I am not infenfible, that great pains have been taken, even by fome Chriftians, to evade the force of these paffages of Scripture, which exclude the merit of man's obedience from any fhare in his juftification before God. Particularly, the paffages from the epiftle to the Romans are evaded, by alledging, that the law, and the the works of the law, there, mean only the rites of the Mofaic difpenfation. This is not a proper time and place for entering fully into that controversy; and therefore I fhall only observe, that, befides the correspondence of the above interpretation with all the other parts of Scripture, it may be fufficiently fupported by this one confideration, That the apostle, who is speaking both of Jews and Gentiles, exprefsly ftates the opposition with respect to our juftification between grace and debt, and excludes every thing that might make it of debt: "Where is boasting "then? It is excluded. By what law? of "works? Nay; but by the law of faith. "Therefore we conclude, that a man is juftified

در

by faith, without the deeds of the law +." And to the fame purpose, a little after, "Now to him "that worketh, is the reward not of grace, but "of debt. But to him that worketh not, but "believeth on him that juftifieth the ungodly, "his faith is counted for righteoufnefs "WhatRom. iv. 4, 5.

↑ Rom. iii. 27, 28.

ever would make our acceptance with God not free, or not of grace, is here excluded. Now, certainly, as there is a much more plaufible plea of merit in favour of works of obedience to the moral, than the ceremonial law; the fift are at leaft as much excluded as the laft by the apoftle's reafoning *.

Thus

It is eafy to forefee, that a grand objection against what is faid on this head will be, That it is going upon a very narrow icheme, and a scheme very uncharitable to many parties of Chriftians. It is the fashionable language of the age, to give large encomiums upon charity, when the defign is to level truth and falfhood; and to alledge, either that there is little difference between them, as to their effects, or that they cannot be diftinguished from one another by their proper marks. This is a fubje&t that needs as much to be fet in a proper light, as any I know. If the fenfe in which charity in fentiment is commonly understood, viz. a favourable judgment of the opinions of others, be the Scripture meaning of it, then certainly fome bounds must be fet to it; and it must be praise or blame-worthy, according to the cafes in which it is exercifed. I must needs take it for granted, that there are fome fundamental errors, and that it is poffible to make shipwreck of the faith. Now, however common cr fashionable it may be, to think, the farther charity, is extended the better: it may be demonftrated, that a favourable judgment of errors fundamental, er destructive of religion, deth neceffarily imply either a light efteem or weak perfuafion of the truth, or both. This furely is no part of a truly Chrif tian character; and if it be rightly denominated charity, it is become vicious by excefs. I confefs it appears to me, that juftification by free grace is a fundamental doctrine of the gospel. If this be true, I am not wrong in having the deepest sense of the danger of contrary opinions: nay, if I am mistaken, the confequences I draw from it, are no breaches of charity, but the neceflary effects of an error in judgment; and fo I claim charity, in my turn from my adverfaries upon their own principles.

But I am perfuaded the above is not the meaning of the word Charity in Scripture, but that it means an ardent and unfeigned love to others, and a defire of their welfare, temporal and eter

nal;

Thus I have endeavoured both to explain and confirm the affertion in the text, That there is no falvation in any other but in Chrift. There is, however, one queftion upon it which I would willingly pafs over in filence, but that the omifmiffion of it might, to fome intelligent hearers, weaken the conclufion, and make them reckon the fubject incompletely handled. The queftion is, Whether an objective revelation and explicit discovery of Chrift, and what he hath wrought, is necessary to falvation? or if his undertaking may not be the ground of acceptance for many who never heard of his name? In support of the laft of thefe it is faid, That many of the ancient pa

nal; and may very well confift with the ftrongest abhorrence of their wicked principles. We do find indeed in Scripture many charges, not to judge one another, mutually to forbear one another in things indifferent, and not to fuppofe that mens outward actions proceed from a bad principle which they do not profefs. But this is never called charity, and it is, by the reafoning on it, exprefsly limited to things really indifferent in their nature. (See the xivth and xvth chapters of the epiftle to the Romans.) Perhaps it will be faid, fome may judge things to be neceffary, which in truth are but indifferent. This cannot be denied; but there is no help for it. It is a confequence of the imperfection of human nature. Yet fall every man muft judge for himself, and muft diftinguish between things indifferent and neceflary, in the best manner he can. It is very remarkable, that the apoftle John, who speaks most of the importance of charity and mutual love, hath alfo perhaps the Arongest expreflions of any of the apoftles, on the hatefulness and danger of error. Thus he fays in his fecond epiftle, ver. 10, 1. "If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, "receive him not into your houfe, neither bid him God speed. "For he that biddeth him God fpeed, is partaker of his evil "deds."

triarchs and prophets were far from having diftinct views of the perfon, character, and work, of Chrift; and if (as all fuppofe) his undertaking was available for their acceptance, why not of others alfo? On fuch a queftion, no doubt, modefty and caution is highly commendable, and perhaps it were wife in fome refpects to fufpend the determination altogether. But there are cafes in which it comes neceffarily to be confidered: for inftance, I do not fee how it can be avoided, in fpeaking of the importance or neceffity of propagating the gofpel among the nations that know not God.

We may therefore obferve, that the only just foundation of our hope in God, either for ourfelves or others, efpecially as finners, is his promife. The firft of thefe ought to be precisely commenfurate to the laft. In fo far as it is defective, or falls fhort of this measure, we are chargeable with unbelief; and in fo far as it exceeds, with prefumption. Now, to whomfoever the true God is revealed in any measure, as merciful and gracious, forgiving iniquity, tranfgreffion, and fin; however obfcurely he points ou the meritorious cause of pardon, if they believ his word and accept of his mercy, they fhal be faved; as we are told," Abraham believel "God, and it was counted to him for righte "oufnefs..

"oufness *." As to any others, if they are in abfolute ignorance of the true God, we must fay, that there doth not appear, from Scripture, any ground on which to affirm, that the efficacy of Chrift's death extends to them: on the contrary, we are exprefsly told, that they have "no "hope t." We find indeed in Scripture, that the difplay of divine perfection in the works of creation, and the conduct of providence, ist represented as rendering the Heathens inexcufable in their contempt and neglect of God: "Ne"vertheless he left not himself without wit"nefs, in that he did good, and gave us rain "from heaven, and fruitful feafons, filling our "hearts with food and gladnefst. Because that "which may be known of God is manifeft in "them; for God hath fhewed it unto them. "For the invifible things of him from the cre"ation of the world are clearly seen, being un"derstood by the things that are made, even "his eternal power and godhead; fo that they "are without excufe ||." Should any defire from these paffages to infer, that if any of them made a juft and dutiful use of these natural notices of God, he would not fruftrate their fearch, but would lead them to the faving knowledge

*Rom. iv. 3. ‡ Acts xiv. 17.

5

See the forecited paffage, Eph, ii, 12.. Rom. i, 19, 20.

of