CHA P. IV.

How Religion conduces to the happiness of the outward man in respect of Riches.

TH

Hirdly, as to our Estates and Poffeffions, I fhall fhew that Religion is the caufe of Riches. In order to the proof of this, the first thing to be enquired into, is, what is the true nature of wealth or riches, and wherein it may properly be faid to confift. And here it is to be noted, that the word Riches is capable of a twofold fenfe,

Ş Abfolute,

Relative.

1. In the more abfolute sense, it may be defin'd to confist in such a measure of estate as may be sufficient for a man's occafions and conveniencies; when his poffeffions are so proportioned, as may fully anfwer all the neceffities of his condition, and afford him a comfortable subsistence, according to his quality, the station

where

wherein he is placed. In which fenfe men of all ranks and degrees are capable of being rich. A Husbandman, or an ordinary Tradefman may be as truly stiled a rich man, as he that is a Gentleman, or a Lord, or a King. Though perhaps what these can very well afford to fling away upon their diverfions, be more than all the estate and poffeffions which the other can pretend to. And upon this ground it is, that all men will grant, one perfon to be as truly liberal in giving but a penny, or a poor mite, as another in giving a hundred pounds, because these things are to be measured by the different conditions of the givers: And a man may as well be rich with a little, as liberal with a little.

2. In the more relative fenfe, Riches

may be described to confist in the having of large Poffeffions, when a man's Estate. and Revenue is of fuch a proportion as is commonly esteemed Great, whether with relation to the generality of other men, and fo only thofe at the upper end of the world are capable of being counted rich; or elfe with refpect to others of the fame rank and order, and fo all fuch are counted rich, who do in their poffeffions exceed the common fort of those

that

that are of the same rank with them; this kind of wealth confifting properly in comparison: There being not any one determinate fum, or proportion of revenue, to which the name of riches may be appropiated, but that it may be as much below the occafions of fome perfons as it is above the condition of others who yet live plentifully.

Now the first of these is the only proper notion of Riches, because this alone is agreeable to the chief end of wealth, which is to free us from want and neceffity. And the other may be rather stiled, the being proprietor of great poffeffions, the meer having of which cannot denominate one a truly rich man for this plain reafon; because though fuch poffeffions be in themselves great, yet they may not be fufficient to free the owner of them from want and poverty, whether in respect to his real or imaginary occafions for more: And that is not Riches which cannot free a man from being poor. And want of necessaries, is as truly poverty in him that hath much, as in him that hath but a little. He that in any one condition of life, hath enough to answer all his conveniences, fuch a man is more truly rich than he whofe revenue is a thousand

times greater, if it be not equal either to his occafions, or to his mind.

Now when it is faid, that Religion is the caufe of Riches, the meaning of this cannot reasonably be understood of Riches in the second fenfe, as if he that were religious should be thereby advanced to the greatest poffeffions that any man else doth enjoy, from the condition of a Peafant or a Tradefman to that of a Prince. Because this would no more consist with those several degrees and fubordinations required to the order of the Universe, than it would for every common Soldier to be a General, or every private man to be a King. But the meaning of this propofition must be, that Religion will be a means to fupply a man with such a fufficiency as may denominate him rich; and to free him from fuch neceffities, whether real or imaginary, as others of his rank and station are liable unto.

So that by what hath been faid, it may appear, that the true notion of Riches doth comprehend under it these two things.

1. A fufficiency for a man's occafions and conveniencies.

2. An acquiefcence of mind, in fo much as is in it felf really fufficient, and which

will

cap. 5.

will appear to be fo, fuppofing a man to judge according to right reafon.

And that this is not a meer fancy or notion, but the most proper sense of the word Riches, wherein all mankind have agreed, may be made very evident.

Concerning the first of thefe there can be no colour of doubt. All the fcruple will be concerning the fecond; Whether that be necessary to make a man rich. And to this the Philofophers do generally Rhet. lib. 1. attest. Ariftotle in particular, doth affirm that the true nature of riches doth confift in the contented use and enjoyment of the things we have, rather than in the poffeffion of them. Thofe that out of penuriousness can fcarce afford themselves the ordinary conveniences of life out of their large poffeffions, have been always accounted poor; nay, he that cannot use and enjoy the things he doth poffefs, may upon this account be faid to be of all others the most indigent, because such a one doth truly want the things he hath, as well as those he hath not.

That man who is not content with what is in it felf fufficient for his condition, neither is rich, nor ever will be fo; because there can be no other real limits to his defires, but that of fufficiency; what