in accordance with the spirit of the glorious Gospel of the grace of God. By it they were emphatically taught that the barrier between the Jew and the Gentile was broken down, never to be replaced; that in God's sight all men are on an equality; none to be saved by external privileges, none to be lost through the want of such privileges; that all men are alike guilty before God; that none have a claim on his favour; and that, if any are saved, it will be by God's showing mercy, not by their asserted rights or self-complacent assumptions.

As acceptance in God's sight did not depend on Abrahamic descent, or on external privileges, so we are taught that it does not now depend on an answer to the question, 'What is our rank in life?' or 'to what branch of the Church we belong;' but on the state of the heart. “In every nation, he that feareth God and worketh righteousness is accepted of him." Hence the importance of such questions as these: 'Is my heart right in the sight of God? Am I giving evidence of my love to God, by my righteousness toward man? Am I living according to that degree of light which I enjoy, and improving my opportunities to the best of my ability?

Works, however, are not the meritorious ground of our acceptance before God! In the case of Cornelius, they simply proved that he feared and loved God, not that he depended on his morality for salvation. By his works he showed that he was disposed to do God's will; and hence it appears that a disposition to do the will of God, as far as it may be known, constitutes the essence of religion. Cornelius improved his advantages; and that he was disposed to do the will of God, to the extent of his knowledge, is clear from the fact that, as soon as the Gospel was preached to him, he believed. Hence his acceptance, even before the Gospel was made known to him, his acceptance through the mercy of that God who "looketh on the heart," and who knew that he who from the heart feared him and aimed to his will, was prepared to embrace the message of the Gospel. It must be so, from the nature of man's moral constitution, as well as of God's spiritual government. He who offends in one point is guilty of the whole law;" that is, he violates the spirit of the law, and sins against the authority of the whole law: and, in like manner, he who cordially respects, in any one particular, the will of God, respects and

66

virtually obeys the whole law. Hence, if one conscientiously acts with reference to the Divine will, so far as that will has been revealed to him through the law of conscience, he cannot reject that will when supernaturally enunciated; because the evidence in the latter case is incomparably clearer than in the former, unless it were reasonable to suppose that he whose vision had been bounded by the light of a taper, would not rejoice in the light of the sun.

It is on this ground we indulge the hope that there are some in heathen lands prepared to receive the Gospel, because they may have come to a perception of the evils of idolatry, and of the necessity of a purer religion. They may now be acting according to the best of their knowledge; and if so, they may be accepted, saved through the mercy of God in Jesus Christ. Blessed thought! were it not for this, we might be tempted to harbour dark views of God's government. Not that such a thought serves to invalidate the duty of sending the Gospel to realms of paganism: on the contrary, it furnishes additional encouragement to publish in all lands the glad tidings of great joy; while it conveys to us this great truth, that all men are to be judged according to the light which they severally enjoy.

It is worthy of remark, that, wherever this disposition to do the known will of God actually exists, there will be no reluctance to embrace the Gospel. Men are prone "to walk in the ways of their heart;" and it is because they will not give up "the world with its affections and lusts," that they so often withstand the claims of Jesus Christ; not because, like Cornelius, they fear God, proving their deference to his authority, and their regard for his favour, by their prayers and alms.

Show me a man who seriously and candidly avails himself of "the light of Nature," and you have pointed me to a heathen who would embrace a revelation from heaven with heartfelt joy. Or, show me one who, Cornelius like, fears God more than the opinion of the world; who teaches his family to reverence God rather than to conform to the ways of the world; a man who daily prays to God, and ministers, out of his abundance, to the relief of the necessitous; and you have pointed me to one who is not too intent on the world to deny himself for the sake of Christ; too proud to learn of Christ and take his yoke; nor so regardless of God's favour, so indifferent to his

soul's interests, that he would for a moment reject the message of God's salvation through Jesus Christ: nay, he is now a practical, if not a professed believer.

This, indeed, is one of the great evidences of our holy religion: that they who are disposed to do the will of God, who show this disposition by their fear of the Lord and their departure from evil, are the most thoroughly convinced of its Divine origin, thus corroborating the words of holy writ: "The secret of the Lord is with them that fear him." “If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine whether it be of God;" and, on the other hand, "they loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.”

He, therefore, who, amid the light of the Gospel, rejects Jesus Christ, cannot reasonably hope in God's acceptance on the ground of his morality. True, the centurion was accepted before he embraced the Gospel; but it does not follow that one can be saved without embracing it. Where is the proof that Cornelius depended on his morality for salvation?

His was an offering of the heart; but even when the moralist enters the house of God, his heart has no connection with his worship. The centurion trained up his family in the fear of God; but the moralist has not even erected the family altar. The former daily prayed to God in secret; but the latter never retires from the world to his closet, and there, closing the door behind him, prays to that God who seeth in secret. Where is the man who "devoutly fears God with all his house," a man of prayer and benevolence, who is, nevertheless, resting on his own works for salvation?

They who are wont to rely on their works, are the very men whose works are unworthy of their reliance. They may be moral, according to the world's low estimate of morality; but the governing motives of their actions have no connection with the fear of God: they may be charitable, but they are not devout worshippers of God. According to the principles of Deism itself, they cannot be accepted; for they neither worship God in spirit, nor aim to do his will to the best of their knowledge.

Cornelius was truly disposed to do the will of God as far as it had been made known to him; and it is on this point that solemn issue might be joined with the moralist. He was disposed to do the will of God, and therefore the first time he heard

the Gospel, he believed. As soon as Jesus Christ was offered, he embraced him as his Saviour, and testified his belief in submitting to the ordinance of baptism; that is, by joining the Christian Church. But the moralist, though he may have repeatedly heard the Gospel, has yet refused to obey; nay, from year to year rejected the Gospel: and that, too, contrary to all evidence, all entreaty, at times when perhaps it was difficult for him to stifle his convictions of truth and duty!

What can constitute an essential difference between Cornelius and thyself, O vain man, if this does not? His example? have you cited it in evidence that you may be accepted without believing in Christ? That unequivocally condemns you: that example will rise in judgment against you, unless you now renounce your own righteousness, and cast yourself, as a poor, lost sinner, on the mercy of God through Jesus Christ, believing on him to the salvation of your soul !

THE ALMOST PERSUADED.

IN contemplating the actions of those who are removed from us by either distance or time, we seldom err in our moral judgments; and, owing to our inability to sympathize with the feelings, or our ignorance of the motives which prompted those actions, we are wont to conclude that had we been in similar circumstances, we would have acted otherwise. Thus, as we go back to the early history of Christianity, and contemplate the character of the Son of God, we wonder that he should have encountered contumely and hate. Our feelings of virtuous indignation rise up against those by whom he was persecuted and slain; and we have no doubt that, had we lived then and there, we should have ranged ourselves among the followers of the Lamb. Thus, too, as we trace the course of the apostles, and at every step gather cumulative evidence to the fact of the Resurrection; as we hang on their lips, and witness the wonderful signs by which their doctrine was attested, we are apt to think that, so far from persecuting, we should have protected them; that if we had not fearlessly espoused their cause, we should not have rejected their testimony with scorn and derision. But if men, through the deceitfulness of sin, are too apt to do even what they have condemned in others, then, to say the least, had we lived in the days of the apostles, and listened to the preaching of Paul himself, we might have been indifferent, or even sceptical; we might have procrastinated compliance with the claims of the Gospel, or at best been only half persuaded to embrace it.

That many to whom the apostles addressed themselves did