again say that an enlightened regard to the happiness of the universe is the only law to which rational creatures are subject. (4.) Others take a still lower view, and say that it is an enlightened regard to onr own happiness which alone has authority over men. It is evident, however, that these theories deny the sjiecific char- acter nf moral obligation. There is no such thing ;is sin, as dis- tinguished from the unwise or the inexpedient. There can be no sense of guilt, no responsibility to justice, except for vioIaHons of ndes of expediency. (5.) It is clear from the very constitution of our nature that we are subject to the authoritv of a rational and moral being, a Spirit, whom we know to be infinite, eternal, and immutable in his being and perfections. All men, in every age and in every jiart of the world, under all forms of religion, and of every degree of culrure, have felt and acknowledged that they were subject to a personal being higher than themselves. No forms of speculative philosophy, however plausible or however widely diffused or confidently held in the schools or in the closet, have ever availed to invalidate this instinctive or intuitive judg- ment of the mincL Men ignorant of the true God have fashioned for themselves imaginary gods, whose wrath tliey have deprecated and whose favour they have endeavoured to propitiate. But wdien the Scri]itui'al idea of God, as an infinitely perfect personal Being, lias been once presented to the mind, it can never be discarded. It commends itself to the reason and the conscience. It solves all the enigmas of onr nature. It satisfies all our desires and aspi- rations : and to this Being, to him and to his will, we feel ourselves bound to be confoi'med, and know ourselves to be responsible for our character and conduct. This allegiance we cannot inissibly throw off. The law of gravitation no more inexorably binds the earth to its orbit than onr moral nature binds us to our iillegiance and responsibility to God. It would be as unreasonable to deny the one as the (jther, and as useless to argue against the one as against tlie other. This is clearly the doctrine of the Apostle in the passnge just referred to. He was speaking of the most de- based and vicious of the heathen world, men whom God had given u]) to a reprobate mind ; and yet he asserts that they not only knew God, but knew his righteous judgment ; that they who commit sin were worthy of death ; that is, that they were rightfully sub- ject to tlie authority, and inevitably exposed to the wrath and indignation, of a moral ruler. This is a fact therefore given in the univei'sal consciousness of men. Sin is related to law, and that law is not one of our own enacting, it is not a mere idea or ab-
1 84 PART n. Cn. Vni. - SIN.
straction, it is not mere truth or reason, or the fitness of thiiifjs, but tlie, nature and will of God. Law, as it reveals itself in the conscience, implies a law-giver, a being of whose will it is tlie ex))ression, and who has the power and the. purpose to enforce all its demands. And not only this, but one who, from the very per- fection of his nature, must enforce them. He can no more pass by transgression than he can love evil. It is in vain to argue against these convictions. It is in vain to say. There is no God, no Being on whom we are dependent, and to whom we are respon- sible for our character and conduct.
The Exte7it of the Law's Demands.
The next question is. What does this law demand ? This is the point on which there has been most diversity of opinion, and sys- tems of theology as well as of morals are founded on the different answers which it has received. The answer given by the unso- phisticated and enlightened conscience of men, and by the woi'd of God, is that the law demands complete perfection, or the entire conformity of the moral nature and conduct of a rational creature with the nature and will of God. We are commanded to love God with all the heart, with all the soul, with all the strength, and with all the mind, and our neighbour as ourselves. This im))lies entire congeniality with God ; the unreserved consecration of all our powers to his service, and absolute submission to his will. Nothing more than this can be required of any creature. No angel or glorified saint can be or do more than this, and this is what the law demands of every rational creature, at all times, and in every state of his being. In one sense this obligation is limited by the capacity (not the ability, in the modern theological sense of that term) of the creature. The capacity of a child is less than that of an adult Christian or of an angel. He can know less. He can contain less. He is on a lower stage of being. But it is the absolute moi-al perfection of the child, of the adult, or of the angel that the law demands. And this ])erfection includes the entire absence of all sin, and the entire conformity of nature to the imago and will of God. As this is the doctrine of the Bible, so also it is the teaching of conscience. Every man, at least every Christian, feels that he sins or is sinful whenever and howsoever he comes short of full conformity to the image of God. He feels that lan- guor, coldness of affection, defect of zeal, and the want of due humility, gratitude, meekness, forbearance, and benevolence are in him of the nature of sin. The old maxim, omne minus lonum
g 7.] PROTESTANT DOCTRINE. 18o
hahet rationem mali, authenticates itself in the conscience of every unsophistical believer. This was the doctrine of Augustine, who in his letter to Jerome,^ says : " Plenissinia (caritas) quae jarn non possit augeri, quamcliu hie homo vivit, est in nemine ; quauidiu auteni augeri potest, profecto illud, quod minus est quam debet, ex vitio est." The Lutlieran and Reformed theologians assert the same principle.^ If this principle be correct, if the law demands entire conformity to the nature and will of God, it follows: —
1. That there can be no perfection in this life. Every form of perfectionism which has ever prevailed in the Church is founded either on the assumption that the law does not demand entire free- dom from moral evil, or upon the denial that anything is of the nature of sin, but acts of the will. But if the law is so extensive in its demands as to pronounce all defect in any duty, all coming short in the purity, ardour, or constancy of holy affections, sinful, then there is an end to the presumption that any mere man since the fall has ever attained perfection.
2. It follows also from this principle that there can never be any merit of good works attributable to men in this world. By merit, according to the Scriptural sense of that word, is meant the claim upon reward as a matter of justice, founded on the complete sat- isfaction of the demands of the law. But if those demands never liave been perfectly fulfilled by any fallen man, no such man can either be justified for his works, or have, as the Apostle expresses ir, anv KavxvM-'^, any claim founded on merit in the sight of God. He must always depend on mercy and expect eternal life as a free gift of God.
3. Still more obviously does it follow from the principle in ques- tion that there can be no such thing as works of supererogaticMi. If no man in this life can perfectly keep the commandments of God, it is very plain that no man can do more than the law demands. The Romanists regard the law as a series of specific enactments. Besides these commands which bind all men there are certain things wdiich they call precepts, which are not thus universally binding, such as celibacy, poverty, and monastic obedience, and the like. These go beyond the law. By adding to the fulfilment of the commands of God, the observance of these precepts, a man may do more than is required of him, and thus acquire an amount of merit greater than he needs for liimself, and which in virtue of the communion
1 Epistvla, CLXVII. iv. 15; Works, edit. Benedictines, vol. ii. p. 897, a.
■■2 See Chemnitz, Examtn Concilii Tridentiniji. Be Juslificatione, edit. Frankfort, 1674, p. 165, f. Be Bonis Operibus, qu. 3, p. 205, a. Gerliard, Loci Theologici, xi. x. 42-45, v.j DP 21--24 Quenstodt, Thedoyia, P. ii, cap. ii. § 2, q. 3, edit Leipzig, 1715, p. 9G7.
18G PART u. Ch. van. — sin.
of saints, belongs to the Church, and may be dispenseil, through the power of the keys, for the benefit of others. The whole foun- dation of this theory is of course removed, if the law demands absolute perfection, to which, even according to tlieir doctrine, no man ever attains in this life. He always is burdened with venial sins, which God in mercy does not impute as real sins, but which nevertheless are imperfections.