tances, how much more important is it to be anxious, and deeply inquiring, in regard to an inheritance of eternal duration!

The apostle Peter, speaking of the Epistles of Paul, says: "In which are some things hard be to understood, which they that are unlearned, [in that wisdom which is from above,] and unstable, wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction." 2 Pet. 3. 15, 16. This is an important caution which ought to be borne in mind, whenever we resort to constructions of the writings of that eminent apostle. He wrote much in the mystery of divine things. But as we believe his writings, or rather, that the doctrines of the gospel, do all harmonize, we should have some regard to the grand scope of the whole: seeking also for divine wisdom, which alone can unfold them to the human understanding.

The apostle Paul very frequently mentioned the terms election, election of grace, &c. but some have given to these terms a construction, which it does not appear the apostle ever gave them. It does not appear that he ever rejected obedience from the work of salvation. We have not sufficient evidence, that he either believed or preached unconditional election and reprobation. Indeed the doctrine does not appear to have been professed in the primitive Church. On the contrary, it was several centuries before it was distinctly brought into view.

A leading feature of the heathen philosophy, was the doctrine of fate or eternal necessity which operated on all things, not excepting the supreme Deity himself. As this doctrine had long prevailed among both the Greeks and Romans, and as it was among these very people that it first became denominated a christian principle, it is easy to discov

er the school from which it emanated. It still bears the strong marks of its original character, as it was handed down from one heathen philosopher to another, till finally, in the 5th century, it was taken up as an argument against Pelagius, who believed that Grace was given in proportion to our merits.* Much pains have been taken, much zeal and talent displayed, to soften its original features: but still it is not materially changed. The eternal necessity bears the same strong, inexorable character, that it did in the darkest ages of the world.

On the introduction of the Gospel Dispensation, an important change was to take place, in the visible church, as well as in the affusions of spiritual blessings. The institutions which had been given to the Jews, were to cease, and in the coming in of the Gentiles, the former distinctions were to be removed. In order to prepare both Jews and Gentiles for this important change, the apostle brought into view the divine prerogative, and the designs of the Almighty, in making these distinctions. When we consider the strong prejudices of the Jews, and the ideas which had prevailed among the Gentiles, to the time at which the apostle wrote, we shall see the necessity of the labors which he used, to break down the middle wall of partition. And this is the way in which the

*We may safely call this doctrine a novelty, seeing the first four hundred years after Christ, there is no mention made of it: for as it is contrary to the Scriptures' testimony, and to the tenor of the Gospel; so all the ancient writers, teachers, and doctors of the Church, passed it over with a profound silence. The first foundations of it were laid in the latter writings of Augustin, who, in his heat against Pelagius, let fall some expressions, which some have unhappily gleaned up, to the establishing of this error: thereby contradicting the truth and sufficiently gainsaying many others, and many more and frequent expressions of the same Augustin. Afterwards was this doctrine fomented by Dominicus, a friar, and the monks of his order: and lastly unhappily taken up by John Calvin, (otherwise a man in divers respects to be commended,) to the great staining of his reputation, and defamation both of the Protestant and Christian Religion." BARC. APOL. P.

Epistles to the Romans, Ephesians, &c. were understood at the time. The Gentiles were encouraged and emboldened, to flock as doves to their windows, and the believing Jews, received them as fellow heirs of the same precious promises.

I say, this appears to have been the understanding of the passages alluded to, at the time-because such was the effect; and the doctrine of election and reprobation, as now held, did not become obvious, till several hundred years afterwards.

The Jews had been a peculiar people; because, to them had been committed the "Oracles of God," and many favors, designed not only for their benefit, but for the benefit of the whole human race. And now the time for the general diffusion of these benefits, had arrived. At the same time, these favors, or this election, (for they were chosen,) did not secure salvation, to the individuals of the Jewish nation-far from it. Many, very many of them, lay under a heavy load of condemnation; and finally, even the nation, as a body, was rejected. Nor did these peculiar favors to the Jews, even during the continuance of that dispensation, exclude the Gentile world, from the saving Love of God. The apostle bore testimony, that "the works of the Law were written in their hearts;" "that there were "glory, honor, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile; for there is no respect of persons with God." Rom. 2. 15-10. The apostle has not left the subject without a sufficient guard against misconstruction. In the Epistle to the Romans, and in the part of it in which he treats of election, (chap. 11,) he thus clearly asserts, that it is not unconditional: "Thou wilt say then, the branches were broken off, that I might be graffed in." But this idea he corrects, by telling them, "Because of un

belief they were broken off," "and thou standest by faith." Here it was the unbelief of the Jews, and not the secret will of God, that was the cause of their being rejected. To the (elect) Gentiles, he was equally explicit. "Be not high minded, but fear;" But why tell them to fear, if their salvation and every thing connected with it, was fixed beyond the possibility of change? The apostle tells them: "For if God spared not the natural branches, take heed lest he spare not thee." He does not give them any reason to believe, that it made no difference whether they took heed or not: which must have been the case, if the doctrine of unconditional election and reprobation is true. "Behold, therefore the goodness and severity of God! On them which fell, severity:" (because their fall was their own act and not his :) "but towards thee, goodness, if thou continue in his goodness, otherwise thou also shalt be cut off." But this was without object or utility, unless there had been a possibility both of their "continuing in his goodness," & of their being "cut off." "And they," said he, directing his attention to the Jews, "if they abide not still in unbelief, shall be graffed in, for God is able to graff them in again." All this would have been without meaning, if an irrevocable decree had rendered it impossible for them to believe and be accepted. He might, with much composure of feeling, have resigned both Jews & Gentiles, to the operation of the "eternal necessity," "Fate," or "decrees," whichever we may call them. The apostle mentions the exercises and selfdenial into which he was led, "lest that by any means, when he had preached to others, he himself should become a cast away." 1 Cor. 9. 27. How much below the dignity of the subject, and the character of the apostle, must such expressions have been, if the thing itself had been impossible!

H

Imagine, for a moment, the ideas we should form of a man, who should surround himself with candles at mid-day, lest the light of the sun should become extint--or an inhabitant of the mountains, who should employ himself in building towers like Babel, lest the ocean should break in upon himor a mariner at sea, who should hide himself below deck, lest the rocks of invisible mountains should fall upon him.-And yet, if the doctrine in question is true, the whole strain of admonition and caution, which has run through every dispensation of God to mankind, is equally inconsistent with the condition of man. Why should we use precautions-lest impossibilities should happen? The proposition carries its own refutation with it: and we only need to see it, in its simple, genuine character, to reject it.

It must be borne in mind, whenever the apostle makes use of the terms, election or reprobation, that these are not to be understood as unconditional, or wholly independent of the faithfulness or unfaithfulness of the individual, when they relate to individuals, or have reference to a future state of existence: for the terms are often applied to nations or national concerns.

Thus, the Jews were chosen, that through them the knowledge of the true God should be preserved, through a dark and idolatrous age. The law, the prophets, and the Messiah, came through them. This was an election. But they were individually and nationally judged according to their obedience. On the coming of the Messiah, it pleased Divine Goodness to call in the Gentiles, to an equal participation of the light of the Gospel. This also was an election, but the Gentiles stood by faith and faithfulness, as evidently appears from the passages already quoted from the Epistle to the Romans.