Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

the Lord thy vows,' but it does not follow, that therefore thou shalt make vows. So in these also there is no consequence of obligation. Thou shalt not take from thy neighbour what is his; therefore thou shalt give to thy neighbour :-thou must take from none; therefore thou must give to all :-thou must not give false testimony; therefore thou must tell all the truth thou knowest :-thou mayest not give wrong judgment, therefore you must give right;-for it may so happen that you need not give any at all. These instances point out to us the measures of affirmatives, which follow from the contrary negations. Thus :

6

10. (1.) Affirmative duty follows from the negative; not in contraries, but in contradictories. To make a vow and break a vow are contraries; and, therefore, it follows not, because I must not break a vow, therefore I must make one: but to break a vow and not to break it are contradictories, and, therefore, if one be forbidden, the other is commanded; and if the commandment be expressed in negatives, Thou shalt not break thy vows,' the affirmative is in the bosom of it, therefore thou shalt keep them: because, unless this part of the contradiction be done, the other is, and therefore it is not enough, that we do nothing expressly against the instance of the vow; but we must also understand ourselves obliged to the performance of it, according to the first intention. The reason of this is, because between two contraries there can be a third thing of a disparate nature; not at all included or concluded by either part, either by inference or by opposition.

11. (2.) From a negative an affirmative is not always inferred, in a particular instance. We must not be uncharitable in any instance; but it follows not, that, by virtue of this commandment, therefore we must be charitable, or do our alms in every instance: for every man is not bound to redeem captives, or to visit prisoners: the reason is, because uncharitableness and visiting prisoners are not opposed in their whole matter and nature; but the commandment which is contrary to uncharitableness, can be obeyed according to all its intention, although it be not instanced in that particular. But this is to be added; that when, by accidents and circumstances, and the efficacy of some other command

ment, we are called upon to this instance; then that this be done, is by virtue even of the negative, by the prohibition of uncharitableness,-because when we are determined to an instance, the sanction of the whole commandment is incumbent on it, and will not be satisfied without it; but in other cases it is indifferent, and is obeyed by any instance, that is fitted to our circumstances and to our powers. It is like a man's stomach, which, of itself, is indifferent to any good meat, but when, by a particular xgdois or accident, it requires this and nothing else, it must either have this or it will fast. So are affirmative laws; though they oblige to every instance, and are indifferent to any that we can and may, yet sometimes we are determined to this and no other, and then the whole force of the law is upon it. But else, ordinarily it is true, that the universal negative infers only the indefinite affirmative, not the particular: the universal is only inferred by the consequence, the particular by accidents and circum

stances.

12. (3.) From a negative law the affirmative is inferred, but not in the same degree of duty and necessity. It is not so great a sin, if we neglect an act of charity, or an opportunity of doing glory to God, as if we do an act of uncharitableness, or positively dishonour God. The reason is, because sins of omission are less than sins of commission, because negligence is not so bad as malice,-and of omission, sometimes, there is no evil cause, but a mere negative or unavoidable inadvertency; but of a sin of commission, the cause is always positive, and therefore always intolerable.

13. (4.) The affirmative which is inferred by the negative law of Christ, is not absolute and unlimited like the negative, but modificated and limited by its proper and extrinsic measures. We must, in no case and for no regard, hinder our innocent neighbour from doing his necessary work; but it does not follow, that therefore we must always set his work forward, and lend him oxen to plough his land for it is in no case lawful to do evil, but in many cases it is lawful not to do good: that is, there is something more required to specificate a positive act besides the consequence of a negative law. For although the body of an action is there commanded, yet because the body of the action must be invested

:

છે

with circumstances, they also must have their proper causes, or they cannot have a direct necessity. "Never turn thy face from any poor man," is a negative precept: to which the affirmative of Christ doth rightly correspond, "Give to every one that asks." Now, although the negative is universally to be observed in its own just sense, "Ut ne aversemur à paupere ;"--that is, that we deny not to be charitable to him;—yet, when this comes to be specificated by positive actions, the commandment is not the only measure; but some conditions are required of him that is to receive; and some of him that is to give :-for to him that will not work, when he can, we are not to give; and he that needs it for himself, is not obliged to part with it to his brother; supposing their needs are equal or not extreme. To this purpose is that known rule, that negative precepts oblige always, and to an actual obedience in all times: but affirmative, although they always oblige, yet they can be obeyed but in their own season.' So that, although every negative precept is infinite and hath no limit, yet the affirmative have extrinsic measures and positions of their own, something to make them laws to me and you, though the consequence of the negative is sufficient to make them to be laws to all mankind. So that, although negative precepts may be the mother of affirmatives, yet the child is but a dwarf, and not like the mother; and besides that, it is exposed to be nursed by chance and by circumstances, by strangers and all the measures of contingency.

6

14. (5.) When affirmatives are included in, and inferred from, the negatives, the proportion of them is not positive but comparative. Thus when our blessed Lord had given commandment, Resist not evil,' that is, we should not do evil for evil,-the affirmative, which is properly consequent from this, is, Do good for evil:' and this is obliging according to the former measures: but when you inquire further into the proportions, and ask after the instances, which our blessed Saviour made, we shall find that their obligation is not positive but comparative: "If a man strike thee on thy cheek, turn the other also;"-that is, rather than revenge thyself for one injury, receive another: and rather than vex him who forces thee to go a mile, go with him two miles:

not that Christ intends thou should offer to do thyself a shrewd turn, or invite another; nor that thou shouldst suffer it, if thou canst fairly avoid it: but that thou shouldst choose. rather to suffer two evils, than do one. But this is especially to be reduced to practice in matters of counsel rather than precept; that is, when the affirmative inferred from the negative is matter of perfection rather than positive necessity, then the comparative proportion is a duty; but the absolute proportion and measure is but counsel. To oblige an enemy, and do him acts of favour and benefit, is an excellency of charity, for which Christians shall receive a glorious reward: but this is a counsel of perfection, which if, upon probable reasons and fairly inducing circumstances, it be omitted, a man shall give no answer for: but when the case is so, that it must be that I must either take revenge of him, or else rescue him from that revenge by an act of kindness, by a labour of love, or an expense of charity, then this becomes a duty; for in comparative measures every affirmative is at least obligatory: that is, we must rather be at any trouble, or expense, to do an affirmative, than prevaricate a negative commandment.

15. But then as to the other part of the rule, that in the affirmative commandment the negative is included,' there is no other difficulty but this,-that caution be had, that the negative be opposed to the affirmative in relation to the same subject: for because we are bound to love our friends, therefore we must not hate them; but it follows not (as the Pharisees did falsely comment on this text) because we must love our friends, therefore we must hate our enemies; for these two are not opposed as affirmative and negative in the same subject, but as two affirmatives relating to subjects that are divers.

16. But this is sometimes not to be understood of the precise commandment itself, but of the appendages; I mean the promises and threatenings: for though it follows, we must do good to our neighbour; therefore we must do no evil to him yet it does not follow, Do this and live; therefore if ye do not do it, ye shall die:' the reason of that is this, because there are some things encouraged with excellent rewards, the negatives of which are permitted to us with

impunity thus it is said by our blessed Saviour, "When thou makest a feast, invite the poor, and thou shalt have recompense in heaven;" but then if we do not invite the poor, it does not follow that we shall be punished in hell; but we shall not have that recompense, which the hospitable man shall have: so that to invite the poor is an affirmative precept; but in this the negative is not included; Thou shalt not invite the rich,' or if thou doest, thou shalt be punished but that it is not so excellent a thing, it is not so encouraged by the proposition of an eternal reward;' but expires in a temporal interest: so that the negative included relates to the reward, not to the precept, and means this only: if thou dost not invite the poor, thou shalt not have any reward in heaven for feasting and making entertainments. But the sign of this is, 1. when the precept is only in the particular instance of a general commandment; as this of inviting the poor is of alms or charity: or else, 2. when it is matter of counsel and not of express precept: then the negative is not directly included in the preceptive words, but in the reward that is appendant.

17. Lastly, when it is said that in the affirmative precepts the negatives are included; the word 'negative' is to be understood in the moral sense; that is, so as to include the privatives also: thus when we are commanded to love our brother, it is not only forbidden to us to hate him; but we are also commanded not to omit to express our love by symbolical actions: for not only contrarieties and repugnancies to the duty of the commandment, but even omissions also, are forbidden: and this is highly to be regarded in the matters of charity; which toward enemies we use to estimate by our not cursing him, our not hurting him, our not being revenged on him: these, indeed, are proper instances of the negative included; but the privatives also are to be considered; for not loving him is hating him; our refusing to do him kindness, our not praying for him, our unaptness to do him good offices, our remembering and reporting his injustice, our refusing to converse with him and denying him the comforts of our society, when, without danger or injury to ourselves, we may converse; is a prevaricating the negative or privative measures of the commandment.

« AnteriorContinuar »