nature of the eye to see an object by the light that it reflects, or of the ear to hear the sounds which the air conveys to it. To discern the connexion between a fact and its evidence, a proposition and its proof, is a faculty fixed in the nature of the mind by God; which faculty the mind is pretty much at liberty to employ or not, and hath a strange power of employing it in some instances perversely; but when it is employed aright — when proof is brought into the mind's view, either by its own fair investigation or by the force of external objects striking the bodily organs, assent and conviction must ensue. The eye may

be shut; the ear may be stopped; the understanding may turn itself away from unpleasing subjects: But the eye, when it is open, hath no power not to see ; the ear, when open, hath no power not to hear; and the understanding hath no power not to know truth when the attention is turned to it. It matters not of what kind the proposition may be to which the understanding assents in consequence of full proof; — the completeness of the proof necessarily precludes the possibility of merit in the act

of assenting. Now this was the case of Thomas, and indeed of all the apostles, not with respect to the whole of their faith, but with respect to the particular fact of our Lord's resurrection ; — the proof they had of it was full and absolute: Jesus in his well-known person stands alive before them; and to believe, when they saw him alive, that he who had been dead was then living, could be nothing more meritorious than to believe that he was dead when they saw the body laid in the grave.

I desire not to be misunderstood. There may be much merit in the diligence, the candour, and sincerity with which a man inquires and investigates; there may be merit in the conduct he pursues in consequence of particular convictions. In the conduct of the apostles, there was much merit, under the conviction they at last attained of our Lord's resurrection — in their zeal to diffuse his doctrines in their firmness in attesting his triumph over the grave, in defiance of the utmost rigour of persecution, such merit as shall be rewarded with unfading crowns of glory:

--

But in the mere act of believing a fact evidenced by the senses, or a proposition legitimately proved, of whatever kind, there can be none.

But here arises that most interesting question, Since there is confessedly no merit in that act of belief which is the result of ocular conviction, what is the merit of that faith which hath no such foundation which "believes that which it hath not seen," that our Saviour should so emphatically pronounce it blessed?

I trust that I shall evince, by God's assistance, that this blessing to the faithful standeth sure. But this great subject may well demand a separate discourse.

SERMON XLII.

JOHN, XX. 29.

Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: Blessed are they who have not seen and yet have believed.

THE propriety of the reproof addressed in these words to the apostle hath been already shown. It was not his fault that he did not believe before he was convinced; but that he had hastily set a resolution of unbelief, without attending to a proof which, how, ever inferior to the evidence of sense, might haye given him conviction.

It hath been shown besides, that a faith which is the result of the immediate testimony of the senses must be altogether destitute, as our Saviour intimates, of moral

merit. Hence arises this interesting question, the last in my original division of the subject, which I now purpose to discuss,Since there is no merit in believing upon ocular conviction, what is the merit of that faith which hath not that foundation? Is it that it is taken up upon slighter grounds? Is this possible in the nature of things, that the imperfection of the proof should enhance the merit of belief? Will it not follow, if this principle be once admitted, that where there is the least of proof there will be the most of this merit; and that the faith which is the most valuable in the sight of God is that which hath the least support and countenance from the understanding? proposition which the adversaries of our holy religion would much rejoice that its professors should affirm.

a

To clear these difficulties, I know no readier way, than to inquire on what grounds their faith for the most part is likely to be built, who believe, as all Christians do who at this day believe the gospel, without the evidence of their senses. From this inquiry, I hope to make appear both