been too clear t

the mind, its a the suggestion Self-righ pride of sa up, and I' by Ch looks!

he 1 ver

was lost;' and to call, not

repentance.' The father in e prodigal into his family and service which he had rendered, for an account of the misery and ruin with his own compassion. Such

of every convicted sinner, when he Je renewing grace of God.

a reason why such sinners are made the A when they have arrived at a complete

ger, and dependance on God for sancrance, rather than while they were at ease ded in their rebellion. In the latter situa

y unprepared either to feel or understand exteut of the divine goodness in bestowing and of course to be thankful, obedient, humaily virtuous to that degree which is necessary eta preparation for heaven, and which seems ing accomplished in any other manner than this ve described. A deliverance is both understood oportion to the greatness of the sense which the evered has had of his danger. A new moral characcicomed in proportion to the feelings which have been Conced in the debasement and disadvantages of the chapreviously existing. Universally every benefit is reaa proportion to the sense of our own necessity. Thus, de seuse of his guilt, danger, and need of salvation, expecaced, under the conviction of his sin, the sinner is prepared wata the utmost advantage to receive his sanctification, justiication, and final deliverance from eternal ruin. This is what I call the fitness of the sinner for the reception of these benefit; a fitness which seems indispensable; appearing plainly to render it proper that God should give these blessings to a convinced sinner, when it would be wholly improper to give them to the same sinner while unconvinced and insensible. Benefits are wisely conferred on those who are fitted thoroughly to understand, feel, and acknowledge them; and unwisely on those who are not; whose views are obscure, whose toolings are blunt, and whose acknowledgments, if made at

all, are wrung from them by the hard hand of necessity. In the former case, the benefits may be said to be laid out well; in the latter, to little or no purpose.

These observations may possibly throw some light on a subject which hitherto has been almost merely a topic of debate among theologians. This is the true nature and efficacy of the prayers of such persons as are under conviction of sin. Some divines have strongly encouraged, and others utterly discouraged, convicted sinners from praying. Those of the latter class, founding their opinions on the declaration that 'the prayers of the wicked are an abomination to the Lord,' observe, that the prayers of convinced sinners cannot be acceptable to God; that they cannot reasonably be expected to be either heard or answered; and that, therefore, it is unjustifiable to advise such sinners, or any sinners whatever, to pray at all.

This subject will hereafter naturally offer itself for discussion, I shall now consider it only so far as my present purpose demands. According to the opinion which I have recited, no man can with any propriety pray for his regeneration. The sinner cannot pray for it, because his prayers are sinful and abominable. The saint cannot pray for it with propriety, because he is already regenerated, and cannot possibly either need or receive it. Thus the greatest blessing ever given to man, and that on which all other blessings depend, cannot be prayed for by him who receives it; and stands, therefore, on a ground totally diverse from that on which all other blessings rest; viz. on such a ground that a man can never ask it for himself.

The prayers of convinced sinners, it is said, are insincere, and therefore abominable to God. In answer to this objection, I observe, that a sinner, whether convinced or not, may undoubtedly pray with insincerity in all instances; but there is no invincible necessity that his prayers should always be insincere, notwithstanding he is a sinner. A sinner may, from a sense of his danger and misery, pray as sincerely to be saved from that danger and misery, as a saint. His disposition, I acknowledge, is still sinful; and his prayers are wholly destitute of moral goodness. But the mere wish to be saved from suffering, is neither sinful nor holy. On the contrary, it is merely the instinctive desire of every percipient being;

without which he would cease to be a percipient being. That there is any thing hateful to God in this wish, whether expressed in prayer or not, I cannot perceive, nor do I find it declared either by reason, or Revelation. It may, indeed, be united with other desires, and those either virtuous or sinful; according to the prevailing character of the mind in which it exists; and the whole state of the mind may be accordingly denominated virtuous, or sinful. Still this desire is neither morally good, nor morally evil; and therefore neither pleasing nor displeasing, as such, in the sight of God.

That God pities sinners as mere sufferers will not be doubted; otherwise he would not have sent his Son to redeem them from sin and misery. That he pities them more when strongly affected with a sense of their guilt and misery, than when at ease concerning both, will I think be readily believed. The sinner is certainly not less an object of compassion, but much more, when he feels the evils in which he is involved; and I can see no reason why he may not be more an object of divine compassion on that account, as well as of ours. The cries of the sinner for mercy are not therefore in themselves sinful; and there is nothing to make the sinner less, but apparently much to make him more an object of the divine pity.

As the sinner knows that regeneration is the only possible mean of escape and safety, so he may, and plainly will, feel in the same degree the necessity of regeneration to him, as of safety. For regeneration then he will cry with the same ardour and the same freedom from sinfulness in this prayer, considered by itself, as for salvation or deliverance from suffering.

That the prayers of unregenerate men are not virtuous must undoubtedly be admitted; for nothing can be virtuous which does not proceed from a heart good in the evangelical sense. That they are sinful, so far as they are of a moral nature, must also be admitted, at least by me. The declaration of Solomon, that the prayers of the wicked are an abomination,' appears to me, together with others of the like import, to be a description of the prayers of wicked men as they are in their general nature; and not as the mere cries of a suffering creature for mercy. In these, considered by themselves, 1 see nothing of a sinful nature. They are not indeed objects

of the divine complacency; and the sinner who offers them is clearly an object of the divine anger. But I see no evidence that the prayers of such a sinner may not be objects of the divine benevolence, and regarded by the infinite mind with compassion. To that compassion only are they addressed. The cries of a profligate vagrant in distress render him more properly and more intensely an object of compassion, and more especially entitled to relief, although he is still profligate, from a good man, than he would be were he to continue insensible and hardened under his sufferings, and thus utterly unfitted to have any proper views of his need of relief, or the kindness of his benefactor in furnishing it. I see no reason why God may not regard suffering sinners in a similar manner. That he does in fact thus regard them is, I think, unanswerably evident; regeneration, regularly following such prayers, and being regularly communicated to the subjects of them in the course of God's providence, whenever it exists at all. That this is ordinarily, nay, that it is almost always the fact cannot, I think, be questioned. All sinners under conviction pray; and of such sinners all converts are made. To convinced sinners, crying to God for mercy, regeneration is communicated by the Spirit of God; and we are not, I think, warranted to conclude that it is given to any others. As then the whole number of regenerated persons is formed of those who have been convinced of sin, and who have been diligently employed in prayer while under conviction, it is plain that their prayers are not abominable in such a sense as to prevent the blessing prayed for from descending upon them; and therefore not in such a sense as rationally to discourage them from praying.

The prayer of the publican is in my view a clear and strong illustration of the justice of these remarks. There is no proof, nor in my opinion any reason to believe that this man was regenerated. On the contrary, he declares himself in his prayer to God, to be a sinner. As this declaration is put into his mouth by our Saviour, it must I think be considered not only as a sincere declaration, but a correct one; expressing with exactness the precise truth. He was also a convinced sinner; as is evident from his own words, and from the whole tenour of the parable. Yet he was justified rather than the pharisee.' The pharisee came before God with a false ac

count of himself, with a lofty spirit of self-righteousness, and with an unwarrantable contempt for other men, particularly for the publican. The publican came with a strong and full conviction of his sin, and his supreme need of deliverance. With these views, confessing himself to be a sinner merely, he earnestly besought God to have mercy on him. His sense of his character was plainly just; and his prayer, being the result of his feelings, was of course sincere. Thus far I consider him as justified, and no farther. If he was regenerated in consequence of his prayer, and justified in the evangelical sense, the parable becomes completely decisive to my purpose, and furnishes all the encouragment to convinced sinners to pray which can be asked. But this I will not at present insist on, because it is not expressly declared; although in my own view it is fairly and rationally inferred from the strain of the parable.

These observations I have made at the present time, because the subject could scarcely fail of occuring to your minds, and because difficulties could scarcely fail of attending it, in the view of some persons at least, which it must be desirable to remove. Allow me, however, to observe, that divines, so far as I may be permitted to judge, have insisted on the metaphysical nature of this and several other subjects in such a manner as rather to perplex than to instruct those who have heard them. To unfold or to limit exactly the agency of moral beings, seems to be a task imperfectly suited to such minds as ours. What the Scriptures have said concerning this subject we know, so far as we understand their meaning. We also know whatever is clearly taught us by experience. Beyond this our investigations seem not to have proceeded very far; and almost all the conclusions derived from reasoning à priori, have failed of satisfying minds not originally biassed in their favour.

From this digression, which I hope has not been wholly without use, I now return to the general subject.

When the sinner has come to this state of discernment and feeling, in which his character, danger, and necessity of deliverance are thus realized; and has thus cast himself, as a mere suppliant for mercy, at the footstool of divine grace, God, as has been already observed, gives him a new and virtuous disposition, styled in the Scriptures a new heart;' a right