infidelity. Suppofe a man to have divested himself of partiality and prejudice, and to have honestly enquired into the truth and divinity both of the Chriftian and the Mahometan revelations, and fuppofe the produce of fuch enquiry to be faith in the Chriftian, and infidelity, with refpect to the Mahometan revelation; then, the queftion would be, whether infidelity, with regard to the Mahometan revelation, be not equally valuable and moral, as faith in the Chriftian? And, the answer, I prefume, will be, that one of these is as valuable as the other; or, rather, that the morality, in each cafe, was not so much relative to faith, nor infidelity, as to that rectitude of action which was distinct from, and previous to both. And, let it be admitted, for argument fake, that the reverse of this was the cafe; namely, that the produce of fuch enquiry was faith in the Mahometan, and infidelity with refpect to the Chriftian revelation; and then, the queftion will be, whether faith and infidelity in this latter cafe, be not equally valuable and moral, as faith and infidelity in the former? And the anfwer, I think, will be, that the latter would be equally valuable, equally moral with the former: Ifay, I think, the answer will be this,

(except

(except the judgment be strongly biaffed, by fome unreasonable prejudice, which is fupposed to have been St. Thomas's cafe ;) because infidelity is equally as valuable, or moral, as faith, when they are equally well grounded. And, as faith is plainly diftinct from that rectitude of action which is previous to it; fo, furely, what is proper and peculiar to one of thefe, ought not to be applied to the other; and yet, I think, the blending together, or incorporating of these, and then, making what is proper and peculiar to a part, relative to the whole, is that upon which the strength of Mr. Foster's reafoning, and the weight of his argument depends. And as, in the difquifition of all questions of this nature, great care ought to be taken, in guarding against all hurtful errors; so, in order thereto, I think, we must not only distinguish betwixt faith, and what is previous to it, but also betwixt faith, and what may be confequent upon it. Suppose a man to divest himself of partiality and prejudice, and carefully and candidly to enquire, whether there will be a future ftate of existence to men, and a future retribution; and fuppofe the produce of fuch enquiry to be faith in both these, and that fuch faith was proper, as being proportionate

to

to the evidence upon which it was grounded and fuppofe likewife, that the believer, in confequence of his faith, was led to repent of the evil of his ways, to cease to do evil, and learn to do well; then, tho' there would be a propriety, or worthiness in his faith, and in his behaviour precedent to it; yet, the principal worthiness, or merit of the case, would not be relative to these, but to that rectitude of mind and life which was confequent to them; and, it would be this chiefly that would render the believer pleasing and acceptable to his Maker. For, if the faith before mentioned should have no fuch good effect upon the mind and behaviour of the believer, but he still goes on in a vicious course, and lives as if there would be no future ftate, no future retribution, which may be, and, perhaps, fometimes is the cafe; then, fuch a believer, notwithstanding the propriety of his faith, and of his conduct previous to it, would be unacceptable to God; and his conduct, the whole, would be so far from entitling him to a blefing, that, on the contrary, it would bring upon him a most grievous curse. But further, the propriety and worthiness that may take place in faith, and in that rectitude of action which may be previ

upon

ous

I

may

sus to it, these rise no higher than a virtuous or proper felfishness; he that enquireth, enquireth for himself, and he that believeth, believeth for himself, and not for another; and the worthiness of these fall infinitely short, if fo fpeak, of that worthinefs which is relative to a virtuous, godlike benevolence, or what one agent generously does for another. What an agent does for himself, it carries with it it's own reward; what an agent generously does for others, renders him worthy of recompence or reward from all.

As the cafe of St. Thomas has been under confideration, I think, it may not be amifs to obferve, that the branch of history, wherein that cafe is contained, feems to be of doubtful authority; because it seems, at least, to contradict, in two points, the other hiftories, wherein the refurrection of Chrift is recorded; and thereby it seems to weaken the cause it is brought to support, viz. the doctrine of Christ's refurrection. The purpose Chrift's refurrection was immediately directed to, was his qualifying his difciples, by giving them proper inftructions for preaching his gospel to the world; and his commiffioning or authorizing them to execute that truft. And the doing of this properly, feems to have required

that he should fully have inftructed them first, and then commiffioned them afterwards; this last act being the finishing part, or that which concluded and put a period to his miniftry among them. And it seemed alfo to require, that, when the commiffion* was given, all should be present which were defigned to act under it; because otherwife the abfent perfons would have no commiffion at all; and it seems very ftrange, that Chrift fhould have chofe a time for giving this commiffion, when any one perfon was abfent, who was intended to act by virtue of it's authority; thefe points are what the nature and propriety of the thing feem to call for. And as the account of the refurrection of Chrift is contained in five histories; fo four of them make Chrift's giving the aforefaid commiffion the last minifterial act he performed to his difciples, except his bleffing them when he was parted from them. And as to the

other

* That Chrift fhould give a commiffion to his difciples, and that five hiftorians fhould take upon them to tranfmit this commiffion to pofterity in the very words of Chrift; and yet fhould all differ from each other with refpect to it, is exceeding ftrange, and fhews a defect of memory, or fomething elfe. This commiffion was of fuch concern, that one would have thought it should have been fo strongly impreffed upon the minds of those that heard it, as never to have been forgot, in whole, or in part.