XVII. *But still the word of God shall not pass away. _Having food and raiment, let us be therewith content. For they who will be rich fall into a temptation and a snare, and into many foolish and hurtful lusts, which drown men in destruction and perdition._ 1 Tim. vi. 8.
We may, perhaps, by some acuteness of reasoning, find out, that this still leaves us at our liberty, whether we will labour to be rich or not: that notwithstanding what the apostle says, of a _snare_, a _temptation_, and _foolish lusts_, yet we can pursue the means and desire the happiness of riches, without any danger to our virtue.
But if so, we are as prudent as those Christians, who think they can secure their virtue without watching and prayer, tho’ our Saviour has said, _Watch and pray that ye enter not into temptation_.
And he that neglects watching and prayer, tho’ the appointed means of avoiding temptation, lives as much according to scripture, as he that is careful and desirous of riches, tho’ the declared occasions of _sin, snares_ and _destruction_.
XVIII. If we could submit to the plain doctrines of scripture, it would never be asked what people of _fortune_ are to do with themselves, if they are not to live up to the splendour and plenty of their estates?
The rich man in the gospel was a _ruler_, a _young_ man, and a _good_ man: if therefore there are any of his rank who are neither young nor good, it can hardly be thought, they have less to do to inherit eternal life.
And as for those who, like him, have kept the commandments of God from their youth, I dare not tell them, that they are not under a necessity of offering all their wealth to God, and of making their estates, however acquired, not the support of vain indulgences, but the relief of their brethren.
XIX. Suppose great people, by means of their wealth, could throw themselves into a _deep sleep_ of pleasant dreams, which would last till death awaked them, would any one think it lawful for them to make such use of their riches?
And yet he that had done nothing but sleep and dream to the time of his death, might as well say, that he had been working out his salvation with fear and trembling, as he that has been living in luxury, splendour, and sensual gratifications.
The gospel has made no exception for _dignity_ of birth, or difference in _fortune_; but has appointed the same _straight_ gate, the common passage for all persons to enter into glory.
The distinctions of civil life have their use; but if any one thinks he may be less devoted to God, less afraid of the corruptions of pleasure and pride, because he is born of a rich family, he is as much mistaken as he that fancies he has a privilege to steal, because he was born of a Father that was poor.
XX. If the rich or great man can find out a course of pleasures, that support no wrong turn of mind, an indulgence which does not gratify sensuality, entertainments which feed no vain passions: if they can find out such instances of splendour and greatness, as shew they love God with all their hearts, and as gratify neither _the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eye_, nor _the pride of life_, religion has no command against such enjoyments.
But if this cannot be done, then the rich have no more permission to live in vain indulgences than the poor have to steal.
*And let it be always remembered, that if any distinction of life makes men forget that sin is their only baseness, and holiness their only honour; if any condition makes them less disposed to imitate the low, humble estate of their suffering Master; instead of being any real advantage, it is their curse, their snare and destruction.
XXI. I know it will still be objected, that a man is not necessarily proud, because he lives in shew and figure, any more than another is necessarily humble, because he lives in a low estate.
It is granted, that men may be of a temper contrary to the estate in which they live. But this is only true, of such as are in any state by force, and contrary to their desires and endeavours.
A man in a low estate may be proud, because he is in such a state by force; and is uneasy till he can raise himself out of it. If the same is true of him that lives in figure and pomp, that he is in this state by force, and is restless till he can lay it all aside, then we grant he may be humble.
But nothing is weaker than to say, because a man may _be_ in a low estate _per force_, without lowliness of mind, therefore another may _chuse to live_ in all the height of grandeur and vanity, without any height or vanity of mind.
A man may be an epicure in his temper, tho’ he is forced to live upon bread and water. But will you therefore say, another who lives on all sorts of dainties, and that by choice, may be no epicure?
If therefore they that live in pomp and shew, live therein out of choice, and are not willing to live otherwise, we must talk nonsense if we do not say their minds are as vain as the vanity of their state.