SUMMARY OF DISCOURSE XIV.

ROMANS, CHAP. III.-VERSE 8.

EARNEST zeal of the apostle in vindicating himself, and his associates in the conversion of the world, from the imputation of having lent their authority to this pernicious maxim, which would set religion at variance with the plainest dictates of reason and conscience, and justify the vilest acts of perfidy, or scenes of cruelty. If we attend to the train of reasoning in which this maxim is alluded to, we shall discover the propriety of its introduction, &c.

On mentioning the rejection of the unbelieving Jews, the apostle supposes one of that disobedient nation expostulating with him thus: If our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Is God unrighteous who taketh vengeance?' The apostle answers, 'God forbid, for then how shall God judge the world?' That is, the same argument which you oppose to the rejection of your nation, to the particular dispensation of which you complain, will apply with equal force to the general dispensation of God, which you allow, in the final condemnation of sinners: this shown. The Jew continues or explains his argument thus: For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie (or my unbelief) unto his glory, why yet am I also judged as a sinner?' The apostle again reminds him, in the words of the text, that the same reasoning, whereby he excuses his unbelief, might be urged for all sin; nay, that even the detestable maxim might be defended

by it, with which the Christians had been calumniated, ́ Let us do evil that good may come.' It was therefore no sufficient apology for the conduct of the Jews that their unrighteousness had illustrated the righteousness of God, or their disbelief in the gospel had contributed to its success.

Nor will the plea, denied to the Jews, avail the disciple of Christ this shown from other express words of the apostle. The event of our actions is in the hand of God; and the only point which we are required to consider, is, not the effects they may produce, but the motives and principles on which they are deliberately performed. We are indeed commanded, 'whatsoever we do, to do all to the glory of God;' but the precept must be understood with the same restriction, as (according to the apostle) was observed even in the contests for earthly fame, 2 Tim. ii. 5., that we strive lawfully:' now the only lawful means, whereby we can contribute to God's glory, are habitual virtue and unaffected piety: God hath no need of sinful man :' this topic enlarged on.

The instances, to which the apostle has applied the principle which he condemns, being considered, some of the cases remain to be examined, in which the same principle more particularly influences the manners of later ages.

Many writers on morals have considered utility as the criterion of virtue: will it not then follow, in contradiction to the apostle, that nothing can be evil, from which good will come? The real meaning of utility pointed out, as not the separate effect of a single act, however highly or diffusively beneficial it may prove; but the general consequence of all actions of the same kind, supposing them permitted and practised without restraint: deduction from this principle. Vice is indeed attended with allurements and pleasures, which it is the business of moral instruction and discipline to enable us to resist and forego; but the particular good, which we are forbidden to pursue, is such as does not merely tempt us to commit evil, but is

speciously or commonly urged to excuse or vindicate our compliance. Of this there are many examples.

I. Persecution for religious opinions is confessedly doing evil that good may come : this shown. Perhaps it may be asked, if persecution for opinions be doing evil, and therefore in all cases forbidden; will not the punishment of crimes come under the same description, and be equally indefensible? Answer in the negative; and reasons thereof given.

་

II. The obligations to truth, though generally acknowleged to be of the very highest importance, are yet, on many occasions of seeming convenience or utility, very liberally dispensed with instances and illustrations given to affirm that all these offences are of equal malignity, were absurd; to allow not of the minutest deviations, were perhaps unreasonably severe : but he who considers the use and necessity of the general principle, will confine his exceptions within very narrow limits. Strange, that they who justify the neglect of truth in their own case, should yet consider the imputation of falsehood as utterly unpardonable!

III. This observation naturally leads us to another breach of moral duty, which, notwithstanding its dreadful consequences, is often vindicated on pretence of its utility in preserving the decency of human intercourse ;—an argument, which falsely represents the present state of manners as requiring a restraint unheard of in every former period, and absurdly guards the external decorum of society by the same sanctions which are applied to maintain its welfare and safety. That there was no want of such a restraint in former ages, pointed out. Practice of those nations, amongst whom it originated, though not founded on reason, shown to have been at least consistent. Disgraceful that it should prevail in those nations alone, which are confessedly the great masters of human reason, and possess the purest and most beneficent of all religions.

The general principle, on which this ferocious practice is

founded, is very disputable; and were it less so, were all its supposed advantages certain and secure, they would be purchased at too dear a rate, &c.

Farther considerations, on the supposition that the person who makes the appeal to this decision is generally the injured person but if the contrary very frequently happens, and if the laws of honor often arm the man of violence, whom they pretend to control, &c., then is the practice at variance with the principle on which it is supported: even if it be urged, that the balance of utility, on the whole, inclines in favor of duelling; yet an expediency, so weak and unimportant, cannot be successfully pleaded in a cause, which nothing but uncontrolable necessity could justify.

Moreover, this practice is not only irrational in its general principle, and as considered with respect to the public; but also with respect to individuals.

To meet danger with calmness is indeed a test of courage, but not of veracity or honor; and to put the life of an aggressor and your own to the same risk, is neither reparation, nor punishment, nor revenge. If it be said that it prevents such offences in future, the same plea may be urged for assassination itself. Its appeal to honor shown to be unavailing: circumstances detailed which may mitigate the offence; but to mitigate is not to vindicate: and certainly, if in any instance it be our duty and our wisdom to obey God rather than man,' it must be in the case before us: this shown.

IV. Consideration of the principle of doing evil that good may come, considered in its application to our civil conduct.

Here it has always been indulged with a much wider range. With those men indeed, who have nothing more in view than to supply the defects, and correct the abuses, which may be thought still to remain in the theory or practice of our government; whilst they strictly confine themselves within the legal bounds of peaceful, temperate, and constitutional measures, with them

the question does not lie. Yet even they may be reminded, that unguarded displays of little imperfections may countenance those who depreciate the whole; and that the best remedies, imprudently administered, may only increase the complaint, &c.

Conduct of men described, who are laboring to introduce the most serious evils into the state, inviting their fellowcitizens, not to resist oppression and tyranny, but to subvert the constitution itself: exhortations not to sacrifice our interest, our country, and our duty, to vain and extravagant speculations. Example of our ancestors proposed to us: the absence of all necessity or expediency of abandoning our ancient constitution shown. The popular plea of those unfeeling theorists, who would force on us, at any risk, their crude and untried notions, is taken from the condition of the poor this plea shown to be a wretched one: the condition of the poor and the rich examined the appointments of Providence in this respect cannot be reversed: instance taken from the Jewish nation. Miseries of the French revolution commented on, and held out as a beacon to preserve us from similar dangers. Concluding exhortation.