ness in and of himself, and has every thing that pleases him immediately in his power, so there is no room to hope or wish for any thing beyond this. It is evident that faith and hope, however excellent, are peculiar to dependent and imperfect creatures, and are adapted to our present state, while as yet we have not the immediate sight and possession of their objects. 2. Love is the greatest in respect of its duration. The state of things to which faith and hope are adapted will come to an end. Their objects are things not seen, and made known to us at present only by the divine testimony and promise; but when they become objects of sight and enjoyment, there will be no more occasion for faith and hope; "for what a man seeth why doth he yet hope for ?" Rom. viii. 24. They will then give place to the immediate vision and fruition of their objects. But love never faileth. That which supersedes faith and hope perfects love, which shall endure for ever in the glorified state. A time shall come, when constant faith One lost in certainty of sight, And one dissolv'd in joy. But love shall last when these no more Or open on his dying eyes His long-expected rest: Love's unextinguish'd ray shall burn Thus it appears that faith, hope, and love, are in the strictest propriety of speech termed three, and that the greatest of these is love. And therefore every attempt to con found faith and love, particularly on the point of a sinner's acceptance with God, is to pervert the Scripture doctrine of justification by faith only. QUESTION III. WHETHER JUSTIFYING FAITH RESPECTS GOD AS THE JUSTIFIER OF THE UNGODLY? On this important question I shall, 1. Recite what I have already advanced in my Treatise on the Commission of Christ; and then-2. Examine Mr. Fuller's sentiments on this subject. What I have advanced on this subject in the Commission is contained in the following words : "It will perhaps be asked, Why so nice in distinguishing here? What harm can arise from including in the nature of faith such holy dispositions, affections, and exercises of heart, as are confessedly inseparable from it? In answer to this, let it be considered, "1. That unless we carefully distinguish faith from its effects, particularly on the point of a sinner's acceptance with God, the important doctrine of free justification by faith alone will be materially affected. The Scriptures pointedly declare, That God justifies sinners "FREELY BY HIS GRACE, through the REDEMPTION that is in Jesus Christ," Rom. iii. 24, and that this justification is received "through FAITH in Christ's blood," ver. 25. Faith in this case is always distinguished from, and opposed to the works WHETHER JUSTIFYING FAITH RESPECTS GOD, ETC. 85 of the law, Rom. iii. 26, 27, 28. chap. ix. 32, Gal. ii. 16, chap. iii. 9-15, not merely of the ceremonial law which was peculiar to the Jews; but of that law by which is the knowledge of sin, Rom. iii. 20, which says, "Thou shalt not covet," chap. vii. 7, and which requires not only outward good actions, but love and every good disposition of heart, both towards God and our neighbor, Matt. xxii. 37 -41; so that the works of this law respect the heart as well as life. The distinction therefore between faith and works, on this subject, is not that which is between inward and outward conformity to the law; for if faith is not in this case distinguished from, and opposed to our conformity to the law both outwardly and inwardly, it cannot be said that we are "justified by faith without the deeds of the law," Rom. iii. 28, or that God "justifieth the UNGODLY," chap. iv. 5. Faith, indeed, as a principle of action, "worketh by love;" but it is not as thus working that it is imputed for righteousness; for it is expressly declared that righteousness is imputed "to him that wORKETH NOT, but BELIEVETH on him that justifieth the ungodly.”—“It is of FAITH that it might be by GRACE," chap. iv. 16, and grace and works are in this case represented as incompatible with each other, chap. xi. 6; for "to him that WORKETH is the reward not reckoned of GRACE but of DEBT," chap. iv. 4. Now, when men include in the very nature of justifying faith such good dispositions, holy affections, and pious exercises of heart as the moral law requires, and so make them necessary (no matter under what consideration) to a sinner's acceptance with God, it perverts the apostle's doctrine upon this important subject, and makes justification to be, at least, "as it were by the works of the law." "2. The effect of such doctrine upon the mind of an awakened sinner is obvious. He who conceives that, in order to his pardon and acceptance with God, he must first be possessed of such good dispositions and holy affections as are commonly included in the nature of faith, will find no immediate relief from the gospel, nor any thing in it which fully reaches his case while he views himself merely as a guilty sinner. Instead of believing on him that justifieth the ungodly, he believes, on the contrary, that he cannot be justified till he sustains an opposite character. Though Christ died for sinners-for the ungodly, yet he does not believe that Christ's death will be of any benefit to him as a mere sinner, but as possessed of holy dispositions; nor does he expect relief to his conscience purely and directly from the atonement, but through the medium of a better opinion of his own heart or character. This sentiment, if he is really concerned about the salvation of his soul, must set him upon attempts to reform his heart, and to do something under the notion of acting faith, that he may be justified; and all his endeavors, prayers, and religious exercises will be directed to that end." Commission of Christ, page 83, 84, 85. The reader has here before him the whole of that passage which Mr. Fuller so strenuously opposes, and loads with the most odious consequences. He will perceive that I am not here speaking of faith as it works by love, or as a principle of sanctification, or holiness of heart and life (which I had mentioned a little before,) but merely as it relates to justification, or respects the ground of a sinner's acceptance with God; so that, whatever Mr. Fuller opposes to it, must be restricted to that point, otherwise it is nothing to the purpose. The reader will also observe, that I am not here denying that faith itself is a holy principle; but I am oppos. ing those who "include in the very nature of faith as justifying, such good dispositions, holy affections, and pious exercises of heart as the moral law requires, and so make them necessary to a sinner's acceptance with God." This I consider as perverting the doctine of justification by faith alone. I had no particular view to Mr. Fuller in this, it being a |