the Mosaic Law. The first, Exod. xxi. 22-25.

10. The second, Deut. xix. ver. 16, to the end.
11, The third, Lev. xxiv. 19, 20.
12. Mention of Gen. ix. 6. and Lev. xxiv. 17.
13. Remarks on Retaliation.

Errors to which the Jews were liable with respect to retaliation ; in public capacities.

15. - in private capacities.
16. Errors particularly opposed by Christ.
17. The duties here enjoined are discretionary.

18. The particular directions, Matt. v. 39, 40, 41. their meaning.

19. Their excellence.

20. The seeming injuries to which they relate arisc from good motives.

21. No appearance of danger is a sufficient excuse for neglecting them.

22. Niether is the dread of the imputation ofcowardice. 23. Additional considerations. 24. Paraphrase of of Matt. v. 39, 40, 41. 25. The connexion between Justice and Mercy.

26. How far Nations are bound by the directions here given.

St. Matthew and St. Paul compared. 28. Of Matt. v. 42. 29. Proposal to consider Matt. v. 43. 44.

30. Whence was derived the notion that a man ought to hate his enemy.-Where of the severity towards the Seven Nations.

31. What is meant by loving an enemy.
32. Of blessing those who curse us.
33, Of doing good to those who hate us.
34. Of praying for those who persecute us.
35. Conclusion of Matt. y. 43, 44.


36. Proposal to consider Rom. xii. 16-21.

37. Heaping “ coals of fire” most probably meansa inflicting or encreasing punishment.

38. That expression is quoted from the book of Proverbs.

39. Our sense of it defended on supposition of its being St. Pauls originally: First, by considering rules of interpretation.

40. Secondly, by obviating consequences supposed hurtful.

41. Difficulty taken from Rom. xii. 21.

42. Recapitulation, in the form of a paraphrase on Rom. xii. 16-21.

43. Of our forgiveness as occasioning the exercise of the Divine Mercy.

44. Forgiveness how to be practised.

45. Of improvements in the regulation of resente ment by Christianity.

46. Conclusion of the whole.

[merged small][ocr errors]

Malevolent Sentiinents.





[ocr errors]

The Gospel dispensation is compared to the

light, in many places of holy writ; and with great reason: "whatever doth make manifest is light." Suppose men to hold any sort of intercourse with each other in a light which is faint and imperfect, and it is natural to conceive them interfering with each other, and doing each other harm; but suppose the light to shine fully upon theni, they must not only see how to avoid any hurtful interference, but they must discern that in each other which is adapted to excite mutual regard and affection. So when men are involved in the spiritual or moral darkness of ignorance and barbarism, they find it difficult to avoid incroaching on each others rights; they become insensibly engaged in a course of injuries, begun perhaps through inadvertence, but carried on through passion, till the liglit of true wisdom illumines the scene; then they are enabled to perceive the ways of avoiding offences, and to discover qualities, which incline them to mutual friendship and beneficence.

2. There is no evil into which men are more apt to fall, whilst grossly ignorant of religion and morality, than an excessive indulgence of the malignunt passions: there is perhaps no one thing which would better mark out degrees of barbarism than the degrees in which


[ocr errors]

such passions habitually prevail: with regard to these, Christianity hath a peculiar title to be compared to the light: for it not only enjoins the practice of benevolent virtues, but puts us upon various methods of softening our dispositions and rendering ourselves kindly atfectioned towards each other in brotherly love. And yet we find from St. John, that some persons could profess themselves Christians, though they indulged themselves in hating their brethren.“ He that saith he is in the light, and hateth his brother, is in darkness even until now."

3. Some remarks heretofore offered by me to a respectable audience, (a) and afterwards to the public, have been thought to fall, in some measure, under the censure of the Apostle; as being in some sort favourable to hatred and other unkind passions; but surely it is one thing to justify our Creator in giving us our malevolent affections, as far as they are his work, and another to justify man in indulging them to the hurt of his species. A thing may be given to a man with a kind intention, and judiciously, to be used on a particular occasion, though it cannot be used without doing some harm; and though the unrestrained and unlimited use of it, on all occasions, would be pernicious. He who puts a sword into your

hand when you are attacked by an assassin, is

your benefactor, and acts a reasonable part; but it does not follow, that you can make use of what is given you, without some present partial evil; or that the use of destructive weapons always proinotes the general good. It seems, however, expedient, for the purpose of preventing wrong notions on this matter, to treat the subject of the malevolent affections somewhat more fully than I did in the work alluded to; so as to comprehend not only a justification of the Deity, but the part which man ought to take in the discipline and regulation of such affections; in both which things it would be a very material assistance if I might be permitted to go so far as to examine the declarations and precepts of the holy scriptures.

4. Although our sentiments are very various and diversified, yet it is found commodious to treat them as if cach class were only a single sentiment or passion. We have accordingly divided malevolent sentiments into four classes, or passions; Hatred, Envy, Malice, and Resentment. And the method, with regard to each, might be,

In the first place to consider its Nature.

In the second place to enumerate some of its good and bad effects.

And in the third place, to offer some hints of a practical sort, which might contribute towards the due manageinent and regulation of it.

We begin with the passion of Hatred: a passion the Nature of which it is more difficult to define, than that of any other now before us. Still let us not give up the attempt; as every degree of explanation or investigation will be useful in practice. We will first view it experimentally, and then notice expressions of Scripture which relate to it.

5. On any occasion whatever, when we want to convey a precise idea of any feeling, we must consider first, whether he to whom we would convey it, already uses the name of it familiarly, or not: for it may happen, that the name may be commonly used by one whose idea affixed to the name is by no means precise and determinate. And it is also worthy to be remarked, that we generally use words by our feelings long before we think of defining: and that we are able to do this with such steadiness and uniformity as to answer the ends of conversation.

If the name is already in use, the regular way to ascertain the precise idea annexed to it, would be, to enumerate the instances in which it is used, and to class those instances, perhaps over and over again, until the peculiar circumstances appeared, in which that word could be used, and no other. But if the name were unknown to any man, though as a man he must sometimes feel the sentiment, then the proper or only way to describe the sentiment would be, to present the object which naturally excited it. In discourses of this nature we cannot perfectly attain to either of these modes of describing the sentiment of hatred; but we may approach to both. We may approach to the

« VorigeDoorgaan »