SERMON IV.

The plea of an erroneous Confcience diftinctly confider'd and argued.

ACTS xxiii. 1.

Men and brethren, I have lived in all good confcience before God, until this day.

I

N my laft difcourfe, I treated SERM. largely of the nature, the Divine IV. original, the office, and facred authority, of Conscience in ge

neral; and of the effential characters, and difcriminating properties, of a good Confcience. The only inquiry that remains to

be

SERM. be made (according to the method of handIV. ling this fubject, which I at first propofed) is,

In the THIRD place, How far an erroneous Confcience can deserve to be term'd a good Confcience; and, especially, when it excites men to immoral practices, and approves of injustice and barbarity as grateful services to the God of truth and mercy. This the cafe of St. Paul, and what he has afferted in the text, directly lead us to confider; and the importance of the thing itself renders it highly worthy of a particular difcuffion; fince it must, in a great measure, determine Perfonal virtue, and its just and rational claim to a reward. Virtue in action, and real character, is always to be estimated from the difpofition and conduct, or, in general, from the integrity, of the mind. And, therefore, in order to form a right idea of it, the affections and biasses of the mind, fo far as they are voluntarily indulged and cherished, the degree of application which it has used in order to understand what is the true rule of life, together with the good or bad principles from whence its judgments and determinations flow, must

be

IV.

be fairly and impartially weigh'd. And, SERM. of consequence, the causes of an erroneous Confcience, their innocence or malignity, and the strength of their influence, must go a great way towards denominating particular characters to be either pious and apright, or corrupt and vicious. I now proceed to folve the inquiry propofed, and hall begin with obferving in general,

In the FIRST place, that no error can totally excufe from guilt, but what is invincible. This is the bafis of all our reafonings upon the fubject, and therefore it is neceffary that it be clearly and distinctly ftated. And that what is afferted in this propofition is agreeable to our wifest apprehenfions of God, and of the intelligent and accountable frame of Man, and to all the equitable principles and maxims of Divine and Human governments, will immediately appear upon fettling rightly this fingle point What is meant by invincible error? It ftrictly fignifies that error, which arises from a natural incapacity of knowing better; or from the want of fufficient and adequate means of knowledge. But in a moral conftruction an error may

--

be

SERM. be faid to be invincible, that is not natuIV. rally and absolutely unavoidable: i.e. in

other words, it may be fairly prefumed, that all fuch errors, as it is not reasonable to expect, taking in every circumstance, that a person should avoid; or which it was highly probable he would fall into, from his education, and the force of example, from the want of motives to examine, and helps to judge rightly, and feveral other disadvantages, which might be enumerated; it may, I fay, be fairly prefumed, that fuch errors as these will be admitted as a good plea before the righteous and merciful tribunal of God, and be no more a bar to the obtaining his favour, than if they sprang from an incurable defect in the intellectual faculty, or the want of necessary light. So when it is affirm'd, that none but invincible error will totally excufe us from guilt, the whole amounts to no more than this almoft felfevident truth,―That nothing will entirely excufe us, but what argues a thorough unperverted honesty, and good difpofition; nothing, in short, that we might and ought to have prevented, and which

is owing to the voluntary neglect and SERM abuse of our own powers.

BUT if it be allowed, that invincible error removes all guilt, it may still be afk'd, how an erroneous Confcience can be described as a good Confcience? — Can that be a good Confcience, which is corrupt in its most important decifions? Which puts forth falfe lights whereby to delude and enfnare us? which, fo far as it is erroneous, defeats the natural intent and use of Confcience? which as a guide is unfafe and dangerous, as a monitor unfaithful, as a judge blind and prejudiced; and by following which, we must of neceffity relinquish and desert the paths of virtue ? -I answer, that it is undoubtedly evil in all these respects: But how? Why if its errors are, in the fenfe in which I have explain'd the term, invincible, only thus: As the natural decay or loss of reafon is an evil, or as all the accidental infirmities and misfortunes, that attend Human nature, may be reprefented as evils. But, notwithstanding this, in the moral confideration of it, it may be denominated good, when its mistakes are of fuch a kind, and

IV.