and passion. Thus it practises vice, though in less degrees, as it passes from infancy to childhood; thus it grows up to taste, to indulge, and to delight in forbidden enjoyments. Then as its knowledge increases, it sins against the plainer dictates of conscience, and with a more criminal consent of the will; thus it increases its guilt, and strengthens the habits of sin, both in the body and in the mind, and grows up towards perfection in iniquity, unless restraining or recovering grace prevent.

QUEST. VII. But if we allow that it is possible the new-created Soul should be thus corrupted, yet is it agreeable to the Justice or Wisdom, or Goodness of God, to create so many millions of Souls, pure, innocent and holy, as they must be in their own Natures, coming from the Hands of God, and to unite them immediately to such bodies, derived from sinful Parents, and infected with vicious Ferments and Appetites, whereby they are so early, and almost unavoidably led into sinful Practices, and defiled thereby?

And, to make this question still more difficult, it might be added, Is it not contrary to the Justice and Goodness of God to create innocent Souls and unite them to such Bodies derived from sinful Parents, whereby they are, subject to many painful Sensations, such Anguish and Agomes, and early Misery, before they can know any thing of good or evil, or have committed any actual Transgression?

Answer.-Perhaps, this is the greatest difficulty in the whole doctrine of original sin*, and therefore I shall offer at a humble endeavour to answer it in a more particular and distinct manner, by the following steps or degrees of reasoning:

Reason I. Though the soul of man be created by God himself, without depraved or sinful qualities in it, yet it never exists or comes into being, but as a part of human nature; and that not as a piece of new workmanship from God's hand, but as a part of mankind who are propagated from the first parent, by the continued power of God's first creating word, be fruitful and multiply: Gen. i. 28. And thus, though the soul really comes from God rather than from the parent, yet man is to be considered as propagating his kind, much in the same manner as brute-creatures and all animals propagate their kind: And their descendants or offspring are tainted with any poison, disease or painful infirmity, which is mingled with the blood or animal

* As abstruse and difficult as this question is, yet almost all parties of christians, who acknowledge any thing of original degeneracy, are obliged to answer it, as well as those who are called Calviniste.

juices of their sires or their dams. And this is according to the law of creation, and it can hardly be otherwise in the nature of things.

You will say, man does not propagate his kind by the mere mechanism of flesh and blood, and animal ferments; for it is the original and constant creative decree of God that produces a new substance, a human soul, and joins it to this body; whereas the offspring of brutes are propagated, and come into existence, by the mere mechanical agency of flesh and blood, without any other particular act of the divine will or power, or any creation of a new substance. To this I answer, That perhaps few or none of the common appearances of nature, or the constant daily events in the corporeal world, come to pass by mere * mechanism, or the impulse and necessary effects of the motions of the particles of matter without the influence of some superadded laws of nature, beside and beyond the necessary properties of matter; which laws proceed from God's constant uniform agency upon matter, such as the law of gravitation, or the mutual tendency of all the parts of matter toward each other, which is a law of nature, or decree of creation, and is in reality the constant uniform agency of God on the inanimate world: And some suppose elasticity, electricity, magnetism, &c. to be of the same kind, as well as all vitality in the vegetable and animal creatures.

And in this sense brutes propagate their kind, not merely by the mechanical motions of flesh and blood, but by some original creative decree of God, or constant law of nature, whereby matter is impelled into such particular vital motions and forms, and kindled into life in a succession of generations, by a constant uniform act or agency of the divine will. Let me add also, that it is by this universal divine agency, all animals borrow their breath of life from the air, which is an extraneous substance, which yet is then counted a part of themselves, and is called their breath, and their life. In like manner, when the infant-body of man is so far formed as to become fit for union with a rational soul, the soul then comes into existence, in union with the body, by an original creative decree of God, or a settled law of nature; and thus, the man and the brute, in their long successions, are both formed by the power of that ancient law of creation, this almighty creative word," be fruitful and multiply." I add also, that the soul, though it be a distinct substance coming from God, yet coming into existence in this manner by a law of nature,

By the words "mechanism and mechanical," in this place, I mean only the mere effects arising from the natural and essential properties of motion and matter, considered only as a piece of solid extension moved: Sometimes the word "mechanism" is taken in a larger sense, so as to include all the superadded laws of nature or motion, which are impressed and maintained, through all the material creation, by the divine will; such as gravitation, mutual attrac tion and repulse, &c.

becomes a part of the man as much as the breath of life, which is an extraneous substance borrowed from the air, or as the blood of the child, which is hourly made out of the food of the mother.

II. In this view of things, the soul of the infant is not to be considered or judged of as a single separate being, but as always in union with the infant's flesh and blood, and as making up a compound creature of the human species, propagated from the parents as effectually to all intents and purposes, as though the soul itself proceeded directly from generation as well as the body.

III. If Adam had maintained his innocency, the universal and original law of propagation, would have been just the same as now it is; and the soul had been brought into existence and union in the same manner, and would have kept its original and native bias and inclination to holiness; for the animal body would then have promoted it rather than led it astray as now it does. And according to the first covenant, the soul of the child might have also hoped, or perhaps by prayer and dependence, have humbly claimed sanctifying influences, to preserve it from temptation and to keep it innocent.

IV. But since the soul, in the first moment of its being, belongs to a human body deprived from the first man who sinned, and that according to the rules or laws of creation and providence, it becomes hereby a son or a daughter of fallen man, and according to the law of creation it is naturally involved in the same circumstances of ruin with its parent: As the buds and branches that grow out of a rotten tree fallen to the ground, partake of the corruption and ruin, and speedy death of the stock; or as a feeble and diseased young brute animal partakes of the infirmities and diseases of its sire or dam? or as a child of a traitor is born a beggar, though his father were once a lord; or as the son of a lewd and diseased person derives perhaps both a lewd and diseased constitution from his parent.

V. Then being one of the race of sinful man, the young creature comes into the world under the common estrangement of the whole race from God by sin, according to the original law of creation, and the covenant made with its forefather, whereby the descendants or offspring come under the same circumstances with the parent, whether good or bad: And thus the child has no just claim to pr. serving or securing grace, and amidst all the temptations of the flesh has no right to any good influences or divine aids, but is left merely to the faculties of its intelligent nature. It is esteemed in the sight of God, as a part of the race that is fallen from their allegiance and from his protection, have lost his image and his favour, and have no hope but in and by the methods of recovering grace revealed in the gospel. And by the same supposition of the formation and union of the human

soul, by some constant original law of creation or nature, and acting as uniformly as gravitation on matter, we answer the difficulty of the soul's becoming subject to the sensations of pain and anguish: At its creation and union to the body, it becomes a child of Adam, and is exposed to the pains of nature, as a part of the curse coming on the first sinner, and on all his natural posterity, whose representative he both stood and fell But there is hope of deliverance in the gospel from the pains as well as the sins which came into human nature from our first parents; blessed be God for this relief. To conclude; as I have acknowledged this to be the very chief point of difficulty in all the controversies about original sin, so I am doubtful whether this solution sets the matter in such a sufficient light, as to take away all remaining scruples from a curious and inquisitive mind. I confess it is the most probable hypothesis I can think of, and shall be glad to see this perplexing enquiry more happily answered. But if the case itself be matter of fact, that souls are defiled, and exposed to pain, by being united to human bodies so vitiated, we are sure it must be just and equitable, because God has thus ordered it, though we should not find out a happier solution of the difficulties that attend it, in this dark and imperfect state.

QUEST. VIII. Suppose it were granted, that this Representation of Things, if it were true, would in a great Measure account for that Universal Deluge of Sin and Misery which has overspread Mankind, yet what Reason have we to believe it to be true? Does the Word of God, which is our truest and safest Guide, give us the same Representation of Things, or support this Scheme?

Answer I. The difficulties and darknesses which attend this important question, how came sin and misery into the world? are so many and great, that if, by reasoning on these subjects, we can but find any hypothesis, or supposed scheme of transactions between God and man, which will give a tolerable solution of these difficulties, and lead us through this dark scene of providence, without any just imputation or reflection upon the wisdom, justice and goodness of our Creator, it ought to have considerable, weight with every reasoning and enquiring mind, if it be not contrary to scripture, though it should not be asserted, and expressly maintained in scripture. It was this same perplexing enquiry that led several of the heathens and Greek philosophers into many vain imaginations, and betrayed some of those professors of wisdom into various wild fooleries and atheistical impieties. Some of them thought that all things were produced by mere chance, others ascribed it to a necessary fatality and irre

sistible connexion of causes and effects; some of these allowed a first cause or some divine being to set things in motion at first, but without any subsequent interposure or overnment of a wise, a righteous, or a merciful being. The best of them, that is the platonics, fell into the doctrine of the pre-existence of all human souls, and thought that all of them had sinned in a former state, and were thrust down into these bodies, subject to such perverse appetites, unruly passions, and huge miseries, as a punishment Others indulged a fancy that there were for those former sins. two supreme beings, one the spring of all good, and the other the spring of all evil: The Persians also took up with this opinion, and even a sect of christians was deluded with this doctrine, who were called Manichees. So great were the darknesses that surrounded this enquiry, how came sin and misery, that is, evil both natural and moral, to be so universal among men? It is evident that this general corruption and calamity which has overspread all the race of man, carries in it at first sight such a hard or doubtful idea of the conduct of God, their Maker, and has raised in many a thoughtful person such reflections upon the goodness and justice of God, and such hard thoughts of the Almighty Being who formed them, that it ought to be esteemed a great happiness, if we can but by way of conjecture and humble reasoning find a probable method, whereby these difficulties may be relieved, and the objection against the goodness and justice of our Maker refuted or silenced*.

II. Though God hath not thought fit to reveal to us at large in his word, all these particular transactions between himself, and the first man whom he created, yet there might be all this and more revealed to the first man; and it might be set before him in full light, to secure his obedience and deter him

*Those who oppose the doctrine of original sin will neither allow our arguing from reason or revelation.

Our fathers, as well as some present writers, have abundantly proved this doctrine from several places of scripture and our adversaries have endeavoured to shew from the light of reason, that it does not agree with the reason and nature of things, and therefore, say they, scripture must be otherwise explained; and they are forced to labour bard to give some strained and perverse interpre tations of it to support their scheme: And yet when we come in our turn to search what the reason of things will say on this subject, as is done in the present treatise, then it is replied, "why do we not immediately take our account from scripture ?" And we are upbraided, that we set a candle before the noonday sun, that we weaken the evidence of a certain rule by bringing over it what is doubtful and fallacious.

Whereas all that I have attempted to do here, is to shew that reason goes a great way to teach and prove what scripture asserts, and that reason and scripture agree, as far as reason goes, in one and the same account of this matter. And thus we confirm our belief of this great article of original sin, which we learn both from observation and reason, as well as revelation. Sometimes indeed we introduce one first in order, and sometimes the other, and we place this subject in every light, both of scripture and reason, while we are repres-wting their mutual agreement: And what is there in this conduct that is worthy of accusation, reproach or blame?