^^_^pm^ -, ^^

'..^

* :

.%^

YALE
UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

OPINIONS
ON FAITH, DIVINE INFLUENCE, &c.

FROM TEE WRITINGS OP

JOHN BROWN, D, D.

' L^iudum non aniielo, et vituperium non perhurresco : " Fun-
'..lUHiitum aliud nemo potest ponere, prseter id quod positum est
Itjctovs 6 XpioTof." An superstruxerim aurum, argentum, et
l:i|ii'lis j.Rtiosos, .-in vero lignum, foenum, ct stipul.-is, 'H ijftffia
oijXcoirci.' —.Iahn.

OPINIONS

FAITH, DIVINE INFLUENCE,
HUMAN IxN ABILITY, THE DESIGN AND
EFFECT OF THE DEATH OF CHRIST, ASSURANCE,
AND THE SONSHIP OF CHRIST,

EXPRESSED IN THE PUBLISHED WRITINGS OF

JOHN BROWN, D. D.

MINISTER OF THE UNITED ASSOCIATE CONGREGATION, BROUGHTON PLACE, EDINBURGH ;
AND TROFESSOR OF EXEGETICAL THEOLOGY TO THE UNITED SECESSION CHURCH.

SECOXD EDITION,
WITH ADDITIONAL NOTES.

EDINBURGH .
WILLIAM OLIPHANT AND SON :
7 SOUTH BRIDGE STREET.

MDCCCXLI.

MURRAY AND GIBE, PRINTERS, 21 GEORGE STREET, EDINBURGH.

MW5 Op 6

ADVERTISEMENT.

Thk opinions of the Author, on the topics men
tioned in the title-page, now exciting so deep an in
terest throughout the churches of the United Seces
sion, have been of late so often referred to, in public
and in private, that, considering the responsible
place assigned to him by the free suffrage of his
brethren, he apprehends that it is due to them, as
well as to himself, to afford them every facility for
knowing what these opinions really are. The state
ments which follow, have not been got up for the
occasion; — all of them have been before the public
for a considerable time, — most of them for many
years. They are brief, but it is hoped not obscure.
It was meant that they should ' give no uncertain
sound,' and be ' uttered in words easy to be under
stood.' Had they not been believed to be in ac
cordance with the Holy Scriptures, they would never
have been made at all. Had they been considered
as inconsistent with our symbolical books, they
would never have been made in connexion with the
United Secession Church. On being convinced that

ADVERTISEMENT.

they are unscriptural, the Author will cease to teach
them, and will count him who lodges such a convic
tion in his mind, a true benefactor. On being con
vinced that they are contradictory to our subordi
nate Standards, though still persuaded that they are
agreeable to Scripture, he will not cease to teach
them, but he will cease to teach them in the com
munion of a body to which he is bound by so many
strong and tender ties, — ties which nothing but the
clear voice of conscience can ever induce him volun
tarily to unloose; and, even though unconvinced
equally of their inconsistency with the Scriptures
and with our Creeds, if the majority of his brethren
shall express a judgment opposite to his own, he has
too much respect for both parties, to wish to con
tinue for a day to fill an office of trust, should it thus
become evident that he has lost the confidence of
his constituents, though he may feel it as difficult
to discover the reason for their withdrawing, as he
did for their originally reposing, it.
These Opinions may seem disjecta membra, but
they are indeed closely connected, at least in the
Author's mind. The general principles which bind
them together there, will be found in the introduc
tory observations. JOHN BROWN.
Edinburgh, May 27, 1841.

CONTENTS.

Pago
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS, . . 9
ON FAITH, ..... 12
ON DIVINE INFLUENCE, . . . .24
ON HUMAN INABILITY, ... 28
ON THE DESIGN AND EFFECTS OF THE DEATH OF CHRIST, 31
ON ASSURANCE OF SALTATION, . . .39
ON THE SONSHIP OF CHRIST, ... 44

NOTES.
MORAL AND NATURAL INABILITY, ... 47
GENERAL REFERENCE OF THE DEATH OF CHRIST, 54
PECULIAR REFERENCE OF THE DEATH OF CHRIST, . 60
BISHOP DATENANT AND ARCHBISHOP USHER ON THE
REFERENCE OF THE DEATH OF CHRIST, . 63
NOTES, CHIEFLY HISTORICAL, ON THE QUESTION RE
SPECTING THE EXTENT OF THE REFERENCE O^ THE
DEATH OF CHRIST, .... 68
CONSEQUENCES OF DENTING A GENERAL REFERENCE OF
THE DEATH OF CHRIST, AND ASSERTING A PHYSICAL
INABILITY IN MAN, . . . . 81

OPINIONS, &c.

INTRODUCTORY REMARKS.
There is a striking analogy between revelation and the
other works of God. There is system in it, as in all the
other divine works.* That system is not in general self-
apparent ; but it discloses itself to the studious humble
inquirer. The facts both in nature and providence, as
well as in grace, appear generally unconnected, not un-
frequently incompatible ; and the only way satisfactorily
to explain and reconcile them, is not ingenious c6njecture,
but patient investigation. The true account is to be
found in the facts themselves ; but they must be care
fully studied, in order to discover it. Philosophers, by
following this course, have done much to unfold the
sj'stem of nature ; and were divines steadily to pursue
a similar track, they would be more successful than they
generally have been in unfolding the system of Chris
tianity. That system which pervades all the works of God, is
to be traced ultimately to the perfect order which charac-
* ' God in all his works has proceeded by system. There is a
beautiful connexion axid harmony in every thing he has written.
We sometimes speak of a system of nature, a, system of provi
dence, and a system of redemption ; and as smaller systems are
often included in larger, the language is not improper ; in reaUty,
however, they are all but one system ; one grand piece of ma
chinery, each part of which has a dependence on the other, and
altogether form one glorious whole. Now, if God proceed by
system, it may be expected that the Scriptures, being a transcript
of his work, should contain a system ; and if we would study
them to purpose, it must be so as to discover what this system
is.' — Fuller. A

10 introductory remarks.
terizes the divine nature. The order of his works, and
the regularity of his dispensations, are, as it were, an
imperfect transcript of the ineffable symmetry of his at
tributes. It has been remarked, with equal truth and
beauty, that ' the bosom of God is the seat of law ;' and
hence, all that he does is done in ' measure, number, and
weight.' Our God is the author, not of confusion, but
of order. The human constitution is a beautiful speci
men of that systematic order, which forms one of the
signatures of divinity impressed on every thing God has
made. Man, to a careless observer, may seem a strange
combination of heterogeneous materials. Much of this
appearance arises out of the moral derangement which
sin has introduced ; and when the subject is thoroughly
investigated, it appears, that in the primitive order of
things, man's various capacities of thinking, and feeling,
and acting, were admirably adjusted to the place he was
appointed to occupy, and the design he was intended to
serve. And notwithstanding all that sin has done to
unhinge the primeval order of man's nature, it still so
far prevails as to give a kind of systematic character even
to that state of moral disorder in which he is now in
volved. Alan, in his present state, is not so much like
.1 majestic edifice fallen into a shapeless heap of ruin, as
like a curious machine which has been disordered in
some of its principal parts, but which still continues to
move, and in its systematically irregular movements
attests the ingenuity of its inventor.
Alan, in his original state, was the object of the kind
regards of the Supreme Being — he knew and loved his
Creator — he was innocent, obedient, and happy. His
state and character were in perfect harmony, and calcu
lated to perpetuate each other. His intellectual and
moral faculties were in complete unison. He was good,
and he was happy ; and his goodness and happiness were
plainly fitted, by their re-action, to secure an indefinite
progress in both. ' How is the gold become dim ! how
is the pure gold changed !' Man, the sinner, is the ob
ject of the righteous displeasure of the Moral Governor
of the world. He misconceives the true cliaracter of
God, and hates it ; he violates his law, and renders
himself miserable. Guilt, ignorance, error, depravity,

introductory remarks. 11
misery — these are the leading characteristics of man in
his present state. These circumstances bear the same
relation to each other that their opposites did in the
primeval state. Ignorance, and error, and depravity
lead to guilt. Guilt perpetuates and increases ignorance,
error, and depravity ', and all work together, with a
fearfully systematic regularity and certainty of result, in
sinking man in a bottomless pit of degradation and
wretchedness. The machinery of man's constitution re
mains, in a great measure at least, unaltered ; but it
has got under a malignant influence, and works as
steadily and powerfully in destroying, as under a happier
influence it would have done in perfecting his moral
nature. If these views are correct, it follows, of course, that
there must be a system and order in any dispensation,
or series of dispensations, which has for its object the
restoration of human nature — there must be something,
which, according to the laws of the divine moral govern
ment, shall lay a foundation for a change of man's rela
tions in reference to the Supreme Being — there must be
something, which, according to the laws of the human
constitution, will effect a complete transformation of the
character — and these, whatever they may be, may be
expected to have a close connexion. The Bible is sub
stantially a revelation of such a restorative dispensation,
— an account of the way in which ignorant, guilty, de
praved, miserable man may, in a consistency with the
perfections of the divine character, and the principles of
his own constitution, be forgiven, and be made truly
wise, and good, and happy for ever. In that revelation,
which contains a detail of those divine dispensations
which have the restoration of man for their object, we
are led to anticipate, and we do not anticipate in vain,
certain grand principles which bind together what, at
first view, may appear unconnected statements, and give
a character of consistent regularity to the whole.*
' Introductory Essay to M'Laurin's Works, pp. xiv-xvii.

12. ON faith.

I.— ON FAITH.
The grand means of ' getting wisdom,' or of attain
ing true religion, is faith. It is by believing the truth
about God that a man is formed to a right mode of
thinking, and feeling, and acting, in reference to Him.
It is impossible to read the Bible, with any degree of
attention, without observing the prodigious importance
which is attached to faith. It seems to occupy much
the same place, in the spiritual world that gravitation
does in the natural; and, in both cases, it is impossible
not to be struck with the variety and grandeur of the
ends which are produced by means so simple. By the
operation of faith is man made wise, and good, and
happy; restored to the enjoyment of the divine favour,
and to a resemblance of the divine moral excellence. It
purifies the heart, transforms the character, and regu
lates the conduct. It justifies, and sanctifies, and saves.
What is it which does all this ? and how does it
effect changes so great and so delightful? These are
obviously important questions, and we shall endeavour
briefly and plainly to answer them.
I know few questions which it would require more
time and mental labour to answer perspicuously, than,
'.What are the views which theologians have enter
tained respecting the nature of faith in general, and the
nature of that faith in particular, which, in the New
Testament, is represented as justifying, and sanctifying,
and saving ?' Merely to state their definitions would
fill many pages; to apprehend their meaning, and to
weigh the arguments by which it has been attempted to
support their justness, is a task which would require
very considerable acuteness of intellect, skill in dialec
tics, and expertness in unravelling the entanglemeiits of
confused thought, and correspondingly perplexed state
ment ; and it may well be doubted if the labour, except
as a mental exercise, would be productive of any thing
like an adequate compensation. If on any subject, cer
tainly on this, ' counsel has been darkened by words
without knowledge.'

ox faith. 13
I cannot, however, bring myself to think, that He
who is infinitely merciful, as well as infinitely wise, ha's
suspended the salvation of millions of plain unlettered
men, on something, the nature of which cannot be ren
dered apparent without deep research and metaphysical
reasoning. Belief, in the ordinary sense of that word,
is something level to every man's capacity, for every
man has had experience of it ; and if belief, in the ordi
nary sense of the word, can be shown calculated to
serve all the purposes which in Scripture are ascribed to
faith, why should we dig to the centre to discover what
indeed lies very near the surface ?
Faith or belief is an abstract term, expressive of a
person's accounting a declaration to be true, on the evi
dence of testimony. Like every other simple operation
or state of mind, it does not admit of strict definition :
Yet every person who allows himself to reflect on what
takes place within him, may easily perceive what is
meant by the term: Nothing but the prevalence at
extremely confused and inaccurate views of the subject,
could save the following brief illustration of it from the
charge of attempting to cast light on a subject which is
clear as day abeady.
When a person delivers in my hearing a statement of
what he declares to be fact, if I understand the meaning
of what he says, and think it a matter worth making
inquiry about, I will either reject his statement as falst.
or I will receive it as true, or I will remain in a state of
hesitation. I will either believe it, or disbelieve it, or
doubt it. The statement may perhaps carry falsehood
on its face — it may be self-contradictory, or it may be
opposed to other facts, of which I have satisfactory evi
dence. In this case, I cannot but disbelieve it. Or,
though there is nothing incredible in the statement
itself, and nothing inconsistent with what, from other
sources, I know to be true, yet if there is no evidence at
all, or no sufl&cient evidence, I have no ground to dis
believe it, but I have as little to believe it. It may be
true — but it also may be false. In this case, I cannot
but doubt of its truth. But if the statement is not
only in itself credible, and consistent with what I know
to be true, but supported by satisfactory evidence; if

14

on faith.

it is made clear to my understanding that he who makes
the statement is at once an honest and a well-informed
man, that he has not been imposed on, and that he does
not mean to impose on me, then, by the constitution of
my nature, I account his statement true — in other words,
I believe it. I have faith in him in reference to this
statement, and am affected by it according to its nature.
If what he has told me is an uninteresting fact, it
makes little or no impression on me. If it is wonder
ful, I am amazed. If it is alarming, I am terrified.
If it is joyful, I am delighted. If it is mournful, I am
sorrowful. If the statement involve in it a promise of
good to me, I expect the good promised, and rely or
depend on him who has made the promise to do as he
has said. In a word, there is a correspondence between
the nature of the truth believed, and its influence on my
mind believing it.
Transfer these remarks respecting any statement, to
that statement which God has given of his character
and will in the Holy Scriptures, and you will clearly
see what is meant by that faith which is the grand
means of the attainment of true religion. If I do not
understand the meaning of this statement, or if I do
not attend to its evidence, it is impossible for me to be
lieve it. I may say I believe it, or disbelieve it ; but,
properly speaking, I do neither. If the statement ap
pear to me intrinsically absurd, or inconsistent with
what I think I am sure is true, I will disbelieve it. If
it appear to me destitute of sufficient attestation, I must
doubt it. But if it appear to me, understanding its
meaning, to be what indeed it is, God's testimony con
cerning himself — then, persuaded that God cannot be
deceived, and cannot deceive, I must consider the state
ment as true; in other words, I must believe it: and
believing it, I must be affected by it according to its
nature. When it testifies God's immaculate purity,
and my own depravity, I must admire Him, and abhor
myself; and when it testifies the riches of his mercy,
and the freedom of his grace, I must be filled with ' joy
and peace in believing.' These illustrations might easily
be extended; but enough has been said to show, that
that faith, which consists in accounting the statements

on faith. i!£
God has given in the Scriptures of his own character
and will to be true, in consequence of our perceiving at
once their meaning and evidence, is calculated to in
fluence the whole frame of our intellectual and activt
nature. How it influences us so as to form us to a right way
of thinking, and feeling, and acting about God, is the
point to which I wish to draw your most attentive con
sideration in the following remarks. Now, here I shall
endeavour to make it evident, both that in no other way
than by believing, can man be brought to think aright.
and feel aright, and act aright, in reference to God, and
that right thinking, feeling, and acting, in reference to
God, are the natural and the necessary results of be
lieving. I. In a former part of the discourse, it was stated,
that man is not only destitute of true religion, but he is
under the influence of irreligious — of anti-religious
principles. Now, how are these irreligious and anti-
religious principles to be eradicated, and how are re
ligious principles to be implanted in their room ?
Where is man to obtain just sentiments in reference to
the divine character and will ? Though he were dis
posed, which he is not, to exert to the utmost the means
he possesses of acquiring knowledge about God, from
the contemplation of the works of nature, and the dis
pensations of Providence, he must still continue igno
rant of that part of the divine character and will which
principally affects his duty and interests as a guilty and
depraved being; for, with regard to this, nature and
providence suggest but little information. The kind
and degree of information man needs can be derived
only from revelation — and this revelation can be effi
cient in bringing man to the right way of thinking,
only by being believed.
It is equally evident, that a right way of feeling about
God, can originate in nothing but a faith in the revela
tion which God has given of his character and will.
Why do men despise, forget, and hate God ? Is it not
because they do not know and believe the truth re
specting him ? And how are the sentiments of disre-

16 ON faith.
gard, contempt, and dislike to be rooted out, and the
affections of reverence, confidence, and love, substituted
in their place, but by bringing the mind to contemplate
the divine character as it really is ? And where is such
an exhibition of the divine character to be met with but
in the Bible ? And how can this exhibition touch the
heart, unless we understand its meaning, and be con
vinced of its truth ?
The impossibility of man's becoming religious, ex
cept by believing, is equally apparent, in reference to
the third constituent of true religion — a right way of
acting in reference to God. Moral action is the result
of conviction and affection, and must be right or wrong
according to the principles from which it flows. In
proving, then, that man cannot think rightly, nor fci'l
rightly, about God without faith — we have proved, that
without faith, he cannot act rightly in reference to him.
It is indeed possible, by a very different process, to
bring men to do with considerable regularity many
things materially good; most things in which the ex
ternal expression of religion consists. By a dexterous
management of that part of the human constitution
usually termed habit, man may be taught to go th(^
round of external observance, and practise many of the
duties of relative life, while, at the same time, his views
of the divine character, and his feelings in reference to
it, are either greatly deficient, or grossly erroneous.
But this is not religious action. It cannot be pleasing
to Him who requires rational worship of his rational
children — who regards the outward appearance only as
it is expressive of the inward principles.
To place this truth, that in man's present circum
stances religion is a moral impossibility without faith,
in as clear a point of view as possible, I shall present
the evidence in its support in a somewhat shorter com
pass. — Man is a depraved being. His depravity con
sists in a wrong mode of feeling and acting in reference
to God. This, from the very principles of his nature,
and the circumstances of the case (for though man i.s an
irreligious being, he is still a rational being; though
depraved, he is not, in the ordinary sense of the term,
deranged), originates in a wrong mode of thinking about

ON faith.

God. This, then, is the radical disease — and if so
what is the appropriate cure ? In what can right feel
ing and right action originate but in right thinking ?
How can man learn to think aright about God, but
from the revelation God has made of himself? And
how can this revelation exert an influence over our feel
ings and habits, but by its meaning and evidence be
coming apparent to our understanding, or, in other
words, by our believing it.
II. But this is not all. Faith is not only tlie neces
sary, but the effectual, means of true religion. It is
already, I trust, apparent, that, without faith, it is im
possible for man to be religious. It will soou, I hope,
be equally clear, that true religion, as including a right
way of thinking, feeling, and acting, about God, is the
natural and necessary result of faith; that as a man
cannot become religious without being a believer, so a
man cannot be a believer without becoming religious.
Faitli is necessarily connected with a right way of
¦ thinking about God. In a former part of this discourse,
I stated that, in a right way of thinking about God,
are implied— a disposition to attend to those notices
which God has given of himself in his works and word
— an apprehension of the meaning of these notices — and
a perception of the evidence by which they are accom
panied. Now, it is plain, that a man believing the tes
timony of God concerning himself in his word must be
possessed of all these things.
Is it possible for man to believe God to be the author,
preserver, and governor of all things — him ' who worfc-
eth all things according to the counsel of his own will'
— -without being put in mind of him by the works of
his hand ? Is it possible for a man to believe that he
is more closely connected with God, than with any
other being in the universe, as the Father of his spirit,
and the Former of his body, his Lawgiver, his Bene
factor, his Redeemer, and Judge, according to the re
presentations of the Scripturd^ without often thinking
of him — and without wishing, above all things, to know
all that can be known about his character and will ?
The apprehension of the meaning of these notices
which God has given of himself in his works and in his

18 ON faith.
word, is necessarily implied in faith. We cannot, with
any propriety, be said to believe a proposition which we
do not understand. There may be knowledge where
there is not faith, but there can be no faith where there
is not knowledge. If I do not understand the meaning
of a proposition, I cannot believe it. For example,
were the Bible in its original language, put into the
hand of a person who did not understand it, he could
not be said to believe it. Were the proposition stated
in his own language to him, This book, in an unknown
tongue, is the word of God — he would understand that
— and were the evidence of this proposition presented
to his mind in a form which he was able to apprehend —
he would believe it. But it would be an abuse of lan
guage to assert, that, because he believed that book to
be the word of God, and that of course every thing
contained in it was true, he therefore believed its parti
cular contents ; for of these contents he is supposed to
be wholly ignorant. Let him apprehend their mean
ing, and he will immediately believe them, just as we
immediately believe whatever a man, of whose informa
tion and veracity we are fully persuaded, says to us,
though we cannot surely be said to believe before he
has spoken.*

' It is of great importance, however, to prevent most serious
mistakes, to remark here, that there is a great difference between
understanding fully the subject of a revelation, and understanding
the revelation itself. I ' cannot by searching find out God,' but
I can, if I will but attend to it, understand what he has revealed
about himself in his word. There is much about him unrevealed,
and of that I know nothing — but of what is revealed 1 may ob
tain distinct notions ; and it is only in so far as I do so, that I
can be said to believe it. Even the most mysterious parts of re
velation are not unintelligible. The subjects about which they
treat are incomprehensible- — but so far as they are revealed, they
are capable of being understood. 1 cannot understand how
moral evil could find its way into the perfect world of "¦ perfect
Creator ; but I can understand, and believe too, the proposition,
that it has found its way — anS that creatures, originally innocent
and pure, are now guilty and depraved. I cannot understand the
nature either of the unity or of the plurality which exists in the
divine nature — but I can understand the propositions, and can
see, that there is nothing self-contradictory in them ; that in the
divine nature there is both unity and plurality ; that God is, in

ON FAITH. 19
Every believer, then, so far as he is a believer, thinks
rightly about God — inasmuch as he understands the
meaning of the notices which God has given of his
character and his will. And then, as to the third thing
included in a right way of thinking about God, a per
ception of the evidence of these notices, or a persuasion
of their truth; this is just faith itself It is plain, then,
that just in proportion to a man's faith, is his mode of
thinking about God right. A believer may, indeed
every believer does, to a certain extent, think wrongly —
that is, deficiently or erroneously of God; but the rea
son of this is one of the two following— either that he
does not believe all that God has revealed of himself, or
that he believes something which God has not revealed
of himself. The man who believes all that God has
revealed of himself, and no more, thinks about God just
as he ought to do.
As faith thus necessarily implies, so far as it extends,
a right way of thinking about God, so it necessarily
produces a right way of feeling about Him. From the
constitution of our nature, our affections are in a great
measure governed by our belief If I believe that a
man, who has it in his power to do me much mischief, is
my determined enemy, I cannot help fearing him. If
I believe that a man who has it in his power to make
me happy, is my warm and sincere friend, I cannot help
trusting him. If I do not fear the first, it is because
I doubt either his power or his enmity. If I do not
trust the second, it is because I doubt either his power
or his friendship.
Apply this plain principle to the subject before u.¥,
and you will perceive how naturally, how necessarily, a
right way of feeling about God results from a faith in
the divine testimony. How can I believe that God is
the greatest, and wisest, and most powerful, and most
just, and most holy of beings, without fearing him ?
How can I believe that God is infinitely munificent and
compassionate, the Father and the Friend of mankind,
one point of view one, and in another three. These principles
are of the greatest importance to the right resolution of the ques
tion respecting mysteries — one of the principal parts of the Su-
cinian controversy.

20 I IN FAITH.
and my Father and Friend in Christ Jesus, without
loving him ? How can I believe that he has made pro
mises, and that ho is infinitely powerful, and wise, and
faithful, without trusting him ? I may say, indeed, 1
believe all these things, without having these feelings.
I may even tliink I believe all these things, without per
manently having these feelings — but if I really do be
lieve these things, I rtiust have these feelings. It is con
ceivable that beings may be formed, between whose be
lief and feehngs there is no connexion ; but most cer
tainly man is not such a being.
The same train of illustration is applicable to the
third constituent of religion — a right way of acting in
reference to God. How can I believe the truth in re
ference to God's wisdom, justice, goodness, and autho
rity, without believing his law to be holy, just, and
good; and how can I believe this, without endeavour
ing to conform myself to its requisitions? How can I
believe God to be what the Scripture represents him to
be, without worshipping him in my heart? and how
can I believe that he has required me to express the
inward acts of my mind, in a certain form of external
conduct, without doing so ?
It may, indeed, be urged, that though all this sounds
wcU, and, as a theory, seems to hang well enough to
gether ; yet, when brought to the experiment of fact,
it turns out to be mere hypothesis : For, are there not
many men who believe the doctrines of Christianity,
who yet plainly think, feel, and act in reference to God,
in any way rather than that in which they ought ? and
even with respect to the soundest believer, does he not
often think, and feel, and act, towards God in an impro
per manner ?
That many who profess to believe all the doctrines of
Christianity, who yjass with others for sound believers,
and who flatter themselves that they are so ; that many
of this description are, in every sense of the word, irre
ligious, we most readily admit. But before we can
acknowledge, that any believer, any person who really
believes the truth about God, can be so, we must give
up not only with the plain declarations of God's word,
but contradict the first principles of sound philosophy.

ON FAITH. 21
I appeal to your common sense ; for it is a question
which properly comes under its cognizance. Should a
man, who professed that he believed that a certain in
dividual was a most accomplished character, and his
best friend ; that he had already bestowed on him im
portant favours, and that his future happiness entirely
depended on the continuance of his kindness, carefully
avoid his benefactor's presence, never approach him but
with obvious reluctance, and habitually pursue a course
of conduct directly opposite to what, according to his
own acknowledgment, both gratitude and interest re
quired. What name would you give him ? How would
you account for the inconsistency ? If the man was not
deranged, would you not call him a liar and a hypo
crite ; and account for the badness of his conduct, by
the insincerity of his professions ? And, were it not for
the mistiness which invests spiritual objects when sur
veyed by the human understanding, the case of the
worldly or immoral professor of the Christian faith,
woidd be equally plain.
With regard to the partial deficiencies and deviations
of believers, they are to be accounted for, in perfect con
sistency with the principles laid down above. They
may be all traced to a defect or error in their faith ; to
their not perceiving, so clearly as they ought, and as
they might, the meaning or evidence of some part of the
truth with respect to God.
It is now, I trust, abundantly evident, that, without
faith, it is impossible for men to be religious, and that,
with faith, it is impossible for them to continue irre
ligious ; and that believing the truth about God, which
is to be found only in his testimony in the Scriptures, is
at once the necessary and the effectual means of bring
ing men to a right way of thinking, feeling, and acting,
in reference to him.
The way to the attainment of true religion is now
manifest, — the belief of the testimony of God concerning
himself in a well-accredited revelation. This is the only,
and this is the certain way in which we may acquire a
right way of thinking, a right way of feeling, and a
right way of acting with regard to God. This is the
work of God : and few questions are of deeper interest

22 ON FAITH.
than, ' What shall we do that we may work this work
of God ?'
In answering this question, much caution is neces
sary ; for, while one class of theologians have replied to
it, so as completely to ' frustrate the grace of God,' by
leading men to seek for that in themselves which is ' the
gift of God ;' another class, by their answer, have freed
the unbeliever of all responsibility, by representing the
believer as the mere passive subject of supernatural
operation. With these equally dangerous extremes in
my recollection, and with the pole-star of revelation in
my view, I shall endeavour to steer the middle course.
I do not think it necessary here to say any thing
more about the nature of faith than I have already said.
Discussions of this kind, except so far as absolutely ne
cessary to remove dangerous mistakes, seem to me not
only useless, but absurd. It has been said, with much
truth (and the illustration is apt, though homely), that
the nature of faith is in itself like a piece of the most
transparent crystal, but it has been much bedimmed by
incautious handling.*
' The author would not willingly appear as an abettor of the
senseless outcry against metaphysical discussion in general, which
multitudes of writers, emboldened by Dr Beattie's success as an
author in morals, have raised, while totally incapacitated by their
own ignorance from forming any rational opinion on the subject ;
and still less, if possible, would he wish to represent ' belief as
an improper subject for the inquiries of the philosopher of the
mind. On the contrary, he ia persuaded that few things are of
greater, importance, as an instrument for discovering and illustrat
ing the true scriptural scheme of doctrine, tlian an intimate ac
quaintance with human nature ; that a deficiency here has been
one great source of perplexity and error in theology ; and that
few services could be performed of greater value both to philo
sophy and religion, than to place the nature of belief, and its
relation to moral obligation, in a clear and consistent point of
view. But he certainly does mean to say, that the dividing faith
into a variety of species, in reference not to the things believed,
mor to the evidence on which it rests, but to the mental act of
believing ; and the representing it as if it included in it almost
every mode of thought and feeling of which the human mind is
capable, is quite irreconcileable with just notions of the mental
constitution of man ; and that the application of these views to
the explication of Christian doctrine, and the regulation of reli
gious experience, has, to an incalculable extent, injured the cause
of scriptural truth and practical godliness.

on FAITH. 23
The capacity of believing is one of the natural facul
ties of the human mind ; and men need no more to be
taught how to believe, than how to breathe, or to see.
To enter into a long discussion about the nature of
faith, when it is our object to make persons believe some
fact, is not much more wise than to illustrate the laws
of vision, when our object is to make them look at some
object. In the latter case, instead of schooling the per
son in the principles of the Newtonian philosophy, we
would endeavour to procure light, and point out the
object ; and, if the organ is in a healthful state, and the
person disposed to use it, the work is done. In the
former case, we should adopt an analogous course. In
stead of involving our scholar in the depths of meta
physical discussion, we should make plain to his under
standing the principle or fact which we wish him to
believe, and the evidence, on the ground of which we
would have him to believe it ; and if this can be done,
believing follows of course.
In urging men to be religious, then, we tell them that
they must become believers, for there is no other way of
becoming religious ; and in urging them to become be
lievers, we call on them to attend to divine truth in its
meaning and evidence — to attend to the principles pro
posed to their belief, that they may understand them ;
and to attend to the grounds on which it is proposed to
their belief, that they may understand them ; for there
is no other method of obtaining faith. It is indeed a
conceivable thing, that the Divine Being, by an influ
ence similar to inspiration, may convey at once into the
mind a knowledge of truth, and such an overwhelming
impression of its evidence, as to preclude the possibility
of doubt; but to expect to be brought to the belief of
the gospel, and, through this belief, to the possession of
religion in this way, were to cherish a hope for which
neither revelation nor reason gives any warrant.
To the person who, conscious that he wants real re
ligion, and convinced that it is infinitely worth having,
is inquiring, ' Where shall wisdom be found ? and where
is the place of understanding ?' I point to the sacred
volume, and say. Here alone can wisdom be found. This
is the place of understanding : this is the field in which

24 ox DIVINE IXFLUEXCI:.
lies the pearl of great price, which, if you seek, you shal
find, and which, if found, will make you rich for ever.
Endeavour to obtain accurate and extensive views of tin
scriptural revelation. Attend to the evidence which it
presented to you, that this testimony is God's testimony,
and therefore true. The statements made in the scrip
tures are generally plain. All who really wish to un
derstand them, will understand them. The evidence is
abundant. All who do not shut their eyes to it must
perceive it. Allow your minds to rest on the divine
testimony, on its meaning and evidence, and faith must
be the result. Wherever there is a want of faith, it
proceeds from not perceiving the meaning or the evi
dence of divine truth ; and wherever these are not per
ceived, where the Bible is known, and the gospel
preached, it is because they are not duly attended to ;
and hence the criminality of not receiving the divine
testimony ; and hence, too, the justice of the sentence
which dooms the obstinate unbeliever to endless per
dition.*

II. ON DIVINE INFLUENCE.
I am aware that to some this view of the matter (the
statements made above respecting faith) may seem to
cast very much into the shade, if not altogether to ex
clude, the doctrine of the necessity of the agency of the
Holy Spirit in making men religious, by resolving the
whole change from irreligion to religion, into the natural
operation of certain doctrines believed on the mind.
This is, however, entirely a misapprehension. The prin
ciples that men become religious through the belief of
the truth, and that they become religious through the
influence of the Holy Spirit, are perfectly consistent.
That, in order to a man's becoming truly religious, an
* On Religion and the Means of its Attainment, Part II. § 2.
Published in 1818. If any one wishes to see these views of faith
more fully stated and defended, they may consult Dr John
Erskine's Dissertations, M'Lean's Works, Ecking's Essays, Pike
on the Nature and Evidence of Saving Faith, Martin's Remains.

ON DIVIXE IXFLUEXCE. 2.5
agency of a kind different from, and of an efficacy far
superior to, that of argument and motive * is necessary,
is very clearly taught in the holy Scriptures; but that
this agency is exerted agreeably to man's nature as a
rational and active being, and while different from, co
operates with, and gives efficacy to, the moral influence
of the faith of the Gospel, is equally evident. Religion
is more the work of God than of man; but it is the
work of God working in us and by us, suitably to our
nature as rational beings, capable of perceiving the force
of argument, and feeling the weight of motive, according
to his good pleasure.
The truth on tliis subject may be shortly stated; and
completely removes every appearance of discordance
between renovation by faith, and renovation by divine
influence. Divine influence is necessary to our becom
ing religious: for divine influence is necessary to our
becoming believers. Hence ' faith' is termed ' the gift
of God.' Hence it is said, that ' no man can come to
Christ, except the Father, who has sent him, draw him.'
Hence it is said to be ' given to men to believe on the
name of Clirist.' Hence God is represented as ' opening
the heart to receive the word.' And hence we read of
' the exceeding greatness of God's power towards them
who believe.'
The meaning of ' the truth as it is in Jesus' is so ob
vious, and its evidence is so abundant, that, in a properly
constituted mind, nothing more would be necessary than
to call the attention to it, to secure faith as the result.
But man's mind is not rightly constituted. There is an
indisposition to attend to the truth, in its meaning and
evidence, so strong as to amount to a moral inability.
To revert to a figure formerly brought forward for
* A most satisfactory defence of the doctrine of the Holy
Spirit's direct and physical agency on the mind, as contrasted with
the moral influence of truth revealed by the Holy Spirit, is to be
fovmd in two small, but very valuable works of Storr, entitled,
Commentatio Theologica de Spirilus Sancli in Mentibus Nostris
Efficientia ; and Doctrina de Spiritus Sancti in Mentibus Nostris
efficientia momenta suo ponderata. They form a part of a small
(juarto volume, under the title of ' Opuscula Theologica.' Tu-
bingee, 1788.

26 ON DIVIXE IXFLUEXCE.
the sake of illustration; — to a person whose eye is in a
sound state, and who is disposed to use it, nothing more
is requisite to see a particular object, than the presence
of light, the medium of vision, and that the object be
within the sphere of vision. But if the person's eye he
disordered by disease; if it be covered by a bandage ; or
¦what comes nearer the case before us, if he obstinately
keep his eyes shut, it is plain that something elge is
necessary — something to cure the distemper, or remove
the obstruction, or alter the determination.
And thus it is with man in his natural state. There
is no want of truth to be seen ; that is to be found in
the Bible: — no want of evidence to make it appear;
that is to be found in the Bible too : — no want of an
organ to perceive truth by ; that is to be found in the
human understanding : But that organ labours under
moral disease ; or, to speak more accurately, the indivi
dual is strongly, so far as human argument and motive
are concerned, inmncibly determined, not to employ it.
Divine influence is necessary to fix the mind on the
truth, and to keep it fixed, till, by perceiving its mean
ing and evidence, faith is the result; yet still it is by
the moral influence of the truth thus perceived, but
which, ¦without divine influence, never would have been
perceived, that the whole of the moral change, in its
commencement, termed regeneration, and its subsequent
stages, sanctification, is effected. This account seems
exactly to harmonize with that ofthe Apostle Peter, who
represents Christians as ' having purified their souls in
obeying the truth through the Spirit.'
Of the necessity and reality of such a supernatural
and physical influence, different in its nature from the
moral influence of truth which could not have been
known had not God revealed it, we can have no doubt;
and we can have as little, that this physical influence
produces its effects through the medium of the moral
influence of that truth. But, with regard to the nature
of this influence, as of Influence in general, -we are very
much in the dark. The influence which eloquence has,
by fixing the mind more closely, in making statements
and arguments more striking than if they had been
brought more coldly forward, while yet it is entirely by

ON DIVIXE IXFLUENCE. 27
means of the statements and arguments that our minds
are affected, may be perhaps of some use in enabling us
to form some conception of that divine influence, with
out which men will never believe, and without which,
of course, men 'will never become religious.
In these iUustrations, I have represented /aiVA as the
sole direct means of forming men to a really religious
character — ^believing as the only way of getting wisdom,
of becoming religious at first, and of becoming more and
more religious : And I have done so, because, on care
ful consideration, it will appear, that all those exercises
¦which are usually termed the means of religion are so,
merely so far as they have a tendency to produce faith,
or to secure that divine influence which is necessary, in
order to the production of faith.
What, for example, is the design of reading the Word
of God, of hearing it preached, or of meditation, but just
to bring before the mind, and keep before the mind, the
truth in its meaning and evidence, by the belief of which
we only can, by the belief of which we certainly will,
be brought to a right way of thinking, feeling, and act
ing in reference to God? The two symbolical ordin
ances, usually, though not very happily, termed sacra
ments, are means of religion just in the same way.
Baptism brings before the minds of those who witness
it, by emblems, some of the leading truths of the Gos
pel, and involves in it a strong evidence of the truth of
them all ; while it secures, so far as can be secured, to
the infant recipient, that in due time the whole truth
shall be laid before him. The Lord's Supper is useful
also as a mean of religion, ju.st as it is an emblematical
representation of the leading principles and evidences of
the Gospel.
Prayer is not only calculated to promote faith direct
ly, by bringing and keeping before the mind, in circum
stances peculiarly solemn, the great truths of religion;
but is also the appointed means of securing the continued
operation of that divine influence which is not more
necessary to make men believers, than to keep men be
lievers. ' God gives the Holy Spirit to those who ask
him.' *
' On Religion and the Means of its Attainment, Part II. § 2

28 ox lir.M.VX IXABILITV.

III.— ON HUMAN INABILITY.
That men are naturally destitute of all moral vigour,
all spiritual strength — that they are morally incapable,
or, in other words, very strongly indisposed, to perform
actions acceptable to God, is most decidedly the doctrine
of scripture. ' Without strength, dead in trespasses
and sins,' are the expressive appellations given in scrip
ture CO all men in their natural state : ' They who are
in the flesh cfiiinol please God.'
This moral inability seems owing to two causes — the
divine curse, and the depravity of human nature : ' All
men have sinned,' and, of course, are under the curse
which God has denounced against all the transgre-sor^
of his law. To this most holy and righteous oniinaiice
of heaven, I impute no active energy in paralysing the
native powers of the human mind ; but, without doubt,
the object of the divine curse, continuing to be so, can
not be the subject of that divine influence, which is the
sole source of moral goodness in created minds. The
divine curse cuts off, as it were, the supplies of divine
life, and man, of course, continues ' dead in trespa^se-
and sins.' It is thus ' that the law is the strength of
sin.' It is, however, to the depravity of man's nature
— to the wilful delusions of his understanding — and the
determined wickedness of his heart, that man's moral
inability is to be traced as its operative cause. It is be
cause men will not do their duty that they cannot do it :
' Ye will not come to me, that ye might have life.'
From this view of the subject it is plain, tiiat in order
to our acquiring spiritual vigour, two things are neces
sary — we must obtain deliverance from the divine curse,
and we must be ' renewed in the spirit of our minds.'
I trust none of you are ignorant of the manner in which
these blessings are to be obtained ; yet, as it is scarcely
possible to present the truth on this subject too fre
quently to the mind, I shall state the leading doctrines
of the christian scheme of restoration : — ' Christ hath
On the subject of divine influence, M'Laurin, Edwards, lI'Lean,
and Orme may be consulted.

ON HUMAN INABILITY. 29
redeemed us from the curse of the law, having himself
become a curse for us. When we were without strength,
in due time Christ died for the ungodly. God, send
ing his Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and a sin-
offering, has condemned sin in the flesh ; which the law
could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh.'
By faith in Christ Jesus, we are ' made the righteous
ness of God in him,' and become partakers of all the
blessings which he has procured by his death. God,
well pleased with him, and with us in him, ' blesses us
with heavenly and spiritual blessings;' and, among
these blessings, one of the first and most important is
spiritual ability, a disposition and a power to do our
duty. This is conferred through the agency of the Holy
Ghost enlightening the understanding in the knowledge
of truth, and inclining the heart to the love of holiness.
We are ' born again of the Spirit — saved by the wash
ing of regeneration, and the renewing of the Holy
Ghost.' ' Sin no longer reigns in our mortal bodies.
We yield no more our members to sin, as the instru
ments of unrighteousness ; but we yield ourselves to
God, as those who are alive from the dead, and our
members to him as the instruments of righteousness.'
But if the communication of spiritual strength be en
tirely the work of God, how can we, who are dead in
trespasses and sins, with consistency be exhorted to ' be
strong' by acquiring spiritual vigour ? This is a diffi
culty which arises from confounding together the ideas
of physical strength and moral ability, than which no
two ideas can be more distinct ; and from arguing from
what is true in the one case, to what is true in the other.
The difficulty is not to be got rid of, as has sometimes
been attempted, by merely saying, that, though man
cannot acquire spiritual vigour, he can use the means of
acquiring it ;* but by asserting the plain truths, that an
¦* It is sometimes said, ' Repent and believe tho gospel. I
know indeed you cannot do this of yourselves, but you can pray
for the Holy Spirit to enable you to do it ;' but as Mr Fuller says,
' to introduce prayer for the Spirit, instead of repenting and be
lieving, and as something which the sinner can do,' in the sense
in which he cannot repent and beheve, ' is erroneous and dange
rous.' — Part of a Body of Divinity, Letter II.

,30 ON HU-MAX INABILITY.
indisposition to do what is our duty can never excuse
us from its performance — that arguments and motives
are the means suited to our rational nature for urging
us to a particular mode of conduct — and that it is
through their medium that that divine influence is
usually communicated, ' which works in us both to will
and to do of God's good pleasure.' *
' I am glad to have it in ray power to lay before my readers
the sentiments of the most eloquent of living preachers, and, to
say the least, one of the most profound of living theologians, on
this highly important subject. ' From the moral impotence which
the oracles of truth ascribe to man in his fallen state, a certain
class of divines were induced to divide moral and religious duties
into two classes — natural and spiritual ; comprehending under
the latter those which require spu-itual or supernatural assistance
to their performance, and under the former those which demand
no such assistance. Agreeable to this distinction, they conceived
it to be the duty of all meu to abstain from the outward acts of
.sin — to read the scriptures — to frequent the worship of God— and
to attend with serious assiduity on the means of grace ; but they
supposed that repentance, faith in Christ, and the exercise of
genuine internal devotion, were obUgatory only on the regenerate.
' These conclusions were evidently founded on two assump
tions; first, that the impotence which the Scriptures ascribe to
the unregenerate is free from blame, so as to excuse them from
all the duties to which it extends, whereas, in truth, the inability
under which the unconverted labour is altogether of a moral
nature, consisting in the corruption of the will, or an aver
sion to things of a spiritual and divine nature ; that it is in itself
criminal, and ia so far from affording an excuse from what would
otherwise be a duty, that it stamps with its own character all its
issues and productions.
' Another principle assumed as a basis by the High Calvinists
is, that the same things cannot be the duty of man and the gift of
God ; or, in other words, that what is matter of promise can on
no occasion be the matter of obligation. The consistency of the
promises and commands in question, arises from the matter of
each being of a moral nature. If we will allow ourselves to re
flect, we shall perceive, that the will, and the will only, is the
proper object of command ; and that an agent is no otherwise ac
countable, or susceptible of moral government, than as he is the
subject of voluntary powers. We shall also perceive, that the
disordered state of the will, or the radical indisposition of an agent
to comply ivith legitimate commands, which is the same thing, by
no means exempts him from their obligation, nor tends in the least
degree to render the addressing such commands to him absurd
or improper. That they wiU not be complied with while that
disordered state subsists is true, but legitimate commands, en-

DESIGN AND EFFECTS OF CHRIST's DEATH. 31

IV. ON THE DESIGN AND EFFECTS OF CHRIST'S
DEATH.
The apostle (1 Tim. ii. 1-6), speaks ofthe One God,
as ' our Saviour.' It may not be very easy to determine
whether, when Paul used the word our here, he spoke
as a Christian or as a man. It is certain that God is,
in a peculiar sense, the Saviour of those who, through
the faith of the gospel, receive the blessings of the Chris
tian salvation ; but it is equally plain that God stands
in the relation of Saviour, as well as of Creator, and
Preserver, and Benefactor, and Governor, to the human
race. ' The living God is the Saviour of all men, spe
cially of them that believe.' These words plainly teach
us that there is a sense in which God is the Saviour of
all men, while there is another and a higher sense, in
which he is the Saviour only of them who believe.
He is the Saviour of all men, inasmuch as, moved by
that infinite benignity which prevents him from having
pleasure in the sufferings, even of the most guilty of his
forced by proper sanctions, are among the strongest motives; that
is, they tend in their own nature to incline the ¦will, and therefore
they cannot be withheld without virtually relinquishing the
claim of authority and dominion.' — HaU's (of Leicester) Preface
to Hall's (of Amsby) Help to Zion's Traveller. — It is a profound
remark of the same great man, that the radicalprinciple both of
Pelagianism and Hyper-Calvinsm is, that moral ability is the rule
of obligation: ' a position which, when the terms are accurately
defined and cleared of their ambiguity, conducts us to this very
extraordinary conclusion, that men are obliged to just as much of
their duty as they are inclined to.' *
* Discourses suited to the Admiidstration of the Lord's Supper, part
ili. discourse 2, published in 1816. On the subject of moral and physical
inability, Truman, Edwards, Smalley, Williams, Fuller, and Payne,
may be applied to with advantage. Had I the above passage to re
write, I would probably alter, in some degree, its phraseology ; but the
sentiment, that man's inability to comijly with the divine will is entirely
of a blameable kind, moral not physical, would certainly be not less
strongly asserted. I entirely concm' with Mr Fuller when he says, ' All
man's misery arises from his votuviary abuse of mercy, and his wilful
rebellion against Grod. It is not want of ability, but of inclination, that
proves his WLin.'— Reality and Efficaetl of IHmne Grace, Letter X. He
adds, in a note, * Men have the same power, strictly speaking, before
they are wrought on by the Holy Spirit, as after ; and, oefore conver
sion, as after. The work of the Spirit endows with no new rational
powers, nor any powers that are necessary to moral agency.— f^cte Note
A.

32 THE DESIGN AND EFFECTS
creatures, in the death of him who dietli, he has provid
ed a Saviour and salvation, such as arc ¦iienlitl by all
men — such as are suUeil to all men — and inasmuch, too,
as he has made a revelation of that salvation, addressed
to all mankind, proclaiming Himself ' Go<l in Christ, re
conciling THE WORLD to liimself, nut imputing their tres
passes unto them.' There is nothing restrictive cither in
the nature of the salvation, or in the form of the revela
tion. Both respect the common character of mankind
as rational, responsible, guilty, depraved, miserable, mor
tal, immortal beings. In the salvation there is every
thing man needs, and the language of tho revelation is,
' To you, O MEN, I call, and my voice is to the sons
op MEN.' He is thus the Saviour, iKjt of a jiarticular
nation, but of men ' of every kindred, and people, and
toni^ue, and nation.'
This Saviour-God ' would have all men to be saved,
and to comi! to the knowledge of the truth.' From
Scripture nothing is plainer than that the salvation of
man is wholly of God, and the destruction of man wholly
of himself If man perishes, he is the suicide of his own
soul : For God has sworn by himself, that ' he has no
pleasure in the death of him who dieth,' but that he has
pleasure in his turning from his evil ways, and living.
' Turn ye, turn ye,' says he, ' why will ye die?'
And in order to their being saved, Ho willeth that
' they come to the knowledge of the truth.' From the
constitution of the economy of mercy, a constitution ad-
iidrably illustrative of the wisdom, and righteousness,
and benignity of God, and admirably suited to the in
tellectual and moral frame of man's nature, the only wa}'
in which individuals can become partakers of the salva
tion provided by God, is by thus understanding and be
lieving the truth, that plain, well-accredited, and most
indubitable statement of the way of salvation made in
the Holy Scriptures. This statement God wills that all
men should become acquainted with, and that all who
become acquainted with it, should believe it. In regard
to the first of these facts, what can be more satisfactory
evidence than the words of our Lord, invested ' with all
power in heaven and on earth,' the fully accredited re-
vealer of the Divine Will, ' Go ye into all the world, and

OF CHRIST S DEATH. 33
preach the gospel to every creature.' It is ' the com
mandment of the everlasting God, that the mystery
kept secret from former generations, but now made ma
nifest, should by the scripture of the prophets be made
known to all nations for the obedience of faith;' and
arrangements, in the appointment of the gospel mi
nistry, are made for carrying this commandment into
effect. If all mankind have not the knowledge of the truth,
the cause is to be sought for any where, rather than in
God's not willing that it should be so. It is to be found
in men's neglecting to comply with, in men opposing, the
plainly revealed will of God. And it is equally plain
that it is the will of God, that all to whom the truth
comes, should know and believe, wherever the gospel
comes. ' He commands all men every where to repent'
i. e. to change their minds by believing the truth. If
men continue ignorant and unbelieving under a dispen
sation of the gospel, this is not in accordance with, but
in direct opposition to, the will of God. God, as the
Saviour of men, appears in the gospel holding forth a
salvation which all men need, and which he is ready to
bestow on every sinner believing in Jesus.
How this character ofthe Saviour of men is consistent
with the character of the righteous, moral governor of
men, will appear, when we consider, as we now proceed
to do, the principles laid down respecting the Mediator
between God and man. These are, that there is a Me
diator between God and man, — that this Mediator is
the man Christ Jesus, — that there is but one Mediator,
—and that this one Mediator has given himself a ransom
for all.
Had it been possible that men should have fallen,
without guilt, into a state of danger and misery (which
we believe it was not), then God, without the interven
tion of any Mediator, would have been their Saviour.
His benignity, in the form of pity, would have impeUed
him to deliver the wretched; and righteousness, instead
of throwing obstacles in the way of the exercise of good
ness, would have been glorified in the removal of unde
served suffering.
But men were sinners. They had disturbed the order

31. THE DESIGN AND EFFECTS
of the Divine moral government. They had violated his
holy, and just, and good law. They had incurred the
penalty which that law denounces against its trans
gressors. They had thus placed their happiness in direct
opposition to the honours of the divine justice and holi
ness, and to the wise and benignant purposes of the di
vine moral administration. For God, directly to save
guilty men by an act of absolute mercy, would have
been ' to deny himself It would have been to proclaim
the original arrangement under which man was placed,
unwise, if not unjust ; and, as that arrangement is the
general law of all created intelligent beings, it would have
been to hold out an encouragement to rebellion, to
those who yet retained their allegiance, and to repeated
acts of insubordination to those who had so easily escaped
the hazards of their former transgression. As this ob
viously could not be, it follows, of course, that if God
save man at all, it must be by a Mediator ; — there must
be interposition. Something must take place, to make
it wise and just in God to pardon and save man ; for,
viewed as a sinner, man is the proper object, not of par
don and salvation, but of condemnation and perdition.
It is not difficult to make it evident, on the principles
of reason, to any man ¦who admits the justice of God,
and the guilt of man, that, on the supposition that man
is to be saved, a mediator is absolutely necessary. But
whether it be consistent with the divine character of
God to admit of a Mediator at all, — what, on the sup
position that it is so, must be the qualifications of this
Mediator, and the nature of his mediation, — whether a
properly qualified Mediator can be obtained, — whether,
on these suppositions, the Divine Being will be disposed
to admit of his mediation, — whether such a Mediator
has been actually appointed, and, if so, what have been
the results of his appointment, and ¦what effect has his
mediation produced on the relation of men to the moral
government of God — these are questions most interest
ing to a being in man's circumstances, but questions to
which reason, however improved, can afford no satisfac
tory answer, and which, if replied to at all, must be re
plied to liy a revelation from heaven.
Happily such a revelation has been given. There is

OP CHRIST S DEATH. 35
a Mediator — a divinely appointed — a divinely qualified
Mediator — ^between God and man. There is one who
can do, who has done, all that is necessary to make the
manifestation of God in the character of the Saviour of
man perfectly to harmonize, completely to coincide with
the manifestations of God in the character of the righte
ous sovereign of man, so that he is, and he appears to be,
at once infinitely holy and benignant. Justice and mercy,
through the same channels, have fuU course, and are
glorified to the uttermost; and Jehovah stands forth the
object of the admiring love of all the wise and holy beings
in the universe, as ' the just God and the Saviour.'
That Mediator is Jesus Christ. — Who Jesus Christ
the Mediator is, must be learned from the same divine
revelation that informs us that he is the Mediator. Now,
this revelation ' shows to ns that he is that eternal life^
i. e. in our idiom, that eternal living one ' who was with
the Father, who was in the beginning with God, and
who in the beginning was God, the only begotten Son,
the brightness of the Father's glory, the express image
of his person, by whom all things were created, by whom
all things consist, who is over all, God blessed for ever.'
But, while Scripture most explicitly teaches us that
the Mediator is divine, and clearly shows us that divi
nity was absolutely necessary to his successfully per
forming the great functions of mediation, it not less ex
plicitly teaches us that he is human, and as clearly shows
that humanity was absolutely necessary to his success
fully performing the great functions of mediation. He
is ' the man Christ Jesus.' Yes, ' the word was made
flesh, and dwelt among men.' ' Inasmuch as the child
ren are partakers of flesh and blood, he also took part of
the same.' He was, with the exception of sin, ' in all
things made like unto them in whose behalf he was to
mediate,' and who are termed his ' brethren.'
This glorious person — the God-man, Christ Jesus, is the
one Mediator between God and man. He and he alone
is the Mediator. There is no other being, divine, angelic
or human, qualified for filling this office. He is the only
person in the universe in whom divinity and humanity
are combined ; and he is the only person in the universe
divinely appointed to fill this office. ' There is no name

o6 the -0 ESIGX AND EFFECTS
given under heaven, nor among men, whereby we must
be saved, but tlie name of Jesus.'
This is truth, important truth; but I doubt if it be
the truth which is intended to be most prominently, at
least, presented to the mind by the Apostle in the pas
sage before us. The idea of the Apostle seems to be, as
God is the one God of all men, whether Jews or Gen
tiles, — so Jesus Christ is the one Mediator of all men,
whether Jews or Gentiles. The Jewish High Priest, or
or rather the Jewish High Priesthood, was the medium
of favourable intercourse between Jehovah and the Jews,
as his peculiar people, but not between him and the Gen
tiles, except in the case of those individuals who joined
themselves to the chosen people. But Jesus is ' the
surety' or mediator ' of a better covenant' — a covenant
which refers not to a particular nation, but to the race of
mankind generally, to men of ' every kindred, and nation,
and people, and tongue.'
' This one Mediator of men,' has given himself a ran
som for all. He has given himself a ranww. — The lan
guage is plainly figurative. A ransom is a sum of mo
ney paid by one person to deliver another from punish
ment to which he is exposed, and is peculiarly applica
ble to deliverance from slavery, by the payment of a
price. When Jesus Christ, the Mediator of men, is said
to give himself a ransom, the meaning is, that, by his
personal exertions and suffering, he gives a manifestation
of the reasonableness and excellence, both of the precep
tive and sanctionary parts of the divine law which men
have violated, and of course, of the holiness and justice
of God in establishing this constitution, and the unrea
sonableness and wickedness of man in violating it, fully
equivalent to what would have been given, had the law
taken its course, and all its transgressors been ' punished
with everlasting destruction from the presence of the
Lord, and from the glory of his power.'
This is what our Lord Jesus Christ became incarnate
to accomplish, and what he has, in fact, completely ac
complished. The holy law of God, which man had
broken, is more illustriously ' magnified and made
honourable,' by the Eternal Living One who was with
the Father, voluntarily assuming human nature, that he

OF CHUIST's DEATH. 37
might become capable of being subject to it, and most
cheerfully yielding perfect obedience to all its requisi
tions, in circumstances of the greatest conceivable diffi ¦
culty than it could have been by the perfect obedience of
innumerable millions of men and of angels. This was the
highest tribute which could be paid to the wisdom and
righteousness of the divine law : And the wilUng en
durance of the suffering awarded by that law against
transgression, by this infinitely excellent and exalted
Person, in the room of the guilty, placed in a stronger
light the malignity of sin, and the ill desert of the sin
ner, than the endless torments of all the millions of sin
ning men and angels could have done.
This was the giving himself a ransom, — not, as some
would have it, the yielding the exact amount of duty
and suffering, neither more nor less, due by those who
are ultimately to be saved through his mediation — a doc
trine no where explicitly taught in Scripture, — replete
with most perplexing difficulties, and utterly irrecon
cileable with many inspired declarations; but the doing
and suffering, as the substitute of sinners, what, in the
estimation of infinite wisdom and righteousness, was
necessary and sufficient to make the pardon of sin, and
the salvation of sinners, consistent with — illustrative of
the perfections of thi divine character, and the principles
of the divine govern t.
And when he gave himself a ransom, he gave himself
a ransom for all. * It is most deeply to be deplored,
that that truth, which above all others is calculated to
be salutarily influential on the minds of men, and which,
in fact, the Holy Spirit principally employs, at once to
destroy the enmity, to humble the pride, and to cleanse
the pollution of the human heart, that the Son of God is
the Saviour of sinful men — that ' he came to seek and
save the lost, to save sinners, even the chief,' — should
have become the subject of so much angry controversy,
and that even those who are substantially agreed about
it, dispute so much about the proper mode of stating it,
as to give infidel scoffers great advantage in their unholy
warfare, and as to throw great difficulties in the way of
the awakened sinner finding that God means he should
* "Vide Note B.

38 DESIGN AND EFFECTS OP CHRIST S DEATH.
very readily find, peace, and holiness, and salvation, in
the faith of the truth.
When it is said our Lord, as the Mediator of men,
gave himself a ransmn for all, we arc not to under
stand that our Lord secured the salvation of all men;
for it is plain that all men will not ultimately be saved ;
— nor are we to understand that our Lord anticipated
any result from his mediatorial exertions, which will not
flow from them, for he sees and ' shall see of the travail
of his soul, so as to be satisfied;'* but we are to under
stand that as, if Christ had not given himself a ransom,
in tlio sense in which we have explained it, the perfections
ofthe divine character, and the principles ofthe divine go
vernment, would have presented insurmountable obstacles
in the way of the salvation of any sinner; so, because
Christ has given himself a ransom, these obstacles are
completely removed ; so that, if sinners perish, their per
dition must be traced to some other cause than to the
absolute impossibility which, without the mediation of
Christ, must have existed of their being saved; and that
every sinner, be he Jew or Gentile, however guilty, how
ever depraved, believing in Jesus, is assured of salvation
in a way infinitely glorious to the righteousness, as well
as to the grace, of Jehovah. Not only is the ransom
paid by him, that is, his ' obedience to the death,' of suf
ficient value, that, if God so pleased, it might avail for
the pardon and salvation of all the sinning beings in the
universe, but it is intended by God — is in its own na
ture fitted, and has in fact been found effectual, for re
moving all the obstacles rising out of the divine moral
government, to the pardon and salvation of the lost race
of men ; so that, ' whosoever believeth in him shall as
suredly not perish, but have everlasting life.'t This glo
rious truth, the grand cardinal principle of the gospel,
is what I apprehend is here stated, where Christ, as the
Mediator between God and man, is represented as giv
ing himself a ransom for all. J
* Vide Note C. f Vide Notes D, E, and F.
t The Duty of Prayer for all Men : A Sermon. United Se
cession Magazine, vol. iii. p. 296-305. Published in 1835. On
the subject of this article, Davenant, Usher, Polhill, Scott, Ward-
law, and Gilbert, may be consulted.

ON ASSURANCE OP SALVATION. 39

v.— ON ASSURANCE OF SALVATION.
Every sinner, in his unpardoned state, is entirely
destitute of solid ground of hope of final happiness.
He has violated the divine law — he has incurred the
divine displeasure. He has deserved remediless misery ;
and, if mercy do not interpose, he must, under the
righteous government of God, receive his desert. The
ground of a sinner's hope obviously cannot be any
thing in himself. It cannot be that he is innocent, or
that, though giiilty, he has fuUy answered the demands
of the divine law, for this is not true; — nor can it be
that he is less guilty than others, or that a great change
has taken place on him, or is to take place on him ; for
this is not at all to the purpose. When he looks at
himself in the light of the divine word, he may well
discover abundant ground of fear, abundant ground of
despair; but he can discover no ground of hope. The
ground of the sinner's hope is in God alon^ That
ground is sometimes represented to be the sovereign self-
moved benignity of God; at other times, ' the obe
dience to death' of his incarnate only begotten Son;
and, at other times, the untrammelled revelation of
mercy in ' the word of the truth of the Gospel.' These
are, in reality, but different aspects of the same glorious
object; and the ground of the sinner's hope may be
described, as ' the sovereign benigiuty of God exercising
itself in perfect consistency with, in glorious illustra -
tion of, his holiness and justice, through the obedience
to death of his Son Jesus Christ — the Just One, in the
room of the unjust, made known to us in a clear and-
abundantly attested revelation.'
This ground of hope is held up to the mind in such
passages of scripture as the following : — ' God so loved
the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that
whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have
everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the
world to condemn the world, but that the world through
liim might be saved.' When ' every mouth was stop
ped, and the whole world brought in guilty before God'
— when it had been made evident, that, ' by the deeds

40 ON ASSURANCE OP SALVATION.
of the law no flesh could be justified in his sight,' since
by the law was the conviction of guilt, the divine
method of justification, not by law, but by the faith of
Christ, has been manifested to all, and takes effect " on
all them that believe; for there is no difference' among
them that believe, ' for they all have sinned and for
feited the divine approbation ;' and are ' justified freely
by God's grace, through the redemption that is in Christ
Jesus, whom God hath set forth a propitiation through
faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness in the re
mission of sins that are past, through the forbearance
of God — to declare, at this time, his righteousness, that
he might be just, and the justifier of him who believeth
in Jesus.' ' This is a faithful saying, and worthy of
all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world
to save sinners, of whom I am chief ' God hath re
conciled us to himself by Christ Jesus, and hath given
to us the ministry of reconciliation, to-wit, that God
was in Christ reconciling the world to himself, not im
puting -their trespasses unto them ; for he hath made
Him who knew no sin, to be sin for us, that we might
be made the righteousness of God in Him.' ' The blood
of Jesus Christ, God's Son, cleanseth us from all sin;
and he is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours
only, but also for the sins of the whole world.' ' Not
by works of righteousness which we have done, but
according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of
regeneration, and the renewing of the Holy Ghost,
which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ
our Saviour.' ' He is able to save to the uttermost
them who come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth
to make intercession for them.' Such is the ground, the
only ground, of the sinner's hope.
If these statements have been understood, it will not
be difficult to perceive, how an individual sinner comes
to cherish the hope of eternal life on this ground. The
sovereign benignity of Jehovah, and the consistency of
the exercise of this benignity towards guilty men with
righteousness, through the mediation of Jesus Christ,
are matters of pure revelation. They are made known
in ' the word of the truth of the Gospel ;' and it is
only by the truth, in reference to them there revealed.

ON ASSURANCE OP SALVATION.

+ 1

being understood and believed, that hope of eternal
fife on these grounds can be awakened in the human
heart. If I believe the above statements, I hope for
eternal life, and I hope for it on these grounds. If I
do not believe the above statements, I either have no
hope of eternal life, or, if I have a hope of eternal life, it
rests on another, and, therefore, on a false foundation.
Thus it is, that, in the faith of the truth, in the faith of
the truth alone, the sinner finds hope; for it is in the
faith of the truth, in the faith of the truth alone, that the
sinner finds ' the just God and the Saviour.' Mark
this weU. The sinner's faith or believing is not the
ground of his hope, but it is only by faith, or believing,
that he can discover the ground of his hope ; just as the
ground of the hope of Elisha's servant, was the celes
tial host, which drew a line of impregnable defence be
tween his master and him, and the Syrian army ; but,
had not these angelic guards been seen by his heaven
invigorated eyes, their presence there could not have
been a grotmd of hope to him.
The ground of the sinner's hope never varies. It is
' the same yesterday, to-day, and for ever.' The ground
of the hopes of the accomphshed saint, who, by the
word and providence and spirit of God, has been made
meet for that inheritance on which he is just about to
enter ; whose whole tone of thought and affections is in
almost perfect unison with those of the Heavenly as
sembly which he is soon to join — is precisely the same
as when, ' in the day of power,' a guilty, depraved,
God-condemned, self-condemned, and, so far as the uni
verse of creatures was concerned, a hopelessly lost sin-
«er, driven from all the false confidences in which he
had been accustomed to seek and find shelter, ' he fled
for refuge to lay hold on the hope set before him in the
gospel.' Our first hope is our last hope; — ' the begin
ning of our confidence' is the end of our confidence.
It follows, of course, that the principal and direct
means of sustaining and strengthening this hope, is the
continued and the increasing faith of the truth. At the
same time, it is plain, from the Scriptures, that as the
faith of the gospel uniformly produces holiness as well
as hope — unholy dispositions and actions must, from

¦42 ON assurance op salvation.
their very nature, becloud hope, as they prove that the
truth on which alone sohd hope can rest is, for the
time, out of the view of the mind; and, on the other
hand, holy dispositions and conduct must, from their
very nature, be connected with, and even productive of,
an increase of hope — not, however, by adding to its
foundation, but by affording evidence that we are really
building on that foundation. It is in this way that,
' patience worketh experience, and experience hope.'
There are two other questions respecting this hope,
which, though not of such vital importance as those
which we have attempted briefly and plainly to an
swer, are yet at all times of considerable interest, and
possess a peculiar claim on our attention at present,
when, as it appears to us at least, there is so much
* darkening counsel by words without knowledge' on
this subject. Is the hope of eternal life necessarily
connected with the faitli of the gospel ? and does every
believer of the gospel at all times enjoy the unclouded
hope — the undoubting expectation of eternal life ?
To the first of these questions we reply unhesitat
ingly in the aflu-mative. The hope of eternal life is
necessarily connected with the faith of the gospel. Just
turn back and peruse the inspired summary of the gos
pel contained in a preceding paragraph, and say, can
any man understand and believe these statements, and
yet continue without hope of eternal life. No. In the
degree in which a man understands and believes the
gospel, he must have the hope of eternal life. The
faith of the gospel and absolute despair of salvation are
plainly incompatible states of mind. A man may be
lieve what men falsely call the gospel, and what he rais-
takingly thinks the gospel, and yet remain a stranger to
the hope of eternal life. A man may think that he believes
what is really the gospel, while he only speculates about
it, and remains a stranger to the hope of eternal life.
But the real gospel cannot be really believed without,
in the degree in which it is believed, producing hope.
It is, therefore, not only not necessary that a sinner
should wait till he has ascertained, by a process of self-
examination, that the faith of the gospel has proved its
efficacy in his case by a moral transformation of his

on assurance op salvation. -*•&
character, before he dare cherish the hope of salvation;
but he cannot believe the gospel without cherislnng this
hope. The hope and the holiness of the gospel are pro
duced and grow together, and while they have a power
ful influence on each other, they are both directly de
pendent on that truth which, in the hand of the Holy
Spirit, is the grand instrumental means of making man
both holy and happy.
To the second question, does every behever ot the
gospel at aU times enjoy the unclouded hope of eternal
life ? the true answer is. He enjoys it according to the
measure of his faith. A habitual perfect faith of a com
pletely understood gospel, would produce a constant
unclouded hope of eternal happiness. He who is ' strong
in faith,' that is, who has clear and accurate apprehen
sions of the meaning and evidence of the revelation of
mercy, -will ' abound in hope.' He who is ' weak m
faith,' that is, who has hmited and inaccurate views of
the meaning and evidence of the revelation of mercy,
will be constantly hable to be frequently agitated by
doubts and fears.
The faith of the gospel admits of an infinite variety
of degrees, according to the measure in which its mean
ing and its evidence are apprehended by different indi
viduals; and this gives origin to that endless variety of
degrees, both of holiness and of comfort, which are ac
tually experienced among Christians. It seems as unrea
sonable to expect that an imperfect faith should produce
a perfect hope, as that it should produce a perfect meek
ness, humiUty, or any other variety of christian excel
lence. With respect to every one of these it will be
with a man ' according to his faith.'
Rightly to understand this important subject, it is
also necessary to recoUect, that every Christian while in
the present state, is but imperfectly delivered from that
false mode of thinkiag on the subject to which the
Christian revelation refers, which is natural to all men.
In the degree in which he knows and beheves the truth,
he is delivered from it, but no farther. It is a law of
the human constitution, that a man cannot believe two
principles which he perceives to be contradictory; but
it is not a law of the human constitution, that a man

4t ON the SONSHIP op CHRIST.
cannot believe two principles which are really incom
patible, if he do not perceive their incompatiblity.
There are false principles, as well as true principles, in
the mind of every Christian while on earth ; and as a
man's faith of what is false, as well as of what is true,
if it be honest, will be influential, the true account of a
Christian's spiritual state, either as to hope or to holi
ness, will be found to be, not what would be the natural
result of tho truth which he believes, taken by itself,
and supposed to operate without opposition; but what
is the mean effect of that truth, and of those deficient
and mistaken views with which it is connected in his
mind. It is a most important practical deduction that na
turally flows from these statements, that for a Christian
to be haunted with doubts and fears in reference to his
final happiness, is at least as much his sin as his un-
happiness ; and that the cause, so far as it is not of a
physical nature, is to be traced ultimately to something
wanting or something wrong in his faith; while the
only radical cure is to be found in obtaining more ex
tended, accurate, and influential views of the truth as
it is in Jesus.*

VI.— ON THE SONSHIP OF CHRIST.
It has often been disputed whether the term Son of
God, as applied to Christ, is to be understood literally
or figuratively ; and like many other theological dis
putes, this is in a good degree a mere question of words.
If by the term being figurative be meant that it does
not express any real or essential relation, but merely
* Amethyst for 1832, pp. 285-294. I know no theologian who,
upon the whole, has treated the doctrine of assurance with more
soundness of mind, guarding equally against legalism and fana
ticism, giving due prominence at once to the gratuitous character
and sanctifying influence of the gospel, than my friend Dr
Wardlaw. It is worth while to compare his illustrations of this
subject with those of his revered ancestor Ebenezer Erskine.
Though the form is very different, improved greatly in our esti
mation in the later exhibition, many of the great elementary prin
ciples will be found the same.

ON THE SONSHIP OF CHRIST. 45
a relation originating in positive appointment, or a rela
tion rather of a moral than of a physical nature, then we
would say the term is not figurative but literal; but if
by the term being figurative be meant that the word is
used in a sense somewhat different from that in which
it is employed in reference to that human relation of
which it is properly expressive, then we would say the
term is not literal but figurative ; and this last employ
ment of the term figurative, seems most consistent with
the ordinary use of language.
The general ride for explaining this kind of expressions
is a very simple one, whatever difficulty may occasionally
occur in its application to particular cases. The word is to
be understood as bearing its proper meaning as far as, and
no farther than,we know from other sources, that it is not
inapplicable to the object to which it is in a figurative
sense applied. Let us apply this rule to the case before
us. what are the ideas suggested by the word son in its
proper application to mankind ? They are, I apprehend,
chiefly the following : — -Identity of nature, derivation of
being, posteriority, inferiority, affection both on the part
of the father and the son, and resemblance. Now, when
in the scriptures I find angels and saints represented as
God's sons, I understand by it that they derive their
•being from him, both as creatures and as holy creatures,
— that they are the objects of his kind regard, and that
he is the object of their dutiful regards, and that there
is a resemblance between them and God ; but I do not
conclude that they are of the same nature, and for this
reason, not that the word son does not naturally suggest
the idea, but because I know, from the most certain
sources of information, that angels and saints do not be
long to the same order of being with the Divinity. When
I find the same appellation given to Jesus Christ, and
given to him in a way quite peculiar, I consider it as
signifying identity of nature with God, as well as that
he is the object of the divine kind regards, and that the
Father is the object of his kind regards, and that he re
sembles the Father : and so I understand it, for this
reason, that this is the natural meaning of the word son ;
and I find from other passages of scripture that Jesus
Christ is really possessed of this identity of nature with

•16 ON THE SONSHIP OP CHRIST.
his Father : and I consider it as not signifying deriva
tion of being, posteriority, or inferiority, for this reason,
that though the word sow naturally enough suggests
these ideas, yet I know from other plain passages of
scripture what is, indeed, implied in the leading idea of
identity of nature, that Jesus is the eternal God, — God
over aU, and, of course, neither posterior nor inferior to
his Father. This appears to me the true mode of inter
preting such phrases ; and had it been generally adopted
on this subject, it would have prevented, on the one hand,
much rash speculation about the eternal generation of the
Son, as the m ode of the communication of the divine nature
to him by the Father, — and on the other, the adoption of
what I cannot but consider as the unscriptural dogma of
a mere economical sonship, to which some good men have
resorted, under the mistaken idea that sonship here ne
cessarily implies posteriority and inferiority. The Son of
God, then, though an appropriated appellation of the
Messiah, is not a synonymous term with the Messiah,
but intimates that he who wears it is a possessor of the
divine nature. He is so the Son of God as to be one
with his Father. He is so the Son of God as to be
equal with God.'*
* Christ Essentially and Officially Superior to the Angels. A
Sermon. Christian Teacher, November 1840. P. 793. Millar,
Fuller, Watson, and Treffrey, may be consulted on this head.

NOTES.

Note A.

MOK.\L AND NATURAL INABILITY.

Moral Inability consists only in the want of a heart, or
disposition, or will, to do a thing. Natural Inability, on
the other hand, consists in, or arises from, want of under
standing, bodily strength, opportunity, or whatever may
prevent, our doing a thing, when we are willing, and
strongly enough disposed and inclined to do it. Or, in
fewer words, thus : Whatever a man could not do, if he
would, he is under a natural inability of doing ; but when
all the reason why one cannot do a thing, is because he
does not chuse to do it, the inability is only of a moral
nature. This distinction takes place equally with regard to evil
actions and good ones. Thus, for instance, the divine Being
cannot do evil ; not because he wants opportunity, or un
derstanding, or strength, to do, with infinite ease, whatever
he pleases ; but only because he is not, and it is impossible
he ever should be, inclined to do iniquity. He is so in
finitely and immutably holy, wise, just, and good, that it
is impossible he should ever please to act otherwise, than
in the most holy, righteous, and best manner. Hence,
though we read that ' with God all things are possible,' and
that he can do every thing ; yet elsewhere we are told, ' he
cannot deny himself,' and that it is impossible ' for God
to lie.'
On the other hand, Satan is incapable of doing right, or
of behaving virtuously, in any one instance, or in the least
possible degree. But this is not hecause he wants natural
abilities ; for undoubtedly, in that respect, he is far superior
to many that are truly virtuous. His being incapable of
any thing but infernal wickedness, is altogether owing to
his being of such an infernal disposition.

48 NOTES.
And it is not uncommon to speak of hicapacity in nian-
kind, both as to doing good and doing evil, in this two-fold
signification. Some persons, we say, are incapable of doing
a mean thing. Not that we think it is above their natural
capacity,— but it is beneath them ; they abhor, or they
would scorn to do it. Others are incapable of several sorts
of villain)', not through any want of good will to do it, —
they only want a convenient opportunity, or sufficient in
genuity. And just so in regard to doing good. Some have
It not in the power of their hands ; others have no heart
to it. One is of a truly generous spirit, and nothing but
his own poverty keeps him from being what Job was, a
father to the poor, the fatherless, and him that has none to
help him. Another is rioh, and might be a great benefactor
and blessing to all around him ; but he has no heart to de
vise liberal things. He is deaf to the cries of the poor,
blind to their wants, and dead to all the generous feelings
of humanity and compassion.
Some are so feeble and infirm that they can do scarce
any bodily labour ; though they are extremely free and
willing to lay themselves out to the utmost that their
strength will bear, and often go beyond it. Others are
strong and healthy enough, and might get a good living,
and be useful rnembers of society ; but such is their in
vincible laziness, that their hands refuse to labour, and they
can hardly get them out of their bosoms. Some are effec-
tuallj' kept from shining, or being very useful, in any
public sphere in church or state, through the weakness of
their heads ; others, as effectually, by the badness of their
hearts. Some are incapable of being taught, by reason of
natural dulness ; others only because they are of an un-
teachable spirit, and full of self-conceit. Some are blind
for want of eyes ; but it is an old proverb, that none are
more blind than those who won't see.
These examples are sufficient to illustrate the distinction
I am insisting on, and to make it evident, that by incapable,
we often mean something very different from want of na
tural capacity. We may also perceive, from these instances,
that there is a real necessity for using such words as capable,
incapable, cannot, &c., in this diversity of signification, in
which we see they are used, in common speech, as well as
in the scriptures. For whenever any thing, whether in
ourselves or without us, is really absolutely inconsistent
with our doing a thing, we have no ¦way fully and strongly
enough to express that inconsistence, but by saying we are
unable, we cannot, it is impossible, or using some word of
like import. And now it is certain that want of a heart,

MORAL AND NATURAL INABILITY. 49
or inclination to do a thing, may be, and is, as inconsistent
with our doing it as any thing else could be. Covetousness
is as inconsistent with liberality as poverty is, and may as
effectually hinder a man from doing deeds of charity. In
dolence is as inconsistent whh industry, as bodily weakness
and infirmity. The want of an upright heart and a public
spirit, is as inconsistent with the character of a good ruler,
as the want of wisdom and understanding. And the want
of all principles of virtue must be as inconsistent with act
ing virtuously, as even the want of those intellectual facul
ties which are necessary to moral agency. And so, on the
other hand, as to doing evil things. There is no possibility
of doing them, that is, knowingly, designedly, and as
moral agents, without an evil disposition. Our free and
moral actions are, and must be, as invariably guided and
dictated by our minds, as they are limited and bounded by
our natural power. That is, every one must act his own
nature and choice ; otherwise he does not act himself; he
is not the agent. And if, when we would express this sort
of necessity, we should not use the same phrases as are
made use of in cases of natural necessity ; but, for fear of
a misunderstanding, should carefully avoid saying a man
cannot, whenever we mean only that he has not such a
heart as is necessary, and only say that he will not, in all
such cases ; our language would often sound odd, being out
of common custom, which governs the propriety of words ;
and not only so, but it would not be sufficiently expressive.
Should we be afraid to say it is impossible for a man to
love God, or come to Christ, while his heart is altogether
wicked and full of enmity against God and Christ ; people
would be ready to think we imagined this might sometimes
happen, and that there was no real impossibity in it of any
kind. Whereas there is as real, and as absolute an impos
sibility in this case, as in any supposable case whatever. To
be more guarded, therefore, than the scripture is, in this
matter, would be to be unguarded. The apostle demands,
' can the fig-tree, my brethren, bear olive-berries , either a
vine, figs f And the prophet, ' can the Ethiopian change
his skin ? or the leopard his spots ? Then may ye also do
good, who are accustomed to do evil.' And our Saviour
says, ' a good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit ; neither can
a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. A good man out of
the good treasure of the heart bringeth forth good things.
And an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil
things.' There is as certain and never-failing a connexion
in this case as any natural connexion whatever. Which
ought by no means to be dissembled, but openly maintained.

50 NOTES.
But then it is certainly of a quite different, and even a
directly opposite nature,'to all intents and purposes of moral
agency. And it is of the last importance, in my apprehen
sion, that this also should be maintained and manifested to
every man's conscience.
Because a man must act according to his own heart, or as
he pleases ; does this destroy his freedom ? It is the very
thing in which all free agency consists. The pulse can
beat ; the limbs can move in some bodily disorders, or when
one that is stronger than we takes hold of them, whether
we will or no. But God does not consider us as accountable
for such actions as these. And we should, and that not
without reason, think it very hard, should he blame or
punish us for them. For an honest and good man's pulse
may beat as irregularly as the worst villain's in the world ;
or his hands, in a convulsion, may strike those around him,
in spite of all he can do to hold them still. Or one may be
carried by force along with a gang of thieves, and be taken
for one of them, though no man hates such company and
actions as theirs, more heartily than he does. Such in-
Voluntary actions every one sees a man is not, and ought
not to be accountable for ; and the reason is, no bad inclina
tion of ours, or want of a good one, is necessary in order to
them. They are so free, as to be independent of us, and
out of our power. If all our actions were like these, — no
ways necessarily connected with our disposition, and choice,
and temper of mind, we could not be accountable creatures,
or the subjects of moral government. If a good tree could
bring forth evil fruit, and a corrupt tree good fruit ; if a
good man, out of the good treasure of his heart, could bring
forth evil things, and an evil man, out of the evil treasure,
good things ; the tree could never be known "by its fruit.
It could never be kno^wn by a man's actions, any thing what
his heart was. So that, if they were dealt with according
to their works, the most upright and well-disposed would
be as liable to be punished ; and the most ill-natured and
ill-disposed, as likely to be rewarded, as the contrary.
Whence all moral government must be at an end.
Certainly, if we are justly accountable, rewardable, or
punishable, for any actions ; if any actions are, or can be,
properly our own, it must be such as are dictated by our
selves, and which cannot take place without our own con
sent. An inability, therefore, to act otherwise than agree
ably to our own minds, is only an inability to act otherwise
than as free agents. And that necessity which arises from,
or rather consists in, the temper and choice of the agent
himself, and that which is against his choice and his very

Moral and natural inability. 51
nature, are so far from coming to the same thing at last,
that they are directly contrary one to the other, as to all
the purposes of morality, freedom, accountableness, and
desert of praise or blame, reward or punishment.
And this is agreeable to the sense of all mankind, in all
common cases. A man's heart being fully set in him to do
evil, does not render his evil actions the less criminal, in
the judgment of common sense, but the more so ; nor does
the strength of a virtuous disposition render a good action
the less, but the more amiable, and worthy of praise. Does
any one look upon the Divine Being as less excellent and
glorious, for being so infinitely and unchangeably holy in
his nature, that he ' cannot be tempted with evO,' or'' act
otherwise than in the most holy and perfect manner ? Does
any one look upon the devil as less sinful and to blame,
because he is of such a devilish disposition, so full of un
reasonable spite and malice against God and man, as to be
incapable of any thing but the most horrid ¦wickedness ? —
And as to mankind ; who is there that does not make a
difference between him that is incapable of a base action,
only by reason ofthe virtuousness of his temper, having all
the natural talents requisite for the most consummate
villainy ; and him that is incapable of being the worst of
vfllains, for no other reason than only because he does not
know how ? Does any one think that only the want of a
win to work, excuses a man from it, just as much as bodily
infirmity does ? Or, do any of us ever imagine, that the
covetous miser who, with all his useless hoards, has no heart
to give a penny to the poor, is for that reason equally ex
cusable from deeds of charity, as he who has nothing to
give? We certainly always make a distinction betwixt want of
natural abilities to do good, and the want of a heart ; look
ing upon the one as a good excuse, the other as no excuse
at all, but rather as that in which all wickedness radically
consists. A natural fool no one blames for acting like a
fool ; but ' to him that knoweth to do good, and doth it
not, to him it is sin,' in the sense of all mankind, as well
as in God's account. ' If there be first a willing mind,' we
always suppose it ought to be accepted according to that a
man hath, and not according to that he hath not. But the
want of a willing mind, or not having a mind to do well, is
universally considered as a crime, and not as an excuse.
Nothing is more familiar to us, than to distinguish in this
manner. Nor can any man of common sense help j'Udging
thus. Now this distinction is as applicable to the ease before

52 NOTES.
US, as it is to any other case. Some may he unable to com
ply with the gospel, through the want of those powers of
mind, or those bodily organs, or those means of grace,
without which it is impossible to understand the character
of Christ, or the way of salvation through him. In either
of which oases, the inability is of the natural kind. Others
may have all the outward means and all the natural facul
ties, which are necessary in order to a right understanding
of the gospel ; and yet, through the evil temper of their
minds, the_v may be disposed to make light of all its pro
posals and invitations, and to treat every thing relating to
religion and another world, with the utmost neglect and
indifference. Or, if their fears of ' the wrath to come,' are
by any means awakened, and they are made with much
solicitude to inquire ' what they shall do to be saved,' still
they may be utterly disinclined to submit to the righteous
ness, or the grace of God, as revealed in the gospel. They
may be still, ' such children of the devil,' and ' enemies of
all righteousness,' as to be irreconcileably averse to all ' the
right ways of the Lord.' They may have ' such an evil
heart of unbelief, to depart from the living God,' as is ab
solutely inconsistent with consenting to the covenant of
grace, or ' believing to the saving of the soul.' Now, when
this is the case, the inability the sinner is under, is only of
a moral nature. — Smalley s Inability of the Sinner to comply
with the Gospel, his inexcusable GuUt in not complying with
it, and the Consistency of these with each other Illustrated.
Pp. 7-12. Lond. 1793.
Ad actus elicitos quod spectat, illi consistunt in ipsis
mentis ac voluntatis motionibus, intellectione, scilicet, at-
que volitione, ut loquuntur in scholis. Dicuntur autem
esse ((p' rjjiiv et in nostra potestate, duobus modis. Nimi-
rum vel quatenussunt naturales, velquatenus sunt morales.
Et quatenussunt naturales, quidem sunt i< rav i(p' rjfiiv,
quum nihil est vel in organorum congtitutione naturali,
vel in temperamento corporis, vel in aliis ejusmodi rebus,
quod facultatum illarum operationes interuertat. lUe
enim certe qui vel febri vel huniore melancholico in furo-
rem incidit, dicitur exisse e sui potestate. Qui vero natura,
mente oaptus est, ob infeliceni organorum constitutionem,
ille nunquam in sui potestate fuit. Quamobrem actus illi
eliciti non sunt in talium potestate, neque i<^ airols. Con
tra vei-6 ((j) r)jj.lv, esse dicuntur istic facultatum nostrarura
operationes, cum ab omnibus illis partibus, ex quibus mentis
et voluntatis functiones naturaliter, pendent, recte et na-
tur£B convenienter constituti sumus.

moral and natural inability. 53
Quatenus sunt morales, hoc est, bonse vel malse moraliter,
duobus modis e'</)' ^niv esse dici possunt. Nimirum vel qua
tenus contingere potest ut eliciantur e facultatibus nostris
et a nobis edantur ; vel quatenus, si minus contingere id
possit, impedimentum positum est in ipsis facultatibus qua
tenus sunt morales tantiim, non in ulla alia re quse faculta
tum imperio vel subsit vel non subsit.
Et priore quidem modo dici non potest to credere esse
« Toyv ecj) fjiiiv, postquam semel peccato corrupti sumus ;
Nam contingere certe non potest ut per nos, et nulla acce-
dente virtute Spiritus illuminantis, Evangelic credamus.
Posteriore vero modo to credere est « Ta>i> f'0' ti/jlIv.
Quod enim non contingit, neque vero contingere potest ut
credamTis,nulli sen causse, sen impedimento potest imputari,
quod non sit in ipsis facultatibus locatum et constitutum.
Etenini si to marov offertur, quandoquidem to Tna-revtiv
non est actus facultatis quse voluntati subsit, sed mentis ac
voluntatis ipsius, posuimus autem eas res, ex quibus mentis
ac voluntatis operationes, quatenus sunt naturales, pendent,
recte et congruenter se habere, per eas unas facultates stat,
quatenus sunt morales, ne to nuTTov amplectantur.
Etsi autem facultates illse morales, quatenus sunt mo
rales, ita sunt affectse, ut contingere non possit ut credant,
non sequitur tamen dici non posse to credere esse « twi/
f't^' fifiiv. Ilia enim e'l^' rjiuv esse dicuntur, quse si fieri de-
beant, neque fiant tamen, una culpari mens nostra possit
atque voluntas. Ea vero non sunt irp' r)fui/ quee si a nobis
non fiant, cum fieri jubentur, causam in aliquam aliam rem
k mente et voluntate nostra diversam, vere et merito reji
cere queamus. To credere autem est istiusmodi, ut nisi a
nobis praestetur, nihil quidquam causari valeamus prseter
nostram mentem ipsam, nostramque voluntateni.
Atque id manifestum exemplo fieri potest. Fingamus
enim animo, Dei jussu, .Slthiopi duo ilia praecipi eodem tem
pore, ut deponat cutis nigrorem, et ut credat in Evangeli-
iim, quod iUi eadem opera clare et distincte proponatur.
Neutrum ille sane .vel prtestabit, vel praestare poterit.
Utriusque mandati respectu erit iuobedicntia pariter neces-
saria atque inevitabilis. At cur nigrorem non deponat,
excusationem habet et legitimam et paratam. Nam etsi
parere vehementissime velit, non potest tamen : quia id pen-
det ex re aliqua ab ipsa voluntate diversa, et qu« non est
in ipsius potestate, neque en airm. Cur vero non credat,
ne ipso quidem judice, uUam excusationem habebit. Quia
si parere voluissit, utique id potuisset. Id enim non ali-

54 notes.
unde pependit'quam ex ipsius mente ac voluntate, faculta
tibus quae vel maxime sunt en aira, quamdiu organa bene
disposita manent.
Neque vero inde petet excusationem, quod utrobique ev-
entus fuit pariter et ex sequa necessitate infallibilis. Quod
enim infallibile fuit fore ut nigrorem non deponeret, id in
de provenit quod nullo modo fuit iir aira cutem immu-
tare. At quod infallibile fuit fore ut non crederet, ex alia
causa profectum est. 'Ett' avTa enim fuit credere nisi ma-
lus fuisset ; ne mains esset, en airai eatenus fuit, quod ne
quam esset, annon, situm fuit in una ejus voluntate. Et
quamvis usqueadeo nequam fuit ut evenire non potuerit
quin talis esset, malitia tamen ilia in una mente ac volun
tate est, per quas quamdiu consilio et voluntate utimur,
ipsi vel maxime e<j> fjjjuv esse cxistimamur.
Uno verbo ecp' rifilv illud esse dicitur ad quod faciendum
libertatem habemus. Libertas autem est potestas faciendi
quod velis ; quae enim facere possumus si velimus, eorum
respectu liberi esse dicimur. Non est autem in jEthiope
talis libertas sen potestas ad cutis colorem immutandum.
Nam etsi id velit, non potest. At est in eodem ..ffiithiope
talis libertas sen potestas ad Evangelium amplectendum.
Id enim si vellet, utique id posset. Quominus id faciat, prohi-
bet ejus una voluntas. — Fidei Mosis Amyraldi, circa errores
Arminianorum, Declaratio. Pp. 60-64. Samur. 1G46.
Note B.
the oenebal refbrenoe of the death of christ.
There cannot be a truer measure of the extent of Christ's
death than God's will of salvation out of which the same
did issue. So far forth as that will of salvation extends to
all men, so far forth the death of Christ doth extend to all
men. Now, then, how far doth God ¦will the salvation of
all? Surely, thus far, that, if they believe, they shall be
saved. No divine can deny it, especially seeing Christ him
self hath laid it down so positively. ' This is the will of
Him that sent me,' saith ho, ' that every one which seeth
tlie Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life ;'
John vi. 40. Wherefore, if God will the salvation of all
men thus far, that, if they believe, they shall be saved. But
you will say that promise, ' whosoever believes shall be
saved,' is but voluntas signi, and not voluntas beneplaciti,
which is the adequate measure of Christ's death. Unto
which I answer : If that promise be voluntas signi, what
doth it signify? What but God's wiU? What will but

GENERAL REFERENCE OF THE DEATH OF CHRIST. 55
that good pleasure of His, that whosoever believes shall be
saved ? How else is the sign of a true God a true sign ?
Whence is that universal connexion betwixt faith and sal
vation ? Is it not a plain efflux co-product from the decree
of God? — PoWiilTs Divine Will, Considered in its Eternal
Decrees, and Holy Bxecution of them, ch. viii. p. 284. Lon
don, 1673.
These general promises, ' Whosoever believes shall be
saved,' ' Whosoever will, let him take of the water of life
freely,' undeniably extend to all men, and in that extent
are infallibly true; they are all faithful sayings, and words
of truth, and thefr truth is sealed up by Christ's blood ;
wherefore as these promises extend to all men, so the
death of Christ (in which they are founded^ doth extend
to all men. If Christ did no way die for ^ men, which
way shall the truth of these general promises be made
out ? ' Whosoever wUl may take the water of life.'
What, though Christ never bought it for him ? ' Whoso
ever believes shaU be saved.' What though there were no
\vTpov, no price paid for him ? Surely the Gospel knows
no water of life but what Christ purchased, nor no way of
salvation but by a \vTpov, or price paid. But you wUl say
that albeit Christ died not for all men, yet are those gene
ral promises very true, and that because theh truth is
founded upon the sufficiency of Christ's death, which hath
worth enough in it to redeem millions of worlds. I an
swer, there is a double sufficiency, sufficientia nuda, con
sisting in the intrinsical value of the thing, and sufficientia
ordinata, consisting in the intentional paying and receiv
ing that thing as a price of redemption ; the first is that
radical sufficiency whereby the thing may possibly become
a price ; the second is that formal sufficiency whereby the
thing doth actually become a price. Let a thing be of
never so vast a value in itself, it is no price at all unless it
be paid for that end, and heing paid, it is a price for no
more than those only for whom it was so paid ; because
the intrinsical worth, how great soever, doth not constitute
it a price. Hence it is clear, that if Christ's death (though
of immense value) had been paid for none, it had been no
price at all; and if it were paid but for some, it was no
price for the rest for whom it was not paid. These things
premised, if Christ no way died for all men, how can those
promises stand true ? All men, if they believe, shall be
saved — saved, but how ? Shall they be saved by a XvTpov,
or price of redemption ? There was none at all paid for
them ; the unmense value of Christ's death doth not make
it a price as to them for whom he died not ; or shall they

56 NOTES.
be saved without a XvTpov, or price. God's unsatisfied
justice cannot suffer it, his minatory law cannot bear it,
neither doth the gospel know any such way of salvation ;
take it either way, the truth of those promises cannot be
vindicated, unless we say that Christ died for all men.
But you will yet reply, that albeit Christ died not for all,
yet is the promise true ; because Christ's death is not only
sufficient for all in itself, but it was willed by God to be
so. I answer, God willed it to be so, but how ? Did he
will that it should be paid for all men, and so be a sufficient
price for them ? then Christ died for all men ; or did he
will that it should not be paid for all men, but only be
sufficient for them in its intrinsical value ? then stUl it is
no price at all as to them, and consequently either they
may be saved without a price, which is contrary to the cur
rent of the gospel, or else they cannot be saved at aU,
which is contrary to the truth of the promise. If it be
yet further demanded, To what purpose is it to argue which
way reprobates shall be saved, seeing none of them ever did
or will believe ? Let the apostle answer, ' What if some did
not believe ? Shall their unbelief make the faith of God
of none effect ? God forbid ; yea, let God be true, but
every man a liar;' Rom. iii. 3, 4. And again, ' If we be
lieve not, yet he abideth faithful and cannot deny himself;'
2 Tim. ii. 13. No reprobate ever did or will believe, yet
the promise must be true, and true antecedently to the
faith or unbelief of men ; true, because it is the promise
of God, and antecedently true, because else it could not be
the object of faith.'
The oblation of Christ in the Gospel is founded on his
oblation on the Cross ; and the ministry of reconciliation is
founded on the mystery of it. Hence, the apostle joins
both together. ' God was in Christ reconciling the world to
Himself, and hath committed to us the words of reconcilia
tion;' 2 Cur. V. 19. And in another place, ' Christ gave him
self a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.' The
word of reconciliation is extensive to all, therefore so is the
work. The price of redemption may be testified to all,
therefore it was paid for all, so far as to found that testi
mony of Jesus, which is the spirit of prophecy. But if
Christ no way died for aU men, how came the ministers'
commission to be so large ? They commanded men (all men
everywhere) to repent, that their sins may be blotted out ;
but how can their sins be blotted out for whom Christ was
not made sin ? They beseech men to be reconciled to God ;
but how can they be reconciled for whom Christ paid no
price at all. If Christ died for all men, the ministry is a

GENERAL REFERENCE OP THE DEATH OP CHRIST. 57
true mmistry as to all ; but if Christ died only tor the elect,
what is the ministry as to the rest ? Those exhortations
which, as to the elect, are real undissembled offers of grace,
as to the rest seem to be but golden dreams and shadows :
those invitations tqthe Gospel feast which, as to the elect,
are the cordial wooings and beseephings of God himself, as
to the rest look like the words of men speaking at random,
^nd without commission; for, alas ! why should they come
to that feast for whom nothing is prepared ? how should
they eat and drink for vyhom the Lamb vfas never slain ? —
Ibid. p. 290, 291.
If Christ died not for all men, hovv can those men re
ceive grace in vain for whom it was never procured ? or
neglect salvation, for whom it was never prepared ? How
can they fall short of eternal rest for whom it was never
purchased ? or draw back from the kingdom of Heaven,
which has never approached to them ? How can there be
life in Christ fqr those for whom he never died ? and if
not, which way does unbelief give God the lie ? How can
they re-crucify the Sqn of God, for whom He was never
crucified? or trample on that precious blood which was
never shed for them. — 2 Cor. vi. 1; Heb. ii. 3; iv. 1; x. 39;
1 John V. 10 ; Heb. vi. 6 ; x. 26, 29.
Salvation flows out from Christ actually upon all believers,
andbya glorious superfluence it would runover uponall men,
if they did but believe. As it was with the widow's little pgt
of oil, 2 Kings iv. 6, the oil did run till all the vessels were
full, and then it staid ; the widow called for another vessel,
and if she had had many more there, the oil in the pot
would have filled them all. Even so (pardon the compa
rison), it is with the immense sea of Christ's merits; it actn-
ally fills all the vessels of f^ith, and then it stays, as it
were, for want of vessels. Meanwhile, Chrjst calls and cries
out for more, and if all men would come and bring their
vessels to him, he would fill them all. Doubtless, if all
men did believe, all would see the glory of Gpd — all vfould
have the river of living ¦water flowing in them — all vi'ould
feel spiritual miracles wrought in their hearts by that
Christ who sits at the right h^d of Power, and, cpnse-
quently, all would find an experimental witness in them
selves that Christ died for a\l.—Jbid. p. 294, 2$)o,
I argue frpm the general and large expressions in
scripture topching Christ and his de&th. ' Christ died for
all,' 2 Cor. v. 15 ; ' for every man,' Heb. ii. P ; ' He gave
hhnself for thp world,' John vi. 6} ; ' for the whole world,'
1 John ii. 2. He is styled ' the Saviour of the world,

58 NOTES.
1 John iv. 14, and his salvation is called ' a common sal
vation,' Jude, ver. 3 ; ' A salvation prepared before the
face of all people,' Luke ii. 31 ; ' and flowing forth to the
ends of the earth,' Isaiah xlix. 6. The gospel of this sal
vation is to be preached ' to all nations,' Matt, xxviii. 19 ;
' and to every creature,' Mark xvi. 16; there is xap'f o-mT^/Jtoj,
' grace bringing salvation to all men,' Tit. ii. II; a door
of hope open to them, because Christ gave himself ' a
ransom for all,' 1 Tim. ii. 6. I know not what could be
more emphatical to point out the universality of redemp
tion. But you will say, all these general expressions do
but denote genera singulorum, some of all sorts, for the
world of the elect, or the all of believers.
In answer to which I shall only put two queries.
1 . If those general expressions denote only the world of
the elect, or the all of believers, why is it not said in scrip
ture, that God elected all and every man, the world, and
the whole world ? In that sense it is as true that God
elected them all, as it is that Clirist died for them all.
Why, then, doth the Holy Spirit altogether forbear those
general expressions in the matter of election, which it useth
in the matter of redemption ? Surely it imports thus much
unto us, that redemption hath a larger sphere than elec
tion, and therefore the scriptures contract election in words
of speciality only, whilst they open and dilate redemption
in emphatical generalities.
2. If those general expressions denote only the world of
the elect, or the all of believers, why doth the scripture use
such very different language in the same thing ? Some
times Christ is called ' the Saviour of the world,' and
sometimes ' the Saviour of the body;' sometimes it is said
that Christ ' died or gave himself for all,' or ' for the
world,' and sometimes it is said that he died or gave him
self ' for the church,' or ' for his sheep.' Who can ima
gine that such words of universality, and such words of
speciality, should be of the same latitude ? that one and
the same thing should be imported in both ? Moreover,
the scripture doth make a signal distinction ; when it speaks
of his giving himself, or dying for all, it says only that he
died for all, or gave himself a ransom for all But when
it speaks of giving himself for his church, it says, ' that he
sanctified himself that it might be sanctified through the
truth,' John xvii. 19, and ' that he gave himself for it, that
he might purify to himself a peculiar people,' Tit. ii. 14,
and ' that he gave himself for it, that he might sanctify
and cleanse it by the word, and present it to himself a
glorious church, without spot or wrinkle,' Eph. v. 25, 26, 27.

GENERAL REFERENCE OP THE DEATH OF CHRIST. 59
Never in all the scripture is it said that he gave himself for
all, or for the world, that he might sanctify, or cleanse it, or
make it a peculiar people, or glorions church, which yet
might have been truly said, if the all were no more than
the aU of believers, or the world than the world of the
elect; wherefore to me it seems clear from those various
expressions and the observable distinctions in them, that
the all for whom Christ died is larger than the all of be
lievers, and the world for whom Christ gave himself larger
than the world of the elect. — Ibid. Pp. 284, 285, 295-298.
London, 1673.

' Universal Redemption' (in the sense of universal atone
ment) ' is so far from being inconsistent with absolute elec
tion, and with special differencing grace, and with Christ's
special intention of calling and saving his chosen, that it is
necessarily concomitant and supposed, and they may as well
think that universal creation is inconsistent with election
and special grace. To deny the universal common grace,
is to destroy the ground-work of special grace. If this were
well understood, there would few sober divines be against
universal redemption. A clear explication must do more
here, and is more needful than argumentation.
' Would you believe that Christ died for all men, if the
Scriptures plainly speak it ? If you would, do but tell me
what words can you devise, or would you wish, more plain for
it,thanai'e there used? " Is it not enough that Christ is called
the saviour ofthe world ?" You ¦will say, But is it of the
whole world ? Yes ; it saith, " He is the propitiation for the
sins of the whole world." Will you say. But it is not for
all men in the world ? Yes ; it saith, " He died for all men
as well as for the world." But you will say, It means all
the elect ; if it said so of any non-elect, I would believe.
Yes; it speaks of those that denied the Lord that bought
them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.' — Baaa-
ter on Universal Redemption, p. 279, 287.
There is not one text of Scripture that saith Christ died
not for all, or that Christ died only for his chosen, or any
thing equivalent. — Baxter on Universal Redemption, p. 275.
Does it any where except any one man, and say Christ died
hot for him ? Doth it any where say that he died only for
his sheep 'i.—Ibid. p. 288.

60 NOTES.
Note C.
the peculiar reference of the death of christ,
Christ's death is the meritorious cause of salvation, and
respects men more or less proportionably as God's will
(which is the fontal cause thereof) doth more or less re
spect them. God wills that all men should be saved if they
believe, and proportionably Christ died for them all ; God
wills that the elect should infallibly believe and be saved,
and suitably Christ died for them in a special way; there
is a peculiarity in Christ's redemption answering to the
peculiarity of God's love. God eternally resolved with
himself that he would have a church and a peculiar people,
and ' Christ gave himself for it, that he might sanctify and
cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, that he
might present it to himself a glorious church, without spot
or wrinkle,' Eph. v. 25, 26, 27. ' He gave himself for us,
that he might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify to
himself a peculiar people, zealous of good works,' Tit. ii. 14.
If Christ had given himself thus far for all, all would have
been his church and people. You will say, unbelief is the
only obstacle. I answer, that if Christ had given himself
for all, that he might wash them as he washes the church,
and redeem them from all iniquity as he redeems his pecur
liar ones, there would have been no such thing as unbelief
left among men ; that Christ, who ' washes out every spot
and wrinkle,' would not have left unbelief; that Christ,
' who redeems from all iniquity,' would not have left un-
beUef, no, not in any one man's heart; nay, I may truly
say, he could not leave it there, because he could not lose
his end, nor shed one drop of his blood in vain. There are
among men some chosen ones, such as are ' chosen out from
among men, and chosen out pf the world,' John xv. 19,
and Christ in his death had a special eye upon these.
Hence, proportionably to their election, they are said to be
' redeemed from among men,' Rev. xiv. 4, ' and redeemed
out of every kindred and tongue, and people, and nation.
Rev. V. 9. Now, how is it possible that all men should be
thus redeemed ? Christ's death as it respects all men, re
deems them (as I may so say) from among devils, for that
it renders them capable of mercy which devils are not,
but Christ's death as it respects the elect redeems them
even ' from among men,' for that it procures faith for
them, and thereby pulls them out of the unbelieving world,
¦.ind what is peculiar redemption if this be not ? But you

PECULIAR REFERENCE OP THE DEATH OF CHRIST. Ci
wdl say these are said to be redeemed from among men,
not because Christ specially died for them above others,
but because these particularly applied his death by faith,
which others did not. I answer, that either this applica
tion by faith was merited by Christ's death or not ; if so,
then Christ redeemed them in a special manner, because by
his death he impetrated faith for them, which he did not
for all; if not, then they were redeemed from among men
by themselves and their own free will, and not by Christ
and his death, which (I tremble to think) puts the lye
upon the church triumphant, who sing the new song to the
Lamb in these words, ' Thou wast slain and hast redeemed
us to God by thy blood, out of every kindred and tongue,
and people, and nation,' Rev. v. 9. — Pdhill's Divine Will,
S^e. pp. 322-325.*
As the death of Christ is set forth in Scripture in words
of universality, so it is set out there in words of special
peculiarity : — ' Christ died for the elect,' Rom. viii. 33, 34
— ' died for the children of God scattered abroad,' John xi.
52 — ' gave himself for the Church,' Eph. v. 25 — ' gave him
self for a peculiar people,' Tit. ii. 14 — ' laid down his life
for the sheep,' John x. 15—' sanctified himself for the given
ones,' John xvii. 9-19 — 'purchased the Church with his
ewn blood,' Acts xx. 28 — ' redeemed a people from among
men,' Rev. xiv. 4 — ' is a Jesus to his own people,' Matth.
i. 21, and ' a Saviour to his own body,' Eph. v. 23. And is
there no emphasis of love ? are there no strains of free
grace? is there no import of singular respect and affection
in all these expressions? We cannot say so, without dis
piriting the Scripture. Experience itself teUs us, that all
ai'e not Christ's elect, chddren. Church, peculiar people,
sheep, given ones, body, and redeemed ones from among
men ; wherefore, When the Scripture saith that he died for
these, it imports that he died for them in a peculiar manner.
But you will say, those Scriptures speak rather of the ap
plication of Christ's death than the impetration, and that,
though the impetration be equally for all, yet the applica
tion is proper to believers only. I answer, that if these
phrases do not import impetration, 1 know not what can
import it. You will reply, that these expressions import
not nnpetration, as it is barely and nakedly in itself, but as
* In the Holy Scriptures, the exertion of divine influence, which
leads to faith, is represented as connected with the work of Christ.
' It is given' to those who are saved ' on behalf of Christ to be
lieve in his name,' Phil. i. 29 ; and ' faith' is represented as
' the gift of God,' Eph. ii. 8 ; and all his saving gifts, all his
'heavenly and spiritual blessings are in Christ,' Eph. i. 3  En.

6i NOTES.
it hath application following upon it, and this is the em
phasis of them. But if these expressions import impetra
tion with application following upon it, whether doth that
application follow upon impetration as a fruit thereof or
not ? If so, then Christ merited that application for the
elect, and, consequently died in a special manner for them ;
if not, then there is no emphasis of special love and grace
in all those expressions of His ' dying, giving Himself, sanc
tifying Himself, and laying down His life for them;' for
there was no merit in all this to procure the application of
His death unto them. But let us farther inquire, what
these elect children, church, peculiar people, sheep, given
ones, and redeemed ones from among men, were before, or
without the purchase made by Christ ? Were these elect
called and justified without Christ or not? If so, why did
he die for them ? if not, then he died for them that they
might be so called and justified. Were these children me
ritoriously begotten by Christ's blood or not ? If so, then
that blood did more for them than for others ; if not, then
they were not the seed of Christ. Was that Church an
actual Church before or without Christ's purchase ? or ¦was
it a church in his intention ? If an actual church, what
need he purchase it ? If a church in intention, then the
special design of his death was to make it an actual church.
Was that peculiar people such without the merit of Christ's
death or not ? If so, why did he give himself for it ? if not.
then he gave himself for it that it might be such. Were
those sheep brought into Christ's fold without his death or
not ? If so, why did he lay down his life for them ? if not,
he laid it down to bring them thither. Were these given
ones actually sanctified without the virtue of Christ's sacri
fice or not f If so, then why did he sanctify himself for
them ? if not, then he sanctified himself for them that they
might be sanctified. Were those redeemed from among
men redeemed by Christ or not ? If so, then he redeemed
them in a special manner ; if not, then they are the re
deemed ones of their own free will. But let the texts them
selves breathe forth their own native strains of love and
grace. He so died for the elect as ' to effectually call and
actually justify them,' Rom. viii. 30-33 — he so died for his
children as to ' gather them together into one,' one faith
on earth and one fruition in heaven, John xi. 52 — he so
gave himself for the church as to make it a glorious church,
without spot or blemish, Eph. v. 25-27 — he so gave himself
for his people as ' to make them his peculiar ones,' Tit. ii.
14 — he so laid down his life for his sheep as ' to bring them
into his fold, and make them hear his voice,' John x. 16, 16

REFERENCE OF THK DEATH OF CHRIST. 63
—he so sanctified himself for the given' ones as ' to sanctify
them through the truth,' John xvii. 19 — he so redeemed
his chosen ones from among men as ' to make them first
fruits to God and the Lamb,' Rev. xiv. 4. In all these
special scriptures, it evidently appears that Christ, in his
death, had a special respect to his elect. Wherefore, I will
shut up all with that of an ancient : ' Etsi Christus pro
omnibus mortuus est, pro nobis tamen specialiter passus est,
quia pro ecclesia passus est.' — Ibid. p. 342-346.
' Christ died with a special intention of bringing infalli
bly, immutably, and insuperably, certain chosen persons to
saving faith, justification, and salvation. — Baxter on Uni^
versal Redemption, p. 481.

Note D.
bishop davenant and archbishop usher on the reference of
the death of christ.
Dr Balcanquhal, in a letter to Sir D. Carleton, from the
Synod of Dort, says : ' The question among us is, whether
the words of the Scripture, which are likewise the words of
our Confession (Christus oblatus ant mortuus est pro toto
humane genere, sen pro peccatis totius mundi,) be to be
understood of all particular men, or only of the elect, who
consist of all sorts of men. Dr Davenant and Dr Ward are
of Martin of Bremen's mind, that it is to be understood of
all particular men. The other three take the other expo
sition. Both sides believe they are right, and, therefore,
cannot yield unto one another with a safe conscience.' In
another letter he ¦writes : ' The paper sent to your Lordship
contains the true state of the difference which will be con
cerning these propositions : — Christ offered himself for the
sins of the whole world ; the offering of Christ made on the
Cross is a perfect redemption, propitiation, and satisfaction
for all the sins of the whole world, as well original as actual.
The controversy is, whether by the whole world may be
understood the world of the elect, or the world of all men
particularly; where the ambiguity is about these three
(1), whether that distinction is to be kept. He died for all,
according to the sufficiency or greatness of the price, not
according to the propriety of redemption. Some think that
this is not to be retained, because they reckon he may be
said then sufficiently to die for devils. (2), The controversy
is about this proposition' — Christ gave himself for all, or

64 NOTES.
paid the price of redemption for all. Some think the sense
is, He paid a price which is sufficient fdr all, but did not
actually pay that price unless for redeeming the elect.
Others reckon this exposition unfit, because they think the
commentary destrovs the very words; for by that it must
follow that Christ had a price to pay down, which, being
paid, might have been sufficient for redeeming all; but that
Christ did not actually pay that price, or was made a pro
pitiation for the sins of the whole world. (3) The contro
versy is about these words, " The whole world," whether
we ought to Understand every individual man, or all the
elect only, or, if no explication be to be given but the words
of the Confession, to be kept without any exposition.'
Dr Davenant himself, in his letter from the Synod of
Dort, says : ' We undoubtedly hold these propositions, in
which we had the consent of the foreign divines. (1) From
the special love and intention of God the Father and of
Christ himself, Christ died for the elect, that he might
really obtain and infallibly confer on them remission of
sins and eternal salvation (2) From the same love, through
and for the merit and intercession of Christ, are given, to
the same elect, faith, perseverance, eternal life,' &c. Fur
ther, he asserts : ' We hold these two ensuing propositions
approved by the foreign divines — (1) God, pitying fallen
mankind, sent his Son, who gave himself a price of redemp
tion for the sins of the whole world ; which proposition is
equivalent to the express article of the Church of England,
set forth by authority, viz. " The oblation or offering once
made is a perfect redemption and satisfaction for all the
sins of the whole world, as ¦well original as actual," Art.
xxxi. (2) In this merit of Christ's death is founded the
universal gospel promise, according to which all believing
in Christ may really obtain remission of sins and eternal
life. According to these last two propositions, ive hold,
" That our blessed Saviour, by God's appointment, did offer
up himself to the blessed Trinity for the redemption of
mankind; and, by this oblation once made, did found,
confirm, and ratify the evangelical covenant, which may
and ought to be preached seriously to all mankind, without
exception." (3) In the Church, according to the promise
of the Gospel, salvation is offered to all (that is, the admi
nistration of His grace, which is sufficient to convince all
impenitent sinners and unbelievers that it is by their own
voluntary fault, through the neglect and contempt of the
Gospel, they perish, and lose the benefit offered) ; and,
according to this, we hold, that there are sundry initial
preparations, tending to conversion, merited by Christ, and

REFERENCE OF THE DEATH OF CHRIST. 65
dispensed in the preaching of the Gospel, and wrought by
the Holy Ghost on the hearts of many that never attain to
true regeneration or justification, such as a knowledge of
the doctrine of faith, a dogmatical or historical faith, a
sense of sin, serious thoughts about salvation, hope of par
don; an evident example whereof may be seen in them
who sin against the Holy Ghost, Heb. vi. and x. chaps.,
and, consequently, we hold that the whole merit of Christ
is not confined to the elect only.'
' The all-sufficient satisfaction of Christ made for the sins
of the whole world, in its true intent and extent, is lubricus
locus to be handled, and hath troubled, and doth now much
trouble, the Church. This question hath been moved sub
iisdem ierminis quibus nunc, and hath received contrary
resolutions. The reason is, that, in the two extremities of
opinions held in this matter, there is somewhat true and
somewhat false. (I) The one extremity extends the bene
fit of Christ's satisfaction too far, as if hereby God, for his
part, were actually reconciled to all mankind, and did really
discharge every man from all his sins ; and that the reason
why men do not reap the fruit of this benefit is, the want
of that faith whereby they ought to have believed that God
in this sort did love them. Whence it would follow, that
God should forgive a man his sins and justify him before he
believed ; whereas the elect themselves, before their effec
tual vocation, are said to be " without Christ and without
hope, and to be utter strangers from the covenants of pro
mise," Eph. ii. 12. (2) The other extremity contracts the
riches of Christ's satisfaction into too narrow a room, as if
none had way kind of interest therein but such as ¦were
elected before the foundation of the world ; howsoever, by
the Gospel, everj' one be charged to receive the same ;
whereby it would follow, that a man should be bound in
conscience to believe that which is untrue, and charged to
take that with which he has nothing to do. Both these
extremities, then, drawing with them unavoidable absur
dities, the word of God (by hearing whereof faith is begot
ten, Eph. i. 13) must be sought unto by a middle course,
to avoid these extremities. For finding out this middle
course we must, in the matter of our redemption, carefully
put a distinction betwixt the satisfection of Christ abso
lutely considered, and the application thereof to every one
in particular. The former was done once for all ; the other
is still in doing. The former brings with it sufficiency abun
dant to discharge the whole debt ; the other adds to it effi
cacy. The satisfaction of Christ onlv makes the sins of

66 NOTES.
mankind fit for pardon. The particular application makes
the sins of those to whom that mercy is vouchsafed to be
actually pardoned.' — ' The Lamb of God offering himself a
sacrifice for the sins of the whole world, intended, by
giving sufficient satisfaction to God's justice, to make the
nature of man, which he assumed, a fit subject for mercy,
and to prepare a medicine for the sins of the whole world,
which should be denied to none that intended to take the
benefit of it: howsoever, he intended not by applying this
all-sufficient remedy unto every person in particular, to
make it effectual to the salvation of all, or to procure there
by actual pardon for the sins of the whole world; so, in one
respect, he may be said to have died for all, and, in another
respect, not to have died for all : yet so, as in respect of his
mercy, he may be counted a kind of universal cause of the
restoring our nature, as Adam was of the depraving of it;
for, as far as I can discern, Thomas Acquinas rightly hits the
nail on the head, determining the point in this manner: —
' Jlors Christi est quasi quaedam universalis causa salutis;
sicut peccatum primi hominis fuit quasi universalis causa
damnationis. Opottet autem universalem causam applicari
ad unumquemque specialiter, ut effectum universalis causae
participet. Effectus igitur peccati primi parentis pervenit
ad unumquemque per carnis originem : effectus autem mor
tis Christi pertingit ad unumquemque per spiritualem re-
generationem per quam Christo, homo quodammodo con-
jungitur et incorporatur.' — Thorn. Acq. contra Gent. Lib.
LV. — Usher's Judgment ofthe Ewtent of Christ's Death. 1617.
' The main error ofthe Arminians, and of the patrons of
universal grace, is this : — That God offereth unto every
man those means which are necessary to salvation, both
sufficiently and effectually, and that it resteth on the free
will of every one to receive or reject the same : for the
proof thereof, they allege, as their predecessors, the Semi-
pelagians, did before them, that received axiom, of Christ's
dying for all men, which, being rightly understood, makes
nothing for their purpose. Some of their opposites, subject
to oversights as well as others, more forward herein than
circumspect, have answered this objection, not by expound
ing, as was fit, but by fiat denying that famous axiom, —
affirming peremptorily, that Christ died only for the elect,
and for others nullo modo ; whereby they gave the adverse
party advantage to draw them into this extreme absurdity,
— that seeing Christ in no wise died for any but for the
elect, and all men are bound to believe that Christ died for
themselves — and that upon the pain of damnation for the
contrary infidelity — therefore all men were bound to be-

REFERENCE OF THE DEATH OF CHKIST. 67
Heve that they themselves were elected, though in truth
the matter were nothing so : —
Non tali auxilio n€c defensoribus istis
Tempus eget.
Neither is their hope, that the Arminians ¦will be drawn to
acknowledge the error of their position, as long as they are
persuaded the contrary opinion cannot be maintained, with
out admitting that an untruth must be believed even by
the commandment of Him that is God of truth, and by the
direction of that word which is the word of truth. That
Christ died for his apostles, Luke xxii. 19 ; for his friends,
John XV. 13; for his church, Eph. v. 25, — may make, per-
adventure, against those who make all men to have a share
alike in the death of our Saviour : but I profess myself to
hold fully with him who said, " Etsi Christus pro omnibus
mortuus est, tamen speciaUter pro nobis passus est, quia
pro ecclesia passus est." As, in one respect, Christ may be
said to have died for aU, so, in another respect, he may be
truly said not to have died for all ; and my belief is, that
the principal end of the Lord's death was, " that he might
gather together into one the children of God scattered abroad,"
Johnii.52; and that "fortheirsakes"hedidspecially "sancti
fy himself, that they also might be sanctified through the
truth," John xvii. 19. And therefore it may be well con
cluded that Christ, in a special manner, died for these ; but
to infer from hence, that, in no manner of respect, he died
for any others, is but a very weak collection. — By Christ's
satisfaction to his Father, the impediment to man's sal
vation, on God's part, is taken away ; so that, if it were
not for the impediment on man's part, for the having
whereof we can blame none but ourselves, and in the
not removing of which we cannot say God hath done us
any wrong — ^there was no let, but all men might be saved;
and if it pleased God to extend mercy to all — as he keeps
his freedom therein, in ha^ving compassion "on whom he will
have compassion," and leaving others in blindness and na
tural hardness of heart — ^yet the worth of Christ's satisfaction
is so great, that his justice herein should be no loser. —
The end of the satisfaction of God's justice is to make way
for God's free liberty in shewing mercy, — that so mercy and
justice meeting and embracing one another, God may be
just, and the justifier of him that believeth on Jesus.' —
Usher's Answer to some exceptions taken against his Letter on
the true Intent and Extent of Christ's Death.

68

Note E.
notes, chiefly historical, on the question respecting thk
extent of the reference of the death of christ.
(From the Vnited Secession Mwjuzine, June liil.)
There are three great questions respecting what has been
termed the extent of the death of Christ, distinct from each
other, all of them of deep interest, but by no means of equal
importance. Some hold that Christ died for all men, so as
to secure their salvation; — this is a question between the
Universalists and the great body of Christians, whether
Calvinists or Arminians. Some hold that he died for aU
men, so as to procure for them easier terms of acceptance, and
sufficient divine aid to enable them to avail themselves of these
terms ; — this is a question between Arminians and Calvin
ists. Some hold that not only did Christ die with the in
tention of saving the elect, but that he died for all men,
so as to lay a foundation for unlimited calls and invitations to
mankind to accept salvation in the belief of the gospel ; or
so as to remove all the obstacles in the way of man's salvation,
except those which arise out of his indisposition to receive it ;
— this is a question among Calvinists. It is the last ques
tion which is to come under the consideration of the Synod
at its next meeting.
Till the introduction of the Pelagian heresy, there seems
to have been no controversy on the extent of Christ's death.
The earlier fathers, when speaking of the ' decease accom
plished by him,' describe it as undertaken and endured for
the redemption of the human race ; while they agree that
it is actually beneficial to those only who believe. Pela-
gius's grand error was, ' that God willed the salvation of all
men equally by the death of Christ ; and that he did not,
in consequence of a special act of predestination, endow
certain persons with that persevering faith by which the
saving effects of the death of Christ are derived to the in
dividual.' Augustine maintained the negative ; but there
is no evidence that he ever opposed the proposition, ' Christ
died for all men,' or held that he died for the predestinate
alone. The Presbyter Lucidus seems to have been the first who
asserted in express terms that Christ died not for all man
kind. It is plain from a passage in Remigius of Rheims
( on Hebrews ii. 9), who appears to have held the views of
Lucidus — that among the christian teachers of that age a

REFERENCE OF THE DEATH OF CHRIST. 69
variety of opinion prevailed; ' Some doctors understand this
in a hmited sense, that it means for all for whom he tasted it,
— that is for the elect who are predestinated to eternal life.
But others understand it generally, that he tasted death for
all, believers and unbelievers, — saying, he died indeed for
all, though all will not be saved.' Godeschalcus, a monk,
following in the tract of Lucidus, ' to bring himself into
notice' as an ancient ecclesiastical historian, rather uncha
ritably alleges, — taught, among other things, ' That our
Lord Jesus was not crucified and put to death for the re
demption of the whole world, but only of those who are
saved, i. e. the predestinated.' This sentiment was con
demned by synods which met at Mentz and Rheims, the
last of which held, ' That as no man is, was, or will be,
whose nature was not assumed by Christ Jesus, so no man
is, was, or will be, for whom he did not suffer, although all
are not redeemed,' i. e. saved, ' by the mystery of his pas
sion.' This mode of speaking was, however, disapproved
by the church of Lyons^ who very wisely say, that there
is something mysterious in this matter, that nothing should
be rashly defined, and that neither mode of representing the
death of Christ should make a man be accounted a heretic,
' unless he become such through his contentiousness.' The
question was taken up by the schoolmen, and they held,
' that Christ died for all sufficiently — for the predestinated
effectually — ^pro omnibus sufficienter, pro electis effica-
citer/ The earlier reformers adopted general language on the
subject. They held ' that the redemption procured by the
death of Christ was proposed and offered to all, but appre
hended by, and applied to, only those who believe.' Me-
lancthon says in his Loci Communes, ' On the promises of
the Gospel,' ' Reconciliation is offered and promised to all
mankind,' and quotes John iii. 16. Calvin, when comment
ing on this passage says, ' he had put an universal mark
both that he might invite all men promiscuously to the
participation of life, and that he might leave the unbeliev
ing without excuse.' ' He shows himself to be propitious
to the whole world, since he calls all without exception to
believe in Christ.' On Romans v. 18, he says, ' He makes
grace common to all, because it is set before all, not because
it is actually extended to all,— for although Christ suffered
for the sins Of the whole world, and thi-ough the goodness
of God is pffered to all indifferently, yet all do not appre
hend him.' Buliinger, in his 28th sermon^ on Revelations
y. says, ' The Lord died for all; but all are not partakers
of redemption, through their own fault.' Eanchius, one of

70 NOTES.
the highest of Predestinarians, says, ' It is not false that
Christ died for all men as it regards his conditional willj
that is, if they are willing to become partakers of his death
through faith ; for the death of Christ is set before all in
the Gospel, and no one is excluded from it but he who ex
cludes himself.' In the opinion of Davenant, who was
deeply conversant in that kind of literature, — the early
reformers, — ' so explained the doctrine of election and re
probation, as that they might not infringe the universality
of the redemption accomplished by the death of Christ.'
The Arminian controversy not only raised the old Pela
gian question, but also the question between Godeschalcus
and his opponents. The synod of Dort, which determined
the first question, left the other in a great measure an open
one. The Gomarists were bent on its being decided, but
the English deputies had sufficient influence to prevent
this. John Cameron, whose extensive and accurate learn
ing and critical acumen do honour to his country and age,
taught ' that while the elect are, by an effectual and ir
revocable calling, saved through the death of Christ, Christ
died for all men with the intention that they may be invit
ed and called to repentance, — and that, when so invited
and called, it arises from themselves alone, and the hard
ness of their heart repelling the means of salvation, that
they are not saved.' This sentiment was strongly support
ed by Amyraut,'* and opposed by Rivet, Spanheim, and Des
Marets. Amyraut defended himself with much ability,
both from the press and before synods, and was ultimately
honourably acquitted of heresy. His views are supported
' Of Amyraut's doctrine respecting the death of Christ, Mo-
sbeim has remarked, ' It is the opinion of many, that this doc
trine does not differ from that maintained at Dort, except as Her-
cules's naked club differed from the same, when painted and adorn
ed with ribbons, that is, but slightly. But I doubt whether such
persons have duly considered the principles from which it is
derived, and the consequences to which it leads. After considering
and reconsidering it, it appears to me to be Arminianism, or, if you
please, Pelagianism, artificially dressed up and veiled in ambiguous
terras ; and in this opinion 1 feel myself greatly confirmed, when
I look at the more recent disciples of Amyraut, who express their
views more clearly and boldly than their master.' Institut. of Ece.
Hist. Book IV. Cent. xvii. Sect. II  Part II. § 14. Soame's
Edition of Murdoch's Translatibn, vol. IV. p. 232. Lond. 184).
The prejudices ofthe Lutheran divine against the Reformed Church
have here got the better of the candour and the perspicacity of
the historian. Schlegel, his learned and judicious German trans
lator (for the Institutes were written in Latin), expresses much

REFERENCE OP THE DEATH OF CHRIST. 71
by Daille, Mestrezat, Claude, and other distinguished
French Protestant divines. They became the common
doctrine of most of the reformed churches, including the
church of England.*
At present, this doctrine, with modffication, is held by
the great body of evangelical Protestants on the continent
of Europe — ofthe Congregationalist and Baptist churches in
this country — of the Congregational churches of New Eng
land — and of both the great divisions of the Presbyterian
church in America ; for it is quite a mistake to suppose,
that the doctrine of a limited or genei-al attonement, as un
derstood among Calvinists, is one of the points of difference
between these two bodies.
The restricted view of the reference ofthe death of Christ
is very ably defended in 'Dr Owen's Salus Electorum-,
Sanguis Jesu, or the Death of Death in the Death of Christ,'
and in Witsius' Oeconomia Faderum ; and the other view
has seldom been represented with greater judgment than in
Davenant's dissertation, ' De Morte Christi^ to which we
have been indebted for a number of the details given above ;
and in Polhdl's ' Divine Will Considered in its Eternal De
crees and Holy Execution of them,' — a book recommended
by Dr Lazcirus Seaman, a member of the Westminster As
sembly, — and by Dr Owen, the most accomplished leader
of the opposite party ; by the one unqualifiedly, — by the
other with qualification, but still with great cordiality. Dr
Owen's words well deserve to be quoted : — ' The modesty
wherewith he dissents from others, or opposes their senti
ments without severe reflections on persons or opinions, is
another thing that deserves both commendation and imi
tation, and the consideration of it gives me the confidence,
in these few lines, to express my own dissent from some of
his apprehensions, especially about the object and extent of
redemption. Had I seen the discourse before it was wholly
regret that Dr Mosheim neither here nor in his Lectures, more
clearly shewed how a disguised Pelagianism lies concealed under
the scheme of the hypothetical Universalists j and he refers to
his Notes on Cent. V. Part II. chap. v. § 23, and 26, to shew
that this scheme of Amyraut was not in reality Pelagianism, nor
even Semi-pelagianism. " — Mubdock.
' ' It seems to be the established opinion of his Lordship ( the
Bishop of Lincoln, Tomlyn), ' that the evangelical clergy, espe
cially such of them as believe the doctrine of personal election,
hold what is called particular redemption ; whereas, in fact, very
few of them adopt it.' — Scott's Remarks on the Refutation of
Calvinism.

72 NOTES.
printed, I should have communicated my thoughts unto
him on that subject, and some few other passages in it ; but
where there is an agreement in the substance and design of
any doctrine, as there is between my judgment and what
is here solidly declared, it is our duty to bear with each
other in things circumstantial, or different explanations of
the same truth, when there is no incursions made upon the
main principles we own.' A very clear and candid account
of the views of the two sides of the question, as a question
among Calvinists, is given by Mr Fuller, in his ' Conversa
tion between Peter, James, and John, on Particular Re
demption.' The question which, so far as this subject is concerned,
will come before the Synod for determination is this : — Is
the doctrine of such a generality of reference of the death
of Christ, as is maintained by some among us, consistent
with the holy scriptures, as their meaning is exhibited in
our symbolical books ? It may be of use then to bring be
fore the mind, in one view, what is taught on this subject
in these books. Our symbolical books, as to doctrine,
are the Westminster Confession of Faith, and the Cate
chisms Larger and Shorter ; and the following are the pas
sages in these which bear most directly on the question :
— ' They who are elected, being fallen in Adam, are re
deemed by Christ, are effectually called unto faith in Christ,
by his Spirit working in due season, are justified, adopted,
sanctified, and kept by his power through faith unto salva
tion. Neither are any other redeemed by Christ, effectually
called, justified, adopted, sanctified, and saved, but the elect
only.' Confess, iii. 6. ' God freely offereth unto sinners
life and salvation by Jesus Christ, requiring of them faith
in him that they may be saved, and promising to give unto
all those that are ordained unto life his Holy Spirit, to
make them willing and able to believe.' lb. vii. 3. ' The
Lord Jesus, by his perfect obedience and sacrifice of him
self, which he through the eteiTial Spirit once offered up
unto God, hath fully satisfied the justice of his Father ;
and purchased not only reconciliation, but an everlasting
inheritance in the kingdom of heaven for all those whom
the Father hath given to him.' lb. viii. 6. ' To all those
for whom Christ hath purchased redemption, he doth cer
tainly and effectually apply and communicate the same,"
&e. lb. viii. 8. ' Christ, by his obedience and death, did
fully discharge the debt of all those that are thus justified,
and did make a proper, real, and full satisfaction to his Fa
ther's justice in their behalf.' lb. xi. 3. ' God did from all
eternity decree to justify all the elect, and Christ did in the

REPERENCB OP THE DEATH OP CHRIST. t^
fulness of time die for their sins, and rise again for their
justffication.' lb. xi. 4. ' In the second covenant God freely
provideth and offereth to sinners a mediator, and life and
salvation by him, and requiring faith as the condition to in
terest them in him, promiseth and giveth his Holy Spirit to
all his elect, to work in them that faith,' &c. Larg. Cat.
xxxii. ' Redemption is certainly applied, and effectually
communicated to all those for whom Christ purchased it/
lb. lix. ' God having out of his mere good pleasure elected
some to everlasting life, did enter into a covenant of grace
to deliver them out of the estate of sin and misery, and to
bring them into a state of salvation by a Redeemer.'
Shorter Cat. xx.
Some of our readers, we have no doubt, will be surprised
to learn, that this is all, or nearly all, in our symbolical
books, bearing directly on the doctrine called in question.
The doctrine of particular election, and the doctrine of par
ticular salvation, are very strongly asserted ; but the doc
trine of a certain generality of reference in the death of
Christ, or the atonement made by it, is certainly not ex
plicitly condemned, unless the words redeemed and redemp
tion be, in one or two places, used as synonymous with ex
piation or atonement. Redemption is usually, in the writ
ings of the compilers of the Westminster Assembly, equi
valent not to the payment of a price, but to the deliverance
obtained through the payment of a price. This must be obvi
ous to every person who reads even the above quotations.
In the sixth section of the third chapter of the Confession, —
to be redeemed by Christ, if used in its ordinary sense, as
defined by Mr Brown in his Brief Explication of the Shorter
Catechism, Q. 29, to be ' deliverance from sin and misery,
and a possession of holiness and happiness for evermore,'*
— is just to be saved by Christ, — and the clauses which
' ' Chap. iii. § 6, and chap, viii. § 8, of the Westminster Con-
fessioH) which speak against universal redemption, I understand
not of all redemption, and particularly not of the mere bearing of
the punishment of man's sins, and satisfying God's justice, but of
that special redemption proper to the elect, which was accom
panied with an intention of actual application of the saving bene
fits in time.' ' I hope it was never the mind of the Assembly to
have shut out such men as Bishop Usher, Davenant, Hall, Dr
Preston, Dr Staughton, Mr William Fenner, Dr Ward, and
many more excellent English divines as ever this church enjoyedj
who were all for general redemption, though not for an equal ge
neral redemption ; to say nothing of the divines of France, —
Brcmej and Beroline, and other foreigners that go this way.'^^
Baxter.

74 NOTES.
follow are the items of that salvation. Perhaps some light
may be thrown on the sense of the term by looking at a
paragraph in the canons of the Synod of Dort, from which
the section of the Confession seems to have been bor
rowed : — ' It was the will of God that Christ, by the blood
of the cross, whereby he confirmed the new covenant,
should effectually redeem out of every people, tribe, na
tion, and language, all those, and those only, who were
from eternity chosen to salvation, and given to him by
the Father ; that he should confer upon them faith, which,
together with all the other saving gifts of the Holy Spirit,
he purchased for them by his death — should purge them
from all sin, both original and actual, whether committed
before or after believing, and having faithfully preserved
them even to the end, should at last bring them, free from
every spot and blemish, to the enjoyment of glory in his
own presence for ever.' In this connexion, ' redeemed' is
represented as equivalent to ' delivered and saved from sin
and destruction, through the death of Christ.' — Canons of
the Synod of Dort, chap. ii. ' Of the death of Christ, and
the redemption of men thereby.'* The whole chapter is so
excellent, that we give the greater part of it in a note.+
That it was the intention of the Westminster Assembly, in
* It is strange how generally it has passed current that the
Synod of Dort condemned the doctrine of universal redemption,
in the sense of universal atonement. This is one of the mistakes
and misrepresentations arising from the 'falsifications' of Daniel
Tilenus, an Arminian divine. He gives as the substance of the
chapter above referred to, the following proposition :: — ' That
Jesus Christ hath not suffered death but for the elect only, hav
ing neither had any intent nor commandment from the Father
to make satisfaction for the sins of the whole world.' Peter
Heylin, in his Quinquarticular history, adopts Tilenus' forgeries ;
and we find Bishop Tomlin, and other soi-disans orthodox di
vines of the English Church, blindly following their dishonest
leaders, and circulating base coin which they would not have
forged, but the spuriousness of which they ought to have been
aware of; as to discover it, nothing more was necessary than to
read the ' Acta et Canones ' themselves.
t ' The death of the Son of God is the only and most perfect
sacrifice and satisfaction for sin; — is of infinite worth and value,
abundantly sufficient to expiate the sins of the whole world.
' The promise of the gospel is, that whosoever believeth in
Christ crucified shall not perish, but have everlasting life. This
promise, together with the command to repent and believe, ought
to be declared and published to all nations and to all persons pro
miscuously, and without distinction, to whom God of his good
pleasure sends the gospel.

REFERENCE OF THE DEATH OF CHRIST. 75
a book ultimately intended, it would appear, to be a term
of ministerial communion, to condemn the doctrine, that
Christ, in any sense, died for all men, is certainly very un
likely, as they must have known that this would have ex
cluded from the ministry many of the best Christians and
theologians who adorned that and the preceding age ; Abp.
Usher, Bps. Davenant, Carleton, and Hall, Fenner, Preston,
Baxter, Corbet, Howe, &c. &c. Dr Twisse, their learned
prolocutor, declares, ' that every man who hears the gospel
(without distinction between elect and reprobate), is bound
to believe that Christ died for him ; and, as Baxter says,
asserts twenty times over, ' That Christ died to purchase
pardon for all, if they will believe ;' and we have seen that
Dr Lazarus Seaman, a member of Assembly, warmly re
commends a treatise, in which is embodied a very able de
fence of the thesis, ' that Christ died for all men.'
Besides our Confession and Catechisms, there are certain
pubUc^documents, such as the Testimonies which have been
emitted at different times, — The Act concerning the Doc
trine of Grace, — The Act concerning Arminian Errors,- —
and especially the Summary of Principles, and the Testi
mony sanctioned by the United Associate Synod, — which
have always been highly regarded among us, and it may be
desirable to have the passages in these beariug on the pre
sent question brought before the mind. The following are
some of the most important : — ' The eternal Son of God,
mamfest in the flesh, did, in our nature, as the second Adam,
the public head and representative of elect sinners, and the
undertaking surety for them, yield a perfect obedience to
the law as a covenant of works, in the room and stead of
elect sinners ; and in their room and stead alone he bore the
whole punishment threatened in the law, and incurred by
the breach of it ; and in his sufferings unto death he sub
stituted himself in the room of sinners, and endured that
curse, bare that wrath, and died that death which is the
wages and just desert of every sin, and which the sinner
himself should have undergone ; and the sufferings of the
Son of God in our nature was a true, proper, and expiatory
sacrifice, and a proper, real, and complete satisfaction unto
' And whereas many who are called by the gospel do not repent
nor believe in Christ, but perish in their unbelief, that is not ow
ing to any defect or insufficiency in the sacrifice offered by Christ
on the cross, but is wholly to be imputed to themselves.'
' A man that holds to the moderation of the Synod of Dort
need not say that Christ did not die, or satisfy for all men, nor
trouble himself with presumptuous determinations about many
mysteries in the decrees of God.' — Baxter.

76 NOTES.
the justice of God for sin.' — Act. Dec and Test. chap. iii.
sect. i. par. 9. 'God the Father, moved by nothing but his
free love to mankind lost, hath made a deed of gift and
grant of his Son Jesus Christ unto mankind in the word ;
that whosoever of them all shall receive this gift, by a true
and lively faith, shall not perish, but have everlasting life.
Or which is the same thing, there is a revelation of the di-
¦vine will in the word, affording a warrant to offer Christ
unto all mankind without exception, and a warrant to all
freely to receive him, however great sinners they are, or
have been ; and this gift is made to mankind only, and not
to fallen angels.' — Act concerning the Doctrine of Grace,
sect. ii. art. 1. ' Our Lord Jesus Christ hath redeemed
none others by his death but the elect only ; because for
them only he was made under the law, made sin, and made
a curse ; being substituted only in their law, room, and stead,
and having only their iniquities laid upon him, or imputed
to him ; so that he did bear only their sins, — for them only
he laid down his life and was crucified, — for their sins only
he made satisfaction to divine justice, — for them only he
fulfilled all righteousness, — in their stead only was his obe
dience and satisfaction accepted, — and for them only he
purchased redemption, with all the other benefits of the
covenant of grace. There is but one special redemption by
the death of Christ for all the objects thereof; as he died in
one and the same respect for all those for whom he in any
respect died ; or he died out of the greatest special love for
all in whose room he laid down his life, with an intention
of having them all effectually redeemed and saved unto the
glory of his grace.' — Act concerning Arminian Errors, § §
ii. iii. ' There is a general, free, and unlimited offer of
Christ, and salvation through him, by the gospel, unto sin
ners of mankind as such, upon the foundation of the intrin
sic sufficiency of the death of Christ, his relation of a kins
man Redeemer to mankind sinners, as such, and the pro
mise of eternal life through him to mankind-sinners, as
such, in the gospel, with an interposal of divine authority
in the gospel call, immediately requiring all the hearers
thereof to receive and rest upon Christ alone for salvation,
as he is freely offered to them in the gospel ; and all the
hearers of the gospel are thus privileged, with an equal,
full, and immediate warrant, to make a particular applica
tion of Christ, with all his redemption and salvation, seve
rally unto themselves, by a ti-ue and lively faith.' — lb. § vii.
' We assert and declare that Christ died for all the elect,
and for them only. The death of Christ, possessing infinite
merit, is indeed in itself sufficient for the redemption of all

REFERENCE OF THE DEATH OF CHRIST. 77
mankind ; but in respect of the Father's designation, and
his own intention, he died only for the elect.' ' We con
demn the following error, that Christ died in some sense
for all men.' — ]S^arrative and Testimony enacted by the Gen.
Ass. Synod, 1804. Test. chap. x. ' The gospel revelation is
directed to mankind sinners, as such, and the call to believe
it is addressed to all that hear it, without exception. By
this revelation Christ, with all the blessings of his purchase,
is brought near to sinners as a free gift, to be received by
faith. The gospel is the great means which God is pleased
to bless for working faith in his own elect ; and thereby
bringing them to the possession and enjoyment of the pro
mised solvation ; but they have no other ground of faith,
and no hotter warrant to receive Christ and salvation than
others who remain in unbelief, and perish in sin.' — lb.
chap. xi. ' It is a deviation from truth to hold that al
though aU men shall not be saved, yet Christ, according to
the purpose pf God and his own intention, died for all men,
actually expiating the guilt even of those who eventually
perish.' — Testimony ofthe United Associate Synod ofthe Se
cession Church, Part II. chap. ii. § vii. 51 2. ' If, by placing
us in a salvable state, were meant that the anger of God is
appeased, by a true and complete satisfaction to justice, so
that, without reference to deprees which regulate intention
and determine the effect, salvation is offered to all men, —
then, doubtless, it is true that, so far as the requisitions of
the law and justice are concerned, all obstructions are re
moved, and every one may be called on as welcome, and
warranted to claim salvation, on the ground of Christ's
finished work.' — lb. IT 3. ' The Son of God having, as the
surety of his people, been made under the law, perfectly
obeyed its precepts, and endured its curse. The dignity of
his person gave such value to his work, that their iniquities
were expiated, and eternal life obtained for them.' — Sum
mary of Principles, ' Of Redemption.' ' The salvation ob
tained by the Son of God is presented as the gift of Heaven
to all who hear the gospel.' — lb. ' Of the Application of
Redemption.' These extracts have not the same weight as those taken
from the Confession and Catechisms; but they are well
worthy of being carefully considered. It is obvious that
there is considerable diversity in these statements, and it
would, perhaps, not be easy completely to reconcile them
with each other, or with some of the statements in the sym-
^bolical books. In them, we believe, will be found state
ments as strong as either the friends of an exclusively parr
tieular, or of a general reference of the atonement, would

78 NOTES.
wish to make. It is evident that, during the whole course
of its history, the Secession church has been anxious to
maintain with equal firmness the doctrine of personal elec
tion and particular salvation, and the doctrine of the un
limited calls and invitations of the gospel ; and that their
great object has been to state the doctrine with respect to
the reference of the death of Christ, in a manner which,
while agreeable to the word of God, seems best to harmonize
with both these doctrines. The controversy now pending,
like most on the same subject, respects much less a princi
ple than the manner of stating it, so as to make it | agree,'
as Baxter says, ' with the rest of our theology.' Here
considerable latitude seems to be required, — and probably
may be given, without materially endangering either of the
great doctrines referred to.'* There can be no doubt that
' Few things have done more injury in the christian church
than the attempt to secure absolute uniformity of sentiment and
language, on subjects like that under consideration. Even when
it seems to succeed, it is to be feared the result is gained either by
precluding inquiry, or doing violence to conviction; and little
advantage, surely, can the church gain by being ' filled with no
minally orthodox,' or by having kept up ' a unity of exoteric faith
in the bond of ignorance, fear, and hypocrisy.' Perfect resem
blance in the spiritual stones of which the house of God is to be
built, under the new economy, is not to be expected; 'rather,' as
Milton says, ' the perfection consists in this, that out of many
moderate varieties and brotherly dissimilitudes that are not vastly
disproportional, arises the goodly and the graceful symmetry that
commends the whole pile and structure.' It is more than two
hundred years since the following weighty sentences were uttered,
but the warning they contain is as seasonable as ever  ' The
presumptuous imposing of the senses of men upon the ¦word of God,
the special senses of men upon the general words of God, and lay
ing them upon men's consciences together under the equal penalty ;
the vain conceit that we can speak of the things of God better than
in the words of God ; the deifying our own interpretations, and
tyrannous enforcing them upon others ; the restraining the word
of God from that latitude and generality, and the understandings
of men from that liberty in which Christ and his apostles left them,
is, and hath been, the only fountain of all the schisms of the church,
and that which makes them immortal, the common incendiary of
Christendom, and that which tears in pieces not the coat, but the
bowels and members of Christ.' — Ridente Turca nee dolente Judtno."
' Proud opinionators have striven partly about unrevealed or un
necessary things, but chiefly about mere ambiguous words and
arbitrary human notions ; and multitudes condemn and revile each
other, while they mean the same thing, and do not know it. One
writeth a learned book, and another confuteth such an adversary ;
* ChillinEworth.

REFERENCE OF THE DEATH OF CHRIST. 79
there is danger in running to extremes on both sides.
' Inattention on the part of many to the glorious sufficiency
of the atonement, has led to the wildest Antinomianism ;
while overlooking the sovereign limitation of it, or its applied
efficiency, has led to an equally objectionable Neonomian-
ism, or to ascribe salvation not so much to the death of
Christ, as to the sinner's obedience to a new law, which he
is enabled to obey by being put, through the work of Christ,
into a salvable state.'* To a cool reflecting mind it must
and many read and applaud all as excellently done ; when a truly
discerning man perceiveth that it is but a striving about unexplained
words, for the most part. And their being over-wise in pretences
of zeal for truth, and under-wise in understanding it, and departing
from christian simplicity of doctrine, hath made even some honest
men become dividing engineers, and their articles and controver
sies the church's calamity."
* One extreme naturally produces another. ' It is not the least
wrong that the Pelagians, Jesuits, and Arminians have done to the
church, that by making Christ to have died for all, with an equal
intention of saving them, they have occasioned so many to deny
that indeed he did die for all (in any sense) ; so that, had not the
notions of an universal sufficiency of Christ's death, and of an uni
versal offer of him in the gospel, through the great mercy of God,
been preserved among us, — and these had much influence in our
popular and practical preaching, — we had been drawn very near
to a subverting of the very foundation, and should have been too
like to them that preach another gospel, to the great danger of the
souls of our bearers, and the dishonour of our Redeemer.' — Baxter.
It is a dangerous mistake, some seem to have fallen into, that a
man may, on this subject, ' hold what he will, without danger, so
he be but sure that it go far enough from Arminianism.' — Am
biguous terms and phrases should be carefully avoided. Amyraut,
who had been in the habit of saying ' that Christ died ex cequo for
all,' — as Calvin before him had said, that he died indifferenter for
all, — in the sense that he laid a foundation by his death for offering
salvation to all, on being convinced that his language was liable
to be misunderstood, and actually was misunderstood, abandoned
its use ; ' Etsi habet locutionis illius auctorea idoneos, quia tamen
vel caluranise, vel sinistrae interpretationi obnoxia visa est, consti-
tuit ab ea constanter abstinere.' Ultraists on both sides of the
question may learn a good lesson from Amyraut.
As it has been publicly questioned whether Calvin ever used
the language attributed to him, I add the passage from Amyraut
on which the statement is founded : — ' Ese causse fuerunt, cur apos
tolus dixerit " justitiam venisse in omnes et super omnes credentes
nullo discrimine:" quaeque Calvinum impulerunt ut dicerit Chris
tum, ' indifferenter mortuum esse pro omnibus, et perseque omni
bus proponi:' quae denique Cameronem adduxerunt ut statueret,
* Baxter.

80 NOTKS,
appear evident, that with men intelligently and honestly
united as to particular salvation originating in sovereign
personal election, and accomplished through the atonement,
on the one hand, and as to the unlimited call of the gospel,
on the other, the differences which may exist with regard
to the reference of the death of Chist, must be much more
differences as to the meaning of a word, or the propriety of
an expression, than as to the truth of any great principle.
It would be a deplorable matter if, on such grounds, any
thing like schism or division should take place. What was
stated about a hundred years ago respecting the Secession,
is, through the ' tender mercy' and ' good hand' of our God,
still true, and, we trust, will long be true : — ' There is a
beautiful harmony among the ministers of the association,
with reference to the doctrine of grace, the gospel of Christ,
and the ready access that every law-condemned sinner, to
whom these glad tidings are published, has unto the blood
of atonement, as the sure and tenable plea before the bar of
law and justice, as a full satisfaction for all their offences,
committed against an infinitely just and holy God, and a
proper and particular answer unto the particular indictment
and charge laid against the sinner by God's law, set home
upon the conscience by the Spirit of Christ, as a Spirit of
conviction.' To those who espouse the different sides on
this question, we would, with all humility, and with deep
earnestness, address the words of Andrew Fuller : — ' Bre
thren, there are many adversaries of the gospel around you,
who would rejoice to see you at variance. Let there be no
strife between you. Ypu are both erring mortals; but
both, we trust, the sincere friends of the Lord Jesus. Love
one another.'

" Christi mortem sub fidei conditione ex aequo ad omnes omnino
homines pertinere ' — Fidei Mosis Amyraldi declaratio, pp. 40, 41.
Amyraut, who was very much the reverse of either a knave or a
fool, ' vir magnse sane et accuratse doctrinae,' as Abresch, a com
petent judge, calls him, could scarcely have made such a declara
tion without ground. I should think a much more extensive and
careful examination of Calvin's works than is at all common, ne
cessary to warrant the calling in question the unhesitating asser
tion ot such a man.

UKFERENCE OF THE DEATH OF CHRIST. 81

Note F.
consequences of denying a gjenebat reference of the death
of christ, ano asserting a physical inability in man-
Had sufficient provision been made for the salvation of
but only a remnant of mankind ; or, were the terms of ob
taining an interest in the covenant of grace naturally* im
possible to men, without that special divine influence which
is given only to an elect number, it would indeed seem, as
some have objected, that the offers of mercy could not, with
any sincerity, be made to the non-elect ; and that it could
not be their fault that they are not saved. But neither of
these is truly the case. ' Christ is the propitiation for the
sins of every one that believeth ; and not for theirs only,
' but also for the sins of the whole world.' He hath
rendered all that obedience, and endured all that suffering,
which the law made necessary, in order to the eternal
redemption of every individual of the human race. By
' his righteousness the free gift' may come ' upon all men
unto justffication,' unless it be because they will not, or
do not, ' come unto him that they might have life.' ' 'This
is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that
Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners ; the chief
of sinners.' And what doth the Lord our God require of
us, in order to an interest in Christ and in his salvation ?
Nothing naturally impossible, surely. Nothing which
would be hard, were it not for an evil heart. 'Tis but to
understand what is most plainly revealed — to love that
which is most obviously most excellent — and to do that
which is evidently most reasonable. As to knowing what
we are to beheve, as far as is necessary in order to eternal
life, were men willing to come to the knowledge of the
truth, there would be no difficulty. A very little serious
attention to the Bible would be sufficient. There is no
necessity of ascending high or diving deep, to find the in-
faUible truth, the word is in all your hands, in which it is
fully made known. — Nor would it be any harder to per
ceive the things of the Spirit of God, as they are spiritually
discerned, than to understand them in speculation, were it
not for the blindness of men's hearts — thefr selfishness, pride,
and other corrupt passions. To see the hatefulness of sin,
the desirableness of salvation, and the universal loveliness
ofthe Lord Jesus Christ, would be the easiest things in the
world, were it not for a totally vicious taste, whence wicked
* i. e. physically. n

&'2 NOTES.
men ' call evil good, and good evil ; put bitter for sweet,
and sweet for bitter.' And as to doing what is required, —
being willing to be followers of Christ, denying ourselves
and taking up the cross ; nothing in this is impracticable,
or arduous, provided we have any real inclination to be
good. His ' yoke is easy' — his ' burden is light' — his
' commandments are not grievous.' What God said to Cain,
he may most justly say to every murmurer against the
terms of the gospel, as hard and impossible : — ' Why art
thou wroth ? and why is thy countenance fallen ? If thou
dost well, shalt thou not be accepted ? and if thou dost not
well, sin lieth at the door.' If doing at all well be our
duty, or tf doing not well in any case be our sin, it must
lie at our own door if we perish, or fail of eternal life. No
unbeliever can dispute this, unless he will assert, that
despising and rejecting Christ, making light of the gospel,
and neglecting so great salvation, is doing well. — A door of
salvation is set open to all men. ' Whosoever will,' is
heartily bid welcome to ' take of the water of life freely.' —
Smalley's Second Sermon with a View to the Universalists.
Pp. 24-26. Hartford, 1786.

FINIS.

MURRAY AND GIBB, PRINTERS, 21 GEORGE STREET, EDINBURGH.

PUBLISHED BY THE SAME AUTHOE.

I. Strictures on Mr Yates' Vindication of Unitarianism.
8vo, 2s. 6d.
II. The Danger of Opposing Christianity, and the
Certainty of its final Triumph : A Sermon
preached before the Edinburgh Missionary Society,
on Tuesday, the 2d of April, 1816. 8vo. Is. 6d.
III. Remarks on the Plans and Publications oe
Robert Owen, Esq. of New Lanark, 8vo. ls.6d.
IV. On the State of Scotland, in Reference to the
Means of Religious Instruction : A Sermon
preached at the Opening of the Associate Synod,
on Tuesday, April 27, 1819. 8vo. Is. 6d.
V. On the Duty of Pecuniary Contribution to Reli
gious Purposes : A Sermon preached before the
London Missionary Society, on Thursday, May 10,
1821. Third Edition. 18mo. Is.
VI. On Religion, and the Means of its Attainment.
Third Edition. 18mo. Is. 6d.
VII. On Forgetfulness of God. Second Edition.
18mo. Is. 6d.
VIII. Notes on an Excursion into the Highlands of
ScoiiAND, Autumn 1818. 18mo. Is.
IX. The Christian Pastor's Manual ; a Selection of
Tracts on the Duties, Difficulties, and Encourage
ments ofthe Christian Ministry. 12mo. 7s.
X. Statement ofthe Claims of the British and Foreign
Bible Society, on the Support of the Christian
Pubhc : With an Appendix. 8vo. Is. 6d.
XI, A Tribute to the Memory of a very dear Chris
tian Friend. Third Edition. 18mo. Is. 6d.

2 BOOKS PUBLISHED BY THE SAME AUTHOR.
XII. M'L.iurin's Essays and Sermons, with an Intro
ductory Essay. Second Edition. 12mo. 6s. 6d.
XIII. Henry's Communicant's Companion, with an In
troductory Essay. Second Edition. 4s.
XIV. Discourses suited to the Administration of the
Lord's Supper. Second Edition. I2mo. 5s.
XV. Venn's Complete Duty of Man, with an Introduc
tory Essay. Second Edition. 12mo. 6s. 6d.
XVI. Sermon occasioned by the Death of the Rev.
James Hall, D. D. 8vo. Is. 6d.
XVII. Hints on the Permanent Obligation and Fre
quent Observance of the Lord's Supper. Second
Edition. 12mo. 4d.
XVIII. Hints on the Nature and Influence of Chris
tian Hope. Post 8vo.
XIX. The Mourner's Friend; or Instruction and Con
solation for the bereaved, a Selection of Tracts and
Hymns. 32mo. 3s.
XX. The Law of Christ Respecting Civil Obedience,
Especially in the Payment of Tribute ; with an
Appendix of Notes : to which are added Two Ad
dresses on the Voluntary Church Controversy.
Third Edition. 8vo. 13s.
XXI. The United Secession Church Vindicated from
the Charge, made by James A. IIaldane, Esq.,
of Sanctioning Indiscriminate Admission to
Communion. 8vo. 4d.
XXII. On the Means and Manifestations of a Genuine
Revival of Religion : an Address Delivered be
fore the United Associate Presbytery of Edinburgh,
on November 19, 1839. Second Edition. 12mo. 4d.
XXIII. What Ought the Dissenters of Scotland to Do
in the Phesent Crisis. Second Edition. 8vo. 6d,

YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

3 9002 03720 0285

'^^V'.