nifters who ftrongly plead for liberty and freedom, and loudly complain of the malice, uncharitableness, and cenforiousness of the world. They feem as if they defired, nay, which is ftill more foolish, expected, that no part of their conduct fhould be attended to, or any inference drawn from it with refpect to their character. This will never be the cafe till they are invifible. It appears, from what hath been faid in the preceding difcourfe, that it is the right and the duty of every man to try a minister by his fruits. Ignorance indeed, may fometimes be guilty of mistakes to our prejudice, and malice or envy may go too far; yet this is only what we ought to lay our account with, and it fhould excite us, not to a contempt of the judgment of others, but to greater ftrictness and circumfpection, that "they may be afhamed who falfely accufe "our good converfation in Christ.”

It is very hurtful in this as in many other cafes, when a man views things only on one fide. Some are apt to impute fo much to the malice and uncharitableness of the world, that they feldom or never think themselves as truly guilty of any offence or mifcarriage. I am perfuaded many are in a manner blinded to the errors of their own conduct, by this very circumftance. Or, if they cannot but be fenfible that they have been guilty of fomething that was wrong, when the fault is aggravated by report, they feem to think that this atones for any thing really blameworthy, and fo are hardened both againft confeffion and repentance. To speak without prejudice, it is more than probable, that we are as much chargeable with unguarded and offenfive conduct, on the one hand, as the world with precipitate or partial judgment on the other. It hath been fometimes obferved, that the multitude or common people are but poor judges of a man's ability or learning, but they are very good judges of his life. There is a great deal of truth in this obfervation; and to fupport it I add, that even a hypocritical pretence is extremely hard to maintain, and fo often betrays itself by little circumftances, that there are very few whofe real character is not better underftood by the world than themfelves. The chief exception I know to this is the cafe of violent party difputes. The

injuftice done to characters on each fide there, is very great. If you take a man's character from one to whom he ftands in party oppofition, you must conceive him not a man but a monfter. But (fetting this afide, which does not fall within the compafs of our prefent fubject) in general, it is furely much more becoming, and it is infinitely more fafe for us to fufpect ourselves, than to complain of hard measure from the world. Let us therefore, by doubling our diligence in every perfonal and minifterial duty, endeavor to "make our light fo fhine before men, that "they may fee our good works, and glorify our Father "which is in heaven."*

In the 4th place I must now take the liberty, in fidelity to the truft committed to me, to be a little more particular in the application of this fubject, and to enquire, whether minifters are not, in a good measure, chargeable with the low flate to which religion is at prefent reduced. May I not fay without offence, that an eminent, holy, diligent, and fuccefsful gofpel miniftry was once the glory and bleffing of this part of the united kingdom! But how are we fince fallen afleep! "How is the gold become "dim! How is the moft fine gold changed!" That there is a difference is plain; and that this difference does not lie in inferior abilities or a lefs proportion of learning, is equally certain. I am fenfible, that this is a part of my fubject which would require to be touched with a very tender and delicate hand, and that, perhaps, I run as great a hazard to inflame and exafperate the fore, as to bring any effectual cure. This is, indeed, itself, one ftrong fymptom of our difeafe, that we cannot endure plain dealing; and there is not a fingle circumftance, in which there is a greater difference between this and the preceding age. What in former times would have been reckoned (to speak in their language) no more than plainnefs and minifterial freedom, would now be called the moft flanderous invective and unpardonable abuse. Inftead, therefore, of taking upon me to fay who are chiefly to be blamed as the crimimal caufes of it, I fhall only affirm and lament the me

* Matt. v. 16.

lancholy effect, that we have in many places of this church a defpifed, forfaken, useless miniftry; that many of the people have gone from mountain to mountain, and forgotten their refting place, while a ftill greater number is fast asleep in ignorance, fecurity, and floth. Where is that union, that mutual efteem and affection, which once fubfifted between minifters and their people. It must be acknowledged, that their influence and authority is now. in a great measure loft, and therefore I may fafely conclude that their usefulness is gone. That the fault is all on one fide, is neither a modeft nor a probable fuppofition. Should we throw the blame off ourselves, what a terrible. load must we thereby lay upon others? We must suppose and fay, that under a blameless ministry, under the best and pureft of inftruction, one part of the nation is funk in brutality and floth, and the other rent in pieces by divifion, and religion loft in the fury of contending parties.

We may fay fo, my brethren, and fome do fay what amounts to the fame thing, but it is not credible. I do therefore, in the most earnest manner befeech every minif ter in this audience, seriously to think, how far he hath given just cause to his people to defpife his perfon, or defert his miniftrations. Let us not fo infift upon the ignorance, prejudices, and weakness of the giddy multitude, as if a failure on our part was impoffible. We may be fome. times blamed in the wrong place; but we have, perhaps, as much refpect in general, as we really deferve. Do not think it is fufficient that you are free from grofs crimes, fuch as blafphemy, riot, and unclean luft. Bleffed be

God, nothing of this kind would yet be fuffered among us without cenfure. But there are many other things, which, either separately or together, render a minifter juftly contemptible, on which no law, either civil or ecclefiaftic can lay hold. If one fet apart to the fervice of Chrift in the gofpel, manifeftly fhows his duty to be a burden, and does no more work than is barely fufficient to screen him from cenfure; if he reckons it a piece of improvement how feldom or how fhort he can preach, and makes his boast howmany omiffions he has brought a patient and an injured people to endure without complaint; while, at the fame

time, he cannot fpeak with temper of those who are willing to do more than himfelf; however impoffible it may be to afcertain his faults by a libel, he justly merits the deteftation of every faithful minifter, and every real Chriftian.

The things here in view, though they are eafily feen, are difficult to defcribe; and, therefore, I fhall not attempt to be more particular. But I cannot forbear warning you against, and pointing out the evil of two pieces of difhonef ty, which may poffibly be found united to gravity and decency in other refpects. One of them is common in our neighbor kingdom, and may poffibly have taken place among us, though I cannot affirm it. The other, I am certain, hath many times taken place in the church of Scotland. The first is a minifter's fubfcribing articles of doctrine, which he does not believe. This is fo direct, a violation of fincerity, that it is aftonishing to think, how men can set their minds at eafe in the profpect, or keep them in peace after the deliberate commiffion of it. The very excufes and evasions, that are offered in defence of it, are a difgrace to reafon as well as a scandal to religion. What fuccefs can be expected from that man's miniftry, who begins it with an act of fuch complicated guilt. How can he take upon him to reprove others for fin, or to train them up in virtue and true goodness, while himself is chargeable with direct, premeditated, and perpetual per jury. I know nothing fo nearly refembling it, as those cafes in trade, in which men make falfe entries, and at once fcreen and aggravate their fraud, by fwearing, or caufing others to fwear contrary to truth. This is juftly reputed fcandalous even in the world, and yet I know no circumftance in which they differ, that does not tend to show it to be less criminal than the other. We are not yet so much hardened in this fin as many in our neighbor church, for I have never found any among us fo bold as to profefs and defend it. But, if no fuch thing is at all admitted among us, Why is there fo heavy a fufpicion of it? Why do fo many complain, that the great and operative doctrines of the golpel are withdrawn, and an unfubftantial theory of virtue fubstituted in their place? Or why are not such

complaints put to filence, fince it may be fo easily done? Appearances are certainly fuch as will warrant me in mentioning it upon this occafion: and I have particularly chofen to introduce it upon this fubject, that I may attack it not as an error, but as a fraud; not as a mistake in judgment, but an instance of grofs difhonefty and infincerity of heart. Suppofing, therefore, that there may poffibly be truth in the charge against fome of us, I must beg every minifter, but especially those young perfons who have an eye to that facred office to remember, that God will not be mocked, though the world may be deceived. In his fight, no gravity of deportment, no pretence to freedom of enquiry, a thing excellent in itself, no regular exercise of the right of private judgment will warrant or excufe fuch a lie for gain, as folemnly to fubfcribe what they do not believe.

The other particular I propofed to mention is the folemn atteftation of men's characters, not only in general, but for particular qualities, without any fatisfying knowledge whether the thing affirmed is true or falfe. This hath been often done in the church of Scotland, not by particular perfons, with whom we might renounce relation, but by confent of many, gravely and deliberately in conftituted courts. Can we avoid making the following obvious but melancholy reflection, How great is the blindnefs of men to thofe fins which are introduced by degrees and countenanced by prevailing fafhion? Should we be told by an hiftorian of credit, that, in one of the dark and corrupt ages of popery, it was common for a body of mi nifters, when defired, to give a figned atteftation to particular perfons, that they were ftrict obfervers of the fabbath, and worfhipped God regularly in their families, while the perfons attesting knew nothing of the matter, and, in fact, with regard to fome of them, it was abfolutely falfe. Would there be a diffenting voice in affirming, that fuch men must have been loft to all sense of integrity, and utterly unworthy of regard. What fhall we fay, if the fame thing is done among us every day, and defended by no better argument than the judgment of charity, which be