Imatges de pàgina
PDF
EPUB

tender the promises in return, and then delay their fulfilment; has never been the manner of the Divine dealing. The prayer of the true penitent is answered at once, although it may not be in a way perceptible to himself, nor with the immediate consequences to his own mind, which he had fondly anticipated. We must learn to distinguish between the manner and the thing; between an utter refusal and the mode of conferring the boon. I should not hesitate to say to any complainer on this subject, that either his prayer was already answered, or the fault was entirely his own. We cannot escape this inference, if we consider the Creator as consistent with himself. I cannot, therefore, restrain an expression of regret when I read a contrary sentiment, in works expressly designed to relieve or assist the Inquirer. The question seems to be so clearly and unequivocally settled in the word of God, that it is a matter of surprise how it should involve a doubt in any other mind, than one harassed by its fears, and confused by its perplexities.

Adieu, dear sir. May the spirit of prayer richly abound in you; and in its exercise may you realize the full assurance of grace, mercy, and peace!

Truly yours, &c.

227

LETTER XII.

A common error adverted to again.—An evil from theological distinctions.-Different kinds of repentance.-The scriptural distinction.-Sorrow does not constitute repentance.The perversion of selfish sorrow to a false hope-Examples.The error reproved in scripture.-Its cause.-Causes leading to genuine repentance.-Conviction of sin.- Why not to be effected without divine power. -Looking to Christ a means of repentance.-Evangelical sorrow follows.-Difference between counterfeit and true repentance.-The practical effects of real repentance.

MY DEAR SIR,

THERE is one error which I have had reason several times to mention, as possessing a more pervading influence over the mind of the Inquirer than any other. This is the idea, that there is a certain something to be obtained by himself, before he may venture to approach the Redeemer with the hope of mercy, or even the expectation of an audience and this error creeps into his very notion of the Christian graces. It puts a construction on the divine language foreign from its true import, and renders reflection upon it the means of increased confusion. You have known the application of this remark to the duty and

doctrine of repentance. I have frequently seen the convinced sinner keeping aloof, and at least half satisfied with himself in doing so, until he may be able to ascertain whether he has evidence of true repentance; without which he would conceive all application nugatory, and accompanied with which he would be assured of a favourable answer. The amount of all this is, that he desires to be a Christian before he asks the divine influence, which is to render him such; that he would have evidence of being saved, before he solicits salvation. This practical contradiction is too flagrant to need a comment.

Another evil on this subject arises from those theological distinctions respecting the nature of this grace, with which the Inquirer may often be more entertained than edified. A clear view of repentance, and of its place in the covenant of God, is certainly important. But the adoption of metaphysical distinctions, and a nice and accurate discrimination of the consecutive order of certain causes and effects, is rather an accomplishment in the theologian, than an advantage to the Inquirer. Instead of reviewing the past to discover the evidence of direct approach to repentance, or to institute a comparison of such workings with other things, the only duty before you is to learn whether you have indeed repented. To assist you in this, I will reduce within the

limits of a single letter, all that appears to me essential on the subject.

Practical divines have divided repentance into three kinds: the first is called natural, and it is supposed to have no reference to rewards or punishments; as when a man of integrity and honour regrets the commission of an act which violates the rules he had adopted for his own guidance, but without fearing, or thinking of, any consequences arising from the law of God. I will not stay to discuss the justness of this notion. The second distinction is that of legal repentance, which is simply a regret of the commission of sin on account of its personal consequences in the penalty of a violated law. Different from this, evangelical repentance is both a principle and a habit; it belongs to the Christian alone, and it is accompanied with a class of feelings peculiar to itself. These I shall afterwards describe.

There are two words in the scriptures, which our translators have rendered by the term repentance.* The first of these signifies after-reflection, or after-care, and anxiety. It indicates a simple alteration of feeling, sorrow on account of something that has taken place on our own part, without any reference to the nature of that sorrow, or its durability; and without any connection

[blocks in formation]

with the moral character of the act, or its eternal consequences. You have an example of this in the man who has expended time or money upon a deed of benevolence, and then regrets having done so.

The second word, which is literally translated a change of mind, is intended to designate an alteration for the better, and refers to the purposes and dispositions of the heart. It indicates not only sorrow for the past, but such a radical change in the affections as will create a permanent abhorrence of the evil. In 2 Corinthians vii. 10. you will find both these words in the original Greek, with the constructions now assigned them.

If I were to select the mistake most common to Inquirers on this subject, I should certainly point to the impression, that sorrow constitutes repentance, and that its intensity is the test of sincerity. It is this idea which frequently leads the Inquirer to peculiar endeavours in order to deepen his grief, without examining its character or its cause. Mere sorrow, independently of reference to these, may be very distinct from real repentance. Judas exhibited this sorrow of mere remorse; and, according to the first sense of the word, he repented of his sin; but the feeling terminated in suicide. The Jews, on the day of Pentecost, were in deep sorrow when they cried out, "Men and brethren, what shall we do?" The answer of

« AnteriorContinua »