תמונות בעמוד
PDF
ePub

ever adopts this, as the rule of estimating his own character and honestly applies it in all cases, will not essentially err. Very few, how ever, if any do this. Most minds adopt a rule, which they have received by education, from the customs of society, or from some favourite course of speculation. It is seldom the result of reflection or careful examination into the origin, character or authority of its provisions; but is adopted without notice, not at once, but by degrees. The rule may never have been expressed in words, or written in a book; and yet it may be as efficient in its application as though it had been engraved on a tablet of stone. To give it efficiency the rule must be familiar to the mind, and distinctly apprehended, that we may readily know the result of comparison when our conduct is brought

to the test.

As to the consciousness of our own conduct, we have already explained this act of the mind, and its necessity in the operations called conscience will be perfectly manifest from a slight examination. It is entirely plain that conscience can not relate to those things of which we have no knowledge or consciousness. We must, therefore, have a consciousness of the feelings or conduct which are to be compared with the apprehended rule. Here it may be proper to say that our conduct is morally right or wrong, good or evil, independently of our estimate. We of course mean not to include those actions which have no perceptible relation to the standard of right, the perfections of God. Breathing, walking, and in general all those actions which indicate no development of the heart or affections, which will not distinguish good men from bad, have not in themselves or in their relations any moral quality. But these are exceptions to the general rule of estimating the conduct of responsible beings. The general principle is

this, that the conduct of responsible agents has a moral character, and must be right or wrong. This estimation is ascertained by comparing our actions with the rule of right. By this comparison we know the character of our conduct and judge of actions. Here is the intellectual apprehension of the agreement or disagreement of our actions with the rule of right, which is the most essential operation in the process called conscience. The only remaining operation in the process is the feeling consequent upon the discovery of moral character. Strictly and technically speaking, conscience is no more than an apprehension of the right or wrong of our conduct, according to the rule of the mind's adoption; but use has given the term a more extended meaning, so as to include the feeling of approbation, or compunction, connected with the apprehension. We object not to this acquired meaning of the term; it is convenient and appropriate. But we think this fact has misled some to consider conscience a distinct faculty. It has also led to a phraseology that seems to justify the same opinion; thus we say, conscience condemns or justifies, accuses or acquits. But when we analyze the process we find it to consist of apprehension and feeling. To express the same thought in another form, conscience is judging of our conduct, and the pleasure or pain which follows. We sometimes speak principally of the intellectual exercise, and sometimes principally of the feeling, which may also have led some to consider conscience a faculty of which these are the operations. This impression will also be readily removed by a careful analysis of the facts as they occur in the mind. Another cause of mistake on this subject is, that an apprehension of right in one's own conduct gives more lively and lasting pleasure than any perception of abstract truth. This consideration

has led some to suppose there is a distinction in the nature of those exercises called judgment and conscience; but let the analysis be carefully made, and the only difference will be found in the objects of the exercises, and the degree of pleasure or pain following them. Any further discussion of this particular is deemed unnecessary in this place. The principles and hints contained in the foregoing analysis are sufficient for our present purposes.

There are now a few practical questions on the use and influence of conscience, which require some attention. The first which occurs is, whether it is always a right rule or sure guide of conduct? The principles involved in the true answer to this question have already been recognised. It is settled on the correctness or incorrectness of the rule, by which the mind estimates conduct and feelings-and on the distinctness or indistinctness of the apprehension. If the rule of judging be right, and the apprehension of the agreement or disagreement be distinct and clear, the judgment will be according to truth and righteousness. In such case no man can be justified in violating the dictates of his conscience. But if the rule which the mind has adopted be wrong, and the apprehension be ever so distinct, the decision will be wrong; or if the rule be right and the apprehension be obscure or mistaken, the decision may be wrong. The question may, therefore, assume an inductive form: Do men's minds always adopt a right rule of estimating the morality of their conduct? Facts settle this question incontrovertibly in the negative. Nothing is more certain or clearly ascertained than the fact, that those rules are indefinitely multiplied and diversified: often they are directly opposed to each other, in principle and practical application. It is impossible that all should be right. If

they were all supposed to be right, every distinction between right and wrong would be set aside. Filial kindness and parricide, on such a principle, would be equally innocent. The truth is, that the only unexceptionable rule of judging is the word of God, revealing his perfections as the holy standard of right for all moral beings in the universe. That mind, which adopts this rule of judging, has a right, and that mind which adopts another diverse from it, has a wrong standard of estimation. The one will do right when he follows the dictates of his conscience, and the other will do wrong. All that has been said by many about sincerely obeying one's own conscience, amounts to nothing in determining a man's true character, until his rule of judging is known and estimated by the only unerring standard. The Christian sincerely follows the dictates of his conscience, in cherishing with tenderness his offspring; the worshipper of Juggernaut follows sincerely the dictates of his conscience, in offering his child a sacrifice to the ghastly idol. Multitudes of illustrations will readily occur to every thinking mind, to show that conscience cannot be a sure guide in moral estimates of heart or conduct.

Another question, which claims some attention is, why do men adopt such different standards, by which to estimate the moral character of their conduct? On the supposition of a moral sense, or distinct faculty, of which this judging is the appropriate exercise, it would be difficult, if not impossible, to account for the fact. The fact is, however, certain, and we think the analysis here given, furnishes the solution. Men adopt rules of estimating their conduct which accord as nearly as possible with the propensities of their hearts. These are exceedingly various, and are excited, strengthened or diminished by circumstances of edu

A stupid conscience is just the reverse of the former. Without knowledge of the correct rule of estimate, or without skill in its application, no man's conscience will exert much influence over his life. Arguments and appeals to the conscience, or estimates of his conduct, will avail nothing with his stupified mind.

A tender conscience refers us to the feelings of the heart, and denotes a sensibility, easily excited by an apprehension of the agreement or disagreement of conduct with the rule of judging. Some minds seem to have, by nature, much more delicate sensibility of feeling than others; which is discoverable in childhood. The influence of early education, improves or diminishes this susceptibility in view of right and wrong in conduct. A habit of carefully observing the conduct, and regulating it according to the rule adopted, will increase the susceptibility of feeling which constitutes the tenderness of conscience.

cation, and by many adventitious understanding in estimating the things. If it be admitted that ori- moral character of our own actions, ginally man had but one rule of means an extensive knowledge of judging and no disposition to seek the rules by which the estimation any other, the depraved principles is made, and skill in applying of his fallen nature will account for them. the diversity. On the admitted fact of man's fallen state, we place the solution. The process we need not trace in its details, or inquire how the different systems of religion and moral standards first originated; they may all be ascribed to the fallen principle of man's nature, under the influence of which "he has sought out many inventions." On this ground it is perfectly easy to perceive, that men will be inclined to vary and lower the standard of estimation, whenever they can persuade themselves that it is within their province to adopt their own rules. And what is obvious, on principle, is fully illustrated by facts. Education, custom, aversion to what is good, and a constitutional propensity to avoid painful feelings, are sufficient to account for the diversity of standards, in different minds and at different times in the same minds. There are some phrases in common use, the explanation of which properly belongs to this description. The phrases to which we allude are those that connect such qualifying terms as enlightened and stupid, tender and seared, good and defiled, with conscience. An enlightened conscience indicates an enlarged apprehension of moral principle, a ready comparison of conduct with the standard of right, and an accurate discrimination of one's own actions. It refers more particularly to the intellectual exercise, than to the feelings of the heart. An enlightened mind intends the acquisition of extensive knowledge; an enlightened astronomer, mathematician or theologian, means one skilled in those branches of knowledge. So an enlightened conscience, referring us to the operations of the VOL. IX. Ch. Adv.

In the opposite course, a habit of disregarding the decisions of conscience, diminishes not only the readiness of apprehension, but the susceptibility; and byneglecting to compare the conduct with the rule, the sensibility is blunted and the influence destroyed. This explains what is meant by a callous or seared conscience. Having been, for a long time, neglected or denied its proper influence, it sleeps, or in other words, the heart loses its sensibility, and becomes indifferent to right and wrong. Other propensities of. the heart may be cherished and strengthened; some of them may be even of a delicate, susceptible character, while this is blunted and

3 X

its character well described in the phrases being "seared as with a hot iron," "being past feeling, and hardened through the deceitfulness of sin."

A good conscience denotes the adoption of the right rule, a readiness to apprehend the agreement or disagreement of conduct with it, and a constant, uniform regulation of feelings, words and actions, according to the rule. This is what the apostle sought to preserve when he exercised himself, "to have always a conscience void of offence toward God and man.'

[ocr errors]

The principal thing intended directly by a good conscience is, uniform obedience to its enlightened dictates, but it implies all that belongs specifically to an enlightened and tender conscience.

A defiled or evil conscience is the reverse of one that is good, and denotes the adoption of a wrong rule, a blindness of apprehension, or a callousness of feeling: either will produce an evil conscience. There is one thought more, which may sometimes be intended by an evil conscience, that is a sickly feeling that leads to a wrong application of the rule, which in itself may be right. Any thing, in short, which distorts the apprehension, or perverts the sensibility to moral character, may produce an evil conscience.

A general remark should here be made, on the influence of habit and education in forming and improving the apprehension and sensibility of the mind in relation to morals. The facility and readiness with which the mind apprehends any relations are greatly improved by a habit of discrimination, and injured by neglect. Every student must be aware of the influence which habit gives to his mind in fixing the attention, in the investigation of exact science, and in associating numbers or facts. It induces a discipline of intellect, that makes things easy which were before extremely difficult. Not unlike this is the

influence of habit upon the readiness, distinctness and accuracy of the mind, in apprehending the relations of conduct to the rule of right. A habit of carelessness often produces a sleeping conscience, and a habit of strict attention a wakeful, influential one.

Sometimes another effect of habit is seen in its influence upon the heart. By neglecting the compunctions of conscience, the sensibility to error and sin becomes deadened, and the heart is hardened in sin, although the apprehension of wrong may be present. The understanding may make a righteous decision, but the heart be too callous to feel. This state of mind is always acquired by degrees, from sinful indulgences, and never at once by any individual.

Sometimes men have great sensibility, and they are very conscientious to avoid some things which are wrong, while, in regard to other things, even more sinful, they have no sensibility at all. This fact may be accounted for in one of two ways; either the rule adopted is defective, and so the fault is principally in the understanding; or the feelings are perverted by the deadening influence of sinful indulgence, and so the fault is principally in the heart. The association of thought and feeling, in some things, has been broken up by the habit, but in other things it remains unbroken.

The whole discussion shows the importance of early education, in the true principles of sound morals and pure religion. The mere acquisitions of science, arts and business talent, however valuable in their place, have vastly less influence in the formation of character, than moral principles and religious doctrines. Every child must adopt, as he grows up, some rules of estimating his own conduct; to avoid it is impossible, from the very constitution of his mind. To estimate the relations of things in the con

stant and almost exclusive employment of his mind, the relations of his own conduct to the objects sought, are the most prominent and important to be estimated. To bring these suggestions to their proper bearing, which to some may seem not very obvious, it must be recollected that happiness is the great object of every man's pursuit, and that the relations of conduct to that object involve moral principles, so that every man must estimate his own conduct by some moral rule or standard. On the admitted principle and influence of human depravity, children will be disposed to adopt rules that are wrong, and ultimately subversive of their own and others' happiness. Education, correctly and wisely conducted, may do much towards forming an enlightened and tender conscience. This law of mental operation has more to do with the formation of character, than is generally supposed by the teachers and guardians of youth. As character is estimated by the people of this country generally, good morals are more valuable to human happiness, social order and publick prosperity, than wealth, or power, or science. Care should, therefore, be taken to furnish the young mind with correct rules of judgment, so that in subsequent life it shall have no occasion to alter them, or adopt different rules of estimating the conduct. These remarks may help to account for the fact, that an early religious education is so very efficient in restraining men in after life from gross outbreakings in vice. Religious

perverted their intellectual apprehensions, by long continued violations of truth and duty.

We close this article with a single direction for the formation and preservation of a good conscience. The first thing to be carefully observed is, to study the revealed will of God, and adopt its maxims and principles as the rule of estimating conduct. The adoption of a correct, righteous rule, is indispensably important to the formation of a good conscience. The next thing is, to habituate the mind to compare the conduct in all its parts with the rule thus adopted. A just and delicate discrimination of one's own character, must be the result of much and careful observance of the comparison, It is equally necessary, to the readiness and efficient influence of the comparison and judgment, that the care should be habitual and constant.

Another thing is, punctually and resolutely to obey, in practice, the feelings consequent upon the comparison. This will cherish a tenderness of feeling, and serve to discipline the whole mind to its proper exercise and character. The last part of the direction is, a prayerful reliance on the teaching of the Holy Spirit for guidance. Philosophers may smile at this direction, incorporated in a discussion on mental science; but we shall show hereafter, that this is in its place, and vastly important to the correct knowledge of the subject.

BYTERIAN CHURCH.

No. IV.

truth ever has more effect upon such THE PRESENT STATE OF THE PRESmen, and they are more likely than others, to become subjects of permanent religious impressions. They have adopted correct rules of estimating their character, consequently they cannot endure the compunctions of their consciences, in the commission of crime. This will always be true of all such, who have not hardened their hearts or

Having in our last number given our views of the manner in which the Moderator of the late General Assembly discharged the duties of his office, we expected to proceed immediately to a consideration, seriatim, of some of the principal

« הקודםהמשך »