XIII - The annual atonement

(IV v-3 )
The begninning of the 16 chapter of Leviticus  Last Lords day, we were considering the importance of observing sacrificial institutions and the example afforded us by Nadab, and Abihu - To day, our attention is to be directed to the circumstances which occurred in the approach of the priest to the holy place. after the death of Nadab and Abihu. We take up this subject, both as a continuation of the [thread(?)] of the narrative. and as a farther exemplification of the general character of the subject, and evidence of its relation to the atonement of Christ  Some may ask, why do we heap up evidence upon evidence. to prove what was never doubted  But we answer,  that there may be moments of weakness when doubts will thrust themselves upon us in spite of our faith, and a chain of weighty evidence may be found exceedingly valuable. Besides the face that this succeeding evidence is given to us in the Bible, is sufficient to show us that it was necessary to inquire into it, it must be useful, or it would not have been given to us. 
Having - thus considered sacrifices first as to their general intention, then as applied to the consecration and ministratino of the priest, to the atonement for the congregation, for an individual, and for the ruler of the people, We have now to consider the manner in which the priest was to minister, once in the year, to atone for the unknown sins of the congregation not only unwittingly

(IV r-4)
committed, but unknown, even at the time of atonement  The year is supposed to have passed by and the offences committed in that year. through ignorance, but afterwards known or recollected, have been atoned for, not a moment past after they came to the knowledge of the guilty person. before atonement was made for them. But besides thesem there might, there must, have been other sins, committed by the congregation, of which they not only became guilt through ignorance, but had never afterwards discovered, and even at the time of atonement, were not certain, that they had ever committed the sin for which they were atoning, it was only a strong supposition. still, these unknown sins must be expiated. once in the year and that on the part of every individual in the congregation  Some may thinkk, that these unknown offenses might have been freely pardoned. that sacrifice need not have been again introduced here, they had atoned for all known sins, the people could scarcely be said to have disobeyed commands which they knew not, some may think this was too much severity and strictness But no, it is not inquired how they sinned, but whether. they sinned. Sacrifice is the groundwork of atonement and atonement is the groundwork of pardon.
Now, in the particulars of this great, and solemn atonement, we see that there were two atonements to be offered. 1.st for - the priest himself, alone, and not for the general sin of the whole 

(IV v-4)
congregation, but for the sin of every particular person, that is, every person in the whole congregation was not atoned for separately. but the whole ceremony was shut up to the high priest to signify, that every individual of the congregation, must be singly atoned for. 
1st. For the priest himself, The high priest was in the first place, to take a yound bullock, for a sin offering for himself alone. We cannot but suppose, that they high priest from so continually sacrificing, and atoning for sin, was particularly alive to its nature, and manner of approach, so that sin could scarcely lurk in him, without his knowledge. or after discovering for he knew how important it was to keep free from it, and to obey the commands of the Law, and likewise the high priest must, without doubt, have been acquainted with the minutest tittle of those commands, so that he could hardly sin through ignorance, and the fault committed through negligence, or forgetfulness, must have been afterwards discovered, and atoned for. Yet, in spite of all. this, in spite of the almost impossibility of the priests committing unknown sin, sacrifice must be made for him, and for him. not as - an individual of the congregation, but for him first, and alone, that he might be made perfectly pure, before he offered the sacrifice for the people  It is useless to think of pardon without the intervention of atonement, and sacrifice. 
2. For the congrefation. Now. as we before said, the priest was here a representative of the people of Israel. and. that they might be more fully and perfectly represented, all was shut up to him, there were no other priests, not even his sons, to 

(IV r-5)
minister with him. and it is likewise a very singular manner, in which he offered. He received two goats from the congrefation and one of these he slew, for the expiation, while the [other(?)] escaped, to show the forgiveness of unknown guilt thus expiated, The character of individuals is here counted as no thing, and pardon is here certainly not granted for confession of sin, not for repentance, for that cannot be confessed which is not known, neither can it be repented of, except in a general way, but the pardon was granted for<e> expiation of sin by sacrifice, and we therefore see, that here also we remain shut up to sacrifice as the only way to escape from the punishment of sin.
In the 16 verse, we are told, that atonement must for the tabernacle, likewise, because it was unclean. Now, it was not defiled by the touch of any particular individual, but because it was constantly in the midst of an unclean congregation, and the altar must also be purified. Now incense is here represented, as offered to the Lord, as a token of Gods acceptance of the sacrifice  The Lord smelt a sweet savour, The perfume of the incense devoted the sweetness of the sacrifice and expiation of sin. and the cloud of incense covered the mercy seat, when the priest offered sacrifice. to prevent his attention being disturbed by the symbolical presence of the Lord between the cherubims, and to prevent idle curiosity being excited and restrain all wandering thoughts, because the least deviation from the established rule of sacrifice. was punished with death, it was a penalty attached to the minutest error. And thus by the incense rising and enveloping <by> the holy place. the priest was undisturbed, and lefte to contemplate the efficacy of the atonement, which

(IV v-5)
he was engaged in presenting, and the sacrifice was offered only once in the year, in order to impart to it, a greater solemnity and to impress on every individual the vast importance of a full and perfect expiation of unknown sin. 
The next circumstance which we have to consider, is, that the priest in this one particular atonement, was entirely to forget the dignity of his character, he was not to remember that he was the high priest, and in order to this, he was not to be dressed in his sacrificial robes, The breastplate on whose twelve stones were graven the names of the tribes of Israel, and the mitre, and the ephod, were all to be laid aside, he was to be dressed only in simple linen garments, to show his humility before God, but after he had finished sacrificing, and had come out from the most holy into the holy placem he was to put on his sacrificial robes, before he came out to bless the people. before he came out to tell them that this most solemn atonement had been offered, & had been offered with success. If we reflect that death was the penalty of the slightest deviation, and that not only of the priest, but that as the sacrifice would in such a case certainly not be accepted, the wrath of God might be poured forth upon the whole congregation of Israel on account of their unexpiated sin we cannot but feel that it must <a> deeply interesting and solemn, for the gathered multitude to have behold their priest entering alone into the holy place. to atone for the sins which they knew not <[(?)]> if they had committed, and being doubtful if the agitation which the mind of the priest must in such circumstances have been under, might not cause him to commit some error slight in the estimation of man, but to which a dreadful penalty was attached by the Almighty, and which might cause the rejection of their atonement and then to hear the sound of the priests bells in the holy place after he had come out from 

(IV r-6)
the most holy, after having been in such intimate contact with God, it must have been a glad sound to the ears of that assembled multitude of doubting and ignorant sinners, for it told them that the atonement which they had offered was accepted, and pardon granted them, and the remission of their sins. 
Now, as we have previously pointed out the intention of this. Mosaic economy, and the manner of its shadowing forth the sacrifice of Jesus, & as to day we have seen how the slightest deviation from this law was punished with death, and how completely the Israelites were shut up to their - doctrine of atonement by shedding of blood, it follows that we are equally shut up to the doctrine of salvation through the blood of Christ. and the great question must then suggest itself. have we indeed come to this all powerful Redeemer. There were three things connected with the ancient expiation of sin, there was, 1st atonement. 2nd pardon. and 3rd Blessing. Now we know, that there can be no effectual groundwork of pardon, or blessing, that is not laid in his atonement, for vindication on the ground of innocent intention, is, we have seen, utterly out of the question, much less then on account of innocence. Let us not then say in our hearts, we have injured no man, we have defrounded no man, we believe in God, we have nothing to fear. The priest did not - do this, he did not advance one step without sacrifice, he ackknowledges & atones for guilt, but he does not plead innocence, for, had he done so, he would have been departing from the plan which God has universally laid down of salvation. 
Let us then finally remember, that Christ is at present our high priest and that he has done more than the priest of the Jews, inasmuch, as besides offering the atonement which he has made with his own blood, he has also met the punishment, allotted to our sin and presents us with the assurance that our God is one, who will be always gr[acious(?)]