originally meant an energy of the mind; or, as it has been said, a strength of soul. But from the word denoting the state of the mind as being sustained in the contemplation and performance of good actions, in progress of time it came to be applied to the actions themselves; and now our dictionaries give moral goodness, as its syno

nyme.

Dr. Paley was writing a treatise on moral philosophy when he defined the word; he therefore meant to confine the term to a moral signification; to that part of morals which embraces our duty to our fellow men. But by deducing that duty from a religious motive, he attests the truth of my position, that a moral law never was discovered by man; and thus, also, furnishes a further proof of my argument, that there is now, under the gospel dispensation, no need of a moral law. It is not sufficient to say, that these last-named writers mean the highest degree of virtue or morality, of which our species is capable, independent of the consideration of its original source; because by such a laxity of expression, not only they, but also other writers on the subject, have, by the authority and influence of their writings, through the very excess of their learning, propagated, and sustained, and defended an error, charged with the most blighting influences upon the religious state of the

66

community. Locke and Paley* make religion a part of morals. Again, Paley defines virtue (or morals) to be a part of religion. Butler speaks of" the moral character of the author of nature," and says, that "his government is righteous or moral." And Horsley, in his sermons, speaks of the intellectual and moral powers of Christ. Moral," he writes, "in his power of resisting all the allurements of vice, and of encountering all the difficulties of virtue and religion, despising hardship and shame, enduring pain and death." Now the science of morality is a relic of pagan philosophy; and holds a place in Christian philosophy, as inconsistent with its real worth, as Minerva would claim, were she to demand the accustomed worship of the temple from the Christian altar. Religion cannot be a part of morals. "To do good to mankind in obedience to the will of God" is a part of" holiness of life:" to call it virtue, therefore, is to confound the terms religion and virtue, (from the common acceptation of the word,) the same as to call religion, morality. Righteousness and morality can never be convertible, as Bishop Butler has used the words. And I most respectfully observe of Horsley's language, that the power of Christ was a spi

* Moral Philosophy, vol. i. p. 1.

ritual*, and not a moral power. The author of nature cannot have a "moral character." God is a Spirit, and our relation to Him is a spiritual,

not a moral relation.

Could the religious sense be preserved to the pagan word, there would still be an unwise redundancy of expression: but as the words, virtue and morals, have a distinct and inferior meaning; from the well known and certain process of the human mind, the higher sense will always be degraded and debased into the lower. It is of this confusion of terms that I complain. Nor is the complaint against a mere verbal distinction, without a difference. To be obedient to the will of God implies the action of the preventing influence of the Holy Spirit upon the heart. To be moral or virtuous, is to act without that influence. The former is the state of holiness; the latter the state of nature, in which men cannot please God. For such high authority, therefore, as Locke, Paley, and Butler, to have confounded the distinction between the opposite states of spiritual and carnal mindedness, seems at once to be both the cause and excuse for the general and fatal error into which mankind has fallen, in supposing a moral life to

* John xxxiv. and Luke iv. 1.

Rom. viii. 6.

XIII. Article.

Vide Welchman and Burnett on the

merit the promises, which are only held out to a holy life, to godliness of mind, and sanctification of heart. The great authority of these names has taught mankind, by a parity of reasoning, so congenial to their nature, to excuse, or rather not to see their religious neglect, through the pride of their moral virtue. And now, after the same mode of reasoning, men, instead of meaning religion when they speak of virtue, mean only moral goodness when they speak of religion : -an error which has crept into the language, and manners, and religion of the age, and by a fatal substitution of a moral for a religious life, blinded many to the light of the gospel, and kept them back from the promises of salvation:an error which has done more injury to the religion of the country, than all the efforts of Paine and Carlile, and their ignorant and infatuated disciples. Not that men knowingly frame their conduct by Paley's definition; but that the public mind is betrayed by the general assent given to the religious character and merit of moral virtue. And men, whilst under the delusion of such philosophy, think that in acting morally, in the most inferior sense of the word, they are entitled to "everlasting happiness," although their motive to action is the purest feeling of selfishness. An error the more deplorIable and the more fatal, as frequently, those who walk in its darkening influence, desire to

find the true way of life, and believe that they are walking in the light of the Lord.*

An important distinction may also be formed between moral and religious actions in a more general view, by examining the cause from whence they each arise. Moral actions are purely selfish, looking only to their price; but religious actions are strictly disinterested, arising from certain affections which grace will give to the heart. "The love of God shed abroad on the heart."

Could any feeling be present at the heart of the Christian, which moved him to calculate upon the merit of his deeds, those deeds would cease to be holy. Even the promise of "everlasting happiness" is never regarded as the price of his obedience; nor is the reward of heaven considered as due to his merit. † When engaged in duties which require the greatest self-denial; when forgiving injuries; when returning prayers for curses; when doing good to them who have treated him despitefully; when loving his enemies, the Christian looks for no reward; the Spirit of God is dwelling within him‡, and has wrought such a change of heart, as to produce godliness of mind, and holiness of life, and its natural and disinterested fruits. It is evident, therefore, that the moment a religious state of

* Vide Ellis, pp. 10, 11. † 2 Thess. ii. 13. and Tit. iii. 5° ‡ 1 Cor. iii. 16.