it manifestly could not be maintained for any length of time by any but a divine power-controlling when necessary the course of nature, and the conduct of man, to accomplish its purposes and execute its will.

The confirmation which the evidence of Revelation derives from the extraordinary Providence exercised over the Jews, is not the only good effect resulting from it. In this dispensation, mankind are enabled to discern the principles and the process of that moral government which God exercises over nations, even in the course of his ordinary providence, which undoubtedly dispenses public prosperity and public calamity, and regulates the rise and decay of empires, on the very same principles which are so strikingly displayed in the history of the chosen people. The divine interposition in the general government of the world is indeed conducted by the regular operation of secondary causes, and therefore more silent and unseen than the course of that extraordinary providence then exhibited; but it is not therefore less certain, or less effective. In this part of sacred history the judgments of God are distinctly and solemnly exhibited for the instruction of man. Here we are convinced by experimental and decisive proofs, that "the Most High "ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever "he will;"*" that wisdom and might are his ;"+"that the race is not to the swift, nor the battle to the strong;" for "it is the Lord of Hosts who governs the hearts of kings, and "subdueth the strength of the mighty;"§ "He hath purposed, "who shall disannul it? his hand is stretched out, and who "shall turn it back?" || "Who hath hardened himself against "him, and prospered ?" In a word, in the history of the Jewish state this great truth is clearly and powerfully impressedThat as "righteousness exalteth a nation," so "sin is the re"proach of any people :"** a lesson which, but for the immediate and extraordinary providence displayed in this awful dispensatiou, could never have been so forcibly inculcated, or so clearly understood.

66

* Dan. iv. 17.
§ Job, xii.

+ Ibid. ii. 20.

|| Isaiah, xiv. 27. ** Proverbs, xiv. 34.

Eccles. ix. 11. ¶ Ib. ix. 4.

SECT. II.-Visiting the sins of the fathers upon the children.-In what sense to be understood-Not unjust-Necessary in a theocracy, as far as relates to temporal and national punishments-Chiefly denounced against idolatry-In this case not only just but merciful— Human tribunals not permitted by the Mosaic Law to act upon this principle-Why-Analogous to God's general providemce-A dispensation of mercy rather than severity—Limited in its extent and application.

EXODUS, XX. 5, 6.

"Visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, to the third and fourth generation of "them that hate me; and shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my "commandments."

:

THE consistency and necessity of temporal sanctions in the Jewish Law, we have endeavoured to establish, in the last Section if with success, we derive from this a clear and easy answer to the objection which at first appears to arise from the denunciation, "That God would visit the sins of the fathers

66

upon the children, to the third and fourth generations of them "that hate him; and shew mercy unto thousands in them who "should love him, and keep his commandments." The only circumstance that makes this denunciation appear severe or unjust, and this promise unreasonable, is the supposition, that the sanc tions of a future state are understood; which it would certainly be repugnant to the divine justice to suppose should be distributed according to such a rule as this. But this objection altogether vanishes, the moment we are convinced that the reward and punishment here meant, relate only to outward circumstances of prosperity and distress in the present life; because, if such a sanction was necessary in the particular system of providential administration by which God thought fit to govern the Jewish race, it is evident any equality as to individuals would be certainly and easily remedied in a future life;*

We cannot but believe this to be the case, in many instances of divine judgment recorded in the sacred history; as in the children of Achan involved in the punishment of his violation of the divine anathema, Joshua, vii. 24, (though it is possible they may have seen his conduct, and by concealing it, been partakers of his guilt;) and in the punishment denounced in consequence of the

so that each should receive his final reward exactly according to his true merit in the sight of God, and "thus the Judge of all "the earth do right."

Now it seems undeniable, that such a sanction was a necessary part of the Jewish polity, so far as this required a providential distribution of national rewards and punishments. These affecting the great mass of the people, and extending through such portions of time as were necessary to give them their full efficacy in forming the national character, could not be confined within the limits of a single generation; or exclude from their operation each private family in succession, as the heads of that family might drop off, whose conduct had originally contributed to swell the mass of national guilt, or contribute to the progress of national improvement.

Thus when it became necessary to chastise the Jewish idolatry by a captivity of such a length as might permanently reform it, which was the result of the captivity in Babylon, a period of seventy years was found scarcely adequate to this effect. Thus the sins of the parents were necessarily visited on the children to the third generation, so far as related to national suffering. Yet surely we cannot derive any impeachment against divine justice or mercy, from a dispensation which placed the children of the guilty in a situation so favourable for their moral and religious improvement, by checking the crimes of their parents; while those individuals, who, though exempt from the national guilt, might yet be swept away in the overwhelming torrent of national calamity, would meet abundant compensation for their unmerited sufferings, by the favour of their God in another and better world.

idolatries of Jeroboam, Baasha, and Ahab, involving their entire posterity. At least in the instance of Abijah, the son of Jeroboam, this recompense seems to be more than obscurely hinted at. On his falling sick, Jeroboam's queen disguises herself, and repairs to Abijah the prophet; who though blind with age, is enabled by God immediately to discover her, and to announce to her that God would destroy the whole house of Jeroboam; and in particular, that the moment she entered into the city to her own door, her son should die; and it is added, 1 Kings xiv. 13. "And all Israel shall mourn for him, and bury him: for he only of "Jeroboam shall come to the grave," (i. e. obtain regular burial) "because "in him there is found some good thing toward the Lord God of Israel, in the "house of Jeroboam." On this fact can we believe the reflecting Jews even then understood that the only recompense to this child's goodness was his dying of

Considered, therefore, as forming part of a scheme of national reward and punishment, the sanction thus promulgated was equally just and necessary; and to promulgate it thus clearly could not but materially contribute to check the inconsiderateness of transgression, and confirm the steadiness of virtue. But the Mosaic Law certainly employed the same sanction to influence the conduct of each individual. Nor is this objectionable if that sanction was a necessary part of the providential system of discipline exercised over the nation at large. Each individual by his separate transgression contributed to the accumulated weight of national guilt; and it was just, that each should be taught to regard the share of national calamity, which he and his posterity must sustain, as a personal chastisement from the hand of God.

But the operatiou of this sanction was not confined to the participation of national rewards or punishments; it certainly effected individuals who violated the commands to which it was annexed even though such violation was confined to themselves, and could not therefore draw down any national chastisement ; but let it be recollected, that the great crime, the temporal punishment of which was to extend to the third and fourth generation, was idolatry;* that source of all profaneness and

a disease rather than by the sword, and being regularly buried and mourned for though he died prematurely, while his idolatrous father was permitted to reign twenty-two years? I acknowledge this narrative appears to me to supply an intelligible hint of a future state. Vide the next Lecture.

* On this subject, Maimonides, More Nevochim, Pars. I. Cap. liv. p. 90, makes the following observations, which seem just and important: "As to that character "of God, of visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, know, this re"lates only to the crime of idolatry; as may be proved from the Decalogue, which "says, on the third and fourth generation of them who hate me; for nobody is "said to hate God but an idolater; as the Law expresses, (Deut. xii. 31.) Every "abomination of the Lord which he hateth have they done unto their gods:' and "mention is made of the fourth generation, because no man can hope to see "more of his progeny than four generations. When therefore the idolaters of "any city are to be put to death, then not only the parent idolater shall be des"troyed, but his son and his grandson, and his great grandson; as if it said, By "this denunciation it is signified, that the seed and posterity of idolaters were to "be cut off, however young, on account of the crimes of their parents and ances❝tors. And this precept we find universally observed in the Law; whence against a city which had apostatized to idolatry, the Law commands that it should be destroyed, and every thing therein; and this for the sake of guarding against and preventing that pollution and guilt, which might otherwise arise from it."

pollution, which under the Jewish polity was not only a violation of that religious duty for which the children of Israel were set apart from every nation under heaven, but was besides the highest crime against the state which acknowledged Jehovah as supreme Sovereign, the sole object of civil allegiance, as well as of religious worship: on whose immediate protection the whole nation depended; from whom was derived the authority of every part of the government, the tenure of all property, and the enjoyment of every civil right. To introduce idolatry, was therefore to subvert the foundation of the social union, to violate the most sacred and solemn duties of allegiance, and engage in the foulest treason, and the most audacious rebellion. The supreme sovereign therefore denounced against such treason and such rebellion, not only condign punishment on the offender himself, but the extension of this punishment to his family and immediate descendants; a principle recognised by so many of the most civilized states, in which the crime of treason is punished not only by death, but the confiscation of property, and the taint of blood; a principle which, when carried into execution by a human tribunal, may operate in particular instances with unmerited or excessive severity, but which in the Jewish state was applied in every instance by unerring justice. "For the Deity, "(as Warburton well observes, *) though he allowed capital "punishment to be inflicted for the crime of lese majesty, on the "person of the offender, by the delegated administration of the "Law; yet concerning his family or posterity, he reserved the "inquisition of the crime to himself, and expressly forbad the "magistrate to meddle with it, in the common course of justice. "The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither "shall the children be put to death for the fathers; every man "shall be put to death for his own sin."+"Now God's appro"priating to himself the execution of this Law would abun"dantly justify the equity of it, even supposing it had been given

* Divine Legation, Book V. sect. v. Vol. iv. p. 332.

Deut. xxiv. 16. See this law acted upon, 2 Kings xiv. 5 & 6; where we are told, that Amaziah king of Judah, "as soon as the kingdom was confirmed in his hand, slew his servants which had slain the king his father. But the children of "the murderers he slew not; according unto that which is written in the book of "the Law of Moses, wherein the Lord commanded, saying, The father shall not

be put to death for the children, nor the children be put to death for the fathers; but every man shall be put to death for his own sin."