Skip to main content

Full text of "The doctrine of universal pardon : considered and refuted in a series of sermons, with notes, critical and expository"

See other formats 


■I 


Aimmmuii^ummnMiiKii; 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 

in  2009  with  funding  from 

Princeton  Theological  Seminary  Library 


http://www.archive.org/details/doctrineofuniverOOthom 


^'■^,J:.m^  CI, 


y^ 


^ 


^er, 


^-^'^•9-^. 


^^'       ^ 


,0" 


2'^-^^^/^ 


>^ 


^    X    .^^: 


^^<^i/:^^^. 


t^:" 


i 


S  E  R  M  O  N  S. 


THE 
/ 

DOCTRINE 

OP 

UNIVERSAL   PARDON 

CONSIDERED  AND  REFUTED, 

IN  A 

SERIES    OF    SERMONS, 

WITH 

NOTES,  CRITICAL  AND  EXPOSITORY. 


BY  ANDREW  THOMSON,  D.D. 

MIXISTKR  OF  ST.  GEOR/iE's   CHURCH,   EDINBURGK, 


EDINBURGH : 
WILLIAM  WHYTE  AND  CO. 

W.  COI.T.INS  AND  M.  OGLE,  GLASGOW,  AND  LONGMAN, 
REES.  ORME,  BROWN  AND  GREEN,  LONDON. 


JLDCCC.XXX. 


XmUHY    ilHKVT. 


KIRK  SESSION  AND  CONGREGATION 

OF 

ST.  GEORGE'S  CHURCH,    , 
EDINBURGH, 

THIS  VOLUME  OF  SERMONS 

IS  RESPECTFULLY  INSCRIBED, 

BY  THEIR  AFFECTIONATE  PASTOR, 

THE  AUTHOR. 


PREFACE. 


When  I  began  the  following  course  of  Sermons, 
I  certainly  had  no  intention  to  publish  them ; 
nor  was  it  my  purpose  to  enter  so  largely  as  1 
have  ultimately  done,  into  the  discussions  with 
which  they  are  occupied.  But  finding,  as  I  ad- 
vanced, that  the  sentiments  which  it  is  their  ob- 
ject to  refute,  were  more  prevalent  than  I  at  first 
suspected,  and  anxious  to  guard  my  congrega- 
tion against  such  erroneous  doctrines,  and  such 
perversions  of  Scripture  as  were  afloat,  I  felt 
myself  called  upon  to  enlarge  my  original  plan. 
After  all,  I  perceive  that  I  have  omitted  many 
topics  which  it  might  have  been  profitable  to 
consider. 

Although  Mr.  Erskine  had  published  his  Es- 
says on  the  Unconditional  Freeness  of  the  Gos- 


viii  PREFACE. 

pel,  which  seemed  to  be  used  as  a  sort  of  text 
book,  by  the  supporters  of  his  dogmas,  I  did 
not  confine  myself  to  what  is  there  advanced, 
but  thought  it  right  to  take  notice  of  the  opinions 
and  practices  known  to  exist  among  his  party, 
though  not  acknowledged  in  any  printed  record- 
But  instead  of  running  any  risk  of  misrepresent- 
ing them,  by  adducing  what  was  only  rumoured, 
I  have  even  abstained  from  bringing  forward  some 
circumstances,  of  whose  truth  I  could  scarcely 
entertain  a  doubt,  and  which  would  have  still 
more  strongly  demonstrated  the  delusions  and 
the  extravagance,  in  which  the  sect  think  proper 
to  indulge. 

It  was  not  till  the  very  conclusion  of  my  se- 
ries, that  I  obtained  Mr.  Erskine's  Introduc- 
tory Essay,*  in  which  he  has  given,  if  not  a  more 
ample,  at  least  a  more  explicit  statement  of  his 
views.  Like  his  former  volume,  it  is  extremely 
rambling    in  its  observations,  and  altogether  in- 

•  This  Essay  is  introductory  to  '•  Extracts  of  Letters  to  a 
Christian  Friend,  by  a  Lady."  In  referring  to  it,  I  find  that 
I  have  once  or  twice  called  it  "  Preface."  I  mention  this,  to 
prevent  the  reader  from  thinking  that  there  are  two  treatises  of 
the  kind  by  Mr.  Erskine. 


PREFACE.  ix 

capable  of  being  analysed.  I  have  endeavoured, 
however,  in  my  notes,  to  make  such  remarks  on 
what  is  contained  in  both  productions  as  to  show, 
that  their  author's  reasonings  are  as  inconclusive, 
and  his  interpretations  of  Scripture  as  perverse, 
as  his  opinions  are  unsound  and  mischievous.  A 
minuter  and  more  lengthened  exposure  of  his 
blunders  might  have  been  expedient ;  but  enough 
has  been  said,  I  flatter  myself,  to  deprive  his 
oracular  sayings  of  that  influence  which  they 
appeared  to  be  exercising,  over  ignorant  and  in- 
considerate minds. 

I  refer  my  readers  to  the  following  publications 
which  have  been  recently  produced  in  the  con- 
troversy about  Assurance  and  Universal  Pardon : 

Remarks  on  Certain  Opinions  recently  propa- 
gated respecting  Universal  Redemption,  by  Dr. 
Hamilton  of  Strathblane. 

The  Gairloch  Heresy  Tried,  in  a  Letter  to  the 
Rev.  Mr.  Campbell  of  Row,  by  Dr.  Burns  of 
Paisley. 

A  Treatise  on  the  Forgiveness  of  Sins,  as  the 
Privilege  of  the  Redeemed,  in  Opposition  to  the 
Doctrine  of  Universal  Pardon,  by  the  Rev.  Mr. 
Smith  of  Glasgow. 


X  /         PREFACE. 

A  Sermon  on  Peace  in  Believing,  by  Dr.  Barr 
of  Port-Glasgow. 

Strictures  on  "  Notes  and  Recollections"  of 
Mr.  CampbelFs  Sermons,  by  Mr.  Barclay  of  Ir- 
vine. 

A  Letter  to  Mr.  Erskine,  containing  Animad- 
versions on  his  "  Unconditional  Freeness,"  by 
the  Rev.  Mr.  Buchanan  of  North  Leith. 

Two  Reviews  in  the  Christian  Instructor  for 
June  1828  and  February  1830. 

The  Way  of  Salvation,  a  Discourse  by  the 
Rev.  Mr.  Russel  of  Dundee ;  with  Notes  and 
Illustrations,  containing  Remarks  on  the  Doc- 
trine of  Universal  Pardon. 


'mm'*  "  "r~'TriTf;mr^i'ii«rit"iT' iV'i     m     m  ■  -  -   ririminniiifi.nr , 


CONTENTS. 


Page 

SERMON  I. 

PSALM  CXXX.  7,  8. 

Let  Israel  hope  in  the  Lord :  for  with  the  Lord  there  is 
mercy,  and  with  him  is  plenteous  redemption.  And  he 
shall  redeem  Israel  from  all  his  iniquities 1 


SERMON  XL 

SAME  TEXT, 23 

SERMON  III. 

SAME  TEXT,        . 42 

SERMON  IV. 

SAMR  Ti:XT, ()1 

SERMON  V. 

SAME  TKXT,  J)l 

6 


Xll 


CONTENTS. 
SERMON  VI. 


Page 


SAME  TEXT, 125 


SAME  TEXT, 


SAME  TEXT, 


SAME  TEXT, 


SAME  TEXT, 


SAME   TEXT, 


SAME  TEXT, 


SERMON  VII. 


SERMON  VIII. 


SERMON  IX. 


SERMON  X. 


SERMON  XI. 


SERMON  XII. 


162 


202 


234 


259 


28!) 


328 


CONTENTS.  xiit 

Page 

APPENDIX. 

Note  A, 365 

B, • 369 

C  and  D,   . 374 

E, 385 

F, 385 

G, 387 

H, 398 

I, 410 

K, 411 

L, 417 

M, 418 

N  and  O,       419 

P, 427 

Q, '^•^s 

R, 444 

S, 447 

T, 448 

U  and  X, 448 

Y, 456 

Z, 457 

AA,       458 

BB, 469 

CCandDD, 475 

EE,        478 

FF,        479 

GG,       481 


xir  CONTENTS. 

SUPPLEMENTARY  NOTES. 

Page 

NoteHH, 48-2 

11,      ..... 484 


SERMON  I. 


PSALM  CXXX.  7j  8. 

"  Let  Israel  hope  in  the  Lord,  for  with  the  Lord  there 
is  mercy  ;  and  with  him  is  plenteous  redemption;  and 
lie  shall  redeein  Israel  from  all  his  iniquities," 

The  Psalmist  laboured  under  convictions  of  sin, 
and  under  the  pressure  of  those  distressful  feel- 
ings which  these  convictions  naturally  produced. 
And  so  great  was  the  affliction  which  he  suffered 
that  he  represents  himself  as  having  been  in  "  the 
depths."  He  had  sunk  so  deep  in  "  the  horrible 
pit,  and  in  the  miry  clay,"  as  not  only  to  be  in- 
volved in  much  wretchedness,  but  to  be  beyond 
recovery,  either  by  the  exertion  of  any  inherent 
energies  of  his  own,  or  by  the  interposition  of 
power  and  skill  on  the  part  of  his  fellow-men. 
Although  the  strength  of  the  creature,  however, 
was  utterly  unavailing  for  his  deliverance,  he  did 

B 


2  SERMON  I. 

not  despair.  He  directed  his  regards  to  that 
Being  whom  he  had  offended,  and  by  whose 
"  wrath  he  was  troubled  ;"  and  in  the  character 
and  promises  of  God,  he  found  all  that  was  suffi- 
cient for  his  emancipation,  and  all  that  was  need- 
ful for  his  comfort.  The  God  of  holiness  whom 
he  had  provoked,  was  also  a  compassionate  God, 
in  whose  willingness  to  forgive  he  might  take  en- 
couragement to  trust,  because  it  had  been  both 
proclaimed  and  experienced.  And,  therefore,  he 
applied  to  God  for  salvation,  with  the  spirit  and 
in  the  language  of  heartfelt  penitence — lifted  up 
to  him  the  voice  of  earnest  supplication — and, 
with  assured,  because  warranted  confidence,  as 
well  as  with  intense  and  longing  desire,  waited 
for  those  divine  communications  which  the  wants 
and  the  exigencies  of  his  condition  required. 

The  course  which  the  Psalmist  adopted  was 
attended  with  the  consolation  v/hich  he  needecL 
It  was  not  merely  right  and  becoming  in  itself, 
but  it  was  the  means  of  procuring  relief  and  so- 
lacement  to  him,  in  the  midst  of  those  calamities 
to  which  he  had  been  subjected  by  sin.  And 
sympathising  with  all  those  of  the  church  of  Is- 
rael, or  of  the  people  of  God,  who  were  placed  in 
similar  circumstances,  he  recommends  to  them 
the  remedy  which  he  had  found  so  suitable  and 
so  efficient  for  himself — exhorting  them  to  "hope 

in  the  Lord,""  as  he  had  done,  and  detailing  the 
1 


SERMON  I.  3 

grounds  upon  which  that  hope  might  confident- 
ly and  securely  rest.  "  Let  Israel  hope  in  the 
Lord ;  for  with  the  Lord  there  is  mercy ;  and 
with  him  is  plenteous  redemption  ;  and  he  shall 
redeem  Israel  from  all  his  iniquities."  These 
grounds  of  hope  we  propose  to  illustrate  in  dis- 
coursing from  the  words  of  the  text.  And  may 
God  give  us  his  Holy  Spirit  to  open  our  minds  to 
the  lessons  of  his  word,  and  to  the  influences  of 
his  truth. 

I.  Let  Israel  hope  in  the  Lord  ;  for  with  the 
Lord  there  is  mercy. 

Mercy  is  that  attribute  in  the  divine  character 
upon  which  the  sinner's  hope  must  ultimately  de- 
pend. In  every  regard,  indeed,  that  can  be  just- 
ly and  safely  paid  to  the  divine  character,  there 
mvist  be  a  becoming  reference  to  all  the  attributes 
by  which  it  is  distinguished,  because  every  one 
of  these  attributes  is  concerned  in  its  perfection 
and  its  glory,  and  no  dispensation  can  be  true, 
whatever  benefits  it  may  hold  ovit,  in  which  any 
of  them  are  violated  or  disregarded.  But  the 
sinner  being  in  such  circumstances  as  that  all  the 
attributes  of  God,  if  mercy  is  excluded,  would 
conspire  to  destroy  and  not  to  save  him,  it  is  the 
attribute  of  mercy  to  which  the  sinner''s  eye  must 
look,  and  on  which  the  sinner^s  reliance  must  be 
built,  as  a  source  of  comfort  or  as  a  foundation 


4  SERMON  I. 

of  hope.  It  would  be  disrespectful  to  God,  and 
dangerous  for  himself,  were  the  sinner  to  hmit 
his  views  to  the  divine  mercy,  and  leave  out  of 
his  contemplation,  the  divine  holiness,  or  the  di- 
vine veracity,  or  the  divine  omnipotence.  These, 
and  all  the  other  divine  qualities  with  which  they 
are  associated  in  the  Supreme  Being,  must  be 
duly  honoured,  in  being  dul;  acknowledged  by 
him.  Only  it  is  essential  that  he  recognise  mer- 
cy as  one  of  them,  and  that  to  it  he  must  princi- 
pally have  recourse,  if  he  would  be  justified  in 
cherishing  any  expectation  from  that  God  whose 
law  he  has  transgressed,  and  for  the  transgression 
of  whose  law  he  is  condemned,  and  miserable,  and 
lost. 

We  say  mercy,  and  not  goodness  merely. 
Mercy  is  not  synonymous  with  goodness.  It  is  a 
specific  exercise  of  goodness,  and  not  a  necessary 
but  a  sovereign  exercise  of  it.  Goodness  is  ma- 
nifested towards  sentient  creatures  in  general, — 
but  mercy,  towards  those  who  are  in  sin,  in  dan- 
ger, or  in  suffering.  Before  our  first  parents 
fell,  God  was  good  to  them ;  and  as  they  were 
created  with  capacities  of  enjoyment,  and  as  he 
saw  reflected  from  them  the  unsullied  image  of 
himself,  and  as  they  had  done  nothing  to  forfeit 
his  favour,  or  to  awaken  his  displeasure,  his  good- 
ness emanated  in  liberal  contributions  to  their 
happiness,  as  naturally  as  did  his  hohness  dis- 


SERMON  T.  *  5 

play  itself  in  giving  them  a  law,  written  in  their 
hearts,  or  communicated  by  external  revelation,  for 
their  guidance  in  moral  and  religious  duty.  But 
when  they  broke  the  covenant  of  life,  and  became 
obnoxious  to  God's  anger,  and  liable  to  the  miseries 
consequent  upon  disobedience,  they  had  no  longer 
any  claims  on  the  divine  goodness.  They  stood  in 
a  totally  different  relation  to  Him,  whose  responsi- 
ble creatures  they  were.  They  became  objects  of 
his  aversion  and  indignation.  They  had  so 
changed  their  character  and  their  state,  that  his 
justice  demanded  from  them  a  penalty  which 
they  were  unable  to  pay.  It  would  have  been  no 
unrighteousness  in  him,  to  have  actually  doomed 
them  to  the  destruction  which  they  had  merited 
by  their  apostacy.  And  the  question  came  to  be, 
if  we  may  so  speak,  in  the  councils  of  heaven, 
whether,  and  in  what  way,  fallen  man,  who  had 
been  at  first  the  worthy  recipient  of  the  divine 
goodness,  should  still  be  so  dealt  with  as  to  par- 
ticipate in  its  bounties,  to  be  rescued  from  the 
degradation  and  ruin  into  which  he  had  plunged, 
and  restored  to  that  high  and  happy  estate  which 
he  had  deservedly  lost. 

Now  it  seemed  meet  to  the  adorable  Godhead 
to  settle  this  question  in  favour  of  our  apostate 
race, — to  determine  that  the  innate  goodness  of 
Deity  should  be  extended  to  them,  all  unworthy 
as  they  had  made  themselves, — to  accommodate 


6  SERMON  I. 

its  operations  to  their  altered  nature  and  their  al- 
tered circumstances, — to  make  them  still  the  ob- 
jects of  its  care  and  of  its  liberality, — and  thus 
to  exhibit  it  under  that  new,  and  appropriate, 
and  attractive  modification,  which  is  denominated 
mercy,  which  is  so  peculiar  in  its  bearing  on  the 
government  and  the  destinies  of  our  fallen  world 
as  almost  to  wear  the  aspect  of  a  distinct  and  ad- 
ditional attribute,  and  which,  at  any  rate,  pro- 
vides as  richly  and  effectually  for  the  redemption 
of  the  sinner,  as,  in  its  original  actings,  it  provid- 
ed for  the  felicity  of  his  first  progenitors,  while 
they  were  yet  pure  and  holy  in  paradise.  And 
whenever  that  attribute  by  which  God  is  prompt- 
ed to  be  kind  or  beneficent  to  his  rational  off- 
spring is  spoken  of  as  a  ground  on  which  they 
may  confide  in  him,  when  they  have  contracted 
guilt  by  breaking  his  commandments,  it  is  right 
and  expedient  that,  instead  of  regarding  it  under 
the  general  and  vague  appellation  of  goodness, 
which  is  more  applicable  to  the  angels  that  sur- 
round the  throne  of  the  Eternal,  than  to  the  pol- 
luted inhabitants  of  this  polluted  earth,  they 
should  view  it,  and  have  recourse  to  it,  under  the 
appellation  of  mercy.  This  appellation,  more  pre- 
cisely, and  certainly,  and  emphatically  conveys  the 
truth,  that  while  it  is  impossible  for  us  to  appear 
before  God  in  any  other  light  than  that  of  crimi- 
nals, pronounced  to  be  such  by  his  law,  senten- 


SERMON  I.  y 

ced  to  the  punishment  which  it  has  threatened, 
and  actually  and  helplessly  lying  under  its  curse, 
still  he  is  not  relentless  and  implacable,  but  has 
revealed  himself  in  the  attitude  of  compassionat- 
ing our  case,  and  as  possessing  an  excellence 
which,  but  for  the  existence  of  our  sinfulness,  we 
should  not  have  known,  which  teaches  us  to  look 
to  him  without  despondency  or  distrust,  and 
which  may  embolden  us  to  prefer  the  petition, 
equally  indicative  of  humility  and  hope,  "  God 
be  merciful  to  me  a  sinner." 

We  have  already  asserted  the  propriety  and 
necessity  of  taking  a  comprehensive  survey  of  the 
divine  character.  Even  though  it  is  the  mercy 
which  resides  in  it,  that  bespeaks  and  demands 
our  chief  attention,  as  being  in  a  situation  which 
especially  requires  its  exercise,  still  our  due  ho- 
mage is  not  rendered  to  the  divine  character,  nor 
can  we  account  ourselves  sufficiently  safe  in  our 
contemplation  of  it,  as  possessing  the  attribute  of 
mercy,  unless  we  consider  at  the  same  time  those 
other  attributes  with  which  it  is  connected.  And, 
indeed,  having  ascertained  that  it  does  possess 
mercy,  so  far  from  being  afraid  of  meditating  on 
the  other  attributes  with  which  it  is  adorned,  we 
should  engage  in  that  meditation  of  them,  in  or- 
der to  have  our  ideas  of  its  mercy  confirmed,  and 
exalted,  and  accompanied  with  hope. 

Had  we  looked  to  God  as  just,  powerful,  wise, 


8  SERMON  I. 

faithful,  and  good,  we  should  have  discovered  no- 
thing calculated  to  relieve  us  of  the  apprehensions 
created  by  guilt,  but  every  thing  calculated  to 
strengthen,  to  rivet,  and  to  increase  them.  For 
the  goodness  which  lavished  so  much  honour  and 
blessedness  on  our  first  parents  ere  they  lapsed  in- 
to rebellion,  and  which  cannot  fail  to  watch  over 
the  well-being  and  happiness  of  all  God's  intelligent 
creatures  who  have  never  sinned  against  him, 
does  not  necessarily  embrace  those  who,  by  trans- 
gression, have  at  once  forfeited  the  blessings  which 
it  would  have  otherwise  bestowed,  contracted  a  debt 
to  the  justice  with  which  it  stands  united,  and 
are  incompetent  to  liquidate  the  debt  by  any  re- 
sources of  their  own.  And  if  the  goodness  of 
God  is  withdrawn  from  the  sinner's  view,  or 
if  no  declaration  is  made  of  its  being  extend- 
ed to  the  sinner's  case,  then  the  exactions  of 
his  justice  must  be  satisfied  in  our  punishment, 
his  faithfulness  will  secure  the  fulfilment  of 
every  evil  he  has  threatened,  his  wisdom  will 
contrive  and  his  power  will  execute  the  most  ef- 
fectual methods  of  inflicting  the  wrath  that  has 
been  incurred,  while  his  very  goodness,  from  the 
abundance  of  the  gifts  which  it  conferred,  and  the 
ingratitude  and  disobedience  with  which  it  was 
requited,  will  only  serve  to  render  his  vengeance 
more  certain  and  more  awful. 

But  the  moment   that   we   substitute  mercy 


SERMON  I.  9 

for  goodness,  and  introduce  it  into  the  divine 
character  as  an  essential  ingredient,   and  as  an 
object   of    beheving    contemplation,    the   whole 
complexion  of  that  character  is  changed  to  the 
sinner's    eye.      The    attributes    which   formerly 
created  and  enhanced  his  terror,  assume,  from 
their  alUance  with  mercy,   a  friendly  bearing  ou 
his  fate.      Each  of  them  now  acts  its  part  in 
seconding  the  exercise,  and  securing  the  awards  of 
mercy  in  his  behalf.     And,  in   their  combined 
operation,  he  sees  a  perfect  and  indubitable  pledge, 
that  whatever  mercy  designs  for  him  will  come  in- 
to his  lot,  without  failure  and  without  deficiency. 
From  the  mercy  of  God,  as  now  wocking  in  that 
system  of  divine  administration  under  which  he  is 
placed,  he  may  anticipate  deliverance  instead  of 
ruin ;  and  his  anticipation  does  not  rest  on  the 
mere  insulated  position  that  with  God  there  is 
mercy,  but  on  the  glorious  harmony  which  sub- 
sists among  all  the  attributes  of  the  divine  charac- 
ter, and  in  pursuance  of  which  they  are  all  united 
in  giving  to  that  mercy  its  proper  direction  and 
its  full  effect.     The  mercy  of  God  must  and  will 
extend  to  communicate  to  him  the  blessings  that 
are  suited  to  his  state.     And  nothing  can  occur 
to  frustrate  that  gracious  purpose,  or  to  detract 
either  from  its  extent  or  its  efficiency.     On  the 
contrary,  the  ivisdom  of  God  must  provide  most 
skilfully  for  the  full  execution  of  it :  the  power  of 


10  SERMON  I. 

God  will  overcome  all  obstacles  and  all  opposition 
that  may  come  in  its  way  :  the  truth  of  God  will 
guarantee  every  effort  that  may  be  required  for 
its  fulfilment :  and  the  Justice  of  God,  which,  by 
itself,  is  so  terrible  to  the  transgressor,  will  be  put 
forth  to  realize  every  thing  that  it  has  engaged 
to  confer,  with  as  much  strictness  and  rectitude, 
as  it  would  have  exhibited  in  inflicting  punish- 
ment on  the  guilty,  had  no  mercy  interposed  for 
their  salvation. 

If  then  we  would  hope  in  the  Lord  as  possessing 
the  attribute  of  mercy,  let  us  not  limit  our  view 
to  that  attribute,  but  let  us  regard  it  as  inhe- 
rent in  a  God  of  infinite  perfection,  and  with 
whom  therefore  it  will  have  its  perfect  work.  Let 
us  consider  well  the  nature  and  operation  of  the 
attributes  with  which  it  is  indissolubly  linked  in 
the  divine  character,  and  the  effect  which  they 
will  have  on  its  manifestations  in  favour  of  sinful 
men,  both  as  to  their  individual  and  their  com- 
bined influence.  And  let  us  derive  from  this 
comprehensive  consideration  of  that  which  makes 
God  the  sinner''s  refuge  and  the  sinner's  hope, 
all  the  encouragement,  and  confidence,  and  conso- 
lation which  the  necessities  of  our  spiritual  con- 
dition as  ftiUen  creatures  so  peremptorily  and 
lU'gentiy  need. 

But,  while  we  hope  in  the  Lord  because  he 
is  merciful,  and  while  we  look  to  the  rest  of 


SERMON  I.  11 

God'^s  attributes  as  aiding  in  the  exhibition  of 
his  mercy  and  in  the  accomphshment  of  its 
designs,  it  is  necessary  for  us  to  take  the  same 
extended  view  of  God's  character,  in  order  that 
our  hope  may  not  degenerate  into  presump- 
tion, but  be  preserved  within  safe  and  legitimate 
bounds.  If  we  were  to  think  of  the  divine 
power,  and  justice,  and  wisdom,  and  faithful- 
ness, as  mere  auxiliaries  to  the  Divine  mercy, 
as  having  no  other  office  than  to  contribute  to 
its  demonstration,  as  employed  for  the  single 
purpose  of  rendering  it  more  ample  and  more 
efficient, — we  should  be  giving  it  an  undue  as- 
cendancy, and  thus  not  only  destroying  the  sym- 
metry, and  proportions,  and  mutual  dependance 
that  reign  in  the  character  of  God,  and  consti- 
tute its  supreme  virtue  and  glory,  but  introduce 
the  most  mischievous  errors  into  our  faith,  and 
our  sentiments,  and  our  practice,  in  reference  to 
it.  It  cannot  be  that  his  mercy  should  be  ex- 
erted at  the  expense  or  to  the  disparagement, 
in  any  the  least  degree,  of  one  excellence  which 
beautifies  his  nature,  or  upholds  his  government, 
or  speaks  his  praise.  His  mercy  is  sovereign 
and  gratuitous  ;  and  therefore  it  can  only  be 
displayed,  when  every  other  quality  that  belongs 
to  him  is  fully  maintained,  and  there  is  no  sac- 
rifice of  the  honour  that  is  due  to  each,  and  of 


12  SERMON  I. 

the  consistency  which  pervades  the  whole.  When- 
ever his  mercy  cannot  be  exercised  without  re- 
fusing the  demands  of  his  justice,  or  without 
bringing  into  question  the  immutability  of  his 
faithfulness,  or  without  denying  the  irresistible 
energy  of  his  power,  or  without  impeaching  the 
infallibility  of  his  wisdom,  or  without  throwing 
suspicion  on  the  absolute  purity  of  his  nature — 
in  these  cases  his  mercy  cannot  be  exercised  at 
all,  for  the  exercise  of  it  would  involve  some 
shortcoming  in  his  perfection,  which  is  neces- 
sarily unqualified  and  unlimited.  It  is  only  of 
this  attribute  that  it  can  be  said,  "  He  will  have 
mercy  on  whom  he  will  have  mercy  ;"  of  every 
other  attribute,  it  is  requisite  that  we  predicate 
positive  and  peremptory  operation.  He  must  be 
holy  ;  he  must  be  wise ;  he  must  be  powerful ; 
he  must  be  just ;  he  must  be  true ;  he  must  be 
each  and  all  of  these  whatever  betide  his  uni- 
verse ;  and  if  we,  his  apostate  creatures,  cannot 
be  the  objects  of  his  mercy  except  by  some  sur- 
render of  the  homage  due  to  them,  or  some 
violation  of  the  harmony  that  reigns  among  them, 
his  mercy  cannot  save,  and  cannot  reach  us. 
But  this  is  our  comfort,  that  choosing  to  mani- 
fest his  mercy,  we  may  be  quite  assured  that 
he  will  form  such  arrangements  as  to  effectuate 
its  most  liberal  purposes,  and,  at  the  same  time, 


SERMON  I.  13 

to  make  it  entirely  compatible  "with  all  that  i« 
perfect  and  glorious  in  his  character ;  and  this  is 
our  duty^  to  defer  to  these  arrangements,  what- 
ever they  may  be,  as  necessary  alike  for  his 
honour,  and  for  our  welfare,  and  never  to  think 
of  his  mercy,  and  never  to  seek  for  it,  and  never 
to  expect  it,  without  directing  our  contempla- 
tion to  all  his  divine  excellencies,  and  to  regard 
it  only  in  its  combination  with  these,  as  the 
ground  of  that  hope  which  we  are  exhorted  to 
repose  in  God. 

Thus  shall  we  be  prevented  from  looking  for 
the  blessings  of  salvation  from  Him,  m  a  way 
or  to  an  extent,  in  which  they  cannot  possibly 
be  granted.  Thus  shall  we  be  prepared  for 
givinsj  that  tribute  of  humble  and  rational  sub- 
mission  which  every  scheme  that  he  may  reveal 
for  our  deliverance  or  our  consolation,  deserves 
from  such  helpless  beings  as  we  are.  And  thus 
shall  it  be,  that,  relying  on  God,  according  to 
what  he  has  declared  himself  to  be,  as  not  only 
merciful  to  sinners,  but  altogether  perfect  in  his 
dealings  with  them,  neither  will  our  prayers 
for  compassionate  treatment  be  undutiful,  nor 
will  our  expectations  of  receiving  it  be  finally 
disappointed. 

Notwithstanding  all  the  qualifications  that  we 
can  suppose  to  be  imparted  to  the  mercy  of  God 
by  the  existence  of  his    other  attributes,  and 


14,  SERMON  I. 

notwithstanding  the  necessity,  and  the  wisdom  of 
keeping  these  quaUfications  continually  in  view, 
when  we  rest  upon  it,  still  it  is  presented  to  us 
in  such  a  light,  and  celebrated  in  such  strains, 
and  recommended  by  such  facts  and  examples, 
throughout  the  whole  volume  of  inspiration,  that 
we  can  scarcely  appreciate  it  too  highly  or  depend 
upon  it  too  assuredly.  The  Bible  is  just  a  di- 
vine record  of  it — a  continued  testimony  to  it — 
a  bright  and  cheering  emanation  from  it.  From 
the  beginning  to  the  end  of  this  sacred  book ; 
from  the  account  which  it  gives  of  the  first  pro- 
mise, down  to  the  gracious  benediction  with 
which  its  Canon  closes  ;  amidst  all  the  trutlis 
which  it  proclaims,  and  all  the  providences  which 
it  relates,  and  all  the  prospects  which  it  unfolds ; 
at  every  successive  period,  and  through  every 
successive  generation,  whose  history  it  sets  before 
us, — God  is  represented  to  our  faith  as  speaking, 
<uid  working,  and  ruling  in  our  fallen  world,  and 
this  is  his  unceasing  and  unchangeable  memorial, 
that  he  is  merciful,  and  merciful  in  all  the  variety 
of  which  that  character  is  susceptible,  and  accord- 
ing to  all  the  circumstances  of  those  upon  whom 
it  is  made  to  operate.  We  see  many  a  manifes- 
tation of  his  other  attributes ;  but  amidst  them 
all  we  see  his  mercy  held  forth  to  our  admira- 
tion, and  working  its  way,  either  in  faithful  pro- 
mise or  in  actual  application  to  the  heart  of  the 


SERMON  I.  15 

guilty — to  the  condition  of  the  miserable,  that 
it  may  console,  and  purify,  and  save. 

Only  observe  what  an  endless  diversity  of  terms 
and  figures  are  employed  by  the  sacred  writers  to 
illustrate  its  excellence,  and  to  delineate  its  ex- 
tent. They  call  it  "great,"  "manifold,"  "tender," 
"abundant,"  "higher  than  the  heavens," and  "ev- 
erlasting." The  Lord  is  said  by  them  to  be  "  rich" 
— to  be  "plenteous" — and  to  "delight  in  mercy." 
We  read  of  the  "  multitude  of  his  mercies" — of 
"  the  earth  being  full  of  his  mercy" — of  "  all 
his  paths  being  mercy"" — of  his  "  tender  mercy 
being  over  all  his  works."  His  mercy  is  describ- 
ed as  exceeding  in  permanency  those  objects 
whose  permanency  is  proverbial.  "  The  moun- 
tains shall  depart,  and  the  hills  shall  be  removed; 
but  my  kindness  shall  not  depart  from  thee, 
neither  shall  the  coveniint  of  my  peace  be  re- 
moved, saith  the  Lord,  that  hath  mercy  upon 
thee."  It  is  compared  to  those  affections  which 
actuate  the  heart  of  a  Father,  when  he  looks 
upon  the  offspring  whom,  though  erring  and  per- 
verse, he  still  bears  with  and  loves ;  "  Like  as 
a  Father  pitieth  his  children,  so  the  Lord  piti- 
eth  them  that  fear  him  ;  for  he  knoweth  their 
frame,  and  remembereth  they  are  but  dust."  It 
is  exalted  above  those  tenderer  and  more  ardent 
feelings  with  which  a  mother  regards  the  weep- 
ing infiint  that  hangs  upon  her  breast.     "  Can 


16  SERMON  r. 

a  mother  forget  her  sucking  child,  that  she 
should  not  have  compassion  on  the  son  of  her 
womb  ?  Yea ;  she  may  forget ;  yet  will  not 
I  forget  thee,"  saith  God  to  Zion  in  the  sea- 
son of  her  calamity.  And  to  bring  the  sub- 
ject still  nearer  to  us,  and  to  make  it  bear  still 
more  impressively  on  our  feelings,  God  conde- 
scends to  have  himself  represented  as  actually 
sympathising  with  us — as  partaking  largely  of 
our  sufferings — as  afflicted  in  all  our  afflictions — 
"  How  shall  I  give  thee  up,  Ephraim  ?  How  shall 
I  deliver  thee,  Israel  ?  How  shall  I  make  thee 
as  Admah  ?  How  shall  I  set  thee  as  Zeboim  ? 
Mine  heart  is  turned  within  me ;  my  repentings 
are  kindled  together." — "  Is  Ephraim  my  dear 
son  ?  Is  he  a  pleasant  child .''  For  since  I  spake 
against  him,  I  do  earnestly  remember  him  still. 
Therefore  my  bowels  are  troubled  for  him ; 
I  will  surely  have  mercy  on  him,  saith  the  Lord." 
My  friends,  do  not  you  perceive  in  all  these 
things  such  proofs  and  illustrations  of  God'^s 
mercy  as  should  determine  you  to  place  your 
hope  in  him,  as  a  being  who  never  can  look  vip- 
on  you  with  indifference,  and  never  can  treat 
you  with  neglect — who  will  take  an  interest  in 
your  well  being,  amidst  all  the  saddest  vicissi- 
tudes of  your  lot — and  who  will  withhold  no- 
thing that  is  needful,  when  as  sinful,  and  miser- 
able, and  helpless,  you  cast  yourselves  upon  his 


SERMON  I.  17 

compassion  ?     But  if  such  instances  and  such 
descriptions  of  his  mercy,  as  we  have  been  setting 
before  you,  are  calculated  to  produce  such  an 
impression  on  your  minds,  what  may  you  not  be 
expected  to  feel  when  we  make  mention  of  that 
marvellous  and  emphatic  token  of  it  which  he  has 
given  in  the  sacrifice  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ, 
which  you  are  this  day  assembled  to  commemo- 
rate?*  This  is  such  a  token  of  it  as  surpasses  not 
only  all  the  knowledge  of  God's  character  which 
you  cotdd  have  derived  from  any  other  source, 
but  all  the  conceptions  which   your  imagination 
itself  could  possibly  have  formed  of  its  conde- 
scension and  its  adaptation  to  the  circumstances 
of  fallen  humanity.     God  could  not  show  mercy 
to  us  without  satisfying  the  demands  of  his  jus- 
tice, and  vindicating  the  authority  of  his  law,  and 
magnifying  and  honouring  all  the  perfections  of 
his  nature.     And  it  should  seem  that  these  ne- 
cessary ends  could  not  be  attained,  without  the 
substitution  of  some  one  in  our  stead,  who  should 
endure  the  suffering  that  we  could  not  endure, 
and  render  the  obedience  that  we  could  not  ren- 
der, and  by  a  scheme  of  divine  workmanship,  ex- 
ecuted by  a  being  of  divine  perfection,  procure 

•  This  Discourse  was  preached  on  the  morning  of  a  Com- 
munion Sabbath. 


18  SERMON  I. 

for  us,  and  bestow  upon  us,  every  thing  which  our 
complete  recovery  and  restoration  required.  And 
though  he  in  whom  all  this  fitness  resided,  and 
who  alone  possessed  might  and  sufficiency  to  save, 
was  none  other  than  his  own  Son,  he  spared  not 
his  own  Son, — his  only  begotten  Son — his  well- 
beloved  Son, — but  "  freely  delivered  him  vip  for 
us  all,"  that  we,  "  believing  in  him,  might  not  pe- 
rish but  have  everlasting  life."'''  He  delivered 
him  up  to  humiliation, — to  sorrow, — and  to 
death  ; — to  humiliation,  involving  an  assumption 
of  our  nature  and  of  our  transgressions  ; — to  sor- 
row, unparalleled  in  the  history  of  suffering  hu- 
manity ; — to  death,  implying  not  merely  the  dis- 
solution of  soul  and  body,  but  the  burden  of  a 
world's  guilt,  and  the  wrath  of  an  avenging  God. 
And  he  thus  delivered  him  up,  that  he  might 
rescue  us  from  misery  v/hich  he  could  have  inflict- 
ed upon  us,  and  received  for  it  the  adoration  of 
his  universe,  and  that,  after  ministering  to  our 
manifold  wants,  and  cheering  our  afflicted  hearts, 
and  guiding  our  wandering  steps  in  this  desert 
place,  through  which  we  are  doomed  to  travel  for 
a  season,  he  might  take  us,  who  were  children  of 
wrath,  and  heirs  of  hell,  into  his  heavenly  pre- 
sence, and  there  rejoice  over  us  for  ever  as  the 
trophies  of  his  redeeming  love. 

The  mercy  of  God,   therefore,  lays  a  foun- 


SERMON  L  19 

dation  for  hope  that  is  deep,  and  broad,  and 
stable;  and  he  that  builds  upon  it  can  never 
be  confounded  or  put  to  shame,  but  is  as  sure 
of  being  effectually  helped  and  abundantly  sa- 
tisfied, as  there  is  perfection  in  the  character  of 
God,  and  truth  in  the  mission  of  his  Son,  Jesus 
Christ. 

I  call  upon  sinners,  therefore,  who  are  still  "  in 
the  gall  of  bitterness,  and  in  the  bonds  of  ini- 
quity," to  look  to  this  mercy  that  their  hearts 
may  be  melted  into  contrition  by  its  greatness 
and  its  tenderness.  It  is  so  great,  and  so  tender, 
and  so  ready  to  pour  out  its  beneficence  on  the 
chief  of  sinners,  that  if  you  will  but  accept  of  it, 
and  confide  in  it,  as  it  is  made  known  in  the  gos- 
pel, you  shall  obtain  forgiveness,  fully,  freely, 
and  for  ever  ;  and  be  your  transgressions  ever  so 
aggravated,  and  your  pollutions  ever  so  multipli- 
ed, and  your  wretchedness  ever  so  deplorable, 
here  is  a  remedy  for  them  all, — and  even  for  you 
there  is  deliverance  provided  now,  and  even  for 
you  there  will  be  a  crown  of  glory  hereafter. 
But  if  you  refuse  to  acquiesce  in  the  dispensation 
by  which  it  is  appointed  that  these  blessings 
should  be  conveyed  to  you,  and  persevere  in  the 
ungodly  course  you  have  been  hitherto  pursuing, 
this  mercy,  which  is  so  liberally  offered  to  you, 
will  only  add  to  your  guilt  and  your  condemna- 


20  SERMON  I. 

tion,  and  it  will  be  one  of  the  bitterest  recollec- 
tions in  the  place  of  punishment,  that  you  neglect- 
ed, and  despised,  and  put  away  from  you,  the 
mercy  that  was  manifested  for  the  salvation  of 
ruined  souls. 

I  call  upon  the  "  prisoners  of  hope"  to  take 
refuge  in  this  divine  mercy  which  we  have  been 
holding  forth.  You  are  sensible  of  your  spiritual 
bondage, — and  you  not  only  long,  but  in  some 
measure  expect  and  wait  for  deliverance  from  its 
chains,  and  for  a  return  to  freedom,  and  purity, 
and  blessedness.  Let  your  desires  grow  stronger 
—let  your  expectations  be  encouraged  ;  for  the 
mercy  on  which  you  rely,  and  which  has  already 
taught  you  to  hope,  is  ready  to  do  for  you  all 
that  you  need,  and  to  receive  you  into  its  generous 
embrace,  and  to  bless  you  with  "the  glorious  liber- 
ty of  the  children  of  God.""  "Turn  ye  then  to  the 
stronghold ;"  lose  no  time  in  casting  yourselves 
upon  Christ ;  commit  all  your  interests  into  his 
hands;  and  you  will  find  in  your  immediate,  in 
your  continued,  in  your  everlasting  experience, 
tliat  the  divine  mercy,  as  manifested  in  him,  is  a 
fountain  of  blessedness — full,  and  overflowing, 
and  inexhaustible. 

And,  finally,  I  call  upon  the  Israel — the  peo- 
ple of  God,  to  continue  stedfast  and  immovable  in 
their  dependance  upon  his  mercy,  and  free  and 


SERMON  I.  21 

fearless  in  their  applications  for  its  promised  exer- 
cise and  its  needed  blessings.  You  already  know 
its  inestimable  value — its  ample  and  ever-during 
sufficiency ;  and  you  have  experienced  the  hap- 
piness of  a  habitual  recourse  to  it  for  supplies  of 
spiritual  and  temporal  comforts  ; — and  it  is  too 
much  endeared  to  you,  to  be  ever  forgotten,  or  to 
be  ever  disregarded.  This  day  it  is  again  an- 
nounced in  your  hearing — it  is  presented  to  your 
faith — it  is  ready  to  sustain  all  your  hopes — it 
bids  you  welcome  to  whatever  can  contribute  to 
your  safety  and  your  consolation,  to  your  peace 
and  your  joy.  It  is  embodied,  and  most  affect- 
ingly  represented,  and  most  liberally  urged  upon 
you,  in  the  holy  ordinance  of  which  you  are  invit- 
ed to  partake.  Come,  then,  to  God,  with  the 
confidence  that  is  warranted  and  emboldened  by 
the  manifestation  of  his  mercy  here  brought  nigh 
to  you.  Come  with  your  prayers  and  supplica- 
tions, that  they  may  be  preferred  and  answered. 
Come  with  your  sins,  that  they  may  be  forgiv- 
en— with  your  corruptions,  that  they  may  be 
subdued, — with  your  fears,  that  they  may  be 
dissipated, — with  your  wants,  that  they  may  be 
supplied, — with  your  miseries,  that  they  may  be 
exchanged  for  joy.  Come  as  you  are,  that  the 
God  of  mercy  may  shower  down  upon  you,  and 

send  into  your  very  hearts,  all  the  rich  benefits 
6 


22  SERMON  I. 

of  Clirist's  jourcliase,  and  give  you  such  renewed 
tokens  of  his  loving  kindness  as  will  comfort  and 
gladden  you  in  time,  and  be  a  pledge  and  pre- 
lude of  the  felicities  of  the  eternal  world. 


SERMON  11. 


PSALM  CXXX.  7j  8. 

"  Let  Israel  hope  in  the  Lord  ;  for  with  the  Lord  there 
is  mercy  ;  and  loith  him  is  plenteous  redemjJtion  ;  and 
he  shall  redeem  Israel  from  all  his  iniquities." 

In  discoursing  on  these  words,  we  proposed  to 
consider  the  three  grounds  on  which  David  here 
invokes  Israel  to  hope  in  the  Lord.  The  Jirst, 
that  "  with  the  Lord  there  is  mercy,"  we  have 
aheady  iUustrated. 

II.  We  are  now  to  consider  the  second  reason 
mentioned  by  the  Psahnist  for  hoping  in  the 
Lord.  "  Let  Israel  hope  in  the  Lord  ;  for  zvith 
him  is  plenteous  redemption.'''' 

God  is  not  only  merciful,  but  he  has  actually 
exercised  his  mercy  for  the  benefit  of  sinners,  and 
he  has  done  so  by  forming  and  executing  a  plan 
for  securing  to  those  who  are  the  objects  of  it. 
whatever  is  necessary  for  their  deliverance  and 


24  SERMON  II. 

their  happiness.     This  plan  is  neither  more  nor 
less  than  the  gospel — which  is  just  a  revelation 
of  God's  mercy  to  guilty  men  ;  for  though  God 
appears  in  it  as  possessing  all  the  perfections  which 
can  be  supposed  to  distinguish  an  infinite  Being, 
and  though  all  these  perfections  are  exhibited, 
not  in  accidental  connexion  with  it,  but  as  es- 
sentially   conducing   to    its  excellence    and   its 
efficiency,  yet  mercy  is  its  characteristic  feature, 
and  pervades  its  purposes,  its  arrangements,  and 
its  fulfilment,   as  that  which  makes  it  at  once 
suitable  and  acceptable  to  the  creatures  for  whose 
advantage  it  was  originally  contrived.     In  look- 
ing to  the  character  of  God,  as  adorned  with  the 
attribute  of  mercy,  we  see  that  mercy  put  forth, 
practically  realized,  substantially  embodied,  irre- 
vocably pledged,   in  a  well  ordered  scheme,  and 
finished  work  of  redemption.     Provision  is  made 
in  it  for  our  rescue  and  our  restoration.     It  is 
adapted  to  our  peculiar  character,  and  to  our  pe- 
culiar circumstances,  as  transgressors.     And  all 
that  it  intends  to  bestow  upon  us  is  so  insured, 
that  none  of  the  perfections  of  the  Deity  will  be 
infringed  or  tarnished  by  that  bestowal.     Nay, 
these  perfections  are  so   demonstrated,    and   so 
honoured  by  it,  as  not  merely  to  allow  God's  re- 
deeming mercy  to  expatiate  upon  our  condition 
as  a  condition  of  sin  and  misery,  but  even  to 
contribute  to  its  manifestation  in  all  the  freeness 
and  fulness  which  our  necessities  demand 


SERMON  II.  25 

The  redemption  which  is  asserted  to  be  with 
God  is  called  a  plenteous  redemption.  This 
character  may  be  considered  as  necessarily  be- 
longing to  it.  Whenever  we  are  assured  that 
God  is  merciful,  and  that  he  is  pleased  to  exer- 
cise his  mercy  towards  sinners,  we  are  entitled  to 
anticipate  liberality  in  its  display,  because  it  is 
liberal  in  its  very  nature,  being  an  extension  of 
goodness  to  those  who  deserve  no  expression  of 
favour  or  of  friendship,  and  because  being  the 
operation  of  an  absolutely  perfect  being,  and  al- 
together consistent  with  his  honour  and  glory, 
we  can  see  no  reason  for  its  being  niggardly  in  the 
bounties  that  it  communicates,  or  in  the  mode  of 
communicating  them.  It  no  doubt  essentially 
involves  the  divine  sovereignty,  so  that  God  is 
not  under  any  peremptory  obligation,  or  any  com- 
pulsory motive,  to  redeem  certain  individuals, 
or  any  certain  number  of  individuals  ;  but  then 
this  very  sovereignty,  having  made  its  choice  and 
its  determination,  forms  a  pledge  that  the  mercy 
will  go  forth  upon  its  objects  without  let  or  hin- 
derance,  and  that,  every  obstacle  being  thorough- 
ly removed,  and  every  warrant  afforded  for  its 
acting  in  a  manner  corresponding  with  the  innate 
benignity  of  the  Godhead,  completeness  and 
abundance  will  distinguish  the  redemption  which 
it  has  provided.  In  short,  it  will  be  a  plenteous 
redemption . 


26  SERMON  II. 

Now,  when  we  look  to  that  redemption  itself,  as 
unfolded  in  the  gospel,  we  find  all  these  anticipa- 
tions of  it  verified  and  realized.  There  is  nothing 
defective  in  it,  nothing  stinted,  nothing  reluctant, 
nothing  inadequate.  It  is  accommodated  to  all  the 
features  of  our  character,  and  to  all  the  varieties  of 
our  lot.  It  embraces  the  whole  range  of  our  pre- 
sent state,  and  the  whole  extent  of  our  future 
prospects.  We  cannot  say  that  there  is  a  want 
which  it  is  not  competent  to  supply,  or  that  there 
is  an  evil  which  it  is  not  sufficient  to  remedy,  or 
that  there  is  a  benefit  which  it  is  not  intended, 
and  has  not  power,  to  confer.  It  is  a  system  of 
recovery ;  and  amidst  all  the  direful  calamities 
in  which  our  apostacy  has  involved  us,  there  is 
not  one  to  which  it  would  leave  us  subject,  while, 
of  all  the  blessings  of  which  our  apostacy  has  de- 
prived us,  there  is  not  one  to  which  it  would  deny 
us  a  new  and  inviolable  title.  So  that  the  change 
which  it  is  fitted  to  effectuate,  in  all  that  concerns 
us  as  spiritual,  and  responsible,  and  immortal 
beings,  is  such  as  to  justify  all  the  conceptions 
we  could  have  formed  of  the  mercy  of  Him  whom 
we  had  offended,  and  to  be  an  ample  foundation 
for  our  hope  in  him,  however  guilty,  however 
wretched,  and  however  helpless  we  may  be. 

But  let  us  take  a  somewhat  nearer  and  more 
particular  view  of  this  plenteous  redemption,  as 
a  ground  of  hope  for  all  those  who  will  accept  of 
it,  as  it  has  been  wrought  out  and  offered. 


SERMON  It.  27 

1.  In  \\ie  first  place,  it  implies  deliverance  from 
the  punishment  due  to  us  as  transgressors. 

To  that  punishment  the  law  of  God,  in  conse- 
quence of  our  violation  of  it,  had  justly  doomed 
us ;  and  but  for  the  interposition  of  his  mercy, 
we  must  have  endured  it  without  mitigation,  and 
without  end.  His  mercy,  however,  having  inter- 
posed, this  is  its  first  and  leading  achievement, 
to  make  atonement  for  human  guilt,  so  that  the 
penalty  of  the  law  may  be  remitted,  and  its  con- 
demnatory sentence  recalled,  as  to  all  those  who 
obtain  an  interest  in  the  redemption  of  the 
gospel.  To  them  there  is  no  condemnation  here, 
and  there  will  be  no  condemnation  hereafter. 
Their  sins  are  so  thoroughly  forgiven,  that  though 
each  one  of  these  sins  merits  the  wrath  of  God, 
not  one  of  them  remains  in  the  book  of  his  re- 
membrance, as  that  for  which  suffering  will  be 
inflicted.  The  debt  which  was  due  to  inflexible 
justice  has  been  paid,  even  to  the  uttermost  far- 
thing :  the  debtor  walks  abroad  from  his  prison- 
house  ;  and  his  surety  who  has  laid  down  the 
price,  is  pledged  to  maintain  the  freedom  from 
bondage  which  has  been  effected  in  his  behalf, 
and  to  answer  every  demand  that  may  henceforth 
be  made  upon  him  by  his  lawgiver  and  his  judge. 
It  cannot,  indeed,  be  literally  affirmed  concerning 
him,  that  the  expiatory  death  of  Christ  has  pro- 
cured the  actual  pardon  of  all  the  iniquities  which 


28  SERMON  II. 

he  may  yet  commit,  as  -rtrell  as  those  with  which 
he  already  stands  chargeable,  so  that  he  can  look 
upon  himself  as,  in  his  existing  state,  equally 
freed  n-om  both.  Such  a  doctrine  is  unscriptural 
— it  is  as  absurd  as  it  is  unscriptural — and  it  is 
as  dangerous  as  it  is  unscriptural  and  absurd.  A 
man,  though  justified,  is  still  exposed  to  tempta- 
tion, and  liable  to  be  overcome  by  it ;  and  every 
day  that  passes  over  his  head  will  find  him  break- 
ing the  commandments,  and  incurring  the  dis- 
pleasure of  God,  so  that  he  continually  needs  re- 
newed forgiveness  for  renewed  transgression.  But 
herein  consists  the  pleuteousness  of  the  redemp- 
tion provided  for  him,  that,  while  God  pardons 
him  by  an  act  of  justifying  grace,  so  that  the  law 
no  longer  can  prefer  any  valid  claim  against  him 
for  punishment,  God  continues  to  pardon  the  sins 
which  he  continues  to  commit.  The  absolution 
he  has  received  remains  unmodified  and  untouch- 
ed. Divine  mercy  perseveres  in  granting  remis- 
sion for  his  trespasses  on  account  of  which  Divine 
justice  has  been  satisfied  by  the  vicarious  death 
of  his  substitute.  And  this  gift  of  God  is  with- 
out repentance — it  is  never  withdrawn,  and  never 
ceases  to  be  bestowed — it  extends  throughout  the 
whole  course  of  his  life — and  at  the  close  of  it, 
the  handwriting  that  was  upon  the  wall  against 
him,  is,  every  sentence,  and  every  word,  and  every 
syllable  of  it,  blotted  out.     Whenever  he  is  jus- 


SERMON  II.  29 

tified  through  the  redemption  which  is  in  Christ 
Jesus,  he  is  safe,  and  his  safety  remains  unaffect- 
ed by  those  aberrations  into  which  he  is  seduced 
by  external  allurements,  or  by  inherent  infirmity 
— for  there  is  the  same  unchangeable  mercy  to 
pardon  him,  and  the  same  all-sufficient  surety  to 
satisfy  every  demand  that  can  be  made  upon  him. 
Conscience  speaks  no  terror  to  him ;  for  the  guilt 
which  fiUed  it  with  remorse  is  all  taken  away  by 
the  blood  of  sprinkling.  He  can  look  up  to  God 
without  fear,  for  the  frown  of  righteous  vengeance 
has  been  removed  from  the  Divine  countenance 
by  the  offering  of  a  perfect  and  acceptable  sacri- 
fice. And  he  can  look  forward,  without  one 
painful  apprehension,  for  that  unbending  justice, 
which  had  kindled  up  the  everlasting  burnings, 
having  been  fully  and  for  ever  appeased,  hell  has 
no  place  in  the  anticipations  of  his  eternity,  and 
the  Judge  before  whom  he  is  to  appear  is  that 
very  Being  who  has  effected  this  plenteous  re- 
demption for  him,  and  must,  as  a  part  of  it,  pro- 
nounce upon  him  the  sentence  of  acquittal. 

2.  In  the  second  place,  the  plenteous  redemp- 
tion mentioned  in  the  text  implies  emancipation 
from  the  dominion  of  sin. 

This  emancipation  is  not  perfect  and  entire  in 
a  present  world.  Even  where  it  is  most  real, 
most  visible,  most  unreserved,  there  are  many 
remains  of  unraortified  and  unsubdued  corrup- 


30  SERMON  II. 

tion,  much  prevalence  of  the  passions  and  habits 
of  the  old  man  over  the  principles  and  affections 
of  the  new,  numerous  instances  in  which  sin  is 
practically  preferred  to  duty,  the  creature  to  the 
Creator,  and  earth  to  heaven.  But,  in  the  midst 
of  these  shortcomings  and  imperfections,  the  man 
who  partakes  of  the  redemption  which  is  with 
God,  is  rescued,  truly,  vitally,  consciously,  and 
perpetually,  from  the  reigning  power  of  iniquity. 
Formerly  he  was  its  slave,  in  all  the  members  of 
his  body  and  in  all  the  faculties  of  his  mind — he 
willingly  wore  its  galling  chains — he  actively  per- 
formed its  meanest  drudgery — he  implicitly  sur- 
rendered himself  to  its  tyrannical  sway — it  said 
to  him,  Go,  and  he  went.  Do  this,  and  he  did  it. 
As  soon,  however,  as  the  redemption  of  the  gos- 
pel is  extended  to  him,  the  fetters  of  his  spiritual 
enthralment  are  broken  off — sin  no  longer  rules 
in  him  as  one  of  the  children  of  disobedience — 
its  servitude  provokes  his  resistance,  and  he  es- 
capes from  it — and,  in  whatever  way,  or  through 
whatever  channel,  its  ascendancy  was  wont  to  be 
maintained,  it  ceases  to  retain  his  ready  homage, 
or  to  command  his  habitual  submission.  The 
enmity  of  the  carnal  mind  is  slain,  and  deprived 
of  its  power  to  lead  him  in  hostile  defiance  against 
the  authority  of  God.  The  blandishments  of  the 
world  fail  to  engage  him  in  its  service,  by  pro- 
mising to  reward  him  with  its  pleasures,  and  ex- 


SERMON  II.  31 

erting  their  thousand  influences  on  the  corrupt 
propensities  of  his  heart.  And  even  to  the  wiles 
of  Satan,  who  had  long  led  him  captive  at  his 
will,  he  is  enabled  to  set  himself  in  decided  oppo- 
sition, to  throw  off  the  yoke  of  bondage  under 
which  he  had  been  kept  by  that  arch-enemy  of 
his  soul,  and  to  resist  his  manifold  and  artful  at- 
tempts to  keep  him  attached  to  those  employ- 
ments, and  pursuits,  and  gratifications  which  de- 
grade the  character,  and  lead  to  endless  perdition. 
In  all  these  respects,  he  finds,  that  the  redemp- 
tion to  whose  privileges  and  benefits  he  is  admit- 
ted, is  a  plenteous  redemption.  There  is  not  a 
partial  reform,  but  a  total  revolution  in  the  go- 
vernment of  his  heart  and  life.  "  Old  things  are 
done  away — all  things  are  become  new*"  in  his 
moral  state.  The  supremacy  which  sin  had  pos- 
sessed over  him  by  nature,  and  more  firmly  secur- 
ed by  practice,  is  overturned.  The  victory  is  de- 
cisive in  the  feeling  and  experience  of  his  own 
mind.  Even  when  in  an  unguarded  moment,  or 
from  the  strength  and  the  suddenness  of  tempta- 
tion, he  is  drawn  aside  from  the  path  of  righteous- 
ness and  prevailed  upon  to  indulge  in  forbidden 
joy,  he  is  sensible  that  this  is  but  a  temporary 
though  criminal  dereliction  of  the  conquest  that 
has  been  won  for  him  by  the  mercy  and  the  Spirit 
of  God  ;  and  in  the  promise  that  sin  shall  not  now 
have  dominion  over  him,  he  recognises  a  security 


32  SERMON  II. 

and  an  encouragement  by  which  he  is  animated 
to  maintain  that  liberty  wherewith  Christ  has  made 
him  free.  And  though  he  may  still  find  "  a  law 
in  his  members  warring  against  the  law  of  his 
mind,"  and  occasionally  "  bringing  him  into  cap- 
tivity to  the  law  of  sin  which  is  in  his  members," 
yet  there  is  a  provision  in  the  scheme  of  salvation 
for  upholding  him  in  the  mastery  he  has  acquired 
over  the  devil,  the  world,  and  the  flesh  ;  there  is  a 
rich  assurance  that  this  merciful  and  necessary 
provision  will  be  carried  into  full  effect ;  and  there 
is  the  certain  prospect  of  the  triumph  being  com- 
pleted and  matured,  when  the  believer  to  whom 
it  has  been  vouchsafed  shall  enter  into  that  holy 
and  happy  region,  where  nothing  that  defileth 
can  ever  enter,  and  where  the  pleyiteousness  of 
redemption  from  the  dominion  of  sin  shall  be  ex- 
perienced in  its  hteral  sense,  in  its  full  value,  and 
in  its  uninterrupted  perpetuity. 

3.  In  the  third  place,  this  plenteous  redemption 
implies  deliverance  from  the  common  distresses  of 
humanity. 

These  are  the  effects  of  sin  ;  and  in  propor- 
tion as  the  power  of  sin  is  subdued,  and  the  pre- 
valence of  sin  circumscribed,  will  their  severity  be 
diminished.  As  sin,  however,  still  maintains  its 
ground  and  works  its  mischief,  in  a  present  world, 
bodily  and  outward  affliction  continues  to  cleave 
to  the  lot  even  of  those  who  have  embraced  the 


SERMON  II.  33 

redemption  of  the  gospel.  Enjoying  all  the  be- 
nefits which  that  redemption  brings  to  them,  in 
this  imperfect  state,  they  are  yet  "  born  to 
trouble,"  and  have  to  sustain  it  through  life,  in 
all  its  multiplied  forms,  and  in  all  its  various  de- 
grees. But  they  are  redeemed  even  here  from 
whatever  renders  the  sufferings  of  mortality  into- 
lerable. Having  been  forgiven  and  accepted, 
they  no  longer  regard  these  as  the  tokens  of 
God's  avenging  wrath,  but  as  the  chastisements 
of  his  parental  discipline.  They  are  no  longer 
called  to  endure  them  unsupported  and  unso- 
laced,  for  strength  and  consolation  are  communi- 
cated to  them,  suitable  to  the  nature,  the  extent, 
and  the  duration  of  every  calamity  with  which 
they  can  be  visited.  And  they  are  no  longer 
doomed  to  bear  them  as  vmconnected  with  the 
prospects  of  a  better  state,  of  an  unsuffering  king- 
dom, for  the  gospel  opens  up  to  them  the  scenes 
of  immortality,  where  no  disease  shall  invade  their 
bodies,  where  no  sorrow  shall  wound  or  oppress 
their  spirits,  where  no  misfortune  shall  ever  cloud 
their  view,  and  where  death  with  all  its  anxieties 
and  agonies  shall  be  known  no  more. 

Herein,  therefore,  is  the  redemption  of  the  gospel 
plenteous,  even  as  affecting  our  present  outward 
circumstances,  that  though  it  does  not  exempt  from 
temporal  afflictions,  it  plucks  out  their  sting  and 
mitigates  their  pressure;  it  secures  beyond  all 


34?  SERMON  II. 

doubt,  not  merely  their  termination,  but  their  ter- 
mination in  a  state  of  existence,  forming  a  perfect 
contrast  with  that  which  they  now  so  darken  and 
deform  ;  it  converts  them  into  blessings  by  making 
them  the  instruments  of  God's  paternal  kindness, 
and  subservient  to  the  progressive  improvement 
and  everlasting  welfare  of  those  upon  whom  they 
had  been  inflicted.  And  while  the  contempla- 
tion of  them,  as  treated  and  influenced  by  the 
gospel,  cannot  fail  to  give  us  a  strong  impression 
of  the  abundance  of  the  redeeming  mercy  which 
God  exercises  with  respect  to  them,  that  impres- 
sion must  be  strengthened  and  confirmed  by  re- 
collecting the  experience  of  all  to  whom  the  re- 
demption has  been  revealed  in  its  power,  and  its 
preciousness,  for  they  have  been  brought  to  re- 
joice in  tribulation  of  whatever  kind,  to  triumph 
over  death  in  its  most  horrible  shape,  to  welcome 
the  trials  and  the  pains  from  which  unsanctified 
nature  shrunk  with  instinctive  aversion  and  alarm, 
as  the  best  blessings  which  heaven  had  to  bestow, 
and  to  glory  in  them  as  conducive  to  their  moral 
perfection,  and  as  preparatory  to  their  future 
blessedness. 

4.  In  the  fourth  place,  this  plenteous  redemp- 
tion implies,  that  provision  is  made  for  the  en- 
tire restoration  and  perfect  felicity  of  those  for 
whom  it  is  prepared. 

The  views  we  have  hitherto  taken  of  it  have 


SERMONII.  25 

been  almost  altogether  negative.  And  these  have 
been  illustrative  in  their  own  place,  and  to  a  cer- 
tain extent,  of  the  fulness  of  that  salvation  which 
the  divine  mercy  has  wrought  out  for  sinners. 
But  if  we  rest  satisfied  with  these,  and  do  not  go 
forward  to  the  consideration  of  the  positive  bless- 
ings with  which  they  stand  connected,  or  to  which 
they  are  essential  preliminaries  in  the  economy 
of  the  gospel,  we  shall  have  a  most  defective  idea 
of  the  plenteousness  of  the  Christian  redemption. 
We  must  take  into  consideration  all  those  abso- 
lute  benefits,  to  which  the  mere  deliverances  we 
have  been  speaking  of  are  only  preparatory,  that 
we  may  see  from  their  nature,  their  certainty, 
and  their  permanency,  whether  as  Isestowed  on 
this  world  or  to  be  enjoyed  in  the  next,  what  a 
ground  of  hope  is  afforded  by  the  great  truth  that 
*'  with  the  Lord  is  plenteous  redemption."*" 

For  example,  this  redemption  implies  our  deli- 
verance from  the  wrath  of  God  and  the  pains  of 
hell.  And  every  one  who  understands  these  terms, 
and  is  alive  to  any  considerable  portion  of  their 
import,  must  be  aware  that  it  is  incalculably  im- 
portant to  escape  from  the  evils  which  they  de- 
scribe. But  how  is  the  importance  of  this  en- 
hanced, and  how  rich  and  precious  must  that 
scheme  of  mercy  which  makes  such  a  discovery 
be  esteemed,  when  we  recollect  that  deliverance 
from  the  wrath  of  God  is  accompanied  with  re- 


36  SERMON  11. 

storation  to  his  favour,  and  that  deliverance  from 
the  pains  of  hell  brings  along  with  it  a  new  title 
to  the  blessedness  of  heaven — that  while  rescued 
from  the  heaviest  calamities  which  can  lie  upon 
the  fate  of  human  beings,  we  are  also  put  in  pos- 
session of  the  most  exalted  benefits  that  can  be 
enjoyed  by  them,  either  in  time  or  in  eternity  ! 

This  redemption  implies  deliverance  from  the 
reigning  power  of  sin ;  and  doubtless  it  is  of  un- 
speakable consequence  that  sin  should  no  more 
have  dominion  over  us  and  keep  us  as  its  slaves ; 
but  see  what  additional  worth  is  imparted  to  that 
emancipation  from  spiritual  bondage,  by  the  re- 
lative blessing  of  being  invested  with  "  the  li- 
berty of  the  sons  of  God" — of  being  "  made  par- 
takers of  a  divine  nature" — of  being  sanctified 
throughout  the  whole  of  our  intellectual  and  mo- 
ral frame, — of  having  holy  principles,  holy  af- 
fections, holy  habits,  established  in  our  heart  and 
character — of  being  thus  qualified  to  hold  pre- 
sent communion  with  our  heavenly  Father,  to 
whom  we  have  been  reconciled,  and  after  honour- 
ing and  serving  him,  and  walking  in  the  light 
of  his  countenance,  and  partaking  of  the  com- 
munications of  his  love  upon  earth,  to  be  ad- 
mitted to  the  angelic  employments,  and  the  se- 
raphic joys  of  his  celestial  presence  ! 

This  redemption  implies  deliverance  from  the 
ills  that  are  incident  to  mortality,  inasmuch  as  it 


SERMON  II.  37 

gives  us  support  and  consolation  under  them, 
and  finally  takes  them  all  away  for  ever  ;  and  to 
those  who  have  suffered  long  or  suffered  much, 
this  is  a  mighty  boon.  But  how  greatly  is  its 
worth  magnified  by  the  fatherly  kindness  which 
is  mingled  with  every  one  of  the  distresses  to 
which  we  are  subjected  by  the  anticipation  of 
that  happy  result  in  which  they  are  ere  long  to 
terminate,  and  for  which  they  are  to  prepare  us, 
by  the  reflection  that  we  are  chastened  for  our 
good,  that  the  furnace  of  affliction,  by  its  refin- 
ing power,  raises  us  to  a  higher  and  more  divine 
purity,  and  that  death  is  not  more  certain  than 
is  a  final  resurrection  to  glory,  and  an  immortal 
existence  in  the  paradise  above  ! 

So  abundant,  in  short,  is  the  mercy  that  has  ap- 
peared in  the  scheme  of  the  gospel,  and  so  fully  has 
this  scheme  provided  for  the  well  being  of  those  on 
whose  account  it  was  devised,  that  not  only  are  all 
the  mischiefs  involved  in  the  fall,  or  consequent 
upon  it,  entirely  done  away,  but  all  the  blessings 
which  had  been  forfeited  are  regained  and  made 
over  to  the  redeemed  in  their  original  excellence 
and  in  their  largest  measure — not  only  shall  the 
sinners  who  come  to  be  interested  in  it  "  never  pe- 
rish," or  be  subjected  permanently  to  any  thing 
comprehended  in  that  awful  doom, but  they  "  shall 
have  everlasting  life,"  as  comprising  all  that  is 
most  worthy  and  most  desirable  in  the  destiny  of 


38  SERMON  IL 

man — not  only  shall  every  want  essentially  ex- 
isting in  their  nature  and  their  condition  be  am- 
ply supplied,  but  they  shall  be  raised  to  honours, 
and  to  privileges,  and  to  enjoyments,  greater  by 
far  than  their  hearts  can  desire  or  their  imagina- 
tions conceive. 

And  so  plenteous  is  the  redemption  here  spo- 
ken of,  that  there  is  not  a  doubt  or  an  apprehen- 
sion or  a  suspicion  respecting  either  its  fulness  or 
its  security,  which  can  arise  in  the  mind,  and  for 
which  in  some  corner  of  it  there  may  not  be  found 
what  is  more  than  sufficient  to  subdue  or  to  dis- 
sipate it,  at  once  and  for  ever.  Whenever  any 
thing  of  this  kind  occurs,  it  is  only  necessary  to 
have  recourse  to  the  gospel,  as  delineated  in  the 
word,  in  order  that  the  mind  may  be  satisfied,  en- 
couraged, and  built  up.  Indeed,  this  one  truth, 
that  the  author  and  giver  of  the  redemption  is 
the  Son  of  God,  is  more  than  enough  to  convince 
the  most  sceptical  and  distrustful,  that  boundless 
hope  may  be  safely  rested  upon  it,  as  perfect  in 
its  efficiency  and  overflowing  in  its  benefits.  The 
unspeakable  gift  of  Christ  Jesus  gives  a  demon- 
stration of  the  mercy  which  sent  him,  that  for- 
bids us  to  set  any  limits  to  its  exercise  in  behalf 
of  those  whom  it  has  determined  to  save,  and  it 
is  itself  a  pledge  that  the  beneficent  fruits  which 
accompany  it  must  be  such,  in  number,  in  va- 
riety, in  fitness,  and  in  intrinsic  worth,  as  to  raise 


SERMON  11.  39 

them  to  all  that  is  perfect  in  the  nature,  and  to 
all  that  is  happy  in  the  condition,  of  restored  and 
regenerated  men.  For  "  He  that  spared  not  his 
own  Son,  but  freely  delivered  him  up  to  the 
death  for  us  all,  how  shall  he  not  with  him  also 
freely  give  us  all  things  ?"  The  Son  of  God 
is  our  Redeemer,  and  seeing  that  he  is  "  the 
brightness  of  the  rather"'s  glory,  and  the  express 
image  of  his  person,"  it  cannot  be  that  he  should 
fail  in  any  part  of  the  work  he  has  undertaken,  or 
that  he  should  not  put  us  in  complete  and  unali- 
'Cnable  possession  of  all  that  he  has  purchased  for 
us  at  the  infinite  price  of  his  own  hfe.  We  have 
only  to  cast  an  eye  on  what  he  is,  and  on  what  he 
lias  undertaken  to  do,  and  on  what  he  has  actu- 
ally accomplished,  to  have  our  minds  settled  in 
the  assured  belief,  that  his  redemption  must  be  a 
plenteous  redemption.  His  blood  is  of  such  aton- 
ing virtue  as  to  cleanse  from  all  guilt — his  power 
rescues  from  all  hostility — his  merit  purchases  all 
happiness — his  Spirit  infuses  and  cherishes  and 
matures  all  holy  meetness  for  it — and  every  attri- 
bute of  his  divine  character  is  pledged  to  intro- 
duce us  into  that  land  of  vision,  where  we  shall 
indeed  be  *•'  filled  with  all  the  fulness  of  God." 
And  whatever  triak  may  befal  those  who  have 
embraced  the  salvation  which  he  has  wrought 
out, — wliatever  weakness  may  cleave  to  them 
— whatever  enemies  may  assail  them, — what- 
1 


40  SERMON  II. 

ever  dangers  and  difficulties  may  surround  them, 
they  may  rest  in  the  persuasion,  that  "  neither 
death  nor  Ufe,  nor  angels,  nor  principahties,  nor 
powers,  nor  things  present,  nor  things  to  come,  nor 
height,  nor  depth,  nor  any  other  creature,  shall 
be  able  to  separate  them  from  the  love  of  God, 
which  is  in  Christ  Jesus  their  Lord." 

Surely  then  sinners  may  hope  in  the  Lord, 
that  since  there  is  with  him  this  plenteous  redemp- 
tion, he  will  in  no  wise  cast  them  out  if  they  come 
unto  him,  and  will  in  no  wise  withhold  it  from 
them  if  they  seek  for  it  in  faith,  and  repentance, 
and  prayer.  But  if  such  redemption  has  no 
charms  for  them,  and  if  the  mercy  which  has 
purchased  it  fails  to  affect,  and  to  allure,  and  to 
persuade  them,  what  can  their  insensibility  lead 
to  but  certain,  aggravated,  everlasting  destruc- 
tion ?  O  let  them  look  to  God  and  come  to  him, 
and  throw  themselves  upon  his  covenanted  but 
rich  and  saving  compassion,  while  yet  his  re- 
demption is  offered,  and  the  ear  of  his  mercy  is 
open  to  the  cry  and  the  supplication  of  his  peni- 
tent off'spring. 

And  let  those  who  have  already  fled  to  the  di- 
vine mercy  and  embraced  the  redemption  of  the 
gospel,  admire  and  rejoice  in  its  plenteousness. 
Let  this  sustain  their  faith  whenever  it  begins  to 
fail ;  let  it  renovate  their  hope  when  despondency 
is  stealing  upon  their  minds  ;  let  it  increase  their 


SERMON  11.  41 

comfort  when  affliction  visits  their  hearts  or  their 
abodes, — let  it  inspire  them  with  holy  resolution 
when  temptation  offers  to  lead  them  astray, — let 
it  be  the  song  of  their  pilgrimage  as  they  travel 
through  the  wilderness  of  life ;  and  when  they 
come  to  the  threshold  of  eternity,  let  it  tune  their 
souls  to  that  anthem  of  praise  which  they  are  to 
join  all  the  redeemed  from  the  earth  in  singing 
through  the  ages  of  eternity ;  "  To  him  that  loved 
us  and  washed  us  from  our  sins  in  his  own  blood, 
and  made  us  kings  and  priests  unto  God,  even 
his  Father,  to  him  be  glory  and  dominion,  now 
and  ever.     Amen." 


SERMON  III. 


PSALM  CXXX,  7?  8. 

*  Lei  Israel  hope  in  the  Lord,  for  with  the  Lord  there  is 
mercy  ;  and  with  him  is  plenteous  redemption;  and  he 
shali  redeem  Israel  from  all  his  iniquities" 

In  discoursing  on  these  words,  we  proposed  to 
consider  the  grounds  on  which  the  Psalmist  in- 
vokes Israel  to  hope  in  the  Lord.  There  is,  Jirst, 
the  ground  that  with  the  Lord  there  is  mercy  ; 
there  is,  secondly,  the  ground  that  there  is  plen- 
teous redemption  with  hira;  and  there  is,  thirdly, 
the  ground  that  "  He  shall  redeem  Israel  from 
all  his  iniquities.''^  To  the  consideration  of  this 
last  particular  we  now  call  your  attention,  hav- 
ing already  illustrated  the  two  preceding  ones. 

It  is  not  merely  true  that  God  is  merciful,  and 
ready  to  extend  his  mercy  for  the  dehverance  and 
the  happiness  of  his  apostate  creatures ;  his  mercy 
has  led  him  to  form  a  plan  by  which  redemption 


SERMON  IIL  43 

is  provided  for  all  such  as  are  the  objects  of  it, 
in  perfect  consistency  with  the  other  attributes  of 
his  nature,  and  with  the  honour  and  authority  of 
his  moral  administration,  and  by  which  no  bless- 
ing whatever  is  excluded  that  can  contribute  to 
the  comfort  and  well-being  of  those  upon  whom 
it  is  to  be  bestowed,  or  that  can  entitle  it  to  be 
held  out  and  recommended  as  possessing  the  cha- 
racter of  plenteousness.  And  not  only  has  his 
mercy  led  him  to  form  a  plan  of  redemption  so 
abundant  and  complete,  but  an  assurance  is  given 
that  this  plenteous  redemption  will  be  actually 
conferred,  applied  in  all  its  extent,  and  finally 
and  everlastingly  enjoyed. 

This  might  have  been  anticipated  from  the 
mere  existence  of  mercy  as  an  attribute  in  the 
character  of  God ;  for  we  could  not  have  sup- 
posed that  while  there  was  such  a  multitude  of 
beings  on  whom  it  might  appropriately  operate,  it 
would  have  all  consisted  in  sympathy  for  their 
sufferings  and  their  fate,  either  silently  cherished 
in  the  divine  mind,  or  verbally  expressed  in  the 
-divine  revelation.  And  still  more  confidently 
might  it  have  been  anticipated  from  the  scheme 
of  redemption,  as  actually  devised  and  unfolded  in 
the  gospel,  for  it  could  not  be  imagined  that  such 
a  wonderful  apparatus  of  means  as  that  scheme 
presents  to  us,  would  have  been  contrived,  that 
such  manifestations  of  divinity  as  it  exhibits  would 


44  SERMON  III. 

have  been  made,  that  so  much  virtue  and  effi- 
ciency as  it  contains  would  have  been  wrought 
out,  and  yet  that  the  whole  was  to  remain  as  a 
subject  of  curious  speculation,  or  adoring  won- 
der, and  to  leave  mankind  in  all  their  natural  de- 
generacy and  helplessness.  Every  rational  view 
that  could  have  been  taken  of  it  must  have  led 
us  to  expect  that  it  would  be  brought  into  imme- 
diate contact  with  the  circumstances  of  our  fallen 
race ;  that  it  would  accomplish,  in  some  good 
measure,  those  ends  which  it  was  so  admirably 
calculated  to  promote  ;  that  it  would  give  a  prac- 
tical demonstration  of  its  power  to  redeem,  in 
such  a  measure  and  to  such  an  extent,  as  to  glo- 
rify him  by  whom  it  had  been  prepared  and  exe- 
cuted. 

This  purpose,  indeed,  it  clearly  and  express- 
ly contemplated,  in  its  original  formation,  and 
throughout  its  whole  process.  It  was  designed — 
not  to  give  an  idle  display  of  what  might  be  done 
for  the  salvation  of  sinners,  and  to  mock  with  the 
discovery  of  what  they  were  never  to  partake  of — 
but  to  effectuate  the  real  emancipation  of  those 
who,  in  God's  eternal  councils,  were  chosen  to  be 
the  vessels  of  his  mercy,  and  ordained  to  eternal 
life.  With  regard  to  them,  it  has  a  definite  and 
specific  aim,  which  cannot  be  frustrated  by  any 
mistake  on  the  one  hand,  or  by  any  opposition  on 
the  other.     It  was  framed  for  their  benefit — so 


SERMON  III.  45 

that  their  benefit  is  just  as  certainly  to  be  realiz- 
ed, as  it  has  had  a  place  in  the  measures  of  God's 
administration.  The  very  same  perfections  which 
invested  it  with  all  its  excellence  and  all  its  capa- 
city, are  pledged  to  secure  their  participation  in 
whatever  good  it  was  intended  to  communicate. 
And  we  may  as  well  think  of  its  utter  annihilation, 
as  of  their  failing  to  experience  that  saving  effi- 
cacy which  necessarily  belongs  to  it.  The  two 
things  are  but  parts  of  one  whole — both  resulting 
from  the  same  sovereign  decree,  linked  together 
by  indissoluble  ties,  and  terminating  in  triumphs 
as  real  as  is  the  mercy  of  God  or  the  misery  of 
man.  The  Lord  "  shall  redeem  Israel.""  No 
dubiety  hangs  over  their  redemption.  Not  one 
of  them  shall  be  lost.  Neither  their  own  per- 
/erseness  nor  the  machinations  of  their  enemies 
can  possibly  defeat  that  purpose  which  embraces 
their  deliverance.  And  nothing  can  occur  to  de- 
tract in  the  very  least  degree  from  the  certainty 
of  all  that  blessedness  to  which  they  are  ultimate- 
ly destined.  For  it  is  the  same  unerring  wisdom, 
the  same  Almighty  power,  the  same  inflexible 
rectitude,  and  the  same  unchanging  faithfulness 
that  laid  and  executed  the  plan  of  redemption,  to 
which  the  Great  Being  in  whom  all  these  attri- 
butes centre  bids  us  look,  for  carrying  it  out  into 
the  practical  results  which  it  was  intended  to  pro- 
duce, in  rectifying  the  disorders  of  our  fallen 


46  SERMON  III. 

state,  and  bringing  us  back  to  the  state  which  we 
primarily  occupied  in  the  universe  of  God. 

And  while  we  can  rest  our  belief  of  this  truth  on 
the  simple  fact,  that  the  plan  of  redemption  as  to 
its  inherent  sufficiency,  and  its  actual  application 
to  the  individuals  whose  interests  it  comprehends, 
is  one  and  indivisible,  and  in  neither  department 
susceptible  of  change,  or  liable  to  be  frustrated, 
there  is  this  additional  reason  for  taking  that  view, 
that  God  has  promised  that  it  shall  accomplish  all 
his  good  pleasure  concerning  an  apostate  world. 
He  has  not  left  us  to  reasoning  or  to  inference — 
and  far  less  to  speculation  and  conjecture.  He 
has  declared  in  explicit  terms,  and  in  oft  repeated 
statements,  that  the  gospel  shall  have  its  full  ef- 
fect in  the  salvation  of  his  people — that  they  shall 
be,  brought  out  of  all  the  tribes,  and  kindreds, 
and  people,  among  whom  they  are  scattered,  to  feel 
its  power  and  to  enjoy  its  blessings — that  it  shall 
be  effectually  applied  to  each  one  of  them  in  what- 
ever corner  or  in  whatever  age  of  the  world  his  lot 
may  be  cast — that  without  a  single  exception,  and 
beyond  all  controversy,  and  in  spite  of  all  difficul- 
ty and  opposition,  they  shall  be  rescued  from  the 
■wretchedness  of  their  condition  as  sinners,  and  re- 
stored to  the  purity,  and  honour,  and  happiness 
of  their  primeval  state.  The  mouth  of  the  Lord 
hath  spoken  this ;  and  shall  he  not  perform  it  ? 
The  assurance  is  given  by  him  for  whom  it  is 


SERMON  IIL  47 

impossible  to  lie  or  to  deceive — to  whom  truthful- 
ness is  as  essential  as  his  existence  itself — and 
who,  in  the  history  of  his  church,  has  already 
"  magnified  his  word  above  all  his  name ;"  and 
on  that  assurance,  therefore,  we  may  rely  with 
as  implicit  confidence,  as  we  can  rely  upon  the 
continuance  of  his  being,  and  the  stability  of  his 
throne. 

Nor  does  this  certainty  attach  merely  to  their 
redemption  in  general.  It  may  be  applied  to 
their  redemption  as  to  all  the  various  particulars 
of  which  it  is  composed.  "  He  shall  redeem 
Israel  from  all  his  iniquities."  "  Iniquities"  is 
a  term  of  comprehensive  import — implying  every 
evil  that  is  connected  with,  or  results  from,  the 
first  apostacy  of  man.  He  who  has  committed 
iniquity  is  under  the  wrath  and  curse  of  God. 
But  his  guilt  or  obligation  to  punishment  does 
not  stand  alone — it  is  allied  to  the  moral  corrup- 
tion of  his  nature  ;  and  his  guilt  and  moral  cor- 
ruption combined,  entail  upon  him,  either  by  ju- 
dicial sentence  or  by  natural  consequence,  the 
manifold  temporal  distresses  and  the  more  awful 
miseries  of  eternity  to  which  he  is  subjected  and 
doomed  as  a  transgressor.  Now  the  gospel  does 
not  propose  to  relieve  him  from  any  particular 
portion  of  the  judgments  that  thus  burden  his 
fate — it  proposes  to  relieve  him  from  them  all ; 
it  is  competent  to  do  so,  and  it  will  do  so.     The 


48  SERMON  III. 

deliverance  may  not,  and  it  will  not  be  accom- 
plished aU  at  once  :  but  sooner  or  later  it  will 
be  realized  in  every  the  minutest  circumstance. 
In  the  end,  not  one  penalty  will  be  left  unremit- 
ted ;    not  one  moral  stain   unefFaced ;    not  one 
painful  feeling  unremoved.     Sin,  in  all  its  as- 
pects, in  all  its  influence,  and  in  all  its  effects, 
shall  be  totally  and  for  ever  taken  away.     As 
those  to  whom  this  privilege  belong,   acquire  a 
title  to  it  in  its  most  unqualified  sense  while  so- 
journing  upon    earth,    so   when    admitted   into 
heaven,   which  is  its  ultimate  object  and  issue, 
they  shall  leave  behind  them  every  thing  that 
has  tarnished  its  purity  or  marred  its  enjoyment, 
and  not   a   single  vestige  of  evil,   of  any  kind, 
shall  be  either  felt  or  feared  by  them,  as  they 
rejoice  in  the  undisturbed  possession  of  it  through 
everlasting  ages.     And  this  minuteness  of  their 
redemption  is  not  more  a  result  from  the  consti- 
tution and  provisions  of  the  gospel  scheme,  than 
it  is  the  subject  of  specific  declaration  and  faith- 
ful promise  on  the  part  of  Him  by  whom  that 
scheme  has  been  revealed  ;  for  you  cannot  coi^- 
descend  on  the  most  inconsiderable  ingredient  in 
that  cup  of  sin  and  sorrow  of  which  it  is  their 
fate  to  drink,  to  which  there  is  not  a  correspond- 
ing assurance  in  that  word  on  which  we  are  taught 
to  hope,   that  it  will  be  wholly  abstracted  and 


SERMON  III.  49 

destroyed,   either  in  this  world  or  in  that  which 
is  to  come. 

We  have  said  that  the  redemption  here  spoken 
of  includes  deliverance  from  all  the  evils  in  which 
sin  has  involved  its  victims.  But  it  is  evident 
from  the  context  that  it  has  a  special  reference 
to  that  branch  of  redemption  which  is  denomin- 
ated forgiveness.  Indeed  in  other  passages  of 
Scripture,  redemption  and  forgiveness  are  used 
as  synonymous  ;  for  example,  "  In  Christ  we  have 
redemption  through  his  blood,  the  forgiveness  of 
sins.""  And  in  the  passage  before  us,  the  Psalm- 
ist, after  having  intimated  strong,  and  humbling, 
and  distressful  convictions  of  guilt,  consoles  him- 
self with  the  belief  that  "  with  God  there  is  for- 
giveness," and  takes  encouragement  to  hope  for 
it,  from  its  being  announced  in  the  divine  word, 
as  a  gift  ready  to  be  bestowed  on  those  who  ask 
it  in  the  appointed  way.  And  cherishing  this 
belief  himself,  and  the  hope  founded  upon  it, 
he  calls  upon  Israel  to  entertain  the  same  senti- 
ments, and  of  course  to  expect  the  same  bless- 
ing. "Let  Israel  hope  in  the  Lord" — "for  he 
shall  redeem  Israel  from  all  his  iniquities,"  or,  he 
shall  forgive  Israel  all  his  iniquities. 

Now  it  is  obvious  from  this  that  the  doctrine  of 
forgiveness,  being  the  instantaneous  fruit  of  Christ's 
death,  not  to  be  sought  for,  because  it  is  already 
received,  is  not  true  :  for  if  it  were  true  the  lan- 
guage and  conduct  of  the  Psalmist  would  be  in- 

D 


50  SERMON  III. 

consistent  and  absurd.  Why  should  Israel  be 
told  to  expect  forgiveness  from  God,  if  this  for- 
giveness was  at  that  very  moment  in  his  posses- 
sion, in  virtue  of  the  great  atonement  to  be  made 
hereafter  by  the  Messiah,  and  at  this  time  pre- 
figured by  the  ceremonial  law,  and  in  all  ages  the 
only  foundation  of  hope  ?  What  sense  could 
there  be  in  his  asking  for  that  which  had  been 
really  given  ?  And  how  could  there  be  any  ration- 
al consolation  arising  from  the  prospective  view  of 
what  was  not  a  matter  of  anticipation,  but  an  ex- 
isting benefit  previously  made  over,  and  inalien- 
ably secured  to  him  ? 

Similar  questions  may  be  asked  with  respect  to 
David  himself.  He  had  committed  sin.  But 
why  should  he  have  thought  of  the  terrible  in- 
fliction of  God's  displeasure,  if  that  displeasure 
was  removed,  as  it  must  have  been,  in  the  act  of 
forgiveness,  which,  we  are  told,  is  involved  in 
the  expiatory  sacrifice  of  the  Saviour  ?  Why 
should  he  speak  of  a  thing  as  yet  to  come,  which 
on  that  supposition  was  truly  past  and  fully  re- 
alized? And  why  should  he  virtually  pray — 
which  he  does  in  this  psalm — as  in  another  psalm 
he  literally  prays,  "  O  Lord,  Pardon  mine  ini- 
quity, for  it  is  great,*"  when  this  great  iniquity 
was  at  that  very  time  divinely  and  wholly  pardon- 
ed, and  could  not  therefore  be  made  the  subject  of 
such  a  petition  ?  Was  David,  indeed,  so  igno- 
rant of  the  great  doctrines  of  atonement  and  for- 


SERMON  III.  51 

giveness  as  to  fall  into  such  a  foolish  and  hurtful 
mistake  ?  And  was  he,  though  the  man  accord- 
ing to  God's  own  heart,  yet  left  uninstructed  of 
God  in  a  point  of  faith  and  duty  so  essential  for 
regulating  his  devotions,  so  deeply  affecting  his 
regards  towards  the  Being  whom  he  worshipped, 
and  so  closely  connected  with  his  spiritual  com- 
fort and  happiness  ? 

Nay,  but  it  is  not  David  alone  that  is  con- 
cerned in  this  topic.  All  the  servants  of  God 
who  are  exhibited  before  us  in  the  Scripture  his- 
tory are  placed  in  the  same  predicament ;  and 
even  those  who  had  the  advantage  of  being  in- 
structed by  our  Lord  himself,  and  were  super- 
naturally  illuminated  for  the  express  purpose  of 
instructing  others,  will  be  found,  like  the  Psalm- 
ist, proceeding  on  the  ground  that  God  is  ready 
to  forgive,  and  that  forgiveness  is  a  blessing  that 
must  be  sought  for,  and  supplicated  as  absolutely 
needed,  and  not  reposed  in  as  a  blessing  already 
obtained,  and  so  obtained  as  to  render  all  future 
applications  for  it  unnecessary  and  improper. 
Did  not  our  Saviour  say  to  the  sick  of  the  palsy, 
"  Son,  be  of  good  cheer,  thy  sins  be  forgiven 
thee  ?"*  Did  not  he  pray  thus  for  his  murderers, 
"  Father,  forgive  them,  for  they  know  not  what 
they  do  .^"-j-  Was  not  he  "  exalted  as  a  Prince 
and  a  Saviour  to  give  repentance  to  Israel  and 
forgiveness  of  sins"  ?l     Did  not  he  commission 

*  Matt.  ix.  2.  t  Luke  xxiii.  34.  *  Acts  v.  31. 


52  SERMON  III. 

Paul  to  preach  to  the  Gentiles,  "  to  open  their 
eyes,  to  turn  them  from  darkness  to  light,  and 
from  the  power  of  Satan  unto  God,  that  they 
may  receive*  forgiveness  of  sins,  and  inheritance 
among  them  which  are  sanctified  by  faith  that  is 
in  Christ  ?"-f-  Did  not  Peter  say  to  Simon  the 
sorcerer,  "  Repent,  therefore,  of  this  thy  wicked- 
ness, and  pray  God,  if  perhaps  the  thought  of 
thine  heart  may  be  forgiven  thee  ?"]:  Does  not 
James  say,  "  And  the  prayer  of  faith  shall  save 
the  sick,  and  the  Lord  shall  raise  him  up ;  and 
if  he  have  committed  sins,  they  shall  be  forgiven 
him  P"!!  Does  not  John  affirm  that,  "  if  we  con- 
fess our  sins,  God  is  faithful  and  just  to  forgive 
us  our  sins,  and  cleanse  us  from  all  unrighteous- 
ness ?"^  And  are  not  all  these  passages,  and 
many  more  that  might  be  adduced,  utterly  at 
variance  with  the  idea  that  the  death  of  Christ 
is  not  merely  a  meritorious  cause  of  forgiveness, 
or  a  ground  on  which  Israel  may  apply  and  hope 
to  receive  that  blessing,  but  is  really  itself  the 
conveyancer  of  the  blessing,  in  such  a  sense  as 
that  the  moment  we  think  of  Christ's  death,  as 
an  atonement,  we  ought  to  think  of  forgiveness 
actually  bestowed,  and  of  that  forgiveness  as  ex- 
tending to  our  whole  course  of  disobedience,  from 
its  earliest,  down  to  its  remotest  period  ? 

Were  such  an  idea  founded  in  truth,  is  it 

*  Note  A.         t  Acts  xxvi.  18.         *  Acts  viii.  22. 
II  James  v.  15.  ^  1  John  i.  9. 


SERMON  III.  53 

possible  to  conceive  that  the  prophets  and  saints 
under  the  Old  Testament  dispensation,  and  that 
our  Lord  and  his  apostles,  as  promulgators  of  the 
New,  would  have  used  language,  and  that  too  under 
the  guidance  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  so  directly  and 
uniformly  calculated  to  enforce  upon  us  a  differ- 
ent and  an  opposite  doctrine  ?  If  we  adopt  their 
phraseology  according  to  its  plain  and  palpable 
meaning,  and  if  we  follow  the  example  which 
they  have  set  before  us,  every  conviction  of  sin 
that  we  may  experience  will  lead  us  to  ask  of 
God  the  forgiveness  of  that  sin — not  to  thank  him 
for  the  forgiveness  of  it,  as  a  boon  long  since  con- 
ferred, but  to  beseech  him  for  it,  as  that  which  is 
still  wanting,  and  which  he  is  ready  and  disposed  to 
grant  "  to  them  that  ask  it  in  prayer  believing  ?" 
And  while  we  do  this  in  respect  to  our  own  case, 
will  not  we  do  the  same  thing  in  respect  to 
others,  when  we  look  upon  them  as  transgressors 
of  the  divine  law,  or  as  going  on  in  a  course  of 
wickedness, — not  expressing  gratitude  in  their  be- 
half, or  seeking  that  they  may  be  filled  with 
gratitude,  as  being  previously  and  actually  par- 
doned for  the  iniquities  which  they  are  hourly 
committing — but  expressing  gratitude  that  there 
is  hope  for  them,  founded  on  the  "  plenteous  re- 
demption," revealed  in  the  gospel,  and  on  that 
ground  imploring  God  to  have  mercy  on  them, 
and  to  blot  out  their  trespasses,  which  if  not 


54  SERMON  III. 

blotted  out,  must  terminate  in  their  perdition  ? 
Are  not  these  the  views  which  have  been  held 
and  acted  upon  by  prophets  and  apostles,  and 
by  him  who  was  wiser  and  greater  than  them  all? 
And  can  we  entertain  different  views,  or  follow  a 
different  course,  unless  we  either  mean  to  set 
their  authority  at  nought,  or  put  upon  their 
language  and  conduct  an  interpretation  which 
no  rule  of  interpretation  ever  adopted  by  the 
learned  or  the  unlearned,  by  saint  or  by  sinner, 
can  be  quoted  to  justify  or  support  ? 

But  the  absurdity  and  mischief  of  the  doctrine 
against  which  I  contend  are  still  more  extensive. 
It  breaks  in  upon  the  established  order  and  moral 
fitness  of  God's  administration  of  the  gospel,  as 
that  is  disclosed  and  explained  in  his  word.  I 
appeal  to  the  whole  strain,  and  to  the  express  de- 
clarations of  that  word,  if  the  forgiveness  of  sins 
do  not  stand  in  immediate  connexion  with  faith, 
with  repentance,  with  holiness  ?  It  is  not  meant 
that  these  are  represented  to  be  conditions  of  for- 
giveness, but  only  that  these  graces  are  uniform- 
ly announced  as  understood  to  constitute  the  cha- 
racter of  those  whose  sins  are  forgiven.  Is  it  any 
where,  on  any  page  or  in  any  corner  of  this  re- 
cord of  God's  truth,  ever  insinuated  or  implied, 
that  any  man  who  is  not  a  believer,  who  is  not  a 
penitent,  who  is  not  leading  a  holy  life,  is  yet  in 
a  pardoned  state,  and  has  no  occasion  to  apply  for 


SERMON  III.  55 

that  privilege  ?  No,  but  the  very  contrary  posi- 
tion is  carefully  and  everywhere  inculcated.  "  He 
that  belie veth  not,"  is  said  to  be  "  condemned  al- 
ready," that  is,  the  sentence  of  condemnation  un- 
der which  he  lies  as  a  sinner  is  unrecalled — he 
has   not   obtained  the   forgiveness   of  his   sins. 
"  Let  the  wicked  forsake  his  ways  and  the  un- 
righteous man  his  thoughts,   and  let  him  return 
unto  the  Lord,  who  will  have  mercy  upon  him,  and 
to  our  God,  for  he  will  abundantly  pardon  ;"  an 
exhortation  evidently  presupposing,   that   those 
who  have  not  returned  to  God  by  repentance, 
have  not  had  the  pardon  of  their  sins  vouchsafed 
to  them,  and  are  still  in  a  state  of  guilt,  the  ob- 
jects of  God's  displeasure,  and  the  heirs  of  hell. 
And  it  would  be  to  suppose  you  altogether  un- 
acquainted with  your  Bible  were  I  to  adduce  pas- 
sages, for  it  is  full  of  such  passages,  to  show,  that 
so  long  as  men  are  going  on  in  a   course  of  re- 
bellion against  God,  breaking  his  commandments, 
despising  his  ordinances,  leaguing  with  his  foes,  his 
wrath  abideth  upon  them ;  that  they  are  truly  and 
individually  liable  to  all  the  penalties  which  his 
law  ever  denounced  against  them  ;  and  that  living 
and  dying  in  this  state  of  alienation,  they  must 
be  "  punished  with  everlasting  destruction"  in  a 
future  world.     And  yet,  according  to  the  opinion 
I  am  combating,  it  is  quite  possible  that  a  man  may 
be  an  unbehever — that  he  may  be  an  impenitent 


56  SERMON  III. 

person — that  he  may  be  rioting  in  all  the  excesses 
and  abominations  of  profligacy,  and  habitually  vio- 
lating every  law,  human  and  divine ;  but  that  all 
this  time,  even  while  he  is  cherishing  that  evil 
heart  and  exhibiting  that  wicked  character  upon 
which  God  has  pronounced  a  damnatory  sen- 
tence— he  has  obtained  from  that  very  God  the 
forgiveness  of  it  all,  and  may  feel  just  as  safe 
from  punishment  on  account  of  it  as  if  he  had 
truly  believed,  and  repented,  and  obeyed  the  gos- 
pel !  Why,  really,  my  friends,  if  such  an  opinion, 
an  opinion  so  contradictory  to  the  first  principles 
of  practical  religion,  so  inconsistent  with  the 
scheme  of  the  gospel,  or  its  warranted  application 
to  the  objects  of  divine  mercy,  and  so  repugnant 
to  all  that  the  Scriptures  contain  upon  the  subject 
it  refers  to,  if  such  an  opinion  can  find  refuge  in 
the  mind  of  one  thinking  and  intelligent  Chris- 
tian, I  can  figure  no  absurdity,  however  unscrip- 
tural  and  extravagant  it  may  be,  which  may  not 
be  greedily  swallowed,  and  doated  upon  as  a  pre- 
cious and  consolatory  truth. 

I  have  not  yet  presented  to  you  the  doctrine  in 
question  in  all  its  extent,  nor  have  I  yet  made  all 
the  remarks  upon  it  which  a  full  exposure  of  it 
reqviires.  But  I  find  that  I  must  reserve  what  I 
have  farther  to  say  respecting  it  for  future  consi- 
deration. In  the  meantime,  I  trust  you  have 
heard  enough  to  satisfy  you,  that  even  in  the  li- 


SERMON  IIL  57 

mited  shape  in  which  we  have  made  it  the  topic 
of  discussion,  it  is  neither  true,  nor  rational,  nor 
safe.  And  why,  let  me  ask,  are  we  called  upon 
to  embrace  what  is  so  destitute  of  these  estimable 
and  essential  properties  ?  For  no  other  reason 
that  I  can  perceive  than  this,  that  it  supports  a 
new  hypothesis  that  has  been  got  up  on  the  point 
of  a  sinner's  justification  by  faith.  Many  of  us 
thought  that  this  point  had  been  known  and  set- 
tled ages  ago.  But  this  is  a  little  age  of  novel- 
ties and  wonders.  Our  ears  hear  strange  things, 
our  understandings  are  confounded  with  absurd 
things,  and  our  hearts  distressed  with  sad  and 
fearful  things.  And  without  all  doubt,  one  of 
the  most  extraordinary  and  affecting  things  of  the 
present  era  is,  the  discovery  that  till  now  the 
people  of  God  have  not  known  what  justification 
means — that  the  saints  who,  in  what  were  ac- 
counted the  best  and  brightest  days  of  the  church, 
rejoiced  in  that  blessed  truth,  rejoiced  in  that  of 
which  they  were  entirely  ignorant, — that  the  re- 
deemed who  surround  the  throne  on  high,  and 
praise  the  Saviour  who  brought  them  there,  have 
reached  heaven  by  a  pathway  very  different  from 
the  one  pointed  out  by  himself  in  the  gospel, — and 
that  we  are  still  in  gross  and  perilous  darkness  con- 
cerning the  method  and  the  ground  of  a  sinner's 
acceptance  with  God,  in  spite  of  all  our  ad- 
vantages,  of  all  our   information,  and  all  ou? 


58  SERMON  III. 

experience.  To  maintain  and  vindicate  the  novel 
discovery,  we  are  to  admit,  it  seems,  that  the  for- 
giveness of  sins  is  a  blessing  already  received, 
and  not  to  be  asked  for  in  prayer,  as  no  longer 
needed,  and  that  when  forgiveness  is  mentioned 
in  the  Bible,  whether  under  the  idea  of  redemp- 
tion or  any  other  equivalent  word,  it  does  not 
mean  forgiveness  as  the  word  is  universally  un- 
derstood, the  remission  of  sins,  but  only  a  sense 
of  forgiveness,  or  a  feeling,  conviction,  know- 
ledge, that  forgiveness  became  ours  the  instant 
that  Christ's  atoning  work  was  finished  on  the 
cross.  So  that  when  our  Saviour  prayed,  '•  Fa- 
ther forgive  them,  for  they  know  not  what  they 
do," — he  did  not  pray  that  his  murderers  might 
receive  from  the  mercy  of  God  the  actual  par- 
don of  the  crime  tlicy  were  only  then  perpe- 
trating, but  merely  a  sense  or  feeling  that  this 
sin  was  already  blotted  out,  and  would  not  be  re- 
membered against  them  any  more  !  And  when, 
in  the  fourth  petition  of  the  Lord's  prayer,  we 
say,  "  Forgive  us  our  trespasses,  as  we  forgive 
them  that  trespass  against  us,"  we  must  hold 
ourselves  as  saying,  "  Give  us  a  sense  of  the  for- 
giveness of  our  trespasses  against  thee,  as  we  give 
to  them  who  trespass  against  us  a  setise  of  the 
forgiveness  of  their  trespasses  !" 

It  is  almost  impossible  to  treat  such  a  tenet  and 
such  a  mode  of  construction  as  what  we  are  nowdis- 


SERMON  III.  59 

proving  with  the  gravity  that  is  due  to  sacred  sub- 
jects. Yet  this  is  pressed  upon  us  every  day  as 
that  which  has  been  found  out  by  theological  ad- 
venturers, or  imagined  by  well  meaning  visionaries, 
and  hailed  and  welcomed  by  the  simple  ones  who 
follow  in  their  train  ;  and  which  is  recommended 
by  the  delusive  and  groundless  notion  that  it  at- 
taches more  glory  to  the  salvation  of  the  gospel, 
by  investing  it  with  greater  freeness  and  greater 
fulness  than  it  can  possess  on  any  other  suppo- 
sition. Whatever  it  may  do  in  that  way,  it  is 
unsound,  it  is  untrue,  it  is  dangerous,  it  is  inad- 
missible :  for  it  involves  this  monstrous  proposi- 
tion, that  a  man  may  be  forgiven,  and  is  to  be 
considered  as  forgiven — as  having  that  forgive- 
ness, which  is  the  richest  blessing  in  the  treasury 
of  divine  grace,  and  which  is  so  important  as  to 
stand  in  holy  writ  for  the  whole  of  redemption — 
that  a  man  may  possess  this  blessing,  though  he 
has  never  fled  to  the  Saviour  who  alone  can  con- 
fer it — that  he  may  possess  it,  though  he  has 
never  yet  felt  one  regret  or  shed  one  tear  for  any 
one  of  the  sins,  which  notwithstanding  are  all 
completely  pardoned  and  washed  away — that  he 
may  possess  it,  though  day  after  day,  and  year 
after  year,  he  is  persevering  in  all  those  pol- 
lutions which  distinguish  the  unregenerate  na- 
ture, and  "  for  which  thing's  sake,""  we  are  ex- 


QO  SERMON  III. 

pressly  told,  "  the  wrath  of  God  cometh  upon  the 
children  of  disobedience  !" 

My  friends,  let  me  state  to  you  the  old,  the 
tried,  the  scriptural,  the  rational,  the  true  doc- 
trine on  this  all-important  topic  as  it  is  contained 
in  our  Confession  of  Faith,  which  has  this  at 
least  to  distinguish  it  from  the  fanciful  theories 
to  which  it  stands  opposed — that  while  we  deem 
it  consistent  with  the  Bible,  it  is  at  all  events  and 
most  indisputably  consistent  with  itself. 

"  God  did  from  all  eternity  decree  to  justify 
all  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.  God  doth  continue  to 
forgive  the  sins  of  those  that  are  justified.  And 
although  they  can  never  fall  from  the  state  of 
justification  ;  yet  they  may  by  their  sins  fall  un- 
der God's  fatherly  displeasure,  and  not  have  the 
light  of  his  countenance  restored  unto  them,  until 
they  humble  themselves,  confess  their  sins,  beg 
pardon,  and  renew  their  faith  and  repentance.""* 

*  Chap.  XI.  Sec.  iv.  and  v. 


SERMON  IV. 


PSALM  CXXX.  7j  8. 


"  Let  Israel  hope  in  the  Lord ;  for  with  the  Lord  there 
is  mercy  ;  and  with  him  is  plenteous  redemption  ;  and 
he  shall  redeem  Israel  from  all  his  iniquities." 

In  discoursing  to  you  on  these  words,  we  have 
been  considering  the  grounds  on  which  Israel  is 
exhorted  by  the  Psalmist  to  hope  in  God.  And  last 
Lord's  day  we  were  employed  in  illustrating  the 
third  ground  of  hope  here  mentioned,  namely,  that 
the  Lord  shall  "  redeem  Israel  from  all  his  iniqui- 
ties." This  contains  an  assurance  that  the  plente- 
ous redemption  provided  in  the  gospel  will  be  ac- 
tually conferred,  applied  in  all  its  extent,  and  final- 
ly and  everlastingly  enjoyed.  In  discussing  this 
part  of  our  subject,  we  took  occasion  to  combat 
and  disprove  the  erroneous  tenet  which  has  been 
held  by  some,  and  which  consists  in  maintaining 
that^the  death  of  Christ  not  only  secured  but 


62  SERMON  IV. 

conveyed  tlie  blessing  of  forgiveness,  and  that 
this  blessing  being  already  possessed  by  sinners 
of  mankind,  it  is  unnecessary  for  them  to  ask  it 
in  prayer. 

We  drew  our  argument  from  various  scriptural 
statements.  And,  in  the  course  of  our  observations, 
we  hinted  at  the  interpretation  put  upon  the  term 
"forgiveness,"  in  order  to  get  quit  of  the  reasoning 
founded  upon  such  statements  as  those  that  we 
quoted  from  the  Bible.  The  interpretation  al- 
luded to  is,  that  "  forgiveness"  means  a  sense  or 
feeling  of  forgiveness.  But  we  demonstrated  to 
you,  by  texts  of  Scripture,  that  this  is  utterly  in- 
admissible, and  that  such  a  mode  of  interpretation 
converts  the  dictates  of  the  Spirit  of  truth  and 
wisdom  into  palpable  falsehood  and  utter  non- 
sense. We  shall  see  more  proofs  of  this  as  we 
advance  with  our  subject.  I  think  it  expedient, 
however,  at  this  stage  of  our  argument,  to  call 
your  attention  to  the  point  as  one  of  most  mate- 
rial moment.  To  say  that  "forgiveness"  means 
a  sense  of  forgiveness,  is  to  beg  the  question — it 
is  to  take  for  granted  what  remains  to  be  proved 
— it  is  to  assume,  as  the  foundation  of  a  system, 
what  is  not  only  unsupported  by  any  sound  and 
valid  reasoning,  but  what  is  inconsistent  with  and 
contrary  to  the  Divine  testimony,  as  contained  in 
the  volume  of  inspiration.  Just  take  your  Bibles, 
and  read  all  the  passages  in  which  forgiveness  of 


SERMON  IV.  63 

sins  is  mentioned,  and  see,  from  the  nature  of  the 
subject,  and  the  circumstances  that  accompany 
it,  and  the  kind  of  phraseology  employed  in  speak- 
ing of  it,  whether  it  means  forgiveness  as  com- 
monly understood,  or  only  a  sense  of  that  forgive- 
ness— whether  it  means  forgiveness  as  a  blessing 
already  possessed,  though  not  attended  with  the 
feeling  or  persuasion  of  its  being  possessed,  or  as 
a  blessing  that  is  still  needed,  and  for  which  ap- 
plication must  be  made  in  faith  and  prayer — 
whether  it  means  remission  of  sins,  so  that  the 
punishment  due  for  sin  will  not  thereafter  be  in- 
flicted, or  a  mere  consciousness  that  this  remis- 
sion was  long  ago  made  over  to  the  individual, 
and  such  a  satisfaction  as  that  consciousness  is 
calculated  to  produce.  Let  me  again  adduce  the 
two  instances  which  I  formerly  referred  to,  as  at 
once  affording  evidence  themselves  of  the  absur- 
dity I  am  exposing,  and  furnishing  you  with  the 
method  by  which  I  would  have  you  try  all  the 
other  passages  in  which  the  term  occurs. 

When  Christ  was  upon  the  cross,  he  prayed 
thus  for  his  murderers  :  "  Father,  forgive  them, 
for  they  know  not  what  they  do."  Now,  if  our 
Saviour  knew  that  the  crime  which  his  enemies 
were  in  the  act  of  perpetrating  when  he  offered 
up  this  prayer,  was  already  forgiven,  would  he 
have  coviched  his  prayer  in  such  terms  as  he  is 
here  said  to  have  employed  ?     Would  not  he 


64  SERMON  IV. 

have,  some  how  or  other,  intimated  that  this  was 
the  existing  fact,  and  only  asked  that  the  guilty 
Jews  might  be  visited  with  a  sense  or  conviction 
of  this,  hitherto  unknown,  blessedness  on  their 
spiritual  lot  ?  And  supposing  that  their  trans- 
gression, not  yet  completed,  was  not  yet  forgiven, 
and  that  his  petition  meant  to  implore  a  remis- 
sion of  the  penalty  to  which  it  subjected  them, 
could  he  have  made  use  of  language  to  express 
his  meaning  different  from  that  which  the  evan- 
gelist has  put  upon  record  ?  It  is  clear,  beyond 
all  controversy,  that,  if  the  import  of  forgiveness 
be  what  our  antagonists  assert,  our  Saviour  could 
not  have  selected  phraseology  for  giving  vent  to 
the  desire  which,  on  that  hypothesis,  he  intended 
to  offer  up,  more  calculated  to  mislead  all  who 
heard  it,  or  more  opposite  to  v/hat  such  a  hypo- 
thesis would  naturally  have  suggested,  and  abso- 
lutely required.  He  is  alleged  to  have  merely 
wished  that  God  would  impress  the  minds  of  his 
murderers  with  a  sense  of  the  forgiveness  of  the 
murder,  as  a  blessing  previously  and  independent- 
ly of  all  prayer,  conferred  upon  them  ;  and  yet 
he  speaks,  when  intimating  this  wish,  exactly  in 
the  same  words  as  if  he  knew  that  the  forgiveness 
was  not  yet  vouchsafed,  and  that,  if  it  were  to  be 
withheld,  they  could  not  escape  the  punishment 
due  to  such  a  heinous  and  aggravated  offence  J 
And  then  he  adds,  as  an  extenuation  of  their  of« 


SERMON  IV.  65 

fence,  "  for  they  know  not  what  they  do," — a 
circumstance  which  might  be  naturally  and  con- 
sistently pleaded  when  imploring  a  remission  of 
punishment,  but  is  really  qviite  preposterous  and 
senseless  when  urged  with  a  view  to  enforce  any 
suit  for  awakening  in  the  minds  of  the  ferocious 
and  blood-thirsty  multitude  a  comfortable  feeling 
that  the  horrid  guilt  they  were  at  the  very  instant 
contracting,  had  been  pardoned  of  God  for  his 
own  sake,  even  before  they  had  begun  to  commit 
it! 

Again,  there  is  the  following  petition  in  what 
is  commonly  called  the  Lord's  Prayer  : — "  For- 
give us  our  trespasses,  as  we  forgive  them  that 
trespass  against  us."  Now,  it  is  said  that  our 
trespasses  against  God  are  already  forgiven — and 
that,  when  we  are  required  to  pray  for  that  for- 
giveness, we  are  required  to  pray  for  a  sense  or 
internal  conviction  that  the  forgiveness  actually 
belongs  to  us,  it  having  become  ours  solely  in 
virtue  of  Christ's  death,  and  altogether  irrespec- 
tively of  any  thing  in  our  character  or  conduct. 
But,  to  say  nothing  of  such  an  arbitrary  mode  of 
explaining  the  word,  how  does  this  tally  with  the 
second  and  qualifying  clause  of  the  petition,  "  as 
we  forgive  them  that  trespass  against  us  ?''''  For- 
giveness must  have  the  same  substantial  import 
in  the  second  clause  that  it  has  in  the  first — that 
is,  we  are  supposed  to  exercise  towards  our  fel- 


ee  SERMON  IV. 

low-men  the  very  same  thing  in  relation  to  the 
injuries  they  have  done  to  us,  that  we  beg  God 
to  exercise  towards  ourselves  in  relation  to  the  in- 
juries that  we  have  done  to  Him — to  his  character, 
his  law,  his  glory.  And  can  we  really  speak  of 
giving  to  our  fellow-creatures  a  sense  of  the  for- 
ffiveness  of  those  wroncrs  which  we  have  suffered 
at  their  hands,  without  violating  all  the  proprie- 
ties of  thought  and  of  expression  ?  Even  though 
we  could  speak  of  this  with  any  measure  of  cor- 
rectness, does  not  the  phrase  presuppose  that  the 
forgiveness  is  bestowed  upon  our  offending  fel- 
low-men ?  And  yet  where  is  this  mentioned  or 
whence  is  such  a  meaning  to  be  extracted  ?  And 
if  the  second  clause  of  the  petition  truly  and  ne- 
cessarily bears  that  we  do  not  subject  others  to 
the  retribution  which  they  deserve  and  have  pro- 
voked by  their  cruel  or  unjust  treatment  of  us, 
the  first  clause  must  as  truly  and  necessarily  bear 
that  we  pray  God  not  to  subject  us  to  the  retribu- 
tion which  he  might  justly  exact  from  us,  on  ac- 
count of  our  violations  of  his  righteous  command- 
ment. If  we  make  forgiveness  to  mean  a  sense  of 
forgiveness  in  both  clauses  of  the  petition,  we 
shall  utter  a  gross  absurdity  when  we  offer  such 
a  prayer  to  God,  for  it  will  then  be,  "  Give  us  a 
sense  of  forgiveness  of  our  trespasses  against  thee, 
as  we  give  to  others  a  sense  of  the  forgiveness  of 
their  trespasses  against  us."     And  if  we  make 


SERMON  IV.  67 

forgiveness  to  mean  a  sense  of  forgiveness  in  the 
first  clause,  but  attach  to  the  word  its  commonly 
understood  meaning,  as  it  occurs  in  the  second 
clause,  we  shall  then  deprive  the  petition  of  all 
propriety  and  consistency,  for  our  prayer  will  run 
thus,  "  Give  us  a  sense  of  the  forgiveness  of  our 
trespasses  against  thee,  as  we  give  to  others  the 
actual  remission  of  all  the  evil  that  they  merited 
and  had  incurred  by  their  trespasses  against  us." 
But  if,  adopting  the  plain  obvious  common  sense 
construction  of  the  words,  we  attach  to  them  the 
meaning  which  they  have  been  always  believed  to 
contain,  till  the  Jage  for  new  theories  of  the  gos- 
pel commenced,  the  petition  will  be  perfectly  in- 
telligible, one  part  of  it  will  completely  harmonise 
with  another,  and  the  whole  will  be  agreeable  to 
the  analogy  of  Scripture.  It  will  be  this,  "  Re- 
move the  displeasure  which  we  have  incurred,  in- 
flict not  the  punishment  to  which  we  have  become 
obnoxious,  by  reason  of  our  unworthy  and  injurious 
deportment  towards  thee  our  God,  as  we  suppress 
the  displeasure  that  we  justly  feel,  and  remit  the 
punishment  that  we  might  justly  award,  to  those 
of  our  neighbours  who  have  done  wrong  to  us  ; 
and  if  we  are  relentless  and  vindictive  towards 
them,  we  imprecate  upon  ourselves  all  the  indig- 
nation and  penalties  which  we  have  deserved  at 
thy  hand,  and  which  would  otherwise  have  been 
mercifully  averted." 


68  SERMON  IV. 

These  two  instances  we  conceive  sufficient  to 
settle  the  point.  But  we  must  add  this  general 
remark,  that  if  such  a  groundless  and  gratuitous 
mode  of  interpreting  the  words  of  Scripture  be 
admitted,  we  have  no  record  of  divine  truth  on 
which  we  can  place  reliance,  and  any  sentiment, 
however  ridiculous  and  false,  may  be  extracted 
from  the  Bible.  The  speculatists  in  our  eye 
must  be  allowed  to  hold  that  forgiveness  means 
only  a  sense  of  forgiveness  ;  and  on  that  assump- 
tion, in  part  at  least,  they  straightway  build  up 
their  system.  Why,  then,  let  me  be  allowed  to 
hold  that  holiness  means  the  idea  of  being  holy, 
and  that  heaven  means  the  confidence  that  we  will 
get  to  heaven  ;  and  I  will  prove  to  you  in  two  sen- 
tences that  the  most  wicked  men  are  the  most 
holy,  and  that  heaven  will  be  the  portion  of  those 
of  whom  God  has  said  that  they  shall  never  see 
it.  Away  with  such  arbitrary  and  dogmatical 
construction  of  language  !  Away  with  such  ar- 
rant trifling  in  matters  of  faith  and  salvation  ! 
Away  with  such  shameful  perversion  of  all  that 
is  plainest  and  most  important  in  the  word  of 
God  !  The  danger  of  this  may  be  seen  in  the 
very  case  to  which  we  are  referring ;  for  those 
who  are  pleased  to  affirm  that  forgiveness  means 
a  sense  of  forgiveness,  are  going  from  one  erro- 
neous opinion  to  another,  are  daily  multiplying 
their  delusions,  and  find  nothing  too  extravagant 


SERMON  IV.  69 

or  too  monstrous  for  their  belief.  We  have  seen 
that  they  maintain  remission  of  sins  to  be  a  bless- 
ing actually  secured  and  made  over  by  Christ's 
death ;  and  they  maintain  this  not  only  with  re- 
spect to  those  who  shall  be  finally  saved,  but  also 
with  respect  to  every  individual  of  the  human 
race.  Yes,  my  friends,  they  do  hold,  and  they 
do  urge  it  upon  us,  and  they  do  make  it  a  funda- 
mental doctrine  of  the  gospel,  that  every  man's 
sins  are  already  pardoned,  and  that  in  this  respect 
there  is  no  difference  between  him  who  lives  as  a 
saint  and  him  who  lives  as  a  sinner — between 
him  who  dies  in  rank  infidelity*  and  him  who 
dies  in  the  faith  of  Jesus  Christ. 

Let  us  now  proceed  to  the  exposure  of  this 
gross  and  perilous  error.  And  may  the  Spirit  of 
truth  give  in  his  direction  and  aid  ! 

1.  And  in  the  Jirst  place,  I  refer  you  for  this 
purpose  to  the  statements  of  Holy  Writ.  Take 
your  Bible  in  your  hands,  and  go  along  with  me 
while  I  demonstrate  to  you  how  much  it  is  sin- 
ned against  by  the  doctrine  we  are  rebutting. 
The  passages  I  might  adduce  are  numberless.  I 
shall,  therefore,  select  a  few,  from  which  you  will 
find  the  inference  irresistible. 

(1.)  The  first  I  mention  is  the  text  on  which 

•  Final  unbelief,  we  understand,  is  the  only  sin  that  re- 
mains unforgiven.     Of  that  more  hereafter.     But  all  the 
sins  that  precede  final  unbelief  are  forgiven. 
3 


70  SERMON  IV. 

we  are  discoursing,  "  And  he  shall  redeem  Israel 
from  all  his  iniquities."  Had  the  Psalmist, 
who  spoke  as  he  was  moved  by  the  Holy  Ghost, 
known  and  believed  that  all  men  were  pardoned, 
would  he  have  used  such  language  as  this  to  in- 
duce Israel  to  hope  in  the  Lord  ?  Would  not  he 
have  simply  and  strongly  stated  that  fact  as  a  part 
of  their  history,  and  as  a  part  of  the  history  of 
all  preceding  generations  of  the  children  of  men  ? 
And  would  not  he  have  avoided  any  expression 
that  had  the  appearance  of  limiting  the  bestowal 
of  the  privilege  to  a  future  period,  and  to  a  pe- 
culiar character  ?  But  how  differently  does  he  an- 
nounce the  ground  of  expectation  and  encourage- 
ment !  He  speaks  of  himself  as  having  commit- 
ted grievous  sins,  and  he  speaks  also — not  of  his 
conviction  that  they  had  been  formerly  or  lately 
pardoned — but  of  his  hope  that  they  would  be 
pardoned,  because  with  God  there  was  forgiveness, 
and  God  would  be  faithful  to  his  word  of  pro- 
mise. And  he  immediately  exhorts  Israel  to  en- 
tertain the  same  hope  on  the  same  grounds. 
Israel  had  committed  transgressions,  but  says 
the  Psalmist,  do  not  despair  of  having  these  for- 
given,— for  God,  whose  indignation  you  have  pro- 
yoked,  is  merciful,  and  there  is  plenteous  redemp- 
tion with  him,  and  he  is  ready  to  redeem  Israel 
from  all  his  iniquities,  or,  according  to  the  con- 
text, to  forgive  them  all.  At  the  moment  he  said 


SERMON  IV.  -yi 

this,  neither  he  nor  Israel  thought  that  the  sins 
referred  to  were  actually  pardoned  ;  they  were 
only  encouraged  to  believe  and  hope  that  God 
would  pardon  them  ;  and  he  does  not  say  or  in- 
sinuate that  the  Israel  whom  he  comforts,  and  all 
human  beings  besides,  were  on  a  level  in  this  re- 
spect ;  but  it  is  to  Israel  as  possessing  some  pecu- 
liar character, — and  that  word,  you  will  observe, 
does  indicate  the  possession  of  such  a  character 
in  contradistinction  to  the  rest  of  the  world, — it 
is  to  Israel  as  possessing  some  peculiar  character 
that  he  addresses  the  consolation  that  arises  from 
the  prospect  of  obtaining  needed  forgiveness.  So 
that,  according  to  the  lesson  taught  in  the  words 
of  our  text,  not  only  are  sinners  not  forgiven  in 
advance  or  beforehand,  but  this  forgiveness  is  li- 
mited to  a  certain  specified  class,  and  not  bestow- 
ed indiscriminately  on  the  whole  human  race. 
"  God  shall  redeem,  and  he  shall  redeem  Israel 
from  all  his  iniquities  ;"  and  on  the  ground  of 
this  assurance,  Israel  may  hope  to  receive  a  full 
and  a  free  forgiveness. 

(2.)  Look  next  to  John's  gospel,  chap.  iii.  ver. 
36.  There  you  find  this  declaration,  "  He  that 
believeth  on  the  Son  hath  everlasting  life,  and  he 
that  believeth  not  the  Son  shall  not  see  life,  but 
the  wrath  of  God  abideth  on  him."  Now,  my 
friends,  are  you  prepared  to  admit  that  a  man 
who  has  the  wrath  of  God  abiding  on  him,  is  ne- 


72 


SERMON  IV. 


vertheless  pardoned  of  God  ?  Would  not  that  in- 
volve a  contradiction?  Do  not  you  perceive  that 
a  sinner  may  either  endure  the  wrath  or  receive 
the  forgiveness  of  God,  but  that  both  of  them  can- 
not exist  at  the  same  time  ?  The  wrath  of  God 
is  that  which  is  due  to  the  sinner,  which  is  threat- 
ened against  him,  which  must  fall  upon  him  in 
such  inflictions  as  the  righteousness  of  the  great 
Lawgiver  has  prescribed.  And  what  is,  or  what 
can  be,  the  removal  of  that  wrath,  but  just  the 
blessing  which  is  denominated  forgiveness  ?  Or 
what  can  be  the  continuance  of  that  wrath  but 
the  withholding  of  forgiveness  ?  The  two  things 
are  obviously  equivalent.  And,  therefore,  it  fol- 
lows, of  course,  that  those  who  are  unbelieving 
have  not  obtained  the  pardon  of  their  sins,  it  be- 
ing explicitly  declared,  that  on  them  "  the  wrath 
of  God  obideth.''''*  And  as  all  men  do  not  believe, 
the  conclusion  is  undeniable,  that  all  men  are  not 
forgiven.  Those  only  are  forgiven  who  do  be- 
lieve. The  privilege  is  attached  to  the  character 
— and  as  the  character  does  not  belong  to  all,  so 
neither  does  the  privilege  belong  to  all. 

Consider,  in  connexion  with  this,  the  18th 
vers?;  of  the  same  chapter :  "  He  that  believeth 
on  him"" — Christ — "  is  not  condemned;  but 
he  that  believeth  not  is  condemned  already,  be- 
cause he  hath  not  believed  in  the  name  of  the 
only-begotten  Son  of  God."  Sin  is  a  transgression 
*  Note  B. 


SERMON  IV.  73 

of  the  law  of  God  :  and  the  sinner,  having  trans- 
gressed the  law,  is  condemned  to  suffer  the  pe- 
nalty with  which  it  was  sanctioned.     But  the 
words  we  have  quoted  most  distinctly  assert,  that 
there  are  some  with  regard  to  whom  the  penalty 
is  remitted,  and  others  with  regard  to  whom  the 
penalty  remains.    The  former  are  not  condemned 
"^^ — they  are  no  longer  obnoxious  to  punishment — 
they  are  judicially  acquitted — in    other   words, 
they  are  pardoned ;  and  they  are  thus  pardoned, 
as  believers  in  the  only,  the  appointed  Saviour. 
But  the  latter  are  in  a  different  predicament — in 
the  very  opposite  state.    They  are  condemned  al- 
ready— not  already  pardoned,  but  already  con- 
demned— their  transgressions  have  subjected  them 
to  the  primitive  sentence  denounced  by  the  law, 
and  passed  upon  them  by  the  Judge ;  and  this  is 
their  unavoidable  fate.     They  are  not  pardoned, 
because  they  have  rejected  him,  through  faith  in 
whom  alone   they  could  be  pardoned ;  and  they 
cannot  be  pardoned  so  long  as  they  persevere  in 
their  unbelief,  which,  indeed,  aggravates  as  well 
as  confirms  their  guilt  and  their  condemnation, 
because  they  obstinately  refuse  the  interposition 
and  mediation  of  the  only-begotten  Son  of  God. 

This  is  the  only  meaning  of  which  the  verse  that 
we  have  quoted  is  fairly  susceptible.  It  connects 
forgiveness  with  the  possession  of  faith  in  the  Son 
of  God ;  and  as  it  is  only  some  that  possess  this 

£ 


74  SERMON  IV. 

faith,  it  cannot  be  that  all  men,  whether  they 
have  faith  or  not,  are  actually  and  truly  forgiven. 
(3.)  The  next  Scripture,  to  which  I  would  di- 
rect your  attention,  is  the  32d  Psalm,  at  the  be- 
ginning. "  Blessed  is  he  whose  transgression  is 
forgiven — whose  sin  is  covered.  Blessed  is  the 
man  unto  whom  the  Lord  imputeth  not  iniquity, 
and  in  whose  spirit  there  is  no  guile."  Observe 
now  the  various  terms  employed  to  express  the 
spiritual  condition  of  him  who  is  here  said  to  be 
blessed.  The  privilege  that  constitutes  his  happy 
state,  is  not  merely  called  the  forgiveness  of  his 
transgression,  but  also  the  covering  of  his  sin,  and 
the  not  imputing  iniquity  to  him — which  expres- 
sions cannot  by  any  means  be  understood  to  signi- 
fy a  sense  of  forgiveness — but  forgiveness  itself, 
the  act  of  not  looking  as  it  were  at  the  sinner's 
guilt,  but  treating  it  as  if  it  were  not  seen  and 
did  not  exist,  and  the  act  of  not  charging  it 
against  him,  and  making  him  responsible  for  it, 
but  cancelling  the  obligation  to  punishment  which 
it  imposed  upon  him,  according  to  the  award  and 
the  demand  of  divine  justice.  And  then  take  no- 
tice that  the  forgiveness  thus  described  is  limited 
as.  to  the  objects  on  whom  it  is  bestowed — for  if 
it  had  been  conferred  upon  all  without  exception, 
blessedness  would  have  been  predicated  of  all,  in- 
stead of  being  mentioned  as  belonging  to  a  cer- 
tain privileged  number.     And  this  appears  in  a 


SERMON  IV.  75 

Still  stronger  light  when  we  find  the  privileged 
number  who  are  blessed  in  consequence  of  being 
forgiven,  represented  as  those  "  in  whose  spirit 
there  is  no  guile" — a  moral  quality  which  unques- 
tionably is  far  from  being  universally  prevalent. 
Nay,  in  the  fifth  verse,  we  have  a  still  more  con- 
clusive proof  of  the  fact — for  there  the  Psalmist 
adduces  himself  as  a  specific  example  of  the  per- 
sons by  whom  the  privilege  of  forgiveness  and  its 
accompanying  blessedness  are  exclusively  possess- 
ed. And  he  thus  expounds  his  case,  "I  ac- 
knowledged my  sin  unto  thee,  and  mine  iniquity 
have  I  not  hid.  I  said  I  will  confess  my  trans- 
gressions unto  the  Lord,  and  thou  forgavest  the 
iniquity  of  my  sin."  He  was  a  true  penitent — 
he  made  an  ingenuous  and  sorrowful  confession 
of  his  guilt  before  God — and  it  is  with  this  grace 
that  the  divine  forgiveness  stands  connected,  and 
all  the  safety  and  felicity  involved  in  that  precious 
gift.  But  surely  repentance  forms  an  exception  to 
the  general  character  of  mankind;  it  is  not  exercis- 
ed by  all  men  ;  and  consequently  the  forgiveness, 
from  which  it  is  evidently  inseparable,  is  not 
communicated  to  all  men. 

(4.)  In  Acts  ii.  38,  you  read  thus  : — "  Then 
Peter  said  unto  them,  Repent,  and  be  baptizec 
every  one  of  you  in  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ,  for 
the  remission  of  sins,  and  ye  shall  receive  tht 
Holy  Ghost."     The  Jews  had  crucified  Jesus, 


76  SERMON  IV. 

notwithstanding  the  proofs  he  gave  of  his  Divine 
mission.  In  doing  so,  they  had  contracted  heinous 
guilt  i  and  the  apostle  accused  them  of  that  crime. 
and  set  it  before  them  in  a  strong  light,  by  intro- 
ducing the  divine  testimony  which  was  afforded 
to  his  innocence  and  his  mediatorship,  by  his  be- 
ing raised  from  the  dead  and  called  to  the  right 
hand  of  God.  And  what  is  the  object  of  the 
apostle  in  thus  addressing  them?  Is  it  not  to 
make  them  sensible  of  the  danger  in  which  they 
were  involved,  and  to  persuade  them  to  escape 
from  it  in  the  only  way  by  which  their  deliver- 
ance could  be  effected  ?  He  is  anxious  that  they 
should  experience  the  remission,  not  only  of  this 
particvJar  sin  which  was  so  aggravated,  but  of  all 
the  sins  with  which  they  stood  chargeable  in  the 
sight  of  God,  and  which  made  them  liable  to  the 
wrath  to  come.  Had  their  sins  been  already  re- 
mitted, he  would  not  have  used  language  which 
made  that  event  future,  and  taught  them  to  con- 
sider it  as  an  object  of  desire  and  pursuit.  And 
stUl  less  would  he  have  pointed  out  the  way  by 
which  they  were  to  attain  it,  and  without  which  it 
would  not  be  bestowed  on  any  one  of  them. 
Could  a  single  individual  to  whom  the  exhortation 
was  addressed  understand  it  to  mean,  that  his  ini- 
quities were  now  blotted  out — that  he  stood  ac- 
quitted in  the  judgment  of  heaven — that  he  had 
no  reason  to  apprehend  the  infliction  of  punish> 


SERMON  IV.  77 

ment  r  Or  if  he  could  have  supposed  by  any  un- 
common sagacity  and  acuteness,  that  the  apostle 
meant  to  express  or  to  insinuate  such  a  thing, 
yet  what  could  he  next  make  of  the  repent- 
ance and  the  baptism  that  were  pressed  upon  him 
with  an  evident  view  to  the  remission  of  his  sins  ? 
On  the  ordinary  construction  of  the  phrase,  "  re- 
mission of  sins,""  he  could  have  had  no  difficulty 
in  perceiving  that  unless  he  repented  and  was 
baptized,  or  embraced  the  gospel,  he  must  continue 
in  a  state  of  guilt  and  condemnation — but  if  his 
guilt  was  so  pardoned  as  that  he  was  as  free  from 
it,  as  though  he  had  been  already  in  heaven,  what 
power  of  intellect  could  enable  him  to  per- 
ceive the  connexion  between  what  he  was  requir- 
ed to  do,  and  the  privilege  alleged  to  have  been 
possessed  ?* 

The  same  strain  of  remark  is  applicable  to  the 
exhortation  given  by  Peter  on  another  occasion, 
(Acts  iii.  19.)  "  Repent  ye  therefore  and  be  con- 
verted, that  your  sins  may  be  blotted  out — ." 
The  exhortation  plainly  and  necessarily  proceeds 
upon  the  fact  that  the  sins  of  those  to  whom  it  is 
given,  are  not  yet  pardoned — that  pardon  will  be 
granted  to  them  only  if  repentance  and  conver- 
sion takes  place — that  if  they  do  not  experience 
the  change  implied  in  these  terms,  their  "  deny- 

*  See  Note  C, 


78  SERMON  IV. 

ing  the  Holy  One,",  and  "  killing  the  Prince  of 
life,"  along  with  every  oiFence  they  had  ever  com- 
mitted, must  remain  as  causes  of  certain  and  aw- 
ful condemnation.  Again  we  disclaim  the  idea 
of  ascribing  merit  or  causality  to  repentance  and 
conversion.  What  we  simply  and  singly  assert 
is,  that  repentance,  conversion,  and  the  blotting 
out  of  sins,  are  so  conjoined,  that  the  one  cannot 
be  separated  from  the  other.  And,  consequent- 
ly, as  every  man  does  not  repent  and  is  not  con- 
verted, so  every  man  has  not  his  sins  blotted  out, 
or,  in  other  words,  is  not  pardoned.* 

(5.)  Turn  now  to  Matthew''s  Gospel,  chap.  vi. 
verses  14  and  15,  "  For  if  ye  forgive  men  their 
trespasses,  your  heavenly  Father  will  also  for- 
give you  :  but  if  ye  forgive  not  men  their  tres- 
passes, neither  will  your  Father  forgive  your  tres- 
passes." This  is  an  explanatory  comment  on 
the  petition  for  forgiveness  in  the  Lord's  prayer, 
which  we  formerly  considered ;  and  we  then 
showed  that  forgiveness  here  cannot  possibly  mean 
a  sense  or  feeling  of  forgiveness,  but  only  the  act 
of  forgiveness  or  the  remission  of  sins  itself. 
Well  then,  there  are  two  classes  of  men  specified 
by  our  Lord:; — men  that  do  forgive  others,  and  men 
that  do  not  forgive  others.  And  his  specifica- 
tion is  not  hypothetical — for  we  see  it  reahzed 
every  day  in  the  world.    But  he  tells  us  distinct- 

•  See  Note  D. 


SERMON  IV.  79 

ly,  not  merely  that  both  of  them  are  not  already 
forgiven  of  God,  but  that  both  of  them  never  shall 
be  forgiven.  Those  who  refuse  to  forgive  their 
ofiPending  brethren,  cannot  be  forgiven  of  him  so 
long  as  they  are  guilty  of  cherishing  such  unhal- 
lowed dispositions.  It  is  not  meant  that  we  can 
merit  or  purchase  forgiveness  of  God  by  exercis- 
ing forgiveness  towards  others.  Such  a  meaning 
is  neither  consistent  with  gospel  truth,  nor  is  it 
in  the  least  degree  essential  to  our  argument. 
We  have  only  to  do  with  the  simple  and  most  in- 
teUigible  statement  of  our  Lord — that  there  is  a 
class  of  sinners,  from  whom  God  is  pleased  to 
withhold  the  blessing  in  question.  On  whatever 
ground,  or  for  whatever  purpose,  he  makes  the 
distinction,  it  is  quite  certain  that  the  distinction 
is  made  by  him.  While  our  forgiveness  of  the 
injuries  done  us  by  our  fellow  men,  is  to  be  ho- 
noured or  attended  with  the  forgiveness  of  our 
own  offences  from  our  heavenly  Father,  every 
one  of  the  children  of  men  in  whom  that  virtue  is 
not  found,  is  shut  out  from  any  expectation  of 
the  privilege,  and  must  be  considered  as  still  un- 
der the  curse  of  the  divine  law,  and  still  needing 
actual  deliverance  from  it.  And  this  being  the 
case,  surely  no  man  who  believes  what  Christ  says 
can  ever  reconcile  it  to  his  understanding,  his 
conscience,  or  his  piety,  to  believe  also  what 
those  say  who  so  strenuously  maintain  that  the 
whole  human  race  have  been  really  and  absolute- 
ly forgiven  by  the  death  of  the  Saviour,  that 


80  SERMON  IV. 

they  do  not  need  to  hope  or  to  pray  for  that  bless- 
ing,— being  already  in  possession  of  it,  and  that 
all  which  they  require  now  is  only  a  sense  or  feel- 
ing that  all  their  sins  are  indeed  and  for  ever  par- 
doned. 

(6.)  I  request  you  next  to  look  at  Matthew  ix. 
2 — 8,  compared  with  Luke  v.  20 — 25,  there  we 
have  an  account  of  a  cure  performed  by  our  Lord 
on  a  man  who  was  "  sick  of  the  palsy.""  In  per-- 
forming  the  cure,  Christ  said  to  the  poor  man, 
"  Son,  be  of  good  cheer,  thy  sins  be  forgiven 
thee.'"  The  question  here  is,  whether  Christ  ac- 
tually forgave  his  sins  at  this  moment,  or  whe- 
ther he  only  announced  a  forgiveness  which  pre- 
viously existed.  But  the  circumstances  of  the 
story  make  it  clear  that  the  former  is  the  idea 
conveyed  to  us  by  the  inspired  Evangelist.  For 
our  Saviour  immediately  proceeded  to  work  a 
miracle  of  healing  on  the  paralytic,  by  making 
him  instantly  to  arise  and  take  up  his  bed,  and  go 
away  to  his  own  house.  And  he  did  this,  not 
merely  to  restore  the  man  to  health,  but  to  esta- 
blish his  right  to  forgive  sin, — a  right  which  he 
has  just  exercised,  and  his  pretensions  to  which 
the  Scribes  and  Pharisees,  denominated  blasphe- 
my. This  could  not  possibly  mean  a  right  to  an- 
nounce to  the  man  that  his  sins  were  already 

before  he  spoke,  and  before  he  exerted  any  voli- 
tion on  the  subject — blotted  out  and  forgiven. 
His  enemies  understood  him  in  a  different  sense  ; 


SERMON  IV.  81 

they  understood  him  as  actually  on  the  instant 
pardoning  the  man's  transgressions,  and  in  that 
view  it  was  that  they  censured  him  ;  they  said, 
"  Why  doth  this  man  thus  speak  blasphemies  ? 
Who  can  forgive  sins  but  God  only  P" — plainly 
meaning  that  he  was  then  affecting  to  exert  a  power, 
and  was  pretending  to  possess  a  knowledge,  which 
belonged  to  God  only.  And  our  Saviour,  instead 
of  saying  any  thing  to  indicate  that  they  mistook 
the  matter,  proceeded  on  the  supposition  that  they 
were  quite  correct  in  their  conceptions  of  what  he 
had  been  doing,  and  effectuated  the  man's  instan- 
taneous and  complete  recovery — not  to  show  that 
this  man  was  pardoned  before,  but  that  he  had 
authority  to  pronounce  that  sentence  of  absolu- 
tion which  had  so  much  excited  their  displeasure. 
"  That  ye  may  know,"  says  he,  "  that  the  Son 
of  Man  hath  power  on  earth  to  forgive  sins.'"* 
And  then  if  the  man's  sins  were  already  forgiven, 
just  as  all  the  sins  of  all  the  people  present,  and  of 
all  the  inhabitants  of  the  earth  were  forgiven,  what 
propriety  could  there  be  in  our  Lord  saying  to 
him,  "  Son,  be  of  good  cheer  ?""  Was  there  any 
thing  that  peculiarly  called  on  him  to  be  joyful, 
when  he  had  only  what  was  common  to  all,  and 
was  still  a  paralytic  besides  ?  Or  why  was  the 
universal  fact  of  men's  sins  being  already  pardon- 
ed, applied  to  him  and  nobody  else  ?  Or  how 
came  it  that  he  and  the  persons  in  company  were 
kept  in  ignorance  of  a  doctrine  in  which  they  were 


82  SERMON  IV. 

all  equally  concerned,  and  left,  from  what  our 
Saviour  said  and  did  on  the  occasion,  to  conclude 
that  no  such  thing  existed  as  universal  pardon  ? 
Nothing,  in  short,  can  be  more  distinct  and  in- 
telligible than  the  meaning  of  this  narrative. 
Christ  performed  two  acts.  He  performed  them 
upon  a  paralytic  man.  He  performed  them  on 
the  same  occasion,  and  before  the  same  company. 
He  performed  the  one  to  prove  that  he  had  a  di- 
vine right  to  perform  the  other.  He  performed 
the  act  of  miraculously  curing  the  sick  of  the 
palsy,  and  he  did  so  avowedly  that  he  might  vin- 
dicate what  he  had  been  accused  of  blasphemy, 
for  pretending  to  do  a  little  before — for  giving  to 
the  sick  of  the  palsy  the  pardon  of  all  his  sins. 

(7-)  The  only  other  portion  of  Scripture  that 
I  deem  it  necessary  to  adduce  at  present,  is  in  the 
Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  viii.  10 — 13.  "  For  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 
m  ore."     The  apostle  is  employed  in  proving  that 


SERMON  IV.  83 

Christ  is  the  Mediator  of  a  better  covenant  than 
that  was  which  was  managed  by  the  ministration 
of  the  Jewish  priesthood  :  And  for  this  purpose 
he  produces  a  prediction  from  Jeremiah,  which 
shows  not  only  the  promise  of  God  concerning 
this  matter,  but  points  out  the  peculiar  nature 
and  properties  of  the  new  covenant  which  was  thus 
predicted  and  promised.  He  describes  God's  cove- 
nant with  the  true  Israel — those  properties  of  it  at 
least  which  go  to  demonstrate  its  difference  from, 
and  its  superiority  over,  the  covenant  he  had  made 
with  the  ancient  Israel.  And  observe,  that  while 
this  covenant  is  made  with  a  chosen  people,  to  the 
exclusion  of  all  others,  so  the  properties  which 
he  ascribes  to  those  who  are  ivithin  its  pale,  must 
be  considered  as  characteristics  of  it  in  contradis- 
tinction to  what  marks  out  those  who  are  left 
without  its  pale.  Now,  look  at  the  passage,  and 
you  will  see  that  one  great  distinguishing  pro- 
perty is  the  infusion  of  sanctifying  grace,  or  of 
personal  holiness — consisting  of  knowledge  of 
God's  will,  love  to  it,  and  observance  of  it — as 
contained  in  the  tenth  and  eleventh  verses.  And 
then  you  will  see  that  the  other  great  distinguishing 
property  is  the  conveyance  of  pardoning  mercy  : 
"  I  will  be  merciful  to  their  unrio-hteousness" — 
or  as  the  clause  is  in  Jeremiah,  "  I  will  forgive 
their  iniquity,'"* — "  and  their  sins  and  iniquities 
will  I  remember  no  more."     Can  any  thing,  my 


84  SERMON  IV. 

friends,  be  clearer  or  more  conclusive  than  this? 
The  privilege  of  forgiveness — so  expressed  here 
as  to  take  away  all  colour  for  calling  it  a  sense  of 
forgiveness — the  privilege  of  forgiveness  is  men- 
tioned as  a  thing  hereafter  to  be  bestowed — it  is 
to  be  conferred  upon  a  chosen,  peculiar,  covenant- 
ed people — and  whether  it  comes  before,  or  fol- 
lows after,  or  goes  along  with  sanctification — that 
is  of  no  consequence  to  our  present  argument — 
it  is  to  belong  to  those  who  are  at  the  same  time 
walking  in  the  ways  of  holiness.  In  order,  there- 
fore, that  forgiveness  may  be  justly  accounted  the 
privilege  of  all  men,  it  is  requisite  that  all  men 
be  walking  in  the  ways  of  holiness — which  is  no- 
toriously untrue  ;  and  it  is  requisite  that  all  men 
be  a  chosen,  peculiar,  covenanted  people — which 
is  a  contradiction  in  terms  ;  and,  moreover,  it  is 
requisite  that  /  will  forgive  Israel,  be  held  equi- 
valent to  /  have  forgiven  all  men — which  is  al- 
together absurd. 

It  will  not  do  to  say  here  that  the  forgiveness 
of  the  true  Israel  is  not  incompatible  with  the  doc- 
trine of  jinlversal  forgiveness,  and  that,  indeed, 
the  forgiveness  of  all  men  necessarily  includes  the 
forgiveness  of  that  particular  class.  This  maybe 
true  as  an  abstract  proposition,  for,  indeed,  noth- 
ing can  be  more  palpably  true  than  that  if  aU  are 
forgiven,  then  every  one  of  that  all  is  forgiven. 
But  the  proposition  is  not  true  as  applied  to  the 


SERMON  IV.  85 

case  under  consideration.  The  incompatibility 
of  the  two  statements  is  almost  self-evident.  For 
the  forgiveness  here  mentioned  is  mentioned  as 
the  characteristic  peculiarity  of  those  who  consti- 
tute the  true  Israel,  chosen  out  of  the  world,  and 
distinguished  from  the  world  by  a  certain  definite 
character.  And  if  it  is  their  characteristic  pecu- 
liarity— that  does  effectually,  and  in  terms,  ex- 
clude all  others  from  any  participation  in  it. 
Nothing  can  be  the  distinction  of  one  which 
equally  belongs  to  all.  And  if  it  be,  as  it  assuredly 
is,  the  doctrine  of  the  Bible  that  forgiveness  of  sins 
belongs  only  to  the  true  Israel,  as  described  by 
the  Prophet  and  the  Apostle,  then  to  maintain 
that  it  belongs  to  those  who  do  not  come  under 
that  description,  or  that  it  belongs  to  all  men, 
while  it  is  confessed  and  undeniable  that  a  great 
proportion  of  men  have  the  very  opposite  charac- 
teristics, is  to  contradict  the  doctrine  of  the  Bible, 
and  to  confound  distinctions  which  the  authority 
of  God  has  established,  as  important  and  essen- 
tial in  the  dispensation  of  his  mercy,  and  in  his 
government  of  the  world. 

Passages  of  Scripture,  to  the  same  effect,  might 
be  indefinitely  multiplied  ;*  but  enough  has  been 
adduced  to  overturn  and  expose  that  principle  of 
universal  pardon,  against  which  we  are  called  to 

•  See  Note  E.. 


86  SERMON  IV. 

contend  as  one  of  the  prevailing  heresies  of  the 
present  day.  And  we  may  now  ask  whether  those 
who  maintain  and  inculcate  it,  can  bring  forward 
any  distinct  statement,  or  any  explicit  declaration, 
in  which  it  is  either  directly  taught,  or  plainly  and 
necessarily  implied.  We  challenge  them  to  in- 
stance a  single  verse,  or  a  single  clause  of  a  verse, 
in  the  whole  compass  of  revelation,  that  gives  any 
countenance  to  their  dogma.  It  is  not  gratuitous 
assertions  respecting  God,  as  a  God  whose  very 
name  is  love,  that  we  want.  It  is  not  abstract 
reasonings  on  his  character  and  administration, 
that  we  want.  It  is  not  finely-constructed  and 
attractive  theories  of  what  the  gospel  is  supposed 
to  be,  that  we  want.  Even  on  these  grounds  we 
have  no  fear  of  meeting  our  opponents  triumph- 
antly. But  what  we  desiderate,  in  this  stage  of 
our  progress,  is  any  scriptural  declaration  which 
they  can  produce,  and  set  in  opposition  to  those 
which  we  have  been  submitting  to  your  attention 
as  indisputably,  out  and  out,  hostile  to  their  sen- 
timents. Such  they  have  not  found,  and  such 
they  cannot  find.  We  appeal  "  to  the  law  and 
to  the  testimony" — and  we  know  where  it  is  said, 
"  If  they  speak  not  according  to  this  word,  it  is 
because  there  is  no  light  in  them.""  From  the 
Scriptures  which  we  have  set  before  you,  it  is  evi- 
dent that  they  not  only  do  not  speak  according 
to  this  word,  but  that  they  flatly  contradict  it — 


I 


SERMON  IV.  87 

not  willingly  we  grant — but  really  and  continual- 
ly— and,  therefore,  they  are  in  darkness  on  this 
most  momentous  article  of  faith — deluded  them- 
selves, and  wholly  unqualified  to  be  the  guides 
and  instructors  of  others.  It  is  not  the  plain 
written  record  that  they  look  to,  and  walk  by  as 
their  oracle — but  a  mere  theory  spun  out  of  their 
fancies  and  feehngs,  referring  to  the  record  in 
some  general  points,  but  entirely  at  variance  with 
it  as  to  the  fundamental  point  in  question,  and 
constructed  with  the  view  of  giving  to  God  a 
glory  which  he  does  not  assert  for  himself,  and 
a  richness  to  the  gospel  which  its  own  divine  and 
authoritative  testimony  entirely  disclaims.  On 
this  ground  alone,  were  there  no  other — on  the 
ground  that  it  is  opposed  to  a  multitude  of  Scrip- 
tures on  the  one  hand,  and  not  sanctioned  or 
supported  by  a  single  affirmation  of  Scripture  on 
the  other,  we  hesitate  not  to  reject  it  as  unsound, 
vmtenable,  and  dangerous. 

Perhaps  it  will  be  said  that  every  thing  in  the 
Bible  which  speaks  of  Christ  having  died  for  the 
world  or  for  all  men,  is  favourable  to  the  doctrine 
of  universal  pardon.  No  such  thing.  Even  sup- 
posing that  these  expressions  are  to  be  taken  li- 
terally, and  that  they  are  not  justly  and  necessarily 
limited  by  the  context  or  by  the  indisputable 
truths  with  which  they  are  associated,  still  they 
do  not  amount  to  any  thing  hke  an  authority  for 


88  SERMON  IV. 

the  doctrine  we  are  combating.     In  that  case  the 
death  of  Christ  is  nothing  more  than  a  provision 
made  by  the  mercy  and  wisdom  of  God,  which  is 
capable  of  securing,  and  may  be  made  available 
for  the  forgiveness  of  every  sinner  or  of  allmen^* 
But  there  is  not  a  syllable,  declaring  or  implying 
that  every  sinner,  or  that  all  men  are  actual  par- 
takers of  its  pardoning  virtue  ;  and  that  is  the  po- 
sition that  is  to  be  proved.     Christ  during  his  life 
had  a  power  given  him  that  was  adequate  to  the 
healing  of  all  the  sick  throughout  the  land.     But 
all  were  not,   therefore,   healed — those  only  were 
healed  on  whom  he  chose  to  put  forth  his  mira- 
culous strength,  and  who  came  to  him   or  were 
brought  to  him  in  the  exercise  of  faith.     And  in 
like  manner  the  death  of  Christ  having  in  it  such 
a  worth  as  is  equal  to  cancel  all  the  guilt  that  ever 
was  or  ever  will  be  committed  by  the  human  race, 
and  possessing  this  worth  by  the  constitution  of  grace 
which  appointed  it  as  essential  to  the  expiation  o 
sin,  as  well  as  from  the  inherent,  infinite  dignity 
of  the  Saviour,  does  not  therefore  imply  that  all 
the  transgressions  of  all  men  have   actually  been 
washed  away  by  it.     And  while  the  one  is  not  on 
any  sound  maxim  of  reasoning  a  necessary  con- 
sequence of  the  other,  we  are  assured  by  the  word 
of  God>  that  it  is  not  a  consequence  at  all — but, 

*  See  Note  F.. 


SERMON  IV.  89 

on  the  contrary,  that  the  death  of  Christ  operates 
that  effect  on  those  only  who  are  distinguished 
by  a  particular  state  and  character — all  which  is 
clearly  evidenced  by  such  passages  as  say  that 
"  whosoever  believeth  shall  receive  the  remission 
of  sins" — that  they  who  "  repent  and  are  con- 
verted shall  have  their  sins  blotted  out" — that  the 
Lord  shall  grant  forgiveness  to  Israel^  or  "  re- 
deem Israel  from  all  his  iniquities."*  And  if  par- 
don is  limited  to  such  as  are  thus  specified  and 
characterized  in  the  sacred  volume,  this  honour 
and  privilege  cannot  upon  any  conceivable  ground, 
and  cannot  without  stultifying  the  oracles  of  truth, 
and  cannot  without  making  the  Spirit  of  God  deny 
himself,  be  extended  to  every  individual  of  the 
apostate  family  of  man.  This  is  what  we  hold  on 
the  authority  of  that  book,  from  which  all  our 
knowledge  of  the  Gospel  is  to  be  derived,  on  the 
sayings  of  which  all  our  hopes  must  be  founded, 
and  out  of  which  we  are  all  at  last  to  be  judged 
by  him  who  has  inspired  and  given  it. 

My  friends,  I  am  dwelling  long  upon  this  sub- 
ject. But  I  am  influenced  by  a  conviction  that 
its  importance,  both  intrinsic  and  relative,  demands 
for  it  a  full  and  lengthened  illustration.  And  in 
commenting  on  so  many  passages  of  Scripture,  I 
have  had  it  in  view  not  only  to  expose  the  error 
under   consideration,  by  throwing  upon  it   the 

See  Note  G. 


90  SERMON  IV. 

light  of  God's  own  word,  but  also  to  point  out 
the  mode  of  correctly  interpreting  the  Scripture, 
and  thus  to  prevent  you  from  being  so  easily 
misled  by  those  who,  in  labouring  to  imbue  your 
minds  with  their  opinions,  either  pervert  the 
truth  before  they  offer  it  to  your  acceptance,  or 
so  fill  you  with  amiable  prepossessions,  and  so 
charm  you  with  beautiful  theories,  that  you  never 
see  or  arrive  at  the  truth  at  all. 


SERMON  V. 


PSALM  CXXX.  7)  8. 

"  Let  Israel  hope  in  the  Lord,  for  with  the  Lord  there 
is  mercy  ;  and  with  him  is  plenteous  rede7nption;  and 
he  shall  redeem  Israel  from  all  his  iniquities." 

The  Psalmist  exhorts  Israel  to  hope  in  the 
Lord  on  certain  grounds,  or  for  certain  reasons, 
which  he  specifies.  The  last  of  these  consists  in 
the  assurance  given,  that  the  redemption  which 
God  in  his  mercy  has  provided,  he  wUl  most  un- 
questionably bestow  upon  Israel.  In  the  illus- 
tration of  this  particular,  we  noticed  the  connex- 
ion here  stated  between  privilege  and  character. 
The  correlative  term  to  redemption  is  not  every 
sinner  or  all  men,  but  Israel.  He  shall  redeem, 
— not  mankind  at  large,  but  only  Israel,  every 
one  that  is  included  under  that  denomination, 
from  all  his  iniquities.  And  here  we  were  called 
upon  to  notice  the  heresy  of  universal  pardon, 


92  SERMON  V. 

which  has  been  lately  revived, — for  though  some 
of  our  would-be  theological  guides  seem  to  speak 
of  it  as  if  it  were  a  recent  discovery,  it  is  in  truth 
of  very  ancient  origin,  and  is  one  of  those  mon- 
strous things  which  the  human  heart,  ever  fertile 
in  error,  did  not  wait  till  now,  to  gender  and  to 
propagate, — we  were  called  upon,  I  say,  to  notice 
the  heresy  of  universal  pardon  which  has  been 
lately  revived,  and  modifted  by  its  composition 
with  other  heresies  as  bad  as  itself.  And,  in  the 
course  of  what  we  took  occasion  to  say  upon  it, 
we  showed  you,  Jirst,  that  forgiveness,  as  used  in 
Scripture,  does  not  mean,  according  to  the  mo- 
dern universalists,  a  mere  sense  or  feeling  of  for- 
giveness, but  the  actual  remission  of  sins,  or  de- 
liverance from  obligation  to  punishment  on  ac- 
count of  sin  ;  and,  secondly,  we  showed  you  that 
forgiveness,  or  the  remission  of  sins  is,  according 
to  scriptural  statement,  connected  with  the  pos- 
session of  certain  quahties  of  character,  and  so 
connected  as  clearly  and  necessarily  to  exclude 
from  the  benefit  all  to  whom  these  ^qualities  do 
not  belong.  The  passages  to  this  effect  that  are 
to  be  found  in  the  Bible  are  numerous,  unequivo- 
cal, and  explicit.  Some  of  them  we  produced 
and  applied  to  the  subject, — showing  you,  as  we 
went  along,  how  fatal  they  are  to  the  tenet  of 
universal  pardon. 
We  followed  up  our  references  to  these  Scri^- 


SERMON  V.  93 

tures  by  challenging  the  assertors  of  universal 
pardon  to  produce  a  single  passage  of  the  Bible, 
which  affirms  their  proposition.     When  we  made 
this  challenge,  we  did  not  mean  to  say  that  they 
can  produce  nothing  from  that  volume  which  they 
so  interpret  as  to  answer  their  purpose,  or  which 
may  not  in  its  insulated  state,  and  to  a  superficial 
eye,  have  the  appearance  of  favouring  their  views. 
For  there  never  was,  since  the  Christian  record 
existed,  an  opinion,  however  extravagant  or  im- 
pious, for  which  its  abettors  did  not  appeal  to 
Holy  Writ.     We  are  quite  aware  that  our  oppo- 
nents have  their  texts  ready  on  demand;  that  they 
have  a  considerable  number  of  them  ;  that  they 
can  expatiate  and  dogmatise  upon  these  most  flu- 
ently; and  that  could  they  but  shut  out  all  the 
rest  of  revelation  from  our  view,  and  prevent  us 
from  exercising  the  powers  of  common  under- 
standing, they  might  be  wonderfully  successful  in 
puzzling  and  confuting  us  :  and  in  all  this,  they 
do  but  practise  the  very  tactics  which  Socinians 
and  unbelievers  have  always  practised  in  their 
warfare  against  the  truth  and  the  doctrines  of  the 
gospel.     We  do  not  intend  to  blink  the  scriptural 
authorities  with  which  they  have  attempted  to 
back  their  heresy.     On   the  contrary,  so  far  as 
they  are  known  to  us,  we  shall  occupy  ourselves 
by  and  bye  in  pointing  out  their  total  insufficien- 
cy to  prove  an  iota  of  what  they  are  so  confident'- 


94  SERMON  V. 

ly  advanced  to  support.  In  the  meantime,  we 
aver,  that  there  is  not  one  of  them  ;  nor  is  there 
a  single  syllable  in  the  volume  of  inspiration,  de- 
claring that  every  sinner,  or  that  every  individu- 
al of  the  human  race,  is  an  actual  partaker  of  the 
pardoning  virtue  of  Christ's  death.  This  we 
shall  illustrate  at  some  length  when  we  discuss 
the  scriptural  proofs,  as  they  are  called,  which 
have  been  adduced  on  the  other  side.  But  we 
cannot  help  submitting  it  even  now  to  your  con- 
sideration, as  of  paramount  and  vital  moment. 

We  bring  many,  many  passages  from  the  word 
of  God  which  do  not  seem  to  imply,  and  which  do 
not  leave  us  to  infer,  but  which  declare  expressly, 
and  in  so  many  words,  that  forgiveness  of  sins  is 
bestowed  on  those  only  who  are  distinguished  by 
certain  specified  characters,  and  that  all  who  are 
destitute  of  these  characters  are  denied  that  boon. 
But  we  repeat  it,  there  is  not  a  sentence,  nor  a 
clause  of  a  sentence,  in  any  part  of  the  divine  re- 
cord, which  asserts,  that  every  sinner  is  really  and 
already  pardoned  in  consequence  of  Christ's  death, 
Or  in  consequence  of  any  arrangement  or  dispen- 
sation whatsoever.  If  there  were,  you  must  see 
at  once  that  there  would  be  no  escaping  the  con- 
clusion, that,  on  this  infinitely  important  point, 
the  Bible  contradicts  itself,  and  is  thus  de- 
prived of  its  most  essential  claims  to  our  belief. 
But  there  is  no  such  inconsistency  in  the  sacred 


SERMON  V.  95 

volume,  and  there  is  no  such  unrighteousness  in 
its  divine  author.  We  owe  the  allegation  to  that 
partial  view  of  things,  to  that  love  of  theory,  to 
that  passion  for  something  new,  to  that  pride  of 
maintaining  what  has  been  once  professed,  from 
which  even  good  men  are  not  always  exempt,  and 
which  leads  them  to  indulge  in  the  most  sense- 
less paradoxes,  or  even  to  sacrifice  the  authority 
of  God's  word,  by  making  it  deny  in  one  place 
what  it  has  affirmed  in  another.  But  we  reiterate 
the  position,  that  whUe  the  Scriptures  often  an- 
nounce in  explicit  terms,  that  only  a  certain  num- 
ber of  sinful  men,  marked  and  designated  by  de- 
finite characteristics,  shall  obtain  forgiveness  of 
their  sins,  and  that  the  blessing  cannot,  and  will 
not  be  extended  to  those  in  whom  these  charac- 
teristics are  wanting,  the  Scriptures  nowhere  an- 
nounce in  explicit  terms,  or  in  terms  at  all,  that 
each  individual  transgressor  may  lay  his  account 
with  receiving  it,  or  may  consider  himself  as  one 
on  whom  it  has  been  already  bestowed.  And  in 
such  a  case,  it  is  not  difficult  to  determine  on 
which  side  of  the  controversy  the  truth  is  to  be 
sought  for  and  found. 

2.  We  now  proceed  to  show  you,  that  the  doc- 
trine of  universal  pardon  necessarily  leads  to  the 
doctrine  of  universal  salvation,  meaning  by  sal- 
vation the  sinner's  final  admission  into  heaven, 
together  with  every  blessing,  such  as  acceptance, 


96  SERMON  V. 

sanctification,  and  so  forth,  which  that  issue  pre- 
supposes or  pre-requi'res. 

It  is  not  our  intention  at  present  to  prove  that 
the  doctrine  of  universal  salvation  is  unscriptural 
and  unsound,  nor  does  the  discussion  in  which 
we  are  engaged  call,  upon  us  to  do  so.  None 
will  venture  to  maintain  such  a  tenet  who  have 
any  belief  in  the  Bible  as  an  inspired  document, 
and  any  knowledge  or  comprehension  of  its  con- 
tents. If  there  are  persons  who  hold  it,  still  it  is 
not  with  them  we  are  contending.  Those  with 
whom  we  are  contending  profess  to  reject,  and  to 
deprecate,  and  to  abhor  it,  as  much  as  we  can  do. 
And,  therefore,  with  them,  and  with  all  who  are 
of  the  same  opinion  on  that  point,  the  argument 
we  have  announced  is  a  fair  one,  and  must  be 
held  to  be  conclusive  as  it  is  fair.  If  the  princi- 
ple of  universal  pardon  is  such  as  to  establish  the 
principle  of  universal  salvation,  or  necessarily  to 
infer  it,  and  if  you  are  satisfied  that  the  principle 
of  universal  salvation  is  false  and  inadmissible, 
then  you  cannot  possibly  or  consistently  adopt  the 
principle  of  universal  pardon.  This  is  self-evi* 
dent  and  needs  no  illustration. 

Now  what  is  the  forgiveness  which  is  said  to  be 
bestowed  upon  every  sinner  .?  It  is  the  remission 
or  the  cancelling  of  that  penalty  to  which  he  had 
become  subject  in  consequence  of  breaking  the 
divine  law, — a  penalty  consisting  in  the  loss  of 


i 


SERMON  V.  97 

God''s  favour,  and  in  liability  to  the  infliction  of 
God's  ■wrath.  He  who  is  forgiven  is  no  longer 
exposed  to  this  punishment,  but  is  entirely  and 
for  ever  delivered  from  it.  And  who  does  not 
perceive  at  one  glance  the  vast  importance,  the 
unspeakable  value  of  such  a  blessing  ?  So  im- 
portant and  so  valuable  is  it  accounted  in  the  book 
of  inspiration,  that  it  is  there  spoken  of  as  equi- 
valent to  the  whole  of  redemption,  forgiveness 
and  redemption  being  used  as  synonymous  words. 
They  are  so  used  in  the  passage  where  our  text 
lies,  and  they  are  so  used  repeatedly  by  the  Apos- 
tle Paul,  who  says,  that  we  have  "  redemption 
through  the  blood  of  Christ,  even  the  forgive- 
ness of  sins."  And  yet  in  a  scheme  clearly  and 
avowedly  devised  for  the  salvation  of  sinners,  the 
salvation  of  multitudes  proceeds  thus  far  and  goes 
no  farther  !  They  are  forgiven,  but  they  are  not 
accepted,  they  are  not  sanctified,  they  are  not 
made  happy,  they  never  get  to  heaven,  they  are 
still  to  suffer  misery  !  Had  the  scheme  which  in 
this  manner  gives  them  so  much  and  still  with- 
holds so  much,  been  of  mere  human  contrivance, 
we  could  not  perhaps  have  wondered  at  such  an 
appearance  of  imperfection  and  inconsistency. 
But  the  marvel  is,  that  it  is  a  scheme  of  God's 
device  and  of  God's  accomplishment.  It  is  a 
scheme  which  in  Scripture  is  called  "  the  power  of 
God  and  the  wisdom  of  God,"  and  the  very  privi- 
r 


98  SERMON  V. 

lege  which,  unaccompanied  with  any  other,  it  is  al- 
leged to  bestow  upon  so  many  of  the  children  of 
men,  the  forgiveness  of  sins,  is  ascribed  to  the 
riches  of  his  grace,  and  said  to  be  "  according  to 
the  riches  of  his  grace."*  Nay,  those  who  put 
that  limitation  on  the  effects  of  the  gospel,  are 
fain  to  represent  God  as  altogether  love,  as  hav- 
ing no  anger,  no  wrath  towards  his  offending  and 
degenerate  creatures.  And  notwithstanding  they 
will  have  us  to  believe,  that  God  who  is  love  and 
nothing  else  ;  who  at  any  rate  along  with  other 
attributes  is  distinguished  by  rich  grace  in  the 
communication  of  forgiveness,  and  from  whose 
grace  and  love  the  scheme  of  salvation  has  eman- 
ated, is  so  stinted  in  his  mercy  towards  those  for 
whom  it  is  intended,  that  though  he  will,  in  vir- 
tue of  it,  pardon  all  their  sins,  he  will  leave  them 
destitute  of  every  thing  else  !  He  pardons  them 
in  the  freest  and  the  fullest  manner,  through 
means  of  a  dispensation  which  is  framed  to  ma- 
nifest the  unmixed,  the  unqualified  love  which 
constitutes  his  essence  and  his  character,  and  ha- 
ving pardoned  them,  he  stops  short  in  the  career 
of  his  beneficence,  as  if  he  grudged  to  give  them 
any  more,  or  as  if  the  dispensation  had  been 
formed  so  unskilfully,  or  as  if  the  strength  put 
forth  to  render  it  efficacious  had  been  so  feeble 

*  Ephes.  i.  7. 


SERMON  V.  99 

and  inadequate,  that  the  one  portion  of  the  work 
of  salvation  being  done,  the  other  and  finishing 
portion  of  it  had  to  be  left  undone  ! 

We  deny  not  the  sovereign  right  of  God  to  con- 
vey to  sinful  men,  who  deserved  no  bounty  from  him, 
a  part  of  salvation,  and  not  to  convey  the  whole  : 
and  had  it  pleased  him  to  act  in  this  manner,  and 
to  announce  the  fact,  we  should  have  humbly  ac- 
quiesced in  his  arrangement,  and  adored  him  for 
it.    But  such  an  arrangement  is  so  much  more  like 
the  doing  of  imperfect  man,   than  it  is  like  the 
doing  of  the   all -perfect  Jehovah — it   bears    so 
little  analogy  to  all  that  we  have  been  able  to  con- 
ceive of  the  character  and  administration  of  God 
— it  has  so  little  resemblance  to  the  general  aspect 
and  features  of  the  gospel,  as  these  are  delineated 
in  his  own  word,  that  we  cannot  bring  ourselves  to 
give  it  any  credence,  unless  it  be  clearly  stated 
and  palpably  set  forth  in  some  page  of  Holy  writ, 
or  in  some  department  of  the  Christian  scheme. 
And  no  such  evidence  can  we  any  where  discover. 
None  of  the  divine  promises  give  assurance  of 
pardon,  and  of  pardon  alone.     There  is  no  pre- 
diction of  the  Messiah,   and  no  prefiguration  of 
him,  as  a  mere  Redeemer  from  punishment.    We 
can  see  no  example  of  a  man  being  forgiven  all 
his  trespasses,  and  receiving  no   other  token  of 
God's  mercy.     No  instance  presents  itself  of  any 
individual  in  the  history  of  Christianity  being 
pointed  out  as  pardoned,  but  not  saved.     And 


100  SERMON  V. 

so  far  as  eternity  is  opened  up  to  our  view,  we 
cannot  recognise  any  one  who,  in  giving  in  his 
account,  or  in  having  his  portion  allotted  to  him, 
stands  released  from  all  obligation  to  penal  suffer- 
ing without  being  invested  with  honour  and  feli- 
city. 

These  things  being  so,  we  have  a  strong  pre- 
sumption at  least  that  forgiveness  is  uniformly 
followed  or  accompanied  by  all  the  other  benefits 
which  are  included  under  salvation.  The  pre- 
sumption arises  from  the  incalculable  worth  of 
forgiveness,  from  the  awkward  predicament  in 
which  they  are  placed  who  get  no  other  boon 
along  with  it,  from  the  character  of  God  connect- 
ed with  the  plan  of  the  gospel  as  proceeding  from 
his  mercy  and  designed  for  tbe  advantage  of  the 
very  persons  who  are  pardoned,  and  from  the  ap- 
parent defects  and  incompleteness  by  which  it  is 
marked  in  leaving  the  objects  for  whom  it  pro- 
fesses to  come,  as  it  were  half  redeemed  ;  and  it 
is  a  presumption  which,  arising  from  all  these 
very  significant  circumstances,  is  unopposed  and 
untouched  by  a  single  fact  in  the  gospel  plan,  or 
by  a  single  announcement  in  the  gospel  record. 
So  far  then  as  all  rational  probability  goes,  if  all 
are  pardoned,  all  are  likewise  saved. 

But  let  us  advance  a  little  farther,  and  attend 
to  the  connexion  between  the  death  of  Christ  and 
the  various  blessings  of  salvation. 


SERMON  V  101 

The  forgiveness  of  sins,  we  are  told  truly,  flows 
from  the  death  of  Christ ;  but  we  are  also  told 
that  they  flow  directly  and  necessarily  from  it 
to  all  mankind  without  exception,  so  that  all  man- 
kind without  exception,  whatever  they  do,  and 
wherever  they  are,  partake  of  that  blessing  in  its 
full  extent.  But  the  death  of  Christ  was  just  as 
certainly  the  cause  of  all  the  other  benefits  of  sal- 
vation as  it  was  of  forgiveness.  It  was  appoint- 
ed and  suffered  in  order  to  secure  them.  It  did 
?iot  work  out  one  blessing,  or  several  blessings,  or 
a  variety  of  blessings  insulated  from  each  other  ; 
but  all  the  blessings  which  the  sinner  needs  for 
his  complete  recovery,  and  his  complete  restor- 
ation. And  these  are  so  connected  together  as 
to  their  origin  in  the  death  of  Christ,  and  as  to 
their  constituting  in  that  united  form  the  purpose 
and  object  of  Chrises  death,  that  we  cannot  se- 
parate one  of  them  from  the  rest,  with  respect  to 
its  destination,  without  dividing  the  work  of  the 
Redeemer,  and  doing  violence  to  the  unity  and 
perfection  by  which  it  is  distinguished-  Christ 
died  that  he  might  procure  for  us  the  pardon  of 
all  our  sins.  But  he  also  died  that  he  might 
"  redeem  us  from  all  iniquity,  and  purify  unto 
himself  a  peculiar  people,  zealous  of  good  works."* 
He  also  died  that  he  "  might  deliver  us  from 

*  Titus  ii.  H. 


102  SERMON  V. 

this  present  evil  world,  according  to  the  will  of 
God,  even  our  Father."*  He  also  died  that  he 
might  "  destroy  him  that  had  the  power  of  death, 
that  is  the  devil,  and  to  deliver  them  who  through 
fear  of  death  were  all  their  lifetime  subject  to 
bondage."-}-  He  also  died  that  he  might  "  make 
reconciliation  for  the  sins  of  the  people,"!  and 
bring  us  into  a  state  of  "  peace  with  God."|| 
He  also  died,  that  he  might  "  redeem  them  that 
were  under  the  lav/,  that  we  might  receive  the 
adoption  of  sons."§  And  he  died  that  "  we  might 
never  perish,  but  have  everlasting  life."^  By 
his  death — his  once  offering  of  himself,  he  not 
only  intended  but  effectuated  aU  these  achieve- 
ments. His  obedience  to  the  death  of  the  cross 
accomplished  every  one  of  them  as  well  as  every 
other.  And  what  authority  is  there  for  saying 
that  the  blessings  of  forgiveness  only  went  forth 
from  that  fountain  of  every  blessing  into  the  lot 
of  all  for  whom  it  was  opened  up,  and  that  it  left 
all  the  rest  behind,  though  these  were  equally 
provided  and  equally  needed  ?  It  would  be  just 
as  legitimate  to  say  that  a  sinner  may  be  sancti- 
fied  and  get  to  heaven  without  being  pardoned, 
as  to  say  that  a  sinner  may  be  pardoned  without 
being  sanctified  and  getting  to  heaven.  If  it  be 
true  that  a  sinner  is  forgiven  in  virtue  of  the  di- 

•  Gal.  i.  4-.  t  Heb.  ii.  14,  15.  f  Heb.  ii.  17. 

II  Ephes.  ii.  16,  17.       §  Gal.  iv.  4,  5.         ^  "^ohn  iii.  14,  15k 


SERMON  V.  103 

rect  and  necessary  operation  of  Christ's  death, 
then  must  the  sinner  be  renewed  and  accepted  and 
glorified  in  virtue  of  the  same  operation,  for  Christ's 
death  provided  in  the  same  manner  and  with  the 
same  efficacy  for  all  the  necessities  of  the  sinner's 
fallen  condition.  And  on  the  supposition  that  it 
was  intended  to  do  more  for  some  sinners  than  it 
did  for  the  remainder,  surely  we  shall  be  instruct- 
ed in  the  reality  of  that  distinction  by  some  ex- 
plicit declaration,  or  some  peculiar  and  obvious 
arrangement.  If  no  such  instruction  is  given  us, 
we  are  necessitated,  on  the  very  allegation  that  the 
death  of  Christ  procures  forgiveness  for  all  sin- 
ners, and  absolutely  conveys  it  to  them,  to  con- 
join with  it  every  other  blessing  as  proceeding 
from  the  very  same  cause,  and  existing  in  the 
very  same  scheme  of  mercy,  and  as  procured  for 
them  and  conveyed  to  them,  with  the  very  same 
certainty. 

It  will  not  do  to  say  that  Scripture  speaks  of 
pardon  as  universal  in  its  application,  but  of 
salvation  as  partial  in  its  application,  though 
both  are  ascribed  to  the  death  of  Christ :  for 
the  assertion  is  not  correct.  The  application 
of  the  one  is  as  extensive  as  is  that  of  the  other. 
Our  opponents  quote  triumphantly  that  passage 
from  John's  first  epistle,*  which  says,  that  Christ 


ii.  2, 


104  SERMON  V. 

is  a  "  propitiation  for  the  sins  of  the  "whole 
world,"'"'  by  which  they  understand  that  Christ's 
death  as  a  propitiation  secures  the  forgiveness  of 
the  whole  world.  This  text  we  shall  afterwards 
consider  and  explain ;  but,  taking  them  at  their 
word,  it  is  enough  for  our  present  purpose  to  say, 
that  terras  as  universal  are  used  in  Scripture  in 
speaking  of  salvation.  In  this  very  epistle*  it  is 
said,  that  "  the  Father  sent  the  Son  to  be  the 
Saviour  of  the  world.''''  The  Apostle  Paul  says,-|- 
that  "  the  grace  of  God  hath  appeared  unto  all 
men  bringing  salvation.'"'  And  our  Lord  him- 
self is  represented  as  saying,  J  "  Look  unto  me 
and  be  ye  saved,  all  ye  ends  of  the  earth.'" 

Neither  will  it  do  to  affirm,  that  while  forgive- 
ness is  bestowed  upon  all  men,  the  other  blessings 
of  salvation  are  bestowed  upon  those  only  who 
believe.  This  statement  is  as  incorrect  as  the 
other.  The  other  blessings  of  salvation,  we  al- 
low, are  bestowed  on  those  only  who  believe. 
But  we  positively  deny  that  forgiveness  is  bestow- 
ed upon  any  who  do  not  believe.  "  To  Christ,"" 
said  Peter,§  "  give  all  the  prophets  witness,  that 
whosoever  believeth  in  him  shall  receive  remission 
of  sins.'"*  "  If  ye  believe  not  that  I  am  he," 
said  Christ,  ||  "  ye  shall  die  in  your  sins."" 
And  John  the   Baptist  has  said,^  "  He  that 

•  John  iv.  14.  t  Titus  ii.  11.  t  Is.  xlv.  22. 

§  Acts  X.  4.3.  II  John  viii.  24-.        ^  Jolin  iii.  36. 


SERMON  V.  105 

believeth  on  the  Son  hath  everlasting  Hfe ;  and 
he  that  believeth  not  the  Son  shall  not  see  life  ; 
but  the  wrath  of  God  abideth  upon  him."" 

Since,  then,  the  death  of  Christ  procures  sane- 
tification  and  eternal  life  as  certainly  and  as  ef- 
fectually as  it  procures  forgiveness ;  since  they 
are  spoken  of  in  terras  of  the  same  enlarged  and 
general  import  that  it  is  spoken  of;  since  all  of 
them  are  equally  annexed  to  the  possession  and 
exercise  of  faith  ;  and  since  there  is  no  other  cir- 
cumstance to  distinguish  among  them  as  to  the 
extent  of  their  application  and  enjoyment,  it  fol- 
lows, without  a  doubt,  that  if  the  forgiveness  of 
ein  is  universal,  universal  also  must  be  every 
other  blessing  which  Christ  died  to  secure — in 
other  words,  every  individual  of  the  human  race 
shall  be  saved.  And  so,  if  you  reject  with  abhor- 
rence such  an  unscriptural  tenet  as  that  of  uni- 
versal salvation,  you  must  reject  with  no  less  ab- 
horrence the  tenet  of  universal  pardon. 

Let  us  now  attend  for  a  little  to  the  light  thrown 
vupon  this  subject  by  what  is  said  of  justification.* 
This  privilege  stands  opposed  to  a  state  o{ condem- 
nation— to  our  being  subject  to  divine  wrath — to 
our  needing  the  remission  of  sins.  Now,  it  is 
very  possible  to  conceive  that  we  may  be  delivered 
&ora  a  state  of  condemnation — that  the  divine 

*  Note  H. 


106  SERMON  V. 

wrath  may  be  taken  away — that  our  sms  may  be 
remitted,  and  yet  that  we  may  not  obtain  all  that 
is  usually  comprehended  under  justification  :  for 
all  these  expressions  mean  strictly  what  is  called 
forgiveness,  whereas  justification  means  not  only 
forgiveness,  but  such  a  treatment  as  we  should 
receive  were  we  personally  righteous  according 
to  the  law.  But  such  is  the  relative  position 
v/hich  justification  bears  to  the  unpardoned  state, 
that  not  merely  does  the  fact  of  our  being  justi- 
fied imply  that  we  are  pardoned,  but  the  fact  of 
our  being  pardoned  infers  that  we  are  justified. 
This  is  the  actual  view  of  the  subject  that  is  set 
before  us  in  the  gospel.  Pardon  does  not  stand 
by  itself  in  its  negative  form — it  stands  in  close 
and  inseparable  alliance  with  acceptance  on 
the  same  common  ground — the  death  or  obe- 
dience of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ ;  and  thus  if  we 
are  pardoned  we  are  received  into  favour,  or,  in 
one  word,  we  are  justified  ;  and  being  justified, 
peace  with  God,  the  gift  of  the  Spirit,  and  hea- 
venly blessedness  become  ours.  They  become 
ours,  in  consequence  of  our  being  pardoned — for 
pardon  insures  whatever  there  is  more  than  itself 
in  jvistification,  and  justification  ensures  every 
thing  else  that  the  love  of  God  prompts  him  to 
bestow,  because  it  is  essentially  connected  with 
faith  in  every  one  that  receives  it,  and  the  pro- 
clamation of  the  gospel  is,  that  "  whosoever  be- 


SERMON  V.  107 

lieveth  in  the  Son  of  God  shall  never  perish  but 
have  everlasting  life."  So  far  as  justification  is 
concerned,  we  know  of  no  case  in  which  the  least 
countenance  is  given  to  the  idea  that  any  oiie 
may  be  invested  with  a  part  of  that  great  privi- 
lege, while  he  fails  in  obtaining  the  whole  of  it. 
We  never  find  that,  of  the  general  description  of 
those  who  are  under  condemnation  or  under  wrath, 
some  are  taken  to  be  pardoned  merely,  while 
others  are  taken  to  be  justified  wholly.  We  never 
find  any  thing  like  an  approach  even,  to  such  a 
division  of  sinners  in  the  communication  to  them 
of  spiritual  mercies — any  notice  that  it  has  taken 
place,  or  any  intimation  that  it  ever  will  take 
place.  But  it  uniformly  happens  that  all  of  them, 
upon  whom  a  change  is  effected,  are  said  to  be 
justified, — thus  making  the  distinction  that  is 
occasioned  by  the  change  to  consist  in  their  be- 
ing persons  who  enjoy  that  fulness  of  blessing 
which  is  comprised  in  justification,  contrasted 
with  their  former  selves,  or  with  others  who  still 
remain  as  they  once  were,  under  a  sentence  of 
condemnation,  or  unforgiven. 

Jews  and  Gentiles  were  equally  included  under 
sin  ;  the  law  found  them  all  guilty  ;  the  penalty 
incurred  by  transgression  was  due  to  them  with- 
out exception.  Very  well,  but  say  our  oppon- 
ents, these  were  all  forgiven  through  the  blood 
of  atonement  at  the  very  time  that  the  apostle 


108  SERMON  V. 

was  proving  and  declaring  them  to  have  been,  at 
one  period,  at  least,  in  a  state  of  guilt  or  condem- 
nation. Indeed  !  Then,  to  say  nothing  of  this 
beiug  the  happy  fact,  and  yet  of  the  Apostle  who 
%vas  always  glad  of  an  opportunity  to  celebrate 
the  riches  of  Divine  grace,  most  studiously  and 
unaccountably  omitting  to  make  the  remotest 
allusion  to  it ;  how  comes  it  to  pass,  that  when 
he  speaks  of  the  method  of  deliverance  which 
had  been  propounded  both  for  Jews  and  Gentiles, 
and  of  their  profiting  by  it,  he  speaks  of  the»ir 
being  *' justified  freely  by  the  grace  of  God, 
through  the  redemption  that  is  in  Christ  Jesus, 
whom  God  hath  set  forth  to  be  a  propitiation 
through  faith  in  his  blood,  to  declare  his  righte- 
ousness for  the  remission  of  sins  that  are  past?''^* 
The  very  mention  of  "  remission  of  sins'''  here, 
being  conferred  by  the  act  of  justification,  shows 
the  absurdity  of  the  opinion  we  are  combating, 
for  if  these  sins  were  already  remitted  or  pardoned, 
of  what  use  was  an  act  which  repeated  their  par- 
don or  remission,  as  if  they  needed  to  be  blotted 
out  a  second  time,  or  as  if  by  mistake  they  had 
been  forgotten  or  intentionally  left  out  when  the 
former  general  absolution  took  place  ?  I  refer  to 
the  passage  quoted,  however,  chiefly  for  the  pur- 
pose of  showing  you,  that  when  the  apostle  teaches 

*  Rom.  iii.  24.,  2a. 


SERMON  V.  109 

the  doctrine  of  "  remission  of  sins, ^^  he  employs 
the  term  justification,  and  that  by  employing 
that  term  in  such  a  case,  he  clearly  inculcates 
this  truth,  that  the  remission  of  sins  does  not 
stand  alone  in  the  case  of  any  one,  be  he  Jevf 
or  Gentile,  who  receives  that  benefit,  but  that, 
at  the  same  time,  on  the  same  ground,  and  in 
the  same  way,  he  receives  Divine  favour,  the 
gift  of  eternal  life,  and  whatsoever  else  is  includ- 
ed in  the  condition  of  those  who  are  justified 
"  through  the  redemption  that  is  in  Christ  Jesus." 
This  it  proves  clearly  and  conclusively.  And 
again,  I  say  that  if  pardon  be  universal,  salva- 
tion is  universal  also ;  so  that  if  the  doctrine  of 
our  antagonists  is  true,  all  men  having  obtained 
impunity,  must  be  admitted  into  heaven. 

These  views  are  greatly  corroborated  and  fully 
established  by  various  passages  of  Scripture, 
some  of  which  I  must  now  bring  before  you.  We 
formerly  quoted  the  thirty-second  Psalm,  to 
prove  that  forgiveness  is  limited  to  persons  pos- 
sessing a  certain  character.  We  now  refer  to  it, 
as  a  proof  that  the  forgiveness  of  which  it  speaks 
infers  a  participation  in  the  other  blessings  of  the 
gospel.  And  for  this  end  we  quote  it,  not  from 
the  boot  of  Psalms,  as  before — but  from  the 
Epistle  to  the  Romans,  *'  But  to  him  that  work- 
eth  not,  but  belie veth  on  him  that  justifieth  the 
ungodly,  his  faidi  is  counted  for  righteousness. 


110  SERMON  V. 

Even  as  David  also  describeth  the  blessedness  of 
the  man,  unto  whom  God  imputeth  righteous- 
ness without  works ;  saying,  Blessed  are  they 
whose  iniquities  are  forgiven,  and  whose  sins  are 
covered.  Blessed  is  the  man  to  whom  the  Lord 
will  not  impute  sin."*  Don't  you  see,  my  friends, 
that  "  not  imputing  sin,""  is  made  equivalent  to 
the  "^  imputing  of  righteousness," — that  in  the 
gospel  dispensation,  pardoning  the  ungodly  is 
tantamoxinttojiistifyingthe  ungodly, — that  every 
man  whose  sins  are  covered,  whose  iniquities  are 
forgiven,  is  accounted  righteous,  and  treated,  and 
blessed,  and  saved,  as  faithful  Abraham  was  ? 
True,  it  is  said  to  be  through  faith  :  but  that  is 
nothing  to  the  purpose,  because,  not  to  reiterate 
the  proof  that  forgiveness  itself  is  limited  to  them 
that  believe,  all  that  we  have  to  do  with  at  pre- 
sent is  the  inspired  statement  we  have  adduced, 
from  which  it  undeniably  appears,  that  in  the  eco- 
nomy of  the  gospel,  forgiveness  is  identified 
with  justification,  and  that  all  the  ungodly  who 
are  forgiven,  are  just  as  safe  with  respect  to  their 
spiritual  and  eternal  interests,  as  was  the  patri- 
arch Abraham,  the  friend  of  God,  and  tlie  father 
of  the  faithful.  Faith  no  doubt  is  necessary : 
but  that  does  not  alter  the  fact.  If  God  has 
settled  and  appointed  that  every  pardoned  sinner 

*  Rom.  iv.  5 — 8. 


SERMON  V.  Ill 

shall  be  also  justified  and  saved,  he  will  take 
care  that  neither  faith  nor  any  other  circum- 
stance be  wanting,  which  is  requisite  for  com- 
pleting the  work  of  his  grace.  The  grand  truth 
is,  that  whomsoever  he  pardons,  he  also  saves 
with  an  everlasting  salvation. 

Again,  you  will  perceive  the  same   doctrine 
taught  in  the  eighth  chapter  of  the  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews,  10,  11,  and  12th  verses,  which  we  for- 
merly quoted  on  the  subject  of  forgiveness  being 
associated  with  character.     We  now  allude  to  it 
with  the  view  of  showing  how  God's  forgiveness 
of  any  number  of  sinners  is  a  pledge  of  his  entire 
salvation  of  them.     In  the  10th  and  11th  verses 
he  promises  to  be  to  them  a  God,  and  to  make 
them    his  people,    to   instruct  them,    to    guide 
them,  and,  sanctify  them  wholly,  that  thus  they 
may  have  the  character,  and  partake  of  the  hap- 
piness to  which  his  people  are  destined.     And 
then  he  adds  in  the  12th  verse,   as  the  reason 
why  he  would  so  treat  them,   "  For  I  will  be 
merciful  to  their  unrighteousness,  and  their  sins 
and  their  iniquities  will   I   remember  no  more." 
Forgiveness  is  here  represented  by  God  himself, 
as  the  spring  and  foundation  of  all  other  bless- 
ings— as   of  such  a  nature,   and  so  important, 
that  it  would  be  inconsistent  in  him  to  refrain 
from  granting  the  other  benefits  that  are  specified 


112  SERMON  V. 

— as  of  itself  an  indication  and  a  purpose  found- 
ed on  the  very  fitness  of  things,  or  on  the  per- 
fection of  his  character  and  government,  that 
having  bestowed  pardon,  his  truth  and  honotir 
would  be  impeached,  if  he  did  not  bestow  all 
other  gifts  and  graces  that  might  serve  to  con- 
stitute or  to  insure  a  complete  salvation.* 

Look  also  the  9th  chapter  of  the  same  Epistle, 
at  the  11th  verse.  "  But  Christ  being  come  an 
high  priest  of  good  things  to  come,  by  a  greater 
and  more  perfect  tabernacle,  not  made  with  hands, 
that  is  to  say,  not  of  this  building ;  neither 
by  the  blood  of  goats  and  calves,  but  by  his  own 
blood,  he  entered  in  once  into  the  holy  place, 
having  obtained  eternal  redemption  for  us.  For 
if  the  blood  of  bulls  and  of  goats,  and  the  ashes 
of  an  heifer  sprinkling  the  unclean,  sanctifieth  to 
the  purifying  of  the  flesh  ;  how  much  more  shall 
the  blood  of  Christ,  who  through  the  eternal 
Spirit,  offered  himself  without  spot  unt®  God, 
purge  your  conscience  from  dead  works,  to  serve 
the  living  God  ?''"'  Here  you  observe  the  eternal 
redemption  obtained  for  us  by  Christ,  must  mean 
the  expiation  of  our  guilt  or  the  forgiveness  of 
our  sin,  as  analogous  to  the  expiation  and  for- 
giveness of  ceremonial  offences  procured  by  the 

•  See  N«te  I. 


SERMON  V.  113 

sacrifices  and  intercessions  of  the  priesthood  un- 
der the  law,  of  which  our  Lord's  sacrifice  and 
intercession  are  the  antitypical  fulfilment.  And 
yet  the  same  apostle  speaks  of  it  as  implying  at 
the  same  instant  our  sanctification,  by  which  we 
are  disposed,  enabled,  and  encouraged  to  engage 
in  the  service  of  him  from  whose  service  and  from 
whose  favour  our  transgressions  had  alienated  us. 
He  speaks  of  it  as  implying  this — not  because 
there  is  a  transition  from  sinners  at  large  to  the 
ungodly  who  believe  in  Jesus,  but  because  the 
atoning  death  of  Christ  is  equally  productive  of 
both  blessings,  and  whoever  is  privileged  to  ob- 
tain the  one  does  by  fixed  engagement  and  neces- 
sary consequence  obtain  the  other.  Whoever  is 
anterestedin  the  eternal  redemption  that  is  wrought 
•out,  so  as  to  be  no  longer  under  sentence  of  con- 
demnation, is  simultaneously  and  inevitably  res- 
cued from  the  bondage  of  corruption,  made  a  new 
<*reature,  and  fitted  both  for  the  service  and  the 
enjoyment  of  God.* 

Consider  also  Romans  viii.  33,  34.  "  Who 
shall  lay  any  thing  to  the  charge  of  God's  elect 't 
It  is  God  that  justifieth,  who  is  he  that  condemn- 
eth  ?  It  is  Christ  that  died,  yea  rather  tliat  is 
risen  again,  who  is  even  at  the  right  hand  of 
God,  who  also  maketh  intercession  for  us."  The 
Apostle  had  said,  that "  he  that  spared  not  his  own 

*  See  Owen  on  the  Hebrews,  in  loc. 


114  SERMON  V. 

Son,  but  freely  delivered  him  up  to  the  death," 
would  unquestionably  bestow  "  all  things"  upon 
those  for  whom  the  gift  of  his  own  Son  was  in- 
tended. And  here  he  triumphantly  asserts  the 
safety  of  such  persons,  referring  specifically  to 
the  grounds  on  which  he  makes  this  assertion, 
"  It  is  God  that  justifieth."  God  himself  is  pleased 
to  justify  the  elect,  to  deliver  them  from  con- 
demnation, and  treat  them  as  having  an  accept- 
able righteousness.  And  being  in  this  justified 
state,  by  the  judicial  sentence  of  God,  "  who  is 
he  that  condemneth  .P"  There  is  none  that  can  dis- 
cover a  single  sin  of  which  to  accuse  them  as  still 
subjecting  them  to  the  curse  of  the  law,  and  to 
send  them  back  into  the  condemnation  from  which 
they  had  been  rescued  by  the  doing  of  God  him- 
self. That  would  render  fruitless  and  set  at 
nought  the  whole  contrivance  of  the  gospel.  "  It 
is  Christ  that  died."  Christ  the  Son  of  God, 
agreeably  to  the  Father's  own  appointment,  was 
"deliveredfor  their  offences," and  to  doubt  theeffi- 
cacy  of  his  death  would  be  to  doubt  "  the  power 
of  God  and  the  wisdom  of  God."  But  Christ  not 
only  died  for  the  elect, — "  yea  rather  he  is  risen 
again,"  risen  again  for  their  justification,  as  it  is 
expressed  Romans  iv.  25.  Nor  does  the  security 
of  the  elect  stop  even  here.  For  the  Apostle 
adds  as  a  still  higher  step,  though  as  a  matter  of 
course,  in  the  economy  of  redemption,  "  who  is 


SERMON  V.  115 

even  at  the  right  hand  of  God,  who  also  maketh 
intercession  for  us."  This  intercession  is  a  part 
of  his  priestly  office,  and  is  grounded  on  the 
merit  of  the  blood  which  he  shed  for  "  the  remis- 
sion of  sins,"  and  which  he  took  with  him  when 
he  "  passed  into  the  heavens,"  into  "  the  holiest 
of  all."  He  makes  intercession  for  the  very  per- 
sons in  whose  behalf  and  in  whose  stead  he  died. 
And  his  intercession,  which  is  prevalent,  has  re- 
spect not  merely  to  one  part  of  their  condition, 
but  to  every  thing  connected  with  their  redemp- 
tion and  happiness, — to  the  "all  things"  which  the 
apostle  had  previously  asserted  that  God  would 
"  freely  give,"  because  he  had  given  his  only  be- 
gotten and  well  beloved  Son  to  humiliation,  suf- 
fering, and  death.  The  issue  of  the  whole  is  and 
must  be  a  complete  salvation,  for  "  he  is  able  also 
to  save  them  to  the  uttermost  that  come  unto 
God  by  him,  seeing  he  ever  liveth  to  make  inter- 
cession for  them.''''  Heb.  vii.  25.  And  accord- 
ingly the  apostle  adds,  in  a  tone  of  assurance  and 
exultation,  "  Who  shall  separate  us  from  the 
love  of  Christ .?"  We  can  have  no  doubt,  then, 
that  whoever  is  so  interested  in  the  love  of  God 
and  in  the  work  of  Christ  as  to  obtain  forgiveness, 
must  necessarily  have  every  thing  else  which  the 
love  of  God  can  bestow,  or  which  the  work  of 
Christ  can  secure.  There  is  no  getting  rid  of 
this  conclusion  without  attributing  to  the  scheme 


116  SERMON  V. 

of  the  gospel  unaccountable  shortcoming  and  fatal 
inconsistency.* 

The  only  other  passage  I  would  produce  in  elu- 
cidation of  the  point  at  issue  is  to  be  found  in 
Cor.  ii.  18.  "  And  all  things  are  of  God,  who 
hath  reconciled  us  to  himself  by  Jesus  Christ,  and 
hath  given  us  the  ministry  of  reconciliation,  to  wit, 
that  God  was  in  Christ  reconciling  the  world  to 
himself,  not  imputing  their  trespasses  unto  them." 
Now,  according  to  our  opponents,  the  world  here 
must  signify  all  men,  and  to  none  of  these  are 
their  trespasses  any  longer  imputed.  But  the 
non-imputation  or  forgiveness  of  their  trespasses 
stands  side  by  side  with  their  reconciliation  to 
God,  which  reconciliation  surely  can  be  exclusive 
of  nothing  that  is  essential  to  the  perfect  happi- 
ness of  those  who  enjoy  it.  And  lest  it  be  said 
that  the  forgiveness  is  mentioned  as  a  fact  already 
existing,  while  reconciliation  is  spoken  of  as  a 
thing  only  recommended  and  urged — though  the 
words,  being  both  in  the  present  participle,  may 
be  properly  understood  as  both  in  the  predicament 
of  carrying  on  a  work  which  is  to  be  hereafter 
finished,  or  at  any  rate  in  the  very  same  pre- 
dicament whether  the  thing  spoken  of  is  do- 
ing or  done — lest  this  be  said,  let  us  look  for- 
ward  to   the   21st  verse,    and   all  dubiety  will 

*  See  also  1  Peter  ii.  24  j  iii.  18,  22 ;  Ephes.  i,  3,  13;  v.  25, 
26,  27;  Heb.  x.  U. 


SERMON  V.  117 

be  removed.  It  says,  "  For  he  hath  made  him 
to  be  sin  for  us,  who  knew  no  sin,  that  v,'e 
might  be  made  the  righteousness  of  God  in 
him,"  or  might  be  regarded  and  treated  by  God 
as  righteous  persons,  on  account  of  the  righte- 
ousness of  Christ,  brought  in  when  he  became 
obedient  to  the  death  of  the  cross.  Hence  it  is 
obvious  and  indisputable,  that  if  those  to  whom 
their  trespasses  are  not  imputed,  receive  that  be- 
nefit directly  from  Christ  becoming  a  sin-offering 
for  them,  they  are  also  made  the  righteousness  of 
God  in  Christ.  There  is  no  allusion  to  faith  or 
to  any  other  circumstance,  as  intimating  a  dis- 
tinction which  would  make  others  more  abun- 
dantly blessed  by  Christ's  sacrifice  than  they. 
They  are  spoken  of  as  having  their  iniquities  for- 
given, and  in  the  same  statement  they  are  spoken 
of  as  those  who  are  made  the  righteousness  of 
God,*  by  the  identical  cause  to  which  their  for- 
giveness is  ascribed.  So  that  here  again  the  gos- 
pel method  of  redemption  is  declared  to  be  such, 
that  whosoever  is  pardoned  is  likewise  saved,  and 
therefore  the  dogma  of  universal  pardon  involves 
in  it,  or  draws  after  it,  the  unscriptural  and  per- 
nicious dogma  of  universal  salvation. 

What  we  have  now  advanced  gives  reality  and 
authoritative  truth  to  the  general  presumption 

•  See  Note  K. 


& 


118  SERMON  V. 

which  we  brought  forward  at  the  outset — name- 
ly,, that  if  God  so  loves  us  as  to  grant  us  the  par- 
don of  sin,  at  the  expense  of  Christ's  humiliation 
and  decease,  we  cannot  but  expect  that  he  will 
go  farther,  and  proceed  all  the  length  of  a  com- 
plete deliverance  and  a  complete  salvation.  This 
expectation  is  dictated  by  the  value  of  what  he 
has  already  done,  and  the  value  of  the  sacrifice 
he  has  made  for  doing  it.  And  the  same  mode 
of  judging  is  used  by  the  Apostle  Paul,*  when 
looking  to  the  manifestation  of  divine  mercy 
given  in  the  atoning  work  of  Christ,  he  exclaims 
in  confident  and  impassioned  language,  "  He  that 
spared  not  his  own  Son,  but  delivered  him  up 
for  us  all,  how  shall  he  not  with  him  also  freely 
give  us  all  things  ?"  If  God  delivered  up  his  own 
Son  literally  for  us  all,  and  if  all  of  us  literally  and 
truly  derive  from  that  act  of  condescension  and 
mercy,  the  full  forgiveness  of  our  oifences,  how 
can  it  be  imagined — how  is  it  possible — how  will 
it  be  reconciled  with  any  ideas  of  the  divine  cha- 
racter, that  he  should  not  perfect  the  gift,  by 
making  us  partakers  of  that  abundant  blessed- 
ness for  which  pardon  is  the  suitable  preliminary, 
,  or  of  which  it  forms  an  essential  part,  and  that 
after  leading  us,  in  the  "  riches  of  his  grace,"  to 
the  very  threshold,  as  it  were,  of  the  heavenly 

"  Rom.  yiii.  32. 


SERMON  V.  119 

world,  on  the  ground  of  Christ's  atoning  merit, 
he  should,  instead  of  actually  admitting  us,  leave 
us  to  rebellious  and  despairing  wonder  that  there 
— even  there^  the  "  riches  of  his  grace"  should 
cease  to  be  beneficent,  and  the  atoning  merit  of 
Christ  should  fail  to  accomplish  our  salvation  .' 

In  short,  every  survey  that  we  can  take,  and 
every  account  that  is  given  us,  of  the  gospel 
scheme,  prove  to  demonstration  that  pardon  is 
enjoyed  by  none  but  those  who  are  also  saved — 
or,  in  other  words,  that  universal  pardon  is  equi- 
valent to  universal  salvation — that  our  oppo- 
nents, whatever  they  may  think  or  allege,  can- 
not stop  short  at  the  stage  where  they  seem  to 
set  up  their  rest — that  they  must  advance  in  the 
career  on  which  they  have  entered,  till  they  have 
carried  every  one  of  the  children  of  men  to  the 
regions  of  glory — and  that  if  they  do  not  choose 
to  proceed  so  far,  they  are  at  least  showing  the 
way  to  others,  and  only  stop  short  themselves, 
because  they  are  alarmed  at  the  consequence  and 
result  of  their  favourite  principle. 

Why,  my  friends,  if  we  needed  any  thing  more 
to  convince  us  of  the  unsoundness  and  fallacy  of 
that  principle,  than  what  has  been  already  ad- 
duced, we  have  only  to  look  at  the  scene  of  fu- 
ture retribution,  as  that  is  disclosed  and  present- 
ed to  us  in  the  inspired  volume.  We  there  see — 
whatever  varieties  may  appear  or  be  imagined  to 


120  SERMON  V. 

exist  in  a  present  world — we  there  discover  just 
two  descriptions  of  persons  that  are  to  be  judged, 
the  righteous  and  the  wicked;  just  two  sen- 
tences that  are  to  be  pronounced,  "Come  ye  bless- 
ed of  my  Father,*"  — "  Depart  from  me,  ye 
cursed  ;"  and  just  two  conditions,  in  one  or  other 
of  which  men  are  for  ever  to  be  placed,  "  ever- 
lasting punishmentj^'and  "eternal  life.""  But  where 
amidst  the  characters,  the  sentences,  or  the  con- 
ditions that  are  set  before  us,  do  we  recognise  any 
trace  of  the  semi-redeemed — of  those  who  are 
pardoned  but  not  saved  ?  Where  do  they  stand 
on  the  great  day  of  reckoning  ?  Surely  they  are 
neither  on  the  right  hand,  nor  on  the  left.  What 
is  the  decision  that  is  passed  upon  them  ?  It  is 
neither  recorded  nor  alluded  to.  Where  is  it  that 
we  are  to  find  them  throughout  the  vast  expanse 
of  eternity  ?  They  occupy  no  place  ;  their  voice 
is  not  heard  in  joy  or  in  sorrow  ;  their  forms  are 
invisible  even  to  the  eye  of  fancy ;  they  have  no 
existence  in  heaven  or  in  hell ;  and  even  the  in- 
termediate and  purgatorial  state  of  popery  seems 
to  have  no  room  for  them. 

But,  as  an  attempt  to  remove  difficulties,  we  are 
bravely  told  that  sinners  are  not  to  be  punished 
hereafter  ;  that  they  are  only  left  to  the  distress 
which  will  naturally  flow  from  a  sense  of  their 
distance  and  separation  from  God  ;  and  that  no- 
thing like  a  positive  penal  doom  will  be  assigned 


SERMON  V.  121 

them.  And  this  is  all  that  is  meant  by  "  de- 
parting into  everlasting  fire  prepared  for  the  de- 
vil and  his  angels" — by  being  "  punished  with 
everlasting  destruction" — by  being  in  "  torment 
whose  smoke  ascendeth  for  ever  and  ever !" 
Granting,  however,  that  the  suffering  is  not  of  the 
kind  alleged ;  that  it  is  not  external  or  material ; 
that  it  consists  in  the  bitter  reflections  of  a  lost 
and  hopeless  soul ;  what  then  ?  Is  it  not  still 
punishment  ?  Is  not  that  punishment,  appointed 
and  fixed  of  God  as  the  award  of  a  guilty  and  un- 
believing, unredeemed  apostate  ?  Is  it  not  hell, 
whether  its  pains  are  inflicted  from  without,  or  from 
within,  or  from  both  ?  And  is  it  by  such  arrant 
quibbling  as  this  that  we  are  to  be  discomfited, 
when  arguing  for  the  vital  doctrines  of  Christi- 
anity ? 

O  but  those  who  once  thousjht  that  there  was 
to  be  no  positive  punishment  inflicted,  are  now  of 
opinion  that  there  will  be  such  punishment.  What 
oracles  of  wisdom  !  What  trust-worthy  guides  ! 
What  safe  and  enlightened  interpreters  of  the 
Bible !  With  the  Bible  in  their  hands  for 
years,  and  with  their  attention  turned  closely  to 
its  contents,  and  with  faculties  for  ascertaining 
its  meaning,  they  discovered  yesterday  that  God 
had  so  much  love  in  his  nature  that  he  woiild  ne- 
ver punish  his  rebellious,  impenitent  subjects ; 
but  they  have  discovered  to-day,  and  are  equally 


122  SERMON  V. 

dogmatical  both  times  in  announcing  their  dis- 
covery that,  after  all,  God  will  punish  the  wicked  ! 

Well,  let  them  take  it  either  way.  If  the 
wicked  are  not  to  be  punished  hereafter,  let  us  be 
told  what  is  to  become  of  them,  and  what  mean 
the  denunciations  of  God's  vengeance  against 
them  ;  and  what  we  are  to  make  of  the  proposi- 
tion that  a  pardoned  sinner  may  yet  be  "  cast, 
soul  and  body,  into  hell  fire  for  ever  ?"  Or,  if 
the  wicked  are  to  be  punished,  which  is  the  latest 
opinion,  what  is  to  be  made  of  the  great  doctrine 
of  universal  pardon  ?  Are  we  to  tax  our  credulity, 
and  to  degrade  our  understanding  so  far  as  to  be- 
lieve that  a  sinner  who  is  pardoned  of  God,  will  yet 
be  punished  by  God  ? — punished  and  pardoned 
at  the  same  time,  and  for  the  same  things,  by  the 
God  of  infinite  mercy  and  infinite  rectitude  !  Or 
must  we  assent  to  the  statement,  that  after  Christ 
has,  by  God's  own  appointment,  and  by  suffering 
in  his  own  person,  on  account  of  the  sins  of  man- 
kind, got  all  these  expiated  and  forgiven,  God  is 
to  recal  his  act  of  amnesty,  and  punish  over  again 
in  a  future  world,  the  guilt  which  has  been  so 
completely  punished,  and  so  freely  cancelled  in 
this  ?  Is  there,  indeed,  unrighteousness  with  the 
Holy  One  ? 

Still,  however,  we  are  pressed  with  another 
discovery — namely,  that  men  are  to  be  punished 
for  nothing  except  final  unbelief.     But  this  con- 


SERMON  V.  123 

tradicts  Scripture,  for,  are  not  we  told,  "  that 
every  one  is  cursed  that  continueth  not  in  all 
things  that  are  written  in  the  book  of  the  law  to 
do  them  ?"*  Are  not  we  told  that  the  wrath  of 
God  has  been  revealed  from  heaven  against  all 
unrighteousness  and  ungodliness  of  men  ?■}*  Are 
not  we  told  that  "  indignation  and  wrath,  tribula- 
tion and  anguish,  will  be  rendered  to  every  soul 
of  man  that  doeth  evil,  of  the  Jew  first  and  also 
of  the  Gentile  ?+  And  is  it  not  evident  that  un- 
belief is  produced  by  the  cherishing  of  sinful  dis- 
positions and  immoral  habits  ?§  And  how  is  it 
that  the  wickedness  which  leads  to  unbelief  will 
be  pardoned,  but  that  the  unbelief  itself  will  be 
punished  ?  Into  such  inconsistencies  will  men — 
good  men, — pious  men — holy  men,  plunge  them- 
selves, when  they  are  resolved  to  build  up  and  to 
defend  a  theory,  be  it  what  it  may,  and  to  make 
converts  to  the  cause  they  have  espoused. 

This  notion  of  unbelief  only  being  a  damn- 
ing sin,  introduces  another  distinction  into  the 
virtue  of  Christ's  death.  It  of  course  avails  to 
the  pardon  of  all  their  sins  except  unbelief,  of 
all  the  sins  even  which  generated  and  nourished 
this  unbelief — but  it  does  not  avail  to  the  pardon 
of  that  particular  sin,  without  the  pardon  of  which 
the  pardon  of  all  the  rest  is  of  no  use  or  conse- 

*  Gal.  iii.  10.     +  Rom.  i.  18.     \  Rom.  ii.  9.      §  John  iii.  19. 


124  SERMON  V. 

quence  whatsoever  !  And  this  is  held  forth  as  a 
grand  illustration  of  the  wisdom,  the  power,  and 
above  all,  the  love  and  mercy  of  God  ! 

But  we  are  wearied  with  winding  through  such 
labyrinths ;  and  therefore  we  conclude  at  present 
with  exhorting  you  to  meditate  on  the  argument 
which  we  have  brought  before  you  this  evening, 
and  on  the  passages  of  holy  writ  by  which  we  have 
.supported  it  throughout — and  to  pray  that  God 
by  his  Spirit  would  preserve  you  from  those  gross 
and  vital  errors  which  are  afloat  in  the  Christian 
world,  and  that  he  would  guide  you  into  all  the 
truth  that  maketh  wise  unto  salvation. 


SERMON  VI. 


SAME  SUBJECT. 


We  have  been  employed  for  some  Sabbaths  in 
exposing  the  heresy  of  universal  pardon.  And 
we  concluded  our  last  discourse  with  noticing  the 
qualification  which  its  advocates  put  upon  the  doc- 
trine— namely,  that  Christ's  death  does  not  take 
away  the  guilt  of  final  unbelief.  On  this  point 
we  must  be  allowed  to  offer  a  few  remarks  before 
proceeding  to  the  principal  object  we  have  in  view, 
in  the  present  discourse. 

Final  unbelief,  then,  is  the  only  sin  that  is  to 
be  punished — for  punishment  of  transgressors  in 
a  future  world  is  at  length  admitted ;  but  all  other 
sins  are  pardoned  or  blotted  out  by  the  atone- 
ment. 

1.  Now,  in  the  first  place,  this  is  contrary  to 
numerous  declarations  of  sacred  Scripture.  For 
example,  we  are  told  that  "  cursed  is  every  one 
that  continueth  not  in  all  things  that  are  written 
in  the  book  of  the  law  to  do  them."     We  are  told 


126  SERMON  VI. 

that  "  the  wrath  of  God  has  been  revealed  from 
heaven  agamst  all  unrighteousness  and  ungodli- 
ness of  men."  We  are  told  that  "  indignation 
and  wrath,  tribulation  and  anguish  will  be  ren- 
dered to  every  soul  of  man  that  doeth  evil,  of  the 
Jew  first,  and  also  of  the  Gentile."  We  are  told 
that  "  uncleanness,  inordinate  affection,  evil  concu- 
piscence, and  covetousness""are  things  "  for  whose 
sake  the  wrath  of  God  cometh  on  the  children  of 
disobedience."*  We  are  told  that  those  who  have 
not  given  meat  and  drink  and  clothing  to  the 
needy  disciples  of  Christ  shall  "  go  into  everlast- 
ing punishment. ''-f-  We  are  told  that  the  Judge 
of  the  quick  and  the  dead  will  say  to  the  wicked 
at  the  last  day,  "  I  never  knew  you  ;  depart 
from  me,  "  ye  that  work  iniquity."!  ^^  ^^^  **^^^ 
that  even  the  merely  "  unprofitable  servant  shall 
be  cast  into  outer  darkness,  where  shall  be  weep- 
ing and  gnashing  of  teeth."||  But  time  would  fail 
me  to  quote  the  many  passages  of  holy  writ  which 
put  it  beyond  all  controversy,  that  every  sin,  as 
well  as  that  of  unbelief,  is  liable  to  punishment, 
and  that  all  who  die  under  the  guilt  of  any  sin 
whatever  shall  be  punished  for  it  in  a  future 
world.  Their  distinction  therefore  is  most  un- 
scriptural. 

2.  Then,  in  the  second  place,  observe  what  an 

"  Col.  iii.  5,  6.  f  Matt.  xxv.  41,  &c.         \  lb,  vii.  23. 

U  Matt.  xxv.  30. 


SERMON  VI.  127 

imperfect  and  mutilated  work  this  idea  makes  of 
the  atonement.  The  atonement,  it  is  said,  procures 
and  confers  pardon,  but  not  complete  pardon.  It 
blots  out  all  the  sins  of  an  individual,  except  one  ; 
and  that  is  one  without  which,  the  blotting  out 
of  all  the  rest  is  a  boon  which  can  be  of  no  worth 
or  moment  at  aU.  Nay  a  man  may  live  for 
three  score  years  and  ten  in  unbelief,  and  all  that 
unbelief  is  forgiven,  but  if  he  lives  one  moment 
longer  in  unbelief  and  then  dies,  that  mo- 
ment's unbelief,  unpardoned  and  unpardonable, 
nuUifies  and  renders  useless  all  the  previous  for- 
giveness of  his  unbelief,  by  dooming  him  to  the 
place  of  torment.  Christ  was  a  substitute  for 
him  on  the  cross  only  as  to  a  part  of  his  guilt. 
He  bore  in  his  own  body  on  the  tree  the  sin  of 
unbelief  committed  by  the  individual  for  seventy 
years,  but  he  did  not  bear  the  self  same  sin  as 
committed  for  a  single  instant  longer.  His  love 
and  his  merit  failed  at  the  critical  point  of  deli- 
verance ;  and  after  cancelling  the  sinner's  obliga- 
tions to  punishment  up  to  the  very  moment  of  his 
departure  into  the  eternal  world,  abandoned  him 
to  a  fate  which  annihilates  all  the  benefit  he 
had  received,  and  stultifies  all  the  scheme  that 
had  taken  him  under  its  redeeming  care.  Don't 
you  see  in  this,  my  friends,  an  incongruity  that 
is  dishonourable  to  Him  who  devised  the  method 
of  salvation,  and  to  him  by  whom  it  was  execut- 


128  SERMON  VI. 

ed  ?  And  are  you  aware  of  any  thing  in  the  Bible 
which  gives  the  faintest  colour  to  such  a  repre- 
sentation of  the  saving  work  of  the  Son  of  God  ? 

3.  On  the  contrary,  as  may  be  remarked  in  the 
third  place,  is  it  not  evident  that  Christ  is  held 
out  uniformly  as  a  complete  Saviour,  leaving  no- 
thing undone  inbehalf  of  those  for  whom  he  died? — 
that  there  is  no  exception  made  in  the  case  of  any 
person  on  whom  he  had  set  his  love,  and  for  whose 
life  he  had  given  his  flesh  in  sacrifice  ? — that  so 
far  as  these  are  concerned,  every  stain  of  guilt 
is  washed  away  in  virtue  of  that  sacrifice,  and 
nothing  reserved  that  could  bring  them  into  con- 
demnation ? 

4.  And  finally^  this  view  necessarily  results 
from  the  mode  of  interpreting  Scripture  adopted 
by  those  against  whose  errors  we  are  contending. 
For  they  support  their  doctrine  of  universal  par- 
don, by  appealing  to  the  universality  of  the  terms 
in  which  the  intention,  and  efficacy,  and  applica- 
tion of  Christ's  atoning  death  are  described.  They 
tell  us,  for  instance,  that  he  is  a  "  propitiation  for 
the  sins  of  the  whole  world.""  Very  well — let 
them  be  consistent.  One  of  the  sins  of  the  world 
is  unbelief — alas  !  final  unbelief  is  one  of  the  worst 
and  most  prevalent  of  all  the  sins  with  which  apos- 
tate men  are  chargeable.  Surely,  then,  if  the 
universal  terms  are  to  be  interpreted  literally  and 
rigidly,  unbelief,  final  unbelief,  as  well  as  every 


SERMON  VI.  129 

other  sin  is  atoned  for  and  pardoned  !  And  of 
course  every  man  must  be  freed  from  punishment, 
and  every  man  must  be  accepted  and  saved  !  But 
they  make  the  exception  of  unbelief ;  and  where 
is  their  authority  for  this  ?  since  the  Bible  says 
that  Christ  is  not  only  the  propitiation  for  the  si7is 
of  the  whole  world,"  but  that  he  has  "  made  an 
end  of  sin,  and  finished  the  transgression,  and 
brought  in  an  everlasting  righteousness  !"  Their 
authority  is  founded  on  such  passages  as  declare 
that  on  him  that  believeth  not  the  wrath  of  God 
abideth.  Be  it  so ;  and  it  is  just  to  that,  and 
a  multitude  of  passages  of  similar  import, 
that  we  have  rei^flirse  in  order  to  prove  that 
Christ's  death  does  not  convey  the  pardon  of  all 
the  sins  besides  unbelief,  which  all  men  have 
committed.  And  how  comes  it  that  they  should 
be  privileged  to  employ  a  rule  of  interpretation, 
the  use  of  which  must  be  denied  to  us  ?  I  say 
again,  let  them  be  consistent.  Either  the  uni- 
versal terms  used  in  Scripture  on  this  subject  are 
to  be  taken  strictly,  or  they  may  be  qualified  by 
other  declarations  that  occur  in  the  same  record. 
If  they  are  to  be  taken  strictly,  then  our  oppo- 
nents have  reduced  themselves  io  the  necessity  of 
maintaining  that  even  the  sin  of  final  unbelief  is 
atoned  for,  and  will  be  pardoned,  and  so  all  men 
will  get  to  the  promised  land.  But  if  they  allow 
that  the  universal  terms  in, question  may  be  qua- 


130  SERMON  VI. 

lifted,  then  we  claim  the  benefit  of  that  admission, 
being  as  well  entitled  to  it,  as  they  are ;  and  we 
affirm,  in  virtue  of  it,  that  whatever  other  reason 
they  have  for  maintaining  their  position,  it  cannot 
be  derived  from  a  rigid  construction  of  what  is 
said  by  the  sacred  Scriptures  as  to  the  death  of 
Christ,  and  its  actual  and  absolute  effect  in  par- 
doning sinners.  Thus  we  come  to  common  ground. 
Still,  however,  there  is  a  difference  between  them 
and  us,  and  it  is  just  this  ; — that  by  the  help 
of  the  confession  which  they  have  found  them- 
selves necessitated  to  make,  in  order  to  avoid  con- 
sequences, the  prospect  of  which  caused  even 
them  to  tremble,  the  proof  of  our  doctrine  be- 
comes easy,  while  their  argument  falls  to  the 
ground,  and  their  theory  falls  down  along  with  it. 
I  have  only  farther  to  notice,  on  this  point,  that 
we  perfectly  agree  with  them  in  maintaining,  that 
final  unbelief  is  unpardonable.  But  we  say  that 
they  are  quite  inconsistent  in  maintaining  that 
final  unbelief  is  unpardonable,  and  that  all  other 
sins  are  actually  pardoned,  seeing  that  their  rea- 
son for  asserting  the  latter  part  of  the  proposi- 
tion is  at  variance  with  their  reason  for  asserting 
the  former.  And  we  hold  up  our  doctrine  as 
forming  a  triumphant  contrast  to  theirs.  Be- 
cause, while  they  represent  Christ  as  pardoning 
sinners  for  whom  his  death  was  endured,  but  only 
as  pardoning  them  partially,  and  stopping  short 


SERMON  VI.  131 

where  the  "  unUmited  mercy''  wiii^h  they  ascribe 
to  God,  would  have  naturally  magnified  its  riches 
and  its  power,  by  finishing  the  redemption  so  much 
of  which  it  had  accomplished  and  applied, — we 
represent  Clirist  as  pardoning  all  the  sins  of  all 
the  sinners  whom  he  undertook  to  save,  as  in  no 
case  beginning  a  work  of  deliverance  which  he 
did  not  carry  on  to  its  perfect  completion,  as  for- 
giving, regenerating,  glorifying,  every  individual 
for  whom  he  shed  his  infinitely  precious  blood, 
as  not  losing,  nor  leaving  in  a  state  of  half-salva- 
tion and  half-perdition,  even  one  of  the  multitude 
whom  the  Father  gave  him  to  redeem,  but  con- 
ducting them  all  in  the  appointed  way  to  heaven 
and  to  happiness. 

The  second  branch  of  our  argument  against 
the  doctrine  of  universal  pardon,  you  will  recol- 
lect, consisted  in  showing  that  it  necessarily  leads 
to  the  doctrine  of  universal  salvation — a  doctrine 
which  is  altogether  contrary  to  the  plainest  inti- 
mations of  the  Bible,  and  which  our  opponents 
themselves,  so  far  as  the  present  state  of  their 
opinions  is  publicly  known,  profess  to  reject  with 
abhorrence.  We  showed  you  that  this  is  its  le- 
gitimate consequence  from  the  nature  of  forgive- 
ness as  connected  with  the  revealed  character  of 
Ood,  from  the  relation  in  which  all  the  blessings 
«f  redemption  stand  to  the  death  of  Christ  as 
their  procuring  cause,  from  the  account  given  of 


132  SERMON  VL 

justification  in  Scripture,  vhich  makes  pardon  and 
acceptance  to  go  together  in  constant  fellowship, 
and  from  various  passages  of  the  word  of  God, 
"w^hich  corroborate  these  views  in  the  most  distinct 
and  unequivocal  manner,  and  which  are  unsus- 
ceptible of  any  other  meaning,  without  doing 
violence  to  every  rule  of  fair  and  just  interpreta- 
tion. 

But  I  would  particularly  remind  you  of  the 
first  part  of  our  reasoning,  in  which  we  referred 
directly  to  the  authority  of  Scripture,  and  produc- 
ed a  multitude  of  texts  expressly  restricting  the 
benefit  of  pardon,  so  that  to  receive  them,  and 
yet  to  hold  the  doctrine  of  universal  pardon,  is 
to  assent  to  the  truth  of  what  becomes  in  that 
case  a  contradiction  in  terms.  We  proved  that 
forgiveness  is  not  bestowed  upon  all  men  indis- 
criminately, but  only  upon  such  as  possess  a 
certain  specified  character.  It  is  expressly  said, 
that  he  that  believeth  on  the  Son  of  God  is  not 
condemned — or  is  delivered  from  condemnation — 
but  "  he  that  believeth  not  i«  condemned  already, 
and  has  the  wrath  of  God  abiding  upon  him  :" 
It  is  expressly  said,  that  if  we  repent,  our  sins 
shall  be  blotted  out ;  but  that  except  we  repent 
we  shall  perish.  It  is  expressly  said,  that  they 
who  forgive  men  their  trespasses  shall  be  forgiven 
of  God ;  but  that  they  who  forgive  not  men  their 
trespasses  shall  jiot  be  forgiven  of  God.     And  it 


SERMON  VI.  133 

is  expressly  said,  that  forgiveness  belongs  to  them 
who  being  a  chosen  and  covenanted  people,  are 
walking  in  the  ways  of  holiness,  but  that  on  such 
as  are  living  addicted  to  vice  and  to  the  world, 
the  wrath  of  God  cometh,  they  being  the  children 
of  disobedience.  We  do  not  say  that  forgiveness 
is  conferred  upon  men  because  they  beUeve,  or 
because  they  repent,  or  because  they  are  merci- 
ful, or  because  they  are  holy.  Such  a  doctrine 
is  not  essential  to  our  argument ;  nor,  if  it  were 
so,  durst  we  avow  it,  for  it  is  not  true,  and  we 
utterly  reject  it — with  somewhat  more  consist- 
ency, as  we  shall  hereafter  see,  than  our  oppo- 
nents. But  we  state  it  as  a  Scripture  fact,  clear- 
ly taught,  and  undeniably  true,  that  there  is  an 
inseparable  connexion  between  the  forgiveness 
of  sins  and  certain  qualities  of  character — a,  con- 
nexion so  inseparable  that  no  man  who  is  desti- 
tute of  these  qualities  can  consider  himself  as 
forgiven,  unless  he  disbelieves  the  explicit  testi- 
mony of  God  himself.  And  from  this  it  una- 
voidably follows,  that  as  these  characters  are  want- 
ing in  the  case  of  multitudes,  both  of  past  gene- 
rations and  of  the  present,  there  are  multitude."? 
of  men  to  whom  the  death  Gf  Christ  has  not 
conveyed  pardon,  but  who  have  died  or  are  still 
living  under  the  burden  of  all  their  sins.  Unbe- 
lieving, impenitent,  unmerciful,  unholy  men  are 
all  classed  under  this  description.     The  point  is 


134  SERMON  VI. 

settled  by  the  declarations  of  the  divine  Spirit. 
It  is  settled  both  positively  and  negatively.  They 
who  have  the  specified  characters  are  forgiven ; 
they  who  have  not  these  characters  are  not  for- 
given. And,  therefore,  neither  are  all  sins  nor 
all  men  pardoned. 

Now,  my  friends,  observe  the  bearing  and  ef- 
fect of  this.  Of  itself  it  is  perfectly  sufficient  to 
overthrow  the  doctrine  of  universal  pardon,  as  so 
zealously  taught,  and  so  joyfully  received  in  these 
days.  But  we  wish  you  to  mark  it,  and  to  take 
it  along  with  you,  and  to  give  it  its  proper  weight, 
as  you  consider  those  Scriptures  which  have  been 
quoted  in  support  of  the  opposite  side  of  the 
question.  It  furnishes,  if  not  a  solution  of  every 
apparent  or  real  difficulty  that  may  be  started,  at 
least  a  satisfactory  reply  to  any  argument  for  the 
opinion  of  our  antagonists  that  may  be  founded 
on  such  difficulties.  Something  may  be  adduced 
from  the  Bible  which  seems  to  favour  or  coun- 
tenance their  views ;  but  you  are  sure  that  there 
is  some  mistake  or  misapprehension  in  this,  for 
you  have  already  ascertained,  beyond  the  shadow 
or  possibility  of  doubt,  that  pardon  is  bestowed 
only  upon  persons  of  a  certain  description,  and 
that  all  others  are  unpardoned.  And  this  reply 
is  equally  intelligible  and  irresistible.  What 
though  various  expressions,  and  various  incidents, 
and   various  illustrations   may   be   referred  to. 


SERMON  VI.  135 

which  are  perplexing  and  inexplicable  to  you  on 
any  other  supposition  than  that  of  universal  par- 
don ?   Still,  on  every  principle  of  piety  and  com- 
mon sense,  you  take  refuge  in  this,  that  God  has, 
in  language  which  has  no  ambiguity,  and  no  ob- 
scurity in  it — language  which  cannot  be  misun- 
derstood by  any  one — excluded  from  that  bless- 
ing a  vast  number  whom  he  has  designated  and 
described  as  those  upon  whom  his  curse  conti- 
nues to  lie,  and  on  whom  he  will  at  length  inflict 
the  penalty  that  he  has  already  threatened.    Let 
men  propound  what  theories  they  will — let  them 
recommend  their  notion  as  much  as  they  can,  by 
giving  it  all  the  aspect  of  glorifying  God  moue 
than  any  thing  else — let  them  put  whatever  in- 
genious and  plausible  glosses  they  please  on  the 
phraseology  of  certain  parts  of  the  inspired  vo- 
lume— it  must  all  go  for  nothing  when  you  re- 
collect that  He  whose  word  that  inspired  volume 
is — He  whose  glory  it  is  intended  to  consult  and 
promote — He  from  whom   all  redemption  pro- 
ceeds, and  by  whom  its  method,  and  its  extent, 
and  its  application  have  been  all  determined — 
that  He  has  assured  us,  in  words  which  admit  of 
no  other  meaning,  that,   on  the  one  hand,  those 
who  are  possessed  of  a  certain  character,  which, 
we  see  with  our  own  eyes,  belongs  to  some  only, 
shall  receive  the  pardon  of  their  sins,  and  that,  on 
the  other  hand,   those  who  are  possessed  of  the 


136  SERMON  VI. 

contrary  character,  which,  we  see  with  our  own 
eyes,  belongs  to  a  vast  number,  shall  not  be  for- 
given, but  shall  abide  under  the  wrath  of  God 
and  the  sentence  of  condemnation. 

This  consideration  is  the  stronger  when  we  at- 
tend to  the  way  in  which  the  statements  now  al- 
luded to  are  given  in  the  Scripture,  as  contrasted 
with  the  way  that  the  statements,  to  which  they 
are  thought  to  stand  opposed,  are  presented  to  us 
by  the  sacred  writers. 

The  terms  in  which  pardon  is  predicated  of 
certain  characters,  and  condemnation  is  predicat- 
ed of  certain  other  characters,  are  discriminative, 
determinate,  and  precise.  There  is  an  individu- 
ality and  specification  which  prevents  us  from  mis- 
apprehending what  is  meant,  or  from  confounding 
the  two  classes  so  as  to  confer  upon  the  one  what 
is  specially  appropriated  to  the  other.  And  oc- 
casionally the  language  of  condition  is  used,  not 
to  intimate  any  thing  meritorious,  but  to  point 
out  the  distinction  more  definitely  and  more  for- 
cibly. "  He  that  believeth  on  the  Son  of  God  is 
not  condemned ;  bid  he  that  believeth  not  is  con- 
demned already."*  "  Indignation  and  wrath, 
tribulation  and  anguish  upon  every  soul  of  man 
that  doeth  evil,  of  the  Jew  first,  and  also  of  the 
Gentile."-f-      "  Repent   and   be   converted   thai 

*  John  iii.  18.  f  Bom,  ii.  9. 


SERMON  VI.  137 

your  sins  may  be  blotted  out."*  "  Eacept  ye  re- 
pent ye  shall  all  perish/'-f  "  If  ye  forgive  men 
their  trespasses,  your  heavenly  Father  will  also 
forgive  you ;  but  if  ye  forgive  7iot  men  their 
trespasses,  neither  will  your  Father  forgive  your 
trespasses.":]:  "  Woe  unto  you  Scribes  and  Pha- 
risees!  hypocrites  r\\  "  Ye  serpents,  ye  gener- 
ation of  vipers,  how  can  ye  escape  the  damna- 
tion of  hell  .P"'§  "  Sodom  and  Gomorrah  and  the 
cities  about  them^'' — are  "  set  forth  for  an  example 
suffering  the  vengeance  of  eternal  fire."^  "  Woe 
unto  thee,  Ckorazin,  woe  unto  thee,  Bethsaida  r 
"  it  shall  be  more  tolerable  for  Tyre  andSidon  at 
the  day  of  judgment  than  for  you."**  We  might 
furnish  you  with  many  more  examples  of  the  very 
same  kind.  But  where  do  you  find  any  thing  re- 
sembling these  to  uphold  the  position  of  univer- 
sal pardon  ?  In  order  to  have  passages  which  will 
nevitralise  tlwse  that  we  have  been  quoting,  our 
jopponents  must  produce  such  as  declare  that  every 
individual  of  our  fallen  race  is  forgiven  by  the 
death  of  Christ — that  speak  of  each  and  all  of 
them  as  in  that  blessed  condition — that  accom- 
pany general  declarations  of  pardoning  mercy 
with  the  assertion  that  they  are  not  qualified  by 
any  one  exception — that  leave  no  person  what- 

*  Acts  iii.  19,         +  Luke  xiii.  3.         X  ^^^tt.  xii.  ll,  lo. 
II  ]\Iatt.  xxiii.  13.  §  lb.  33.  ^  Jude  7. 

**  M-att.  .\i.  81,  22. 


138  SERMON  VI. 

ever,  be  he  saint,  or  be  he  sinner,  to  doubt  that 
all  his  iniquities  are  covered,  and  blotted  out,  and 
will  not  be  remembered  any  more.  But  have  they 
produced,  or  can  they  produce,  even  a  single 
scriptural  statement  couched  in  such  exact  and 
particular  phraseology  ?  Not  one.  Observe,  if 
they  did  so,  it  would  not  so  much  disprove  the 
doctrine  we  have  established,  as  a  doctrine  taught 
explicitly,  and  in  so  many  words,  by  the  Spirit  of 
Ood,  as  it  would  ascertain  the  existence  of  palpa- 
ble and  vitally  important  contradictions  in  the 
rule  of  faith  which  has  come  to  us  from  heaven. 
But  what  we  affirm  is,  that  passages  of  the  de- 
scription that  we  require  are  nowhere  to  be  met 
with  in  the  Bible — not  one  occurs  in  it,  from  the 
beginning  of  Genesis  to  the  end  of  the  Apoca- 
lypse. There  are  such  terms  and  phrases  as  the 
world,  the  whole  ivorld,  all,  all  men  ;  and  there 
are  expressions  and  statements  from  which  uni- 
versality may  be  inferred,  and  from  which,  unless 
modified  by  other  expressions  and  statements, 
universaUty  should  be  inferred.  But  there  are 
no  terms  or  phrases — no  expressions  or  statements 
in  the  word  of  God,  which  tell  us  that  every  man 
is  pardoned — or  that  no  man  is  ?^wpardoned.  And 
let  it  be  remembered  that  language  which  is  mere- 
ly general  and  comprehensive,  can  never  be  al- 
lowed to  supersede  language  which  is  individual 
and  distinctive  and  expository,  when  they  ap- 


SERMON  VI.  139 

ply  to  the  same  subject,  and  when  the  explicit 
import  of  the  latter  stands  opposed  to  the  appar- 
ent import  of  the  former  :  and  that  a  mere  infer- 
€7ice,  though  a  possibly,  and  in  ordinary  circum- 
stances, an  obviously  correct  inference,  can  never 
be  received  for  the  purpose  of  overturning  a  pro- 
position which  is  stated  positively,  clearly,  and 
unequivocally,  and  is  wholly  incapable  of  having 
any  other  meaning  attached  to  it. 

It  is  to  be  observed,  besides,  that  the  general 
terms  which  occur  in  Scripture  respecting  the 
purpose  or  the  objects  of  Christ's  interposition, 
must  have  a  much  more  extensive  meaning  than 
what  our  opponents  attribute  to  them,  if  that 
meaning  is  to  be  admitted  at  all.  These  general 
terms  do  not  relate  merely  to  pardon — they  re- 
late in  many  cases  to  salvation  at  large.  For  in- 
stance, "  The  grace  of  God  hath  appeared  unto 
all  tne7i  bringing  salvation^  "  God  sent  not 
his  own  Son  into  the  world,  to  condemn  the 
world,  but  that  the  icorld  through  him  might  be 
.sawec?."  "  Look  unto  me  and  be  ye  saved,  all  ye 
ends  of  the  earth."  Now,  do  our  opponents 
mean  to  insist  that  all  men  are  saved .?  No ;  they 
do  not  go  this  length.  But  why  not  ?  If  their 
argument  is  valid  for  universal  pardon,  it  is 
equally  valid  for  universal  salvation.  It  is  no- 
where said  that  all  men  are  pardoned — but  only 
that  Christ  died  or  gave  himself  as  a  propitiation 


,140  SERMON  VI. 

for  the  sins  of  all  men.  And,  in  like  manner, 
though  it  is  nowhere  said  that  all  men  are  saved, 
we  read  that  Christ  died  or  gave  himself  that  he 
might  be  the  Saviour  of  all  men.  The  Armini- 
ans  are  quite  consistent,  for  they  maintain  that 
both  as  to  pardon  and  all  other  blessings  compre- 
hended under  the  general  term  salvation,  Christ 
gave  himself  for  every  man,  so  that  every  man,  on 
the  condition  of  his  repenting  and  believing,  shall 
receive  all  these  blessings  as  well  as  pardon.  But 
■our  opponents  have  not  courage  enough  to  follow 
out  the  reasoning  which  they  ground  on  the  uni- 
versal languao-e  of  the  Bible  to  its  full  and  fair 
extent,  or  they  have  not  consistency  enough  to 
apply  the  same  rule  of  construction  to  the  subject 
of  salvation  which  they  apply  to  the  subject  of 
pardon,  though  it  is  just  as  applicable  to  the  one 
as  to  the  other.  They  must  either  give  up  their 
position,  that  every  man  is  pardoned,  because  the 
Scripture  says  that  Christ's  death  was  a  propitia- 
tion for  the  sins  of  the  world ;  or  they  must  be 
prepared  to  maintain  that  every  man  is  also  sav- 
ed, because  the  Scripture  says  that  Christ  died  for 
the  salvation  of  the  world.  One  of  the  alterna- 
tives they  must  adopt ;  and  either  of  them  will 
suit  our  purpose. 

Supposing,  now,  that  the  subjects  of  some 
earthly  sovereign  had  rebelled  against  him,  but 
that  he  was  willing  to  extend  mercy  and  pardon^ 


SERMON  VI.  141 

and  had  for  this  purpose  sent  forth  a  proclama- 
tion among  them ;  supposing,  that  he  had  in- 
serted in  it  the  strongest  and  most  generous  as- 
surances of  his  clemency  towards  them,  and  that 
these  assurances,  taken  by  themselves,  looked  as 
if  he  had  passed  an  act  of  unlimited  amnesty  or 
oblivion,  and  would  with  respect  to  them  all,  re- 
frain from  the  infliction  of  deserved  punishment ; 
and,  supposing  that  he  added  certain  clauses  to 
this  effect,   "  whosoever  of  you   lays  down  his 
arms  shall  be  forgiven,  but  whoso  continues  to 
wield  them  in  hostility  to  me  shall  not  be  for- 
given"— "  if  you  petition  for  the  extension  of  my 
mercy  I  will  extend  it,  but  if  you  do  not  so  peti- 
tion I  will  withhold  my  mercy  from  you" — "  if 
you  come  into  my  presence  and  swear  anew  the 
oaths  of  allegiance  and  fidelity,  I  will  take  care 
that  no  penalty  shall  reach  you,  but  if  you  refuse 
to  pay  me  that  homage,  I  pledge  my  word  that 
you  shall  certainly  suffer  for  your  crimes  upon  a 
scaffold  ;" — supposing   a   proclamation   in   such 
terms  as  these  to  have  come  from  a  sovereign  to 
his  rebellious  subjects,  how  should  they,  and  how 
would  they  interpret  it  ?  Should  they,  think  you, 
or  would  they  content  themselves  with  looking  to 
the  first  part  of  the  document,  and  dwelling  up- 
on that  alone,  and  congratulating  one  another  on 
their  absolute  and  individual  safety,  as  already 
secured  to  all  of  them,  and  gifted  to  all  of  them  ? 


142  SERMON  VI. 

And  were  some  benevolent  friends  wiser  than 
themselves  to  step  forward  and  point  out  the  re- 
strictive clauses  which  it  contained,  as  worthy  of 
their  serious  regard  in  determining  its  just  con- 
struction, would  they  or  should  they  g€t  the  bet- 
ter of  all  these  by  still  having  recourse  to  the 
universal  terms  in  which  it  announced  the  merci- 
ful purpose  of  their  sovereign,  and  by  eliciting 
from  certain  portions  of  it,  inferences  favourable 
to  their  views,  which  are  formally  legitimate,  but 
not  at  all  necessary  ?  Would  they  or  should  they 
adopt  this  mode  of  proceeding  ?  No  man  of  sound 
judgment  will  venture  to  say  so.  Every  one  must 
see  that  the  purpose,  the  declaration,  the  ofler  of 
mercy  is  to  be  fixed,  not  as  to  its  reality,  but  as 
to  its  extent,  by  the  restrictive  clauses — that 
these  form  the  true  and  correct  explanation  of 
the  manifesto,  with  respect  to  those  for  whose  be- 
nefit it  is  framed  and  issued — that  such  as  do  not 
lay  down  their  arms,  such  as  do  not  petition, 
such  as  do  not  swear  allegiance,  have  no  lot  or 
part  in  the  pardon  which  is  proclaimed — and  that 
for  these  persons  to  overlook  the  limitations  whicli 
have  emanated  from  the  same  authority  as  the 
general  assurance  of  mercy  and  forgiveness  it- 
self has  done,  is  the  height  of  folly  and  of  danger, 
and  can  only  aggravate  the  offence  that  has  been 
committed,  and  insure  the  condemnation  that 
lias  been  incurred. 


SERMON  VI.  143 

The  application  of  this  to  the  question  before 
us  is  abundantly  obvious.  It  is  of  no  conse- 
quence how  general  or  how  universal  soever  the 
declarations  of  divine  forgiveness  may  be.  Had 
God  been  pleased  to  give  no  other  declarations, 
we  might  have  affixed  to  them  all  the  latitude  of 
meaning,  which  is  so  much  pleaded  for,  though 
the  state  of  the  moral  world  and  the  melancholy 
facts  which  it  everywhere  exhibits,  had  presented 
to  us  inextricable  difficulties.  But  it  is  not  by 
such  declarations  alone  that  God  has  thought 
proper  to  instruct  us  on  this  interesting  theme. 
He  has  made  other  declarations  in  his  word  by 
which  he  has  limited  the  efficacy  and  application 
of  that  forgiving  mercy  which  is  manifested  on 
the  death  of  Christ.  He  announces  that  forgive- 
ness is  conferred  upon  those  who  possess  certain 
characters  which  he  has  taken  care  to  specify — 
and  that  wrath  and  condemnation  still  abide  upon 
those  in  whom  these  characters  are  not  found. 
And  to  know  his  real  will  concerning  the  pardon 
of  sinful  men,  we  must  look  to  the  whole  of  the 
record  in  which  it  is  revealed,  and  qualifying  his 
comprehensive  assurances  by  the  conditions,  or 
exceptions,  or  limitations,  which  he  has  decreed 
and  published,  ascertain  exactly  the  truth  which 
he  would  have  us  to  believe.  Though  he  says 
that  Christ  died  for  the  ivoi'ld  or  for  all  men,  yet 
it  would  be  both  undutiful  to  him  and  irrational 


144  SERMON  VI. 

in  itself,  to  say  that  every  man  is  forgiven,  when 
he  has  told  us  that  no  man  is  forgiven  who  is  re- 
vengeful, or  impenitent,  or  unholy — but  that  the 
very  contrary  is  the  fact.  The  particular  excep- 
tion modifies  the  general  affirmation.  And  so  we 
proceed  to  the  interpretation  of  the  passages  con- 
taining the  general  language,  with  a  conviction 
fovmded  on  the  information  of  God  himself,  that 
they  must  mean  something  different  from  the  pro- 
position strictly  and  absolutely  understood, — as 
meaning  that  all  the  sins  of  all  sinners  are  already 
pardoned  by  the  atoning  death  of  Jesus  Christ. 

But,  indeed,  those  with  whom  we  are  contend- 
ing are  obliged  to  allow  the  justice  and  submit  to 
the  operation  of  this  rule.  For  they  acknow- 
ledge, as  we  formerly  noticed,  that  final  unbelief 
constitutes  a  limitation  to  the  pardoning  mercy  of 
God,  and  the  pardoning  virtue  of  Christ's  sacri- 
fice. The  principle  being  once  admitted  by  them, 
the  great  foundation  of  their  argument  is  over- 
turned. They  not  only  grant  that  all  the  sins  of 
all  men  are  not  pardoned,  but  they  grant  that  the 
Scripture  passages  which  seem  to  give  universali- 
ty to  the  pardon  effected  by  the  death  of  Christ, 
and  on  which  they  have  rested  their  doctrine  so 
confidently ,  may  be  taken  in  a  limited  sense.  And, 
therefore,  when  we  assert  that  the  sins  which  pre- 
cede final  unbelief  are  also  unforgiven,  and  that 
the  sins  of  all  the  impenitent  men  upon  earth  are 


SERMON  VI.  145 

unforgiven,  and  that  the  sins  of  the  revengeful 
man  are  unforgiven,  and  that  the  sins  of  every 
person  who  is  going  on  in  a  course  of  wilful  dis- 
obedience, ungodhness,  and  profligacy,  are  unfor- 
given, and  that  all  the  sins  of  aU  men  are  unfor- 
given, till  that  very  moment  when  God  is  pleas- 
ed to  make  the  sinner  the  subject  of  a  justifying 
act,  or  to  forgive  him  and  cancel  his  guih  for  the 
sake  of  Christ,  to  whom  he  is  then  brought  in-  the 
exercise  of  a  true  faith — when  we  assert  these 
things,  as  we  do  most  positively  and  unhesitating- 
ly on  the  authority  of  the  Bible,  we  can  no  longer 
be  met  by  a  reference  to  those  passages  which, 
when  taken  literally  and  rigidly,  embrace  the  for- 
giveness of  the  whole  sinful  family  of  mankind. 
These  are  allowed  to  bear  no  such  signification. 
They  cannot  be  brought  forward  to  prove  the 
dogma  of  universal  pardon.  And  consequently, 
our  opponents  have  nothing  for  it  but  to  produce 
scriptural  evidence,  contained  in  explicit  terms, 
that  such  characters  as  we  have  just  now  advert- 
ed to  are  not  merely  the  objects  of  God*'s  mercy, 
but  have  truly  and  actually  received  from  him, 
or  derived  from  the  death  of  Christ,  the  blessing 
of  forgiveness. 

Under  the  impression  of  these  remarks,  let  us 
now  go  on  to  the  consideration  of  those  passages 
which  are  quoted  or  referred  to,  as  proving  that 
every  sin  that  has  been  or  may  yet  be  commit- 

H 


ly  SERMON  VI. 

ted  by  men,  is  abeady,  completely,  and  for  ever 
pardoned. 

1.  The  first  passage  we  would  consider  is 
Paul's  first  Epistle  to  Timothy,  verses  5  and  6  : 

"  For  there  is  one  God,  and  one  mediator  between  God 
and  men,  the  man  Christ  Jesus ; 

"  Who  gave  himself  a  ransom  for  all,  to  be  testified  in 
due  time." 

That  is,  it  is  said,  every  man  is  ransomed  from 
guilt,  or  delivered  from  going  down  to  the  pit, 
or  obtains  the  forgiveness  of  his  sins,  through  the 
virtue  of  that  price  which  Christ  paid — of  that 
sacrificial  death  which  he  endured. 

But  our  opponents  are  as  much  concerned  in 
vindicating  the  words  firom  this  interpretation  as 
we  are ;  for  they  hold  that  from  this  statement 
must  be  excepted  those  who  are  chargeable  with 
final  unbehef, — ^Aai^being  a  sin  which  does  subject 
to  condemnation  and  punishment.  By  whomsoever 
this  text  may  be  advanced  against  us,  it  cannot 
be  advanced  by  them.  If  the  construction  put 
upon  it  contradicts  our  doctrine,  it  also  contradicts 
theirs.  And  as  it  is  with  them  that  we  have  the 
present  controversy,  we  are  not  called  upon  to 
explain  it.  Moreover,  it  is  said  in  the  fourth 
verse  that  God  our  Saviour  "  will  have  all  men 
to  be  saved,  and  to  come  to  the  knowledge  of  the 
truth  "  And  here  the  advocates  of  universal  par- 
don will  be  involved  in  equal  difficulty,  for  if  it 


SERMON  VL  147 

is  the  will  of  God,  who  alone  can  produce  the  ef- 
fect, that  every  man  should  be  sanctified, — that 
being  the  meaning  of  the  wqrd  saved  in  their  vo- 
cabulary— and  to  come  to  the  knowledge  of  the 
truth,  how  does  it  happen  that  such  a  vast  num- 
ber die  in  ignorance  of  the  truth,  and  amidst  the 
pollutions  of  iniquity  ?  The  real  fact  stands  in 
opposition   to  the  verbal  statement. 

It  appears  to  me,  however,  that  the  Apostle's 
language  is  susceptible  of  an  explication  qviite 
consistent  with  a  limited  view  of  the  effect  of 
Christ's  ransom.  For  the  better  understanding 
it,  let  us  look  to  his  epistle  to  Titus  ii.  11,  where 
he  affirms  that  "  the  grace  of  God,  that  bringeth 
salvation,  hath  appeared  to  all  men.""*  Now,  it 
was  not  correct,  in  point  of  fact,  that  the  sav- 
ing or  sanctifying  grace  of  God  had  appeared  to 
all  men,  if  by  "  all  men""  is  meant  every  man  on  the 
face  of  the  earth, — it  had  not  appeared  even  to  a 
majority  of  mankind, — it  had  appeared  only  to  a 
comparatively  small  number.  This,  therefore, 
could  not  be  the  Apostle's  meaning.  But  his 
meaning  may  be  clearly  discovered  by  attending 
to  the  context.  He  was  telling  Titus  to  exhort 
servants  to  be  faithfid  in  discharging  their  pecu- 
liar duties,  that  by  their  minute  and  conscientious 
performance  of  these,  they  might  "  adorn  the 
doctrine  of  God  the  Saviour  in  all  things."  And 
he  enforces  the  exhortation  by  asserting  the  prac- 


148  SERMON  VL 

tical  tendency,  the  sanctifying  design  of  the 
gospel:  for,  says  he,  the  grace  of  God,  that 
bringeth  the  salvation  which  they  have  embraced 
by  faith,  and  by  which  their  spiritual  condition  is 
blessed,  has  appeared  to  servants  as  well  as  to 
masters — to  all  classes  and  conditions  of  the  peo- 
ple, teaching  every  one,  who  does  not  receive  it 
in  vain,  to  "  deny  ungodliness  and  worldly  lusts, 
and  to  Hve  soberly,  righteously,  and  godly  in  this 
present  world." 

Now    this    may  help    us    to  comprehend  the 
meaning  of  the  Apostle  in  his  address  to  Timo- 
thy.    The  members  of  the  Christian  church  were 
exposed  to  much  persecution.  They  suffered  this 
vinjust  and  cruel  treatment  chiefly  from  the  civil 
rulers  under  whom  they  were  placed.     And  it 
would  naturally  excite  in  their  minds  feelings  of 
disaffection  and  resentment,  which,  if  unrepressed , 
and  unsubdued,   might  lead  to  a  neglect  of  thej 
duties  that  they  owed  to  the  constituted  authori- 
ties.    In  order  to  prevent  or  counteract  such  a| 
mischief,  Paul  exhorted  Timothy  both  to  inculcate 
and  to  practise  the  lesson  of  offering  up  prayers 
and  supplications,  and  intercessions,  and  thanks- 
givings for  all  men,  whatever  might  be  their  sta-j 
tion,  their  office,  or  their  conduct, — even  for  the] 
kings  and  magistrates  who  stretched  out  upon] 
them  the  arm  of  barbarous  oppression, — even  foi 
those  who  set  themselves  against  the  anointed  of 


SERMON  VL  149 

the  Lord,  and  his  believing  people  ;  because  this 
did  not  put  them  beyond  the  pale  of  his  favour, 
who  was  merciful  to  "  the  chief  of  sinners,"  or 
beyond  the  reach  of  his  merit,  who  died  for  ene- 
mies, and  would  bring  the  trophies  of  his  cross 
from  all  descriptions  of  character,  and  all  condi- 
tions of  life.  On  this  account,  as  well  as  on  ac- 
count of  the  security  it  might  obtain  for  the 
preachers  of  the  truth,  as  alluded  to  in  the  se- 
cond verse,  he  urges  the  duty  of  Christian  mini- 
sters and  Christian  worshippers  every  where,  pray- 
ing for  all  in  authority — (verse  8.)  "  without 
wrath"  against  those  of  them  even  who  wronged 
and  harassed  them  most,  and  "  without  doubt- 
ins'"  that  their  intercessions  would  be  instrumen- 
tal  in  gaining  the  object  of  their  labour,  by  bring- 
ing out  from  the  midst  of  their  very  foes,  and 
adding  to  the  church,  such  as  should  be  saved. 
And  this  restricted  interpretation  corresponds  ex- 
actly with  what  is  said  in  other  parts  of  Scrip- 
ture, on  the  same  topic.  As  for  instance,  when  our 
Lord  said  to  his  disciples  that  "  the  Son  of  man 
came  not  to  be  ministered  unto,  but  to  minister, 
and  to  give  his  life  a  ransom  for  many''' — and  also 
when  he  instituted  the  sacrament  of  the  supper, 
on  which  occasion  he  declared,  "  this  is  my  blood 
of  the  New  Testament,  which  is  shed  for  many, 
for  the  remission  of  sins." 


150  SERMON  VL 

2.  The  next  passage  I  would  direct  your  at- 
tention to  is  in  1  John  ii.  2  : 

"  And  he  (i.  e.  Jesus  Christ)  is  the  propitiation  for  our 
sins ;  and  not  for  ours  only,  hut  also  for  the  sins  of  the 
whole  world." 

The  world,  when  spoken  of  as  benefited  by 
Christ's  interposition,  does  not  mean  every  inha- 
bitant of  the  world,  or  even  every  man  in  Chris- 
tendom.   Thus,  when  in  the  gospel  by  John,  our 
Saviour  says,   "  God  sent  not  his  Son  into  the 
world  to  condemn  the  world ;  but  that  the  world 
through  him  might  be  saved,"  he  immediately 
qualifies  his  statement,  by  limiting  the  privilege 
to  a  certain  class,  and  excluding  from  it  the  op- 
posite class ;   "  He  that  believeth  on  him  is  not 
condemned,  but  he  that  believeth   not  is  con- 
demned already."     And  though  John  the  Bap- 
tist exclaimed,   "  Behold   the    Lamb    of   God, 
which  taketh  away,    or  beareth    the  sin  of  the 
world  !" — yet,  as  if  to  guard  against  the  idea  that 
he  meant  the  world  to  signify  every  man  in  the 
world,    he  is    recorded   as  having  shortly  after 
said,   "  He  that  believeth  on  the  Son  nath  ever- 
lasting life  ;  and  he   that  believeth  not  the  Son 
shall  not  see  life  ;  but  the  wrath  of  God  abideth 
upon  him  :" — as  he  had  said  before  to  the  Phari- 
sees and  Sadducees  that  came  to  his  baptism,  "  O 
generation   of  vipers,   who  hath  warned  you  to 
flee  from  the  wrath  to  come .''" — evidently  speak- 


SERMON  VL  151 

ing  on  the  supposition  that  the  Pharisees  and 
Sadducees,  who  surely  formed  a  part  of  the  world, 
were  not  yet  delivered  from  the  wrath  to  come, 
or  had  not  yet  obtained  the  forgiveness  of  their 
sins. 

Now  the  phrase  in  the  Epistle  is  subject  to  the 
same  limitation  ;  and  though  it  is  here  called  the 
whole  world,  which  implies  intensity  of  mean- 
ing, the  intensity  of  meaning  is  applicable  to  the 
phrase  in  its  qualified  acceptation.  Whatever 
modified  import  the  "  worUr  is  found  to  bear, 
with  THAT  the  "  whole'''  is  associated  to  give  it 
force  and  emphasis,  and  not  with  the  "  world"  in 
its  literal  sense.  John  addresses  this  Epistle  to  be- 
lievers ;  "  these  things,"  says  he,  towards  the 
end  of  it,  "  have  I  written  unto  you  that  believe 
on  the  name  of  the  Son  of  God,  that  ye  may  know 
that  ye  have  eternal  life."  And,  in  the^r*^  verse 
of  the  2d  chapter,  he  thus  exhorts  them,  "  My 
little  children,  these  things  write  I  unto  you, 
that  ye  sin  not" — a  useful  and  necessary  admoni- 
tion, even  to  the  most  eminent  Christians.  He 
knew  that  as  they  were  exposed  to  manifold  temp- 
tations, so  they  would  in  all  likelihood  be  over- 
taken in  faults,  and  break  the  commandments  of 
God.  And  to  prevent  them  from  falling  into 
despondency  when  such  deviations  occurred,  he 
directed  their  thoughts  to  the  permanent  provi- 
sion that  was  made  for  the  expiation  and  the  for* 


152  SERMON  VI. 

giveness  of  their  sins — even  to  the  atoning  sacri- 
fice and  prevalent  intercession  of  the  Lord  Jesus 
Christ.  "  And  if  any  man  sin,  we  have  an  Ad- 
vocate with  the  Father,  Jesus  Christ  the  righteous, 
and  he  is  the  propitiation  for  our  sins."  That  is, 
if  any  of  you,  or  if  I,  or  if  such  as  have  obtained 
like  precious  faith  with  us,  shall  sin,  after  having 
received  the  forgiveness  which  is  included  in  the 
act  of  justifying  grace,  let  us  not  despair  as  if  we 
were  again  hopelessly  brought  under  condemna- 
tion ;  let  us  remember  that  we  have  the  same  ad- 
vocate with  God  to  plead  our  cause,  even  Jesus 
Christ,  and  that  he  pleads  it  on  the  same  ground — 
his  perfect  righteousness  and  expiatory  sacrifice ; 
and  let  us,  renewing  our  application  for  pardon, 
in  a  renewed  dependance  on  the  merits  of  our 
great  High  Priest,  doubt  not  that  it  will  be  as 
freely  bestowed  upon  us  as  when  God  first  said  to 
us,  "  Be  of  good  cheer,  your  sins  are  forgiven 
you."  Then  the  Apostle  adds,  "  and  not  for 
ours  only,  but  also  for  the  sins  of  the  whole  world." 
But  were  he  to  be  understood  as  meaning  all 
transgressors  whatsoever,  he  would  be  understood 
as  departing  totally  from  his  subject,  for  the  com- 
fort he  had  suggested  arose  from  their  being  be- 
lievers and  in  a  justified  state,  and  having  there- 
by a  settled  interest  in  the  finished  work  of  the 
Redeemer ;  and  how  could  he  have  mentioned 
that  as  a  peculiar  reason  for  their  not  being  des- 


SERMON  VI.  153 

pondent  when  they  fell  into  sin,  if  he  could  go 
on  to  affirm  that  the  propitiation  of  Christ  was 
available  to  the  pardon  of  every  man,  and  that 
every  man  was  already  pardoned  by  it,  even 
though  he  had  neither  heard  nor  received  the 
Gospel  ?  In  another  part  of  the  Epistle  he  says 
that  "  the  whole  world  lieth  in  wickedness."  Is 
that  consistent  with  the  idea  of  the  whole  world 
being  delivered  from  its  guilt  by  the  blood  of  a- 
tonement  ?  Attend  also  to  the  connexion  here 
stated  between  Christ's  propitiation  and  his  inter- 
cession. His  intercession  is  employed  in  behalf 
of  those  with  respect  to  whom  his  propitiation  be- 
comes efficient.  And  what  superior  advantage 
had  the  Apostle  and  his  fellow  believers,  or  how 
could  he  say,  "  we  have  an  advocate  with  the  Fa- 
ther," if  he  ascribed  the  same  privilege  to  every 
body  else  "^  And  does  not  Christ  himself  say,  "  I 
pray  not  for  the  world,  but  for  them  which  thou 
hast  given  me  T^  In  short,  the  broad  construc- 
tion put  upon  the  clause  we  are  considering,  de- 
prives the  clause  which  precedes  it  of  all  its  mean- 
ing and  power,  and  makes  the  Apostle  stultify 
himself  by  representing  him  as  first  suggesting  an 
appropriate  ground  of  consolation  and  hope  to  be- 
lievers, and  then  speaking  of  it  as  equally  possess- 
ed by  all  those  to  whom  the  gospel  was  still  un- 
known, or  by  whom  it  was  still  despised. 
But  our  opponents  must  confess  that  "  the  whole 


154  SERMON  VI. 

world"  here  is  exclusive  of  those  that  die  in  final 
unbelief.  Then  they  agree  with  us  in  maintain- 
ing that  the  phrase  the  whole  world  is  not  intend- 
ed by  the  Apostle  to  be  taken  literally,  but  only 
denotes  a  portion  of  the  whole  world ;  and  of 
course  the  extent  of  this  abatement  is  to  be  ascer- 
tained by  considering  the  circumstances  of  the 
case  so  far  as  they  are  calculated  to  affect  the  lan- 
guage made  use  of  And,  recollecting  that  the 
term  "  the  world" — as  used  in  other  places  of 
Scripture — does  not  necessarily  signify  every  hu- 
man being,  methinks  there  is  no  difficulty  in  the 
passage  before  us,  except  what  is  created  by  the 
determination  of  certain  persons  to  uphold  a  fa- 
vourite opinion. 

The  Apostle  in  the  first  verse,  and  in  the  first 
clause  of  the  second  verse,  as  indeed  throughout 
the  whsle  Epistle,  addresses  himself  to  believers 
only ;  and  when  he  says  "  if  any  man  sin,"  he 
must  be  held  as  having  in  his  thoughts  and  in  his 
eye  those  believers  whom  he  had  just  exhorted  as 
his  "  little  children,"  not  to  sin.  If  any  of  you,  or 
if  I,  who  am  speaking  to  you  in  the  bonds  of  our 
common  faith,  be  guilty  of  transgressing  God's 
law,  let  us  not  be  dejected  as  if  the  recovered  fa- 
vour of  our  heavenly  Father  were  again  itnd  ut- 
terly taken  from  us.  Remember  for  your  satis- 
faction and  your  comfort,  that  he  in  whom  we 
have  trusted,  and  who  made  peace  by  the  blood  of 


SERMON  VI.  155 

his  cross,  still  is  and  will  continue  to  be  our  ad- 
vocate with  the  Father,  whose  will  we  have  dis- 
obeyed, and  that  this  disobedience  will  be  forgiven, 
like  all  the  other  sins  that  are  past,  for  the  sake  of 
that  infinitely  meritorious  propitiation  which  Christ 
has  taken  with  him  into  the  holiest  of  all,  and  in 
virtue  of  which  it  is  that  God  justifies  the  ungod- 
ly that  believe  in  Jesus.  But  let  it  not  be  thought 
that  such  an  invaluable  privilege  is  confined  to 
you  and  to  me.  It  belongs  to  all  who  are  placed 
in  similar  circumstances.  It  belongs  not  to  Jews 
only,  but  to  Gentiles  also.  It  belongs  not  merely 
to  such  a  small  company  as  we  constitute,  but  to 
each  and  all  of  those  who  constitute  the  churches 
of  Christ  throughout  the  world.  It  belongs  not 
solely  to  existing  believers,  ho\/ever  numerous 
they  may  be,  but  to  all  who  shall  beheve  in  every 
quarter  and  in  every  successive  ag  •  of  the  world. 
In  all  places  and  in  all  generations,  even  to  the 
remotest  corner  and  the  latest  period,  they  who 
can  be  addressed  as  "  little  children"  who  "  be- 
lieve on  the  name  of  the  Son  of  God"" — if  they 
sin,  may  "  come  boldly  to  the  throne  of  grace," 
and  expect  to  obtain  renewed  tokens  of  that  mercy 
which  they  have  already  experienced,  and  will 
ever  continue  to  need;  for  the  propitiation  by  which 
their  guilt  was  cancelled  when  they  first  believed 
is  stiU  efficacious  to  procure  their  forgiveness, 
and  that  Redeemer  to  whom  they  committed  them- 
selves is  still  "  at  the  right  hand  of  God,"  and 


156  SERMON  Vh 

"  ever  livetli  to  make  intercession  for  them."  He 
is  the  Advocate  and  the  propitiation  for  the  ivhole 
world — there  being  "in  him  neither  Greek  nor  Jew, 
circumcision  nor  uncircumcision,  barbarian,  Scy- 
thian, bond  nor  free" — such  distinctions  have  no 
place  in  the  regards,  and  operations,  and  results 
of  his  mediatorship ;  but  he  "  z«  all,  mid  in  alV 

3.  Another  passage  brought  against  us  is  in  the 
second  Epistle  of  Peter,  ii.  1. 

"  But  there  were  false  prophets  also  among  the  people, 
even  as  there  shall  be  fiUse  teachers  among  you,  who  pri- 
vily shall  bring  in  damnable  heresies,  even  denying  the 
Lord  that  bought  them,  and  bring  upon  themselves  swift 
destruction." 

The  argument  deduced  from  these  words,  is  to 
be  found  in  the  clause  "  denying  the  Lord  that 
hought  them^  These  false  teachers  were  bought 
or  redeemed  by  the  death  of  Christ ;  and  there- 
fore, say  our  opponents,  pardon  is  bestowed  upon 
all  men  for  all  their  sins. 

Now,  were  we  to  be  as  rigorous  in  our  treat- 
ment of  the  language  of  Scripture  as  our  oppon- 
ents are,  we  would,  though  admitting  their  in- 
terpretation, reject  their  inference,  and  fix  them 
down  to  the  precise  number  of  individuals  to  whom 
the  Apostle  is  said  to  refer  as  bought  by  the  Lord. 
But  believing  such  a  mode  of  reasoning  to  be  ut- 
terly absurd,  and  to  be  a  great  barrier  in  the  way 


SERMON  VI.  157 

of  our  getting  at  the  truth,  we  shall  grant  that 
if  the  false  teachers  were  so  bought,  the  Lord 
has  also  bought  every  one  of  the  children  of  men. 
We  cannot  but  marvel,  however,  that  any  such 
meaning  should  be  discovered  in  the  Apostle's 
language  as  has  been  affixed  to  it.  The  per- 
sons he  speaks  of  were  false  teachers, — they  were 
perverting  the  truth,  they  were  hostile  to  it,  they 
made  it  the  instrument  of  their  ambition,  of  their 
worldly  policy,  of  their  personal  aggrandisement. 
They  brought  in  damnable  heresies — doctrines  dif- 
ferent from,  and  contrary  to,  the  doctrines  of  the 
gospel,  doctrines  that  were  hateful  to  God,  doc- 
trines that  were  ruinous  to  the  souls  of  those 
that  taught,  and  of  those  that  believed  them.  And 
while  they  continued  to  be  false  teachers,  and 
to  bring  in  and  propagate  damnable  heresies, — 
thus  guilty  of  the  most  aggravated  crimes  that 
mortals  can  commit,  and  leading  their  misguid- 
ed disciples  into  eternal  perdition, — at  that  very 
time,  all  criminal  and  all  impenitent  as  they  were, 
it  could  be  said  of  them  that  they  were  actually 
pardoned  by  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ ! 

Nay,  but  the  case  is  worse  than  this — for  on 
account  of  their  profane,  wicked,  cruel  conduct, 
they  were  to  be  destroyed^  and  this  destruction 
was  inevitable,  and  just  impending  over  them, 
and  yet  though  thus  devoted  to  future  punish- 
ment by  the  just  judgment  of  the  great  head  of 


158  SERMON  VI. 

the  church,  and  on  account  of  all  the  sins  implied 
in  their  false  teaching — in  their  introduction  and 
diffusion  of  damnable  heresies — in  denying  the 
very  Redeemer  himself  as  to  the  most  essential 
parts  of  his  office — notwithstanding  all  this,  they 
were  actually  forgiven  every  thing  they  had  done, 
every  thing  they  were  doing,  every  thing  they 
might  thereafter  do,  and  formed  a  part  of  the 
purchased  possession  of  Christ,  against  whom  they 
were  engaged  in  a  warfare  that  was  speedily  to 
terminate  in  their  awful  and  everlasting  misery  ! 
And  there  is  still  another  element  in  the  case. 
These  false  teachers — these  authors  of  damnable 
heresies — these  deniers  of  the  Lord  the  Redeem- 
er— these  vessels  of  wrath  fitted  for  destruction — 
were  bought — and  at  what  price  ?  The  blood  of 
Christ — called  also  the  blood  of  God,  as  shed  by 
him  who  had  the  divine  nature,  united  with  the 
human,  when  by  his  obedience  unto  the  death 
of  the  cross,  he  purchased  eternal  redemption. 
And  yet  they  who  were  bought  with  this  price, 
were  at  the  very  moment  loaded  with  guilt  unut- 
terably great,  and  ere  long  allowed  to  sink  irre- 
coverably into  ruin  !  The  love  of  Him  who  is 
love  itself,  let  go  its  hold  of  those  to  whom  it  had 
actually  secured  a  title,  by  paying  down  a  price 
which  was  infinitely  costly,  and  accepted  in  so- 
lemn covenant !  And  that  atonement  which  is 
the  theme  of  the  redeemed  in  heaven,  when  they 


SERMON  VI.  159 

exclaim,  "  Thou  art  worthy  to  take  the  book, 
and  to  open  the  seals  thereof,  for  thou  wast  slain, 
and  hast  bought  us  to  God  by  thy  blood,"  goes 
for  nothing  in  the  case  of  the  ver}'^  persons  who 
are  yet  affirmed  to  have  been  delivered  by  it  from 
all  their  guilt,  and  they  are  left  to  the  strange 
and  agonising  reflection  that  they  are  at  the  same 
time  pardoned  and  punished  for  ever  ! 

My  friends,  don't  your  understandings  and 
vour  hearts  revolt  from  such  a  proposition  as 
tills  ?  And  must  not  they,  think  you,  be  ready 
to  make  vast  sacrifices  both  of  reason  and  of 
Scripture,  who,  to  bolster  up  any  theory  what- 
ever, can  set  their  face  to  the  maintenance  of 
any  thing  so  monstrous — so  fraught  with  irre- 
concilable contradictions,  and  so  diametrically 
opposite  to  the  whole  strain  of  the  Bible,  and  to 
the  whole  analogy  of  the  gospel  ? 

And  is  there  any  difficulty  in  the  passage  to 
warrant  or  to  require  such  a  strange  hypothesis 
for  explaining  it  ?  For  my  part  I  can  see  none. 
The  matter  is  simply  this  :  False  teachers,  such 
as  are  here  described,  had  appeared  in  the  church. 
They  did  not  preach  the  truth,  but  heresies  of 
the  worst  and  most  dangerous  kind.  They 
preached  Christ  indeed — they  pretended  to  set 
him  forth  as  he  had  been  revealed — they  urged 
him  upon  men  as  a  Saviour  and  as  one  who  had 
become  a  Saviour  by  suffering  and  dying  upon  a 


160  SERMON  VI. 

cross  for  sinners.  This  was  a  part  of  the  system 
of  doctrine  which  they  professed  to  have  embrac- 
ed for  themselves,  and  pressed  upon  those  whom 
they  got  to  listen  to  them.  And  such  was  their 
perversity,  their  want  of  sincerity,  their  contempt 
of  principle,  that  they  trampled  upon  the  gravest 
and  most  important  of  the  truths  which  had  a 
place  in  their  ministrations.  Avowing  belief  in 
the  atoning  death  of  Christ — glorying  in  that  ?.s 
the  foundation  of  their  hopes — and  labouring  to 
inculcate  it  upon  the  faith  of  others — they  did, 
at  the  same  time,  so  mis  it  up  with  gross  and 
damning  errors,  and  were  so  disobedient  to  the 
will  of  Christ,  whom  all  the  while  they  affected  to 
follow  as  teachers  of  his  religion,  that  they  are 
strongly  said  to  have  denied — to  have  dishonour- 
ed— to  have  rebelled  against  him  whom  they 
proclaimed  as  the  Lord  that  had  bought  them 
with  his  blood.  All  this  resembles  a  method  not 
uncommon  with  our  Saviour  himself  and  his  pro- 
phets and  apostles,  who  argued  with  opposers  on 
their  own  principles,  and  on  their  professed  tenets, 
as  if  their  principles  had  been  just,  and  their  profes- 
sions sincere.  And  it  is  a  mode  of  reasoning, 
and  judging,  and  censuring,  which  men  have  re- 
course to  continually,  and  in  adopting  which  they 
are  neither  considered  as  offending  against  pro- 
priety and  truth,  nor  incur  any  risk  of  being 
misunderstood  by  the  intelligent,  or  misrepre- 
sented by  the  candid. 


SERMON  VI.  161 

Your  time  is  too  far  spent  to  allow  me  to  pro- 
ceed with  our  expositions,  till  another  oppor- 
tunity occurs.  In  the  meanwhile,  I  trust  that 
this  plan  of  replying  to  the  abettors  of  universal 
pardon,  will  not  only  enable  us  to  put  down  their 
most  pernicious  heresy,  if  it  has  got  any  footing 
in  your  minds,  and  to  guard  such  of  you  as  are 
in  danger  of  being  imposed  upon  by  its  palata- 
bleness  and  its  plausibilities,  but  will  profit  us 
by  fixing  more  clearly,  and  more  effectually  in 
our  minds,  both  the  real  meaning  of  the  passages 
commented  upon,  and  the  correct  mode  of  dis- 
covering and  ascertaining  it.  I  shall  direct  your 
attention,  in  our  next  discourse,  to  various  other 
passages,  and  hope  to  convince  you  that  holy 
writ  must  be  altogether  dreadfully  perverted  be- 
fore it  can  be  made  to  give  a  statement,  or  to  ut- 
ter a  word  in  support  of  the  dogma  of  universal 
forgiveness.  And  let  us  all  pray  for  the  effectual 
teaching  of  the  Holy  Spirit ;  and  according  to  the 
light,  which  through  the  medium  of  the  word  he 
sheds  upon  our  minds,  let  us  work  out  our  own 
salvation,  guide  our  brethren  in  the  path  of  truth, 
and  labour  for  the  glory  of  Him  who  came  into 
the  world  to  call  sinners  to  repentance,  and  to 
give  himself  an  offering  and  a  sacrifice  unto  God, 
that  whosoever  believeth  may  not  perish,  but 
have  everlasting  Mfe  ! 


SERMON  VII. 


SAME  SUBJECT. 


We  are  contending  against  the  doctrine  of  uni- 
versal pardon.  And  after  showing  its  direct  and 
palpable  contradiction  to  the  plainest  declarations 
of  tlie  word  of  God,  and  its  necessary  result  in 
the  final  and  complete  redemption  of  every  man, 
a  result  which  our  opponents  themselves  hold  to 
be  most  unscriptural — we  proceeded  to  the  con- 
sideration of  those  passages  of  the  Bible  which 
they  quote  in  support  of  their  opinion.  Three 
of  these  we  explained — pointing  out  at  the  same 
time  how  much  they  had  been  misunderstood  and 
perverted,  and  what  inconsistencies  arose  from  the 
interpretation  put  upon  them,  in  order  to  main- 
tain the  opposite  side  of  the  question.  We  now 
go  forward  in  the  work  of  exposition. 

4.  And  the  next  passage  to  which  we  would 
call  your  attention  is  in  1  John  v.  8 — 13. 


SERMON  VII.  163 

"  And  there  are  three  that  bear  witness  in  earth,  the  spi- 
rit, and  the  water,  and  the  blood  :  and  these  three  agree  in 
one. 

"  If  we  receive  the  witness  of  men,  the  witness  of  God  is 
greater :  for  this  is  the  witness  of  God  which  he  hath  tes- 
tified of  his  Son. 

"  He  that  beUeveth  on  the  Son  of  God  hath  the  witness 
in  himself:  he  that  believeth  not  God  hath  made  him  a  liar ; 
because  he  believeth  not  the  record  that  God  gave  of  his 
Sou. 

"  And  this  is  the  record,  that  God  hath  given  to  us  eter- 
nal life  ;  and  this  life  is  in  his  Son. 

"  He  that  hath  the  Son  hath  life ;  and  he  that  hath  not 
the  Son  of  God  hath  not  life. 

"  These  things  have  I  written  unto  you  that  believe  on 
the  name  of  the  Son  of  God,  that  ye  may  know  that  ye 
have  eternal  life,  and  that  ye  may  believe  on  the  name  of 
the  Son  of  God." 

We  are  told  that  the  doctrine  of  universal  par- 
don is  proved  by  the  record  which  God  is  said  to 
have  given  of  his  Son,  since  our  disbelieving  that 
record  could  not  be  to  make  God  a  liar,  unless 
he  had  really  conveyed  the  gift  of  life  to  us,  and 
since  every  man  who  believes  this  record  must  of 
course  be  held  to  believe  a  divinely  attested  truth. 

But  it  must  be  very  evident  to  you  all  that  this 
interpretation  of  the  words  goes  much  farther  than 
they  who  adopt  it  can  possibly  approve — that  it 
makes  the  Apostle  assert  what  they  cannot  admit, 
because  it  is  contrary  to  Scripture — that,  in  short, 
by  proving  a  great  deal  too  much,  it  really  proves 
nothing  at  all,  and  must  be  rejected  by  themselves 


164  SERMON  VII. 

as  well  as  by  us.  For  observe  what  the  blessing 
is  which  it  is  alleged  God  has  bestowed  upon  every 
one  of  us,  and  to  the  bestowal  of  which  he  is  af- 
firmed to  have  given  such  a  decisive  testimony  ? 
It  is — not  pardon  merely,  but  "  eternal  life.'''' 
"  This  is  the  record,  that  God  hath  given  us  eter- 
nal life,  and  this  life  is  in  his  Son." 

We  cannot  allow  that  this  phrase  means  nothing 
more  than  a  removal  of  the  curse,  so  that  the  sinner, 
has  his  existence  prolonged,  and  is  freed  from  the 
positive  punishment  to  which  the  law  had  doomed 
him  for  his  transgression.  This  is  not  the  meaning 
of  "  eternal  life"  in  the  New  Testament.  There 
it  invariably  means  the  felicity  of  heaven,  em- 
bracing, of  coiu'se,  all  the  privileges  and  bless- 
ings which  constitute  that  felicity,  or  which  con- 
tribute to  it.  It  is  described  as  the  grand  and 
ultimate  object  of  Christ's  mission.  "  God  so 
loved  the  world  that  he  gave  his  only  begotten 
Son,  that  whosoever  believeth  in  him  should  not 
perish,  but  have  everlasting  (eternal)  life.  For 
God  sent  not  his  Son  into  the  world  to  condemn 
the  world ;  but  that  the  world  through  him  might 
be  saved."*  Thus  Christ  makes  salvation  and 
eternal  life  equivalent,  as  the  intended  issue  of  his 
redeeming  work.  And  is  every  man  saved  ?  Or 
has  every  man  eternal  life  actually  conferred  up- 

•Johniii.  16,17. 


SERMON  VIL  165 

on  him  ? — Again,  we  are  informed,  that  Paul 
and  Barnabas  said  to  the  Jews  in  the  synagogue 
of  Antioch  of  Pisidia,   when  they   were  contra- 
dicting and  blaspheming  (Acts  xiii.   46.)     "  It 
was  necessary  that  the  word  of  God  should  first 
have  been  spoken  unto  you  :    but  seeing  ye  put 
it  from  you,  and  judge  yourselves  unworthy  of 
everlasting  (eternal)  life,  lo,  we  turn  to  the  Gen- 
tiles."    But  how  unreasonable  all  this  on  the  hy- 
pothesis of  our  opponents  !    For  if  eternal  life 
means  only  pardon,   and  if  pardon  belonged  to 
the  Jews  already,  and  belonged  to  them  whether 
they  would  or  not,  why  should  the  apostles  have 
reproached  and  abandoned  them  because  they 
would  not  accept  of  it  ?    And  see  also  from  the 
conclusion  of  their  address,   that  salvation  and 
eternal  life  are   identified   in   their  estimation. 
"  For  so  hath  the  Lord  commanded  us,  saying, 
I  have  set  thee  to  be  a  light  of  the  Gentiles, 
that  thou  shouldst  be  for  salvation  to  the  ends 
of  the  earth.     And  when  the  Gentiles  heard  this, 
they  were  glad,   and  glorified  the  word  of  the 
Lord ;  and  as  many  as  were  ordained  to  eternal 
life  believed."" — Once  more,  after  the   account 
given  us  by  our  Lord  of  the  transactions  of  the 
judgment  day,   this  is  stated  as  the  grand  result 
of  the  whole ;  "These  (the  wicked)  shall  go  away 
into  eternal  punishment,  but  the  righteous  into 
eternal  life."     And  are  we  really  to  suppose  that 


166  SERMON  VII. 

this  is  nothing  more  than  the  pardon  which  the 
righteous  and  the  wicked  were  equally  in  posses- 
sion of,  in  virtue  of  Christ's  death,  while  they 
tabernacled  upon  earth  ?  Or  is  it  not  clear,  be- 
yond the  reach  of  doubt,  that  it  signifies  all  that 
is  to  be  enjoyed  in  the  heavenly  state,  implying 
not  merely  the  blessedness  of  that  state,  but  the 
sanctification,  the  victory  over  death,  every  thing 
that  is  necessary  to  prepare  for  the  attainment 
and  the  fruition  of  it  ? 

And  in  the  passage  we  are  considering,  it  can- 
not denote  any  thing  else ;  for  although  it  is 
called  simply  life,  in  the  12th  verse,  yet  that  is 
merely  an  abbreviated  mode  of  expression, — the 
full  character  of  the  life  alluded  to  being  given 
in  the  11th  verse,  and  repeated  in  the  13th  verse, 
so  that  both  the  preceding  and  the  subsequent 
context  ascertain  it  to  be  "  eternal  life^  And 
then,  as  it  is  the  privilege,  according  to  the 
apostle's  assertion,  of  those  only  who  believe  on 
the  Son  of  God,  it  must  be  something  more  than, 
or  different  from,  the  'pardon  which  we  are  told 
belongs  to  all,  whether  they  believe  or  not.  If  it 
be  said,  that  the  faith  here  mentioned  is  just  the 
taking  and  enjoying  the  pardon  already  conferred, 
we  reply,  that  this  is  inconsistent  with  the  de- 
clared object  of  the  apostle,  as  intimated  in  the 
13th  verse,  which  is  to  satisfy  those  to  whom  he 
writes,  and  who  are  asserted  to  he  believers,  "  that 


SERMON  VII.  167 

they  may  know  that  they  have  eternal  life,"  as 
true  believers,  and  to  state  the  grounds  on  wh  ich 
they  may  acquire  that  knowledge,  and  have  no 
doubts  of  its  reality,  and  take  to  themselves  all 
the  comfort  and  advantage  which  it  is  fitted  to 
afford.  And  if  any  stress  is  laid  upon  this, 
that  we  are  said  to  be  in  actual  possession  of, 
or  to  have,  eternal  life,  which  could  not  be  the 
case  if  eternal  life  meant  the  happiness  of  hea- 
ven, we  answer,  that  it  is  common  enough  in  Scrip- 
ture to  speak  of  blessings  to  which  we  have  only 
acquired  a  title,  and  of  which  we  have  only  the 
prospect,  as  our  present  property,  as  for  instance, 
"  all  things  are  yours,  whether  things  present  or 
things  to  come."*  And  in  this  very  epistle,"f"  its 
inspired  author  declares,  "  this  is  the  promise 
which  he  hath  promised  us,  even  eternal  life,"  so 
that  in  one  place  eternal  life  is  spoken  of  as  a 
promise  of  something  yet  to  come,  and  the  very 
same  blessing  is  spoken  of  in  another  place  as 
something  which  is  already  come,  jvist  because  it 
is  secured  beyond  all  possibility  of  its  being  lost, 
and  they  to  whom  the  promise  is  made,  may  re- 
gard it  as  indubitably  certain,  and  enjoy  it  in 
the  full  assurance  of  anticipation,  as  they  expe- 
rience that  character  to  which  the  word  of  the  un- 
changeable God  has  irrevocably  annexed  it ;   for 

*  1  Cor.  iii.  21,  22.  t  1  JoI»n  »•  25. 


158  SERMON  VII. 

"  being  justified  by  his  grace  they  are  made 
heirs,"  as  Paul  expresses  it,*  "  according  to  the 
hope  of  eternal  life.'" 
The  eternal  life,  therefore,  here  mentioned,  de- 
notes the  happiness  of  heaven,  as  it  does  in  all 
other  parts  of  Scripture  where  it  occurs.  And, 
consequently,  this  declaration  of  John,  does  not 
support  the  doctrine  of  universal  pardon,  unless 
universal  pardon  is  tantamount  to  universal,  final, 
and  complete  salvation.  Let  our  opponents  either 
admit  or  reject  that  equation.  If  they  admit  it, 
then  it  follows  that  in  their  opinion  no  man,  be 
he  a  believer  or  an  unbeliever,  shall  ever  be  con- 
demned or  fail  of  everlasting  felicity,  and  this 
should  be  known,  that  the  simple  may  be  fully 
aware  of  what  they  really  embrace  when  they 
embrace  the  tenet  of  universal  pardon.  But  if 
they  reject  it,  as  they  profess  to  do,  methinks 
with  great  inconsistency,  then  it  is  clear  as  a  sun- 
beam that  John  is  no  auxiliary  of  theirs  in  this 
boasted  passage,  and  that  his  meaning,  let  it  be 
what  it  may,  is  altogether  at  variance  with  theirs. 
Even  though  we  should  admit  that  the  eternal 
life  here  mentioned  is  not  the  state  of  felicity  in 
heaven,  but  only  that  state  of  pardon  to  which 
the  sinner  is  said  to  be  restored  by  the  atonement 
of  Christ,  this  will  not  serve  the  cause  or  assist  in 

•  Tit.  iii.  7. 


SERMON  Vll.  169 

establishing  the  views  of  our  opponents.  Nay, 
it  will  be  found  to  do  the  very  contrary.  For  the 
apostle  says  in  the  15th  verse  of  the  third  chap- 
ter, "  Whosoever  hateth  his  brother  is  a  murder- 
er, and  ye  know  that  no  murderer  hath  eternal 
life  abiding  in  him,"  The  maintainers  of  univer- 
sal pardon  say,  that  every  sin,  and  of  course,  mur- 
der, and  all  that  is  justly  denominated  hatred  of  a 
brother,  is  already  forgiven,  or  that  every  person 
guilty  of  it  has  "  life.""  But  the  inspired  writer, 
whose  words  we  have  quoted,  affirms  expressly, 
that  no  man  who  commits  murder  or  cherishes 
hatred  is  forgiven,  the  term  "  eternal  hfe''''  as 
used  by  them,  being  synonymous  with  the  term 
forgiveness.  They  hold  that  eternal  life  or  par- 
don is  given  to  every  one  of  the  children  of 
men,  and  that  the  divine  record  testifies  this. 
And  yet  the  apostle  most  distinctly  declares  that 
all  murderers  and  haters  of  the  bretiiren  are  des- 
titute of  that  blessing.  This  latter  statement  is 
plain,  literal,  exphcit,  and  must  be  taken  as  the 
exponent  of  the  former,  which  is  not  a  positive 
averment  of  the  apostle,  but  an  interpretation  put 
upon  his  language — that  language  being  certainly 
such  as  not  necessarily  to  include  each  and  all  of 
the  guilty  race  of  man.  On  the  hypothesis  of 
our  opponents,  the  two  views  are  irreconcilable. 
Whereas  on  ours  they  harmonize  completely. 
Murderers  and  haters  have  not  as  yet  pardon  or 


170  SERMON  VII. 

eternal  life,  and  they  cannot  obtain  such  a  privi- 
lege so  long  as  they  are  unbelieving  persons.  But 
let  them  believe  on  Jesus  Christ  and  then  they 
shall  obtain  forgiveness,  for  "  this  is  the  record, 
that  God  hath  given  to  us"  who  believe  "  eternal 
life,"  or  forgiveness,  "  and  this  life  is  in  his  Son." 
Having  proved  that  this  passage  gives  them  no 
assistance  at  aU  in  making  out  their  case,  it  is  no 
more  our  concern  than  it  is  theirs,  in  the  present 
controversy,  to  give  the  true  explanation  of  it. 
But  as  the  explanation  of  it  is  to  my  mind  abun- 
dantly easy,  and  as  it  has  an  important  bearing 
on  the  subject  of  assurance,  it  may  not  be  im- 
proper to  expound  its  import. 

Observe  then  that  the  apostle  is  writing  to  be- 
lievers, to  "  them  that  believe  on  the  name  of 
the  Son  of  God."  Observe  also  that  he  writes  to 
these  believers  with  this  view,  that  they  might 
know  that  they  had  eternal  life,  and  also  that  they 
might  be  encouraged  to  remain  steadfast  in  that 
faith  which  they  had  placed  in  Jesus  Christ. 
This  is  set  forth  in  the  13th  verse,  and  must  be 
borne  in  mind.  Observe,  moreover,  that  the  ori- 
ginal word  which  is  rendered  "  record,^''  in  the 
10th  and  11th  verses,  is  the  very  same  word  that 
is  translated  "  witness'''  so  frequently  in  the  pre- 
ceding context,  and  that  it  would  have  made  the 
meaning  plainer  had  the  translators  kept  the  same 
rendering  all  along,  or  perhaps  it  will  become 


SERMON  VII.  171 

more  intelligible  if  instead  of  witness,  we  use  the 
more  appropriate  word  testimony^  which  is  equally 
agreeable  to  the  Greek. 

Now,  in  order  to  persuade  those  believers  to 
whom  he  addi-esses  himself,  that  they  had  eternal 
life,  and  to  establish  them  in  the  faith  with  which 
this  persuasion  was  connected,   he  reasons  thus, 
V.  9,  "  You  have  the  testimony  of  God  to  this 
great   truth,   that  Christ  is  the  Saviour.     And 
surely  if  you  believe   the  testimony  that  fallible 
and  sinful  men  give  to  any  fact,  much  more  will 
you  believe  the  testimony  of  God,  who  cannot  be 
mistaken,  seeing  he  is  omniscient,  and  who  will 
not  deceive,  seeing  he  is  infinitely  holy  and  true. 
He  that  believeth  on  the  Son  of  God,  hath  the 
testimony  of  God  in  himself ;  you  believe  on  the 
Son  of  God,  and  therefore  you  have  in  your  own 
minds   God's  testimony  to   Christ  being  the  Sa- 
viour, or  the  author  of  eternal  life.    Were  it  pos- 
sible to  suppose  that  any  of  you  did  not  believe 
tliig  testimony  of  God  to  Christ,  that  would  be  to 
make  God  a  liar  by  discrediting  his  solemn  word. 
-I  say  this  to  show  you  the  folly  and  inconsistency 
of  believing  on  the  Son  of  God,  and  yet  not  ap- 
plying to  yourselves  the  comfort  and  the  benefit 
of  the  fact  testified  of  God,  that  his  Son  is  indeed 
your  Saviour.     For  as  you   cannot  be  guilty  of 
any  thing  so  absurd  as  to  disbelieve  God's  testi- 
mony, since  you  are  actually  believing  on  him 


172  SERMON  VII. 

to  whom  he  has  given  that  testimony,  so  you  are 
in  this  manner  shut  up  to  the  belief,  that  salva- 
tion or  eternal  hfe  is  yours, — the  testimony  being 
this,  that  God  has  given,  not  to  him  that  makes 
God  a  liar  by  his  unbelief,  but  to  you,  and  to  me,  and 
to  all  of  us  who  believe,  eternal  life,  or  the  promise 
of  eternal  life,  or  a  title  to  eternal  life,  or  the  pos- 
session of  eternal  life,  so  far  as  it  can  be  possess- 
ed in  a  present  world,  even  that  eternal  life  which 
is  in  his  Son,  for  he  is  altogether  eternal  life — 
he  is  the  author  of  it — he  is  the  proprietor  of  it — 
he  is  the  giver  of  it.  And  so  closely  and  inse- 
parably is  it  connected  with  him,  that  it  may  be 
affirmed  vithout  exception,  that  whoever  hath  the 
Son  hata  life,  and  whoever  hath  not  the  Son  hath 
not  life.  But  you  have  ih^  Son  ;  he  dwells  in  you 
by  faith  ;  you  do  really  and  consciously  believe 
in  him  ;  and  therefore  know  and  doubt  not  that 
you  have  eternal  life,  and  in  obedience  to  the  tes- 
timony of  God,  continue  to  believe  with  unwaver- 
ing confidence  on  the  name  of  the  Son  oi'  God, 
through  whom  it  is  that  this  great  privilege  is  in- 
dubitably yours,  cither  in  possession  or  in  rever- 
sion. 

Such  appears  to  me  to  be  the  real  meaning  of 
the  passage  we  have  been  considering.*  It  is 
conformable  to  every  fair  rule  of  interpretation ; 

•  See  Note  L. 


SERMON  VII.  173 

it  is  agreeable  to  the  express  design  of  the  sacred 
penman ;  it  is  suggested  by  the  character  of 
those  whom  he  reasons  with,  and  it  is  consistent 
with  the  torms  and  tenor  of  the  whole  epistle. 
Its  only  misfortune  is,  that  it  excludes  the  doc- 
trine of  universal  pardon,  and  gives  no  counte- 
nance to  the  notion  that  assurance  of  personal 
salvation  is  of  the  very  essence  of  saving  faith. 
But,  at  any  rate,  and  independently  of  our  con- 
struction of  its  import,  we  have  demonstrated 
that  the  Apostle  does  not  teach  here  that  every 
individual  sinner  of  mankind  is  absolutely  par- 
doned by  the  atonement  of  Christ ;  and  it  is  with 
that  point  only  that  our  present  discussion  is  con- 
cerned. 

5.  Another  Scripture  authority,  which  our  op- 
ponents appeal  to  in  behalf  of  their  opinion,  is 
derived  from  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  where 
it  is  said — 

"  He  that  despised  Moses'  law  died  without  mercy,  under 
two  or  three  witnesses ;  of  how  much  sorer  punishment, 
suppose  ye,  shall  he  be  thought  worthy,  who  hath  trodden 
under  foot  the  Sou  of  God,  and  hath  counted  the  blood  of 
the  covenant,  wherewith  he  was  sanctified,  an  unholy  thing, 
and  hath  done  despite  unto  the  Spirit  of  grace." — Heb.  x. 
28,  29. 

It  is  alleged  that  this  represents  those  who 
have  trodden  under  foot  the  Son  of  God,  and 
done  despite  to  the  Spirit  of  grace,  and  coimted 


l^4>  SERMON  VII. 

the  blood  of  the  covenant  an  unholy  thing,  as 
having  been  sanctijied  with  that  blood,  and  that 
it  therefore  affirms  the  actual  efficacy  of  the 
atonement  in  behalf  even  of  such  as  were  to  be- 
come apostates,  and  for  that  crime  to  be  visited 
with  a  terrible  condemnation. 

(i.)  Now  it  is  to  be  remarked,  in  the  first 
place,  that  satictifi cation  here  cannot  mean  that 
process  by  which  the  Divine  Spirit  delivers  the 
sinner  from  the  power  and  pollution  of  his  ini- 
quities, infuses  into  him  holy  principles  and  dis- 
positions, and  causes  him  to  "  delight  in  the  law 
of  the  Lord,  after  the  inward  man."  For  if  the 
persons  spoken  of  were  fully  pardoned,  and  if 
they  were  dso  sanctified  or  saved — these  words 
being  synonymous  in  the  judgment  of  our  oppo- 
nents— what  more  was  requisite  to  constitute  their 
safety  ?  What  should  have  hindered  him  by 
whom  they  were  both  justified  and  sanctified, 
from  also  glorifying  them,  according  to  the  te- 
nor of  his  word  ?  Or,  how  could  the  God  of 
love  and  faithfulness  leave  such  to  perish  for  ever 
under  the  guilt  of  apostacy  ?  The  thing  is  ut- 
terly incredible,  and  is  not,  we  believe,  insisted 
upon  by  the  advocates  of  universal  forgiveness 
themselves.     Well  then, 

(2.)  We  remark,  in  the  second  place,  that  if 
external  sanctification  be  meant,  if  designating 
and  setting  apart  to  sacred  service,  which  indeed 


SERMON  VII.  175 

is  the  true  import  of  the  word  in  this  place,  be 
what  the  Apostle  intended,  still  it  will  not  neces- 
sarily follow  that  the  individuals  so  separated, 
had  all  their  sins  forgiven  them.  For  their  se- 
paration to  the  service  of  Christ,  consisted  in  their 
being  subjected  to  the  rite  of  baptism,  which  had 
been  administered  to  them  when  they  made  a 
pubhc  profession  of  faith,  and  in  their  partaking 
of  the  Lord's  supper,  which  it  was  customary  for 
converts  to  do,  as  soon  after  their  baptism  as  cir- 
cumstances permitted.  In  the  case  of  baptism, 
the  water  that  was  sprinkled  upon  them,  or  in 
which  they  were  immersed — for  both  modes  of 
baptising  prevailed — signified  the  blood  of  Christ, 
which  cleanses  the  soul  from  moral  defilement, 
as  water  cleanseth  the  body  from  natural  defile- 
ment ;  and  as  the  sign  derived  its  meaning  from 
the  thing  signified,  nothing  could  possibly  be 
more  natural  for  the  Apostle  than  to  use  the 
thing  signified  in  place  of  the  sign  itself.  The 
water  had,  in  its  own  nature,  no  more  virtue  to 
consecrate  outwardly  to  a  sacred  office,  than  it 
had  to  consecrate  inwardly  to  the  real  love  and 
service  of  God,  but  had  all  its  efficacy  for  the  one 
as  well  as  for  the  other,  from  the  precious  blood 
which  it  was  by  divine  appointment  employed  to 
represent.  Whatever,  therefore,  did  violence  to, 
or  poured  contempt  upon  the  baptismal  consecra- 
tion, was  by  necessary  consequence,  and  in  the 


176  SERMON  VII. 

intention  of  all  who  irs.derstood  the  subject,  to 
oiFer  the  same  violence  and  the  same  contempt  to 
the  blood  of  Christ,  by  which  that  consecration 
was  invested,  either  with  meaning  or  with  efficacy. 
And  in  this  view  it  was  not  only  most  natural  for 
the  Apostle  to  speak  of  the  blood  of  Christ  in 
place  of  the  water  of  baptism,  but  he  was  called 
upon  to  do  so  by  the  object  he  was  aiming  at, 
which  was  that  of  pointing  out  the  aggravations 
of  the  guilt  of  apostacy,  and  which  could  not  have 
been  so  effectually  done  by  merely  stating  the 
renunciation  of  a  Christian  profession,  as  by 
stating  what  was  implied  in  that  profession — by 
merely  alluding  to  the  external  designation  of 
the  persons  concerned,  to  the  maintenance  of  the 
faith  and  character  of  disciples,  as  by  bringing 
prominently  forward  the  sacrifice,  a  behef  in  whose 
divinity  had  been  once  solemnly  avowed,  and  a 
profane  disregard  to  whose  divinity  was  now 
openly  manifested.  AU  which  will  appear  in 
a  still  stronger  light,  if  we  recoUect  that  the 
apostates  had  renewed  their  baptismal  profession, 
and  confirmed  it  by  partaking  of  the  Lord's  sup- 
per, in  which  the  wine  represented  the  blood  of 
Christ  expressly  as  the  blood  of  the  covenant, 
and  by  their  symbolical  drinking  of  which,  they 
were  again,  by  their  own  act,  and  in  the  bosom 
of  the  visible  church,  consecrated  to  a  life  of  obe- 
dience, as  God's  devoted  and  redeemed  people. 


SERMON  VII.  177 

(3.)  In  the  third  place,  it  is  called  the  blood 
«/  the  covenant  wherewith  they  are  sanctified. 
Now,  if  they  were  really  sanctified  with  the 
blood  of  Christ,  and  derived  substantial  bene- 
fits from  it,  these  benefits  are  to  be  ascertained 
surely  by  looking  to  the  terras  of  that  covenant 
which  the  blood  of  Christ  was  appointed  to  ratify, 
and  which  could  be  no  other  than  the  new  cove- 
nant which  God  made  with  the  house  of  Israel — 
spoken  of  in  the  prophecies  of  Jeremiah,  and  re- 
peated in  the  8th  chapter  of  this  Epistle  to  the 
Hebrews.  And  which  of  all  the  benefits  specified 
there  had  the  apostate  Jews  been  favoured  v  ith 
at  the  time  they  were  sanctified  ?  There  is  for- 
giveness of  sin — there  is  knowledge  of  the  Lord 
— there  is  moral  renovation — there  are  all  the 
privileges  included  in  the  state  and  character  of 
God's  people.  By  what  rule  of  interpretation 
shall  we  fix  upon  one  or  more  of  these  in  prefer- 
ence to  the  rest,  as  conveyed  to  those  who  are 
said  to  have  been  sanctified  .''  And  if  this  sancti- 
fication  gave  to  its  subjects  all  the  character  and 
all  the  blessings  that  are  secured  and  made  over 
by  the  blood-sealed  covenant — which  is  the 
only  consistent  idea — what  more  could  be  desi- 
derated to  constitute  their  complete  salvation, 
and  how  was  it  possible  to  regard  them  as  visited 
with  a  much  sorer  punishment  than  was  awarded 
to  those  who,  for  their  crimes,  were  doomed  by 
the  law  of  Moses  to  die  without  mercy  ? 


178  SERMON  VII. 

(4.)  But  perhaps  we  shall  be  told,  and  indeed 
it  is  insinuated  by  our  modern  universalists,  that 
the  sanctification  by  the  blood  of  Christ  was  alto- 
gether external  and  ceremonial ;  and  in  connex- 
ion  with  this  it  is  said,  that  expiation  by  the 
blood  of  Christ  was  also  of  the  same  ceremonial 
description,  so  that  the  whole  economy  of  Christ- 
ian sacrifice  is  a  mere  ceremonial  institution,  in- 
tended simply  and  solely  as  a  manifestation  of 
God''s  mercy  and  love  to  sinners.  In  this  way, 
one  ceremonial  system  is  typical  of  another  ce- 
remonial system — the  relation  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment dispensation  to  the  New  Testament  dispen- 
sation is  only  that  of  a  figure  to  a  figure — and 
both  are  shadowy  and  unsubstantial.  If  such  be 
the  notion  of  any  of  our  opponents,  it  would  be 
well  for  them  fairly  and  fully  to  avow  it,  that  we 
may  see  exactly  to  what  issues  their  peculiar 
principles  lead,  and  how  far  it  is  safe  to  give 
any  heed  at  all  to  their  speculations.  At  any 
rate  it  is  plain,  that  such  a  notion  overturns  not 
a  part  only  but  the  whole  of  our  faith  respecting 
the  end,  and  operation,  and  efficacy,  of  Chrisfs 
shedding  his  blood  or  laying  down  his  life  for  the 
redemption  of  the  world.  And  it  is  needless  to 
trouble  ourselves  with  disputes  about  the  doc-^ 
trine  of  universal  or  partial  forgiveness,  since  the 
blood  of  Christ  cleansing  from  all  sin  cannot 
mean  that  there  is  virtue  in  that  blood  either  to 


SERMON  VII.  179 

cancel  guilt,  or  to  remove  moral  pollution,  or  to 
secure  any  one  spiritual  privilege  whatever,  but 
only  that  there  is  so  much  benevolence  in  the  di- 
vine nature  as  to  bestow  all  these  privileges  on 
such  of  his  creatures  as  stand  in  need  of  them.* 

But  since  our  opponents  quote  the  passage  I 
am  commenting  on  to  prove  the  dogma  of  universal 
pardon,  I  may  with  equal  propriety  quote  another 
passage  from  the  same  epistle  to  show  that  they 
are  quite  wrong  both  in  their  interpretation  and 
in  their  doctrine. 

It  is  in  the  9th  chapter,  13th  and  14th  verses, 
"  For  if  the  blood  of  bulls  and  of  goats,  and  the 
ashes  of  an  heifer  sprinkling  the  unclean  sanctifi- 
eth  to  the  purging  of  the  flesh ;  how  much  more 
shall  the  blood  of  Christ,  who  through  the  eternal 
Spirit  offered  himself  without  spot  unto  God, 
purge,  (cleanse  or  purify)  your  consciences  from 
dead  works,  to  serve  the  living  God."  In  the 
13th  verse,  the  efficacy  of  the  legal  sacrifices  for 
taking  away  ceremonial  offences  is  asserted.  In 
the  14th  verse,  the  efficacy  of  the  blood  of  Christ 
for  removing  moral  transgression  and  sinfulness 
is  also  asserted.  The  former,  according  to  the 
whole  strain  of  the  epistle,  were  typical  and  pre- 
figurative  of  the  latter.  And  from  the  virtue  and 
efficiency  of  the  one,  the  Apostle  argues  to  the 

•  See  Note  M. 


180  SERMON  VII. 

virtue  and  efficiency  of  the  other — the  legal  sa- 
crifices, however,  doing  nothing  more  than  deli- 
vering from  outward  ceremonial  offences,  while 
the  bloody  sacrifice  of  Christ  avails  to  the  deli- 
verance of  the  soul  from  the  spiritual  and  perma- 
nent evils  to  which  it  is  subjected  by  sin,  and  it 
being  still  more  certain  in  accomplishing  its  pur- 
pose than  those  sacrifices  which  were  merely  ty- 
pical of  it  could  be  in  accomplishing  theirs. 

Now,  the  legal  sacrifices  sanctified  or  conse- 
crated those  on  whose  account  they  were  offered 
up  so  far  as  external  purification  went,  by  the 
blood  of  bulls  and  of  goats  being  oftered  in  atone- 
ment, and  the  ashes  of  an  heifer  sprinkling  the 
unclean,  that  ceremonial  guilt  and  ceremonial 
impurity  might  be  taken  away.  And  in  confor- 
mity to  that  view,  the  blood  of  Christ,  who 
through  the  eternal  Spirit  offered  himself  with- 
out spot  unto  God,  had  the  double  effect  of  can- 
celling the  guilt  and  rescuing  from  the  power  of 
sin.  Every  one  for  whom  that  blood  was  shed, 
to  whom  it  is  applied,  and  who  has  recourse  to  it 
by  faith,  is  at  once  pardoned  and  purified.  Its 
virtue,  one  and  indivisible  in  its  operations  and 
its  achievements,  leaves  no  part  of  his  salvation 
unaccomplished,  if  it  is  really  brought  into  con- 
tact with  him.  It  is  mighty  to  emancipate  his 
conscience  from  the  condemning  power  of  sin, 
and  from  the  inherent  pollution  of  sin,  so  that  not 


SERMON  VII.  181 

being  any  longer  under  the  burden  of  dead  works 
— of  works  which  keep  him  in  the  thraldom  both 
of  judicial  and  spiritual  death,  he  enjoys  at  once 
the  right  and  the  freedom  of  coming  into  the  pre- 
sence of  the  living  God,  and  serving  him  all  the 
days  of  his  life.  It  accomplishes  this  change  in 
his  condition  and  in  his  character,  more  assuredly 
and  effectually  than  the  blood  of  balls  and  of 
goats,  or  the  ashes  of  a  heifer  sprinkling  the  un- 
clean, under  the  JNIosaic  economy,  ever  sanctified 
to  the  purifying  of  the  flesh,  and  enabled  offend- 
ers against  that  economy,  by  expiating  their 
transgressions  and  making  them  ceremonially 
clean,  to  mingle  again  in  the  worship  and  service 
of  their  divine  lawgiver. 

And  if  this  be  that  sprinkling  of  the  blood  of 
Christ  wherewith  the  apostates  here  described  had 
been  sanctified,  where  is  there  any  room  left  for 
that  damning  guilt  which  the  apostle  cliarges 
home  upon  them,  or  for  that  awful  and  superla- 
tive punishment  with  which  he  threatens  them  in 
a  future  world  ?  Does  not  this  show  clearly  and 
conclusively  that  Christ's  death  has  never  been 
at  all  brought  home  to  their  case  in  its  redeem- 
ing power  and  prevalence  ?  And  does  it  not 
compel  us  to  draw  the  inference  that  the  sanctifi- 
cation  which  is  said  to  have  passed  upon  them 
was  nothing  deeper,  nothing  more  spiritual,  no- 
thing more  connected  with  their  state  in  the  sight 


182  SERMON  VII. 

of  God,  than  what  consisted  in  their  being  dedi- 
cated by  baptism,  voluntarily  and  formally  to  the 
service  of  him  whom  they  professed  to  believe  in, 
and  embrace,  and  follow  as  their  God  and  Re- 
deemer. 

(5.)  We  have  been  proceeding  on  the  suppo- 
sition that  the  person  referred  to,  as  having  been 
sanctified  with  the  blood  of  the  covenant,  was  the 
person  guilty  of  apostacy.  And,  on  this  suppo- 
sition, we  have  proved  to  you,  that  it  gives  no  aid 
whatever  to  our  opponents  in  their  views  of  uni- 
versal pardon.  But  we  are  inclined  to  believe 
that  the  person  referred  to  was  no  other  than  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  himself.  Without  all  doubt 
the  grammatical  construction  admits  of  this  mean- 
ing.  The  antecedent,  so  far  as  correct  language 
goes,  may  be  "  the  Son  of  God,"  as  well  as  "  he 
that  trampled  on  the  Son  of  God."  But  the  for- 
mer hypothesis  seems  to  be  the  most  probable. 

The  Apostle  is  describing  the  guilt  of  those 
who  apostatized,  and  he  states  the  circumstances 
which  rendered  it  peculiarly  heinous  and  deserving 
of  condemnation.  In  apostatising  they  "  trampled 
under  foot  the  Son  of  God."  They  had  professed 
to  receive  him  in  that  character,  and  in  that 
character  they  honoured  him  and  did  him  ho- 
mage. They  admitted  the  Divinity  of  his  nature 
and  of  his  mission.  They  listened  to  him  as  one 
who  came  from  heaven  with  a  message  to  the 


SERMON  VII.  183 

children  of  men.  They  embraced  for  themselves, 
and  they  taught  to  others  the  doctrme  which  he 
revealed.  They  acknowledged  him  as  the  great 
head  of  the  church  whom  all  were  bound  to  obey. 
They  enlisted  in  his  service.  They  observed  his 
ordinances.  They  rendered  an  outward  submis- 
sion at  least  to  his  commandments.  They  asso- 
ciated with  his  people.  And  they  proclaimed 
their  obligations  to  live  to  his  glory.  But  when 
they  apostatized,  their  conduct  implied  that  they 
now  refused  all  subjection  to  his  authority,  all 
belief  in  his  mission,  all  respect  for  his  character. 
They  denied  his  title  either  to  reverence  or  to 
love.  They  broke  off  all  connexion  with  him,  as 
degrading  to  their  understanding  and  hurtful  to 
their  interests.  They  held  him  out  as  a  fit  ob- 
ject of  ridicule  and  contempt.  They  blasphemed 
him  in  the  terms  of  reproach  that  were  dictated 
by  the  most  inveterate  enemies  of  his  name  and 
of  his  cause.  And,  treating  him  in  this  impious 
manner,  they  might  be  justly  said  to  "  trample 
on  the  Son  of  God." 

But  they  went  farther  than  this.  The  Son  of 
God  was  sanctified  and  set  apart  to  the  office  of 
Redeemer,  by  the  appointment,  and  under  the 
sanction  of  the  Father.  He  became  the  High- 
priest,  by  whom  that  sacrifice  was  to  be  offered 
up,  which  was  to  take  away  the  sin  of  the  world, 
and  reconcile  men  to  God.    And  it  was  necessary 


184  SERMON  VII. 

that  he  should  be  regularly  consecrated  to  such 
a  sacred  and  important  function.  The  priests 
of  old  were  consecrated  by  others,  their  fellow- 
men,  as  Aaron  and  his  sons,  before  they  offered 
up  any  sacrifices,  were  consecrated  by  Moses. 
But  the  Son  of  God  could  not  derive  such  a  de- 
signation from  the  greatest  of  men,  or  even  from 
the  highest  of  angels.  He  was  set  apart  by  the 
Father  as  giving  him  his  commission,  and  invest- 
ing him  with  power  and  authority  to  save  his 
people  from  their  sins.  But  he  was  the  priest 
himself,  and  it  was  by  the  blood  of  his  own  sa- 
crifice that  he  was  dedicated  to  the  work,  and 
sanctified  for  accomplishing  it,  not  merely  by 
bearing  the  sins  of  many,  but  by  going  into  the 
holiest  with  his  expiatory  offering  and  there  pre- 
senting it  at  the  mercy  seat  of  the  eternal  in  their 
behalf.  Now  the  blood  wherewith  he  was  thus 
sanctified,  the  apostates,  in  question,  counted  an 
unholy  thing.  Having  at  one  time  speculatively  or 
professedly  allowed  and  depended  upon  its  infinite 
merit,  they  now  denied  its  virtue  to  consecrate  or 
to  qualify  him  for  the  duties  of  his  priesthood  : 
they  reckoned  it  of  nothing  more  than  common 
value  ;  they  treated  it  as  an  unclean  thing — as 
equally  worthless  with  the  blood  of  a  criminal 
who  had  been  made  to  suffer  the  punishment  he 
had  justly  deserved.  Thus  they  deprived  Christ 
of  the  chief  and  paramount  glory  of  his  mediate- 


SERMON  VIL  185 

rial  undertaking.  They  rejected  him  as  unable 
to  rescue  men  from  perdition  by  the  virtue  of  his 
cross.  They  would  not  even  allow  him  to  pos- 
sess any  right  to  offer  himself  as  a  propitiation 
for  sin.  And  they  held  him  out  to  the  world  as 
pretending  to  take  away  the  sins  of  all  men,  when 
he  had  neither  official  nor  inherent  ability  to  save 
even  one  soul. 

And  to  this  aggravation  of  the  guilt  contract- 
ed by  these  apostates,  there  was  added  that  of 
doing  despite  to  the  Spirit  of  grace.  The  Holy 
Spirit  acted  an  important  and  essential  part  in 
relation  to  Christ  as  a  Saviour.  The  Spirit  de- 
scended upon  him  and  filled  him  without  measure. 
By  the  Spirit  it  was  that  those  mighty  and  mir- 
aculous works  were  wrought,  which  attested  the 
truth  of  his  mission  and  of  his  doctrine.  It  was 
through  the  Spirit  that  he  offered  himself  with- 
out spot  unto  God.  The  power  of  the  Spirit  co- 
operated in  his  resurrection  from  the  grave,  for 
the  justification  of  those  for  whose  offences  he 
had  died.  When  he  conveyed  the  necessary 
gifts  to  his  disciples  and  apostles,  it  was  by  the 
effectual  ministry  of  the  Spirit.  And  all  the 
graces,  all  the  comforts,  all  the  joys  of  those  who 
were  converted  to  the  faith  of  his  Gospel,  were 
the  first  fruits  of  the  Spirit,  who  was  sent  forth 
to  dwell  in  their  hearts  ;  to  communicate  to  them 
all  the  benefits  of  his  purchase,  and  to  prepare 


18^  SERMON  VII. 

them  for  the  heavenly  inheritance.  But  to  this 
Spirit  of  grace  tlie  apostates  did  despite.  They 
had  rendered  thanks  to  God  for  all  these  his  holy 
and  merciful  operations.  They  had  prayed  to 
be  made  the  subjects  of  his  agency,  and  to  re- 
ceive more  abundant  supplies  of  his  influence. 
They  had  ascribed  to  him  Divine  honours ;  they 
had  witnessed  the  signs  and  wonders  wliich  he 
enabled  apostles  to  perform ;  and  they  affected 
to  regard  him  as  necessary,  according  to  Christ''s 
promise,  to  lead  them  into  all  the  truth,  and  to 
give  efficacy,  and  diffusion,  and  triumph  to  the 
Gospel  in  all  future  ages.  But  now  they  made 
light  of  the  doctrine  concerning  him  which  they 
had  hitherto  maintained.  They  ascribed  his 
work,  whether  of  miracles  or  of  grace,  to  satanic 
agency,  or  to  delusive  imagination.  They  derided 
every  manifestation  of  his  presence  and  his  power 
as  deceptions  or  visionary.  And  they  taught 
others  to  expect  no  good  thing  through  such  a 
medium,  seeing  that  Christ  had  no  authority  to 
send  the  Spirit,  and  that  whatever  had  seemed 
to  come  from  the  Spirit,  was  the  result  either  of 
mere  fancy  or  of  mere  artifice. 

In  this  way  these  apostles  did  indeed  cast  off 
all  allegiance  to  Christ,  and  treat  him  with  tho- 
rough and  blasphemous  contempt.  They  treat- 
ed him  thus  in  his  great  original  character  as  the 
Son  of  God,  who  came  from  heaven  to  save  the 


SERMON  VII.  187 

world.  They  treated  him  thus,  though  he  had 
shed  his  blood  for  the  remission  of  sins,  and  was 
divinely  consecrated  to  be  High  Priest  over  the 
house  of  God.  And  they  treated  him  thus  in 
regard  to  the  Holy  Spirit  who  acted  such  an  im- 
portant part  in  establishing  the  truth  of  his  gos- 
pel, and  giving  efficacy  to  his  redeeming  work. 
Were  we  to  understand  the  Apostle  as  referring 
to  the  sanctifying  of  the  apostates  themselves,  it 
would  break  in  upon  the  obvious  train  of  his  re- 
flections, and  diminish,  what  it  is  evidently  his 
design  to  increase,  the  weight  of  his  indictment 
against  these  guilty  and  unhappy  persons.  But 
when  we  understand  the  sanctifying  to  refer  to 
Christ,  there  is  greater  consistency  in  the  Apos- 
tle's criminative  argument  against  those  whom 
he  is  speaking  of ;  the  aggravations  of  their  sin, 
which  he  is  called  upon  to  state  in  all  their  mag- 
nitude, come  out  more  clearly  and  forcibly  ;  and 
in  short,  it  squares  more  with  the  intention  of  the 
author,  and  the  analogy  of  the  passage,  to  take 
this  view  of  the  clause  in  question,  than  to  adopt 
that  view  of  it  which  we  formerly  assumed  to  be 
the  true  one.  But  whichever  of  these  views  is  cor- 
rect, we  have  seen  that  the  language  and  senti- 
ment of  the  Apostle  furnish  no  ground  at  ail  for 
holding  the  doctrine  of  universal  forgiveness — a 
subject  to  which  they  have  not  the  remotest  al- 
liance. 


188  SERMON  VII. 

6.  The  next  passage  I  shall  speak  to  is  in  the 
Gosoel  of  John  xv.  at  the  beginning ;  where 
Christ,  under  the  parable  of  the  vine,  gives  some 
illustration  of  the  connexion  subsisting  between 
him  and  his  disciples. 

"  I  am  the  vine,  and  my  Father  is  the  husbandman. 

"  Every  branch  in  me  that  beareth  not  fruit  he  taketh 
away ;  and  every  branch  that  beareth  fruit  he  purgeth  it, 
that  it  may  bring  forth  more  fruit. 

"  Now  ye  are  clean  through  the  word  which  I  have 
spoken  unto  you. 

"  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. 

"  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. 

"  If  a  man  abideth  not  in  me,  he  is  cast  forth  as  a  branch, 
and  is  withered ;  and  men  gather  them,  and  cast  them  in- 
to the  fire,  and  they  are  burned." 

Now,  from  this  it  is  inferred,  that  all  men  are 
in  Christ,  as  all  the  branches  are  in  the  vine ; 
that  though  in  Christ,  they  do  not  necessarily 
derive  from  him  spiritual  nourishment,  just  as 
there  may  be  some  branches  in  the  vine  which 
get  no  nourishment  from  that  union,  and  conse- 
quently bring  forth  no  fruit ;  that  being  in  Christ, 
they  are  aUve,  freed  from  the  punishment  of  death, 
and  only  unholy  on  account  of  their  not  having 
faith,  and  opening  their  hearts  for  the  reception 


SERMON  VII.  189 

of  those  influences  by  which  he  would  make  them 
abound  in  righteousness,  exactly  as  the  branches 
of  the  vine  are  all  possessed  of  vegetable  life,  but 
some  of  them  are  unfruitful,  because  there  is  a 
certain  defect  in  that  communication  with  the 
stem,  or  the  root,  which  is  requisite  for  the  pro- 
duction of  grapes.  So  say  the  maintain  ers  of  the 
doctrine  of  universal  pardon. 

Now  here,  as  on  other  occasions,  their  argu- 
ment goes  too  far  to  be  of  any  use  to  them. 
They  draw  their  argument  from  the  similitude, 
and  from  the  phraseology  employed  in  express- 
ing it.  But  the  similitude  and  the  phraseology 
employed  in  expressing  it,  being  taken  literally, 
go  much  beyond  their  purpose  ;  and  as  explained 
by  other  passages  of  Scripture,  lead  to  the  total 
overthrow  of  their  opinion.  Let  us  refer  to  one 
or  two  of  these. 

In  Romans  viii.  1.  it  is  said — "  There  is  there- 
fore now  no  condemnation  to  them  which  are  in 
Christ  Jesus,  who  walk  not  after  the  flesh  but 
after  the  Spirit."  This  language  evidently  sup- 
poses that  there  are  some  who  are  not  in  Christ 
Jesus.  It  is  only  those  who  are  in  him,  to  whom 
there  is  no  condemnation:  those  who  are  not 
in  him  are  already  condemned  and  left  in  that 
state. 

Moreover,  the  test  of  their  being  in  Christ, 
and  therefore  not  under  condemnation,  is  that 


190  SERMON  VII. 

they  "  walk  not  after  the  flesh,  but  after  the  Spi- 
rit ;"  and  what  is  this  but  bringing  forth  the 
fruits  of  righteousness  ?  So  that  their  being  in 
Christ  Jesus,  and  being  deHvered  from  condem- 
nation, and  being  truly  holy,  are  all  inseparably 
combined  in  the  same  individuals. 

Besides,  according  to  Paul,  those  who  are  in 
Christ  Jesus  are  delivered  from  condemnation  or 
punishment ;  but,  according  to  the  construction 
put  upon  our  Lord's  figurative  language  by  our 
opponents,  those  who  are  in  Christ  Jesus,  are  to 
be  condemned  and  punished,  for  the  unfruitful 
branches  of  the  vine  are  "  cast  forth  and  wither, 
and  men  gather  them,  and  throw  them  into  the 
fire,  where  they  are  burnt."  (v.  6.) 

Again,  we  read  in  2  Corinthians  v.  1'J, 
"  Therefore,  if  any  man  be  in  Christ  he  is  a  new 
creature,  old  things  are  passed  away,  behold  all 
things  are  become  new."  Now  surely  nobody 
will  affirm  that  all  men  are  "  new  creatures,"  y€t, 
say  our  opponents,  all  men  are  in  Christ  Jesus, 
and  here  the  apostle  identifies  being  in  Chriat 
with  being  new  creatures.  He  plainly  affirms 
that  every  man  who  is  in  Christ  is  a  new  crea- 
ture, has  undergone  the  moral  change  indicated 
by  that  strong  and  empliatic  phrase,  is  so  revo- 
lutionized and  transformed  in  his  principles,  dis- 
positions, and  habits,  that  all  "  old  things  are 
passed  away,  and  all  things  are  become  new,"  and 


SERMON  VII.  191 

exhibits  this  thorough  renewal  in  his  conduct,  for 
he  is  said  in  another  place  to  be  "  created  again 
in  Christ  Jesus  unto  good  works."  And  yet 
with  all  this,  he  may  be  cut  off,  cast  away,  and 
burnt,  like  the  unproductive  branches  of  the  vine ! 
Nay  he  may  be  fruitful  and  unfruitful  in  righte- 
ousness, condemned  and  saved,  happy  and  miser- 
able at  the  same  time  !  For  all  men,  say  the  ad- 
vocates of  universal  pardon,  are  in  Christ  as  all 
the  branches  are  in  the  vine ;  and  some  of  them 
may  be  like  the  branches  that  were  cast  away  and 
gathered  to  be  destroyed  by  fire,  because  they 
brought  forth  no  fruit,  while  the  Apostle  says  ex- 
pressly, that  whosoever  is  in  Christ  is  renovated 
in  his  nature  and  character  so  as  to  be  adorned 
with  "  the  beauties  of  holiness,"  and  to  be  quali- 
fied by  his  purity  and  attainments  for  the  king- 
dom of  the  just  above. 

I  may  also  quote  from  1  Corinthians  i.  30, 31, 
which  says,  "  Of  him  are  ye  m  Christ  Jesus, 
who  of  God  is  made  unto  us  wisdom,  and  righte- 
ousness and  sanctification,  and  redemption ;  that, 
according  as  it  is  written,  he  that  glorieth  let  him 
glory  in  the  Lord."  Here  it  is  impossible  to  mis- 
apprehend the  Apostle's  meaning  so  far  as  not  to 
perceive,  that  to  them  who  are  in  Christ  Jesus  he 
ascribes  the  various  privileges  which  he  enume- 
rates. The  persons  to  whom  he  writes,  and  he 
himself,  are  in  Christ  Jesus.     For  this  they  were 


192  SERMON  VII. 

indebted  to  the  free  grace  of  God,  and  not  to  any 
ability  or  merit  of  their  own.  And  while  to  this 
union  with  Christ,  effectuated  by  divine  grace, 
and  still  the  medium  of  divine  grace,  they  owed 
all  the  spiritual  blessings  of  their  lot,  which  were 
wisdom,  righteousness,  sanctifi cation,  and  re- 
demption, they  looked  to  it  as  the  certain  source 
of  these  blessings,  so  that  whoever  was  i7i  the  Sa- 
viour was  sure  of  possessing  them  all.  I  do  not 
at  present  enter  into  any  particular  explanation 
of  these  several  blessings,  but  it  must  be  most 
evident  to  every  one,  that  they  are  of  such  a  na- 
ture as  to  be  altogether  inconsistent  with  the  idea, 
that  those  to  whom  they  belong  are  in  the  bondage 
of  corruption  any  more  than  they  are  in  danger 
of  punishment.  Whatever  else  they  have  ob- 
tained in  virtue  of  their  being  in  Christ,  they  are 
at  least  made  holy,  and  cannot  be  numbered  with 
such  as  in  figurative  language  bear  no  fruit,  and 
are  therefore  cut  off,  and  withered,  and  burnt. 

To  be  in  Christ,  therefore,  is  equivalent,  from 
the  passages  now  quoted,  to  being  both  pardoned 
and  sanctified;  and  really  to  talk  of  a  man  who  has 
had  such  blessings  bestowed  upon  him,  as  resem- 
bling the  branch  of  a  vine,  which  is  cast  off  and 
burnt,  by  reason  of  its  unfruitfulness,  is  to  trifle 
at  once  with  our  common  understanding,  and 
with  the  most  sacred  truths  of  the  Bible.     We 

see  clearly  that  being  in  Christ  expresses  a  vital 
6 


SERMON  VII.  193 

union  with  him ;  it  is  the  object  of  ambition  to 
every  awakened  sinner,  who  is  acquainted  with 
the  gospel ;  it  is  the  peculiar  and  distinguishing- 
privilege  of  the  true  Christian  ;  it  is  the  source 
and  the  security  of  all  he  enjoys  or  hopes  for  ;  it  is 
maintained  on  his  part  by  faith,  which  uniformly 
produces  purity  as  well  as  peace,  and  it  is  main- 
tained  on  the  jiart  of  the  Saviour  by  the  indwell- 
ing of  his  Spirit,  wlio  "  is  in  all  goodness,  right- 
eousness, and  truth;"  and  it  is  as  inconsistent  with 
final  condemnation,  or  with  unholy  character,  as 
light  is  with  darkness,  or  heaven  with  hell.  Yes, 
my  friends,  if  you  are  really  in  Christ  you  have 
nothing  to  fear,  for  "  all  things  are  yours" — for- 
giveness, reconciliation,  holiness,  eternal  life.  But 
if  you  are  not  believing  in  Christ,  and  if  you  are 
not  devoted  to  him  in  heart  and  life,  and  if  you 
are  not  glorifying  him  by  your  active  obedience 
to  his  will,  as  well  as  by  your  unlimited  trust  in 
his  merits,  you  are  not  truly  in  Christ,  and  are 
as  much  unforgiven  as  if  he  had  never  come  into 
the  v^orld  for  the  salvation  of  sinners. 

If  I  am  now  asked  what  means  this  parable  of 
the  vine  and  its  branches  ?  I  answer  negatively 
that  it  cannot  possibly  mean  that  all  men  are  par- 
doned ;  and  I  answer  positively  that  it  is  intend- 
ed to  point  out  the  difference  between  the  nominal 
and  the  real  disciples  of  Jesus  Christ. 

Our  Saviour  teaches  this  difference,  according 

K 


194  SERMON  VIL 

to  his  usual  method,  by  a  similitude  which  fur- 
nishes him  with  sufficient  illustration,  and  is  well 
calculated  to  convey  and  to  impress  the  instruc- 
tion that  he  was  desirous  to  communicate.  But, 
in  using  that  similitude,  he  could  never  intend  it 
to  be  understood  and  applied  in  every  minute 
particular,  because  in  that  case  he  might  have 
been  found  teaching  error,  when  it  was  of  course 
his  sole  object  to  inculcate  truth,  and  because 
such  a  mode  of  treatment  would  render  figurative 
language,  in  almost  every  instance,  so  dangerous, 
that  it  could  not  be  innocently  or  wisely  employ- 
ed. For  example,  Christ  likens  himself  to  the 
sun  in  the  firmament,  when  he  says,  "  I  am  the 
light  of  the  world ,"  and  every  one  comprehends 
the  design,  and  perceives  the  beauty  and  the  apt- 
ness, of  the  metaphor.  But  would  it  be  any  thing 
but  utter  absurdity  to  found  upon  that  metaphor 
the  position  that  Christ  regularly  withdraws  him- 
self from  his  people,  and  leaves  them  in  aU  the 
gloom,  and  discomfort,  and  peril  of  a  spiritual 
midnight,  because  the  natural  sun,  to  which  he 
had  compared  himself,  in  order  to  assure  them 
that  he  is  the  fountain  of  all  the  knowledge  of] 
God  and  of  salvation,  which  men  can  ever  pos- 
sess, ceases  every  evening  to  shine  upon  us,  and 
abandons  us  to  the  shades  of  thick  darkness  ? 
Why,  from  the  very  parable  of  the  vine  itself, 
we  may  learn  the  folly  of  such  a  method  of  ex- 


SERMON  VIL  195 

trading  religious  doctrine,  or  moral  lessons  from 
every,  the  minutest,  capability  of  any  simile  that 
a  teacher  or  writer  may  make  use  of.  It  is  well 
known  that  the  branches  of  the  most  vigorous 
and  productive  vine  do  not  bear  fruit  in  all 
places  and  in  all  seasons.  But  how  would  it  do 
to  argue  from  this,  that  our  blessed  Saviour  does 
not  expect  his  people  to  be  always  and  every- 
where abounding  in  the  work  of  the  Lord  ?  Yet 
that  would  be  just  as  rational  and  sound  as  the 
particular  interpretation  of  the  parable,  against 
which  I  am  now  contending. 

Christ  is  inculcating  upon  those  whom  he  ad- 
dresses, this  most  important  truth,  that  he  is  the 
source  of  all  spiritual  influence  and  blessing,  and 
that  it  is  necessary  for  them  to  be  in  him,  and  to 
abide  in  him,  for  the  purpose  of  obtainingwhatever 
is  needful  for  their  salvation.  He  knew  well  that 
there  would  be  many  to  assume  his  name — to  pro- 
fess his  religion — towearthe  outward  badges  of  dis- 
cipleshiptohim — and  not  only  to  appear  to  others, 
but  to  be  in  their  own  estimation,  his  real  and  de- 
voted followers.  Against  this  fatal  delusion  he  is 
anxious  to  guard  them  ;  for  this  end  he  brings  for- 
ward the  parable  of  the  vine ;  and  he  puts  it  upon 
record  for  the  warning  and  tuition  of  all  successive 
generations.  By  this  he  assures  us  that  mere  ex- 
ternal attachment  to  him  is  of  no  avail ;  that  we 
may  seem  to   cUng   to  him  as   closely  as   tha 


196  SERMON  VII. 

bTanclies  of  a  vine  do  to  the  stem ;  that  we  may 
have  the  leaves,  and  the  blossoms,  and  all  the  or- 
dinary aspect  of  a  good  profession  ;  that  we  may 
be  so  like  his  people  as  to  be  mistaken  for  them  ; 
that  we  may  hold  an  outward  and  constant  fellow- 
ship with  him,  and  adhere  so  closely  as  not  mere- 
ly to  escape  detection,  but  to  be  accounted  and 
denominated  his,  admitted  to  the  privileges  of  his 
visible  chmrch,  and  ranked  among  those  who  are 
entitled  to  look  forward  to  eternal  life; — that  all 
this  may  be  the  case,  and  still  that  we  may  have 
no  lot  or  part  in  his  redemption,  and  that  in  the  end 
we  may  be  destroyed,  like  an  unfruitful  branch 
that  is  cast  forth  and  withereth,  and  is  burnt. 

But,  on  the  other  hand,  he  assures  us  that 
if  there  is  a  vital  union  between  him  and  us, 
our  spiritual  welfare  is  secure.  This  union  will 
be  demonstrated  in  our  experiencing  the  secret 
and  holy  influences  that  he  sends  forth  into  the 
hearts  of  his  people,— ^in  the  practical  godliness 
which  he  disposes  and  enables  us  to  cultivate 
•—in  the  care  which  he  employs  in  cherishing 
our  growth,  and  improving  our  graces — and  in 
the  joy  which  he  imparts  to  us  as  his  believing 
and  obedient  servants.  And  it  is  by  these  and 
similar  circumstances  that  we  are  to  have  th^ 
evidence  in  ourselves,  and  to  afford  evidence  to 
all  around  us,  that  we  are  Christ's  redeemed 
ones  :   that  we  are  of  those  for  whom  he  died. 


SERMON  VII.  197 

and  "vvho,  being  "  washed  and  justified  and 
sanctified  in  his  name  and  by  his  Spirit,"  shall 
glorify  his  Father  while  they  live,  and  be  at 
length  admitted  to  those  mansions  in  heaven,  of 
which  he  had  been  speaking  to  the  disciples  for 
their  comfort  and  encouragement,  and  into  which 
he  promised  to  introduce  them  at  his  secondcaming. 
The  error  of  our  opponents  with  regard  to  the 
parables  of  the  Prodigal  Son*  and  the  Marriage 
Feast,-f-  proceeds  from  the  same  principle  of  in- 
terpretation which  they  have  adopted  in  the  case 
of  the  Vine  and  its  branches.  They  lose  sight  of 
the  main  design  and  scope  of  the  parables,  and 
they  fix  their  attention  on  certain  facts  and  cir- 
cumstances which  are  merely  introduced  to  give 
connexion,  and  verisimilitude,  and  interest  to 
the  story,  and  which  neither  were,  nor  could  be, 
designed  to  convey  religious  instruction  or  to 
establish  Christian  doctrine.  And  I  repeat  it, 
tliat  if  you  follow  out  this  principle  to  all  its  ex- 
tent, you  will  prove  what  is  false,  and  bring  out 
what  is  ridiculous.  Make  the  experiment  in  the 
course  of  your  private  studies,  and  you  will  soon 
discover  and  be  convinced  of  the  correctness  of 
my  remark.  Much  could  I  say  to  you  on  both 
the  parables  I  have  alluded  to,  in  proof  and  in 
illustration  of  it.  Let  me  only  remind  you  that 
in  the  parable  of  the  Prodigal  Son,  our  Saviour's 

*  Luke XV.  II.  f  Mat.  xxiii.  2. 


198  SERMON  VII. 

object  evidently  is,  to  show  the  readiness  of  ovir 
compassionate  God  to  receive  back  into  his  favour 
all — even  the  most  ungrateful,  the  most  rebel- 
lious, the  most  profligate — who  will  return  to 
him  as  true  penitents,  and  that  those  who  have 
continued  in  his  service,  with  whatever  fidelity, 
and  however  long,  should  rejoice,  rather  than 
murmur  at  such  a  manifestation  of  his  condes- 
cension and  paternal  love.  And  on  the  parable 
of  the  Marriage  Feast,  our  Saviour's  object  is  to 
represent  the  guilt  and  danger  of  the  Jews  in  re- 
jecting the  salvation  that  was  offered  to  them  by 
the  preaching  of  his  Gospel,  and  the  Divine  pur- 
pose of  calling  the  Gentiles  to  a  participation  of 
what  the  Jews  had  so  madly  put  away  from  them, 
the  better  reception  that  it  would  experience 
from  these  despised  outcasts,  and,  at  the  same 
time,  the  necessity  of  a  certain  character,  shadow- 
ed forth  by  the  wedding  garment,  in  order  to  be 
warranted  to  appropriate  present  blessings,  or  to 
hope  for  an  entrance  into  the  eternal  recompense — 
all  which  would  establish  the  fact,  that  though 
"  many  are  called,  few  are  chosen."" 

These  views  make  the  whole  of  the  two  pa- 
rables, plain,  intelligible,  and  instructive.  But 
if  you  endeavour  to  elicit  from  every  incident, 
and  from  every  particular,  a  doctrinal  truth, 
you  will  involve  yourselves  in  the  strangest 
and  most  fatal  errors.     For  instance,  you  will 


SERMON  VII.  199 

learn  from  what  is  said  respecting  the  elder 
brother  in  the  parable  of  the  Prodigal  Son, 
that  there  are  some  of  the  children  of  men 
who  have  never  transgressed  at  any  time  the 
commandment  of  God  !  And  you  will  learn  from 
the  parable  of  the  Marriage  Feast,  that  the 
church,  which  is  the  spouse  of  Christ,  is  some- 
thing altogether  different  from  those  who  obey 
the  call  of  God  and  accept  of  the  gospel,  and 
are  admitted  with  wedding  garments  to  partake 
of  the  entertainment  that  is  prepared  for  them  ! 
But  there  is  one  thing  that  you  cannot  learn  from 
either  of  the  parables, — you  cannot  learn  that  the 
death  of  Christ  forgives  any  whom  it  does  not 
also  save.  The  prodigal  son  returned  in  the  ex- 
ercise of  that  repentance  which  is  invariably  con- 
nected with  forgiveness,  and  with  forgiveness  he 
obtained  all  the  other  blessings  which  paternal 
affection  could  bestow.  Though  once  dead,  he 
was  now  alive  again — though  once  lost,  he  was 
now  found ;  and  his  Father  rejoiced  over  him. 
And  the  Gentiles  who  were  afar  off  from  God,  in 
idolatry  and  sin,  and  came  at  his  invitation  to 
the  gospel  feast,  found  there,  beyond  aU  contro- 
versy, forgiveness  of  their  worst  abominations, 
and  whatsoever  other  benefits  they  needed  to 
make  them  even  as  the  redeemed  of  Israel,  and 
to  render  their  "  fruit  unto  holiness,  that  the  end 
might  be  everlasting  life.''' 
In  my  next  discourse  I  shall  consider  other 


200  SERMON  VII. 

passages  of  Scripture  adduced  by  the  abettors  of 
universal  pardon,  in  support  of  their  doctrine. 

Beheve  me,  my  friends,  I  would  not  dwell  so 
long  upon  the  subject,  did  it  not  appear  to  me 
of  vital  impoi'tance.  I  wish  to  guard  you  against 
a  heresy  of  the  very  worst  and  most  pernicious 
description,  and  to  enable  you,  with  a  good  con- 
science, and  in  a  decided  manner,  to  lift  up  your 
voice  and  your  testimony  against  it.  I  wish  to 
vindicate  "theglorious  gospel  of  the  blessed  God," 
from  an  abuse  which  is  founded  on  the  perver- 
sion of  all  Scripture,  and  the  dereliction  of  all 
reason.  I  wish  to  arrest,  as  far  as  I  can,  a  dog- 
ma which  may  be  very  harmless  on  the  few  es- 
tablished Christians,  by  whom,  as  yet,  it  is  main- 
ly supported,  but  which  must  open  all  the  flood- 
gates of  licentiousness,  when  it  shall  speak  to  the 
most  abandoned  and  profligate  of  our  race  in  this 
wise,  "  All  the  sins  you  have  already  committed 
are  freely  and  fully  forgiven ;  if  you  commit 
murder  and  every  other  iniquity  to-morrow,  these 
also  were  long  ago  forgiven  ;  if  you  persevere  in 
the  most  heinous  sins  to  the  last  hour  of  your 
lives,  these  too  are  all  forgiven  :  faith  and  re- 
pentance are  not  necessary  to  your  being  forgiven 
for  .the  most  aggravated  transgressions  ;  and,  if 
you  should  die  unbelieving  and  impenitent,  still 
your  only  punishment  will  be,  that  you  will  be 
destitute  of  that  sense  of  the  favour  of  God  which 
constitutes  the  happiness  of  heaven.*" 


SERMON  VII.  201 

May  the  Lord  himself  give  us  understanding 
in  these  things  ;  may  he  keep  us  from  such  aw- 
ful delusions  ;  and  may  he  send  forth  his  Spirit 
to  lead  and  guide  us  in  the  way  everlasting. 


SERMON  VIII. 


SAME  SUBJECT. 


We  have  been  engaged  in  the  consideration  of 
those  passages  of  Scripture  which  those  who  hold 
the  doctrine  of  universal  pardon  refer  to  as  sup- 
porting their  opinion.  Such  as  we  have  exa- 
mined have  been  found  quite  inapplicable  or  in- 
adequate '  to  the  purpose  for  which  they  are  ad- 
duced. We  showed  you,  that  they  are  either 
wholly  misunderstood,  or  perverted  from  their 
true  and  original  design,  or  that  they  prove  no- 
thing to  the  point,  by  proving  a  great  deal  more 
than  either  party  can  possibly  admit.  We  now 
proceed  to  what  remains  on  this  branch  of  the 
subject. 

7-  Great  stress  is  laid  upon  the  5th  chapter  of 
the  epistle  to  the  Romans,  and  particularly  upon 
the  18th  verse,  which  says, 

"  Therefore,  as  by  the  oflFence  of  one  judgment  came 
upon  all  men  to  condemnation;  even  so  by  the  righteous- 
ness of  one  the  free  gift  came  upon  all  men  unto  justifica- 
tion of  life.    For  as  by  one  man's  disobedience  many  were 


SERMON  VIII.  203 

made  sinners :  so  by  the  obedience  of  one  sliall  many  be 
made  righteous." 

The  argument  deduced  from  these  words  is, 
that  those  who  are  involved  in  the  offence  of 
Adam  are  declared  to  be  the  very  same  with  those 
who  participate  in  the  benefit  of  Christ's  death, — 
that  as  all  men,  without  exception,  are  subjected 
to  condemnation  in  consequence  of  Adam's  trans- 
gression, so  aU  men,  without  exception,  are  deli- 
vered from  that  condemnation,  or  pardoned,  in 
consequence  of  what  Christ  suffered  to  remove 
the  curse, — that  just  as  certainly  as  every  indivi- 
dual of  our  race  is  actually  affected  even  unto 
death  by  the  disobedience  of  the  one,  so  certainly 
must  every  individual  of  our  race  be  affected  even 
unto  life  by  the  obedience  of  the  other. 

(1.)  Now,  in  answer  to  this,  we  have  to  observe, 
in  the  first  place,  that  though  Adam  is  said,  in 
the  14th  verse,  to  have  been  a  figure  or  type  of 
Christ,  it  does  not  necessarily  follow  that  he  was 
a  type  of  him  in  every  particular  of  his  character 
or  his  condition.  If  this  were  to  be  held  true  of 
the  relation  subsisting  between  all  types  and  their 
antitypes,  it  is  needless  for  me  to  expatiate  on  the 
errors  and  absurdities  which  such  a  mode  of  view- 
ing the  subject  would  constantly  produce.  Adam 
was  a  type  of  Christ ;  but  it  is  not  said  that  he 
was  so  as  to  the  number  of  those  who  were  in- 
jured by  the  fall  of  the  former,  and  benefited  by 


204-  SERMON  VIIL 

the  interposition  of  the  latter.  Though  it  is  very 
evident,  both  from  scriptural  statement  and  his- 
torical fact,  that  Adam  represented  all  his  poste- 
rity, as  well  as  acted  for  himself,  the  Bible  no- 
where informs  us  that  Christ  represented  the 
whole  of  mankind,  any  more  than  that  he  had  a 
personal  responsibility.  And  while  it  cannot  be 
denied  that  the  first  Adam,  as  a  public  person, 
did  bring  into  a  state  of  sin  and  misery  each  one 
of  his  descendants,  whether  finally  saved  or 
finally  destroyed,  we  know  not  one  passage  of 
holy  writ  whicli  asserts,  nor  can  we  avoid  being 
startled  by  the  assertion,  that  the  second  Adam, 
■as  a  public  person,  redeemed  not  only  those  who 
were  ultimately  carried  to  heaven,  but  those  also 
who  had  gone  to  the  place  of  punishment  before 
he  died,  and  who  continued  in  the  place  of  pu- 
nishment after  he  had  died  and  "  finished  the 
>work  which  his  father  had  given  him  to  do." 

(2.)  In  the  second  place,  if  the  reasoning  which 
vour  opponents  found  upon  the  passage  quoted  be 
good  for  any  thing,  it  is,  like  very  much  of  their 
reasoning  from  other  passages,  good  for  a  great 
.deal  too  much — much  more  than  they  themselves 

would  admit.  Supposing  the  parallel  between 
.Adam  and  Christ  to  hold  true,  then  we  must  in- 
...sist,  that  whatever  was  lost  to  all  men  by  Adam, 

is  regained  to  all  men  by  Christ.  There  is  no 
express  qualification  mentioned  by  which  we  are 


SERMON  VIIL  20S 

entitled  to  say,  that  while  all  whom  Adam  repre- 
sented were  alike  overwhelmed  by  the  threatened 
penalties  and  consequences  of  his  transgression, 
all  whom  Christ  represented,  being  the  very  all 
whom  A'dam  represented,  were  favoured  only  with 
a  part  of  the  salvation  he  wrought  out  to  repair  the 
ruins  of  the  fall,  and  that  only  a  certain  proportion 
of  them  were  restored  by  him  to  the  whole  of  the 
blessings  which  his  type  had  forfeited.  And  as 
there  is  no  such  express  qualification,  the  conclu- 
sion is  inevitable,  that  if  the  effect  of  Christ''? 
death  is  co-extensive  as^  its  objects  with  the  ef- 
fect of  Adam''s  fall,  every  human  being  must  ob- 
tain from  Christ  deliverance  from  all  the  evils 
which  Adam  entailed  upon  him,  and  restoration 
to  all  the  blessings  of  which  Adam  denuded  him. 
And  will  any  one  venture  to  set  his  face  to  such 
a  conclusion  as  this, — a  conclusion  so  inconsistent 
with  the  doctrine  of  God's  word,  and  so  contra- 
dictory to  the  records,  the  aspect,  and  the  for- 
tunes of  our  degenerate  world  ?  Even  in  this 
general  view,  the  alleged  similitude  between  the 
type  and  the  antitype  cannot  be  sustained  as 
either  probable  or  true.  * 

(3.)  But  its  want  of  justness  and  of  truth  will 
be  still  more  apparent,  when  we  look  to  the  de- 
scriptions here  given  by  the  Apostle,  of  the  bene- 

*  See  Note  N. 


206  SERMON  VIII. 

fits  derived  by  the  all  spoken  of,  from  the  virtue 
of  Christ's  merit.  Remember  that  this  all  is,  we 
are  told,  the  very  identical  all  that  suffered  from 
Adam's  apostacy,  and  means,  therefore,  every 
person  that  has  sprung  from  our  first  parents. 
And  of  every  such  person,  therefore,  the  inspired 
•writer  must  be  understood  as  affirming  that  he 
has  received  "  abundance  of  grace,"  and  the 
'*  free  gift  of  righteousness,"  and  "justification," 
and  is  "  made  righteous"  by  the  Redeemer's 
"  obedience,"  and  is  the  subject  of  "grace  reign- 
ing through  righteousness  unto  eternal  life." 
And  can  these  things  be  really  predicated  of  every 
one  of  the  children  of  men  ?  Are  all  who  suffer 
from  Adam's  first  transgression  really  and  actually 
invested  with  the  privileges  now  enumerated? 
When  we  look  around  us,  even  on  what  is  called 
the  Christian  world,  can  we  fix  our  eyes  on  no 
one  who  has  not  abundance  of  grace,  who  is  not 
made  righteous,  who  is  not  justified  here,  and  will 
not  (continuing  to  be  what  he  is)  enjoy  eternal 
life  hereafter  ?  Nay,  must  we  believe,  when  we 
think  of  the  world  of  retribution,  that  though 
those  who,  as  the  fallen  offspring  of  a  fallen  pro- 
genitor, are  there  irrecoverably  condemned,  are 
yet  justified  by  the  obedience  of  an  aU-merciful 
and  all-powerful  Mediator,  and  that,  while  en- 
during the  terrors  of  the  second  death,  as  their 
everlasting  portion,  they  have  received  the  free 


SERMON  VIII.  207 

"gift  of  God,  which  is  eternal  life  by  Jesus  Christ?" 
Yet  to  this  extent — to  the  admission  of  these 
horrible  incongruities  must  our  credulity  go,  and 
to  the  assertion  of  them  must  the  courage  of  our 
opponents  be  equal,  if  their  interpretation  of  the 
term  all  in  this  chapter  is  to  be  received  as  ex- 
pressing correctly  the  meaning  and  intention  of 
the  Spirit.  Nothing  more,  surely,  is  requisite  to 
establish  the  illegitimacy  of  that  interpretation ; 
and  yet  we  may  proceed  a  step  farther — 

(4.)  For,  in  the  fourth  place,  the  blessings 
here  specified  as  secured  for  the  all,  and  conferred 
upon  the  «//,  upon  whom  the  miseries  of  Adam's 
apostacy  have  fallen,  are  invariably  connected 
with/rti//i.  They  have  received  "  abundance  of 
grace  :"  and  can  we  really  say  that  "  abviudance 
of  grace"  is  a  privilege  of  unbelievers,  when  it  is 
"  by  grace  that  we  are  saved,"  and  "  through 
grace"  that  we  have  "  good  hope  ?"  They  have 
been  favoured  with  "  the  gift  of  righteousness" — 
but  this  "  righteousness  is  hy  faith  of  Jesus  Christ 
unto  all  and  upon  all  them  that  believe.''''  They 
have  obtained  "justification" — but  we  are  "justi- 
fied freely  by  the  grace  of  God,  through  the  re- 
demption that  is  in  Christ  Jesus,  whom  God  hath 
set  forth  to  be  a  propitiation  through  faith  in  his 
blood.""  They  have  "  eternal  life  by  Jesus 
Christ  our  Lord  ;"  but  "  God  gave  his  only  begot- 
ten Son,  that  whoso  believeth  on  him  should  not 


208  SERMON  VI 1 1. 

perish  but  have  eternal  life."  And  have  all  men 
faith  ?  Are  there  not  multitudes  who,  with  a 
profession  of  faith  in  Christ,  are  entirely  desti- 
tute of  its  reality  ?  And  are  there  not  multitudes 
who  have  neither  the  reality  nor  the  profession, 
but  reject  Christ  as  their  Saviour  openly  and  al- 
together ?  And  yet  even  these  must  be  included 
among  the  all  men  who  possess  the  blessings 
which,  by  the  plan  and  the  language  of  the  gos- 
pel, are  inseparably  connected  with  faith  ! 

It  is  of  no  consequence  whether  we  adopt  the 
common  acceptation  of  faith,  or  whether  we  adopt 
that  acceptation  of  it  which  is  given  forth  by  the 
maiilainers  of  the  high  assurance  doctrine.  Nay, 
the  latter  acceptation  will  make  the  case  more  un- 
favourable if  possible  to  our  opponents.  For  there 
are  far  fewer  believers,  according  to  their  defini- 
tion of  faith,  than  there  are  according  to  ours  ; 
and,  consequently,  it  is  still  more  absurd  to  sup- 
pose that  the  phrase  all  men  here  comprehends 
every  one  individual  of  the  race  of  Adam,  al- 
though the  spiritual  privileges  ascribed  to  them 
are  the  property  of  none  but  believers,  of  whom 
notwithstanding  there  is  but  a  very  inconsiderable 
number  in  the  world. 

But,  however  that  may  be,  as  the  all  men  re- 
ferred to  by  the  apostle  as  receiving  benefits 
through  the  death  of  Christ,  must  clearly  and 
undeniably    have  faith  in    him,    this  faith  and 


SERMON  VIIL  209 

those  benefits  being  indissolubly  allied  together 
in  the  constitution  of  divine  grace,  and  as  an  im- 
mense number  of  mankind  are  utterly  devoid  of 
faith,  the  inference  is  irresistible,  that  the  all 
men  so  benefited  by  Christ  are  not  identical  or 
co-extensive  with  the  all  men  injured  by  Adam, 
"who  are  confessed  on  both  sides  to  comprehend 
every  one  of  human  kind,  whatever  be  his  age, 
his  condition,  his  country,  or  his  character. 

It  is  not  incumbent  upon  me  to  comment  at 
greater  length  on  the  passage  we  have  been  con- 
sidering. I  have  shown  you  from  its  own  state- 
ments that  it  gives  no  countenance  to  the  doc- 
trine of  universal  pardon,  but  rather  operates  di- 
rectly against  it.  And  that  was  the  the  sole  pur- 
pose for  which  it  was  made  the  subject  of  discus- 
sion. Yet  it  may  be  satisfactory  to  glance  at 
what  we  conceive  to  be  its  true  import. 

Although  Adam  is  called  a  type  of  "  him  that 
was  to  come,^'  we  are  not  to  regard  him  as  an  in- 
Mituted  type  of  Christ,  in  the  same  sense  and 
-manner  as  the  sacrifices  under  the  Old  Testament 
dispensation  were  types  of  the  one  great  sacrifice 
under  the  New.  There  is  merely  a  resemblance 
between  the  two  recognised,  and  this  resemblance 
is  made  use  of  to  illustrate  on  the  one  hand  the 
evils  of  the  fall,  and  on  the  other  hand  the  bless- 
ings of  the  restoration.  The  apostle  speaks  as  a 
believer,  and  he  addresses  himself  to  believers,  and 


210  SERMON  VIII. 

it  is  for  their  mutual  instruction  and  consolation 
that  he  dwells  upon  that  recovery  from  moral  and 
eternal  ruin,  which  originated  in  God's  marvellous 
love,  and  was  accomphshed  by  Christ's  meritori- 
ous death.  And  in  the  course  of  his  argument 
he  draws  a  contrast  between  the  destructive  work 
of  Adam  and  the  saving  work  of  Christ,  or  he 
compares  Adam,  as  to  the  effect  produced  by  his 
apostacy  upon  those  who  suffered  from  it,  with 
Christ,  as  to  the  effect  produced  by  his  atonement 
upon  those  who  were  restored  by  it.  His  pur- 
pose evidently  is,  not  to  intimate  the  extent  to 
which,  in  respect  of  its  objects,  the  beneficial  re- 
sults of  that  atonement  were  to  be  carried,  but 
to  affirm  its  certainty  and  its  efficacy  in  making 
its  objects  partakers  of  the  great  salvation.  What 
comfort  could  it  have  been  to  himself  or  to  the 
believers  to  whom  he  writes,  and  who  as  believers 
were  separated  both  in  character  and  in  privilege 
from  the  rest  of  the  world,  to  state  that  the  pri- 
vileges conferred  upon  them  were  privileges  that 
all  mankind  possessed  as  well  as  they?  How 
could  he  and  they,  in  the  capacity  of  believers, 
be  said  by  him  to  ^^  joy  in  God  through  their 
Lordf''  in  consideration  of  that  which  was  com- 
mon to  believers  and  to  unbelievers  .''  And  if  he 
really  intended  to  be  understood  in  the  wwliraited 
sense,  why  should  he  have  used  language  which, 
in  itself,  and  in  connexion  with  the  rest  of  the 


SERMON  VIII.  211 

epistle,  obliged  the  church  at  Rome  to  under- 
stand him  in  a  limited  sense — as  meaning,  not 
literally  all  the  children  of  men,  but  only  all  who 
were  justified,  and  were  heirs  of  eternal  life  ?  But 
all  difficulty  is  removed  by  considering  Adam  and 
Christ  in  relation  to  those  whom  they  severally  re- 
presented. Adam  was  the  federal  head  of  his 
natural  posterity.  Christ  was  the  federal  head  of 
his  spiritual  seed.  All  men  forming  the  com- 
pany for  whom  Adam  became  sponsor,  as  it  were, 
in  what  is  called  the  covenant  of  works,  became 
subject  to  sin  and  death  in  consequence  of  his 
violation  of  its  terms.  And  all  men  constituting 
the  company  for  whom  Christ  was  made  surety^ 
are  delivered  by  him  from  the  sin  and  death  un- 
der whose  dominion  they  must  otherwise  have 
eternally  remained.  Not  more  inevitable  were 
the  evils  arising  from  Adam's  apostacy  to  every 
one  of  the  all  or  the  many  that  descended  from 
him  by  ordinary  generation,  than  the  blessings 
wrought  out  by  Christ's  obedience,  were  the  as- 
sured and  inalienable  property  of  every  one  of 
the  all  or  the  many  that  had  been  given  to  him 
to  be  redeemed  to  God. 

And  then,  there  was  this  important  difference 
between  the  two  cases — which  shows  how  the 
apostle  was  paying  peculiar  attention  to  the  great- 
ness and  glory  of  the  deliverance  effected  in  be- 
half of  Christ's  people — that  this  deliverance  was 


212  SERMON  VIII. 

more  abundant  unto  many,  than  the  destruction 
from  which  it  rescued  was  abundant  unto  many, 
(see  V.  15.)  Its  superior  abundance  consisted  in 
two  things.  In  the  Jirst  place,  as  is  stated  in 
the  16th  verse,  the  sentence  of  condemnation 
was  passed  in  consequence  of  one  offence,  name- 
ly, the  first  act  of  Adam's  disobedience — his 
other  acts  of  disobedience  having  no  more  influ- 
ence on  our  fate  than  those  of  any  intervening 
progenitor — whereas  the  free  gift  justifies  those 
who  receive  it  from  many  offences — not  merely 
■from  the  one  offence,  which  brought  a  curse  up- 
on the  world,  but  from  all  the  multiplied  person- 
al offences  with  which  every  man  stands  charge- 
able on  his  own  account  in  the  sight  of  God. 
And,  in  the  seco7id  place,  as  you  have  it  in  the 
lyth  verse,  as  death,  or  the  privation  of  that  life 
which  God  gave  or  promised  to  man,  resulted 
from  the  failure  of  Adam  to  fulfil  the  condition 
on  which  it  was  suspended,  so  they — not  all  men, 
or  all  who  have  become  liable  to  that  death — 
but  "  they  who  have  received  abundance  of  grace 
and  of  that  gift  of  righteousness"  which  is  "  un- 
to all  and  upon  all  them  that  believe,'"  shall  not 
only  be  emancipated  from  the  death  incurred, 
but  shall  be  so  restored  and  so  revivified  as  to 
reign  in  the  possession  and  enjoyment  of  a  life, 
much  nobler,  much  more  perfect,  much  more 
glorious  than  that  which  was   lost  bv  the  sin  of 


SERMON  VIII.  213 

paradise.  Nay,  the  very  introduction  or  entrance 
of  the  law  of  Moses,  as  you  find  in  verse  20th, 
had  for  its  ultimate  purpose  the  manifestation  of 
the  riches  of  divine  grace  to  all  for  whom  it  had 
prepared  salvation.  For  as  it  rendered  sinful 
what  were  formerly  ntatters  of  indifference — as  it 
aggravated  what  had  been  always  sinful,  by  af- 
fording a  clearer  rule  of  duty,  and  rendering  more 
inexcusable  every  instance  of  transgression — as 
it  assumed  a  more  scrutinizing  inspection  of  the 
heart,  and  a  more  extensive  sway  over  the  cha- 
racter of  man — and  as  it  accordingly  caused  of- 
fences to  abound  more  than  ever,  so  a  more 
abundant  exercise  of  grace  was  called  for  to  can- 
cel all  the  heinous  and  manifold  guilt  that  was 
thus  contracted.  And  that  grace  was  exhibited  and 
put  forth  so  richly,  that  where  sin  abounded, 
grace  super-abounded,  as  the  original  word  ex- 
presses it ;  and  as  the  sin  of  the  first  Adam  had 
reigned  in  such  manner,  and  with  such  power  as 
to  subject  all  his  descendants  to  the  penalty  of 
death,  so  the  grace  of  God,  operating  through  the 
righteousness  of  Jesus  Christ,  the  last  Adam,  or 
through  his  obedience  unto  death,  reigns  in  such 
manner  and  with  such  power  as  at  once  to  deliver 
his  spiritual  children  from  the  accumulated  penalties 
of  the  first  apostacy  and  of  their  own  innumerable 
iniquitieSj  and  in  spite  of  all  these  to  raise  them  to 
a  state  of  existence,  which  is  far  more  exalted  and 


214  SERMON  VIII. 

blessed  than  the  one  that  was  forfeited  by  the  of- 
fence of  Adam,  and  in  which  they  shall  be  able, 
from  experience,  to  sing  a  louder  song  of  praise, 
and  joy,  and  triumph,  than  ever  could  have  been 
sung  in  the  garden  of  primeval  innocence,  or 
even  by  the  angels  that  surround  the  eternal 
throne — "  Unto  him  that  loved  us,  and  washed 
us  from  our  sins  in  his  own  blood,  and  hath  made 
us  kings  and  priests  unto  God,  even  his  Fa- 
ther ;  to  him  be  glory  and  dominion  for  ever  and 
ever."  * 

8.  Allied  in  some  respects  to  the  passage  we 
have  been  considering,  is  that  other  in  1  Cor. 
XV.  22. 

"  For  as  in  Adam  aU.  die,  even  so  in  Christ  shall  all  be 
made  alive." 

Our  opponents  allege,  that  as  death  was  the 
penalty  of  sin,  which  was  introduced  by  Adam, 
and  "  death  passes  upon  all  men,  for  that  all  have 
sinned,"  so  the  resurrection  of  all,  which  happens 
through  Christ,  can  only  be  owing  to  sin  having 
been,  through  Christ,  pardoned  in  the  case  of  all. 

But  who  that  reads  the  chapter  in  which  this 
verse  lies,  can  possibly  suppose  that  the  apostle  is 
speaking  of  the  resurrection  of  all  the  dead  ?  Is 
it  not  demonstrably  evident,  that  he  refers  to  the 
resurrection  of  believers,  and  of  believers  alone  ? 

*  See  Note  O. 


SERMON  VIII.  215 

In  the  beginning  of  the  chapter,  he  asserts 
Christ's  resurrection,  and  states  the  evidence  by 
which  the  fact  was  estabUshed.  He  then  adverts 
(v.  12.)  to  the  opinion  started  by  some,  that  there 
was  no  resurrection  of  the  dead, — that  is  of  those 
who  died  or  fell  asleep  in  Christ,  and  who  were 
accounted  fooUsh  if  they  adhered  to  Christ  and 
his  cause  at  the  expense  of  all  worldly  comforts, 
and  were  yet  to  receive  no  recompense  hereafter. 
Against  this  false  and  injurious  opinion  he  strenu- 
ously contends.  He  argues,  that  if  this  opinion 
weretrue,then  that  which  he  had  testified  and  prov- 
ed, and  which  they  themselves  professed  to  believe, 
namely,  the  resurrection  of  Christ,  was  false  ;  and 
in  this  case,  both  the  believers  who  had  died  in 
Christ,  and  the  believers  who  still  lived  in  him, 
were  lost  and  undone,  (v.  16.)  "  For  if  the 
dead  rise  not,  then  is  not  Christ  raised" — these 
persons  being  so  united  to  him  as  members  of  his 
mystical  body,  that  the  fate  of  the  one  necessarily 
inferred  the  same  fate  to  theother — "And  if  Christ 
be  not  raised,  your  faith  is  vain ;  ye  are  yet  in 
your  sins" — it  being  the  fact,  as  the  apostle  states 
it  in  his  epistle  to  the  Romans,  that  he  "  died  for 
your  offences,  and  rose  again  for  your  justifica- 
tion." "  Then  they  also  which  are  fallen  asleep 
in  Christ"" — in  the  faith  of  Christ,  and  that  faith 
united  to  him, — "  are  perished,"  as  ye  also  must 


216  SERMON  VIIL 

do  when  ye  die,  however  assured  your  faith,  and 
however  confident  your  hope.  And  "  if  in  this 
Hfe  only  ive — not  all  men,  but  we  believers  in 
Christ,  and  suffering  the  severest  persecutions  on 
account  of  our  attachment  to  him, — "  if  in  this 
life  only  we  have  hope  in  Christ,  then  we  are  of 
all  men  most  miserable," — more  miserable  than 
the  men  of  the  world,  who  by  reason  of  their  un- 
belief, or  their  indifference,  provoke  against  them- 
selves no  hostility,  and  escape  all  those  cruelties 
and  wrongs  which  we  are  exposed  to,  for  our  ad- 
herence to  a  leader,  who,  after  involving  us  in  mi- 
sery in  a  present  world,  neither  will  nor  can  giv& 
us  any  compensatory  happiness  in  the  world  to 
come.  ••'  But  now  (v.  20.)  is  Christ  risen  from 
the  dead"" — this  is  an  ascertained  fact — "  and 
become  the  first  fruits  of  them  that  slept"" — a 
thing  that  cannot  be  affirmed  surely  of  unbeliev- 
ers and  reprobates.  "  In  Christ  all  shall  be  made 
alive,  but  (v.  23.)  every  man — or  each  in  his  own 
order  :  Christ  the  first  fruits.""  He  himself  has  al- 
ready risen  as  the  first  fruits  of  them  concerning 
whom  he  said,  "  he  that  believeth  on  me,  though 
he  were  dead,  yet  shall  he  live," — and  these  per- 
sons— "  they  that  are  Christ's"" — that  belong  to 
him  by  right  of  purchase — "  afterward  at  his 
coming, "  when  he  shall  appear  to  call  his  redeem- 
ed people  "  to  the  resurrection  of  life,""  and  to  con- 
duct them  into  glory. 


SERMON  VIII.  217 

Then  go  on  to  the  42d  verse,  and  you  will 
perceive  from  the  nature  of  the  resurrection  de- 
scribed, that  it  can  apply  to  none  but  believers. 
The  bodies  of  those  whose  resurrection  is  men- 
tioned, are  to  be  raised  in  incorruption,  in  honour, 
in  power,  in  spirituality.  And  though,  as  we 
learn  from  the  40th  and  41st  verses,  they  shall 
differ  in  their  degrees  of  glory,  yet  every  one  of 
them  is  to  be  invested  and  adorned  with  some 
glory, — which  assuredly  they  who  are  to  "  awake 
to  everlasting  shame  and  contempt""  can  never 
hope  to  possess. 

Then  again  proceed  to  the  50th  and  four  follow- 
ing verses,  and  you  will  perceive  that  the  all 
who  are  to  be  made  alive  at  Christ's  coming,  are 
to  "  put  on  incorruption"  and  "  immortality,"  that 
they  may  "  inherit  the  kingdom  of  God,"  which 
flesh  and  blood,  or  the  earthy  frames  which  their 
spirits  here  inhabit  and  animate,  are  quite  in- 
capable of  doing  ;  and  who  can  inherit  the  king- 
dom of  God,  but  those  who  believe  in  his  Son 
Jesus  Christ  ? 

And  lastly,  look  to  the  exulting  apostrophe  of 
the  apostle  at  the  55th  verse,  and  the  exhortation 
by  which  it  is  followed  up,  and  say  if  it  could  be 
employed  truly  and  consistently  by  any  but  those 
who  believed  in  him  who  raised  up  Christ  from 
the  dead,  and  in  him,  who,  though  he  "  was  dead, 
is  alive  again,  and  liveth  for  evermore,"  and  antici- 

L 


218  SERMON  VIII. 

pated  the  resurrection  that  Paul  had  been  descant- 
ing upon  as  the  introduction  to  celestial  felicity, 
"  O  death  where  is  thy  sting  ?  O  grave,  where  is 
thy  victory  ?  The  sting  of  death  is  sin  ;  and  the 
strength  of  sin  is  the  law.  But  thanks  be  to 
God,  which  giveth  us  the  victory  through  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ.  Therefore,  my  beloved 
brethren,  be  ye  steadfast,  immovable,  always 
abounding  in  the  work  of  the  Lord,  forasmuch 
as  ye  know  that  your  labour  is  not  in  vain  in  the 
Lord." 

From  this  detailed  exposition  it  is  abundantly 
manifest  that  the  all  who  die  in  Adam,  are  not 
the  all  who  are  made  alive  in  Christ — but  that 
while  the  former  comprehends  the  whole  human 
race,  the  latter  includes  none  but  those  who  are 
united  to  Christ  by  faith,  and  who  are  partakers 
of  his  conquest  over  death,  so  far  as  that  they 
are  to  be  by  him  admitted  into  the  blessedness 
of  immortality. 

I  may  be  asked,  indeed,  if  the  wicked  and  un- 
believing are  not  to  be  raised  as  well  as  the  others .? 
And  I  answer.  Yes,  iindoubtedly  they  are.  But 
surely  it  does  not  follow  from  this,  that  their  re- 
surrection must  be  alluded  to  in  the  fifteenth 
chapter  of  the  first  epistle  to  the  Corinthians. 
The  Apostle  was  a  perfectly  competent  judge  of 
what  particular  subject  he  should  discuss,  and 
of  the  manner  in  which   he  ought  to  treat  it. 


SERMON  VIII.  219 

And  it  is  too  much  that  he  should  be  held  as  for- 
getting or  wandering  away  from  the  topic  he  had 
selected  and  fixed  upon,  merely  to  extort  from 
his  inspired  pen,  sanction  and  authority  to  a 
doctrine  which  the  whole  strain  of  his  writings 
repudiates  and  condemns. 

Again,  if  I  am  asked  whether  all  who  are  to 
be  raised,  the  righteous  and  the  wicked,  shall  not 
be  alike  raised  in  Christ :  I  answer,  undoubtedly 
they  shall  not.  They  shall  be  raised  hy  Christ, 
but  not  in  him.  They  do  not  live  in  Christ ; 
they  do  not  die  in  Christ ;  they  do  not  sleep  in 
Christ ;  and  they  shall  not,  they  cannot,  be  made 
alive  in  Christ.  To  be  in  Christ,  whether  in  this 
world  of  living  men,  or  when  mouldering  amidst 
the  corruptions  of  the  grave,  or  when  the  last 
trumpet  shall  sound,  is  a  mighty  privilege,  or 
rather  the  source  of  all  privilege,  and  we  may  as 
well  say  that  the  wicked  are  in  heaven,  as  that 
they  are  in  Christ.  In  pressing  the  verse  we  are 
commenting  on  into  their  own  service,  our  op- 
ponents seem  to  imagine  that  mere  resurrection 
from  the  dead  is  of  course  an  advantage.  But 
that  altogether  depends  on  the  character  of  those 
who  are  raised.  Our  Saviour  has  most  emphati- 
cally said,*  "  The  hour  is  coming,  in  the  which 
all  that  are  in  the  graves  shall  hear  the  voice  of 

•  John  V.  28,  29. 


220  SERMON  VIII. 

the  Son  of  man,  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."  They  that  have  done  evil — are  they 
in  Christ,  as  well  as  those  that  have  done  good  ? 
Is  there  so  little  difference  between  life  and  dam- 
nation that  they  are  both  purchased  by  the  same 
sacrifice,  and  both  emanate  from  the  same  mercy? 
Can  any  man  in  his  right  mind  congratulate  him- 
self on  the  prospect  of  being  rescued  from  the 
death  brought  upon  him  by  Adam,  when  that  is 
to  be  effected  by  an  event  which  ensures  his 
everlasting  misery  ?  And  would  he  not  infinitely 
rather  be  for  ever  forgotten  in  the  grave  than  be 
taken  from  it,  even  though  death's  dominion  is 
thus  broken  down  and  set  at  nought,  only  that 
he  may  endure  the  gnawings  of  "  the  worm  that 
never  dies,"  and  the  torments  of  "  the  fire  that 
never  shall  be  quenched  ?"  Christ  will,  indeed, 
raise  the  wicked  as  he  will  raise  the  righteous. 
He  will  raise  them  by  virtue  of  that  power  which 
his  own  triumphant  resurrection,  as  preceded 
by  his  own  meritorious  death,  procured  for  him. 
In  this  act  of  his  regal  administration  towards 
them,  may  be  traced  the  distinguishing  attributes 
and  prerogatives  of  him  who  was  appointed  to 
work  out  the  salvation  of  a  lost  world.  But 
still  when  he  raises  the  wicked,  it  is  not  that  any 
part  of  the  curse  which  sin  brought  upon  them 
1 


SERMON  VIIL  221 

may  be  removed,  but  that  he  may  finally  separ- 
ate them  from  the  righteous ;  that  he  may  bring 
them  to  his  judgment  seat ;  that  he  may  there 
condemn  them  as  impenitent  criminals  ;  and  that 
he  may  "  punish  them  with  everlasting  destruc- 
tion from  the  presence  of  the  Lord,  and  from 
the  glory  of  his  power.""  And  this  being  their 
fate,  and  their  resurrection  taking  place  for  the 
very  purpose  of  securing  its  infliction,  it  must  be 
evident  to  every  one  that  their  resurrection  is  no 
expression  of  Divine  mercy — that  it  indicates 
any  thing  but  the  forgiveness  of  their  sins,  or  an 
interest  in  the  redemption  of  the  gospel — that 
they  cannot  therefore  be  numbered  among  those 
who  are  to  be  made  alive  in  Christ — that  these 
are  and  can  be  none  but  believers  and  saints, 
while  those  who  have  died  in  Adam  comprise  his 
whole  offspring — and,  in  fine,  that  this  statement 
of  the  Apostle,  so  far  from  teaching  or  support- 
ing, puts  a  direct  and  conclusive  negative  on  the 
doctrine  of  universal  pardon. 

9.  Another  passage  founded  on  is  Heb.  ii.  9- 

"  But  we  see  Jesus,  who  was  made  a  little  lower  than 
the  angels,  for  the  suffering  of  death,  crowned  with  gloiy 
and  honour ;  that  he,  hy  the  grace  of  God,  should  taste 
death  for  every  man" 

Here  the  Apostle  expressly  says,  we  are  told, 
that  Christ  tasted  death,  or  died  for  every  man, 
without  any  exception. 


222  SERMON  VIII. 

But  if  this  apparent  meaning  of  the  expression 
be  the  true  one,  the  abettors  of  universal  pardon 
must  show  cause  why  the  effect  of  Christ's  death 
is  to  be  limited  to  that  blessing.  Every  blessing 
which  the  sinner  needs,  or  to  which  the  true  Chris- 
tian is  ultimately  raised,  is  ascribed  to  the  death 
of  Christ.  And  what  is  there  in  the  language  of 
the  Apostle  that  should  entitle  us  to  make  Christ's 
sacrifice  productive  of  one  only,  to  the  exclusion 
of  all  the  rest .''  If  Christ  died  for,  or  in  the  room 
and  stead  of  every  man  whatever,  then  every  man 
whatever  must  be  wholly  saved  as  well  as  pardon- 
ed— that  being  the  real  design  and  necessary 
result  of  his  vicarious  sufferings — unless,  indeed, 
they  mean  to  say  with  the  Remonstrants  that 
Christ  did  die  forthe  complete  salvation  of  all  men, 
but  that  its  actual  attainment  depends  in  each 
case  upon  the  individual  repenting  and  believing, 
which  are  represented  to  be  the  conditions  of  the 
gospel.  But  this  they  will  not  and  cannot  do, 
seeing  that  in  another  part  of  their  system  they 
treat  with  absolute  horror  every  thing  that  has 
the  name  or  wears  the  form  of  a  condition.  Well 
then ;  they  must  either  show  how  Christ's  dying 
for  every  man  means  only  that  he  died  to  the 
effect  of  procuring  pardon  merely — a  conclusion 
for  which  this  verse  certainly  wiU  not  serve  them — 
or  they  must  allow  that  their  mode  of  proving  the 


SERMON  VIII.  223 

dogma  of  universal  pardon  from  Scripture  leads 
directly  and  unavoidably  to  the  still  more  unscrip- 
tural  dogma  of  universal  salvation. 

Let  us  look,  however,  to  the  context,  and  we 
will  find  the  Apostle  explaining  his  own  meaning. 
He  does  not  here  say,  every  one  of  the  human 
race,  or  every  single  descendant  of  Adam — which 
would  have  put  the  matter  out  of  dispute  :  but 
he  merely  says  every  one* — or  be  it  every  man. 
Now  the  question  is,  since  the  phrase  he  makes 
use  of  is  indefinite,  to  what  class  does  he  refer  ? 
What  body  of  men  has  he  in  his  eye,  when  he 
says  that  Christ  died  for  every  one  of  them  ?  Is 
it  every  one  of  the  whole  family  of  mankind  to- 
gether ?  Or  is  it  every  one  of  a  certain  company 
or  proportion  of  them  ?  The  Apostle  himself 
settles  this  point,  in  the  five  verses  immediately 
following  the  one  we  are  expounding,  and  these 
verses  are  connected  with  this  by  the  particle 
*^  for,''''  to  show  more  closely  and  clearly  what 
description  of  persons  the  every  man  for  whom 
Christ  died  alludes  to. 

In  the  10th  verse,  they  are  marked  out  as  the 
"  many  sons,"  whom  he  was  appointed  to  "  bring 
unto  glory,"  and  for  bringing  whom  unto  glory, 
he  was  "  made  perfect  through  sufferings."  In  the 
11th  verse,  they  are  described  as  "  sanctified"  by 

*  The  Greek  word  is  Travrof,  every. 


224  SERMON  VIII. 

him.  In  the  11th  and  12th  verses,  they  are  men- 
tioned as  standing  in  the  relation  of ' '  brethren"  to 
him,  of  whom  "  he  is  not  ashamed."  In  the  13th 
verse  they  are  presented  under  the  title  of  "  the 
children  whom  God  has  given  him."  And  in  the 
14th  and  15th  verses,  they  are  those  whom  he 
delivers  from  the  fear  of  death,  as  having  on  their 
account  "  destroyed  him  that  had  the  power  of 
death,  that  is  the  devil,"  and  thus  rescued  them 
from  a  galling  bondage. 

Now  surely,  every  man  is  not  favoured  with 
deliverance  from  the  fear  of  death,  in  consequence 
of  Chrisfs  victory  over  Satan.  Every  man  is  not 
related  to  Christ  as  a  child  or  a  brother.  Every 
man  is  not  sanctified  or  made  holy  by  Christ. 
Every  man  is  not  brought  by  him  unto  glory. 
And  therefore  when  the  Apostle  says  that  Christ 
died  for  every  man,  it  is  impossible  to  understand 
him  as  meaning  to  say  that  Christ  died  for  each  and 
all  of  the  human  race.  His  death  is  limited  in  its 
object  to  a  certain  class.  And,  therefore,  this  de- 
claration, when  taken  in  its  proper  connexion, 
and  interpreted  according  to  its  author"'s  obvious 
purpose,  so  far  from  teaching  universal  pardon, 
teaches  the  very  contrary,  and  allows  no  man  to 
consider  himself  as  benefited  by  Christ's  death, 
unless  he  possess  a  certain  delineated  character  as 
well  as  enjoy  certam  specified  privileges. 

10.  The  only  other  passage  we  shall  adduce  at 


SERMON  VIIL  225 

present — and  it  will  not  detain  us  long — you  will 
find  in  1  Tim.  iv.  10. 

"  For  therefore  we  both  labour  and  sniFer  reproach,  be- 
cause we  trust  in  the  living  God,  who  is  the  Saviour  of  all 
men,  specially  of  those  that  believe.'^ 

The  latter  part  of  this  verse  is  quoted  as  evi- 
dence of  what  we  have  denominated  a  half-salva- 
tion. Christ  is  the  Saviour  of  all  men — so  as  to 
deliver  them  by  his  death  from  guilt  and  punish- 
ment. But  he  is  in  an  especial  manner  the  Sa- 
viour of  them  that  believe.  When  they  believe, 
they  obtain  all  the  blessings  of  his  purchase. 
Thus  opening  their  eyes,  they  behold  all  the  glo- 
ries of  redemption — thus  opening  their  mouths, 
they  are  filled  with  all  the  good  things  of  God. 

How  easily  are  people  led  away  and  deceived 
by  a  mere  sound — particularly  when  that  sound 
favours  their  own  theory  !  The  language  of  the 
Apostle  does  not  refer  to  Christ  at  all — nor  to  his 
death — nor  to  his  redemption.  It  refers  to  God  ; 
and  it  refers  to  him,  not  as  the  justifier  of  the  un- 
godly, or  as  the  source  of  spiritual  and  eternal  sal- 
vation, but  as  the  God  of  Providence — on  whom 
his  creatures  continually  depend  for  sustenance, 
and  protection,  and  deliverance,  and  whose  kind- 
ness they  are  ever,  in  one  degree  or  another,  expe- 
riencing. The  Apostle  and  his  brethren  in  the 
ministry  laboured  and  toiled  much  in  the  cause 
of  the  gospel — they  were  exposed  to  many  re- 


226  SERMON  VIII. 

proaches,  to  many  privations,  to  many  dangers — 
and  had  they  looked  only  to  their  own  resources, 
they  must  have  been  discouraged,  and  sunk  into 
despair.  But  they  persevered  in  the  work  assign- 
ed them,  difficult  and  perilous  as  it  was,  because 
they  "  trusted  in  the  living  God."  They  trusted  in 
him  as  the  wise,  and  righteous,  and  beneficent  go- 
vernor of  the  world,  who  would  not  unnecessarily 
permit  them  to  be  overwhelmed  by  the  evils 
that  menaced  them.  And  they  trusted  in  him 
in  an  especial  manner,  as  that  God  whose  chil- 
dren they  were  by  faith  in  Jesus  Christ,  and  whose 
own  cause,  and  whose  own  glory,  they  were  en- 
gaged in  promoting ;  and  could  have  no  doubt 
that  if  he  exercised  a  vigilant  and  compassion- 
ate superintendance  over  men  in  general,  even 
the  unthankful  and  the  unholy,  much  more  would 
he  care  for  them,  who  were  serving  him  with  so 
much  zeal  in  the  gospel  of  his  Son,  by  fortifying 
them  against  danger,  delivering  them  out  of  their 
troubles,  providing  for  their  wants,  and  preserv- 
ing them  for  the  vigorous  and  successful  prose- 
cution of  that  benevolent  enterprise  in  which,  by 
the  appointment  of  his  own  authority,  and  the 
callings  of  his  own  grace,  they  had  willingly  em- 
barked.* 

We  have  now  finished  our  expositions  of  those 
*  See  Note  P. 


SERMON  VIII.  227 

passages  of  Scripture,  which  are  most  confidently 
appealed  to  as  proofs  of  the  doctrine  of  universal 
pardon.  And  these,  taken  in  connexion  with 
those  passages,  which  we  brought  forward  as  con- 
taining and  inculcating  the  very  opposite  doctrine, 
must  appear,  I  think,  to  every  unprejudiced 
mind,  more  than  sufficient  to  demonstrate  that 
the  opinion  of  our  opponents  has  no  foundation 
in  truth  whatever.* 

There  are  various  points  connected  with  this 
matter,  which  are  most  important  for  bringing  it 
to  a  right  and  settled  conclusion  in  your  minds, 
and  to  which  I  feel  it  a  duty  to  call  your  particu- 
lar attention-  But  it  is  impossible  to  overtake 
any  considerable  portion  of  them  in  the  present 
discourse.  And  therefore,  deferring  the  discussion 
of  these  to  another  opportunity,  I  conclude,  in 
the  meantime,' with  setting  before  you  the  follow- 
ing views : 

1.  In  the  Jirst  place,  the  dogma  of  universal 
pardon  is  grounded  upon  an  unwarrantable  and 
most  injurious  treatment  of  the  Holy  Scriptures. 
Those  who  hold  it,  force  the  Scriptures  to  give  a 
testimony  to  it.  They  take  an  insulated  passage 
— an  insulated  verse — an  insulated  clause  of  a 
verse,  and,  disconnecting  it  from  the  context,  and 
from  the  rest  of  the  Bible,  they  draw  from  it  a 
meaning  which  never  entered  into  the  writer's 
*  See  Note  Q. 


228  SERMON  VIII. 

mind,  and  urge  it  upon  us  as  the  dictate  of  in- 
spiration. If  any  word  or  phrase  comes  in  the 
way,  which  fair  construction  would  render  hostile 
to  their  views,  they  remove  the  difficulty,  in  the 
most  unceremonious  manner,  by  arbitrary  defi- 
nitions, and  gratuitous  assumptions.  And,  for- 
getting or  disregarding  the  interpretation  they 
have  put  upon  what  they  read  in  one  place,  they 
put  a  different  interpretation  upon  what  they 
read  in  another  place,  though  they  have  no  rea- 
son for  changing  the  interpretation — what  they 
read  in  both  places  being  the  same — excepting  its 
expediency  for  getting  aid  to  their  favourite  hy- 
pothesis. And  thus  they  are  continually  falling 
into  inconsistencies ;  which  would  be  of  less  con- 
sequence, so  far  as  they  are  concerned,  were  it 
not  that  contradictions  and  confusion  are  thereby 
palmed  upon  the  word  of  God  itself.  Of  this  you 
must  have  observed  several  instances  as  we  pro- 
ceeded in  our  course,  and  many  more  might  have 
been  pointed  out,  had  there  been  time  or  neces- 
sity for  it.  But  I  would  press  it  upon  you  that 
a  doctrine  is  not  likely  to  be  sound  which  requires 
such  a  mode  of  handling  and  explaining  Holy 
Writ,  and  whose  advocates  dare  not  look  at  the 
scope  and  purport  of  the  sacred  author,  when 
endeavouring  to  asceria,!.:  his  meaning,  but  must 
content  themselves  with  detaching  his  sentences 
from  one  another,  and  dealing  with  his  writings, 


SERMON  VIII.  229 

as  they  would  not  be  allowed  to  deal  with  the 
writings  of  any  profane  author,  without  being 
found  guilty  of  unfairness  or  of  folly.  And  I 
would  also  press  it  upon  you,  that  this  method  of 
treating  the  Bible — of  making  it  say  any  thing  we 
like — however  palatable  to  those  who,  by  this 
means,  get  authority  for  all  the  vain  fancies  and 
strange  tenets  they  may  choose  to  adopt,  to  pa- 
tronise, and  to  propagate,  cannot  fail  to  pro- 
duce the  most  disastrous  effects  on  the  many 
whom,  ignorant  as  they  are  of  religion,  or  regard- 
less of  it,  we  direct  to  the  Scriptures  as  God's 
faithful  word,  and  as  the  only  and  infallible  rule 
of  saving  faith.  It  holds  up  the  oracles  of  truth 
to  ridicule  and  -contempt ;  and  while  it  gives  to 
heresy  a  greater  licence  and  a  wider  range,  it  goes 
directly  to  gender  scepticism,  and  to  promote  in- 
-fidehty. 

2.  In  the  second  place,  observe  how  the  doc- 
trine we  are  contending  against,  may  mar  the 
salvation  of  sinners.  We  say  the  doctrine  is 
false.  We  have  proved  it  to  be  so.  We  have 
exhibited  its  contrariety  to  the  revelation  of 
Ood^s  will.  We  have  knocked  from  under  it 
every  prop  it  was  supposed  to  have  in  the  divine 
record.  But  suppose  it  to  be  beUeved,  and  what 
is  the  consequence  ?  No  man  who  so  believes 
will  ever  pray  for  pardon.  It  would  be  utterly 
absurd,  and  a  mocking  of  God  for  him  to  do  so. 


230  SERMON  VIII. 

He  is  already  pardoned.  And  he  is  taught  to 
look  on  any  application  for  that  blessing  at  the 
throne  of  grace,  as  not  only  a  work  of  superero- 
gation, but  as  an  indication  of  distrust  in  God's 
mercy,  and  as  an  act  of  ingratitude  and  offence. 
Now  supposing  that  he  is  not  pardoned ;  that 
every  sin  he  commits  needs  forgiveness  from  the 
Holy  Being  against  whom  it  is  committed ;  and 
that  prayer  is  the  constituted  means  of  obtaining 
what  is  thus  needed, — is  he  safe  in  neglecting  to 
pray  for  it.f^  Is  not  prayer  the  method  which 
God  has  appointed  for  getting  from  his  unme- 
rited benignity  every  blessing  that  our  situation 
requires  ?  If  prayer  for  such  blessings  is  re- 
strained, from  whatever  motive,  or  under  what- 
ever pretext,  have  we  any  warrant,  either  in  rea- 
son or  in  Scripture,  for  expecting  them  ?  On  the 
contrary,  is  it  not  in  the  very  nature  of  a  system 
of  means  and  ends,  and  is  it  not  a  lesson  taught 
by  all  the  maxims,  and  precepts,  and  examples, 
which  the  Bible  furnishes  for  our  guidance,  that 
if  the  means  be  disregarded  the  ends  cannot  be 
attained  ?  This  being,  the  case,  in  what  peril  are 
those  involved,  who,  by  listening  to  teachers  of 
strange  doctrines,  and  especially  of  the  doctrine 
of  universal  pardon,  are  persuaded  that  it  is  not 
requisite,  nor  becoming,  nor  even  innocent,  to 
supplicate  from  the  giver  of  all  good,  that  which 
if  not  received  and  enjoyed,    must  sink  the  soul 


N 


SERMON  VIIL  231 

into  everlasting  perdition  !  No  wonder,  then, 
my  friends,  that,  viewing  the  subject  in  this  light, 
I  should  feel  earnest,  and  labour  strenuously  in 
warning  and  guarding  you  against  an  error  so 
serious  and  so  fatal  as  that  to  which  I  allude, 
and  of  which  I  must  say,  whatever  offence  it 
may  give  to  the  ignorant,  and  the  fastidious,  and 
the  gentle,  that,  in  the  language  of  an  inspired 
Apostle,  it  is  a  "  damnable  heresy."  And  I  must 
be  allowed  to  add,  that  I  know  no  presumption 
greater  or  more  reprehensible  than  that  of  young, 
raw,  inexperienced  Christians,  going  at  once  and 
headlong  into  a  theory,  such  as  we  are  speaking  of, 
respecting  the  momentous  subject  of  the  pardon  of 
sin,  and  on  the  strength  of  that  theory,  refusing 
to  ask  God  for  forgiveness  of  their  trespasses,  al- 
though they  have  for  their  direction,  the  example 
of  the  most  eminent  of  the  saints — the  precept  of 
inspired  teachers  of  the  truth — and  even  the  au- 
thority of  that  Saviour  whom  they  profess  to  be- 
lieve in,  to  love,  and  to  obey.  Be  not  led  astray, 
my  friends,  by  such  delusions,  practised  by  such 
novices — recommended  and  inculcated  by  such 
dreamers.  Go  on  to  pray  for  forgiveness — pray  for 
it  as  that  which  is  essential  for  your  well-being — 
pray  for  it  as  a  multitude  of  believers  have  done 
before  you — pray  for  it  in  the  name,  and  under 
the  sanction,  and  according  to  the  pattern,  of  your 
Lord  Jesus  Christ     If  you  have  ever  yielded  to 


232  SERMON  VIII. 

the  suggestions  of  those  who  have  been  urging 
upon  you  a  different  doctrine,  let  it  be  the  first 
and  the  most  fervent  petition  you  prefer,  that 
your  iniquity  in  following  their  unhallowed  ad- 
vice may  be  blotted  out  from  the  book  of  remem- 
brance. And  beseech  God  to  pardon  the  iniqui- 
ty of  those  who,  misled  themselves,  are  so  industri- 
ous in  misleading  others,  and  so  resolute  in  stand- 
ing between  the  unforgiven  sinner  and  the  throne 
of  a  forgiving  God.  And  implore,  without  ceasing, 
the  pardon  of  all  the  guilt  you  are  from  day  to 
day  contracting,  so  that  you  may  experience 
mercy  from  the  High  and  Holy  One  for  the  sake 
of  that  Mediator,  "  in  whom  you  have  redemp- 
tion through  his  blood,  even  the  forgiveness  of 
your  sins." 

3.  Finally,  I  would  denounce  the  doctrine  of 
universal  pardon  as  the  certain  and  the  fruitful 
source  of  aU  manner  of  iniquity.  This  I  have 
already  done — I  do  it  again — and  I  will  continue 
to  do  it,  with  all  my  might.  Don't  let  it  be  said 
that  the  doctrine  has  produced  no  such  effects  on 
those  who  hold  it  most  firmly,  and  teach  it  most 
unweariedly.  Be  it  so  :  that  is  very  likely — it  is 
most  true — and  therein  we  have  a  fact  which  has 
attended  the  history  of  antinomianism  in  almost  all 
ages  of  the  church.  We  do  not  say  that  the  tenet 
in  question  will  immediately  corrupt  good  men  who 
embrace  it,  or  lead  them  at  once  into  the  abomi- 


SERMON  VIII.  233 

nations  of  immorality.  But  what  can  its  influ- 
ence be  on  the  mass  of  mankind,  but  an  influence 
of  the  most  demoralising  and  pernicious  descrip- 
tion. Tell  them  that  their  past  offences  are  all 
forgiven — tell  them  that  the  very  vices  in  which 
they  are  at  this  moment  indulging,  are  all  forgiv- 
en— tell  them  that  the  most  heinous  crimes  they 
choose  hereafter  to  commit,  are  all  forgiven — tell 
them  that  for  not  one  of  these  is  God  any  longer 
angry  with  them,  and  that  for  not  one  of  these 
will  God  inflict  any  punishment  upon  them — tell 
them  this,  and  get  them  to  believe  it — and  you 
instantly  deprive  them  of  all  sense  of  future  re- 
sponsibility, and  annihilate  the  sanctions  of 
eternity,  and  open  the  sluices  of  libertinism, 
to  whose  desolating  torrent  our  opponents  will 
in  vain  present  the  barrier  of  recondite  love 
and  sentimental  contemplation,  and  whose  de- 
structive effects  may  be  felt  and  exhibited  in  the 
guilt  and  wretchedness  and  despair  of  thousands 
who  have  been  taught  that  their  worst  sins  need 
neither  forgiveness  nor  prayer,  when  they  who 
have  been  instrumental  in  producing  the  calami- 
ty, shall  have  no  power  to  check  it,  or  may  have 
gone  to  give  their  account  to  the  Judge  of  all. 


SERMON  IX. 


SAME  SUBJECT. 


In  considering  the  doctrine  of  universal  pardon, 
which  has  of  late  been  publicly  taught  and  zeal- 
ously propagated,  we  showed  you  that  this  doc- 
trine is  contradicted  by  many  passages  of  Scrip>- 
ture,  in  the  most  distinct  and  unequivocal  man- 
ner. We  showed  you  that  it  directly  and  neces- 
sarily leads  to  the  doctrine  of  the  complete  and 
eternal  salvation  of  the  whole  human  race,  which 
its  broachers  themselves  do  not,  in  the  present 
stage  of  their  religious  opinions,  believe  in  or  ad- 
mit. And  we  showed  you  that  those  parts  of  the 
Bible  to  which  they  appeal  as  proofs  of  their  pe- 
culiar tenet  give  them  no  countenance,  except  by 
being  grossly  perverted  or  strangely  misunder- 
stood ;  and  that  a  great  proportion  of  these,  in- 
stead of  being  for,  are  decidedly  against  them. 
We  concluded  our  last  discourse,  with  alluding 
to  the   mischievous   mode   of  interpreting   the 


SERMON  IX.  235 

word  of  God  to  which  they  have  had  recourse — 
to  the  injurious  influence  which  their  notion  is 
calculated  to  exercise  over  the  Christians  who  em- 
brace and  act  upon  them — and  to  the  encourage- 
ment which  these  must  give  to  licentiousness  and 
crime  among  the  great  mass  of  mankind. 

We  are  now  to  submit  to  you  a  variety  of  con- 
siderations, which  it  seems  very  necessary  for  you 
to  be  aware  of,  and  to  bear  in  mind,  during  the 
course  of  those  discussion.s  which  you  may  be  called 
upon  to  listen  to,  or  to  engage  in,  on  the  main  sub- 
ject in  dispute.  Someofthem  do  affect  its  substan- 
tial merits,  and  need  to  be  specially  noticed,  while 
others  are  more  remotely  connected  with  it,  but 
yet  so  important  as  to  the  way  in  which  it  is  usu- 
ally managed  and  regarded,  that  they  deserve  par- 
ticular attention.  And  if  I  speak  freely  on  the 
different  topics  I  am  to  bring  under  review,  it  is 
also  my  design  to  speak  candidly — to  speak 
without  giving  unnecessary  offence,  but  at  the 
same  time  without  fear,  or  favour,  or  compromise. 

My  first  remark  has  relation  to  the  charge 
brought  against  us,  that  we  are  persecuting  the 
advocates  of  universal  pardon,  by  representing 
them  in  an  odious  light,  stirring  up  enmity  against 
them  in  the  public  mind,  and  treating  them  with 
a  degree  of  harshness  or  of  obloquy  to  which  we 
Ayould  scarcely  subject  those  who  are  avowed 
enemies  to  the  religion  of  Christ. 


236  SERMON  IX. 

This  mode  of  endeavouring  to  defeat  or  to 
deter  from  opposition  to  an  unworthy  cause — of 
awakening  sympathy  where  there  is  no  substan- 
tial merit  to  ensure  respect  and  countenance — 
and  of  gaining  proselytes  in  the  absence  of  stern- 
er and  more  rational  means,  has  been  often  re- 
sorted to  in  cases  like  the  present,  and  has  some- 
times been  much  more  successful  than  it  ever 
deserved  to  be.  It  seems  very  hard  to  be  con- 
demned for  openly  stating  what  is  conscientious- 
ly believed.  Notliing  looks  more  harsh  and  cruel 
than  to  speak  against  such  as  are  merely  pretend- 
ing to  a  greater  insight  into  the  mysteries  of  faith, 
and  to  a  higher  measure  of  spirituality  and  godli- 
ness, than  generally  prevails  around  them.  One  can 
scarcely  deem  it  any  thing  else  than  desperate  into- 
lerance and  oppression,  that  those  should  be  dislik- 
ed, or  shunned,  or  ridiculed,  whose  great  character- 
istics are,  that  they  are  devoted  to  the  Bible  and 
to  prayer,  that  they  are  perpetually  conversing 
on  their  own  views  of  religion,  that  they  compass 
sea  and  land  to  make  converts  to  their  peculiar 
tenets,  that  they  never  have  a  doubt  or  a  fear 
respecting  their  personal  salvation,  and  that  they 
aTe  always  full  of  joy.  To  be  visited  with  such 
sore  trials  for  such  holy  practice,  naturally  makes 
them  interesting  to  every  ingenuous  observer. 
Something  more  than  ordinary  of  what  is  good, 
must  reside  in  them,  since  all  athers  combine  in 


SERMON  IX. 


237 


keeping  them  down,  or  in  keeping  them  at  a  dis- 
tance. The  truth  can  hardly  fail  to  be  with  those, 
by  whom  so  much  patience  and  meekness  are  dis- 
played in  enduring  what  they  are  thus  made  to 
suffer.  And  being  the  smaller  and  the  weaker  party, 
it  is  but  fair  to  listen  to  their  statements  with  the 
tenderest  indulgence,  and  there  being  no  unwil- 
lingness on  their  part  to  press  upon  all  who  hear 
them,  the  new  lights  which  have  broke  in  upon 
their  minds,  and  made  them  so  pious,  and  so  peace- 
ful, and  so  happy,  the  idea  of  persecution  is  worth 
a  thousand  arguments  in  procuring  currency  and 
advancement  for  their  doctrine. 

Now,  my  friends,  I  wish  to  put  an  end  to  this 
delusion,  and  to  deprive  our  opponents  of  an  ad- 
vantage and  an  influence  over  the  susceptible, 
the  ignorant,  and  the  unwary,  which  they  are  not 
entitled  to  possess.  And  I  take  the  liberty  to 
affirm,  without  qualification  or  reserve,  that  in 
the  resistance  which  is  made  to  them,  as  the  dis- 
seminators of  certain  principles,  there  is  no  per- 
secution, nor  any  thing  that  approaches  it.  They 
may  call  it  by  that  name — and  they  may  com- 
plain of  it — and  they  may  pray  about  it — and 
they  may  persuade  superficial  thinkers  that  they 
are  really  suffering  from  it.  But  when  we  come 
to  examine  what  they  mean,  and  to  ascertain  the 
circumstances  referred  to,  it  amounts  to  nothing 
more  than  this,  that  we  set  ourselves  to  withstand 


238  SERMON  IX. 

what  is  in  our  conviction  a  pernicious  heresy — 
that  we  warn  the  simple  and  unsuspecting  against 
the  danger  of  giving  heed  to  their  enticing  words 
— and  that  we  employ  all  legitimate  means  of 
frustrating  the  efforts  which  they  every  where, 
and  unceasingly  make,  to  increase  the  number  of 
their  sect.  We  do  nothing,  all  the  while,  to  in- 
jure their  character — we  do  nothing  to  affect  their 
worldly  fortunes — we  do  nothing  to  coerce  them 
into  silence — we  do  nothing  to  encroach  on  their 
freedom  of  conscience  or  of  speech — we  do  no- 
thing, in  short,  which  has  either  the  reality  or  the 
appearance  of  that  hateful  thing,  by  the  imputa- 
tion of  which  they  stigmatise  our  conduct  towards 
them,  and  attempt  to  excite  interest,  and  to  se- 
cure favour,  where  they  might  not  otherwise  have 
been  able  to  produce  any  impression.  On  the 
contrary,  when  the  matter  is  sifted  and  both  sides 
of  the  question  are  looked  at,  it  will  be  found  that 
they  have  been  made  to  bear  incalculably  less 
than  they  have  provoked,  and  that  if  the  spirit  of 
persecution  has  been  working  at  all,  which  we 
are  far  from  saying,  that  spirit  has  been  working 
■with  them,  and  not  with  us. 

The  doctrine  that  they  teach  is  that  of  univer- 
sal pardon, — meaning  by  it,  that  unbelievers, 
impenitent  persons,  hardened  profligates,  have 
all  their  sins,  including  those  they  may  hereafter 
commit,  already  and  actually  forgiven.  And  is  it 
6 


SERMON  IX.  239 

really  to  be  supposed,  that  a  doctrine  which  we 
hold  to  be  so  contrary  to  the  Bible,  and  so  de- 
structive to  the  interests  of  morality,  and  so  en- 
snaring and  ruinous  to  immortal  souls,  shall  be 
regarded  by  us  with  unconcern — that  we  shall 
see  it  spreading  over  our  land  without  striving  to 
arrest  its  progress — that  we  shall  wait  till  it  has 
established  itself  in  the  bosom  of  our  community 
before  we  put  forth  our  energies  to  crush  it — or 
that,  if  we  do  make  it  the  subject  of  animadver- 
sion, we  shall  speak  of  itself  and  of  its  abettors  in 
courtly  and  indulgent  phrase,  as  if  we  secretly  fa- 
voured them,  or  in  doubtful  and  ambiguous  phrase, 
as  if  after  all  we  suspected  that  the  truth  might 
be  found  to  lie  on  their  side.  This  indeed  might 
be  supposed,  and  might  be  expected,  had  we  been 
as  unacquainted  with  Christianity  as  our  oppo- 
nents seem  to  have  been,  till  very  lately,  even  by 
their  own  acknowledgment,  and  had  the  views  of 
it  which  are  now  propagated,  interfered  with  no 
clear  and  settled  convictions  regarding  its  vital 
tenets.  But  really  it  is  too  much  to  be  told,  that 
we  are  persecuting,  when  we  only  reprobate  sen- 
timents with  regard  to  whose  heterodoxy  and 
mischievous  tendency  we  have  long  ago  made  up 
our  minds,  with  fully  more  advantage  for  that 
purpose  than  their  advocates  possess,  and  only 
point  out  the  sophistries,  and  fallacies,  and  igno- 
xance,  and  absurdities,  which  these  employ  and 


240  SERMON  IX. 

manifest  in  the  course  of  defending  them.  If  we 
have  erred  on  this  point  at  all,  our  error  has  con- 
sisted in  being  too  tardy  and  too  cautious  in  bear- 
ing our  testimony  against  the  heresies  that  are 
afloat,  and  too  forbearing  and  commendatory  to- 
wards those  by  whom  they  are  disseminated. 
And  I  am  inclined  to  think,  that  in  refraininsr 
from  a  greater  degree  of  promptitude,  decision, 
and  severity  than  we  have  displayed,  we  have  not 
been  sufficiently  impressed  with  a  sense  of  our 
duty,  and  have  not  been  sufficiently  forward  and 
active  in  performing  it. 

Consider,  besides,  how  far  that  species  of  per- 
secution with  which  we  are  charged,  may  not  be 
fairly  attributed  to  our  opponents.  Why,  if 
what  they  say  of  us  without  scruple  or  ceremony 
be  true,  we  should  be  contemned,  distrusted,  and 
abandoned  by  every  one  who  desires  to  be  right- 
ly instructed  in  the  way  of  salvation,  and  studies 
his  spiritual  and  eternal  well-being.  They  re- 
present us  all  as  in  profound  ignorance  of  the 
essential  principles  of  the  gospel — we  neither 
know  the  truth  nor  declare  it.  The  ministers  of 
religion  among  us,  even  the  most  sound  and 
zealous  of  them,  with  one  or  two  marvellous  ex- 
ceptions, are  misleading  the  people  on  the  point 
of  life  and  death.  The  people,  including  those 
whom  we  have  been  always  accustomed  to  hon- 
our   as  ripe    and  experienced  Christians,    are 


SERMON  IX.  241 

willing  to  be  thus  misled — all  of  us,  in  short,  are 
in  thicker  darkness  than  that  of  Egypt,  and  grop- 
ing in  the  broad  way  that  leadeth  to  destruction 
■ — and  they,  who  have  pronounced  such  a  fatal 
sentence  upon  us,  will  alone   survive  to   tell  this 
tale  of  death  and  desolation.  *     They  say  all  this 
to  our  disparagement — but  nevertheless  we  must 
be  quite  peaceable  and  contented  ;   and  if  we  be- 
stir ourselves  to  throw  off  the  calumnies,  and  re- 
buke or  expose   those  who   utter  and   circulate 
them,  then  forsooth  we  are  guilty  of  persecution  ! 
Because  we  will  not  allow  them  to  assert  without 
a  very  flat  contradiction,  that  almost  all  the  pas- 
tors of  this  church  and  country  are  preachers  of 
false  doctrine — because  we  laugh  them  to  scorn, 
when  they  accuse  vis  of  being  wholly  blind  to  the 
elements  of  Christian  truth,   and  of  leading  our 
hearers  astray — because  we  will  not  permit  them 
to  wean  away  the  members  of  our  flock,  on  such 
a  ground,   without  struggling  to  retain  them — 
because  we    will  not   take   this  in  good  part,   or 
even  feel  grateful  for  it  as  one  of  the  perfect  gifts 
which  come  from  above,  but  hold  it  up  to  public 
disapprobation  as  characterized  by  presumption 
and  folly — we  are  to  be  branded  with  this  addi- 
tional stigma,  that  we  are  guilty  of  persecution  ! 
We  see  them  perverting  the  holy  oracles  of  God 

•  See  Note  R. 
M 


242  SERMON  IX. 

in  support  of  wild  and  untenable  theories — we 
see  them  sporting  with  the  best  interests  of  their 
fellow  creatures,  by  rashly  impugning  and  stur- 
dily denying  what  has  been  the  faith  of  God's 
people  for  ages — we  see  them  introducing  with 
oracular  dogmatism  a  new  gospel,  a  new  form  of 
belief,  a  new  plan  of  redemption,  as  if  Scripture 
had  been  heretofore  a  sealed  book  to  the  best  and 
the  wisest  that  ever  adorned  the  Christian  church 
— we  see  them  teaching,  with  the  zeal  of  apostles, 
what  makes  the  word  of  God  a  bundle  of  incon- 
sistencies, mutilates  and  misrepresents  the  aton- 
ing work  of  our  Redeemer,  under  the  pretext  of 
glorifying  God,  and  giving  comfort  to  man,  and 
throws  a  loose  rein  on  human  passions,  and  gives 
licence  to  the  "  wickedness  of  the  wicked" — we 
see  them  engaged  in  this  illegal  and  unholy  en- 
terprise ;  and  because  we  unfold  its  unworthiness 
and  its  dangers,  and  lift  up  a  loud  voice  against 
those  who  are  embarked  in  it,  and  warn  and  be- 
seech you  not  to  "  come  into  their  secrets"  nor 
to  be  "  united  to  their  assembly" — therefore,  we 
violate  the  spirit  of  our  religion,  and  are  guilty 
of  persecution  ! 

And  who  are  they,  whose  unscriptural  and  per- 
nicious speculations  we  must  not  expose — whose 
wholesale  condemnation  of  our  ministers  we  must 
not  reprove — whose  attempts  to  unsettle  the  be- 
lief and  to  alienate  the  attachment  of  our  people, 


SERMON  IX.  243 

we  must  not  repel  with  eagerness  or  with  indig- 
nation, if  we  would  avoid  the  charge  of  being 
persecutors  ?  Show  me  that  they  are  persons  who 
from  their  knowledge,  their  judgment,  their  con- 
sistency, their  standing  in  the  church  of  Christ, 
their  services  to  the  cause  of  pure  and  undefiled 
religion — of  their  personal  piety,  and  personal 
holiness,  as  connected  with  doctrinal  error,  I  shall 
speak  hereafter — show  me  that  from  their  pecu- 
liar and  appropriate  gifts,  they  are  qualified,  in 
any  tolerable  measure,  to  be  the  instructors,  the 
censors,  and  the  guides  of  all  other  men,  and 
though  I  cannot  yield  my  convictions  to  their 
tuition,  or  change  my  creed  at  their  bidding,  I 
will  at  least  listen  to  their  dogmas  with  more  pa- 
tience, and  treat  their  exertions  with  more  reve- 
rence. But  what  are  their  claims  on  our  respect 
or  our  indulgence  as  the  teachers  of  novel  opi- 
nions in  matters  of  faith  ?  I  know  of  none  that 
they  possess,  and  none  that  I  can  sustain.  On 
the  contriiry,  I  perceive  in  them  all  that  is  cal- 
culated to  create  suspicion  and  distrust  as  to 
whatever  lessons  they  inculcate,  and  to  excite  sur- 
prise and  amazement  that  they  should  have  the 
courage  to  demand  attention,  and  that  they  should 
so  frequently  get  the  ascendancy  over  those  at 
whose  conversion  they  aim. 

They  are  persons  who  did  not  come  into  ex- 
ktence  for  many  years  after  those  whom  they  de- 


244  SERMON  IX. 

liberately  proclaim  to  be  in  gross  spiritual  dark- 
ness, had  themselves  come  to  the  knowledge  of 
a  reconciled  God,  and  been  instrumental  in  bring- 
ing others  to  the  belief  and  obedience  of  the 
truth,  and  in  upholding  the  grand  interests  of 
vital  and  practical  Christianity  in  the  world. 

Or,  they  are  persons  who  are  not  only  young 
in  years,  and  of  immature  understanding  in  every 
thing,   but  who  as  Christians — for  we  deny  not 
their  sincerity — are  but  of  yesterday,   and  know 
nothing  as  they  ought  to  know  it,  and  who  not- 
withstanding assume  all  the  prerogatives  of  ex- 
perienced age,  and  all  the  airs  of  consciovis  infal- 
libility,  in    announcing  their  newly    discovered 
principles   to   those  little   cii'cles   in  which  they 
move,  and  hesitate  not  to  decide,  even  to  unspar- 
ing  proscription,    on  the   character  of  a  whole 
church — aye,  of  that  very  church,   perhaps,   in 
which  they  drew  the  first  breath  of  their  spiritual 
life  ;   in  whose  temples  they  lisped  the  praises  of 
their  divine   Redeemer  ;   by  whose  pastors  they 
were  fed,  and  guided,   and  comforted,  even  till 
they  lifted  up  their  voices  to  curse  them;  and  whose 
services  to  their  souls  they  are  grateful  enough 
to  repay  with  unreluctant  desertion,  and  relent- 
less anathemas. 

Or,  they  are  persons  who,  having  been  in  search 
of  God's  will  concerning  the  salvation  of  sinners 
for  a  longer  period  than  I  choose  to  define,  have 


SERMON  IX.  245 

not  yet  made  up  their  minds  as  to  what  that  will 
really  is — who  have  flitted  from   speculation  to 
speculation  with  unceasing  restlessness,  and  riot- 
ed as  it  were  in  the  exhibition  of  human  mu- 
tability— who    reject    to-day    what    they    main- 
tained yesterday,  who  may  be  expected  to  hold 
to-morrow  what  is   essentially  different  from  the 
opinions  both  of  yesterday  and  to-day,  and  who 
at   every  successive  era  of  their  wanderings  are 
alike  assured  and  alike  dogmatical — who  have  so 
perplexed  themselves  with  hypothesis,  and  got  so 
entangled  by  their  struggles  to  make  the  Scrip- 
ture speak  according  to  their  own  exigencies,  and 
not  according  to  its  real  import,  that  they  may 
be  safely  challenged  to  give  a  positive  and  con- 
sistent statement  of  their  present  belief — and  who, 
with  all  this  changeableness  and  uncertainty,  af- 
fect to  look  upon  us  with  compassion  or  disdain 
because  we  have  a  settled  system  of  doctrine,  in 
some  parts  of  which  they  have  not  been  able  to 
acquiesce,   and  scruple  not  to  unchristianize  us 
because  we  cannot  consent  to  follow  them  through 
all  their  changes,  or  account  ourselves  quite  safe 
and  happy  amidst  all  their  bewilderments. 

Or,  they  are  persons  who,  though  office-bearers 
in  our  church,  and  pledged  by  solemn,  and  public, 
and  recorded  vows  to  abide  by  her  standards,  and 
to  maintain  her  doctrine  all  the  days  of  their  lives, 
yet — such  is  the  awful  delusion  which  has  blinded 
their  understanding,  or  blunted  their  moral  sensibi- 


246  SEEMON  IX. 

lities — unblushingly  eat  her  bread  and  betray  her 
cause ;  retain  authority  in  her  bosom,  and  declaim 
against  the  essentials  of  her  Confession  ;  partake 
of  all  the  immunities  she  confers  upon  her  sworn 
defenders,  and  enjoy  all  the  influence  they  can 
derive  from  the  high  places  of  her  communion, 
and  yet  openly,  and  avowedly,  and  constantly, 
through  the  whole  length  and  breadth  of  her  do- 
main, and  in  defiance  of  all  that  is  essential  for 
securing  respect  and  confidence  to  her  ministry, 
join  with  her  declared  foes  in  holding  her  up  as 
ignorant  of  what  constitutes  the  gospel  of  our 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  and  as,  even  in  the  very  ar- 
ticles of  her  creed,  hostile  to  the  character  of 
God,  and  to  the  salvation  of  souls. 

Or,  they  are  persons  in  whose  minds  imagina- 
tiveness, or  sentimentalism,  or  the  romantic  in 
religion,  or  the  love  of  novelty,  is  so  predominant, 
that  sober  and  established  truth  has  no  chance  of 
a  kind  reception,  or  a  permanent  abode, — with 
whom,  whatever  is  wild,  or  new,  or  mystical,  or 
removed  from  ordinary  thought,  and  ordinary 
feeling,  and  ordinary  belief,  finds  a  ready  and  ex- 
clusive welcome, — by  whom,  every  notion  that  is 
propounded  to  them,  marked  with  these  charac- 
teristics, and  especially  if  recommended  by  the 
oracles  of  their  school,  is  instantaneously  em- 
braced as  if  by  instinct,  cherished  as  a  sort  of 
fresh  revelation  from  heaven,  and  immediately 
pressed  upon  others  with  as  much  confidence  as 


SERMON  IX.  247 

it  could  have  been,  had  it  resulted  from  the  in- 
quiry and  the  meditation  of  a  thousand  years, — 
and  who,  because  we  look  more  steadfastly  "  to  the 
law  and  to  the  testimony,"  and  will  not  be  "carried 
about  with  every  wind  of  doctrine,"  and  prefer  "  the 
faith  once  delivered  to  the  saints,"  to  the  extra- 
vagant fancies  and  perilous  errors  of  the  abettors 
of  universal  pardon,  banish  us  all,  by  one  sweep- 
ing sentence,  from  the  pale  of  salvation,  and  un- 
ceremoniously shut  us  up  in  "  outer  darkness." 

These  are  the  persons, — I  know  of  no  other, — 
whom  we  blame  for  the  rashness  and  the  forward- 
ness of  their  zeal,  for  their  want  of  due  respect  to 
the  authority  of  those  Scriptures  which  they  pro- 
fess to  expound,  and  for  the  arrogance  with  which 
they  treat  all  who  differ  from  them,  by  standing 
up  for  the  old  doctrine  of  justification — of  pardon 
and  acceptance  by  faith  only  in  the  Redeemer's 
perfect  righteousness.  These  are  the  persons, 
whose  sentiments  we  repudiate  and  condemn,  as 
equally  contrary  to  evangelical  truth,  to  sound 
speech,  and  to  holy  practice,  and  to  whom  there- 
fore, to  their  influence,  to  their  labours,  to  their 
workofproselytism,wedoset  ourselves  in  broad  and 
uncompromising  opposition.  And  when  we  do  so, 
our  consciences  not  only  acquit  us  of  every  thing 
that  partakes  of  a  persecuting  spirit,  but  we  feel 
it  to  be  our  duty  to  give  this  explanation  of  our 
grounds  of  acting,  so  as  at  once  to  vindicate  our 


i 


248  SERMON    IX. 

own  conduct,  in  the  estimation  of  those  before 
whom  it  is  arraigned,  and  to  deprive  our  oppo- 
nents of  all  that  sympathy  which  the  plea  of  per- 
secution, and  even  the  very  idea  of  it,  is  so  apt  to 
secure  for  them  in  generous  and  unsuspecting 
minds,  and  of  all  that  adventitious  and  unmerit- 
ed patronage,  to  which  they  would  be  thereby  in- 
debted for  no  small  portion  of  their  success,  in 
ensnaring  the  hearts  and  misleading  the  footsteps 
of  our  people. 

Well,  but  though  there  may  be  no  persecution 
in  the  case,  still  we  are  accused  of  giving  to  that 
difference  of  opinion  which  has  occvn-red,  the  form 
of  a  controversy,  which  may  not  speedily  termi- 
nate, and  which  may  nourish  evil  tempers  and 
produce  evil  consequences.  Our  opponents  find 
fault  with  this  as  indicative  of  a  contentious  spirit, 
as  unbefitting  the  sacred  and  peaceful  nature  of 
the  subject,  and  as  unlikely  to  advance  the  pro- 
sperity of  the  gospel,  or  the  cause  of  personal 
godliness.  And  even  some  of  our  friends,  while 
they  allow  that  our  views  are  correct,  and  that  it 
is  important  to  maintain  them,  would  yet  have  us 
to  maintain  them  without  a  struggle,  and  let  them 
find  their  own  way,  without  running  the  risk  of 
kindhng  up  the  flames  of  strife,  and  provoking 
angry  words. 

Now  we  grant  that  it  is  wrong  to  enter  into 


SERMON  IX.  249 

controversy,  when  the  subject  is  of  trivial  mo- 
ment ;  a  trifle  will  not  justify  eager  or  lengthen- 
ed debate.  We  grant,  that  in  the  mode  of  con- 
ducting a  controversy,  all  violations  of  the  royal 
law  of  charity  ought  to  be  avoided ;  the  exercise 
of  charity  is  not  incompatible  with  the  mainte- 
nance and  vindication  of  truth.  We  grant  that 
it  is  neither  wise  nor  good,  to  carry  on  controversy 
for  its  own  sake,  or  to  prolong  it  after  its  legiti- 
mate ends  are  answered ;  in  that  case  it  has  not 
the  glory  of  God,  and  as  little  has  it  the  welfare 
of  man  for  its  object,  and  therefore  it  is  unlawful 
and  injurious.  We  grant  all  this,  but  we  grant 
nothing  more.  Controversy  is  not  in  itself  an 
evil ;  circumstances  may  render  it  indispensably 
necessary  for  upholding  religion  and  virtue  ;  and 
v.'hen  managed  under  the  government  of  Christian 
principle  and  Christian  feeling,  it  may,  by  God's 
blessing,  serve  the  best  and  noblest  purposes. 
And,  therefore,  I  have  no  sympathy  with  that  de- 
licate and  morbid  sensibility,  which  shrinks  from 
controversy  as  a  mighty  and  unqualified  mischief, 
and  would  suffer  error  to  spread  ever  so  far,  and 
to  prevail  ever  so  much,  rather  than  have  its  de- 
merits exposed,  and  its  progress  arrested,  by  the 
instrumentality  of  dispute. 

Why,  my  friends,  if  we  are  real  Christians, 
controversy  is  our  daily — our  continual  occupa- 
tion.    We  have  a  controversy  with  the  preju- 


250  SERMON  IX. 

dices  of  our  own  understanding,  and  -with  the 
corruptions  of  our  own  hearts.  We  have  a  con- 
troversy with  the  world  around  us,  that  "  heth  in 
wickedness,"*'  and  amidst  whose  allurements  and 
hostilities  we  are  doomed  to  dwell.  We  have  a  con- 
troversy with  the  great  enemy  of  our  souls,  who 
''  goeth  about,  like  a  roaring  lion,  seeking  whom 
he  may  devour."  We  have  a  controversy  with 
all  these  as  our  spiritual  foes,  who  are  perpetual- 
ly assailing  us,  with  whom  it  is  ovir  duty  to  wage 
a  good  and  vigorovis  and  persevering  warfare,  and 
in  contending  with  whom,  victory  is  recompensed 
with  heaven — defeat  has  its  issue  in  hell. 

And  shall  our  contendings  have  no  larger  or 
more  extended  object  than  our  own  personal  and 
individual  safety  ?  Is  there  no  other  good  than 
what  belongs  to  ourselves  in  jeopardy,  from  the 
prevalence  of  error  and  of  evil  ?  Can  we  be  so 
selfish  as  to  see  any  thing  done  to  impair  the  cha- 
racter or  to  mar  the  prosperity  of  religion,  with- 
out being  ready  to  strive  much  and  to  sacrifice 
much  in  its  behalf?  Shall  we  make  no  resist- 
ance to  doctrines  by  whose  influence  the  truth  of 
God  is  obscured,  "  unstable  souls  are  beguiled," 
and  the  sinful  propensities  of  mankind  encoura- 
ged ?  Is  it  right  that  we  should  see  all  this  per- 
petrated at  our  very  door — that  we  should  see 
the  divine  honour  affronted,  the  work  of  the  Sa- 
viour made  the  sport  of  fancy,  and  the  high  des- 


SERMON  IX.  251 

tinies  of  our  brethren  put  in  peril — is  it  right 
that  we  should  see  all  this,  and  remain  passive 
and  peaceable — wrapt  up  in  our  private  medita- 
tions, and  careless  of  the  danger  that  impends, 
and  of  the  interests  that  are  at  stake  ? 

If  this  be  right,  the  lesson  which  teaches  so, 
has  not  been  learnt  in  the  school  of  Christ ;  for 
a  great  proportion  of  his  public  ministry  was  em- 
ployed in  controversy  with  the  Pharisees  and  the 
Sadducees,  not  as  to  their  moral  deportment  mere- 
ly, but  as  to  their  perversions  of  the  law  of  Moses 
and  of  the  language  of  Scripture,  the  ungodly 
maxims  which  they  held  and  acted  upon,  the  cor- 
ruptions of  religious  doctrine  which  they  cherish- 
ed, the  opposition  which  they  gave  to  what  he 
revealed  for  their  instruction.  It  has  not  been 
learnt  from  the  inspired  Apostles,  who,  while  they 
lived  and  laboured  as  ministers  of  the  Prince  of 
Peace,  found  their  chief  employment  in  guarding 
the  precious  message,  which  they  delivered  with 
all  fidelity,  from  the  false  interpretations  put  upon 
it,  and  the  false  opinions  mixed  up  with  it,  by 
the  ignorant,  the  designing,  and  the  self-sufficient 
^-whose  Epistles  are  almost  a  series  of  controver- 
sial writings  on  topics  of  greater  or  of  lesser  mo- 
ment, with  regard  to  which  mistaken  or  heretical 
ideas  were  making  their  way  into  the  minds  of  the 
simple — and  who,  from  that  very  circumstance, 
which  is  so  much  deprecated  in  our  case,  were  led 


i 


252  SERMON  IX. 

by  the  Spirit  to  give  a  more  precise  statement  of 
the  points  in  dispute  than  could  otherwise  have 
been  expected,  and  even  to  furnish  us  with  argu- 
ments that  are  directly  and  conclusively  appli- 
cable to  the  unscriptural  dogmas,  which  we  are 
in  these  days  called  upon  to  notice  and  disprove. 
Neither  has  the  lesson  been  learnt  from  any  of 
the  gifted  and  eminent  Worthies  who  have  been 
raised  up  from  time  to  time  by  the  great  Head 
of  the  Church,  to  plead  his  cause  when  endan- 
gered by  the  follies  and  delusions  of  misjudging 
friends,  or  by  the  assaults  and  the  stratagems  of 
inveterate  foes; — notfrom  those  men  of  lofty  enter- 
prise and  of  holy  v/arfare  who  originated,  and  car- 
ried forward,  and  accomplished  the  glorious  work  of 
the  Reformation,  and  who,  amidst  struggles  and 
controversies,  the  very  thought  of  which  would 
make  our  modern  sentimentalists  tremble,  rescued 
the  sacred  Scriptures  from  the  grasp  and  the 
guile  of  priestcraft,  and  the  doctrines  of  salva- 
tion from  the  manifold  corruptions  with  which  they 
had  been  adulterated  and  overlaid; — and  not  from 
our  forefathers,  to  whom  it  was  "  given  in  the 
behalf  of  Christ,  not  only  to  believe  on  him,  but 
also  to  suffer  for  hjs  sake,"  whose  lot  fell  upon 
those  evil  times  which  called  forth  the  spirit  of 
"  resistance  unto  blood,"  who  declined  not  the 
contest,  arduous  and  trying  as  it  was,  and  who, 
by  means  of  controversy,  far  more  difficult  and 


SERMON  IX.  253 

hazardous  than  any  that  we  are  reqiiired  to  en- 
gage in,  asserted  for  us  those  civil  liberties,  and 
those  rehgious  privileges,  in  which  we,  their  un- 
grateful posterity,  so  selfishly  rejoice. 

No,  my  friends,  the  lesson  can  be  derived  from 
no  competent  authority.  It  is  in  the  nature  and 
reason  of  the  thing — it  arises  from  the  character 
of  Christianity,  as  contrasted  v/ith  the  state  of  the 
moral  world — it  follows  from  every  enlightened 
consideration  of  the  history  of  the  church,  that 
error  is  to  be  subdued,  and  truth  maintained,  by 
controversy ;  and  that  could  the  friends  of  reli- 
gion be  persuaded  to  proscribe  controversy,  no- 
thing but  the  intervention  of  a  miracle  could  pre- 
serve that  which  should  be  dearer  to  us  than  life 
itself — "  the  truth  as  it  is  in  Jesus."  Away, 
therefore,  with  the  cry  against  controversy  in  the 
present  question  ! 

But,  indeed,  who  are  they  that  have  stirred 
the  controversy  in  v/hich  we  are  engaged  ?  Not 
we,  who  were  preaching,  and  inculcating,  and 
believing,  and  acting  upon,  what  had  been  long, 
and  after  mature  consideration,  deemed  the  doc- 
trine of  God's  word  ; — not  we,  but  those  who 
have  come  forward  to  broach  and  to  propagate 
the  tenet  of  universal  pardon,  and  its  accompa- 
nying dogmas.  They  attack  what  they  them- 
selves allow  to  be  the  common,  the  almost  uni- 
versal belief  of  the  Christians  in  this  land  ;  and 


254  SERMON  IX. 

so  serious  and  vehement  is  their  attack  that  the 
Christians  in  this  land  who  will  not  think  as  they 
do,  are  declared  to  be  no  Christians  at  all.  We 
only  repel  their  attack,  and  withstand  the  at- 
tempts which  they  are  industriously  making  to 
overturn  the  doctrine  of  the  gospel,  and  to  sub- 
stitute in  its  place  their  own  imaginary  conceits. 
Far  be  it  from  us  to  deny  their  right  to  hold  and 
to  diffuse  whatever  they  believe  ;  they  are  indeed 
responsible  for  that,  but  not  to  us.  On  our  part, 
however,  we  claim  the  same  unfettered  right  to 
expose,  to  the  utmost  of  our  power,  the  erroneous- 
ness  of  their  belief,  and  to  warn  others  against  opi- 
nions which  come  home  to  our  convictions  as  con- 
trary to  God's  word.  And  if  their  inode  of  going  to 
work  has  less  of  the  aspect  of  controversy  than 
ours  has,  so  much  the  more  imperative  is  our  duty 
to  be  explicit  in  our  condemnation,  and  active  and 
decided  in  our  endeavours. 

They  put  forth  publications,  which,  under  the 
appearance  of  being  little  more  than  effusions  of 
fervent  piety,  and  meek  benevolence,  and  experi- 
mental feeling,  are  really  levelled  against  some 
of  the  fundamental  articles  of  our  faith,  and  really 
intended  to  press  upon  the  reader's  attention,  and 
recommend  to  the  reader's  affections,  conclusions 
at  which,  were  they  fairly  avowed,  and  stripped 
of  the  drapery  by  which  they  are  so  beautifidly 


SERMON  IX. 


'Joo 


disguised,  he  would  startle,  as  not  only  novel,  but 
irrational  and  false. 

Or,  they  preach  these  things  under  restraints, 
which  oblige  them  to  give  their  discourses  the  air 
and  character  of  ordinary  instruction,  and  they 
preach  them  to  people  who  rather  yield  to  the  fervid 
zeal  and  affectionate  earnestness  with  which  the 
speaker  urges  his  peculiar  views,  than  trouble 
themselves  with  demanding  the  arguments  and 
the  proofs  by  which  these  can  be  substantiated, 
and  are  thus  imbued,  before  they  are  aware,  with 
sentiments  which,  in  a  broader  form,  they  would 
in  all  likelihood  have  at  once  rejected. 

Or,  they  get  themselves  invited  to  domestic 
parties,  which  are  pervaded  by  religious  excitement, 
and  ready  to  receive  every  impression,  if  it  is  only 
conveyed  to  them  in  an  interesting  tone  and  in 
spiritual  language,  and  if  it  only  carries  them  to 
sublimer  heights  of  faith,  and  devotion,  and  joy 
than  they  ever  reached  before ;  and  there,  to  a 
willing  audience,  hnked  together  by  intimate  and 
endeared  companionship,  and  panting  with  ex- 
pectation of  some  better  and  sweeter  tidings  than 
what  the  common  herd  of  teachers  are  able  to 
convey,  and  eager  to  penetrate  still  farther  into 
those  mysteries  which  have  been  hid  from  all  be- 
side, they  deliver,  as  the  oracles  of  Divine  love, 
what  better  informed  and  more  intelligent  hear- 
ers would,  by  a  process  of  catechising  and  rea- 


256  SERMON  IX. 

soning,  have  speedily  demonstrated  to  be  an 
emanation  of  their  own  misguided  and  mystic 
fancy. 

Or,  they  lay  hold  of  susceptible  individuals, 
whose  religion  is  more  a  matter  of  feeling  than 
of  faith,  and,  sympathizing  with  the  dark  and 
distressful  state  in  which  their  ordinary  pas- 
tors leave  them,  and  dwelling  on  the  insufficiency 
of  all  that  they  yet  know  to  make  them  what  they 
should  desire  to  be,  they  lay  before  them  the 
chart  of  that  royal  road  to  heaven  which  they 
have  discovered,  and,  by  the  help  of  a  few  dis- 
jointed texts,  arbitrary  definitions,  and  loving  ex- 
hortations, they  convert  them  to  the  belief  of  uni- 
versal pardon,  and  straightway  employ  them  as 
disciples  for  the  support  and  the  diffusion  of  that 
baneful  heresy. 

And  so  much  is  there  of  seeming  contrivance 
in  all  this — so  much  does  it  look  like  a  systema- 
tic plan  for  gaining  proselytes — so  much  has  it 
the  face  of  intentionally  profiting  by  the  consti- 
tutional weaknesses,  and  the  amiable  dispositions, 
and  the  peculiar  circumstances  of  those  whose 
conversion  is  aimed  at  or  accomplished — that 
were  it  not  for  our  conviction  of  the  integrity  of 
those  by  whom  it  is  practised,  we  should  regard 
it  as  the  result  of  a  deliberate  design,  artfully 
formed  and  incessantly  pursued,  to  effectuate,  by 
the  help  of  private  and  cunning  influence,  what 


SERMON  IX.  057 

formal  discussion   and  open   contending   would 
have  rendered  chimerical  and  impracticable. 

For  us,  therefore,  who  view  the  matter  in  that 
light,  and  who  are  so  situated,  nothing  remains 
but  to  convert,  what  it  would  well  suit  our  op- 
ponents to  have  continued,  a  field  of  peace,  into 
a  field  of  controversy,  and  to  strive,  openly,  and 
honestly,  and  firmly,  against  the  errors  which  are 
so  zealously  disseminated  among  our  popvdation. 
We  act  thus,  because  our  Christian  and  official 
obligations  constrain  us  to  adopt  this  course. 
We  act  thus,  because  we  have  no  other  habile 
method  of  counteracting  the  mischief;  we  cannot 
go  where  its  abettors  go — we  cannot  do  what  they 
do.  We  do  this,  because,  in  our  solemn  convic- 
tion, the  errors  they  are  spreading  are  deep  and 
deadly.  We  act  thus,  not  merely  because  they 
teach  universal  pardon,  but  also  because,  from 
the  evident  connexions  and  dependencies  of  that 
doctrine,  they  will  be  tempted  to  teacli  other  er- 
rors, still  greater,  if  possible,  and  more  pernicious 
— and  because  they  are  already  far  gone  in  the 
road  that  leads  to  Socinianism.  The  leaders  them- 
selves may  not  advance  so  far  ;  but  many  of  their 
followers  will  run  headlong  to  Socinianism — act- 
ing more  consistently  than  their  masters — and 
beyond  that  it  is  but  a  short  and  easy  stage 
to  infidelity.  And  we  act  thus,  because  were  we 
to  remain  silent  on  the  subject,  and  were  any  of 


258  SERMON  IX. 

yourselves,  or  any  of  your  families,  or  any  within 
the  sphere  of  our  influence  to  become,  through 
that  silence,  the  victim  of  those  delusions  which 
are  abroad  in  the  Christian  world,  how  could  we 
be  watching  for  your  souls,  as  they  that  must  give 
an  account  ?  and  how  could  we  answer  to  him  who 
has  appointed  us  to  that  office,  that  we  may  warn 
you  of  your  danger  ?  and  how  could  we  be  free 
from  your  blood,  and  "from  the  blood  of  all  men  ?" 
I  beseech  you,  therefore,  to  bear  with  me,  not 
only  as  to  what  we  have  already  done,  but  also 
as  to  what  we  still  find  it  necessary  to  do,  in  or- 
der to  bring  to  its  right  issue  this  controversy 
that  we  have  with  the  apostles  of  some  of  the 
worst  heresies  that  have  ever  deformed  the  face 
of  the  church. 


SERMON  X. 


SAME  SUBJECT. 


The  heresies  we  have  been  considering  are  not 
new  in  the  Christian  church.  We  have  occa- 
sionally called  them  novel  opinions,  because,  to  a 
great  proportion  of  those  who  have  embraced 
them,  they  were  absolutely  so,  and  even  recom- 
mended by  that  supposed  quality,  and  also  be- 
cause they  were  unknown  as  matters  of  actual 
belief  in  our  day — though  well  known  as  matters 
of  ecclesiastical  history — till  sent  forth  by  those 
against  whom  we  are  contending.  Hundreds  of 
years  ago  they  were  more  prevalent  than  they 
are  now — in  what  circumstances,  and  with  what 
effect  I  will  state  to  you  presently.  But  I  men- 
tion this  now,  to  undeceive  those  who,  when  they 
have  listened  to  their  propagators,  have  been 
struck  and  attracted  by  the  novelty  of  their  sen- 
timents, and  partly  on  that  account  adopted 
them — fondly  persuading  themselves  that  it  was 
a  light  from  above  which  had  in  these  days  made 


260  SERMON  X. 

an   extraordinary  development  of  divine  truth, 
instead  of  being  aware  that  it  was  a  meteor  which 
appeared   of  old,   and  which,   after  bewildering, 
and  misleading,    and  destroying  its   thousands, 
vanished  away,  and  left  the  errors  it  had  disclos- 
ed in  the  darkness  that  befitted  them.     In  a  vo- 
lume which  has  been  printed  for  nearly  two  cen- 
turies, I  read  the  following  as  statements  of  cer- 
tain religious  tenets  which  were  held  in  those  an- 
cient times;  and  on  hearing  them  you  will  judge 
how  far  they  resemble  what  are  now  admired  as 
wonderful  discoveries,  and  embraced  as  truths, 
which  have  been  hid  from  all  former  generations, 
and  whether  the  resemblance  is  not  so  strikingly 
exact,   that  we  may  well  be  excused  for  suspect- 
ing that  the  one  has  been  borrowed  from  the 
other.     In  the  book  referred  to,  thiese  are  stated 
as  rampant  opinions  at  the  time  ; — 

"  That  by  Christ's  death,  all  the  sins  of  all  the 
men  in  the  world,  Turks,  Pagans,  as  well  as  Chris- 
tians, committed  against  the  moral  law  and  first 
covenant,  are  actually  pardoned  and  forgiven;  and 
this  is  the  everlasting  gospel.*" — "  That  no  man 
shall  perish  or  go  to  hell  for  any  sins  but  unbelief 
only." — "  That  Christ  died  for  all  men  alike,  for 
the  reprobate  as  well  as  for  the  elect,  and  that 
not  only  sufficiently,  but  effectually — for  Judas 
as  well  as  Peter — for  the  damned  in  hell  as  well 
as  the  saints  in  heaven." — "  That  God's  child- 
ren are  not  to  ask  the  pardon  and  forgiveness  of 


SERMON  X.  261 

their  sins ;  they  need  not,   they  ought  not,  and 
'tis  no  less  than  blasphemy  for  a  child  of  God  to 
ask  pardon  of  sins ;  'tis  infidelity  to  ask  pardon 
of  sins,  and  David's  asking  forgiveness  of  sins 
was  his  weakness." — "  That  there  is  no  hell  but 
in  this  life,  and  that  is  the  legal  terrors  and  fears 
which  men  have  in  their  consciences."—"  That 
the  promises  belong  to  sinners  as  sinners,   not  as 
repenting  or  humbled  sinners." — "  That  sancti- 
fication  is  not  an  evidence   of  justification ;  and 
all  notes  and  signs  of  a  Christian's  estate  are  le- 
gal and  unlawful." — "  That  true  faith  is  without 
all  doubts   of  salvation,  and  if  any   man  have 
;    doubts  of  his  salvation,  his  faith  is  to  be  noted 
with  a  black  mark." — "  That  the  doctrine  of  re- 
I    pentance  is  a  soul-destroying  doctrine." — "  That 
Ij    God  was  never  angry  nor  displeased  with  man  ; 
I    for  if  he  were  ever  displeased  and  pleased  again, 
I    then  there  is  a  changeableness  in  God." — "  That 
jij    Christ  Jesus  came  into  the  world  to  witness  and 

SI  declare  the  love  of  God  to  us— not  to  procure  it 
I  for  us,  or  to  satisfy  God  (as  some  say).  Christ 
was  a  most  glorious  publisher  of  the  gospel — he 
was  sent  to  preach  the  gospel,  to  heal  the  broken- 
hearted, to  preach  deliverance  to  the  captives  ; 
in  all  that  Christ  saith  to  be  the  end  of  his  com- 
ing, is  not  a  word  mentioned  of  any  thing  done 
by  him  in  the  way  of  satisfying  God.  Christ's 
coming  was  more  like  a  conqueror  to  destroy  the 
enemy  in  our  nature,  and  so  to  convince  us  of  the 


^.  SERMON  X. 

love  of  God  to  us,  by  destroying  in  our  nature' 
that  which  we  thought  stood  between  God  and 
us." — "  It  is  not  suitable  to  God  to  pick  and 
choose  amongst  men  in  showing  mercy ;  if  the 
love  of  God  be  manifested  to  a  few,  it  is  far  from 
being  infinite  ;  if  God  show  not  mercy  to  all,  to 
ascribe  it  to  his  will  or  pleasure,  is  to  blaspheme 
his  excellent  name  and  nature." — "  That  there 
shall  be  a  general  restoration,  wherein  all  men 
shall  be  reconciled  to  God  and  saved — only  those 
who  now  believe  and  are  saints  before  this  resto- 
ration, shall  be  in  a  higher  condition  than  those 
that  do  not  believe."  * 

You  cannot  have  failed,  my  friends,  to  observe 
how  like  these  statements  are  to  the  opinions  up- 
on which  we  have  been  animadverting.  In  the 
material  points  there  is  a  perfect  identity ;  in 
other  respects  the  similarity  is  very  close  ;  and 
we  might  have  even  quoted  more  to  show  you, 
that  not  only  an  universal  pardon  and  its  cognate 
heresies  are  not  new,  but  that  the  very  same  anti- 
quity belongs  to  certain  opinions  more  extrava- 
gant still,  of  which  there  are  symptoms  and  ex- 
amples at  the  present  day,  and  among  ourselves. 

Now,  what  were  the  circumstances  in  which 
the  notions  we  have  referred  to  were  produced 
and  professed  ?  It  was  in  the  time  of  the  Com- 
monwealth that  they  sprung  up — a  period  when 

«  See  Note  S. 


SERMON  X.  263 

much  evil  was  mixed  with  much  good — when 
along  with  some  of  the  most  admirable  specimens 
of  Christian  Theology  that  the  Church  has  ever 
seen,  there  were  produced  a  multiplicity  of  notions 
vying  with  each  other  in  absurdity  and  impiety — 
when  the  human  mind  was  let  loose  from  its  custo- 
mary restraints  in  every  department  of  life — when, 
on  subjects  of  the  most  sacred  moment,  imagina- 
tion took  its  wildest  flight,  in  defiance  both  of  rea- 
son and  Scripture — when  every  illiterate  fanatic 
thought  himself  entitled  to  teach,  and  povu'ed 
forth  his  crudities  over  his  village  or  his  neigh- 
bourhood, as  if  he  had  been  a  messenger  from 
heaven — when  the  great  contest  seemed  to  be, 
who  should  be  most  extravagant  and  most  dar- 
ing in  deciding  on  the  things  of  God — when  un- 
acquainted with  the  Bible,  or  disregarding  its 
contents,  or  using  it  as  a  partial  counsel,  men  did 
not  so  much  attend  to  what  God  had  spoken  as 
to  what  they  themselves  thought  proper  to  allege 
and  promulgate — and  when  the  voice  of  sober, 
learned,  evangelical  divines  was  drowned  amidst 
the  Babel  anarchy  that  was  created  by  stupid 
ignorance,  blasphemous  error,  and  reckless,  un- 
godly speculation. 

It  was  in  such  perilous  times — "  times  of  li- 
berty and  error,"  as  Dr.  Owen  calls  them — that 
the  heretical  opinions  we  are  speaking  of  had  their 
birth,  and  their  nourishment,  and  their  maturity. 

They  proceeded — not   from    any    of  those  emi- 
1 


264  SERMON  X. 

nent  men  who  then  flourished,  and  whose  memo- 
ries will  always  be  venerated  as  being  some  of  the 
brightest  ornaments  of  the  church  of  Christ — but 
from  the  meanest  of  the  multitude,  who  had  nei- 
ther talent,  nor  knowledge,  nor  gifts  of  any  kind, 
but  who,  acting  under  the  mad  inspiration  of  the 
day,  thought  themselves  qualified  to  prophesy 
and  to  preach  in  the  name  of  the  Lord. 

Such  was  their  parentage  at  that  extraordinary 
?era.  We  do  not  say  that  it  proves  them  to  be 
heretical.  But  it  certainly  gives  us  no  prepos- 
session in  their  behalf — it  rather  affords  a  pre- 
sumption against  them.  And  this  presumption 
is  strengthened  when  we  recollect  that  they  sunk 
in  repute  and  died  away,  as  men  awoke  from  the 
delirious  dreams  in  which  they  had  mistaken  vi- 
sions for  reality,  and  substituted  their  own  fancies 
for  the  dictates  of  the  Spirit,  and  as  they  returned 
to  that  grave,  unprejudiced,  enlightened,  and 
prayerful  consideration  of  the  Scriptures  by  which 
alone  we  can  ever  correctly  ascertain  what  God 
would  have  us  to  believe  and  to  do  that  we  may 
be  saved. 

Nor  must  I  forget  to  state,  that  these  Anti- 
nomian  doctrines  did  not  fall  into  oblivion,  with- 
out having  first  demonstrated  their  ungodliness 
in  the  practical  effects  which  they  produced.  It 
might  have  been  easily  foreseen  that  they  would 
lead  to  immoralities  of  every  kind.  To  beUeve 
them,  and  yet  to  continue  holy,  was  a  state  of 


SERMON  X.  265 

character  not  likely  to  be  realized.     It  could  not 
be  supposed  that  where  impunity  was  positively 
annexed  to  every  transgression,   the  passions  of 
our  fallen  nature  would  abstain  from  indulgence, 
or  submit  to  be  controlled.     And  the  fact  corres- 
ponded with  the  probability.    Those  who  imbibed 
the  heresy,  took  occasion  and  encouragement  to 
sin.     They  felt  that  there  could  be  no  hazard  in 
committing  the  iniquity  which  was  already  par- 
doned, and  which,  let  it  be  as  gross  and  as  heinous 
as  it  might,  could  never  subject  them  to  condem- 
nation.   And  the  fear  of  consequences  being  thus 
removed,  and  the  path  of  sin  having  been  cleared 
of  all  its  ruggedness  and  all  its  terrors,  they  gave 
themselves  up  to  every  vicious  gratification,  and 
did  "work  all  uncleanness  with  greediness."  Habits 
of  moral  depravity,  added  to  the  daring  freedoms 
they  had  taken  in  interpreting  the  will  of  God, 
led  to  a  dereliction  of  religious  principle  ;  and  the 
wickedness  of  their  lives,  combined  in  unholy  al- 
liance with  the  impiety  of  their  minds,   made 
Christianity,  as  a  Divine  revelation,  hateful    to 
them,  and  sooner  or  later  dragged  them  into  in- 
fidelity.    We  do  not  say  that  this  was  the  case 
with  all  of  them.     Some  had  such  strength  of 
faith  as  to  resist  the  natural  tendency  of  their  er- 
rors, and  others  were  reclaimed  before  they  had 
proceeded  far  on  their  career.     But  it  was  the 
fate  of  many,  under  the  government  of  those 

K 


266  SERMON  X. 

principles  which  included  universal  pardon,  first 
to  become  abandoned  profligates,  and  then  to  de- 
generate into  hopeless  and  accomplished  infidels. 
I  utter  no  predictions ;  but  the  experience  of  the 
past  is  intended  to  read  lessons  on  the  events  of 
the  future ;  and  it  may  be  useful  to  consider 
whether  we  have  any  greater  security  than  they 
had  in  former  ages,  if  indeed  we  have  not  less, 
against  the  natural  tendency  of  the  same  causes 
to  produce  the  same  disastrous  effects. 

But  then  we  are  told,  in  answer  to  the  allega- 
tion of  such  dangers  as  we  have  now  adverted  to, 
that  the  leading  advocates  of  universal  pardon  at 
present  are  wise,  and  pious,  and  holy  men. 

To  their  wisdom  as  teachers  of  divine  science, 
I  must  refuse  to  give  my  testimony.  I  demur  to 
that  being  considered  as  one  of  their  characteris- 
tics. Most  unequivocally  do  I  deny  their  pos- 
session of  it.  All  that  I  see,  and  hear,  and  know 
of  them  in  this  respect,  gives  me  the  irresistible 
impression  that  as  to  the  matter  in  hand  they  are 
unwise — they  neither  clearly  comprehend,  nor  do 
they  "  rightly  divide,  the  word  of  truth." 

But  when  piety  and  holiness  are  ascribed  to 
them,  I  cheerfully  concur  in  the  commendation. 
If  all  the  tribute  that  is  claimed  for  them  have 
respect  to  their  personal  and  spiritual  worth,  that 
is  a  tribute  which  is  justly  due,  which  I  pay  down 


SERMON  X.  267 

at  this  moment,  and  which  I  pay,  not  merely 
without  reluctance,  but  with  pleasure.  And  I 
only  wish  that  they  could  be  prevailed  upon  to 
cast  away  the  heresies  to  which  they  are  so  eager- 
ly attached,  in  order  to  make  our  esteem  unqua- 
hfied,  and  that  many  who  censure  their  zeal  in 
propagating  these,  would  imitate  them  in  their 
heavenly  conversation,  their  devotedness  to  God, 
and  their  benevolence  to  men. 

The  truth  is,  that,  had  we  deemed  them  other 
than  men  of  God,  and  not  deserving  of  the  re- 
spect which  they  receive,  we  might  have  been 
tempted  to  let  their  errors  pass  away — as,  in  that 
case,  they  would  quickly  have  done — into  con- 
tempt and  forgetfulness.  Absurd,  unscriptural, 
and  dangerous  as  their  pecuhar  opinions  are,  these 
could  only  have  been  buoyed  tip  and  acquired 
distinction  by  those  moral  qualities  with  which 
they  are  associated.  And  while  I  am  anxious  to 
make  all  requisite  acknowledgment  of  the  latter, 
1  would  insist  upon  separating  them  entirely  from 
the  former,  that  your  minds  may  not  be  unduly 
influenced  and  biassed,  in  pronouncing  judgment 
on  the  existing  subject  of  dispute.  Granting  to 
the  individuals  who  are  the  chief  patrons  and 
promoters  of  the  obnoxious  tenet,  all  the  ami- 
ableness  and  all  the  respectability  that  can  be 
,.  ipredicated  of  them,  still  I  do  not  see  what  it  has 
to  do  with  the  truth  or  the  falsehood  of  the  doc- 


268  SERMON  X. 

trine  of  universal  pardon — farther  than  this,  that 
you  are  extremely  apt  to  be  deceived  into  an  easy 
reception  of  the  one  by  your  cordial  admiration 
of  the  other,  and  that  your  attention  should  be 
directed  to  the  essential  difference  that  subsists 
between  the  two. 

Could  you  ascertain  that  their  excellence  had 
been  created  by  their  doctrine,  this  connexion 
might  furnish  a  plausible  argument  for  embrac- 
ing the  doctrine,  though  its  truth  must  still  be 
determined  only  by  its  conformity  to  the  volume 
of  inspiration — there  being  no  other  legitimate 
and  conclusive  test  of  Christian  principle  but  that 
sacred  record.  But  such  a  connexion  cannot  be 
established,  the  excellence  having,  in  point  of 
chronological  order,  preceded  the  doctrine.  And 
then  though  the  order  had  been  difPerent,  and 
though  we  had  found  the  two  co-existing  harmo- 
niously in  the  same  persons,  any  argument  de- 
duced in  favour  of  the  doctrine  from  that  circum- 
stance, would  have  been  met  and  neutralized  by  the 
far  broader  and  more  mvdtifarious  fact,  that  thou- 
sands and  tens  of  thousands,  who  have  held  and 
are  holding  the  opposite  doctrine,  have  made  the 
highest  attainments  in  Christian  godliness  and 
virtue,  and  demonstrated  themselves  to  be  emi- 
nent saints  as  well  as  sound  believers.  If  such 
reasoning  is  entitled  to  have  any  weight  at  all, 
the  abettors  of  universal  pardon  must  give  way 


SERMON  X.  269 

to  those  who  maintain  the  doctrine  of  Justifica- 
tion as  taught  in  the  pages  of  our  ecclesiastical 
standards. 

We  have  to  remark,  however,  that  in  certain 
cases,  doctrinal  error  is  not  incompatible  with  most 
fervent  piety  and  most  exemplary  conduct.* 

Such  combinations,  indeed,  do  not  exist  in 
general.  In  general,  the  mind  and  the  deport- 
ment will  have  their  moral  complexion  decidedly 
and  habitually  affected  by  the  nature  of  the  creed 
that  is  embraced,  and  of  the  opinions  that  are  en- 
tertained. We  are  taught  to  expect  this  from  the 
constitution  of  human  nature,  and  from  the  state- 
ments of  holy  writ ;  and  we  find  it  realized  in  ex- 
perience. 

And,  therefore,  let  no  one  underrate  the  import- 
ance of  sound  opinions,  or  feel  contented  with  any 
kind  of  sentiments  respecting  gospel  truth,  pro- 
vided only  these  produce  no  deleterious  effects  on 
the  temper  and  the  practice.  Independently  of 
their  practical  influence,  correct  notions  of  what 
God  has  revealed  are  most  honourable  to  him, 
and,  on  that  account,  are  things  which  should  not 
be  regarded  with  indifference.  But  it  should 
never  be  forgotten  that  mistakes  in  one  depart- 
ment of  the  system  of  belief  are  apt  to  gender 
others  where  they  will  be  of  still  greater  moment, 
and  will  do  still  greater  mischief.     And  it  should 

"  See  Note  T, 


270  SERMON  X. 

as  little  be  forgotten  that  a  wrong  faith  must 
more  or  less,  in  one  respect  or  another,  tend  to 
occasion  some  defects,  or  to  create  some  faults,  in 
the  dispositions  or  the  behaviour,  the  worship  or 
the  morality,  of  those  who  sincerely  maintain  it. 
So  that  you  cannot  be  too  careful  to  acquire  for 
yourselves,  and  to  inculcate  upon  others,  the 
most  accurate  conceptions  of  all  that  the  Spirit 
of  God  has  been  pleased  to  promulgate  for  your 
instruction  in  divine  things.  In  every  case  this 
should  be  subject  of  solicitude.  And  it  should  be 
more  especially  and  minutely  attended  to,  where 
the  points  at  issue  have  a  near  and  influential  re- 
lation to  the  more  immediate  principles  of  human 
conduct  and  of  Ch:istian  character. 

But  still,  though  the  rule  is  aswehave  now  stat- 
ed it  to  be,  there  are  exceptions  to  it.  We  some- 
times see  individuals  far  wrong  in  their  doctrinal 
views,  and  yet  "walking  in  the  commandments  and 
ordinances  of  the  Lord,  blameless,""  and  especially 
remarkable  for  their  spirituality  and  devotion.  So 
much  are  they  under  the  influence  of  sanctifying 
grace,  and  so  peculiarly  balanced  and  disciplined 
is  their  spiritual  frame,  that  the  natural  tendency 
of  these  views  is  restrained ;  what  they  contain 
of  evil  motive  is  removed  to  a  distance,  as  it  were, 
from  the  springs  of  action,  and  the  sound  and 
healthful  principles  of  the  divine  life  are  kept  so 
continually  present  to  the  thoughts,  and  in  such 
close  contact  with  the  affections,  and  in  such  vi- 


SERMON  X.  271 

gorous  and  unceasing  exercise,  that  they  overpow- 
er all  the  counter  working  of  what  would  other- 
wise lead  to  ungodly  and  unrighteous  living. 
Examples  of  this  have  actually  occurred.  I 
might  mention  one,*  whose  piety  and  holiness 
can  scarcely  be  questioned  by  any  candid  mind, 
and  who  yet  held  opinions  which  must  be  deemed 
extremely  erroneous — maintaining,  for  instance, 
that  "  man  rises  again  immediately  after  death, 
and  is  then  a  real  substantial  man  in  perfect  hu- 
man form," — that  "the  general  judgment  has  been 
already  accomplished" — that  "  the  sacrifice  of 
Jesus  Christ  did  not  consist  in  his  suffering  the 
punishment  due  to  sinners," — and  that  "  he 
himself  had  communications  with  the  spiritual 
world  and  revelations  from  heaven,  as  the  Apos- 
tles Paul  and  Peter  had."  And  surely  it  will  not 
be  denied  that  many  a  Roman  Catholic  has  spent 
his  days  in  close  and  devout  communion  with  his 
God,  and  has  abounded  in  godliness  and  good 
works,  and  walked  steadfastly  and  perseveringly 
heavenward,  though  all  the  while  he  had  not 
renounced  his  belief  respecting  transubstantiation, 
and  the  infallibility  of  the  Pope,  and  the  power 
of  the  priest  to  grant  absolution,  and  the  proprie- 
ty and  efficacy  of  extreme  unction.  We  say  that 
these  and  similar  instances  which  might  be  no- 

*  Baron  Swedenborg:. 


272  SERMON  X. 

ticed,  give  proof  of  the  possibility  of  being  pious 
and  holy,  and  yet  having  the  mind  possessed  with 
opinions,  which,  if  they  are  allowed  to  take  prac- 
tical effect,  will  lead  directly  to  enthusiasm,  su- 
perstition, carelessness,  presumptuous  sins,  and 
prove  hostile  to  the  cultivation  of  that  character 
which  the  Bible  is  intended  and  calculated  to 
form  in  all  who  put  themselves  under  its  guid- 
ance. God's  overruling  and  sovereign  grace  has 
interposed  to  put  an  arrest  upon  the  natural 
course  of  what  would  otherwise  have  operated  to 
the  production  of  manifold  evils. 

But  would  it  therefore  be  right  to  give  your 
countenance  to  the  errors  which  pervade  either  of 
the  systems  alluded  to — or  to  regard  them  with 
indifference — or  to  refrain  from  opposing  those 
who  are  active  in  giving  them  extensive  circula- 
tion ?  No  more  can  it  be  right  to  treat  with  un- 
concern or  indulgence  the  heresy  of  universal 
pardon,  or  to  abstain  from  withstanding  to  the 
very  face,  such  as  give  their  days  and  their  nights 
to  the  dissemination  of  it,  however  consecrated 
they  may  be  to  the  service  of  God,  and  however 
animated  by  good  will  to  men.  Their  doctrine  con- 
tradicts the  word  of  God,  and  brings  ridicule  on 
the  gospel  of  Christ,  though  they  mean  it  not, 
and  though  they  know  it  not ;  and  that  is  a  com- 
manding reason  for  our  giving  it  no  quarter,  and 
showing  its  authors  no  deference.     It  is  inimical 


SERMON  X.  273 

to  the  cause  of  piety  and  virtue,  for  though  they 
themselves,  from  having  been  previously  grounded 
and  settled  in  the  faith  which  "  purifies  the  heart,"" 
and  having  had  their  minds  previously  trained 
to  the  exercises  of  godliness,  are  proof  against  its 
demoralizing  influence,  yet  its  influence  is  such 
as  to  hold  out  direct  encouragement  to  the  grati- 
fications of  appetite  and  passion.  It  will  assert  its 
native  mastery  over  those  who  are  constitutionally 
weak,  and  mingling  much  in  the  world,  and  expos- 
ed to  strong  temptations ;  and  when  it  gets  among 
the  crowd  whose  predispositions  are  already  on  the 
side  of  licentiousness,  it  will  be  found  an  over- 
match for  all  the  restraints  which  have  been  hi- 
therto employed  to  awe  them  into  the  decencies 
and  honesties  of  conduct.  And  being  thus  inimi- 
cal to  the  cause  of  piety  and  virtue,  we  should  be 
the  worst  enemies  of  our  kind,  if  we  did  not  pro- 
claim war  against  it,  and  struggle  manfully  and 
relentlessly  for  its  extermination. 

It  is  on  these  accounts  that  I  am  anxious  to 
break  asunder  that  tie  by  which  it  is  bound  in 
your  conceptions  to  the  Christian  graces  of  those 
who  take  the  lead  in  pressing  it  upon  the  credu- 
lity of  the  young,  and  the  ignorant,  and  the  sim- 
ple, who  come  within  the  sphere  of  their  attrac- 
tion. This  alliance  is  an  alliance  in  fact,  but  not 
in  principle — I  should  rather  say  in  appearance, 
but  not  in  reality.     I  would  have  you  to  look  at 


274  SERMON  X. 

the  doctrine  of  universal  pardon  apart  from  the 
character  of  its  authors,  with  which  the  right  or 
the  wrong  that  may  be  in  it  has  nothing  to  do. 
I  would  have  you  to  look  at  it  in  the  light  of 
Scripture,  which  is  no  respecter  of  persons,  and 
which  condemns  it  in  every  page.  I  would  have 
you  to  look  at  it  as  bearing  upon  the  principles 
and  propensities  of  our  fallen  nature  in  all  its  di- 
versified conditions,  that  you  may  see  how  neces- 
sarily it  genders  those  things  for  "  whose  sake, 
the  wrath  of  God  cometh  upon  the  children  of 
disobedience."  And  if  you  will  but  contemplate 
it  in  these  points  of  view,  I  trust  you  will  allow 
no  degree  of  heavenly-mindedness,  and  no  sanc- 
tity of  deportment  with  which  it  may  happen  to 
be  associated,  to  prevent  you  from  regarding  it 
with  abhorrence,  and  resisting  it  with  firmness. 

Many  of  our  opponents  are  rather  fond,  and 
apparently  somewhat  proud,  of  referring  to  the 
personal  excellence  of  those  who  have  been  most 
forward  in  propagating  their  tenets.  But  is  not 
this  inconsistent  with  their  renunciation  of  all 
human  authority  in  matters  of  faith  ?  The  in- 
consistency is  the  greater,  that  the  authority  here 
relied  on  derives  its  weight  chiefly  from  those  qua- 
lities, which  do  not  constitute  a  man's  pecuHar 
fitness  for  expounding  the  Scriptures,  and  giving 
a  correct  and  consistent  view  of  the  truths  of  the 

I 


SERMON  X.  275 

gospel.  A  man  does  not  make  any  approach  to 
infallibility  of  judgment,  merely  because  he  is 
much  given  to  prayer,  and  is  adorned  with  many 
of  the  beauties  of  holiness.  The  Bible  lays  great 
stress  on  knowledge  and  wisdom  and  spiritual  un- 
derstanding, even  for  private  Christians.  And 
much  more  must  these  be  requisite  for  such  as 
venture  to  say  that  all  the  Christians  that  have 
gone  before  them,  and  all  the  Christians  that  are 
around  them,  have  mistaken  the  meaning  of  the 
Scripture  on  the  most  essential  points  of  faith,  and 
that  they  have  discovered,  and  explained,  and 
made  indisputable,  that  which  was  dark  and  unin- 
telligible to  all  besides.  So  that,  here,  any  ap- 
peal to  their  chief  men  on  the  mere  ground  of 
moral  worth  is  especially  inappropriate  and  inad- 
missible. 

But  still  it  is  a  leading  maxim  with  them,  that 
in  such  concerns,  human  authority  is  not  to  be 
allowed  or  submitted  to.  And  truly,  if  they  only 
mean  that  we  must  not  permit  any  of  our  fellow- 
creatures  to  dictate  to  us  what  we  are  to  believe, 
and  thus  denude  ourselves  of  our  independent 
right,  of  our  protestant  privilege,  to  search  the 
Scriptures  for  ourselves — if  they  only  mean  this, 
we  cordially  agree  with  them,  and  would  exhort 
them  to  "  stand  fast  in  that  liberty.""  But  if  they 
mean  that  we  are  not  to  take  assistance  from 
others  in  our  efforts  to  understand  the  word  of 


276  SERMON  X. 

God — that  we  are  not  to  take  assistance  from 
any  one  who  is  capable  of  rendering  it — that 
we  are  not  to  take  it  in  a  particular  man- 
ner from  those  whose  endowments,  and  stu- 
dies, and  experience,  all  fit  them  \  for  throwing 
light  on  what  is  obscure,  in  the  sacred  volume — 
if  this  be  their  meaning,  I  must  dissent  from  it 
as  at  once  foolish,  hurtful,  and  unscriptural.  That 
this,  however,  is  the  import  of  their  maxim  we 
are  inclined  to  believe  from  what  they  say  when 
we  refer  to  certain  commentaries  from  whose  writ^ 
ings,  I  am  sure,  both  you  and  I  have  often  re- 
ceived much  comfort  and  instruction.  When  in 
order  to  aid  us  in  settling  any  disputed  point,  we 
would  consult  good  Matthew  Henry,  or  good  Mr. 
Scott,  or  good  Dr.  Doddridge,  we  are  cut  short 
in  our  appeal  by  being  reminded  that  these  are 
but  human  authorities — and  we  are  moreover 
told  that  one  and  all  of  them  were  ignorant  of  the 
truth — and  it  is  even  insinuated  as  a  matter  of 
justifiable  doubt,  whether  they  are  now,  wherein 
our  simplicity  we  have  always  believed  such  holy 
men  to  be  ! 

And  yet  their  practice  does  not  always  square 
with  their  maxim.  If  the  authority  happens  to 
be  against  them,  then  they  resolutely  reject  it, 
and  interpone  their  own  ability,  by  the  help  of 
the  Spirit,  whose  illumination  they  claim  to  enjoy 
in  as  liberal  measure  as  any  of  the  departed  saints 


SERMON  X.  277 

that  we  have  named,  to  understand  what  the  pass- 
age of  Scripture  which  is  under  discussion  signifies. 
But  if  the  authority  happens  to  be  in  their  favour, 
its  explanations  and  its  statements  are  listened  to 
with  the  utmost  readiness,  and  received  as  from 
"the  excellent  glory."  Were  not  this  the  case,  why 
do  they  listen  so  complacently  and  so  submissive- 
ly to  the  commentaries  of  the  living,  whom  they 
employ  to  edify  them  ;  as  if  these  could  have  any 
more  of  the  divine  sanction  than  the  commenta- 
ries of  the  dead,  who  were  honoured  to  win  many 
souls  to  Christ,  and  whose  praise  is  in  all  the 
churches  ?  Why  should  they  recommend  pilgrim- 
ages to  that  temple  in  which  alone,  of  all  the  tem- 
ples in  our  favoured  land,  the  true  doctrine  is 
preached,  and  the  true  worship  is  performed  ? 
W'^hy  are  certain  books  and  tracts  circulated,  as 
containing  or  unfolding  what  the  initiated  must 
abide  by,  and  the  uninitiated  must  receive  ?  Why 
are  particular  individuals  spoken  of,  resorted  to, 
and  quoted  as  expounders  of  the  system,  as  oracles 
of  the  truth,  as  discoverers  of  the  gospel  ? 

Nay,  we  find,  that  when  it  answers  their  pur- 
pose, they  can  attempt  to  prop  up  their  argu- 
ments by  calling  in  the  aid  of  foreign  churches, 
and  foreign  divines.  And  even  here  it  appears 
to  us  that  the  authorities  are  misquoted,  and  their 
opinions  misrepresented.  We  care  not  much 
what  the  Protestant  churches  of  France,  or  even 

6 


278  SERMON  X. 

what  Luther  himself  held  on  the  subject  of  uni- 
versal pardon,  so  long  as  we  have  the  Scriptures 
from  which  they  derived  their  creed,  and  can 
judge  for  ourselves.  But,  in  justice  to  both  of 
these,  who  have  been  dragged  in  to  give  counte- 
nance to  a  doctrine  so  palpably  at  variance  with 
the  doctrine  of  revelation,  we  must  openly  state, 
that  when  their  confessions  and  writings  are  im- 
partially perused,  and  fairly  interpreted,  they  will 
be  found  guiltless  of  any  such  heresy. 

And,  in  particular,  we  apprehend,  that  the 
great  Reformer  has  been  much  misunderstood  and 
uncandidly  dealt  with.  Even  though  he  had  fa- 
voured the  doctrine  of  universal  pardon,  let  not 
our  opponents  take  refuge  in  his  name,  unless 
they  will  also  consent  to  adopt  his  views  on  Con- 
substantiation,  andon  whatever  other  point  he  may 
have  been  unscriptural  and  unsound.  But  we 
think  it  clear,  when  one  part  of  his  statement  is 
compared  with  another,  and  the  whole  system 
which  he  embraced  is  considered  in  connexion, 
that  he  did  not  distinctly  entertain  the  opinion  so 
willingly  imputed  to  him.  There  are  expressions 
in  his  work  on  the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians,  which 
seem  to  intimate  that  opinion,  and  which,  when 
taken  in  an  insulated  form,  do  perhaps  plainly 
enough  contain  it.  But  it  should  be  recollected 
that  when  he  wrote,  his  grand  controversy  was 
with  the  church  of  Rome  as  to  the  ground  of  a 


SERMON  X.  279 

sinner''s  acceptance  -with  God,  and  that  as  his  an- 
tagonists maintained  the  doctrine  of  that  accept- 
ance resting  on  human  merit,  which  Luther  just- 
ly considered  as  striking  at  the  very  root  of  the 
gospel  as  a  scheme  of  divine  mercy,  and  makingthe 
work  of  Christ  of  none  effect,  so  he  in  maintain- 
ing the  opposite  doctrine,  which  he  looked  on  as  of 
the  last  importance,  as  the  essential  article  which 
served  as  a  touchstone  to  a  standing  or  a  falling 
church,  he  was  tempted  to  yield  to  the  natural 
vehemence  of  his  temper,  and  employ  language 
much  stronger  and  more  unlimited  in  its  literal 
meaning,  than  was  at  all  necessary  for  conveying 
what  he  thought  and  wanted  to  express.  Let  it 
be  recollected,  moreover,  that  in  the  very  book  in 
which  he  is  said  to  teach  the  doctrine  of  universal 
pardon,  he  states  sentiments  and  uses  phraseology 
which  are  at  complete  variance  with  it;  as  for  ex- 
ample when  he  says,  "  The  32d  psalm  witness- 
eth,  that  the  faithful  do  confess  their  unrighteous- 
ness, and  pray  that  the  wickedness  of  their  sin 
may  be  forgiven."  "  Moreover  the  whole  church, 
which  indeed  is  holy,  prayeth  that  her  sins  may 
be  forgiven  her,  and  it  believeth  the  forgiveness 
of  sins.*"* 

Above  all,  let  it  be  recollected,  that  even  in  those 
confessions  in  which  the  principles  of  the  Re- 

•  See  Note  U. 


280  SERMON  X. 

formers  are  embodied,  and  from  which  we  may 
best  learn  the  sentiments  which  they  had  clearly 
and  deliberately  formed  on  every  essential  topic 
of  Christianity,  we  have  that  very  account  of  par- 
don and  justification  which  is  given  in  the  stan- 
dards of  our  church,  and  which,  as  it  stands  there, 
finds  no  favour  from  our  opponents.  In  a  con- 
fession sanctioned  and  recommended  by  Luther, 
we  meet  with  the  following  statements. 

"  Justification  takes  place  when  in  the  just 
judgment  of  God,  our  sins  and  the  eternal 
punishment  due  to  them  are  remitted,  and  when 
clothed  with  the  righteousness  of  Christ,  which  is 
freely  imputed  to  us,  and  reconciled  to  God,  we 
are  made  his  beloved  children  and  heirs  of  eternal 
life."*"  And  again, — "  There  is  nothing  whereby 
men  can  deliver  themselves  from  sin,  and  escape 
deserved  punishment,  except  Jesus  Christ,  who 
alone  is  able  to  rescue  all  the  elect  from  sin,  the 
wrath  of  God,  eternal  condemnation."  And 
again,  "  True  penitents,  though  altogether  desti- 
tute of  every  righteousness  of  their  own,  yet  in 
dependence  on  the  righteousness  of  Christ,  they 
flee  to  the  throne  of  God's  grace,  and  there  im- 
plore his  mercy  and  the  remission  of  their  sins, 
and  that  on  account  of  the  merit  and  satisfaction 
of  his  only  begotten  Son."* 

•  See  Note  X. 


SERMON  X.  281 

Was  it  possible,  my  friends,  for  Luther,  to 
entertain  such  sentiments  as  these,  and  at  the 
same  time  to  entertain  the  sentiments  ascribed  to 
him  on  the  subject  of  universal  pardon  ?  It  can- 
not be :  and  therefore,  when  he  is  represented  as 
holding  the  latter,  he  has  either  been  wholly  mis- 
apprehended, or  his  inconsistency  is  such  that 
any  appeal  to  his  authority  is  quite  nugatory  and 
vain. 

It  is  evident,  indeed,  that  had  Luther's  atten- 
tion been  turned  to  such  a  doctrine,  it  would  have 
shared  richly  in  that  indignation  with  which  he 
attacked  the  system  of  indulgences  that  was  prac- 
tised in  the  church  of  Rome.  It  is  the  worst 
species  of  indulgence.  The  indulgences  of  the 
church  of  Rome  depend  upon  the  good  pleasure 
of  the  Pope,  and  he  may  be  pleased  to  withhold 
them  from  every  one,  or  to  any  extent  he  thinks 
proper.  But  the  indulgence  that  flows  from  the 
doctrine  of  universal  pardon,  as  maintained  and 
taught  by  our  opponents,  cannot  be  withheld 
from  any  man.  It  comprehends  all  sinners  with- 
in its  wide  embrace.  It  is  already  granted  for 
the  past,  the  present,  and  the  future — gifted  by 
divine  mercy — written  by  the  finger  of  God  in 
his  immutable  word — sealed  by  the  blood  of  his 
incarnate  Son — and  the  irrevocable  privilege  of 
every  profligate  that  infests  the  world,  as  well  as 
of  every  saint  that  adorns  the  church  ! 


282  SERMON  X. 

Such  is  the  doctrine  of  our  opponents,  which, 
I  will  venture  to  affirm,  is  supported  by  no  esta- 
blished authority  from  which  they  would  be  will- 
ing to  profess  much  reverence  ;  to  which  the 
authority  of  the  best  and  wisest  of  themselves 
can  afford  no  recommendation,  if  we  may  judge 
by  the  knowledge  of  Scripture,  and  powers  of  rea- 
soning, which  they  have  yet  been  able  to  exhibit ; 
and  whose  inherent  contrariety  to  the  first  prin- 
ciples of  moral  government,  and  moral  obligation, 
all  the  human  authorities  in  the  world  are  insuf- 
ficient to  alter  or  annul. 

On  the  subject  of  authority  in  matters  of  re- 
ligion, I  do  not  think  it  necessary  to  expatiate. 
I  have  ever  told  you  and  urged  it  upon  you, 
that  so  far  as  authority,  strictly  and  properly 
speaking,  is  to  be  submitted  to,  that  authority 
belongs  to  the  word  of  God,  and  to  the  word  of 
God  alone.  On  points  of  Christian  faith  and 
practice,  you  are  to  call  no  man  master  upon 
earth.  You  are  to  consult  the  oracles  of  truth, 
and  by  these  you  are  to  be  exclusively  guided, 
as  to  what  you  are  to  believe  and  do  for  your  eter- 
nal salvation.  This  is  a  principle  which  should 
not  only  be  admitted,  but  have  a  fixed  residence 
in  your  mind,  and  a  practical  influence  over  all 
your  judgments  and  actings.  In  every  case 
your  watchword  should  be  "to  the  law  and  to 
the  testimony."" 


SERMON  X.  283 

But  though  this  is  a  position  of  indisputable 
truth,  and  of  primary  importance,  it  does  not  su- 
persede the  propriety  and  necessity  of  your  tak- 
ing assistance  from  such  of  your  fellow-creatures 
as  are  qualified  to  give  it,  in  order  that  you  may 
more  fully  and  clearly  comprehend  what  God  has 
revealed.  In  every  important  concern  of  life, 
we  need  help ;  and  we  ask  it,  and  we  take  it, 
from  such  as  are  wiser  and  abler  than  ourselves. 
And  it  is  neither  rational  nor  scriptural  that  we 
should  refuse  such  help  in  our  attempts  to  under- 
stand God's  word, — our  right  understanding 
of  which  is  the  most  important  of  all  the  con- 
cerns that  can  engage  our  attention,  or  aifect  our 
well-being.  Why  has  the  great  Head  of  the 
Church  appointed  an  order  of  men  to  be  teachers 
and  expounders  of  Christianity,  if  yet  it  is  un- 
lawful or  unsafe  to  take  any  human  help  what- 
ever, in  any  circumstances,  or  for  any  purpose  ? 
And  what  would  the  great  bulk  even  of  our  read- 
ing and  more  intelligent  population  have  been, 
had  they  not  received  edification  from  the  works 
of  departed  worthies,  and  from  the  labours  of 
Kving  instructors .''  They  might  have  been  an 
easier  prey  to  the  preachers  of  universal  pardon  ; 
but  they  would  neither  have  had  that  extent  of 
knowledge,  nor  that  holiness  of  practice,  by  which 
so  many  of  them  are  distinguished.  The  idea 
of  a  man  setting  up  for  himself  as  altogether  in- 


284  SERMON  X. 

dependent  of  his  more  gifted  fellows,  and  not 
only  refusing  all  aid  from  them  as  unnecessary, 
but  rejecting  it  as  mischievous,  is  pure  and  rank 
fanaticism — condemned  alike  by  reason,  by  ex- 
perience, and  by  the  Bible.  Attend  to  these 
monitors,  and  you  will  find  them  telling  you 
with  one  voice,  that  while  the  word  of  God 
should  be  exclusively  your  authoritative  standard, 
and  should  be  continually  and  implicitly  revert- 
ed to,  as  given  by  inspiration,  and  profitable  for 
every  thing,  you  should  employ  all  the  means 
that  providence  has  placed  within  your  reach,  and 
among  others,  take  advantage  of  the  talents,  the 
information,  the  attainments  of  your  Christian 
brethren  for  enabling  you  to  acquire  a  more  ac- 
curate and  more  thorough  acquaintance  with  the 
gospel  and  its  record,  than  you  can  possibly  ob- 
tain by  your  own  isolated  efforts. 

It  is  requisite,  however,  that  you  be  careful  and 
cautious  in  your  choice  of  the  auxiliaries  you 
apply  to  for  this  purpose.  And  I  will  take  the 
liberty  of  warning  you  against  certain  persons 
who,  in  spite  of  all  their  contempt  of  human 
authorities,  are  yet  very  willing  to  be  ranked  among 
them,  and  from  whom  it  will  be  your  wisdom 
and  your  safety  to  turn  away. 

Refuse  all  aid  from  those  who,  instead  of 
looking  in  the  first  instance  to  the  Bible,  and 
drawing  their  religious  sentiments  from  that  in- 


SERMON  X.  285 

fallible  source,  form  a  theory  of  their  own,  and 
then  go  to  the  Bible  in  order  to  find  countenance 
and  proof  for  what  they  have  previously  fancied, 
or  previously  determined,  to  be  the  truth. 

Refuse  all  aid  from  those  who,  without  any 
appropriate  gifts  or  any  suitable  preparation,  set 
about  "  searching  the  Scriptures,"  that  they  may 
work  out  of  their  pages  something  simpler  and 
better,  than  what  has  yet  been  seen  in  them 
since  they  were  first  penned,  and  be  able  to  give 
forth  to  a  wondering  world,  what  is  different 
from,  or  additional  to,  all  that  has  ever  been 
uttered  by  "  the  voice  of  the  shepherds."  Trust 
them  not,  for  they  are  like  inexperienced  and 
unfurnished  navigators,  who  sail  over  the  wide 
ocean  on  a  voyage  of  discovery,  and,  if  they  es- 
cape destruction  from  rocks  of  which  they  had 
got  no  chart,  and  from  storms  for  which  they  had 
made  no  preparation,  come  back  with  intelligence 
which  amounts  to  this,  that  they  mistook  in  one 
case,  trees  for  giants,  and  in  another,  clouds  for 
islands  :  for  the  more  skilful  navigators  who  have 
pursued  the  same  tract,  to  test  the  observations 
of  their  predecessors,  have  ascertained  that  the 
giants  are  all  stationary,  and  still  more  stately 
than  before,  and  that  the  islands  have  all  melted 
into  thin  air,  and  become  altogether  invisible. 
Refuse  all  aid  from  those  who  decry  the  ablest, 


286  SERMON  X. 

and  most  godly,  and  most  experienced  divines, 
as  totally  unworthy  of  your  reverence,  and 
straightway  plant  themselves  in  that  chair  of  in- 
struction from  which  they  have  just  displaced  those 
whom  you  had  been  accustomed  to  regard  as 
masters  in  Israel,  and  insist  upon  your  receiving 
their  interpretation  of  holy  writ  as  the  truth, — 
cease  not  to  whisper  their  peculiar  opinions  in 
your  ear  with  all  the  tone  of  infallibility — and 
give  you  up  as  irrecoverably  lost,  if  you  will  not 
consent  to  be  their  humble  and  obedient  disciples. 
Refuse  all  aid  from  those  who,  affecting  to 
be  guided  by  the  Bible,  to  resort  to  it  for  every 
thing  they  inculcate,  and  to  understand  it  much 
better  than  all  other  commentators,  fix  your  atten- 
tion upon  certain  passages  and  certain  phrases, 
till  these  have  assumed  a  meaning,  and  till  the 
ideas  which  they  are  thus  made  to  convey  have 
swelled  into  a  magnitude,  which  certainly  do  not 
belong  to  them  when  viewed  in  their  proper  con- 
nexion, and  explained  by  the  analogy  of  Scrip- 
ture ;  and  who  in  this  manner  either  destroy  those 
fair  proportions  which  give  strength  and  beauty  to 
the  fabric  of  the  gospel  dispensation,  or  introduce 
into  it  principles  and  materials  which  have  receiv- 
ed no  sanction  from  the  Spirit  of  God,  and  which 
can  have  no  other  effect  than  that  of  weakening 
and  deforming  it. 


SERMON  X.  287 

• 

And  refuse  all  aid  from  those  who,  young  in 
years,  and  indigent  in  knowledge,  and  slender  in 
capacity,  are  bold  enough  to  place  themselves,  as 
interpreters  of  holy  writ,  on  a  level  with  the  most 
aged,  and  the  most  practised,  and  the  most  intel- 
ligent explorers  of  the  sacred  writings,  and  assert 
an  equal  competency  with  them  to  determine  the 
import  of  what  those  writings  contain,  merely  be- 
cause they  have  the  same  Bible  in  their  hands,  and 
the  same  Spirit  to  enhghten  their  minds — forget- 
ting all  the  while  that  the  Spirit  does  not  equalise 
the  intellectual  powers,  and  the  external  means  and 
opportunities  of  those  with  whom  he  dwells, — that 
acquaintance  with  the  original  languages  in  which 
the  Old  and  New  Testaments  were  given  to  the 
world,  long  and  laborious  study  of  the  Sacred 
book,  and  liberal  endowments  of  the  understand- 
ing, whether  natural  or  acquired,  must  confer  a 
superiority  in  this  respect  over  such  as  are  desti- 
tute of  these  advantages, — and  that  the  very  ap- 
pointment of  a  ministry,  to  whom  belong  no  mira- 
culous gifts,  recognises  the  doctrine  that  is  now 
so  arrogantly  put  aside  by  the  merest  Tyros  in  di- 
vine science,  and  teaches  us  that  even  where  there 
is  no  security  from  regular  and  official  training 
for  the  qualifications  that  should  be  possessed  by 
a  trust-worthy  interpreter,  one  man  may  far  excel 
another  as  to  the  degree  in  which  these  are  pos- 


288  SERMON  X. 

* 
sessed,  and  that  with  a  common  portion  of  that 
divine  grace  which  is  needful  for  all,  learning, 
abiUty,  experience,  and  industry,  should  never  be 
set  at  nought  by  those  who,  so  far  from  being 
distinguished  by  such  properties,  have  them  in  a 
very  imperfect  measure,  or  have  them  not  at  all. 


SERMON  XL 


SAME  SUBJECT. 


One  s;reat  recommendation  of  the  doctrine  of 
universal  pardon,  is  said  to  be,  that  it  glorifies 
God  far  more  than  the  common  notions  on  this 
matter  do,  by  investing  him,  in  the  very  highest 
degree,  with  the  character  of  love.  Let  us  exa- 
mine this  idea  somewhat  closely. 

1.  In  the  first  place,  though  it  were  admitted 
that  the  tendency  of  a  doctrine  to  glorify  God  is 
not  merely  a  recommendation  of  its  excellence, 
but  an  evidence  also  of  its  truth — still,  before  we 
receive  it,  we  must  be  satisfied  that  the  tendency 
of  the  doctrine  under  consideration  is  really  such 
as  has  been  asserted.  Now,  if  it  is  said  that  the 
doctrine  of  universal  pardon  goes  to  promote 
.God"'s  glory,  we  deny  the  proposition,  and  affirm 
o 


290  SERMON  XL 

that  it  goes  to  do  the  very  contrary.  Here  then 
is  human  opinion  opposed  to  human  opinion. 
And  how  is  the  contest  to  be  settled  ?  Why,  by 
an  appeal  to  the  Scriptures,  which  are  the  only 
rule  to  direct  us  how  we  are  to  glorify  God.  But 
do  the  Scriptures  say,  that  the  doctrine  of  uni- 
versal pardon  glorifies  God  ?  They  say  no  such 
thing.  Do  the  Scriptures  contain  the  doctrine 
itself  as  revealed  to  our  faith  ?  We  have 
proved  that  it  has  no  sanction  from  them — that 
it  is  utterly  repugnant  to  them.  Do  the  Scrip- 
tures warrant  us  to  glorify  God  according  to  our 
own  conceptions  of  things  "?  No ;  they  give  us  no 
such  licence  or  liberty,  but  plainly  require  us  to 
regard  him  just  as  he  has  made  himself  known 
to  us,  and  to  believe  concerning  him,  and  to 
act  towards  him,  in  conformity  to  the  disclosures 
of  his  will  which  he  has  given  us  in  the  Bible. 
The  argument  we  are  speaking  of  proceeds 
on  the  principle  of  will-worship,  which  is  unwar- 
ranted, smful,  dangerous.  And  it  behoves 
our  opponents  to  take  special  care  that,  in  the 
present  instance,  while  they  flatter  themselves  that 
they  are  glorifying  God,  they  are  not,  in  fact, 
dishonouring  him,  by  misrepresenting  his  perfect 
character,  and  bringing  contempt  on  his  moral 
administration. 

2.  In  the  second  place,  there  is  lafallady  in  the 


SERMON  XI.  291 

view  that  is  taken  of  the  connexion  between  the 
doctrine  of  universal  pardon,  and  the  transcend- 
ant  love  of  God,  and  in  the  reasoning  founded 
upon  it,  which  must  be  pointed  out  and  attended 
to.  We  are  sometimes  told,  that  God''s  being 
love  is  deducible  from  his  bestowal  of  universal 
pardon,  and  at  other  times  we  are  told,  that  the 
doctrine  of  universal  pardon  is  deducible  from  the 
fact  that  God  is  love.  Now  let  us  not  be  de- 
ceived by  such  sophistry.  If  both  statements 
are  found  in  the  word  of  God,  then  they  are  both 
true,  and  may  be  taken  as  mutually  connected,  and 
mutually  illustrative  of  each  other  ;  but  the  truth 
of  the  former  does  not  prove  the  truth  of  the  lat- 
ter, nor  does  the  truth  of  the  latter  prove  the  truth 
of  the  former.  And,  therefore,  we  are  again 
driven  to  the  Scriptures,  where  both  subjects 
are  treated,  and  where  alone  the  truth  of  each 
can  be  ascertained.  But  we  have  already  dis- 
proved the  doctrine  of  universal  pardon  by  refer- 
ence to  Scripture  testimony ;  and  we  now  go  on 
to  dispose  of  the  other  point  by  reference  to  the 
same  conclusive  and  divine  authority. 

3.  We  have  to  observe,  in  the  third  place,  that 
God  is  not  merely  love,  according  to  the  Scripture 
statement,  but  that  he  has  other  attributes  as  es- 
sential and  as  precious  to  him,  as  the  attribute  of 
love.  Our  opponents  may  theorise  as  much  as 
they  please  about  the  amiableness  of  the  divine 


292  SERMON  XL 

nature — and  labour  to  simplify  our  views  of  it 
by  considering  it  as  one  undivided  essence — and 
speculate  as  they  will  on  the  necessity  of  clothing 
it  with   "  unlimited  mercy,"  in  order  that  our  in- 
tercourse witli  Him  to  whom  it  belongs  may  be 
comfortable  and  confident.     And  they  may  mis- 
tify  the  subject  by  telling  us   that  "  pardon  is 
just  another  word  for  the  compassion  of  God," 
and  talk,  in  incomprehensible  phrase,  of  such  a 
thing  as  the  "  holy  love  of  God  against  sin."* 
And  they  may  even  astound  us  by  discovering 
in  the  general  deluge,  and  in  the  destruction  of 
Sodom  and  Gomorrah,  a  manifestation  of  God's 
mercy  to  the  very  victims  of  these  awful  judg- 
ments,— to  the  world  that, being  "overflowed  with 
water,  perished,"  and  to  the  cities  of  the  plain  that 
are    *'  suffering  the  vengeance  of  eternal  fire." 
But  after  listening  to   such  things  with  wonder 
and  with  pity,  we  just  appeal  to  the  manifold  de- 
clarations and  most  intelligible  language  of  that 
inspired  book  which  God  has  put  into  our  hand 
for  giving  us  all  the  information  respecting  him- 
self, which  we  are  either  capable  of  receiving,  or 
which  it  is  necessary  for  us  to  possess.    And  there 
we  find,  if  our  senses  have  not  failed  us,  and  if 
our  understanding  is  not  altogether  in  fault,  that 
while  goodness,  mercy,  compassion,  love,  are  as- 
cribed to  God,  holiness,  justice,  purity,  are  as- 

♦  See  Note  Y. 


SERMON  XL  293 

cribed  to  him  with  equal  plainness,  and  with  equal 
emphasis ;  so  that  if  we  do  not  believe  him  to 
possess  the  latter  as  well  as  the  former,  we  are 
not  believing  in  the  one  living  and  true  God,  but 
in  a  God  whom  we  have  made  for  ourselves  after 
the  imaginations  of  our  own  hearts. 

This  is  not  answered  by  saying,  that  when  we 
understand  those  expressions  literally,  which  speak 
of  God  as  angry,  wrathful,  avenging,  we  attach  to 
him  the  imperfection  and  even  the  sinfulness  of 
human  passions  ;  for  we  do  not  understand  these 
expressions  literaDy,  and  whatever  meaning  we 
affix  to  them,  it  is  always  exclusive  of  every  the 
least  degree  of  frailty  or  of  sin.  In  truth  we  have, 
and  can  have  no  accurate  conceptions  of  any  of 
the  divine  attributes,  abstractly  and  metaphy- 
sically, as  the  attributes  of  an  infinite,  eternal,  and 
immutable  Being.  But  his  love  is  in  this  respect 
as  incomprehensible  as  his  justice.  His  love  is 
as  unlike  the  love  of  fallen  mortals,  as  his  justice 
is  unlike  the  justice  of  fallen  mortals.  As  to 
their  intrinsic  nature  and  excellence,  we  may  af- 
firm of  each  of  them  that  it  "  passeth  knowledge." 
And  shall  we  therefore  infer,  that  God  is  distin- 
guished and  made  glorious  by  none  of  these  at- 
tributes ?  The  inference  is  legitimate  according 
to  the  argument  of  our  opponents,  but  it  is  fool- 
ish and  false,  according  to  the  Bible,  which  as- 
sures us  that  he  has  them  all — in  full  perfection, 


284  SERMON  X. 

dependent  of  his  more  gifted  fellows,  and  not 
only  refusing  all  aid  from  them  as  unnecessary, 
but  rejecting  it  as  mischievous,  is  pure  and  rank 
fanaticism — condemned  alike  by  reason,  by  ex- 
perience, and  by  the  Bible.  Attend  to  these 
monitors,  and  you  will  find  them  telling  you 
with  one  voice,  that  while  the  word  of  God 
should  be  exclusively  your  authoritative  standard, 
and  should  be  continually  and  implicitly  revert- 
ed to,  as  given  by  inspiration,  and  profitable  for 
every  thing,  you  should  employ  all  the  means 
that  providence  has  placed  within  your  reach,  and 
among  others,  take  advantage  of  the  talents,  the 
information,  the  attainments  of  your  Christian 
brethren  for  enabling  you  to  acquire  a  more  ac- 
curate and  more  thorough  acquaintance  with  the 
gospel  and  its  record,  than  you  can  possibly  ob- 
tain by  your  own  isolated  efforts. 

It  is  requisite,  however,  that  you  be  careful  and 
cautious  in  your  choice  of  the  auxiliaries  you 
apply  to  for  this  purpose.  And  I  will  take  the 
liberty  of  warning  you  against  certain  persons 
who,  in  spite  of  all  their  contempt  of  human 
authorities,  are  yet  very  willing  to  be  ranked  among 
them,  and  from  whom  it  will  be  your  wisdom 
and  your  safety  to  turn  away. 

Refuse  all  aid  from  those  who,  instead  of 
looking  in  the  first  instance  to  the  Bible,  and 
drawing  their  religious  sentiments  from  that  in- 


SERMON  X.  285 

fallible  source,  form  a  theory  of  their  own,  and 
then  go  to  the  Bible  in  order  to  find  countenance 
and  proof  for  what  they  have  previously  fancied, 
or  previously  determined,  to  be  the  truth. 

Refuse  all  aid  from  those  who,  without  any 
appropriate  gifts  or  any  suitable  preparation,  set 
about  "  searching  the  Scriptures,"  that  they  may 
work  out  of  their  pages  something  simpler  and 
better,  than  what  has  yet  been  seen  in  them 
since  they  were  first  penned,  and  be  able  to  give 
forth  to  a  wondering  world,  what  is  different 
from,  or  additional  to,  all  that  has  ever  been 
uttered  by  "  the  voice  of  the  shepherds."  Trust 
them  not,  for  they  are  like  inexperienced  and 
unfurnished  navigators,  who  sail  over  the  wide 
ocean  on  a  voyage  of  discovery,  and,  if  they  es- 
cape destruction  from  rocks  of  which  they  had 
got  no  chart,  and  from  storms  for  which  they  had 
made  no  preparation,  come  back  with  intelligence 
which  amounts  to  this,  that  they  mistook  in  one 
case,  trees  for  giants,  and  in  another,  clouds  for 
islands  :  for  the  more  skilful  navigators  who  have 
pursued  the  same  tract,  to  test  the  observations 
of  their  predecessors,  have  ascertained  that  the 
giants  are  all  stationary,  and  still  more  stately 
than  before,  and  that  the  islands  have  all  melted 
into  thin  air,  and  become  altogether  invisible. 
Refuse  all  aid  from  those  who  decry  the  ablest, 


296  SERMON  XI. 

Could  they  but  be  persuaded  to  submit  to  the 
counsel  of  God,  and  to  think  of  him  as  he  has 
manifested  himself  in  his  word,  and  to  resolve 
whatever  difficulties  may  occur  to  them  in  the 
contemplation  of  his  character,  and  of  his  deal- 
ings with  his  creatures,  into  that  will  of  his  for  the 
exercise  of  which  he  is  not  accountable  to  his  uni- 
verse, we  should  have  less  theory  from  them  and 
more  humility,  and  they  would  find  themselves 
necessitated  to  admit  that  God  is  at  once  holy  and 
merciful  and  sovereign,  and  as  thus  perfect,  en- 
titled to  all  godly  fear,  and  child-like  confidence, 
and  profound  adoration,  from  the  highest,  and 
from  the  lowest,  of  his  intelligent  offspring. 

In  tl^.e  fourth  place,  it  is  to  be  noticed,  that  if 
God  be  all  love,  and  if  he  has  not  the  other  at- 
tributes we  have  ascribed  to  him,  except  as  the 
handmaids  of  his  love,  universal  salvation  should 
be  maintained,  and  not  universal  pardon  merely. 
It  might  be  asked  in  that  case,  why  did  God  allow 
sin  and  misery  to  enter  into  his  creation  at  all  ? 
Or  if  this  was  requisite  for  the  fuller  manifesta- 
tion of  his  glory,  that  is,  his  love  ;  why  then 
was  not  all  the  sin  and  all  the  misery,  which  the 
fall  introduced,  completely  swept  away  by  the 
work  of  Christ  as  the  Redeemer  of  apostate  men.^^ 
If  this  is  the  result  which  our  opponents  antici- 
pate, let  them  confess  it  and  be  judged  of  ac- 


SERMON  XL  297 

cordingly.  And  if  they  anticipate  no  such  re- 
sult, then  let  them  reconcile,  if  they  can,  the 
guilt  and  the  wretchedness,  which  are  still  to 
remain  under  the  Divine  administration,  with 
those  exhibitions,  which  they  so  confidently  set 
forth,  and  on  which  they  so  delightedly  expatiate, 
of  the  character  of  God,  as  exclusively,  or  almost 
altogether,  adorned  with  the  attribute,  the  excel- 
lence, the  glory  of  love. 

I  know  not  how  the  advocates  of  universal 
pardon  can  take  their  ideas  of  the  love  of  God 
from  Scripture,  and  yet  confine  it  in  every  case 
to  that  one  blessing.  Those  declarations  which 
express  the  ardour  and  intensity  of  God's  love,  have 
no  reference  to  the  universality  of  its  application 
— but  to  the  riches  by  which  it  is  characterized, 
and  to  the  fulness  and  abundance  of  blessings 
which  all  those  experience  from  it,  on  whom  it 
actually  and  individually  operates.  The  assu- 
rances and  delineations  of  its  exceeding  greatness 
are  intelligible,  when  we  look  to  the  overflowing 
measure  of  benefits  which  it  delights  to  lavish 
upon  them  towards  whom  it  is  directed,  and  to 
their  total  destitution  of  whatever  could  deserve 
its  exercise,  and  to  the  condescension  and  sacri- 
fices with  which  it  has  gone  forth  to  accomplish 
its  purposes.  But  they  are  altogether  incom- 
prehensible, or  they  lead  in  the  most  direct  and 
necessary  manner,  to  the  eternal  blessedness  of 


298  SERMON  XI. 

every  sinner,  if  they  are  to  be  considered  as  re- 
ferring to  the  multitude  of  objects  for  whose 
well-being  it  provides,  because  in  that  case  it  is 
so  vast  and  unbounded,  that  we  do  not  see  how 
a  single  individual  can  be  excluded  from  its  fond- 
est embrace,  and  from  its  largest  bounties. 
And,  indeed,  the  very  language  of  Holy  Writ 
implies  so  clearly  the  doctrine  that  all  who  are 
interested  in  God's  redeeming  love,  receive 
from  that  source  whatever  can  sanctify,  and  com- 
fort, and  guide  them  upon  earth,  and  bring  them 
at  length  to  the  felicities  of  heaven,  as  to  render 
it  impossible  for  any  one  who  admits  the  dogma 
of  universal  pardon,  to  doubt  for  a  moment  that 
every  man  is  sure  of  eternal  salvation.  If  the 
love  of  God  is  consistent,  and  if  the  word  of  God 
is  true,  how  can  we  explain  or  understand  the 
following  passages,  on  any  other  supposition  ? 
"  God  so  loved  the  world,  that  he  gave  his  only 
begotten  Son,  that  whosoever  beheveth  in  him 
should  not  perish,  but  have  everlasting  life  ;  for 
God  sent  not  his  Son  into  the  world  to  condemn 
the  world,  but  that  the  world  through  him  might 
be  saved."*  "  For  scarcely  for  a  righteous  man 
will  one  die  ;  yet  peradveuture  for  a  good  man 
some  will  even  dare  to  die.  But  God  commend- 
eth  his  love  toward  us  in  that,  while  we  were 

*  John  iii.  16,  17. 


SERMON    XL  ^99 

yet  sinners,  Christ  died  for  us.*  "  He  that 
spared  not  his  own  Son,  but  freely  deHvered  him 
to  the  death  for  us  all,  how  shall  he  not  with 
him  also  freely  give  us  all  things. f  "  But  God, 
who  is  rich  in  mercy,  for  his  great  love  where- 
with he  loved  us,  even  when  we  were  dead  in 
sins,  hath  quickened  us  together  with  Christ, 
and  hath  raised  us  up  together,  and  made  us  sit 
together  in  heavenly  places  in  Christ  Jesus. | 
"  For  God  hath  not  appointed  us  to  wrath,  but 
to  obtain  salvation  by  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ ; 
who  died  for  us,  that  whether  we  wake  or  sleep, 
we  should  live  together  with  him.""§  "  Christ 
loved  the  church,  and  gave  himself  for  it,  that 
he  might  sanctify  and  cleanse  it  with  the  wash- 
ing 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  .'"'ll  "  I  am  per- 
suaded, that  neither  death,  nor  life,  nor  angels, 
nor  principalities,  nor  powers,  nor  things  present, 
nor  things  to  come,  nor  height,  nor  depth,  nor 
any  other  creature,  shall  be  able  to  separate  u.n 
from  the  love  of  God,  which  is  in  Christ  Jesu-s 
our  Lord."^   "  Unto  him   that  loved  us,  and 

*  Rom.  V.  7,  8.        t  Rom.  viii.  32-         %  Ephes.  ii.  4—6. 

§  1  Thess.  V.  9,  10.  |1  Eph.  v.  25—27. 

%  Rora.  viii.  38,  39. 


300  SERMON  XI. 

washed  us  from  our  sins  in  his  own  blood,  and 
hath  made  us  kings  and  priests  unto  God,  even 
his  Father ;  to  him  be  glory,  and  dominion  for 
ever,  and  ever.  Amen."*  All  these,  and  many 
other  passages  of  a  similar  kind,  that  might  have 
been  adduced,  are  employed  to  extol  and  il- 
lustrate the  love  of  God,  as  manifested  in  Christ 
Jesus  dying  for  sinners  of  mankind.  And  I  put 
it  to  every  man  who  is  capable  of  drawing  con- 
clusions from  the  plainest  premises  that  can  be 
set  before  him,  whether  he  would  not  infer  from 
what  has  now  been  quoted  from  the  Scriptures, 
not  only  that  God  pardons  those  whom  he  has 
i>o  loved,  as  to  send  his  Son  to  be  a  propitiation 
for  their  sins,  but  that  he  also  gives  them  to 
partake  of  every  other  privilege  that  they  need, 
for  their  complete  and  ultimate  happiness.  It 
is  quite  easy  to  distinguish  between  the  pardon 
and  its  concomitant  blessings — to  contemplate 
them  apart — to  give  them  a  separate  illustration. 
But  if  the  former  flows  from  God's  unbounded 
love  in  Christ,  it  is  impossible  to  avoid  uniting 
the  latter  with  it  as  equally  secured,  and  equally 
bestowed,  and  regarding  every  individual  whose 
sins  are  forgiven,  as  "  an  heir  of  God,  and  a  joint- 
heir  with  Christ,"  of  the  incorruptible  and  never- 
fading  inheritance. 

*  Rev.  i,  5,  6. 


SERMON  XI.  301 

5.  But  in  the  Jifth  and  last  place,  we  aver  that 
the  system  of  our  opponents  shows  no  greater,  it 
shows  less  love  to  sinners  than  ours  does.  According 
to  the  views  which  they  give  of  the  issue  and  effect 
of  Chrisfs  sacrifice,  there  are  fewer  that  will  be  car- 
ried to  heaven,  than  there  are  according  to  the 
views  that  we  maintain,  so  far  at  least  as  we  can 
judge  from  their  doctrine  and  from  experience. 
To  get  to  heaven,  we  must  all  believe  as  they 
do  ;  there  is  otherwise  no  hope  for  us.  On  the 
contrary,  we  hold  no  such  exclusive  doctrine. 
We  maintain  that  all  will  get  to  heaven  who  be- 
lieve in  such  sort  as  that  they  are  new  creatures, 
and  are  devoted  to  God,  and  living  habitually 
under  the  sanctifying  influences  of  his  Holy 
Spirit.  And  then,  though  they  do  secure  par- 
don for  all,  it  does  not  appear  that  they  have 
secured  exemption  from  future  punishment  for 
all.  Every  unbeliever — every  one  that  will  not 
submit  to  Christ — ^becomes  subject  to  that  sen- 
tence which  says,  "  As  for  these  mine  enemies, 
which  would  not  that  I  should  reign  over  them, 
bring  hither  and  slay  them  before  me."  So  that 
this  theory  of  divine  love,  of  which  universal  par- 
don is  curiously  at  once  the  cause  and  the  effect, 
instead  of  providing  for  the  salvation  of  every 
one,  does,  after  all,  provide  for  the  salvation  of  a 
smaller  number  than  the  doctrine  maintained  by 
the  old-fashioned  Christians  of  our  church  ;  and 


302  SERMON  XL 

while  in  its  treatment  of  those  who  are  not  sav- 
ed, but  only  pardoned,  and  yet  scarcely  pardon- 
ed, since  they  are  to  be  punished,  no  tribute  is 
paid  to  Divine  mercy,  the  Divine  wisdom  is  im- 
peached, and  the  Divine  glory  tarnished  and  ob- 
scured. 

Nay  but  there  is  something  more  than  this  in 
the  view  which  our  opponents  give  of  the  love  of 
God  as  exhibited  in  pardoning  every  man.  They 
tell  us  gravely,  and  they  seem  to  lay  stress  upon 
the  proposition,  that  the  sinner  can  derive  no  pos- 
sible benefit  from  his  pardon  except  by  believing 
it  !*    This  I  must  confess  is  somewhat  startling. 

For,  in  the  first  place,  it  is  not  and  it  cannot 
be  true.  If  a  criminal  who  was  condemned  to  be 
publicly  and  ignominously  put  to  death,  has  re- 
ceived a  pardon  from  his  sovereign,  will  this  par- 
don be  of  no  use  to  him  merely  because  he  takes 
it  into  his  head  that  no  such  expression  of  royal 
clemency  has  taken  place  .'*  Must  he  still  be  ex- 
ecuted according  to  his  sentence  .''  And  must  he 
have  all  the  shame  and  agony  of  that  dreaded 
fate  ?  The  appointed  period  for  his  enduring  the 
penalty  of  a  violated  law  arrives,  but  the  penalty 
is  not  inflicted.  Year  after  year  elapses,  and  still 
he  is  in  life.  Is  all  this  nothing  ?  Has  no  boon 
been  conferred.  Is  no  evil  escaped  ?  Is  no  good 
enjoyed  ?  And  how  is  it  otherwise  with  the  sin- 
ner who  has  been  condemned,  but  is  now  pardon- 
*  See  Note  Z. 


SERMON  XI.  303 

ed  of  God  ?  He  was  condemned  to  bear  some 
specific  suffering.  We  need  not  decide  in  what 
it  was  to  consist.  It  is  enough  to  know  that  the 
suffering  was  real  and  to  be  endured  as  a  penalty. 
Well :  through  the  virtue  of  Christ's  death,  the 
sentence  which  adjudged  the  sinner  to  that  suffer- 
ing is  recalled  and  cancelled.  But  he  does  not 
choose  to  believe  this  fact ;  and  because  he  is  ob- 
stinate in  his  unbelief,  he  is  not,  it  seems,  to  be 
benefited  by  it !  Is  the  suffering  then  still  to  be  in- 
flicted upon  him  ?  Or  are  we  to  consider  infliction 
of  suffering  and  exemption  from  it  to  be  one  and 
the  same  thing  ?  And  will  it  be  so  in  his  expe- 
rience ?  Is  it  the  same  thing  to  a  man  whether 
he  be  cast  into  hell,  or  snatched  from  it  ?  There 
may  be  little  difference  to  his  feelings  while  he  re- 
mains in  the  world  of  probation  ;  but  the  ques- 
tion is,  will  there  be  no  difference  in  the  world  of 
retribution  ?  Our  opponents  may  have  failed  to 
convince  him  here  that  he  has  been  pardoned, 
but  there  where  the  threatened  punishment  was 
to  be  endured,  when  no  such  endurance  is  laid 
uppn  him,  can  he  fail  to  be  convinced  of  the  fact  ? 
Or  if  it  should  be  a  part  of  the  new  doctrine  that 
his  conviction  of  the  fact,  if  taking  place  in  eter- 
nity instead  of  taking  place  in  time,  will  not  be 
able  to  make  the  fact  available,  must  it  not  still 
be  true  that  from  the  suffering  to  which  he  was 
doomed  as  a  transgressor  he  will  be  entirely  and 


304  SERMON  XL 

for  ever  free  ?  And  will  it  be  contended  that  no 
benefit  accrues  to  him  from  his  being  delivered 
from  awful,  unconceivable,  and  everlasting  de- 
struction ? 

But,  in  the  second  place,  if  it  be  still  maintain- 
ed that  pardon  is  conferred  upon  the  sinner,  but 
that  the  unbelieving  sinner  derives  no  advantage 
from  it,  then  I  ask,  how  does  all  this  square 
with  those  views  of  God's  love  which  are  enter- 
tained on  the  ground  of  universal  pardon  ?  God 
has  such  strength  of  love  to  a  fallen  world,  we  are 
told,  that  he  could  not  fail  in  giving  his  own  Son 
to  death  for  it,  to  deliver  every  individual  from  the 
curse  of  the  broken  law.  Or — for  we  have  it  both 
ways — every  individual  sinner  is  pardoned,  and  this 
gives  an  affectino-  and  conclusive  demonstration  of 
the  infinite  greatness  of  God's  love  to  his  apostate 
children.  Take  it  either  way  ;  but  how  is  the 
love  of  God  manifested  in  bestowing  that  which 
yet  is  of  no  use  or  benefit  whatever  to  those  on 
whom  it  is  bestowed  ?  He  works  out  an  actual 
deliverance  from  the  greatest  possible  evils,  and 
yet  this  actual  deliverance  is  of  no  service  to  those 
for  whom  it  is  effected  !  Some  how  or  other  they 
have  it — but  some  how  or  other,  they  are  as  if 
they  had  it  not !  It  rescues  them  from  all  the 
pains  of  hell,  and  yet  they  feel  as  if  not  one  of 
those  pains  were  removed  or  mitigated !  The 
undying  worm  is  never  to  gnaw  them — the  un- 


SERMON  XL  305 

quenchable  fire  is  never  to  burn  them  ;  and  yet 
they  will  be  as  miserable  as  if  they  were  to  be  sub- 
jected to  both  !  The  love  of  God  is  thus  magni- 
fied by  giving  much,  and  yet  it  ends  in  giving 
nothing,  where  it  might  have  been  expected  to 
perfect  its  operation  by  giving  ail !  How  is  this 
paradox  to  be  explained  or  solved  ? 

Our  opponents  may  say  that  the  love  of  God 
abounds  in  giving  pardon  to  all,  but  a  setise  of 
pardon,  moreover,  and  sanctifi cation  and  all  other 
blessings,  to  them  that  believe.  But  can  sinners 
believe  of  themselves  ?  If  that  be  a  part  of  the 
system  we  are  combating,  let  it  be  confessed,  and 
then  the  men  who  hold  it  must  no  longer  arrogate 
to  themselves  the  distinction  of  taking  away  all 
merit  from  the  sinful,  dependent  creature.  If 
not — if  sinners  can  only  beheve  when  it  is  given 
them  of  God — then  what  proof  is  afforded  of  the 
divine  love  to  guilty  men,  though  pardon  be  con- 
veyed to  them,  and  yet  that  very  thing  withheld 
which  is  indispensable  for  giving  to  their  pardon 
the  least  degree  of  value  ?  According  to  this 
view,  the  condition  of  sinners  is  not  changed  from 
that  of  danger  to  safety — of  misery  to  happiness, 
till  they  believe.  And  we  affirm  exactly  the  same 
thing.  They  that  believe,  we  say,  and  none  but 
they  that  lelieve,  are  pardoned.  They  that  be- 
lieve, say  our  opponents^  and  none  but  they  that 
believe,  derive  the  slightest  benefit  from  the  par- 


306  SERMON  XL 

don  which  they  received  independently  of  believ- 
ing. Is  there  the  least  substantial  or  tangible 
difference  between  the  two  statements  ?  And  yet 
we  are  told  that  the  latter  affords  a  far  richer  dis- 
play of  the  love  of  God  to  sinners  than  the  former 
— with  what  incorrectness  this  is  asserted,  I  need 
not  occupy  your  time  in  showing,  for  the  bare 
announcement  of  it  is  sufficient  to  satisfy  any  one 
that  to  talk  of  a  difference  here,  is  to  talk  of  a 
nonentity.  But  there  may  be  some  difference  per- 
ceptible when  we  remark  that,  in  the  one  case, 
there  is  attributed  to  God  a  show  and  a  commu- 
nication of  pardoning  mercy  which  has  yet  no 
actual  existence  and  produces  no  sensible  effect, 
while,  in  the  other,  there  is  nothing  attributed  to 
him  in  his  dealing  with  sinners,  which  is  not  rea- 
lized ;  and  that  as  the  whole  result  depends  upon 
faith,  and  that  as  the  faith  inculcated  by  our  op- 
ponents is  incalculably  more  exclusive  than  that 
which  is  inculcated  by  us,  their  doctrine  must 
furnish  a  much  smaller  tribute  than  ours  to  the 
glory  of  God  as  a  God  of  mercy  and  love. 

But,  whatever  there  may  be  in  this,  I  cannot 
help  reverting  to  what  I  formerly  observed  re- 
specting the  necessity  of  attributing  love  to  God 
no  farther  than  his  own  word  has  warranted,  and 
no  farther  than  is  consistent  with  that  revelation 
of  his  character  which  he  himself  has  given  us. 
A  greater  snare  cannot  be  laid  for  your  piety  and 


SERMON  XL 


307 


your  judgment,  than  that  which  consists  in  mak- 
ing love  his  paramount  or  his  only  perfection. 
For  whenever  there  is  a  consciousness  of  guilt, 
and  a  dread  of  responsibility,   it  must  be  com- 
fortable to  have  a  God  who  is  divested  of  all  that 
is  frowning  and  indignant  towards  transgressors, 
and  clothed  with  all  that  is  compassionate  and 
kind.  And  whenever  there  is  a  soft  or  a  sentimen- 
tal temperament  at  work,  that  representation  of  the 
Divine  nature  must   be  pecuHarly  pleasing  and 
acceptable.     And  whenever  men  wish  to  have  a 
religion  which  will  be  without  any  rigorous  ex- 
actions of  self-denial  and  of  duty,   and  without 
any  tendency  to  excite  apprehension  and  alarm, 
the  same  predilection  must  exist  for  a  Supreme 
Ruler,  in  whose  benevolence  all  other  qualities 
are  absorbed  and  lost.     And,   accordingly,  not 
only  is  this  partial  and  unscriptural  view  of  the 
character  of  God  adopted  as  the  leading  principle 
of  certain  systems  of  theology,  but  it  is  held,  and 
cherished,  and  acted  upon  by  multitudes,  whose 
sole  concern  in  matters  of  faith  is  to  have,  not 
what  is  true,  but  what  is  agreeable,  and  who  find 
in  the  tenet  we  are  speaking  of,  the  most  sooth- 
ing and  satisfying  of  all  persuasions, — that  God 
loves  every  one  of  his  creatures  with  such  an  af- 
fection as  is  depicted  in  the  gospel.     I  warn  you 
against   the  delusion — so  dishonourable    to  the 
Holy  One,  the  Everlasting  Father — so  ruinous 


308  SERMON  XL 

to  all  who  have  surrendered  themselves  to  its 
influence — so  inconsistent  with  what  you  read  in 
the  book  of  inspiration — so  destructive  of  that 
mystery  of  godliness  and  of  grace  which  has  been 
made  known  to  us  in  Jesus  Christ.  And  I  warn 
you  with  the  more  earnestness,  because  the  ad- 
vocates of  universal  pardon  push  forward  this 
false  but  fascinating  statement  of  the  Divine  cha- 
racter, as  a  leading  feature  and  chief  recommen- 
dation of  their  scheme, — and  carry  their  heresy 
to  such  an  extravagant  length  as  to  say,  that 
while  God  loves  guilty  men  so  much,  that  for 
Christ's  sake  he  forgives  every  one  of  them, 
whether  they  repent  and  believe  or  not, — he 
also  loves  the  devil,  that  arch  enemy  of  his 
throne  and  of  his  people,  though  this  love  is  so 
anomalous  as  "  not  to  spare"  its  devoted  object, 
but  to  "  deliver  him  into  chains  of  darkness,  to  be 
reserved  unto  judgment,"  and  then  to  cast  him 
"  into  everlasting  fire  prepared  for  him  and  his 
angels."  How  melancholy  that  such  jargon 
should  be  given  forth  and  tolerated  as  precious 
doctrine  !  How  necessary  that  we  abide  by  the 
teaching  of  that  "  word  whose  entrance  alone 
giveth  light !"  How  important  that  "  we  pray 
without  ceasing,"  to  be  kept  from  vain  imagina- 
tions, and  unauthorised  thoughts,  respecting  the 
all-perfect  Jehovah,  and  to  have  all  our  ideas  of 
his  nature,  his  attributes,  and  his  administration 
conformable  to  revealed  truth  ! 


SERMON  Xr.  309 

We  now  proceed  to  consider  the  allegation, 
that  while  the  doctrine  of  universal  pardon  gives 
a  peculiarly  illustrious  display  of  the  love  of  God 
on  the  one  hand,  it  completely  demolishes  the  plea 
of  human  merit  on  the  other. 

Now,  supposing  that  this  were  true,  it  would 
be  no  argument  for  the  truth  of  the  doctrine  in 
question.  Though  the  extent  of  God's  love  to 
sinners  might  be  better  exhibited  by  his  pardon- 
ing them  all,  whether  they  believe  or  not,  than 
by  his  only  pardoning  them  that  believe,  this  cir- 
cumstance could  not  prove  that  such  universal 
pardon  has  taken  place,  unless  we  knew  before- 
hand that  God's  love  was  literally  unbounded ; 
and,  in  like  manner,  allowing  that  the  doctrine 
of  universal  pardon  made  the  sinner  more  passive 
in  his  regards  to  the  Saviour  than  the  ordinary 
doctrine  on  the  subject,  that  circumstance  could 
not  more  fully  estabhsh  its  truth,  unless  We  were 
previously  convinced  that  man  must  be  altogether 
passive,  and  never  think,  nor  feel,  nor  will,  nor 
act  as  a  moral  being,  in  any  respect  or  in  any  de- 
gree, towards  him  who  is  appointed  to  redeem, 
and  by  whom  the  pardon  has  been  secured.  But 
this  would  be  to  take  for  granted,  what  not  only 
remains  to  be  proved,  but  what  is  contradictory 
to  the  system  of  our  opponents  themselves  ;  for 
they  admit,  that  if  men  are  not  pardoned,  they 
are  at  least  saved,  by  faith  on  the  part  of  the 


310  SERMON  XL 

sinner.  And  surely  as  faith  is  commanded,  the 
exercise  of  faith  must  be  obedience  to  that  com- 
mandment. It  is  confessed,  indeed,  that  the  be- 
nefit annexed  to  the  saving  faith  may  be  consi- 
dered as  less  in  quantity  and  in  value,  than  the 
benefit  annexed  to  the  faith  that  is  connected  with 
both  pardon  and  salvation.  That,  however,  is  of 
little  consequence,  unless  it  is  insisted  upon  that 
the  faith  which  saves  requires  less  effort  and  less 
sacrifice,  than  the  faith  which  both  pardons  and 
saves.  And  then,  if  we  are  to  reason  in  this  way, 
and  to  regard  the  inferences  as  legitimate  which 
flow  from  such  reasoning,  another  class  of  reli- 
gionists may  go  a  step  farther  than  our  opponents, 
and  maintain  that  everlasting  salvation  is  bestow- 
ed upon  all  sinners,  whether  they  are  believers  or 
unbelievers,  because  this  not  only  manifests  more 
strongly  the  great  love  of  God,  but  more  com- 
pletely strips  man  of  every  possibility  of  deserv- 
ing any  thing,  by  wholly  breaking  up  all  relation- 
ship between  the  character  that  he  possesses  and 
the  blessing  that  he  receives.  Nay,  by  parity  of 
reasoning,  the  more  wicked  and  ungodly  any  in- 
dividual is,  at  the  moment  of  his  departure  into 
eternity,  the  more  overpowering  will  be  the  dis- 
play of  divine  love  and  the  more  perfectly  ex- 
cluded and  annihilated  will  be  all  idea  of  human 
merit,  if  he  be  carried  straightway  and  trium- 
phantly to  heaven. 


SERMON  XL  311 

From  such  a  supposition  your  minds  will  at 
once  and  decidedly  revolt :  but  though  an  ex- 
treme case,  and  sufficiently  startling,  it  is  a  fair 
and  legitimate  application  of  the  principle  we  are 
endeavouring  to  expose.  And  I  have  introduced 
it  to  show  you  that  the  alleged  tendency  of  the 
doctrine  we  are  controverting,  to  humble  the  pride 
of  man,  by  depriving  him  of  every  thing  like  a 
ground  in  himself,  on  which  it  can  be  asserted 
that  he  is  pardoned,  is  no  good  reason  for  giving 
it  a  place  in  our  creed,  and  that  we  must  adopt 
some  other  sounder  and  safer  mode  for  ascertain- 
ing its  title  to  be  received.  That  mode  consists 
in  a  reference  to  the  Bible.  We  have  made  this 
reference.  And  we  have  found  it  fatal  to  the 
dogma  of  universal  pardon. 

But  still  as  the  particular  tendency  we  have 
noticed  is  urged,  and  with  some  success,  on  the 
minds  of  simple  people,  I  deem  it  requisite  to  ex- 
amine the  point  a  little  more  closely  and  mi- 
nutely. 

Now,  in  the  business  of  man's  salvation,  our 
opponents  and  we  coincide  in  holding  that  faith  is 
absolutely  necessary.  The  only  difference  be- 
tween them  and  us  respects  the  meaning  we  se- 
verally attach  to  the  term — the  place  we  assign  it 
— the  part  we  give  it  to  perform — in  that  scheme 
of  mercy  to  which  both  parties  agree  that  it  in- 
dispensably belongs.     They  accuse  us  of  regard- 


312  SERMON  XL 

ing,  recommending,  exercising  it,  as  a  meritori- 
ous cause  of  the  redemption  that  is  proposed  to 
us  in  the  gospel ;  and  plume  themselves  on  di- 
vesting it  entirely  of  that  character,  and  reducing 
it  to  a  state  of  perfect  conformity  to  the  dispen- 
sation of  free  grace. 

Whether  this  be  a  correct  view  of  their  own 
opinions,  we  shall  see  presently  ;  but  I  must, 
without  delay,  enter  my  protest  against  the  view 
which  they  have  given  of  ours.  When  they  al- 
lege— as  those  of  them  do  who  should  know  best 
what  we  maintain,  from  having  studied  and  sub- 
scribed the  standards  of  our  church, — that  in  af- 
firming pardon  to  be  obtained  only  in  the  way  of 
believing  in  Christ,  we  mean  that  we  obtain  such 
pardon,  because  we  so  believe — they  exceedingly 
and  grievously  misrepresent  us.  For  the  language 
of  our  confession  is  this  ;  "  They  whom  God  effec- 
tually calleth,  he  also  freely  justifieth;  not  by  infus- 
ing righteousness  into  them,  but  by  pardoning  their 
sins,  and  by  accounting  and  accepting  their  per- 
sons as  righteous  ;  not  fof  any  thing  wrought  in 
them,  or  done  by  them,  but  for  Christ's  sake 
alone ;  not  by  imputing  faith  itself,  the  act  of 
believing,  or  any  other  evangelical  obedience  to 
them  as  their  righteousness  ;  but  by  imputing 
the  obedience  and  satisfaction  of  Christ  unto  them, 
they  receiving  and  resting  on  him  and  his  righte- 
ousness by  faith  ;  which  faith  they  have  not  of 


SERMON  XL  313 

themselves,  it  is  the  gift  of  God.""     The  Larger 
Catechism  thus  explains  how  faith  justifies  a  sin- 
ner in  the  sight  of  God  ;   "  Faith  justifies  a  sin- 
ner in   the  sight  of  God,  not  because  of  those 
other  graces  which  do  always  accompany  it,  or  of 
good  works  that  are  the  fruits  of  it ;  nor  as  if  the 
grace  of  faith,  or  any  act  thereof,  were  imputed 
to  him  for  his  justification  ;  but  only  as  it  is  an 
instrument,  by  which  he  receiveth  and  applieth  ■ 
Christ  and  his  righteousness."     The  Shorter  Ca- 
techism gives  the  following  definition  of  faith ; 
"  Faith  in  Jesus  Christ  is  a  saving  grace,  where- 
by we  receive  and  rest  upon  him  alone  for  salva- 
vation,  as  he  is  offered  to  us  in  the  gospel."    And 
what  can  be  the  "  common  phraseology"*  of  this 
country,  in  which  the   people  get  their  religious 
instruction  from  these  very  summaries  of  Christ- 
ianity from  which   we  have   now   quoted,   but  a 
phraseology  implying — thovigh  it  may  be,  in  many 
cases,  vaguely  and  inaccurately  used — that  the 
faith  through  which  the   sinner  is  justified   and 
saved,   is   not  only  destitute  of  all  merit,  but  is 
itself  a  disclaimer  of  all  merit  on  his  part,  and  rests 
his  whole  reliance  upon  a  sacrifice,  an  atonement, 
an  obedience,  a  righteousness,  that  is  totally  in- 
dependent of  any  thing  in  himself,  and  is  previ- 
ously wrought  out  and  provided  for  all  them  that 
Tjelieve  on  the  Son  of  God  ?     It  is  not  our  doc- 
•  See  Note  AA« 


1 


i 


314  SERMON  XL 

trine  that  we  are  forgiven,  or  that  we  receive  any 
blessing  whatever,  because  we  believe.  We  hold 
that  no  one  is  forgiven  unless  he  believes,  and 
that  his  believing  is  the  mere  instrument  by 
which  he  receives  Christ  and  his  benefits,  and 
which  is  itself  furnished  him  by  divine  grace,  the 
exclusive  source  of  all  his  good.  These  two 
statements  are  expressly,  wholly,  obviously,  and 
indisputably  different — the  former  asserting  a 
title  established  by  the  sinner''s  own  doings,  and 
the  other  disavowincf  and  renouncing  all  such 
title,  as  what  the  sinner  neither  has  acquired  nor 
can  acquire  by  personal  worth  in  any  conceivable 
shape.  What  do  our  opponents  themselves  say  ? 
They  say  "  that  all  men  are  forgiven,  and  that 
each  man's  salvation  arises  out  of  the  belief  of 
his  own  personal  condemnation  having  been  re- 
moved by  his  own  personal  forgiveness."  And 
supposing  that  we  should  translate  the  words, 
"  man's  salvation  arises  out  of  the  belief  of  his 
own  personal  forgiveness"  into,  "  man  is  saved 
or  sanctified,  because  he  believes  that  he  is  al- 
ready forgiven,"  would  that  be  accounted  fair  or 
candid  ?  Or  would  we  be  justifiable  in  founding 
upon  such  an  arbitrary  rendering  of  their  lan- 
guage, the  charge  of  their  attributing  good  de- 
sert to  saving  faith,  and  forgetting  chat  it  is  the 
i^od  of  peace  that  sanctifies  believers,  and  that 
they  are  saved  through  sanctification  of  the  Spi- 


SERMON  XI.  315 

rit  ?  And  who  conferred  upon  the  new  school  of 
theology,  the  partial  privilege  of  being  exempt- 
ed from  that  treatment,  as  to  the  construc- 
tion of  language  and  the  imputation  of  meaning, 
which  they  so  unceremoniously  give  to  us,  and 
upon  which  they  build  so  many  sentences  of  ex- 
communication?. In  both  cases  the  treatment 
would  be  unjust.  We  give  it  not  to  them  ;  they 
deal  it  out  to  almost  all  the  Christians  in  this 
land.* 

Let  us  see  how  far  they  can  vindicate  their  own 
declarations  in  this  respect.  They  say  that  a 
man's  saving  faith  consists  in  his  believing  that 
all  his  sins  are  already  and  freely  forgiven.  But 
surely  they  allow  that  this  faith  admits  him  into 
the  possession  and  enjoyment  of  privileges,  which 
without  it  would  have  been  denied  him.  Yes, 
their  position  is  that,  remaining  in  unbelief,  he 
is,  though  previously  pardoned,  not  saved,  or 
sanctified,  or  happy  ;  but  that,  in  consequence 
of  believing,  all  that  constitutes  salvation,  over 
And  above  mere  pardon,  becomes  his  in  property 
and  fruition.  Nay,  they  allow,  that  though  par- 
don is  actually  bestowed  upon  him  previously 
to  liis  believing,  and  independently  of  it,  yet 
this  pardon  is  of  no  use  nor  benefit  to  him  ex- 
cept  he  believes.     The  position  is  absurd,  as  we 

•  See  Note  BB. 


316  SERMON  XI. 

formerly  showed  you.  But  it  is  one  of  their  po- 
sitions ;  and  it  implies  the  necessity  of  faith  for 
pardon,  so  far  as  pardon  can  be  of  aiiy  service, 
as  well  as  for  salvation.  Not  to  press  this,  how- 
ever, against  them,  I  shall  only  argue  on  the  sup- 
position that  they  hold  faith  to  be  essential  to 
salvation.  Well  then,  to  faith  they  annex  the 
holiness,  and  felicity,  and  glory  of  the  saints 
here  and  hereafter.  Now,  this  faith  which  they 
maintain,  as  a  necessary  inlet  to  the  spiritual  and 
eternal  blessings  conferred  by  the  love  of  God  on 
those  who  are  in  the  exercise  of  it,  is  unquestion- 
ably a  personal  quality  of  those  whose  faith  it  is. 
It  is  not  a  quality  external  to  them — it  is  no  part 
of  the  forgiveness  whose  existence  it  realizes  and 
acknowledges — and  it  does  not  reside  in  him  by 
whom  that  forgiveness  was  procured  for  them.  Let 
our  opponents  simplify  it  as  they  will.  Let  them 
illustrate  it  by  what  operations  of  the  bodily  organs 
they  think  best.  Let  them  describe  it  as  resem- 
bling the  opening  of  the  eyes  to  see  the  Kght,  or 
of  the  mouth  to  breathe  the  air.*  If  they  can 
find  any  similitude  more  indicative  still  of  the 
idea  of  simplicity  and  ease,  which  they  evidently 
wish  to  convey,  let  them  adduce  it.  After  all, 
must  not  faith  undoubtedly  be  considered  as  an 
act  of  the  individual  of  whom  it  is  predicated .'' 
Does  it  not  imply  some  assent  of  the  understand- 
*  See  Note  CC. 


SERMON  XI.  317 

ing? — some  outgoing  or  movement  of  theheart? — 
some  acquiescence  on  the  part  of  the  whole  man  ? 
Does  not  a  man  do  something  when  he  believes — 
would  not  he  omit  or  refuse  to  do  something,  if 
he  did  not  believe  ?  In  short,  is  not  the  faith — 
wanting  which  he  knows  not  that  he  is  pardoned, 
and  obtains  not  the  advantages  flowing  from  such 
knowledge,  and  possessing  which,  he  has  both  the 
one  and  the  other — is  not  this  faith  characteristic 
of  him  as  a  rational  being  exerting  his  moral  and 
intellectual  faculties  in  that  particular  way  which 
results  in,  or  which  is  denominated,  helieving  f 
With  all  the  refinements  to  which  our  opponents 
are  so  fond  of  having  recourse,  they  cannot  ex- 
plain away  faith  as  if  it  formed  no  essential  part 
of  the  believer's  character. 

We  have  then  to  ask  them,  whether  they  regard 
this  faith  as  the  independent  effort  of  the  sinner,  or 
as  a  grace  wrought  and  maintained  in  him  by  the 
Holy  Spirit.  They  must  hold  the  one  or  the  other 
of  these  views  ;  and  the  question  is,  which  of  them 
it  is  that  they  do  hold.  Let  us  consider  both  al- 
ternatives, that  in  either  way  we  may  make  a  pro- 
per estimate  of  their  pretensions  to  superior  or- 
thodoxy. 

1.  Supposing  them  to  say  that  the  sinner  be- 
lieves "  of  himself,"  then,  they  immediately  as- 
scribe  to  the  sinner  the  power  of  acting  worthily 
without  divine  help,  they  trace  his  interest  in  the 


318  SERMON  XI. 

privileges  which  follow  upon  faith  to  his  own  ef- 
ficacious working,  they  give  him  occasion  of  boast- 
ing as  if  he  had  merit  in  accomplishing  the  most 
important  part  of  his  souFs  salvation,  and  an 
encouragement  to  the  hope  of  becoming  holy,  and 
reaching  heaven,  by  his  inherent  and  unaided 
ability.  Of  such  an  idea,  and  of  every  approach 
to  it,  our  system  is  utterly  abhorrent.  We  main- 
tain, that  the  redemption  of  sinners,  is,  from  first 
to  last,  and  throughout  all  its  departments,  a  work 
of  free  and  sovereign  grace.  Not  only  is  this  grace 
the  sole  origin  of  the  blessings,  external  to  man, 
such  as  forgiveness,  and  acceptance,  and  eternallife, 
and  of  the  apparatus  of  mercy  by  which  these  were 
provided — it  is  also  the  sole  origin  of  that  union 
with  Christ  without  which  we  can  have  no  inte- 
rest in  any  one  of  them,  and  of  that  faith  by  which 
our  union  with  Christ  is  formed  and  maintained, 
and  of  those  convictions  and  feelings  which  lead 
to  our  reception  of  Christ  as  the  only  Redeemer, 
and  of  all  the  holy  conformity  to  God's  will,  and 
cordial  devotedness  to  God's  glory,  and  joyful 
experience  of  God's  favour,  which  distinguish 
those  who  *'  believe  with  the  heart  unto  righteous- 
ness." According  to  the  doctrine  that  we  profess, 
every  believer,  whether  he  thinks  of  his  forgive- 
ness or  his  faith — of  his  holiness,  or  of  his  hopes, 
must  say  with  the  apostle,  "  By  the  grace  of  God,  I 


SERMON  XI.  319 

am  what  I  am."  And  surely  this  presents  a  strik- 
ing and  triumphant  contrast  to  the  opinion  of  our 
opponents,  if  they  make  faith  such  a  light  and  facile 
matter  as  that  every  man  may  exercise  it  when  he 
chooses,  and  by  his  ordinary  and  natural  strength. 
It  ill  becomes  them  to  blame  others  for  an  er- 
ror of  which  others  are  guiltless,  while  that  er- 
ror cleaves  to  themselves,  and  is  moreover  held 
up  as  a  recommendation  of  their  peculiar  and  fa- 
vourite dogma.  We  say  not  only  that  our  faith 
does  not  and  cannot  purchase  pardon,  which  like 
all  the  other  gifts  of  God  to  sinful  men  is  an  en- 
tirely free  and  undeserved  gift,  but  that  the  faith 
which  so  links  us  to  Christ  as  that  pardon  is  bestow- 
ed upon  us  for  his  sake,  is  as  gratuitously  wrought 
in  us  as  the  pardon  is  bestowed  upon  us.  But 
on  the  supposition  we  are  now  making  as  to  their 
notions  of  faith,  although  the  pardon  is  said  to 
have  been  at  once  provided  and  conferred  while 
we  were  yet  living  in  impenitence,  unbelief,  and 
profligacy,  still  the  faith  which  brings  to  us  the 
sensible  comforts  produced  by  the  knowledge  of 
pardon  having  been  received,  and  the  sanctifica- 
tion  and  the  happiness  to  which  we  are  conse- 
quently advanced,  is  regarded  as  something  which 
any  one  is  capable  of  exerting  by  his  own  ener- 
gies, and  which  he  may  found  upon  as  investing 
him  with  a  right  to  the  blessings  connected  with 
it  in  the  ordinance  of  God. 


( 


320  SERMON  XI. 

Nor  think,  my  friends,  that  the  supposition  now 
made  is  uncandid,  or  got  up  for  the  purpose  of 
exciting  prejudice.  It  is  naturally  suggested  by 
the  manner  in  which  our  opponents  have  thought 
proper  to  illustrate  their  own  opinions  on  the  sub- 
ject. And  assuredly  were  we  to  interpret  their 
meaning  as  tliey  have  laboured  ta  interpret 
the  meaning  of  the  Scriptures,  and  consider  every 
figure  or  allegory  to  be  tantamount  to  an  argu- 
ment, we  should  not  forego  the  advantage  which 
they  have  afforded  us.  For  how  is  it  that  they 
endeavour  to  give  us  accurate  conceptions  of 
faith  ?  Why,  they  say  that  as  light  is  common 
property  which  any  man,  by  simply  opening  his 
eyes,  may  be  enabled  to  see,  and  as  air  is  com- 
mon property  which  any  man,  by  simply  opening 
his  mouth,  may  breathe,  so  pardon  is  the  common 
property  of  all,  and  a  sinner  has  only  to  believe — 
to  open  his  spiritual  mouth  or  spiritual  eyes — 
that  he  may  receive  the  comfort  of  the  fact,  and 
find  his  way  to  the  many  blessings  which  the  God 
of  love  is  ready  to  communicate.  And  is  it  any 
violent  construction  of  such  a  statement,  to  ima- 
gine that  its  authors  meant  to  teach  and  persuade 
us  that  it  is  as  much  within  the  compass  of  a 
sinner's  power  to  believe,  as  it  is  within  the  com- 
pass of  any  man's  power,  to  unclose  his  eyes  or 
to  open  his  mouth  ?  The  two  things  are,  indeed, 
radically  dissimilar,  as  we  shall  find  immediately; 


SERMON  XL  .321 

still,  as  the  one  is  set  before  us  for  the  purpose  of 
expounding  the  other,  we  are  guilty  of  no  unfair- 
ness in  arguing  on  the  hypothesis  that  they  hold 
the  act  of  believing  to  be  parallel,  in  point  of  faci- 
lity, to  the  organic  motions  to  which  they  have  so 
fondly  and  confidently  likened  it.* 

2.  But  we  shall  allow  that  the  intended  import 
of  their  language  attributes  no  merit  to  the  belief 
by  which  the  sinner  comes  to  know  that  he  is 
pardoned,  whether  he  has  faith  or  not.  What 
then  ?  His  belief  is  '*  the  gift  of  God  ;""  and  is 
such  a  belief  in  the  least  degree  more  affirmative 
of  divine  grace,  or  more  exclusive  of  human  me- 
rit, than  the  belief  which  we  inculcate,  and  which 
is  also  in  its  formation,  and  in  its  exercise,  and  in 
every  thing  belonging  to  it,  "  the  gift  of  God?"" 
The  belief  that  we  inculcate  gives  credit  to  God's 
testimony  respecting  his  Son,  and  relies  upon 
Christ  solely  as  Redeemer,  and  receives  forgive- 
ness and  whatever  else  is  needed,  as  mere  gratui- 
tous benefits,  conferred  by  God  through  his  me- 
diation. The  belief  that  ^Ae?/ inculcate,  if  we  under- 
stand it  aright,  is  of  the  very  same  description,  so 
far  as  the  bountiful  giver,  the  unworthy  reci- 
pient, and  the  only  channel  of  communication  are 
concerned.  The  single  point  of  difference  lies  in 
the  period  and  the  circumstances  of  the  actual 

*  See  Note  DD. 


322  SERMON  XL 

conveyance  of  that  pardon  which  Christ  has  se- 
cured and  which  God  bestows.  Both  admit  that 
it  is  altogether  undeserved,  and  that  even  faith 
has  no  part  in  obtaining  it,  as  if  it  were  given  on 
account  of  faith.  But  our  opponents  hold  that 
it  is  bestowed  not  only  before  faith  is  wrought  in 
the  sinner,  but  bestowed  on  him  whether  faith  is 
ever  wrought  in  him  or  not,  and  that  faith  is  the 
admission  of  this  important  fact  in  his  spiritual 
condition  ; — while  we  hold  that,  in  the  order  of 
dispensation  settled  by  the  wisdom  of  God  and 
revealed  in  his  word,  pardon  not  only  comes 
after  the  formation  of  faith,  but  is  never  the 
portion  of  any  one  who  lives  and  dies  without  the 
faith  that  is  required,  and  that  faith  accepts 
of  pardon  and  its  concomitant  blessings  as  ex- 
pressions of  God^s  unmerited  mercy,  manifested 
through  Christ.  The  difference  that  exists  be- 
tween us,  therefore,  does  not  at  all  affect  the  ques- 
tion respecting  the  share  that  the  sinner  has  in 
procuring  the  pardon  which  is  revealed  in  the 
gospel. 

If,  however,  the  faith  which  our  opponents 
teach  be  thus  devoid  of  all  alliance  with  the  sin- 
ner's own  doing  or  deserving,  they  have  been 
very  unfortunate  or  very  neghgent  in  the  method 
which  they  have  adopted  for  explaining  its  true 
nature.  They  seem  to  flatter  themselves  that  they 
get  quit  of  the  very  appearance  of  such  an  error  by 


SERMON  XL  3^ 

employing  the  similitudes  to  which  we  have  al- 
ready alluded,  whereas  by  employing  these  simi- 
litudes, they  have  exposed  themselves  to  the 
charge  of  doing  what  is  directly  calculated  to 
mislead  the  minds  of  others,  if  not  to  deceive  their 
own.  The  similitudes  they  make  use  of  are  ex- 
tremely incorrect.  For  example,  they  say  that 
believing  is  like  opening  the  eyes  for  the  admis- 
sion of  light. 

Now,  in  the  first  place,  this  is  to  compare  an 
operation  which  is  in  every  man's  natural  power, 
with  an  operation  which,  by  their  own  acknow- 
ledgment, no  man  can  perform  except  it  be  given 
him  from  above.  And  from  the  purpose  for 
which  the  comparison  is  introduced,  we  are  entit- 
led to  infer  that  it  is  intended  to  ascribe  to  faith, 
considered  as  the  act  of  the  sinner's  mind,  a  virtue 
which  it  does  not  possess. 

In  the  second  place,  as  the  mind  of  fallen  man 
is  corrupted  and  enfeebled  by  sin,  so  as  to  render 
divine  grace  absolutely  essential  for  the  acquisition 
of  every  good  principle,  and  the  cultivation  of  every 
good  affection,  they  should  have  adduced  the  case 
of  a  man  whose  eye  is  greatly  diseased  or  altogether 
blind,  and  tried  how  the  analogy  would  succeed 
in  that  predicament.  The  analogy  would  have 
been  exact,  but  then  it  would  not  have  succeed- 
ed in  answering  the  purpose  which  they  seem  to 
be  aiming  at.     Every  one  would  have  felt  that 


324  SERMON  XI. 

the  same  species  of  divine  interposition  was  as 
requisite  for  making  the  sinner  believe  as  for  mak- 
ing the  blind  man  see.  The  hand  of  God  would 
have  been  equally  desiderated  for  giving  faith  to 
the  mind  in  the  one  case,  and  for  giving  sight  to 
the  eye  in  the  other.  And  the  imposing  theory 
of  its  being  merely  necessary  to  receive  the  fact 
as  being  indisputably  applicable  to  each,  because 
it  was  affirmed  to  be  common  to  all,  would  have 
failed  to  satisfy  any  one  of  its  being  so  hostile,  as 
it  is  alleged  to  be,  to  the  idea  of  human  merit. 

But  observe,  in  the  third  place,  what  is  the  pro- 
bable and  almost  inevitable  influence  of  such  il- 
lustrations as  those  on  which  we  are  commenting, 
on  men's  notions  respecting  faith.  They  are  in- 
formed that  pardon  is  laid  at  every  man's  door — 
that  the  veriest  profligate  has  a  right  to  it — that 
it  does  not  belong  to  the  believer  merely,  but  that 
it  actually  belongs  to  all  mankind  alike — and  that 
it  is  as  much  theirs  as  the  air  or  the  light  in  the  na- 
tural world.  And  they  are,  moreover,  informed, 
that  as  they  have  simply  to  open  their  eyes,  in 
order  to  enjoy  the  beauty  and  the  advantages  of 
the  light,  and  simply  to  open  their  mouths,  in  or- 
der to  enjoy  the  freshness  and  vivifying  effects  of 
the  air,  in  like  manner  they  have  simply  to  be- 
lieve that  they  are  pardoned,  in  order  to  expe- 
rience the  consolation  of  the  pardon  already  con- 
veyed to  them,  and  all  the  manifold  and  import- 


SERMON  XL 

ant  benefits  which  are  implied  in  the  great  salva- 
tion. So  that  well  knowing  how  easy  a  thing  it 
is  to  open  the  eye  and  the  mouth,  so  as  to  see 
and  breathe — an  operation  which  every  one  who 
has  these  organs  in  a  sound  and  healthful  state, 
performs  thousands  of  times  in  the  course  of 
every  day  that  he  lives, — they  must  conclude 
that  there  can  be  no  great  difficulty  in  believ- 
ing— that  they  can  do  it  at  any  time  here- 
after, when  they  may  deem  it  useful  or  find  it 
convenient — that  any  morning  when  they  open 
their  eyes  to  behold  the  light  of  the  sun,  they 
may,  at  the  same  moment,  and  with  the  same 
ease,  open  the  eyes  of  their  minds  to  behold,  to 
acknowledge,  and  to  rejoice  in  the  fact,  that  all 
their  sins  are  long  ago  forgiven,  and  that  it  is 
discrediting  the  truth  of  God,  to  be  in  any  alarm 
about  the  condemnation  which  sin  deserves. 
Thus  by  being  taught  to  consider  faith  as  a  work 
at  their  own  command,  and  of  their  own  accom- 
plishment, they  are  tempted  to  be  careless,  and 
procrastinating,  and  presumptuous  in  their  deal- 
ings with  the  "  one  thing  needful.""  The  feeling  of 
pride  and  self-conceit  is  gendered  by  the  thought 
that  they  can  so  readily  effectuate  the  mighty 
achievements  ascribed  to  faith,  and  at  the  same 
time,  the  anxiety  of  which  they  might  otherwise 
be  conscious,  to  have  that  grace  formed,  and  set- 
tled, and  stablished  in  their  minds,  is  greatly 
diminished,  or  altogether  suppressed. 


326  SERMON  XL 

Nor  will  these  evils  be  lessened  or  counter- 
acted by  the  doctrine  itself,  that  the  fact  to  be 
afterwards  believed,  is  their  existing  freedom 
from  the  penalties  of  the  law  which  they  have 
transgressed,  and  in  the  transgression  of  which  they 
are  still  living,  and  may  continue  to  live,  without 
dread  from  the  denunciations  of  that  law.  Such 
a  doctrine  is  calculated  to  prevent  the  law  from 
acting  as  a  schoolmaster  to  bring  them  unto 
Christ.  Recurring  to  the  similitudes  brought 
from  the  air  and  the  light,  they  may  perceive, 
without  the  help  of  much  sagacity,  that  these 
similitudes  have  very  little  power  to  hasten  their 
belief.  It  is  true  that  they  cannot  see  the  light 
without  opening  their  eyes,  and  cannot  breathe 
the  air  without  opening  their  mouths,  and  there- 
fore they  never  fail  to  perform  both  of  these 
necessary  functions.  But  the  resemblance  does 
not  apply  to  their  case.  For  they  are  told  by 
our  opponents,  who,  of  course,  look  for  their  as- 
sent to  the  statement,  that  whatever  other  pur- 
poses believing  may  subserve,  assuredly  it  has 
nothing  to  do  with  getting  them  pardon — that 
there  is  no  necessary  connexion  between  the  two 
— that  the  latter  is  theirs,  even  though  they 
should  never  practise  the  former — that  they  are 
as  much  freed  as  ever  they  can  be,  from  that 
penalty  which  God's  justice  denounced  against 
the  breakers  of  his  commandments.    And,  there- 


SERMON  XI.  327 

fore,  "while  the  opening  of  the  eyes  and  of  the 
mouth  is  indispensably  requisite  for  their  seeing 
and  breathing,  or  having  any  benefit  whatever 
from  the  light  and  air,  common  property  though 
they  be,  faith  is  not  requisite  at  all  for  their  pos- 
sessing pardon,  that  being  a  common  property  to 
every  individual  of  our  race,  be  he  a  believer,  or 
be  he  an  unbeliever.     To  say  that  without  be- 
lieving, they  cannot  know  that  they  are  pardoned, 
and  cannot  therefore  be  comforted  or  sanctified, 
is  little  or  nothing  to  the  purpose.     If  they  are 
really  ignorant  of  this,  so  far  at  least  as  not  to 
be  influenced  by  it  to  be  at  ease  in  Zion,  it  is 
owing  to  no  want  of  zeal  on  the  side  of  our  op- 
ponents, who  labour  hard  to  give  them  a  specula- 
tive, if  they  cannot  produce  in  them  a  saving 
conviction  of  the  fact.     And  as  a  man  may  be- 
lieve in  the  existence  of  God,  though  his  belief 
in  that  proposition  does  not  persuade  him  to  love 
and    serve   and    glorify   God,    so   they  may  be 
brought  to  believe  that  their  sins  are  already  par- 
doned, though  their  behef  may  go  no  farther  than 
to  give  them  encouragement  to  persevere  in  sin. 


SERMON  XII. 


SAME   SUBJECT. 


We  shall  now  direct  yovir  thoughts  to  some  of 
the  causes  ■which  have  chiefly  operated  in  produc- 
ing and  spreading  the  deadly  heresy  that  we  have 
been  so  long  employed  in  exposing.  Our  dis- 
cussion of  this  part  of  the  subject,  however,  must 
necessarily  be  very  limited  and  imperfect. 

] .  And  first,  I  am  more  convinced  than  I  was 
when  I  first  announced  it  to  you,  that  the  doc- 
trine of  universal  pardon  has  originated  in  a  great 
measure,  in  the  high  doctrine  of  assurance  of 
faith. 

The  doctrine  I  refer  to  consists  in  making  the 
assurance  of  a  man"'s  own  personal  salvation  to  be 
of  the  very  essence  of  his  faith.  A  considerable 
time  ago  I  explained  to  you  what  I  conceived  to 
be  the  sound  and  scriptural  view  of  the  subject. 
The  first  thing  that  a  true  believer  does  is  to  give 
credit  to  the  divine  testimony  concerning  Christ 


,  SERMON  XII.  329 

as  the  Redeemer  of  men.  The  next  thing  is  that, 
in  accordance  to  that  testimony,  he  receives  Christ 
and  trusts  in  him  as  all-sufficient,  and  commits 
his  salvation  entirely  into  his  hands.  And  then, 
as  a  consequence  of  this  belief  in  Christ,  he  is  as- 
sured of  his  being  pardoned  and  saved,  a  child  of 
God  and  an  heir  of  heaven — not  that  such  assur- 
ance follows  immediately  and  necessarily,  for  as 
our  Confession  says,  "  a  true  believer  may  wait 
long  and  conflict  with  many  difficulties  before  he 
be  partaker  of  it,"  but  it  is  a  practicable  attainment 
by  the  use  of  ordinary  means  ;  it  is  what  many 
disciples  of  the  Saviour  have  been  privileged  to 
enjoy  ;  and  it  is  what  every  real  Christian  will 
be  studious  to  reach,  seeing  it  is  his  duty  to  *'  give 
all  diligence  to  make  his  calling  and  election 
sure,"  if  he  would  have  his  comforts  or  his  graces 
to  abound.  With  this  view,  however,  of  saving 
faith  not  a  few  have  been  dissatisfied.  They  have 
considered  it  as  coming  short  of  the  truth.  On 
looking  at  certain  passages  of  Scripture,  they  have 
been  led  to  conclude  that,  according  to  the  im- 
port of  these,  assurance  of  personal  salvation  is  a 
constituent  quality  of  faith,  so  that  in  believing 
on  Christ,  they  have  an  undoubting  conviction  of 
their  own  actual  interest  in  God's  favour  and  of 
their  own  actual  right  to  eternal  life.  Or,  they 
have  been  led  to  take  this  strong  view  of  the  mat- 
ter, by  engaging  in  keen  and  controversial  oppo- 
sition to  the  Romish  divines  who  have  contended 


330  SERMON  XII. 

vehemently  for  a  "  vague  and  doubtsome  faith,"" 
as  it  has  been  called,  in  order  to  leave  room  for 
their  penances,  and  works  of  supererogation,  and 
indulgences,  and  other  destructive  errors  ;  and  by 
stretching  the  arguments  which  they  employed  in 
hostility  to  these  antagonists,  farther  than  per- 
haps they  would  have  done,  had  they  been  able 
to  consider  coolly  and  dispassionately  what  the. 
word  of  God  contains,  in  relation  to  the  topic  in 
dispute.  Or,  they  have  been  put  into  circum- 
stances of  trial  and  persecution,  which  gave  a 
Jiigh  excitement  to  all  their  religious  feelings — 
which  hedged  them  in  to  a  closer  communion 
with  the  Saviour,  for  whom  they  suffered,  and  a 
more  realizing  anticipation  of  that  immortality 
which  he  had  purchased  for  them — which  neces- 
sitated them  to  keep  their  faith  in  Christ  in  con-, 
stant  and  vigorous  exercise,  and  habitually  to 
connect  his  love  to  them  with  their  dependence 
upon  him,  their  duties  to  him,  their  endurances 
for  him :  and  thus  feeling  the  full  assurance  pos- 
sessing and  influencing  their  own  minds,  they 
were  induced  to  speak  of  it  as  the  distinguishing 
privilege  of  every  one  who  had  like  precious  faith 
with  them,  though  placed  in  situations  less  try- 
ing, and  therefore  less  favourable  to  the  loftier 
and  more  perfect  operations  of  that  divine  prin- 
ciple. But  it  seldom  happened  that  any  of 
these — even  such  of  them  as  went  farthest, 
broached  the  doctrine  of  universal  pardon.     In 


SERMON  XII.  331 

some  cases  we  have  observed  them  using  language 
which  so  implied  it  that  they  could  not  have  con- 
sistently explained  what  they  had  advanced,  if 
they  had  been  called  to  do  so,  without  perceiv- 
ing that  it  was  involved  in  their  statements. 
And  in  other  cases  it  was  so  obviously  taught 
by  what  they  argued  in  support  of  their  opinions 
or  assurance,  that  they  were  reduced  to  the  ne- 
cessity of  disclaiming  it,  and  vindicating  them- 
selves from  the  suspicion  of  entertaining  it  as  an 
article  of  their  faith.  But  with  a  few  exceptions, 
it  was  held  to  be  unscriptural  by  all  the  more 
respectable  writers  on  theology,  and  where  there 
was  any  danger  of  being  successfully  accused  of 
holding  it,  ingenious  distinctions  were  devised, 
and  no  little  sophistry  was  employed,  to  rebut 
the  charge,  and  to  throw  off  an  imputation  which 
was  deemed  discreditable  to  the  understanding 
and  the  orthodoxy  of  those  who  were  liable  to  it. 
It  appears  to  me,  that  they  were  right  as  to 
universal  pardon,  and  wrong  as  to  the  full  assur- 
ance of  faith.  Their  present  followers,  in  main- 
taining the  latter  doctrine,  have  refused  to  imi- 
tate them  in  rejecting  the  former.  They  insist 
upon  both.  And  although  they  are  egregiously 
wrong  in  both,  they  are  certainly  entitled  to  the 
praise  of  consistency,  which  those  are  not,  who 
hold  the  one  but  repudiate  the  other.  Not  only 
have  they  found  it  difficult,  but  they  have  found 
it  impossible,  to  make  the  believer's  assurance  of 


332  SERMON  XII. 

his  personal  salvation,  essential  to  his  faith  in 
Christ,  without  being  previously  satisfied  that 
his  sins  were  pardoned.  And  the  difficulty,  or 
the  impossibility,  may  be  very  easily  expounded. 
A  short  and  simple  statement  wiU  make  it  quite 
intelligible. 

Bear  it  in  mind,  then,  that  in  the  opinion  of 
our  opponents,  when  a  man  believes  in  Christ  he 
has  an  infallible  assurance  of  his  own  pardon, — 
that  this  is  not  a  sequence  to  his  believing,  but  an 
essential  ingredient  in  it,  and  wholly  inseparable 
from  its  nature, — that  if  he  has  not  this  certainty 
of  actual  deliverance  from  all  condemnation,  he  has 
no  belief  at  all — and  that,  possessing  it,  his  faith 
is  a  true  and  saving  faith.  Such  being  the  case, 
suppose  that  ungodly  men  are  not  yet  pardon- 
ed, and  that  I  were  to  go  to  one  of  them  and  say 
to  him,  "  In  the  name  of  the  Lord  I  bid  you  be- 
lieve in  Jesus  Christ,"  is  it  not  obvious  that  he 
could  not  rightly  comply  with  my  exhortation  ? 
He  is  not  pardoned,  and  yet  I  require  him  to 
believe  that  he  is  pardoned,  that  is  to  say,  I  re- 
quire him  to  believe  what  is  manifestly  a  lie ;  and 
that  a  man  is  to  be  saved  under  the  administra- 
tion of  a  holy  God,  by  believing  a  lie,  or  that  it 
can  be  said  of  God  that  he  commands  any  of  his 
creatures  to  believe  a  lie,  is  a  great  deal  too  much 
to  be  admitted  by  any  rational  or  pious  mind.  Nor 
is  this  all.  It  is  sufficiently  bad  to  be  enjoined  to 
believe  a  lie,  but  moreover,  if  the  individual  can 


SERMON  XII.  333 

be  only  persuaded  to  believe  the  lie,  this  lie  un- 
dergoes a  marvellous  transformation,  and  instant- 
ly assumes  the  character  of  a  truth,  for  he  there- 
by becomes  a  real  believer,  and,  of  course,  his 
sins  are  all  pardoned  !  Thus  it  is  that  if  sinners 
are  not  forgiven  before  they  believe,  it  must  be 
exacted  of  them,  that  on  the  divine  authority 
they  believe  a  lie,  and  that  by  this  believing  of 
theirs,  a  falsehood  is  immediately  converted  into 
a  truth,  and  so  by  this  extraordinary  process,  and 
by  this  extraordinary  process  alone,  sinners  of 
mankind  are  to  be  saved ! 

But  keep  the  same  definition  of  faith,  and 
make  the  supposition  that  sinners  are  already  par- 
doned, then  observe  how  the  difficulty  now  ad- 
verted to  as  so  startling  and  so  insuperable,  al- 
together evanishes.  Whenever  1  ask  a  sinner 
to  believe,  meaning  by  that,  to  believe  that  he  is 
forgiven,  I  ask  him  to  believe  no  lie,  but  a  cer- 
tain and  established  truth.  His  iniquities  are  all 
in  fact  blotted  out  by  the  death  of  Christ,  even 
if  he  should  refuse  to  believe,  and  therefore  he  is 
acting  a  right  and  dutiful  part  when  he  gives  his 
assent  to  this  proposition,  so  indubitable  as  well 
as  so  momentous.  He  is  then,  without  any  vio- 
lation of  a  moral  principle  either  on  his  own  side 
or  on  the  side  of  that  authority  which  he  obeys 
when  he  believes,  a  real  believer,  and  shall  be 
saved.  For  this,  we  are  told,  constitutes  the 
only  difference  between  a  believer  and  an  unbe- 


384  SERMON  XII. 

liever,  that  while  both  are  equally  forgiven,  the 
former  knows  or  is  sensible  of  it,  and  the  latter 
does  not  know  or  is  not  sensible  of  it. 

You  will  not  now  wonder,  my  friends,  that  the 
rigid  and  extravagant  maintainers  of  assurance 
are  also  the  maintainers  of  universal  pardon. 
They  are  driven  to  this  doctrine  as  a  refuge  from 
a  gross  and  palpable  inconsistency  in  which  they 
must  otherwise  be  involved.  Without  holding 
that  all  men  are  actually  pardoned,  the  work  of 
evangelizing  or  making  proselytes  to  the  faith  of 
the  gospel,  as  they  count  faith,  must  inevitably 
stop,  it  being  altogether  out  of  the  question  that 
God  should  lay  it  upon  an  unpardoned  sinner, 
or  a  reprobate,  to  believe  that  he  is  indeed  and 
irrevocably  pardoned,  or  that  a  belief  of  this 
falsehood  should  be  the  instituted  method  of  sal- 
vation. But  the  moment  that  the  doctrine  of 
universal  pardon  is  brought  into  play,  the  doc- 
trine of  assurance,  as  understood  by  our  oppon- 
ents, takes  full  effect.  It  has  then  a  broad  and 
secure  foundation  on  which  to  rest,  and  they  are 
able  to  inculcate  it  in  the  strongest  terms,  and 
mthout  the  slightest  embarrassment.  They  can 
say  to  the  most  obdurate  and  impenitent  trans- 
gressor, "  Believe  without  all  doubt  or  hesitation 
that  thou  art  forgiven,"  and  in  doing  this  they 
ask  him  to  believe  a  proposition  just  as  consistent 
with  fact  and  verity  as  the  proposition  is  that  he 
is  a  living  man.     To  those,  therefore,  who  enter- 

6 


SERMON  XII.  335 

tain  such  notions  respecting  faith  as  that  it  es- 
sentially implies  a  most  confident  assurance  that 
he  is  personally  freed  from  condemnation,  the 
doctrine  of  universal  pardon  is  not  merely  use- 
ful, it  is  indispensable.  They  cannot  get  on  with- 
out it;  and,  right  or  wrong,  they  must  have  it  as  a 
part  of  their  system.  Reason  may  reclaim  against 
it  as  absurd  ;  revelation  may  refuse  it  any  sanc- 
tion, and  even  distinctly  contradict  it — no  matter, 
it  cannot  be  wanted.  Without  it,  assurance  is  ut- 
terly untenable,  and,  therefore,  cost  what  sacrifices 
the  adoption  of  it  may,  adopted  it  must  be,  and 
held  fast  as  one  of  the  truths  of  God. 

We  have  already  shown  you,  at  great  length, 
that  the  doctrine  of  universal  pardon  is  at  va- 
riance with  the  scheme  of  the  gospel,  and  the 
express  language  of  Holy  Writ,  and  that  it  leads 
directly  and  necessarily  to  the  most  absurd  and 
pernicious  consequences.  It  therefore  falls  to  be 
rejected,  however  essential  it  may  be  found  for 
upholding  the  favourite  tenet  of  assurance.  And 
if  this  tenet  depend  upon  it,  as  the  only  sohd  ba- 
sis on  which  it  can  be  placed,  the  superstructure 
must  of  course  share  the  fate  of  its  foundation. 
Both  must  be  considered  as  overturned  and  ruin- 
ed. So  long  as  the  doctrine  of  assurance  requires 
me  to  admit  the  doctrine  of  universal  pardon,  I 
can  see  nothing  in  it  but  what  is  repulsive  and 
dangerous.  For  if  all  men  are  not  pardoned, 
which  I  hold  to  be  demonstrable,   and  to  have 


336  SERMON  XII. 

been  demonstrated  from  Scripture,  then  I  am 
commissioned  to  urge  sinners  to  believe  that  they 
are  pardoned  "when  they  are  not  pardoned,  and 
this  is  a  contradiction  in  terms — it  is  a  contra- 
diction in  thought — it  is  a  contradiction  in  mo- 
rals— it  is  a  contradiction  in  the  system  of  pure, 
unmixed,  divine  truth — it  is  a  contradiction  which 
insults  the  character  of  God,  and  the  understand- 
ing of  man, — and  it  is  a  contradiction  which,  both 
in  its  contrariety  to  the  Bible,  and  in  the  immo- 
ral tendency  which  cleaves  to  it,  and  especially 
as  requiring  the  hypothesis  of  universal  pardon 
to  extricate  and  cure  it,  amounts  to  a  gross,  wick- 
ed, and  pestiferous  heresy.* 

2.  In  the  secowd  place,  I  attribute  the  obsti- 
nacy and  zeal  with  which  the  doctrine  of  univer- 
sal pardon  is  maintained,  to  what  may  be  justly 
called  a  passion  for  whatever  is  very  much  away 
from  sober  ordinary  modes  of  thinking,  and  feel- 
ing, and  acting,  in  matters  of  religion. 

There  are  certain  persons  who  cannot  be  re- 
strained within  the  bounds  which  have  heretofore 
limited  even  the  best  of  Christians.  They  must 
be  as  much  as  possible  excited.  A  doctrine  be- 
ing merely  true  is  no  sufficient  recommendation 
of  it  to  their  esteem — it  must  be  also  invested 
with  something  of  novelty  and  extravagance ;  and, 
indeed,  if  it  only  possesses  the  latter  property  in 

•  See  Note  E  E. 


SERMON  XII.  337 

any  attractive  form,  or  in  any  considerable  degree, 
they  are  not  very  rigid  in  requiring  that  it  shall 
be  distinguished  by  the   former.     The   pastors 
from  whom  they  were  wont  to  receive  spiritual 
instruction  are   quite  stale   and  insipid ;  and  if 
changing  from   one  pastor  to   another,  will  not 
procure  for  them  what  is  more  delectable  to  their 
new-born  taste,  they  supply  the  defect  by  read- 
ing every  fanatical  tract,  and  listening  to  every 
upstart   theologian,    that  makes  up  for  want  of 
knowledge  and  experience,  by  bold  assertions,  chi- 
merical fancies,  and  an  odious  mixture  of  spirit- 
ual  and   sentimental  disquisition.     They  distin- 
guish  themselves  from   the    common  throng   of 
what  we  have  been  accustomed  to  denominate  sin- 
cere believers,  and  exemplary  Christians,  by  be- 
ing more  confident  about  their  own  attainments, 
and  more  dogmatical  and  unsparing  in  their  celi- 
sures  of  others — by  talking  incessantly  and  wild- 
ly  about  experience,  of  which   they  carl   have 
had  but  little,    and    that  rather  of  a  doubtful 
kind — by  running  about  from  house  to  house, 
and  from  meeting  to  meeting,  as  if  the  very  ex- 
istence of  Christianity  depended  upon  all  this  rest- 
less, and  unwearied,  and  unseemly  bustUng  of 
theirs — and  by  never  dreaming  that  they  are  right, 
or  safe,   or  happy,  unless  they  are  exalting  their 
own  peculiar  views,  to  the  disparagement  of  all 
that  the  wise  and  the  good  have  held  sacred  for 
4 


338  SERMON  XII. 

ages,  and  unless  they  are  taking  an  intrusive  and 
dictatorial  inspection  of  other  people's  souls,  in- 
stead of  being  "  keepers  at  home,"  and  meditating 
on  what  may  be  faulty  in  themselves,  and  attend- 
ing to  thepractical  details  of  personal  godliness  and 
social  duty.  And  though  they  pray,  their  devo- 
tions must  be  characterized  by  something  peculiar, 
such  as  omitting  confessions  of  sin  and  petitions 
for  pardon ;  and  though  they  peruse  the  Bible,  it 
is  chiefly  to  the  more  mysterious  parts  of  it  that 
they  have  recourse,  and  with  the  view  of  dis- 
covering such  passages  and  such  expressions  as 
they  may  afterwards  quote  in  defence  of  their  fa- 
vourite fancies  ;  and  though  they  go  to  church,  it 
is  to  spy  out  the  nakedness  of  the  land,  and  to 
gratify  themselves  with  proofs  of  their  being  now 
"  wiser  than  all  their  teachers,"  and  to  give  them 
an  additional  relish  for  those  more  pungent  and 
imaginative  entertainments,  of  which  they  partake 
in  their  mutual  intercourse,  and  in  their  private  as- 
sociations. 

Such  is  the  spirit  which  is  abroad  in  the  pre- 
sent day — and  such  are  the  materials  which  the 
propounders  of  assurance  and  universal  pardon 
have  to  work  upon  in  getting  currency,  and  mak- 
ing proselytes  to  their  favourite  opinions.  They 
may  go  much  farther,  and  still  they  will  find  willing 
audiences,  and  devoted  disciples.  They  may  vary 
as  much  as  their  caprice  shall  dictate — there  will 


SERMON  XII.  339 

nevertheless  be  abundance  of  credulous  and  ad- 
miring followers.  They  may  turn  the  whole  gos- 
pel into  an  airy  speculation,  in  which  our  under- 
standing shall  perceive  no  wisdom,  and  our  hearts 
shall  find  no  comfort,  and  our  footsteps  shall  be 
favoured  with  no  moral  direction — in  spite  of  it 
all,  there  will  be  a  busy  running  after  them,  and 
a  greedy  acceptance  of  their  every  folly,  among 
the  people  of  this  perverse  generation.  We  can- 
not doubt  it,  when  we  consider  what  is  daily  tak- 
ing place  around  us,  and  what  we  have  had  to  en- 
counter in  our  ordinary  commerce  with  society, 
and  in  our  controversy  with  the  more  intelligent 
whom  we  have  felt  it  our  duty  publicly  and  frank- 
ly to  oppose.  The  youngest  and  the  rawest  in 
their  ranks  now  thinks  himself  entitled  to  say  to 
every  one  who  resists  his  dogmas,  and  to  contend 
for  the  faith  which  has  heretofore  upheld,  and 
consoled,  and  sanctified  him,  "  Thou  child  of  the 
devil,  thou  enemy  of  all  righteousness,  wilt  thou 
not  cease  to  pervert  the  right  ways  of  the  Lord .''" 
The  saints  of  past  times  who  have  fought  the 
good  fight,  who  have  enlightened  the  church  by 
their  teaching  labours,  who  have  adorned  it  with 
their  virtues,  and  guided  it  by  their  example,  and 
of  whom  the  world  was  not  worthy,  are  uncere- 
moniously proscribed  by  both  leaders  and  follow- 
ers of  the  new  sect,  as  if  tliey  had  not  known 
the  gospel,  and  were  not  now  in  the  joy  of  their 


340  SERMON  XII. 

Lord.  We  are  gravely  told,  and  the  story  gains 
credit  where  we  should  have  expected  it  to  meet 
with  rejection  and  rebuke,  of  miraculous  cures 
being  performed,  and  of  equally  miraculous  an- 
swers being  given  to  the  prayers  of  the  initiated. 
And  as  to  the  licence  that  is  taken  in  interpret- 
ing the  word  of  God,  and  in  altering  the  nomen- 
clature of  divinity,  and  in  affixing  arbitrary  mean- 
ings to  words  and  phrases  whose  import  has  been 
long  established — why  it  is  unbounded,  and  alto- 
gether incredible,  were  not  specimens  of  it  acces- 
sible to  the  observation  of  every  one  who  has  cu- 
riosity to  look  into  their  publications,  or  patience 
to  listen  to  thei?  azguments  and  expositions. 

Nothing,  perhaps,  can  better  demonstrate  the 
wildness  and  perversity  which  prevail  in  their 
mind  than  the  paradoxes,  the  inconsistencies^  the 
absvirdities,  which  their  leaders  scruple  not  to  pro- 
pound with  all  solemnity  and  dogmatism,  and 
which  the  best  and  the  worst,  the  strongest  and 
the  silliest,  of  the  crowd  of  followers,  seem  to  think 
it  a  duty  to  receive  with  the  most  implicit  credu- 
lity, and  maintain  with  the  most  perfect  coolness. 
According  to  them,  heaven  is  not  a  place  of  re- 
compense, but  merely  a  character  which,  being 
holy,  makes  those  who  have  it  happy  :  and  there- 
fore the  judge — if  indeed  there  be  any  judgment — 
will  say  to  such,  "  Come  ye  blessed  of  my  Fa- 
ther, inherit  the  holy  character  prepared  for  you 


SERMON  XII.  341 

from  the  foundation  of  the  world."  Hell  is  not  a 
place  of  punishment ;  it  is  only  a  wicked  charac- 
ter, which  makes  all  who  maintain  it  uncomfort- 
able and  wretched.  And  of  course  the  judge  will 
say  to  them,  "  Depart  from  me  ye  cursed  into 
everlasting  wicked  character^  prepared  for  the 
devil  and  his  angels."  God  no  doubt  hates  sin  ; 
but  it  is  more  correct  to  say  that  he  has  a  "  holy 
love  against  sin."  Pardon,  instead  of  bringing  an 
acquittal  or  deliverance  from  merited  penalties,  is 
"just  another  word  for  the  compassion  of  God." 
.Justification  is  a  totally  diiferent  thing  from  par- 
don— justification  being  a  sense  of  our  having 
obtained  the  pardon  ;  and  yet  pardon  and  justifi- 
cation arc  exactly  the  same  thing,  being  each  of 
them  a  sense  of  pardon  or  a  sense  of  the  "  divine 
nearness  and  love."  It  is  said  that  justification 
sometimes  signifies  a  sense  of  pardon,  and  there- 
after it  has  always  that  signification.  To  repent 
is  to  believe,  and  it  is  to  give  praise  and  glory  to 
God — but  it  is  not  by  any  means  to  repent.  Hu- 
mility is  sometimes  confidence, — at  other  times, 
assured  hope — at  other  times  spiritual  order — at 
other  times  it  is  the  spirit  of  dependence — at  other 
times  it  is  nothing  but  truth — but  it  is  never  humi- 
lity itself — and  the  world,  with  all  their  sage  ex- 
planations, "does  not  know  what  humility  means." 
The  sinner  can  derive  no  possible  benefit  from 
pardon  unless  he  believes  that  it  has  been  be- 


342  SERMON  XII. 

stowed,  and  yet  pardon  even  to  the  unbeliever  is 
such  a  benefit  as  to  show  forth  the  marvellous  and 
unspeakable  love  of  God  to  him.  At  one  time 
mankind  are  dead  and  yet  alive — at  another  time 
they  are  reconciled  and  straightway  they  are  ene- 
mies. Now  they  are  freed  from  penalties — then 
they  are  subject  to  penalties.  In  this  breath  they 
are  forgiven,  and  in  the  next  they  are  under  con- 
demnation and  encompassed  with  wrath.  They 
are  even  pardoned  and  punished  at  one  and  the 
same  instant,  and  in  both  cases  the  love  of  God 
to  them  is  equally  manifested.  When  they  ask 
pardon,  they  do  not  ask  pardon,  but  only  a  sense 
of  pardon ;  and  the  saint  who  asks  pardon,  has  a 
full,  confident,  and  undoubting  assurance  of  the 
fact  that  the  very  iniquities  for  which  he  asks 
pardon  are  all  blotted  out,  and  that  he  has  no 
reason  at  all  to  fear  God's  displeasure  ;  and  yet 
he  is  to  confess  sin  and  to  ask  pardon  for  sin, 
which  pardon  he  does  not  need,  because  he  has 
got  it  already,  and  which  sin  was  actually  cancell- 
ed, washed  away,  forgiven,  long  before  he  was  born 
or  was  capable  of  committing  it.  And  such  is  the 
definition  given  us  of  "  eternal  life,"  that  when 
our  Lord,  in  describing  the  last  judgment,  says  of 
the  righteous  that  they  shall  go  away  into  life 
eternal,  he  means  that  they  shall  go  away  into 
"  the  communication  of  the  life  of  God  into  the 


SERMON  XII.  343 

soul,""  or  into  "  the  knowledge  of  God  as  reveal- 
ed in  Christ."* 

These  contradictions  and  absurdities  are  scat- 
tered in  endless  profusion  over  the  system  of  our  op- 
ponents. They  are  found  in  their  books  and  tracts — 
their  public  sermons — their  half-private, half-pub- 
lic expositions  ;  and  are  either  stated  in  these  so 
plainly,  thatnoreader  or  hearer  of  ordinary  sagacity 
can  fail  to  perceive  them,  or  so  easily  as  well  as  just- 
ly inferred  from  what  they  have  taught,  that  every 
child  of  tolerable  intellect  is  able  to  make  the  de- 
duction. Can  any  thing  prove  more  conclusively 
the  low  ebb  to  which  theology  has  fallen  among 
us,  when  men  who  send  forth  such  crudities,  are 
listened  to  or  tolerated  by  the  intelligent  ?  And 
can  any  thing  be  more  demonstrative  of  the  ex- 
travagant excitement  which  pervades  certain 
classes  of  the  community  than  the  greedy  recep- 
tion and  all-devouring  belief  of  what  is  so  vitterly 
ludicrous,  so  insulting  to  reason,  so  devoid  of 
any  portion  of  that  ingenuity  which  sometimes 
makes  error  look  inviting — recommended  though 
it  be  with  a  large  accompaniment  of  piety,  and 
worth,  and  love  .'' 

Were  there  not  a  most  unnatural  appetite  for 
the  marvellous  and  excessive  in  matters  of  faith, 
would  not  the  very  pretension  set  up  by  some 

•  See  Note  FF. 


344)  SERMON  XT  I. 

persons  of  having  only  now  discovered  what  the 
gospel  really  is,  excite  aversion  and  disgust? 
This  truth,  of  such  vast  and  essential  mo- 
ment, has  not  only  been  hid  from  the  inhabitants 
of  Christendom  during  those  dark  ages  when  the 
fountain  of  sacred  knowledge  was  shut  up  from 
the  people  of  all  ranks  by  the  hands  of  a  bigot- 
ed and  tyrannical  hierarchy,  but  even  during  the 
centuries  that  have  elapsed  since  this  fountain  was 
opened  up  and  made  accessible  to  aU,  and  resort- 
ed to  by  the  wisest,  and  most  learned,  and  most 
holy  men  whom  the  world  ever  saw.  But  to 
none  of  them  was  it  ever  revealed  in  its  just  na- 
ture and  character, — at  least,  any  of  them  by  whom 
it  was  perceived,  had  only  a  feeble  and  momentary 
glimpse  of  it,  while  it  was  wholly  concealed  from 
all  besides.  And  if  it  ever  came  to  be  more  ge- 
nerally known,  it  was  only  by  such  as  were  re- 
markable either  for  their  ignorance  or  their  immo- 
rality. But  now  it  is  put  forth  as  the  grand  dis- 
covery of  these  days,  a  discovery  made  in  the 
pages  of  a  volume  which  men,  both  of  power  and 
prayer,  had  perused  during  a  lifetime  without  see- 
ing a  vestige  of  the  doctrine  in  any  corner  of  it, 
and  made  by  individuals  who,  compared  with 
them  that  went  before,  are  as  nothing  and  vanity. 
And  though  coming  in  such  suspicious  circum- 
stances, it  is  received  without  inquiry,  as  infalli- 
bly true,  hailed  as  the  richest  boon  that  heaven 


SERMON  XI L  3i5 

has  vouchsafed  to  our  degenerate  days,  and  made 
to  supersede  all  that  was  wont  to  instruct,  and 
sanctify,  and  gladden,  the  church  of  God  ! 

But  there  is  nothing  which  shows  in  a  strong- 
er light  the  violence  of  that  spiritual  fever  which 
rages  among  so  many  of  the  present  day,  as 
the  freedom  which  our  opponents  use  with  the 
Bible  in  order  to  make  it  speak  their  sentiments. 
It  is  quite  revolting ;  and  it  gives  us  reason. to 
apprehend  that  from  those  for  whose  illumination 
it  is  practised,  and  to  whose  shame  it  is  practised 
successfully,  piety  has  for  the  time  departed  as  well 
as  sense.  For  if  they  really  "  trembled  at  God's 
word,"  and  felt  reverence  for  him  who  spoke  and 
inspired  it,  it  is  difficult  to  imagine  how  they  could 
endure  the  uncourtly  treatment  which  it  receives 
from  the  modern  and  new-fangled  interpreters 
of  its  pages.  These  interpreters  set  aside  and 
trample  upon  all  the  plainest  and  most  necessary 
and  most  indisput-^ble  rulesof  explication,  and  give 
us  as  the  import  of  the  Bible,  not  what  it  really 
teaches,  but  merely  what  they  would  wish  it  to  say. 

They  don't  attend  to  the  scope  of  a  passage,  or 
to  the  obvious  design  of  the  inspired  author,  but 
catch  at  a  word,  or  a  phrase,  or  the  very  shadow 
of  one,  and  distort  it  to  the  purpose  in  hand  with 
the  most  provoking  coolness.  If  a  passage  makes 
against  them  they  pass  it  by  as  if  it  were  no  part 
of  God's  word.     They  see  it  not  though  it  is 


348  SERMON  XII. 

staring  them  in  the  face.     Point  out  the  state- 
ments in  it  which  contradict  their  doctrine,  they 
just  wink  the  harder,  and  will  not  look  at  them. 
Dwell  upon  these  with   whatever  force  and  so- 
lemnity you  can  employ  ;  it  is  all  in  vain,  for  they 
will  recognise  nothing,  and  will  attend  to  nothing, 
and  will  be  influenced  by  nothing,  that  would  rob 
them  of  their  theory,  or  disconcert  them  in  their 
attempts  to  build  it  up.  They  pick  and  choose  from 
the  Bible  at  their  own  discretion  and  for  their  own 
ends  ;   of  course  they  conveniently  exclude  from 
their  regard  and  from  their  expositions  all  that 
would   overthrow   or    shake   the  fabric  of  error 
which    they  have   so    industriously  reared,   and 
which  they  so  fondly  and  doatingly  contemplate ; 
and  there  is  nothing  that  they  dread  so  much,  or 
to  which  they  have  so  great  an  aversion  as  con- 
troversy.    They  rather  confide  in  the  silent  and 
progressive  influence  of  positive,  reiterated,  per- 
severing asseverations,   poured  into  the  ears  of 
those  who  are  too  timid,  too  ignorant,    or  too 
peaceable  to  withstand  them,  and  who,  by  degrees, 
will  be  gained  over  to  opinions  which  would  have 
been  annihilated  by  the  word  of  God  and  the  ope- 
rations of  reason,  in  the  hand  of  a  competent  an- 
tagonist. 

I  would  give  you  just  one  example  of  their 
misrepresentation  of  Scripture,  which  I  confess  has 
struck  me  forcibly.     They  say,  in  order  to  un- 


SERMON  XII.  347 

dervalue  the  importance  of  faith,  "  The  gospel  is 
not  '  He  that  believeth  shall  be  saved,'  hut  it  is 
*  God  gave  his  Son  to  be  a  propitiation  for  the 
sins  of  the  whole  world.' "  There  is  here  obvious 
and  unworthy  artifice ;  I  can  call  it  nothing  bet- 
ter. Properly  speaking,  the  gospel  is  neither  the 
one  nor  the  other.  If  the  author  of  such  a  state- 
ment had  been  determined  to  be  fair  and  candid 
in  the  matter,  and  to  let  Scripture  speak  for  itself, 
and  to  expound  the  gospel  in  a  single  declaration, 
why  should  he  not  have  taken  the  account  of  the 
gospel  that  was  given  by  the  Author  and  Finish- 
er of  our  faith  himself,  who  says,  "  God  so  loved 
the  world,  that  he  gave  his  only  begotton  Son, 
that  whosoever  beheveth  in  him  should  not  perish 
but  have  everlasting  life  ?"  But  the  truth  is,  that 
for  an  account  of  the  gospel,  for  knowing  pre- 
cisely and  fully  what  it  is,  we  must  not  go  to  any 
single  verse  or  to  any  detached  expression — that 
is  the  way  to  get  the  gospel  made  any  thing  that 
we  please — but  take  into  view  the  whole  record  in 
which  the  gospel  is  revealed,  and  from  its  various 
parts  to  collect  the  doctrines  which  God  has  of- 
fered to  our  belief,  and  from  which  we  are  to 
learn  the  method  whereby  we  are  to  be  saved  from 
our  sins,  and  to  lay  hold  on  eternal  life. 

3.  I  may  mention,  in  the  third  and  last  place, 
that  separation  of  privilege  from  character — of 
principle  from  practice — of  one  part  of  the  gospel 


348  SERMON  Xll. 

sclieme  from  another,  in  which  men  are  so  apt  to 
indulge,  as  another  and  a  fertile  source  of  the  er- 
rors -whose  prevalence  we  so  much  deplore. 

This  is  a  theme  on  which  I  might  expatiate  at 
great  length  ;  and  it  is  certainly  deserving  of  a 
full  discussion  as  well  as  of  serious  consideration. 
But  it  is  necessary  that  I  should  confine  myself  to 
a  very  few  remarks. 

Although  the  religion  of  Christ  is  not  present- 
ed to  us  in  the  regular  form  of  a  system,  yet  a 
system  assuredly  it  is.  It  consists  of  various  parts. 
These  parts,  indeed,  may  be  separately  examined, 
and  separately  illustrated  ;  and  from  each  one  of 
them  we  may  deduce  what  is  both  true  and  use- 
ful. But  they  are  linked  together.  Every  one 
of  them  is  not  merely  related  to  all  the  rest,  but 
has  a  distinct  bearing  and  throws  a  certain  light 
upon  them  all.  And  when  put  into  their  proper 
places,  and  kept  in  their  proper  connexions,  they 
constitute  one  harmonious  whole,  and  exhibit  afull 
and  correct  development  of  the  will  of  God  concern- 
ing human  redemption.  So  that  while  we  learn 
most  completely  what  that  will  is,  and  feel  its  in- 
tended effect  on  our  belief  and  conduct  only  when 
we  take  a  comprehensive  view  of  it  as  it  is  em- 
bodied in  the  Christian  system,  so  it  follows  of 
course,  that  when  we  neglect  or  overlook  any  por- 
tion of  it,  if  we  substitute  one  principle  for  ano- 
ther, or  allow  any  feature  which  it  possesses  to 


SERMON  XII.  349 

engross,  or  occupy  an  immoderate  share  of,  our  at- 
tention, there  must  be  a  corresponding  misappre- 
hension of  its  import,  and  a  corresponding  defect 
in  its  practical  influence.  Much,  indeed,  will  de- 
pend on  the  intrinsic  or  relative  importance  of  that 
which  has  been  either  altogether  detached,  or  in- 
serted in  a  wrong  station,  or  made  of  too  great  or 
of  too  little  moment.  But  let  this  be  as  it  may, 
there  must  still  be  some  mistake  in  our  under- 
standing of  the  gospel,  and  in  the  homage  which 
we  render  it,  and  in  the  effects  which  it  produces 
on  our  comfort  and  our  character.  And,  there- 
fore, though  it  may  be  difficult  to  deduce  from 
the  sacred  record,  that  system  which  it  undoubt- 
edly contams,  and  impossible  to  give  its  compo- 
nent parts  with  that  perfect  adjustment,  of  which, 
however,  they  are  capable,  it  must  be  that,  on  the 
one  hand,  the  nearer  we  can  approximate  to  this 
the  more  honourable  is  it  to  God,  and  the  more 
beneficial  to  ourselves;  and,  on  the  other  hand,  the 
less  successful  we  are  in  such  an  attempt,  the 
more  likely  are  we  to  have  erroneous  conceptions 
of  saving  truth,  to  err  in  our  submission  to  its 
power,  and  to  come  short  in  the  benefits  which  it 
is  intended  to  convey. 

Now,  in  this  respect,  ignorance  and  careless- 
ness are  prevalent.  Christianity  is  not  known 
by  some,  who  should  from  their  education  and 
their  profession,  have  been  well  and  minutely  ac- 


350  SERMON  XII. 

quainted  with  it,  as  a  system.  By  others  it  is  ac- 
counted injurious  to  study  or  to  regard  it  in  that 
regular  and  connected  form.  And  in  general  its 
various  doctrines  are  attended  to  as  if  they  were 
totally  insulated  from  one  or  other,  and  as  if  it 
were  of  no  consequence  what  degree  of  considera- 
tion they  severally  claimed,  or  what  positions  they 
severally  maintained.  Hence  one  man  dwells  al- 
most exclusively  on  this  tenet,  and  another  man 
dwells  almost  exclusively  on  that  tenet.  Neither  of 
them  inquires  or  determines  what  place  his  tenet 
should  hold,  or  what  power  it  should  exercise :  but 
he  just  gives  it  that  weight  and  operation  which 
pleases  his  own  fancy,  or  comports  with  his  own 
prejudices  and  feelings.  Unrestricted  by  sys- 
tem, which  perhaps  he  has  been  taught  to  despise, 
or  which  he  finds  it  convenient  to  set  at  nought, 
or  unrestricted  by  those  principles  which  give  birth 
to  system  in  every  science  as  well  as  in  that  of  re- 
ligion, he  recognises  no  order  and  subordination 
in  the  gospel  scheme,  but  takes  it  up  and  treats 
it  as  if  there  were  no  skilful  arrangement  or 
fixed  continuity  in  it,  as  if  it  were  just  a  heap  of 
disjointed  fragments,  and  as  if  it  were  either  im- 
practicable or  undesirable  to  discover  in  it  any 
thing  like  philosophical  consistency.  Thus  it  is 
that  when  any  theoretical  notions  occur  to  a  man's 
fancy,  he  does  not  see  how  it  affects  the  gospel 
system  ;  but  finding  that  it  agrees  with  some  doc- 


SERMON  xir.  351 

trine  or  other  which  he  had  been  accustomed  to  be- 
lieve as  belonging  to  Christianity,  he  straightway 
embraces  it,  and  doats  upon  it,  and  makes  it  every 
thing  ;    whereas,  had  he  been  well  instructed  in 
the  kingdom  of  God,  and  not  only  known  all  that 
has  been  revealed,  but  had  his  knowledge  so  or- 
dered as  that  he  saw  the  dependence  of  one  de- 
partment upon  another,  and  the  relative  position 
and  value  which  divine  wisdom  had  given  to  each, 
he  would  have  easily  discovered  that  his   theory 
was  inadmissible,  or  that  it  must  be  subjected  to 
certain  modifications  before  it  could  be  safely  re- 
ceived  into   his   creed.     Examples   of  this  will 
occur  to  every  attentive   observer,  in   reflecting 
on  the  various  opinions   that   have  been  lately 
broached  in  the  province  of  theology,  and  on  the 
facility  with  which  they  have  been  adopted   by 
persons  whose  intelligence  would  otherwise  have 
afforded  a  perfect  security  against  their  approach 
and  their  prevalence. 

But  the  same  general  remark  may  be  made 
with  respect  to  the  mode  that  too  much  obtams 
of  reading  and  regarding  the  Scriptures,  out  of 
which  alone  the  Christian  system  is  to  be  evolved. 
The  Scriptures  are  perused  as  a  set  of  detached, 
incoherent,  rambling  sentences,  on  one  or  more 
of  which  we  are  entitled  to  fix  our  attention,  to  the 
exclusion,  or  at  least  the  comparative  neglect,  of 
the  rest.     They  are  not  viewed  as  proceeding 


352  SERMON  XII. 

from   one   infinite   source — as  intended  to    pro- 
mote one  great  end — as  sanctified  and  enforced  by 
one  divine  authority — and  as  consequently  having 
this  to  characterize  them,  that  every  one  portion 
of  their  contents  agrees  with   every  other,   and 
that  their  meaning  is  to  be  ascertained  by  a  due 
and  a  comprehensive  consideration  of  the  whole. 
It  is  indeed  their  peculiar  excellence,  that  though 
they  do  not  exhibit  a  scheme  of  Christian  doc- 
trine laid  down  in  that  order  which  is  observed 
in  a  Confession  of  Faith,  they  yet  contain  the 
scheme  as  really  as  if  they  did  give  that  exhibi- 
tion of  it.     And  it  is  so  diffused  over  their  pages 
as  to  serve  more  than  the  purposes  of  a  regularly 
dfgested  creed,  by  having  all  its  articles  recurring 
frequently,   in  every  variety  of  form,  and  with 
every  variety  of  accompaniment,  and  interwoven 
with  each  other  in  such  a  manner,  as   that   the 
knowledge  and  belief  of  one  may  infer  the  know- 
ledge and  belief  of  all  the  rest.     To  illustrate  this 
more  fully,  it  would  be  necessary  to  go  over  the 
Avhole  of  the  sacred  volume.     But  if  you  have 
perused  it  with  any  care,  you  must  be  sensible 
that  there  are  examples  of  what  I  have  stated  oc- 
curring in  every  page  ;  and  that  a  man  who  is  well 
furnished  with  religious  information,  gathered  by 
him  from  a  diligent  and  frequent   perusal  of  its 
statements,   and  used  by  him  in  the  connexions 
in  which  it  is  found  there,  is  most  hkely  to  be 


SERMON  XII.  353 

preserved  from  the  inroads  of  error  in  bis  attempts 
to  learn  the  will  and  the  truth  of  God.  Only 
think  for  a  moment  of  what  you  have  read  in  his 
word,  that  you  may  be  convinced  of  this.  If  his 
mercy  or  compassion  to  sinners  is  often  spoken  of, 
is  not  his  anger  and  indignation  against  impenitent 
sinners  spoken  of  with  equal  emphasis,  and  peihaps 
in  the  very  same  passage  ?  Do  not  you  find  privi- 
lege and  conduct  so  closely  combined,  as  that  eter- 
nal happiness  is  sometimes  annexed  to  the  exercise 
of  a  single  virtue.''  If  in  oneclause  of  asentence  you 
find  the  safety  and  happiness  of  behevers  assert- 
ed, is  not  the  next  clause  sometimes  employed  in 
awfully  depicting  the  danger  and  the  misery 
of  unbelievers  .''  Have  not  we  occasionally  a 
great  and  all  important  truth  taught  in  the  course 
of  inculcating  a  relative  or  personal  duty  ?  In 
short,  is  it  not  obvious,  that  while  great  blessings 
are  held  out  to  us  to  receive,  a  great  work  is  at 
the  same  time  given  us  to  do — that  the  richest  and 
freest  benefits  are  associated  with  the  utmost 
diligence  in  duty,  and  the  most  rigid  abstinence 
from  sin — that  doctrinal  truth  and  practical  god- 
liness, that  peace  and  purity,  that  God's  love  to 
us  and  our  love  to  him,  are  constantly  and  inse- 
parably united — that  we  must  at  once  know,  and 
believe,  and  accept,  and  feel,  and  do,  as  our  Father 
in  Heaven  has  been  pleased  to  communicate  his 
mercies,  and  his  promises,  and  his  will,  in  order 


354  SERMON  XII. 

that  we  may  be  the  true  Israel,  that  we  may  en- 
joy peace,  that  we  may  be  sanctified  for  his  ser- 
vice, that  we  may  honour  him  upon  earth,  that 
we  may  be  admitted  into  his  presence  in  heaven, 
and  partake  of  the  glory  which  is  hereafter  to  be 
revealed.* 

Of  all  this  every  person  must  be  satisfied  who 
has  ever  attended  to  the  strain  and  structure  of 
the  Bible  as  the  records  of  Christianity.  And 
yet  in  despite  of  all  this,  the  teachers  of  strange 
doctrines  come  forward  with  their  texts  to  prove 
them,  as  if  these  texts,  torn  away  from  the  con- 
nexion in  which  they  were  placed  by  their  infal- 
lible Author,  and  presented  as  the  only  thing 
given  to  regulate  our  judgment,  were  to  be  held 
decisive  of  the  points  in  question.  They  state,  and 
reiterate,  and  urge  incessantly  these  texts,  as  if 
they  constituted  the  whole  of  revelation,  and  ad- 
mitted of  no  other  explanation,  and  had  no  other 
meaning,  than  what  they  are  pleased,  on  such  limit- 
ed premises,  to  affix  to  them.  All  opposition 
is  unavailing,  all  doubt  is  unscriptural,  all  disbelief 
is  sinful, — for  still  the  texts,  isolated  and  naked 
as  ever,  are  pressed  upon  us  with  the  most  un- 
wearied and  offensive  pertinacity.  Let  them  en- 
ter into  a  conversation  with  you,  or  give  an  ex- 
position, or  preach  a  sermon,  or  publish  a  little 

*  See  Note  Gfi. 


SERMON  XII.  355 

book,  their  theme,  their  illustration,  their  proof, 
their  all,  consists  in  ringing  changes  on  these 
texts^  so  that  as  certainly  as  they  begin  to  speak 
or  to  write  on  the  all-engrossing  subject,  so  cer- 
tainly may  you  expect  the  texts — sometimes  in 
one  order,  sometimes  in  another,  and  sometimes  in 
no  order  at  all — but  still  the  favourite  texts^  with- 
out weariness  and  without  end.  To  whomsoever 
they  address  themselves — though  it  is  chiefly  to 
the  feeble,  and  the  ignorant,  and  the  inexperien- 
ced— to  whomsoever  they  address  themselves,  their 
great  object  is  to  get  their  victims,  on  whom  they 
have  fixed  their  eye,  allured  within  the  magic 
circle  of  the  texts — away  from  the  fine,  large,  com- 
prehensive field  of  Scripture  document,  and  from 
all  that  might  break  the  spell  of  these  texts,  and 
set  the  enchanted  free.  So  constantly,  in  short, 
do  they  chime  over  their  texts,  and  so  much 
are  the  texts  identified  with  the  men  who  have 
selected  them,  and  who  make  them  the  begin- 
ning, the  middle,  and  the  end  of  their  discussion, 
that  you  cannot  look  at  or  think  of  the  one  with- 
out having  the  other  realized  in  your  imagina- 
tion. And  the  result  with  many  is,  that  an  im- 
pression in  favour  of  the  opinions  which  it  is 
wished  to  propagate  is  gradually  and  insensibly 
made  by  the  unceasing,  solemn,  and  earnest  re- 
petition of  the  texts,  while  every  thing  is  for- 
gotten by  which  that  impression  might  have  been 


356  SERMON  XII. 

prevented  from  taking  effect,  or  again  enfeebled 
and  effaced  ;  and  that,  by  the  indefatigable  tu- 
ition of  their  masters,  the  disciples,  having  got 
the  texts  fixed  in  their  memory,  and  intertwined 
with  all  their  thoughts,  deem  the  production  of 
them  a  sufficient  answer  to  any  objection  that 
may  be  stated,  and  an  unfailing  instrument  for 
gaining  proselytes  to  the  dogmas  of  their  sect. 

Of  these  texts  I  may  specify  a  few,  that,  by 
quoting  along  with  them  other  texts,  by  which 
their  import  is  modified,  you  may  see  how  dan- 
gerous it  is  to  make  such  partial  use  of  the  sa- 
cred writings.  "  God  is  love,""  is  one  of  them ; 
but  it  is  also  said  that  God  "  hates  all  workers  of 
iniquity" — that  "  the  Lord  revengeth,  and  is  fu- 
rious"— that  *'  his  wrath  cometh  on  the  children  of 
disobedience" — that  he  will  "  render  indignation 
and  wrath,  tribulation  and  anguish,  upon  every 
soul  of  man  that  doeth  evil." — Another  of  them 
is,  that  Christ  is  "  the  propitiation  for  the  sins  of 
the  whole  world" — but  it  is  also  stated  "  that  God 
has  set  forth  Christ  to  be  a  propitiation  through 
faith  in  his  blood." — Another  of  them  is,  that 
"  God  tvas  in  Christ,  reconciling  the  world  unto 
himself,  not  imputing  unto  them  their  tres- 
passes"— but  the  apostle  who  says  so,  adds,  al- 
most immediately,  that  his  commission  was  to 
address  sinners  in  these  terms  ;  "  Be  ye  recon- 
ciled to  God." — Another  of  them  is,  that  "  God 


SERMON  XII.  357 

hath  given  us  eternal  life,  and  this  life  is  in  his 
Son" — but  our  Saviour  is  recorded  by  the  very 
apostle  who  makes  that  statement,  to  have  de- 
clared, that  "  whoever  believeth  in  him  shall  not 
perish,  but  shall  have  eternal  life."  Another  of 
them  is,  "  Behold  the  Lamb  of  God,  that 
taketh  away  the  sin  of  the  world" — but  he  of 
whom  this  was  said,  held  this  language  to  the 
Pharisees,  "  If  ye  were  blind  ye  should  have  no 
sin  ;  but  now  ye  say.  We  see  ;  therefore  yotii'  sin 
remaineth  ;"  and  again,  "  I  go  my  way,  and  ye 
shall  seek  me,  and  shall  die  in  your  sins  ,•"  and 
again,  "  I  say  unto  you,  Capernaum,  that  it  shall 
be  more  tolerable  for  the  land  of  Sodom  in  the 
day  of  judgment  than  for  thee."— Another  of 
them  is,  that  "  Christ  hath  redeemed  us  from  the 
curse  of  the  law,  having  been  made  a  curse  for 
us — "  but  Paul,  who  announces  tliat  truth,  occu- 
pies himself  in  the  chapter  where  it  is  found,  and 
in  the  whole  of  the  Epistle,  in  proving  that  all  the 
blessings  of  the  gospel  come  to  the  sinner  through 
faith  and  not  by  the  law,  and  expressly  sayg, 
"  The  Scripture  hath  concluded  all  under  sin, 
that  the  promise  by  faith  of  Jesus  Christ  might 
be  given  to  them  that  believe.'''' — Another  of  them 
is,  "  he  that  believeth  not  God,  hath  made  him  a 
liar,  because  he  believeth  not  the  record  that  God 
gave  of  his  Son.  And  this  is  the  record,  that  God 
hath  given  to  us  eternal  life."     But  the  Apostle, 


G 


358  SERMON  XII. 

who  lays  this  foundation  for  assurance,  also  says, 
"  these  things  have  I  written  unto  you  that  be- 
lieve, that  ye  may  know  that  ye  have  eternal 
life."  And  again,  "  we  know  that  we  have  passed 
from  death  to  life,  because  we  love  the  brethren : 
he  that  loveth  not  his  brother  abideth  in  death. 
Whosoever  hateth  his  brother  is  a  murderer,  and 
ye  know  that  no  murderer  hath  eternal  life  abid- 
ing in  him."  And  he  elsewhere  says,  "  These 
are  written  that  ye  might  believe  that  Jesus  is  the 
Christ,  the  Son  of  God,  and  that  believing,  ye 
might  have  life  through  his  name." 

Time  would  not  fail  me  to  enumerate  those 
texts  which  are  brought  forward  by  our  oppo- 
nents ;  but  time  would  fail  me  to  enumerate  all 
the  other  texts  by  which  these  are  so  explained 
as  to  have  a  meaning  not  only  different  from,  but 
directly  hostile  to,  and  destructive  of,  the  meaning 
which  they  assign  to  theirs.  And  I  have  ad- 
duced some  specimens,  merely  to  point  out  to  you 
what  I  consider  as  one  prolific  source  of  the  he- 
resy in  which  they  indulge,  and  as  one  great 
cause  of  the  ready  reception  which  it  has  expe- 
rienced. According  to  the  mode  of  treating 
Scripture  to  which  1  have  been  adverting,  I 
know  not  any  error  whatever  that  I  could  not  de- 
duce from  its  pages,  and  establish  by  its  state- 
ments.    There  is  not,  indeed,  a  false  doctrine  that 

has  been  taught  since  the  commencement  of  the 
6 


SERMON  XII.  359 

Christian  Church,  in  support  of  which,  its  propa- 
gators have  not  referred  to  the  Bible  : — but,  in 
referring  to  the   Bible,  they  have  only  attended 
to  single  expressions  or  detached  passages  in  it, 
and  not  to  its  general  strain   and  phraseology  ; 
and  among  those  who  have  imbibed   such  doc- 
trines, there  has  been  almost  always  an  exclusive 
regard  to  the  portions  of  Scripture  pressed  upon 
them  by  their  teachers,  and  a  great  ignorance  or 
studied  neglect  of  every  thing  else  in  the  sacred 
volume.     And  so  it  is  with  the  dogma  of  universal 
pardon.     There  are  the  texts — the  convenient 
texts — the  consecrated  texts — the  ever-recurring 
texts, — brought  in  at  all  times,  in  all  forms,  and  in 
on  all  occasions — there  are  these  texts — and  there 
are  no  more.     Let  the  view  of  Scripture  testi- 
mony be  extended — let  the  believing  eye  travel 
over  the  whole  territory  of  revelation — let  the  un- 
derstanding of  the  Christian  be  exercised  in  im- 
partially comparing  one  part  of  it  with  another, 
and  his  heart  be  laid  open  to  all  the  impressions 
which  that  wise  and  faithful  dealing  with  it  is 
calculated  to  produce — and  the  bubble  will  im- 
mediately burst,  the  charm  will  be  straightway 
dissolved,  the  theory  of  universal  pardon  will  be 
dissipated  as  it  has  been  before,  and  there  will 
stand  revealed  to  the  conviction  of  every  unpre- 
judiced mind,  the  solemn  truth  at  once  delightful 


360  SERMON  XII. 

and  awful,  so  obviously  contained  in  these  words  ; 
"  He  that  believeth  on  the  Son  hath  everlasting 
life ;  and  he  that  believeth  not  the  Son  shall  not 
see  life,  but  the  wrath  of  God  abideth  in  him.'''' 
I  could  almost  appeal  to  our  opponents  them- 
selves, and  ask  them  whether,  as  they  talk  on 
this  subject,  in  the  house  or  by  the  way,  when 
they  lie  down  or  when  they  rise  up,  or  as  they 
meditate  upon  it  at  even  tide,  and  at  noon,  and  in 
the  morning — ^for  they  seem  to  meditate  and  to 
talk  upon  nothing  else — they  do  not  shut  out 
from  their  view  and  their  conversation  every  thing 
but  the  fondled  texts,  and  dwell  upon  them  as  if 
there  were  nothing  else  worth  heeding — whether, 
when  they  have  recourse  to  the  Bible,  that  vo- 
lume  "  all  of  which  is  given  by  inspiration,  and 
profitable  for  doctrine,  and  reproof,  and  correction, 
and  instruction  in  righteousness,"  does  not  open 
at  the  very  places  where  their  texts  are  situat- 
ed, as  if  it  had  been  used  to  open  at  these 
places  alone — whether,  when  turning  over  its 
leaves,  if  any  passage  which  wears  an  unfavourable 
aspect  to  their  texts  happens  to  meet  their  eye,  it 
does  not  affect  them  with  disappointment  and  pain, 
and  does  not  occasion  a  speedy  retreat  to  some 
of  their  chosen  positions — and  whether,  having 
shut  the  depository  of  every  saving  truth,  these 
are  not  almost  the  only  texts  which  adhere  to 


SERMON  XII.  361 

their  memories,  and  which  they  can  quote  with  ac- 
curacy and  facility,  in  assailing  the  orthodox  creed, 
and  in  defending  their  own  peculiar  opinions. 

At  any  rate,  my  friends,  whatever  they  may 
confess,  or  whatever  they  may  deny,  I  think  you 
must  have  observed  the  fact,  and  I  am  sure  you 
have  heard  enough  to  convince  you  of  it,  that  in 
maintaining  the  doctrine  of  universal  pardon,  they 
have  been  studious  to  overlook  a  large  proportion 
of  the  inspired  volume,  that  they  have  scrupled 
not  to  put  asunder  what  God  has  joined  together, 
and  that  instead  of  receiving  the  plan  of  salva- 
tion, simply  and  submissively  as  it  is  revealed  to 
them,  they  have  selected  certain  parts  of  it,  and 
omitting  the  rest  as  if  it  were  useless  or  non-ex- 
istent, have  given  to  these  a  meaning  and  an  in- 
fluence, altogether  different  from  what  they  really 
possess  in  that  connexion  which  they  hold  in 
the  divine  system  and  in  the  divine  record.  And 
hence  have  arisen,  in  a  great  measure,  those  ab- 
surd and  ruinous  errors  which  we  have  been  en- 
deavouring to  expose;  hence  the  delusion  in  which 
their  leading  and  more  active  advocates  are  perti- 
naciously abiding ;  and  hence  no  small  degree  of 
that  success  with  which,  "  creeping  into  houses," 
and  fastening  upon  the  weak  and  the  half-inform- 
ed who  have  been  so  unfortunate  as  to  listen  to 
them  when  tliey  unfolded  their  little  bundle  of 
texts,  they  have  propagated  doctrines  which  belie 


362  SERMON  Xll. 

the  word  of  God  most  odiously — which  reason  re- 
pudiates as  inconsistent  and  mistaken — which 
break  the  constitution  of  the  gospel  into  pieces,  and 
substitute  for  it  freaks  of  fancy  and  unwholesome 
paradoxes — which  introduce  into  religion  all  that 
is  silly  and  bigotted  and  presumptuous — and  which 
add  to  all  their  other  evils,  that  worst  of  all  evils — 
saying  peace  !  peace  !  to  the  worldling  and  the 
sinner,  when  there  is  no  peace. 

I  trust,  my  friends,  that  none  of  you  have  em- 
braced the  dogmas  whose  unscriptural  nature  and 
mischievous  tendency,  I  have  been  attempting  to 
demonstrate.  My  object,  indeed,  has  been  not 
so  much  to  cure  those  who  are  already  labour- 
ing under  the  malady — for  with  such,  argument, 
however  appropriate  and  strong,  seems  to  make 
the  disease  more  inveterate — as  to  guard  the 
young,  the  unwary,  the  inexperienced,  who  are 
still  sound  in  the  faith,  against  the  danger  of  in- 
fection, and  to  provide  them  with  adequate  means 
of  safety.  And  I  hope  that  enough  has  been 
stated  to  convince  you  of  the  folly  and  the  false- 
hood of  those  opinions  which  have  recently  risen 
from  their  graves,  and  haunted  us  in  our  going 
out  and  our  coming  in,  and  to  guide  you  to  such 
a  mode  of  receiving  and  of  checking  these  dis- 
turbers of  your  tranquillity  as  should  render  them 
either  hateful  or  harmless.  What  remains,  but  that 

I  should  beseech  you  to  search  the  Scriptures  more 

1 


SERMON  XII.  363 

and  more,  that  you  may  increase  in  solid  wisdom, 
and  in  dislike  to  novelties  and  speculations  in 
matters  of  eternal  moment — to  pray  diligently  for 
the  Holy  Spirit  that  he  may  keep  you  from  the 
encroachments  of  heresy,  and  lead  you  into  all 
the  truth — and  to  mind  the  exhortation  which 
says,*  "  Stand  ye  in  the  ways,  and  see  and  ask 
for  the  old  paths,  where  is  the  good  way,  and 
walk  therein,  and  ye  shall  find  rest  to  your 
souls." 


•  Jer.  vi.  16. 


APPENDIX. 


Note  A,  p.  52. 


I  DO  not  find  that  Mr.  Erskine  has  made  any  comment 
on  this  verse.  But  he  has  given  a  comment  on  Acts  x.  43. 
which  I  presume  he  ^vdll,  as  he  may  with  equal  propriety, 
apply  to  this. 

"  To  him,"  said  Peter,  "  give  all  the  prophets  witness, 
that  whosoever  believeth  on  him  shall,  through  liis  name, 
receive  the  remission  of  sins."  "  The  word  receive  here," 
says  Ml'.  Erskine,  "  has  the  same  sense  that  it  has  in 
John  i.  11.  which  has  been  already  quoted, '  He  came  to 
his  OMTi,  and  his  own  received  him  not,'  or  accepted  him 
not.  He  had  come  to  them  whether  they  received  him 
or  not,  and  so  had  the  remission  of  sin ;  but  those  only 
who  believed  in  his  true  character,  viz.  that  he  had  come 
as  a  destroyer  of  the  works  of  the  devil,  and  a  propitia- 
tion for  the  sins  of  the  world,  would  in  that  very  chai-ac- 
ter  of  him,  read  and  receive  their  own  forgiveness."* 

1.  Now,  in  the  first  place,  on  what  authority  does  Mr. 

•  Unconditional  Freeness,  p.  181. 


366  APPENDIX. 

Erskine  assert  that  receive  here  means  accept?  Is  that 
necessarily  or  uniformly  the  meaning  of  the  original  word 
Xccfi^avea  ?  Is  it  the  meaning  of  the  word  in  Matt.  xxi.  22. 
"  And  all  things  whatsoever  ye  shall  ask  in  prayer,  be- 
lieving, ye  shall  receive  (x»i^£7^5)  ?  Is  it  the  meaning  of 
the  word  in  Acts  viii.  17.  "  Then  laid  they  their  hands  on 
them,  and  they  received  (i\aiJi,lia\)0)i)  the  Holy  Ghost  ?"  Is 
it  the  meaning  of  the  word  in  Rom.  v.  11.  "  by  whom  we 
have  now  received  (aa/Sa^Ksv)  the  atonement  ?"  Is  it  the 
meaning  of  the  word  in  1  Cor.  ix.  24.  "  Know  ye  not  that 
they  Avhich  run  a  race,  run  all,  but  one  receiveth  {>.a.i/,!ia,nt) 
the  prize  '?  so  run  that  ye  may  obtain  (^KaraXccSriTi^  '?"  It 
is  not  the  meaning  of  the  word  in  these,  nor  in  a  multitude 
of  other  passages  that  might  have  been  adduced.  And 
why  is  it  to  be  rendered  accept  in  the  passage  under  con- 
sideration ?  Merely  because  Mr.  Erskine  thinks  it  more 
agreeable  to  his  theory.  The  common  meaning  of  Xafifiava 
in  the  New  Testament,  is  simply  to  get,  in  whatever  way, 
that  which  was  not  previously  possessed.  And  I  am  en- 
titled, so  far  as  the  Greek  phrase  is  concerned,  to  insist 
that  the  rendering  in  our  authorised  version  shall  be  re- 
tained as  the  correct  one. 

2.  But,  in  the  second  place,  I  really  cannot  see  what  ad- 
vantage Mr.  Erskine  gains  by  the  alteration  which  he  so 
arbitrarily  proposes  to  make.  I  have  no  objection  to  say 
accept  instead  of  receive,  if  he  is  very  anxious  for  it.  Eut 
let  it  be  observed,  that  by  using  the  word  accept,  he  gives 
the  act  which  it  expresses  more  of  a  conditional  charac- 
ter than  the  word  receive  indicates.  What  has  no  will 
at  all  may  be  said  to  receive  a  thing ;  to  accept  a  thing 
supposes  will  in  the  accepter.  I  could  say,  that  purse 
will  receive  whatever  money  you  put  into  it ;  not,  will 
accept  the  money.  We  hear  of  a  bill  being  accepted,  not 
received.     Now  the  idea  which  Mr.  Erskine  is  anxious  to 


APPENDIX.  367 

explode  as  quite  uiiscriptural,  is  that  of  a  sinner  being  ac- 
tive in  obtaining',  or  doing  any  thing,  or  exerting  any  wish 
to  obtain  pardon,  because  pardon  is  ab-eady  obtained,  and 
belongs  to  the  sinner,  whether  he  is  active  or  passive  in 
reference  to  it.  But  does  he  not  perceive  that  by  substi- 
tuting accepting  for  receiving,  he  is  encouraging  the  idea 
which  he  is  so  desirous  to  abolish  ?  When  a  sinner  is 
said  to  receive  pardon,  it  may  mean  that  he  gets  that 
which  is  freely  given.  But  when  he  is  said  to  accept  it, 
this  implies  that  he  might  refuse  it,  if  he  had  chosen  to 
do  so,  and  consequently,  it  could  not  previously  and  ab- 
solutely have  been  his.  And  truly  let  it  be  taken  either 
way,  receive  or  accept,  nothing  can  be  plainer  than  that 
the  thing  which  is  thus  got,  was  not  beforehand  in  the 
possession  of  the  recipient,  but  only  becomes  his  when 
the  act  of  receiWng  or  accepting  takes  place.  And  it 
still  holds  true,  that,  according  to  the  declaration  of  Peter, 
none  can  hope  to  receive  or  accept  of  the  remission  of 
sins,  except  those  who  believe  on  Christ. 

3.  The  passage  in  John  to  which  Mr,  Erskine  refers, 
does  the  very  contrary  of  what  he  intended — it  proves 
him  to  be  wrong.  "  Christ  came  to  his  own,  but  his  own 
received,  or  accepted  him  not."  The  Jews,  that  is  to 
saj',  rejected  him — would  not  have  him  to  be  their  Re- 
deemer— cast  him  out  as  unworthy  of  their  confidence 
and  submission.  True ;  but  how  can  it  be  said  that,  in 
like  manner,  any  sinner  may  refuse  to  receive  or  accept 
pardon  ?  How  can  he  refuse  that  boon  which  is  already 
his ;  ^nd  whose  existence  in  him  is  wholly  independent 
of  his  belief  or  his  unbelief?  Christ  came  to  the  Jews 
and  presented  himself  to  them  as  the  Messiah,  but  they 
would  not  have  him  in  that  character,  and  the  conse- 
quence was,  that  they  "  died  in  theii-  sins."  But  pardon, 
according  to  Mr.  Erskine,  does  not  come  to  us  in  that 


368  APPENDIX. 

way ;  it  is  not  presented  to  us  for  our  acceptance ;  and  it 
does  not  fail  to  belong  to  us,  because  we  have  refused  it. 
All  our  guilt  is  cancelled,  and  we  can  never  be  punished 
for  the  sin,  to  which  that  act  of  amnesty  referred,  in  what- 
ever way  we  may  treat  the  message  or  the  messenger  of 
God.  Christ  offered  himself  to  the  Jews,  and  they  refused 
the  offer.  Pardon,  Mr.  Erskiue  maintains,  is  not,  and 
cannot  be  offered  to  us,  pardon  being  already  bestowed  in 
the  very  atonement  itself  which  was  made  for  sin.  Here 
then  Mr.  Erskine  is  altogether  inconsistent.  And  to  re- 
gain his  consistency  he  must  either  allow  that  Christ  was 
actually  the  Redeemer  of  the  Jews,  in  spite  of  their  re- 
jection of  him,  which  would  broadly  contradict  the  Scrip- 
ture testimony  respecting  the  matter  of  fact,  or  he  must 
allow,  that  as  the  Jews  would  not  accept  Christ,  though 
they  might  and  should  have  accepted  him,  so  we  may 
accept  or  reject  the  pardon  which  comes  to  us  as  provided, 
though  not  yet  conferred — which  is  proposed  to  us,  and 
therefore  not  yet  possessed.  Mi".  Erskine  may  say  that 
accepting  the  remission  of  sins  means  believing  that  this 
blessing  is  uiready  ours.  This  is  perfectly  absiu-d  ;  and  a 
most  unwarranted  explanation  of  terms.  But,  admitting 
it — then  when  it  is  said  that  the  Jews  would  not  accept 
Christ,  it  imports  that  they  would  not  believe  that  all  the 
blessings,  implied  in  his  Messiahship,  belonged  to  them ;  that, 
of  course,  these  did  belong  to  them,  notwithstanding  their 
rejection  of  Christ;  and  that,  therefore,  their  eternal  sal- 
Tation,  which  was  certainly  the  grand  object  of  his  com- 
ing as  the  Messiah,  was  as  secure  as  if  they  had  believed  on 
him  vi-ith  aU  their  heart. 

4.  Finally,  see  with  what  ease  Mr.  Erskine  can  give  up 
his  case.  Christ  "  had  come  to  the  Jews  whether  they 
received  him  or  not,  and  so  had  the  remission  of  sin." 
Very  well  so  far ;  both  had  come — Christ  as  a  person, [par- 


APPENDIX.  369 

don  as  a  blessings ;  both  of  them  oflfered,  but  neither  as  yet 
accepted.  "  But  those  only,"  adds  Mr.  Erskine,  "  who 
believed  in  his  true  character,  viz.  that  he  had  come  as 
a  destroyer  of  the  works  of  the  devil,  and  a  propitiation  for 
the  sins  of  the  world,  would,  in  that  very  character  of  his, 
i-ead  and  receive"  (why  not  accept? J  "  their  forgiveness." 
And  add  to  this  what  Mr.  Erskine  says  in  p.  178.  as  a 
comment  on  John  i.  12.  "  but  as  many  as  received  him,  to 
them  gave  he  the  privilege  of  becoming  sons  of  God,  even 
to  them  Avho  believed  in  his  name.  He  came  to  the 
world,  and  pardon  was,  and  is  contained  in  him.  Those 
who  receive  him,  receive  pardon  in  him  j  those  who  do 
not  receive  him,  do  not  receive  pardon."  What  more 
can  we  desire  from  Mr.  Erskine,  than  such  concessions 
as  these  ?  Accepting  or  receiving  Christ,  and  believing 
in  his  name,  are  convertible  phrases  in  the  passage  quoted. 
Be  it  that  Christ  came  to  the  world;  still  though  he 
came  to  the  world,  and  though  "  pardon  was  and  is  con- 
tained in  him,"  which  I  would  be  sorry  to  gainsay,  it  is 
admitted — distinctly  and  unequivocally  admitted  by  Mr. 
Erskine,  that  those  only  who  receive,  accept,  or  believe  in 
Christ,  receive  pardon  in  him ;  and  that  those  who  do  not 
receive,  accept,  or  believe  in  him,  do  not  receive  pardon. 
What  more,  I  repeat  it,  can  we  desire  from  Mi-.  Erskine  ? 
He  has  granted  that  they  who  do  not  beUeve  are  not  par- 
doned. And  yet  his  book  is  written  for  the  very  purpose 
of  showing  that  sinners  are  pai'doned,  whether  they  believe 
or  not ! 


Note  B,  p.  72. 
Mr.  Erskine  is  exceedingly  perplexed  by  the  inconsist- 
ency of  "  a  man  being  pardoned  and  yet  condemned  after 


370  APPENDIX. 

all."  He  explains  himself  by  saying,  that  man  "  is  not 
condemned  for  the  oiFence  which  had  been  pardoned,  but 
for  a  new  one ;  is  not  condemned  for  breaking'  the  law,  but 
for  rejecting-  the  gospel."*  This  gentleman  has  the  art 
of  as  easily,  though  not  quite  so  successfully,  getting  out 
of  a  dilemma  as  he  has  of  getting  into  it.  He  gives  an  ex- 
planation of  the  absurdity  he  has  broached,  and  his  ex- 
planation is  as  unsupported  as  is  his  absurdity.  He  just 
calmly  and  simply  avers  what  he  thinks  necessary  to  hi!§ 
piu'pose,  and  supposes  his  readers  will  implicitly  receive 
whatever  he  is  pleased  to  stamp  with  the  imprimatur  of 
his  opinion.  An  example  of  this  ipse  dixit  style  of  his  is 
aflforded  by  the  passage  I  have  now  quoted  He  >^ilfully 
and  obstinately  shuts  out  from  his  view  all  the  Scriptures 
that  represent  imbelieving  men  as  under  the  condemna- 
tion of  the  law.  If  these  are  not  under  the  condemna- 
tion of  the  law,  how  could  our  Saviour  have  said  to  the 
JewSjt  "  Ye  serpents,  ye  generation  of  vipers,  how  can 
ye  escape  the  damnation  of  hell  ?"  And  how  could  James 
have  said,:};  "  that  whosoever  shall  keep  the  whole  law, 
and  yet  offend  in  one  point,  he  is  guilty  of  all,"  "  if  thou 
kill  thou  art  become  a  transgressor  of  the  law,"  and  that 
"  he  shall  have  judgment  without  mercy  that  hath  showed 
no  mercy  ?"  And  hov^'  could  Jude  §  have  said  that  the  in- 
habitants of  Sodom  and  Gomorrah  "  suffer  the  vengeance 
of  eternal  fii-e"  for  certain  specified  violations  of  the  mo- 
ral law,  and  of  judgment  coming  upon  all  who  are  guilty 
of  similar  offences  ?  And  how  could  the  apostle  Paulj] 
say  of  certain  acts  of  immorality  which  he  enumerates, 

*  Introductory  Essriy,  p.  xlvi.  f  Mat.  xxiii.  33. 

^  James  ii.  10,  11,  13.  §  Jude  7,  et  seq. 

Jl    Ephes.  v.  6. 


APPENDIX.  371 

that  "  because  of  these  things,  cometh  the  wrath  of  God 
upon  the  children  of  disobedience  ?"* 

The  very  text  (John  iii.  36.)  to  which  this  note  is  append- 
ed, gives  a  decisiveproof  of  the  unsoundness  of  Mr.  Erskine's 
doctrine.  We  read  in  Ephes.  ii.  2,  that  we  are  all  "  by  na- 
ture the  children  of  wrath."  And,  indeed,  it  is  a  truth  per- 
vading^ the  whole  of  Scripture,  that  as  transgressors  of 
God's  law  we  are  all  subject  to  his  wrath,  and  that  ony 
great  object  of  the  death  of  Christ  is  to  deliver  us  from  it, 
and  that  for  this  purpose  it  is  absolutely  requisite.  Well ; 
John  the  Baptist  says,  that  if  we  believe  not,  the  wrath 
from  which  Christ  died  to  redeem  us,  "  abideth  upon  us." 
Does  that  mean  that  it  cometh  upon  us  for  the  first,  or 
rather  for  the  second  time  ?  Is  it  the  same  thing  to  come 
to  a  house  and  to  abide  iu  it  ?  The  original  word  is  f-ivu, 
which  signifies,  not  the  simple  fact,  nor  the  commence- 
ment of  the  fact,  to  which  it  refers,  but  the  continuance  of 
that  which  has  ah-eady  begun,  or  Avhich  already  exists. 

For  example,  "  After  this  Christ  went  down  to  Caper- 
naum, he  and  his  mother,  &c.  and  they  continued — i//.iim> — 
there  not  many  daj^s."  John  ii.  12.  "  Then  said  Jesus  to 
those  Jews  which  believed  on  him,  if  ye  continue — ^s/vsjrs — 
in  my  word,  then  are  ye  my  disciples  indeed."  John  viii. 
31.  "I  will  pray  the  Father  and  he  shall  give  you  ano- 
ther Comforter,  that  he  may  abide — j«;vj) — with  you  for 
ever."  John  xiv.  16.  "If  the  mighty  works  which  have 
been  done  in  thee  had  been  done  in  Sodom,  it  would  have 
remained — if^uvat — until  this  day."     Matt.  xi.  23.     "  And 

"  The  original  word  may  be  rendered  "  unbelief"  as  well  as 
"  disobedience."  But  that  rendering  is  even  more  favour- 
able to  my  argument,  as  showing  that  faith  in  Christ  is  ne- 
cessary to  the  sinner's  deliverance  from  the  wrath  of  God, 
which  he  has  merited  by  his  breaches  of  the  divine  law. 


372  APPENDIX. 

now  abideth — ^svs; — faith,  hope,  charity."  1.  Cor.  xiii.  13. 
"  His  righteousness  remaineth — /Jt-tvu — for  ever."  2.  Cor. 
ix.  9.  "All  things  continue — "imfuni — as  they  were  from  the 
beginning  of  the  creation.''  2.  Peter  iii.  4.  "  Upon  whom 
thou  shalt  see  the  Spirit  descending,  and  remaining 
xaraSxivov  xai  fiivov  upon  him,  the  same  is  he,"  &c.  John  i. 
33.  "  That  their  bodies  should  not  remain — f^uvri — on  the 
cross."     Johnxix.  31. 

These  are  but  a  few  of  the  numerous  instances  that 
might  be  adduced  of  the  proper,  and,  I  may  say,  invaria- 
ble meaning  of  the  word  that  is  translated  abideth.  It  re- 
fers to  the  continuance  and  permanency  of  something 
which  previously  had  an  existence.  And,  therefore,  in 
the  declaration  of  John  the  Baptist,  it  intimates,  that  the 
wrath  of  God  had  not  been  removed,  that  sinners  were 
still  subject  to  it,  and  that  by  rejecting  Christ  they  must 
remain  under  its  burden. 

Had  the  Spirit,  speaking  by  the  mouth  of  John  thg 
Baptist,  intended  to  declare  that  the  disbelieving  of  the 
Son  of  God  was  an  offence  committed  by  those  who  had 
no  previous  offence  to  answer  for,  he  would  not  have 
used  a  word  which  presupposes  guUt  i->ot  yet  cancelled, 
and  which  traces  to  the  act  of  disbelieving,  the  continuance 
of  tliat  guilt,  and  of  the  penalty  connected  with  it  He 
would  have  employed  phraseology  which  at  least  was  ca- 
pable of  the  opposite  construction — M'hich  admitted  of  the 
sin  of  unbelief  being  considered  as  tiie  only  sin  for  the  sake 
of  which  the  persons  committing  it  w<jre  to  endure  God's 
wrath.  The  language  adopted  is  the  very  language  which 
would  have  been  adopted  to  convey  the  truth  that  till 
faith  was  exercised  on  Christ,  sinners  were  under  the  di- 
vine displeasure,  and  that  it  would  remain  upon  all  who 
did  not  by  that  faith  embrace  the  appointed  Saviour.  And, 


APPENDIX.  373 

therefore,  the  import  of  this  declaration  is  clearly  agaiiigt 
the  notion  of  universal  pardon,  and,  indeed,  fatal  to  it. 

And  tliis  appears  the  more  evident  when  we  attend  to 
the  language  'ohich  the  Baptist  had  heen  addressing  to 
the  Pharisees  and  Sadducees  who  came  to  him  to  be  bap- 
tized. He  did  not  speak  to  them  as  persons  ah-eady  par- 
doned, and  for  whom,  had  they  died  then,  there  would  have 
been  no  future  punishment.  On  the  contrary,  he  said  ex- 
pressly, "  O  generation  of  vipers,  who  hath  warned  you  to 
flee  from  the  wrath  to  come  ?"*  And  he  said  this  when 
they  were  coming  to  him  to  undergo  the  baptism  of  re- 
pentance for  the  remission  of  sins,f  which  he  preached 
and  administered.  His  phraseology  on  this  occasion  is  an 
exact  counterjiart  to  the  phraseology  that  he  after\vards 
made  use  of  when  he  spoke  of  the  wrath  of  God  "  abiding 
on"  unbelievers.  And  the  doctrine  he  states  is  still  far- 
ther illustrated  by  his  exhortation  to  the  professed  prose- 
lytes, to  bring  forth  fi-uits  meet  or  worthy  of  repentance, 
because  while  a  true  repentance  and  a  sincere  submission  to 
the  rite  of  baptism,  as  significant  of  internal  cleansino-,  was 
inseparably  connected  with  the  foi'giveness  of  their  sins,  so 
unless  their  repentance  was  genuine,  unless  their  baptism 
was  a  real  sign  of  inward  purification,  unless  they  brought 
forth  good  fruit,  unless  they  resembled  the  good  and  sound 
wheat,  instead  of  being  mere  empty  chaff,  they  would  not 
be  found  to  have  been  forgiven  as  they  flattered  theun-. 
selves,  but  would  be  "  burned  with  fii-e  unquenchable."! 

"  Matt.  iii.  7.  +  Luke  iii,  3. 

X  Matt.  ill.  12  ;  Luke  iii,  9^ 


374  APPENDIX. 


Notes  C  and  D,  pp.  75,  77. 

Ml'.  Erskine  refers*  to  Acts  ii.  33,  and  iii.  19.  as  suscep- 
tible of  an  explanation  that  tallies  with  his  views.  Even 
though  these  passages  could  not  be  fairly  or  conclusively 
adduced  against  him,  enough  remains  to  deprive  his  theory 
of  all  scriptural  foundation.  And  if  he  had  succeeded  in 
proving  that  the  meaning  commonly  attached  to  them  is 
not  the  correct  one,  I  should  have  frankly  said  so,  and 
dispensed  with  their  aid.  But  I  am  satisfied  that  he  has 
completely  failed  iu  his  endeavour.  His  new  exposition 
is  neither  founded  on  the  contexts  nor  on  just  criticism. 
And  I  feel  it  a  duty  to  point  out  whatever  demonstrates 
him  to  be  a  most  arbitrary  conunentator,  and  a  most  un- 
safe guide  to  the  Holy  Scriptures. 

I  begin  with  Acts  iii.  19.  which  Mr.  Erskine  para- 
phrases thus,  "  Leave,  therefore,  your  false  notions  of  God, 
and  be  converted  to  that  true  view  of  his  character  which 
blots  out  sin  and  assures  of  the  forgiveness  of  sin." 

1.  Now,  in  iYvQjirst  place,  this  has  no  connexion  with 
the  preceding  context,  though  it  must  be  considered  as  an 
inference  from  what  Peter  had  been  just  saying  to  the 
people — "  Repent  ye,  therefore"  &c.  Peter  had  not  ac- 
cused them  of  having  "  false  notions  of  God,"  or  of  being 
destitute  of  that  '•  view  of  his  character"  respecting  for- 
giveness and  assurance  which  some  half  dozen  of  half- 
formed  theologians  are  propagating  in  Scotland  at  the  pre- 
sent day.  He  Avas  charging  home  upon  them — not  erro- 
neous opinions  or  heretical  doctrines  concerning  any  thing, 
but  a  specific  crime  of  the  most  iiggravated  description, 
which  they  had  but  lately  committed,  which  was  itself  suffi- 

*  Unconditional  Freeness,  p.  178,  180. 


APPENDIX.  375 

cient  to  condemn  them  as  a  transgression  of  the  moral  law, 
and  Avhich  barred  the  forgiveness  of  all  the  other  sins  they 
had  been  guilty  of.     They  had  "  delivered  up"  the  Son  of 
God,  and  "denied  the  Holy  One  and  the  Just,  and  desired 
a  murderer  to  be  granted  unto  them"  in  preference  to 
him,  and  "  killed  the  Prince  of  Life."     Hitherto  they  had 
felt  no  regret  or  contrition  for  such  a  violation  of  justice 
and  humanity.  They  had  flattered  themselves  with  the  idea 
that  they  had  only  put  to  death  a  seditious  person,  a  deceiver, 
a  blasphemer.     But  proofs  were  now  afforded  them  of  the 
heiuousness  of  the  guilt  they  had  contracted  :  for  he  whom 
they  had  crucified  and  slain  was  now  "  glorified  by  the 
God  of  Abraham  and  of  Isaac  and  of  Jacob,  the  God  of 
tlieir  fathers ;"  he  was  "  raised  from  the  dead,"  and  it  was 
"  this  name,  through  faith  in  his  name"  that  had  accom- 
plished the  muracle  of  healing  on  the  lame  man  who  sat  at 
the  gate  of  the  temple,  which  now  attracted  the  notice 
and  excited  the  admiration  of  the  assembled  multitude, 
Avhom  the  Apostle  took  the  opportunity  of  addi-essing  on 
the  subject  of  their  having  put  to  death  such  a  divine  per- 
son.    These  are  the  premises  of  the  Apostle's  discourse  to 
the  murderous,  guilty,  impenitent,  unbelieving  Jews.  And 
Ml*.  Erskine  would  have  us  to  think  that  the  Apostle  con- 
cluded with  exhorting  such  men  to  "  leave  their  false  no- 
tions of  God,"  and  to  be  "converted  to  the  views  of  his  cha- 
racter," which  would  embolden  them  to  assm^e  themselves 
that  their  putting  the  Son  of  God  to  death  was  already 
pardoned,  that  they  were  in  no  danger  of  being  punished 
for  it,  that  they  had  only  to  believe  that  their  sin  was  blot- 
ted out  without  any  change  of  mind  or  any  conversion  of 
heart  on  their  part,  and  all  would  be  well  with  them  ! 

Had  the  Apostle  been  telling  them  that  their  sinful  con- 
duct proceeded  from  their  not  knowing  and  acknowledg- 
ing God  as  the  pardoner  of  impenitent  and  unbelieving 


376  APPENDIX. 

men,  I  could  have  understood  the  propriety  of  the  gloss 
tliat  Mr.  Erskine  has  put  upon  his  exhortation.  And  what 
is  of  far  greater  importance,  the  Jews  could  have  under- 
stood its  meaning  and  application.  But  really  I  cannot 
see  what  meaning  they  could  attach  to  the  words  of  the 
preacher,  when  he  said,  according  to  Mr.  Erskine's  fancy, 
"  You  have  been  guilty  of  the  great  and  aggravated  crime 
of  crucifying  the  Lord  of  glory,  of  killing  the  Prince  of 
life ;  therefore,  renounce  your  erroneous  and  groundless 
notions  of  God,  as  a  God  who  will  punish  miu-der,  injustice, 
cruelty,  impiety,  and  be  quite  satisfied  that  your  guilt, 
though  it  be  of  crimson  die,  and  though  you  feel  no  regret 
for  it,  has  been  ah-eady  washed  away,  and  that  should  you 
go  on  to  break  all  the  commandments  with  a  high  hand, 
even  to  the  last  moment  of  yoiu-  lives,  no  penal  doom  will 
befal  you  on  that  account  in  an  eternal  world!" 

According  to  the  common  acceptation  of  Peter's  lan- 
guage, his  exhortation  is  intelligible  and  appropriate. 
"  You  have  committed  a  horrible  crime — you  have,  by  the 
sacrifice  of  every  principle  of  morals  and  religion,  murder- 
ed the  Christ  of  God,  and  Mere  God  relentless,  and  had  no 
provision  been  made  for  the  expiation  of  guilt,  your  condi- 
tion and  your  prospects  would  have  been  hopeless ;  but 
God  is  merciful,  and  he  has  promised  forgiveness  for 
Christ's  sake  to  all  sinners  that  turn  to  hira.  Turn  to  him, 
therefore,  and  even  you  shall  be  pardoned  and  saved.  But 
if  you  refuse  to  do  so,  yoixr  sin  remains,  and  you  must  go 
into  everlasting  punishment."  This  would  have  corres- 
ponded with  all  the  ordinary  ideas  of  the  Jews  respecting 
our  forgiveness,  penitence,  &c.  and  would  have  been  at 
least  quite  level  to  their  comprehension,  however  much  it 
might  have  failed  to  influence  their  heart  and  conduct. 
Whereas,  the  import  which  Mr.  Erskine  gives  to  the  ex- 
hortation of  the  Apostle  is  so  recondite,  so  remote  from 


APPENDIX.  377 

any  thing  that  coiild  have  possibly  been  conjectured  as 
what  he  intended  to  convey,  and  so  totally  destitute 
of  reference  to  the  previous  part  of  his  discoiu'se,  from 
which  it  is  nevertheless  deduced  by  a  "  therefore"  that  they 
would  have  as  easily  apprehended  him  had  he  spoken  to 
them  in  Gaelic. 

Nay,  what  Mr.  Erskine  wiU  deem  far  worse,  the  Apos- 
tle, while  intending  to  convey  to  them  the  doctrine  which 
his  new  commentator  is  so  industi'ious  in  diffusing  as  the 
only  doctrine  of  the  gospel,  did  really  convey  to  his  hear- 
ers the  doctrine  which  is  declared  to  be  utterly  false,  and 
to  "  make  the  cross  of  Christ  of  none  effect."     For, 

2.  In  the  second  place,  the  original  language  will  not 
bear  the  interpretation  put  upon  it  by  Mr.  Erskine,  and 
can  mean  nothing  else  than  what  I  have  stated  in  the  dis- 
course to  Avhich  this  note  is  appended. 

It  is  somewhat  curious,  that  Mr.  Erskine  does  not  ex- 
ercise his  critical  powers  on  the  verse  in  question.  He 
had  just  employed  himself  in  attempting  to  show  that  the 
Greek  of  Acts  ii.  3.3.  did  not  warrant  the  translation  given 
in  oiu*  common  version.  But  he  glides  over  Acts  iii.  19. 
without  the  slightest  allusion  to  the  Greek,  except  in  as 
far  as  to  approve  of  Schleusner's  interpretation  of  the  re- 
maining part  of  the  passage,  which  is  of  no  consequence 
as  to  the  matter  in  dispute.  On  this  he  expends  a  para- 
graph, but  as  to  the  proper  meaning  of  the  original  text 
of  "  Repent,  therefore,  and  be  converted,  &c."  he  is  alto- 
gether silent.  There  is  some  wisdom  in  this,  if  there  be 
no  ingenuousness ;  for  the  original  text  is  out  and  out  hos- 
tile to  his  annotation,  as  I  shall  now  endeavoui*  to  show. 

The  original  is  ^liravorifetn  vv  »ai  i'ffi7^i.'<^a.ri,  u;  to  l|aXsj- 
(f^Tivai  vf/.av  TCi;  a/ji.ct^'ria;. 

I  do  not  think  it  of  any  consequence  here  to  fix  very 
precisely  the  meaning  of  f/.ira^ionta.T-,,  or  to  contrast  i^iTavo-.u 


378  APPENDIX. 

with  fiiTa^iXoiiu.!.  My  opinion  is,  that  though,  according 
to  the  etymology  of  the  wordj^wravota  signifies  properly,  "to 
change  one's  mind,"  and  though  it  might  originally  he  used 
in  that  sense  exclusively,  yet  in  process  of  time  it  came  to 
signify  those  affections  of  the  heart,  and  that  alteration  in 
tlie  conduct,  which  are  comprised  in  the  term  repentance. 
And  though  ^irai^  tXo.Ma/  strictly  refers  to  those  feelings  of 
i-egret,  anxiety,  and  distress,  which  the  conviction  of  hav- 
ing done  what  is  wrong  ought  always  to  produce,  yet  it  is 
perfectly  weU  known  that  the  two  Ai'ords  are  employee 
indiscriminately  to  express  the  same  thing — that  which 
we  call  penitence — both  by  the  writers  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament, and  by  the  best  profane  authors.  All  that  I  desi- 
derate is,  that  |U«Ta>5»o-aT!  be  understood  to  imply  some- 
thing that  was  to  be  felt  or  done  on  the  part  of  those  to 
whom  it  fl-as  addressed. 

I  make  the  same  remark  on  s^rs-T^sr^ars.  It  is  of  no  mo- 
ment here  to  ascertain  what  that  word  means  in  the  var- 
ious passages  where  it  occurs,  or  what  is  comprehended 
in  the  general  chai-acter  Avhich  it  denotes.  Nothing  more 
is  requisite  than  the  admission  that  it  refers  to  some  change, 
some  turning  or  other,  which  the  apostle  inculcated  upon 
those  for  whom  his  exhortation  was  intended. 

But  ^vhile  I  desire  nothing  more  respecting  the  import 
of  these  words,  than  that  they  be  understood  to  intimate 
some  movement  on  the  part  of  the  individuals  to  whom 
they  Avere  spoken,  it  must  be  borne  in  mind,  that  they 
were  not  introduced  into  a  discourse  on  general  topics — 
did  not  form  one  of  a  series  of  admonitions  designed  for 
mankind  at  large.  They  were  delivered  to  persons  Avho 
had  been  guilty  of  a  particular  act  of  transgression,  or  ra- 
ther of  many  acts  of  transgression,  tenninating  in,  and 
consummated  by,  one  great  crime — who  M^ere  specifi- 
cally and  emphatically  charged  with  the  guilt  in  which 


APPENDIX.  379 

such  conduct  involved  them,  and  who  had  hitherto  nei- 
ther confessed,  nor  regretted,  nor  been  made  sensible  of 
it.  And  they  specially  and  expressly  refeired  to  it  as 
requiring  the  assembled  crowd  to  exercise  the  temper,  or 
to  undergo  the  change,  whatever  it  might  be,  which  Peter 
recorded  or  enjoined. 

Now  one  would  naturally  suppose,  that  as  in  these  cir- 
cumstances the  apostle  had  an  end  in  view,  v^hich  was  to  be 
subserved  by  the  compliance  of  the  people  with  his  advice, 
and  that  as  a  preacher  of  righteousness  and  mercy  to  per- 
sons M'ho  knew  well  the  connexion  between  sin  and  pu- 
nishment on  the  one  hand,  and  repentance  and  forgiveness 
on  the  other,  according  to  what  was  taught  in  their  law 
and  history,  and  according  to  what  was  the  uniform  and 
universal  understanding  among  the  Jews,  he  would  be  so- 
licitous to  put  them  on  the  right  way  of  procuring  the 
pardon  of  those  crimes  which  he  had  been  laying  to  their 
charge,  and  which  had  made  them  obnoxious  to  divine 
wrath.  And  in  exact  confonnity  to  this  supposition  is 
the  tenor  of  his  exhoi'tation.  It  is  not  merely,  "  repent  and 
be  converted" — it  is  not  merely,  change  your  minds  and 
your  ways,  as  to  your  treatment  of  Christianity — it  is  not 
merelj%  take  a  diflferent  view  of  the  pretensions  of  Christ, 
and  of  your  obligations  to  God,  and  of  the  deportment  you 
have  maintained  tov^ards  a  once  crucified,  and  now  risen 
and  exalted  Savioui- — it  is  not  merely,  do  any  of  these 
things,  or  do  them  all,  as  becoming  and  dutiful — but  it  is, 
"  repent  and  be  converted,  that  your  sins  maij  be  blotted 

out;"  MtTaton<raTi  xa.1  I'^iirr^i-^^xTt,  EI2  TO  ESAAEIO0HNAI 
'TMUN  TA2  'AMAPTIAT. 

The  end  here  mentioned  is  forgiveness — or  the  blotting 
out  of  sins.  Various  expressions,  it  is  well  known,  were 
lised  in  the  Old  Testament,  and  have  been  used  among 
every  people,  for  the  act  of  forgiveness.     And  one  of  the 


380  APPENDIX. 

most  significant  is  the  one  employed  on  this  occasion  hy 
Peter.  God  is  supposed  to  keep  a  book,  or  record,  in 
which  the  transgressions  of  men  are  registered.  And 
when  sins  are  pardoned,  they  are  said  to  be  blotted  out — 
erased — obliterated,  as  effectually  as  we  would  expunge 
any  word  or  sentence  that  is  written.  So  that  the  apos- 
tle connects  the  act  of  forgiveness  as  it  relates  to  God,  who 
alone  could  forgive  sins,  or  the  privilege  of  forgiveness  as 
it  relates  to  those  who  were  forgiven,  with  the  transgres- 
sions for  which  he  had  indicted  the  Jews  at  the  bar  of  theii- 
own  conscience  j  and,  accusing  them  of  the  latter  as  sub- 
jecting them  to  just  condemnation,  he  directs  their  view 
to  the  former,  as  that  without  which,  the  condemnation 
they  had  incurred  must  continue  to  lie  upon  them. 

But  then  their  condemnation  and  their  forgiveness  were 
not  connected  by  such  a  mere  sequence  as  that,  without  any 
thing  intervening,  the  forgiveness  was  already  obtained, 
and  the  condemnation  ah-eady  removed.    Peter's  language 

is  /iiravsrKrart,  xa.i  iTiffT^i^"^"^^  8/5  to,  &C.       It    WaS   incumbeut 

on  the  Jews  to  do  what  is  implied  in  the  two  words,  which 
in  our  common  version  are  rendered  repent  and  be  con- 
verted, in  order  to  their  being  forgiven.  The  vinculum  be- 
tween v/hat  they  were  required  to  do,  and  what  they  were 
eventually  to  receive,  is  E12  To.  The  phrase  is  not  u; 
a(f>iir,v,  in  which  case  I  doubt  not  Mr.  Erskine  would  have 
amended  our  translation  in  this  way,  "  Change  your  mind, 
and  be  converted  to  the  doctrine  of  the  remission  of  sins, 
as  a  thing  already  granted  to  all  the  transgressors  of  God's 
moral  law."  The  phrase  is  m  ro  i^xXuf^nvai  v/auv  ras  ajmt^- 
"Tt".},  and  from  the  force  of  this  Mi*.  Erskine  cannot  pos- 
sibly escape.  Indeed,  he  seems  to  be  aware,  that  it  is 
too  much  for  him,  and  therefore  he  does  not  meddle  with 
it,  though  abundantly  willing  to  be  critical  wherever  it  can 
be  of  any  apparent  use  to  his  cause.    The  preposition  m 


APPENDIX.  381 

with  ro  and  an  infinitive,  links  the  antecedent  and  the 
consequent  as  means  and  end.  This  mode  of  expression 
occurs  at  least  forty-seven  times  in  the  New  Testament. 
The  places  where  it  is  to  be  foimd  are  enumerated  be- 
low*, that  Mr.  Erskine  may  examine  them  if  he  pleases. 
And  in  all  these  it  invariably  and  undeniably  means 
that  the  thing  towards  which  it  looks,  is  a  purpose,  an 
effect,  an  object  aimed  at,  a  result  contemplated,  for  which 
the  actions  or  circimistances  previously  stated  and  refer- 
red to,  are  preparatory  and  pre-requisite. 

Mr.  Erskine  may  say  that  this  is  making  forgiveness 
conditional.  Be  it  so ;  but  if  the  word  of  God  makes  it 
conditional,  what  title  has  he  or  any  man  to  make  it  un- 
conditional. And  after  all,  he  is  just  using  an  obnoxious 
word,  to  excite  a  prejudice  against  the  palpable  meaning 
of  the  Bible.  If  by  conditional,  he  means  that  forgiveness 
is  merited,  I  agree  with  him  that  this  cannot  be  a  correct 
interpretation  of  the  verse,  because  the  whole  scheme  of 
the  gospel  is  a  scheme  of  free  grace.  But  if  by  conditional 
is  meant,  that  the  one  thing  is  not  bestowed  without  the 

»  Bfatt.     XX.   19 — Mark    xiv.    6S — Luke    iv.   29 Acts 

vii.  19 Rom.  i.   11,  20 — iv.  11  (UsJ  16,  18— vi.  12 vii. 

5 viii.  29 — xi.  11 — xii.  2 — xv.  8,  13 — 1  Cor.  viii.  10— 

ix.  18 X.  6 — xi.   22,  33. 2   Cor.  i.  4 — iv.  4 — Eph.  i. 

12,  18 Philip,    i.    23 — iii.  21— 1  Thess.  ii.  12,  16 iii. 

2,  5,  10.— 2  Thess.  i.  5.— ii.  2,  6,  11 — iii.  9 — Heb.  ii.  17. 
— ix.  14,  28 — xi.  3 — xii.  10 — xiii.  21 — James  i.  18,  19. 
1  Peter  iii.  7. 

This  list  will  be  considerably  increased  if  we  take  those 
instances  in  which  m  t»  is  omitted,  but  necessarily  understood; 
such  as  Matt.  ii.  2.  tiXioftsv  (us  to)  •r^offxvv/ia-ai  awra.—Jjvik.e 
xix.  10.       HXh   yosj  i  vies  Tin  av^^avn    (tis  to)  l^/irtiirai    Kai    a  ait  to 

cLWoXuXcs,  &c.  &c.  &c.  In  every  one  of  these  cases  the  same 
idea  is  manifestly  involved,  that  occurs  in  the  other  examples. 


382  APPENDIX. 

presence,  or  the  doing  of  the  other,  there  is  not  only  no- 
thing' in  this  that  is  inconsistent  with  the  doctrine  of  free 
grace,  but  there  is  something  in  it  analogous  to  the  whole 
of  God's  moral  administration.  The  farmer  does  not 
merit  from  the  God  of  Providence  a  harvest,  by  ploughing 
and  sowing  his  fields ;  and  yet  unless  he  ploughs  and 
sows  his  fields,  he  cannot  expect  a  harvest.  A  poor  man 
does  not  merit  the  blessings  that  he  asks  from  the  God  of 
grace,  by  praying  for  them,  and  yet  if  he  does  not  pray,  he 
has  no  right  to  look  for  them.  And  so,  if  the  Jews  did 
not  repent  and  were  not  converted,  there  was  no  ground 
for  anticipating  the  blotting  out  of  their  sins. 

It  is  easy  to  see  that  by  the  repentance  and  conversion 
ui'ged  upon  them  by  the  Apostle,  he  meant  such  a  revolu- 
tion in  their  character  as  consisted  in  renouncing  their  un- 
belief of  the  Son  of  God,  whom  in  their  unbelief  they 
had  crucified,  and  in  casting  themselves  upon  God's  mercy 
as  ready  to  receive  all  Avho  return  to  him  by  "  the  true 
and  living  way."  But  I  do  not  insist  upon  any  particular 
exposition  of  the  word  at  present.  All  that  I  maintain 
is,  that  as  the  Jews  had  to  do  something  which  preceded 
the  forgiveness  of  theii*  sins,  the  proof  is  cleai-  and  con- 
clusive that  their  sins  Avere  not  previously,  indepen- 
dentlj',  or  really  forgiven — that  between  them  and  that 
blessing  there  yet  lay  the  step,  which  is  described  by 
"  repenting  and  being  converted," — that  if  they  took  that 
step,  forgiveness  «-ould  unquestionably  be  the  result — that 
if  they  refused  to  take  it,  they  would  not,  and  could  not  be 
forgiven — and  therefore,  that  the  doctrine  of  universal 
pardon,  as  taught  by  Mi*.  Erskine,  not  only  has  no  war- 
rant from  that  passage  of  Holy  Writ,  but  is  utterly  and 
irreconcilably  at  variance  with  it.  Upon  this  single  text 
I  could  safely  stake  the  whole  of  the  controversy.  Oui' 
opponents  may  declaim  and  dogmatize  as  long  as  they 


APPENDIX.  383 

please  on  the  subject.  They  may  frighten  some  by  talk- 
ing- of  the  alleged  condition  of  a  pardon  not  yet  bestowed  ; 
and  they  may  please  others  by  talking  of  the  benefits  of 
a  pardon  already  received.  They  may  mislead  the  igno- 
rant by  concealing  what  they  know,  and  torturing  words 
to  make  them  express  what  they  do  not  signify.  They 
may  impose  on  the  imaginative  and  superficial,  by  advanc- 
ing one  conjectiu-e  to  build  up  another,  and  substituting  a 
pleasing  hypothesis  for  a  stubborn  fact.  But  their  at- 
tempts to  establish,  in  the  conviction  of  any  man  of  com- 
mon sense,  biblical  scholarship,  and  of  reverence  for  the 
declarations  of  God's  word,  must  ever  be  unsuccessiiJ, 
while  they  can  be  confi-onted  with  this  one  exhortation  of 

an  inspil'ed  apostle,  M;Tayo>i<rar'.  kcci  £^;?J£^//aTS,  ;;,-  to  tl,-iXii<(l6r.- 

vai  v/jt,uv  rarr  auKonai — correctly  rendered  thus,  "Repent  and 
be  converted,  for  this  end,  that  your  sins  may  be  blotted 
ojd." 

The  exhortation  in  Acts  ii.  38,  cannot  fail  to  be  consi- 
dered as  having  the  same  general  meaning  with  the  ex- 
hortation in  Acts  iii.  19.  The  circumstances  in  which  the 
former  was  given,  M'ere  precisely  the  same  as  those  in 
which  the  latter  was  given.  Peter  accused  the  Jews  of 
having  committed  the  heinous  crime  of  murdering  Jesus 
of  Nazareth,  M'hom  God  had  certified  by  miracles,  and 
M'hom  he  had  raised  from  the  dead.  And  when  they  were 
coR\'icted  of  guilt  in  their  own  minds,  and  felt  the  remorse 
and  the  terror  Aihich  such  conviction  had  produced,  they 
"  said  unto  Peter  and  to  the  rest  of  the  apostles.  Men  and 
Brethren,  what  shall  ^'e  do  ?"  What  could  they  mean  by 
this  question  ?  What,  but  that  Peter  and  his  brethren 
would  direct  them  to  the  means  of  obtaining  the  forgive- 
ness Avhich  they  so  greatly  and  urgently  needed  ?  And 
the  means  they  are  directed  to  use  are  repentance  and  em- 
bracing the  faith  of  the  gospel.     "  Repent,"  says  Mr. 


^84  APPENDIX. 

Erskine,  "  or,  rather,  change  yom-  mind,"  that  is,  accor<i- 
ing  to  the  explanation  which  he  gives  of  repent  in  Acts 
iii.  19,  "  Leave  youi-  false  notions  of  God."  False  notions 
of  God  they  did  entertain.  But  these  were  not  the  sub- 
ject of  Peter's  discourse.  He  spoke  of  one  great  and  aggra- 
vated violation  of  God's  law  which  they  had  committed, 
and  fi'om  the  guilt  of  which,  moved  by  his  representations, 
they  inquired  as  to  the  way  of  deliverance.  This  was  the 
exact  and  simple  point  as  to  which  they  put  the  question, 
"  What  shall  we  do  ?"  Mr.  Erskine  seems  to  think  that 
they  put  a  question  as  to  one  thing,  and  that  the  Apostle 
answered  them  as  to  another.  On  the  contrary,  the  ra- 
tional and  just  construction  of  his  words  is,  that  he  an- 
swers them  as  to  that,  and  that  alone,  which  had  excited 
their  anxiety,  and  produced  their  appeal.  And  the  answer 
was  correct  and  appropriate.  He  told  them  to  repent  of 
the  atrocious  sin  that  they  had  perpetrated,  and  to  apply 
for  pardon  and  acceptance  from  the  God  whom  they  had  so 
grossly  offended,  by  application  to  that  very  person,  Jesus 
Christ,  whom  "  with  wicked  hands  they  had  crucified  and 
slain,"  but  who  was  the  Saviour  of  sinners,  and  through 
whom,  even  they  might  obtain  redemption. 

Mr.  Erskine  flatters  himself,  that  because  the  original 
words  \^ill  bear  the  signification  he  attaches  to  them, 
therefore  that  signification  should  be  adopted.  But  this  is 
as  much  as  to  say,  that  in  interpreting  a  i)assage  of  Serip- 
ture,  we  are  not  to  attend  to  the  occasion  on  which  it  was 
spoken,  and  to  its  connexion  with  the  preceding  context, 
and  to  the  various  circumstances  which  detei-mine  the 
import  of  what  we  wish  to  explain,  but  that,  in  defiance  of 
all  these,  we  may  come  forward  with  urn*  doctrinal  theory, 
and  if  the  passage  will  only  bear  the  grammatical  con- 
struction that  suits  our  view,  we  are  therefore  entitled  and 
bound  to  regard  this  as  its  legitimate  import*    On  the  con- 


APPENDIX. 


385 


traiy,  it  is  by  ascertaining  the  seope  and  design  of  the 
MTiter,  and  by  this  alone  sometimes,  tliat  we  are  enabled, 
not  only  to  discern  the  meaning  of  a  particular  passage, 
but  to  fix  the  meaning  of  those  words  and  phrases  which 
would  otherwise  have  perplexed  us,  for  the  interpretation 
of  other  passages  where  they  may  happen  to  occur.  And 
there  is  an  obvious  propriety  in  doing  so,  except  where  the 
original  language  is  undeniably  such  as  not  to  admit  of  the 
interpretation  which  the  context  suggests.  The  meaning 
of  the  passage  under  review  is  settled  by  the  circumstan- 
ces in  which  the  exhortation  M^as  given,  and  if  the  origi- 
nal will  grammatically  allow  it,  that  is  the  meaning  which 
must  of  necessity  be  adopted.  And  Mr.  Erskine  knew 
well  enough,  that  the  original  does  admit  of  the  common 
translation,  though  he  appears  to  forget  that  liiraionirari  is 
allied  to  £«  ctptn)>  as  well  as  /sacrr/ir^xTa  is ;  that  n;  may  be 
rendered  not  only  into,  but  also^r,  or  vjith  a  view  to; 
that  s'a-',  with  the  dative,  does  sometimes  signify  «j  ,-  that 
by  the  analogy  famished  by  Acts  iii.  19,  nr  aipiaiM  may  be 
considered  as  an  ellipsis  for  £'<»•  to  Xa/i^Sciyiif  atpiiriv ;  and  that 
his  arrangement  of  the  different  clauses  of  the  verse  is 
forced  and  unusual. 


Note  E,  p.  85. 

The  reader's  attention  is  requested  to  2  Cliron.  vii  13, 
14 ;  Jerem.  xviii.  23 ;  1  Kings  viii.  33,  3-t ;  Dan.  ix.  19 
Ps.  XXV.  11,  IS;  Numb.  xiv.'19,'20;  Matt. xviii.  21 — end 
Josh.xxiv.  19  ;  Mark  xi.  25, 26  ;  1  John  i.  9 ;  Ps.  Ixxxvi.  5 
Levit.  iv.  20 ;  Mark  iii.  28,  29 ;  Exod.  xxiii.  21 ;  Neh.  ix, 
17 ;  2  Kings  xxiv.  4 ;  2  Chron .  xxx.  18 ;  Exod.  xxxiv.  8, 9 
Jer.  xxxiii.  8  ;  Pa.  li.  I,  9  ;  Mark  iv.  12  ;  Matt.  xii.  31, 32 
&c. 

s 


386  APPENDIX. 


Note  F,  p.  88. 

This  is  tbe  Arminian  scheme ;  which,  though  we  conceive 
it  to  be  unscriptui'al,  derogatory  to  the  grace  of  God,  and 
chargeable  with  inconsistency,  is  yet  far  preferable  to  the 
scheme  of  universal  pardon — a  scheme  that  does  much 
greater  violence  to  the  Bible,  and  to  the  integrity  of  the 
Gospel  dispensation,  and  is  much  more  indefensible  on 
the  ordinary  principles  of  reason. 

According  to  the  former  scheme,  Christ  accomplished  a 
complete  redemption  for  all  men,  and  every  man  may  accept 
it,  and  will  enjoy  its  benefits  to  the  uttermost,  if  he  will 
only  repent,  and  believe,  and  obey,  and  thus  implement 
the  conditions  which  are  said  to  be  prescribed.  So  that 
if  all  men,  in  the  exercise  of  their  free  will,  fulfil  these 
terms,  all  men  will  actually  be  saved,  and  if  all  men, 
in  the  exercise  of  their  free  will,  refuse  or  neglect  to  ful- 
fil these,  all  men  will  remain  under  condemnation  and 
be  punished.  On  the  supposition  of  either  alternative, 
there  is  at  least  a  completeness  in  what  is  prepared  for 
the  sinner;  and  there  is  a  correspondence  between  his 
conduct  and  his  fate  ;  and  there  is  no  practical  solecism 
in  his  condition,  whatever  it  may  turn  out  to  be.  Its 
grand  defect  seems  to  be,  that  according  to  the  possible 
decision  of  the  sinner's  free  will,  no  man  may  be  saved 
at  aU,  under  a  dispensation  which,  it  is  maintained,  was 
intended  for  all,  and  where  mercy  is  illustrated  by  the 
Son  of  God  giving  himself  to  death  for  aU. 

But  according  to  the  latter  scheme,  fallen  men  are 
delivered  from  all  the  penalties  due  to  them  for  their 
transgressions  of  the  moral  law,  whether  they  repent  of 
their  sins  or  not,  and  whether  they  despise  the  love  of 
God  in  Chi-ist  or  not,  and  whether  they  reject  the  re- 


APPENDIX.  387 

vealed  metliod  of  redemption  or  not.  Nevertheless,  their 
havings  peace  of  mind,  their  being  sanctified,  their  i-eaching 
the  felicity  of  heaven,  will  depend  upon  their  faith  in  Christ, 
and  upon  their  believing  that  they  have  been  freely  and 
fully  pardoned  in  virtue  of  Christ's  death,  and  in  despite  of 
impenitence  and  unbelief.  And  thus  while  some  may  get 
to  heaven,  some  will  be  sent  to  hell — or  if  any  are  sent  to 
hell,  they  are  sent  there  only  for  not  believing  that  God 
hath  pardoned  them,  and  ^viIl  exist  there  in  the  double 
capacity  of  pardoned  and  punished  transgressors !  And 
all  this  under  the  government  of  an  infinitely  wise,  holy, 
and  merciful  Beins: ! 


Note  G,  p.  89. 


I  might  pi'oduce  all  the  passages  which  speak  of  Christ 
being  offered,  or  sacrificed,  or  given,  for  such  classes  or 
descriptions  as  do  necessarily  exclude  the  idea  of  univer- 
sality. When  it  is  said,  for  instance,  that  he  gave  himself 
for  the  church,  for  the  elect,  for  his  people,  for  liis  body,  for 
his  sheep,  for  those  whom  the  Father  had  given  him,  for  his 
children  and  brethren,  &c.* — when  such  language  is 
used,  a  restriction  is  stated  or  implied  which  forbids  us 
to  place  each  and  every  person  among  the  objects  of  his 
interjjosition.  It  is  not  the  mere  phraseology  that  is  con- 
cerned here ;  it  is  the  essential  idea  conveyed  by  the 
sacred  writer,  or  by  our  Saviour  himself,  and  I  do  not 
see  it  possible  to  get  quit  of  the  idea  by  any  rational 

*  See  Matt.   i.  21 — Heb.  ii.  10,  12,  13 Acts  xx.  28 

Ephes.  V.  23,  25— Rom.  viii.  32 Ephes.   i.  3-- 8— John 

X.  11,  12,  H. 


388  APPENDIX. 

construction  of  the  wordy  in  which  it  is  embodied  and 
expressed. 

"  His  people"  is  an  expression  which  cannot  be  ex- 
tended to  all  mankind.  No  stretch  of  charity,  and  no 
intimation  of  Scripture,  will  entitle  us  to  think  that  all 
mankind  are  the  people  of  Christ.  He  has  a  people 
whom  he  shall  save  from  their  sins.  They  are  denomi- 
nated a  "peculiar  people."  And  for  this  people  he  gave 
himself. 

The  "  church"  also  is  a  term  of  limited  meaning.  No- 
body would  think  of  calling  the  whole  world  by  this 
name.  There  is  a  body  of  men  called  the  church ;  and 
there  is  a  body  of  men,  in  contradistinction  to  them, 
called  the  world.  And  we  are  told  that  "  God  hath  pur- 
chased the  church  with  his  own  blood ;"  and  that  "  Christ 
loved  the  church,  and  gave  himself  for  it,  that  he  might 
sanctify  and  cleanse  it." 

The  term  "ele 't"  is  equally  decisive  of  the  point.  It 
is  of  no  consequeiice  here,  whether  the  election  be  con- 
sidered as  absolute,  or  as  conditional ;  still  election  cir- 
cumscribes the  number  of  those  regarding  whom  it  is 
predicated.  AU  cannot  be  partakers  of  the  privileges 
which  belong  to  an  elect  portion.  And  since  forgiveness 
of  sins  is  one  of  the  privileges  conferred  upon  the  elect 
as  the  fruit  of  Christ's  death,  it  is  impossible  that  all  can 
be  said  to  be  forgiven. 

I  beg  to  call  my  readers'  attention  to  a  passage*  in 
which  Mr.  Erskine  gives  an  exhibition,  not  only  of  his  pe- 
culiar opinion,  but  also  of  the  method  by  which  he  tries 
to  gain  his  object,  which  I  do  not  think  very  creditable  to 
his  candour.  It  is  as  foUoAvs  :  "  The  names  and  titles  of 
Christ  are  aU  relative.  He  is  the  shepherd  of  his  sheep  : 
he  is  the  head  of  his  body :  he  is  the  high  priest  of  his 

•  Uncond.  Freeness,  p.  219. 


APPENDIX.  389 

rhurch :  he  is  the  saviour  of  sinners :  he  is  the  propitia- 
tion for  the  sins  of  the  world." 

True,  Christ  is  the  shepherd  of  his  sheejy  ;  but  why  did 
not  Mr.  Erskiue  add,  that  his  sheep  form  a  "  little  flock," 
and  "  hear  his  voice,"  and  "  follow  "  him,  and  that  for 
these  sheep  the  "  good  shepherd  giveth  his  life  ?"  True, 
Christ "  is  the  head  of  him  hodyf  but  is  not  his  body  the  very 
church,  of  which  Le  is  the  high  priest  ?  And  why  did  Mr. 
Erskine  forget  to  state  that  Christ  "  loved  the  church,  and 
gave  himself  for  it  ?"  And  then  how  comes  it,  that  along 
Avith  Christ's  sheep,  his  body,  his  church.  Mi-.  Erskine 
makes  mention  of  sinners  and  of  the  world,  Avhich  in 
Scrij)ture  are  contradistinguished  from  the  others  ?  But 
granting  that  he  could  with  propriety  confound  these  op- 
posite classes,  though  the  confusion  tends  unquestionably 
to  deceive  an  unwary  reader,  still  why  did  not  Mr.  Erskine 
notice,  in  order  to  prevent  mistakes,  that  as  certainly  as 
Christ  is  the  saviour  of  none  but  of  those  who  believe,  so 
certainly  is  he  a  propitiation  for  the  sins  of  the  T\'orld, 
"  thrmighfaith  inhis  blood  ?"  By  withholding  these  things, 
and  giving  his  statement  apart  from  them,  Mr.  E.  holds 
out  a  false  view  of  the  doctrine  of  Christ's  relationship  to 
the  objects  of  divine  mercy,  misrepresents  the  Scriptures, 
to  which  he  notwithstanding  refers,  and  misleads  the 
minds  of  ignorant  and  unreflecting  men.  And  for  this  I 
do  seriously  blame  him. 

But,  in  his  enumeration  of  the  relative  names  and  titles 
of  Christ,  why  is  election  so  completely  and  carefully 
omitted  ?  Was  he  afraid  of  "  the  common  phraseology," 
which  speaks  of  the  "  Medeemer  o(  God's  J^lect?"  But 
he  should  not  have  been  ifraid  of  telling  the  whole  truth. 
And  if  he  had  told  the  whole  truth,  he  would  have  told 
that  Christ  forgives  the  elect  of  God  through  the  sprink- 
Jinff  of  his  blood. 


390  APPENDIX. 

Arminians  may  affirm,  that  all  might  have  been  for- 
given, and  would  have  been  forgiven,  if  they  had  fulfilled 
the  conditions  on  which  that  blessing  is  suspended.  Be 
it  so  :  but  that  does  not  affect  the  present  ai'gument,  for 
those  ^vith  whom  I  am  at  present  contending,  maintain 
that  all  sinners  are  pardoned  without  any  condition  being 
imposed,  and  even  before  any  condition  can  be  perform- 
ed— that  is  to  say,  that  all  sinners  are  actually  for- 
given, though  the  Scripture  says  that  this  blessing  is  be- 
stowed upon  those  only  Avho  belong  to  that  election — 
who  are  predestinated  to  be  thus  redeemed.  And  that 
the  Scripture  says  so,  is  evident  from  a  variety  of  pas- 
sages, particularly  from  the  first  chapter  of  the  epistle  to 
the  Ephesians,  where  the  Apostle  mentions  one  of  the 
privileges  of  those  whom  God  "  hath  chosen"  or  elected 
(the  original  word  is  iSEXs^aTo)  in  Christ,"  that  they  have 
"  redemption  through  his  blood,  the  forgiveness  of  sins ;" — 
from  tlie  third  chapter  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Colossians, 
in  M'hich  Paul  exhorts  "  the  saints  and  faithful  bre- 
thren in  Christ,"  in  the  following  terms,  "  Put  on,  there- 
fore, as  the  elect  of  God,  holy  and  beloved,  bowels  of 
mercies,  &c. — even  as  Christ  forgave  you,  so  also  do 
ye ;" — from  Isaiah  liii.  10,  where  the  prophet  thus  connects 
the  sacrificial  death  of  Christ  with  those  who  were  given 
him  to  be  his  spiritual  offspring,  "  when  thou  shalt  make 
his  soul  an  offering  for  sin,  he  shall  see  his  seed ;" — and 
from  1  Pet.  i.  2.  where  election  and  the  atonement  are 
inseparably  united,  "elect  according  to  the  foreknow- 
ledge of  God  the  Father,  through  sanctification  of  the 
Spirit  unto  obedience,  and  sprinkling  of  the  blood  of 
Jesus  Christ." 

The  doctrine  of  election  is  a  stumbling-block  to  Mr. 
Erskine.  He  cannot  deny  it ;  and  yet  he  does  not  know 
well  what  to  make  of  it,  he  is  greatly  at  a  loss  where  to 


APPENDIX.  391 

bring  it  in,  and  he  thus  disposes  of  the  whole  subject. 
"  Where  then  is  the  election  ?  It  is  here,  that  when  this 
love  was  poured  upon  all,  and  this  forgiveness  sealed  to 
all ;  and  the  power  to  believe  it  conferred  upon  aU ;  and 
yet  no  man  would  believe  it;  when  aU  loved  darkness 
rather  than  hght,  because  their  deeds  were  evil ;  when  all 
vidth  one  consent  begau  to  make  excuses  ;  then  the  elect- 
ing word  came  forth,  saying,  '  compel  some  to  come  in.' 
And  thus  is  the  creature  condemned  throughout,  and 
God  is  glorified.  And  he  who  believer,  believes  because 
he  has  been  compelled  to  come  in."* 

To  this  most  extraordinary  theory  of  election  I  have 
three  objections,  M'hich  probably  never  occurred  to  its 
author,  but  which,  though  they  had  occurred,  it  is  as  proba- 
ble would  have  had  little  effect  on  his  statement.  Reason 
has  no  chance  in  contending  with  vagaries.  It  may  be 
useful  however  to  let  the  reader  see  how  unsafe  it  is  to 
take  Ml*.  Erskine  for  a  theological  guide. 

1 .  In  the  first  place,  the  theory  is  wholly  gratuitous  on 
his  part.  He  does  not  support  it  even  by  the  shadow  of 
an  argument,  though  he  must  be  aware  that  on  such  a 
subject  argument  is  necessary.  He  does  not  ventui*e  to 
quote  the  Bible,  though  he  cannot  deny  that  the  Bible 
distinctly  speaks  of  election.  He  does  not  give  any 
ground  at  all  for  his  opinion,  though  he  cannot  but  be 
sensible  that  he  is  contradicting  the  "  common  phraseolo- 
gy," and  trying  to  subvert  the  system  of  many  able  di- 
vines, and  the  faith  of  thousands  of  Christians  upon  that 
important  point.  No :  he  merely  introduces  it  that  he 
may  not  seem  to  blink  a  question  which  had  no  doubt 
been  often  put  to  him ;  and  having  introduced  it,  he  utters 
a  gratis  dictum — he  brings  forth  a  position,  and  is  pleased 

*  Essay,  p.  Ixix. 


392  APPENDIX. 

to  give  us  his  own  warrant  for  its  truth !  Of  all  the 
writers  I  have  ever  met  with,  Mr.  Erskine  is  the  very 
last  whose  warrant  I  would  be  inclined  to  take  for  any 
thing  of  that  kind :  for  he  is  ever  and  anon  indulging  in 
fancies  and  conjectures,  and  puts  forth  absurdity  and 
sense  with  equal  gravity,  when  it  comports  with  his  main 
doctrine.  On  the  present  occasion,  he  assigns  no  more 
reason  for  asserting  that  "  then  the  electing  word  came 
forth,  saying,  compel  them  to  come  in,"  than  he  could 
assign  for  asserting  that  election  is  to  take  place  at  the 
last  day,  for  "  then  the  electing  word  will  be  spoken. 
Come  ye  blessed  of  my  Father."  The  one  hypothesis  is 
just  as  unsubstantiated  as  tho  other;  and  Mr.  Erskine's 
sanction  would  be  equally  good  for  both — that  is  to  say,  it 
is  good  for  neither. 

2.  But,  secondly,  while  Mr.  Erskine's  notion  is  entirely 
gratuitous,  it  is  in  opposition  to  the  word  of  God.  Not 
only  has  it  no  countenance,  but  it  receives  a  direct  and  ex^ 
plicit  negative,  from  that  sacred  authority.  He  supposes, 
or  rather  aflBrms,  that  God's  election  of  those  who  were 
to  be  finally  saved  did  not  take  place  till  he  had  made  an 
experiment,  for  the  purpose  of  ascertaining  whether  any 
man  would  believe  that  he  had  loved  all,  and  forgiven  all, 
and  given  to  all  the  power  of  exercising  faith  in  this  fact ! 
It  was  not  till  God  had  made  this  experiment,  and  till  the 
experiment  wholly  failed  in  his  hands,  that  he  chose  out 
of  the  unbelieving  world  certain  persons  whom  he  compell- 
ed to  believe,  and  thus  to  embrace  the  salvation  he  had 
provided !  I  will  venture  to  say,  that  however  ancient  some 
of  Mr.  Erskine's  speculations  may  be,  his  view  of  election 
has  all  the  merit,  and  may  have  all  the  praise,  of  perfect 
novelty.  Of  the  myriads  who  have  read  the  inspired  vo- 
lume, I  am  quite  safe  in  asserting  that,  to  not  one  of  tliera 
did  it  ever  so  much  as  suggest  such  an  odd  fancy  on  the 


APPENDIX.  393 

subject  of  election.  If  there  be  any  thing  clearer  than  an- 
other, it  is  this,  that  the  election  was  made  before  sinners 
could  be  subjected  to  any  trial  as  to  their  willingtiess  to 
accept  of  that  manifestation  of  redeeming  love,  which  is 
set  before  them  in  the  gospel.  The  persons  so  distinguish- 
ed are  said  to  hare  been  "  chosen  or  elected  before  the 
foundation  of  the  world,"* — to  have  been  "  predestinated 
according  to  the  purpose  of  God,"-f- — to  be  saved  "  ac- 
cording to  the  purpose  and  grace  of  God,  which  was  given 
them  before  the  world  began,"J — to  have  been  "  chosen 
of  God  from  the  beginning  to  salvation,"  || — to  be  "  elect 
according  to  the  foreknowledge  of  God,"$ — to  have  had  a 
kingdom  "  prepared  for  them  before  the  foundation  of  the 
world,"! — to  have  been  "  promised  eternal  life,  before  the 
world  began."**  These  passages — and  others  might  have 
been  quoted — sufl&ciently  prove  that  election  is  from  eter- 
nity, or  precedes  every  thing  like  that  state  of  probation  to 
which  Mr.  Erskine  alleges  sinners  to  be  subjected  before  the 
"  electing  word  comes  forth,"  as  he  chooses  to  express  it. 
And  I  should  reaUy  like  to  know  how  he  attempts  to  re- 
concile them  with  his  opinion. 

I  have  heard  and  read  of  conditional  election — that  is, 
that  certain  persons  were  elected  to  eternal  life,  on  the  fore- 
seen condition  of  their  believing  and  repenting.  But  Mr. 
Erskine  introduces  a  new  species  of  conditional  election. 
And  it  is  this,  that  certain  men  are  selected  from  among 
the  crowd — not  of  sinners  at  large,  but  of  sinners  «'ho  will 
not  believe  that  God  has  already  loved  and  pardoned  them 
— and  the  election  takes  place  on  the  condition  that  all 
have  been  guilty  of  such  unbelief;  for  if  any  had  believed 

*Epbes.  i.  4.       flbid.  i.  11.    i  2  Tim.  i.  9.     [|  2  Thess.  ii.  13. 
§  1  Peter  i.  2.  f  Matt,  xsv,  34.  *•  Tit.  i.  2. 


394?  APPENDIX. 

the  fact  alluded  to — and  all  got  the  power  of  believing  it — 
these  would  not  have  been  elected,  having  no  need  of  such 
a  boon,  because  they  themselves  had  done  what  precluded 
the  necessity  of  God's  interference  to  elect  them.  So  that, 
as  all  have  the  power  of  believing,  it  is  not  improbable  that 
some  will  be  pleased  to  exert  that  power,  and  require  no 
compulsion  to  come  in,  and  then  heaven  will  be  peopled 
partly  by  redeemed  sinners  who  have  been  elected,  and 
redeemed  sinners  who  have  not  been  elected — partly  by 
those  whose  redemption  has  been  wholly  owing  to  God,  and 
partly  by  those  who  can  arrogate  a  portion  of  that  destiny 
to  themselves ! 

Mr.  Erskine  says,  that  "God's  love  does  not  flow  through 
the  channel  of  election,  neither  does  the  gift  nor  the  atone- 
ment of  Christ."  This  assertion  he  finds  in  his  own  in- 
tei-pretation  of  such  texts  as  "  God  so  loved  the  world  as  to 
give  his  Son" — Christ  "tasted  death  for  eveiy  man" — and  is 
"  the  propitiation  for  the  sins  of  the  vihole  world."  But  his 
interpretation  of  these  has  been  demonstrated  to  be  erro- 
neous. If  universality  is  really  to  be  predicated  of  the 
death  of  Christ,  or  of  the  redeeming  love  of  God,  it  is  that 
universality  which  consists  in  providing  a  salvation  out  of 
which  every  man  may  be  supplied  with  forgiveness  and 
eternal  life.  And  the  very  text  that  he  quotes,  but  quotes 
partially  and  unfairly,  from  John  iii.  16,  may  be  adduced 
to  show  this  ;  for  it  says,  "  God  so  loved  the  world  that  he 
gave  his  only  begotten  Son,  that  whosoever  believeth  in 
him  should  not  perish,  but  have  everlasting  life."  Here 
God's  love  to  the  Avorld,  and  the  gift  and  atonen-ent  of  his 
Son,  are  all  linked  to  the  grace  of  believing,  and  he  M^ho 
is  destitute  of  this  grace  must  of  necessity  be  excluded 
from  those  benefits,  which  yet  Mr.  Erskine  affirms  to 
belong  to  all  without  exception.  But  as  to  election,  is 
it  not  evident  from  Scripture,  that  he  goes  egregiously 


APPENDIX.  395 

wrong'  in  separating  election  from  the  love  of  God,  the 
gift  of  Christ,  and  the  atonement  made  by  him  for 
sin  ?  The  people  of  God  are  saved  according-  not  only 
to  his  purpose,  but  his  grace,  which  M'as  given  them  before 
the  vrorld  began.*  They  were  chosen  in  Christ  before 
the  foundation  of  the  world,f  and  God  has  predestinated 
them  unto  the  adoption  of  children  by  Jesus  Christ  to  him- 
self.J  And  they  are  "  elect  according  to  the  foreknow- 
ledge of  God  the  Father — through  sprinkling  of  the  blood 
of  Jesus  Christ  "\\  I  recommend  to  Mr.  Erskine's  atten- 
tion, or  rather  to  the  attention  of  those  who  are  in  danger 
of  being  deluded  by  him  on  this  point,  Ephes.  i-  3 — 13, 
where  the  true  doctrine  is  particularly  and  fuUy  stated  by 
an  inspired  writer. 

3.  In  the  third  place,  although  Mr.  Erskine  does  not 
expressly  refer  for  his  authority  on  the  subject  of  elec- 
tion, to  Scripture,  which  is  all  against  him,  he  makes  a 
correct  and  artful  reference  to  it,  M'hich  I  cannot  allow  to 
pass  unnoticed.  In  the  passage  of  his  Essay  that  I  am 
commenting  on,  it  wiU  be  perceived  that  he  has  in  his  eye 
the  Parable  of  the  "  Great  Supper"  mentioned  in  Luke 
xiv.  16 — 25,  and  that  he  uses  as  much  of  the  phraseology 
of  that  pai'able  as  to  give  the  reader  an  impression  that  he 
speaks  according  to  the  book  of  God,  though  he  is  careful 
not  to  use  so  much  of  it  as  would  prove  it  to  be  not  at  aU 
to  his  purpose.  His  statement  of  the  case  is  at  variance 
with  the  circumstances  narrated  in  the  story.  He  says 
that  it  was  after  all  had  been  loved  and  forgiven,  and  era- 
powered  and  enabled  to  believe,  and  all  had  refused,  that 
the  compulsion  which  he  makes  tantamount  to  election 
was  resorted  to.     So  does  not  our  Lord  say  in  his  parable. 

*  2  Tim.  i.  9.       f  Epl^cs.  i.  4.        *  Ibid.  5.     [J  1  Peter  i.  2, 


396  APPENDIX. 

All  those  who  were  originally  invited,  refused  the  invita- 
tion, and  none  of  them  were  to  be  allowed  to  "  taste  the 
Supper."  But  of  those  who  were  in  "  the  streets  and  lanes 
of  the  city," — of  "  the  poor,  and  the  maimed,  and  the  halt, 
and  the  blind,"  there  was  evidently  "  brought  in"  a  great 
number,  for  the  servant  who  had  been  sent  to  bring-  them 
in,  said,  "  Lord,  it  is  done  as  thou  hast  commanded,  and 
yet  there  is  room"  Were  these  none  of  the  elect  ?  Were 
the  elect  such  only  as  were  found  in  "  the  hig-hways  and 
hedges"  and  "  compelled  to  come  in,"  that  they  might 
occupy  the  small  space  that  still  remained  for  guests,  and 
that  the  "  house  might  be"  thus  completely  "  tilled  ?"  Or 
rather,  did  not  the  elect  consist  chieHy  of  the  second  class 
of  people  mentioned,  who  had  taken  their  places  as  guests 
before  the  "  electing  word  went  forth  V" 

This  is  one  among  many  instances  of  the  improper  free- 
dom which  Mr.  Erskine  takes  with  the  ^yord  of  God.  He 
does  not  seem  anxious  to  be  taught  by  that  word  as  it  is, 
but  to  make  it  teach  what  he  has  otherwise  adopted-  The 
parable  of  the  Great  Supper  is  neither  intended  nor  fitted 
to  give  instruction  on  the  subject  of  election.  It  has  no- 
thing to  do  with  that  topic.  And  when  a  writer  has  re- 
course to  it  for  propping  up  his  hypothesis  as  to  "what" 
or  "  lohere  is  election,"  nothing  more  is  necessaiy  to  con- 
vince us,  that  he  knows  the  Bible  to  be  against  him, 
though  he  will  not  acknowledge  it.  The  parable  M'as  de- 
livered by  our  Saviour  to  illustrate  the  rejection  of  the 
Jews  and  the  calling  of  the  Gentiles, — the  former  being 
represented  by  the  persons  who  were  first  invited  to  the 
feast,  and  the  latter  by  those  who  were  brought  and  pressed 
or  constrained  to  come,  in  consequence  of  the  first  refus- 
ing. And,  even  in  this  vie^v,  we  may  observe  how  ab- 
surd it  is — an  absurdity,  however,  of  which  Mr.  Erskine 


APPENDIX.  39y 

is  often  guilty — to  take  every  particular  of  a  parable  as 
strictly  inculcating  some  truth  or  fact  apait  frona  that 
which  it  was  merely  or  solely  designed  to  illustrate.    Are 
we  to  conclude,  for  example,  from  this  parable,  that  there 
are  three  classes  of  men — one  besides  the  Jews  and  the 
Gentiles — to  whom  the  gospel  is  addressed,  although  these 
two  are  the  only  classes  specified  in  Scripture,  and  known 
in  history  ?     Are  we  to  conclude  that  the  ministers  of  re- 
ligion ought  to  use  compulsory  means  for  getting  men  to 
embrace  Christianity,  instead  of  acting  like  the  apostles, 
who  addressed  themselves  to  the  reasoning  faculties  and 
the  moral  susceptibilities  of  those  whom  they  applied  to  y 
And  are  we  to  conclude,  that  of  the  Jews  not  one  was 
permitted  to  taste  or  partake  of  the  privileges  of  the  gos- 
pel, though  it  is  matter  of  recorded  fact,  that  thousands  of 
them  were  converted  to  the  faith  and  obedience  of  oiu* 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  ?     Impossible ;  and  yet  this  is  Mi*.  Er- 
skine's  mode  of  going  to  work,  Avhenever  he  finds  a  pa- 
rable which,  in  any  of  its  incidental  circumstances,  or  a 
figure  which,  in  any  of  its  possible  applications,  can  be 
made  to  say  any  thing  in  support  of  his  favourite  theories. 
This,  indeed,  enables  us  frequently  to  overcome  his  argu- 
ments and  illustrations  from  Scripture  by  a  kind  of  reduc- 
tio  ad  absurdum.     But  it  is  painful  and  injurious  to  be 
dealing  in  this  manner  with  any  thing  that  seems  to  wear 
the  authority  and  the  sacredness  of  inspiration.     At  the 
same  time,  it  is  Mi-.  Erskine,  and  such  as  he,  that  necessi- 
tate us  to  adopt  this  method  of  defence ;  and  M'e  must 
either  employ  it,  or  allow  the  grossest  errors  to  take  shel- 
ter under  the  language  of  God's  word,  and  fix  themselves 
in  the  minds  of  uninstructed  persons  as  essential  tenets  of 
the  Christian  religion. 

I  cannot  conclude  this  note  without  remarking,  that  the 


398  APPENDIX. 

slight  notice  IVIi\  Erekine  has  taken  of  election,  and  the 
strang-e  out-of-the-way  corner  he  has  assigned  it  in  his 
system,  afford  sufficient  proof  of  his  dislilie  to  the  doc- 
trine. In  this  opinion  I  am  confirmed  by  the  strain  of 
those  Letters  which  he  has  employed  his  pen  to  usher  in- 
to the  world ;  for  the  antipathy  which  the  Ladj^ — who  is 
raised  out  of  her  tomb,  where  she  might  have  advantage- 
ously been  left  to  slumber,  in  order  to  plead  with  her  young 
sisters  for  universal  pardon — has  to  election,  is  apparent 
throughout ;  and  no  man  could  have  been  instrumental 
in  giving  her  sentiments  publicity,  who  was  not  like- 
minded  with  her  on  that  important  topic.  To  what  de- 
nomination the  fair  waiter  belonged  it  is  not  very  easy  to 
determine.  The  "  common  phraseology  "  of  Scotland  evi- 
dently did  not  please  her  more  than  it  pleases  ]Mr.  Erskine. 
I  should  conjectiu'e  that  she  was  a  Scotch  Episcopalian 
converted  into  a  Wesleyan  Methodist ;  and  that  her  zeal 
was  rather  an  overmatch  for  her  knowledge.  She  is 
about  as  confused  as  her  reviver,  and  rather  more  con- 
sistent. But  she  is  honest  enough  to  avow  her  utter 
aversion  to  election,  which  the  other  only  disclaims  by 
giving  it  a  place  in  which  it  is  equally  useless  and  ridicu- 
lous— in  which,  indeed,  it  is  called  by  the  name,  but  has 
lost  all  the  reality  and  meaning  of  election. 


Note  H,  p.  105. 


I  am  quite  aware  of  the  sense  in  which  Mr.  Erskine 
and  others  understand  and  employ  the  term  justification. 
They  cannot  deny  that  it  is  used  in  Scripture  to  denote 
that  act  by  which  God  pai-dons  the  sinner  and  re-instates 


APPENDIX.  399 

him  in  the  divine  favour — treating-  him  as  if  he  were 
I'ighteous.  But  then  it  strilies  them,  that,  on  some  occa- 
sions, the  word  signifies,  not  this  act  on  the  part  of  God 
towards  the  sinner,  but  the  sense  or  feeling  on  the  part  of 
the  sinner  that  he  is  actually  pardoned.  And  to  what  ac- 
coimt  do  they  turn  this  notable  discovery  ?  They  do  not 
confine  the  application  of  it  to  those  passages  in  which 
the  'oord  occurs,  as  they  think,  ^\'ith  this  meaning ;  but 
they  straightway  affix  this  meaning  to  the  word  wherever 
it  occurs,  and,  by  this  most  extraordinary  proceeding,  la- 
bour to  support  their  theory  of  the  gospel.  Can  any  thing 
show  more  strongly  their  determination  to  make  the  Scrip- 
ture speak  in  their  behalf,  whether  it  wiU  or  not  ? 

Let  us  try  a  few  passages,  as  interpreted  according  to 
this  new  meaning  of  the  word  justification,  recollecting, 
at  the  same  time,  that  faith  is  defined  to  be  the  belief  of 
the  sinner  that  he  is  pardoned. 

Rom.  viii.  33,  34,  will  run  thus — "  Who  shall  lay  any 
thing  to  the  charge  of  God's  elect  ?  It  is  God  that  gives 
the  sinner  a  sense  or  feeling  that  he  is  pardoned  ;  who  is 
he  that  condemneth  ?"  What  becomes  of  the  antithesis 
plainly  intended  by  the  Apostle  between  the  act  of  justifi- 
cation passed  by  God  on  behalf  of  the  sinner,  and  the  act 
of  condemnation  supposed  and  challenged  to  be  passed  by 
any  created  being  against  him  ? 

Gal.  ii.  16,  would  be  thus  translated — "  Knowing  that  a 
man  has  not  a  sense  of  pardon  by  the  works  of  the  law, 
but  by  the  belief  that  he  is  pardoned  of  Jesus  Christ, 
even  we  have  had  a  belief  that  we  are  pardoned  in  Jesus 
Christ,  that  we  might  have  a  sense  of  pardon  by  the  be- 
lief that  we  are  pardoned  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  not  by  the 
works  of  the  law ;  for  by  the  works  of  the  law  ehaU  no 
flesh  have  a  sense  of  pardon." 

Rom.  iv.  5,  must  be  rendered  thus — "  But  to  him  that 


400  APPENDIX. 

worketh  riot,  but  believes  that  he  is  pardoned  by  him  that 
gives  a  sense  of  pardon  to  the  ungodly,  his  belief  that  he 
is  pardoned  is  counted  for  righteousness." 

Rom.  V.  1,  must  be  read  thus — "  Therefore  having  a 
sense  of  pardon  by  a  belief  that  we  are  pardoned,  we  have 
peace  with  God,"  or  being  at  peace  with  God  by  a  belief 
that  we  are  at  peace  with  him,  we  have  peace  with  God ! 
Could  our  opponents  prove  that  justification  in  any  case 
means  a  sense  of  pardon,  it  would  be  quite  fair  to  employ 
it  with  that  signification  in  the  particular  case.  But  it  is 
a  most  unwarrantable  freedom,  not  merely  with  the  lan- 
guage, but  with  the  essential  truths  of  the  Bible,  to  sup- 
pose, that  in  all  cases  the  word  is  to  be  held  as  denoting 
the  same  thing.  Such  a  mode  of  interpretation  shows 
neither  critical  knowledge  of  the  sacred  writings,  nor 
pious  reverence  for  them  as  the  word  of  God.  But  it 
gives  abundant  proof  of  a  dogged  resolution  to  maintain 
the  opinion  which  such  a  lawless  mode  of  proceeding  is 
deemed  requisite  to  uphold. — Another  example  of  this  un- 
worthiness  is  suggested  to  me  by  the  veiy  point  I  am  con- 
sidering. 

Mr.  Erskine  is  exceedingly  anxious  to  impress  upon  his 
readers  the  difference  between  pardon  and  justification. 
No  wonder;  for  if  pardon  forms  a  part  of  justification,  his 
theoiy  is  gone.  But  while  he  labours  hard  to  fortify  his 
scheme  on  that  side,  it  is  exposed  to  imminent  danger  on 
another  side.  For,  if  pardon  is  already  obtained,  there  is 
no  occasion  to  pi*ay  for  it ;  and  yet  our  Saviour  instmcted 
his  disciples  to  put  up  that  petition,  "  Forgive  us  our  tres- 
passes."' Well,  there  is  no  help  for  it;  great  exigencies 
demand  great  daring.  And,  accordingly,  with  the  same 
hardihood  and  recklessness  of  exposition  bj'^  which  he 
struggles  to  extricate  himself  from  other  difficulties,  he 
attempts  to  surmount  this  by  attaching  a  new  import  to 


APPENDIX.  401 

the  word  forgiveness  or  pardon.  It  now  means  a  "  sense 
of  pardon !"  I  have  shown,  in  my  fourth  discourse,  how 
absurdly  this  tells  on  the  ear  and  to  the  understanding  of 
any  man  whatever.  But  it  may  be  useful  to  quote  a  pas- 
sage in  which  the  terms  believe,  pardon,  and  justification, 
all  occur  together,  that  my  readers  may  see  what  havoc 
Mr.  Erskine  and  his  school  are  making  on  the  phraseology 
and  doctrine  of  inspiration. 

Acts  xiii.  .38,  39.  "  Be  it  known  unto  you,  therefore, 
men,  and  brethren,  that  through  this  man  (Christ)  is 
preached  unto  you  a  sense  of  the  pardon  of  sins ;  and  by 
him  all  that  believe  that  they  are  pardoned,  have  a  sense 
of  pardon  from  all  things,  from  which  we  could  not  have 
a  sense  of  pardon  by  the  law  of  Moses." 

I  agree  in  the  position  that  there  is  a  diflFerence  between 
pardon  and  justification,  though  that  position  is  abandoned 
by  IVIr.  Erskine  when  it  answers  his  own  end,  and  when 
he  finds  it  inexpedient  to  make  them  one  and  the  same 
thing,  by  making  each  of  them  to  signify  a  sense  of  pardon 
or  of  forgiveness.  But  the  difference  is  just  that  which 
exists  between  a  part  and  the  whole  of  any  thing  :  justifica- 
tion implying  pardon,  and,  moreover,  acceptance  unto  eter- 
nal life.  And  it  is  not  a  little  strange,  if  any  thing  can  be 
accounted  strange  in  the  production  of  such  an  inconsist- 
ent and  imaginative  writer,  that  Mr.  Erskine  himself  ad- 
mits this.  He  allows  that  when  a  man  is  justified  by  faith, 
he  has  "  the  sense  of  pardon  and  acceptance  before  God,* 
that  he  has  "  a  sense  of  God's  acceptance  and  favour,"  and 
that  he  has  the  "  eternal  life"  which  is  in  the  Son  of  God.f 
See  now  what  his  doctrine  amounts  to.  He  makes  pardon, 
acceptance,  favoui  with  God,  and  eternal  life,  to  go  to- 
gether.    They  form  parts  of  the  same  great  boon.     They 

•  Unconditional  Freeness,  p.  1.58,  f  Ibid-  p.  l(>(ii 


402  APPENDIX. 

are  inseparably  united.  Just  as  certainly  as  the  sin- 
ner is  pardoned,  he  is  accepted,  and  has  eternal  life.  And 
as  it  is  not  his  faith  that  secures  the  pardon,  so  neither  is 
it  his  faith  that  secures  the  other  accompanying  Ijencfits. 
The  one  and  the  other,  and  all  of  them  were  already  com- 
mon property,  and  the  sinner  had  only  to  beheve  the  pre- 
existing' fact  of  their  being  actually  bis,  that  he  might  know 
and  enjoy  the  knowledge  of  his  having  been  ah-eady  par- 
doned, accepted,  and  invested  with  eternal  life.  But  his 
not  believing,  or  not  knowing,  or  not  being  sensible  of  the 
fact,  can  never  sui'ely  deprive  him  of  the  pai-don,  the  ac- 
ceptance, the  eternal  life  which  had  been  conferred  and 
made  his,  long  previously  to,  and  altogether  independently 
of,  his  exercising  faith.  And  what  more  than  these  bless- 
ings can  any  being  desire  for  his  complete  safety  and  feli- 
city ?  If  any  thing  else  is  requisite,  undoubtedly,  on  Mr. 
Erskine's  theory  of  divine  love,  it  will  not  be  withheld — 
especially  such  a  simple  gift  as  that  of  letting  the  sinner 
know,  and  making  him  convinced  that  God  has  been  so 
gracious  as  to  bestow  all  these  things  upon  those  even  who 
will  not  repent  of  their  sins,  and  will  not  beheve  the  gospel. 
Though  Mr.  Erskinethus  betrays  his  own  cause — no  un- 
common thing — and  is  convicted  on  his  own  admissions,  I 
must  not  be  supposed  as  for  one  moment  giving  counte- 
nance to  his  notion  about  the  proper  meaning  of  justifi- 
cation. On  the  contrary,  I  hold  it  to  be  one  of  the  great- 
est absurdities  that  ever  was  attempted  to  be  palmed  upon 
the  religious  world  under  the  form  of  criticism  and  prin- 
ciple. Throughout  all  Scripture,  to  justify  is  to  pronounce 
or  account  righteous — appMod  to  such  as  have  transgress- 
ed, and  forfeited  favour,  as  well  as  incurred  a  penalty,  and 
conveying  to  them  deliverance  from  that  penalty,  and  res- 
toration to  that  favour.  This  is  the  radical  meaning  of  the 
word  ;  it  is  so  used  in  the  sacred  voliune  wherever  God's 


APPENDIX.  403 

dealing  with  his  rebellious  creatures  is  spoken  of;  and  to  say- 
that  it  signifies  the  sinner's  sense  or  conviction  of  what  had 
been  done  before,  is  to  pervert  the  plainest  language  from 
its  obvious,  established,  necessary  meaning,  and  to  attach  to 
it  a  meaning  which  could  never  have  occun*ed  to  any  sober 
mind  that  was  not  seeking  for  support  to  a  pre-conceived 
and  extravagant  opinion.  We  may  just  as  well  maintain 
that  when  a  human  governor  reverses  the  condemnatory 
sentence  that  had  been  passed  on  a  criminal,  tliis  criminal 
should  not  say,  or  it  should  not  be  said  of  him,  that  he  is 
acquitted,  forgiven,  and  restored  to  his  forfeited  privileges, 
but  that  he  is  only  favoured  with  a  sense  or  knowledge 
tliat  such  things  have  taken  place.  Who  does  not  see  that 
the  two  things  are  quite  distinct  ?  And  when  God,  as  the 
great  moral  governor  of  the  world,  reverses  the  condemna- 
tory sentence  passed  by  him  on  the  sinner,  it  is  the  act  of  his 
conveying  to  the  sinner  what  the  sinner  did  not  previously 
possess — whatever  there  might  be  in  God' s  decree,  or  in 
Christ's  meiit — and  it  can  only  be  affirmed  of  him,  after 
the  act  whioh  has  been  denominated  with  great  propriety, 
justification,  that  he  is  acquitted,  forgiven,  and  restored  to 
his  forfeited  privileges.  The  sense  or  knowledge  of  this 
must  be  subsequent  to  the  act  communicating  it ;  God  dis- 
covers the  change  of  state  to  the  sinner  after  the  change 
has  taken  place ;  and  the  sinner  is  enabled  to  im2)rove  the 
discovery  for  Lis  comfort,  his  sanctification,  his  encourage- 
ment, and  his  hope. 

Really  it  is  difficult  to  argue  with  a  man  who  so  con- 
founds things  as  Mr.  Erskine  does,  by  introducing  gratui- 
tous definitions  of  words,  and  proceeding  upon  the  idea 
that  because  the  new  meaning  which  he  adopts,  without 
Scripture  warrant,  or  any  warrant  l>ut  his  own  authority, 
dove-tails  with  tolerable  exactness  into  his  own  system, 
therefore  it  is  the  true  meaning,  and  must  be  admitted. 
But  this  affords  a  test,  and  a  pretty  good  test,  of  the  sound* 


404  APPENDIX. 

ness  of  his  opinions.  For  whenever  a  man  is  pleased  to 
give  us,  not  the  original  raeaniag  of  the  passages  he  quotes 
from  the  Bible — not  the  meaning  as  fixed  by  the  context — 
not  the  meaning  as  ascertained  by  the  anah  gy  of  Scrip- 
ture— but  the  meaning  M'hich,  in  defiance  of  aU  these 
standards  and  criterions,  suits  the  necessities  of  his  argu- 
ment, and  is  somewhat  as  arbitrary  as  if  he  should  say 
that  tM'o  and  two  make  five,  we  may  conclude  that  he  is 
wandering  from  sound  doctrine,  and  deserves  not  to  be 
trusted  or  followed.  This  is  exactly  the  predicament  in 
which  Mr.  Erskine  is  perpetually  involved.  He  cannot 
get  on  without  compelling  the  word  of  God  to  agree  with 
him.  And  the  freedom  he  uses  with  tl.o  term  justification, 
is  the  freedom  which  he  remorselessly  uses  with  every 
other  term,  or  phrase,  or  passage,  that  interferes  with  any 
hypothesis  he  undertakes  to  support.  We  shall  see  mul- 
tiplied proofs  of  this  as  we  advance  in  the  discussion.  These 
indeed  are  so  numerous  and  so  very  revolting,  that  were  it 
not  for  the  strain  of  piety  which  pervades  his  books,  and 
which  seems  to  break  forth  most  ardently  v.hen  scriptural 
statement  and  common  sense  are  most  grossly  violated,  Ave 
are  confident  his  books  would  be  throwai  away  with  dis- 
like by  nine-tenths  of  those  who  begin  to  peruse  them,  and 
A'tith  a  feeling  of  \^'onder  that  any  one  should  be  imposed 
upon  by  such  fanciful  and  outre  divinity.  "  This  may  ap- 
pear a  harsh  and  presumptuous  saying,  but  I  feel  it  to  be 
the  kindest  thing  that  I  can  say,  because  I  am  persuaded  it 
is  the  truth."*  And  though  quoted  from  Mr.  Erskine's 
own  tirade  against  the  men  whom  he  can  only  calumniate, 
"  it  proceeds  now  also  from  the  voice  of  one  of  those  shep- 
herds,"f  whom  in  his  excessive  piety  and  love,  he  has  held 
up  to  the  country  as  "  preaching  a  false  gospel,"  and  "  mak- 
ing the  cross  of  Christ  of  none  eifect." 

•  Essay,  p  xxi.  f  lb.  p.  xxiii. 


APPENDIX.  405 

We  have  already  seen  how  unsound  and  inconsistent 
Mr.  Erskine  is  on  the  subject  of  justification.  I  will  give 
another  example,  and  I  give  it  the  more  readily,  as  the 
Scripture  declaration  to  which  it  relates  seems  to  have 
an  important  bearing  on  his  theoiy  of  universal  pardon. 

The  declaration  I  aUude  to  is  Rom.  iv.  25,  upon  which 
text  Mr.  Erskine  comments  in  the  foUowiug  manner  :  * 

"  Now  what  is  the  import  of  the  expression, '  raised  for 
our  justification  ?'  Does  it  mean  raised  in  order  that  we 
may  be  justified  ?  It  may  appear  at  first  sight  to  have 
this  meaning,  but  it  is  not  the  true  meaning,  as  a  moment's 
considei'ation  will  discover.  Tbe  meaning  of  the  preposi- 
tion^?*, here,  must  be  determined  by  its  meaning  in  the  first 
clause  of  the  sentence.  The  whole  sentence  is, '  who  was 
delivered  for  our  offences,  and  was  raised  again  for  our  justi- 
fication.' Now,  when  it  is  said  that  he  '  was  delivered  for 
our  offences,'  it  cannot  mean  that  he  was  delivered  in  order 
that  we  might  offend  ;  it  evidently  means  that  he  was  de- 
livered because  we  had  offended.  And  so,  in  the  last 
clause  of  the  sentence,  the /or  must  have  the  same  signifi- 
cation ;  '  he  was  raised  again,  not  in  order  that  we  might 
he  justified,  but  because  we  were  pardoned.'  Jesus  never 
could^have  been  raised,  unless  we  had  been  pardoned ;  for 
he  was  put  into  the  prison  of  the  grave  because  of  our  of- 
fences, and,  therefore,  whilst  these  offences  remained  un- 
expiated,  he  must  have  remained  still  in  the  prison.  Why 
is  a  man  put  in  prison  ?  because  he  is  an  offender.  Why 
is  he  let  out  ?  because  the  penalty  has  been  sustained  and 
exhausted." 

Now,  in  the  first  place,  it  is  curious  to  observe  how 
plastic  the  language  of  Scripture  is  in  the  hands  of  Mr. 

*  Essay,  p.  Ixiv. 


406  APPENDIX. 

Erskine.  No  matter  whether  it  be  Greek  or  English,  he 
puts  it  into  his  critical  crucible,  and  by  a  strange  sort  of 
process,  it  comes  forth  whatsoever  he  is  pleased  to 
make  it.  lu  the  last  verse  of  Romans  iv.  he  vaske?,  justi- 
fication Qixaiaffis')  to  signify  pardon  ;  and  in  ih^  first  verse 
of  chapter  v.,  he  makes  justified  (}i»aiahyris)  "  having  ob- 
tained a  sense  of  pardon."  Were  he  consistent,  or  would  he 
allow  the  Sacred  writers  to  be  consistent,  he  would  either 
make  justified  in  the  latter  place  pardoned,  conformably 
to  what  it  is  in  the  former, — or  he  would  make  justifica- 
tion in  the  former  place,  a  sense  of  pardon,  conformably  to 
what  it  is  in  the  latter.  The  more  especially  should  he 
study  this  conformity,  seeing  that  the  statement  in  Rom. 
V.  Lisa  deduction  from  Romans  iv.  25,  pointed  out  by«uy, 
therefore.  But  then  Mr.  Erskine  sees  that  if  he  converts 
justified  into  pardoned  in  the  one  case,  he  loses  one  great 
prop  of  his  theory  on  assurance  and  universal  forgiveness 
— and  that  if  he  conxerts  justification  into  a  sense  of  par* 
don  in  the  other  case,  it  would  make  such  nonsense  as 
he  could  scarcely  set  himself  to  utter,  for  the  assertion 
would  then  be,  that,  according  to  his  mode  of  inteqiretat- 
ing  the  ^or,  Christ  was  raised  again  because  we  had  got  a 
sense  of  pardon  !  It  would  surely  be  edifying  to  receive 
from  Mr.  Erskine's  pen  some  canons  of  interpretation  and 
of  criticism.  The  first  and  last  of  them,  I  suspect,  would 
be,  "  Always  criticise  and  interpret  in  such  a  manner,  as 
just  to  serve  the  purpose  in  hand." 

2.  Secondly y  Mr.  Erskine  has  no  title  to  say  that  "  Jesus 
never  could  have  been  raised  luiless  we  had  been  pardon- 
ed." He  confounds  the  expiation  of  guilt  with  th.?  pardon 
of  the  guilty — the  securing  of  pardon  with  the  application 
of  it  to  individuals.  He  goes  on  the  supposition  that  a 
sin  may  be  actually  pardoned,  before  it  is  actually  com- 
mitted— that  a  thing  may  be  pushed  out,  before  it  is  taken 


APPENDIX.  4,07 

in,  annihilated  before  it  is  created,  possessed  before  the  pos- 
sessor has  any  existence.  A  right  to  pardon  is  not  iden- 
tical with  the  reception  of  pardon.  The  purchase  of  a  gift 
is  not  the  same  with  the  bestowal  of  the  gift.  He  who 
promises  a  benefit  will  perform  his  promise  if  he  be  faith- 
ful, but  the  promise  and  the  performance  are  two  different 
things.  When  a  man  by  endurance  of  penalty,  or  by  any  other 
service,  works  out  deliverance  for  another,  it  does  not  fol- 
low of  course  that  the  deliverance  wrought  out  is  equiva- 
lent to  the  deliverance  conferred.  The  gospel  feast,  as 
shadowed  forth  in  Mr.  Erskine's  favourite  parable  of  the 
Great  Supper,  was  all  provided  ;  but  those  for  whom  it  was 
provided  did  not  partake  of  it  till  they  were  "  brought  and 
compelled  to  come  in."  Jesus  Christ  undei  took  to  save 
sinners — he  did  and  suflFered  what  was  necessary  for  this 
end — he  finished  the  work  which  the  Father  had  given  him 
to  do — ^he  "  obtained"  by  his  meritorious  obedience,  "  eter- 
nal redemption"  for  us — and  having  obtained  eternal  re- 
demption for  us,  he  passed  into  the  heavens,  and  is  exalted 
to  the  right  hand  of  God,  "  to  be  a  Priuce  and  a  Sa- 
viour"— let  Mr.  Erskine  note  this — "for  to  yz  we  Repentance 
unto  Israel,  arxA.  forgiveness  of  sins."*  This  is  a  sufficient 
answer  to  all  Mr.  Erskine's  quibbling — it  is  nothing  more 
respectable, — about  putting  into  prison,  and  letting  out  of 
prison. 

But,  thirdly,  Mr.  Erskine  totally  perverts  the  plain  and 
obvious  meaning  of  the  passage  in  question.     Christ  "was 

"  Acts  V.  31 — It  may  be  thought  by  some  that  if  the  pardon 
is  secured,  there  can  be  no  great  harm  in  saying  that  we  are 
pardoned.  There  is  just  the  harm  of  saying  what  is  not  true  in 
fact,  or  sound  in  doctrine.  And  it  is  not  only  destructive  of  that 
connexion  which  is  established  between  forgiveness  and  faith, 
but  gives  additional  countenance  to  the  dogma  of  uniccrsal  for- 
giveness. 


408  APPENDIX. 

delivered  for  our  offences,"  that  is,  says  this  commentator, 
"  he  was  delivered  because  we  had  offended."  And  to 
hialie  his  meaning'  look  the  more  plausible,  he  introduces 
it  with  averring:  that  the  expression  "  cannot  mean,  he  was 
delivered  in  order  that  we  might  offend."  And  so  his 
argument  is,  that  since  it  has  not  the  one  meaning  it  must 
have  the  other !  I  must  take  the  liberty  of  asserting  that 
neither  meaning  is  the  correct  one.  Doubtless  the  apostle 
does  not  affirm  that  Christ  was  delivered  that  we  might 
offend :  nobody  ever  said  so,  and  why  Mr.  Erskine  should 
have  imagined  any  such  thing,  he  himself  can  best  tell.  But 
if  Christ  was  not  delivered  that  we  might  offend,  it  is  as 
true  that  he  was  not  delivered  merely  because  we  had 
offended.  Our  having  offended,  and  his  having  suffered 
death,  are  not  necessarily  connected.  Though  we  had 
offended,  we  might  have  been  left  to  suffer  death  for  it 
in  our  own  persons.  Christ  suffered  death  because  we 
had  offended,  and  because  he  imdertook  to  redeem  us, 
and  because  his  suffering  was  essential  to  the  accomplish- 
ment of  his  undertaking.  That  is  the  right  state  of  the 
case.  And  hence  we  see  that  the  object,  or  end,  or  final 
cause,  of  Christ's  being  delivered,  was  the  expiation  of  our 
^ilt,  here  elliptically  expressed  thus, — "for  our  offences." 
Christ  was  delivered  ^br  effectuating  that  pui-pose.  Then 
in  like  manner,  he  was  raised  again  for  our  justification. 
Justification  was  the  end  or  object  for  which  his  resurrec- 
tion took  place.  If  there  is  a  "  because"  in  the  case,  it 
means  that  our  justification  was  the  final  cause  of  his 
rising.  Unless  he  had  risen,  our  justification  could  not 
have  been  accomplished  or  manifested ;  or,  he  rose  in  or- 
der that  our  justification  might  be  accomplished,  or  in 
order  that  its  accomplishment  might  be  proved  and  evi- 
denced. 

The  original  word  rendered  for  in  our  version,  is  i'«  ; 


APPENDIX.  409 

and  it  is  not  an  uncommon  thing  for  ?<«  to  occur  twice  in 
the  same  sentence,  in  reference  to  two  different  clauses, 
and  though  it  has  the  same  general  import,  to  require  mo- 
dification according  to  the  word  or  phrase  which  it  go- 
verns. For  example,  in  John  xii.  30.  our  Saviour,  in 
refex-ence  to  the  voice  that  came  from  heaven,  said  "This 
voice  came  not  because  of  me,  but  for  your  sakes."  ou  V 
ri/.i — aXXa,  S('  vftc;,  not  for  me,  but  for  you ;  not  to  con- 
vince me  of  ray  Father's  love,  but  that  you  might  believe 
in  me,  as  the  Son  of  God ; — in  Rom.  xi.  28.  "  As  concern- 
ing the  gospel,  they  are  enemies  for  your  sake — 5/  y^aaj ; 
but  as  touching  the  election,  they  are  beloved  for  the  fa- 
thers' sake — 5,fl!  ms  ■^^■■Ti^x" — i.  e.  The  Jews  by  rejecting 
the  gospel,  were  held  as  enemies  to  God,  and  this  has 
been  oven-uled  for  the  calling  and  the  benefit  of  you  Gen- 
tiles ;  whereas  in  respect  to  the  election  of  that  people  in 
Abraham,  they  are  yet  destined  to  experience  much  kind- 
ness and  mercy  from  God,  for  the  sake  of  their  fathers, 
ivho  had  been  so  distinguished ; — and  in  Rom.  xiii.  5. 
"  Wherefore  you  must  needs  be  subject  not  only  for  \^  rath, 
2'ct  TJiv  o^y/iv,  but  also  for  conscience'  sake,  5,a  t>jv  (ruv-.i'/i7ivi^ 
or,  you  must  be  subject  unto  the  higher  powers,  not  only  in 
order  to  avoid  their  anger  and  resentment,  but  also  in 
order  to  maintain  a  good  conscience  towards  God.  In 
all  these  instances,  ^'«  means,  on  account  of,  for  the  sake 
of,  in  order  to  ;  but  the  precise  modification  of  that  general 
meaning,  is  to  be  ascertained  by  the  nature  of  the  subject 
which  is  affected  by  the  preposition.  And  so  in  Rom.  iv. 
25,  "  Christ  was  delivered  for  our  offences,"  or,  in  order 
to  expiate  them,  and  "  he  was  raised  again  for  our  justifi- 
■cation,"  or  in  order  to  secure  and  manifest  it. 


d 


410  APPENDIX. 


Note  I,  page  112. 

"  lu  the  proj)liecy  of  the  new  covenant  hj  Jeremiah 
xxxi.  33,"  saj^s  Mr.  Erskine,*  "  the  blessing-  promised  is, '  I 
"vvill  put  my  law  in  their  inward  parts,  and  write  it  in  their 
hearts.'  And  look  also  what  the  instrument  is, — what  the 
pen  is  by  A^hich  the  law  is  to  be  written  on  the  heart ; 
',fo7'  I  will  forg-ive  their  iniquity,  and  I  will  remember 
their  sin  no  more.'  But  the  great  blessing  itself  is  to 
have  the  law  ^vi-itten  in  their  heart." 

I  wonder  that  Mi*.  Erskine  does  not  see  how  directly 
and  conclusively  this  very  passage  that  he  quotes  beare 
agaiust  his  theory  of  universal  pardon.  In  his  eagerness 
to  prove  that  holiness  is  "  the  great  blessing,"  he  over- 
looks every  thing  else,  and  adduces  language  that  con- 
demns himself.  In  the  Jirst  place,  what  title  has  he  to  say 
that,  "  in  the  prophecy  of  the  new  covenant  by  Jeremiah, 
the  blessing  promised  is,  I  will  put,  &c.  ?"  Does  not  the 
other  sentence  he  has  put  down  show  that  forgiveness 
of  iniquity  is  also  a  blessing,  promised  as  distinctly  fis  the 
one  to  wliich  he  would  direct  our  exclusive  regard  ?  It  is 
not,  I  have  forgiven  the  whole  race  of  Adam,  but  I  ivill 
forgive  those  ivith  whom  the  new  covenant  is  to  be  made. 
In  the  second  place,  is  the  forgiveness  of  iniquity  mention- 
ed as  already  past  ?  Or  is  it  not  mentioned  as  a  thing  yet 
to  be  bestowed  ?  Is  not  the  phraseology  in  both  cases  the 
very  same  ?  Is  not  the  future  tense  employed  throughout 
the  M'hole  prophecy  ?  Is  it  not  "  I  will  put  my  law  in  their  J 
hearts,"—"  I  will  he  their  God,"—"  they  shall  all  know! 
me,"  and  "  Iivill  forgive  their  iniquity  ?"  And,  thirdlt^A 
are  not  all  these  blessings  united  together  ?    Are  not  they| 

•  Essay,  p.  Iviii. 


k 


APPENDIX.  411 

in  the  same  well  ordered  and  sure  covenant  ?  Are  not  they 
the  subjects  of  the  same  faithful  promise  ?  Is  not  renewal 
and  sauctification  to  be  granted,  for  or  because  forgiveness 
is  to  be  granted  ?  Is  not  the  one  as  certain  as  the  other  ? 
Is  not  the  writing  of  the  law  to  take  place  just  as  surely  as 
the  jjcn  or  instriuuent  for  preparing  the  operation  is  to  be 
provided  ?  And,  therefore,  if  forgiveness  is  a  blessing  of 
the  new  covenant,  does  it  not  inevitably  follow  that,  if 
forgiveness  is  the  privilege  of  all  men,  all  men  must  be 
sanctified  and  saved — so  that  universal  salvation,  neces- 
sarily flo^^s  from  universal  j)ardon  ? 


Note  K,  p.  117. 

The  passage  to  Avhich  this  note  refers  is  considered  bv 
some  of  those  Avho  maintain  universal  pardon,  as  very 
strongly  iu  their  favour ;  on  -svhat  ground,  I  am  greatly 
at  a  loss  to  discover.  In  ray  opinion,  it  is  clearly  and  de- 
cisively against  them.  They  say,  "  God  toas  in  Christ 
veconcihng  the  world  imto  himself,"  &c.  and  therefore, 
the  reconciliation  Avas  abeady  effected  and  past.  And  so 
it  was  as  it  respected  the  apostles  Paul  and  Timothy,  who 
therefore  say  of  themselves,  "  All  things  are  of  God,  ^vlio 
hath  reconciled  us  to  himself  and  Jesus  Christ."  But 
God  did  more  than  reconcile  them  to  himself — he  made 
them  ministers  of  the  reconciliation — of  that  gospel 
Avhose  great  design  was  to  reconcile  sinners  to  God  by 
Jesus  Christ  the  Mediatoi",  and  Peace-maker :  and,  there- 
fore, they  add,  "  and  hath  giyen  to  us  the  ministry  of  re- 
conciliation." Now,  M'hat  was  the  ministry  of  reconcilia- 
tion ?  It  rested  on  this  great  fact,  that  "  God  was  in  Christ 
reconciling  the  world  to  himself."    The  ^vorld  had  not  yet 


412  APPENDIX. 

been  reconciled,  othei'M'ise  the  Apostle  would  have  stated 
it  as  a  perfected  work,  and  said  that  God  had  reconciled 
the  world  to  himself,  and  that  he  was  commissioned  to  de- 
clare this  truth.  But  it  was  the  great  end  of  his  ministry 
to  bring  about  this  reconciliation,  acting  as  a  messenger 
from  God,  as  an  ambassador  for  Christ.  And,  accordingly, 
he  says,  "  now  then  we  are  ambassadors  for  Christ,  as 
though  God  did  beseech*  by  us,  "  We  pray  you  in  Christ's 
stead,  be  ye  reconciled  to  God."  What !  if  all  men  were 
aheady  reconciled  to  God,  would  God  yet  send  his  Apos- 
tles to  speak  and  preach  and  exhort,  as  if  no  reconciliation 
had  taken  place  ?  The  thing  cannot  for  a  moment  be  sup- 
posed. The  commission  given  to  the  Apostles  proceeds 
necessarily  on  the  fact  that  there  was  still  enmity  between 
man  and  God,  that  the  ministry  of  reconciliation  was  re- 
quisite, that  those  who  were  appointed  to  it  should  use 
all  entreaty  to  prevail  upon  sinners  to  be  at  peace  with 
their  Maker,  and  that  the  doctrine  of  Christ's  meritorious 
obedience  to  the  death  in  their  stead  should  be  held  out 
as  the  ground  on  i\hich  they  might  be  successfully  urged. 
And  the  commission  given  to  Paul  and  his  fellow-labour- 
ers, is  the  very  commission  which  is  still  given  to  those 
who  are  raised  up  or  sent  forth  to  proclaim  the  gospel ; 
they  are  to  beseech  sinful  men  to  be  reconciled  to  God 
through  the  blood  of  an  accepted  atonement  and  righte- 
ousness ;  and  it  is  only  such  as  yield  to  the  exhortation 
that  can  hope  to  be  actually  reconciled  unto  God,  and  not 
to  have  their  trespasses  imjiuted  unto  them — all  who  re- 

'.  *  You  is  in  our  authorized  version,  but  it  has  no  corres- 
ponding word  in  the  original ;  and  should  not  have  been  in- 
serted, for  the  apostle  is  announcing  what  he  was  authorized 
and  appointed  to  say,  not  to  the  Corinthian  converts,  but  in 
general,  to  them  that  were  afar  off,  and  enemies  to  God,  and 
still  in  their  sins. 

6 


APPENDIX.  413 

ject  the  message  and  turn  a  deaf  ear  to  the  invitation 
remain  in  their  sins,  the  wrath  of  God  abideth  upon  them, 
they  are  unforgiven. 

How  absurd  is  it  in  Mr.  Ersldne  to  quote  the  19th  verse 
in  this  form,  "  God  was  in  Christ  reconciling  the  world 
unto  himself,  not  imputing  unto  them  their  trespasses  !"* 
Does  he  really  mean  to  say  that  the  loorld  signifies  in  Scrip- 
ture every  one  human  being  ?  When  the  Pharisees  said 
of  Christ,  "  Behold,  the  world  is  gone  after  him,"  did  the 
Pharisees  allude  to  the  people  on  the  other  side  of  the 
globe  as  well  as  the  people  of  Jerusalem  ?  And  when  Paul 
told  the  Roman  converts,  that  their  "  faith  was  spoken  of 
through  the  tvliole  world"  did  he  intend  to  be  understood 
as  sajriug  that  every  man,  woman,  and  child  upon  the  face 
of  the  earth  made  mention  of  their  faith  '^  But  if  the 
Apostle's  object  was  to  assure  the  Coriutluaxis  and  otliers 
that  all  men  ai'e  actually  pardoned,  is  it  possible  to  suppose 
that  he  would  have  used  the  phi-aseology  he  here  employs  V 
Would  he  have  said  that  "  God  was  in  Christ  r-concilinrj 
the  world  unto  himself,  not  t/wpw^m^' their  treop;v:os  unto 
them  ?"  Or  would  he  not  have  rather  said  that  ood  hath 
in  Christ  reconciled  the  world  unto  himself,  and  will  never 
impute  their  trespasses  unto  them — just  as  he  had  said  a 
little  before  (v.  18,)  "  God  hath  reconciled  us"  (i.  e.  him- 
self and  his  fellow  Apostles)  "  to  himself  by  Jesus  Christ?" 
And  then  why  did  not  Mr.  Ersl-iine  quote  the  rest  of  the 
passage,  that  it  might  be  seen  how  it  contradicted  liis  inter- 
pretation of  what  went  before,  seeing  that  the  Apostles 
were  to  beseech  the  world  to  be  reconciled  to  God — which 
they  were  surely  not  so  foolish  as  to  do,  it  reconciliation  had 
already  taken  place,  and  which,  on  that  supposition,  God 
would  certainly  have  never  commissioned  them  to  do  ? 

I  may  add,  that  Mr.  Erskine  is  never  restrained  by  the 

*  Introductory  Essay,  p.  xx^'i. 


414  APPENDIX. 

meaning-  of  a  passage — for  if  it  has  not,  he  coolly  gives  it, 
tlie  meaning  that  suits  liim.  Thus  because  it  is  said,  "  Be- 
hold the  Lamb  of  God  that  taketh  away  the  sin  of  the 
world,"  he  very  gravely  gives  an  amended  edition  of  the 
words  by  making  them  say  that  Christ  hath  taken  a-nay 
the  sins  of  the  world.  And  even  if  it  be  said  that  Christ 
hath  made  an  end  of  sin,  what  Marrant  from  Scripture,  or 
from  reason,  or  from  fact,  has  Mr.  Erskine  to  understand 
that  expression  in  its  strict  literality  ?  Is  it  the  fact,  that 
sin  exists  no  more  in  the  world,  and  that  when  Me  call 
murder  and  robbery  sin,  we  are  guilty  of  a  misnomer,  every 
kind,  degree,  and  vestige  of  sin  having  been  washed  away 
by  the  blood  of  atonement  ?  Then  let  transubstantiation 
be  admitted.  But  if  it  is  not  the'matter  of  fact  that  Christ 
has  literally  made  an  end  of  sin — does  not  reason  reclaim 
against  any  one,  who  would  construe  such  a  declaration 
in  such  a  way  as  to  make  it  nullify  the  evidence  of  his 
senses  ?  And  is  it  not  profene  to  apply  to  the  Language 
of  Scripture,  a  mode  of  verbal  construction  which  is 
equally  inconsistent  with  all  that  we  see  around  us,  and 
with  the  manner  in  which  we  treat  similar  statements  of 
men  in  similar  circumstances  ?  But  what  is  all  this  to  Mr. 
Ei'skine  ?  He  is  determined  to  uphold  his  dogma  of  uni- 
versal pardon ;  and  there  must  be  no  hindrance  or  ob- 
stacle to  his  com-se  of  assertion — jiroof  is  out  of  the  ques- 
tion— even  in  all  that  we  are  accustomed  to  hold  both  ra- 
tional and  sacred. 

I  may  here  notice  Mr.  Erskine's  Socinian  idea  of  recon- 
ciliation. "  I  ought  to  observe,"  says  he,*  "  that  the 
word  reconcile  has  a  sense  in  the  New  Testament  some- 
what different  from  wliat  is  usually  attached  to  it  in  ordi- 
nary language.  The  Bible  never  speaks  of  God  being  re- 
conciled, but  only  as  reconciling :  to  reconcile  is  the  act  of 

*  Unconditional  Freeness,  p.  174. 


I 
i 


APPENDIX.  415 

an  injured  party  who  forgives  ;  to  be  reconciled,  is  the  con- 
dition of  one  ^I'ho  has  committed  an  oifence,  and  has  oh- 
tained  forgiveness.  See  Matt.  v.  23,  24.  '  If  thou  bring 
thy  gift  to  the  altar,  and  there  remember  that  thy  brother 
hatli  ought  against  tliee  (hath  ground  of  complaint  against 
thee,)  leave  there  thy  gift  before  the  altar  and  go  thy  way ; 
first  be  reconciled  to  thy  brother,  (obtain  his  forgiveness) 
then  come  and  offer  thy  gift.'  " 

Here  Mi'.  Erskine,  as  usual,  is  wrong  in  his  doctrine, 
and,  once  more,  he  yields  up  his  dogma  of  universal  par- 
don. 

1.  First,  he  is  wrong  in  his  doctrine.  It  may  be  true 
that  the  Bible  does  not  speak,  totidem  verbis,  of  God  being 
reconciled;  but  it  follows  not  that  the  Bible  does  not 
countenance  and  inculcate  the  idea  contained  in  that 
phrase.  Mr.  Erskine  knows  this,  and  he  should  not  have 
concealed  it,  whatever  attempts  he  might  have  made  to 
explain  away  what  he  could  not  deny,  and  what  he  should 
have  been  candid  enough  to  confess.  God  is  represented 
as  "  angry  with  the  wicked,"  * — as  "  hating  the  workers 
of  iniquity,"  -f — as  threatening  to  "  render  indignation  and 
wrath  against  every  soul  of  man  that  doth  evil."  \  And 
he  is  also  represented  as  "  turning  himself  from  the  fierce- 
ness of  his  anger,  and  taking  away  all  his  wrath,"  § — as 
"  pacified  towards "  his  people  "  for  all  that  they  had 
done,"  II — as  being  "  merciful  to  their  unrighteousness, 
and  remembering  their  sins  and  their  iniquities  no  more.lT" 
What  is,  and  what  can  be,  the  meaning  of  all  this,  but  that 
God's  being  reconciled  to  sinners  is  a  doctrine  taught  in 
the  Bible  ?  jlnd  in  many  places  the  death  of  Christ  is 
stated  to  be  the  method  by  which  that  reconciliation  is 

•  Ps.  vii.  11.  +  Ps.  V.  5.  t  Rom.  ii.  8,  9. 

§  Ps.  Ixxxv.  3.  II  Ezek.  xvi.  63.       ^  Heb.  viii.  1?. 


( 


416  APPENDIX. 

brought  about.  "  We  liave  redemption  through  his  blood, 
the  forgiveness  of  sins," — which  forgiveness  is  the  expres- 
sion of  his  being  pacified,  or  reconciled.  And  in  the  very 
passage  on  which  Mr.  Erskiue  lays  so  much  emphasis,  as 
favourable  to  his  views,  though  it  is  said  that  God  was  in 
Christ  "  reconciling  the  world  to  himself,"  the  reconcilia- 
tion there  spoken  of  is  a  reconciliation  of  God  to  sinners ; 
for  it  is  immediately  explained  in  these  words — "  not  im- 
puting their  trespasses  unto  them," — it  being  perfectly 
evident,  that  whoever  is  reconciled  to  another  that  has 
offended  him,  declares  and  effects  it  by  forgiving  his  of- 
fence. * 

2.  Mr.  Erskine,  in  the  extract  I  have  made  above,  gives 
up   his  doctrine   of  universal   pardon.     The  passage  he 
quotes  from    Matt.   v.   23,   24,  might  be   used   to   show 
that  reconciliation    may   signify  the  regard  which   God 
has  towards  sinners,  when  he  pardons  them  for  Christ's 
sake ;    for   tliough  the    bringer   of    the  gift   is    exhort- 
ed to  be  rto-nciled,  the  meaning   evidently   is,   that   he 
should  be  reconciled  to  the  offended  brother,  by  getting 
the  offended  brother  to  be  reconciled  to  him.    But  I  refer        ■ 
to  it  especially  as  explained  by  Mr.  Erskine  in  the  second         I 
parenthesis  that  he  has  inserted — "  first  be  reconciled  to         I 
thy  brother,  (^obtain  his  forgiveness,)  then  come  and  offer 
thy  gift."     This  he  brings  forward  as  an  illustration  of 
the  import  of  the  passage  in  2  Cor.  v.,  "  the  expressions 
of  which  he  begs  the  reader  to  consider  attentively."  Now 
this  is  one  of  the  expressions,  and  a  most  important  one  it 
is — "  be  ye  reconciled  to  God"     If  Mr.  Erskine  is  true  to         « 
his   own  illustration,  the  Apostle  must  unquestionably        I 
mean,  "  aim  at  obtaining  from  God  the  forgiveness  of  your 

*  See  Magee  on  Atonement  and  Sacrifice,  vol.  i,  pp.  26,  202, 
3d  edit.  ;  and  Whitby's  Commentary  on  Rom.  v.  10. 


APPENDIX.  417 

sins."  For  once  he  is  rig-ht.  That  is  precisely  the  com- 
mission given  to  Paul  and  his  fellow-labourers.  Man  had 
violated  God's  law,  and  there  was,  in  consequence  of  this, 
enmity  between  God  and  man.  But  God  provided  an 
atonement.  He  sent  Christ  to  "  make  reconciliation  for 
iniquities ;"  and  to  his  Apostles  he  committed  the  minis- 
try of  reconciliation,  and  he  commanded  them  to  say  to 
sinners  who  had  forfeited  God's  tavour,  "  Be  ye  reconciled 
to  God," — that  is,  says  Mr.  ErsMne,  "  obtain  his  forgive- 
ness." Now,  as  it  would  be  utterly  ludicrous  to  exhort 
our  fellow-men  to  set  themselves  to  obtain  what  they  al- 
ready possessed,  and  as  it  is  impious  to  suppose  any  such 
exhortation  to  proceed  from  God,  we  are  shut  up  to  the 
conclusion,  that  all  dinners  are  not  yet  pardoned  ;  and  for 
this  conclusion  we  have  Mr.  Erskine's  own  explicit  autho- 
rity ! 


Note  L.,  p.  172. 

There  is  another  exposition  of  this  passage  A\hich  many 
persons  prefer.  It  proceeds  on  the  supposition  that  the 
word  itax.lv,  translated  "  given,"  does  not  mean  an  absolute 
gift,  so  that  the  thing  given  is  accepted  and  becomes  ours ; 
but  that  it  is  offered,  proposed,  laid  do^vn  to  us,  and  that 
we  may  either  take  or  reject  it.  That  the  word  "hiieof^i  has 
sometimes  this  signification,  I  would  not  positively  deny, 
tliough  I  am  not  quite  convinced  by  any  examples  I  have 
yet  seen.  But  my  objection  to  it  arises  fi-omthis,  that  the 
Apostle,  speaking  of  himself,  and  of  those  to  M'hom  he 
wrote,  speaks  of  such  as  do  already  "  believe  on  the  name 
of  the  Son  of  God ;"  and,  therefore,  have  actually  obtained 
the  life  to  which  sJs/xev  refers,  as  being  "  in  the  Son"  wliom 


i 


418  APPENDIX. 

they  have  taken  by  faith  into  their  spiritual  system.  Both 
interpretations,  however,  are  alike  unfavourable  to  uni- 
versal pardon,  and  to  that  belief  which  every  man,  it  is 
said,  may  entertain  that  he  has  been  truly  and  fully  for- 
given. 


Not«  M.  p.  179. 

I  do  not  find  in  any  of  IVIr.  Erskine's  pages  a  distinct 
avowal  of  a=»  hat  is  here  alluded  to.  But  there  are  many 
passages  Tihich  lead  to  it,  and  give  it  countenance.  And 
among  the  disciples  of  his  school,  some  are  found  to  in- 
dulge in  speculations  and  to  sport  opinions  Aihich  attach 
little  or  no  permanent  value  to  the  mediation  of  Jesus 
Christ.  Christ  died  to  procure  pardon  :  but  that  work  is 
over,  and  every  one  who  believes — not  every  one  who  be- 
lieves in  Christ,  and  is  united  to  him  by  faith,  and  regards 
him  as  the  channel  of  all  communications  from  the  eternal 
source  of  good — but  every  one  who  believes  that  his  sins 
are  pardoned,  has  obtained  the  talisman  by  which  he  may 
secure  every  other  blessing  that  can  tend  to  make  him 
either  holy  or  happy.  And  the  privileged  few  "viho  have 
exerted  their  power  to  acquire  this  belief,  seem  to  look 
upon  the  Christian  system  as  a  sort  of  vail  or  curtain  be- 
tM-een  God  and  men,  and  to  suppose  that  if  this  were  but 
draM'u  aside,  men  would  get  freely  in  upon  the  divine  es- 
sence, and  feast,  without  interruption,  upon  the  divine  love. 
Where  this  folly  may  end,  or  how  for  it  may  be  carried,  it 
is  impossible  to  tell.  But  it  is  working  with  individuals 
who  scruple  not  to  say  that  we  may  hold  intercourse 
with  God  without  the  intervention  of  a  Mediator :  and 
when  I  look  to  the  writings  of  INIr.  Erskine,  I  am  struck 


APPENDIX.  419 

with  the  elements  of  this  mystical  heresy,  and  must  hold 
him  accountable  in  a  great  measure  for  the  mischief  whicli 
it  may  produce. 


r 


Notes  N  and  O,  pp.  205,  and  214. 

It  is  not  a  little  extraordinaiy  that,  though  IMr.  Erskine 
maintains  that  the  forfeiture  produced  by  Adam's  tirhit 
transgression  was  altogether  done  away  by  the  sacrifice  of 
Christ,  and  appeals  to  the  fifth  chapter  of  the  Epistle  to 
the  Romans  as  his  principal  proof,  he  yet  holds  language 
respecting  the  import  of  that  chapter,  which  wholly  de- 
stroys it  as  a  proof  of  his  doctrine.     For  he  says,* 

"  In  the  preceding  chapter,  (i.  e.  chap,  v.)  the  Apostle 
had  been  explaining  the  natiu'e  of  the  analogy  which  sub- 
sisted between  Christ  and  Adam,  as  the  representative  heads 
oftJieir  respective  families." 

Now,  if  the  whole  human  race  constituted  the  family  of 
Christ,  as  well  as  of  Adam,  how  could  he  speak  of  their 
respective  families  ?  Or  how  could  he  speak  of  each  of 
them  being  a  representative  head  of  these  families  ?  Ac- 
cording to  his  general  doctrine,  the  family  of  Christ  is  pre- 
cisely, and  without  an  exception,  the  family  of  Adam.  And 
yet  here  he  pronounces  them  to  be  two  families — each  of 
them  represented  by  a  different  head !  The  two  families 
are  identified,  and  yet  not  identical !  They  are  but  one  fa- 
mily— ^notwithstanding  which  they  are  two  "  respective 
families,"  the  one  having  Adam,  and  the  other  Christ,  as 
its  "  representative  !"  Here  is  some  strange  confusion  of 
ideas — which  Mr.  Erskine  does  not  extricate  by  the  fol- 

*  Unconditional  Freenqss,  p.  37. 


■■■* 

i 


420  APPENDIX. 

lowing-  seHteuce,  which  comes  immediately  after  the  one  i 
have  quoted. 

"  He  (the  Apostle)  had  been  speaking  of  the  imiversaUty 
of  the  sentence  of  death  which  has  fallen  upon  the  de- 
scendants of  Adam,  in  consequence  of  their  federal  connex- 
ion with  him,  as  illustriitive  of  the  restoration  that  is  de- 
rived through  Christ.  Then  there  was  one  great  restora- 
tion opposed  to  one  great  forfeitur  e"  &c. 

What !  "  One  great  restoration,"  a  "  universal  restora- 
tion" by  Christ — not  of  his  own  family — not  of  the  family 
of  which  he  was  the  "  representative  head" — not  of  the 
family  with  which  he  had  a  "  federal  connexion" — but  of 
another  family — of  a  family  of  which  he  was  not  the  repre- 
sentative head — and  with  which  he  had  not  a  federal  con- 
nexion !    This  needs  an  explanation  which  I  profess  my- 
self unable  to  give  on  any  consistent  principle.     Nor  is 
the  difficulty  lessened  by  the  care  with  Avhich  Mi-.  Erskine 
avoids  expressing  the  federal  connexion  \^hich  Ciirist  has 
with  the  family  that  is  not  his,  but  Adam's.     That  must 
be  considered  as  necessarily,  though  not  palpably,  implied 
in  the  sentence.   And  if  Christ  has  taken  every  man  into  a 
federal  connexion — if  he  is  closely  and  indissolubly  related 
to  all  the  race  of  Adam  as  Adam  himself  was,  by  special  or 
divinely  appointed  covenant — how  comes  it  that  he  goes  no 
farther  than  certainly  conferring  upon  them  all,  restoration  to 
animal  hfe  ?  Are  any  of  Christ's  covenanted  family  to  live 
for  ever  unsanctified  and  miserable  ?     Are  a  large  propor- 
tion of  them  to  suffer  such  a  fate,  and  to  be  left  to  suifer 
it,  by  the  short-coming  of  their  divine  parent,  their  federal 
liead  ?     Is  this  the  honour  that  Mr.   Erskine  puts  upon 
God  and  Christ,  and  the  Avork  of  redemption  which  he  is 
so  anxious  to  magnify  ?     Is  it  come  to  this,  that  many  of 
those  whom  the  God  of  love  had  given  Christ  to  redeem, 
and  whom  Christ  died  to  redeem,  and  who  were  taken  in- 


APPENDIX.  421 

to  covenant  for  that  purpose,  shall  yet  finally  perish  ?  Or 
is  Mr.  Erskine,  by  these  "  ambiguous  giviugs  out,"  load- 
ing' on  his  readers  to  a  more  easy  reception  of  the  doctrine 
of  that  "  one  great  and  universal  restoration,"  which  is 
taught  in  the  Unitarian  School  of  theology  ?  He  may  not 
intend  this — but  if  such  Tvere  his  intention,  I  do  not  see 
that  he  could  moi'e  effectually  accomplish  it,  than  by  adopt- 
ing the  style  of  language,  and  the  reasoning,  to  which  he 
has  had  recourse. 

The  reasoning  of  Mr.  Erskine,  however,  is  not  more 
faulty  than  his  criticism.  In  reference  to  the  point  at  issue, 
he  brings  forward  a  new  interpretation  of  Rora.  vi.  1,  as 
bearing  on  what  is  contained  in  the  5th  chapter,  and  sup- 
porting the  dogma  of  universal  pardon.  The  verse  stands 
thus  in  our  common  trauslation — "  What  shall  we  say 
then  ?  Shall  we  continue  in  sin,  that  grace  may  abound  ?" 
And  Mr.  Erskine  thus  paraphrases  it — "  Shall  we  con- 
tinue under  condemnation  until  grace  be  also  multiplied, 
until  the  acts  of  atonement  equal  the  niunber  of  the  for- 
feitures ?  Not  so ;  how  shall  we  Avho  have  ab'eady  died 
under  the  sentence  of  sin,  yet  continue  under  it,  noM'  that 
we  ai'e  restored  to  life ';'"  This  paraphrase  labours  under 
three  capital  defects : 

1.  It  takes  for  granted  that  Adam's  sin  lost  nothing  for 
his  posterity  but  life  temporal,  and  that  Christ's  death  pro- 
cured the  reversal  of  the  penalty  for  all.  The  idea  of  tem- 
poral death  being  the  only  penalty  of  Adam's  transgres- 
sion, Ml".  Erskine  more  explicitly  brings  out  in  his  pre- 
face, though,  as  usual,  it  is  all  ipse  dixit.     He  says, 

"  The  penalty,  according  to  the  record,  is  this — '  In  the 
(lay  thou  eatest  thereof  thou  shalt  [why  omit  surely?^  die.' 
Mi'a,  by  tlieu-  traditions,  have  converted  this  penalty  into 
threefold  death — death  temporrJ,  death  spiritual,  and  defith 
eternal.     But  death  spiritual  is  nothing  more  or  less  than 


k 


422  APPENDIX. 

the  sin  itself — for  sin  is  the  shutting  God  out  from  the 
heart,  and  that  is  shutting-  out  spiritual  life.  And,  there- 
fore, if  I  am  told  that  spiritual  death  is  the  punishment  of 
sin,  I  might  ans^'er.  Then  sin  is  the  punishment  of  spi- 
ritual death,  for  they  are  one  and  the  same  thing.  And 
death  eternal  is  not  a  punishment  under  the  law,  but  under 
the  gospel.  The  death  denounced  by  the  law  was  just  the 
separation  of  soul  and  body.  This  does  not,  however, 
make  the  penalty  nugatory,  for  the  soul  which  had  shut 
out  God  must  have  been  miserable  in  its  state  of  separation 
from  the  body.  This  was  the  sentence  on  the  whole  race," 
&c. — Pref.  p.  xlvii. 

Mr.  Erskine  does  not  seem  to  be  aware  that  his  opinion 
about  the  penalty  of  Adam's  transgression  was  held  ages 
ago,  and  ages  ago  refuted ;  and  he  does  not  seem  to  be 
aware  that  any  thing  more  is  requisite  to  gain  admission 
for  it,  than  his  own  unsupported  averment.  "  Death  eter- 
nal," says  he,  "  is  not  a  punishment  under  the  law,  but 
imder  the  gospel."  I  assert  the  very  contrary,  and  I  ap- 
peal to  Scripture — both  to  its  explicit  declarations  and  to 
the  %4ews  which  it  every  where  gives  of  the  "  exceeding 
sinfulness  of  sin."  But  what  does  Mr.  Erskine  mean  by 
saying  that  "  death  spiritual  is  nothing  more  or  less  than 
the  sin  itself?"  He  does  not  appear  to  understand  either 
the  subject  in  general,  or  the  terms  which  he  is  himself 
employing.  "  The  sin"  by  which  the  first  covenant  was 
broken — the  sin  committed  by  Adam  as  the  "federal" 
head  of  his  posterity — was,  his  eating  the  forbidden  fruit, 
or  disobeying  the  special  commandment,  on  which  his  own 
Avelfai'e  and  that  of  his  posterity  were  made  to  depend. 
But  the  "  spiritual  death"  which  followed  "was  quite  a  dif- 
ferent thing,  and  consists  in  the  moral  corruption  with 
which  the  nature  of  man  was  thereby  and  thenceforth  so 
pervaded,  as  to  be  at  enmity  with  God,  and  only  evil  con- 


k 


i 


APPENDIX.  423 

tinually — and  necessarily  involved  in  this  state  of  aliena- 
tion and  depravity,  till  restored  by  the  regenerating  ener- 
gies of  God's  Spirit  operating  in  virtue  of  Christ's  sacri- 
fice. Supposing  that  Adam's  first  sin  was  "  the  shutting 
God  out  from  the  heart,"  hoAv  could  that  shut  God  out 
from  the  hearts  of  all  his  descendants,  unless,  according  to 
the  "  common  phraseology,"  they  "  sinned  m  him  and  fell 
with  him  ?"  Was  not  this  a  consequence  of  the  fall,  as 
well  as  the  dissolution  of  soul  and  body  was  ?  And  what 
good  reason  can  be  assigned  for  calling  the  form 'r  a  natu- 
ral consequence,  and  the  latter  an  appointed  consequence, 
when  each  of  them  resulted  from  the  same  dispensation, 
and  followed  the  same  breach  of  the  same  covenant  V  They 
were  both  penal :  the  penalties  Avere  fixed  and  determined 
by  God ;  and  whatever  evils  flowed  from  the  transgres- 
sion, must  come  under  that  title, — unless  we  can  suppose 
that  evils  were  produced  which  God  did  not  foresee,  or 
that,  foreseeing  them  to  issue  necessarily  from  the  trans- 
gression of  Adam,  he  did  not  mean  that  any  such  e^nls 
should  be  inflicted  on  the  human  race. 

2.  Mr.  Ei'skine  dogmatises  on  the  meaning  of  the  5th 
chapter,  and  holds  it  as  proved,  though  his  proof  is  not 
given,  that  the  restriction  or  removal  of  the  penalty  in- 
flicted for  Adam's  transgi'ession  was  universal.  It  is  abun- 
dantly evident  that  more  is  included  in  the  Apostle's  state- 
ment than  what  Mr.  Erskine  alleges.  And  although 
doubtless  all,  both  believers  and  unbelievers,  righteous  and 
wicked,  shall  be  raised  by  Christ  at  the  last  day,  yet  it  is 
most  certain  that  the  resurrection  of  the  Tricked  is  never 
said  to  be  a  resurrection  unto  life-  It  deserves  not  the 
name,  and  it  is  not  honoured  with  it.  It  is  "  the  resurrec- 
tion of  damnation."  The  resurrection,  therefore,  men- 
tioned in  the  5th  chapter  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans, 
is  the  resurrection  of  believers — of  the  spiritual  seed  of 


A 


/ 

424  APPENDIX. 


/. 


Christ — of  the  people  of  whom  he  is  the  federal  head  and 
representative.  And  the  restoration  there  spoken  of,  com- 
prising what  never  is,  and  never  can  be,  predicated  of  the 
wicked,  is  not  the  restoration  of  all  men  to  life, — in  other 
words,  does  not  intimate  universal  pardon. 

3.  But  Mr.  Erskine's  interpretation  of  Rom.  vi.  1,  de- 
pends very  much  on  a  critical  emendation  of  oiu-  common 
version.  But  such  a  criticism !  "  nxsova^w,"  he  affirms, 
"  relates  to  number  and  variety ;  -^t^frtnvca  relates  to  quan- 
tity and  extension."  And  then  he  applies  this  dictum  to 
the  verse  in  hand,  saying-,  "  The  original  word  here  trans- 
lated abound,  is  not  vri^nrctlca,  but  ■jrXiova.Z^u.  It  oiig-ht, 
therefore,  according-  to  this  theory,  to  be  translated  '  mul- 
tiplied.' "  Yes,  according  to  Mr.  Erskine's  theory  it  ought 
to  be  so  translated,  but  not  according  to  the  real  meaning 
of  the  word  as  used  in  Scripture.  His  OAvn  view  of  the 
20th  verse  of  the  5th  chapter  might  have  taught  him  other- 
wise. He  expounds  it  thus — "  But  law  entered  to  the  ef- 
fect of  increasing  the  nimiber  of  forfeitures,  but  where  the 
condemnation  was  thus  multiplied  grace  abounded  over 
them  aU,"  as  oil  out  of  one  cask  covers  a  pond  nourished 
by  a  hundred  springs  !"  This  is  directly  in  the  teeth  of  his 
translation  of  chap.  vi.  1 .  For  in  the  latter  case  he  main- 
tains that  irXiotaZ,!-!  should  be  rendered  multiply,  because 
it  relates  to  a  number  of  acts  of  grace,  thought  to  be  ne- 
cessary for  removing  a  number  of  acts  of  forfeiture.  And 
so  in  the  former,  the  word  should  also  be  -Trx-ovaZ,-^,  because 
it  indicates  the  abundance,  or  great  number  of  acts  of  the 
grace  to  take  away  the  numerous  acts  of  forfeiture  occa- 
sioned bythe  introduction  oilaw — and  yet  it  is  not  'rx-cn^w 
but  Tt^icraivM.  Though  Ml-.  Erskine  has  chosen  to  fix  each  of 
these  Greek  words  down  to  a  particular  diverse  meaning, 
he  translates  them  so  as  to  give  them  both  the  same  signi- 
fication, and  make  them  both  mean  multiply.    The  abund- 


APPENDIX.  425 

ance  of  grace  in  both  verses  refers  to  tbe  multiplication  of 
oiFences  as  the  cause  of  its  exercise  and  the  object  of  its 
application — and  yet  in  one  case  the  Apostle  uses  ^rs^/irs-sui/, 
and  in  the  other  •aXiov.-.Z,-:  Mi:  Erskine  cannot  alter  the 
original  text — but  he  can  do  what  is  equally  unwarrant- 
able— give  an  arbitrary  paraphrase  to  pervert  the  meaning 
of  the  sacred  writer,  and  convey  his  own ! 

Thus  he  is  found  wrong  by  considering  the  verj'-  passage 
on  which  he  has  employed  his  critical  powers.  But  is  he 
really  so  ignorant  of  the  New  Testament  Greek,  as  not  to 
know  that  he  eirs  egi-egiously  in  saying  that  "  c-xsuvk^w  re- 
lates to  number  and  variety ;  ■jri^iTi^tvu  relates  to  quantity 
and  extension."*  These  words  are  used  indiscriminately. 
TL'.^KriTiuu,  relates  to  number,  for  example,  in  Acts  xvi.  5. 
"  And  so  were  the  churches  established  in  the  faith,  and 
increased  in  number  daily — frt^Kraiudv  ru  ecgidftM  aa^'  ri/£;^xv." 
According  to  INIi-.  Erskine's  notion,  the  sacred  penman 
should  here  if  any  where,  have  used  the  word  TkmvaX'^ — 
number  being  the  very  idea  that  is  expressly  intimated. — 
Phil.  iv.  17.  "I  desire  fruit  that  may  abound — '^xtom- 
^svTfls — to  your  account."  1  Tim.  i.  14.  "  The  grace  of 
our  Lord  was  exceeding  abundant — uxsoi^rXiovan — &c." 
2  Thess.  i.  3.  "  The  chai'ity  of  every  one  of  you  all  to- 
ward each  other  aboundeth — •rXiova.l^u" — 2  Pet.  i.  3. 
"  For  if  these  things" — certain  virtues  mentioned — "  be 
in  you,  and  abound — ■xXma^otrK,"  The  following  are  two 
instances  where  both  words  are  used  in  expressing  the 
same  thing.  2  Cor.  viii.  14,  15.  "  But  by  an  equality 
that  now  at  this  time  yoiu*  abundance — "Tti^ia^iVjjLo. — may  be 
a  supply  for  their  want,  tliat  their  abundance — zi^.acnvfAo. — 
also  may  be  a  supply  for  your  want,  that  there  may  be 
equality ;  as  it  is  ^vritten,  He  that  had  gathered  much  had 

•  ]\lr.  Erskine  might  have  added  quality. 


426  APPENDIX. 

notliiug'  over — 5«  i^Xuvxin* — &c."  1  Thess.  iii.  12.  "  And 
the  Lord  make  you  to  increase  and  abound — ^kiovxrai  xai 
wi^tTiTivTa.t — in  love  one  toward  another — &c." 

In  short  there  is  no  ground  for  Mr.  Erskine's  rendering 
of  the  words  in  question.  It  is  just  one  of  his  subordinate 
fancies  for  propping  up  the  more  important  errors  in  theo- 
logy which  he  has  brought  forward  Avith  so  much  dogma- 
tism. Scriptm-e  testimony  is  against  him,  if  he  takes  it  as 
it  is ;  and  tlierefore  he  tries  his  scholarship  upon  it,  to  con- 
vert it  to  liis  own  purposes.  But  he  is  as  imsuccessful  in 
biblical  criticism  as  he  is  illogical  in  reasoning.  And  truly  if 
his  efforts  on  Rom.  vi.  1. — be  a  correct  specimen  of  that 
new  translation  of  the  Avhole  Epistle,  which  he  is  said  to 
have  prepared  for  publication,  and  the  very  existence  of 
which  has  given  him  some  influence  over  the  opinions  of 
the  ignorant  and  the  simple,  I  have  no  hope  that  this 
elaborate  and  long  promised  work,  will  add  any  thing  either 
to  his  reputation  as  a  man  of  Bible  learning,  or  to  the 
stores  of  orthodox  theology.  At  the  same  time,  I  long  for 
its  appearance.  If  it  does  not  profit  the  Christian  world 
in  one  way,  it  may  do  good  in  another. 

I  shall  not  enter  into  any  further  discussion  of  Mr.  Ers- 
kine's new  translation  of  Rom.  vi.  1.  A  single  remark  is 
sufficient  to  set  it  aside  as  totally  inadmissible.  The  original 
Gi'eek  will  not  by  any  means  tolerate  it.  His  translation 
is  "  Shall  we  continue  under  condemnation,  iintil  grace  be 
also  multiplied  ?"  The  Greek  word,  here  rendered  until, 
is  ivx..  I  know  not  Mr.  Erskine's  attainments  in  Greek 
scholarship.  But  I  have  often  heard  them  praised,  as  far 
as  the  New  Testament  is  concerned,  by  respectable 
authorities;  and  they  are  lauded  to  the  skies  by  the  herd 

*  This  is  the  word  used  also  by  the  LXX.  Exod.  xvi.  1. 


N     APPENDIX.  427 

of  his  every-day  admirers  and  followers.  But  reaUy,  if  his 
translation  of  Rom.  vi.  1.  be  a  spe(;imen  of  them,  I  must 
say  that  they  are  limited  indeed ;  or  rather,  I  should  say, 
that  his  rage  for  theory  prevents  him  from  doing-  justice 
to  his  knowledge  of  the  languag'e.  Can  Mr.  Erskine  point 
out  a  single  example  of  Iva  signifying  until?  Is  he  not  aware 
that  no  such  example  exists  ?  Must  he  not  acknowledge 
that  he  has  here  committed  a  great  and  fatal  error  ?  And 
when  the  error  is  corrected,  and  Ua.  translated  aright,  will  he 
maintain  that  his  rendering  of  the  other  parts  of  the  verse 
does  any  thing  else  than  make  the  whole  a  piece  of  unin- 
telligible nonsense,  seeing  that  it  must  run  thus — "  What 
shall  we  say  then  '?  Shall  we  continue  under  condemnation, 
that  ^'ace  may  be  multiplied,"  or,  "  that  the  acts  of  atone- 
ment may  equal  the  number  of  the  forfeitui'es  ?"  Again, 
I  say,  let  us  be  favoured  with  Mr.  Erskine's  new  transla- 
tion of  the  whole  Epistle.  And,  till  it  makes  its  appear- 
ance, let  the  samples  of  it  which  v\'e  ah-eady  possess  teach 
us  to  place  no  great  confidence  in  its  author's  qualifica- 
tions, either  as  a  translator  or  an  interpreter. 


Note  P,  p.  226. 


I  am  not  siu-prised  that  persons  Avho  take  up  the  subject 
hastily,  and  talk  about  it  without  consideration,  should  fall 
into  the  mistake  mentioned  in  the  text.  But  I  cannot 
easily  account  for  Mr.  Erskine  committing  such  a  blunder. 
He  had  sm-ely  considered  the  Scripture  refeiTed  to,  for  he 
actually  quotes  it.*  But  how  ?  After  stating  with  his 
usual  dogmatism  that  the  penalty  of  this  law  is  reversed 

*  Preface,  p.  xlix. 


428  APPENDIX. 

with  regard  to  every  man,  he  adds  "thus  we  see  the  mean- 
ing of  the  text" — giving  one  text  after  another,  till  he  con- 
cludes the  list  with  the  one  in  question ;  "  and  of  that 
other,  Jesus  Christ  is  the  Saviour  of  aU  men,  especially  of 
those  whe  helieve."  He  might  have  been  startled  by  the 
occurrence  of  the  word  "  Saviour,"  for  according  to 
him  to  save  is  to  sanctify,  and  surelj'  all  men  are  not 
sanctified,  or  if  all  men  are  not  sanctified,  what  could 
he  make  of  the  term  "  especially"  as  applied  to  be- 
lievers, except  it  had  been  that  believers  are  only  some- 
what more  sanctified  than  unbelievers  ?  But  the  ex- 
traordinary thing  is,  that  he  should  have  omitted  God  and 
substituted  Jesus  Christ !  Even  though  it  had  been  Jesus 
Christ,  the  context  and  circiunstances  of  the  Apostle  would 
have  satisfied  any  candid  reader  that  Christ  was  here  men- 
tioned, not  in  his  mediatorial  capacity,  but  in  that  charac- 
ter which  he  assumed  when  he  sent  out  his  disciples  to 
preach  the  gospel,  and  promised  to  ^-atch  over  and  pro- 
tect them ;  for  he  exercised  that  providential  care  after, 
as  well  as  before,  his  departure  from  the  world.  But  it  is 
the  "  living  God"  in  \^hom  the  Apostle  expresses  his 
"  trust,"  and  therefore  INIr.  Erskine  should  have  been 
careful  not  to  alter  the  record,  raid  to  introduce  a  name 
Avhich,  as  connected  M'ith  Saviour,  is  calculated  to  convey 
the  impression  that  Christ  lialf  redeems  some  men,  and 
«  holly  redeems  others  ! 


Note  Q,  p.  227. 


The  case  of  our  Lord's  visit  to  Simon  the  Pharisee, 
mentioned  by  the  Evangelist  Luke,*  is  adduced  by  IMi'. 

*  Luke  vii.  36 — end. 


APPENDIX.  429 

Erskine*  in  support  of  his  theory;  and,  in  his  nsuai  way, 
he  disregards  every  thing  in  the  passage  that  makes  against 
him,  and,  by  one  of  the  most  arbitrary  and  unfair  inter- 
pretations I  have  ever  met  with  in  any  commentator, 
extracts  from  it  what  it  certainly  does  not  teach.  He  in- 
sists that  the  parable  of  the  two  debtors,  introduced  by 
our  Lord,  contains  the  doctrine  that  all  men  without  ex- 
ception are  forgiven.  He  aifirms  that  Simon  and  the 
woman  represent  the  two  great  classes  into  which  the 
human  race  is  divided,  believers  and  unbelievers :  that  as 
both  debtors  are  said  to  have  been  fi'ankly  forgiven,  so 
both  classes  of  mankind  must  be  held  to  have  received 
the  same  blessing ;  and  that  the  only  difference  between 
them  is  this,  that  unbelievers  are  ignorant  of  the  fact  for 
want  of  faith,  while  believers  are  by  their  faith  brought 
to  the  knowledge  of  it. 

I  can  with  great  difficulty  bring  myself  to  believe  that 
Mr.  Erskine  did  not  perceive  the  fallacy  of  his  annotation. 
His  own  statement  condemns  himself.  For  he  says, "  The 
believer,  or  those  who  believe  that  their  many  sins  are 
forgiven,  live,  i.  e.  they  are  saved ;  the  unbelievers,  or 
those  who  believe  not  that  their  many  sins  are  forgiven, 
do  not  live,  i.  e,  they  remain  unsaved."  Now  according 
to  this,  it  must  be  perfectly  evident  that  Simon  believed, 
and  that  he  was  saved,  as  well  as  the  woman.  Both 
debtors — meaning  thereby  both  Simon  and  the  woman — 
loved ;  only,  while  the  woman  loved  much,  Simon  loved 
but  a  little.  This  is  clear  from  the  47th  verse,  "  Where- 
fore, I  say  unto  thee,  her  sins,  which  are  many,  are  for- 
given; for  she  loved  much ;  but  to  whom  little  is  forgiven 
the  same  loveth  little"  The  contrast  is  stated  between, 
the  two  debtors  ;   these  two  debtors  are  considered  as 

Unconditional  Freeness,  p.  51. 


430  APPENDIX. 

meaning'  the  ^  oman  and  Simon,  in  tlie  first  instance,  and 
more  generally,  the  two  classes  of  mankind,  believers  and 
unbelievers.  So  that  whatever  is  asserted  of  the  debtors 
must  be  understood  or  asserted  of  those  whose  character 
and  condition  they  are  used  to  signify.  This  is  Mr.  Ers- 
kine's  principle  in  explaining  the  parable ;  and  unless  he 
is  to  be  allowed  to  take  as  much  of  the  parable  as  suits 
his  Ott'n  end,  and  to  reject  the  rest  as  inadmissible,  he  is 
reduced  to  a  strange  dilemma.  For  if  Simon  loved  at  all, 
however  little,  he  was  as  truly  saved,  and  did  as  much 
believe,  as  the  Avoman  who  is  said  to  have  loved  much. 
They  both  loved,*  that  is,  according  to  Mr.  Erskine,  they 
were  both  saved  ;  and  tliat  is,  according:-  to  INIi'.  Ei-skine, 
they  both  believed, — "  each  man's  salvation  (or  loving) 
arising-  out  of  the  belief  of  his  own  personal  condemnation 
having  been  removed  by  his  own  personal  forgiveness." 
See  now  what  our  commentator  has  extracted  from  the 
passage  in  question.  It  really  and  undeniably  amounts  to 
this,  that  unbelievers,  represented  by  Simon,  who,  he  says, 
"  was  most  assuredly  an  unbeliever,"  do  yet  believe ;  and 
that  they  are  saved,  though  they  are  not  saved ;  and  that 
belief  and  imbelief — being  saved,  and  not  being  saved, 

*  This  indeed  is  admitted  by  Mr.  Erskine,  when  he  says, 
"  It  is  quite  evident  that  Jesus  means  by  it,  (the  parable)  to 
tell  Simon  that  both  he  and  the  woman  were  equally  forgiven, 
when  they  had  nothing  to  pay,  and  that  the  difference  of  their 
love  towards  1dm,  arose  from  their  different  appreciations  of  their 
forgiveness."  Pref.  p.  xlii.  And  again,  "There  can  be  no  gratitude 
at  all,  if  the  debt  is  not  supposed  to  be  forgiven,  and  the  grati- 
tude will  be  small,  if  the  debt  be  supposed  to  be  small."  Do. 
p.  xli.  The  same  thing  he  allows  in  p.  51.  of  "  Unconditional 
Freeness,"  where  he  says,  "  The  one  (debtor)  had  the  sense 
of  a  great  forgiveness,  the  other  of  a  small  one,  and  their  gra- 
titude was  in  direct  proportion  to  their  sense  of  forgiveness." 


APPENDIX.  431 

are  oue  and  the  same  thing.  And  all  this  mass  of  con- 
tradiction is  to  be  palmed  upon  our  blessed  Saviour,  for 
the  purpose  of  upholding  Mi-.  Erskine's  nostrum  about 
faith  and  forgiveness ! 

"  I  do  not  see,"  says  Mr.  Erskine,  "  how  any  other  in- 
terprctiition  can  be  given  of  this  parable,  than  that  which 
I  have  gi\eu."  ^\^len,  I  may  ask,  will  Mi\  Erskine  learn 
to  open  his  eyes  to  the  simplest  facts  of  the  Bible,  and  to 
the  simplest  processes  of  reasoning  ?  And  if  he  is  unable 
to  give  any  interpretation  except  one  that  is  so  utterly  at 
variance  inith  itself,  and  that  makes  Christ  speak  palpable 
inconsistencies,  would  it  not  be  right  to  be  somewhat 
more  modest,  and  to  wait  till  greater  light  be  vouchsafed 
to  him,  since  he  does  not  choose  to  be  indebted  to  other 
men  for  an  explanation  of  what  he  evidently  does  not 
himself  understand  ?  But  no ;  he  does  not  seem  to  care 
Avhat  consequences  follo%v  to  the  Scriptures,  if  he  can  only 
and  in  any  way,  get  them  to  appear  favom-able  to  his  idle 
and  mischievous  speculations. 

If  Mr.  Erskine  lA'Ould  remember  what  the  veriest  tyro 
in  Bible  interpretation  can  tell  him,  that  a  parable  is  never 
intended  to  be  doctrinally  understood  and  applied  as  to 
eveiy  incident  or  particular  in  the  story,  it  would  often 
save  him  from  the  "  great  transgression"  of  distorting 
God's  viord.  His  tlieory,  indeed,  would  suffer,  but  true 
religion  would  gain  incalculably  by  his  attention  to  such 
a  lesson. 

It  is  impossible,  also,  not  to  remark  that  a  better  speci- 
men of  Mr.  Erskine's  great  dogmatism  cannot  be  M-ished 
for,  than  is  to  be  found  in  his  commentary  on  the  pass- 
age of  Scriptm'e  we  have  been  considering.  One  affii'ma- 
tive  succeeds  another,  as  if  it  were  pervaded  by  infalli- 
bility. Never  does  a  suspicion  seem  to  arise  that  any 
thing  either  Avill  or  can  be  disputed.     All  is  advanced  so 


432  APPENDIX. 

smoothly  and  peremptorily,  that  we  can  easily  see  how  ex- 
clusively it  is  intended  for  implicit  believers  in  the  author's 
leading  doctrine.  And  no  wonder  that  he  dislikes,  or  more 
properly  speaking,  is  afraid  of  controversy  ! 

There  would  be  no  difficulty  in  showing  that  the  sense 
commonly  attached  to  the  passage  is  the  just  one — that 
the  woman's  sins  were  forgiven  her  in  connexion  with 
her  faith  in  Christ  the  Savioiu- — that  forgiveness  could  be 
truly  predicated  of  her,  she  being  a  believer,  but  not  of 
Simon,  he  being  an  unbeliever — and  that  the  salvation  an- 
nexed to  her  faith  was  salvation  from  the  guilt  she  had 
committed,  or,  in  one  word,  the  forgiveness  bestowed  upon 
her  by  oiu*  Lord.  But  all  this  is  unnecessary — it  being  be- 
yond doubt  that  IVIr.  Erskine's  method  of  interpreting 
the  parable,  is  incompetent,  and  overturns  his  own  position. 
If  it  proves,  as  he  says,  that  all  men  are  forgiven,  it  proves 
also,  and  on  the  same  ground,  that  all  men  believe,  and  that 
all  men  love,  and  that  all  men  are  sanctified  and  saved. 

Another  of  the  passages  on  which  Mr.  Erskine  founds 
his  peculiar  notion,  is  that  which  gives  an  account  of  the 
woman  taken  in  adultery.*  Here,  in  his  customary  way, 
he  either  strangely  overlooks,  or  intentionally  withholds 
from  view,  the  scope  and  meaning  of  the  narrative,  and 
fastens  upon  a  corner  of  it  on  which  he  most  coolly  puts 
his  own  arbitrary  construction.     His  language  is, — 

"  And  when  our  Lord  says  to  the  woman  taken  in  adul- 
tery, '  Go  and  sin  no  more ;'  he  grounds  the  admonition  on 
that  word  of  life,  '  neither  do  I  condemn  thee.'  And  lest 
the  woman  herself,  or  any  other  should  suppose,  that  this 
word  had  any  exclusive  application  to  her  more  than  to 
others ;  he  immediately  adds, '  I  am  the  light  of  the  world,' 
— not  of  this  woman  only,  John  viii.  11,  12.     These  two 

*  John  viii.  1 — 12. 


APPENDIX.  433 

verses  ought  not  to  be  separated." — "When  this  Son  (Jesus 
Christ)  whom  the  Father  sent,  spoke  to  men,  he  just  said, 
'  neither  do  I  condemn  thee.'  This  was  the  language  of 
the  light,  who  came  to  condemn  sin  in  the  flesh ;  and  it 
was  on  this  ground  that  he  said, '  Go  and  sin  no  more.'  "* 

What  a  perversion  of  Holy  Writ !  I  had  almost  said, 
what  an  artful  concealment  of  the  key  to  the  whole  pass- 
age !  At  any  rate,  what  an  instance  of  the  gross  delusiou 
into  which  zeal  for  a  theory  will  betray  its  author  or  abet- 
tor! 

In  the  first  place,  Christ,  in  these  words,  "  neither  do  I 
condemn  thee,"  does  not  express  the  woman's  exemption 
from  futm-e  punishment,  nor  does  he  refer  to  her  moral 
guilt  at  all.  She  was  brought  before  him  by  the  Scribes 
and  Pharisees,  his  enemies,  who  "  said  unto  him.  Master, 
this  woman  was  ta'.en  in  adultery,  in  the  very  act.  Now 
Moses  in  the  law  commanded  us,  that  such  should  be 
stoned  ;  but  what  sayest  thou  ?  This  they  said  tempting 
him,  that  they  might  have  to  accuse  him."  The  object 
of  the  Pharisees  was,  to  get  an  accusation  against  Christ; 
and  the  method  they  took  to  procure  it  was  to  submit  an 
important  case  to  him,  that  he  might  be  tempted  to  decide 
upon  it  in  the  capacity  of  a  judge,  and  thus  fiu-uish  them, 
whatever  way  he  decided,  with  the  means  of  accomplish- 
ing his  destruction.  If  he  had  assumed  the  office  of  a  judge, 
and  acquitted  the  adulteress,  they  would  have  represented 
him  to  the  people  as  a  despiser  of  the  law,  and  a  patron 
of  its  most  infamous  transgressors.  And  if,  acting  as  a 
judge,  he  had  condemned  her  to  death,  they  would  have  i-e- 
presented  him  to  the  Roman  government  as  assuming  a 
power  which  was  inconsistent  with  theii-  authority,  and 
amounted  to  an  act  of  rebellion.    In  these  circumstances, 

"  Introductory  Ess.ay,  p.  liv. 
U 


434  APPENDIX. 

Clirist  counteracted  and  defeated  the  invidious  design,  by 
refusing  to  exercise  the  judicial  function.  He  first,  by 
charging  home  such  guilt  on  the  persons  who  had  come 
forward  to  accuse  the  M'oman,  as,  he  foresaw,  would  make 
them  stand  convicted  in  their  own  minds,  got  quit  of  their 
presence  as  her  accusers.  And  he  next  said  to  the  wo- 
man, "  Hath  no  man,"  none  even  of  those  who,  in  similar 
cases,  possess  and  exercise  the  office  flhich  would  entitle 
them  to  pronounce  sentence,  "  condemned  thee  ?  Neither 
do  I  condemn*  thee."  I  assume  no  such  prerogative ;  and  I 
do  not,  whatever  I  may  think  of  the  criminality  of  thy 
conduct,  take  it  upon  me  to  declare  judicially  the  penalty 
of  the  law,  and  adjudge  thee  to  suffer  it.  And  this  will 
still  more  obviously  appear  to  be  the  true  meaning  of  the 
transaction,  ■\^hen  Me  look  to  the  15th  verse  of  the  chap- 
ter, where  Christ  says,  in  evident  reference  to  what  had 
immediately  before  occurred,  "  Ye  judge  after  the  flesh ; 
Ijudge-\  no  man."  In  fact,  Christ  uniformly  disclaimed 
any  such  magisterial  authority  as  he  was,  in  this  case,  art- 
fully called  upon  to  assume  and  put  in  practice.  And 
hence  he  evaded  the  snare  that  liis  cunning  adversaries 
laid  for  him,  by  uniting  the  wisdom  of  the  serpent  M'ith 
the  harmlessness  of  the  dove. 

To  hold,  then,  as  INIi'.  Erskine  does,  that  when  Cluist 
said,  "  neither  do  I  condenm  thee,"  he  spoke  "  the  word  of 
life,"  or  intimated  that  the  sin  of  the  woman  was  already 
pardoned  of  God,  is  to  attach  to  the  expression  a  meaning 
for  which  the  nature  and  circumstances  of  the  occasion 
give  not  the  slightest  colour  or  pretext,  but  which,  on  the 
contrary,  they  show  to  be  altogether  absurd  and  inadmis- 
sible.    Had  Christ  intended  to  convey  such  a  meaning,  he 

*  Ka<r«x^ni(y— I  adjudge  to  punishment. 
f  Kjivo/ — I  act  as  a  judge. 


APPENDIX.  435 

could  not  liave  cliosen  a  more  inap})Osite  phraseology.  It 
neitlier  denotes  nor  implies  past  forgiveness.  And  the  ad- 
monition M'hich  accompanied  it  is  not  grounded  upon,  but 
only  suggested,  by  the  foct,  that  the  woman  had  been 
guilty,  and  expresses  Christ's  benevolent  concern  for  her 
futiu-e  reformation  and  spiritual  welfare. 

2.  Ml".  Ersldne  says  of  the  11th  and  12th  verses,  that 
they  "  oug-ht  not  to  be  separated."  So  I  think ;  and  it 
would  have  demonstrated  more  candour  or  more  skill  iu 
intcii)retation,  had  he  extended  the  maxim,  and  not  sepa- 
rated one  pai't  of  the  story  from  another,  so  as  to  conceal 
from  the  i^iorant  reader,  and  perhaps  from  himself,  what 
is  necessary  for  the  right  explanation  of  the  whole.  This 
practice  of  detaching  one  thing-  from  another  is  habitual  iu 
liim ;  and  no  marvel,  for  connected  views  of  Scripture  are 
destructive  of  his  tlieory.  But  he  can  indulge  in  excep- 
tions to  his  general  rule,  when  it  promises  to  be  more  ad- 
vantageous to  liim,  to  take  two  verses  together,  than  to 
take  them  separately.  And  there  is  an  example  of  this  be- 
fore us.  By  taking  as  much  of  the  passage  as  suits  his  pm*- 
pose,  and  attaching  to  it  after  all  a  most  fictitious  meaning, 
he  flatters  himself  that  he  has  got  the  pardon  of  the  adul- 
teress established,  though  she  had  not  exhibited  one  symp- 
tom of  penitence  or  belief.  And  then,  in  order  to  prove 
that  this  pardon  is  a  universal  privilege,  he  makes  it  a  point 
of  conscience  that  the  11th  and  12th  verses  should  not  be 
disjoined,  but  considei'ed  in  connexion.  But  how  does  he 
accomplish  this  object  ?  He  accomplishes  it  thus.  Ac- 
cording to  liim,  "  neither  do  I  condemn  thee,"  means.  Thou 
impenitent  and  unbelieving  adulteress,  I  declare  tliat  thy 
crimes  are  all  pai-doued, — not  only  this  crime  in  which  thou 
hast  been  detected,  but  all  the  other  crimes  thou  hast  ever 
perpetrated,  or  may  hereafter  perpetrate  !  "  I  am  the  light 
of  the  icorld,"  means  I  am  come  to  enlighten  not  this  wo- 
man only,  but  all  human  beings,  and  to  assui'e  them  that 


436  APPENDIX. 

all  the  sins  of  every  one  of  them  are  freely  and  everlasting'- 
ly  forgiven  just  as  hers  are  ! !  And  as  the  connexion  be- 
tween verses  11th  and  12th  of  the  eighth  chapter  is  not 
sufficient,  these  two  verses  are  to  he  also  connected — not 
on  account  of  juxta  position  or  on  any  other  account  but 
that  of  Mr.  Erskine's  good  pleasure — with  the  9th  and  29th 
verses  of  the  first  chapter,  and  the  17th  and  19th  verses 
of  the  third  chapter  of  the  same  Gospel ;  and  thus  by  local 
ox>nnexion,  and  fanciful  connexion,  and  arbitrary  connex- 
ion, it  is  proved  that  every  man  is  already  and  complete- 
ly pardoned !  1 1 

By  all  means  let  the  12th  verse  be  read  after  the  1 1th ; 
but  let  the  whole  narrative  be  also  read,  and  then  Mi*.  Er- 
skine,  or  at  least  every  unprejudiced  person,  will  be  con- 
vinced, that  he  has  sadly  misrepresented  the  passage  in  ques- 
tion.   It  wiU  be  found  (verse  2)  that  our  Saviour  was  teach- 
ing the  people  in  the  temple,  when  the  Scribes  and  Phari- 
sees interrupted  his  discourse,  by  bringing  before  him  the 
woman  taken  in  adultery — that  having  in  the  manner  we 
have  stated,  disposed  of  the  case  that  was  so  treacherously 
submitted  to  him, he  resumed  his  discourse, "speaking  again 
unto"  the  people — and  that  as  it  was  "  early  in  the  morn- 
ing" when  he  taught  in  the  temple,  the  probability  is  that 
he  took  advantage  of  the  rising  of  the  sun  to  represent 
himself  as  the  "light  of  the  world"  in  a  spiritual  sense, — as 
the  only  one  who  could  lead  ignorant  and  sinful  men  to  the 
possession  of  eternal  life.     And  it  is  not  unworthy  of  re- 
mark that  the  warning  which  our  Lord  gave  to  the  Jews  in 
prosecuting  the  address  which  he  was  delivering  to  them 
when  the  interruption  took  place,  he  uses  language  which 
cannot  be  reconciled  with  Mr.  Erskine's  doctrine.     He 
says,  (verse  24,)  "  I  said  therefore  unto  you  that  ye  shall 
die  in  yom*  sins;  for  if  ye  believe  not  I  am  he,  ye  shall  die 
in  your  sins."     It  cannot  be  maintained  that  he  refers  here 
■to  unbelief  merely — for  that  is  but  one  sin,  and  according 


APPENDIX.  437 

to  oui-  opponent,  it  is  the  only  sin  for  which  men  shall  be 
punished,  or  which  shall  remain  unforgiven  at  death,  or 
for  which  the  second  death  shall  be  inflicted  upon  them. 
Those  who  believe  not  in  Christ,  we  are  here  expressly  told, 
shall  die — not  in  that  sin,  but  in  their  sins — in  all  the  sins 
they  have  ever  committed,  and  which  have  not  been  blot- 
ted out,  because  they  have  not  accepted  of  him  by  whom 
alone  they  can  be  saved !  Strange  !  that  any  man  what- 
ever, who  has  the  least  mental  perspicacity,  or  who  has 
the  least  portion  of  fairness,  should  overlook  a  declara- 
tion so  expressive  as  this  on  the  subject  he  is  treating  of, 
and  not  merely  give  out  as  a  supposition,  but  as  a  certain 
and  infalUble  statement,  that  when  Christ  said  "  neither 
do  I  condemn  thee,"  he  told  the  woman  that  her  adultery 
and  every  other  sin  she  had  committed  were  pardoned, 
and  that  when  he  exclaimed,  "  I  am  the  light  of  the  v/orld," 
he  intended  to  announce  that  all  ungodly  persons  of  every 
country  and  of  every  generation  were  possessed  of  the 
very  same  privilege  ! ! !  Really  Mr.  Erskine  should  not 
only  connect  the  1 1th  and  12th  verses,  but  the  whole 
chapter  of  which  these  form  a  part,  before  he  gives  forth 
his  evil  crudities  as  wholesome  tniths. 

One  of  the  choice  texts  which  Mr.  Erskine  and  his 
fellow-laboiu'ers  are  continually  pressing  on  our  notice  is 
John  i.  9.  "  That  was  the  true  light,  which  lighteth  every 
man  that  cometh  into  the  world."  And  what  do  they 
understand  by  this,  or  how  do  they  explain  it,  so  as  to 
make  it  subservient  to  their  theory  ?  I  question  very 
much  if  those  who  repeat  it  so  incessantly  have  any  dis- 
tinct idea  of  what  it  means.  It  looks,  indeed,  like  an 
assertion  of  universality,  but  the  universality  of  what  ? 

J.  Do  they  imagine  that  "light"  denotes  pardon  ?  For 
such  a  meaning  of  the  word  they  cannot  produce  a  single 
authority.     Oa/j  has  various  significations,  but  pardon  is 


438  APPENDIX. 

not  one  of  tliem.  In  this  verse  it  represents  Christ  as  the 
fountain  of  spiritual  and  saving-  knowledge — showing  men 
their  real  condition  and  character  as  fallen  creatures,  and 
pointing"  out  the  way  by  which  they  are  to  be  redeemed. 
And  accordiugij',  when,  as  in  the  third  chapter  of  the 
sanie  Gospel,  our  Saviour  is  accounting  for  the  prevalence 
of  unbelief,  he  ascribes  it  to  the  evil  deeds  of  men  which 
makes  them  choose  the  darkness  rather  than  the  light.  "  For 
every  one  that  doeth  evil,  hateth  the  lig"ht,  neither  cometh 
to  the  light,  lest  his  deeds  should  be  reproved"  or  disco- 
vered, "  But  lie  that  doeth  truth  cometh  to  the  light,  that 
his  deeds  may  be  made  manifest  that  they  are  ^iTought  in 
God."  And  in  that  sense  of  the  Avord,  Christ  frequently 
held  himself  out  to  the  Jews  as  "  the  light."  As  when  he 
said,  "  Yet  a  little  while  is  the  light  with  you ;  walk  Avhile 
ye  have  the  light,  lest  darkness  come  upon  you ;  for  he 
that  walketh  in  darkness  knoweth  not  Avhither  he  goeth." 
Even  Mere  it  granted  that  light  may  be  taken  to  repre- 
sent pardon,  in  John  i.  9,  it  wiU  not  answer  the  jnuijose  for 
which  it  is  adduced  ;  for  Christ  said  to  the  people,  "  I  am 
come  a  light  into  the  world,  that  ichosoever  believeth  on 
me  should  not  abide  in  darkness."  It  is  only  believers 
that  obtain  the  pardon,  so  that  it  cannot  be  afRrmed  that 
every  man  is  ■pardoned  by  Christ,  unless  it  can  also  be 
affirmed  that  every  man  believes  in  Christ.  But  no  per- 
son, whose  mind  is  not  Avofnlly  carped  and  pei-verted  by 
prejudice  can  ftiil  to  see  that  light,  in  the  passage,  under 
consideration,  refers  to  the  character  of  Christ  as  the  re- 
vealer  and  teacher  of  his  Father's  Mill  respecting  the  saU 
vation  of  the  Morld. 

2.  Well  then,  will  universalitj'^  belonc:  to  the  proposi- 
tion as  thus  explained  V  It  is  sufficient  to  ansM'er,  that 
the  fact  precludes  the  possibility  of  so  understanding  it. 

*  John  xii.  35. 


APPENDIX.  439 

For  every  man  that  cometh  into  the  world  is  not  enlig-ht- 
ened.  The  proposition  clearly  intimates — not  the  actual 
effect  produced — but  the  design  of  Christ's  coming-,  or  the 
official  character  which  he  sustains.  He  is  the  true  light ; 
there  is  no  other  from  whom  the  knowledge  of  salvation 
can  be  derived,  and  every  man  that  cometh  into  the  world, 
or  every  human  being  who  is  favoiu-ed  with  that  light 
or  knowledge,  gets  it  from  him  and  from  him  alone.  He 
came  as  "  a  light  to  lighten  the  Gentiles,"  but  though  that 
was  one  object  of  his  advent  upon  earth,  who  would  ven- 
ture to  conclude  that  the  Gentiles  are  aU  instructed  by 
him  ?  And  when  it  is  said  that  "  the  grace  of  God  hath 
appeared  unto  all  men  bringing  salvation,"  who  wiU  be 
bold  enough  to  assert  that  to  every  man  on  oui-  globe 
God's  grace  has  actually  appeared,  and  that  it  has  brougiit 
salvation,  or,  as  Mr.  Erskine  explains  it,  sanctification 
and  happiness  to  the  whole  human  race  ? 

Another  text  is,  1  Cor.  viii.  11.  "And  through  thy 
knowledge  shall  the  weak  brother  perish,  for  whom  Chi-ist 
died?"  Here  we  are  told,  it  is  taught  that  a  person  for  whom 
Clirist  died  may  ultimately  perish,  and  that  this  may  be 
maintained  on  the  hypothesis  of  our  opponents,  but  must 
be  rejected  on  ours.  In  truth,  it  agrees  neither  \^ith  ours 
nor  with  our  opponents' ;  and  they  should  be  as  anxious 
as  we  to  repel  such  an  interpretation  of  the  verse. 

The  person  alluded  to  by  the  apostle,  it  must  be  noticed, 
is  a  brother — that  is,  he  is  a  believer.  He  is  "  weak  in 
the  faith ;"  but  still  he  has  the  faith,  and  is  accounted  one 
of  those  who  have  truly  embraced  the  Saviour.  This  will 
be  seen  by  looking  to  the  context,  and  comparing  it  with 
what  Paul  says  in  his  epistle  to  the  Romans,  xiv.  1,  &c., 
when  writing  and  exhorting  on  the  very  same  subject. 

Now,  will  Mr.  Erskine  or  his  friends  say  that  a  true 
believer  wi]!  finally  perish  ?  An  Armiman  may  say  so,  and 


440  APPENDIX. 

he  does  say  so,  because  he  holds  that  election  is  condi- 
tional, and  that  the  believer  may  fall  away.  But  Mr, 
Erskine  cannot  acquiesce  in  such  a  position,  because  he 
maintains  the  doctrine  of  unconditional  election,  and  that 
necessarily  infers  the  perseverance  of  the  saints.  He  can- 
not, therefore,  think  or  insist  that  the  individual  supposed 
by  the  apostle  can  ever  perish  in  any  sense  of  that  word. 
The  individual  was  always  pardoned ;  being  a  believer,  he 
is  saved;  and  having-  been  individually  elected,  he  can 
"  never  pprish,  but  must  have  everlasting  life." 

But  I  deny  the  interpretation  given  to  the  verse  on  a 
stiU  broader  ground.     For  this  weak  brother  Christ  died ; 
therefore  I  conclude,  on  Clirist's  own  express  authority, 
that  it  is  impossible  for  him  to  perish — meaning  by  the 
word  perish,  whatever  is  different  from  the  attainment  of 
heaven.     In  the  fourth  chapter  of  John's  Gospel,  Christ 
says,  "  I  am  the  good  shepherd ;  the  good  shepherd  giveth 
his  life  for  the  sheep."     "  I  am  the  good  shepherd,  and 
know  my  sheep,  and  am  known  of  mine."     "  Other  sheep 
I  have  which  are  not  of  this  fold ;  them  also  I  must  bring; 
and  they  shall  hear  my  voice ;  and  there  shall  be  one  fold 
and  one  shepherd."     "  Ye  " — unbelieving  Jews — "  believe 
not,  because  ye  are  not  of  my  sheep,  as  I  said  unto  you. 
My  sheep  hear  my  voice,  and  I  know  them,  and  they  fol- 
low me ;  and  I  give  luito  them  eternal  Ufe,  and  they  shaU 
never  perish,  neither  shall  any  pluck  them  out  of  my  hand. 
My  father,  which  g-ave  them  me,  is  greater  than  all ;  and 
none  is  able  to  pluck  them  out  of  my  father's  hand."     If 
this  language  teaches  any  thing,  it  teaches  the  following 
truths  : — that  the  sheep  of  Christ  are  not  all  men,  but  in- 
dividuals selected  and  brought  from  among  all  men — that 
these  are  distinguished  by  having  been  given  to  Christ  by 
the  Father — that  they  are  the  objects  of  a  love  and  of  a 
care  on  the  part  of  Christ  which  he  does  not  manifest  to 


APPENDIX.  441 

others — that  as  the  good  shepherd  he  gave  his  life  for 
them — that  they  hear  his  voice,  that  he  knows  or  ap- 
proves of  them,  and  that  they  follow  him — that  he  gives 
them  eternal  life — and  that  none  of  their  enemies  shall 
ever  be  able  to  snatch  them  from  the  possession  of  their 
God  and  Redeemer.  This  is  altogether  at  variance  with 
the  idea  of  any  one  perishing  for  whom  Christ  died.  He 
died  for  his  owm — his  sheep  ;  he  gives  them  eternal  life  ; 
and  it  is  impossible  for  any  thing  whatever  to  destroy 
them,  or  to  tear  them  out  of  his  divine  embrace. 

There  would  be  no  difficulty  in  the  verse  in  question, 
were  not  the  theory  of  universal  pardon  in  need  of  sup- 
port. Some  of  the  Corinthian  converts  had  a  clear 
and  distinct  knowledge  of  the  difference  between  the  meat 
employed  in  sacrifice  to  idols,  and  that  same  meat  as  used 
for  food ;  and,  on  the  strength  of  that  knowledge,  they 
partook  of  the  sacrifices  even  in  the  idolatrous  temples. 
Against  this  the  apostle  remonstrated ;  because,  although 
they  who  did  it  might  not  be  injured  by  the  practice,  there 
Ai'ere  others  who  had  not  sufficient  discernment,  or  force  of 
mind,  or  vigour  of  faith,  to  guard  against  the  very  natural  as- 
sociation of  eating  meat  sacrificed  to  idols,  with  rendering 
worship  to  the  idols  to  whom  it  had  been  offered,  and  who 
were  therefore  in  danger  of  committing  idolatry,  or  giv- 
ing homage  to  false  gods,  or  holding  fellowship  with  devils. 
This  was  a  sin :  every  sin  merits  God's  anger,  and  leads 
to  condemnation  ;  and,  if  unforsaken  and  unforgiven,  must 
terminate  in  destniction.  Now,  the  apostle  speaks  of  the 
sin  of  a  weak  brother  as  having  this  tendency — not  of  its 
actually  and  necessarily  involving  the  person  guilty  of  it 
in  ruin  ;  for  surely  it  was  not  the  unpardonable  sin — the 
sin  which  was  neither  to  be  prayed  for  nor  to  be  forgiven 
— but  a  sin  which,  by  a  sincere  and  thorough  repentance, 
would  be  washed  away  like  other  sins.    And  he  merely 


442  APPENDIX. 

speaks  of  its  ultimate  result  if  divine  grace  did  not  pre- 
Tent,  in  order  to  represent  more  strongly  and  more  effec- 
tually the  miscliievous  conduct  of  those  who,  by  indulging 
in  the  practice  adverted  to,  wounded  the  weak  conscience 
of  their  weak  brethren,  and  caused  them  to  offend  against 
their  God  and  Saviour.  There  is  an  example  of  similar 
phraseology  in  this  very  epistle.*  We  know  the  attain- 
ments, and  the  privileges,  and  the  experience  of  the  apos- 
tle— his  assurance  of  his  personal  salvation — his  certain 
hope  of  eternal  Ufe.  And  yet  he  proposed  to  himself  the 
possibility  of  his  being  irrecoverably  lost,  as  a  motive  for 
his  exercising  temperance  and  self  denial.  "  I  keep  under 
my  body,"  said  he,  "  and  bring  it  into  subjection,  lest  that 
by  any  means,  when  I  have  preached  to  others,  I  myself 
should  be  a  cast-away"  And  this  is  the  very  same  sort  of 
argument  that  he  brings  to  bear  against  the  Corinthians, 
to  whom  he  addresses  his  expostulation.  He  does  not 
advance  the  abstract  doctrine,  that  a  true  believer,  one 
for  whom  Clirist  died,  could  finally  perish.  But  he  uses 
the  supposition  of  such  a  thing  in  the  particular  case  be- 
fore him,  as  a  ground  on  which  to  dissuade  from  eating 
meat  offered  to  idols,  in  the  presence  of  weak  brethren, 
lest  they  should  be  tempted  to  do  what,  in  its  own  nature 
and  tendency,  was  calculated  to  involve  men  in  perdition. 
And  siu-ely  he  might  thus  reason  with  the  Corinthians, 
whom  he  addressed  as  to  the  government  of  their  conduct 
towards  one  for  whom  Christ  died,  when  he  reasoned  in 
the  same  flay  with  himself  as  to  the  government  of  his 
passions  and  appetites,  and  talked  of  the  contingency  of 
his  being  a  cast-away,  although  he  could  also  say,  "  I  live 
by  the  faith  of  the  Son  of  God,  ^vho  loved  me  and  gave 
himself  for  me" 

*  ix.  27. 


APPENDIX.  443 

The  only  other  passage  I  think  it  of  any  consequence 
to  examine  is,  Matt,  xviii.  23,  to  the  end.  It  is  a  parable 
spoken  in  answer  to  Peter's  question,  "  Lord,  how  oft 
shall  my  brother  sin  against  me,  and  I  forgive  him  ?"  and 
is  clearly  intended  to  teach  the  necessity  of  cherishing  a 
compassionate  and  forgiving  disposition  towards  our  of- 
fending brother.  But  the  abettors  of  universal  pardon, 
who  have  the  art  of  extracting  poison  from  the  most  whole- 
some viands,  discover  in  it  a  divine  authority  for  their  fa- 
vom'ite  doctrine.  It  shows,  they  think,  that  God,  repre- 
sented by  the  "  certain  king,"  may  pardon,  and  yet  finally 
condemn  those  Avhom  he  has  pardoned  for  the  very  offences 
that  were  pardoned.  Now,  don't  they  perceive,  in  the 
first  place,  that  the  king  forgave  the  servant  indebted  to 
him,  only  in  consequence  of  a  humble  supplication  for  pa- 
tient and  indulgent  treatment,  which  indicated  sense  of 
error,  humility,  regret,  and  dependence ;  and  that,  there- 
fore, the  forgiveness  which  followed  was  conditional  ? — 
Don't  they  perceive,  in  the  second  place,  that  the  subse- 
quent exaction  of  the  debt  proves  the  forgiveness  to  have 
been  suspended  upon  continued  good  conduct  on  the  part 
of  the  debtor,  and  on  that  account,  also,  to  have  been  con- 
ditional ? — Don't  they  perceive,  in  the  ^Awrf place,  that  the 
"  delivering  of  the  servant  to  the  tormentors  tiU  he  should 
pay  all  that  was  due,"  after  he  had  been  forgiven  his  debt, 
if  taken  as  descriptive  of  God's  conduct  to  sinnei-s,  repre- 
sents him  as  changeable,  and  deprives  believers  of  all  well- 
grounded  assiu-ance  of  personal  forgiveness,  and  contra- 
dicts the  Scriptures,  which  declare,  that  "  the  gifts  and 
callings  of  God  are  without  repentance,"  and  that  no  one 
can  ever  condemn  those  whom  God  has  pardoned,  or  "  se- 
parate them  from  his  love  which  is  in  Christ  Jesus  ?"— 
Don't  they  perceive,  in  the  fourth  place,  the  great  truth 
which  this  parable  is  meant  to  inculcate,  and  which  im- 


444  APPENDIX. 

plies,  that  pardon  or  freedom  from  condemnation  is,  in  the 
case  of  every  one,  linked  conditionally  to  a  forgiving  tem- 
per and  conduct,  as  summed  up  in  the  concluding  verse  of 
the  chapter,  "  So  likewise  shall  my  heavenly  Father  do 
also  unto  you,  if  ye  from  your  hearts  forgive  not  every 
one  his  brother  their  trespasses  ?" — And  don't  they  per- 
ceive, in  the  last  place,  how  destructive  is  this  parable — 
according  to  their  mode  of  construing  parables — of  one 
important  branch  of  their  system,  inasmuch  as  the  servant 
who  was  in  debt  to  his  master,  though  he  was  forgiven, 
and  could  not  but  believe,  and  know,  and  feel  it,  seeing 
that  ho  M'as  "loosed,"  and  that  neither  he,  nor  his  wdfe, 
nor  his  children  were  to  be  sold,  yet  found  it  no  medicine 
for  curing  the  diseases,  or  promoting  the  health  of  his 
soul,  as  apj)ears  from  the  relentless  and  unsanctified  de- 
portment that  he  maintained  toward  his  fellow  servant, 
whom  he  "  took  by  the  throat"  and  "  cast  into  prison  till 
he  should  pay  the  debt"  that  he  owed  him  ? 


Note  R,  p.  241. 


I  allude  here  to  the  language  generally  held  respecting 
us  by  the  disciples  of  the  new  school ;  and  I  paiticularly 
allude  to  what  INIr.  Erskine  has  published  in  his  Preface 
to  the  Letters  of  a  Lady.  After  giving  a  distorted  ac- 
count of  the  sentiments  that  obtain  in  this  country  on 
the  subject  of  religion,  which  he  ends  with  saying,  "  He," 
that  is,  the  "serious  man"  has  little  or  no  confidence  at 
all,  and  all  that  he  has,  is  in  himself — in  his  oivn  faith," 
he  goes  on  thus,  "  This  is  the  leprosy  which  has  over- 
spread the  land.  And  whence  does  it  proceed  ?  It  pro- 
ceeds from  the  voice  of  the  shepherds,  who  tell  the  peo- 


APPENDIX.  445 

pie,  that  althoi^h  the  g-ospel  is  a  proclamation  of  God's 
love,  and  of  forgiveness  of  sins  through  Christ — yet  that 
those  only  are  loved,  and  those  only  are  forgiven,  who 
have  faith  in  the  gospel.     I  do  not  speak  of  the  author- 
ized standards  of  any  church,  I  speak  of  the  religion  taught 
to  the  people.     This  is  the  fountain  head  of  the  leprosy ; 
and  let  the  shepherds  look  to  it,  and  let  the  flocks  look  to 
it.     This  doctrine  is  the  standing  doctrine  of  the  land, 
and  it  is  nothing  else  than  making  the  cross  of  Christ  of 
none  effect.     It  is  a  false  gospel,  which  places  the  ground 
of  confidence  not  in  God,  hut  in  the  creatiu-e.     It  is  a 
false  gospel,  which  mocks  man  Avith  a  semblance  of  good, 
but  gives  him  nothing.     It  makes  the  whole  matter  a 
peradventure,  &c."     And  again,  "  Let  the  shepherds  look 
to  it;   let  them  look  to  the  state  of  their  flocks,  and, 
Avhilst  they  do  so,  let  them  ponder  that  word,  '  If  they 
had  stood  in  my  counsel,  and  caused  my  people  to  hear 
my  words,  then  they  should  have  turned  them  from  their 
evil  way,  and  from  the  evil  of  their  doings,'  Jer.  xxiii.  22. 
And  there  is  a  word  in  that  same  chapter  for  the  flocks, 
M'hich  they  also  would  do  well  to  mark.     They  must  judge 
of  the  doctrine  which  they  have,  by  the  standard  of  the 
word  of  God.     It  is  no  excuse  for  their  receiving  false  doc- 
trine, that  they  have  heard  it  from  their  teachers — they 
are  called  on  to  '  try  the  spirits  Avhether  they  be  of  God.' 
They  aaiU  be  judged  by  the  Bible — and  God  says,  of  the 
truth,  that  it  is  easily  discernible  from  falsehood,  for  '  what 
is  the  chaff  to  the  wheat,  saith  the  Lord ;  is  not  my  word 
like  as  a  fire,  saith  the  Lord,  and  like  a  hammer  that 
brealveth  the  rock  in  pieces  ?'     And  let  all  look  to  that 
word — '  Cursed  is  the  man  that  trusteth  in  man,  and  whose 
heart  departeth  from  the  Lord.'  * 

•  Introductory  Essay,  pp.  xxiii.  xxv.     Harsher  and  more  in- 


446  APPENDIX. 

The  ministers  and  people  of  thia  country  ai'e  really  very 
much  indebted  to  Mr,  Erskine  for  his  warnings,  and  re- 
bulies,  and  exhortations,  severe  though  they  be,  and  end- 
ing though  they  do  in  a  curse.  I  have  no  disposition  to 
curse  him  in  return ;  but  I  may  use  tlie  freedom  of  remind- 
ing him,  tliat  after  holding  such  language  respecting  the 
Christian  inhabitants  of  this  country,  among  whom  he 
finds  no  exceptions,  ])ut  himself  and  one  or  two  more, 
it  is  utterly  ludicrous  for  him  and  them  to  talk  to  their 
coteries  of  being  persecuted,  when  we  simply  repel  their 
slanders,  deny  their  infallibilitj'-,  reprove  their  presump- 
tion, and  laugh  at  their  nonsense.  In  his  former  produc- 
tion Mr,  Erskine,  though  abundantly  dogmatical,  was  com- 
paratively mild — -I  don't  like  heresy  and  meekness  com- 
bined— but  he  has  got  heated  by  finding  that  his  prelec- 
tions are  not  quite  so  successful  as  he  expectbd,  and  that 
neither  the  shepherds  nor  the  sheep  are  so  submissive  to 
his  dicta  as  he  expected  them  to  be.  In  the  passages 
quoted  above,  and  in  others  of  a  similar  stamp  that  might 
have  been  adduced,  he  betrays  aiTogance,  acerbity,  and  dis- 
dain towards  those  Avho  differ  from  him,  which  he  has  no 
title,  from  any  endowments,  either  mental  or  moral,  that 
are  discoverable  in  him,  to  manifest  even  in  the  least 
degree.  Whence  did  he  acquire  a  right  to  lay  the  whole 
Christian  world  under  his  ban,  because  they  will  not  go 
along  with  him  and  a  few  others,  in  a  theory  on  the  free- 
ness  of  the  gospel,  for  which  they  see  no  authority  in 
the  Bible,  and  which  they  believe  to  be  hostile  aUke  to 
the  character  of  God,  and  the  safety  of  men  ?  I  cannot 
help  quoting  from  the  pages  of  one  of  the  dictatorial  and 
self  sufficient  school  to  which  he  belongs,  the  follow- 

tok'rant  language  still  is  used  by  Mr.  Erskine  in  a  previous 
part  of  his  Essay,  for  \^  hich  see  Note  AA. 


APPENDIX.  447 

ing  sentences,  "  It  is  not  unworthy  of  observation,  that 
those  whose  statements  in  this  respect  have  been  the  high- 
est, have  often  in  their  controversies  assumed  towards 
their  opponents  a  tone  of  bitterness  and  contempt  most 
unbecoming  the  Christian  character.  This  looks  like 
self-righteousness,  and  seems  to  mark  that  they  are  trust- 
ing rather  in  their  own  faith,  which  elevates  them,  than  in 
the  cross  of  Christ,  which  would  humble  them."* 


Note  S.  p.  262. 


These  passages  are  extracted  from  Edwards'  Gangrsena. 
It  is  curious  to  observe  that  about  the  same  period,  there 
were  afloat,  notions  respecting  the  Millennium  and  the 
human  nature  of  Christ,  very  much  resembling  those  which 
are  now  prevailing  in  certain  quarters.  I  have  not  the 
means  of  ascertaining  whether  these  notions  and  those  I 
have  been  endeavoiu'ing  to  refute  in  this  volume,  were  held 
by  the  same  persons ;  but  such  is  very  much  the  fact  in 
the  present  day.  I  find  that,  with  some  few  exceptions, 
those  who  greedily  receive  the  one  set  of  heresies,  as  gree- 
dily receive  the  other.  Those  who  have  adopted  the 
belief  that  all  men  are  already  pardoned,  and  that  God  is 
nothing  but  love,  have  also  adopted  the  belief  that  Christ's 
humanity  was  such  as  it  is  represented  to  have  been  by 
Mr.  Irving.  And  I  know  that,  though  the  thing  is  not 
avowed,  this  latter  doctrine  is  imbibed  by  such  as  have 
imbibed  the  doctrine  of  universal  forgiveness,  and  cherish- 
ed by  them  as  an  additional  soxu-ce  of  comfort  and  joy,  and 
inculcated  upon  their  companions  and  correspondents  as  a 
more  clear  proof  of  the  divine  mercy  and  condescension. 

•  Essay  on  Faith,  by  Thos.  Erskiae,  Esq.  p.  9. 


448  APPENDIX. 


Note  T.  p.  269. 

This,  I  am  a^A'are,  is  a  delicate  and  a  difficult  subject  ; 
and  had  my  limits  permitted,  I  would  have  entered  into  a 
little  more  explanation.  But  I  have  no  doubt  of  the  truth 
of  the  general  doctrine  which  I  have  stated,  though  it  is 
not  very  easy  to  apply  it  to  particular  cases,  and  though, 
perhaps,  I  might  be  found  wrong  in  that  respect  by  many 
whose  judgTQent  I  revere.  And  I  am  sure  that  I  shall  not 
be  deemed  too  indulgent  in  the  opinion  I  have  expressed 
<M)ncerning  those  individuals  against  whom  I  am  especial- 
ly contending.  For  with  all  the  exceptions  furnished  by 
their  mode  of  caiTying  on  this  dispute,  and  which  I  have 
not  failed  to  notice  and  reprehend,  I  am  impressed  with  a 
decided  conviction  of  their  personal  Christianity,  and  only 
regret  that  their  personal  Christianity  should  serve  as  a 
passport  to  the  fundamental  errors  that  they  are  dissemin- 
ating with  such  apostolic  zeal. 


Notes  U  and  X,  p.  279,  280. 

The  Confession  from  which  I  have  quoted  is  the  Bohe- 
mian, which  was  drawn  up  after  conferring  with  Luther, 
and  to  which  he  wrote  a  recommendatory  Preface. 

I  have  given  one  or  two  short  extracts  from  his  Com- 
mentary on  the  Galatians.  But  it  may  be  proper  that  I 
should  exhibit  more  of  Luther's  sentiments  as  contained  in 
that  work,  to  show  that  he  has  been  somehow  or  other 
much  misunderstood,  unless  he  has  been  himself  altogether 
inconsistent.  The  reader's  attention  is  requested  to  the 
following  passages. 


APPENDIX.  449 

"  Faith  taketh  hold  of  Christ,  and  hath  him  present,  and 
holdeth  him  enclosed,  as  the  ring  doth  the  precious  stone. 
And  Avhosoever  shall  be  found  having  this  confidence  in 
Christ  apprehended  in  the  heart,  him  wiU  God  account  for 
rig-hteous.  This  is  the  7nean,  and  this  is  the  merit,  where' 
hy  we  attain  the  remission  of  sins  and  righteousness.  '  Be- 
cause thou  helievest  in  me,  saith  the  Lord,  and  thy  faith 
layeth  hold  upon  Christ,  whom  I  have  freely  given  unto 
thee  that  he  might  be  thy  mediator  and  high  priest,  there- 
_/a/'e,  be  thou  justified*  and  righteous."     Page  180. 

"  Here,  saith  the  Christian,  this  (the  merit  of  congruence, 
and  the  merit  of  worthiness,)  is  not  the  right  way  to  jus- 
tify us,  neither  doth  this  way  lead  to  heaven.  For  I  can- 
not, saith  he,  by  my  works  going  before  grace,  deserve 
grace,  nor  by  my  works  following  g-race,  deserve  eternal 
life  ,•  but  to  him  that  believeth,  sin  is  pardoned  and  righte- 
ousness imputed.  This  trust,  and  this  confidence,  maketh 
him  the  child  of  God,  and  heir  of  his  kingdom ;  for  in 
hope  he  possesseth  already  everlasting  life  assiu-ed  unto 
him  by  promise.  Through  faith  in  Christ,  therefore,  all 
things  are  given  unto  us,  grace,  -peace,  forgiveness  ofsinsy 
salvation  and  everlasting  life,  and  not  for  the  merit  of  con- 
gruence and  worthiness."     Page  182. 

" '  Him  that  honoureth  me,'  saith  God,  '  I  will  honour.' 
Now  God  is  honoured  in  his  Son.  Whoso  then  believeth 
that  the  Son  is  our  Mediator  and  Saviour,  he  honoureth 
the  Father,  and  him  again  doth  God  honoiu- ;  that  is  to  say, 
adorneth  him  with  his  gifts,  forgiveness  of  sins,  righteous- 
ness, the  Holy  Ghost,  and  everlasting  life."     Page  187. 

"  Christ,  our  instructor,  is  Lord  over  the  laiv,  sin,  and 
death;  so  that  they  which  believe  in  him  are  delivered 
from  the  same.     '  Christ  is  the  Lamb  of  God,  that  hath 

"  According  to  Luther,  justification  included  not  a  sense  of 
forgiveness,  but  the  blessing  of  forgiveness  itself. 


450  APPENDIX. 

taken  away  the  sin  of  the  world.'  Now,  if  the  sin  of  the 
world  be  taken  away,  then  is  it  taken  away  from  me  also, 
which  do  believe  in  him."     Page  194. 

"  He,  therefore,  that  will  avoid  the  ciu-se,  must  lay  hold 
upon  the  promise  of  blessing-,  or  upon  the  faith  of  Abrar 
ham,  or  else  he  shall  remain  under  the  ciu-se.  Upon  this 
place,  therefore,  '  shall  be  blessed  in  thee,'  it  followeth  that 
all  nations,  whether  they  were  before  Abraham,  in  his  time, 
or  after  him,  are  accursed,  and  shall  abide  under  the  curse 
for  ever,  unless  they  be  blessed  in  the  faith  of  Abraham,  un- 
to whom  the  promise  of  the  blessing  was  given  to  l)e  publish- 
ed by  his  seed  throughout  the  whole  world."    Page  269. 

"  Faith  is  a  certain  steadfast  beholding,  Avhich  looketh 
upon  nothing  else  but  Christ  the  conqueror  of  sin  and 
death,  and  the  giver  of  righteousness,  salvation,  and  eternal 
life."  •'  Moses  commanded  the  Jews  which  M'ere  stung 
of  serpents  in  the  desert,  to  do  nothing  else  but  steadfastly 
behold  the  brazen  sei*pent,  and  not  to  turn  away  their  eyea. 
They  that  did  so,  were  healed  only  by  that  steadfast  and 
constant  beholding  of  the  serpent.  But  contrariwise,  they 
died  which  obeyed  not  the  conmiandment,  but  looked  up- 
on the  woimds  and  not  upon  the  serpent.  So  if  I  would 
find  comfort  when  my  conscience  is  afflicted,  or  when  I 
am  at  the  point  of  death,  I  must  do  nothing  but  apprehend 
Christ  by  faith,"  &c.*  Page  357. 

*  Luther  here  refers  to  John  iii.  14,  15.  Christ  said,  "  And 
as  Moses  lifted  up  the  serpent  in  the  wilderness,  even  so 
must  the  Son  of  Man  Ije  lifted  up  ;  that  whosoever  believeth 
in  him  should  not  perish,  hut  have  eternal  life."  If  the  Old 
Testament  provision  for  the  saving  of  the  people's  lives  is  in 
any  measure  an  Illustration  of  the  New  Testament  provision, 
for  the  saving  of  the  sinner's  soul — and  for  this  very  purpose 
it  is  introduced  hy  our  Lord — then  faith  in  Christ  is  as  neces- 
sary for  the  latter,  as  looking  to  the  brazen  serpent  was  ne- 


APPENDIX.  451 

"  Now  if  they  be  servants,  they  cannot  be  partakers  of 
the  inheritance,  but  shall  be  cast  out  of  the  house ;  for  ser- 
vants remain  not  in  the  house  for  ever,  (John  viii.  35,)  yea, 
they  are  already  cast  out  of  the  kingdom  of  grace  and  li- 
berty :  "  for  he  that  bclicveth  not  is  condemned  already" 
(John  iii.  18.)  They  remain,  therefore,  under  the  male- 
diction of  the  law,  under  sin  and  death,  under  the  power 
of  the  devil,  and  under  the  wrath  and  judgment  of  God." 
P.  425. 

These  passages  sufficiently  and  amply  prove  that  Luther 
did  not  maintain  Mr.  Erskine's  doctrine,  but  that,  on  the 
contrary,  he  held  faith  and  forgiveness — unbelief  and  con- 
demnation by  the  law — to  be  inseparably  united.  I  grant, 
that  though  he  taught  predestination,  and  election,  and 
pardon  by  faith  only,  he  did  in  some  way  or  other  consider 
the  death  of  Christ  as  taking  away  the  sins  of  the  whole 
irorld.     But  I  am  not  aware  that  he  made  any  attempt  to 

cessary  for  the  former.  Nor  is  saving  here  used  in  Mr.  Ers- 
kine's sense  for  sanctifying — it  is  for  redeeming  from  death, 
the  penalty  of  sin.  The  death  occasioned  by  the  bite  of  the 
fiery  serpents  was  sent  as  a  punishment  on  the  murmuring 
and  rebellious  Israelites ;  and  from  that  punishment,  deli- 
verance could  be  obtained  only  by  looking  to  the  serpent ;— . 
those  who  refused  to  look  of  course  died.  And  so  the  death 
to  which  sinners  are  subjected,  is  a  punishment  inflicted  upon 
them  for  transgressing  against  God  ;  and  from  that  punish- 
ment, deliverance  can  be  obtained  only  by  believing  in  Jesus 
Glirist ; — those  who  refuse  to  believe,  must,  of  course,  pe- 
rish. I  cannot  understand  how  Mr.  Erskine  gets  quit  of 
this  scriptural  argument,  except  by  obstinately  declining  to 
consider  it.  The  cliapter  from  which  it  is  taken,  he  is  per- 
petually harping  upon.  It  is  one  of  his  select  themes  for 
exposition.     How  does  he  dispose  of  verses,  14  and  15  .' 


452  APPENDIX. 

explain  the  consistency  of  this  view  with  the  other  view:^ 
to  which  we  have  aUuded,  and  which  are  certainly  incom- 
patible with  universal  redemption  as  he  himself  seems  to 
understand  it.  At  all  events  he  is  no  authority  for  IMr. 
Erskiue — because  he  never  affu-ms  that  aU  men  are  par- 
doned whether  they  believe  or  not.  And  as  I  have  already 
hinted,  it  is  probable  that  the  discrepancy  of  his  statements 
has  arisen  from  the  violence  with  which  he  opposed  the 
Romish  doctrine  of  merit,  and  the  anxiety  that  he  felt  to 
be  as  far  away  as  possible  from  that  destructive  heresy. 
The  following  passage  from  one  of  his  Tracts,  entitled 
"  Martin  Luther  against  the  order  of  Pope  and  Bishops," 
at  once  states  his  own  real  views,  and  shows  the  abuse 
against  which  he  was  directing  his  eflforts. 

"  The  most  atrocious  and  most  mischievous  poison  of 
all  the  papal  usages  is  that,  where  the  pontiff,  in  his  bulls 
of  indulgence,  grants  a  full  remission  of  sins.  Christ,  in 
the  9th  of  Matthew  did  not  say  to  the  sick  of  the  palsy, 
'  Put  money  into  this  box,'  but  "  Son,  be  of  good  cheer, 
thy  sins  are  forgiven  thee."  No  words  or  conceptions 
can  reach  the  atrocity  and  abomination  of  this  Satanic 
invention :  for,  through  this  means,  the  people  are  seduc- 
ed from  the  purity  and  simplicity  of  that  faith  which,  by 
relying  on  the  precious  promises  of  God,  alone  justifies 
and  obtains  remission  of  sins ;  and  they  are  led  to  put 
their  trust  in  the  pope's  bulls,  or  in  paying  certain  pre- 
scribed sums  of  money,  or  in  their  own  works  and  satis- 
factions." 

To  the  "  Extracts  from  the  Letters  of  a  Lady,"  with 
Mr.  Erskine's  Introductory  Essay,  there  are  append- 
ed some  quotations  from  Eraser  of  Brae's  Treatise  on 
Justifying  Faith.  The  Publisher  is  pleased  to  say  that 
these  are  a  "  suitable  appendix  to  the  Essay  and  Letters;" 
and  so  they  are.     For  they  contain  the  same  unsound 


Ai?PENDlX.  4S3 

tfenets ;  the  same  misapprehensions  of  Scripture,  even  as 
to  1  Tim.  iv.  10 ;  the  same  inconsecutive  reasoning ;  the 
same  frequent  recourse  to  the  petitio  principii ;  the  same 
sort  of  inconsistencies ;  the  same  strain  of  piety  j   and 
the  same  affectation  of  superfine  orthodoxy.     I  wonder 
that  Mr.  Erskine  did  not  look  better  about  him  before 
he  allowed  such  an  Appendix  to  appear  under  the  sanc- 
tion of  his  name — though,  indeed,  that  need  scarcely  be 
wondered  at,  after  he  has  given  such  a  marked  approba- 
tion to  the  epistolary  effusions  of  the  deceased  Lady — 
which  are  about  as  poor  specimens  of  theology  as  any  liv- 
ing Lady  of  his  school  is  capable  of  producing.     And  so  in 
spite  of  all  that  is  said  against  authority  in  matters  of  re- 
ligion, our  opponents  not  only  play  off  Luther  against  us — 
with  what  success  I  have  endeavoiu-ed  to  show — but  set  be- 
fore us  what  an  aged  sickly  female  wTote  to  her  con-espond- 
ents  about  50  or  60  years  ago,  and  what  a  Dr.  W.  wrote  to 
a  Mrs.  G.  at  a  still  earlier  period ;  and  lest  these  should 
fail  to  convince  the  public,  that  God  has  actually  pardoned 
the  unbelieving  and  impenitent,  and  after  all  wiU  punish 
them,  they  bring  upon  us  the  sayings  of  "  that  eminent 
and  learned  servant  of  Jesus  Christ,  Mr.  James  Fraser  of 
Brae,  sometime  minister  of  the  gospel  at  Culross,  while  he 
was  prisoner  on  the  Bass  for  the  testimony  of  Jesus."  The 
array  brought  against  us  is  reaUy  formidable ;  for  there  are 
Refonners,  Covenanters,  old  Ladies,  and  older  Doctors, 
and  if  we  add  to  these  the  author  of  the  little  books  and 
penny  tracts  that  are  put  forth  so  copiously  in  support  of 
the  heresies  Ave  have  been  considering,  it  may  look  as  if  we 
should  be  utterly  overwhelmed.  But  I  beg  leave  to  remind 
the  Gentlemen  who  are  so  busy  with  their  authorities,  that 
such  a  mode  of  settling  points  of  faith  is  neither  rational 
nor  scriptural,  and  most  inconsistently  resorted  to  by  those 
who  reject  the  use  of  it  even  so  far  as  mere  assistance  and 


454.  APPENDIX. 

advice  are  concerned ;  that  were  it  at  all  admissible,  IVLf. 
Erskine  andhis  coadjutors  must  be  fully  aware  that  we  could 
produce  at  least  five  hundred  for  one  against  them — for, 
indeed,  by  their  own  confession,  their  sect  is  small  as  well 
as  despised,  and  they  are  fain  to  represent  theij-  peculiar 
notions  as  a  sort  of  occult  truths,  revealed  to  them  only, 
and  uukno^^^^  to  all  the  world  beside ;  aud  that,  when  we 
come  to  a  particular  enumeration  of  the  masters  and  the 
mistresses  in  Israel,  whom  they  muster  in  opposition  to 
us,  they  are  found  to  have  sadly  mistaken  what  they  so 
confidently  adduced,  aud  to  have  been  catching'  at  a  straw 
when  thejf  thought  themselves  safely  floating  in  an  ark. 
As  to  Mr.  James  Eraser  of  Brae,  I  have  to  offer  a  few  re- 
mai'ks  which  deserve  their  notice. 

1.  First,  are  they  quite  sure  that  the  work  from  which 
they  have  quoted  wa^  really  from  the  pen  of  that  perse- 
cuted individual  ?  I  should  Uke  to  have  tlieir  proofs  of  the 
fact,  for  I  believe  it  to  be  the  general  opinion  that  he  left 
no  manuscripts  such  as  that  from  which  the  Treatise  on 
Faith  Avas  printed.  That  manuscript  was  not  in  liis  own 
handwriting,  as  the  publisher  falsely  alleged,  but  in  the 
hand^Titing  of  others,  who  must  have  been  totally  incom- 
petent to  judge  of  the  genuineness  of  what  they  WTote. 
But,  supposing  the  work  to  have  been  the  composition  of 
Ml*.  Fraser, 

2.  I  observe,  in  the  second  place,  that  he  did  not  enter- 
tain the  same  opinions  that  are  held  and  ])ropagated  by 
INIi-.  Erskine.  Mr.  Erskine's  doctrine  makes  no  account 
of  faith  as  to  getting  the  pardon ;  but  Mr.  Eraser's  makes 
faith  absolutely  necessary  for  that  purpose,  just  as  the  pro- 
pounding of  a  sovereign's  act  of  forgiveness  is  essential  in 
law  to  prevent  the  execution  of  the  condemned  criminal. 
IVIr.  Erskine  makes  salvation  and  sanctification  the  same  ; 
but   Mr.  Fraser  includes   pardon  imder  salvation.     Mr. 

5 


i 


APPENDIX.  455 

Erskine  makes  faith  and  repentance  the  same ;  but  Mr. 
Eraser,  more  closely  following'  the  Bible,  makes  them 
different,  and  considers  both  as  necessary  to  forgiveness 
and  salvation,  &c. 

3.  Third! I/,  I  must  notice  that  the  quotations  from  Era- 
ser's treatise  are  mutilated  and  garbled ; — those  passages 
being  left  out  which  would  have  modified  his  meaning, 
and  Avhich,  though  they  would  not  have  proved  him  to  be 
on  our  side  of  the  question,  would  have  shown  that  he  is 
not  so  much  on  the  side  of  Ivlr.  Erskine,  as  the  unfair  re- 
presentation given  of  his  sentiments  would  lead  us  to  sup- 
pose. 

4.  Lastly,  why  did  not  Mr.  Erskine  take  care  that  the 
readers  of  the  voliune,  containing-  the  extracts  from  Era- 
ser's Treatise,  should  see  exactly  the  length  to  which  this 
chosen  authority  on  the  subject  of  universal  redemption 
has  carried  his  doctrine  ?  He  maintains  that  Christ  laid 
down  his  life  for  those  that  ultimately  perish — in  Ai^hich 
Mr,  Erskine  agrees  -ivith  him,  though  he  does  not  agree 
with  Mr.  Erskine  that  pardon  is  actually  bestowed,  and 
individually  applied,  where  there  is  neither  faith  nor 
repentance  —  but  he  goes  farther,  and  maintains  that 
Christ  suffered  and  died  for  those  who  notwithstand- 
ing perish,  "  with  this  intention  and  purpose,  that  they 
might  be  made  fit  objects  of  gospel  vengeance  and  M'rath, 
wrath  of  a  gospel  kind,  as  a  sorer  and  worse  punishment, 
than  law-wrath  :  for  which  end  they  were  given  to  him 
and  piu-chased  by  him!"  How  does  this  harmonise  with 
Mr.  Erskine's  theory  of  redeeming  love  ?  What  does  he 
say  to  his  new  ally  ?  Is  there  any  thing  in  the  "common 
phraseology"  more  revolting  to  him  than  this  ?  But  our 
opponents  not  only  have  no  objection  to  human  authority 
when  it  can  be  made  to  speak  a  word  or  two  for  their  pe- 
culiarities, but  seem  to  care  very  little  about  either  the  gc- 


4^6  APPENDIX. 

nuineness  or  the  cliaracter  of  the  authority  which  they 
i)ring'  forward  in  their  support.  They  are  as  welcome  to 
Mr.  Fraser,  whom  neither  Calviuist  nor  Arminian  can  ac- 
knowledg-e,  as  they  are  to  the  old  Lady  and  the  Doctor. 
The  word  of  God  is  the  standard  of  tnith,  and  to  that  word 
we  appeal,  against  the  tenets,  equally  of  Mr.  Fraser  and  Mr. 
Erskine. 


Note  Y,  p.  292. 

This  strange  language  occurs  in  Mr.  Erskine's  "  Uncon- 
ditional Freeness,"  p.  110.  It  is  so  very  much  away  from 
correct  phraseology,  that  I  cannot  refrain  from  suspecting 
it  to  be  indicative  of  the  Socinian  belief,  that  God  is  alto- 
gether love.  I  see  strong  expressions  in  this  volume  in- 
deed, respecting  the  holiness  of  God,  and  the  evil  of  sin. 
But  when  I  read  those  passages  in  which  God's  compassion 
is  celebrated — when  I  observe  the  exceeding  carefulness  with 
which  divine  threatenings,  God's  sovereignty,  and  the  pu- 
nishments of  hell,  are  avoided,  or  the  studied  and  unscrip- 
tui'al  softness  with  which  they  are  mentioned — and  when 
I  mark  the  great  tendency  of  the  whole  theory  to  make 
wicked  men  look  for  universal  salvation,  as  well  as  to  be- 
lieve in  universal  pardon,  I  caunot  help  fearing  that  Mr. 
Erskine  has  some  speculations  at  least,  such  as  I  have  al- 
luded to,  floating  in  his  mind,  and  that  his  disciples  may  be 
insensibly  led  to  adopt  the  error,  and  to  plead  his  tuition. 
Whatever  excuses  and  explanations  may  be  adduced,  there 
is  something  too  sig-nificant  in  God's  "  holy  love  directed 
against  sin"  to  allow  me  to  have  any  confident  persuasion, 
that  Mr.  Erskine's  views  of  God's  nature  and  character  are 


i^. 


APPENDIX.  457 

as  hostile  as  they  should  be  to  what  has  been  taught  in  the 
school  of  Priestley  and  Belsham. 


Note  Z,  p.  302. 


The  following  is  Mr,  Erskine's  statement  on  this  sub- 
ject. 

"  In  the  meantime,  however,  the  pardon  stands  at  the 
door,  and  the  deliverer  is  in  it,  and  knocks  for  admittance. 
The  pardon  is  universal;  and  stiU  it  may  with  perfect  pro- 
priety and  consistency  be  said,  that  until  man  receives 
it  into  his  heart,  he  is  under  condemnation.  For  he  is  ex- 
cluded, or  excludes  himself  from  the  only  good  and  joy  in 
the  universe ; — he  is  away  from  the  God  of  love,  and  thus 
he  is  full  of  wrath,  and  encompassed  with  wTath ; — he  is 
away  from  the  God  of  light,  and  thus  he  is  in  outer  dark- 
ness ;  and  this  is,  and  must  be  his  inheritance,  until  he  ad- 
mits the  gospel  into  his  heart.  It  is  quite  evident,  then, 
that  a  man  may  be  thoughtless  and  for  ever  miserable,  al- 
though he  has  this  pardon ;  and  that  he  can  derive  no  pos- 
sible benefit  from  it,  except  by  believing  it."  Uncondi- 
tional Freeness,  p.  143. 

I  know  not  how  Mr.  Erskine  reconciles  this  passage 
with  that  other  passage  in  which  he  tells  us,  that  if  we  have 
Christ  we  have  pardon,  but  that  if  Ave  have  not  Christ  we 
have  not  pardon.  But  contradictious  are  to  be  found  of- 
ten in  his  very  confused  treatises.  I  question  much — nay 
I  do  not  believe,  that  he  is  able  to  think  systematically  of 
the  various  opinions  that  he  has  given  to  the  world.  An  at- 
tempt to  do  so,  could  he  but  be  persuaded  to  make  it,  would 
probably  convince  him  that  his  main  positions  are  erro- 
neous, or  at  least  make  him  less  confiden*.  of  their  accu- 
racy and  truth.  / 


m 


458  APPENDIX. 


Note  A  A,  p.  313. 

Mr.  Erskine  says,  "  A  very  common  idea  of  the  object 
of  the  gospel  is,  that  it  is  to  show  how  men  may  obtain 
pardon;  whereas,  in  truth,  its  object  is  to  show, how^a?- 
donfor  men  has  been  obtained,  or  rather  to  show  how  God 
has  taken  occasion,  by  the  entrance  of  sin  into  the  world, 
to  manifest  the  inisearchable  riches  of  holy  compassion. 
And  it  is  to  present  this  most  important  truth  (as  I  can- 
not but  consider  it)  to  some  who  may  not  have  thought  of 
it  before,  that  I  have  published  this  book, — and  it  is  for 
this  reason  that  I  have  chosen  to  depart  from  the  common 
phraseology  on  the  subject, — because  I  have  found  the 
common  plu-aseology  liable  to  misintei*pretation.  Thus  I 
have  observed  that  even  the  phrase  free  offer  of  pardon 
is  so  interpreted,  that  the  veiy  existence  of  the  freedom  is 
made  to  depend  on  the  acceptance  of  the  offer.  The  be- 
nefit of  the  pardon  does  most  assuredly  depend  on  its  being 
accepted,  but  the  pardon  itself  is  laid  up  in  Christ  Jesus, 
and  depends  on  nothing  but  the  unchangeable  character  of 
God."     Unconditional  Freeness,  p.  1 30. 

Here  Mr.  Ei-skine  represents  the  "  common  phraseolo- 
gy" of  this  country  as  only  "  liable  to  misinterpretation." 
It  is  not  in  itself  doctrinally  unsound — it  has  only  such  a 
degree  of  ambiguity  about  it  as  that  people  are  apt  to  put 
a  wrong  construction  upon  it.  Indeed !  And  why  should 
Mr.  Erskine  be  so  very  anxious  about  such  a  matter  ?  If 
the  phraseology  is  not  inherently  heterodox,  and  if  it  be 
used  by  the  people  at  large  with  an  orthodox  meaning, 
who  were  to  be  injiu'ed  by  its  mere  liability  to  misinter- 
pretation ?  Not  the  people  at  large — but  I  suppose,  such 
,  learned  persons  as  Mr.  Erskine !  And  he  proposes  to  take 
away  this  liability  to  misintei-pretation,  by  altering  the 


APPENDIX.  459 

phraseology,  so  that  it  may  convey  the  same  meaning,  but 
in  a  much  more  distinct  manner.  To  whom  ?  To  himself 
of  course,  and  a  few  more — for  the  people  at  large  under- 
stood it  well  enough  in  its  ordinary  use.  And  \A'as  he  not 
afraid  that,  by  such  a  change  in  the  "  conmion  phraseolo- 
gy," he  might  overset  the  people's  ideas  altogether,  or  at 
least  introduce  a  great  deal  of  confusion  among  them,  by 
the  uncommon  phraseology  that  he  was  to  su]>stitute  in  its 
place  ?  Was  he  really  hopeful  of  mending  matters  as  to 
mere  diction  or  verbal  expression,  by  calling  justification 
a  sense  of  pardon — and  faith  in  Christ,  a  belief  that  we  are 
pardoned  whether  we  believe  or  not — and  faith,  repentance, 
and  repentance,  faith — and  salvation,  sanctificatioa — and 
heaven,  a  holy  character,  and  hell,  a  wicked  character,  &c. 
&c.  &c.  ?  Was  there  not  reason  to  apprehend  that  the 
few  would  bamboozle  and  mislead  the  many,  much  more 
than  the  many  could  possibly  have  inilicted  these  evils  on 
the  few  ?  Yet  ftlr.  Erskine,  in  his  great  consideration  and 
kindness  to  that  small  number  whose  principles  were  so 
unsettled,  and  whose  intellect  M'as  so  obtuse,  set  himself  to 
publish  some  hundreds  of  duodecimo  pages  in  order  to 
amend  the  "  common  phraseology"  which  he  found  "  lia- 
ble to  misinterpretation !" 

In  the  course  of  a  very  short  time,  however,  he  made  a 
discovery.  He  discovered  that  the  fault  lay  not  in  the 
phraseology,  but  in  the  doctrine  which  it  contained.  And 
though  I  thinli  there  is  some  reason  to  conclude  that  he 
had  made  the  discovery  of  unsound  doctrine,  when  he  af- 
fected to  be  puzzled  with  nothing  more  than  obscure  and 
doubtful  phraseology,  he  very  soon  became  more  explicit 
in  his  charges,  and  an-aigncd  the  religious  principles  and 
character  of  those  by  whom  the  common  phraseology  was 
and  is  employed,  in  the  following  terms  of  bitter,  and  un- 
sparing, and  indiscriminate  severity. 
5 


460  APPENDIX. 

"  Man's  religion  dishonours  God,  both  in  the  attain* 
raent  of  its  object,  and  in  the  means  which  it  employs 
for  attaining  it.     It  considers  God  merely  as  a  power  that 
can  inflict  injuries,  and  bestow  benefits.      It  does   not 
consider  him  as  in  himself  the  Fountain  of  living  waters. 
It  does  not  make  God's  character  to  be  a  matter  of  any  im- 
portance.    It  does  not  consider  him  as  a  Father.     It  de- 
nies both  his  love  and  his  holiness.     It  tramples  under 
foot  the  Son  of  God,  and  all  that  is  contained  in  his  in- 
carnation, and  death,  and  resurrection.     This,  I  say,  is 
man's  religion,  whether  it  assumes  the  name,  and  uses  the 
phrases  of  that  religion :  or  takes  any  other  name,  or 
uses  any  other  phrases.     And  tJiis  I  believe  to  be  the  pre- 
valent religion  of  our  land, — taught  from  the  pulpits  and 
received  by  the  people.     I   don't  speak  of  the  worldly 
people,  but  of  the  religious  people.     This  may  appear  a 
harsh  and  presumptuous  saying,  but  I  feel  it  to  be  the 
kindest  thing  that  I  can  say,  because  I  am  persuaded  it  is 
the  truth."     Introductory  Essay,  pp.  xx,  xxi. 

Of  Mr.  Erskine's  "  Unconditional  Freeness,"  the  third 
edition  from  which  I  have  quoted,  is  dated  in  1829 ;  his 
Introductory  Essay  is  dated  1830.  So  that  in  the  course 
of  a  twelvemonth  or  less,  he  has  made  wonderful  progress 
in  his  perception  and  understanding  of  the  evil  against 
which  he  directs  his  efforts.  His  progress  has  been  no 
less  wonderful,  in  the  arrogance  and  violence  with  which 
he  has  thought  it  necessary  to  deliver  himself^  against  the 
objects  of  his  hostility.  Did  he  really  not  know  that  the 
prevalent  doctrine  in  1829,  was  exactly  what  the  preva- 
lent doctrine  is  in  1830 ?  If  he  did  not,  flith  what  de- 
cency can  such  an  ignorant  man  take  it  upon  him  to  be- 
come the  censor,  the  instructor,  the  guide  of  his  country 
and  bis  age  ?  If  he  did,  why  did  he  talk  as  if  his  anxiety- 
was  confined  to  the  correction  of  the  "  common  phraseo- 


APPENDIX.  461 

logy" — that  being  "  liable  to  misinterpretation,"  and  as  if 
the  opinions  which  it  expressed  had  little  or  nothing  erro- 
neous in  them  ?  Let  Mr.  Erskine  embrace  either  alter- 
native, and  then  vindicate  his  conduct. 

But,  however  that  be,  Mr.  Erskine  is  now  convinced 
that  the  prevalent  religion  is  a  false  one, — and  so  false,  as 
to  deserve  all  the  unmixed  abuse  that  he  has  thrown  upon 
it,  and  to  call  for  that  sentence  of  proscription  which  he 
has  pronounced  upon  those  who  teach  it,  and  those  who 
attend  their  ministrations.     I  feel  myself  urged  by  a  sense 
of  duty,  and  a  regard  to  justice,  to  speak  plainly  out  on 
this  subject.     And  I  ask,  is  Mr.  Erskine  entitled  to  hold 
such  language,  and  to  expect  either  approbation  or  ac- 
quiescence ?     Even  though  he  had  been  peculiarly  gifted, 
the  simple  consideration,  that,  on  points  which  had  been 
deeply  and  duly  discussed  ages  before  he  came  into  the 
world,  he  stood  almost  alone  among  thousands  of  learned 
theologians,  and  tens  of  thousands  of  Christian  and  holy 
men,  should  have  filled  him  with  diffidence,  and  brought 
from  him  humble  inquiry,  instead  of  unfaultering  and  pro- 
phetic denunciation.   But,  really,  when  I  look  to  the  proofs 
which  he  has  given  us  of  his  capacity, — when  I  perceive 
in  his  works  such  inaccuracy  in  thinking,  such  feebleness 
in  argument,  such  blunders  in  criticism,  such  a  destitution 
of  all  those  high  qualities  of  intellect  and  erudition,  which 
authorize  a  man  to  come  forward  as  a  reformer  in  Biblical 
theology, — I  cannot  help  expressing  my  astonishment  at 
the  tone  that  he  has  assumed,  in  holding  up  the  religion 
taught  by  all  the  ministers,  and  received  by  all  the  people 
of  this  countiy,  as  deserving  of  that  deep  damnation  to 
which  he  has  consigned  it,  in  his  deliberate,  solemn,  and 
published  judgment.    Considering  all  the  circumstances  of 
the  case,  let  him  have  that  sincerity  to  the  utmost,  for 
which  I  willingly  give  him  credit,  there  is  a  degree  of  pre- 


462  APPENDIX. 

sumptuonsness  in  the  attitude  he  has  taken  up  for  which 
I  can  find  no  apology.  The  very  singularity  of  his  dog- 
ma should  have  led  him  to  suspect  himself  of  rashness 
and  error,  as  it  should  teach  others  to  listen  to  his  ha- 
rangues, and  to  perase  his  books,  T\'ith  the  greatest  cau- 
tion and  distrust.  His  pursuing  the  opposite  coui'se,  and 
his  example  being  followed  by  those,  whose  nonage  should 
make  them  teachable  and  not  dictatorial,  is  sufficient  to 
show  that  if  there  be  nothing  in  his  system  to  fasten  down 
upon  it  the  character  of  intolerance,  there  is  at  least 
something  in  himself  that  should  impair  his  credit — that 
should  destroy  his  influence,  as  the  propounder  of  a  new 
theory  of  the  gospel. 

The  magisterial  style  of  IMi-.  Erskine  in  the  passage 
under  review  is  the  more  unliefitting,  when  we  recollect 
the  changea1)leness  of  his  own  creed.  Many  things  are 
essential  to  a  man  before  he  can  be  at  liberty  to  anathe- 
matize all  his  fellow  Christians.  But  one  of  them  imques- 
tionably  is  consistency.  And  that  is  none  of  Mi*.  Ers- 
kine's  characteristics.  From  the  commencement  of  his 
Christian  career  down  to  the  present  day,  it  is  notorious 
to  all  liis  acquaintance,  and  not  unknown  to  many  be- 
yond that  circle,  that  his  religious  opinions  have  been 
varying  from  time  to  time — that  even  on  topics  of  im- 
portance, his  views  were  always  remarkable  for  their 
being  singular,  and  as  remarkable  for  their  being  un- 
steady— that  in  conversing  on  his  peculiar  notions  with 
those  who  disputed  their  soundness,  and  referred  to  what 
he  had  himself  formerly  maintained,  he  scouted  the  idea 
of  being  now  responsible  for  his  former  sentiments — and 
that  his  friends  on  whom  he  lu'ged  his  theories,  were  not 
unfrequently  tempted  to  promise  submission,  on  the  con- 
dition that  he  Avould  engage  to  adhere  to  them  himself 
for  six  months  to  come  !     Such  things  I  should  not  have 


APPENDIX.  463 

thought  it  proper  to  mention,  had  his  accusations  been 
pervaded  in  any  measure  by  a  spirit  of  forbearance  and 
modesty.  But  they  are  necessary,  and  I  scrapie  not  to 
state  them,  in  order  to  meet  that  harsh  invective  which 
he  has  poured  out  upon  the  "  religious  people,"  and  the 
Christian  pastors  of  this  country ;  that  Vatican-like  au- 
thority with  which  he  has  excommunicated  them  all,  as 
enemies  alike  to  God  and  man.  Such  treatment  would 
have  come  with  a  bad  grace  from  any  individual,  howe  ver 
staid  in  his  principles,  and  however  uniform  in  his  pro- 
gress :  but  it  is  only  not  thoroughly  ludicrous,  because 
it  is  deeply  oiFensive  and  disgusting,  when  it  comes  from 
a  man  who  has  been  a  perfect  Proteus  in  his  travels 
through  the  Bible,  and  whom  it  is  impossible  to  fix  down 
for  any  length  of  time  even  to  a  Confession  of  his  own 
making. 

And  then,  is  what  we  have  quoted  fi'om  Mr.  Erskine's 
Introductory  Essay,  to  be  considered  as  a  specimen  of  that 
temper  with  which  the  new  gospel — the  universal-pardou 
dogma,  teaches  its  adherents  to  speak  of  those  by  whom  it 
is  not  blindly  and  submissively  received  ?  IVIr.  Erskine  and 
his  friends  are  continually  talking — I  must  now  say,  cant- 
ing about  love — that  blessed  word  is  never  out  of  their 
mouths — and  it  is  made  the  whole  of  salvation  to  love 
God  and  man.  But  is  there  really  an  exhibition  of  love  to 
that  God  who,  they  say,  has  pardoned  his  impenitent  and 
unbelieving  creatures,  and  is  there  any  love  to  man  whom, 
though  impenitent  and  unbelieving,  the  God  of  love  has 
redeemed  by  the  sacrifice  of  his  own  Son,  in  those  uncha- 
ritable and  damnatory  sentences  which  Mr.  Erskine  has 
levelled  against  all  who  fill  the  pulpits  and  attend  the 
chui'ches  of  the  land  ?  He  seems  aware  that  his  saying 
will  be  accounted  harsh  as  well  as  presumptuous,  and  so  it 
will  by  all  but  the  relentless  bigots  of  his  own  little  sect ; 


464  APPENDIX. 

but  he  "  feels  it  to  be  the  kindest  thing  he  can  say,  be- 
cause he  is  persuaded  it  is  the  truth ;"  and  if  this  is  the 
kindness  of  Mr.  Erskine,  what  will  be  his  severity,  and  if 
this  is  the  native  result  of  that  truth,  which  he  flatters 
himself  he  has  discovered,  what  may  we  expect  him  to 
utter  when  he  is  so  unhappy  as  to  fall  into  error  ? 

Let  it  not  be  thought  that  I  express  myself  too  strongly. 
Wlien  I  look  to  the  charges  brought  against  us  who  are 
the  ministers  of  religion,  and  against  the  people  committed 
to  oiu"  care,  with  the  most  indiscriminating  and  reckless 
vehemence,  I  cannot  allow  that  my  expressions  are  too 
strong — I  even  feel  it  necessary  to  repress  the  indignation 
which  is  justly  awakened.     Among  other  things,  we  are 
accused  by  him  of  preaching  and  believing  a  religion,  which 
"  does  not  make  God's  character  to  be  a  matter  of  any  im- 
portance"— which  "  denies  both  his  love  and  his  holiness," 
— which  "  tramples  under  foot  the  Son  of  God,  and  all  that 
is  contained  in  his  incarnation,  and  death, and  resurrection!" 
Even  if  he  had  produced  a  much  more  able  case  in  support 
of  this  calumnious  dittay,  and  been  joined  by  more  and 
better  coadjutors  than  he  can  yet  boast  of,  I  should  have 
thought  that  his  religion  would  have  prompted  a  gentler 
and  more  moderate  style.     But  really  when  I  consider  the 
number  and  attainments  of  his  associates  in  the  warfare 
he  is  carrying  on  against  what  he  calls  the  "  prevalent  re- 
ligion of  our  land,"  and  when  I  read  the  treatises — fuU  of 
perverse  interpretations  of  Scripture,  unsubstantiated  aver- 
ments, false  representations,  and  confused,  misty,  unintel- 
ligible paragraphs,  for   which  there   is   no  name  in  our 
books  of  rhetoric, — by  which  he  has  laboured  to  uphold 
the  doctrine  of  his  newly  discovered  or  newly  invented 
plan  of  salvation,  I  cannot  find  any  language  which  I  should 
think  too  sti'ong  to  convey  the  reprobation  which  his  as- 
sault deserves,  except  I  were  to  adopt  and  employ  his  own. 


APPENDIX.  465 

I  would,  however,  separate  his  Christianity  from  his  folly 
and  arrog'ance,  and  retrain  from  saying  all  that  I  think,  or 
all  that  is  merited ; — only  let  this  forbearance  be  duly  esti- 
mated. 

After  I  read  the  tirade  on  which  I  have  been  animad- 
verting, I  frankly  own  that  I  almost  regretted  what  I  had 
said  in  my  Tenth  Discourse  concerning  the  personal  worth 
of  those  who  take  the  lead  in  advocating  the  new  views. 
I  do  not  mean  to  say  that  I  would  have  denied  them  what 
they  so  uublushingly  deny  to  us,  the  character  of  Chris- 
tians ;  but  certainly  I  would  have  modified  my  eulogium, 
so  as  to  bring  it  nearer  to  what  I  now  find  to  be  the  truth. 
The  "  Introductory  Essay,"  containing  such  unchai-itable- 
ness,  such  wrathful  declamation,  such  narrow-minded  bi- 
gotry, such  assumptions  of  exclusive  knowledge  of  the  way 
of  salvation,  such  attempts  to  render  the  ministers  of  reli- 
gion odious  in  the  eyes  of  their  people, — the  Introductory 
Essay  containing  all  this,  was  not  published  or  did  not 
come  into  my  hands,  tiU  I  had  nearly  printed  my  series ; 
and  I  have  printed  exactly  what  I  preached  in  reference  to 
the  men  whose  peculiar  views  I  was  endeavom*ing  to  ex- 
pose. But  my  readers  will  so  far  understand  the  qualifi- 
cations with  which  I  wish  my  opinion  of  them  to  be  ac- 
companied, as  to  make  it  imnecessary  for  me  to  enter  into 
any  fiu-ther  explanation. 

"  I  do  not  speak  of  the  authorized  standards  of  any 
chm-ch,"  says  Mr.  Erskine,  "  I  speak  of  the  religion  taught 
to  the  people.  This  is  the  fountain-head  of  the  leprosy,'' 
&c.  And  why  is  it  that  Mr.  Erskine  does  not  speak  of  the 
authorized  standards  of  any  church  ?  Or,  rather,  why  does 
he  say  so  ?  Is  it  possible  for  any  candid  man,  ^vi-iting  as 
Mr.  Erskine  has  done,  to  omit  aU  reference,  even  in  his 
own  mind,  to  the  standards  of  the  church  of  Scotland  ? 
Is  he  not  aware  that  these  standards  teach  the  very  docr 


466  APPENDIX. 

frines  which  he  has  been  at  so  much  pains  to  reprobate  ? 
Is  he  not  aware  that  they  are  the  standards,  not  merely  of 
the  Established  church,  but  also  of  the  Secession,  Relief, 
and  Cameronian  churches,  and  that  they,  therefore,  in- 
fluence the  religious  beUef  of  the  greatest  part  by  far  of 
the  Scottish  population  ?  Is  he  not  aware  that  the  chil- 
dren in  all  these  communions  are  taught  the  Shorter  Ca- 
techism, M'liich  gives  definitions  of  justification,  faith,  re- 
pentance, &c.  in  direct  opposition  to  what  he  calls  the  true 
doctrine  of  the  gospel  ?  Is  he  not  aware,  that  of  the  other 
communions  a\  hich  exist  in  this  country,  as  the  Indepen- 
dents, the  Baptists,  &c.  the  great  majority,  though  they 
reject  our  standards  as  standards,  and  oppose  them  as  to 
baptism,  ecclesiastical  government,  and  other  things  ot 
this  kind,  yet  do  hold  them  as  sound  and  scriptural  in 
all  the  points  with  regard  to  which  he  holds  them  to  be 
fundamentally  and  grossly  anti-evangelical?  And,  this 
being  the  case,  again  I  ask,  why  has  he  disclaimed  all  re- 
ference to  the  authorized  standards  of  the  church  of  Scot- 
land, while  he  proscribes  the  ministers  that  preach  from 
them,  or  conformably  to  them,  and  the  people  that  are 
taught  at  school  and  at  church  what  they  contain,  as 
covered  over  with  the  leprosy  of  their  doctrines  on  the 
pardon  of  sin  ?  Was  Mr.  Erskine  imwUling  to  cen- 
sure or  to  frighten  that  individual  friend,  whom  he  repre- 
sents as  almost  the  only  Clergyman  in  Scotland  Avho 
preaches  the  gospel,  inasmuch  as  he  preaches  what  Mr. 
Erskine  believes  to  be  the  gospel,  and  what  is  in  obvious 
and  broad  hostility  to  the  Confession  of  Faith,  which  in  the 
most  solemn  manner,  every  Clergyman  in  the  Established 
Church  declares  to  be  the  Confession  of  his  Faith  ?  Or 
what  other  reason  could  he  have  for  being  so  chaiy  in 
meddling  with,  or  alluding  to  the  standards  of  our  Church, 
when  by  attacking  these,  and  proving  their  contrariety  to 


APPENDIX. 


467 


Scripture,  he  could  have  done  more  for  the  alleg'ed  truth, 
than  he  could  by  any  sweeping  indictment  against  the 
Christians  or  reUgious  inhabitants  of  Scotland  ?  What- 
ever individual  ministers  may  do,  nothing  is  more  certain 
than  that  the  great  bulk  of  the  clerical  body  in  this  land, 
whether  in  the  establishment  or  out  of  it,  do  in  their  preach- 
ing agree  with  the  standards,  in  altogether  rejecting  JMr. 
Erskine's  dogma  of  universal  pardon ;  and  how  it  comes  to 
pass,  therefore,  that  Mr.  Erskine  should  have  deemed  it 
either  dutiful  or  expedient  to  leave  these  standards  out  of 
consideration,  is  a  mystery  of  which  I  profess  myself  un- 
able to  conjecture  any  satisfactory  or  feasable  explanation. 
But  though  Mr.  Erskine  talked  of  the  "  common  phra- 
seology," as  that  which  in  his  volume  on  the  "  Uncondi- 
tional Freeness  of  the  Gospel,"  he  was  desirous  to  correct, 
on  account  of  its  being  "  liable  to  misinterpretation,"  he 
did  not  seem  altogether  satisfied  with  the  substantial  doc- 
trines that  prevail  in  this  country  respecting  the  gospel. 
For  he  says,  "  a  very  common  idea  of  the  object  of  the 
gospel  is,  that  it  is  to  show  how  men  may  obtain  pardon  ; 
whereas,  in  tnith,  its  object  is  to  show  how  pardon  for 
men  has  been  obtained"  This  is  a  good  specimen  of  a 
style  of  remark  in  which  Mr.  Erskine  often  indulges.  He 
palms  upon  his  opponents  what  they  do  not  hold,  and  then 
contrasts  it  with  something  of  his  0A\'n — expecting  that  if 
we  reject  their  statement,  we  must  as  a  matter  of  coiu-se 
embrace  liis.  The  common  idea  of  the  object  of  the  gos- 
pel is  not  that  it  is  to  show  how  men  may  obtain  pardon. 
That  is  only  one  of  its  objects.  Those  whom  Mr.  Erskine 
thus  represents,  hold  that  the  object  of  the  gospel — if  all  its 
objects  are  to  be  comprehended  in  one — is  to  show  how 
men  may  obtain  every  blessing  that  they  need  as  rational, 
fallen,  recoverable,  and  immortal  beings.  And  as  neces- 
sarily connected  with  that,  and  as  preliminary  to  it,  they 


468  APPENDIX. 

hold  that  the  gospel  shows  how  pardon  has  been  obtamed ; 
ineauiiig  by  that,  the  scheme  of  redemption,  by  wliich  God 
has  been  pleased  to  provide  pardon,  and  all  other  sav- 
ing benefits,  for  the  sinners  who  are  redeemed.  But  what 
is  Mr.  Erskine's  account  of  the  object  of  the  gospel  ? 
Why  it  is  this — "  to  shew  how  pardon  for  men  has  been 
obtained."  And  is  this  the  sole  object  of  the  gospel  ? 
Then  its  showing  would  be  of  very  little  use,  even  accord- 
ing to  Mr.  Erskine's  own  principles.  For  he  has  express- 
ly told  us  that  the  pardon  obtained  is  of  no  benefit  at  all 
unless  it  be  believed  in.  Very  well ;  and  is  it  not  essen- 
tial, therefore,  to  the  completeness  of  the  gospel  that  it 
show  us  how  we  are  to  treat  the  fact  of  pardon  having  been 
obtained,  so  as  that  it  may  prove  useful  to  us  ?  Mr.  Er- 
skine's account  of  the  object  of  the  gospel  is  thus  alto- 
gether imperfect.  Ours  is  not,  for  it  embraces  both  the 
fact  of  redemption  being  Avrought  out,  and  the  means  by 
which  the  fact  is  to  be  made  available  to  our  deliverance 
and  happiness.  The  difference  between  Mr.  Erskine  and 
us  is  this — we  hold  that  pardon  is  not  bestoued  upon  any 
except  those  who  believe,  while  he  holds  that  pardon  is 
already  bestowed  upon  every  man  whether  he  believes  or 
not.  But  then  his  pardon  bestowed  is,  according  to  his 
own  acknowledgment,  of  as  little  use  to  the  sinner,  as  our 
pardon  not  bestowed,  till  the  sinner  believes.  Now  we 
say  that  the  gospel  has  for  its  object  to  show  how  the  par- 
don is  to  be  obtained  and  made  beneficial ;  and  he  says 
that  the  gospel  has  for  its  object,  merely  to  show  how  the 
pardon  has  been  obtained,  without  alluding  to  the  mode 
qi  its  becoming  the  instrument  of  salvation  and  happiness. 


APPENDIX.  469 


Note  BB,  p.  315. 

I  have  said  in  the  preceding  note  that  IVIr.  Erskine's  dis«» 
claiming  all  allusion  to  the  standards  of  the  Church,  wheu 
railing  against  "  the  prevalent  religion  of  the  land"  is  un- 
accountable. But  I  begin  to  suspect  that  his  object  was 
deeper  and  more  artful  than  would  have  been  supposed. 
He  advances  various  charges  which  I  have  no  hesitation 
in  rebutting  as  unfounded.  But  by  levelling  them  against 
what  is  thought  and  spoken  only,  he  might  be  safer  from 
any  successful  contradiction ;  for  though  others  were  ac- 
quainted with  no  pai'ticular  instances  in  Aihich  the  alleg- 
ed error  had  been  maintained,  it  might  be  supposed  that 
he  would  not  assert  Avhat  he  had  not  himself  witnessed  or 
had  sufficient  reason  to  beUeve — whereas  had  he  tixed  on 
the  Confession  of  Faith  or  the  Larger  or  Shorter  Cate- 
chisms, or  any  book  of  acknowledged  authority,  we  had 
only  to  look  at  the  arraigned  passages,  in  order  to  be  satis- 
fied at  once  whether  the  arraignment  was  just  or  ground- 
less. Can  this  be  the  reason  for  Mr.  Erskine's  strange  pre- 
teritLon  of  the  standards  ?  At  all  events  I  have  to  com- 
plain that  liis  misrepresentations  of  our  doctrine  on  faith 
are  very  gross — so  much  so,  that  did  I  regaid  their  author 
as  a  man  of  acute  intellect,  I  would  account  them  mlful. 
As  it  is,  I  must  ascribe  them  to  obtuseness  and  prejudice. 

Mr.  Erskine  will  have  it,  that  we  make  Ihith  a  condition 
of  pardon,  in  the  obnoxious  sense  of  that  term.  We  deny 
this,  without  quaUlication  or  reserve.  But  no  matter ;  it 
does  not  suit  Mr.  Erskine's  purpose  to  take  oiu'  denial ; 
and  if  he  does  not  ascribe  it  to  intended  concealment,  he 
ascribes  it  to  our  not  comprehending  our  oAvn  doctrine ; 
for,  in  edition  after  edition,  and  in  essay  after  essay,  and 
in  page  after  page,  he  insists  upon  it  that  we  do  mean  what 


470  APPENDIX. 

he  alleges,  and  that  we  do  mean,  and  can  mean  nothing  else 
He  says  that  we  put  faith  and  obedience  on  the  same  footing,— 
that  we  look  upon  pardon  as  a  reward  for  believing,  or  faith 
as  the  price  of  pardon — that  we  expect  to  be  pardoned  be- 
cause we  believe—that  we  earn  pardon  by  faith' — that  wc 
malie  faith  the  ground  of  a  sinner's  hope  and  confidence — 
that  we  betake  ourselves  to  our  own  faith  as  oiu*  prop,  &c. 
We  disavow  all  such  sentiments,  as  being  equally  unscrip- 
tural  and  dangerous,  and  at  variance  with  all  our  views  on 
the  subject.  Still,  however,  Mr.  Erskine  is  better  acquaint- 
ed with  oiur  creed  than  we  are  ourselves  ;  and  such  a  re- 
presentation being  very  necessary  to  render  his  lucubrations 
more  needful,  and  the  title  of  his  book  more  significant  by 
contrast,  he  yvxYL  cram  it  down  oiu*  throats,  that,  in  our 
system,  pardon  is,  in  right  mercantile  phrase,  the  premium 
of  faith  I  To  quote  proofs  of  his  pertinacity  in  pressing 
this  most  gratuitous  misstatement,  would  be  to  quote  a 
great  part  of  his  books.  But  perhaps  it  may  be  enough  to 
lay  before  my  readers  the  following  extract  from  the  Essays 
on  Unconditional  Freeness,  p.  123  : — 

"  Now,  what  meaning  is  to  be  attached  to  such  an  es.' 
Tpression  as  pardoned  b^  faith  ?  lean  only  conceive  two 
meanings, — the  one  is,  pardoned  on  account  of  faith,  i.  e, 
actually  receiving  forgiveness  as  a  mark  of  God's  approba- 
tion of  faith ;  the  other  is,  taking  pardon  for  granted,  or 
believing  that  we  are  pardoned.  In  the  first  of  these  mean- 
ings, pardon  is  really  forgiveness ;  in  the  second,  it  is  a 
sense  of  forgiveness,  which  is  exactly  what  I  understand 
by  the  terra,  justification.  In  the  first  meaning,  pardon  is 
consequent  on  the  faith,  and  secui'ed  by  it ;  in  the  second, 
the  pardon  exists  before  the  faith,  and  only  becomes  a 
matter  of  personal  feeling  in  consequence  of  being  be- 
lieved. In  the  first  case,  there  is  a  change  on  the  sentence 
of  the  judge  produced  by  the  faith  of  the  criminal;  in  the 


APPENDIX.  *J1 

second,  there  is  a  change  produced  by  it  only  on  the  feel- 
ing of  the  criminal  himself." 

INIr.  Erskine  can  only  conceive  tioo  meanings  that  may 
be  attributed  to  the  expression  pardoned  by  faith.  But, 
happily,  Mr.  Erskine's  po«'ers  of  conception  are  not  the 
standard  of  what  is  either  true  or  possible.  Of  the  two 
meanings  supposed  by  him,  the  one  which  he  has  adopted 
is  one  of  which  the  words  are  not  susceptible  ;  the  other 
which  he  attributes  to  us  we  reject,  because  we  deem  it 
contrary  to  the  mind  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 

When  a  man  is  said  to  be  pardoned,  he  is  unifomaly  un- 
derstood to  get  what  he  did  not  before  possess.  He  must 
be  either  pardoned  or  unpardoned.  If  he  is  unpardoned, 
his  being  pardoned  puts  him  into  a  new  and  different  state. 
If  he  is  already  pardoned,  it  is  absurd  to  speak  of  him  being 
pardoned  or  as  coming  into  a  new  and  different  state,  for  his 
state  is  exactly  the  same  that  it  was.  The  question  is  not 
at  all  about  a  sense  of  pardon.  Pardon  and  a  sense  of 
pardon  are  two  distinct  things.  Pardon  may  exist  where 
the  individual  pardoned  has  no  sense  or  feeling  of  the  par- 
don conferred.  And  he  may  have  a  sense  of  pardon, — 
that  is,  he  may  be  under  the  delusion  of  thinking  that  he 
is  pardoned,  when  he  is  still  unpardoned.  But  to  talk  of 
pardon  as  a  sense  of  pardon,  is  to  confoimd  both  language 
and  ideas, — and  though  it  may  suit  Mr.  Erskine's  theorj-,* 

•  Mr.  Erskine's  love  of  theory  is  remarkably  strong,  and 
pervades  his  whole  writings.  He  absolutely  revels  in  conjec- 
ture. Plain  truth  lies  before  him  ;  but  he  turns  aside  to  feast 
on  hypothesis.  And  the  truth,  when  he  does  embrace  it,  is  so 
mixed  up  with  the  hypothesis,  that  the  inattentive  or  ignorant 
reader  believes  what  lie  should  reject,  and  rejects  what  he 
should  believe.  A  most  extraordinary  instance  of  his  ruling 
passion  is  to  be  found  in  "  Unconditional  Freeness,"  p.  9?, 


472  APPENDIX. 

it  is  agreeable  neither  to  Scripture  nor  to  common  sense. 
Pardon  is  jjardon,  or,  as  he  phrases  it,  "  pardon  is  really 
forgiveness.^^ 

But  "  pardoned,"  or  obtaining  pardon,  "  by  faith,"  does 
not  necessarily  mean  being  pardoned  on  account  of  faith. 
When  Mr.  Erskine  says  that  it  means  getting  a  sense  of 
forgiveness  by  faith,  is  his  proposition  this,  that  a  man  gets 
a  sense  of  forgiveness  on  account  of  his  faith  ?  No,  as- 
suredly :  then  why  should  he  put  an  interpretation  upon  our 
language,  which  he  \\\\\  not  aUow  to  be  put  upon  his  own  ? 
He  will  say,  that  faith  is  the  natural  way  of  getting  a 
sense  of  forgiveness.  We  say,  that  faith  is  the  appointed 
way  of  getting  forgiveness  itself.  And,  since  the  two 
blessings  are  on  a  level,  forgiveness  being  acknowledged 
by  Mr.  Erskine  himself  to  be  of  no  use  or  benefit  what- 
ever to  the  sinner  without  a  sense  of  it,  we  differ  from 
him  only  by  ascribing  to  grace,  what  he  ascribes  to  nature. 
But  if  he  insists  that  he  does  not  mean  that  the  sinner 
gets  a  sense  of  forgiveness  on  account  of  faith,  so  we  insist 
that  we  don't  mean  that  the  sinner  gets  real  forgiveness  on 
account  of  faith. 

Still,  however,  pardoned  *  by  faith,  is  a  Scripture  ex- 

where  he  enters  on  a  speculation  regarding  Adam  and  Eve, 
which  is  extended  through  two  dozen  of  pages,  and  in  the 
course  of  which  he  supposes  what  our  first  parents  would  think, 
and  feel,  and  say,  and  do ;  and  upon  these  fancies — considered 
by  him  as  "  conceivable  and  probable  in  their  circumstances," 
— he  grounds  an  argument  for  his  grand  doctrine  of  universal 
pardon  !  Did  not  this  strike  himself  as  immeasurably  absurd  ? 
I  am  sure  it  must  strike  every  one  else  in  that  light. 

•  "  Justified  by  faith,"  is  strictly  the  Scripture  expression  ; 
but  as  justification  includes  pardon,  '•  pardoned  by  faith"  is  quite 
scriptural  ;n — though  the  phrase  justified  by  faith,  or  justifica- 


APPENDIX.  473 

pressioQ,  and  it  must  have  a  meaning,  both  orthodox  and 
rational.  Nothing  appears  to  me  more  easy  than  to  dis- 
cover that  meaning,  and  were  Mr.  Erskine  at  a  loss  for 
it,  J  would  be  glad  to  help  him  in  the  search.  But  really 
it  is  strange  that  he  should  affect  so  much  difficulty  ia 
the  matter,  when  he  himself  has  given  a  most  sound  and 
satisfactory  explanation.  "  Christ '  came  to  the  world" 
says  he,  *  "  and  pardon  was  and  is  contained  in  him. 
Those  who  receive  him,  receive  pardon  in  him;  those 
who  do  not  receive  him,  do  not  receive  pardon."  And 
again,-|-  "  if  we  would  have  pardon  and  eternal  life,  we 
must  have  Christ ;  for  these  gifts  are,  in  reality,  not  se- 
parable from  him." — "  K  we  receive  not  him,  we  receive 
not  them."  Here  the  whole  mystery  of  the  case  is  xm- 
folded,  and  I  wonder  how  Mr.  Erskine  should  have  been 
so  much  perplexed  by  it,  when  he  had  the  solution  of  it 
in  his  own  mind  and  in  his  own  book.  Pardon  is  to  be 
found  in  Christ  alone,  as  all  spiritual  blessings  are ;  of 
course  if  we  have  not  Christ,  we  cannot  possibly  have 
pardon,  but  if  we  have  Christ,  then,  by  necessary  con- 
sequence, we  have  pardon.  So  long  as  we  reject  Christ 
or  do  not  believe  in  Christ,  we  are  not  pardoned,  we  are 
in  a  state  of  condemnation,  we  are  exactly  as  we  would 
have  been  had  no  Saviour  been  sent ;  but  the  moment 
that  we  exercise  faith  in  Christ,  or,  according  to  the 
"  common  plu-aseology"  of  this  benighted  and  atheistical 
land,  "  receive  Christ  and  rest  upon  him  alone  for  salvation 
as  he  is  oflFered  to  us  in  the  gospel,"  that  moment  we  are 
actually,  fully,  and  for  ever  invested  with  the  privilege, 
denominated  pardon.     And  this  is  precisely  what  we  find 

tiou  by  faith  conveys   the  important  truth,   that  pardon  and 

acceptance  are  inseparably  combined  in  the  gospel  dispensation. 

•  Unconditional  Freeness,  p.  178.  t  Do.  p.  121. 


474)  APPENDIX. 

explicitly  stated  in  the  Bible.  "  He  that  hath  the  Son, 
hath  life ;  he  that  hath  not  the  Son  of  God,  hath  not  life."* 
"  He  that  believeth  on  the  Son  hath  everlasting  life ;  and 
he  that  believeth  not  the  Son,  shall  not  see  life;  but  the 
wrath  of  God  abideth  upon  him."\ 

I  have  no  objections  to  say  that  those  who  are  really 
pai'doned,  were  pardoned  before  they  believed,  if  the 
language  is  jjroperly  understood.  I  have  no  objection  to 
say  that  they  were  pardoned  on  the  cross,  or  even  that 
they  were  pardoned  eternally — provided  nothing  more  be 
meant  than  that  God  had  from  eternity  decreed  to  pardon 
them,  and  that  Chiist,  by  his  vicarious  suffering,  made  it 
consistent  with  God's  justice  and  glory  to  pardon  them. 
But  I  maintain  that  the  decree  of  God,  and  the  death  of 
Christ,  had  respect,  both  of  them,  to  the  exercise  of  faith. 
That  is  to  say,  God  did  not  decree  to  pardon,  and  Christ's 
death  was  not  endured  to  pai-don,  any  who  should  reject 
tbe  Saviour,  or  refuse  to  believe  in  him.  The  faith  was 
decreed,  and  was  a  fruit  of  Christ's  death,  as  much  as  the 
pardon  itself  was,  each  of  them  having  its  place  in  the 
great  scheme  of  redemption.  And,  according  to  this 
scheme,  God  does  not  actually  apply  or  bestow  the  pai- 
don  which  he  had  decreed,  and  which  Christ  died  for,  un- 
til the  sinner  flees  for  refuge  to  Christ,  or  receives  him, 
CM"  believes  in  him.  For  this  statement  ^^■e  have  the  au- 
thority of  Mr.  Erskine  himself  in  the  passages  quoted 
above.  And  it  would  be  just  as  proper  and  correct  to 
say  that  the  sinner  had  faith  when  Christ  died,  or  that 
he  had  faith  from  all  eternit)^,  as  that  he  had  pardon. 
They  are  both  the  subjects  of  God's  predestination ;  they 
are  both  the  result  of  Christ's  sacrifice ;  they  are  both 
gifted  when  it  seems  good  to  Him  who  is  the  author  of 

•  1  John  v.  12.  f  John  iii.  36. 


APPEM)IX.  475 

all  gifts ;  and  it  is  his  wise,  holy,  and  sovereign  appointment 
that  pardon  shall  not  be  bestowed  till  the  sinner  believes, 
or  that  the  sinner  shall  not  receive  the  pardon  except  in 
conse<juence  ef  his  receiving  Christ. 


Notes  CC  and  DD,  p.  316  and  3-21. 

We  give  the  foUowin?  extracts  from  Mr.  Erskine's  writ- 
ings as  illustrative  of  what  is  said  in  the  parasraphs  to 
which  this  note  refers. 

"  I  am  persuaded  that  faith  in  the  gospel  is  always, and 
must  be  always,  an  appropriating  faith,  and  that  there  is 
no  true  faith  in  the  gospel  which  is  not  an  appropriating 
faith.  When  a  man  opens  his  eyes  upon  the  sun,  he  ne- 
cessarily appropriates  his  share  of  its  li?ht,  and  he  cannot 
look  upon  the  sun  without  making  this  appropriation.  In 
like  manner,  no  man  can  look  upon  the  sun  of  righteous- 
ness, which  is  the  love  of  God  manifested  in  the  making 
and  accepting  of  a  propitiation  for  the  sins  of  the  world, 
without  appropriating  his  own  share  of  its  blessed  light." 
Unconditional  Freeness,  p.  137.  "  The  gospel  reveals  to 
us  the  existence  of  a  fund  of  Divine  love,  containing  in  it 
a  propitiation  for  all  sin,  and  a  promise  to  destroy  all  the 
works  of  the  devil, — the  sin, — the  misery, — the  death,  which 
he  has  introduced ;  and  this  fimd  is  general  to  the  whole 
race, — every  individual  has  a  property  in  it,  of  the  same 
kind  that  he  has  in  the  common  air  and  light  of  this  world, 
which  he  appropriates  and  uses  simply  by  opening  his 
mouth  or  his  eyes.  Is  it  not  clear,  that  as  soon  as  any  one 
really  knows  that  such  a  fund  exists,  and  that  it  is,  indeed, 
the  gift  of  God  to  the  world,  and  the  common  property  of 
all  the  individuals  in  the  world,  just  as  the  material  air  or 


476  APPENDIX. 

light  is,  he  will  immediately  infer  his  own  particular  inter- 
est in  it,  and  enter  into  the  enjoyment  of  it,"  &c.  Do. 
page  116. 

"  But  the  language  of  the  Bihle,  in  inviting  sinners  to 
God,  is  so  free,  that  we  must  either  suppose  that  there  is  a 
deception  in  the  Bible,  or  we  must  suppose  that  every  man 
has  the  power  of  coming  to  God  if  he  chooses"  Do. 
p.61. 

"  Where  then  is  election  ?  It  is  here,  that  when  this 
love  was  poured  upon  all,  and  this  forgiveness  sealed  to  all, 
and  the  power  to  believe  it  corf  erred  upon  all — and  yet  no 
man  would  believe  it,"  &c.     Introductory  Essay,  p.  Ixix. 

Another  figure  of  which  Mr.  Erskine  appears  to  be  ena- 
moured, from  his  using  it  very  often,  is  contained  in  the 
following  proposition,  "  the  pardon  is  given  to  all,  it  is 
laid  down  at  evert/  door."*  This  is  a  very  ambiguous  ac- 
count of  the  matter.  jVIr.  Erskine's  doctrine  is,  that  every 
man  is  pardoned — that  is,  the  penalty  due  for  sin  is  remit- 
ted, and  the  sinner  delivered  from  his  obligation  to  suffer 
it.  But  how  can  this  be,  if  the  pardon  is  only  at  the  door, 
and  not  taken  into  the  house,  and  actually  applied  to  the 
person  for  whom  it  is  intended  ?  If  he  is  to  be  subject- 
ed to  the  penalty  notwithstanding,  of  ^hat  avail  is  it  that 
pardon  is  lying  at  the  door  ?  And  if  the  penalty  is  re- 
moved, then  must  not  the  pardon  be — not  at  the  door — 
but  admitted  and  appropriated  ?  A  man  is  starving  with 
cold  and  hunger  in  his  cottage  ;  will  it  warm  him,  or  feed 
him,  or  prevent  his  perishing,  that  a  basket  of  bread,  or  a 
hundred  weight  of  coals,  is  laid  at  his  door  ?  Certainly  not  : 
his  perishing  is  prevented  by  the  coals  and  the  bread  being 
taken  in,  and  personally  applied  to  the  perishing  individu- 
al.    And  in  like  manner,  a  pardon  laid  at  the  door  of  a 

•  Unconditional  Freeness,  p.  182. 


APPENDIX,  477 

condemned  criminal  will  not  prevent  liim  suffering  the 
award  of  judgment — it  is  in  truth  a  nonentity  till  it  is 
brought  in,  and  pleaded  in  bar  of  punishment,  and  thus 
made  available  for  his  personal  deliverance. 

In  one  place,*  Mr.  Erskine  says  that  "  Christ  is  the 
gift  M'hich  is  laid  down  at  each  door,"  and  in  another 
place,-)-  he  says,  that  "  pardon  is  contained  in  Christ." 
Well  then  ;  not  ouly  is  not  every  man  really  pardoned  by 
having  a  pardon  laid  down  at  his  door,  but  he  cannot  get 
pardon  except  by  taking  in  Christ,  in  whom  this  pardon 
is  to  be  found ;  and  indeed  Mr.  Erskine  himself  elsewherej 
affirms  that  "  if  we  would  have  pardon  and  eternal  life,  we 
must  have  Christ ;  for  these  gifts  are,  in  reaUty,  not  separ- 
able from  him."  So  that  after  all  Mr.  Erskine's  positive 
avennents  about  every  man  being  aheady  pardoned,  it 
turns  out  that  pardon  is  only  "  laid  down  at  every  man's 
door," — that  this  pardon  is  in  Christ  alone,  and  that  with- 
out taking  Christ,  or  in  other  words,  without  believing  in 
him,  the  pardon  is  not  obtained  ! 

But  while  Mr.  Erskine  affirms  that  the  pardon  is  in  Christ, 
he  also  affirms  that  Christ  is  in  the  pardon ;  for,  he  says,^ 
"  The  pardon  stands  at  the  door,  and  the  Deliverer  is  in  it, 
and  knocks  for  admittance."  The  deliverer — from  what? 
Of  course,  from  that  to  which  the  pardon  refers — from 
the  penalty  to  which  the  transgressor  has  become  fiable. 
This  other  metaphor,  then,  conveys  the  same  idea — 
namely  that  there  is  no  deliverance  from  guilt — no  re- 
mission of  sins — no  pardon  for  the  guilty,  except  by  be- 
lieving in  Christ.  And  thus  again  Mr.  Erskine's  tropes 
have  brought  him  unawares  to  the  good  old  doctrine. 
To  complete  this  view  of  the  inconsistency  of  Mr.  Ers- 

*  Unconditional  Freeness,  p.  121.  f  Do,  p.  178. 

t  Do.  p.  121.  §  Do.  p.  143. 


478  APPENDIX. 

kine's  tenets,  let  us  attend  for  a  moment  to  his  notion  of 
penalty  and  of  pardon.  He  holds*  that  temporal  death  is 
the  only  penalty  denounced  by  the  law- — that  pardon  is  the 
reversal  of  a  penalty — and  that  the  resurrection  of  every 
man  is  a  proof  that  every  man  is  pardoned.  Now,  accord- 
ing to  Mr.  Erskine's  former  statement,  nobody  gets  the  par- 
don unless  he  takes  in  Christ,  who  is  both  in  the  pardon, 
and  has  the  pardon  in  himself,  and  who  stands  at  the  door 
and  knocks  for  admittance — agreeably,  I  suppose,  to  the 
declaration  of  John,-|-  "  He  that  hath  the  Son  hath  life ; 
he  that  hath  not  the  Son  of  God,  hath  not  life  ;"  that  is 
to  say,  nobody  is  to  be  raised  again  except  those  who  re- 
ceive Christ,  and  have  him,  and  believe  in  him.  And  yet 
ever)'  man  is  to  be  raised,  because  every  man  is  pardoned, 
and  the  pardon  consists  in  the  resurrection,  which  is  just 
the  reversal  of  the  penalty  of  death  !  From  this  most  ab- 
surd conclusion,  there  is  no  ^Yay  of  escape  for  IMr.  Er- 
skine,  except  what  may  be  found  in  his  maintaining  that 
as  there  is  in  his  system  a  semi-redemption,  so  there  is  also 
a  semi-believing ; — that  as  everj^  man  is  pardoned,  but  only 
some  are  saved,  so  every  man  believes  effectually  to  a  cer- 
tain extent,  but  as  effectually  disbelieves  with  res2)ect  to 
all  beyond  ! 


Note  EE,  page  336. 

I  intended  to  have  discussed  at  some  length  the  doctrine 
contained  in  the  "  Marrow  of  Modern  Divinity."  But  to 
do  the  subject  justice,  more  room  would  have  been  requir- 
ed than  my  limits  permit.  And  indeed  it  is  of  less  conse- 
quence, seeing  that  whatever  may  be  said  for  or  against 

*  Introductory  Essay,  p.  xlviii.  f  1  John  v.  12. 


APPENDIX.  479 

the  views  Avhich  that  volmue  and  its  supporters  have  given 
of  assurance,  they  differ  toto  ccelo  from  Mr.  Erskine  on 
Faith,  Pardon,  Election,  Justification,  Salvation,  and  every 
point  almost  that  he  has  touched  upon  in  his  Essays.  In 
my  own  opinion,  the  language  used  in  the  Marrow  of  Mo- 
dern Divinit}^  is  frequently  unguarded,  and  the  doctrinal 
statements  sometimes  incorrect,  unscriptm-al,  and  not  ac- 
cordant with  the  Standards  01  our  Church.  But  I  also 
think  that  the  act  of  the  General  Assembly  is  liable  to  si- 
milar objections — that  the  alarm  occasioned  by  the  mar- 
row doctrine  was  somewhat  greater  than  was  necessary — 
and  that  it  led  to  declarations  as  unsound  as  any  thing  in 
the  productions  by  which  it  was  excited.  The  following 
sentence  extracted  from  the  vkTitings  of  one  of  the  Marrow- 
men  as  they  are  called,  will  show  how  contrary  their  sen- 
timents were  to  Mi-.  Erskine's,  "  I  do  not  say  the  first  lan- 
guage of  faith  is,  Chi'ist  died  for  me,  or,  I  was  elected  from 
eternity;  but  the  language  of  faith  is,  '  God  offers  a  slain 
and  crucified  Saviour  to  me,  and  I  take  the  slain  Christ 
for  my  Savioiu-,  and  in  my  taking  and  embracing  of  him 
as  offered,  I  have  ground  to  conclude  I  was  elected,  and 
that  he  died  for  me  in  particular,  and  not  before.'  "* 

I  beg  to  recommend,  on  the  subject  of  assurance,  as  it 
was  treated  by  Hervey,  Mai'shall,  &c.  a  small  volume  en- 
titled "  Letters  and  Dialogues  between  Theron,  Paulinus, 
and  Aspasio,  by  Joseph  Bellamy  of  New  England." 


Note  FF,  p.  343. 

I  could  have  easily  enlarged  this  catalogue  of  absurdities ; 
but  my  readers  may  think  it  ample  enough  to  convince 

•  Eb.  Erskine  on  Saving  Faith. 


480  APPENDIX. 

any  one  that  the  author  of  the  books  which  contain  them, 
is  little  qualified  to  lead  this  erring  generation  back  to  the 
paths  of  wisdom  and  of  truth.  Indeed  were  I  not  convinc- 
ed of  his  piety  and  reverence  for  sacred  things,  I  should  be 
inclined  to  suspect  that  he  was  trying  to  throw  burlesque 
on  the  subject  he  is  discussing,  or  to  ascertain  how  many 
paradoxes  he  could  get  the  public  to  swallow.  A  misap- 
plication of  Scripture — a  flat  contradiction,  in  one  place, 
of  what  he  had  said  in  another, — these  things  andsuch  things 
as  these,  instead  of  making  him  uneasy  and  afraid,  seem  to 
be  the  very  element  in  which  he  finds  himself  at  home.  For 
example — I  cannot  resist  the  temptation  of  giving  one  or 
two  additional  instances  of  this  which  occur  to  me — he 
asserts,*  "  To  every  individual  of  the  apostate  family  was 
it  said,  '  Return  unto  me,  for  1  have  redeemed  thee,'  " 
and  he  asserts  it  over  again  in  another  page,  as  if  by  re- 
iteration an  error  M^ould  in  his  hands  become  a  truth  :  he 
makes  this  assertion,  though  he  knows  very  m  ell  that  the 
language  which  he  quotes  from  the  Biblet  was  not  address- 
ed "  to  every  individual  of  the  apostate  family,"  but  only 
to  ancient  Israel,  and  that  the  redemption  mentioned  is 
not  the  pardon  of  those  sins  which  prevail  in  the  world, 
but  the  removal  of  temporal  judgments  which  Israel  had 
deserved,  -if  indeed  it  is  not  the  original  redemption  out 
of  the  land  of  Egypt  and  out  of  the  house  of  bondao'e. 
This  is  an  example  of  his  misapplication  of  Scripture  :  the 
next  is  one  of  his  sturdy  endeavours  to  make  one  passaofe 
of  Scripture  contradict  another.  In  one  place:j:  after  giv- 
ing out  the  proposition  that  "  the  gospel  is  the  declara- 
tion to  every  creature  that  God  loves  him,  and  has  washed 
away  his  sins  in  the  blood  of  the  Lamb,"  and  that  this  "  de- 

*  Unconditional  Freeness,  p.  41.        f  Isaiah  xli v.  22. 
X  Introductory  Essay,  p.  xxvi. 


APPENDIX.  481 

clares  to  him  somethiuw  in  God,  which  is  an  immovable 
ground  of  confidence," — he  adds,  that  this  confidence  "  sets 
its  seal  to  the  record  of  the  Father,  that  he  hath  given  us 
eternal  life  in  his  Son," — evidently  making  the  record  mean, 
that  the  sins  of  every  creature  are  already  washed  away  in 
the  blood  of  the  Lamb,  or  that,  by  the  shedding  of  that 
blood,  eternal  life  is  in  the  possession  of  every  creature. 
But,  forgetting  this  broad  and  unqualified  statement  which 
he  had  made  of  every  creature  having-  eternal  life,  he  af- 
terwards coolly  and  gravely  informs  us,  in  despite  of  him- 
self, that  "  as  the  eternal  life  consists  in  the  knowledge  of 
God,  as  manifested  in  Christ,  those  who  have  not  this  know- 
ledge have  not  the  eternal  life"  Such  is  INIr.  Erslcine's 
treatment  of  "  every  creature,"  that  he  will  neither  let  him 
have  eternal  life,  nor  will  he  let  him  want  it, — and  all  this 
on  the  authority,  if  we  may  credit  Mr.  Erskioe,  of  the 
word  of  God ! 


Note  GG,  p.  354. 


I  refer  to  the  following  passages  of  Scripture  as  illustra- 
tions of  my  meaning: — 1  Peter  ii.  24;  1  John  i.  vi.  10; 
Ephes.  i.  3—13;  Rom.  viii.;  Matt.  x.  32  ;  John  x.  27,  28, 
xiv.  23,  xvi.  27  ;  Heb.  v.  9;  1  Peter  iii.  12 ;  2  Peter  i.  1— 
12;  Acts  V.  31,  32  ;  Phihp.  ii.  5-  -17 ;  Col.  i.  21, 22;  Titus 
ii.  9—13;  Matt.  v.  3— 13. 


482  APPENDIX. 


SUPPLEMENTARY  NOTES. 


Note  H  H. 


Mr.  Erskine  is  pleased  to  make  salvation  and  sauctifica- 
tion  synonymous.  For  this  there  is  no  authority  but  hi.s 
own,  and  he  evidently  has  recourse  to  it  because  his  theory 
will  not  stand  without  such  aid.  But  we  must  have  Scrip- 
ture warrant  for  it,  else  it  is  inadmissible.  It  is  a  subject 
of  life  and  death.  The  glory  of  God  and  the  safety  of  man 
are  concerned  in  the  present  question ;  and  let  Mr.  Erskine 
be  as  devout  and  holy  as  he  may,  he  must  not  be  allowed 
to  trifle  with  such  mighty  interests,  by  inventing  hypo- 
theses at  wiU,  and  building  up  one  by  the  introduction  of  an- 
other. What  sanction  has  ho,  I  ask,  from  the  word  of  God, 
for  making  salvation  and  sanctification  convertible  terras  ? 
I  say  he  has  none,  and  I  challenge  him  to  the  proof.  That 
proof  I  defy  him  to  bring  forward,  because  it  does  not  exist. 
And  were  he  not  blinded  by  his  passion  for  theorizing,  and 
by  his  prejudice  in  favour  of  his  own  scheme  of  doctrine, 
his  acquaintance  with  the  Bible  might  easily  convince  him 
that  it  furnishes  no  support  to  the  opinion  in  question. 

Salvation  is  a  term  of  general  import,  and  means  deliver- 
ance from  evil.  And  so  far  as  sanctification  is  deliverance 
from  the  power  and  pollution  of  sin,  the  terms  may  be  re- 
garded as  equivalent.  But  even  here  sanctific^ition  is  only 
a  part,  not  the  whole,  of  salvation.     And  to  say  that  they 


APPENDIX.  483 

are  so  uniformly  or  so  frequently  the  same,  as  tluit  the  one 
may,  and  should  be,  used  for  the  other,  is  to  speak  in  de- 
fiance of  the  teaching  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 

Can  there  be  a  doubt  that  salvation  imj^lies  pardon  in  all 
those  cases  where  Christ  is  called  oui*  Saviour,  or  m  here  the 
object  of  his  mission  is  said  to  be  to  save  ?  Mr.  Erskine 
himself  cannot  consistently  deny  this  :  and  whether  he  de- 
nies it  or  not,  every  man  ofcommon  understanding- in  such 
things,  must  be  fully  satisfied,  that  when  it  is  said  that 
Christ  "  came  to  seek  and  to  save  that  ^ihic^h  was  lost"* — 
that  he  "  came  into  the  world  to  save  sinners" f — that "  the 
Father  sent  him  to  be  the  Saviour  of  the  world,"J  &c.  deli- 
verance from  punishment  is  included  iu  the  term,  and  can- 
not be  separated  from  it. 

The  same  thingis  established  still  more  precisely  by  those 
passages  in  Avhich,  from  antithesis,  the  word  salvation  is  fix- 
ed to  be  what  we  denominate  forgiveness  or  remission  of  pe- 
nalty. It  is  opposed  to  tv7rith,\\ — it  is  opposed  to  destruc- 
tio7i,§ — it  is  opposed  to  judgment,^ — it  is  opposed  to  pe-- 
rishing** — it  is  opposed  to  conde7nnation,\\ — it  is  oppos- 
ed to  perdition-XX — Will  Mr.  Erskine  venture  to  main- 
tain that  sanctijication  is  the  proper  or  intended  contrast 
to  these  terms,  or  to  any  one  of  them  ?  Or  is  it  not  clear  to 
every  person  that  these  terms  intimate  that  penal  fate — 
that  punishment,  from  which  salvation  is  the  deliverance  ? 
And  then  see  hoAV  faith  is  connected  with  salvation  in  that 
sense,  so  as  to  be  essentially  requisite  for  the  attainment  of 
pardon  or  freedom  from  the  penalty.    Take  two  of  the  pas- 

"  Luke  six.  10.  f  1  Tim.  i.  15.  \  1  John  iv.  U. 

II  1  Thess.  v.  9.  §  Luke  ix.  56.    James  iv.  1?. 

il  John  \ii.  47.  ••  2  Cor.  ii.  15.       ff  John  iii.  16,  17. 
tt  Heb.  X.  39. 


4,84  APPENDIX. 

sages  now  referred  to.  Hebrews  x.  39,  "We  are  not  of  thein 
^^•ho  draw  back  unto  perdition,  but  of  them  who  believe 
to  the  saving  of  the  soul."  And  again,  John  iii.  16,  17, 
"  For  God  so  loved  the  world,  that  he  gave  his  only  be- 
gotten Son,  that  tvhosoever  believeth  in  him  should  not  pe- 
rish, but  have  everlasting  life  ;  for  God  sent  not  his  Son 
into  the  world  to  condemn  the  world,  b"t  that  the  Avorld 
through  him  might  be  saved." 

As  additional  proofs  that  save  and  salvation  are  not  con- 
vertible terms  w  ith  sanctify  SinA.sanctification,\mt  that  they 
refer  to  condition  rather  than  to  character,  I  appeal  to 
]  Tim.  iv.  16, — Jude  23, — Luke  xxiii.  39, — Acts  xxvii.  20, 
—Rom.  X.  1,— Rom.  v.  9,— Matt.  x.  22,— Luke  i.  71,— 
1  Peter  i.  5,— Rom.  xiii.  11,— Heb.  ix.  28,— Heb.  v.  9. 


Note  I  L 

One  grand  objection  that  Mr.  Erskine  has  to  what 
he  calls  "  man's  religion"  which  is  the  "  prevalent  re- 
ligion of  the  land — "  "  taught  from  the  pulpits  and  received 
by  the  religious  people,"  is,  that  it  is  pervaded  and  charac- 
terized by  selfishness.  Now  it  is  freely  granted  that  self- 
ishness not  only  forms  no  part  of  true  religion,  but  is  at 
utter  variance  both  with  its  doctrines  and  its  precepts ; 
and  if  any  man  preach  selfishness,  or  if  any  man  practice 
it,  he  is  so  far  a  recreant  to  the  gospel.  But  really  I  am 
yet  to  learn  fi-om  competent  authority  that  selfishness  has 
got  any  such  hold,  either  of  the  ministrations  of  our 
preachers,  or  of  the  creed  of  our  population.  Much  of  it 
certainly  prevails  in  practice.  We  are  all  too  apt  to  yield 
to  its  influence.  And  Mr.  Erskine's  sect,  I  fear,  are  fully 
more  beset  by  it,  than  are  the  many  of  whom  they  make  it 


APPENDIX.  485 

characteristic.  That,  however,  is  quite  a  different  thing- 
from  the  reUgion  which  is  preached  and  believed  being 
selfish  in  its  principles ;  and,  I  tell  Mr.  Erskine,  that  he 
blunders  and  misrepresents  in  this,  as  he  does  in  almost 
every  other  part  of  his  lucubrations. 

The  truth  is,  ]VIr.  Erskine,  with  his  usual  indistinctness, 
confounds  self-love  and  selfishness,  as  if  they  were  one 
and  the  same  thing.  He  tinds  self-love  in  the  prevalent 
system.  He  calls  it,  or  mistakes  it  for,  selfishness.  And 
then  he  takes  the  liberty  of  consigning  the  system  which 
he  has  thus  interpolated  with  his  own  ijlunders  to  deep  re- 
probation. His  disregard  to  the  dilfereuce  between  the 
two  qualities  alluded  to  must  be  obvious  to  every,  the 
most  superficial  reader  of  IVIr.  Erskine's  volume,  and  no 
elaborate  proof  of  it,  therefore,  is  necessary. 

He  is  inspired  ^ith  such  a  hatred  of  selfishness  that  he 
not  only  would  altogether  sink  self,  but  m  ouid  absolutely 
get  quit  of  it,  by  merging  it  in  Deity.  1  consider  the 
following  as  a  piece  of  as  raviug  mysticism  as  I  ever  met 
with.  "  There  is  something  inexpressibly  mysterious  and 
solemn  in  the  relation  of  the  creature  to  the  Creator. 
There  is  no  parallel  to  it  in  the  universe.  Vv  hen  I  think 
of  it,  I  am  overwhelmed  by  it.  I  cannot  conceive  how  I 
have  the  consciousness  of  a  separate  existence  distinct 
from  my  Creator.  It  seems  to  me  that  I  am  in  regard  to 
him  as  a  ray  of  light  to  the  sun,  proceeding  continually 
out  of  his  substance,  and  having  no  individuality  of  ray 
own."  Why,  truly,  if  this  be  the  tendency  of  Mr.  Ers- 
kine's thoughts,  1  should  imagine  that  a  little  of  the 
system  of  self  would  be  the  best  counteractive  for  such  a 
distemper  as  he  has  contracted,  in  the  "  sundry  contem- 
plations of  his  travels."  He  is  in  danger  of  believing 
himself  an  emanation  of  the  Supreme  Being — of  mixing 
himself  up  with  the  Divine  essence — of  mistakihg  liimself 


486  APPENDIX. 

for  a  portion  of  the  Divinity.  How  such  a  fancy  could 
enter  the  mind  of  one,  who,  like  him,  had  searched  the 
Scriptures,  I  profess  myself  unable  to  conjecture.  It 
looks  as  if  Plato  had  been  more  studied  by  him  than  Paul. 
Nothiug-  is  more  distinctly  and  forcibly  taught  in  the 
Bible  than  the  infinite  distance  between  the  creature  and 
the  Creator;  and  it  just  shows  how  nearly  piety  and  pro- 
faneness  approach  one  another,  \A'hen  a  taste  for  out-of.. 
the-way  imaginations  has  been  acquired  and  indulged. 
The  wonder  of  Mr.  Ei'skine's  visionary  speculation  is 
increased  by  his  going  on,  as  he  immediately  does,  to 
mention  as  the  rampant  sin  on  this  subject,  that  instead 
of  the  creature  dreaming  that  he  is  connected  with  the 
Creator  as  a  ray  of  light  is  ^A'ith  the  sun,  he  becomes  in- 
dependent in  his  spirit,  sets  up  for  himself,  and  substitutes 
his  own  pro'.vess  for  the  intluenco  and  help  of  God. 

Mr.  Erskiue  accuses  the  religious  system,  which  pre- 
vails in  this  country,  of  being  a  system  of  selfishness, 
both  as  to  the  objects  which  its  adherents  aim  at,  and 
the  means  A\hicli  they  employ  to  reach  these. 

1.  First,  as  to  the  objects,  he  thus  Avrites,  "  According 
to  that  religion  God  Is  sought  not  for  himself,  but  for  his 
gifts — not  because  he  is  the  God  of  holy  love,  and  there- 
fore the  fountain  of  life,  but  because  he  is  the  dispenser 
of  rewards  and  punishments.  But  the  man  who  acts  In 
a  particular  way,  in  order  to  obtain  heaven,  or  to  avoid 
hell,  is  as  thoroughly  selfish  (only  on  a  larger  scale)  as 
the  man  who  acts  in  a  particular  w&y  to  obtain  a  thou- 
sand pounds  or  to  avoid  the  gallows.  The  one  glorifiea 
God  just  as  much  as  the  other.  They  are  both  evidently 
following  their  own  interests." 

If  Mr.  Erskine  had  only  protested  against  a  base,  sordid, 
mercenary  spirit  in  religion,  and  against  neglecting  the 
love  and  holiness  of  God,  or  the   comfort  and  welfare 


APPENDIX.  487 

of  his  fellow  men,  in  jjursuing  individual  happiness,  I 
should  have  joined  him  in  his  protest,  though  I  should,  at 
the  same  time,  have  insisted,  that  such  a  representation  of 
the  matter  of  fact  as  he  has  given  was  to  be  attributed  to  his 
own  imaginative  brain  or  splenetic  humour,  rather  than  to 
an  accurate  acquaintance  with  the  principles  of  those  whom 
he  has  conti'ived  to  delineate  in  such  dai-k  and  forbidding- 
colours.  But  really  when  he  condemns  us  for  '"  following 
our  own  interests,"  for  regarding  God  as  "  the  dispenser  of 
rewards  and  punishments,"  for  being  careful  "  to  avoid 
hell"  and  desirous  "  to  obtain  heaven,"  he  presiunes  a  great 
deal  too  much  on  the  stupidity  of  his  readers,  or  on  their 
ignorance  of  Scripture,  if  he  expects  any  thing  short  of 
contempt  or  ridicule  for  such  absurd  censure.  Constituted 
as  man  is,  it  is  of  necessity  that  pain  should  be  the  object 
of  his  aversion,  and  pleasui'e  the  object  of  his  desire.  It 
would  be  rebellion  against  the  Author  of  his  natui-e  if  he 
did  not  corishlt  his  own  safety  and  advantage.  Nothing, 
indeed,  but  a  distempered  state  of  mind  could  possibly  in- 
duce him  to  disregard  and  neglect  what  he  believed  to  be 
his  well-being.  And  in  proportion  as  that  end  is  over- 
looked or  despised,  will  be  the  disorder  of  the  whole  plan, 
and  success,  and  influence  of  his  acting,  as  a  moral  being, 
as  an  individual,  or  as  a  member  of  society.  God  has  re- 
cognised this,  as  a  fundamental  principle  in  the  revelation 
which  he  has  given,  for  the  guidance  and  government  of 
bur  lan  conduct.  It  is  the  second  of  those  two  great  com- 
mandments on  which  "  hang  all  the  law  and  the  prophets," 
"  Thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbour  as  thyself."  And  in  this 
commandment  self-love  is  expressly  enjoined,  and  made  the 
measure  of  that  love  which  we  are  to  exercise  towards  oiu' 
fellow-men,  in  fultilliug  oiu-  social  and  relative  obligations. 
Christ  died  that  he  might  deliver  us  from  the  infliction  of 
an  awful  penalty,  and  restore  us  to  the  enjoyment  of  in- 


488  APPENDIX. 

finite  blessing's ;  and  are  we  at  liberty  to  be  indifferent 
to  the  hapjjiness  and  the  misery  for  which  the  incarnate 
Son  of  God  shed  his  precious  blood  ?  Were  not  life  and 
death  set  before  our  first  parents,  in  their  state  of  inno- 
cence, as  motives  to  deter  them  fi'om  guilt,  and  to  secure 
their  obedience  ?  Have  not  prophets  and  apostles  uni- 
formly enforced  their  exhortations  to  repentance,  and  con- 
version, and  submission,  l)y  an  address  to  hope  and  to  fear 
— by  an  appeal  to  the  sanctions  of  futurity  ?  Did  not  our 
Saviour  himself  speak  of  the  never-dying  worm,  to  alarm 
the  impenitent,  and  of  an  exceeding-  great  reward,  to  cheer 
the  persecuted  and  to  animate  the  virtuous  ?  Did  he  not 
speak  of  hell,  and  did  he  not  speak  of  heaven,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  influencing-  those  whom  he  taught  ?  Did  he  not 
assert  that  the  wicked  should  go  away  into  everlasting  pu- 
nishment, and  the  righteous  into  life  eternal  ?  And,  after 
all  this,  are  we  to  be  told  that  it  is  a  wrong,  and  base,  and 
selfish  thing,  in  the  business  of  religion,  to  dread  the  ever- 
lasting destruction  threatened  against  the  wicked,  or  to 
anticipate  and  long  for  the  glorious  recompense  that  is 
promised  to  the  just  ?*  Mr.  Erskine  would  have  us  to  be 
more  disinterested  than  God  would  have  us  to  be.  And 
yet,  with  his  usual  inconsistency,  he  would  have  us  to  be 

*  Mr.  Erskine  says  (Unconditional  Freeness,  p.  167,)  that 
"  a  man  must  renounce  self  before  he  says  in  earnest,  *  1  will 
arise  and  go  to  my  father.'  "  Has  Mr.  Erskine  forgotten  that 
the  prodigal  son,  to  whom  he  alludes,  only  thought  of  return- 
ing to  his  father  when  he  was  in  s>ich  ch-cumstances  as  led  him 
to  say,  "  How  many  hired  servants  of  my  Father's  have  bread 
enough  and  to  spare,  and  I  perish  with  hunger  !"  If  self  had 
no  share  in  his  movements  towards  home  and  his  father's  em- 
brace, I  know  not  what  "self"  means.  But  Mr.  Erskine  must 
always  be  singular  and  absurd  iii  his  interpretations  of  Scrip- 
lure. 


APPENDIX.  489 

no  such  thing-.  For,  in  spite  of  this  tirade  of  his  against 
the  selfish  system,  and  at  tlie  very  time  that  he  is  "  breath- 
ing- out  threatenings  and  slaughter"  against  all  regard  to 
self,  he  is  asking,  with  a  pathetic  interjection,  if  there  be 
"  any  madness  equal  to  the  madness  of  neglecting  the  soul, 
and  the  favoiu-  of  God,  and  spending  oiu*  short  uncertain 
bom*  here  in  treasiuing  up  for  oiu-selves  regrets  and  feai-s 
against  the  hour  of  death,  and  misery  for  the  life  to  come."  * 
Akin  to  Mr.  Erskine's  horror  of  a  man  pursuing  his 
own  individual  and  everlasting  felicity,  is  his  exquisite  re- 
finement as  to  the  real  and  legitimate  end  of  pursuit.  He 
is  offended  at  us  for  looking  for  any  blessing  beyond  obe- 
dience, and  very  gravely  maintains,  that,  "  according  to 
God's  religion,  obedience  is  itself  the  ultimate  blessinr/.^'  f 
But  here  again  I  must  prefer  the  language  and  the  doctrine 
of  the  Bible  to  those  of  Mr.  Er-kine.  According  to  the 
Bible,  obedience  is  not  the  ultimate  blessing ;  else  wh.it 
are  we  to  make  of  such  declarations  as  these — "  Blessed 
are  the  pure  in  heart,  for  they  shall  see  God,":}: — "  Christ 
became  the  author  of  eternal  salvation  to  all  them  that 
obey  him,"(J — "  God  Avill  render  to  them  ^vho,  by  patient 
continuance  in  well-doing,  seek  for  glory,  liouoiu',  and  im- 
mortality, eternal  life,"|| — "  Blessed  is  the  man  that  en- 
dureth  temptation  ;  for  when  he  is  tried,  he  shall  receive 
the  crown  of  life,  which  the  Lord  hath  promised  to  them 
that  love  him."!  Mr.  Erskine  must  be  aware  that  ruAny 
similar  declarations  might  be  added  to  these ;  and  if  he 
does  not  perceive  that  they  contradict,  in  tlie  broadest 
manner,  his  position  about  "  obedience  being  the  ultimate 
blessing,"  he  must  be  blind  indeed, 

"  Unconditional  Freeness,  p.  206. 

f  Introductory  Essay,  p.  Ivi.  :J:  3Iatt.  v.  8. 

§  Heb.  V.  y.  II    Rom.  ii.  6,  7.         %  .James  i.  12., 


490  APPENDIX, 

I  do  not  mean  to  say  that  tliere  can  be  happiness  without 
holiness,  or  that  one  of  the  glories  of  the  heavenlj'^  state  is 
not  the  moral  and  spiritual  excellence  which  will  be  possess- 
ed by  its  inhabitants;  but  I  do  mean  to  say,  that  happiness — 
enjoyment — the  pleasurable  feelings  which  result  from  their 
sanctiiication,  and  from  the  right  exercise  of  then-  faculties 
and  aft'ectious,  constitute  the  blessing  which  the  nature  of 
man,  and  the  appointment  of  God,  and  the  doctrine  of  Scrip- 
ture, teach  them  to  look  for^ai'd  to  as  the  grand  object  oi" 
then-  ambition  and  their  hope.  Neither  do  1  deny  that 
the  glory  of  the  Supreme  Being,  who  has  both  made 
and  redeemed  them,  and  in  whom  resides  all  the  per- 
fection that  can  claim  their  highest  admiration,  and  fill 
their  hearts  ^ith  the  purest  blessedness,  should  be  a 
ruling-  object  ;  hut  still  I  say,  that  the  wisdom  and 
goodness  of  him  Aiho  made  man  ^^hat  he  is,  not  only  au- 
thorize but  requii'e  him  to  seek  after  present  comfort  and 
future  felicity,  and  to  consider  himself,  while  aiming  at 
these,  as  fulfilling  the  purposes  of  his  existence.  Mr.  Er- 
skiue  is  for  annihilating  the  happiness  of  self,  because 
"  the  happiness  of  stlf,  and  the  happiness  of  God,  are  t^;  o 
structures  that  cannot  stand  together."  *  In  my  opinion,, 
they  can  stand  together — they  are  both  built  by  him  who 
is  infinitely  wise — and  each  of  them  holds  its  place  in  the 
economy  of  the  gospel.  And,  with  Mr.  Erskine's  leave, 
I  would  M'ind  up  this  part  of  the  discussion  with  stating 
the  view  given  of  the  subject  in  our  Shorter  Catechism, 
and  in  "  common  pliraseology."  It  is  this,  "  Man's  chief 
end  is  to  glorify  God,  and  to  enjoy  him  for  ever." 

2.  But  Mr.  Erskine  complains  of  self  too  as  being  idolis- 
ed in  the  means  whereby  we  piu-sue  those  objects,  in  whicli 
we  are  also  accused  of  selfishness.     He  very  conveniently 

*   Uncon.litioDa!  Frceiiess,  p.  208^ 


APPENDIX.  491 

supposes  that  when  we  maintain  that  we  must  believe  in 
order  to  be  pardoned  and  accepted,  we  are  diiving  a  bar- 
gain with  God.  In  illustrating  this  idea,  lie  g-oes  about  and 
about  it,  till  his  movements  grow  absolutely  tiresome  and 
sickening.  But  it  aU  comes  to  this  that  we  propose  a  (jttcd 
pro  quo  ;  that  we  exercise  faith,  and  get  forgiveness  in  re- 
turn ,•  and  that  thus  we  are  guilty — all  in  the  sj.irit  of  sel- 
fishness— of  engaging  in  a  mercantile  transaction  with  him 
whose  name  is  love,  and  who  will  not  sell  his  blessings. 

This  is  very  unv\orthy  misrepresentation.  The  views  of 
faith  which  we  entertain  are  such  as  to  divest  it  entirely  of 
what  is  meritorious.  Faith,  indeed,  we  hold  to  be  essen- 
tially an  acknowledgment  of  our  utter  unworthiness  and 
destitution.  It  is  a  humble  application  to,  and  confident 
reliance  upon,  the  appointed  Redeemer  alone,  for  all  the  spi- 
ritual blessings  that  we  need.  We  know  that  in  him  is 
treasui'ed  up  every  thing  which  is  necessary  to  oui-  deliver- 
ance and  salvation.  And  therefore,  we  cast  ourselves  upon 
his  grace,  and  power,  and  sufficiency.  In  truth  our  faith 
has  less  of  self,  and  looks  less  to  self,  than  does  the  faith  of 
Ml-.  Erskine.  His  faith  has  for  its  first  or  rather  s-ole  ob- 
ject, the  proposition  which  predicates  of  his  own  state  that 
it  is  a  pardoned  state.  This  is  what  he  thinks  of,  and  rests 
upon,  and  rejoices  in.  Our  faith  casts  its  regards  aAvay 
from  ourselves  altogether,  because  it  can  find  no  resting 
place  in  ourselves,  and  throws  and  fixes  itself  upon  Christ 
that  it  may  draw  from  him  those  mercies  whicdi  lie  and 
none  but  he  can  communicate.  Besides,  how  often  must 
I  remind  jMr.  Erskine  of  Itis  omu  confession,  tliat  the  par- 
don is  in  Christ,  and  that  unless  he  take  Christ,  which  can 
only  be  done  by  believing,  the  pardon  cannot  be  his? 
Wiien,  therefore,  he  believes  in  Christ,  it  is — it  must  be, 
Avith  a  view  to  the  pardon,  or  he  must  be  considered  as  in- 
different to  the  pardon.  And  thus,  in  getting  the  pa»dyn  he 
has  to  use  a  means,  he  has  to  fulfil  a  condition,  he  has  ta 


492  APPENDIX. 

do  somethinor,  without  which  the  pardon  can  in  no  sense 
or  degree  become  his.  Wliat  else  can  he  affirm  of  our  be- 
lieving- in  order  that  we  may  be  pardoned  ? 

But  granting-  that  this  were  incorrect,  let  ns  only  ad- 
vance a  step,  and  Mr.  Erskine  is  beyond  all  question  in- 
volved in  the  same  predicament.  He  cannot  be  saved  with- 
out faith.  Though  he  is  pardoned  by  Christ's  death  whe- 
ther he  believes  or  not,  Christ's  death  does  not  give  him 
salvation.  That  he  may  be  saved  or  sanctified,  he  must 
exercise  faith.  And  from  the  vast  importance  he  attaches 
to  sanctification  as  "  the  ultimate  blessing"  to  be  sought 
for,  he  cannot  fail  to  aim  at  the  acquisition  of  it  by  the  in- 
strumentality fl'hich  is  requisite  to  seciu-e  it.  That  instru- 
mentality is  faith.  And,  as  we  believe,  in  order  that  we 
may  be  pardoned,  so  he  believes,  in  order  that  he  may  be 
saved.  He  is,  therefore, in  this  respect  as  great  a  self-seeker, 
as  ^great  a  bargain-maker  with  God,  as  gi-eat  a  purchaser 
of  the  Holy  Ghost  Ti-ith  money  as  we  are  ;  and  it  is  worse 
than  preposterous  to  be  comparing  us  to  Simon  Magus, 
while  all  the  time  he  himself  is  as  sacrilegious  as  was  the 
sorcerer. 

Mr.  Erskine  is  quite  slanderous  when  he  says  that  our 
religion  is  "just  an  endeavour  to  obtain  forgiveness."  Our 
religion  teaches  us  to  aspire  to  the  possession  of  every  bless- 
ing that  is  provided  for  us  in  the  Gospel.  But  he  is  la- 
bouring to  establish  the  selfishness  of  the  system;  and 
therefore  he  must  be  indulged  mth  some  false  colouring. 
And  so  he  goes  on,  "  if  a  man's  religion  continue  to  be  of 
this  kind,  it  really  makes  little  difference  what  it  is  that 
he  does  in  order  to  obtain  forgiveness.  One  may  build  an 
hospital,  another  may  indulge  a  penance,  another  may  lead 
a  sober  and  upright  life,  another  may  endeavour  to  do  what 
he  calls  believing  in  Jesus  Christ,  but  whilst  the  object  is 
to  obtain  forgiveness,  the  whole  acting  of  the  man  is  a  con- 


APPENDIX.  493 

tiaued  self-seeking — he  is  fawiiing  ou  his  father  for  his  es- 
tate."* 

Observe  how  slightingly  Mr.  Erskine  spealis  of  believ- 
ing in  Jesus  Clu-ist — ^liow  he  degrades  it  by  putting  it  on 
a  footing  with  penance — how  he  makes  no  account  of  it  at 
all !  And  observe  how  he  makes  a  sinner's  anxiety  to  be 
forgiven  by  that  holy  and  gracious  God  whom  he  has  of- 
fended, one  of  the  worst  species  and  expressions  of  a  selfish 
temper  If  And  above  all,  observe  how  beautifully  he  con- 
demns himself,  while  he  thinks  of  nothing  but  poiu-ing  ri- 
baldry and  contempt  upon  those  M'ho  dilfer  from  him  !  So 
a  man  who  believes  in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  according  to 
the  divine  behest,  that  he  may  obtain  "  redemption  through 
his  blood,  even  the  forgiveness  of  sins,"  is  characterised  by 
all  the  meanness  of  a  son  "  faicning  on  his  father  for  his 
estate !"  Be  it  so.  And  when  Mr.  Erskine  asks  of  God, 
that  he  may  receive  vi  hat  he  needs,  is  he  "  faA\*ning  on 
his  father  for  his  estate  ?"  Wlien  he  observes  any  of  the 
ordinances  of  his  religion  that  he  may  profit  thereby, 
is  he  "  fawning  on  his  father  for  his  estate  ?"  And  when 
he  believes  the  fact  of  liis  personal  forgiveness,  that  he 
may  be  sanctified  and  made  happy,  is  he  "  fawning  on  his 
father  for  his  estate?"  Let  Mr.  Erskine  withdraw  the 
charge  that  he  has  prefen-ed  against  his  opponents,  or 
let  him  be  content  to  stand  convicted  of  all  the  syco- 
phancy and  baseness  and  impiety  that  are  implied  in 
making  use  of  faith,  to  "  fawn  upon  God." 

*  Introductory  Essay,  p.  ■si. 

•f  Some  very  shallow  disciple  ia  Mr.  Erskine's  school  has 
written  a  tract,  which  is  industriously  circulated,  on  the  pre- 
cept, "  Be  careful  for  nothing,"  and  very  strongly  inculcates 
the  folly  and  sinfulness  of  our  being  anxious  even  for  the  salva- 
tion of  our  souls  ! 


INDEX. 


Absurdities  indulged  in  by  the  advocates  of  Universal  Pardon^ 
340. 

Adam  and  Christ,  parallel  between,  203- 

Affliction,  deliverance  from,  32. 

j^ll  men,  in  Rom.  v.  explained,  207,  211. 

Antiquity  of  the  doctrine  of  Universal  I'ardon,  259. 

Apostacy,  guilt  of,  182. 

Arminian  Scheme,  more  consistent  than  the  modern  scheme 
of  uaiver.sal  redemption,  386. 

Assurance  of  Faith,  origin  of  the  doctrine  of  Universal  Par- 
don, 328. 

Authorised  Standards  of  the  Church,  why  does  not  Mr.  Ers- 
kine  speak  of  them  ?  465. 

Authority  on  matters  of  religion,  human,  275. 

Catechism,  Larger,  quoted  as  to  faith,  313. 

Shorter,  ditto,  313. 

Changeableness  cf  Mr.  Erskine's  religious  opinions,  462. 

Christ,  connexion  between  his  death  and  the  blessings  of  sal- 
vation, 101. 

Christ  sanctified  to  the  office  of  Redeemer,  183. 

Christianity,  a  system,  348. 

Commonwealth,  heresies  in  the  time  of  the,  260. 

Confession  of  Faith,  Westminster,  quoted  as  to  Justification, 
60. 

— as  to  Faith,  312, 

Controversy,  vindicated,  249. 

.^ —respecting  Universal  Pardon,  by  whom  stirred,  253. 


496  INDEX. 

Debtors,  parable  of  the  two,  misunderstood  by  Mr.  Erskine, 

429. 
Aia,  explained,  408. 

Doctrinal  errors,  not  incompatible  with  personal  piety,  269. 
E;f  TO,  meaning  and  force  of  the  phrase  explained,  380. 
"  Elect,"  the  term,  inconsistent  with  Universal  Pardon,  388. 
Election,  Mr.  Erskine's  theory  of,  considered,  391. 

the  doctrine  of,  evidently  disliked  by  fllr.  Erskine,  398. 

Erskine's,  Mr.  attack  on  the  ministers  and  people  of  Scotland, 

444. 
Eternal  Life,  means  the  happiness  of  heaven,  168. 
Faith,  misrepresentations  on  the  subject  of,  312. 
Forgiveness  of  sins,  not  already  received  by  all,  49. 
bestowed  only  on  persons  of  certain  specified  cha- 
racter, 132. 
Eraser  of  line,   adduced  as  an  authority  for  universal  pardon, 

452. 
Future  retribution,  scriptural  view  of,  opposed  to  universal 

pardon.  120. 
God,  propriety  of  taking  a  comprehensive  view  of  his  character, 

7,  10. 
God  the  Sanour  of  all  men,  225. 
Grace,  the  source  of  all  our  blessings,  318. 
Hope  in  the  Lord,  encouragement  to  it,  40. 
Iva  mistranslated  by  Mr.  Erskine,  426 
Indulgences,  Popish,  not  so  bad  as  universal  pardon,  281, 
Interest  and  happiness,  our  own,  a  legitimate  object  of  pursuit, 

487. 
Justification,  as  it  aifects  the  doctrine  of  universal  pardon,  105. 
,  Mr.  Erskine's  meaning  of  it,  applied  to  various 

passages  of  Scripture,  399. 
•■■  explained,  and  the  common  notion  of  it  defended, 


482. 

Harax^ivj,  434. 

Lady,  Extracts  from  Letters  by  a,    452. 

Light,  in  what  respect  Christ  \vas  the  true  light,  438. 


INDEX. 


497 


Love,  of  God,  as  incomprehensible  as  his  justice,  293. 
Luther's  Commentary  on  the  Galatians,  extracts  from,  419. 
Luther  quoted  in  support  of  universal  pardon,  278. 
Marrow  of  Modern  Divinity,  ■iTS. 
Mediation  of  Christ,  likely  to  be  dispensed  with  by  the  abettors 

of  universal  pardon,  418. 
Mercy  of  God  in  pardoning,  confessedly  limited,  144. 
Mercy  of  God  defined,  4. 

,  its  freeness,  15. 

I       exhortations  in  reference  to  it,  19. 

Misrepresentations  on  the  subject  of  Faith,  312. 

Novelty  of  a  religious  doctrine,  a  presumption  against  it,  344. 

Obedience  not  the  ultimate  blessing  of  the  gospel,  489. 

Pardon,  abettors  of  universal,  who  they  are,  242. 

Parable  of  the  great  supper,  misinterpreted  by  .Mr.  Erskine, 
395. 

■  forgiven  and  unforgiving  servant,  443. 

-  vine  and  branches,  193. 

.  prodigal  son,  197. 

IMarriage  feast,  197. 

.  two  debtors,  misunderstood  by  IMr.  Erskine,  429. 

Pardon,  terms  in  which  it  is  predicated,  137. 

,  general  and  universal  term  applied  to  it,  applied  also  to 

salvation,  139. 

doctrine  of  universal,  contrary  to  Scripture,  69. 

— — ■        ,  infers  xiniversal  salvation,  95. 

Pardon  no  benefit    unless  known  to  the  pardoned,  the  idea 

examined,  302. 
"  Pardoned  by  faith,"  explained,  472. 

"  People"  of  Christ,  the  term  inconsistent  with  universal  par- 
don, 388. 
Tl'-^iffffsvco  mistranslated  by  "Mr.  Erskine,  424. 
Persecution,  charge  of,  against  the  opponents  of  the  abettors 

of  universal  pardon,  groundless  and  false,  237. 
Peter's  Exhortations  to  the  Jews,  explained,  374,  383. 
<!>«/?  does  signify  pardon,  437. 

6 


498  INDEX. 

UXidvec^dj  mistranslated  by  Mr.  Erskine,  424. 

Punishment  to  !)C  inflicted  for  other  things  besides  final  unbe- 
lief, 123,  125. 

Punishment,  deliverance  from,  27. 

Reconciliation,  Mr.  Erskine's  doctrine  of,  wrong,  415. 

Redemption  for  Israel,  plenteous,  25. 

implies  positive  blessings,  35. 

its  certainty,  43. 

Religion  of  Scotland,  Mr.  Erskine's  account  of  the,  460. 

condemned,  461. 

Repentance  necessary  to  pardon,  379. 

Resurrection  in  1  Cor.  xv.  that  of  believers  alone,  21 1-. 

Roman  Catholics,  pious,  271. 

Scripture,  absurdity  of  refusing  all  aid  in  interpreting  Scrip- 
ture, 283. 

the  aid  of  certain  persons  in  this  to  be  refused,  284. 

Sanctification,  in  Heb.  s.  28,  29,  explained. 

Scripture  references,  respecting  pardon,  385. 

Scriptures,  importance  of    taking  a   comprehensive   view  of 
tlxem,  352. 

Self-love  and  selfishness  confounded  by  ^fr.  Erskine,  484. 

Serpent,  brazen,  fact  of,   hostile  to  the  doctrine  of  universal 
pardon,  450. 

Similitudes  erroneously  employed  to  illustrate  faith,  323. 

Sin,  deliverance  from  its  power,  29. 

Socinianism,  Mr.  Erskine's  language  indicative  of,  456. 

Sovereignty  of  God,  295. 

Swedenborg,  Baron,  his  opinions,  271. 

System,  Christianity  a,  348. 

Texts,  exclusive  regard  to  favourite,  354. 

Unbelief,  Final,    punishment   for  that  only,  an  unscriptural 
and  false  doctrine,  425. 

Union  with  Christ,  193. 

Universal  paidon,  the  character  of  its  leading  advocates,  26ff. 

'     ■■  I doctrine  of,  originates    in  the    passion    for 

what  is  fanciful  and  extravagant,  336. 


INDEX. 


499 


Universal  Pardon,  the  doctrine  of,  originates  in  the  hiG;h  doc- 
trine of  assurance,  328. 

■ dogma  of,  grounded  on  wrong  treatment  of 

the  Scriptures,  227. 

,  may  mar  the  salvation  of  sinners,  229. 

— — fruitful  source  of  iniquity,  232. 

said  to  destroy  the  plea  of  human  merit, — 


tliis  disproved,  309. 

,  antiquity  of  the  doctrine,  259. 

Weak  iireihren  perishing,  explained,  441. 
Wicked  raised  hj  Christ,  not  in  him,  219. 
■Woman  taken  in  adultery,  the  conduct  of  Christ  respecting 

her  explained,  433. 


TEXTS  OF  SCRIPTUHE  ILLUSTRATED. 


Psalm  xxxii.  p.  74. 

cxxx.  8.     70. 

Jer.  xxxi.  33.     410. 
3Iatt.  V.  23,  24.    416. 

vi.  14,  15.     78, 

ix.  2.     51. 

ix.  2—8.     80. 

xviii.  23 — end.     443. 

Luke  V.  20—25.     80. 

vii.  36— end.     428. 

xiv.  16—25.    395. 

— —  xxiii.  34.     51. 
John  i.  9.     437. 

iii.  14,  15.    450. 

iii.  36,  71,     371. 

viii.  1—12.    432. 

viii.  24.    436. 

XV.  1—7.     188. 

Actsii.  33.    383. 
ii.  38.    75. 


Acts  iii.  19.     p.  77. 

V.  31.    51. 

viii.  22.    52. 

X.  43.     365. 

xiii.  48.     165, 

xxvi.  1 8.    52. 

Rom.  iii.  24,  25.     108. 

iv.  5—8.     1 10. 

iv.  25.     405. 

V.  18,  202.     419. 

vi.  1.    424. 

viii.  1.     189. 

viii.  33,  34.     113. 

1  Cor.  i.  30,31.     191. 

viii.  11.    439. 

ix.  27,     442. 

XV,  22,  214. 

2Cor.  ii.  18.    1164,  11. 

V.  17.     190. 

1  Tim.  iv.  10.     225,  427. 


500  INDEX. 

1  Tim.  V.  6.    p.  \4r6.  James  v.  15.    p.  52. 

Titus  ii.  11.     14-7.  2  Peter  ii.  I.    156. 

Heb.  ii.9.     221.  1  Johni.  9.    52. 

viii.  10— 13.     82,111.        ii.  2.     150. 

ix.  11,    112.  V.  8— 13.     162,417. 

X.  28,  29.      1 73. 


EDINBURGH : 
VIUXTED    JiY  A.    BALFOUR  &  CO.    KIDDnY  STREET. 


Prmceion  Theological  Seminary-Speer  Library 


1    1012  01029  3704