Jefus, according to the flesh. He was honoured by his heavenly Master with especial marks of favour. For it is evident from the book of the Acts, and from the Epiftles of St. Paul, that, after the afcenfion of Chrift, St. James was uniformly confidered by the Apostles as it were the chief among them; and his opinion was regarded with particular respect (a). He became Bishop of the Church at Jerufalem; and in that ftation obtained by his zeal and integrity the furname of the Juft. By the unbelieving Jews he was at length maffacred. And, if the credit of authenticity may be affigned to the paffage profeffedly quoted from Jofephus by early Chriftian writers; fo decidedly were the very enemies of the Apoftle impreffed by his piety, that the miferable deftruction of the city, which foon afterwards followed, was regarded by of the Jews as a judgement from God for their guilt in putting that righteous Chriftian to death.

many

In the paffage then which is now under consideration, you hear the words of the Holy Ghoft delivered to you by the

(4) Acts, xii. 17. xv. 13. 19. xxi. 18. 1 Cor. xv. 7. Gal. i. 19. ii. 9. 12.

mouth

mouth of, perhaps, the moft eminent of the Apostles..

I propofe, under the Divine bleffing, firft, to explain the meaning of the text: in the next place, to illustrate by examples the reasonableness of the doctrine which it conveys and, thirdly, to prove that the doctrine is not peculiar to St. James, but is the univerfal doctrine of the Scriptures.

I. Whofoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point; he is guilty of all.

What is the truth which in these words St. James defigns to affirm? Does he mean to aver, that the man who commits one fin virtually commits every kind of fin? He means no fuch abfurdity. He knew that, although one tranfgreffion commonly draws on other and various and greater offences; a finner may perpetrate feveral kinds of wickednefs without plunging into all kinds. Does he maintain that a perfon who has yielded to one fin, needs not to hefitate as to indulgence in more? The Apoftle never purpofed to contradict the Scriptures. He knew that every additional fin cries for additional punishment. Does he imply that the man who deliberately

breaks

He

breaks any one of the commandments of the Gospel is neceffarily excluded from falvation? God forbid! For how then should any man be faved? The Apoftle well-knew that to every true penitent mercy is extended through Christ. What then is the fact, which he declares? declares this fact that the man, who fins against any one branch of the divine law, fins against the authority of the whole law, and against the lawgiver of the whole. He declares that the divine law is not to be taken piecemeal: that it is not an affemblage of unnconnected commandments flowing from different fources, and guarded by different sanctions; but one entire work, in all its parts proceeding from the will and vindicated by the power of the fame Author. He declares that God who, by his law, faid, Do not commit adultery, faid alfo, Do not kill: that whofoever commits adultery offends against the authority of Him who also said, Do not kill: that however widely the nature and circumstances of actions may vary the degrees of their guilt, whofoever commits any one fin rebels against the law and the majefty of Him, who has equally forbidden every sin. He declares that no one is a true Chriftian,

who does not purpose and labour to keep the whole law, that every person who wilfully perfeveres in any one habitual transgreffion, and hopes to escape the penalty of rebellion, because he observes many of the commandments of God, will find himself, at the day of judgement fatally difappointed.

II. Perhaps this declaration of the Apoftle founds in your ears unreasonable. "Is it not fufficient," you reply, "if I obey moft "of the ordinances of God? If I disregard

one, am I to lofe the benefit of obferving "all the reft? Will no allowance be made "for fome one evil difpofition or practice,

to which I am particularly tempted? If "I fight ftrenuously and fuccessfully against "nineteen finful habits; muft I be con"demned, if I fhould be overcome by the "twentieth ?" You will recollect that, when it is affirmed that the violation of one part of the law of God will exclude a man from the kingdom of heaven, notwithftanding his obedience to the other parts; we fpeak of a man, whose breach of one of the divine commandments is knowingly, and wilfully, and perfeveringly indulged. With this recollection fully prefent in

your

mind, proceed with me to examine, by the confideration of fome parallel examples, whether a perfon who thus difobeys any one part of the divine law can be a fincere follower of Jefus Christ.

Suppose one of your neighbours to be punctual in obeying all the laws of the land with one exception; but to be obstinate in the tranfgreffion of that particular ftatute. He abftains, for inftance, from offering violence to his fellow-fubjects. He enters not into plots against the Government. He fubmits to every perfonal fervice, which his country requires of him for her defence. He undertakes and executes any public function, to which his ftation renders him liable. He pays his taxes, in general, with honesty. But there is one particular tax, which he cannot be perfuaded to discharge. He acknowledges that the tax is equitable and proper; and that he is lawfully called upon to pay it. He is again and again entreated to pay it. He is reminded that he owes that tax to his country that to refufe payment is to febel against the laws and to refift his rightful governors that, if he perfifts in the refufal, juftice must take its course against him. Solicitations and arguments are loft VOL. II. upon