say what we know of the character of an individual, though it be manifestly to his disadvantage? Yes; we reply, the same law of love to our neighbour, on which the general admonition is founded, requires, in the following instances, a deviation from it. If a church or a friend is apt to be deceived by one whom we have reason to consider a false professor, or if one is in danger of being injured in the business of life, by ignorantly reposing confidence in a person who does not deserve it, whether he professes Christianity or not; it is necessary for us, in these cases, to declare what we know to be true in regard to his character, though it should be to his disadvantage. But all speaking evil of any man in common conversation, or the indulgence of a vein of satire for a little amusement, availing ourselves of a person's peculiarity in appearance or manner to play upon him, or quiz him, as it is called, for our own entertainment, or that of others, though it cannot be called directly evil speaking, seems a plain violation of the spirit of this precept.

CHAPTER IV.

BE SLOW TO SPEAK.

In no case is a regard to this admonition more necessary, than when any occurrence happens, that is calculated to inflame. A rash and hasty expres

sion, dropped on such an occasion, has often proved the cause of much uneasiness, both to the person who used it, and to others. Sometimes a strong assertion, respecting what a man is determined to do, places him under a powerful temptation, from a regard to consistency, to do what he afterwards sees to be wrong. It is true, where a man has thus expressed himself rashly, it is plainly his duty, and much to his credit, in his cooler moments, to recal the expression; to acknowledge that it was uttered under the impulse of irritation, and to act, however inconsistent it may be with his foolish language, according to the dictates of the word of God. Wherever a man is living under the influence of Christian principles, he will do this. But it is an important prayer, "Lead us not into temptation ;" and avoiding occasions of temptation ought certainly to be, on our part, a subject of much watchfulness. The language, however, used in such a case as that referred to, puts a man under a dangerous temptation to indulge an improper spirit; according to the common expression, to be as good as his word, (however inconsistent it be with his cooler judgment,) in order to avoid the reproach of rashness, folly, or indetermination, to which he imagines he would otherwise be exposed.

When a man professing godliness has fallen into this snare, it is a pleasing proof of the influence of Christianity over his mind, and that he is truly humbled on account of his conduct, when he is willing that his folly should not be concealed, that others may learn, from his example, the guard they ought to place over their temper and language,

However humiliating this may be, it is a sort of compensation he owes to his brethren, when, by betraying such an improper temper, he has given them just ground of offence. But the following example will best illustrate what we here have in view.

I lately heard of a member of a church, who, in a rash moment, had declared at one of their meetings, that he would never witness the conduct of the church, if they took a certain step which was then in agitation.* He afterwards, however, had reason to change his sentiments on the point in question. But when the measure referred to was put in execution, he was purposely absent, alleging, as his reason, to one who afterwards inquired, that in this way he avoided the charge of inconsistency. Now this was a mixture of pride and obstinacy. How much better would it have been, had he fairly come forward, and candidly acknowledged, that he had expressed himself rashly, but now saw reason to alter his opinion. Such a step might have been useful to himself. It would indeed have been humbling; but it is this very circumstance that would have made it useful, for we generally remember best, that from which we feel most. His example, in this way, would also have been calculated to be beneficial to others. It would have furnished them with a warning to guard against similar rashness, when they saw the disagreeable situation to which in consequence of it, a man was reduced.

* It is proper to notice here, that the church referred to was at this time destitute of a pastor, and their meetings of course did not partake of that regularity and decorum, which will always be produced where pastoral authority is properly employed, in ruling among those who are in subjection to the law of Christ.

In connexion with the above remarks, we may add, that wherever any one has thus committed himself, by unguarded language, if he afterwards seem sensible of it, it ought to be completely forgotten; if he is not, it ought to be the subject of serious Christian admonition. On no account ought it ever to be made matter of jest or reproach. This would indicate a most improper disposition, instead of manifesting (what every Christian ought to feel,) regret that one who professed to believe the Gospel, had betrayed a spirit so inconsistent with it. It would be criminally adding strength to the temptation under which he had laid himself, to follow out his foolish resolution, or to adhere to his unguarded expression, whatever should be the consequence. It would be quite inconsistent with the apostolic precept, "to restore a brother, who had been overtaken in a fault, in the spirit of meekness, considering ourselves, lest we also be tempted." In such a case, where a man is brought to see his criminality, Christian love will gladly draw a veil over the language of rashness and irritation, and bury it in oblivion forever.

CHAPTER V.

IMPRUDENT CHARACTERS IN A CHURCH TEND MUCH TO PERPLEX IT, AND DISTURB ITS COMFORT.

I HAVE known characters, who, from a foolish and unguarded way of speaking, are perpetually falling into blunders, and offending their brethren. They readily confess, indeed, that they are wrong, when they see the bad effects of their rashness; but there is little or no amendment, and they as readily fall again into the same transgression. Such characters forcibly remind us of the language of the Apostle James: "The tongue can no man tame; it is an unruly evil, full of deadly poison," James 3:8.

In persons, too, of this description, we often find such favourable appearances, as tend greatly to counterbalance their prevailing defect. Besides, their offence is not of that gross kind, that can with propriety warrant exclusion. Such characters are sometimes apt to plead, that they mean no harm. But they ought to recollect, that when they see the evil produced by their conduct, and are fairly warned of it, they are answerable for that evil, whether they foresaw and intended it or not.

Let persons of this description seriously consider the declaration of the Spirit of God, James 1:23: "If any man among you seem to be religious, und bridleth not his tongue, that man's religion is vain."