greater evils than they have deserved. If this should indeed be said, and believed; it can only spring from gross inattention to the subject, and gross ignorance of the demerit of sin: an inattention and ignorance, it must be acknowledged, most unhappily common among men. The doubt, if it exist, may be easily removed. Go to as many such men, as you please; and every one of them will inform you, that his own sufferings are much less than he is conscious of having deserved. In truth, good men never call this fact in question; but find themselves sufficiently employed in lamenting, on the one hand, their own guilt; and in thankfully admiring, on the other, the forbearance of God.

But it will be further said, that Infants, also, are subjected to suf ferings; and that, beyond any desert, which can be imputed to them. The situation of infants, and the dispensations of Providence towards them, I acknowledge to be, in many respects, mysterious, to a degree, beyond my ability satisfactorily to explain. But I utterly question the ability of any objector to show, that they suffer more than they deserve. We We can never know the moral state of a mind, which possesses no means of communication with our minds, sufficient to explain that state to us. Yet it is with the highest probability argued from Reason, since every infant, which advances to the state of childhood, proves himself to be a sinful being, that infants, if moral beings at all, are also sinful beings in their infancy. The contrary conclusion, no objector can maintain. The objection, therefore, fails entirely of proof.

Besides, it is reasonably argued, that the same God who never afflicts adults, whose case we can understand, beyond their desert, does not afflict infants, whose case we cannot understand, beyond their deserts; and that, as there are plain proofs of benevolence in the former case, so it is justly to be presumed in the latter. This analogical argument is the more forcible, because no reason can be imagined, why even a malevolent being should take any peculiar pleasure in afflicting infants.

3dly. These evils are necessary parts of a benevolent system of dispensations towards a sinful world.

That in such a world it is absolutely necessary to check iniquity in its progress, and prevent it FROM ACCOMPLISHING those miseries, which it is its universal tendency to accomplish, if unrestrained, must be granted by all men; if the existence of the world is to be continued. For, plainly, this world, without restraints of this nature, would in a little while come to an end. The weak would become a prey to the strong; the simple to the cunning; the quiet to the violent; and all men to the sloth and indulgence, to the passions and mischiefs, of themselves, or each other. So far, then, as the natural evils of this world are necessary to restrain the wickedness of man, they are proofs of benevolence on the part of God. But the proof, that there are no more such evils, than are necessary for this purpose, is complete; because the wickedness is not more than sufVOL. I.

23

ficiently restrained. On the contrary, how often is each man conscious of believing, that still greater restraints are necessary to keep evil men within due bounds; and of wishing, and praying, that God would make bare his arm for the further hindrance of evil designs, and the more extensive protection of the distressed from the injustice of their oppressors.

The afflictions of this world are, also, plainly benevolent in their intentional and actual influence on those who suffer. No means have, probably, a more frequent or efficacious influence in reforming wicked men, than afflictions. Prosperity, which one would expect to see draw them to obedience, as a cord of love, not only fails of this effect, but appears usually to harden their hearts in sin and security, and to terminate in a total alienation of their minds from all virtuous regard to God, or to mankind. Fulness of bread was one of the great sources of corruption to Sodom and Gomorrah. When Jeshurun waxed fat, he forgot the God that made him, and lightly esteemed the Rock of his salvation. Thus both nations and individuals have commonly acted in circumstances of high prosperity. The pride and insolence of wealth, office, power, and conquest, is, as you well know, proverbial phraseology: an unanswerable proof, that pride and insolence are the standing effects of prosperity. The more we possess of worldly enjoyments, although our happiness is often diminished, the stronger do. our attachments to the world become; and the weaker our disposition to think of our duty. Afflictions, only, seem to break down this attachment, and to awaken the attention of the soul to virtue, and to God. Even the security of life, itself, as has been proved in the case of the Antediluvians, (the length of whose lives is attested by both scriptural and profane history) can become, of course, a most powerful mean of emboldening men to sin, and involving them in misery: and death, at the comparatively untimely period of seventy years, has been a most important blessing to mankind. Were men again to live a thousand years, the same violence, corruption, and wretchedness, which preceded the deluge, would again overwhelm the globe.

Nor do good men stand in a less absolute need of afflictions. The same tendencies to negligence of God and their duty, although weakened, exist still in their minds also. Before I was afflicted, says the Psalmist, I went astray; but now have I kept thy word. The mind of every good man will echo this declaration. Riches, honours, and pleasures, are all eminently seductive; and allure the heart insensibly after them. Afflictions teach us how vain they are, how deceitful, and how dangerous; pluck us by the arm in our downward course; and conduct us back to safety and peace. In both of these views, also, afflictions are plainly eminent blessings; and in this manner it is satisfactorily evinced, that God doth not willingly afflict, nor grieve the children of men.

All the observations, which I have hitherto made under this head, have been intended to respect only those evils, of which in the pro

per sense God is the author. They are, however, to an extensive degree applicable to those, produced by men. These, intended by men for evil, are very often by God converted into means of good; who thus glorifies himself by bringing good out of the evil, designed by his creatures.

It ought here to be added, that every human account agrees with the Scriptures in asserting, that the world, as it came from the hands of God, was only beautiful and delightful; and that man was created upon it in a state of perfect holiness and felicity; that man apostatized from this state of perfection, and became sinful, and odious to his Maker; that in process of time all his descendants, one family excepted, became wholly corrupt, abandoned their duty, perpetrated every iniquity, dishonoured God, and destroyed each other; that a deluge was at length brought on the Earth, to lay waste both the world, and its polluted inhabitants; and that in consequence of this event the Earth itself was rendered comparatively a barren and uncomfortable habitation, and its inhabitants afflicted with many evils from the hand of God, which were before unknown. The history of these events in the Scriptures, which I here consider merely as a history, and not as a Revelation, is supported by such high internal evidence; by so uniformly concurrent a tradition; by so many facts in the general history of mankind; and by so many and so powerful proofs, found on the surface, and in the bowels, of the Earth; that it cannot fail to be admitted, as true, by every candid mind. Hence, therefore, it is unavoidably concluded, that the evils, inflicted by God, had no existence before the Apostacy of man; and are only intended either to check, or to punish, iniquity and rebellion. In this view they cannot evince the least want of benevolence on the part of God, but exhibit him as wise, just, and good.

From these considerations it is, I think, clearly evident, that the objections specified, furnish no solid argument against the benevolence of the Creator; and, as these involve all the objections hitherto alleged by mankind, it is evident, that the direct arguments on this subject remain in their full force.

The chief difficulty, attending this subject, lies in the uncertainty, in which the future existence of the soul is seen by the light of nature. As the end of all things exists beyond the grave; and as the twilight of Reason feebly illuminates all objects, which lie beyond that limit, and exhibits them dimly and doubtfully; the mind cannot fail, in taking a prospect of them, to feel unsatisfied with such uncertainty concerning things so important, and yet so imperfectly known. The whole force of the arguments on this subject is, in my view, in favour of the soul's immortality. These arguments are, also, of no inconsiderable strength. From this source, then, the objector against the benevolence of God will find himself weakened, and his antagonist strengthened: for, if a future existence be admitted, all, which seems irregular, improper, or mysterious, may

plainly and easily be rendered proper, even to the view of creatures, by means of the relation, which things in this world may then be seen to have to those, which are future and eternal.

Such is the view of the benevolence of God, presented to my mind by the works of Creation and Providence. I will not say, that the arguments amount to a demonstration, in the strict, logical sense but they furnish the most solid foundation for rational and immoveable confidence. Indeed, the moral character of Intelligent beings, particularly of virtuous beings, and peculiarly that of God, is susceptible of evidence from experience only. We consider such beings as good, because they say and do that which is good, and we are incapable of seeing, that it is impossible for them to say and do that which is evil. Spirits are in their nature incapable of being immediately discerned, except by the infinite Spirit; whose preroga tive it is alone to search the heart, and try the reins. But, when such beings do good only, and uniformly, they are concluded to be good, on such firm and rational grounds, as can never be shaken. Nor is this want of intuitive, or demonstrative certainty, any disadvantage to Intelligent creatures. Intuitive, or demonstrative, certainty concerning the moral character of God, might exist in every supposable case, without any useful influence on the heart, or on the life. Nor would he, who in the possession of high probable evidence, that God is a benevolent being, demanded a demonstration of this truth before he would yield his heart to his Maker, be at all more. inclined to yield it, when he arrived at the demonstration. Confidence, on the contrary, is always a virtuous state of mind; being invariably a cordial assent to that truth, which is its object. Confidence in the moral character of God is a virtuous emotion, capable of reaching to any degree of excellence, predicable of rational creatures; and, being founded on evidence, which, like a converging series, will rise higher and higher for ever, it will increase eternally in strength and excellence; and will, more and more intimately, in an unceasing progress, unite the hearts of all moral beings to their glorious and perfect Creator.

SERMON IX.

BENEVOLENCE OF GOD, AS EXHIBITED BY REVELATION.

1 JOHN iv. 8-For God is love.

IN my last discourse, I proposed, from these words, to consider the Benevolence of God, as exhibited to us in the

I. place, by Reason, and

II. By Revelation.

Under the former of these heads I proposed several direct Arguments, in support of the doctrine that God is benevolent; and also examined the Objections usually alleged against it. I shall now consider

The exhibition of this doctrine, furnished by Revelation.

On this subject I observe generally, that, in my own view, the arguments in support of this doctrine, contained in the Scriptures, may be completely satisfactory, notwithstanding the apprehension, usually entertained, that the character of God must be proved, antecedently to the admission of all arguments, professedly derived from a Revelation supposed to be given by him. The Revelation itself may, for aught that appears, be so formed, as to become an indubitable proof of his existence, and of any, or all, of his attributes. The Revelation itself is an effect; and from its nature, the nature of the Cause, which gave it existence, may be as satisfactorily argued, as from any other effect. In other words, it may be such an effect, as to prove the cause divine. Still more obviously may this be the case, when the Revelation, in question, is such a comment on the works of Creation and Providence, as to explain such mysteries existing in them, and remove such difficulties, as before prevented us from a correct judgment concerning their nature and tendency. A text may be very difficult to be understood, and may yet by an ingenious and just comment be rendered perfectly plain, even to a moderate understanding. The Scriptures therefore, which are an extensive and explicit commentary on the works of Creation and Providence, may so exhibit their nature to us, even if we should suppose them incapable of exhibiting the same doctrine in a convincing manner by themselves only, as to prove unanswerably, when considered in this light, the benevolence of God.

The manner, in which Revelation exhibits the divine benevolence, is the following.

1st. God directly asserts his character to be benevolent.

The text is the strongest conceivable example of this assertion. Thou art good, says David, and thou dost good; and thy