only expedient we can ufe, to fecure us SER M. against the sad effects of prejudice and blind XVIII. obedience. For it confifts in cafting off all prejudice and bias from the mind, in ufing all proper methods to inform our judgment, and then thinking impartially of things as they deferve. But the modern notion of free-thinking is oppofite to this. It It proposes a frantick kind of liberty, and is fo far from owning Reason for its guide, that it runs against the common Reafon and experience of mankind. It not only allows of taking up what prejudice we pleafe, but adds yet these prejudices greater than the reft, that we have no ftable principles to go upon, that we should use no outward helps for the discovery of truth, and that the most received opinions deferve most to be opposed. 'Tis therefore an inconfiftent notion, and destroys itself. For either we ought to reason from found principles, or not. If we ought, in God's name let us do so, and never trust the uncertain conduct of our own humour, when we have fo ready a way to the discovery of Truth. But if not, why then should we truft to those principles which they propofe, and in adhering to which they make their liberty of thought confift? And if these be once removed, the obftacle is gone, which fhould keep us from found Chriftian Principles, and hinder our afpir SERM. ing to that true liberty which the gospel XVIII. recommends. In short, to call This, freedom and liberty of thought, is a mere abuse of words, and altogether as abfurd and extravagant as it would be to fuppofe, that the freedom of the Will confifts in observing the dictates of concupifcence. Man was created with liberty of will as well as thought. But he furely does not deftroy that freedom with which he was created, who preferves the faculties of his mind in due fubordination, and takes care to keep his Will under the conduct of his Reafon: though he on the other hand makes large advances towards it, who fhamefully inverts that order, and enflaves his Reafon to his Luft. They therefore that pervert the Gospel as a colour for licentioufnefs (for I would turn now to christian liberty with reference to Practice) they that imagine Chrift has fo fatisfied for fin as to require no obedience from us, but leave us to act even as we lift; or fuppofe he has invefted us with fuch immunities, as do exempt us from all fubjection to the civil Magiftrate, making us the fole arbiters of our own actions, and obnoxious to none either earthly or heavenly tribunal: they perfectly mistake the nature of this glorious Privilege, and confider not that whilst they promife us li berty, berty, they themselves are the fervants of SERM. corruption *. Sin is an unjuft encroachment on the human nature, and they who let it reign over them, are fo far from liberty, that they are fervants of fin. To deliver us from this tyranny, and enable us to pay to God the obedience of fons, was the end of Chrift's Incarnation, and all he did and fuffered for us. He came to fave his people from their fins; as well from the dominion of them, as their guilt and punishment. By his doctrine he invites us to repentance, and has fet before us life and death, to encourage and oblige. By his grace he enables us to perform our duty in such a manner, as fhall be gracioufly accepted. And by his blood he has made fuch atonement for our imperfections, as fhall purchafe pardon for the penitent. To him therefore we must have recourfe for power to fubdue our lufts, and to obey his Laws, that we may be delivered from the bondage of corruption, into the glorious liberty of the children of God; that we may be freed at prefent from the power of our fins, and hereafter from their punishment. Nor is this fubjection to the Laws of Christianity at all inconfiftent with the notion of Liberty. For true liberty does not confift in an abfolute freedom from re 2 Pet. ii. 19. ↑ Matt. i. 21. ‡ Rom. viii. 21. VOL. III. Ff ftraint, XVIII. SERM.ftraint, and exemption from all kind of XVIII. government, but only from fuch as is illegal and ufurped. And, indeed, fubject we must be to one or other. We cannot poffibly maintain either a ftate of fovereignty, or independency. But if we abandon the fervice of God, we commence inftantly vaffals of the Devil, and there can be no way of getting clear from his vaffalage, but by returning to God. "Tis hence that to be freed from fin, and become Servants of righteousness, are terms equivalent in fcripture language. And therefore if we would be made free by the Son, and fo be free indeed, we must take care that we ufe not our liberty for a cloak of malicioufnefs, but as the fervants of God. This then (befides an exemption of the Chriflian Church from thofe ritual obfervances which were exacted of the Jewish; This) is that true Chriftian freedom which the Gospel proposes and commends to us, which for that reafon is called here by St. James, the perfect law of liberty. Not that we are to fuppofe, before the publication of the Gospel, that there was no remiffion of fin, no getting free from the power and dominion of it. The clean contrary is evident. And hard had been their fate indeed, who lived under the legal difpenfation, if they had thus been excluded from the covenant of grace. But then all the the benefit they enjoyed of this nature, SER M. was not from that difpenfation in itfelf con- XVIII. fidered, but from thofe merits of Chrift which it was defigned to fignify. The legal facrifices had no virtue or efficacy of their own. For it is not poffible (as the Author to the Hebrews argues) that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away fins. But then This ferved to figure out, and was the means of applying that blood of the covenant wherewith we are indeed fanctified, and which alone can purge our confcience from dead works to ferve the living God. So that although the benefits of the Gofpel were beftowed on them who lived before it was published in that clear manner we enjoy it now, and Christ is therefore called the Lamb that was flain from the foundation of the world, yet ftill it is the Gofpel only, not any other Difpenfation, can be called the perfect law of liberty. To conclude now, in a word or two by way of Reflection. If the fcriptures we enjoy be indeed a Rule of faith and manners, if they have really the force and obligation of a Law; let this confideration excite us to obedience. For why fhould we difpute a ready compliance with our Mafter's orders? Is it, because we doubt of his authority, and with Pilate, make it a queftion whe*Heb, x. 4, 29. + Heb. ix. 14. Rev. xiii. 8. Ff2 ther |