and makes us alive; and yet it remains not alone; that is, it is not idle. Not that it does not stand alone in its proper province and office-for it constantly justifies us... but it is not idle, and without charity."

On the difficulty of treating these questions rightly, he says, on c. v. 13: "It is a nice and difficult thing to teach, that we are justified without good works, and yet to require them as necessary. Here, unless the teachers are faithful and wise ministers of Jesus Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God, able rightly to divide the word of truth, faith and works will immediately be confounded. Each topic, both faith and works, ought to be diligently urged and taught, yet so that each may be kept within its own province."

Speaking of sanctification, he alludes to his former views when a monk, and the desire he then felt to converse with a saint, or holy person; figuring to himself under that name a hermit, an ascetic, feeding on roots: but he had since learned that the saint was one, who, being justified in the righteousness of Christ, went on to serve God in his proper calling; through the Spirit to mortify the deeds of the body, and to subdue his evil affections and desires. Not that all such characters were equally strong; they had many infirmities and evils to contend against: but that did not prevent their being holy, provided they did not sin with a wilful and impenitent mind....I joyfully therefore give thanks to God," he says, "that what I desired he has abundantly granted me, and that I see not one saint but many, yea innumerable saints; not such as empty sophisters imagine, but such as Christ and his apostles describe; and that, by the grace of God, I

IV.

CHAP. myself am one of the number." This, again, may be opposed to the abuse often made of his complaints of the evils existing among his own followers.

On the Divine Law.

Perhaps the most exceptionable point in the whole work is, the dishonourable manner in which it often seems to speak of "the law" of God; joining it with sin and Satan as almost equally opposed to man's happiness. This has commended the work to certain modern antinomians, as if it really favoured their views, when nothing can be further from the fact. The following passage furnishes the true explanation, always intended by the author, though not so often expressed as was necessary, unless he had reduced his language, of the kind referred to, to a more scriptural model. "In the conflicts of conscience nothing else ought to be known or thought of, than Christ alone, and the law should be placed out of sight: but, apart from these conflicts and the topic of justification, we ought, with Paul, to speak reverently of the law, to extol it with the highest praises, and to call it holy, just, good, spiritual, divine." It was not the law itself, therefore, of which Luther ever meant to speak dishonourably, but only the abuse of it into which they fell, who sought to be "justified by the works of the law," or refused all peace of conscience because they felt that they could not be so.

Accordingly in some lectures on the first chapter of St. John, delivered in the year 1537, he thus makes the law our rule of life. "Even the moral law loses its power so far as this, that it cannot condemn those who believe in Christ, and are thus delivered from the curse of the law. Yet the decalogue remains in force,

and belongs to Christians that they may obey it. For the righteousness which the law requires is fulfilled by believers, through the grace and assistance of the Holy Spirit which they receive. Hence all the exhortations of the prophets, and likewise of Christ and his apostles, to piety and holiness, are so many excellent expositions of the ten commandments." 2

A. D. 1536.

His remarks on predestination are practical, rather than conformed to a system. In a commentary on Joel, on the words, "Whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved," he says, "In this and similar sentences, the mercy of God is offered generally to all... here we ought to rest; and believe, since God sends us his word, that we are among the predestinated; and then, on the ground of this promise, to call upon him, and be assured [in so doing] of the salvation which he thus expressly promises." 3-With respect to per- Perseseverance, Luther, Bugenhagius, and Melanc- verance. thon jointly assign their reasons, in the year 1536, for disapproving, and dissuading the publication of a book written by a Thuringian divine, because he had "treated dangerously on predestination, and affirmed that the Holy Spirit was not lost by the elect, even if they fell into manifest crimes." They assert, that they had always unanimously taught the contrary in all the churches; namely, that, if any saint and believer knowingly and wilfully offended, he was no longer a saint, but had cast away true faith and the Holy Spirit; though God would receive him again if he repented.

1 Above,.28.

2 Seck. iii. 166.

3 Seck. ii. 3. See also 85 and 86. In fact this differs in no way materially from the Synod of Dort itself: on Predestination, § 16.

IV.

CHAP. They add, (what will meet the concurrence of all sober-minded persons,) that we are "not commanded to inquire whether we are elect, but to believe that he who perseveres to the end in repentance and faith is elect and saved." "This doctrine," say they," is clear, and does not make the fallen secure, but excites them to fear the wrath of God; for it is most certain that God is offended by all sins, whether of the elect or the non-elect. They particularly advert to the case of David, and maintain that he lost the Holy Spirit when he committed adultery and murder. The paper is so explicit, says Seckendorf, "that it must furnish the explanation of what Luther may any where else have dropped that sounds differently.' The same doctrine was also introduced into the articles of Smalkald, of the year following.2

In 1537, he published a small piece on the constitution of Councils, shewing what was necessary to their freedom, and why one, constituted as the pope would have it, could not be free-particularly on account of the oaths by which all persons, admissible to vote, were bound to support to the utmost all the rights, privileges, and powers of the papal hierarchy.3 Multiplica- In a preface to some expositions of S.

tion of

books.

1538.

Matthew's Gospel, he expresses his fear of too great a multiplication of books; lest, as fathers, councils, and doctors had superseded the apostles, so it should be again; and he modestly says, he" wishes his own books to last only for the age in which they were written, and which they might serve; but that God would give to succeeding ages their own labourers, as he had always heretofore done." 4

A. D.

1538.

We will close these extracts with the following pious and pleasing passage, founded on Matt. xii. 35. "A corrupt heart turns good to a pious evil, a good one turns even evil to good. For sentiment. example: Does a good man see a murderer or a thief he is moved to compassion-pities him, prays for him, mourns over the misery of man, admonishes him, reproves him, does all he can to reclaim him. Next, mindful of human frailty, he humbly reflects, He did so yesterday, I may do it to-day!' Hence, thirdly, he prays to God to keep him, and praises him for having kept him hitherto. So much good does a rightly disposed heart derive from one evil seen in another person."!

expositions.

The remark of the pious and learned Seck- Character endorf on Luther's expositions of scripture of Luther's seems to be very just. "I do not deny," he says, "that there are to be found at this day commentaries on the sacred writings distinguished by erudition, eloquence, and deep research; but I confess I much doubt, whether there ever existed a man who furnished, in extemporaneous language, (for thus Luther delivered his lectures,) a more forcible and more edifying exposition of the word of God. I would not, indeed undertake to defend every phrase or every opinion which he uttered, as if it were inspired he himself earnestly disclaimed all pretensions to such perfection: but I speak of the general consistency of his expositions with the analogy of faith, and of the heroic energy of the language and the arguments which he employed: and I think that all, who will bestow any such pains, as I have done on the study of his writings, will agree with me in this sentiment."2