language of the doctrine of election to sinners of mankind, and that on various occasions. It is not designed to supersede universal invitations; but to provide against those invitations being universally unsuccessful. Thus, our Lord having upbraided Chorazin and Bethsaida for their impenitence under his ministry, it is immediately added by the evangelist, AT THAT TIME Jesus answered, and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes: even so, Father ; for so it seemed good in thy sight. (Matt. xi. 25, 26.) This was like saying, 'Though Chorazin and Bethsaida have not repented, yet I shall not be wanting of subjects: deliverance shall arise from another place!' -Again: When addressing the unbelieving pharisees, he applied those words in the cxviiith psalm to them, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner, his words convey the same idea: Ye builders may set me at nought; but God will exalt me in defiance of you. God will have à temple, and I shall be the foundation of it, though you should persist in your unbelief, and perish!" (Matt. xxi. 42.)-Again: Those very remarkable words in John vi. 37, All that the Father giveth me shall come to me, &c. are introduced in the same manner. Addressing himself to those Jews who followed him because they had eaten of the loaves, and were filled, he saith, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger, and he that believeth on me shall never thirst. But I said unto you, that ye also have seen me, and believe not All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out. As if he should say, You have no regard to me in my true L character, but merely for yourselves, and for the meat that perisheth: but I shall not lose my reward, however you may stand affected towards me.' * ON EVIL THINGS Which pass under Specious Names. THE HERE is something in the nature of evil, which if it appear in its own proper colours, will not admit of being defended, or recommended to others: he therefore who is friendly to it, is under the necessity of disguising it, by giving it some specious name, in order to render it current in society. On the other hand, there is something in the nature of good, which, if it appear in its own proper colours, cannot well be opposed: he therefore who wishes to run it down, is obliged first to give it an ill-name, or he could not accomplish his purpose. This species of imposition, it is true, is calculated only for superficial minds, who regard words rather than things; but the number of them is so great in the world, and even in the church, that it has in all ages been found to answer the end. In the times of the prophet Isaiah there were those who called evil good, and good evil, who put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter: but as the wo of heaven was then denounced against the practice, it becomes us to beware of going into it, or of being imposed on by it. It is not the design of the writer to trace this abuse of language through any part of history or politics, or any other worldly department; but merely to notice a few terms which are very current in our religious circles:-such as moderation, liberality, charity, &c. on the one hand, and bigotry, narrowness of mind, and ill-nature, on the other. There is a spirit gone forth in the present age which is calculated to do more harm to the Church of God than the most erroneous doctrine that has been advanced since the days of the apostles. It bears a favourable aspect towards those systems of divinity which depreciate the evil of sin, the freeness of grace, the dignity of Christ, and the glory of his righteousness, as the only ground of acceptance with God; so much so, that it is seldom known to oppose them. Or if, for the sake of preserving its reputation, it strikes an occasional blow at them, yet it is with so light a hand as never to hurt them. It takes no decided stand on this side or that, and thereby obtains admission among all parties. If the friends of Christ meet together, it wishes to meet with them, though it be only to oppose every measure which may bear hard upon its favourite designs, and would take it very unkind to be treated as an intruder. If his enemies be assembled, it will also be there; and if no untrusty brother be in company, will commonly manifest itself to be then most in its element. Now let a spirit of this kind make its appearance in any other department than religion, and observe how it will be treated. In the year 1745, for instance, when the great question in the country was, Shall we support the reigning family, and the constitution? Or shall we admit the Pretender, with Popery and arbitrary power in his train? What would have been thought of a man who should have pretended to be on neither this side nor that; but talking against war, and in favour of moderation, liberality, and charity towards the unhappy youth, who by landing on our shores had greatly endangered his life, made use of all his influence to oppose every decided measure tending to drive him from the country? • Sir, they would have said, you are on the side of the Pretender, and deserve to be taken up as a traitor.' And had he complained of their bigotry, narrow-mindedness, and ill-nature, his remonstrance would have deserved no regard. But is the cause of God and TRUTH of less importance than the temporal prosperity of a nation? Surely not! If indeed our differences merely consist in words; or though they should be things, yet if they do not af fect the first principles of the doctrine of Christ, considering the imperfections which attach to the best of men, a spirit of moderation or forbearance is here in character. When we have frankly spoken our minds, we may with a good conscience leave it, and join with our brethren notwithstanding in the work of the Lord. But in differences which respect the principles above mentioned, compromise would be treason against the Majesty of heaven. There were cases in which an apostle allowed that every one should be fully persuaded in his own mind: but there were cases also in which the doctrine of Christ was given up; and if any man came as a minister without this, Christians were directed not to receive him into their houses, nor bid him God speed*. Such conduct in the present times would raise a great outcry of bigotry and illiberality: a plain proof this, that what passes amongst us under the names of moderation and liberality is in a great degree anti-christian. * Rom. xiv. 5. 2 John 9-11. 1 What is moderation? The Scriptures recommend a yielding and gentle disposition in things wherein our own name or interest only are concerned-Such is the moderation enforced by Paul*: but when the continuance of the truth of the Gospel was at issue, he refused to give place, even for an hourt. The Scriptures also recommend forbearance in Christians one towards another: but this is far from that spirit of indifference which would confound truth and error, religion and irreligion, the friends of Christ, and the men of the world. What is liberality? The term denotes freedom, or enlargedness of mind. It is applied in the Scriptures merely to that simple, sincere, and bountiful spirit, which communicates freely to the needy; and stands opposed to a sinister, close, contracted, and covetous disposition. The application of it to sentiments may be proper, when used to describe that enlargedness of mind which arises from an intimate acquaintance with the Scriptures, and an extensive knowledge of men and things. A rigid attachment to modes and opinions merely of human authority, is often seen in persons who have read but little, and thought less. Had they seen more of the religious world, and heard more of what is to be said against the notions in which they happen to be educated, their tenacity, we may commonly say, might be abated: in other words, they might be more liberally minded, and moderate in their censures against those who differ from them. But to attribute all attach ment to principles, and even modes of worship, to illiberality of mind, is itself illiberal. If an attachment, whether it be to one or the other, be the effect * Phil. iv. 5. † Gal. ii. 5. Ephes. iv. 2. Col. iii. 13. |