forfeited, and the offender becomes again 'liable to the wrath of God. Repentance 'therefore and Faith, if sincere, will in all cases procure justification; but obedience must 'be added, to preserve the state of justification 'when obtained."* This it must be acknowledged, is also the opinion of Bishop BULL, as quoted by his Lordship. Again, Adults are 'not required to perform any good works pre'vious to baptism, but simply to profess their 'faith in the blessed Trinity, and to promise 'future obedience to God's holy will and com'mandments: they are then baptized, and by 'this spiritual regeneration they receive remission of all their former sins, both original. ' and actual.-But, from the corruption of his nature, and the enticements of sin, he [the 'justified person] may afterwards not lead a life 'agreeable to the precepts of the gospel-and if he dies while he continues an impenitent sinner, he will not be saved, although he had 'justification in this world.' Dr. WATERLAND, on Justification, seems to regard this as the sentiment of the Church of England.

§ 16. Setting aside names and human authority, as we ought to do, let us calmly examine the sentiment itself. There are two things of

* Refut. p. 142.

+ Ibid. p. 143.

primary importance, which require our attention.: first, whether the justification supposed to be conferred by baptism, on profession of faith in the Trinity, and a promise of future obedience, be not a gratuitous assumption; and, secondly, whether the difficulty proposed to be obviated by this statement, may not be more satisfactorily, that is, more scripturally and rationally, removed on different principles. As to the first of these points, what evidence is there, that adults, converted from Heathenism, or persons educated among Christians without baptism, are brought into a state of justification before God, by simply professing their faith in the Trinity and promising future obedience, and being baptized? That any churches, whether primitive or modern, have acted on this presumption, can surely be no substantial argument for the rectitude of the sentiment. Primitive practice may be as wrong as a modern practice; and if antiquity be a test of truth, there is scarcely an error or absurdity, which may not be proved to be true and correct. May not a hypocritical pretender profess faith and promise obedience,-nay, be baptized, and introduced to the visible church? It is true the church ought, in the judgment of charity to esteem them as sincere in their profession and promise, and therefore in a justified state, until they give evidence to the contrary; but the omniscient God can be under no such obligation:

he sees their insincerity of profession and promise, and that their faith is dead. Surely no one without contradicting the whole tenor of holy writ, as well as many particular express declarations, can suppose that he approves, accepts, pardons and justifies those whom he knows to be insincere; nor ean any thing be more adverse to scripture and piety than the notion, that baptism was ever designed to sanctify hypocrites, and to render those acceptable to God who were before detested by him?

§ 17. It is granted that the apostolic writing's regard those who were admitted to the Christian church to be Christians, and partakers of all the benefits of Christianity: but on what ground? Clearly because it was charitably hoped that they believed and promised from a pure principle and a right motive. To be thus justified, however, by the fallible opinion of the church, is no evidence that they are so before God who searcheth the hearts. By him, such false pretenders both before and after baptism stand condemned; and their being thus introduced to the participation of gospel privileges, and outward communion with the faithful, is so far from lessening their guilt, that it rather enhances their condemnation. Doubtless when they manifest a temper and conduct incompatible with true Christianity, they lose that justification

which they had from the good opinion of the church; but they lose no justification before God, because they were never possessed of any. He saw the rottenness of their heart before it discovered itself to the eyes of men, and that through every stage they were under his righteous condemning sentence.-Whether, in any instance a person possessing evangelical sincerity and a living faith, may afterwards losc these estimable qualities, belongs to a totally different question; and the discussion of it in this place would be a premature digression. It may be sufficient to observe here, that if these qualities originate in themselves, they may certainly lose them; but if they are imparted by sovereign mercy, there are many strong reasons for concluding, that the "seed shall' remain," and that their faith, however strongly assaulted, "shall not fail."

§. 18. The second thing that remains to be considered, is, whether the difficulty to be obviated by his Lordship's statement may not be more satisfactorily removed on different principles. His design is, doubtless, to befriend the interests of practical piety. At first view it may appear plausible, that a dread of having our justification before God, cancelled, may be a strong barrier against licentiousness; while a persuasion of the contrary opens a wide gate to

carelessness: but against this we have several considerations to offer. In the first place every sin, in whatever degree, is displeasing to God,— and this displeasure duly apprehended is a far stronger barrier, except with the selfish and unprincipled, who regard the pleasure or displeasure of God as only of secondary consideration. According to the one sentiment, a person will be no farther careful to please God, or to avoid sin, than to preserve his justification; according to the other, he has reason to guard against all sin, even the smallest. His language in the hour of temptation would be, "How can I do this great wickedness, and sin against God?" In the next place, if every sin, however comparatively small, forfeits our justification, where in this world shall we find a justified person? For "there is not a just man upon earth that doeth good and sinneth not." "If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us." A sinful thought is displeasing to God, but does every sinful thought forfeit our justified state? On this theory, the same person may have his justified state renewed and cancelled a hundred times a day! And if we lessen the condition a little, and say, "By the indulgence of any criminal passion, or by the neglect of any practicable duty, the state of justification is forfeited, and the offender becomes again liable to the wrath of God;" the inference is easy, that