hered to; then muft they admit a diftinction between "the good and the evil," between real and merely nominal Chriftians, and the neceffity of the latter being changed and converted; then will their reprobation of others for making this diftinction and inculcating this neceffity, be found abfurd; then will it be obvious, that it is not, as they would perfuade us, the Word of God, but their language about all baptized perfons being in a state of falvation, which "means nothing.". -If it is perfifted in, that, in making this ideal distinction among the profeffors of Christianity, no perfons who poffefs outward decency of character, or as they term it," no moral Chriftians," fhould be supposed radically defective; this is acknowledging in fo many words, that internal and Spiritual Christianity is dispensed with.

In reference then to the whole which has been advanced in this chapter, we appeal to all competent judges to fay, whofe teaching most resembles that of the Church and her Reformers on thefe fubjects; ours who make Chrift and his peculiar doctrines the foul which animates the whole body of our divinity, or theirs who make fo little use of the Saviour and these doctrines; ours who thus infift upon internal and practical Chriftianity, or theirs who reft fo much upon mere externals, and use the language which has been exhibited?

CHAP. IV.

The inquiry pursued with regard to the Doctrine of ORIGINAL SIN, and the confequent STATE AND CHARACTER OF MAN, in this world, AS A SInner.

LITTLE doubt, it is prefumed, can remain in the intelligent and impartial mind, whofe pretenfions are beft founded on our fubject, from what has been advanced in general upon it. We wish, however, that the truth, on which ever fide it lies, may be placed in every light, and, if poffible, rendered unquestionably confpicuous. With this view, we will now particularize fome of the most important points of Chriftian doctrine, refpecting which the prefent controversy chiefly fubfifts, and which are noticed by our opponents. In doing this, we muft conftantly keep in remembrance what has already been proved; namely, that our church is certainly to be interpreted according to the most natural and full fenfe of her words, and that a practical acquaintance with her doctrines is required.—We will begin our particulars with the doctrine of original fin, and the consequent ftate and character of man confidered as a finner.

It is not easy to conceive how any perfons, who really believe the Bible, can confider this an uninterefting doctrine. "It is obvious from the New-Teftament," even Mr. Locke is conftrained to obferve, "that the doctrine of redemption, and confequently of the Gospel, is founded on the suppofition of Adam's falla.” “Revelation," the great Bishop Butler obferves, "fuppofes the world to be in a fiate of ruin, a fup

(a) Reasonablenefs of Chriflianity, at the beginning.

pofition which feems the very ground of the Chriftian difpenfation "." "In the corruption and depravity of human nature," an eminent modern Prelate adds, " are founded all the peculiar precepts and doctrines of the gospel"." This native depravity, with actual tranfgreffion, its invariable effect in all capable fubjects, are the disease, and, in the nature of the thing, only as the malady is rightly understood, will there be a proper folicitude respecting the remedy.

2. On this fubject then, Dr. Croft, on behalf of himself and Brethren in fentiment, expreffes himfelf thus: "Though we admit the dire effects of original fin, yet we do not admit them to the degree fo warmly contended for.". And this is a true statement of the cafe. They do not avowedly, and exprefsly, and in every fenfe, deny the doctrine and its awful effects; this would be exceeding both the Socinian and the Deift d; but it is their uniform endeavour to evade or extenuate, the plain representations of fcripture on the fubject. But let us further learn from the Divines under confideration themfelves, in what manner they treat these doctrines, and what it is which they really admit respecting them. It may perhaps affift our inquiry to keep in view three particulars in the condition under which we are confidering man: namely, his corruption or finfulness, his defert, and his impotence.

Some then, among the most exalted of these teachers, deny the corruption of our nature by the fall altogether, and endeavour to propagate this notion in the church. This is the profeffed and notorious doctrine of Dr. Paley's great model, the late Bishop Law, as his works teftify unquestion

(z) Analogy, Part 2. Chap. v. § 5. See alfo Part 2. Ch. i. § 2. (b) Bishop of Durham, Char. 1797, p. 3. (c) Thoughts, &c. p. 19. (d) See Taylor on Original Sin, p. 27, 30, 37, 164; Dr. Priestley's Familiar Illustration, p. 11; and Bishop Watson's Char. 1795. p. 68,

ably. It is the doctrine of the eminent Bishop Warburton, to whom, as we have feen, our opponents fo generally refer us as a standard. If this prelate does not abfolutely avow the fentiment, be certainly approaches infinitely near fuch an avowal. "Adam," he obferves, "ate, and became as he was at firft created, mortal." "It is aftonishing," he fays, "that any other death should have been understood by his fentence." He refers us alfo, like Bishop Law, to Mr. Locke's Reasonableness of Christianity, where the doctrine is taught unequivocally. At the most, "What physical contagion we contracted at our birth, it is," he fays, "of little ufe to inquire." The fame appears to be the doctrine, which is propagated by the celebrated Bishop Watson. It is impoffible to be more express in denying the depravity of our nature than Dr. Taylor is, both in his treatise on Original Sin, and his Scheme of Scripture Divinity in which he refers to the other for explanation; yet upon this latter Work his Lordship beftows the moft unqualified encomiums. "It deferves," he fays, " to be generally known; and has been much fought after by the Clergy; and he thought he should do them an acceptable service, in making it a part of his collection!." In nearly the fame manner he treats the above mentioned Work of Mr. Locke, with its vindications against the orthodox Dr. Edwards, and other Works of a fimilar tendency". Mr. Fellowes also speaks out. "The fin of Adam," this Gentleman thinks himself imperiously called upon as a Minister of the Church of England' to affirm, did not vitiate the nature of mankind. The punishment inflicted on Adam for his tranfgreffion was death, and temporal mifery. His pofterity therefore are

(e) See his Confiderations on the Theory of Rel. third Edit. p. 45, Note c. p. 101, 325. (f) See above, p. 28. . (g) Divine Le

gation, B. 9. Vol. iii. Works, p. 634. (h) Ibid. p. 638. (i) See the beginning of it.

(1) Tracts, Vol, i. Contents.

(k) Divine Lega. as above, p, 639.

(m) Ibid. Vol. iv. Contents.

born to mortality and to fuffering; but they are not born either in guilt or in wickedness. They are not born dijpojed to evil and indifpofed to good. They are born innocent; and this was certainly the opinion of our Saviour."

By others, the history, in the first part of Genefis, refpecting the difobedience of our first Parents, is confidered as being "not a literal defcription of fact, but an allegorical ftory, like the Pilgrim's Progrefs." "Many ferious and thinking Christians," Profeffor Hey, fays, have thus confidered it. And for this reafon he fuggefts a "doubt, whether the diforderly propensities of man were owing to Adam's tranfgreffion," and whether the compilers of our ninth and tenth Articles meant to affirm that they are"!

Another method of treating the fubject of the Fall of man is, to reprefent it as a tranfaction "of which we are very obfcurely and imperfectly informed." This is the famous Dr. Balguy's manner of fpeaking concerning it; which, Dr. Hey obferves, "feems rather to imply, that he would not lay much stress on a state fo little underfood "." Accordingly, as the fame Gentleman informs us, "Dr. B. has only two very fhort expreffions relating to original fin;" and other "valuable authors," he tells us, "have not dwelt much on it." This view of the fubject the learned Profeffor appears to adopt. "Every thinking man," he fays, will keep it in mind. And on this ground alfo he founds the above doubt. Mr. Ludlam is full on the point. Having obferved that a change of character fucceeded in Adam in confequence of his difobedience, "how far," he proceeds, "or in what manner, this change affected his posterity, we are not clearly told "." "Though the fcriptures of the Old

(z) See "The Anti-Calvinift; by Robert Fellowes, M. A. of St. Mary Hall, Oxford; Curate of Harbury, and Author of a Picture of Chriftian Philofophy, &c. &c." p. 15.

(n) See Nor. Lect. Vol. iii. p. 137, 152, 189*.

(0) Ibid. p. 154.

(q) Ibid. p. 152, 163, 219, 188, 255.

* See Appendix, p. 424.