industry (the subject of our prefent queftion) tho' it may in fome cafes and degrees be unlawful, yet in fome also, and indeed, in general, it is a duty, a pofitive part of our religion, and the contrary to it, floth and idleness, a notorious fin. The Proverbs of Solomon are very copious on this head, and the New Teftament inspiration is not behind-hand in this matter. St. Paul has delivered a general Canon, that if any man will not work, neither should be eat, and preffes his own example, * who wrought. with labour and travel night and day, to maintain himself. And amongst his exhortations to the Romans, this is one, that they fhould not be + flothful in business. Our Saviour, though he whip'd the buyers and fellers out of the Temple, yet he did not out of their fhops; but honoured laborious and honeft profeffions, by choofing Difciples of fuch employments. The labour therefore, which we are here fpeaking againft, as finful, is to be diftinguished from honeft industry.

(1.) IN the object of it, riches and abundance. If we look back to the primitive inftitution of labour, we find it enjoined us in part of punishment for Adam's difobedience. From whence 'tis very plain, the defign of it could never be to fupply us with power and riches. But what was the proper and appointed object of our labour by that fentence, the words of it fufficiently intimate, In the fweat of thy face fhalt thou eat thy bread. We were not bid to labour, that we might engross as much of the world as we could get; but to procure thereby the neceffaries of life, for our felves and thofe that depend upon us; including fuch a provifion for the future, as may put our children into a way of living, by trades or profeffions, fuitable to the rank we bear. If any more be aim'd at, it must

I Thef. iii. 8, 10. † Rom. xii, 11.

Gen. iii. 19.

be

be only the glorifying God, and doing good to others by works of charity, according to that rule of St. Paul, *Let him that ftole fteal no more: but rather let him labour, working with his hands the thing which is good, that he may have to give to him that needeth. Or, as it is expreffed upon another occafion, that tour abundance may be a fupply to the want of others. But this is a defign too generous for a narrow-fpirited and selfish world to think of; and yet I dare be bold to affirm, that for fuch good offices ought all the endeavours of encrease, and the command of riches, chiefly to be intended. Works of charity, and the promoting and propagating true religion, are the only warrantable views of labour that I know of. But where the design is merely the raifing of an eftate, or the fcraping together fo much money, let the methods by which they purfue it, be never fo honeft, their improvement never fo juft, the end denominates the action, and it becomes unlawful. I fear this will be thought a very hard faying, by thofe (even better men than ordinary) that are in a way of growing rich, and have hitherto pleased themselves with the fairness and integrity of the means they ufe to become fo, and never queftioned that in the ufe of fuch fair means, they might lawfully get as much as ever they could; to these it will be an hard saying, but who can help it? The precept is very plain, Lay not up for your felves treafures upon earth; fo plain, that one would think it equally impoffible to be unobserved or evaded, by what political gloffes foever the covetoufnefs of men may think to interpret away a command, that lies fo directly against them. But farther, labour may become finful, not only by its object, but,

Eph. iv. 28,

† 2 Cor. viii. 14.

(2.) By

(2.) By excess in the measures of it, by a too great eagernefs and intenfenefs in labouring, even for a lawful end, the neceffaries of life, and much more for an unlawful object, riches and abundance. I call it exceffive, when it either breaks the health, or fo takes up our time from the fervice of God, as to draw us into a neglect of the neceffary duties of religion, in public, in private, or with our families. Whenever it thus loofens our affections, or withdraws us from the daily practice of prayer, meditation, and reading of the word of God, 'tis no longer laudable industry, but finful labour. Martha was undoubtedly well imploy'd, as to the end of her diligence, when fhe was preparing an entertainment for our Saviour, yet fee how he rebukes her in favour of her fifter Mary, who was more intent in hearing his divine inftructions, and minding the fpiritual concerns of her own foul. * Martha, Martha, thou art careful and troubled about many things; but one thing is needful, and Mary hath chofen that good part which shall not be taken away from her. I proceed now (as those busy worldlings ufually do, of whom I am speaking) to,

(4.) THE fourth and laft particular prohibited, the boarding up of treasures, when acquired. Not caring to expend, but keeping together all they have gotten; either from a vanity of mere pof feffion, to please their eye, and entertain their fancy; or by way of reserve against the poffibilities of future want; or upon the project of leaving much wealth to their children, to advance and render them more confiderable in the world. Now the first of the cafes will be allowed, by all that are not concerned in it themfelves, to be finful. Men generally speak ill of thofe covetous wretches that lay up money out of a bafe affection to the coin, that

*Luke x. 41, 42.

with fuch delight count their cafh, and review their fecurities, it goes against the heart of them to part with any thing, but in a way of ufury and increafe; and are fo far from doing any good with it to their neighbourhood, by hofpitality or charity, that they almoft ftarve their own families, in the midst of this abundance. There is no need, I fay, of convincing the generality of men, that this is finful and prohibited; but those that are guilty of the practice, want to be convinc'd, and they may be fo, if they will but compare it with those pofitive texts of Scripture, wherein God, who is ftill the direct proprietor of all their wealth, prefcribes to them what they fhall do with it. The paragraph we are upon exprefly forbids them to lay it up, or keep it as an ufelefs treasure by them. St. Paul orders Timothy to* charge them that are rich in this world, that they do good, that they be rich in good works, ready to distribute, willing to communicate. And St. Peter charges them to tufe hofpitality one to another, without grudging. And it is elsewhere declared, that if any man provide not for his own, efpecially for thofe of his own boufe, he has denied the faith, and is worfe than an infidel. But here perhaps the third clafs of men (who pretend to be laying up for their children) taking advantage of this laft cited text, will think themfelves not only fairly acquitted, but even value themselves upon laying up treasures, as difcharging a duty inftead of committing a fin. "Tis fit we should confider this matter a little more carefully, for no miftake is fo fatal as betwixt fin and duty. Let them then, in the first place, examine well their own confciences, whether their defign and end in laying up, is really the benefit of their children, or whether it be not rather the indulging a vanity of their own, * 1 Tim. vi. 17, 18. 1 Tim. v. 8

† 1 Pet, iv. 9.

their love of money? 'Tis poffible they may deceive themselves. If while they pretend to be doing this for their children, they hoard up treafure to leave them only when they die; and will either not bestow any due proportion of it in the mean time, in giving them a liberal and advantagious education; or not enable them by handsome fettlements upon marriage, or encouragements that may forward 'em in a way of business, to live comfortably and creditably in the world at prefent; I will venture to determine, that (let them pretend what they will) their children's benefit is not the principle by which they are acted, but their own covetous fancy. In the next place, fuppofing they are in earnest, and that the wealth they are laying up, is all defign'd to make their children rich and great, to raise a family, and advance them much above the rank they were born to, this can never be justified by that text they cite for it; 'tis not fuch a providing for one's own, as the Apoftle fpeaks of. He is confidering the cafe of widows maintain'd by the public charity, and directs as a thing highly equitable, that fuch of them as have relations able to take care of them, should not be caft upon the Church, for a maintenance, but fupported at the private charge of those relations. And this is plainly in the prime intention and scope of the context, what the Apoftle means by providing for our own, the relieving of our poor relations, that they may not be chargeable to the public. But if we will needs interpret it, of laying up fortunes for our children, (which has not the leaft connection with his argument) it cannot reasonably be extended farther, than that befide what is neceffary to their prefent maintenance and education, we fhould endeavour to leave them fo much, as, join'd with their own industry, in a way of business fuitable to our rank, may probably fecure them from want. Thus far, I doubt

not,