habitation, it must be dwelt in...... Of the free grace of God, this house, this sanctuary with all its provisions, was bestowed upon Abraham, &c. pursuant to which he resorted to it, and dwelt in it. Such were the works of Abraham...... Yea, moreover, God has promised of his free and sovereign grace, that the righteousness of this house. ......that the righteousness of the Lord of this house should be imputed unto its inhabitants, of every name and description, obeying the good orders of the house, and living in the peace and fellowship of the family; which obligations, as has been fully shewn, are, in their nature, inseparable from family privileges.

The privilege of a house of sanctuary, and the necessity of resorting to it, was shewn when the stroke of the destroying angel fell upon Egypt; for whilst, within the designated doors, persons of every description were equally safe, it was known, that to be without, the most virtuous Israelite would have been equally exposed with the most offensive Egyptian.

The good government of Abraham's house is also expressly mentioned as being connected with the promise. And the Lord said, shall I hide from Abraham that thing which I do; seeing that Abraham shall surely become a great and mighty nation, and all the nations of the earth shall be blessed in him? For I know him, that he will command his children and his household after him, and they shall keep the way of the Lord, to do justice and judgment; that the Lord may bring upon Abraham that which he hath spoken of him. The promise, as we have seen, was that of a family and household blessing; it respected the state of a distinct society, formed upon the most perfect principles to become a great and mighty nation.....But a family and household of disorder and violence is not a blessing to any man; and a society without government, justice

4

and judgment, can never be truly great and illustrious. It appears, therefore, most plainly, that these obligations and works of Abraham, in relation to his children and household, existed in the nature of the promise, and were inseparable from the blessing; and that they do not in the least affect the principle, that the privileges and blessings of the covenant were bestowed upon him in the most absolute and unconditional man

ner.

When the Lord said of Abraham, as in the passage above quoted, I know him, &c. it is not to be understood, surely, that he regarded any ground of confidence out of himself. Behold, he - putteth no trust in his saints; yea, the heavens are not clean in his sight, Job xv. 15......But as Abraham stood in company with Christ, it was saying merely that he knew the firm; that he knew the responsibleness of the house of Abraham, &c. which was saying no more than that he knew himself. He is a rock, and his work is perfect...... And this chief corner stone does, indeed, give solidity to the whole house.

Were it necessary we might make similar remarks upon the peculiar nature of Abraham's acts of worship; his memorials, altars, sacrifices, &c. and shew, that so far from being conditions of his title to the blessings of the covenant, they resulted from it; and, in a wonderful degree, were participations, earnests and foretastes of the promised glory, that, as one with Christ, he should be a king, a prophet and a priest unto God.

Together with the works of Abraham, James illustrates his observation upon the nature of the promise, by the works of Rahab the harlot, which, therefore, under this head require consideration. The Son of Peace, without any act or knowledge of her's, and without any consideration of her merits, (for she may not have been the most virM

tuous person in Jericho) of his mere sovereign pleasure, sent his messengers into her house; this alone, strictly speaking, was the ground of her salvation; every thing that followed, were the requisites existing merely in the nature of her escape from ruin......First, It was requisite in the nature of things that she should receive the messengers.....Secondly, It was necessary that she should secrete them, and send them out another way, and that when they were gone, she should not utter this their business. When she had given up her native hopes and prospects, and with them her obligations of allegiance to her own country and people, and had decided in favor of another people, and had bound them by the oath of God for her safety; it was both a requisite inseparable from her salvation, and a moral obligation upon her not to betray them..... Thirdly, As her house was made her sanctuary, it followed of course, that, for safety, she and her kindredhousehold must come into it, and keep in it......... And lastly, As it was necessary in the nature of the case, that her house be so marked that it could not be missed or mistaken; the friendly and well distinguished line of scarlet thread must be bound in the window......With these requisites, which existed plainly in the nature of the salvation that came, as it were, begging to her door, every thing else respecting her character was put out of the question; and her life, and the lives of her father, and her mother, and her brethren, and her sisters, and all that they had, were bound up together in a bond of life for life, with the lives of the messengers.

I have often heard it said, that this doctrine militates against good works, viz. That our title to the privileges and blessings of the covenant of promise exists, solely, in the sovereign vocation of God, and that we have nothing to do, but to

keep the joyful feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth; which requisites, in all cases, are inseparable from the privileges and bounties bestowed upon guests. Still I have preached this doctrine under a deep conviction, that it is as friendly to holiness as it is to the hopes of the helpless.....the guilty and perishing men to whom I have proclaimed it. And, as many have done before me, I appeal to the observation of the thousands in various parts of the land, among whom I have held it up, and with all persuasion have urged it, and not surely without effect, whether its infiuence has ap peared to weaken a sense of obligation, or to slacken attention either to moral, social, or religious duties.

SECTION VI......Circumcision...

THOUGH circumcision was a sign and seat of the same covenant in which the people of God now stand; and though the church under that seal, the same as under the present, were placed on sanctuary ground in union with Christ, and the members of that body, the same as we are, were intitled to all the privileges and blessings resulting from an union with Christ; yet, as has been noticed, their standing, in a most important respect, differed from ours. This difference, however, great as it is, was no more than what was necessarily comprised in the peculiar privilege and blessing of the covenant, viz. an immediate union with Christ, whose standing, in relation to

the covenant being then so different from what it now is.

This covenant, as has been shewn, being an establishment, of the nature of a partnership, forming one society, or firm of Abraham and his seed, engaged in one common interest, both for the performance of the requisite services, and the reception of the accruing rewards; and as Christ, the great Sponser of the seed, at the time the covenant was established, stood under the redemption bond as a sacrifice bound to the horns of the altar, it is plain, that a standing in union with him, such as this on sanctuary ground, must necessa ily connect the whole covenant body with the bonds of his service work.

It has been asserted, and upon very apparent and ample evidence, that circumcision was a law transaction. And it has appeared very mysterious to me, that any defender of the perpetuity and glory of the covenant with Abraham, should appear desirous of evading this evidence; for, upon this ground alone, arises that distinction of honor, and peculiarity of glory, which will place Abraham and his natural seed first; it will be only for this reason that Abraham, and Isaac, and Israel will first sit down in the kingdom of God; and that all besides who come in, will sit down with them, as being an adoption to them in the family of God.

Why should it be supposed a disparagement to the ancient church, that it was so early under the bond of the law, when the Lord himself, their Head and Husband, was then under it, to which institution the Gospel Church have so fully consented, as being holy, just and good, and before which, one day, the whole universe will bow?.... Or, Why should it be supposed a matter difficult to explain, that the church was once, as a minor child, in a subject state, under bonds for an im