You are not entitled to these benefits merely because you are descended from Abraham: it was the good pleasure of God to limit the privilege to Isaac. "At this time I will come, and Sarah shall have a son." He descends to Jacob and Esau."The children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God, according to election, might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth, it was said unto her (Rebecca) that the elder shall serve the younger; as it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated." The general strain of the apostle's argument shows, that the election here spoken of, respects a people, not an individual; and it is evident from the annexed prophecy, the elder shall serve the younger. This was verified in their descendants the children of Israel subjected the Edomites; but Esau never served Jacob-he was a terrour to him the greater part of his life. St. Paul proceeds." What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid. For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy; and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion." Is it unrighteous with God to bestow external privileges in this mannerto distinguish one people from all others, by granting them particular advantages-to select an individual man, and grant him privileges which are withholden from his fellow beings? Let no one entertain this impious thought. God giveth to all richly; and who shall direct him in the bestowment of unmerited blessings? Did not God declare to Moses, when he distinguished him from all

mankind by divine communications, that he conferred these peculiar blessings according to his own will, and had compassion and mercy on whom he would? The apostle adds "Thou wilt say then unto me, Why doth he yet find fault, for who hath resisted his will? Nay, but O man, who art thou, that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed, say unto him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus? Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel to honour, and another to dishonour ?" If God, the Creator and governour of the universe, according to his own will, give existence to various orders of beings; if he bestow external advantages to this people, and that man, as he pleases; and if the actions of men are made ultimately, by an overruling Providence, subservient to the designs of his government, why doth God ever find fault? Consider,' O man, what thou sayest! Shall not God be permitted to display his attributes in the creation of various classes of beings, as to him seemeth best? Is it not fit, that he should make individuals of the same class to differ from others in their natural powers? May he not grant higher means of improvement to one than to another? Dost thou find fault with thy Maker, because thou wast not formed an angel? Because the wise and benign Governour of the world overrules thy wickedness, and makes thy sinful agency ultimately conducive to the purposes of his wise government, wilt thou make this an excuse for evil doing? Does not the potter form the clay into any shape he pleases, and

shall the Parent of Being be limited in the exercise of his creative power? On the supposition that our apostle is speaking of God, as the creator of all beings, and the author of all privileges, the allusion to the potter is pertinent and forcible; but admit the capacity of moral beings, and suppose Paul to be speaking of God as their judge, and assigning their condition in a future world, and the simile loses its pertinence and force. What analogy is there between a potter forming clay into vessels of various sizes and shapes, clay that has neither consciousness nor sensation, and God, adjusting, at the close of a probationary life, the future condition of the rational and accountable subjects of his present moral government?

In the tenth chapter of Romans, St. Paul illustrates the principle he had advanced in the ninth, respecting the sovereign pleasure of God, by mentioning the manner, in which the Gentiles were placed in the possession of the blessings of the Christian revelation; and he alludes to the fulfilment of the prophesy of Isaiah." I was found of them that sought me not: I was made manifest to them that asked not after me."

I have not time to comment particularly on every part of the apostle's reasoning on the subject before us. I therefore pass to an allegory contained in the eleventh chapter. By the metaphor of an olive-tree St. Paul illustrates the moral state of the Jew and the Gentile. By the olive-tree, doubtless the apostle means the revealed dispensation of divine grace and mercy. mercy. The Jews he considers as

the natural branches of this tree, but cut off, and the Gentiles grafted into it. By being the natural branches of this tree, or by being ingrafted into it, we must understand either an election to the immortal rewards promised through Christ to the children of God, or an admission on earth to the enjoyment of the privileges of this divine dispensation. That personal election, in the sense of our proposition, cannot be intended, is evident, because the apostle declares that the Jews were cut off for their unbelief; and on their believing they may again be joined; and the Gentiles are told that they shall also be cut off, unless they continue in the faith. In the condition of persons elected to eternal life, no such change can take place. The decrees of God are immutable. That Paul, throughout these chapters, means election to external privileges, is further evident, from the allusion to the prophet Elias or Elijah. In his time, a period of general apostacy, there were seven thousand Israelites who did not bow the knee to Baal. In like manner, St. Paul observes, that in his day, a remnant of Israel was found, who adhered to the dispensation of heaven, according to the election of grace. Election to what? Clearly to the enjoyment of the privileges of revelation.

We find, then, that the apostle, in the ninth, tenth, and eleventh chapters of his epistle to the Romans, treats of national, not personal election; of election to the enjoyment of the external privileges of revelation, and not of unconditional election to eternal life.

You, my candid hearers, may have taken notice that I passed without comment those passages of the chapters reviewed, which speak of God as hardening the heart of Pharaoh, of blinding those whom he will, &c. On these I have but few remarks to offer. In all instances, when we have discovered the general purpose of a writer, we should be careful not to put a meaning opposed to this, on allusions and examples incidentally introduced. It should be observed that the compassion and mercy, mentioned by St. Paul in the above places, are limited to the bestowment of external privileges, and are not extended to the acceptance of individuals at the tribunal of Heaven; the reprobation, the blindness and obduracy, opposed to this compassion and mercy, should be limited to an exclusion from, or an insensibility to these external privileges, and not extended to the condemnation of the day of judgment.

I generally observe, in the bold and figurative style of the Jews, God is said to do what is brought about in the ordinary course of events. Moses, where he distinguishes between murder and justifiable homicide, uses the following language.— "He that smiteth a man, so that he die, shall be surely put to death. And if a man lie not in wait, but God deliver him into his hand, then will I appoint thee a place whither he shall flee." Here an event is imputed to the agency of God, which we should call accidental. In the same phraseology, God is said to blind the minds, and harden the hearts of those, whom he permits to abuse his blessings, and by their wilful and habitual sins,