But many persons not generally uninquiring, or uncandid, or incompetent to reason accurately, have yet been so early accustomed to take for granted, and assent to on authority, certain particular points, that they afterwards adhere to the belief so formed, rather from association than on evidence. And some again, through the influence of a feeling which I have described in Essay I. § 5. when inculcating what they are conscientiously convinced is a duty, are so fearful of unsettling the minds (as the phrase is) of their hearers, that, rather than use any argument, which though valid, might startle and revolt popular prejudices, they will avail themselves of such as they know will be readily admitted, though really unsound sometimes even cautioning their hearers (as I know to have been done in respect of the present question) against reading any thing on the other side.

They probably satisfy themselves with the consideration that the great point being to bring men to a right practical conclusion, it is a matter of comparatively small moment how they get at it. And it may, I am sensible, seem to many, that it is a mere speculative question, on what the observance of the Christian Sabbath is made to depend, as long as all Christians are practically agreed that it shall be observed, and observed on the same day of the week, the first,-and observed in a different manner from that prescribed to the Jews; who were forbidden, among other things, to kindle a fire, &c.

Now this practical agreement does certainly make any hostile bitterness on such a question doubly unjustifiable, and aggravates greatly the culpability of any slanderous

misrepresentation of the doctrine maintained. I cannot however but consider it as practically very dangerous to admit a principle that may encourage men to take liberties with any divine commandment which they confess to be binding on them, and to modify it according to human tradition, or any kind of human authority. And such a danger cannot but be incurred, if we teach them that the Mosaic law of the Sabbath is binding on Christians, while we also teach them that they are obeying it by observing a different day from the one which that law appoints,in a different manner,—and in memory of a different event. And it is every way desirable that they should be taught not only, in practice, to observe the Lord's Day, but also in principle; to observe it not as an ordinance enjoined by the Mosaic Law-which in fact it is not-nor as deriving its obligation—even if it were enjoined there-from a law which the Apostle assures us does not bind Christians; but on the reasonable and true grounds which I have endeavoured to point out in the foregoing pages, as a Christian festival.

For a fuller elucidation of this subject than would be suitable to the present occasion, the reader is referred to the treatise already mentioned,-"Thoughts on the Sabbath;"-and also (besides the authors above cited) to Bishop Kaye's "Selections from ths Works of Justin," and to a well-written Review of the same in No. X. of the Brtish Critic; to several parts of Augustine and the other early Fathers when treating of the Decalogue; and to "Calvin's Institutes," [lib. ii. ch. 8.]

ESSAY VI.

ON IMPUTED RIGHTEOUSNESS.

THE importance of obtaining correct, and avoiding erroneous notions, respecting any point of doctrine, is not always to be measured by the intrinsic importance of the doctrine itself, or by the practical consequences immediately resulting from this or that view of it. No error can be considered as harmless and insignificant, which tends to put a stumbling-block in the way of believers in the Gospel, and to afford to infidels or heretics the advantage of a plausible objection against its truths. The genuine and fundamental doctrines of Christianity, may become liable to the scoffs of some, and to the dread or disregard of others, from their supposed connexion with such as are in fact no part of the gospelrevelation. It then becomes a matter of importance to rectify even those mistakes which

are in themselves of no moment; since we thus (to use once more the expression of Dr. Paley) "relieve Christianity of a weight that sinks it." God forbid that the Christian should deny or explain away any thing that is a part of his faith, for the sake of moderating the hostility, or escaping the scorn that may be directed against it; but as little is he authorized needlessly to expose his religion to that hostility or scorn, by maintaining or allowing to be maintained, as a part of the Christian-revelation, any tenet (however intrinsically true) which the Scriptures do not warrant. The same authority which forbids us to "diminish aught" from the word of God, forbids us also to "add thereto."

That the Apostle Paul's authority in particular has been appealed to in support of several conclusions which are in fact not taught by him, I have already endeavoured to show; principally with a view to the removal of that dread or neglect of his writings which has too often been the result.

§ 1. Another doctrine, or set of doctrines rather, there is, in support of which, this

Apostle's authority is principally referred to, and which being (whether deservedly or not) regarded by many with suspicion and alarm, or with disgust and contempt, has thus proved a source of objection, either to the gospel-scheme altogether, or to the teaching of Paul in particular, of which such tenets have been supposed to form a part. I allude to the doctrine of "imputed sin," and "imputed righteousness," as set forth by some writers, who represent it as the very key-stone of the Christian system.

I purposely abstain from referring to any authors in particular; because the proper character of a calm inquiry after truth, is so liable to be lost in that of a controversy with some individual or party; and the discussion of any question thus becomes, though more interesting perhaps to some minds, yet less edifying; since, after all, the object ultimately proposed should be, not the confutation of this or that theologian, but the ascertainment of the genuine doctrines of our religion; which must rest, not on any merely human authority, but on that of the Holy Scriptures.

The system at present in question, as far as