Chapter 17.

SANCTIFICATION BY FAITH.

Do are then make void the law through faith? God forbid; yea, we
establish the law.   Romans 3:31.

The apostle had been proving that all mankind, both Jews and
Gentiles, were in their sins, and refuting the doctrine so generally
entertained by the Jews, that they were a holy people and saved by
their works. He showed that justification can never be by works, but by
faith. He then anticipates an objection like this, "Are we to understand
you as teaching that the law of God is abrogated and set aside by this
plan of justification?" "By no means," says the apostle, "we rather
establish the law." In treating of this subject, I design to pursue the
following order:

I. Show that the gospel method of justification does not set aside or
repeal the law. II. That it rather establishes the law, by producing true
obedience to it, and as the only means that does this.

The greatest objection to the doctrine of Justification by Faith has
always been, that it is inconsistent with good morals, conniving at sin,
and opening the flood-gates of iniquity. It has been said, that to
maintain that men are not to depend on their own good behavior for
salvation, but; are to be saved by faith in another, is calculated to
make men regardless of good morals, and to encourage them to live
in sin, depending on Christ to justify them. By others, it has been
maintained that the gospel does in fact release from obligation to obey
the moral law, so that a more lax morality is permitted under the
gospel than was allowed under the law.

I. I am to show that the gospel method of justifications does not set
aside the moral law.

1. It cannot be that this method of justification sets aside the moral
law, because the gospel everywhere enforces obedience to the law,
and lays down the same standard of holiness.

Jesus Christ adopted the very words of the moral law, "Thou shalt love
the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all
thy mind, and with all thy strength, and thy neighbor as thyself."

2. The conditions of the gospel are designed to sustain the moral law.

The gospel requires repentance as the condition of salvation. What is
repentance? The renunciation of sin. The man must repent of his
breaches of the law of God, and return to obedience to the law. This
is tantamount to a requirement of obedience.

3. The gospel maintains that the law is right.

If it did not maintain the law to its full extent, it might be said that
Christ is the minister of sin.

4. By the gospel plan, the sanctions of the gospel are added to the
sanctions of the law, to enforce obedience to the law.

The apostle says, "He that despised Moses' law, died without mercy
under two or three witnesses; of how much sorer punishment,
suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot
the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant,
wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite
unto the spirit of grace?" 

Thus adding the awful sanctions of the gospel to those of the law, to
enforce obedience to the precepts of the law.

II. I am to show that the doctrine of justification by faith produces
sanctification, by producing the only true obedience to the law.

By this I mean, that when the mind understands this plan, and
exercises faith in it, it naturally produces sanctification. Sanctification
is holiness, and holiness is nothing but obedience to the law,
consisting in love to God and love to man.

In support of the proposition that justification by faith produces true
obedience to the law of God, my first position is, that sanctification
never can be produced among selfish or wicked beings, by the law
itself, separate from the considerations of the gospel, or the motives
connected with justification by faith.

The motives of the law did not restrain those beings from committing
sin, and it is absurd to suppose the same motives can "reclaim" them
from sin, when they have fallen under the power of selfishness, and
when sin is a confirmed habit. The motives of the law lose a part of
their influence, when a being is once fallen. They even exert an
opposite influence. The motives of the law, as viewed by a selfish
mind, have a tendency to cause sin to abound. This is the experience
of every sinner. When he sees the spirituality of the law, and does not
see the incentives of the gospel, it raises the pride of his heart, and
hardens him in his rebellion. The case of the devil is an exhibition of
what the law can do, with all its principles and sanctions, upon a
wicked heart. He understands the law, sees its reasonableness, has
experienced the blessedness of obedience, and knows full well that to
return to obedience would restore his peace of mind. This he knows
better than any sinner of our race, who never was holy, can know it,
and yet it presents to his mind no such motives as reclaim him, but on 
the contrary, drive him to a returnless distance from obedience.

When obedience to the law is held forth to the sinner as the condition
of life, immediately it sets him upon making self-righteous efforts. In
almost every instance, the first effort of the awakened sinner is to obey
the law. He thinks he must first make himself better, in some way,
before he may embrace the gospel. He has no idea of the simplicity of
the gospel plan of salvation by faith, offering eternal life as a mere
gratuitous gift. Alarm the sinner with the penalty of the law, and he
naturally, and by the very laws of his mind, sets himself to do better,
to amend his life, and in some self-righteous manner obtain eternal
life, under the influence of slavish fear. And the more the law presses
him, the greater are his pharisaical efforts, while hope is left to him,
that if he obeys he may be accepted. What else could you expect of
him? He is purely selfish, and though he ought to submit at once to
God, yet, as he does not understand the gospel terms of salvation,
and his mind is of course first turned to the object of getting away from
the danger of the penalty, he tries to get up to heaven some other
way. I do not believe there is an instance in history, of a man who has
submitted to God, until he has seen that salvation must be by faith,
and that his own self-righteous strivings have no tendency to save
him.

Again; if you undertake to produce holiness by legal motives, the very
fear of failure has the effect to divert attention from the objects of love,
from God and Christ. The sinner is all the while compassing Mount
Sinai, and taking heed to his footsteps, to see how near he comes to
obedience; and how can he get into the spirit of heaven?

Again; the penalty of the law has no tendency to produce love in the
first instance. It may increase love in those who already have it, when
they contemplate it as an exhibition of God's infinite holiness. The
angels in heaven, and good men on earth, contemplate its propriety
and fitness, and see in it the expression of the good will of God to his
creatures, and it appears amiable and lovely, and increases their
delight in God and their confidence toward him. But it is right the
reverse with the selfish man. He sees the penalty hanging over his
own head, and no way of escape, and it is not in mind to become
enamored with the Being that holds the thunderbolt over his devoted
head. From the nature of mind, he will flee from him, not to him. It
seems never to have been dreamed of, by the inspired writers, that
the law could sanctify men. The law is given rather to slay than to
make alive, to cut off men's self-righteous hopes for ever, and compel
them to flee to Christ.

Again; Sinners, under the naked law, and irrespective of the gospel  
I say, sinners, naturally and necessarily, and of right, under such
circumstances, view God as an irreconcilable enemy. They are wholly
selfish; and apart from the considerations of the gospel, they view God
just as the devil views him. No motive in the law can be exhibited to a
selfish mind that will beget love. Can the influence of penalty do it?

A strange plan of reformation this, to send men to hell to reform them!
Let them go on in sin and rebellion to the end of life, and then be
punished until he becomes holy. I wonder the devil has not become
holy! He has suffered long enough, he has been in hell these
thousands of years, and he is no better than he was. The reason is,
there is no gospel there, and no Holy Spirit to apply the truth, and the
penalty only confirms his rebellion.

Again: The doctrine of justification can relieve these difficulties. It can
produce, and has produced, real obedience to the precept of the law.
Justification by faith does not set aside the law as a rule of duty, but
only sets aside the penalty of the law. And the preaching of
justification as a mere gratuity, bestowed on the simple act of faith, is
the only way in which obedience to the law is ever brought about. This
I shall now show from the following considerations:

1. It relieves the mind from the pressure of those considerations that
naturally tend to confirm selfishness.

While the mind is looking only at the law, it only feels the influence of
hope and fear, perpetuating purely selfish efforts. But justification by
faith annihilates this spirit of bondage. The apostle says, "We have not
received the spirit of bondage again to fear." This plan of salvation
begets love and gratitude to God, and leads the souls to taste the
sweets of holiness.

2. It relieves the mind also from the necessity of making its own
salvation its supreme object.

The believer in the gospel plan of salvation finds salvation, full and
complete, including both sanctification and eternal life, already
prepared; and instead of being driven to the life of a Pharisee in
religion, of laborious and exhausting effort, he receives it as a free gift,
a mere gratuity, and is now left free to exercise disinterested
benevolence, and to live and labor for the salvation of others, leaving
his own soul unreservedly to Christ.

3. The fact that God has provided and given him salvation as a
gratuity, is calculated to awaken in the believer a concern for others,
when he sees them dying for the want of this salvation, that they may
be brought to the knowledge of the truth and be saved. How far from
every selfish motive are those influences. It exhibits God, not as the
law exhibits him, as an irreconcilable enemy, but as a grieved and
offended Father, willing to be reconciled, nay, very desirous that his
subjects should become reconciled, to him and live. 

This is calculated to beget love. It exhibits God as making the greatest
sacrifice to reconcile sinners to himself; and from no other motive than
a pure and disinterested regard to their happiness. Try this in your
own family. The law represents God as armed with wrath, and
determined to punish the sinner, without hope or help. The gospel
represents him as offended, indeed, but yet so anxious they should
return to him, that he has made the greatest conceivable sacrifices,
out of pure disinterested love to his wandering children.

I once heard a father say, that he had tried in his family to imitate the
government of God, and when his child did wrong he reasoned with
him and showed him his faults; and when he was fully convinced and
confounded and condemned, so that he had not a word to say, then
the father asked him, Do you deserve to be punished? Yes, sir. I know
it, and now if I were to let you go, what influence would it have over the
other children? Rather than do that, I will take the punishment myself.
So he laid the ferule on himself, and it had the most astonishing effect
on the mind of the child. He had never tried anything so perfectly
subduing to the mind as this. And from the laws of mind, it must be so.
If affects the mind in a manner entirely different from the naked law.

4. It brings the mind under an entire new set of influences, and leaves
it free to weigh the reasons for holiness, and decide accordingly.

Under the law, none but motives of hope and fear can operate on the
sinner's mind. But under the gospel, the influence of hope and fear are
set aside, and a new set of considerations presented, with a view of
God's entire character, in all the attractions he can command. It gives
the most heart-breaking, sin-subduing views of God. It presents him
to the senses in human nature. It exhibits his disinterestedness. The
way Satan prevailed against our first parents was by leading them to
doubt God's disinterestedness. The gospel demonstrates the truth,
and corrects this lie.

The law represents God as the inexorable enemy of the sinner, as
securing happiness to all who perfectly obey, but thundering down
wrath on all who disobey. The gospel reveals new features in God's
character, not known before. Doubtless the gospel increases the love
of all holy beings, and gives greater joy to the angels in heaven,
greatly increasing their love, and confidence, and admiration, when
they see God's amazing pity and forbearance towards the guilty. The
law drove the devils to hell, and it drove Adam and Eve from Paradise.
But when the blessed spirits see the same holy God waiting on rebels,
nay opening his own bosom, and giving his beloved Son for them, and
taking such unwearied pains for thousands of years to save sinners,
do you think it has no influence in strengthening the motives in their
minds to obedience and love?

The devil, who is a purely selfish being, is always accusing others of
being selfish. He accused Job of this: "Doth Job fear God for naught?"
He accused God to our first parents, of being selfish, and that the only
reason for his forbidding them to eat of the tree of knowledge was the
fear that they might come to know as much as himself. The gospel
shows what God is. If he were selfish, he would not take such pains
to save those whom he might, with perfect ease, crush to hell. Nothing
is so calculated to make selfish persons ashamed of their selfishness,
as to see disinterested benevolence in others. Hence the wicked are
always trying to appear disinterested. Let the selfish individual who
has any heart, see true benevolence in others, and it is like coals of
fire on his head. The wise men understood this, when he said, "If thine
enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink; for in so doing,
thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head." Nothing is so calculated to
cut down an enemy, and win him over, and make him a friend.

This is what the gospel does to sinners. It shows that notwithstanding
all that they have done to God, God still exercises toward them
disinterested love. When he sees God stooping from heaven to save
him, and understands that it is indeed true, oh, how it melts and
breaks down the heart, strikes a death-blow to selfishness, and wins
him over to unbounded confidence and holy love. God has so
constituted the mind, that it must necessarily do homage to virtue. It
must do this, as long as it retains the powers of moral agency. This is
as true in hell as in heaven. The devil feels this. When an individual
sees that God has no interested motives to condemn him, when he
sees that God offers salvation as a mere gratuity, through faith, he
cannot but feel admiration of God's benevolence. His selfishness is
crushed, the law has done its work, he sees that all his selfish
endeavors have done no good; and the next step is for his heart to go
out in disinterested love.

Suppose a man was under sentence of death for rebel lion, and had
tried many expedients to recommend himself to the government, but
failed, because they were all hollow hearted and selfish. He sees that
the government understands his motives, and that he is not really
reconciled. He knows himself that they were all hypocritical and
selfish, moved by the hope of favor or the fear of wrath, and that the
government is more and more incensed at his hypocrisy. Just now let
a paper be brought to him from the government, offering him a free
pardon on the simple condition that he would receive it as mere
gratuity, making no account of his own works what influence will it
have on his mind? The moment he finds the penalty set aside, and
that he has no need to go to work by any self-righteous efforts, his
mind is filled with admiration. Now, let it appear that the government
has made the greatest sacrifices to procure this; his selfishness is
slain, and he melts down like a child at his sovereign's feet, ready to
obey the law because he loves his sovereign.

5. All true obedience turns on faith. It secures all the requisite
influences to produce sanctification. It gives the doctrines of eternity
access to the mind and a hold on the heart. In this world the motives
of time are addressed to the senses. The motives that influence the
spirits of the just in heaven do not reach us through the senses. But
when faith is exercised, the wall is broken down, and the vast realities
of eternity act on the mind here with the same kind of influence that
they have in eternity. Mind is mind, every where. And were it not for
the darkness of unbelief, men would live here just as they do in the
eternal world. Sinners here would rage and blaspheme, just as they do
in hell; and saints would love and obey and praise, just as they do in
heaven. Now, faith makes all these things realities, it swings the mind
loose from the clogs of the world, and he beholds God, and
apprehends his law and his love. In no other way can these motives
take hold on the mind. What a mighty action must it have on the mind,
when it takes hold of the love of Christ! What a life-giving power, when
the pure motives of the gospel crowd into the mind and stir it up with
energy divine! Every Christian knows, that in proportion to the strength
of his faith, his mind is buoyant and active, and when his faiths flags,
his soul is dark and listless. It is faith alone that places the things of
time and eternity in their true comparison, and sets down the things of
time and sense at their real value. It breaks up the delusions of the
mind, the soul shakes itself from its errors and clogs, and it rises up in
communion with God.

REMARKS.

I. It is as unphilosophical as it is unscriptural to attempt to convert and
sanctify the minds of sinners without the motives of the gospel.

You may press the sinner with the law, and make him see his own
character, the greatness and justice of God, and his ruined condition.
But hide the motives of the gospel from his mind, and it is all in vain.
II. It is absurd to think that the offers of the gospel are calculated to
beget a selfish hope.

Some are afraid to throw out upon the sinner's mind all the character
of God; and they try to make him submit to God, by casting him down
in despair. This is not only against the gospel, but it is absurd in itself.
It is absurd to think that, in order to destroy the selfishness of a sinner,
you must hide from him the knowledge of how much God loves and
pities him, and how great sacrifices he has made to save him.

III. So far is it from being true that sinners are in danger of getting false
hopes if they are allowed to know the real compassion of God, while
you hide this, it is impossible to give him any other than a false hope.
Withholding from the sinner who is writhing under conviction, the fact
that God has provided salvation as a mere gratuity, is the very way to
confirm his selfishness; and if he gets any hope, it must be a false
one. To press him to submission by the law alone, is to set him to build
a self-righteous foundation.

IV. So far as we can see, salvation by grace, not bestowed in any
degree for our own works, is the only possible way of reclaiming
selfish beings.

Suppose salvation was not altogether gratuitous, but that some degree
of good works was taken into the account, and for those good works
in part we were justified just so far as this consideration is in the
mind, just so far there is a stimulus to selfishness. You must bring the
sinner to see that he is entirely dependent on free grace, and that a
full and complete justification is bestowed, on the first act of faith, as
a mere gratuity, and no part of it as an equivalent for any thing he is
to do. This alone dissolves the influence of selfishness, and secures
holy action.

V. If all this is true, sinners should be put in the fullest possible
possession, and in the speediest manner, of the whole plan of
salvation.

They should be made to see the law, and their own guilt, and that they
have no way to save themselves; and then, the more fully the whole
length and breadth, and height, and depth of the love of God should
be opened, the more effectually will you crush his selfishness, and
subdue his soul in love to God. Do not be afraid, in conversing with
sinners, to show the whole plan of salvation, and give the fullest
possible exhibition of the infinite compassion of God. Show him that,
notwithstanding his guilt, the Son of God is knocking at the door and
beseeching him to be reconciled to God.

VI. You see why so many convicted sinners continue so long
compassing Mount Sinai, with self-righteous efforts to save
themselves by their own works.

How often you find sinners trying to get more feeling, or waiting till they
have made more prayers and made greater efforts, and expecting to
recommend themselves to God in this way. Why is all this? The sinner
needs to be driven off from this, and made to see that he is all the
while looking for salvation under the law. He must be made to see that
all this is superseded by the gospel offering him all he wants as a
mere gratuity. He must hear Jesus saying, "Ye will not come unto me
that ye may have life:

O, no, you are willing to pray, and go to meeting, and read the Bible,
or anything, but come unto me. Sinner, this is the road; I am the way,
and the truth, and the life. No man cometh to the Father but by me. I
am the resurrection and the life. I am the light of the world. Here,
sinner, is what you want. 

Instead of trying your self-righteous prayers and efforts, here is what
you are looking for, only believe and you shall be saved."

VII. You see why so many professors of religion are always in the
dark.

They are looking at their sins, confining their observations to
themselves, and losing sight of the fact, that there have only to take
right hold of Jesus Christ, and throw themselves upon him, and all is
well.

VIII. The law is useful to convict men; but, as a matter of fact, it never
breaks the heart. The Gospel alone does that. The degree in which a
convert is broken hearted, is in proportion to the degree of clearness
with which he apprehends the gospel.

IX. Converts, if you call them so, who entertain a hope under legal
preaching, may have an intellectual approbation of the law, and a sort
of dry zeal, but never make mellow, broken hearted Christians. If they
have not seen God in the attitude in which he is exhibited in the
gospel, they are not such Christians as you will see sometimes, with
the tear trembling in their eye, and their frames shaking with emotion,
at the name of Jesus.

X. Sinners under conviction, and professors in darkness, must be led
right to Christ, and made to take hold of the plan of salvation by faith.
You cannot do them good in any other way.

Chapter 18.

LEGAL EXPERIENCE.

The Seventh Chapter of the Epistle to the Romans.

I have more than once had occasion to refer to this chapter, and have
read some portions of it and made remarks. But I have not been able
to go into a consideration of it so fully as I wished, and therefore
thought I would make it the subject of a separate lecture. In giving my
views I shall pursue the following order:

I. Mention the different opinions that have prevailed in the church
concerning this passage.

II. Show the importance of understanding this portion of scripture
aright, or of knowing which of these prevailing opinions is the true one.

III. Lay down several facts and principles which have a bearing on the
exposition of this passage.

IV. Refer to some rules of interpretation which ought always to be
observed in interpreting either the Scripture or any other writing or
testimony.

V. Give my own views of the real meaning of the passage, with the
reasons.

I shall confine myself chiefly to the latter part of the chapter, as that
has been chiefly the subject of dispute. You see from the manner in
which I have laid out my work, that I design to simplify the subject as
much as possible, so as to bring it within the compass of a single
lecture. Otherwise I might make a volume, so much having been
written to show the meaning of this chapter.

I. I am to show what are the principal opinions that have prevailed
concerning the application of this chapter.

1. One opinion that has extensively prevailed, and still prevails, is, that
the latter part of the chapter is an epitome of Christian experience.

It has been supposed to describe the situation and exercises of a
Christian, and designed to exhibit the Christian warfare with indwelling
sin. It is to be observed, however, that this is, comparatively, a modern
opinion. No writer is known to have held this view of the chapter, for
centuries after it was written. According to Professor Stuart, who has
examined the subject more thoroughly than any other man in America,
Augustine was the first writer that exhibited this interpretation, and he
resorted to it in his controversy with Pelagius.

2. The only other interpretation given is that which prevailed in the first
centuries, and which is still generally adopted on the continent of
Europe, as well as by a considerable number of writers in England and
in America, that; this passage describes the experience of a sinner
under conviction, who was acting under the motives of the law, and
not yet brought to the experience of the gospel. In this country, the
most prevalent opinion is, that the seventh chapter of Romans
delineates the experience of a Christian.

II. I am to show the importance of a right understanding of this
passage.

A right understanding of this passage must be fundamental. If this
passage in fact describes a sinner under conviction, or a purely legal
experience, and if a person supposing that it is a Christian experience,
finds his own experience to correspond with it, his mistake is a fatal
one. It must be a fatal error, to rest in his experience as that of a real
Christian, because it corresponds with the seventh of Romans, if Paul
in fact is giving only the experience of a sinner under legal motives
and considerations.

III. I will lay down some principles and facts that have a bearing on the
elucidation of this subject.

1. It is true that mankind act, in all cases, and frost the nature of mind,
must always act, as on the whole they feel to be preferable

Or, in other words, the will governs the conduct. Men never act against
their will. The will governs the motion of the limbs. Voluntary beings
cannot act contrary to their will.

2. Men often desire what, on the whole they do not choose.

The desires and the will are often opposed to each other. The conduct
is governed by the choice, not by the desires. The desires may be
inconsistent with the choice. You may desire to go to some other place
tonight, and yet on the whole choose to remain here. Perhaps you
desire very strongly to be somewhere else, and yet choose to remain
in meeting. A man wishes to go a journey to some place. Perhaps he
desires it strongly. It may be very important to his business or his
ambition. But his family are sick, or some other object requires him to
be at home, and on the whole he chooses to remain. In all cases, the
conduct follows the actual choice.

3. Regeneration, or conversion, is a change in the choice.

It is a change in the supreme controlling choice of the mind. The
regenerated or converted person prefers God's glory to everything
else. He chooses it as the supreme object of affection. This is a
change of heart. Before, he chose his own interest or happiness, as
his supreme end. Now, he chooses God's service in preference to his
own interest. When a person is truly born again, his choice is
habitually right, and of course his conduct is in the main right.

The force of temptation may produce an occasional strong choice, or
even a succession of wrong choices, but his habitual course of action
is right. The will, or choice, of a converted person is habitually right,
and of course his conduct is so. If this is not true, I ask, in what does
the converted differ from the unconverted person? If it is not, the
character of the converted person, that he habitually does the
commandments of God, what is his character? But I presume this
position will not be disputed by any one who believes in the doctrine
of regeneration.

4. Moral agents are so constituted, that they naturally and necessarily
approve of what is right.

A moral agent is one who possesses understanding, will, and
conscience. Conscience is the power of discerning the difference of
moral objects. It will not be disputed that a moral agent can be led to
see the difference between right and wrong, so that his moral nature
shall approve of what is right. Otherwise, a sinner never can be
brought under conviction. If he has not a moral nature, that can see
and highly approve the law of God, and justify the penalty, he cannot
be convicted. 

For this is conviction, to see the goodness of the law that he has
broken and the justice of the penalty he has incurred. But in fact, there
is not a moral agent, in heaven, earth, or hell, that cannot be made to
see that the law of God is right, and whose conscience does not
approve the law.

5. Men may not only approve the law, as right, but they may often,
when it is viewed abstractly and without reference to its bearing on
themselves, take real pleasure in contemplating it.

This is one great source of self-deception. Men view the law of God in
the abstract, and love it. When no selfish reason is present for
opposing it, they take pleasure in viewing it. They approve of what is
right, and condemn wickedness, in the abstract. All men do this, when
no selfish reason is pressing on them. Who ever found a man so
wicked, that he approved of evil in the abstract? Where was a moral
being ever found that approved the character of the devil, or that
approved of other wicked men, unconnected with himself? How often
do you hear wicked men express the greatest abhorrence and
detestation of enormous wickedness in others. If their passions are in
no way enlisted in favor of error or of wrong, men always stand up for
what is right. And this merely constitutional approbation of what is
right, may amount even to delight, when they do not see the relations
of right interfering in any manner with their own selfishness.

6. In this constitutional approbation of truth and the law of God, and
the delight which naturally arises from it, there is no virtue.

It is only what belongs to man's moral nature. It arises naturally from
the constitution of the mind. Mind is constitutionally capable of seeing
the beauty of virtue. And so far from there being any virtue in it, it is in
fact only a clearer proof of the strength of their depravity, that when
they know the right, and see its excellence, they do not obey it. It is not
then that impenitent sinners have in them something that is holy. But
their wickedness is herein seen to be so much the greater. For the
wickedness of sin is in proportion to the light that is enjoyed. And when
we find that men may not only see the excellence of the law of God,
but even strongly approve of it and take delight in it, and yet not obey
it, it shows how desperately wicked they are, and makes sin appear
exceeding sinful.

7. It is a common use of language for persons to say, "I would do so
and so, but cannot," when they only mean to be understood as
desiring it, but not as actually choosing to do it. And so to say, "I could
not do so," when they only mean that they would not do it, and, they
could if they would.

Not long since, I asked a minister to preach for me next Sabbath. He
answered, "I can't." I found out afterwards that he could if he would. I
asked a merchant to take a certain price for a piece of goods. He said,
"I can't do it." What did he mean? That he had not power to accept of
such a price? Not at all. He could if he would, but he did not choose to
do it. You will see the bearing of these remarks, when I come to read
the chapter. I proceed now.

To give several rules of interpretation, that are applicable to the
interpretation not only of the Bible, but of all written instruments, and
to all evidence whatever.

There are certain rules of evidence which all men are bound to apply,
in ascertaining the meaning of instruments and the testimony of
witnesses, and of all writings.

1. We are always to put that construction on language which is
required by the nature of the subject.

We are bound always to understand a person's language as it is
applicable to the subject of discourse. Much of the language of
common life may be tortured into any thing, if you lose sight of the
subject, and take the liberty to interpret it without reference to what
they are speaking of. How much injury has been done, by interpreting
separate passages and single expressions in the scriptures, in
violation of this principle. It is chiefly by overlooking this simple rule,
that the scriptures have been tortured into the support of errors and
contradictions innumerable and absurd beyond all calculation. This
rule is applicable to all statements. Courts of justice never would allow
such perversions as have been committed upon the Bible.

2. If a person's language will admit, we are bound always to construe
it so as to make him consistent with himself.

Unless you observe this rule, you can scarcely converse five minutes
with any individual on any subject and not make him contradict
himself. If you do not hold to this rule, how can one man ever
communicate his ideas so that another man will understand them?
How can a witness ever make known the facts to the jury, if his
language is to be tortured at pleasure, without the restraints of this
rule?

3. In interpreting a person's language, we are always to keep in view
the point to which he is speaking.

We are to understand the scope of his argument, the object he has in
view, and the point to which he is speaking. Otherwise we shall of
course not understand his language. Suppose I were to take up a
book, any book, and not keep my eye on the object the writer had in
view in making it, and the point at which he is aiming, I never can
understand that book. It is easy to see how endless errors have grown
out of a practice of interpreting the Scriptures in disregard of the first
principles of interpretation.

4. When you understand the point to which a person is speaking, you
are to understand him as speaking to that point; and not put a
construction on his language unconnected with his object, or
inconsistent with it.

By losing sight of this rule, you may make nonsense of every thing.
You are bound always to interpret language in the light of the subject
to which it is applied, or about which it is spoken.

V. Having laid down these rules and principles, I proceed, in the light
of them, to give my own view of the meaning of the passage, with the
reasons for it. But first I will make a remark or two.

1st. Remark. Whether the apostle was speaking of himself in this
passage, or whether he is supposing a case, is not material to the right
interpretation of the language.

It is supposed by many, that because he speaks in the first person, he
is to be understood as referring to himself. But it is a common practice,
when we are discussing general principles, or arguing a point, to
suppose a case by way of illustration, or to establish a point. And it is
very natural to state it in the first person, without at all intending to be
understood, and in fact without ever being understood, as declaring an
actual occurrence, or an experience of our own. The apostle Paul was
here pursuing a close train of argument, and he introduces this simply
by way of illustration. And it is no way material whether it is his own
actual experience, or a case supposed.

If he is speaking of himself, or if he is speaking of another person, or
if he is supposing a case, he does it with a design to show a general
principle of conduct, and that all persons under like circumstances
would do the same. Whether he is speaking of a Christian, or of an
impenitent sinner, he lays down a general principle.

The apostle James, in the 3rd chapter, speaks in the first person; even
in administering reproof. "My brethren, be not many masters, knowing
that we shall receive the greater condemnation. For in many things we
offend all."

"Therewith bless we God, even the Father; and therewith curse we
men, which are made after the similitude of God."

The apostle Paul often says, "I," and uses the first person, when
discussing and illustrating general principles: "All things are lawful unto
me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I
will not be brought under the power of any." And again, "Conscience,
I say, not thine own, but of the other: for why is my liberty judged of
another man's conscience? For if I by grace be a partaker, why am I
evil spoken of for that for which I give thanks? For now we see through
a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall
I know even as also I am known. And now abideth faith, hope, charity,
these three; but the greatest of these is charity." So also, "For if I build
again the things which I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor." In
1 Corinthians 4:6, he explains exactly how he uses illustrations, "And
these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to myself, and to
Apollos, for your sakes: that ye might learn in us not to think of men
above that which is written, that no one of you be puffed up for one
against another."

2nd. Remark. Much of the language which the apostle uses here, is
applicable to the case of a backslider, who has lost all but the form of
religion. He has left his first love, and has in fact fallen under the
influence of legal motives, of hope and fear, just like an impenitent
sinner. If there be such a character as a real backslider, who has been
a real convert, he is then actuated by the same motives as the sinner,
and the same language may be equally applicable to both. And
therefore the fact that some of the language before us is applicable to
a Christian who has become a backslider, does not prove at all that
the experience here described is Christian experience, but only that a
backslider and a sinner are in many respects alike. I do not hesitate to
say this much, at least: that no one, who was conscious that he was
actuated by love to God could ever have thought of applying this
chapter to himself. If any one is not in the exercise of love to God, this
describes his character; and whether he is backslider or sinner, it is all
the same thing.

3rd. Remark. Some of the expressions here used by the apostle are
supposed to describe the case of a believer who is not an habitual
backslider, but who is overcome by temptation and passion for a time,
and speaks of himself as if he were all wrong. A man is tempted, we
are told, when he is drawn away by his own lusts, and enticed. And in
that state, no doubt, he might find expressions here that would
describe his own experience, while under such influence. But that
proves nothing in regard to the design of the passage, for while he is
in this state, he is so far under a certain influence, and the impenitent
sinner is all the time under just such influence. The same language,
therefore, may be applicable to both, without inconsistency.

But although some expressions may bear this plausible construction,
yet a view of the whole passage makes it evident that it cannot be a
delineation of Christian experience. My own opinion therefore is, that
the apostle designed here to represent the experience of a sinner, not
careless, but strongly convicted, and yet not converted, The reasons
are these:

1. Because the apostle is here manifestly describing the habitual
character of some one; and this one is wholly under the dominion of
the flesh. It is not as a whole a description of one who, under the
power of present temptation, is acting inconsistently with his general
character, but his general character is so. It is one who uniformly falls
into sin, notwithstanding his approval of the law.

2. It would have been entirely irrelevant to his purpose, to state the
experience of a Christian as an illustration of his argument. That was
not what was needed. He was laboring to vindicate the law of God, in
its influence on a carnal mind. In a previous chapter he had stated the
fact, that justification was only by faith, and not by works of law. In this
seventh chapter, he maintains not only that justification is by faith, but
also that sanctification is only by faith. "Know ye not brethren, (for I
speak to them that know the law) how that the law hath dominion over
a man as long as he liveth? So then, if while her husband liveth, she
be married to another man, she shall be called an adulteress; but if
her husband be dead, she is free from that law; so that she is no
adulteress, though she be married to another man." What is the use
of all this? Why, this,

"Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the
body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who
is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God."
While you were under the law you were bound to obey the law, and
hold to the terms of the law for justification. But now being made free
from the law, as a rule of judgment, you are no longer influenced by
legal considerations, of hope and fear, for Christ to whom you are
married, has set aside the penalty, that by faith ye might be justified
before God.

"For when we were in the flesh," that is, in an unconverted state, "the
motions of sins, which were by the law, did work in our members to
bring forth fruit unto death. But now we are delivered from the law, that
being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness
of spirit, and not in the oldness of the letter." Here he is stating the real
condition of a Christian, that he serves in newness of spirit and not in
the oldness of the letter. He had found that the fruit of the law was only
death and by the gospel he had been brought into true subjection to
Christ. What is the objection to this? "What shall we say then? Is the
law sin? God forbid. 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. And the
commandment which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death."
The law was enacted that people might live by it, if they would
perfectly obey it; but when we were in the flesh, we found it unto
death. "For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me,
and by it slew me. Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment
holy, and just, and good." Now he brings up the objection again. How
can anything that is good be made death unto you? "Was, then, that
which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might
appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the
commandment might be exceeding sinful." And he vindicates the law,
by showing that it is not the fault of the law, but the fault of sin, and
that this very result shows at once the excellence of the law and the
exceeding sinfulness of sin. Sin must be a horrible thing, if it can work
such a perversion, as to take the good law of God and make it the
means of death.

"For we know that the law is spiritual; but I am carnal, sold under sin."
Here is the hinge, on which the whole questions turns. Now mark; the
apostle is here vindicating the law against the objection, that if the law
is means of death to sinners it cannot be good. Against this objection,
he goes to show, that all its action on the mind of the sinner proves it
to be good. Keeping his eye on this point, he argues, that the law is
good, and that the evil comes from the motions of sin in our members. 
Now he comes to that part which is supposed to delineate a Christian
experience, and which is the subject of controversy. He begins by
saying "the law is spiritual but I am carnal." This word "carnal" he uses
once, and only once, in reference to Christians, and then it was in
reference to persons who were in a low state in religion. "For ye are
yet carnal; for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and
divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men." These Christians had
backslidden, and acted as if they were not converted persons, but
were carnal. The term itself is generally used to signify the worst of
sinners. Paul here defines it so; "carnal, sold under sin." Could that be
said of Paul himself, at the time he wrote this epistle? Was that his
own experience? Was he sold under sin? Was that true of the great
apostle? No, but he was vindicating the law, and he uses an
illustration, by supposing a case. He goes on, "For that which I do, I
allow not; for what I would, that I do not; but what I hate, that do I."

Here you see the application of the principles I have laid down. In the
interpretation of this word "would," we are not to understand it of the
choice or will, but only a desire. Otherwise the apostle contradicts a
plain matter of fact, which every body knows to be true, that the will
governs the conduct. Professor Stuart has very properly rendered the
word desire; what I desire, I do not, but what I disapprove, that I do.
Then comes the conclusion, "If, then, I do that which I would not, I
consent unto the law, that it is good. "If I do that which I disapprove, if
I disapprove of my own conduct, if I condemn myself, I thereby bear
testimony that the law is good. Now, keep your eye on the object the
apostle has in view and read the next verse, "Now then it is no more
I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me." Here he, as it were, divides
himself against himself, or speaks of himself as possessing two
natures, or, as some of the heathen philosophers taught, as having
two souls, one which approves the good and another which loves and
chooses evil. "For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) dwelleth no
good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which
is good I find not." Here "to will" means to approve, for if men really will
to do a thing, they do it. This everybody knows. Where the language
will admit, we are bound to interpret it so as to make it consistent with
known facts. If you understand "to will" literally, you involve the apostle
in the absurdity of saying that he willed what he did not do, and so
acted contrary to his own will, which contradicts a notorious fact. The
meaning must be desire. Then it coincides with the experience of
every convicted sinner. He knows what he ought to do, and he
strongly approves it, but he is not ready to do it. Suppose I were to call
on you to do some act. Suppose, for instance, I were to call on those
of you who are impenitent, to come forward and take that seat, that we
might see who you are, and pray for you, and should show you your
sins and that it is your duty to submit to God, some of you would
exclaim, "I know it is my duty, and I greatly desire to do it, but I
cannot." What do you mean by it? Why, simply, that on the whole, the
balance of your will is on the other side.

In the 20th verse he repeats what he had said before, "Now if I do that
I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me." Is
that the habitual character and experience of a Christian? I admit that a
Christian may fall so low that this language may apply to him; but if
this is his general character, how does it differ from that of an
impenitent sinner? If this is the habitual character of a Christian, there
is not a word of truth in the scripture representations, that the saints
are those who really obey God; for here is one called a Christian, of
whom it is said expressly that he never does obey.

"I find then a law, that when I would do good, evil is present with me."
Here he speaks of the action of the carnal propensities, as being so
constant and so prevalent that he calls it a "law." "For I delight in the
law of God after the inward man." Here is the great stumbling block.
Can it be said of an impenitent sinner that he "delights" in the law of
God? I answer, Yes. I know the expression is strong, but the apostle
was using strong language all along, on both sides. 

It is no stronger language than the prophet Isaiah uses in chapter 58.
He was describing as wicked and rebellious a generation as ever
lived. He says, "Cry aloud, spare not; lift up thy voice like a trumpet,
and show my people their transgression, and the house of Jacob their
sins." Yet he goes on to say of this very people, "Yet they seek me
daily, and delight to know my ways, as a nation that did righteousness,
and forsook not the ordinance of their God; they ask of me the
ordinances of justice; they take delight in approaching to God." Here
is one instance of impenitent sinners manifestly delighting in
approaching to God. So in Ezekiel 33:32. "And lo thou art unto them
as a very lovely song of one that hath a pleasant voice, and can play
well on an instrument: for they hear thy words, but do them not." The
prophet had been telling how wicked they were. "And they come unto
thee as the people cometh, and they sit before thee as my people, and
they hear thy words, but they will not do them: for with their mouth they
show much love, but their heart goeth after their covetousness." Here
were impenitent sinners, plainly enough, yet they love to hear the
eloquent prophet. How often do ungodly sinners delight in eloquent
preaching or powerful reasoning, by some able minister! It is to them
an intellectual feast. And sometimes they are so pleased with it, as
really to think they love the word of God. This is consistent with entire
depravity of heart, and enmity against the true character of God. Nay,
it sets their depravity in a stronger light, because they know and
approve the right, and yet do the wrong.

So, notwithstanding this delight in the law, he say, "But I see another
law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing
me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. O wretched
man that I am! who shall deliver me from the body of this death?" Here
the words, "I thank God, through Jesus Christ our Lord," are plainly a
parenthesis, and a break in upon the train of thought, Then he sums
up the whole matter, "So then, with the mind I myself serve the law of
God, but with the flesh the law of sin."

It is as if he had said, My better self, my unbiased judgment, my
conscience, approves the law of God; but the law in my members, my
passions, have such a control over me, that I still disobey. Remember,
the apostle was describing the habitual character of one who was
wholly under the dominion of sin. It was irrelevant to his purpose to
adduce the experience of a Christian. He was vindicating the law, and
therefore it was necessary for him to take the case of one who was
under the law. If it is Christian experience, he was reasoning against
himself; for if it is Christian experience, this would prove, not only that
the law is inefficacious for the subduing of passion and the
sanctification of men, but that the gospel also is inefficacious.
Christians are under grace, and it is irrelevant, in vindicating the law,
to adduce the experience of those who are not under the law, but
under grace.

Another conclusive reason is, that he here actually states the case of
a believer as entirely different. In verses four and six, he speaks of
those who are not under law and not in the flesh; that is, not carnal,
but delivered from the law, and actually serving, or obeying God, in
spirit.

Then, in the beginning of the eighth chapter, he goes on to say, "There
is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus,
who walk not after the flesh, but after the spirit. For the law of the Spirit
of life in Christ Jesus, hath made me free from the law of sin and
death." He had alluded to this in the parenthesis above, "I thank God,"
etc. "For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the
flesh, God sending his own Son in the flesh, and for sin, condemned
sin in the flesh: that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in
us who walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit." Who is this of
whom he is now speaking? If the person in the last chapter was one
who had a Christian experience whose experience is this? Here is
something entirely different. The other was wholly under the power of
sin, and under the law, and while he knew his duty, never did it. 

Here we find one for whom what the law could not do, through the
power of passion, the gospel has done, so that the righteousness of
the law is fulfilled, or what the law requires is obeyed. "For they that
are after, the flesh, do mind the things of the flesh; but they that are
after the Spirit, the things of the Spirit. For to be carnally minded is
death; but to be spiritually-minded is life and peace: because the
carnal mind is enmity to God: for it is not subject to the law of God,
neither indeed can be. So then they that are in the flesh cannot please
God." There it is. Those whom he had described in the seventh
chapter, as being carnal, cannot please God. "But ye are not in the
flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now,
if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his. And if Christ
be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life
because of righteousness." But here is an individual whose body is
dead. Before the body had the control, and dragged him away from
duty and from salvation; but now the power of passion is subdued.

Now I will give you the sum of the whole matter:

(1.) The strength of the apostle's language cannot decide this
question, for he uses strong language on both sides. If it be objected
that the individual he is describing is said to "delight in the law," he is
also said to be "carnal, sold under sin." When a writer uses strong
language, it must be so understood as not to make it irrelevant or
inconsistent.

(2.) Whether he spoke of himself, or of some other person, or merely
supposed a case by way of illustration, is wholly immaterial to the
question.

(3.) It is plain that the point he wished to illustrate was the vindication
of the law of God, as to its influence on a carnal mind.

(4.) The point required by way of illustration, the case of a convicted
sinner, who saw the excellence of the law, but in whom the passions
had the ascendancy.

(5.) If this is spoken of Christian experience it is not only irrelevant, but
proves the reverse of what he intended. He intended to show that the
law though good, would not break the power of passion. But if this is
Christian experience, then it proves that the gospel, instead of the law
cannot subdue passion and sanctify men.

(6.) The contrast between the state described in the seventh chapter,
and that described in the eighth chapter, proves that the experience
of the former has not that of a Christian.

REMARKS.

I. Those who find their own experience written in the eleventh chapter
of Romans, are not converted persons. If that is their habitual
character, they are not regenerated; they are under conviction, but not
Christians.

II. You see the great importance of using the law in dealing with
sinners, to make them prize the gospel, to lead them to justify God and
condemn themselves. Sinners are never made truly to repent but as
they are convicted by the law.

III. At the same time, you see the entire insufficiency of the law to
convert men. The case of the devil illustrates the highest efficacy of
the law, in this respect.

IV. You see the danger of mistaking mere desires for piety. Desire,
that does not result in right choice, has nothing good in it. The devil
may have such desires. 

The wickedest men on earth may desire religion, and no doubt often
do desire it, when they see that it is necessary to their salvation, or to
control their passions.

V. Christ and the gospel present the only motives that can sanctify the
mind. The law only convicts and condemns.

VI. Those who are truly converted and brought into the liberty of the
gospel, do find deliverance from the bondage of their own corruptions.

They do find the power of the body over the mind broken. They may
have conflicts and trials, many and severe; but as an habitual thing,
they are delivered from the thralldom of passion, and get the victory
over sin, and find it easy to serve God. His commandments are not
grievous to them. His yoke is easy, and his burden light.

VII. The true convert finds peace with God. He feels that he has it. He
enjoys it. He has a sense of pardoned sin, and of victory over
corruption.

VIII. You see, from this subject, the true position of a vast many church
members They are all the while struggling under the law. They
approve of the law, both in its precept and its penalty, they feel
condemned, and desire relief. But still they are unhappy. They have
no spirit of prayer, no communion with God, no evidence of adoption.
They only refer to the 7th of Romans as their evidence. Such a one
will say, "There is my experiences exactly." Let me tell you, that if this
is your experience, you are yet in the gall of bitterness and the bonds
of iniquity. You feel that you are in the bonds of guilt, and you are
overcome by iniquity, and surely you know that it is bitter as gall. Now,
don't cheat your soul by supposing that with such an experience as
this, you can go and sit down by the side of the apostle Paul. You are
yet carnal, gold under sin, and unless you embrace the gospel, you
will be damned.

Chapter 19.

CHRISTIAN PERFECTION.

Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is
perfect.   Matthew 5:48.

In the 43rd verse, the Savior says, "Ye have heard that it hath been
said, Thou shalt love thy neighbor, and hate thine enemy; but I say
unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to
them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you and
persecute you, that ye may be the children of your Father which is in
heaven: for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and
sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. For if ye love them which
love you, what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same?
And if ye salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do
not even the publicans so? Be ye therefore perfect, even as your
Father which is in heaven is perfect."

In discoursing on the subject of Christian Perfection, it is my design to
pursue this order:

I. I shall show what is not to be understood by the requirement, "Be ye
therefore perfect;" or, what Christian Perfection is not. II. Show what
is the perfection here required. III. That this perfection is a duty. IV.
That it is attainable; and, V. Answer some of the objections which are
commonly argued against the doctrine of Christian Perfection.

I. I am to show you what Christian Perfection is not.

1. It is not required that we should have the same natural perfections
that God has.

God has two kinds of perfections, natural and moral his natural
perfections constitute his nature, essence, of constitution. They are his
eternity, immutability, omnipotence, etc. These are called natural
perfections, because they have no moral character. They are not
voluntary. God has not given them to himself, because he did not
create himself but existed from eternity, with all these natural attributes
in full possession. All these God possesses in an infinite degree.
These natural perfections are not the perfection here required. The
attributes of our nature were created in us, and we are not required to
produce any new natural attributes, nor would it be possible. We are
not required to possess any of them in the degree that God possesses
them.

2. The perfection required in the text is not perfection of knowledge,
even according to our limited faculties.

3. Christian Perfection, as here required, is not freedom from
temptation, either from our constitution or from things that are about
us. The mind may be ever so sorely tried with the animal appetites,
and yet not sin. The apostle James says, "Every man is tempted,
when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed." The sin is not in
the temptations, but in yielding to them. A person may be tempted by
Satan, as well as by the appetites, or by the world, and yet not have
sin. All sin consists in voluntary consenting to the desires.

4. Neither does Christian perfection imply a freedom from what ought
to be understood by the Christian warfare.

5. The perfection required is not the infinite moral perfection which
God has; because man, being a finite creature, is not capable of
infinite affections. God being infinite in himself for him to be perfect is
to be infinitely perfect. But this is not required of us.

II. I am to show what Christian perfection is; or what is the duty
actually required in the text.

It is perfect obedience to the law of God. The law of God requires
perfect, disinterested, impartial benevolence, love to God and love to
our neighbor. It requires that we should be actuated by the same
feeling, and to act on the same principles that God acts upon; to leave
self out of the question as uniformly as he does, to be as much
separated from selfishness as he is; in a word, to be in our measure
as perfect as God is. Christianity requires that we should do neither
more nor less than the law of God prescribes. Nothing short of this is
Christian perfection. This is being, morally, just as perfect as God.
Every thing is here included, to feel as he feels, to love what he loves
and hate what he hates, and for the same reasons that he loves and
hates.

God regards every being in the universe according to its real value. He
regards his own interests according to their real value in the scale of
being, and no more. He exercises the same love towards himself that
he requires of us, and for the same reason. He loves himself
supremely, both with the love of benevolence and the love of
complacency, because he is supremely excellent. And he requires us
to love him just so, to love him as perfectly as he loves himself. He
loves himself with the love of benevolence, or regards his own interest,
and glory, and happiness, as the supreme good, because it is the
supreme good. And he requires us to love him in the same way. He
loves himself with infinite complacency, because he knows that he is
infinitely worthy and excellent, and he requires the same of us. He also
loves his neighbor as himself, not in the same degree that he loves
himself, but in the same proportion according to their real value. From
the highest angel to the smallest worm, he regards their happiness
with perfect love, according to their worth. It is his duty to conform to
these principles, as much as it is our duty. He can no more depart
from this rule than we can, without committing sin; and for him to do
it would be as much worse than for us to do it, as he is greater than
we. God is infinitely obligated to do this. His very nature, not
depending on his own volition, but uncreated, binds him to this. And
he has created us moral beings in his own image, capable of
conforming to the same rule with himself. This rule requires as to have
the same character with him, to love as impartially, with as perfect love
to seek the good of others with as single an eye as he does. This,
and nothing less than this, is Christian Perfection.

III. I am to show that Christian Perfection is a duty.

1. This is evident from the fact that God requires it, both under the law
and under the gospel.

The command in the text, "Be ye perfect, even as your Father which
is in heaven is perfect," is given under the gospel. Christ here
commands the very same thing that the law requires. Some suppose
that much less is required of us under the gospel, than was required
under the law. It is true that the gospel does not require perfection, as
the condition of salvation. But no part of the obligation of the law is
discharged. The gospel holds those who are under it to the same
holiness as those under the law.

2. I argue that Christian Perfection is a duty, because God has no right
to require anything less.

God cannot discharge us from the obligation to be perfect, as I have
defined perfection. If he were to attempt it, he would just so far give a
license to sin. He has no right to give any such license. While we are
moral beings, there is no power in the universe that can discharge us
from the obligation to be perfect. Can God discharge us from the
obligation to love him with all our heart, and soul, and mind, and
strength? That would be saying that God does not deserve such love.
And if he cannot discharge us from the whole law, he cannot
discharge from any part of it, for the same reason.

3. Should any one contend that the gospel requires less holiness than
the law, I would ask him to say just how much less it requires.

If we are allowed to stop short of perfect obedience, where shall we
stop? How perfect are we required to be? Where will you find a rule in
the Bible, to determine how much less holy you are allowed to be
under the gospel, than you would be under the law? Shall we say each
one must judge for himself? Then I ask if you think it is your duty to be
any more perfect than you are now? Probably all would say, Yes. Can
you lay down any point at which, when you have arrived, you can say,
"Now I am perfect enough; it is true, I have some sin left, but I have
gone as far as it is my duty to go in this world?" Where do you get your
authority for any such notion? No; the truth is, that all who are truly
pious, the more pious they are, the more strongly they feel the
obligation to be perfect, as God is perfect.

IV. I will now show that Christian Perfection is attainable, or
practicable, in this life.

1. It may be fairly inferred that Christian Perfection is attainable, from
the fact that it is commanded.

Does God command us to be perfect as he is perfect, and still shall we
say it is an impossibility? Are we not always to infer, when God
commands a thing, that there is a natural possibility of doing that
which he commands? I recollect hearing an individual say, he would
preach to sinners that they ought to repent, because God commands
it; but he would not preach that they could repent, because God has
nowhere said that they can. What consummate trifling! Suppose a
man were to say he would preach to citizens, that they ought to obey
the laws of the country because the government had enacted them,
but he would not tell them that they could obey, because it is now
where in the statute book enacted that they have the ability. It is
always to be understood, when God requires anything of men, that
they possess the requisite faculties to do it. Otherwise God requires
of us impossibilities, on pain of death, and sends sinners to hell for not
doing what they were in no sense able to do.

2. That there is natural ability to be perfect is a simple matter of fact.

There can be no question of this. What is perfection. It is to love the
Lord our God with all our heart, and soul, and mind, and strength, and
to love our neighbor as ourselves. That is, it requires us not to exert
the powers of somebody else, but our own powers. The law itself goes
no farther than to require the right use of the powers you possess. So
that it is a simple matter of fact that you possess natural ability, or
power, to be just as perfect as God requires.

Objection. Here some may object, that if there is a natural ability to be
perfect, there is a moral inability, which comes to the same thing, for
inability is inability, call it what you will, and if we have moral inability,
who are as really unable as if our inability was natural.

Answer 1. There is no more moral inability to be perfectly holy, than
there is to be holy at all. So far as moral ability is concerned, you can
as well be perfectly holy as you can be holy at all. The true distinction
between natural ability and moral ability, is this: Natural ability relates
to the powers and faculties of the mind; Moral ability only to the will.
Moral inability is nothing else than unwillingness to do a thing. 

So it is explained by President Edwards, in his treatise on the Will, and
by other writers on the subject. When you ask whether you have moral
ability to be perfect, if you mean by it whether you are willing to be
perfect, I answer, No. If you were willing to be perfect, you would be
perfect; for the perfection required is only a perfect conformity of the
will to God's law, or willing right. If you ask then, Are we able to will
right? I answer, the question implies a contradiction, in supposing that
there can be such a thing as a moral agent unable to choose, or will.
President Edwards says expressly, in his chapter on Moral Inability, as
you may see, if you will read it, that strictly speaking, there is no such
thing as Moral Inability. When we speak of inability to do a, thing, if we
mean to be understood of a real inability, it implies a willingness to do
it, but a want of power. To say therefore, we are unable to will, is
absurd. It is saying we will and yet are unable to will, at the same time.

Answer 2. But I admit and believe, that there is desperate
unwillingness in the case. And if this is what you mean by Moral
Inability, it is true. There is a pertinacious unwillingness in sinners to
become Christians, and in Christians to become perfect, or to come up
to the full perfection required both by the law and gospel. Sinners may
strongly wish to become Christians, and Christians may strongly wish
or desire to be rid of all their sins, and may pray for it, even with
agony. They may think they are willing to be perfect, but they deceive
themselves. They may feel, in regard to their sins taken all together,
or in the abstract, as if they are willing to renounce them all. But take
them up in the detail, one by one, and there are many sins they are
unwilling to give up. They wrestle against sin in general, but cling to it
in the detail.

I have known cases of this kind where individuals will break down in
such a manner that they think they never will sin again; and then
perhaps in one hour, something will come up that they are ready to
fight for the indulgence, and need to be broken down again and again.
Christians actually need to be hunted from one sin after another, in
this way, before they are willing to give them up, and after all, are
unwilling to give up all sins. When they are truly willing to give up all
sin, when they have no will of their own, but merge their own will
entirely in the will of God, then their bonds are broken. When they will
yield absolutely to God's will, then they are filled with all the fullness of
God.

After all, the true point of inquiry is this: Have I any right to expect to
be perfect in this world? Is there any reason for me to believe that I
can be so completely subdued, that my soul shall burn with a steady
flame, and I shall love God wholly, up to what the law requires? That
it is a real duty, no one can deny. But the great query is, is it
attainable?

I answer, Yes, I believe it is.

Here let me observe, that so much has been said within a few years
about Christian Perfection, and individuals who have entertained the
doctrine of Perfection have run into so many wild notions, that it seems
as if the devil had anticipated the movements of the church, and
created such a state of feeling, that the moment the doctrine of the
Bible respecting sanctification is crowded on the church, one and
another cries out, "Why, this is Perfectionism." But I will say,
notwithstanding the errors into which some of those called
Perfectionists have fallen, there is such a thing held forth in the Bible
as Christian Perfection, and that the Bible doctrine on the subject is
what nobody need to fear, but what every body needs to know. I
disclaim, entirely, the charge of maintaining the peculiarities, whatever
they be, of modern Perfectionists. I have read their publications, and
have had much knowledge of them as individuals, and I cannot assent
to many of their views. But the doctrine that Christian Perfection is a
duty, is one which I have always maintained, and I have been more
convinced of it within a few months, that it is attainable in this life.
Many doubt this, but I am persuaded it is true, on various grounds.

1. God wills it.

The first doubt which will arise in many minds, is this; "Does God really
will my sanctification in this world?" I answer: He says he does. The
law of God is itself as strong an expression as he can give of his will
on the subject, and it is backed up by an infinite sanction. The gospel
is but a republication of the same will, in another form. How can God
express his will more strongly on this point than he has in the text? "Be
ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is
perfect." In the 1 Thessalonians 4:3, we are told expressly, "For this
is the will of God, even your sanctification." 

If you examine the Bible carefully, from one end to the other, you will
find that it is every where just as plainly taught that God wills the
sanctification of Christians in this world, as it is that he wills sinners
should repent in this world. And if we go by the Bible, we might just as
readily question whether he wills that men should repent, as whether
he wills that Christians should be holy. Why should he not reasonably
expect it? He requires it. What does he require? When he requires
men to repent, he requires that they should love God with all the heart,
soul, mind, and strength. What reasons have we to believe that he
wills they should repent at all, or love him at all, which is not a reason
for believing that he wills they should love him perfectly? Strange logic,
indeed! to teach that he wills it in one case, because he requires it,
and not admit the same inference in the other. No man can show, from
the Bible, that God does not require perfect sanctification in this world,
nor that he does not will it, nor that it is not lust as attainable as any
degree of sanctification.

I have turned over the Bible with special reference to this point, and
thought I would note down on my card, where I have the plan of my
discourse, the passages that teach this doctrine. But I found they were
too numerous altogether to admit of its being done, and that if I
collected them all, I should do nothing else this evening but stand and
read passages of scripture. If you have never looked into the Bible
with this view, you will be astonished to see how many more passages
there are that speak of deliverance from the commission of sin, than
there are that speak of deliverance from the punishment of sin. The
passages that speak only of deliverance from punishment, are as
nothing, in comparison of the others.

2. All the promises and prophecies of God, that respect the
sanctification of believers in this world, are to be understood of course,
of their perfect sanctification.


What is sanctification, but holiness? When a prophecy speaks of the
sanctification of the church, are we to understand that it is to be
sanctified only partially? When God requires holiness, are we to
understand that of partial holiness? Surely not. By what principle, then,
will you understand it of partial holiness when he promises holiness.
We have been so long in the way of understanding the scriptures with
reference to the existing state of things, that we lose sight of the real
meaning. But if we look only at the language of the Bible, I defy any
man to prove that the promises and prophecies of holiness mean any
thing short of perfect sanctification, unless the requirements of both
the law and gospel are to be understood of partial obedience which is
absurd.

3. Perfect sanctification is the great blessing promised, throughout the
Bible.

The apostle says we have exceeding great and precious promises,
and what are they, and what is their use? "Whereby are given unto us
exceeding great and precious promises, that by these ye might be
partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is
in the world through lust." 2 Peter 1:4. 

If that is not perfect sanctification, I beg to know what is. It is a plain
declaration that these "exceeding great and precious promises" are
given for this object, that by believing and appropriating and using
them, we might become partakers of the divine nature. And if we will
use them for the purposes for which they were put in the Bible, we
may become perfectly holy.

Let us look at some of these promises in particular. I will begin with the
promise of the Abrahamic covenant. The promise is that his posterity
should possess the land of Canaan, and that through him by the
Messiah, all nations should be blessed. The seal of the covenant,
circumcision, which every one knows is a type of holiness, shows us
what was the principal blessing intended. It was holiness. So the
apostle tells us, in another place, Jesus Christ was given, that he
might sanctify unto himself a peculiar people.

All the purifications and other ceremonies of the Moasic ritual signified
the same thing; as they are all pointed forward to a Savior to come.
Those ordinances of purifying the body were set forth, every one of
them, with reference to the purifying of the mind, or holiness.

Under the gospel, the same thing is signified by baptism; the washing
of the body representing the sanctification of the mind.

In Ezekiel 36:25, this blessing is expressly promised, as the great
blessing of the gospel: "Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and
ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will
I cleanse you. A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I
put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh,
and I will give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my Spirit within you:
and cause you to walk in my statutes, and you shall keep my
judgments, and do them."

So it is in Jeremiah 33:8: "And I will cleanse them from all their iniquity,
whereby they have sinned against me; and I will pardon all their
iniquities, whereby they have sinned, and whereby they have
transgressed against me." But it would take up too much time to quote
all the passages in the Old Testament prophecies, that represent
holiness to be the great blessing of the covenant. I desire you all to
search the Bible for yourselves, and you will be astonished to find how
uniformly the blessing of sanctification is held up as the principal
blessing promised to the world through the Messiah.

Why, who can doubt that the great object of the Messiah's coming was
to sanctify his people? Just after the fall it was predicted that Satan
would bruise his heel, but that he should bruise Satan's head. And the
apostle John tells us that "For this purpose the Son of God was
manifested, that he might destroy the works of the devil." He has
undertaken to put Satan under his feet. His object is to win us back to
our allegiance to God, to sanctify us, to purify our minds. As it is said
in Zecheriah 13:1, "In that day there shall be a fountain opened to the
house of David and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem for sin and for
uncleanness."

And Daniel says, "Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and
upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of
sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting
righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint
the Most Holy." But it is in vain to name the multitude of these texts.
The Old Testament is full of it.

In the New Testament, the first account we have of the Savior, tells us,
that he was called "Jesus, for he shall save his people from their sins."
So it is said, "He was manifested to take away our sins," and " to
destroy the works of the devil." In Titus 2:13, the apostle Paul speaks
of the grace of God, or the gospel, as teaching us to deny
ungodliness. 

"Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great
God, and our Savior Jesus Christ, who gave himself for us, that he
might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto himself a peculiar
people, zealous of good works." And in Ephesians 5:26, we learn that
"Christ loved the church, and gave himself for it; that he might sanctify
and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, that he might
present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot or wrinkle or
any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish." I only
quote these few passages by way of illustration, to show that the
object for which Christ came is to sanctify the church to such a degree
that it should be absolutely "holy and without blemish." So in Romans
11:26, "And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall
come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from
Jacob; for this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their
sins." And in 1 John 1:9, it is said, "If we confess our sins he is faithful
and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all
unrighteousness." What is it to "cleanse us from all unrighteousness,"
if it is not perfect sanctification? I presume all of you who are here
tonight, if there is such a thing promised in the Bible as perfect
sanctification, wise to know it. Now what do you think? In 1
Thessalonians 5:23, the apostle Paul prays a very remarkable prayer:
"And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly; and I pray God your
whole spirit, and soul, and body, be preserved blameless unto the
coming of our Lord Jesus Christ." What is that? "Sanctify you wholly."
Does that mean perfect sanctification? You may think it does not mean
perfect sanctification in this world. But the apostle says not only that
your whole soul and spirit, but that your "body be preserved
blameless." Could an inspired apostle make such a prayer, if he did
not believe the blessing prayed for to be possible? But he goes on to
say, in the very next verse, "Faithful is he that calleth you, who also
will do it." Is that true, or is it false?

4. The perfect sanctification of believers is the very object for which
the Holy Spirit is promised.

To quote the passages that show this, would take up too much time."
The whole tenor of scripture respecting the Holy Spirit proves it. The
whole array of gospel means through which the Holy Spirit works, is
aimed at this, and adapted to the end of sanctifying the church. All the
commands to be holy, all the promises, all the prophecies, all the
ordinances, all the providences, the blessings and the judgments, all
the duties of religion, are the means which the Holy Ghost is to employ
for sanctifying the church.

5. If it is not a practicable duty to be perfectly holy in this world, then
it will follow that the devil has so completely accomplished his design
in corrupting mankind that Jesus Christ is at fault, and his no way to
sanctify his people but by taking them out of the world.

Is it possible that Satan has so got the advantage of God, that God's
kingdom cannot be reestablished in this world, and that the Almighty
has no way but to back out, and take his saints to heaven, before he
can make them holy? Is God's kingdom to be only partially
established, and is it to be always so, that the best saints shall
one-half of their time be serving the devil? Must the people of God always
go drooping and drivelling along in religion, and live in sin till they get
to heaven? What is that stone out of a mountain without hands, that
is to fill the earth, if it does not show that there is yet to be a universal
triumph of the love of God in the world?

6. If perfect sanctification is not attainable in this world, it must be
either from a want of motives in the gospel, or want of sufficient power
in the Spirit of God.

It is said that in another life we may be like God, for we shall see him
as he is. But why not here, if we have that faith which is the
"substance of things hoped for, and the evidence of things not seen?"
There is a promise to those who "hunger and thirst after
righteousness" that "they shall be filled."

What is it to be "filled" with righteousness, but to be perfectly holy?
And are we never to be filled with righteousness till we die? Are we to
go through life hungry, and thirsty and unsatisfied? So the Bible has
been understood, but it does not read so.

OBJECTIONS

l. "The power of habit is so great. that we ought not to expect to be
perfectly sanctified in this life."

Answer. If the power of habit can be so far encroached upon that an
impenitent sinner can be converted, why can it not be absolutely
broken, so that a converted person may be wholly sanctified? The
greatest difficulty, surely, if when selfishness has the entire control of
the mind, and when the habits of sin are wholly unbroken. This
obstacle is so great, in all cases, that no power but that of the Holy
Ghost can overcome it: and so great, in many instances, that God
himself cannot, consistently with his wisdom, use the means
necessary to convert the soul. But is it possible to suppose, that after
he has begun to overcome it, after he has broken the power of
selfishness and the obstinacy of habit, and actually converted the
individual, that after this God has not resources sufficient to sanctify
the soul altogether?

2. "Many physical difficulties have been created by a life of sin, that
cannot be overcome or removed by moral means."

This is a common objection. Men feel that they have fastened upon
themselves appetites and physical influences, which they do not
believe it possible to overcome of moral means. The apostle Paul, in
the 7th of Romans, describes a man in great conflict with the body. But
in the next chapter he speaks of one who had gotten the victory over
the flesh. "And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but
the spirit is life because of righteousness. But if the Spirit of Him that
raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ
from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that
dwelleth in you." This quickening of the body is not spoken of the
resurrection of the body, but of the influence of the Spirit of God upon
the body the sanctification of the body.

You will ask, "Does the Spirit of God produce a physical change in the
body?" I will illustrate it by the case of the drunkard. The drunkard has
brought upon himself a diseased state of the body, an unnatural thirst,
which is unsuitable, and so strong that it seems impossible he should
be reclaimed. But very likely you know cases in which they have been
reclaimed, and have entirely overcome this physical appetite. I have
heard of cases, where drunkards have been made to see the sin of
drunkenness in such a strong light, that they abhorred strong drink,
and forever renounced it, with such a loathing that they never had the
least desire for strong drink again.

I once knew an individual who was a slave to the use of tobacco. At
length he became convinced that it was a sin for him to use it, and the
struggle against it finally drove him to God in such an agony of prayer,
that he got the victory at once over the appetite, and never had the
least desire for it again. I am not now giving you philosophy, but facts.
I have heard of individuals over whom a life of sin had given to certain
appetites a perfect mastery, but in time of revival they have been
subdued into perfect quiescence, and these appetites have ever after
been as dead as if they had no body. I suppose the fact is, that the
mind may be so occupied and absorbed with greater things, as not to
give a thought to the things that would revive the vicious appetite. If a
drunkard goes by a grocery, or sees people drinking and allows his
mind to run upon it, the appetite will be awakened. 

The wise man, therefore, tells him to "Look not upon the wine when it
is red." But there is no doubt that any appetite of the body may be
subdued, if a sufficient impression is made upon the mind to break it
up.

I believe every real Christian will be ready to admit that this is possible,
from his own experience. Have you not, beloved, known times when
one great absorbing topic has so filled your mind and controlled your
soul. that the appetites of the body remained, for the time, perfectly
neutralized? Now, suppose this state of mind to continue to become
constant, would not all these physical difficulties be overcome, which
you speak of as standing in the way of perfect sanctification?

3. "The Bible is against this doctrine, where it says, there is not a just
man on the earth that liveth, and sinneth not."

Answer. Suppose the Bible does say that there is not one on earth, it
does not say there cannot be one. Or, it may have been true at that
time, or under that dispensation, that there was not one man in the
world who was perfectly sanctified; and yet it may not follow that at this
time, or under the gospel dispensation, there is no one who lives
without sin. "For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of
a better hope did." Hebrews 7:9. That is, the gospel did.

4. "The apostles admit that they were not perfect."

Answer. I know the apostle Paul says, in one place, "Not as though I
had already attained, either were already perfect." But it is not said
that he continued so till his death, or that he never did attain to perfect
sanctification, and the manner in which he speaks in the remainder of
the verse, looks as if he expected to become so: "But I follow after, if
that I may apprehend that for which also I am apprehended of Christ
Jesus." Nor does it appear to me to be true that in this passage
referred to, he is speaking of perfect sanctification, but rather of
perfect knowledge.

And the apostle John speaks of himself as if he loved God perfectly.
But whatever may be the truth as to the actual character of the
apostles it does not follow, because they were not perfect that no
others can be. They clearly declare it to be a duty, and that they were
aiming at it, just as if they expected to attain it in this life. And they
command us to do the same.

5. "But is it not presumption for us to think we can be better than the
apostles and primitive Christians?"

Answer. What is the presumption in the case? Is it not a fact that we
have far greater advantages for religious experience, than the
primitive churches. The benefit of their experience, the complete
scriptures, the state of the world, the near approach of the millennium,
all give us the advantage over the primitive believers. Are we to
suppose the church is always to stand in regard to religious
experience, and never to go ahead in any thing? What scripture is
there for this? Why should not the church be always growing better?
It seems to be the prevailing idea that the church is to be always
looking back to the primitive saints as the standard. I suppose the
reverse of this is a duty, and that we ought to be always aiming at a
much higher standard than theirs. I believe the church must go far
ahead of the primitive Christians before the millennium can come. I
leave out of view the apostles, because it does not clearly appear but
that they became fully sanctified.

6. "But so many profess to be perfect, who are not so, that I cannot
believe in perfection in this life."

Answer. How many people profess to be rich, who are not;. Will you
therefore say, you cannot believe any body is rich? Fine logic!

7. "So many who profess perfection have run into error and fanaticism,
that I am afraid to think of it."

Answer. I find in history, that a sect of Perfectionists has grown out of
every great and general revival that ever took place. And this is exactly
one of the devil's masterpieces, to counteract the effects of a revival.
He knows that if the church were brought to the proper standard of
holiness, it would be a speedy death blow to his power on earth, and
he takes this course to defeat the efforts of the church for elevating the
standard of piety, by frightening Christians from marching right up to
the point, and aiming at living perfectly conformed to the will of God.
And so successful has he been, that the moment you begin to crowd
the church up to be holy, and give up all their sins, somebody will cry
out, "Why, this leads to Perfectionism;" and thus give it a bad name
and put it down.

8. "But do you really think any body ever has been perfectly holy in this
world?"

Answer. I have reason to believe there have been many. It is highly
probable that Enoch and Elijah were free from sin, before they were
taken out of the world. And in different ages of the church there have
been numbers of Christians who were intelligent and upright, and had
nothing that could be said against them, who have testified that they
themselves lived free from sin. I know it is said, in reply, that they must
have been proud, and that no man would say he was free from sin for
any other motive but pride. But I ask, why may not a man say he is
free from sin, if it is so, without being proud, as well as he can say he
is converted without being proud? Will not the saints say it in heaven,
to the praise of the grace of God, which has thus crowned his glorious
work? And why may they not say it now, from the same motive? I do
not myself profess now to have attained perfect sanctification, but if I
had attained it, if I felt that God had really given me the victory over the
world, the flesh and the devil, and made me free from sin, would I
keep it a secret, locked up in my own breast, and let my brethren
stumble on in ignorance of what the grace of God can do? Never. I
would tell them, that they might expect complete deliverance, if they
would only lay hold on the arm of help which Christ reaches forth, to
save his people from their sins.

I have heard people talk like this, that if a Christian really was perfect,
he would be the last person that would tell of it. But would you say of
a person who professed conversion, "If he was really converted, he
would be the last person to tell of it?" On the contrary, is it not the first
impulse of a converted heart to say, "come and hear, all ye that fear
God, and I will declare what he hath done for my soul!" Why then
should not the same desire exist in one who feels that he has obtained
sanctification? Why all these suspicions, and refusing to credit
evidence? If anyone gives evidence of great piety, if his life is
irreproachable, and his spirit not to be complained of, if he shows the
very spirit of the Son of God, and if such a person testifies that after
great struggles and agonizing prayer God has given him the victory,
and his soul is set at liberty by the power of divine grace; why are we
not bound to receive his testimony, just as much, as when he says he
is converted. We always take such testimony, so far. And now, when
he says he has gone farther, and got the victory over all sin, and that
Christ has actually fulfilled his promise in this respect, why should we
not credit this also?

I have recently read Mr. Wesley's "Plain Account of Christian
Perfection," a book I never saw until lately. I find some expressions in
it to which I should object, but I believe it is rather the expression than
the sentiments. And I think, with this abatement, it is an admirable
book, and I wish every member of this church to read it. An edition is
in the press, in this city. I would also recommend the memoir of James
Brainerd Taylor, and I wish every Christian would get it, and study it.
I have read the most of it three times within a few months. 

From many things in that book, it is plain that he believed in the
doctrine that Christian perfection is a duty, and that it is attainable by
believers in this life. There is nothing published which shows that he
professed to have attained it, but it is manifest that he believed it to be
attainable. But I have been told that much which is found in his diary
on this subject, as well as some things in his letters, were suppressed
by his biographers, as not fitted for the eye of the church in her
present state. I believe if the whole could come to light, that it would
be seen that he was a firm believer in this doctrine. These books
should be read and pondered by the church.

I have now in my mind an individual, who was a member of the
church, but very worldly, and when a revival came he opposed it, at
first; but afterwards he was awakened, and after an awful conflict, he
broke down, and has ever since lived a life of the most devoted piety,
laboring and praying incessantly, like his blessed Master, to promote
the kingdom of God. I have never heard this man say he thought he
was perfect, but I have often heard him speak of the duty and
practicability of being perfectly sanctified. And if there is a man in the
world who is so, I believe he is one.

People have the strangest notions on this subject. Sometimes you will
hear them argue against Christian Perfection on this ground, that a
man who was perfectly holy could not live, could not exist in this world.
I believe I have talked just so myself, in time past. I know I have talked
like a fool on the subject. Why, a saint who was perfect would be more
alive than ever, to the good of his fellow men. Could not Jesus Christ
live on earth? He was perfectly holy. It is thought that if a person was
perfectly sanctified, and loved God perfectly, he would be in such a
state of excitement, that he could not remain in the body, could neither
eat nor sleep, nor attend to the ordinary duties of life. But there is no
evidence of this. The Lord Jesus Christ was a man, subject to all the
temptations of other men, He also loved the Lord his God with all his
heart and soul and strength. And yet it does not appear that he was in
such a state of excitement that he could not both eat and sleep, and
work at his trade as a carpenter, and maintain perfect health of body
and perfect composure of mind. And why needs a saint that is
perfectly sanctified, to be carried away with uncontrollable excitement,
or killed with intense emotion, any more than Jesus Christ? There is
no need of it, and Christian Perfection implies no such thing.

REMARKS

We can see now the reasons why there is no more perfection in the
world.

1. Christians do not believe that it is the will of God, or that God is
willing they should be perfectly sanctified in this world.

They know he commands them to be perfect, as he is perfect, but they
think that he is secretly unwilling, and does not really wish them to be
so; "Otherwise," say they, "why does he not do more for us, to make
us perfect?" No doubt, God prefers their remaining as they are, to
using any other means or system of influences to make them
otherwise; because he sees that it would be a greater evil to introduce
a new system of means than to let them remain as they are. 
Where one of the evils is unavoidable, he chooses the least of the two
evils, and whom doubt that he prefers their being perfect in the
circumstances in which they are, to their sinning in these
circumstances. Sinners reason just as these professors reason. They
say, "I don't believe he wills my repentance; if he did, he would make
me repent." Sinner, God may prefer your continued impenitence, and
your damnation, to using any other influences than he does use to
make you repent. 

But for you to infer from this, that he does not wish you to yield to the
influences he does use, is strange logic! Suppose your servant should
reason so, and say, "I don't believe my master means I should obey
him, because he don't stand by me all day, to keep me at work." Is that
a just conclusion? Very likely, the master's time is so valuable, that it
would be a greater evil to his business, than for that servant to stand
still all day.

So it is in the government of God. If God were to bring all the power of
his government to bear on one individual, he might save that
individual, while at the same time, it would so materially derange his
government, that it would be a vastly greater evil than for that
individual to go to hell. In the same way, in the case of a Christian,
God has furnished him with all the means of sanctification, and
required him to be perfect, and now he turns round and says, "God
does not really prefer my being perfect; if he did, he would make me
so." This is just the argument of the impenitent sinner, and no better
in one case than the other. The plain truth is, God does desire, of
both, that in the circumstances in which they are placed, they should
do just what he commands them to do.

2. They do not expect it themselves.

The great part of the church do not really expect to be any more pious
than they are.

3. Much of the time, they do not even desire perfect sanctification.

4. They are satisfied with their hunger and thirst after righteousness,
and do not expect to be filled.

Here let me say, that hunger and thirst after holiness is not holiness.
The desire of a thing is not the thing desired. If they hunger and thirst
after holiness, they ought to give God no rest, till he comes up to his
promise, that they shall be filled with holiness, or made perfectly holy.

5. They overlook the great design of the gospel.

Too long has the church been in the habit of thinking that the great
design of the gospel is, to save men from the punishment of sin,
whereas its real design and object is to deliver men from sin. But
Christians have taken the other ground, and think of nothing but that
they are to go on in sin, and all they hope for is to be forgiven, and
when they die made holy in heaven. Oh, if they only realized that the
whole framework of the gospel is designed to break the power of sin,
and fill men on earth with all the fullness of God, how soon there would
be one steady blaze of love in the hearts of God's people all over the
world!

6. The promises are not understood, and not appropriated by faith.

If the church would read the Bible, and lay hold of every promise there,
they would find them exceeding great and precious. But now the
church loses its inheritance, and remains ignorant of the extent of the
blessings she may receive. Had I time tonight I could lead you to some
promises which, if you would only get hold of and appropriate, you
would know what I mean.

7. They seek it by the law, and not by faith.

How many are seeking sanctification by their own resolutions and
works, their fastings and prayers, their endeavors and activity, instead
of taking right hold of Christ, by faith, for sanctification, as they do for
justification. It is all work, work, work, when it should be by faith in
"Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and
righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption." When they go and
take right hold of the strength of God, they will be sanctified. 

Faith will bring Christ right into the soul, and fill it with the same spirit
that breathes through himself. These dead works are nothing. It is faith
that must sanctify, it is faith that purifies the heart; that faith which is
the substance of things hoped for, takes hold of Christ and brings him
into the soul, to dwell there the hope of glory; that the life which we live
here should be by the faith of the Son of God. It is from not knowing,
or not regarding this, that there is so little holiness in the church.

And finally,

8. From the want of the right kind of dependence.

Instead of taking scriptural views of their dependencies and seeing
where their strength is, and realizing how willing God is to give his
Holy Spirit to them that ask, now and continually, and thus taking hold,
and holding on, by the arm of God, they sit down, in unbelief and sin,
to wait God's time, and call this depending on God. Alas how little is
felt, after all this talk about dependence on the Holy Spirit; how little is
really felt of it; and how little is there of the giving up of the whole soul
to his control and guidance, with faith in his power to enlighten, to
lead, to sanctify, to kindle the affections, and fill the soul continually
with all the fullness of God!

Chapter 20.

CHRISTIAN PERFECTION.

Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in heaven is
perfect   Matthew 5:48.

In speaking from these words, previously, I pursued the following
order.

1. I showed what is implied in being perfect.

2. What Christian perfection is.

3. That it is a duty.

4. That it is attainable in this life.

5. Answered some objections, and then gave some reasons why so
many persons are not perfect. Tonight my object is to mention some
additional causes which prevent the great body of Christians from
attaining perfect sanctification. As a matter of fact, we know that the
church is not sanctified, and we ought to know the reasons. If the
defect is in God, we ought to know it. If he has not provided a sufficient
revelation, or if the power of the Holy Spirit is not adequate to sanctify
his people in this world, we ought to understand it, so as not to perplex
ourselves with idle endeavors after what is unattainable. And if the
fault is in us, we ought to know it, and the true reasons ought to be
understood, lest by any means we should charge God foolishly, even
in thought, by imagining that he has required of us that which he has
furnished us no adequate means of attaining.

I. The first general reason which I shall mention, for persons not being
sanctified, is that they seek sanctification "by works," and not "by faith."

The religion of works assumes a great variety of forms and it is
interesting to see the ever-varying, shifting forms it takes:

1. One form is where men are aiming to live so as to render their
damnation unjust. It matters not, in this case, whether they deem
themselves Christians or not, if they are in fact trying to live so as to
render it unjust for God to send them to hell. This was the religion of
the ancient Pharisees. And there are not a few, in the present day,
whose religion is purely of this character. You will often find them out
of the church and perhaps ready to confess that they have never been
born again. But yet they speak of their own works in a way that makes
it manifest that they think themselves quite too good to be damned.

2. Another form of the religion of works is, where persons are not
aiming so much to render it unjust in God to damn them, but are
seeking by their works to recommend themselves to the mercy of God.
They know they deserve to be damned, and will for ever deserve it.
But they also know that God is merciful; and they think that if they live
honest lives, and do many kind things to the poor, it will so
recommend them to the general mercy of God, that he will not impute
their iniquities to them, but will forgive their sins and save them. This
is the religion of most modern moralists. Living under the gospel, they
know they cannot be saved by their works, and yet they think that if
they go to meeting, and help to support the minister, and do this and
that and the other kind of good works, it will recommend them to God's
mercy sufficiently for salvation. So far as I understand the system of
religion held by modern Unitarians, this must be their system. Whether
they understand it so, or admit it to be so, or not, as far as I can see,
it comes to this. 

They set aside the atonement of Christ, and do not expect to be saved
by the righteousness of Jesus Christ; and I know not on what they do
depend, but this. They seem to have a kind of sentimental religion,
and on this, with their morality and their liberality, they depend to
recommend them to the mercy of God. On this ground they expect to
receive the forgiveness of their sins, and to be saved.

3. Another form of the religion of works is, where persons are
endeavoring to prepare themselves to accept of Christ.

They understand that salvation is only through Jesus Christ. They
know that they cannot be saved by works, nor by the general mercy
of God, without an atonement, and that the only way to be saved is by
faith in Christ. But they have heard the relations of the experience of
others, who went through a long process of distress before they
submitted to Christ and found peace in believing. And they think a
certain preparatory process is necessary, and that they must make a
great many prayers and run hither and thither to attend meetings, and
lie awake many nights, and suffer so much distress, and perhaps fall
into despair, and then they shall be in a situation to accept of Christ. 

This is the situation of many convicted sinners. When they are
awakened, and get so far as to find that they cannot be saved by their
own works, then they set themselves to prepare to receive Christ.
Perhaps some of you, who are here tonight, are in just this case. You
dare not come to Christ just as you are, when you have made so few
prayers, and attended so few meetings, and felt so little distress, and
done so little and been so little engaged. And so, instead of going right
to Christ for all you need, as a poor lost sinner, throwing yourself
unreservedly into his hands, you set yourself to lash your mind into
more conviction and distress, in order to prepare you to accept of
Christ. Such cases are just about as common as convicted sinners
are. How many there are, who abound in such works, and seem
determined they will not fall down at once at the feet of Christ. It is not
necessary to go into an argument here, to show that they are growing
no better by all this process. There is no love to God in it, and no faith,
and no religion. It is all mere mockery of God, and hypocrisy, and sin.
There may be a great deal of feeling, but it is of no use; it brings them
in fact no nearer to Christ; and after all, they have to do the very thing
at last, which they might have done just as well at first.

Now suppose an individual should take it into his head that this is the
way to become holy. Every Christian can see that it is very absurd,
and that however he may multiply such works, he is not beginning to
approach to holiness. The first act of holiness is to believe, to take
hold of Christ by faith. And if a Christian, who is awakened to feel the
need of sanctification, undertakes to go through a preparatory process
of self-created distress, before he applies to Christ it is just as absurd
as for an awakened sinner to do it.

4. Another form of the religion of works is, where individuals perform
works to beget faith and love.

The last mentioned class was where individuals are preparing to come
to Christ. Here we suppose them to have come to Christ, and that they
have accepted him, and are real Christians; but having backslidden
they set them selves to perform many works to beget faith and love,
or to beget and perfect a right state of feeling. This is one of the most
common and most subtle forms in which the religion of works shows
itself at the present day.

Now this is very absurd. It is an attempt to produce holiness by sin.
For if the feelings are not right, the act is sin. If the act does not
proceed from faith and love, whatever they may do is sin.
How idle, to think that a person, by multiplying sins, can beget
holiness! And yet it is perfectly common for persons to think they can
beget holiness by a course of conduct that is purely sinful. For
certainly, any act that does not spring from love already existing, is
sinful. The individual acts not from the impulse of faith that works by
love and purifies the heart, but he acts without faith and love, with a
design to beget those affections by such acts as these.

It is true, when faith and love exist, and are the propelling motive to
action, the carrying of them out in action has a tendency to increase
them. This arises from the known laws of mind, by which every power
and every faculty gains strength by exercise. But the case supposed
is where individuals have left their first love, if ever they had any, and
then set themselves, without faith or love, to bustle about and warn
sinners, or the like, under the idea that this is the way to wake up, or
to become holy, or to get into the state of feeling that God requires. It
is really most unphilosophical and absurd, and ruinous, to think of
waking up faith in the soul, where it does not exit, by performing
outward acts from some other motive. It is mocking God, to pretend,
by doing things from wrong motives, to produce a holy frame of mind.
By and by, I shall show where the deception lies, and how it comes to
pass that any persons should ever dream of such a way of becoming
sanctified. The fact is too plain to be proved that pretending to serve
God in such a way, so far from having any tendency to produce a right
spirit, is in fact grieving the Holy Ghost, and insulting God.

So far as the philosophy of the thing is concerned, it is just like the
conduct of convicted sinners. But there is one difference; the sinner,
in spite of all his wickedness, may by and by learn his own
helplessness, and actually renounce all his own works, and feel that
his continued refuse to come to Christ, so far from being a preparation
for coming, is only heaping up so many sins against God. But it is
otherwise with those who think themselves to be already Christians,
as I will explain by and by.

It is often remarked, by careful observers in religion, that many
persons who abound in religious acts, are often the most hardened,
and the farthest removed from spiritual feeling. If performing religious
duties was the way to produce religious feeling, we should expect that
ministers, and leaders in the church, would be always the most
spiritual. But the fact is, that where faith and love are not in exercise,
in proportion as persons abound in outward acts without the inward
life, they become hardened and cold, and full of iniquity. They may
have been converted but have backslidden, and so long as they are
seeking sanctification in this way, by multiplying their religious duties,
running round to protracted meetings, or warning sinners, without any
spiritual life, they will never find it, but will in fact become more
hardened and stupid. Or if they get into an excitement in this way, it is
a spurious superficial state of mind that has nothing holy in it.

II. Another reason why so many persons are not sanctified is this:
They do not receive Christ in all his relations, as he is offered in the
gospel.

Most people are entirely mistaken here and they will never go ahead
in sanctification, until they learn that there is a radical error in the
manner in which they attempt to attain it. Take a case: Suppose an
individual who is convinced of sin. He sees that God might in justice
send him to hell, and that he has no way in which he can make
satisfaction. Now tell him of Christ's atonement, show him how Christ
died to make satisfaction, so that God can be just and yet the justifier
of them that believe in Jesus, he sees it to be right and sufficient, and
exactly what he needs, and he throws himself upon Christ, in faith, for
justification. He accepts him as his justification, and that is as far as he
understands the gospel. He believes, and is justified, and feels the
pardon of his sins. 

Now, here is the very attitude in which most convicted sinners stop.
They take up with Christ in the character in which, as sinners, they
most feel the need of a Savior, as the propitiation of their sins, to make
atonement and procure forgiveness, and there they stop. And after
that, it is often exceedingly difficult to get their attention to what Christ
offers beyond. Say what you will in regard to Christ as the believer's
wisdom and righteousness and his sanctification, and all his relations
as a Savior from sin   they do not feel their need of him sufficiently
to make them really throw themselves upon him in these relations. The
converted person feels at peace with God, joy and gratitude fill his
heart, he rejoices in having found a Savior that can stand between him
and his Judge, he may have really submitted, and for a time, he
follows on in the way of obedience to God's commandments. But, by
and by, he finds the workings of sin in his members, unsubdued pride,
his old temper breaking forth, and a multitude of enemies assaulting
his soul, from within and without, and he is not prepared to meet them. 

Hitherto, he has taken up Christ and regarded him, mainly, in one of
his relations, that of a Savior to save him from hell. If I am not
mistaken, the great mass of professing Christians lose sight, almost
altogether, of many of the most interesting relations which Christ
sustains to believers. Now, when the convert finds himself thus
brought under the power of temptation, and drawn into sin, he needs
to receive Christ in a new relation, to know more of the extent of his
provision, to make a fresh application to him, and give a new impulse
to his mind to resist temptation. This is not fully apprehended by many
Christians. They never really view Christ, under his name Jesus,
because he saves his people from their sins. They need to receive him
as a king, to take the throne in their hearts, and rule over them with
absolute and perfect control, bringing every faculty and every thought
into subjection. The reason why the convert thus falls under the power
of temptation, is that he has not submitted his own will to Christ, as a
king, in every thing, as perfectly as he ought, but is, after all exercising
his own self-will in some particulars.

Again: There are a multitude of what are called sign of ignorance,
which need not be. Christians complain that they cannot understand
the Bible, and there are many things concerning which they are always
in doubt. Now, what they need is, to receive Christ as wisdom, to
accept him in his relation as the source of light and knowledge. Who
of you now attach a full and definite idea to the text which says, "We
are in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and
righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption?" What do you
understand by it? It does not say he is a justifier, and a teacher, and
a sanctifier, and a redeemer; but that he is wisdom, and
righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption. What does that
mean? Until Christians shall find out by experience, and know what
that scripture meaneth, how can the church be sanctified? The church
is now just like a branch plucked off from a vine; "Except ye abide in
me, ye cannot bear fruit." Suppose a branch had power voluntarily to
separate itself from the vine, and then should undertake to bring forth
fruit, what would you think? So with the church; until Christians will go
to the Eternal Source of sanctification, and wisdom, and redemption,
it will never become holy. If they would become, by faith, absolutely
united with him, in all those offices and relations in which he is offered,
they would know what sanctification is.

I may, at some other time take this text as the foundation of a separate
discourse, and discuss these points, one by one, and show what this
means. I will only say, at present, as much as this: that it means just
what it says, and there is no need of explaining it away, as has too
commonly been done. And when the church shall once take hold of
Christ, in all his relations, as here set forth, they will know what it is,
and will see that he is the light and the life of the world. To be
sanctified by him, they must so embrace him, as to receive from him
those supplies of grace and knowledge, which alone can purify the
soul and give the complete victory over sin and Satan.
I will mention some reasons why Christians do not receive Christ in all
his relations.

(1.) They may not have those particular convictions, that are
calculated to make them deeply feel the necessity of a Savior in those
relations.

If an individual is not deeply convicted of his own depravity, and has
not learned intimately his own sinfulness, and if he does not know
experimentally, as a matter of fact, that he needs help to overcome the
power of sin, he will never receive Jesus Christ into his soul as a king.

When men undertake to help themselves out of sin, and feel strong in
their own strength to cope with their spiritual enemies, they never
receive Christ fully, nor rely on him solely to save them from sin. But
when they have tried to keep themselves by their own watchfulness
and prayers, and binding themselves by resolution and oaths to obey
God, and find that, after all, if left to themselves, there is nothing in
them but depravity, then they feel their own helplessness, and begin
to inquire what they shall do? The Bible teaches all this plainly
enough, and if people would believe the Bible, converts would know
their own helplessness, and their need of a Savior to save from sin at
the outset. But, as a matter of fact, they do not receive nor believe the
Bible on this subject, until they have set themselves to work out a
righteousness of their own, and thus have found out by experiment
that they are nothing without Christ. And therefore they do not receive
him in this relation, till after they have spent, it may be, years, in these
vain and self-righteous endeavors to do the work of sanctification
themselves. Having began in the Spirit they are trying to be made
perfect by the flesh.

(2.) Others when they see their own condition, do not receive Christ as
a Savior from sin, because they are, after all unwilling to abandon all
sin.

They know that if they give themselves up entirely to Christ, all sin
must be abandoned; and they have some idol which they are unwilling
to give up.

(3.) Sometimes, when persons are deeply convinced, and anxious to
know what they shall do to get rid of sin, they do not apply to Christ in
faith, because they do not know what they have a right to expect from
him.

There are many who seem to suppose they are under a fatal necessity
to sin, and that there is no help for it, but they must drag along this
load of sin till their death. They do not absolutely charge God foolishly,
and say in words that he has made no provision for such a case as
this. But they seem to suppose that Christ's atonement being so great
as to cover all sins, and God's mercy being so great, if they do go on
in sin all their days, as they expect they shall, he will forgive all at last,
and it will be just about as well in the end, as if they had been really
sanctified. They do not see that the gospel has made provision
sufficient to rid us forever of the commission of all sin. They look at it
as merely a system of pardon, leaving the sinner to drag along his
load of sin to the very gate of heaven; instead of a system to break up
the very power of sin in the mind. The consequence is they make very
little account of the promises. O, how little use do Christians make of
those exceeding great and precious promises, in the Bible, which were
given expressly for this purpose, that we might become partakers of
the divine nature! Here God has suited his promises to our exigencies
for this end, and we have only to draw upon him for all we want, and
we shall have whatever we need for our sanctification. Hear the Savior
say, "What things soever ye desire when ye pray, believe that ye
receive them and ye shall have them."

The fact is, Christians do not really believe much that is in the Bible.
Now, suppose you were to meet God, and you knew it was God
himself, speaking to you, and he should reach out a book in his hand,
and tell you to take that book, and that the book contains exceeding
great and precious promises, of all that you need, or ever can need,
to resist temptation, to overcome sin, and to make you perfectly holy,
and fit you for heaven; and then he tells you that whenever you are in
want of anything for this end, you need only take the appropriate
promise, and present it to him at any time, and he will do it. Now, if you
were to receive such a book, directly from the hand of God, and knew
that God had written it for you, with his own hand, would you not
believe it? And would you not read it a great deal more than you now
read the Bible? How eager you would be to know all that was in it?
And how ready to apply the promises in time of need! You would want
to get it all by heart, and often repeat it all through, that you might
keep your mind familiar with its contents and be always ready to apply
the promises you read! Now, the truth is, the Bible is that book. It is
written just so and filled with just such promises; so that the Christian
by laying hold of the right promise, and pleading it, can always find all
that he needs for his spiritual benefit.

Christ is a complete Savior. All the promises of God are in him. Yea,
and in him Amen, to the glory of God the Father. That is, God has
promised in the second person of the Trinity, in the person of Jesus
Christ, and made them all certain through him. Now, the thing which
is needed is, that Christians, should understand these promises, and
believe them, and in every circumstance of need apply them, for
sanctification. Suppose they lack wisdom. Let them go to God, and
plead the promise. Suppose they cannot understand the scriptures, or
the path of duty is not plain. The promise is plain enough, take that.
Whatever they lack of wisdom, righteousness, sanctification, and
redemption, only let them go to God in faith, and take hold of the
promise, and if he does not prove false, they will assuredly receive all
that they need.

4.) Another reason why many do not receive Christ in all his relations
is, that they are too proud to relinquish all self-dependence or reliance
on their own wisdom and their own will.

How great a thing it is, for the proud heart of man to give up its own
wisdom, and knowledge, and will, and every thing, to God. I have
found this the greatest of all difficulties. Doubtless all find it so. The
common plea is, "Our reason was given us, to be exercised in religion
but what is the use, if we may not rely on it, or follow it?" But there is
one important discrimination to be made, which many overlook. Our
reason was given us to use in religion; but it is not in the proper
province of reason to ask whether what God says is reasonable, but
to show us the infinite reasonableness of believing that all which God
says must be true, whether we in our ignorance and blindness can see
the reasonableness of it or not. And if we go beyond this, we go
beyond the proper province of reason. But how unwilling the proud
heart of man is to lay aside all its own vain wisdom, and become like
a little child, under the teaching of God! The apostle says, "If any man
think that he knoweth any thing, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought
to know." There is a vast meaning in this. He that does not receive
Christ alone as his wisdom, knows nothing in religion to any purpose.
If he is not taught by Jesus Christ, he has not learned the first lesson
of Christianity. So again, "No man knoweth the Father but the Son,
and he to whomsoever the Son revealeth him." The individual who has
learned this lesson, feels that he has not one iota of knowledge in
religion, that is of any value, only as he is taught by Jesus Christ. For
it is written, "And they shall all be taught of God."

REMARKS

I. You see what kind of preaching the church now needs.

The church needs to be searched thoroughly, shown their great
defects, and brought under conviction, and then pointed to where their
great strength lies. 

With their everlasting parade of dead works, they need to be shown
how poor they are. "Thou sayest I am rich, and increased with goods,
and have need of nothing, and knowest not that thou art wretched,
and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked." Until Christians are
shown their poverty, and the infinite emptiness and abominable
wickedness of their dead works, and then shown just where their help
is, and that it is by faith alone, they can never be sanctified, the church
will go farther and farther from God, till it will have only the form of
godliness, denying the power thereof.

II. When you see the Christian character defective in any particular,
you may always know that the individual needs to receive Christ more
fully in the very relation that is calculated to supply this defect.

The defect, whatever it be, in the character of any believer, will never
be remedied, until he sees the relation of Christ to that part of his
character, so as by faith to take hold of Christ, and bring him in to
remedy that defect. Suppose a person is naturally penurious and
selfish, and reluctant to act in a disinterested manner: he will never
remedy that defect, until he receives Christ as his pattern, and the
selfishness is driven out of his heart by imbuing his very soul with the
infinite benevolence of the Savior. So it is with regard to any other
defect; he will never conquer it, until you make him see that the infinite
fullness of Christ is answerable to that very want.

III. You see the necessity there is that ministers should be persons of
deep experience in religion.

It is easy for even a carnal mind to preach so as to bring sinners under
conviction. But until the tone of sanctification is greatly raised among
ministers, it is not to be expected that the piety of the church will be
greatly elevated. Those Christians who have experience of these
things should therefore be much in prayer for ministers, that the sons
of Levi may be purified, that the leaders of Israel may take hold of
Christ for the sanctification of their own hearts, and then they will know
what to say to the church on the subject of holiness.

IV. Many seek sanctification by works, who do not know that they are
seeking in this way.

They profess that they are seeking sanctification only by faith. They
tell you they know very well that it is in vain to seek it in their own
strength. But yet the results show how conclusively, that they are
seeking by works, and not by faith. It is of the last importance that you
should know, whether you are seeking sanctification by works, or by
faith for all seeking of it by works is a