^ v ~ 
 
 
 r >tt 
 
 '%, 
 
 PRINCETON, N. J. 
 
 % 
 
 Jf*/. /3 / 
 
 BT 15 .S64 1868 
 
 Skinner, Thomas Harvey, 179: 
 
 -1871. 
 Discussions in theology 
 
 7/' 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 
 in 2010 with funding from 
 
 Princeton Theological Seminary Library 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/discussionsintheOOskin 
 
DISCUSSIONS 
 
 IN THEOLOGY 
 
 THOMAS H. SKINNER, 
 
 PROFESSOR IN TIIE UNION THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY. 
 
 NEW YORK: 
 
 ANSON D. F. RANDOLPH, 
 
 No. 770 BROADWAY. 
 
 1868. 
 
Entered according to the Act of Congress in the year 1868, 
 By ANSON D. F. RANDOLPH, 
 
 in the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the United States, for the 
 Southern District of New York. 
 
 EDWARD O. JENKINS, 
 PRINT BR AND STEREOTYPER, 
 
 50 Nonh William Street. 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 This volume is a Second Edition of the 
 Miscellanies it contains. They have been col- 
 lected out of Periodicals, in which at different 
 times they were printed. They have been 
 carefully revised, and it is hoped, now appear 
 in a better than their original form. The 
 subjects of them are important, and however 
 imperfectly treated in these small papers, have 
 not been discussed without a deep sense of 
 their value. The author has been induced 
 to prepare the little book which embodies 
 them, by a desire to give whatever of truth- 
 fulness and sound teaching may be found in 
 them, more emphasis and more influence than 
 it might otherwise have had. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 I.— MIRACLES THE PROOF OF CHRISTIANITY, . 1 
 
 II.— NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT, 39 
 
 III.— NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT— Continued, . 57 
 
 IV.— CHRIST PRE-EXISTENT 73 
 
 V.— CHRIST PREACHING TO THE SPIRITS IN 
 
 PRISON, 99 
 
 VI.— IMPOTENCE OF WILL: WILL-NOT A REAL 
 
 CAN-NOT, 114 
 
 VII.— THEORY OF PREPARATION FOR PREACHING, 131 
 
 VIII.— DELIVERY IN PREACHING, 173 
 
 IX.— FRAGMENTS OF THOUGHT, 206 
 
 I. — OPTIMISM, 206 
 
 II. — THE DIVINE PURPOSES, 211 
 
 III. — MYSTERY, 218 
 
 IV. — HAPPINESS, 222 
 
 v. — sin, . 4 226 
 
 VI. — THE REIGN OP SIN, 231 
 
 VII. — MEKCY, 237 
 
 Vni. — THE REDEEMER, 244 
 
 IX. — THE WORK OP THE SPIRIT, 251 
 
 X. — MEDIATION, 258 
 
 XI. — JUSTIFICATION BY GRACE, 262 
 
 XII. — FAITH, 2G9 
 
 XIII. — CHARACTER OF BELIEVERS, 275 
 
 XIV. — TRUTH THE SAME AND ALWAYS YOUNG : THE 
 
 OLD IN THE NEW, 283 
 
I. 
 
 MIRACLES THE PROOF OF CHRISTIANITY. 
 
 1. Side by side with the recent naturalistic ideas of 
 Christianity, have come, as might have been expected, 
 objections to miracles as proof of it. There is a rea- 
 son why the objections and the ideas should be found 
 together : the natural in the religion can have no need 
 of, or affinity with, the supernatural or miraculous in the 
 evidence. Hume opposed miracles because he thought, 
 that admitting them, they proved Christianity ; our 
 naturalists oppose them because, as they allege, they 
 are unnecessary, if not a hindrance, to its proof. The 
 difference is only in appearance : the naturalists agree 
 with Hume in opposing miracles ; they do not really 
 disagree with him as to the bearing of miracles on the 
 proof of Christianity. What the naturalists call Chris- 
 tianity did not in Hume's time pass under that name ; 
 it would not, in itself, have been unacceptable to him, 
 only he would have thought it a misnomer to call it 
 Christianity. 
 
 2. To determine whether miracles are necessary to 
 the proof of Christianity — our present undertaking — 
 
2 MTBACLES 
 
 the meaning of the terms must be fixed. Understand- 
 ing- by Christianity, a revelation distinctively and di- 
 rectly from God ; and by miracles, direct works of God, 
 wrought in attestation of it, our inquiry is : Are the 
 latter the proper proof of the former ? Or, may Chris- 
 tianity be adequately proved without miracles? A 
 miracle, according to its etymology, sometimes signifies 
 what is simply wonderful or marvellous ; sometimes it 
 is what is supposed to be superhuman; sometimes it is 
 something supernatural, or out of the order, if not an 
 arrest and inversion of the order of nature, and unex- 
 plainable by any law, at least any known law of na- 
 ture. In our use of the word, a miracle is a direct 
 work of God, performed in nature and under the 
 notice of the senses, but of divine, in contradistinction 
 to natural or finite force. God, indeed, is in a true 
 sense the force of nature's forces ; still there are works 
 which God does not, and works which he does, directly 
 and personally perform ; and miracles, as we take the 
 term, are divine works of the latter class. "We as- 
 sume, as out of question, that the testimonial miracles 
 of Christianity are direct or personal works of 
 God. 
 
 We would state more precisely what we take to be 
 the true idea of revelation as actualized in Christianity. 
 According to Westcott* the objects of revelation are 
 " things essentially existing beneath the suffering, sin, 
 and disorder, which are spread over the world within 
 us and without ;" and revelation itself is " the re- 
 moval of the dark veil from the face of these things f 
 * Introduction, to the Study of the Gospels, p. 34. 
 
THE PROOF OF CHRISTIANITY. 3 
 
 that is to say, if we understand him, revelation ac- 
 quaints us with nothing extra-natural or out of the 
 sphere of nature ; it only removes a veil from what 
 exists essentially in "man and nature"— the world 
 within us and without. We do not accept this view 
 of the objects, or the office of revelation. The Scrip- 
 ture revelation does more than remove a veil from 
 things essentially existing in the world ; it acquaints 
 us, by direct communication from God, with things 
 not existing in the world ; even the deep, the infinite 
 things of God, of which, independently of this revela- 
 tion, no one would have had an idea, though all the 
 secrets of nature had been disclosed to him. There 
 are things, indeed, presupposed and embodied in those 
 of revelation, doctrines and precepts of natural reli- 
 gion, facts of history, which are not peculiar to it ; 
 these things do not individuate the revelation, or dis- 
 tinguish it as such ; some of the distinctive things are : 
 the Trinity of Persons in the unity Divine Essence ; 
 the Divine-human character of Jesus of Nazareth; 
 the salvation of mankind by the blood and intercession 
 of the Lord Jesus ; the resurrection of the same body; 
 these are peculiarities of revealed religion ; they are 
 not things lying under a dark veil spread over the 
 face of the world, but things altogether extra-mundane, 
 having no place in man or nature, the world within 
 us or without. The idea of revelation, according to 
 which nothing is revealed except what previously ex- 
 isted in the world under a veil, seems to Westcott " to 
 be peculiarly Christian ;" we reject it, as identifying 
 substantive Christianity with natural religion. 
 
4 MIRACLES 
 
 3. Our limits allow us but a word on the arguments 
 against miracles. Hume contented himself with as- 
 sailing their reality, or trying to make out the impossi- 
 bility of proving them. Miracles, he insisted, are 
 contrary " to firm and unalterable experience ;" which, 
 surely, he was safe enough in saying no testimony can 
 countervail.* But how did he know what he asserts 
 as a fact ? Whether miracles are against all experi- 
 ence, is the point in question. His task was not to 
 assert, but to prove the affirmative ; a task he has 
 evaded. A host of unimpeachable witnesses has 
 affirmed the occurrence of miracles as a matter of their 
 own experience. Hume has not discredited their 
 testimony,t which, if it cannot be discredited, dis- 
 proves his assumption ; he is mistaken as to the re- 
 ality of the ground of his argument. — Recently it has 
 been alleged in the interest of Hume's attempt, that 
 the testimony for miracles can be no other than testi- 
 mony to sensible events seemingly miraculous ; that 
 they were really miracles, could have been to the spec- 
 tators only a matter of belief, not of experience. But 
 the witnesses of miracles were not the spectators of 
 them only : the prime witnesses were the performers 
 of them, who wrought them, as they declared, in the 
 
 * " A miracle is a violation of the laws of nature ; and as a firm 
 and unalterable experience has established these laws, the proof 
 against a miracle, from the very nature of the fact, is as entire 
 as any argument from experience can possibly be imagined." — 
 Essay on Miracles, p. 160. 
 
 f He has said, indeed, that there is not to be found in all his- 
 tory any trustworthy testimony to miracles, but he has said it 
 merely. (See Essay on Miracles, p. 163.) 
 
THE PROOF OF CHRISTIANITY. 5 
 
 name, arid simply as instruments in the hand of God. 
 Theirs, chiefly, is the testimony to be discredited. 
 "If St. Paul did not work actual, sensible, public 
 miracles, he has knowingly in these letters," says 
 Paley, " borne his testimony to a falsehood." Did St. 
 Paul, with his fellow-apostles and others, bear such 
 testimony in fact ? 
 
 Modern naturalists, going further than Hume, deny 
 not the reality or demonstrableness only, but the 
 possibility of miracles. Science, they say, has dis- 
 covered that order in the world is a pure necessity, 
 and absolutely inviolable ; but science can have made 
 no such discovery as this, uuless it has further dis- 
 covered that the world is not the creature of God, or 
 is independent of him ; or, in a word, that there is no 
 God distinct from the world. If the world with its 
 order be the creature of God, the order in it may be 
 necessary and inviolable in respect of creatures, but 
 surely not in respect of God himself, who is no longer 
 God if he cannot destroy or change as well as estab- 
 lish a certain order. If it be said that he is, by 
 nature, the God of order, this, though doubtless true 
 in the highest sense of the term order, does not imply 
 that miracles arc against order in that sense. For 
 aught we know they may not be, and the assertion 
 that they are, is an assertion merely. " Once believe 
 that there is a God," says Paley, " and miracles are 
 not incredible." 
 
 4. But now to our question. Assuming that mira- 
 cles are both possible and real, may Christianity be 
 adequately proved without them ? We take Christi- 
 
6 MIRACLES 
 
 anity as a revelation in the sense already expressed. 
 In any other view of it, miracles, among proofs of 
 Christianity, would, as we have already intimated, be 
 superfluous if not obtrusive. " Those," says Mansell, 
 " who deny the existence of any special revelation of 
 religious truths distinct from that general sense in 
 which mere reason itself, and all that it can discover, 
 ar^'the^ gifts of Him from whom every good thing 
 coSnes»are only consistent when they deny that mira- 
 cles, -J&rve any value as evidences of religious truth ; 
 and are still more consistent when they deny that such 
 works have been wrought." How gratuitous, and 
 therefore how improper to work miracles in attesta- 
 tion of things essentially existing in the world! To 
 remove the veil, to show the things, would be to prove 
 them : if they and Christianity were identical, the 
 latter would doubtless be self-demonstrative apart 
 from all external evidence. The truth, revealed 
 through Christ, would have, as Coleridge affirms it 
 has, its evidence in itself. Infinitely different is 
 Christianity, according to the meaning in which our 
 question takes the term. It uses the term in its own 
 signification when it asks whether Christianity can be 
 adequately attested without miracles. 
 
 5. And now, first of all, let us understand what is 
 an adequate attestation, a sufficient proof of Christi- 
 anity? This, if we mistake not, is determinative of 
 the main question. Whatever the requisite proof 
 may be, one thing is certain, that Christianity is not 
 sufficiently attested if its evidence does not justify and 
 demand, not a persuasion of the possibility or proba- 
 
THE PROOF OF CHRISTIANITY. V 
 
 bility, but a full undoubting assurance of the absolute 
 verity of its averments : not that this assurance must 
 or always does attend the evidence, which, through 
 preoccupation may be neglected, or through prejudice, 
 misjudged ; but that it is demanded by the nature of 
 the evidence. Christianity itself makes this demand 
 of mankind : Wherever it comes it holds itself en- 
 titled to immediate acceptance as true and as divine ; 
 proclaims a fearful menace to unbelief, the menace of 
 eternal death ; it imputes to unbelief the highest 
 criminality, even that of making God himself a false 
 witness ; it connects this infinite guilt with every 
 degree of unbelief, so that he who believes with an 
 incomplete faith is ready, with a penitence propor- 
 tional to his shortcoming in faith, to cry out, with the 
 father of the lunatic child : " Lord, I believe, help 
 thou my unbelief." It has been said* that the assent 
 to which Christianity is entitled is not equal to that 
 which we owe to the discoveries of science ; that a 
 sense of probability is the utmost the former can le- 
 gitimately include, while the latter must extend to a 
 sense of certainty. But how inadvertent or disloyal 
 to the interests of Christianity is this remark ! Well 
 has Stillingfleet said, that " an assent no stronger than 
 to a thing merely probable, which is that it may or 
 may not be true, is not properly assent at all, but a 
 suspension of our judgment till some convincing argu- 
 ment be produced on either side."f But confront this 
 remark with the peremptory claim of Christianity to 
 
 * In Aids to Faith, Essay II. f Origines Sacrce, vol. i., p. 222- 
 
8 MIRACLES 
 
 our absolute assent. According to this claim, what 
 is there that ought to be more certain to me than the 
 truth of Christianity? Not the existence of God, or 
 the existence of the world, or my own existence. 
 " He who believeth not is condemned already, because 
 he hath not believed;" "he hath made God a liar." 
 This fact it is that gives the answer to the question, 
 as to the nature of the proof, that adequately authen- 
 ticates Christianity. The assent required is surely 
 not out of proportion to the proof. The measure of 
 the first is not greater than the measure of the second. 
 The contrary supposition charges the highest injustice 
 on him who only is just and good. " If there be no evi- 
 dence given sufficient to carry the minds of men beyond 
 mere probability, what sin can it be in those who can- 
 not be obliged to believe as true what is only dis- 
 covered as probable ?"* On the ground of this postu- 
 late, then, let our inquiry proceed. Abstract the 
 miracles, and will there be adequate proof of Christi- 
 anity ? 
 
 6. But before advancing let us name one preliminary 
 more, and one bearing with decisive force on the 
 decision of our question. The miracles are in fact 
 innumerable, and they have never been separated from 
 Christianity. Whether the proof of our religion re- 
 quired miracles or not there has been no experiment 
 to determine. Christianity has never existed except, 
 as we may say with emphasis, in the blaze of miracles. 
 Revealed religion, itself a miracle, was accompanied 
 at its beginning with testimonial miracles, to which 
 * Stilling fleet, vol ii., p. 222. 
 
THE PROOF OF CHRISTIANITY. 9 
 
 others were added, from time to time throughout the 
 whole history of its progress. What a brilliant gal- 
 axy of miracles in days of old before the advent of 
 Christ ! How full of splendid miracles the life-history 
 of our Lord ! How is the record of the beginning and 
 planting of Christianity studded witli miracles as the 
 firmament with stars ! But more, much more than 
 this : miracles are not only accompaniments of Chris- 
 tianity, they are inwrought and consubstantial with it. 
 " Miracles and prophecy," says Rothe, " are not ad- 
 juncts appended from without to a revelation inde- 
 pendent of them, but arc constitutive elements of the 
 revelation itself." "The miracles in the Bible," Bol- 
 ingbroke has said, " are not like those in Livy, de- 
 tached pieces that do not disturb the civil history, 
 which goes on very well without them. But the 
 whole history is founded on them ; it consists of 
 little else, and if it were not a history of them it 
 would be a history of nothing." "Miracles," says 
 Mansell, " are part of the moral as well as sensible 
 evidences, and cannot be denied without destroying 
 both kinds of evidence alike. ' That ye may know 
 that the Son of Man hath power on earth to forgive 
 sins, I say unto thee arise and take up thy couch and 
 go into thine house.' ' If I with the finger of God 
 cast out devils, no doubt the kingdom of God is come 
 among you.' ' By the name of Jesus Christ of Nazar- 
 eth, even by him, doth this man stand before you 
 whole :' Let us imagine, for an instant, such words as 
 these to have been uttered by one who was merely 
 employing a superior knowledge of natural laws to 
 
10 MIRACLES 
 
 produce a false appearance of supernatural power; 
 by an astronomer, for instance, who had predicted an 
 eclipse to a crowd of savages ; or by a chemist avail- 
 ing himself of his science to exhibit relative miracles 
 to an ignorant people, and we shall feel at once how 
 even the most natural explanation of miraculous phe- 
 nomena deals the death-blow to the moral character 
 of the teacher no less than to the sensible evidence of 
 his mission." We see then how the miraculous enters 
 essentially into the very constitution and structure of 
 Christianity. In fact, it can no more be separated 
 from either the intrinsic or the testimonial, the moral 
 or sensible evidence of Christianity, than color from 
 the rainbow, or light from the rays of the sun. 
 Whether, then, miracles were or were not necessary, 
 they have never been wanting. In number, almost 
 without number, they do, in fact, attest Christianity. 
 And this decides one thing, and it is the only thing 
 needed to justify the high claim of our religion, this, 
 namely, that, taking the evidence of Christianity as it 
 in reality is, there can be no question as to its suffi- 
 ciency ; with its miracles it is sufficient, whether it 
 would or would not be without them. There is no 
 ground of certainty if there be none in this evidence : 
 it is no less infallible than the character of God. 
 The presence of miracles is the presence of God him- 
 self as a Deponent. Unbelief in Christianity does, 
 indeed, make God a false witness: there is no deeper 
 criminality. " When He is come, He will reprove the 
 world of sin, because they believe not on me." 
 
 7. But though mir'acles arc in fact inseparable 
 
TEE PROOF OF CHRISTIANITY. \\ 
 
 from the evidences of Christianity, their absence may 
 be imagined ; and there are those who, as apologists 
 for Christianity, say they would prefer their absence, 
 and would fain eliminate them, if they could ; and 
 groundless and purposeless as our question may now 
 seem, the cause of Christianity, as claiming to be a 
 revelation directly from God, is staked on the decision 
 of it. The answer to this question tests the natural- 
 istic view of revealed religion. If there is no necessity 
 for the miraculous in the evidence, it is because there 
 is nothing miraculous in the religion : in our sense of 
 the term it is not a revelation. Away with miracles, 
 means, away with a so-called miraculous revelation. 
 The inquiry whether Christianity may not be proved 
 without miracles, is virtually the inquiry whether 
 essential Christianity may not be resolved into na- 
 turalism. Let us then proceed. 
 
 8. If Christianity can be proved apart from testi- 
 monial miracles, it must be either by the self-evident 
 truthfulness of its substantive or constitutive elements ; 
 or by its moral evidence ; or by its proper effects ; 
 or lastly, its collateral evidences, so-called, in counter- 
 distinction to miracles, will suffice to prove it. We 
 are to inquire whether, without any presupposition or 
 aid of the miraculous, sufficient evidence may be de- 
 rived from these sources. 
 
 Is Christianity its own witness through its indi- 
 viduality as a revelation, or its constitutive elements ? 
 " Evidences of Christianity !" says Coleridge, " I am 
 weary of the word." " The truth revealed through 
 Christ has its evidence in itself.' 7 Let us patiently 
 
12 MIRACLES 
 
 inquire as to the fact concerning this : Has Christi- 
 anity its evidence in itself? We have distinguished, 
 in Christianity, between what it has in common with 
 natural religion, and what is distinctively its own. 
 The present question has no reference to the former ; 
 so far as that is concerned, the evidence is in itself ; 
 but it is no part of the evidence of Christianity, as 
 such, being no part, distinctively, of Christianity it- 
 self. It is in respect to the latter that we ask, does 
 it, apart from miracles, or by mere self-evidence, assert 
 its own truth ? The things concerning which we in- 
 quire, whether they are self-evident or not, are of the 
 class including the following : That the Eternal Word 
 was made flesh in the Person of Jesus ; that the death 
 of Jesus was the redemption of the world ; that Jesus 
 is the Almighty Ruler and Judge of the world ; that 
 the dead will be raised by him at the last day : are 
 these things, independently of testimony, true to the 
 reason of mankind ? The question gives its own an- 
 swer. " Nothing," says Dr. Hodge, " in the appre- 
 hension of rationalists, can be more absurd than that 
 the blood of the cross can remove sin." " We preach 
 Christ crucified," said Paul, " to the Jews a stumbling- 
 block, and to the Greeks foolishness." The Gospel 
 certainly never made its way by recommending itself 
 to the intuitive consciousness, or the natural reason, 
 of man, apart from external evidences of its truth. No 
 more palpably untrue assertion could be made than that 
 Christianity, in its supernatural peculiarities, has its 
 evidence in itself, meaning thereby that it has no need 
 of external proof. " There is nothing." says Calvin, 
 
THE PROOF OF CHRIS1IANITY. 13 
 
 •' that is more at variance with human reason than 
 this article of our faith (the resurrection of the body). 
 For who but God alone could pursuade us that bodies 
 which are now liable to corruption, will, after having 
 rotted away, or after they have been consumed by 
 fire, or torn in pieces by wild beasts, not only be re- 
 stored entire, but in a greatly better condition ? Do 
 not all our apprehensions of things reject this as a 
 thing fabulous, nay, the greatest absurdity in the 
 world?" Truly, only God himself, bearing witness 
 directly to the truth of Christianity, could justify or 
 warrant belief in it. Reason, nature itself, demands 
 that God himself, by supernatural works, or some 
 equivalent means, attest a supernatural revelation, 
 such as Christianity claims to be. They are its 
 natural and proper proofs . " I should not be a 
 Christian," said St. Augustine, "but for miracles." 
 Except for miracles, there would not have been sin 
 in not believing on Jesus Christ. " If I had not done 
 among them the works which none other man did, 
 they had not had sin." Claiming to be the Messiah, 
 it behooved our Lord to authenticate His claim by 
 miracles — preannounced notes of Messiahship — which, 
 if He had not wrought, the Jews, in reverence of the 
 prophetic Scriptures, ought to have rejected Him. 
 Let us inquire, then, of those who say that Christi- 
 anity has its evidence in itself, what they mean by this 
 language. Taking Christianity, with its concreted 
 testimonial miracles, it has its evidence in itself, and 
 witnesses in its own behalf, as the sun does for himself, 
 by the light and heat which he sheds through the 
 
14 MIRACLES 
 
 world '; but apart from the evidence of miracles, ought 
 it not to be discredited ? 
 
 9. It is demonstrated, it has been said, by its moral 
 evidence, or ethical excellency. Is this so ? We 
 have seen that the moral in the evidence is, in fact, 
 interblended and consubstantiated with the miracu- 
 lous ; but still it is urged that the moral, of itself, and 
 without need of the miraculous, demonstrates the truth 
 of Christianity. The ethics of Christianity stamp it, 
 beyond all question, as Divine. And as a general 
 fact, is it not the ethical influence, or the moral evi- 
 dence of Christianity, that, as the objective cause, 
 actually produce faith in men ? — Be it so — we assent 
 not only, but affirm and insist. It cannot be denied 
 that Christianity, to one susceptible of the specific 
 impressions from it, does witness for itself, does de- 
 monstratively assert its divinity, by its ethical peculi- 
 arity. In such a type, and with such resplendence, 
 has the ethical element been developed in Christianity, 
 as to make it an absolute Unique in the earth ; and 
 challenge for it, wherever it is known, the assent of 
 the world, as a miraculous revelation. And this evi- 
 dence it truly is, that in every case prevails, in actually 
 gaining men's assent to Christianity, so far as it is 
 gained in truth. None, at least, become true believers 
 while they are insensible to the moral evidence, the 
 ethical or spiritual excellency of the Gospel. All the 
 evidences pour their force into the moral, or become 
 moralized, so to speak, when that impress is given to 
 the susceptible heart, which is the just counterpart, in 
 man, of objective Christianity. To that spiritual dis- 
 
THE PROOF OF CHRISTIANITY. 15 
 
 cernment, in which faith has its upspring and being, 
 all the things of the Spirit of God are, preeminently) 
 ethical things ; — permeated and filled with the ful- 
 ness of ethical power and excellency. Well does 
 Edwards resolve " a spiritual and saving conviction 
 of the truth and reality of the things revealed in the 
 word of God " into " a sense of the divine excellency 
 (the moral glory) of these things." Nevertheless the 
 evangelical morality, that form of morality which 
 constitutes the moral evidence and asserts the truth 
 of Christianity, so far from being without the miracu- 
 lous, has the miraculous in fact, as its suppositum and 
 ground. It is a form or type of morality, taken al- 
 together from the contact and intercourse of the 
 principle of morality with the miraculously attested 
 wonders of redemption. The moral evidence of Chris- 
 tianity, distinctively, is not its embodiment of morality 
 in the abstract, or of morality in so far as it is com- 
 mon between Christianity and natural religion, but 
 that peculiar and ineffably glorious type of morality, 
 which consists in the concretion of the ethical element 
 in the miraculous facts of the great mystery of Godli- 
 ness : God manifest in the flesh, justified in the spirit, 
 seen of angels, preached unto the nations, believed on 
 in the world, received up into glory. It could not be 
 known that Christianity is Divine or truthful in its 
 claims to divinity from morality unmodified by influ- 
 ences from its own facts and doctrines : no such exhi- 
 bition or enforcement of morality could avail, in any 
 degree, to prove the Trinity in God, or the incarnation 
 of the Word, or the atonement, or the resurrection. 
 
16 MIRACLES 
 
 In order to be demonstrative by its moral evidence, 
 Christianity with its supernatural wonders, must come 
 itself into the sphere of morality, and take a form of 
 morality from itself, and express itself in that form ; 
 that is to say, produce a morality distinctively Chris- 
 tian; or such as has Christianity, with its miracles, for 
 its origin and base. It is divinely revealed and at- 
 tested Christian truth, that entering into the ethical 
 sphere, makes all things there new, giving every prin- 
 ciple a new illustration, and every precept a new 
 exposition and a new motive, and making every man 
 who becomes an example of it, a new creature — this 
 is the moral evidence which demonstrates Christianity. 
 It has its breath and being in the miracles ; take 
 them away, and the evidence goes with them. Apart 
 from these, the ethical superiority of Christianity is, 
 so far, to its praise, but does not demonstrate its claims 
 to a divine origin. 
 
 10. Next, is there proof of Christianity from its 
 effects, or actual efficiency on mankind, apart from 
 miracles ? We do not ask whether this evidence is 
 demonstrative, but whether the influence of miracles 
 is to be excluded from it. The evidence is demonstra- 
 tive: the tree is known by its fruits — Christianity 
 meets the infinite wants of man ; it recovers him from 
 the dominion of sin ; it creates him anew in the image 
 of God ; it is the power of God unto salvation to every 
 one who believes in it. Here truly is the crowning 
 evidence of the truth of Christianity, and it is evidence 
 which Christianity will always be multiplying to 
 itself. But the present question is, Does this evidence 
 
THE PROOF OF CHRISTIANITY. i? 
 
 imply that miracles may be dispensed with ? And the 
 answer to it is, that the evidence is the very fruitage of 
 miracles. Whence that efficacy of Christianity which 
 supplies this evidence ? What is this efficacy but 
 that of a wondrous miracle, or collection of miracles, 
 enshrined in countless witnessing miracles ? Would a 
 Christianity, so called, denuded of the miraculous, 
 have had the same efficacy? Take away this element 
 from the Gospel, and would it still be the perfect 
 satisfaction of human need, the power of God unto 
 salvation ? 
 
 11. As yet, then, we have no proof of Christianity, 
 apart from miracles. May it not, nevertheless, be 
 sufficiently proved without them, by its collateral evi- 
 dence? We have already answered this question. 
 Christianity has evidence of this kind of an immense 
 amount, in which apparently or distinctively, there is 
 nothing of the miraculous. " It has pleased the Di- 
 vine Author of our religion," says Mansell, " to fortify 
 his revelation with evidence of various kinds, appeal- 
 ing with different degrees of force to various minds, 
 and to the same mind at different times." In the 
 words of Butler, "the evidence of Christianity 
 is a long series of things reaching as it seems 
 from the beginning of the world to the present 
 time, of great variety and compass." Is there not 
 in this series of things evidence enough to prove 
 Christianity independently of the miraculous portion 
 of it ? Butler, who ascribes great weight to this evi- 
 dence, " consisting of things not reducible to the heads, 
 either of miracles or the completion of prophecy," 
 
18 MIRACLES 
 
 still, while making these two the direct and funda- 
 mental proofs, adds that those others (the collateral 
 proofs), however considerable they are, ought never to 
 be urged apart from the direct proofs, but to be always 
 joined with them." Why should the collateral proofs 
 never be urged apart from the direct ones, but always 
 be joined with them ? For two palpable reasons : 
 first, because, if the collateral proofs could exist, 
 apart from the direct, they would not be in themselves 
 or in their influence, equivalent to the direct. They 
 would not be, as God himself directly deposing to the' 
 truth of Christianity, so as to make unbelief an im- 
 peachment of the veracity of God : the evidence of 
 Christianity must be this, or equivalent to this ; mir- 
 acles are the thing itself, the collateral proofs are 
 neither the thing nor its equivalent. What they 
 would amount to by themselves as demanding assent, 
 what measure of assent they would call for, or justify, 
 if perfectly appreciated, we cannot determine; but 
 the very fact, if it were a fact, that such miraculous 
 matters as those of substantive Christianity had no 
 miraculous attestation, would, as we have seen, apart 
 from posterior requisitions, be such a presumption 
 against its truth, as no evidence could overcome. 
 Reason — nature itself, would, to the last, require that 
 attestation. Christianity, without it, would be in- 
 credible. — But secondly, the collateral evidences should 
 not be urged apart from the direct or miraculous, be- 
 cause separate from the latter they have, and can 
 have, in fact, no existence. The collateral evidences, 
 like every thing in Christianity, had their origin and 
 
THE PROOF OF CHRISTIANITY. ] 9 
 
 source in the miraculous, arc an outflow from it, and 
 can in reality be no more separated from it, or used 
 in proof against its necessity, than beams of sunlight 
 be separated from, and then made an argument against, 
 the necessity of the body of the sun. It is owing to 
 miracles originally and determinantly, that the collat- 
 eral evidences are what they are. We know not 
 what would have been the course of things in the 
 history of Christianity, had it not originated and 
 started in miracles : enough that we know what was 
 the fact: the success of Christianity, the conversion 
 of the Roman empire, the lives of the saints, the testi- 
 mony of the noble army of martyrs, the progress of 
 civilization and the arts under Christian institutions 
 and society, the whole of that long series of things 
 reaching from the beginning of the world to the pre- 
 sent time, which comprehends all the collateral proofs 
 of Christianity, — instead of implying that miracles 
 arc not necessary as direct proofs of it, infer the re- 
 ality, if not the necessity also of miracles, as certainly 
 as the fruit and foliage of a tree infer the reality of 
 the tree. Well, therefore, has Butler said, the col- 
 lateral should never be urged apart from the direct 
 proofs of Christianity, but be always joined with 
 them. Most fitly and undeniably has this other im- 
 portant word been spoken by the same great author : 
 " Revelation itself is miraculous, and miracles are the 
 proof of it." The collateral evidences, apart from 
 miracles, arc not the proof of it, and as such should 
 never be urged or relied on. 
 
 12. But after all, how are miracles the supreme, 
 
20 MIRACLES 
 
 ultimate, decisive Test of the truthfulness of Christi- 
 anity, since miracles themselves are amenable to a 
 test? Be it that they are decisive, that they give 
 absolute certainty, when once their genuineness is 
 beyond doubt : still if there are true miracles, there 
 are also false ones ; and there is evidence which, if it 
 be against a miracle, no miracle can countervail ; that, 
 namely, of self-evident truth and goodness. We know 
 from Scripture itself (see Deut. xiii. 1-11) that if the 
 object or purpose of a miracle be wrong, the testimony 
 of the purpose against the miracle is stronger than 
 the testimony of the miracle, or any miracle can be, in 
 the interest of the purpose. And does it not hence 
 follow that miracles, instead of proving Christianity, 
 are dependent on Christianity for their own proof? 
 that if we know the miracles to be true, we know 
 this, because we know by antecedent and higher evi- 
 dence, the religion to be true ? This argument seems 
 to have convinced some persons that the defence of 
 Christianity is complete, independent of the testimony 
 of miracles, and is rather impeded than facilitated 
 by it. 
 
 13. But the argument is a fallacy. It assumes as 
 true in an absolute sense, what is true only in a certain 
 case. Because a miracle, so called, wrought for a bad 
 purpose, is already condemned by its purpose, it con- 
 cludes that every miracle depends for its credibility 
 on knowledge of its purpose ; or, in ignorance of its 
 purpose, is necessarily undeterminative as to its own 
 genuineness. It cannot assert its own reality as a 
 miracle, a personal or direct work of God, unless it is 
 
THE PROOF OF CHRISTIANITY. 21 
 
 known to what intent it is wrought. The argument 
 is, that since a bad purpose condemns an alleged 
 miracle performed in its favor, no miracle, irrespective 
 of acquaintance with its purpose, can, as a miracle, 
 authenticate itself. The sophistry is manifest. It is 
 a mere truism, that no miracle can countervail the 
 contradictory testimony of a bad purpose or object ; 
 it is simply asserting that a true miracle cannot be 
 wrought in attestation of a bad purpose; that God 
 cannot act, cannot exert his power in the interest of 
 moral evil ; that is to say, cannot deny or undeify 
 Himself. But does this imply that He can never act 
 and authenticate the act as His own, unless it is al- 
 ready known why or to what intent the act is per- 
 formed ? Must we know what God intends by His 
 works, before we can be certain that the works are 
 indeed His ? Can He do no works capable of differ- 
 encing themselves absolutely from the works of His 
 creatures ? We know that He can have no bad de- 
 sign ; we know that He must have some design, not 
 unworthy of Himself ; but must He acquaint us with 
 His designs, before He can perform works which shall 
 be able to assert themselves as distinctively His own ? 
 It is true that we know not the limit of finite power ; 
 but cannot infinite power go beyond that limit, and 
 there put itself forth in works after its own kind, 
 which no finite power shall be able to equal, or suc- 
 cessfully counterfeit ? And by such self-authenticated 
 works, cannot God authenticate a revelation which, 
 as such, could not otherwise be adequately attested ? 
 What if we knew no more as to the purpose of Chris- 
 
22 MIRACLES 
 
 tianity than that it is not a bad one, or one unworthy 
 of the Deity? might not God, without acquainting us 
 further with its object, seal it as a revelation, by in- 
 contestable miracles ? May this be denied, without 
 limiting the Holy One ? 
 
 14. But we have been putting the matter at its 
 greatest disadvantage. Our knowledge is not alto- 
 gether negative as to the purpose of Christianity ; its 
 purpose is worthy of its miracles, and required them 
 for its fulfilment ; and whatever may be said of a sup- 
 posed necessity or duty of testing or proving miracles, 
 here are miracles which are their own proof. Ad- 
 mitting that the Scripture miracles were really 
 wrought, we may as well deny that God made the 
 world, as deny that He was their author. If the genu- 
 ineness of some of them, apart from the rest, and from 
 the system to which they all belong, might seem to 
 be questionable, yet, as a whole, once admit their re- 
 ality, and the possibility of reasonable doubt as to 
 their authorship is excluded. If the plagues of Egypt, 
 the giving of the manna, the crossing of the Jordan, 
 the regression of the sun, the swimming of the iron, 
 the walking on the sea, the resurrection of Lazarus, 
 the resurrection of our Lord — if these, with the rest 
 of the Scripture miracles, were matters of fact, he who, 
 admitting them as such, does not believe in the relig- 
 ion which they attest, does indeed charge God Himself 
 with bearing false witness. It is not because these 
 miracles do not assert themselves to be miracles indeed, 
 that there is held to be a necessity for superior or 
 antecedent proof. The Creation itself is not more self- 
 
THE PROOF OF CHRISTIANITY. 23 
 
 evidently of God, than the testimonial miracles of 
 Christianity. 
 
 15. Miracles, then — mi testable, because there is 
 nothing to test them by — miracles wrought, it is cer- 
 tain, for no unworthy purpose, but not dependent on 
 a knowledge of their purpose for proof of their reality, 
 are the direct, fundamental, indispensable proofs of 
 Christianity. Whatever is peculiar in Christianity, 
 would never have been known had it not been reveal- 
 ed, and for evidence of its truth, or its demonstrative 
 certitude, rests at last on testimonial miracles. Ex- 
 cept as ultimately assured by these divine vouchers, I 
 have no sufficient ground for rational belief as to any 
 thing distinctively or peculiarly Christian. I do not 
 know that there are more Persons than one to whom 
 Deity belongs, or that Jesus was God, or that His 
 death was an atonement for the sins of mankind, or 
 that the dead will be raised by Him ; I do not know 
 these things by intuition, or because, independently of 
 external proofs, they are true to my reason ; I know 
 them because God, having revealed them by His Holy 
 Spirit, has sealed that revelation by evidence either 
 in itself directly miraculous^nrst, last, and midst, as 
 its ground. 
 
 16. After all, however, it may be objected that if 
 Christianity behooved to certify itself by miracles, it be- 
 hooved to continue miracles. To the masses of mankind, 
 for whom Christianity was chiefly intended, historical 
 miracles, as far as their ability to verify them is con- 
 cerned, are as nothing. What, to the common people, 
 as to power of verifying them to themselves, are events 
 
24 MIRACLES 
 
 of the far distant past? Moreover, as a general fact, 
 it is notorious that men do not become Christians from 
 personal examination of the testimony of miracles, or 
 the historical evidences of Christianity. This objec- 
 tion is virtually answered already. The miracles, 
 though performed ages ago, are present, and live in all 
 the ages, and even to the unlearned and children, wit- 
 ness for Christianity to-day, not less decisively and 
 strongly than they did at first. The Scripture mir- 
 acles are not as other events of the past, in respect of 
 the antiquating influence of time ; on the contrary, 
 they and those events, are in this respect a contrast to 
 one another. The miracles were not left, like com- 
 mon occurrences, to the accidents of tradition, or 
 chance, or human history ; they were not detached, 
 isolated, inorganic things ; they all pertained to one 
 whole, with every part of which, as with the whole, 
 they were co-organized, interconnected, and, as it 
 were, interfused. The miracles of Christianity are, in 
 fact, as we have already said, among its integrant, 
 constitutive elements ; they live in its life ; they live 
 in the Scriptures, in the Church, and in the holy ex- 
 amples and confession of members of the Church : in 
 preaching, in the sacraments, in all the memorials and 
 ordinances of Christianity, their witnessing presence 
 and power are conserved and felt. Besides, the mir- 
 acles of power which attest Christianity, are like 
 Christianity itself, and whatever essentially belongs 
 to it, is perpetually quickened and rejuvenated by an- 
 other species of miracles, comprised in the completion 
 of the prophecies — miracles of knowledge, which are 
 
THE PROOF OF CHRISTIANITY. 25 
 
 continually being accomplished, as time advances in 
 its course. These direct and fundamental proofs of 
 Christianity, in their demonstrative force, enter into 
 every part and fibre of the great organism which they 
 authenticate as divine, and at once verify and are ver- 
 ified by it. In this sense, it is true that the religion 
 asserts the miracles, as well as the miracles the relig- 
 ion. The proofs of Christianity, direct and collateral, 
 " make up," to use the admirable words of Butler, " all 
 of them together, one argument, the conviction arising 
 from which kind of proof may be compared to what 
 they call the effect in architecture, or other works of 
 art— a result from a number of things so and so dis- 
 posed, and taken into one view." The miracles are in 
 the view with all the rest, attesting all, and in and 
 through all, attesting and asserting themselves ; and 
 in their proper influence, no less, perhaps even more 
 effective, on the whole, at this day, than they were to 
 many who saw them performed. There is no need of 
 new miracles ; indeed, they might be a disadvantage, 
 and, after a short time, would, in effect, cease to be 
 miracles. If the old miracles, certified as they are to 
 all, do not convince men, new ones doubtless would 
 also fail to do it. " If they hear not Moses and the 
 prophets "—if Moses and the prophets, with the mir- 
 acles which attested and still attest their mission, are 
 disregarded by them— " neither would they be per- 
 suaded though one rose from the dead." Greater, 
 doubtless, to us, is the advantage from the Scripture 
 miracles, greater as they lie together in the one view 
 of which we have spoken ; more decisive as evidencing 
 2 . 
 
2G Mill ACL ES 
 
 the truth of revealed religion, than would be the repe- 
 tition of fresh miracles every day. Miracles prove 
 Christianity, but they may fail to make converts to 
 it. Referring to the too common results of miracles, 
 Pascal has said, " the purpose of miracles is not to 
 convert, but to condemn. 77 
 
 17. The objection owes what of force it may seem 
 to have, to great indiscrimination ; it does not distin- 
 guish between what the evidence of Christianity be- 
 hooves to be in itself, and the way and the degree in 
 which it becomes effective in individual converts — be- 
 tween the necessity of its having a sufficient ground 
 for its authoritative demand for faith, and the mea- 
 sures and workings of faith, on the part of those in 
 whom the demand is met. To make the former com- 
 plete, the specific testimony of miracles is necessary ; 
 the latter, though the influence of miracles, as before 
 explained, is never wanting in it, vary indefinitely 
 with different persons. In no one is faith commensur- 
 ate with the objective demand for it ; nor is it alike as 
 to its origin and advances in all. St. Augustine, but 
 for miracles historically verified, to and by himself, 
 could not have been a Christian ; the generality do 
 not distinctively feel the necessity of miracles, or for- 
 mally recognize their specific influence and function as 
 the supreme Test and proof of Christianity. They 
 also, in a true sense, would not believe, but for mir- 
 acles, but it is the miraculous, as integrant and inter- 
 fused in the whole of the evidence, and pervading the 
 essence of Christianity, that their faith apprehends 
 and rests in. It is the " one argument" of which But- 
 
THE PROOF OF CHRISTIANITY. 27 
 
 ler speaks, "made up of all the proofs taken together," 
 the conviction arising from which he compares to 
 what they call the effect in architecture, or other works 
 of art. This it is that generally produces faith, when 
 it becomes a personal reality. Different minds may 
 be variously affected by it ; some more by one part, 
 some more by another ; some in a larger, some in a 
 smaller measure ; but in every case, the efficiency of 
 the whole, as such, is felt, and the result is the product 
 of the whole. It is so from the fact that Christianity, 
 with its proofs, is a single, living organism, each part 
 of which interconnects itself with every other, giving 
 every other part an influential, life-producing, if not a 
 distinctly recognized presence. 
 
 18. This distinction between the fundamental ne- 
 cessity of miracles, as outward proofs or seals of testi- 
 mony, and the influence of these and the other evi- 
 dences in the genesis of faith, or in producing faith, 
 in different persons, solves at once the objection 
 before us. It was needful that the demonstration 
 of Christianity should be absolute, irrespective of 
 men's belief or disbelief; thus only could be jus- 
 tified its absolute claim to belief, and its denun- 
 ciation of all unbelief. How it was to fare in the 
 world, what fruit its evidence was to produce in the 
 minds of men, or which part of the evidence was to be 
 first or most effective, or what in the beginning and 
 progress of a life of faith was to have ascendant pow- 
 er, depended on the different individualities of men, 
 and the contingencies of time and circumstances. 
 
 19. On this point, it is to be further and distinctly 
 
28 MIRACLES 
 
 remembered, and strongly accented, that in every case 
 of the subjective demonstration of Christianity, there 
 is another agency concerned besides that of the out- 
 ward evidence. It is not of themselves alone that 
 men believe : faith is the gift of God. It is the in- 
 ward demonstration of the Spirit and of power, that 
 makes the external demonstration fruitful. Amidst 
 the full effulgence of outward evidence, "if thine eye 
 be evil, thy whole body will be full of darkness." 
 Without the subjective prerequisites, — to use the words 
 of Coleridge, without " that predisposing warmth, 
 which renders the understanding susceptible of the 
 specific impressions from the history, and from all 
 other outward seals of testimony," the whole of the 
 evidence, collateral and miraculous, internal and ex- 
 ternal, will be without avail, except to condemn, as 
 Pascal said of the miracles, in particular. And it is 
 also certain, and equally essential as bearing on the 
 topic before us, that where the inward witnessing of 
 the Spirit has place ; where, to adopt Coleridge's lan- 
 guage again, there is " a true efficient conviction of a 
 moral truth — the creation of a new heart, which col- 
 lects the energies of a man's whole being in the focus 
 of the conscience," where there " is emphatically, that 
 leading of the Father, without which no man can come 
 to Christ," there the dominion of the entire external 
 evidence is actualized. Christianity, now, has all its 
 evidences at command, and they do their work. The 
 miracles, whether distinctively verified or not, work 
 together with all the rest. There is nothing now 
 that does not bear witness to Christianity. Nature 
 
THE PROOF OF CHRISTIANITY. 29 
 
 itself, under the power of this inward demonstration, 
 this " one essential miracle." asserts the Supernatu- 
 ral : 
 
 " Nature is Christian : preaches to mankind, 
 And bids dead matter aid us in our creed." 
 
 20. On the whole, we are brought by the discussion 
 we have been engaged in, to the conclusion that ob- 
 jections to miracles as proofs of Christianity presup- 
 pose and in fact have as their ground objections to 
 veritable Christianity itself. As naturalism cannot 
 but make objections to miracles as the proper proof of 
 religion, so, reciprocally, when there are these objec- 
 tions, the religion adhered to, if any, is that of natural- 
 ism. An objector to miracles as proof of doctrine, 
 cannot be an intelligent believer in such a doctrine as 
 that of a plurality of Persons in the God-head, or of 
 the two Natures in Christ, or of the resurrection of the 
 dead. He ought not to call himself a Christian ; not 
 even a neochristian, unless he intend by the prefix to 
 deny that he is a real Christian at all. The only re- 
 ligion which, after discarding miracles as proofs, has 
 any ground of credibility in it, is that which, in the 
 words of the Westminster Review, has its attestation 
 "in the essential unity and self consistency of our 
 moral and spiritual nature, opening more and more 
 with the progressive education of the race, to a con- 
 sciousness of the fundamental laws on which it rests, 
 and which we learn partly through mutual intercourse 
 and sympathy, partly through the awakening influence 
 of superior minds, on those that are less developed and 
 advanced." We would not press the inexorable con- 
 
30 MIRACLES 
 
 sequences of a theory on those who shrink from them ; 
 all who disparage miracles, are not, we must hope, ab- 
 solute naturalists, yet we cannot but stand in doubt, 
 if not of the substantial loyalty to the cause of Chris- 
 tian truth, at least of the logical consistency, of those 
 who say they would rather have Christianity without 
 than with the miracles, or that the credibility of mir- 
 acles depends on doctrine rather than the credibility 
 of doctrine on miracles. Nor can we adopt the for- 
 mula, as applicable to a supernatural revelation, that 
 " the miracle must witness for itself and the doctrine 
 must witness for itself, and then the first is capable of 
 witnessing for the second."* We take Butler as com- 
 plete ; Revelation itself is miraculous and miracles are 
 its proof. If miracles do indeed witness for them- 
 selves, that is to say, assert themselves, demonstra- 
 tively, to be direct works of God, they can witness for 
 that which to us, through our ignorance, does not wit- 
 ness for itself, if by the will of God, they are wrought 
 for that end. Revelation, apart from testimonial mir- 
 acles, does not witness for itself to us : in this isolation 
 it would not be true to human reason. The proper 
 statement is : " the miracle must witness for itself; the 
 doctrine, apart from the miracle, does not witness for 
 itself ; the first, by itself, must witness for the second.'' 
 In the evidence of miracles all other evidence has its 
 ground and its beginning. Without miracles Chris- 
 tianity is indemonstrable. 
 
 21. Before dismissing the subject we would repro- 
 duce, for the purpose cf emphasising with a. specific 
 
 * Trench. 
 
THE PROOF OF CHRISTIANITY. 31 
 
 reference, what 1ms already been expressed with some 
 particularity as to the measure or fulness of the assent 
 demanded by Christianity. What we would further 
 say on this point is, that, while this assent indicates 
 the nature of the proof of Christianity, it indicates at 
 the same time the proper task of a Christian apolo- 
 gist. Whatever may be the measure or form of men's 
 belief or disbelief of Christianity, there can, as we 
 have urged, be no question that the assent which with 
 infinite authority it challenges of all, is that of unqual- 
 ified, absolute, prompt assurance. Most assuredly 
 therefore he who sets himself to defend Christianity, 
 undertakes, if he knows what he is doing, to make out 
 a sufficiency in its evidences to produce, not a convic- 
 tion of the probability or bare credibility, but a con- 
 viction of the absolute certainty of its truth. He must 
 present evidence proportional to the assent required. 
 If he does not do this, his attempt is a failure. If he 
 only gives reason for a preponderant conviction, a 
 balance of probability, in favor of Christianity, or for 
 an assent short of a full sense of the certainty of its 
 truth, he has not defended Christianity; he has at best 
 only approximated a defence of it. Without contro- 
 versy Christianity cannot be defended, if its evidence 
 be not in itself and to a just appreciation of it, abso- 
 lutely demonstrative. The claims of Christianity to 
 positive, undoubting belief, cannot be otherwise justi- 
 fied. " If," says Stillingfleet, " there be no evidences 
 given sufficient to carry the minds of men beyond mere 
 probability, what sin can it be in them to disbelieve 
 who cannot be obliged to believe as true what is only 
 
32 MIRACLES 
 
 discovered as probable?" Yet a recent writer* on 
 the study of the evidences has said that to require cer- 
 tainty as the just result of the evidence of Christian- 
 ity, is to require an assent out of proportion to the 
 evidence : as if there might be evidence greater than 
 the direct testimony of God. And have not defences 
 of Christianity, so called, works on the evidences, too 
 often contented themselves with this idea as the ut- 
 most which the evidence can extend to ? And why, 
 but from not thinking with Butler, or forgetting what 
 he has said, that the collateral evidences ought never 
 to be urged apart from the direct, the miraculous 
 ones, but to be always joined with them ? The col- 
 lateral evidences, by themselves, would not warrant 
 the assent demanded by Christianity ; but keep the two 
 kinds of evidences always united, let the witnessing 
 virtue of miracles be as it is in truth retained in every 
 part of the evidence ; let all the evidence involve and 
 rest upon miracles as its substratum, what then, as to 
 the nature, the measure of the assent demanded by it? 
 Does the evidence then come short of substantiating 
 its claim to a sense of certainty, as its proper counter- 
 part in man ? Let men apprehend this as the fact re- 
 specting the evidence, and ought they to be less cer 
 tain of the truth of Christianity than of that of natural 
 science, or of the existenee of the world, or of their 
 own existence ? In the words of Stillingfleet, we ask, 
 " can there be greater evidence that a testimony is in- 
 fallible, than that it is the testimony of God Him- 
 self?" Let us not disparage the books on the evi- 
 * Aids to Faith. 
 
THE PROOF OF CHRISTIANITY. 33 
 
 dencea ; there are among books few of greater power; 
 they triumphantly refute all objections ; they are vic- 
 torious in all controversies ; they do completely what 
 they undertake to do ; they overwhelm infidelity with 
 its logical incousistencies and absurdities; but after 
 all, what for the most part have they achieved or aim- 
 ed at in the battle of the evidences, but just to 
 show the bare credibility of the religion attested by 
 them? When a spiritual man, after pondering, doubt- 
 less not without edification and delight, the profound 
 and masterly treatises of the apologists, comes into 
 the presence of the great Object itself, in whose inter- 
 est they labor so well, and looks directly upon the 
 Miracle Christianity, encompassed by countless testi- 
 monial miracles, how feeble is language to express the 
 difference of which he now becomes conscious, between 
 the title of Christianity to assent, and the measure of 
 assent which these works contend for ? And whence 
 the difference, if not from inappreciation of the place 
 and position of miracles in the evidence ? It is in 
 two respects with the evidence of Christianity, as with 
 that of the being of God ; both are alike demonstrative 
 in asserting the reality of their objects, and both alike 
 unheeded or rejected, or dimly seen, even by the prin- 
 ces of human wisdom. 
 
 22. We add one remark. Is not a reassertion of 
 the miraculous in the evidence of revealed religion an 
 especial desideratum of the times? If it be possible, 
 should not the Scripture miracles be made to reappear 
 as living realities, before the eyes of this generation ? 
 Otherwise where before long will be faith in revela- 
 2* 
 
34 MIRACLES 
 
 tion? Natural religion, even, seems to be standing 
 " a tiptoe," ready to forsake the sphere of religious 
 philosophy. What more notorious, than that the re- 
 ligious philosophy of the day is mainly pantheistic ? 
 "It is an admitted fact," said Isaac Taylor some years 
 since, " that already all, or nearly all, educated men 
 from end to end of continental Europe, those of the 
 Anglo-Saxon race alone excepted, are either open 
 pantheists, or are kept from avowing themselves to be 
 so, by motives of conventional propriety, or of policy." 
 The Anglo-Saxons themselves are becoming unstead- 
 fast in belief in a Personal God. Men of high culture, 
 English and American, are coming to the conclusion 
 that there is no Divine Being different from the world, 
 and nothing in a proper sense supernatural. Not 
 many of these as yet profess themselves to be pantheists, 
 but leading minds among them employ reasonings and 
 forms of expression, which involve pantheism inevit- 
 ably, and not obscurely or indirectly. It may be 
 traced too perceptibly in some of the recent review 
 articles. Professor Powell tells us that " to attempt 
 to reason from law to volition, from order to active 
 power, from universal reason to distinct personality, 
 from design to self-existence, from intelligence to in- 
 finite perfection, is in reality to adopt grounds of 
 argument and speculation entirely beyond those of 
 strict philosophic inference." Pantheism on a large 
 and increasing scale is the manifest goal to which 
 modern thinking on religion is tending. The fact is 
 on all sides seen and confessed. It is beginning to be 
 felt beyond the educated classes ; the people at large 
 
THE PROOF OF CHRISTIANITY. 35 
 
 are becoming more or less acquainted and pleased 
 with pantheistic speculations. What is to be done ? 
 Something surely besides what has been or what is 
 being done. The means now and hitherto used have 
 failed even to check the progress of the deadly error ; 
 it was never more triumphant than at the present 
 moment. To what other means may we look? Shall 
 we expect new theophanies, new manifestations of the 
 supernatural and the miraculous, to confound the 
 naturalism on all sides so predominant ? What were 
 this but to make incomplete or transitory the original 
 attestation of Christianity ; to make obsolete or in- 
 valid all the miracles both of the Old and New Testa- 
 ments ? What were it, moreover, but to make void 
 our own highest responsibility and privilege; to cease 
 from personal dignity and worth ; to distrust and 
 count as nothing the indwelling power and grace of 
 the Holy Spirit; in short, to require unnecessary mira- 
 cles ; that is, in principle, to put miracles among com- 
 mon tilings ; to make them indeed miracles no longer? 
 This were virtually to become pantheists ourselves. 
 Still the living reality, the influential presence of the 
 miraculous in the evidence of Christianity, the just 
 antitheton of naturalistic tendencies and successes, — 
 this is clearly indicated and imperatively demanded, 
 as their proper remedy. Never more than in this our 
 day, should the "City of our God" be known 
 and read of men by its name, Jehovah-Shammah, 
 the Lord ts there. It will not be so known and 
 read without direct, infallible revelations of the Divine 
 Presence. " Out of Zion the perfection of beauty," 
 
36 MIRACLES 
 
 the excellent glory itself must shine, and it will not 
 shine thence, except in its own proper manifestations ; 
 the natural, simply, does not directly reveal, does not 
 attest the Infinite or Divine. Naturalism will be 
 efficiently confuted by nothing but an actual exhibi- 
 tion and perception of the miraculous, the proper seal 
 of God. It is far from being certain that the presence 
 of the miraculous would impart that perception of it ; 
 but its presence, its essential or influential presence, is 
 necessary. All just religious conviction, all true piety, 
 consists essentially in a sense of divinity or the mira- 
 culous as at once inhering in and attesting revela- 
 tion ; the central Miracle Christianity, authenticated 
 as directly of God by its accompanying testimonial 
 miracles. And may this sense be produced in the 
 absence of its objective cause, the miraculously attested 
 Miracle itself? Must not that Miracle by some means 
 display itself anew ? And by what other means, since 
 new miracles are not to be looked for but by reasserting, 
 producing anew, the testimony of the ancient miracles? 
 But how is this to be done? Is it a possibility? Can 
 Christianity, after eighteen centuries, reproduce its 
 miraculous attestations as at first? The question has 
 been answered. Christianity, in itself, or as an objec- 
 tive reality, has its first life always ; its facts, its doc- 
 trines, its testimony, all live in, perpetuate, and are 
 perpetuated by that life : therefore nothing in substan- 
 tive Christianity can become stale or obsolete ; by its 
 constitutive elements, it is like its Author, in respect of 
 time, the same yesterday, to-day, and forever : so it is 
 in itself, and so it seems to be to every one whose 
 
THE PROOF OF CHRISTIANITY. 37 
 
 understanding has been opened to understand it. To 
 the eye of faith, Christianity is as novel, as wonderful 
 now as it was to the disciples on the day of Pentecost. 
 If in the primitive vigor and fruitfulness of faith Chris- 
 tianity should reappear in the life of the Church, would 
 there be any decrepitude, any wrinkle or infirmity 
 of age, any trace of the wear or waste of time in its 
 aspect? The doctrines, the examples, and with all 
 the rest, the miracles, would they not live again, as 
 before the very eyes of men ?* Would not this be 
 the certain, the necessary consequence, even if to the 
 miracles distinctively no special attention were drawn? 
 But as the times call with such emphasis for the spe- 
 cific witness of miracles, as it is specially character- 
 istic of the times to disown and deny God's direct 
 testimony to His revelation, so abundantly given, and 
 this for the reason that His revelation itself is disbe- 
 lieved — this fact would make it impossible to the 
 
 * " Methought I saw, with great evidence, from the four evan- 
 gelists, the wonderful works of God in giving Jesus Christ to 
 save us, from His conception and birth even to His second com- 
 ing to judgment ; methought I teas as if I had seen Him bom, as 
 if I had seen Him grow up, as if I had seen Him walk through 
 this world from the cradle to the cross. . . . When I have 
 considered also the truth of His resurrection, and have remem- 
 bered that word, ' Touch me not, Mary,' etc., I have seen as if He 
 had leaped out of the grave's mouth,'" etc. (Bunyan's Life.) 
 See also Chrysostom on Gal. iii. 1 : " It was not in the country of 
 the Galatians, but in Jerusalem, that He was crucified : how then 
 does he (Paul) say among you ? To demonstrate the power of 
 faith, which is able to see even distant objects. And he does not 
 say, ' was crucified.' but ' was painted crucified,' showing that by 
 the eyes of faith they beheld more distinctly than some who 
 were present and saw the transactions." 
 
38 MIRACLES 
 
 revived Church not to have a very prominent refer- 
 ence in all the workings of her life, inward and out- 
 ward, in her thoughts, her prayers, her discourses, her 
 books, the labors of her ministry, to the reproduction 
 of the miraculous testimony, the sign-manual of God 
 Himself. And the result would be sure : with corres- 
 ponding prominence, the miracles would return and 
 take their proper position among the evidences. The 
 constancy of nature is not less to be doubted than that 
 rejuvenated Christianity, novel and fresh as at first, 
 with the advantage of an experience as old as time 
 and not older than opulent in teachings of Divine wis- 
 dom and prudence, would renew its pristine demon- 
 strativeness and power; and if still confronted by 
 adversaries, of whatever number or whatever name, 
 — neo-christians, naturalists, pantheists, atheists, — 
 would by their opposition, however maintained, be no 
 more retarded in its triumphant advances, than the 
 sun is retarded in his circuit of the heavens by the 
 mists and vapors of the atmosphere. " Woe unto 
 him that striveth with his Maker. Let the potsherds 
 strive with the potsherds of the earth." 
 
II. 
 
 NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. -I. 
 
 Nothing is more emphatically taught in Scripture* 
 than that " the grace of God which bringeth salvation" 
 could not have been bestowed arbitrarily, or without 
 regard to principles of fitness and propriety, as to 
 the MODE of procedure ; but w r as under the highest 
 necessity of adhering to a suitable manner in ac- 
 complishing its object. God, though above every 
 other necessity, could not disregard His own character 
 nor act in a way unworthy of Himself, as the Lord and 
 Maker of all. Such a way is conceivable, but it was 
 not possible, because not consistent with the essential 
 perfections of the Divine Nature. It would not have 
 become the Most High. 
 
 2. It may have been well, if not necessary, on our 
 account also, that respect should have been had to 
 method. The way of showing favor is itself often of 
 more value than all particular benefits ; indeed, essen- 
 tial to the permanent value of every benefit. A family 
 may have received a father's generosity in the amplest 
 measures, and yet be less indebted to him for this, 
 
 * Heb. ii. 10, 14, 17. Gal. iii. 21, etc. 
 
 (39) 
 
40 NATURE OF TIIE ATONEMENT. 
 
 than for his having always bestowed his offices of 
 kindness in such a way as to make them so many in- 
 stances of wisdom in himself — so many exemplary 
 lessons to his household, as to the paramount value of 
 character. It is often better that things in themselves 
 very desirable should be left undone, rather than be 
 done in an improper manner. Might not, then, 
 the Divine favor towards man have proved no 
 favor in the end, if God had disregarded mode in 
 conferring it ? 
 
 3. It was not only well, but absolutely indispensable 
 for our salces, that method should have been observed. 
 Had not God consulted his own honor, He would 
 not ultimately have benefited mankind. God is 
 Himself the portion of man ; but God dishonor- 
 ing Himself were no more God. No happiness, no 
 possibility of it, would be left to man, if God should 
 do an unwise thing, or a thing on any account misbe- 
 coming the Supreme Majesty of heaven and earth. 
 The benevolence of God, His power to bless mankind, 
 depends on His always acting worthily of Himself. 
 
 4. But the Scripture* teaches that the glory of God, 
 " the essential perfections of the Divine nature,"t re- 
 quired, that He should not only have had respect to 
 manner, but have limited Himself to one manner 
 namely, " the making the Captain of our salvation per- 
 
 * In the text before referred to and others. 
 
 f See Heb. ii. 10. We have not exaggerated the force of the 
 word " became " in this passage. " The word signifies that de- 
 cency and becomingness, which justice, reason and equity require ; 
 so that the contrary would be unmeet, because unequal and un- 
 just. Thus every one's duty, that which is incumbent on him, 
 
NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 41 
 
 feet through sufferings." For this— this, and no 
 other — the necessity was the same as that God be un- 
 changeably God, a Being of infinite perfection, who 
 will not dishonor Himself by conduct unbecoming or 
 unsuitable in such a Being. 
 
 5. The doctrine we are to explain, takes for granted 
 concerning this plan, that it embraces what evangel- 
 ical theology has termed an atonement for sin. 
 By this phrase is intended, an amende, a compensation, 
 or satisfaction, for the remission or selling aside of the 
 condign punishment of sin ; or the punishment of the 
 sinner according to his desert. The idea of Atone- 
 ment is sometimes identified with simple at-one-ment, 
 or reconciliation ; but if the design be to exclude 
 what has now been expressed, it will not be pretended 
 that this is the evangelical or orthodox meaning of 
 the term. The Atonement, as commonly held by the 
 Church, rests on the assumptions that man is a sinner, 
 and that there is in the nature of sin that which de- 
 serves and calls for punishment; and is something 
 which comes in place of punishment, supposing this to 
 be forborne. Our object does not require us to ex- 
 amine the assumptions just mentioned. Taking as 
 conceded, that man is a sinner, and that sin incurs 
 punishment, we are to show the principles or nature 
 of that Atonement or satisfaction for the remission of 
 
 in his place and station, is that which becomes him ; and thence 
 in the New Testament, that which is not Kara to irpinov, thus 
 decent, is condemned as evil, 1 Cor. xi. 13 ; 1 Tim. ii. 10 : and 
 itself is condemned as a rule of virtue, Mat. iii. 15 ; Eph. v,-3." — 
 Dr. Oven, in loc. Works, vol. iii. p. 394. 
 
42 NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 
 
 punishment, which, wo assume, the way of the Divine 
 mercy to mankind embraces. 
 
 6. We ground the necessity for an atonement, under 
 the circumstances supposed, in the perfection of the 
 Divine Nature, and the necessity that God always act 
 worthily of Himself. Supposing that there is for- 
 giveness with Him, — that He may and does remit the 
 punishment of sin, God, we say, owes it to Himself, as 
 the Best and Greatest, the Lord and Creator of all 
 things, to require an atonement. Sin calls for pun- 
 ishment, and God cannot disregard the demand ; can- 
 not — if it be necessary that the Deity retain the glory 
 of His nature inviolate. Of this the proof is in itself. 
 The difference between good and evil, holiness and 
 sin, is essential and immutable, and to this differ- 
 ence, no upright being can be insensible ; neither 
 can such a being refrain, if occasion arise, from ex- 
 pressing appropriately, approbation of holiness, and 
 hatred of sin. The Most High, then, infinite as He is 
 in moral perfection, and holding the provinces of 
 Lawgiver and Ruler of the world, was under a neces- 
 sity — that repeatedly mentioned, of being true to 
 Himself in His mode of agency, — to manifest, in fitting 
 measure and form, His disapprobation of sin. It be- 
 came Him to do this, in the first place, in His Law — 
 the rule of life which He gave to man ; and. in the 
 next place, he must do the same, if there be occasion, 
 in administering and executing His Law. It is impos- 
 sible, that either in the one or the other province, He 
 should fail to express His estimate of the demerit or 
 turpitude of sin ; much more do, or omit to do, any- 
 
NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 43 
 
 thing-, which might imply, that his His abhorrence of 
 sin is less than it should be, or may be changed or 
 abated. These things have their proof in themselves, 
 and cannot be denied. But if they be true, how may 
 God, acting towards His creatures as Lord and Judge 
 of all, dispense with the punishment of sin ? A pen- 
 alty the law must have ; and where it has been in- 
 curred by transgression, how may it consist with the 
 moral rectitude of the Deity, not to execute the 
 penalty ? Is not punishment in this case necessary 
 to the just revelation of the Divine displeasure 
 against sin ? 
 
 7. But the fact lies before us, and is admitted by 
 all, that punishment is foreborne ; that mercy in the 
 Divine administration" rejoices against judgment," and 
 opens the gates of Heaven to those who have incurred 
 condemnation to eternal death. There is remission of 
 punishment for rebellious men. But how might this 
 take place, without dishonor to Him, " for whom are 
 all things and by whom are all things ?" The primary 
 and natural means of maintaining His honor being set 
 aside, does a possibility remain of securing the end by 
 any other means ? Our doctrine gives this question 
 an affirmative reply. It asserts there was one other 
 means, — namely, an Atonement, by which the end could 
 be and was secured. And because the end must be 
 secured, and could be by no other means, an Atone- 
 ment in order to the forgiveness of mankind was as 
 necessary, as that God do nothing incompatible with 
 His essential excellency. 
 
 8. But how could even an Atonement answer the 
 
44 NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 
 
 purpose ? The careful consideration of this question 
 is necessary to our design. To see the truth distinctly 
 here, is to understand the doctrine of the Atonement. 
 Let it be remembered, then, what the precise thing 
 was that would have put the Divine conduct out of 
 harmony, out of consistency, with the essential perfec- 
 tion of God, in case of an arbitrary remission of pun- 
 ishment. It was just this, that there would in that 
 case have been no appropriate revelation of the des- 
 pleasure of God against sin. Against sin : Not as 
 jeoparding government merely, but as essentially 
 evil in itself, apart from its actual or possible develop- 
 ments of its evil tendency. The interest of govern- 
 ment does not comprehend the entire ground of the 
 necessity for an Atonement. Does not the efficacy of 
 the Atonement in maintaining government depend on 
 its sufficiency to meet a higher demand, namely, that 
 the harmony of the Divine Perfections be conserved, 
 and particularly, that Justice, as an attribute of the 
 Divine Nature, essential and indefeasible, irrespective 
 of external relations and consequences, be satisfied ? 
 Let there be then an adequate revelation of God's 
 displeasure against sin, and does not the necessity for 
 punishment disappear ? Why is punishment necessary 
 any longer, if its object is attained ? It was only in 
 order to the manifestation of the Divine abhorrence 
 of sin, that punishment was appointed. It was not 
 appointed simply for its own sake. If it be possible, 
 then, by any other means than punishment, to reveal in 
 full measure and power the Divine Indignation against 
 sin ; in othor words, if there be any means by which 
 
NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 45 
 
 the end of punishment is answered as perfectly as by 
 punishment itself, and if these means are provided, is 
 not the way now open, so far as the honor of God is 
 concerned, for the setting aside of punishment ? May 
 not pardoning mercy here intervene, and grace abound 
 in all its offices of kindness and love, without opposi- 
 tion from any one of the Divine perfections? May 
 not God now act as it becomes Him to do, even while 
 He pours upon the guilty and the condemned, if only 
 they are prepared to receive it, all the fulness of His 
 benevolence? In the language of inspiration, may we 
 not say that God now mzyhe just and yet the justifier 
 of men? Or is there still something in the nature of 
 God inconsistent with the remission of punishment ? 
 
 9. To some it appears, so at least we understand them 
 to say, that two things in the Divine Nature are still 
 inconsistent; two essential perfections — the Divine 
 Justice and the Divine Veracity. 
 
 A necessity for punishing sin lies, it has been said, 
 in the nature of sin itself, as deserving of punishment ; 
 punishment is dueto sin ; — so that Justice has no place 
 if punishment be set aside. But, is this indeed so ? 
 Punishment is due to sin, if due and desert be the 
 same? Sin deserves punishment; and if Justice is 
 wanting wherever there is not treatment according 
 to desert, forbearing to punish is being unjust ; and 
 there is truly a hindrance to the remission of punish- 
 ment still remaining in the Nature of God : He would 
 be the author of injustice if He should forbear to pun- 
 ish. The high and unchangeable necessity of which we 
 have again and again spoken, would be against admit- 
 
46 NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 
 
 ting any substitute for the punishment of sin. No atone- 
 ment is admissible, not even though the atonement be 
 itself punishment, i. e., the punishment of another: for 
 the argument is, that there must be punishment where 
 and because it is deserved ; and the sinner's desert of 
 punishment is one of the things which are eternal. 
 
 10. But let it be inquired into, whether that is the 
 true idea of Justice which leads to this conclusion? 
 Is it so, that Justice implies and necessitates treatment 
 according to desert, so that where there is sin there 
 must be punishment, or Justice is sacrificed? The 
 necessity of treatment according to desert — is this em- 
 braced in the nature of Justice ? Is there, then, no 
 such thing with God, as the remission of the punish- 
 ment of sin, or veritable forgiveness ? What means 
 the preaching of the remission of sins among all na- 
 tions in the name of Christ ?* 
 
 Besides, how, after adopting this idea of Justice, can 
 we give it a place among the Virtues ? If Justice be 
 a virtue, a good thing, it can never be opposed to any 
 other virtue, or oblige us to anything evil, or be incon- 
 sistent with universal goodness. The Virtues are ho- 
 mogeneal, sisters in the same family ; they love and 
 embrace one another. If I must renounce Virtue — be 
 malignant or vindictive, for example, in order to re- 
 tain what I choose to call Justice, either Justice is 
 now an evil thing, or I have abused it, by giving its 
 name to that which is evil. That cannot be in its 
 own nature good which requires us to be, or to do, 
 evil. But suppose a man to be brought into judgment 
 * Luke xxiv. 47. 
 
NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 47 
 
 and condemned as a criminal ; and that, by some 
 means, the ends to be answered by his punishment are 
 already secured — that through a certain arrange- 
 ment or provision, no injury will be sustained, and no 
 good be lost — no ill consequences of any kind will fol- 
 low, by forbearing to punish him — so that if his pun- 
 ishment should take place it would be for no end but 
 simply for punishment's sake ; and now suppose again, 
 that something naming itself Justice should forbid his 
 discharge on the ground that it would keep him from 
 his desert, would this something, bear whatever name it 
 may, be anything else than simple malignity — would it 
 do in this case what might be regarded as a praiseworthy 
 office, a thing worthy to be classed with the exercises 
 and acts of that holy Love, which is the fulfilling of 
 the moral law ? Surely it ought not to be called Jus- 
 tice. Is the quality of Justice such that it must in- 
 flict punishment, in all cases where it is merited, irre- 
 spectively of the ends of punishment, or merely be- 
 cause punishment has been incurred and is deserved ? 
 The ends of punishment must be regarded ; they are 
 the justification and defence of its infliction — what 
 Justice points to, it may be with tears of pity, as 
 the necessitating cause of her severity. If these 
 can be secured without punishment, it is not Jus- 
 tice, or any form of goodness, but arbitrary cruelty, 
 that will proceed, in these circumstances, to inflict a 
 pang, thongh death itself be deserved. Justice is in 
 this case satisfied — she does not and cannot object to 
 the remission of punishment : Justice is no enemy to 
 Love. 
 
48 NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT 
 
 11. It may be well to note the office and place of 
 Justice in a Virtuous character. It is essential, but it 
 does not hold the highest seat among the attributes of 
 goodness. The supremacy belongs to Love — the 
 highest, brightest adornment and glory of every good 
 being. Wisdom is in the service of Love ; so is Pow- 
 er ; so is Justice. The work of Justice is to secure to 
 all their rights, and protect the interests of all. This 
 done, Justice is content ; she seeks nothing more. If 
 by any proceeding of Wisdom — any means whatever 
 not unlawful in themselves — the interests of all are 
 placed in perfect security, nothing would be more un- 
 just and absurd than to forbid, in the name of Justice, 
 the manifestations of mercy. 
 
 12. Distinctions have been made in Justice, as if it 
 were of different kinds, Distributive, Commutative, 
 and Public ; but Justice in each of these varieties is of 
 the same nature ; in neither of them does it ever 
 fulfil the part of simple despotic power, or renounce 
 the rule of Love and Goodness. Distributive Jus- 
 tice deals out to every one the portion of good " which 
 falleth to him f allots to each one his claims, suffers no 
 one to be injured ; but it hinders no one from relin- 
 quishing his rights at the suggestion of benevolence or 
 compassion, much less does it oblige any one to be 
 malignant or unforgiving. Commutative Justice — 
 faithfulness to contracts, honesty between man and 
 man — is not against indulgence to an unfortunate 
 debtor, nor will it imprison an honest debtor who has 
 no means of payment ; such a measure never proceeds 
 from any modification of Justice ; it is the doing of 
 
NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 49 
 
 pure malevolence. Public Justice is of the same char- 
 acter : it demands the punishment of crimes, as a 
 means of securing the public good, but it is not against 
 the pardon of an offender whose punishment may be 
 remitted with prudence ; or, as the case sometimes is, 
 must be remitted, unless the public good be disregard- 
 ed. To return to our former statement, it is never 
 of the nature or spirit of Justice to give pain where 
 no ulterior end is to be answered, where there is 
 no object to be reached beyond the giving of pain, 
 or where the infliction terminates in itself. Such 
 severity proceeds not from Justice, but gratuitous 
 cruelty. Justice, then, is not in the way. 
 
 13. The other supposed obstacle is the Divine Ver- 
 acity. Punishment, we are reminded, is not only de- 
 served, it is threatened and denounced. It is expressed 
 in the Law itself, as the consequence of transgression, 
 and is not the Law the voice of truth ? Or is it con- 
 sistent with the principle and end of Divine legislation, 
 to allow the idea that what the Law names as the 
 penalty of transgression, may be incurred and yet not 
 endured? If this be so, is not the discouragement of 
 transgression, the majesty of the Law — the strength of 
 the Divine government, less than it might be? 
 
 It must be confessed that there is, on this supposi- 
 tion, less of one kind of strength than in the opposite 
 view there would be. If the Divine government pro- 
 ceeded on the principle, adopted, it is said, by an 
 ancient tyrant, that no remission or mitigation of the 
 punishment prescribed in the law would, under any 
 circumstances, be admitted, there would, indeed, be in 
 3 
 
50 NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT 
 
 it more of that terrible strength -which is dis- 
 played in the stern exercise of authority ; more, in 
 other words, of despotic power. But it is impos- 
 sible that God, a Being of perfect and unchange- 
 able goodness, should administer such a government. 
 He would not be God if He should assume the 
 throne of an arbitrary despot. Any plan of govern- 
 ment, not consistent with the supreme rule of 
 Love or Goodness, is such as would dishonor the 
 Most High. He could govern on no such plan. If 
 the remission of punishment may be made compatible 
 with Justice,, it is reproachful to Him to suppose that 
 He would, by institutes of law and government, have 
 foreclosed against Himself the exercise of the pardon- 
 ing prerogative ; or disabled Himself from appearing 
 in His administration true to His own nature as the 
 God of Love, whose goodness is His glory. 
 
 The fact is, that mere legislation, unless it be itself un- 
 lawful, never binds the hands of love, or forbids mercy 
 under all possible or supposeable circumstances. The 
 veracity of a lawgiver is not pledged by the simple fact 
 that he has annexed a penalty to his law, for the exe- 
 cution of the penalty in all cases of transgression. 
 Let Justice be satisfied, and truth itself would lose the 
 quality of a virtue, if it should now be a barrier to 
 the free exercises of benevolence. Just legislation, 
 like Justice itself, implies no necessity for punishment, 
 except as the ends of punishment may require. The 
 penalty of a law is "not to be taken for a prediction, 
 expressive of a certain event, or what shall be ; but a 
 oommination, expressing what is deserved, or most 
 
NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 51 
 
 justly may be ; the true meaning or design of a com- 
 mination being, that it may never be executed."* They 
 who think otherwise, " labor under a delusion as to 
 the meaning of threatenings, which, though they affirm 
 simply, nevertheless contain in them a tacit condition, 
 depending on the result."t Such universally is the 
 groundwork, the law, of all true legislation, human 
 and Divine. Where law under the Divine govern- 
 ment is broken, the penalty is incurred, the transgres- 
 sor is amenable to pnnishment ; but God has not, by 
 the mere fact of having given the law, pronounced a 
 priori against the exercise of mercy. He holds, and 
 from the first meant to hold, the pardoning preroga- 
 tive in His hand. Although, according to the letter 
 of the law, the offender is exposed to death, yet God, 
 except as justice demands satisfaction, has left Himself 
 free to do with him as He pleases — to have mercy on 
 whom He will have mercy, and show compassion to 
 whom He will show compassion. 
 
 14. These Divine perfections, then, are not in the 
 way. So far as Justice and Truth are concerned, the 
 way is open and clear. Is there any other obstruc- 
 tion? If an amende, an atonement, may be supplied, 
 is there anything remaining, in or out of the Divine 
 nature, to restrain the exercise and manifestation of 
 Divine benevolence to mankind ? 
 
 According to the evangelical faith, such a measure 
 has become a reality. An Atonement has been made, 
 by means of which all the perfections of God harmon- 
 ize and interblend their glories in favor of men ; His 
 
 * Howe. f Calvin. 
 
52 NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 
 
 Justice, Truth, Holiness, Wisdom, commingling with 
 His Mercy, and all perfectly consenting together, to 
 set before us, as a free and sovereign gift, eternal life, 
 with all its variety of infinite blessings. It is, we hold, 
 a historical verity, that such a measure has come into 
 existence and operation ; has taken effect, and is the 
 groundwork of the Divine dispensations of grace and 
 goodness which so abound towards our sinful world. 
 We regard it as the chief of all the ways of God — 
 the foundation of His kingdom. The immediate agent 
 by whom it was accomplished, was He to whom the 
 Scripture refers, under the title, " the Captain of our 
 salvation." The means were included in those suffer- 
 ings of His, by which, as the Scripture saith, "He was 
 made perfect." In these sufferings the Atonement is 
 to be found. The Gospel of Jesus Christ records the 
 history of the transaction. It had its consummation 
 in the agony and bloody sweat and unparalleled death 
 of Christ. " The decease which He accomplished at 
 Jerusalem," including its preliminary and attendant 
 particulars, was an atonement, a satisfaction to Divine 
 Justice, whereby the door of salvation was opened to 
 mankind. This is the grand article of evangelical 
 Theology. 
 
 15. The doctrine embraces an explanation, showing 
 why it was that this death had the efficacy which is 
 ascribed to it; or what gave it its power to atone for 
 sin. This arose in part from the nature of the death 
 or sufferings of Christ ; but chiefly from the character 
 which the doctrine ascribes to the Sufferer. In this 
 latter respect, the doctrine, without controversy, pre- 
 
NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 53 
 
 sents a great mystery. It gives to the Sufferer a 
 sphere of antecedent and independent existence, out 
 of and above the creation. It makes Him distinct 
 from God * and at the same time co-equal and co- 
 eternal with Him ; partaking with Him the essence 
 and inherent glory of the Godhead :t whereby He was 
 competent to dispose of Himself as He pleased, and 
 also to suffer or do whatever might be exacted of Him 
 for the satisfaction of Justice, without being Himself 
 overcome and swallowed up, in meeting His dread 
 liability. It affirms of Him, moreover, that He sus- 
 tained a mysterious relation to God, that, namely, of 
 an Only Begotten Son, who dwelt from eternity in the 
 bosom of the Father. It adds, that this uncreated 
 and co-eternal Companion and Son of God, came into 
 the world, in the fulness of time, clothed in humanity, 
 yet without sin, for the suffering of the death which 
 awaited Him. Further, it represents Him as bearing, 
 by the imputation of Justice, the sin of mankind; thus 
 making His sufferings vicarious, while it gives them a 
 severity not to be explained or justified under any 
 other idea than that they were a substitute for our 
 punishment — a compensation for its remission. Finally, 
 it declares that by virtue of these sufferings, on the 
 part of one who possessed the Divine nature in full 
 equality with God, an Atonement was made — every 
 end answered which could have been gained by in- 
 flicting condign punishment on mankind. 
 
 16. The sufficiency of this measure — its power to 
 atone — no one, of course, could perfectly appreciate, 
 
 * " The Word was with God." f " The Word toas God." 
 
54 NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 
 
 besides God Himself. None else could comprehend 
 the amount of the guilt to be forgiven, or the punish- 
 ment which it incurred ; nor could any other estimate 
 justly the value of the sufferings which were endured 
 by Christ — such sufferings of such a personage. Their 
 compensative merit, in their breadth and length, their 
 depth and height, who but God alone could compre- 
 hend? But they must have been an adequate com- 
 pensation, having been appointed and accepted as 
 such by the Divine Justice : and now, since by the 
 will of God they have been published and set forth as 
 sufficient for their great purpose, that it has this suf- 
 ficiency, or is a full amende or satisfaction to justice, 
 cannot but assert itself in the consciousness of every one 
 to whom it comes, in its just statement and influence. 
 Being an atonement in fact, according to the judgment 
 and testimony of God, it must be one in their experi- 
 ence. Having satisfied the ethical nature of God, it 
 cannot but also satisfy conscience, or the ethical nature 
 of man. The facts embraced in it, — that the sufferer 
 was, in essential dignity, equal with God, and was 
 also His Only Begotten Son, cannot but be regarded 
 and accepted as constituting it an atonement. Let it 
 be admitted, that the degraded man, whose sweat in 
 the garden was as great drops of blood falling down 
 to the ground, and who died on the cross in the man- 
 ner described in the gospel, was the equal, and express 
 image of God, the brightness of His glory, and His 
 own Son ; and that He suffered thus " to purge our 
 sins," or make satisfaction for us to Justice ; and 
 though no finite mind can conceive the magnitude 
 
NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 55 
 
 of the punishment due to mankind, yet sure and self- 
 evident it is, that neither this punishment nor any- 
 thing else, could have been of greater avail as expres- 
 sive of the demerit of sin, and the Divine indignation 
 towards it. Let the statement be apprehended and 
 received by the human conscience, and it cannot but 
 give that conscience peace and quietness, as to the 
 atoning sufficiency of the stupendous Measure.* 
 
 17. But is the statement itself credible ? Does it 
 not involve intrinsic absurdity, or what is repugnant 
 to reason and natural ueligion ? Is not the possibility 
 of an atonement grounded in an assertion respecting 
 the character of Christ, which cannot be true? There 
 could have been no atonement, it is said, if there had 
 not been One in eternity with God, who Himself pos- 
 sessed the Divine attributes: in other words, it is 
 taught, that Christ was strictly a Divine Person. 
 This is the foundation of the doctrine of the atone- 
 ment. Is it consistent with the greatest and first 
 of all truths — the Unity of God ? The statement is 
 presented with a concession — rather with a bold 
 
 * It is sometimes said, that the identical penalty denounced 
 against transgressors of the law was suffered by Christ ; but 
 that what Christ suffered, as to the matter of it, was not their 
 penalty is certain : Edwards has indicated the difference in the 
 following particulars : 
 
 1. Christ felt not the gnawings of a guilty condemning con- 
 science. 
 
 2. He felt no torment from the reigning of inward corruption 
 and lusts, as the damned do. 
 
 3. Christ had not to consider that God hated him. 
 
 4. Christ did not suffer despair, as the wicked do in hell. 
 Edwards' Works, vol. viii., p. 176. Dwight's edition. 
 
56 NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 
 
 averment, that it is in this respect a mystery ; 
 but it is a mystery and no more ; it is not against 
 any dictate of reason, or contradictory of the Divine 
 Unity. In asserting the pre-existent and eternal 
 Divinity of Christ, it docs not deny the one and 
 simple essence of God, but only implies that this one 
 essence is pluri-personal ; or that in the essence of the 
 Deity there are more Persons or subsistences than 
 one. There is nothing in reason, nothing in nature 
 against this assertion. It relates to the mode of the 
 Divine existence — a great mystery indeed. But to 
 men, what is there that is not in some respect mysteri- 
 ous ; and if all nature be full of mystery, why should 
 we expect to find out by searching, the mode in which 
 the great Infinite Himself subsists ? The mystery, in 
 this case, is one which, it is contended, the Scriptures 
 reveal in a thousand places ; which, indeed, including its 
 cognate doctrines, is the subject-matter of the Bible. 
 The only question is, Is the Bible understood and in- 
 terpreted aright? 
 
III. 
 
 NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT-E 
 
 To this brief view of the Atonement, though we 
 have endeavored to make it definite and distinctive, 
 it may be proper to subjoin a few additional observa- 
 tions in order to insure it, if possible, against misap- 
 prehension- 
 
 1. The doctrine as now set forth, does not 
 present God as divided against Himself, or the 
 Persons of the Godhead as divided and contrary to 
 one another ; does not ascribe compassion to the Son 
 and deny it to the Father. The whole Deity is made 
 the Author and Finisher of the Atonement ; the will and 
 purpose of the entire Godhead were fulfilled ; it was 
 as much the doing of the Father as of the Son ; the 
 Son, while He gave Himself, was also the Father's 
 gift. The conception of opposite feelings and inter- 
 ests is not justified, but precluded. 
 
 2. There is no ground for the objection, that it 
 makes God unjust in order to be just, — unjust in His 
 treatment of Christ, in order to be just in showing 
 favor to the guilty. Christ does not become a sinner, 
 
 3* (57) 
 
58 NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 
 
 because by imputation He bears our sins. He is not 
 regarded as deserving the treatment He receives. 
 He is not treated otherwise than as He chooses to be. 
 He simply foregoes His own honors and rights for a 
 time, and offers Himself to suffer, as the necessary 
 means of our salvation. He is not punished, in the 
 ordinary meaning of the word, as implying personal 
 criminality. No injustice is done Him, unless it be 
 in the nature of Justice to permit no sacrifice to be 
 made, no interest or right surrendered for the benefit 
 of others ; unless Justice be the enemy of self-denial 
 and disinterested benevolence. 
 
 3. The Atonement does not imply that there is a 
 vindictive propensity in the Divine nature ; or that 
 God needs compensative sufferings for His own 
 gratification, or any motives out of Himself in order 
 to be inclined to the exercise of compassion. It sup- 
 poses the Deity to be incapable of acting with impro- 
 priety, or in a manner which does not become Him, 
 but not to be vindictive or slow to mercy. The Atone- 
 ment assumes as a necessity, that every Divine at- 
 tribute harmonize in every Divine act or proceding ; 
 and that the Divine conduct can never be out of keeping 
 with itself, or inconsistent with the majesty and honor 
 of God, as the Lord and Maker of all. But this is not 
 against the purest and highest benevolence ; it is only 
 against a benevolence falsely so called, which, by dis- 
 regarding mode in manifesting itself, would defeat all 
 the ends of Infinite goodness. The Atonement is but 
 the mercy or goodness of God, using a proper mode 
 of showing itself to man. Instead of being against 
 
NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 59 
 
 goodness, it is an instance of goodness, comprehending 
 every other, and also infinitely surpassing all other 
 forms of goodness possible or conceivable. It is the 
 chief means by which God demonstrates His goodness. 
 There are representations in evangelical writings 
 and discourses which, taken to the letter, and apart 
 from their connexions, are to the discredit of the 
 Atonement, as implicating the Divine character in 
 reproach. The Atonement is said to be the appease- 
 ment of the Divine vengeance ; the wrath of God is 
 set forth as spending and exhausting itself on the pure 
 and innocent Saviour, etc. But these are bold and 
 strong expressions, the import of which, as consisting 
 with just views of the Divine goodness, is commonly 
 obvious from their context and scope. They are not 
 without warrant from Scripture.* They make no 
 bad impression on candid minds. When it is kept in 
 mind that the Atonement is God's own work, that 
 Christ was His own Son, in whom He was always 
 well pleased, and that His treatment of Christ was, in 
 fact, a sacrifice infinitely expensive to Himself, no 
 room is left for understanding the language in question 
 as imputing malignant feelings to the Deity. It serves 
 but to show the malignant nature of sin, and the great- 
 ness of the love of God to man.f 
 
 * Zech. xiii. 7. Is. liii. 10. Rom. iii. 25. 
 
 f It is a theological question, whether Avenging or punitive 
 justice is natural to God. (An justitia vindicatrix naturalis sit 
 Deo.) If Justice be taken as we have presented it, the question 
 must be answered in the affirmative, even if we understand 
 the words, " natural to God," as implying that God would lose 
 His true nature or be no longer God, if He should be without 
 
60 NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 
 
 4. It is not true of the Atonement* that it is incom- 
 prehensible or obscure as to the manner in which it 
 answers its end. Nothing in the Atonement is more 
 manifest than its mode of influence, or how it is con- 
 nected with forgiveness and salvation. An attempt 
 to state the doctrine, which does not show this con- 
 nection, omits the radical idea of the Atonement. The 
 Atonement, in its very definition, declares how it opens 
 the door for the manifestations of mercy. What is 
 the Atonement but a satisfaction to Justice, as com- 
 plete as would have been our punishment, in order to 
 the remission of punishment without dishonor to God, 
 and without detriment to His law and government? 
 And is it still a mystery how the Atonement is con- 
 nected with our salvation ? There is mystery in some 
 things pertaining to the Atonement, but it is denying 
 the doctrine to say that we know nothing of the mode 
 of its influence. 
 
 5. The Atonement cannot with propriety be re- 
 garded as a strictly forensic transaction. Where the 
 terms peculiar to courts of judicature are used in 
 speaking of it, they are not to be taken literally; 
 but, as human language must needs be taken very 
 
 avenging justice ; that is to say, if He did not execute punish- 
 ment at the behest of love. This justice is indeed natural to 
 God ; and the very strong authropopathic language referred to 
 in the text, and examples of the Divine severity in punishment, 
 may be cited in proof of the assertion. But if we take Avenging 
 Justice in a sense which allows a disconnection of it from the 
 rule of love, and suppose its inflictions to be for their own sake, 
 merely, and ascribe it to the nature of God, we make Him an 
 object of horror. 
 
 * As Mr. Coleridge, Dr. Paley and others say. 
 
NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 61 
 
 often when used to express Divine things, with more 
 or less accommodation to the nature of the subject, as 
 by its own evidence, or by other means, understood. 
 The Atonement, for example, justifies no one in the 
 forensic sense, the satisfaction which it makes not 
 being such as the law exacts from debtors or criminals. 
 Forensic justification and satisfaction are incompati- 
 ble with forgiveness : he who is justified in a court 
 cannot be pardoned : he whose debt is discharged 
 cannot be forgiven : but the Atonement does not ren- 
 der our free and gratuitous forgiveness an impossi- 
 bility. Its influence is precisely the reverse ; namely, 
 to make our forgiveness consistent with the perfection 
 and glory of God ; or if we may so speak, to obtain 
 the consent of Justice and all the other Divine at- 
 tributes to the exercise of the pardoning power. The 
 Atonement does not give us a claim on God, on the 
 ground of justice ; it does not impose a necessity or 
 obligation on God to forgive us ; it does not deprive 
 Him of His high prerogative, as Judge and Lord of 
 all, to have mercy on whom He will have mercy : it 
 does not transfer this prerogative from Himself to 
 Christ, or give it to the Son exclusively of the Father. 
 We have mentioned what it does. It brings all the 
 perfections of God into harmony with the free mani- 
 festations of His mercy ; so that in making these 
 manifestations He acts as " becomes Him for whom are 
 all things and by whom are all things.' 1 
 
 6. There is a theory of the Atonement which makes 
 the believer's discharge from punishment a matter of 
 debt to him from God. It supposes hira, on his be- 
 
C2 NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 
 
 coming a believer, or accepting the Atonement, una- 
 menable to punishment on the score of distributive 
 justice, square with the law, its demands against him 
 having been fully met by his Surety, in such a sense, 
 that to punish him would be injustice to him, a double 
 infliction of the very punishment he had incurred. It 
 limits grace in our salvation to providing the Atone- 
 ment ; that was an affair of grace ; all after that was 
 debt, absolute debt to the believer. It expresses it- 
 self on this point in the following emphatic language : 
 "The Justice of God that required man's damnation, 
 and seemed inconsistent with his salvation, now does 
 as much require the salvation of those that believe, as 
 ever before it required their damnation. Salvation is 
 an absolute debt to the believer from God, so that he 
 may in justice challenge and demand it ; not upon the 
 account of what he himself has done, but upon the 
 account of what his Surety has done. For Christ has 
 satisfied justice fully for his sin : so that it is a thing 
 that may be challenged, that God should release the 
 believer from punishment ; it is but a piece of justice 
 that the creditor should release the debtor, when he 
 has fully paid the debt." Nor is this the full extent 
 of his demand on Divine justice : " The believer may 
 demand eternal life, because it has been merited by 
 Christ by a merit of condignity, so that it is contrived 
 that that Justice that seemed to require man's destruc- 
 tion, now requires his salvation."* Is this the teach- 
 ings of the Bible ? 
 
 * This citation is from President Edwards. Professor Park 
 remarks concerning it, (Theory of Atonement,) that it was written 
 
NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 63 
 
 The Bible teaches the doctrine of forgiveness of sins. 
 as well as Atonement, through the grace of God. 
 Discriminating (Eph. iv. 33,) between Christ and God 
 who, though the same in one respect are not so in 
 another, it declares that God forgives us, — forbears to 
 treat us as we deserve, not pays us what is, in justice, 
 due to us from Him,— -for Christ's sake, or on account 
 of the Atonement which he made. It is impossible to 
 imagine a greater contrast than that of the doctrine of 
 the Bible and the doctrine of this theory, in regard to 
 the claim of believers for their salvation. The oppo- 
 site of the latter doctrine it could not have asserted 
 if it has not done so. Instead of making the Atone- 
 ment inconsistent with forgiveness, it makes for- 
 giveness — free forgiveness by the grace of God, — the 
 very object and fruit of the Atonement. Instead of 
 limiting grace to providing the Atonement, it makes it 
 the very function of that stupendous work of grace, to 
 remove obstacles to the farther manifestations of grace. 
 Instead of leaving no place for the exercise of 
 grace after the first office of it — or having mercy on 
 whom He will have mercy, a prerogative of God no 
 longer, it assigns to the Atonement the virtue of 
 enabling Him, if we may speak thus, to exercise this 
 prerogative consistently with Justice. Instead of em- 
 powering believers to demand salvation as a debt due 
 to them from Him, it summons all men to lift up prayer 
 to Him for pardon and daily bread, and whatsoever else 
 of good they would receive from Him. It sets forth 
 
 by Edwards " when he was only thirty years old, and was point- 
 edly condemned by Dr. Smalley." 
 
64 NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 
 
 God * in absolute independence of all creatures as to 
 claims on His favor ; and in respect to sinners, while 
 it announces Him as appeased or propitiated toward 
 them, by virtue of the Atonement, it still leaves 
 them at the disposal of His mercy, which on their 
 acceptance of the Atonement, He is more than will- 
 ing for Christ's sake to extend to them; but to the 
 Atonement itself, infinitely precious as it is in His 
 sight, it ascribes no influence restrictive of freedom in 
 dispensing mercy, whether in making sinners "will- 
 ing" in the day of his power to accept his grace, or in 
 realizing to them its fulness, afterwards. It reveals 
 God as a Promiser, it is true, and lays the utmost 
 stress on the divine benignity as shown in the freeness 
 and abundance of His promises ; and pleads with us 
 by the argument that God cannot fail to keep His 
 word to the uttermost ; it allows us — strange to think 
 — to hold Him to His word, to prove Him, to test His 
 fidelity ; but both in promising and keeping His pro- 
 mise, it is not justice to them but pure love that ac- 
 tuates Him, and such love as only the infinitude of His 
 own nature could express or contain. 
 
 7. The theory of the Atonement, therefore, which 
 gives it a virtue to render God a debtor to believers, 
 is not the true theory. There is no such virtue in the 
 Atonement. Creatures, not to say sinners, cannot be 
 put into relations toward God, which would make a 
 claim on Him, in justice, either proper to them as de- 
 pendent on Him, not only for what of good or goodness 
 they may have, but even for existence ; or, consistent 
 * Rom. xi. 25. 
 
NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 65 
 
 with the absolute and indefeasible independence of 
 the Deity as the sole Original Fountain of created 
 good and being. There is no possibility of adding to 
 the merit of the Atonement. Among the works of 
 God, there is nothing so worthy of praise as what our 
 Blessed Lord achieved, when uttering on the Cross 
 the words, It is finished, he bowed his head in the 
 death of propitiation. Nothing has received such ex- 
 pressions of complacency from God, such Alleluias 
 from the hosts of heaven : Nothing has been, nothing, 
 in all ages to come, is to be so rewarded. But for 
 some purposes, nevertheless, it has no competence ; 
 and one of these is, to entitle men to demand their 
 salvation as an absolute debt to them from God. And 
 it is not lessening its value to deny that it has a com- 
 petency for this ; nay, it would take away all value 
 from it to give it this competency : it would then be- 
 come a greater power for evil, than it now is for good. 
 If it might in some sense save men, it might dethrone 
 and undeify God. 
 
 8. The theory mistakes in thinking to bring the 
 idea of condignity into the rationale of the Atonement. 
 There is no such thing as Creature-merit, as pertain- 
 ing to God. It is alike impossible and unnecessary. 
 First, it is impossible : Creatures may have claims 
 on one another. The laborer is worthy of his 
 hire : but while His creatures are indebted to God 
 for every thing, He can owe them nothing. "For 
 who hath first given to Him and it shall be recom- 
 pensed unto him again ?" Even Christ, when He 
 became a man and so entered into the relations 
 
66 NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 
 
 of the finite, could not in these relations make 
 God a debtor. It became Him, it was what He 
 owed Himself as well as God, to fulfil all righteous- 
 ness. It was otherwise before He became a man, or 
 while He remained in the sphere of pure Godhead. 
 But when He became human, it behooved Him to 
 meet the conditions of that nature. He bound 
 Himself thereby to absolute obedience to God, and 
 did no more than it became Him to do. His put- 
 ting Himself into human relations, which He was infi- 
 nitely above all obligations to do, together with His 
 subsequent obedience unto death, gave His work an 
 excellence not to be measured by finite thought ; but 
 even this could not lay God under the obligations of a 
 debtor : God who alone could appreciate such excel- 
 lence, could not but have an infinite complacency in 
 it ; but He was not bound except as by His own en- 
 gagement He bound Himself, to save mankind for the 
 sake of it. And as this kind of merit was impossible, 
 so, as we have said, it was also unnecessary. God did 
 not require a merit of condignity, to make him favor- 
 able to us : all He required was, that the obstacles to 
 the exercise of His love, which our sin put in its way, be 
 removed ; after that His love needed no motive but 
 itself ; it had motive enough in its nature : love seek- 
 eth not her own ; she is moved for others' good : her 
 nature impels her, and when once her way is prepared, 
 there is nothing she will not do to give herself a com- 
 plete development — to multiply favor, until it would be 
 favor no longer to do so. 
 
 9. We have thus seen that there cannot and need 
 
NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 67 
 
 not be a meriting of salvation ; lout we must say more 
 than this ; the desert of punishment cannot be taken 
 away. The Atonement can do no more than cover 
 the guilt of man, that is to say, secure him against 
 punishment ; it cannot make him innocent. The wages 
 of sin are still his due, his only due ; they need not 
 be given him, but he deserves, in justice, nothing else. 
 Upon his becoming a believer, God for Christ's sake 
 remits his punishment, adopts hitn, takes him into 
 highest favor, treats him, as if, to use the language 
 of Paul* he had become " the righteousness of 
 God ;" but in all this he is still undeserving, and 
 God does but exercise mercy ; sovereign and bound- 
 less mercy. So it is, and it is impossible it should 
 be otherwise. Ill-desert once contracted, the fact 
 remains forever, and its nature is also eternal. 
 
 10. The theory, therefore, of the Atonement, which 
 makes this, the greatest of the works of infinite wisdom 
 and love, a payment of a debt, putting believers in a 
 relation to law,f by which they require a right to salva- 
 tion as a debt due to them from God, is not the true one. 
 We accept no theory as a full explanation of the subject. 
 We are persuaded that its philosophy is completely 
 comprehended only by the mind of the Infinite. Its idea, 
 
 * 2 Cor., v. 21. 
 
 f The theory, to make itself complete, applies most thoroughly 
 its idea of the merit of condiguity. Regarding the transgressor 
 in his two-fold relation to the penalty and the precept of the law, 
 it divides the work of Christ, so as to accommodate this view, into 
 two parts ; one his passive righteousness or sufferings and death, 
 to meet the liability to the penalty ; the other, his active right- 
 eousness or obedience to fulfil the precept. By the first, a dis- 
 charge from punishment is merited, by the second, eternal life. 
 
68 NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 
 
 in its fullness, exists as it has done from eternity in 
 that mind ; doubtless it has never entered, and will 
 never enter into any other. The more we consider 
 the subject, the more we distrust all philosophizing on 
 it, farther than to exclude inconsistency with known 
 truth ; which is all that we have attempted. The full 
 significance of the facts of the Atonement, the incar- 
 nation, the temptation, the agony and bloody sweat, 
 the desertion and outcry on the cross, the death and 
 burial of Christ, — can neither be explained nor fully com- 
 prehended by man : neither can the teaching of Scrip- 
 ture concerning these facts. The language employed 
 by the Bible in communicating this great lesson — " The 
 Lord laid on him the iniquity of us all," "Awake, O 
 sword, against the man that is my fellow," "He was 
 made a curse for us," " He who knew no sin was made 
 sin for us," "Through the eternal Spirit he offered 
 himself without spot unto God," "By himself he purged 
 our sins," " He was the propitiation for our sins," etc., 
 can never be adequately rendered into logical defini- 
 tions or the statements of human systems. The more 
 profoundly it is pondered, the more the mind strives 
 to take in its full meaning, the more is its wonder; the 
 more its amazement such as that expressed by the 
 holy apostle in his exclamation, " the depth !" — the 
 more cold and sterile appear all human theories ; the 
 more suitable the prayer of A Kempis : "Let all teach- 
 ers be silent, let the whole creation be dumb before 
 Thee, and do Thou only speak to my soul." 
 
 11. The extent of the Atonement is determined from 
 its nature. How far indeed it is to avail in actually 
 
NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 69 
 
 saving men, or to how many it is to be applied, or what 
 portion of mankind were, as its fruit, destined to salva- 
 tion by the eternal purpose of God, cannot be understood 
 from the Atonement itself. The satisfaction which it 
 renders for sin, not being like the payment of a debt, in- 
 consistent with, but only the necessary condition of, 
 forgiveness, the Atonement of itself involves the actual 
 salvation of none. Certain indeed it was, that this 
 Provision of infinite wisdom and goodness would not be 
 without fruit ; but to render the Atonement effectual, 
 other agencies and influences, those especially of the 
 renewing and sanctifying Spirit, must be employed. 
 In respect to its application or success, the Atonement 
 will be coincident in extent with that of the Divine 
 purpose : But the Atonement proper, the Atonement in 
 itself, or its efficacy precisely as an Atonement, has an 
 amplitude and a sufficiency equal to the value of the 
 blood of Christ— the infinite worth of His sufferings 
 and death. The overture of salvation to man is 
 limited in Scripture to no age, no country, no class, no 
 number ; it is made, not to as many as God secretly 
 intends to make willing to accept it, but with the 
 same earnestness to those who are not made willing ; 
 nothing limits it but incorrigible obstinacy of will in 
 those by whom it is not received. The boundlessness 
 of the overture has an adequate ground in the Atone- 
 ment, whose breadth and length are also without 
 bound. 
 
 12. Again, the Atonement is adapted to have influ- 
 ences and effects ulterior to the salvation of men. 
 By the discoveries which it makes, the lessons of wis- 
 
70 NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. 
 
 dom, justice, purity, power, and goodness which it in- 
 culcates, aud the manner in which it enforces them, it 
 is suited to be the teacher of the world and the ages 
 — the great light, the central sun of the moral crea- 
 tion. The impression of necessities which it makes — 
 the necessity that the ways of the Most High be 
 always as becometh His essential majesty and glory ; 
 that order be preserved in the Divine kingdom ; that 
 the displeasure of God against sin be revealed ; and 
 the necessity of punishment, or else of satisfac- 
 tion, in order to this revelation ; and the other 
 mysterious necessities which are shown in making 
 satisfaction ; — how fitted is an Expedient of this import 
 and this power of enforcement, to uphold the universe 
 in love and allegiance to Him, by whose infinite good- 
 ness it was devised and accomplished ? That it is not 
 hidden from any part of the creation, and that it is, 
 in fact, the pillar and ground, the strength and se- 
 curity of the moral empire of the Almighty, the bond 
 of eternal union and harmony among angels and men, 
 and all the sons of light, is a scriptural asseveration 
 concerning it, which has a high ground of probability 
 in itself. 
 
 13. The distinguishing traits of evangelical piety 
 appear in high relief in the light which shines from 
 the Atonement. It is this doctrine which gives evan- 
 gelical piety its peculiarity. That piety takes from 
 the Atonement its entire image and fashion, its every 
 line and point, as the clay receives whatever is 
 engraved on the seal. The Atonement in evangeli- 
 cal doctrine is a fullness that iilleth all in all. It is 
 
NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT. n 
 
 the ground of all, it sustains all, it permeates all, it 
 gives life and form and power to all. It has the same 
 pre-eminence and importance in the piety which cor- 
 responds to this doctrine as its just counterpart. The 
 impress of the Atonement on the soul and the charac- 
 ter is the sum, the all of evangelical piety. That 
 piety is nothing else than the doctrine of Christ, co- 
 existent and co-eternal with God ; Deity incarnate, 
 suffering for the sins of men, the Just instead of 
 the unjust ; — this doctrine written on the heart by 
 the Spirit of the Living God, and exhibited in the 
 life and conduct. We have not time to examine this 
 subjective image particularly — the sense of mystery 
 and wonder, the humility, the annihilation of self, 
 wisdom, self- righteousness, and self-will, the filial 
 dread of the Divine majesty, the contrition and 
 brokenness of heart, the sense of the evil of sin, the 
 love and delight in Christ, the love and gratitude to 
 God, the peace, the joy, the hope, the praise, and other 
 traits comprised in it : But one thing we cannot for- 
 bear to observe: that there is in the piety which 
 answers to the Atonement as the image to the seal, 
 an absolute, overwhelming conviction of the final and 
 aggravated condemnation of unbelievers. That the 
 Atonement, with all its inherent evidences of divinity, 
 and all the testimonial signs and wonders, and other 
 outward proofs by which it is confirmed, should not 
 be received by those to whom it is offered ; that this 
 great salvation should be neglected, this only means 
 be despised, by which man could be saved ; how ap- 
 palling the thought of such desperate wickedness 1 
 
72 NATURE OF TIIE ATONEMENT. 
 
 How shall they escape, where shall they appear, who, 
 in the language of Scripture, " tread under foot the 
 Son of God?" 
 
 There is a piety whose most distinguishing cha- 
 racteristic seems to be aversion to that which is termed 
 Evangelical. It has many recommendations. It 
 melts with tenderness, it bows with reverence, it 
 smiles with complacency, it rejoices with confidence 
 and hope, at its own religious views. It often dis- 
 courses with fluent and gentle, and tasteful language, 
 in praise of itself; and it certainly has many 
 fruits of natural goodness and self-culture to boast 
 of. But so inimical is it to the majesty and 
 glory of God, that when the great Device is men- 
 tioned, by which alone it was made possible to keep 
 the Divine honor unsullied and immaculate, while 
 grace is shown to men, then this piety is ready to cry 
 out, " away with it, away with it," as the Jews ex- 
 pressed their scorn for the Son of God, when Pilate 
 brought him forth to them, saying, "behold your 
 king." No wickedness moves its indignation sooner 
 or more profoundly than the doctrine of the Atone- 
 ment. If that doctrine be true, of what avail will this 
 piety be, "when God taketh away the soul?" 
 
IV. 
 
 CHRIST PRE-EXISTENT; 
 
 AS ASSERTED IN JOHN I. 1-5. 
 
 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Ward was with God, 
 and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning tcith God. 
 All things icere made by Him ; and without Him teas not any thing 
 made tlutt was made. In Him was life; and the Life teas the light 
 of men. And the light shinethin darkness ; and the darknesscom- 
 prehended it not." 
 
 Our familiarity with these words, unless it has ren- 
 dered us unthinking, cannot have diminished our in- 
 terest in them. Francis Junius, of whom, at his death, 
 it was remarked by Scaliger, that the whole world 
 lamented him as its instructor* was recovered from 
 atheism in a remarkable manner, by this passage of 
 Scripture. Persuaded by his father to read the New 
 Testament, "at first sight," he says, "I fell unexpect- 
 edly on that august chapter of St. John the Evange- 
 list, 'In the beginning was the Word,' etc. I read 
 
 * Junius, and Joseph Scaliger were Professors at Leyden, at tlie 
 same time. Scaliger had a strong aversion for Junius in his life- 
 time, because the latter took the liberty to contradict him some- 
 times in matters of chronology, and opposed his having the pre- 
 cedency over all the other professors. But at the death of Junius, 
 the resentment of Scaliger gave place to the strongest feelings of 
 respect which expressed themselves in an admirable panegyric. 
 4 (73) 
 
74 CHRIST PREEXISTENT. 
 
 part of the chapter, and was so struck with what I 
 read, that I instantly perceived the divinity of the 
 subject, and the authority and majesty of the Scrip- 
 ture, to surpass greatly all human eloquence. I shud- 
 dered in my body ; my mind was confounded ; and I 
 was so strongly affected all that day, that I hardly 
 knew who I myself was : but Thou, Lord my God, 
 didst remember me in thy boundless mercy, and receive 
 a lost sheep into thy flock." 
 
 What is the subject of these wonderful assertions? 
 What is meant by the appellation, the Word, by 
 which that subject is expressed? 
 
 In the first place, does it denote a Being, or an at- 
 tribute ; a Person, or a quality ? 
 
 That a real Person was intended, should never, we 
 think, have been questioned. It is afiirmed that this 
 Word was with God, was God* created all things, 
 was testified unto by John, was made flesh, and dwelt 
 with men, full of grace and truth. There is an irrev- 
 erent freedom, to suspect nothing worse, in that criti- 
 cism which ventures to inquire whether the Evangelist 
 meant anything more than an attribute or quality, 
 that is, no real subsistence, by what he denominates 
 the Word in this sublime passage. He does not more 
 explicitly affirm the Personal existence and iudividu- 
 
 * " On this supposition," namoly, that an attribute was intend- 
 ed, " the commencement of the Gospel, would be altogether tauto- 
 logical : ' In the beginning was the wisdom of God, this divine 
 wisdom was with God, and God was this divine wisdom.' The 
 Evangelist would have had no occasion to establish the identity 
 of the Logos with God, if he had intended to denote by Logos, 
 nothing else than a Divine attribute." — Tholuck, 
 
CHRIST PRE-EXISTENT. 75 
 
 ality of Jesus Christ, the subject of his Gospel, than 
 the perfect Personality of the Word, the subject of his 
 great declarations in this place. 
 
 Next, Who was the Individual intended by this ap- 
 pellation ? We hesitate not to say that the evidence 
 could not be more perfect than it is, that the self-same 
 Person is here spoken of, whom the Evangelist after- 
 wards presents in a human form, and under a human 
 name, as the subject of his narrative. The Word here 
 intended was our Lord Jesus Christ. To argue on 
 this point, implies, in our view, a doubt whether the 
 Evangelist did not mean to practice a deception on 
 his readers. 
 
 But why, thirdly, does he give Christ this mysteri- 
 ous appellation? That some reason for this existed, 
 we cannot but think. None of the names given to our 
 Lord, were given arbitrarily. They were all chosen 
 from their being significative of Him, in either his 
 nature, or his office. What is there in the present 
 appellation that renders it an appropriate name for 
 our Lord Jesus Christ ? 
 
 We think with Clarke, that this name should have 
 been left untranslated. The original Logos is, he 
 justly remarks, as proper an appellative of the Saviour 
 of the world, as either of the terms Jesus or Christ. 
 And as it would be improper to say, the Deliverer, the 
 Anointed, instead of Jesus Christ, so it is improper to 
 say, the Word, instead of the Logos. 
 
 It should be premised also, that this appellative had 
 been used before the Evangelist wrote, with a deeply 
 significant reference. Philosophers had used it to 
 
76 CHRIST PRE EXISTENT. 
 
 designate the creative power, to which in opposition 
 to the doctrine of chance, they ascribed the origin of 
 the Universe." It was in use too among the Jewish 
 teachers, who employed it to discriminate the Deity 
 revealed, from the Deity un-revealed — a distinction 
 which they seem to have derived from certain passages 
 in the Old Testament ; assisted, however, as Tholuck 
 thinks, by the ancient oriental theosophy.f This fact 
 accounts for the Evangelist's -using the term as if it 
 needed no explanation.^: It was a term already in 
 
 * " The Platonists make mention of the Logos in this way : — 
 /cm?' ov aei ovra, ra yevofieva cyevero — by whom eternally existing 
 all things were made." — Clarke. 
 
 •j- The passages from the Old Testament cited and commented 
 on by Tholuck are Exod. xxxiii. 14. xx. 23. Is. lxiii. 9. Mai. iii. 1. 
 Ps. xxxiii. 6. Prov. viii. 23 seq. These passages he shows, we think, 
 contain the distinction ; but he supposes it improbable that the 
 Jewish teachers would have discovered it in them, but for their ac- 
 quaintance with the oriental systems of religion. " In several of 
 these systems, the idea that the highest Being is in himself in- 
 comprehensible and unapproachable, is found developed under 
 various modifications. Man is represented as being seized with 
 dizziness, when he attempts to comprehend this idea ; and in gen- 
 eral there is no transit from this Being to a world of created ex- 
 istences. Consequently it becomes necessary for God to generate 
 in Himself a certain transition-point, to make His fulness compre- 
 hensible and communicable ; and this He did by producing out of 
 Himself from eternity, a Being like unto Himself through whom 
 the concealed God was manifested." — The reader will find in 
 Smith's Scripture Testimony to the Messiah, Vol. I. pp. 548—569, 
 third edition, a collection of the principal passages in the extant 
 writings of Philo, concerning the subject of the Logos. Philo 
 was a Jew of Alexandria, of a sacerdotal family, who is supposed 
 to have been about sixty years old at the death of Christ. His 
 expressions concerning the Logos, have excited great admiration. 
 
 X " Since it can be actually proved, that the words 6 loyoc tov 
 Veov at that time expressed a definite doctrinal conception, and 
 
CHRIST PRE-EX1STENT. TV 
 
 familiar use, and used, unquestionably, to designate a 
 Person. Mankind had been taught the doctrine of the 
 Divine unity ; they had also received some intima- 
 tions of the doctrine of the Logos. Their knowl- 
 edge on the latter subject, however, was extremely 
 confused. The Evangelist has delivered concerning 
 the Logos sublime and distinct statements, and identi- 
 fied the very Person to whom that name appropriately 
 belongs. The true Logos, of whom the Old Testa- 
 ment had given some discoveries and promises, but of 
 whom the philosophers and rabbis had ignorantly 
 discoursed, was, the Evangelist here affirms, Jesus 
 Christ, the Lord and Saviour of the world* 
 
 such an one as is similar to that of John, it is altogether certain 
 that John employed the Word in that determinate doctrinal sense 
 which was prevalent in his time."— Tholuck. 
 
 * Tholuck rejects the idea that the Evangelist had allusion to 
 the doctrine of the theosophists on this subject. " Since we find 
 in the first place, that previously in the Old Testament, intima- 
 tions of this doctrine of the Logos can he pointed out ; and 
 secondly, that the apostle Paul teaches the same doctrine of the 
 Logos, Col. i. 15 ; 2 Cor. iv. 4 ; comp. Heb. i. 3, although he bor- 
 rowed his mode of teaching neither from the Orientals nor from 
 Philo, but from Jewish theologians only ; and thirdly, since in 
 Sir. xliii. 26 (28), the creative word of God, and in the book of 
 Wisdom xviii. 15, the angel which presided over the theocracy 
 of the Old Testament, is called ?.6yoc ; it must seem to be most 
 probable that John did not occupy himself with the dogmas of 
 other religions, but adhered to the Jewish doctrinal theology of 
 his time, which was based on the Old Testament ; and that in 
 this way he made known that the Revealer of God pointed out 
 in the Old Testament— He who had directed the administration 
 of the Old Testament theocracy, had actually appeared in Christ. 
 In the Epistles also, 1 John i. 1, and in the Revelation xix. 13, 
 John calls Christ the Logos, and thereby intimates the impor- 
 tant meaning of this appellation." As the Evangelist wrote, as 
 
78 CHRIST PREEXI8TENT. 
 
 The propriety of giving Christ this appellation will, 
 in some measure, appear by considering that He is, 
 as Philo in speaking on the subject of the Logos, or 
 Word, admirably says, the same to the Supreme 
 Intellect, that speech is to the human. All 
 who believe in the Scriptures admit that Christ is, in 
 some sense, the Revealer of God , The Scriptures teach 
 nothing more explicitly than that the Deity, except 
 as revealed by Christ, is at this day and forever will 
 be hidden out of sight, and out of thought, to the 
 entire universe of men and angels. That God 
 M could not make an external revelation of Himself 
 in the world until He had become revealed within 
 Himself, that is, in the Son," is affirmed (how intelli- 
 gibly different persons will differently decide) by the 
 excellent expositor Tholuck ; however this may be, 
 it is the clear teaching of Scripture, that in point of 
 fact, God, by Jesus Christ, has exerted all the power 
 which He ever has exerted out of Himself, and mado 
 all the disclosures of Himself to creatures which ever 
 have been made. That whatever knowledge men 
 have of God and divine things, they have obtained 
 through Christ, He Himself affirms : " No one hath 
 seen God at any time ; the only begotton Son who is 
 in the bosom of the Father, He hath declared Him," 
 It is related in the Old Testament that God was seen 
 by Adam, Abraham, Moses and the prophets ; but 
 
 he was moved by the Holy Ghost, he was competent to make 
 known that the Revealer of God pointed out in the Old Testa- 
 ment had appeared in Christ, without being indebted to either 
 the Jewish theologians of his time or the eastern theosophists. 
 
CHRIST PREEXISTENT. 79 
 
 they saw Him only in the Person of Christ, who also, 
 by His Spirit, gave to holy men of old " the lively 
 oracles " of inspired truth. Now, as speech is the 
 medium by which knowledge is communicated among 
 ourselves, it is manifestly proper that the source and 
 channel of all true knowledge should, in a revelation 
 given to man, be denominated the Logos — a term 
 which signifies speech, or instruction, or the word 
 spoken, or, as in our translation, the Word. There 
 is, doubtless, more of fitness in this appellation to the 
 Person to whom it is given than we can understand, 
 but it is sufficiently obvious, that while there is mys- 
 tery, there is also intelligible and striking propriety 
 in naming our Lord the Logos. 
 
 Having seen that the term, in its present use, de- 
 signates a Person, and that this Person was Christ, 
 let us proceed to consider the announcements concern- 
 ing him, which follow : 
 
 I. The first is, that Christ was in existence at the 
 birth of the creation. The phrase "In the begin- 
 ning" — the same with which Moses commences the 
 Bible, refers us to the date of the creation, there 
 being nothing to limit or qualify it. The assertion is 
 that the Logos was in the beginning ; the question 
 may be asked, in the beginning of what? of the 
 world as it now is? of the dealings of God with 
 man ? of the Christian dispensation ? And men may 
 give their own answers. The Evangelist is silent. 
 He leaves us with the unqualified affirmation that the 
 Logos was in the beginning — an affirmation which, if 
 taken in the absolute sense, transfers us to the instant 
 
80 CHRIST PBE-EXI81ENT. 
 
 when creation had its origin and time with it, and 
 presents to us Christ as then in existence. 
 
 The assertion here is, unless it should be understood 
 with some restriction of which the Evangelist gives 
 no hint, that Christ was in existence at the creation 
 of the' world ; that when there were no depths — when 
 there were no fountains abounding with water — be. 
 fore the mountains were settled — before the hills — 
 while as yet God had not made the earth, nor the 
 fields, nor the highest part of the dust of the world — 
 when He prepared the heavens — when He set a com- 
 pass upon the face of the depth — when He established 
 the clouds above — when he strengthened the fountains 
 of the deep — when He gave to the sea his decree that 
 the waters should not pass his commandment — when 
 He appointed the foundations of the earth* — then 
 existed our Saviour Jesus Christ. 
 
 There are those, however, who restrict the words 
 before us, so as to make them mean, in the he- 
 ginning of the preaching oftJie gospel. It is not 
 probable that many readers of the Evangelist will 
 adopt this gratuitous exposition. It gives a trivial 
 sense to one of the most remarkable texts of in- 
 spiration, and thus subjects itself to contempt.f 
 
 * In this use of Prov. viii. 22-30, to express what we believe 
 to be asserted by the Evangelist as an historical fact, we design 
 not to cite it as a parallel passage. It was, however, understood 
 by the Jews of old, and the Christian church from the beginning, 
 of a Person, the substantial wisdom of God ; and whatever advances 
 have been made in the science of interpretation, we question the 
 soundness of that criticism which takes it in a different senso. 
 See Waterland's Eight Sermons, pp. 216-218. 
 
 f Tholuck calls it the shallow Socinian explanation. 
 
CHRIST PRE-EXISTENT. 81 
 
 This assertion stands and ever will stand, without 
 limitation or addition. 
 
 But taking it thus, what is it that it requires us to 
 believe concerning Jesus Christ ? That He is a Being, 
 in the strictest sense, eternal ! If He was in existence 
 when the world and time commenced, He did not Him- 
 self then come into existence. To make Him one of 
 the objects that then came into existence, to say that 
 in the beginning He began to be, or that among those 
 existences which came forth out of nothing at the 
 command of the Creator, was the Logos, is to contra- 
 dict the assertion that He was already in existence 
 when the beginning took place. Well have the 
 ancient Fathers said that " He who was in the begin- 
 ning comprehended every beginning in himself,"* and 
 that " as to the Being who was from the beginning, 
 no time can be found when He was not."f It is 
 therefore the proper import of the words of the 
 Evangelist, that the attribute of eternity, in the most 
 perfect sense, belongs to Christ ; that as the prophet 
 Micah affirms of Him. His emanations are from the be- 
 ginning, from the days of eternity. 
 
 II. We are next informed, that Christ in eternity 
 was the Companion of God. This is asserted not once 
 only, but to give it stronger impression it is repeated 
 in the second verse. The same was in the beginning 
 with God. Eternal accompanying with Eternal ! 
 An unsearchable mystery, but yet a fact, to which 
 the highest importance is attached in the Scriptures. 
 In the statements of Scripture, concerning both crea- 
 
 • Augustine. f Theophylact. 
 
 4* 
 
82 CHRIST PRE-EXISTENT. 
 
 tion and redemption, the proposition that God did 
 not dwell alone in that eternity which anteceded both, 
 that the Logos was with Him there, is always im- 
 plied and is often prominent. We do not give it as 
 the assertion of the Scriptures, though a great com- 
 mentator has made it, that God could not, except 
 through the Son, have made an external revelation of 
 Himself in the world ; but that in point of fact He 
 has not any otherwise revealed Himself in the world, 
 that before creation was entered upon, there was, to 
 speak after the manner of men, a consultation held, 
 and an arrangement agreed upon, between God and 
 the Logo?, and that both creation and redemption 
 were the fruit not of God's agency apart from that of 
 the Logos, but of the concurrence and intercommu- 
 nion of both ; and further, that but for the part 
 agreed to be fulfilled, and in due time actually ful- 
 filled, by the Logos, there never would have been 
 either redemption or creation — is not only a state- 
 ment, but the leading and fundamental statement of 
 the Bible. That book does not speak concerning the 
 origin and authorship of the universe, as too many 
 do who profess to take it as the standard of their 
 faith. It tells of a creating Deity, but it also tells of 
 one inhabiting, with that Deity, the eternity which 
 preceded creation, and equally concerned in accom- 
 plishing that glorious work : " The Lord possessed me 
 in the beginning of His way, before His work of old. 
 I wa3 set up from everlasting, from the beginning, or 
 ever the earth was : Then I was by Him as one 
 brought up with Him ; and I was daily His delight, 
 
CHRIST PRE-EXISTENT. 83 
 
 rejoicing always before Him— rejoicing in the habit- 
 able part of His earth, and my delights were with 
 sons of men."* The Bible teaches that the universe 
 was created for Christ, and with reference to a revela- 
 tion of the divine glory to be made by Christ, through 
 the instrumentality of various redemptive and govern- 
 mental agencies ; and that redemption itself, except 
 through Christ, was not achievable without a sacrifice 
 of the Divine Justice. From which clearly stated 
 premises the conclusion is, that had there been no 
 Christ, no Logos, in eternity, there had been no world, 
 no creation, no time. We are accustomed in our de- 
 vout meditations to trace our salvation to a covenant 
 or agreement entered into, in eternity, between the 
 Father and the Son, and to admit that but for what 
 the Son then consented to do for us, our salvation 
 would have been unaccomplished ; but the Bible leads 
 us to take a wider survey, and to see in the existence 
 and agency of the Logos, the foundation of the exist- 
 ence and perpetuity of all creatures and worlds. The 
 doctrine of a Personal Logos, the Companion of God 
 in eternity, enters as distinctly into the biblical sys- 
 tem of the universe, as the doctrine of a Divine exist- 
 ence ; and the great Lord Bacon has shown himself 
 as sound in the faith, as he was in philosophy, in that 
 memorable confession of his, from which we give the 
 
 * This language is not introduced as proof, but as happily 
 suited to express the sense intended to he conveyed by the 
 author. That it is, however, applicable to Christ in the strictest 
 sense, was the universal opinion of the ancients (themselves, be 
 it remembered, Orientals and therefore), perhaps the best quali- 
 fied to give the true exposition. 
 
84 CHRIST PRE-EX1STENT. 
 
 following extract : " That neither angels, man, nor 
 world, would stand, or can stand one moment in God's 
 eye, without His beholding the same in the face op 
 a Mediatoe ; and therefore that before Him with 
 whom all things are present, the Lamb of God was 
 slain before all worlds ; but that out of His eternal 
 and infinite goodness and love, purposing to become 
 a Creator, and to communicate to His creatures, He 
 ordained in His eternal counsel, that one Person of 
 the Godhead should be united to one nature and to 
 one particular of His creatures ; so that in the Person 
 of the Mediator the true ladder may be fixed whereby 
 God may descend to His creatures, and His creatures 
 might. ascend to God ; so that God, by the reconcile- 
 ment* of the Mediator, turning His countenance toward 
 His creatures, (though not in equal light and degree) 
 made way unto the dispensation of His most holy and 
 sacred will ; whereby some of His creatures might stand 
 
 * Lord Bacon, on the basis of such scriptures as Job iv. 18 ; 
 Job xxv. 5 ; Isa. xxiv. 23, and of bis own exquisite sense of what 
 is fit and seemly, held that the reason or ground of necessity for 
 a Mediator was the ineffable purity and majesty of God. The 
 writer once questioned if it be consistent with the infinite good- 
 ness of the Deity to suppose that He would not converse with 
 innocent and pure creatures except through a mediator. Reflec- 
 tion has convinced him that Lord Bacon is sustained in his be- 
 lief by both Scripture and reason. It may be the highest good- 
 ness to inspire even unfallen creatures with a sense of infinite 
 majesty and greatness ; the want of that sense might be the 
 means of their ruin ; and in order to produce it in them, Media- 
 tion might have been indispensable. God is too good not to 
 express delight in upright creatures, but it might have been 
 unwise and contrary to goodness to be regardless of the mode in 
 which His delights should be manifested. 
 
CUEIST PEE EXISTENT. 85 
 
 and keep their state ; others might possibly fall and be 
 restored ; and others might fall and not be restored 
 to their estate, but yet remain in being though under 
 wrath and corruption ; all with respect to the Mediator, 
 which is the great mystery and perfect centre of all 
 God's ways with His creatures, and to which all 
 his other works and wonders, do but serve and refer." 
 That doctrine of the Logos, which makes Him the 
 Companion, in eternity, of the eternal God, was, in the 
 belief of Lord Bacon, as it is in the explicit testimony 
 of Scripture, the foundation-stone of the systems of 
 creation and redemption. 
 
 III. The next of the anouncements before us is that 
 Christ, the Companion of God in eternity, was also God 
 Himself. The Logos was God. This is not a more 
 explicit assertion of the Deity of Christ, than the 
 phrase of which it is the translation. The translation 
 is literally exact. This no criticism questions ; but 
 still there is a criticism which will not take this as a 
 proof-text of the strict Deity of Christ. It asserts that 
 he was God, but " if we suppose the word Logos to 
 mean the reason, or wisdom, or power of God, what 
 can that reason, or wisdom or power be, but God ? "* 
 The evidence however that the word Logos, means 
 not an attribute but a Person, is as we have before 
 
 * " A man's word, or thought, is not called man ; nor would 
 the word, or wisdom of God be called God, if a mere attribute, 
 or operation only was intended, and not a real person." — Water- 
 land. That a prosopopoeia cannot be here admitted, is further 
 evident from the fact, that it would, as Tholuck has remarked, 
 render the expression tautological : " The tcisdom of God, per- 
 sonified, was God ! " 
 
86 CHRIST PRE-EXISTENT. 
 
 remarked such, that it requires a degree of opiniona- 
 tiveness not often found, capable of offering it resist- 
 ance. Recourse therefore has been had to another 
 supposition, namely, that an inferior and subordinate 
 godship is here ascribed to the Logos. He is said to 
 be God, but not the Supreme God. If we admit that 
 He was in some sense Divine, or was God by office, or 
 delegated power and prerogative, we do not reject this 
 testimony concerning Him. Here we submit four short 
 remarks. 1. That Christ was a creature in some sense 
 divine, or that He was God by office or prerogative; and 
 that he was God ; are not identical propositions. 
 They appear at least to have infinitely different mean- 
 ings, and wonderful must be the critical ingenuity, that 
 can make them even seem convertible. 2. If the incon- 
 trovertible meaning of other passages of Scripture 
 would be set aside by taking the words before us in 
 their obvious sense, an attempt to interpret them dif- 
 ferently might show respect for the sacred oracles ; but 
 there is a great mass of Scripture testimony demand- 
 ing an adherence to the obvious sense in this place, and 
 not a sentence nor a word to justify a departure from 
 it. There are many scriptures which assert that Christ 
 was a man, but there is not one which denies his Su- 
 preme Divinity. On the contrary, it might be shown, 
 as it has often been, with the greatest strength of evi- 
 dence, that this latter point is asserted in Scripture in 
 the most unequivocal manner. 3. The first of these 
 affirmations concerning the Logos, namely, that " He 
 was in the beginning," prepares us to take the present 
 one in its obvious import. If the Logos was in the 
 
CHRIST PREEXISTENT. 87 
 
 beginning, that is, as we have proved the phrase to 
 mean, existed before all created things, and, of course, 
 was distinct from them and uncreated, there should be 
 no hesitation in admitting his Deity in the absolute 
 sense. After hearing that Christ is an uncreated or 
 eternal Being, no surprise should be felt, at being in- 
 formed that He is the Supreme God. The first of these 
 propositions includes the second. If any thing be pe- 
 culiar to the great Supreme, it is to have existed from 
 eternity, or to be, without having been created or begun 
 to be. 4. Since the words refer to Christ as existing 
 in eternity, while as yet there was no world, and no 
 time, to make them declare that he was God by office, 
 is to forget that office implies creatures, over whom it 
 is exercised. How was He God by office when there 
 were no objects in existence to hold office over ? 
 
 Zeal for the Divine Unity, is the ostensible motive 
 for so explaining this and other scriptures as to disal- 
 low the Supreme Deity of our Saviour. The proposi- 
 tion that there was a Being with God, who was yet 
 Himself Supreme God, implies, it is alleged, dualism 
 in the Divine Xature, than which nothing is more con- 
 trary to both reason and Scripture. The implication, 
 we reply, is not included. God may be one in essence, 
 and more than one in some other respect. There may 
 be a distinction in the mode of the Divine existence, 
 and yet be perfect unity in the Divine essence. This 
 is not in itself a contradiction, and if Scripture asserts 
 it, the inspiration of the Bible should be disproved, be- 
 fore it is rejected. Further ; there may be a distinc- 
 tion in the Godhead of such a kind, as to admit of more 
 
88 CHRIST PRE-EXISTENT. 
 
 than one impersonation of it, consistently with its 
 numerical unity. That is ; the one God may be one 
 in respect to Godhead, and yet more than one in some 
 other respect : and the difference in this other respect 
 may be such as to lay the basis for distinct Personal 
 attributes and offices. This is not an inconsistency in 
 itself : No man can show it to be an absurdity : No 
 man can discard it as contrary to reason without mak- 
 ing himself wiser than God, provided Scripture has 
 affirmed it. If now Scripture has affirmed that a Per- 
 son called the Logos, had union and happiness in 
 eternity with God, and that this Person was Himself 
 God, supreme and eternal, why, since God may subsist 
 in several Persons and yet be one God, should we hes- 
 itate to adopt the belief that He does so subsist ; — a 
 doctrine, which, while it makes Scripture intelligible 
 and consistent, in the present case, is demanded in 
 explicit terms by a thousand other texts, and has ever 
 been a fundamental article in the faith of the Christian 
 church ? It is not said, that the Logos as God, was 
 with God ; but that the Logos, as the Logos, was with 
 God. When it can be shown that the expressions 
 the Logos as the Logos, and the Logos as God, mean pre- 
 cisely the same thing, then may dualism in the Divine 
 Essence be inferred from that interpretation of the 
 phrase, the Logos was God, which gives it as a proof- 
 text, of the Supreme Deity of Jesus Christ. 
 
 IV. We proceed to the fourth of these great testi- 
 monies. We are confirmed in the belief, that the 
 Evangelist meant to assert the Divinity of Christ in 
 the former affirmation, by what he now tells us of his 
 
CHRIST PRE-EXISTEXT. 89 
 
 agency. He makes Him the author of the universe — 
 "All things were made by Him ; and without Him was 
 not any tiling made that was made." If He who pro- 
 duced all things from nothing, be not the Supreme 
 God, the idea of such a Being has not yet entered into 
 the human mind. This is here said to be the work of 
 Christ in the most emphatic and guarded terms. The 
 universe in general, is first made His workmanship, 
 and then each particular existence composing it, so as 
 to preclude one exception. 
 
 It has been said, that the creation here meant, was 
 the new spiritual creation ; the state of things in the 
 moral world, as arranged under the New Testament 
 dispensation ; and that the assertion of the Evangelist 
 is, that Christ was in all respects the author of that 
 state and order of things. But not only is this said 
 without warrant from the context, but it would not 
 have been said, had the preceding testimonies con- 
 cerning Christ been taken in the only sense, in which, 
 as we have seen, every rule of just interpretation re- 
 quires them to be taken. It is only those who deny 
 that Christ was, at the creation, and therefore before 
 it, and Supreme God, who take the words before us as 
 referring to the spiritual or moral world. To give 
 them such a reference is taking such liberty with them, 
 as no one would take, who had not some favorite doc- 
 trine or interpretation which otherwise must be sur- 
 rendered. Besides, this assertion, so weak in itself, so 
 unsupported, so repudiated by the context, is a virtual 
 denial of what Scripture elsewhere affirms with the 
 greatest stress. We shall cite a passage to this pur- 
 
90 CHRIST PREEXISTENT. 
 
 port from Paul's epistle to the Colossians, and subjoin 
 a comment. " For by Him (Christ) were all things 
 created, that are in heaven and that are on earth, vis- 
 ible and invisible, whether they be thrones or dominions, 
 or principalities, or powers, all things were created by 
 Him, and for Him." "Not one example," remarks 
 Whitby on this place, " can be shown where the crea- 
 tion of all things in heaven and earth, is ever used in 
 a moral sense, or concerning any other than the natural 
 creation. Moreover, in the first place, all things in 
 earth, and things visible, must comprise things without 
 life, the inanimate parts of nature, concerning which 
 it is absurd to speak of a moral creation. Secondly, 
 under things in heaven, invisible, etc., must be compre- 
 hended the whole celestial hierarchy ; but good angels 
 cannot require a spiritual renovation, and Christ came 
 not to convert fallen angels, but to destroy their em- 
 pire." They truly have undertaken a difficult task, who 
 are endeavoring to show that the Scriptures do not 
 make Christ the author of the natural creation. It is 
 the declaration of the Scriptures, that God created all 
 things, but it is also their declaration, that Christ is 
 the Creator ; and since they teach that Christ was 
 the Supreme God, they are not inconsistent with them- 
 selves. They likewise and frequently affirm, that God 
 created all things, by Christ ; but if while Christ pos- 
 sesses the Divine Nature, he is in personality, distinct 
 from the Father, this expression conveys the sublime 
 and most interesting truth, so clearly taught in other 
 texts, that the Divine Person, in whom the creative 
 power directly exerted itself to the production of the 
 
CHRIST PRE-EXISTENT. 91 
 
 universe from nothing, was the same that assumed our 
 nature and dwelt amongst men under the name of 
 Jesus Christ. We forbear examining into the grounds 
 of this economy of the creation, or searching for the 
 reasons, why the creative power did not exert itself 
 irrespectively of the Personal distinctions in the God- 
 head, or why the Person in which it did exert itself 
 was the Logos or Christ. Tholuck asserts a necessity 
 in this case. This only would we say on the subject, 
 that if it were only through the mediation of the Logos, 
 that the Deity could converse with created beings, or 
 that such beings, as Lord Bacon says, could stand for 
 a moment in God's eye, it seems meet and reasonable, 
 if not morally necessary, that the power which was to 
 give creatures existence, should exert itself in the 
 Person of the Mediator. 
 
 V. The fifth of these declarations is, that in the Logos 
 was Life. We are not to understand by these words, 
 that the Logos was a living in contradistinction to a 
 lifeless or dead being, in the primary meaning of these 
 epithets. To say this after having affirmed that He 
 was the Creator of all things, were not only unneces- 
 sary, but were to sink the lofty strain of the discourse 
 almost bencatli contempt. That he was not a dead 
 being, by whom the vital universe was made, is an as- 
 sertion which in the connections before us, no one can 
 seriously think could proceed from the inspired Evan- 
 gelist. But if Life here is not to be taken in contra- 
 distinction to mere death, what is the sense in which 
 we should take it ? It is not difficult to answer this 
 question. There is a life, which is if we may so speak, 
 
92 CHRIST PREEXISTENT. 
 
 the life of all life in rational creatures. It is not 
 natural life merely, whether of body or of raind, but 
 the higher life of holiness, or holy joy. Life in Scrip- 
 ture, often means moral excellence, holiness, benevo- 
 lence ; and often, also, happiness, the fruit or effect of 
 holiness. These, from their relation to each other, 
 are considered as one, holiness implying happiness as 
 its result, and happiness implying holiness as its cause. 
 We need not therefore in the present instance dis- 
 criminate : life is holiness ; life is happiness : no ac- 
 count need be taken of the difference. Spiritual life, 
 including both true holiness and true happiness, things 
 dwelling in one another as heat in the sun-beams, is 
 the life Avhich is here said to have been in the Logos. 
 This life, which filled the rational creation, while in 
 its first estate, and we may hope, fills it still with slight 
 exception, had its fountain in Christ, as the revealing- 
 God. All rational creatures awoke into existence in 
 possession of it, which along with existence itself, they 
 derived from Christ. He infused into them the holy 
 vitality which dwelt in himself and filled them witli 
 his fulness. That fathomless love which appeared so 
 wondrously in redemption, had been before manifested 
 as perfectly as the nature of things would admit, in 
 the work of creation, when the morning stars sang to- 
 gether and all the sons of God shouted for joy. 
 
 VI. This history of our Saviour in his pre-existent 
 state, informs us further that the Life, the spiritual 
 life of whose nature and fountain we have just spoken, 
 — was the Light of men. The sense of this statement 
 cannot be misapprehended. We are in no danger of 
 
CHRIST PRE-EXISTENT. 93 
 
 positive mistake, even if we do not fully and distinctly 
 take the meaning, so as to be able to express it in a 
 perfect definition. Man, when he first awoke from 
 non-existence, found himself in a world furnished 
 magnificently for his use, and gloriously illuminated 
 by those larger and lesser lights, which still pour their 
 splendors from the firmament. Those material beams, 
 however, which gilded the face of nature, and trans- 
 ported the eye with the views of sublimity and beauty 
 which it presented, are not the light of men. Nor is 
 this the light of the understanding, consisting in ideas 
 or the images of things in the mind and the results of 
 combining and comparing them ; — a light which may 
 or may not be associated with moral depravity, and, 
 if associated with it, is called darkness in Scripture, 
 nay, the blackness of darkness. The true light of men 
 is, as Tholuck has happily expressed it, an ethico-relig- 
 ious knowledge, based on an inivard communion with 
 God, and comprehending the theoretical and practical at 
 the same time; a knowledge obtained not by mere in- 
 tellection, but by the blended exercise of the under- 
 standing and the heart, when in agreement with the 
 understanding and heart of God ; the knowledge 
 which fills the upright mind, by its inwardly appre- 
 hending and loving the Divine excellence. This being 
 the end of all material and intellectual light is properly 
 the light of men ; the glory and joy of our rational 
 nature. The source of this light, which shone in man 
 at his creation, purely and perfectly, was in that life 
 in the Logos, of which we have been speaking. It 
 was the communication of that Divine life from the 
 
94 CHRIST PRE-EXISTENT. 
 
 Logos to man, that made him the subject of this light. 
 Even as in the new-creation by grace, it is by the soul's 
 partaking again of this same life in Christ, that it 
 acquires the light of the knowledge of the Divine 
 glory.* Human teaching may impart the light of 
 external knowledge, the knowledge contained in defi- 
 nitions ; but that sort of knowledge, in which the true 
 light of men consists, is not obtained, until a spiritual 
 union takes place between God and the soul ; it is by 
 virtue of that union, that the soul obtains those views 
 of divine things with which it is transported on the 
 day when it is born into the kingdom of God. 
 
 VII. This recital concerning Christ in his pre-exis- 
 tent state, closes with these words : "And the light 
 shineth in darkness, and the darkness comprehended it 
 not." No note need be taken of the variation of the 
 tense, since, as it has been justly remarked, nothing is 
 a more distinguishing peculiarity of the style of this 
 Evangelist, than the confounding of the tenses. The 
 scope of the context manifestly requires, that the past 
 time be understood in both clauses of the sentence. 
 The declaration relates to the Logos in his pre-existent 
 state, and to man as apostate and depraved. 
 
 Darkness here means human nature amid the ruins 
 of the fall. Darkness strictly, expresses a state, but 
 the abstract is here taken for the concrete. Man in 
 the darkness of his apostate condition is spoken of, as 
 if he were darkness itself. This mode of speaking 
 concerning depraved man is not peculiar to this writer. 
 Paul declares that Christians before their conversion 
 
 * John viii. 12. 
 
CHRIST PRE-EXISTENT. 95 
 
 were darkness : " Ye were sometime darkness, but now 
 are ye light in the Lord." The present testimony 
 then, referring to man as alienated from the Divine life, 
 and therefore involved in spiritual darkness, affirms 
 the renewed love of the Logos to him, in these circum- 
 stance of guilt and misery. When by transgression he 
 made himself darkness, He who was the light of his 
 soul in innocence, did not forsake him, but continued to 
 shine within him, to the end that he might recover 
 himself by repentance. Through the period before 
 the flood and through all subsequent time, man, a few 
 individuals excepted, was darkness ; but the Logos 
 continued to shine in the world. He shed some rays, 
 even as he now does* among the most ignorant of 
 mankind, enlightening in some degree every one who 
 came into the world ; but they were shed generally in 
 vain ; the darkness which they penetrated did not 
 comprehend them. The Logos was in the world, but 
 the world knew Him not ; He came to his own, but 
 His own received Him not. They preferred the crea- 
 ture to the Creator, the finite to the infinite, the visi- 
 ble to the invisible, through the madness of sin. The 
 great mass of all nations made no improvement of the 
 light which shone amongst them and within them, but 
 as Paul teaches, suppressed or perverted it, through 
 their unrighteousness. Even at this day the light is 
 shining in darkness, and the darkness comprehendeth 
 it not. Is the reader acquainted with no individual 
 
 * Some have thought that the constant shining of the Divine 
 light, was intended to be expressed by the use of the present 
 tense, in the first clause ; but we rest not our remark on this crit- 
 icism, for a reason before given. 
 
06 CHRIST PRE-EXI8TENT. 
 
 in -whom this Scripture is verified ? Does not his own 
 experience teach him, what the language before us 
 means ? It is true in respect to himself, that the light 
 has been shining in darkness, showing him his immor- 
 tality, his relations to God, his sin, his danger, his 
 misery, the way of peace, and motives to effort, of in- 
 finite power. Is it not also true, that in this case, the 
 darkness has not comprehended the light ; that he has 
 seen as if he had seen not, and perceived as if he had 
 understood not ; that his immortality he has practically 
 disbelieved, his relations to God violated ; his sin he 
 has loved ; his danger disregarded ; his misery not 
 lamented, the way of peace not pursued, motives vast 
 as eternity resisted ? Where is the man who can se- 
 riously reflect on his own moral history, and not know 
 from an interpreter within his own breast, what is 
 meant by the light shining in darkness, and the dark- 
 ness not comprehending it? 
 
 Our reflections on these sublime testimonies con- 
 cerning Christ pre-existent, have deepened our im- 
 pressions of the truth and importance of the three fol- 
 lowing statements. 
 
 First, That this world's opposition to the Christian 
 religion shows it to be a world in rebellion against its 
 own Maker. The Author of the Christian faith was 
 the Author of the universe. The Founder ol the Chris- 
 tian church was He who laid the foundations of the 
 earth and meted out the heavens with a span. The 
 institutions, laws, documents, doctrines of Christianity, 
 rest on the authority of Him who upholds the pillars 
 of creation. To oppose this religion is to lift the hand 
 
CHRIST PRE-EX1STENT. 97 
 
 of treason against the throne of the Almighty. The 
 world have opposed and still do oppose it. " The- 
 ophilus of Antioch compared the little Christian church 
 in the wide domains of heathenism, to verdant islands 
 in a great raging ocean. Thus too within the pale of 
 Christianity has the congregation of the regenerate 
 always stood in relation to the children of the world."* 
 The testimony of this fact concerning the moral state 
 of mankind, renders a denial of their deep depravity, 
 their "desperate wickedness," the highest possible 
 proof of it. 
 
 Secondly, That it is not Christianity, that assigns 
 simple God-head or Deity as the cause of the creation. 
 It is coming short of the teaching of Christianity on 
 this subject, only to say, the universe is the workman- 
 ship of God. It is rejecting Christianity, in this great 
 article, to exclude Christ's handiwork from the causal 
 influence of the creation. Christianity tells us of a 
 Logos as well as of a Deity, and makes the Deity in 
 the Logos the author of the world's existence. They 
 who assert that God apart from the Logos, or Deity 
 out of Christ, was the maker of the universe, contra- 
 dict the Scriptures in the most explicit manner. In- 
 timations, that the creative power dwelt in a Divine 
 essence which was pluri-personal, are contained in the 
 narrative of the creation given by Moses,f and through- 
 
 * Tholuck. 
 
 f "After the closest attention that I can give," says Dr. Smith, 
 Scrip. Test. Vol. I. p. 483, " the impression on my mind is favor- 
 able to the opinion, that this peculiarity of idiom, — (the use of 
 plural nouns, especially EloMm in application to the Divine Be- 
 ing) originated in a design to intimate a plurality in the nature 
 5 
 
98 CHRIST PREEXISTENT. 
 
 out the Old Testament ; but in the New Testament, 
 the subject is set forth in the clearest light, and the ex- 
 press assertion made that the Creator was Deity in 
 the Logos, or God in Christ. 
 
 The doctrine that simple Deity was the Creator of 
 the universe, ought never to be published, and if pub- 
 lished never received as a doctrine of Christianity; 
 it may be naturalism, but it is not the Gospel. Nay, 
 if it pretend to be Christianity, it is another and a rival 
 Gospel, which no true friend of Christ can do other- 
 wise than disavow and condemn. 
 
 Thirdly, That the greatest of all wonders is the 
 Love of Christ for man. That our Maker should for 
 our sakes make Himself a man — that He who dwelt in 
 eternity with God, — glorious in all the perfections of 
 the Deity Himself, and happy in the complacency of 
 the other Divine Persons, — should, to recover us from 
 sin and deserved death, take upon Him the form of a 
 servant, and be made in the likeness of sinful flesh ; 
 and being found in fashion as a man, should humble 
 Himself and become obedient unto death, even the 
 death of the cross — 
 
 " Oil, for this love let rocks and hills 
 Their lasting silence break, 
 And all harmonious human tongues 
 The Saviour's praises speak." 
 
 of the one God ; and that thus in connection with other circum- 
 stances calculated to suggest the same conception, it was intend- 
 ed to excite and prepare the minds of men for the more full dec- 
 laration of this unsearchable mystery, which should in proper 
 time be granted." — Any exposition of Gen. i. 2G, or of the narra- 
 tive of the creative process given in that ohapter which does not 
 admit this intimation, should, we think, be rejected as unsatis- 
 factory. 
 
V. 
 
 CHRIST PREACHING TO THE SPIRITS IN PRISON. 
 
 "On Kai Xpiarug arret,!; Trepl dpapTi&v eira'he, diicatog 
 vTrsp adittbiv, iva r/ftag irpwoaydyq tg3 Sew, ^avarufoeig 
 fisv oapKL, ^uorroufhelg 6£ nvev^ari, ' kv u> Kai rolg ev 
 (pvXan%i nvevpiaai iropevhelg efcrjpvgev, r dTtei^rjaaac izore, 
 ore aTregedexETO 77 rov "heov naKpohvfila ev rjfiepaig Nwe, 
 KaraoKevaC,o\ievr\g ki(3(otov, elg i)v oXiyai tovt' ecnv oktoj 
 ipv%al dieou>%T]oav 61 v6arog. b Kai fyiag avTirvnov vvv 
 ato^ei (3dnTioi.ia, ov oapK.bg diro'heoig pvnov, dXXd awei- 
 6fjO£(s)g dya^rjg enepu)T7]fxa eig Seov, 61 dvaardoecdg '1-qaov 
 Xpiarov.—l Pet. iii. 18-21. 
 
 It is the design of Peter in the preceding context 
 to fortify Christians against discouragement from the 
 sufferings to which they were exposed for the sake of 
 the Gospel. To this end he tells them that it is better, 
 if the will of God be so, that they suffer for well-do- 
 ing than for evil-doing ; assuming that all suffering for 
 adhering to the Gospel is suffering for well doing. 
 He cites, in confirmation of this, the example of Christ, 
 who suffered as a well-doer, the Just for the unjust, 
 that he might bring us to God ; the highest instance 
 that ever was or will be, both of well-doing and of suf- 
 fering on account of it. What the apostle would have 
 them particularly remember was, that the sufferer in 
 
 (99) 
 
100 CHRIST PRE AGEING TO TEE 
 
 this instance found ultimately no disadvantage from 
 the unparalleled injuries which lie endured. Though 
 He suffered to the greatest extremity, even to His be- 
 ing put to death in the flesh, the ignominious death of 
 the cross, yet He was quickened by the Spirit, by which 
 He went and preached to the spirits in prison, etc. 
 
 " This place is somewhat obscure in itself, but as it 
 usually happens, made more so by the various fancies 
 and contests of interpreters, seeming or pretending to 
 clear it." The fact, however, that efforts to explain it 
 have been unsuccessful, will not and should not pre- 
 clude continued attempts. It is relied upon to support 
 unsound and dangerous doctrines, and it should, if 
 possible, be shown by just exposition, that it lends 
 them no countenance. Its affirmation concerning 
 Christ's preaching to the spirits in prison, is interpret- 
 ed to mean that He went after His death to the abode 
 of departed sinners, " the proper hell," and " that as He 
 revealed here on earth the will of God unto the sons 
 of men, and propounded Himself as the object of their 
 faith, to the end that whosoever believed in Him should 
 never die ; so after His death he showed Himself unto 
 the souls departed, that whosoever of them would yet 
 accept of Him should pass from death to life." This 
 and other dogmas contrary to the catholic faith, ap- 
 peal to this scripture as their warrant, and so long as 
 they do so, the friends of truth, certainly, should not 
 cease looking for the key to its true interpretation. 
 Whether there be any conclusive force in the following 
 remarks, is with deference submitted to the decision of 
 the reader. 
 
SPIRITS IN PRISON. 101 
 
 We would first ascertain the meaning of the phrase 
 rendered in our version, " quickened by the Spirit." 
 So far as we know, what we take to be the sense of 
 the original words, has never been given. If this can 
 be established, we think a new ray of light will be 
 thrown on the passage. 
 
 Our translation, it is admitted, is not the only one 
 the original will bear. Nay, much as we desire to 
 honor the received English version, we are constrained 
 to say that it has in this instance given a reading 
 which the original will not bear. The true reading is 
 not, quickened by the Spirit, but quickened in the 
 the Spirit. So it is given in Wickliffe, by Tyndale, by 
 Cranmer, and in the versions of Geneva and Rheims, 
 and so, but for certain theological antipathies, it would 
 probably have been given by our translators. Both 
 the prepositions, in the clause, " put to death in the 
 flesh but quickened by the Spirit." have been supplied. 
 The words flesh and Spirit stand in the original with- 
 out any preposition whatever, and it is obvious from 
 their antithesis, that if the word " spirit " denote the 
 active cause by which Christ was restored to life, the 
 word " flesh " must equally denote the active cause by 
 which he was put to death ; which, therefore, must 
 have been the flesh of his own body, an interpretation 
 too manifestly absurd to be admitted.* 
 
 The important phrase before us must have one of the 
 five following significations : 1. That Christ after 
 His death, was invigorated as to His human soul as 
 distinguished from His bod y ; that, though as to His 
 
 * Horseley. 
 
102 CHRIST PREACHING TO THE 
 
 body He was dead, He was more vital than before as 
 to His soul. We cannot adopt this as the true sense, 
 though the thing affirmed may have been true, for a 
 reason which will hereafter be given. It may seem 
 to be required, at the first view, by the law of antithe- 
 sis, but besides that it is a feeble sense, it does not, as 
 we shall see, fall in with the scope of the context. 
 
 2. That Christ, after death, was made more vital as 
 to His Deity, as distinguished from His human nature. 
 This sense must be rejected, as being inconsistent with 
 the essential immutability of the Godhead. 
 
 3. That Christ suffered death, indeed, in His body, 
 but was resuscitated or quickened again into bodily 
 life, by the Holy Ghost. This, however true, is not 
 what the words were intended to express : (1.) Be- 
 cause, as we have shown, the original cannot be justly 
 rendered so as to give this sense ; it must be translated 
 quickened, not by, but in the Spirit. (2.) Because 
 the resurrection of Christ was not more the act of the 
 Holy Ghost, than that of the Father ; nay, than Christ's 
 own act. It is ascribed to the Father in Eph. i. 20. 
 It is ascribed to Christ Himself in John ii. 19, and 
 John x. 18. If it is anywhere ascribed to the Holy 
 Ghost, it is not as His act exclusively or peculiarly ; 
 and no reason appears from either the text or context 
 for introducing the Holy Ghost here as the agent in 
 raising the body of Christ : nay, (3.) the raising of His 
 body cannot have been referred to in this quickening, 
 for the very reason that the context on that supposi- 
 tion cannot be explained. Indeed, all context, i.e. con- 
 nection between the parts of the passage, is destroyed 
 
SPIRITS IN PRISON. 103 
 
 by it. For what connection is there between Christ's 
 being raised from the dead, and preaching to the ante- 
 diluvians ? 
 
 4. That Christ, after being put to death in His 
 body, quickened Himself into bodily life by His 
 own Divine power. This cannot be what is intended, 
 because, to mention no other reason, the original can- 
 not be so translaetd as to admit the preposition by. 
 
 5. The only remaining sense of the phrase is, that 
 Christ, after His death, was quickened in reference to 
 His great work, the salvation of mankind ; — quickened 
 as to that efficacious agency, by which this work was 
 to be carried forward ; — an agency by which Christ 
 made Himself to be felt among men in His power to 
 save ; an agency which diffused new and mighty life 
 through the church, and, by means of His church, thus 
 vitalized, throughout the world. This agency was 
 specifically that of the- Holy Spirit, — according to the 
 representations of Scripture, the Spirit of Christ. 
 So he is called in Romans viii. 10, and elsewhere, (1,) 
 because, the Holy Spirit, in reference to the accom- 
 plishment of our redemption, is possessed by Christ 
 above measure ; John iii. 34, Acts xxxviii. Is. xlii. 1 ; 
 and, (2,) because, for the same purpose, the Holy Spirit 
 is given or sent by Christ ; John i. 33, xv. 26, Luke 
 xxxiv. 49. The distinguishing mark of our Lord, as the 
 Messiah, was, that he baptized with the Holy Spirit. 
 So He baptized His disciples on the day of Pentecost ; 
 and so, by their instrumentality, He baptized great 
 multitudes throughout the world, or in the language 
 of the prophet, " sprinkled many nations,'' Is. Iii. 15. 
 
 5* 
 
104 CHRIST P BEACHING TO THE 
 
 Thus, though Christ suffered unto death in the flesh, 
 in accomplishing the redemption of man, yet, relatively 
 to that work, He was quickened in the Spirit, became 
 efficaciously vital and life-giving, in the influences of the 
 Holy Ghost, which were thenceforward so abundantly 
 bestowed. In the Spirit, thus understood, he was 
 " straitened " before His death, according to His own 
 complaint, Luke xii. 50 ; after His death, He was 
 " quickened ; " life flowed from Him filling His church 
 with vitality, and the world too became conscious of His 
 life-giving energy, agreeably to His own forcible 
 illustration, John xii. 32, " And if I be lifted up from 
 the earth, I will draw all men upon me." 
 
 We propound this, then, as the true sense of the ex- 
 pression, as being, 1, the worthiest and greatest sense 
 and on that account preferable, other tilings being 
 equal ; 2, accordant with a manifest and wonderful 
 fact, which was then filling the world with excitement, 
 namely, the outpouring of the Spirit in His divinely 
 vivifying influence ; and, 3, coincident with the scope, 
 of the place, in connection with which it stands, as 
 follows : No damage comes from well-doing : Christ 
 suffered extremely on that account, and the result is 
 known. To redeem man, He was put to death in the 
 flesh ; but His deatli was the means of life to His cause. 
 Before He died, to use His own simile, He was like an 
 implanted grain which abideth alone ; after His death, 
 He was like a corn of wheat, which having yielded its 
 life in the midst of a fruitful soil, is now producing a 
 hundred-fold increase. To vary the form of speaking, 
 He was straitened before He suffered : He was quick- 
 
SPIRITS IN PBISON. 105 
 
 ened afterwards. Filled Himself with the Spirit above 
 measure, He poured it out from on high, baptized His 
 church with it, and diffused, through His church, a 
 heavenly life among the nations. 
 
 Such is our understanding of this very important 
 phrase " quickened in the Spirit." Irrespective of the 
 light which the remaining part of the text receives 
 from this interpretation, it commends itself, we think, 
 as the only one the place will bear. It will appear, 
 however, as having new claims to our adoption, when 
 it is seen how it elucidates the following context. We 
 proceed with our exposition. 
 
 The apostle having mentioned Christ's becoming 
 thus quickened in consequence of His death, as to the 
 life-giving power of the Spirit, goes on to speak of His 
 having exerted Himself, in an office of the Spirit, 
 among those who perished by Noah's flood. He 
 expresses this in the following language: "By 
 which he went and preached unto the spirits in 
 prison, which sometime were disobedient, when 
 once the long-suffering of God waited in the days 
 of Noah." But why does he mention this ancient 
 fact in this connection ? What has Christ's ministry 
 to the antediluvians, in the person of Noah, to do with 
 the subject which the apostle has in hand, namely, His 
 being put to death in the flesh, but quickened in the 
 Spirit? This, at the first view, seems exceedingly 
 abrupt, and some persons, probably, have been inclined 
 by this appearance of dislocation and irrelevance to 
 question, if the apostle be in fact speaking of what 
 we have said, namely, the preaching by means of Noah 
 
106 CHRIST PREACHING TO THE 
 
 to the disobedient men of this day. The dogma, as we 
 have before mentioned, has been advanced, that Christ, 
 after His death, went to the place where the antedilu- 
 vians where now confined, for the purpose of preach- 
 ing to them ; and in accordance with it this text has 
 been explained ; and the explanation has, it may be 
 said, this at least to recommend it, namely, that it makes 
 the apostle less disjointed and incoherent in his dis- 
 course. For it is what one would be naturally enough 
 led to inquire about, after being told that Christ, when 
 lying dead in the grave, was, in spirit, more vital and 
 energetic than before. Where was Christ's disembodied 
 spirit, and how was it exerting its invigorated powers 
 during the three days and nights which intervened 
 between His crucifixion and His resurrection? An in- 
 quiry which it has been supposed the apostle, in the 
 words following, proceeds to resolve. Is this so ? 
 
 Was the soul of Christ in fact thus employed, while 
 His body was in Joseph's tomb ? If there is any tes- 
 timony in Scripture in favor of this, it is in the present 
 text. There is no parallel place, no hint, no trace of 
 evidence, direct or indirect, besides. Presumption 
 certainly is against it: for why should these ante- 
 diluvians, above all mankind who have departed in 
 disobedience, be distinguished by such a privilege as 
 it is said they had ? It is moreover fatal to this expo- 
 sition, that it gives a feeble sense to the great expres- 
 sion, '" quickened in the Spirit." The spirit, according 
 to this interpretation, means Christ's human soul ; but 
 to say that Christ did not die as to His soul when His 
 body was dead, but was rather more vigorous, were 
 
SPIRITS IN PRISON. 107 
 
 but to make a common place remark, and to say what 
 is doubtless true of every one who dies, as well as of 
 our Lord. "We shall see yet further reason for not 
 adopting this exposition. 
 
 But, after all, is the alleged objection against the 
 commonly received meaning of Christ's " preaching, 
 etc.," true? Is it impossible to trace a connection be- 
 tween this interpretation and Christ's being quickened 
 in the Spirit ? A connection there doubtless is, if the 
 interpretation be the true one. Confessedly it is not 
 apparent at the first glance, but may not a connection 
 be discovered by close attention to the drift of the 
 apostle's discourse, and by comparing scripture with 
 scripture? We humbly hope we have made this 
 discovery. 
 
 The connection in question is a connection or link 
 of union in the apostle's thought, between Christ's be- 
 ing quickened in the Spirit after His death in the body, 
 and His preaching through Noah to the Antediluvians, 
 then disembodied spirits in prison. Can no reason be 
 conceived of, why the apostle should mention these 
 things as he has done, in close conjunction ? We know 
 the following fact, namely, that there was an impor- 
 tant connection in the mind of this apostle between 
 that flood, in foresight of which Noah, filled with the 
 Holy Ghost, lifted up his warning voice in the ears of 
 his disobedient contemporaries, and that eternal de- 
 struction which is now coming upon the world of the 
 ungodly, and in prospect of which Christ, after His 
 death, sent the Holy Spirit upon His disciples, and 
 through them, thus qualified for the work, called men 
 
108 CHRIST PREACHING TO THE 
 
 to repentance. These two floods, (if for convenience 
 sake we may so call them,) though distant in time — 
 the one long since past, the other yet to come — stood 
 together in the apostle's illumined mind, closely re- 
 lated the one to the other. We see this in the follow- 
 ing passage from the third chapter of his Second 
 Epistle. " By the word of God, the heavens were of 
 old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the 
 water ; whereby the world that then was, being over- 
 flowed with water, perished : but the heavens and the 
 earth which are now, by the same word, are kept in 
 store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment 
 and perdition of ungodly men." The flood of water, 
 the first flood, pointed in the apostle's view to the sec- 
 ond, the flood of fire, by which the world's final de- 
 struction is to be effected. He could not, therefore, 
 well be thinking of the one without being reminded of 
 the other. Now, this final destruction held a lofty 
 place in the apostle's present meditation. It was to 
 deliver men from this destruction, that Christ, as 
 quickened in the Spirit, according to the interpretation 
 of this phrase, which we have given, was now em- 
 ployed. This was the end of that movement now 
 going forward through the ministrations of the apostle 
 and his fellow-laborers in the work of Christ ; and 
 that the apostle had this in mind, appears from what he 
 says in the 21st verse. Having remarked that the 
 result of Noah's ministry was the salvation of few, that 
 is, eight souls, by water, he adds, "the like figure, 
 whereunto baptism doth now save us by the resurrec- 
 tion of Jesus Christ." Baptism, in its signification and 
 
SPIEITS IN PRISON. 109 
 
 design, was no other than the great work of recover- 
 ing mercy, which Christ, as now quickened in the 
 Spirit, was accomplishing among men. This baptism, 
 not the outward ceremony so called, not the putting 
 away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good 
 conscience towards God — this name for the great sal- 
 vation now everywhere proclaimed, was the antitype 
 of the water of the deluge — that water which, while it 
 destroyed the world, saved, as the apostle affirms, Noah 
 and his house. Baptism, we say, was the antitype 
 (avThvTTov — fidTTTiofiar) of that water which floated and 
 defended the ark while it submerged the earth. The 
 antitype baptism, the great blessing which Christ, as 
 now quickened in the Spirit, is giving to men — this 
 baptism, saith the apostle, doth now save us— namely, 
 those of the present generation, who, as did Noah and 
 his house, have obeyed the warning voice of the Divine 
 mercy. As the eight souls were saved in the ark, so 
 we are saved by the antitype baptism, now appointed 
 as the world's only hope. Another flood is approach- 
 ing — a flood of devouring fire, which is to sweep ere 
 long over the face of the earth, and dissolve the ele- 
 ments with fervent heat. In view of this overwhelm- 
 ing destruction, of which Noah's flood was a fore- 
 shadow, Christ, quickened in the Spirit, and exerting 
 Himself in the anointed ministers of His grace, is 
 rousing mankind from the slumber of sin, and warn- 
 ing them to make their escape, and proposing to them 
 " baptism " as the means ; and they who hear His voice 
 and fall in with His proposal, are saved from this infi- 
 
 * See MacKnight's version. 
 
110 CHRIST PREACHING TO THE 
 
 nite ruin, even as they were saved from the flood who, 
 according to the Divine premonition, took refuge in 
 the ark. 
 
 We see, then, that this great destruction, the flood 
 of fire, was in the Apostle's thought. Christ, being 
 quickened in the Spirit, the religious stirs and move- 
 ments of the times — the developments of the saving 
 virtue of the antitype Baptism, implied this : but the 
 flood of Noah stood in his thought, (as we have seen, 
 and as it well might have done, from its prelusive and 
 prefigurative relations,) associated with this other 
 coming storm of wrath ; it was to him a proof and a 
 pledge, that this more dreadful storm was truly coming. 
 How natural was it, therefore, that when he thought 
 of the one, his second thought should have been of the 
 other ; that as he beheld the evidences of Christ's 
 being quickened in the Spirit, in the great exertions 
 which were then made to save men from the infinite 
 destruction then impending," he should remember that 
 when the first destruction was at hand, the same be- 
 nevolent Being (not indeed, as now, quickened in the 
 Spirit, not in that fulness of power which He was then 
 displaying, yet) by the Spirit in some measure of His 
 influences, by the same Spirit, by which he was then 
 striving so mightily with mankind, sought, through 
 the instrumentality of His prophet, to bring the in- 
 fatuated men of that age to repentance, and so deliver 
 them likewise. And if it was natural for him to be 
 
 * Dr. Owen thinks the Apostle's primary reference was to the 
 approaching destruction of the Jewish Church and State, but 
 that he also embraced in his view the destruction of the world. 
 
SPIRITS IN PRISON. \\\ 
 
 reminded of this, it is not surprising that he spoke 
 of it. 
 
 There is one expression in our English translation 
 of the passage, which some persons, probably, would 
 lay stress upon, as being favorable to the interpretation 
 which we reject: "By which, he went, and preached, 
 etc.," (nopev'helg eKrjpvgev). But there arc examples to 
 show, both in the Scriptures and in classic authors, 
 that no special emphasis should be given to this form 
 of expression. Among Scriptural examples see Eph. 
 ii. 17, " Having abolished — the enmity — and came 
 and preached (teal eX'how evrjyycXiaaro) peace to you who 
 were afar off, and to them who were nigh." — "' It is 
 certain that our Lord, after his resurrection, did not 
 go personally to the Gentiles to preach peace to them. 
 He preached to them by his apostles only. But if 
 Christ is said by Paul to go and do what he did by 
 his apostles only, he may, with equal propriety, be said 
 by Peter, to go and do what he did by his prophet 
 Noah." He went and preached, is but a pleonasm for, 
 he preached. 
 
 According to the exposition now given of the 
 passage, the sense and connection of it may be ex- 
 pressed in the following paraphrase : 
 
 Christians should not be discouraged by their suf- 
 ferings on account of well-doing. No ultimate evil 
 will come to them from these sufferings. They may 
 convince themselves of this by considering the example 
 of Christ. In order to save mankind, to bring us to 
 God, He underwent the greatest extremity of suf- 
 fering, having been put to death in the flesh. Yet 
 
112 CHRIST PREACHING TO THE 
 
 His unparalleled sufferings were no detriment to Him 
 in respect of His great undertaking. So far from 
 this, they were the foundation of His success : all 
 thenceforth was life in His body, the Church, and the 
 world also felt His vitalizing power. By what abun- 
 dant manifestations of the Spirit, and what glorious 
 triumphs hath He since then been carrying on His 
 mighty work of saving men from that infinite wrath 
 which is so fast coming on the world? And this re* 
 minds me how this same mighty Deliverer exerted 
 Himself by the Spirit through the ministrations of 
 Noah, when the deluge was at hand. He then 
 preached, by His faithful prophet, to the disobedient 
 persons of that generation, whose disembodied spirits 
 are now in the prison of hell, bearing the just punish- 
 ment of their incorrigible impenitence. The great 
 patience of God once waited on those unhappy per- 
 sons for a long period, even one hundred and twenty 
 years, during which time the ark was being built. 
 The result, though small, was not an entire failure. 
 Eight persons were saved in the ark by that water 
 which bore it up and defended it, while it drowned all 
 the world besides. The salvation of these few was 
 the fruit of that same Divine grace which is now dis- 
 covering itself in our deliverance from the greater 
 wrath to come, and of which baptism, in its significa- 
 tion and purport, is the compendium ; baptism, the 
 antitype of the water which saved the family of Noah . 
 I do not mean the external rite merely, but the thing 
 thereby represented, the answer of a good conscience 
 toward God, a conscience purified through the blood 
 
SPIRITS IN PRISON. 113 
 
 of Christ, and following 1 its convictions in piously 
 observing the sacramental ordinance of the Christian 
 Church : baptism, another name for the influences and 
 effects of Christ, as quickened in the Spirit — this anti- 
 type baptism, through the resurrection of Christ, which 
 is the consummation of His work, and the grand 
 proof of His redeeming virtue — baptism, I say, doth 
 now save us from the coming vengeance of God, even 
 as Noah and his household were saved from the flood 
 which drowned the world, by the typical ark and 
 water. 
 
VI. 
 
 IMPOTENCE OF WILL: 
 
 WILL-NOT A REAL CAN-NOT 
 
 God has given to creatures different kinds of power, 
 or power to do different things. Reptiles can creep, 
 fishes can swim, birds can fly, quadrupeds can walk : 
 Men can think, reason, abstract and classify, discourse, 
 discriminate between good and evil, can do good and 
 evil, love and hate. 
 
 The power which creatures have by their nature, or 
 what they are as creatures, is, strictly speaking, their 
 natural power. The word natural is applied in scrip- 
 ture (1 Cor. ii. 14), to a man as unrenewed ; but it is 
 now used tropically ; in its proper meaning it defines 
 what pertains to the make or constitution of beings — 
 their nature, as we commonly say. The power then 
 which man has as man, that whereby he is recognized 
 as man or human, is man's natural power : power to 
 think, reason, discourse, distinguish between good and 
 evil, etc., in short, to do "whatever a human being as 
 such can do by virtue of his having the human na- 
 ture. 
 
 The epithet moral has been applied to power, and 
 (114) 
 
WILL-NOT A REAL CAN-NOT. 115 
 
 so we have the phrase moral power ; and it has been 
 used as if it denoted the contrast of natural power ; 
 or, as if the power now called moral, was not natural, 
 or did not belong to man as man. It should never be 
 so used. There are but two senses in which it may be 
 taken : Power may be called moral, from the sphere 
 of its activity, from its being- concerned with tilings of 
 a moral nature, things morally good or evil, right or 
 wrong. Power does not, on this account, cease to be 
 natural. Power to think, reason, etc., in the moral 
 sphere, is as proper to human nature, as aught else 
 that belongs to it; nothing is more natural to man 
 than this moral power. It is only by a metonomy, 
 transferring the quality of the objective to the sub- 
 jective, that power in this exercise of it, has come 
 to be called moral. It is not called moral because 
 it is itself so, any more now than when the objects 
 with which it is concerned are not of a moral na- 
 ture. Why should moral and natural power be made 
 contraries, when moral power is still natural ? Taken 
 in the remaining sense, the phrase is figuratively ap- 
 plied to that which is not power properly so called ; 
 namely, to a disposition or internal state, whereby one 
 is specially apt or propense to a certain use of nat- 
 ural power. One may name this power, if lie 
 will, but he does so by rhetorical license, unless he 
 would confound a disposition to use a thing, with the 
 thing itself. In no application of the term, then, is 
 moral power a real antithesis to natural. 
 
 There is however a reason for calling disposition, in 
 this case, power. Disposition, by continued exercise 
 
116 IMPOTENCE OF WILL: 
 
 of the power it sets one to the use of, increases in 
 favor of that use j aud even by its first exercise 
 may acquire a fixity unchangeable except by foreign 
 power, as in the case of Adam in his first sin, who 
 thereby subjected himself to a propensity to sin, not to 
 be overcome except by renewing grace. It is not 
 strange — it was indeed almost inevitable in a free use of 
 language — that such a propensity or disposition should 
 be called power, and there is no inconvenience from 
 so calling it, provided metaphor or rhetoric do not 
 afterwards pass itself as logic. 
 
 The essential difference between disposition and 
 power appears in this, that disposition to use power 
 in a certain way may be changed ; whereas, natural 
 power cannot be changed, without making the agent 
 another being ; in which case change is but destruc- 
 tion. A man as long as he is a man, will have man's 
 natural power, power to do what is proper to a crea- 
 ture of man's order. In the great change called Re- 
 generation, nothing in effect is done, but to bring 
 about a new use of natural power by putting it under 
 the command of a new disposition. The subject of 
 this change, as to his humanity simply, is exactly what 
 he was ; he has acquired no new power, though from 
 the new disposition which controls him, and the con- 
 sequent new use of his power, he is sometimes called a 
 new man. 
 
 As disposition to a certain use of power is not itself 
 power properly so called, so neither is the hindrance 
 to the use of power arising from an opposing dis- 
 position, properly called inability. Terms expressive 
 
WILL-NOT A REAL CAN-NOT. 117 
 
 of inability are often applied to it, but they are so 
 applied only in free or tropical speech : As to effect, 
 the hindrance is equivalent to the want of power, and 
 is therefore taken for this, and called by its name, 
 inability. We say the man cannot act, only meaning 
 however that he is invincibly indisposed, or set against 
 acting. The connection or obvious drift of language 
 in such cases, generally makes the meaning unmistak- 
 able. When, e. g. the Scripture says that Joseph's 
 brothers " hated him and could not speak peaceably to 
 him," it implies, that their hatred apart, they could 
 have spoken to him peaceably : they might have so 
 spoken to him, had they not been otherwise disposed. 
 They were therefore able, while unable ; which they 
 would not have been, if the inability imputed to them 
 had been a want of natural power : it was spoken of 
 as inability by the license of rhetoric. 
 
 Nevertheless, this moral or figurative impotence, 
 however denominated, is a reality : it hinders the use 
 of power : if man were a brute or a stone, he would 
 not be farther from the holy use of the power of a 
 man than it is certain he will be, while left to him- 
 self in a state of subjection to a disposition to sin. 
 Indeed, there is a sense in which this disposition may 
 be said to be natural to man. He has it from his birth 
 (Ps. li. 5.) He begins accountable existence with it, 
 preventing grace apart. It is no part of the human 
 nature as God made it ; is the effect of the apostacy ; 
 but through the apostacy it is the sad inheritance of 
 man, and may be figuratively termed a second nature. 
 This the Christian ministry preach, as the fundamen- 
 
118 IMPOTENCE OF WILL: 
 
 tal fact on "which Christianity is built. And it pre- 
 sents a question of great moment, as to appeals to nat- 
 ural power in preaching. Man is still man, a creature 
 having the powerproper to man ; but, as to a holy useof 
 it, it is as none, because of a bias or disposition to evil 
 which underlies it ; as it were, a second nature. Now 
 the question just referred to is this : Shall we, on the 
 ground simply of man's having natural power, urge 
 the holy exercise of it, just as if this hindrance to such 
 an exercise of it, did not make it certain, that he will 
 not, of himself alone, exercise it thus ? The certainty 
 is known to us, and we endeavor to acquaint him with 
 it ; we state the evidence of it to him ; we require him 
 to believe it ; we would have him feel as we ourselves 
 do, that his existence is not more certain, than that he, 
 if left to himself, will continue to exercise his natural 
 power as he has been doing in servitude to sin. Shall 
 we still urge him to the holy use of it, simply on the 
 ground of his having it? Self-evident it indeed is, 
 that he is under obligation so to use it ; his having it 
 involves this ; he ought so to use it, and will stand 
 condemned before God and his own conscience if he 
 does not ; nevertheless, if he is to believe what with 
 so much earnestness we tell him, will he have any 
 more motive or reason to exert himself as we require, 
 than he would, if natural power did not belong to 
 him ? Though he is without excuse, though sin is sin, 
 even when committed in a state of absolute despair, 
 yet despair — the certainty of continuing in an existing 
 state of sin — this certainty felt and in force on the 
 mind, as in the supposed case it would be, is, by the 
 
WILL-NOT A REAL CAN-NOT. 119 
 
 unchangeable law of voluntary activity, no less effectu- 
 al to hinder even the attempting a change of state, 
 than natural impotence itself. Let the question be 
 considered : Should preaching, since the fact is indu- 
 bitably so, ever limit the ground of its urgency with 
 unrenewed men, simply and absolutely, to their having 
 natural power? Under the circumstances, what were 
 more absurd than even an attempt to do what would 
 be required of them ? Nor can we conceive of their 
 making an attempt in earnest. Palpably, therefore, 
 they must not be shut up to this consideration, as a 
 reason for their making one. There is, in truth, no 
 persuasive force in it whatever, taken by itself. It is 
 deprived of all such force by the pressure of despair. 
 Some door of hope must be opened to effort, or effort 
 will, nay, cannot but be forborne. The mind is so 
 made that it cannot exert itself in such a case. Some 
 other argument must be used, which will not leave the 
 door of hope closed and barred. Along with natural 
 power, mention must be made of some other power 
 whereby the holy use of natural power may be brought 
 about. That is to say : the proffered Help and Pres- 
 ence of the Holy Spirit must be announced to the un- 
 converted in the way of encouragement. 
 
 Let it not seem that there is no need of saying this ; 
 there has been, if there be not still, a delinquency in 
 preaching in regard to it. Has not preaching re- 
 frained, on theory, — from setting forth the hope of 
 the co-operation of the Spirit, as a motive to exer- 
 tion, previous to conversion ? By divers considera- 
 tions, it has sought to set natural power into 
 
120 IMPOTENCE OF WILL: 
 
 exercise, but the hope of the Spirit's co-operation, 
 it did not, and, with theoretic consistency, could 
 not, . insist upon. This co-operation was promised 
 on the condition of actual repentance ; but it was not 
 held forth as an indispensable motive to repentance. 
 The unconverted were pressed to repentance, just and 
 only because they had natural power. Having it they 
 were under obligation, and it was demanded of them 
 to fulfill their obligation, to do their duty, because 
 obligation and duty existed. "With much persistency 
 they were pressed to this ; and the course was wont 
 to be justified by its tendency to beget self-despair, — 
 an almost phrenzy of desperation, wherein they might 
 perhaps break down, as the phrase was, under a sheer 
 necessity of an entire self-surrender to the Divine will, 
 whatever it might be, concerning them. How strange 
 the outrage which such a course obviously does to the 
 principles of human action! What though grace be 
 not necessary to accountableness? That is to say: 
 "What though the obligation of the unconverted have a 
 sufficient ground in the fact of their having natural 
 power, so that sin in all circumstances Is inexcusable ? 
 If the object were simply to convict them, or break 
 them down through despair, the course pursued might 
 for that purpose have sufficed. But as the end which 
 the preaching should have aimed at, was to ivin or 
 convert them, nothing can be more glaring than the 
 absurdity of this method. So far, this preaching was 
 not the preaching of the Gospel : it was simply legal. 
 The Gospel ignores and virtually condemns it. 
 
WILL-NOT A REAL CAN-NOT. 121 
 
 But it may be that the day of preaching, of this form, 
 is past, and that it need not have been adverted to, 
 except, perhaps, as indicating progress. Be this as it 
 may, there is doubtless room for progress still, both in 
 the theory and practice of preaching to the uncon- 
 verted ; especially, it would seem, in regard to appeals 
 to natural power, and the activity thence resulting, 
 previous to conversion. Let this point for a moment 
 engage our attention : — 
 
 It often happens that awakened persons, under 
 preaching, in general sound, are perplexed with what 
 to them lias a formidable aspect, the alternative of 
 either sinning or doing nothing in order to their con- 
 version. They understand the - assertion that " what- 
 soever is not of faith is sin," as teaching that all 
 activity before conversion is sinful, and therefore for- 
 bidden ; whence it seems to them, as they are not yet 
 converted, the necessity exists, if their conversion is to 
 have place, that it take place without previous agency 
 of theirs, or by an agency which they ought not to 
 use. Their case, therefore, is not, in their view, much 
 different from what it would be, if they were thrown 
 upon their own mere power, without the overture of 
 aid from the Holy Spirit. As to activity or effort, in 
 order to conversion, they are at an absolute stand. 
 They must not commit new sin ; yet, since they are 
 still unconverted, what else are they to do, if they do 
 anything ? If they should hear, reflect, resolve, be 
 active or exercised in any way, would they not herein 
 be sinning, and so making their case worse ? This is 
 far from an uncommon difficulty, and there have been 
 6 
 
122 IMPOTENCE OF WILL: 
 
 three methods of dealing with it in preaching. Some 
 preachers have evaded or ignored, or possibly have 
 not been aware of it. They have spoken to the 
 awakened as if there were no cause or place for 
 trouble to them from this source ; as if their way could 
 not but be plain before them ; and, sometimes, they 
 have pledged the promises of God to guarantee suc- 
 cess, if they did but persevere in it. By others, to the 
 demand from the awakened : — " How am I to repent ? 
 What way must I take? Must I needs sin or do 
 nothing?" this reply has been usually given: — "I 
 have nothing to say as to the How, or the Means of 
 repenting, I only say, Repent, repent this instant, the 
 next may be too late." Yet another answer has been 
 made : " True, you will be sinning if you do anything 
 before conversion, but you may be sinning more if you 
 do nothing ;" and assuming a choice of evils to be 
 inevitable, that was recommended which it was sup- 
 posed was the less sinful of the two. How plainly 
 can neither of these courses be justified ? The first is 
 grossly discreditable to the pulpit ; yet more so is the 
 last, which expressly counsels what it admits to be 
 sinning, as the way to conversion from sin, and that 
 on the self-contradiction, that a choice between greater 
 and less is admissible, where both are forbidden. The 
 other, also, though under a show of logic, assumes 
 what every one cannot but know to be untenable : as 
 if there were indeed no place for preliminary atten- 
 tion, or thought, or feeling, where conversion has not 
 already had place : As if, e. g. wlion the jailer asked 
 with trembling and astonishment, "What shall I do to 
 
WILL-NOT A REAL CAN-NOT. 123 
 
 be paved ?" Paul should have said to him : " You are 
 sinning inputting the question, and in being excited 
 as you are." Or as if Peter should have made a like 
 reply to his hearers, when pricked to the heart, they 
 asked, " What shall we do?" A psychological theory, 
 or doctrinal creed which excludes such preliminary 
 exercises as necessarily sinful, in this respect, most 
 certainly, falsities itself. The exercises in question are 
 not spiritual, but neither are they to be rejected as 
 necessarily carnal or sinful. The alternative of either 
 doing nothing, or adding sin to sin previous to con- 
 version, is without foundation or reality. There is 
 no such alternative. It is not so that there must 
 needs be sinning in all activity, antecedent, or in order 
 to actual conversion. When God, seeking to bring 
 sinners to repentance, challenges their attention, they 
 do not sin in giving their attention. When, with 
 reference to conversion, he urges them to consider 
 their ways, he does not set them to doing what is in 
 itself wrong. When convinced of sin, and alarmed at 
 their danger, they seek to make their escape, and 
 struggle against difficulties, and in their distress ask 
 what they must do, and cry for help from above, their 
 exercises, it is true, are not yet spiritual ; but they 
 are not to be on any account blamed or regretted ; 
 they are the regular response of simple nature to 
 divine appeals to it ; a response, of which the absence 
 would be sinful. God surely does not intend to pro- 
 duce in us any impure excitement, but who knows not 
 that He does address Himself to the nature He has 
 given us ; to every part of our higher nature ; to 
 
124 IMPOTENCE OF WILL: 
 
 reason, to conscience, to self-love, self-respect, etc. ; 
 and this before and wit:i reference to conversion, as 
 ■well as afterwards ; and if the exercise of these ele- 
 ments of our nature in immediate correspondence to 
 His addresses, that is to say, an exercise of them, 
 which, like the addresses, is before and with reference 
 to actual conversion ; if this were necessarily sinful, 
 is not God Himself, in this case, the responsible author 
 of sin ? We ought to respond to His appeals ; we 
 shall sin, with aggravation, if we do not ; if we must 
 also sin, when we do respond to them, has He not 
 laid us under a necessity of sinning, and in truth in- 
 cited us to it ? 
 
 The importance of this point justifies further re- 
 mark. The preliminary exercise of the simple prop- 
 erties of our nature, in brief, our natural power, is, 
 in fact, the proper subjective means, whereby, through 
 the grace of God, our nature recovers itself from the 
 bondage of its corruption ; and it is precisely this 
 which suasory preaching, whether aware of the fact 
 or not, aims and labors to produce in its hearers, in 
 all its applications to them previous to conversion. 
 In other words, through natural power exercising 
 itself as it may without being as yet under grace, it 
 seeks to bring men into a state of grace, the ultimate 
 end of preaching. It does not stimulate this power 
 to the doing of that, apart from grace, of which it 
 publishes the certainty, that grace apart, it never 
 will do ; but to the doing of what it unquestionably 
 may do, and of what it must do, as the condition 
 of the removal by grace of the ground of certainty 
 
WILL-NOT A REAL CAN-NOT. 125 
 
 aforesaid, and a consequent just use of natural 
 power. 
 
 It is of necessity that we take this course in preach- 
 ing ; we could otherwise do absolutely nothing in the 
 way of earnest persuasion. How could we begin ? 
 Recognizing man as under a certainty, equivalent in 
 effect to a necessity, of sinning, we should not be more 
 incapable of earnestness in addressing stones or the 
 dead, than in urging him to repentance. Earnestness 
 depends on hope, instead of which, there is, in this case, 
 by the terms of the statement, absolute despair of the 
 desired result from the course pursued ; it would be 
 pressing men, in the mere exercise of natural power, 
 to what it could not expect from them, as the result 
 of this exercise : in this it is impossible it should be 
 in earnest ; it would be strictly absurd ; and to hope 
 for the divine co-operation with it, would be looking 
 to God to sanctify absurdity by lending Himself 
 to it. 
 
 Surely there is a possibility, a place of beginning, 
 to earnest persuasion in the pulpit! Shall a theory 
 be accepted which implies that there is none ? Man- 
 ifestly there is no such place or possibility, if man is 
 required to look on himself as under the alternative 
 of either sinning or doing nothing in order to conver- 
 sion. Persuasion to doing nothing* is inconceivable ; 
 and persuasion to sinning, is, itself, whether it means 
 so or not, doing what it urges. There is, therefore, 
 some form of allowable activity, which, though it is 
 not spiritual, is not of the nature of sin. Man in a 
 state of sin, and man in a state of grace, are, indeed, 
 
12C IMPOTENCE OF WILL: 
 
 the two terms set before the preacher. Man has to 
 start from the first, and not to stop short of the second. 
 He remains in the first if he be not actually in the sec- 
 ond. If he should die before completing the transi- 
 tion from the first to the second, he would die in his 
 sins. In man himself, however, there is somewhat 
 common to both states, namely the constitutional ele- 
 ments of humanity, or our natural power. He has 
 this — otherwise he were not man — in both. He has 
 it in the transition from the one to the other. In 
 this transition he has and he exercises his natural 
 power, which exercise of it is not already spiritual, 
 else he were not still in the transition ; yet neither, 
 if the transition be transition indeed, is it sinful. 
 But, on the contrary, being necessary to conversion, 
 it is virtually included in the call to conversion, and 
 the suppression or absence of it were a contempt of 
 that call. This preliminary or intermediate activity, 
 destitute though it be of spirituality, is the condition 
 of conversion. Take it away, leave no place for it, 
 and the Gospel and man can never be brought to- 
 gether, except by miracle or without the use of any 
 appropriate means. 
 
 A word on the form of this transitional activity, or 
 the particular exercises and efforts of which it con- 
 sists. These, it is obvious, are different in different 
 cases. In general they should be such, whatever these 
 be, as are comprehended in a just response of nature 
 to the appeals which are made to it with reference to 
 conversion. These appeals arc not always met or 
 heeded at once. Nature, perhaps, is not sufficiently 
 
WILL-NOT A REAL CAN-NOT. 127 
 
 awake to recognize them. Perhaps they have to 
 make their way against manifold impediments and 
 disadvantages ; previous instruction, argumentation, 
 reproof, remonstrance, may be rrecessary ; and after 
 the contact with nature has been effected, she may be 
 thrown into strife with herself, reason contending with 
 passion, conscience with the heart, the will with inte- 
 rest ; whence indirection, wavering, delay, obliquity 
 in the course of the action. Such, more or less, is 
 the general fact. Sometimes, on the contrary, the 
 activity would almost seem to be normal or faultless. 
 When it is so, the end is near. Nature cannot be 
 true to herself without yielding herself up to the 
 dominion of truth. Swift as time, now, is the prog- 
 ress to conversion. Let preachers understand this. 
 Let them study psychology. Let them acquaint them- 
 selves completely with the many-stringed instrument 
 they are required to play on. Let them learn to play 
 on it skillfully, so that there shall be no discord, no 
 movement too slow or rapid, no pitch too high or low, 
 nothing but pure harmony, the sweet concert of all 
 nature's powers and feelings. This should be their 
 aim ; with all possible earnestness, intelligence and 
 tact, should they pursue it ; never forgetting that to 
 themselves and their hearers, the present opportunity 
 may be the last. 
 
 But the whole truth has not yet been told. Where 
 the response of nature terminates in actual conversion, 
 the result is not from nature, but from the special grace 
 of the Holy Spirit. It is not in nature to remove the 
 ground of the certainty of continuing under sin. It is 
 
128 IMPOTENCE OF WILL: 
 
 not in nature to do this, even under the best advant- 
 ages of common grace. Though it is done through an 
 exercise of natural power, under external appliances, 
 it is not this that does it. Something happened to na- 
 ture in the fall which made recovery impracticable by 
 any merely natural operation. It retained its essen- 
 tial elements, otherwise it were no longer the human 
 nature. It still was and is a living, active, responsible 
 power ; but as to a holy use of its faculties, it became 
 blind, torpid, dead. Deep within fallen nature itself 
 lies the ground of its certain continuance in a state of 
 sin. A renovation, a " new birth " of nature is neces- 
 sary, in order to render it properly susceptive of pure 
 influences from without ; in order, indeed, to its having 
 any appreciative views of the objects towards which 
 its highest activity is demanded. 
 
 The question has been asked : " Can man regener- 
 ate himself ?" This is asking whether man can do a 
 work proper to God. Or whether that which is be- 
 gotten or born of God, may also be begotten or born 
 of man. Man has no power of any kind, directly to 
 regenerate himself. He is not required to do this, lie 
 is required to do only what he can do. He is required 
 to be active in order to regeneration ; generally — not 
 always, otherwise no infants are regenerated, — but 
 generally, he is active in the regenerative process ; but 
 the work of regeneration itself, is no more his work 
 than his generation or creation. For this work man 
 has no natural power. To reverse that law, whereby 
 after sinning, a disposition to sin became as a second 
 nature ; to displace the ground in which this disposition 
 
WILL-NOT A REAL VAN-NOT. 129 
 
 is rooted ; to put nature back to where it was before 
 the fall, this belongs to no human power ; God alone 
 can do it, and it were absurd to set man about it. He 
 may be set to doing what may be connected with it as 
 a means ; and what may result in it, under Divine 
 direction and influence ; and so, in a figurative 
 way of speaking, he may be required to regenerate 
 himself. The command of Scripture, "Make you a 
 new heart," is equivalent to this : If men would obey 
 this command, their activity would result in regenera- 
 tion ; having a new heart, supposes regeneration. But 
 the making a new heart is to be done in some mode or 
 by some means, and by a familiar use of language, that 
 which is done in the use of means, is spoken of as if it 
 were done by the instrumental agency itself, though 
 in truth it is the product of the Divine power : as when 
 we say, e.g. that a planter has made himself bread- 
 • corn, or a sick man made himself well ; not meaning 
 to deny that man might as soon make a world from 
 nothing, as do either of these by a direct act of his 
 own power or will. 
 
 What has been said on this subject may be briefly 
 expressed in the following propositions : 
 
 1. Man's natural power is power to do what is pro- 
 per to man, by virtue of his having the human nature, 
 or being man. 
 
 2. Since the fall, the natural power of man is sub- 
 ject to the control of a disposition to sin, which 
 makes it certain that left to himself he will remain in 
 this subjection. 
 
 3. The Gospel bringing grace to man, makes ap- 
 
 6* 
 
130 IMPOTENCE OF WILL. 
 
 peals to his natural power with reference to his 
 conversion, or recovery from servitude to sin. 
 
 •A. As it is certain and known that, left to him- 
 self, man will abide in servitude to sin, or an un- 
 converted state, and so believing would, on the mere 
 ground of his having natural power, be without hope 
 from effort, and could not earnestly attempt it ; he is 
 therefore, not to be set to exert himself, simply on this 
 ground ; but, on the contrary, is to be animated to 
 effort by the overture of help from the co-operation of 
 the Holy Spirit. 
 
 5. All activity previous or preliminary to actual 
 conversion, is not necessarily of the nature of sin : 
 some such activity is generally necessary to conversion, 
 and is therefore virtually required in the call to it. 
 The activity which is necessary to conversion is not 
 already spiritual, but neither is it sinful. It is not spir- 
 itual, because conversion has not place as yet ; it is 
 not sinful, because conversion is not attainable without 
 it. The activity which, in fact, generally precedes 
 conversion, is different in different cases : it is seldom, 
 if ever, without much fault. When it is as it should 
 be, it admits of no obliquity, delay, or wavering, but 
 proceeds directly to its end. 
 
 6. When activity, in order to conversion, terminates 
 in it, it does this, not of itself, but by a special agency 
 of the Holy Spirit, whereby our corrupted nature is 
 renewed and restored. 
 
VII. 
 
 THEORY OF PREPARATION FOR PREACHING. 
 
 1. Amtdst the diversities of practice in preparing for 
 the pulpit, are there no principles to be inviolably fol- 
 lowed ? Is there no theory of preparation ? Undoubt- 
 edly there is ; and, assured that the intelligent appli- 
 cation of theory to practice, in this as in every other 
 case, cannot but be useful, we shall attempt a brief 
 analysis of our subject. If what we have to say shall 
 incline none to change or modify the method to which 
 they have been accustomed, our sketch may possibly 
 be of some advantage to those who are yet to form a 
 habit of preparation. We have to do with a difficult 
 subject, and one which demands our earnest and pa- 
 tient thought. 
 
 2. We sometimes have to preach without having 
 had opportunity to prepare a sermon for the occasion. 
 The call is unexpected, but our duty to meet it is plain • 
 and if indifference, or timidity, or a too scrupulous 
 respect to reputation, do not hinder — if the love of 
 Christ and of souls be the strongest impulse of our 
 ministry — we shall in a few moments, be in the pulpit, 
 
 (131) 
 
132 THEORY OF PREPARATION 
 
 delivering a discourse, not from a manuscript or mem- 
 oiy, but extempore, in the strictest sense of the word. 
 "We should not be backward to improve these emer- 
 gent, out of season, occasions. They are probably 
 among our best opportunities of doing good ; and the 
 sudden demands now made upon us, may not be more 
 extraordinary than the excellence of our preaching, 
 if we meet them bravely and promptly. Perhaps, after 
 our most elaborate preparations, we have never 
 preached better than we shall preach now. We may 
 outdo ourselves. We may have very unwonted if not 
 supernatural ability for our work. Our speaking may 
 be less our own than that of the Spirit of our Father 
 speaking in us. We know not what unusual and won- 
 derful experiences of Divine aid, what depths and 
 heights of spiritual insight and feeling, what surpris- 
 ing enlargements of thought and expression, what 
 special advantages for doing and getting infinite good 
 we might resign, by declining to meet these abrupt 
 calls to testify the Gospel of the grace of God. 
 
 3. It is the high and singular distinction of Preach- 
 ing or spiritual eloquence — and this is our chief guide 
 in the inquiry we are pursuing — that the supreme and 
 
 DOMINATING PART IN IT, BELONGS TO THE HOLY GHOST. 
 
 In the apostles, and other primitive ministers, nay, 
 even in our Divine Master Himself, the sufficiency for 
 preaching was from a special unction and co-operation 
 of the Spirit of God.* In reproducing the inspired 
 word by preaching, there is, as there was pre-eminently 
 
 * Luke iv. 18, 19. Compare verses i. 14, and Acts i. 2 ; 1 Pet. 
 i. 12 ; 1 Cor. ii. 13 ; Acts i. 8, ii. 4. vii. 55, xi. 24. 
 
FOR PREACHING. 133 
 
 in the first inditing of that word, a Divine-Human 
 agency, in which as it was, in the higher case also, the 
 Human is wholly subordinate and subservient to the 
 Divine. The man in preaching is but an organ, though 
 a living, free, self-active organ, of the Holy Spirit, who 
 dwells and works within him to make him competent 
 for what he does. The part of the Spirit in preaching 
 is essentially different, and never to be undistinguished 
 from that which he performs in original inspiration ; 
 but it is special and paramount ; the preacher can do 
 nothing as he ought, if he be left to himself. " We are 
 not sufficient of ourselves," said a representative 
 preacher, " to think anything as of ourselves." It is 
 denying the substantive difference between preaching 
 and natural eloquence to make the former the product, 
 or a possible achievement, of merely human capabili- 
 ties. There is, it is true, nothing in the structure of 
 a sermon which is not referable to the human powers, 
 as the directly producing cause ; but a true sermon, 
 is never produced by these powers of themselves ; it 
 comes from an exercise of them, originated, sustained 
 and made adequate to its result, by a distinctive and 
 special operation of the Holy Ghost. Preaching, the 
 kind of discourse which God requires as the fit medium 
 and vehicle of His spiritual power, is human, and yet 
 not simply natural eloquence ; the manner as well as 
 the matter, the very diction of it is spiritual : " Which 
 things we speak not in words which man's wisdom 
 teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth, combin- 
 ing spiritual things with spiritual ivordsr My speech 
 * See Calvin, Beza, and Hodge, in loc. The apostle dis- 
 
134 THEORY OF PREPARATION 
 
 and ni) r preaching was not "with enticing words of 
 man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and 
 of power." A true preacher is a spiritual man; the 
 natural man has no perception of the things of the 
 Spirit, the material of preaching ; he may have notions 
 of these things and if he be an eloquent speaker, he 
 may discourse on them eloquently ; but he can make 
 no spiritual discourse ; this requires more than notions 
 or forms of the understanding ; it is from spiritual 
 
 tinguishes, (v. 12,) between revelation and spiritual knowledge of 
 the things revealed ; and here, speaking of the expression of 
 these things in preaching, he says that this also was of the 
 Spirit. He does not mean that his language in preaching was 
 dictated to him directly, as if he had been no more than an 
 amanuensis. His contrasting the teaching of words by the Spir- 
 it, with the teaching of words by man's wisdom shows this. 
 Man's wisdom teaches the use of language not by dictating 
 words to us, but by giving us through intellectual discipline and 
 culture, the command of this wisdom's words : the principle of 
 contrast suggests a parallel method, in the Spirit's teaching, as 
 to words. The words taught by him in this way, are no less 
 from him, than the words of which one has the use, through a 
 liberal education, are from man's wisdom. If we are enabled to 
 speak the words we use in preaching no otherwise than through 
 subjective preceptions and apprehensions, imparted by the influ- 
 ence of the Spirit ; if through the operation of the Spirit we ac- 
 commodate the words to the subject, so that, " as the things we 
 teach are spiritual, our mode of teaching them is in like manner 
 spiritual," it is strictly proper to ascribe the language we use to 
 the teaching of the Spirit. In a true sense he gives us this lan- 
 guage though he does not pronounce it to our ear. But the apos. 
 tie himself explains what he means by the Spirit's teaching him 
 words, in the expression before us : " Combining spiritual things 
 with spiritual words." His preaching, both as to matter and 
 expression, was different from ours in that it was in both these 
 respects, infallible ; but ours also should in all respects be spir- 
 itual, or of the special influence of the Holy Spirit. 
 
FOR PREACHING. 135 
 
 discernment of the infinite things themselves. Preach- 
 ing prc-supposcs intellectual knowledge, but this 
 knowledge, though one of the conditions of preaching, 
 is not its direct producer ; it comes from " a sense of 
 the divine excellency of the things of the Spirit and a 
 conviction of the truth and reality of them, thence 
 arising."- There is the same essential difference be- 
 tween preaching and unspiritual eloquence, that there 
 is between spiritual and natural life ; only, as the 
 exercises of spiritual life in preaching are, from the 
 nature of the business, highly peculiar and unique, 
 correspondently so is preaching itself, the sum and the 
 name of these exercises. 
 
 4. We see, then, what a preacher is about when he 
 is preparing a sermon. We have before us the sort 
 of discourse he has set himself to construct. A dif- 
 ferent sort will not, cannot come from an operation in 
 which the Spirit has the causal influence. Unspiritual 
 discourse is neither from Him, nor will He take it as a 
 fit instrument to work by, in effecting His proper pur- 
 pose. He may, indeed, in some way make use of it. 
 He knows how to use, He knows how to serve Himself 
 of material uncongenial, and antagonistic to His pur- 
 pose. Through His sovereign wisdom and grace He 
 may turn an unspiritual sermon into an occasion of 
 giving spiritual life. As by touching the dry bones 
 of a prophet, the dead body of a man was once rean- 
 imated, it is not incredible that the Spirit may some- 
 times quicken dead souls into life, under preaching, so 
 called, which has no soul-quickening virtue in itself. 
 * Edwards on the Reality of Spiritual Light. 
 
136 THEORY OF PREPARATION 
 
 But as He does not produce, so He never authenticates 
 or approves, such discourse. However orthodox and 
 eloquent it may be, it is not according to His mind, 
 it is not hoinogeneal with the Divine nature ; its ten- 
 dency is not spiritual ; and He seldom attends it, in 
 any way, with His effectual agency. The sermons He 
 is most pleased with are such as approximate most 
 nearly to His own preaching in the oracles of God. 
 In manner and spirit, as well as in matter, the Bible 
 is the pattern, the exemplar to the pulpit. Second- 
 hand preaching is without the infallible inspiration 
 which dictated the Scripture ; but the mind and life 
 of the Holy Spirit permeate this preaching also. A 
 true sermon is of the same temper and purpose with 
 the Bible ; the same in assimilation with the spirit- 
 uality of God ; the same in inconsistence with evil 
 and vanity ; the same in attractiveness to Christ and 
 heaven ; the same in antagonism to whatever imperils 
 the soul and the immortality of man. No human 
 preaching is perfect ; but a true preacher strives after 
 perfection, and the Bible is his standard. 
 
 5. The supremacy of the Spirit's agency requires 
 the preacher, not the less, but the moke, to attend 
 to his part of the work. Though the sermon is, 
 at last, the result of two combined agencies, the 
 agencies have not the same direct purpose. That of 
 the Spirit is not the sermon, but the preparation of 
 the preacher. The Divine-Human in preaching is not, 
 as to its ultimate product, altogether what it is in 
 Scripture. In Scripture the Human is never the in- 
 strument of error ; in preaching, as we just now said, 
 
FOB PREACHING. 137 
 
 the liberty of man is not secured against abuse. The 
 preacher, though a spiritual, is far from being a per- 
 fect man. His sermon, though made with the Spirit's 
 co-operation, is his own immediate work, the direct 
 fruit of his own labor. The Spirit does but help 
 him to help himself; his freedom is not abridged ; he 
 has special assistance from the Spirit, but he may ne- 
 glect and frustrate it. By inattention, by indolence, 
 by haste, by self-wisdom, by ambition, by aspiring 
 after eminence in his work, he may cross and thwart 
 the working of the Spirit within him. Even pro- 
 phetic inspiration left entiro liberty to the will of the 
 prophet. " The spirit of the prophets was subject to 
 the prophets." More than once the anger of the Lord 
 was kindled against Moses himself. No man should 
 guard himself more watchfully against the neglect or 
 perversion of advantages, than he in whom the Spirit 
 is working with reference to his having ability in 
 preparing to preach. Paul has left all preachers an 
 example as to their method and measure, in the entire 
 exercise of their ministry : "Whereunto I labor, striv- 
 ing according to his working, who worketh in me 
 mightily."* 
 
 6. The nature of preaching as spiritual work — 
 work not to be done without the co-operation of the 
 Spirit — acquaints us with the part which prayee has 
 in preparing for it. Self-evidently, prayer, as a 
 means, is required before every other, and is, virtu- 
 ally at least, continued and ascendant in every other. 
 If a spiritual discourse is not a possible achievement 
 * Col. 5. 29. 
 
138 THEORY OF PREPARATION 
 
 of natural power, to attempt one independently of the 
 aid of the Holy Spirit were a plain absurdity ; and 
 since the Spirit is present to impart His aid, the at- 
 tempt were impious, an insult to the Infinite Spirit, as 
 well as absurd. But not without intentional and con- 
 scious effort on the preacher's part, directed to that 
 end, is the power of the Spirit developed in congenial 
 concurrence with his activity. The Divine does not 
 concur with the Human in this free and holy opera- 
 tion, but at the urgent and continued exertion of the 
 Human. Even in the ordinary work of sanctification. 
 in which also the Divine and Human are combined* 
 this is the case ; and may it be otherwise in this high 
 and special work of holy power ? May a man make 
 a sermon, without consciously looking to the Spirit 
 and seeking His assistance, when, without doing this, 
 he cannot read the Scriptures, or do aught else as he 
 should? It is an intuition of conscience that a 
 preacher is required, by the business of his vocation, 
 to be, above others, a man of prayer. It was but 
 natural, the dictate of common reason, that the apos- 
 tles should think of instituting a new office in the 
 Church when they saw that otherwise they would be 
 hindered in giving themselves to prayer and the 
 ministry of the word. And was it with no reference 
 to what was needful to ordinary preachers, that the 
 pre-eminence of their Master and Lord, in connecting 
 the practice of prayer with the exercise of His minis- 
 try, has been so particularly and pointedly recorded 
 by the evangelists ? What a lesson is it to common 
 * Phil. ii. 12, 13. 
 
FOR PREACHING. 139 
 
 preachers, as to the place they should give to 
 prayer in their plan of labor, that the greatest of all 
 the inspired ministers of Christ, in nearly all his epis- 
 tles, makes specific mention of his own habit in regard 
 to prayer ;* and asks so fervently the prayers of the 
 Church ;t and particularly, that they would pray that 
 God would assist him in the work of preaching.% 
 Is it surprising that the great models of the pulpit 
 had their fellowship with their Lord and His chief 
 apostle in this spiritual habit? that Luther gave 
 many of his best hours every day to earnest wrestling 
 with God ; showing thus his faith in his own motto 
 (bene orasse, bene studuisse) ; and doubtless how he 
 came to adopt it as his motto ? that Whitfield's prepa- 
 rations were chiefly made on his knees at the mercy- 
 seat ? that the main business of Bruce in preparation 
 was the elevation of his heart into a holy and rever- 
 ential frame, and in pouring it out before God in 
 wrestling prayer ? Is it not manifest that this, in 
 truth, must be the main business with every preacher 
 who really regards preaching as an impossibility to 
 man without aid from above? He will, of course, 
 give to the work, study, invention, the closest applica- 
 tion of his mind, the highest use of his talent, learn- 
 ing, culture ; but in all, and more than all, he will be 
 praying in spirit with all prayer and supplication, 
 that the Holy Spirit may not cease to work mightily 
 within him, illuminating, sanctifying, strengthening 
 
 * 1 Thess. iii. 10 ; Col. i 3 ; Philip i. 4 ; Rom. i. 19 ; Eph. i. 16 ; 
 2 Tim. i. 3 ; Phil. iv. 
 f Rom. xv. 30 ; 2 Cor. i. 2. \ Eph. vi. 14; 1 Thess. v. 25, 
 
140 THEORY OF PREPARATION 
 
 directing the exercise of his faculties, until he has 
 completed his preparation. 
 
 7. Advancing further with our inquiry, we come at 
 once to the question : Whether writing is to be 
 included in the work? Is composition essential 
 to the best preparation? In the absolute sense, 
 no ; but yes, yes, with emphasis, relatively to general 
 proficiency. In some instances we may prepare bet- 
 ter without than with writing ; we sometimes preach 
 better when we have no manuscript, not even a brief; 
 but, on the whole, the highest success in preparing 
 requires the use of the pen. " The pen is the best, 
 the most excellent former and director of the tongue. 
 However long a person may practice spontaneous 
 elocution, he can never command admiration without 
 practice in writing ; and the man who after using his 
 pen shall come to the bar, will carry along with him 
 this advantage, that though he shall speak without 
 previous meditation, yet what he will deliver will 
 have the air of correct composition ; and further, if 
 at any time he shall use the assistance of notes, as 
 soon as he lays them aside the remaining part of his 
 speech will be of a piece with the preceding. As a 
 boat under sail, though the rowers suspend their 
 efforts, the vessel still moves in the same direction as 
 when impelled by the impulse of the oars ; so in a 
 continued discourse, when no longer supplied with 
 notes, yet the remaining part proceeds in the same 
 strain, by the resemblance and strength acquired from 
 composition."* What is here so well said, has a 
 * Cicero. 
 
FOB PREACHING. 141 
 
 special claim to the attention of the ministers of the 
 Word. The discourse of the pulpit, more than all 
 other public speaking, ought to be chaste in style and 
 diction, as well as of masculine strength and force. 
 The subject matter of it, the excellence and nobleness 
 of its purpose, the criticism it has to meet, and, let it 
 be added impressively, its great claim as of Divine- 
 Human texture, demand for it, not only an absolute 
 exemption from whatever is coarse, commonplace, pro- 
 vincial, but the highest classical simplicity and purity. 
 What an indignity were it, to use the striking image 
 of Foster, " to impose the guise of a cramped, formal, 
 ecclesiastic on what is destined for a universal mon- 
 arch." Moreover, the advance of society heightens 
 the duty of the pulpit, to be in the advance, as an 
 instrument of popular refinement and culture in all 
 respects, and especially in the use of language, which 
 besides being a mark of cultivation has no remote con- 
 nection with moral improvement. The times require 
 of the pulpit a higher order of discourse. One of the 
 first thinkers and writers of the age, tells us : " It is 
 necessary at the present day, in order to banish from 
 the threshold of conscience, prejudices which to cer- 
 tain minds of a fastidious character, may be a lasting 
 hindrance, that evangelical discourse should not be 
 unpolished and rude ; it is necessary that, when com- 
 pared with other products of the understanding, it 
 should not appear chargeable with any kind of infe- 
 riority, and that no one should have it to say, with 
 any appearance of reason, that it is only the ears of 
 the vulgar of which it has the command. And let it 
 
142 THEORY OF PREPARATION 
 
 not be imagined that the merit of an elaborate com- 
 position may be anywhere lo?t from its not being 
 everywhere appreciated. In all minds true excellence 
 and true beauty find a point in which they are felt. 
 Their intimate congeniality with all the wants of the 
 soul, enable them at length to penetrate it. The dis- 
 cernment of just expressions and silent forms gradu- 
 ally becomes an instinct with the multitude ; and the 
 preacher's care as to the logic of his composition, and 
 the texture of his language, gives him a new authority 
 over the people, whereby he becomes not only their 
 spiritual guide, but, in many respects, their law-giver."* 
 
 8. It would then, doubtless, be perilous to the credit 
 and honor of preaching, to forbear writing as a means 
 of preparing for the pulpit. Few, even of educated 
 preachers, men of literary talent, could preach no other 
 than unwritten sermons, without incurring blemishes 
 of elocution, which might seriously impair their gen- 
 eral influence as public speakers. They would be in 
 danger of becoming more or less inexact, repetitious, 
 disorderly, if not even slovenly, not only in diction, 
 but in thinking and reasoning also. This danger has 
 been actualized in too many examples. 
 
 9. But it should be added, on the other hand, and 
 with strong accent, that if writing for the pulpit be 
 important, not less so ake the capacity and the 
 habit of preparation without WRITING. Generally, 
 indeed, this latter mode of preparation is a condition 
 of the highest success in the other mode. Better that 
 a preacher should write no sermons than compose as 
 
 * Vinet's Installation Discourse. 
 
FOR PREACHING. 143 
 
 many as he will probably have to preach. Of three 
 sermons a week, the least number usually required, he 
 would hardly have time for more than the bare hand- 
 writing. Unless he has uncommon facility of compo- 
 sition, he cannot write well, more than one at the 
 utmost. And the utility of the habit of composition 
 depends on the care given to the work. Better that 
 one should do all his preaching extemporaneously, 
 than practise no other than negligent, hasty, extempo- 
 raneous writing. But what is a preacher's resource, 
 if, having three sermons to preach, he write only one ? 
 Either, he must use other men's sermons, or repeat his 
 own, or prepare to preach without writing. The first, 
 however allowable, elsewhere, is inadmissible with us.; 
 the second, after a while will make his preaching in 
 sipid to his hearers, as well as next to intolerable to 
 himself. Without great disadvantage and loss of 
 influence, he cannot repeat to his stated hearers, more 
 than once or twice, discourses which they will remem- 
 ber — " What eloquence is that of a man whose hearer 
 knows beforehand all his expressions, and his moving 
 appeals ? A likely way indeed, to surprise, to aston- 
 ish, to soften, to convince, to persuade men ! A 
 strange method of concealing art and letting nature 
 speak ! For my part, I say that all this offends me. 
 What ! shall a steward of the mysteries of God, be an 
 idle declaimer, jealous of his reputation, and ambitious 
 of vain pomp ? Shall he not venture to speak of God 
 to his people, without having arranged all his words, 
 and learned like a school boy his lesson by heart?"* 
 * Fenelon. 
 
144 THEORY OF PREPARATION 
 
 The third is the only remaining means ; he must pre- 
 pare to preach without writing. Plagiarism and the 
 too oft repetition of the same discourse apart, extem- 
 poraneous preaching would seem to be a necessity. 
 
 10. And this means, which there appears to bo 
 hardly any way of dispensing with, has its own very 
 high recommendation. Along with the other, and in 
 larger measure than that can well have, it enhances. 
 on the whole, the utility of a protracted course of 
 preaching. Indeed, valuable as well written discourses 
 are in other respects, their chief advantage, ultimately, 
 both to the preacher and his hearers, is from the in- 
 fluence they have on the preparation to preach extem- 
 poraneously. Certain it is, that the ideal of excellence 
 in preaching, is unattainable when the delivery is from 
 full notes.* Extemporizing in itself is the best way 
 of speaking, the natural way, the only speaking in- 
 deed, in the strict sense of the term.f Each of the 
 other ways, reading, reciting, reproducing from a man- 
 uscript, has somewhat in it, which nature would hardly 
 suggest or allow in such an occupation as that of ad- 
 dressing, speaking to, an assembly.^ Neither of them 
 is often if ever used, in other kinds of eloquence. Does 
 the singularity of the pulpit in using them so freely as 
 it has done, admit of an apology? A great master in 
 
 * " To read in a manuscript book as our clergy now do, is not 
 to preach at all. Preach out of a book if you must, but do not 
 read in it or even from it. A read sermon of twenty minutes will 
 seem longer to the hearers than a free discourse of an hour." — 
 Coleridge. 
 
 f Whately's Rhetoric. 
 
 \ " Nunquam aliud natura, aliud sapientia dicit." — Juvenal. 
 
FOR PREACHING. 145 
 
 the ministry of the word has said : " The people must 
 be taught in a manner that they may be inwardly con- 
 vinced, and made to feel the truth of what the apostle 
 says, that ' the word of God is a two-edged sword, 
 piercing even to the dividing asunder of the soul and 
 spirit, the joints and marrow, and is a disccrner of the 
 thoughts and intents of the heart." There is too little 
 of living preaching in your kingdom (England) ; ser- 
 mons there have been mostly read or recited. True 
 and faithful servants of God ought not to wish to 
 shine in the ornaments of rhetoric, or effect great 
 things thereby; but the Spirit of God should be 
 echoed by their voice, and so give birth to virtue. 
 No possible danger must be permitted to abridge the lib- 
 erty of the Spirit of God, or prevent his free course 
 among those he. has adorned with his graces for the edi- 
 fying of the Church."* 
 
 11. This last remark of Calvin should be as a loud 
 warning to preachers, when writing discourses for the 
 pulpit. Both in preparing and preaching from manu- 
 scripts, there is special danger of abridging the lib- 
 erty of the Spirit, in His part of the work. From 
 neither, as we have before insisted, is His peculiar 
 agency to be for a moment abstracted. Writing is the 
 preacher's business ; he puts himself in it, if he does it 
 in earnest ; and he is very apt, from the nature of the 
 operation, to be in it by himself and to do it in too 
 exclusive self reliance ; and when he has done it, to 
 restrict himself to what he has written, ignoring the 
 Spirit's province and right, in the actual work of 
 
 * Letter of John Calvin to Somerset. 
 
146 THEORY OF PREPARATION 
 
 preaching, even to the end. He is in peril of doing 
 this in the other way of preaching also ; but his lia- 
 bility to it is special, when he uses a completely writ- 
 ten discourse. And he knows not what his preaching 
 may lose if he does abridge the Spirit's liberty in it. 
 By far the best part of preaching is often from the un- 
 anticipated assistances of the Holy Spirit. "The 
 salient points of Whitfield's oratory, were not prepar- 
 ed passages ; they were bursts of passion, like the jets 
 of a geyser when the spring is in full play."* " The 
 degree," says Thomas Scott, " in which after the most 
 careful preparation for the pulpit, new thoughts, new 
 arguments, animated addresses often flow into my 
 mind, while speaking to the congregation on very com- 
 mon subjects, makes me feel as if I was quite another 
 man, than when poring over them in my study." A 
 preacher, whom we know, has related of himself, that 
 when discoursing from Heb. xi. 5, he had such a sense 
 given to him at the moment, of the patriarch's privi- 
 lege there mentioned (" before his translation he had 
 the testimony that he pleased God,") that he was en- 
 abled to enlarge on it, nearly half an hour, in an 
 almost rapture, which made him nearly unconscious 
 of what he was doing or where he was, yet as he gath- 
 ered from a reporter, without inflation of style, or any 
 kind of excess ; making discourse, he believed, never 
 equalled by himself, before or afterwards. There 
 have been instances yet more remarkable — instances 
 wherein the Holy Spirit, in the exercise of His sover- 
 eign right in the business of the pulpit, has displaced 
 
 * Southey. 
 
FOR PREACHING. 147 
 
 altogether the preacher's precomposed sermon, by one 
 spontaneously preached by him from the same, or an- 
 other text. "The Rev. Dr. Dickson, handed me* on 
 Saturday evening, his sermon for Sabbath morning, to 
 read, and I went to church expecting to hear him 
 preach it : He took the same text, but not one idea 
 of what he had written and I read, did he utter. At 
 dinner, lie asked, if I had observed anything at church. 
 Yes. What was it? Why, sir, you took your Satur- 
 day evening text, but you uttered not one idea on it 
 you had written to preach. I thought you would no- 
 tice it. I got such a new and precious view of my 
 text, when in prayer, that I put my sermon in the 
 Bible and spoke just as I saw and felt." It would be 
 presumptuous hastily to refer sudden pulpit experi- 
 ences to the direct agency of the Holy Spirit, but it 
 may be no less so to determine arbitrarily that they are 
 not from Him : they may be from Him ; it is within 
 His province to give them ; and no possible danger 
 must be permitted to abridge His liberty. 
 
 12. "The very idea of extemporizing, supposes that 
 
 THE WORDS OF THE DISCOURSE ARE UNPREMEDITATED. 
 
 In this consists the difference between the two meth- 
 ods of preaching. The matter of an extemporaneous 
 sermon should be as well prepared as that of one 
 which is written ; excepting what may be supplied by 
 a sudden movement of the Spirit, the whole ought to 
 be premeditated and predisposed. The only thing to 
 be excepted is the language ; and this precisely, the 
 
 * We forget the reporter's name, but the anecdote is au- 
 thentic. 
 
148 THEORY OF PREPARATION 
 
 omission of the language, is what the term extempora- 
 neous, when applied to preaching, signifies. The words 
 are improvised ; they come for the first time in the act 
 of speaking. Preparation to preach extempore is 
 sometimes partial ; that is to say, certain parts of the 
 discourse, definition, division, passages requiring spe- 
 cial exactness, color and grace of expression, are writ- 
 ten, or words to express them fittingly premeditated 
 at least. But in so far as these parts are concerned, 
 the discourse is not extemporaneous. To prepare to 
 preach extempore, is to prepare without choosing or 
 thinking of words, previous to the delivery of the dis- 
 course. The words spring into being at the exigence 
 and command of the mind, in the business of speaking ; 
 they are born in the pulpit, of the nisus and exercises 
 of thought : and it is best for the discourse that they 
 should there and thus originate ; any specific provision 
 for them would require labor, much better given to 
 the preparation of the matter. There is no cause 
 whatever for anxiety concerning them. If the preach- 
 er be not disqualified in some other respect, he may 
 confidently and safely rely on being supplied with the 
 language he will need. He may not have at command 
 the niceties, and delicate coloring of expression, which 
 he might introduce into an elaborate composition ; but 
 these are not essential to good discourse, and perhaps 
 they are not desirable. " Eloquence requires a more 
 manly temper, and if its whole body be sound and vig- 
 orous, it is quite regardless of the nicety of paring the 
 nails, and adjusting the hair."* Let the words then 
 
 * Quintilian. 
 
FOR PREACHING. 149 
 
 be left to themselves : So the best extemporizers ad- 
 vise. " Digest well 3*0111- subject, but be not careful to 
 choose your words previous 1o your delivery; follow 
 out the idea with such language as may offer at the 
 moment."" " If any words of mine could be needed 
 to reinforce the opinion of the most enchanting speak- 
 er I ever heard, I should employ them in pressing on 
 your mind, the counsel not to prepare your words. 
 Certain preachers by a powerful constraining disci- 
 pline, have acquired the faculty of mentally rehearsing 
 the entire discourse they were to deliver, with almost 
 the precise language. This is manifestly no more ex- 
 temporaneous preaching than if they had written down 
 every word in a book. But if you would avail your- 
 self of the plastic power of excitement in a great as- 
 sembly, to create for the gushing thought, a word of 
 fitting diction, you will not spend a moment on the 
 words. Generally speaking, the best possible word is 
 one which is born of the thought in the presence of the 
 assembly, "t 
 
 13. Should preparation to preach extempore include 
 the preparation of a programme or brief to serve as 
 a mnemonic in the PULriT ? Not ordinarily, for the 
 generality of the preachers. Preachers who are not 
 afraid to trust their memories, find more freedom in 
 delivery, when they have no paper before them ; there 
 is an interruption of the flow and continuity of utter- 
 ance in casting the eyes often on a brief. Much more 
 easy and agreeable is the manner of an orator, who, 
 standing erect before his bearers in perfect independ- 
 * Summerfield. \ Dr. J. W. Alexander. 
 
150 THEORY OF PREPARATION 
 
 ence of aid from notes, completes the delivery of 
 liis speech. This was the manner of the most consum- 
 mate extemporaneous preacher to whom we have ever 
 listened.* It is strongly recommended by other mas- 
 ters in the art. " If you press me to say which is 
 absolutely the best practice, in regard to notes, pro- 
 perly so called, that is in distinction from a complete 
 manuscript, I unhesitatingly say, use none / carry no 
 scrap of writing into the pulpit. Let your scheme, 
 with all its branches be Avritten on your mental tablet. 
 The practice will be invaluable. I know a preacher, 
 about my own age, who has never employed a note of 
 any kind."f 
 
 14. The reason for the absence of notes, is more de- 
 cisive, generally, against introducing prepared para- 
 graphs and pages into an extemporaneous sermon. The 
 more elaborately they are written, the more ornate 
 and exquisite their composition, the less their homoge- 
 neity with the ordinary strain of spontaneous, unstud- 
 ied elocution, Indeed, it is extremely difficult to hinder 
 the effect of direct contrast between the latter and 
 these elaborate appendages, " It requires the practice 
 of years, and I doubt if even that would generally suf- 
 fice, to dovetail an extemporaneous paragraph grace- 
 fully into a written sermon ; "J and to inweave a writ- 
 ten paragraph into an extemporary sermon, would be 
 a yet harder attempt. One may be assisted by the 
 impulse of thought, or the swell of emotion, in deliver- 
 
 * The immediate predecessor of Mr. Barnes in Philadelphia. 
 
 \ Dr. J. W Alexander. 
 
 % Dr. Alexander : There are striking exceptions however. 
 
FOR PREACHING. 151 
 
 ing a written discourse, to produce an extemporaneous 
 paragraph of a piece with the composition ; there 
 is no like assistance in the other undertaking ; the pas- 
 sage in this is from the natural into the artistic, from 
 freedom into restraint, from warmth into comparative 
 frigidity. There is not, however, an absolute rule 
 against the intermixture of written with unwritten 
 language in the same discourse, either in less or larger 
 measure. Some preachers, especially in treating cer- 
 tain subjects extemporaneously, have used liberally 
 the labor of the pen in certain places, with much ad- 
 vantage; the general heterogenousness of the two 
 kinds of elocution is nevertheless undeniable.f 
 
 f Several modes of learning to speak well extempore, have been 
 recommended by different writers. The best mode, according to 
 Lord Brougham, is as follows: " The beginning of the art is to 
 acquire the habit of easy speaking. In whatever way this can be 
 had, which inclination or accident will generally direct, and may 
 be safely allowed to do, it must be had. Differing as I do from all 
 other doctors in rhetoric, in this I say learn to speak easily and 
 fluently, as well and sensibly as you can, no doubt — but at any 
 rate learn to speak. This is to eloquence or good public 
 speaking, what being able to talk in a child, is to good 
 grammatical speech. It is the requisite foundation, and on it you 
 must build. To speak easily, ad libitum, to be able to say what 
 you choose, what you have to say — this is the first requisite, to 
 acquire which, everything for the present must be sacrificed. 
 This is the first step ; the next is the grand one, to convert this 
 kind of easy speaking into chaste eloquence. And as to this, 
 there is but one rule — to set daily and nightly before you the 
 Greek Models." But is this really the only means ? Should 
 not the study of English and French and some other models — 
 models of the pulpit especially — be also recommended ? Diligent 
 word-study, apart from all models, should, we think, be also in- 
 sisted on. One's vocabulary — the number and character of the 
 words at his ready command — should be constantly husbanded 
 
152 THEORY OF PREPARATION 
 
 15. But to return to the preparation of the matter 
 in distinction from the expression of an extemporane- 
 ous sermon : This, we repeat, is the same, whether the 
 discourse is to be written or not. The only difference 
 is in the composition. There is the same analysis of 
 the subject ; the same invention and disposition of 
 materials ; the same array of arguments, divisions, and 
 subdivisions ; the same working up of the every thing 
 into one compact organism, the parts set together in 
 the order of climax, one growing out of another, inter- 
 fused, intensified, concentrated, secured against dissi- 
 pation and divergence of force from the one object of 
 the work ; in the one case as in the other ; noth- 
 ing omitted in the discourse, which is to be extempor- 
 ized, except the composition. In neither case, must 
 the preparation be permitted to overlook or abridge 
 the liberty of the Spirit in the preaching of the dis- 
 course ; His way must be left open to modify, or add to 
 the matter, if He please to do so ; but whatever the 
 Spirit's course may be, the work of preparation on the 
 preacher's part ought to be complete ; as much so 
 when he omits as when he performs most perfectly the 
 labor of composition. " The sermon must be well and 
 solidly prepared," irrespective of possible accessions to 
 it from sudden impulses or communications of the 
 Spirit. 
 
 16. With different preachers, and with the same 
 
 preacher at different times, there is great difference as 
 
 and enriched. In connection with every means, and, as of more 
 importance than all, the pen should be elaborately used. And, 
 one thing more we earnestly recommend, namely, the Jiabit of 
 using only chaste diction in common conversation. 
 
FOR PREACHING. 153 
 
 tO SPEED AND RAPIDITY IN THE PREPARATION OF THE 
 
 matter. Sometimes it is accomplished with a celerity 
 almost equal to that of lightning. " There belongs to 
 the human mind a peculiar power of discerning at once 
 the entire nature of a subject ;"* it is given to the 
 preacher occasionally, to exercise this wonderful 
 power ; with the inception of the purpose to treat his 
 subject, the plan, the partes and sub-partcs, and the 
 course of thought to the end, are already virtually in 
 his possession ; the preparation is completed in a mo- 
 ment. But generally its movement is a contrast to 
 this electrical s witness ; often it is the extreme oppo- 
 site. The first view of the subject is commonly con- 
 fused, chaotic, without the slightest perception of 
 method or order ; a process of intellectual gestation en- 
 sues, including deep, intense, protracted thinking ; 
 struggles with obscurity and confusion ; with objec- 
 tions, with half-truths and indecisive arguments, with 
 erroneous or false prejudgments, with bad or imper- 
 fect disposition, with disproportion, disunity, dishar- 
 mony, complication, in organizing the material. Such, 
 for the most part, is the toil of preparation, the con- 
 dition of thoroughness and success in the work. 
 
 IT. There should be no sparing or abatement of 
 pains in this labor. It is generally the all in all, in 
 extemporaneous preaching. The character of the 
 utterance and the elocution, the merit of the perform- 
 ance, probably depends upon it With few exceptions, 
 the whole is done, virtually, when this is done. When 
 the discourse is written, the antecedent plan and 
 
 * Isaac Tavlor. 
 
154 THEORY OF PREPARATION 
 
 arrangement of the matter may be changed and perhaps 
 improved in the work of composition : not so, in the 
 delivery of an extemporaneous discourse. The deliv- 
 ery now is generally predetermined by the character 
 of the antecedent labor. It is as the preparation: the 
 preparation makes it. Now and then, it maybe other- 
 wise by some happy accident ; but the exception con- 
 firms the rule, which virtually includes the delivery 
 itself in the preparation : when this is finished, the 
 preacher by examining it, may anticipate the estima- 
 tion of his pulpit performance. If he would therefore 
 be sure of preaching well, he should be sure of doing 
 well the work of preparation. He ought to revise and 
 scrutinize exactly what he has done, whether it was by 
 the rapid or the slower movement. His swift prepar- 
 ations, especially, should be subjected to criticism. 
 They may be less pleasing to him, if he return to them 
 after a day or an hour or two : Perhaps their rapidity 
 was from want of breadth or depth, or gravity of 
 thought : But his most elaborate schemes may be sus- 
 ceptible of substantial improvement. After the sever- 
 est labor, the best plan sometimes remains to be dis- 
 covered. "There are plans which applying the lever 
 as deeply as possible, raise the entire mass of the 
 subject ; there are others which escape the deepest 
 divisions of the matter, and which raise, so to speak, 
 only one layer of the subject.' 1 * But even if no change 
 be made in the work, a revision of it will be useful : 
 It will fecundate and inspire the mind more thoroughly 
 
 * Vinet. 
 
FOB PREACHING. 155 
 
 with the subject, It ought never to be foreborne if 
 there is time to give it. 
 
 18. The preacher may avail himself of aid in pre- 
 paring. Conference with an intelligent friend, com- 
 parison of his plans with those of others, examining 
 the discourses of others on the subjects he undertakes 
 to treat, may, directly or indirectly, assist him. But 
 more important than all other means of aiding him- 
 self, is this one, namely a quickened consciousness, on 
 the one hand, of dependence on the co-operation of 
 the Spirit ; and on the other, of relying entirely on 
 no other human mind than his own. With these two 
 consciousnesses, which generally are inseparable, and 
 involve one another, his mind will have the normal 
 prerequisite for its freest and. best style of activity, 
 and for its greatest effectiveness and success. He will 
 not assist himself really by any means if he forget or 
 intermit his sense of dependence on the Spirit ; he 
 certainly will not, by using the method or thoughts 
 of others, any otherwise than as he makes them his 
 own by his own mental rumination and digestion. 
 Not more individual is one's own flesh and blood, or 
 personality even, than the material which one natu- 
 rally or honestly works up in the construction of a 
 discourse. It must be his own as veritably as his 
 mind is his own. He may use freely whatever he can 
 obtain from others, when he has digested it and in- 
 wrought it into the life of his own mind ; but other- 
 wise he cannot use it without using what does not be- 
 long to him, and he will be a plagiarist if he takes to 
 himself the credit of originating it, or gives it as from 
 
156 THEORY OF PREPARATION 
 
 himself.* The method which the mind truly uses, is* 
 one which it forms to itself by a kind of gestatory 
 process ; it may be suggested or given by another, 
 but it is not mechanically accepted, it is received 
 through the mind's free self-activity ; it is from the 
 application of thought to the ultimate intention, from 
 consideration of the end. Hence all the material 
 of the operation ; hence, also, the disposition of the 
 material. This it is that determines the number and 
 the arrangement of the parts, and the entire method 
 of the work. The whole business of speaking is 
 resolvable into reflection on what is to be done, and 
 how to do it ; and the first indicates the second ; and 
 both presuppose the free exercise of the speaker's 
 individuality. Both will express that individuality. 
 Following nature, no two persons do precisely the 
 same thing in precisely the same way. The difference 
 will appear in substantial as well as in minor par- 
 ticulars. Even miraculous inspiration did not hinder 
 the apostles from doing each his own work after his 
 own method and fashion. 
 
 19. We have nothing more to say of the work of 
 preparing the matter of the discourse. But prepara- 
 tion to preach includes more than this — the preacher 
 has to prepare himself as well as his sermon. And 
 
 * We see in the light of this fact how to estimate books of 
 " skeletons " proffered as " helps," in the composition of sermons. 
 Except as inciting the writer to self-exertion (and generally they 
 do only the contrary), they are not helps indeed, unless they do, 
 as is the case with some of them, the whole business themselves ; 
 when, if they are used, they occasion the preacher's falling into 
 the snare of plagiarism. 
 
FOR PREACHING. 157 
 
 this, after all, is the most important part of the pre- 
 paration. " It is not so much by what he says, as by 
 what he is, that the preacher may flatter himself that 
 he does not beat the air. Before everything he is con- 
 cerned to hold the mystery of the faith in a -pure con- 
 science. This pure conscience is the true force of 
 preaching. A discourse is powerful from the motive 
 of him who pronounces it, whatever may be the mode 
 in which that motive expresses itself. A discourse is 
 so much the better the more it resembles an act of 
 contrition, of prayer, of martyrdom. The preacher 
 should regard himself as a channel for what ought to 
 be conveyed by him into the heart of his hearers."* 
 Preaching presupposes a very peculiar habit or temper 
 of spirit. Preaching is an action of the soul of the 
 highest spiritual excellence, if it be rightly performed, 
 but for the right performance of which, no ready-made 
 discourse, however good, is the least security. The 
 actual labor of the pulpit is as much a spiritual, 
 Divine-Human work, as the most spiritual preparation 
 for that labor. The co-operation of the Spirit has 
 never been more necessary than now. Even if the 
 words of the sermon have been prepared by His help, 
 and are in themselves spiritual words, they cannot be 
 reproduced aright by the voice without the continu- 
 ance of the Divine aid. If the Spirit withdraw Him- 
 self from the preacher in the reading of the Scrip- 
 tures, he cannot read them as he should. The words 
 are spiritual, but not his reading of them. The repe- 
 tition of words, whether from the Bible or the sermon, 
 
 * Vinet. 
 
158 THEORY OF PREPARATION 
 
 should be in the exercise of spiritual discernment 
 " a sense of the excellency of the things of the 
 Spirit, and a conviction of the truth and reality of 
 them thence arising.'' There is no action more full 
 of spirituality, more animated by spiritual perception 
 in its highest degrees, than the just delivery of an 
 evangelical sermon. The short-coming, therefore, in 
 preparation to preach, however elaborate and com- 
 plete, is radical, if the preacher has omitted to pre- 
 pare himself. His preaching, after all, will not be 
 preaching indeed. He may be very eloquent, the 
 matter of his sermon very spiritual, but his preaching 
 will not differ essentially from the speaking of a mere 
 barrister ; it will be as really of mere human ability 
 or accomplishments. The barrister, perhaps, might 
 deliver the sermon as well as he ; the action in his 
 delivery of it would have the same moral nature ; 
 the eloquence would be no other than natural elo- 
 quence ; it would be void of holiness, void of spiri- 
 tuality, void of the peculiar influence of the Holy 
 Spirit. The absence of the spiritual element in pulpit 
 elocution makes preaching preaching no longer. Dis- 
 course bearing this name, with, perhaps, the highest 
 linguistic and logical excellencies, and even having 
 the most sacred verities of the Gospel for its matter, 
 may be no less ambitious, no less studious of personal 
 reputation and popular applause, no more in affinity 
 with the inspiration and influences of the Holy Ghost, 
 than the oratory of the forum or the platform. 
 
 20. The personal disqualification may include, if 
 not a want of modesty or feeling, a want of self- 
 
FOR PREACHING. 159 
 
 COMMAND IN PRESENCE OF THE ASSEMBLY, a Serious 
 
 matter, if one is going to preach without notes. A 
 slight discomposure of mind is enough to take away 
 his ability to reproduce his discourse, even as a 
 breath of wind on the surface of a lucid water will 
 deprive it of its capacity of showing the images of the 
 trees and other objects which are about it. And a 
 man of sensibility, who has due respect to the as- 
 sembly, and to his own position, is in danger of being 
 thus agitated, especially in extempore speaking, how- 
 ever well prepared and practised in the art. Even 
 Cicero has said of himself, and he told certain emi- 
 nent orators to whom he was speaking, that he had 
 observed the same thing to be true of them, that " he 
 grew pale at the beginning of a speech and felt a 
 tremor in every part of his frame." " When a young 
 man," he added, " I was so intimidated, that (I speak 
 it with the highest sense of gratitude) Quintus Max- 
 imus adjourned the court when he perceived me thus 
 oppressed and disabled with concern." Heroical 
 preachers, who have been many years in the ministry, 
 are no strangers to this perturbation. " I am now an 
 old man," said Luther, " and have been a long while 
 occupied in preaching, but I never ascend the pulpit 
 without a tremor."* Practice in preaching, to one 
 whom familiarity has not made unfeeling, to one who 
 has been growing in the grace which pulpit duty 
 requires for its just performance, enhances, rather 
 than diminishes, the liability to agitation at the out- 
 
 * Nunc senex et diu concionando versatus sim, sed nusquam 
 suggestum conscendo sine treinore. 
 
160 THEORY OF PREPARATION 
 
 set of the delivery of a sermon. " The more a man 
 excels in speaking, lie is the more sensible of its 
 difficulty ; he is under the greatest concern for the 
 event and to answer the expectation of the public."* 
 Let one approach the pulpit with a matured sense 
 of the pre-eminent sacrcdness of the position which 
 he is about to occupy, the responsibilities attached to 
 it, the issues of the work to be done in it, and of his 
 own insufficiency for this work, and would it be pos- 
 sible for him to remain unmoved without more than 
 human support ? We are acquainted with a preacher 
 who, after escaping, through Divine mercy, out of a 
 state of spiritual decline, was so burdened with emo- 
 tion in the pulpit the next Sabbath morning, that he 
 could scarcely command himself, or bear his new 
 experiences, though he had been fourteen years in the 
 ministry. 
 
 In speaking of the high peculiarity proper to true 
 feeling and action in the pulpit, the words of St.Cyran 
 deserve, we think, the deepest consideration. " Preach- 
 ing is a mystery not less awful and terrible than that 
 of the eucharist. It appears to me that preaching is 
 much more awful ; for it is that by which souls are be- 
 gotten and quickened unto God ; whereas by the 
 eucharist they are only nourished, or to speak more 
 correctly, healed. For my part I had rather say a 
 hundred masses than preach once. We are alone at 
 the altar, but in the pulpit we preach to a public as- 
 sembly, where we ought to fear offending God more 
 than elsewhere, unless we have previously labored for a 
 
 * Cicero. 
 
FOR PREACHING. 161 
 
 long time to mortify our spirit, and that pruriency which 
 every one has to know many fine things, which is the 
 greatest temptation that remains to us from the sin of 
 Adam." Is it not probable that too much of the self- 
 possession and familiarity commonly exhibited in 
 preaching is to be referred rather to the presence of a 
 manuscript, or to an unspiritual self-assurance, than 
 to proficiency in pulpit piety and grace? It is not 
 in either of these that the potentiality is seated, 
 for spiritual activity in preaching ; it lies, exclus- 
 ively, in a habit of soul, produced and perpet- 
 uated with reference to it, by the anointing of the 
 Spirit of God. We read of primitive preachers* that 
 they were men habitually full of the Holy Ghost and 
 faith ; and from the nature of the business which is 
 done in true preaching, it could not but be, that a man 
 so subjectively qualified, would have this fullness in 
 special vigor and force, when engaged in this business. 
 It is hence, and hence alone, that there is a security 
 for that holy self-composure, that sublime elevation 
 above all regard to self, and the fear of man, which is 
 the condition of performing this business aright. 
 
 21. Having analyzed preparation for preaching, so 
 far as it is common to both methods, we return to 
 
 WRITING, WHICH MAKES THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN 
 
 THExM. The difference is not small ; for writing, after 
 the best preparation, is a long and painful labor. 
 Writing is not a bare transcription on paper of what 
 has been mentally prepared. The words of the dis- 
 course, as we have remarked, have not been prepared ; 
 * John, Peter, Stephen, Paul, Barnabas, etc. 
 
162 THEORY OF PREPARATION 
 
 they are produced by the emergency of the mind in 
 the operation of writing. Not more in extemporizing 
 than in composing, are the verbal creations and con- 
 structions, the creations of the moment ; there are not 
 ready-made sentences or words for either. The labor 
 of the linguistic work in writing, is commonly much 
 more difficult than the labor of preparing for it ; not 
 only are the forms of language originated now, but 
 new ideas and relations are originated also. " Writ- 
 ting is still thinking, still inventing, still arranging.""' 
 " To write well is at once to think well, to feel well, 
 to render well : it must have-, at the same time, mind, 
 soul and taste ; style requires the combination and ex- 
 cellencies of all the intellectual powers. The intellec- 
 tual excellencies which it contains, all the relations of 
 which it consists, are so many truths not less useful, 
 and perhaps of more value to the human mind, than 
 those which form the foundation of the subject. "t 
 
 22. The usefulness of writing depends on its being 
 done with care. Writing is useful as a gymnastic of 
 the mind, that is to say, when the mind acts as an 
 athlete, when its utmost abilities are put forth : writing 
 again is useful as contributing to the command of lan- 
 guage ; as a means of chastening, purifying, and invig- 
 orating style, of improvement in disposition and 
 method, of thoroughness in the treatment and exhibi- 
 tion of subjects, and, chiefly, as we have said already, 
 of proficiency in extemporizing. But the writing 
 which subserves these ends, is no other than elaborate 
 composition ; the fruit of a struggle after ideal excel- 
 * Vinet. f Buffon. 
 
FOR PREACHING. 163 
 
 lence. We cannot retract what we have said : Better 
 be restricted to preparation for preaching extempore, 
 than fall into a habit of preparing by unstudious, sup- 
 erficial, extemporaneous writing. 
 
 23. But it is to be kept vividly and constantly be- 
 fore the mind, in writing for the pulpit, that there is a 
 
 FUNDAMENTAL SPECIALITY IN THIS KIND OF COMPOSITION. 
 
 It approaches as nearly as possible to the style of ex- 
 temporaneous speaking. In its ideal, preaching is, as 
 we have before said, extemporaneous as to its lan- 
 guage ; the extemporaneous sermon, therefore, abstract- 
 ing its faults, is the model as to the style and diction 
 of one which is to be written ; it gives command in the 
 verbal construction of the sermon. The pen, in coin- 
 position, should as much as possible do the very office 
 of the tongue in its unpremeditated utterances. It 
 should intend the words it writes, not for the eye, but 
 the ear. The preacher should imagine the assembly 
 he is to address to be present with him where he is 
 writing, and make his silent sentences and words as a 
 tongue or a living voice wherewith he speaks to it. 
 He must write in a style, analogous, not to a miniature, 
 but to the bold representations of scene-painting. He 
 has lost the idea of preaching if he think it realizable 
 in a composition suited peculiarly to the press. The 
 composition of a sermon should, if possible, be made 
 perfect in its kind; but its kind is its own, and unchange- 
 able. The style of the sermon, like its matter and its 
 purpose, is individual and unique. 
 
 24. But, moreover, and infinitely more important : 
 Writing for the pulpit should, no less than the ante- 
 
164 THEORY OF PREPARATION 
 
 cedent preparation for writing, be kept under the 
 
 COMMAND AND CONTROL OF THE HOLY SPIRIT. Not 
 
 less needful now is the Spirit's co-operation : if possi- 
 ble it is more needful. There is special danger of 
 being uuspiritual in this part of the labor : the danger 
 of the undue pursuit of ornament ; of ambitious ora- 
 tory ; of going into a search for the enticing words of 
 man's wisdom ; of depending too much on the sermons 
 or plans of others ; of being too speculative and ab- 
 struse, or, on the other hand, vulgar and commonplace ; 
 of being only half or almost true : in a word, of ignor- 
 ing the Spirit's part in preaching, and, consequently, 
 of abating the necessity and exercise of prayer. In 
 writing, much more than in the preliminary labor, and 
 than in extemporizing, the mind busies itself about the 
 externalities, the outward investments of the matter ; 
 in the other operation, it is engrossed with the matter 
 alone ; or if it apply itself at all to the clothing of its 
 thoughts, it does so for the most part, in an embryotic 
 manner ; there is no distinct construction, or discern- 
 ment of forms of language. The mind certainly can and 
 often does think in these forms, but if it never thinks 
 without them, they are often undistinguishable even in 
 its own consciousness. It is at least certain, that 
 whereas in writing, the expression is very apt to be 
 the principal thing, it is comparatively as nothing in 
 the direct activity of the extempore speaker. And 
 this shows the specially high place which prayer 
 should have in writing sermons : it is, if possible, more 
 important now than in preparing the matter. The 
 expression of a written, no less than a spoken sermon, 
 
FOB PREACHING. 165 
 
 ought to be spiritual, but where it is the chief object 
 of attention, there is special clanger that it will not 
 be ; it will be from special spirituality in the writer of 
 the sermon if the structure and tissue of it be not un- 
 spiritual ; in wisdom of words, rather than in demon- 
 stration of the Spirit and of power. 
 
 25. The work of composition generally goes on 
 better when, without anxious attention to diction, the 
 
 PEN OF THE WRITER MOVES SWIFTLY, UNDER THE IM- 
 PULSE OF STRONG AND VIVID CONCEPTIONS OF THE SUB- 
 JECT. Direct study of expression at the time of writing 
 is seldom the best method of success in the style of a 
 composition. Quintilian tells us, that the choicest 
 expressions are, for the most part, adherent to things, 
 and are seen in their own light ; while we search after 
 them as if they were hiding and stealing themselves 
 away from us. Still we know that one may have vigorous 
 conceptions without ability to express them well ; there 
 are very good thinkers who are not good writers. 
 Again, it is a matter of experience, that after the best 
 preparation of the matter one can make, he has some- 
 times to depend on the labor of expression at the 
 moment of performing it, to give him the precise con- 
 ceptions he needs in order to write well. It is so 
 sometimes in speaking extempore ; it is oftener so in 
 writing. The movement of the tongue in the former, 
 and much more of the pen in the latter, is deliberate 
 and interrupted ; the expression being studied as a 
 means of more distinctness of thought. But, generally, 
 good writers and speakers give their direct attention 
 to thought first and chiefly : leaving expression to 
 
166 THEORY OF PREPARATION 
 
 come at the nisus, and, as it were, the call of thought. 
 The opposite order, the study of expression chiefly, 
 produces a style not without ideas altogether, but 
 " with ideas of tinsel, ideas without roots and without 
 power; or, if some thought is mixed with ir, it is ex- 
 ternal to the subject, sustained by nothing, and unsus- 
 tained."* A vigorous style is from strong and vigor- 
 ous thinking, directed to the matter, not to the diction. 
 " A true style is not the mask but the physiognomy of 
 thought ; it comes from thought, as complexion 
 comes from the blood, as the flower springs from 
 the sap." This tells tells us why it is that very 
 masculine writing is sometimes slow, very slow, per- 
 haps, in its progress. It nevertheless remains a fact, 
 that one ordinarily writes best, especially if he is 
 occupied on a sermon, which should always have a 
 popular, speaking style, when inspired and stimula- 
 ted by clear views of his subject ; his pen is nimble 
 and brisk, and yet perhaps much too slow for the 
 movement of his mind.f 
 
 But though with the generality of preachers, the 
 rule in writing a sermon should be to despatch it, 
 currente calamo, yet they should not assume that be- 
 cause they have followed the best method, and prob- 
 ably produced a better composition than tliey could 
 have otherwise done, they should not subject it to a 
 critical revision of the language, now that it is sub- 
 stantially finished according to the true rule. Verbal 
 criticism has been biding its time ; after a little rest 
 
 * Vinet. 
 
 f Dr. Alexander's chief trouble in writing was the time requir- 
 ed in the chirography. 
 
FOR PREACHING. 167 
 
 from the labor of composition, this second labor may be 
 instituted, not only without peril, but probably with 
 much advantage, to the fruit of the first. The first 
 words, and the first verbal constructions are not 
 always the best, even when the writer's mind is preg- 
 nant and aglow with clear and vigorous thought ; 
 there may be epithets too many or too few, or not well 
 selected ; sentences involved ; redundant phrases ; 
 statements exaggerated or imprecise, or weak through 
 too much strength ; or without verity to thought. If 
 the criticism keeps itself under the law which every 
 thing in a sermon should obey — the law which makes 
 subservience to the end the critic of every sentence 
 and word — it can hardly be too severe. If it do not 
 make too large a demand on time, it should not rest 
 until it has done its work as exactly and completely 
 as possible. Not only the improvement of the discourse, 
 but the preacher's general improvement in the use of 
 the language, is the fruit of fidelity in this second la- 
 bor of composition. It has been of high value with 
 the best thinkers and writers. John Foster, speaking 
 of one of his own discourses, says : " I dare say I could 
 point out scores of sentences, each one of which has 
 cost me several hours of the utmost exertion of my 
 mind to put it in the state in which it now stands, 
 after putting it in several other forms, to each one 
 of which I saw some precise objection, which I could 
 at the time have very distinctly assigned." Robert 
 Hall (witness what his biographer says of his toil in 
 preparing his sermons for the press*) was scarcely be- 
 * " Writing, improving, rejecting the improvement; seeking 
 
16S THEORY OF PREPARATION 
 
 hind his eminent contemporary in this exquisite care 
 for perfect expression. 
 
 26. But to return to the first operation : If the 
 theory of writing well forbids the study of words, as 
 the first tiling, mucli more does it forbid the labor of 
 patch-work in the composition.* Those who write 
 detached passages at different times never combine 
 them, we are told,f without forced transitions ; and 
 if they have trouble with passages of their own writ- 
 ing they will, doubtless, have more in working up 
 excerpts from scrap-books, or memory, gathered in 
 reading. The construction of discourse is accretive, 
 not mechanical ; never by mere juxtaposition or acces- 
 sion. It is the development of a living germ, an up- 
 spring and a growth from a living seed of truth. It 
 takes nothing into itself from without which it can- 
 not assimilate ; it avoids heterogeneous, immiscible 
 matter, as it were by instinct, as the animal in its 
 pasture avoids the herbage which does not suit its 
 hunger. The advance of a discourse to completion, 
 and especially a sermon, a Divine-Human discourse, is 
 from within outward ; what comes into it from with- 
 out does so by elective affinity, and coalesces with its 
 life a 5 ? it enters, so that this, with the rest, works as 
 an inward living force. Come whence or how it may, 
 
 another ; rejecting it ; recasting whole sentences and pages ; often 
 recurring precisely to the original phraseology ; and still oftener 
 repenting, when it was too late, that he had not done so." — Dr. 
 Gregory's Memoirs. 
 
 * " Purpureus, late qui splendeat, unus et alter 
 Assuitur paunus." 
 t Buffon. 
 
FOR PREACHING. 169 
 
 it will receive it into itself, if it will at once mix and 
 become consubstantial with its own life ; but it can 
 accept of nothing which is not closely akin and ger- 
 mane to itself, however beautiful or sublime. 
 
 27. It is inexpedient to attempt a sermon which is 
 to be written for an urgent occasion, on a theme not 
 
 ALREADY FAMILIAR TO THE PREACHER. His knowl- 
 edge of it should be adequate before he begins the 
 work. The delay required by having to gain new 
 knowledge, is incompatible with the intense and rapid 
 thinking which is the ordinary condition of life and 
 energy in the composition, and in the present case, 
 probably, a stern necessity. He has no time to give 
 to "reading up," or the acquisition of knowledge. 
 He should have a sufficiency of knowledge when he 
 begins. If more come to him as he proceeds, it 
 should come spontaneously, or from the principle of 
 association or suggestion, not by any direct effort to 
 obtain it. By turning aside to look into commentaries 
 or books of sermons, or even by stopping to ask infor- 
 mation of a friend who is near, he is in danger of 
 losing interest in his work and breaking the vital 
 force and connection of his thought. He cannot do two 
 things at once ; he has time for but one ; and if he 
 had more time, the law of the main labor he is en- 
 gaged in would forbid the appropriation of it to aught 
 else until that labor is finished. 
 
 28. And one thing more as to the selection of a 
 favorable topic. The highest success in writing re- 
 quires a QUICKENED INTEREST IN THE SUBJECT AS WELL 
 AS SUFFICIENT KNOWLEDGE OF IT. Eloquence is not 
 
 8 
 
170 THEORY OF PREPARATION 
 
 from knowledge or thinking merely, but from sympa- 
 thy, from lively emotion, from light within, which 
 burns as it shines. Eloquence is the fruit of an en- 
 gagement of the powers and forces of the mind, in a 
 business operation, an affair of action, directed to an 
 immediate object. Interest is its law, its spring, its 
 life ; other things being equal, the livelier the interest, 
 the higher the strain of eloquence. The preacher 
 should, as much as possible, be impassionated by the 
 subject, should put himself wholly into it, so as to be 
 able to give himself to his hearers in and with his 
 discourse. This is the condition of the highest suc- 
 cess in writing for the pulpit ; and it shows, what 
 Pastoral Theology teaches as one of its great axioms, 
 
 the CLOSE ASSOCIATION OF EXCELLENCE IN THE PREA- 
 CfllNG OF A PASTOR WITH FIDELITY IN THE CARE OF 
 
 souls. The best parish preacher is not one so en- 
 grossed in preparing his sermons that he can earnestly 
 do little else ; but one, on the contrary, so occupied 
 in the work of pastoral oversight that his abounding 
 in that work, his intimate acquaintance with the state 
 of his flock thence resulting, gives him the word of 
 command in the selection of his topics for preaching, 
 and stimulates and guides him in writing his dis- 
 courses. This is, in truth, the pastor's chief labor ; 
 that which, with a conscientious pastor, holds the 
 highest place. " I confess I would rather hear the 
 care of souls objected against preaching, than preach- 
 in a- against the care of souls. I would rather one 
 should say to me, my sick, my poor, my scattered 
 sheep require me, and forbid me to give my preaching 
 
FOR PREACHING. 171 
 
 all the attention -which is desirable."* But there is 
 no clashing between the two works : they aid, use, 
 one another. Preaching serves itself greatly of pa- 
 rochial assiduity. Next to prayer and the co-opera- 
 tion of the Holy Spirit, the most effective assistance 
 in writing for the pulpit is afforded by acquaintance 
 and sympathy with the state of families and individ- 
 uals in the parish. In this, as in everything, duty is 
 one in effect with expediency and success. The secret 
 of life, alacrity, excellence, happiness, in preaching is 
 sclf-devotedness, earnestness, and particularity of con- 
 cern in the pastoral care. The difference between a 
 ministry of the word which springs from this concern 
 and fulfills its impulses, and one which may be desig- 
 nated a ministry at large, is often as the difference 
 between liberty and servitude, delight and drudgery, 
 strength and weakness, success and failure. t 
 
 29. We here finish our outline of this important 
 subject, feeling that, even as an outline, it is very, very 
 incomplete, and hoping that if what we have said shall 
 have no other good result, it may induce some one 
 better furnished for the work to supply its defects, 
 correct its faults, and extend it into a book. We feel 
 that our subject deserves to be treated at large ; it 
 has not been so treated, so far as we know. Vinet 
 
 * Vinet. Past. Theol. 
 
 f " I acknowledge that there are two things whereby I regulate 
 my work in the whole course of my ministry : To impart those 
 truths of tchose power I have had, in some measure, a real experi- 
 ence ; and to press those duties ichich present occasions, tempta- 
 tions and other circumstances, do render necessary to be attended 
 to in a peculiar manner." — Dr. Owen. 
 
172 THEORY OF PREPARATION. 
 
 seems to have included it in the plan of his great 
 work on Homiletics ;* but it has no place in that 
 work ; and we should rejoice greatly to know that a 
 vigorous thinker, with a strong and full apprehension 
 of the New Testament idea of preaching, with ade- 
 quate learning and culture, and in special communion 
 with the Holy Spirit, has given himself to the labor 
 of preparing for the press a complete treatise on it. 
 In the plan of our Lord for recovering the world to 
 Himself, the pulpit remains ascendant over all other 
 means ; and let means be multiplied or varied as they 
 may, it will so remain ; and if it abdicate its place, 
 or become essentially different from what it was at 
 first, other means, however diligently used, will be- 
 come as waters which have no fountain, or as bitter 
 waters flowing from a fountain which has been 
 poisoned. Next to the outpouring of the Spirit upon 
 her general membership, the Church has no interest 
 so momentous as the ministry of the Word. Amid 
 the radical errors and misbeliefs of the times, are 
 there no indications that the appearance of such a 
 book as we have expressed a desire to see, would be 
 seasonable ? 
 
 * See page 261. 
 
VIII. 
 
 DELIVERY IN PREACHING. 
 
 1. An intelligent observer of the common preaching 
 of the times, who compares it with the New Testa- 
 ment idea of preaching, or attempts to resolve it 
 into its proper principles as claiming to be a species 
 of public eloquence, cannot but see that in several 
 radical respects, it needs to be reformed. He must 
 remark in it as quite ordinary and prominent features, 
 violations of oratorical unity ; want of the freeness, 
 directness and pungency of appeal which individuate 
 the oratorical style ; want of the impassionate, the 
 unction, and the agonistic force by which the oratory 
 of the pulpit, more than any other, should be charac- 
 terized. But with a just estimation of its share of im- 
 portance in preaching, must he not, above all, note and 
 lament an imperative demand for reformation in the 
 particular which forms the subject of this article ? 
 Long ago, the pulpit was reproached very sharply for 
 a very bad manner of delivery. Said a celebrated ec- 
 clesiastic to a celebrated actor of the former century : 
 " How is it that you who deal in nothing but fiction 
 
 (173) 
 
174 DELIVERY IN PREACHING. 
 
 can so affect your audience as to throw them into 
 tears, while we who deliver the most awful truths can 
 scarcely produce any effect whatever?" " Here," re- 
 plied the actor, " lies the secret : you deliver your 
 truths as if 'they were fictions ; but we deliver our fictions 
 as if they were truths." There has been, it would seem, 
 no material change for the better. It has been recent- 
 ly remarked,* that action in speaking generally is so 
 little approved or designedly employed, that it is 
 hardly any part of the orator's art. In reference to 
 preaching, the fact has been spoken of thus : " Why 
 are we natural everywhere but in the pulpit ? Why this 
 holoplexia on sacred occasions alone ? Why call in 
 the aid of paralysis to piety ? Is it a rule of oratory 
 to handle the most sublime truths in the driest man- 
 ner? Is sin to be taken from men, as Eve was from 
 Adam, by casting them into a deep slumber V t 
 
 2. This is not a matter of small moment. If 
 preaching be indeed a kind of eloquence, and if its 
 efficacy depend at all on its being true to its princi- 
 ples as such, nothing relating to the practice of it is 
 weightier. Delivery comprehends all the modes of 
 expression in public speaking. " It is," says Cicero, 
 very admirably, " the eloquence of the body ; and im- 
 plies the proper management of the voice and gesture." 
 According to the masters of the art and practice of 
 speaking, it is the chief thing in eloquence. " What 
 we have composed," says Quintilian, " is not of so much 
 consequence as how it is delivered ; because everyone 
 is affectod in proportion as he is made to hear. 
 * By Archbishop Whatoly. f Sidney Smith. 
 
DELIVERY IN PREACHING. 175 
 
 There is no proof so strong but it will lose its force 
 unless it is aided by an emphatic tone in the speaker ; 
 and all passions must become languid unices spiritcd- 
 up by the voice and countenance and attitude of the 
 body.". In like manner, Cicero gives more import- 
 ance to delivery, than, apart from it, to what is deliv- 
 ered. " Without a good delivery, the best speaker 
 can have no name, and with it, a middling one can 
 obtain the highest." Demosthenes goes further : 
 " Being asked what was the greatest excellency in or- 
 atory, he not only gave the preference to delivery, but 
 assigned to it the second and the third place ; where- 
 by it appeared that he judged it not so much the 
 principal, as the only excellency.'' His own practice 
 accorded, it would seem, with his judgment. " After 
 iEschines had lost a cause, he retired in disgrace 
 from Athens to Rhodes, where, at the request of the 
 Rhodians, ho read to them that fine oration which 
 Demosthenes had pronounced against Ctesiphon, which 
 he did with a charming voice. When everybody was 
 expressing their applause : ' How would you have ap- 
 plauded,' says he, ' if you had heard the author him- 
 self deliver it ?' Whereby it appears what a vast 
 influence action had, since the change of the actor 
 could make the same speech appear in quite a different 
 light."* Let us not wonder at this estimation of this 
 part of oratory. W T ho that has been much employed 
 in speaking has not often found a good discourse 
 spoiled, and a poor one made quite a success, by the 
 manner of pronouncing it ? The preaching of White- 
 * Cicero de Oratore. • 
 
176 DELIVERY IN PRE ACHING. 
 
 field, apart from his delivery, was in no respect 
 extraordinary ; including his delivery, it has never 
 been equalled. " To ignorant and semi- barbarous 
 men," said John Foster, " even common truths, in 
 Whitefield's preaching, seemed to strike on them in 
 fire and light." 
 3 "*6> In the tones of the voice alone there are 
 elements of eloquence of inconceivable force. 
 The human voice and the human mind, both inscrut- 
 able marvels of divine handiwork, were made for one 
 another. ; ' The voice, together with the look and the 
 whole frame, is responsive to the passions of the mind, 
 as the strings of a musical instrument are to the fin- 
 gers which touch them. For as a musical instrument 
 has its different keys, so every voice is sharp, full, slow, 
 loud or low : and then each of these keys has different 
 degrees which beget other strains, such as the smooth 
 and the sharp, the contracted and the lengthened, the 
 continued and the interrupted, the tender, the shrill 
 and the swelling." 
 
 4. But the voice, with its wonderful modulations, is 
 unmeasurably aided by the other part of the elo- 
 quence of the body. " No man expresses warm and 
 animated feelings with his mouth alone, but with his 
 whole body. He articulates with every limb and joint, 
 and talks from head to foot with a thousand voices."f 
 And how does the accession of fitting gesture to vocal 
 expression emphasize and enhance the latter ? In 
 Paul's address to Agrippa, what vivid, overcoming elo- 
 quence was added to his vocal utterance, by his dis- 
 
 * Cicero. f Sidney Smith. 
 
DELIVERY IN PREACHING. 177 
 
 playing his chains? "Except these bonds. 1 ' How 
 did Antony intensify the words of his oration over 
 the dead body of Ctesar, by uncovering it before the 
 eyes of the people, and counting over its wounds one 
 by one ? To the peroration of Burke's speech, in the 
 impeachment of Hastings, what an overwhelming force 
 of eloquence was given, when, with streaming eyes 
 and with a suffused countenance, he raised his hands 
 with the documents in them as a testimony to Heaven 
 of the guilt of the person charged?* What had 
 Whitefield's apostrophe " to the attendant angel "been, 
 abstracting from it his supplosio pedis, and his lifting 
 up his eyes with gushing tears, compared to what it 
 was by virtue of this accompanying gesticulation? 
 Take from the celebrated conclusion of Webster's 
 argument before the Supreme Court, in the case of 
 Darmouth College, the quivering of the lips, the trem- 
 bling of the firm cheeks, the choked voice, the eyes 
 overfull of tears, of the great Advocate, and that con- 
 clusion would never have been celebrated or remem- 
 bered.f 
 
 * « jfever was eloquence more triumphant. His audience could 
 endure the agony no longer. Mrs. Siddons confessed that all the 
 terror and pity she had ever witnessed on the stage, sunk into 
 insignificance before the scene she had just witnessed. Mrs. 
 Sheridan fainted ; and the stern Lord Chancellor, Thurlow, who 
 had always in the most headstrong way insisted on Hastings' in 
 nocence, was observed for once in his life to shed a tear." 
 
 f " The court-room during these two or three minutes, presented 
 an extraordinary spectacle. Chief Justice Marshall bent over as 
 if to catch the slightest whisper ; Mr. Justice Washington, at his 
 side, leaning over with an eager troubled look ; and the remain- 
 der of the court, at the two extremities, pressing as it were to a 
 single point, while the audience were wrapping themselves round 
 8* 
 
178 DELIVERY IN PREACHING. 
 
 5. Delivery holds the same place in Preaching, 
 
 THAT IT HAS IN NATURAL ELOQUENCE. The human ill 
 
 it is not less complete or normal from its subordina- 
 tion to the Divine. The supernatural does but tend 
 to and require perfection in the natural. If therefore 
 delivery is the chief thing in eloquence as such, it is 
 the chief thing in preaching. There are congruities, 
 proprieties of delivery, peculiar to preaching ; but 
 they are not in any disagreement with nature ; they 
 are, in kind, only such accommodations to occasions 
 and circumstances, as nature requires in different in- 
 stances and moments of secular oratory. They are 
 but requirements of nature in a peculiar sphere. No 
 eloquence applies more completely and naturally the 
 principles of oratorical art, than the genuine elo- 
 quence of the pulpit. Delivery here also, then, has the 
 supremacy. 
 
 6. There is therefore no justification of the com- 
 mon disparagement of delivery in preaching ; and no 
 apology for it. It implies a violation of order beyond 
 a mere violation of nature, a violation of it, also in 
 the sphere of the supernatural — a counteraction of order 
 in a work in which the chief part belongs to the Holy 
 Spirit: a counteraction of the Spirit's influence and 
 agency in it. The part which the Spirit has in it, im- 
 poses, as its corollary, an obligation on the preacher, 
 
 in closer folds beneath the bench, to catch each look and every 
 movement of the speaker's face. If a painter could give us the 
 scene on canvass — their forms and countenances, and Daniel Web- 
 ster as he then stood in the midst — it would be one of the most 
 touching pictures in the history of eloquence." — Prof. Goodrich 
 to Mr. Clioate. 
 
DELIVERY IN PREACHING. 179 
 
 to give to delivery his principal regard. Being first 
 in itself, it is first in the regard of the Spirit, who 
 cannot but estimate things as they are. If the 
 preacher puts it last, or aught else above it, he is 
 therein at variance with the Holy Spirit, and impairs 
 if he does not entirely thwart His operation. By the 
 inversion of order for which he makes himself respon- 
 sible, he cannot but grieve, if he does not altogether 
 quench the Spirit of God. And he will be likely to 
 gain little by misapplying to something else attention 
 which is due to delivery. He will not compose as 
 well, he will not make as good a sermon in any re- 
 spect, as he would if, in making it, he concurred with 
 the Holy Spirit in his estimation of delivery. Not 
 having been made with just reference to good delivery, 
 it will doubtless be little suitable to it ; perhaps in- 
 compatible with it ; that is to say, as an instrument 
 of oratory, it will be at fault, if not directly opposite 
 to what it should be, in respect to the exigency of 
 eloquence in its chief element. Underrating delivery, 
 therefore, cannot but be inexpedient, in the whole 
 business of preaching. It is a capital mistake and its 
 fruits are after its kind. It is the bane of pulpit elo- 
 quence. 
 
 7. Proceeding now with our main design, which is 
 to present as far as we can in a few brief remarks, 
 the theory of delivery in preaching, we first of all 
 premise, as its chief principle, that even more if pos- 
 sible THAN IN MAKING THE SERMON, THE BUSINESS OP 
 DELIVERING IT, IS SPIRITUAL ; CONSISTING IN THE HIGH- 
 EST activities of spiritual life. Cicero makes 
 
180 DELIVERY IN PREACHING. 
 
 action in speaking radically different from that of the 
 stage : " Orators," he says, i; are the actors of truth ; 
 players but its mimics." Infinitely greater is the 
 difference between action in. preaching and in other 
 oratory ; since the distance is infinite, between nature 
 and spirit.* Just action in speaking, therefore, quite 
 as much as the discourse itself, is of Divine-Human 
 agency. It is impossible to the preacher, except as 
 he is moved and actuated thereto and therein, by the 
 Spirit of God. It is infinitely beyond his ability on 
 two accounts : in the first place, he cannot have the 
 kind of knowledge, the spiritual light and sense neces- 
 sary to it ; and secondly, having this knowledge, he 
 still needs the co-operation of the Spirit, in order to 
 express it appropriately in delivery — the eloquence of 
 the hody. As to the former, the continued agency of 
 the Spirit is indispensable because spiritual know- 
 ledge, unlike the other kind, cannot, from its nature, 
 be retained, or recalled, apart from the unintermitted 
 working of the Holy Ghost in the soul. The preacher 
 may have had the Divine aid in making his sermon ; 
 the sermon, both as to its matter and words may be 
 a spiritual one ; its delivery nevertheless will not be 
 spiritual, if spiritual knowledge or discernment be 
 required in it ; only the incessant operation of the 
 Spirit within him, can fulfill this condition.t " I fear," 
 says Pascal, with admirable judgment, " that you do 
 not sufficiently distinguish, between the things you 
 
 * The infinite distance between body and mind, is a figure of 
 the infinitely more infinite distance between mind and love," — 
 the fruit of the Spirit.— Pascal. f In a letter to his sister. 
 
DELIVERY IN PREACHING. 181 
 
 speak of (spiritual things) and those of which the 
 world speaks ; since it is beyond doubt sufficient to 
 have once learned these latter things, in order to re- 
 tain them, so as not to require to be taught them 
 again ; whereas, it is not sufficient to have once 
 learned those of the other kind, and to have compre- 
 hended them in a good way, that is to say, by the in- 
 ternal operation of God, in order to preserve a like 
 knowledge of them, though we may well retain the 
 recollection of them. There is no reason why we 
 should not be able to remember them, or why we should 
 not retain in our memory, an epistle of St. Paul as 
 easily as a book of Virgil. But the knowledge which 
 we acquire in this way, as well as the continuation of 
 it, is but an effect of memory ; whereas in order that 
 those who are of heaven may understand this secret 
 and strange language, it is needful that the same 
 grace which alone can give the first understanding of 
 it should continue it, and render it always present, by 
 graving it incessantly in the hearts of the faithful, so 
 as to keep it always alive. As in the blessed, God is 
 continually renewing their beatitude which is an 
 effect and consequence of grace ; as also the church 
 holds, that the Father continually produces the Son, 
 and maintains the eternity of His being, by an effusion 
 of His own substance, which is without interruption 
 as well as without end." But in a spiritual delivery, 
 the continued influence of the Spirit, is on another 
 account required ; spiritual knowledge, its indispen- 
 sable condition is not sufficient for it of itself. It 
 cannot express itself in the appropriate action, with- 
 
182 DELIVERY IN PREACHING. 
 
 out being aided therein by the Spirit : it is not pro- 
 vided for by knowledge alone. Action, which is more 
 than knowledge, needs aid for itself. In elocutionary 
 action, as well as in thinking and writing, the 
 preacher, however qualified hy self culture, can attain 
 to no degree of spirituality, by merely natural effort. 
 If the activity of a preacher in speaking, the elo- 
 quence of the body, be indeed spiritual, it is doubtless 
 a higher exercise of the spiritual life, than either of 
 its other exercises in the business of preaching. It 
 must needs be so, if it be answerable, in all respects, 
 to the unique and mysterious exigencies of such a 
 work, as delivering appropriately the inspired word 
 of God as a vehicle and representative of the Holy 
 Spirit. Apart from a very special operation of the 
 Spirit himself, who is sufficient for the just perform- 
 ance of this work? — spiritual things, expressing them- 
 selves fitly, in spiritual modulations of the voice, spir- 
 itual looks, spiritual attitudes — the supernatural ex- 
 erting itself proportionately in and through these 
 bodily signs of thought and feeling — think of one's 
 having in himself, an independent sufficiency for this ! 
 i The apostles, with all their gifts for other uses, had it 
 not, nay, even our Lord's spirituality of mind and 
 knowledge, added to the perfectly natural use of the 
 human powers did not qualify Him adequately, for the 
 business of dispensing the word, independently of the 
 continued co-agency of the Spirit in this specific busi- 
 ness ; even He delivered His discourses, under the 
 anointing and in the power of the Spirit of God.* 
 * Luke iv. 18, cf. 21, iv. 14. 
 
DELIVERY IN PREACHING. 183 
 
 After His resurrection, it was still, through the Holy- 
 Ghost, that He gave commandment to the apostles 
 whom He had chosen. * 
 
 8. It need hardly be added, that in all prelim- 
 inary WORK WITH REFERENCE TO DELIVERY, THE 
 PREACHER MUST ABIDE IN COMMUNION WITH THE 
 
 Holy Spirit. He is not sufficient, of himself, for 
 the least of the exercises of self-culture prerequisite 
 to just pulpit action. The teachers of elocution, with 
 their utmost assiduities, cannot make him independent 
 of the Spirit's aid in practising aright the rules of 
 art, relative to delivery in preaching, or in studying 
 aright the philosophy of voice and gesture. They 
 cannot instruct him, in what he chiefly needs to know 
 and do, in order to act well his part in pronouncing 
 his discourses. No appliances, whether simply natu- 
 ral or artistic, can effect anything to this end of 
 themselves ; they may suffice for the orators of the 
 world ; they come infinitely short of meeting the 
 necessities of preachers. As far as preparatory prac- 
 tice for pulpit delivery proceeds, on the contrary sup- 
 position its failure is inevitable. It is so of necessity ; 
 were it otherwise, it might become so by real, if not 
 conscious visitations of Divine displeasure. It is an 
 offence, a glaring disrespect to the Holy Spirit whose 
 proffered aid it declines. Let not the ministers of 
 the Word forget for a moment the most intimate and 
 sacred relations — relations never for a moment sus- 
 pended — between the work of their office and the 
 high prerogatives of the Holy Spirit in the economy 
 of the Gospel. 
 
 - Acts i. 2. 
 
184 DELIVERY IN PREACHING. 
 
 9. In regard to particular points of attention, 
 
 THE DETAILS OF APPLICATION IN CULTIVATING DELIV- 
 ERY, there is no substantial difference between preach- 
 ing and other kinds of public eloquence. Preachers 
 cannot be too well acquainted with the theory of 
 elocution ; cannot know too well the principles of 
 emphasis, the science of the passions, and their inter- 
 relations with each other ; how they naturally ex- 
 press themselves in the tones of the voice, the looks, 
 attitudes, movements of the body, etc.* The spiritu- 
 ality of pulpit action, and the part in it belonging 
 to the Holy Ghost, interfere in no degree with the 
 highest culture in reference to it. On the contrary, 
 they favor and promote it. It is one of the proper 
 designs of the Spirit's influence to secure attention to 
 it as far as possible. It is among the ends to which 
 He lends His aid ; and it is not to be doubted that the 
 general neglect so much to be deplored, into which 
 delivery in preaching has fallen, is to be ascribed, in 
 great measure, to want of pains-taking with regard to 
 it arising from being out of the Spirit's counsel in this 
 matter. It is not of Him that preachers have been 
 inclined to neglect the scientific study of elocution. 
 The labor which this study requires is, doubtless, the 
 explanation of its being neglected. The labor un- 
 questionably, is a severe one ; but had the Holy 
 Spirit been obeyed, it would have been accepted as 
 a pleasure.f 
 
 * See Cicero, de Oratore, lib. iii. c. 56-61. 
 f Labor ipse voluptas — when performed in the strength of the 
 Spirit. 
 
DELIVERY IN PREACHING. 185 
 
 10. But supposing' that no preliminary pains have 
 been omitted, and that nothing remains but delivery 
 
 itself, WHAT METHOD SHOULD BE FOLLOWED IX THIS 
 
 part of preaching ? The actual methods arc three : 
 Reading. Reciting and Extemporising. Reserving the 
 last for the moment, which of the first two should 
 be preferred ? Both reproduce a written discourse, 
 which does it in the better manner ? Taking them in 
 their best form, Reciting, doubtless, has the advantage. 
 In general, reciting is injured by requiring an effort 
 of memory in order to recall the words of the dis- 
 course. But there is a kind of recitation which has 
 no such inconvenience ; the reciter, in this case, has 
 no more concern about his words or linguistic forms 
 than the extemporizer ; he uses the very expressions 
 he has written ; but he does this from his perfect pos- 
 session of his subject, not from a consciously distinct 
 exercise of recollection. He has his composition so 
 exactly and thoroughly by heart, that to reproduce it 
 he has but to open his mouth ; his utterance of it is 
 as spontaneous as his breathing. We speak what to 
 us is a mystery, but we are acquainted with an eminent 
 person, in whom, according to his own assertion to 
 us, it is actualized. His language in speaking, though, 
 elaborately written, is as spontaneous as it would be 
 if he were extemporizing. So intimately identified 
 and united are his thought and the form of it in his 
 manuscript, that it would require an effort to separate 
 them. Such a way of reciting as this, is, undoubtedly, 
 preferable to the best way of reading. But it is very 
 uncommon ; except to a few privileged geniuses, it is 
 
1S6 DELIVERY IN PREACHING. 
 
 extremely difficult if not impossible. To almost every- 
 one who practices it, reciting is a labor of recollec- 
 tion, requiring even for an imperfect performance of 
 it, an anxious mental application. This fact is a very 
 grave objection to this method being generally ad- 
 opted. For by how much the mind is occupied in 
 recalling forms of expression, by so much is it disabled 
 for the work itself of delivery. This is no part of 
 the business ; it is another business ; the common 
 reciter attempts two things at once. He puts himself 
 to an impracticable task ; his delivery is bad at best ; 
 and, what is another serious disadvantage, lie is apt 
 to betray a solicitude, lest the words of his manuscript 
 escape him ; and the hearers perceiving his embarrass- 
 ment, are hindered from attending to what lie says, 
 by sympathetic trouble, fearing that his memory may 
 fail him. Generally, therefore, reciting is much in- 
 ferior to reading, at least to the best way of reading. 
 It is inferior, we think, to reading as commonly prac- 
 ticed. Bad as this is, there is no interference in it 
 from a distinct exercise of thought about another mat- 
 ter, and whether interested by it or not, the hearers 
 are at ease. 
 
 11. Delivery by reading may rise to high 
 excellence. — In this method one may be exclusively 
 occupied by the sense ; the words are before his eye ; 
 but he does not think of them ; he is not conscious 
 of seeing them ; the subject with reference to its pur- 
 pose wholly engrosses him ; he has no concern except 
 through reading, to possess his hearers of it, and com- 
 pel them to yield to its force. Into his delivery, such 
 
DELIVERY IN PREACHING. 187 
 
 as it is, he throws himself entirely ; his action may be 
 very defective ; his gestures, especially, may be awk- 
 ward or ungraceful ; but his hearers are so interested 
 with what he says, that they see nothing amiss. In- 
 finitely different is reading like this from ordinary 
 reading, which simply reports what is written on the 
 page. This reading does more than inform ; it is full 
 of living fire ; it conveys the preacher's soul, all 
 aglow with the inspiration of his subject, and the pur- 
 pose for which he treats it. Such was the method 
 of Chalmers, the most eloquent preacher of his age. 
 He read, but what was his reading as an instrument 
 of oratory ! Edwards, too, was a reader — a quiet 
 reader — but in what demonstration of the Spirit and 
 power was the preaching of that great man of God ! 
 12. But neither in Reciting nor in Reading does 
 the ideal of delivery reside. As to reading, the 
 best of these methods, a very high authority would 
 hardly admit it into a comparison with that which 
 we named last. " Pleadings which are read," says 
 Pliny * " lose all their force and warmth and well 
 nigh their very name, as being things which the ges- 
 tures of the speaker, his bold advances, even his 
 changes of position and the activity of his body, in 
 harmony with all the emotions of the mind, are wont 
 at once to enforce and kindle. But the eyes and 
 hands of one who reads, which are the main auxiliaries 
 of delivery, are fettered, so that it is no wonder the 
 attention of the auditors flags, since it is sustained 
 by no charm, and awakened by no excitement from 
 * Epist. iv : lib. ii. 
 
138 DELIVERY IX PREACHING. 
 
 without. " Edwards, also, notwithstanding his con- 
 trary practice, which, in the latter part of his life, 
 he thought it had been well had he never followed, 
 pronounced delivery without notes the most natural 
 way, and that which had the greatest tendency, on the 
 whole, to answer the end of preaching. It appeared 
 evident to him, to have been the manner of the apostles 
 and primitive ministers of the Gospel.* A thousand 
 examples demonstrate the incomparable superiority of 
 this manner. By the side of that of Whitefield, what 
 is the best possible way of reading ! In his looks ; 
 his tears ; the flashes, glances, suffusion of his eyes ; 
 in his attitudes and changes of position ; in the sud- 
 den effects of reaction on himself from observed im- 
 pressions on the hearers, what matchless eloquence — 
 utterly impossible in any other than extemporaneous 
 speaking ! Admitting that it was spiritual as well 
 as natural, as it doubtless may have been and was in 
 a high degree, the conclusion is intuitive, that delivery 
 can rise into its highest sphere only in extemporaneous 
 discourse. Think of the spiritual and the natural 
 combining harmoniously in such an instance of the 
 eloquence of the body as the following : " Treating 
 of the sufferings of our Saviour, as though Geth- 
 semane were in sight, he would say — stretching out 
 his hand : ' Look yonder — What is it I see ? It is my 
 agonizing Lord.' And as though it were no difficult 
 matter to catch the sound of our Lord praying, he 
 would exclaim : ' Hark ! hark ! do you not hear Him ?' " 
 Wonderful preaching! We admit that it is of the 
 
 * Life of Edwards, by Dr. Hopkins. 
 
DELIVERY IN PRE ACHING. 189 
 
 best in its kind ; but we are contrasting with it the 
 very best of any other. 
 
 13. We go on to say that it is against true art, 
 
 AGAINST NATURE, AND, OF COURSE, AGAINST THE DOMIN- 
 ION of the Holy Spirit, in Delivery, to put among 
 
 PREPARATIVES FOR IT A PRESCRIBED OR PREMEDITATED 
 
 scheme for regulating it ; to determine beforehand 
 what the emphases, looks, gestures, are to be in par- 
 ticular parts, and perhaps to preactualize them in a 
 rehearsal " practiced at the glass." On two accounts, 
 this must be a preposterous way. In the first place, 
 just action in speaking cannot be anticipated : the 
 time for it must indicate it. It is only the critical 
 moment itself that can give its idea ; it is contingent 
 on the unimaginable futuritions and incidents of elocu- 
 tion. But were it otherwise, good delivery after this 
 method would be an impossibility. With a programme 
 of action artistically perfect, the speaker would 
 have no advantage ; he could not carry it out justly. 
 He could make no good use of it. The very attempt 
 to use it would disable him for proper elocution. 
 What art could conceal the art he would be trying to 
 practice ? and what effect on his delivery, from the la- 
 bor to conceal it ? The hearers doubtless would not 
 fail to know : itself the surest testimony to its absurd- 
 ity. As to all earnest action having an object ulterior 
 to itself, it is an instinct of nature, that not its manner 
 but its object ; or, in such a business as that of public 
 speaking, its subject with reference to its object, be 
 exclusively regarded at the moment of performing it. 
 Even a good reader obeys this instinct. " A reader is 
 
190 DELIVERY IN PREACHING. 
 
 sure to pay too much attention to his voice, not only 
 if he pays any at all, but if he does not strenuously 
 labor* to withdraw his attention from it altogether. 
 He who not only understands fully what he is reading-, 
 but is earnestly occupying his mind with the matter of 
 it, would be likely to read as if he understood it. And 
 in like manner, with a view to the impressiveness of 
 the delivery, he who not only feels it but is exclusive- 
 ly absorbed with that feeling, will be likely to read 
 as if he felt it, and to communicate the impression to 
 his hearers. But this cannot be the case if he is occu- 
 pied with the thought of what their opinion will be of 
 his reading, and how his voice ought to be regulated; 
 if, in short, he is thinking of himself, and, of course, in 
 the same degree abstracting his attention from that 
 which ought to occupy it exclusively. "f It is there- 
 fore certain that there should be no labor in 
 speaking to carry out a scheme of delivery. The 
 study of delivery, now, must be forborne ; pro- 
 per application to this study is 'previous, like the 
 educational training by which one is furnished for ar- 
 tistic action in all particular art performances. One 
 who applies the principles of art (e.g.), in writing or 
 in playing of an instrument of music, gives while do- 
 ing this no direct thought to these principles ; they 
 have become a second nature to him, through his 
 familiarity with them. Scarcely more does the bee 
 act by instinct in building its cell according to 
 
 * In order to overcome acontrariant inclination, too wont to be 
 besetting him. 
 t Whately. 
 
DELIVERY IN PREACHING. 191 
 
 the principles of mechanics, than he does in his 
 exquisite exemplifications of art. So acts the accom- 
 plished speaker in delivering his discourse. He has 
 studied delivery ; but he is not studying it now. He 
 knows the theory of delivery ; this has acquainted him 
 with his old faults in speaking. He has corrected 
 them ; he has formed good elocutionary habits. Hence, 
 and hence alone, his security for proper action on 
 occasions as they arise. 
 
 14. In accordance with this principle of Delivery, 
 
 VERY EMINENT PROFICIENTS IN IT HAVE PROTESTED 
 STRONGLY AGAINST ALL ATTEMPTS TO FOLLOW OUT A FOR- 
 
 casted programme of action. The great tragedian 
 of the recent past* after experience of the disadvant- 
 ages of this method, gives his testimony concerning it, 
 in these striking terms : " It has been imagined, even 
 by enlightened minds, that in studying my parts I 
 place myself before a glass, as a model before a paint- 
 er in his atelier. According to them, I gesticulate, I 
 shake the ceiling of the room with my cries. In the 
 evening on the stage, I utter the intonations I learned 
 in the morning : prepared inflections and sobs of which 
 I know the number ; imitating Crecentini, who, in his 
 Romeo, evinces a despair beforehand, in a passage 
 sung a hundred times over at home, with a piano ac- 
 companiment. It is an error. Reflection is one of the 
 greatest parts of my labor. Following the example 
 of the poet, I walk, I muse, or even seat myself on the 
 margin of my little river : like the poet, I rub my fore- 
 head ; it is the only gesture I allow mvself ; and you 
 * Talma. 
 
192 DELIVERY IN PREACHING. 
 
 know it is by no means one of the grandest. Oh, how 
 a thing becoming historical remains true ! If any- 
 one should inquire how I have found the greater 
 part of my greatest successes, I should reply, by con- 
 stantly thinking of them. We were rhetoricians and 
 not dramatic personages. How many academic dis- 
 courses on the stage ! How few words of simplicity ! 
 But one evening chance threw me into the parlor with 
 the leaders of the Gironde Party ; their sombre and 
 disquieted appearance attracted my attention. There 
 were written there, in visible characters, great and 
 mighty interests. As they were too much men of heart 
 to allow these interests to be tainted with selfishness, 
 I saw there manifest proofs of the danger of the coun- 
 try. All were assembled for pleasure, yet no one 
 thought of it. Discussion ensued ; they touched the 
 most thrilling questions of the crisis. It was beautiful : 
 I imagined myself present at a secret deliberation of the 
 Roman Senate. It is thus, thought I, that men should 
 speak. The country, whether it be named France or 
 Rome, employs the same accents, the same language. 
 If they do not declaim here, neither did they declaim 
 in the olden time, it is evident. These reflections made 
 me more attentive. My impressions, though produced 
 by a conversation void of all emphase, became pro- 
 found. An apparent calmness in these men, thought 
 I, agitates the soul. Eloquence then may have force 
 without throwing the body into disorderly movements. 
 I even perceived that discourse uttered without effort 
 or outcry, renders the gesture more energetic, and 
 gives more expression to the countenance. All these 
 
DELIVERY IN PREACHING. 193 
 
 deputies, thus assembled before me, appeared far more 
 eloquent than at the tribune, where, finding themselves 
 a spectacle, they thought it necessary to utter their 
 harangues in the manner of actors as we then were ; 
 that is to say, of declaimers fraught with turgidity. 
 From that moment I caught new light, and saw my art 
 regenerated." 
 
 15. After proper self-culture in elocution and re- 
 newing the prerequisite communion with the Holy 
 Spirit, the only condition of success, the only object of 
 preliminary concern, in a particular instance of preach- 
 ing, IS TO BE FULLY POSSESSED, TO BE THOROUGHLY IN- 
 SPIRED BY THE SUBJECT AND THE OCCASION. This IS the 
 
 prime necessity of all eloquence ; it was the discovery 
 of the great French actor, when his eyes were opened 
 to see the true secret of delivery. Hence it was that 
 rejection became his great labor ; that he walked, 
 mused, sat on the margin of the river, rubbed his fore- 
 head after the manner of the poet. He sought to 
 absorb himself in his subject ; he left action to itself. 
 Being qualified generally for his art, by acquainting 
 himself with the philosophy of the voice and of ges- 
 ture, and by just self-culture, in accordance with it, he 
 assumed that what remained to him, as the prerequisite 
 of success, was to get perfect command of his subject ; 
 or, to speak better, to give the subject perfect com- 
 mand and supremacy over him. This, witli the quali- 
 fications just mentioned, is all that remains to the 
 preacher ; and his is no other than the player's way 
 of gaining it. That way is the thorough rumination of 
 the subject, meditating on it over and over again ; 
 9 
 
194 DELIVERY IN PREACHING. 
 
 not the committing to memory the words be is to re- 
 peat, with premeditated action, but the working their 
 meaning, their strength, into himself ; the tilling him- 
 self with their total sense ; the vitalizing himself with 
 it in its breadth, length, depth and height ; the making 
 it so live and rule in all his life, that its procession 
 from him in delivery shall be rather a spontaneous 
 outflow than the result of a separate memoriter 
 effort, Doubtless, the memory is exercised, intensely 
 exercised, even when this is done ; but not exclus- 
 ively or distinguishably to the consciousness from 
 the other powers of the mind. The memory and 
 these are united, are inter-blended in the operation, as 
 rays in the sunbeam. There may be moments when 
 it acts by itself, even in a delivery very good on the 
 whole ; but they are exceptive and anxious moments ; 
 and the delivery now deteriorates, and witnesses 
 against itself as violating its norm. As soon as the 
 recollective faculty is distinctively exercised, the 
 speaker generally betrays the fact ; his hearers see his 
 hesitation, and begin to tremble for him lest his 
 memory should lapse, and to wish he had his manu- 
 script lying open before him. 
 
 16. It is impossible to prescribe a standard op 
 action for all preachers. There are peculiar congrui- 
 ties of pulpit delivery which must not be violated ; the 
 preacher with his hearers is in the temple ; he is the 
 representative of the awful presence of God ; on mat- 
 ters of infinite moment he acts in the name of the great 
 and dreadful Unseen. The difference as to interest 
 between his business and that of any orator of the 
 
DELIVERY IN PREACHING. 195 
 
 world, makes the latter, however great in itself, less 
 than nothing comparatively. Without being under 
 a total eclipse of spiritual illumination, and entirely 
 out of the communion and harmony with the Holy 
 Ghost, he cannot be insensible to this fact ; and if he 
 lias but a faint impression of it, he cannot allow him- 
 self in certain modes and ways of action, which, in 
 secular orators, are sometimes proper and even highly 
 admirable ; they would be unnatural, monstrous, in the 
 elocution of the pulpit. Nevertheless, who may give 
 the preacher an absolute rule or criterion of delivery ? 
 Beyond self-evident, palpable improprieties, every 
 preacher is a rule to himself; his idiosyncrasy is his 
 rule. What would he a just measure to one, would 
 be a defective or an extremely excessive and absurd 
 one to another. The lion docs not more differ from the 
 lamb, than preachers from one another in elocutionary 
 gifts. In, different preachers, vehemence and gentle- 
 ness, commotion and stillness, thunder and whisper, 
 whirlwind and zephyr, arc both alike appropriate 
 characteristics ; as they are also very suitable and 
 natural, in the same preachers at different moments. 
 Both, too, are alike acceptable to the Spirit, who at- 
 tempers His influences to the natures of His instruments, 
 making them now as the softest breath, now as a rush- 
 ing mighty wind, or as lightning and fire. It is not 
 by the quantity, but by the quality of pulpit action 
 that the holy proprieties are on the one hand violated, 
 and on the other maintained. There maybe the sub- 
 limest form of spirituality in abundant and stormy 
 action : and there may be nothing better than t lie 
 
196 DELIVERY IN P REACHING. 
 
 affectation of tenderness, in a quiet, soft, reserved man- 
 ner of delivery.* 
 
 17. It follows from what we have just been saying, 
 or rather is included in it, that imitation can have 
 
 NO PLACE LN JUST ACTION IN SPEAKING. In this as 
 
 well as in invention, in disposition, in the entire con- 
 struction and finish of his discourse, a true speaker is 
 himself and not another ; he is generally true even to 
 his habitual imperfections of manner. Without re- 
 nouncing his own identity he may profit by observ- 
 ing excellencies and faults in the elocution of others ; 
 he may thus acquaint himself better with his own de- 
 fects, instruct himself better generally in the regula- 
 tion of his voice, emphasis, attitudes, etc.; and stimu- 
 
 * How far violent or very demonstrative action may have place 
 in preaching without indecorum, no rule can determine. White- 
 field was often exceedingly demonstrative, but so far as we know, 
 never undignified or ungraceful. The severest criticism, that of 
 Hume, Chesterfield, Franklin, Garrick, gave it transcendent praise. 
 How vehement was the delivery of Chalmers ! how terrible that 
 of Knox ! how lion-like that of Luther ! Each a mighty man of 
 God, a chosen and an eminent vehicle of the power of the Holy 
 Ghost. We once heard a sermon from the elder Mason, the de- 
 livery of which combined, with unexceptionable propriety, a man- 
 ner in the highest degree bold and even dramatic. He began 
 with a rap on the desk, personating one knocking at the door — 
 "a messenger from the world of spirits." He used personation 
 freely in the midst of the discourse, and at the close, it rose to 
 sublimity. The subject was — deliverance from bondage through 
 the fear of death. (Heb. ii. 15.) He first dramatized the death-bod 
 scene of one who died in his sins — a wilful ueglecter of this great 
 salvation ; and then that of a triumphant believer. His manner 
 was to the last in keeping with its surprising outset. We had 
 no sense of anything at all amiss in this wonderful instance of 
 pulpit elocution. It seemed to be no less proper than unusual. 
 
DELIVERY IN PREACHING. 197 
 
 late himself in studying the principles and philosophy 
 of delivery ; but he could not but mar his own action 
 by endeavoring to model it after another's. He might 
 as soon change himself into another man as be natural 
 any longer. If his hearers happen to be acquainted 
 with the example he is striving to copy, they will not 
 fail to see his weakness, and — what of itself sufficiently 
 confutes all such imitation — they cannot but think it 
 unfortunate for him ; a palpable vanity. A tolerable 
 speaker he might perhaps have been if he had been 
 content with himself ; he has made himself an intoler- 
 able one by his pitiable emulation. It remains that 
 after studying models with reference to general im- 
 provement, the only thing in which they are to be 
 imitated is that by which they made themselves 
 models, namely, their absolute independence and for- 
 getfulness of models in delivery. 
 
 18. It seems to us that one of the chief causes of 
 bad delivery in preaching, a sufficient cause of it, cer- 
 tainly, is THE CHARACTER OF THE ORDINARY SERMON, 
 SO CALLED, ESPECIALLY ITS DEFECT IN RESPECT OF THE 
 ORATORICAL ELEMENT, THE BUSINESS-LIKE CHARACTER 
 
 OF all true oratory. Delivery in discourse takes 
 its stamp, in part, from the sort of discourse which is 
 given ; oratorical delivery requires an oration ; that 
 is to say, a discourse which is an affair, an earnest, 
 agonistic speech, which has a single point ulterior to 
 itself, and which has no other concern than to carry 
 that point. Preaching is too seldom discourse like 
 this. It is sometimes chiefly expository, as perhaps it 
 should be. But when preaching is not of this form, 
 
198 DELIVERY IN PREACHING. 
 
 when it uses what has the name of the sermon, which, 
 by its etymology should be an oration par excel- 
 lence* it is frequently, if not generally, as a whole, 
 no oration at all : it has several points instead of one ; 
 perhaps indeed no point in particular. It treats sev- 
 eral co-ordinate propositions ; it is rather an analysis 
 than a synthetic speech, like that of a pleader at the 
 bar; it makes a treatise or an essay: it is without 
 oratorical unity ; of course, it cannot but be defective 
 in oratorical delivery : and if such be the actual char- 
 acter of preaching, as undoubtedly it is to a great ex- 
 tent, this defect is but its natural and proper concomi- 
 tant. Nor is there a possibility of the desired change 
 in the elocution of the pulpit, while preaching retains 
 this abnormal character. It surely ought not to re- 
 tain it as extensively as it has done. Preaching in 
 its ideal is a species of oratory ; the noblest form of 
 it. In its ordinary efforts no discourse should excel 
 it in singleness of design, or in strenuous, suasory, 
 synthetic urgency to attain its end. In some of its 
 specimens (those e. g. of Baxter, Edwards, Chalmers), 
 no discourse, not that of Demosthenes or Burke, does 
 in these respects excel it. Let preaching be generally 
 true to its own idea, its supreme law as a means to the 
 highest of all ends, and with just cultivation of de- 
 livery, preachers, in respect to this part of eloquence, 
 will cease to hide their " diminished heads " in the 
 presence of other speakers. At least, it is only on 
 
 * Why, else, should the term sermon (speech), be restricted to 
 sacred discourse, as if a secular oration was, comparatively, not 
 a speech at all ? 
 
DELIVERY IN PREACHING. 199 
 
 tins condition that even with the utmost attention to 
 delivery, much proficiency in it is to be expected. The 
 character of the discourse will continue to overrule 
 and determine that of its delivery, in conformity to 
 itself. 
 
 19. There is, let us add, a conventional restraint 
 on pulpit elocution, from the preacher's place in the 
 assembly. He stands above and at a distance from 
 them, behind a desk, which conceals more than half 
 his person. His seclusion may give him some con- 
 veniences in conducting the immediate preliminaries 
 of preaching ; but it should be no privilege to him in 
 delivering his discourse. If an earnest speaker " ar- 
 ticulates with every limb and joint, and talks from 
 head to foot, with a thousand voices," how much is an 
 earnest preacher curtailed of his means of bodily ex- 
 pression, by the narrow enclosure which he occupies ? 
 He is without advantage from his lower limbs ; his 
 bust only is seen ; he cannot change his position ; his 
 attitudes are but half visible, and for this cause, proba- 
 bly, disagreeable. How must his delivery be marred 
 by these subtractions of " the eloquence of the body ?" 
 Compare with it that of a speaker who stands fully in 
 view, and presents in his entire person, a complete, 
 graceful example of this crowning glory of oratory. 
 That preachers, exclusively, should be thus restricted 
 in elocution is but a prescription of arbitrary tradi- 
 tion : nothing in the peculiarity of spiritual eloquence 
 requires it ; it maims this noblest of all eloquences ; 
 it presupposes a theory of preaching, which makes 
 delivery in it a thing of little or no moment ; it has 
 
200 DELIVERY IN PREACHING. 
 
 doubtless had no small influence in reducing- it to this 
 estimation, in the general practice, if not also in the 
 opinion of the pulpit. If in the pulpit of the future, 
 delivery is to assume its rightful supremacy, tradition, 
 in this matter, will dominate no longer ; the princi- 
 ples of true art, which are, at last, but the principles 
 of simple nature, will assert their authority ; and 
 preaching, like speaking in the forum or the senate, 
 will be free of all such abridgments of elocutionary 
 force as tradition has so unwarrantably prescribed 
 to it. 
 
 20. IS IT TO BE EXPECTED THAT THE KEFORM WILL 
 
 actually have place? A change in the form of 
 preaching is doubtless at hand. The renovating power 
 which has been changing all things in science, in art, 
 in the physical, social and civil life of man, cannot but 
 be felt, indeed has manifestly been felt, by the modern 
 pulpit. Already preaching, as to form, is, in several 
 respects, different from what it has ever been. In 
 some respects we think it is better. It is by no means 
 changed as much as it should be. It ought to be in 
 advance of the other instruments of change which are 
 exerting themselves with such astonishing efficiency in 
 every sphere of human life. There is no object of 
 deeper interest to every true philanthropist, every one 
 who identifies the progress of humanity with the suc- 
 cess of the gospel, than that preaching should receive 
 a new and healthful impulse, which shall give it the 
 precedence to which it is entitled, — a just adaptation 
 to humanity in its present excited and over-active 
 state, and a regulating power of all the changes which 
 
BELT VERY IN PRE 'ACHING. 201 
 
 with such unparalleled rapidity are coming to pass 
 everywhere in the world. But it is as yet very far 
 from having' this pre-eminence of control. There is an 
 imperative demand for farther variance, we might 
 almost say a revolution in the form of it. And is not 
 this demand to be met ? In that Future of over- 
 whelming interest, which all men feel to be just before 
 us, which indeed is now opening itself upon us and in- 
 spiring us with wonder at what is surely and swiftly 
 coming, what will preaching be, if accommodated, as it 
 should and must be if it is to play well its part — to 
 the unparalleled circumstances in which it will find 
 itself? Imperfect as our anticipation of them must 
 be, we cannot but be sure in general, from signs before 
 us, that they will be circumstances of earnest, intense 
 materialism, of an exceedingly practical, matter-of-fact 
 bearing, such as have not been dreamt of in all the 
 past ; causes are already in operation before our eyes r 
 which make the anticipation of this almost as reality 
 itself. Surely amidst such circumstances, preaching, 
 if true to its mission, will not take from the present 
 or any former period, its measures or its methods of 
 practice. There must be, in these respects, a novelty 
 in it, parallel, or, when need be, antithetic to the 
 novelty of its unexampled surroundings. Its character 
 cannot be precisely foreseen; it will be, we would 
 hope, as didactic, as discriminative, as solid, in all 
 respects as scholarly, as it has been at any time ; we 
 cannot but hope it will be so from necessities which 
 will be upon it, and from its present advantages of 
 culture. But how changed must it be, especially in 
 9* 
 
202 DELIVERY IN PREACHING. 
 
 its chief performances, in respect of oratorical free- 
 dom, force and action? It cannot but be, preeminently, 
 it would seem, of the nature of business — " business 
 which is a business :"* It will still treat " subjects ;" 
 but it will need to treat them, not as terminating in 
 themselves, or in the way of analysis or disquisition, 
 but with reference to issues or specific ends : to de- 
 termine first, not on either texts or subjects, but on 
 points to be carried, on things to be done ; and, as in 
 all earnest oratory, to be, in all its propositions, en- 
 largements, utterances, ornaments, but a strenuous 
 means of attaining definite ends : to strive, of course, 
 to avail itself of the advantages of just delivery, the 
 peerless eloquence of appropriate action. This, its 
 chief means, it may no longer forego or neglect. 
 Due attention to delivery, and due provision for it, 
 will be a deeply felt necessity. It will suffer no tra- 
 ditional trammels ; it will folloAV out the inviolable 
 principles of eloquence; it will obey nature and the 
 free Spirit of God. If it meet the high exigencies of 
 the epoch, it cannot take the word of command from 
 tradition, or the perfunctory examples of these or 
 former times. 
 
 * Preacher, your business is a business ; yet more than Senators 
 and Advocates, you are Advocates and Senators : Be both. Let 
 your pulpits be to you alternately a tribune and a bar ; let your 
 word be an action directed to an immediate object : Let not your 
 hearers come to hear a discourse, so much as to receive a message. 
 Possess yourselves, possess them, of all the advantages, which 
 pertain to the subjects of the pulpit. Your eloquence has more 
 artless aspects, and more vivid tints, than that of the Senate or 
 the Bar ; nothing condemns it to abstraction ; everytJiing impels it 
 toicard senxilile facts." — Vinet, p. 503. 
 
DELIVERY IN PREAVII1NG. 20:3 
 
 21. But will the change after all have place? 
 Will delivery in the preaching of the all-pregnant 
 future, whose dawn is already advancing, have its 
 rightful pre-eminence ? Will this form of preaching, 
 which cannot but be new, be what it should be, in this 
 grand respect ? Or will the construction of the sermon 
 continue to be the all-absorbing concern of preachers 
 and its delivery comparatively as nothing ? We can- 
 not confidently say. The undervaluation of delivery 
 at the present moment, and too generally in foregoing 
 times, in view of its inherent unjustness and the stand- 
 ing reprobation of it by the reason of things and the 
 verdict of the human mind, begets hesitation as to the 
 probability of a correction of it, under the influence of 
 any possible circumstances ; and yet since it has pleased 
 God to institute preaching as the leading instrumen- 
 tality, the means of means, in applying his efficacious 
 grace, must not " the wickedness of the wicked " rush 
 on to its climax and its doom, if the correction shall 
 not take place? In a practice of preaching so 
 wrong, so utterly ineloquent, in the thing of chief mo- 
 ment, as that now generally prevailing, will the Spirit 
 of God who can give no sanction to inherent im- 
 propriety of any sort, work with that plentitude of His 
 power, which will be necessary to write " holiness to 
 the Lord," on such inventions and aboundings of 
 secular life, as those which we already see in such 
 rapid progress must become in their culmination ? As, 
 then, no change is to be expected in God's plan for 
 reducing men to obedience to Himself, must not the 
 change we are speaking of in preaching be a reality 
 
20-i DELIVERY IN PREACHING. 
 
 at length, if the triumph of the gospel on earth is to 
 be a reality ? 
 
 22. And why should it not be inaugukated at 
 once? The very occasion for it presupposes a high 
 existing culpability in the ministers of the word. No 
 tongue can express the evil of delivering Christian 
 truths as if they were fictions. As far as preachers 
 are chargeable with this evil, they have cause for the 
 deepest humiliation. Next to counting Christ Himself 
 a myth, nay identical with it in effect, is so represent- 
 ing His doctrine. What infidelity whether in itself or 
 in its consequences is worse? We know it is pleading 
 for a paradox to insist on the reform, as an immediate 
 necessity ; but if a paradox be true and the truth im- 
 portant, these facts imply criminality in its being a 
 paradox,* and imperatively require that it be so no 
 longer. Think of it as we may, the prevailing way of 
 delivery, in preaching, is matter for the profoundest 
 regret to the ministry and the church. Whether it is to 
 remain in the coming times or not, it should, for the 
 sake of the times now present, from henceforth cease, 
 or cease to be excused or tolerated. Infinite interests 
 demand that the reform begin without delay. 
 
 23. Let not the change seem impracticable. No 
 circumstances, no powers of argument or persuasion, 
 can of themselves effect it ; these can produce no 
 spiritual fruit whatever ; and this, as we have seen, is 
 the highest perfection of this kind of fruit ; but there 
 is on this account no cause for discouragement. The 
 power to be ultimately relied on, in the whole business 
 
 * Paradox — Something against prevailing opinion. 
 
DELIVERY IN PREACHING. 205 
 
 of preaching, is the power of the Holy Ghost. It is 
 the privilege, it is the duty, of preachers, to be full of 
 the Holy Ghost, and workers together with Him in 
 every part of their labor. The chief thing, the only 
 thing virtually necessary to the change, is what they 
 cannot be wanting in, without sinning alike against 
 themselves and against the highest law of their func- 
 tion, the law of all its laws. Remembering the Divine- 
 Human character of preaching, let them rise above 
 themselves, as they should and may without presump- 
 tion, into the illuminations and sanctities of the Eternal 
 Spirit ; and over all difficulties connected with the 
 cultivation and practice of just delivery in preaching 
 they will be already triumphant. And if they live to 
 be preachers in the opening Future they will pass into 
 it prepared for its eventful activities and develop- 
 ments ; and whether they live or die, under the con- 
 sciousness of their new impulses and experiences, they 
 will well fulfill what remains of their sacred mission ; 
 and for that part of it, at least, be able to endure the 
 fiery ordeal through which every preacher's work, with 
 himself, will have to pass in the judgment of the great 
 day of the Lord. 
 
IX. 
 
 FRAGMENTS OF THOUGHT 
 
 I.— OPTIMISM. 
 
 If there be several courses of action claiming our 
 choice, some better than others, and one best of all, 
 goodness obliges us to prefer this last to all the others ; 
 goodness were otherwise disowned, in so far as it 
 stands in the best above what it does in the better and 
 the simply good — for all that is goodness which differ- 
 ences the good from the best. Here, in brief, is 
 the demonstration of Optimism. Optimism is true, if 
 goodness may not be disallowed ; if the difference 
 may not pass for nothing between good, better, and 
 best. 
 
 It may be that a better than either of the solicitors 
 of choice is a negation of them all ; doing nothing, let- 
 ting the several courses remain ideal only, may be 
 better than to actualize the best of them, which, in that 
 case, were to obey the behest of Optimism. Absolute 
 quietism, the latency of power, would then be the ex- 
 pression of Optimism. 
 (206) 
 
OPTIMISM. 207 
 
 Applying this to the Deity, the existence of the 
 world is proof that Optimism did not demand the in- 
 ertia or latency of creative power. The rule of the 
 best required this power to reveal itself in an actual 
 creation. A world was a necessity, if Optimism was 
 to be determinative. God would not have realized 
 His own idea, or done what seemed to Him best, had 
 He not given existence to a creation external to Him- 
 self. 
 
 And the same principle of necessity required that 
 the creation be that which came into being — that, and 
 not another. He could not have given existence 
 to another without disowning goodness, for goodness, 
 in His idea, stood in this creation above itself in any 
 other ; there was no ideal creation, different from this 
 that seemed to Him so good. The existing world, 
 therefore, and not another must have been created. 
 This world was a moral necessity. 
 
 And as with its creation, so likewise with its econo- 
 my or government — the rule of the best could not but 
 obtain. Among conceivable economies different from 
 one another, as to goodness, the perfection and bless- 
 edness of the Deity required Him to take the best. 
 The All-Perfect, whose moral essence is pure goodness, 
 could have been content with no other. 
 
 Since, therefore, evil exists, the best world, under 
 the best government, was one in which this was pos- 
 sible ; and Optimism, the antitheton of evil, consists 
 with this possibility. But the possibility of evil is not 
 its reality ; there may be a prevention of the latter, 
 though the former may have place. And goodness 
 
208 OPTIMISM. 
 
 self-evidently demands its prevention, if this be pos- 
 sible. This is true ; still, the preventive agency, as 
 much as the creative and controlling, must abide under 
 the sway of Optimism. That only which is best may 
 be done to prevent the appearance of evil. The pos- 
 sibility of preventing it, therefore, is thus conditioned. 
 It cannot be prevented without offending against good- 
 ness, if it be not preventable by the best agency that 
 can be employed for the purpose. There is a good, a 
 better, and a best, in conceivable agencies, in this case ; 
 the idea of the best was in the mind of the Deity. He 
 could have given reality to no other idea. Evil is not 
 to be prevented, indeed is not preventable, by a viola- 
 tion of the principle of Optimism. That, itself, were 
 greater evil, virtually, than the evil it would prevent ; 
 it would undeify God. 
 
 The same necessity, the dominion of the best, holds 
 as to the remedy or removal of evil. If there had 
 been in the Divine Mind, a kind or plan of agency 
 better than that which God has employed, it would 
 have taken the place of this. If the direct interven- 
 tion of physical power, or arbitrary volition, or aught 
 else, had been better, this would not have been pre- 
 ferred ; Optimism would have prevailed here, also : 
 the remedy, otherwise, would have been worse, virtu- 
 ally, than the evil. 
 
 Optimism, then, the law, the prevalence of the Best, 
 is the principle of the Divine goodness in the Universe. 
 Nothing asserts its own truth with higher evidence 
 than this proposition. To deny it, is to set goodness 
 against itself; to deny it, when its terms are under- 
 
OPTIMISM. 209 
 
 stood, would seem to imply an intention to affirm a 
 contradiction. 
 
 In connection with the above, it is edifying to note 
 some results of other applications of the doctrine of 
 Optimism. 
 
 It condemns wishing that the world did not exist. 
 Among human wishes, two have been not a little pro- 
 minent : that there were no Creation, and that there 
 were no God. Both would abolish goodness — the for- 
 mer the realization of the ideal of finite goodness ; 
 the latter, Infinite goodness itself. Let the reasons 
 for these wishes be recalled ; in what reproach do 
 they implicate their authors ! 
 
 Again, it challenges, in God's behalf, the highest 
 praise of His creatures. It assures them that the best 
 of worlds exists under the best of administrations, and 
 the best agencies for preventing and remedying evil. 
 How urgent the demand for praise, such as that which 
 is made in the last three of the Psalms! and how un- 
 worthy and unhappy the spirit of those who refuse to 
 meet this demand ! 
 
 Once more : it is the absolute reprobation of sin. It 
 is, by its name, the opposite of evil. It is the doctrine 
 of the preference of the greatest good which sin would 
 destroy. It announces that when a world was to be 
 created, the best of all worlds was determined on ; the 
 same preference of the best in establishing a govern- 
 ment over the world ; the same in preventing, and the 
 same in remedying evil. Let men believe and obey 
 Optimism, and they could bear no sin in themselves, 
 and omit to use no proper means in expelling it from 
 
210 OPTIMISM. 
 
 the world. Applied to human life, Optimism is the 
 same as in other applications of it. It requires men 
 to adopt the bc?t plan of life, to do all the good pos- 
 sible to them, and to improve perfectly all their pow- 
 ers, opportunities and means in diffusing good. 
 
II.— THE DIVINE PURPOSES. 
 
 The purposes of the Divine mind, though without 
 succession in time, have a relation to each other to 
 which the order of their fulfilment correlates and 
 agrees. And as events have their reason or justifi- 
 cation in the order in which they occur, so have the 
 Divine Purposes theirs, in their order or relation to 
 each other. The particular purposes which eventuated 
 in the exercises of creative power, depended on the 
 prime purpose to create ; those which the scheme of 
 redemption fulfilled, depended on the purpose to re- 
 deem ; and the particular purposes themselves were 
 also interdependent, requiring and required by one 
 another. It is impossible for us to comprehend a 
 Timeless order or relation; but as a reality it is not 
 less certain to us than the existence of the Deity, to 
 whom, as infinite or eternal, time, with its successions 
 and changes, is wholly and necessarily objective or 
 extrinsic. The inward activities of the Divine Nature 
 are eternally immanent ; but its very idea, as all per- 
 fect, requires that there be in these activities an abso- 
 lutely perfect order ; and to suppose that any one of 
 them may have no reference or relation to any or 
 every other, is to make the Supreme Being God no 
 longer. 
 
 Proper regard to the fact of Timeless order or 
 
 (211) 
 
213 THE DIVINE PURPOSES. 
 
 inter-relation, in the Purposes of God, is indispensable 
 to all just thinking concerning the relation between 
 these Purposes and. the Divine ways or conduct. The 
 ways of God pertain to the sphere of time or the 
 finite ; His purposes exist in the infinite, or are time- 
 less. If the latter fact be not kept in mind, — if the 
 Divine Purposes and the Divine Ways are regarded, 
 as in the same category as to time, — the same predica- 
 tions will be made of both, the distinction, in state- 
 ment and discourse, between the finite and the infinite, 
 will be lost, and nothing but the finite will remain. 
 The Divine Mind will be conceived of as but a mag- 
 nified human one, having a like beginning and ending, 
 a like fore and after, a like capacity of growth and 
 decrease, in its inherent activity, with the mind of 
 man ; — with no other difference than that of enlarge- 
 ment to an indefinite extent. Thus eternity becomes 
 but a longer time ; the infinite but a multitude of 
 fmites ; and the world, in its vicissitudes, an exponent 
 of purposes, springing up and disappearing, in the 
 mind of its Maker, one after another, in time, accord- 
 ing to the Time-order which has place in the course 
 of events. Whence, — since time, in the purpose, must 
 antecede it in events, — a Fatalism, in all things, de- 
 structive of the foundations of piety and virtue, and 
 implying that there is, in truth, no such Being as an 
 infinite and good God. It is incidental to the im- 
 perfections of human language, that in speaking of 
 events, and the Divine Purposes, in their connection 
 with one another, we sometimes apply terms to the 
 latter which are strictly appropriate only to temporal 
 
THE DIVINE PURPOSES. 213 
 
 things ; but such anthropomorphisms must be carefully 
 excluded when we would make precise statements of 
 truth concerning the Nature of the Deity ; otherwise 
 we shall make the Eternal and the Infinite altogether 
 such a one as ourselves.* 
 
 Let then the Ways of God, or events, be thought 
 of as they are, and in the proper sphere. If now they 
 commend themselves to right reason, when we pass to 
 the Divine Purposes, of which they are the develop- 
 ment, we shall find nothing here to vary their charac- 
 ter, since this is the sphere of the infinite or timeless, 
 in which there is no succession, no fore nor after, 
 nothing to come into thought except the Divine Pur- 
 poses themselves as existing in their eternal relations 
 to one another. Of these purposes, with their inter- 
 relations, the Divine ways are the expression. If, as 
 thus expressed, they cannot be objected to, there is no 
 ground of objection to them. The ways of God are 
 justified, and equally so are His purposes. The justi- 
 fication of the former is the justification of both. If, 
 in all places of His dominion, the works of God 
 praise Him, so likewise do His purposes, of which His 
 works are the execution. 
 
 The principle of identity, as to their justification, 
 
 * An infinite length of Time, distinguished by successive 
 parts, properly and truly so, or a succession of limited and un- 
 measurable periods of Time, following one another in an infinite- 
 ly long series, must needs be a groundless imagination. The 
 eternity of God's existence is nothing else but his immediate, 
 perfect; and invariable possession of the whole of His unlimited 
 Life, together and at once : Vitae interminabilis, tota, simul, ct 
 perfecta possessio. — Edwards. 
 
214 THE DIVINE PURPOSES. 
 
 between the Ways and Purposes of God, is specially 
 important in its application to the determination of 
 the Divine Mind respecting the final destinies of man- 
 kind. With very special explicitness and emphasis is 
 the connection declared in Scripture between the 
 agency and the purposes of God in this high matter. 
 Equally explicit and emphatic is the verification of 
 the Biblical word by the facts of history and expe- 
 rience. In the sphere of human knowledge nothing 
 is exhibited in a more outstanding and prominent 
 manner than this connection. Manifestly and palpa- 
 bly it has been the design of God to set this connec- 
 tion forth to the view of mankind, so as to leave no 
 place for reasonable doubt concerning it. Among a 
 multitude of inspired testimonies relating to this sub- 
 ject, see the ninth chapter of the Epistle to the Ro- 
 mans, and the words of our Lord in Mat. xi. 25-27. 
 If the agency and the purpose of God, in this respect, 
 have one and the same vindication, there is herein, as 
 we shall see, no cause for stumbling or dissatisfaction 
 with the latter. 
 
 Let His agency, in part, be considered. First, He 
 makes an atonement, by the sacrifice of His Son, 
 for the sins of all mankind ; the greatest of all the 
 wonders of His goodness. Next, through the virtue 
 of this atonement. He introduces His Spirit into the 
 world as the renewer and sanctifier of human nature, — 
 the next greatest of His mercies. Then in direct con- 
 nection with these mighty doings of infinite goodness, 
 the proclamation of grace is made indiscriminately to 
 all. Added to these, a system of suasory appliances 
 
THE DIVINE PURPOSES. 215 
 
 is appointed, in which the Spirit strives with men 
 with an urgency which forbears nothing but compul- 
 sion. Finally, after resistance on the part of all, not 
 to be overcome by all these amazing measures of 
 Divine love, a discrimination appears ; the inward 
 work of the Spirit is wrought in some, and not 
 wrought in others ; the former receive the atonement, 
 and are saved ; the others continue to reject it, and 
 perish. 
 
 Such are the "Ways of God in their order. Ex- 
 cepting the final one, unquestionably they demand 
 adoring praise and wonder ; and as to the exception, 
 the discrimination of sovereignty, what but blasphemy 
 can ask, " What doest Thou ?" Either God must per- 
 form the inward work of His Spirit in whom He will 
 perform it, or perform it in all, or consign all to de- 
 struction. Excluding the last, the choice lies between 
 the other two. The demand that He do the second 
 were impious ; for who knows that He would not, by 
 doing it, dishonor Himself, and so destroy the happi- 
 ness of the universe ? The first, therefore, remains as 
 the only alternative : God must exercise His preroga- 
 tive of showing mercy, in this form, to whom it seems 
 best to Himself to show it. 
 
 In doing this, it is denying His Deity to suppose 
 that He acts without a sufficient reason. What the 
 reason is we know not, and doubtless can never fully 
 know ; nor have we a right to demand the reason ; 
 nor is it certain that the knowledge of it would be 
 for our advantage. But in ignorance of the reason, 
 we know enough to command our praise. The objects 
 
216 THE DIVINE PURPOSES. 
 
 of the Divine preference, it is true, are not always 
 those human wisdom would have selected. There are 
 not many mighty, or noble, or wise ones of the world 
 among them. But three facts are certain to us : First, 
 not one of the human race can claim to be preferred 
 for the sake of anything in or done by himself, or on 
 the ground of compliance with conditions, there being 
 no such compliance before the choice goes into effect. 
 Secondly, the Divine agency generally exerts itself, 
 not in the absence of proper activities, whether on the 
 part of the chosen, or of others on their behalf, but 
 on the contrary, in the midst of such activities, and 
 so as to encourage and stimulate them in the highest 
 degree. And thirdly, the perfection of the Divine 
 Character makes it certain that there is nothing 
 which should have influence on the determination of 
 the mind of God, which has not this influence on it 
 in its precise measure and weight. Such is the Divine 
 agency in reference to the heirs of salvation. 
 
 In respect to the others, there is one essential point 
 of difference as to the reason of the Divine determi- 
 nation. We have important knowledge as to this 
 reason ; it lies in something within themselves. The 
 elect are not elected because of any goodness of their 
 own. It is for the sake of sin, wilful, persistent, in- 
 corrigible sin in themselves, that the others are repro- 
 bated. God waits to be gracious to them, until to 
 wait longer is forbidden by goodness itself. They fill 
 up the measure of their iniquity ; justice performs its 
 strange work upon them ; they are abandoned to their 
 own wilfulness ; they are judicially hardened, and 
 
THE DI VINE P URPOSES. 217 
 
 sealed to the day of perdition. Such is the Divine 
 conduct ; it is its own vindication. According to 
 what has been demonstrated, there is no difference as 
 to vindication between this conduct and the eternal 
 purpose which it fullfils. 
 
 Aversion is often expressed, and doubtless, oftener 
 felt, towards the doctrine of God's purposes. But 
 nothing is more unreasonable than this aversion, 
 nothing of higher importance than the doctrine which 
 provokes it. The world needs to know that there is 
 no chance, no place for chance, in the dominions of its 
 Almighty Maker aud Sovereign. That all things are 
 moving forward under the direction of an intelligence, 
 a will, and a goodness which secures their infallible 
 convergence and consummation in their appointed end, 
 is no less certain than that God exists, and no less 
 necessary than this, as a foundation for human hope 
 and peace. 
 
 10 
 
III.— MYSTERY. 
 
 In the idea of God, the world, comprising an im- 
 mense variety of parts, is an absolute unit or whole. 
 As a whole, it is what it is from the relation and 
 unition of its parts, one with another ; and each of 
 its parts is what it is from its membership with the 
 whole ; all its antecedents, concomitants and sequent?, 
 and their interdependence on one another, contribute 
 to give it its individuality. I am what I am, and 
 everything in me, and pertaining to me, is what it is, 
 from an exigency in the organism of the Universe, 
 which acts upon me, and upon which, in some measure, 
 I reciprocally act ; whence it follows that it is impos- 
 sible to comprehend any, the least part of the world, 
 without ability to comprehend the entire world. I 
 can no more understand why I am what I am, or why 
 my bodily configuration, or size, or temperament, or 
 any part of me, is distinctively what it is, than why 
 the sum of existence, comprising the various worlds 
 and creatures which make it up, is the aggregate of 
 these, instead of others in their place. 
 
 And as with the creation, so likewise with Provi- 
 dence, the management of the creation ; ability to com- 
 prehend the whole, is the indispensable condition of 
 comprehending any part. The plan of Providence is 
 also a unit. The purposes of the Infinite Mind, though 
 
 (218) 
 
MYSTERY. 219 
 
 they do not begin and end like ours, exist in an order 
 in which they are related, one to all the others, and 
 these to that, at the demand of absolute unity or sys- 
 tem. The purpose which now goes into effect has 
 fitting respect to every other Divine purpose, and is 
 what it is, from its being an integrant in a system of 
 purposes, or in one comprehensive and all-controlling 
 purpose. The dispensations of Providence, and all 
 particular acts and arrangements under them, imply 
 one another ; so that the indispensable prerequisite 
 of comprehending anything whatever in the course 
 of Providence is a complete knowledge of everything 
 included in the entire scheme of Providence. 
 
 And if God's works be mysterious to us, how much 
 more His Nature ! A Being who exists, not by will, 
 but of necessity ; whose non-existence is an impossi- 
 bility even to omnipotence ; in whom nothing begins 
 or ends ; the very idea of whom excludes time, with 
 all its successions and changes ; to whom nothing is 
 new or old ; absolutely free, yet whose choices and 
 affections are eternally immanent and the same — how 
 far must such a Being transcend forever the utmost 
 reach of finite thought ! There are, it is true, certain 
 predications which we may make concerning Him, 
 assuming that certain perfections belong to Him, with 
 which we are acquainted. If He is wise, and just, 
 and good, since we know the qualities which these 
 terms express, we know that He is incapable of every- 
 thing self-evidently the opposite of them ; nay, more, 
 we know that He cannot but prefer a greater to a 
 less good : he cannot disown the principle of Optim- 
 
220 MYSTEBY. 
 
 ism. But beyond such inevitable intuitions, wc can, 
 of ourselves, neither affirm nor deny anything as to 
 the contents, or capabilities, or requisitions of His 
 infinite Nature. Not even through a revelation from 
 Himself, however perfect, can we ever know more 
 than a part of what He is, and a part less than nothing, 
 compared to what remains. 
 
 To creatures, therefore, mystery in the ways of God 
 is and ever will be a necessity. What the greatest 
 good required, what world, what order of creatures, 
 what disposition of them, what revelations of Himself 
 and of Truth, what plans and acts of Providence were 
 necessary to the realization of this good, only God 
 Himself could know. If an intelligence, large as He 
 could have created, be supposed to have existed when 
 He was about to begin His works, it could have had 
 no anticipation of the first or any other one of these ; 
 or have conjectured any single step of an agency 
 which was to move under the direction of perfect fore- 
 knowledge of all the possibilities, contingencies and 
 futuritions embraced in the scheme of operations from 
 beginning to end. How utterly ignorant must it 
 have been, as to what should be the limit of the Crea- 
 tion, or whether in time it should have a limit ; or, 
 whether such orders of creatures as the angelic and 
 human should be brought into being — or if so, how 
 related to each other ; whether there should have 
 been such a pre-Adamite earth as that which preceded 
 the creation of man ; or, what constitution of things 
 man should be put under ; or, in the event of his fall, 
 what thereafter behooved to be done through the 
 
MYSTERY. 221 
 
 progress of time, until the final consummation ! How 
 forcible on this point the questions put to Job, by the 
 Almighty Himself, out of the whirlwind ! 
 
 Nor is it in any respect to our disadvantage, or, so 
 far as we can see, inconsistent with Optimism, that 
 the ways of God should be a mystery to us. On the 
 contrary, mystery is itself one of the means of the 
 greatest good — an indispensable means. That God 
 should be evermore, both in Himself and as to the full 
 significance of His works— deus absconditus— a God 
 who hideth Himself from us, is essential to our highest 
 good. It is to His own glory, and therefore to our 
 advantage, that He remain for ever unsearchable and 
 past finding out to perfection. He were no longer a 
 God to us if He were not to our apprehension the 
 Incomprehensible ; the infinite would be no more. It 
 is not the part of true science, it is the renuncia- 
 tion alike of reason and of piety, to stumble at mys- 
 tery. The highest illumination, the profoundest 
 philosophy, the greatest virtue and happiness of a 
 creature is attained, when, with an adoring sense of 
 the unfathomable Being and counsels of God, he can 
 utter from the lowest depths of his soul such words as 
 these of the humble Psalmist : " Lord, my heart is not 
 haughty, nor mine eyes lofty ; neither do I exercise 
 myself in great matters, nor in tilings too high for 
 me. Surely I have behaved and quieted myself, as a 
 child that is weaned from his mother ; my soul is even 
 as a weaned child." 
 
IV— HAPPINESS. 
 
 Among objects, ideal or real, some are pleasing, 
 some only unpleasing or painful. The latter, for 
 their own. sake, cannot be desired or regarded as 
 good. If they are ideal merely, goodness forbids 
 their becoming real ; if they are real, it requires their 
 destruction. Only the possibility that good ulterior 
 to themselves may be educed from them, can make 
 their actuality consistent with the dominion of good- 
 ness. Objects which only give pain, apart from the 
 possibility of their being in some way made useful, 
 are simply noxious. There can be no such objects, in 
 reality, under the requisition of goodness ; they can 
 exist only in idea. 
 
 If things simply and absolutely painful might be 
 supposed to be good in themselves, their realization 
 were not to be desired. But such things are not in 
 themselves good. Even the sublime goodness, which 
 suffered in the Person of Christ, would not have been 
 goodness if it was to have had no fruit of goodness, 
 or if its sufferings had terminated in themselves. 
 Better would it have been, on that supposition, that 
 they had never been a reality. They were, in truth, 
 not good — not in any view desirable. 
 
 It is thus manifest that goodness presupposes good 
 (222) 
 
HAPPINESS. 223 
 
 ill its ultimation ; to be goodness, it must tend to and 
 result in good, or have its fruit unto happiness. That 
 is not goodness which in itself, and its uses or results, 
 is pure and permanent unhappiness. The estate and 
 the fruit of goodness may be unhappy for a time, 
 through its own sacrifices for the sake of good, or 
 the abuse it receives from its enemies ; but that good- 
 ness should in no way and at no time result in happi- 
 ness, or in less happiness than it foregoes or denies 
 itself, is a contradiction ; and this, in principle, pro- 
 portions the value of goodness to its utility or fruit- 
 fulness in happiness. The tree of goodness, as our 
 Lord taught, is known by its fruits ; fruits of absolute 
 unhappiness or pain for its own sake, show that the 
 tree which produces them is not a good one ; the 
 greater the fruits of happiness, on the other hand, 
 the more excellent the tree. 
 
 The manner of the connection of happiness with 
 goodness, or how the latter is to result in the former, 
 is not always obvious ; as far as can be seen, there is, 
 perhaps, no mode in which the two can be conjoined ; 
 nevertheless goodness assumes the absolute and final 
 disconnection to be impossible : goodness trusts in 
 itself as the principle or agent of good ; has the as- 
 surance of faith where sight is denied it, as to its 
 appropriate ultimation ; anticipates the advance of 
 happiness, as the end of its painful sacrifices, when 
 these it is called to make. Amidst its greatest suf- 
 ferings, compensatory joy is set before it ; it casts its 
 bread upon the waters, assured of receiving it again 
 after many days, if not sooner ; it does not doubt, 
 
224 HAPPINESS. 
 
 when it goes forth and weeps, bearing precious seed, 
 that it shall come again with rejoicing, bringing its 
 sheaves with it : applying the most " crucial " of 
 tests to it, it will be found to have happiness, its own 
 or others, as its ultimate end. 
 
 The doctrine that goodness has utility or happiness 
 for its principle and last end, cannot be reproached, 
 without first doing an injury to happiness, by discon- 
 necting its idea from that of goodness and setting it 
 forth in this dishonorable isolation. The two ideas, 
 in truth, are neither separate nor separable. As good- 
 ness must comprehend happiness, virtually, in order 
 to be goodness, so happiness, in its chief element, is 
 goodness itself. Not only is the good man the only 
 happy one, but it is his goodness, more than aught 
 else, that makes him happy. Goodness, for goodness 
 and happiness' sake, may suffer pain ; but while it 
 thereby advances itself, it is potential happiness, in an 
 equal degree, to its subject and others. In this view 
 of happiness our Lord appears transcendent in it, 
 above all others, in the extremity of His passion. In 
 a full view of His estate, there was not, out of the 
 sphere of the Infinite, one as happy as He was amidst 
 the overwhelming flood of His piacular sorrows. 
 
 It is only by identifying happiness with present 
 enjoyment, or assuming that there is no happiness, in 
 so far as pleasurable feeling is interrupted, that Christ, 
 in His sufferings, can be esteemed unhappy. Let hap- 
 piness be taken as including goodness in itself ; or, 
 instead of naming it happiness, let it be called good — 
 its completest name ; and its just and inevitable dis- 
 
HAPPINESS. 225 
 
 tinction is that of the geeatest good — the pursuit 
 and goal of Optimism. 
 
 It follows from what has been said, that the only 
 absolute unhappiness is sin — that is to say, rebellion 
 against goodness. This, in its very idea, is the adver- 
 sary of happiness. It must be counteracted and de- 
 feated, to prevent its proving the destruction of uni- 
 versal good. Everything else may be made by goodness 
 to subserve the greatest good ; sin is an exception. 
 The sinner's only hope is in repentance and forgiveness. 
 Incorrigible impenitence is necessary ruin. 
 
 10* 
 
V. — SIN. 
 
 Sin, or moral evil, is absolutely or only evil. Other 
 evils, which are made necessary by sin, are means of 
 good ; but sin is the means of no good, in the strict 
 sense of the expression. It would, on the contrary, 
 destroy all good, if not effectually counteracted. In 
 a system in which sin has place, other evils may not 
 be ultimately evil, but good — things, on the whole, to 
 be desired. They may counterwork sin, undo its mis- 
 chief, prevent further mischief from it ; cultivate good- 
 ness ; subserve the pursuit of the highest good attain- 
 able after sin has entered. But sin itself, which gave 
 occasion for these evils, would, in its destructiveness 
 of good, hinder them also from promoting good, and 
 work, through them, to the increase of itself; and 
 would pervert everything else unto evil, and so make 
 the condition of the universe merely evil, and the non- 
 existence of the universe an object of desire. The ills 
 of life, so called, the afflictions of good men, the chas- 
 tisements of God, the severest punishments of sin, are, 
 in a comprehensive view, the means of good — the 
 necessary means of the greatest good, ivhere sin is to 
 be encountered ; hell itself is so, regarded as the punish- 
 ment of sin. But sin in itself, and in its proper effects 
 and tendencies, is simply evil, out of which good, as 
 its natural product, can no more come than light out 
 (226) 
 
SIN. 227 
 
 of darkness, sweet out of bitter, cold from burning 
 heat. Optimism, therefore, which, in principle and 
 activity, seeks only good, has no need of sin, and as a 
 means adapted, in itself, to an end, can make no use of 
 it ; on the contrary, it has, from first to last, to work 
 against it and destroy its works. It may have to take 
 occasion from it to employ instruments and agencies 
 of its own, which, in the absence of sin, would have 
 been unnecessary. It may turn the machinations of 
 sin against itself, and thus produce good, not other- 
 wise to be attained ; but this good is from its own 
 activity, in contending against sin ; not from sin as an 
 agent or means of good. The word means is some- 
 times used in a loose sense, in which it includes what- 
 ever forms of instrumental agency may spring incident- 
 ally from urgent occasions ; as when e.g., a pestilence 
 is said to be a means of health, because it occasioned 
 the invention of medicinal or other remedies against 
 future visitations of the calamity. But there is, in 
 such a use of language, no intention of confounding 
 means and occasions / or, to take the illustration just 
 instanced, to say that the pestilence, and the remedies 
 bear the same relation to health. The pestilence was 
 the means of death or disease ; the means of health 
 were the remedies, of the invention or application of 
 which the pestilence was the occasion. Whether of 
 the remedies or their effects, the pestilence was a 
 means, only in the sense in which everything is said to 
 be a means, which leads, however incidentally or casu- 
 ally, to results ulterior to itself. 
 
 Sin, instead of being the means of the greatest good, 
 
228 am. 
 
 is a means of preventing this, in so far as sin, with 
 its proper effects, cannot be excluded, under the best 
 mode of agency which can be employed for the pur- 
 pose. The good attainable in the absence of sin, was 
 greater than that which could be attained after its 
 entrance ; otherwise, sin was the indispensable con- 
 dition of the greatest good, originally ; and the 
 earnest pursuit of this, while repelling, or seeking 
 to prevent sin, was impossible, unless one may be in 
 earnest in seeking to defeat his own ends. 
 
 But though sin be not the means of good, may not 
 the remedy of sin, with its evils, have been originally 
 necessary to the greatest good? If it was, then, the 
 greatest good, demanding this remedy as indispens- 
 able to its attainment, demanded, at the same 
 time, sin — apart from which there was no place 
 for the remedy ; and the answer to the question has 
 all-cad}' been given. It may be that advantage may 
 come from a remedy beyond that which was directly 
 sought from it ; but to make a remedy originally neces- 
 sary to the greatest advantage, is to make the evil — 
 that is, in the present case, sin — also necessary, with- 
 out which there is no need or place for the remedy. 
 Where there is a disease, there may be nothing better 
 than a remedy for it ; but it were better, if it might 
 be so, to have neither disease nor remedy. He surely 
 were " a physician of no value," however famous as a 
 curer of disease, who makes the disease which he 
 cures. 
 
 As the plan of the world involved the possibility 
 and the futurition of evil — though to be prevented, if 
 
SIN. 229 
 
 it might be, under the best preventive agency— the 
 Divine Goodness, to which all things in the world's 
 appointed course were manifest, could not but have 
 had reference to the rise of sin, and anticipated and 
 provided against it even from the beginning ; and the 
 arrangement and ordering of all things in creation and 
 providence could not but have been accordingly de- 
 termined on. But this proleptical or prudential re- 
 ference no more interfered with the desire of the 
 the Deity that sin might not be, or with His using 
 proper means to prevent it, than does his foresight 
 of the future certainty of sin, now. God did, from 
 the first, as He now does, oppose Himself to sin. 
 He did not and does not want it. It is, as it ever 
 has been and must be, the abominable thing which 
 His soul hateth. He made all things good ; it was 
 desirable, that is to say, it was for the best, that 
 they should remain so. He used the best agency to 
 keep them so. It was not best to depart from this 
 agency, in order to prevent the dire change which was 
 made in the state of the world by sin. Better than this 
 variation from His established order, was inflexible 
 adherence to it, together with the Remedial Scheme 
 which He purposed to introduce, upon the perpetration 
 of sin. But it was not better for the change to take 
 place. Sin gave occasion for new procedures of Divine 
 goodness, which was still intent on gaining the great- 
 est good now achievable ; but that this was greater 
 than that which Avould have been attainable, if sin had 
 not entered, supposes either that God preferred a less 
 good to a greater, as the end of His works, or that 
 
230 srsr. 
 
 He had need of sin, the enemy of all good and the 
 cause of evil, of which He only can know the magni- 
 tude, in order to gain the greater ; each of which 
 would undeify Him. It does not hence follow that 
 there was a change or an after-thought in the mind of 
 God. The only thing necessary to be assumed is, that 
 God, the Infinite and Incomprehensible, is incapable 
 of any agency inconsistent with goodness, or with sin- 
 cerity in opposing or resisting sin. An assumption 
 contravening the theory of the universe, which makes 
 Redemption or the Remedial system the prime end of 
 the Divine agency in creation and providence. All 
 things were made by and for Him, who, in due time, 
 became the Redeemer of man ; but — except in the sys- 
 tem of the Divine purposes, of which the order is 
 anti-typical to that of events — He was not a Redeemer 
 when they were made ; and the prolepsis, or anticipa- 
 tion of Redemption, was not inconsistent with the 
 earnest use of the best agency for preventing the ne- 
 cessity for it. 
 
VI. — THE REIGN OF SIN, 
 
 Volition, the act of willing, follows prevailing de- 
 sire, or what appears best at the moment of its occur- 
 rence ; and under the influence of sin, this appearance 
 always belongs to evil. It is the peculiar function of 
 sin, to make evil seem the greatest good, when an ex- 
 ercise of the will is about to put itself forth, under its 
 command. It is impossible that evil, as such, or for 
 its own sake, should be preferred before good ; it is 
 also impossible, that to the view of any one, however 
 debased by sin, evil and good, as such, should exchange 
 qualities or lose their essential distinctiveness from 
 one another. Nevertheless, while, and in so far as sin 
 reigns within any one, his preference is steadfast and 
 inevitable in favor of evil. It is the work of sin to 
 produce this preference ; that is, as before said, to 
 make evil appear more desirable than good — or better, 
 at the moment of volition, than any good in its stead. 
 Here, at a glance, is seen the nature of the Dominion 
 of Sin. Its beginning is in Deceit ; the sinner is drawn 
 away of his own desire, and enticed ; hence a false ap- 
 pearance, wherein is the inception, and the elemental 
 life or essence of sin. (See James i. 14, 15, and com- 
 pare Genesis iii. 6.) Thus it is that sin, the enemy of 
 good, whose good is evil, begins its work of death. It 
 does its first mischief in deluding the sinner ; it is to 
 
 (231) 
 
232 THE REIGN OF SIN 
 
 him a voluntary enslavement to delusion ; it makes 
 him the victim of false appearance ; it starts him in a 
 career of desperate enmity to good and goodness in 
 himself ; and according to this mad beginning, he pur- 
 sues his way, the agent of his own ruin, and fitted to 
 be an instrument of ruin in the world. 
 
 The history of sin, presents it as an organized Em- 
 pire. The first sinner was an angel. We know noth- 
 ing as to the manner of his fall ; whether it originated 
 in a confederacy with others, or whether they became 
 his confederates after its occurrence, we are not inform- 
 ed ; but he appears in the history of our world, under 
 the name of Satan, as the supreme head of an empire, 
 and as such holds a place of impious rivalry and de- 
 fiance to the Almighty Maker and Ruler Himself. 
 Already " the prince " of evil angels, he sought to add 
 the race of man to the number of his subjects, and the 
 record of his success stands in the foreground of the 
 sad fortunes of mankind. Thenceforth, he became 
 " the prince," or " god," as he is variously called, of 
 this world also ; a bad eminence, which lie has always 
 found it too easy to maintain. The earth, consequently, 
 is the seat of a kingdom of Satan, having its own com- 
 pact, its own constitution and laws, its own most effec- 
 tive administration, and the nations and generations 
 of men in voluntary subjection to it. Through this* 
 mighty organism, sin is ever and everywhere working 
 to the destruction of good, and the multiplication of 
 evil, with a force and to an extent not to be com- 
 puted. 
 
 The accomplishment of the arch-adversary's design 
 
THE EEION OF SIN. 233 
 
 against man, required but one attempt. The race ex- 
 isting in germ, in a common sire, from whom it was to 
 spring in successive generations, fell in his fall — the 
 natural result of the debasement of humanity in him. 
 Success with Adam was the success with his posterity. 
 The race was lost in him. Until man shall cease to 
 be born of woman, flesh to be born of flesh, each indi- 
 vidual, when he comes into the world, will be ''by 
 nature a child of wrath, shapen in iniquity and con- 
 ceived in sin." The contrary could not be, but by 
 superseding natural by the intervention, in every in- 
 stance, of supernatural force ; which, if the principle 
 of Optimism determined the first arrangement, could 
 not be admitted — the consequence to be excluded by 
 it, being, in the Divine view, in that case, not so unde- 
 sirable as the intervention itself would be on the 
 whole. The result, therefore, was inevitable. Through 
 a perversion of the constitution under which our na- 
 ture had its beginning, the first man's ruin was the 
 ruin of mankind. 
 
 Nor has the perversion of Divine order in the inter- 
 est of sin been restricted to this fundamental instance. 
 Man was to live in families, in communities, in cities, 
 in states ; in each of these were to be spheres of closer 
 affinity, fellowships of pleasure, of trade, of science, 
 and letters, etc. ; whence special customs, modes of 
 life, maxims, principles of action, compacts, etc., each 
 forming a distinct centre of influence. All have been 
 perverted, and all, through perversion, have contribu- 
 ted to enlarge immeasurably the predominance of sin. 
 And the more so, immeasurably, because on the whole, 
 
234 TEE REIGN OF SIN. 
 
 and in each particular, the original enemy, with the 
 evil principalities and powers under his command, has 
 never ceased to apply the machinations of his own in- 
 dustrious sagacity. Nor is the view of perversion yet 
 complete. It has been extended through the entire 
 physical sphere, all natural agencies and forces — the 
 light, the air, all the elements, all the ordinances of 
 heaven and earth : to use sacred language, " the whole 
 creation," subsidized by sin, " has been made to groan 
 and travail together in pain until now." 
 
 Moreover, sin has its own individual organisms — 
 establishments directly formed by itself ; fellowships 
 and foundations originally intended and constructed 
 as engines of evil ; institutions of error, idolatry, in- 
 iquity of every form, vast and manifold, in and through 
 which the various agents of evil operate, with every 
 advantage for success, all under the control and energy 
 of the prime Author of evil. 
 
 The actual varieties in which sin has appeared in 
 human life, and its triumphant progress from age to 
 age, correspond with these great facilities for extend- 
 ing and demonstrating its power. Its expression 
 toward man himself has been in every form of lust, 
 deception, injustice, rapine, murder, cruelty, violence ; 
 toward God, in irreverence, insult, blasphemy, idolatry, 
 atheism ; in which, and in all their subordinate forms, it 
 has, in all time, overspread the face of the earth, as 
 the waters cover the sea. Before the flood, every 
 imagination of the thoughts of man's heart being only 
 evil continually, all flesh corrupted its way on the 
 earth, and filled it with violence; insomuch that, in the 
 
THE REIQN OF SIN. 235 
 
 language of the sacred record, it repented God and 
 grieved Him at His heart that He had made man. 
 From its second beginning until the advent of Christ, 
 the course of mankind is traced in the first chapter of 
 the Epistle to the Romans ; with which profane re- 
 cords fully concur j and this transcript of atrocity is 
 equally applicable to the generations which have fol- 
 lowed. 
 
 And it immensely enhances the evil of sin's enormi- 
 ties among men, that it has put them all forth, against 
 incessant opposition to it, on the part of the Divine 
 goodness. For, after the first transgression of man, 
 the Remedial scheme, the best which that goodness 
 could devise, immediately began to exert itself. Atone- 
 ment was anticipated, punishment was stayed, pardon 
 was offered to repentance, institutions of grace were 
 appointed, and in every appropriate mode, the agency 
 of the Holy Spirit was exerted. Nor was it only in 
 forms of forbearance and gentleness, that the goodness 
 of God strove against sin. It employed severity as 
 well as pity ; it arrayed against incorrigible impeni- 
 tence the terrors of Avenging justice; it set forth signal 
 examples of this justice, to induce others to repent ; 
 through judicial abandonments it exhibited sin as 
 dreadfully punishing itself, by the multiplication of 
 monstrous forms of evil ; it pointed man to whole na- 
 tions, one after another, one by means of others, per- 
 ishing through their sinfulness ; it announced eternal 
 death and hell as following on the heels of obstinate 
 guilt ; in fearful sights and signs, in shakings and con- 
 vulsions of nature, it sounded loud alarms to the world. 
 
230 THE REIGN OF SIN. 
 
 Thus God has contended, and thus He is still contend- 
 ing against sin, which appears in the greatness and terri- 
 bleness of its dominion, in that even against such 
 opposition to it, it can not only maintain itself, but 
 pervert this very opposition into the occasion of its 
 self-aggrandisement. How eminent among mysteries, 
 this most outstanding fact of the mutual militancy of 
 sin and the Divine goodness ! Yet even above this, as 
 cause for amazement, stands another very familiar 
 fact — namely, that men, with knowledge of the former 
 fact, and with bitter experience in themselves of the 
 deadliness of the reign of sin, and often with lively 
 apprehensions of the peril of final and absolute subju- 
 gation to it, in the eternity to come, impending over 
 them every moment, still, by their own choice, keep 
 themselves exposed to this peril. 
 
VII.— MERCY. 
 
 There is in sentient being, so far as we are ac- 
 quainted with it, a self-protective property called anger, 
 which, on a sudden attack, instantly springs into exer- 
 cise against the assailant. But in rational creatures 
 this constitutional element is under the law of good- 
 ness, against the interest of which its indulgence is 
 not to be allowed. When, therefore, its proper end, 
 self-protection, ceases to require its exercise, it should 
 be suppressed, since it would produce only pain or 
 unhappiness, which, if not necessary, is inconsistent 
 with the rule of goodness. A good being cannot in- 
 dulge anger for no purpose : simply vindictive or 
 malign anger resteth nowhere, except in the bosom of 
 fools. (Eccles. vii. 9.) 
 
 If this property belong to the nature of the Deity, it 
 must in Him, also, be subordinate to goodness, the 
 glory of every good being. The All-Perfect, the pat- 
 tern of perfection to His creatures, can give no ex- 
 pression to useless anger. The Scripture ascribes this 
 feeling to the Divine Being, in the strongest terms of 
 irascible passion : " God is jealous, and the Lord rc- 
 vengeth ; the Lord revengeth and is furious ; the Lord 
 will take vengeance on His adversaries, and He re- 
 serveth wrath for His enemies." (Nah. i. 2.) But to 
 apply such language to God, in a sense supposing Him 
 
 (237) 
 
238 MERCY. 
 
 to be revengeful, like a man infuriated with malignant 
 passion, were to set the Scripture into discord with 
 itself, and to make the Deity an object of infinite 
 horror to His creatures. Over every thing in the 
 constitution and essence, and entire agency of God, 
 the supremacy of goodness is immanent and absolute. 
 His anger, in its highest manifestations, its severest 
 inflictions, is the servitor and agent of His goodness. 
 If it destroys some, it is because something worse would 
 be involved in sparing them. If it makes a hell, it 
 does this work of indignant justice, because in not 
 doing it, it would cease to be goodness, or refrain from 
 using the necessary means of the greatest good. It 
 has had to do this dreadful work. The first sinners, 
 the devil and his angels, are reserved under chains of 
 everlasting darkness ; and the same is the inevitable 
 doom of those of mankind who will not forsake their 
 fellowship. For the way of goodness is not that of 
 mere will : it has its own indispensable and immutable 
 conditions. It would defeat itself, it would, in effect, 
 cease to be goodness, if it did not observe proper 
 mode ; or if it disregarded moral proportion or har- 
 mony in its actings. God cannot act out of harmony 
 with Himself. He were no longer God, if, in any 
 movement, in or out of Himself, there were a non-con- 
 currence of any one of His perfections ; if, e.g., He 
 should put forth an exercise of poiver from which 
 xvisdom should dissent ; or an exercise of mercy against 
 the protest of justice. In strictest truth, what God, as 
 God, can do, is not what power or mercy can do — for 
 God is more than power or mercy — but what can be 
 
MERCY. 239 
 
 done by an activity in which every divine attribute 
 can combine and coalesce. It is one of the worst fruits 
 of sin, that an opinion which denies this highest of 
 necessities prevails among men. They think the good- 
 ness of God may take the form of mercy by arbitrary 
 will ; on this assumption they reason and construct 
 their theories and systems ; — an assumption which is 
 itself virtually the sum of delusion, involving the un- 
 deifying of God, the end of all good and goodness in 
 the universe. 
 
 There was, as the event proved, a possibility of 
 showing mercy to man, when he brought the need of 
 it on himself. But this possibility had its ground in 
 another, namely, the possibility to the Divine goodness, 
 of so preparing its way to take the form of mercy, that 
 it might do so and yet remain goodness to the end ; or 
 not do ultimately more evil than good. There was 
 this latter possibility, but the ground of it did not lie 
 in simple will or power, but in a sufficiency and a 
 readiness in the Divine goodness to make a self-sacri- 
 fice, which was itself the highest instance of that good- 
 ness, and the comprehension of all the good thenceforth 
 to be communicated to mankind. Two subordinate 
 ends required to be answered : First, the adequate 
 revelation of Avenging justice, or the Divine displeas- 
 ure against sin, the measure of which is nothing less 
 than that of the Divine goodness itself, since of this 
 goodness and all its possible fruits, sin is the enemy 
 and would be the destroyer ; and, secondly, the applica- 
 tion of an agency by which sin itself can be destroyed, 
 and the original order restored in those to whom the 
 
240 MERCY. 
 
 sacrifice is ultimately available ; since, otherwise, the 
 effect of the sacrifice would be but to promote and 
 aggrandize the power of sin. Sell-evidently these 
 two were indispensable prerequisites to the course of 
 goodness toward man. And incidental to them, there 
 was this contingence, namely, the aggravation of final 
 uuhappiness to such as might, in persistent contempt 
 of goodness, choose to abide under the dominion of sin. 
 The conditions involving the contingency were met : 
 the possibility became a reality. The reigx of Meecy 
 was instituted: Goodness — establishing itself on its 
 own firm and everlasting foundation ; meeting all exi- 
 gencies of Holy justice ; securing itself against ultimate 
 defeat and abuse — changed its original form, and, 
 thenceforth, instead of simple kindness or favor, be- 
 came favor to the guilty ; wherein, in countless va- 
 rieties, and in fulness, as that of the sea, it has abound- 
 ed to mankind. 
 
 It is impossible to us to know in what respects 
 goodness had to forego its first course of agency, the 
 course it would have pursued, if sin had been unknown. 
 A different object was now before it. Known unto 
 God are all His works from the beginning of the 
 world ; the end ultimately to be attained by them 
 must, therefore, have also been known to Him ; but 
 this, before the entrance of sin, did not hinder His 
 earnestly pursuing the end which might have been at- 
 tained in the absence of sin ; else, as has been already 
 said, God's foreknowledge would subject Him alto- 
 gether to Fate, — that is to say, there were in truth no 
 God. And if Ho did aim ol this end, means suited to 
 
MERCY. 241 
 
 its attainment must have been employed by Him. 
 What they were, or, beyond the negative intuitions of 
 reason, what they were not, it were presumptuous in us 
 to attempt to imagine, much more to claim, as too 
 many have done, to have positive knowledge. Not 
 contingent possibilities or requisitions, but inspired 
 teaching and the facts of history and experience, are 
 what we are concerned with. According to these, the 
 economy of goodness proceeding on its new basis, was 
 wonderfully new in many fundamental particulars. It 
 required Human Nature to be constituted anew, under 
 a new Head, and in a new Root. It made new con- 
 ditions and terms of favor with God ; it appointed new 
 institutions and ordinances of life ; it gave access to 
 new resources of strength and happiness ; it opened 
 new prospects ; it made new promises, and threatened 
 new penalties ; it called for a new and highly peculiar 
 form of character ; it involved new and stupendous 
 fortunes to mankind. 
 
 It applied its provisions and influences to the entire 
 race ; it blessed the entire race with mercies innumer- 
 able, and of immeasurable value. But it did not at 
 once undo the perversions and mischiefs of sin ; it did 
 not restore at once the original order of the world ; it 
 did not abolish natural evils ; it did not exclude temp- 
 tation or the tempter ; it did not reverse the sentence 
 of bodily dissolution, or exempt man from disappoint- 
 ment, pain, or any form of disease ; it did not preclude 
 enmities among men toward one another ; it left itself 
 subject to malignant opposition from evil angels and 
 men ; it was to make its' way through desperate con- 
 11 
 
242 MERCY. 
 
 flicts, and alternate success and defeat, to be continued 
 to the end of time ; and at last the dire necessity would 
 remain to it of consigning the impenitent to enhanced 
 unhappiness. 
 
 The manifestations and achievements of Goodness, 
 both before and after the change of its way, will at 
 last demonstrate the undeviating supremacy of Optim- 
 ism in the universe. It will then be made evident 
 that as the best world was brought into existence by 
 creative power, so the best management of it will have 
 been maintained through the entire course of time. 
 There will be nothing to be excepted, nothing instead 
 of which something better might have been done. Not 
 so good would have been the agency necessary to pre- 
 vent the entrance of sin, as that negative agency 
 which permitted this, connected with its sequel, the 
 institution of the Reign of mercy. Not better would 
 it have been to have employed a different agency to 
 that which was exerted to prevent the predominance 
 of sin and the doom of the lost. Still it will remain 
 self-evident that greater good would have been possible 
 if sin, with its evils, had never been known. The do- 
 ing of mercy will fill Heaven with eternal wonder and 
 joy ; it will make revelations of goodness which but 
 for it would have had no place ; God, in one aspect of 
 His character, will be known, as otherwise He could 
 not have been. But better, nevertheless, had it been 
 if no occasion for the exercise of His mercy had arisen ; 
 if His goodness had been left to pursue its course as 
 goodness simply ; to employ its unsearchable resources 
 for the production of goodness and happiness in the 
 
MERCY. 243 
 
 universe, without a necessity for a Hell. The inflic- 
 tions of Avenging justice in punishing incorrigible sin, 
 are not to be spared ; they produce a sense, as salutary 
 as it is awful, of the majesty of law, and the strength 
 and stability of government. But it is pure malignity 
 only that can refrain from regret at the demand for 
 them ; and it is only this demand, this inexorable ne- 
 cessity, that enables goodness to reconcile itself to 
 them. 
 
VIII.— THE REDEEMER. 
 
 Among things of highest certainty to us, are those 
 to which our ideas of personality and essence corres- 
 pond, and the radical difference between these two. 
 And though we cannot define or explain them, the 
 knowledge of them and of their difference from each 
 other cannot but be assumed in common intellection 
 and discourse ; nor can there be any justness of con- 
 tinuous thinking or expression on subjects of great- 
 est moment, without carefully distinguishing between 
 them, so that nothing shall ever be predicated of one 
 which is peculiar to the other. 
 
 Of finite persons, so far as we know, each one has a 
 distinct and a single personality proper to himself; 
 but personality in them may, in the same individual, 
 be united to several essences or natures. Thus, the 
 same man with one personality, is a compound of body 
 and spirit, the essences of which are not only diverse, 
 but immiscible. Of the Deity, whose essence is in- 
 finite, the opposite of this has been revealed to us. 
 He has but one Essence, but this dwells completely in 
 three distinct Persons, from eternity and of necessity 
 united, and so constituting one God. 
 
 By that wisdom of the world, which with God is 
 foolishness, the Tri-personality of the Supreme Being 
 is rejected ; using, in doing so, its own absolute ignor- 
 (244) 
 
THE REDEEMER. 245 
 
 ance to deprive itself of knowledge of highest concern- 
 ment, and thus giving a pre-eminent example of the 
 Deceit and infatuation in which sin had its beginning, 
 and by which it has strengthened and extended its 
 dominion. 
 
 In rejecting this sublime revelation, a sinful world 
 virtually abolishes all hope for itself. It was the 
 peculiarity as to the mode or constitution of the Divine 
 Being, which this revelation announces, that enabled 
 infinite Goodness, so to speak, to continue its course 
 toward fallen man in the form of Mercy. Herein lay 
 the ground of the possibility of its making the prere- 
 quisite sacrifice. It was impossible for us to have 
 known of ourselves what this sacrifice behooved to be ; 
 but as it required to have a value satisfactory to 
 Avenging Justice, or equivalent to that of the punish- 
 ment of sin, according to its demerit, it is self-demon- 
 strative that it could be made by no finite or created per- 
 son. In the sphere of the finite there is no person compe- 
 tent to make, or undertake to make it. However exalted 
 or endowed, however eminent in rank or goodness, finite 
 persons may be, they depend on the Infinite for what- 
 ever they are and have ; and to deny or lose a sense 
 of this dependence, would be to become atheistic, or 
 make themselves gods. There is absurdity, not to say 
 impiety, in the idea that such persons, unless already 
 falleu into the delusiveness of sin, should think them- 
 selves capable of more goodness than is already due 
 from them to their Maker on their own account. How, 
 then, shall they be able, or think themselves able, to 
 make satisfaction for sin, or the want of goodness in 
 
246 THE REDEEMER. 
 
 another ; much less in a whole race of creatures ? If, 
 therefore, the sacrifice was required to be made by a 
 Person, lie must be a Divine one ; that is to say, a 
 Person in the sphere, and having the essence of the 
 Infinite ; and if there had been but one such Person, 
 he must have been that one ; a necessity, as we shall 
 see, involving another necessity, namely, that for a 
 time there should be no Divine Person in the estate 
 of glory proper to the Divine Being ; the idea of which 
 is no less absurd and monstrous than that of blank 
 atheism . 
 
 Which of the Divine Persons should assume the un- 
 dertaking was of necessity determinable only by them- 
 selves. There was one of them called by various 
 names, — the Word, the Life, the only begotten Son of 
 God, — by whom, in a special sense, though with con- 
 currence of the others, all acts and operations of the 
 Deity in the world and in its creation had been per- 
 formed. On Him this work also was devolved, and 
 by Him it was accomplished. 
 
 Its accomplishment required of Him an infinite hu- 
 miliation . He had to descend into the sphere of hu- 
 manity, and to take humanity completely, its sinfulness 
 alone excepted, into a personal union with His Divine 
 Nature. His eternal Personality, divesting itself of 
 the form proper to Him as Divine, was to appear 
 thenceforth, for a human lifetime, in fashion as that of 
 a man ; in which, by additional abasement, in all 
 respects extreme, Pie had to finish His undertaking. 
 In this descent from the rank of the Infinite, He could 
 not cease Himself to be Infinite : God cannot undeify 
 
TEE REDEEMER. 247 
 
 Himself. Accordingly, in the descent, even down to 
 its lowest depth, the honors due only to the Deity 
 were still paid to Him ; as in its sequel, He showed 
 Himself still Divine by Divine works of His own, and 
 was also witnessed unto and sealed, as having coequal 
 Divinity with themselves by the other Divine Persons. 
 Nevertheless, except that He knew no sin, the measure 
 of His humiliation was throughout without measure ; 
 and, at its last stage especially, it was unsearchably 
 strange and wonderful. In its process to this stage, 
 He presents an example of wisdom in teaching, of self- 
 denying beneficence, of patient endurance of tempta- 
 tion and affliction, of meekness and self-composure 
 under the greatest provocations, wherein His Divine- 
 Human character is also resplendent with brightest 
 glory to those who are competent to discern it. But 
 now, a tragical scene occurs, which stands alone even 
 in this wondrous history of God-man abasement. As 
 to its direct causes, it is to us absolutely incomprehen- 
 sible ; yet one fact sufficiently explains it. Having 
 made Himself answerable to Eternal Justice for the 
 sins of mankind ; their sins, in the language of Scrip- 
 ture, were laid upon Him, to be avenged in His sacred 
 person ; nor was He spared any, the least portion, of 
 the infliction required of Him by that terrible justice. 
 This infliction was not the same, — it could not have 
 been the same, — which it would have been if it had 
 been received by us in our persons ; but it was what 
 only He, as uniting in Himself the finite with the in- 
 finite, could have either sustained or received. It 
 dealt with " Him who knew no sin," as if, to use in- 
 
248 THE REDEEMER. 
 
 spired language, He ha:l been "Sin itself," the em- 
 bodiment of whatever could be called sin. It ex- 
 pressed itself in effects and demonstrations answerable 
 to this representation. Not only in insult, mockery, 
 scourging, crucifixion, from those for whom he suffered, 
 but in prayers and supplications, with strong crying 
 and tears, to Him who was able to save Him from 
 death ; in a sweat, as it were, of great drops of blood, 
 falling down to the ground ; in a loud outcry on the 
 cross, in which He proclaimed Himself forsaken of 
 God ; and, finally, in a preternatural death, succeeded 
 by entombment in " the heart of the earth." These, 
 attended by profoundly symbolical phenomena of 
 nature, in heaven and earth, and the shades of death, 
 are the interpreters to the world of what has been 
 called emphatically The Passion of the Redeemer. 
 They do not explain its psychology, or mode of pos- 
 sibility, or how the finite and infinite could have the 
 interagency which was involved in it ; but the know- 
 ledge of this, which doubtless no finite mind is capable 
 of receiving, was not necessary. The facts which 
 God has made as ever living, ever present realities in 
 the eyes of the world, are sufficient. It is enough 
 that these facts, by the ordering of God, set forth, like 
 the sun in the firmament, the great certainty they in- 
 volve, namely, that one of the Divine Trinity, leaving 
 His estate of glory with his coequals in Godhead, and 
 assuming under His Divine Personality the nature of 
 man, became the subject of such humiliation and suffer- 
 ing as the facts attest — this was enough. The demon- 
 stration could not be made greater that the satisfaction 
 
THE REDEEMER. 249 
 
 to Justice was complete, the indignation of the Divine 
 goodness against sin adequately revealed. 
 
 There remains, however, another consideration 
 which immensely increases the estimation of this doing 
 of Divine Love. It is that of the Relationship of the 
 God-man to the other Divine Persons. The eternally 
 Three-one are in their unity eternally related to each 
 other. They are so of necessity, even as they are of 
 necessity united in the essence. And their inter-rela- 
 tions are grounds of special affections and interagen- 
 cies among them. As a fact, — a fact unexplained and 
 doubtless unexplainable, — God has affirmed nothing 
 concerning His Deity, not even His essential unity, 
 more explicit than this. Especially, He has announced 
 nothing more impressively, than that He who bore the 
 sins of mankind was a Person of ineffable nearness and 
 endearment to Himself. He calls Him His own, His 
 only begotten Son. And, farther, He tells us, that 
 this His Son, who offered Himself as a sacrifice for us, 
 was His own gift to us. The essential coequality of 
 this Person with the other Divine Persons, made it 
 impossible that He should be given against His own 
 desire ; but that desire presupposed, His Filial re- 
 lationship to God, gave possibility to His being given 
 of His Eternal Father, and the possibility became 
 real. So that a complete statement of the subject re- 
 quires the assertion, that in order that Mercy, in the 
 fulness of its blessings, might be extended to mankind, 
 God gave His own coequal Son, who Himself desired 
 to be so given, that through a substitutionary sacrifice 
 made by this Divine Person, the reign of Mercy might 
 11* 
 
250 THE REDEEMER. 
 
 be consistent with Justice, or be in harmony with all 
 he Divine perfections. 
 
 This is the Atonement — anticipated from the be- 
 ginning, available as soon as man fell, accomplished in 
 due time, — it lays a foundation for the throne and domi- 
 nion of Mercy firmer and more enduring than the 
 foundation of the heavens and the earth. 
 
IX— THE WORK OF THE SPIRIT. 
 
 Though man, by his first disobedience, subjected 
 himself to the despotism of sin, he did not cease to be 
 a free agent. He was free in that act of willing, and 
 he continued no less free afterwards. His will re- 
 mained to him, with all the constitutional properties 
 requisite to volition. He could not but will in ac- 
 cordance with his desire, but he was under no compul- 
 sion. There is no higher freedom — higher cannot be 
 conceived — than that which he had : the power of 
 willing, and opportunity to exercise it according to 
 prevailing desire. It is, in itself, impossible to will 
 without desire, or under no influence from former acts 
 of willing ; or, after once acting, under no disposition 
 to one act rather than another : And if so acting was 
 the indispensable condition of freedom, there would be 
 no freedom in the universe ; the Infinite Himself were 
 not free, a predisposition to good volition being a ne- 
 cessity of His Nature. 
 
 Nevertheless, since by the immutable law of volition, 
 the act of willing must follow desire, or the will be as 
 the greatest apparent good, at the moment of its de- 
 termination ; and since evil, at that moment, always 
 has the appearance of good, if sin has command, the 
 certainty remains absolute of man's willing in the ser- 
 vice of sin, until its power to deceive be overcome. 
 
 (251) 
 
252 THE WORK OF THE SPIRIT. 
 
 Evil will ever seem best to him, when the act of will- 
 ing is to have place. The greatest good will have the 
 appearance of evil. Urgency of persuasion, objective 
 appliance of whatever kind, can make no difference ; 
 none, at least, in favor of the choice of good. There- 
 fore Goodness, in order to become mercy to man, had 
 more to do than to reveal the Divine indignation 
 against sin, or make an atonement for it, as explained 
 in the preceding number. It had to meet the further 
 necessity of displacing the power of sin in man. It 
 had to put out of its way a deep-rooted, subjective 
 hindrance in the nature of man, as well as an objective 
 one interposed by the Avenging justice of God, or by 
 its own necessity of being consistent with itself, or of 
 not so doing good, as to do evil on the whole, or fail 
 of the greatest ultimate good. This necessity was 
 upon it. How was it to be met? In ignorance of the 
 condecencies, which, in truth, are necessities of the 
 Divine activity, simple omnipotence or arbitrary will 
 might have seemed sufficient for the purpose ; but, in 
 fact, it was not. God, as God, the All and Ever Per- 
 fect, could not so meet it. There was a possibility 
 of meeting it, but the ground of this possibility, like 
 that of forbearing to punish sin, lay not in the simple 
 will or power, but in the Constitution of the Deity, as 
 a Pluri-personal Being. This great peculiarity in the 
 nature or constitution of the Godhead, ever an "of- 
 fence" to the proud wisdom of the world, contains, in 
 this respect also, the only foundation of hope for man. 
 According to God's revelation of Himself to us in His 
 Word, the economy, if we may so speak, of the agencies' 
 
THE WORK OF THE SPIRIT. 253 
 
 of the Godhead, the order of operations among the dis- 
 tinct Persons of the Trinity, an order depending on 
 that of their subsistence, — ascribes the beginning of 
 all Divine works to the First Person; their immedi- 
 ate production, subsistence, and sustcntation, to the 
 Second; and all concluding, completing, and' perfect- 
 ing acts, to the Third. With reference to the heavens 
 and the earth (Gen. i. 2, Job xxvi. 13); to man, after 
 his creation (Gen. ii. 7, Job xxxiii. 4); to the furnish- 
 ing of man with extraordinary virtues and gifts for 
 special works, including even the God Man Himself 
 (Judges iii. 10, Zach. iv. 6, Is. lxi. 1), the agency in 
 this last sphere, belongs specifically to the Spirit. It 
 is not for us to know the reason, the fact is enough, — 
 a fact having its basis in the Nature of the Deity, and so 
 equalizing the necessity for the agency of the Spirit 
 in order to displace the power of sin in man, with that 
 of the Divine existence itself. 
 
 As it was the work of the Second Divine Person, 
 then, to make the Atonement, so this other work with- 
 out which the Atonement would have been made in 
 vain, was the province of the Third. The two works 
 were correlated to each other ; the last depending on 
 the first, as its indispensable condition. It was per- 
 formed in the world, as was every work of Mercy, be- 
 fore the Atonement was actually made ; but as it was 
 needful (John xvi. 7) that the Atonement should be 
 made before the Spirit could come in the fulness of His 
 peculiar power, so was it, by virtue of the Atonement, 
 anticipated, that He previously exercised His dis- 
 tinctive office. (Rev. xiii. 8X '. •■' •' 
 
254 THE WORK OF THE SPIRIT. 
 
 His operation, in accomplishing it, is generally two- 
 fold, objective and subjective, outward and inward; 
 and these, though not invariably connected, are so re- 
 lated to each other, that the latter seldom, if ever, has 
 place, in adult age, if the other is wanting. The rela- 
 tion is not that of cause and effect, nor does it in the 
 least interfere with the sovereignty of the Spirit in the 
 inward operation ; but the antecedence of the outward 
 is, ordinarily, at least, indispensable to the performance 
 of the other. With reference to the displacement of 
 the power of sin by the inward operation, its chief end 
 is to give a just impression of the character of that 
 power, the fact of its all-ruinous delusiveness, its dire 
 malignity, its utter renouncement of reason, of a pure 
 conscience, of true self-interest, of self-respect, of the 
 just exercise of every sentiment of humanity, as well 
 as of the Supreme authority of infinite rectitude and 
 goodness. It seeks to rouse up every part of man's 
 rational, moral, godlike nature, — to make everything 
 great and noble in man, insurgent and rebellious, 
 against the deep debasement under which sin is hold- 
 ing him as its willing, most wretched captive. There 
 is nothing, except sin itself, to which it does not direct 
 its appeals, with the certainty, in so far as they are 
 heeded, of a favorable response. There is in these ap- 
 peals a didactic, argumentative, benign, suasory force, 
 — that of the inspired Word of God, quick, powerful, 
 sharper than a two-edged sword, a searcher of the 
 thoughts and intents of the heart, — not to be resisted 
 by anything simply human in man. And while they 
 cannot prevail with reference to the main purpose, — 
 
THE WORK OF THE SPIRIT. 255 
 
 deliverance from the tyranny of sin, the effect, exclu- 
 sively, of the Spirit's inward agency, — they can, in a 
 sense, approximate this ; they can make the yoke of 
 sin too grievous to be borne ; they can give a keen, 
 intense conviction of the cruelty, the enormous wrong 
 and iniquity, the turpitude and hatefulness of its bon- 
 dage ; of absolute helplessness also, or the abolition of 
 all hope of self-deliverance ; they can elicit longing, 
 sighing, imploring outcries for aid ; and so, peradven- 
 ture, make it proper and suitable for the Spirit to do, 
 what otherwise it might not seem meet, and there- 
 fore not possible for Him to do, — penetrate, with His 
 inworking energy, to the innermost recess of nature, 
 where sin hath its seat, and supersede its dominion by 
 His own, — the Supreme ascendency of Truth and Holi- 
 ness, over desire and consequent determinations of the 
 will. 
 
X. — MEDIATION. 
 
 The Atonement and the Work of the Spirit did not 
 comprehend the whole of the Plan of Mercy to man ; 
 these were connected with another Provision of high- 
 est peculiarity. 
 
 It was not possible that the Divine Person, who was 
 made flesh and died for our sins, should have remained 
 under the power of death. (Acts ii. 24.) But if it 
 had been possible it could not have proved a reality, 
 without losing the end of His incarnation and death. 
 The Atonement would have been completed, but it 
 would have been without fruit. If we are reconciled 
 to God by the death of His Son, it is by His life that 
 we are saved. (Rom. v. 10.) Moreover, the Spirit 
 could not have been given if Jesus had not been glori- 
 fied. (John vii. 39 ; xiv. 7.) But immensely more 
 was necessary — a vast sequel of administrative agency 
 over whatsoever was to come to pass in the history of 
 the world. The Royal authority over the universe 
 must be committed to Christ, and exercised by Him 
 until the end of all things. (Phil. ii. 9, 10 ; 1 Cor. 
 xv. 24.) 
 
 Even before His death He had Lordship over all 
 
 things. Life, death, demons, angels, the wind and 
 
 seas, nature in all its spheres, took orders from Him. 
 
 Nay, the Lord Jehovah, the Ruling God under the 
 
 (256) 
 
MEDIATION. 257 
 
 Old Testament, was the Cod-man of the New Testa- 
 ment. But it was not until He had risen from the 
 dead and ascended to the Father, that His solemn en- 
 thronement over the universe took place. That event 
 was reserved as the Testimonial of God's estimation 
 of His infinite self-abasement for man's sake. (Com- 
 pare Phil. ii. 6-11 with Psalms xxiv. 7-10.) It had 
 its reason, its ground of possibility in that self-abase- 
 ment : He could not otherwise have been exalted. 
 As a Divine Person, simply, the supremacy over all 
 things was His already. It was originally and neces- 
 sarily His ; He could not have divested Himself of it. 
 But after uniting in Himself the Human Nature to the 
 Divine, and exchanging the Form of God for the form 
 of aservant. He became, in this Theanthrojnc, Divine- 
 Human character, capable of exaltation ; and God, at 
 the proper time, made Him supreme Monarch of the 
 whole creation, He gave Him this infinite dominion, to 
 the end that the object of His death might be secured. 
 (Eph. i. 22.) It was necessary that He should have it ; 
 it comprehends the potentiality, the possibility, of the 
 full accomplishment of this object. (Eph. iv. 10.) In 
 the fact itself of His receiving it, in the evidence here- 
 by afforded of the infinite value of the Atonement, 
 there was a potential bearing on the attainment of this 
 object ; but His having it was beyond this influential, 
 and even necessary, in manifold respects. It was 
 needed to perpetuate the virtue of the Atonement. 
 There were, it is true, provisions on earth for this pur- 
 pose ; but there was a necessity for this Heavenly pro- 
 vision also ; without it all earthly arrangements would 
 
258 MEDIATION. 
 
 have been of no avail. A vitalizing, energizing power 
 was demanded to keep these arrangements from be- 
 coming unfruitful, perhaps even forgotten and lost ; 
 and it was only the Theanthropic kingdom that could 
 supply this power. (Eph. i. 20-23.) But there was 
 a necessity for Divine influences beyond the virtue of 
 the Atonement, however perfectly conserved and act- 
 ualized. The specific end of the Atonement was to 
 remove the obstacle which our sin, as incurring the 
 displeasure of God. had put in the way of mercy. (Ro- 
 mans iv. 25.) A further influence was required to 
 fulfil the designs of mercy ; one, namely, from the 
 Resurrection of Christ. (Rom. iv. 25, second clause.) 
 And more than even this was necessary : for neither 
 the death of Christ nor His resurrection from the 
 dead, by virtue of which we are justified, sufficed to 
 complete our salvation. After justification we are 
 still compassed by infirmity, and exposed to tempta- 
 tion and to all the forms of earthly affliction and sor- 
 row, and are incessantly falling into new sin, so that 
 if no further provision had been made for us the for- 
 mer ones would have failed. The additional exigen- 
 cies were met, but they were not otherwise to be 
 met than by the Theanthropic elevation of Christ. 
 For the way of mercy now, as in its former stages, 
 might not be arbitrary ; the requisite aid could not 
 come to us, from simple Will, though clothed with 
 Omnipotence. The ability to aid us as we need 
 had its ground in the qualifications and offices which 
 belong to the God-man, as such, in His exalted estate. 
 To his possession of these it was necessary that He 
 
MEDIATION. 259 
 
 should have had a personal experience of our trials, 
 in the days of His flesh ; been touched with a feeling 
 of our infirmities ; tempted in all points like as we are, 
 though without sin ; and then, having been " made 
 higher than the heavens," and assumed the Throne of 
 Universal Empire, it was further necessary that He 
 should avail Himself of the exercise of an August 
 Function, of which we are yet to make mention. Only 
 on this condition could He enable Himself to succor 
 us adequately in our temptations. (Hebrews vii. 25, 
 26, compared with ii. 18.) Why it was so we do not 
 fully comprehend ; it is enough that we know the fact, 
 with its necessity and its sufficiency. The certainty, 
 the possibility even, of our salvation to the uttermost, 
 could have had no foundation out of the Theanthropic 
 Reign of Christ. 
 
 But a full view has not yet been taken of the ground 
 of necessity for this Reign. While it was required 
 for the completion of our salvation, there were sub- 
 sidiary and ulterior purposes which could not be 
 otherwise answered. It was necessary that He should 
 have all power in heaven and earth to carry forward 
 His great undertaking through the coming ages of 
 the world, and to bring the history of the world to its 
 predestined end. Supreme authority over all nations 
 was required. (Matt, xxviii. 18-20.) He must be 
 the Prince of the kings and the kingdoms of the 
 earth. (Rev. i. 5.) Rebellious empires were to be 
 overthrown ; the powers of darkness, the gates of hell 
 were to be vanquished ; Satan was to be cast out and 
 consigned to the bottomless pit ; death, the last enemy, 
 
260 MEDIATION. 
 
 was to be destroyed ; the creature was to be delivered 
 from the bondage of corruption ; the heavens and the 
 earth were to be renewed ; the peace of the universe 
 was to be conquered. The book of the Apocalypse 
 gives the shadows of the things which are compre- 
 hended in the immense system of agencies and changes 
 over which it was necessary that a government, sure 
 of success, should be maintained. What breadths of 
 time, what cycles of civilization, what revolutions of 
 empire, what conflicts of kingdoms, what powers of 
 good and evil, visible and invisible, working with and 
 counterworking one another — even down to the end 
 of the world ! On no shoulder but that of the exalted 
 and enthroned God-man could the government rest 
 which the vast exigence required. Infinite Goodness, 
 pursuing justly and wisely its end, could not dispense 
 with the Theanthropic Kingdom. 
 
 Of this kingdom the grand distinction is that it is 
 Mediatorial or Priestly. The titles God-man and 
 Mediator are of the same significance. The monarch 
 of this kingdom is styled " a Priest upon his Throne." 
 (Zech. vi. 13.) The regal and sacerdotal functions are 
 combined in His unparalleled supremacy. It is through 
 the virtue of a Sacrifice that He exercises the gov- 
 ernment over the world. All royal decrees, com- 
 mands, distributions are fulfilled through the concur- 
 rent exercise of a great High-Priesthood — the presen- 
 tation of a Sacrifice. The Sacrifice is the same that 
 He presented when, through the Eternal Spirit, He 
 offered Himself without spot on the Cross. The pre- 
 sentation now is through Intercession. It implies no 
 
MEDIATION. 261 
 
 necessity, it does not admit of oral or formal suppli- 
 cations ; it consists in the presence, in Heaven, of such 
 a one as He is — the Eternal Son of God, as a Lamb 
 which has been slain — with those scars of infinite 
 honor in His adorable Person, which He received at 
 His immolation. (Rev. v. 6.) These ever-glorious 
 scars, the prints of the nails in His hands and feet, and 
 the cleft in His side, were all conspicuous when He 
 ascended the Throne ; they have continued to be so ; 
 they constitute the Intercession — the comprehensive 
 virtue and strength of the Mediatorial Kingdom. 
 
 The duration of this kingdom is limited. It will 
 end in the end of the world. The necessity for it will 
 then have ceased ; the purpose for which it was estab- 
 lished will have been accomplished. The God-Man 
 will surrender His delegated dominion to God, even 
 the Father. (1 Cor. xv. 24.) The Mediatorial will 
 be merged into the Immediatoeial kingdom, and the 
 Son himself be subject to Him who put all things un- 
 der Him. The Incarnate Deity will remain incarnate ; 
 in His Divinity coequal and coeternal still, as of 
 necessity He ever must be, with the other Divine Per- 
 sons ; but as clothed in our nature, and as everlasting 
 Head of His Body the Church, He will be officially 
 subordinate to God ; and thenceforth God, as such, 
 the Eternal Three-One, be all in all: All in all, in 
 the delighted consciousness of every creature through- 
 out the Realm of goodness and blessedness ; in the 
 exercise of government all in all, likewise, to the 
 apprehension and everlasting torment of unholy beings 
 in the prison of despair. 
 
XI.— JUSTIFICATION BY GRACE. 
 
 Man, in his first estate, being sinless or innocent, was 
 legally just in the sight of God. Perfectly obedient 
 to the precept of the law, he was not obnoxious to its 
 penalty. By sinning he changed his relations to law. 
 Might he by any means be put back into his original 
 relations ? Might he again become legally just ? 
 
 Innocent again, he certainly cannot become. The 
 same person cannot be both criminal and innocent. If 
 he has committed an offence, he may repent of it, he 
 may be forgiven ; but the fact remains ; character and 
 condition may change, but what has been, cannot cease 
 to have been ; it may be atoned for, it cannot be abol- 
 ished. 
 
 The law, then, cannot justify one who has trans- 
 gressed it, if to justify means to make or pronounce in- 
 nocent. The restoration of man, therefore, in respect 
 of justification, taking this term in its strict or legal 
 sense, is impossible. No arbitrary act of will, no im- 
 putation of another's innocence or merit, though it be 
 the merit of condignily, can effect the legal justification 
 of one who has broken the law. This merit can by no 
 possibility be made his, any more than the desert of 
 punishment can be made the desert of reward. The 
 question whether a sinner may be justified again, in 
 the sense in which he was justified before he trans- 
 
 (262) 
 
JUSTIFICATION BY GRACE. 263 
 
 gressed the law, is, by his having transgressed it, an- 
 swered in the negative. 
 
 Is it proper, then, to apply the term justification 
 to a state in relation to law, into which a sinner may 
 by any means be brought ? The fact that the term is 
 not only so applied in Scripture, but, in this applica- 
 tion of it, intensely emphasized and insisted upon, su- 
 persedes this question. The propriety, if not the in- 
 dispensableness of using this term, in this application 
 of it, is not a subject of legitimate inquiry or doubt. 
 And the question, doubtless, never would have arisen 
 — there would have been no place for it, even in 
 thought — if just views had always been taken of the 
 relation to law in which the Atonement puts a believ- 
 er — one who avails himself of its benefit. This rela- 
 tion, though not that precisely which obedience to the 
 law constitutes, is at least of equivalent virtue. It 
 makes it unnecessary on any account to punish the be- 
 liever, by answering all the ends of his punishment ; 
 and exemption from this is all that, in justice, obedi- 
 ence to the law can claim from God. For aught be- 
 yond this, God, in justice, can be in debt to no creature. 
 Creatures owe God their perfect obedience ; but He 
 owes and can owe them nothing, beyond the negative 
 good of not doing them an injury. All that He does 
 for them, more than this, is the fruit of His goodness, 
 not of that justice which must acknowledge and pay a 
 debt, or become injustice. There is no creature to whom 
 continuance in being is desirable, who is not indebted 
 to the Divine goodness even for this. Everything, in 
 such a creature's existence, except iu so far as he may 
 
264 JUSTIFICATION BY GRACE. 
 
 have harmed himself. — everything in so far as God's 
 dealing with him is concerned, has been simply good, 
 up to this moment ; and if from this moment he should 
 cease to be, there would be no abatement of that good- 
 ness of which his life, from its beginning, has been 
 full, and no ground of complaint against God, so far 
 as regards this creature's history. If the Power which 
 made, and has been incessantly upholding him, should 
 withdraw Itself, and leave him to pass back into noth- 
 ness out of which it brought him, it would do him no 
 wrong ; nor might any one call It to account. God is 
 answerable to Himself, and to Himself only, for the 
 exercises of His Almighty power. Should He make 
 new worlds, and, after a time, unmake them, who can 
 say that He would not be doing right? God owes it 
 to Himself to bless His obedient creatures ; it becomes 
 Him as the All-Perfect, the All-Good, thus to deal with 
 them ; if He has given thern His promise, self-regard 
 requires Him to fulfil it. But in respect to their per 
 sonal desert or claim, its limit has been defined ; they 
 have, and can have, no merit of condignity beyond the 
 negative one, not to be dealt with injuriously : a merit 
 of this kind, a claim on justice, beyond that, is incon- 
 sistent with the very idea of the Deity as the Fountain 
 of all being, and all good, and with the necessary rela- 
 tions between Him and His dependent creatures. (See 
 Rom. xi. 85, 36.) 
 
 Now, so far as regards this claim, though the Atone- 
 ment cannot create it, on the part of a believer, or 
 take away from him the desert of punishment, yet it 
 can and does take away all ground or reason for the 
 
JUSTIFICATION BY GRACE. 265 
 
 infliction of punishment ; and thus put him virtually in 
 that relation to law, which he would have been in, if 
 he had not broken it. It cannot be said that he would 
 be dealt with unjustly, or as he does not deserve to be, 
 if he should be punished ; but his punishment would be 
 unnecessary, or to no end ulterior to itself; it would 
 be punishment for punishment's sake, which, however 
 merited, cannot be executed where goodness bears 
 sway. The Atonement offers itself as a substitute for 
 punishment; as a full equivalent for it, and thus, ex- 
 cepting only the believer's ill-desert, as availing to 
 form the relation to law, in respect to him, which 
 would have existed if he had not been disobedient to 
 it. And, as his justification, in that case, would have 
 been simply and only a recognition of him as unamen- 
 able to punishment, that is, virtually, a justification 
 which he obtains through the Atonement — it renders 
 him, on the ground of a perfect equivalent or substi- 
 tute for punishment, unamenable and unexposed to a 
 penal affliction. 
 
 It may be thought that justification, in this view of 
 it, is nothing more than pardon ; but the difference is 
 fundamental : pardon or forgiveness is included in 
 justification (see Rom. iv. 6-8.) ; but pardon may be 
 arbitrary, or, at least, for a reason, different from an 
 atonement or a satisfaction to punitive justice. In jus- 
 tification there is this satisfaction, and it is precisely 
 this which discriminates the idea of justification from 
 that of mere mercy in whatever form. In order 
 to constitute the justification of a sinner, there must 
 be a pardon, but to this must be added an Atonement 
 12 
 
2G6 JUSTIFICATION ' B? GRACE. 
 
 as its ground — a provision, the virtue of which is to 
 put him who has the advantage of it in the same rela- 
 tion to the law, so far as regards the reasons for pun- 
 ishment, as obedience to the law constitutes and im- 
 plies. 
 
 It has been thought that the term justification is not 
 applicable to one's state in relation to law, unless this 
 include something more than unamenableness to pun- 
 ishment ; additional to this, he must have a legal title 
 to eternal life. But this is not included even in a 
 strictly legal justification : obedience itself confers no 
 such title, as has been said already. A person legally 
 justified, as long as he lives without sinning, cannot be 
 punished : God, moreover, may owe it to Himself as 
 good and the friend of goodness, to show such a per- 
 son favor, perhaps eminent favor ; but if he does, it is 
 not a debt due to him from God in strict justice ; he 
 has no claim on his Maker, on this or any ground, 
 even for one moment's continuance in being. 
 
 They who say that justification includes a legal title 
 to salvation, give the Atonement the virtue of confer- 
 ring this title. But if the existence of the title be an 
 impossibility, the Atonement cannot have the virtue 
 they ascribe to it. We have seen that a legal title, 
 even to exemption from punishment where it has been 
 incurred, is an impossibility. As to this, even a merit 
 of condig)iity, a claim in law or justice, in one who has 
 incurred it by transgression, is an absurdity, a contra- 
 diction in terms. What place, then, is there for the 
 idea of a legal title to eternal life? And for what 
 reason were such a title to be desired if it were a pos- 
 
JUSTIFICATION BY OR ACE. 267 
 
 sibility ? Or what advantage could it give its pos- 
 sessor which he may not have without it, unless it be 
 an advantage to be free of the Divine goodness, and to 
 have self-merit as the measure of one's happiness ? A 
 title to anything in justice, or as a debt, is not a con- 
 dition of receiving good from God : He requires no 
 such title ; He is already more than willing, for the 
 sake of the Atonement, to confer the highest favors on 
 those to whom the only debt due from Him is eternal 
 death. The Atonement itself was required, not from 
 a parsimony of goodness, but rather that the way of 
 goodness, on the largest scale, might be open and un- 
 obstructed. And the Atonement itself was the fruit of 
 goodness, and of all its fruits unspeakably greatest. 
 From first to last the salvation of man — the Atone- 
 ment, forgiveness, eternal life, for the Atonement's 
 sa k e — nas goodness, not justice, not obligation, as its 
 fountaiu. The whole comes, it is true, through the 
 Atonement — the immediate producing cause of the 
 whole. It is for Christ's sake, for the sake of His infi- 
 nite sacrifice, His obedience unto death, His personal 
 intercession, that God exalts the believer to the honors 
 and felicities of His everlasting kingdom ; treats him, 
 to use the language of Scripture, as if he were " the 
 righteousness of God ;" justifies him with a justifica- 
 tion which makes him a son and an heir of God, a 
 joint-heir with Christ : But while this justification has 
 its ground in the work of Christ, it is not on that ac- 
 count the less gratuitous, the less independent of a 
 claim in justice, the less an act of pure and absolute 
 grace. The Biblical statement of the doctrine of a 
 
268 JUSTIFICATION BY GRACE. 
 
 sinner's justification is nowhere more complete or pre- 
 cise than in Romans iii. 24: "Being justified feeelt 
 by His grace through the redemption that is in 
 Christ Jesus." 
 
XII.— FAITH. 
 
 There are two senses in which the epithet spiritual 
 may be applied to man : as signifying either the im- 
 material or spiritual part of his nature, or a certain 
 state or quality of the latter. In the former meaning 
 it distinguishes the soul from the body ; in the other 
 it distinguishes regenerate from unregenerate man. 
 An unregenerate man, even in respect to his immateri- 
 ality or spirit, is called carnal (1 Cor. iii. 3 ; Col. ii. 
 18) ; a regenerate man, as such, is called spiritual. 
 That which is born of the Spirit is spirit ; that is, has 
 a spiritual nature like that of the Holy Spirit of whom 
 he is born. And this new spiritual nature which comes 
 of the second birth, has a spiritual understanding, or 
 power of spiritual discernment (Rom. viii. 6, 7 ; Col. i. 
 9 ; 1 Cor. ii. 15) ; " A new foundation laid in the na- 
 ture of the soul for a new kind of exercises of the 
 natural understanding."* Hence the explanation of 
 man's deliverance from that moral deceptiveness or 
 power of infatuation in which sin begins, and by which 
 it maintains its dominion within him. It is in the ex- 
 ercise of this new power or principle of nature that 
 the spell of sin is broken, that good and evil are again 
 discerned in their proper characters, and the reign of 
 rectitude or goodness established. 
 
 * President Edwards. 
 
 (269) 
 
270 FAITH. 
 
 Now that which is objectively correlative to this 
 new principle, toward which it acts, and from which 
 it takes its impressions, is not a direct presentation of 
 things, but a representation of them by means of state- 
 ment or testimony, namely, the Word of God — the 
 outward witness of the Spirit. In respect to the 
 things themselves, God is a Testifier or Affirmant, 
 apart from whose Word there is no possibility of our 
 knowing them, no evidence to us of their truth or ex- 
 istence. If they become realities to us, if they impress 
 themselves upon us, they do so no otherwise than 
 through the medium of this Word, which has this in- 
 fluence only as it is accredited or believed. This 
 accounts for the application of the term Faith to that 
 use or exercise of the spiritual understanding by which 
 we are said to discern or know these things. 
 
 It is not possible to give a strict definition of Faith. 
 Like vision or hearing it can no otherwise be under- 
 stood than by its function or what it does. In regard 
 to this the Biblical assertion is, that Faith is what 
 makes the contents of the Divine Word as present 
 realities to the believer, (Heb. xi. 1). These contents — 
 simple assertions — are matters of as perfect certitude 
 to him as things which he sees, hears, or handles ; and 
 it is his faith which gives them this certitude. And 
 the reason why it does this is, that that which attests 
 them is what it is, the Word op God. He has no 
 conception, no knowledge of them, except what this 
 Word gives him ; they surpass his power of compre- 
 hension ; many of them are futurities, which only Om- 
 niscience can know, and only Omnipotence can actu- 
 
FAITH. 271 
 
 alize; and were they not declared by God Himself, 
 it would be simple credulity or folly to believe them. 
 But because, and only because, the Mouth of God hath 
 spoken them, they are to that new power of discern- 
 ment which belongs to him as a regenerate or spiritual 
 person, as certain and real as objects of sight are to 
 the eye. 
 
 What gives them this reality is, the correlation be- 
 tween this new spiritual sense and God Himself as ob- 
 jective to it. It is this sense which makes the Deity 
 in His proper nature a reality to man. The world is 
 a revelation of the glory of God (Ps. xix. 1, Rom. i. 
 20) ; but it is such in effect only to a spiritual mind. 
 The unregenerate are without God in the world (Eph. 
 ii. 12). Even the inspired Word of God is no revela- 
 tion to them (1 Cor. ii. 14). Being destitute of spiritual 
 sense or understanding, there is no possibility to them 
 of the spiritual knowledge of God any more than there 
 is of the intellectual knowledge of Him to irrational 
 creatures. But let one have this new sense, and God, 
 in the glory of His nature, becomes the only reality ; 
 all being, all goodness, all else is comparatively less 
 than nothing to Him. What then — as a ground or 
 reason of certitude to him, — what is there in the uni- 
 verse superior or equal to the Word of this all-glorious 
 Being ? Is it cause for wonder, that whatever this 
 Word contains is as obviously true and real to the soul 
 of a believer, as the existence of the world is to his 
 natural consciousness ? 
 
 Now, among the contents of this Word, high and 
 transcendent as the sun in fhe system which he il- 
 
2^2 FAITH. 
 
 lumines, is the scheme of Justification by grace. It is 
 of course correspondent^ distinguished among the 
 spiritual apprehensions of a regenerate man. His in- 
 effable complacency in it, his joyous acceptance of it, 
 his absolute reliance upon it, for his own personal justi- 
 fication, is, of course, a fact, a moral necessity. Thus 
 it comes to pass, that he is actually justified by it ; 
 and because the event occurs through an exercise of 
 faith, it is ascribed to Faith as its productive cause. 
 He is said to be justified by his faith. The connect- 
 ing medium between him and the scheme of justifica- 
 tion, is spoken of, by metonomy, as if it had in itself a 
 justifying virtue. It is said, indeed, to be imputed to 
 him, for righteousness ; as if it were equivalent, at 
 least, to a complete obedience of the law. The ex- 
 planation has been given. It is not that faith is this 
 in itself; it would not be this, even if it were perfect. 
 The only substitute for obedience, or the righteousness 
 of the law, is the Atonement — " the righteousness of 
 God," (Rom. i. 17 ; iii. 21, 22) ; but whereas it is 
 through the instrumentality of faith, that this righteous- 
 ness becomes available to justification, so the instru- 
 ment is put for its object, and is imputed or accounted 
 as if it were tin's in reality. 
 
 The function of faith is not restricted to justification. 
 From first to last, it is, on our part, the factor, the 
 working power in our salvation. Next to the influence 
 of the indwelling Spirit, it is the prime agent in the 
 production of character, the perfecting of inherent 
 righteousness in the justified. In all its acts, the first 
 included. — that in which it justifies us, — it is a van- 
 
FAITH. 273 
 
 qnislier of evil, a purifier of the heart, a former of the 
 image of Christ within us. The same faith which ap- 
 propriates justifying grace, accomplishes the whole, 
 and does this in the self-same kind and mode of 
 activity. It sanctifies precisely as it justifies us. In 
 itself, an exercise of spiritual understanding or dis- 
 cernment terminating on its proper objects, the con- 
 tents of Scripture, it gives these objects a formative 
 influence on the soul, and moulds the character and 
 life in conformity to them. Its efficacy is not from 
 itself, but from the revelations of the Word of God, 
 or more strictly from God Himself, as discerned by 
 means of them. It is therefore, in a sense, a Divine 
 efficacy. The Word of God gives Faith, a use as it 
 were of the Divine attributes. It sees light in God's 
 light, is wiser than the ancients, has an unction from 
 the Holy One whereby it knows all things, looks into 
 the future, sees the fulfilment of the prophecies, the 
 second advent of Christ, the resurrection of the dead, 
 the judgment of the world, the new heavens and 
 earth, the end of the righteous and the wicked : The 
 whole is reality to Faith. Moreover, it can do all 
 things, remove mountains, quench the violence of fire, 
 subdue kingdom?, overcome the world. It can com- 
 mand whatever it will ; ask and receive what it will ; 
 fill itself with all the fulness of God : Nothing is im- 
 possible to it : So it is written in the Word of God — 
 that Word which to Faith is as God Himself. Of 
 course, it is to be taken in a consistency with what- 
 ever else that Word contains : for its contents are a 
 unit, each cognate and co-organized with every other 
 12* 
 
274 FAITH. 
 
 and with the whole ; but it is not hereby deprived of 
 its own proper significance, a significance not dimin- 
 ished but increased in value by its organic relations, 
 and not to be misapprehended by Faith. 
 
 Three conclusions follow : In the first place, that 
 the first concern of a believer, is to have his faith 
 always in lively and vigorous exercise. Only let him 
 believe. In proportion to the measure of his faith will 
 be the measure of his attainment in personal virtue or 
 conformity to Christ ; the measure of his good works 
 or usefulness in the world ; the measure of his meet- 
 ness for the blessedness of heaven. And, that he may 
 be mature and strong in faith, it is necessary, in the 
 next place, that he keep the principle of faith, the 
 spiritual sense of which faith is an exercise in its nor- 
 mal condition ; in order to do which, thirdly, the 
 chief prerequisite is, that he grieve not the indwelling 
 Spirit of God, the author and vitalizer of this principle 
 and of all its activity. This last practically includes 
 the others ; they will not, cannot be wanting, when 
 the Spirit is not grieved ; and therefore this precept, 
 " grieve not, quench not the Spirit," may be propounded 
 as the summary or compend of all his concern. 
 
XIII.— CHARACTER OF BELIEVERS. 
 
 The chief excellence of the good is in themselves, 
 not in their works ; in their character, not in their 
 manifestations of it. However high their estimation 
 in respect of the latter, it is as nothing compared with 
 that of their inherent excellence. The revealed glory 
 of the Deity, which fills the world with its effulgence, 
 is but a faint ray of the immanent perfection of His 
 Nature. But there is a distinction, a higher and a 
 lower, in inherent excellence itself. The spiritual is 
 superior to the natural, the moral to the constitutional. 
 The latter, indeed, is but in order to the former, from 
 its subordinate relation to which it takes its highest 
 value. It is the chief glory of the Divine attributes, 
 that they are all, if we may so speak, in the service of 
 Love, the essence and sum of moral rectitude or good- 
 ness. 
 
 In the ground of our justification by grace, there is 
 no place for any righteousness or moral excellence of 
 ours ; and there is no necessity for it. The Atone- 
 ment is all sufficient for its purpose, without addition 
 from us. It were, moreover, offering the highest 
 affront to infinite excellence ; it were arrogating a 
 justifying virtue to that which needs to be justified ; 
 it were bringing guilt to assist in justifying the guilty ; 
 it were seeking to combine pollution with a purity, in 
 
276 CHARACTER OF BELIEVERS. 
 
 the presence of which " the heavens arc not clean," to 
 attempt making an addition to it : An iniquity too 
 common among men, and not less perilous and hurtful 
 than common. 
 
 But it is not to be hence concluded, that personal 
 righteousness or moral excellence, on our part, may be 
 dispensed with in our justification, or that we may be 
 justified by grace, while still unjust in ourselves, or 
 disobedient to the law. Justification allows no inver- 
 sion of the scale of excellence ; no place for the idea 
 that character is less valuable than condition, or that 
 personal goodness is unessential to the favor of God. 
 Justification, on the contrary, is itself in order to a 
 good character ; of which, the germ is already in us 
 when it takes place, and the full maturity and perfec- 
 tion already provided for and secured. In the act of 
 justifying us, God begins the fulfilment of a scheme 
 of agency, each part of which is interconnected with 
 the whole, and with every other part. In its time and 
 order, the presence of no part can be wanting. The 
 scheme is a unit. The first part anticipates the last 
 "Whom He justifies, them He sanctifies, and, in due 
 time, He also glorifies. 
 
 While, therefore, justification and personal virtue 
 are distinct, they are inseparable from each other. 
 The former, a single act, is already complete ; the 
 latter, a gradual formation, is also sure of eventual 
 completion. Simultaneously with the moment of justi- 
 fication, the Holy Spirit begins His appropriate func- 
 tion within us. It is through this beginning that we 
 meet the indispensable condition of our justification. 
 
CHARACTER OF BELIEVERS, 277 
 
 Having already entered our perverted nature, the 
 Spirit regenerates it, renews it, assimilates it to His 
 own ; and thus delivering it from the dominion of sin, 
 giving truth and falsehood, good and evil, their just 
 appearances again, making old things to pass away 
 and all things to become new to us, He evokes our 
 complacency in the glorious plan of justification by 
 grace, as set before us in the inspired "Word, so that 
 we joyfully adopt and accept it as our own. Nor does 
 He rest here. He has come into us, as into His tem- 
 ple, His everlasting habitation, out of which He is 
 never more to depart. Henceforth the supreme do- 
 minion within us is that of rectitude. Our reason, 
 our conscience, our intelligence, our affections, our acts 
 of willing, our spirit, our habits and ways of life, are 
 inviolably consecrated to personal virtue. Such is the 
 security for good character in the justified. It is as 
 sufficient for its purpose, as the Atonement is for our 
 justification before God. 
 
 For substance, personal righteousness, or moral ex- 
 cellence, is universally the same ; the same in heaven 
 and on earth, in God and the angels, in man before his 
 fall and after his restoration. But like intelligence 
 and physical life, it is modified by its surroundings, 
 the external agencies which exert themselves upon it. 
 In respect to justified man, these are wondrously 
 distinctive and peculiar. The mode of his justification, 
 as an objective power, has an influence upon him to 
 which there is no parallel, and which is necessarily 
 foreign and strange to others. In the reversal of his 
 doom to eternal death ; in the obliteration of his 
 
278 CHARACTER OF BELIEVERS. 
 
 countless impurities and offences ; in the immeasurable, 
 all-amazing contrast between what he was, and what 
 he has become ; and above all, in the Great Propitia- 
 tion through which he is justified, there are motives, 
 elements of purity, of which he alone can be conscious, 
 and such as cannot but give him a transcendent 
 peculiarity of personal character. 
 
 But there is yet another demand for peculiarity. 
 The plan of justifying grace comprehends our confor- 
 mity to an unparalleled pattern or type of personal 
 virtue ; even of that self-same type, by the exercise of 
 which the Atonement was made, the way for our justi- 
 fication by grace prepared. After the very example 
 of that righteousness through the virtue of which we 
 are justified, we ourselves are required to become 
 righteous. The character of Christ is to be produced 
 in us. That very stamp or distinction of righteous- 
 ness which he displayed in His humiliation and death 
 on our behalf, we ourselves are to bear. The same 
 mind is to be in us which was also in Him when, being 
 in the Form of God and equal with God, He emptied 
 Himself, and took upon Him the Form of a servant, 
 and was made in the likeness of man ; and being 
 found in fashion as a man, humbled Himself, and be- 
 came obedient unto death, even the death of the Cross 
 (Phil. ii. 5-8). In making the Atonement Christ was 
 alone ; no creature could take part with Him in that. 
 But in the spirit in which He performed that work, 
 the character so strange and peculiar which He dis- 
 played in performing it, we are to be like Him, pre- 
 cisely and perfectly like Him — conformed to Him with- 
 
CHARACTER OF BELIEVERS. 279 
 
 out exception or reserve. This conformity on our 
 part — elemental at first, and at last complete — is the 
 true exponent or significance of the condition of our 
 being justified by His atoning death ; and this not by 
 an arbitrary arrangement, but by the requisition of 
 essential rectitude. We should be without the prin- 
 ciple of personal virtue if we should be found wanting 
 in this conformity ; if the same love in kind, where- 
 with He loved us when He died for our sins had no place 
 in our hearts ; nay, if it did not actually reproduce His 
 character in us. When the Apostle speaks of his 
 being crucified with Christ, of his being made conform- 
 able to the death of Christ, of his bearing about in 
 his body the dying of the Lord Jesus, that the life 
 also of Jesus might be manifest in his body, he does 
 but give himself as a specimen of the character which 
 is proper and requisite in all who are justified by 
 grace. This mode of justification demands such a 
 character, and virtue itself is disowned where the 
 demand is not met. 
 
 On no point is Biblical teaching more full and im- 
 pressive than on this — the essential identity in charac- 
 ter between Christ and ourselves. Recur to our 
 Lord's frequent discourses on it to His disciples : re- 
 cur especially to the prayer which He offered on their 
 behalf before His Passion, the great burden of which 
 was this very thing : call to mind the declaration that 
 God has predestinated us to be conformed to the image 
 of His Son : study the meaning of the Scripture where 
 it calls us the brethren of Christ, and Him the First- 
 born among many brethren, and makes us members 
 
280 CHARACTER OF BELIEVERS. 
 
 of His body, of His flesh, and of His bones, and 
 identifies us with Him, in His death, His burial, His 
 resurrection, His ascension, and His glory in Heaven : 
 Mark attentively the Biblical representation of the 
 Spirit's method of working in sanctifying us : how He 
 ever keeps the image of Christ before us ; takes of 
 the things of Christ and shows them to us ; changes 
 us into His likeness more and more, from glory to 
 glory ; forms Him within us the hope of glory, and 
 ceases not until our resemblance to Him is perfect and 
 entire, wanting nothing. It is not simply virtue or 
 righteousness that is needed, but that mode or fashion 
 of it of which the only example, in this or any world, 
 is that of the God-man our Saviour. 
 
 Such then is that peculiarity of character or inherent 
 righteousness, which belongs to those who are justified 
 by grace. It is individual and unique. It has no 
 parallel, no similitude, among men or angels. As to 
 their subjective virtue, angels are not altogether what 
 they were before they knew the depth to which the 
 Divine Goodness could descend in the form of mercy 
 to man. The manifestations of this mercy cannot but 
 modify and immeasurably enhance the virtue and con- 
 sequently the happiness of the universe. But justified 
 man must have forever an individuality of character 
 of which no other can partake. Others will be one 
 with him in celebrating the praise of justifying mercy 
 (Rev. v. 11, 12) ; but there is one act of worship in 
 which they cannot take part : they cannot sing with 
 the justified, " Unto Him that loved us and washed 
 us from our sins in His blood ;" and the subjective 
 
CHARACTER OF BELIEVERS. 281 
 
 difference which hinders them from uniting in this 
 song has, as to its ground, a breadth and a length, 
 a depth and height, which passes finite knowledge. 
 
 Among men, all but the justified are entire strang- 
 ers to virtue. There is to them no alternative, but 
 either to be virtuous with that peerless virtue which 
 is the companion and fruit of justifying grace, or to 
 be destitute of the germ and life of virtue. It is com- 
 mon to commend the pursuit of virtue, without refer- 
 ence to this grace as prerequisite to it — sometimes as 
 preparatory to our receiving it ; sometimes not only 
 as possible but sufficient without it ; sometimes with 
 contempt for it as antagonistic to virtue : But if an 
 effect cannot be without its cause, if we cannot have 
 sunbeams apart from the sun, neither can man be virtu- 
 ous or inherently just, without being already just with 
 God, through justification by grace. The first concern 
 of man is to accept the Atonement ; to reject it, is to 
 love a twofold death — death under the condemnatory 
 sentence of immutable law and rectitude, and death 
 as to the hope of restoration to rectitude or virtue. 
 It is sin refusing to be forgiven, guilt too proud to ac- 
 cept of justifying grace ; it is also the foul and bitter 
 waters of inborn corruption, refusing to be displaced 
 by a well of celestial water springing up into the life 
 of everlasting purity and joy. After it may remain, 
 what doubtless were before it, activities of conscience 
 and natural affection, struggles to be just with God ; 
 good works, so called, but no virtue, and no sufficiency 
 for virtue ; nay, it necessitates an invigoration of the 
 principle of sin, and a new guilt greater than the first. 
 
282 CHARACTER OF BELIEVERS. 
 
 As to appropriate character in the justified, it has 
 been already said that its formation is gradual. Its 
 beginning, like that of our natural existence, is ru- 
 dimental or embryonic ; its development is often re- 
 tarded, sometimes even regressive ; it has to endure 
 manifold contentions from within and from without ; 
 it is sometimes overborne in its conflicts, and for a 
 season seems to be extinct : but it eventually prevails, 
 over its adversaries, — through all its changes pro- 
 gresses to completion, and at length appears pure 
 amid the purities of Heaven, a perfect resemblance to 
 the character of Christ. 
 
XIV.— TRUTH THE SAME AND ALWAYS YOUNG: 
 THE OLD IN THE NEW. 
 
 " I write no new commandment unto you, but the 
 old commandment which ye had from the beginning. 
 Again, a new commandment I write unto you."* It is 
 common in popular discourse, to contradict our own 
 assertions immediately after making them— to say 
 what we go on to deny, or deny what we have just 
 said ; we are not, however, in such cases, inconsistent 
 with ourselves, nor do we speak inadvertently ; our 
 design is to set the thing we speak of into contrast 
 with itself, under different aspects. We speak of 
 the thing in the second instance, in a different rela- 
 tion, or with a different reference from that which we 
 intended in the first. The apostle does not contra- 
 dict himself, when, after saying, " I write no new com- 
 mandment," he adds, in the following sentence, "Again, 
 a new commandment I write." What he wrote was, 
 for substance, " the word which the church had had 
 from the beginning.'' It was, therefore, nothing new. 
 But yet it was new in a sense, on account of the new 
 light which was shining in respect to it ; the new as- 
 sociations and enforcements it had received — the 
 fullness of meaning which it had been shown to con- 
 tain. 
 
 * 1 John ii. 7, 8. 
 
 (283) 
 
2S4 THE OLD IN THE NEW. 
 
 There has been but one true religion. There are 
 two Testaments ; but the religion they contain is one. 
 Christianity, the new commandment of the apostle, is 
 but the faith of the antediluvian elders in its maturity 
 and completeness. The books of the New Testament, 
 in their historical, doctrinal, and ethical details, and 
 in their diversified style, diction, examples, illustra- 
 tions, are but the perfect edition of a religion, the 
 rudiments of which were given to man by his Maker 
 near the beginning of his existence ; regarding it in 
 its date, it was old ; regarding it in the stage of devel- 
 opment which it had reached, it was strangely new : 
 eye had not seen, ear had not heard it ; the thought 
 of it had not entered into the heart of man. 
 
 The apostle might speak of it as new, comparing it 
 with itself under the latest of its antecedent forms ; 
 those not only of the last of the prophets, and of the 
 harbinger of our Lord, but of our Lord Himself, pre- 
 vious to His ascension. Even during his personal 
 ministry, there was scarcely the twilight of evangeli- 
 cal truth, when compared with the full-day brightness 
 with which it shone after the baptism of the Holy 
 Ghost and of fire. 
 
 Nor have the epithets old and new ceased to be ap- 
 plicable to Christianity. There has been progress in 
 the knowledge of Christianity — progress from vague- 
 ness to precision, from obscurity to splendor, in some 
 points — since the days of the apostles. There have 
 been no authentic additions to it ; but new represen- 
 tations and impressions have been given of it, from 
 time to time, in virtue of which it has been itself called 
 
THE OLD IN THE NEW. 285 
 
 new. At different epochs, it has become almost as 
 new as it was at first, in its new manifestations of 
 power, and in the new impressions which men have 
 had of it. It was so in the early part of the sixteenth 
 century, when its republication by the reformers, was 
 as a resurrection of it to the nations of Europe. In- 
 deed, at every period of awakening in the church, the 
 ancient faith becomes new again. Nay, it is, as it 
 •were, constantly rcjuvenizing itself in the experience 
 of individual Christians, to many of whom it seems to 
 be always becoming more and more novel. The old, 
 primitive word, the same essentially, yesterday, to-day 
 and forever, appears to them each day more fresh than 
 when it first opened itself to them. It is always re- 
 cognized by them as the same old commandment, but 
 it has a new aspect ; everything in it looks perfectly 
 fresh and young ; its facts, teachings, tendencies, bear- 
 ings, relations, influences, are ever and more and more 
 
 new. 
 
 This power of self-rejuvenescence, this old-new, or 
 new-old life of our religion, is what makes it a religion 
 for all time— for universal man, till the end of the 
 world. It would not otherwise have a permanently 
 saving power. It does not possess this power, as be- 
 ing simply historic, that is to say, not a myth or 
 fabulous, but founded in fact ; this is necessary, but 
 not sufficient : to meet the wants of man in successive 
 generations, Christianity must be unlike other relig- 
 ions in two respects— not only in having a ground, as 
 they have not, in veritable history, but also in having 
 power to renovate and reproduce its ground, so as to 
 
286 THE OLD IN THE NEW. 
 
 make it no less real and manifest to others of tlic re- 
 motest times, than it was to those who lived in the 
 beginning. The past must return in the present ; 
 antiquity must reappear in novelty : a merely historic 
 religion is not an available one — does not, cannot 
 answer the purpose of religion. Dying man needs a 
 Saviour, and one inhabiting the present equally with 
 the past, and one, moreover, present to him, and with 
 him, as he walks through the valley of the shadow of 
 death, more really, more perfectly, than any fellow- 
 mortal can be at any time. The ability of the Chris- 
 tian history, of the ground-fact of Christianity, to re- 
 produce itself in the present, to be always fresh, young, 
 palpable, as at first, in the experience of believers, is, 
 in truth, its saving ability. Christianity, divine in its 
 essence — a divine life, as well as a divine doctrine — 
 having its spring in God — and being vitalized and 
 sustained by the indwelling Spirit of God — being, 
 moreover, not only historic, but the key of history — 
 its Author being the Creator and Ruler of the world, 
 who orders the events of time with reference to its 
 advancement, and to the same end exerts, when He 
 pleases, supernatural forces: Hence its permanent 
 efficiency as a religion for man ; its antiquity and also 
 its perpetual and progressive novelty, its venerable 
 age, and also its eternal youth and freshness. 
 
 This two-fold characteristic of Christianity has 
 given rise to a principle of classification and division 
 in the church. The epithets oZc/and new, from this, as 
 the occasion, have been applied to different classes of 
 Christians. Among Christians, as among men, some 
 
THE OLD IN THE NEW. 287 
 
 are constitutionally conservative, sonic versatile and 
 impulsive: hence antagonisms, "sides," "schools," 
 " liohts " — one called old from their attachment to the 
 oldness, the antiquity of Christianity ; the other new, 
 from their characteristic susceptibility to the power of 
 the novelty in which Christianity arrays itself from 
 time to time. 
 
 This susceptibility implies no comparison of old and 
 new in Christianity itself, no ground or possibility of 
 a difference between Christianity at first and after- 
 wards, but only a special liveliness or impressibility to 
 new manifestations of what is, in itself, old. It im- 
 plies no want of interest or delight in the old faith — 
 it is, in truth, this delight, this interest itself. The 
 novelty, whose power is felt, is not absolute novelty ; 
 it is antiquity in novelty ; the new does but reproduce 
 the old ; it is the same old Christianity which the 
 apostles preached, giving new proofs of its identity, 
 and of its invincible, undying, ever-efficient power to 
 save. It is not a reproach, it is not weakness, to be 
 perfectly alive to novelty, under this idea of it. 
 It is honorable to be called new for such a reason, and 
 more so than old, if the latter term is to be understood 
 in a sense implying that the other is not honorable. 
 
 This nominal distinctiveness has no necessary con- 
 nection with sectarianism : that is the bane of Chris- 
 tianity, but this, apart from the spirit of sect, is but 
 diversity in unity, which in the scheme of the world 
 and in Deity itself, is the condition of perfection. In 
 veste Chrisli varktas sit, non scissura sit. 
 
Erratum. — Page 23, line 23, insert after "miraculous. 
 " or having the miraculous." 
 
if 
 
 .**: