whom he permitted to be received upon the charitable lifts of the chriftian church, he requires that they be " well reported of for good works-that they have brought up children, that they have lodged ftrangers, that they have relieved the afflicted, and that they have diligently followed every good work." To quote no other example lif ten to the reproach which our bleffed Lord makes to the unhappy man who had not industriously improved the talent with which he had been intrufted-" Thou wicked and flothful fervant!" And let us tremble at the fentence pronounced upon him, "caft ye the unprofitable fervant into utter darknessthere fhall be wailing and gnashing of teeth." From hence it appears that, in the final judgment, we must render an account of the neglect of our talents as well as of their mifimprovement-of our omissions of duty as well as of our pofitive tranfgreffions.

When, in another paffage, our Saviour commands his difciples "not to labour for the meat that periffeth, but for that which endureth to everlafting life"-can he mean, as fome have imagined, to recommend a

pious idleness, or to make a merit of monaftic poverty? Can he intend to confine all the images of vigilance and labour by which, in other places, the chriftian life is reprefented, wholly to the fecret and interior duties of religion ?-It is impoffiblebut knowing how prone mankind are to give the preference to vifible and temporal things above those that are invisible and eternal, he intends by this ftrong expreffion to caft down the world from its ufurped fuperiority, and to give their juft afcenden-· cy in our esteem and pursuit to the objects of an immortal exiftence. Amidft all our justifiable concerns for the prefent life, the life to come is of infinitely higher moment, and demands our principal care.

II. Industry is a duty required, in the next place, by our relations to fociety.

No man liveth to himself alone. We are all members one of another, and are linked together by innumerable ties of mutual intereft and dependence. The joint ef-. forts of all are neceffary for the happiness of all. Man, as an infulated individual, is capable of little improvement, and even of

little enjoyment. Arts are invented and cultivated, fociety advances, and is refined, and the public prosperity is promoted only by united labours. Each one is called to contribute his portion to the common stock. Every man, therefore, who is not usefully employed, may be confidered as robbing fo much from the fum of general benefit and happiness as his labours ought to have added to it. He does more. His example infects the community. And the idle become injurious, not only by their own indolence, but by their pernicious influence.

Who has a right to enjoy the advantages -of fociety if he contribute nothing to maintain and increase them? Shall the wealthy claim this dishonorable privilege, as if being the spring of action in others, and the channels through which the rewards of labour flow to them, they might remain idle? No, the ties of reciprocal dependence pervade all orders of the community, and reach, like a mighty chain, from the highest to the loweft. Befides, is it not manifeftly unjust that those who enjoy the bounties of providence in the greatest profufion fhould employ them to the Icaft worthy purposes

fhould render themselves the least worthy of men-fhould fuffer their powers to flagnate and degenerate for want of a necellary and useful exercise-should become, by their example, the corrupters of fociety? If God has elevated them to confpicuous stations, and put into their hands the means of doing extenfive good, has he not laid them under proportionally higher obligations than other men to cultivate an intrinfic worth of character, and to co-operate with the great Father of the universe in moting the happiness of mankind. Can this be effected by an indolent felf-enjoyment that takes no intereft in the affairs of men? Can it, by a luxurious diffipation in which, though men may be active, they are worfe than idle, and active only to pernicious ends?

pro

To the law of an ufeful induftry, therefore, the rich as well as the poor, as well as the humble are, by their relations poor, the great to fociety and to God, equally and indifpenfably fubject.

But, independently on thefe high relations, every inan is under obligations to in

U

duftry from his holy and tender connections with a family. If he has been thrown by providence among the inferior claffes of fortune, is it not among the first duties both of nature and religion to make provifion for thofe of his own houfchold, who depend upon his care, or to whom he has been the voluntary occafion of exiflence? -Whatever ftation he holds, is it not his duty to exhibit before them a worthy example? With affiduity to fuperintend their education on which fo much depends for their happiness in life? And to throw round them, in that rank which they poffefs, all the refpectability that virtue, talents, and industry can beftow upon them? Without great vigilance and care in forming the fentiments and habits of youth, they are liable to fink into infignificance, or to fall a prey to the innumerable minifters of vice that furround them. Parents are refponfible for their children to God, and the public, as well as to their own hearts. For want of that energy and vigilance which a just education requires, how many of the poor plunged into a low and brutal profligacy? how many families of high fortune have gradually degenerated in the qualities both

have