ably ignorant of the present state of human nature, who imagines that any of the descendants of Adam is able to perform it,

First, The law demands obedience to all its precepts.-"Cursed is every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them." It is thus that Paul quotes these words of Moses, "Cursed is he that confirmeth not the words of this law, to do them." The chief difference is, that the word "all" is inserted by the apostle; but the original passage implies universal obedience, as well as the quotation. The law is a declaration of the will of the supreme Lord, and the authority which enacted it, extends alike to all its precepts. Whatever duty is enjoined in the law, there is the same reason for performing it as for performing any other, namely, the command of the lawgiver. If a single duty is omitted the law is not fulfilled; and so high is this matter carried, that the Scripture declares, that "he who offendeth in one point, is guilty of all." He virtually subverts all the precepts by the violation of one; for, by disowning the Divine authority in this instance, he in fact disowns it in every instance. All the precepts depend upon the will of the Lawgiver; and, if his will is not a sufficient reason for obedience in one case, it cannot be a sufficient reason in another. Our claim, then, to the favour of God will be invalidated by omission, as well as by positive transgression; and it is preposterous to dream of making one duty a compensation for another. The law admits of no lower terms. We must give all or nothing. We may now ask the man who seeks to be justified by works, whether he thinks himself able to comply with this demand? whether he has always performed his duty in its full extent? whether he has never neglected it, or forgotten it, or omitted it through ignorance; for ignorance, let it be remembered, is not an excuse unless it be invincible. If God has published his law, and we through inattention and carelessness are unacquainted with its contents, our ignorance is voluntary, and we shall in vain hope for impunity. Although a man may have done many things, yet, if he have not done every thing, his plea is lost; for, to justify him in such circumstances would be to declare falsely, that he has fulfilled the whole law, while in truth he had fulfilled only a part of it.

Secondly, The law demands obedience absolutely perfect. "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself." This is the sum of the law, and the standard of our duty. It requires such love to God as is worthy of him who is infinitely excellent and good; the highest love of which our nature is capable; love not merely sincere, but perfect; love which not only prevails over opposite affections, but extinguishes them, and reigns alone in the heart. It is inconsistent with the perfection of this love, that it should ever lean towards any rival, that it should be suspended for a single moment, that it should abate and languish in its exercise. The law is violated by the slightest remission of its intensity, or by the temporary cessation of its activity in producing the proper fruits and expressions of it. The love to our fellow men which is required, is equally perfect. We must love our neighbour as ourselves; if not with a love exactly of the same degree, yet certainly of equal sincerity; desiring his welfare as we desire our own, and willingly exerting ourselves to promote it. A regard to our own interests is not to be laid aside; but it must be so moderated as not to degenerate into selfishness. Not only hatred and malice are transgressions of the law, but even indifference to our brethren; nay, it is violated not only by indifference, but by a love not sufficiently ardent, and by efforts not sufficiently vigorous for their good. In † James ii. 10.

• Gal. iii. 10. Deut. xxvii. 26.

Matt. xxii. 37-39.

short, the law demands not only the form, but the spirit of obedience. It demands, in every act of obedience, the full exertion of all the moral power with which we were originally endowed by our Creator. There must be no languid endeavours, no cold and feeble services. No motives must influence our minds but the right ones; no ultimate end must be proposed but the glory of God. Nothing must be wanting in matter or in manner, in external actions or in internal principles; for a deficiency in the measure or degree of our obedience, would prove fatal to our hopes. Enough, I presume, has been said to show that no man can be justified by the works of the law.

I shall add, however, in the last place, that the law demands an uninterrupted course of obedience to the end of our lives. In the case of Adam, the time of trial was limited and probably would have soon terminated. But in our case, I know of no limitation; there is no period within the bounds of our mortal existence at which we might claim the reward. Every day calls for new labour; every year extends the term of our service, and multiplies the probabilities of a failure; it is only when the shades of evening descend, that man finishes his task and retires to rest. We must not therefore think that we have attained, and are already perfect; but, forgetting the things which are behind, and reaching forth to those which are before, we must press towards the mark, if we would bear away the prize of immortality. This we must do, notwithstanding our natural disposition to grow weary of every exercise which is long continued, and in the face of many discouragements and temptations, calculated to divert our attention from our duty, to seduce our affections, and to create impatience of restraint. Should these causes overcome our resolution; should we suspend our services for a time ever so short; should we begin to faint, or even admit a wish to be released from our obligations, we should immediately become criminal in the eye of the law, and forfeit all claim to the expected recompence. He who runs a race will not be crowned, although he run well, unless he reach the goal.

The plan of justification by works appears to be absolutely impracticable. The labour is difficult, and man is weak and inconstant. If we take into the account the strength and waywardness of his passions, his liableness to error, the obstacles which lie in his way, and the numerous causes by which his attention may be diverted from his duty, disgust and weariness may be created, and opposite considerations may obtain a predominant influence upon his mind, we shall be convinced of the probability, or rather the certainty, that he will fail, not in one instance only, but in a thousand. There is no man that liveth and sinneth not in deed, or word, or thought. Besides the invincible difficulties attendant upon this plan of justification, it is in itself comfortless, and a source of continual anxiety to every person who in earnest attempts it. No such thing is possible as the assurance of hope; his mind is a stranger to the peace and joy which arise from the belief of the record of the Gospel, because a fear must always haunt him, that, after all his pains, he shall in some unpropitious hour lose his labour. "When I shall say to the righteous, that he shall surely live; if he trust to his own righteousness, and commit iniquity, all his righteousness shall not be remembered; but for his iniquity that he hath committed, he shall die for it." The spirit, therefore, by which he is necessarily animated, is a spirit of bondage, which from its nature destroys the value of his obedience by converting it into the task of a slave, who toils under the dread of the lash.

In an inquiry, whether it is possible to be justified by works, it was necessary to ascertain what are the requisitions of the law. The law is the standard of works; and if they are not conformable to it, the hopes founded upon

them are vain. The question is not, What measure of obedience we are disposed to yield, or what measure we are capable of yielding? but, What is the obedience which God requires from us? This we learn from his precepts, fairly and honestly interpreted; and so high is the demand, that every man may justly despair of being able to fulfil it.

But will God be satisfied with nothing less than perfect obedience? Yes, some reply; he has had compassion upon his frail and erring creatures, and is willing to receive them into favour upon easier terms. He has given them a milder law, more suitable to their present condition, which, through the assistance of his grace, they are enabled to obey. This notion, which is exceedingly prevalent, and by which the scriptural doctrine of justification is subverted, will be examined in the next lecture.

LECTURE LXX.

JUSTIFICATION.

ground of Justification continued; not Repentance and Sincere Obedience-Righteousness of Christ, the sole ground-Observations on the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness to Believers.

IN the preceding lecture, I showed you that justification is a legal term, and denotes the sentence pronounced by a judge upon a person who has been brought before him for judgment. If the person is righteous in himself, the sentence merely ascertains and declares in a judicial manner what he is; but in the case of men who are standing before the tribunal of God, a different process is necessary. As they are unquestionably guilty, an act of grace must be passed in their favour, cancelling the obligation to punishment; and, accordingly, the remission of sins is an essential part of our justification. this is not all. The acquitted criminal is not necessarily restored to the favour of his prince, and entitled to the reward which was promised to an obedient subject. Pardon frees the sinner from the pains of hell, but gives him no right to the happiness of heaven. He must somehow be possessed of a complete righteousness, which shall answer all the demands of the law, that he may be accepted by his Maker, and obtain the eternal inheritance.

But

It may be proper by the way to remark, that our common language on this subject may give rise to misapprehension. We often speak of the pardon of sin, and the possession of a justifying righteousness, as if they were distinct; and hence it may be supposed, that the one might be enjoyed without the other. This is the inference suggested, when it is sometimes inaccurately stated, that justification consists in the forgiveness of sin and the imputation of righteousness. But the truth is, that the imputation of righteousness is the foundation of pardon, as well as of restoration to the favour of God. The righteousness of Christ, although it is strictly one and cannot be divided, is distinguished, for the sake of explanation, into active and passive; the former denoting his obedience to the precepts, and the latter his endurance of the penalty. There is an imputation of his whole righteousness to the believer, and, in the language of scholastic theology, it is the material cause of our justification. These remarks have led me to anticipate a subsequent department of the doctrine; but I deemed it necessary to make them at this time, to guard against any misapprehension of what I have said, that more than pardon is

necessary to the sinner, and that he must be possessed of a complete righteousness, a righteousness corresponding to the precept, as well as to the penalty, in order to his being accepted by his Maker.

It is therefore an important question, how this righteousness may be obtained; and there are only two ways in which it can be conceived to be acquired; by our personal obedience, or by the imputation of the righteousness of another. I have endeavoured to prove, that the attainment of it in the first way is possible, by showing you that the demands of the law are so extensive that no man living can comply with them. It requires obedience to all its precepts, without a single exception; obedience absolutely perfect, a failure in one act, or in the motive from which it is performed, being sufficient to invalidate the whole; and obedience continued to the end of life, because no prior term is fixed, and it is after death that the final judgment will take place. To every person who considers the extent of these demands, it will appear as impossible for the descendants of Adam, in their present state of weakness and depravity, to fulfil them, as it is to remove mountains by a word, or to ascend to heaven by a wish. The notion of sinless perfection as attainable in this life, which has been broached in modern times, could arise only in minds disordered by enthusiasm, or blinded by profound ignorance of human nature, and the Divine law.

I might therefore proceed to show you that we are justified by the righteousness of another, did not a new obstacle present itself, which it is necessary to remove out of the way. The pride of the human heart, unwilling to forego its claims to the favour of God, has exerted its ingenuity in devising a method of evading the force of the argument founded on the high demands of the law. It is granted, we are told, that we are unable to fulfil them; but it is added, that the original terms upon which eternal life was promised are relaxed. God has been graciously pleased, for the sake of Christ, to make a new covenant with us, in which he promises to pardon our sins upon repentance, and since we cannot perform perfect, to accept of sincere obedience as the ground of our justification. This doctrine is laid down in a variety of terms, and with greater or less degrees of plainness; but I have stated the substance of what is maintained by Divines of a particular class. To give it the more plausibility, it is acknowledged, that still our salvation is of grace, because there is grace displayed in lowering the demands of the law, and grace is communicated to assist us; although it turns out to be such aid as we may use or not as we please, and as will be of little avail without vigorous exertions of our own. It is also acknowledged, that we are under high obligations to our Saviour, in consequence of whose mediation this new law has been given, and what may be wanting in our obedience is supplied by his merit. The scheme, however, is manifestly an attempt to establish our own righteousness, from a reluctance to submit to the righteousness of God. It is a miserable mixture of the law and the gospel, an illicit association of the righteousness of Christ and that of the sinner, an abortive effort to defend the doctrine of justification by works against the solemn denunciations of Scripture. Upon this scheme I make the following remarks.

First, There is not the slightest vestige of it to be found in the Scriptures. I challenge any man to point out a passage in which it is declared, that Christ merited that we might merit; that since we cannot be justified by perfect, we shall be justified by imperfect obedience; or that God has given an easier law, adapted to the present condition of human nature. These are dogmas of very great importance, as they relate to our everlasting concerns, and they would need to be supported by evidence perfectly satisfactory; but when we call for it, we are put off with bold assertions and sophistical arguments. We read of our being constituted righteous, but it is by a righteousness which is not our

own, nor of the law, but the righteousness of another, namely Christ. "By the obedience of one shall many be made righteous."* We read of a new covenant which God has made with men, but it is truly a covenant of grace, for it is a covenant of promise. "I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts; and I will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people. For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more." Where do we read of a new covenant of works, in which sincere obedience is the condition, and eternal life is the recompence? It exists only in the writings of some men, who cannot or will not understand the gospel of Christ.

Secondly, The idea of such a new law as has been described, is fraught with absurd and impious consequences. It reflects the greatest dishonour upon the law which was originally given to man. It sets aside its demands, although they were not arbitrary, but were founded on the nature of God and man, and the relations subsisting between them; it pronounces them to be unreasonable in the present circumstances of human nature, and makes the authority of the law give way for the accommodation of the criminal. It is in fact an abrogation of the law, than which a greater dishonour cannot be conceived; for the new law of which we speak is totally different from the original law, no two things being more different than a law which requires perfect, and a law which is fully satisfied with sincere obedience. The supposed change implies a reflection not only upon the law, but upon the Lawgiver. When first delivered to man, the law was a representation of the holiness of his Maker, a glass which brightly reflected the infinite purity of his nature; and his language by it was, "Be thou holy, for I am holy." How can we conceive a change to have taken place in its requisitions, and at the same time believe that its Author continues the same? Must we not conclude, that if he demands less holiness from his creatures he is himself less holy? He can bear now certain imperfections which he formerly condemned; he is pleased if we love him in some degree, although we do not love him with all our strength and soul; he is content if we have some portion of good-will to our neighbour, although we do not love him exactly as ourselves. If we really wish to do our duty, it is enough; we shall obtain his approbation should we fail in the performance, and the intention will be accepted for the deed. That strictness which called for "good measure, pressed down, and shaken together, and running over," no longer exists; that opposition to sin which rejected an action upon which the slightest stain was found, has given place to a more accomodating temper. In short, we do not recognise in the Author of this milder law, the Being who published the decalogue from Sinai. Besides, the doctrine which we are con sidering, gives a false and unfavourable view of the mediation of Christ. "Think not," he said, "that I am come to destroy the law or the prophets. 1 am not come to destroy, but to fulfil." That it was not the ceremonial law which he meant, or the ceremonial law alone, is evident from his subsequent vindication of the moral precepts from the corruptions of tradition. "Whosoever, therefore, shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven." But notwithstanding this solemn admonition, we must conclude that he did come to destroy the law, if we give credit to those who affirm, that in consequence of his mediation, a lower degree of obedience is accepted. The first law would not be pleased with our obedience unless it were absolutely perfect; the second is satisfied if it is simply sincere. The first therefore has been set aside to make room for the second, as the edict of an absolute prince claiming the whole property of his subjects, would be repealed by the publication of another, in § Ib. 19.

* Rom. v. 19.

+ Heb. viii. 10-12.

Matt. v. 17.