ran to him, fell upon his neck, and kissed him, Luke xv. 20. The fame representation we fee in the parable of the creditor, who freely forgave his fervant, because he humbly defired him. Let us not then, my brethren, deprive the ever-bleffed God of the most glorious and honourable of all his attributes, and leave him nothing but justice, or rather vengeance, which is exprefsly faid to be his ftrange work, Ifaiah xxviii. 21.

It is impoffible to reconcile the doctrine of the fatisfaction for fin by the death of Chrift, with the doctrine of free grace, which, according to the uniform tenor of the fcriptures, is fo fully difplayed in the pardon of fin, and the justification of finners. When, therefore, the apostle Paul fays, Rom. iii. 24. That we are justified freely by the grace of God, through the redemption that is in Christ Jefus, the latter claufe muft be interpreted in fuch a manner as to make it confiftent with the former; and it is far from requiring any force or ftraining of the text to do it. For it is only necessary to suppose that our redemption (or, as the word properly fignifies, and and is indeed frequently rendered by our tranflators, our deliverance) from the power of fin, i. e. our repentance and reformation, without which there is no promise of pardon, is effected by the gospel of Jefus Christ, who came to call finners to repentance; but ftill God is to be confidered as the giver, and not the receiver, with refpect to our redemption; for we read

that he fpared not his own fon, but gave him up for us all. Rom. viii. 32.

To say that God the Father provided an atonement for his own offended justice is, in fact, to give up the doctrine. If a perfon owe me a fum of money, and I chufe to have the debt discharged, is it not the fame thing, whether I remit the debt at once, or fupply another person with money wherewith to pay me in the debtor's name? If fatisfaction be made to any purpose, it must be in fome manner, in which the offender may be a fufferer, and the offended perfon a gainer; but it can never be reconciled to equity, or answer any good purpose whatever, to make the innocent fuffer the punishment of the guilty. If, as Abraham fays, it be far from God to flay the righecous with the wicked, and that the righteous fhould be as the wicked, Gen. xviii. 25. much farther muft it be from him to flay the righteous inftead of the wicked.

I wish the zealous advocates for this doctrine would confider, that if it be neceffary, in the nature of things, that the juftice of God be fatisfied before any fin can be pardoned, and Chrift be God as well as the Father, whether the justice of Christ ought not to have been satisfied in the first place. If fo, what other infinite being has made fatisfaction to him? But if the divine nature of the fon required no fatisfaction, why fhould the divine nature of the Father require any?

1

If it had been inconfiftent with the divine juftice to pardon fin upon repentance only, without fome farther fatisfaction, we might have expected to have found it expressly faid to be fo in the fcriptures; but no fuch declaration can be produced either from the Old or the New Teftament. All that can be pretended is, that it may be inferred from it. Though good works are recommended to us in the strongest manner, it is never with any falvo or caution, as if they were not of themfelves acceptable to God. The declarations of the divine mercy to the penitent are all abfolute, without the most diftant hint of their having a reference to any confideration on which they are made. Thou, Lord, art good, and ready to forgive Pfalm lxxxiv. 5. To the Lord our God belong mercies and forgivenefes, though we have rebelled against him, Dan, ix. 3. When David and other penitents confels their fins, and entreat for pardon, they refer themselves to the divine mercy only, without feeming to have the leaft idea of any thing farther. Remember not the fins of my youth, nor my tranfgreffions; according to thy mercy remember thou me, for thy goodness-fake, O Lord. Pfalm xxv. 6.

It is particularly remarkable, that when facrifices under the law are expressly faid not to be fufficient for the pardon of fin, we are never referred to any more availing facrifice; but to good works only. Thou defireft not facrifice, elfe would I give it; thou delighteft not in burnt-offering. The facrifices of the Lord are a broken

C 3

broken fpirit. A broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not defpife. Pfalm li. 16, 17. If any of the jews had had the leaft notion of the neceffity of any atonement for the fins of mankind, they could not but have expected a fuffering Meffiah; and yet it is plain that the very best of them had no fuch idea. And though our faviour frequently explains the reafon of his coming, and the neceffity of his fuffering, it is never on any such account. If he had done it any where, it might have been expected in thofe difcourfes by which he endeavoured to reconcile his difciples to his death, in his folemn prayer before his fufferings, at the time of his agony in the garden, or when he was upon the crofs; yet nothing of this kind drops from him on any of these occafions.

When our Lord defcribes the proceedings of the day of judgment, he doth not represent the righteous as referring themselves to the sufferings or merit of their judge for their juftification; and the judge himfelf exprefsly grounds it on their good works only. Though Peter, in his discourse to the jews on the day of Pentecost, speaks of their fin in murdering Christ as of a heinous nature, he fays not a word of the neceffity of any atonement, or that an ample fatisfaction had just been made, by means of their very wickedness. How would a modern divine have harangued upon the occafion, and what advantage might he have taken of the cry of the jews; his blood be upon us, and upon our children? But Peter

only

only exhorts to repentance, and speaks of the death of Christ as an event that took place according to the fore-knowledge of God.

ment.

All the discourses of Paul upon various occafions in the book of Acts are entirely moral. In his celebrated speech at Athens, he only urges his hearers to repentance, from the confideration of a future judgHe fays not a word of what is now called the true gospel of Jefus Chrift. In fhort, it is only from the literal interpretation of a few figurative expreffions in the scriptures that this doctrine of atonement, as well as that of transubstantiation, has been derived; and it is certainly a doctrine highly injurious to God: and if we, who are commanded to imitate God, should act upon the maxims of it, it would be fubverfive of the most amiable part of virtue in men. We fhould be implacable and unmerciful, infifting upon the uttermoft farthing.

Thefe, my brethren, are the principal heads on which I proposed to expoftulate with you, in the plain and free manner in which I have done. Do you yourselves, fearch the fcriptures and fee whether these things be fo. Pray to the God of truth to lead you into all truth, and may he give you understanding in all things.

VII. PRAC