and when the command is express, that it be "preached to every creature under heaven." That it has not, long before now, been proclaimed in all lands, is not to be attributed to any restriction of the divine benevolence, but to the criminal neglect of man. It is one part of the divine economy, to make us the almoners of his bounty to one another, so that, for a variety of blessings and advantages necessary to their well-being, nations and individuals are mutually dependent. Of how much value is this constitution of things, in rivetting the links of society, in expanding our charities towards the whole human race, and in calling into exercise innumerable feelings and attachments greatly conducive to happiness; a moment's reflection will convince us. The author of spiritual blessings, is also the author of temporal benefits; and in his distribution of both, he pursues a similar plan. He treats us as the subjects of his government, and binds us under weighty responsibilities to execute, in behalf of each other, his published designs. To have given the gospel directly to every human being, would have required a miraculous procedure, unworthy of the Deity, inasmuch as it would have suspended, without reason, the rules of moral dispensation: nor could any thing more be consistently expected from the Supreme Governor, than to issue commands in favour of all, and supply inducements for their accomplishment. The precious grant, therefore, directed to the whole human race, is committed to a few, with a charge, transferred to each successively to whom the blessing is imparted, to communicate the treasure; and he who refuses, either to accept it himself, or to employ his exertions to extend the benefit, violates the greatest of obligations. On those, accordingly, who keep back the heavenly gift from others, rests the guilt of the blood of all, who, through such default, perish for lack of knowledge. To such persons especially, and indeed to all, we earnestly recommend a consideration of the following remarks.

From this discussion it is natural to infer, that to be unconcerned about the propagation of the gospel among the Heathen, the Mahommedans, the Jews, and ignorant people of every name, is a crime of no small magnitude, and yet too common among those who call themselves Christians. How can such persons pray "thy kingdom come," without condemning themselves by the very petition they utter? The evidence of the truth of Christianity being sufciently established, God does not employ miracles for its propagation, but leaves it with the subjects of his government as a sacred deposite, which they are to use and to circulate for the benefit of others. According to his plan of moral government, it is subjected to the same issue with other providential events, still under the control of sovereign prerogative in raising up instruments and preparing their way. And this is an argument why we should, with

holy promptitude, improve every favourable opportunity that presents itself to encourage all suitable characters, to send them forth with ardent supplications, that they may diffuse the "sweet savour of Christ," and the salutary streams of the Gospel; and to charge them, that they communicate to others the pure doctrines and precepts of Christianity, and exemplify them in their own tempers and practice. Ought not opulent merchants, statesmen, and sovereigns to take this into account? The poor sheep in the wilderness perish for want of pasture and of shepherds, while alas! countless millions of money are expended in destroying men's lives, or are lavished on pleasures and follies, which in the end involve their votaries in disquietude, remorse, and perdition. May British influence continue no longer 80 criminally dormant in reference to this momentous object! And when at any time, missionaries are employed for this benevolent purpose, may they be men of God, whose hearts and lives are transscripts of the gospel of peace!' pp. 225, 226.

From the consideration of the aspect of the gospel, the author proceeds to the design of God in its bestowment. This is a subject which has been involved in great perplexity by inaccurate statement. Some persons do not distinguish between purpose, considered as in God, the source of it, in which respect, it must be, like his essence, one and undivided; and, regarded as it relates to different objects, in which view, it is, like them, greatly diversified. Others again, not distinguishing between his sovereign, and what is usually called his rectoral will, speak of the divine designs, as if God were capable of disappointment. His will, absolutely considered, refers to what he designs himself to accomplish, whether it be for, in, or by his creatures; and it is obvious this cannot be frustrated. His will as a moral Governor, or his rectoral will, regards man, whether in fact the subject of special grace or not, merely as an accountable agent, treats him as such, declares what is right, affords the means of performing it, and proclaims the consequence both of yielding and of refusing compliance. The moral tendency of this display of ends and inducements, is plainly, the obedience and well being of the subject. For, on the one hand, the inducements to obey are infinite, while, on the other, every thing is supplied which might deter from transgression. Death and life, happiness and misery are set before us. Now, as the Divine Being has no secret reservations, no decree that any shall not obey; as he has afforded every allurement to fulfil his commands, and provided every check against negligence and rebellion; and as the will of a Governor is to be deduced from his public acts; it is plain that, considered in that character, his design is not to condemn the world, but that the world through Christ might be saved.' Yet, since he has not sovereignly designed to insure compliance from all the

subjects of his realm, by giving them a right disposition; and since he knows what is in man, if left to himself; he must foresee that many will continue impenitent, and reject the offers of his mercy. As a Lawgiver, he determines the event only hypothetically, as is implied in governing by inducements; but the alternative is fixed :--while as a Sovereign, he secures whatever end he designs;-and failure is impossible. Hence it is inferred, that though the moral end of God's rectoral will is not always accomplished, yet his expectations can in no respect fail of fulfilment. His purpose as a Sovereign regards good ends, which will certainly come to pass, though known to us only by prediction or by eventual accomplishment; but his design as a Governor, respects means, and the consequences of their being improved or neglected and though the object of the means, or the end which in their own nature they are calculated to effect, is not obtained; yet the design to give them, and to deal with men accordingly, is not, and cannot be frustrated. Our disobedience does not subvert the faithfulness of God, or perplex his counsels by unforeseen events. For a full and accurate discussion of this important topic as applied to God;-to those persons who are ultimately saved;-to those who are not ;-to divine law ;-to the death of Christ; together with the radical principles which form the basis of a judicious and faithful exercise of the Christian ministry, we refer to the work itself.

The second Section is, "On the claims of the Gospel, or, the obligation of all Men to believe it." An agent is morally obliged to any thing within his physical ability, for which, all things considered, there are rational inducements. Physical obligation is absolute; that which is moral, hypothetical, deriving its force from the consequence, and leaving the subject of it free in the exercise of choice. If, therefore, the result of not believing the gospel is the greatest possible evil, it follows, that, to obey it, there is the highest conceivable obligation. Mistakes on this subject have arisen chiefly from not distinguishing between the warrant to believe, and moral fitness for the exercise of faith. Men, considered as sinners merely, have the former; but only those who have been enlightened to perceive the adaptation of the Gospel to their circumstances, have the latter. "Who may believe is one thing, who will is another." those only who are predestinated to believe, be authorized so to do; men must either at first believe without warrant, which is presumption, not faith; or ascertain their election, even while in unbelief, which is absurd, for "he who believeth not, is condemned already." The fact and grounds of this warrant are considered and established in the work on our table, and the arguments supported by citations from CALVIN, OWEN, POLHILL, and CHARNOCK.

If

Another source of mistake respecting the extent of obligation, is an erroneous notion about the qualifications of its subjects. To constitute a person accountable, besides natural faculties, freedom, and suitable inducements, every kind of ability, moral as well as natural, has been considered as requisite. That this idea is false, Dr. Williams remarks, is sufficiently apparent from the consequence, that if so, the more wicked a person becomes, the less he is obliged; and, on this supposition, a man may free himself from accountability, and, of course, from punishment altogether, by repeated acts of rebellion and the indulgence of iniquity! For it is certain, that moral impotence is constantly increased by habits of transgression. The following quotation exhibits in a striking manner, how, on this subject, extremes in error sometimes

meet.

It appears to me, I own, a surprising instance of the influence of prejudice, deduced from false principles and associations, that any intelligent persons, acknowledging the New Testament to be the expression of the divine will, should scruple to confess, that Jesus Christ and all his benefits are there proposed to the acceptance of men as sinners. Is the Gospel the primary instrument in the conversion of sinners, or is it not? Who can hesitate to answer in the affirmative? But if so, can it address men in any other character than as unconverted? And if they are addressed in that character, are they not strictly obliged to accept of the heavenly donation? The negative of this question is confronted by every principle of moral obligation. Beside, the rejection of Christ and his great salvation, ranks with crimes the most aggravated, and involves the subjects of it in the deepest guilt. "How shall we escape if we neglect so great salvation?" He who rejects God's testimony, makes him a liar ;" and this is the record, or testimony," that God hath given to us (that is in the Gospel) eternal life, and this life is in his Son."* Gospel of the kingdom is commanded to be preached to all the world, to every creature, that is, to all men in all nations, for the obedience of faith; how can the consequence be evaded, that those who hear are under indissoluble obligation to believe the record in its full extent?

If the

But as the Holy Scriptures abound with calls, invitations, proposals, and inducements to sinners, in order that they may repent, believe, and obey,—with awful denunciations for their want of compliance; so they abundantly testify concerning the ignorance, hardness of heart, moral impotence, and enmity of men to God, to his law, and the light of truth, while they continue in an unregenerate state. Now the question is, are these two representations to be taken in their full extent, or is one of them to be reduced in meaning? The consistent Calvinist asserts the former; but Pelagians and Hyper

*See 1 John v. 9-13.

г

subjects of his realm, by giving them a right disposition; and since he knows what is in man, if left to himself; he must foresee that many will continue impenitent, and reject the offers of his mercy. As a Lawgiver, he determines the event only hypothetically, as is implied in governing by inducements; but the alternative is fixed :--while as a Sovereign, he secures whatever end he designs;-and failure is impossible. Hence it is inferred, that though the moral end of God's rectoral will is not always accomplished, yet his expectations can in no respect fail of fulfilment. His purpose as a Sovereign regards good ends, which will certainly come to pass, though known to us only by prediction or by eventual accomplishment; but his design as a Governor, respects means, and the consequences of their being improved or neglected: and though the object of the means, or the end which in their own nature they are calculated to effect, is not obtained; yet the design to give them, and to deal with men accordingly, is not, and cannot be frustrated. Our disobedience does not subvert the faithfulness of God, or perplex his counsels by unforeseen events. For a full and accurate discussion of this important topic as applied to God;-to those persons who are ultimately saved ;-to those who are not ;-to divine law;-to the death of Christ; together with the radical principles which form the basis of a judicious and faithful exercise of the Christian ministry, we refer to the work itself.

The second Section is, " On the claims of the Gospel, or, the obligation of all Men to believe it." An agent is morally obliged to any thing within his physical ability, for which, all things considered, there are rational inducements. Physical obligation is absolute; that which is moral, hypothetical, deriving its force from the consequence, and leaving the subject of it free in the exercise of choice. If, therefore, the result of not believing the gospel is the greatest possible evil, it follows, that, to obey it, there is the highest conceivable obligation. Mistakes on this subject have arisen chiefly from not distinguishing between the warrant to believe, and moral fitness for the exercise of faith. Men, considered as sinners merely, have the former; but only those who have been enlightened to perceive the adaptation of the Gospel to their circumstances, have the latter. "Who may believe is one thing, who will is another." If those only who are predestinated to believe, be authorized so to do; men must either at first believe without warrant, which is presumption, not faith; or ascertain their election, even while in unbelief, which is absurd, for "he who believeth not, is condemned already." The fact and grounds of this warrant are considered and established in the work on our table, and the arguments supported by citations from CALVIN, OWEN, POLHILL, and CHARNOCK.