thing relating to this life as subordinate to it; as, if there be a future life, of so much more value than this, they reasonably ought to do. Let "the children of this world," as our Saviour calls them, give their whole attention, as they do, to the perishable things of it; but let "the children of light," the heirs of immortality, habitually look above and beyond it, to that "treasure in heaven which faileth not," that "inheritance which is incorruptible, undefiled, and which fadeth not away," not indeed the object of sense, but of faith, and surely reserved in heaven for us.

There is no great danger of leading any person by these representations to make his religion too much an object, so as to neglect the proper business of this life; though, with some persons of a peculiarly melancholy turn of mind, and especially after meeting with misfortunes in life, this has been the case. The constant presence of things seen and temporal, gives them a decided advantage over things unseen, though eternal, especially in these times, in which all monkish maxims are justly exploded, and the duties of all intelligent Christians connect them with the world and the business of it; so that we cannot have any serious apprehension of this inconvenience, which, however, it is proper to guard against. Indeed, I cannot conceive that any of those whom I call rational Christians, whose religion is free from the gross ab surdities that have long prevailed in the Christian world, and which have brought it into the state of discredit in which it now is, are in any danger of this extreme; and these are the only persons by whom I have any expectation that an address from me will be attended to.

Lastly, let the rational Christian, who justly disclaims such doctrines as those of original sin, arbitrary predestination, the Trinity, and vicarious satisfaction, as the grossest corruptions of his religion, and the principal cause of its present rejection, (and which on this account his regard for Christianity requires that he should take every opportunity of exposing,) be equally prepared to meet the too vehement

zeal of the defenders of these doctrines (who are at present the great majority of the nominally Christian world), persons who will not scruple to treat him as a deist or atheist; and also the hatred of the real deists and atheists of the age. For if he be zealous and active in promoting what he deems to be pure Christianity, their sentiments concerning him will not deserve a softer name. However the malignity of both are alike insignificant, considering the great object we have in view, and they are infinitely overbalanced by the solid satisfaction which arises from the cordial esteem of a small number of judicious Christian friends, who will approve of our conduct, and join us in it; to say nothing of the exquisite delight which arises from the consciousness of a steady and undaunted pursuit of what is true and right, the hope we entertain of the approbation of our Maker, and the glorious reward of immortality.

SUPERIOR VALUE OF REVEALED RELIGION.

So little of religion, properly so called, have men ever derived from the light of Nature, and so little are those who reject Revelation really influenced by any religious principle, that the true state of the question, in fact, is, whether it be better for man to have the religion that is taught in the Scriptures, or none at all. They who reject revelation may not absolutely, and in words, reject the belief of a God and of a providence; (though we see in the example of the French philosophers, and many others, that this is generally the case ;) they are not influenced by that belief. Nor can we wonder at this, when they certainly have not, in fact, any expectation of a future state, which, as I shall shew, was never taught to any useful purpose but by revelation. Religion implies the belief of the being and providence of God, and such a respect for the will of God as will effectually control a man's natural inclinations, and direct his conduct; restraining him from irregularities to which he is naturally prone, and exciting him to actions to which he is naturally averse. But as men in general are governed either by strong natural appetites, or a view to their interest, it cannot be expected that virtue alone, without any hope of future reward or punishment, can have such charms for them, that they will abandon their pleasure, their ease, or their advantage, for the pure love of it. Supposing that men might arrive at a knowledge of the will of God with respect to their conduct in life; they would not feel any sufficient obligation to conform to it, without the great sanction of future rewards and punishments. Mere authority, as that of a pa

rent, or of a magistrate, is little or nothing without the power of rewarding and punishing. Nothing, therefore, but a firm belief in a future state of retribution can be expected to restrain men from giving into those indulgences to which they have a strong propensity.

1. With respect to every article of religion, the light of nature is far from being sufficiently clear and distinct, so as to be inferred with certainty by the most intelligent of men. With respect to what is most essential to human happiness, the wisest of men do not appear to have been, in fact, superior to the bulk; having, in a variety of respects, laid down the most erroneous rules for the conduct of men. Plain as the most important maxims of morality are, there is not one of them, but what the most enlightened not only of the ancient philosophers, but of modern unbelievers, have controverted. What we call conscience, and which we might expect to be a better guide, in this respect, than even reason, is by no means the same uniform principle in all men. It is formed by various associations of ideas, depending on the circumstances of our education, so that things which absolutely shock some persons, are not felt as at all improper by others. There is, therefore, something wanted superior to the dictates of reason, or natural conscience; and this can only be revealed religion, or the authority of our Maker, which must be obeyed without reasoning. Men will, no doubt, dispute even about the will of God, when it is most clearly revealed, as they do concerning the most express laws that are ever made by men; but if this be done with respect to the articulate voice of God, it will be done to a much greater extent, and with much more plausibility, to the inarticulate voice of nature, which every person will interpret as he is previously inclined.

If, when men are hurried on by passion or swayed by interest, they will transgress such positive and acknowledged commands, as thou shalt not commit adultery, thou shalt not steal, &c., as we see that, in fact, they do, it will not, however, be without reluctance and remorse; and therefore, trans

gressions will be less frequent and less flagrant, and repentance and amendment may be more reasonably expected to follow. But, where no such positive command is acknowledged to exist, and the voice of nature alone is to be consulted about the proper conduct of life, most men will mistake their own inclination for the voice of nature, and consequently sin without reluctance or remorse. Of this it would easy to give instances in the clearest of all cases; but this would take up too much of our time, and something of this was mentioned in my last discourse.

be

2. Still less would men, by the mere light of nature, have ever attained to any satisfactory conclusion with respect to the ultimate design of the Author of nature in the formation of man. I mean the prolongation of his existence beyond the grave. On this most interesting of all questions nature is altogether silent. Judging from appearances, as the brutes die, so does man; and all his faculties and powers die with him. That at death any thing escapes, unaffected by this catastrophe, is a mere arbitrary supposition, unsupported by any appearance, or probability of any kind.

Supposing that it were possible, by the mere light of nature, to arrive at the belief of a future state; yet judging from present appearances, it could not be the future state announced in the Scriptures, a state in which virtue will find an ample recom pence, and vice its just punishment, but only such a life as this and in all other respects resembling the present; which is the belief of the North-American Indians, and most other barbarous nations. If, because we dislike any thing in the present system, we entertain an idea that the inconvenience complained of will be removed in a future state; where is the evidence that, under the same powers or principles of nature, whatever they are, things will be ordered in a better manner? Is it possible to infer from what we see (and we have nothing else by which to guide our conjectures), that those evils which the Author of nature has thought