any one pleases; still we must suppose it committed while his heart was perfectly good, else he did not sin without this boasted excuse of all other sinners-want of a moral power to do otherways. Thus by forgetting that sin is in itself sinful, we are led to look for something else that is so, not in sinners, but in perfectly innocent beings! We conceive Adam to blame, because of the uprightness of his heart; and ourselves blameless, because our hearts are so wicked! For in this way we certainly bring nothing but perfect holiness into the account, as an aggravation of Adam's sin, beyond those of his posterity.

The very first idea we can have of sin, is a depraved and wicked heart; and if this is not a blameable thing in itself, there is no danger of finding any thing that is so. Could we entirely confound all distinction betwixt natural and moral evil, and so betwixt natural and moral inability, as being things essentially different, we should be secure enough from the accusations of our own consciences. And in matters of religion, men generally do confound these things, so far as to feel very easy, and very much as if there was no sin. But let a neighbour be very unkind and injurious to them, and they presently see a difference. This does not look to them, just as if he was only lame, and unable to go out of their way; nor do they lay the blame upon Adam, but upon the malicious and unrighteous wretch himself; nor does their being told it is in his very nature to be so, make them think much the better of him.

3. If the distinction now insisted on was well understood, and clearly kept in view, it would appear in like. manner, that a sinner's not being able to change his own heart, is really nothing in his favour. Here some may be ready to think lies the grand difficulty after al

What they wanted to know, was, not whether sinners would be able to comply with the gospel, or to obey the law, if their hearts were good; but whether it is in their power to have such an heart in them. For what does it signify what a man could do, if he had that which he has not, and can by no means obtain? Sinners do not see how it is their own fault, that they have such bad hearts, and do nothing from gracious principles. provided it is not in their own power to alter themselves in this respect.

Now if a wicked heart was not a moral evil, but a thing of the same nature as a weak head, a bad memory, or an infirm constitution, this would be the case. A man is not to blame for having these, provided he cannot help it. But if a wicked heart is a thing of a criminal nature, a thing quite different from any such natural weaknesses, then there is no force in the above reasoning. If to have a heart to hate and oppose God and our neighbour, instead of loving them as we are required, is a moral evil; as certainly it is, and the sum of all moral evil; then to say a man cannot alter in this respect, is only to say, he cannot help being a most vile and inexcusable wretch. To be unalterably in love with sin, does not surely render one less sinful, but the more so. Surely the more wicked a man's heart is, the more faulty and blameworthy he is.

But the fallacy whereby sinners elude their consciences in this matter, lies in a secret supposition that they could not change their hearts, nor would they be changed, though they should ever so sincerely and heartily, and uprightly try to do it; which would indeed be a very hard case. If a sinner honestly, and from a truly virtuous disposition, tried to the utmost of his natural power to alter his wicked disposition, but it would not alter, he was as bad as ever after all;

it would seem indeed that he was in a very pitiable situation, but not very faulty. Yea, it would be difficult to see wherein he was at all to blame. And that something like this is the real view which multitudes have of the matter, is very evident.

Let us put the case (as people would have it) that sinners were, in all respects, able to change their own hearts; only it must take some time, a month suppose; and they must apply themselves very diligently, very faithfully to the work, all that while, in order to accomplish it. There is a sinner, however, that neglects his opportunity and spends the whole month in sin, without ever using any means, or making the least attempt to get a good heart. Is he not to blame now for this? Most certainly he is. But why so? Why so! Does not every one see that such carelessness in a case like this, such indifference about becoming good when it was entirely in one's power, must be inexcusable to the last degree? To continue thus in sin, when there was no manner of necessity for it; surely this can never be justified. But another sinner was much better disposed. He seized the favourable opportunity, and applied himself with the greatest imaginable diligence; and at the month's end, actually became a good `man. Now was he to blame, during this time that he was thus faithfully labouring, and doing all in his power to become good? By no means. But why not? He had a bad heart. Yes, but he did as well as ever he could, notwithstanding that. No man could have done better, under his circumstances. And he was actually of a wicked disposition, no longer, than till he could possibly be otherways,

Thus people would be apt to judge in such cases.And this shews what notions men have of inability with respect to the sinner's changing his heart; as also

the reason why they say, the distinction of natural and moral inability signifies nothing. For by whatever name it is called, they will conceive of it as being of the same nature. If they own it lies in the wicked disposition of the sinner altogether, yet they do not conceive it lies in the disposition he acts from, but in a disposition he is acting against, but is unable to overcome. They suppose the inability he labours under is such, that he may be well disposed, and do well; yea, that he may be disposed to do the whole duty of one under his circumstances, and actually do it, and yet not be able to help being of an entirely depraved and wicked disposition. Nor could they find the least. shadow of an excuse for him, did they not view his case in this absurd light ;-did they not consider him as faithfully exerting himself with an honest and good intention, endeavouring to become good, but all in vain. Or at least, did they not suppose him willing enough to exert himself in this manner, only he knows it will signify nothing. In this way it is, that a perverse and stubborn will, a wicked and unwilling mind, comes to be thought as innocent a thing, and as good an excuse, as any in the world. It is viewed as a mere weakness; a thing not inconsistent with trying to be holy, but inconsistent with being so, let one try ever so heartily; which is the proper notion of natural inability. And to maintain this notion, they have a dou ble meaning to every word, by which "the abominable thing" which men are to blame for, can possibly be expressed. They will affix such ideas to every word that can be made use of to express an evil disposition of mind, as to make an innocent thing of it ;a kind of dead weight, which, either they make themselves as easy as they can under, knowing they must bear it; or else are striving with all their might to

shake off, but cannot effect it. Thus "deceitful above all things," is the heart of a sinner! Thus artful in hiding itself and keeping forever out of sight, and laying all blame somewhere else! The heart, the disposition, the inclination, the will, are readily allowed to be altogether wrong and sinful, while at the same time, what is properly meant by all those words, is still supposed to be good enough; and hence the sinner cannot see how he is to blame. Yea, the very thing for which alone any one can be to blame, is looked upon as his sufficient excuse and justification. Thus a deceived heart hath turned him aside, that he cannot de-' liver his soul, nor say, Is there not a lie in my right hand.

4. We may hence learn, what alone is sufficient to convince a man that his utter impotence does not lessen his obligation in any measure, or afford him the least cloke for his sins It is only his being made sensible what his impotence really is, and wherein it consists. The apostle Paul says, Rom. vii. 8, 9. "Without the law sin was dead. For I was alive without the law once but when the commandment came, sin revived and I died." The former of these situations of the Apostle, is that of every sinner who cannot see how it is possible he should be wholly helpless and yet altogether inexcusable, at the same time, and in the same respect. He has no just conviction of "the plague of his own heart." He is alive, and sin is dead. He sees neither his impotence, nor his sin, in a true light. If he saw one, he would necessarily see both. Let an unregenerate sinner only see his real heart, and he will see that he is helpless enough. And let him only see this sort of helplessness, and he will never have a thought of its being of the nature of an excuse. A man never finds himself utterly helples