THE CONSCIENCE. 



161 



The fact is that the writer of th6 paper started by saying that 

 Conscience was a quality, but that it was exemplified by action ; and 

 what we meant by liberty of conscience did not mean liberty to 

 have conscience, but liberty to act according to individual conscience. 

 The point was whether one should allow liberty to act upon what 

 man thought to be right in every case. Conscience was not defined 

 as action. It was defined as something previously existing, and 

 exemplified by action. 



On the other hand, I would like to offer a few criticisms. We 

 are told that personification of Conscience is found in Paul, but I 

 can only discover two instances in which Paul can be said to have 

 personified Conscience. The first is that in Avhich he says : " My 

 conscience also bearing me witness " (Romans ix, 1). The other case 

 is where he is speaking to the heathen, and says, " Their conscience 

 bearing witness " (Romans ii, 15). Otherwise, I cannot find that the 

 apostle Paul personified Conscience. It might equally be said that 

 John did so when he wrote : " They went out one by one, convicted 

 by their own conscience." That might be held to be personification, 

 but in neither case can you be positive. It might simply be the 

 realizing through the faculty of conscience. 



I thought the brief letter from Dr. Schofield, summing up the 

 three faculties, the intellectual, the sesthetical, and the moral, was 

 excellent ; and to me it commends itself, and is surely right. I 

 believe with Mr. Collett that we all have a conscience, and Butler 

 proved that by taking an extreme case. He said : "Is there any 

 heathen tribe, however base, which would not condemn the action of 

 a man who did a vile turn to someone who had saved his life 1 " 

 There is no tribe who would not condemn that. If Conscience did 

 not exist, they might equally say it was right or wrong. There 

 would be nothing to decide it in their minds. 



The Chairman : It is now my pleasing duty to ask you to pass 

 by acclamation a vote of thanks to the very able and talented 

 (though not apparently altogether convincing) author of the paper 

 to which we have had the great pleasure of listening. As my earlier 

 observations have been a little discussed by one or two gentlemen, 

 for whom I feel respect, perhaps I may be allowed to say that when 

 the Apostle speaks of a good conscience and of an evil conscience, 

 he means a conscience that approves, and a conscience that 



