I may give another instance of the same practice, where there is a prejudicate fondness of particular words and phrases. Suppose a man is educated in an unhappy form of speech whereby he explains some great doctrine of the gospel, and by the means of this phrase he has imbibed a very false idea of that doctrine yet he is 30 bigoted to his form of words, that he imagines if those words are omitted the doctrine is lost. Now, if I cannot possibly persuade him to part with his improper terms, I will indulge then a little, and try to explain them in a scriptural sense, rather than let him go on in his mistaken ideas.

Credonius believes that Christ descended into hell; I think the word hell, as now commonly understood, is very improper here; but since the bulk of christians, and Credonius among them, will by no means part with the word out of their English creed, I will explain the word hell to signify the state of the dead, or the separate state of souls; and thus lead my friend into more just ideas of the truth, namely, that the soul of Christ existed three days in the state of separation from his body, or was in the invisible world, which might be originally called hell in English, as well as hades in Greek.

Anilla has been bred a papist all her days, and though she does not know much of religion, yet she resolves never to part with the Roman catholic faith, and is obstinately bent against a change. Now I cannot think it unlawful to teach her the true christian, that is, the protestant religion, out of the epistle to the Romans, and shew her that the same doctrine is contained in the catholic epistles of St. Peter, James and Jude; and thus let her live and die a good christian, in the belief of the religion I teach her out of the New Testament, while she imagines she is a Roman catholic still, because she finds the doctrine she is taught in the catholic epistles, and in that to the Romans.

I grant it is most proper there should be different words (as far as possible) applied to different ideas; and this rule should never be dispensed with, if we had to do only with the reason. of mankind; but their various prejudices and zeal for some partyphrases, sometimes make it necessary that we should lead them into truth under the covert of their own beloved forms of speech, rather than permit them to live and die obstinate and unconvincible in any dangerous mistake; whereas an attempt to deprive them of their old established words, would raise such a tumult within them, as to render their conviction hopeless.

III. Sometimes we may make use of the very prejudices under which a person labours, in order to convince him of some particular truth, and argue with him upon his own professed principles as though they were true. This is called, argumentum ad hominem, and is another way of dealing with the prejudices of men. Suppose a Jew lies sick of a fever, and is forbidden

flesh by his physician; but hearing that rabbits were provided for the dinner of the family, desired earnestly to eat of them; and suppose he became impatient because his physician did not permit him, and he insisted upon it, that it could do him no hurt; surely rather than let him persist in that fancy and that desire, to the danger of his life, I would tell him that these animals were strangled, which sort of food was forbidden by the Jewish law, though I myself may believe that law is now abolished.

In the same manner was Tenerilla persuaded to let Damon her husband prosecute a thief, who broke open their house on a Sunday. At first she abhorred the thoughts of it, and refused it utterly, because if the thief were condemned, according to the English law, he must be hanged; whereas (said she) the law of God in the writings of Moses, does not appoint death to be the punishment of such criminals, but tells us, that a thief shall be sold for his theft; Ex. xxii. 3. But when Damon could no other way convince her that the thief ought to be prosecuted, he put her in mind that the theft was committed on a Sunday morning; now the same law of Moses requires, that the Sabbathbreaker shall surely be put to death; Ex. xxxi. 15, Num. xv. 35. This argument prevailed with Tenerilla, and she consented to the prosecution.

Encrates used the same means of conviction when he saw a Mahometan drink wine to exess, and heard him maintain the lawfulness and pleasure of drunkenness: Encrates reminded him, that his own prophet Mahomet had utterly forbidden all wine to his followers; and the good man restrained his vicious appetite by his superstition, when he could no otherwise convince him that drunkenness was unlawful, nor withhold him from

excess.

Where we find any person obstinately persisting in a mistake in opposition to all reason, especially if the mistake be very injurious or pernicious, and we know this person will hearken to the sentiment or authority of some favourite name, it is needful sometimes to urge the opinion and authority of that favourite person, since that is likely to be regarded much more than reason. I confess I am almost ashamed to speak of using any influence of authority, while I would teach the art of reasoning. But in some cases it is better that poor, silly, perverse, obstinate creatures should be persuaded to judge and act right, by a veneration for the sense of others, than to be left to wander in pernicious errors, and continue deaf to all argument, and blind to all evidence. They are but children of a larger size; and since they persist all their lives in their minority, and reject all true reasoning, surely we may try to persuade them to practise what is for their own interest by such childish reasons as they will

C

hearken to; we may overawe them from pursuing their own ruin by the terrors of a solemn shadow, or allure them by a sugarplum to their own happiness. But after all, we must conclude, that wheresoever it can be done, it is best to remove and root out those prejudices which obstruct the entrance of truth into the mind, rather than to palliate, humour, or indulge them; and sometimes this must necessarily be done, before you can make a person part with some beloved error, and lead him into better sentiments.

Suppose you would convince a gamester, that gaming is not a lawful calling, or business of life, to maintain oneself by it, and you make use of this argument, namely, That which doth not ad.nit us to ask the blessing of God that we may get gain by it, cannot be a lawful employment; but we cannot ask the blessing of God on gaming, therefore, &c. The minor is proved thus: We cannot pray that our neighbour may lose; this is contrary to the rule of seeking our neighbour's welfare, and loving him as ourselves; this is wishing mischief to our neighbour.— But in gaming, we can gain but just so much as our neighbour loses; therefore in gaming we cannot pray for the blessing of God that we may gain by it. Perhaps the gamester shrugs and winces, turns and twists the argument every way, but he cannot fairly answer it; yet he will patch up an answer to satisfy himself, and will never yield to the conviction, because he feels so much of the sweet influence of gaming, either towards the gratification of his avarice, or the support of his expences. Thus he is under a strong prejudice in favour of it, and is not easily convinced.

Your first work therefore, must be to lead him by degrees. to separate the thoughts of his own interest from the argument, and shew him that our own temporal interests, our livelihood, or our loss, hath nothing to do to determine this point in opposition to the plain reason of things, and that he ought to put these considerations quite out of the question, if he would be honest and sincere in his search after truth or duty; and that he must be contented to hearken to the voice of reason and truth, even though it should run counter to his secular interest. When this is done, then an argument may carry some weight of force with it toward his conviction.

In like manner if the question were whether Matrissa ought to expose herself and her other children to poverty and misery, in order to support the extravagancies of a favourite son? Perhaps the mother can hear no argument against it; she feels no conviction in the most cogent reasonings, so close do her fond prejudices stick to her heart. The first business here is to remove this prejudice. Ask her therefore, whether it is not a parent's duty to love all her children, so as to provide for their welfare?

siege in form; he drew all his lines of circumvallation and contravallation according to the rules of art; but he was so tedious and so exact in these mathematical performances, that the season was spent, he was forced to break up the siege, and retire with-. out any execution done upon the town.

Ergates is another sort of preacher, a workman that need not be ashamed: he had in his younger days but few of those learned vanities, and age and experience have now worn them all off: he preaches like a man who watches for our souls, as one that must give an account: he passes over lesser matters with speed, and pursues his great design, namely, to save himself, and them that hear him; 1 Tim. iv. 16. And by following this advice of St. Paul, he happily complies with that great and natural rule of Horace, always to make haste towards the most valuable end :-Semper ad eventum festinat.-He never affects to chuse a very obscure text lest he should waste too much of the hour in explaining the literal sense of it: he reserves all those obscurities, till they come in course at his seasons of public exposition; for it is his opinion, that preaching the gospel for the salvation, of men, carries in it a little different idea from a learned and critical exposition of the difficult texts of scripture.

He knows well how to use his logic in his composures; but he calls no part of the words by their logical name, if there be any vulgar name that answers it reading and meditation have furnished him with extensive views of his subject, and his own good sense hath taught him to give sufficient reasons for every thing he asserts; but he never uses one of them till a proof is needful. He is acquainted with the mistaken glosses of expositors, but he thinks it needless to acquaint his hearers with them, unless there be evident danger that they might run into the same mistake. He understands well what his subject is not, as well as what it is; but when he would explain it to you, he never says first, negatively, unless some remarkable error is at hand, and which his hearers may easily fall into for want of such a caution.

Thus in five or ten minutes at the most, he makes his way plain to the proposition or theme on which he designs to discourse and being so wise as to know well what to say, and what to leave out, he proportions every part of his work to his time ; he enlarges a little upon the subject, by way of illustration, till the truth becomes evident and intelligible to the weakest of his hearers; then he confirms the point with a few convincing arguments, where the matter requires it, and makes haste to turn the doctrine into use and improvement. Thus the ignorant are instructed, and the growing Christians are established and improved the stupid sinner is loudly awakened, and the mourning soul receives consolation: the unbeliever is led to trust in Christ

and his gospel, and the impenitent and immoral are convinced and softened, are melted and reformed. The inward voice of the Holy Spirit joins with the voice of the minister; the good man and the hypocrite have their proper portions assigned them, and the work of the Lord prospers in his hand.

This is the usual course and manner of his ministry. This method being natural, plain and easy, he casts many of his discourses into this form; but he is no slave to forms and methods of any kind he makes the nature of his subject, and the necessity of his hearers, the great rule to direct him what method he shall choose in every sermon, that he may the better enlighten, convince, and persuade. Ergates well knows, that where the subject itself is entirely practical, he has no need of the formality of long uses and exhortations: he knows that practice is the chief design of doctrine; therefore he bestows most of his labour upon this part of his office, and intermingles much of the pathetic under every particular: yet he wisely observes the special dangers of his flock, and the errors of the time he lives in; and now and then (though very seldom) he thinks it necessary to spend almost a whole discourse in mere doctrinal articles. Upon such an occasion, he thinks it proper to take up a little larger part of his hour in explaining and confirming the sense of his text, and brings it down to the understanding of a child.

At another time, perhaps, he particularly designs to entertain the few learned and polite among his auditors: and that with this view, that he may ingratiate his discourses with their ears, and may so far gratify their curiosity in this part of his sermon, as to give an easier entrance for the more plain, necessary, and important parts of it into their hearts. Then he aims at, and he reaches the sublime, and furnishes out an entertainment for the finest taste; but he scarcely ever finishes his sermon without compassion to the unlearned, and an address that may reach their consciences with words of salvation.

I have observed him sometimes after a learned discourse, come down from the pulpit as a man ashamed and quite out of countenance: he has blushed and complained to his intimate friends lest he should be thought to have preached himself, and not Christ Jesus his Lord: he has been ready to wish he had entertained the audience in a more unlearned manner, and on a more vulgar subject, lest the servants and the labourers and tradesmen there, should reap no advantage to their souls, and the important hour of worship should be lost, as to their improvement. Well he knows, and keeps it upon his heart, that the middle and lower ranks of mankind, and people of an unlettered character, make up the greater part of the assembly; therefore he is ever seeking how to adapt his thoughts and his language, and far the greatest part of all his ministrations, to