53

Chrift, never can take away, nay, never can alter his natural relation as a creature, nor the obligation founded upon it. Neither can it be conceived as confiftent with the perfections of God, to abate the demands of his law; that is to fay, a perfect conformity to his holy will. Every the leaft deviation from it, by tranfgreffion, or neglect of duty, must still be evil in itself, and muft still be seen, and efteemed to be fo by the God of truth, who cannot lie. Now, is there any thing in the gospel that hath the leaft tendency to leffen the fenfe of this obligation, after it hath been once difcovered? Very far from it: on the contrary, all that Chrift hath done for the falvation of finners, as its immediate confequence, magnifies the law, and makes it honorable.

-Perhaps it may be thought, that the releafing a finner from the fanction of the law, or the punishment incurred

Since mention has been made of perfect conformity to the will of God, or perfect obedience to his law, as the duty of man, which is indeed the foundation of this whole doctrine, I think it neceffary to obferve, that fome deny this to be properly required of man, as his duty in the present fallen frate, because he is not able to perforin it. But fuch do not feem to attend either to the meaning of perfect obedience, or to the nature or caufe of this inability. Perfect obedience is obedience by any creature, to the utmoft extent of his natural powers. Even in a flate of innocence, the holy difpofitions of Adam would not have been equal in ftrength and activity to thofe of creatures of an higher rank: but furely to love God, who is infinitely amiable, with all the heart, and above all, to confecrate all his powers and faculties, without exception, and without intermiffion, to God's fervice, must be undeniably the duty of every intelligent creature. inability are we under to pay this? Our natural faculties are furely as fit And what fort of for the fervice of God as for any bafer purpose: the inability is only moral, and lies wholly in the averfion of our hearts from fuch employment. Does this then take away the guilt? Muft God relax his law because we are not willing to obey it? Confult even modern philofophers; and fuch of them as allow there is any fuch thing as vice, will tell you, that it lies in evil or misplaced affections. Will then that which is ill in itself excufe its fruits in any degree from guilt or blame? The truth is, notwithstanding the loud charge of licentioufnefs upon the truths of the gospel, there is no other fyftem that ever I perufed, which preferves the obligations of the law of God in its ftrength: the most part of them, when thoroughly examined, just amount to this, that men are bound, and that it is RIGHT and MEET and FIT that they should be as good and as holy as they themfelves incline. VOL. I.

G

by pardon purchased and beftowed, has this effect: and here it is, to be fure, that men by their partial views, are apt to fuppofe the objection lies.

But let us only reflect, that the obligation to duty and obedience to the Creator, hath been seen by a believer in the strongest light, and muft continue to be fenfible. Will he then be induced to act in the face of a perceived obligation, by an inftance of unspeakable mercy? Is this reafonable to fuppofe? or rather, is it not self contradictory and abfurd? It is fo far from being true, that this mercy -difposes to obedience, as a peculiar and additional motive, as I fhall afterwards fhew more fully in its proper place. In the mean time, it is felf-evident, that it can be no hinderance. What leads us into error in this matter, is what happens fometimes in human affairs. In a human government, mercy or a promife of impunity for paft crimes, may enable, though even in that cafe, not incline a rebel. lious traitor to renew his wickednefs. But this is a most unjust and partial view of the case, in which the very cir cumftance is wanting upon which the chief stress ought to be laid. Human laws reach only outward actions, becaufe human knowledge is fo imperfect that it cannot difcover the difpofition of the heart: and as all profeffions are not fincere, fo kindness is often bestowed on improper objects. This kindness, however, though it may discover the impropriety, cannot cause it.

But make the fimilitude complete, and fee how it will lead us to determine. Suppose one who hath been in rebellion, deeply and inwardly convinced of the evil of rebellion, and his obligation to fubmiffion; fuppose this conviction fo ftrong, that he confeffeth the juftness of the sentence condemning him to die, which is very confiftent with a defire of life: will a pardon offered or intimated to fuch a perfon make him difloyal? Is this its natural, nay, is it its poffible effect? If it could be fupposed to have any fuch confequence at all, it could only be in this diftant way, that pardon feems to leffen the fenfe of a judge's difpleasure at the crime. But even this can have no place here, because fufficient care is taken to prevent any fuch abuse of it, by the fubftitution and vicarious futferings of a Mediator.

I cannot help observing here, that the fimilitude above ufed will lead us to the discovery of one great cause of the objection against which I am reafoning. It arifes from that corruption of heart, and inward oppofition to the law of God in its extent and purity, which is in all men by nature, and continues in all who are not renewed in the fpirit of their minds. As they have a ftrong tendency and inclination to tranfgrefs the law where they dare, they are ready to think, that the hopes of impunity must encourage every one to a bold violation of it. And no doubt this would be true, if there could be any real esteem or cordial acceptance of the gospel, without a previous conviction of the obligation of the law, and the guilt and demerit of every tranfgreffor. But fuppofing, what is in truth the cafe with every believer, that there is a real and ftrong conviction of the obligation of the law of God upon every rational creature, which cannot be taken away; to imagine that the mercy of God in pardoning finners for Chrift's fake will leffen or weaken the fenfe of this obligation, is a most manifest contradiction. On the contrary, fin must needs have received a mortal blow, the love of it must neceffarily have been deftroyed, before pardon in this way could be fought or obtained: fo that the apostle might well fay, "How fhall we that are dead to fin, live any longer therein ?"

In the fecond place, he who believes in Chrift, and expects juftification through his imputed righteousness, must have the deepeft and strongest sense of the evil of fin in itfelf. This is in a good measure included in, or an immediate confequence of, what has been already mentioned. For the obligation of the law, as hinted above, is but

But this is impoffible; for though there may be fome fort of fear of punishment, occafioned by difplays of divine power, where there is no true humiliation of mind, or genuine conviction of fin; this is but like the impatient ftruggles of a chained flave, inftead of the willing fubjection of a penitent child. There is ftill in all fuch an inward murmuring against the fentence, as that of an unjuft and rigorous tyrant, and not of a righteous judge. Therefore, though fuch fhould pretend to rely on the merits of Chrift for pardon and deliverance, it is plainly not from their hearts, and therefore neither to the faving of their fouls, nor to the reformation of their lives.

very imperfect, if we confider it only as founded on the power of God, and the dependance of the creature, and not alfo on the holinefs, juftice, and goodness of the law itself. In the firft fenfe, perhaps, it may be felt by the wicked in this world, at least, we are fure, it is felt by devils and damned fpirits in a separate state. They know that they must fuffer, because they will not obey. But where there is a complete fenfe of obligation, it implies a belief of the righteoufnefs of the law, as well as the power of the law-giver; of the equity, nay, the excellence of the command, as well as the feverity of the fanction. All fuch not only believe that God will punish for fin, but that it is most just that he should do fo, and that fin has richly deferved it.

It may therefore feem unneceffary to add any thing on this fubject more than has been already faid: but I have mentioned it by itfelf, becaufe, befides that fenfe of the obligation and purity of the law of God which must pave the way to a finner's acceptance of the righteousness of Chrift, there is a discovery of the evil of fin, and its abominable nature, in every part of this "myftery of godli"nefs, God manifested in the flesh," and the truths founded upon it; fo that the more these are believed, and the more they are attended to and recollected, the more muft the believer be determined to hate and abhor every wicked and falfe way; every new view which he takes of the gofpel of his falvation, every act of truft and confidence exerted upon it, muft increase his horror of fin, and excite him to fly from it.

Let us confider a little what views are prefented us of the evil of fin in the doctrine of Chrift, and of him crucified. Here we fee that a holy and juft God would not forgive fin without an atonement. What a demonftration is this of its malignity, if carefully attended to, and kept conftantly in our eye, as a part of our very idea of the Divine Nature! The difficulty in this cafe, is our partiality in our own caufe; we are unwilling to think fin fo very blame-worthy, becaufe this is condemning ourfelves; but let us confider what views an all-wife and impartial God hath of it, and form ours upon his. And that we

may not fo much as once blafphemoufly imagine, that he allo is partial on his own fide, let us remember that he is the God of love, who, by this very falvation, hath magnified his love in a manner that paffeth knowledge. He fhews his fenfe of the evil of the crime, even whilft he is contriving, nay, in the very contrivance of a proper way for the criminal's efcape. He is not, fo to fpeak, setting forth the malignity of the offence, in order to juftify the severity of his own vengeance, but he is exerting his amiable attribute of mercy, and yet here muft the evil of fin appear.

Confider, in a particular manner, upon this fubject, the dignity and glory of the perfon who made this atonement. The value of the purchafe may be feen in the greatness of the price; the evil of fin in the worth of the propitiation. "For we are not redeemed with corruptible things, "fuch us filver and gold, but with the precious blood of "Chrif, as of a Lamb without blemish and without fpot." It was no lefs a perfon than the eternal and only begotton Son of God, who was before all worlds, the brightnefs of his Father's glory, and the exprefs image of his perfon, who fuffered in our stead. Whoever confiders the frequent mention in the facred oracles of the glory and dignity of the perfon of Chrift, must be fatisfied that it is not without defign; and none can truly relish or im prove these truths, but fuch as thence learn the evil of fin, the immenseness of that debt which required one of fo great, nay, of infinite and inexhauftible riches, to be able to pay it. A creature indeed behoved to fuffer; and therefore he became the fon of man, but intimately united to the Creator, God blessed for ever. It was one of the firft and earliest confeffions of faith, That Jefus Chrift was the Son of God; and this belief muft have the ftrongeft influence in fhewing us the evil of fin, which none elfe was able to expiate.

In many paffages of Scripture, God's fending his own Son into the world to fave finners, is reprefented as the ftrongest proof poffible of his compaffion and love. The

* 1 Pet. i. 18.