The Apostle's words may be considered as relating to,
1. The sins of others —
[" To cover the sins " of others (extenuating what we can- not approve; concealing what we cannot but condemn; and throwing a veil over, not errors only, but " sins," yea, even "a multitude" of sins,) is the proper office of loven. From this office we should not depart, unless (as in the exercise of the ministerial or magisterial office) the honour of God, and the good of society, require it. A just regard to the great duty of love is of incalculable importance: first, to ourselves ; for how can we expect to have forbearance exercised towards us, if we refuse it to others? Next, to the church; for how can the church be edified, if its members do not walk together in love ? And lastly, to the enemies of the church, who will not fail to harden themselves in their iniquities, if evil reports in the church, and consequent dissensions and animosities, afford them any occasion. But mutual forbearance will never be exercised as it ought, without a deeply-rooted principle of love0. Therefore we should cultivate this principle in order to maintain a becoming conduct p.]
2. Our own sins —
[We must not, for one moment, think that our love, how- ever fervent, can merit the pardon of our sins. Yet our pardon may be, and certainly is, suspended on the exercise of this divine principle. To this the whole Scriptures bear witness*1;
n 1 Cor. xiii. 7. The duty of love does not, however, preclude ministers from censuring, or magistrates from punishing, the sins of men : they perform those acts officially ; and in performing them, they obey, instead of violating, the law of love. But to men in their individual capacity, the text prescribes an invariable rule of duty. See Matt, xviii. 22.
When we hate a person, we are ready on all occasions to speak of his faults ; hut this is not the way in which we treat those whom we tenderly love.
P Pro v. x. 12. in our translation seems to countenance, and almost to establish, this sense of the text ; because it appears to have been cited by St. Peter. But the Apostles generally cited rather the Sep- tuagint translation of the Scriptures : and in that the two passages do not at all correspond. The LXX. translate it thus : Mlaoc iyetpet vttKOQ' ~arrac c e tovq pi) (piXortiKouvrag m\v\pei <j>i\ia. So that the apparent parallelism will not enable us to determine, with certainty, the sense of the text.
i Matt. v. 7. and vi. 14, 15. and Prov. xvi. 6. See also Gal. vi. 7, 8. and 1 Tim. vi. IS, 19. contrasted with Jam. ii. 13. Daniel even goes so far as to counsel Nebuchadnezzar Xvrnujaai ras apaprlag iv eXerjfioavpatg.