First, when we may lawfully fpeak of the fanlts of our neighbours in their abfence without being guilty of the fin of backbiting.

Secondly, explain to you wherein backbiting consists.

Thirdly, attempt to exhibit to view the evil and danger of

this fin. As to the

First, it will be a delineation of what is not backbiting. It may be a duty to speak of the faults of others in many instances behind their backs. To tell to his brother various evils in love and chriftian privacy in hopes of convincing him of his wrong; there is nothing of evil in this, but a hope of convincing him of his error or mistake, and bringing him to friendship and reconciliation. If after private conferrence, and the difference is not adjusted, we take two or three friendly and christian neighbours to fettle the difficulty, and the matter be related to them; all this can never be termed backbiting. We may lay the faults of a neighbour before the church or the civil magistrate, and retail all we have to fay behind his back, which we are afterwards to prove, and this can never be conftrued as flander or backbiting. When it is useful to the prefervation of anothers property, when we fee friends enticed into the company of knaves and villains, by whom they may be ruined, it is our duty to ftate to them the characters of thofe by whom they may be enfnared, and to warn them against the dangerous connection. When we know of a combination against others, or confpiracy against good government, to refrain from discovery of private or public injury,, tho' behind the backs of the defigners, would not only be wrong but a grofs iniquity. It would be an offence against reafon, against fociety, against God and man; and he who charges himself with the concealment, becomes a culprit equal with the principal.

Moreover when by unreasonable felf juftification, wrong is

thrown upon the innocent, and the innocent is compelled to recrimination, he stands acquitted and vindicated at the bar of reafon and of God.

Further, when the notorious iniquity of any individual, hath erected fuch a beacon of warning, that his crimes cannot be hid, has forfeted all reputation, and his conduct transcends the rules of concealment, duty to our families and others is not to hide fuch a character. Duty in this cafe is to give warning to others to avoid the abominable example.

Moreover, when called to give a narrative of public facts, fallen under our own obfervation, fuch as rebellion, blafphemy, murder, perjury, cruelty, &c. and to give in the names of offending abfentees, this is right and duty. Alas, how many blaze forth the failings of others without occafion, and intrude themselves into the office of backbiters, to their own detri ment and the exceeding unhappiness of fociety.

Secondly, I am to explain wherein this evil of backbiting confifts..

Firft, if perfons fpread abroad the faults of their neighbours, when they ought previoufly to have mentioned them to them. felves; and proceeded according to the rules of reafon and the gofpel, for reclaiming a brother. In violation of friendship, neighbourhood and chriftianity, how many, and that religionifts too, will tell a fault real or fuppofed, to almoft every body, and never mention it to the perfon himfelf? This is deftroy" ing a neihgbour, wounding his fame, and backbiting with the kceneft feverity.

Secondly, when perfons fpeak of the failing of others in in their abfence, with apparent pleasure and delight, conceal their good qualities and dwell upon and magnify their evil

ones. It is very common to profess forrow for hearing of the mifconduct of others, while pleafure is exhibited in retailing the unhappy ftory. Let the report be true or otherwife, the retail is generally grofs backbiting. The reporting the evil has no tendency to amend, but to injure the character and fpread the evil of his name. Were it not for the latent expectation of this kind, to render the perfon more contemptible and odious, they would be entirely filent.

Thirdly, when perfons, to fpend a vacant hour, and to ens tertain their company, fill up the time with impertinently converfing of the faults and infirmities of their neighbours. This is often done merely for the diverfion and amusement of others, yet hereby they ftain, if not ftab, their neighbour's reputation. When fuch speeches flow from paffion, envy, prejudice, faction, hatred, or to exalt themfelves, it is certain, that is a backbiting tongue. And when the language. expreffes things devious from the truth, magnifying fmall failings as is frequently the cafe, concealing all that is worthy and good, and exhibiting only fome deformities, this has alfo the fin of lying, flandering and reproaching annexed to it. It has been generally remarked, those who are much addicted to backbiting, rarely avoid lying. But here perhaps it will be asked, may we not speak evil of that which is evil, and state every thing as it truly is? It is readily granted, that we are not, under a mistaken notion of charity, to speak a known falfchood, terming a man's vices, virtues; but we are to be very careful refpecting the fpeaking evil of others. When we are about to difcover the faults of our neigbours, we ought to confider, whether we are duly called hereto, whether we are entering upon a duty which we owe to God or fociety. If confideration was practifed, it would put a flop to much of the backbiting that is in the world. But fome will fay, may we not tell fuch things which honeft and religious perfons report. This muft not be done without fufficient evidence and

Y

a fufficient call. However honeft and religious a person may be, we must not imitate him in things that are evil or wrong, Suppofe a good man fhould abufe another, which has often · happened, could the injure d perfon be willing that all should follow that good man's example, and abuse him likewife. Surely not. I proceed,

Thirdly, to attempt to exhibit to view the evil and danger of this fin. Is there need of faying any thing farther after show. ing what backbiting is. The odious character ever one will condemn. Yea, a backbiter himself, would probably be highly offended to have this vice imputed to him. Why will perfons indulge themselves in the evil practice when they abhor the name? None would chufe to be reproached themfelves, why then will they reproach others? Some have fuppofed that backbiting is a term borrowed from the deteftable nature of poisonous ferpents or ugly dogs which will flyly bite a man when his back is turned, but were his face towards them, they would flee from him. How awful is the evil, to find this vile and odious difpofition in any of the children of men? And especially to perceive any tincture of it among those who profefs to be followers of the Lamb of God. The very nature of the fin itself ought to raise the deteftation of all against it. The fupreme Jehovah himself hath forbidden it in the most exprefs terms. It is enumerated amongst the groffet and moft henious tranfgreffions. It is made the evidence of a reprobate mind, and the character of fuch whom God chiefly abhors. When St. Paul makes up a catalogue of the most abominable offenders, backbiters are ranked among murderers, haters of God, &c. On the other hand, the avoiding of this fin is conftituted an evidence of one who is approved of the Moft High, and fhall dwell with him forever. "Lord, who fhall abide in thy tabernacle, who fhall dwell in thy holy hill? He that backbiteth not with his tongue, nor doth evil to his neighbour, nor taketh up a

#reproach against his neighbour." The holy apoftie, when he fharply rebukes the Corinthians for various offences among them, he recounts this as one. I fear, fays "he, when I come, I fhall not find you fuch as I would, and "that I fhall be found unto you fuch as ye would not, left "there be debates, ftrifes, backbitings &c." Let all bitterness, "clamour and evil fpeaking be put away from you, with all "malice, and be kind one to another and tender hearted."

It is a fin in a fpecial manner gratifying to Satan; it affimilates to him; he is full of malice and backbiting, and speaking evil of a neighbour are works which are fuited to his malignity. Shall chriftians and thofe who enjoy the light of the gofpel, employ their tongues to perform the hellifh drudgery of the destroyer of fouls. Forbid it heaven, forbid it eternity.

Moreover, whofoever allow themfelves in this in, it argues a want of due tenderness and christian affection. Love speaketh no evil of its neighbour, neither doth it open his faults without a caufe. It will rather cover infirmities, and will not propagate Hander or carry about evil reports. It is likewife evil which tends to destroy the hearers, love, and thus to ruin their immortal souls. If the backbiter understood himself, he would acknowledge this to be his defign, to banish love from the human breast, and to introduce in its room, hatred, malice and ill will, and all the infernal train of odious paffions and feelings. When one person wishes another to become an object of hatred, he does not directly intreat a man to hate Lis neighbour; but he makes fuch a reprefentation of his character, as excites difguft and brings on a diflike of him. It tends much to the injury of the fpiritual interefts of him of whom the reproaches are uttered; for, generally, he will by fome means hear of them. Backbiting is ufually accompanied with tale bearing. Were it not for the latter the former could not do half the mifchief it does. The one flanders and the other Spreads the evil report.