where it is more pernicious than in ourselves, and for which we are in a very serious degree answerable.

It remains that we state the judgment of scripture concerning this vice; which you will find to be agreeable to what the light of nature, rightly attended to, indicates of its evil tendency; 'Be not drunk with wine,' says St Paul, 'wherein is excess. You here find no rigid rules of abstinence or self denial; nothing of that unnecessary mortification or painful refusal of the satisfactions of life, which all religions that are founded on enthusiasm or imposture have been wont to enjoin. St Paul does not forbid wine; but being drunken with wine, wherein is exThe reasonableness of this precept entitles it to re

cess.

spect.

In the sixth chapter of the first epistle to the Corinthians, St Paul enumerates the offenders of whom he says, 'they shall not inherit the kingdom of heaven.' Amongst these we find drunkards; 'neither thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall enter the kingdom of heaven.' This declaration admits of no comment save one; that we must understand the apostle to speak of habitual offenders, persisting in their respective crimes, without repentance, change, or reformation. In other passages, St Paul is at some pains to teach his disciples how inconsistent this vice is with their particular characters and profession. It was a common way of preaching with him, to describe those who were indulged with the light of the gospel as children of light, and of the day, in opposition to the rest of the world, who lived, as to religious matters, in night and darkness. In this view of their condition as Christians, he takes occasion to enforce upon them the duty of sobriety; They that be drunken, are drunken in the night; but let us who are of the day be sober.' I am not concerned to discuss the arguments. The passage shows St Paul's sentiments of the crime of drunkenness, and its absolute inconsistency with the christian profession.

With respect to the preservatives against this vice, the first thing to be remarked is, that there is no trusting to our natural aversion to excessive drinking. Most people have this aversion at first. Therefore, a man being drawn in notwithstanding, proves that that is no security to be depended upon.

If, then, from our business, in which we are exposed to much company and many invitations to excess, or from any other cause, that we find our aversion abating, and a liking or a desire after this indulgence beginning, I know of no better advice

that can be given, than to tie ourselves down by rules, and resolutely and constantly to abide by them.

All such rules are absurd when they are unnecessary; but they are not unnecessary when we are exposed to such danger by the consequences of falling into such a habit, so utterly destructive of all that is good, and of such incalculable mischief; and from which there is so little hope, if there be any indeed, of ever recovering.

The next great caution I would recommend is, to beware of indulgences of the kind when alone, at home, and in our own families. So long as we confine our intemperance to occasions of feasting or of company, that can be repeated no oftener than the occasions return, which is not constantly. Whenever we cease to wait for occasions, and have found the way of betaking ourselves to this gratification by ourselves, there is less, there is nothing, to hinder or interrupt a settled habit of intemperance fastening upon us. As I have observed already, the most plausible excuse to ourselves for indulgence is fatigue. Thousands have been drawn in by this excuse. It is always, therefore, prudent to place the danger full before our eyes; to reflect how easily and how gently refreshment leads to intemperance, indulgence to excess. We shall consult our safety and happiness by forbidding to ourselves such indulgence, the moment we perceive that there is danger of its gaining ground upon us, and laying, however slowly, the foundation for every other vice.

XIX.

LICENTIOUSNESS AND DEBAUCHERY.

EPHESIANS V. 6.

Let no man deceive you with vain words, for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience.

THESE are awful words. They assert most satisfactorily, that there are certain things, which, let men say or think what they will, are sure of bringing down the wrath of God upon those who commit them. They further intimate, that, although this be certainly true, and will be found to be so, yet many

mistake, fatally mistake the matter, hold flattering opinions upon the subject which will prove to be false, thereby overlooking or remaining ignorant of their own danger, and of the end to which they will come; that there are deceivers and deceived; they who are laboring to deceive others, and they who are very willing to be deceived. For when the apostle uses these words of warning, let no man deceive you,' he knew that such deceptions were abroad, were common, were employed, were listened to, succeeded, and prevailed over the minds and consciences of many. Then he apprizes them of the danger, of the necessity of preparing and fortifying themselves against such delusions. He bids them, for this is the meaning and force of his admonition, he bids them look neither to the right hand nor to the left; to listen neither to what one man said, nor to what another man said; neither to this specious persuasion, nor to that plausible argument, but to keep close to this one momentous, this never to be forgotten consideration, that these, however varnished, however colored over, however extenuated or diminished, however excused or defended, will in the event feel the wrath of God.

'Because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience.' Because, you will ask, of what things? That undoubtedly is the first question to be considered. What were the things which St Paul had particularly in his mind when he wrote the words of the text; I say particularly, for that he had some particular view, or some particular class and kind of view in his contemplation, cannot be well disputed. Now the context, the words which go before, must show us what he meant by these things, because they were things which he had already mentioned. The term these

things implies that; it is a term of reference. But what he had been speaking of before, to which the text relates, was as follows; Fornication and all uncleanness, or covetousness, neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor jesting which is not convenient; for this ye know, that no whoremonger nor unclean person, nor covetous man who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and of God.' And then he goes on; 'Let no man deceive you with vain words, for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience.' Now I say that the class of crimes which the apostle had particularly, and I think had solely in view, were crimes of licentiousness and debauchery. I include all crimes arising from the unlawful and licentious indulgence of men's passions. The terms made use of by St Paul, are for

nications, uncleanness, filthiness, foolish talking, jesting which is not convenient.' Those terms all very evidently relate to one and the same subject, and that subject is what I mentioned. The only thing which can create a doubt whether it was that class of vices alone, which St Paul intended, is the word covetousness. Covetousness is put among the other articles enumerated; all uncleanness or covetousness.' Now it appears very manifest that the word covetousness in this place, does not mean covetousness in the sense in which we usually understand it, as it relates to property or to riches, but that it means inordinate desires of another kind, or the intemperate and unlawful indulgence and letting loose men's passions in the article of licentiousness and debauchery. The phrase, I own, is peculiar; I mean, not only different from the common acceptation of the word at present, but different from the use of the original word in that language, and in the writings of that time ; yet I think it can be made out by proofs, that this and not the other, is the sense of the word in this place, and in some other passages of St Paul's epistles. First; the covetous man is called an idolater. Now there is no proper reason for this, or meaning in it, according to the common sense of the word covetous. For though we may sometimes say that a man idolizes gold, it is only a modern fashion of speaking. It is not intended nor found in the language of the New Testament, nor like that language; but in the sense we are arguing for, it is very just and proper. The character of the heathen idolatry, and this is what St Paul refers to, was, that it taught immorality instead of morality; that instead of prohibiting and discouraging lewd and licentious practices, it promoted and authorized them by the impurity and indecency of its religious rites; which being the case, it was natural for our apostle to call a man addicted to these vices an idolater; inasmuch as these vices composed the character of that religion, if it deserved the name of religion, and even of its religious worship.

Secondly; in the passage from which our text is taken, v. 13, you read that it is a shame even to speak of those things which are done of them in secret;' and what is here said, evidently refers to the offences before enumerated. But its being

a shame to speak of it, and its being done in secret, does not apply to covetousness, in the common sense of the term. There is nothing indecent or shameful in the mention of covetousness in that sense; nor in that sense can it be particularly accused of being carried on in secret; but of covetousness in the sense we are affixing to it in this place, the inordinate indulgence of vile and licentious desires, both these may be said truly.

;

Thirdly; one can hardly avoid being convinced that we are right in our exposition of the word, when we consider how it stands joined with this sort of sins in other parts of St Paul's epistles; Col. iii, 5. Mortify, therefore, your members which are upon earth; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry.' Again, 1 Cor. v. 9. 'I wrote unto you in an epistle, not to keep company with fornicators of this world, or with the covetous;" and in the next verse, 'but now,' says he, 'I have written unto you, not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother, be a fornicator or covetous.' In both these places, covetousness is put in close connexion with fornication, which connexion establishes the sense we give to it. The fourth chapter of the 1st Thess. verse 5th, is equally strong for our purpose, though not quite so obvious. The passage is this is this; 'Ye know what commandments we gave you by the Lord Jesus;' an awful preface; then what follows? This is the will of God, even your sanctification; that ye should abstain from fornication that every one of you should know how to possess his vessel in sanctification and honor, not in the lust of concupiscence, even as the Gentiles which know not God; that no man go beyond, or defraud his brother in any matter, because that the Lord is the avenger of all such; as we have also forewarned you and testified, for God hath not called us unto uncleanness, but unto holiness.' In this passage the apostle is discoursing of one class and kind of crimes; and what that class was appears from the concluding clause; 'God hath not called us unto uncleanness.' Now though the word covetousness does not appear in our translation, it does in the original language; for the word which is translated go beyond in this passage, is the word which is translated coveting, covetousness, in the other passages. In each and every one of these passages, it is put as an undoubted and characteristic mark of idolatry. From the term, therefore, being always put by St Paul in strict and close connexion with fornication, we are authorized to conclude that it bore in his mind, and in his manner of writing, a signification similar to what that term bears.

It may be said, that investigations of this sort are superfluous and minute; but I answer, that when we read such strong texts as the present, because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience,' it can never be superfluous to ascertain what things the apostle really meant. These declarations are what we have to go by. Their true sense, therefore, is of the utmost moment for us to know; and