must be ready cheerfully to say, Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do.'

4. What exalted views does this subject present to us of the future state of the righteous.

In the resurrection,' says our Saviour to the Sadducees, the children of God shall be yeh, equal to the angels;' or perhaps more properly, they shall be like the angels in attributes, station, and employments. Like the angels, they will possess endless youth, activity, power, knowledge, and holiness; enjoy the same immortal happiness, dignity, and divine favour; be lovely, beautiful and glorious, in the sight of God; and shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father.' Like the angels, shall they be sons. and kings, and priests to God, and live and reign with him for ever and ever.

What a change must this be from the present weakness and guilt of man; from sluggishness and ignorance, decay and death, sin and misery. What a wonderful display of the boundless compassion of God, to raise us from such a depth to such a height! Can we hesitate to exclaim, This is love, passing all understanding.' Who would not, for these divine blessings, renounce the pleasures of sin; and cheerfully bid adieu to all that avarice, ambition, and sensuality can boast? Who would not, with all the wise and good, cease at once from the sordid pursuits of sinners, and direct every view, desire, and effort, towards the state and character of angels, and the attainment of the same residence, employments, happiness and glory.

5. What sublime views does this subject furnish us of the greatness of Christ.

By him, says the text, were all these illustrious beings created, together with all their attributes, importance, and dignity. The character of every workman is seen, of course, in the nature of the work which he has made. If this be insignificant and worthless, it exhibits nothing but the insignificance and worthlessness of the maker. If curious and excellent, if sublime and wonderful, it unfolds strongly, and certainly, his greatness, wisdom and glory. Of what faculties are angels the subjects! Of what intelligence, purity, power, loveliness, and elevation of mind! What then must be the

perfections of Him who contrived and formed angels; who with a word called them into being; who preserves, informs, directs, controuls and blesses them for ever. cellent as they are, they are exhibited as

and as charged with folly' before him.

Great and ex

unclean in his sight,

How amazing then

must be the perfection of his character; how great, how wise, how good!

SERMON XX.

CREATION.

THE FALLEN ANGELS.

AND THE ANGELS, WHO KEPT NOT THEIR FIRST ESTATE, BUT LEFT THEIR OWN HABITATION, He hath RESERVED, IN EVERLASTING CHAINS, UNDER DARKNESS, UNTO THE JUDGment of tHE GREAT DAY,

JUDE 6.

In this passage we have a concise, but very interesting account of certain Angels, who once dwelt in heaven. Created at first with all the excellencies of the angelic nature, placed in circumstances of the highest honour, and enjoying the greatest happiness, they are here represented as having lost their character, and forfeited their honour and happiness. The nature and allotments of these Angels furnish the subject, which next demands our attention in this System of Dis

courses.

Before I enter on the consideration of this subject, it will be proper to take some notice of an opinion which has, chiefly within the two past centuries, been adopted concerning it, and advanced with confidence by persons of various descriptions: an opinion, which if true, would preclude the present Discourse as groundless and nugatory. It is this; that there are no such beings as Fallen Angels. Infidels have made the Scriptural account of these beings a formal objection against the truth and credibility of the Scriptures. Not a small number of men, professing themselves to be Christians, have partly

yielded to the objection, and partly considered the contrary doctrine as necessary to their particular systems of theology. Thus here, as in other cases, men apparently opposed to each other in the belief and the denial of the Scriptures, have yet united in overthrowing their authority, and unsettling their character as a revelation.

From the manner in which the doctrine has been opposed, we should naturally argue unfavourably concerning the opposition. It has been most usually opposed, not with sober argument, but with ridicule and sneers. A cause which needs this support is bad of course, and is by its abettors seen to be bad: for no man of common sense will ever resort to this feeble and ineffectual mode of attack or defence, when the surer, more rational, and more efficacious resort of sober argument is in his power.

If the existence of fallen Angels is incredible, it must be so for one of the following reasons:

1. That it is not revealed sufficiently to command belief; and that, as we have no direct knowledge of invisible beings, aside from Revelation, so in this case, Revelation does not warrant us to admit their existence: or,

2. There is some evidence in the nature of things which disproves their existence, or at least renders it highly improbable.

Concerning the first of these methods of opposing the existence of fallen angels, I observe, that it has been very little resorted to by the opposers of this doctrine. Here, as in many other cases, Revelation has been tried before the tribunal of Philosophy. Men have supposed, that their own judgment was a more unerring standard of faith and truth, than the Scriptures. That Infidels should thus act is certainly to be expected, for this opinion is the basis of their system. However irrational therefore, and indefensible, their conduct may seem to us, we are certainly to feel no surprise when they resort to it, or rely upon it with confidence. But for this opinion, they could not retain their system for a moment.

But that men professing to believe in the Scriptures as a divine revelation, should adopt this method of establishing or refuting their declarations, is, to say the least, wonderful. Still it has in every age been more or less the conduct of

persons who have professed this belief. It began to exist in the time of the Apostles, and was boldly adopted in defiance of their authority and inspiration. The declarations of St. Paul, relative to this subject, are ample proofs of the fact. The two first chapters of the first epistle to the Corinthians are in a great measure employed on this subject. In them he informs us that to the philosophical Greeks, who arrogated to themselves the titles of Σοφοι aud Φιλοσοφοι, Wise Men and Philosophers, the doctrine of the cross was foolishness.' This therefore was then a general decision of philosophy. Against the adoption of that philosophy, and the imitation of the men who professed it, he strongly cautions the Corinthian christians, who were in no small danger from its imposing and deceitful influence. At the same time he informs them that this 'foolishness,' as they termed it, of God, was wiser than men ;' that God had not chosen' men of this character to call them' to salvation, but men of an opposite character, who disclaimed the very words,' as well as the spirit of this philosophy; men who, although despised and accounted as nothing by these vain, arrogant philosophers, and their followers, were yet beloved of God, and the instruments of their salvation. He farther informs them, that the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God;' and again declares, that the Lord knoweth the reasonings of the wise, that they are vain.' To the Colossians he writes, Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit; that is, vain and deceitful philosophy; which, he declares, accorded with the traditions of men, and the rudiments of this world, but not with Christ.' Of course it merited contempt on the one hand, and was fraught with danger on the other.

From the age of the apostles to the present time, almost every existing heresy has been derived from this source. The Scriptures were found by many men, and men too, who were often distinguished for their ingenuity, not to agree with their philosophy; and of course could not in their opinion be true, unless they could be bent to such an agreement. Those therefore who chose still to acknowledge the revelation of the Scriptures, employed themselves in helping out their character as a system of truth, and removing their supposed inconsistencies by new constructions, allegorical explanations, and generally by substituting what they ought to mean, for that which ac