God. Still I cannot see, that this conduct is wise, rational, or defensible; nor that the doctrine includes in itself any discouragement, which will not, with as good reason, flow from that, which is opposed to it. It cannot result from the consideration, that the pleasure of God controls this subject, rather than our own pleasure. On the one hand, the pleasure of God is more wisely and benevolently formed than our own; more disposed to promote our salvation; and more able to contrive the best means, by which it may be accomplished. This we never could have done ourselves; nor, if we were able, should we be willing: as is clearly proved by the fact, that, after the wonderful and difficult things, which have been done to provide salvation for us, and while it is proffered to us freely on the easiest of all terms, we are not willing to accept it. How much less willing should we have been to go through the labour and sufferings, could we have gone through them, which were necessary to procure it for ourselves.

On the other hand, if we please to be saved, we shall now be saved. This is one great part of the divine pleasure. There is nothing, which prevents us from being saved, but our own inclination; and this would as effectually prevent us in any supposable circumstances. Nor could we in any circumstances possess a greater freedom of choice, or action, with respect to this or any other subject, than we now possess. Nor is there, so far as I know, any influence from God, which at all hinders us from choosing salvation with all that freedom of action, which moral beings can possess. It will be observed, I speak not here of persons, for their incorrigible obstinacy, punished with judicial blindness, and hardness of heart; though it is to be questioned, whether, even in this case, God does any thing more, than leave them to themselves. The language of God to every sinner is, As I live, saith the Lord, I have no pleasure in the death of the sinner; but would rather, that he would return, and live. His invitations to sinners are, Ho! every one that thirsteth; come ye to the waters; and he that hath no money: yea, come, buy wine and milk without money and without price: and, Whosoever will, let him come, and take the water of life freely. This language is perfectly sincere, and exactly descriptive of the disposition of God.

This discouragement cannot arise from the certainty of the event, as established by this doctrine. The event is equally certain, if the doctrine is given up. It is equally certain in fact, with what Mr. Locke calls Certainty of truth, in distinction from Certainty of knowledge, concerning any man, that he either will, or will not, be saved, whether it be foreknown or not. One of these assertions, either that he will, or that he will not, be saved, is now certainly true. Which of them is true, I grant, does not appear; and will not, until time shall disclose it. Still, one of the events will take place, whether decreed, or foreknown, or not. God will then judge, and punish the wicked; and will punish them for exactly

the same reasons, on either supposition; viz. for their impenitence, unbelief, and disobedience. A person may, therefore, with exact ly the same propriety, whether he admits the decrees of God, or not; or whether God has, or has not, formed any decrees; say, If I shall be saved, I shall be saved, whether I try to obtain salvation or not: and, however earnestly I may try, if I am to perish, I shall perish. The certainty, in either case, is the same, and equally absolute. Even the foreknowledge of God will not alter this fact at all; for though it affects him, it affects not the certainty of the event. All that can be truly said is, that an event, which would otherwise take place, is now foreseen by him. To us in both cases, also, it is equally unknown. The causes, which will bring it to pass, will in both cases be exactly the same. The language in both cases, therefore, may be adopted with exactly the same propriety. But the truth is, the language cannot be proper in either, case. In my apprehension, it is never true, that the attempts of the man concerned, towards the attainment of salvation, make no difference as to the event. On the contrary it is clear, that of those, who are saved, few, very few, indeed, can be found, who have not made such attempts; nor is there any satisfactory reason to believe, that those, who make them with persevering earnestness and zeal, ultimately fail.

I know no reason, why the same language should not be used, with the same propriety and force, concerning our secular, as concerning our spiritual, business. But the farmer, who should loiter at home, and say, "If I am to have a crop the present year, I shall have one; and, if I am not to have a crop, I shall not have one, whether I plough, and sow, and reap, or lie down in my bed :" the student, who should spend his time in dress, sports, and gaming, and say, "If I am to be a scholar, or to get my lesson, I shall accomplish it; and, if I am not, it will never be accomplished, whether I study diligently, or lose my time in idleness:" would be pronounced, and justly, a fool or a madman. But the decree of God extends to each of these subjects as absolutely, as to our salvation. Men are as really chosen to be farmers, and scholars, as Christians and learning and harvests are as truly appointed, as holiness although from the comparative unimportance of the former, and the amazing moment of the latter, we are apt to apply the doctrine to one of the cases, and not to the other.

:

The kingdom of God, as established by his pleasure, is a kingdom of means, regularly connected with their ends. I do not perceive, that this is less true, when applied to spiritual, than to natural, things. The real discouragement, which men generally labour under with respect to their spiritual concerns, is their indisposition to make any efforts for the attainment of salvation. In truth, this indisposition itself suggests the discouragement, which I have obviated, and then admits it. To a dispassionate, unbiassed mind, it would never gain admission. By sober Reason it was never devised, and can never be supported.

Were God really unwilling, that men should strive; had he discountenanced efforts; had he established no means of grace; or had those means, when anxiously and perseveringly used, failed of success; there would, indeed, be ample room for well-founded discouragement. But, when we find, as in my view we do in fact find, all these things reversed in the good pleasure, and providence, of God; we have every inducement to hope, and to labour; much more, it would seem, than from any supposable situation, in which all things were left to fluctuation and casualty. Stupid sinners have indeed, according to this and every other scheme, the most fearful reason for discouragement and terror. But such as are awakened, anxious, and engaged, to seek eternal life, have solid and abundant reason for hope.

Mankind seem, in many instances, to suppose, that the decrees of God produce the event without means; according to the Mohammedan doctrine of predestination. Whereas, if they believed, that the pleasure of God formed the system, and selected the means and agents, by which all events are accomplished; if they believed those agents to be endued with all the powers of the freest possible agency, and to be selected, and formed, so that they might act with perfect freedom; if they believed, that God always furnishes them with the necessary means of obedience, and with motives to obedience, more and greater than any, which they can find, to disobey; if they believed, that God, by a direct agency of his own, does not constrain them to any act whatever, but leaves them in all instances to act, with perfect freedom, just as they please; I think they would also believe, that there is no more difficulty, attending the fact, that he has chosen, and formed, such agents, as he knew would unitedly do all his pleasure, than would attend his choice and formation of such agents, as would act in any other manner whatever. But all this, for ought that appears, is true. The contrary doctrine has never been evinced to be true; at least in my apprehension; and I fully believe never will be.

On the other hand, it will be proper, for a moment, to turn our thoughts to the influence of the supposition, that God has not fixed the system of things according to his Pleasure. It cannot but be acknowledged, that he knew what system was, upon the whole, most desirable, wisest, and best. If he did not resolve on it, it was plainly because he did not desire, or choose, to bring it to pass. In plain English, then, he did not desire the chief good of his creation, or the supreme glory of himself, with sufficient goodwill to resolve on it. Can this be infinite good-will? Can it be moral perfection? It was certainly as easy for him to accomplish it, as to accomplish an inferior system of good. If, then, he did not resolve on the superior system; it was plainly because he loved the inferior system better, and chose to do less good, rather than greater. His disposition, therefore, is on this scheme, imper

fectly good in itself; how imperfectly, it is impossible, according to this supposition, to determine.

According to this supposition, it is further to be observed, all things are left by God in a state of absolute uncertainty. The whole happiness of his intelligent creatures is committed to the casual influence and efficacy of their own views, feelings, and conduct. God cannot, in the nature of the case, interfere, either by determination, or influence, without destroying the free agency, or discouraging the efforts, of his Intelligent creatures, for the attainment of happiness. The whole system of the universe, so far as these creatures are concerned, must of course be regulated wholly by them. Does not this scheme evidently set all their interests afloat, and leave them eternally to the uncertain and hazardous direction of finite wisdom and goodness? From the experience, which we have had of the character and conduct of such creatures, is there a person in this assembly, who would willingly commit his eternal interests to this perilous direction, and trust his all to the disposal of beings so weak, and so often wicked? Can this be safe for creatures? Can it consist with the perfect character of God? To the wisdom and forecast of his own mind, a man might, through overweening self-confidence, be willing perhaps to commit the guidance of any interest, and feel that his Soul itself would be safe in his own hands. But would the same person trust himself to the final direction of others? Would he venture his eternal welfare upon the wisdom and benevolence of any, or all, of those by whom he is encircled? Their fitness for this mighty trust is, however, not inferior to his own; and they would as justly refuse to confide their souls to his care, as he would refuse to entrust his soul to them. Were he not blinded, therefore, by an unwarrantable partiality for himself, he would no sooner, no more willingly, trust himself in this mighty concern, than he would trust those around him. To do either, he would clearly discern, would be foolish and dangerous in the extreme. Wisdom, on the contrary, would teach both him and them to commit themselves, and their whole well-being, implicitly to God.

On the connexion of prayer with this subject, I design to dwell particularly, when I shall come to the consideration of that duty. I have purposely omitted the examination of it at the present time, because several things relating to it, belong to Prayer only, and demand a separate discussion.

Whether the observations, which I have made on the general doctrine of this discourse, will be viewed by others as possessing the importance, which I have attached to them, I cannot determine. To me, they have appeared to possess real weight. If they should contribute in any measure to remove difficulties, to settle doubtful opinions, to establish truth, and to communicate satisfactory views concerning a subject so often attended with perplexity and alarm; I shall esteem my labours amply rewarded.

SERMON XVI.

THE SOVEREIGNTY OF GOD.

JEREMIAH X. 23—O Lord, I know, that the way of man is not in himself, il is no! in man, that walketh, to direct his steps.

IN this passage of Scripture, the prophet, after uttering a variety of sublime declarations concerning the perfections and providence of God, and the follies and sins of men, exhibits the progress of life as a Way. In this Way, all men are considered as travelling. We commence the journey at our birth; pass on through the several stages of childhood, youth, manhood, and old age, and finish it when we enter eternity. The accommodations, and the fare, are greatly varied among the various travellers. Some find their entertainment plentiful, and agreeable: and some, even luxurious and splendid. Others are slenderly provided with food, raiment, and lodging; are almost mere sufferers; and literally, have not where to lay their heads.

In the mean time, sorrow and disease, dangers and accidents, like a band of marauders, lie in wait for the travellers; and harass, and destroy, a great proportion of their number. Of the vast multitude, who continually walk in the path of life, almost all disappear long before they reach the goal, at which it terminates. A very few arrive at the end. Of these, every one, dragging heavily his weary feet over the last division of the road, teaches us, that this part of his progress is only labour and sorrow.

A remarkable fact, universally attendant on our journey, is recited in the text. O Lord, says the deeply humbled prophet, I know, that the way of man is not in himself; it is not in man, that walketh, to direct his steps. The enterprise is not contrived by ourselves. We are placed in it, and necessitated to accomplish it, by a superior, and irresistible, hand. It cannot but seem strange, that in such a journey we should originally be prevented from the ability to direct ourselves; and that, while we are compelled to the undertaking, we should be furnished for it in a manner so imperfect. Yet such is unquestionably the fact. Nor is the explanation so difficult, or so unsatisfactory, as we are prone to believe. GoD originally intended, that all his creatures should be dependent on him for aid, guidance, and protection. Nor can it be rationally supposed, that such a dependence on his perfections, and providence, is either unreasonable or undesirable. The Sovereignty of GoD, which is so clearly, and strongly, visible in this interesting subject, has ever been questioned, and very often denied, by mankind. To establish this doctrine in the minds of