'the flesh,' he might stand related to us also, in the most intimate manner, as our Brother, bone of our bone, and flesh of our flesh: that so, he might properly represent us, undertake our cause as interested in it by the ties of one common nature, and encourage our most unlimited confidence in his compassion and love-Thus hath he humbled, emptied, and impoverished himself. As they, in behalf of whom he mediated, were partakers of flesh and blood, he also took part of the same:'' he is not ashamed to call them brethren :' and, as his union with the Father, in the divine nature, renders him a proper Person to vindicate his rights and display his glory; so, in virtue of his union with us in the human nature, we may most cheerfully rely on him to take care of our immortal souls.-This also shows the propriety of his interposing in our behalf: for some connexion or relation is supposed to subsist between the Mediator and those for whom he acts; else, why does he solicit favour for them, rather than for others in similar circumstances? And, even if the plea be supported by some payment or satisfaction made, it seems proper, that there should be a ground, on which to determine for whom this is done, and to whom the benefit of it shall belong.

6

When, therefore, the Son of God undertook the office of Mediator between God and man, he took not on him 'the nature of Angels,' as he meant not to mediate in their behalf; but he assumed the human nature. And this renders it very obvious and natural for us to conclude, that all he did and suffered on earth, and all he now performs in heaven, in the character of Mediator, was exclu sively intended for the benefit of men, whose nature he bears, for whom he mediates, and to whose account the whole will be imputed; that is, to such of them as avail themselves of his mediation. For if men, who have this divine constitution stated to them with suitable evidence, do not approve of the Mediator, but reject his mediation, they of course exclude themselves from the benefit of it. We shall therefore, in the two following Essays, consider

M

more particularly the righteousness and atonement of our great Mediator, and his continual intercession in heaven for us. It is, indeed, almost impossible to discourse in general concerning his mediation, without in some degree adverting to these subjects; but it would be improper any further to anticipate them in this place.

It does not seem necessary to attempt a laboured proof, that our Lord's mediation is of that nature, and instituted for those purposes, which have been stated. The general language of Scripture conveys this idea of it, to those who understand and believe it in its obvious literal import. In particular the scope of St. Paul's reasoning, in the epistle to the Hebrews, establishes the doctrine under consideration. Was Moses a typical mediator, at the giving of the law, that through his intervention the national covenant might be ratified between God and the people? This only shadowed forth a better covenant, founded on better promises which Christ had mediated between the Lord and his spiritual Israel: and "this Person was counted "worthy of more honour than Moses," being a "Son "over his own house," which he had builded; where

as

"Moses was no more than a servant," or even a

part of the house itself. (Heb. iii. 1—6.) Were the high priests, of the order of Aaron, typical mediators between God and the people, in virtue of their perpetual sacrifices, and the burning of incense? The insufficiency and unprofitableness of such mediators, and of all their sacrifices and services, must be shown, to make it manifest that another Priest must arise, after another order ; whose dignity, excellency, and invaluable ministrations, might really effect those ends, which the other merely prefigured and represented, as in a picture, or rather as an indistinct and feeble shadow. For through Him access was given to believers to the Mercy-seat of God, in the holy places not made with hands: whereas before, the very shadow of this blessing was concealed by the Veil, and none might approach to it on pain of death, but the high-priest alone; nor he more than one day in a year,

with the blood of the sacrifices, and the burning of incense. What do all these arguments (which fill up more than half this epistle,) signify; but that Jesus is such a Mediator, as hath been described? "There is then one Mediator between God and man; even the Man Christ Jesus." (Tim. iii.) No doubt he is truly Man, and performs his mediation in human nature: for he assumed our flesh for this very purpose: but the Apostle, by declaring him to be the one Mediator, excludes all other mediators.Moses and the priests of Aaron's line were, in a common sense, mediators, between God and man; and every be liever, when he prays for others, in some degree interposes his requests between God and them, to seek mercy in their behalf. Yet Christ is the only Mediator; because he alone is capable of and appointed to perform such a mediation, as hath been described; in virtue of his personal dignity and the ransom he hath made. "Through him we have access to the Father." "He is our Peace-maker:" "our Advocate with the Fath❝er." He says, "I am the Way, and the Truth, and "the Life, no man cometh to the Father but by me:" (John xiv. 6.) so that no man ever did, or ever will, find acceptance with God, who rejects Christ's mediation. We must come to God in his Name, asking all blessings for his sake, and presenting all our services by his hands, and through his intercession, even "giving thanks to God and the Father through him.”

In this view of the subject, we may consider Christ as the Mediator between God and man, in such a sense, that no sinner on earth can be found to whom we may not propose all the benefits of his mediation; provided he truly come to God by faith in Christ; whereas fallen Angels, and those men who have died in their sins, are wholly excluded from this benefit by the very constitution of the covenant which he mediated. But all other mediators and all attempts to approach God without a mediator, are an affront both to the Father and the Son; even as the

sacrifices which the Israelites offered contrary to the law, were an abomination to the Lord. As, therefore, we must shortly meet our offended Sovereign at his awful tribunal; let us now avail ourselves of this inestimable appointment; and constantly approach his throne of grace, through our "faithful and merciful High-priest" and mediator; "that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help ❝ in every time of need."

ESSAY IX.

On the Merits and Atonement of Christe

THE opinion, that the Deity might be appeased by ex

piatory sacrifices, has been very widely diffused among the human race; and the attempt has generally been made, by shedding the blood, and burning a part of the body, of some useful animal. This notion and practice seem very remote from the dictates of our natural reason; and it is extremely improbable, that they should have been the result of man's invention. We may therefore most rationally conclude, that it is wholly the doctrine of revelation, and the appointment of God, handed down by tradition, from the progenitors of our race to the several branches of their posterity and it is certain that we meet with it in the Bible immediately after the entrance of sin. When Cain's oblation of the first-fruits of the earth was rejected, and Abel's sacrifice of the firstlings of the flock accepted; we may naturally conclude, that the latter was presented according to the divine appointment, and that the former was

not.

But if we inquire into the reason of this appointment, the practice of the patriarchs, and the multiplied precepts in the Mosaic law, as to this particular, we shall not easily arrive at any satisfactory solution; except we admit the doctrine of Christ's atonement, and suppose the whole to refer to him, as the substance of all these shadows. I shall,

therefore, in this Essay, endeavour to explain, illustrate, and prove that doctrine, and to show its importance in the Christian religion.

The rules and general usages, respecting expiatory sacrifices under the Old Testament, may assist us in understanding the nature of our Lord's atonement, of which they were types and prefigurations, (Heb. x. 1.) The offender, whose crimes might be thus expiated, was required, according to the nature of the case, to bring "his offering of "the flock or of the herd, to the door of the tabernacle." The very nature of the animals appointed for sacrifice was significant: not the ferocious, the noxious, the subtle, or the unclean; but such as were gentle, docile, and valuable; and none of these might be offered, but such as were "without blemish," or perfect in their kind. The offender was directed to bring an offering, in which he had a property to be presented unto God, and thus substituted in his stead for this particular purpose. He must then "lay his hands upon the head" of the sacrifice; which denoted the typical translation of guilt from him, by imputation to the substituted animal. This is generally thought to have been attended by a confession of his sins, and prayers for pardon through the acceptance of his oblation: and doubtless it implied as much, and would be attended at least with secret devotions to that effect by every pious Israelite, (Lev. i. 4. iii. 2. iv. 4. xvi. 21.) The blood of the sacrifice was then shed, which, being the life of every animal, was reserved to make atoncment, and was therefore not allowed to be eaten under the Old Testament dispensation, (Gen. ix. 4. Lev. xvii. 11.) Afterwards the body, or a part of it, was burned upon the altar with the fire which came immediately from heaven, both at the opening of the tabernacle-worship, and afterwards at the consecration of Solomon's temple, (Lev. ix. 24. 2 Chron. vii. 1-3.) Now, who can help perceiving that this fire represented the avenging justice of God, (who is a consuming fire;) and that, when it consumed the