Page images
PDF
EPUB

A

[ocr errors]

thanksgivings, and religious experience. The Apostle Paul, who was one of the holiest of mere men, long after his conversion, and after he had the highest assurance that God had forgiven his sins, was distressed, with the most affecting sense of his own vileness. This led him to exclaim, "I am less than the least of all saints;" "O wretched man that I am, who shall deliver me from this body of death!" From these and numerous similar passages, it appears that a persuasion of pardon from God, does not take away a sense of guilt. This is taken for granted in the doctrine, and is a distinct idea from that which I propose to illustrate, which is that the greater and clearer views saints have of the divine character, the more clear and affecting will be their views of their own sinfulness and ill desert.

The truth of this proposition will appear both from reason and revelation.

I. It is reasonable to suppose that the clearer discoveries any one has of the greatness and majesty of God, the clearer views he should have of his own ill desert. This must be reasonable, when we consider what is implied in true religion; which radically consists in right affection; in feeling towards objects according to their nature and importance. But in order to this, there must be a knowledge of those objects suited to excite religious affection. Truth must be seen, to be loved or hated. Love and hatred necessarily suppose some object in the view of the mind, toward which, they are exercised. And res ligious affections, which are genuine, always imply

some correct views of God.

Hence there can be

no true religion without true conviction, which is. nothing more nor less than a discovery and realizing sense of truth. He who has a correct and realizing view of the character of God, and sees his own character in a true point of light, who sees sin in its nature and tendency to be what it is, and who consequently views his real and relative state with respect to time and eternity, may be said to be a subject of true conviction. Hence it follows, that conviction. is necessary to conversion. In other words, convic

Conviction of

tion is necessary for right affection. truth respecting God, is necessary in order to right affection toward him. And a conviction of the truth with respect to our own character; with respect to sin, and the Saviour, is necessary to right affection towards these objects. Right affection with respect to any object, involves true conviction; and therefore it is reasonable to conclude, that he, who is not the subject of true conviction, is not the subject of right affection. From this we may not infer, that every one, who is the subject of true conviction, is likewise the subject of right affection. For there is no necessary connexion between a conviction of truth and a cordial approbation of it. Hence the most wicked beings may have the clearest conviction of truth, and yet remain enemies to it. This is now the case with satan, the great enemy of God; and this will be the case with all the impenitent at, and after the day of judgment. They will have the clearest and most painful conviction of truth respecting God.-They will see sin and their

own characters in a true light, and yet remain not only destitute of right affection, but full of the contrary. Though conviction be a necessary foundation for right affection, yet it is entirely a distinct thing; as distinct as the perception of truth is from the love of it. But it is a truth, that every one who is truly godly is the subject of right affection. He loves those objects which ought to be loved, and hates those which are hateful. This is essential to a good man. For persons are called godly, in distinction from others, because there is some real conformity in their hearts to the moral image of God.

Let us now consider a number of truths, with which it must be supposed the godly man is acquainted, and consult the dictates of reason with respect to what his views and exercises must be in the contemplation of them.

It is a truth, with which every pious man is acquainted, that God is a being absolutely, and infinitely glorious and amiable. And since the love and honour, which are due to any being, are in proportion to the greatness and goodness of that being, it is therefore a reasonable conclusion, that all men are under the greatest possible obligations to love and obey God. Accordingly God requires, by an express law, all men to love him with all the heart. This law, all have broken; and as the demerit of sin is in proportion to the violated obligation, so no bounds can be set to the ill desert of the transgressor. Accordingly, death, consisting in a separation of the soul from the favour of God, is annexed to this law as its just penalty.

And it is

This is the desert of every sinner. And those who are now reconciled were once "enemies in their minds, by wicked works." Such are sensible, that they were once wholly unconformed to this law, and that even now they are far from entire conformity to it. This want of conformity involves inexpressible guilt. Saints, as they grow in their acquaintance with divine things, see more of the purity and holiness of the divine law and feel more this want of conformity to it. The more they discover of the excellency and glory of God, which is the foundation of the divine law and their obligations, the more clearly will they see their own deficiency, and will increase in this as they increase in their knowledge of God and of his law. further evident, that the ill desert of sin is a thing which never wears out. He who once deserved punishment, will forever in point of justice, deserve punishment. Truly in consequence of the atonement of Christ, it is consistent with justice, to pardon the penitent sinner. But justice does not require it. It is not justice, but mercy which pardons the sinner. This pardon saves him from punishment, but not from the desert of it. He is in himself, and considered without relation to Christ, as ill deserving after pardon and justification as before. We can easily perceive that absolving a criminal from deserved punishment does not render him innocent. And as a pardon does not destroy the ill desert of the pardoned criminal, so neither does his repentance make any atonement for his past crimes. His repentance may be a security against future transgression, but has not the least tendency to expiate his

His pre

sin, or make any alteration in what is past. sent obedience is no more than his present duty, and cannot, in the least degree, make any satisfaction for his former sins.

Now these being established and unquestionable. truths, and it being also a truth, that all godly persons are subjects of right affections, founded upon a conviction of truth, or have correct views of God and his law; it will follow, that every pious man entertains à deep sense of his own vileness and ill desert. For it is a truth, that he is ill deserving at the hand of God; and it is perfectly reasonable that the more he sees of the divine perfection, the clearer he should discover his imperfection. This being true, how can it be otherwise than that a sense of vileness should increase, in every being who has sinned, in proportion as his sense of the excellency of God increases. And should this creature be a penitent, pardoned sinner, this will not alter the case, for the reason already given, that pardon does not expiate sin, but only save him from its deserved punishment. It is reasonable to suppose, that the truly godly, who behold the divine glory, who see the true reason why God is to be loved, should upon every discovery of the divine glory, have a proportional discovery of the evil of sin, and of their own vileness in particular. And that they who have the highest, and most heart affecting sense of the glory of God, and so the highest exercises of true religion, should have the deepest impression of their sinfulness. For this is only to suppose, that they have clearer views of God and themselves, than others; or that they view

« PreviousContinue »