edge from the heart that the law is good, and that they ought to have kept it constantly and perfectly; that in disobeying the law, they have acted a most unreasonable and wicked part, and that they really deserve the punishment which the law denounces against those who transgress. All this sinners feel and acknowledge, when they are thoroughly convinced of sin, and judge of things according to truth. One who is only in part convinced of sin, feels and acknowledges this in part. His conscience is disturbed, but not fully awakened. He is so blinded by his selfish feelings, that he regards the very depravity which renders him illdeserving in the sight of God, as an alleviation of his guilt. But thorough conviction of sin by the Holy Spirit sweeps away all these refuges, and brings the sinner, ashamed and trembling, to smite upon his breast, and say, God be merciful to me a sinner. Those who are thoughtless and quiet in sin have many false conceptions, which can never be removed, except by that Holy Spirit which Christ promised to convince the world of sin. On our part, if we would do that which is best adapted to convince men of sin, we must clearly explain to them the commands of the law and the gospel, and must urge them to immediate and constant obedience, as their reasonable service, and that which God absolutely requires. We must endeavor to persuade them to this by all the motives suggested by the word of God. And we must make it as evident to them as possible, that the delay of obedience is continued rebellion. If they excuse themselves because they are depraved, and say, you require too much; tell them that you only convey God's message to them; that you require only what he requires; that their complaints are against him; that their controversy is with their Maker. Show them the absurdity and presumption of supposing that God can abate anything of his demands upon them, because they are sinners. And never leave them to think that the long continuance and high degree of their sinfulness, or its early date, can have any other effect than to increase their guilt, and render them the more inexcusable. Address the commands of God to them with great seriousness. Show them that you consider these commands perfectly just; that you are in earnest when you incul cate obedience; that you regard them as under the highest conceivable obligation to obey the divine law in all its length and breadth, and as meriting the displeasure of God for failing to do this. In a word, show them that you heartily join with God, and approve of his high and spiritual commands as addressed to sin ners, and of the sentence of condemnation which he pronounces against every one who disobeys. As to the proper manner of exhibiting and inculcating moral obligation, we are to derive our lessons primarily and chiefly from the Holy Scriptures. We are to look much more than we have commonly done to the inspired teachers, as our models. They certainly had true practical wisdom, and their method of teaching was founded on just views of the human mind and character, and perfectly adapted to promote the highest good of the world. We are accustomed to celebrate the sacred writers, as affording the best examples of a just and impressive eloquence, -an eloquençe suited to awaken conscience, and move all the springs of human action. Now we should act very inconsistently with ourselves, if after all our admiration of the Bible as a perfect model of what is eloquent and just and useful in the manner of teaching, we should not be careful to copy it. I earnestly hope that the extraordinary attention which is now given to the Scriptures by theological students, and by ministers of the gospel, will produce happy results, and that the common mode of preaching will become much more Scriptural than it has been. And I hope, too, that the growing attention to the Bible in our Christian community, and especially among the young, will contribute effectually to form such a taste, that no preacher can be acceptable to the public, unless he faithfully conforms to the infallible standard. Let us then seriously and patiently inquire, in what manner the momentous subject of our moral obligation is treated in the Holy Scrip tures. The first thing which occurs is, that the inspired writers do not formally assert, nor attempt by a process of reasoning to prove, our obligation to obey the divine commands, but assume it as a well known and acknowledged fact. In this they are fully justi fied; and in this we ought, certainly in all ordinary cases, to imitate them; because the feeling of obligation originally arises not from the force of arguments, but from the very constitution of our nature, and always exists in full strength when the mind is in a right state, and has the proper objects in view. It is as evidently proper, that a religious teacher should take it for granted that men are in fact moral and accountable beings, and under obligation to obey the divine law, as it is for a teacher of optics to take it for granted that his pupils have the sense of seeing; or for a teacher of geometry, that his pupils have the faculty of understanding. And in ordinary cases, why should it be thought any more necessary in moral and religious discourse, either to prove or to assert the fact, that we are accountable beings and under obligation to obey God, than in philosophical discourse to assert and prove that we are endued with various bodily senses and intellectual faculties, which render us capable of observing the physical world, and understanding philosophical truth? The teacher of natural philosophy says nothing, except incidentally, of these senses and faculties. He does not undertake directly to treat of them, and has no need to do it. Indeed he does not consider this to be within his province. He takes it for granted that we are what we are, and proceeds immediately to teach the principles of his science. The same with the mathematician. Euclid does not begin his system of geometry by affirming and attempting to prove, that we have eyes to see his diagrams, and a mind to understand his maxims and propositions. Should he affirm this and labor ever so long to prove it, he would make it no more evident to us than it was before. He has therefore nothing to do with this, but proceeds at once to give his maxims, and to lay down and demonstrate his propositions. The inspired teachers generally act on the same principle. It is always manifestly implied in their instructions, that we possess the faculties of intelligent and accountable agents. But where do they directly affirm this? Where do they produce any proof of it? Nowhere. They take it for granted. In order to get an exact idea of the manner in which the inspired teachers proceed in regard to man's moral obligation, let us examine some of the great occasions on which truth is taught and duty enjoined in the Scriptures. We begin with the giving of the law. The Lord descended upon Mount Sinai amid terrible thunders and lightnings; and Moses brought the people out of the camp to meet with God, and to hear his words. Now what did God say to them? In what manner did he inculcate their duty upon them? Did he begin by telling them that they had all the powers and faculties necessary to moral agency; that they were free, and accountable, and under obligation to obey? Nothing of this. "He spake all these words, saying, I am the Lord thy God who have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage. Thou shalt have no other gods before me. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image. Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain. Remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy. Honor thy father and thy mother," etc. He simply gave his law; simply announced his commands to the people. Their being under obligation to render obedience was asserted in no other way, than by merely giving the commands. No proof was given, as it was a well known and acknowledged fact. And how was it with Moses, who afterwards labored so particularly, and with an eloquence so powerful and moving, to enforce obedience upon the children of Israel? We have, in Deuteronomy, an account of his faithful and impressive address to the people, containing doctrines, precepts, warnings, threats, exhortations, and a recital of God's favors, and of their sins, in a great variety of forms. But where is the passage in the whole book, in which he asserted the fact of their moral agency, or gave them a description of those powers and faculties which constituted them moral agents, and made it just and proper that they should keep God's law, and be accountable to him for their actions? Let us peruse and reperuse this remarkable book, till we are imbued with its contents. In this way we may do much towards learning the art of plain, pungent, affectionate, powerful, and profitable preaching. And it may be of some use to make the supposition, that Moses himself were now here, laboring among us as a religious teacher, and retaining the same views of man's obligation and man's sinfulness, and the same manner of setting them forth, which he had when he addressed the children of Israel after they had spent forty years in the wilderness. Might not his example correct some common faults in our manner of preaching, and give us a taste for greater seriousness, simplicity, and faithfulness? And if any of us, with our present habits, should stand forth and preach in his presence; what would he think of us? Would it not be a matter of wonder to him, that with all the advantages of the new dispensation, as well as the old, we had attained to no higher excellence? Let us more carefully study the Book of Deuteronomy, and more faithfully copy the model of sacred eloquence which it contains. But we must consider other occasions on which truth was taught and duty inculcated. Look then at the instances in which the prophets, from age to age, gave instruction, warning, reproof, and exhortation. Dwell upon those passages in their writings, where they undertook, with the greatest particularity, to teach men their duty and their guilt, and to urge them to repentance. Is. there a single sentence which shows, that they ever stopped to assert and prove the doctrine of moral agency, or to inquire into the grounds of moral obligation, as ministers often do at the present day? Did they not always assume it as a thing too evident to need any proof, that man is a moral agent, and in duty bound to obey the commands of God? Take a higher example still, that of Jesus Christ. Look at the manner of his teaching in his sermon on the mount. Read the beginning, and the middle, and the end of it. Read his parables; his conversations with his disciples; his addresses to unbelievers, to objectors, to cavillers. Never man spake as he spake. He is a perfect model. Who has studied this model as much as he ought? Read also the addresses of Peter, of Stephen, and of Paul, in the Acts. Read the epistles, especially the Epistle to the |