have, I can find but three States, or Degrees, for the whole Moral Condition of Mankind : For all the Men in the World, and every particular Man in feveral Periods of his Life, may be reduced to one of these three Orders: Either he is one of those who do not apprehend Sin as an Evil; who either through Want of Understanding and Reflection, have not attained to any Sense of its Malignity; or through Debauchery and habitual Viciousness have loft it, and fo will and chufe Sin purely and intirely, with Unity of Confent, and without any Mixture of Reluctancy, which is the moft exalted Pitch of Wickedness that a Creature is capable of. Or else one of those who indeed do look upon Sin as Evil, and as fuch nill and are averse to it; but not looking upon it always as the greatest Evil, do oftentimes nill it only imperfectly, and abfolutely Ipeaking do will and chufe it, to avoid (as they then think) fome greater Evil. Or elfe laftly, one of those who looking upon Sin not only under the Notion of Evil, but as the greatest of all Evils, nill and refuse it, not only in fome certain refpect, but abfolutely and thoroughly, fo as not by any means to be perfuaded to commit it..

THESE Three Degrees will comprize the whole Moral State of Mankind. And accordingly I obferve that St. Paul makes mention of a three-fold Law. The firft is, vóμ✪ rõs áμastías čų. Tois μéneo, The Law of Sin which is in the Members, Rom. 7.23. The Second is, vóμ vods, Ver. 23.

The

The Law of the Mind, or Confcience. The Third vóμ☺ #veÚμa]☺ & Cans, The Law of the Spirit of Life, Rom. 8. 2.

THESE Three Laws anfwer exactly to the three Moral States of Human Nature. Under the first Law, the Law of Sin, are those who will and embrace Sin purely and entirely. Under the fecond Law, the Law of the Mind, are thofe who nill and ftand averfe to Sin in fome certain refpect, as Evil, but yet will and chuse it abfolutely and effectually. Under the third Law, the Law of the Spirit of Life, are those who abfolutely and thoroughly nill the Commiffion of

Sin.

The

THE first of these States is a ftate of meer Sin and Death, and those of this Order are they who are faid to be Dead in Trefpaffes and Sins, Eph. 2. 1. The fecond is a ftate of Imperfect Life. The third is a ftate of Health and Vigour. The firft is a state of Reft and Acquiefcence in Sin. The fecond is a ftate of Contention. third is a ftate of Victory. In the first ftate the Mind is laid faft in a deep fleep. In the fecond fhe is between fleeping and waking. In the third fhe is broad awake, and well come to her felf. He that is in the firft ftate, is born only of the Flesh, and has no higher Principle in him: He is that Animal Man that perceives not the things of God, 1 Cor. 2. 14. He that is in the fecond, has indeed fome quickning Motions, fome ineffective Stirrings and Endeavours of the Divine Life. But he that is in the third, is born

of

of the Spirit and of God, and doth not commit Sin, because his feed remains in him, Joh. 3.9.

FROM this Diftribution of the Moral State of Man, 'tis evident that there can be but two diftinct Degrees of Righteoufnefs, or States of the Divine Life. For the firft of the Three (as was before remark'd) is a State of meer Death and Sin. Righteoufnefs and Life belong only to the Two latter, but with this great Difference, that the first of these two Degrees, tho' it has fomething of Life and Righteousness in it, yet 'tis fuch as is confiftent with the final and abfolute Prevalency and Dominion of Sin, and confequently fuch as cannot qualifie a Man for Pardon, or put him into a State of Grace and Salvation. Whereas in the laft the Principle of the Divine Life is fuppofed to be fo ftrong, as not only to refift, but to overcome Sin.And he that is thus fpiritually alive, is alive indeed, alive unto himself, and alive unto God, and if he abide in this Life, fhall live for ever.

THERE are therefore but two fuch Degrees of Spiritual Life and Righteoufnefs as imply different States. And therefore to the Diftribution of St. John my Answer is, That it must neceffarily be understood not of Three diftin&t States of Righteousness (there being no more for the whole Moral Condition of Man) but of three Degrees in one and the fame general State. If it be demanded which of the two States of Righteousness that is? I anfwer,

That

That St. John must be fuppofed to intend the laft and best State, because he addreffes himfelf to his Little Children, Young Men and Fathers, as thofe who had their Sins forgiven them, who had overcome the wicked one, and who had known the Father, Joh. 2. 12, 13. All which Expreffions argue one State of Grace in common between them, tho' differing in Measures and Proportions. The Reafonablenefs of which threefold Gradation I do not think my felf concern'd at prefent to enquire into or juftifie, it being fufficient to my prefent Purpose to have fhewn that it cannot be meant of Three different States of Righteoufnefs, but only of Three different Degrees in the fame State. The States themfelves are but two.

Now to the Queftion, What Degree or State of Righteousness that is, which if we hunger and thirst after we fhall be fill'd: I anfwer, That it must be no other than that which puts a Man in favour with God, and qualifies him for the Mercies of the New Covenant. For if the Righteousness it felf be not fuch as will render a Man acceptable with God, how can the Defire of it intitle him to his Promifes? "Tis a much lefs Worthiness to defire any Righteoufiefs than 'tis to have it; and how then can it be an acceptable thing to defire an unacceptable Righteoufnefs! The Righteousness therefore here intended must be fuch as makes him that has it, acceptable to God; and confequently it can be no other but the laft Degree

or

or State of Righteoufnefs: Since nothing short of that can either reconcile God to Man, or make Man fit for God. And this I take to be the conftant Voice of Scripture, and the Doctrin of our Holy Church, which every where represents an abfolute and effectual Love of Holiness, and the like Hatred of Sin as neceffary to the State of Grace and real Regeneration.

THERE are, I know, fome among us, who notwithstanding their ufual and popular Pretence, That they differ from our Church not in any Doctrinal Points of Religion, but only about fome few Ritual Obfervances, do yet teach very differently in this Article, fetting the State of Regeneration and Sanctification fo low, that a bare ineffective Striving against Sin is reckon'd a very fufficient Mark of it: Wherein they confpire with those of the Roman Church, who make the flightest Repentance by the Acceffion of Sacerdotal Abfolution to be full and valid; only with this Difference, That what the one make fufficient in a certain Cafe, and on a certain Suppofition, the other make fufficient univerfally and abfolutely, requiring nothing further as of neceffity to Sanctification than a bare ineffective Strife against Sin. A State which a Man may be foon in, tho', according to the fame Gentlemen, not fo foon out. For whoever has the leaft sense of Sin as an Evil (and certainly there are but few who have not fo much) muft needs be fo far averfe to it, and cannot poffibly commit it

but