which he committed before they had a Being. And have they no Cause to be forry for what their Father or their Grandfather did, and for which they are fuffering Beggary and Difgrace to this Day? Even the Heralds, who are Gentlemen of nice Honour, have their Abatements in Coats of Arms, belonging to particular Families, which denote fome difhonourable Action, or Stain in the Character of fome remote Ancestor; and the Defcendants are still obliged to bear the Difgrace of it. In short, this Author's Affertion, that none can, in the Eye of fuftice and Equity, be punishable for a Tranfgreffion that was not his own Act and Deed, nor has any Reason to be forry for it, flies moft directly in the Face, not only of the Juftice and Equity of God, but of the common Senfe and Reason of all Mankind.

Now if it were juft and equitable, that Children fhould bear the Punishment of their Fathers Crimes, in all, or in any, of the forementioned Cafes, our Author's fo often repeated Argument against the Guilt of Adam's firft Sin being imputed to his Pofterity, viz. becaufe he, and not they, committed the finful Act, muft needs be good for nothing. Facts are ftubborn Things, which will yield and buckle to no Arguments whatever. And, if these Facts are true, it is as certainly true, as that the Judge of all

the

the Earth doth right, that, though no Man can be conscious of his having committed a Crime, which not he, but another Perfon committed, and though there can be no Consciousness of perfonal Guilt, but upon perfonal Tranfgreffion; yet it is not, in all Cafes, unjust and unequitable to impute the Guilt of one Man's Sin, or the Obligation to fuffer Punishment for it, to another Person. It is not always unjuft to punish Children for the Sins of their Parents; for this is no more than what God has actually done, very often, and what he does in the Course of his Providence every Day; and it is what the wifest and most civilized Nations upon Earth continually practise. And why then fhould it be thought unjuft and unequitable, for God fo to impute the Sin of Adam to all his Pofterity, as to inflict fome Punishment upon them for it? If the Reader defires to be further fatisfied of the Reasonableness and Equity of this divine Frocedure, I would refer him to a late Book, viz. The Ruin and Recovery of Mankind, in which, I believe, he will find the moft eafy, rational, and fcriptural Account of the Doctrine of Original Sin that has yet been published.

After all that Mr T. has faid, to prove that the Guilt of our firft Parents Sin belonged wholly to themselves, and that we, their Pofterity, have nothing to do with it, C 2

nor

nor any Reason to be forry for it; he cannot but be fenfible of one notorious Fact, too glaring to be denied, that looks with a very malignant Afpect on his Scheme and Argument, viz. That all Adam's Pofterity are, in fact, fubjected to the fame Afflictions and Mortality here, by Sentence inflicted upon our first Parents; and they defcend to us in Confequence of their Tranfgreffion, p. 20. But yet our Author is very pofitive, that thefe are not inflicted upon us as Punishments for their Sin. We may Suffer for the Sin, and actually do fuffer for it but we are not punished for their Sin, because we are not guilty of it, p.21. If Mr T. would have reasoned upon Facts, instead of endeavouring to make Facts buckle to his Scheme, the Argument would naturally have stood thus; We do, in fact, suffer for Adam's Sin, and that too by Sentence inflicted on our first Parents, we fuffer the fame Mortality and Death which God punished them with, in confequence of their Tranfgreffion, therefore we are, fome Way, and in fome Sense, guilty of their Sin; for the Judge of all the Earth doth right, and, therefore, will not make a Perfon fuffer for a Sin which he is in no Senfe guilty of. I would ask here, What is Guilt, but an Obligation to fuffer Punishment for Sin? Now fince we fuffer the fame penal Evil, viz. Death which God threatned to, and inflicted upon, Adam, for his Sin;

and

and fince, it is allowed, we fuffer this for Adam's Sin, and fince also we are obliged to undergo this Suffering by the Sentence of God, who has appointed unto all Men once to die, because Adam finned; is not the Conclufion then most plain and evident? Therefore we are all fome Way guilty of Adam's Sin. But our Author has a quaint Conceit to help in this preffing Difficulty, viz. that the Sufferings, Afflictions, Mortality, and Death, which came upon Adam, and which come upon us, for his Sin, are not inflicted under the Notion of a Curfe, but they are given as Benefits to Mankind. As to our firft Parents, he observes, that although (in the Sentence which God pronounced upon them) they are manifeftly fubjected to Sorrow, Labour, and Death; yet thefe are not inflicted under the Notion of a Curfe, p. 19. This Gentleman fhould, by all means, have told us what a Curfe is, or, rather, in what new Senfe he understands that Word; for without the Help of fome new Meaning, I fufpect no Mortal will be able to distinguish betwixt a Curse, and those Punishments which God inflicted on our first Parents for their Sin. It is obfervable, he tells us, that the Spirit of God wholly abftains from the Ufe of that Word, viz. Curse, even with regard to their outward Condition ; and much more with regard to their Souls.

But,

But, on the contrary, it is obfervable, the Sentence on Adam begins with Curfed is the Ground for thy fake, Thorns and Thiftles fhall it bring forth to thee. And if this Curfe does not relate to Adam's outward Condition, what does it relate to? In what Senfe could the Ground be curfed, which had neither finned, nor was capable of being punished, but only in regard to Adam's outward Condition? It was Part of the Curse upon him, that the Ground was now made lefs fruitful than before; fo that it would require his painful Labour to till and cultivate it. Thus the Jews are threatned, in cafe of their Difobedience, curfed fhall be the Fruit of thy Land, the Increase of thy Kine, and the Flocks of thy Sheep, Deut. xxviii. 19. Did any body ever conceit that this Curfe was threatned merely to the Fields, the Corn, and the Cattle, and not at all to the Proprietors and Owners of them. A Line in Milton, if our Author had read it, might have prevented this egregious Blunder; where the true State and Meaning of the Curfe upon the Ground is expreffed with beautiful Propriety.

On me the Curfe aflope "Glanc'd on the Ground: With Labour I