as if he had said-With thee, I perceive that the consideration of the goodness of God leads to the allowing of thy self in sin: this is not to know what that consideration ought in truth to lead to: it ought to lead thee to repentance, and to no other conclusion.

Again; When the apostle had been speaking of the righteousness of God displayed by the wicked. ness of man; he was not unaware of the misconstruction, to which this representation was liable, and which it had, in fact, experienced: which misconstruction he states thus:-"We be slanderously reported, and some affirm that we say, Let us do evil that good may come." This insinuation, however, he regards as nothing less than an unfair and wilful perversion of his words, and of the words of other Christian teachers: therefore he says concerning those, who did thus pervert them, "their condemnation is just :" they will be justly condemned for thus abusing the doctrine, which we teach. The passage, however, clearly shews, that the application of their expressions to the encouragement of licentiousness of life, was an application contrary to their intention; and, in fact, a perversion of their words.

In like manner in the same chapter our apostle had no sooner laid down the doctrine, that "a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law," than he checks himself, as it were, by subjoining this proviso. "Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law." Whatever he meant by his assertion concerning faith, he takes care to let them know he did not mean this, "to make void the law," or to dispense with obedience.

But the clearest text to our purpose is that, undoubtedly, which I have prefixed to this discourse. St. Paul, after expatiating largely upon the grace," that is, the favour, kindness, and mercy of God, the extent, the greatness, the comprehensiveness of that mercy, as manifested in the Christian dispensation, puts this question to his reader

"What shall we say then! shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound?" which he answers by a strong negative" God forbid." What the apostle designed in this passage is sufficiently evident. He knew in what manner some might be apt to construe his expressions: and he anticipates their mistake. He is beforehand with them, by protesting against any such use being made of his doctrine; which, yet he was aware, might by possibility be made.

By way of shewing scripturally the obligation and the necessity of personal endeavours after virtue, all the numerous texts which exhort to virtue, and admonish us against vice, might be quoted, for they are all directly to the purpose; that is, we might quote every page of the New Testament. "Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven." "If ye know these things, happy are ye if ye do them." In both these texts the reward attends the doing: the promise is annexed to works. Again; "To them, who by patient continuance in well-doing seek for glory and immortality, eternal life; but unto them that are contentious, and obey not the truth, but obey unrighteousness, tribulation and anguish upon every soul of man that doeth evil." Again; "Of the which," namely, certain enumerated vices, "I tell you before as I have also told you in time past, that they, which do such things, shall not inherit the kingdom of God." These are a few amongst many texts of the same effect, and they are such as can never be got over. Stronger terms cannot be devised than what are here used. Were the purpose, therefore, simply to prove from Scripture the necessity of virtue, and the danger of vice, so far as salvation is concerned, these texts are decisive. But when an answer is to be given to those who so interpret certain passages of the apostolic writings, especially the passages which speak of the efficacy of the death of Christ, or draw such

ioferences from these passages, as amount to a dispensing with the obligations of virtue, then the best method of proving, that their's cannot be a right interpretation, nor their's just inferences, is by shewing, which fortunately we are able to do, that it is the very interpretation, and these the very inferences, which the apostles were themselves aware of, which they provided against, and which they protested against. The four texts, quoted from the apostolic writings in this dis course, were quoted with this view; and they may be considered, I think, as shewing the minds of the authors upon the point in question more determinately, than any general exhortations to good works, or any general denunciation against sin could do. I assume, therefore, as a proved point, that what ever was said by the apostles concerning the efficacy of the death of Christ, was said by them under an apprehension, that they did not thereby in any manner relax the motives, the obligation, or the necessity of good works. But still there is another important question behind; namely, whether, notwithstanding what the apostles have said, or may have meant to say, there be not in the nature of things, an invincible inconsistency between the efficacy of the death of Christ and the necessity of a good life: whether those two propositions can, in fair reasoning, stand together; or whether it does not necessarily follow, that if the death of Christ be efficacious, then good works are no longer necessary: and, on the other hand, that, if good works be still necessary, then is the death of Christ not efficacious.

Now, to give an account of this question, and of the difficulty which it seems to present, we must bear in mind, that in the business of salvation there are naturally and properly two things, viz. the cause and the condition; and that these twe things are different. We should see better the propriety of this distinction, if we would allow ourselves to consider well what salvation is: what the being saved means. It is nothing less than, af

ter this life is ended, being placed in a state of happiness exceedingly great, both in degree and duration; a state, concerning which the following things are said: "the sufferings of this present world are not worthy to be compared with the glory that shall be revealed."-"God hath in store for us such things as pass man's understanding." So that, you see, it is not simply escaping punishment, simply being excused or forgiven, simply being compensated or repaid for the little good we do, but it is infinitely more, heaven is infinitely greater than mere compensation, which natural religion itself might lead us to expect. What do the Scriptures call it? "Glory, honour, immiortality, eternal life."-To them that seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life." Will any one then contend, that salvation in this sense, and to this extent; that heaven, eternal life, glory, honour, immortality; that a happiness such as that there is no way of describing it, but by saying that it surpasses human comprehension, that it casts the sufferings of this life at such a distance, as not to bear any comparison with it; will any one contend, that this is no more than what virtue deserves, what, in its own proper nature, and by its own merit, it is entitled to look forward to, and to receive? the greatest virtue, that man ever attained, has no such pretensions The best good action, that man ever performed, has no claim to this extent, or any thing like it. It is out of ali calculation, and comparison, and proportion above, and more than any human works can possibly deserve. To what then are we to ascribe it, that endeavours after virtue should procure, and that they will in fact procure, to those who sincerely exert them, such immense blessings? To what, but to the voluntary bounty of Almighty God, who in his inexpressible good pleasure hath appointed it so to be? The benignity of God to wards man hath made him this inconceivably advantageous offer. But a most kind offer may still be a conditional offer. And this, though an infi

nitely gracious and beneficial offer, is still a conditional offer, and the performance of the conditions is as necessary, as if it had been an offer of mere retribution. The kindness, the bounty, the generosity of the offer, do not make it less necessary to perform the conditions, but more so. A conditional offer may be infinitely kind on the part of the benefactor, who makes it, may be infinitely beneficial to those, to whom it is made; if it be from a prince or governor, may be infinitely gracious and merciful on his part; and yet, being conditional, the condition is as necessary, as if the offer had been no more than that of scanty wages by a hard taskmaster. In considering this matter in general, the whole of it appears to be very plain; yet, when we apply the consideration to religion, there are two mistakes, into which we are very liable to fall. The first is, that when we hear so much of the exceedingly great kindness of the offer, we are apt to infer, that the condition upon which it is made will not be exacted. Does that at all follow? Because the offer, even with these conditions, is represented to be the fruit of love and mercy and kindness, and is in truth so, and is most justly so to be accounted, does it follow that the conditions of the offer are not necessary to be performed? This is one error into which we slide, against which we ought to guard ourselves most diligently; for it is not simply false in its principle, but most pernicious in its application, its application always being to countenance us in some sin, which we will not relinquish. The second mistake is, that, when we have performed the conditions, or think that we have performed the conditions, or when we endeavour to perform the conditions, upon which the reward is offered, we forthwith attribute our obtaining the reward to this our perfor mance or endeavour, and not to that, which is the beginning and foundation and cause of the whole, the true and proper cause, namely, the kindness and bounty of the original offer. This turn of thought likewise, as well as the former, it is ne cessary to warn you against. For it has these con