suspicions in us, yet there is an absolute evil in tying every one down to precisely the same forms of expression; and what we find fault with may be no other than a different truth, and not at all an opposing error.

It seems an important rule, to seek for the most exact language on any subject in those writings which treat of it generally and directly, rather than in those where it is spoken of by the way, the notice of it arising out of some other matter, which was the writer's particular subject at the time. And according to this rule, we should expect to gain the clearest view of this question of justification from St. Paul's Epistle to the Romans, because the very object of that epistle is to give a clear notion of that very point, as the foundation of Christianity; and so far as we know there was nothing in the particular circumstances of those to whom it was written which makes it more applicable to them than to others. It would seem right, therefore, to explain St. Paul's language in other Epistles, when he may touch upon the same subject accidentally, by his language upon it in the Epistle to the Romans, where he has written upon it expressly; and to do the same also with the language of other parts of Scripture, where it is of the same sort; that is, where it notices the matter of justification rather in passing, as it were, and owing to some particular occasion leading to the

mention of it, than as the general subject of the writing, which is to be unfolded fully, and with the utmost accuracy of expression.

Now it cannot be denied, that the faith on which St. Paul lays so much stress, in the Epistle to the Romans, is opposed to the works of the law in this sense; that he who would be justified by the law says to God, "Thou hast commanded certain things, and I have done them, therefore I have earned my wages": whereas he who would be justified by faith says rather, "Thou hast commanded certain things, and I have not done them, therefore I have earned no wages, but thy displeasure; only I throw myself upon Thee as on a God who forgivest sin, whereof thou hast given assurance to all men in that Thou hast given thine own Son to be a sacrifice for sin, that so there might be forgiveness." The essence then of justification by works, is a reliance on what we have done for ourselves; that of justification by faith, is a reliance on what God has done and will do for us. So far I think is clear; and taking a heathen, or a man who had never heard of Christ, and whose life had been full of sin, the answer as made to him seems quite intelligible and satisfactory; "You cannot be justified by works, but come to God, and throw yourself on His mercy for Christ's sake, and then He forgives you, and you are justified." And up to this point I do not know

that any Christians would be found to disagree, if their language be interpreted fairly. But the difficulty lies beyond; take such a man ten years, or five years, or one year, or it may be a few weeks, or days, or even hours, after we had so spoken to him, and told him that he was justified by faith; he says it may be, "I feel that my life is still mixed with much of sin, that my heart is not towards God such as it should be. Am I still justified, or is the past justification undone by sins since committed; and if I can be justified again now by faith, can I be so yet a third time; and what is to be the end, and to what am I to look at last for justification, when my works seem still, as before, unable to bear the burden? But yet to claim forgiveness repeatedly after repeated sin seems abusing God's mercy, and doing dishonour to the blood of His Son. Works can justify at no time; faith, I can well understand, can justify once; but can it justify repeatedly?" What is any man to do, what is he to believe, when having early, perhaps, received his religious impressions, and having once come to God in and through Christ, he lives a long life afterwards, and in that long life sins daily? When he comes to depart from the body, where can be his hope? Or has he only to wish in vain that he had died the very instant when he had first believed, for then he could have felt that he was fully forgiven and justified; then

he had cast away his past evil and had come to Christ for pardon and salvation, but the evil had since returned within him, and with its revival the pardon and salvation must have passed away.

Now how is such a man, that is, how is each one of us, for the case is ours,-how is each one of us putting such a question to be answered? Shall we say, as some do, that having been redeemed from sin to become servants of holiness, our lives are therefore to be holy; that Christ's Spirit was given us to make them so; that the plain question to be asked therefore is, are we holy? And if we are not, then what benefit have we from our justification? We are not now redeemed, although we might have been once; we are sinners, and as such are to be judged. Surely there is much of truth in this language; but then what hope does it leave for any of us? For it was the imperfection of our holiness which made Christ first needful to us, and yet we are still asked whether we are holy; holy, that is, according to God's judgment of holiness, for as to holy in man's sense of the term, that will serve us nothing. We were but mocked, then, with a prospect of redemption, which could only have been effectual, had we died the very instant that we first embraced it. We are again called to produce our works, and again we must confess

that we are sinners. God be merciful to us, for without His pardon we are again lost.

Or shall we say again, as others have said,-fear not, only believe; Christ is mighty to save His own, and He has saved and will save you to the uttermost. Even at the last hour of life, as at the first moment when you come to Him, you are His redeemed. And surely this too is scriptural language, there is much of God's truth here. Yet again, Christ may save those who have been sinners, will He save those who are sinners still? He will save His own to the uttermost; but are not His own the holy and the good? Or if it be His glory to save sinners, those who are as well as those who have been, is there not an accursed thought close at hand to whisper, "Then my continued sin is His greater glory." And what then becomes of watchfulness, what of self-denial, what of the victory of the Spirit over the flesh? Death is near, and there is a man of sinful heart and sinful life, not changed into Christ's image, yet claiming to be one of Christ's redeemed, because he believes that Christ has saved him. And is this Christ's Gospel, is it indeed in this sense that Christ died for sinners?

See then how warily we should speak in this matter, speak whether in answer to others, or to ourselves. Surely the answer has not yet been