quence of such examples. Nothing can justify such conduct in those, who are under the strongest obligations to be scrupulously exact, and solicitously watchful in all their behaviour, from which their offspring may take a bias toward that, which is good or evil. The practice of deceiving children with regard to food, medicine, and other things, to which they are opposed, is on this ground, highly censurable. Not only does the parent destroy his own veracity in the eyes of the child, but teaches the child to undervalue truth, and prepares him to act accordingly.

Whatever attempts may be made to justify or palliate a lie, that Being, who requires truth in the inner parts, cannot be deceived as to its turpitude; nor will he fail to retribute according to his own laws, and his own declarations.

ATONEMENT.

C. D.

ence of his life: that his death, or the shedding of his blood, had nothing peculiarly meritorious in it, except that it was obedience in the most trying circumstances. This seems to fall far short of the scripture representation of the atonement. The vicarious sacrifices under the Mosaic dispensation evidently pointed to something more; and they were only "the shadow of good things to come, of which Christ was the substance. He offered himself up once for all, for the sins of the world. And" without shedding of blood, is no remission."t However highly we may speak of Christ, as an example to believers, if we exclude the merit of his blood, as the the ground of pardon and justification, every pious soul might complain with Mary, " they have taken away my Lord, and I know not where they have laid him." Christ made a proper expiation for sin: therefore it is said, in view of the sinner, " Deliver him from going down to the pit, I have found a ransom," (in the Heb.) atonement.‡

But as some make too little of the atonement; SO there are others who make too much of

it. Not too much, as to its glorious effects. That is impossi ble. But they include things in it, which are repugnant both to reason and scripture. They consider that in Christ's dying for the world, there is a transfer of the sins of men to the person and character of Christ, and a transfer of his righteousness to them. But sin and holiness are personal, and therefore not transferable qualities. Such a pro

† Heb. ix. 22. Job xxxiii. 24.

cess is impossible in the nature of things. One person may suffer for another, but he can never be a sinner for another. It is sometimes replied, however, in view of such a subject, that " with God all things are possible." This is true of all things that do not imply a contradiction in their own nature. The idea of transferring sin is not more repugnant to reason than it is to scripture. Christ is said to die, the "just for the unjust." But if there had been a mutual transfer of moral character, he could be no longer just, nor they unjust; Christ is said also to be "exalted to give repentance and forgiveness of sins." If there is a transfer of our sins to Christ, we can be subjects neither of repentance nor forgiveness. We could lay claim to an exemption from punishment from the purity of our characters.

It is important to expose the fallacy of this principle, as some have inferred from it the erroneous doctrine of universal salvation. And if the premises are true, viz. (that the sins of mankind are transferred to Christ, and his righteousness transferred to them) I see not why the consequence will not follow: for it is said, he "tasted death for every man." If the sins of mankind are transferred to the Mediator, they are no longer their They are exempted from desert of punishment in the most literal and unqualified sense, and justice has no farther claim upon them. But this is not the scriptural idea of the atonement by Christ. It is true, it is said, "He hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin, that we Vol. III. No. 11. PPP

might be made the righteousness of God in him."* But here the word sin is used for a sin-offering; as it is said in another place, "Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us;" where his being made a curse is explained to mean his ignominious death. " Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree."+

In the Levitical law, the priest is commanded to "bring a young bullock, without blemish, unto the Lord, for a sin-offering," (Heb. for a sin.) Now, as this bullock without blemish was a type of Christ, the great sacrifice, it was very natural for Paul, while treating of the antitype, to make use of a similar term, by which we ought to understand, as in the former case, a sin-offering. With this explanation, it perfectly accords with what the same apostle says to the Hebrews, "Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many."§ And to the Romans, "Who was delivered for our offences."

If, then, the atonement is something more than the mere sinless example of Christ, or his perfect obedience to the divine law, and something less than a mutual transfer of character between Christ and a sinful world, we shall not be likely to mistake its nature. Christ, in opening the way to pardon and justification, was substituted in the room of sinners. He voluntarily took their place. He assumed their condition, but not their character. He partook of the cup of afflic

1

tion, but not of iniquity. He experienced the displays of wrath due to sin, but at the same time was "holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners. This idea of the atonement makes the scriptures plain. "Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows; yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted. But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities; the chastisement of our peace was upon him, and with his stripes we are healed. He made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death, because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth. Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him, he hath put him to grief; when thou shalt make his soul an of fering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand."f

Consider Christ as a vicarious sacrifice, or substituted in the room of sinners, and all the evils that came upon him are a manifestation of the wrath of God against sin. And this wrath is manifested in a more striking manner, than it could be by scourging all mankind out of existence. The divine wrath against sin appeared in the universal deluge, in the conflagration upon the plains of Sodom, and in the frequent plagues in the camp of the murmuring Israelites; but it never shone in a- light so awful and convincing, as in the death of Christ, when the prophecy fulfilled, "Awake, O sword, against my

was

* Heb. vii. 26. † Isai. liii. 4, 5, 9, 10.

shepherd, and against the man that is My Fellow, saith the Lord of Hosts."‡

God in this way having testified his utter abhorrence against sin, and Christ having voluntarily, in his own person, on our account, experienced the wages of it, which is death, the way is open, without any reflection upon the divine justice, or any ground of suspicion of the divine character, as conniving at sin, or looking upon it with less detestation than his tremendous threatenings had indicated, for pardon and justification to be proclaimed to all who would thenceforward forsake sin and accept of the Saviour; who would believe in his divine mission and 'character, imbibe his heavenly temper, copy his example, and " adorn his doctrine in all things." Hence, it is said, "Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth." God can "be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus." The Son of man is " lifted up, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life." "Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth."

OMICRON.

picions in the minds of others. If they are called merely to ordain, they cannot censure him. For no man is to be tried and condemned as a heretic, unless there be a complaint exhibited, expressly stating the heresies which he avows; and unless he be previously served with a copy of said complaint, that he may have reasonable time to prepare for his defence; and unless the council to try him be explicitly called for the purpose; and he have a voice in their nomination.

If he is not laid under censure by the refusal of ordination, then the church may continue their call, and may convene another council; and this second council will have the same right, as the former had, to judge for themselves, whether it be their duty to ordain or forbear. If they ordain him, he is to be considered and treated, in all respects, as a minister in good standing, until a judiciary council, vested with authority to try him on the complaint, shall convict and condemn him. As the first council, by refusing to ordain the candidate, have left him under suspicion, but not under censure, in which equivocal state it is improper that he should remain, therefore second

a

whom his opponents may bring their complaint, if they please ; and in such expectation he is entitled to a voice in the nomination of this council. The members, at least some of the members of this council, ought to be called from the vicinity in which he has been previously conversant, as a theological student or preaching candidate, because to them his manners, abilities and sentiments may be best known. If in civil society a man accused of any crime has a right to be tried by good and lawful men of the vicinage, because, as civilians tell us, to them his past manner of life is better known than to strangers; for the same reason a candidate for the ministry, when called to a trial, has a right to the like privilege: And his vicinage may not be in the place, where he is invited to settle, but in the place where he has formerly lived and been educated. This may be at a distance from the place of his proposed settlement. Hence ordaining and judiciary councils are usually called, in part, from a distance.

QUESTION II.

May not a minor part of the council, if they are satisfied with the candidate, proceed to ordain him, although the major part refuse to act in the solemnity?

ANSWER.

As the whole council is called by the church to transact this business, and to approve and sanction the proposed relation between them and their pastor elect, the minor part cannot act in opposition to the major part, without a new call from the church. When the council have declared their result, their