:

fact that it is appointed unto men once to die, and after this the judgment, to Christ's having offered himself to bear the sins of many, limiting the goodness of the news contained in his second coming to those "who look for him "—he is obviously proceeding upon the same principle of present pardon to all through the death of Christ, and future judgment with reference to that pardon, which has been held above. . But I most specially crave attention to the argument held upon the subject of sacrifices for sin, and remission of sin, in the 10th chapter of the same epistle to the Hebrews.—The apostle there argues, that the sacrifices offered year by year continually, could not make perfect as pertaining to the conscience; that it could not relieve from the sense of judicial condemnation; that this they could not do, because it was impossible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sin and therefore that in token of their inability to accomplish this, and of their being but the shadow of a good thing which was to come, they were repeated from year to year; but that what the shadow could not accomplish the substance did; that sin was put away by the one offering of Christ; and that, because there was remission of sins, therefore there was no more sacrifice, "Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin."* And that by remission of sin, as a thing which he had proved, and by the consideration of which he exhorts them to draw near to God-he means just that access to God through Christ which has been described above; as the pardon that embraces, and is upon all, is manifest from the conclusion of his reasoning, "Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus-by a new and living way which he hath consecrated for us, through the veil, that is to say his flesh; and having an high priest over the house of God, LET US DRAW NEAR with a true heart and in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from

*Heb. x. 18.

an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure

The following passage in the Epistle to the Ephesians teaches the same view of the salvation that is through Christ. "For he is our peace who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition, having abolished in his flesh the enmity even the law of commandments contained in ordinances, for to make in himself of twain one new man so making peace; and that he might reconcile both unto God in one body, by the Cross, having slain the enmity thereby; and came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh; for through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father." The peace here represented as being made by Christ through his cross, is explained as our having access through him by one Spirit unto the Father-to preach this peace to men, therefore, is to declare to them that they have access through Christ, by the Holy Ghost, unto God the Father this is the same with announcing to them that they have access into the holiest by the blood of Jesus, by a new and living way; and, in both forms of expression, that is declared which I have stated as the pardon which I preach, viz. that it is an act of God, referring to a sinner, by which he declares his having sinned to be no longer any barrier to his returning to the enjoyment of the light of God's love and favour; making the consciousness of guilt no longer a just cause of fear in seeking the face of God-yea, giving the assurance that it is not only a righteous thing in God to receive back into favour, not taking into account the sin justly chargeable against him, but even, so to speak, to help him back, and by his own spirit to lift him up into the light of his own love, and enjoyment of his own holiness.

With this accords the account given of the ministry of reconciliation by the apostle, writing to the Corinthian Church, + Eph. ii. 14.

*Heb. x. 19.

"that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them."* And in this have we the true conception given us of the character of our present condition, as not under the law, but under grace—that God accounts of Christ as the head and representative of the children of men, that he has given him power over all flesh, and fitted him as a fountain of life to all flesh -that to the end that they may have space for receiving this life, their sin not imputed to them, nor their personal guilt accounted of, while the day of grace lasts ; at the same time that it is the purpose of God to bring them to account for their share in this grace, which he hath caused to pass upon them; condemning them, or acknowledging them, according as they have, or have not received the grace of God in vain.

I might proceed to quote passages in which the gospel is announced as glad tidings, and the effect of believing it set forth as being immediate peace and joy; to show, from the consideration of the circumstances in which that message finds men, that it could not have furnished a reasonable ground for such feelings, did it not reveal to them the remission of their sins; and, to the same effect, I might also quote the passages in which believers are addressed as knowing that they have the forgiveness of their sins in Christ, which knowledge they could only have had because the apostles in first coming amongst them had preached to them, through Christ, the forgiveness of sins-But if once the principle, on which such passages are evidence in this matter, be recognised, viz. that faith being the belief of the testimony of God, can contain no cause of rejoicing beyond the limit of the testimony itself, it will be felt unnecessary to quote particular passages, seeing that, upon this ground, almost every word addressed to the primitive churches might be founded on.

This then is my answer on the subject of universal pardon,

2 Cor. v. 19.

with reference to the relevancy of the libel; pardon, in the sense in which its universality has been held to lead to licentiousness, viz. immunity from the consequences of sin without reference to moral character, I neither hold as to some, or as to all; believing that there is no such thing under the government of a righteous God-pardon, as God's act in the Spirit, through Christ, of taking us up into fellowship and communion with himself, and raising us up out of the deep pit and miry clay of our sinful flesh, I hold as limited to the elect of God, who, through the faith of God's promises, are partakers of the divine nature, escaping the corruption that is in the world through lust-and the pardon, which is thus limited to them, is ever flowing to them, as the answer of their earnest cry and prayer-God's holy relief vouchsafed to the poor and needy, who are confessing their sins, and hungering and thirsting after righteousness— pardon, as the removal of the barrier in the way of our coming to God, which arises from personal guilt, and as the provision of actual strength, in the Spirit, to come to God, I hold to be the gift of God to all-in as much as it is contained in the gift of Christ; and is the justification of the statement that God has given to all eternal life in him. If, in the libel, either of the first senses of the expression pardon be intended, I hold not the doctrine stated, and would admit the relevancy of the major proposition-but deny the truth of the minor as connecting me with such a charge. If the third sense of the word, now explained, be that in which it is used, then I deny the relevancy of the charge, seeing that in that sense universal pardon through the death of Christ is the revealed truth of God.

3. The doctrine that assurance is of the Essence of Faith, and necessary to salvation, is also declared in the libel, to be contrary to the Holy Scriptures.

On this subject much misconception has arisen, from the loose and inaccurate use of terms-Faith being the belief of

God's testimony, assurance of faith should properly mean the confidence in its reality, with which the thing testified is contemplated; and this is the Scripture use of the word—at the same time, it is likely, and may be assumed, that the expression is used, in the libel, in the sense in which it is usually employed in theological writings. In these, it is rather the feeling of personal interest in the thing believed, than of the reality of the thing itself, that is intended to be expressed. At the same time, seeing that the words of God are spoken to us personally, and intended to be received as life to ourselves individually, there is not much reason to complain of this liberty taken with the expression, " Assurance of Faith." So long as men holding a limited atonement, held also that assurance was of the essence of faith, and so required that the love of God in Christ should be felt as personal love, in the mind's apprehension of it, though not held to be personal in the record—and so long as faith was thus made to embrace more than the word reveals, there was a risk of very serious error, and a door opened for a very insidious form of self-righteousness, under the name of what was called the appropriating act of faith-but when it is understood that faith needs not to change any thing, but may, taking things as they are, say, my Lord and my Godso long as it is understood, that the spirit of adoption is the spirit of faith in a revealed fatherly love, then there is no evil in associating the word faith with those feelings of personal delight in the Lord, and confidence towards God, which are inseparable from it. And on this subject I hold and teach, that in believing the gospel, there is necessarily present in the mind, the certainty that the person believing is the object of God's love manifested to him in the gift of Christ-the certainty that he has remission of his sins, the gift of the Spirit, and all things pertaining to life and to godliness, bestowed on him, by the free grace of God; so that he feels himself debtor to God for the gift of eternal life;