and every doctrine of the gospel, that the great majority, of all the professed believers and receivers of those doctrines were proud, worldly, selfish, and exhibited any thing but a right spirit? Now this objection might be made with truth to the professed Christian Church. But would the conclusiveness of such an objection be admitted in Christian lands? Who does not know the ready answer to all such objections as these, that the doctrines of Christianity do not sanction such conduct, and that it is not the real belief of them that begets any such spirit or conduct; that the Christian religion abhors all these objectionable things. And now suppose it should be replied to this, that a tree is known by its fruits, and that so great a majority of the professors of religion could not exhibit such a spirit, unless it were the tendency of Christianity itself to beget it. Now who would not reply to this, that this state of mind and course of conduct of which they complain, is the natural state of man uninfluenced by the gospel of Christ; that in these instances, on account of unbelief, the gospel has failed to correct what was already wrong, and that it needed not the influence of any corrupt doctrine to produce that state of mind? It appears to me, that these objectors against this doctrine on account of the fact that some and perhaps many who have professed to receive it, have exhibited a wrong spirit, take it for granted that the doctrine produces this spirit, instead of considering that a wrong spirit is natural to men, and that the difficulty is that through unbelief the gospel has faied to correct what was before wrong. They reason as if they supposed the human heart needed something to beget within it a bad spirit, and as if they supposed that a belief in this doctrine had made men wicked, instead of recognizing the fact, that they were before wicked and that through unbelief, the gospel has failed to make them holy.

14. But let it not be understood, that I suppose or admit that the great mass who have professed to have received this doctrine into their hearts, have exhibited a bad spirit. I must say that it has been eminently otherwise so far as my own observation extends. And I am fully convinced, that if I have ever seen Christianity in the world, and the spirit of Christ, that it has been exhibited by those, as a general thing, who have received this doctrine into their

hearts.

15. How amazingly important it is, that the ministry and the Church should come fully to a right understanding and

embracing of this doctrine. O, it will be like life from the dead. The proclamation of it is now regarded by multitudes as "good tidings of great joy." From every quarter, we get the gladsome intelligence, that souls are entering into the deep rest and peace of the gospel, that they are awaking to a life of faith and love-and that instead of sinking down into Antinomianism, they are eminently more benevolent, active, holy, and useful than ever before-that they are eminently more prayerful, watchful, diligent, meek, sober-minded and heavenly in all their lives. This is the character of those, to a very great extent at least, with whom I have been acquainted, who have embraced this doctrine, and professed to have experienced its power. I say this for no other reason than to relieve the anxieties of those who have heard very strange reports, and whose honest fears have been awakened in regard to the tendency of this doctrine.

16. Much pains have been taken to demonstrate that our views of this subject are wrong. But in all the arguing to this end hitherto, there has been one grand defect. None of the opponents of this doctrine have yet showed us "a more excellent way and told us what is right." It is certainly impossible to ascertain what is wrong on any moral subject unless we have before us the standard of right. The mind must certainly be acquainted with the rule of right, before it can reasonably pronounce any thing wrong, "for by the law is the knowledge of sin." It is therefore certainly absurd for the opponents of the doctrine of entire sanctification in this life to pronounce this doctrine wrong without being able to show us, what is right. To what purpose then, I pray, do they argue who insist upon this view of the subject as wrong while they do not so much as attempt to tell us what is right? It can not be pretended that the scriptures teach nothing upon this subject. And the question is, what do they teach? We therefore call upon the denouncers of this doctrine, (and we think the demand reasonable,) to inform us definitely, how holy Christians may be, and are expected to be in this life. And it should be distinctly understood, that until they bring forward the rule laid down in the scripture upon this subject, it is but arrogance to pronounce any thing wrong; just as if they should pronounce any thing to be sin without comparing it with the standard of right. Until they inform us what the scriptures do teach, we must beg leave to be excused from supposing ourselves obliged to believe that what is taught in

these lectures is wrong or contrary to the language and spirit of inspiration. This is certainly a question that ought not to be thrown loosely by without being settled. The thing at which we aim is to establish a definite rule or to explain what we suppose to be the real and explicit teachings of the Bible upon this point. And we do think it absurd that the opponents of this view should attempt to convince us of error, without so much as attempting to show what the truth upon this subject is. As if we could easily enough decide what is contrary to right, without possessing any knowledge of right. We therefore beseech our brethren in discussing this subject to show us what is right. And if this is not the truth to show us a more excellent way and convince us that we are wrong by showing us what is right. For we have no hope of ever seeing that we are wrong until we can see that some thing else than what is advocated in this discussion is right.

17. But before I close my remarks upon this subject I must not fail to state what I regard as the present duty of Christians: It is to hold their will in a state of consecration to God, and to lay hold on the promises for the blessing promised in such passages as 1st Thes. 5: 23, 24: "And the very God of peace sanctify you wholly, and I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ; faithful is he that calleth you who also will do it." This is present duty. Let them wait on the Lord in faith for that cleansing of the whole being which they need to confirm, strengthen, settle them. All they can do, and all that God requires them to do is to obey him from moment to moment and to lay hold of him for the blessing of which we have been speaking, and to be assured that God will bring the answer for them in the best time and in the best manner. If you believe, the Anointing that abideth will surely be secured in due time.

LECTURE LXXI.

ELECTION.

In discussing this subject,

I. I SHALL REMIND YOU OF SOME POSITIONS THAT HAVE BEEN SETTLED RESPECTING THE NATURAL AND MORAL ATTRIBUTES OF GOD.

II. WHAT THE BIBLE DOCTRINE OF ELECTION IS NOT.

III.

IV.

V.

WHAT IT IS.

I SHALL PROVE THE DOCTRINE TO BE TRUE.

SHOW WHAT COULD NOT HAVE BEEN THE REASONS

FOR ELECTION.

VI. WHAT MUST HAVE BEEN THE REASONS.

VII.

WHEN THE ELECTION WAS MADE.

VIII. ELECTION DOES NOT RENDER MEANS FOR THE SAL

VATION OF THE ELECT UNNECESSARY.

IX. ELECTION IS THE GREAT GROUND OF HOPE IN THE

SUCCESS OF MEANS TO SAVE THE SOULS OF MEN.

X. ELECTION DOES NOT OPPOSE ANY OBSTACLE TO THE

SALVATION OF THE NON-ELECT.

XI. THERE IS NO INJUSTICE IN ELECTION.

XII. THIS IS THE BEST THAT COULD BE DONE FOR THE INHABITANTS OF THIS WORLD.

XIII. How WE MAY ASCERTAIN OUR OWN ELECTION. I. I shall remind you of some points that have been settled. 1. We have seen that eternity is a natural attribute of God in the sense that he grows no older. He was just as old before the world or the universe was made, as he is now, or as he will be at the day of judgment.

2. We have seen that omniscience is an attribute of God in the sense that he knows from a necessity of his infinite nature, all things that are objects of knowledge.

3. That he has necessarily and eternally possessed this knowledge, so that he never has and never can have any accession to his knowledge. Every possible thing that ever was, or will be, or can be an object of knowledge, has been necessarily and eternally known to God. If this were not true God would be neither infinite nor omniscient.

4. We have seen also that God exercises an universal providence, embracing all events that ever did or ever will occur in all worlds. Some of these events he causes or secures by his own agency, and others occur under his providence in the sense that he permits or suffers them to occur rather than interpose to prevent them. They may be truly said to occur under his providence because his plan of government in some sense embraces them all. He made provision to secure those that are good, and to overrule for good those that are evil and naturally of evil tendency, but which result incidentally from those that are good. They may be said to occur under Divine Providence also, because all events that do or ever will occur are and must be foreseen, results of God's own agency, or of the work of creation.

5. We have seen that infinite benevolence is a moral attribute, or rather that it is the sum of the moral attributes of God.

6. That God is both naturally and morally immutable; that in his natural attributes he is necessarily so, and in his moral attributes he is certainly so.

7. We have also seen that all who are converted, sanctified and saved, are converted, sanctified and saved by God's own agency; that is, God saves them by securing by his own agency their personal and individual holiness.

II. What the bible doctrine of election is not.

1. Not, as Huntington maintained, that all men are chosen to salvation through the atonement of Christ. This gentleman, who was a Congregational minister of New England, left a treatise for publication after his death, (which was accordingly published.) in which he maintained the usual orthodox creed, with the exception of extending the doctrine of election to the whole human race. He took the Old School view of the Atonement, that it was the literal payment of the debt of the elect; that Christ suffered what and as much as they deserved to suffer, and thus literally purchased their salvation. Assuming that such was the nature of the Atonement, he sets himself to inquire into the extent of the Atonement, or for whom it was made. Finding that Christ tasted death for every man, that he died for the world, he came to the conclusion that all were elected to salvation, and that all will therefore be saved. I have never seen the work of which I speak, but such is the account I have had of it from those who know as I suppose. But this is not the bible doctrine of election, as we shall see.