things thought so inconsistent by the apostle, have been found perfectly reconcilable by others; and what Paul looks upon as a contradiction, they have considered as a scheme, beautifully harmonizing the attributes of God, and the moral agency of mankind. God is just and gracious in the atonement, while man is entitled to the benefit of this and the reward of eternal life, by his repentance and new obedience. This is the darling scheme of the wise and the unwise. The bold conclusions of the Socinian and Arian are embraced only by a few hasty speculatists. They are never likely to be the refuge of the generality of mankind.

But let us see how the admirers of this popular scheme reconcile what Paul looked upon as a contradiction. If it is obvious to common sense, that grace and merit are irreconcilable, how can those who have not only common sense, but many that have much good sense and learning, be blind to the contradiction? It seems to me, that they hide the inconsistency from themselves, by viewing the grace of God and the merit of man, as not respecting the same things. Were it not for something of this nature, it would be impossible to attempt to reconcile things palpably irreconcilable. The same thing that is given purely of favour, cannot also be given as wages for work. But they contrive to appropriate the grace of God to one thing, and the merit of man to another. The former respects the giving of Christ as a ransom for sinners; the latter respects the terms of obtaining an interest in this ransom. The atonement is all of grace, but human efforts must obtain an interest in that work. This surely is the spirit of their doctrine, who speak of the grace of God in salvation, yet of man's being pardoned through the atonement for his repentance, rewarded for his sincere obedience. The grace of God consists not in giving all freely through Christ, but in making salvation possible through him, which was otherwise impossible, in giving a new and an easier covenant, which requires not perfect but sincere obedience. This they call a milder law, the gospel covenant, &c. In this view, also, some speak of faith itself, as if God, on account of the excellent disposition which it is supposed to manifest,

The

accepts it in lieu of sinless obedience to his law. They seem to have the same view of God's grace, as they would of that of a rich man, who, to encourage industry among the poor, would engage to give them wages, in value much above their work. While others give but a shilling a day, he gives five. He is gracious, then, in giving the poor so good a bargain; they merit their wages, because they have performed the work. But it is obvious, that when the Scriptures speak of God's grace, and the opposition of grace and works, they refer to the whole scheme of salvation, and oppose grace to work with respect to the same points. In Gal. iii. 18, where Paul asserts the inconsistency of law and promise, he is speaking against the doctrine of those who made the observance of law necessary to salvation, as well as faith in the death of Christ. In Rom. xi. 6, it is not only the salvation of sinners that is represented as of grace, but the election of them as of grace. heirs of life are represented as chosen, not on account of works that they should do, but altogether out of grace. If so, works of no kind can ever be represented consistently with Scripture as conditions of salvation. But all the ingenuity of all the learned advocates of this heterogeneous scheme, has never been able either to harmonize it with the Scriptures, or even with itself. If God requires any conditions on the part of sinners, it is impossible that salvation is of grace. However inconsiderable and easy such conditions may be, however short of the value of what is gained, still, when they are performed, they are work, and therefore contrary to grace. When they have been performed, they give ground to glory. If in themselves they are of no value, then they who have them not, are not inferior in moral worth to those who possess them; consequently they are of no value. If, though of no value in themselves, they are valuable, as commanded by God, then they who possess them, offer some value to God for their salvation. But if these conditions are valuable in themselves, as is generally supposed by the advocates of this scheme, then, according to their value, do they afford God a price for what he gives. If faith, repentance, sincere obedience, are the work of man, or the production of man's own

efforts, then his salvation is the fruit of his own labour. If one perishes, because he does not comply with these terms, and another is saved on account of them, then salvation is not of grace, but by human merit. The man who is saved may glory in the success of his efforts. He cannot be said to be saved by grace. He has given value for what he has received; and although it is not full value, it is all that is thought reasonable in his bankrupt circumstances to require of him. God then still demands of him all the debt which he is able to pay. Is this a salvation of grace? If faith, repentance, sincere obedience, are spoken of as the gift of God, then it is absurd in that view of them, to consider them as conditions on the part of man. In this view, the man who receives them has no more merit than the man who receives them not. If through faith; repentance, and sincere obedience, are the gift of God, but are given to one rather than another, on account of complying with some previous conditions, it is only removing merit a little farther back, and salvation is the reward of these previous conditions. On the other hand, if it can be said that salvation is of grace, that eternal life is the gift of God, then it is absurd and contradictory to suppose that the performance of any thing is required on the part of man. It cannot be grace that requires that will not give without something in return. It cannot be a gift that requires a purchase before it is communicated. No conditions on the part of the sinner can exist in a free salvation. It is of faith that it might be by grace. The pride of man is humbled in the doctrine of the cross. The virtuous sage is able to offer to God, for his salvation, nothing more than the abandoned profligate. If they believe the gospel, they both alike are changed by its power; they repent, are born again, and perform good works.

THE

MAHOMETAN FAST OF RHAMAZAN.

MANY persons in their eagerness to support orthodoxy as a system, speak of salvation by grace and faith in such a manner as to undervalue holiness and a life devoted to God. But there is no ground for this in the Holy Scriptures. The same gospel that declares salvation to be freely by the grace of God through faith in the blood of Christ, and asserts, in the strongest terms, that sinners are justified by the righteousness of the Saviour imputed to them on their believing in him, without any respect to works of law, also assures us, that without holiness, no man shall see God; that believers are cleansed by the blood of atonement; that their hearts are purified by faith, which works by love, and overcometh the world; and that the grace that brings salvation to all men, teaches those who receive it, that denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, they should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world. Any fear that the doctrine of grace will suffer from the most strenuous inculcation of good works on a Scriptural foundation, betrays an inadequate and greatly defective acquaintance with divine truth, and any tampering with the Scriptures, in order to silence their testimony in favour of the fruits of righteousness, as absolutely necessary in the Christian, is a perversion and forgery with respect to the word of God. Holiness is as necessary as faith, but it is necessary for a different purpose. When these purposes are clearly discerned, there will appear no clashing between faith and works, between justification by grace through the atonement, and the fruits of this in righteousness and holiness.

On the other hand, there are many who, not discriminating between the holiness which is produced by the belief of the truth, and that counterfeit piety which is the offspring of ignorance and superstition, think favourably of all who are greatly devoted to external acts of religion. The man who prays, must, in their estimation, be a man in favour with God, without considering that he may be praying, not like Paul after his conversion, but like the Pharisee for ostentation, or as a legal price for his salvation. If he fasts, however superstitious may be his views of religion, it is hoped that God will accept so much piety, though it be in ignorance. If he afflicts himself, and does many things with a view to please God, and appease his wrath, it is hard to think, as appears to them, that it will be utterly without advantage to him in the final day of reckoning. A pillar saint may to them be an object of contempt, but they will not be so uncharitable as to suppose that his austerities will not be rewarded, or at least graciously accepted in the judgment.

These observations forcibly strike us in reading the following account of the austerities with which the Mahometans observe their fast, Rhamazan.

If persons who set so high a value on merely external acts of devotion and religious austerities under the Christian name, would turn their eyes to the ancient nations who professed the grossest idolatries, and modern nations, which are either Pagan or Mahometan, they will find examples of devotedness and superstitious piety, which go far beyond those that, under the Christian name, appear to them to be either meritorious, or in some way giving a claim to divine favour. The austerities of heathenism and of false religion, have infinitely surpassed the severity of Christian superstitions.

The following article is extracted from a newspaper:

THE RHAMAZAN.

"Constantinople, December 17, "The continuance of the Rhamazan keeps every thing connected with politics in the most perfect state of stagnation at Constantinople; fasting, praying, promenading all day, and