dom of heaven. The having been "made a child of God" in baptism, will be of no more avail to the man, who names the name of Christ, while he neglects to depart from iniquity, than the rite of circumcision was to the boastful Jews, who vaunted themselves in being Abraham's children, while they neglected to do the works of Abraham.

Is then, all hope excluded? Can there be no plenary remission of sin after baptism,-no reinstatement in the Divine favour,-no reinvestiture in the escheated inheritance ? Will the Lord cast off for ever? And will he be favourable no more? Is his mercy clean gone for ever? Doth his promise fail for evermore? Hath God forgotten to be gracious? Hath he in anger shut up his tender mercies? Far be it from us to impute such implacability to that great and glorious Being, of whom St. John gives us this concise, but emphatic character, God is love! Such is not the tenor of his dealings with penitent sinners, who have been admitted into that covenant of grace and mercy which was ratified by the blood of his only-begotten and well-beloved Son. They are placed—not under the ministration of death-but under the ministration of the Spirit, and, therefore, a way of reconciliation is opened to their view; and the means of moral renovation are offered to their accept

ance.

To us, my Reverend Brethren, is delegated the important office of pointing out that way; and by the preaching of the word and administration of the sacraments, of indicating and dispensing those means. To

us is committed the ministry of reconciliation In the discharge of our high commission as Ambassadors for Christ, instead of aggravating the horrors of an awakened conscience-instead of driving the trembling penitent to the brink of desperation,* - instead of sternly repelling his advances towards the throne of grace (such is the unspeakable love and mercy of the Deity!) we are bound to convince him that the only obstacles to peace, between him and his offended God, are to be found in impenitence and unbelief: and, further, we are even authorized to entreat him to lay aside the enmity which lurks in his own breast, and to be reconciled to God. Shall we, then, in the fulfilment of our Ambassage, deem ourselves warranted to employ our own discretion in imparting or withholding the terms of peace? Shall we rashly presume to abridge and circumscribe the freeness of the Divine mercy, and to fetter its exercise with conditions, which, whatever countenance they may derive from tradition, can find no sanction in the inspired volume? Shall we think it

"For as in all other things men's hearts do quail and faint, if they once perceive that they travail in vain; even so most especially in this matter must we take heed, and beware that we suffer not ourselves to be persuaded that all we do is but labour lost; for thereof either sudden desperation doth arise, or a licentious boldness to sin, which at length bringeth unto desperation. Lest any such thing then should happen unto them, he doth certify them of the grace and goodness of God, who is always most ready to receive them into favour again that turn speedily unto him. Which thing he doth prove with the same title wherewith God doth describe and set forth himself unto Moses, speaking on this manner; For he is gracious and merciful, slow to anger, of great kindness, and repenteth of the evil."-Homilies, p. 451,

D

expedient to conceal from the sinner's knowledge those incentives which are best adapted to rouse him from his lethargy, and to stimulate him to recover himself from his lapsed condition? Shall we dare to invert the order of the gospel, and call upon him to work, before we have presented to him the most efficacious motives for action? Shall we adopt the principle of reserve, and "give men divine knowledge, and introduce holy associations, not indiscriminately, but as men are able to bear it?" However such a course may be in unison with the system of the ancient Church, its advocates have distinctly admitted (as we have already seen) that it is not in accordance with the practice of the Reformers. To my mind it appears equally incompatible with the notion of our being, in the language of St. Paul- faithful stewards of the mysteries of God; or, in that of St. Peter,-good stewards of the manifold grace of God.

My own firm and unalterable belief has ever been, that the institution of piacular sacrifices was coeval with the fall of Adam, and that it was transmitted by Noah and his family from the Antediluvian to the Postdiluvian world. Faith in the divine origin of this institution, as well as in its typical import, was the reason of the acceptance of Abel's sacrifice; when, through want of this faith, the bloodless offering of Cain was rejected: for the unalterable decree had been promulgated in heaven, and, most probably, communicated to the exiled family of Adam, that, without shedding of blood is no remission. The universality of the custom of making sacrificial offerings by the immolation of victims, not

only in the line of the Patriarchs, but also amongst all the heathen nations of antiquity, indicates its derivation from one common source, and constitutes a tradition, the validity and authority of which can never be impeached. When, however, we descend to the establishment of the civil and religious polity of the Jews, we find that the system of making expiatory offerings, by the death of animals, became the subject of distinct and positive enactment. In St. Paul's epistle to the Hebrews we have the most conclusive evidence that the bloody sacrifices prescribed by the Mosaic law were intended to typify and prefigure that great atonement which, in the fulness of time, was to be made upon Mount Calvary, and, like the illustrious harbinger of the Messiah, to point to the Lamb of God, that taketh away the sin of the world. So that the doctrine of the atonement, whether viewed in anticipation through the dim perspective of types and shadows, or viewed retrospectively as having been completely established by the great propi tiatory sacrifice of the cross, has ever been the sole foundation of the enlightened believer's hope of pardon, from the time of man's first apostacy, to the present day. Well, therefore, may we determine, without any scruple or hesitation, like St. Paul, to preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumbling-block, and unto the Greeeks foolishness; but unto them which are called, both Jew's and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.*

Bishop Wilson thus begins a sermon on 1 Cor. ii. 2—I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ and him crucified,—“ This was

But it is contended by the writer of the Tract on Reserve, that, to bring forward "the atonement explicitly and prominently on all occasions," "is quite opposed to the teaching of scripture," and finds no sanction in the gospels ;-that, "if the epistles of St. Paul appear to favour it, it is only at first sight;' that, "it is a great mistake to suppose that, by preaching the atonement, we are preaching what St. Paul meant by Christ crucified;" that, in fact, by the latter expression, "he always intends the opposite to the modern notion ;"-and that, as it is used by the Apostles, when combined with our Saviour's declaration, he that cometh after me must take up his cross daily and follow me, it

the foundation of all St. Paul's sermons; as it ought to be of ours: this being the power of God, and the wisdom of God, to regain the world out of the hands of Satan, and to save souls from eternal ruin."-The Works of the Right Reverend Thomas Wilson, D.D., Lord Bishop of Sodor and Man, vol. ii. p. 397.-To the same effect, George Cranmer, whom Isaac Walton designates as Hooker's "dear pupil," observes in a letter to his valued Master," The chiefest labour of a Christian should be to know; of a Minister to preach Christ crucified: in regard whereof, not only worldly things, but things otherwise precious, even the Discipline itself is vile and base.”—Appendix to Hooker's Life, prefixed to the folio edition of his Works, p. 33,— The following extract from a communication transmitted by the present exemplary Bishop of Calcutta relative to the religious awakening at Kishnaghur, may be considered as a practical illustration of the great truth here inculcated." I pause," says this pious prelate, "to call the Society's attention to this point: the Kurta-Bhojas uniformly seize on the doctrine of the atonement, they say, 'This is what we have been seeking for.' It seems that their notion of obtaining a sight of God is met by the doctrine of a God incarnate suffering for man. Thus our Missionaries, like St. Paul, know nothing among their converts, but Jesus Christ and him crucified; which, though still a stumbling block to some, and folly to others, is Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God, to them that are called of all nation, and kindreds, and tongues, and people."-See Appendix, vi.