HERE are two rules given us, enforced by a reafon.

We must first be sober. This word, in the original, relates chiefly to temperance in drinking *; but it may easily be extended, and was probably meant to be extended, to all things in which is concerned. This gives it a great temperance is concerned.

range among Christian virtues.

We must next be vigilant. The usefulness of vigilance arises from the proneness of human na

* See Parkhurst's Lexicon.

ture to negligence. Temperance, which acts as a restraint on all our paffions and appetites, is very apt to relax. Such defultory temperance forms no habit. It is the habit of temperance, which religion requires; and which it is the office of vigilance to produce.

Lastly, to awaken us to this vigilance, these two rules are enforced by a reafon. Our adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketḥ about, seeking whom he may devour.

Whether the devil, as a tempter, has power over mankind, at this time, is a question, which hath often been decided with more boldness than

argument. It is certain the fcriptures feem to favour the opinion of fuch existence; and it is as certain, that we know nothing of the nature of fpirit, except from fcripture. Good men alfo oftent experience fuch fubtile temptations, as they cannot account for on any principle, except that of a fedu. cing agent. But whether we take the lion of the text" for fome wicked agent, or for temptation in general, ftill it forms an argument very conclufive. We are always in the midst of temptations, and cannot be too much on our guard against them.

Canotar

EXCEPT A MAN BE BORN AGAIN, HE CANNOT EN

WE are here inftructed to prepare ourselves for the kingdom of heaven, in oppofition to that preparation, which the magistrate thinks fufficient for the kingdoms of this world.

The good of fociety alone is his object. Keep your defires, he cries, within fuch bounds as not to injure your fellow citizens, and I am satisfied.

But religion goes deeper. We are members, it informs us, of a higher kingdom, into which we must be born, as it were anew. We must not be satisfied with restraining the outward act; we must purify the inward affection.

Thus

court

Thus then we are, in fact, members of two different focieties, for which two different modes of preparation are required.-Which of these modes of preparation is fuperior, may be feen, by confidering the first as qualifying us only for one fociety-the other for both. The foldier may fight for glory, or plunder-and the statesman may popularity. Each may benefit his fociety; yet as neither has yet made any ground in the doctrine, which enjoins him to be born again; fo neither, of courfe, is qualified for the kingdom of heaven.Whereas, he who is born again-whofe actions are governed by the laws of the kingdom of heaven, not only qualifies himself for that kingdom, but promotes more uniformly the good alfo of that inferior fociety, of which he is a member. Thus, for in ftance, the foldier who fights for glory or reward, if he have reason to believe he fhall attain neither, withdraws from the fervice as foon as he can he has no other motive to push him on: while the foldier who acts under a fense of religion, has nothing to do with the motives of glory and reward. He acts under higher influence, and obeys the call of his country, as long as his fervices are required.

Such

Such a character, we are told, is ideal. It does not exist. We all mix glory, or reward, or other worldly motive with our pursuits.

t

In a degree, no doubt, we do: but perhaps not in fo full a degree as the objector may fuppofe. However, on a fuppofition the objection were true, it is ftill no argument against the doctrine. We are not contending how many, or how few obferve the doctrine; but only affert fimply, that if the doctrine were obferved, the effect would be, as it is here represented.

This again the objector denies. The maxims of the gospel, he obferves, are fo opposite to the maxims of the world, that they are unfit to qualify men as foldiers, statesmen, or members of a community in any fhape; and that no man, who ftrictly adheres to them, can exert himself properly in any civil department.

This is a bold affertion. But in order to fettle it, the doctrines of Chriftianity must be well examined-they must be compared with the interests of mankind-and the impoffibility of a union must be fhewn from examples, which have failed, not through want of abilities, (for religion cannot fecure abilities,) but through mere adherence to religious principles. We affert, therefore, that on

a fuppo