And yet on the other side, it may fall out that a person of quality, by a seasonable, prudent, handsome, respectful entertainment of his equals or superiors, may do more good than by bestowing that charge upon the poor. He may save more than he expendeth, by avoiding the displeasure of men in power: he may keep up his interest, by which if he be faithful, he may do God and his country more service, than if he had given so much to the poor. And when really it is a needful means to a greater good, it is a duty; and then to omit it, and give that cost to the poor, would be a sin.
_Object._ But if this rule hold, a man must never do but one kind of good; when he hath found out the greatest, he must do nothing else.
_Answ._ He must always do the greatest good: but the same thing is not at all times the greatest good. Out of season and measure a good may be turned to an evil: praying in its season is better than ploughing; and ploughing in its season is better than praying, and will do more good; for God will more accept and bless it.
_Object._ Therefore it seemeth the prudentest way to divide my expenses according to the proportion of others of my quality; some to the poor, and some to necessary charges, and some to actions of due civility.
_Answ._ That there must be a just distribution is no question; because God hath appointed you several duties for your expenses: but the question is of the proportions of each respectively. Where God hath made many duties constantly necessary, (as to maintain your own bodies, your children, to pay tribute to the king, to help the poor, to maintain the charges of the church,) there all must be wisely proportioned. But entertainments, recreations, and other such after to be mentioned, which are not constant duties, may be sometimes good and sometimes sinful: and the measure of such expenses must be varied only by the rule already laid down, viz. according to the proportion of the effect or good which is like to follow: though the custom of others of the same rank may sometimes intimate what proportion will be suitable to that lawful end; and sometimes the inordinate custom of others will rather tell one what is to be avoided. Therefore true prudence (without a carnal bias) comparing the good effects together, which rationally are like to follow, is the only resolver of this doubt. Which having so largely showed, I shall refer you to it, in the solution of many of the following questions.
_Inst._ III. Another way of sinful wasting is upon unnecessary, sumptuous buildings.
_Quest._ III. When is it prodigality to erect sumptuous edifices?
_Answ._ Not when they are for the public good, either in point of use, or ornament and honour, so be it no greater good be thereby omitted. Therefore it is not churches, hospitals, burses, or common halls that I am speaking of. Nor when they are proportioned to the quality of the person, for the honour of magistracy, or for a man's necessary use. But when it is for ostentation of a man's riches, or rather of his pride, and for the gratifying of a carnal, irrational fancy; and when a man bestoweth more upon buildings, than is proportionable to his estate, and to his better expenses; and (to speak more exactly) when he bestoweth that upon his buildings, which some greater service calleth for at that time; it is then his prodigality and sin.
_Quest._ IV. Here once for all let us inquire, Whether it be not lawful, as in diet, so in buildings, recreation, and other such things, to be at some charge for our delight, as well as for our necessities?