II. 2. But to come to our Saviour's manner and character, as connected with our position. Do these, as represented in the Gospel, (or rather I should say, as here conceived and assumed to be represented in the Gospel,) come home to our experience also, as being suitable, according to the terms proposed ?

In entering upon this consideration, let it be again remarked, that, to estimate the points in question properly, we must have recourse to the same sort of contemplation as before. We must contemplate them only for our own satisfaction, and with our own knowledge, from that elevated point of light and evidence, at which Christians now stand. If we look to the immediate apprehensions which seem to have prevailed among the very people to whom our Saviour spake, we shall obtain a very inadequate conception of the fitness for its end, either of his instruction, or of his See as ex- example. His manner of speech was frequently Matt. xvi. misapprehended; his character was not then fully John viii. developed. All that language of the Gospels, in itself apparently at variance, which is now to us familiarly reconciled by the doctrine of two natures in our Lord, must of necessity have worn a very mysterious (not to say, unintelligible) aspect then John vii. when the Holy Ghost was not yet given, because that Jesus was not yet glorified. We cannot, however, for a moment doubt, that evidence enough was offered for conviction, to a generation who be

amples,

5-12.

33

end.

39.

to the

held the signs and wonders of the great Deliverer with their own eyes. The question for ourselves to weigh is this: whether contemplating our Saviour under both those views, in which we must contemplate him, in order to appreciate his claims worthily, (that is to say, both as the Minister and Proprietor at once of a new dispensation, and also as a friend and brother, himself the great exemplar of life and conduct to all his followers, for ever,) the style of his teaching, (in the first instance,) and his personal behaviour, (in the second,) appear adapted to the ends of his sojourn upon earth, to us, living now in the fulness of light?

1. With respect to his manner of speaking and teaching, it cannot be necessary to say much. If the characteristic traits by which he stands distinguished as a teacher were correctly displayed in a pp.145-151. former part of this Lecture, a conclusion of the suitableness of this to its proposed object follows almost spontaneously. Surely, his way of speech is perceptibly the very voice of the bridegroom John iii. himself. His precepts and aphorisms are unem

barrassed, clear, and positive; his discoveries are

29.

what we wanted; enough, and no more. He has rebuke for the hypocrite and the oppressor, and comfort for the penitent. To those who saw him, John xiv. his works bore witness to his words, when he called

11.

them to a saving faith. For ourselves, and all, as many as have never eaten and drunk in his personal Luke xiii. presence, and in whose streets he never taught, he

26.

has left a comprehensive, and sufficient, and perpeJohn xx. 29. tually descending consolation; Blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed.

ii. ch. 2, 3, 4, 5.

But I forbear to tarry on this topic. Let it be referred, rather, to the thoughts suggested conPaley, vol. cerning it by a powerful advocate for the truth of Christianity, in some of his chapters on its "auxiliary evidences." Surely, every thing there set forth relative to Christ, when honestly compared with our own experience, bespeaks him to be one, Matt. xxv. on whom we may rely with perfect security; the very "lord now gone for a season into a far coun"try," who has portioned out his goods among us, and will one day come and reckon with us! And is not this the very precise conviction which it most concerns our happpiness to feel?

14.

viii. 46.

2. A question of greater doubt and difficulty is, whether the second and subordinate object of his incarnation (namely, the exhibiting a perfect human example for our imitation) is accomplished with equal appropriateness ?

I call it a question of greater doubt and difficulty, because it is quite impossible, in sincere seeking after truth, and of our duty as resulting from truth, not to be sensible of this perplexity ;that the pattern thus propounded for our imitation, and declared to be the likeness we must aspire after, is one that neither is, nor ever has been perfectly imitated. For there is no man that sinneth not whereas it is both evident incidentally,

concerning CHRIST, as well as affirmed positively, that he was without sin. Hence it becomes a feel- Heb. iv. 15. ing of unsubdued nature, or of premature despair, that Christ's example is not imitable. An insuperable objection, if it were a sound one, to the present argument! since an example, really not imitable, could never have been held out, as this is, in Scripture, if Scripture be (as we contend) the work of a spirit and a wisdom that knows man thoroughly'.

But a true understanding of revealed religion seems to include (not to say, consist in) the honest reconciling-I mean, the reconciling not through dotage or self-imposition, but in reason and in conscience of certain paradoxes of this description; namely, of which either part separately so cogently approves itself to the natural reason, as not to be gainsaid without violence thereto offered: of which, again, both parts are found to coexist practically, without the least contradiction; in which, never

i This difficulty might be met and obviated by an inquiry, in what the imitation of our Saviour truly consists. Under which head, I take for granted that no fair and reasonable person will refuse to allow, that it must consist, not in the performance of specific actions, corresponding with the actions of Christ; but in a general conformity to his temper and spirit, to be exercised in that condition of life, in which it has pleased God to place us. Not however to stand upon this ground, it seems better to acknowledge the perplexity above represented, that it is a real one; and to meet it as such.

M

theless, there is so much seeming contrariety, when submitted to the mere intellect as abstract propositions, that the acceptance of, and hearty acquiescence in them as certain and consistent truths, is a work of faith alone. And of these paradoxes it appears to be one,-that an example found by deexperience never to have been imitated, in any gree approaching to strict accuracy, is yet presented as the only true standard of universal imitation *.

Nor, when this is so affirmed, does the burden rest with the Christian preacher to explain and

k

Perhaps the greatest of all these paradoxes is that which relates to the subject of the source and possession of faith, to the propositions, severally and conjointly, that faith is "a gift "of God alone," and yet "a faculty within every Christian's

power of attainment, to whom Christ is preached faith"fully;" in effect, the compatibility of grace and free-will. It is not within the scope of the present work to discuss any such question; but as it is a rock of offence, upon which (as it appears to me) every honest estimate of our condition, as responsible subjects of the Christian revelation, must painfully fall, sooner or later, I take this opportunity of remarking, with reference by anticipation to the topic of the succeeding Lecture, that I should not venture upon the assump tion therein made,-I should not think that holy Scripture did meet, and satisfy the wants and wishes of every individual whom it calls unto obedience, if he could not, from the above considerations, reconcile comfortably to his own heart, such apparent inconsistencies, although in words he cannot do so. We may reconcile any thing after a precise and formal pattern of man's prescription, by settling decrees, and calling them divine; and thus imagine that all perplexity is ended: but then, what becomes of the universality of Scripture ?