mysterious parts-not to enter into the inquiries, how? and why?-nor to clog it with difficult, or refined questions; against which the apostle to Timothy, long ago, took abundant pains tó guard us; but to preach it, as we are directed, with plainness-to lay the stress on its obvious truths-and when we have occafion to mention a mysterious point, (one of those great points, which relate to God's part in the covenant of grace, rather than to man's,) to be careful of going too far to keep as close as poffible to fcripture, lest we make a difficulty more difficult by endeavouring to explain, what cannot be explained. The lefs, in general, that is faid on fuch points, the better. One thing we should always remember; and that is to adapt our difcourses to the lower, rather than the higher parts of our audience; that we may, like good minifters, dispense that gospel, whose peculiar character it was, to be preached to the poor.

I shall close this head, with the account, which an ancient heathen of the fourth century gives of the mode of preaching the gospel in his day : "The christian philofophy," says he, " is very " simple. Its principal concern is to regulate "the manners of men, and to infufe worthy

" notions of the Deity. Obscure questions, and " nice arguments, it avoids. Nor does it enter "into the nature and foundation of virtue: but " exhorts, in general, to the practice of it; " which experience shews us is more effectual " among the vulgar *.""

:

Our manners should be as fimple as our doctrine.

:

But you ask, what is fimplicity of manners? It is a phrafe of ambiguous meaning.

Let us not here again puzzle ourselves with definitions. They who feek for close definitions on these subjects, I should fear, seek rather for evafion, than information. The fcriptures have little to do with definitions. On these subjects, they speak to the heart, more than to the head. Whoever reads, with a defire to learn, the in. structions which our Saviour and his apostles give to the ministers of the gospel, will foon feel -unless indeed it be a point which he wishes to overlook not only in what the fimplicity of our manners should confift-but also, that it should be our first, and most indispensable care.

1

(

polis. Vol. IV. p. 11.

And

And the reason of the thing, as we are preachers of the gospel, is plain; because the simplicity of our manners must give force to what we fay. It is not every body, with his best endeavour, who can get hold of the propereft method of communicating his ideas, or can practise that mode of application in his dif *courses, either publicly or privately, which may have the best effect upon the people. But sim plicity of manners is a mode of preaching, which makes up many defects it is adapted to every capacity-every body understands it; and it adds a dignity, and consequence even to a discourse of less weight. Though the common people are no good reafoners, there is however one mode of reasoning, at which they are very ready-that of inferring doctrine from manners: and they will not only make the latter a test of the for mer; but they will in general pay more attention to it likewife.

When the city of Antioch was disposed to receive the gofpel; and the apostle Barnabas was fent from Jerufalem to promote the good work, which was there carrying on, the people feem to have been particularly influenced by his holy life; " for he was a good man," says the apofto. lical

D4

1

lical historian, " and full of the Holy Ghoft, and " of faith and much people was added unto the " Lord."

On the other hand, the purest doctrine will lofe its effect, among the common people at least, in proportion as they fee their minister pay less attention to it himself. That apoftolical apoftrophe, Thou that preachest to others, teachest thou not thyself? will ever be the language of popular contempt.

There is another kind of contempt also, which every confiftent man would particularly wish to avoid and that is, his own contempt of himself. What must that man's feelings be, whose life is spent in a continued variance with those truths, which he is obliged to preach? who must tell his hearers of governing their undue affections; and yet lets his own loofe in all the vanities of a diffipated age? who must talk of the world as a pilgrimage; while every action of his life shews it to be his carnal home? who is obliged to preach the glories of a future state, and the joys of heaven: while his own happiness is plainly centered in worldly ambition, and worldly attentions? Contempt abroad may be borne, if a man feel from the uprightness of his own heart, that

that he does not deferve it: but there is no re fuge from contempt within-unless a man is past feeling, and fets at defiance the remonstrances even of common decency.

How far the minister of the gospel should keep at a distance from the world-from its ambitious views-its interests-and its party. contentions-how far he should stand aloof from its pleasures; and abstain from many amusements, which, though perhaps innocent in themselves, may (at least when countenanced by him) have a tendency to break down the fences of religion, are questions-not proper indeed for me to determine: but very proper for every churchman to examine serioufsly in his own confcience. It is becoming surely that the ministers of a religion, which so entirely disclaims the world, should endeavour at least not to be much intangled in it. A morose character is not the alternative. Cheerfulness is the natural companion of religion. Sourness is an alien intruder. Amusements too are neceffary: but I am not fingular in thinking those amusements should rather be of the retired kind; than fought for amidst the noise and bustle of the world. Riot and excess generally attend the amuse. ments