Standard Jet DBnb` Ugr@?~1y0̝cßFNb7ݜ(]/` {6߱9mC63zy[,|*|eؓf_Љ$g'DeFx -bT4.0dv Y S  Y   Y Y  Y Y  Y  Y  Y  r Y s Y E Y a Y d Y 2Y  Y   Y  jY ConnectDatabaseDateCreateDateUpdate FlagsForeignNameIdLvLvExtraLvModule LvPropName OwnerParentIdRmtInfoLongRmtInfoShortTypeniYYIdParentIdName        OY0%4%X4%S Y Y Y  Y 2ACMFInheritableObjectIdSID,, ,܈YObjectId YSY  Y Y Y  Y  Y Y  Y AttributeExpressionFlagLvExtra Name1 Name2ObjectId Ordernzf edY"ObjectIdAttribute -YSY Y Y  Y  Y  Y  Y  Y ccolumn grbiticolumnszColumnszObject$szReferencedColumn$szReferencedObjectszRelationship   YYYszObject$szReferencedObjectszRelationshipYv1b N  : k & W  C t/ @@X  @@OJmJLJkQkiQ^JmYdbkWYfkmJL^Qk`kvkJMQk`kvkdL[QMmk`kvkhoQiYQk`kvkiQ^JmYdbkWYfkmdfYMbdmQk`kvkOL  @~  @ @           d k f  ])(@ь)(@Topic Notes@DDD88888886 @ )(@ )(@MSysRelationshipsDDDDDDDDDDB  )(@ )(@MSysQueries88888888886  )(@ )(@MSysACEs22222222220  )(@ )(@MSysObjects88888888886  )(@ )(@MSysDb..........,  )(@ )(@Relationships<<<<<<<<<<:  )(@ )(@Databases44444444442  )(@ )(@Tables.........., jY N Y Y d YID TitleCommentsddddddYYIDPrimaryKeyHv1b@?LVALHF{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0{\fonttbl{\f0\fnil\fcharset0 Georgia;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue0;\red0\green0\blue255;} {\*\generator Riched20 5.40.11.2210;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\lang2058\b\f0\fs32 Evangelical Repentance\par by John Colquhoun\par (pronounced "co-hoon")\par \b0\fs22\par Biographical Introduction - by John Murray\par Introduction\par 1. The Sources of True Repentance\par 2. The Nature and Import of True Repentance\par 3. The Necessity of True Repentance\par 4. The Difference Between True and Counterfeit Repentance\par 5. The Fruits and Evidences of True Repentance\par 6. The Priority of the Acting of Saving Faith to the Exercise of True Repentance\par 7. The Priority of Justification to the First Exercise of True Repentance\par 8. Objections Answered\par \b\par \fs32 Biographical Introduction\par by John Murray\b0\par \fs22\par While on a walking tour through Scotland during a College vacation, Alexander Moody Stuart spent a weekend at a country inn on the road between Glasgow and Edinburgh. His interest was aroused in two lads who arrived at the inn late on the Saturday evening. After spending the night there they left early next morning and returned to the inn again that evening. He discovered that they were working lads from Glasgow who, on coming under spiritual concern, had sought for a minister that preached the Gospel fully. They eventually found a preacher to their mind in Edinburgh and were determined to wait on his ministry. That preacher was Dr. John Colquhoun of the New Church in South Leith. Such value did they set upon Colquhoun's preaching that they were willing to walk about a hundred miles each weekend to hear him and be back at their work at 6 o'clock on Monday morning.\par \par These young Christians were typical of many in Scotland at the beginning of last century who had felt the power of the Word and therefore highly prized the full Gospel ministry at South Leith. With much of the Church of Scotland lying under the blight of unbelieving mLVALoderatism, ministries like that of Colquhoun and his contemporaries Dr. John Love of Glasgow and Dr. MacDonald of Ferintosh were oasis in the desert.\par \par John Colquhoun was born at Luss in Dunbartonshire on 1st January 1748. The son of a small farmer, he received his elementary education at the local SPCK school. The teacher, a Christian, not only instructed the minds of his pupils but sought to impress the truth upon their hearts. It was to his explanation and application of the Shorter Catechism question, "What is effectual calling?" that Colquhoun afterwards traced his conversion.\par \par On feeling led to devote himself to the ministry he entered Glasgow University in 1768, where he pursued his studies for ten years. The Presbytery of Glasgow licensed him to preach in 1780, and the following year he was ordained to what proved to be his only pastoral charge-the New Church in South Leith. There he exercised an effective ministry until forced to give up through ill-health a year before his death in 1827.\par \par Shortly after his conversion John Colquhoun had walked all the way from Luss to Glasgow, a distance in all of about fifty miles, to buy a copy of Thomas Boston's Fourfold State . This book had a moulding influence on his early Christian life. He came to esteem it next to his Bible. The influence of Boston's teaching was later to permeate his ministry and writings.\par \par Thomas Boston's remains had been laid to rest in the beautiful churchyard of Ettrick sixteen years before Colquhoun was born, but few if any of his followers bore such marks of his influence as the minister of South Leith. Although a minister of the Established Church, Colquhoun was regarded as one of the ablest exponents of "Marrow" theology. By an Act of Assembly on 20 May 1720 his Church had condemned the book, The Marrow of Modern Divinity, because it maintained that there was a universal call and offer of the Gospel to sinners. Defenders of the free offer-nicknamed "Marrowmen"-foremost of whom were ThomLVALas Boston and the Erskine brothers, were forced to secede from the Church in 1722. Later, however, as we find in the case of John Colquhoun, upholders of "Marrow" teaching continued to exercise their ministry within the Establishment.\par \par How Colquhoun reconciled his respect for an Act of the General Assembly with his uncompromising maintenance of "Marrow" theology is illustrated in some advice he is reported to have given to the students who sought his counsel. "Noo, ye ken," he would say to them in his colloquial tongue, "I daurna advise ye to read the `Marrow' for the Assembly condemned it; but though they condemned the `Marrow' they didna condemn Tammes Boston's notes on the `Marrow,' and that's a book that ye should read."\par \par It is not surprising that one of the great characteristics of Colquhoun's ministry was the emphasis on the duty and necessity of sinners complying with the offers and invitations of the Gospel. At the same time he dwelt much on the danger of hypocrisy. The depth of his own spiritual experience, his discriminating views of truth and his aptitude for religious conversation made him of great use to those in spiritual distress.\par \par Retired and unassuming by nature, he sought no place of distinction in the Church. Indeed, it was in his mature years that he began his career as an author. He wrote seven treatises, all of which are closely related in theme and manner of presentation. The first to appear was on Spiritual Comfort in 1813. It was followed by Law and Gospel (1815), The Covenant of Grace (1818), The Covenant of Works (1822), Saving Faith (1824), The Promises (1825), and Evangelical Repentance (1826).\par \par It was in his writing perhaps more than anything else that Colquhoun came nearest to Boston. They were both at their best in expounding the grand central themes of salvation, and so thoroughly had Colquhoun imbibed The Fourfold State that in cast of thought, mode of development and turn of expression his own writings bear striking similaritieLVALs to it. Above all, the works of both are thoroughly experimental and practical. They preached and wrote for the common people, and it was the common people of Scotland for many generations following that loved and valued their works.\par \par The present work was originally published under the title, "A View of Evangelical Repentance from the Sacred Records," but it is popularly known as "Evangelical Repentance."\par Evangelical Repentance\par by John Colquhoun\par \par \b\fs32 Introduction\par \b0\fs22\par The Lord Jesus came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance. True repentance, accordingly, forms a part of the religion, not of an innocent person, but of a sinner. It is produced by the Spirit of Christ in the regeneration and sanctification of a sinner, and is absolutely essential to the character of a true Christian. As the Christian is daily sinning, he ought to be daily repenting of sin. Tertullian says, "I was born for nothing but repentance."\par \par Repentance is natural, or legal, or evangelical.\par \par Natural repentance is that natural feeling of sorrow and self-condemnation, of which a man is conscious for having done that which he sees he ought not have done, and which arises from a discovery of the impropriety of it, or from reflecting on the disagreeable consequences of it to others, and especially to himself. This feeling of regret frequently occurs. When a man, especially a proud and vain man, is convinced of his having been guilty of some glaring instance of improper conduct, either against, or in the presence of a fellow-creature, it is sometimes very keen and painful.\par \par Legal repentance is a feeling of regret produced in a legalist by the fear that his violations of the Divine law and especially his gross sins do expose him to eternal punishment. This regret is increased by his desire to be exempted on the ground of it from the dreadful punishment to which he knows he is condemned for them. He is extremely sorry, not that he has transgressedLVAL the law, but that the law and justice of God are so very strict that they cannot leave him at liberty to sin with impunity. His love of sin and his hatred of holiness continue in all their vigour. And yet under the dominion of his legal temper he presumes to expect that such repentance as this will in some measure atone for all his crimes against the infinite Majesty of heaven.\par \par Evangelical repentance is altogether different from either of these. It is a gracious principle and habit implanted in the soul by the Spirit of Christ, in the exercise of which a regenerate and believing sinner, deeply sensible of the exceeding sinfulness and just demerit of his innumerable sins is truly humbled and grieved before the Lord, on account of the sinfulness and hurtfulness of them. He feels bitter remorse, unfeigned sorrow, and deep self-abhorrence for the aggravated transgressions of his life, and the deep depravity of his nature; chiefly, because by all his innumerable provocations he has dishonoured an infinitely holy and gracious God, transgressed a law which is "holy, and just, and good," and defiled, deformed, and even destroyed his own precious soul. This godly sorrow for sin and this holy abhorrence of it arise from a spiritual discovery of pardoning mercy with God in Christ, and from the exercise of trusting in His mercy. And these feelings and exercises are always accompanied by an unfeigned love of universal holiness, and by fixed resolutions and endeavours to turn from all iniquity to God and to walk before him in newness of life. Such, in general is the nature of that evangelical repentance, to the habit and exercise of which the Lord Jesus calls sinners who hear the Gospel.\par \par To understand spiritually and distinctly the proper place of true repentance in the covenant of grace, as well as the duty and necessity, the grace and exercise of it, is of inexpressible importance to the faith, holiness, and comfort of the Christian. It is due in a higher degree than is commonly believed, tLVALo their want of such views of it that multitudes in the visible church mistake a counterfeit for a true repentance and so flatter themselves that they are true penitents and their salvation is sure. It is because many convinced sinners have not a distinct discernment of its place in the new covenant that they apprehend that Christ will receive none but the true penitent, or that none else is warranted to trust in Him for salvation. Hence, they dare not attempt coming to the gracious Redeemer till they are first satisfied that their repentance is of the true kind, until they can bring it as a price in their hand to procure their welcome. Instead of this, they ought without a moment's delay to come to Christ for true repentance. It is no less owing to their ignorance of its due place among the other blessings of salvation that many believe it to be the federal condition of the pardon of sin in justification, and persuade themselves that in the Gospel this pardon is offered only to the penitent. And is it not because of their gross ignorance of the nature and use of true repentance that many can persuade themselves that their repentance will even atone for their crimes, that it will make satisfaction to the insulted justice of the Most High, and reinstate them in His favour? It is in a high degree owing to their ignorance of the nature and design of evangelical repentance and of its place in the new covenant that many true converts do, even for years, make their exercise of repentance a part of their warrant to renew the acting of their trust in the Lord Jesus Christ for salvation. And doubtless if others who appear to be real Christians had attained correct and distinct views of the grace, duty, and necessity of true repentance, they would not have imagined, as they seem to have done, that the exercise of it was over with their first conversion; nor would they have presumed to look back on that exercise as a ground of right to apply to themselves the unlimited offers and absolute promises of the glorioujLVALzs Gospel.\par \par As it is then of the utmost consequence both to sinners and to saints that they attain just and distinct views of the nature and the place of true repentance, and they be deeply affected with the high importance and absolute necessity of it to their eternal welfare, I shall endeavour, in humble dependence on the Spirit of truth, to assist such of them as will read this treatise to attain those views. And in order the more effectually to do this, I shall consider first, the sources of true repentance; secondly, the nature and import of it; thirdly, the necessity of it; fourthly, the difference between a true and a counterfeit repentance; fifthly, the fruits or evidences of true repentance; sixthly, the priority of the acting of genuine faith to the exercise of evangelical repentance; seventhly, the priority of justification to the first exercise of true repentance; and in the last place, I shall answer some objections.\par \par \lang1033 Reformatted for e-Sword by David Cox (c) 2007\par dcox@davidcox.com.mx\par \lang2058 Stored on \cf0{\field{\*\fldinst{HYPERLINK "http://www.davidcox.com.mx/"}}{\fldrslt{\ul\cf2 http://www.davidcox.com.mx/}}}\cf1\f0\fs22\par \par \par } k  l9 Y  1. The Sources of True Repentance5IFTH2. The Nature and Import of True Repentance5IFh\3. The Necessity of True RepentanceFj+IFXL4 Difference Between True & Counterfeit RepentanceT^!IFvj5. The Fruits and Evidences of True RepentanceRIFnb6. Priority of Acting of Saving Faith vC IF^R7. Priority of Justification ]-IFL@8. Objections Answered7HF>200 Evangelical RepentancehHFD8LVALHF{\rtf1\ansi\ansicpg1252\deff0{\fonttbl{\f0\fnil\fcharset0 Georgia;}} {\colortbl ;\red0\green0\blue0;\red0\green128\blue0;} {\*\generator Riched20 5.40.11.2210;}\viewkind4\uc1\pard\cf1\lang2058\b\f0\fs32 8. Objections Answered\b0\par \fs22\par Various objections have been keenly urged against the teaching that faith, and the pardon of sin in justification, precede the first exercise of true repentance. I shall here endeavour to return answers to such of them as are the most plausible.\par \par 1. It has been objected, "that there are several passages of Scripture, such as \cf2\ul Luk_3:3\cf1\ulnone and \cf2\ul Luk_24:47\cf1\ulnone , and \cf2\ul Act_5:31\cf1\ulnone , in which repentance is mentioned before the forgiveness of sins."\par \par With regard to these and similar passages, it may be proper to recollect what has been said already concerning the mention of repentance before faith; namely, that the order in which things are mentioned in Scripture is not, in every instance, the order of nature. Repentance or a turning from sin to God, being a duty required by the dictates even of a natural conscience, may well be first preached to sinners, in order to convince them at once of the necessity of it, and of their natural inability to exercise it; and then will properly follow the doctrine and offer of the forgiveness of sins, the faith of which is the principal means of attaining the exercise of that repentance. In this view, repentance might be preached by John the Baptist and the apostles of Christ, before the doctrine of forgiveness. Besides, the word repentance , appears to be sometimes used to express the relinquishing of wrong opinions.\par \par Accordingly, when John exhorted the Jews to repent, he may be understood as inviting them to relinquish the error of the Pharisees about a temporal Messiah, and about justification in the sight of God by the works of the law; and that of the Sadducees concerning the resurrection. When Peter told them that they had crucified Him whom God now glLVALorified, he showed them how they came to commit that most atrocious crime: "through ignorance ye did it, as did also your rulers" (\cf2\ul Act_3:17\cf1\ulnone ). He then corrects their mistake, informing them that, according to the prophecies respecting Messiah, He was to suffer the very things which they had inflicted upon Jesus of Nazareth (\cf2\ul Act_3:18\cf1\ulnone ). Hence he urges them to change their mind, to relinquish the destructive error with respect to Messiah into which they had fallen, and to turn to the Lord by embracing his Gospel (\cf2\ul Act_3:19\cf1\ulnone ).\par \par One reason for not understanding the word repent here to mean evangelical repentance, is that this repentance is evidently included in the next phrase, "be converted." But were it granted that the term repent here might signify evangelical repentance, yet this passage would not prove such repentance to be prior to the forgiveness of sins in justification. For "the blotting out of sins" here may signify, not the formal pardon of them in the act of justification, but the manifestation of that pardon. For in Scripture a thing is often said to be done, when it is manifested. By "the times of refreshing from the presence of the Lord," Calvin, Beza, Piscator, Aretius, and other judicious commentators, understand the day of judgment, when the saints shall be refreshed by the most public and honourable declaration of their state of pardon (\cf2\ul Act_3:20-21\cf1\ulnone ). For the time here referred to is "the time of restitution of all things," when Christ shall be sent from heaven to judge the world.\par \par Now the apostle's teaching, that repentance is before the glorious declaration of pardon at the last day, is surely no proof that the exercise of true repentance goes before the act of pardon itself. In a word, repentance is sometimes put for the whole of conversion to God, including both faith and turning from sin to Him. This seems to be the meaning of it in the words, "Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted LVALrepentance unto life" (\cf2\ul Act_11:18\cf1\ulnone ). Repentance in this its large acceptation may be said to be both before and after the pardon of sin in justification; before it, in respect of faith receiving Christ as "Jehovah our Righteousness," and after it, in respect of godly sorrow for sin and turning from it to God.\par \par As to the expression in \cf2\ul Luk_3:3\cf1\ulnone , "John first declares," says Calvin on the place, "that the kingdom of heaven is at hand; and having thus proposed the grace of God to his hearers, he thence exhorts them to repent. Hence it appears that the mercy of God, by which he restores the lost, is the ground upon which repentance proceeds. In this sense, Mark and Luke say that John preached the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins; not to intimate, as some ignorantly suppose, that repentance is the cause of the remission of sins; but to teach us that, as the free love of God is first in embracing poor sinners, not imputing their sins unto them, so this pardon of sins is granted us in Christ; not that God may indulge us in our sins, but that He may heal us and deliver us from them." Piscator on the same place says, "The baptism of repentance means that this ordinance was used to testify and profess repentance. The words, for the remission of sins , depend immediately not on the word preached , nor on the word repentance , but on the word baptism ; and the import of the exhortation is, that baptism serves to signify and seal the remission of sins."\par \par 2. Some have objected to the doctrine above stated, "that in \cf2\ul Act_2:38\cf1\ulnone and \cf2\ul Act_8:22\cf1\ulnone , the exhortations to the exercise of repentance are prefixed to the attaining of pardon, intimating that, if sinners do not repent, they have no ground to expect the remission of their sins. The exercise of true repentance, therefore, must precede the pardon of sin in justification."\par \par In answer to this, let it be observed that in those passages, the whole way of a LVALsinner's returning to God is in general proposed. On this position, Calvin expresses himself thus, "Truly I am not ignorant that, under the name of repentance, is comprehended the whole turning to God, whereof faith is not the least part" ( Institutes , Book III, Chap 3, Sec 5). If, before a sinner can be pardoned, it is requisite that he exercise faith and repentance and walk in good works, then repentance and good works are made equal with faith as the means of justification; for it is clear that obedience rendered by the regenerate man is comprehended in the whole import of returning to God. Now unless our whole turning to God more generally be an instituted mean of our attaining the remission of sins, the passages alleged prove nothing to the purpose.\par \par As to the first of them, "Repent and be baptized... for the remission of sins" (\cf2\ul Act_2:38\cf1\ulnone ), who does not see that the command to be baptized is prefixed to the remission of sins, as well as the command to repent? Must it then follow that baptism is a necessary mean in order to attain the remission of sins? The argument is of as much force for baptism as it is for repentance. Mention is indeed made of remission, but not by way of promise. Nay, nothing is said here of a formal reception of remission. For, as Piscator well observes, "These words, for the remission of sins , do not depend on the word repent , but on the words be baptized ." The meaning, then, of the apostle's exhortation to those convinced sinners, is that they should repent, that is, should turn to God in Christ by faith and repentance; and that they should receive baptism, not as a mean of obtaining the remission of sins, but as a testimony of their receiving that, and every other spiritual blessing in Christ, by means of faith in Him. It is manifest, from the connection denoted by the causal particle for , in \cf2\ul Act_2:39\cf1\ulnone , that the apostle there exhibits the promise of pardon and salvation as the ground upon which he calls them to repent; LVALas if he had said, "I exhort you to repent; and in order that you may do so in a spiritual and acceptable manner, believe that the promise is to you. You are pricked in your heart, but do not despond; for the promise of the Spirit, and of a free salvation, is graciously directed in offer to you. Therefore turn wholly to God, by faith, repentance, and new obedience; and for assurance of the remission of your sins, receive baptism as the sign and seal of the covenant."\par \par As to the last passage alleged (\cf2\ul Act_8:22\cf1\ulnone ), it is plain that the apostle prefixes the command to pray, to what he says of forgiveness, as well as the command to repent; yet surely it cannot hence be concluded, that acceptable prayer goes before the forgiveness of sin in justification. But here, as before, repentance is put for the whole way of turning to the Lord.\par \par 3. Some have argued for the priority of the exercise of true repentance to the pardon of sin in justification, from these words of our Lord to Saul of Tarsus, "I send thee to open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me" (\cf2\ul Act_26:17-18\cf1\ulnone ).\par \par In answer, let it be observed that here our blessed Lord first shows how He works faith in the hearts of sinners by means of the Gospel: namely, by opening their eyes, and turning them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God. He next declares that, by means of faith thus wrought, they receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them who are sanctified by faith that is in Him. It is urged that this clause, "to turn them from the power of Satan unto God," may signify the exercise of true repentance. I answer, that as these words, "to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God," plainly describe the work of the Spirit of Christ by means of the Gospel, they are tLVALo be understood of regeneration, which is attributed to the Gospel as a mean of it (\cf2\ul Jam_1:18\cf1\ulnone ; \cf2\ul 1Pe_1:23\cf1\ulnone ).\par \par The turning here mentioned is the work of the Spirit of Christ, in which sinners are passive. The first expression, "to open their eyes," is used to describe the work of Christ (\cf2\ul Isa_42:7\cf1\ulnone ); but it is nowhere said to be the sinner's act. The next phrase, "to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God," is of the same meaning with bringing out the prisoners from the prison, and them that sit in darkness out of the prison-house; a work which, in the same passage, is also ascribed to Christ, but nowhere in Scripture to the sinner himself.\par \par Hence the expressions in question cannot be understood of the exercise of true repentance; for this is the exercise or work of a regenerate sinner. But the following expression, "that they may receive," may be connected with these words at the end of the verse, "by faith that is in me"; and may well be understood of the sinner's act of receiving forgiveness and the inheritance of eternal life by faith, which is necessarily followed by the exercise of evangelical repentance. Thus the words of the Lord Jesus in this passage represent a sinner's receiving by faith the forgiveness of sins, and not the exercise of true repentance, as the first or most immediate effect of regeneration; and so, they serve much to confirm the priority of pardon to the first exercise of that repentance.\par \par If the expression, "by faith that is in me," be understood to be immediately connected with the word "sanctified," it will be a further confirmation of the same doctrine. For thus the faith, which receives forgiveness of sins, is declared to be the means of sanctification. But if that faith be the means of sanctification, it is of course the means of attaining the exercise of true repentance; for this repentance, as has been already stated, is included in sanctification. The fLVAL irst act of justifying and saving faith, therefore, is before the first exercise of true repentance, as the means are, in order of nature, prior to the end.\par \par 4. Some have maintained "that the following texts prove the first exercise of evangelical repentance to be prior to the forgiveness of sins in justification: \cf2\ul Luk_13:3-5\cf1\ulnone ; \cf2\ul Pro_28:13\cf1\ulnone ; \cf2\ul Jer_4:1-4\cf1\ulnone ; \cf2\ul Eze_33:11\cf1\ulnone ; and \cf2\ul Isa_55:7\cf1\ulnone ."\par \par To this it may be answered, that the passage in \cf2\ul Luk_13:3-5\cf1\ulnone does not hold forth a connection between repentance and forgiveness, but merely between impenitence and perishing. The difference between these two connections is great. Let the argument be this: Except ye repent, ye shall perish. Therefore if ye do repent, ye shall live. Here, as Thomas Boston well observes, "The consequent is true, but the consequence is naught." It is no better reasoning than it would be to say: Our evil works will damn us, therefore our good works will save us; or, as if we should say, if we do not pray, we shall perish; therefore if we do pray, we shall live. When the Papists argued that men must be justified by their good works, because they are condemned for the want of them, Calvin's answer to them was to this purpose: The contraries here are not equal; for one deviation, however, small, from the perfect rule of God's law, renders a person unrighteous, and liable to eternal death (\cf2\ul Jam_2:10\cf1\ulnone ). But it is not one or a few good works, but an unremitted course of obedience, without the smallest defect, that will constitute a person righteous in the sight of God. And it is a maxim, with respect to a particular action, that it is not morally good unless it have all the requisites of a good work. The want but of one