What country is there now upon earth, in Europe, Asia, Africa, or America, be the inhabitants Pagans, Turks, or Christians, concerning which we may not say,

Vivitur ex rapto: non hospes ab hospite tutus:
Filius ante diem patrios inquirit in annos,
Victa jacet pietas; et virgo cæde madentes
Ultima cælestum terras astræa reliquit.
They live by rapine. The unwary guest
Is poison'd at the' inhospitable feast.

The son, impatient for his father's death,
Numbers his years, and longs to stop his breath;
Extinguish'd all regard for God and man:
And justice, last of the celestial train,

Spurns the earth drench'd in blood, and flies to
heaven again.

14. Universal misery is at once a consequence and a proof of this universal corruption. Men are unhappy, (how very few are the exceptions!) because they are unholy. Culpum pœna premit comes. Pain accompanies and follows sin. Why is the earth so full of complicated distress ? Because it is full of complicated wickedness. Why are not you happy? Other circumstances may concur, but the main reason is, because you are not holy. It is impossible in the nature of things, that wickedness can consist with happiness. A Roman Heathen tells the English Heathens, Nemo malus felix: no vicious man is happy. And if you are not guilty of any gross or outward vice, yet you have vicious tempers and as long as these have power in your heart, true peace has no place. You are proud; you think too highly of yourself. You are passionate; often angry without reason. You are self-willed; you would have your own will, your own way in every thing; that is plainly, you would rule over God and man; you would be the governor of the world. You are daily liable to unreasonable desires: some things you desire that are no way desirable: others which ought to be avoided, yea, abhorred, at least as they are now circumstanced. And can a proud or a passionate man be happy? Oh no: experience shews

it impossible. Can a man be happy, who is full of self-will? Not unless he can dethrone the Most High. Can a man of unreasonable desires be happy? Nay, they "pierce him through with many sorrows.

I have not touched upon envy, malice, revenge, covetousness, and other gross vices. Concerning these it is universally agreed, by all thinking men, Christian or Heathen, that a man can no more be happy, while they lodge in his bosom, than if a vulture were gnawing his liver. It is supposed indeed, that a very small part of mankind, only the vilest of men, are liable to these. I know not that: but certainly this is not the case with regard to pride, anger, self-will, foolish desires. Those who are not accounted bad men, are by no means free from these. And this alone (were they liable to no other pain) would prevent the generality of men, rich and poor, learned and unlearned, from ever knowing what happiness means.

15. You think, however, you could bear yourself pretty well; but you have such a husband, or wife, such parents and children as are intolerable! One has such a tongue, the other so perverse a temper! The language of these, the carriage of those, is so provoking! Otherwise you should be happy enough. True, if both you and they were wise and virtuous. Meanwhile, neither the vices of your family, nor your own will suffer you to rest.

Look out of your own doors: "Is there any evil in the city, and sin hath not done it ?" Is there any misfortune or misery to be named, whereof it is not either the direct or remote occasion? Why is it that the friend or relation for whom you are so tenderly concerned, is involved in so many troubles? Have not you done your part toward making them happy? Yes, but they will not do their own: one has no management, no frugality, or no industry. Another is too fond of pleasure. If he is not what is called scandalously vicious, he loves wine, women, or gaming. And to what does all this amount? He might be happy; but sin will not suffer it,

Perhaps you will say, nay, he is not in fault, he is both frugal and diligent. But he has fallen into the hands of those, who have imposed upon his good nature. Very well; but still sin is the cause of his misfortunes. Only it is another's, not his own.

If you inquire into the troubles under which your neighbour, your acquaintance, or one you casually talk with, labours, still you will find the far greater part of them arise, from some fault either of the sufferer or of others. So that still sin is at the root of trouble, and it is unholiness which causes unhappiness.

And this holds as well with regard to families, as with regard to individuals. Many families are miserable thro' want. They have not the conveniences, if the necessaries of life. Why have they not? Because they will not work: were they diligent, they would want nothing. Or if not idle, they are wasteful: they squander away in a short time, what might have served for many years. Others indeed are diligent and frugal too; but a treacherous friend, or a malicious enemy has ruined them: or they groan under the hand of the oppressor: or the extortioner has entered into their labours. You see then, in all these cases, want (though in various ways) is the effect of sin. But is there no rich man near? None that could relieve these innocent sufferers, without impairing his own fortune? Yes, but he thinks of nothing less. They may rot and perish for him. See, more sin is implied in their suffering.

But is not the family of that rich man himself happy? No; far from it: perhaps farther than his poor neighbours. For they are not content: their "eye is not satisfied with seeing, nor their ear with hearing." Endeavouring to fill their souls with the pleasures of sense and imagination, they are only pouring water into a sieve. Is not this the case with the wealthiest families you know? But it is not the whole case with some of them. There is a debauched, a jealous, or an ill-natured husband: a gaming, passionate, or imperious wife; an undutiful son, or an imprudent

daughter, who banishes happiness from the house. And what is all this, but sin in various shapes, with its sure attendant, misery?"

In a town, a corporation, a city, a kingdom, is it not the same thing still? From whence comes the complication of all the miseries incident to human nature, war? "Is it not from the tempers which war in the soul?" When nation rises up against nation, and kingdom against kingdom, does it not necessarily imply pride, ambition, coveting what is another's, or envy, or malice, or revenge, on one side, if not on both? Still then sin is the baleful source of affliction. And consequently the flood of miseries, which covers the face of the earth, which overwhelms, not only single persons, but whole families, towns, cities, kingdoms, is a demonstrative proof of the overflowing of ungodliness, in every nation under heaven.

PART II.

The Scriptural Method of accounting for this, defended.

1. 1. THE fact then being undeniable, I would ask, How it is to be accounted for? Will you resolve it into the prevalence of custom, and say, "Men are guided more by example than reason?"It is true. They run after one another, like a flock of sheep, (as Seneca remarked long ago) Non qua eundum est, sed qua itur: Not where they ought to go, but where others go. But I gain no ground by this: I am equally at a loss to account, for this custom. How is it, (seeing men are reasonable creatures, and nothing is so agreeable to reason as virtue,) that the custom of all ages and nations, is not on the side of virtue rather than vice? If you say, This is owing to bad education, which propagates ill customs; I own, education has an

amazing force, far beyond what is commonly imagined. I own too, that as bad education is found among Christians, as ever obtained among the Heathens. But I am no nearer still I am not advanced a hair's breadth toward the conclusion. For how am I to account for the almost universal prevalence of this bad education? I want to know when this prevailed first, and how it came to prevail? How came wise and good men, (for such they must have been before bad education commenced,) not to train up their children in wisdom and goodness? In the way wherein they had been brought up themselves? They had then no ill precedent before them: How came they to make such a precedent? And how came all the wisdom of after ages, never to correct that precedent? You must suppose it to have been of ancient date. Profane history gives us a large account of universal wickedness, that is, universal bad education, for above two thousand years last past. Sacred history adds the account of above two thousand more: in the very beginning of which, (more than four thousand years ago,) "all flesh had corrupted their ways before the Lord!" Or, to speak agreeably to this hypothesis, were very corruptly educated. Now how is this to be accounted for, that in so long a tract of time, no one nation under the sun, has been able, by wholesome laws or by any other method, to remove this grievous evil? So that their children being well educated, the scale might at length,-turn on the side of reason and virtue ?

These are questions which I conceive will not easily be answered, to the satisfaction of any impartial inquirer. But to bring the matter to a short issue. The first parents who educated their children in vice and folly, either were wise and virtuous themselves, or were not. If they were not, their vice did not proceed from education. So the supposition falls to the ground: wickedness was antecedent to bad education. If they were wise and virtuous, it cannot be supposed, but they would teach their children to tread i the same steps. In no wise therefore can we account for the present state of mankind from example or education.