not from any doubt which he himself entertained of the matter, but in order that the doubts, which his disciples had conceived about it, might receive an answer and satisfaction at the fountain head; from Jesus himself, who was best able to give it.

You will, therefore, now observe what this answer was, and how, and under what circumstances, it was given. If you turn to St. Luke's statement of the transaction, chap. vii. verse 20th, you will there find it expressly asserted, what is ly implied and tacitly referred to by St. Matthe (and this is one instance, amongst many of the advantages of bringing the accounts of the different evangelists together:) you will find I say, that it so happened,—I ought to have said that it was so ordered by Providence—that at the time, the precise hour, when these messengers from John arrived, our Lord was in the very act of working miracles. In that same hour, says Luke, he cured many of infirmities and plagues, and of evil spirits, and unto many that were blind he gave sight so that the messengers themselves were eye-witnesses of his powers and his gifts, and of his mighty works; and to this evidence he refers them; and a more decisive or dignified answer could not possibly have been given. He neither says he was not the person they inquired atter, but bids them take notice and tell John of what they saw, and make their own conclusion from it. "Go your way, and tell John what things ye have seen and heard, how that the blind see, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, to the poor the pel is preached." It does not, I think, appear, nor is it necessary to suppose, that all these speoies of miracles were performed then, or before their eyes. It is specifically mentioned, that he then cured many of plagues and infirmities, cast out evil spirits, and restored sight to the blind; but it is not mentioned, for instance, that he then raised the dead, though that miracle be referred to in his answer. After having wrought, whilst

gos

they were present, many and various species of decisive miracles, he was well entitled to demand their credit and assent to others upon his own testimony and assertion.

Now from this answer of our Lord's, we are entitled to infer (and this I think is the useful inference to be drawn from it,) that the faith which he required, the ascent which he demanded, was a rational assent and faith founded upon proof and evidence. His exhortation was, "believe me for the very works' sake." He did not bid Philip, upon that occasion, or the disciples of John upon this, believe him, because he was the Son of God, because he came down from heaven, because he was in the Father and the Father in him, because he was with God and from God, because the Father had given unto him the Spirit without measure, because he was inspired in the fullest and largest sense of the word; for all these characters and pretensions, though the highest that could belong to any being whatsoever, to a prophet, or to more than a prophet, were nevertheless to be ascertained by facts; when ascertained, they were grounds of the most absolute confidence in his word, of the most implicit and unlimited reliance upon his authority; but they were to be ascertained by facts. To facts, therefore, our Lord appeals; to facts he refers them, and to the demonstration which they afforded of his power and truth; for shutting their eyes against faith, or, more properly speaking, for shutting their hearts and understandings against the proof and conclusion, which facts afforded, he pronounces them liable to condemnation. They were to believe his word, because of his works: that was exactly what he required. "The works which the Father hath given me to finish, the same works that I do bear witness of me, that the Father hath sent me; and the Father himself who hath sent me, beareth witness of me."* is remarkable that John the Baptist wrought no

* John y. 36.

It

miracles therefore the authority and confirming proof of his mission, rested very much upon the evidences which were exhibited, not by himself, but by the person whose appearance he professed to foretell; and undoubtedly the miracles of our Lord did, by a reflected operation, establish the preaching of John. For if a person in these days should appear, not working any miriele himself, but declaring that another and greater person was soon to follow, and if that other and greater person did accordingly soon follow, and shew forth mighty deeds, the authority of the first person's mission would be ratified by the second person's works. They who might doubt, nay reasonably doubt, concerning the first person's truth and pretensions before, would be fully satisfied of them afterward; and this was exactly the turn, which some rational and considerate Jews gave to the matter. "And many resorted to him, and said, John did no miracles: but all things that John spake of this man were true; the effect of this observation was, what it ought to be, "many believed on him there."

This distinction between our Lord and his forerunner, in one working miracles, and the other not, furnishes an account for two things, which we meet with in the Gospels; one is, John's declaring that when the person, of whom he spoke, should appear, his own ministry, which was then much followed and intended, would sink in importance and esteem. "He must increase, I must decrease-He that cometh after me, is preferred before me-He that was with thee beyond Jordan, to whom thou bearest witness; behold, the same baptizeth, and all men come to him." The other is our Lord's own reflection upon John's testimony in his favour, which was exactly agreeable to the truth of the case. "Ye sent unto John, and he bare witness unto the truth: but I receive Dot testimony from man. He was a burning and

Ibid. x. 47, 42.

a shining light; and ye were willing for a season to rejoice in his light. But I have greater witness than that of John-the works which the Father hath given me to finish, the same works that I do bear witness of me." As if he had said: My own performance of miracles is a higher and surer proof of my mission, than any testimony which could be given to me by another, who did not perform miracles, however great, or praise-worthy, or excellent, his character and his preaching were in all respects, or however much his followers confided in him: the one was the testimony of men, the other of God. "I receive not tes▾ timony of man ?" the proofs, which I myself ex. hibit before your eyes of divine power, supercede human testimony.

Again, our Lord put the truth of his pretensions, precisely and specifically upon the evidence of his miracles, "If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not: but if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works."*" What fairer appeal could be made? Could more be done to challenge inquiry, or place the question upon the right ground?

Lastly, in the xvth chapter and 24th verse, our Lord fixes the guilt of the unbelieving Jews upon this article, that they rejected miraculous proof, which ought to have convinced them and that, if they had not had such proof, they might have been excusable, or, comparatively speaking, they would not have had sin. His words are very me morable, "If I had not done among them the works which none other man did, they had not had sin."

It appears, therefore, that, as well in the answer to John's messengers, as in the other passages of his history and discourses which resemble this, our Lord acted a part the most consistent with his professed character. He referred the messen, ger who came to him, to miraculous works per

* Joba x. $7.

formed before their eyes, to things done apon the spot; to the testimony of their own senses. "Shew John those things which ye do see and hear." Would, could any other than a prophet come from God do this? In like manner, was it for any other than a divine messenger to bid his very disciples not believe in him, if he did not these works; or to tell unbelievers, that if he had not done among them works, which none other man did, their unbelief might have been excusable? In all this we discern conviction and sincerity, fairness, truth, and evidence.

SERMON XVI.

OF INSENSIBILITY TO OFFENCES.

Who can tell how oft he offendeth? O cleanse thou me from my secret faults. Keep thy servant also from presumptuous sins, lest they get the dominion over me.-Psalm xix. 12, 13.

THESE words express a rational and affecting prayer, according to the sense which they carry with them at first sight, and without entering into an interpretation of them whatsoever. Who is there, that will not join heartily in this prayer? for who is there, that has not occasion to pray against his sins? We are laden with the weight of our sins. "The remembrance of them is griev ous to us; the burden of them is intolerable.' But beyond this, these same words, when they come to be fully understood, have a still stronger meaning, and still more applicable to the state and condition of our souls; which I will endeavour to set before you.

You will observe the expression, "my secret faults: O cleanse thou me from my secret faults." Now the question is, to whom are these faults a secret? to myself, or to others? whether the prayer relates to faults, which are concealed from mankind, and are in that sense secret; or to faults which are concealed from the offender himself, and are therefore secret, in the most full and