now before us feems to be wanting (a)." He then proceeds to explain how Nature came to be thus defective. And here he tells us, "The abfurdity upon the com"mon notion of immortality arises from the "diffolution of the body at death, and the great difficulty upon the foot of nature is

how to preserve the individuals for judg"ment, which are evidently destroyed by "Death (b):" He obferves alfo, that the original scheme of Religion, or the Religion of nature, did not provide for this difficulty, as Death had not yet enter'd in, or was no part of the state of nature. (c).

This may indeed fhew, that the original Scheme of Religion, before the Fall, was confiftent, though it did not provide for this difficulty. But what was to be done, when Death coming in, made a (a) Sermons Vol. I. P. 205.

(b) P. 206. Dr. Law agrees with my Lord Bishop in maintaining that men could have no rational and confiftent notion of a future ftate, without the knowledge of the Refurrection. (Confiderations, p. 328.)

Now as he will own that this Knowledge is not to be had by the light of reafon, he must deny natural Theology the fanction of another life. And yet he affures us, (p. 240.) that "the hopes of futurity are the Bafis (i. e. the Sanction) of all natural Religion.

(c) P. 207.

U

breach

breach upon the state of nature, and the old notion of immortality grew abfurd?

"God made man (fays his Lordship) im"mortal, and gave him confiftent hopes and "fears: Man made himself mortal by fin: "Muft not then thofe hopes, which were "confiftent hopes upon the foot of immortality, become very abfurd, when joined "to a state of mortality (a)?

But did not God intend men for religious Creatures as well after as before the Fall? And if fo, was not a confiftent scheme of Religion as neceffary after this period, as it had been before?

If the reasonable hopes of immortality, entertained before the Fall, became very abfurd and inconfiftent afterwards, and yet were the only fupport of Religion; ought not fome new provision to have been made for it?

It seems but little for the honour of Providence, to fay that the original scheme of Religion, before the Fall, was confiftent, if this confiftency was broke in upon and deftroyed fo early (fome Divines think almost immediately) and not reftored till the of the Gofpel. It feems ftrange that his Lordship, who fpeaks fo highly of natu

age

ral

(a) P. 207.

ral Religion, fhould yet contend that, after the Fall, there never was, or ever could be, any consistent scheme of it.

"As Death was no part of the state "of nature, fo the difficulties arising from "it were not provided for in the Religion "of nature. To remove these was the * proper work work of Revelation ; these our Saviour has effectually cleared by his Gospel (a). But they ought to have been cleared long before: The proper time of doing this commenced immediately after the Fall, or affoon as ever things fuffered fuch a change, that no confiftent Scheme of Religion could be formed without the removal of thefe difficulties (b).

·(a) P. 207.

By

(b) It may be faid, my Lord Bifhop fuppofes that a confiftent Scheme of Religion was given after the Fall, or that the knowledge of life and immortality was revealed to mankind in the prophecy, which declares that the feed of the woman should bruise the ferpent's head. I have already observed, that his Lordship gives up this Interpretation in that part of his fixth Sermon, which affirms, that the doctrine of a future ftate was involved in doubts and obfcurities, and embarrassed with difficulties and uncertainties from the time of the Fall to the coming of our Saviour. I muft obferve likewise,

By defering this Revelation to the age of the Gofpel, his Lordship will be obliged to suppose, that no confiftent scheme or fyftem of Religion was offered to mankind, for the fpace of 4000 years. But is it not expofing Providence to the cenfure of Impiety, to fuppofe, that no proper and effectual Provifion was made for the maintenance of Religion, during fo long a PeFiod?

he fays,

Notwithstanding all this, his Lordship in the conclufion of his Sermon intimates, that this was indeed the cafe; for, fpeaking of the Chriftian Doctrine of the Resurrection, "This Evidence of the Gofpel has re-inftated nature in all her hopes, confirmed her right to Immortality, and taught her to triumph over Death and "the Grave, which feemed before to be "UNMOVEABLE BARS to all her Expec"tations. This has restored Religion, which

&C

before had hardly ONE SOUND FOOT to

Stand

that he gives up this Interpretation in that other Part of his fixth Sermon, which declares, that " Death

and the Grave were unmoveable bars to all the (fu"ture) expectations of nature; and that Religion had “hardly one found foot to stand on, as Faith and Rea"fon were at too great a distance to be consistent.”

*fland on, and made our FAITH and our "REASON CONSISTENT, which were be"fore at too great a Diftance. Nature in"deed taught us to hope for Immortality, but it was IN SPITE OF SENSE AND EXPE

RIENCE, till the great Prince of our peace "appeared, who brought life and immortality to light through the Gospel (a).

It is here affirmed, we fee, that Religion' had hardly ONE SOUND FOOT to stand on,' and that FAITH and REASON were at too great a diftance to be coNSISTENT,' before the Revelation of the doctrine of Life and Immortality, brought to Light through the Gospel. But is it poffible to conceive that God had been giving a Series' of Revelations from the beginning of the World, and yet that they were unavailable to reconcile Faith and Reafon; our Hopes and our Experience? One of the Infidel Objections is," That no care was taken of Religion from the time of the Fall to the publication of the Gofpel; a Pofition indeed fcarce more eagerly urged by the Author of Chriflianity as old as the Creation, than