assumes that men may be, and very frequently are, perfectly right in their conduct, although their religious opinions may be never so erroneous. That, however, is the question at issue, and the subject to be decided not by assertion but proof. Now every one knows, that the motives of our actions give to them a definite character for good or ill. Apart from intention, they are the mere movements of a machine; as indicating the state of the heart alone, do they excite our displacency or love. It is evident, then, that a man's actions-all of them through life-must be very materially affected by the absence or presence or the peculiar character of his religious opinions, seeing that they furnish the most elevated and powerful considerations that can be brought to bear upon the heart of man. If his religion be essentially defective or erroneous, his actions must all of them be deprived of the sacredness and disinterestedness, which religious considerations alone can supply. They who shall act through life without religion, are in this position-that whatever else they may do, they never perform an act resulting from the love of God or the recognition of His authority. Not one of all their actions is done with a view to please Him; not one of them is an act of positive allegiance to Him. Then again, there are many duties we owe to our fellow creatures, arising exclusively out of the religious opinions we entertain. Assuming, for example, the truth of Christianity, there are methods by which to show men how they may attain to happiness in this life and in the life to come; there are warnings, by which they are to be deterred from crime-and promises, by which they areto be encouraged, to cherish the most exalted and delightful hopes. There are duties to be performed in immediate reference to God, and repentance and faith, by which they may forsake sin and attain to the salvation of the soul. Now if any one disbelieves Christianity, or mixes with it essential error, he either cannot perform those duties at all, or if he do it is only to delude and to betray. Yet if the Bible should be found to be true, it will follow, that through life he has neglected the highest trust which God has reposed in him, has left undone the most important duty of existence, and has been indirectly guilty of destroying souls, whose blood God will surely require at his hands. As therefore the character of our actions is dependent upon the amount and character of the religious opinions we entertain, it is obvious that for these religious convictions we are responsible to the bar of God. And finally, this seems to me to be proved by the great fact, that in our religious opinions we find the essence and the germ of every thing that is done specially in reference to God himself. Knowing (what nature and revelation teach us) that "God is not far from every one of us," but that "in Him we live and move and have our being," it would seem to follow, that we must have some kind of duties to discharge, and that there is a class of feelings we ought to indulge, in reference to a Being who stands in that relation to us. He centres in Himself all possible perfections; He is our Creator, our kind Benefactor, our constant Preserver, and will be our Judge: does it not therefore seem a surpassingly strange thing, that any men should ever have brought themselves to the conclusion, that it is no matter what sort of feelings and opinions we may entertain, in reference to a Being so exalted, and standing in such relations to ourselves? If a man should receive on earth the tokens of kindness and care, and return no gratitude, he would be branded as among the meanest and most apostate of the children of men. If one, standing in certain relations of consanguinity, as to a parent, for example, should manifest no regard to one who was indirectly the author of his existence, he would be thought guilty of the worst ingratitude of conduct bordering on insanity, or the extreme of crime. If an individual should sustain certain relationships, and should never think of them, or remember them only to trample on the duties they impose, you would deem him socially wrong, and wrong to a very great extent-strangely besotted or else far gone in profligacy and sin. how happens it, that men can be ungrateful to God, and yet not believe that they transgress? Only because indeed His love is so unparalleled, that men dare to despise it; that because He stands in such ineffable relationships to them, therefore they neglect Him without reproof; and because they are so entirely dependent upon Him for the existence they possess, they refuse to acknowledge Him at all. They have received so many mercies from Him, and have so often transgres But sed His law, that they never deem it necessary to come to Him with repentance. Duties like these must be consigned to the ignorant or the weak. Because His love is unsought and undeserved, therefore that love may be denounced as a fable; because He is infinite in majesty, therefore they must learn the strange atrocity of insulting that majesty by all the scorn they can bring. When He came from the bosom of the Father, He announced distinctly the purposes and claims of that Being He knew so well; and His language in reference to it was-" Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind and with all thy strength." God demands this at the hands of every one of His creatures most rightfully, because of what He is in Himself and what He has done for them. He demands it most inexorably; for He is just, and can allow no defrauding; He is pure, and can admit no connivance at sin. If therefore there be any period of our existence, when our notions in reference to God are wrong and we fail of correcting them, and our feelings in reference to God are wayward and we fail of bringing them under control, it follows, that every such act of ours is an act of insult. It is telling the universe, that the Father of spirits does not deserve, and cannot win, the affections of a man. It is a state of rebellion, which if carried out to its highest and natural results would amount to a dethronement of the Deity, or at least would leave Him to sway His sceptre without an eye to gaze upon Him, without a tongue to praise Him, without a heart to love Him. In short, it comes to this: that He being above all, must alone be deprived of any subordination; that He caring for all, must alone be treated with universal contempt; and blessing all, He must be regarded and treated as a tyrant, exposed for the hissing of universal scorn. If these anomalies be too painful for the mind to contemplate, they force upon our attention, my brethren, the principle that our opinions and feelings in reference to God are of the greatest importance; and that in of them, and with reference to them, we must stand before His bar. May God prepare us for the scrutiny. May it be found, that we have neither through the indulgence of indolence nor pride nor selfishness slighted or rejected one religious truth. May it be manifest, that with humble endeavour to serve God we have delightedly seized every opportunity to perform His will, and to raise our thoughts to the contemplation of His love and our hearts to the enjoyment of His favour, and have ever on earth found our association with the Deity our honour and our enjoyment. May it then be manifest, that whatever were our opinions they were at least sincere and sought from the right source, in deference to His authority and with submission to His will. Let me beseech you to bear in mind, whatever be your religious speculations, that it is not merely the actions, of which society can take cognisance and which society can punish, but it is the secret feelings and acts, which the eye of the Omniscient alone can discern, and which the tribunal of the Omnipotent alone can bring into judgment, that form the distinctive elements of final scrutiny. Exert under this conviction, I beseech you, all the mental and moral energy you can exercise; and doing so, you shall find, that He who is ever present to help His creatures shall conduct you forward in the paths of wis dom and of truth, to the honour of His holy name, and finally to the salvation of the soul. consequence PERNICIOUS PRINCIPLES RESPECTING THE AUTHOR OF SALVATION. REV. T. W. JENKYN. President of Coward College. WEDNESDAY EVENING, FEB. 10, 1841. "And it came to pass, as He was alone praying, His disciples were with Him and He asked them, saying, Whom say the people that I am? "For whosoever shall be ashamed of Me and of My words, of him shall the Son of man be ashamed, when He shall come in His own glory, and in His Father's, and of the holy angels.”—Luke ix. 18, 26. It is interesting for us at all times to know what Jesus Christ thought, and what Jesus Christ felt; but it is peculiarly interesting, to know what occupied the mind of Christ in His devotional hours-when He was in prayer. And we have a specimen of His mind and of His character, in the words of the text : "And it came to pass, as He was alone praying, His disciples were with Him; and He asked them saying, Whom say the people that I am?" At this devotional season, then, of our Lord, He was thinking what men thought about Him—what sentiments and what opinions and views men had formed concerning Him, and were propagating and circulating. This was not from any vanity, or from any prying curiosity, just to know how He stood in public feeling and in public sentiment; but there were very important reasons why He put this serious question to His disciples at this time. He asked them the question, because, in the first place, He came into the world to benefit mankind by influencing their minds, by regulating their sentiments, and by forming their opinions. He came not to coerce the mind of man, or to force any class of sentiments upon the acceptance of the mind, either by a miraculous interposition of Almighty power to make men think so and so; or by force of arms or war or edicts and enactments of states. He came to govern mind; and He came to govern mind as free, as perfectly free to think, and to think for itself -and as having perfect liberty, not only to think, but to express its thoughts and to propagate the opinions and the sentiments which it has formed. He asked this question, in the second place, because the cause of Christ was to succeed and to spread in the world by the influence of the opinions and doctrines, which should be propagated concerning Him. As I have intimated, His cause was to spread, not by force of arms nor by any coercion, but by the influence of mind upon mind. We know that mind is influenced by mind; and the results of our own mind—that is, our own thoughts, our own opinions, our own sentiments— are sure to affect, in some way or other, the thoughts, the sentiments, the feelings and the judgments of other men. For there are in the world many who do not think for themselves, and they are therefore ever and always governed and regulated by the thoughts and the decisions and the opinions of others. And the men who do not think for themselves, form by far the majority of the human race. And therefore it is of very great importance, of vast and tremendous importance, what opinions any master mind-or any mind-may form concerning the Lord Jesus Christ, and what class of sentiments and opinions is propagated by such minds; because they invariably influence others-influence them deeply-influence them very deeply and lastingly. But there is another reason why our Saviour put this very important question, "Whom say the people that I am?"—and that is, because inaccurate conceptions and wrong opinions of the character and cause of Jesus Christ would operate injuriously and perniciously upon the minds, which cherished those sentiments, and those which received and admitted them as their own; because wrong sentiments would tend to incline men to dislike the character of Christ, to reject the mission of Christ, and altogether to misapprehend the great design of His coming into the world. VOL. XIII. U It is therefore in the words of the text distinctly implied, that wrong opinions concerning the Author of salvation are not innocent in their influence and resultsthat they are (as is described in the List of this course of Lectures) pernicious principles. All our opinions have their influences and their consequences, of good or evil, both on the individual mind which forms them and also on the minds of others who admit them. Man, therefore, in propagating or in receiving any class of opinions or principles concerning the Lord Jesus Christ, must hold himself prepared for the consequences of such opinions, whether for good or for evil. This is meant by the phrase--that we are responsible, or accountable, for our belief and for our opinions; that is, that a man must hold himself prepared to abide by the consequences of the opinions which he forms or the principles whieh he receives. I invite your attention, I. To the fact, that principles may be pernicious to the soul. 1. Principles may prove pernicious to the welfare of man's soul. It has been the fashion lately to deny this, and to assert distinctly that man ís not responsible for his belief--that man is not accountable for the opinions which he forms. And as this assertion is clearly and distinctly opposed to the principle supposed in the words of my subject, it is indispensably necessary that I should obviate it, in order to clear the way for the introduction of the full evidences, that there are pernicious principles concerning the person and the author of our salvation-principles destructive and ruinous to the soul. In order, then, to obviate this sentiment, we may consider, that men are reponsible for their actions to God, and in some degree also to their fellow-men. All actions worthy of praise or deserving of blame, are the results of belief-the results of opinions and sentiments and judgments already formed. As far as actions are not the results of belief, not the results of opinion, they are deemed accidental, and consequently for them men are irresponsible. For instance; when a surgeon administers poison in the opinion that it is a wholesome medicine, that is accidental, and the man is in some degree irresponsible; and in the case mentioned in the Levitical law of a man killing a person unawares, the killing was not murder, because it was not the result of belief, the result of opinion, the result of thought; it was accidental, and as accidental it was irresponsible. But, in the second place, in the physical government of God, we find constantly, that men are thus responsible for their opinions; that is, they are liable to the consequences of their opinions-sometimes to their hurt and to theirgreat detriment. For instance a merchant may believe and think, that a certain vessel, which he is about to send to the ocean, is seaworthy; and that merchant is liable to all the consequences of this opinion, whether for good or for evil, whether for safety or for loss. In the physical government of God, he is liable to the consequences of that opinion. So also, a traveller in the desert may believe that a certain track will lead him to a certain town or district, to which he intends to go; it may be the wrong track, but nevertheless if he take that track he must abide the consequences of his own opinion, whether it will lead him right or whether it will lead him wrong. This is the case in the physical government of God. In the third place, we see, that in the providence of God, as exercised in the social constitution of the human race, the same responsibility of man for his opinion and belief is evident. For instance: if a man believes a false promise, on which he entrusts all his property, he is to abide by the results of that belief, or of that opinion of the validity of the promise, on which he has cast his hope. Or again; if he confide his health or his life in the prescription of an unskilful or ignorant physician or surgeon, he must be prepared to abide by the consequences of that opinion; that is, he is held responsible for the results of that opinion. Every man in society approves something as right and disapproves something as wrong; it is impossible for a man to live in society, without such opinions and sentiments as these. Even men who condemn religious principles-even men who condemn priestcraft, suppose that priestcraft is wrong; or else why condemn it? These very men, therefore, who seem to dispute whether there can be such a thing as right or wrong, suppose priestcraft is wrong-suppose hypocrisy is wrong; these very men hold something as right, and hold something as wrong, No man, for instance, can approve of a liar; the man that is known to be a liar, loses credit, loses esteem, loses respect, loses affection, in consequence of his opinion and belief that lying is no crime--no crime in the practice; here therefore a liar is held responsible for his opinions and belief. And then, in like manner, every society must hold some things as right and some things as wrong, for the interests and the benefit of the community. For instance: no community would ever send a traitor, or a pretender to the crown, ambassador to a distant Court; because they know it would be destructive to the interests of the community. No community would appoint a smuggler to be the consul at a sea-port; no community would appoint a thief or a coiner to be the magistrate of the chief city or metropolis. Here, therefore, these men suffer the results of their opinions; their opinions and belief have influences and consequences; and it is impossible for men to abide in society or to live in the world, without being held responsible for the opinions and the belief which they cherish. But again, in the fourth place, in the moral government of God this responsibility for belief and sentiment and opinion is equally evident. Every man who believes there is a God, has a conscience; and a conscience, whether it is accusing of wrong or excusing from guilt, implies responsibility. Does a man never feel self-mortification? Does a man never feel humbled in his own mind? Does a man never condemn himself for a certain class of feelings, as well as for a certain class of actions? Why does he condemn himself? The very fact of his condemning himself implies, that he holds himself responsible, either to himself—or, if he believe there is a God, to that God. And conscience has efficacy in its condemnation of the man, only as it derives its authority and force from the God in whom it believes. But all revelation also clearly and distinctly asserts this. No reader of the Bible has ever doubted that such a doctrine is there—that man is responsible for his belief. Indeed the opponents of the Bible make it a distinct charge against the Bible, that it is there; and therefore they oppose the Bible-because the Bible makes them accountable for their opinion and belief, as well as for their feelings and their actions. And therefore all Christians may let this question stand or fall with the question of the inspiration of the Bible. The whole tone of the New Testamant supposes, that wrong views or sentiments concerning Jesus Christ are pernicious-are destructive to the salvation of the soul that cherishes them. It would occupy much, too much, of your time to mention all the passages which might be enumerated on such an occasion as this, when the time is so limited as about half an hour; but look, for instance, at the sixteenth chapter of Mark"He that believeth and is baptised, shall be saved; but he that believeth not, shall be damned." In the third chapter of the Gospel written by John-" He that believeth on the Son, hath everlasting life; and he that believeth not the Son, shall not see life, but the wrath of God abideth on him." In the fifth chapter of the first epistle of John-"This is the record, that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in His Son; he that hath the Son hath life, and he that hath not the Son of God hath not life." I might also mention the tenth chapter of the epistle to the Hebrews-"Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant where with he was sanctified an unholy thing?" Indeed the passages are innumerable, all bearing upon this subject, that there are principles pernicious to the salvation of the soul-principles in reference to the person and the character of Jesus Christ; but it is clear, from the few passages that I have enumerated, that our views and opinions concerning the Lord Jesus Christ are not matters of indifference, are not matters of trifling importance, but are in verity matters of life and of death. They affect our own minds, and may form a mental, an intellectual and a moral character, perfectly opposed to all the designs of the mission of Jesus Christ; they also alienate us from all the benefits that could be |