ed, that there was a point of faith which was essential to their salvation. "If ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins."

It is a great error to suppose and represent, as some appear to do, that faith is required by a mere arbitrary act of God; without our being able to discern how believing will make us the better, or disbelieving make us the worse. No verily-Faith is always required on account of the benefits which accompany, or the use that is to be made of it. Suppose you were ill of a mortal disease, and that there was one, and but one, remedy in the world, which would preserve your life. Suppose you had heard of this remedy, but from utterly discrediting its efficacy, you absolutely refused to take it. You would die, and your death would be justly attributed to your want of faith in the remedy. The faith was essentially necessary to that act which would have saved your life-necessary from the very nature of the case. It is exactly the same in the gospel system of salvation. The whole human race are infected with a moral malady, which, if left to itself, will inevitably prove fatal. There is one, and but one, remedy in the world, which will certainly save the soul. "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, and he that believeth not shall be damned." Faith is the resting of the soul on Christ alone for salvation. Without this faith, it is impossible that the act by which we are to be saved can be performed; and as there "is no other name given under heaven among men whereby we must be saved" but the name of Christ alone, if he be discredited and rejected, we perish of course. You perceive, then, that faith is not a mere speculative, inoperative reception of a fact; but that it is required and is essential, on account of the use that is to be made of it-the influence that it is to have practically on its possessor. Men may quarrel if they will with this appointment of their Creator; but it is utterly false to say that faith

produces no practical effect, which may not be produced on those who want it. He who has faith-I repeat-rests for salvation on the only and the all sufficient Saviour: he who has not faith, must rest on some sandy foundation, which will certainly be swept away in the hour of his utmost necessity.

The connexion between truth and duty is made the subject of a section, in a summary given of the fundamental principles of our church, in the introduction to the Form of Government. It stands thus: "Truth is in order to goodness; and the great touchstone of truth, is its tendency to promote holiness; according to our Saviour's rule, 'By their fruits ye shall know them. And no opinion can be either more pernicious, or more absurd, than that which brings truth and falsehood upon a level, and represents it as of no consequence what a man's opinions are. On the contrary, we are persuaded, that there is an inseparable connexion between faith and practice, truth and duty. Otherwise, it would be of no consequence either to discover truth, or to embrace it."

This section was intended directly to counteract a loose and dangerous notion, which is very prevalent in the world, and is recommended by the guise of liberality or enlarged charity which it assumes, and of which it always boasts. The notion to which I refer is commonly expressed in these words-"It is no matter what a man believes, if his life be right." Mr. Pope, who was infinitely a better poet, than he was a divine or casuist, and who is known to have borrowed the leading principles of his moral system from the infidel Bolingbroke, has lent his sanction to this absurd and pernicious notion. He says

"For modes of faith let graceless bigots His can't be wrong whose life is in the fight, right."

It is highly probable that the sentiment I combat has derived not a

little of its currency from this very couplet. Let us then examine it carefully. For graceless bigots, who fight for religion, we have no apology to make. Let them receive all the reprehension and all the ridicule with which any one may be disposed to treat them. Fighting for religion, either with military arms, or with words dictated by angry and malevolent passions, is contrary to the whole scope and spirit of the gospel. "The weapons of this warfare are not carnal," but spiritual; although they are "mighty through God to the pulling down of the strong holds" of error. But is it true, that "a man's faith cannot be wrong, if his life is in the right?" Let us try to ascertain clear. ly, if we can, what is meant by this assertion. In a certain sense a man's life comprises all his thoughts, words and actions; and of course, if these be all right, his faith will be right. But Mr. Pope certainly did not mean to express such a bald truism as this. He doubtless meant to express precisely the notion already stated in other words" that if a man's external conduct be right, it is no matter what is his faith, or what he believes." Now, in regard to this I remark, that a supposition is here made of what does not take place in fact, except in a few rare instances, and they of such a character as to be unworthy of approbation or imitation: and therefore I deny the truth and justice of the proposition altogether, and maintain that it promulges a most dangerous practical error. It is calculated, and was really intended to teach, that a man may lead a good life, let his faith be what it may; and consequently that belief or inward principle is of little or no account; that, at least, it is not commonly and necessarily so. It has already been shown, and I hope satisfactorily, that the heart searching God judges of our character entirely by what is within us-Outward conduct is nothing in his sight, further than as it is the fair expression of the temper of our hearts, and the nature of our motives. And can this temper and

these motives be all wrong, and yet the outward conduct be right? To affirm this, seems to me almost too absurd for argument. We indeed readily and gladly make the admission, that from the force and influence of early education in establishing right feelings, or from not seeing the legitimate tendency of their own principles, or from the predominancy of conimon sense and the strong perception of moral obligation, men sometimes act much better than we should expect them to do, from the sentiments which they avow. In every such case we are wont to say, and with great propriety, that the man's heart is better than his head. Even here, you observe, the heart is supposed to be right-the intellect only is perverted. But is such a man to be held up as an example, or as exhibiting the general effect of inward principle on outward conduct? No assuredly. He acts rightly only because he acts inconsistently. And there is always danger that he will discover his inconsistency, and on doing so, that he will change his good conduct, rather than his bad principles.

I confess that I hardly know how to reason with a man who would maintain that my faith and opinions have not a natural and almost neces sary influence on my outward conduct. Such an influence they must have, if I do not play the hypocrite, or act irrationally. An honest, reasonable, and consistent man, always acts agreeably to the principles which he has imbibed, and the opinions which he maintains. It is this which gives him the character he sustains. To act otherwise, is ever considered as proceeding from weakness, from cowardice, or from dissimulation. I know of no dictate of common sense, or any self evident truth, more clear, than that a rational being, so far as he acts rationally and honestly, must act agreeably to what he believes to be right: which is only saying, in other words, that his faith must have a natural influence on his practice.

Those who deny the connexion be

tween truth and duty, faith and practice, must surely set some bounds to their system. If not, what, I ask, is the use, in any case, of endeavouring to discover moral truth? If truth and falsehood are exactly on a footing, as to a good influence on the mind and on practice, there is surely little reason to be inquisitive or zealous in regard to truth. Yet these very men are earnest contenders for what they affirm to be truth. But further will they maintain that a man may be an atheist, be free from all fear of a judgment to come, believe that there is no such thing as moral obligation, and that he is the wisest man who takes the largest share of present sensual gratification; and yet be as good a man, and as good a member of society, as a truly pious Christian? Is not the whole experience of the world arrayed against such doctrine? Does not that experience demonstrate, that so far as the atheistical and other corrupt sentiments I have mentioned are known to be embraced by an individual, they render him, in general estimation, a moral monster; and that so far as they prevail in a community, they are destructive of all order, peace, safety, and happiness, in society-overturning it from its very foundations? And yet to all this length will the system I oppose go, if carried to its full extent. It is therefore false and pernicious, and that in the highest degree.

Having now shown that there is an indissoluble connexion between truth and duty, faith and practice, inward principle and outward conduct, I think it proper and important to observe, that it belongs not to us to determine the exact degree of erroneous faith, which may consist with holding what is essential to salvation. This is known only to God. And here we find the proper and ample ground of true Christian charity; so far as it has a bearing on this subject. We may believe that an individual is in many

respects erroneous, and yet hope that he holds all essential truthThat, agreeably to the scripture representation, he has been building with much "wood, hay and stub ble," which will be burned, and he suffer loss; and still that he may be saved, yet so as by fire."

Be reminded, however, and remember it carefully, that when you make allowance for the errors of others, this is not to admit that they are not errors. Think not that these errors will consist with innocence, or even with safety, in yourselves. They may not be incompatible with salvation in another, and yet they may be so in you. Your light and information may give you a responsibility which others have not; and no error is too small to be avoided. Never yield to the idle talk, which you will probably often hear, " that all religions are equally good." Alas! the world abounds with religions which are ruinously bad. You may believe, too, that salvation may be possible in a particular religion, without allowing it to be as good, or half as good, as another; just as I may admit that a certain vehicle may possibly carry an individual to the place of his destination in safety, without admitting that this vehicle is at all to be compared with another-Another may be safer, easier, swifter, and in all respects incomparably better.

My dear youth-it is a prevalent and lamentable evil of this age and place, that a large proportion of the people have no consistent or digested system of religious sentiments and principles. They have picked up one opinion here, and another there: these opinions they have never closely examined; they have never compared them carefully with the scriptures, the standard of truth: they live alonguncomfortably enough-and they often die more uncomfortably than they have lived. A principal object which I have in view in this course

of lectures is, to endeavour to ground you fully and correctly in the very faith of the gospel-"the faith which was once delivered to the saints"-that you may have the advantage and the comfort of it, both in life and in death.

You are, however, by no means to suppose, that in any thing you have heard at this time, it has been my design, to deny or undervalue the practical part of religion, or the performance of Christian duties. No verily I have only aimed to lay a solid foundation for practical duty. There is an error here, I admit, which is quite as bad as that which I have exposed. There is a description of people who value themselves on their orthodox, systematick knowledge of religion, who, notwithstanding, never practise religion. It would seem as if they supposed that a correct creed would save their souls: whereas, the fact is, that if "they hold the truth in unrighteousness"-if "they know their Lord's will, and do it not, they will be beaten with many stripes:" They will perish with a more aggravated condemnation than the ignorant or deluded. Hence it has sometimes been said, that a bad life is the worst heresy: and if such a life be persisted in to the last, by those who have been taught the truth as it is in Jesus, their doom will no doubt be peculiarly awful. This notwithstanding, it is of the utmost importance that the mind should be fixed in just principles of religion, even before practical piety takes place; because, as already shown, just principles naturally lead to a right practice. Corrupt principles lay the conscience to sleep. He who holds them is wrong upon system, and you cannot disturb him until you have broken up his system. But he who transgresses practically, while his principles are sound, must contend with conscience. You can address him with arguments and admonitions drawn from what he admits to be right

And even without this, his own reflections, especially in those hours of seriousness which occur in the lives of all, will have a constant tendency to work his reformation. Hence we see, in fact, that those who have been early and well indoctrinated in religion, do so often become practically pious;-sometimes even in those mournful instances, in which, for a season, they have broken restraining bonds asunder, and been dissolute and profane. The Spirit of all grace, operating on an enlightened understanding and the remaining sensibility of natural conscience, brings them to serious consideration, to deep repentance, to an earnest application to the atoning blood of the Redeemer, and 'to a new and holy life. Of such momentous importance is it, that the mind have clear and consistent views of revealed truth, and be rooted and grounded in it.

From what you have now heard on this answer in the catechism, I shall make, in concluding the lecture, a few inferences of a practical kind.

1. You may perceive, from what has been said, that holding fast the truth as it is in Jesus, and even contending earnestly for it, is not inconsistent with genuine Christian charity. This, indeed, we know must be the fact: because as firmness in the faith, and Christian charity, are both important and obligatory in themselves, and every duty must be consistent with every other, the two duties in question can never be discordant. But we here perceive how the agreement takes place, and what is the ground of it. There are certain things, both in faith and practice, which are essential to religion. For those who understandingly deny and reject these things, we are not bound to exercise charity-if by charity we understand the regarding of such persons as being in a state of safety and salvation. We are, indeed, to cherish toward them the most kind and be

nevolent feelings, and to seek to do them all the good in our power, and especially to bring them to the knowledge of the truth, that they may be saved. But we must either renounce our adherence to the fundamentals of religion ourselves, or regard them as in a state not only dangerous but ruinous. We cannot do the former, and must therefore, however reluctantly, do the latter. Yet genuine charity will make all due allowance for the prejudices of education, for the want of correct information, and for numerous other causes, which produce error, confusion and indistinctness, in regard to some important doctrines of religion. Charity will also lead us to hope, when the essentials of religion are not openly and avowedly rejected, that they may be held, though it be with a mixture of much error, in such manner as to consist with a measure of vital piety: And real fervent charity will always incline its possessor to embrace, in cordial Christian affection, all who appear to love the Saviour in sincerity, by whatever name they may be called, or to whatever sect, or church, or denomination of Christians they may belong. I have never read of an uninspired man who appeared to me to have a more diffusive genuine charity than Dr. Owen; and yet I know of none who has ever more zealously, laboriously, and successfully, contended for all the important doctrines of the Bible.

2. You may perceive, from what you have heard, on the answer in the catechism discussed at this time, that there are some parts of the scripture which should be read more frequently, and more studiously than others. This follows certainly, from the distinction made between what the scriptures principally teach, and what they teach incidentally and subordinately. It is, however, by no means the design of this remark, to recommend the omission of any part of the sacred

volume. On the contrary, I would earnestly recommend, as a matter of great importance, that the Bible be read throughout, and in regular order and that frequently. If there be any young person now hearing me, that has reached fifteen years of age, without having read the Bible carefully through, I would say that such an individual, male or female, has neglected an important duty-an important duty which he or she ought immediately to begin to perform.

There is a great advantage in knowing what is contained in every part of this holy book;-for almost every part has some connexion with another part. It is, however, perfectly consistent with this to say, that some parts should be read far more frequently than others. The whole of the New Testament should, I think, be read more frequently and studiously than the Old; and the devotional, didactick, and historical parts of the whole Bible more frequently than the rest. The book of Psalms, and the book of Proverbs, should be very familiar. The prophecies of Isaiah and Daniel, are more plain than the most of the others. What relates to the Mosaick ritual, though certainly not to be neglected, will not claim as frequent a perusal as the other parts of scripture. I recommend an abundant reading of the sacred text, without note or comment. Yet commentators are useful, and their labours ought not to be undervalued. The prophecies, and some other parts of scripture, cannot be understood fully, without their aid;-and their practical remarks are often highly excellent. For popular reading, the commentaries of Henry, Scott, Guise, Doddridge, Burkit, and Horne, are, in my opinion, the best in our language.

3. You may learn from the statement you have heard, to guard against the evil of separating, in religion, what God hath joined together. This is an evil of very ex