by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway."

In the fourth place, Those who expect justification by the imputed righteousness of Christ, have the highest sense of the purity and holiness of the divine nature; and therefore must be under an habitual conviction of the necessity of purity, in order to fit them for his presence and enjoyment. If this doctrine in its main design, or by any of its essential parts, had a tendency to represent God (I will not say as delighting in sin but) as easy to be pacified towards it, passing it by with little notice, and punishing it but very slightly, there might be some pretence for drawing the conclusion complained of from it. For I think it may be allowed as a maxim, that as is the God, so are his worshippers, if they serve him in earnest. Whatever views they have of the object of their esteem and worship, they will endeavour to form themselves to the same character. But if, on the contrary, this doctrine preserves the purity of God entire; nay, if it gives us still more strong, awful, and striking views of it, it can never encourage such as believe it in the practice of sin.

But that this is the case with all such a believe and understand the doctrine of justification by the imputed righteousness of Christ, may be demonstrated in the clearest manner. It might indeed be shown, from a great variety of arguments founded upon the mediation of Christ: at present I shall mention but two, the propriety of which, and their relation to the subject. in hand, every one must immediately perceive. In the first place, That Christ behooved to suffer by divine appointment for the expiation of sin, is not only equal with, but stronger than all other evidences of the purity of God and his abhorrence of sin. It is an event of the most striking and astonishing nature, every reflection upon which, overwhelms the mind, that the eternal and only begotten Son of God should as

sume the likeness of sinful flesh, and stand in the room of sinners: even though the merited punishment had been inflicted upon the offenders themselves, it would not have been such a proof of the purity of God. Here, even when he is inclined to mercy, its exercise is obstructed till justice is satisfied. Can any one consider this without being deeply convinced, that he is a God "of purer eyes than to behold iniquity," and with whom unrighteousness can have no communion? Will any, after such views, hope for his favour while they retain the love of sin, or expect to dwell in his presence while they continue stained with its pollution?

The same thing must also carry convincing evidence with it, that to suppose Christ to have bought an impunity for sinners, and procured them a license to offend, is self-contradictory, and altogether inconsistent with the wisdom and uniformity of the divine government; that he never could hate sin so much before, and love it after the sufferings of Christ; that he could not find it necessary to punish it so severely in the surety, and yet afterwards love and bear with it in those for whom that surety satisfied. Not only may this be clearly established by reason and argument, but it must be immediately felt by every one who sees the necessity of the atonement of their Redeemer. They will be so far from taking a liberty to sin, that, on the contrary, they will be ready to cry out, "Who can stand before this holy Lord God?"**

*It is a certain fact, that the number of persons under distress of mind, by perplexing doubts or anxious fears concerning their future state, is incomparably greater amongst the friends than the enemies of this doctrine. By this I do not at all mean, that either their doubts are dutiful or their fears desirable. Such a state is to be looked upon as the fruit of their own weakness and imperfection, and as a chastisement from a wise and gracious God, either more immediately for correcting their sins, or for the trial, illustration, and perfec

Accordingly we shall find in experience, that none are more ready to call in question the integrity of their own character, none more ready to fear the effects of the sins that cleave to them, as unfitting them for the divine presence, than such as trust solely in the merits of Christ for their acceptance with God.

The second thing I proposed to mention in the doctrine of Christ's mediation, which shows the purity of the divine nature, is our continued approach to God by him as an intercessor and advocate. It contributes to keep continually upon our minds a sense of the divine holiness and purity, and of our own unworthiness, that we are not permitted to approach him but by the intercession of another. Such a conduct in human affairs properly serves to show dignity and greatness on the one part, distance and unworthiness on the other. The same conduct then in God towards us, doth it not convince us that he must be sanctified of all them that draw near to him? And whilst it makes imputed righteousness the condition, plainly shows the necessity of inherent holiness, as a qualification in our approaches to his throne. Suppose an earthly prince were to be addressed by two different persons, one who thought he had a title upon his own merit to make an immediate application, and another who could not approach him without one nearly related to him, and in high favour at court, to procure his admission and to back his request; which of these would probably be most respectful to his sovereign, and most solicitous to avoid giving offence by his conduct? Surely the latter; and so it is always with the humble, mortified believer, who "counts all

ting of their grace and virtue; but its being more common among those who believe in Christ's imputed righteousness than others, is a plain proof that this doctrine doth not naturally tend to inspire any with an unholy boldness or a secure and slothful presumption.

things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Jesus Christ."

In the fifth place, Those who expect justification by the imputed righteousness of Christ, must be induced to obedience in the strongest manner, by the liberal and ingenuous motive of gratitude and thankfulness to God. That it is the native and genuine expression of gratitude to God, to live a pure and holy life, I suppose will hardly be denied; at least, this the Scriptures represent as pleasing him, serving him, doing his will, honouring him. It is indeed extremely difficult to conceive how God, all-mighty and all-sufficient, should be at all affected with our conduct, either good or bad; it seems to be improper to say, that he can be pleased or displeased with our actions, or that he hath any interest at stake. Nothing, to be sure, can be more weak and impotent, than the injuries offered, or the assaults made upon him by created beings. As his nature is without variableness or shadow of turning, so his happiness is such, as can neither be increased nor impaired. And yet, in this way, he himself has taught us to conceive of the matter, that holiness is not only an imitation of his character, but obedience to his will; and its contrary a transgression of his law. These have been the sentiments of all nations without exception; and, after the utmost efforts we can make to exempt him in our minds from all human passions or affections, of joy, anger, or displeasure, we cannot help considering it still as proper to say, such a course of life is agreeable, and such another is displeasing to God, and will provoke his wrath.

Is not gratitude then a principle of action that will be powerful and operative? Mankind in general bear witness to this, as they have agreed in all ages to brand ingratitude with the blackest mark of infamy, and to reckon it among the most atrocious of crimes. indeed we find by experience, that it is comparatively stronger, for the most part, than the opposite motives

And

of force or fear. There is a sort of natural tendency in man to resist violence and refuse submission to authority; whilst they may be won by favours, and melted to thankfulness and gratitude by kindness and love: at least, this may be applied perfectly to the present case, where the bare outward performance (which may indeed be the effect of fear) will not be accepted without the inclination of the will. A slavish dread both lessens the degree and debases the nature of that obedience we might essay to perform. This is a universal principle; and, in particular, while the law of God stands in its force and rigor, as a covenant of works, threatening death without hope of mercy against every transgression, it begets a despondent sloth, and at best serves only to discover our sin and misery; nay, as the aposle Paul strongly and justly reasons, it renders our corrupt affections more inflamed and violent by restraint: "Nay, I had not known sin but by the law; for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet," &c.

But let us now complete this argument, by showing that a believer in Christ is under the strongest obligations, from gratitude, to do the will of God. And how many considerations concur in showing this? The unspeakable greatness of the blessings he receives, no less than deliverance from everlasting misery and anguish, and a right to everlasting glory and happiness.The infinite and affecting condescension of the great and glorious Giver, who, in mercy to those who could not profit him at all, but on the contrary had highly provoked him, laid help for them upon one who is mighty to save.-The astonishing means employed in this design, namely, God's not sparring even his own Son, but delivering him up for us all." Well might the apostle John say, "God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him, should not perish, but have everlasting life." But, above all, the sense which he himself bath