proportionate statement of the doctrines of election, predestination, and the decrees of God.-To the cautious and scriptural statement of these mysterious truths, I make no objection. I endeavour to do this myself on all occasions which appear to me suitable. I am persuaded they tend greatly to promote, as our Seventeenth Article expresses it, our joy, and love, and thankfulness, and obedience. But I can conceive few things more dangerous than the excessive and somewhat irreverent manner in which they are occasionally treated. I have sometimes heard language on these awful subjects, not only divested of all that deep humility which should mark every statement relating to them, but accompanied with a positiveness, and what appeared to me arrogance, which really made me tremble. In the holy Scriptures I see these doctrines stated occasionally only and briefly, to churches established in the faith, as the Ephesian, Colossian, and Thessalonian, or in the due and natural course of an argumentative exposition of the truth, as in the Epistle to the Romans. And I observe, that such doctrine is in every case brought forward, not in an abstract metaphysical way, but for some directly holy purpose.

The

general course of scriptural instruction does not proceed on the basis of these awful and mysterious truths, but on the plain and intelligible ground of God's revealed will to man, as a fallen indeed, but rational and accountable, creature. I apprehend, that for one verse referring to the secret decrees of God, there are an hundred which stand on the broad foundation of man's responsibility and duty. When, therefore, I listen to sermons or conversations which perpetually insist on these points, familiarly adopt terms of very dubious meaning, and proceed throughout, not on the revealed will of God, but on his inscrutable purposes, I must be permitted to consider such a course as a deflection from the right way, as at vari

ance with the example, and opposed to the simplicity, of the unerring oracles of truth; and I must beg leave to inform all who may be but superficially acquainted with these subjects, that the great body of pious ministers and Christians in the Church, and I believe also among the Dissenters, do most decidedly disapprove of such an injudicious mode of instruction, and are desirous of doing all they properly can to discountenance it, both by the declaration of their sentiments, and by their own practice.

2. The second topic is, the inculcation of the doctrines of the atonement and righteousness of Christ, to the exclusion of almost every other topic.-To" know nothing but Jesus Christ and him crucified," was the apostle's determination, as it must be ours. But the apostle's own conduct unquestionably shews that be comprehended in that brief definition a vast variety of topics subservient to his main design. And I conceive, we very inadequately fulfil the purport of the apostle's expression, if we content ourselves with a perpetual display of one or two points in the comprehensive doctrine of the Cross, to the neglect or exclusion of those numerous introductory or subordinate truths which are absolutely necessary to a just exposition, a clear understanding, and a profitable application of the whole subject. I know I ought to speak with caution, with peculiar caution, on this branch of our inquiry. The distinguishing character of our ministry, should be the doctrine of "reconciliation." No other points should be so introduced, as to afford room to any considerate hearer to complain; that "Christ crucified" is not the prominent figure on the canvas. But I cannot for a moment doubt that it is our bounden duty to insist, also, on all those other scriptural truths which are necessary, in order to prepare the heart for receiving aright the doctrine of "Christ crucified;" and which serve to trace that doctrine out into its consequences, and

"

them the awful sentence of the violated law; they will offer up sincere and fervent prayers for their salvation; but they do not, at least they do not frequently and fully, entreat men, with St. Paul, " to be reconciled to God;" they do not directly exhort inen, as St. Peter did Simon Magus, to repent of their wickedness;" they do not in their Master's name "command" men to "repent, and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance; they do not call-on men to “strive to enter in at the strait gate; " they do not say, Awake, thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead." I cannot imagine a more material defect than this, in the discharge of the high office of "the ministry of reconciJiation; "a ministry which has for its design, its principal design, to treat with rebel nian, with a view to his return to God in Christ Jesus. I consider this as a most important, and even vital question. If this fatal misapprehension should unhappily spread, the effects will soon become too visible in the state of our families, and our parishes. Surely, if there be any one point, which more clearly than another may be inferred from the obvious and uniform tenor of holy Scripture, it is this; that man, though a fallen creature, is to be addressed directly and importunately on all the high duties of religion. The whole Bible is hortatory. And those who so expound the truths which relate to the inability of man, and the power of Divine grace, as to lead them to relax in their efforts to arouse and alarm impenitent sinners, and to entreat and urge them to fly for refuge to the hope of mercy in Christ Jesus, appear to me greatly to misunderstand the whole subject. How such ministers can flatter themselves that they shall escape the doom of the unfaithful watchman, (Ezek. xxxiii. 7-9), I know not.

4. The fourth particular L-mentioned was, an excessive endeavour to produce comfort in the minds of

those who are considered as sincere Christians.-That consolation is a most important part of the effect which Christian doctrine ought to produce, I most readily admit. The character of our Lord was eminent for tenderness. The spirit of St. Paul was as compassionate as it was elevated. The Comforter, is the distinguishing name of the blessed Spirit of God. But I object to the theology which I am now reviewing, that it aims to administer comfort in what appears to me an unsafe and unscriptual manner. Its tendency is, to make joy and confidence the almost exclusive test of a right state of mind. It proposes topics of consolation far too indiscriminately, and often to many, very many persons, who are least of all entitled to consolation. It appears to forget, that there are occasions when contrition and sorrow should penetrate the heart. The consequence is, that that species of instruction which would lead to a careful scrutiny of the heart and life, is almost entirely overlooked, and the whole system seems framed for producing ease of mind at almost any rate. A cautious train of scriptural evidence with respect to our state and character, is but little inculcated, and the perpetual endeavour seems to be to excite joy, by excluding topics of anxiety, and by violently urging on the attention, the promises and privileges of true Christians. This method, I cannot consider as either wise or necessary. Comfort thus injudiciously administered, is like a cordial, which may for a time exhilarate the spirits, but which infalli bly injures the general habit, and prepares the way for proportionate depression. True and abiding peace is of another character, more slow in its growth, indeed, but more valuable in its properties, and more holy in its effects. It is like health in the natural body, which may be considered as the effect which arises from every part of the frame regularly discharging its proper func

tions, and not as the disorderly and fitful produce of a stimulating application. If, indeed, all those to whom sources of consolation are thus perpetually proposed were humble, watchful, and obedient believers in the Son of God, my present objection would have less weight; but when we recollect that these consolatory topics are most eagerly received by the young, the worldly. minded, the inconstant, the disobedient, the presumptuous, I may leave it to your reflecting readers to judge of the mischief which must follow. I have been much grieved to hear the language which private Christians as well as ministers occasionally use, in their endeavours to comfort those whom they admit to have committed great sins. But I will not trust myself to speak on this subject. I hope I may have mistaken their meaning.

I shall have said enough on this branch of my inquiry, if I am distinctly understood to object, not to topics of consolation when soberly treated, nor even to strenuous and animated endeavours to cheer the fainting Christian, when circumstances appear to require them, but to the perpetual and indiscriminate effort to produce consolation, and confidence, and joy in almost every variety of character and situation.

5. I come now to the fifth point which I have laid down-a merely slight and general explication of the duties of obedience. Those whose minds are tinged with the errors I have detailed, uniformly fail here. I do not charge them with directly denying the obligation of the moral Jaw on Christians as a rule of life. I do not charge them with intentionally separating the holiness of the Gospel from its privileges. I believe they are free from these serious imputations. I know, in many cases, that an eminently holy sympathy is propagated by their instructions both in public and private. They feel the purifying tendency of the doctrines they love in their own hearts, and wish to promote that CHRIST. OBSERV. No. 154.

tendency on the hearts of others. The defect in their system appears to me to be this, that they do not follow the Scripture into the detail of Christian duties. They are satisfiedwith general and very partial views of sanctification. They do not insist on the regulation of the temper, and the government of the passions. They do not descend, with the Apostle, to the special duties of every relation of life, and enforce on the husband and wife, the father and child, the master and servant, the governor and subject, the appropriate injunctions of the sacred Scriptures. The prac tical part of the Bible is a field which they do not cultivate. The consequence is, that the understandings of many Christians are not adequately informed on these subjects, nor their consciences directed, I need not say what must, in spite of the best principles and feelings, be the effects on their tempers and lives. It has always appeared to me, that if a minister is to amplify the doctrinal parts of the word of God, he is likewise to unfold the practical: that if he bestow five or six sermons on each of the three first chapters of the Epistle to the Ephesians, he should bestow as many on each of the three last: that if it be God's appointed means of producing faith and love to expound the one, it is equally his appointed means of producing holy obedience to enforce the other. I am aware that it is far more difficult to compose a sermon on a particular topic of duty, sincerity for instance, or the forgiveness of injuries, than on the general doctrines of the grace of God; nor am I ignorant, that such discourses would be considered by the disciples of the school on which I am now animadverting, as dry and legal; but surely, these considerations should have no weight with any one, who remembers aright, that, if he yet pleases men, he is not the servant of Christ." The case is, in my view, so perfectly plain, that it is unnecessary to say another word upon it. 4 N