I HAVE sometimes rejoiced in the breaking up of orthodox rigidity by the lively methods of the sensational pulpit; and yet I never could become reconciled to anything like comedy in religious ministration. My regrets, indeed, have never been poignant that orthodox preachers should make certain aspects of orthodox doctrine ridiculous; and yet I never could understand how they could be betrayed into doing it, because I have always felt that to one who believes in the embassy of the Divine Word to a lost world it must be impossible to step aside from the sacramental ministration of grace and truth, to the stirring of crackling laughter.
I know the current explanation, the ready excuse; and I endeavor to appreciate it, and to have no thoughts which are not the thoughts of charity. And yet I cannot shake off the conviction that comic aspects of Christian ministry weaken a hundred times as much as they win, and that congregations on the broad grin let slip the most essential elements of religious impression. I am unable to understand how any man, under commission to tell his fellow-creatures of sin and punishment, and peril even of eternal doom, and of invitation and hope and deliverance, should ever escape, for a single moment of his “on-duty” hours, from the feeling, tender, it may be, and cheerful and joyous as the smiles of Heaven, and yet the feeling of profound solemnity.
Do any of the “popular” preachers ever permit themselves to raise a laugh at the communion-table? Do they become comic when thus closely held to their exact work? Undoubtedly they do not. A sensational handling of the sacrament is not yet in vogue. But what is any genuine ministry of Christian gospel but the administration of a sacrament which is veritable and significant precisely in proportion to the minister’s consciousness that he handles the living Word of God? Are not great truths of revelation, divine truths of saving faith, more significant elements of a sacrament than bread and wine? These pass the lips, while those go through the very soul, to prepare the way of the King coming in his glory. How can a man ever speak to men’s souls on behalf of redemption, and not feel so much of the shadow before him and upon him, and of the glory behind and above him, as to stand transfixed almost with a sense of sacramental significance in the words which pass his lips and the very gestures which his hands make! And if his creed bids him remember that every passing instant is to some a moment of final doom, and every present step of life a step to far the most into greater peril, must there not come in him a rush of heavenliness, a tide of the passion which sways the plains of redemption, which will make even accidental comedy impossible? It seems to me; and, looking at it the most carefully that I can, I believe that not one of the sensational features of the popular pulpit has done a hundredth part as much good to people’s liberty as it has done harm to their essential interest in religion. If it were only that the laugh is raised against old errors of supposed superstition, or severities of faith and practice, which I am glad to see disused, I should not myself care for the utter discomfiture of orthodox interests, little as I might be able to understand how any but an extreme heretic could promote this discomfiture; but I cannot help lamenting the widespread injury to serious religious sentiment, and rapid decline of this sentiment, under the influence of clerical lightness of heart and speech—the intrusion of the spirit of play where that of incessant prayer is alone fit and proper.
If there were no such thing at all as the struggle of human souls with sin and sorrow; if sense were enough, and spirit were needless for present life; if the energy of action among men, without that of aspiration toward God, were sufficient to our happy progress; or if there were any possible way to fight and fly and mount away toward Heaven, except with the arms, and in the power, and on the wings of the most serious and earnest passion of the soul, the case would be wholly different. But he knows little of average man who anticipates religious impression by any other than deeply religious agencies, or who deludes himself for a moment with thinking that a prophet can turn player without abdicating his function.
In its place, play has its function; but that place is not and never can be the pulpit. A man of varied power and profound experience may easily command the mood of prayer in the midst of play, or may turn from the former to the latter and back again, without violence to the motions of his own spirit; but this is not so with average experience, which does not want prayer in the midst of play, and cannot turn back and forth between the solemnities of sacrament and the jovialities of comedy. If the latter are thrust in, the former are too much driven out to get wholly back again; and when ministry is characterized by sensational appeals to light sentiments it will be at serious and lasting cost to spiritual experience.
I have in my own faith no reason to be mournful about the end of all things for human souls. I only have occasion to strive for present influence and help with those to whom I may minister; and I strenuously summon myself, and all who are seeking for heavenly things, to put on a cheerful courage; and yet I dare not hurt these deepest interests of religious feeling by using any other than grave and earnest words, such as I find religion has always used for effective impression. If there is need of disturbing religious tradition, as heart has given it to heart, I would resort to the most thorough method of honest confession, of vehement appeal, that in great strength of sincerity and great fidelity of conviction there may be preserved, at least, the feeling that it is a business full of urgency, of necessity, of solemn significance, which religious discussion has to settle. Better the fire and sword of honest fanaticism than the pleasantries and gayeties of a sensational pulpit.
There must be, in any at all religious, or even deeply ethical, appreciation of the verities expressed, or suggested, by the word “Christ,” a full and deep sense of the seriousness of every aspect of faith. In any appreciation at all adequate of those verities there must be the quickened conscience, the awakened cry of penitence, the search and struggle of the soul after God, the effort and sacrifice and endeavor after submission; the passionate anxiety of the penitent confessor to escape temptation and get safe past the evil, and the absorbing expectation of help within and without, of heavenly providence and holy spirit. No mind can be held to this veracity of adequate experience where diversion interrupts spiritual sobriety.
And if to these general spiritual elements of conformity to “Christ” is added any variety of degree whatever of recognition of an Incarnate Sacrifice, how utterly incongruous must pleasantry be before the altar of ministry of this incarnation and propitiation! The unreality of such supposed sacrifice will be irresistibly suggested by any comic aspect of ministry, and the Word will be broken rather for the entertainment than for the conviction and conversion of the unbeliever.
The entertainment of believers might be legitimate; and too many settle the question by considering only this. But the mistake is a very great one if in truth the business of ministry is to seek and to save, and not yet to make merry.Not yet to make merry. Even believing, without a shadow of doubt that there is no danger at all of the final loss of any soul, one yet might well bear this always in mind: Not yet to make merry in the ministry of serious faith. How much more, believing that doom has its hand on some; that redemption, in the very heart of God even, is a fountain of tears in view of inevitable loss; and that rescue must be through the humanly-executed embassy of warning, and appeal, and persuasion, who can help shutting down against every gay motion or light emotion with a Not yet to make merry?
And certainly it is no plea suitable to be put in that thus a large and strong nature must disport itself. A little and weak nature might plead a kind of hysterical falling from wisdom; but strength and greatness are to be held to acceptance of the law, especially in view of the force of example. The pleasantries of play are a conspicuous feature of popular ministry, far and near, in consequence to no small degree of some illustrious examples; and if Christian religion, as it is commonly understood, continues to lose ground and ceases to be a serious concern with thoughtful and virtuous persons, it will be largely in consequence of this sensational lightness of the popular pulpit.—E. C. Towne.
Save the Little Ones.
By Sol.
A FEW years ago, a steamer was coming from California. The cry of fire! fire! suddenly thrilled every heart. Every effort was made to stay the flames; but in vain. It soon became evident that the ship must be lost. The only thought now was self-preservation. The burning mass was headed for the shore which was not far off. A passenger was seen buckling his belt of gold around his waist, ready to plunge into the waves. Just then a pleading voice arrested him, “Please, sir, can you swim?” A child’s blue eyes were piercing into his deepest soul as he looked down upon her. “Yes, child, I can swim.” “Well, sir, won’t you please to save me?” “I cannot do both,” he thought. “I must save the child or lose the gold. But a moment ago I was anxious for all this ship’s company. Now, I am doubting whether I shall exchange a human life for paltry gold.” Unbuckling the belt, he cast it from him and said, “Yes, little girl, I will try to save you.” Stooping down, he bade her clasp her arms around his neck, “Thus, child, not so tight as to choke me. There, hang on now and I will try to make for the land.” The child bowed herself on his broad shoulders, and clung to her deliverer. With a heart thrice strengthened, and an arm thrice nerved, he struck out for the shore. Wave after wave washed over them, but still the brave man held out, and the dear child held on, until a mighty mountain billow swept the sweet treasure from his embrace, and cast him senseless on the bleak rocks. Kind hands ministered to him. Recovering his consciousness, the form of a dear child met his earliest gaze, bending over him with more than angel ministrations, and blessing him with mute but eloquent benedictions.
So, dear fellow-teachers and lovers of the little ones, let us bend our hearts to the burden of the precious souls of the children. Let us take them in the strong arms of our faith and prayers, and bear them up through the storms of life, and though the rude waves of sin may tear them from our grasp, yet who knows but by-and-by, when we get on the other shore, we may be welcomed by the little ones we have tried to save!—Sol.
Forks.
FORKS were first known in Italy toward the end of the fifteenth century. It was a hundred years before they came into use in France, and nearly a hundred more before they traveled as far north as Scotland. Their introduction into England was at first ridiculed as a piece of affectation and effeminacy. In one of Beaumont and Fletcher's plays, “your fork-carving traveler,” is spoken of with great contempt; and Ben Jonson, too, joined in the laugh against them. In repeated instances the progress of inventions has been resisted by the popular clamor, and even opposed by popular violence. The first man who appeared with an umbrella in the streets of London drew upon himself a pelting shower of mud and stones, which was worse than the rain against which he spread the new-fangled protection. The old way of making boards was by splitting them with wedges, and, clumsy as the method was, it was no easy matter to persuade the world that there was a better. Saw-mills were first used in Europe in the fifteenth century. In 1636, a Dutchman built one in England, but the public cry against it was so vehement that he was soon obliged to decamp, and for the next hundred years no one ventured to repeat the experiment. In 1768, a rash adventurer began to erect another mill, but a conservative mob gathered at once and tore it down.
“THE NEW EARTH.”
By E. S. Stanley
The Bible teaches that EARTH will be “the place of future bliss,” thus giving us something tangible and certain as a basis of faith.
Can God forgive the child of dust
Who doubts when taught where faith should trust?
Where is “the place of future bliss”?
Gaze not beyond the milky way,
Nor where the Pleiades gently sway
All worlds and systems, as they roll,
To find the elemental soul,
Where nights have ceased, and light to bless
Beams from the Sun of Righteousness;
Earth is the star of future bliss.
Who point us to that “place of bliss”?
The leader who on Pisgah stood,
He saw “the earth” beyond the flood;
So Abram, David, Christ, and Paul,
Proclaimed “the land,” or “earth,” for all
The good. The whole for God confide,
“The earth forever doth abide;”
They point us to this place of bliss.
Who reigns in that sweet “place of bliss”?
Christ rules the waves and thunder loud,
He leads by pillar and by cloud,
He bids his gospel system burn
The schemes of men who seek to turn
Away his light. His arm of might
Bows men, like angels, in his sight;
He reigns who bought this earth for bliss.
But while this “place of future bliss”
Remains as now, Jehovah keeps
His humblest child—he never sleeps;
For he who now sustaineth all
Will make old Abram’s “foot” to fall
And rest in everlasting trust
Where once the mortal slept in dust.
His eyes will see earth full of bliss.
What learn they in this “place of bliss”?
Of him to whom wise men from far
Came, guided by the glorious star;
They learn the earth shall ever be
For those who wait in faith to see
The King return, of glorious birth,
And sing his “reign upon the earth.”
They learn this is “the place of bliss.”
When shall we reach “the place of bliss”?
When the last trumpet loud shall call,
The just shall rise, the ungodly fall,
When earth and seas shall roll in fire,
And all is “new” and sin retire;
When “New Jerusalem” appears,
The place of triumph over tears;
Then we shall reach the place of bliss.
Though sin eclipse “the place of bliss,”
As clouds the seamen, ocean-tossed,
We now—when heavenly light is lost,
And fears with doubts tempestuous roll
Like midnight o’er the driven soul—
Trust One who comes, and comes to save;
He breaks the cloud, he walks the wave,
And brings in sight “the land” of bliss.
In thy bright realms, O “place of bliss”!
No tempest’s jar, no sound of war,
Nor funeral bell, our peace will mar.
Those whom while here, we hold so dear,
We’ll meet, no parting hour to fear;
In thee shall faith be verified,
In thee, God’s love be magnified,
Thou “world to come,” thou home of bliss.
Yes, this must be the “place of bliss.”
“Prisoner of hope” though now I be,
My longing soul pants to be free,
Thy presence is a heavenly ray
To give me joy and light my way,
Till from this melting orb I spring
“To meet thee in the air,” and sing,
Thy fires prepare the place of bliss.
—E. S. Stanley.
The State of the Cause.
By James White
Our brethren who attended the late General Conference are aware of the necessity existing for Bro. White to withdraw from the numerous burdens hitherto resting upon him in Battle Creek. There seems to have rested upon the minds of many the impression that the whole responsibility of management must be laid upon the President of the Association. This is a mistake. According to our Articles, the responsibility is with the Board of Trustees, and although Bro. White, as President of the Association, is Chairman of the Board, the state of his health is now such that it becomes the duty of the remaining members to assume the responsibility from which they have hitherto considered themselves in a measure released. The church in Battle Creek are now enjoying a precious work of God in their midst, and with them must the burden of that work be principally left. Having received light enough in the past on which to act, they must do their own work, and not lean on others. In this way only can this church be brought up to that position which it is the Lord’s will it should occupy in this central place.
But there is most pressing need of help for the proper management of the general interests of the cause, especially as relates to the Publishing Association. It is utterly impossible that any individual devoted to the labor of any one department of the publishing work, should be able to oversee, or have an intelligent oversight of all the departments. A general agent or superintendent seems to be imperatively demanded to meet the wants of the Association at this time.
But this brings us to another difficulty. There are individuals who are competent, with a little experience and consecrated effort, to do this work; who have professedly given all to the Lord and his cause. And now they stand waiting, willing to act when Bro. and sister White shall say it is their duty to come! This may meet their ideas of relieving Bro. White of responsibilities, but we do not look upon it in that light. To dictate to another, or to assume what is his duty, is the greatest responsibility. It is not right that any one should come who has not the consecration and love for the cause sufficient to induce him to throw himself into the work without reserve. But who can judge of the consecration of any one except by his own actions? To put individuals forward so as to assume all the responsibility of their action, is sometimes the heaviest burden that can be borne. We hope they will look at this matter in a more reasonable light. And we pray that God may fasten conviction of duty upon them till they shall be ready to move out in his fear, and feel that their calling is from God and not from man. Then, and then only, will they feel that responsibility to God which is the best indication of ultimate success.
The General Conference has, at several seasons, indicated their desire to relieve Bro. White by inviting others to throw themselves into the work. Their backwardness has made it necessary for Bro. White to withdraw himself entirely from cares at Battle Creek for a season. This action on his part the board of trustees heartily endorse; the state of his health renders this step absolutely necessary, and if the cause suffers, the blame will rest upon those whose duty it is to devote themselves to the work in this time of need.
It will be no excuse for them to say they cannot obey the call now—their business is in such a condition that they cannot leave it just at present. This is a fault of their own, for which they should greatly humble themselves before God. They have long heard the urgent call, and if they have suffered Satan to ensnare them, and let “the god of this world blind their minds,” and bring darkness over their pathway, they should not urge it as an excuse for their neglect. Brethren, what will you do? We may have more to say on this subject next week.
J. H. W.
“A Jew on the Sabbath.”
By J. H. W.
SUCH is the heading over a brief letter in the Sabbath Recorder, the letter being considered, by that paper, “worthy of more than a passing notice.” It is a singular production, and if the writer is only a Jew in religion, it is exactly what might be expected of him; for he recognizes the obligation resting upon him to keep the seventh-day Sabbath only because he is a liberal descendant of Abraham. He thinks the Christian church might more easily be brought up to their duty of keeping the true Sabbath if they could be convinced that “the American nation is the great nation of which Abraham was to be the Father,” or that we are descendants of the tribes of Israel. The writer has not, apparently, looked far enough into Christianity to see that such an amalgamation with Judaism is quite inconsistent. If Paul is any authority with the writer referred to, we invite him to examine Eph. 2:11–20; 3:3–9; Rom. 2:28, 29; and Gal. 3:26–29. We claim to be the children of Abraham, and under obligation to “do the works of Abraham,” or to keep the commandments of the God of our Father Abraham. But we recognize our sonship through faith in the Son of God—the seed of Abraham—and not by literal descent. “The Sabbath was made for man,” and that before Abraham lived. As Christians, we are not deficient in reasons for keeping holy “the Sabbath of the Lord our God.” See also Rom. 3:29–31. “Is he the God of the Jews only? is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes; of the Gentiles also: seeing it is one God, who shall justify the circumcision by faith and uncircumcision through faith. Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid; yea, we establish the law.” To this we say, Amen! J. H. W.
The United States in the Light of Prophecy.
By Uriah Smith
CHAPTER XII.
THE BEGINNING OF THE END.
WE have now found what, according to the prophecy, is to constitute the image which the two-horned beast is to cause to be made, and the mark which it will attempt to enforce. The movement which is to fulfill this portion of the prophecy, is to be looked for in the popular churches of our land. First, a union must be effected between these churches, with some degree of coalition also between these bodies and the beast power, or Roman Catholicism; and, secondly, steps must be taken to bring the law of the land to the support of the Sunday Sabbath. These movements the prophecy calls for. And the line of argument leading to these conclusions is so direct and well-defined that there is no avoiding them. They are a clear and logical sequence from the premises given us.
When first the application of Rev. 13: 11–17 to the United States was made, over twenty years ago, these positions respecting a union of the churches and a grand Sunday movement were taken. But at that time, no sign appeared above or beneath, at home or abroad, no token was seen, no indication existed, that such an issue would ever be made. But there was the prophecy and that must stand. The United States’ government had given abundant evidence, by its location, the time of its rise, the manner of its rise, and its apparent character, that it was the power symbolized by the two-horned beast. There could be no mistake in the conclusion that it was the very nation intended by that symbol. This being so, it must take the course, and perform the acts, foretold. But here were predictions which could be fulfilled by nothing less than the movement above named respecting church and State, and the enforcement of the papal Sabbath as the mark of the beast.
To take the position at that time that this government was to pursue such a policy and engage in such a work, without any apparent probability in its favor, was no small act of faith. On the other hand, to deny or ignore it, while admitting the application of the symbol to this government, would be in accordance with neither Scripture nor logic. The only course for the humble, confiding student of prophecy to pursue in such cases, is to take the light as it is given and believe the prophecy in all its parts. So the stand was boldly taken; and open proclamation has been made from that day to this, that such a work was to be seen in these United States. With every review of the argument, new features of strength have been discovered in the application; and amid a storm of scornful incredulity, we have watched the progress of events, and waited the hour of fulfillment.
Meanwhile, spiritualism has astonished the world with its terrible progress, and shown itself to be the wonder-working element which was to exist in connection with this power. And now, within a few years past, what have we further seen? No less than the commencement of that very movement respecting the formation of the image and the enactment of Sunday laws, for which we have so long waited, and which is to complete the prophecy, and close the scene.
Reference was made in chapter ix, to the movement now on foot for a grand union of all the churches; not a union which arises from the putting away of error and uniting upon the harmonious principle of truth, but simply a combination of sects, each retaining its own particular creed, but confederated for the purpose of carrying out more extensively the common points of their faith. This movement finds in a strong undercurrent of favor in all the churches the source of its strength. And men are engaged to carry it through who are not easily turned from their purpose.
And there has suddenly arisen a class of men whose souls are absorbed with the cognate idea of Sunday reform, and who have dedicated every energy of their being to the carrying forward of this kindred movement. The “New York Sabbath Committee” have labored zealously by means of books, tracts, speeches, and sermons, to create a strong public sentiment in behalf of Sunday. Making slow progress through moral suasion, they seek a shorter path to the accomplishment of their purposes through political power. And why not? Christianity has become popular, and her professed adherents are numerous. Why not avail themselves of the power of the ballot to secure their ends? Rev. J. S. Smart (Methodist), in a published sermon on the “Political Duties of Christian Men and Ministers,” expresses a largely-prevailing sentiment on this question, when he says:—
“I claim that we have, and ought to have, just as much concern in the government of this country as any other men. . . . We are the mass of the people. Virtue in this country is not weak; her ranks are strong in numbers, and invincible from the righteousness of her cause—invincible if united. Let not her ranks be broken by party names.”
A “National Association” has been in existence for a number of years, which has for its object the securing of such amendments to the National Constitution, as shall express the religious views of the majority of the people, and make it an instrument under which the keeping of Sunday can be enforced as the Christian Sabbath. This Association already embraces within its organization a long array of eminent and honorable names: Governors of our States, Presidents of our colleges, Bishops, Doctors of Divinity, Doctors of Law, and men who occupy high positions in all the walks of life.
In the Address issued by the officers of this Association, they say:—
“Men of high standing, in every walk of life, of every section of the country, and of every shade of political sentiment and religious belief, have concurred in the measure.”
In their appeal they most earnestly request every lover of his country to join in forming auxiliary associations, circulate documents, attend conventions, sign the memorial to Congress, &c., &c.
In their plea for an amended Constitution, they ask the people to “consider that God is not once named in our National Constitution.” There is nothing in it which requires an “oath of God,” as the Bible styles it (which, after all, is the great bond both of loyalty in the citizen and of fidelity in the magistrate); nothing which requires the observance of the day of rest and of worship, or which respects its sanctity. If we do not have the mails carried and the post offices open on Sunday, it is because we happen to have a Postmaster-General who respects the day. If our Supreme Courts are not held, and if Congress does not sit on that day, it is custom, and not law, that makes it so. Nothing in the Constitution gives Sunday quiet to the custom house, the navy yard, the barracks, or any of the departments of government.
“Consider that they fairly express the mind of the great body of the American people. This is a Christian people. These amendments agree with the faith, the feelings, and the forms of every Christian church or sect. The Catholic and the Protestant, the Unitarian and the Trinitarian, profess and approve all that is here proposed. Why should their wishes not become law? Why should not the Constitution be made to suit and to represent a constituency so overwhelmingly in the majority? . . . . . .”
“This great majority is becoming daily more conscious not only of their rights but of their power. Their number grows, and their column becomes more solid. They have quietly, steadily opposed infidelity, until it has, at least, become politically unpopular. They have asserted the rights of man and the rights of the government, until the nation’s faith has become measurably fixed and declared on these points. And now that the close of the war gives us occasion to amend our Constitution, that it may clearly and fully represent the mind of the people45on these points, they feel that it should also be so amended as to recognize the rights of God in man and in government. Is it anything but due to their long patience that they be at length allowed to speak out the great facts and principles which give to all government its dignity, stability, and beneficence?” U. S.
Words of Explanation.
By James White
We wish to say to our friends in New England, that the labors of our General Conference, and the care of many things pertaining to the cause, have so worn us that we seek several weeks of rest before we can even journey. We hope to be able to spend several months with our eastern friends as soon as we are able to labor.
We wish here to also state to correspondents, that it has been impossible to give them proper attention for want of time, and now we are unable to notice them for want of strength. We shall be glad to receive words of good cheer from friends, and will give personal matters attention, so far as we shall be able. But on all matters pertaining to the cause, which may call for anxious thought, or responsibility, we must be excused. All letters upon such matters will be respectfully returned to the writers. We are very happy to receive good words from Eld. T. J. Butler, of Missouri, formerly of Ohio, and should be glad to visit him, and help him; but this being impossible, we have referred the matter to the President of our General Conference.
By consent of other Trustees of our Publishing Association, we decide to dismiss all care of the work of editing and publishing for the next three months at least. And if, during that period, the right men become connected with the work at Battle Creek, and we become sufficiently rested and restored, we shall then be willing to serve the cause. But we feel assured that our days of heavy toil are in the past, and that if we shall be of any service to the church at all in the future, it must be under more favorable circumstances.
At this extremely interesting era of the cause, especially of the publishing work, it is with feelings of grief that we feel compelled to lay the armor off for a while to rest. We have ever loved to labor in the cause of truth, and, since our restoration from extreme sickness a few years since we should have been permitted to enjoy labor of our choice away from Battle Creek and saved this breaking down. Those who have urged upon us double responsibilities and toil, against our urgent entreaties, will see that they made a mistake. But in God we trust, and hope for help and strength to work again in his vineyard. J. W.
The Substance of the Two Covenants.
By John Nevins Andrews
FIRST COVENANT. This is stated by Jeremiah in the following words: “Obey my voice and do them, according to all which I command you; so shall ye be my people and I will be your God. Jer. 11:4. This is expressly declared in verses 3 and 4 to be the covenant which the Lord made with Israel when he brought them out of Egypt. It has one grand idea in it viz., obedience to God. The blessings of the covenant are suspended upon this condition.
THE NEW COVENANT. This also is stated in express terms by Jeremiah. “I will put my law in their inward parts and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people. . . . for I will forgive their iniquity and I will remember their sin no more.”
Now wherein do the two covenants differ? Not in this, that one pertains to the law of God and the other does not; for the new covenant is even more express than the old in its connection with the moral law. It puts it in the hearts of men. They do not differ in one demanding obedience to his law and the other excusing men therefrom. But the real difference may be thus stated: The one demands obedience to the law; the other by putting the law in the heart secures that obedience. And whereas the first covenant is forfeited by failure to obey, the second has conditions of forgiveness that are honorable to the law, and yet such that they can extend mercy to the penitent sinner.