the Freedom of the Will to lie in self-determination; the liberty of indifference; and the liberty of contingency. By persons, who hold this scheme, a more unfortunate objection to the doctrine could not, I apprehend, have been easily devised.

If the freedom of the will is the freedom of Contingency; then plainly its volitions are all accidents; and certainly the chances, arithmetically considered, are as numerous in favour of virtuous volitions, as of sinful ones. There ought therefore, on this plan, to be, and ever to have been, as many absolutely virtuous persons in the world, as sinful. Plainly all ought not to be sinful.

If the freedom of the will is the freedom of Indifference; the same consequence ought to follow: for, if there be no bias in the mind towards either virtue or sin, at the time immediately preceding each of its volitions; and the freedom of each volition arises out of this fact; then certainly, there being no bias either way, the number of virtuous, and that of sinful, volitions must naturally be equal: and no cause can be assigned, why every man, independently of his renovation by the Spirit of God, should be sinful only.

If the Liberty of the Will consist in Self-determination; and the mind, without the influence of any motive, first wills that it will form a second volition; and this volition depends for its freedom on the existence of such a preceding one; then it is plain, that from these preceding volitions as many virtuous as sinful ones ought to be derived; because the preceding, or self-determining, volitions, are by the supposition, under no influence or bias from any cause whatever.

Thus it is evident, that according to all these suppositions there could be no preponderancy, much less an universality, of sin in the world. The state of facts is, therefore, contradictory to the objection, as supported by them all.

Further; the Freedom of Will, and consequently Moral Agency, in Man in this world, is the same with that of the Spirits of just men made perfect in Heaven; the same with that of Angels; the same with that of the Man Christ Jesus. Whence, then, does it come to pass, that the same moral agency leads, or influences, these beings universally to virtue, and men in this world universally to sin? This question the objectors are bound to answer.

V. The last proof of the Doctrine, which I shall adduce at the present time, is the Death of Infants.

A great part of mankind die in infancy, before they are, or can be, capable of moral action; in the usual meaning of that phrase. Their death is attended with all the apparent suffering, usually experienced by persons of riper age, and with such suffering, at least, as plainly is often intense. Their death is, also, an ordinance of God; a dispensation of his immediate government. The language of this dispensation cannot, I think, be mistaken; and its meaning cannot be that of approbation. It is also the language, literally, of the Curse, denounced against our first parents; and

the execution of that Sentence, so far as this world is concerned. So St. Paul has directly declared, Death has passed upon all men, for that all have sinned. The wages of sin is death. Death then, the fruit, or wages of sin, the punishment denounced against it in the original sentence, must, I think, be acknowledged to be indubitable evidence of the existence of depravity in every moral being; that is, every being capable of depravity; who is the subject of death.

It ought here to be remembered, that death arrests Infants in every form of distress and terror, in which it befalls persons of riper years. They, together with others, are swept away by the immediate hand of God in those various judgments, with which He awfully punishes Mankind. They are swept away by the silent, awful hand of the pestilence; are consumed by the conflagration; overwhelmed by the volcano; swallowed up by the earthquake; and wasted by the lingering agonies of famine. At the same time, they suffer, from Mankind, all the deplorable violence of war, and the unnatural cruelties of persecution.

With these facts in view, we are compelled to one of these conclusions; either that Infants are contaminated in their moral nature, and born in the likeness of apostate Adam; a fact irresistibly proved, so far as the most unexceptionable analogy can prove any thing, by the depraved moral conduct of every infant, who lives so long, as to be capable of moral action: or that God inflicts these sufferings on moral beings who are perfectly innocent. I leave the alternative to the choice of those, who object against this doctrine.

There are but two objections to this argument within my knowledge. The first is, that beyond the grave Infants may be compensated for their sufferings by receiving superior degrees of happiness. This Objection will be easily seen to be of no validity. It is certainly unnecessary for God to make Infants unhappy, here, in order to make them happy in any manner whatever, hereafter. Angels are made completely happy in heaven, without having suffered any preceding unhappiness. Plainly, Infants might be made happy, to any degree, in the same manner. But if the sufferings of Infants are unnecessary, then they are causeless, on the scheme of this Objection; and God is supposed to create so much misery, merely to compensate it by so much future enjoyment. I think this conduct will not, soberly, be attributed to the Creator; since it would plainly be disgraceful to any of his Intelligent creatures.

The second Objection is, that God governs the Universe by General Laws; and that, in their operation, inequalities and evils ought to be expected. There are two answers to this objection. The first is, that God cannot be supposed to establish any general law, which produces injustice; such as the suffering of virtuous beings must be acknowledged to be. The second is, that this is itself a general law; extending probably to one third, or one fourth, of the

human race. The dispensation therefore, and not the exceptions, is unequal and evil, according to this scheme. Surely the difficulty is not lessened by such a supposition.

It will probably be farther said, that so many difficulties attend this part of the doctrine, as to perplex, and distress, the mind no less than the suppositions already refuted. The difficulties, attending the existence of Moral Evil are, I readily acknowledge, very great, and they easily become very distressing; whatever scheme of thought we may adopt concerning this subject; that is, if we pursue it to any extent. But, I apprehend, the chief of those difficulties, which necessarily attend us, will be found to lie in the Fact, that Moral Evil exists. To these we may, or may not, as we please, add others, found in the particular scheme of doctrine, which we choose to adopt. The doctrine, asserted in this discourse, is, I think, unanswerably supported by Revelation, and by Facts. Of Course, it adds to the original difficulties, inherent in the existence of Moral Evil, no new ones of its own. The schemes, which I am opposing, contain, on the contrary, a new series of embarrassments, beside those, which are common to them and to the doctrine of this discourse. The truth is, the subject of Moral Evil is too extensive, and too mysterious, to be comprehended by our Understanding. Some things, the Scriptures teach us concerning it; and these are usually furnished with important evidence from facts. Many other things, pertaining to this subject, lie wholly beyond our reach. What we can know, it is our duty, and our interest, to know. Where knowledge is unattainable, it is both our duty and interest to trust humbly and submissively to the instructions of Him, who is THE ONLY WISE.

But in this so difficult and perplexing dispensation there is nothing more absolutely inexplicable, than in many others, which, because we are less interested in them, we generally consider as scarcely mysterious at all. I will mention one, out of very many. The state of the Animal world, generally, is such, as to baffle all human investigation. Why most animals exist at all, and why any of them are unhappy; are subjects, which defy and silence, the most ingenious inquiries of Man. Nor is it originally strange, that the dispensations of a Being, whose ways are above ours, as the heavens are higher than the earth, should be incomprehensible, and inexplicable, by us.

It ought to be here remembered, that that, which is true, affected by any difficulty whatever, so far as its truth merely cerned; and that that, which is known, is not rendered less certain by that, which is unknown; whatever connexion may exist between them; or whatever embarrassments may arise concerning that, which is unknown.

It was with these views, that I chose to state the doctrine of this discourse in the words, in which it was expressed. I observed, that in consequence of the Apostacy of Adam, all men have sinned.

The universality of sin was, I trust, proved sufficiently in two preceding discourses. In this, if I mistake not, it has been proved, that the sin of Mankind has existed in consequence of that Apostacy. By this language I presume my audience understand me to intend, that if Adam had not fallen, sin would not have entered this world. To this single fact I have confined all my observations; because this is the simple account, given in the Scriptures; and because I supposed it capable of being easily comprehended, and satisfactorily proved.

I shall only add, that a Cause of human depravity is here alleged, of which all the characteristics, mentioned in the commencement of this discourse, may be truly predicated: viz. The corruption of that Energy of the Mind, whence volitions flow; and which I have heretofore asserted to be the seat of moral character in Rational beings. This cause must be acknowledged to be universal; to be every where the same; and not to have always existed. It must also be conceded, that it began to exist, according to the Scriptures, as early as the effects, which have given birth to all our inquiries concerning the Corruption of Mankind.

SERMON XXXIII.

DEPRAVITY OF MAN.-REMARKS.

ROMANS V. 12.—Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death hath passed upon all men, for that all have sinned.

IN the four preceding discourses, I have endeavoured to show the Universality, and Extent, of human corruption; and its existence in consequence of the Apostacy of Adam. It is now my design to subjoin to the observations, made in these discourses, several Remarks, naturally arising from the consideration of this subject, and of no inconsiderable importance. The end of all doctrinal preaching is to persuade men cordially to receive truth, that they may be governed by it in their conduct; and of preaching, in any particular instance, to persuade them thus to receive one truth, in order to their reception of others.

From doctrines so important, and so absolutely fundamental, as those, which have occupied these discourses, very numerous inferences, of great moment, cannot fail to be drawn by a mind, addicted to solemn contemplation. A small number of them, only, can, however, be mentioned with advantage in a single sermon. For the present occasion I have selected the following.

I. It is evident from the last of these discourses, that the corrup tion of Man is not the result of any given form of Government, nor of any given character in Rulers.

At this subject I have glanced in a former discourse; but have reserved the more extensive discussion, which it merits, for the present occasion.

It has been frequently and triumphantly said, particularly in modern times, that the corruption of mankind is wholly artificial; and owes its existence to civilized society; particularly to the form and administration of government, and to the civil and ecclesiastical rulers of mankind.

The method, in which these orders of men are supposed to have corrupted their fellow-men, is that of oppression. At least, this is considered as the chief instrument of the corruption; and is supposed to operate, principally, in two ways; viz. keeping them poor, and keeping them ignorant.

It ought, undoubtedly, to be acknowledged, that the rulers of mankind have extensively corrupted them, that they have also greatly oppressed them, and that by keeping them poor and ignorant, they have contributed in a very great and guilty degree to the increase of their corruption. It ought to be further acknowledged, that rulers, and other men of wealth and influence, have much VOL. I.

62