voluntary trespasses, than many weak believers have of their voluntary breaches of the moral law. 2. Although a perfect Christian has a witness that his sins are now forgiven in the court of his conscience, yet he knows the terrors of the Lord; he hastens to meet the awful day of God; he waits for the appearance of our Lord Jesus Christ, in the character of a righteous Judge: he keeps an eye to the awful tribunal, before which he is either justified or condemned by his words: he is conscious that his final justification is not yet come; and therefore he would think himself a monster of stupidity and pride, if, with an eye to his absolution in the great day, he scrupled saying to the end of his life, "Forgive us our trespasses."-3. He is surrounded with sinners, who daily trespass against him, and whom he is daily bound to forgive; and his praying that he may be forgiven now, and in the great day, as he forgives others, reminds him that he may forfeit his pardon, and binds him more and more to the performance of the important duty of forgiving his enemies.—And 4. His charity is so ardent that it melts him, as it were, into the common mass of mankind: Bowing himself therefore under the enormous load of all the wilful trespasses which his fellow-mortals, and particularly his relatives and his brethren daily commit against God, he says with a fervour which imperfect Christians seldom feel," For give us our trespasses, &c.-We are heartily sorry for our wisdoings [my own, and those of my fellow sinners :] The remembrance of them is grievous unto us the burden of them is intolerable." Nor do we doubt, but, when the spirit of mourning leads a numerous assembly of supplicants into the vale of humiliation, the person who puts the shoulder of faith most readily to the common bur den of sin, and heaves the most powerfully in order to roll the enormous load into the Redeemer's grave, is the most perfect penitent the most exact observer of the apostolic precept, "Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ ;" and, of consequence, we do not scruple to say, that such a person is the most perfect Christian in the whole assembly. If Mr. Hill considers these answers, we doubt not but he will confess that his opposition to Christian perfection chiefly springs from his inattention to our definition of it, which I once more sum up in these comprehensive lines of Mr. Wesley: "O let me gain Perfection's height ! And feel that Christ is all in all !" VIII. Our opponents produce another plausible objection, which runs thus: "It is plain from your account of Christian perfection, that adult believers are free from sin; their hearts being purified by perfect faith' and filled with perfect love. Now sin is that which humbles us and drives us to Christ, and therefore, if we were free from indwelling sin, we should lose a most powerful incentive to humility, which is the greatest ornament to a true Christian." We answer: Sin never humbled any soul. Who has more sin than satan? And who is prouder ?- Did sin make our first parents humble? If it did not, how do our brethren suppose that its nature is altered for the better ?-Who was humbler than Christ? but was he indebted to sin for his humility? Do we not see daily, that the more sinful men are, the prouder they are also ?-Did Mr. Hill never observe, that the holier a believer is, the humbler he shews himself? And what is holiness, but the reverse of sin ?-If sin is necessary to make us humble, and to keep us near Christ; does it not follow that glorified saints, whom all acknowledge to be sinless, are proud despisers of Christ ?-If humility is obedience, and if sin is disobedience, is it not as absurd to say, that sin will make us humble, i. e. obedient; as it is to affirm that rebellion will make us loyal, and adultery, chaste? See we not sin enough, when we look ten or twenty years back, to humble us to the dust for ever, if sin can do it? Need we plead for any more of it in our hearts or lives?-If the sins of our youth do not humble us, are the sins of our old age likely to do it ?-If we contend for the life of the man of sin, that he may subdue our pride: do we not take a large stride after those who say, "Let us sin that grace may abound. Let us continue full of indwelling sin that humility may increase?"-What is, after all, the evangelical method of getting humility? Is it not to look at Christ in the manger, in Gethsemane, or on the cross; to consider him when he washes his disciples' feet; and obediently to listen to him when he says, "Learn of me to be meek and lowly in heart?"Where does the gospel plead the cause of Barrabbas, and the thieves within? Where does it say, that they may be indeed nailed to the cross, and have their legs broken; but that their life must be left whole within them, lest we should be proud of their death? Lastly, What is indwelling sin but indwelling pride? At least is not inbred pride one of the chief ingredients of indwelling humility? Can a serpent beget a dove? And sin ? And how can pride be productive of will not men gather grapes from thorns, sooner than humility of heart from haughtiness of spirit? IX. The strange mistake which I detect, would not be so prevalent among our prejudiced brethren, if they were not deceived by the plausibility of the following argument. When believers are humbled for a thing, they are humbled by it: but believers are humbled for sin; and therefore, they are humbled by sin The flaw of this argument is in the first proposition. We readily grant that penitents are humbled for sin; or, in other terms, that they humbly repent of sin; but we deny that they are humbled by sin; To shew the absurdity of the whole argument, I need only produce a sophism exactly parallel. "When people are blooded for a thing, they are blooded by it; but people are sometimes blooded for a cold, and therefore people are sometimes blooded by a cold. X. "We do not assert that all perfection is imaginary. Our meaning is that all christian perfection is in Christ; and that we are perfect in his person, and not in our own. Ans. If you mean by our being perfect only in Christ, that we can attain to Christian perfection no other way, than by being perfectly grafted in him the true Vine; and by deriving, like vigorous branches, the perfect sap of his perfect righteousness, to enable us to bring forth fruit unto perfection; we are entirely agreed for we perpetually assert, that nothing but Christ in us the hope of glory, nothing but Christ dwelling in our hearts by faith, or, which is all one, nothing but the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus, can make us free from the law of sin, and perfect us in love. But, as we never advanced, that Christian perfection is attainable any other way, than by a faith that roots and grounds us in Christ; we doubt some mystery of iniquity lies hid under these equivocal phrases, "All our perfection is in Christ's person :We are perfect in him, and not in ourselves." Should those who use them, insinuate by such language, that we need not, cannot be perfect, by an inherent personal conformity to God's holiness, because Christ is thus perfect for us or should they mean, that we are perfect in him, just as county freeholders, entirely strangers to state affairs, are perfect politicians in the knights of the shire who represent them in parliament:as the sick in the hospital are perfectly healthy in the physician that gives them his attendance-as the blind man enjoyed perfect sight in Christ when he saw walking men like moving trees :-as the filthy leper was perfectly clean in our Lord, before he had felt the power of Christ's gracious words, "I will, be thou clean:" or, as hungry Lazarus was perfectly fed in the person of the rich man, at whose gate he lay starving: -should this, I say, be your meaning, we are in conscience bound to oppose it, for the reasons contained in the following que ries. 1. If believers are perfect, because Christ is perfect for them; why does the Apostle exhort them to go on to perfection? 2. If all our perfection is inherent in Christ, is it not strange, that St. Paul should exhort us" to perfect holiness in the fear of God, by cleansing ourselves from all filthi ness of the flesh and spirit?" Did not Christ perfect his own holiness? And will his personal sanctity be imperfect, till we have cleansed ourselves from all defilement ? 3. If Christ is perfect for us, why does St. James say, "Let patience have her perfect work, that ye may be perfect?" Is Christ's perfection suspended upon the perfect work of our patience ? 4. Upon the scheme which I oppose, what does St. Peter mean, when he says, "After ye have suffered awhile, the Lord make you perfect ?" What has our suffering awhile, to do with Christ's perfection? Was not Christ made perfect through his own sufferings? Be 5. If believers were perfect in Christ's person, they would all be equally perfect. But is this the case ? Does not St. John talk of some who are perfected, and of others who are not yet made perfect in love? sides, the Apostle exhorts us to be perfect, not in Antinomian notions, but "in all the will of God, and in every good work;" and common sense dictates, that there is some difference between good works, and the person of Christ. 6. Does not our Lord himself show, that his personal righteousness will by no means be accepted instead of our personal perfection, where he says, "Every branch in me that beareth not fruit," [or whose fruit never grows to any perfection. See Luke viii. 14.] "My Father taketh_away," [far from imputing to it my perfect fruitfulness ?] 7. In the nature of things, can Christ's perfection supply the want of that perfection which he calls us to? Is there not a more essential difference between Christ's perfection and that of a believer, than there is between the perfection of a rose, and that of the grass of the field?-Between the perfection of a soaring eagle and that of a creeping insect ?-If our Lord is the head of the church, and we the members, is it not absurd to suppose that his perfection becomes us in every respect? Were I allowed to carry on a scriptural metaphor, I would ask : Is not the perfection of the head very different from that of the hand? And do we not take advantage of the credulity of the simple, when we make them believe, that an impeni tent adulterer and murderer is perfect in Christ; or, if you please, that a crooked leg and cloven foot are perfectly handsome, if they do but somehow belong to a beautiful face? 8. Let us illustrate this a little more. Does not the Redeemer's personal perfection consist in his being God and man in one person?-in his being eternally begotten by the Father as the Son of God; and unbegot ton in time by a father, as the son of man ;in his having given his life a ransom for all; -in his having taken it up again ;—and his standing in the midst of the throne, able to save to the uttermost all that come unto God through him? Consider this, candid believer, and say, if any man or angel can decently hope, that such an incommunicable perfection can ever fall to his share? 9. As the Redeemer's personal perfection cannot suit the redeemed, no more can the personal perfection of the redeemed be found in the Redeemer. A believer's perfection consists in such a degree of faith as works by perfect love. And does not this high degree of faith chiefly imply: 1. Uninterrupted self-diffidence, self-denial, self-despair? 2. A heart-felt, ceaseless recourse to the blood, merits, and righteousness of Christ? And, 3. A grateful love to him, because he first loved us, and fervent charity towards all mankind for his sake? Three things these, which in the very nature of things, either cannot be in the Saviour at all; or cannot possibly be in him, in the same manner in which they must be in believers. 10. Is not the doctrine of our being perfect in Christ's person, big with mischief? Does it not open a refuge of lies to the loosest Ranters in the land? Are there none who say, we are perfect in Christ's person: In him we have perfect chastity and honesty; perfect temperance and meekness; and we should be guilty of pharisaic insolence if we patched his perfection with the filthy rags of our personal holiness? And has not this doctrine a direct tendency to set godliness aside, and to countenance gross Antinomianism ? Lastly. When our Lord preached the doctrine of perfection, did he not do it in such a manner as to demonstrate that our perfection must be personal? Did he ever say, If thou wilt be perfect, only believe that I am perfect for thee? On the contrary, did he nɔt declare, "If thou wilt be perfect, sell what thou hast ;" [part with all that stands in thy way ;]" and follow me," in the way of perfection? And again: "Do good to them that hate you, that ye may be the children of your Father who is in heaven; for he sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust, &c. Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father who is in heaven is perfect?" Who can read these words and not see, that the perfection which Christ preaches, is a perfection of holy dispositions, productive of holy actions in all his followers? And that, of consequence, it is a personal perfection, as much inherent in us, and yet yet as much derived from him, and dependent upon him, as the perfection of our bodily health? The chief difference consisting in this; that the per fection of our health comes to us from God in Christ, as the God of nature: whereas our Christian perfection comes to us from God in Christ, as the God of grace. SECTION IV. Mr. Hill's first Argument against Christian Perfection is taken from the IXth and XVth Articles of the Church of England. These Articles properly understood are not contrary to that Doctrine.-That our Church holds it is proved by thirteen Arguments. --She opposes Pharisaic Perfection and not Christian perfection.-Eight Reasons are produced to shew, that it is absurd to embrace the Doctrine of a Death-purgatory, because our Reformers and Martyrs, in following after the perfection of Humility, have used some unguarded Expressions, which seems to bear hard upon the Doctrine of christian perfection. In the preceding Sections I have laid the axe at the root of some prejudices, and cut up a variety of objections. The controversial field is cleared. The engagement may begin: Nay, it is already begun : For Mr. Hill in his Creed for Perfectionists, and Mr. Toplady in his Caveat against unsound Doctrines, have brought up, and fired at our doctrine two pieces of ecclesiastical artillery; the IXth and XVth Articles of our Church: And they conclude that the contents of these doctrinal canons absolutely demolish the perfection we contend for. The report of their wrong-pointed ordnance, and the noise they make about our subscriptions, are loud: but that we need not be afraid of the shot, will, I hope, appear from the following ob servations. The design of the XVth article of our church is pointed out by the title, 66 Of Christ alone without sin." From this title we conclude, that the scope and design of the Article is not to secure to Christ the honour of being alone cleansed from sin; because such an honour would be a reproach to his original and uninterrupted purity, which placed him far above the need of cleansing. Nor does the Article drop the least hint about the impossibility of our being cleansed from sin before we go into the purgatory of the Calvinists; I mean the chambers of death. What our church intends, is to distinguish Christ from all mankind, and especially from the Virgin Mary, whom the Papists assert to have been always totally free from original and actual sin. Our Church does this by maintaining: 1. That Christ was born without the least taint of original sin, and never committed any actual transgression:-2. That all other men, the Virgin Mary, and the most holy believers not excepted, are the very reverse of Christ in both these respects; all being conceived in original sin, and offending in many things, even after baptism, * and with all the helps which we have under the Christian dispensa tion to keep us without sin from day to day. -And therefore, 3. That if we say we have no sin," if we pretend, like some Pelagians, that we have no original sin; or if we inti mate, like some pharisees. that "we did any harm in all our life," i. e. that we have no actual sin, "we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us ;" there being absolutely no adult person without sin in those respects, except our Lord Jesus Christ. never That this is the genuine sense of the Article appears: 1. By the absurdity which follows from the contrary sentiment. For if these words, "Christ alone without sin," are to be taken in an absolute and unlimited sense: if the word alone entirely excludes all mankind, at all times: if it is levelled at our being cleansed from sin, as well as at our having always been free from original and actual pollution:-if this is the case, I say, it is evident that, not only Fathers in Christ, but also, Enoch and Elijah, St. John and St. Paul, are to this day tainted with sin, and must to all eternity continue so, lest Mr. Hill's opinion of Christ alone without sin, should not be true. 2. Our sentiment is confirmed by the Article itself, part of which runs thus: "Christ, in the truth of our nature, was made like unto us in all things, sin only accepted, from which he was clearly void, both in his flesh and in his spirit. He came to be a lamb without spot-and sin, as St. John says was not in him. But all we the rest, although baptized and born again in Christ," [i. e. although we have from our infancy all the helps that the Christian dispensation affords men to keep them without sin,] "yet we offend in many things" (after our baptism) "and if we say" [as the above-mentioned Pelagians and pharisees]" that we have no" [original or actual] "sin" [i. e. that we are like Christ in either of these respects; our conception, infancy, childhood, youth, and age, being all taken into the account] we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.", 66 Having thus opened the plain, rational, and scriptural sense, in which we subscribe to our XVth Article, it remains to make a remark upon the Ninth. Some bigotted Pelagians deny original sin, or the Adamic infection of our nature, and The Rev. Mr. Toplady in his Historic Proof, page 253, informs us, that a popish Archbishop of St. Andrew's condemned Patrick Hamilton to death, for holding, among other doctrines, That children incontinent after baptism are sinners," or, which is all one, that haptism does not absolutely take away original sin. This anecdote is important, and shews that our Church levels at a popish error, the words of her Articles, which Mr. Hill and Mr. Toplady suppose to be levelled at Christian perfection. some bigotted Papists suppose that this infection is entirely done away in baptism: in opposition to both these, our church prudently requires our subscription to her IXth Article, which asserts: 1. That the fault and corruption of our nature is a melancholy reality: 2. That this fault, corruption, or infection doth remain in them, who are regenerated: that is, in them who are baptized or made children of God according to the Christian dispensation. For every person who has attentively read our liturgy knows, that these expressions baptized, regenerated and made a member of Christ and a child of God, are synonymous in the language of our church. Now, because we have acknowledged by our subscription to the Ninth Article, that the infection of nature is not done away in baptism, but does remain in them which are reg enerate, or baptized, Mr. Hill thinks himself authorized to impose upon us the yoke of indwelling sin for life; supposing that we cannot be fair subscribers to that Article, unless we renounce the glorious liberty of God's children and embrace the Antinomian gospel, which is summed up in these unguarded words of Luther, quoted by Bogatzky in his Golden Treasury, "The sins of a Christian are for his good, and if he had no sin he would not be so well off;-neither would prayer flow so well:" Can any thing be either more unscriptural or absurd? What unprejudiced person does not see, we may with the greatest consistency maintain, that baptism does not remove the Adamic infection of sin, and that nevertheless this infection may be removed before death. Nevertheless we are willing to make Mr. Hill all the concessions we can, consistently with a good conscience. If, by "the infection of nature," he understands the natural ignorance, which has infected our understanding; the natural forgetfulness, which affected our memory: the inbred debility of all our mental powers, and the poisonous seeds of mortality which infect all men from head to foot, and hinder the strongest believers from serving God with all the fervour they would be capable of were they not fallen from paradisaical perfection, under the curse of a body sentenced to die, and dead because of sin ;-If Mr. Hill, I say, understands this by "the infection of nature," we believe that such an infection, with all the natural, innocent appetites of the flesh, remains not only in those whom the scriptures call babes in Christ, but also in fathers: there being no adult believer that may not say, as well as Christ, Adam, or St. Paul, "I thirst.-I am hungry. I want an help-meet for me.-I know but in part.-I see darkly through a glass.-I groan, being burdened. He that marrieth sinneth not. It is better to marry than to burn, &c." But, if Mr. Hill, by "the infection of na ture," means the sinful lusts of the flesh, such as mental drunkenness, gluttony, whoredom, &c.—or if he understands unloving, diaboli cal tempers, such as envy, pride, stubborn ness, malice, sinful anger, ungodly jealousy, unbelief, fretfulness, impatience, hypocrisy, revenge, or any moral opposition to the will of God;-If Mr. Hill, I say, understands this, by "the infection of nature;" and if he supposes, that these evils must radically and necessarily remain in the hearts of all be lievers [fathers in Christ not excepted] till death comes to cleanse the thoughts of their hearts by the inspiration of his ill-smelling breath: we must take the liberty of dissenting from him; and we produce the following arguments to prove, that whatever Mr Hill may insinuate to the contrary, the Church of England is not against that doctrine of evangelical perfection which we vindicate. I. Our Church can never be so inconsistent as to level her articles against what she ardently prays for in her liturgy: but she ardently prays for Christian perfection, or for perfect love in this life therefore she is not against Christian perfection. The second proposition of this argument can alone be disputed, and I support it by the well-known collect in the communion service, "Cleanse the thoughts of our hearts by the inspiration of thy Holy Spirit, that we may perfectly love thee, and worthily magnify thy holy name, through Jesus Christ our Lord." Here we see, 1. The nature of Christian perfection: it is perfect love; 2. The seat of this perfect love; a heart cleansed from its own thoughts 3. The blessed effect of it, a worthy magni fying of God's holy name: 4. Its author, GOD, of whom the blessing is asked. 5. The immediate means of it, the inspiration of the Holy Spirit: and lastly, the gracious procu. rer of it, our Lord Jesus Christ. II. This vein of godly desire after Chris tian perfection runs through her daily service. In her confession she prays, "Restore thou them that are penitent, according to thy promises, &c. that hereafter we may live a godly, righteous, and sober life, to the glory of thy holy name." Now godliness, righteousness, and sobriety, being the sum of our duty towards God, our neighbour, and our selves, are also the sum of Christian perfection. Nor does our Church absolve any, but such as desire “that the rest of their life may be pure and holy, so that at the last they may come to God's eternal joy;" plainly intimating that we may get a pure heart, and lead a pure and holy life, without going into a death-purgatory: and that those who do not attain to purity of heart and life, that is, to perfection, are in danger of missing God's eternal joy. III. Hence it is, that she is not ashamed to pray daily for sinless purity, in the Te Deum: "Vouchsafe, O Lord, to keep us this day without sin," that is, sinless; for I suppose, that the title of our XVth Article, “ Of Christ alone without sin," means of Christ alone sinless from his conception to his last gasp. This deep petition is perfectly agreeable to the collects for the ix. xvii. xviii. and xix. Sundays after Trinity. "Grant to us the Spirit to think and do always such things as be rightful,-that we may be enabled to live according to thy will,"-[i. e. to live without sin.]-We pray thee, that thy grace may always prevent and follow us, and make us to be continually given to all good works," &c.-"Graat thy people grace to withstand the temptations of the world, the flesh, and the devil, and with pure hearts and minds to follow thee."-" Mercifully grant that thy holy Spirit may in all things direct and rule our hearts." Again: "May it please thee, that by the wholesome medicines of the doctrine delivered by him [Luke, the evangelist and physician of the soul,] all the diseases of our souls may be healed," &c. St. Luke's day. "Mortify and kill in us all vices" [and among them envy, selfishness, and pride:]" and so strengthen us by thy grace, that by the innocency of our lives, and constancy of our faith even unto death, we may glorify thy holy name," &c. The Innocents' day. "Grant us the help of thy grace, that in keeping thy commandments we may please thee both in will and deed," 1st Sunday after Trinity." Direct, sanctify, and govern both our hearts and bodies, in the ways of thy laws and in the works of thy commandments, that we may be preserved" [in those ways and works] "in body and soul." "Prevent us in all our doings, &c. and further us with thy continual help; that in all. our works begun, continued, and ended in thee, we may glorify thy holy name,' munion Service. Once more: "Grant that in all our sufferings here on earth, &c. we may stedfastly look up to heaven, and by faith behold the glory that shall be revealed; and being filled with the Holy Ghost, may learn to bless our persecutors by the example of thy first martyr," &c. St. Stephen's day. It is worth our notice, that blessing our per: ecutors and murderers, is the last beatitude, the highest instance of Christian perfection, and the most difficult of all the duties, which [if we may believe our Lord] constitute us perfect, in our sphere, as our heavenly Father is perfect. See Matt. v. 11, 44, 45, 48. -1 "Com IV. Perfect love, i. e. Christian perfection instantaneously springs from perfect faith: and as our church would have all her members perfect in love, she requires them to pray thus for perfect faith, which must be obtained in this life or never. Grant us so perfectly, and without all doubt, to believe |