the inspired writer, in that interesting portion of scripture, to treat principally of the sufferings of Christ, and of the glory that should follow, is, if matter of accusation, one that I admit, and triumph in. Convinced as I am, that the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy,† and that to him and to his glorious work of mediation the psalms, especially, bear witness; I should ill satisfy my own conscience, and ill discharge my duty to my people,were I to keep back from them any part, and especially so important a part as this, of the counsel of God. If, in the opinion which I entertain on this subject, I am wrong, it affords me no small gratification to reflect, that I err with some of the ablest and most learned divines of the present, or a former age. If such men, profiting by the hint given by our Lord to his two disciples on the way to Emmaus,§ have had the veil of prejudice torn from their eyes, and have penetrated farther into the recesses of scripture, than others either have been able or have chosen to do, am I to be condemned to shut my eyes to the blaze of light thrown upon the sacred volume by their discoveries, and to continue to grope my way, amidst the dark, confused, and mystical meanings imputed to it by the schoolmen, and by those who chuse to rank among their followers? Certainly not. Besides, as the view of the Psalms which I have adopted cannot be shown to be in any respect what See the works of the celebrated Bishops Horseley and Horne on the Psalms. § Luke xxiv, verses 25, 26, 27. See also verse 44. ever repugnant to the standards of our church, why are others among my brethren to be permitted to form and propagate harmless opinions of theirs; and am I alone to be restrained in the formation and propagation of mine? A fine specimen truly of the justice and propriety with which we lavish encomiums on this as a most enlightened age, and vaunt of the spirit of enquiry now said to be abroad, if the human mind is in any respect, or in the investigation of any subject, to be thus trammelled and fettered. But lest I should be mistaken, let me observe, that the ninth charge is, as it stands, to a certain degree a misrepresentation of my sentiments on the point in question, and that although I hold the general principle of Christ being the chief personage treated of, exhibited, and speaking in the Psalms, it never was my intention to separate him for a single moment from his people, who constitute one mystical body with him,* and who being possessed of and united to him by his spirit, can, in a subordinate sense, in certain respects, use his language and lay claim to his experience ;-nor to justify every expression or every idea which I may have employed in illustrating this portion of scripture. Alas, human knowledge is too imperfect, and human nature too liable to err, to permit me to suppose that every word which I may have uttered on this subject was properly weighed, and in all respects agreeable to the unerring standard. Indeed, many remarks were made with a hesitation, and my own doubts as to their accuracy were expressed with a frankness, which had I not known them, might have induced me to expect somewhat more candour from my opponents than * See 1st Corinth. xii. 12th verse downward. they have exhibited. But this is of little consequence; if, in the course of divine providence, I shall ever have an opportunity of submitting my views concerning the Psalms to the public, it is to be hoped that I shall meet with more justice from it, than I have done from many persons belonging to my own congregation. Thus have I attempted, as briefly and pointedly as possible, to meet and refute the calumnious charges of my adversaries. Whether I have been successful or not, every reader, whatever may be his sentiments with regard to the points in dispute, will, of course, judge for himself. My own mind, at all events, is convinced, that the accusation has been satisfactorily rebutted, nay, that the burden of proving themselves to hold the doctrines of our national church, has been, in some measure at least, thrown upon my opponents. Does it not, for instance, strike the intelligent reader, that they have virtually, if not directly, questioned the doctrines of man's utter inability, in his natural state, to do that which is truly good-of the irresistibility of divine grace—and of the perseverance of the saints? Nay, have they not, as has already been shewn, by adducing it as a charge against me that I maintain the doctrine of two natures co-existing in a believer, flatly contradicted scripture* and the Confession of Faith'?—and if * Let the following passages, in addition to those already quoted, be fairly considered: John iii. 3-Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God; verse 6-That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the spirit is spirit. 1 Peter, i. 23-Being born again, not of corruptible seed but of incorruptible, &c. 2 Peter, i. 4—Whereby are given unto us exceeding great and precious promises, that by these ye might be partakers of the divine nature, &c. 2 Corinthians, v. 17—Therefore if any man be in Christ he is a new creature, &c. so, besides rendering extremely doubtful the soundness of their creed, does not this single circumstance tend to excite suspicions in the breast of every impartial person, as to the purity of their motives, in preferring this present accusation against me? Of From a review of my answers to the charges it will be evident, that three of these, viz. the fifth, seventh, and ninth are quite irrelevant, being, even if correct, mere matters of opinion in no respect whatever opposed to the Westminster Confession of Faith, and consequently not cognizable by any ecclesiastical Court in Scotland. the others, the first and last parts of the first charge, the latter part of the fourth, and the eighth, are gross and abominable falsehoods. The third is, except as to the inference insinuated in the first member of it, admitted, in the very words in which it is stated. The second, and sixth, are misrepresentations of doctrines actually preached; and the middle part of the first, and the former part of the fourth are distorted views, if not underhand and insidious denials of the utter inability of man to originate his own salvation, of the irresistibility of divine grace, and of the perseverance of the saints. It may now be proper to remark, for the information of those who may not already have observed it, that the charge brought against me of opposing certain doctrines contained in the Westminster Confession of Faith is entirely constructive. My opponents are not able to say that I ever expressly attacked that venerable form of sound words, either as a whole or in any of its parts. They fancy, or rather pretend to fancy, that certain views which I hold and certain doctrines which I preach, are at variance with the Westminster Confession, and thus, upon the ground of mere imagination, found their charges against me. This is a mode of accusation always extremely suspicious, and requiring to be very narrowly investigated into. Had my opponents been able to charge me with a direct attack upon the Confession of Faith, or upon any of the doctrines which it contains, then I admit that they would have had some reason for their present conduct, and the whole affair would have assumed a more grave and serious aspect. What, however, shall be thought of them and of their charges, when it is considered that so far from assailing our venerable Confession, I have never spoken of it, nor of the views broached in it, but in terms of the highest respect; nay, that I am in the constant habit of adducing its very language in illustration of my pulpit remarks ? Need I again remark that, in such circumstances, a charge of opposing the standards of our church, of a structive kind, founded merely on the false and strained interpretations which certain individuals are disposed to put upon my words, looks extremely suspicious. Now that I am upon this part of the subject, it may be worth while adverting to one most glaring instance of inconsistency on the part of my opponents. It occurs in what they call "The Correspondence of the Committee of Management Continued," at the top of page 39. Not that, properly speaking, I have any thing ado with that or with any of the other numerous productions which my adversaries have poured forth against me, or that I mean to refer to it as of any authority in this business. I make the present digression simply for the purpose of showing with what ease some men may, out of their own mouths, be made to condemn themselves. Let it be recollected, that it is professedly upon the ground of opposing the E |