"would hate to make fuch a Thing." But if this be good arguing in the Case to which it is applied, may I not as well fay, God would not continue a Thing in Being that is hateful to him; because, by the very Terms, he would hate to continue fuch a Thing in Being? I think, the very Terms do as much (and no more) infer one of thefe Propofitions, as the other. In like Manner, the reft that he fays on that Head may be fhewn to be unreafonable, by only fubftituting the Word, continue, in the Place of make and propagate. I may fairly imitate his Way of Reafoning thus: "To fay, "God continues us according to his own original "Decree, or Law of Continuation, which obliges "him to continue us in a Manner he abhors, is really to make bad worfe: For it is fuppofing "him to be defective in Wisdom, or by his own

66

66

Decree or Law to lay fuch a Conftraint upon "his own Actions, that he cannot do what he "would, but is continually doing what he would not, what he hates to do, and what he con"demns in us; viz. continuing us finful, when he "condemns us for continuing ourselves finful.”— If the Reasoning be weak in the one Cafe, it is no lefs fo in the other..

If any shall still infist, That there is a Difference between God's fo difpofing Things as that Depravity of Heart shall be continued, according to the fettled Course of Nature, in the fame Perfon, who has by his own Fault introduced it; and his fo difpofing as that Men, according to a Course of Nature, fhould be born with Depravity, in Confequence of Adam's introducing Sin, by his Act, which we had no Concern in, and cannot be juftly charged with: On this I would observe, that it is quite going off the Objection, which we have been

upon,

upon, from God's Agency, and flying to another. It is then no longer infifted on, that fimply for him, from whofe Agency the Courfe of Nature and our Exiftence derive, fo to difpofe Things, as that we fhould have Existence in a corrupt State, is for him to be the Author of Sin: But the Plea now advanced is, That it is not proper and just for such an Agent fo to difpofe, in this Cafe, and only in Confequence of Adam's Sin; it not being just to charge Adam's Sin to his Pofterity. And this Matter fhall be particularly confidered, in Answer to the next Objection; to which I now proceed.

CHAP. III.

That great Objection against the Imputation of Adam's Sin to his Pofterity, confidered, That fuch Imputation is unjust and unreasonable, inasmuch as Adam and his Pofterity are not one and the fame. With a brief Reflection subjoined of what fome have fuppofed, of God's imputing the Guilt of Adam's Sin to his Pofterity, but in an infinitely lefs Degree, than to Adam himself.

THA

HAT we may proceed with the greater Clearness in confidering the main Objections against fuppofing the Guilt of Adam's Sin to be imputed to his Pofterity; I would premise fome Obfervations with a View to the right Stating of the Doctrine of the Imputation of Adam's first Sin; and then fhew the Reasonableness of this Doctrine, in Oppofition to the great Clamour raised against it on this Head.

I think,

I think, it would go far towards directing us to the more clear and diftinct conceiving and right ftating of this Affair, were we steadily to bear this in Mind: That God, in each Step of his Proceeding with Adam, in Relation to the Covenant or Conftitution established with him, looked on his Pofterity as being One with him. (The Propriety of his looking upon them fo, I fhall fpeak to afterwards.) And though he dealt more immediately "with Adam, yet it was as the Head of the whole Body, and the Root of the whole Tree; and in his Proceedings with him, he dealt with all the Branches, as if they had been then exifting in their Root.

From which it will follow, that both Guilt, or Exposedness to Punishment, and alfo Depravity of Heart, came upon Adam's Pofterity just as they came upon him, as much as if he and they had all co-exifted, like a Tree with many Branches; allowing only for the Difference neceffarily refulting from the Place Adam ftood in, as Head of Root of the whole, and being first and most immediately dealt with, and most immediately acting and fuffering. Otherwife, it is as if, in every Step of Proceeding, every Alteration in the Root had been attended, at the fame Inftant, with the fame Steps and Alterations throughout the whole Tree, in each individual Branch. I think, this will naturally follow on the Suppofition of there being a conftituted Oneness or Identity of Adam and his Pofterity in this Affair.

Therefore I am humbly of Opinion, that if any have supposed the Children of Adam to come into the World with a double Guilt, one the Guilt of Adam's Sin, another the Guilt arifing from their Dd

having

having a corrupt Heart, they have not fo well conceived of the Matter. The Guilt a Man has upon his Soul at his firft Existence, is one and fimple, viz. the Guilt of the original Apoftacy, the Guilt of the Sin by which the Species first rebelled against God. This, and the Guilt arifing from the first Corruption or depraved Difpofition of the Heart, are not to be looked upon as two Things, diftinctly imputed and charged upon Men in the Sight of God. Indeed the Guilt that arifes from the Corruption of the Heart, as it remains a confirmed Principle, and appears in its confequent Operations, is a distinct and additional Guilt: But the Guilt arifing from the first Exifting of a depraved Difpofition in Adam's Pofterity, I apprehend, is not diftinct from their Guilt of Adam's firft Sin. For fo it was not in Adam himfelf. The first evil Difpofition or Inclination of the Heart of Adam to Sin, was not properly diftinct from his first Act of Sin, but was included in it. The external Act he committed was no otherwife his, than as his Heart was in it, or as that Action proceeded from the wicked Inclination of his Heart. Nor was the Guilt he had double, as for two diftin&t Sins: One, the Wickedness of his Heart and Will in that Affair; another, the Wickednefs of the external Act, caufed by his Heart. His Guilt was all truly from the Act of his inward Man; exclufive of which the Motions of his Body were no more than the Motions of any lifeless Inftrument. His Sin confifted in Wickednefs of Heart, fully fufficient for, and intirely amounting to, all that appeared in the Act he committed.

The depraved Difpofition of Adam's Heart is to be confidered two Ways. (1.) As the first Rifing of an evil Inclination in his Heart, exerted in his

firft

firft Act of Sin, and the Ground of the complete Tranfgreffion. (2.) An evil Difpofition of Heart continuing afterwards, as a confirmed Principle that came by.God's forfaking him; which was a Punishment of his firft Tranfgreffion. This confirmed Corruption, by its remaining and continued Operation, brought additional Guilt on his Soul.

:

And in like Manner, Depravity of Heart is to be confidered two Ways in Adam's Pofterity. The first Exifting of a corrupt Difpofition in their Hearts, is not to be looked upon as Sin belonging to them, distinct from their Participation of Adam's firft Sin It is as it were the extended Pollution of that Sin, through the whole Tree, by Virtue of the conftituted Union of the Branches with the Root; or the Inherence of the Sin of that Head of the Species in the Members, in the Confent and Concurrence of the Hearts of the Members with the Head in that first Act. (Which may be, without God's being the Author of Sin, about which I have spoken in the former Chapter.) But the Depravity of Nature remaining an established Principle in the Heart of a Child of Adam, and as exhibited in After-Operations, is a Confequence and Punishment of the first Apoftacy thus participated, and brings new Guilt. The first Being of an evil Difpofition in the Heart of a Child of Adam, whereby he is difpofed to approve of the Sin of his first Father, as fully as he himself approved of it when he committed it, or fo far as to imply a full and perfect Confent of Heart to it, I think, is not to be looked upon as a Confequence of the Imputation of that firft Sin, any more than the full Confent of Adam's own Heart in the Act of finning; which was not confequent on the Imputation of his Sin to himself, but rather prior to it in the Dd 2 Order