character, except he act faithfully in the article of justification. I am aware that there are not a few in the land who have made themselves respectable; but it is by their knowledge and activity in science or politics, and perhaps other more valuable qualifi cations, not by any thing they do in religion. The doctrine before us alone can give them weight and authority; and I wish it could be said of all who know it, that they gave themselves up simply to the Lord's work, and were none of them as fruitlessly employed in trifling controversies as others are in propagating Socinianism, or mere morality.

4. It is surprizing to any one that so few in all ages have understood the doctrine of Justification! This only confirms. the Scripture," Straight is the gate and narrow is the way that leadeth to life." A true interpreter of God's word is one of a thousand *. Nor will this be so much wondered at, if men considered the heavenly and mysterious nature of the doctrine of Justification itself, and how entirely opposite it is to the very nature of man since the fall. We love independence. The remains of our pristine grandeur, the power of conscience, gives no insight into the doctrine of imputed righteousness, but rather seems to establish the necessity of an inherent one. But the more opposite this doctrine is to the pride of man, the clearer impressions does it convey of its divinity, and that man did not invent it; and if it bear hard on man's dignity, provided it establish that of his Maker, it will not be the less relished by those who love him. The rarity of it in the world, and the constant proneness of men to corrupt it, are so many proofs "that the hand of the Lord hath done this, and the Holy One of Israel hath created it +." Whoever is a friend to this doctrine indeed, will confess, that it was a divine arm and light that made him so. The divine predestination and election are very offensive to human pride; but still the ancient Jews could digest something like it, while they applied it to their nation. With respect to the fall and regeneration, there want not several ideas in Pagan writers which carry some faint resem blance but Justification is a perfectly new idea; there is not a glimpse of any thing like it in any religion except that of the Bible; and yet the general custom of sacrifices demonstrates, that salvation by the Redeemer must have been traditionally conveyed into all parts of the world. Yet self-righteousness, the very opposite of the article of Justification, is all that the heathen world learnt from it; and even in Christian lands, the very emblem of Christian Justification, the Lord's Supper is made by numbers the most powerful engine of Pharisaism. The doctrine has indeed nothing in human nature to befriend it; and the thankfulness of those who know it should hence be excited, as well as their care to preserve it. Lastly, To forsake our first

F

THOUGHTS ON I COR. VIII. 11.

5505 love, is but too common with Christians. Let ministers then beware of refinement, self-conceit, and an affected desire of novelty. The good old simplicity of doctrine which first comforted their souls by faith in Jesus Christ, will do so still, and supply them with all needful strength for all that they are called to do and suffer, if they be humbled enough to receive it. Let us revert again and again to our first principles. Let us call to mind those who were honoured as the first instruments of a revival of gospel-truth. Let us study their taste, spirit, views, and above all, their simplicity. Let us dread lest a philosophic spirit render us too proud to learn from them, whom the Lord delighted so much to honour. In a word, let us daily seek communion with the Son of God on the strength of this doctrine, and we shall not materially err, either as ministers or as Christians. CLERICUS.

Sir,

THOUGHTS ON 1 COR. VIII. 11.

To the Editor.

In your Number for September, 1805 (p. 413) an enquiry was made respecting 1 Cor. viii. 11; or, more properly, the thoughts of friends were solicited on this passage; and in the Supplement (p. 591) an explanation of the text was given by a correspondent, in answer to the request. In that answer there are several good remarks; and the circumstances of the case are made sufficiently plain. But there are some additional considerations, which, I beg leave to suggest, and which appear to me of some importance.

I

This text and its parallel (Rom. xiv. 15, "Destroy not him with thy meat for whom Christ died") have been urged by the opposers of the doctrine called Calvinistic, as an evidence both in favour of universal redemption, and agains: the perseverance of the saints unto eternal salvation; for they argue, If the person in question was not a real Christian, then Christ must have died for all, else such an one could not have been included in the number of those for whom Christ died, without great presumption; but if he was a real Christian, or even was, in the judgment of charity, supposed to be such, then the apostle's language concedes, he might notwithstanding perish or be destroyed; which overturns the doctrine of perseverance.

I

This is the Anti-Calvinistic objection in its full force; nor do suppose that C. C. D. has been materially deficient in meeting it. But there is another ground on which the indiscriminate universality of redemption, and the uncertainty of everlasting salvation to a real saint, may be successfully opposed in defending this text, though but little noticed. The consideration to

Tude, and which I am going to lay before you, assed over as of trivial moment, since, if I mistake e extends not only to many controverted parts particular, but also to the divine dispensations

w advert to the words first proposed: "Through edge shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died?" If the Corinthian professor be considered merely as an external believer, without any satisfactory evidence of a saving change, yet of such it may be said that Christ died for him with a rectoral design of saving him, though not with a decretive. This is no arbitrary distinction, but one founded in the very nature and character of the parties concerned; viz. God and Man. An essential character of God is, That he is the Sovereign and absolute Disposer of all his creatures, as they are passive; and an equitable Governor of those who are accountable. An essential character of man is, That he is at the disposal of his Maker, in the most absolute sense, as to every thing which does not imply injustice; and that, considered as a moral agent and accountable, nothing is required of him but what he has the requisite moral means of accomplishing. I said moral means,

not moral ability. How, though a sinner may be required, under the pain of everlasting condemnation, to believe in Christ without any communication of moral ability; yet for God, in a manner consistent with justice, to require the same without moral means, or an external sufficient consideration for so doing, is not conceivable. But what, short of a rectoral design or purpose to save sinners as such, can justify an address to them in the way of invitation to believe in Christ for salvation, and to repent for the remission of sin through the death and mediation of Christ?

On this ground then, in perfect consistency with sovereign election, and the decretive peculiarity of Christ's atoning death, may an Anti-Calvinist be auswered in vindication not only of this passage, but of all other passages that speak of Christ having died for sinners, or died for all. To make any such text answer his purpose, an advocate for the indiscriminate universality of Christ's atonemen', should prove that such a text is to be so understood as if Christ died for all, or for every man, or for sinners as such, decretively; which, if not devoid of common sense, he will not attempt. The existence of the above-mentioned twofold design of God in the death of Christ, has not been very commonly attended to; but there are few propositions in theology more capable of demonstrative proof than this; and I will venture to add, few of more beneficial and universal influence towards discriminating truth from error.

Let us now advert to the other objection founded on this text. It may be pleaded that he for whom Christ died, relates to a real Christian, or at least, one supposed to be such; and yet

THOUGHTS ON 1 COR. VIII. 11:

505 the apostle supposes that he may perish or be destroyed. Your correspondent C. C. D. very justly observes, that guilt contracted, "tends to final perdition;" and that the parallel place*, "Destroy not him," &c. means "Destroy not his peace and. comfort." Instead of finding fault with this exposition, I fully admit its propriety and force as far as it goes. Yet I am inclined to think, we may advance a step further towards removing still more completely the objection against perseverance, founded on the word perish. The original term (απολλύω or απολλυμι) commonly rendered to perish, or to be destroyed, when taken actively, implies " to counteract the well-being" of a person or thing which often admits of progressive steps, or successive degrees; and when used intransitively, it retains the same generic idea, "a failure as to well-being;" this also is frequently compatible with a gradation of change. That this is the import of the original term in many places, might be easily shewn ; among which let the following serve as instances: "He will destroy those husbandment;" meaning the Jewish nation, "Destroyed them that believed not+;" that is, the Israelites as a body in the wilderness. "I will destroy the wisdom of the wise." "I perish with hunger §." "We are cast down, but not destroyed:" our well-being is secure.

It has, therefore, been gratuitously assumed by objectors, that there is no perishing or destruction but what is everlasting, or final: whereas, more properly, whatever counteracts the welfare or good quality of any person or thing, destroys it; and whatever is in such a state perishes. The degree of destruction or perdition must be gathered either from annexed expressions, or the nature of the case. A house that goes to decay perishes; so does a plant when it withers; or an animal body that wastes. When a real Christian's conscience is defiled or wounded; when his faith and holy vigour droop; when his affections are grown worldly and unprofitably entangled, his well-being or welfare fails. Like the prodigal, he perishes with hunger; he is destroyed of serpents, he dies by inches, and nothing but the true divinely appointed antidote can prevent his final and everlasting perdition. The finally impenitent, indeed, evil men and seducers who, to the last, grow worse and worse; all those who know not God, and obey not the gospel, shall be punished with everlasting destruction. But to connect the grieving and wounding of a weak brother, by means of the superior knowledge of another brother, used without tender charity, and everlasting perdition, is totally remote from the apostle's design. On the whole, the perdition intended in the text, in my view, is the very opposite to edification; and were

-

it allowable to express my sense of its full import in a coined term, it would be disedification. "And through thy knowledge shall the weak brother be disedified, for whom Christ died?"

But, in a practical point of view, how forcible the apostle's expostulation, and how highly deserving of the feeling regard of professors! How criminal the man who despises another that has not attained his standard of knowledge! How aggravated the offence! If we are bound, according to the benevo lent genius of the gospel, to love an enemy, how base must the act be, with haughtiness and unconcern, to wound a brother. If we are to shew kindness to the strong, how shocking to trample on the feelings of the weak brother! To have wounded any through ignorance or mistake, calls for humiliation; but how doubly criminal when superior knowledge inflicts the wound! If we ought to lay down our lives for the brethren, what can be said of him who, when the gratifying of his vanity is concerned, can give up nothing. The condescending Saviour gave up his life for his enemies; but the towering unaccommodating professor cannot give up a punctilio for the edification of a friend! Christ died no less for the weak Christian than for the strong; but this unfeeling giant in knowledge, imitates E. W. no such model, values no such character.

INTRODUCTION OF THE GOSPEL INTO BRITAIN.

THOSE who prize the gospel of our salvation, cannot but feel a desire to know by what means that invaluable blessing was first communicated to this island. On this head little more than conjecture has generally been offered to serious enquirers. But if the following account be genuine, and well supported, it will throw an agreeable light on this interesting part of Church History. We copy it from a note subjoined to the Missionary Sermons, delivered in May last, at Surry Chapel, by the Rev. Mr. Charles; but which, to save time, was omitted in the delivery. It is introduced in the following manner:

"The most calamitous events are often, through the wise direction of a superintending Providence, productive of the most important and happy consequences. There is one instance corroborating this remark, which, because not very generally known, I wish to mention here: it relates to so important an event as the First Introduction of Christianity into this island. The captivity of the magnanimous Caractacus, through the eachery of Aregweed, or Cartismandua, as she is called by