served kindness as I please, have determined to leave Esau, among many others of the apostate sinful race of mankind, whom I justly abhor as such-to the free choice of his own will, that he may walk in the way of his own heart." This exposition at once establishes the difference between the case of Esau, and that which we are considering. God left Esau to the free choice of his own will, that he might walk in the way of his own heart; and thus, it is sup posed, his non-election was apparent; but God does not leave those for whom we are now especially concerned to such an awful abuse of human liberty, he takes them away-as we are still permitted to hope-from all danger of incurring so just a reason of divine abhorrence.

2

Instead of stopping at present to justify the position, it may here be assumed, that though in virtue of his sovereign prerogative, God can and does bestow unmerited favours, it is unworthy of his character to inflict unmerited sufferings. Just so among mankind, an equitable sovereign, may in the exercise of his prerogative, take the orphan of a traitor under his royal patronage, and load him with undeserved proofs of his goodness; but on the other hand, however he may be offended, and though he may leave such child to the inconveniences which naturally result from his peculiar circumstances, he cannot in equity bring the unconscious infant to capital punishment for his father's crime. Now, if

this principle be correct, we may easily perceive how, in the exercise of sovereign benevolence, the unoffending infants of apostate man can be received to eternal happiness; but are, on the other hand, left utterly at a loss to reconcile their final condemnation with the rectitude of divine government.

On a review of what has above appeared, with respect to the bearing of the doctrine of election on the case of deceased infants, it seems impossible to. avoid one of the following conclusions; either that they are introduced to the full felicities of heaven, without the interference of sovereign benevolence in their behalf; or that they remain in some state, intermediate between heaven and hell, where there is exemption from positive sufferings, but the light of God's countenance never shines; or finally, that they are saved by the gracious purpose of God in Christ Jesus. Which of these conclusions is most consonant to revelation, it is needless to specify.

Of

So far from early death being, in any case, a mark of reprobation, we are certain that it has sometimes occurred as a mark of divine favour,-has been affixed as the seal of sovereign benevolence. this, an instance occurred where such gracious discrimination might least be expected, in the family of Jeroboam, the man so emphatically announced as "he who made Israel to sin*." Of all this

* 1 Kings xiv.

wicked man's house, Abijah alone came to the grave in peace; and an early death was the means, divinely appointed, of exempting him from impending calamities. He is not indeed called an infant; and the reason assigned for this peculiar favour, "that in him was found some good thing towards the Lord God of Israel," may imply indications of early piety; yet he was but a child, and his early death, administered in mercy, may suffice to preclude the heart-rending suggestion, that perhaps the early removal of our little ones is a decisive token of divine displeasure against them. Had this dispensation befallen Abijah at a yet earlier period, it would have been equally in mercy to him. Nor is it certain that he had, at the time of his death, attained to an age capable of expressing holy dispositions; for the "good thing in him" may describe the yet undeveloped operations of discriminating grace within his heart.

Bearing in mind that we are only endeavouring to evince the consistency of our position with the analogy of faith, we may be allowed to suggest the enquiry, what principle of evangelical truth is opposed by regarding death in infancy as an indication of the sovereign and distinguishing love of God? Though death is an evil originally and in itself, may not its occurrence previous to the possibility of personal transgression, be a proof of divine favour, at least as much so as the death of believers in Christ? We

have not, indeed, an explicit revelation that this is the case; but if a revelation to this effect would harmonize with the system of evangelical truth, and nothing be wanting but such divine announcement, it will clearly follow, that the doctrine of election to salvation is not in itself inimical to the opinion here maintained.

Every attentive reader of the Scriptures must be impressed with the discrepancy, in point of numbers, so frequently suggested, as subsisting between the church militant and the church triumphant. As to the visible church on earth, "C many are called, but few are chosen;" the church above comprises a

great multitude, which no man can number." To whatever extent the anticipated millennial period may contribute to this discrepancy, we may still, for all that has hitherto appeared, indulge a hope of discovering among that great multitude, all who were removed in infancy from the evil to come, as the objects of sovereign election, the precious purchase of redeeming blood.

SECTION IV.

Inability to exercise Faith in Christ does not exclude Infants from Salvation.

The Gospel declares faith necessary,—yet does not thus exclude Infants from salvation.-Is both a moral economy and a display of sovereign benevolence. Under the former view requires faith,—therefore from moral agents only ;-who also have opportunities of knowing it;otherwise, God could not by his sovereign pleasure save infants. Under the latter, shews faith as a principle wrought in the heart ;— thus more immediately connected with salvation ;-may be produced in infants ;-and in some instances has been.

A SUSPICION may be entertained, that all the above reasoning is rendered nugatory, and our hopes for the happiness of deceased infants demonstrated to be fallacious, by the obvious fact, that the gospel insists on faith in Christ as indispensable to salvation. "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, and he that believeth not shall be damned." Now, as by hypothesis, infants cannot exercise faith in Christ, to hope for their final happiness may seem to be a fatal presumption, maintained in defiance of direct and unequivocal announcements of revelation. Though this difficulty, together with some others which remain, is not so formidable as those which have received attention, yet is it sufficiently imposing to demand particular consideration.