thee, and as he hath sworn unto thy fathers, to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob. Neither with you only do I make this covenant, and this oath, but with him that standeth here with us this day, before the Lord our God, and also of him, who is not here with us this day.

Of the transaction, here recorded, I observe,

First. That it is styled both an Oath, and a Covenant.

Secondly. That it was entered into by all the Israelites, both old and young, and by the strangers, who were with them; and was made, on the part of God, with their posterity; Him, that is not here with us this day.

Thirdly. It was a covenant, of the same tenour with that, which God made with Abraham: That he might be unto thee a God, as he had sworn unto thy fathers, to Abraham, &c.

Fourthly. That the Covenant, or Oath, was the same with that, recorded in Deut. xxvi. JEHOVAH avouched them to be his people; and they avouched him to be their God.

Fifthly. That it is the same covenant afterwards prophesied of by Jeremiah, xxxi. &c., and quoted by St. Paul, Heb. viii. 8, as the covenant of the Christian Church: I will be to them a God; and they shall be to me a people.

From these remarks it is plain, that the Oath, here sworn by all the people of Israel, was no other than a Religious Covenant between God, and them as members of his Church. Scarcely one in one thousand of these persons could have any lawful occasion for swearing in any other sense; and, at the time here specified, no such occasion existed to any individual: their whole business being merely to enter into this covenant with God.

As they are accused frequently of having broken this covenant in their succeeding generations; it is plain, that throughout those generations they entered into it in a similar manner. Several instances of this nature are particularly recorded.

markable one is found in 2 Chron. xv. 12, &c. Here it is said of all Judah, and Benjamin, and strangers from Israel, that they entered into a covenant, to seek the Lord God of their fathers with all their heart, and with all their soul. Of this transaction it is said, That they sware unto the Lord with a loud voice; and all

Judah rejoiced at the oath for they had sworn with all their heart, and sought him with their whole desire. The Covenant, and the Oath, therefore, were the same thing. It was, also, a service commanded: for it is subjoined, And he was found of them: that is, he blessed them. But God blesses men, to whom he has made a revelation of his will, in no religious service, which he hath not commanded. In vain, saith our Saviour, (quoting from the prophet Isaiah,) do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

Another instance is alluded to in 2 Chron, xxix. 10.

Another is recorded 2 Chron. xxiii. 16.

Another, 2 Chron. xxxiv. 31, 32.

In a word, the whole tenour of the Old Testament teaches us, that the Israelites were required publicly to enter into covenant with God in this manner; and that this covenant is styled indifferently a Covenant, and an Oath. As, therefore, there is no hint of any other oath, ever taken to God by this people, as a nation; as there is no conceivable occasion, upon which a whole nation can be supposed, throughout its successive generations, to enter into any other oath to God; it is plain, that the precepts, requiring them to swear to God, required them solely thus to take upon them this covenant.

2. The Members of the Christian Church are, in my view, required to enter into the same covenant, in the same public man

ner.

In Is. xlv. 22, God says, Look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth: for I am God; and there is none else. I have sworn by myself, the word has gone out of my mouth in righteousness, and shall not return; that unto me every knee shall bow, and every tongue shall swear. In this passage, as quoted Rom. xiv. 11, by the Apostle Paul, the word rendered swear, is translated confess; egoμodoynoɛra; as it had before been by the LXX. This, I think, is a direct proof of the real meaning of the word, swear, when used in this manner in the Old Testament. The same meaning appears to be given by God himself in the following verse, in Isaiah. Surely shall one say, In the Lord have I rightcousness and strength. The verb opoλoysw, signifies indifferently to profess and confess; and being thus a translation, both by the

LXX and St. Paul, of the Hebrew verb, which signifies to swear, may be considered, wherever it is used with the same reference, or in the absolute manner, as having the same meaning. In allusion to the same passage of Isaiah, and with an almost literal translation of it, St. Paul says, Phil. ii. 10, That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in Heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; and that every tongue should confess, that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. Here the same verb is used, and translated confess. In 1 Tim. vi. 12, the same verb, and its kindred substantive are rendered profess; as also in 2 Cor. ix. 13; Heb. iii. 1; Heb. iv. 14; Heb. x. 23. &c. The truth is, the words profess, and confess, differ only in this; that one of them denotes an acknowledgment made with, the other without, any supposed present, or previous, reluctance. Wherever such reluctance is not supposed, it ought to be translated profess. The duty of men to make this profession, and their future performance of it, our Saviour clearly discloses in Matt. x. 32. Whosoever, therefore, shall confess me before men, him will I confess, also, before my Father who is in Heaven. In exact confor mity to this declaration, St. Paul says, Rom. ix. 10, If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart, that God hath raised him from the dead; thou shalt be saved. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. In both these passages the word ought to be profess, and profession. It is not easy to conceive how, in so short a compass, the duty of making a profession of religion could, without a precept in form, be more strongly enjoined, than it is in these two passages. The same duty is strongly indicated from the passage, above quoted from the 2d to the Philippians.

It may naturally, and reasonably, be asked, Why, in a case of so much importance, we are not furnished with express precepts, solemnly enjoining this duty? I answer, that the Scriptures have pursued the same plan, in this particular, with respect to this subject, which they have pursued with respect to several others, of similar importance: in the cases, for example, of Infant Baptism, and the observation of the Christian Sabbath. In the Jewish Church, a public profession of religion was abundant

ly enjoined. The Christian Church was only a continuation of the same Church under a new form. It seems to have been unnecessary, so far as we can judge, to repeat a command, which had already been so amply given. Especially was this unnecessary for Jews, among whom the Christian Church commenced, and among whom alone it continued to exist for about twelve years. All these were familiarized from their childhood to such a profession: and acknowledged, that to make it was their indispensable duty.

The existence of this profession among the first Christians is often exhibited in the New Testament. Thus St. Paul, 2 Cor. ix. 13, says to these Christians concerning their fellowchristians, They glorify God for your professed subjection unto the Gospel of Christ; better rendered, for your subjection to the Gospel of Christ, which you have professed. In Heb. iv. 14, St. Paul says, Seeing then, that we have a great High Priest, who is passed into the Heavens, Jesus, the Son of God; let us hold fast our profession. And again, Heb. x. 21, 23, Having an High Priest over the house of God, let us hold fast the profession of our faith without wavering: for he is faithful, who promised. In these instances a profession of faith, or of religion, is evidently spoken of as having been made by Christians universally. To Timothy, the same Apostle says, 1 Tim. vi. 22, Fight the good fight of faith; lay hold on eternal life; whereunto thou art also called, and hast professed, or having professed, a good profession before many witnesses. What Timothy did, in this respect, is reasonably supposed to have been done by all other Christians.

The answer of a good conscience towards God, mentioned by St. Peter as given at the time of Baptism, 1 Pet. iii. 21, denotes, in my view, the same profession.

St. John speaks of the same thing; and sufficiently indicates its necessity, and universality, when he says, Whosoever shall confess, that Jesus is the Son of God; God dwelleth in him, and he in God. 1 John iv. 15. And again, For many deceivers are entered into the world, who confess not, that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh. This is a deceiver, and an Antichrist.

From these passages of Scripture, it appears to me evident,

that Christians are required, not only to believe the Religion of Christ in their hearts, but also to profess it with their mouths; that such a profession was universally made by the Christians under the conduct of the Apostles; and that such, as did not make this profession, were not considered as Christians.

3. So far as I know, all those modern Churches, who do not insist on a public, verbal profession of religion, as a term of admission to their communion, either demand a private one, or consider the proposal to enter into their communion as being, in itself, such a profession.

The difference of opinion, here, respects evidently, not the substance of the thing in debate; not the duty of making a profession; but merely the manner, in which it shall be made. Whatever modes may be adopted by different Churches, there seems to be no debate between them concerning the main object. All of them suppose a profession to be actually made. About the manner of making it the Scriptures have, I think, left room for some latitude of opinion: about the profession itself, I think they have left none. Every Communicant is, I believe, supposed by every Church, not grossly warped from the faith, to have made a profession of the religion of the Gospel, when he entered the Church.

Having now, as I hope, given a Scriptural, and therefore a just, account of this subject, I will proceed to illustrate the main Doctrine of the discourse from the Nature of the Covenant, into which Christians enter, in making this profession. This transac4ion is obviously the most important, and the most solemn, of those, which exist between the soul and its Maker: its public re-introduction into his name, favour, family, service, and eternal kingdom. The subject of it, the Soul, is of inestimable value. The time, is the Sabbath; the place, the sanctuary; the occasion, the public worship of God: the most solemn of all occasions, places, and times. The Being, with whom we are immediately concerned, is JEHOVAH. The foundation on which the transaction rests, is the atonement of Christ, the Mediator of the New Covenant. The things, which we profess, are no other, than that we choose God as our God, and give ourselves