Nor will it at all alter the matter to say that those extraordinary vows are entered into in dependence upon divine grace; for there cannot be such a thing as dependence upon _grace_ when people are placing themselves directly under the _law_. No two things can be more opposite than law and grace. They are put in direct contrast in Paul's epistles to the Romans and Galatians. "Whosoever of you are justified by the law ([Greek: en nomo]),[IX.] ye are fallen from grace" (Gal. v. 4). Hence, to think of depending upon grace when putting myself under law is precisely the same as if I were to look to God for grace to enable me to subvert the entire gospel of His Son Jesus Christ. "As many as are of works of law ([Greek: ergon nomou])[IX.] are under the curse." Could I depend upon God's grace to enable me to abide under the curse? The thought is preposterous in the extreme. And be it observed that the apostle, in the last-quoted passage, does not merely say, "As many as fail to keep the law are under the curse." This he distinctly teaches, no doubt; but the special point is, that as many as attempt to stand before God on the ground of "works of law," are of necessity under the curse, for the simplest of all reasons, that they are not able to satisfy His claims. In order for man to satisfy God's claims, he must bewhat in himself he cannot be; that is, without sin. The law demands, as its right, perfect obedience; and those who take upon them the Confirmation Vows promise perfect obedience. They promise to renounce all evil, and to fulfil all good, in the most absolute manner; and moreover, they make their salvation to depend upon their fulfilment of those vows; else why make them at all?
This, when looked at in the light of the apostolic teaching in Romans and Galatians, is the most complete denial of all the fundamental truths of the gospel. In the first place, it is a denial of man's total ruin, of his condition as one "dead in trespasses and sins," "alienated from the life of God," "without strength," "ungodly," "enmity against God." If I can undertake to renounce all evil, and to do all God's commandments, then, assuredly, I do not know myself to be a lost, ruined, helpless creature; and, as a consequence, I do not need a Saviour. If I can boldly undertake to "_renounce_" and to "_do_," to "keep" and to "walk," I am manifestly not lost, and hence I do not want salvation; I am not dead, and hence I do not want life; I am not "without strength," and hence I do not want the energy of that new, that divine life which is imparted by the Holy Ghost to all who, by His grace, believe in the Son of God. If I am capable of doing for myself, I do not want another, even the Lord Jesus Christ, to do all for me.
Again, as flowing out of what has already been stated, those vows do entirely set aside the essential glories, divine dignities and sacred virtues of the cross of Christ. If I can get a godfather and godmother to take vows on them on my behalf until I am capable of taking them on myself, then it is evident I cannot possibly know the deep blessedness of having all my vows, all my responsibilities and liabilities as a lost sinner, all my sins and shortcomings,--everything, in short,--fully and eternally answered in the Cross. If there is anything in my case which has not been perfectly settled in the Cross, then I must inevitably perish. I may make vows and resolutions, but they are as the morning cloud that passeth away. I may get a sponsor to renounce the devil on my behalf, and I may in due time talk of renouncing him for myself; but what if the devil all the while has fast hold of both my sponsor and myself? He will not renounce me, unless the chain by which he binds me has been snapped asunder by the Cross.