the seemingly evident connexion, there are those who would lay down their lives rather than admit the conclusion. The reason of this conduct seems to be this; they admit an error as an indisputable truth; or, which amounts to the same in this case, they are deceived by an ambiguous expression of Scripture. The principle itself they take up with is true, when rightly understood; and finding it in Scripture, they are positive that no demonstration is stronger than this is, God hath said it, therefore it is true.

But run

ning away with the words, they leave the meaning behind them, and admit verbal principles, if I may call them so, instead of ideal ones. They therefore will deny a consequence, which they find to be inconsistent with all the other notions of religion, which they entertain. They have the good fortune to be kept in their respective duties by other reasons, which are clear, and plain, and positive; and seeing the consequences deduced from their erroneous principles stare them so boldly in their faces, they abominate them; not because they really do not follow, but because they are evidently disagreeable to other notions, which they have equally imbibed.

Had all men judgment to discern error from truth, no one would continue under error. The firmness with which this sort of men embrace the notions, which they think are contained in the word of God, plainly shows them lovers of God, and of his Christ; it shows them honest, and very unwilling that man should extort

from them any sacred truth. They are ready to sacrifice their lives to man, in proof, that with sincerity they believe what God, they think, has revealed. They do their best to know his will, and to act according to it; and therefore errors in such persons signify no more than no errors. Supposing they had had the good fortune to believe right, they would have been but the same good men; their practices had been the same; and since it is our works that will be rewarded or punished, they will certainly have their rewards, who continue good, notwithstanding principles, which have a necessary connexion with evil. Sure it is, that the errors of such people spring, not from choice or will, but from the force of what they think Scripture and reason. And if, as Mr Chillingworth incomparably argues, "By reason of the seeming conflict which is oftentimes between Scripture, reason, and authority on the one side, and Scripture, reason, and authority on the other; if by reason of the variety of tempers, abilities, educations, and unavoidable prejudices, whereby men's understandings are variously formed and fashioned, they do embrace several opinions, whereof some must be erroneous; to say that God will damn them for such errors, who are lovers of him, and lovers of truth, is to rob man of his comfort, and God of his goodness; it is to make man desperate, and God a tyrant."

The fourth and last, and only bad sort of erroneous persons, are such as err voluntarily, that is, through

carelessness, or sloth, and negligence; and are unwilling to receive the truth when laid before them, and practice according to their errors. These it is certain will meet with their deserts, and are the objects of God's just punishments; and the reason of it is, in such there is a want of honesty, or which is worse, the actual practice of dishonesty, insincerity, and their consequence. Here is affected ignorance, no desire of information or amendment; here is a breach of clear, positive laws, and the concurrence of will and choice to render it perfect malice.

The zeal and warmth of some will be for loading this fourth article, and for bringing under these characters all whom they think fit to damn for schism or heresy, or even such whom they suspect of these crimes. Enough has been said already, I think, to satisfy an intelligent, impartial person. But yet I beg leave to subjoin, what will add a considerable force to what has been already offered to you, viz. the consideration of the obligations all men are under to follow their consciences, even though they are erro

neous.

Agreed on all hands it is, that a conscience directed by the will and word of God obliges a man to act according to its dictates. Now conscience being the judgment which every man passes upon his actions, as to the goodness or illness of them, the question is only, how far a man is obliged to act in cases where he is mistaken in his judgment? Now to this the answer

is easy; that a man is obliged always to follow his judgment, though it is erroneous.

For,

First; conscience, or our judgment concerning things is a power or faculty of the mind, which God has implanted in us, on purpose to be the rule of our actions. When therefore we act in contradiction to that, our actions are voluntary, and contrary to the knowledge we have of God; consequently we are guilty of voluntary disobedience, that is, of sin against God.

Secondly; the evil of any action is always measured and judged of by God, and all good men, by the intention of the agent. What a man doth necessarily, is none of his act; but so far as he concurs, consents, and wills any action, so far is he the agent. In an action therefore committed against conscience, the will being supposed entirely to concur, the agent must necessarily be dishonest, insincere, and consequently guilty of a vice.

Or thus; that is the perpetual rule of all actions, which if we follow, we are honest; if we do not, we are dishonest. Now such is conscience; we are honest if we follow and practice virtue, known to us to be virtue; as likewise, if we hate and avoid vice, known to us to be such. Now our conscience being our only guide or rule, and it being wickedness and hypocrisy to swerve from it, to act against conscience, must be wickedness. Should a Jew pretend to turn Christian, and offer himself at the font for baptism, and

yet not believe Christ to be come, nor anything of Christianity, every one would justly detest his hypocrisy and vileness, which is justly imputable to him, for acting contrary to his conscience.

Thirdly; the sacred pages justify the same doctrine, telling us, Rom. xiv. 23. Whatsoever is not of faith is sin. St Paul is plainly asserting that to be sin, which does not proceed from a firm and full persuasion of mind, that it is lawful and agreeable to the will of God. Now, whatsoever is contrary to conscience, is contrary to such a persuasion. Nay, St Paul carries this much farther in the former part of the verse; He that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith. And if he that doubteth is liable to punishment, because he doth a thing which he knows not whether it be lawful or not, much more doth he sin, who acts contrary to faith and full sion of mind.

persua

Objection. You will say, perhaps, notwithstanding all this, and more which may be urged, that a man's conscience cannot be the rule of his actions, because a rule must always be right and straight; but conscience very often swerves from straightness by means of errors; therefore some other rule, even the rule of conscience itself, viz. the word of God, should be our guide.

Answer. The word of God is the rule of conscience, so far only as it is known and understood; and all men, no question, who know it to be the word