honor the law, not to annul it. The dispensation of mercy is based upon it, but does not supersede or abate one iota of its claims. No person can become interested in the grace of the gospel, till he consents to the entire law that it is good, and condemns himself for all his transgressions of it. We may frame for ourselves a standard of character, if we will, and live up to it, and call this perfection; but the Bible knows nought of such perfection. It is of no value in the sight of God.

3. The third class of perfectionists are those who profess to fulfil perfectly the law of God. They admit that the moral law-the great law of love-stands in unabated force; that it is binding on themselves; and insist that they can and do fulfil it. They love the Lord their God with all their heart, and soul, and mind, and strength. They love their neighbor as themselves. From day to day, and in many instances from year to year, they come short of the requisitions of the divine law in nothing. They are as free from sin, as was the man Christ Jesus. They are perfect, even as their Father who is in heaven is perfect.

This latter scheme of perfection is that which has been most recently promulged, and most plausibly advocated.* It contains more of truth than either of the former theories, and on that account is more likely to prevail. It is to this latter theory-the claim of fulfilling the whole divine law-to which attention will be given at the present time.

The advocates of this theory hold it in connexion with much important truth. They agree, in several points, with other evangelical Christians; and it may be important, in the commencement of this discussion, to notice some of these points of agreement.

We agree, then, in insisting that the moral law, the great law of love, has never been repealed or abated.† It is the only standard of character which God has ever fixed, or ever will. It is in full and binding force now, in heaven, on earth, and throughout the intelligent universe.

We agree in insisting, that this law requires a constant, unwavering obedience. It makes no allowance to human infirmi

* Particularly by Rev. Charles G. Finney, in his Sermons to Christians.

At least, we agree in words. It may be questioned whether this class of perfectionists do not, in their conceptions of things, very considerably diminish the high demands of the law.

ty; no compromise with our delinquencies. Every thing which comes short of it, or passes over it-all want of conformity to it, or transgression of it, it denounces and punishes as sin.

We agree with the third class of perfectionists, that men have all the requisite natural faculties to keep the divine law. The reason why the law is not obeyed perfectly is, not that men are destitute of the requisite faculties-not that they lack a proper natural ability-but solely because they lack the right feelings or dispositions of heart. The law is obeyed perfectly by saints in heaven; and if saints on earth had the same feelings of heart, the same moral affections, which they will have when they arrive at heaven, the law would be perfectly obeyed here. The difficulty with us, I repeat, is, not that we lack the requisite faculties, but that we are wanting in right affections, or holy de

sires.

We agree further with the class of perfectionists of whom I speak, that the law of God is to be approved and loved. It is the great standard which we are to keep ever before us, and towards which we are constantly and earnestly to aspire. We are to believe and feel, that the divine law requires nothing which is not altogether reasonable-that it is not at all too strict -and that we are to blame for all our transgressions of it. Like Paul, we are to say, "The law is holy, just, and good, but we are carnal, sold under sin." Like him, we are to forget the things which are behind and reach on to those which are before. We are to aim continually at a sinless perfection, and to be satisfied with nothing that comes short of it.

On all these points, and perhaps others, we agree with the class of perfectionists of whom I now speak. And these are very important points. Christians cannot have them too deeply imprinted on their memories, and engraven on their hearts. We are not to feel that we are under a natural, invincible necessity to be imperfect, and therefore may rest satisfied with our imperfections. There is nothing in the way of our moral perfection-our perfection in holiness, but the corrupt desires and propensities of our hearts; and for these we should ever feel that we are to blame. With these, we should never allow ourselves to be satisfied, till the last remains of them are overcome, and we are made meet for the inheritance of the saints in light.

But if we agree with the class of perfectionists to whom reference has been made, in so many points; wherein, it may be asked, do we differ? In what does the difference consist?

To this I reply, that the question between us is simply one of fact. The perfectionist asserts, not only that Christians ought to be perfect in the present life, but that they often are so ;not only that perfection is metaphysically attainable, but that, in frequent instances, it is actually attained. Christians come to be perfect, in the present life. They are free from sin. They keep the whole law. They may be said to have entered into their rest.

This position of the perfectionist he endeavors to sustain by various arguments, the more important of which it will be necessary to consider.

1. The testimony of the perfect is sometimes alleged in proof of their own perfection. Certain individuals think they are perfect. They say they are perfect. And their testimony in the case is to be admitted.-But do not persons often think of themselves more highly than they ought to think? Do they not often think themselves better than they are? And are we under obligations to believe all that individuals take it upon them to say, in regard to their own attainments in holiness? The young man in the gospel thought that he had kept all the commandments from his youth; whereas, in their proper spiritual import, he had not kept any of them.

"Man

2. But to the testimony of the perfect respecting themselves is added, in some instances, the testimony of others. Others around them, express the opinion that they are perfect. But their testimony is not conclusive for this reason, among others, that they have no means of looking into the heart. looketh on the outward appearance, but God looketh on the heart." Persons sometimes appear much better externally, than they are internally. They draw nigh to God with the mouth, and honor him with the lips, while their heart is far from him. Partial friends may see no palpable imperfections in one another, while God may see great imperfections in them all.

3. The command of God is sometimes urged in proof of perfection in this life. We are commanded to be perfect, even as our Father who is in heaven is perfect. But does it follow, because Christians are commanded to be perfect, that they actually are so? Do men in this life actually perform all that God has commanded them? He has commanded us to remember the Sabbath day, and keep it holy; and yet by multitudes the Sabbath is dreadfully profaned. He has commanded all

men to love him with their whole heart; and yet millions upon millions do not love him at all.

4. It is urged again, in proof of perfection in the present life, that it is our duty to pray that we may be perfect. In the Lord's prayer, we are directed to pray that we may be delivered from all evil. Paul prays for the Thessalonians, that the God of peace would sanctify them wholly, and preserve their whole spirit, soul, and body, blameless, unto the coming of the Lord Jesus, 1 Thess. 5: 23. But admitting that it is the duty of Christians to pray for perfection in the present life, is it certain, from this circumstance, that any of them actually arrive at it? Do Christians receive here all that they pray for, and all that they may with propriety pray for? Were the Thessalonian Christians sanctified wholly, and were their whole spirit, soul, and body, preserved blameless, unto the coming of the Lord Jesus, in answer to the prayer of Paul? Paul's heart's desire and most fervent prayer for the Israelites was, that they might be saved; and yet the great mass of them were not saved. He prayed also for the removal of the thorn in his flesh; but the thorn was not taken away. No more is it certain that Christians arrive at perfection in the present life, because they may with propriety pray for it.

5. Various passages of Scripture have been urged, in proof of perfection in the present life. Thus it is said that “Noah was a just man, and perfect in his generations." Job, too, was perfect and upright, one that feared God, and eschewed evil." In addressing the Philippians, Paul says, "Let us, therefore, as many as be perfect, be thus minded." But the perfection here spoken of, can only be a comparative perfection, not a sinless. one. This we know, from the subsequent history of Noah and Job, and from the connection of the passage quoted from Paul. It was long after Noah was spoken of as perfect, that he was found drunken in his tent, Gen. 6: 9. 9: 21. It was subsequent to the alleged perfection of Job, that we hear him abhorring himself, and repenting in dust and ashes for his sins, Job 42: 6. And in the verses immediately preceding that, in which Paul speaks of himself and others as perfect, he represents himself as not having yet attained, neither as being already perfect, Phil. 3: 12-15. Noah, and Job, and Paul, were just and devout In comparison with men generally among whom they lived, they may be said to have been perfect men; yet we know from their history, and from what they said of themselves

Inen.

in other connections, that they were not sinless in the sight of God.

In proof of perfection in the present life, there are often quoted some of the promises of God to the Israelites. Thus it is said in the Psalms, " He shall redeem Israel from all his iniquities," Ps. 130: 8. There is a promise, also, to the Jews, when returned from their captivity, that they should be cleansed from all their idols, and their filthiness, and saved from all their uncleanness, Ezek. 36: 25. In regard to the first of these promises, there is nothing connected with it to limit its application to the present life. God will redeem his people from all their iniquities; but will he do it before they arrive at heaven? In regard to the latter promise, we know that the restored Jews, although for a time a reformed people, were not a strictly perfect people. The promise was fulfilled to them in its intended comparative sense, but not in an absolute, unqualified sense.

Certain expressions are used in the first Epistle of John, from which it has been inferred that some Christians are perfect in the present life. "Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him, and he cannot sin, because he is born of God," 1 John 3: 9. That this passage is not to be un-* derstood absolutely, and without qualification, is certain from two considerations. In the first place, if we thus understand it, it proves too much. It proves, not that some few Christians only, of eminent attainments, are free from sin, but that this is true of all regenerated persons: "Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin." Yea, more than this, such an one "cannot sin, because he is born of God." But this is saying more than the advocates of perfection would be willing to admit. It is saying that not one of those ancient worthies, of whose imperfections we read in the Scriptures—indeed, that no one, who does sin, or can sin, is a regenerated person.-But there is another objection to an unqualified interpretation of this passage. Such an interpretation would make it contradictory to other plain declarations of the apostle John, in the same Epistle. "If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.” Again, "if we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us," 1 John 1: 8, 10. Now we are not at liberty so to interpret one passage of Scripture, as to make it contradictory to another, and to the general current of Scripture testimony on the same subject. The passage under consideration, like many of the sweeping generalities SECOND SERIES, VOL. 1. NO. I.

7