when we are weighed in the balance we shall be found wanting-without this, we frustrate the gracious purposes of mercy, and throw ourselves voluntarily on the sword of justice.

It may be proper to take notice upon this occasion, with what sort of joy we ought to solemnize and celebrate this festival; the benefit we commemorate extends both to our souls and bodies; and therefore it is reasonable that God should be glorified in both; in our bodies, not only as they are concerned to express the devotion of our souls in the worship of God; but likewise by making such provision for their sustenance, as may conduce more particularly to create chearfulness and joy, provided this be done within the bounds of decency and moderation; for whenever we exceed them, we are so far from glorifying God with our bodies, that we abuse them, rather to dis

honour and despise him. But our joy should be also spiritual, such as may imply a grateful sense of this invaluable mercy, and be productive of a good life; without this the service of our lips, and all outward expressions of joy will be of no value; it is this which makes our services, imperfect as they are, yet accepted of God in the beloved.

With this disposition of soul, let us now approach the holy table, where we may behold the Son of God crucified for us; there may we receive that bread which is able to nourish our souls unto eternal life; there, that wine which may put true joy and gladness in our hearts, add new warmth to our virtue, and vigour to our zeal. Let us then with thankful hearts receive these holy mysteries, and with the wise men of the East, let us fall down and worship the Saviour whom they represent,

and offer him the sacrifice of our praise and thanksgiving; for unto us was born, this day, in the city of David, a Saviour which is Christ the Lord;-to whom with the Father, &c.

SERMON XV.

ON THE GOOD SAMARITAN.

ST. LUKE, CHAP. X. VER. 29. But he, willing to justify himself, said unto Jesus, " And who is my Neighbour ?”

NONE but a narrow-minded people, whose notions of benevolence were selfish and contracted as the Jews were, could have asked this question, or not have known what common sense, with the least observation on human life, must every day have taught them. But it seems from his manner of putting the question, this lawyer had flattered himself that our Saviour,

possibly through fear of offending so powerful a sect, would have given a definition of the word neighbour, according to his limited conception of it. Little did he know the man whose judgment he appealed to, and still less did he consider the constant tenor of his doctrine, whose unwearied endeavours had ever been employed to implant in the minds of all who heard him, the seeds of universal benevolence, and who before this time had taught them that wonderful but charitable lesson of loving their one suppose, a teacher of such humane and candid sentiments, would, by a partial definition of charity, authorize his hearers to confine it to any particular nation or religion? or rather must he not expect the rebuke his artful enquiry had wantonly provoked? Our Saviour answered him, as was his custom, by a plain affecting story, which clearly pointed out who was his neighbour, and at the same time laid

very enemies. Could any