motions of inordinate desire, no intestine conflicts between reason and the passions. The distressing struggle between the flesh and the spirit had not commenced: those two parties, now incessantly at war, were then in perfect concord. The senses had not yet rebelled: man might safely credit the information they communicated, and had no cause to distrust the sober pleasures they enabled him to enjoy. He was not obliged to be always employed in subduing rebellious passions, and mortifying his body to preserve the vigour of his mind. Reason was the charioteer, and the affections were like tractable horses that know their driver, and readily obey the rein. Happy state! where the under. standing was like a sky beaming with radiance, and shedding upon the earth, I mean on the inferior part of the soul, none but benign influences. Happy state! where the will was like a queen equally prudent and free, governing according to the laws, absolute over her subjects, but always guided by justice and equity. Such was the condition of man in his integrity and innocence. "God made man

Let us proceed to attempt a fuller illustration of this matter. What is right is properly something

What is denomi

conformed to a rule or standard. nated uprightness or rectitude, is a thing purely relative; a quality and disposition which has relation to some rules, to some law that regulates and prescribes duty. Had man, then, such a rule, a measure of duty to which he was required to be conformed, and to which he was actually conformed in his state of integrity? This is not to be doubted.

He could no more be without law, than without God. He was upright, inasmuch as his thoughts and desires were conformed to the law of his Creator. Being a creature, he could not be independent, sole master of himself, exempt from the control of his Maker, and owing him no homage: this was impossible, Subjection to the divine sovereignty under certain conditions, was just and necessary. He was under indispensable obligations to render love, obedience, and gratitude. The laws which require the love, gratitude, and obedience of a reasonable creature towards his Author, are natural and immutable, necessarily resulting from the mutual relation of Creator and creature. Being endued with intelligence and reason, man could not be guided simply by impulsion, by a physical power unconnected with any knowledge or contemplation of duty. God's government of man consisted not merely in actuating him, like brute and insensible creatures, by the sole force of his power and the simple impression of his concurrence. He governs all beings in a manner proportioned to their nature. Thus he not only gave man at his creation reason and faculties capable of knowing and distinguishing good and evil, but impressed on those faculties principles sufficient to guide that discrimination. He also gave the will a determination, a proper bias towards moral good, capable of inclining it to the right side. He furnished man with all needful information respecting his duty, and endued him with sufficient ability to conform to the laws which he gave him, both natural and positive. Was not this "making man upright ?”

Adam received from God natural laws, and a positive law, or a law of arbitrary establishment. By natural laws, I mean those moral obligations which right reason discovers to be necessary and indispensable, and which arise out of the very nature of things; such as the duty of love to God. These laws needed not to be given at first, otherwise than in a way of internal impression. They so accord with the nature of man, so necessarily result from the most simple use of his faculties, and are so adapted to his condition in a state of rectitude, that it was impossible for them not to be approved by his reason; and as angels in heaven have been able to know their duty without any word, oracle, or external revelation; so nothing more was necessary than an impression on the mind and heart, for man in a state of innocence to be sufficiently acquainted with the moral and natural laws, and to conform his conduct to their obligations. This is evident from his retaining, after his fall, a conscience which distinguishes good and evil; and from the circumstances of the heathens themselves, "which shew "the work of the law written in their hearts, their "conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts "the mean while accusing, or else excusing one "another." These natural laws were also perfectly agreeable to the inclination and bias of his will, They were not resisted by any internal principle of opposition: man found nothing within him repugnant or contrary to these laws, nothing to cause vacillation respecting his duty, or to excite a doubt what he should practise or avoid.

Rom. ii. 15.

To these natural laws, it was highly reasonable that God should add some positive commands; that he should give to man, according to his good pleasure, some precept of arbitrary appointment, for the clearer manifestation of his supreme and absolute power, and the more express assertion of that empire, that right of sovereign authority, which the Creator possesses over his creature. In all his covenants, God has given to men two kinds of commandments, some of eternal, indispensable obligation, others of an establishment purely free and arbitrary, which he might either enjoin or not. Man in his state of innocence was the subject of both kinds of laws. Beside the moral duties required by the constitution of his nature, he received the wellknown prohibition,-not to eat the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. In reference to both these classes of laws, "God made man "upright" he gave him a capacity to perceive the necessity and justice of obedience, and there was nothing in him but what promoted submission to the pleasure of his Lord. The simple light of

reason was sufficient to shew him that he was bound to conform himself to the will of God. This was enough to induce compliance with the interdiction of a particular fruit. The Creator chose to receive this mark of homage and dependence from him, as his vassal and tributary. Had he not a general principle of love to God, an obligation of gratitude, and a consciousness of dependence; which disposed him to render, and that with sincere pleasure, this small token of homage? And with regard to the natural laws, not only had he the same general

motives to incline him to obey them, but he had ideas and principles which enabled him to comprehend and feel the justice and necessity, the beauty and utility, of those duties.

To his precepts God annexed an express denunciation of death, and at least a tacit promise of life, immortality, and blessedness. He treated with man in a way of covenant. He proposed himself as his rewarder and benefactor. He required his obedience upon certain conditions. His laws were accompanied by every thing necessary to establish their authority, or adapted to incline man to obedience, and confirm him in the practice of his duty. What could have been done for him which the Lord had not done? In what had God been wanting, that was required to render man just and upright? And how could we now complain of the state in which his Creator placed him? Lastly, this rectitude of man, this original righteousness, could not fail of ensuring his happiness as long as he should conform himself to the laws of his Maker, and retain his uprightness. Consistently with his own goodness, and according to the tenour of the covenant of nature, God could not do otherwise than confer perpetual happiness on a creature who should have persevered in integrity. And if we consider what this integrity includes, it was impossible but it must render man happy in the In that state man was very nature of things. acquainted with the supreme good, and tended towards it. He knew and loved his God, held communion with him, and enjoyed the assurance of his protection and the sense of his love. He experienced perfect tranquility, possessing health of body,