in the balances of the sanctuary, would be found alloyed with pride, sectarianism, vanity, and evil temper! Thus are we, like Peter, constantly liable to injure the cause of our Master, at one time by sloth and indifference, and at another by rash impetuosity. Peter was really doing no more for Christ, when, in his anger, he smote off the servant's ear, than when, stretched at length in the garden, he slumbered while Jesus was at prayer.

One extreme is always liable to be succeeded by its opposite. Rashness is naturally followed by cowardice. He who smote off the servant's ear was seen, in a few minutes, hiding himself in the darkness among the trees of the garden. But two extremes of wrong, though ever so closely united, never lead to rectitude. If we have sinned against Christ in one way, this can form no excuse for sinning against him in precisely the opposite way. If we find that our efforts in the cause of Christ have been mingled with pride and vain-glory, does this make it right for us to fold our hands in indolence, and resolve that we will do nothing? Much less does it justify us in forsaking him entirely, and being found associated with his avowed enemies.

3. The vacillation of Peter produced its natural result insufficient and undecided repentance. He could not forsake his Master entirely. He dared not openly confess his fault, and meet the consequences of doing right. He followed Christ afar off. Thus difficult is it to do right, after we have once commenced the doing of wrong. Yet, after all, the bold, manly, and immediate forsaking of sin is the only safe course that can be taken. A course only half way right, is as perilous a one as can be chosen. Hence, let us learn, then, never to allow sin unrepented of to remain upon the conscience. At the last, it will bite like a serpent and sting like an adder. It will wither our spiritual strength, and inevitably lead us to aggravated transgression. Nothing could have restored to Peter the moral courage of innocence, but going at once to Christ, confessing his sin, and avowing his attachment, no

matter what the avowal might have cost him. The rule is the same for every one of us. We may be surprised into sin. Our only safety consists in forsaking it immediately. If we hesitate, our conscience will become defiled and our resolution weakened. It is also of the utmost importance that our reformation be bold, manly, and universal. A mere formal return to our duty, lip-service, shame, regret, desire to repent, like Peter's, following Christ afar off, will only lead us into greater moral dangers.

4. Peter heard Jesus falsely accused, and he uttered not a word in his defence. The Son of man was buffeted and spit upon, yet Peter never rebuked the ruffians who were insulting him. This was a grievous and inexcusable sin. Yet, observe, it was not his doing, but his not doing, that was guilty. He was the friend and the witness of Christ. It was his duty to act, and to act promptly. By quietly looking on, when he ought to have acted, Peter prepared himself for all the guilt and misery that ensued. There can be no doubt that this friend and apostle of Christ, by standing there in silence, was doing a far greater wickedness than the very soldiers who were torturing him with every refinement of barbarian malignity.

Hence let us learn the danger of being found in any company in which the cause of Christ is liable to be treated with indignity. If we enter such company from choice, we are accessory to the breaking of Christ's commandments. If our lawful duties call us into society, where the name of Christ is not revered, we can never remain in it innocently, for a moment, unless we promptly act as disciples of Christ. Whenever our love to Jesus demands it, we must, without flinching or shamefacedness, boldly defend his cause. Whenever his name is reviled, we must meekly, yet boldly, rebuke the transgressor. Every where, and at all times, we are required to be ready to offer our testimony in favor of that Savior by whose blood we hope to be redeemed. To fail in the performance of this duty, is a grievous sin, and it always exposes us, in the end,

to inextricable embarrassment and overwhelming temptation. Thoughtless and irreligious men themselves look upon such a disciple with contempt. They quickly apprehend the inconsistency of his conduct, and not unfrequently put to him the taunting question, "Did I not see thee in the garden with e him?"

5. Peter attempted to escape from the embarrassments of his situation by equivocation. "I know not," said he, " nor understand what thou sayest." This only in the end rendered his embarrassment the more inextricable. It soon reduced him to a situation in which he had no alternative except confession of Christ, under still more disadvantageous circumstances, or hes the open and violent denial of him altogether. Let this part of the history teach us the importance of cultivating, on all occasions, the habit of bold and transparent veracity. Equivocation is always a sort of moral absurdity. It is an attempt to make a lie answer the purpose of the truth. He who does this when his attachment to Christ is called in question, has already fallen. He denies his Lord in the sight of his all-seeing Judge, though his cowardice will not permit him to do it openly. He cannot, however, long maintain this dubious position. His next step in sin will be open and avowed apostasy. The Lord, whom we serve, is a jealous God. He will not long suffer us to wear his livery when we are in heart united to his enemies. The man who has gone thus far will soon be brought into circumstances which will openly reveal his guilt.

E

6. Peter was rapidly led on to the commission of crimes in themselves most abhorrent to his nature, and crimes of which, at the commencement of his wrong-doing, neither he nor any one else would have believed him capable. He began by nothing more guilty than self-confidence and the want of watchfulness. He ended with shameless and repeated lying the public denial of his Master, accompanied by the exhibition of frantic rage, and the uttering of oaths and blasphemy in the hearing of all Jerusalem. And how is this

sudden and awful transformation to be accounted for? My brethren, it may all be explained in the most simple manner possible. The first step in sin placed him in a position in which he must either humble himself in penitence, or, by a second step, plunge still deeper in guilt. He did not repent, but took that second step. Here, again, the same choice was offered to him, but with increased difficulty of repentance, and diminished moral power of resisting temptation. Thus, step after step, he plunged headlong into more and more atrocious guilt, until, without the power of resistance, he surrendered himself up to do the whole will of the adversary of souls.

From this, let us learn the danger of little sins, and especially of sinning against God in the temper of our hearts. If, in any case, we find ourselves cherishing wrong dispositions, let us learn immediately to repent of them. Still more imperative is this necessity, if we have gone so far astray as to sin against God by the actual commission of wrong. In such a case, we are always in imminent peril. Our only way of escape from impending moral danger, is immediate and sincere repentance. If this be neglected or delayed, we may be sure that more formidable temptation will soon surprise us, and that, while sin unrepented of palsies our conscience, we shall most surely be overcome. Nothing but penitence will either remove us beyond the reach of temptation, or with the temptation make a way also for our escape.

In closing this sermon, what need have we of application? If you have not already brought these truths home to your own consciences, all that I can say will be unavailing. Are there not some of us here present who are under those circumstances which the history of Peter illustrates? Is there no one here slumbering in false security, and saying to himself," Though all men should be offended, yet will I never be offended"? Is there no one here who, by his boisterous and misplaced zeal, has brought dishonor on the cause of Christ? Is there no one here who, for some time past, has

been following Christ afar off, in darkness, hardly knowing whether he shall number himself among the friends or the enemies of his Redeemer ? Is there no one here who, though cherishing a hope of acceptance with Christ, is found habitually in company with those who reject and revile him, and who yet never offers a word in favor of religion? Is there no one here who has, by word and action, once, twice, thrice, brought dishonor on the profession which he has made, who is fast sinking under the power of temptation, and denying the Lord that bought him? Professor of religion, thou art the man to whom this sermon is addressed.