66

"There is reason to fear," says another, that many have imbibed a notion of original sin, considerably different from what is here asserted. It is not improbable that the terms by which the evil has been commonly expressed without a due examination of the idea intended, have had no small influence to effect this. The frequent use of such analogical and allusive terms as pollution, defilement, corruption,, contamination, and the like, seems to intimate something positive; as these expressions in their original meaning convey an idea of something superadded to the subject. Whereas other terms, though equally analogical and allusive, imply no such thing; such as disorder, discord, confusion, and the like. We do not mean to condemn the use of the former, or to recommend the latter to their exclusion, but only design to caution against a wrong inference from a frequent use of

them."

It appears, then, that human beings are produced with simply the faculties and powers, essential to their nature as intelligent and accountable, without any connatural bias towards either moral good or evil; and that being destitute of the divine image as above explained, they certainly become, on the supposition of the continuance of life till moral agency commences, personal transgressors

* Dr. Edward Williams, Note on Edwards, as above.

of the divine law, and therefore justly amenable to the supreme moral Governor.

To entertain correct and scriptural views concerning the natural depravity of mankind, is on many accounts of considerable importance, and especially so in the bearings of this doctrine on our enquiries into the condition of departed infants. Were they as depraved, the subjects, as some have represented or rather misrepresented the doctrine, of a "quality like a taint, tincture, or infection, altering the natural constitution, faculties and dispositions of our souls,*" they must, from their very birth, appear odious to a holy God. But as the doctrine is above explained, though there subsist in them nothing to attract the regards of infinite holiness, there is nothing to excite its abhorrence. And by the termination of life during infancy, the soul is removed from the operation of those causes which would otherwise have induced personal transgression, and thus separated between it and God.t

On the ground, therefore, of natural depravity merely, there appears nothing to excite the repugnance of divine holiness to the happiness of deceased infants; and if their relation to Adam preclude them from future bliss, it must be not by the

* Taylor on Original Sin, p. 187, quoted by Edwards, as above.

+ Isa. lix. 2.

transmission of a depraved nature, but by subjection to guilt in consequence of his fall.

That infants are held guilty, or subject to natural evil in consequence of the fall, is generally allowed to be a doctrine of revelation, and appears evident from their sufferings and death. But so far as their future happiness is concerned, various considerations may at least diminish the apprehensions which this acknowledged fact too commonly suggests.

The guilt imputable to the posterity of fallen Adam, is maintained by most divines to be, not that which he incurred as an individual, by violating his natural obligations to God; but that which he incurred as a partaker of federal privileges, by violating the condition on which they had been granted. "What Adam therefore suffered for breach of covenant," says a judicious divine,* "was a privation of chartered benefits. The unavoidable effect of this, was DEATH; a privation of spiritual life-which continued is death eternal, -and a privation of that protection and care which would have preserved from temporal death." From what has been observed above, it appears, that the privation of spiritual life constitutes the depravity of human nature, entailed by the fall; whether this must unavoidably be continued, and involve all the

*Dr. Williams, in Edwards, as above, p. 334.

horrors of eternal death in the case of deceased infants, is the precise point of enquiry.

Their corporal sufferings in the present world, do not involve this alarming conclusion. It does not necessarily follow, that he who endures "a privation of that protection and care which would have preserved from temporal death," is, and must be, subject to eternal death. Believers in Christ are no longer considered as subject to the full guilt of Adam's transgression; yet are they equally with others liable to infirmities, sickness, pain, and death; nor can we, by any external dispensations of divine Providence, discriminate between the saved and the lost of mankind. It is indeed true, that such believers give moral indications of "repentance towards God, and faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ," which, according to the gospel, ascertain their interest in the life and immortality that it brings to light: by sincere repentance, they are looking to him whom their sins have pierced; and by living faith, they have fled for refuge to the hope set before them. Hence, notwithstanding their subjection to affliction and death, we have an explicit divine warrant, as the ground of our hope for their future happiness, which we confessedly have not in the case of deceased infants. Yet, on the other hand, it ought to be considered, that infants have no personal sins of which to repent, or for which they need a personal recourse to the only

refuge. It is of still greater importance to bear in mind, that we are not here investigating the positive grounds of our hopes respecting them. Reference was made to the affliction and death of believers, to evince, by obvious facts, that implication in the temporal consequences of the fall, does not certainly imply subjection to its full and ultimate consequences; and thus far, the reference appears conclusive in favour of departed infants.

The punishment of sin beyond the grave, appears chiefly to consist in total and hopeless exclusion from the favour of God; the pangs of everlasting remorse from a conviction of having justly incurred that exclusion; and the rage of unbridled appetites and passions, struggling in vain for gratification or relief. These, the bitterest ingredients in the sinner's cup, it seems unwarrantable to suppose can ever fall into that of beings who die without personal transgression.

No portion of the Sacred Volume has occurred, which denounces eternal banishment from the presence of God, on any who have not forfeited that blessing by personal crime. When such declaration is adduced,-clear and unequivocal as the contrary impressions received from the whole tenour of revelation must require, in order to efface them from our hearts,-it will become us to bow and adore. But until then, our hopes remain, so far as this consideration extends, altogether unobstructed.