without them it meant nothing. It was no more than killing an ox or a sheep under any other circumstances. David understood this in the twilight of the old dispensation.

After two of the most horrid crimes that man can commit, he prays: "Thou desirest not sacrifice, else would I bring it. Thou delightest not in burnt offering. The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit; a broken and contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise. Create in me a clean heart, O God, and renew a right spirit within me." The sin-offering, then, was in itself no expiation. It left the matter just where it was before. God looketh only at the heart; a broken and a contrite heart is the only sin-offering. The outward offering signifies this, or it is nothing, and of no avail. Penitence, David assures us, is as accceptable without the offering as it is with it. But, if this be so, it may be inquired, what was the use of sacrifices, and why were they instituted? I answer, that they were a form of divine worship calculated for a rude and barbarous age. They have no necessary connection with religion, as we see that enlightened men may be as religious without them as they ever were with them. They were universal among the heathen, before they were adopted by the Jews. They were adopted by Moses, for the reason that man could not step the whole distance from idolatry to the spirituality of Christianity at one stride. Moses merely made the change of directing sacrificial worship from the false gods of the heathen to the true Jehovah. Sacrifices were used for various religious purposes. They were used to express gratitude. A portion of the first fruits were

offered to God, to acknowledge that he was the giver of them. Sacrifices were offered as mere acts of stated worship, as in the morning and evening sacrifice for the whole nation, at the hour of morning and evening prayer, and by neighbourhoods, at the new moons, and on great occasions, merely as acts of acknowledgment of the superintending providence of God. They were

offered in token of penitence for sin, as if to propitiate an offended Deity. When such offerings, under the Mosaic economy, received the sanction of God, they became the symbol and pledge, not only of man's penitence, but God's mercy. By their institution God pledges himself to forgive the penitent. Once a year there was appointed a general sin-offering. The parties represented in it were, God on the one hand, and the children of Israel on the other. And it was signified in this way. The offering was considered to be made by the whole people, through their high priest. The most sacred thing in their temple was the ark, and it was placed in the inmost recess of the temple. God, therefore, was represented as having his seat upon the ark. To represent the part which the Deity had in the general expiation, the priest went into the holiest of holies, and sprinkled some of the blood of the sacrifice was called, from this

upon the lid of the ark, which circumstance, the mercy-seat. But, after all, this ceremony was only symbolical. It had no intrinsic efficacy. That day was likewise made a day of humiliation and penitence. "It shall be a sabbath of rest to you, and ye shall afflict your souls by a statute forever." If there were no penitence in the people, there would have

been no meaning in the sacrifice, and it would have been altogether useless.

Sacrifices were likewise made in ratification of treaties and covenants. It was so as early as the days of Abraham. God, at an early period, promised to give him the land of Canaan. In token of this promise, which is called a covenant, Moses is directed to take several animals, and sacrifice them. He divided them, and placed the parts over against each other. "And it came to pass, that when the sun went down and it was dark, behold, a smoking furnace and a burning lamp passed between those pieces. In that same day the Lord made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed will I give this land." So after giving the law on Sinai, the Israelites made a covenant with God to keep the law, by sacrifice. "And Moses came and told the people all the words of the Lord, and all the judgments; and all the people answered with one voice, and said, All the words, which the Lord hath said, we will do. And Moses wrote all the words of the Lord, and rose up early in the morning and builded an altar under the hill, and twelve pillars, according to the twelve tribes of Israel. And he sent young men of the children of Israel, which offered burnt offerings and sacrificed peace offerings of oxen unto the Lord. And Moses took half of the blood and put it in basins, and half of the blood he sprinkled on the altar. And he took the book and read in the audience of the people, and they said: All that the Lord hath said will we do and be obedient. And Moses took the blood and sprinkled it on the people and said, Behold, the blood of the covenant which

the Lord hath made with you concerning all these words." Such, then, were the principal purposes of sacrifices.

Now, after this explanation of the purposes of sacrifices, can we say that the death of Christ was a literal sacrifice in any sense? If so, it was a human sacrifice; and nothing can be more shocking than the idea of God's being propitiated by a human sacrifice. What are the conditions of a sacrifice? It must be offered by men to God. It must be such a one as it is lawful for man to make, and consistent for God to receive. If Christ's death was a sacrifice, then a murder may be a sacrifice. A sacrifice must be offered by some party or parties. Was it the soldiers, was it Pontius Pilate, or the Jewish high priest? Can a man be transformed into an altar? But it is said that Christ offered himself. If he did, literally, then he must have been guilty of his own death. Paul says of himself, when about to die in the cause of the Gospel "I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand." On another occasion, "If I be offered up on the sacrifice and service of your faith, I joy and rejoice with you all." No man supposes Paul to have spoken literally. Nor is it necessary to suppose that Christ was a literal sacrifice.

What exposition is left of the sacrificial language of the New Testament, when applied to Christ? It was not a sacrifice, but it was like a sacrifice, and therefore it is called a sacrifice. There was a resemblance between the death of Christ and the expiatory sacrifices, because they were both the emblems of the mercy of God. Christ came as the ambassador of God's mercy, not on

the ground of his own future sufferings, but the spontaneous, unbought mercy of God. His mission originated in the Divine mercy. "God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth. in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." In this embassy of mercy, he sacrificed his life. We have remission of sins through him, not because he purchased it, but because through him we have repentance, without which remission is impossible. As in the Old Testament the sacrifices were the symbol of the divine clemency, so is Christ under the New, and in so far, may be said to answer the same end, in the promotion of holiness and religion. As the annual sacrifice, in which the high priest went into the holy of holies, was a perpetual remembrance of the sinfulness of men, and of the readiness of God to forgive the penitent, (but not without their penitence, for that day was set apart as a day to afflict their souls, and mourn for their sins,) so the death of Christ upon the cross, is a perpetual memorial of the sinfulness of mankind, inasmuch as he died to bring them to repentance, and to assure them of the Divine mercy. In neither case are either of them, in themselves, of the least avail, without penitence and reformation on the part of man.

There is a resemblance between the death of Christ and the sacrifices of ratification, such as that of which I read to you from the account which is given of the covenant made between the children of Israel and Jehovah, in which they stipulated that they would keep the law. When Christ had given the new law, and was about to depart out of the world, he compared his blood, that was