to fpend an hour or two at the fame place. Such companies are plainly described by thofe divines, who prefs religious difcourfe, and who cenfure the declining of it upon these occafions as particularly finful. Let us further enquire, whether in carnal, or mixed companies, fuch as moft vifiting companies muft be, religion converfation can either be introduced, or maintained with any probability of religious profit; alfo when, or what fort of religious converfation may be profitable: and laftly, what fort of converfation is really finful and forbidden? And here it must be taken for granted, that all converfation upon the awful, and important fubject of religion, ought to be moft folemn and serious; fhould be accompanied with a fuitable earneftnefs of the affections, and gravity of deportment: without this, it will be worse than unprofitable-it will be in danger of finking into profanenefs. But ferioufnefs, and attention of mind, and indeed ftudy of any fort, is a kin to fadnefs. Phyficians fay it hinders digeftion, and other animal functions; is an enemy to health; and wears out body and mind. For this reafon it is, that seasons of relaxation, both from religious duties, and from study, are abfolutely neceifary-made neceffary by Him, who formed us men, and gave us an human confiitution. Relaxation from ferious thought, and from intenfe thinking of every kind, is as neceffary for the mind, as relaxation from labour is for the body. The focial, or the convivial meeting of a number of perfons, having any flight tie to commend them to each other, is the proper feason, and the natural means of such relaxation: the love of fociety planted in every one's breaft, fhews it: an unfociable temper is unnatural. But how is this end of relaxation from ferious thought, and feverer ftudies, to be answered, if the converfation must needs be on the most severe and ferious of all ftudies-upon religion? But it is faid, "we fhould not spend our precious time in vain converfation." But furely all conversation-all trifling conversation is not vain, in the scripture sense of the word vain-i. e. finful. If converfation has no other fault, than that it is about the weather, or about nothing, it is not worse than filence; and filence is not finful. But why muft all conversation, except upon religious fubjects, needs be trifling? Why muft it needs be only about horses, hounds, cards, and courtezans? Or are there none but religious subjects to which we may give a confiderable portion of our time? Yes, it will be said, we may pursue our occupations; we may talk with others upon fecular affairs, as far as our bufinefs requires." We may also give orders about what is neceffary for the body. We may ufe means to preserve the body. We may adorn it also. If we are to determine this matter by the general practice, (that of religious perfons, no less than that of others,) we may. Why not then adorn the mind? Whence have we that natural thirit after knowledge of all forts? Whence the tafte for poetry, painting, architecture, mufic, and all the circle of the fciences? Muft we fay, as has been faid, that fuch a defire of profane knowledge is a mark, that the heart is earthly? That these tastes are the confequences of the fall? Or do they proceed from the influence of the evil one upon our minds? Not from our Creator? There are, who feem to confider, I know not why, the arts and sciences as confederate enemies to Chriftianity; as if the rules of Profody, or the propofitions of Euclid, might fome how or other overturn the articles of the Chriftian Faith fuch perfons pay Christianity a poor compliment.. All real truths proceed from one and the fame fountain-the fountain of all truth, and cannot be repugnant. 66 The : The encouraging of mathematical and metaphyfical ftudies, even in our univerfities, has been called fharpening our natural proneness to vain reafoning. So far from it, it is the cure of vain reafoning. Vain reafoning abounds no where fo much as amongst those who are ignorant of the fciences. If any reasoning be vain, it is that, which pretends to demonftrate the grounds, and to examine the fitness of the divine difpenfations. Yet we find the celebrated Mr. Hervey, (a man of piety, and a scholar in every thing but the sciences,) undertaking to give an account of that counfel of God, by which Jefus was delivered to be crucified; deciding upon the fitness of fuch facrifice; and pretending to fhew the particular way in which it had its efficacy and all this fupported by a few forced texts, and much vain metaphyfical reafoning. Of the fame fort is what Whitfield tells us, in one of his journals, "that he threw away his Latin and Greek, being determined with St. Paul, to know nothing but Jefus, and him crucified." Yet St. Paul (and after his converfion too,) could employ his exa& knowledge of the tenets of the Jewish fects in his defence before the councils; and could quote Greek poets and Greek proverbs in his preaching. Surely, then, the arts and fciences, and other parts of human lite rature, are proper topics of public converfation. The common occurrences in the world, the ufual fubjects of converfation in mixed companies, afford occafion for many judicious obfervations. The reflexions made on them by different perfons in the company, are often not only entertaining, but ufeful: nor is there any reafon why all mirth and pleasantry fhould be utterly banished. They fhould be reftrained within the bounds of decency; but, thus reftrained, they contribute much both to health of body and cheerfulness of mind. : It will be faid by fome, that "they, who are truly religious, want no fuch vain relaxation; that they are never tired of religious duties; that religious converfation is their delight, and is the only proper amusement." What fort of religious converfation they here speak of, we will confider by and by in the mean time it must be acknowledged, that there are thofe, who can fit and hear fermons, and who, with the fame eafe, could preach all day long. In fact, their understanding is never employed; they attend to nothing but particular words, and a fet of phrafes. Thefe, ftrung together in proper order, make up their favorite fyftem of divinity. Every preacher of every denomination, who ufes the right words, is fure to please these perfons. Perfons of this fort are commonly very ready in Scripture language: they can put together a number of texts and scripture phrafes, without any regard to their meaning or connexion; and these they will pout with great fluency for half an hour together; will plume themselves on it, and triumph over all, who have too much sense, or too much modefty to do the like. Well may fuch incoherent talk, fuch per-verfion of Scripture, "turn the hearers fick or four." Indeed, this Scripturé fpouting can hardly be called converfation. But, whatever may be faid of the innocency of converfing upon fecular affairs, ftill it will be urged, that it is unprofitable." It might be answered, "that cannot be unprofitable, which is neceifary both for body and mind." But, waving this, let us enquire whether that, which paffes for religious conversation with those who make the objection, is really profitable to religion? And here I fhall take notice of that fort of talk, called by fome gospel converfation, but which may more properly be called gospel goflipping; fuch as enquiries "who are in the right faith?"-" What new preacher is expect ed?" ed?"" Whether he speaks extemporè, or from notes?" &c. All this, and much more of the fame fort, the delight of all, who run from fermon to fermon, does not deferve the name of religious conversation; it is the burlefque, the difgrace of it. But there is another fort of converfation, on which much ftrefs is laid by many-what they call relating their experiences, viz. their religious ftate, internal as well as external; their former flate of ignorance, ufually called darknefs, in order perhaps to magnify their present state of light. In short, relating their experiences, is a fuppofed relation of their Chriftian warfare-of the combats between the rational, or religious principle, with unreftrained appetites, (Jer. v. 8.) ungoverned paffions, (Prov. xxix. 22.) or ill-directed affections. (Rom, i. 27.) These they dignify with the title of their conflicts, with their defeats of, or their victories over the devil: tho' moft of this is confined to general complaints of the wickedness of their hearts. How far fuch matters are subjects for public converfation, will be eafily feen by confidering, that fuch experiences muft relate not only to themfelves, but to their families, and to many other perfons: but, if all that paffes in the heart of every man, was faithfully related, we fhould live not only in a ftate of religious, but of fecular warfare. But the fact is, the parties are deceiving one another, when they talk thus in public. If self is to be the fubject of the conversatian, every one will glofs over his particular vices, and magnify his particular virtues: fuch converfation will produce in the end nothing but habitual hypocrify towards God, and spiritual pride towards men. The lefs we talk of ourselves the better; it is a nice fubject; and few enter upon it, who come off clear either of folly or fin. When the difficulty of maintaining religious converfation in public is hinted at, it is immediately replied, " you can talk of fecular matters, why not of religious matters?" You know your own thoughts, and out of the abundance of the heart the mouth fpeaketh. But, do men fpeak all their thoughts on worldly affairs in public? Does a tradefman tell in public what profit he puts upon his goods: where his neighbour can buy cheaper than himself can afford to fell; what debts he owes; or what he gains in a year? He can talk of the general nature of trade-of the public occurrences that affect it; but he never tells his experiences in trade to his brother tradesman. Well then, if the general nature of trade may be the fubject of public converfation, why may not the general doctrines of Christianity be difcuffed, and the nature of its evidence be examined in public companies? So they may but thefe very advocates for religious converfation pofitively forbid this, and with reafon; it will raise debate, and debate is unprofitable-it will eat as doth a canker: and truly this will be the cafe, unless the debate be carried on between men of difcernment and moderation.To introduce fuch subjects into common conversation, would leffen all reverence for religion, and turn what should be a visiting company, into a Robin Hood Club.* But, without either talking of ourselves, or entering into debate, may we not talk of Jefus, and his falvation? Mr. Hervey fays, Letter XCH. when people come to fee him, they expect to hear of Chriftianity."Talking of Chriftianity," fays he," is my touchftone, to fee whether a perfon is worth my acquaintance." *A meeting of ordinary perfons at a low ale-house, known by the fign of Robin Hood, near Temple Bar. Vol, III, Churchm, Mag. O&. 1802 Ff / I afk, I afk, is this difcourfe to be carried on by one perfon? Or, are all prefent to speak? If only one is to fpeak, as feems to be the expectation of those who came to fee him, then it is a fermon. The company are not vifitors, but an audience collected together to honour Mr. H. by attending his parlour difcourses. But, as to the making fo awful a thing as Chrift, and his falvation, the fubject of common chat in a mixed company, to be bandied about from one to another, or dealing out rhapsodies on the love of Jefus in public, men of true piety cannot but look upon this as a grievous profanation of that facred Name, which is above every name; and could no more endure this, than they could endure to ftand praying in the corners of the streets they must be diftreffed!-they must be filent!-and their filence will expose them to the contempt and hatred of thefe orators; who will think meanly of their religious attainments, if, indeed, they will allow those, who are thus filent, to have any religion at all. But, fuppofing the whole difcourfe properly conducted, and none present but who are either properly qualified to fpeak, or feriously difpofed to hear; what is it then but a religious exercise, maintained by perfons, who come together for that very purpofe? They come prepared for it it is not a vifiting company of neighbours met together, without any concerted defign, or even the knowledge of who may compose the company; nor is it a relaxation from serious thinking. Still it may be aiked, what if fome perfon in a mixed company (out of fincere zeal,) fhould begin to fpeak on fome very awful religious fubje&t? Why the probable confequence is, that he would be called a rude fellow and a methodist ;* and of what ufe is it thus to obtrude religious discourse upon the company, out of feafon; and without authority?. The appellation given to fuch a man is juft, though the giving it would be unkind and uncivil. And would not fuch a rebuff, though nothing lefs could be expected, hurt him who made the attempt? Would it not ftir up in him ill-humour against all fuch of the company as would not follow his abfurd example; Yet, in a large company, there might be many, who would be filent, from real veneration for religion. Young perfons-women, (modeft ones, I mean,) and thofe, who are not profeffional men, are never forward to talk on fuch awful fubjects; and, above all, will be averse to relate in public their private experiences; yet all these fhall be lumped, by a man thus heated, with the reft, and reproached with a want of liking to religious fubjects, and with a want of power to introduce them,* in manifeft allufion to that deteftable character, noticed by St. Paul, of having a form of godlinefs, but denying the power thereof. All this cenfure breathes the fpirit of party: and when we fee fuch perfons (women as well as men,) bufily giving to one another the right-hand of fellowship, what is it but a party diftinction, as much as the different coloured ribbands at an election? But, let us not mistake, by any means, reverfe of wrong for right. Let not what has been faid be fo understood, as if ALL religious converfation were improper, or ALL fecular converfation innocent. Let us proceed to confider, in what cafes religious converfation may be profitable; and certainly religious converfation is both practicable and profitable in our own family. In how many refpects may the mafter of a family regulate, and make fuch converfation ufeful in his own houfe: probably there is no better * Berridge's Chriftian World Unmasked, p. 15. better way of inftruction for the younger part of the family, than by entering into difcourfe with them; their anfwers will discover any misapprehenfion-will thew what improvement they make. Nor need religious talk be confined to children or fervants: domeftic converfation between the elder branches of the family upon fuch important fubjects, is natural, efpecially as the restraint that those are under, who speak in public, is taken off. Nor is religious debate ufelefs, when carried on by proper perfons, and in a proper manner: but controverfial difcourfes are most useful, when reduced to writing, and are then the freeft from any ill-tendency. I fay nothing of formal meetings for religious exercises-they are not con→ verfations: they ought to be subject to orders and rules. What rules, is it not our business to lay down? Two may be mentioned: the company fhould not be too numerous, left it resemble the gospel net, Matt. xiii. 47., Alfo the fame perfon, who leads the exercise, fhould continue to lead it through each meeting, left comparisons fhould arife; and good king Charles admonishes us to make no comparifons. As to relating experi-. ences, when it is in private-when it is between perfons very intimate, it may fometimes be useful: I fuppofe in no cafe more fo than when it is between those, whom God has joined in the most intimate union; and who ought to dwell together evermore in unity, and to confider themselves as being heirs together of the grace of eternal life. When alfo, for the quieting of confcience, we afk ghoftly counsel of the minifter, fome relation of private experiences may be neceffary: but, in all other cafes, it seems useless at leaft, if not mifchievous. I fpeak not here of what we may call public experiences, or fuch mercies and bleffings as are known to all, and should be acknowledged by all, and before all. The cafe was very different in the firft ages of Chriftianity. Their perfecutions and fufferings could not but be the subject of their private converfation. The relation of fuch fad experiences as thefe, might be useful, and thus they might comfort themfelves together, and edify one another. The cuftoms of the early Chriftians, are neither to be wholly difregarded, nor exactly imitated. While they were forbidden to meet in public, all their vifits, even their feafts, were of a religious nature. We have juftly dropped thefe; yet, in imitation of the primitive Chriftians, we keep the fabbath on the first day of the week, and not, according to the letter of the commandment, upon the Seventh. But neither is all fecular converfation innocent. Though there is no neceffity that we should always be talking of Chrift, yet our converfation ought ALWAYS to be fuch as becometh the gofpel: and, let it ever be remembered, that all our relaxation from religious duties, is to fit us to return to them with greater vigour, just as reft is to fit the body for a renewal of labour. Whatever converfation then tends to weaken, or unfettle our religious principles; whatever induces fuch a levity of mind as prevents our returning to ftated duties in a proper frame, is undoubtedly finful.— Whatever occafions fin, is finful; and there are things, which should not fo much as be named in any conversation among Chriftians, (for that is the meaning of the word Saints,) neither filthinefs, nor foolish taiking or jefting, which are not convenient. "Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth," fays the Apostle," but that which is good to the use of edifying :" and, indeed, whenever the converfation becomes corrupt, it is the duty of every true Chriftian prefent to exprefs his diflike Ff2 of |