never to be separated, to wit, the use of the proper means of conviction. And after this hint, there is nothing I conceive in this account but what any man of a tolerable capacity may easily understand. It will be vain here to allege, that though this method be proper with respect to children, it may not be so with respect to men. For so far as men are governed by passion and not by reason, so far they degenerate into children; and so far therefore it must be proper to deal with them as such. The propriety of this method results not from any thing by which a perverse child is distinguishable from an unreasonable man; but from something which, in a greater or in a lesser degree, is common to them both. That in which a perverse child differs from an unreasonable man, is this; that he hath a less measure of understanding: but in this they both agree, that the one is led by his passions to contradict that measure of understanding which he has as well as the other. Now the same disease under a like constitution naturally calls for the same remedy: and since in both cases it is by the motives of this world that our passions rise into mutiny and become a party against the truth; the same sort of motives contrarily applied must also in both cases be the proper means of reducing them into order. What reason suggests to us upon this head, experience also verifies. For has any one so little knowledge, or so little charity as to say, that there

have not been many instances of men, as well as of children, who, by wholesome severities or seasonable encouragements, have been reclaimed from evil courses? Has no one either seen or heard of a malefactor, who, whilst under sentence of condemnation, has been brought to a better mind? Though such cases are not so frequent as one would wish; yet I trust in God, and we have, I think, great reason to believe that the world has not wholly been without them. And whence ? Why the Ordinary of the place, perhaps you will say, has discharged his duty; or some charitable and well disposed persons have been diligent in applying good advice and sober instruction. It may be so; and who doubts but these are proper and necessary helps to the bringing of sinners to repentance. But let me ask one question or two more? Do you believe that good advice alone would have done the business? Do you not think that the instruction administred received some weight from the condition of the offender; or rather that it was entirely owing to this, that he was found in a fit temper and disposition to be wrought upon by persuasion? These are the points I would propose upon the case before us; and the decision of them I willingly leave to any man of common observation.

If any thing else be wanting to make the argument yet plainer; I desire it may not be forgotten, that God himself is pleased to make use of this

method for the same purpose. That he might the more effectually lead us to the observance of his. laws, he hath so ordered it that the breach of them (according to the natural order and constitution of things) is generally attended with the inconveniencies of this world; and in the extraor dinary exercise of his Providence, he hath declared this to be the end of his afflicting and' grieving the children of men, (not to clothe them with a mere outside shew, which he hates and abhors, but) that they may be partakers of his holiness. May not then some one expostulate with the Almighty in the modern way of reasoning and say; "Is “holiness the effect of force? Of bodily plea

sure or of bodily pain? Is it religion to abstain "from drunkenness for fear of surfeiting, or from "whoredom to avoid the rottenness of the bones ?

66

Why then, since thou desirest a free and willing service, hast thou not left us free? Thou hast given us a reasonable soul; thou has prescribed "us reasonable laws; thou hast proposed to us "the motives of a life to come, as an encourage"ment. to us to do as we are commanded; and "obedience performed under the influence of "these reasons, and with a view to these motives, "is the only obedience which thou has promised "to accept. Why then dost thou go about to destroy, as it were, the work of thine own

66

hands, in proposing to effect that by worldly "motives, which worldly motives can never pro

duce?" If our adversaries can tell how to silence this impious and vain babbler, İ will undertake, by those very arguments, they shall make use of, to answer them. For the case is thus far parallel to the other; that here is the use or application of the motives of this world to this intent, and for this purpose, even the begetting true religion, which is the absurdity they complain of. I know it has been observed that when God himself has threatened temporal judgments; the being moved by these as they come from God, is an act of faith in him, and no such worldly inducement as God disapproves of. But this observation does not reach the whole of the objection, nor is it indeed any thing to the purpose. I say, first, it doth not reach the whole of the objection. For my argument is drawn not only from those evils which are properly the judgments of God upon sinners; but from those inconveniencies which in the order of nature do generally attend upon wicked practices. It is no act of faith for a man to believe, that if he plays the glutton or the dunkard over night he shall be sick the next morning. Yet this is commonly the case; God hath so adjusted the frame of our natures, that we can seldom offend him without bringing down some present mischief upon ourselves: in which dispensation there is certainly less wisdom, not to say goodness, than there would have been, had it otherwise been ordered; if it

* See Answer to the Representation, p. 233.

be true that worldly inconveniencies not only cannot promote, but do even destroy true religion. Again; this argument relates not merely to those judgments of God which are visibly so, and are considered by us as such; but even to those secret acts of his Providence, which we cannot distinguish from those effects which result from the natural order and constitution of things. When God, by a special warning, tells us beforehand (as he told the Ninevites) that we shall be destroyed unless we repent; our repenting, in virtue of this warning, is indeed properly an act of faith, or rather it is the effect of our faith. But, in the ordinary course of his Providence, God chastises us without giving us any certain tokens by which we may know that it is his hand; and although, even in this case, there is room enough for the exercise of faith, (God's general threatnings supplying in some sort the want of a special warning) yet I do not think it to be absolutely necessary to the end propounded, .e. to the amendment of the sinner. If it were, God would have taken care to have given us a sure foundation for it: for he doth not propose an end by insufficient means. If a licentious liver be punished with the loss of his estate; it may be a means of bringing him to sobriety, whether he considers it as a judgment from God, or as a common accident and in truth that God is the author of the evil we suffer, is, I believe, generally speaking, one of the last thoughts