to be done here, I mean the work of preaching, or edifying the Church; on the contrary, it leads, as I said before, to competency and proficiency in that work and inasmuch as it is humbling ourselves, and sitting down in the lowest room, it affords, another strong presumption that it is one of those things which are not despicable in the sight of the Lord Jesus, howsoever the world may consider it.

If we are to be over nice about being mechanical, nothing could be done either in Church or State. Ministers submit to the mechanical employment of reading a liturgy. Many a learned, eloquent, and pious judge submits to the mechanical and laborious employment of writing down evidence from morning till night. Ah this foolish pride! How it makes us mistake what exalts us for what degrades us! How lamentably it keeps us in the dark! The mind is endowed by its Creator with great capabilities, which our blessed Lord himself encourages us to cultivate, saying, herein is my Father glorified, that ye bear much fruit: so shall ye be my disciples. Pride indeed persuades us to try what forcing and torturing will do, but seldom prevails with us patiently to dig about the tree, to dress it, and to dung it.

But it will be said "learning by heart is not enjoined in the Scriptures." Meditation with a view to sanctification is enjoined in the Scriptures, and if learning by heart administer to meditation it may answer a scriptural purpose. If the Lord give us this medicine to heal our sickness, shall we

refuse to take it because we are not commanded to take it? If we are commanded to mount a wall, although we be not enjoined to use a ladder, shall we not use a ladder if it be given to us? If we are commanded to bring water into a house from a stream, although we be not enjoined to use a pitcher, shall we not use a pitcher if it be given to us? If we are commanded to water a garden, although we be not enjoined to use a watering pot, shall we not use a watering pot if it be given to us? And if we are commanded to revive the natural deadness and dryness of the heart with the holy dews of meditation, although we be not commanded to use our memory, shall we not use our memory if memory be useful herein? be useful herein? Is not the aptitude of the instrument to the work a strong argument for its being used?

But indeed it is not so clear that learning by heart is not enjoined in the Scriptures. Be filled with the Spirit, says St. Paul, speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs. Is not this a precept mandatory as to the very point in question? How can we speak to ourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs unless we have learned them by heart? Does not St. Paul intimate that we may be filled with the Spirit in such a devotional exercise as this? When indeed should that blessed Spirit come to us if not when all carnal tempers being thrown aside, and our hearts breathing nothing but contrition and supplication, we employ all our understanding and

our attention on Scriptural truths? Many things have been gathered from Scripture by inferences more indirect than this. Again we are commanded to lay up these words in our heart and in our soul, speaking of them when we sit in our house and when we walk by the way, when we lie down and when we rise up. This looks very like an intimation that we should call in memory to our assistance and learn by heart for devotional purposes. But though learning by heart be more matter of inference than of commandment, though Scripture be not peremptory on this subject, though it leave us at liberty to make our own inferences as to what may promote our sanctification, and though it be better to argue from the general tenor of Scripture than from any text or texts, yet particular passages (for instance Deut. xI. 18. 19. Eph. v. 18. 19. 1 Tim. Iv. 14. 15. 16. Acts XVI. 25. 1 Cor. XII. 12. 31. 1 Cor. xiv. 39. 40. 1 Cor. XIV. 26. Col. III. 16. James v. 13. 1 Cor. xiv. 1.) show that learning by heart for devotional purposes is at least very conformable to what Scripture inculcates; and there are besides innumerable passages (Deut. xI. 13. Proverbs iv. 23. Jer. XxxI. 33. Ezek. xI. 19. Eph. IV. 23. Eph. vi. 13. Philippians IV. 8.) which in a more general way imply that we should be active in using whatever means are put into our hands (and why not memory among the rest?) to promote that which is the will of God, even our sanctification. The subject of our sanctification must be considered

in all its branches and bearings, directly and indirectly. Scripture supposes as much. The kingdom of Heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force. This warfare supposes every kind of stratagem. St. Paul speaks of laying a foundation. Laying a foundation supposes every kind of superstructure. That in asserting the use of memory under grace in our sanctification I am building merely hay and stubble, is what no mortal man can prove. But perhaps you you know and remember the spirit of God's word though you cannot say much of it by heart ;" and you say "you can remember and meditate upon that word without compelling yourself to clothe your thoughts in the language of other persons, or to write down first yourself what you are to think."

will say

66

I answer, as the health of the body requires that the veins be thoroughly warmed every day by patient continuance in bodily exercise, so the health of the soul requires that the affections of the soul be thoroughly warmed every day by patient continuance in devotional exercise.

If your soul be not thus warmed every day; if you find it difficult to hold it to its work; if your attention wanders in your meditations, this use of memory is recommended to you as a remedy for that wandering of attention. If your soul be thus warmed every day, you have attained the princi

pal end for which this use of memory is recommended.

"But the labour is too great." Why the labour is for Heaven! Can we labour too hard for that, especially if in the course of our labours we experience actual foretastes of Heaven? This objection implies a degree of scorn which would not be manifested if we duly considered the end of the labour as well as the labour itself. Ephraim also complained of labour in learning the will of God, and thus retorted upon the prophet Isaiah: Whom shall he teach knowledge? and whom shall he make to understand doctrine? Them that are weaned from the milk and drawn from the breasts. For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little and there a little. But their scornful untowardness in patient learning drew forth the severest denunciations of Divine wrath. What is the covenant which the Lord makes with us? Is it not that He on His part will be merciful to our unrighteousness, and will remember no more our sins and iniquities, and that we on our parts receive His laws written in our minds and hearts? Now will memory duly and devoutly exercised help us to fulfil our part of the covenant or will it not? If it will, what becomes of all frigid objections against it?

"But the labor is unnecessary it implies a course of life more contemplative than useful."

It has pleased the Lord to make that life useful which is spent in devoutly pondering on his word. To this end many persons, whether of the ministry or laity seem to be called: who having