ferring a weaker evidence to a stronger. Let it be allowed, that the evidence required is, in fact, the stronger. Still there is reason to think that such evidence was not proper to be given. And I argue, from the nature of the things and from the genius of the Gospel.

1. In the nature of the thing it seems not reasonable that a divine revelation should be obtruded upon men by the highest possible evidence. This would be to constrain their assent, not to obtain it and the very essence of religion consists in its being a willing, as well as reasonable service.

Or, take the matter thus. On supposition that it should please God to address himself to man, it is to be presumed he would treat him as man; that is, in a way, which is suitable to the whole of his nature. But man is not only an intelligent being, that is, capable of discerning the force of evidence, and of being determined by it: he is, also, a moral being, that is, capable of making a right or wrong use of his liberty. Now put the case of an overpowering, irresistible evidence, and his understanding is convinced, indeed; but the will, that other and better half of his composition, the spring of liberty and of virtue, this, with

all the energies depending upon it, is untouched, and has no share in the operation. On the other hand, let the evidence submitted to him be such only as may satisfy his. reason, if attentively, if modestly, if virtuously employed, and you see the whole man in play: his intellectual powers are considered, and his moral faculties, the faculties of a wise and understanding heart, applied to and exerted.

It seems, then, that, if a Revelation were given to man, it would most probably, and according to the best views we can form of the divine conduct, be given in this way; that is, in such a way, as should make it, at once, the proper object of his faith, and the test, I had almost said the reward, of his merit.

And such, we may observe, is the sense of mankind in other instances of God's government. Who complains, that the ordinary bles sings of Heaven, the conveniences and accommodations of life, are not ready furnished and prepared to his hands? Who does not think it sufficient, to our use and to God's glory, that we have the powers requisite to prepare them? Why then expect this greatest of God's blessings, a divine Revelation, to be made cheap in being forced upon us, whether we will or no,

by an evidence, which silences reason, rather than employs it; and precludes the exercise of the noblest faculties, with which our nature is invested?

2. Thus, the reason of the thing affords a presumption (I mean, if men will reason at all on such matters), that these high demands in religion are unfit to be complied with. But we shall argue more safely, in the next place, from the GENIUS AND DECLARATIONS OF THE GOSPEL.

From the tenour of the Gospel-revelation we learn, that, though a reasonable evidence be afforded of its truth, yet the author and publishers of it were by no means solicitous to force it on the minds of men by an unnecessary and irresistible evidence.

We see this in the conduct of our Lord himself, who refused to gratify the curiosity both of friends and foes by needless explanations, or supernumerary miracles b. We see it, further, in his general method of speaking

a Matt. xxi. 27.-xxii. 46.-xxvii. 14. b Matt. xii. 38.-xvi. 1.

by Parables; which are so contrived as to instruct the attentive and willing hearer, but not the prejudiced or indifferent. Nay, when some of his parables were so obscure as that they might seem to require an explanation, he did not always vouchsafe to give it before the people, but reserved the exposition of them for his disciples, in private d. To them, only, it was given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven: others, were left to their own interpretation of his Parables.

This proceeding of Christ plainly shews that he was not anxious to instruct or convince in that way, which might appear the most direct and cogent. It seems, on the contrary, to have been his choice to afford the strongest proofs of his mission and the clearest views of his doctrine to those, not whose incredulity needed his assistance most, but who, by their good dispositions and moral qualities, deserved itt. He thought not fit to cast pearls before swine; and, as contrary as it may be to our forward expectations, it was a rule with him, that he that hath, to him it should be given ↳.

e Mark iv. 34. e Mark iv. 11.

& Mark iv, 34.

f Matt. xiii, 58. g Matt, vii. 6.

Mark ix. 23.

h Mark iv. 25.

That this was the genius of the Gospel, we further learn from the stress, which is laid on Faith. It is everywhere demanded as a previous qualification in the aspirants to this religion; it is everywhere spoken of as the highest moral virtue: a representation, strange and impossible to be accounted for, if men were to be borne down by the weight of evidence only.

But, to put the matter out of all doubt, we have it declared to us in express words, that those converts are the most acceptable to Christ, who receive his religion, on a reasonable, indeed, but inferiour evidence. When the Apostle Thomas expressed his belief, on the evidence of sense, Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed m.

Now, whatever occasion prophane men may take from this account of Gospel-evidence to calumniate the divine Author of our Faith, as though he relied more on the credulity, than the conviction of his followers; whatever perverse use, I say, some men may be disposed

m John xx. 29.