that he is not the only offender, but that the conduct of others presents something that is blameworthy, as well as his own. It is much to be regretted, when any handle is given on which this malignant propensity can fasten. When this is the case, the offender, instead of being humbled at his own criminality, is apt to feel a sort of secret consolation, at the thought that others, in some measure, keep him in countenance; that if guilt be incurred, he is not the only offender, but that it is only a share of that guilt that can be imputed to him. Whenever any one professing godliness feels a satisfaction from this quarter, let him take the alarm. It is the signal of danger; it indicates the influence of that spirit of self-deception which men often indulge, in order to keep them from that humiliation which a sense of guilt should produce. Let such a one recollect, that "every man must bear his own burden;" that his personal conduct ought to be viewed quite detached from that of those who may have incurred blame along with him; that his guilt cannot be mitigated by that of others, however great.

The following is one way, among others, in which a spirit of self-justification is often manifested. If the charge that is brought against a man be at all of a complex nature, he is apt to fix with eagerness on any part of it, which is either unfounded altogether, or exaggerated; and the circumstance of one small part of it (perhaps something even merely incidental) being false, is frequently considered as mitigating, if not altogether doing away, the criminality of what is true. Now, this is a most unhappy propensity; and wherever there is a disposition to dwell on such

a circumstance, there is no evidence of genuine humiliation for what is wrong. Though, in bringing a charge, some circumstances should be misrepresented or exaggerated, there may be others which, according to the most impartial view of them, contain matter of the most just accusation.

It ought, in this case, to be more the concern of the offender to be humbled, where the ground of accusation is just, than to defend himself, because some part of the charge brought against him is unfounded. This suggests a hint to those who meet with what offends them in the conduct of others, and which they have occasion to reprove. Let them cautiously guard against exaggerating any circumstance. Let them scrupulously inquire into the truth of every thing they advance, that the effect of their reproof may not be lost by some inaccurate representation, which the party reproved may lay hold of, and which may seem to furnish him with an apology for self-defence, or irritation, instead of leading him to godly sorrow for his conduct. Above all, let it ever manifestly appear, that reproof, wherever administered, is dictated by genuine affection to him who is the subject of it.

CHAPTER II.

THE IMPORTANCE OF IMPARTIALITY IN THE BRETHREN CALLED UPON TO ASSIST IN REMOVING AN

OFFENCE.

IN cases of offence, where it becomes necessary to have recourse to the second step in our Lord's rule, viz. to take one or two more, to see if the offender will hear them, it is of the utmost importance that the brethren thus employed should examine the subject with the most unbiassed and unprejudiced minds. It may sometimes happen that, from their previous view of the character of the one or the other party, they may be disposed to lean to the one side or the other, before the whole circumstances of the case be laid before them. Now, this is what ought to be carefully avoided. They ought to guard against any tendency, even in their own minds, to prejudge the case, till both parties be fully heard. Much, in the way of removing offences, often depends on the temper and judgment manifested by the brethren employed on such an occasion. If they form a false decision, either from want of discernment or from partiality, it tends to irritate the party, who is not conscious of being blameworthy, while it encourages and screens the aggressor, and thus prevents him from being brought to that humiliation, on account of his conduct, which it is one great design of discipline to produce.

It is necessary, at the same time, for the party really aggrieved in such a case, to recollect, that the brethren called in may at first form an inaccurate judgment, merely from not fully understanding the subject, without any intended partiality. Much temper and patience are of course requisite in the person who has just cause of offence. As he knows all the circumstances of the case, he is apt at once to fix in his own mind the decision that ought to be formed, without giving others time to know them as well as himself. I have seen a person, in this situation, betray a very improper spirit, because the brethren called upon could not all at once decide in his favour, though the hesitation arose only from an imperfect acquaintance with the circumstances, and was completely removed by more correct information. A man must be very ignorant of human nature indeed, if he expects that others are to enter into a case in which he is personally implicated, as warmly as he does himself. No! What he views with the deepest interest, others will contemplate as a matter of comparative indifference; and an offence, which he sees clothed with circumstances of such high and peculiar aggravation, that he can hardly view it with any temper, and conceives that a similar one is scarcely to be found, to his astonishment will appear to others as nothing different from what happens every day. Such is the deceitful influence of self-love. When stated in general, we recognise the justness of the representation; but how apt are all to be sadly misled by it, wherever a case occurs in which, from the nature of the circumstances, this principle is called forth?

It may sometimes happen, that after an offence, originally of a private kind, has, in consequence of the failure of other attempts to remove it, been brought before a church, a delay may be requisite, on account of the unexpected absence of one whose testimony is necessary, or of some other cause. In such a case, it is of equal importance, that all the members should keep their minds unbiassed till the whole evidence be laid before them. They are sometimes in danger, from the particular neighbourhood in which they live, or from their intimacy with one of the parties, to listen to a partial representation of the matter, and are thus prepared in their own minds to exculpate the one, and condemn the other, before the case be fully heard. But though the decision ultimately pronounced by the pastor should be obviously the right one, such a practice as that referred to is apt to excite a certain degree of prejudice, from which a schismatical spirit (i. e. a spirit hostile to the circulation of mutual confidence and affection,) is very likely to flow. If one part of the members may with propriety hear one statement of the case, may not another part with equal propriety listen to another? A foundation is thus laid for secret surmising and dissatisfaction; and though there can be no room for objections after the true state of the case is ascertained, and the application of the law of Christ pointed out, yet there may be a want of that cordiality in the decision, which every member of a church ought to feel where the laws of the Lord Jesus are faithfully executed.