their Hopes and Expectations. 'Tis pity fuch near Friends, who have one common Interest, should have any Difputes. But Disputes there are.

Far be from us to weaken the Hopes of Nature. The Gospel is no Enemy to thefe Hopes; fo far otherwife, that all the Hopes and Expectations of Nature are fo many Preparations to the Gofpel of Chrift, and lead us to embrace that Mercy offered by Chrift, which Nature so long and fo earnestly has fought after.

But the Question is, whether thefe natural Hopes can give us fuch Security of Pardon, and of Life and Immortality, as will justify us in rejecting the Light of Revelation ? Now, whoever depends on the Forgiveness of God, admits himself to be in a Cafe that wants Pardon; that is, admits himself to be a Sinner. This being the Cafe of Mankind in general, let it be confidered,

First, That Natural Religion could not be originally founded in the Confideration of Man's being a Sinner, and in the Expectation of Pardon..

Secondly, That the Hopes which we are able to form in our present Circumstances, are too weak and imperfect to give us entire Satisfaction.

Thirdly,

Thirdly, That the Coming of Christ has supplied thefe Defects, and has perfected and completed the Hopes of Nature.

It must be allowed, That the original Religion of Nature was agreeable to the original State of Nature: And confequently, if Natural Religion is founded in the Con fideration of Man's Sin and Weakness, it follows, That Man was originally formed a Sinner and weak. But farther,

Suppofing Men made originally to be what we fee they are, upon what Grounds are we to hope for an Alteration for the better? For, if it was confiftent with God's Goodnefs to put Men into this State originally, how is it inconsistent with his Goodness to continue that State, which was at firft his own Appointment? He could no more act inconfiftently with his Goodnefs at the Beginning of the World, than he can at the End of it. If Reafon therefore admits the prefent State of the World to be of God's Appointment, it must never afterwards pretend to entertain Hopes of being delivered from it; and without fuch Hopes all Religion is vain and ufelefs.

It may be thought perhaps, That, fuppofing the present State of Things to be of God's Appointment, we cannot be anfwerable

for what we do; for why fhould he blame us for doing the Work he has appointed? Allow this Reasoning; yet no Religion can be built on it; for it can go no farther than to say that we ought not to be punished for our Doings: It can never shew that we have any Title to be Title to be put into a better State: The utmost it can pretend to prove, is, that we are abfolutely unaccountable; and, if fo, there is nothing we can do to lefs Purpose, than to trouble our Heads about Religion.

Farther, If the Laws of Nature are the Precepts of Natural Religion, as without all doubt they are, it follows, That Natural Religion can be nothing else but Obedience to the Laws of Nature; and, consequently, the genuine Hopes of Natural Religion must be founded in Obedience. This muft neceffarily be the Cafe; for all Laws are made to be obeyed. No Prince was ever so absurd as to make Laws with this View, that his Subjects might break them, and he shew his Goodness in pardoning their Tranfgreffions:. And yet this must have been the Scheme of Providence, if Natural Religion was nothing elfe from the Beginning but an Expectation of Pardon for Sin.

Secondly, Let us take a View of our prefent State, without inquiring whether any

and

and what Change has happened to put us into this Condition; and let us confider what may be expected from our present Circumstances. Two Things may be affirmed with Certainty of the present Condition of Mankind: One is, That they have a Sense of their Obligation to obey the Laws of Reason and Nature; which is evident from the Force of natural Confcience: The other is, That very few do in any tolerable Degree, and none perfectly, pay this Obedience.

Let us examine then how Religion will ftand upon thefe Circumftances. It is impoffible to found the Hopes of Religion on Innocence and Obedience; for Obedience is not paid. On the other hand, absolute Impunity cannot be claimed for all Sins; much lefs can any Degree of Happiness, either prefent or future, be claimed in behalf of Offenders. The utmost Probability to which human Reason can arrive in this Cafe, is, That, the Goodness of God and the Weaknefs of Man confidered, God may favourably accept our Endeavours, how imperfect soever our Attainments may be. But is this Reafoning built on infallible Principles? Can any Certainty or Security arise out of this? any that can give Reft or Peace to the Mind of Man, ever inquifitive after Futurity? Will

you promise Impunity to Offenders upon Repentance? Impunity, mere Impunity, is not the Thing that Nature feeks after: She craves fomething more. But can the Argument from the divine Mercy be carried farther? Is it not great Mercy to pardon Sinners? Can you with Decency defire a Reward for them? Our Saviour has told us, that, when we have done our best, we must ftill own that we are unprofitable Servants : And, if we reflect that all our natural Powers are the Gift of God, and, confequently, our beft Services are but a Debt paid to the Donor; if we confider that in all we do there is no Profit to the Moft High, that His Power and Majefty are not exalted by our Service, nor leffened by our Neglect; we fhall find that our own Reafon teaches us the fame Leffon, and that, when we confefs ourselves unprofitable Servants, we give greater Evidence of our Understanding than of our Humility. And, if this be truly the Cafe, what are the Claims of Natural Religion? Are they not the Claims of unprofitable Servants? the Claims of those to whom nothing is due?

Thirdly, Let us now take a View of the Conditions and Promifes of the Gospel, and fee whether we have any Reason to be offended