361 
good, and true-always. If lie fails in his conformity nr ^n R e8 ponI 
thereto, he is in opposition to immutable realities sibiiityma^or 
of being. What may be the condition, in the nature may n ° 5 
of things, of persons who, at the final adjudication of the 
moral system, or who at the termination of life's probation 
here, have wilfully failed in duty, and so are in opposition to 
essential reason, and essential good, our natural Deontology 
does not inform us. But if additional knowledge and power 
imply responsibility in proportion, the conscious rejector of 
Revelation, we cannot help seeing, incurs penalty beyond others. 
159. When we bear in mind how permanently all the 
opinions which we form may influence our cha- 
racter and action, the duty of forming right t0 Infe ^“ c f 0 Ja 
opinion forces itself on the attention even of the Responsibility: 
least enlightened moralist; for opinion has rela- 
tion to both knowledge and power. 
Of Religious opinion, the influence on our whole Deontology 
seems well-nigh unlimited. We must recognize, however, 
in all equity, even in this, the original distinctiveness of the 
individual. The power, the capacity of virtue, the discern- 
ment of truth and duty, are widely different ab initio in man 
and man : and the responsibility is also graduated. The 
eventual justice of the moral system is only safe in the hands 
of the Supreme Governor. — But of these aboriginal differences 
something further should be said. 
160. In entertaining any opinion, or forming any judgment, 
or in contemplating any action, there is in every 
rational being some estimate of the Possible and of ts gradatlons 
the Probable. The difference in such estimate between different 
men may evince various gradations of the capacity of insight 
into that which lies beyond the present, which may, more 
or less readily, become Religious Faith. We know that the 
various degrees of sensitiveness to moral truths, commonly so 
called, indicate widely different states of conscientiousness in 
morals. We do not suppose that the sanguine temperament 
of one, or the dulness of another, precludes accountability : 
but simply modifies it. So what is sometimes termed the 
“ temper of faith" is far from uniform, among* those who are 
nevertheless responsible. Yet no accountable being 
is destitute of a faith of an initial kind within his implying a 
very soul which will at least respond to the pro- meST^ faith!’ 
phetic words — “ Say ye to the righteous, it shall be 
well with him : woe to the wicked, it shall be ill with him." 
But, (what is more rare,) a persistent continuance in righteous- 
ness under adverse circumstances (which all would applaud,) is 
certainly of the nature of Faith of even a higher kind. 
