thrown out in these productions, are evidential of the same truth. In innumerable forms they declare, and appeal to, the universal corruption of mankind, as the object about which they are extensively occupied; and the only source, in a great multitude of instances, from which they are derived. Were not human nature corrupted, a great part of them could never have had either existence or meaning.

4. The conversation of all men abundantly declares the same truth.

All men continually ascribe sin to all men, except themselves; and few, very few, have ever dared to deny even themselves to be sinners. The best of mankind readily confess and deeply lament their own sins, in terms of the greatest humiliation and sorrow. Paul declares himself to be encompassed with a body of sin and death.' Jacob, Job, Moses, David, Hezekiah, Daniel, Jeremiah, Peter, James, and John, all acknowledged their own guilt, without hesitation or concealment. Good men in every succeeding age have followed their steps, in this frankness and integrity, so suited to their general character, and have with a single voice declared their own share in the common corruption. Could this fact have taken place, if the corruption were not universal? If Job, Daniel, Paul, and John, were not sinless, we must seek in vain for persons of this character among men: for no men have by their conduct ever proved themselves to approximate nearer to this enviable character. If the doctrine of this discourse be not true, on what principles shall this conduct be explained? Can it be supposed that men distinguished for their virtue, have thus violated their integrity by confessing guilt, with which they were not chargeable; and become gratuitously wicked, merely for the sake of persuading others that they were wicked? Have men of the fairest reputation assumed a scandalous character, merely for the sake of acquiring that character? Nothing is more clear, than that men would never ascribe sin to themselves, and voluntarily pronounce themselves deformed and hateful; especially men of distinguished sincerity, and possessing the fairest means of escaping such an imputation; unless they were compelled to this ascription by the real state of the fact, and the irresistible conviction of their own consciences.

Another class of persons however, at times deny themselves

to be sinful, and employ various expedients to support themselves in this denial; such as labouring to prove that they are mere machines, the subjects of no moral attributes, and utterly incapable of any moral action; and attempting to disprove all distinction between right and wrong. But this denial, instead of proving the authors of it to be sinless, is an unquestionable proof that they are peculiarly sinful. Their general sinfulness of character is, in all instances, unanswerably evident from the general tenor of their conduct. Were they not the subjects of that blindness which is the result of sin only, they could not fail to confess their true character; a character, to all with whom they have intercourse, so obvious, that they never deceive any one by this denial except themselves. Accordingly, no one gives credit to their assertions. On the contrary, all around them regard them as more sinful than other men, and as unanswerably proving their peculiar depravity by this very denial.

In the mean time, the conversation of mankind proves the truth of the doctrine, with the same clear evidence, in another manner. All men ascribe sin to all other men. The sin either exists in those to whom it is ascribed, or it does not. If it be acknowledged thus to exist, the debate is at an end. If it do not exist in those to whom it is ascribed, the ascription itself, being a gross act of injustice, is sin in the ascriber. As all are concerned in making this ascription, all are certainly sinful; whether one or the other side of this dilemma be chosen. Indeed, if our fellow-men were not too evidently sinful to admit of any debate, all men would regard such an ascription with horror and detestation. So palpable and malignant an act of injustice could not be tolerated for a moment. Ministers particularly, when preaching in a solemn and pungent manner on this subject, would be considered only as designing to slander and abuse their audiences: and to say the least, would never be able to assemble a congregation a second time. Still few, very few of mankind, pretend to be offended with them, for the plainest exhibitions of this subject. On the contrary, hardly any sermons are more popular or better received, than those which pourtray the human character as deformed, guilty, and odious; if at the same time they wear evident proofs of sincerity, solemnity, and concern; and are not conducted in a strain of invective. Whence can this arise, but

from the fact, that the preacher' commends himself to every man's conscience by manifestation of the truth?'

Very few men also think of resenting this ascription, as made in the common intercourse of mankind, unless when made with some appearance of contempt or malignity. All men hear it continually, yet no man ordinarily conceives it to be unjust or false, unkind or uncivil, nor even as extraordinary or unexpected. On the contrary, it is plainly considered as a thing of course, and is listened to without emotion. Could this be, were the doctrine untrue?

To the evidence, furnished by the consideration of these facts, it ought to be added, that they contain the direct confession of the whole human race, that the doctrine is true: a confession made in several different forms; all of them unequivocal, solemn, and decisive. Of course, it expresses the real opinion of the whole human race concerning this subject. But it is undoubtedly true, that in all cases where mankind have sufficient ability and opportunity to understand a subject, where they examine and decide without partiality, and especially where they decide against every bias of human nature, their decision is true, and to be admitted without a question. The present case is absolutely of this nature. We have sufficient opportunity and discernment to determine whether we ourselves, and our fellow-men, are sinners or not. It is certain that every bias of our minds inclines us to believe ourselves free from sin; and that in pronouncing ourselves sinful we oppose every prejudice, and every personal interest. But all men have thus pronounced. The decision is therefore just, and is expressed in such a manner as to admit neither of doubt nor misconstruction.

5. No man has been ever yet produced as an example of complete holiness in the present world.

Amid a race of beings so generally sinful as mankind, a person perfectly holy could not fail of being distinguished, as wholly extraordinary, by his fellow-men. Amid the numerous, flattering, panegyrical accounts which have been given, and which have strongly evinced the disposition of their authors, to say the most favourable thing concerning human nature, it is incredible that we should not find some one spotless subject of their panegyric, if such a one had ever existed. Such a character in the present world would be so extraordinary as to

excite the utmost attention of our race, and the story could not fail of being recorded. Particularly, the opposers of the doctrine which I am attempting to establish, must certainly know the fact, had any such character existed; for many of them are very industrious and learned men. But no such character has ever been mentioned by them, or by any other person. Yet, according to their system, many such ought to appear in every country, and in every age. Their system is therefore false, otherwise these facts could not exist.

The Lord Jesus Christ is the only person that ever appeared in this world, who knew no sin.' Accordingly, he is totally distinguishable in his character from all the children of Adam; and has actually been thus distinguished to such a degree, that no other person has been imagined to approximate at all towards his perfection. In the whole history of man, no single solitary instance of this nature has been ever found. Time has rolled on for six thousand years; the world is, and long has been, filled with myriads of myriads of inhabitants; yet even now a spotless man would be regarded as a prodigy, and the knowledge of so extraordinary a person would be carefully treasured up for the instruction of succeeding generations.

6. This doctrine is proved to every man who examines his own character, by the state of his own heart and life.

The evidence, furnished to the doctrine from this source, may be advantageously exhibited under the following heads.

(1) Every such man is, at times, the subject of serious apprehensions concerning his future state. These apprehensions certainly prove the mind in which they exist, to be sinful. No man probably ever believed, that God will or can make sinless beings unhappy hereafter; particularly, that if himself were sinless, God would make him unhappy. It is I think discernible by reason, that perfect love,' or holiness, necessarily 'casteth out fear;' or in other words, that these apprehensions cannot exist in a sinless being. How ever disposed therefore any man may be to combat this doctrine, and however satisfied with his arguments against it; he will find, if he attends to his own thoughts, that he still secretly believes it; and proves that he believes it by his fears concerning his own future existence. Were an angel from heaven to declare to him that he is free from sin, and that through life he would preserve this

character; all his tears would unquestionably vanish, and leave him perfectly undisturbed, concerning every thing which lies beyond the grave.

(2) Every man is conscious that he does not perform all his duty. It will be observed, that I here suppose all men to acknowledge, in their minds, the distinction between right and wrong. There are those indeed, as I before observed, who openly deny this distinction; but as these men use exactly the same language with others, when speaking of their own excellencies and those of their friends, or complaining of the conduct of their enemies; I consider them as admitting this distinction, in their thoughts, equally with the rest of mankind. Certainly no persons more strenuously insist on their own rights, or complain more bitterly of the wrongs which they suppose themselves to suffer.

It cannot be denied, that we are fairly bound to do all the good which is in our power. But there is not a man living, who will soberly assert that he has acted in this manner. The knowledge of those around him, concerning his life, would refute the assertion, and cover him with blushes for the folly and disingenuousness which it evinced. The testimony of his conscience also, concerning his thoughts, would declare it to be false; and accuse him of having added to his former guilt, by the insincerity of this assertion.

(3) Every man living is conscious of having committed many positive sins. This truth may be sufficiently established by two obvious modes of illustration.

No man living durst recite every transaction of his life, even to his nearest and best friend. There are things in the story which he cannot bring himself by any consideration to disclose. This is true concerning his external conduct. Still more is it true concerning his thoughts; because in still greater numbers and higher degrees, they have violated his sense of moral obligation; and contravened what he secretly believes to be the will of God. Nor is there probably a man living, who has not often rejoiced that some, both of his thoughts and actions, are now known to himself only, and concealed effectually from his fellow-men.

Again, no man can go into his closet, and solemnly declare to his Maker, that he has not been guilty of positive sins. Even the impudence and pride of the self-righteous Pharisee,