*Some years ago I was asking a plain man, “Ought not _he who feeds the flock, to eat of the milk of the flock_?” He answered, “Friend, I have no objection to that. But what is that to him who _does not feed the flock_? He stands on the far side of the hedge, and feeds himself. It is another who feeds the flock. And ought _he_ to have the milk of the flock? What canst thou say for him? Truly, nothing at all. And he will have nothing to say for himself, when the great Shepherd shall pronounce that just sentence, _bind_ the unprofitable servant _hand and foot, and cast him into outer darkness_.”
I have dwelt the longer on this head, because a right _intention_ is the first point of all, and the most necessary of all; inasmuch as the want of this cannot be supplied by any thing else whatsoever. It is the setting out wrong; a fault never to be amended, unless you return to the place whence you came, and set out right. It is impossible therefore to lay too great stress upon a single eye, a pure _intention_; without which, all our sacrifice, our prayers, sermons and sacraments are an abomination to the Lord.
I cannot dismiss this important article, without touching upon one thing more. How many are _directly_ concerned therein, I leave to the searcher of hearts.
You have been settled in a living or a curacy for some time. You are now going to exchange it for another. Why do you do this? For what reason do you prefer this before your former living or curacy? “Why, I had but fifty pounds a year where I was before, and now I shall have an hundred.” And is this your real motive of acting? The true reason why you make the exchange? “It is: And is it not a sufficient reason?” Yes, for a Heathen; but not for one who calls himself a Christian.
*Perhaps a more gross infatuation than this, was never yet known upon earth. There goes one, who is commissioned to be an ambassador of Christ, a shepherd of never-dying souls, a watchman over the _Israel_ of God, a steward of the mysteries which angels desire to look into. Where is he going? “To _London_, to _Bristol_, to _Northampton_.” Why does he go thither? “To get more money.” A tolerable reason for driving an herd of bullocks to one market rather than the other; though if a drover does this, without any farther view, he acts as an Heathen, not a Christian. But what a reason for leaving the immortal souls, over whom the Holy Ghost had made you overseer! And yet this is the motive which not only influences in secret, but is acknowledged openly and without a blush! Nay, it is executed, justified, defended; and that not by a few, here and there, who are apparently void both of piety and shame; but by numbers of seemingly religious men, from one end of _England_ to the other!
2. Am I, secondly, such as I ought to be, with regard to my _affections_? I am _taken from among, and ordained for men, in things pertaining to God_. I stand between God and man, by the authority of the great Mediator, in the nearest and most endearing relation both to my Creator and my fellow-creatures. Have I accordingly given my heart to God, and to my brethren for his sake? _Do I love God with all my soul and strength?_ And my _neighbour_, every man as myself? Does this love swallow me up? Possess me whole? Constitute my supreme happiness? Does it animate all my passions and tempers, and regulate all my powers and faculties? Is it the spring which gives rise to all my thoughts, and governs all my words and actions? If it does, not unto me, but unto God be the praise. If it does not, God _be merciful to me a sinner_!
At least, do I feel such a concern for the glory of God, and such a thirst after the salvation of men, that I am ready to do any thing, however contrary to my natural inclination, to part with any thing, however agreeable to me, to suffer any thing, however grievous to flesh and blood, so I may save one soul from hell? Is this my ruling temper at all times and in all places? Does it make all my labour light? If not what a weariness is it? What a drudgery? Had I not far better hold the plough?
But is it possible this should be my ruling temper, if I still love the world? No certainly, _If I love the world, the love of the Father is not in me_. The love of God is not in me, if I love pleasure so called, or diversion. Neither is it in me, if I am a lover of honour or praise, or of dress, or of good eating and drinking. Nay, even indolence, or the love of ease, is inconsistent with the love of God.