66

their own experience. By yielding to the demands of duty, and liberally bestowing their property for benevolent purposes; they have experienced the streams of God's bounty and blessing flowing in upon them in an unexampled manner.-Look at Job. He "delivered the poor that cried, and the fatherless, and him that had none to help him." He was eyes to the blind, and feet to the lame, and a father to the poor." And after the days of his trial were ended, the Lord, it is said, "turned his captivity, and gave him twice so much as he had before, and blessed his latter end more than his beginning."-The widow of Sareptah was very charitable to the needy prophet Elijah. She willingly received him into her house, and made him a sharer of the little which remained to herself and her son. And how wonderstock of provisions

fully was she prospered? Her was miraculously continued and increased, during the season of famine; and more than this, her beloved child, when breathless, was restored living to her bosom.-We have a similar instance of charity, in the kindness of the Shunamite to the prophet Elisha; and by reading the fourth and eighth Chapters of "the second Book of the Kings," you will learn what a series of blessings she on that account experienced.

Numerous instances of the same kind, occuring in all periods of the Church, may be gathered from other sources besides the Bible. It was said of Constantine the great by a contemporary Bishop, " God gave that merciful prince more wealth than heart could wish, because of his bounties to the poor.". .Tiberius the second, a succeeding Emperor, was so much distinguished for his charitable distributions, as to incur on account of them, the censure of his friends.

His reply was, "I shall never want money, so long as in obedience to Christ's command, I supply the necessities of the poor." On one occasion, after he had bestowed much in this way, "under a marble table which was taken up, he found a great treasure; and news was brought to him of the death of a very rich man who had left him his whole estate."-John, a Bishop of Alexandria in the sixth century, was surnamed the Almoner, on account of his extensive liberality. In a season of distressing famine, he continued to bestow his largesses, till he was in the utmost apparent danger of being reduced to want. But just at this crisis, when both his money and credit were about to fail, he heard of the arrival of two large ships, richly laden, which were sent to him from the island of Sicily.-As the charitable Bishop of Millain was one day travelling with his servant, they were overtaken by some poor people who asked alms. The Bishop directed to give them what money he had, which, as it happened, was no more than three crowns. The servant however thought it not prudent to part with all, and gave them but two. Directly afterwards, the Bishop received a present of two hundred crowns; upon which he is reported to have said to his disobedient servant, "See, how in wronging the poor of their due, thou hast likewise wronged me. If thou hadst given those three crowns, which I commanded thee to give, I had received three hundred crowns; whereas now I have but two."-Mr. John Walter, a citizen and draper of London more than a hundred years ago, was remarkable for his liberality, even from his youth. In consequence of this, he was so richly blessed, and his possessions so rapidly and constantly increased, that he became satisfied with his worldly estate, and twenty years before

his death, entered into a solemn covenant with God, that all future additions to his wealth should be sacredly devoted to charitable uses. After this, as riches poured in upon him from every quarter, he commenced building and endowing alms houses and chapels for the poor, investing property for their support when he was dead, and in every way possible ministering to their necessities; and notwithstanding all, he left to his family who survived him, a very large estate. Samuel D- Esqr., in the county of Berks, England, who also lived more than a century ago, was perhaps the most liberal man of his age. He literally" honoured God with his substance," and endeavoured to "do good to all." And yet, so far from being ruined or impoverished by his extensive charities, he was greatly enriched. More than double the estate which he received from his fathers, he was enabled to bequeath for the benefit of his children. -Dr. Hammond, whose name has been mentioned in another part of this discourse, was himself an eminent example of that liberality which he so strongly inculcated. He devoted annually a tenth of all his income for charitable purposes; and this he was accustomed to set apart and dispose of, before even his personal wants were supplied. He also was not impoverished by his beneficence, but died in the enjoyment not only of honours, but of wealth.

It would be easy to multiply instances of this nature-and instances taken, as well from the charitable who are now living, as from those who are dead. But it is believed to be unnecessary. They are too frequently occurring in the present age of charitable effort, to require a particular detail.—It has, I think, been made to appear, both from the reason of the thing, from the express promises of Jehovah, from

the decisions of wise and good men in all periods of the Church, and from a somewhat extended appeal to facts, that "the liberal soul shall” indeed" be made fat"; and that the safest way in which to become rich is to be truly and consistently liberal.

REFLECTIONS.

1. From the description which has been given of true Christian liberality, there is reason to believe that the nature of this virtue has been not unfrequently mistaken.-Some have mistaken liberality for prodigality. They have supposed that in order to be liberal, they must riot upon the bounty of their Maker, and live in an expensive and extravagant manner. Others have mistaken liberality for a heedless indifference as to the value of wealth. They have supposed that in order to be liberal, they must care little about their worldly concerns; must feel above troubling their minds with such trifles; and must be willing to lavish their estates, without much regard to objects, or to consequences. And with such views of liberality, persons have found a difficulty in classing it even among the virtues; and a still greater difficulty, in accounting for the promises which are made to it in the word of God.But from the remarks which have been made, it appears that these views of liberality, are altogether erroneous. The truly liberal man is not a prodigal, or a spendthrift, or one who has no care or thought for the things of this world. He knows and feels the valule of wealth, and is honestly but diligently occupied in the pursuit of it.

The difference between the covetous, and the truly liberal, is not this-that the one class care for the

things of this world, and are engaged in seeking and securing them, while the other have no such cares or engagements; but it is rather this-the covetous are laboring exclusively for themselves. They have no desire for riches, except as these are supposed to stand in some way connected with their own personal good. But the liberal are seeking and pursuing wealth, as an instrument of good to others; and as a means of rendering them more highly and extensively useful. The covetous are never willing to part with their property, however loud or imperious the call; but the liberal hold theirs at the disposal of Providence, and are always ready to part with it, when duty and conscience require.

Were the nature of true Christian liberality better understood, not only its excellence, but the propriety of those promises which are made to it in the Scriptures, would be more readily perceived and admitted.

It would be seen to result, as well from the nature of the case, as from the Divine promise and blessing, that "the liberal soul should be made fat," and that the consistent practice of liberality should be the way to wealth.

2. If the way to be rich is to be liberal, then covetousness may be expected ordinarily to end in poverty. Covetousness is a "withholding more than is meet;" but this, it is expressly asserted in the sentence preceding the text, "tendeth to poverty." It does so, for several reasons. Covetousness is in most cases the property of a little mind-one which is incapable of extending itself to large and liberat views, and consequently of deriving those worldly advantages, which such views of things are capable of affording. It is usually attended by a contractedness of scheme and effort, and the adoption of a narrow