ous heart breathe to heaven the ardent aspiration: O thou Desire of nations,

"Come, and added to thy many crowns,

Receive yet one, the crown of all the earth, Thou who alone art worthy." CLEORA.

EVIDENCES OF GRACE.

THE apostles and primitive preachers of the Gospel required evidences of grace, in those whom they admitted to their holy communion: and the Scriptures require professors of Christianity to exhibit evidences of grace to one another, and to the world. Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works and glorify your Father who is in heaven. Whosoever shall confess me before men, him shal! the Son of man confess before the angels of God. The Scriptures also require professed Christians to examine themselves and prescribe rules or propose evidences by which they may prove themselves, whether they be in the faith. Hence, to examine themselves, determine their state, and exhibit evidence that they are born of God, tome important duties incumbent upon every professor of religion. It is not the object particularly contemplated to specify the evidences of grace.

These are so scattered throughout the inspired writings, that they will occur to every sober, attentive reader of the Holy Scriptures. Christ has distinctly taught us, that the tree is known by its fruit. Visible holiness of life is visible evidence of grace in the heart. But it is my design to inquire, what kind of evidence is the most direct and

satisfactory. All religion essentially consists in benevolent affections, that is in love to God and men. Evidences of grace of love to God and men; and are consequently only evidences when we inquire for evidences of grace, we only inquire for ev idence of this disinterested holy affection. It is almost the invariable practice, when we inquire for evidence of grace with res. pect to others, or ourselves, to seek evidence of love to God; but it is questionable whether this evidence is the most satisfactory and conclusive. Not that it can ever be otherwise, in its own nature, than genuine and true; for, either love to God, or love to man, is, where it really exists, perfect evidence of religion; but, from incidental circumstances, the one may be more imposing than the other; and when we inquire for the most satisfac tory, we only inquire for that by which we are the least liable to be imposed upon and deceived.

It will not be apprehended from any observations on this subject, that love to God ever exists without love to men, or love to men without love to God; as these are only diversified exercises of the same benevolent affection; nor that evidence of love to God is not evidence indirectly of love to men, and evidence of love to men, indirectly evidence of love to God; but as this benevolent affection, or grace, is exercised towards separate objects, it may be proper to give the evidences of it a separate consideration.

I resume the question, therefore, which is the most direct and satisfactory evidence of grace, or which exposes the least

to deception, evidence of love to God or of love to men?

It is now proposed to produce some arguments to prove, that evidence of love to men is more satisfactory and conclusive evidence of a gracious state, than evidence of love to God.

Upon examination, it will prob. ably appear, that the duties, which respect our fellow men in cluding ourselves, are more frcquently inculcated in the Scriptures,than the duties which relate to God; from which we may infer, that the duties which respect our fellow men are the most exposed to neglect, and the most difficult to perform; and consequently the performance of these duties is the most unexceptionable evidence of that disinterested affection, which is the essence of true religion. But more par ticularly,

1. The apostle James i, 27, has defined pure and undefiled religion to consist in visiting the fatherless and widows in their afflictions, and in keeping oneself unspotted from the world. This definition represents true religion as consisting in benevolent or compassionate affection to the distressed, and in a self-denying temper. The evidence of this sympathetic self-denying disposition, consequently, is essentially necessary to support a gra cious character; and evidence of love to God without evidence of this temper, will be essentially defective. So this apostle, iii, 16, has described the wisdom which is from above, and the apostle Paul the fruit of the Spirit, Gal. v, 22, 23, principally by the social graces.

2. In determining the sincerity of his professed disciples,

Christ referred to the duties implied in the second great com. mandment.

When the scribe addressed Jesus, Matt. viii, 19, 20, Master, I will follow thee whithersoever thou goest; Christ replied, Foxes have holes, and the birds of the air have nests, but the Son of man hath not where to lay his head. As though he had said, I am poor and destitute; can you submit to my indigent self-deny. ing condition? When the ruler came to Christ, inquiring what he should do to inherit eternal life, Christ referred him to relative duties.

When he profess

ed to have observed these from his youth, Christ required him to sell what he had and distribate to the poor, assuring him that upon doing this he should have treasure in heaven; but by this requisition Christ lost a hopeful disciple, and the ruler a promising character.

3. In describing a true saint, or the qualifications which are essential to prepare a man for the kingdom of heaven, the Psalmist has drawn his character from the performance of relative duties; Ps. xv. Lord who shall dwell in thy holy hill? He that walkesh uprightly, and worketh righteousness,and speaketh the truth in his heart. He

that backbiteth net with his

tongue, and doeth not evil to his neighbor, and he that taketh not up a reproach against hin neighbor.

He that sweareth to his own hurt and changeth not. He that letteth not his money to usury, nor taketh re ward against the innocent. He that doeth these things shall neve er be moved. As this was a most important subject, to pre

vent deception it was peculiarly necessary that the evidences or character should be most dis criminating and infallible. As the Psalmist has produced these evidences from the practice of relative duties, from integrity, justice and compassion, we rationally infer, that such practice is more decisive of character, than visible conduct towards God is. It may also be remarked, that the apostle, in describing those who will be finally rejected, has principally characterized the transgressors of precepts which relate to men, 1 Cor. vi, 9, 10. Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor extortioners, nor revilers, shall inherit the kingdom of God. See also Ephes. v, 5. It is proper to add, that the exhortations of the apostle addressed to Christians, especially respect social duties. Ephes. iv, 32. Be ye kind, tender-hearted, forgiving one another, as God, for Christ's sake, hath forgiven you. Read, also Rom. xii, 9-19; Coloss. iii, 12, 13; Philip. iv, 8.-Opposed to these virtues are the sis, which the apostle exhorts them to avoid. Ephes. iv, 31. Let all bitterness, and wra'h, and anger, and clamor, and evil speaking be put away from you with all matice. Read also Colos. iii, 8; 1 Pet. ii, I; and iii, 8, 9.

4. The apostles have explicitly decided, that professions of love to God, not supported by acts of benevolence and compassion to the indigent, are vain and

delusive.

James ii, 14—16,

What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? Can faith save him? If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food, and one say to them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body, what doth it profit? Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. By the works which prove the sincerity of faith, may we not consistently understand the apostle to denote deeds of compassion to the indigent and distressed? 1 John iii, 17. But whose

hath this world's goods, and seeth his brother have need, and shutteth up his bowels of compassion from him, how dwelleth the love of God in him? The ob servation of the apostle is evidently of this import. The wretchedness of man affected the compassion of God, and induced him to give his Son to redeem and save us. How can that compassionate love of God dwell in the man who has this world's goods, and seeth his brother have need, and shuts up his bowels of compassion from him? It is impossible.

5. The violation of precepts, which relate to men, is produced in Scripture, as decisive evidence of hypocrisy in the worship and service of God. To this effect are Isa. i, 10-15; and lviii, 3. To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices untv me? saith the Lord: Bring no more vain oblations: incense is an abomination to me it is iniquity, even the solemn meeting. Your new moons, and your appointed feasts, my soul hateth

-and when you make many prayers, I will not hear; your hands are full of biood. Wherefore have we fasted, say they, and thou seest not? wherefore have we afflicted our soul, and thou takest no knowledge? Behold, ye fast for strife and debate, and to smite with the fist of wickedness. Most gracious promises are made to the practice of the opposite duties.

6. The practice of relative deties constitutes the basis, upon which Christ, the Supreme Judge, will finally determine the characters of men and assign their cternal recompences. This Christ himself has taught us, Matt. xxv, 34. Then shall the king say unto them on his right hand, Come, ye blessed of my Father. For I was an hunger. ed, and ye gave me meat; I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink; I was a stranger, and ye took me in. Then shall he say also to them on his left hand, Depart from me ye cursed. For I was an hungered, and ye gave me no meat; I was thirsty, and ye gave me no drink; I was a stranger, and ye took me not in. As this will be a most public and important process, we may be assured that the Supreme Judge will adopt the most unexceptionable principle of scrutiniz ing and determining the characters of men; and as he will ascertain their characters from the practice of relative duties, we may be confident that this is the most infallible criterion, and, consequently, that evidence of love to men is more decisive of a gracious state, than evidence of love to God.

Presuming that the preceding observations have illustrated my

proposition, some reasons for it will now be assigned.

1. Apprehensions of the majesty, power, purity and presence of God, impose a powerful restraint upon the passions of the mind, and produce solemnity and propriety of deportment towards Him. For the same reasons that persons appear more circumspectly in the presence of a superior, than of an equal or an inferior, will all men appear in the presence of God, so far as his presence is realized by them, more solemn, dutiful, and submissive, than in the presence of men; and, in all their professions and transactions with Him, proportionally so much more devout, affectionate, and sincere. They are so much lese themselves, and have so much less opportunity for the latent principle, and genuine motives of their conduct to be disclosed, in their transactions with God, than with men, that they are much more exposed to err in judgment respecting them.

2. Love to God, and love to men, are manifested by different expressions. Love to God, except it be by acts of benevolence to men, is principally expressed by professions, and a visible respect for his institu tions; but the performance of these duties may require no painful sacrifices, and correspond with interested motives. Our fellow men, however, will not be satisfied with be ye warmed, and be ye filled. We must love them in deed, and bestow those things which are needful to the body; and these duties may interfere with some favorite object, and will put our benevolence to the test, and more

effectually illustrate the sincerity of our professions.

3. Persons acknowledge their dependence upon God, and from Him their hopes originate: by Him, also, are they to be judge ed, and their final state decided; and even the sordid principle of selfishness may induce them to conduct themselves respectfully and dutifully towards Him, in the hope of conciliating his favor, and securing his blessing; but they are not in the same sense dependent on their fellow men. They have more induce ments to deal falsely with God, than with men. They consequently disclose the genuine principles of their actions more frankly and undisguisedly, and their true character is more accurately ascertained, from their transactions with men, than from their professions of love and duty to God.

4. God is infinitely above men; his fear fails on them, and his dread makes them afraid; and this lays a powerful restraint upon their passions and conduct, and constrains them to behave themselves circumspectly and dutifully towards Him: but their fellow men are their equals, and they are not under the same restraints, and act out themselves towards them more simply, and spontaneously, and manifest their true character more correctly. Hence we may observe a manifest difference in their conduct towards God and towards men, in similar circumstan ces and in reference to the same subjects. If God more immediately disconcerts men in their prospects, and reduces them to distress, we frequently observe them to be silent, patient and

submissive; but if they are op posed and injured by men, how irritable, passionate, and vindictive? But does not this difference of appearance evidently originate from their apprehensions of the majesty and power of God? Is it not obvious, that if men were in the place of God, and God in the place of men, they would conduct themselves toward men, as they do toward God, and toward God as they do toward men, and that they are not as violent and malignant in their conduct toward God, under the disappointments and afflictions of his providence, as they are toward inen, under injuries received from them, is to be attributed to the restraint which a consciousness of God's power lays upon them. Consequently, their character is not so decidedly ascertained from their conduct toward God, as toward men.

5. Men are more immediately in their view, and there are more opportunities, and occasions of manifesting the dominating principles of their heart, in their connexions and transactions with men, than in their professions of love to God.

This appears to be the basis of the apostle's reasoning, and inference, 1 John iv, 10. If a man say I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar; for he that loveth not his brother, whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen. If a person denies his compassionate aid to the indigent at his door; with whom he is acquainted, will he exercise true love to God? Who will believe it? We may infer,

1. In investigating the sincerity of religious professions, we