191

LECTURE XII.

ROMANS, iii, 27-31.

"Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? nay; but by the law of faith. Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law. Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also seeing it is one God which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith. Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law."

THE term law may often be taken in a more general acceptation, than that of an authoritative rule for the observation of those who are subject to it. It may signify the method of succession, by which one event follows another-either in the moral or in the physical world; and it is thus that we speak of a law of nature, or a law of the human mind, thereby denoting the train or order of certain consecutive facts, which maintain an unvarying dependence among themselves. Both the law of works, and the law of faith, though the judicial character of God is strongly evinced in the establishment of them, may be understood here in this latter sense which we have just now explained. The law of works, is that law by which the event of a man's justification, follows upon the event of his having performed these works. The law of faith is that law, by which the event of a man's justification follows, upon the event of his conceiving faith-just as the law of gravitation is that law upon which

every body above the surface of the earth, when its support is taken away, will fall toward its centre; and as the law of refraction is that, upon which every ray of light, when it passes obliquely from air into water, is bent from the direction which it had formerly.

Ver. 29. It is good, for the purpose of keeping up in your mind the concatenation that obtains between one part of the epistle and the other, to mark every recurrence of similar terms which takes place in the prosecution of its argument. He had in the second chapter, made a pointed address to the Jew -who rested in the law, and made his boast of God. He now excludes his boasting; and in doing so reduces the Jew and the Gentile to the same condition of relationship with God.

Ver. 30. The term 'one' may either be taken numerically, or refers to the unity and unchangeableness of God's purpose.

By a preceding verse, the works of the law are set aside in the matter of our justification. And it comes in as an appropriate question-Is the law made void through this? What would have been consequent upon obedience to the law, is now made consequent upon faith; and does this nullify the law? No, it will be found that it serves to establish the law, securing all the honour which is due to the Lawgiver; perpetuating the obligation and authority of the law itself; and introducing into the heart of the believer such new principles of operation, as to work conformity between the law of God and the life of man, a conformity that is ever making progress here and will at length be perfected hereafter.

The passage now expounded scarcely requires any paraphrastic elucidation at all-yet agreeable to our practice we shall still offer one.

'Where is boasting then? It is excluded. In what method? By the method of justification through works? No, it is by the method of justification through faith. But if works had any part in our justification there would still be room for boasting and we must therefore conclude since boasting is done away that they have no part at all—and that man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law. Is He only the God of the Jews? Is He not also the God of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also-seeing that He the same God dispenses justification to both in the same way, that is, justifying the circumcision by faith and also the uncircumcision by faith. Do we then make the law void through faith? By no means. We rather establish the law."

We now proceed as usual to press upon you, any such lessons as may be extracted from the passage of the day.

And first you know it to be a frequent evasion, on the part of those who dislike the utter excluding of works from that righteousness which justifies a sinner before God, that they hold the affirmation of Paul upon the subject to be of the ceremonial and not of the moral law. They are willing enough to discard obedience to the former, but not obedience to the latter, as having any efficacy in justification. And they will further acknowledge, that they have a much higher esteem for the latter than for the former; that they think greatly better of the man

who has the rectitudes of morality to signalize his character, than of the man who has only the ritual observations of a punctual and prescribed ceremonial to signalize his character; that all rites, be they Jewish or Christian, have a greatly inferior place in their estimation, to the virtues of social life, or to the affections of an inward and enlightened piety-insomuch that should there stand before them an individual of fidelity incorruptible, and of honour fearless and unspotted, and of humanity ever breathing the desires of kindness and ever busying itself with deeds of kindness in behalf of our species, and of patriotism linking all its energies with the good of his native land, and of gentleness shedding its mild and pleasing lustre over the walks of private companionship, and of affection kindling its still more intense and exquisite charm in the bosom of his home-why there would not be one moment's hesitation with them, whether the homage of their reverential and regardful feelings, were more due to such an individual, even though a stranger to the puritanical rigours of the sabbath and of the sacrament; or to him, who, trenched in the outward regularities of worship and of ordinance, had less of the graces and less of the honesties of character to adorn him-and you can well anticipate their reply to the question, Which of the two had the more to boast of-the man of social worth or the man of saintly exterior?

We are far from disputing the justness of their preference for the former of these two men ; but we would direct them to the use that they should make of this preference—when turning to its right

ful and consistent application the statement of our apostle, that from the affair of our justification all boasting is excluded. We ask them upon a refer

ence to their own principles and feelings, whether this assertion of the inspired teacher points more to the exclusion of the moral or of the ceremonial law? Is it not the fair and direct answer that it points the more, to that of which men are inclined to boast the more ? To set aside the law of works in the matter of our justification is not to exclude boasting at all—if it be only those works that are excluded, which beget no reverence when done by others, and no complacency when done by themselves. The exclusion of boasting might appear to the mind of an old Pharisee, as that which went to sweep away the whole ceremonial in which he gloried.. But for the very same reason should it appear to the mind of him who is a tasteful admirer of virtue, to sweep away the moral accomplishments in which he glories. To him, in fact, the ceremonial law, in which he has no disposition to boast whatever, is not so touched by the affirmation of the apostle, as the moral law on which alone he would ground a boastful superiority of himself over others. The thing which is shut out here from the office of justification, is that thing which excites boasting in man. Carry this verse to the Jew who vaunted himself that he gave tithes and fasted twice in the week; and these are the observances, which, as to any power of justifying, are here done away. Carry this verse to the man who stands exalted over his fellows, either by the integrities which direct or by the kind humanities which adorn him ;