with those which ascribe omniscience, &c. to him, demonstrate that he had another nature in union with his humanity, of which such things are spoken. And "his delivering up of the kingdom to God, even the Father," (1 Cor. xv. 24-28), only establishes the distinction between the absolute and everlasting kingdom of God as Creator, and the mediatorial kingdom of Christ as the divine Saviour of sinners. As the absolute kingdom existed before sin entered, so will it exist for ever, after the mediatorial kingdom hath answered its grand de-. sign, and is come to an end; but the Son will be one with the Father to eternity, as he was in the beginning, before time was, or creation had taken place.

If any person should be convinced, by these plain arguments, of the truth and importance of this doctrine, I would conclude with warning him, not to rest in the notion of it, but to apply it practically, by relying on Emmanuel for all things belonging to salvation, and by rendering him that love and honour which are due to his name. The truth held in unrighteousness can only increase a man's condemnation; but they who deem it the life of their souls, should endeavour to adorn and promote the knowledge of it by all suitable means, remembering, that "the servant of the Lord must not strive, but be gentle to all men, in meekness instructing them that oppose themselves; if neradventure God will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth: and that they may recover themselves out of the snare of the devil, who are taken captive by him at his will," (2 Tim. ii. 24-26).

ESSAY VIII.

ON THE NATURE AND DESIGN OF THE MEDIATO RIAL OFFICE, SUSTAINED BY THE LORD JESUS CHRIST.

THE mediation of Christ between a holy God and sinful men, has an immediate connexion with every part of that religion which bears his name; and all who call themselves Christians, should use great diligence in seeking an accurate and adequate knowledge of this interesting subject, as far as they can deduce it from the sacred scriptures. It is therefore intended, in this essay, to make some observations on mediation in general;-to explain the nature and ends of our Lord's mediation in particular;-to show in what respects he, and none else, was qualified to sustain such an office; and to prove from scripture that he is a mediator, in the sense that will be explained.

The interposition of a mediator in the affairs of men implies, that some difference, or ground of difference, subsists between the two parties; it supposes, that at least one of them has cause of complaint or resentment against the other; and that consequences, injurious to one or both of them, or to those connected with them, may be apprehended, if the controversy be not amicably terminated. To prevent these effects, some person, either of his own accord, or at the request and by the appointment of one or both the contending parties, interposes, and endeavours, by his authority, influence, or good offices, to effect a pacification, on such terms as are supposed to be equitable, or at least not materially injurious to either party: for if a mediator should take great care of the rights and interests of one party, and evidently neglect those

of the other, he would be justly condemned for acting contrary to the design and nature of his office. He should therefore act as the friend of both; accommodating their differences according to the justice of their claims, and in a manner as satisfactory to each of them as can consist with equity and impartiality.

In some cases a superior in station or power may assume the office of mediator, and by authority induce the contending parties to accept of the terms proposed to each of them: In others, the end may be accomplished by argument, remonstrance, or persuasion. And this is nothing more than convincing both parties, that they ought to make or accept of such concessions, for the sake of peace and their mutual good, as are equitable and reasonable; and then inducing them to act according to the dictates of their understanding and conscience. But sometimes (especially when one party is much inferior to the other, and hath been highly criminal or injurious) the office of a mediator will chiefly consist in prevailing with the offended superior to accept of such concessions and satisfaction as the other can make, and not to proceed against him with rigour though he deserve it; and if this can be effected, it only remains for him to prevail with the inferior, or criminal party, to make the required concessions, &c. It may how ever so happen, on some occasions, that the mediator, out of great love and pity to the offender, may offer to make compensation at his own expense for the injuries he hath done, in order that the other party may without loss or dishonour lay aside his purposes of inflicting deserved punishment upon him. Various qualifications would be requisite for persons who should sustain the office of a mediator between two parties at variance, in any of the cases which have been stated; but our attention must principally be fixed upon the last, as it

doubtless most accords to the interesting subject which it is intended to illustrate. Should any one interpose between a sovereign prince and his rebellious subjects, in order to prevail with him to show them mercy, it is obvious that he should himself be free from all suspicion of the least favouring their rebellion, otherwise his interposition would render him the more suspected. He ought, moreover, to be a person of that rank and character, or to have done those important services, which entitle him to the confidence of his sovereign, and tend to render it honourable for him, at his instance, to pardon those that deserve punishment. Every one must perceive the absurdity of a criminal undertaking to mediate in behalf of his associates in guilt; nor could an obscure person, of indifferent character, and in no respect entitled to, or possessed of, the affection or confidence of the prince, attempt such an interposition without manifest impropriety. If a company of men, in any such circumstances, were desirous of thus conciliating the favour of their offended lord, they would naturally turn their thoughts to one of his chief nobles; to some person that had performed signal services with great renown; or to his principal favourite (Acts xii. 20); or even to his be loved son, if they had any prospect or hope of obtaining his good offices. And if such a mediator could be engaged in their behalf, with so firm and cordial an attachment to their cause as to say with Paul, when he mediated with Philemon for Onesimus, "if they have wronged thee, or owe thee aught, put that on mine account-I will repay it," (Philem. 19, 20); and if he really were competent to make good such an engagement, then his interposition would have its utmost ad. vantage for success.

But no mediator can be fully authorized for his office, unless, by one means or other, both parties

parties to ac

There is also

allow of his interference: at least his mediation' cannot have its due effect till they both accede to his terms, or plan of accommodating their differences. For if one party authorize him to propose certain terms to the other, as the utmost that he will yield, the whole must yet be frustrated, and the dissension perpetuated, if these terms be pertinaciously rejected, except when the mediator acts also as an umpire, and compels the cept of his prescribed conditions. an evident propriety in a mediator's standing in such a relation to each of the parties, as to lay a foundation for his being considered as an equal friend to both of them, in all respects in which their rank or the justice of the cause will admit of it; so that there can be no reason to suspect that a person, thus situated, will sacrifice the interests or rights of one party, from a partial regard to the other.

These observations concerning the office of a mediator, as well known among men, may enable us to understand more clearly the doctrine of scripture respecting the mediatorial office of Emmanuel: and we may very properly argue from them, in something of the same manner that Paul did from the office of high-priest among the Jews, when he wrote to them concerning the high-priesthood of Christ. This, indeed, was a divinely appointed type and shadow of the subject that the apostle illustrated and confirmed by it; whereas our arguments from the office of a mediator among men derive their force from analogy, or the particulars in which the cases coincide: yet as the Lord himself has represented the office of Christ under the idea of a mediator, it is manifest that he intended to assist, and not to mislead or confuse our apprehensions by this allusion; and this authorizes us to make what use we can, with caution and so