Years
ago I got called for a week of jury duty and was chosen for five cases. Most –
if not all – of them were DUIs (or DWIs – I never know the difference). I
remember one case in particular in which it was clear that the defendant was
guilty as charged; the State’s Attorney, however, failed to present a case that
proved it. It was very hard for me to declare the accused “not guilty” but the other
jurors helped me to understand the difference between “not guilty” and
“innocent.”
As Paul confesses here, a clear
conscience is not a sure sign of innocence or lack of guilt. The Jiminy Cricket
in our head can be ignored until he no longer bothers to speak to us. Our
conscience can only convict us if we are aware that what we are doing is wrong.
As someone has observed, the conscience is more reliable when it condemns than
when it acquits.* You don’t want to ignore those twinges that are
telling you that you are wrong but the absence of a twinge is not a sure
indication of a thumbs-up. In other words, the conscience is not an infallible
guide.*
A conscience that is truly clear
is one that recognizes the cleansing power of the blood of Jesus. We will never
be innocent again but the jury finds us “not guilty.”
|
No comments:
Post a Comment