And the word of the Lord came to Elijah the Tishbite, saying, Seest thou how Ahab humbleth himself before me? Because he humbleth himself before me, I will not bring the evil in his days: in his son's days I will bring the evil upon his house. Jehu was commissioned to destroy the family of Ahab. This commission he punctually executed. When he had finished this work, God said to him, Because thou hast done well in executing that which was right in mine eyes, and hast done unto the house of Ahab according to all that was in my heart, thy children of the fourth generation shall sit on the throne of Israel.' Immediately it is subjoined, But Jehu took no heed to walk in the law of the Lord God of Israel with all his heart; for he departed not from the sins of Jeroboam, who made Israel to sin.' Here we see both these princes rewarded, and expressly declared by God himself to be rewarded, for external actions merely; for both, in a manner equally express, are pronounced still to be gross sinners. But that which is declared by God to be rewarded by himself, is not so sinful conduct, as that which is either not thus rewarded, or is punished. Of Jehu, God says further, 'Thou hast done well in executing that which is right in mine eyes.' He who has done well, in executing that which is right in the eyes of his Maker, has not done so ill, as he who has perpetrated that which is wrong in his eyes.

What is thus taught in the Scriptures may be advantageously illustrated by the common experience of ourselves. The person who does those actions which God requires, dishonours his Maker by his life far less, and contributes to the well-being of mankind far more, than he who does them not, or who does the contrary actions. To the eye of mankind the actions themselves are often exactly the same; and have exactly the same influence when performed by an unrenewed, as when performed by a renewed man. The actions of an unrenewed man, therefore, may have very beneficent influence on the interests of mankind, when performed agreeably to those commands of God, which regulate the external conduct of men. According to the scheme here exhibited, the Israelites, as has been observed, were required to be present at the various religious services enjoined by the Mosaic law. Yet God perfectly knew, and all the succeeding prophets and teachers also knew, that the greater part by far of those to

whom these requisitions were addressed, were sinners. Still they not only required them to repent and believe, but advised, exhorted, and commanded them also to do all these things. Nor would it have been any vindication to them for omitting the action, that their disposition was not sanctified; nor of the prophet or the priest for not exhorting them to the action, that they could not conscientiously advise sinners to any thing beside faith and repentance.

The same scheme is pursued throughout the New Testament. Christ, adopting the very language of the Law, directed the ten lepers to go and show themselves to the priest, in order to their cleansing. Luke xvii. 12. Nine of these lepers appear to have been sinners. This Christ knew as well before, as after. Yet he did not think this a difficulty in his way towards giving them this direction.

He directed a collection of Jews, of whom he testifies that they did not believe, to search the Scriptures,' for the purpose of discovering his true character; and this, plainly, in order to their faith. John v. 39, 44.

He directed the young ruler, who plainly was not a believer, to go, and sell all that he had, and give to the poor, and come, and follow him.'

He directed the Herodians to render to Cæsar the things that are Cæsar's. They were sinners. But paying tribute was neither repenting nor believing.

He directed the Scribe, in the parable of the good Samaritan, to go and show kindness to his enemies.' Yet this scribe appears to have been an unbeliever.

He directed Paul also, after he had fallen to the earth, and inquired what he would have him to do; to arise, and go into Damascus, where it should be told him what he would have him to do.'

Peter, also, directed Simon Magus to repent, and pray that the thoughts of his heart might be forgiven.' It has been thought, that Peter directed him to repent first, and then to pray for forgiveness. This certainly is an unnatural construction of the passage. The obvious meaning is, that St. Peter directed both of these things to be done immediately; and without indicating any intention that Simon should wait until after he repented, before he began to pray. Many more examples of a similar nature might be added.

It will not be supposed, that in any one of these directions the objects of them were commanded or advised to commit sin. As rational beings, they were directed to do such things as, in the character of actions, were proper to be done in their circumstances; while a general indication of their duty, as to the disposition with which they were to be done, is unquestionably implied in all these passages.

These passages, however, show that in his preaching and advice a minister is not to confine himself to the mere enjoining of faith and repentance; but is to extend them to any other conduct in itself proper to be pursued: while he universally teaches these great Christian duties, as the immediate end of all his preaching.

Antecedently to every effort which the sinner makes, he is wholly ignorant whether God will not enable him to obey with the heart. It is also his indispensable duty thus to obey. Whenever advice or exhortation is given to sinners by any minister, he is equally ignorant whether they will or will not obey with the heart, as well as with the outward conduct. He knows also, that it is their duty to obey in this manner. The effort therefore ought to be made, and the advice given.

In this manner I understand all those general commands and exhortations which respect the affairs of sinners. Our Saviour, preaching obviously to a collection of sinners, says, Luke xiii. 24, Strive to enter in at the strait gate:' and again, Matt. vii. 14, Enter ye in at the strait gate: because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, that leadeth unto life; and few there be that find it.' The gate is at the head of the way, leading to the house, into which those who enter at the gate are finally to be admitted. Christ never speaks of heaven as a city, but several times as a house. Those who have not entered are obviously sinners; and to sinners he was obviously preaching in this kindred passage of St. Luke. Of the same nature is the memorable passage in Isaiah lv. 6, 7, Seek ye the Lord while he may be found: call ye upon him while he is near.' The persons here addressed, are in the second verse mentioned as those who spend money for that which is not bread, and their labour for that which satisfieth not.' Such persons are obviously sinners. Still they are directed to seek and call upon the Lord.

If then it is still objected, that directing sinners to such

acts is directing them to commit sin; the answer is short. God gave these very directions to the Israelites by Moses. Christ also gave the same directions to the Jews. It will not be supposed that he directed them to commit sin.

It may be farther said, that sinners will commit sin in their prayers. If they continue sinners they undoubtedly will. So will Christians. If this be a reason, why sinners should not be advised to pray, it is also a reason why Christians should not be advised to pray.

But it will be replied, that the sacrifice of the wicked is an abomination to the Lord: while the prayer of the upright is his delight.' That the prayer of the wicked is in some respects an abomination-of hypocrites universally, of other sinners generally--is not to be questioned. There is plainly nothing holy in the conduct of impenitent men. But it will not follow, that the prayer of every impenitent man is in such a sense abominable to God, as to ensure rejection from him. Christ did not tell the young ruler, that his inquiry concerning eternal life was abominable; nor refuse to hear and answer him. On the contrary, the Scriptures inform us, that 'Jesus, beholding him, loved him.' This love was plainly distinct from the general benevolence of Christ to sinners; for with this benevolence he loves all sinners. The young ruler he loved peculiarly, and in a manner in which he did not love the Pharisees, and the Jews generally. Otherwise, the fact would not have been specified. He did not, I acknowledge, love him with complacency; for he was not a Christian. But he loved him, peculiarly, with what is called natural affection. In the character of this youth there was a peculiar natural amiableness, such as all men see, love, and acknowledge; and acknowledge often against their own doctrines. The foundation of this love is a train of attributes belonging to man, not as a sinner, nor as a saint, but as an intelligent being. Of this number are native sweetness of temper, frankness, sincerity, simplicity, strongly seen in little children; gentleness, kindness, generosity, and compassion. All these are in themselves amiable in a certain degree; and in this degree they were loved by Christ.

Hence I argue, that, as all Christ's affections were exactly accordant with truth and propriety, so this exercise of affection to the young man was of the same nature, and was perfectly

approved by God. Of course, there is at times something in sinners, which, in itself, is not abominable to God; although their moral or sinful character is altogether abominable.

It is not wrong in itself, that sinners should desire food, or raiment, or happiness, or safety from evil. It is impossible, that percipient beings should exist without desiring the two last of these objects; and equally impossible, that men should not desire the two first. The best men, and the worst, desire them alike and no man is for this conduct ever reproved in the Scriptures. To ask of God for happiness and final safety, is not necessarily insincere, nor guilty, even in sinners. When sinners ask for mere mercy, or mere happiness, or mere safety, they may desire either as truly as saints, although their desires are not virtuous. So far as their desires are merely natural, inseparable from their nature, and sincere, they are not morally wrong; nor are they exhibited in the Scriptures as objects of the divine anger.

Accordingly, the prayer of the publican, who was, I think, plainly a sinner, was not regarded with mere anger by God, and was exactly such a prayer as I have mentioned; a prayer for mere mercy and safety. He went down to his house justified rather than the pharisee, because he had, in some important respects, a just sense of his character, and a sincere desire to be delivered from the dangers of it; while the pharisee had neither.

It is in the nature of things proper, that God, who saves no man for his merit, but communicates salvation merely from compassion, should save those who are sensible of their guilt, danger, and distress, rather than those who are utterly insensible, stupid, and careless. The former, in the natural sense, are qualified, and the latter are unqualified, to understand his mercy, the greatness of the love of Christ, and the wonderful work of sanctification; and to feel the evils from which they are delivered, and the blessings to which they are introduced, beyond the grave. Accordingly, sanctification, as I have heretofore particularly observed, is communicated by God to sinners, only when they are convinced of their guilt and danger, and laboriously employed in asking for forgiveness; and not to those who neither feel, nor strive, nor pray. If the prayers of convinced sinners were abominable, in the sense of the objector, could this fact exist? Is not the