DISCOURSE II.*

PERFECTION IN HOLINESS ATTAINABLE.

"Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father in heaven is per fect." Matt. v. 48.

THE object of the preceding discourse was, to illustrate and explain the nature of Christian perfection. The object of the present discourse is to answer the inquiry," Is such a state attainable in this life? ” to ascertain the fact, whether it is practicable for us, as Christians, to consecrate our entire being, with all its powers and susceptibilities, to Christ, and to live under the continual influence of the all-pervading and all-controlling principle of pure and perfect love "of faith on the Son of God."

I use the terms attainable and practicable with reference not merely to our powers as moral agents, but also with respect to the provisions and promises of divine grace. If provision is made in the gospel for the entire sanctification of believers in this life, if God has promised to render those " perfect in every good work to do his will," by whom he is inquired of by faith to do it for them, then is such a state, in the highest and most common acceptation of the term, attainable; and we are under the most

* Parts of this and the following Discourse have already been before the public in another form.

sacred obligation to aim at that state, with the full and joyful expectation of attaining it.

The question now returns

Is perfection in holiness, in the sense of the term as above explained, attainable in this life? That it is attainable, I argue from the following reasons:

I. The Bible positively affirms that provision is made in the gospel for the attainment of that state, and that to make such provision is one of the great objects of Christ's redemption. Rom. viii. 3, 4, "For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God, sending his own Son, in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh; that the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not after the flesh, but after the spirit." The phrase "righteousness of the law" obviously means the precepts of the law, or the moral rectitude which the law requires. This I argue, 1st. From the fact that the same phrase is undeniably used in this sense in the preceding part of the epistle, chap. ii. 26; "If the circumcision keep the righteousness [the precepts] of the law." Without the best of reasons, we should not suppose the apostle to use the same phrase, in entirely different senses, in the same epistle. 2d. Justification, the only other sense ever, I believe, attributed to the phrase under consideration, is never in the Bible called the justification of the law, but is definitely distinguished from it, by being called "justification by faith." 3d. If justification were the thing primarily referred to in this phrase, still the moral rectitude required by the law, i. e. sanctification, is

also implied in it. For, if Christ should justify, and not to the same extent sanctify his people, he would save them in, and not from their sins. The phrase "righteousness of the law," then, directly and primarily means, or obviously implies, the precepts of the law, or the moral rectitude required by the law. To have this righteousness fulfilled in us, implies, that it be perfectly accomplished in us, or, that we are brought into perfect conformity to the moral rectitude required by the law. This is declared to be one of the great objects of Christ's death. Such conformity, then, is practicable to the Christian, or Christ failed to accomplish one of the prime purposes of his redemption.

Again, 1 Pet. ii. 24, "Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, might live unto righteousness." To be dead to sin, and alive unto righteousness, implies entire sanctification, or, to be dead in sin, does not imply total depravity. That we might be thus dead, and thus alive, Christ "bore our sins in his own body on the tree." Entire sanctification, then, is attainable, or Christ failed, in one important respect, to finish the work which his Father "gave him to do."

2 Cor. v. 15, " And he died for all, that they which ́ live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him that died for them, and rose again." In other words, Christ died that his people might be free from all selfishness, and become purely and perfectly benevolent. Did he fail to accomplish his work?

2 Pet. i. 4, "Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises; that by these ye might

X

be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust."

2 Cor. vii. 1, "Having therefore these promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God." If to 66 escape the corruption that is in the world through lust," and to be "made partakers of the divine nature," to "cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit," and to "perfect holiness," do not imply entire sanctification, how, 1 ask, can that doctrine be expressed? That the Christian may be thus sanctified is the declared object for which the promises were given. Who will deny that they are adequate to this object? Unless they are thus inadequate, perfection in holiness is, in this life, practicable to the Christian.

Under this head I might cite many other passages, equally to my purpose; but these must suffice. On these and other kindred passages, I have one remark to make, to which the special attention of the reader is invited. It is this-We have the same evidence from the Bible, that provision is made for the entire sanctification of Christians, that we have that provision is made for their entire justification. Any principles of interpretation that will show that provision is not made for the former, will be equally conclusive to show that it is not made for the latter.

II. Perfection in holiness is promised to the Chris tian in the new covenant under which he is now placed. To present this part of the subject distinct ly before the reader's mind, we will first inquire what is the old or first covenant.

Exod. xxxiv. 27, 28, "And the Lord said unto Moses, Write thou these words; for after the tenor of these words have I made a covenant with thee and with Israel. And he was there with the Lord forty days and forty nights; he did neither eat bread nor drink water. And he wrote upon the tables the words of the covenant, the ten commandments." Deut. ix. 11, 15, “And it came to pass at the end of forty days and forty nights, that the Lord gave me the two tables of stone, even the tables of the covenant." "So I turned, and came down from the mount, and the mount burned with fire; and the two tables of the covenant were in my hands." The first, or the old covenant, then, is the moral law, that law by which we are required to "love the Lord our God with all our powers, and our neighbor as ourselves." This covenant, as we learn from Heb. ix. 1-4, had annexed to it the types and shadows of the ancient dispensation. "Then verily the first covenant had" attached to it "ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary," &c.

What the new covenant is, we learn from Jer. xxxi. 31-34, and Heb. viii. 8-11, "Behold the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah; not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers, in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; (which my covenant they brake, although I was a husband unto them, saith the Lord;) but this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel: After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and I will