The lawyer is obliged to ftudy with attention a number of books, and to examine a variety of parallel cafes, before he can be qualified to act in his profeffion. The phyfician is under the fame neceffity. And it is a mortifying confi deration, that becaufe the common people are obliged to take our prefcriptions, juft as we pleafe to prefcribe, we fhould for that reafon prescribe carelefly; and without fufficiently confulting that book, from which alone we can procure the true ingredients.

Some think the fimplicity, that is in Chrift, confifts in clothing their fentiments always in fcripture phrafe. I fee no more reafon for this, than for going about, as the apoftles did, in fandals, with a fcrip, and a ftaff. Modes of fpeech are just as much the fashion of times, and countries, as modes of drefs; and need be as little obferved. The fcriptural mode of fpeech is highly figurative-very different from any mode now in ufe; and requires tranflation, as much as the original Greck. It is the fcriptural idea, not the fcriptural mode of expreffion, for which we contend: and this may be loft in many ways. It may be narrowed to speak the opinions

7

opinions of a fect-or, it may be widened to fpeak the opinions of the world—or, it may be lost in morals; when instead of preaching plainly, and fimply on gospel fubjects, and gospel motives, our discourses, with fcriptural mottoes affixed, are fhort immethodical effays, in which the beginning can hardly be diftinguished from the end-nor indeed what is aimed at, till the book is closed, juft as the audience may suppose the fubject will open.

There is another thing alfo, which often occa fions our erring from the fimplicity, which is in Chrift. As the gofpel is a covenant between God and man, it touches, of courfe, on fuch things, as relate to both. As far as it relates to God, it is, no doubt, a deep, myftericus fubject; but as far as it relates to man, nothing can be more fimple, and easy. Hence it is, that our religion, without any contradiction of terms, (peace be to all fceptical cavils!) is fometimes called the mystery of godliness; and sometimes the fimplicity of the gospel. It is the mystery of godlinefs, as it relates to God's part in this gracious plan; and the fimplicity of the gospel, as it relates to us. To the want of fufficient attention to this eafy diftinction perhaps arife not only many

of the difputes, and misconceptions, and infufions of worldly wifdom, which have fo often difgraced the gofpel: but alfo much of that ftrange, unaccountable confufion of ideas, that perplexes, and confounds the understanding of the lower people. If the loft condition of man —his restoration, and redemption by Christthe neceffity of a holy life through faith-the tendency of the gofpel to make him happy both here, and hereafter-and other plain points, had generally been the subjects of popular discourses, we fhould not have had now that grofs ignorance in matters of religion, and that variety of ftrange notions, and prejudices tó combat, which we find amongst the common people, on all religious subjects; but especially on the facrament of the Lord's fupper. As nothing is more difficult than to eradicate old prejudices; nothing would have been more cafy than to have prevented their getting ground at first. The plain truths of the gospel might have defcended juft as eafily as mifconception and error have done

fince.

It should be our care then to accommodate our doctrine, as much as we can, to the fimplicity that is in Chrift-not to dwell upon its myfterious

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 to guard us; but to preach it, as we are directed, with plainnefs-to lay the ftrefs on its obvious. truths-and when we have occafion to mention a myfterious 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 clofe as poffible to scripture, left 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, difpenfe that gofpel, whofe peculiar character it was, to be preached to the poor.

I fhall close this head, with the account, which an ancient heathen of the fourth century gives of the mode of preaching the gofpel in his day : "The chriftian philofophy," fays he, " is very fimple. Its principal concern is to regulate "the manners of men, and to infufe worthy

"notions of the Deity. Obfcure 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 fhews us is more effectual among the vulgar*."

t

OUR manners fhould be as fimple as our doctrine.

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

Let us not here again puzzle ourselves with definitions. They who feek for clofe definitions on thefe fubjects, I fhould fear, seek rather for evafion, than information. The scriptures have little to do with definitions. On thefe fubjects, they speak to the heart, more than to the head. Whoever reads, with a defire to learn, the inftructions which our Saviour and his apoftles give to the minifters 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 firft, and moft indifpenfable care.

* See Lardner's Teftimonies from Alexander of Lycopolis. Vol. IV. p. 11.

And