first exercises had been contrary to holiness, they would have been as much his own exercises, and as really criminal, as was his first sin, which he committed after he had been holy for a time. The plain, incontestible reason has been given for this, viz. That all sin consists in the nature and quality of the exercises which take place in a moral agent, and not in any thing which goes before, or follows after them, and which is not of the same kind.

If a person finds himself now a sinner, and that from the heart he approves of, and chooses rebellion against God and his laws, he is not the less a sinner, because he has been of the same disposition many years, and has always sinned, since he has been conscious of any of his own exercises; yea, has in fact had the same disposition, from the beginning of his existence. His having sinned before, and done nothing else but sin, since he began to act, is no excuse for his siuning now, and going on to sin, nor does it make his present sinful exercises less his own sin, nor any of the precedent ones, than if he never had such exercises more than at one time of his life. Yea, according to the common sense of mankind, he is the more criminal, and his character is the worse and more odious, for his being always given to wickedness, and to do evil, from a child; so that it is natural, or in his very nature, to do evil. It has been often said of persons, in order to represent them very criminal, and set their character in a bad and odious light, "Their conduct has been always bad and mischievous, their character has been bad from children, they sprang from very wicked families; they are vicious by nature; and mischievousness runs in their very blood, &c."

King David represents himself in this light, and speaks of his native corruption as his own, and as an aggravation of all his sins, and the odiousness of his own character, in that remarkable penitential psalm of his,* "Behold I was shapen in iniquity, and in sin did my mother conceive me."

It is not necessary to determine when or how soon the children of Adam became moral agents, or what is necessary to constitute them such, in order to decide the • Psalm li.

point now under consideration; since it is only asserted that the moral corruption of mankind, is not the less their own sin and fault, because it takes place as soon as they are capable of moral exercise, be that when it may. Many have supposed that none of mankind are capable of sin or moral agency, before they can distinguish between right and wrong, and know what the law of God requires, and what it forbids: But this wants proof, which never has been yet produced. And it appears to be contrary to Divine Revelation: For that speaks of sins committed ignorantly, and supposes a person may sin and be guilty in those exercises, and that conduct, in which he has no knowledge or consciousness that he is doing wrong. Hence it appears, that persons may be moral agents, and sin without knowing what the law of God is, or of what nature their exercises are; and while they have no consciousness that they are wrong. And if so, then as soon as children are capable of the least motion and exercise of the heart, which is contrary to the law of God, such motions and exercises are sin in them, and their sin, though they are ignorant of it: And of such sinful inclinations and exercises, they may be capable as soon as they exist the children of Adam. It is certain no one can know it not to be so: And this is agreeable to the representation the scripture gives of the matter, which puts it beyond all doubt. This has been particularly considered, page 273, &c.

3. The corruption of mankind is not the less their own moral depravity and sin, and they are not the less culpable and guilty, because it is so deeply fixed in their hearts, and they are totally corrupt and sinful.—This observation might be thought quite needless, and as only saying, that a greater degree of sinfulness is not less than a small degree; or that ten or a thousand degrees of moral corruption are not less than one degree; or that sin is not the less sinful, because it is so great. I say, this observation would be needless and but trifling, were it not too common to believe and assert the contrary, though not in plain and express terms; however unreasonable and absurd.

If one degree of sinfulness, or opposition of heart to the law of God in any person, be wholly his own sin,

and he is justly accountable for it, and the blame and guilt of it lies upon him; then, if he has ten, or a thousand degrees of evil inclination and opposition to the law of God; this must be all still his own sin, and he proportionably more criminal and blameworthy. If inclination to oppose the law of God be wrong and criminal; then it must be criminal in proportion to the strength of such inclination. And if this be the constant reigning inclination and choice of his heart, so as wholly to exclude every degree of opposite inclination and choice, he is wholly sinful, and criminal in proportion to the strength and constancy of his evil disposition, by which his heart is obstinately fixed and bent to do evil. This is the clear dictate of reason, and the contrary is most absurd, and supposes that the more strongly the heart is inclined to oppose God and his law, the less criminal the man is; and that when the heart is wholly and constantly fixed in opposition to the law of God, this opposition of heart to God becomes wholly innocent, so that a man cannot be justly condemned for it; whereas if he had less opposition to God, and a very small degree of it, it would be very odious and sinful! That the greatest possible degree of moral corruption does not excuse, but increase the odiousness and guilt of the man so depraved, is not only demonstrable by reason, but is the dictate of common sense, and feelings of mankind. If a person appears wholly and constantly inclined to falsehood, and to injure his neighbours; and if no means and arguments used with him, or motives set before him to desist from his evil conduct, have the least impression or effect upon him, to reclaim him; but he obstinately persists in his evil practices, we consider him not as innocent and blameless, because his moral depravity is so deeply fixed that he is incurable by any possible means; but as more odious and criminal in proportion to the degree and obstinacy of his incurable and unalterable inclination to do evil.

It has been thought and urged by many, that fallen man cannot be wholly blameable for his moral depravity, because he has lost his power to do that which is good, and is wholly unable to change and renew his depraved heart. But what has been before observed, must be

here kept in mind, that man has not lost any of his natural powers of understanding and will, &c. by becoming sinful. He has lost his inclination, or is wholly without any inclination to serve and obey his Maker, and entirely opposed to it. In this his sinfulness consists; and in this lies his blame and guilt, and in nothing else; and the stronger and more fixed the opposition to the law of God is, and the farther he is from any inclination to obey, the more blameable and inexcusable he is, as has been observed and proved. So that when it is considered what must be meant by man's losing his power, and having no ability to do right, if there be any real meaning, and any thing be meant that is agreeable to the truth, the objection and difficulty vanishes entirely; and it appears that man is under no inability to obey the law of God, but what consists in his inclination to disobey. And it is easy to see that if inclination to disobey God, be it ever so strong, will excuse disobedience, and render it blameless; then there cannot possibly be any such thing as sin and blame in the universe; unless creatures may commit sin contrary to all their inclination and choice.

It is certain that every degree of inclination contrary to duty, which is and must be sinful, necessarily implies and involves an equal degree of difficulty, and inability to obey. For indeed, such inclination of the heart to disobey, and the difficulty or inability to obey, are precisely one and the same. This kind of difficulty or inability, therefore, always is great according to the strength and fixedness of the inclination to disobey; and it becomes total and absolute when the heart is totally corrupt, and wholly opposed to obedience. But this inability to obey, being the same in kind and degree with opposition of heart to obedience, does not excuse disobedience, or in the least remove the blame of it, unless opposition of heart to obedience renders disobedience no crime: Which none, it is presumed, will assert or believe.

This leads to observe, that the holy scriptures speak frequently of this kind of inability, or want of power to do good; and always represent it as inexcusable and blameable. Our Saviour said, "No man can come to

me, except the Father, which hath sent me, draw him." And yet apparently blamed the Jews for rejecting, and not coming to him, and said to them, "Ye will not come to me, that you might have life." From whence it appears that the cannot, the inability mankind are under to come to him, is precisely the same thing with their unwillingness, or opposition of heart to come to him, as the matter has been stated above. Nothing but the opposition of the heart, or will of man, to coming to Christ, is, or can be in the way of his coming. So long as this continues, and his heart is wholly opposed to Christ, he cannot come to him, it is impossible, and will continue so, until his unwillingness, his opposition to coming to Christ, be removed by a change and renovation of his heart by divine grace, and he made willing in the day of God's power. And yet this inability, and impossibility to come to Christ, consisting wholly in the opposition of his will or heart to Christ, is the man's own sin, and he is criminal in proportion to the degree of his inability, or the strength and fixedness of the opposition of his heart to Christ.

This kind of inability, therefore, is so far from being an excuse for not coming to Christ, that it is in its own. nature criminal, being nothing but sin, a strong fixed opposition of heart to that which is most reasonable and right. No man can act contrary to his present inclination and choice. But whoever imagined that this rendered his inclination and choice innocent and blameless, however wrong and unreasonable it might be ?

St. Paul says, "the carnal mind is enmity against God, for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be." None can think the Apostle means to excuse man's enmity against God, because it renders him unable to obey the law of God, and cannot be subject to it. The contrary is strongly expressed, viz. that this enmity against God is exceeding criminal, in that it is directly opposed to God and his law, and involves in its nature an utter inability to obey the law of God; yea, an absolute impossibility.

On the whole, it is hoped that by what has been said above on the apostasy of man, it will appear that the doctrine of original sin has been stated and explained agree.