tance, be immediately pardoned. Such a pardoning law would be the ready way to fupplant precedent laws, to make man negligent of his obedience to them, and to enervate the force of any penal fanction added to them. And if the light and law of reason did not, in the state of innocence, promife pardon to future, penitent tranfgreffors, how does it do it fince? Reafon was as clear then, as it is now, and as much GOD's law then, as it is now. And the nature and perfections of GOD would be as much known then, as now. It is true, reafon does not fay, that the penitent fhall be equally punifh'd with the impenitent. So much duty as is perform'd in and by repentance, fo much guilt will be prevented which would be contracted, by and for the omiffion of fuch duty. And thereupon fo far as the goodness of GOD leads us to repentance, it would lead us to a proportional impunity. But it does not follow, that the performance of a finall part of duty muft procure the pardon of a great deal of fin. But

III. What is this repentance that is fuppofed to be fuch an infallible fecurity of the divine forgiveness? Is it a perfect abhorrence of all fin; and a perfect return to GOD, and to full obedience to him, for the future? Where it fo (though it would not compenfate or atone for, paft impiety) yet more might be faid on the behalf of it. But fince it is an imperfect repentance (proceeding from an imperfect knowledge, both of the evil of fin that has been committed, and of GOD, against whom it has been committed) it is but an imperfect duty; and raises us but to an im

perfect

perfect obedience. And fo the repentance it felf, and the obedience it leads us to, will both ftand in need of forgiveness. Now that which, it felf, ftands in need of forgivenefs, will fcarce procure forgiveness for a deal of fin and impiety. May fin and repentance go on for ever in a perpetual round? To allow of this (fays the learned Dean of Chichester) differs nothing from allowing a liberty and impunity to fin without repentance, Difc. of Prophecy 3. p. 58. At leaft, to admit that repentance, that muft confift with future fin (for I do not find, that the Religion of Nature is, in procefs of time, established upon perfect innocence) and to forgive the fins, that are intermixt with repentance must be the act of foveraign unoblig'd clemency and grace.

IV. At what time must this repentance begin and commence? If early and in youth; how fhall I be affur'd, that the fins and impenitence of thirty or forty years will be forgiven? Or will a long adjourn'd, late repentance be accepted with GOD, in order to a full forgiveness? How will the Religion of Nature aflure me of that? Or has it nothing to fay in this cafe? O how defective will it be! if I have finned fifty years, and have but one month to live; will reafon affure me, that the repentance of one month (fuppofe it to be true) will obtain the forgiveness of all the fins of fifty years? what evidence of that? Sure I am, it is hard to perfwade the fenfible conscience, that one notorious fin (fuch as murder, adultery, blafphemy) will, upon any repentance, be forgiven. Prima eft hæc ultio, quod fe judice, nemo

nocens abfolvitur. And I have fome reason to fufpect, that fome gentlemen and perfons of diftinction, that have lived long in impiety, are driven from due thought of repentance and reformation, by a terrified mind, that tells them, their fins, are too many and too flagrant to be forgiven. And fo there is no more to do (think they) but drink on, and revel on, and despair and die. It were to be wifh'd therefore, that the reverend, the minifters of the revealed religion would more frequently and fully (in the bowels of Jefus Chrift) represent and recommend the treafures of revealed grace and forgiveness, in order to draw affrighted minds to repentance and to GOD. And when he (the renegado-debauchee) was yet a great way off, his father Jaw him, and had compasfion, and ran, and fell on his neck (let angels be furpriz'd, and envy, if they can!) and kifs'd him. But if the light of nature will not affure us, that a late repentance, will be accepted to forgiveness, it does not affure us, that repentance, as fuch, will be favour'd with fuch a bleffing. And fo the more dark and dubious the light of nature is about the acceptance of repentance, (in the court of heaven) as the fure condition of pardon, the more thankful we ought to be for our Bible that fo fairly and fully (in the name of the bleffed G O D) calls us to repentance and remiffion of fins, which we are well affured (in the Reason and Religion of Nature) must be the direct road to human happiness.

V. But if we were affured, that forgivenefs may, upon repentance, be fome how or other obtain'd, it

fhould

fhould be confider'd, whether that forgiveness must be an abfolute, gratuitous one, or must be procured by fome fufficient atonement made to the offended Majefty. Here we fhould have been glad to have heard what the rational philofopher would fay concerning the neceffity of propitiation (or a propitiatory facrifice) in the Religion of Nature. But if forgivenefs of fin was forgotten, we need not much wonder, that no notice is taken of the congruity or expediency of an expiation in order thereto.

1. If forgiveness must be absolute and gratuitous (i. e. unobtain'd by propitiation; gratuitous to us it will be whether fo obtain'd or no) then 1. what meant the numerous expiations and expiatory facrifices, that were fo generally made by mankind? were they all contradictions to the Law of Truth? did they implicitly confefs, that GOD had been offended? that there was fome excellency or dignity, pertaining to GOD, that must be atoned! That by fome bloody propitiation he is really atoned! And did the Law of Truth deny all this? or did the GOD of truth never give any attestation to the acceptablenefs of propitiatory facrifice? And

2. Is there no perfection in the divine Nature, that, in case of fin and defigned forgiveness of fin, would require an honorary propitiation made thereto? This would lead our philofopher to confider, fomewhat fo licitoufly (as philofophical light will allow) the perfections of the divine Nature. And fo it might have been proper to confider what the neceffary purity and

C 2

rectitude

rectitude of that Nature is, what the holiness and the justice is, and its contrariety to all moral evil and turpitude.

It is faid indeed, p. 116.. that, As GOD is a pure, uncompounded Being, his attributes of mercy. and juftice, &c. cannot be as we conceive them, becaufe in him they are one perhaps (fays he) they may. more properly be called together, divine reafon. I thought there had been many, that fay, that (by reafon of the purity and fimplicity of GOD) his attributes of mercy and justice and fome others, are one in him; and profefs to conceive them as one; and fo (if they are one) they conceive them aright. And, yet fhould we fay, that the mercy of GOD condemns the world to endless punishment, and the justice made the world, or forgives the impieties of it, we fhould be cenfured for impropriety. To be fure, they are so one, as to admit, that GOD is a, pure uncompounded Being. And yet how far they, are distinct, perhaps, the human mind can, by no means, investigate.

But it would be more ufeful to inquire, whether, there be fuch a perfection as juftice, belonging to the divine nature, than, how the attributes are diftinct from each other. Such an attribute would have its. influence in the Religion of Nature, and might, to, that end, have been illustrated and improved. And, the philofopher fure muft acknowledge, that there is fome divine attribute or perfection, that we know not how to call better, than by the name of vindictive.

or.