"Quisquis amat dictis absentum rodere vitam,
Hanc mensam vetitam noverit esse sibi."[11]
[11] Possidonius: De Vitâ Augustini, c. 22.
Such was the memento which St Augustine had inscribed upon his dining-table. He found it necessary to remind the Bishops (coëpiscopi) whom he entertained not to misuse their ordained tongues. And the Pastors of the nineteenth century need it still, quite as much as it was needed in the fifth.
"SET A WATCH."
It is impossible, of course, to lay down exhaustive rules for the Christian guidance of conversation in detail. It is quite certain that the Gospel does not prescribe, or intend, that we should never speak except about things spiritual, or even except about our special duties in the Ministry. But it is quite certain too that the Gospel does prescribe inexorably the utmost watchfulness and self-discipline in the matter of the tongue, for all who name the Name of Christ. "For every idle word that men shall speak they shall give account" [Matt. xii. 36.]; "Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but such as is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers" [Eph. iv. 29.]; "If any man among you seem to be devout (θρῆσκος), and bridleth not his tongue, that man's devoutness (θρηκεία) is vain" [Jas. i. 26.]; "Set a watch, O Lord, before my lips." [Ps. cxli. 3.]
LIFE IN A CLERGY-HOUSE.
I may say a few words in this connexion about the peculiar call for care and consistency where a group of young Clergymen live together in a "clergy-house."
*ITS OPPORTUNITIES AND NEEDS.
It seems to me that such groups must in the nature of the case be either means of the greatest good in the mutual intercourse of their members, or just the opposite. As sure as corruptio optimi est pessima, so sure it is that the young Clergyman who is not consistent in temper, word, and habit, is the most unhelpful specimen of the young man; just because of the discord between his ministerial character and his personal. And if, say, three or four young servants of God (by profession) domicile together and are not consistent, I am afraid they will positively and actively draw one another, without in the least meaning to do so, away from the mind of Christ and the walk with God. Do they allow themselves to engage in trivial foolish, unkind talk? Do they so valiantly determine "not to be goody-goody" as tacitly to avoid all open-hearted, loving, reverent conversation about their Lord and His truth? Are they much fonder of endless argument than of the Word of God and prayer? Do their united devotions tend to be formal and perfunctory? Do they (I come back to that point again) "bridle not their tongues" about the absent, about those over them, about those who differ from them? Then they are doing each other harm, at a rapid rate, by their collocation. On the other hand, are they each for himself living close to their Master and Friend in the secret chamber and in the inner heart? Are they walking humbly and gladly with their God, much in prayer, and having the Scriptures often open? And are they considering one another, to provoke unto love and to good works? Are they remembering generally and habitually the sacredness of the duty of mutual influence and example, in personal habits, and otherwise? Are they determined each for himself to help his brethren in all things pure, and just, and lovable, and of good report, and to strengthen them to endure hardness, and not to be ashamed of the blessed Name? Then they are blessing one another in Christ, as few men otherwise can do. But personal, individual consistency is the absolute requisite to this; each man must follow the Lord for himself in faith and fear.
THE DUTY OF EXAMPLE.