mon with the Jews, under the dispensation of the gospel

If instead of first adopting a prevailing opinion, and then seeking to make the language of scripture bend to it, which has frequently been the case, we carefully observe the facts stated in the New Testament, and follow the reasoning of the Apostles of of the Jesus, it will be ascertained that the reconciliation which Christ hath made, consists not in his having appeased the wrath of God, satisfied his justice and changed its aspect towards sinners, nor in his having reconciled him to the world, but that it consists in his having brought the Gentiles nigh to God, by placing them under the dispensation of the gospel. Con sequently, the Gentiles are no longer without Christ. He is sent to them, with all the truth and grace which came by him, in the gospel. They are no longer strangers and foreigners, but fellow heirs of all the advantages of the gospel.

The Apostles intreated sinners to be personally reconciled to God-to his character, the methods of his grace, to his authority, and all the dealings of his hand-to avail themselves of the gracious dispensation under which God had placed them, by embracing his gospel, receiving his favor, and becoming obedient to his Son-to lay aside their enmity and cease from rebellion, by repenting, turning to God, and submitting themselves to his will. We pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God.

Such is the christian doctrine of reconciliation,

which has been mistaken for the modern doctrine of atonement. The former displays the great love of God to sinners, stamps the greatest importance on the ministration of Christ, as calculated and designed to make the world pure and happy, and every way secures the good of the moral system. The latter is irreconcileable with the divine character, it gives the work of Christ an unimportant direction, by supposing it designed, to effect some change in the aspect of divine justice, if not in God himself, where no change ever was either necessary, or possible, and is inimical to the good of the moral system, as it substitutes an imaginary in the place of a real and personal righteousness.

CHAPTER SECOND.

A reply to MR. JERRAM'S LETTERS on Atonement, in a series of Letters to that Gentleman.

LETTER I.

.

SIR,

THAT christianity has 'certain leading principles, which are interwoven with its very texture,' and that these principles are in perfect unison with each other, I fully grant; but that the doctrine of atonement, as maintained by you, and other reputed Orthodox writers, is one of these leading principles, I deny, for the following reasons. 1. Nothing can be a leading principle of christianity that is not clearly laid down as such in the New Testament; but so far from this being the case, with respect to the popular doctrine of atonement, its advocates are necessitated to support it by inference and deduction. 2. It is not in unison with a grand leading princi

ple of christianity, which is indeed interwoven with its very texture, the salvation of sinners by the grace of God; this principle you do not professedly deny, but it seems impossible to make your notion of atonement harmonize with it. You, however, take upon you to say that its being a leading principle of christianity has never been denied, except by those who have refined upon christianity, till it can scarcely be distinguished from a system of ethics.* Thus, Sir, many great men, who have been the firm supporters of divine revelation, and benefitted the world by their labors, are by you placed under the censure of refining away the most material part of christianity.

As to the totally different aspect which a renunciation of it (the popular notion of atonement) has invariably given to the whole of the christian religion: I beg leave to ask, has a renunciation of it given a less benevolent aspect to the character of God, or a less benign aspect to the doctrines of the gospel, or a less important aspect to the precepts and example of Jesus Christ, or changed the aspect of pure and undefiled religion as said by James to consist in a man's visiting the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and in keeping himself unspotted from the world? It may be said indeed that it divests christianity of the gloomy and ungracious aspect it acquired in the dark ages, and restores the pure and heavenly aspect it had in the primitive times.

Preface to Letters on Atonement.

D

That the fall of the popular doctrine of atonement would pull down with it the very pillars of christianity,' is a position incapable of proof. Do the Messiahship of Jesus, his divine mission, the truth of what he taught, the reality of his miracles, the proof of his resurrection, which things are certainly pillars of christianity, all depend on the retention of this doctrine? certainly not. Why should christians be terrified with the idea that if they suffer a pillar of reputed Orthodoxy to fall, the whole structure of christianity will fall with it? Rather let them be informed that men have introduced many pillars into the edifice erected by Christ and his Apostles, which deform the beautiful structure, and that the removal of them, so far from endangering, will add strength to the building.

I perceive nothing more in your preface, that requires to be noticed; your uncandid and ungenerous reflections on those who differ from you, I pass over in silence, remembering that the servant of the Lord must not strive. Sincerely wishing you more eandor and christian charity,

I remain yours, &c.