Serm. the Object of our Love; for no Man is withIX. out Faults.

But if lower Inftances of Injury may lef fen our Benevolence, why may not higher, or the highest, destroy it? The Answer is obvious. It is not Man's being a focial Creature, much less his being a moral Agent, from whence alone our Obligations to Good-will towards him arise. There is an Obligation to it prior to either of these, arifing from his being a fenfible Creature; that is, capable of Happiness or Mifery. Now this Obligation cannot be fuperfeded by his moral Character. What juftifies publick Executions is, not that the Guilt or Demerit of the Criminal dispenses with the Obligation of Good-will, neither would this justify any Severity; but, that his Life is inconfiftent with the Quiet and Happiness of the World: That is, a general and more enlarged Obligation neceffarily destroys a particular and more confined one of the fame Kind, inconfiftent with it. Guilt or Injury then does not difpenfe with or fuperfede the Duty of Love and Good-will.

Neither does that Self-partiality, which was before allowed to be natural * to Man

*Serm. VIII. p. 144.

ST

kind, difpenfe with it: Because that can no Serm. way innocently heighten our Refentment IX. against those who have been injurious to ourselves in particular, any otherwise than as it heightens our Senfe of the Injury or Guilt; and Guilt,though in the highest Degree, does not, as hath been fhewn, dispense with or fuperfede the Duty of Love and Goodwill.

If all this be true, what can a Man say, who will dispute the Reasonableness, or the Poffibility, of obeying the divine Precept we are now confidering? Let him speak out, and it must be thus he will speak. "Mankind, i. e. a Creature defective and

faulty, is the proper Object of Good" will, whatever his Faults are, when they "respect others; but not when they re

spect me myself". That Men fhould be affected in this Manner, and act accordingly, is to be accounted for like other Vices; but to affert that it ought, and must be thus, is Self-partiality poffefs'd of the very Underderstanding.

Thus Love to our Enemies, and those who have been injurious to us, is so far from being a Rant, as it has been prophanely called, that it is in Truth the Law of our Na

Serm. ture; and what every one muft fee and own, IX. who is not quite blinded with Self-love.

But

From hence it is caly to fee, what is the Degree in which we are commanded to love our Enemies, or those who have been injurious to us. It were well if it could as cafily be reduced to Practice. It cannot be imagined, that we are required to love them with any peculiar Kind of Affection. fuppofe the Perfon injured to have a due, natural Sense of the Injury, and no more; he ought to be affected towards the injurious Perfon in the fame Way any good Men, uninterested in the Cafe, would be; if they had the fame juft Senfe, which we have fuppofed the injured Perfon to have, of the Fault.

Now what is there in all this, which fhould be thought impracticable? I am fure there is nothing in it unreasonable. It is indeed no more than that we should not indulge a Paflion, which, if generally indulged, would propagate itself fo as almoft to lay wafte the World: That we should suppress that partial, that falfe Self-love, which is the Weakness of our Nature: That Uncafinefs and Mifery fhould not be produced, without any good Purpose to be ferved by it: And that we fhould not be affected towards Perfons differently

ferently from what their Nature and Cha- Serm. racter require.

But fince to be convinced that any Temper of Mind, and Course of Behaviour, is our Duty, and the contrary, vitious, hath but a diftant Influence upon our Temper and Actions; let me add fome few Reflections, which may have a more direct Tendency to fubdue thofe Vices in the Heart, to beget in us this right Temper, and lead us to a right Behaviour towards those who have offended us: Which Reflections however fhall be fuch as will further fhew the Obligations we are under to it.

No one, I fuppofe, would choose to have an Indignity put upon him, or to be injuriously treated. If then there be any Probability of a Misunderstanding in the Cafe, either from our imagining we are injured when we are not, or representing the Injury to ourselves as greater than it really is; one would hope an Intimation of this Sort might be kindly received, and that People would be glad to find the Injury not so great as they imagined. Therefore, without knowing Particulars, I take upon me to affure all Perfons who think they have received Indignities or injurious Treatment,

that

IX.

Serm. that they may depend upon it, as in a ManIX. ner certain, that the Offence is not so great as they themselves imagine. We are in fuch a peculiar Situation, with respect to Injuries done to ourselves, that we can scarce any more fee them as they really are, than our Eye can see itself. If we could place ourselves at a due Distance, i. e. be really unprejudiced, we fhould frequently discern That to be in reality Inadvertence and Mistake in our Enemy, which we now fancy we fee to be Malice or Scorn. From this proper point of View, we fhould likewife in all Probability fee fomething of these latter in ourselves, and most certainly a great deal of the former. Thus the Indignity or Injury would almost infinitely leffen, and perhaps at last come out to be nothing at all. Selflove is a Medium of a peculiar Kind: In these Cafes it magnifies every thing which is amiss in others, at the fame time that it lef fens

every thing amiss in ourselves. In general, there are very few Inftances of Enmity carried to any Length, but Inadvertence or Misunderstanding, on one Side at least, if not on both, have a great Share in it. Neither is it at all uncommon, to fee Perfons, in the Progrefs of Strife and Va