God," he was not in a state of entire sanctification? Having noticed all the objections derived from Scripture to the doctrine under consideration, it remains to notice some others arising from the supposed tendencies of the doctrine itself. I. This doctrine, it is said, is, or in its legitimate tendencies, leads to Perfectionism. If any individual will point out any thing intrinsic in the doctrine here maintained, at all allied to that error, I, for one, will be among the first to abandon the position which I am now endeavoring to sustain. Perfectionism, technically so called, is, in my judgment, in the native and necessary tendencies of its principles, worse than the worst form of infidelity. The doctrine of holiness, now under consideration, in all its essential features and elements, stands in direct opposition to Perfectionism. It has absolutely nothing in common with it, but a few terms derived from the Bible. 1. Perfectionism, for example, in its fundamental principles, is the abrogation of all law. The doctrine of holiness, as here maintained, is perfect obedience to the precepts of the law. It is the "righteousness of the law fulfilled in us." 2. In abrogating the moral law, as a rule of duty, Perfectionism abrogates all obligation of every kind, and to all beings. The doctrine of holiness, as here maintained, contemplates the Christian as a "debtor to all men," to the full extent of his capacities, and consists in a perfect discharge of all these obligations of every obligation to God and man. 3. Perfectionism is a "rest" which suspends all efforts and prayer, even, for the salvation of the world. The doctrine of holiness, as here maintained, consists in such a sympathy with the love of Christ, as constrains the subject to consecrate his entire being to the glory of Christ in the salvation of men. 4. Perfectionism substitutes the direct teaching of the Spirit, falsely called, in the place of the "word." This expects such teachings only in the diligent study of the word, and tries every doctrine by the "law and the testimony,"—" the law and the testimony" expounded in conformity with the legitimate laws of interpretation. 5. Perfectionism surrenders up the soul to blind impulse, assuming, that every existing desire or impulse is caused by the direct agency of the Spirit, and therefore to be gratified. The doctrine of holiness, as here maintained, consists in the subjection of all our powers and propensities to the revealed will of God. 6. Perfectionism abrogates the Sabbath, and all the ordinances of the gospel, and, in its legitimate tendencies, even marriage itself. The doctrine of holiness, as here maintained, is a state of perfect moral purity, induced and perpetuated by a careful observance of all these ordinances, together with subjection to other influences of the gospel, received by faith. 7. Perfectionism renders, in its fundamental principles, all perfection an impossibility. If, as this system maintains, the Christian is freed from all obligation, is bound by no law-in short, if there is no standard with which to compare his actions, and there is none, if the moral law, as a rule of action, is abrogated, moral perfection can no more be predicated of the Christian, than of the horse, the ox, or the ass. The doctrine of holiness, on the other hand, as here maintained, contemplates the moral law as the only rule and standard of the moral conduct, and consists in perfect conformity to the precepts of this law. 8. Perfectionism, in short, in its essential elements, is the perfection of licentiousness. The doctrine of holiness, as here maintained, is the perfect and perpetual harmony of the soul with "whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest," " "just," "pure," lovely," and of "good report," and if there be any virtue, "and if there be any praise," with these things also. What agreement, then, has the doctrine of holiness, as here maintained, with Perfectionism? The same that light has with darkness. A man might, with the same propriety, affirm that I am a Unitarian, because I believe in one God, while I hang my whole eternity upon the doctrine of the Trinity, as to affirm that I am a Perfectionist, because I hold the doctrine of holiness as now presented. II. This doctrine, it is said, will lead to spiritual pride. I answer, 1. An individual holding the sentiment under consideration, who has the true standard of holiness before his mind, and is conscious of coming "short of the glory of God," will be weighed down in deep humiliation and selfabasement, under the conviction that he not only is not what he ought to be, but what he might become. On the other hand, the man holding the common views, will be greatly comforted, under a consciousness of moral imperfection, with the thought that he, in common with holy Paul, and David, and Isaiah, and all the purest saints that ever lived, through the "law in his members warring against the law of his mind, is in captivity unto the law of sin and death." 2. If an individual should attain to a state of entire consecration to Christ, spiritual pride would, of course, be wholly excluded. I shall recur to this subject again in a subsequent discourse. III. It is further objected, that the belief of this doctrine will lead individuals to suppose themselves perfect, when they are not, and thus leave them in delusions fearfully dangerous. I answer, 1. This will not be the case, if, as remarked in a former discourse, the true standard of holiness be kept before the mind. 2. If no doctrine is to be proclaimed which hypocrites will abuse, we must certainly find some other doctrine than this, that none are entirely sanctified in this life. IV. I have never yet seen any person that was perfect. I answer, 1. The reason may be, and I have no doubt is, the unbelief of the Church in respect to the nature and extent of the provisions and promises of divine grace. 2. If, brother, your confidence in the provisions and promises of divine grace, is at all weakened, or your judgment of their nature and extent is at all influenced by the actual attainments of Christians at the present time, you ought to know that your faith rests upon "things seen," and not upon the word of God. Where is the authority for determining the meaning of God's declarations by the attainments of those who, by their unbelief, perhaps, are "mak |