not thou my money into the bank, that at my coming I might have required mine own with usury?" Or, as it is in a parallel place, "Thou oughtest therefore to have put my money to the exchangers, and then, at my coming, I should have received mine own with usury." This was as much as to say, "You knew that I gave you a talent, and commanded you to occupy and improve it for my profit. You knew that I was very strict with my servants, and would require of them all my due. You ought, therefore, to have had a heart to improve my talent to the best advantage; and had you had a heart to improve it to the best advantage, I should have received mine own with interest; or, as you say, I should have reaped where I had not sown, and received from you more than I gave you; which is perfectly reasonable, because you are, and acknowledge you are, my servant." Now sinners have no more reason to complain that God is unjust and severe in requiring them to have that which he has not given them, than the slothful servant had to complain that his master was unjust and severe in requiring that of him which he had not given him. The reason, in both cases, is perfectly plain and obvious. The master required nothing of his servant but what the talent he gave him enabled and bound him to give him. And God requires nothing of sinners but what the talents he has given them enable and bind them to give him. The talents which God has given to sinners both enable, and bind them to have a good heart; that is, to have an heart to improve all the talents he has given them to his glory. If they presume, therefore, to justify themselves in not having a heart to improve the talents which God has given them, their own mouths condemn them.

2. Sinners have no reason to complain of God for his requiring them to have a good heart which he has not given them, for this is the only thing that he has a right to require of them. They know that he has no right to require them to have any natural talents, or any intellectual and moral powers, which he has not given them. They know that he has no right to require them to have a selfish or wicked heart. They know, therefore, that he has no right to require any thing of them except a holy or benevolent heart. And to deny that he has a right to require this of them, is virtually to deny that he has a right to require any thing of them; and, of consequence, that they ever did, or ever can commit any sin. For if God has no right to require any thing of them, they cannot be guilty of disobeying him, or committing any sin at all. If God has no right to require them to have a good heart, which he has not given them, then he has no right to require them to do any thing which they are not willing to do; which must render them completely innocent. He has 12

VOL. VI.

no right to require them to love him with all the heart, unless they choose to love him supremely. He has no right to require them to love their fellow men as themselves, unless they choose to exercise disinterested benevolence towards them. He has no right to require them to repent, to believe, to speak the truth, to do, or to refrain from doing whatever they please. For any precept, or prohibition of his, necessarily implies that he requires such love, such faith, such repentance, or some such affection, as he has not given them; which, they say, is reaping where he has not sown, and gathering where he has not strewed; or, in other words, requiring that of them which he has not given them. Now can there be any thing more unreasonable and absurd than this complaint of God, for requiring a good heart which he has not given them? It implies that God has no right to command them in a single instance, and that they are under no obligation to obey him in a single instance. The complaint of the slothful servant implied that his master had no right to require any obedience or service of him; which was absolutely criminal and extremely displeasing to his master, who said unto him, "Thou wicked and slothful servant: thou knewest that I reap where I sowed not, and gather where I have not strewed." This you have unreasonably and presumptuously complained of. Therefore his master commands, "Take the talent from him, and give it unto him which hath ten talents;and cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness: There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth." Thus God views, and will treat sinners, who complain of his injustice and severity in requiring them to have a good heart which he has not given them, or for requiring them to do any thing which they are unwilling to do.

3. One person has no reason to complain of another, who has authority over him, for requiring him to do what he is able to do but has no heart to do. A child has no reason to complain of a parent for requiring him to do what he is able to do, though he has no heart to do it. A servant has no reason to complain of a master for requiring him to do what he is able to do, though he has no heart to do it. And a subject has no reason to complain of a ruler for requiring him to do what he is able to do, though he has no heart to do it. All human authority supposes a right to require that of men which they are able to do, but have no heart to do. No subject of human authority, therefore, has reason to complain of being required to do any thing which is right in itself, and which he is able to do, if he were willing. The reason why the Israelites in Egypt had a right to complain of their task masters was, because they required more than they were able to perform, though ever so

willing to obey. Now if no subjects of human authority have any reason to complain of being required to do what they are able to do, but have no heart to do, then surely no subjects of divine authority have any reason to complain of being required to do what they are able to do, but have no heart to do. They are as much the subjects of God as they are the subjects of their rulers. They are as much the servants of God as they are the servants of their masters. And they are as much the children of God as they are the children of their parents. It is upon the ground of his supreme right to command, that God requires a cordial and universal obedience of sinners, as well as of others. "A son honoreth his father, and a servant his master if, then, I be a father, where is mine honor? and if I be a master, where is my fear? saith the Lord of hosts." If a subject has no reason to complain of his prince, nor a servant of his master, nor a child of his parents, for requiring him to do what he is able to do, but has no heart to do; then a sinner has no reason to complain of his Creator and supreme Sovereign, for requiring him to do what he is able to do, but has no heart to do. God does not require sinners to make brick without straw, nor to do any thing which he has not given them talents or natural abilities to do. They have no reason to complain of his requiring them to love and serve him, though he has not given them a dutiful, obedient and benevolent heart. Farthermore,

4. Sinners have no reason to complain of God that he condemns them for not doing what they are able to do, but have no heart to do; for they condemn themselves for the same thing. The idle sinner, when he finds himself plunged into poverty and distress, condemns himself for neglecting to do what he had health and strength to do, but had no heart to do. The spendthrift condemns himself for neglecting to save his property, though he had no heart to preserve it; when he feels the evil effects of his foolish prodigality. The disobedient sinner condemns himself for his disobedience, when he sees the fatal consequence of his disobedience; though God gave him no heart to obey. Saul condemned himself before Samuel, for not obeying the voice of the Lord in the destruction of the Amalekites, which he had power, but no heart to do. Joseph's brethren, in distress, condemned themselves for their guilty conduct towards him, though they had no heart in the time of it, to speak or act peaceably towards him. Pharaoh, in extremity, condemned himself before Moses, for disobeying the divine messages; though God had not softened, but hardened his heart. Judas judged, condemned, and punished himself for not loving and obeying his master, though he had no heart to love and

obey him. Those who were awakened under Peter's preaching on the day of Pentecost, condemned themselves for their treatment of Christ, which they would not have been guilty of, if God had given them a heart to know and love the Lord of glory. And all awakened and convinced sinners always condemn themselves for not doing what they are able, but have no heart to do. Such abundant evidence we have, that sinners condemn themselves for not doing what they are able to do, but have no heart to do. They are, therefore, extremely absurd and criminal, in complaining of God for condemning them for not loving and obeying him, which they are able to do, but have no heart to do. If sinners will now only consider candidly and attentively what God has given them, and does not require, and what he has not given them, but does require, they cannot fail of feeling convinced that they have no ground to complain of any precept, or prohibition, which he has enjoined upon them in the Bible; and that it is owing to the blinding nature of their moral depravity, that they have been, and still are, plunged in darkness upon this most plain and important subject.

IMPROVEMENT.

1. It appears from what has been said upon this subject, that sinners are not under a natural, but only a moral inability to do all that God requires them to do. God does not require them to get any more, or better talents, than he has given them. This they are under a natural inability to do. They cannot add one cubit to their stature, nor one intellectual faculty to their minds. All that God requires of them is, to improve all the talents or natural faculties he has given them. This they do not want natural ability to do, but only a good heart, or moral ability. The slothful servant was as able to improve the one talent that was given him, as the servant that had two talents was able to improve his two; or as he that had ten talents was able to improve his ten. Sinners are as able to improve all the talents they have, as saints are to improve all the talents they have. Sinners in general have as good natural talents as saints in general, and they are under no greater natural inability to love God, embrace the gospel, and obey all its precepts, than saints are. But they are under a total moral inability to do these things. Hence our Saviour says, "No man can come unto me, except the Father who hath sent me draw him." Sinners have natural ability to do their duty, because they have natural talents; but they have not moral ability to do their duty, because they have no heart to improve their natural talents. The distinction between natural ability and moral ina

bility is as plain and obvious, as the distinction between natural talents and a heart to improve them. This distinction is to be seen and felt all over the world. We every where see men of fine natural talents, who have no heart to improve them. And we all feel, at times at least, that we have talents that we have no heart to improve. But notwithstanding this plain and sensible fact, how many are there among the learned and unlearned, among saints and sinners, who either directly or indirectly deny the distinction between natural and moral inability; and maintain that sinners are under a natural, and not merely a moral inability to embrace the gospel, or to do any thing in a right and acceptable manner. This must be owing to their not making a distinction between a talent, and a heart to improve it; or in supposing the want of a heart is the want of a talent; which is absurd, because a heart is no talent. A talent is something that God gives, but never requires; a heart is something that God requires, whether he gives it or not. A talent is something passive; but a heart is something active. A talent has no moral qualities; but a heart has moral qualities. A talent is something which never deserves either praise or blame; but a heart always deserves either praise or blame. No talent or rational faculty can change; but a heart may change, and often does. It is extremely strange, therefore, that so many should think that the heart is a talent, and the want of it is the want of a natural talent, or intellectual faculty, which lays sinners under a natural inability to love God, to repent of sin, and to embrace the gospel. No person would ever think that sinners are under a natural inability to love and serve God, if he did not imagine that the want of a good heart is the want of a natural talent, or intellectual faculty, to love and serve God. And whoever thinks that a want of a good heart is the want of a talent or natural faculty, must, to be consistent, think that sinners are as really under a natural inability to do their duty, as a blind man is to see, or a deaf man to hear. But it appears from what has been said of the distinction between talents and the heart, that sinners want no talents, but only a good heart, in order to embrace the gospel; and consequently, their inability is altogether moral, and not natural.

2. It appears from what has been said, that it is of great importance to understand the distinction between talents and a heart to improve them; or between natural and moral inability. It is absolutely necessary to understand this distinction, in order to understand some of the most important truths in the Bible. Without seeing this distinction, who can see the propriety of the first and fundamental law of God's moral kingdom, which commands every person, let his heart be what it will, to love