himself of that imputation, especially with those who are not
thoroughly acquainted with his conversation? So he that calleth a
man unjust, proud, perverse, hypocritical, doth load him with most
grievous faults, which it is not possible that the most innocent
person should discharge himself from.

3. Like to that kind is this: aspersing a man's actions with harsh
censures and foul terms, importing that they proceed from ill
principles, or tend to bad ends; so as it doth not or cannot appear.
Thus when we say of him that is generously hospitable, that he is
profuse; of him that is prudently frugal, that he is niggardly; of
him that is cheerful and free in his conversation, that he is vain
or loose; of him that is serious and resolute in a good way, that he
is sullen or morose; of him that is conspicuous and brisk in
virtuous practice, that it is ambition or ostentation which prompts
him; of him that is close and bashful in the like good way, that it
is sneaking stupidity, or want of spirit; of him that is reserved,
that it is craft; of him that is open, that it is simplicity in him;
when we ascribe a man's liberality and charity to vainglory, or
popularity; his strictness of life, and constancy, in devotion, to
superstition, or hypocrisy. When, I say, we pass such censures, or
impose such characters on the laudable or innocent practice of our
neighbours, we are indeed slanderers, imitating therein the great
calumniator, who thus did slander even God Himself, imputing His
prohibition of the fruit unto envy towards men; "God," said he,
"doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, your eyes shall be
opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil;" who thus
did ascribe the steady piety of Job, not to a conscientious love and
fear of God, but to policy and selfish design: "Doth Job fear God
for nought?"