worship, and should remember that the pre-eminence which is
implied in his being the peculiar object of our prayers, is merely economical.
Even when we address the Father, we do not give honour to him alone. ' As
the Divine nature which is in him is also in the Son and the Spirit, in wor
shipping him we worship the whole Trinity. We worship God, and each of
these persons is God. In consequence of the essential union, although one of
the persons may be immediately in the contemplation of the mind, we cannot
divide the honour so as to withhold it from another; and, besides, as the Father
is the representative of the Godhead, the glory which terminates in the first
instance upon him, redounds to the Son and the Spirit. We honour them in
the Father, with whom they are one. This reasoning is justified by our
Lord's express declaration: " He that hath seen me, hath seen the Father."!
Secondly, It is evident from what has been already said, that we must con
sider him as reconciled. In this light the gospel reveals him as the object of
prayer. The majesty, and power, and moral purity of the mysterious Being
who presides over nature and pervades all space, are calculated to overwhelm
us with awe and terror; but the mild glory of mercy shining in the face of Jesus
Christ, revives and comforts the amazed and trembling soul. " There is for
giveness with thee, that thou mayest be feared."
Lastly, We should consider him as our Father; and in this relation believers
are authorized to claim him, in consequence of his relation to their Savioui.
" I ascend to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God."! When
our Lord taught his disciples to pray, he directed them to begin with saying,
" Our Father which art in heaven." This character, which he has conde-
* Eph. ii. 18. * John xiv. 9. i Ib. xx. 17.

430 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
scended to assume, reminds us of the temper of mind with which we should
approach the throne of heaven; not as slaves, who are afraid to utter their re
quests before a haughty and unfeeling master; nor as criminals, trembling in
the presence of a judge who has their life at his disposal; but as children con
fident of the affection of their parent, with the language of faith in our mouths,
and the expectation of grace in our hearts. The name of Father awakens
every pleasing emotion. Will he not lend an ear to our requests, although
presented with much unworthiness ? Will not his compassion prompt him to
relieve our distress ? Will not his hand bestow all the blessings which we
need ? Christians should reflect, that they are speaking to a Father whose
heart is more tender than that of the most affectionate earthly parent, from
whose ample stores they may expect the supply of all their wants, and to
whose all-wise disposal they may resign themselves without fear.
In speaking of the object of worship, I have shown that his essential attri
butes, his dispensations, and the character of a Father which he has assumed,
lay a foundation for the duty of prayer, and hold out encouragement to engage
in it. But the same subject is viewed in different lights, according to the dif
ferent states of mind in individuals, the associations which they have formed,
the dispositions which predominate, and the objects which they have in view.
Hence, we find men not only contending about principles, but sometimes draw
ing from the same principle the most opposite inferences. A striking exam
ple is furnished by the different conclusions at which men have arrived re
specting the connexion between the character of God and the duty of prayer.
While we have endeavoured to prove that his character authorizes and encour
ages the duty, others have inferred that it is no duty at all, and have supported
the assertion by an appeal to the same grounds on which our reasoning is
founded. Since God knows our wants, it can serve no purpose to tell him of
them, as if he needed information; and if he is a Being of infinite benevolence,
there is no occasion to make use of entreaties, and to fill our mouths with ar
guments; because his own nature will undoubtedly prompt him to promote
the happiness of his creatures. There is another argument against prayer,
derived from the wisdom and immutability of God. As he is an infallible judge
of what is proper to be done, he surely will do it whether we ask him or not;
and if he has determined that it is not proper, yain and presumptuous is the
hope that we shall prevail upon him to alter his purpose by our importunity.
In answer to these objections, I would observe, that although prayer is cer
tainly not necessary to give information to God, yet it does not follow from this
concession that it is superfluous, because there may be other reasons of great
importance for which it is required. It may be enjoined as the means of im
pressing our own minds more deeply with a sense of our wants, and of bringing
them into that state in which alone it is proper that blessings should be be
stowed upon us. It may be enjoined, too, to effect us more strongly with a
feeling of our dependence upon God, and to express that feeling to others who
witness our prayers, with a view to convince them and ourselves, that the good
things which we obtain do not come to us by chance, but by his appointment
and agency. To suppose that his infinite goodness will prompt him to sup
ply our wants without any solicitation on our part, is a hasty inference from a
partial view of his character, and is contrary to the analogy of his general admin
istration. The supposition proceeds upon the idea, that benevolence is the only
attribute of his nature, and that he is instinctively and necessarily impelled by
it to communicate himself, as the sun necessarily gives light, or a fountain
pours out its contents. But as God is possessed of other perfections, there
may be moral restraints upon his benevolence; there may be reasons why it
should not be exercised indiscriminately, and why the supplications of his
creatures should precede the distribution of his gifts. The argument proves

PRAYER. 431
nothing, by proving too mucn; for if we infer from his benevolence that there
is no necessity for prayer we mighi also infer that there is no necessity for
means of any kind, and tnat an- our wants will be supplied without iabour. God,
however, has not ordained tnat the earth should spontaneously, yield its fruits,
but has made its productions tne reward of cultivation; and it is therefore con
formable to the order of inings that men should first ask, and then receive.
The argument from tne wisdom of God, which, it is said, will lead him to do
what is fit without being asKea, establishes the very point which it is intended
to disprove. There art «i<w things, no doubt, which will advance his glory,
and which he will therelore do independently of us; but the point now under
consideration, is the communication of blessings to individuals, and the question
is, Whether it would be proper to bestow favours upon them without prayer?
We answer, that it worna not be proper, because it would tend to cherish a
spirit of impiety, to dissolve the moral relation of man to his Maker, to en
courage the neglect of mm, which is too natural, and the ingratitude which we
so often display amidst tne most abundant tokens of his goodness. Would it
be proper that a guilty man should be pardoned, who will not be at pains to
implore the mercy of nis sovereign? or that Divine grace should help and com
fort us, while we are too indifferent to request its assistance? To talk of
wisdom doing what is fit to be done, as a reason why prayer should be re
strained, is to use words wnich either mean nothing, or lead to a conclusion ex
actly the reverse of that wnich is deduced from them. God will do what is
worthy of himself; but it would not be worthy of him to adopt a mode of
procedure which wouid terminate in the extinction of religious sentiments.
We acknowledge that God is immutable, and therefore acknowledge that it
would be vain to hope that we shall change his purpose by our entreaties.
Our prayers are offered up with no such design. We do not conceive that
there is any decree wnich must be reversed before they can be answered. If
there is any case in which it is uncertain whether our wishes are in unison
with the will of God, as when we pray for the recovery of others from sick
ness, our petitions are presented with this reservation. In other cases, we
assume, upon the authority of his word, that he is ready to bestow blessings
upon us, and only waits till we have made our humble and earnest request.
We ask them with confidence, because we know that ne is willing to give
them to those who ask in faith. We do not call upon God to alter the estab
lished order of his administration, but to act conformably to it; and this is the
order, as we are informed by the highest authority: " Ask, ana it shall be given
you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you."* Now,
here is nothing to be changed, no new inclination to be excited in the object
of worship. It is agreeable to his character and his purpose to attend to the
supplications of men, for he is described in his own word as the Hearer of
prayer. Whatever false notions the ignorant may entertain of God, as if he
resembled a man, whose judgment may be convinced by arguments, and whose
affection may be gained over to those whom he has formerly regarded with
aversion; true Christians believe that he is of himself disposed to fulfil our de
sires. They do, indeed, expect that he will do something for them, in conse
quence of their prayers, which he would not have done if they had not prayed;
but they do not, therefore, consider him to be a changeable Being. To give
blessings when they are asked, which he would not have given if they had not
been asked, is not more a proof of mutability, than it is to crown with his
goodness a cultivated field, which would have yielded nothing for the nourish
ment of men, if it had not oeen ploughed and sown. Prayer, then, is not an
attempt to prevail upon the Almighty to alter his plan; but it either supposes
or produces in us *hr.i itate of mind which his wisdom requires as a prepara-
* Matth. vii. 7.

432 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE :
tion for the reception of his favours. And certainly it does not destroy or di
minish the freeness of Divine mercies, that they must be sought before they
can be obtained. Who would call in question the benevolence of the man who,
was disposed to assist every person who applied to him?
Thus, it appears that the objections urged against prayer have no force, and
are as little founded on reason as in Scripture. They have been suggested by
the Spirit of irreligion, which labours to estrange man from his Maker, and says
to the Almighty, " Depart from us, for we desire not the knowledge of thy
ways." The rule of prayer is the word of God. Experience, indeed, makes us ac
quainted with our wants; but the information which we derive from it, relates
chiefly to the necessities of the body, and of the present life. The wants of
the soul are little felt, till the mind is enlightened, and the conscience is awa
kened by the truths of revelation. It is only in its light that we see ourselves
to be ignorant, guilty, polluted, miserable, and helpless, when left to our own
resources and the assistance of our fellow-creatures. A sense of need is an
indispensable pre-requisite to prayer; but it still remains to ascertain whether
God is willing to relieve us, and to what extent we may expect his goodness
to be exercised. It is evident that, on this subject, we can obtain satisfactory
information only from himself, and that without an express manifestation of
his good will, we could have no sure ground to go upon in our reauests. We
might ask what he has no intention to bestow, and neglect what he is ready to
give. " The whole word of God is of use to direct us in prayer;" its doctrines
exhibiting the privileges which he confers upon believers; its precepts enjoin
ing duties which only his grace can enable us to perform; its histories relating
the blessings which men in former ages have obtained; its threatenings denounc
ing evils from which no arm but his own can deliver us; its promises holding
out to us the good things prepared for those who seek him; and the prayers of
the saints being recorded as patterns to us, when we are placed in similar cir
cumstances. It is of the utmost importance to attend to this rule in our supplications. In
reference to this subject, we may say that a man can receive nothing except it
be given him from above; or, in other words, has no ground to expect any
blessing from God, unless there be a warrant for asking it in his word. The
prayers of ungodly men, for they sometimes pray, are not regulated by this
standard, but by the suggestions of imagination, and the desires of their hearts.
Give us riches, they say, give us honours, give us long life, give us something
to gratify our appetites, our ambition, our avarice. Even if they should happen
to present their petitions for blessings which God has promised, they have no
respect to his wisdom and goodness, as pledged in his faithful word, but are
impelled solely by their eager wishes to obtain what will contribute to improve
their condition. But we are not permitted to assail his throne with our crude
and random petitions. The spirit, who "makes intercession for the saints,"
enables them to intercede for themselves, " according to the will of God."*
.•lis grace is the source of supply; and it therefore becomes our duty to conform
cur requests to the rule or measure of distribution established by himself. We
rjoceed safely, and may feel the utmost confidence, when we found our peti
tions upon Scripture; for we are certain that, in this case, we are doing what
is agreeable to God, and there is a perfect harmony between his will and our
i.esires. But, as soon as we permit our own views of expedience and advan
tage to dictate, we must be perplexed with doubt and the fear of offending, un
less all misgivings of mind be precluded by profound ignorance, and complete
moral insensibility. Then only can we pray in faith, when we have a Divine
declaration or promise as the ground of our petition, and can address God in
* Rom. viii. 27

PRAYER. 433
the words of the holy Psalmist: " And now, O Lord God, the word that thou
hast spoken concerning thy servant, and concerning his house, establish it for
ever, and do as thou hast said."*
The word of God is our directory in prayer. It holds out encouragement
to us to pray for all blessings; for he says, " Be careful for nothing; but in every
thing, by prayer and supplication, with thanksgiving, let your requests be made
known unto God. And the peace of God, which passeth all understanding,
shall keep your hearts and minds through Jesus Christ."! Nothing really
necessary to us can be pointed out, which is not contained in some declaration
or promise. The blessings for which we should pray may be distributed into
two classes, temporal and spiritual. Spiritual blessings are, the pardon of sin,
peace with God, the gift of the Holy Spirit, the continual influences of grace,
the Divine presence in the ordinances of religion, assistance in duties and
temptations, comfort in affliction and its salutary fruits, hope in death, and a
happy eternity. The incaleulable value of these blessings should give them
the first place in our prayers, and excite our fervent and importunate desires;
and that man is destitute of the spirit of devotion, who looks upon them as se
condary things, and is more remiss in asking them than in his petitions for
temporal blessings. With respect to the latter, it may be observed, that we
have no authority to seek great things for ourselves. On this subject, we
are altogether disqualified to judge, and should keep a strict watch upon our
desires, which are naturally immoderate, and would prompt us to solicit
what it might not be for our good to possess, or for the glory of God to bestow.
We ought to content ourselves with praying for a competent portion, and should
leave its amount to be determined by Divine wisdom. We may pray for
health, and the continuance of life, etnd other worldly enjoyments; but, at the
same time, we should cultivate a submissive temper, which will acquiesce in
the event without a murmur. Our Saviour has given us directions in the foi- .
lowing words: "Seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness, and
all these things shall be added unto you."! ^ne ^rst care °f every man should
be to obtain an interest in the salvation of Christ, and God will provide for his
temporal wants. But our Saviour is not to be understood as forbidding us to
pray for temporal blessings, either in this passage, or in the preceding verses,
where he gives this admonition to his disciples, "Therefore, take no thought,
saying, What shall we eat? or, What shall we drink? or, Wherewithal shall
we be clothed? For after all these things do the Gentiles seek; for your
heavenly Father knoweth that ye have need of all these things. "§ The know
ledge of our heavenly Father is not adduced as a reason why we should not
pray for food and raiment, nor is this the design of the promise, that they shall
be given, but the intention of both is to preserve his followers from anxiety,
and fear, and distrust. His injunctions in one place, must be explained con
sistently with those in another; and while he assures such as believe in him,
that those things which are needful for the body shall not be withheld from
them, he shows it to be their duty to make them the subject of their petitions
to God, by teaching them to say, " Give us this day our daily bread."
* 2 Sam. vii. 25. * Phil. iv. 6, 7. i Matth. vi. 33. § Ib. 31, 32.
Vol. IL— -55. • 2 O

434 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
LECTURE XCIV.
ON PRAYER.
On Prayer for others. — Public Prayer. — Private Prayer. — Secret Prayer. — Ejaculatory Pray
er. — Seasons of Prayer. — Forms of Prayer Objectionable. — Acceptable Prayer. — Answer
to Prayer.
In the preceding lecture, I explained the nature of prayer, showed that it
should be addressed to God alone, removed some objections against it, pointed
out the rule, and specified the blessings for which we should present our pe
titions. It is acknowledged that our prayers should not be confined to ourselves, but
that there are others in whose behalf we should offer up our supplications to
God. Who these are, we learn from the following words: "I exhort there
fore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks,
be made for all men; for kings, and for all that are in authority, that we may lead
a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty."* While it is evident
from Scripture, and from the dictates of nature, that certain individuals, related
to us by the ties of blood, and friendship, and religion, should have a particular
place in our prayers, it appears from the words now quoted, that men of every
nation, and of every degree, should be remembered by us when we draw near
to the throne of grace. Our hearts, like our religion, should be expanded to
embrace the whole family of mankind.
It is an inference from the command to pray for ourselves and others, that
there is some efficacy in prayer. It is not only an expression of our desires,
but a mean of obtaining the divine blessing. It is improper, therefore, to con
sider it as solely intended for our personal improvement, by awakening devout
sentiments and feelings, and giving scope for the exercise of Christian tempers;
there is a connexion between it and the end proposed, similar to the connexion
between means and ends in the economy of nature. To encourage Christians to
pray for their afflicted brethren, the Apostle James says, that " the effectual fer
vent prayer of arighteous man availeth much;"! and confirms the assertion by the
example of Elijah, in answer to whose prayers, rain was first suspended and
afterwards given. If it should be thought that their case was singular and mi
raculous, I would refer you to the words of our Saviour which are addressed
to his disciples in general: " Ask and it shall be given yo.u, seek and ye shall
find, knock and it shall be opened unto you."! The efficacy which we as
cribe to prayer, does not resemble that which the heathens imagined to be in
certain words, by the repetition of which the aid-of invisible beings was obtain
ed; nor does it arise from any merit in the duty, which imposes an obligation
upon the Supreme Being to grant our request. It is the result of a free gra
cious constitution, by which God has engaged to bestow blessings upon those
who ask them in faith. Strictly, the efficacy of prayer proceeds from the
divine promise. We succeed in our supplications, because God has pledged
himself to attend to them; but they must precede the exercise of his goodness,
and no encouragement is given to us to expect any thing from him, if they are
withheld. When he promises blessings he says, " For these things will I be
inquired of by the house of Israel."§
The efficacy of prayer being ascertained, we are authorized to hope that our
supplications will be useful to others as well as to ourselves, and are encour
aged to intercede for them. We should be excited to the performance of the
• 1 Tim. ii. 1, 2. * James v. 16. i Matth. vii. 7. § Ezek. xxxvi. 37.

PRAYER. 435
duty, by reflecting that they as well as we are dependent upon God; that they
are subject to the same necessities, and infirmities, and distresses, which fall
to our lot; that they have wants which he only can supply, and sins which he
only can pardon; that they are actuated by the same desire for happiness
which we feel, are in danger of eternal perdition, being by nature children of
wrath, but are capable of heavenly bliss. If they pray for themselves, we
should unite our interest with theirs, if we have any interest with the object
of worship, that they may not fail of success; if, thoughtless and impious, they
are living without God in the world, they are the more the objects of our pity,
and we are the more loudly called to remember them because they are forgetful
of themselves. Our prayers will thus be a becoming expression of love to our
brethren of mankind; and among all the offices of kindness by which we should
show our love, there is none more decisive, and more fitted to accomplish the
end which we have in view, if we sincerely desire their welfare, than our
earnest recommendation of them to the favour and care of the Father of mercies.
In behalf of others, we should ask the same temporal and spiritual blessings
which we ask for ourselves. We should pray for the poor, that their wants
may be supplied; for the afflicted, that they may be restored to health, and fitted
by divine grace for life or death; for mourners, that they may be comforted; for
the oppressed, that they may be delivered. We should pray for the young,
that the seeds of piety may be sown in their hearts; for the old, that they may-
have wisdom to improve the short remainder of life, and to exhibit a salutary
example to their inferiors in years; for persons in the other stages of life, that
they may perform the duties of their stations, and fulfil the purpose of their
being. We should pray for those who are in sin, that they may be awakened
and converted; and for those who are in a state of grace, that their faith may
be strengthened, and that amidst difficulties and temptations, they may per
severe to the end. We should pray for magistrates, that they may be just,
and may rule over us in the fear of the Lord, and that under their protection
we may enjoy all the rights and privileges which belong to us as men and
Christians. We should pray for the ministers of religion, that they may be
faithful and zealous, and that their labours may be crowned with success; and
for the Christian people, that they may receive " with meekness the ingrafted
seed of the word," and walk in the ordinances and commandments of the Lord.
We should pray for the catholic church, that truth, and peace, and holiness
may flourish in it; that its limits may be extended till it comprehend all the
inhabited regions of the earth; and that the time may come when it shall be
said to it, " Arise, shine, for thy light is come, and the glory of the Lord hath
arisen upon thee." "Lift up thine eyes round about, and see; all they gather
themselves together, they come to thee; thy sons shall come from far, and
thy daughters shall be nursed at thy side."*
One exception however is mentioned by the Apostle John: " If any man
see his brother sin a sin which is not unto death, he shall ask, and he shall
give him life for them that sin not unto death. There is a sin unto death; 1 do
not say that he shall pray for it."! There is a degree of obscurity in these
words; but ,the sin unto death most probably is the sin against the Holy Ghost,,
which alone is pronounced to be unpardonable. Its irremissible nature is evi
dently the reason why prayer is forbidden for the person who is guilty of it.
It is extremely difficult to say in what it consists; and as Christians are divided
in their sentiments on this subject, and it is impossible to determine when a
person is chargeable with it, — if it was not confined, as some have thought, to
the age of miracles, — the exception stated by John is practically no exception
to us. We may pray for the greatest sinners, since, for aught that we can tell,
•Is. Ix. 1.4. *Uohnv. 16.

436 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE :
they are within the reach of mercy, and God may give them repentance to the
acknowledging of the truth.
Prayer may be distinguished into public, private, and secret.
Public prayer is that which is offered up in the church, or in any other place,
where many are assembled to observe the ordinances of religion; and it appears
from ancient records to have made a part of the service in the meetings of
Christians from the earliest times. It is an acknowledgment of God by those
who are present; an acknowledgment of their dependence upon him, of their
expectations from him, of their desire for his grace, by which only the institu
tions of religion will be rendered effectual. On such occasions one necessarily
speaks in the name of the rest, but all are understood to join in the petitions.
It is not the minister alone who prays, it is the congregation which addresses
God by his mouth; and every man should make the petitions his own by seri
ous attention to them, and by stirring up the sentiments and affections of which
they are expressive.
Private prayer is offered up in select associations, and particularly in fami
lies. Our Saviour has given an example in his prayers for his disciples; it is
implied in the accounts of good men, which we find in the Scriptures; and it
has been practised in all ages by the saints. The motive which excites a man
to pray for himself, will lead him also to pray for his family, and with them.
The relations in which they stand Lo one another give them a sort of individu
ality; as there are benefits which they all need, so there are mercies for which
they should be all thankful; and interwoven as their interests are, the good
which any of them obtains will be regarded as a common blessing. There is
no fear of God in that house, in which the exercises of devotion are unknown;
and it is worthy of observation, while the fact may seem strange, and is deeply
to be lamented, that it is only among professed Christians that private worship
is neglected, and that Mahometans and even Heathens act more consistently in
carrying their religion into the bosom of their families, and the ordinary trans
actions of life.
Secret prayer is offered up by an individual in some place of retirement.
Withdrawing from the world, and even from his most intimate friends, he con
verses with God alone. Seclusion is necessary to the collection of his
thoughts, and the full unrestrained expression of his desires. He has wants
which God alone can supply, and sorrows amidst which he alone can comfort
him; he needs counsel to direct him in his personal conduct, and assistance
under infirmities, the sense of which overwhelms him. Our Saviour has en
joined this duty upon us: " But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet,
and when thou hast shut the door, pray to thy Father which is in secret, and
thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly."* Secret prayer
is so characteristic of a Christian, that we may pronounce him to be a mere
pretender to the name who habitually neglects it, or contents himself with the
occasional and formal performance of the duty. When Ananias seemed to
doubt of the conversion of Paul, or at least hesitatedto commit himself to a
man of whom he had never heard before but in the character of a persecutor,
our Lord gave him this sign, "Behold, he prayeth."! This will be the con
stant effect of the grace of God in the soul of man. It will awaken feelings
which will irresistibly draw him to the throne of grace; and it will be as im
possible for him to live without prayer, as to live without his daily food. His
graces would decline; his spirits would sink; his activity would abate; his joy
would fail, as the fruits of the earth languish and wither in the want of rain.
Prayer brings down the Divine blessing, with all its precious attendants, light,
and peace, and strength, and hope.
I may add to these, ejaculatory prayer, or prayer not offered up on stated
* Matth. vi. 6. * Acts ix. 1 1.

PRAYER. 437
occasions, and in consequence of a previous purpose, but called forth by some
unexpected circumstance; prayer prompted by some unforseen perplexity
and danger, by something afflicting which we see or hear, by an unlooked
for deliverance, or by the sudden incursion of temptation. So natural, in
deed, is it to have recourse to God under strong momentary impressions,
that often they call upon him then, who at other times spend days and weeks
without ever bowing a knee; and in this impulse of the mind have originated
those exclamations or prayers, — that God would bless and preserve them, —
which are so frequently in the mouths of the profane. The ejaculations of
which I speak, are the effusions of a devout soul, which knows God, and loves
him, and spontaneously flees to him as its refuge in the season of need. As
sured that he is at hand, and that his ear is always open, it implores his favour,
and commits itself to his care. Hence, we perceive of how much importance
it is to cultivate a habit of piety, and to establish, if I may speak so, a fami
liar correspondence with him who compasses our path, and is acquainted with
all our ways; for occasions will often occur when our own resources will prove
insufficient, and no friend will be at hand to help, or when a friend could afford
us no effectual aid. How happy, in such a case, is he who is not confounded
and driven to despair, like the men of the world, but knows of an asylum to
which he may run, and, by the prayer of faith, throws himself into the arms
of almighty power and love !
The design of one of our Saviour's parables is to teach us, " that men should
pray always, and not faint."* And an Apostle exhorts Christians to " pray
always, with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit."! Such passages can
not be misunderstood. Uninterrupted prayer is impossible; both mind and
body would fail, if they we're not relieved by intervals of repose, and a
change of employment; and when devotion is prolonged beyond a reasonable
time, varying, no doubt, according to the circumstances of individuals, it dege
nerates into bodily exercise, the mere labour of the lips. The business allotted
to man in this world, comprehends a variety of duties which demand his at
tention, and will occupy a considerable portion of his time. Persecution first
drove Christians into deserts, and from this accident arose the practice which
afterwards led thousands to bury themselves in solitudes, and within the walls
of a cloister, where their days were spent in the offices of piety. But it is
superstition which has suggested the idea of superior sanctity, in thus abandon
ing the active duties of life; and had the voice of true religion been attended to,
it would have brought them back to the world, and prevailed upon them to
enter into the common relations of society, and conscientiously to perform the
duties arising from them. There are two tables of the law, and he only is a
perfect Christian, who makes both the rule of his conduct. Nothing is meant
by the exhortation to constant prayer, but that we should be frequently and
regularly engaged in it; that we should pray at all the stated times; that we
should comply with every call to it from Providence and our own feelings; that
we should cultivate a habit of devotion, and lift up our hearts to God, when we are
walking by the way, as well as when we are sitting in our houses; in company
as well as in solitude; in the midst of business, as well as in the hours sacred
to religion. When Cornelius is said to have " prayed to God alway,"! the
historian, by specifying the ninth hour, plainly signifies his meaning to be, that
the centurion regularly engaged in prayer at the hours which were observed by
the Jews.
By these remarks, I am naturally led to inquire what are the proper seasons
of prayer. The holy Psalmist speaks, in one place, of engaging in devotional
exercises seven times a-day;§ in another, of morning, evening, and noon;|| and
again he says, that it is a good thing to show forth the loving kindness of God
• Luke xviii. 1. * Eph. vi. 18 *Actsx.2. § Ps. cxix. 164. J Ib. Iv. 17
2o2

438 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GHACE:
in the morning, and his faithfulness every night.* Religion ought not to be
subjected to mechanical rules. Although it is enjoined by authority, yet its
exercises must be spontaneous, or they will not be acceptable to God; and
their multiplicity will not compensate for this defect. Yet it may be sub
jected to regulation, without interfering with its free and liberal spirit; and al- ^
though no attempt should be made to impose restraints upon a person whose
heart impels him to make frequent approaches to the throne of God, and no man
can decide for another in a matter which his own feelings alone can deter
mine; yet, we may say without hesitation, that there are two seasons which
seem to be pointed out by the hand of nature itself as peculiarly suitable, —
the morning and the evening. These, however, are not mentioned as the only
seasons, but as times at which there is a particular call to the duty; which have
been uniformly dedicated to a sacred use by the people of God; and which,
therefore, should not be permitted to pass without a solemn address to Him
who makes the sun know his time of rising and going down. There would be
no overstraining in considering the law which commanded the. Israelites to of
fer sacrifices in the morning and the evening, as intended to admonish us that
we should begin and end the day with our sacrifices of prayer and praise.
In the morning we have awaked from a refreshing sleep, and life has been,
as it were, restored to us with fresh vigour after the exhaustion caused by the
labours of the preceding day. As our situation evidently calls for praises to the
Author of our mercies, so it no less plainly points out the seasonableness of
prayer, in the view of the events of the day upon which we have entered.
There are duties to be performed, of great importance to ourselves and others,
and connected with the glory of God, by a failure in which we shall incur
guilt, and a train of consequences fatal to our peace and happiness. There
are temptations to be encountered, arising from our intercourse with the world,
against which our own vigilance is an insufficient defence, as they often assail
us in an imperceptible manner, and our hearts are too prone to give them a
favourable reception. We are exposed to danger at every step; and the <;alami-
ties which befall men in circumstances that give no warning of evil, are a
proof of our constant insecurity while we are not under the protection of
Providence. These considerations show that the morning, when we are about
to plunge into the busy perilous scene, is a season when we should solemnly
commit ourselves, and those with whom we are connected, to the care of the
Most High, who is near to them who call upon him in truth and sincerity.
The man who, by the prayer of faith, has obtained the protection of the Al
mighty, may walk forth with humble confidence; not trusting in his prayers,
but in Him to whom they were addressed, and assuring himself that no real
evil shall be permitted to befall him. " He shall cover thee with his feathers,
and under his wings shalt thou trust; his truth shall be thy shield and buckler."!
When the evening comes, there is a new call, not only to thanksgiving, but
also to confession and supplication. If we review the transactions of the day,
we shall not fail to perceive that we have been ungrateful for mercies, and negli
gent of duties; that we have offended in deed, and word, and, above all, in
thought; and our only refuge liom guilt and its consequences is in the Divine
mercy, through Jesus Christ. We are about to lie down upon our beds, and to
close our eyes in sleep, from which we may never awake. Is not this a sea
son to implore the favour of that Being into whose immediate presence death
will introduce us, and earnestly to entreat that we may be so prepared for the
awful event, that we shall find ourselves in that blessed world on which the
shades of night never descend 1 We are exposed to dangers by night as well
as by day. The storm may arise, and bury us under the ruins of our houses.
We may awake amidst flames frrvn which it is impossible to escape. The
* Ps. xcii. 2. * Ib. xci. 4.

PRAYER. 439
midnight robber may break into oui*'dwellings, and, to make sure of his prey,
may deprive us of life. What security have we for our preservation but the
providence of God ? How unavailing would our precautions be, if the Lord
himself did not. keep the house ! The fearlessness with which many lie down
and rise up, is the effect of thoughtlessness and insensibility. In calculating
chances, they appear to be in their favour, and the agency of God does not
enter into their reckoning. But rational, solid, imperturbable peace, can be
enjoyed only by the man who commits himself to the Shepherd of Israel, who
neither slumbers nor sleeps. " I will both lay me down in peace, and sleep :
for thou, Lord, only makest me dwell in safety."?'
The question, Whether forms of prayer should be used in the worship of
God ? has given rise to much controversy, particularly between the Church of
England and Dissenters. That they may be lawfully adopted by children,
and others who are incapable of praying without assistance, we do not deny;
but the subject of our present inquiry is, Whether a liturgy should be compo
sed and enjoined upon the ministers of religion in their public administrations,
and private Christians should be called upon to adhere to it in their families
and closets ? It is certain that no trace of this practice can be discovered in
the Apostolical church; and it has been satisfactorily shown, that, although
afterwards an order was established for the administration of the sacraments,
and in different places the prayers might bear a considerable resemblance to
one another in respect of their matter, prescribed forms were unknown for
several centuries. When Justin Martyr is describing the worship of the se
cond century, he says, " that the president or officiating minister offers up
prayers and thanksgiving — oar; Svva./j.is avt? — according to his ability;"! an ex
pression which would be unmeaning if he had read prayers from a book, as in
this case no mental ability is required, and it is only necessary that he should
use his eyes and his voice. Tertullian, in the same century, says, Sine moni-
tore quia de pectore oramus; " We pray without a monitor, because we pray
from the heart."!
We object to forms of prayer, on the ground that there is no warrant for
them in Scripture, and that they are not sanctioned by the example of the primi
tive church. We object to them, because they interfere with the office of the
Holy Spirit, who is sent not only to inspire us with devotional sentiments, but
also to suggest petitions; for this surely is implied in his " helping our infirmi
ties," " and making intercession for us with groanings which cannot be utter
ed. "i| And if we dispassionately reflect upon the subject, it will appear more
consonant to common sense, as well as to religion, that a person should be
allowed to express the feelings and desires which spontaneously arise in his
mind, than that he should be under the necessity of conforming them to a
standard prepared by another. Would it not be preposterous to confine a son
to a collection of written requests, from which he was never to deviate, ir. his
addresses to his Father ? This leads me to state farther, that we object to
forms of prayer, because they cannot be adapted to the endlessly-diversified
and ever-varying circumstances of the people of God, and must therefore prove
a painful and injurious restraint upon the liberty of spirit which the divine
promises encourage us to exercise. The minister must pray for nothing in
public, nor the private Christian in his family and closet, however urgent is
the demand for it, if he do not find it in his books. We object, once more,
to forms of prayer, on account of their tendency to produce coldness and list-
lessness in the offices of religion. The human mind needs to be kept awake;
and nothing is so much calculated to throw it into an inattentive, slumbering
¦ state, as the dulness of uniformity. The perpetual recurrence of the same
sounds, the accustomed transitions from one subject to another, and the unvaried
* Ps. iv. 8. * Apolog. Secund. i Apolog. c. 30. [ Rom. viii. 26.

440 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
length of the service, must create a monotonous state of mind, if not an ab
sence of thought, and convert prayer into a mere bodily exercise. The care
less and unvaried manner in which prayers are often read in the English
Church, proves too well that there is ground for this objection.
Yet the praise bestowed upon the liturgy of that church exceeds all bounds.
It is "an excellent liturgy," an "admirable liturgy," an " incomparable litur
gy," an " all but inspired liturgy." This extravagant language is quite in uni
son with the pretensions of that arrogant church, which like the Church ot
Rome, her prototype in pride, says, " I sit as a queen, and shall never see sor
row;" looking haughtily down upon us as hardly worthy to be accounted
Christians,, pronouncing our assemblies to be conventicles, and our minis
ters to be without ordination; and sometimes going so far as to exclude us
from any interest in the promises, and leaving us to what is called the un-
covenanted mercy of God. "Let another praise thee," says the wise man,
" and not thine own mouth; a stranger, and not thine own lips." If this won
derful liturgy be brought to the test of Scripture and sound reason, its vaunted
excellence will vanish as a dream of fancy. To say nothing of the supersti
tious rites which it inculcates, and the false doctrine which it teaches, whjle it
assumes in the burial service the salvation of all but self-murderers and excom
municated persons, and asserts the regeneration of all infants who are bap
tized, it has been justly charged with defects and redundancies; with omitting
some important petitions, and unnecessarily repeating others; with dealing in
generalities, without descending to particulars upon which the mind could fix;
confessing, for example, sin in general, without specifying particular sins; with
joining together petitions which have no kind of connexion; with prescrib
ing prayers which contain, perhaps, only a single petition, expressed in
two or three words, while the remaining space is filled up with a verbose
introduction and conclusion. A serious objection is the shortness of the
prayers. The longest is ended almost before you have time to bring your
mind into a proper frame for joining in it; and' some of them, consisting only
of a single sentence, are finished almost as soon as they are begun. Besides
the interruption which is thus given to devotional feelings, there is a want of
dignity, and of sense, in a collection of what may be called shreds and frag
ments of prayers. The Lord's prayer is sometimes introduced out of place,
or where no person can perceive any reason for using it; and it is brought for
ward so often, four or five times in the course of one service, as to have the
appearance of vain repetition, and to give the idea of children conning a task,
rather than of rational creatures worshipping God with the understanding. This
is that boasted liturgy which has been extolled with bombastic praise, and, in
comparison of which, the extemporaneous prayers of other churches are des
pised as vain babblings, or the incoherent effusions of enthusiasm. I have no
hesitation in saying, that, in those churches, prayers far superior are offered up
every Sabbath; and I have frequently heard a prayer poured out by a man of
God with the assistance of the Holy Ghost, which, in my judgment, was ot
more value than the whole of the liturgy. Let us be thankful that we stand
in no need of its proffered assistance, and that our devotion is not encumbered
and impeded by any such human imposition.
From the observations which have been already made, we can be at no loss
to determine what prayers are acceptable. It is evident that they are prayers
addressed to God alone, and not to any created being, however highly exalted;
that they are prayers offered up in the name of Christ, the only Mediator be
tween God and man; and that they are prayers regulated by the Scriptures, and
consisting solely in petitions for such blessings as God has promised to bestow.
I may add, that in prayer the understanding must be exercised, or it will not
be a rational service. If men repeat a number of words without knowing their

PRAYER. 441
meaning, or without reflecting upon their import; if they are ignorant or inatten
tive, they are guilty of mocking God, and instead of drawing down his blessing,
will incur his displeasure. And here we may take notice of the practice of praying
in an unknown tongue, when others are expected to join with us; a practice so
contrary to common sense, that not the shadow of an argument can be alleged for
it; and it rests solely upon the same authority which has instituted and cor
rupted the other ordinances of Christ, and established iniquity and absurdity by
law. Had there been no liturgy in the Church of Rome, her ministers would
pray in the languages of the countries in which they officiate; but the forms
of an infallible church are immutable, and her service is still performed in her
ancient language, which has ceased to be vernacular for a thousand years.
Prayers must be offered up in sincerity; for God regards not the words of the
mouth, but the desires of the heart, and holds in abhorrence those who present
to him hypocritical petitions. " This people draweth near to me with their
mouths, and honoureth me with their lips; but their hearts are far from me."*
They should be offered up with fervour of spirit, which is the fire that should
kindle our sacrifices. We would not grant a favour to a person who asked it
in so indifferent a manner, as to show that he was careless whether he obtained
it or not. Now God, who knows our hearts, will dismiss those without an
answer, whom he perceives to entertain no sense of the value of his blessings,
and upon whom therefore they would be thrown away. This qualification of
prayer is connected with importunity and perseverance; with importunity,
which consists in pressing our suit, and using arguments to enforce it; with
perseverance, which renews its supplications when disappointed, applies again
and again, and does not desist till such an answer is obtained as was given to
the Syrophenician woman, " 0 woman, great is thy faith; be it unto thee even
as thou wilt."!
We have already seen that there is an efficacy in prayer, or that, in conse
quence of the appointment and promise of God, it is effectual to obtain tempo
ral and spiritual blessings. There would be no motive to the duty if God
were inexorable, or if such an order was established, that the good things
which we need would come to us as a matter of course, without any effort on
our part to procure them. Where there is such an order or constitution of
things, all supplication is superseded. We do not pray that the sun may rise
the next morning, because his return is secured by the ordinance of heaven,
which will not be changed till the end of time; but we pray that we may again
open our eyes to behold his light. The one event will certainly happen; the
other will or will not take place according to the Divine determination. Pray
er is offered up in the expectation of an answer; and when it is the prayer of
faith, it is not presented in vain: " The eyes of the Lord are over the righte
ous, and his ears are open unto their prayers."! On this department of the
subject, let me request your attention to the following observations.
First, God sometimes returns an immediate answer to the prayers of his
people. In proof of this, many instances might be collected from the Scrip
tures. When the Israelites, in their flight from Egypt, were entangled by the
Red Sea in front, the mountains on either hand, and the host of Pharaoh be
hind them, the Lord said to Moses, who, in this distress, was pouring out his
prayer before him, Why standest thou, crying unto me? " Speak unto the
children of Israel, that they go forward;"§ and immediately the waters were
divided, and opened a passage to the opposite shore. When Elijah entreated
God to determine, by a visible interposition, the controversy between himself
and Baal, fire descended from heaven and consumed not only the sacrifice, but
also the stones of the altar.l! These are the words of God concerning his peo
* Matth. xv. 8. * Ib. 28. * 1 Pet iii. 12.
§ Exod. xiv. 15. | 1 Kings xviii. 38.
Vol. IL— 56.

442 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
pie: " They shall not labour in vain, nor bring forth for trouble; for they are
the seed of the blessed of the Lord, and their offspring with them. And it shall
come to pass, that before they call, I will answer, and while they are yet speak
ing, I will hear."* The idea suggested, is the promptitude of the answer.
While the petitions are yet upon their lips, and before that they have had time
to express all that they had conceived in their hearts, he will send down from
heaven the blessing which they desire. No sooner had the Apostles prayed
that " the Lord would grant unto his servants, that with all boldness they might
speak his word," than " the place was shaken where they were assembled to
gether, and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost,"! who inspired them
with heavenly eloquence and undaunted courage. God returns a speedy an
swer to the prayers of his people when the case is urgent, and delay would
prove injurious; and while he thus puts honour upon the duty of prayer, and
holds out encouragement to persevere in it, he furnishes a proof, by which all
should be convinced, that there is profit in serving the Lord. When an audi
ble answer had been returned from heaven to our Lord upon a certain occasion,
he said, " This voice came not because of me, but for your sakes."*
Secondly, Although God has heard the prayers of his people, yet he some
times delays to answer them. Whatever conclusion their impatient minds
may draw, their petitions are not rejected because the favour asked is not im
mediately conferred. David was convinced of this truth, as we see from his
exercise recorded in the hundred and thirtieth psalm: " Lord, hear my voice;
let thine ears be attentive to the voice of my supplications." Afterwards he
adds, "I wait for the Lord, my soul doth wait, and in his word do I hope.
My soul waiteth'for the Lord more than they that watch for the morning."§
This is the. language of expectation. He did not receive an immediate answer;
but he did not sink into despondency. He looked for the blessing, as the sick
man or the benighted traveller waits for the morning light, and supported him
self by the faithful promises of God, which were the foundation of his hope:
" Though the vision tarry," says the prophet, " wait for it, because it will
surely come, it will not tarry. "|| While God grants full liberty to his' people
to address him on every occasion, and promises that all their wants shall be
supplied, he does not permit them to dictate to him with respect to the times
and seasons of his interposition. His own wisdom, and not their anxiety, is
the rule of his procedure. They are incompetent judges, as they know little
more than their own feelings, and are unable to take a comprehensive view of
the relations and consequences of the Divine dispensations. It is enough to be
assured that God never turns away his ear from the prayer of faith, and that
nothing truly good shall be withheld from those who fear him. Perhaps they
^re not yet in a proper state of mind for the reception of the blessings which
they ask, not duly humbled by a sense of their unworthiness, and consequently
not prepared to estimate them according to their value, and to feel all that
warmth of gratitude which would lead to sincere and fervent thanksgiving.
The delay may serve the salutary purpose of awakening their dormant piety, or
of increasing its vigour and activity. It will teach them to live by faith, to
support themselves by dependence upon his promises, to serve him in hope,
instead of always being impelled by the actual experience of his goodness. It
will lead their thoughts more to God, and render their supplications more earn
est and importunate; and such is the constitution of human nature, that mer
cies which have been long sought, and sometimes despaired of, but at last
obtained, acquire in our eyes a double value, and are enjoyed with a keener
relish. For these and other reasons, there is sometimes a considerable interval
between the prayer and the answer, but none of those who wait upon God shall
* Is. Ixv. 23, 24. * Acts iv. 29, 31. i John xii. 30.
§ Ps. cxxx. 2, 5, 6. j Hab. ii. 3.

PRAYER. 443
be ashamed. The prayer was heard when it was presented; it was remem
bered, although the saint might have been tempted to exclaim, 'The Lord hath
forgotten me;' and when the proper season has arrived, a testimony of ihe Di
vine favour is given to convince them, that blessed are they who wait upon the
Lord. Thirdly, The prayer of faith is heard even when the blessing sought is
withheld, but another more expedient is bestowed. When the disciples, at
their last meeting with our Saviour, said to him, "Lord, wilt thou, at this time,
restore the kingdom to Israel?" he did not return an answer, for a reason which
is assigned in the following words: " It is not for you to know the times and
the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power."* But, although he
refused to gratify their curiosity on this subject, yet he promised them what
was of far greater value than the information which they were anxious to ob
tain: "Ye shall receive power after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you."
He would give them the Spirit, to teach them all mysteries, and all necessary
knowledge. When the Apostle Paul thrice entreated the Lord, that the mes
senger of Satan, sent to buffet him, might be removed, he obtained only this
answer, " My grace is sufficient for thee; for my strength is made perfect in
weakness."! He was not relieved from his present distress, but he was as
sured of grace to support him. God reserves to himself the power of judging
what answer he shall return to the prayers of his people; and it is a power
in which they should cheerfully acquiesce, as it will be always exercised for
their best interests. From their imperfect knowledge, they may commit mis
takes with respect to the object of their requests; but their petitions are pleas
ing to him, as expressions of their faith, and hope, and humble desires; and
he therefore bestows in return a blessing more suitable to their circumstances
and conducive to their good, which they afterwards perceive to be preferable to
that which was selected by themselves.
I observe, in the last place, that God hears the prayers of his people, even
when he does not return any direct answer to them. A Christian may pray,
as he is bound in duty, for the recovery of a friend who is sick, and yet his
friend may die; or he may pray for the conversion of particular persons, who
may never come to the knowledge of the truth. In such cases a distinction
should be made, and we must say, that, although the prayers are not heard, so
far as this implies the obtaining of an answer, yet they are acceptable to God,
as proceeding from a holy heart, and being conformable to the general rule of
Scripture. The exercise of grace may be pleasing to God, although the occa
sion of its exercise be a mistake. The love which a saint bears to a hypocrite,
whom, in charity, he supposes to be a saint, is the fulfilment of the law, and
receives the Divine approbation as well as any other duty. The unworthiness
ofthe object does not destroy its value, because his real character is unknown,
and the formal reason of it is his profession of piety. Notwithstanding the
error of those members of the Church at Rome, who, not considering that the
ceremonial law was abolished, observed a distinction of days and meats from a
principle of conscience, we are assured by Paul that the Lord received them.!
We may therefore conclude that, although the people of God should, in parti
cular circumstances, present their petitions for favours which his wisdom does
not judge it proper to bestow, yet he is pleased with their prayers, because they
are founded on the general promises of Scripture. Such prayers ought not to
be considered as lost. They are among the works of faith, and labours of love,
which God will not forget.
The prayer of faith is always heard. It brings down, sooner or later, the
specific blessing, or another of equal value; and although no direct answer
should be returned, it is still a sacrifice pleasing to God, through Jesus, Christ,
* Acts i. 6, 7. * 2 Cor. xii. 9. i Rom. xiv. 3.

444 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
" Let us therefore come boldly to the throne of grace, that we may obtain
mercy, and find grace to help us in time of need."*

LECTURE XCV.
ON PRAYER.
The Lord's Prayer. — Its Use as a Form and as a Pattern. — Is it a Compilation? — Its Parts. —
Commentary upon it. — Dispute Respecting the Genuineness of the Doxology.
In the course of his sermon on the mount, our Saviour said to his disciples,
" After this manner, pray ye. Our Father which art in heaven. Hallowed
be thy name. Thy kingdom come. Thy will be done on earth as it is in
heaven. Give us this day our daily bread. And forgive us our debts as we
forgive our debtors. And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil.
For thine is the kingdom, and the powor, and the glory, for ever. Amen."!
The same prayer in substance occurs in the gospel of Luke,! '3Ut there are some
verbal differences, and the doxology is omitted. On this account, and because
it was pronounced by our Lord the second time, in answer to the request of
one of his disciples, who said, " Lord, teach us to pray, as John also taught his
disciples," Origen, in his treatise, rttpi evxr/s-, thinks that they should be con
sidered as different prayers. This, however, is too nice a distinction; and it is
not easy to see on what it is founded, as with the alteration of a word or two,
all the petitions are exactly the same. If you should inquire how this disciple
came to ask Christ to teach them to pray, although he had taught them already,
the same Father will tell you, that perhaps he was not present when it was first
delivered, or he had forgotten what was said.
It has been asked, whether this prayer was intended to be a form, or a pat
tern; and the question has given rise to various opinions, and to arguments for
and against. Those who maintain that it is only a pattern, besides, other rea
sons, allege the words in Matthew, "After this manner, pray ye;" but their
criticism is founded on the English version. The original word uvtas, may
beT-endered, "after this manner," but also more simply, "thus," and is used
in Scripture, in reference to the identical words which were spoken. They
also forget that in Luke, our Lord said without any qualifying term, " When
ye pray, say." If it were only meant, that our Lord did not intend to confine
them to this prayer, to enjoin the constant unaltered use of it, to prohibit prayer
in any other terms, we should certainly concur with them; but it is not a little
surprising to find some persons discovering an anxiety to prove, that we should
cautiously avoid the words which were dictated by the Son of God himse1*
and should apply them to no other purpose, but as a guide in prayers of our
own composition. It has the appearance of impiety, or, to use a softer term
of very great folly; and it can be accounted for only on the principle which
directs the conduct of weak-minded men, that of guarding against one extreme
by running into another. They imagine that, they cannot remove to too great
a distance from any thing which they conceive to be wrong, and if their an
tagonist should go to the east, they know of no better way of testifying their
disapprobation than by walking in all haste to the west. There is no doubt
"Heb. iv. 16 * Matth. vi. 9— 13. *Lukexi.2— 4.

PRAYER. 445
.hat in some churches, and particularly the Church of England, the Lord's
prayer is improperly used, being introduced into the service unseasonably, and
repeated over and over, as if there were supposed to be some magical virtue in
the words. But this is no reason why others should treat it, as Hezekiah did
the brazen serpent, which he broke in pieces, because it had been made the
object of idolatrous worship. It is not profaned by man's abuse; it is still the
best and most comprehensive of all prayers; and when offered up with suitable
sentiments and affections, is acceptable to our Father in heaven. Who is the
presumptuous man who dares to think, that he can find more proper words to '
express the desires of his heart? I acknowledge, at the same time, that it was
chiefly intended to be a pattern; that it is only a summary of the blessings for
which we should pray; and that the Scriptures show, and our own hearts dic
tate, that in our addresses to God, it is necessary to be more full and particular.
But this concession does not in any degree derogate from its excellence. As a
pattern it is unavoidably concise; and its design was not to enter into a minute
detail, but to furnish us with hints which we might improve, with the assistance
of the other parts of the word of God. Thus we unite the two contending
opinions, which never would have been disjoined had it not been for ignorant
zeal. The Lord's prayer is both a form and a pattern.
It is the opinion of many learned men, that this prayer is not an original com
position, but a compilation. They affirm that it was not dictated by our Saviour
in the exercise of his own wisdom, and that he only displayed judgment in select
ing it from the prayers which were then current among the Jews. Accordingly,
quotations have been given from their different books, in which we find the
same or nearly the same expressions, which are here brought together.* It has
been said, that it is contrary to all probability, that such a correspondence of
words and phrases should have happened by chance; and hence either of these
suppositions must be made, that the Jews have transferred those things from
the gospel to the use of the Synagogue, or that Christ borrowed them from the
Jews, and consecrated them for the use of his disciples. Either supposition,
it is added, will redound to the honour cf our Saviour. If the Jews, the
avowed enemies of the Gospel, have adopted this prayer from it, they show
their high opinion of its wisdom and piety, which has led them to receive it
into their liturgy, notwithstanding their violent prejudices against its Author
But it is incredible that they would have yielded so far, and it is more reasona
ble to believe that our Lord, in accommodation to them, converted to his own
purpose these scattered fragments of devotion, these golden remains of ancient
piety. There is one point, however, which it is necessary previously to ascer
tain, whether the books in which the component parts of this prayer are found,
are more ancient than the days of our Saviour. If, as I presume, they are all
of a posterior date, the idea that our Saviour borrowed from the Jews, rests on
slender grounds, as we have no certainty that the expressions which we now
find in their books were then known to them. In estimating probabilities, men
are often influenced by prior associations which have a powerful effect upon
their judgment; and hence what seems probable to one person, may appear in
a different light to another. I confess that I cannot reconcile the supposition.
that our Lord was indebted to any human help in instructing his disciples
with the idea which I entertain of the dignity of his character, as the great
Prophet, whose doctrine was from heaven, and not from men; and nothing
should induce me to assent to it, but evidence much stronger than has yet been
produced. In this as in similar cases, the claim of originality should be de
cided by the question of priority. We know when our Lord delivered this
prayer to his disciples; but we have no certain information respecting the time
when the corresponding expressions were adopted by the Jews. It is a con-
* Vide Witsii Exercit. in Orat. Dom. vi. § 32—38.
2P

446 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
jecture of a learned man, that they came into use among them, by means ol
such of the Judaizing Christians as apostatized, who having been taught this
prayei, communicated it to their brethren. As it contains no reference to Jesus
as the Messiah, and there is no part of it which does not accord with their own
Scriptures, as understood by themselves, it would the more readily meet
with a favourable reception. If it should still seem incredible, that the Jews
should have ever been persuaded to give the sanction of their approbation to
any thing, of which a person so obnoxious as Jesus of Nazareth was the Au
thor, I would remind you that the case is not without a parallel, for never was
man more hated by Papists than Calvin, and the object of more violent abuse,
and yet it is known that some of their writers have made free use of his works
in the composition of their own.
The Lord's prayer consists of three parts, — an address to God in the cha
racter of our Father, a number of petitions, and a doxology. I intend to give
you a short commentary upon it in the subsequent part of this lecture.
Our Saviour directs us to begin with addressing God in the character of our
Father: " Our Father which art in heaven." Now, God may be called our
Father on two accounts; first, because he is the Author of our being; and, se
condly, because by his grace he has adopted us into his family. In the first
respect, he is the Father of the whole human race; and hence the Prophet
asks, " Have we not all one Father, and hath not one God created us?"*
Creation and generation are indeed two things totally different, and it is upon
the latter that the paternal relation is founded; but they agree in the general
idea of the communication of life, and hence God is called our Father, although
he did not beget, but created us. In the second respect, he is the Father of
believers alone, or of those who have been made his children by faith in Christ
Jesus; and it is primarily, although not exclusively, in this relation that we
should contemplate him when we offer up our prayers. His greatness would
overawe us, and the reflection that he gave us existence, would not relieve us
from our fears, conscious as we are that we have been ungrateful for the gift,
and have degraded our nature, which was originally adorned with his image;
but the grace, and condescension, and tender pity, which the new character of
Father implies, inspire us with hope, and embolden us to approach to his
throne, and to present our requests. — The words, " in heaven," do not refer
to the local residence of the Deity. If he were in heaven as created beings
are in a place, the heavens would be greater in extent than he, and conse
quently he would be limited. Against the mistake into which the sound of the
words might lead an ignorant person, it is not necessary to put those on
their guard who have read in the Scriptures the sublime descriptions of the im
mensity of the Divine essence; and all that is incumbent upon us is,, to inquire
for what reason the infinite Creator is represented as in heaven. The common
answer is the just one; that, as there must be a region of the universe in which
he confers their full reward upon his holy creatures, he is said to be in it be
cause he there gives the highest manifestations of his goodness and glory. As
it is a natural thought that this place is elevated above this terrestrial and the
visible creation, we point upwards when we are speaking of the habitation of
the Divinity, as our Saviour lifted up his eyes when he prayed, acting on that
occasion under the influence ofthe ideas and feelings of a man. — This prelimi
nary address is an appropriate introduction to the prayer which follows; for the
contemplation of God as our Father, w^ll give us an interest in his glory, which
's the subject of the first petition, and will encourage us to ask the blessings
which are mentioned in the other petitions.
The first petition is, "Hallowed," or sanctified, " be thy name;" in which
the meaning ol the two words, name and sanctify, must be ascertained. A
* Mai. ii. 10.

PRAYER. 447
name properly signifies the discriminative appellation of an individual; and in
Jiis sense our Father in heaven has different names, as Jehovah, God, Lord,
&c. But the term is used in other significations, and particularly, I apprehend,
denotes on some occasions God himself. As the Jews were wont to call him
the Name of the heavens, and the Name, absolutely; so, when the Scripture
calls us to give thanks to his name, it evidently calls us to give thanks to him
self. In the present case, it is frequently explained to be, every thing whereby
God makes himself known; but then the prayer, that every thing whereby he
makes himself known maybe sanctified or glorified, is not very intelligible. I
think it therefore preferable, to consider the name of God in this place as signi
fying God himself, the idea of his being manifested to his creatures being ne
cessarily implied in the petition. The word wyin^tiv, signifies to make
holy ; but this cannot be its meaning here; for we should either utter words to
which we attached no idea, or express a sentiment full of impiety and blasphe
my, if we prayed that God might be made holy. 'Ayiaftw, signifies also to
separate from a common to a peculiar use, and hence, also, to treat any thing
with reverence as sacred. Now, as a person who is honoured is distinguished
or separated from other persons, is the object of respect and homage, to sanc
tify, comes to be equivalent to glorify. The true sense, therefore, of the peti
tion before us is, let God be glorified. The two words evidently convey the
same meaning in the following passage: " I will be sanctified in them that
come nigh me, and before all the people I will be glorified."* The petition,
therefore, may be understood as a prayer that God would glorify himself, and
that he would enable us and others to glorify him.
God has already glorified himself in the works of creation; and he contin
ues to glorify himself in his dispensations of providence and grace. He
glorifies himself when he performs such works as afford bright and impressive
manifestations of his power, wisdom, goodness, justice, and holiness. To
mention only one instance, — he is said to honour ' himself by executing ven
geance upon sinners, whose daring crimes seemed to call for his interposition.
The words lately quoted were spoken immediately after the death of Nadab
and Abihu, who were destroyed by lightning from the oracle, because, in a
state of intoxication as it would seem, they had offered strange fire in the
sanctuary. In reference to the doom of Pharaoh and his army, who were
drowned in the Red Sea, he said, "I will get me honour upon Pharaoh, and
upon all his host, upon his chariots, and upon his horsemen."! We therefore
pray that God would give such manifestations of his glory in the course of
events, as shall make man know that " he whose name alone is Jehovah, is
the Most High God over all the earth."
If it is our duty to pray that God would glorify himself, it is undoubtedly
incumbent upon us to pray also tharwe may be disposed and enabled to con
cur in this design, which is the ultimate end of our creation and redemption
We hallow his name, when we observe, and admire, and acknowledge the
displays of his perfections in nature, and providence, and grace; when we
elevate our minds and hearts to him, as the greatest, the holiest, the wisest,
the best of all beings; when we worship him according to his own institution;
when we speak to the honour of his character and dispensations, and vindicate
them from the accusations of impiety, and when we cheerfully obey the pre
cepts which prescribe the objects and the extent of our duty. " Herein is my
Father glorified, that ye bear much fruit."! The Greek commentator Theo-
phylact, thus briefly explains the petition: " Let thy name be sanctified; that
is, make us holy, that thou mayest be glorified on our account. For as God
is blasphemed, so he is sanctified, on my account; that is, is glorified as holy."
" Thy kingdom come." God, who is the Creator, is also the Lord of the
• Lev. x. 3. * Exod. xiv. 17. i John xv. 8.

448 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
universe, and his kingdom of providence rules over all, and admits of no increase
of power and dominion. The petition has no reference to it, because it would
be absurd to pray that that may come, which is come already. But there is a
kingdom which was announced in the Old Testament as future, and concerning
which we have the following prophecy of Daniel: "In the days of these
kings," that is, before the four great monarchies were ended, " the God of
heaven shall set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the king
dom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume
all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever."* In the New Testament it is
called the kingdom of heaven, and the kingdom of God; and this name is
given to the dispensation of grace under the Messiah, which is carried on by
the gospel and ihe institutions of our Saviour, and by the operations of the
Holy Ghost. It also is already come. It commenced on the day of Pente
cost, and has continued, amidst various vicissitudes, to the present hour; but,
in its most prosperous state, it never was established except over a small por
tion of the earth. Besides, almost from the beginning, its strength has been
impaired by internal divisions, and its glory obscured by manifold corruptions;
and in not a few places it subsists only in name, and what is called the king
dom of Christ, should rather be considered as a province of the kingdom of
darkness. At the time when our Lord taught this prayer to his disciples, their notions
of his kingdom were very imperfect; but he called upon them to pray for the
propagation of his religion in the world, the conversion of Jews and Gentiles,
and the universal reign of righteousness and truth. There are still valid reasons
for continuing to present this petition. We do not yet see all things put under
Christ. A great part of the world is subject to the dominion of his adversary,
whom he was manifested to destroy. Heathenism spreads its deepest shades
over many a wide and populous region; Mahometanism tramples on the cross in
countries where his religion once flourished; Popery has degraded it into a
profligate and contemptible superstition; and among those who profess a purer
faith, there are comparatively few who honour him with the homage of their
Hearts. Ought we not, then, to pray that his kingdom may come?, We are
authorized by prophecy to look for a more glorious dispensation, when " the
Spirit shall be poured out from on high, and the wilderness and the solitary
place shall be glad, and the desert shall rejoice and blossom as the rose;" for
a time " when the knowledge of the Lord shall cover the earth as the waters
cover the sea." As the bold and magnificent language of prophecy may re
quire a cautious and sober interpretation, it is uncertain whether the true re
ligion will ever be strictly universal; and some obscure hints render it doubtful:
but if the whole human race should, at a future period, be the faithful subjects
of Christ, it would then be their duty, not to pray for the coming of his king
dom, but to rejoice because it had come. It should be remembered, that the
event to which we should look forward, is not the general prevalence of a
profession of his religion, but a cordial acceptance of it, accompanied with
subjection to his laws and institutions; and consequently, that we ought to pray
for the exertion of Divine power, by which only this great spiritual revolution
will be effected. The kingdom of God comes when it is established in the
heart. Some have understood the kingdom to mean the second coming of Christ.
" He who has a bold or assured conscience," says Theophylact, " will wish
the resurrection and judgment to come." It is the character of believers, that
they are looking for and hastening to the coming of the Lord; and when their
faith is strong, they will say with the beloved disciple, " Even so, come, Lord
Jesus." I presume, however, that we have given the true sense of the pe-
* Dan. ii. 44.

PRAYER. 449
lition, when we have explained it as a prayer for the enlargement and pros
perity of the Church.
The petition which is next in order, is closely connected with the coming
of the kingdom of God; for when the gospel, by which it is advanced, is
accompanied with Divine power, men are disposed and enabled to do the will
of God. "Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven." Divines speak of
the secret and the revealed will of God; but with the former we have nothing
to do, and this petition respects the latter alone. It is his will made known to
us as the rule of our conduct, by positive precepts, and by the dispensations
of Providence. It is the duty of every man to submit to the appointments of
heaven, to bear trials without murmuring, to be content with his condition;
it is his duty to pay a sacred regard to all the commands of his Maker, and to
perform with fidelity the various offices of piety, justice, and charity. There
are several important ideas suggested by this petition: — that the will of God is
the reason of obedience, or the foundation of morality; that it is a law to all
men without exception; that it should be carefully studied by us, and kept
constantly in view as the standard of our actions; that it is only by Divine as
sistance that we shall be enabled to obey it; and, that we should pray for grace
to others as well as ourselves. The notion, that men possess a natural power
to obey, as Pelagians affirm, or that they have all received sufficient grace, is
contradictory to this petition, which manifestly supposes that we have no such
power, and must therefore ask it from God.
In presenting this petition, we are directed to have in our eve the example of
obedience exhibited by the inhabitants of heaven, or the angels of God, con
cerning whom it is said, that " they do his commandments, hearkening to the
voice of his word."* We cannot, indeed, hope to attain to equal perfection,
but it should be our constant aim, and every endeavour should be used to make
the nearest approach to it. The utmost which we can hope in the present
state, is the perfection of sincerity, consisting in integrity of heart, and lead
ing us to esteem the Divine precepts concerning all things to be right. If we
are sincere, our obedience will resemble that of the angels in promptitude and
cheerfulness. Not hesitating from fear of the consequences, nor retarded by
the love of ease, and the interference of other demands, we will immediately
and willingly comply with the calls of duty, like those blessed spirits, who, as
soon as the command is given, fly, like the lightning, from heaven to earth, to
execute his orders.
The next petition respects our temporal affairs: " Give us this day our daily
bread." The word translated bread, is used both in Greek and in Hebrew, in its
proper signification; but it is also put, by a figure, for the whole of our tempo
ral provision, because bread is called in Scripture the staff of life, and among
the eastern nations was a principle article of food. It is altogether fanciful to
say, — what you have no doubt heard, — that the people of God should be con
tent if they have only bread and water, because these only are contained in
the promise, " His bread shall be given him, his water shall be sure."!
Undoubtedly, they should be pleased with the scantiest portion which may be
assigned to them; but they have better reasons for contentment than this or any
similar promise. The interpretation may be called pious; but it is entitled to
no other praise, and betrays ignorance of the rules according to which Scrip
ture should be explained. Bread stands as a part for the whole, and denotes
all the necessaries of life; and our Church gives a more rational view of the
petition, when it represents it as teaching us, to ask not a bare subsistence, but
" a competent portion."
The true sense of the word translated daily, it is more difficult to settle.
The Greek term is eitwnxsws, concerning which Origen observes, that it was
* Ps. ciii. 20. * Is. xxxiii. 16.
Vol. IL— 57. 2 p 2

450 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
not used by either the learned or the vulgar, and seems to have been formed
by the Evangelists. There is, therefore, no resource left but etymology,
which has guided Jerome in his translation, who calls it in Matthew super-
substantialis, but in Luke quotidianus. Now, super-substantialis is a very
literal version of e*i.od<»os, which is compounded of im, upon, and ovaia, essence
or substance. But such versions are the result of ignorance, and prove that
the translator understands only the component parts of a word, but not the
word itself. Super-substantialis is as unintelligible as ettiovaios, although it
has been supposed to mean the bread of the Eucharist, a supposition utterly
absurd. Some have thought that it is derived from the verb eiteiiju., which sig
nifies to remain, to be after; and that aptos trtiovaios is our future bread, the
bread of to-morrow. But the petition thus understood would sound harshly,
" Give us this day," or, as in Luke, " Give us day by day the bread of the
next day;" and seems not to be consistent with trust in God, and with our Sa
viour's exhortation not to take thought for the morrow. The word is not so ex
plained by any of the ancients; and this sense is rejected by Origen, who
mentions it only as a sense which might occur to some of his readers. Aptos
ejtiovaios is explained by Chrysostom and others, who were the most compe
tent judges, to be bread which passes into tke essence or substance of our
bodies, bread which is sufficient for the preservation of our bodily substance;
and they understand by it, not the luxuries and superfluities of life, but those
things which are necessary for its support.*
We are forbidden to seek high things, and if we are duly influenced by the
glorious discoveries of the Gospel, we will feel a great degree of indifference
to the enjoyments and splendours of the world. But daily bread is not to be
confined to those things which are usually called the necessaries of life. Even
the phrase, the necessaries of life, does not convey a definite idea, as the cir
cumstances of individuals are so much diversified, and what is sufficient for one
would be totally inadequate to the wants of another. God, who has placed
man in different situations, has himself rendered a larger share of worldly
good things necessary to a man of rank, for example, than to an obscure per
son, to the father of a numerous family than to him who is childless. Our
Saviour has in his wisdom employed a general expression, which admits of
considerable latitude of application, and authorises us to pray for sufficient
bread, for a competent portion, for all that our station requires. The prayer
of Agur will serve as a model, and will show us, that, although we should not
presume to dictate to God, yet there are two extremes from which we may
pray to be preserved, as there is danger to be apprehended from both. " Two
things have I required of thee; deny me them not before I die: Remove far
from me vanity and lies; give me neither poverty nor riches; feed me with food
convenient for me: lest I be full and deny thee, and say, who is the Lord ? or
lest I be poor, and steal, and take the name of my God in vain."!
It is almost unnecessary to add, that this prayer does not supersede the use
of means; for it is only in conforming to the established order of providence,
that we ought to expect it to be answered. The prayer imports that our tem
poral blessings come from God, in whatever channel they may be communica
ted; that without his blessing our industry and foresight will prove unavailing;
and that our dependence upon him is constant: and hence we are directed to
present this petition, not at distant intervals, but from day to day. Even the
rich man who thinks that he has goods laid up for many years, should ask his
daily bread from God; for when it is in his hand, providence could snatch it
from him, and scatter in an hour his wealth to the winds.
In the next petition we pray for the remission of sin: " And forgive us our
debts as we forgive our debtors." Our debts are our sins, and accordingly
• Vide Wits, in Symbolum Exercit. xi. de Pane Quotidiano, § 10. * Prov. xxx. 7  9

PRAYER. 451
the latter word is used when the prayer is repeated in Luke. They are called
our debts, because they formally consist in the non-payment of the obedience
which we owed to God, or as some think, because the sinner has a debt of
punishment to pay to divine justice. If our debts are our offences against
God, it follows that our debtors are not those who owe us money, but those
who have injured us in word and deed, and from whom we might think our
selves entitled to demand satisfaction.
It is unnecessary to inquire what is implied in the forgiving of our debts, as
this important subject was explained in its proper place; and remission is well
known to consist in our absolution from the sentence of condemnation pro
nounced upon us for our sins. Nor is there any occasion at present for show
ing that God alone can forgive sin, and that although no mention is made of
the atonement of Christ, it must be understood to be referred to; agreeably to
the uniform doctrine of Scripture, that it is solely for his sake that God be
stows this blessing upon us. Waiving these points as not now demanding our
attention, let us consider the subjoined condition or qualification, as it seems to
be, with which our 'Lord has connected this petition: "As we forgive our
debtors." And certainly no small difficulty here presents itself to those who
hold the doctrine of justification by grace without any conditions. It does npt
appear easy to reconcile with that doctrine, this petition as expressed in Mat
thew, and still more strongly in Luke: " For we also forgive every one that is
indebted to us." Various attempts have been made to point out their harmony;
but some of them have not been successful.
It has been said that our forgiving others is an evidence of the grace of God
towards us, from which it appears, that we are not given up to our sinful
affections, and his Spirit has not utterly departed from us, and that hence
we may hope for new displays of his grace. It has also been said that our
forgiving others must precede the sense of our own forgiveness, and that we
cannot expect to experience joy and peace, if we do not exercise charity to
wards our brethren. But this reasoning shifts the state of the question, and
supposes the person in whom this qualification is required, to have been already
forgiven. It is a better solution of the difficulty, to represent the petition as
containing an argument from the less to the greater, which may be thus stated:
— ' Our Father in heaven, if we whose goodness is so limited are so affected
towards others as not unwillingly to pardon their offences, with how much
confidence can we ask the same thing to ourselves from thee, whose benignity
has neither measure nor bounds !' Our Lord reasons in a similar manner:
" If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children;
how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them
that ask him?"*
I have long thought that the difficulty may be more satisfactorily removed
in a different way. There are two kinds of pardon, — legal pardon, and fa
therly pardon; of which the one consists in the repeal of the curse of the law,
or the sentence of condemnation; and the other, in the removal of the chas
tisements to which the children of God are subjected for their offences. The
first is obtained by faith alone, without works, but the second is suspended
upon conditions, — repentance, confession, prayer, and the performance of
duty. Our Lord taught this prayer to his disciples, who were already in a
state of grace; and it begins with an address to God as our Father, which sup
poses us to stand in the relation of children to him. It is the prayer of a be
liever, who, having been freely forgiven when he was justified, has still to ask
the pardon of his daily offences. Now, that he may recover a comfortable
sense of the love of God, and again enjoy the light of his countenance, it is
necessary that he should be in a proper disposition of mind, and particularly
• Luke xi. 11.

452 THE EXTERNAL MEANS OF GRACE:
that he should be in a state of charity towards his brethren of mankind, and
especially towards those who have offended him. " If ye forgive men their
trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if ye forgive not
men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses."* By
subjoining this qualification to the petition, our Lord reminds his disciples of
the necessity of being placable and merciful, and encourages them, when they
are conscious of this temper, to expect mercy from God. The petition points
out the order, according to which God dispenses favours to his people. He
will withdraw his chastening hand when they return to a sense of their duty.
When they forgive others, he will forgive them.
If we take this view of the subject, the difficulty is removed. It is not the
condition of their original pardon which is prescribed, but of the forgiveness of
their subsequent failings and imperfections.
We cannot pray in sincerity for the pardon of sin, without feeling an abhor
rence of it, and forming a resolution henceforth to renounce it. Our Saviour
has therefore taught us to say in the next place, " And lead us not into temp
tation, but deliver us from evil." Temptation signifies, any thing which en
tices us to sin. It would be foreign to our present design, to inquire what are
the various sources of temptation; but it is necessary to ascertain what is
implied in not leading us into it. The expression has rather a strange sound,
as it occurs in an address to God, and it seems to import that God might be
actively concerned in tempting us, in direct contradiction to the following
words: "Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God; for God
cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man."! It is certain
that God may give permission to wicked spirits and bad men to tempt us, for
there is no doubt that he could restrain them; that, in the course of his provi
dence, he may place us in circumstances which have a tendency to stimulate
our corrupt desires and passions; and that he may leave us to act according to
the inclinations of our hearts. Thus far we may conceive him to lead us into
temptation; but to suppose him to exert any direct influence to excite us to
comply with it, would be to represent him as the author of sin. The words
before us, and all similar expressions, ought to be explained consistently with
the perfect purity of the Divine nature; and we should avoid all those meta
physical speculations concerning the agency of God in the actions of his crea
tures, which bewilder the mind, and lead us so far, that we can only escape
the impious conclusion by retracting our own reasonings, and resting, where
we should have always rested, in the incontrovertible truth, that " God is light,
and in him there is no darkness at all." This petition, then, is expressive of
two things; first, of a request, founded on a humble sense of our weakness and
liability to err, that God would keep temptation at a distance from us; and, se
condly, of a request that, if for wise reasons he shall be pleased to expose us
to it, he would assist and strengthen us in the evil hour. It is a direct ac
knowledgment of our inability to preserve ourselves. Accordingly, we are
directed farther to say, " Deliver us from evil;" signifying, that our own wisdom
and resolution are insufficient, and that our only resource is the power of God.
Evil is generally understood to be sin; but in the original, the article is pre
fixed to it — pusat t)fias owo tov 7tovTjpov; which may be translated, from tke evil
one. It was generally so explained by the Fathers. The character of the evil
one is justly given to the apostate spirit who was the first transgressor, and is
continually soliciting others to transgress; and the description of him " as a
roaring lion, that goes about seeking whom he may devour,"! shows the danger
which we have reason to dread from him, and the urgent necessity of prayer
that we may be preserved from his power. When Christians are exhorted to
put on the whole armour of God, — the breastplate of righteousness, the helmet
* Matth. vi. 14, 15. * James i. 13. i 1 Pet. v. 8.

PRAYER. 453
of salvation, the shield of faith, and the sword of the Spirit, — it is added, " pray
ing always with all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, and watching there
unto with all perseverance."*
The prayer is concluded with this doxology: " For thine is the kingdom,
and the power, and the glory for ever. Amen." It may be considered, not
only as an ascription of praise to God, but as containing reasons or motives
to encourage us to offer up the preceding petitions. The kingdom belongs to
God; who is the Sovereign of the universe, and, having all things at his dispo
sal, can bestow the blessings which we ask. The power belongs to him; and
therefore no obstacle can prevent the accomplishment of his gracious designs.
The glory belongs to him; and therefore we infer that he will grant our requests,
because in the dispensations of his providence and grace his name will be glo
rified. To the whole prayer, the Hebrew word " Amen" is subjoined, which,
in this connexion, is expressive of our desire, and of our confidence that we
shall be heard.
It is proper to observe, that the genuineness of the doxology has been called
m question by many learned men, and that it is supposed to be an interpolation
transferred into the text from the ancient liturgies, in which it was used after
the prayer was recited. It is remarked, that it is wanting in Luke, where this
prayer is repeated, only with some unimportant alterations; but if the doxology
is interpolated in Matthew, it is not easy to conceive why it has been left out
in Luke, as it would have been as easy to introduce it in the one place as in the
other. Its presence in the former Gospel, and its absence in the latter, seem
rather to prove it to be genuine. It is not found in many manuscripts, in the
writings of some of the Greek Fathers even when they professedly explain the
Lord's prayer, in several ancient versions, and in the Fathers of the Latin
Church. On the other hand, there are several ancient versions in which it is
found, and Greek and Latin writers by whom it is quoted and commented
upon; and it is asserted also, that it appears in many manuscripts some of which
are of high antiquity. Griesbach has ejected it from the text; but, although
his authority is great, the discussions of some learned men have made some
abatement from it, and shown us that we ought not implicitly to bow to his de
cisions. I do not pretend to determine a question, with respect to which the
most eminent critics are divided in sentiment.
In this formulary, we have all the constituent parts of prayer. It begins and
ends with adoration and thanksgiving; and it contains petitions for temporal
and spiritual blessings, some of which obviously imply confession of our sin
fulness and weakness. It is an admirable guide to us in our devotions; and
prayers conformable to this pattern are acceptable to God, when they flow
from a heart purified by faith. It is entitled to the highest respect, as a form
to be occasionally used in public and private; and to lay piety out of the ques
tion, we could not say much for the modesty of the man who should presume
to think that any prayer which he could compose would be better. Our Direc
tory for Public Worship says, " Because the prayer which Christ taught his
disciples is not only a pattern of prayer, but itself a most comprehensive prayer,
we recommend it also to be used in the prayers of the church."
• Eph. vi. 18.

454 THE CHURCH.
LECTURE XCVI.
ON THE CHURCH.
Different Meanings of the Term, Church. — Import of the Distinctions into the Visible and
Invisible, Militant and Triumphant Church. — The Design of the Church. — The Quali
fication of its Members; Baptism, Knowledge, Failh, and a Credible Profession. — The
Unity, Universality, Perpetuity, and Infallibility of the True Church.
The design of God in the various dispensations of religion, has been to es
tablish and uphold a society of a singular character, separated from the world,
dedicated to his service, and distinguished by the high privileges conferred
upon the members. As this society is the object of his special care, and it is
in it that revelation is preserved, the ordinances of the true religion are admin
istered, and the blessings of salvation are enjoyed, it is entitled to particular
attention. The name by which it is known among us is the Church, and this term is
used as equivalent to the Hebrew word bnp, and the Greek word txx%fiaia.
As hup signifies a congregation, or a number of persons gathered together, so
this is the import of txxv\t;aia,, which denoted, among the Greeks, an assembly
of the people convoked by lawful authority. Accordingly, the former word is
frequently translated by the latter in the Septuagint, and occurs likewise as its
substitute in the New Testament. In the fortieth psalm, the Messiah says,
" I have declared thy righteousness in the great congregation;" — at hnpz — and
the passage is thus quoted in the Epistle to the Hebrews, Ev /itey ixx^ams
iyivjiaa af, " In the midst of the church I will sing praise to thee."* The Sep
tuagint here employs the word awayaytj.
The word exxtojaio, bears a variety of senses, which either are found in Scrip
ture, or have been since attached to it in the common language of Christians
It is not certain that it any where signifies, in the New Testament, the place
of meeting for the worship of God, (see 1 Cor. xi. 22.) although it very early
received this meaning by metonymy, according to which the thing containing is
called by the name of that which it contains; and, in imitation of the ancients,
we give the designation of churches to those houses in which Christians hold
their religious assemblies. As it would serve no purpose to inquire whether
there were any houses so denominated in the days of the Apostles, I proceed
to observe, that the Church sometimes denotes a single family, or rather a few
individuals associated together in observing the institutions of the Gospel.
This appears from such passages as the following: " Greet the church that is in
the house of Aquila and Priscilla." " Salute the church which is in the house
of Nymphas."! It is highly probable that those churches consisted, not only
of the children and servants belonging to the persons named, but of others,
who, professing the faith, repaired to their houses at stated times to hear the
word, and to unite in the exercises of prayer and praise. There is little reason
to think that the primitive disciples had any other houses in which they might
hold their conventicles, as they were an infant sect, and were surrounded with
enemies, whose notice it would have been imprudent to attract by a public dis
play. However few in number, they were encouraged to meet by the gra
cious promise of our Saviour, that " where two or three are met together in his
name, he is in the midst of them."
Again, The Church signifies all the Christians in a particular city, whether
they assembled for religious offices in one place, or in several places. This is
* Heb. ii. 12. * Rom. xvi. 5. Col. iv. 15.

THE CHURCH. 455
plain from the following words: " Now there were in the church that was at
Antioch certain prophets and teachers."* All the disciples in that celebrated
city were accounted one church; while it is beyond doubt that they were too
many to form only one congregation. On this subject, indeed, there has been
a diversity of opinion; and, in particular, Independents, have discovered an
anxious wish to prove the negative, because the fact which I am stating is at
variance with their notions of the constitution of a church. But let us attend
to the language in which the sacred historian speaks of the success of the
Gospel among its inhabitants: " And the hand of the Lord was with them; and
a great number believed, and turned to the Lord." " And it came to pass, that
a whole year Saul and Barnabas assembled themselves with the church, and
taught much people; and the disciples were first called Christians at Antioch."!
When we consider that there were many converts before the arrival of Barna
bas and Saul, and that they had laboured with success for a whole year prior to
the time when the church is spoken of as one, it must be strong prejudice
which leads any person to deny that the word is used as a general term com
prehending several congregations; for it is altogether incredible that the disci
ples would have been called "a great number," and " much people," if they
could have been convened in one house, and for the reason given above, proba
bly a private house. In the same sense the word is used in reference to Jeru
salem, all the disciples in which are repeatedly represented as one church.!
But that there were more assemblies than one in that city is evident, not only
from the number of converts specified in the Acts, many of whom might be
strangers, who afterwards removed to different places; but from the fact that the
Apostles continued a long time in it after the day of Pentecost, not surely to
minister to a single society of believers; and that the poor were so numerous,
that not one deacon, but seven, were appointed to take care of them. I have
dwelt rather long upon this point; but as this application of the term has been
contested, some discussion was necessary, and I have thus been led to antici
pate an argument which will again be brought forward in favour of the form of
church-government which we have adopted.
There is another sense of the term which is now common, but of which I do
not find any example in the New Testament, namely, when it is employed to
denote the inhabitants of a whole country united inythe same religious profes
sion. There we read of the churches of Judea, the churches of Galatia, the
churches of Macedonia, the churches of Asia. We, in this country, speak of
the Church of Scotland, the Church of England, the Church of Holland, &c.
This phraseology has arisen from the connexion of the church with the state, in
consequence of which, Christianity, or rather a particular modification of
Christianity, is established by law in a particular country, and all the inhabi
tants are required to adopt it in that form, unless a toleration be granted to dis
senters to worship God according to the dictates of their consciences. This
has originated in an attempt to make Christianity a national affair, and to
render the church commensurate with the territory over which the power of
the civil government extends. It would lead us away from our present design,
to enter upon the question concerning the lawfulness of civil establishments of
religion. In general, we may say, that, so far as they blend together secular
and spiritual things, interfere with religious liberty, and consider men as Chris
tians, merely because they are subjects of the state, they are unscriptural, anil
must prove the source of manifold and grievous corruptions.
Farther, The word has been supposed to denote, not a whole religious socie
ty, but only the office-bearers in it. It has been considered as bearing this
sense in the following words: " And if he shall neglect to hear thee, tell it to
the church; but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as
*Actsxiii. 1. * Acts xi. 21,26. i lb. v. 11. viii. 1,3. xi. 22. xii. 1, 5. &c

456 THE CHURCH.
a heathen man, and a publican."* It is evident that the offending brother is
to be brought before the church for judgment; and if he prove refractory, to be
excommunicated. The power of government, Presbyterians affirm, is not
vested in the people, but in those who preside over them; and consequently, if
they are right, the church must here mean the ministers and rulers. Indepen
dents, of course, reject this interpretation; and some who differ from them in
their views of church government, explain the words in a different manner.
To settle this controversy, would require a train of circuitous reasoning, into
which this is not the proper time to enter. I shall therefore pass over this
sense of the term, and proceed to another, concerning which there is no
dispute. I observe, in the last place, that the church signifies all the disciples of Christ
throughout the world. There are many examples of this extensive meaning
of the term: " The church of God which he hath purchased with his own
bldod." " Christ loved the church, and gave himself for it." "The church
of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth."! In these passages,
the meaning of the term is more extensive than in any of the former instances,
and comprehends all in every country, and in every age, who acknowledge
Jesus Christ as their spiritual head.
In speaking of the church in this general view, it is necessary to consider it
under two aspects, and to attend to the distinction which is commonly made
of it into visible and invisible.
"The visible church," says our Confession of Faith, "consist of all those
throughout the world that profess the true religion, together with their children;
and is the kingdom of the Lord Jesus Christ, the house and family of God,
out of which there is no ordinary possibility of salvation."! It comprehends,
therefore, various sects, differing from each other in some particulars, but
united in acknowledging the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament as the
rule of faith and practice, and observing the ordinances of the gospel. The
Church of England calls the visible church " a congregation of faithful men, in
the which the pure word of God is preached, and the sacraments be duly minister
ed, according to Christ's ordinance, in all those things that of necessity are requi
site to the same."§ We may acquiesce in both definitions; but they are ge
neral, and particularly the first, so that we may find some difficulty in practically
applying them, to ascertain who are the true members of this church. Some
sects we must exclude, because they deny the fundamental articles of the
Christian religion, as Unitarians do; but others hold a mixture of truth and
error, and hence it may not be easy to determine whether they should be ad
mitted for the truth, or rejected for the error. Again, if the visible church
consists of those who profess the true religion, and is an assembly of faithful
men, it follows that those who do not fall under this description, — men who
are ignorant of the doctrines of religion, disregard its ordinances, and openly
transgress its laws, — cannot be considered as belonging to it. However con
tradictory, therefore, may be the practice of the two churches of Scotland and
England, the creed of neither encourages the idea of national Christianity, or
of holding every person who is born in a particular country to be a member
of the church, merely because he has been baptized by it, and is living within
its bounds. The phrase, the visible church, is used very loosely by us all;
but, if we would speak scripturally, and even rationally, we would not include
in it the grossly ignorant and openly profane, any more than heathens and
Mahometans; for the former are as little connected with Jesus Christ, even in
outward appearance, as the latter. We would comprehend in the visible church
none but those who make a credible profession of religion; that is, none but per
sons who possess a competent knowledge of its doctrines, observe its institutions,
• Matth. xviii. 17. * Acts xx. 28. Eph. v. 25. 1 Tim. iii. 15. i Conf. xxv. 2. § Art. xix

THE CHURCH. 457
and regulate their conduct by its laws. Were this mode of settling its limits
adopted, they would be very much narrowed, and a great part of what is called
the Christian world would be left without its pale.
This church is called visible, not only beeause the persons who compose it
are not angels or separate spirits, but men dwelling in mortal flesh, but because,
as a society, it falls under the observation of our senses. The members are
known; their assemblies are public; we may be present in them, and observe
the celebration of the several' parts of their worship. It is distinguishable, like
any other society; and we can say, Here is the church of Christ; but there is
the church ofthe Jews or ofthe Mahometans. Nothing more is necessary to
discover it than the use of our senses. Having learned, by the perusal of the
Scriptures, what are the discriminating characters of the church, wherever we
perceive a society whose creed and observances are upon the whole conforma
ble to this pattern, we are authorized to say, This is the church, or rather, a
part of the church.
"The invisible church," I again quote the words of our Confession, "con
sists of the whole number of the elect that have been, are, or shall be gathered
into one, under Christ the head thereof; and is the spouse, the body, the fulness
of him that filleth all in all."* This is a definition of the church for which
Christ gave himself; for he died for all who were chosen in him to salvation;
but not an accurate definition of the invisible church as actually existing, in
which not all the elect are comprehended, but those only who have believed. I
consider the invisible church to be the congregation of those who have been
called by Divine grace into the fellowship of the gospel, and sanctified by the
truth; and they are one congregation, because, however distant in place and
diversified in circumstances, they are united by closer bonds than those of ex
ternal communion. " By one Spirit we have all been baptized into one body,
whether we be Jews or Greeks, whether we be bond or free, and have been all
made to drink into that one Spirit."! In the visible church there is a mixture
of saints and sinners, as there is of chaff and grain in the barn-floor, and of
wheat and tares in the field; but this sopiety is pure; not that the individuals
who compose it are free from sin, but that they are all of one description,
having been born from above. This is the true church, in which God dwells,
and to which the promises are made. This is the body of Christ, to which
he communicates spiritual influences, that it may " increase with the increase
of God."
This church is said to be invisible, because it cannot be discovered by the
eye. It is not separated from the world in respect of place, but of state. It
lies hidden in the visible church, from which it cannot be certainly distinguished.
The qualifications of its members are internal; their faith and love are not the
objects of sense. Towards our fellew men we can exercise only the judgment
of charity, founded on probable grounds; but we are liable to err, and from va
rious causes may suppose saints to be hypocrites, and hypocrites to be saints.
It is unseen by every eye but that which " searches the heart and tries the reins
of the children of men." "The Lord," and he only, " knows them that are
his." Hitherto I have spoken of the Church as subsisting exclusively upon earth;
but there is another distinction which relates to it, as subsisting both on earth
and in heaven. Taken in this comprehensive sense, it is divided into the
church militant, and the church triumphant. The former comprehends those
who are engaged in the spiritual warfare, wrestling against principalities and
powers, struggling with the flesh and the solicitations of the world, and, in some
t cases, resisting even unto blood in their opposition to sin. The latter is made
' up of the glorified saints, who have overcome by the blood of the Lamb and
* Conf. xxv. 1. 1 1 Cor. xii. 13.
Vol. IL— 58. 2 S

458 THE CHURCH.
the word of their testimony, and have obtained the crown of life which fades
not away. Let it be observed, that these constitute only one church, one
family in heaven and on earth, being subject to the same Head, animated by the
same spirit, and, notwithstanding their distance, holding holy communion,
while they take an interest in one another's joys and sorrows, and unite in the
worship of Him who sits upon the throne, and of the Lamb.
The design of the establishment of the church will be explained by the fol
lowing particulars. First, It is appointed to be the depository of divine truth,
in which it should be preserved, and by which it should be published to the
world. To the Jews were committed the oracles of God in ancient times; but
the custody of them is now transferred to the Christian church. Hence it is
called, in a passage formerly quoted, " the pillar and ground of the truth."
Secondly, It is an important part of its duty, to maintain and observe the ordi
nances of Christ, that the ends of their institution may be accomplished in the
salvation of men, and He may receive due honour, as the exalted Lord to whom
every knee should bow of things on earth. Thirdly, It is intended to be the
asylum of sinners, who are called upon to leave the society of the world, and
to enter into it by faith, that they may escape the destruction which is coming
upon the wicked. It is like the cities of refuge in the promised land, into
which the man-slayer fled from the pursuit of the avenger of blood. Lastly, It
is the nursery of the saints, in which they are trained for the duties of the
present life and the happiness of the next, by spiritual instruction, and watchful
superintendence, by doctrine and discipline.
From the general remarks which have been already made, it has appeared
who are the members of the church considered both as visible and as invisi
ble. With respect to the latter, it is unnecessary to say any thing farther, as
there can be no doubt that the members are believers, regenerated persons,
saints, since the Scripture says expressly, " If any man have not the Spirit of
Christ, he is none of his."* But concerning the qualifications of the mem
bers of the visible church, it will be proper to enter into a more particulai
discussion. First, An indispensable qualification of the members of the visible church
is baptism, which has been called the initiatory seal of the new covenant,
and is the rite by which our admission into the society of the faithful is de
clared. When Jesus Christ sent his Apostles to establish his church upon
earth, he said to them, " Go ye therefore and teach," or rather, make disciples
of "all nations" — /i,o£r]tEvaatt jtwta to. eBvri — "baptizing them in the name of
the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."! They were to be made
disciples by baptism; not that the simple administration of this rite would con
stitute them such, or that it was to be administered to all who should come in
the way of the Apostles, but that when they found persons who, having heard
the gospel, professed faith in Christ, they should baptize them, and in this
manner receive them into the number of his followers. As the uncircumcised
were not admitted into the congregation of Israel, so the unbaptized have no
right to enter into the church. In this respect the two ordinances resemble
each other, that both were instituted as a preliminary step to the enjoyment of
the other privileges of the people of God. It does not however follow, that
baptism is necessary to salvation; for we may conceive a case, and it has actu
ally happened, that a man has by some means — for example, by the perusal
of the Scriptures — been savingly enlightened, who, at the same time, was in
such a situation that he could not obtain the external sign of the righteousness
of faith. There is no doubt that such a man went to heaven at death, and that
he was a member of the invisible church, which is united to its exalted
Head by the Spirit; but of the visible church, he was not a member, be-
* Rom. viii. 9. * Matth. xxviii. 19.

THE CHURCH. 459
eause he wanted, yet without any fault on his part, the distinguishing badge
of Christianity. Hence you perceive the reason that our Confession expresses
itself with some degree of caution, when it says, that "out of the visible
church there is no ordinary possibility of salvation." There is a possibility
of salvation without its pale; but the cases are extraordinary, and such as those
to which I have just now referred. When men have access to the church,
they are bound by the highest authority to enter into its communion, and there
fore to submit to baptism, which is the door of admission. If any person,
knowing baptism to be an ordinance of Christ, should deliberately and con
temptuously neglect it, he would no more be a disciple of Christ than a
heathen or a Mahometan, and his final salvation would be as impossible as if
he had lived and died in the habitual violation of any moral precept.
The second qualification of the members of the church, is knowledge; for
Jesus Christ does not want blind followers, who are attached to him merely
for his name, or in consequence of their local situation; and the ignorant are
utterly incapable of performing the duties incumbent upon the members of this
spiritual society. What degree of knowledge is requisite, it is not easy to de
termine with accuracy. Men differ much in education, in talents, in opportu
nities, so that it would be equally absurd to demand the same proficiency in all
the candidates, as to insist that they should be all of the same stature. But
unless a person know something about his own natural character and state,
something about the person, and office, and work of the Saviour, something
about the promises of God and the duties of a Christian, he cannot make a
rational profession of faith, and consequently ought not to be admitted. The
Church of Rome requires implicit faith in the members. This does not mean,
as you might suppose from the terms, a belief of certain doctrines simply
upon the authority of the church, but something much more mysterious, and
of which the world never had an idea till it was revealed by the Schoolmen.
Implicit faith is a belief that all the doctrines held by the church are true,
although you know nothing about them, and never so much as heard them
mentioned. It matters not to you what the church believes, and you need not
give yourself the trouble to inquire; if you believe that all that she believes is
agreeable to truth, you are an orthodox Christian, and are sure to go to heaven,
In short, the Church of Rome teaches men to believe by proxy, to have faith
without having one idea of the object of faith, to assent to a creed of which
they know as little as the inhabitants of Tartary. Such a faith is very suita
ble to a church which holds that ignorance is the mother of devotion; but
would ill accord with the church of Christ, which proposes its creed to be read
and studied by all, invites and encourages inquiry, and demands from men a
rational service. Those are commended who, like the Bereans, search the
Scriptures daily, with a view to ascertain whether the doctrines proposed to
them are true; and every member is called upon to be always ready to give " a
reason of the hope which is in him, to any man who asks him."
The standard by which the knowledge of those who seek admission into
the church should be tried, is the Scriptures. But the several churches of
Christendom have adopted, besides the Scriptures, what have been called sub
ordinate standards, — creeds, articles, and confessions. At first it may seem
that this is an unwarrantable addition, and derogates from the perfection and
permanent authority of the word of God; but their conduct admits of a satis
factory explanation. In the first place, They profess — and this is true at least
of Protestant churches — to exhibit in their creeds only the doctrines of Scrip
ture, and to e^lude all human dogmas. But if this is a fair representation of
the design of their creeds, it may be said that they are of no use, as the Scrip
tures contain all that they tell us. In answer to this objection, I observe, in
the second place, That they are necessary for the defence of the truth against

460 THE CHURCH.
heresies and errors. The authors of these profess great reverence for the
Scriptures, and are ready at any time to give an account of their faith couched
in their language, while they affix to ita sense totally different from that which
you understand it to convey. Hence arose the necessity of employing a test
to ascertain their real sentiments; and such a test is a creed expressed in human
words, which established usage has rendered definite and incapable of perver
sion. This is a short account of the origin of creeds; and those who exclaim
most vehemently against them, are the causes of the evil of which they
complain. When churches employ their subordinate standards as a test of religious
sentiments, their reason is not that they consider them as having any authority
in themselves, but that they appear to them to be founded on Scripture, and
proper therefore to be used as a means of discovering the real sentiments of
those who are desirous to be received into their fellowship. It is evident,
however, that if the assent of private members is to be required to them, they
ought to be very short and simple; and some modern creeds, however excellent,
are too copious, and involve too many intricate points, to be fit for this purpose.
I might add as a third qualification of the members of the church, a profes
sion of faith; for it is not the simple possession of knowledge which entitles
any man to be admitted into its communion, but a declaration, explicit or im
plied, that he believes the doctrines in which he has been instructed, acknow
ledges Jesus Christ as his Saviour, submits to his authority, and is resolved to
yield obedience to his laws and institutions. This profession is made by adults
at their baptism, and by those who were baptized in infancy, by their attend
ance upon the ordinances of religion, and by the answers returned to the
questions proposed to them when they apply for admission to ihe Lord's table.
The last qualification which I shall mention, is a character which shall give
credibility to this profession. If men profess to know God, but deny him in
works, their conduct neutralizes their profession, and it is no breach of charity
to consider it as insincere. Of faith as it exists in the heart, we can have no
knowledge but by external signs, which are to be sought for in the practice;
because the truths of religion, when believed, do not remain as an intellectual
treasure in the understanding, but exerting their power upon the heart, give
rise to a conduct becoming the gospel. Our Lord has laid down a rule to di
rect us in our private and public judgments of our brethren, " Ye shall know
them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles ?
Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit, but a corrupt tree bringeth
forth evil fruit."* All Christians might be expected to agree, that into a so
ciety founded by Jesus Christ, and dedicated to his service, those should not be
permitted to enter, who show, by their disregard of piety and their unholy
actions, that whatever they pretend, they are hostile to his religion; and that a
church is criminally negligent, and guilty of a violation of her trust, which
lays open her fellowship to the profane and worldly. The members of the
primitive church are addressed as " saints," and " faithful in Christ Jesus,"
and were so called perhaps, because the majority were truly entitled to this ap
pellation, or at least because they were saints in appearance. There were
great irregularities in that church; but these were unavoidable in a society, all
the members of which were imperfect, and into which some unworthy persons
had intruded under the mask of hypocrisy. They were not however allowed,
and discipline was employed to correct them, and to expel those who refused
to be reformed.
From the account which has been given of the necessary qualifications for
admission into the visible church, it follows that it is not regeneration by the
Spirit which is an indispensable pre-requisite, but the appearance of it; and
* Matth. vii. 16, 17.

THE CHURCH. 461
after all that can be said upon the subject, in this the greatest zealots for purity
of communion must virtually acquiesce. It is certain, that God has not given
the church authority to scrutinize the hearts of candidates, because he has not
furnished the means. The gift of discerning spirits has long since ceased, and
the present rulers of the church can judge only by profession and practice. To
attempt to penetrate into the recesses of the soul, is to erect an inquisitorial tri
bunal for the trial of men's spiritual state; and as long as there are hypocrisy
and self-deceit in the world, the sentences pronounced from it will be often ex
ceedingly unjust. The Apostles appear to have received disciples upon such
a profession of faith as we require from our applicants; and although it is mani
fest from the New Testament, that there were unregenerated persons in the
primitive church, we do not find that they thought of expelling them on this
ground, if they were free from scandalous crimes. Without regeneration,
however, we readily acknowledge external connexion with the visible church
will be of no avail, " for in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing,
nor iincircumcision, but a new creature."*
In the sequel of this lecture, I shall direct your attention to some general
characters or properties of the church.
The first is its unity. It is one church, and must be so called, whether we
consider it as invisible or visible. With regard to the former there is no doubt,
as all its members are united to Jesus Christ as their head, animated by the
Spirit of holiness, and thus compacted into one body. The unity may not be
so obvious with respect to the latter, because it is divided into different socie
ties, not only distinct in place, but also disjoined by the peculiarity of their
tenets and usages. But the appearance of disunion will be diminished, if we
attend to what was formerly hinted, that although the designation of the visible
church is employed in common language with great latitude, yet we cannot
rationally and scripturally comprehend in it any society, which does not pro
fess the true religion in its essential parts. We thus exclude heretical sects,
and recognize as the constituent members, those only who acknowledge " one
Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all." These we account
one on the ground of the fundamental points in which they agree, and do not
consider the unity as destroyed by the minor point in which they disagree.
Particular churches would do well to look upon themselves only as integral
parts, and not as the whole. The latter idea is too much encouraged by the
illiberal views and high pretensions of some parties. In certain cases it is
avowed; and thus, while certain societies appropriate the name and privileges
of the church, to the exclusion of all others, they prove themselves to be no
part of it at all, but are self-excommunicated, cut off by their own act from all
interest in the body of Christ.
The second character of the Church is its universality. It is the catholic
church; and this epithet is explained by the Fathers to mean that it extends
throughout the world, reaches from one end of the earth to another, as a body,
says Theophylact, consisting of the churches every where, having Christ as
its head. It is called Catholic, to signify that it is not confined to a particular
country or sect, but comprehends all who profess the true religion, and observe
the ordinances of the gospel. It is not Catholic de facto, if we mean by this
word universally diffused; for we know that there are extensive regions and
populous nations in which it has not been established, or claims only a very
few of the inhabitants. The whole number of nominal Christians amounts only
to a fifth or a sixth part of the human race. But it is Catholic de jure, be
cause " the heathen have been given to Christ for his inheritance, and the
uttermost parts of the earth for his possession." His commission authorized
the Apostles and their successors to preach the gospel to every creature; and
* Gal. v. 6.
2 0.2

462 THE CHURCH.
the sense in which we understand prophecy, encourages us to hope that in a
future age, the light of truth, like that of the sun, will illuminate every region;
that the whole world will be converted into a temple, and all its inhabitants
will be worshippers of the living God. The claims of the church of Rome
to be the Catholic Church are well known, and to every man who understands
the Scriptures, they appear equally presumptuous and ridiculous. Their arro
gant style is too much imitated by some Protestants. In the southern part of
the Island, the cry of "the Church," "the Church," is raised by proud, in
tolerant, uncharitable men, who appropriate this name to their own society,
and pronounce all who do not submit to the government of bishops, to be
schismatics and sectarians, who have no hope of salvation but through the un-
covenanted mercy of God. But "we have not so learned Christ." We ac
knowledge as a part of the church " every congregation of faithful men in
which the pure word of God is preached, and the sacraments are duly adminis
tered." The third character of the church is its perpetuity. The declarations and
promises concerning Zion, that God would establish it, and that it should
be his rest for ever, are fulfilled in that society of which it was a figure. We
believe upon the best authority, that as the church has subsisted from its erec
tion to the present hour, so it will continue through all subsequent ages, till the
second coming of Christ. " Upon this rock will I build my church, and the
gates of hell shall not prevail against it;"* neither death, which is daily making
havock among the members, and is probably meant by the gates of Hades, nor
the powers of darkness, as the words in our translation seem to import. In
the most degenerate times God has had a seed to serve him, a remnant has been
saved; as in the days of Elijah, who supposed himself to be the sole worship
per of God, while there were seven thousand in Israel who had not bowed
the knee to the image of Baal. There has always, too, been a visible profes
sion of Christianity; there have been assemblies held, in which its forms of
worship have been observed; and although many of these have been so corrupt,
that they might rather have been considered as synagogues of Satan, yet
even during the reign of Antichrist, it appears that in some corner or other of
Christendom, there were men enlightened by divine grace, who escaped the
general pollution, and maintained the truth at the peril of their lives.
With the perpetuity of the church, is intimately connected the question con
cerning its infallibility. It is one of the principal points of discussion between
Protestants and Papists. The latter strenuously maintain that the church can
not err; and appropriating this prerogative to their own church, they call upon
all men, under the pain of damnation, to submit to its authority. In settling the
point to which this infallibility extends, they differ among themselves; but all
agree that it is lodged somewhere in the church, in the Pope, or in a general
council, or in both united. The doctrine of Protestants is stated in our Con
fession of Faith, in the following passages. " All synods or councils since the
Apostles' time, whether general or particular, may err, and many have erred."
" The purest churches upon earth are subject both to mixture and error, and
some have so degenerated as to become no churches of Christ, but synagogues
of Satan."! These assertions it would be easy to support, both by reasoning
from Scripture, and by an appeal to the history of religion in the ages which
are past. We believe that infallibility can be predicated of no assembly, how
ever learned, of no association of professed Christians, and still less of any
individual, although dignified with the high title of the vicegerent of Christ.
Still, there is a sense in which the church may be said to be infallible, and
must be considered as such, if we hold its perpetuity. The true faith can
never be utterly lost, because, if such a calamity could take place, the church
* Matth. xvi. 18. * Conf. xxxi. 4. xxv. 5.

THE CHURCH. 463
•would be annihilated. The truth will be known and professed by some society
or other, greater or less, in all generations, and all the true members of the
church are under the unerring guidance of the Spirit; so that, although they
may mistake in some points, and be for a time seduced by temptation, they shall
not totally and finally apostatize. This view of the matter does not in any degree
favour the pretensions of the Church of Rome, or secure the faith of one society
more than that of another. It is applicable to no particular church, and merely
affirms that, however widely error may be diffused, and whatever desolation
persecution may work, the power of Jesus Christ will preserve his own reli
gion, and raise up some persons to profess it. t

LECTURE XCVII.
ON THE CHURCH.
True Nature of Schism. — Separation, when Justifiable. — Government of the Church. — Dif
ferent Opinions Respecting it. — Popish Form. — Assumptions on which it is Founded, Ex
amined and Disproved. — Episcopacy. — Examination of the Arguments in its Favour. —
Proof that Presbyters and Bishops are of the same Order.
It is the duty of the members of the church to dwell together as brethren in
unity. Many arguments are employed in Scripture to inculcate mutual love;
but there is one derived, in particular, from the connexion which subsists be
tween them as parts of a whole : " God," says Paul, " has tempered the human
body together, that there should be no schism in it, but that the members should
have the same care one for another. And whether one member suffer, all the
members suffer with it; or one member be honoured, all the members rejoice
with it. Now," he adds, " ye are the body of Christ, and members in particu
lar;"* applying this illustration to the church, and signifying that the members
should sympathize with each other.
Opposed to this love, which should characterize the disciples of Christ, is
schism; an evil which is highly detrimental to the interests of religion, and of
which it is the more necessary to take notice, because its true nature has been
often misunderstood. In common language, it signifies an open division among
Christians; and they are called schismatics who have withdrawn from the
communion of a church, and formed themselves into a separate party. Dr.
Campbell, in his Preliminary Dissertations,! has explained the scriptural sense
of the term. His view of it, however, is not new, but had been adopted long
before him by many writers, who had accurately examined its import. The
Apostle Paul uses the word to denote an internal division in the church, arising
from alienation of affection. Hence he says to the Corinthians, " Now, I be
seech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that there be no
schisms among you."! He addressed this earnest exhortation to them, not so
much to prevent the evil, as to suppress it, for he knew that it already existed:
" When ye come together in the church, I hear that there are schisms among
you, and I partly believe it."§ As he exhorts them, at the same time, to be
perfectly joined together in the same mind, and in the same judgment, he inti
mates that their schisms proceeded from a difference of sentiment; and it is cer-
* 1 Cor. xii. 24— 27. * Diss. ix. p. 3. $ 1 Cor.L 10. §Ib. xi. 18.

464 THE CHURCH.
tain that, if men were agreed in all their views, the utmost harmony would
prevail. But, whatever is the cause, schism itself consists in the want of love
among the members of the church, and may exist in full force while there is
no visible breach in their external communion. If, in a church, there are two
parties who meet in the same places of worship, and are subject to the same
rulers, but, at the same time, are actuated by mutual jealousy, and are secretly
endeavouring to counteract and undermine each other; in that church there is a
schism. United in their sentiments respecting articles of faith and modes of
worship, Christians may be divided about matters of inferior moment, as we
too often see the peace of congregations disturbed, and hostile parties formed,
about the management of their temporal affairs, or the election of a minister, or
some point much more insignificant. The schism in the Church of Corinth
originated in the preference of one minister to another; while one said, " I am
of Paul, and another, I am of Apollos, and a third, I am of Cephas."* In all
such cases a schism exists, because that love is wanting, without which a so
ciety of professed Christians is not one body, but a number of parts in juxta
position, or a chaos of discordant elements.
Let us proceed to speak of separation from a church. Now the question,
whether in any case it is lawful, relates to a particular, not to the universal
church; for to separate from the latter, would be to renounce Christianity, and
to excommunicate ourselves from Jesus Christ himself. There have been in
dividuals so situated, that they could not hold fellowship with any society of
Christians; but they considered themselves as still belonging to the true church,
and were ready to unite themselves Visibly to it as soon as they should enjoy
an opportunity. A total separation from it takes place in cases of apostasy, as
when a person, who had been baptized, becomes an Infidel, a Jew, a Maho
metan, or a Heathen. It is, therefore, only concerning the lawfulness of sepa
ration from a particular church, that there is any room for discussion. I begin
with observing, that no particular church has a claim, distinct from the truth of
its principles, upon any man to enter into its communion, rather than into that
of any other church which is equally pure. He may have been baptized by
its ministers; but as the sacraments are not badges of a party, but belong to
the whole body of Christians, he must be considered as having been baptized
into the communion of the Catholic Church. His accession to a particular
church, when he has arrived at the age of maturity, ought to be the result of a
serious examination whether its creed accords with the infallible standard.
When he has found such a church, he ought not to withdraw from it upon light
grounds; and nothing is more unbecoming the Christian profession, than the
conduct of those who run from one society to another, from restlessness of
temper, or in resentment of some occasional offence which has arisen, not from
the fault of the church, but from the imprudence of some individual. There is
not, however, a greater absurdity, than to suppose that, when a man has con
nected himself with a church, he should remain in it, whatever may be its
errors in doctrine, and corruption in practice. Many reason in this manner,
and none are more apt to do so than the members of an established church, in
whose eyes its connexion with the state gives it a sacredness and an authority
which do not seem to belong to other denominations. But this is merely an
adventitious circumstance, and prejudice being laid aside, an established church,
considered simply as a religious society, will appear to every person, who
judges according to sound reason, to be exactly on a level in respect of its
spiritual claims with the sects which exist in its vicinity. That man has a very
faint idea of his duty to Jesus Christ, who imagines that he is bound to continue
in a church which is corrupt in doctrine, superstitious in worship, tyrannical
in government, and, by the relaxation, or total neglect of discipline, profanes
• 1 Cor. i. 12.

ITS GOVERNMENT. 465
its privileges by extending them to the unholy, and converts itself into a worldly
society. It is not, however, every thing exceptionable in the order and proceed
ings of a church which will justify us in forsaking it. Those who acknow
ledge that men are imperfect, are not very consistent in expecting perfection in
any association made up of such fallible materials. Even great corruptions
will not authorize us to separate, till means have been used to remedy them;
but, when every endeavour has failed, and the prevailing party are determined
to persist, no enlightened Christian can be at a loss with respect to his duty.
He must listen to the voice of conscience; he must obey God rather than men.
He may be stigmatized as a separatist and a schismatic; but he is guiltless in the
sight of God, and those alone are responsible for the consequences, who have
laid him under the necessity of maintaining, in this manner, his fidelity to
Christ. It is a consolation to know that he is still in the church of the living
God, which is not circumscribed by legal boundaries, and is independent of
acts of the legislature, and the patronage of the great.
To the constitution of any society, laws are necessary, and persons appoint
ed to execute them; a number of individuals without government are a disor
derly crowd. As Jesus Christ has founded his church to be the seat of love,
and peace, and holy order, it may be presumed that he has given direction con
cerning the manner in which its affairs should be conducted. As we learn
from the Scriptures, what office-bearers he has instituted, and what laws he has
given to regulate the conduct of individuals, it is natural to expect that we shall
receive some information from them with regard to the form which this spiritual
society should sustain, and the power which should be exercised for the set
tlement of its concerns. Some have supposed that the government of the
church is ambulatory; by which they mean, that no precise form has been pre
scribed, and that it is left to the wisdom of men to vary the form according to
circumstances; to adapt it to the genius, and habits, and civil constitution of dif
ferent nations. This is a summary mode of terminating all disputes about the
subject. Nothing more is necessary than the exercise of political wisdom, ac
companied with due care that the arrangements which are made may be
Christian in their general character, and may not interfere with any of the
acknowledged purposes which a church is intended to serve. Episcopacy will
be the proper form in one country, Presbytery in another, and Independency in
a third. The first will accord best with a monarchical government in the state,
and the two latter with a republic.
Although this opinion has found many patrons, yet most Christians are dis
posed to think that a particular form of government was appointed by Christ
and his Apostles; which consequently is of Divine right, ought to be adopted
in all countries, and preserved inviolate to the end of the world. Hence Epis
copalians, Presbyterians, and Independents, advance a claim of preference in
favour of their respective models; and the controversy has been carried on
with great warmth, and not always with a Christian temper. It is argued that,
if no human society can subsist without government, it is incredible that Jesug
Christ, to whom the care of the church is committed, should have left it without
this necessary provision for its welfare; that human wisdom was not competent
to supply this defect, because it is apt to err even in temporal affairs, and still
more in those of a spiritual nature, and experience shows what horrible corrup
tions it has introduced under various pretexts; that, when the ends of church
government are considered, it was evidently of the utmost importance that spe
cific directions should be given, as the credit of religion, the advancement of
piety and holiness, the encouragement of the good, and the restraint of the bad,
so much depend upon the due administration of it; that a form of government
was as necessary to the Christian, as it was to the Jewish Church: and we
Vol. IL— 59.

466 GOVERNMENT OF THE CHURCH:
cannot reasonably suppose that, while the government of the latter was so ex
actly delineated, that of the former has been totally neglected.
It is hazardous and presumptuous to reason a priori concerning what God
ought to have done, and hence to infer what he has actually done. This is a spe
culation too high for us; it is arrogant in short-sighted mortals, to point out the
line of conduct which it behoved an infinite Being to pursue. Yet some have
ventured to introduce a priori argument on the subject of Church government,
and to say, that certainly the wisdom of our Saviour would lead him to do what
seemed proper to them. At the same time, it cannot be denied that there is
considerable force in the arguments mentioned above, particularly in that taken
from the constitution of the Jewish Church; and on these grounds, most Chris
tians believe that there may be found in the Scriptures the outlines of a plan
for the government of that spiritual society, over which Jesus Christ presides
as Lord and King.
There is no point, however, about which Christians are more divided in sen
timent; and this diversity may be owing partly to prejudices of various kinds,
and partly to the fact, which none but furious zealots will deny, that the form
of government is not so fully and explicitly taught in Scripture, as the funda
mental articles of faith, and the great duties of morality. The three forms of
government which it is necessary to discuss, are the Episcopalian, the Inde
pendent, and the Presbyterian; but before we enter upon these, we must turn
our attention for a little to the Church of Rome.
Papists affirm that there is a visible head ofthe Church upon earth, and that
this dignity is assigned to the bishop of Rome; that he is properly the only
bishop by*Divine right, the whole episcopate being vested in him, and from
him all other bishops derive their authority; that he has dominion over the
whole Christian world; that all Christians are bound to submit to him, and that
those who refuse to do so are heretics, and are exposed to eternal damna
tion; and that he possesses this supreme and uncontrolled power as the succes
sor of Peter, who was bishop of Rome, and at his death left all his authority
and prerogatives to his successors in that See. There are disputes among Ro
man Catholics, whether infallibility is lodged in the Pope or in a general
council? and whether the Pope is superior to a council, or a council to the
Pope? but they all acknowledge him to be the universal bishop, and the vice
gerent of Christ.
Three points are assumed as the foundation of these extravagant claims; the
supremacy of Peter, his residence in Rome in the character of its bishop, and
the transmission of his power to those who occupy the same station.
With respect to the supremacy of Peter, it is founded, as Papists allege,
upon the pre-eminence which is given to him in the evangelical history, and
upon some things which our Lord said to him in particular. I shall take no
tice only of the principal passage: " I say unto thee, that thou art Peter, and
upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail
against it;"* which is applied without hesitation to the person of Peter. There
is indeed an allusion to his name, which, both in Syriac and in Greek, signifies
a stone; but it is questionable whether any thing more was intended. ' You will
observe that there is a slight change in the original — tv ei Uetpos, xao en.<, tavty
tvj jtetpq oixoSo/itjBa fiov trjv exxi\riaio,v. Had he said, ejtt, not oixoSofitiaio, or, ent
tovtq tip jittptj, oixoSofitjaa, the inference which Papists draw would have seem
ed to be more legitimate; but as the words are studiously varied — the one,
ttetpos, being in the masculine, and the other, ttetpa, in the feminine gender, —
there is reason to believe that our Lord merely alluded to his name; and that
tke Rock is either Christ himself, or the confession which Peter had made,
that he is the Messiah, and the Son of the living God; for those are the truths
* Matth. xvi. 18.

POPISH FORM. 467
upon which the Christian religion and the faith of the church are founded. In
this sense the words have been understood by some learned and distinguished
members of the Church of Rome, bishops, archbishops, and cardinals; who
have honestly acknowledged that Christ alone is the Rock, and that it is absurd
to interpret it of a man who, like Peter, was subject to infirmity. It is indeed
added, " And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and what
soever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever thou
shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." But the same words were
used on another occasion, when our Lord was speaking to all the Apostles,* and
consequently they do not imply any thing peculiar to Peter; and after his resur
rection he gave them all equal authority, when he breathed on them, and said,
" Receive ye the Holy Ghost. Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted
unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained."! As, however,
the words were addressed in the first instance to Peter, and to him alone, some
Protestants are disposed to admit that they import something peculiar, — not a
superiority to his brethren, but a priority in the order of ministration; and think
that the keys of the kingdom of heaven were said to be given to him in particular,
because Jesus Christ had destined him to be the person who should open the
kingdom, to the Jews by preaching to them on the day of Pentecost, and to
the Gentiles by preaching to Cornelius.
We do not find that the supremacy of Peter was acknowledged by his con
temporaries. It rather appears that it was utterly unknown to them, and that
he is indebted for his exaltation above the other Apostles to the ignorant and
superstitious veneration of posterity. He is indeed mentioned first on the day
of Pentecost, when we are informed that he stood up with the eleven; but as
the ardour of his temper had already impelled him frequently to come forward,
and sometimes not much to his honour, so now, when it was under better di
rection, it would still lead him to take the precedence of his brethren in the
performance of his duty. Besides, it is probable that he was the oldest of
the company, and would on this account be the spokesman of the rest. Paul
seems to have been ignorant of the pretended supremacy of Peter, when he
says, that he himself was "not a whit behind the very chiefest Apostles;"!
for if he had ever heard of it, he would not have presumed to place himself
upon a level with Peter; and, when comparing himself with the other Apos
tles, would have excepted him. He did not acknowledge his superiority at
Antioch, where he " withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed"§
for symbolizing with the Jews, from an unmanly fear of certain persons who
had come from Jerusalem. And the brethren of Jerusalem were far from sub
mitting to him implicitly as the sovereign pontiff of the church, whose deci
sions should be received by all Christians with profound respect, when they
contended with him after he had preached to Cornelius, and demanded an ac
count of his conduct.ll
Having seen that the supremacy of Peter has no foundation in Scripture,
let us inquire, Whether there is any proof that he was bishop of Rome ?
Some of the ancients asserted, and Papists firmly believe, that he was first
bishop of Antioch, and afterwards removed to Rome, where he continued till
his martyrdom, during the space of five-and-twenty years. Few of his pre
tended successors have equalled him in the length of his reign; and as those
who are elected are commonly advanced in life, it is customary to say at the
installation of a Pope, Sancte pater, non videbis annos Petri. I remark, in
the first place, That it is absurd to suppose an Apostle to have been a bishop,
because constant residence in any particular place was contrary to the nature
and design of his office. The Apostles were appointed " to be witnesses to
* Matth. xviii. 18. * John xx. 22, 23. i 2 Cor. xi. 5.
§ Gal. ii. 1 1. j Acts xi. 2.

468 GOVERNMENT OF THE CHURCH.
Christ in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost
part of the earth."* They were given to the church at large; and would
have been guilty of a violation of duty if they had appropriated their labours to
a particular part of it. Peter is degraded by the supposition, that from being
an Apostle he became bishop of Rome, unless he was also constituted the visi
ble head of the church; but we have seen that the Scripture gives no counte
nance to his pretended supremacy. I remark, in the second place, That there
is no satisfactory evidence that he was bishop of Rome. He is indeed called
so by Eusebius, who wrote in the fourth century; and the oldest writer who
is said to have asserted it, lived a hundred years after the death of the Apostle.
But in a case of so much importance, it is not human testimony, however
explicit, which would suffice, and far less uncertain traditions and doubtful
arguments. If Jesus Christ did appoint him bishop of Rome and head of his
church upon earth, and if it was his intention that all the subsequent bishops of
that city should succeed him in his high prerogatives, and Christians should look
up to them as their guides and governors, we might reasonably expect that the
fact upon which the mighty superstructure is reared, would be clearly delivered
in Scripture. On this subject, however, it preserves profound silence. Papists
appeal to a verse in the first Epistle of Peter, which says, " The church that is
at Babylon saluteth you;"! and affirm that this is Rome, because it is so called in
the Revelation of John, and, consequently, that Peter was there when he
wrote. But this is a miserable shift. In a prophetical work where symboli
cal language is used, Rome might be called Babylon, on account of its moral
resemblance to that ancient city; but the change of the name would have been
altogether improper in a plain epistle, in which there was no reason for con
cealment. There is no doubt that he means the Babylon so often mentioned
in the Old Testament. It is decisive against the notion of Peter's residence
in Rome, that in the Epistle which he addressed to the Christians there, Paul
sent no salutation to him, although he saluted several others; and that, although
he lived in Rome for at least two years, and wrote several epistles from it, he
never once mentions his name. How could this have been if he had been
bishop of that city ? Not to multiply arguments, I shall only add, that Cle
ment, who is so honorably mentioned in the New Testament, in an epistle
written from Rome to the Church of Corinth, says that Paul suffered martyr
dom in the west, but takes no notice of the martyrdom of Peter. His silence
is absolutely unaccountable, if, as Papists tell us, Peter had been bishop of
Rome, and had been crucified there before the eyes of Clement. The sum of
all that has been said is, that we have no evidence that Peter was ever in
Rome, and still less that he was its bishop.
Thus we see that the claims of the Pope are the baseless fabric of a vision.
But although we should grant the premises, the conclusion would by no means
necessarily follow. It is not a legitimate inference, that because Peter was
universal bishop and resided in Rome, the bishops of Rome must be acknow
ledged the heads of the church, unless it could be shown that he had authority
to transmit, and did actually leave, all his power and prerogatives to them. But
at this point the proof totally fails. We have only assertion instead of argu
ment; and it must be so, because Papists would have it so. How does it ap
pear to have been the will of Christ that there should always be a visible head
of his Church upon earth ? How does it appear that the bishop of Antioch,
where Peter is said to have first had his throne, has not as good a claim as the
bishop of Rome ? How comes it to pass that the ancient church knew nothing
of this supremacy, and rejected all approaches to it ? and that even a bishop of
Rome thundered out anathemas against the bishop of Constantinople for assum
ing the very title in which his successors now glory ?! And is it credible that
* Acts i. 8. * 1 Pet v. 13. $ Gregory the Great, in a. n. 595.

EPISCOPACY. 469
Jesus Christ intended that they should be his representatives and vicegerents,
whose ignorance, and profligacy, and cruelty, and falsehood, have stamped their
names with infamy ? that the gift of infallibility should be conferred upon adul
terers, and robbers, and murderers ? and the salvation of men should be sus
pended upon submission to devils in human shape, as many of the Popes well
deserve to be called ? To these questions we leave the votaries of Antichrist
to return such answers as they can.
It is. not necessary to proceed farther in the consideration of the form of
government established in the Church of Rome, and to speak of its cardinals
and its patriarchs, and its different ecclesiastical orders. When stript of some
adventitious circumstances, it resolves itself into simple Episcopacy; and our
reasoning respecting this form of government will apply to every church,
whether Greek, Papist, or Protestant, in which it is adopted.
I shall now, therefore, call your attention to the Episcopal form of govern
ment, and in the following remarks, shall refer to it as established in the
southern part of the island.
In the Church of England, there are three ecclesiastical orders, — deacons,
priests, and bishops. The lowest is the order of deacons, whose office it is to
baptize, to read the Scriptures, homilies, and prayers to the people, to assist the
priests in the distribution of the Eucharist, and if it seem good to the bishop,
also to preach. It is the business of the priests, or presbyters, to preach, to
read prayers, to administer both sacraments, and to pronounce the sentence of
absolution upon penitents. To the bishop it belongs to ordain priests and dea
cons, to confirm those who have been baptized, and to rule over their dioceses,
of which all the clergy are subject to tlieir authority. In the government of
the Church, neither deacons nor priests have any share; it is vested solely in
the bishops. The latter may preach if they please, but this is a matter of choice.
To preach the gospel is not an essential duty of their office, they are appointed
merely to rule; and hence it appears that, although they receive double honour,
they are not worthy of it, according to the judgment of Paul, who assigned
it only to those who both rule well and labour in word and doctrine.*
Hence you will perceive what is the specific difference between Episcopacy
and Presbytery. Episcopacy holds a distinction of ranks among the minis
ters of religion; and its fundamental article is that a bishop is superior to a
presbyter. According to Presbytery, all the ministers of the word are on a
level in respect of office and authority, whatever differences may be among
them, in age, and talents, and learning. A gradation of ranks is indeed al
lowed even by Presbyterians, who admit elders to rule, and deacons to serve
the poor; but they assert the parity of those whose office it is to preach and
administer the sacraments.
The arguments of Episcopalians in favour of their form of government,
are derived from the Scriptures, as well a3 from the practice of antiquity.
In the first place, They have sometimes founded an argument upon the
constitution of the Jewish Church, in which there was a gradation of ranks;
the Levites being appointed to perform various inferior services in the taberna
cle and temple, the priests to offer sacrifices upon the altar, and the High
Priest to preside over them all, and to enter into the holy of holies. It has
hence been inferred that the wisdom of Jesus Christ would undoubtedly lead
him to give a similar constitution to his church. This however is only a pre
sumptive argument, which is of no weight unless it be found to be supported
by facts; and may be pronounced also to be a presumptuous one, as it pre
scribes the law of conduct, which he who is wiser than all men was bound to
pursue. The Christian dispensation is so different from the Jewish, that no
conclusion with respect to the former can be drawn from the mode of adinin-
* I Tim. v. 17.
2R

470 GOVERNMENT OF THE CHURCH:
istering the latter. The ceremonial system was totally abolished at the death
of Christ; and it is to no purpose to presume that any part of it was renewed,
unless it can be proved that it actually was so from Scripture. It is not
necessary to proceed farther in the refutation of this argument, as it is aban
doned and rejected as invalid by some of the best writers of ihe Episcopal
communion. In the second place, They affirm that there was a distinction of ranks
among the office-bearers of the church, instituted by our Lord himself during
his ministry upon earth; and they appeal for proof to the Apostles, who were
of the first degree, and to the Evangelists, who were of the second. The
Apostles represented the bishops of the church, and the seventy disciples the
presbyters. But " this comparison," says Dr. Whitby, " will not hold, for
the seventy received not their mission, as Presbyters do, from bishops, but im
mediately from the Lord Christ as well as the Apostles, and in their first mis
sion were plainly sent on the same mission, and with the same power."* Ac
cording to him, they were not dependent upon the Apostles, and were equal to
them in authority; and consequently, this is no warrant for Episcopalian sub
ordination. Other writers of the same principles agree with him. The truth
is, that the commission of the seventy seems to have been temporary, and
probably ceased as soon as it was executed. But the argument is completely
overthrown by a consideration which has been insisted upon even by an Epis
copalian author. " It is 'obviously observable in the evangelical records, that
the church was not and could not be founded till our Lord was risen from the
dead, seeing it was to be founded on his resurrection." The truth of this re
mark is indisputable, and so likewise is the following reasoning from it. " If
the Christian church had no being before Christ's resurrection, then certainly
there was no government; and if no government, then certainly not prelatical
government; and consequently, the argument is lost to all intents and purposes.
It is clear as light, that the followers of Christ in the days of his flesh, were
under no distinct government but that of the Jewish Church, with which they
were still incorporated, and from which, as we have already proved, no con
sequence can be drawn for the' nature of the Christian government."
In the third place, They reason in favour of Episcopacy from the cases of
Timothy and Titus, whom they suppose to have been bishops, the one of Ephe
sus, and the other of Crete. They are indeed so called in the postscripts to the
Epistles, which Paul addressed to them; but he who should reason from these
would make himself ridiculous, because it is acknowledged by all learned men,
that they are of a later age, and of no authority. Presbyterians affirm that
there is not only no evidence that Timothy and Titus were bishops, but that
the contrary is absolutely certain. Timothy was of a higher order even than
a bishop, being expressly called an Evangelist, who was next in rank to an
Apostle, and, like the Apostles, had a general care of the churches. Titus is
commonly supposed to have, held the same office. It is evident that Ephesus
was not the stated charge of Timothy, because he would have left it when
Paul went into Macedonia,! had not the Apostle entreated him to remain, on ¦
account of eertain false teachers who were endeavouring to disseminate error in
that church. Such intreaties would not have been necessary, if Timothy had
been bishop of Ephesus, for such a man would not have thought of abandon
ing his station; nor would Paul have afterwards requested him to come to him
at Rome, as he does in the second Epistle,* to be his companion and assistant
there, in the absence of certain other persons who had withdrawn for differ
ent reasons. Hence it is evident that his residence in Ephesus waj merely
temporary, for the accomplishment of a particular purpose; and it happens
most -aincitunatdy for the pretended bishopric of Timothy, th?t vhen Paul
* Whitb/s Commentary, note on Luks x. 1. f 1 Tim. i. 3. $ 2 I'jm. iv. 3.

EPISCOPACY. 471
sometime before had an interview with the ministers of that church, as we
read in the twentieth chapter of the Acts, he found that they had no need of a
bishop, because they had not only one but many; for he addresses all the elders,
as we shall afterwards see, by this appellation.*
It is evident that the argument equally fails with respect to Titus. He -was
left in Crete to ordain elders, to reprove sharply unruly and vain talkers and
deceivers, to admonish heretics, and excommunicate such as were obstinate.!
But, according tp the principles of Episcopalians themselves, his office was
extraordinary. The elders whom he was appointed to ordain, are expressly
Called bishops, as we shall afterwards show. But to ordain bishops is not the
work of a bishop, but of an archbishop; and none will contend that there was
any such person in the Apostolic church. Titus therefore could not be a bishop,
but must have held a superior rank. The case seems to have been this, that
the affairs of the church in Crete were not yet properly settled, and Titus,
with the power of an Evangelist, was left by Paul on that island, to set in or
der the things which were wanting, and particularly to appoint ministers to
labour in word and doctrine. That he was not the bishop of Crete may be
inferred from the request or order of the Apostle, that he should come to him
at Nicopolis, where he had determined to winter-! Paul surely would not
have called him away from Crete, if it had been his stated charge; for, how
ever common it has since been for bishops not to reside in their dioceses, no
such practice was then known; and had there been any attempt to introduce
it, the Apostle would have opposed himself to it as a criminal desertion of
duty. In the fourth place, They reason from the Epistles of Jesus Christ to the
seven churches of Asia, which are addressed to the angels of those churches,
by whom none can be meant but the bishops. I lay no stress upon an argu
ment which has been used by Presbyterians, that the angles are the churches
themselves, because it appears from the contents of the Epistles, and from the
occasional use of the plural number, that they are addressed to the whole body
of Christians. It is inconceivable that a whole society should be called an
angel, and what is still more strange, the angel of itself; and there is certainly
no reason for resorting to this supposition, as the Epistles, although intended
for the respective churches, would naturally be sent to the persons who presi
ded over them. I have therefore no doubt that the angel signifies an indi
vidual, but it does not follow that it signifies a bishop in the Episcopalian,
sense. It is a name not of order, but of office, which was given by the Jews
to the president of their synagogues, and chiefly for this reason, that he offered
up prayers to God in the name of the assembly. This being known to be
the sense in which the word was understood by the Jews, John, who was
himself a Jew, naturally applied it to the president of a Christian Church,
or the minister who officiated in holy things, and acted as intercessor with
God for the people. The utmost which can be fairly inferred, is, that in
each of the Asiatic churches, there was a person who held the first place; but
Episcopalians can derive no advantage to their cause from this circumstance,
because Presbyterians hold, that in every congregation there is, or ought to be,
one person at least who is superior to the rest, and to whom it pertains to con
duct the public offices of religion.
Episcopary is founded on the assumption, that bishops are of a different order
from presbyters. If we can show that, in the style of Scripture, they are of
the same order, the whole fabric falls to the ground. Now, when we look
into the New Testament, we find that bishop and presbyter are convertible
term1?, ar.d ire indiscriminately applied to the same individuals. When Paul
was on his way to Jerusalem, he stopped at Milotus, from which ho sent to
* Aits xx. 28. * Tit i. 5, &c * lit. iii. 13.

472 GOVERNMENT OF THE CHURCH:
Ephesus, and called the elders or presbyters of the church. No mention, you
will observe, is made of the bishop; but we are at no loss to find the reason.
It had several bishops, and thesewere the very presbyters whom the Apostle
had summoned to meet him, fo» he says to them, " Take heed to yourselves,
and to all the flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers."*
Perhaps prejudice or party-zeal had some influence in rendering the word over
seers, in this instance, because the term, in the original, if rendered in the
usual way, would not accord with the Episcopalian scheme. The Greek word
is ertiaxoTtovs, which, indeed, literally signifies overseers, but should have been
translated bishops here, as it is in other places; but, then, it would have been
evident to all, that Paul knew of no distinction between a bishop and a presby
ter, because those who were first called presbyters, are now called bishops.
In his Epistle to Titus, he says to him, " For this cause left I thee in Crete,
that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders
in every city, as I had appointed thee. If any be blameless, the husband of
one wife, having faithful children, not accused of riot, or unruly. For a bishop
must be blameless, as the steward of God."! It would be a waste of time to
show, that here the bishop and the presbyter are the same person, and no man
can resist the evidence, however much he may be disposed. The presbyter
must be blameless, for the bishop must be blameless. There would be no
force in this conclusion if a bishop and a presbyter were different persons.
And hence you perceive the reason why, in his First Epistle to Timothy, he
makes no mention at all of presbyters, but speaks only of bishops and deacons.
It is, that he did not consider the two former as different; and consequently, in
describing the qualifications of the one class, he describes those of the other.
For the same reason he takes no notice of presbyters, in his Epistle to the
Philippians, but addresses himself to the bishops and deacons.! He mus mr"
nishes us with a new argument against Episcopacy. There were several
bishops in the Church of Philippi; but how could this be, according to the
scheme of our antagonists? More bishops than one in a church seem to them
as monstrous as more heads than one upon a human body. It follows that the
bishops of Philippi were plain presbyters, and that such were the only bishops
in the apostolic age. Wherever Episcopacy may be found, it is vain to seek
for it in the Scriptures. Of this, its advocates are in some degree sensible,
and therefore appeal to antiquity; but upon this part of the argument we cannot
at present enter.

LECTURE XCVIII.
ON THE CHURCH.
Examination of the Arguments for Episcopacy, Drawn from Christian Antiquity. — Just Im
port of its Testimony. — Explanation of the Renunciation of Episcopacy in the Solemn
League and Covenant. — Independent and Presbyterian Forms of Government. — Examina
tion of the Arguments for Independency. — Proof that the Term " Church" in the New Tes
tament Includes more than One Congregation.
I concluded the last lecture by observing, that Episcopalians appeal to an
tiquity in favour of their scheme of ecclesiastical government. Many of them
* Acts xx. 28. * Tit. i. 5-7. i Phil. i. 1.

EPISCOPACY. 473
have too much wisdom to think that any decisive argument can be drawn from
the Scriptures, and they therefore have recourse to the practice of the primitive
church; contending that, as Episcopacy is the most ancient form of government,
it should be universally adopted. If it could be proved that there were such
bishops as they plead for, ever since the death of the Apostles, and that it was
universally affirmed by the earlier Fathers that they were instituted by the
Apostles, we might be perplexed, but still should not be convinced, while we
could find no vestige of them in the genuine apostolical writings. It is a Pro
testant principle, that nothing is an article of faith which is not delivered in the
Scriptures in express terms, or by necessary consequence; and the moment we
deviate from this principle, and admit any thing upon the authority of tradition,
we begin to build upon the foundation of popery, and cannot foresee the extent
of the superstructure which we may be led step by step to raise upon it. It
has been observed, that Episcopalians, in managing the plea for their church
from the testimony of antiquity, have been compelled to use the same sort of
reasoning in defence of it, against the employment of which by papists, they
protest in their controversy with them; that is, they will not allow them to ar
gue from tradition in favour of their usages and dogmas. Such is the unhappy
effect of adopting a principle for a particular purpose, while we find it incon
venient to follow it out into all its consequences. We are entangled in our
o^vn reasonings; we are under the necessity of retracting, at one time, what we
had asserted at another; we give our antagonist an advantage which he will not
fail to improve, and of which we cannot deprive him without totally shifting
our ground.
It is not denied that the Fathers speak of bishops in the primitive church,
and that lists are given of the succession of them in the principal Sees. With
respect to these, there is a good deal of uncertainty; and it happens unfortu
nately for the high claims of the Church of Rome, that it is not easy to tell
who came in the room of Peter, who, they pretend, was the first bishop. Cle
ments, Clitus, Lenius, and Anaclitus, have been mentioned; but it is doubted
whether Clitus and Anaclitus were not the same individual, and in what order
the persons now named succeeded each other; while some have suspected tha*
they are all cotemporary, and equally Bishops of Rome, as there were several
bishops at the same time in Philippi. But, although it were granted that the
catalogues are correct, it remains to be proved that they were bishops in the
Episcopalian, and not merely in the Scriptural sense; and Dr. Stilling-
fleet, himself a bishop, has candidly acknowledged, " that mere succession
of single persons named above the rest in_ the successions in apostolical
churches, cannot enforce any superiority of power in the persons so named,
above others supposed to be joint governors of the churches with them."*
We have seen that the titles of bishops and presbyters were indiscrimi
nately given to all the ministers who conducted the religious service in the
apostolic churches. It seems, however, that it was not long till the title
of bishop was appropriated to one of them for the following reason. When
there were more presbyters than one in a church, it was necessary, for the sake
of order, that one should preside in the meetings which were held for the
management of the public affairs. This honour was naturally assigned to the'
presbyter who was'oldest, or who had most experience and the greatest talents;
and he was known by the different names of president, pastor, governor, priest,
and bishop. As it is not improbable that there were several presbyters in the
seven churches, and this is certain with respect to Ephesus, when Paul had an
interview with them; some have supposed that it is this president who is called
the angel, in the epistles addressed to them. But he was only primus inter
pares, the first among his equals, and first by their choice and consent. Sir
* Works, vol. ii. p. 344, Diversities of forms of Church Gov. Part ii. ch. iv.
Vol. IL— 60. 2 n 2

474 GOVERNMENT OF THE CHURCH:
Peter King, in his Inquiry into the Constitution ofthe Primitive Church, con
siders bishops and presbyters as exactly of the same order, and invested with
the same powers; and defines a presbyter to be " a person in holy orders,
having thereby an inherent right to perform the whole office of a bishop, but
being possessed of no place or parish, nor actually discharging it, without the
permission and consent of the bishop of a place or parish."* This definition
differs a little, but not materially, from the view which we have taken of bishops
and presbyters; for it makes only this distinction between them, that bishops
had a charge, and presbyters had not, and consequently, that presbyters must
have leave from the bishop before they could perform any part of their function
within the limits of his jurisdiction. Presbyterians make a similar distinction,
and considering every minister as bishop in his own parish or congregation,
forbid any other minister to preach and baptize in it without permission asked
and obtained. Sir Peter proceeds to show, at considerable length, that the
distinction, in the primitive church, was little more than nominal, because the
powers of bishops and presbyters were the same. He proves, from the
writings of the Fathers, that presbyters had a right to preach, that they bap
tized; that they administered the Eucharist; that they presided in the consisto
ries together with the bishop; that they had power to excommunicate, to restore
penitents, and to confirm; and lastly, that they had the power of ordination.
He was therefore fully justified in saying, that " they were of the very same
specific order with bishops, having the same inherent right to perform all ec
clesiastical offices."! Thus far it appears that antiquity gives no countenance
to modern Episcopacy, which affirms bishops to be of a different order from
presbyters, and appropriates to them the power of ordination, and the whole
government of the church.
Episcopalians appeal with much confidence to the epistles of Ignatius, as
furnishing clear proof that, in his time, the church was governed by bishops;
and they lay the greater stress upon his authority, because he flourished in the
first, and ended his course by a glorious martyrdom early in the second centu
ry, was contemporary at least with some of the Apostles, and from an expres
sion which he uses, but which is ambiguous, is supposed to have seen Christ
in the flesh. There has, however, been much controversy respecting his epis
tles, and it is not yet terminated. When they were first published, they were
full of gross corruptions, and contained heretical sentiments, which such a man
as Ignatius must have held in abhorrence; and as it thus appearsthat unprinci-
pled men had altered them to serve their own purposes, it is impossible to de
termine to what extent they had carried their wicked design. In the more
correct form which they have since assumed, it is impossible to ascertain with
precision, what is genuine and what is interpolated, as some of the most learned
writers of the Church of England have acknowledged; and this being the case,
an appeal to them cannot decide the controversy, because it remains doubtful
whether it is Ignatius himself who speaks, or some other person in his name.
The style of the epistles concerning the dignity, the authority, and the preroga
tives of a bishop, and the demand of little less than implicit submission to him,
ill accords with the simplicity of the primitive times, and with the humility
which may be conceived to have characterized a man who had lived with the
Apostles, and had imbibed their spirit. Would the genuine Ignatius have said
without qualification, that what the bishop approves is acceptable to God?
After all from these epistles as they stand, it is the opinion even of some
Episcopalians, that little can be drawn in favour of their scheme. "In all
those thirty-five testimonies," says Bishop Stillmgfleet, "produced out of Ig
natius' epistles for Episcopacy, I can meet but with one which is brought to
prove the least semblance of an institution of Christ for Episcopacy; and if I
*Chap.iv.§l. *Chap.iv.§3.

EPISCOPACY. 475
be not deceived, the sense of that place is clearly mistaken too."* From the
impossibility of determining what is genuine and what is interpolated in those
epistles, the utmost which we can safely infer from them is, that there were
bishops in the days of Ignatius, but this concession will not at all serve the
cause of our antagonists, because there were bishops in the days of the
Apostles, who, we have seen, were only presbyters, and because the person
to whom this name was afterwards given by Way of distinction, was merely
the president in an assembly of his equals.
We have already seen, that the bishops of the primitive church were very
different from the persons to whom this title is given in modern times; that
they possessed no peculiar powers, and could do nothing which a presbyter
was not competent to perform. They differed from them also in the extent of
their dioceses. A modern bishop has the superintendence of many churches or
congregations scattered over the face of the country; but an ancient bishop
presided over a single congregation only, or at most, over the Christians of a
single city. The original meaning of the word has not been less changed in
this respect, than by making it denote a person of a different order from a pres
byter. There were bishops not only in large cities, but in small villages, as
has been shown in many instances. The diocese of a bishop was exactly the'
parish of a Presbyterian minister; and many bishoprics were much smaller than
the parishes in this country. The number of bishops shows that their juris
diction was circumscribed within very narrow limits. In that part of Africa
which was subject to the Romans, there were in the days of Augustine, about
five hundred orthodox bishops, and four hundred of the sect of the Donatists;
and in Ireland, which we have no reason to believe to have been nearly as popu
lous as at present, St. Patrick is said to have founded three hundred and sixty-
five churches, each of which was governed by a bishop. It would require a
very perspicacious eye to perceive any distinction between such bishops and
those whom we call pastors of particular congregations. There is certainly no
resemblance between them and the prelates of the English Church; and with
whatever respect the latter may speak of them, I suspect that if they were still
officiating in their humble charges, the bishops of the present age would not
acknowledge them as their equals. It may be thought that, however diminu
tive the ancient dioceses were, the bishops truly deserved the title, because
they had at least some clergy under them. There is no doubt that sometimes
this was the case; and we have shown that this supposition is of little use to
establish the claims of modern Episcopacy, because the bishop was at first
only primus inter pares; but it is probable that many of them laboured alone,
without presbyters to assist them and execute their orders. It is not likely,
for example, that those Irish bishops had inferior clergy, whose churches were
so poor that they could afford them no better endowment than as much ground
as would pasture two cows. This, we are informed, was the whole income
of some of them.
The epistle of Clemens, " whose name," says Paul, " is in the book of life,"
is supposed to have been written between the years sixty-four and seventy of
the first century, and consequently before the destruction of Jerusalem. It was
addressed to the Church of Corinth, and had the same object with the epistles
of Paul, to compose the contentions and divisions which existed in it. He
says that " the Apostles, preaching through the countries and cities, appointed
such of the first-fruits of their ministry as they had proved by the Spirit, to be
bishops and deacons;" plainly referring to two orders only, whereas Episcopa
lians affirm that there are three in the church. He goes on to say that "the
Apostles, having known by our Lord Jesus Christ that there would be great
strife about the name of Episcopacy, appointed the foresaid persons, namely,
* Works, vol. ii. p. 349. Divine Right of Forms of Church Government, Part ii. c. vi.

476 GOVERNMENT OF THE CHURCH:
bishops and deacons, and ordained that there should be a succession of them."
Then, referring to the insubordination which prevailed at Corinth, he adds,
" It will be no small sin if we expel from the episcopate those who have
blamelessly and holily offered the gifts. Blessed are the presbyters who have
gone before, and who have had a fruitful and perfect dissolution, for they do
not fear lest any person should remove them from their settled place." It is
manifest that he here speaks of bishops and presbyters, as the same persons;
and he does so in other parts of the Epistle, where, omitting the mention of
bishops, he speaks only of presbyters. "It is base, very base, and unworthy
of the conduct of Christians, that the ancient church of the Corinthians should,
by means of one or two persons, make an insurrection against the presbyters."*
And he tenders this exhortation: " Be ye who have made this insurrection
subject to the presbyters." It is obvious that Clement knew of no bishops in
the Corinthian Church, but presbyters; and it is remarkable that he never
speaks of any persons in that church under the name of bishops, and still less
of one to whom the title exclusively belonged.
Episcopalians appeal also to Irenaeus, who presided over the Church of
Lyons in the second century, and imagine that he bears testimony to their
cause, when he says, " We can reckon those who were appointed bishops by
the Apostles in the churches, and their successors, to our days, whom they left
as their successors, delivering to them the same dignity of power," as his
words have been rendered, but literally " delivering to them their own place
of mastership;" evidently meaning nothing more than that they constituted
them the supreme office-bearers in the church, as we acknowledge a preaching
presbyter to be. Irenaeus shows that these were the bishops to whom he re
ferred, by saying farther: " It behoves us to hear the presbyters who are in
the church, those who have their succession from the Apostles, and with the
succession of the episcopate, have received the gift of truth according to the
good pleasure of the Father."
Jerome, who in learning and judgment was equal to any of the Fathers, is
decidedly against the divine origin of Episcopacy. A deacon in the Church
of Rome had broached the opinion that deacons were superior to presbyters;
Jerome confutes it in one of his epistles by this argument, that presbyters and
bishops were the same in the days of the Apostles, and that no man could be
so foolish as to maintain that deacons are superior to bishops. The proposi
tion which is the foundation of his argument, he proves from those passages of
Scripture which are usually produced by us to show the identity of apostolical
bishops and presbyters. According to this Father, bishops and presbyters
were not originally different, either in order or in degree; but the titles were
given to the same individuals, and the distinction between them which subsisted
in his time, was merely an arrangement of human prudence for the preserva
tion of peace. This is not a deduction from his argument, but it is explicitly
stated by himself. " A presbyter is the same with a bishop. Before, by the
instigation of the devil, there were parties in religion, and it was said I am
of Paul, I of Apollos, and I of Cephas, the churches were governed by the
common consent of presbyters. But afterwards it was decreed throughout the
whole world, that one chosen from the presbyters should be set over the rest, lo
whom the whole care of the church should pertain, that the seeds of schism
might be plucked up." If Jerome is right, the plea of apostolical authority in
favour of Episcopacy is unfounded; its jus diviaum is a dream; and its au
thors, more modest than their seccessors, rested it solely upon the principle '
of expedience. -
It appears, then, that in the controversy with the advocates of Episcopacy,
we have to encounter strong assertions, but feeble proofs; lofty claims, but a very
•Vid. Epist. 1. ad Corinth.

INDEPENDENCY AND PRESBYTERY. 477
questionable title; and in short, that their cause has nothing to support it, but the
sound of words in opposition to the sense.
You may think it unnecessary to have dwelt so long upon this' subject, as
with a few exceptions, we in this country are all agreed in rejecting the Epis
copalian government as unscriptural. But in the other part of the island it is
established by law, and with the arrogance which has so remarkably character
ised it, pronounces those who have adopted a different form to be schismatics,
and hardly entitled to the appellation of Christians. Dissenters, we have been
told, have " a religion without a church," because what they call their church
is not governed by bishops.
You are aware of the violent struggle between Episcopacy and Presbytery
in the days of our fathers, in the course of which they displayed exemplary
zeal, and were subjected to severe sufferings, resisting even to blood. The
reign of Episcopacy in Scotland was marked by cruelty and murder. It was
publicly and solemnly renounced at the renewal of the National Covenant, and
afterwards in the Solemn League and Covenant of the three kingdoms, and
was finally abolished at the Revolution. There is a fact relative to this busi
ness which is not generally known, and deserves to be mentioned; and I shall
give it in the words of Mr. Baxter: " The covenant was proposed by the Parlia
ment to the consideration of the Synod af Westminster. The synod stumbled
at some things in it, and especially at the word Prelacy. Mr. Burges, the
Prolocutor, Mr. Gataker, and abundance more, declared their judgments to be
for Episcopacy, even for the ancient moderate Episcopacy, in which one stated
president with his Presbytery governed every church; though not for the En
glish diocesan frame, in which one bishop without his presbytery did, by a lay
chancellor's court, govern all the presbyters and churches of a diocese being
many hundreds; and that in a secular manner, by abundance Of upstart secular
officers, unknown to the primitive church. Hereupon grew some debate in
the assembly, some being against every degree of bishops, (especially the Scot
tish divines,) and others being for a moderate Episcopacy. But these English
divines would not subscribe the covenant, till there were an alteration suited to
their judgments, and so a parenthesis was yielded to, as describing that sort of
prelacy which they opposed," — which follows the words, ' We shall endea
vour the extirpation of prelacy,' — " [that is, church government by archbishops,
bishops, deans, and chapters, archdeacons, and all other ecclesiastical officers,
depending on that hierarchy.] All which conjoined are mentioned as the de
scription of church government which they meant by prelacy, as not extending
to the ancient Episcopacy. When the covenant was agreed on, the Lords and
Commons first took it themselves; and Mr. Thomas Coleman preached in the
House of Lords, and gave it them with this public explication, that by prelacy,
we mean not all Episcopacy, but only tke form which is here described."*
Hence you learn that the Solemn League was not such a security of presbytery
as is commonly supposed, having been so framed that the friends of moderate
Episcopacy could enter into it; but this is a matter of little moment, since we
renounce Episcopacy, not because our fathers renounced it, but because we
deem it to be contrary to Scripture.
I proceed to speak of Independency; but it is impossible to examine its
claims, without at the same time attending to those of Presbytery. These
are the only forms of government which appear to receive any countenance
from Scripture, so that, if we overthrow the one, we virtually establish the
other; and hence, it is necessary to view them in connexion. I begin with
stating the principles of Independency, which are the following: that every
particular society of visible professors, agreeing to walk together in the faith
* Baxter's Narrative of his own Life and Times, Part i. p. 48.

478 GOVERNMENT OF THE CHURCH:
and order of the gospel, is a complete church; that the whole power of go
vernment is vested in the cntus fidelium, the assembly of the faithful; and that
all censures and acts of government are administered in single congregations.
The principles of Presbytery are, that particular congregations are only a part
of the church, which is composed of many congregations; that the power of
government is lodged in certain office-bearers, appointed by Jesus Christ; and
that there is a subordination of courts, in which the sentences of inferior courts
may be reviewed, and either affirmed or reversed. Hence you perceive the
reason of the names by which these two forms of government are distinguish
ed. The former is called Independency, because each congregation is a church
distinct from and independent upon all other churches in the world, possessing
all power in itself, and accountable only to Jesus Christ for its proceedings.
The latter is called Presbytery, because it is governed by presbyters, or teach
ing and ruling elders, who, although chosen by the people, do not derive their
power from them, but from Christ, and meet in presbyteries, — for this is truly
the name of all our ecclesiastical courts, although, for the sake of distinction,
they are denominated sessions, presbyteries, and synods, — meet in presbyteries,
I say, to regulate the affairs of particular congregations, of several congrega
tions connected by vicinity, or of all the congregations in a province or a na
tion. You will observe, however, that these names do not mark, with perfect
accuracy, the difference between the two forms of government; for it is not only
possible, but it has actually happened, that a church has been independent of
all other churches, and yet has been governed by presbyters, to the exclusion
of the people; but use has affixed a definite sense to the words, and they im
mediately suggest the particular constitution of the churches to which they are
respectively applied.
With a view to establish the principle upon which their system rests as its
foundation, Independents labour to prove, that the churches mentioned in the
New Testament were all single congregations. It is granted that this is some
times the meaning of the word, as when the church in the house of a certain
individual is spoken of; but I had occasion, in a former lecture, to remark, that
there are cases in which it will not admit of so limited a signification. This is
a point of great importance in the present controversy; and if it can be proved
that the word church is used, when it must be understood to comprehend several
congregations, we shall be authorized to conclude that the plan of independency
is unscriptural. It will be necessary to enter into some detail, and I shall se
lect as an example, the church of Jerusalem.
Let it be observed that, although we read of the " churches of Judea," we
never read of the "churches of Jerusalem;" but the "church" of that city is
always mentioned in the singular number. It is impossible to account for this
fact upon the principles of Independents, except by supposing, that there were
no more believers in Jerusalem than might be collected in one assembly; and
accordingly, they affirm that such was the case, and endeavour to explain
the passages of Scripture, from which their antagonists draw a contrary
conclusion, so as to favour this hypothesis. I think, however, that, to
an impartial judge, it will appear that the laws of just criticism require a
different interpretation, and that their comments do violence to the sacred text.
Let us attend to the narrative of the success of the Gospel in Jerusalem. On
the day of Pentecost, when Peter preached to the Jews, " they that gladly re
ceived' his word were baptized; and the same day, there were added unto them
about three thousand souls." The chapter closes with this remark, " And the
Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved;"* which is, indeed,
very general, but conveys to us this information, that the societ)' was constantly
receiving an'accession of new converts. Not long after, Peter again addressed
6 »Actsii.41,47.

INDEPENDENCY AND PRESBYTERY. 479
the people, and what was the effect? " Many of them which heard the word
believed; and the number of the men was about five thousand."* The historian
speaks of men — tov aj<8pui>, — and as this word denotes males, as distinguished
from females, it may be fairly inferred that many women, although not men
tioned, were converted at the same time, so that the whole number was proba
bly much greater than five thousand. But whether we suppose females, as
well as males, to have believed on this occasion or not, it is perfectly plain that
the five thousand were additional to the three thousand who were formerly
mentioned. One or two commentators, of great name, having unluckily
adopted the notion that the three thousand are included in the five, Indepen
dents have eagerly laid hold of it to help them out of a difficulty. But I would
ask, whether this idea would present itself to any person, whose mind was not
prepossessed with a particular system; and whether it would not naturally oc
cur to such a person, that Luke, who had stated the effect of the first sermon
of Peter, here states the effect of the second, without referring to any thing
which is past. Were another historian to tell us that, on a certain day, three
thousand men joined an army, and that some days after, it was joined by five
thousand, there is not a reader in the world who would suppose that he included
the first number in the second. It is impossible to conceive any reason why a
reader of the Acts should form a different opinion with respect to these two
distinct numbers of converts. Thus we have eight thousand disciples in Jeru
salem, besides those who were, believers before the day of Pentecost, and those
.who, without being specified, were daily added to the church. It has been said
with respect to those converts, and particularly such of them as embraced the
Gospel on the day of Pentecost, that they were strangers, whose usual residence
was in the countries enumerated, but who had come to Jerusalem to worship
at the feast. It would be too much to deny that any of them were strangers;
but there would be a manifest absurdity in supposing them to have been all of
this description; for, was it ever heard that an extraordinary event brought to
gether only the sojourners in a city? Does not every rational ground of calcu
lation suggest the idea that sojourners were only a minority, and that the as
sembly consisted chiefly of the inhabitants of Jerusalem? It has been remarked
that they are called " dwellers in Jerusalem,"! and that the word xo.toixtiv,
which the sacred historian uses, signifies to have a permanent abode in a place.
When a temporary residence is expressed, the verb xapoixuv is employed,
which imports simply to sojourn, or to be in a place for a short time. Many
of the converts, on the day of Pentecost, had lived in foreign countries; but they
had now removed to Jerusalem, from secular or religious motives, or perhaps,
as has been supposed, in expectation ofthe Messiah, whose advent was looked
for about this period. At any rate, although they were present in Jerusalem
only for a time, there is no reason to think that the assembly on Pentecost was
composed wholly of them; and if it should be admitted, that, of the three
thousand, one thousand, or even five hundred, were foreigners, we should make
an ample allowance.
To the eight thousand who, at the lowest computation, already belonged to
the church of Jerusalem, we must add many more; for we read that "believers
were the more added to the Lord, multitudes both of men and women;" that
" the number of the disciples was multiplied;" and again, that " the word of
God increased; and the number of the disciples multiplied in Jerusalem greatly;
and a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith."! These pas
sages import a very abundant increase, and justify us in understanding the fol
lowing words, not of the disciples in Judea, or among the Jewish nation at
large, but of those in Jerusalem alone: " Thou seest, brother, how many thou-
* Acts iv. 4. * Acts ii. 5. i Acts v. 14. vi. 1, 7.

480 GOVERNMENT OF THE CHURCH:
sands of Jews there are which believe;"* in the original, itoetu /xvpia&ts — how
many myriads, or tens of thousands.
Independents are compelled by their system to reduce to the lowest possible
number the disciples in a particular city. It is necessary for them to prove,
not that the success of the gospel was great, but that it was small. They
surely cannot feel any complacency in thus weakening the argument in favour
of Christianity, from its rapid and extensive success; but we may justly sus
pect the cause which is forced to resort to such an expedient for support. It
is certain that the argument completely fails in the case of Jerusalem, in which
there was only one church, but the members amounted to thousands and my
riads. It is objected by Independents, that " all that believed were together, and
had all things common."! It has been answered, that although the disciples,
whose number was at this time about three thousand, had met together in one
place, it will not follow that they could do so when they had increased to ten
or twenty thousand; and yet even then they were only one church. It has
been remarked too, that although the phrase ejti to avto, translated together,
may signify in one place, yet this is not necessarily its meaning, and that it
occurs where it can import only unity of purpose: "The kings of the earth
stood up, and the rulers were gathered together — titotoajuto — against the Lord,
and against his Christ."! These words are applied to the conspiracy of Pilate,
the Sanhedrim, and Herod, against our Saviour; but we know that, although
they concurred in one design, they did not assemble in the same place.
It is objected again, that they are said " to have continued daily with one
accord in the temple."§ As this immediately follows the other passage, the
same answer may be returned, that, if three thousand might assemble in the
temple, a meeting of all the disciples in it was impossible when ihe number
had become much greater. Besides, as the meetings were daily, a little reflec
tion will convince us that a multitude of people, chiefly in the lower ranks of
life, could no more have found time every day to attend the ministrations of the
Apostles than they could find it now; and, consequently, that the historian can
only mean that the Apostles daily frequented the temple, and that the disciples
met them there as they had opportunity. But there was no occasion always
to repair to it for the purpose of hearing them, because the Apostles did not
confine their labours to the temple, but " in every house ceased not to teach
and to preach Jesus Christ."i|
An argument for one congregation in Jerusalem is founded on these words:
" And when they had prayed, the place was shaken where they were assembled
together. And the multitude of them that believed, were of one heart and of
one soul. IT But these two verses, although they stand in the order now
quoted, have no connexion with each other; and it is altogether unfair to quote
them as a proof that the multitude were assembled in the place which was
shaken, as any person will see by reading the passage. The persons assem
bled in that place, are called the Apostles' own company; and probably were
a select number of the disciples, met together to pray for the deliverance of
Peter and John from the hands of their enemies.
The last argument is drawn from these words: "And they were all with
one accord in Solomon's porch, and of the rest durst no man join himself to
them; but the people magnified them."** But here the question occurs, Who
were the persons that were assembled in this porch ? It is said in the begin
ning of the verse, that " by the hands of the Apostles were many signs and
wonders wrought among the people;" and it is then added, that " they were all
with' one accord in Solomon's porch." The most natural idea is, that the per-
* Acts xxi. 20. * lb. ii. 44. * Ib. iv. 26. § Ib. ii. 46.
| lb. v. 42. 1 lb. iv. 31, 32. *• Ib. v. 12, 13.

INDEPENDENCY AND PRESBYTERY. 481
sons referred to were the Apostles; and as no others are mentioned but the
people, or the Jews, who resorted to the temple, it is a mere fancy to suppose
that the church was assembled in it.
It has appeared that there is no reason to suppose that all the Jews from for
eign countries who were converted at Pentecost were merely sojourners in
Jerusalem, and that the historian makes use of a term which imports that they
had taken up their abode in it. This is confirmed by an event which took
place some time after, and is thus related : " In those days, when the number
of the disciples was multiplied, there arose a murmuring of the Grecians
against the Hebrews, because their widows were neglected in the daily minis
tration."* The Grecians, or Hellenists, as every person knows, were Jews,
who, living without the bounds of Judea, and scattered over what was once
the Macedonian empire, spoke the Greek language, and used the Greek trans
lation of the.Scriptures in their synagogues. Of these there were some in the
Church of Jerusalem; and it is highly probable that there were also others,
who, having come from different regions, understood neither Hebrew nor
Greek, and were acquainted only with the language of the country in which
they were born. Hence arises a new argument for a plurality of congregations
in Jerusalem. Although all the members of the church might have been con
vened in one place, they could not all have joined in the service, because what
was understood by one part of them, would have been unintelligible- to the
other. It would be absurd to imagine that different speakers addressed the
audience at the same time, or that the same speaker delivered a discourse first
in one language and then in another. There is no reason, except the interests.
of a party, for making any supposition but the natural one, that as the first
disciples in Jerusalem — the place of resort to Jews from every region of the
earth — spoke different languages, they were divided into different assemblies,
in which every man heard in his own tongue the wonderful works of God. As
some time elapsed after the day of Pentecost before the Apostles went forth to
preach the Gospel to the nations of the world, unless there were in Jerusalem
believers who spoke different languages, the gift of tongues which the
Apostles had received would have been useless during this interval. We have
seen that, from their number, the primitive disciples must have been divided
into several congregations, and we now see that, if the number had been
smaller, the formation of distinct societies was necessary for the purpose of
edification. We have therefore one church, made up of several congregations,
according to the Presbyterial plan, not a number of independent assemblies,
possessing each the powers of a church in itself.
To strengthen our argument, let us observe that, in the Church of Jerusa
lem, many persons were, employed in performing the ordinary ministrations.
It is certain that all the Apostles continued in it for a considerable time after it
was founded. It appears that with them were associated prophets, or inspired
men, who foretold future events, or explained by supernatural assistance the
predictions of the Old Testament; and we read of the elders or presbyters of
that Church, or ordinary ministers of the word, as this title usually imports,
and as Independents will grant; for they deny that there is any such office-bearer
by divine appointment as a ruling, distinct from a preaching, elder. Now, I
should wish to be informed by them, how all these persons were employed ?
What were twelve Apostles, several prophets, and a competent number of
ministers, doing ? Independents tell us that they had only one congregation:
but if so, how could they find scope for" the exercise of their gifts? The
Christians in Jerusalem could not be always hearing sermons, because they
had their worldly affairs to attend to; but unless the Apostles and their assist
ants, were engaged in preaching from morning to night, on every day of the
* Acts vi. 1.
Vol. IL— 61 2 S

482 GOVERNMENT OF THE CHURCH:
week, the turn of each must have come at distant intervals, and during a con
siderable part of their time they must have been idle, in respect of this most
important duty of their office. We find, however, that this was not the case.
The Apostles were so much occupied with preaching, that they found it im
possible to pay attention to the affairs of the poor; and hence, when com
plaints arose that some were neglected, they instituted the order of deacons:
" It is not reason that we should leave the word of God, and serve tables:
wherefore, brethren, look ye out seven men whom we may appoint over this
business. But we will give ourselves continually to prayer, and to the ministry
of the word."* It is a downright absurdity to suppose that so many preach
ers could have been kept in constant employment by a single congregation;
and every man who lays aside prejudice, and judges dispassionately, will be
of this opinion. No rational account can be given of so many office-bearers,
not sinecurists, but active labourers in the work of the gospel, remaining
in Jerusalem, except by admitting that the disciples were divided into many
congregations. The last argument for the existence of more congregations than one in Jeru
salem, is founded on the want of a place in which all the disciples could as
semble. To this argument Independents have a ready answer, that they could
be contained in the temple, and that it appears that the Apostles preached in it
daily. It is easy for some men to get rid of a difficulty by a few general as
sertions, especially when they are talking of something very remote, into all
the particulars of which we cannot enter; but capacious as the temple was, it
is not certain that ten or twelve thousand could have frequently gone into it,
without incommoding the multitudes of unconverted Jews who went up to it
to worship. It is not certain that the priests and rulers would have permitted
acknowledged assemblies of the disciples, whom they accounted heretics and
apostates, to be held within its precincts. The contrary is, I think, highly
probable; and we may be sure that an attempt to commemorate the death of
Christ, by the celebration of the Eucharist, would have been immediately re
sisted. The Apostles, indeed, preached daily in the temple; not, however, to
the whole church of Jerusalem, but to the Jews whom they accidently found
in it; and this is evident from the words of the sacred historian, who says,
that they preached " daily in the temple, and in every house;"! that is, while
they preached to the Jews, in the temple, they preached in private houses to
the Christians, and consequently, had many congregations. These observa
tions are obvious to the plainest understanding; and nothing but the blinding
uower of prejudice can prevent any man from perceiving their truth.
*Actsvi. 2— 4. *Ib. v.42.

INDEPENDENCY AND PRESBYTERY. 483
LECTURE XCIX.
ON THE CHURCH.
Independent and Presbyterian Forms of Church Government Examined. — Proof that the
Power of the Church Rulers does not flow from the People. — Opinions of Dr. Owen.-
Argument against Independency from the Council of Jerusalem. — Superiority of the Pres
byterian Plan.
In the preceding lecture, I entered upon the consideration of the two forms
of ecclesiastical government, which alone seem to receive any countenance
from Scripture, Presbytery and Independency; and proposed to discuss them
together, because the establishment of the one necessarily involves the over
throw of the other.
We have examined the first principle of Independency, from which it de
rives its name, that each congregation of Christians is a complete church, pos
sessing in itself all the powers and privileges which Jesus Christ has conferred .
upon the church, and unconnected with all other churches in the world, except
by a common profession of the faith. We have seen that this principle does
not apply to the Church of Jerusalem, which has appeared, from several ar
guments, to have consisted of more congregations than one. We might draw
the same conclusion with respect to some other churches mentioned in the New
Testament; but your attention has been confined to that of Jerusalem, because
its history is more fully detailed.
The obvious inference from the fact, that in Jerusalem there were several
congregations, which are nevertheless represented as one church, is, that those
congregations were incorporated, or so united by some common tie, as to com
pose only one body. Now, this could be no other than the same government,
to which these congregations were subject; as the inhabitants of different
cities and provinces constitute one nation, not simply by living in the same
country, but by obeying the same laws, and acknowledging the authority of
the same civil rulers. Independents could not, consistently with their princi
ples, have spoken of the Ckurck of Jerusalem, but must have adopted a dif
ferent phraseology, if they had composed the narrative in the Acts, and have
said, the churches of Jerusalem. It follows, therefore, that there was a pres
bytery in Jerusalem, composed of the Apostles and elders, who came together,
as we see from the fifteenth chapter, to manage the affairs of all the congrega
tions in the city, and to whose decrees they were bound to submit. This is
the most rational account of the matter; and it is so natural, that it follows from
the particulars mentioned in the history, without any effort; whereas Indepen
dents are compelled to have recourse to a variety of awkward expedients, to
make out their favourite point, that there was only one congregation; and in
particular, to reduce the believers in that city to the lowest possible number.
And thus, what is gained to their cause, is lost to Christianity; which, if they
are right in their calculations with respect to Jerusalem and other cities, had
very little success in the primitive ages, and could boast of only handfuls of
converts in the most populous places.
I now proceed to consider the second principle of Independency, which is,
That all power is vested in the church collective, or in the body of the faith
ful; that to them the keys of the kingdom of heaven are committed; and that
those who exercise any authority in the church, in the character of rulers,
derive it from the people. In opposition to this principle, Presbyterians main
tain, That the power of governing the church belongs exclusively to certain

484 GOVERNMENT OF THE CHURCH:
office-bearers, who derive their authority from Jesus Christ, and are account
able to him alone for the exercise of it. They are not, indeed, lords over
God's heritage, but helpers of the faith and joy of the saints; and are their
servants, but only in this sense, that the object of all their ministrations should
be, the spiritual good of those who'are committed to their care.
The constitution of the church differs from that of a civil society. A vo
luntary society is formed by the free consent of the members. Each of them
has certain rights which he is desirous to secure, and to enlarge by the co-ope
ration of others; and he therefore unites with them upon such terms as seem
best calculated to promote the common design. They proceed in concert to
compose a code of laws, and to appoint certain persons who shall have au
thority to execute the laws, and to manage the affairs of the society. In such
«ases, power necessarily emanates from the people. The society is created
by them for their own benefit; and the rulers owe their official existence solely
to the deed of their constituents, which is the source of their power, and pre
scribes its limits. Here, the society is before the rulers; but with respect to the
church, the rulers were before the society; and no reasoning, therefore, from
the one >case, is fairly applicable to the other. There was no church when
our Lord ,gave the Apostles their commission; when he committed to Peter, and
to them all, the keys of the kingdom of heaven; when he invested them with
authority to preach the gospel, to administer the ordinances, and to exercise
discipline over his professed disciples. They were appointed immediately
by him; ;and they were appointed as the first in a long succession, which
was to continue to the end of time, as we learn from his promise to them:
" Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world."* The office
of ihe Apostles was extraordinary, and ceased at their death; but, besides the
gifts of inspiration and of miracles, they were possessed of ordinary powers,
for the edification and government of the church, which did not expire with1
them, but passed into other hands. The pastors, and teachers, and rulers,
who existed in the primitive times, and can never be wanting, without the dis
solution of the church as an organized body, were appointed by the Apostles.
They were set apart to their office, and through them, as the channel in
which power was conveyed to them from Christ, the source of all spiritual
gifts and privileges.
This is the channel of transmission which was established in the beginning.
As we are reasoning with Independents, who pretend to pay a more sacred
fegard to Scripture than other denominations of Christians, we confidently
appeal to it, and ask, whether they can deny the statement now made, or show
that the original order has been changed ? Is it not true, that the Apostles
derived their power immediately from Jesus Christ? Is it not true, that the
first ministers and rulers of the church derived their authority from the Apos
tles ? And ean any passage be produced reversing this order, and ordaining
that, in the subsequent ages, official power should flow from the people ? The
first governors of the church were not created by it, but received their official
character before its erection. They did not, as in other voluntary societies,
exercise a portion of power which the society had delegated to them. Their
power came directly from heaven, and was given to them, that they might or
ganize the society, and govern the members; not by laws of their own making,
but by a code stamped with the authority of the King of Zion. In the New-
Testament, the people are known, not as rulers, but as subjects. It is acknow
ledged, that it recognizes a right in the people to interfere in the appointment of
their office-bearers, to a certain extent. In many churches, they have been de
prived of that right; but in the days of the Apostles, and for a long time after,
they possessed and exercised the privilege of electing the persons who were
* Matth. xxviii. 20.

INDEPENDENCY AND PRESBYTERY. 485
10 preside over them in the Lord. But the limits of this right are defined
with* the greatest exactness; so as to show that it does not recognize any por
tion of authority as vested in the people, and far less represents them as the depo
sitaries of all ecclesiastical power. The account which Luke gives of the
election of deacons, is so expressed, as if it had been intended to guard
against the principles of Independents : " Look ye out among you seven men
of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom we may appoint over
this business."* The people were called upon to choose persons whom they
judged to be qualified, and in whom they could confide; and it was the more
necessary that they should be consulted in the election, because there had
been dissatisfaction in consequence of the former management of the poor.
This, however, was a simple nomination, and here their power terminated.
They could not invest the persons with the office, and give them authority to
discharge its duties. This was the prerogative of the Apostles; it was their
province to " appoint them over this business." In other words, it appears
from this account, that official power is not derived from the people, but from
those who are already in office.
I shall here quote a passage from the writing of the celebrated Dr. Owen,
who was an Independent, but has admitted principles on the subject of church
government, which are more congenial to the views of a professed Presbyte
rian. In his True Nature of a Gospel Church, after having shown that Christ
has instituted offices in his church; that he qualifies persons for them; that he
communicates power to them by their call and ordination, and commands the
church to be subject to them; he adds, " By these ways and means doth the
Lord Christ communicate office-power unto them that are called thereunto;
whereon they become, not the officers or ministers of men, no, not of the
church, as unto the actings and exercise of their authority, but only as the
good and edification of the church is the end of it; but the officers and ministers
of Christ himself. It is hence evident that, in the communication of church
power in office, unto any persons called thereunto, the work and duty of the
church consists formally in acts of obedience unto the commands of Christ.
Hence, it doth not give unto such officers a power or authority which was for
mally and actually in the body of the community, by virtue of any grant or law
of Christ, so as that they should receive and act the power of the church, by
virtue of a delegation from them; but only they design, choose, and set apart
the individual persons, who are thereon intrusted with office-power by Christ
himself, according as was before declared. This is the power and right given
unto the church, essentially considered, with respect unto their officers, namely,
to design, call, choose, and set apart the persons, by the ways of Christ's ap
pointment, unto those offices, whereunto, by his laws, he hath annexed
church power and authority."! He says again, in another part of the same
work, speaking of the election ofthe pastors and rulers by the people, " This
choice or election doth not communicate a power from them that choose, unto
them that are chosen, as though such a power as that whereunto they are called
should be formally inherent in the choosers, antecedent unto such a choice.
For this would make those that are chosen tojbe their ministers only, and to
act all things in their name, and by virtue of authority derived from them. It
is only an instrumental, ministerial means, to instate them in that power and
authority which is given unto such officers by the constitution and laws of
Christ, whose ministers they thereon are. These gifts, offices, and officers,
being granted by Christ unto the churches, wherever there is a church called
according to his mind, they do, in and by their choice of them, submit them
selves unto them in the Lord, according to all the powers and duties wherewith
they are by him intrusted, and whereunto they are called."! These quotations
• Acts vi. 3. * Owen's True Nature of a Gospel Church, chap. iii. p. 39. i Ib. chap. iv. p. 77.
2s2

486 GOVERNMENT OF THE CHURCH :
are long, but they are important; and have the greater weight, as coming from
an avowed Independent, who, in learning, piety, and profound knowledge of
the Scriptures, was never surpassed by any of his brethren. They contain the
essential principles of Presbytery, and show that, when such a man dispassion
ately examined the Scriptures, he found in them the elements of that system of
government which our church has adopted.
There are other arguments by which we prove that power is not lodged in
the members ofthe church, and by them imparted to its office-bearers; but that
the latter derive it immediately from Christ. When Paul says, that Christ has
given to his church " pastors and teachers, for the work of the ministry, and
the edifying of his body,"* it certainly would not occur to a person whose
mind was not biassed by previous notions, that his meaning is, that Christ has
given power to the church to create such ministers by its own deed. The
words would naturally suggest, that the church and the ministers are distinct
from each other; that the church is merely the society for whose benefit pro
vision was to be made; that the Head of the church has manifested his atten
tion to its interests, by appointing persons to instruct and govern it; and that the
rights and prerogatives of its office-bearers emanate directly from himself.
No man, when he was told that a king had appointed the governor of the pro
vince, would conclude that the governor was appointed by the people, and
possessed no power but what they had conferred upon him. " God hath set
some in the church, first, Apostles; secondarily, prophets; thirdly, teachers;
after that, miracles; then gifts of healing, helps, governments, diversities of
tongues."! While this passage suggests that teachers are set in the church,
not by the people, but by God, and the word government, which is the abstract
for the concrete, imports, that there is authority to be exercised, as well as
knowledge to be communicated, it is worthy of observation, that God is said
to have " set some in the church;" not all, but a certain number of persons,
for the various purposes mentioned. But how does this comport with the prin
ciples of Independents, according to whom all possess an original right to
govern; all do actually govern, as no cause can be decided but by the suffrages
of the church; and those who bear official names are, in fact, as subject to its
authority as others; for as it made, so it can unmake them at its pleasure? In
an Independent church all are governors, and there are none to be governed but
the individuals who have done something which has brought them under the
cognizance of their brethren, and exposed them to censure.
I shall only add, that the Scripture speaks of persons in the church, whom
it calls pastors, overseers, leaders, elders who rule; and that it calls upon the
members to "know" or acknowledge them, to "submit" to them, to "obey
them," to " esteem them very highly in love, for their work's sake," and to
"count them worthy of double honour."! The titles of the office-bearers
import authority; but they would be merely titles of honour and empty sounds,
if all power were vested in the people, and the nominal rulers were their ser
vants, whom they had a right to control. The duty of the people would be
confined to sentiments of affection, and an external show of respect. Accord
ing to the Independent system, they owe no obedience to their rulers, who are,
in fact, such only in name, as the people retain the rule in their own hands.
How shall they obey those who can issue no command, and submit to those
who have no authority to exercise? The language of Scripture is absolutely
unmeaning, if all power resides in the people; but is perfectly intelligible upon
the Presbyterian plan, which clearly distinguishes between the governors and
the governed. .
To this reasoning, Independents oppose some passages of Scripture which
seem to them to recognize a power of government and discipline in the body
* Eph iv. 11, 12. * 1 Cor. xii. 28. i 1 Thess. v. 12, 13. Heb. xiii. 17. 1 Tim. v. 17.

INDEPENDENCY AND PRESBYTER'S. 487
of the people. Thus, our Lord says, " If thy brother shall trespass against
thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear
thee, thou hast gained thy brother. But if he will not hear thee, then take
with thee one or two more; that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every
word may be established. And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto
the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an
heathen man and a publican."* The ultimate appeal, say Independents, is to
the church, and by the assembled church the offender is judged and excommu
nicated. Let it be observed, that when these words were spoken, the Chris
tian church was not founded; and that, consequently, they would have been
unintelligible to the disciples, unless they had alluded to some mode of pro
ceeding with which they were acquainted. Now, I think that no dispassionate
person can doubt that the allusion is to the Jewish synagogue, the constitution
of which bore a close resemblance to that of a Presbyterian congregation. It
was composed of two classes of persons, — the people, who met together to
hear the law read and expounded, and the rulers, who presided over this as
sembly. The latter are frequently mentioned in the New Testament; and we
learn from the writings of the Jews, that their office consisted in teaching and
governing, and that the government comprehended the regulation of all the or
dinary proceedings of the synagogue, the care of the poor, and the judging and
excommunicating of offenders. " Tell it," says Christ, " to the church," in
the same way in which such cases are told to the synagogue; that is, ' bring it
before the rulers of the church, that they may deal with the obstinate brother,
and expel him if he will not submit.' If our Lord intended to give a rule for
the future conduct of his disciples when his church should be established, he
plainly signified that the mode of treating offenders should be taken from the
model of the synagogue; and his words, instead of favouring the Independent
notion, that the .people are the depositories of power, import that it is vested
in the rulers alone, and that to them exclusively the government belongs. Thus
the passage is in unison with those from which it has appeared, that the keys
of the kingdom of heaven were granted to the Apostles, and their successors in
the care of the church.!
The other passage which seems to recognize the power of the people, is in
the first Epistle to the Corinthians, when, speaking of the incestuous person,
the Apostle commands them, " in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when
they were gathered together, and his spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus
Christ, to deliver him unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh."! ¦^nc' 'n me
second Epistle, he speaks of this punishment as " having been inflicted by
many."§ It is worthy of attention, that from this case, which was evidently
peculiar, no legitimate inference can be drawn respecting the ordinary proce
dure of the church. The Corinthians had neglected to do their duty, and Paul,
interposing by his apostolical authority, pronounced a sentence, and called
upon them to execute it. It was Paul, and not the Corinthians, who excom
municated the incestuous man; and their office consisted in publishing the sen
tence in their assembly, and acting conformably to it, by excluding him from
their fellowship. There is no recognition of power in that church to judge and
censure; their business was merely ministerial. This I consider as the proper
explanation of the passage, which, thus viewed, gives no countenance to Inde
pendents. The common answer, however, is satisfactory; that, on the suppo
sition that the sentence was pronounced by the Corinthians, the address to the
whole church does not necessarily imply that they were all judicially concern
ed, because there are many examples of addresses to a whole society or people,
when only a part is intended, or only the rulers. The congregation of Israel
* Matth.xviii. 15 — 17. * Vitringa de Synagogo Vetere, 96. 734.
i 1 Cor. v. 4. § 2 Cor. ii. 6.

488 GOVERNMENT OF THE CHURCH:
is said to have done what was certainly done only by persons in authority, and
the people are spoken to as chargeable with sins which their rulers alone had
committed. In such cases, we must ascertain from circumstances whal persons
are meant; and the case before us must be explained consistently with other
passages which appropriate power to the governors of the church. At the same
time, it should be remembered that all the members of the church had a part to
act in the excommunication of the offender, not however as judges; but they
were all bound to concur in the sentence, and to testify their approbation of it
by refusing to associate with him. Thus the punishment was, in the most
emphatic sense, inflicted by many.
I proceed to consider the last principle of Independency, That all acts of
government are performed in a single congregation, ultimately, and without ap
peal to a superior assembly. Presbyterians maintain that there is a subordina
tion of courts, and a right of appeal from an inferior to a superior court. This
seems to be a fair deduction from what we have already established concerning
the union of several congregations in one church. Being separate assemblies,
each of which possesses its own rulers, they can be considered as one only, be
cause they are united under one general government; and there are two ways
in which their union may be effected, namely, by their being placed under a
bishop, or under a presbytery. We have proved that, in the Apostolic age,
there were no bishops, in the modern sense of the word; and it follows that the
Church of Jerusalem, in which there were many assemblies, was governed by
the common council of its presbyters. Each assembly regulated its own ordi
nary affairs; but when any extraordinary case arose, or any difficulty occurred,
it was referred to that council, and decided by its authority. No reasonable
objection can be made to this view of the subject; and if it be admitted to be
just, the principle must be given lip that a single congregation possesses in it
self all the powers of government, and is independent of all other congrega
tions in the world.
This argument would hold good although we should not be able to produce
from Scripture, proof of an appeal from an inferior to a superior court. But
Presbyterians think that they are furnished with an example in the fifteenth
chapter of the Acts, and that, by the transaction there recorded, the lawfulness
of courts of review is clearly established. I shall examine that passage of
Scripture; and show you what countenance it gives to the plan of ecclesiasti
cal government which we have adopted.
Some persons from Judea had taught the brethren in Antioch, that " unless
they were circumcised after the manner of Moses, they could not be saved."*
As this doctrine was subversive of the gospel, Paul and Barnabas opposed them,
and much contention ensued. It was found impossible to settle the controver
sy, even by the authority of Paul, to whom the false teachers refused to sub
mit; and it was therefore determined to refer it to the Apostles and elders in
Jerusalem. Besides, it was not a local controversy, arising from the peculiar
circumstances of the plaee, but might be agitated in any other city or district
where the Jews resided; and for this reason, prudence required that it should
be finally decided in a higher assembly than that of the rulers of Antioch, an
assembly which would command the respect and obedience of all the churches
in the world. There is no doubt that it might have been determined in Anti
och, in which, besides Paul and Barnabas, both men of high rank in the church,
there were prophets and teachers competent to manage such affairs; but the
opposing party was refractory, and there was no hope of reducing them to
silence except by the sentence of a court from which there was no appeal.
It was resolved that " Paul and Barnabas and certain others of them should
go up to Jerusalem unto the Apostles and elders about this question."!
- Acta xv. 1. * lb. 2.

INDEPENDENCY AND PRESBYTERY. 489
Whether these were delegates from the other churches of Syria, and from those
of Cilicia, in which this controversy was agitated, does not appear. If it
should be denied that any such were present, because no specific mention is
made of them, those who are most concerned to prove their absence, lest the
meeting in Jerusalem should turn out to be a representative assembly, will be
involved in an inextricable difficulty. It is evident, that in the present case,
there was not merely a reference for advice, but submission to a sentence: and
how the elders of Jerusalem could have a right to legislate for the church of
Antioch, it is impossible for Independents upon their own principles to explain.
One Independent church may apply to another for advice, but it still retains
the power to receive or reject it. The church to which the application is
made, may give counsel to the other, but has no authority to enforce it. We
shall find that something very different took place on the occasion now before
us. It has been said that the reason for referring this cause to the Church of Je
rusalem, was that the Apostles were there, who were inspired men, and could
decide this question by infallible authority, and that this was the ground of the
submission of other churches to their sentence. But this supposition is of no
avail to the cause of Independency, because it appears not to be founded in
truth. First, if it had been the wish of the Church of Antioch, that the dis
pute should be terminated by the authority of inspiration, there was no reason
for sendingto Jerusalem, as Paul was among them, who was not behind the chief
of the Apostles, and Barnabas, who was endowed with supernatural gifts; and
there were also prophets, as we are informed in the fourteenth chapter, who
enjoyed the miraculous assistance of the Spirit. Their decision would have
been infallible, and k would have been the duty of all parties to acquiesce in
it. Secondly, if it should be said, that although there were inspired men in
Antioch, yet parties had run so high, and such prejudices had been conceived,
that a decision there would not have had the effect to settle the peace of the
church, and that this was the cause of the reference to Jerusalem; I observe,
that while this is probably a true statement of the case, there is no evidence
that the reference was made to the Apostles as infallible judges. The reason
of this allegation is, that it was made at the same time to the elders who were
not inspired. If the Apostles were consulted as oracles, why were the elders
also consulted who were not oracles? What right had they to interfere in a
sentence proceeding from the inspiration of the Holy Ghost? Were the Chris
tians in Antioch so ignorant, as to confound two classes of persons totally dis
similar, and to assign to both equal authority? If the Apostles spoke by inspi
ration, the elders must have been silent, and they had only to submit, like the
parties who had made the appeal. Nothing however is more evident than
that the elders were considered as judges, as well as the Apostles. Thirdly,
when the question came to be discussed, the assembly proceeded not in the
¦way of authority, but by reasoning. No person rose and pronounced an ora
cular sentence; but first one Apostle stood up, and then another, and drew from
passages of Scripture a conclusion in which all present acquiesced. The bu
siness was conducted in the same manner as in other assemblies. Every
member had liberty to give his opinion, and that which was supported by solid
arguments was adopted.
But although the Christians of Antioch did not send to Jerusalem, to obtain
a decision of the question by inspiration, they sought something more than an
advice. They submitted the controversy to an authority in which they were
bound to acquiesce; and, accordingly, the assembly did not give them a counsel,
but issued a decree; so their sentence is called in the next chapter, and the
word thus translated is the same which is used to express the authoritative
mandates of superiors. The decree of Caesar Augustus that all the world
Vol. IL— 62

490 GOVERNMENT OF THE CHURCH:
should be taxed, is called by the same name, ooy/io; and it is twice employed
to denote the ordinances of the Mosaic law. The matters contained in the
decree are termed necessary things, things which the churches were not simply
advised, but commanded to observe. The obligation of the decree upon the
Christians of Antioch, and not upon them alone, but upon all the churches of
Syria and Cilicia, and throughout the world, could not arise from the authority
of the elders of Jerusalem, even although it had been strengthened by the suf
frages of the people, according to the principles of either Independents or Pres
byterians. Neither will acknowledge the right of one church to dictate to
another, its equal in power and privileges. And the eagerness of Indepen
dents to make us believe, that the question was determined in a church meet
ing, in their sense of the term, only serves to embarrass them the more; for
how could the members of one church issue a decree, which should be binding
upon all Christian churches? The fact, however, presents no difficulty to us.
There were present on this occasion, not only the elders of Jerusalem, but pro
bably deputies from the other churches, which were interested in the contro
versy; and some suppose these to be meant by the brethren, mentioned in the
superscription of the decree. As this point is doubtful, I shall not insist upon
it, nor is it necessary to the argument. Besides the elders, the Apostles were
members of the council, and their presence was sufficient to constitute it an
Ecumenical one, and to render its decrees universally binding. We have, in
deed, said that they did not act by inspiration in pronouncing the sentence; but
dhey did not therefore sink down to a level with the other members. Although
they reasoned in concert with them, and on other occasions assumed the de
signation of presbyters or elders, and joined with the ordinary pastors and
rulers in administering the affairs of the church, they never did nor could
divest themselves of their apostolical character. They had at all times the care
of all the churches, and on every public occasion, acted in behalf of them all.
In this council they were considered as Apostles; and consequently, if deputies
from other churches were not present, the Apostles supplied their place, being
the representatives of the Catholic Church. Thus the meeting in Jerusalem
became a general council, which had a right to give law to the disciples of
Christ in every region of the earth.
It is objected by Independents, that this meeting did not resemble a Presby
terian synod, in which only ministers and elders have a right to deliberate and
judge; for that the people also took a part in the business. " The Apostles
and elders with the whole church, were pleased to send chosen men of their
own company to Antioch;" the letter is superscribed by " the Apostles, elders,
and brethren," and " all the multitude kept silence, and gave audience to Bar
nabas and Paul." But " the multitude" can mean only the people who had
convened to witness the proceedings, and who listened to the narrative with
profound attention. The " whole church," or the whole assembly, must sig
nify only the persons present, who could be but a part of the church properly
so called, which we have seen consisted of many thousands; and consequently,
even upon the principles of Independents, they have no judicial authority. The
" brethren" have been understood to be other ministers of the word; but, ad
mitting that they were the people, we can rationally conceive nothing more to
be intended, than that they concurred in the decree, and signified their consent
to the foreign churches as a means of obtaining their acquiescence; in the same
manner as the laity were sometimes permitted, in ancient times, to subscribe
the decrees of councils, in order to testify their approbation of them.* This is
the conclusion to which we must come, if we attentively and candidly consider
the whole history of this meeting, and would render one part consistent with
another. The reference from Antioch was not made to the whole body of be-
* Grotii Annotat ad Acta Apostol. xv. 22.

INDEPENDENCY AND PRESBYTERY. 491
lievers in Jerusalem, but to the Apostles and elders; it is expressly stated that
" the Apostles and elders came together to consider the matter," and the mnL
titude are only incidentally mentioned as present; and, although the brethren
are conjoined with them in the beginning of the letter sent to the churches, yet
when delivered to them, it is called the decree, exclusively of the Apostles and
elders. It is worthy of attention, too, that we do not find a single member of
the church taking part in the discussion. From these particulars, it seems to
be a necessary conclusion, that the people had no concern in the discussion
and determination of the question; and that, although the church and the
brethren are afterwards brought forward to view, their appearance being poste
rior to the sentence, can reasonably be understood to import only their appro
bation of it. This explanation will recommend itself to a candid inquirer, be
cause it harmonizes the different parts of the narrative; whereas, the opposite
opinion represents Luke as writing in a careless and inaccurate manner, while,
in the successive steps of the process, he studiously excludes the people from
the office of judges, and then abruptly admits them at the close.
If any of you should be of opinion that the assembly in Jerusalem has not
been proved to be conformable in every point to a Presbyterian synod, we
would say to him, that we do not pretend to trace a perfect similarity, but
that we have established the principle upon which such synods are founded.
There was, in this case, a reference from an inferior to a superior assembly,
and the design was to obtain, not a simple advice, but an authoritative decision.
We have, therefore, apostolical example for courts of review. The transaction
clearly recognizes the system of subordination, and justifies the transference of
a cause from the consistory, or session of a particular congregation to a presby
tery, and from a presbytery to an assembly of presbyteries, which the Greeks
call a synod, and the Latins a council. And thus we have disproved the last
principle of Independency, that all acts of government are performed in a single
congregation, ultimately, and without appeal.
The advantage, and even the necessity of courts of review have been ac
knowledged by some enlightened Independents; and Dr. Owen, the brightest
ornament of the party, has not hesitated to declare, that a church, meaning a
single congregation, cannot always perform its duty to Christ and the Catholic
Church by its intrinsic powers; that, in attempting to do so, it cuts itself off
from the communion ofthe church universal, and that it would not be safe for
any man to commit himself to its care.* When this passage was, sometime
ago, brought under the notice of the public,! it gave great offence to Indepen
dents, who were not aware that it was to be found in his writings, and would
willingly, if they could, have disputed its genuineness, because it aims a mortal
blow at their scheme. But so he thought, and so every man who takes a dis
passionate view of the subject will think. Modern Independents partially ac
knowledge its truth in their practice, for the associations which are generally
established among them, are an imitation of our presbyteries and synods.
They profess, indeed, to have no authority over the churches, of the delegates
from which they are composed, and to meet solely to consult about their affairs,
and to give them an advice ; but the power which they disclaim in words,
they exercise in fact ; for, if any church does not consent to what has been
agreed upon, it is, I understand, cut off from their communion.
There are some weigrity objections which may be urged against the Inde
pendent system. First, It destroys the visible unity of the church, by fritter
ing it away into a multitude of little societies, separate and unconnected. It
is a matter of lamentation to good men, that Christians are divided into so
many parties, which have no intercourse with each other; but this state of
things is the consequence of imperfect views of the truth, of prejudice, passion,
* Owen's True Nature of a Gospel Church, chap. xi. * Lectures on the Acts, lect xvi.

492 GOVERNMENT OF THE CHURCH:
and secular interests; and all acknowledge that it is not as it ought to be. But
Independency upon principle parcels out the followers of Christ into distinct
portions, and pronounces their incorporation into one body to be contrary to
Scripture. Instead of exhibiting the church as the one kingdom of Christ, it
distributes it into an endless variety of little republics. Secondly, Itlodges the
power of managing the affairs of the church in incompetent hands. Men may
be qualified to be members of a Christian society, who are altogether unfit to
be rulers. The grace of God may exist in a mind which has received no cul
ture from education, and is very scantily endowed with natural gifts. A person
may know the truth by Divine illumination, so as to believe and love it, and
may know the wickedness and deceitfulness of his own heart, who is very im
perfectly acquainted with the characters, and tempers, and ways of men.
There is an absurdity in supposing that day-labourers, who perhaps can hardly
read; dofnestic servants, who are so much engaged from morning to night, that
they can, with difficulty, find time to look into the Bible; and women, living
in a state of seclusion, or holding intercourse only with persons as ill-informed
as themselves, are proper persons to discuss and determine the intricate cases
which may come before a church. The Presbyterian plan is evidently more
rational, which commits the government to the ministers of Christ, and elders
chosen for their superior knowledge, and prudence, and experience. Lastly,
It provides no means for determining controversies. If the members of an In
dependent congregation differ in opinion, they must wrangle on without the
prospect of an end, or must withdraw from each other, and set up separate
churches. In this way their disputes frequently terminate, and not seldom
they have kept their churches in an agitated state for many weeks and months.
In our church courts, unanimity is more likely to be obtained; if the decision
of one court does not give satisfaction, a cause can be brought under the review
of another. There is, besides, a greater probability of candid investigation and
impartial decision, as the judges are not immediately interested) and while all
questions are submitted to the rulers, the minds of the members are left in
peace.

LECTURE C.
ON THE CHURCH.

Rulers ofthe Church. — Extraordinary Office-Bearers: Apostles, Prophets, and Evangelists. —
Ordinary Office-Bearers: Pastor; His Duties: — Teacher or Doctor; His Duties: — Deacons:—
Ruling Elders; Warrant for them; Their Duties.
I have endeavoured to show you, from the Scriptures, what form of govern
ment Jesus Christ has prescribed lo his church, and ,it has appeared, I trust,
that we find in them the outlines of the Presbyterian plan. It is acknowledged
that it is not so fully detailed as the plan given to the Jewish Church, which
contains a minute account of the tabernacle, of its services, of the persons who
alone had a right to minister in it, and, in short, of every thing which related
to religion: " See that thou make all things according to the pattern showed to
thee in the mount."* This is the reason that there have been so many disputes
* Heb. viii. 5.

OFFICE-BEARERS. 493
upon the subject. As only general principles are laid down, they have been
viewed in different lights, and men have reared1 upon them different super
structures. But if the principles are clear, they furnish a rule to guide us in
the development of the system; and the scheme which we have adopted, is, I
think, fairly deduced from them, in all its ramifications.
I now proceed to lay before you a short account of the persons whom Christ
has appointed to administer this government. The Apostle Paul has given an
enumeration of them in the Epistle to the Ephesians; whieh, however, is not
complete, because there are two orders which he has omitted, but which are
mentioned in other passages of the New Testament: "And he gave some,
apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and
teachers; for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the
edifying of the body of Christ."* They are divided into two classes, the ex
traordinary and the ordinary office-bearers of the church. In the first class are
included apostles, prophets, and evangelists; and we call them extraordinary,
not only because they were endowed with supernatural gifts, but because they
were instituted only for a time. They were ordained to serve a particular
purpose, namely, the establishment of the Christian church; and when this
design was accomplished, their offices ceased. The ordinary office-bearers of
the church are pastors and teachers, and to these must be added ruling elders
and deacons.
The apostles stand first in the catalogue, and they hold the highest rank
among the ministers of the church. The word signifies a messenger, a person
sent to execute a commission. In this sense it was used by the Greeks, and it
occurs also in some places of the New Testament: "The servant is not greater
than his lord, neither he that is sent — a,itoato%os — greater than he that sent
him."! Paul, speaking to the Corinthians, of certain brethren who had been
deputed to receive the collections for the saints, calls them aatoatoj\oo exxintamv,
" the messengers" or " apostles of the churches."* The same title is given to
Jesus Christ himself, who is called " the Apostle of our profession,"§ because
he was sent by the Father to publish the religion which we profess; and hence
he said, " My doctrine is not mine, but his that sent me."|| In the same ge
neral sense the term is applied to the twelve disciples, who are known by the
designation of Apostles; but it is, at the same time, expressive of something
peculiar respecting them.
We may remark, in the first place, that they received their commission im
mediately from Jesus Christ himself, first during his personal ministry, when
he sent them to publish the good news of the kingdom throughout the land of
Judea;1T and again after his ascension, when he commanded them to "go into
all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature."** With respect to
Paul, who was afterwards added to the number, he is careful to inform us, that
his commission was of the same nature with that of his brethren: " Paul, an
Apostle, not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father,
who raised him from the dead."1 f The case of Matthias, who was nominated
by the Apostles to fill up the place of Judas, is not an exception; for a direct
appeal was made to Christ; and after prayer, the lot fell upon him.!! ®e"
condly, it was an indispensable qualification of an Apostle that he should have
been an eye and an ear witness of the actions and sayings of Christ, and that
he should have seen him after his resurrection, as we learn from the words of
Peter, when they were deliberating about a successor to Judas. §§ Paul, in
deed, was not in all respects so qualified; but what was essential was supplied
by the personal appearance of our Saviour to him, and the revelation with
* Eph. iv. 11, 12. * John xiii. 16. i 2 Cor. viii. 23. § Heb. iii. 1.
J John vii. 16. U Matth. x. 5. »* Mark xvi. 15. ** Gal. i. 1.
ii Acts i. 24, 26. §§ Ib. i.21,22.
2T

494 GOVERNMENT OF THE CHURCH:
which he was favoured: " Have not I seen Jesus Christ our Lord?"* Thirdly,
They were endowed with supernatural gifts, with a complete and infallible
knowledge of the gospel; a power to speak languages which they had not
learned; to work miracles; to discern spirits; and in all these ways, to give full
proof of their commission. They were authorized to preach to Jews and to
Gentiles; to found the Christian Church; to instruct and govern it; to order all
its affairs, independently of any human controul; and to provide for its well-
being and continuance, by appointing office-bearers to administer the ordi
nances, and to perform all the services which would conduce to its peace and
spiritual prosperity. Their doctrine and commands were the rule to the church
during their life, and their writings are the standard of faith and practice to all
succeeding ages. They left no successors in their extraordinary prerogatives,
and their office expired with them.
The next in order were the prophets. The word prophet bears various
senses in the Scriptures. It sometimes signifies merely a person who speaks
in the name of another, as Aaron is called the prophet of Moses,! because he
delivered to the people the messages which Moses had received from God. At
other times, it denotes a person who, by the assistance of the Spirit, explained
the prophecies of the Old Testament; and there is reason to believe that there
are several instances of this use of it in the New Testament. The prophets
there mentioned, did not always foretell future events, but edified the church by
interpreting the ancient predictions. They are not, however, to be viewed as
exactly on a level with the commentators of modern times. They were su
pernaturally assisted, and were infallible guides in the application of the Scrip
tures to Jesus Christ, and the new dispensation. Their office must have been
productive of great benefit to the primitive church, when the Messiahship of
Christ was the grand subject of controversy between the Jews and the Chris
tians, and the faith of the latter so much depended upon the proof, that all the
circumstances descriptive of the promised Redeemer, were realized in the
person and history of Jesus of Nazareth. Our Lord opened the understand
ings of his disciples to understand the Scriptures, and he imparted the same
knowledge to those inspired expounders of prophecy. In strict language, a
prophet signifies a person who, by the Holy Spirit, foretells future events. Such,
unquestionably, were some of the prophets in the primitive church. This is
evident from the eleventh chapter of the Acts, where we read, that " in those
days came prophets from Jerusalem unto Antioch. And there stood up one of
them, named Agabus, and signified by the Spirit that there should be a great
dearth throughout all the world; which came to pass in the days of Claudius
Caesar."! Here an event was predicted which could not have been foreseen by
human sagacity, because the natural causes of it were not then in operation.
The other prophets from Jerusalem were of the same class; for Agabus is said
to be one of them, and, therefore, to have exercised no power which was not
possessed by them in common. The gift of prophecy might be subservient
to the immediate advantage of the church, as in the case before us it gave
warning to the disciples to make provision for their poor brethren against the
approaching calamity; and it contributed, with other supernatural endowments,
to establish their faith, as an evidence of the presence of God with his
servants. The last extraordinary office-bearers in the primitive church were Evange
lists. There is an application of this word which is not authorized by Scrip
ture, but is in common use, and has been inadvertently supposed to be one of
its original meanings. It is the well known designation of the writers of the
four gospels. It acquired this sense at a period posterior to the Apostolic
age, and points out, not the official character of the persons to whom it is given,
• 1 Cor. ix. 1. *Exod. vii. 1. ' i Acts xi. 27, 28.

OFFICE-BEARERS. 495
out the subject of their books. Mark calls his narrative, to tvojyytUov Irjaov
Xpiatov.* The Evangelists of whom we now speak, were persons hold
ing a high rank in the primitive church. Besides the passage in the
Epistle to the Ephesians, already quoted, the word occurs in some other
places. In the twenty-first chapter of the Acts, mention is made of Philip
the Evangelist, and Timothy is exhorted to " do the work of an Evangelist."!
Titus appears to have been invested with the same office, and so were proba
bly Silas and Mark, who were companions of Paul in his journeys and labours,
and Barnabas, who is also called an apostle, in the general sense of a messen
ger or missionary, and seems to have been more than an ordinary minister of
the word. The peculiar duties of an Evangelist are not defined in the New
Testament; but they are generally understood to have been materially the
same with those of an Apostle. The Evangelist was not confined to a particu
lar congregation, like the pastor afterwards mentioned; but had a general com
mission to preach the gospel wherever an opportunity presented itself. He
had power to ordain elders in any city, and to set in order the affairs of the
churches which he visited; to correct what was amiss, and to supply what was
wanting. We do not know that he enjoyed the general gift of inspiration, as
the Apostles did; and it is probable that he did not, from the cases of Timothy
and Titus, to whom Paul deemed it necessary to give instructions concerning
their conduct. It may be presumed, that the honour of revealing the doctrines
of the gospel, and delivering the commands and institutions of Christ to the
church, was reserved to the Apostles; and that, by this prerogative, they were
elevated above all the extraordinary office-bearers. We may suppose, how
ever, that certain supernatural endowments were conferred upon an Evange
list, as the gift of tongues, and the power of working miracles, to authenticate
his commission, and to enable him to discharge his duty among different
nations. Evangelists were assistants of the Apostles, inferior to them in rank,
and subject to their authority. Paul speaks to Timothy and Titus as their
superior, and lays injunctions upon them, with which they were bound to
comply, the Apostles were in number twelve, or rather thirteen, after Paul was
added to them. Although they separated from one another, and chose differ
ent countries as the scene of their labours, and although they were unweariedly
diligent in the work of their office; yet, when we consider how extensive was
the range of their ministrations, we are sensible that, in most cases, they could
do little more than found churches in particular places. If circumstances some
times required that they should continue longer in a place, as we find Paul
doing in Corinth and in Ephesus, other churches were deprived of the benefit
of their presence. Infant societies, the members of which had been recently
converted from Judaism and heathenism, were but imperfectly acquainted with
the religion which they had embraced; and, being exposed to many difficulties
and temptations, stood in need of more frequent and lasting visits than the
numerous demands upon the attention of the Apostles would afford. Hence
arose the order of Evangelists. They followed the Apostles, to carry on what
the latter had begun. They went to those places where their presence was
most wanted, and probably regulated their movements according to the direc
tion of the Apostles. Paul, when he departed from Ephesus, besought Timo
thy to remain behind, that he might oppose certain false teachers; and he left
Titus in Crete, " that he might set in order the things which were wanting."!
The extraordinary office-bearers of the church were apostles, prophets, and
evangelists. We now proceed to consider the second class, which com
prehends those who are to continue in the church to the end of the world.
When the church had been founded by the preaching of the Apostles,
regulated by the wisdom given to them, and established by their care, and
•Maiki. 1. *2Tim. iv.5. i 1 Tim. i. 3. Tit.i. 5.

496 , GOVERNMENT OF THE CHURCH:
the ministrations of prophets and evangelists; persons of an inferior character,
possessed only of the common gifts of the Spirit, and guided by the instruc
tions and rules which the Apostles have left, were sufficient to carry on the
work of converting sinners, and building up saints in faith and holiness.
I shall speak of the ordinary office-bearers of the church.
The first are called Pastors. The word literally signifies a shepherd who
has the care of a flock- It is here used in a metaphorical sense, and such use
is not uncommon in profane writers. Homer, for example, calls kings itoipavts
vxauv, shepherds of the people. It is applied to our Lord Jesus Christ, who is
denominated " the chief Shepherd," and " the great Shepherd of- the sheep;"*
and to men who minister in holy things,! because he has delegated to them a
portion of his authority, and they are employed in the same work. They are
also styled ministers of Christ,! and the two titles may be used indiscrimi
nately. It is therefore affectation in some sects to adhere rigidly to the former
designation, always speaking of the pastors of their churches, as if the latter
were not equally scriptural, especially as there is still another term sanctioned
by the Apostles, namely bishops or overseers.
Two ideas are suggested by the designation of Pastors. Tt is the duty of
those to whom it belongs, to feed and to govern the church. With respect to the
first, we hear Paul saying to the elders of Ephesus, " Feed the church of God,
which he hath purchased with his own blood."§ As it is the office of a shep
herd to provide proper pasture for his flock, and to lead them to it, so it is in
cumbent upon the minister of Christ to make provision for the nourishment
of the souls of his people; and as it is only the truth which will sustain and
strengthen spiritual life, he ought to " feed them with wholesome words, even
the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the doctrine which is according to
godliness." He is not appointed to instruct them in the arts and sciences, in
agriculture and commerce, or in mere morality, as it is exhibited indepen
dently of religion in the systems of philosophers; but to preach the gospel in
the most extensive sense of the term, to explain its doctrines, to propound its
promise, to inculcate its precepts, to bring its motives to bear upon the con-'
sciences and hearts of his hearers. With careful attention to their different
characters, and circumstances, and feelings, he must rightly divide the word
of truth, not publishing it at random, but having a regard to the varieties
among men in respect of their moral state, their duties, their temptations, and
their difficulties, that each individual may receive his portion of food in due
season. The general design of his office is also promoted by the adminis
tration of the sacraments, and particularly of the Lord's supper, the very name
of which is significant of its fitness to impart nourishment to the soul. Thus,
through the divine blessing, the people upon whom he bestows his labour will
grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ;
and the faithful minister will be indeed the pastor of his flock.
It belongs to the office of the pastor, not only to feed, but to govern the
flock, as the shepherd regulates the movements of the sheep. " The good
shepherd," says our Lord, "goeth before the sheep, and they follow him, for
they know his voice.'l The Christian pastor should lead his flock in the
right way, by instruction and by example; but this is not the whole of his
office. He is invested with authority over them, to keep them in the right
way, and to bring them back when they have wandered from it. He has
power to reprove, and rebuke, and exhort, and to suffer no man to despise him.
The church being an organized body, the peace and prosperity of which can
not be maintained without an observance of its laws, it pertains to those who
are set over it, not only to inculcate the duty of the members, but to enforce
*lPetv. 4. Heb. xiii. 20. *Eph.iv. 11. 4 1 Cor. iv. 1. 2 Cor. xi. 23.
§ Acts xx. 28. II John x. i.

OFFICE-BEARERS. 497
it by all means corresponding with the voluntary and spiritual nature of the
society. While the ministers of religion ought to watch over the people with
affectionate solicitude, they have a commission from Jesus Christ to call upon
them to walk according to the gospel, to censure them when they deviate from
this rule, and to exclude those who will not be reclaimed. This power, how
ever, is not vested exclusively in them, but in other governors of whom we
shall afterwards speak; and it is evidently a power given to them, not for de
struction, but for edification. Its object is to maintain the respect which is
due to the institutions of Christ, to secure the consistent and seemly conduct
of his professed disciples, to guard the privileges of the church against abuse,
and to make an open distinction between the pure and the impure.
It is evident that the duties of the pastoral office may be performed, without
the supernatural endowments which were bestowed upon apostles, prophets,
and evangelists. The qualifications of a bishop, which are enumerated in the
First Epistle to Timothy, are such as may be found in a person who possesses
only the gifts of nature, improved by education and experience, and sanctified
by grace. But it is not on this account alone that we rank pastors among the
ordinary office-bearers in the church. Besides that no new effusion of the
Holy Spirit, like that on the day of Pentecost, is necessary, and a sufficient
number of able ministers will be regularly furnished in the common course
of things, the circumstances of the church evidently require that their office
should be continued throughout successive generations. As in the beginning
Christianity was new, both to Jews and to Gentiles, converts could not be sup
posed at once to acquire a perfect acquaintance with it; and many years elapsed
before all the books of the New Testament were written, and came into gene
ral use. On these accounts it may seem that there was then a peculiar reason
for the institution of the ministry. But its utility, or I may rather say its ne
cessity, is manifest even in the present times, when the system of divine truth
is accessible to private study, and is in some degree rendered familiar by early
instruction. Still great ignorance prevails from various causes, and however
plain are those parts of the Scriptures, the knowledge of which is essential to
salvation, preparatory education is requisite to the full exposition of it; and to
many even its simplest truths would be unknown, if they never heard them in
the church. Besides, the ministry of the word is not designed solely to tell
what is new, but to bring old truths into view, and to impress them upon the
heart; to give line upon line and precept upon precept; and it is one of the
means which Jesus Christ has appointed for communicating his Spirit to illu
minate and sanctify the soul. It is therefore a permanent institution; it will
continue " till we all come, in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of
the Son of God, to a perfect man, to the measure of the stature of the fulness
of Christ."*
With pastors, Paul joins teachers in his enumeration of the office-bearers
of the church. That these are not the same persons, as some might suppose,
is evident from this consideration, that we have no reason to think that two
words would have been employed to describe them, especially as the word,
pastors, implies teaching, or the feeding of the flock by instruction. It is
probable that a distinct class is pointed out, as many commentators think, and
our church affirms. In the form of church government, there is a chapter
entitled the Teacher or Doctor, which begins with these words: " The Scrip
ture doth hold out the name and title of teacher, as well as of the pastor;"
and after giving an account of his office, it concludes thus: " A teacher or doc
tor is of most excellent use in schools and universities, as of old in the schools
of the prophets, and at Jerusalem, where Gamaliel and others taught as doc
tors." In the description of the office, it is too much confounded with that
* Eph. iv. 13.
Vm, IT.— 63 2 t 2

498 GOVERNMENT OF THE CHURCH:
of the pastor, while the power of administering the sacrament is assigned to
the teacher; and he is represented as differing from the pastor, not properly in
office, but rn the nature of his gifts, being one" who doth more excel in ex
position of the Scriptures, in teaching sound doctrine, and in convincing gain-
sayers, than he doth in application, and is accordingly employed therein."
With all deference to the compilers of this part of our standards, I would say
that this account is not very accurate. While it distinguishes between the
pastor and doctor, it makes them virtually the same. In fact, the doctor has
all the powers of a pastor, and differs from him only in his aptness for a par
ticular part of the pastoral office. The distinction is not of office, but of
qualifications. The doctor, I apprehend, was different from the pastor, and
had a different province assigned to him. His business was not to preach the
gospel and administer the sacraments, but to instruct the young, and candidates
for baptism, and those who, having been lately received into the church, were
not yet fully initiated into the knowledge of religion. We know that, in the
first ages, there were schools attached to certain churches, in which sueh per
sons were placed under the care of a teacher appointed by proper authority.
There was a school of this nature in Alexandria, in which the celebrated Ori
gen presided for a time. Similar schools were established in other places, as
Rome, Antioch, Csesarea, &c. There is probably a reference to the doctor in
the following passage: " Let him that is taught in the word, communicate unto
him that teacheth in all good things;"* or, " let the catechumen;" — so those
were called who were in a course of religious instruction, — " let the catechu
men communicate to the catechist." We have no such person now in the
church. Our schoolmasters, although they were under the superintendence
of the rulers of a congregation, do not answer to the title; first, because
they are not exclusively engaged in teaching the principles of religion;
and, secondly, because they are not ecclesiastical officers, but belong to the
laity. Doctors are not so necessary at present as they were in the primitive
times, when Christianity was new, and the ehurch was daily receiving acces
sions of converts from heathenism and Judaism, who needed to be prepared
for admission by private instruction. Religious education may now be in
trusted to parents and common teachers, aided by the personal diligence of
young persons, and the attention which pastors ate able to pay to them.
I proceed to speak of Deacons, of whose institution we have an account in
the sixth chapter of the Acts: " When the number of the disciples was multi
plied, there arose a murmuring of the Hellenists against the Hebrews, because
their widows were neglected in the daily ministration."! A complaint was
made to the Apostles, who, in order to remedy the evil, commanded the disci
ples to look out among them seven men, duly qualified, whom they might ap
point over this business. This was the origin of deacons, of whom mention
is made in other places of the New Testament, and their qualifications are de
scribed. They were chosen to manage the affairs of the poor, to receive the
contributions made for their use, to distribute them to the proper persons, and,
no doubt, to accompany their acts of charity with exhortations and prayers.
Their duty is expressed by the Apostles, when they say, " It is not meet that
we should leave the word of God and serve tables."! These words have been
understood to mean, that they were to serve the table of the poor, and the table
of the Lord; and this commentary oceurs in many books; but it is inaccurate,
as it is evident from the whole transaction that only the table of the poor is in
tended. It is true, indeed, that, as the design of the institution was not to di
vert the attention of the Apostles from the ministry of the word, the care of all
temporal matters in which the church is concerned, may be considered as be
longing to deacons; but they were specially appointed solely for the poor. In
* Gal. vi. 6. * Acts vi. 1. i Acts vi. 2.

OFFICE-BEARERS. 499
some parts of the church, the office of deacon is retained, but in others it is
not; and the want of it has been represented as a criminal omission. But the
institution arose out of particular circumstances, and may therefore be dis
pensed with where these do not exist. In some congregations, there are no
poor; in others, they are very few in number; and where they most abound,
they can be attended to by the elders, whom we acknowledge as office-bearers
in the church, as we shall afterwards see; and who, on the principle that an
inferior office is comprehended in a superior, possess the powers of deacons,
as ministers possess the powers of elders. This is our apology for not having
deacons in all our congregations, and it seems to be satisfactory. They are
not appointed, because all that they could do can be done by the elders, with
out encroaching upon their other duties. y
The deacons of an Independent church, seem to have a general care of the
members, and resemble our elders, as far as is consistent with the principle
that all are rulers. But when they assign to them any other power than that
of taking care of the poor, they deviate from the original institution; and while
they deny that there is any warrant in Scripture for our elders, we may confi
dently reply that, at any rate, deacons, as constituted by them are equally un
scriptural. Apostolical deacons had no inspection of the church; their business
was with the poor, and with the poor alone.
The last class of office-bearers in the church, consists of Ruling Elders; in
speaking of whom it will be necessary to enter into greater detail, as the divine
institution of such persons is controverted, by Episcopalians, who deem it in
congruous that laymen, as they call them, should be admitted to any share in
the government of the church; and by Independents, who maintain that the
Scriptures make mention of no other offices besides pastors except deacons.
It is acknowledged, that our information respecting the latter is more explicit
and ample, as we have not only an account of their institution, but a descrip
tion, in another place, of their qualifications. Still, however, we believe that
there is a warrant for ruling elders, because there are some passages in which
they appear to be distinctly recognized.
The first passage which I shall quote, is in the twelfth chapter of the Epistle
to the Romans: " Having then gifts differing according to the grace that is
given to us; whether prophecy, let us prophesy according to the propor
tion of faith; or ministry, let us wait on our ministering; or he that teach-
eth, on teaching; or he that exhorteth, on exhortation: he that giveth, let
him do it with simplicity; he that ruleth, with diligence; he that showeth
mercy, with cheerfulness."* It is the opinion of many commentators, that
prophesying, which sometimes signifies public teaching by the assistance of
the Holy Spirit, and ministry, are general divisions under which the different
offices of the church are arranged: that prophesying comprehends teaching and
exhorting; and ministry, giving, ruling, and showing mercy. At any rate, it is
plain -that ruling is distinguished from teaching, exhorting, and giving, or from
the peculiar work of the pastor, the doctor, and the deacon. The original
term, iipoiatai>.tvos, is properly translated, he that ruleth, because it evidently
denotes one who presides over others with authority. This presidency is at
tributed to one as his proper business. It is his duty to preside or to rule, as it
is the duty of another to teach, and of another to give. The Apostle is not
enumerating the various duties of one individual, but different duties belonging
to different individuals. Who, then, is 6 ripoietainevos1. He is not the deacon,
for the deacon does not rule, but gives to the poor; he is not the pastor, for, al
though the pastor rules, he is here characterized by teaching or exhorting,
which is peculiar to him. '® Ttpoietaftevos must therefore be a person whose
whole duty consists in ruling, or, in other words, an elder, according to the
• Rom. xii. 6 — 8.

500 GOVERNMENT OF THE CHURCH:
views of Presbyterians. Some tell us, that his rule is over his family; but this
is nothing to the purpose, and is a shift to get rid of a difficulty, because the
Apostle is obviously speaking of. the church. Others say, that he rules over
the church stock; but they confound him with the deacon, who gives; and, be
sides, in this sense the expression would be indefinite and improper, there being
nothing to determine the kind of rule to which the Apostle refers; and surely it
will not be supposed that a deacon was held in such estimation in the primitive
times, as to be called <5 7tp6iato.ij.evos by way of eminence. There is another
mode of evading the argument, by saying that the Apostle is not speaking of
offices and office-bearers but of gifts. Some pains have been taken to obviate
this opinion, but without any necessity, because it is manifestly unfounded;
and, at any rate, it does not answer the design of those who have adopted it.
Paul does indeed make mention of gifts; but he immediately proceeds to con
sider them as bestowed upon particular persons, and speaks of those persons as
plainly as one man can speak of another. Besides, although he were speak- •
ing of gifts, the argument is of the same force as if he were speaking of
persons, for gifts are bestowed upon persons for particular purposes; and if
there are gifts which qualify for ruling, as there are gifts which qualify for
teaching, it follows, that to rule or govern is the exclusive duty of those upon
whom the former are conferred. Every unprejudiced man must perceive the
truth of this reasoning, and consequently must think that the evasion mentioned
above is not worthy of notice.
The next passage to which I shall direct your attention, is in the twelfth
chapter of the First Epistle to the Corinthians: " God hath set some in the
church, first, apostles; secondarily, prophets; thirdly, teachers; after that mira
cles; then gifts of healing, helps, governments, diversities of tongues."* It
does not follow, because some of the offices and ministrations enumerated in
this place were miraculous and extraordinary, that they were all of that de
scription; for we have already found apostles and prophets in the same cata
logue with pastors and teachers; and we cannot be justly charged with wresting
the passage from its design, when we consider it as specifying, in part, the
ordinary office-bearers of the church. There are no persons who may be so
reasonably supposed to be meant by helps, as deacons; and thus the word has
been often explained. They were instituted for the express purpose of helping
the Apostles, for the purpose of relieving them from the care of the poor, that
they might devote themselves exclusively to the ministry of the word. If
helps signify helpers, governments must signify governors, the abstract being
in both cases put for the concrete. The question then is, Who were the go
vernors to whom the Apostle referred? They were not the apostles, nor the
prophets, nor the teachers, because they are mentioned as distinct classes.
They were not helpers, because they are distinguished from them also; and
besides, if deacons were intended, they could with no propriety be called go
vernors, for deacons have no rule over the church. There is no other class of
persons to whom this title, used as it is in contra-distinction to other office
bearers, will apply, but the ruling elder of Presbyterians; and it is with obvious
propriety that they are designated governors, as the sole business of their office
is to govern the congregation over which they are appointed. God has set
some governors in the church. He has not lodged the power, as Independents
suppose, in the people at large, but has ordained that a few should be invested
with authority to take order that the members should walk in the ordinances
and commandments of the Lord.
The last passage which I shall quote, is in the fifth chapter of the First Epis
tle to Timothy: ". Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double
honour, especially they who labour in word and doctrine."! Many attempts
* Cor. xii. 28. * lTiin. v. 1 7.

OFFICE-BEARERS. 501
have been made to evade the evidence of this passage in favour pf the point
which we are endeavouring to establish. It has been explained in various
ways; and learned men have employed their ingenuity to prove one thing at
least, that it ought not to be understood of ruling elders; but who are meant by
the elders who rule well, as distinguished from those who labour in word and
doctrine, they are not agreed. Their different opinions can be viewed in no
other light than as conjectures. Some say that the elders who rule well are
diocesan bishops, and that those who labour in word and doctrine are preach
ing presbyters; but besides that, contrary to their own system, they thus
assign greater honour to presbyters than to bishops, we have seen that there
were no such bishops iff the apostolic church; and this hypothesis must be
abandoned. Others tell us that the former are ordinary bishops and presby
ters, and the latter evangelists; as if it had been the business of bishops and
presbyters in the primitive church to rule, and of evangelists to preach, with
out having any concern in the government of the church. Again, it has been
supposed that the rulers here mentioned are deacons; and the labourers in word
and doctrine, the ministers of the word; but we have seen that deacons have
nothing to do with the government of the church. Some have fancied two
kinds of elders, of whom some preached the word, and administered the sacra
ments; while others were employed in reading the Scriptures to the people,
and performing other inferior offices. But this is a gratuitous assumption, un
worthy of further attention. The most extravagant idea of all, is that of the
learned Mr. Mede, who contends that the elders who rule well are civil magis
trates, and those who labour in word and doctrine are ministers of the Gospel.*
These evasions being quite unsatisfactory, some have recourse to criticism,
in order to wrest the passage out of our hands. First, They affirm that the
adverb fiausta, translated especially, is not here distinctive, but descriptive;
that is, it does not point out a different. class, but describes with greater particu
larity the class mentioned in the beginning of the verse, " Let the elders that
rule well be counted worthy of double honour, particularly because they labour
in word and doctrine." But the word, both in sacred and profane writers as it
would be easy to show, uniformly serves to distinguish, and may be rendered,
most qf all, chiefly, especially. There is no reason why it should be transla
ted differently in this verse, but one, which every honest critic will reject,—
the interest of a party. Secondly, It has been said that the Apostle does not
distinguish two classes, but refers, in the end of the verse, to those of the same
class, who distinguish themselves by their diligence; and this is signified by the
use of the word xorttavtes, which they affirm implies labouring with our utmost
strength. It happens unfortunately for this criticism, that the word is employ
ed in the New Testament to express simply the duty of the servants of Christ,
and not the degree of it; and, on one occasion, when Paul intended to express
greater activity, he did not consider the verb xonma as sufficient to convey this
idea, but joined another with it, representing Tryphena and Tryphosa as
xoniaaas, labouring, but saying of Perses, that she " laboured much in the
Lord,"! qtis ttoMa txortiaaev tv xvpup. As no word is added in the verse under
consideration to xamuvtts, it is plain that the Apostle is not speaking of un
common diligence; and besides, it is somewhat strange to suppose that he
would command the members of the church to give equal honour to all the
ministers of the Gospel, although some of them were more, and others less
diligent in performing their duty. Degrees of diligence certainly call for de
grees of honour.
I have endeavoured to clear this passage from the attempts which have been
made to pervert its meaning, and from the exceptions against our application
of it. The result is, that it ought to be understood in its plain and natural
* Mede's Works, Disc. xix. p. 71. * Rom. xvi. 12.

502 GOVERNMENT OF THE CHURCH:
meaning; and that thus viewed, it points out two classes of office-bearers who
have distinct functions. It belongs to one class to rule, and in ruling their
whole duty consists. They are required to do nothing more than to adminis
ter the laws of Christ for the regulation of the conduct of his followers. Those
of the other class are joined with them in the rule of the church; but there is an
additional duty incumbent upon them, in which the former have no concern,
namely, to labour in word and doctrine, to preach the gospel, and administer
the sacraments. The argument may be stated in the following manner: —
There are elders, who, although they rule well, are not worthy of double
honour, unless they labour in word and doctrine. But there are elders who are
counted worthy of double honour, because they rule well, although they do not
labour in the word and doctrine. Therefore, there are elders who are not teach
ing or preaching elders, that is, they are ruling elders only. The premises are
clearly laid down in the passage, and the conclusion is therefore legitimate.
If there were any office in the church manifestly useless, we might confi
dently affirm that it is not of Divine institution. We could not, with equal
confidence, pronounce an office, which appeared to us to be useful, to be di
vinely instituted, because we may err in our notions of utility. But the ad
vantages resulting from the office of ruling elders are a subsidiary argument in
its favour. As there can usually be only one preaching elder in a congregation,
he could not perform his peculiar duties, and at the same time undertake the
superintendence of the conduct of the members. Elders are his assistants in
this work. Living among the people, and associating familiarly with them,
they have opportunities of knowing their conduct, and can personally interpose
with their counsels and admonitions; and under the joint care of the pastor and
the rulers, the people grow in faith and holiness, and walk in all the ordinances
and commandments of the Lord.

LECTURE CI.
ON THE CHURCH.

Church Power. — Nature of It. — Independence of the Church. — Its relation to the State. —
Church Power distinguished into POTESTAS Soy/ia-vi-m, POTESTAS Autoxt/jw, and
POTESTAS Stajtpnuui. — The Extent and Limits of these Several Kinds.
We have seen that Jesus has established a particular form of government
in the church, and has appointed certain persons to administer it. They have
been distinguished into two classes; the first comprehending the extraordinary
office-bearers, who ceased when the purpose of their institution was accom
plished; and the second comprehending pastors and elders, who are to con
tinue to the end of the world. I proceed to inquire with what power they
are invested, and to finish what I have to say on the subject of the church.
Some have maintained that the church possesses no power, and that the
office of her rulers consists solely in instructing and persuading the people.
They merely propose to them truths to be believed, and duties to be practised,
which they may enforce by motives calculated to impress their consciences
and hearts; but they have no authority to call them to account for their con
duct, and to deprive such as they deem unworthy, of their privileges. If any
power of this kind Is exercised in a particular church, it is conferred, according

CHURCH POWER. 503
to them, by the civil magistrate, who may appoint censures to be inflicted in
particular cases for the maintenance of good order, and the advancement of
the interests of morality. The author of this opinion was Erastus, a physi
cian of the sixteenth century; from whom the doctrine, which makes the
church subject to the state, and places the civil magistrate at its head, has re
ceived the name of Erastianism. It found friends and advocates; and, to a
certain extent, is acted upon in the Church of England, which acknowledges
the supremacy of the king in causes ecclesiastical as well as civil. It was
brought forward by Erastus, and defended by his followers, as the only effec
tual method of putting an end to the extravagant and tyrannical power which
had been claimed by the Church of Rome. This was a clumsy expedient for
remedying the evil, requiring no wisdom or ingenuity; and upon the same
principle, many a good thing should be destroyed because it has been abused.
But, in such cases, enlightened zeal will content itself with reform; and leaving <
the power in existence, will employ itself in so defining it, and placing such
checks upon it, as shall henceforth prevent the excesses which are the subject
of complaint.
It is unnecessary to engage in the refutation of an opinion, which no person
will adopt who entertains just notions of the nature and design of the church,
and does not consider it merely as an appendage of the state, and a political
engine. As we have already shown that a form of ecclesiastical government
is appointed in the Scriptures, and that certain offices have been instituted for
the management of the affairs of the church, we have virtually proved that
power is committed to it; and nothing is now necessary but to ascertain what
't is, and how far it extends.
Let it be observed, that it is a spiritual power, totally distinct from the civil
power which is exercised in the government of cities and nations. The rule
according to which it is exercised is the word of God, and not the laws of
ihe state. The law of Jesus Christ supersedes every other law; and when
these happen to interfere, the members are bound to obey God rather than
men. Its object is the conscience; and its end is not gained, as in human
governments, by the external obedience of the subjects, unless it proceedfrom
a sense of the Divine authority. The means which it employs to secure
obedience are, commands, entreaties, promises, threatenings, and censures;
which, however, are all calculated to affect the mind only, and not the outward
state. The church does not resort to confiscation of goods, imprisonment,
banishment, stripes, and death, to enforce its decrees; it leaves men in full
possession of their temporal privileges. The matters about which civil go
vernment is concerned, are property, liberty, personal security; the power of
the church relates to instruction in heavenly mysteries, excitement to the cul
tivation of holiness, and preparation for the world to come. The end of civil
government is to promote the peace and happiness of the present life; the end
of ecclesiastical government is the edification of the body of Christ, the build
ing up of the Saints in faith and holiness to life everlasting. Civil govern
ments can compel their subjects to obey the laws, but the church uses no com
pulsion, and employs only moral means to work upon the heart.
Hence you perceive that the church is a society totally distinct from and
independent of the state. Its constitution, its laws, its administration, and its
objects, are different; and, although its members and the subjects of the state
are the same individuals, yet they are considered as sustaining different cha
racters, in relation to the state, as rational beings who have certain duties to
perform to society; in relation to the church, as the worshippers and servants
of God. The alliance of church and state, of which so much has been said,
and which has been represented as necessary to the welfare of both, is always
injurious to the former, when the state encroaches upon the prerogatives of the

504 GOVERNMENT OF THE CHURCH:
church, or the church barters any portion of her power to secure the patron
age of the state. The separate provinces of both are clearly defined; and
each may exercise its peculiar functions without interfering with the other.
The state can accomplish all the ends of civil government, without any other
aid from the church than the influence of the doctrine which it teaches, upon
the tempers and manners of the people; and the church is so far from needing
the assistance of the state, that its interference would defeat the design of its
institution, which is to .prevail upon men by persuasion, and not by force; to
inspire them with a sincere attachment to religion, not to extort a hypocritical
profession of it.
When we affirm that the power of the church is not derived from the state,
or dependent upon it, we do not plead for the exemption either of the mem
bers, or of the rulers, from civil authority. The Church of Rome, indeed,
contended for this privilege in behalf of the clergy, and succeeded in estab
lishing it. They were not amenable to the magistrate, even when they had
committed crimes, and were accountable only to the ecclesiastical tribunals.
Protestants advance no such claim; and acknowledge that church-men, as well
as lay-men, are subject to the civil jurisdiction. The objection, therefore,
which has been raised against the intrinsic power of the church, — that it es
tablishes imperium in imperio, — is not applicable to our principles; although it
bears with all its force against those of papists, by which the clergy, in all the
nations of Europe, were incorporated into a body, independent of the states
which protected them, and owing obedience solely to bishops and archbishops,
and the pope at their head. Thus two rival powers were erected, with oppo
site interests; and we learn from history what fatal conflicts sometimes ensued,
involving nations in destructive wars, and terminating in the degradation and
dethronement of monarchs. The church, indeed, even upon our principles,
may be called imperium in imperio; because it is a society subsisting in the
bosom of a state, distinct from it with respect to its internal jurisdiction, and
governed by its own laws; but it threatens no danger to the state, and gives it
no disturbance in carrying on its proper functions, because it does not inter
meddle with civil and political affairs, and confines itself to claims and opera
tions purely spiritual.
i The power of the church is commonly divided according to the nature of
the objects about which it is employed, into three parts. The first is called
potestas Soyfiatixij, or its power respecting articles of faith; and under this
head some comprehend the preaching of the word, the administration of the
sacraments, the ordination of ministers, &c. The second is potestas Siatax-Hxri,
or the power of the church to make laws and constitutions. The third is po
testas Smxpitixtj, or the power of the church to censure and excommunicate
offenders, and to restore the penitent to communion.
The first in order is the potestas Soy/iottixij, or the power of the church in
reference to dogmas or articles of faith. That the church has power to make
such articles, Protestants deny, upon this ground, that the Scriptures contain
all the truths which it is necessary to know and believe; and they justly con
demn the Church of Rome, which, admitting another rule of faith called tra
dition, has introduced into her creed human dogmas and grossly erroneous
tenets, and anathematised all who do not implicitly receive them. In order to
determine how far this part of the power of the church extends, I shall lay
before you the following observations.
First, The church is the depository of the Scriptures. Under the former dis
pensation, the sacred oracles were committed to the Jews; but the honour of
being their guardians is now transferred to the disciples of Christ. The
church having received them as containing the whole revelation of the will of
God, she is bound to keep them as a precious treasure, and to transmit them from

CHURCH POWER. 505
age to age, in order to enlighten, and sanctify, and comfort the souls of men,
" till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son
of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of
Christ."* But although the Scriptures are deposited in the hands of the
church, we must beware of thinking that their authority depends in any degree
upon her judgment, or that her sanction was necessary to give them validity.
This doctrine is maintained in the church of Rome. The Scriptures, it has
been said, have no authority without the authority of the church; and without
the church, Matthew is entitled to no more credit than Livy. But, besides the
impiety of such sentiments, papists involve themselves in palpable absurdity.
If you ask them how we shall know the church, whose authority is so great,
they must answer that we know it from the Scriptures, and thus they reason
in a circle, proving first the authority of the church from the Scriptures, and
then the authority of the Scriptures from the church. We acknowledge that
it is by testimony that we ascertain the genuineness and authenticity of the
Scriptures. By the testimony of those who lived at the time when they were
published, and were deeply interested in the matter, we are assured that they
are the writings of the persons to whom they are ascribed. Thus far their
testimony goes, but no farther. We do not receive the Scriptures simply be
cause they received them; but because we are sure, from their circumstances,
that they would not have received them, unless they had been fully satisfied
of the Divine commission of those who gave them to the world. If the
church has any thing to do in this business, its office is merely to point out the
books in which revelation is contained. Our belief of their divinity is founded
on the internal and external evidences of their heavenly origin. We do not
ascribe a power to the church to admit books into the canon, or to exclude
them from it, at her pleasure. In admitting and excluding, she was bound to
proceed upon evidence; and we acquiesce in her decision, not because it is
hers, but because the evidence upon which it was founded appears satisfactory
to ourselves. But this is very different from the Romish doctrine, which re
solves all the evidence of the inspiration of the Scriptures, and all their au
thority, into the decrees of the church.
Secondly, It belongs to the church to explain the Scriptures, and to call upon
men to study, and believe, and obey them. , The ministers of the church are
the expounders of the law; and to them maybe applied the words of the
prophet, " The priest's lips should keep knowledge, and they should seek the
law at his mouth; for he is the messenger of the Lord of hosts."! But the
expositions of the church are authoritative only in a limited sense. Her mi
nisters are not self-created teachers, but have received their commission from
Jesus Christ, and in executing it are bound to take his word as their rule; but
as they may misapprehend its meaning, or intentionally deviate from it, and
obtrude their own notions as the dictates of revelation, it is a duty which
Christians owe to themselves and to their Divine Master, to exalt no human
being to the chair of infallibility, to take nothing upon trust, and to bring the
doctrine of their teachers "to the law and to the testimony, because, if they
speak not according to this word, there is no light in them."* The church.
we have said, has no power to make new articles of faith, and ought therefore '
to adhere strictly to the Scriptures in all her instructions. By the Romanists
another standard has been introduced, to which they assign an equal degree
of authority with the Scriptures, or rather a greater, as they do not hesitate to
affirm that without its aid the Scriptures cannot be understood. This is tradi
tion; by which they mean a summary of doctrine which was in the church
before the Scriptures were published, and is the only sure interpreter of them,
nas come down by oral communication or in the writings of the Fathers, and
* Eph. iv. 13, + Mai. ii. 7. i Isa. viii. 20.
Vol. IL— 64 2 U

506 GOVERNMENT OF THE CHURCH:
would suffice for the direction of Christians in all things necessary to be
believed and practised, although the Scriptures were annihilated. It is unne
cessary to say how derogatory all this is to the honour of the Scriptures, and
how contrary to their own testimony concerning themselves, that they are " a
light to our feet and a lamp to our path;"* and that they " are able to make us
wise unto salvation," and to " furnish us for every good work."! This wit
ness is not true, if tradition is necessary. What the church of Rome says
concerning tradition is a mere assumption without the shadow of proof, and
rests upon the same ground with the oral law of the Jews. It is equally un
certain, no man being able to tell what it is; it changes with the fancies of men,
that which is a truth of tradition in one age, being pronounced to be an error in
another; it is any thing which they choose to make it, to serve their own pur
poses. It is the inexhaustible storehouse from which papists have drawn the
enormous mass of error, superstition, and idolatry, which has made the word
of God of no effect, and almost overwhelmed the Christian religion.
Lastly, The church has power to draw up and enact summaries of Chris
tian doetrine, in order to exhibit to the world her views of the Scriptures, to
oppose prevaiting heresies and errors, to furnish the people with a concise
statement of the great principles of religion, and to provide an effectual means
of ascertaining the sentiments of candidates for admission, especially into the
ministry, and thus to secure harmony and uniformity in the public ministra
tions. These are called symbols, confessions, articles, formularies, and they
were introduced at an early period. We have the Nicene creed, the Constan-
tinopolitan creed, and others composed by synods and councils. There is also
the celebrated Athanasian creed, which is called by the name of Athanasius,
.because it contains a summary of his doctrine. The real author is unknown,
Ibut its orthodoxy has procured its reception by several churches. Besides
ithese, there is the Apostles' creed, which also owes its name to the conformity
>df its doctrines to that of the Apostles. It is certain that it was not drawn up
by them; and a story which has been told, that at its original formation all the
Apostles were present and each contributed a part, is absurd and ridiculous.
Modern churches have imitated the example of those in former times, and have
given to the public their confessions of faith, from which we learn how far
ithey agree with the Scriptures, and in what respects they differ from each
mother.. If you ask what authority these summaries possess, I answer, that they
(have none in themselves, any more than other human compositions. The
only difference between them and the creeds of individuals is this, that there
is a greater probability that they are right; as it is less likely that so many who
were engaged in drawing them up should have erred, than a single person,
who gives the result of his insulated studies. At the same time, I must say
that this probability does not amount to much, because we sometimes find that
there is an Athanasius contra totum mundum, or that one man discovers the
truth, and a council misses it; and, at any- rate, it is not a ground on which
any Christian could safely and rationally proceed in choosing his creed. The
authority of such summaries is derived solely from the Scriptures; if they are
agreeable to them, they are binding, because they exhibit the truth if not
agreeable to them, they ought to be rejected, with as little ceremony as we
should use towards a private attempt to impose upon conscience. There has
been much misapprehension upon this subject, which has been too much en
couraged by the vague, injudicious language of the public teachers of religion;
and1 the standards of a church have been regarded as sacred things, which it
would be profaneness to touch. So far as these sentiments prevail among
Protestants, they adopt one of the most absurd and dangerous errors of Po-
* Ps. cxix. 105. * 2 Tim. iii. 15. 17.

CHURCH POWER. 507
pery. When the church speaks, we have a right to try what she says by
the supreme standard; and her dictates have no control over our consciences,
unless she can satisfactorily show that they are conformable to it.
The sum, then, of what has been said concerning the potestas dogmatica of
the church is, that she is the depository of the Scriptures; that she is appointed
to interpret them, and performs this duty by public and private instruction, oral
and written, but has no power to make articles of faith; and that, as she is not
infallible, every man retains the right of private judgment, or the right to ex
amine the Scriptures for himself, and to follow them, either by joining in the
profession of the church, or by dissenting from it. This view of the power of
the church accords with the sentiments stated in our Confession of Faith: "It
belongeth to synods and councils ministerially to determine controversies of
faith, and cases of conscience;" and their " decrees and determinations, if con
sonant to the word of God, are to be received with reverence and submission."
" All synods and councils since the Apostles' times, whether general or par
ticular, may err, and many have erred; therefore they are not to be made the
rule of faith or practice, but to be used as an help in both."* The church of
England expresses the same sentiments in the article concerning general coun
cils: " When they be gathered together, (forasmuch as they be an assembly of
men, whereof all be not governed with the Spirit and word of God,) they may
err, and sometimes have erred, even in things pertaining unto Gout Where
fore things ordained by them, as necessary to salvation, have neither strength
nor authority, unless it may be declared that they be taken out of holy Scrip
ture."! Let us now proceed to consider the second part of the power of the church,
which is called potestas Siataxtixv, or potestas ordinans; that is, the power to
enact canons, or rules for government and order.
In the first place, The church has not power to establish any form of govern
ment which shall appear most eligible to her rulers, judging in this matter as if
they were at liberty to pursue their own views of propriety and expedience.
Were the form of government ambulatory, as some suppose, it would undoubt
edly belong to them to accommodate it to circumstances, so far as this might be
done without injury to the interests of religion. But we have proved that a
particular form is prescribed, from which they cannot deviate, without usurping
an authority which cannot be derived from Jesus Christ, as it is employed in
setting aside his institutions. The command to Moses is addressed also to
them: " See that thou make all things according to the pattern shown unto
thee in the mount."! It may be objected, that the form of government for the
Christian church is not delineated with as much particularity as the tabernacle
was, with its various services. But the general principles are laid down; the
outlines are given; and the church has nothing to do but to develope the princi
ples, and to fill up the outlines, in exact conformity to the spirit of the original
sketch. In the second place, The church has not power to make laws to regulate the
moral conduct of the members; she has no legislative authority; and her office
consists solely in publishing and enjoining the laws which the Head of the
church has already enacted. Moral laws can emanate only from the Sovereign
of heaven and earth. Ecclesiastical rulers are in the same situation with the
subordinate magistrates in a kingdom. There are laws which bind them as well
as the subjects; and the only purpose for which they are appointed, is to superin
tend the execution of them. The decalogue which was published from Sinai,
is the standard of duty to Christians as well as to Jews; and of its perfection
no doubt can be entertained, whether we reflect upon its Author, or upon the
two grand principles upon which it is founded, and into which all its precepts
* Chap. xxxi. § 3, 4. * Art. xxi. i Heb. viii. 5.

508 GOVERNMENT OF THE CHURCH:
are resolved, — supreme love to God, and sincere love to our neighbour. The
details of duty in the Scripture, whether in the didactic, the exhortatory, or the
admonitory form, serve to explain it; and the text, with the commentary, con
stitutes a rule so full and so particular, that it stands in need of no addition,
and is sufficient to direct the Christian in the whole course of his life. The
Church of Rome is guilty of great presumption and impiety in assuming the
right of legislation. Not content to enforce the commandments of Christ, she
has enlarged his law by new precepts, originating in her own authority, or,
what is the same thing, in tradition, — the name which she uses to justify her
corruptions and usurpations; she has instituted holidays which God has- not ap
pointed; prescribed modes and objects of worship which are condemned in his
word; prohibited certain kinds of food at some times to all, and at all times to
some; forbidden the marriage of the clergy; enjoined confession to a priest,
fasts, penances, and pilgrimages; and has introduced these innovations, not as
matters of order and expedience; but as laws binding upon conscience, and re
quiring obedience under pain of censure and mortal sin. Thus the prediction
has been fulfilled, that "the man of sin should, as God, sit in the temple of
God, showing himself that he is God."* And every church which dares to
make laws which shall directly affect conscience, blasphemously arrogates the
prerogative of the Most High. " God alone," says our Confession, " is Lord
of the conscience, and hath left it free from the doctrines and commandments
of men which are in any thing contrary to his word, or beside it, in matters of
faith or worship. So that, to believe such doctrines, or to obey such com
mandments out of conscience, is to betray true liberty of conscience.''!
In the third place, The church has not power to decree rites and ceremonies.
Here we encounter the Church of Rome, and the Church of England; which
last affirms in her articles that the church has such power;! and to both, the
claim is necessary to justify their practice. We demand Scriptural proof, but
can find none. It is in vain to quote the words of Paul to the Corinthians,
" Let all things be done decently and in order;"§ because they do not refer to
rites and ceremonies, but to certain abuses in the public exercise of extraordi
nary gifts. They have not the most remote relation to a supposed power to
render the ordinances and ministrations of religion more becoming and impres
sive by human additions to them. There is a vague kind of talk among per
sons who seem to know little of the nature of genuine religion, about the neces
sity of adapting it to the nature of man, who is so much influenced by his
senses as to be incapable of pure spiritual contemplations, and needs their aid
to fix his attention, and excite devout sentiments and affections. But while we
deny that there is any such necessity, and can prove the falsity of the assump
tion by experience, we say that, if it had existed, we may presume that the
Author of religion, who knows our frame, would have provided for it by ap
pointing suitable rites, and not have left the invention of them to men them
selves, who have discovered such a propensity in all ages to corrupt religion,
and to turn it into a vain show. It is supposed that the ordinances of the gospel
are defective from their simplicity, and that, unless they be new-modelled,
they will not produce the intended effect, at least upon the generality of man
kind. Is not this plainly to impeach the wisdom of Christ, as if he had not
rightly apprehended the proper means of making religious impressions upon
the human mind, or had delivered his institutions to the church in an unfinished
state, and committed the supply of what was wanting to persons who have
proved themselves incompetent, by the nature of the ceremonies which they
have devised, and by the multiplication of them to such a degree as to convert
religion into a bodily service? The advocates for ceremonies forget the words
of our Lord, " God is a Spirit, and they that worship him must worship him,
* 2 Thess. ii. 4. * Chap. xx. 2. i Art xx. § 1 Cor. xiv. 40.

CHURCH POWER. 509
in spirit and in truth;"* and would turn religion into a mechanical process, the
effect of impressions on the senses and the imagination. They forget that it is
spiritual; that it is produced by the contemplation of spiritual objects; that the
medium by which these affect the mind is faith, which " is the evidence of
things not seen, and the substance of things hoped for;"t and that the excite
ment of the natural passions has nothing of the nature of piety, in the estima
tion of Him who dwells with the humble and the contrite that tremble at his
word. The church assumes a power which does not belong to her, when she makes
any addition to the institutions of Christ; and still more when she exacts the
observance of these on pain of censure and excommunication. In this case,
she claims an authority co-ordinate with that of our exalted Redeemer. Were
the church simply to recommend certain ceremonies, leaving it free to every
man to observe them or not, according to the dictates of his conscience, her
conduct, although it could not be justified, would be less reprehensible. But
when she issues her mandate, that all should conform, she assumes the tone of
an usurper and a tyrant; and it is a duty which every man owes to the Head
of the church, to resist her impositions. Besides other instances of will-wor
ship in the Church of England, she has appended two human rites to the sa
craments, — the sign of the cross in baptism, and kneeling at the Lord's Supper.
For the first, there is not a shadow of authority in the practice of the Apostles;
and the reason which she gives for it is imaginary; — that " it is a token that
the baptized person shall not be ashamed to confess the faith of Christ cruoified,
and manfully to fight under his banners against sin, the world, and the devil;
and to continue Christ's faithful soldier and servant unto his life's end." Men
are the authors both of the sign and of the interpretation of it. Faith, which
rests solely upon revelation, sees nothing in it but an idle motion of the
hand. Kneeling at the Lord's table is enjoined as expressive of reverence; but
by what authority is this posture required? Not surely by that of Jesus Christ,
who administered the ordinance to his disciples placed at table in the same
manner as when they received their ordinary meals^ How then comes it to
pass that the symbols of his body and blood must be received with a sign of
external reverence, which was not given when he himself was corporeally pre
sent? This is rather a puzzling question even to Papists, who believe tran
substantiation; and still more so to Protestants, who do not believe it: but the
truth is, that the rite is derived from Papists, who maintain that the elements
are changed into the body, blood, and divinity of Christ; and is therefore,
among Protestants, a childish and absurd imitation of a practice founded on a
doetrine which they hold in abhorrence. There is not much encouragement
to recognize in the church this power of ordaining ceremonies, when we see
that one of its fruits is symbolizing with idolaters. The ordinances were
given by Jesus Christ in a perfect state, and are as sufficient to promote all the
ends of their institution now, as they were in the primitive times, when they
subsisted in their original simplicity.
Lastly, There are several matters respecting external order, to which the
power of the church does extend. These do not relate to the essence or form
of the ordinances of religion, or to the moral conduct of the members; but to
circumstances which are connected with the regular proceedings of any society,
and which human prudence is competent to settle. Thus, it belongs to the
church to appoint the times of public worship; not to make holidays, but to
determine at what hours Christians shall assemble on the Sabbath, and on what
other occasions they shall eome together to join in the solemn exercises of
religion, according to the calls of Providence. It is also her province, to
point out the order in which the public ministrations should be conducted, that
• John iv. 24. + Heb. xi. 1.
2u2

510 GOVERNMENT OF THE CHURCH:
uniformity may be established within her pale; to fix the bounds of congregations,
presbyteries, and synods, that there may be no interference of interests and claims,
and that each may confine itself to its owri jurisdiction; to make regulations re
specting their intercourse, and the transference of members from one place to
another; to lay down rules for conducting judicial processes, that nothing may
be done rashly or unfairly, but the ends of justice may be attained; to prescribe
the education of candidates for the ministry, and the steps which are to be taken
with a view to ascertain their qualifications, and to introduce them into office.
With regard to such matters, it is evident that they imply no legislative authori
ty, but merely the power of arrangement; that uniformity is not necessary
throughout the whole Christian church, but only in particular divisions of it;
and that the order may be varied, without impeding the general purpose of
edification, according to the judgment of the church, founded upon the customs
and circumstances of different nations and times.
Let us proceed to consider the last part of ecclesiastical power, which is
called potestas Smxpitixv, or potestas judicialis vel disciplinaris, and consists
in the exercise of discipline. Erastus and his followers, who denied the power
of the church in toto, necessarily controverted the power of discipline, and
maintained, that she had no right to exclude any from her communion; and that,
in doing so, she encroached upon the prerogative of the civil magistrate, to
whom alone it belongs to punish the guilty.
The abettors of this opinion place the church in more disadvantageous cir
cumstances than any other society. A state has power to protect itself from
disorder and dishonour, by the restraint and expulsion of the lawless and un
ruly. Every other association lays down rules to be observed by the members,
the infraction of which subjects them to censure, and it may be, to the loss of
their privileges. It would be strange to suppose that the church alone is ex
posed, Without defence, to have her peace disturbed, her laws violated, her
reputation injured, by conduct inconsistent with her holy profession. To say
that the civil magistrate ought to interpose to remedy such disorders, is to
annihilate the church, or to make it exist only in name. In this case, the
church and the state are the same; the privileges of the church belong to men
as members of the state; and the state punishes them, not as unworthy disci
ples of Christ, but as disobedient subjects.
To every person who has read and understood the Scriptures, it will appeal
that the church is a society specifically different from the state, and instituted
solely for spiritual purposes. A person has a right of admission into it, not be
cause he was' born in the country whpre it is established, nor simply because
he was baptized in his infancy, but because he makes a credible profession of
faith. On this ground only can he claim the enjoyment of its privileges,
which from their nature appear not to be intended for all promiscuously, but
for those who in the judgment of charity are disciples of Christ. It is evident,
that it is only on the same ground that he can retain them; and that, if he has for
feited his title by conduct which impeaches the sincerity of his profession, they
may be justly suspended or withdrawn. If this be granted to be true, — <and it
is not conceivable that it can be disputed by any man of common sense, — the
inference is obvious, that there must be a power lodged in the church to enforce
the observance of her laws by censures and excommunication.
When our Lord gave Peter " the keys of the kingdom of heaven," we do not
conceive that he conferred upon him a peculiar privilege, unless the words
refer simply to the fact, that he was the person who opened the new dispensa
tion to the Jews, by preaching to them on the day of Pentecost, and to the
Gentiles by preaching to Cornelius. Whatever power is implied in these
words, " Whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth, shall be bound in heaven, and

CHURCH POWER. 511
whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, shall be loosed in heaven,"* was common
to him and the other Apostles, to whom the same words were addressed on
another occasion.! Binding and loosing are expressive of authority, not only
to declare doctrinally what are the obligations of Christians, and in what re
spects they are free, but to inflict and remove censures. The offender is bound
when the church pronounces sentence upon him, and is loosed when he is
restored to privileges upon repentance; and the proceedings are ratified in
heaven, when they are conducted in conformity to Scripture,
It appears that discipline was exercised in the primitive church. The case
of the incestuQus man is an example. He had committed a sin aggravated in
itself, and highly discreditable to the Christian profession; and Paul commanded
the Corinthians, " when they were gathered together, in the name of the Lord
Jesus Christ, to deliver him unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the
spirit might be saved in the day of the Lord."! He told them at the same
time, that although they could not avoid all intercourse with the wicked men
of the world; yet, "if any man that was called a brother was a fornicator, or
covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner," they
were not to keep company, nor even to eat with him;§ and as we might have
expected, he plainly signified that they were not to sit down with him at the
table of the Lord. He directs a heretic to be rejected after the first and second
admonition;!1, and he calls upon Christians to withdraw from every brother that
walked disorderly, and not after the tradition which they had received. 1T Some
of the Asiatic churches are reproved, because they had neglected the exercise
of discipline. The charge brought against them is, that " they had them that
held the doctrine of the Nicolaitans," and " that held the doctrine of Balaam;"
" that they suffered that woman Jezebel, who called herself a prophetess;"**
and the obvious meaning is, that, instead of employing the authority which
they had received from Jesus Christ against such persons, they permitted them
to remain in the church.
The rulers of the church have authority over the members. As it is their
province to judge who should be admitted, and to inspect their conduct when
they have been received into fellowship, so they have power to censure and to
expel such as prove themselves to be unworthy. This is the natural right of
every society, and it is given to the church by the special appointment of her
Sovereign: " Reprove, rebuke, exhort with all long-suffering and doctrine."
" Exhort and rebuke with all authority; let no man despise thee."!!
The objects of the censures of the church are offences or scandals; by
which are meant, parts of conduct which are contrary to the law of Christ,
and are calculated to lead others into sin by the force of example, as well as to
expose religion to reproach. They are public offences known to the church,
or to some part of the members; for, with respect to those of a private nature,
they ought not to be brought to light, unless the guilty person persist in them
after private admonition; and to tell them in the first instance to the church, is
to create a scandal, under the pretext of removing it.
Offences are to be treated differently, according to the difference of their de
grees. When they are of a lighter kind, and discover rather inadvertence than
bad intention, a simple admonition will suffice: " Brethren, if a man be over
taken in a fault, ye which are spiritual restore such an one in the spirit of
meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted."!! A greater degree
of guilt will call for a more severe expression of disapprobation, or a rebuke
solemnly administered in the name of Jesus Christ, of which it is the design
to affect more deeply the conscience of the offender, and to excite him to
* Matth. xvi. 19. * Ib. xviii. 18. * 1 Cor. v. 4, 5.
§ 1 Cor. v. 1 1. 1 Titus iii. 10. 12 Thess. iii. 6.
••Rev.ii. 14, 15. 20. **2Tim.iv.2. Tit. ii. 15. a Gal. vi. 1.

512 GOVERNMENT OF THE CHURCH:
prayer for pardon and sanctifying grace. There are cases which require that
the church should proceed still farther. Individuals sometimes commit flagrant
and aggravated sins, which, although they do not necessarily infer the total
want of religious principle, bring the sincerity of their profession into doubt.
Such offenders are suspended from sealing ordinances, as they are called, till
they have given evidence of repentance, and then they are restored to their
privileges. This sentence is called the lesser excommunication, and the re
moval of it is termed absolution. They are not absolved from their sin, — for
it is the prerogative of God alone to forgive it, — but from the sentence of ex
communication. The highest censure which the church has power to inflict,
is called the greater excommunication, and consists in expelling the person from
the communion of the faithful. The grounds of it are contumacy or the
obstinate refusal to submit to admonition and rebuke, and perseverance in sin
in defiance of all endeavours to reclaim him. We have an example in the
case of the incestuous man, who was delivered " unto Satan for the destruction
of the flesh, that the spirit might be saved in the day of the Lord."* Com
mentators generally suppose that these words imply something miraculous,
and that the man was smitten with some bodily disease, through the agency
of Satan, in consequence of which his health and strength declined. His
spirit would be saved in the day of the Lord, if, through the Divine blessing,
his experience of the painful effects of sin in this life, proved the means of
leading him to repentance. But even in the present times, this highest cen
sure may be still considered as the delivering of the excommunicated person to
Satan. The world is the kingdom of Satan, and the church is the kingdom
of Christ. Excommunication is the returning of a professed subject of
Christ, who has proved himself to be a traitor and a rebel, to the kingdom to
which he originally belonged. It declares that Christ is not his Lord, for he
has refused to obey him, and that he is under the dominion of the prince of
this world. He is sent back to him as an alien, who has no right to remain
in the kingdom of Christ; because he has violated its laws, and is determined
not to submit to them. Hence it appears that this sentence is very awful;
since, when pronounced upon just grounds, it involves the eternal perdition of
the person, if he continue impenitent.
But the effects of the censures of the church extend only to the soul. It
is a gross perversion of their design, to accompany them with civil pains,
confiscation of goods, imprisonment, exile, or death; to deliver up the excom
municated person to the secular arm, as the Church of Rome does, with a
hypocritical prayer that he may be mercifully treated, while it is her secret inten
tion that he should expire at a stake." " The weapons of our warfare are not car
nal, but spiritual." Power is given to the church, not for destruction, but for
edification; and its object is the good even of those who fall under the severest
censures. Like him whom she acknowledges as her Head, she has no pleasure
in the death of the wicked, but rather that the wicked should turn from their
ways and live; and her arms are opened to receive the penitent, and to restore
them to a place among her children. * 1 Cor. v. 5.

THE LAW OF GOT>. 51 3
LECTURE CI1.
ON THE LAW OF GOD,
Connexion of the Practical and Doctrinal Parts of Theology. — The Moral Law. — Remarks
on the Ground of Moral Obligation; and the Source of Morality. — The Decalogue. —
Rules for Interpreting It.

The system of Theology consists of two parts, the doctrinal and the prac
tical. The former is the foundation of the latter. The natural order of things,
therefore, requires that we should first consider the doctrines and then proceed
to explain the duties which spring out of them. It is because God is our
Creator, that he has a right to give law to us; and the relation in which he
stands to us as creatures and as sinners, the dispensations of which we are the
objects, and the privileges and blessings which he has bestowed upon us, sup
ply the motives by which we should be excited to obey. In a course of mi
nisterial instructions, these two parts are usually blended together. It may
sometimes, indeed, be deemed expedient to go over the system in regular order,
and, in this case, a separate illustration will be given of doctrines and precepts;
but even then they ought not to be kept entirely distinct. No doctrine of re
ligion should be expounded, without some statement of the duties to which it
leads, and the motives which it furnishes; for all our discourses should be. of
a practical tendency. On the other hand, no duty should be inculcated, with
out a reference more or less explicit, to the doctrine or doctrines with which
it is connected, and by the belief of which the heart is purified, and its powers
are engaged in the service of God. The gospel is represented to be the doc
trine according to godliness, or, the doctrine which inspires piety towards God,
and respect for his authority.
In the Scriptures, doctrines and precepts are often mixed; but sometimes
they are exhibited separately. In the Old Testament, besides the precepts of
the law of Moses which are delivered at great length in the Pentateuch, we
have the Book of Proverbs, which is almost wholly composed of moral max
ims and rules of life. In the New Testament, we have our Saviour's Sermon
on the Mount, besides parables and discourses of the same nature in the Gos
pels; and of the Epistles, those of which the first part is devoted to doctrinal
discussions, commonly conclude with a detail of duties which believers are
bound to maintain. Some of the Epistles are the models upon which our
systems are formed; and the similarity of arrangement is particularly observa
ble in the Epistle to the Romans. •
The law of God, which is binding upon Christians, is contained in the
Decalogue, or the Ten Words, as the Jews call it, because it consists of ten
precepts, which were originally written on two tablets of stone; the first,
comprehending the four precepts which enjoin our duty to God; and the se
cond, the six which prescribe our duty to men. It is called the Moral Law,
because the subject of its injunctions is not ceremonial observances, but moral
actions; and to distinguish it from the positive laws, which were only of tempo
rary obligation. Of this description was the ceremonial law, which prescribed
the ritual of worship under the former economy, and the judicial law, which
regulated the civil and political affairs of the Jews. The ceremonial law was
abrogated when its typical institutions were fulfilled in Jesus Christ; and the
judicial law was repealed when the Jews ceased to exist in a national capacity.
The moral law, however, has no relation to times and places, or to one nation
Vol. IL— 65

J4 THE LAW OF GOD.
more than another; but being founded in the relations of men to their Creator,
and to one another, it retains its authority under all dispensations.
It is commonly said that this law was originally written upon the heart of
man; but the language is figurative, and, unless it be explained, conveys no
idea to the mind. We understand by it, then, not only that man was endowed
with intellectual and moral powers, or was created with a capacity to perceive
his duty and feel its obligation, but that the knowledge of it was immediately
communicated to him by his Maker. He was not left to find it out by reflec
tion and reasoning, but was at once made acquainted with his relations, and
the moral obligations resulting from them. In consequence of sin, this light
became dim, so that the full extent of the region which it once illuminated
was no longer perceived, and the objects which still fell within the sphere of
vision, were not seen in their exact shape and dimensions. Accordingly, the
moral code of heathen nations is imperfect, leaving out some duties, and ex
hibiting others in a mutilated form; but the notion of a moral law has been
widely diffused, and some traces of it may be discovered among all nations.
The Gentiles who have not the written law, do by nature the things enjoined by
it, and show that the work of the law is written upon their hearts, by the ope
rations of conscience, which sometimes accuses, and at other times excuses
them.* The morality of heathens may be accounted for in two ways. It
may be conceived to have been handed down to them by tradition, to be the
voice of the law, which was given to our first parents, and revived by subse
quent revelations, still speaking to men by the lips of their progenitors and
teachers, who have inculcated from age to age the precepts which had been
delivered to themselves by a preceding race. It may be supposed, again, to
be the result of reasoning; a discovery made by the mental faculties employed
in contemplating the principles, feelings, and instincts of human nature, and
the circumstances in which it is placed, and in deducing inferences from them.
This, however, is the work only of a few superior minds, and will not account
for the existence of moral sentiments among all classes of men. I am dis
posed to think that heathen nations are chiefly indebted for their knowledge to
tradition, although it cannot be questioned that the human mind is so constitu
ted as to perceive the propriety or impropriety of certain actions, and to make
them the objects of approbation or disapprobation. '
How insufficient reason is to discover a system of morality, we could not
determine with precision, unless we had an opportunity to observe its success
in a nation which was left solely to the light of nature. But where shall we
meet with such a nation, since all mankind are derived from the same stock,
and the original family was illuminated by revelation? Few of its rays may
now shine in some regions of the earth; but we are not certain that they are
any-where completely extinguished; that is, we cannot ascertain that any
nation owes all its knowledge on this subject to its own insulated discoveries. But
the general insufficiency of reason is evident, not only from the errors and de
fects in the codes of morality which have been drawn up with the aid of tra
dition by the most learned and civilized heathens, but from the difficulty which
professed Christians have experienced in settling the foundation of their
system, when they had resolved to be guided in the inquiry by reason alone.
The first question which demands our attention, is the ground of moral ob
ligation; and here we encounter many different opinions. If I ask why I
should pursue one course of action rather than the opposite; one says, Because
it is right; another, Because it is conformable to reason and nature; a third,
Because it is conformable to truth; a fourth, Because it is agreeable to the fit
ness of things; and a fifth, Because it contributes to the general good. The
fitness of things has been much insisted upon by some metaphysical writers
* Rom. ii. 14.

THE LAW OF GOD. 515
as the ground of moral obligation. " The necessary and eternal different re
lations that different things bear to one another, and the consequent fitness or
unfitness of the application of different things or different relations to one
another, ought constantly to determine the wills of all rational beings, to go
vern all their actions by the rules of justice, equity, goodness, and truth, for
the good of the public, in their respective stations; that is, these eternal and
necessary differences of things make it fit and reasonable so to act; they cause
it to be their duty, or lay an obligation upon them so to do, even separate from
the consideration of these rules being the positive will or command of God."
It is pretty plain that this abstruse speculation, which some of you may find
it difficult to comprehend, could never be intended to be the ground of moral
obligation to mankind at large; and that we must seek for it in something more
simple and level to their capacity. It is equally evident, that it properly con
stitutes no moral obligation at all. The fitness of things is said, indeed, to
oblige us independently of the will of God; but how can this be? Is there
any obligation but from a law; and any law without the will of a superior? If a
man act contraryjo the fitness of things, you may pronounce him to be un
reasonable, but you cannot call him criminal. He may subject himself to in
convenience or suffering; but he is only foolish. The truth is, that the fitness
of things as a rule of duty is a word without meaning; and is only used in an
intelligible sense, when it expresses the institution of things by the will of
the Creator, from which the duties of his creatures naturally flow. But when
thus explained, the fitness of things and the will of God signify the same
thing; the fitness, the relation, or the order of things, being the medium
by which he has intimated his will. — Another ground of obligation is utility,
or the tendency of actions, to promote the general good. " Actions are to be
estimated," says Dr. Paley, " by their tendency. Whatever is expedient is
right. It is the utility of any moral rule alone which constitutes the obliga
tion of it."* But hear Bishop Butler. "As we are not competent judges
what is upon the whole for the good of the world, there may be other imme
diate ends appointed us to pursue, besides that one of doing good or produ
cing happiness. Though the good of the creation be the only end of the
Author of it, yet he may have laid us under particular obligations, which we
may discern and feel ourselves under, quite distinct from a perception, that
the observance or violation of them is for the happiness or misery of our fel
low-creatures. And this is in fact the case. For there are certain dispositions
of mind, and certain actions, which are in themselves approved or disapproved
by mankind, abstracted from the consideration of their tendency to the happi
ness or misery of the world; approved or disapproved by reflection, by that
principle which is the guide of life, the judge of right and wrong." ! I may
add, that to hold utility to be the foundation of morals, is to ascribe to men
more comprehensive views than they actually possess; and it is well said in
the above quotation, that we are not competent judges what is upon the whole
for the good of the world. It is a principle too unwieldy for our grasp, and
extremely apt to be abused by the substitution of particular for general good.
Besides, all our knowledge of what is good is derived from experience, and
is posterior to moral obligation, unless we suppose that the laws founded upon
it did not become binding, till men had discovered them in the progress of
time. I apprehend that, in this theory, the effects of a law are confounded
with the reason of it; and this is an error; for it by no means follows, because
moral laws are ^productive of happiness, that they had no other cause, and
were intended to accomplish no other design. They may result from the na
ture of things, or the relations which subsist in the universe; and the good
* Moral Philosophy, book i. chap. 6. * Sermon on the Love of our Neighbour — Note

510 THE LAW OF GOD.
resulting from them, may not be their ultimate end, but a consequence of the
benevolence which gave existence to the system of creation.
The details of morality will evidently be affected by the principle which is
assumed as its foundation, or by the rule of action which is established. It is
not certain that the same conclusions would be drawn by the person who found
ed it in the fitness of things, and by him who founded it on utility. Hence
we see the insufficiency of reason to be the guide of life, and should be thankful
that we enjoy a clearer and more steady light.
A question has been agitated among Theologians with respect to the rule of
moral action, whether it originated in the will of God, or is founded in the na
ture of things; and this is in fact to inquire whether morality is mutable or im
mutable. Some have maintained that the whole moral law originated in the
will of God; that the duties enjoined in it are right, solely because he has com
manded them; and that, if he had so pleased, our duty might have been made
to consist in actions different, or contrary. A similar notion was entertained
by some ancient philosophers, who pronounced virtue and vice to be arbitrary
distinctions; and is imputed by the Fathers to Simon Magus, as one of the er
roneous tenets which he inculcated. It has been adopted by some Divines of
the Roman Church, with a design to uphold the dispensing power which they
ascribe to the Pope. It would be sufficient, I should think, to silence them,
were we simply to ask, whether God could have exempted us from the duty
of loving himself, or have made it our duty to hate him; and whether the same
change might have taken place with respect to the love of our neighbour?
Others run into the opposite extreme, and affirm, that the whole moral law is
founded in, the nature of things; and consequently that no part of it could be
altered. It is exactly what it must always be, while God and man continue
the same. Some of them, however, have found it necessary to qualify this
opinion, and have^given such an explanation of it as virtually amounts to the
third opinion, which I am going to state, and which holds an intermediate place
between the two former; namely, that although the moral law in general is
founded on the nature of things, or on the relations of man to his Maker and to
his fellow-creatures, yet some particulars are the subject of positive institution.
I refer, as an example, to the fourth commandment, which is acknowledged to
be partly moral, and partly positive; moral, as it requires the consecration of a
part of our time to the immediate service of God; positive, as it appropriates a
seventh part of it. God might have demanded a greater or a less portion, a
fifth, or a tenth; or, instead of setting apart a whole day, he might have been
satisfied with a part of each day. There was a reason for the selection of the
seventh rather than of any other day, namely, because upon it God rested
from the work of creation; but it has given place, as we Christians believe, to
a new and stronger reason, and the Sabbath is changed from the seventh day
to the first. I refer, as another example, to the law respecting marriage, by
which the relation is forbidden to persons standing in certain degrees of con
sanguinity and affinity. According to the latitude in which the precepts of the
Decalogue are to be interpreted, the prohibition is included in the seventh com
mandment. Whatever reason may be assigned for the prohibition, we cannot
consider it as of the same immutable obligation with the precept, not to steal,
or not to lie. It may be dispensed with, not by human authority, but by that
of the Supreme Lawgiver; and accordingly, marriages within the forbidden
degrees have been contracted with his express approbation. In the beginning
of the world, the sons of Adam married their sisters; and, by the Mosaic law,
if a man died without issue, his brother was required to marry his widow.
Such marriages are now held to be incestuous. We may therefore say, that
there is a mixture of moral and positive in the Decalogue; and there is truth
in the old observation, that some things are commanded because they are just,

THE LAW OF GOD. 5 17
and some are just because they are commanded. Those which are just be
cause they are commanded, may be altered by the same will which enacted
them; but those which are commanded because they are just, are of perpetual
obligation. We have no example of the suspension or abrogation of a moral
precept, unless we should view, as an instance of suspension, the permission
to work on the Sabbath in cases of necessity and mercy; which, however, is
not a deviation from the original design of the Law, because the Sabbath was
made for man, that is, for his good, not man for the Sabbath. But we cannot
regard in this light, the command to the Israelites to destroy the seven nations
of Canaan. This was not a violation ofthe sixth precept; which, indeed, for
bids one man to embrue his hands in the blood of another, but reserves to God
the right to dispose of his creatures; and, in taking away their life, he may em
ploy some of themselves, as the civil magistrate does not himself execute the
law, but delegates another. Neither can we regard in this light, the command
to the Israelites to borrow from the Egyptians. It seems to imply an autho
rized breach of morality; for borrowing involves a promise to restore, which
the Israelites had certainly no intention to perform. But they received no such
command. Our translation is unhappy; the original word signifies simply to
ask. God directed the Israelites to ask jewels of gold and silver, and at the
same time he disposed the Egyptians to grant their request. Thus he spoiled
the oppressors of his people, and recompensed the latter for the hard service
which they had so long performed: " The Lord gave the people favour in the
sight of the Egyptians. Moreover, the man Moses was very great in the
land of Egypt, in the sight of Pharaoh's servants, and in the sight of all the
people."* On whatever ground the precepts of the moral law are supposed to rest, the
reason that we are bound to obey them is the will of God. This makes them
law to us, and not our perception of fitness or utility. That only is a law
which proceeds from the will of a superior; obedience and authority are corre
lates, the one supposes the other. To us who enjoy revelation, questions con
cerning the abstract foundation of morality are unnecessary; and the best thing
which can be said of them is, that they are idle speculations, because our mo
rality will not constitute a part of religion, unless it proceed from love to God,
or, in other words, from respect to his will. The man who believes that his
duty is enjoined by the authority of God, possesses all the r^uisite knowledge
for practical purposes, and, I may add, the true knowledge of the subject; for
when we attempt to derive our obligations from any other source, we turn mo
rality into a matter of calculation. The question with us is, not what is con
formable to the nature of things, for in many cases this is a point about which
we are incompetent to judge; or what is conducive to the general good, for
here our views are too limited to decide; but what is agreeable to the will of our
Maker; and this is easily ascertained by referring to his own authoritative de
clarations. Thus the knowledge of morality is brought within the reach of all
who can read the word of God, or hear it read; and it is owing to this simple
method of teaching it, that the illiterate in Christian countries have more com
prehensive and accurate ideas than the most enlightened moralists of the hea
then world.
Our Lord delivered a summary of duty on the following occasion, which is
thus related by Matthew: "Then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked
him a question, tempting him, and saying, Master, which is the great com
mandment in the law? Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy
God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is
the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt
love thy neighbour as thyself. On these two commandments hang all the law
* Exod. xi. 3.
2 X

518 THE LAW OF GOD:
and the prophets."* Love to our Maker and to our fellow-men is the principle
of obedience. Our various duties are merely the development of it. It is the
root, and they are the branches growing out of it, or the fruits which it yields.
" On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets;" that is,
the precepts delivered in the pentateuch, and in the prophetical writings, are
the different modes in which love to God and to man is expressed, and they
will be obeyed by every man in whom this love exists. " If there be any
other commandment," says an Apostle, when speaking of the precepts ofthe
second table, "it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt
love thy neighbour as thyself. Love worketh no ill to his neighbour; there
fore love is the fulfilling of the law."!
But love is only the principle of obedience, the state of mind which leads to
it; the mode in which it should be manifested, is the subject of positive pre
scription. The Decalogue is founded upon it, and points out the various ways
in which we should express our love to God and to men; it was written upon
two tables, the one containing the duties of which God is the immediate object,
and the other the duties which we owe to our fellow-men. Yet these tables
must be considered as exhibiting only a summary of duty. They do not enter
into detail, but are general heads, from which particulars are to be deduced by
ourselves, or are to be collected from the commentaries upon them, which are
scattered up and down in the Scriptures. Certain rules have been laid down
for the right interpretation of the law.
First, It should always be remembered that " the law is spiritual," as it is
called fey an Apostle;* and, consequently, that it requires something more than
external conformity to its precepts. Most of the precepts, when literally un
derstood, relate only to the outward conduct; as, " Thou shalt not kill;" "Thou
shalt not steal," &c; but the last, which says, " Thou shalt not covet," regu
lates the movements of the heart; and this instance clearly shows the spirit
which pervades all the other precepts. It is an admonition in the close by the
Lawgiver, that he ultimately regards the state of the mind. A human legisla
tor aims at nothing more than the compliance of his subjects with the letter of
the law. If they abstain from murder, theft, perjury, and other crimes, he does
not concern himself with the motives; and, in fact, the heart lies beyond his
jurisdiction. He cannot know the thoughts of other men, and observe what is
passing in the interior of their souls. It is the same thing to him whether the
laws are obeyed from conscience, from fear, or from a regard to self-interest; he
has gained his end, when the peace of society is maintained. But the moral
law has emanated from Him who is the Former of our spirits as well as of our
bodies, has a right to the homage of both, and pays no regard to an action or a
course of actions, unless the disposition from which it proceeds be such as he
can approve. If a human governor could discover that the man who bows to
him despises him in his heart, and that, amidst the most imposing appearances
of respect, he harbours the feelings and the purpose of a traitor, he would set
no value upon his hollow professions. The moral Governor of the universe
sees the secret operations of the mind, and demands that we should serve him
with our spirits as well as with our bodies. His law must therefore be under
stood to regulate the external sentiments and desires, as well as the actions to
which they give rise, and to extend its authority in the first place to the former,
as constituting what is most valuable in obedience. When it enjoins any duty,
it enjoins the corresponding state of mind; when it forbids any sin, it forbids
the appetite, or propensity which leads to it. In the Scriptures men are ex
horted to " keep their hearts with all diligence, because out of them are the
issues of life;"§ that is, from them their actions receive their moral character
oi denomination. The spirituality of the law is implied in the principle upon
* Matth. xxii. 35—40. * Rom. xiii. 9, 10. i lb. vii. 14. § Prov. v. 23

THE DECALOGUE. 519
which it is founded. It is the affection of love which is the source of all ac
ceptable obedience.
Secondly, One species is used to denote all the different species of the same
sin or duty; that is, when one form of a particular sin is forbidden, all the forms
of that sin are forbidden; and when one form of a particular duty is enjoined,
all the forms of that duty are also enjoined. The law says, " Thou shalt no.
kill;" but we must not limit this precept to the prohibition of actual murder
alone. It forbids, at the same time, all injuries offered to the person of another,
all malice and revenge, and all the expressions of malignant feeling. Our Sa
viour has authorized this explanation: " Ye have heard that it was said by
them of old time, Thou shalt not kill; and, whosoever shall kill shall be in
danger of the judgment: But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his
brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment; and whosoever
shall say unto his brother, Raca, shall be in danger of the council; but who
soever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell-fire."* The law
says, " Thou shalt not commit adultery;" but besides the sin specified, it
forbids incest, fornication, unnatural lusts, and not these alone, but all sen
sual desires. " Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou
shalt not commit adultery: But I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a
woman to lust after her, hath committed adultery with her already in his heart."*
On the other hand, when we are commanded to have no other gods before
God, we are commanded not only to acknowledge that he alone is the living
and true God, but to make him the object of all the love, and reverence, and
confidence, to which his infinite excellencies give him an unquestionable title.
When he commands us to love our neighbour as ourselves, he commands us
to esteem him for his virtues, to be grateful to him for his kindness, to sympathize
with him in his infirmities, to comfort him in his sorrows, to assist him in
difficulties; in a word, to perform all the good offices which love naturally sug
gests, and by which its sincerity is expressed.
In the third place, Negative precepts are contained in affirmative, and af
firmative precepts in negative. When any duty is enjoined, the contrary sin
is forbidden; and when any sin is forbidden, the contrary duty is enjoined. It
has been said, that as in the Scriptures there are more things than words, so in
the precepts and prohibitions there is more than the words express. The law
is not to-be subjected to that kind of interpretation which brings any thing out
of any thing; but its sense is to be diligently explored. As the good prescribed
by the law cannot be performed unless the opposite evil be guarded against,
nor the evil prohibited be avoided unless the opposite good be performed, it
follows, that negative precepts include the affirmative, and affirmative precepts
the negative. When the law forbids us to steal, or take away unjustly the
property of our neighbour, it requires us to promote his temporal interests, as
far as we have ability and opportunity. When it forbids us to kill, or unjustly
to deprive him of life, it commands us to use the means of preserving his life,
to give him the counsel, the warnings, and the assistance which are necessary
for his safety. In these cases, affirmative precepts are included in the negative.
When the law commands us to honour our parents, it forbids neglect of them,
contempt for them, or the doingof any thing which maybe injurious or offensive
to them. When it commands us to sanctify the Sabbath, it forbids all worldly em
ployments and recreations, and every thing, in a word, which is inconsistent with
the sacred rest and holiness of the day. In these instances, the negative precepts
are included in the affirmative. It appears from the precepts of both kinds,
that the duty of men consists not simply in abstinence from evil, but also in the
practice of good; and we may farther infer, that the law of God is exceedingly
broad, extending its authority in every direction, and subjecting the whole of
human life to its control.
* Matth. v. 21,22. *Ib.27,28.

520 THE LAW OF GOD-
In the fourth place, When the law forbids a sin, itfijrbids all the causes of
it; and when it enjoins a duty, it enjoins also the means by which we shall be
enabled to perform it. Thus, when it prohibits uncleanness, it prohibits drunken
ness and gluttony, and all the provocatives of the sensual appetites; when it pro
hibits theft, it prohibits covetous desires and idleness, which may prompt us to
steal, by reducing us to want; when it enjoins justice, it enjpins diligence in
business, prudence in conducting our affairs, and econom)', that we may be able
to satisfy every lawful demand upon us. And hence it follows, that if a man
has brought himself by indolence, folly, and extravagance, into such a situation
that he cannot pay his debts, he is not so much to be pitied as to be condemned,
and instead of calling him unfortunate, we should say that he is criminal.
In the fifth place, Negative precepts are always binding, but positive pre
cepts oblige only in certain circumstances. It is never lawful to murder, to
steal, to commit adultery, to bear false witness against our neighbour. No
situation can occur in which a man shall be permitted to do any of these things.
The strongest temptations will not exculpate him. These precepts never bend
to circumstances; a man is bound to refrain, although he should expose himself
to the loss of his life. Positive precepts bind us always when the duties which
they enjoin may be performed; but certain conditions are supposed, which may
be wanting, and there are fit seasons, which do not always occur. We are re
quired to honour our parents; but as the obligation ceases when they die, so,
during their life, we cannot give them the usual tokens of honour, when we
are removed to a distance from them. We ought to minister to the wants of
the indigent; but to do so is not our duty, if we are ourselves so poor that we
have nothing to spare. We ought to worship God, but we cannot be con
stantly engaged in acts of devotion. We must spend much of our time in pro
secuting our business, and in conversing with our fellow-men about necessary
affairs. The command requires us to worship him only at the stated times,
and on such other occasions as are suggested by the state of our own minds,
and the circumstances in which we are placed. It has been justly remarked,
that the positive precept concerning love to God must be excepted, which is
obligatory at all times; there being no season, place, or state, in which it is not
our duty to love him with all our heart. We may make the same remark con
cerning love to our neighbour, which is also binding at all times; and the ob
servation which has been made respecting positive precepts, relates only to the
particular modes of expressing our love to both.
In the sixth place, There is another rule mentioned by Divines, which, how
ever, is not directly to the purpose, as it does not help to interpret the law,
but is intended to point out the relative importance of its duties. The rule is,
that the precepts of the second table of the law must give place to those of the
first, when both cannot be obeyed. The following instances have been given
to illustrate the rule. The love of our relations must be subordinate to the love
of God; and our Lord has said that we must hate father and mother, when
fidelity to him requires us to do so.* Again, when the commands of our
earthly superiors interfere with the commands of God, we must prefer the
latter to the former. But these are rather apparent than real illustrations, be
cause it will appear, on reflection, that in such cases there is no interference
of duties. The authority of men over others is limited, and ceases the moment
that it is exercised in requiring any thing unlawful. When the commands of
parents and magistrates are opposed to the commands of God, there is no choice
of duties; the will of God is the sole obligation which an enlightened con
science will acknowledge. Our duty to God and our duty to man must always
be consistent, because the one is the measure of the other; and instead of talk
ing loosely of a possible opposition between them, it is more accurate to say
* Luke xiv. 26.

THE DECALOGUE. 521
that, whatever human laws and customs may require from us, whatever natural
affection or self-interest may prompt us to do, whatever our superiors may ex
pect from us, their claims are unjust, and ought to be disregarded, when offence
would be given to God by our compliance. As he is the First and the Last, so
great that all other beings are as nothing when compared with him, we are always
bound to sacrifice for his glory, all that is most tender and valuable in our con
nexion with our fellow-creatures. There can be no jarring moral obligations;
and it is ignorance or inattention which makes them appear incompatible.
We can never owe that to man which God claims for himself. Love to God
is the first and great commandment; and the second, or love to our neighbour,
is subordinate, but not contrary to it. It is remarkable that a case mentioned
in Scripture, in which one duty is made to yield to another, relates to the first
table. What is positive in it, gives place to what is moral in the second, ac
cording to these words, "I will have mercy, and not sacrifice," or, "rather
than sacrifice."* We are permitted to violate the rest of the Sabbath by works
of mercy, for the relief and preservation of men and animals, and by works
of necessity, as the. preparation of our food, the extinguishing of fire, the carry
ing away of property exposed to an inundation, &c. Let it be observed, that
the law of the Sabbath is not repealed in such cases, but admits these excep
tions, that other duties which cannot be deferred may be performed. The ex
ceptions, if I may speak so, are a part of the law.
Lastly, I shall briefly mention one other rule, — that whatever the law re
quires us to do, we are bound to endeavour, in our several stations, to make
others do. It is their duty to glorify God as well as ours; and zeal for his
glory will excite us to use all lawful means that it may be promoted by them.
This end is to be gained not only by our example, but by our instructions, and
counsels, and entreaties, and reproofs, and by the proper exercise of our au
thority over those whom Providence has placed in subjection to us. Every
man, for example, is bound to see the Sabbath sanctified by all under his roof;
for thus says the law, " The seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God;
in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy
man-servant, nor thy maid-servant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is with
in thy gates."
These rules have been laid down for the interpretation of the law; and by
the judicious application of them, with the assistance afforded by other pas
sages of Scripture, we may deduce from the ten precepts of the decalogue all
the duties which we owe to God and to man. It is a complete code of mo
rality. As no man can attempt without impiety to take any thing from it, so
there is no need that any thing should be added to it. When Socinians affirm
that Christ has corrected and enlarged the law, they unjustly accuse it of im
perfection in its original form; and they totally misapprehend the design of his
commentaries upon it in the Gospels, which was not to new-model the law, but
to free it from the corrupt interpretations which the Scribes had given of it, on
the authority of tradition. He evidently recognized its perfection in his
answer, formerly, quoted, to the question, " Which is the first and great com
mandment?" and the Apostle Paul, who was enlightened by his Spirit, pro
nounced it to be "holy, just, and good."!
The obligation of the moral law is universal. All men, in every region of
the earth, are subject to its authority. It was the law given to man at his
creation, from which his subsequent , apostasy could not release him; it is
founded in relations which subsist wherever there are human beings endowed
with reason and volition. The other laws given to the Jews were national
and local. The ceremonial law could not be practised in all its parts but within
narrow limits. The temple could not be resorted to on all necessary occasions,
* Matth. ix. 13. * Matth. xxii. 37. Rom. vii 12.
Vol. IL— 66

522 -THE LAW OF GOD:
nor the three annual festivals be observed in Jerusalem by persons wnose usual
residence was in the remote countries of Asia, Africa, and Europe. It does
not appear that circumcision was incumbent upon any but the descendants of
the twelve patriarchs, with whose father, Abraham, the covenant was made; nor
is it to be supposed that if a heathen, at a great distance from Jerusalem, had
attained to the knowledge of the true God, and became a devout worshipper of
him, he was bound to conform to the Mosaic ritual, and that his sacrifices
would not have been accepted if they were offered upon any other altar than
that of Jerusalem. There is no doubt that then, as well as now, in every na
tion, he who feared God and wrought righteousness was accepted of him.*
The peculiarity of the judicial law is still more unquestionable. It was the
civil law of the Jews, intended solely for the government of their nation; to
which, therefore, other nations were not more subject than men living in
one country are at present subject to the laws of another. Nay, some
things were enjoined upon the Jews, which by other nations are consid
ered as unlawful; fpr example, the marriage of a widow to the brother of
her deceased husband who had died without children. The ceremonial law
is therefore abolished, as is also the judicial law, so far as it did not embody
the moral precepts, which are of perpetual obligation. But while the authority
of certain ordinances, religious and civil, extended only to the Jews, the deca
logue is the law of all nations. Morality is not the subject of positive institu
tion, and of human regulation. It is not determined by geographical bounda
ries, so that what is right on one side of a river or mountain is wrong on the
other, and virtue and vice exchange characters according to changes of climate.
Piety towards God, truth, justice, and charity towards men, and the exercise
of temperance, or self-government, are duties in every country under heaven.
The moral law is the rule of our present conduct, and will be the rule of our
future judgment.
From what has been said, it is evident that the obligation of this law is per
petual. As it binds all men who at present exist, it will for the same reason
bind all succeeding generations. It has constituted an essential part of all the
divine dispensations. It was the rule of duty to man in his primeval state,
and obedience to it was the condition of the covenant into which his Maker
entered with him in the name of his posterity. It was solemnly promulgated
to the Israelites from Sinai, and a curse was denounced upon every man who
should not continue in all the things which were written in it to do them.
Jesus Christ has adopted it into his religion, re-enacted it, if I may speak so,
by his authority, and commanded all his disciples to conform to it. He came
not to destroy, but to fulfil it; and as he himself obeyed its precepts, and sub
mitted to its sanction, by dying in the room of his people, so he declared it to
be his own law, and admonishes us that he will disown every man who ne
glects or violates its precepts, whatever respect he may profess forhim. "Why
call ye me Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?"! There cannot be
a more erroneous view of his religion than to suppose, that it sets men free
from the obligations of morality. The error first made its appearance in the
apostolic age, as we learn from the Epistle of James, which was written to re
fute those who expected to be saved by a faith not accompanied with works;
and it has been adopted in succeeding ages, because it accords so well with the
natural wish to enjoy impunity in sin. We pronounce the man to be a heretic
who denies the Trinity, or the atonement, or original sin, or justification by
faith, or the necessity of the influences of the Spirit; but be assured that there
is not a greater heresy than to teach that by the gospel we are exempted from
the authority of the law. It transforms the holy religion of Christ into a system
of impurity; it turns the grace of God into licentiousness.
* Acts x. 35. + Luke vi. 46.

THE DECALOGUE. 523
The moral law is an emanation from the holiness of God; and when it is
imprinted upon our hearts by the Spirit, we are changed into the image of God.
To. produce this effectis the design of the death of Christ, of his ministra
tions in heaven, of the operations of grace, the institutions of die Gospel, and
the dispensations of Providence. Only the half of the work of redemption is
performed, when men are delivered from the punishment of sin: to emancipate
them from its dominion, to eradicate the love of it, to render them obedient to
God, to inspire them with a sacred respect to his will, this is the other half,
and is surely of equal importance. And the whole design will be accomplish
ed when grace shall triumph in the pardon of their sins, and the complete sanc
tification of their souls; and the love which the law requires shall reign without
a rival in every heart, and shine in every action.

LECTURE CIII.
ON THE LAW OF GOD.

Division of the Decalogue into two Tables. — Statement of the Sins Forbidden and Duties
Enjoined in the First, the Second, and the Third Commandments.
Having made some general observations upon the law, and laid down ge
neral rules to be observed in explaining it, I proceed to consider its precepts
in their order.
It was originally written upon two tables, in order, it should seem, to distin
guish the two classes of precepts which the decalogue contains. This is the
only reason which we can conceive why it was engraven upon two tables
rather than upon one. There have been different opinions, however, respect
ing the division of the precepts. Josephus assigns five to each table, and has
been followed in this arrangement by one or two authors; but their mistake is
evident. The precepts naturally fall under the two general heads of love to
God and love to man; and to the first none properly belong but four, which im
mediately respect our Maker; the other six being the modes in which our love
to man should be expressed. Besides, when the Apostle calls the fifth pre
cept, " the first commandment with promise,"* we are sure that he does not
mean that it is the first in the decalogue; and we must understand his words to
import, .that it held the first place in the second table delivered to Moses.
Some assign to the first only three precepts, not by transferring the fourth to
the second table, but by joining together the first and the second, because they
consider the latter as a continuation of the former. This was the idea of some
of the Fathers, and it has been adopted by the Church of Rome, for an obvious
reason. Standing separately, it forbids the use of images in the worship of
God, and plainly condemns the practice of that church; but viewed as an ap
pendix to the first precept, it only forbids, as they pretend, the worship of the
images of false gods; and, consequently, leaves them at liberty to worship the
images which they have consecrated to the honour of the true God and his
saints. They seem, however, to be sensible of the weakness of this argument,
and for this reason have been accustomed to leave it out of their books which
were intended for the inspection of the people, lest, being incapable of entering
* Eph. vi. 2.

524 THE LAW OF GOD:
into their subtile distinctions, and interpreting the law according to its obvious
sense, they should begin to suspect that the service in which they are daily en
gaged is idolatry. The surest way to prevent a discovery is to dismiss the
witness, without allowing him to speak. " Two precepts being turned into one,
there remain only nine; and the question therefore occurs, Where are the ten?
To solve this difficulty, Papists split the tenth precept into two, making "Thou
shalt not covet thy neighbour's house," one; and the words which follow,
another. We cannot give this division the praise of ingenuity; we must call it
barefaced impudence. There never was a precept delivered by any lawgiver,
which was more clearly one and indivisible. The whole of it relates to one
subject, covetousness, or unlawful desire; and the words, " Thou shalt not
covet," are repeated merely to enforce the prohibition, by prefixing it to the
different classes of objects which ought not to excite our cupidity. The Apos
tle Paul speaks plainly of it as one precept, when he says, "I had not known
lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet."*
The four precepts of the first table of the law relate immediately to God.
The first points out the object of worship; while it forbids us to have any other
God before him, it calls upon us to acknowledge and worship him alone. The
second prescribes the means of worship, not by images or any other plan of
human invention, but by the rites and ordinances which are divinely appointed.
The third declares the manner in which the service of God should be perform
ed, namely, with reverence, as opposed to profaneness and every abuse of reli
gious institutions. The fourth specifies the time of worship, to-wit, one day
in seven, which is to be wholly devoted to God; not however to the exclusion
of other seasons which the events of providence may point out, and the regular
devotional exercises of every day.
We shall begin with the first commandment. " Thou shalt have no other
gods before me." In explaining the precepts, whether negative or posi
tive, our church-catechism lays down first what is required, and secondly,
what is forbidden. It is not material what order is observed, provided that the
import of the precepts is unfolded; but the most natural mode, I apprehend,
of expounding a negative precept, is first, to show what it forbids, and then,
according to the rule formerly mentioned, to give an account of the opposite -
duties which it enjoins.
This precept forbids, in the first place, atheism, which may be divided into
explicit and constructive. Explicit atheism consists in the formal denial of
the existence of God. He is an atheist who excludes from the universe any
other intelligence than that of the human mind; says that it is eternal; that there is
nothing in it but matter and motion, and talks of nature, and chance, and fate, —
words which have no meaning, but serve as a substitute in discourse for the name
of a living, designing Agent, by whom all things were created and are governed.
Atheism is so contrary, not only to the general sentiments of mankind, but to
the clearest deductions of reason, that some have supposed it to be impossible
that any man could be an atheist, and have thought that those who were re
puted atheists in ancient times were falsely charged with this crime, because
they treated the gods, who were commonly worshipped, with contempt. It
is not necessary to examine whether this opinion is true or false, because,
whatever judgment may be pronounced upon certain old philosophers, some
of the moderns have put the matter out of doubt by an undisguised avowal of
their unbelief. Atheists have appeared in our own age, and in our own
country. — By constructive atheism, I mean sentiments which amount to the
denial of God, or lead to this conclusion, although they do not formally ex
press it. Such atheism was charged upon Epicurus and his followers, who,
as Cicero says, granted in words that there were gods, but in reality took them
* Rom. vii. 7.

THE FIRST COMMANDMENT. 525
away, because they represented them as removed to a distance from mortals,
and taking no interest in their affairs. The charge may be brought, with
equal justice, against those who deny the providence of God; who consider
him as limited in essence and knowledge, as did the elder Socinians; or divest
him of any of his attributes, and substitute'in the room of the transcendently
just and all-perfect Being of the Scriptures, a God fashioned according to their
own likeness, an idol of their own brain. Under this head, we may include
what is called practical atheism, by which is meant such conduct as virtually
contradicts the profession of the lips; and accordingly, an Apostle speaks of
some, " who profess to know God, but in works deny him, being abominable
and disobedient, and to every good work reprobate."* And certainly the man,
whose profane and lawless conduct indicates that he has renounced the authority
of God, or calls in question his omnipotence and his justice, is guilty of viola
ting the precept, — which requires a practical, and not merely a verbal, acknow
ledgment of him, — as well as the man who ventures to impugn his existence.
In the second place, this precept forbids polytheism. Idolatry was intro
duced long before the time when the law was published from Sinai. It
existed in Chaldea while Abraham sojourned there; and it seems that this
patriarch was a worshipper of false gods before he was called to leave
his country and his kindred. By the time of the Exodus, the evil had
spread far and wide; and we have reason to believe that polytheism prevailed
among all nations, although there might still be some individuals who continued
exclusively to adore the Creator of heaven and earth. The design of the
call of Abraham was to separate his descendants from the apostate race, and
to constitute them a peculiar people, among whom the knowledge and
worship of Jehovah should be preserved till the fulness of time, when he
would again reveal himself to the nations of the world, and destroy the
gods of the Gentiles. We see, therefore, a peculiar reason for this command,
and for the solemn words with which it is introduced: " I am the Lord thy
God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of
bondage. Thou shalt have no other gods before me." He had manifested
himself as the God of the Israelites by their recent redemption, in accom
plishing which he had shown himself to be greater than the deities of their
oppressors, according to his words to Moses, " Against all the gods of Egypt
I will execute judgment;" and they who had witnessed the displays of his
power were bound to worship him alone. By this precept, the religions of
all heathen nations are condemned. They are directly opposed to the funda
mental doctrine of the unity of the Divine essence; and they either exclude the
true God, or they associate others with him as sharers in the honours to which
he alone is entitled.
If the polytheism of the Gentiles is condemned by this precept, there can
be no doubt that the worship given to saints and angels in the Church of Rome
is equally forbidden. Churches are dedicated to them as well as to God; the
most solemn services of religion are performed in honour of them; pilgrimages
are undertaken to the places which they are understood to favour, and in which
their pretended relics are deposited; they are invoked in the most humble pos
tures, and in the usual forms of supplication; their assistance is implored, and
thanks are returned to them for benefits which they are supposed to have con
ferred; and, in short, they receive all the honours which the heathens pay to
their male and female deities, and all the honours which are paid to God him
self. Papists pretend that they make a distinction in the kind or degree of
worship, and call that which is given to God latria, and that which is given to
the saints dulia. This is an arbitary use of the terms, which, in the Greek
language, are promiscuously employed to express services performed to God,
•Titi. 16.

526 THE LAW OF GOD:
or to men. When they tell us, therefore, that they worship God with latria,
and the saints with dulia, they tell us nothing but what any other two words
in the Greek language would have expressed equally well, namely, that they
do not give precisely the same kind of worship to both. But, however much
they may distinguish in theory, the greater part make no distinction in prac
tice. The saints are honoured as highly as God, and in some cases more.
Their churches are more frequented; more vows and offerings are made to
them; and when it is supposed that, for the sake of the respect which has been
punctually shown to them, a whole life of sin will be forgiven, is not the crea
ture exalted above the Creator?
It is quite unnecessary to enter into the controversy on this subject between
Protestants and Papists, and to examine the distinctions by which the latter
endeavour to evade the charge of idolatry. If the Gentiles were condemned
by an Apostle because they did service to them who by nature were not Gods,
we cannot see how pretended Christians should be excused who address their
worship to similar objects. It will not be denied that the latter are not Gods
by nature; and if there was a reason why the heathen deities should not be
worshipped, it holds equally good with respect to angels and saints, who are
as really creatures as those who adore them. Their physical and moral
qualities, the rank to which they are elevated, and the happiness which they
enjoy, make no difference; still they want what is the sole foundation of re
ligious homage, a divine nature and divine perfections, infinite knowledge,
almighty power, and inexhaustible goodness. It would make no difference,
although, as Papists suppose, they were invested with authority over men;
because it would be infinitely inferior to that of the Supreme Lord, and could
entitle them to nothing more than a degree, proportioned to their dignity of
the respect which we owe to our earthly superiors. But their authority is
taken for granted, and cannot be proved from Scripture. With regard to any
intercourse between the glorified saints and men in the present state, it main
tains profound silence; and the angels it represents, not as rulers, but as ser
vants: "Are they not all ministering spirits, sent forth to minister for them
who shall be the heirs of salvation?"*
The practice of the Church of Rome is directly in the face of the first
commandment: " Thou shalt have no other gods before me." They do not
expressly call the saints gods, although they distinguish them by the title of
divi, which the heathens gave to their deified heroes and princes; but he is
acknowledged as a God, to whom we pray, and on whom we depend for tem
poral and spiritual blessings, whatever name we appropriate to him. Their
practice is contrary to the words of the law quoted by our Saviour, " Thou
shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve."! It is vain to
pretend that this command is obeyed by giving supreme worship to him, and
subordinate to others;- for the manifest design of it is to appropriate all religious
worship to him; and besides, two kinds of worship are a mere human figment,
of which not a trace is found in the Scriptures. There is not a precept for
the worship or religiou^ invocation of creatures; nor an example, except among
the heathens, and some obscure heretics in the apostolic age, who first intro
duced the idolatry which the Church of Rome has since patronized, and who
were condemned for worshipping angels by Paul in the Epistle to the Colos
sians. In a word, it is certain that the invocation of the saints was unknown
in the primitive church, as some popish writers of great eminence have acknow
ledged. It rests solely upon the authority ofthe church, which, in matters of
religion, is not worth a rush.
Negative precepts virtually enjoin the duties opposed to the sins which they
forbid. The first commandment requires us to have our mind fully established
* Heb. i. 14. * Matth. iv. 10.

THE SECOND COMMANDMENT. 527
in the doctrine of the existence of God; and to acknowledge him only, to the
exclusion of every rival, whether set up by Heathens or by idolatrous' Chris
tians. It requires us to entertain worthy sentiments of his character and per
fections; and with this view to attend to the discoveries which he has made of
himself in his works, and particularly in his word. It requires us to be duly
affected by those discoveries, to cherish and exercise the affections of which
he is the proper object, as reverence for his majesty, profound humility, trust in
his promises, desires for his favour, dependence upon his care, and submission
to his will; and in a word, to love him with all our strength, preferring him to
all creatures in heaven and on earth, cultivating communion with him, and de
riving our satisfaction from the uncreated source of felicity. It requires us to
render to him the honour to which he is entitled, not only by those affections
of our hearts, but by such outward expressions of homage as he himself has
prescribed, — to pray to him, to praise him, and devoutly to observe all his
institutions. It requires us to make him our last end; and as he has created
all things for his glory, to have this as our predominant wish and constant aim,
that we may glorify him with our bodies and our spirits, which are his.
This is a summary of the duties enjoined by the first precept, upon which
it would be easy to enlarge; but an enumeration and illustration of them will
be found in any exposition of the Decalogue. It is evident that an acknow
ledgment of God, does not complete the design of the precept, unless it be ac
companied with those feelings and actions which are included in the idea of
piety. A man may be a Theist, and yet a transgressor of this law, because
he does not fear, and love, and serve, that great and glorious Being in whose
existence he professes to believe.
Let us proceed to the second precept, " Thou shalt not make unto thee any
graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is
on the earth beneath, or that is in the waters under the earth; thou shalt not
bow down thyself to them, nor serve them." I have already hinted what is
the difference between this and the first commandment. The first declares the
object of worship, and the second prescribes the means, forbidding the use of
images, and consequently of every other form which has not been appointed
by himself. It is unnecessary to enter into a critical examination of the words
translated " graven image," and " likeness;" because it is plain to every person
who is willing to understand, that they signify every external representation of
visible or invisible objects employed for religious purposes.
It is obvious that the making of images is not absolutely forbidden, as some
persons have supposed. It is no transgression of this precept to form represen
tations of terrestrial or celestial objects for amusement and ornament, or to re
call the memory of the dead, and to do honour to those who have deserved well
of their country, or of mankind. It is an over-straining of the law to ex
pound it as being hostile to the fine arts of statuary and painting. If the de
sign of the precept be considered, which is manifest from its connexion, it
will be found to relate solely to religion, and to condemn images and likenesses,
whether engraven or drawn with the pencil, only when they are made the ob
jects or the means of worship. The admission of images, of the saints into
churches, where the adoration of them is not permitted, cannot be justly con
sidered as a violation of this precept; for you may make a statue or a picture
of a saint as well as of any other man, and may place it in a church as well as in
a palace, provided that no abuse is likely to ensue; and the practice is chiefly con-
demnaole, because it seems to symbolize with idolatry, and because it may
tend to it by an undue impression upon the imaginations and feelings of the
ignorant. This precept absolutely condemns all representations of God, which, it is

528 THE LAW OF GOD.
astonishing that any person should have attempted, who believed that his es
sence is spiritual and immense: " The Lord spake unto you out of the midst
of the fire: ye heard the voice of the words, but saw no similitude; only ye
heard a voice."* What madness is it to imagine that any configuration of
matter bears a resemblance to a Being who has no bodily parts! or, that a puny
statue can convey an idea of him. whom the heaven and the earth cannot con
tain ! " To whom will ye liken me, or shall I be equal? saith the Holy One."
It is true that the Almighty is described as " the Ancient of days, whose gar
ment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the pure wool;"! but
does it follow that Papists may exhibit him in the form of an old man? Do they
not know that this was an emblematic vision; and that, in whatever manner
God might reveal himself to the eyes or to the imagination of a prophet, we
are expressly prohibited to portray him in any visible shape? By every attempt
of this kind, he is highly dishonoured; he is degraded to a level with his crea
tures, and the glory of the incorruptible God is changed into the image of cor
ruptible man. It is eqully improper to represent the Holy Ghost under the
figure of a dove; first, because it is not certain that he appeared in this figure
at the baptism of Christ, — the words of the Evangelist perhaps signifying only
the apparent motion of the sign which indicated his descent, — and, secondly,
because if the visible shape was that of a dove, -it was merely an emblem; the
design of which is perverted when it is changed into an image of that Divine
Person, who has no corporeal form and lineaments. It may seem that it is
more justifiable to make an image of our Saviour, because he was and is a
man. But the vanity of such images is evident, because they are not true re
presentations of the object, and have their origin solely in the imagination of
the statuary or the painter. The only account which antiquity has transmitted
to us of the personal appearance of our Saviour, is apocryphal. But although
the account were true, and an image were modelled in exact conformity to it,
it might be asked, Does it resemble him now in his glorified state? And, be
sides, it is not the human nature of Christ which our minds should contem
plate, but the incarnate Redeemer, God and man in one person; and his person
can be represented by no material form. Images of him as a man, with a
glory encircling his head, and images of him hanging on the cross, are teachers
of lies.
Farther, This precept forbids images, although they do not profess to be si
militudes of any of the persons of the God-head, but are only intended to be
emblematical representations. Every visible form which is designed to recall
God to our thoughts, and to excite our devotions, and before which we per
form our religious offices, is prohibited. The precept is delivered in the most
comprehensive terms: " Thou shalt not make unto thee any likeness of any
thing which is in the heavens above, or on the earth beneath, or in the waters
under the earth." There is a reference to the images used by the Gentiles,
which were of various forms, and were representations of objects in all the
departments of nature; and they are all without exception condemned. They
may be distinguished into two classes; some of them represented the false gods
whom they worshipped, as Baal and Ashtaroth among the eastern nations, and
in the west, Jupiter, Apollo, and Minerva. The worshipping of such images
was properly a transgression of the first commandment, which requires us to
give religious honours to Jehovah alone. Others again represented by em
blems the Creator of heaven and earth, as the golden calf which the Israelites
made in the wilderness, after the example of the Egyptians, who worshipped
a sacred bull as the representative of Apis, one of their gods. It is remark
able that the feast which they proclaimed is called a feast to Jehovah. It is
against the use of such images that the second commandment is directed. The
•Deut. iv. 12. *Dan. vii. 9.

THE SECOND COMMANDMENT. 529
error which it condemns relates, not to the object of worship, but to the man
ner of worshipping him; and the use of images is specified as the grossest and
most palpable violation of the precept.
The advocates of image worship endeavour to evade the precept by subtile
distinctions. They tell us that there are two kinds of adoration, the one absolute
and the other relative, and that the image is the object only of relative worship;
that is, the worship does not terminate upon the image itself, but passes from it
to the original. Again they tell us, that in an image two things are to be con
sidered, — the matter of which it is composed, gold, silver, wood, or stone, and
its representative character. Considered as a material substance, it ought not
to be adored; but as an image or representation it is entitled to respect. These
however were the identical distinctions by which the heathens attempted to vin
dicate themselves, when they were accused of idolatry by the Christians. It
was only relative worship which they offered to their idols; the ultimate ob
jects of their adoration were the invisible beings whom they believed to be
divine. They were not so stupid as to think, that any kind of matter was in
itself the proper object of worship; the image did not begin to be honoured, till
having been finished by the hand of the artist, it was consecrated to the service
of the god for whom it was designed. As Papists find it necessary to defend
themselves with the arguments of the heathens, it is plain that they are guilty
of the same crime and involved in the same condemnation. All their subtilties
vanish before the plain words of the precept, " Thou shalt not bow down thy
self to them, and serve them."
Our church says, that " the second commandment forbids the worshipping
of God by images, or in any other way not appointed in his word;"* or more
fully in the larger Catechism, that it forbids " all devising, counselling, com
mending, using, and any wise approving, any religious worship not instituted
by God himself; corrupting the worship of God, adding to it or taking from it,
whether invented and taken up of ourselves or received by tradition . from
others, though under the title of antiquity, custom, devotion, good intent, or
any other pretence whatsoever."! This exposition is founded on the principle
already laid down, that when one species of a sin is forbidden, all the other
species of the same sin are also forbidden. There is no doubt a particular
reason why images are forbidden, because they are in themselves dishonorable
to God, by investing Him, who is a pure and infinite Spirit, with a corporeal
form, and degrading him to a level with the lowest of his creatures. But the
design of the precept was to establish this principle, that as God is the sole ob
ject of religious worship, so it is his prerogative to dictate the mode of it.
This matter is of too much importance to be subjected to the regulations of
human wisdom. To the mind of man, blinded as it is by sin, and misled by
the imagination and the passions, observances might recommend themselves
by the pretext of fitness and decency, which the Supreme Being would reject
as incongruous to his nature and character. We see the childishness, the ab
surdity, and the impiety of its devices in the numerous rites of Heathenism,
and in the multiplied services of those Christians, who have deformed the
worship of God under the pretext of adorning it, and robbed it of its native
purity by arraying it in the meretricious garb of superstition. The precept
which we are now explaining condemns all will-worship, that is, all human in
ventions in the service of God. He has declared to us in his word what form
is acceptable to him; and it is a high offence to add to it or take from it. Wc
have an example of both crimes in the Church of Rome, which has mutilated
some of the ordinances of Christ, and corrupted others by foreign mixtures and
appendages. It has also introduced new ordinances, of which not a word is
spoken in the Scriptures, as the use of images, prayer to the saints, five spuri-
* Short. Cat. Q. 51. * Larg. Cat Q. 109.
Vol. IL— 67 2 Y

530 THE LAW OF GOD:
ous sacraments, pilgrimages and penances, and a multitude of observances,
which it would be tedious to mention. Nor are those protestants free from
the charge who have retained some of the usages of popery, and enjoin the
wearing of particular vestments by the ministers of religion, the sign of the
cross in baptism, bowing at the name of Jesus, and kneeling at the Lord's
Supper. These practices we justly call superstitious, because there is no
scriptural warrant for them, and they are the devices of men. The question,
" Who hath required this at your hands?" the abettors and advocates of will-
worship cannot answer; and it were well if they would consider the words of
God concerning the Jews, "In vain do they worship me, teaching for doc
trines the commandments of men."*
This precept requires us to entertain worthy ideas of God, as a spiritual
Being, of whom no representation should be formed, either with the hand or
by the imagination, and to honour him with spiritual worship. In particular,
it requires us to adhere to his own institutions in opposition to all human de
vices, to receive them with due submission to his authority, to observe them
with outward reverence and inward sentiments of devotion, to maintain them
in their purity and integrity, exactly as he has delivered them to us, neither ad
ding to them, as those do who make use of the sign of the cross in baptism,
nor taking from them, as Papists do, who in the Lord's Supper withhold the
cup from the laity. The ordinances of religion are prayer, praise, the preach
ing ofthe word, and the celebration ofthe sacraments; to which may be added
church government, the exercise of discipline, and other particulars which it
is unnecessary to mention. It is evident, as I have already hinted, that while
the prescribed forms of worship should be punctually observed, the precep
calls for those dispositions and exercises of mind of which they are significant,
and which only can give them value, and render them acceptable to the omni
scient God, who looks not upon the countenance, but upon the heart.
This precept is enforced by the following words: " For I the Lord thy God
am a jealous God, visiting the iniquities of the fathers upon the children unto
the third and fourth generations of them that hate me, and showing mercy unto
thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments." Here a diffi
culty occurs,' relating to the denunciation upon the posterity of transgressors.
Some consider it is peculiar to the Jews, who were placed under a dispensa
tion of temporal rewards and punishments, and understand it to import, that
under such a dispensation, by the over-ruling providence of God, a man's family
would be placed in such circumstances as should accord with his conduct, or
that their degradation and suffering would be the effect of his sin; just as under
human governments the children of traitors are deprived of their honours, and
the family estate is confiscated, or as in the common course of things, a person
of profligate manners entails disease, and poverty, and disgrace upon his off
spring. Others have thought that the denunciation relates to those who should
imitate the conduct of their parents; and consequently, that it was for their
own sin, and not properly for that of their parents, that they should be pun
ished. But besides that the words thus understood constitute no sanction or
enforcement of the precept, and do not serve the purpose for which they are
manifestly introduced, it is impossible to assign a reason why the third and
fourth generation only are mentioned, since it is certain that God will visit to
the thousandth generation those who tread in the steps of their idolatrous an
cestors. Others again are of opinion, that not only temporal but spiritual
judgments are denounced; that for the sins of the parents God withholds his
grace from their children; and that being left to themselves, they follow the ex
ample of their parents, and are finally punished for their own sins. There is
a degree of confusion in this statement, which first admits that they are punish-
* Matth. xv. 9.

THE THIRD COMMANDMENT. 53 1
ed for the sin of their parents, and then brings forward their own sin to ac
count for the justice of their final allotment. It is exceedingly difficult to
determine the precise import of the words. If we could satisfactorily show
that the threatening related to the Jews alone, and was founded on their pecu
liar dispensation, and that what was threatened was merely a temporal pe
nalty upon the families of idolaters, considered as members of the state, it would
be more easy to reconcile it to our ideas of the equity of the divine adminis
tration. There seems to be a contradiction between it and the words of God
by Ezekiel: " The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the
iniquity ofthe father."* We might reconcile them by supposing the original
law, which was merely a positive one, to be revoked; or we may consider the
words of Ezekiel as referring to a particular case. The Israelites had adopted
this proverb: " The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children's teeth
are set on edge,"! intimating that their present sufferings were owingjiot to
their own sins, but to those of their ancestors. To repel this accusation against
his procedure, God declares that the case was not as they supposed, that he
was punishing them for their own sins; that it was far from him to confound
the righteous with the wicked, and that every man among them should be re
warded according to his works.
The Third precept of the law is in these words, " Thou shalt not take the
name of the Lord thy God in vain; for the Lord will not hold him guiltless that
taketh his name in vain."
By the name of God, we understand the name or names by which he has
made himself known, or is distinguished from other beings; as God, Lord, Je
hovah, the Almighty, &c. To take this name, is to use it in discourse; and
one form of using it, which claims our attention in the first place, is swearing
by it. As a simple declaration may not be deemed sufficient, when the cha
racter ofthe speaker is unknown, his motives are suspected, or the matter is of
too much importance to be lightly determined, men have been accustomed to
demand the confirmation of it with an oath, or an appeal to God as the witness
of our veracity, and the Judge who will punish us if we are guilty of deceit.
Some ancient sects, and some modern, have denied the lawfulness of an oath,
and have affirmed that it is sinful to swear upon any occasion. Their opinion
is refuted by a variety of arguments. We have examples of oaths in- the Old
Testament, with directions how to swear, namely, in truth, judgment, and
righteousness; and lest any should think that what was formerly tolerated is
now prohibited, we have examples also in the New. When Paul says, " I call
God for a record upon my soul" — " God is my witness" — " I say the truth in
Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost;"!
his language in all these instances, and particularly in the two first, amounts to
an oath. Our Saviour recognized the lawfulness of an oath, when one having
been administered to him, according to the form of his country, he broke the
silence which he hitherto observed, and answered the question of the High
Priest.S It is impossible to understand the words of the Apostle in any other
way than as a sanction of the practice, when he says, " Men verily swear by
the greater, and an oath for confirmation is to them an end of all strife."!) It
is a misapprehension of our Saviour's words, " Swear not at all,"1T to consider
them as an absolute prohibition of an oath; because it is plain from his own
illustration, that he meant only to forbid the practice of swearing in common
conversation, and particularly of swearing by creatures.
An oath should be sworn only ,on such occasions as call for this solemnity,
about matters of importance, and with respect to which satisfaction cannot be
* Ezek. xviii. 20. * Ib. 2. +2 Cor. i. 23. Rom. i. 9. ix. i.
§ Matth. xxvi. 63. J Heb. vi. 16. ? Matth. v. 34.

532 THE LAW OF GOD
otherwise obtained. God is too great and awful a Being to be appealed to aj a
witness for every trifling purpose. It should be taken with external and inter
nal reverence, and be regarded not as a mere ceremony, but as a religious institu
tion, which places us in the immediate presence of the Judge of men and
angels. We should be fully acquainted with the subject of an oath; for, to
swear to any thing of which we are ignorant, or about which we are in doubt,
is at once to deceive men, and to set at nought the divine omniscience. We
should take an oath according to the obvious meaning of it, in the sense in
which it is understood by those who administer it, to the exclusion of all pri
vate interpretations, and .all mental reservations. We ought to be sincere in
giving a promissory oath, having a fixed intention to perform what we pledge
ourselves to do, and never thinking ourselves released from the obligation except
by such a change of circumstances as renders it physically impossible to redeem
our pledge, or would make it sinful to do so, because some other duty of para
mount authority has intervened. It is plain, therefore, that we should never
bind ourselves by oath to do any thing which we know to be impossible, any
thing which we know to be morally wrong, any thing which would impede
our duty to God, or to such of our fellow-men as have a prior claim to our ser
vice and obedience.
The name of God is taken in vain when we swear unnecessary oaths; when
we swear implicitly, without knowing beforehand the nature and extent of the
obligation, when we swear lightly and irreverently, using the name of God
with as little respect as we would show to that of a man; when we swear false
ly, attesting that to be true, which we do not know to be true, or which we
know to be false; when we do not regard the aminus imponentis, but substitute
a meaning of our own as a subterfuge, under which we may escape from the
understood obligation; when we swear to what we know to be impossible, or
what we know to be sinful; when we swear in doubt with respect to the prac
ticability or the lawfulness of the action to which we bind ourselves; when we
swear to release ourselves from a prior obligation, as the Jews devoted their
property to God, that they might be relieved from the duty of supporting their
parents. These are not the only ways in which the name of God is profaned. It is
taken in vain when it is lightly introduced in common conversation; when men
swear by it in anger or in sport, or in the ordinary train of their discourse;
when they utter impious imprecations upon themselves or others; or when,
without the slightest feeling of devotion, they call upon him to bless, preserve,
or help them. There is not a name in the universe with which so much free
dom is used; it is treated as with studied contempt; and it is almost impossible to
walk the streets, or to go into a mixed company, without hearing language
which is always offensive to a pious ear, and which, were it heard for the first
time, would awaken horror and alarm in every man who retained any sense of
religion. In the commission of this gratuitous and heaven-daring sin, our own
country has attained an infamous pre-eminence.
This precept is transgressed not only when men swear falsely, or profanely
by the name of God, but also when they make use of any other oath in con
versation; for in this, as in other preeepts, all sins of the same kind are forbid
den. Our Saviour says, " Swear not at all," — that is, in common discourse, —
" neither by heaven, for it is God's throne; nor by the earth, for it is his foot
stool; neither by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King; neither shalt
thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black.
But let your communication be, Yea, yea; nay, nay; for whatsoever is more
than these cometh of evil."* It appears that such oaths as are here specified
were frequent among the Jews; and our Lord, in forbidding these, condemns all
* Matth. v. 34—37.

THE FOURTH COMMANDMENT. 533
similar oaths, such as those which are current among Christians, who swear
by their faith, their truth, their conscience, and in Popish countries, by the
saints. This precept forbids all kinds of blasphemy, all accusations of Providence,
all reflections against Scripture, all dishonorable thoughts of God. It forbids
the profanation or abuse of any thing by which he has made himself known.
As it relates to the manner of worshipping him, it condemns irreverence, care
lessness, formality, hypocrisy, and unbelief, in the performance of religious du
ties. We profane his word when we read or hear it with indifference; we profane
the ordinance of prayer when we honour God with our lips but our hearts are
far' from him; when those sentiments of faith, and penitence, and holy desire
are wanting, of which our words are expressive; we profane the ordinance of
praise when we feel no admiration of his excellencies, and no gratitude for his
favours, and when we appropriate to ourselves any share of the glory to whlsh
he has an exclusive title; we profane the Lord's Supper, not merely when we
use it as a qualification for civil offices, but when we partake of it in a state of
sin, in the absence of spiritual affections, without a cordial reliance upon the
atonement which it commemorates, and an unreserved dedication of ourselves
to him who died for us and rose again. We profane the ordinance of fasting,
when our professions of repentance are not accompanied with humiliation of
soul, when we use it as a means of obtaining the remission of our sins, or when
we are careful to enumerate and condemn the sins of others, but slightly pass
over our own. We profane Providence when we turn it to superstitious pur
poses, looking for signs from it to direct us where Scripture or even reason is
sufficient to guide lis; when we rashly and uncharitably interpret its proceed
ings; when we place an unwarranted dependence upon it, expecting the end
without the means, venturing without a call upon danger in the hope of its pro
tection, and trusting to it for the supply of our wants, when we are indulging
ourselves in idleness.
From the sins forbidden in this comandment, it is easy to infer the duties
required. They consist in general in a holy and reverent use of his name, of
all his revelations, and all his institutions; and a more particular detail of them
is unnecessary. It will be your business to trace them at your leisure, while
you are meditating upon the subject. " The third commandment," says our
Church, " requires that the name of God, his titles, attributes, ordinances, the
word, sacraments, prayer, oaths, vows, lots, his works, and whatsoever else
there is whereby he makes himself known, be holily and reverently used in
thought, meditation, word, and writing, by an holy profession, and answerable
conversation, to the glory of God, and the good of ourselves and others."*

LECTURE CIV.
ON THE LAW OF GOD.
Commentary on the Fourth, the Fifth, and the Sixth Commandments.
Having considered the object, the means, and the manner of religious woi-
»hip, let us now attend to the time which is consecrated to it. It is determined
* Larger Catechism, Q. 112.
2 y2

534 THE LAW OF GOD:
in the Fourth precept of the Decalogue, which is expressed in these words:
" Remember the Sabbath-day, to keep il holy. Six days shalt thou labour and
do all thy work: but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord thy God; in
it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy man
servant, nor thy maid-servant, nor thy cattle, nor thy stranger that is within
thy gates: For in six days the Lord made heaven and earth, the sea, and all
that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the Lord blessed the
Sabbath-day, and hallowed it."
After reciting this precept, which was delivered to the Israelites in the
wilderness, we are to inquire, Whether it was then given for the first time, or
was only promulgated anew? To most persons, an answer to this question
seems to be supplied by the words of Moses, in the second chapter of Ge
nesis, " And on the seventh day, God ended his work which he had made,
and he rested on the seventh day from all his work which he had made. And
God blessed the seventh day and sanctified it; because that in it he had rested
from all his work which God created and made."* These words have been
commonly understood to signify, that the Sabbath was instituted at the creation.
Some writers, however, are of a different opinion, and maintain that Moses
speaks of it by anticipation; or that, as the reason why the Sabbath was given
to men took place on the seventh day of the creation, he was led to make men
tion of it in this part of his narrative, although the observance did not com
mence till the Israelites were in the wilderness. In confirmation of this opin
ion, it is alleged that there is not a word said about the Sabbath during the
long preceding period of two thousand and five hundred years; and that this
silence is unaccountable, if it was regularly observed by the people of God.
This, however, is merely a negative argument, from which no positive conclu
sion can be safely drawn; and, besides, it would disprove the practice of cir
cumcision among the Jews from their entrance into Canaan to the circumci
sion of the Baptist, not one instance of it being recorded during that long inter
val. Another argument is founded on such expressions as these: God gave
the Israelites a Sabbath, and he gave it for " a sign between him and them."!
But his giving them the Sabbath no more implies that it was a new institution,
than his giving them the other precepts supposes that they were not previously
binding, — nothing more being meant in both cases, than that they were pub
lished anew to them, with peculiar circumstances of solemnity. The Sabbath
may be said to be a sign, because the celebration of it would henceforth serve,
with their other religious rites, to distinguish them from the nations of the
world, and it was enforced by a new reason taken from their recent redemp
tion. Hence, in the repetition of the precept, these words are added: " And
remember that thou wast a servant in the land of Egypt, and that the Lord
thy God brought thee out thence, through a mighty hand, and by a stretched
out arm; therefore the Lord thy God commanded thee to keep the Sabbath-
day."! There does not appear to be any reason for supposing that in Genesis
Moses speaks proleptically, or by anticipation. The manner of the narrative
would naturally lead any reader to suppose that he is relating what took place at
the beginning of the' world. It is a second thought, and a thought which could
occur only to a mind in search of ingenious discoveries, that the present tense
is here significant of the future. This seems to be a strong objection against
the opinion which we are considering; it is inconsistent with the perfect sim
plicity of the Mosaic history, and with the accuracy which is expected from
any historian, to record as a fact which took place at the period of which he
is writing, what did not take place for five-and-twenty centuries. It has been
observed, that the division of time into weeks, which subsisted in the age of
the patriarchs, cannot be satisfactorily accounted for, but by the previous in
* Gen. ii. 2, 3. * Exod. xxxi. 13, 17. Ezek. xx. 12, 20. i Deut. v. 15.

THE FOURTH COMMANDMENT. 535
stitution of the Sabbath; for the creation was finished in six days, and if the
seventh was not then sanctified, we cannot conceive how the ancients came to
divide time by seven days, rather than by six, or eight, or ten. It has been
observed, too, that a peculiar respect was paid to the seventh day by the
Greeks. Some may suppose that they derived their idea of its sacredness
from the Jews, but it is more probable that it was founded on tradition. Not
only the Hebrews, but the Greeks, says Clemens Alexandrinus, acknowledge
the seventh day. Hesiod calls the seventh day %a,/j.rtpov $ooj t)txioio, " the
splendid light ofthe sun;" and Homer characterizes it as Upov ^ap, "the sa-'
cred day." I neglected to remark in the proper place, that the " end of the
days" when Cain and Abel offered sacrifices,* has been supposed to be the
Sabbath; and that this also was the day, in the book of Job, when the sons
of God came together.
It has been further observed, that the Sabbath is spoken of in Exodus be
fore the publication of the decalogue, and is then mentioned, not as new, but
as an institution already known: " To-morrow is the rest of the holy Sabbath
unto the Lord."! Some, indeed, draw an opposite conclusion, and consider
these words as the first intimation of the Sabbath; but I think they are mis
taken, because Moses appears only to remind them of it, as the reason of the
injunction to gather a double quantity of manna on the preceding day, since
none would fall on the next. If the Sabbath had been a new institution, he
would have naturally informed them of its duties, whereas he confines him
self to the single subject of the manna, forewarning them not to expect it on
that day, and therefore to collect and prepare on the day before as much as
would suffice till the Sabbath was past. It has also been thought, that the
word with which the precept begins supposes a prior knowledge of the law.
" Remember the Sabbath-day, to keep it holy." It was an institution with
which they were already acquainted; and they are called upon to keep in mind
the sacred nature of the day, and to sanctify it with the greatest care, espe
cially after this solemn republication of the precept. It is probable that it had
been much neglected in Egypt; and as the Israelites were in a state of slavery,
it is not likely that they would be permitted by their cruel task-masters to de
sist from work one day in seven. Through the necessity of their circum
stances, and their own indifference, the observance of it might have been in a
great measure suspended, and this may be the reason why it was inculcated
anew, and their attention was so particularly called tov it: " Remember the
Sabbath-day, to keep it holy."
The question respecting the date of the Sabbath is of the greater importance,
because it is understood to affect the question respecting its morality. If it
was given in the beginning, it is a law to mankind, binding in all ages and na
tions; if it was first given in the wilderness, it was a law to the Jews, which
was abrogated with their other peculiar institutions; and some new evidence is
necessary to prove that a day of rest should be observed by Christians.
There has been much discussion concerning the morality of the Sabbath,
some affirming and others denying it; and several distinctions have been made
with a view to ascertain what is moral, and what is positive, in the precept.
In a former lecture, something was said upon this subject, when I was explain
ing the difference between moral and positive precepts-! ^' 's a morai duty,
that men should devote a portion of their time to the service of God, but the
portion is the subject of positive command. Some express themselves as if
they thought that the only thing which is positive in this precept is the pre
scription of the particular day; but if they use the term, moral, in its common
acceptation when distinguished from positive, as signifying that which is found
ed in the nature of things, they will be at a loss to show that the nature of
• Gen. iv. 3, marginal reading. *Exod.xvi23. i Lect cii.

536 THE LAW OF GOD:
things, or the relation in which man stands to his Creator, requires that he
should devote one day in seven to his immediate service. They will be at a
loss to show that to have required . more or less, would have been contrary to
what is right and fit. It is acknowledged that the choice of the seventh day
in preference to any other was positive; or that, although there was a reason
for this choice, it was not permanent and immutable, so that no new reason
could authorize a change to another day. It should also be acknowledged, in
my apprehension, that the time allotted for the suspension of our worldly af
fairs, and undivided attention to the exercises of religion, might have been
lengthened or shortened according to the good pleasure of God. It would
have been more accurate in some of our Divines to have stated, that since a se
venth part of our time has been required, the law is of perpetual obligation,
instead of expressing themselves loosely, as if we were as much bound in the
nature of things to set apart one day in seven, as it is acknowledged that we are
to consecrate some portion of our time.
There is scarcely any difference of opinion among Christians with respect
to the change of the day. Some learned men have thought that the original
Sabbath was different from the Jewish, that the latter was put back from the
first to the seventh day of the week; and they endeavour to prove this point by
some facts in the history of the Israelites in the wilderness, and by the decla
ration that the Sabbath was given as a sign to them, and was intended to be a
memorial of their deliverance from Egypt; to accomplish which purposes, it
seems necessary that the day should have been altered. If this supposition
could be satisfactorily proved, it might convince the Jews that the change, which
Christians allege has now taken place in the day, is not unprecedented, and by
no means involves an abrogation of the fourth precept of the Decalogue. It
is not easy to see how it can be reconciled with the account in Genesis, which
makes the seventh day the Sabbath; or how that day could be the first in a
hebdomadal series, when it was preceded only by six.
For the change of the day from the seventh to the first, we cannot produce
any positive precept; but we consider the example of the Apostles and of the
primitive church under their direction as of equal authority, because they were
infallibly guided by the spirit in all things relative to doctrine and worship.
Immediately after the resurrection of Christ, the disciples began to assemble on
the first day of the week; and by meeting repeatedly with them on that day, he
gave countenance to the practice. It was continued after his ascension, and
the mission of the Holy Ghost to lead them into all the truth. Thus at Troas,
"when the disciples came together on the first day to break bread, Paul
preached to them;"* and the time of meeting is manifestly mentioned as the
usual one. On that day the Corinthians were commanded to " lay by them in
store, as the Lord had prospered them;"! and it is reasonable to think that the
first day was specified as the proper time to make collections for the poor, be
cause it was consecrated to religious duties. It is undoubtedly the same day
to which the beloved disciple refers, when he says, " I was in the Spirit on
the Lord's day;"* the day which Jesus Christ peculiarly claimed as his own,
or the first day of the week, which is consecrated to his honour. It Eas been
supposed that the change of the day is predicted in the following words of
Ezekiel, when he is giving a description of the mystical temple, which may
be considered as a figure of the Christian Church: " Seven days shall they
purge the altar and purify it; and they shall consecrate themselves. And when
these days are expired, it shall be, that upon the eighth day, and so forward,
the priests shall make your burnt-offerings upon the altar, and your peace-
offerings; and I will accept you, saith the Lord God."§ This language is
symbolical; the allusions are to the ceremonial services of the temple. Some-
* Acts. xx. 7. * 1 Cor. xvi. 2. i Rev. i. 10. § Ezek. xliii. 26, 27.

THE FOURTH COMMANDMENT. 537
thing is manifestly predicted which was never literally fulfilled; but, as the
whole refers to a new state of things, the mention of the eighth day as the day
of solemn sacrifices may well be considered as an intimation that the eighth
day in order from the beginning of the Jewish week, or the Christian Sabbath,
was henceforth to be holy to the Lord.
If the finishing of the works of creation was a reason why the Lord blessed
the seventh day, and hallowed it, there is a reason at least equally strong for
the consecration of the first day, on which our Saviour rose frdm the grave.
Then the work of redemption was finished; and on account of its greatness and
glory, and the unspeakable benefits which it has procured to mankind, it is
worthy to be held in remembrance in all generations. The first day of the
week is dedicated to the memory of the resurrection, by which God publicly
testified that his incarnate Son had finished transgression, and made an end of
sin, and brought in an everlasting righteousness. And as there will be no new
work of the Almighty of superior or equal importance, the day will not be
altered, but will be kept sacred to the end of the world.
The Jews were enjoined to observe the Sabbath with the utmost strictness.
They were not to go out of their houses, or to take journeys, except to a
place of worship; and the distance to which, according to the Rabbies, they
might lawfully go, was two thousand cubits, or about two-thirds of an English
mile, which is called in the new Testament, a Sabbath-day's journey. They
were not to kindle a fire in their dwellings, that is, I presume, for the purpose
of dressing victuals; for surely they were not forbidden to kindle a fire to warm
themselves. They once deemed it unlawful to defend themselves on the Sab
bath; but experience made them change their opinion, although they continued
to think it a sin to attack their enemies on that day.
Among Christians, there has been a difference of sentiment respecting the
degree of strictness with which the Sabbath should be observed. Some are for
retaining all the rigour of the Jewish law, while others insist that now its seve
rity is relaxed; and this view has been adopted by some of the most eminent
among the foreign Protestant Divines. It is possible so to overstrain the du
ties of the day, as to make men think that they can hardly speak, or move, or
look around them, without violating its sanctity; and thus to give the Sabbath
a gloomy and forbidding aspect. It is possible to grant such liberty, that it shall
resemble a human festival rather than a season of devotion, a day of idleness,
gossiping, and amusement, mixed up with some religious offices. We know
how loosely it is observed in Roman Catholic and many Protestant countries,
in the southern division of our island, and even in the northern, although our
notions of the santification of the Sabbath have been carried as high as by any
denomination of Christians.
This precept requires us to set apart for the service of God, one whole day
in seven, reckoned, like other days, according to our mode of computing time,
from twelve o'clock at midnight to twelve next night. The Jews reckoned
from sunset to sunset. It requires us to abstain from our worldly employments,
manual and mental, from the labours of the body and the labours of the mind about
secular studies, and from all unnecessary words and thoughts respecting such
subjects. It requires us to spend the whole time, when we are awake, in de
votional exercises, in prayer, religious reading, and meditation, in the instruc
tion of our families, and pious conversation with them and our friends, and in
attendance upon the public ordinances of grace. It requires us to abstain
from those innocent recreations and amusements by which the body and the
mind are refreshed and gratified, because we can very well dispense with them
for one day, since we are at liberty to use them on the other six: they would
engross a portion of the time which is sacred to other purposes, and would dis
sipate our thoughts, and indispose us for the proper duties of the Sabbath.
' Vol. IL— 68

538 THE LAW OF GOD:
" The Sabbath," our Confession says, " is then kept holy to the Lord, when
men, after a due preparing of their hearts, and ordering of their common affairs
beforehand, do not only observe an holy rest all the day from their own works,
words, and thoughts about their worldly employments and recreations; but also
are taken up the whole time in the public and private exercises of his worship,
and in the duties of necessity and mercy."*
He who understands in what the sanctification of the Sabbath consists, has
no need that the sins forbidden in the fourth commandment should be pointed
out to him. A detail of them is at least unnecessary at present, when I am ad
dressing those who are capable of tracing the particulars I have mentioned
into all their ramifications and consequences.
You would observe that, in the quotation from our Confession of Faith,
works of necessity and mercy are not considered as a violation of the sanctity of
the Sabbath. By the" former, are meant works which could not have been done
on the preceding day, and cannot be deferred till the next. We must kindle
fires in our houses; we must travel to and from the house of God; we must
look after some parts of our property, as our flocks and herds; we must guard
it when it is exposed to danger; we must use means to extinguish a conflagra
tion, and carry away goods which would be destroyed by it, or by a sudden
inundation. These duties arise from circumstances over which we have no
controul. They will not wait till we find time to attend to them, but must
either be done now, or not done at all; and as the Sabbath was made for man,
they were permitted, although literally they break in upon its rest.
Works of mercy are those which are performed from compassion to our fel
low-creatures. The care of cattle may be placed under this head, as well as
under the former. No man is required, under the pretext of resting from his
works on the Sabbath, to leave them to suffer from hunger and thirst. On the
same principle, we may carry food and raiment to the poor, when their de
mands are urgent and we had not a previous opportunity of attending to them.
We may visit the sick, administer cordials and medicines to them, dress their
wounds, and perform other offices by which they will be soothed and relieved.
It is on this ground that we deem it lawful for physicians to practice upon the
Sabbath. It is a gracious institution, designed for the good of man in this
world, as well as for his salvation in the next; and it does not interfere with any
service immediately called for, which will contribute to either.
The time appropriated to the service of God is one day in seven, and, under
the Christian dispensation, the first day of the week. I need not repeat, that
there ought also to be a daily worship of God, and that the duties ofthe Sab
bath do not release us from devotion during the week. But this is the only
day which God claims as his own in a peculiar sense; he has given us the other
six days to pursue our secular employments. It follows, that men have no
right to institute holidays, which return as regularly at certain intervals as the
Sabbath does in the beginning of the week. This is an assumption of authori
ty which God has not delegated to them. Holidays are an encroachment
upon the time of which he has made a free gift to men for their worldly af
fairs; and although enforced by civil and ecclesiastical laws, they are not bind
ing upon conscience. No man sins in not observing them; but he does sin, if
he observe them from an opinion of their holiness. Men may set apart par
ticular days for fasting and thanksgiving; but those are only occasional, and
not the days, but the services, are holy. As for all stated days of worship be
sides the Sabbath, they are human enactments; and there is no obligation upon
any man to observe them but the general one, which requires us to conform to
the practice of the church, when it is not sinful or superstitious.
* Chap. xxi. 8.

THE FIFTH COMMANDMENT. 539
The Second table of the law prescribes our duty to man, which is in fact our
duty to God, because he enjoins it; but it is called our duty to man, because he
is the immediate object of it. The First precept of the second table, which is
the Fifth of the Decalogue, is in these, words: "Honour thy father and thy
mother, that thy days may be long upon the land which the Lord thy God
giveth thee." The general design of it is to inculcate relative duties; and in the
usual manner, it gives a specimen in the duties of children to their parents.
There are various relations subsisting among mankind, which are founded
partly in nature and partly in convention. They are naturally related to one
another; more generally, as they are sprung from one common stock, for " God
has made of one blood all nations of men to dwell on the face of the earth;"*
and more particularly, as they are descended from the same immediate or re
mote ancestors. There are other relations which, although agreeable to nature,
or to the constitution and circumstances and wants of men, are yet founded in
convention or mutual compact. Of this description are the relations of hus
bands and wives, masters and servants, magistrates and subjects. The duties
resulting from them are comprehended in the precept; and they are made the
subject of positive prescriptions, because they are of great importance, intimate
ly connected with the order and happiness of society, and more effectually to
secure the performance of them by the authority of religion.
The duty of children to their parents is expressed by honouring them, a
general term under which many particulars are comprehended. They ought
to love their parents, to reverence them in their hearts, and treat them with
outward respect; to obey their lawful commands; to conform to the regulations
which they establish in their families; to entertain a grateful sense of all the
care and kindness which they have experienced from them; to acknowledge
them in any important step which they take; to assist and support them ac
cording to their ability, if they are in such circumstances as to be dependent
upon them; and to continue their good offices during the joint lives of them
selves and their parents. In the early part of life, when children are living
with their parents, and are not yet qualified to think and act for themselves, or,
although arrived at the years of discretion, are still lodging under their roof,
their subjection to their parents is more complete than after they have sepa
rated from them, and have houses and families of their own; but at no period
are they released from the obligation to treat them with deference and affection,
to comply with their reasonable wishes, and to perform such services as the
comfort of their parents may require. We have an example in Joseph, who
behaved with the utmost respect to his father, and the most solicitous attention
to his happiness, after he was exalted to be next in rank to the king. Nature
itself dictates the submission of children to their parents; it is enjoined by the
laws of all civilized nations, some of which have carried it to excess, as the
Romans unquestionably did, by making children as much the property of their
father as his cattle, and giving him power to sell them as slaves, and to put
them to death; and such was the severity of the Jewish law, that a froward re
bellious son was capitally punished.!
The duties of children to their parents draw along with them the duties of
parents to their children. There is required a reciprocity of good offices. Pa
rents are bound to take care of their children in early life; to provide food and
clothing for them; to give them an education which will prepare them both for
this world and for the next, to watch over their morals, encourage them in
good, and restrain them from evil; to exercise their authority reasonably and
mildly, but firmly; to endeavour to settle them in life; to administer to them
the counsels of experience; and, in a word, to consider them as a trust from
trod, which they ought to manage with incessant vigilance. I will not say,
* Acts xvii. 26. * Deut. xxxii. 18—21.

540 THE LAW OF GOD:
with some moralists, that the rights of parents result from their duties, because
they originate in the Divine institution; but I will say, that a parent who ne
glects his duty to his offspring, ought not to be surprised if they fail in their
dut)"- to him, and has no right to complain either to God or to men.
The duties of husbands and wives are understood to be comprehended in
this precept, and a detail of them usually constitutes one part of a commentary
upon it. I do not say that this is wrong; but I should think that they occur
more regularly under the seventh commandment, which, according to the rules
of interpretation formerly laid down, by forbidding the violation of the marriage
vow, inculcates the duties arising from the conjugal relation.
I proceed therefore to speak of the duties of servants to their masters.
These consist in respect for their masters as their superiors, submission to their
authority, attention to their interests, honesty, diligence, and fidelity. The
extent of their obedience is limited by their previous stipulation, whether ex
pressed in words or established by custom. A general servant is bound to
execute all the orders of his master; but a servant engaged for a particular pur
pose, is bound only to it, and is guilty of no breach of contract when he de
clines to interfere with another department. There is, however, another limi
tation of the duty of both a general and a particular servant. A master has no
right to command him to do any thing contrary to the laws of the land, and
still less to do any thing which the law of God has forbidden; for example, to
tell lies, to assist him in injustice or debauchery, to perform any unnecessary
work on the Sabbath. With these exceptions, the subjection of a servant to
his master is absolute, during the time of their connexion. The Apostle Paul
makes use of strong language upon this subject, and it is worthy of attention,
that, in his days, servants among the Greeks and Romans were slaves: " Ser
vants, obey in all things your masters according to the flesh; not with eye-ser
vice, as men-pleasers; but in singleness of heart, fearing God: And whatsoever
ye do, do it heartily, as to the Lord and not unto men."*
Masters are bound to fulfil their part of the stipulation, by requiring nothing
from their servants but what is just; by exercising their authority with mild
ness, avoiding every thing harsh in the matter or manner of their commands;
by paying their wages, and bestowing the commendation which they have
merited by their fidelity; by protecting them from injury and caring for them
in sickness; by guarding against entertaining uncharitable suspicions of them,
listening to calumnious reports of them, speaking hastily to their disadvantage,
and showing an unrelenting, unforgiving spirit when they have committed a
fault; and, in a word, by treating them as inferiors who at the same time are
their fellow-creatures and Christians. To these may be added the religious
duties of masters, who are bound to instruct their servants as well as their chil
dren, to excite them to observe the ordinances of grace, to reprove them when
they are guilty of sin, and to encourage them in piety and virtue.
In the next place, The duty of subjects to their civil rulers claims our atten
tion. It is evident that the duties of this class, like those of servants, are
frn n'ded on convention or compact; because, with the exception of parents and
children, between whom nature itself has established an inequality, all men pos
sessed of reason are naturally equal in respect of personal rights, and become
subject to others, either by violence, which establishes no moral obligation to
submission, or by their own consent virtually or explicitly given. It is worthy
of attention, that although the Scripture gives its general sanction to civil go
vernment, as necessary to the existence and good order of society, it still calls
it an ordinance of man;! signifying that it is a human institution, and conse
quently, that as in the government of masters, its claim to obedience is not es
tablished by force but by law. The jus divinum of governments, when ration-
» Col. iii. 22, 23. * 1 Pet ii. 13.

THE FIFTH COMMANDMENT. 541
ally explained, can only mean that lawful governments have a right to demand
the obedience of the subjects, and that it is the will of God that the subjects
should submit to their authority. " The divine right of kings," says Paley,
" like the divine right of constables, is founded on the law of the land."
There is a considerable difficulty in determining how far the moral obligation
of submission extends, because cases may be supposed and questions may be
put, with respect to which it is not easy to come lo a satisfactory and consistent
conclusion. In general it may be said, that no government is lawful which
does not exist with the formal or virtual consent of the people. The world
has been so long accustomed to look upon civil government as independent of
the people, and the notion of legitimacy, as attached to a particular form and a
particular family, has been so carefully instilled into their minds, that they are
slowly brought to assent to what appears one of the plainest propositions, that
a despotic government is an usurpation. Farther, the obedience of subjects is
defined by the laws of the land. No man is morally bound to submit to the
arbitrary will of an individual, because he is called a king any more than be
cause he is called a master, or to the will of a lawful magistrate when he orders
any thing contrary to the law of the land. The moment he steps beyond the
boundary of law, he loses his official character, and becomes a private man or
a tyrant. Lastly, the obedience of subjects, like that of servants, is restrained
by the law of God. When civil rulers presume to command what he has for
bidden, or to forbid what he has commanded, they become rebels against the
King of kings, and have no claim to our homage.
" Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers; for there is no power
but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore
resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God; and they that resist shall
receive to themselves damnation."* These words have been understood to fa
vour passive obedience, but in my opinion they have been grossly perverted.
How could any man in his senses suppose, that a messenger of truth would
teach us to submit tamely to be plundered, and tormented, and destroyed, by
persons who, with the titles of royalty, were worse than eommon robbers and
murderers; to surrender to them all that is dear to us as men, all that renders
life worth preserving; to abstain from making a single effort to secure to our
selves, and our friends, and our country, the blessings of liberty and equal laws?
Is it to be supposed that the God of justice and beneficence has commissioned
a few ruffians to pillage and oppress their fellow-creatures, and called upon the
latter, under pain of his displeasure, to submit like lambs to the butcher's
Knife? No; we will make no such supposition, any more than we will sup
pose that he has forbidden us to use means to stop the ravages of fire, pesti
lence, or flood, or to employ force to restrain and punish the private ruffians,
who with a title equally good, attempt to rob us of our property or our lives.
In the passage quoted, the Apostle, without referring to any existing govern
ment, or any form in perference to another, lays down . the general duty of
Christians to their superiors in the state. They are bound to submit; 'but that
it is not blind submission is evident from the reason assigned: " For rulers are
not a terror to the good, but to the evil." Again, "he is the minister of God
to thee for good."! So far,, then, as a government patronizes good works,
and punishes such as are evil, so far as it answers the end of its institution by
maintaining order and peace in civil society, it is entitled to submission; but
when, instead of protecting, it oppresses the people, we can be no more bound
in conscience to recognize it as lawful, than we are to acknowledge as a mi
nister of Christ, the man who teaches error in doctrine, and licentiousness in
practice. The duty of subjects is to obey " every ordinance of man for the Lord's
• Rom. xiii. 1, 2. * R>. 3, 4.
2Z

542 THE LAW OF GOD:
sake," to "render to all their dues, tribute to whom tribute is due, custom to
whom custom, fear to whom fear, honour to whom honour."* The duty of
civil rulers is to enact just laws, and to execute them impartially; to be the
guardian ofthe rights of their subjects, to maintain order and peace, to patron
ize arts and sciences, to encourage virtue and discourage vice, so far as their
lawful influence extends; to be the fathers of their people, and thus merit their
respect and willing obedience.
The duties of the members of the church to those who are over them in
the Lord, and the duties which the latter should perform, might be here intro
duced; but they are so well known, as to render a detail of them unnecessary.
The precept now before us, is called " the first commandment with pro
mise;"! that is, the first in the second table of the law. The promise is con
tained in these words: " That thy days may be long in the land which the
Lord thy God giveth thee." It is better, I think, to consider this promise as
peculiar to the Jewish dispensation, than to attempt to transfer it to the Christian.
The law promulgated from Sinai was enforced by temporal rewards, among
which long life in Canaan is here held out as the recompense of those who
should duly honour their father and mother. It does not appear from the
present history of Providence, that the promise is applicable to other countries
and nations. Of this our Church seems to have been sensible, when it called
it " a promise of long life and prosperity, as far as it shall serve for God's
glory and their own good, to all such as keep this commandment."! This is,
in other words, to say, that the keepers of it will live long or not as God shall
determine, and, consequently, to acknowledge that the promise is not now at
tached to the precept. The attempts which have been made to show that the
promise is still in force, are unsatisfactory, and usually sum up the matter in
the same indeterminate manner with our catechism.
The Sixth commandment is, "Thou shalt not kill." Its design is to guard
human life against violence, to render it a sacred thing, which is not to be
touched but by Him whose gift it is, and who has a right to resume it at his
pleasure. A distinction is made between it and the life of the lower animals,
in one of the precepts delivered to Noah. Man holds a higher rank in the
scale .of being; his life is therefore of much greater value, and to take it un
justly away is a crime which ought not to pass with impunity. " Whoso
sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed, for in the image of God
made he man."§ .
It is plain from the words now quoted, and from other passages of Scrip
ture, that, although the precept is absolute, it is subject to certain limitations.
It does not forbid the taking away of the life of a man who has forfeited it by
his crimes. The murderer may be put to death; and, by the law of Moses,
the same punishment was inflicted upon other transgressors. It is generally
agreed that murder should be subjected to a capital punishment; but many
doubts "have been expressed whether it should be extended to any other of
fence. The reasoning, indeed, which some employ, goes to abolish all capital
punishments; for if the power of civil rulers consists in the surrender which
their subjects have made of a portionof their rights for the preservation of
the rest, and if no man has such power over his own life as to commit it to the
disposal of another, it follows that the jurisdiction of magistrates does not
reach the life of their subjects, and is confined to what may affect their per
sonal liberty, their property, and, in general, their state in society. This ques
tion is not now before us; nor the question, what end human governments pro
pose by the infliction of punishment, whether they are intended as retribu
tions, or merely as examples in terrorem.
•IPetii. 13. Rom. xiii. 7. * Eph. vi. 2. * Sh. Cat Q. 66. §Gen.ix.6.

THE SIXTH COMMANDMENT. 543
The precept does not forbid the taking away of life in self-defence. When
a man is attacked, he is at liberty to defend himself; and if in the conflict the
intended murderer shall fall, no moralist would say that the defender was
guilty of murder, provided that no means of saving himself were left but the
taking away of the life of the. aggressor. Surely he was not bound to be
more careful of the life of his enemy than of his own. In such a case, the
law can afford him no protection; he must use the power which God has given
him, to preserve the most valuable of all his possessions, to ward off an injury
which can never be repaired. Human laws accord the same right in defence
of our property, when an attempt is made to take it from us by violence.
It may be inquired, how far wars, in the course of which there is a loss of
many lives, are consistent with this precept? The plain answer is, that they
are justifiable only on the plea of self-defence; that we may make war and de
stroy our ertemies when we are unjustly attacked, for we are acting the same
part, on a more extended scale, with the individual who resists the house-breaker,
the highway-man, and the assassin; but that wars of aggression, wars which
have no just cause in the conduct of our antagonist, are unlawful; and that, in
the sight of God, every life which is taken away in the prosecution of them
is a murder. How much guilt is accumulated upon all the nations of the world!
and how dreadful will be the reckoning with the rulers of the earth, when God
shall make inquiry after blood !
The precept is justly understood to forbid suicide; and for this reason, that
we have not absolute power over our own life, but are bound to retain and em
ploy it to the ends for which it was bestowed, till the gift is resumed by the
Giver. Disgust at life will hot justify self-murder, because it can exist only
in an ungrateful and vicious mind; nor severe affliction, which coming from the
hand of God, it is our duty to bear with patience; nor the apprehension of evil,
which may not befall us, and to which, if it did come, we should be bound to
submit without a murmur. Life is an appointed time, measured out to us by
the wisdom of God; it is a race which we must run till we arrive at the goal;
it is a conflict which we must sustain till we have obtained the victory.
The prohibition of murder implies a prohibition of all the causes whieh lead
to it; as, envy, malice, revenge, secret wishes of evil to others, and impreca
tions of it, unjust and excessive anger, duels, and fighting of every kind be
tween man and man. " Ye have heard that it was said, Thou shalt'not kill:
But I say unto you, That whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause,
shall be in danger of the judgment; and whosoever shall say to his brother, Raca,
shall be in danger of the council; but whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in
danger of hell-fire."* An Apostle, speaking in the spirit of his Master, de
clares, that he who " hateth his brother is a murderer."! The command, not to
take away our own life, binds us to avoid not only direct suicide, but every thing
which has a tendency to bring it to an untimely end; as, peevishness, and fret-
fulness, and discontent; immoderate grief; anxious care about our worldly af
fairs, and labour unnecessarily submitted to beyond our strength; neglect of
our bodies, by withholding due nourishment and clothing, and carelessness about
our health; intemperance in eating and drinking, and exposing ourselves to
danger without a lawful call.
The positive duties are implied in the negative. We ought to use all proper
means of preserving our life, for our own sakes, and for the good of those who
are dependent upon us, and to whom we may be useful in temporal and spiritual
things. We are bound also to endeavour to preserve the lives of others, by
warning them of dangers, by rescuing them from perilous circumstances, by
ministering to their necessities, by doing what will contribute to render life
desirable and comfortable to them.
* Matth. v. 21, 22. * 1 John iii. lb.

544 THE LAW OF GOD:
As there is a life of far greater importance than that of the body, the pre
cept may be understood to comprehend the duties which relate to the salvation
of our own souls, and those of our brethren: " He that findeth me findeth life,
and shall obtain favour of the Lord. But he that sinneth against me wrongeth
his own soul; all they that hate me love death."* In these words our duty to
ourselves is pointed out; and with respect to others who are connected with us,
it is only when we endeavour, by our instructions, our example, and our
prayers, to turn them from the path of destruction, that we can say with Paul,
that " we are free from the blood of all men.' '

LECTURE ,CV.
ON THE LAW OF GOD.

Commentary on the Seventh, the Eighth, the Ninth, and the Tenth Commandments.  Con
clusion from a Review of the Law.
The Seventh precept is, "Thou shalt not commit adultery." As it forbids
a sin which can be committed only by married persons, and according to the
rules laid down for the interpretation of the law, not only forbids all the sins
comprehended under this general term, but enjoins the opposite duties; a detail
of the duties of the conjugal relation is more properly introduced in this place,
than under the fifth commandment, to which they are commonly referred.
Marriage is an ordinance of God for the increase of the human race, and
for other important purposes connected with the comfort and moral improve
ment of the species. It was instituted in Paradise, where our first parents
were united as husband and wife by their Creator himself; and an example
was given to be imitated by their descendants. As such it was considered by
Adam, who, instructed no doubt by a divine revelation, said on that occasion,
" Therefore shall a man leave his father and mother, and shall cleave unto his
wife, and they shall be one flesh."!
As only a single pair was created, it appears to have been the intention of
their Maker that a man should have only one wife, and a wife only one hus
band. In this manner Malachi explains the fact, when he says, " And did not
he make one?" namely, one woman; " yet had he the residue of the Spirit.
And wherefore one? that he might seek a godly seed."! Yet we know that
uolygamy was introduced, at an early period, that it was practised by the patri
archs and other pious men, and that it was recognized by the law of Moses,
and subjected to regulation. If it was not properly approved, it was tolerated;
and we must conclude, that at that period there was not such moral evil in it,
if it was at all sinful, as was inconsistent with a state of salvation. The case
is finally decided by our Saviour, who has forbidden polygamy. It now admits
of no apology; and if a man, professing to be a Christian, should take to him
self more wives than one, he would not only incur the penalty of human laws,
but expose himself to the displeasure of heaven.
Marriage is the union of a man and a woman as husband and wife. It is
founded on mutual consent, and binds the parties to each other for life. As the
relation is of great importance, not only to the individuals, but to society at large,
* Prov. viii. 36. * Gen. ii. 24. i Mai. ii. 15.

THE SEVENTH COMMANDMENT. 545
the civil laws have taken it under their cognizance, and prescribed the forms
which are necessary to legalize the transaction. This precaution has not been
neglected in our own country; but the matter is still left too loose, as consent
expressed before witnesses, or even, I believe, in writing, is sufficient to con
stitute marriage. When the laws have settled the forms, the observance of
them becomes indispensable; and as marriage, although a divine institution, is
at the same time a civil transaction, a marriage, in contracting which they have
been neglected, is not legal and cannot be considered as valid.
Marriage is not a temporary contract, like that between master and servant,
but a union of a man and woman for life. They cannot separate at their
pleasure, or at the expiration of a definite period. They are bound to adhere
to each other during the term of their natural lives, and neither of them is at
liberty to enter into a new engagement, without an offence against the law both
of God and man. There is one cause, however, which may terminate the re
lation during their lifetime, namely, the sin forbidden in this commandment.
Adultery, whether committed by the husband or by the wife, is a just ground
of divorce. It is a direct violation of the marriage vow, giving the aggrieved
party a right to demand the dissolution of an engagement which the other has
broken, by retracting the pledge solemnly given at its commencement. You
will observe, however, that adultery does not ipso facto dissolve the conjugal
relation; it only invests the sufferer with a right to demand the dissolution of
it from the competent authority; if the wife or the husband does not choose to
exercise the right, things remain as they were. Another cause which, in this
- country but not in England, is considered as sufficient to procure the dissolu
tion of the conjugal tie, is the wilful desertion of one of the parties, which
means as our law has defined it, the absence of one of the parties for a speci
fied time without any lawful cause. If a man should be absent from his wife
for many years. on business, or because he was forcibly detained, or rendered
incapable of returning, the wife would have no plea for a divorce. Our Sa
viour has taken no notice of this cause when speaking of the subject; but it is
supposed to be countenanced by these words of Paul: " If any brother hath a
wife that believeth not, and she be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put
her away. And the woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if
he be pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him. But if the unbelieving
depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such
cases."* As wilful desertion not only implies alienation of affection, but de
feats all the designs of marriage, it seems to entitle the injured party to be
released from an obligation which the other has violated, and which now serves
only as a restraint upon the natural liberty of the innocent.
This precept addresses married persons in the first instance, and forbids the
violation of the fidelity which they pledged to each other when they entered
into the conjugal relation. It requires mutual affection, cohabitation, the faith
ful performance of their duty, the avoidance of all temptations to sin, and of
all means leading to it, and such care of one another as shall prove effectual,
through the blessing of God, to preserve them pure and blameless.
Under the head of adultery, all the kindred sins are forbidden. I may spe
cify, in the first place, fornication, or the illicit intercourse of two unmarried
persons of different sexes. The enormity of this crime might be shown from
the state of mind which it implies, and from its consequences; but it is
enough in this rapid sketch to remark, that it is expressly forbidden as incon
sistent with moral purity, and offensive to God. Among the heathens, it was
looked upon as a venial sin, or rather as no sin at all, and it was countenanced
by the doctrine and practice of their greatest philosophers. This is probably
the reason that, in the decree of the council of Jerusalem, it is mentioned along
* 1 Cor.vii. 12, 13, 15.
Vol. IL— 69 2 z 2

546 THE LAW OF GOD:
with some other things of less importance, from which the Gentiles were com
manded to abstain.*
This precept also forbids incest or sexual intercourse between persons within
the forbidden degrees, as between brothers and sisters, uncles and nieces, &c.
According to the law3 of our country, the prohibition is extended to the corres
ponding degrees of affinity.
It forbids unnatural lusts, which were practised by the heathens without
shame, and defended, or at least not condemned, by such a man as Socrates,
but which are now of rare occurrence, and always excite unqualified abhor
rence. It forbids, in a word, all impure actions, all impure words, and all impure
thoughts, as sinful in themselves, and as leading to sin. This is our Lord's
commentary upon the law: " Whosoever looketh upon a woman to lust after
her, hath committed adultery with her already in his heart."!
The precept requires us to maintain our own and our neighbour's chastity
in heart, speech and behaviour; to cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the
flesh and spirit, and to perfect holiness in the fear of God. With this view,
we should cultivate a habitual sense of the Divine presence, which enabled Jo
seph to preserve his innocence, when he was exposed to very powerful solici
tation: " How can I do this great wickedness, and sin against God?"! ^ wm-
be well to remember that his eye is upon us in the most secret place; that the
fear of offending him may counteract the most urgent temptation, and check
the irregular movements of our hearts. This leads me to say, in the next
place, that we should guard against the entrance of evil thoughts into our minds,
and immediately expel them if they have entered, and should labour to suppress
the risings of unhallowed appetite. He who rolls iniquity like a sweet morsel
under his tongue, is prepared to commit it if a fit opportunity shall occur, and
Providence shall withdraw its restraints. The man who sports with tempta
tion, and quietly permits or encourages its first advances, is in danger of ulti
mately yielding to it. The most effectual method to prevent the growth of
poisonous fruit, is to destroy the root which bears it. — Again, we should guard
against all incentives to those indulgences which are forbidden by this precept,
all spectacles which are calculated to excite the irregular movements of appe
tite, all reading and conversation which may produce the same effect. We
should avoid loose and profligate company, whose words and example might
taint our minds; we should avoid idleness, which, leaving the mind vacant, ex
poses it to the inroads of unhallowed sentiments and passions; we should avoid
intemperance in eating and drinking, than which nothing is more likely to give
appetite the mastery over reason. In a word, we should live in the contem
plation of death and the future judgment, and the awful realities of eternity, a
just apprehension of which will divest the pleasures of sense of their attrac
tions; and continually offer up our prayers to God for his restraining and sanc
tifying grace, without which our precautions and resolutions will be unavailing.
" Wherewithall shall a young man purify his way? By taking heed thereto,
according to thy word;"§ by making the word his guide, and depending upon
the assistance which it promises. " My son, be strong in the grace which is
in Christ Jesus."il " Once," says Paul to the Corinthians, " ye were adulte
rers, fornicators, and abusers of yourselves with mankind; but ye are washed,
but ve are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by
the Spirit of our God." IT
The Eighth commandment is, " Thou shalt not steal;" and the design of it
is to guard property against fraud and open violence. It places a sacred inclo ¦
* Acts xv 29. * Matth. v. 28. * Gen. xxxix. 9.
§ Ps. cxix. 9. 1 2 Tim. ii. 1. 11 Cor. vi. 9, 1 1.

THE EIGHTH COMMANDMENT. 547
sure around it, into which no person must enter without the consent of the
proprietor. It is unnecessary to engage in an inquiry respecting the manner in which
property is acquired. The subject has been discussed by philosophers, and
different theories have been proposed and defended. It has been said to have
originated in the right of occupancy, or, that he who first took possession of a
part of the common field of nature, became its rightful proprietor. It has been
founded on the right of labour, that is, it has been supposed that a man, by cul
tivating a part of the soil, was entitled to claim not only the produce but the
soil, as his own. It has been referred to the will of God, who, having created
all things for the use of man, gave liberty to every individual to appropriate to
himself what was necessary for the supply of his wants. Without troubling
ourselves to discuss these theories, we may remark that, in a state of society,
property is ascertained by the law of the land. As it points out the various
ways in which it may be acquired, and secures it to the rightful possessor, so
it determines in all controversies which arise between two or more individuals,
who is the rightful owner of a field, a house, money, &c. The sin which the
precept forbids is the appropriation to ourselves, by our own act, of that which
we know belongs to another. A man would not be chargeable with transgres
sing it, who should seize another man's property, believing it to be his own,
and should endeavour to establish his claim to it at law; although his right was
not good, his intentions would not be dishonest. But he is a transgressor,
who takes what he knows to belong to another man; and although he have
attained the sanction of law by such acts as the unprincipled too often employ,
he is a thief or a robber in the estimation of God.
Theft is distinguished into different kinds. There is peculation, or theft of
the public money, a crime often committed, and by persons who pass in the
world for honourable men, and look down with ineffable contempt upon the
obscure culprit, who practises his depredations upon a confined scale. There
is sacrilege, or theft of the property of the church or of any thing devoted to
the service of God. This crime is comparatively rare, partly because the
temptations to it are neither frequent nor great, partly because men are
restrained by a sense of religion, and partly because it would cover the
guilty with indelible infamy. There is common theft, which is practised
daily; and at present abounds to such a degree as to render property extremely
insecure. Robbery differs from theft in the manner of committing it. The
one is secret and the other open; and robbery is accompanied with violence
threatened, or actually employed, to compel a surrender, or to overcome resis
tance. — All those crimes are forbidden, and they are violations of the laws of
God and man. The precept condemns the man of office who fills his purse
out of the public treasury, and places him on a level in respect of moral guilt,
if it do not degrade him still lower, with the contemptible wretch who goes
from house to house pilfering whatever he can find. It condemns neighbours
who steal from one another, servants who purloin the goods of their masters,
and children who secrete for their own use the property of their parents.
Besides what is commonly reputed theft, there are various other ways in
which men may be guilty of transgressing this commandment. It is broken
when a man borrows and does not repay. His dishonesty is manifest if he
denies the debt, or refuses to make restoration, or takes advantage of some le
gal quirk to evade payment, or removes to a place where he is beyond the
reach of his creditors. But he is also dishonest if he borrows without any rea
sonable prospect of being able to pay; if he render himself unable by idleness,
by extravagant living, by rash speculations, in which he has embarked the
property of others as well as his own; or if, having obtained a discharge after
partial payment, he does not make full restitution when Providence has placed

548 THE LAW OF GOD:
him in prosperous circumstances. The commandment is broken by the de
ceitful arts which are practised in trade; when a man takes advantage of the
necessity of another to buy from him or sell to him, at a price which would
have been different in different circumstances, or when he takes advantage of
his ignorance with the same design; when the buyer depreciates the article
of sale contrary to his knowledge, and the seller labours to raise it above its
real value; when goods are adulterated, and consequently sold at a price which
they would not have brought if their state had been known; when false
weights and measures are used, and less is given in exchange than was ex
pected and promised; when bargains are not fulfilled, because there is a pros
pect of greater gain, and so what really belonged to the purchaser, although
he had not obtained actual possession of it, is withheld from him; when pay-
'ments are made in counterfeit or debased instead of current coin; in all these
cases, the precept is as certainly violated, as when direct theft is committed.
It is broken, too, when men waste the property of others which is committed
to their care, or permit it to be wasted by others; when they suffer it to go to
decay, and do not use the means of improving it which are in their power, and
which they were bound by their engagements to employ. In this way many
are guilty of a breach of the eighth commandment, who do not suspect their
own honesty, and would consider themselves insulted, if it were called in
question by others. There are many other ways of transgressing this com
mandment, which it would be tedious to mention.
The duty of those who are guilty, in any form, is to cease to do evil, and to
learn to do well. " Lefhim that stole, steal no more;"* let him make restitu
tion as far as he has ability and opportunity; and let him guard against tempta
tion to a repetition of the crime, and against all the causes which might lead to
it. Besides entertaining a habitual sense of the omniscience and authority of
God, which would be an effectual restraint, from all sin, let him study to be
content with his condition; and if it is attended with inconveniences and pri
vations, let him consider that these are allotted to him by the Supreme Dispo
ser, that it is his duty to suffer with patience, and that he will not be an ulti
mate gainer by resorting to unlawful expedients for relief. Instead of appro
priating to himself any portion of his neighbour's wealth, he ought to regard
it as placed within the fence of the Divine law, and feel that he is bound to
promote his neighbour's interest by all means in his power, for this is the con
verse of the negative precept. There are different ways in which this work of
love may be performed, as by assisting others in their labours, when attention
to our own business will permit; by giving them lessons of prudence and econo
my; by pointing out to them the best methods of managing their affairs; by
warning them of dangers which they do not foresee; and if we are precluded
from using any of these means, we always have it in our power to wish them
well, and to pray for their prosperity.
" Let him that stole, steal no more; but rather let him labour, working with
his hands the thing which is good."! If a man has not resources of his own,
he must endeavour to provide them by lawful industry, and thus cut off one
strong temptation to theft. The crime is most frequently committed by the
poor, who cannot work for their daily bread; or by the idle, who will not
work, and take this easier method of supplying their wants. Hence it follows
that diligence in business is enjoined by this precept. The calling in which
we engage must be lawful, because the gain which is acquired by an illicit oc
cupation, is the fruit of a violation either of this or some other commandment,
and cannot be sought with a good conscience. It must be carried on by lawful
means, by fair and honest industry, to the exclusion of falsehood and fraud,
and any encroachment upon the rights and privileges of others. It should be
managed with attention, and prudence, and perseverance, because it is only by
* Eph. iv. 28. + Eph. iv. 28.

THE NINTH COMMANDMENT. 549
the use of these means that we can reasonably calculate upon success; but
moderation should be observed, not only lest our strength be impaired, and life
abridged, but that we may not contract an undue attachment to the world, and
by fostering the principle of avarice, create a new temptation to dishonesty,
The cultivation of spirituality and heavenliness of mind will be an effectual
means of subduing covetousness, and preventing the evils which spring from
it; for, if we are seeking the true riches, and are fully aware of the vanity of
earthly things, we shall be in little danger of going out of the path of duty to
obtain them.
Even upon those who cannot work, and are.destitute of daily bread, this pre
cept is binding. In an extreme case, moralists have allowed that a man may
take as much of a neighbour's property as is necessary to preserve him from perish
ing of hunger or cold, and assign this reason, that " when property was first es
tablished, the institution was not intended to operate to the destruction of any;
and therefore, when sucn consequence would follow, all regard to it is super
seded." Be this as it may, the source to which the poor are to look is <he
charity of others, which they may solicit, but cannot compel, for this is one of
those rights which moralists call imperfect, because they cannot be enforced in
the course of law. I am speaking of voluntary charity, and not of legal as
sessments. Their right to charity, however, is perfect by the law of God,
who peremptorily enjoins alms, and will punish those who, from inhumanity
or selfishness, withhold them. Besides a sense of duty, which should excite
us to relieve our indigent brethren, and in aid of which comes the sentiment
of compassion towards the sufferers, every man should consider that this is
one of the ways in which we may expect our temporal affairs to prosper; for
" he that hath pity upon the poor, lendeth unto the Lord, and that which he
hath given will he pay him again." " There is that scattereth, and yet in-
creaseth; and there is that withholdeth more than is meet, but it tendeth to
poverty."* I now proceed to the Ninth commandment, " Thou shalt not bear false wit
ness against thy neighbour." The sin which is expressly forbidden is, the
giving of false testimony concerning a person when we are summoned as wit
nesses in his cause by proper authority. This is done when we affirm that to
be true, which we know to be false; when we assert as certain what is doubt
ful; when we give a higher colouring or a deeper shade to a transcation, than
is consistent with fact; when we deliberately conceal ' any thing which would
serve to establish the innocence or the guilt of our neighbour. In these and
other ways, witnesses may swerve from the truth; and as their evidence, in a
judicial trial, is given upon oath, they farther incur the guilt of perjury:
" These are the things that ye shall do, Speak ye every man the truth to his
'neighbour; execute the judgment of truth and peace in your gates."!
But, although the violation of truth in the solemn proceedings of courts is
the only sin specified, yet all other sins allied to it, and contrary to the general
principle inculcated, are forbidden. We must not bear false witness against
our neighbour in common conversation. We must not charge him with a
crime of which we know him to be innocent, or pronounce him to be guilty
upon reports which we have not verified; we must not form rash judgments
of conduct which, upon inquiry, may be found to be right, although appear
ances at first were unfavourable; we must not impute bad motives to him with
out sufficient evidence, when there is room for a more charitable interpretation.
By this precept, all those are condemned who are called calumniators, slan
derers, backbiters, whisperers, evil surmisers; the authors and propagators of
injurious reports; those w'hose business it is to detract from merit, to throw a
* Prov. xix. 17. xi. 24. * Zech. viii. 16.

550 THE LAW OF GOD:
shade upon excellence, and to make virtue suspected; who, as the thief goes
from place to place in search of prey, roam about with the nefarious design to
commit depredations upon the characters of others. We may violate this pre
cept even when we speak the truth, if we speak it unseasonably, unnecessari
ly, and from improper motives. We injure the character of our neighbour
when we retail his real faults without any call to divulge them; when we re
late them to those who have no right to know them; and when we tell them,
not to promote any good end, but to make him lose his estimation in society.
Many think that they are perfectly blameless if they adhere strictly to truth,
not considering that, to a complete moral action, more is necessary than its ex
ternal conformity to the rule, and that the principle in which it originated may
be so vitiated as to convert the action into a sin. Nay, we may transgress this
precept when we do not speak at all; for, by holding our peace when some
thing injurious is said of another, we tacitly give our assent, and, by concealing
what we know to the contrary, by not bringing forward what would rebut the
charge, we become guilty not in a much inferior degree to the first contriver of
the calumny. We certainly do not fulfill the law, which says, " Thou shalt
love thy neighbour as thyself."
The design of this precept is to " maintain and promote truth between man
and man." Our organs of speech were given for the purpose of expressing it.
It is evident that this must have been the design <ff our Creator, whose ultimate
object in subordination to his own glory, was good, to be accomplished by the
structure of our bodies, and the constitution of our minds. Without truth
there could be no society among men, no friendships, no mutual co-operation,
no transactions of any kind; they would be filled with jealousy and distrust,
and be reduced to a helpless individuality of existence, destitute of all comfort,
and harrassed with perpetual suspicion and alarm. To guard against these con
sequences, God has planted two principles in human "nature, — an instinctive
propensity to speak truth, and an instinctive disposition to believe testimony.
The former may seem to be inconsistent with the declaration of Scripture, that
" the wicked are estranged from the womb, they go astray as soon as they be
born, speaking lies."* These words do, indeed, import that there is a prone-
ness to duplicity and deceit in human nature, of which there are indications at
a very early period; but it is called into action only by particular circumstances,
and in general children and fools are proverbial for speaking truth. Truth
comes spontaneously from our lips, when there is no motive to utter falsehood;
and so strong is the natural connexion between our sentiments and our words,
that it frequently escapes from us when it would be our interest to conceal it.
Men commonly speak truth, and lie only occasionally. The disposition to
give credit to testimony presupposes the former propensity; it assumes that
truth is generally spoken; it is strongest prior to experience of deceit, and be
comes suspicious and cautious in proportion as that experience is acquired.
But although there is a natural propensity to speak truth, when it is not
counteracted by any improper influence, men in their degsnerate state do not
feel so sacred a regard to it as is sufficient to secure them against temptation.
There are frequent violations of it from various causes, against which this pre
cept is directed. Truth may be defined to be the conformity of our sentiments
to the nature of things, and the conformity of our words to our sentiments.
The precept immediately regards the latter, but not to the exclusion of the
former. If it is our duty not to deceive others, it is our duty to take care that
we be not ourselves deceived; and consequently, to make ourselves thoroughly
acquainted with a subject before we venture to speak of it. But when a man
speaks as he thinks, he speaks moral truth; and although he should be mista
ken, he is not guilty of a lie. * Ps. lviii. 3.

THE NINTH COMMANDMENT. 551
Lies are commonly distinguished into , three kinds. First, There are mali
cious or pernicious lies, or lies the design of which is to do mischief. These
are universally condemned. Secondly, There are jocose lies, or lies told for
the purpose of amusement and merriment. However common these are, and
however lightly they are thought of, a strict moralist will condemn them also,
because truth is too sacred to be trifled with. Thirdly, There are officious
lies, which are so called, because they are intended to promote the benefit of
others. It has been pleaded as an apology for these, that they do no harm,
but on the contrary do good; a conscience duly informed, however, does not
judge of the morality of an action by its consequences, but by the law; and
to do evil that good may come, is a principle which the Scripture has proscri
bed. Under the same censure are included pious frauds, as they are called,
and which began to be practised at an early period; lies told, miracles feigned,
books forged, and sophistical reasoning deliberately employed, to advance the
cause of religion. Equivocation is another species of falsehood, and consists
in the studied use of terms which bear two different senses, in one of which
the speaker understands them, while he means them to be understood in the
other by the person addressed. He violates truth, because he intends to de
ceive. It is violated also by mental reservation, which has been justified by
Popish casuists, but deserves universal execration, because it subverts all faith
and confidence between man and man. It consists in uttering so many words
aloud, and then muttering or mentally repeating some more which totally alter
their meaning, than which it is impossible to conceive a more deliberate and
baser attempt to deceive.
Every man has not a right to hear the truth when he chooses to demand it.
We are not bound to answer every question which may be proposed to us. In
such cases we may be silent, or we may give as much information as we
please, and suppress the rest. If the person afterwards discover that the in
formation was partial, he has no title to complain, because he had not a right
even to what he obtained; and we are not guilty of a falsehood, unless we made
nim believe, by something which we said, that the information was complete.
We are at liberty to put off with an evasive answer the man who attempts to
draw from us what we ought to conceal. On the ground of the want of a right
to truth, some justify false information given to an assassin who is in quest of
his intended victim, and false promises made to a robber or a tyrant who has
extorted them by violence. It does not serve much purpose to discuss extreme
cases, which rarely occur; and it is hazardous to lay down a rule which may
in any degree lessen our reverence for truth. We have a choice, when we
are exposed to danger, either to sin or to suffer; and if there be any doubt
with respect to the lawfulness of an expedient, every man of a tender con
science will take the safer side, by doing what appears to be his duty, and will
leave the consequences to Providence.
There can be no doubt that promises voluntarily made and properly qualified
are binding. They are binding, according to the sense in which theyllrere
understood by the parties at the time when they were made, — binding, in the
plain and natural meaning of the terms. But promises are not binding when
the performance of them is impossible. This is so obvious as to require no
illustration; but it is proper to observe, that the impossibility must have arisen or
been discovered after the promise was made; and if the promiser was aware
of it at the time, he excited false expectations, and is clearly guilty of a lie.
Promises are not binding when the performance would be unlawful. A prior
cannot be set aside by a subsequent obligation; and the law of God undoubt
edly does not require us to fulfill an engagement by which any of its precepts
would be transgressed. A promise is not binding unless it has been accepted.
It is the acceptance which constitutes the obligation, and not the simple pro-

552 THE LAW OF GOD:
mise, which is merely a declaration on the part of the promiser of his willing
ness to be bound. If I promised to give another a certain sum of money, but
he declared that he would not accept of it, I am released. A promise is not
binding which was suspended upon a condition, if the condition is not per
formed. The promiser has lost his right, or rather had no right till his part of
the stipulation was fulfilled. In a word, a promise ceases to be binding, when
the person to whom it was made releases the promiser from his bond.
The duty enjoined in this precept is, to adhere to truth on all occasions.
There are some cases, indeed, in which, although our words, literally under
stood, do not agree with our sentiments, we do not incur the guilt of falsehood,
as in irony, parables, and fictitious narratives; and the reason is, that as we do
not intend to deceive, so no person is deceived. The design of the speaker or
writer is understood. No man mistakes a romance or a parable for a true his
tory, or supposes irony to be any other thing than a mode of conveying cen
sure under the semblance of praise. But in testimony, in common conversa
tion, and in more formal declarations, our words should be the exact image of
our thoughts. It is the character of the man who shall abide in the taberna
cle of God, that " he speaketh the truth in his heart."*
It remains that we should briefly consider the Tenth commandment: " Thou
shalt not covet thy neighbour's house; thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife,
nor his man-servant, nor his maid-servant, nor "his ox, nor his ass, nor any
thing that is thy neighbour's." The direct object of this precept is not our
external actions, but the movements of the heart; and hence it appears to be
supplementary and auxiliary to the other commandments. They also must be
understood to regard our feelings and affections, because they proceeded from
him who will not be satisfied with outward obedience; but lest men should
not have perceived their extent, and should have pleaded that, in conforming
to the letter of the law, they had fulfilled its demands, this precept is added to
show its spirituality. The seventh command forbids adultery; but here we
find that something more is required than abstinence from the forbidden act,
and that the commandment may be transgressed in the heart: " Thou shalt not
covet or desire thy neighbour's wife." The eighth commandment forbids us to
steal; but this precept shows that the man who would scorn to purloin the
property of another, may become criminal in the sight of God by desiring it:
" Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, nor his ox, nor his ass." By
forbidding us to desire any thing that belongs to him, it forbids every improper
sentiment and feeling excited by the state of his affairs, as envy, rivalship,
contests for superiority; and thus aims at eradicating the principle which might
lead us to injure him in his person, his character, or any of his rights. It is
the safe-guard of all the precepts of the second table; and it comes in at the
close, to remind us that the heart must be pure as well as the life.
It is a celebrated and important question in theology, whether what is called
in Greek tniOvfiia, in Latin concupiscentia, and in English concupiscence, or
desire, has the nature of sin. Concupiscence is used in different senses. In
the first place, It signifies that proneness to evil which is natural to man, and is
found even in the regenerated. This the Church of Rome acknowledges to
be the matter of sin, or that in which sin originates; but denies it to be sin,
and says, that although the Apostle Paul calls it sin, it is not so in itself, but
is so denominated, because it incline^ to sin. I think, however, that we are
much safer in following Paul than the Council of Trent. We cannot conceive
any proneness, or tendency, or inclination to evil, in a perfectly innocent
being; or such to have been the constitution of human nature, when it was
first impressed with the image of its Maker. Although capable of evil, it was
* Ps. xv. 2.

THE TENTH COMMANDMENT. 553
inclined only to good. An inclination to evil must be itself evil, as an in
clination to virtue is a virtuous tendency; and the rule of our Saviour certainly
holds in the present case, that the tree is corrupt which bears corrupt fruit. In
the second place, Concupiscence signifies the involuntary movements of this
habitual disposition; and they are called involuntary, because they are not ac
companied with any deliberate act of the mind approving of them and con
senting to them, but arise suddenly, in consequence of the presence of a suit
able object. These also have been denied to be sinful; but although they do
not imply a formal deliberate volition, yet, as they proceed from an evil habit,
they must themselves be evil. It will be acknowledged, I presume, that it is
our duty to check them; but how could this be, if they were innocent? We
can conceive no such thing in our Lord; and every motion of this kind is ex
cluded by his own declaration, that " the prince of this world was coming, but
would find nothing in him;"* no tendency towards sin, no movement of the
affections, of which he could take advantage to seduce him. Lastly, Con
cupiscence signifies fixed, voluntary desire of what is forbidden, which all admit
to be sinful.
The latter, therefore, is forbidden in this precept, " Thou shalt not covet,
or desire," But it extends farther, and forbids the incipient desire, even before
it has obtained the consent of the mind, and consequently the previous state
of mind in which it originated; for if the tendency in act be condemned, the
tendency in habit is also condemned. The Apostle Paul says, " I had not
known sin but by the law; for I had not known lust, except the law had said,
Thou shalt not covet."! We cannot suppose him to mean, that he did not
know that the deliberate desire of a sinful object was sinful, although there is
reason to think that some of the Jewish Doctors of that age made obedience
to consist merely in external conformity to the law; yet it is hardly credible
that a man who had studied the law so diligently, had entirely over-looked all
the notices of its spirituality, and particularly the principle upon which it is
founded — love to God and to man. It is probable, that in the passage before
us, he refers to the first motions of sin, those involuntary acts of concupis
cence of which we have spoken, and declares that it was only by this precept
that he came to know them to be sinful. It was when the precept was brought
home to his conscience by the Spirit of God, that he made this discovery.
Till then, he had believed that all was right as long as he was free from
outward sin, or, at least, from the settled and deliberate desire of what was
evil. This precept teaches us how we ought ,to be affected towards our neighbour.
As we should abstain from an open invasion of his rights, so we should har
bour no uncharitable disposition towards him, no wish> which, is at variance
with his happiness, and would lead us to encroach upon his honour, and pro
perty, and peace. It condemns all dissatisfaction with our lot; and all inten
tions, as well as endeavours, to change it by any means inconsistent with
justice and love to our neighbour, and with entire submission to the will of
God. Contentment with our own condition, is obviously a duty which it enjoins.
The reason that we covet the things which belong to our neighbour, is, that we
are not fully pleased with the portion which God has assigned to us. A con
tented state of mind would remove the cause of those irregular affections,
which it is the design of this precept to restrain. We see that vanity some
times produces the effect which should flow solely from religion. Some per
sons are highly pleased with themselves, and every thing which pertains to
them. Their houses, their wives, their children, their property, are so much
better than those of others, that they have no wish to make an exchange; and,
* John xiv. 30. * Rom. vii. 7.
Vol. IL— 70 3 A

554 CONCLUSION.
wrapt up in the dream of superiority, they allow the world to go on in its course,
without envying any one, or disturbing any one, except by an ostentatious display
of their advantages. This example shows how true contentment, founded on
submission to the will of God, would preserve us from transgressing this com
mandment. If we believed that our condition is such as it ought to be, that it
has been arranged by Divine wisdom, and is over-ruled by Divine goodness
for our best interests, we should not be grieved at the greater prosperity of
others, nor wish to appropriate to our own use any thing which they possess.
We should even be pleased with what was our own, and leave others to enjoy
undisturbed what God had given to them. The tendency of this precept is to
promote the happiness of mankind, as well as the glory of God. If it were
engraven upon our hearts, if our thoughts and affections were under its con
trol, there would be an end to the complaints and murmurs, the cares and anx
ieties, which agitate our minds; and the world would no longer present the
disgusting spectacle of a field of battle, where emulation, wrath, strife, deceit,
and violence, act their part, men prey upon one another, and all contend who
shall be conquerors in the struggle for honour and wealth.
Upon the whole, we see that the moral law is in every respect worthy of
its Author. It bears upon it an impression of his holiness; it is adapted to the
nature of man; it holds all his faculties in subjection to his Maker, and its aim
is to promote piety, and purity, and love.
When we reflect upon the extensive nature of its demands, the spirituality
of its precepts, its condemnation of even an irregular thought, its requisition
of entire and constant submission to God, of a habitual reference to his will
as our rule, and his glory as our end; when we reflect upon the height and
depth, the length and breadth of the law, we cannot but be sensible that it is
impossible for any man in the present life perfectly to fulfill it. The obedience
of the saints is attended with many defects, as they are always ready to ac
knowledge. " There is not a just man upon the earth, that doeth good, and
sinneth not."* The knowledge of the law is sufficient to convince any per
son, whatever his former notions may have been, that he cannot be justified by
it. Hence there is need of a better righteousness than we can supply; and we
have all reason to be thankful that the law has been fulfilled and magnified by
our Divine Redeemer, and a foundation has thus been laid for the acceptance
and eternal salvation of those who had fallen under the curse. "He is the
end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth." "As by the
disobedience of one man many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one
shall many be made righteous."!
* Eccles. vii. 20. + Rom. x. 4. v. 19.

APPENDIX.

The following Observations on the Extent of Christ's Atonement, forming part of the Fifty-
eighth Lecture, were omitted in their proper place, in Vol. II.
It is an important question, for whom Christ offered his sacrifice; and the
answers to it are different. Some contend that he died for all men; and others,
that he died for those alone who were given to him by his Father. Of late,
we have heard much of a new doctrine, which maintains not only that Christ
died for all men, but that, in consequence of his death, all men are actually
pardoned. The true Gospel is not, that God for Christ's sake will forgive the
sins of all who believe: but that he has already forgiven every man, woman,
and child, who is now alive, or shall be in the ages to come. It seems a natu
ral inference, that every man will be saved; but to guard against this mistake,
we are informed that, although all men are already pardoned, this act of grace
will be of no avail to them, unless they believe that they are pardoned. This
faith is of easy attainment, as easy as to believe that the sun is shining at
noon; because, if it is true that all men are pardoned, it requires no effort to
conclude that, since I am a man, I am one ofthe number. It is added, indeed,
that we shall not enjoy the benefit of this pardon, unless we not only believe,
but are sanctified by our faith; but this is going still farther from the genuine
Gospel, by making our final deliverance from condemnation depend upon our
holiness, and not exclusively upon the atonement of Christ. What a mass of
error, contradiction, and absurdity! Here we have a pardon which is not par
don, because it affords no security to the possessor; the guilt of sin taken away,
and yet liable to be charged upon the sinner; an act of indemnity passed in
his favour, while everlasting punishment is still hanging over his head! Who
can receive this doctrine who has learned from the Scriptures that we are "jus
tified by faith," that is, that pardon follows faith, and does not go before it?
Who can believe that all men are pardoned, who has read in innumerable pas
sages that " all men are by nature children of wrath;" that " God is angry
with them every day;" that " his wrath is revealed from heaven against them;"
that it is " coming upon them;" that " the whole world is guilty before him?"*
Would the sacred writers have spokeii thus if they had known that all men are
already forgiven?
Others, who affirm that Christ died for all men, explain their views in a dif
ferent manner. He may be said to have died for all, because, in consequence
of his death, a dispensation of grace is established, under which all men are
placed; a new covenant is made with them, which promises eternal life to sin
cere, instead of perfect obedience; and such assistance is afforded to them as,
if rightly improved, will enable them to work out their salvation. To every
person who understands the Scriptures, it will be evident that this scheme is
false in all its parts, and consequently, that the doctrine which it is brought for
ward to support, is destitute of any solid foundation. If this is the sense in
which Christ died for all, he did not die for all, because the scheme is a gross
and manifest perversion of the Gospel. The fundamental error of the advo
cates of universal redemption lies in an inaccurate idea of the nature of an
*Eph. ii. 3. Ps. vii. 11. Rom. i. 18. Eph. v. 6. Rom. iii. 19.
555

556 APPENDIX.
atonement. We have shown that it consisted in vicarious suffering, the suffering
of one in the room of another. The one bare the sins of the other; the one
suffered that the other might not suffer From the application of the terms of
the ancient law to the death of Christ, it appears that his death was a sacrifice
of the same kind with those which had been offered by Divine appointment
from the beginning; that he was the substitute of sinners; that their guilt was
imputed to him; that he bore the punishment to which they were exposed; and
bore it with this design, that they might jiot be punished. In consequence of
having offered a sacrifice, the Israelite, who had transgressed, was acquitted,
the penalty was not executed upon him. Must not this be the effect of the
sacrifice of Christ? Must not those for whom it was offered be freed from
condemnation? Does not justice require that they should be dismissed with
impunity, since it has already received full satisfaction? The surety has paid
the debt, and shall the debtor himself be called upon to pay? No; the claim
of the creditor has ceased; the debtor is under no obligation to him, and is as
free as if he had never owed a single farthing. If, then, Christ died for all
men, it necessarily follows that all men will be saved. The inference is obvi
ous, and cannot be evaded. If an atoning sacrifice was offered for all men, all
men must be forgiven. Will God punish sin twice, first in the person of the
Surety, and then in the persons themselves, in whose place he stood? It will
be acknowledged, without a dissenting voice, that in any other case this would
be a manifest injustice. But, " is there unrighteousness with God? God for
bid: the Judge of all the earth will do right." Either then all men will be
finally saved, or Christ did not die for all. But few will be so bold as to main
tain, no person who has any reverance for Scripture will maintain, universal
salvation; and to be consistent, he ought also to renounce the doctrine of uni
versal redemption.
Our Lord, speaking of those for whom he died, calls them his sheep.
" I lay down my life for the sheep."* He explains who his sheep are by say
ing, that they are such persons as " hear his voice and follow him;" and he
adds, " that he gives to them eternal life, and they shall never perish, neither
shall any pluck them out of his hand."! Does it not plainly follow from his
words, that those for whom he died shall be saved, that he died for none but
those upon whom the gift of faith should be bestowed? And does he not sig
nify, by particularizing them as the persons for whom he laid down his life,
that he did not die for others of an opposite character? If he died for all,
there would be no meaning in saying that he died for his sheep, because in
this case there would be nothing peculiar to them, nothing by which they were
distinguished from any other description of men. Again he says in his solemn
prayer to his Father, " I pray for them; I pray not for the world, but for those
whom thou hast given me, for they are thine."! He prayed for the disciples,
and not for them alone, but for those in all ages and places who should believe
on him through their word; but he did not pray for the world. Intercession
is a part of the priestly office of Christ, as well as sacrificing; and it may be
assumed as certain, that the same persons are the objects of both. On what
ground could we suppose, that his sacrifice embraced a wider range than his
intercession, that he willingly shed his blood for the redemption of some, but
afterwards declined to pray to his Father for them. It was not so with the
Jewish priests, who were types of him, for they bore the names of all the
tribes on their breastplate, when they went into the holy of holies, and repre
sented all without exception, for whom the annual atonement was made. So
also does Christ. He intercedes for those whose sins he bore in his own body
on the tree, and therefore, as he does not intercede for all men, he did not die
lor all. This argument may be considered as conclusive, till some better
* John x. 15. *Ib. 3,4. * John xvii. 9.

APPENDIX. 55T
reason is given, why Christ prayed for his disciples, but would not pray for
the world.
It is acknowledged there are some passages which seem to favour the doc
trine of universal redemption; but if there are others which represent the de
sign of his death as limited, — and it has appeared from the nature of the case,
that his sacrifice was not offered for all, since all are not forgiven, — we must
endeavour to give a consistent sense to the former passages, and show that
Scripture is in harmony with itself. It is said that Christ " taketh away the
sin of the world,"* and is " the propitiation for the sins of the whole world."!
But in these, and some other places, the world does not signify every individual
of mankind, but the nations in general, as distinguished from the Jews, who
were long the peculiar people. It is said again, that Christ " died for all;"
but the meaning is explained by the words which follow, " that they who live
should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them,
and rose again;"! anc' tney signify that by all we ought to understand, not all
men without exception, but all those who are made spiritually alive by his
death, and consecrated to the service of their gracious Deliverer. It is farther
said, that he " gave himself a ransom for all."§ But if every individual of the
human race is meant, it necessarily follows that, the ransom being paid, all
must be redeemed from the bondage of sin and the curse of the law, unless we
are prepared to admit that, in respect of many, he died in vain. By all, and
all men, mentioned in another verse,|| it appears, on considering the passage,
that the Apostle included persons of every tribe, rank, and condition; Jews and
Gentiles, high and low, rich and poor. Once more, it is said, that " by the
grace of God he tasted death for every man;" IT but although the language is
strong, and seems to be conclusive, some of the advocates of universal redemp
tion honestly acknowledge that it does not prove the point; and that there is a
reference to the " many sons" mentioned in the following verse, whom the
Captain of our salvation was appointed to bring to glory; — he tasted death for
every one of them. It would be tedious to go over all the passages in which
the universality of the atonement is supposed to be taught. I shall conclude
with this observation: — That the sacred writers do not always use universal
terms, in the strict and usual sense; that the world sometimes signifies a part
of the world, and all is put for many; and that it is not by such terms that we
are to determine the extent of the atonement, but by a view of the whole case
and all its bearings.
* John i. 29. *Uohnii.2. * 2 Cor. v. 15.
§ 1 Tim. ii. 6 J R>. 4. 1 Heb. ii. 9.

3 a 2

INDEX OF MATTER.

Abraham, state of religion in his days, i.
143 ; sacraments of the covenant made
with him, ii. 357.
Absolute, decrees of God are, i. 356.
Actions, concern of providence in good and
bad, i. 439. See Providence.
Adam, viewed as the federal head of the
human race, i. 459 ; effects of his fall
on his posterity, 478.
Adoption, ii. 334. Meaning of the phrase
' Sons of God,' 334 ; practice and nature
of it among men, 335 ; scriptural sense
of the term, 325 ; the mediation of Christ,
the meritorious cause, 227 ; means by
which this privilege is obtained, 228;
difference between spiritual and human,
228 ; blessings enjoyed by, 229 ; signi
fied by baptism, 388.
Adoration, a part of prayer, ii. 424.
Adultery, ii. 545 ; whether it entitles the
injured party to divorce, 545.
Alms, duty of giving, ii. 549.
Angels, signification of the term, i. 387 ;
time of creation, 387 ; their nature, 388.
 Holy, are intelligent, 389 ; their
activity and strength, 390 ; their happi
ness, 391 ; are there ranks and degrees
among them ? 391 ) their offices in the
affairs of Providence, 392 ; their minis
try to the saints, 394; are there, guardian
angels ? 395.
Fallen, were originally created

pure, 396 ; how long they continued so,
397 ; their sin, 397 ; not placed under a
federal head, 398; their number, 398;
effects of their fall, 399 ; objections to
their existence, 400 ; their subordination
to Satan, 401 ; their employment, 402 ;
their power over the bodies of men, 402 ;
over the minds of men, 403 ; to work
miracles, 70 ; to foretell the future, 78.
Animal creation, marks of design in, i.
165; of unity of design, 178.
Anointing, practice of, ii. 26.
Antinomianism, ii. 261.
AntipjEdobaptists, doctrine of, considered,
ii. 378.
Apocryphal books, notice of, i. 41. 51.
Apollinaris, his opinions respecting the
human nature of Christ, ii. 16.
Apostles, their apparent want of qualifica
tion for publishing the gospel, i. 84; they
were extraordinary rulers in the church,
ii. 493.

Apostles' Creed, ii. 99.
Application of redemption. See Redemp
tion.
Arian heresy, i. 303.
Arminian doctrine of divine decrees, i.
361 ; as to Adam being the federal head
of his posterity, 460 ; as to the penalty
in the covenant of works, 466, 469 ; of
application of redemption, ii. 150; of the
perseverance of the saints, 283.
Ascension of Christ, ii. 111. See Christ.
Assurance, whether it is of the essence of
faith, ii. 181. 207 ; attainable in the pre
sent life, 183. ,
Atheism, forbidden by the first command
ment, ii. 524.
Atonement, a doctrine of revelation, r. 93 ;
idea of sacrificial, prevalent among the
heathen, ii. 63 ; sacrifices for, part of the
Jewish worship, 65 ; atonement of Christ.
See Christ, death of.
Attributes of God, division into commu
nicable and incommunicable, i. 208. See
God.
Authentic, when a book is said to be,
i. 34.
Authenticity of the Scriptures. See Scrip
tures.
Autographs of the sacred writings lost,
i. 122.
Balaam's Ass, objections to the story of,
i. 104.
Baptism, sacrament of, the rite of admis
sion into the church, ii. 373 ; difference
between baptism of John and of Christ,
373 ; application of water necessary, 374 ;
popish additions, 374 ; mode of applying
the symbol, 374 ; who may be baptized,
378 ; infant baptism vindicated, 379 ;
benefits resulting from it, 392 ; adminis
tered in the name of the Trinity, 382 ;
meaning and import of the words used,
383 ; who may administer, 384 ; baptism
by laymen, 385 ; by heretics, 386 ; does
not confer regeneration, 385 ; place for
administering, 386 ; sponsors, 387 ; bles
sings signified, 387 ; duties of the bap
tized, 390 ; only administered once, 391 ;
an indispensable qualification for church
membership, 458.
Barnabas, quotations from the gospels in
the epistles of, i. 54 ; notices ofthe other
books, 56. 559

560

INDEX OF MATTER.

Believers, privileges of, ii. 184 ; the law
a rule of life to them, 345 ; they only
have a right to the sacraments, 359. See
Saints.
Beza, his edition of the New Testament,
i. 126.
Bishop, duty of, in episcopal form of go
vernment, ii. 469 ; bishop and presbyter
convertible terms, 471 ; office in primitive
times, 473.
Birth of our Saviour, ii. 92.
Blasphemy, forbidden, ii. 533.
Body, heathen philosophers had no idea of
the resurrection of, i. 95 ; marks of design
in the human body, i. 165 ; state of it
after death, ii. 311 ; resurrection of it,
312 ; identity of it in the resurrection,
315; nature of the glorified body, 319.
Bucer, his opinions respecting the eucha
rist, ii. 411.
Calvin, his opinions respecting the eucha
rist, ii. 412.
Catalogues, ancient, of books of New Tes
tament, i. 57.
Canon of Scripture. . See Scriptures.
Cause, final, what it'is, i. 220.
Ceremonial law, objections to it considered,
i. 107 ; its design, 144.
Ceremonies, decreed by human authority,
not binding, ii. 269 ; power of the church
to enact, 508.
Cerinthus, his heresy, and evidence by
him of the genuineness of the Scriptures,
i. 57.
Chastity enjoined by the seventh com
mandment, ii. 546.
Children, early depravity of, a proof of
original sin, i. 485; their duties to pa
rents, ii. 539. See Infants.
Christ, appearance of, why delayed for
four thousand years, i. 149 ; duration of
his ministry, 149 ; nature of his sonship,
301 ; considered as a party to the cove
nant of grace, 493 ; dispensation of grace
committed to him, 512, 513 ; his qualifi
cation for the office of Mediator. See
Mediator. Proof that he is the Messiah,
ii. 10. See Messiah. Meaning and allu
sion of the term Christ, or the anointed
one, 26; when was he anointed, 26;
office to which he was anointed, 27;
necessity for his being prophet, priest,
and king, 28 ; their respective provinces,
and mutual relations, 28; his righteous
ness the ground of the sinners' justifica
tion, 191—214 ; his mediation the meri
torious cause of adoption, 227 ; did he
purchase temporal blessings for his peo
ple ? 231 ; in what sense sanctification is
his work, 243 ; his is the pattern of sanc
tification, 246; spiritual joy arises from
an interest jn him, 277; his mediation
secures the perseverance of the saints,
287.
 Ascension of, nature in which he as
cended, ii. 112; place to which, 113; the

witnesses, 114; other circumstances,
115.
Christ, Death of, was a propitiatory sacri
fice, ii. 57 ; Socinian view of it, 58 ; mid
dle scheme, 61 ; proof of the catholic
doctrine of, .63; import of the language
of Scripture respecting it, 66 ; correspond
ence with the atoning sacrifices of the
Levitical law, 68 ; it is a part of his hu
miliation, 98 ; extent of its benefits, 555.
 Divinity of, i. 306 ; importance of
the doctrine, and ground of it, 307 ; lan
guage of scripture respecting it, 309 ; his
pre-existence, 311; various proofs and ar
guments for his divinity, 314 — 337; ob
jections to it considered, 337 — 340.
• Exaltation of, his resurrection, ii.

101 ; his ascension, 111 ; his sitting down
at the right hand of God, and what this
implies, 115 ; his judging the world, 121 ;
the kingdom conferred on him, 131.
Humiliation of, ii. 91 ; distinction

between it, and his condescension, 91 ;
steps of it, his birth, 92 ; the meanness
of his condition, 92; the place of his
birth, 93 ; his subjection to the law, 93 ;
events of his life, 94 ; his sufferings, 96 ;
the wrath of God which he endured, 96 ;
his death on the cross, 97 ; his burial, 98 ;
opinion respecting his descent into hell,
99. ¦ Intercession of, what it means, ii.

80 ; place where carried on, 81 ; objects o;'
it, 82 ; mode of it, prayer, 83 ; subject-
matter of, 85 ; difference between it and
the intercession of the Holy Spirit, 87 ;
was typified under the Jewish economy,
88 ; cause or reason for it, 88 ; Christ the
only intercessor, 89.
Judging the world, ii. 121. See

General Judgment.
Kingdom conferred on, ii. 131 ; dis

tinguished from his natural kingdom,
132; in what nature he administers it,
133 ; its universality, 134 ; view of it in
reference to the church, 135; he reigns
in the kingdom of glory, 140 ; its dura
tion, 140 ; what is meant by Christ's de
livering up the kingdom to hisFather,141 .
. Person of, ii. 15 ; his human nature,

16; its integrity and sinlessness, 17
from whence this sinlessness proceeded,
7; reason for his assuming human na
ture, 17 ; constitution of his person as
God and man, 19 ; heresies respecting it,
20 ; effects of the hypostatical union, 23 ;
is his human nature the object of wor
ship1? 24.
- Priestly office of, ii. 46 ; necessity

of his holding it, 47 ; his call to, and in
vestiture with it, 49 ; duties of the office,
and general observations on his execution
of them, 49 ; Socinian heresy respecting
his sacrifice, 50 ; his similitude to Mel-
chisedek explained, 51 ; his pre-eminence
as a priest, over all others, 53.
 Prophetical office of, ii. 26 ; his ex-

INDEX OF MATTER.

561

ercise of it from the fall to his birth, 30 ;
during his life on earth, 30 ; from his as
cension to the end of the world, 32 ; view
of his instructions as a prophet, 34 ; his
superiority to all other teachers, 37;
agency of the Holy Spirit in the execu
tion of his prophetical office, 42.
CHRiST,.ffest«T6cfconof, preliminary remarks
respecting the possibility and necessity,
ii. 102 ; he was raised by the power of
God, 103 ; time of it, 103 ; evidence in
proof of it, 104 ; objections considered,
109 ; connexion with the resurrection of
saints, 318.
 Substitution of, in the room of sin
ners, ii. 68 ; various passages to prove
it, 69 ; objection considered that he did
not suffer actually the same punishment
to which men are liable, 73 ; correct
meaning of a satisfaction for sin, 74 ; ob
jections against the doctrine considered,
77. Union of believers to, ii. 164. See

Union. Effected by justifying faith, 178
Christianity, alone has pretensions to be
a Divine Revelation, i. 34; truth of, proved
by miracles, 68 ; prophecy, 77 ; success
of the Gospel, 83, 84 ; internal evidences,
89.
Church, view of Christ's kingdom in re
ference to the, ii. 135 ; how founded, 135 ;
its form and order prescribed by him,
136; his authority in it is exclusive of
that of man, 136; alliance with the state,
136. 455 ; upheld by Christ, 137 ; de
fended by him, 138; different meanings
of the term, 454 ; the visible, 456 ; the
invisible, 457 ; distinction of militant and
triumphant, 457 ; design of the church,
458 ; qualifications for membership, 458 ;
its unity, 461 ; its universality and per
petuity, 461, 462 ; its infallibility, 462 ;
nature of schism, 463 ; when is separation
justifiable, 464 ; the term in New Testa
ment includes more than one congrega
tion, 478 ; church of Jerusalem, its ex
tent, 479 ; constitution of a church, 484 ;
its independence, 503 ; its relation to the
state, 504. 510.
 Government of the, ii. 465 ; Popish
form, 466; Episcopal form, 469; Inde
pendent and Presbyterian forms examin
ed, 477 ; power of a church to enact a
form, 507.
 Power does not flow from the peo
ple, ii. 483 ; opinions of Dr. Owen, 485 ;
subordination of courts, 488 ; Potestas
toyixamm, 504 ; in reference to the Scrip
tures, 505 ; to creeds, 506 ; Potestas or-
dinans or JiaraxrrMH, 507 ; cannot establish
any form of government, 507 ; or make
laws to regulate moral conduct, 507 ; nor
enact rites and ceremonies, 508 ; it ex
tends to matters of mere external order,
509 ; Potestas, judicialis, or Siaxqnuw,
510; extent of this power, over whom it
extends, and its objects, 511, 512.
Vol. II.— 71

Church Rulers, their power does not flow
from the people, ii. 483; account of,
492 ; extraordinary apostles, 493 ; pro
phets, 494 ; evangelists, 494 ; ordinary
pastors, 496 ; teachers or doctors, 497 ;
deacons, 498 ; ruling elders and warrant
for them, 499 ; their duties, 499 ; power
with which rulers are invested, 502. See
Church Power.
Censures, church, ii. 511.
Circumcision, a sacrament under the Mo
saic dispensation, ii. 363 ; its origin, form,
and import, 364 ; was temporary, and is
now abolished, 365; superseded by the
Christian sacrament of baptism, 368.
Clark, Dr. consideration of his argument,
a priori, for the existence of God, i. 159.
Clement, quotations of the New Testa
ment, in his writings, i. 54 ; proof afford
ed by them for Episcopacy, ii. 475.
Coincidences in Scripture, a proof of their
genuineness, i. 62.
Commandments, the Ten, ii. 513 ; the sum
of them, 517 ; reason for the division of
them into two tables, 523 ; statement of
the sins forbidden, and duties enjoined in
the first, 524 ; the second, 527 ; the third,
531; the fourth, 534; the fifth, 539;
the sixth, 542; the seventh, 544; the
eighth, 546; the ninth, 549; tenth, 552.
Complutensian edition of the New Testa
ment, i, 126.
Concomitance, Roman Catholic doctrine
of, ii. 407.
Concupiscence, whether of the nature of a
sin, ii. 552.
Condition of a covenant defined, i. 455.
See Covenant. Of the covenant of works,
463 ; of the covenant of grace, 500.
Conditional, the decrees of God are, i. 203.
356.
Confession, Popish doctrine of, ii. 369 ; a
part of prayer, 425.
Confessions of Faith, use of, ii. 459 ; power
of the church to enact, 506 ; authority of,
506.
Confirmation, not a sacrament, ii. 368 ;
remarks on as observed by the church of
England, 369.
Conscience, bears testimony to the justice
of God, i. 260 ; import and nature of, ii.
262 ; office of, 264 ; its fallibility, 365 ;
not its own rule, 265 ; power of supe
riors over, 266 ; the will of God the rule,
267; how this rule was known to the
heathen, 268 ; only rule to Christians is
the word of God, 268 ; authority of an
erring, 270 ; God alone the Lord of the,
271 ; different states in which it may
exist, 273 ; distinctions into an antece
dent and consequent, 272; enlightened
and erring, 272 ; firm, and assured, and
doubting, 273 ; timid and delicate, 273 ;
awakened and hardened, 274; good and
bad, 274 ; operations of, prove the immor
tality of the soul, 299.
Conscience, peace ®f, distinguished from

562

INDEX OF MATTER.

mere security, ii. 275 ; founded on peace
with God, 276 ; connected with privilege
of sanctification, 276 ; produces spiritual
joy, 277 ; obtained by the Gospel, 340.
Consubstantiation, some remarks on, ii.
23 ; Lutheran doctrine of, 408 ; objections
to, 409.
Contentment, duty of, ii. 553.
Contradictions, objections to Scripture,
founded on alleged, i. 107 ; remarks for
explaining apparent, 108.
Conversion, the effect of divine grace. See
Regeneration.
Countenance, variety in human, an argu
ment for providence, i. 424.
Covenant, definition of a, i. 455.
¦  of Grace, i. 488 ; fact of its exist
ence, 490 ; the parties to it, 491 ; charac
ter sustained by the Father in it, 492 ;
character sustained by the Son in it, 493
— 497; distinction between it and the
covenant of redemption, 496 ; remarks on
the Son's engagement to perform the
conditions, 500 ; perfect obedience a part
of the conditions, 502 ; and satisfaction
for the sins of his people, 504 ; promises
of it as they respect Christ himself, 506 ;
as they respect the elect, 507. Adminis
tration of, 512 ; how we may know if we
are interested in, 519. See Grace, Me
diator.
—L  of Works, definition of, i. 455.

scriptural evidences for it, 456. Parties,
457 ; character in which God stood, 457 ;
character in which Adam stood, 459 ; he
was the federal head of the human race,
459 ; may be inferred from the effects of
his sin on his posterity, 461 ; condition of
it was obedience, 463 ; its extent, 464 ;
penalty of temporal death, 465 ; including
the sufferings of this life, 467 ; spiritual
death, 469 ; eternal death, 471 ; penalty
still in force against all under it, 477 ;
promise implied in it, 473 ; seals of it,
474 ; inquiry how far it still subsists,
477 ; covenant form abolished, 477 ; ef
fects of the breach of it on Adam's pos
terity, 478 ; scripture proof for the doc
trine of original sin, 482 ; other proofs of
it, 484.
Coveting forbidden by the tenth command
ment, ii. 553.
CREATioN,heathen had no proper idea of, i.18.
91. 378 ; not opposed to the immutability
of God, 205 ; proof that it affords of the
excellence of God, 385 ; of the wisdom
of God, 220 ; of his power, 234 ; of his
goodness, 241 ; ascribed to Christ, 325 ;
and to the Spirit, 346 ; what it properly
is, 376 ; arguments to prove the creation
of the world, 377 ; illustration and de
fence of the Mosaic account, 380 ; date of
it, 382 ; time occupied in it, 384 ; design
of God in it, 386.
.  of Angels, when it took place,
387. See Angels.
Creation of Man, 406 ; Mosaic account,

407; pattern after which he was made
409 ; in what the image of God consisted
409 ; spiritually of his soul, 410 ; author
ity with which he was invested, 410 ;
qualities of his soul, 410 ; his knowledge,
410 ; his original righteousness, 412 ; bis
happiness, 414.
Creed, the apostles', ii. 99.
Creeds, use of, ii. 459 ; church's power to
enact, 506 ; authority of, 506.
Deacons, duty of, in the Episcopal form of
government, ii. 469; they are ordinary
rulers in the chureh, 498.
Death, temporal, the penalty of sin, i. 465 ;
spiritual, in what it consists, 469 ; was
included in the penalty denounced against
Adam, 469 ; eternal also included, 471 ;
in what it consists, 471 ; . reason why
death befalls saints, ii. 292 ; whether it
is necessary for the sanctification of the
'soul, 294 ; its effects on saints, 295 ; de
scribed as a sleep, 296 ; survival of the
soul after it, 297 ; doctrine of an interme
diate state after it, 305 ; of the sleep of
the soul after it, 306 ; of purgatory, 308 ;
state ofthe body after it, 311.
of Christ, an atonement for sin, ii.

56 ; extent of its benefits, 555.
Decalogue, the, ii. 513. See Command-
ments.
Decrees of God are immutable, i. 202;
difficulty of reconciling them with the
free agency and accountableness of man,
203 ; definition of, 350 ; connexion with
the knowledge of God, 351 ; nature of
them, 352 ; objects of them, 353 ; proper
ties of them, 354 ; are eternal, 354 ; wise,
354 ; free, 355 ; absolute and uncondition
al, 356 ; this is not inconsistent with hu
man responsibility, 357. See Predesti
nation, Election, Reprobation.
Defence, self, right of, ii. 543.
Deluge, objections to the history of, i. 105.
Demoniacs, i. 402.
Depravity of mankind a proof of original
sin, i. 484.
Design, marks of, in the universe, a proof of
the existence of God, i. 164; in the hu
man body, 165 ; in the bodies of animals,
166; in the vegetable creation, 167 ; in
the planetary system, 168 ; in the surface
of the earth, 168 ; unity of exhibited in
the works of creation, 178.
Devils. See Fallen Angels.
Didactic theology, what it is, i. 10.
Difficulties may be expected in a divine
revelation, i. 32.
Discipline, power of the church concern
ing, ii. 510 ; in primitive churches, 511 ;
over whom power extends, 511.
Discrepancies of the Gospels, a proof of
their genuineness, i. 62.
Dishonesty, ii. 547.
Dispensation of grace. See Grace. Of re
ligion under the Old Testament, i. 138 ;
under the New Testament, i. 148 ; old.

INDEX OF MATTER.

abrogated, 152; characteristics of the
Christian, 150 ; universality of the Chris
tian, 155.
Divinity of Christ, i. 306 ; of the Holy
Ghost, 341. See Holy Ghost.
Divorce, grounds of, ii. 545.
Docet-e, their heresy respecting Christ's
human nature, ii. 16.
Doctor, or teacher, office of, in the primi
tive church, ii. 497.
Dualism, or the doctrine of two principles,
i. 184.
Ebionites, proof they afford of the books of
New Testament, i. 57.
Editions, different of the New Testament,
i. 126.
Effectual, calling the work of the Holy
Spirit, ii. 154. See Regeneration.
Elders, ruling, ordinary office bearers in
the church, u. 498 ; their duties, 499.
Elect, the object of Christ's intercession,
ii. 82.
Election, divine decree of, i. 362 ; was
made from eternity, 362 ; did not proceed
on the ground of foreseen qualifications in
its subjects, 363 ; they are immutable,
365 ; connexion with the mediation of
Christ, 366 ; not the rule of human con
duct, 366 ; impossibility of the total fall
of saints from grace, inferred from,ii. 284.
Elevation, degree of inspiration called, i.
115; objections to the term, 117.
Elzevir, his edition of the New Testament,
i. 127.
England, church of, practice of confirma
tion, ii. 369 ; liturgy seems to counte
nance the doctrine of regeneration in bap
tism, 385 ; use of sponsors in baptism,
387 ; practice of kneeling at the Lord's
supper, 418 ; liturgy, 440 ; form of go
vernment, 469 ; ceremonies, 508.
Enoch, state of religion in his days, i. 141.
Enos, state of religion in his days, i. 140.
Episcopal form of government, ii. 469 ; du
ties of the several orders, 469 ; difference
from Presbytery, 469 ; arguments for it,
469 ; Christian antiquity of this form con
sidered, 473 ; explanation of the renuncia
tion of, in the solemn league and cove
nant, 477.
Erasmus, his edition of the New Testa
ment, i. 126.
Erastianism, in what it consists, ii. 503.
510.
Eternal death, a penalty of the covenant
of works, i. 471.
 ¦ Lfe, comprehends all the bless
ings promised to believers, i. 508.
Eternity, scholastic divisions of, i. 172 ;
of the divine decrees, 354 ; of election,
362.
 of God, 172; definition, 173 ; as
cribed to Christ, 320 ; to the Holy Spirit,
345.
Eocharist, the. See the Lord's Supper.
Eusebius, his testimony to the genuineness

of Scripture, i. 54 ;
books, 57.

563
his catalogue of the

Eutyches, his heresy respecting the consti
tution of Christ's person, ii. 21.
Evangelists were extraordinary rulers in
the primitive church, ii. 494. , .
Evidences of Christianity, i. 33 — 110. See
Christianity.
Evil. Revelation gives the only satisfactory
account of the origin of moral and physi
cal evil, i. 91 ; origin of moral evil,
452.
Exaltation, Christ's state of, ii. 100. See
Christ.
Existence of God, a primary article of na
tural religion, i. 16. 158; belief of natural
to man, and almost universal, 158 ; a pri
ori argument for it considered, 159 ; Bi
shop Stillingfleet's argument,derived from
the idea of God, 160; several arguments
for his existence, 160 — 172 ; reflections
of this subject, 171.
Faith, demanded by revelation, i. 32 ; an
alogy of, an aid in interpreting Scripture,
132 ; considered as the condition of the
covenant of grace, 497 ; it is the bond of
union with Christ, ii. 167; it is a fruit
of regeneration, 173 ; different kinds of
faith ; historical, 173 ; temporary, 173 ;
of miracles, 174; saving, 174; objects,
175 ; nature and qualities of saving faith
illustrated, 178.
Justifying,&efmed. and explained, ii.

178 ; is assurance of the essence of faith ?
181 ; does it consist in a persuasion that
Christ died for us in particular, and that
we are pardoned 1 182. 207 ; office of, in
justification, 205 ; whether 'it precedes or
follows justification, 205 ; it is not our
justifying righteousness, 207 ; or the con
dition of justification, 208 ; but the means
or instrument, 208 ; this doctrine well
adapted to promote the glory of divine
grace,209 ; is the gift of God, 210 ; justi
fication by faith not unfavourable to mo
rality, 215 ; it is a means of sanctification,
250 ; to secure spiritual joy, believers must
live by faith, 281 ; profession of it by
adults necessary before baptism, 378 ;
and a necessary qualification for church
membership, 460.
Faithfulness of God. See Truth.
Fall of man, objections to the story of, i.
104 ; Mosaic account of, 450 ; agent con
cerned, 450 ; owing to man's own fault,
452 ; consequences to our first patents,
453; to their posterity, 461. See Cove
nant of Works.
Falsehood, crime of, ii. 551.
Father. See God.
Fathers, their testimony to the genuine
ness of Scripture, i. 54.
Forms of prayer, ii. 439.
Fornication, crime of, ii. 545.
Frauds, pious, ii. 551.
Freedom of human will consistent with

564

INDEX OF MATTER.

decrees of God, i. 203. 357. 373. See
Providence.
Future state, heathen notions of, i. 94 ; su
periority of Christian doctrine, 94.
Genuineness of Scripture, i. 33 — 63. See
Scripture.
Generation, eternal, of the Son, i. 301.
Geology, remarks on, with reference to the
age of the world, i. 383.
Ghost, the Holy. See Holy Ghost.
Gibbon, examination of the five secondary
causes assigned by, for the success of
Christianity, i. 87.
Glory, future, one of the blessings promised
to the elect, in the covenant of grace, i.
509 ; in what it consists, ii. 319. 324.
God, existence of, an article of natural re
ligion, i. 16. 158 ; how far it is demon
strable by reason, 16; notions of heathen
regarding, 17 ; how far our relations to
him as Creator and Governor are discover
able by reason, 18 ; scriptural doctrine of
the unity, and existence of God, an inter
nal evidence of Christianity, 89; explana
tion of representations of Him as corpo
real, and having human passions, 105 ;
existence of God, 158 ; his eternity, 172 ;
his spirituality, 175 ; his unity, 177 ; his
immensity, 187; his immutability, 197 ;
his knowledge, 208 ; his wisdom, 219 ;
his power, 230 ; his goodness, 240 ; his
justice, 251 ; his truth and faithfulness,
264 ; his holiness, 273. See these several
titles. Review of his perfections, 280 ;
he is an incomprehensible being, 280 ; all
sufficient, 281 ; sovereign, 283 ; name of
God ascribed to Christ, 314.
,-  the Father, viewed as a party in the
covenant of works, i. 457 ; in the cove
nant of grace, 491 ; sustains the relation
of a Father by adoption, ii. 229 ; sanctifi
cation his work, 242 ; happiness of intel
ligent creatures depends on him, 278 ; he
is the only proper object of pTayer, 425 ;
connexion between his character and the
duty of prayer, 430 ; first table of the
Law contains our duty to him, 524 ; com
mandments considered in their order, 524 ;
time appointed for his worship, 538.
Goodness of God, i. 240 ; displayed in the
act of creation, 241 ; instances and proofs
of it, 242 ; not inconsistent with the pre
valence of disease and death among ani
mals, 244 ; proved by his dispensations
to man, 245 ; consistent with the exist
ence of physical evil, 246 ; and of moral
evil, 248 ; displayed in redemption, 248.
Gospel, the success, of is a proof of Christi
anity, i. 83 ; was repugnant to the Jews
and Gentiles, 84 ; apparent want of quali
fication of persons employed to publish
it, and its progress, 84, 85 ; its rapid pro
gress cannot be explained on principles
of reason or experience, 86 ; examination
of Gibbon2® five secondary causes of its
*?, .-.-", 87 ; its success a proof of the

power of God, 239 ; different senses of
the term, ii. 336 ; its proper import as
distinguished from the law, 336 ; not a
new law of grace, 337 ; its efficacy as a
means of conversion, 339 ; peace of con
science and consolation is obtained by it,
340; it purifies the heart, 341 ; on preach
ing it, 342.
Government of the church. See Church.
Grace, covenant of. See Covenant.
Dispensation of, i. 512 ; committed

to Christ, 513 ; viewed as a Testament,
513 ; prior to the coming of Christ, 515 ;
how then carried on, 517; how carried
on under the New Testament, 518 ; dis
tinguished by its clearness, 518; design
of it, 519. of God, meaning of the term in

Scripture, ii. 155 ; its effect and mode of
operation in conversion, 156 ; it is mighty
and invincible, 156 ; but consistent with
liberty of will, 157 ; its glory obscured by
the doctrine of justification by works,
198 ; but promoted by the doctrine of jus
tification Dy faith, 209 ; its riches illus
trated by the decree of reprobation, i. 371 ;
external means necessary to all but in
fants, ii. 332 ; Gospel not a new law of
grace, 337 ; its efficacy as a means of
grace, 339 ; sacraments a means of, 352 ;
prayer a means, 423.
Happiness, primeval, of man, i. 414.
Heathen, were sensible of their ignorance
and need of revelation, i. 28 ; had no idea
of a resurrection of the body, ii. 513;
good works of, 258.
Heaven, what the word signifies in differ
ent places, i. 381. ii. 113 ; nature of, 324 ,
employment of the saints, 325 ; felicity
of, 327.
Hell, notion of Christ's descent into, ii.
99.
Heretics, early, evidences of Scripture af
forded by, i. 57^
Hermas, pastor or shepherd of, allusions to
the New Testament in, i. 54. 56.
Holiness, meaning of, in Scripture, i. 274 ; ¦
increase of it implied in sanctification, ii.
238 ; perfected at death, 304.
of God, 273 ; definition of, 274 ;

displayed in the formation of man, 275 ;
in the law given to him, 276 ; in the dis
pensations of Providence, 277 ; in re
demption, 278 ; in the qualifications for
eternal happiness, 279.
Holy Ghost, divinity of, i. 341 ; proofs of
his personality, 342 ; reason of the name
Spirit, 343 ; his divinity proved, from di
vine names given to him, 344; divine
perfections ascribed to him, 345 ; works
which he performs, 346; and religious
worship paid to him, 347 ; his relation to
the other persons of the Godhead, called
his procession, 347 ; difference on this sub
ject between the Eastern and Western
^ churches, 348 ; his agency in the execu-

INDEX OF MATTER.

565

tion of Christ's prophetical office, ii. 42 ;
in what his teaching consists, 43 ; his in
tercession, 87; sanctification his work,
244 ; his inhabitation causes spiritual joy,
278 ; and secures perseverance, 288 ; his
office in sealing believers and giving them
the earnest of their future inheritance,
289 ; his influence must accompany the
means of grace to insure success, 351.
Hope, its influence in producing spiritual
joy, ii. 280.
Human nature of Christ. See Christ.
Humiliation of Christ. See Christ, ii. 91.
Hume, his arguments against miracles, i.
Husbands, their duties to their wives, ii.
540.
Ignatius, notice of the books of the New
Testament in his writings, i. 55 ; proof
furnished by his writings for episcopacy,
ii. 476.
Images, worship of, unlawful, ii. 528 ; mak
ing of them not forbidden, 527 ; of God
condemned, 527.
Immateriality of the soul, a proof of its
immortality, ii. 297.
Immensity of God, i. 187 ; denied by some,
188; definition of, 189; distinguished
from omnipresence, 189 ; proofs ofit, 190;
distinguished from infinite extension,193;
unwarrantable speculations concerning
it, 194 ; presence of God with his crea
tures, 194 ; doctrine reconciled with pas-
1 sages which represent God, as peculiarly
present in particular places, 195 ; reflec
tions from the doctrine, 196.
Immortality of the soul, result of the in
quiries of reason with respect to the, i.
20 ; doctrine of does not account for the
spread of Christianity, 88 ; proofs of it,
ii. 297.
Immutability of God, i. 197 ; proofs of it,
198; he is immutable in his existence,
200 ; in his knowledge, 201 ; in his coun
sels, or decrees, 202. 365 ; and in his
moral perfections, 203 ; necessary to the
support of religion, 204 ; consistent with
consummate felicity, 204 ; objections con
sidered, 205 ; reflections on the use of
this doctrine, 207; incarnation, not op
posed to it, 205 ; nor the substitution of
Christ, ii. 79 ; ascribed to Christ, i. 324.
Imputation of Adam's sin on his posterity,
i. 478 ; of Christ's righteousness in justi
fication, ii. 199 ; it is the act of a Judge,
201 ; founded on union to Christ, 201.
Incarnation, objection to revelation, on ac
count of the doctrine of, i. 103; not at
variance with the immutability of God,
205. See Christ.
Incest, crime of, ii. 546.
Incomprehensibleness of God, i. 280.
Independent form of government, ii. 477 ;
examination of the arguments for, 478 —
491 ; objections to the system, 491. See
Church Rulers.

Infallibility of the Church, ii. 462.
Infants, death of, a proof of the imputa
tion of Adam's sin, i. 479 ; early appeai-
ance of depravity in them, a proof ot
original sin, 485 ; their regeneration, tho
immediate effect of the Holy Spirit with
out external means, ii. 149. 333 ; infant
baptism vindicated, 378 ; benefits result
ing from it, 392.
Inspiration, claimed by the sacred writers,
i. Ill ; different opinions respecting it,
114; plenary inspiration, 113; degrees
of inspiration, 114; superintendence, 115;
elevation, 116 ; suggestion or revelation,
117; in what sense the Scriptures are the
Word of God, 118; whether it extends
to the language, 119.
Inspired men, character of, i. 120 ; mode
by which they were inspired, 121 ; pecu
liar privilege of Moses, 121.
Intercession, peculiar duty of a priest, ii.
51 ; Christ's intercession. See Christ.
Ofthe Holy Spirit, ii. 87 ; of saints, 88.
Intermediate state of the soul after death,
doctrine of, ii. 305,
Interpretation of Scripture, rules for, i.
130.
1ren.s:us, notices of the New Testament in
the writings of, i. 55; proof furnished by
his writings for episcopacy, ii. 476.
James, doctrine in epistle of, reconciled
with that of Paul, i. 131 ; ii. 212.
Jehovah, name of, given. to Christ, i. 317.
Jerome, proof furnished by his writings for
episcopacy, ii. 476.
Jerusalem, extent of the church at Jerusa
lem in the apostles' days, and argument
it affords for Presbytery, ii. 479 ; argu
ment derived from the account of the
council of, 488.
John the Baptist, account of his ministry,
i. 148.
Jonah, objections to the story of, i. 105.
Joy. See Spiritual Joy.
Judgment, the general, will exhibit the
justice of God, l. 263 ; ascribed to Christ,
328 ; a doctrine of revelation, ii. 121 ;
reasons for it, 121 ; time, 123; duration,
124; place, 125; the parties, 125; the
Judge and his fitness, 126 ; circumstances
attending it, 127 ; standards of judgment,
128 ; the sentences, 130 ; their execution,
130 ; final judgment of the saints, 321 ;
purpose for which their good works are
mentioned, 322 ; whether their sins will
be mentioned, 322; their acquittal and
entrance into heaven, 323.
Judicial law, given to the Israelites, i. 143.
Justice of God, i. 251 ; distinguished into
absolute, 252 ; relative, 254 ; avenging
justice, 257 ; testimony borne to this at
tribute by conscience, 260 ; by the dis -
pensations of providence, 261 ; and re
demption, 262. 493; it will be openly
manifested at the end of time, 263 ; de
cree of reprobation gives an impressive
3 B

566

INDEX OF MATTER.

view of it, 371 ; rendered the priesthood
of Christ necessary, ii. 48 , doctrine of
his substitution not repugnant to it, 77.
Justification, importance of the doctrine
of, ii. 184 ; meaning of the term, 185 ; its
author and subjects, 186 ; what it im
plies, 187 ; ground of it, 191 ; not the
wprks of the law, 191 ; nor repentance,
195 ; nor sincere obedience, 195 ; but
solely the righteousness of Christ, 199 ;
remarks on the imputation of his right
eousness, 200 ; office of faith in justifica
tion, 205 ; relation which repentance
bears to it, 210; and which good works
bear, 210; doctrines of Paul and James
reconciled, 212; objection that the doc
trine is injurious to morality considered,
215 ; it supplies the most powerful mo
tives to holiness, and against sin, 220 ;
this confirmed by experience, 222 ; dif
ference from sanctification, 234 ; peace of
conscience founded on it, 276.
Killing, in self defence, ii. 543.
Kingdom of Christ, ii. 131. See Christ.
Knowledge of God, i. 208 ; proofs that it is
one of his attributes, 210 ; extent of it,
211 ; distinction of scientia simplicis Intel-
ligenlise, and scientia visionis, 215. 351 ;
scientia media, 216. 351 ; its qualities,
216 — 218 ; reflections, 218 ; connexion
with the decrees of God, 351.
 of Man, possessed at his creation,
i. 410; knowledge acquired by the teach
ing of the, Holy Ghost, ii. 44 ; degree of,
necessary for salvation, 45; knowledge
possessed by the saints in heaven, 327 ;
necessary for church members and the
degree ofit, 459.
Tree of, good and evil, command

regarding it, i. 448 ; whether it was a seal
of the covenant, 450.
Koran, character of the, i. 33.
Language, whether inspiration extends to,
i. 119 ; objection to inspiration, on the ac
count of difference of style, 120.
Languages, acquaintance with original, a
prerequisite for study of the Scriptures,
l. 129; in which the Scriptures were
written, 129.
Law, the ceremonial, objections to it con
sidered, i. 107; exhibits the justice of
God, 255 ; correspondence between its
atoning sacrifices and the death of Christ,
ii. 68.
[ — the moral, excellence of it, i. 95 ; ex
hibits the justice of God, 255 ; and holi
ness of God, 276 ; how far it retains its
authority, notwithstanding the breach of
the covenant of works, 476 ; it was not
corrected and perfected by Jesus Christ,
ii. 31 ; is one ofthe principal parts ofthe
word of God, 344 ; its requirements so
high that no sinner can be justified by it,
191 ; these not lowered in the dispensa
tion of grace, 195 ; nor a new law less

rigorously enacted, 196 ; the law as distin
guished from the gospel, 335. 344; its
use in awakening sinners, 344 ; and as a
rule of life to Believers, 345 ; its con
nexion with the gospel as a rule, 347 ;
when first given, 513 ;. rules for interpret
ing it, 518 ; it is of universal obligation,
521 ; and perpetual, 522.
Learning, a competent share of, a necessary
qualification for a student of theology,
i. 13.
Liberty, human, consistent with the divine
decrees, i. 357; consistent with the power
of divine grace, in the conversion of sin
ners, ii. 157.
Lies, different kinds of, ii. 551.
Life, tree of, was it a seal of the covenant
of works, i. 475 ; ii. 356.
Liturgy of the church of England, ii. 440.
Lord's Prayer. See Prayer.
Supper, a mean of sanctification,

ii. 249 ; institution and primitive simpli
city of the rite, 392 ; its gradual corrup
tion, 393 ; transubstantiation, 394 ; mean
ing of the words of the institution, 396 ;
Lutheran opinion of consubstantiation,
408 ; opinions of other reformers, 410 ;
its true nature, 413 ; in what sense Christ
is present, 414 ; observations on the time
of the institution and the symbols, 415;
mode of administering it, 417; what the
partaking of it implies, 419 ; who may
partake of it, 420 ; now often it should be
administered, 422.
Love of God, the promises of the covenant
of grace originated in it, i. 510; good
works must proceed from love to God
ii. 256; it is the sum of the decalogue
518.
Lutheran doctrine of consubstantiation,
ii. 408.
Magicians of Egypt, their enchantments,
i. 70.
Magistrate has no power over the con
science, ii. 271 ; inconsistency of the
Westminster confession on this point,
272.
Mahomet, character of his religion, i. 33 ;
success of it accounted for, 84.
Man, creation of, i. 406. See Creation.
Pattern after which he was made, 407 ;
his original likeness to the image of God,
409 ; happiness of his primeval state, 414;
how long he retained his innocence, 414 ;
was created fallible, 446 ; was placed
under a law, 448 ; fall of man, 450. See
Fall. Duties he owes to God, ii. 524;
to his fellow man, 539. See Command
ments.
Mankind, universal depravity of, a proof of
original sin, i. 485.
Marcion, the heretic,proves the early exist
ence of the Gospels, i. 57.
Marriage, the pop'ish sacrament of, ii. 371 ;
marriage is an ordinance of God, 544;
nature and duties of, 545.

INDEX OF MATTER.

567

Macknight, character of his commentary,
ii. 50. 145, 146. 315.
Mass, the. See Transubstantiation.
MSS. of the Scriptures existing, i. 122;
causes of various readings in them, 123 ;
classes of them, 124 ; sources of various
readings in them, 125.
Material universe, existence of, a proof of
the existence of God, i. 162.
Means of grace, the word of God, ii. 332 ;
the sacraments, 352 ; prayer, 423. See
these several titles.
Mediation of Christ, its connexion with
the decree of election, i. 366; the effect
of it, 527 ; whether temporal blessings
were purchased by it, ii. 230 ; it secures
the perseverance of the saints, 286.
Mediator of the covenant of grace, i. 496 ;
none necessary in the covenant of works,
520 ; necessary since the introduction of
sin, 521 ; observations on the office, 521,
522 ; qualifications of Christ for the office,
522 ; peace established between God and
man, by a mediator, 527 ; in what nature
Christ is mediator, 528 ; he is not a me
diator of angels, 529 ; commencement of
his office, 530 ; duration of it, 532, ii. 140 ;
offices which it includes, 26 — 29 ; king
dom conferred on him, 131. See Christ,
Messiah.
Melchizedek, similitude between our Sa
viour and, ii. 51, 52.
Members, ch jch, qualifications of, ii. 458 ;
duties towards the rulers, 542.
Messiah, his character different from what
the Jews expected, i. 66 ; prophecies re
specting him, and their fulfilment, 82 ;
opinion of the Jews regarding, 82 ; pre
dictions of, prior to the appearance of
Christ, ii. 7, 8 ; their import, 9 ; proof
that Christ is the Messiah, 10 ; from the
time of his appearance, 10; his charac
ter, 12; his wonderful works, 13; the
success of his religion, 14»
Methodists, doctrine of, as to sinless per
fection being attainable in this life, ii.
241.
Middle scheme of the death of Christ,
ii. 61.
Ministers. See Pastors.
Miracles, definition of, i. 69 ; are possible,
and afford a proof of revelation, 25. 69.
75 ; they are the work of God, 26. 70 ;
the miracles of Apollonius of Tyanna, 43;
definition of, 69 ; power of evil spirits to
work them, 70 ; Hume's argument against
them considered, 72 ; they are natural ac
companiments of a revelation, 73 ; and
necessary, 73 ; miracles of Vespasian, 74 ;
Popish miracles, 74 ; rules for distin
guishing the true from the false, 74 ;
whether they alone are sufficient to prove
the truth of a doctrine, 75 ; ascribed to
the Holy Spirit, 346 ; the faith of mira
cles, ii. 174.
Moral Evil, how existence of it is recon
cilable with the holiness, justice, and

goodness of God, i. 185. 228 ; origin of,
452.
Moral Law. See Law.
Morals, heathen notices of, i. 19 ; excel
lence of Christian, 95 ; doctrine of justifi
cation by faith not contrary to morals, ii.
315. See Good Works. Church has no
power to enact rules of moral conduct, ii.
507 ; state of heathen morals accounted
for, 514 ; insufficiency of reason to dis
cover true morality, 514 ; the rule of mo
ral action, 51(6.
Moses, books of, genuineness of, i. 35 ;
caviis of infidel writers, regarding them,
37 ; opinions of Father Simon and Le
Clerc, 37 ; their authenticity, 64 ; he ex-
Celled all heathen philosophers, 90 ; his
peculiar privilege, 121 ; character of his
institutions, 143 ; his account of the crea
tion illustrated and defended, 378 ; of
creation of man, 406.
Murder forbidden, ii. 542.
Mysteries might be expected in a revela
tion, i. 32 ; objection made to revelation
on account of them, 101 ; was a name
given to the sacraments, ii. 353.
Name of God, what is meant by, ii. 446.
531 ; on taking it in vain, 532.
Natural theology, articles of, i. 9 ; how
far they are discoverable by reason, 15. ,
Nature, laws of, what they are, i. 421. 1
New Testament, account of the books, i
43 — 53 ; quotations from or references to
in the early writers, 54 ; catalogues of
books, 57; inspiration of, 110; various
editions, 126 ; New Testament dispensa
tion, 147. 518.
Nestorius, his heresy respecting the con
stitution of Christ's person, ii. 20.
Oaths, whether they are lawful, ii. 531.
Obedience, the condition of the covenant of
works, i. 463; its extent, 463; perfect
obedience of Christ, a condition of the
covenant of grace, 499 ; how it availed
sinners, 500; it constitutes his righteous
ness, 506.
Obligation, moral law is of universal, 521.
Offices of Christ. See Christ, Mediator.
Old Testament, notices of the books of, i.
35 — 41 ; inspiration of, 111 ; the dispensa
tion of the Old Testament, 138. 515. See
Scriptures.
Omnipresence of God, i. 194 ; ascribed to
Christ, 321 ; ascribed to the Holy Spirit,
345. See Immensity.
Oracles, character of the heathen, i. 78.
Orders, Roman Catholic sacrament of, ii.
370.
Ordinances of Christ, a means of sanctifi
cation, ii. 249.
Original righteousness, in what it consist
ed, i. 413. Sin, consequence of Adam's

transgression, i. 478 ; scripture proofs foi
the doctrine, 479 ; from the necessity of j

568

INDEX OF MATTER.

regeneration, 484; early depravity of
children, 485; universal depravity of
mankind, 485.
Paradise, held by some to be a seal of the
covenant of works, i. 474. ii. 356.
Pardon, promised to the elect in the cove
nant of grace, i. 508. See Christ's Death
and Substitution. Doctrine of universal
pardon considered, ii. 556. Appendix.
Parents, duties of, to children, ii. 539.
Particularity of Scripture a proof of its
genuineness, i. 61.
Passover, a seal of the covenant, ii. 365 ;
its significancy, 366 ; superseded by the
Christian sacraments, 368.
Pastor, an ordinary ruler in the church, ii.
496 ; their duties, 496.
Patriarchal times, state of religion in, i.
142. S
Paul, doctrine of, as to justification by faith
reconciled with that of James, i. 131; ii.
212.
Peace of conscience, ii. 275. See Con
science.
PELAGiANS,their doctrine concerning Adam's
being the federal head of his posterity, i.
460 ; respecting the penalty in the cove
nant of works, 466. 469 ; respecting the
application of redemption, ii. 149. 155.
Penance, Roman Catholic sacramenl of, >;.
369.
Penances, absurdity of them, ii. 254.
Perfection, not attainable in this life, ii.
241.
Perjury, crime of, ii. 532.
Perseverance of the saints, ii. 282 ; differ
ent opinions respecting, 283 ; total fall of
saints impossible, 284; arguments for the
doctrine of perseverance, 284 ; examina
tion of texts alleged against it, 289 ; not
unfavourable to holiness, 292.
Person, meaning of the term as applied to
the Trinity ,i. 297 ; constitution of Christ's
person. See Christ.
Personality ofthe Spirit proved, i. 341.
Peter, alleged supremacy of, ii. 466 ; no
proof that he was bishop of Rome, 468.
Physical evil, how the existence of is re
conciled with the goodness of God, i.
248.
Piety necessary in a student of theology,
i. 12.
Pilgrimages, absurdity of, ii. 254.
Plenary inspiration, i. 113.
Plurality of Gods impossible, i. 182.
Polemic theology, what it is, i. 10.
Popery. See Hume, Church of.
Popish form of church government, ii. 466.
Polytheism, origin of, i. 183 ; forbidden by
the first commandment, ii. 525.
Polycarp, quotations in his writings from
the New Testament, i. 55, 56.
Polygamy, remarks on, ii. 544.
Porphyry, writings of, prove the genuine
ness ofthe New Testament, i. 58.
Power of God, i. 230 ; definition of, 231 ;

connexion of cause and effect, 231 ; appa
rent limitations to it, 232 ; proofs of tnis
attribute in creation, 234 ; in providence,
237 ; and in redemption, 238 ; the power
exerted in the conversion of sinners is
invincible, ii. 157 ; ascribed to Christ, i.
324 ; connexion between truth and power,
i. 75.
Power of the church. See Church Power.
Practical theology, what it is, i. 11.
Prayer, a means of sanctification, ii. 249 ;
natural to man, 423 ; definition of, and its
parts, 424 ; object of it, 425 ; should be
founded on the dispensation of grace,
427 ; connexion it has with the character
of God, 428 ; objections to it considered,
430 ; the rule of prayer is the word of
God, 432; blessings to be implored, 433;
for others, 434 ; public, 436 ; private, 436 ;
ejaculatory, 436 ; seasons for prayer, 437 ;
forms, and objections to them, 439 ; ac
ceptable prayer, 440.
, ihe Lord's, ii. 444 ; its use as a form

and pattern, 444; it is not a compilation,
445 ; its parts, 446 ; commentary on it,
446—453.
 Intercessory, of Christ, ii. 83.
• to Saints, absurdity of, ii, f"

Preaching the gospel, in what it consists,
il. 342 ; observations on, 343.
Predestination defined, i. 359 ; supralap-
sarian system, 360; sublapsarian, 360;
Arminian, 361 ; decree of 'election, 362 ;
decree of reprobation, 367 ; practical uti
lity of the doctrine, 370 ; objections to it,
373. See Election, Reprobation.
Prelacy. See Episcopal form of Church
Government.
Priest, office of, ii. 46 ; duties of, 49 ; im
proper designation for ministers of the
gospel,53 ; duty under the Episcopal form
of government, 469.
Priestly office of Christ, ii. 46. See
Christ.
Priesthood, Christ's superiority to the Le-
vitical, ii. 53.
Presbyter, a convertible term with bishop,
ii. 471 ; office in primitive times, 475.
Presbyterian form of government con
sidered along with independency, ii. 477
— 492 ; superiority over the independent
system, 491.
Preservation of all things, a proof of divine
power, i. 426. See Providence.
Privileges of believers, ii. .184; justifica
tion, 185 ; adoption, 224 ; sanctification,
233 ; ability to perform good works, 252 ;
peace of conscience, 262 ; spiritual joy,
277 ; perseverance, 282. See these titles.
Procession of the Spirit, meaning of the
term, i. 299. 347.
Promise, the first, i. 139 ; the promise im
plied in the covenant of works, 473 ; the
promises of the covenant of grace, 506 ;
meaning of the promise in the fifth com
mandment, ii. 542 ; obligation of a pro
mise, 551.

INDEX OF MATTER.

56!)

Promises of God, faithfulness of them, i.
267 ; remarks on as absolute, and condi
tional, 267 ; they are a source of spiritual
joy, ii. 279.
Property, how acquired, ii. 547.
Prophecy, a proof of the truth of revealed
religion, i. 77 ; definition of a prophecy,
77 ; power of evil spirits to predict the
future, 78 ; character of the heathen ora
cles, 78 ; obscurity of prophecy, a proof
of divine wisdom, 79 ; argument from
prophecy, 79 ; consideration of particular
prophecies, 80.
Prophet, office of, ii. 29 ; was an extraordi
nary officer in the primitive church, 494.
Prophetical office of Christ, ii. 29.
Providence, heathens had imperfect notions
regarding, i. 18. 91 ; proofs it affords of
the existence of God, 170 ; of his wis
dom, 225 ; of his power, 237 ; of his
goodness, 245 ; of his justice, 261 ; his
holiness, 277 ; ascribed to Christ, 327 ;
to the Holy Spirit, 346 ; meaning of the
term, 417 ; arguments for the doctrine of,
418 ; objections refuted, 420. 425 ; in
what it is concerned, 427; its concern in
the sinful actions of men, 430 ; distinc
tions of Calvinistic divines, 433; and
language of Scripture on this subject,
437; God's peculiar or gracious provi
dence, 439 ; is there in the dispensations
of providence a revelation of grace? ii.
145 ; dispensations a means of sanctifica
tion, 249.
Purgatory, doctrine of, ii. 308 ; arguments
against it, 310; best argument for it,
311.
Quakers, opinion of as to baptism, ii. 374.
Reading the word, observations on, ii. 349.
Reason, a source of theology, i. 15; defini
tion of it, and how its powers are to be
ascertained, 15, 16; its researches in na
tural Teligion, 16 ; in morality, 17. 19 ;
as to the immortality of the soul, 20 ; al
together fails in discovering the doctrines
oi supernatural theology, 21 ; its proper
office in theology, 22 ; objection to reve
lation on the ground of its sufficiency, 99 ;
revelation contains no doctrine contrary
to reason, 101 ; reliance to be placed on
its discoveries, 265.
Reconciliation to God,the effect of Christ's
mediation, i. 527. ii. 75.
Redemption, objections made to revelation
on account of the scheme of, i. 102 ;
proofs afforded by it of the wisdom of
God, 227 ; of his power, 238 ; of his
foodness, 248 ; of his justice, 262 ; of his
oliness, 278 ; divinity of Christ inter
woven with the whole scheme, 334; it
originated in the covenant of grace, 488.
 application of, ii. 144 ; its ne
cessity, and what it implies, 144 ; the ex
ternal means, are the word and ordinan
ces, 145 ; internal and effectual means is

the grace of God, 150. See Effectual
Calling, Regeneration, &c.
Redemption, Universal, doctrine of, con
sidered, ii. 555. appendix.
Reformation is not regeneration, but will
always be the result ofit, ii. 161.
Regeneration, one of the blessings of the
covenant of grace, i. 508 ; effected by di
vine grace, ii. 150 ; change implied in it,
159 ; illumination of the mind, 159 ; re
novation of the will, 160 ; effects of it,
161 ; reformation is its fruit, 161 ; it is
specifically the same in all, 162 ; and ne
cessary to all, 162 ; it is the foundation
of all subsequent attainments in religion,
1 63 ; difference between it and sanctifica
tion, 235 ; they are inseparably connect
ed, 236 ; good works a part of it, 252 ;
baptism does not regenerate, 385 ; it is
signified in baptism, 387.
Religion, dispensation of, traced from the
creation to New Testament times, i. 138
—156,
Repentance, not the ground of justification,
ii. 195 ; place it holds in justification, 210.
Reprobation, decree of, i. 367 ; proof for it,
368 ; the ground of it, 369 ; in what it
consists, 369.
Responsibility, divine decrees consistent
with human, i. 203. 357.
Resurrection, heathens had no idea of it,
i. 95; ascribed to Christ, 327. ii. 317;
ascribed to the spirit, i. 346 ; doctrine of
a matter of pure revelation, ii. 312 ; was
believed by the Jews in Old Testament
times, 314 ; universality of the resurrec
tion, 315; identity of our bodies, 315; it
is the work of divine power, 317; con
nexion between the resurrection of the
saints, and that of Christ, 318 ; nature, of
the saints' glorified bodies, 319 ; opinion
of a partial resurrection, 320.
of Christ, ii. 100.

Revelation necessary even to establish
doctrines of natural theology, i. 20 ; a
source of theology, 23 ; definition of a re
velation, 24 ; its possibility ,24 ; connexion
of miracles with it, 25 ; its desirableness,
27 ; and necessary, 30 ; its probable cha-
acter, 31 ; demands the exercise of faith,
32 ; has a revelation been given ¦? 33 ; .pre
tended revelations, 33 ; the scriptures con
tain the only true revelation, 34 ; mira
cles are necessary accompaniments, 73 ;
objections to revelation, 99 ; degree of in
spiration called revelation, 117.
Righteousness of Christ, in what it con
sists, i. 506 ; the sole ground of justifica
tion, ii. 199 ; his obedience was entirely
gratuitous, 200; was fulfilled not for him
self but for sinners, 200.
Original, of man, at his crea

tion, i. 412.
Rites, decreed by human authority, not
binding, ii. 269 ; power of the church to
enact, 508.
Robbery, crime of, ii. 547.
3 b2

570

INDEX OF MATTER.

Rome, church of, her pretended miracles, i.
74; belief of tradition, 134; conduct in
reference to the scriptures, 135 ; doctrines
of intercession of the saints, ii. 88 ; of
justification, 185; of pilgrimages and pe
nances, 254 ; of works of supererogation,
255 ; of probability, 266 ; of purgatory,
308 ; of opus operatum in the sacraments,
f 360 ; of the intention of the administrator
of them, 361 ; five spurious sacraments,
368 ; unauthorized additions to the rite
of baptism, 374 ; opinion as to the per
sons by whom baptism may be adminis
tered, 384 ; doctrine of transubstantiation,
394 ; form of government, 466 ; opinion
that the authority of scripture depends
upon the church, 505 ; conduct in refer
ence to the ten commandments, 523 ; wor
ship of saints and images, 529.
Sabbath, the, whether it was a seal of the
covenant of works, i. 474 ; when esta
blished, ii. 534; its morality,535; change
from the seventh to the first day of the
week, 536 ; method of observing it, 537.
Sabellian heresy, i. 303.
Sacraments are seals of the union of be
lievers to Christ, ii. 170 ; they are means
of grace, 352 ; definition of, 352 ; their
nature, 354 ; their design, 355 ; sacra
ments, or seals of the covenant with
Adam, i. 474. ii. 356 ; with Noah, 356 ;
with Abraham, 356; sacraments are of
divine institution, 357; are significant of
the blessings promised, 357 ; and assu
rances that they shall be enjoyed, 358 ;
how they are to be used, 359.; by whom,
359 ; source of the efficacy, 360 ; not af
fected by the intention of the administra
tor, 361 ; consequences of the popish doc
trine on this subject, 362 ; sacraments of
the Mosaic dispensation, circumcision,
363; the passover, 365; superseded by
the Christian, 367 ; spurious sacraments
of the church of Rome, 368 ; Christian
sacraments, baptism, 372; the Lord's
Supper, 392. See Baptism, Lord's Supper.
Sacrifices, institution of, i. 139 ; of the
ceremonial law, their connexion with the
death of Christ, ii. 68.
Saints, intercession of, ii. 88 ; origin of this
doctrine, 89 ; perseverance of the saints,
282. See Perseverance. Worship of them
forbidden by the first commandment, 526.
See Believers.
Sanctification, one ofthe blessings ofthe
covenant of grace, i. 508 ; inseparable
from justification, 233 ; meaning of the
term, 234 ; difference between it and jus
tification, 235; and regeneration, 235;
viewed as a privilege and as a duty, 235;
as a duty is our work, 236 ; what it im
plies, 236 ; extends to the whole man,
241 ; not perfect in this life, 241 ; it is
the work of the Trinity, 242 ; nature and
effect of the Spirit's operation in it, 244 ;
controversy as to the formation of holy

habits in it, 245 ; Christ is the. pattern of
it, 246 ; the word of God is the rule, 247 ;
external means, 248 ; faith is a mean by
which sanctification is carried on, 250 ;
good works the fruit of it, 252; peace of
conscience connected with it, 276 ; whe
ther death is necessary to complete the
sanctification of the soul, 294 ; it is com
pleted at death, 304 ; the gospel as a
mean of sanctification, 341 ; the law as a
mean, 344.
Sanctification ofthe Sabbath, ii. 537.
Satan, his power to work miracles, i. 70;
to foretell future events, 78. See Fallen

Satisfaction for sin, correct meaning of it,
ii. 74. See Christ.
Scandal, what meant by it, ii. 51 1 ; man
ner of treating, 511.
Schism, nature of, ii. 463.
Scriptures, the holy, contain the only sem
blance to a true revelation, i. 34 ; distinc
tion between their genuineness and au
thenticity, 34 ; necessity and importance
of ascertaining their genuineness, 34. 39.
58 ; account of the books of the Old Tes
tament, 35 ; of the New Testament, 44 ;
Jewish division of the Old Testament
books, 35 ; Septuagint version, 35 ; they
existed in the days of Ezra, 35 ; refer
ences to the bonks of Moses in the other
books of the Old Testament, 36 ; proof
of the genuineness of the several books,
39 ; jealousy of the Jews in admitting a
book into the canon, 41 ; apocrypha, 41 ;
genuineness ofthe gospels, 44; reason of
there being four gospels, 47 ; genuineness
of the other books of the New Testement,
48 ; whether any books have been lost,
51 ; testimony to the genuineness of the
New Testament books, 54 ; authenticity
inferred from their genuineness, 64 ;
proved by miracles, 69 ; by prophecy, 77 ;
by the success of the gospel, 88 ; by in ¦
ternal evidences, 89 ; inspiration of the
Scriptures, 110. See Inspiration. Sense
in which they are the word of God, 118 ;
various MSS. 122 ; result of comparison
of various readings, 127 ; acquaintance
with the original languages, a prerequi
site for the study, 128 ; method for eluci
dating the text, and rules for the study,
130 ; they are the only standards of re
ligious belief, 134 ; lawfulness of infer
ences from them, 135; conduct of the
church of Rome regarding them, 135 ;
reasons for forbidding them, 136 ; the
church is the depositary of them, ii. 504 ;
their authority does not depend on the
church, 505; her duty in reference to
them, 505. See Word of God.
Se'als of a covenant, what is understood by
them, i. 474. See Sacraments.
Sealing of believers, what is meant by it,
ii. 289.
Senses, dependence to be placed on the
evidence communicated by the, L 265.

INDEX OF MATTER.

571

Separation from a church, when justifiable,
ii. 464.
Septuagint version, account of, i. 35.
Servants, duty of, to their masters, ii. 540.
Seventy, the commission of, when sent
out by our Lord, ii. 470.
Sexes, proportion between the, a proof of
an overruling Providence, i. 424.
Simplicity of the nature of God, i. 208 ; of
the Scripture, a proof of their genuine
ness, 60.
Sin, existence of, reconciled with the belief
of a just and a holy God, i. 185. 246 ;
sin of the angels, 396 ; sin of Adam, 450 ;
consequences ofit to himself, 467; to his
posterity, 478 ; it is universal, 485.
Sincerity of God's admonitions, and invi
tations to sinners, i. 270. ii. 147 ; consis
tent with his decrees, i. 374.
Sleep, death of the saints compared to it,
ii. 296 ; doctrine of the sleep of the soul,
306.
Socinian doctrine of inspiration, i. 112; of
immensity of God, 188 ; of the Trinity,
303 ; of the divinity of Christ, 307 ; of
his pre-existence, 312 ; of Adam as a
federal head, and consequences of his
sin, 460 ; of Christ having ascended to
heaven before he entered on his ministry,
ii. 28 ; of his having perfected the moral
law, 31 ; of his sacrifice, 50; of his death,
58 ; of the application of redemption,
150.
Sons of God, meaning of the phrase, ii.
224. See Adoption.
Soul, immortality of, a doctrine of revela
tion, i. 20 ; heathen notions regarding it,
20 ; original qualities of the soul, 409 ;
its immortality, ii. 297 ; it is complete
ly sanctified at death, 304 ; doctrines of
an intermediate state after death, 305; of
the sleep of the soul, 306 ; of purgatory,
308.
Sovereignty of God proved from a review
of his attributes, i. 283 ; in election, 363 ;
in reprobation, 370 ; in the covenant of
grace, 492.
Space, ideas entertained of, i. 188.
Spirit, properties of a, i. 176.
 the Holy. See Holy Ghost.
Spiritual death, a penalty of the covenant
of works, i. 469.
 Ife, the consequences of union to
Christ, ii. 171.
¦ joy, the result of peace of con

science, ii. 277 ; its sources, 277 ; the be
liever enjoys only occasional transports of
joy, 281 ; means of securing it, 281.
Spirituality of God, i. 175; consistent
with texts in which bodily members are
ascribed to him, 176.
Standards, the Scriptures are the supreme
standard, i. 134 ; nature of subordinate
standards, ii. 459.
State, alliance between church and, ii. 136.
455 ; relation of church to the state, 465.
10.

Student of theology, qualifications of, i. 12
Style of Scripture, a proof of genuineness,
i. 59 ; difference of, no objection to inspi
ration, 120.
Subjects, duty of, to their rulers, ii. 540.
Sublapsarian system of the divine decrees
i. 360.
Substitution, -objections made to revela
tion on account of the doctrine of, i. 103 ;
doctrine of the substitution of Christ, -ii.
56. See Christ.
Success of the gospel a proof of the truth
of revelation, l. 83. See Gospel.
Succession, absurdity of the doctrine of
eternal, i. 163.
Suggestion, degree of inspiration called, i.
117; objections to the name, 117.
Supererogation, Roman Catholic doctrine
regarding the works of, ii. 225.
Superintendence, degree of inspiration
called, i. 117 ; objections to, 117.
Supralapsarian system of divine decrees,
i. 360.
Supremacy claimed for Peter, ii. 466.
Surety of the covenant of grace was
Christ, i. 495.
Teacher, or Doctor, office of, in the primi
tive church, ii. 497.
Temporal blessings, whether they were
purchased by believers, ii. 231 .
 Death, the penalty of sin, i. 466.
Temptation, duty to avoid it, ii. 452. 546.
Testament, account of the books of the
Old, i. 35—42; of the New, 44—52;
dispensation of religion under the Old,.
138 ; under the New, 147. See Scrip
tures. , the dispensation of grace view

ed as a, ii. 513.
Text, state of the sacred, i. 122 ; methods
for elucidating, 130.
Thanksgiving, a part of prayer, ii. 424.
Theft, different kinds of, ii. 547 ; duty of
restitution, 548 ; whether lawful for the
preservation of life, 549.
Theology, observations on its importance,
i. 8 ; definitions, 8 ; articles of natural, 9 ;
divisions, 10; qualifications of a student,
12 ; sources, 15 ; connexion of doctrinal
and practical, ii. 513.
Threatenings of God, truth of them, i.
269 ; remarks on them, 269.
Timothy, whether he was a bishop, ii. 470.
Titus, whether he was a bishop, ii. 471.
Tradition made a standard of religious be
lief by church of Rome, i. 134.
Transubstantiation, doctrine of, its rise,
ii. 393 ; explained, 394 ; its contrariety to
Scripture, 395 ; destroys the nature of a
sacrament, 397 ; is at variance with Tea
son, 398 ; and the evidence of the senses,
400; Pascal's defence of it, 401 ; errors
consequent on it, 403 ; idolatry, 403; sa
crifice of the mass, 404 ; mutilation of the
sacrament, 406 ; reasons assigned for this,
407 ; doctrine of concomitance, 407.

672

INDEX OF MATTER.

Thei-jity, tho, cbjestion to revelation on ac
count of this 'doctrine, i. 101 ; meaning
and origin of the term, 286 ; traces of the
doctrine among the heathen, 287 ; it is a
doctrine of pure revelation, 287 ; proofs
for it in the Old Testament, 288 ; in the
New, 292 ; particular statement of the
doctrine, 295 ; unity of the divine essence,
296 ; threefold distinction of persons,
297 ; different ideas of this distinction,
298 ; true nature of it, 299 ; opinions re
specting the subordination of the Son and
Spirit, 300 ; nature of the Sonship, 301 ;
in what his generation consists, 302 ; pro
cession of the Holy Spirit, 303. 343 ; he
resies opposed to the doctrine, 303 ; ob
jections to the doctrine considered, 304.
See Christ, Holy Ghost.
Truth, love of, a necessary qualification for
a student of theology, i. 14 ; connexion
between truth and power, 75 ; duty of
speaking truth, ii. 549 ; natural propensi
ty to truth, 550.
Truth of God, i. 264 ; truth of his commu
nications to man, 265 ; faithfulness of his
promises, 267; of his threatenings and
denunciations, 269 ; sincerity of his admo
nitions and warnings, 270 ; his nature
renders him incapable of error or deceit,
271.
Types, observations on, i. 144
Unconditional, the decrees of God are, i.
356.
Unction, extreme, popish sacrament of, ii.
371.
Union of believers to Christ, of two kinds,
ii. 165 ; legal, formed when he was ap
pointed their covenant head, 165 ; spirit
ual or mystical, formed in regeneration,
166 ; its nature, 166 ; the bonds of it, 167 ;
it is real, 168 ; spiritual and without con
fusion of persons, 168; and indissoluble,
169 ; the sacraments are seals of it, 170 ;
consequences of it, 171 ; faith as a bond
more particularly explained. See Faith.
Imputation of Christ's righteousness is
founded on it, 201 ; spiritual joy results
from it, 277.
Unity of God, inferred from the uniformity
of the works of nature, i. 177, 178 ; other
arguments for it, 181 ; doctrines opposed
f to it, 182; Polytheism, 182; dualism,
184 ; not opposed to the scriptural doc
trine of the Trinity, 186.
Universal redemption derogatory to the
excellence of Christ's sacrifice, ii. 55 ;
not a doctrine of Scripture, 555. Appen
dix.
Universality of the Christian dispensation,
i. 155 ; ofthe church, ii. 461.
Universe, not eternal, proved, i. 163.
Various readings in the sacred text, sources
of, i. 123.
Vespasian, emperor, miracles ascribed to,
i. 74.

War, whether consistent with the sixth
commandment, ii. iJ4.S.
Wife, duties of, to her husband, ii. 545.
Will, rectitude of man's, at his cirai ion, i.
412 ; freedom of the will consistent with
the divine decrees, i. 203. 357. 373.
 of God, whether the source of moial
obligation, ii. 515.
Wisdom of God, i. 219 ; distinguished from
knowledge, 219; characteristics of 819,
220 ; proofs of it from works of creation,
220 ; from providence, 224 ; redemption,
227 ; from the means used for publishing
the gospel, 229; exhibited in the divine
decrees, 354.
Word of God, sense in which the Scrip
tures are, i. 118; the word an external
means of salvation, ii. 147. 332 ; it con
sists of two principal parts, the law and
the gospel, 146. 334 ; it addresses per
sons of every nation and condition, 147 ;
it is not the efficient cause of conversion,
149 ; it is the rule of sanctification, 247 ;
and a principal means of carrying it on,
248 ; it is the only rule of conscience to
Christians, 268 ; it condemns every sin
and enjoins every duty, 268 ; its adequacy
as a rule, 269 ; its doctrines and promises
a source of spiritual joy, 279 ; the law
and the gospel considered separately, 334 ;
use of other portions of the Word, 348 ;
observations on the reading and preaching
of it, 349 ; necessity of the accompani
ment of the Spirit, 351 ; it is the rule of
jrayer, 432.
Works, covenant of, cannot be the ground
of justification, ii. 191 ; the law consider
ed as a covenant of works, 344.
, Good, relation they bear to justifi

cation, ii. 210 ; the apostles James and
Paul did not teach different doctrines,
212; although not the gTound of justifica
tion, there are strong reasons for the per
formance of them, 217 ; motives to them
held out by the doctrine of justification,
220 ; sanctification as a duty is our work, ¦
236 ; good works are the fruit of sanctifi
cation, 252 ; what they comprehend, 253 ;
their relative value, 253 ; when material
ly good, 254; when morally good, 256;
they are possible only to believers, 258 ;
necessarily imperfect, 259 ; incumbent
on all the followers of Christ, 259; all
have means and opportunities of perform
ing them, 260 ; extremes with regard to
good works, 261 ; Antinominian doctrine,
261 ; necessity of inculcating them, 261 ;
reason for the mention of them in the ge
neral judgment, 129. 322.
Worship, religions claimed by, and paid to
Christ, i. 329 ; paid to the Holy Spirit,
347 ; whether Christ's human nature is
the object of it, ii. 24 ; time appointed
for, 537.
Zuinglius, his opinion respecting the eucha
rist, ii. 410.

INDEX

OF TEXTS INCIDENTALLY ILLUSTRATED.

Genesis.
Chap. Verse Vol. Page
1  i. 379.
2  i. 346.380,
26, 27  i. 407.
ii. 7  i. 408.
16, 17  i. 448.
20—24  i. 409.
iii 1—16  i. 450.
7.19  i. 453.
ik ">•• 139-
In  < ¦¦ c
4 u. 5.
22  ii. 356.
iv. 4.26  i. 140.
v. 24  i. 141.
vi. 2  i. 397.
viii. 21  i. 482.
ix. 11. 13  ii. 356.
16  ii. 358.
xvi. 12  i 81,
xviii. 25  i. 480.
xix. 24  i- 291. •
xxii. 1  i. 108.438.
18  ii. 6.
,. ,. Ci. 142.
xllx- 10  Iii. 10.
Exodus.
vii. 11  i. 70.
xii. 13  ii. 366.
36  i. 107.273.
xiv. 21  i. 26.
xix. 19  i. 521.
xx. 2   ii. 347.
Leviticus.
x. 3  ii. 447.
xvi. 21, 22  ii. 70.
NUMBERS.
vi. 24—26  i. 290.
Deuteronomy.
xiii. 1—3  i. 76.
xxviii. 46.64  i. 80, 61.
2 Samuel.
xii. 11  i. 439.
xvi. 11  i. 439.
1 Kings.
xxii. 22, 23  i. 429.
Job.
ix. 33  i- 521.
xiv. 4  i- 484.
5.14.20  j. 428.
xxviii. 12, &c  i- 22.
xxxi. 33  •• 456.

Psalms.
Chap. Verse Vol. Page
xxxiii. 6  i. 346.
xxxvii.37  ii. 295.
xl. 7,8  i. 494.
xiv. 6  i. 289.29U
xlix. 12  i. 414.
Ii. 5  i. 483.
11  ii. 282.284.
Iv 17  ii. 437.
Ixxxii. 6,7  i. 456.
Ixxxix. 3, 4  i. 520.
xcii. 2  ii. 438.
xcviii. 1  i. 274.
civ. 4  i. 388.
cv. 25  i. 439.
cxix. 164  ii. 236.437.
cxxx. 2.5,6  ii. 442.
cxlv. 17  i. 275.
Ecclesiastes.
vii. 29  i. 276.409.
Isaiah.
vi. 1—5  i. 274.
vii. 14  ii. 7.
viii. 13,14  i. 274.
xiii. 19—22  i. 81.
xxxiii. 16  ii. 449.
xl. 3  i. 318.
xiv., 21—23  i. 319.
xlviii. 16  i. 291.299
1. 8  ii. 185.
liii. 4.  ii. 72.
10  ii. 63.
Ixv. 23,24  ii. 442.
Jeremiah.
xx. 7. 9  i. 439.
... K a Ci. 319.
xxm. 5,6  i .. ,.
( u. 9.
23,24  i. 189.321.
xxxii. 40.....  ii. 285.
Ezekiel.
xiv. 9  i. 438.
xviii. 20  ii. 191.
24  ii. 289.
xxvi. 14  i. 81.
xliii. 26,27  ii. 536.
Daniel.
17  i. 291.
24—27  ii. 11.55 |
xii. 3  ii. 186.
13  -  ii. 312.
HOSEA.
i. 7.  i. 291.
vi. 7  i. 456.
573

574

INDEX OF TEXTS.

MlCAH.

111.
xiii.xvi.

xx.xxii.xxiv.

3XV1.xxviii.

Chap.v.

Verse

Vol

Page
3*1.

ii.

9 

Haggai.

10

i.

12...

Zecuariah.

531

xii.

10...

347
i.iii.
11...
Malachi.
•a
155. 14.
iv.
2.4-
-6 
148
ii.
Matthew.
69
iii.
376.
1. xiv.xvi.
XVIII.
XX.xxii.
16...
8 
17. 12
34. . . .
9—13  ii.
14,15  ii.
23  ii.
19  ii.
27  i.
32  ii.
20, 21  ii.
18  ii.
19  ii.
10  i.
15. 17  ii.
18  ii.
20 
14 
16 
17 
21 
28..:..
35-40. 3 
II
22. 24.
31, 32.
32, 33.
34-36.20. 26.
19 
20 
26. 376.
327. 196.
531.
444. 452,273.186.
322. 334.
310. 174.
462.511.391. 394.
456.
467.322.
414. 381.
339. 456. 502.
345.255. 69.
518. 124.
285. 328.
321.130.322.
415. 294. 136.
136. 334.
Mark.
10.
23. 19.
ii.
376.
ii.
417.
115.
iiiiv
Luke.
1—4  i. 46.
35  i. 301.
2 — 4  ii. 444.
11  ii. 451.
1  ii. 437.
36  i. 399.
31  ii. 81.85.
Char;.xx iii.
VI.viii.
x.
XI-
xiv.
XV.xvi.xvii.
Luke.
Verse Vol. Page
34  ii. 87.
43  ii. 307.
John.
1,2  i. 47.311.
3  i. 314.325.
18  i. 151.384.
29  ii. 92.366.
23—25  i. 323.
5  ii. 153. 163.
6  i. 483.
13  ii. 112.
36  i. 269.334.
2, 3  i. 31).
14  ii. 299.
2  i. 46.
17 — 19  i. 299.325.
21  i.
22, 23  i.
28, 29  i.
36  i.
35. 53, 54  ii.
328.
330. 327. 77.
397.
310.339. 399.
58  i. 142.200.
44.
15.16.
29.
25. 2.. 11.16..
28.,
 ii. 556.
 ii. 82.
 ii. 286.
 i. 328.
 ii. 303.326.
 i. 77.
 ii. 288.
 i. 338.
26  i. 347.349.
26, .27  ii. 87.
3  i. 338.
5  i. 312.
9  ii. 83.
11.15.20  ii. 287.
21  ii. 166.
24  ii. 86.
17  ,  i. 323.
19.26  ii. 110.
22  i. 335.343.
23  ii. 186.
28  i. 316.
Acts.
6,7  ii. 135.
5  ii. 479.
27.31  ii. 99, 100.
32, 33  i. 513.
38,39  ii. 381.
42  ,ii. 422.
44. 46  ii. 480.
23  i. 335.
31,32  ii. 480.
12, 13  ii
1  ii
38. 55.
°9,60;  Jh
480.479.
ii. 485.
ii. 111.
ii. 116.
331. 296.
INDEX OF TEXTS,

575

Chap.viii.ix. x.

xix.xx.

XXUl. ii.

in.iv.

X.xii.xiii.xiv.

Acts.
Vorse Vol. Page
38, 39  ii. 376.
14  i. 331.
34,35  S\: fl3/
i_u. 259.
48  ii. 383.
1,2  ii. 488.
18  i. 202.354.
5  ii. 373.383.
7  ii. 422.
28  Sl 336-
I ii. 23. 472.
1  ii. 274.
Romans.
13  ii. 186.
., ,, Ci. 422.
14,10  iii. 128.268.
16  ii. 334.
25  S\: *£¦
3  ii. 207.
4,5  ii. 180.186.
11  ii. 364.379.
3—5  ii. 250.
7,8  ii. 69.
10,11  ii. 66.76.
12. 14  i. 454.479.
15,16.19  i. 454.
15—19  i. 494.
18  i. 461.
19  ii. 189.196.
4  ii. 165.376.
5  ii. 389.
6  ii. 244.
23  i. 472.
4...,  ii. 250.
7,8  i. 481.
25  ii. 238.
1  ii. 171. 188.
13  ii. 290.
17  ii. 232.289.
26  ii. 87.439.
28  ii. 249.
30  ii. 145.235,
33  ii. 86.186. 201,
35—39  ii. 170.280,
4  ii. 225.
5  i. 315.
15—18..  i. 369.
13—17  ii. 146. 333,
6—8  ii. 499.
1—4, 5  ii. 267.
14  ii. 270.
23  ii. 256.
1 ConiNTHIANS.
2  i. 331.
10. 12  ii. 464.
13—15  ii. 383.
30  ii. 168. 202
8  i. 336.
9—U  i- 30.117.
10, 11. 16  i. 342.345,
14  ii. 150.

Chap.

1 Corinthians.
Verse 13.15 

Vol. Page
.ii. 310.

21. 23.
4 

.ii. 132.231.
.ii. 197.

4 

.ii. 487.
5 
.ii. 511,512.
7. 8...
.ii. 355.368.
9 
.i. 49.
•
.ii. 167.
.ii. 255.
14 
.ii. 382.
. .ii. 257.
16, 17.
14 
. .ii. 170.396.
.i. 480.
17. 20.
18 
23 26.
4 6...
. .ii. 422.
.ii. 463.
. , ii. 393.
. .i. 294.
13 
. .ii. 389.
xiii. XV. i,v. vii. xii.xiii. ii.
iii. iv.v. i.ii.iv. v.vi. i.ii.
iii.iv.
. .ii. 486.
9 12..
12 
, .ii. 327.
..i. 297.
36, 37,
41 
50, 51. 2
38. 53 
n. 140.318.
..u. 316.
..ii. 331.
. .ii. 294.321.
Corinthians
21, 22.
..ii. 289.
..ii. 307.
10 
. .i. 328.
15 
..ii. 557.
19 21
1 
..ii. 76,77.'
..ii. 236.
ii 251.443;
..ii. 277.
14 
..i. 294.347.
20.... 10....
Galatians.
ii. 165.171.
..ii. 187.192.
13....
..ii. 94.98.
4 
. .i. 148.
4 
..ii. 338.
17 
..i. 413.484.
Ephesians.
. .i. 529.
. .i. 480.
..ii. 171.
..ii. 318.
. .ii. 33. 486.
..ii. 548.
•
..i. 317.
..ii. 353.
..ii. 523.
..i. 403.
..ii. 437.
Colossians.
. .i. 326, 327.
. .i. 517.
..i. 410.484.
576

INDEX OF TEXTS.

Chap.

1 ThESSAIOIOANS.
Verse Vol

Page
127. 315.
281.234. 240i
317. 83.
362, 363.
307. 119.134,
338. 500.
92.
319.
434. 69.
353.274.
469. 500.
317.
302. 111. 38.
471,472. 317.387.
202.121.236. 296. 327.
332. 388.
291.315. 393. 118. 49.
525. 18.
24. 75.
51.
81. 84.
290. 51.
405.495. 336.
490. 50.
235. 345.345. 234.
315. THE

Chap

16 

23 
i.
2 Thessalonians.
12  i
xiii.
ii.
3,4....
13 
i.
23 
Philippiahs.
i.
ii
5—11
6 
u
iii.
7,8...
81....
v.
ii.
1,2...
1 TlMOTHT.
i.
6 
16....
2 
n.
17 
m.
21 
i. iii.
10....
5 
2 Timothy. Titus.
a
l.
i. ii.
ii.
13 
4. 6....
u.
L
18....
1 
Philemon. Hebrews.
iii. iv.
3 
6 
v.
7 
8 
ii.
2 
9 
10....14—16 16 
i.
17. . . .
6 
7 
vi.vii.
4 — 6..
ii.
3 
v.
vii.
xii.
viii. ix.
xix.
12....
XX.
xxi.
xxii.
16, 17
zL
Em
Hebrews,
Verse VoL Pago
1  ii. 510.
3  i. 377.
4  i. 140.
5  i. 141.
8  i. 323.
12  ii. 234.243.
James.
1q Ci. 108.
ld  iii. 452.
10  ii. 192.
21,22  ii. 213.
25  ii. 214.
14  ii. 372.
1 Peteb.
10,11  ii. 30.
15  ii. 173.236.
15,16  i. 274.
24  ii. 66.70.72.
21  ii. 388.
2 Peteb.
1  i. 317.
10. Sl 366'
1U  iii. 183.282.
4  i. 400.
20  ii. 291.
1 John.
2  i. 320.
2 Sl- 156-
*  iii. 55.66.75.
18  i. 50.
18—21  ii. 183.277.
24  ii. 167.
10  ii. 79.
13  ,  ii. 167.
7  i. 292
16  ii. 435.
Jttde.
4  i. 317.368. 370.
14, 15  i. 141.
19  ii. 44.
Revelatiows.
4,5  i. 294.347.
5, 6  i. 332.
8. 17, 18  i. 320.
20  ii. 353.
23  i. 323.
6  ii. 72.82.
11, 12  i. 332.
10  i. 332.
10  ii. 86.
13  ii. 374.
4,5  ii. 320.
12  ii. 128.210
19—25  ii. 324.
1,2  ii. 211.324
13  i. 320.
14  ii. 811.