nishing mystery, we readily acknowledge. But this was naturally to be expected in a work of fuch infinite difficulty, as that of rendering the mercy of God, in pardoning mankind, confiftent with the exercise of his juftice, and the support of his authority, as the moral Governor of the world. Whatever could effect this, muft neceffarily be fomething far beyond the comprehenfion of our lis mited understandings; that is, must neceffarily be myfterious. And, therefore, this very circumstance, inftead of fhocking our reason and staggering our faith, ought to fatisfy the one, and confirm the other.

What remains further to be faid on this interesting and important fubject, I fhall res ferve for a separate discourse.

VOL. II.

E

SERMON

SERMON III.

I COR. i. 20.

WHERE IS THE WISE? WHERE IS THE SCRIBE? WHERE IS THE DISPUTER OF THIS WORLD? HATH NOT GOD MADE FOOLISH THE WISDOM OF THIS WORLD?

ROM the train of reafoning pursued in

FR

the preceding difcourfe, it has, I trust, been made evident, that, though repentance and reformation are without doubt indifputably neceffary towards procuring the pardon of fin, (o neceffary, that without them not all the facrifices on earth, nor all the mercies of heaven, can avail to fave us) yet they are not of themfelves fufficient to wash away the ftains of past guilt, to fatisfy the juftice of an offended God, and reftore a wicked and rebellious world to his protection and favour.

It appears, both from the nature of the things themselves, from the clearest deductions of reason, from the ordinary courfe of human affairs in the prefent world, from the common apprehenfions, and the univerfal practice of mankind, before the appearance of Christ upon earth, and, above all, from the pofitive declarations of God himself, both in the Old and New Teftament, that, befides the contrition of the finner himself, something must be done or fuffered by fome other being on his account; fome fort of expiation must be made for him, and accepted, before he can be exonerated of guilt, and redeemed from punishment, and stand juftified in the eyes of his offended Maker.

This principle being established, (and it appears to me incontrovertible) who fhall afterwards prefume to fay, that the particular kind of expiation, or, in other words, the particular mode of Redemption, which God actually fixed upon for the prefervation of mankind, was not the best and fitteft that could be devised? If fome victim, fome propitiatory facrifice, was plainly neceffary for this purpose; who fhall undertake to affirm,

that

that the very individual facrifice appointed by God himself, was not the properest and most effectual to answer the end proposed? If commutative punishment and vicarious suffering appear not only to have prevailed among all Heathen nations from the earliest ages, and to have been established among the Jews by the exprefs appointment of God, but even at this hour make a part of the ordinary difpenfations of God's providence in the prefent world, (where we continually fee men rescued from ruin by the interpofing kindness, the generous exertions, and the voluntary fufferings of others on their account); who fhall fay, that there was either cruelty or injuftice, in appointing Chrift to dię, much lefs in his voluntary confent to die," for us "men and for our falvation ?" If, in fine, the value of the victim offered was usually proportioned to the magnitude of the offence, and the number of the offenders; why should appear in the least incredible, that when the inhabitants of a whole world, (perhaps of many worlds and fyftems of worlds) and all their generations, from the very fall of our first parents to the end of time, were to be

it