But is there not another hindrance? Should not compassion, should not tenderness hinder us from giving pain? Yes, from giving unnecessary pain. But what manner of tenderness is this? It is like that of a surgeon who lets his patient be lost, because he is too compassionate to probe his wounds. Cruel compassion! Let me give pain, so I may save life. Let me probe, that God may heal.
(1.) Are we then such as we are sensible we should be, 1st, With regard to natural endowments? I am afraid not. If we were, how many stumbling-blocks would be removed out of the way of serious infidels? Alas, what terrible effects do we continually see of that common, tho’ senseless imagination, “The boy, if he is fit for nothing else, will do well enough for a parson?” Hence it is, that we see (I would to God there were no such instance in all Great-Britain, or Ireland) dull, heavy, blockish ministers; men of no life, no spirit; no readiness of thought; who are consequently the jest of every pert fool, every lively, airy coxcomb they meet. We see others whose memory can retain nothing: therefore they can never be men of considerable knowledge. They can never know much even of those things which they are more nearly concerned to know. Alas they are pouring the water into a leaky vessel; and the broken cistern can hold no water. I do not say, with Plato, That “all human knowledge is nothing but remembring.” Yet certain it is, that without remembring, we can have but a small share of knowledge. And even those who enjoy the most retentive memory, find great reason still to complain,
“Skill comes so slow, and life so fast does fly;
“We learn so little, and forget so much.”
And yet we see and bewail a still greater defect, in some that are in the ministry. They want sense; they are defective in understanding; their capacity is low and shallow: their apprehension is muddy and confused: of consequence they are utterly incapable, either of forming a true judgment of things, or of reasoning justly upon any thing. O how can these who themselves know nothing aright, impart knowledge to others? How instruct them in all the variety of duty, to God, their neighbour, and themselves? How will they guide them through all the mazes of error, through all the intanglements of sin and temptation? How will they apprize them of the devices of Satan, and guard them against all the wisdom of the world?
It is easy to perceive, I do not speak this for their sake; (for they are incorrigible) but for the sake of parents, that they may open their eyes and see, A blockhead can never “do well enough for a parson.” He may do well enough for a tradesman; so well as to gain fifty or an hundred thousand pounds. He may do well enough for a soldier; nay, (if you pay well for it) for a very well-drest and well-mounted officer. He may do well enough for a sailor, and may shine on the quarter-deck of a man of war. He may do so well, in the capacity of a lawyer or physician, as to ride in his gilt chariot. But O! think not of his being a minister, unless you would bring a blot upon your family, a scandal upon our church, and a reproach on the gospel, which he may murder, but cannot teach.
Are we such as we are sensible we should be, 2dly, With regard to acquired endowments? Here the matter (suppose we have common understanding) lies more directly within our own power. But under this, as well as the following heads, methinks, I would not consider at all, how many or how few, are either excellent or defective. I would only desire every person who reads this, to apply it to himself. Certainly some one in the nation is defective. Am not I the man?
Let us each seriously examine himself. Have I 1. Such a knowledge of scripture, as becomes him who undertakes so to explain it to others, that it may be a light in all their paths? Have I a full and clear view of the analogy of faith, which is the clue to guide me through the whole? Am I acquainted with the several parts of scripture; with all parts of the Old Testament and the New? Upon the mention of any text, do I know the context, and the parallel places? Have I that point at least of a good divine, the being a good textuary? Do I know the grammatical construction of the four gospels? Of the acts? Of the epistles? And am I a master of the spiritual sense (as well as the literal) of what I read? Do I understand the scope of each book, and how every part of it tends thereto? Have I skill to draw the natural inferences deducible from each text? Do I know the objections raised to them or from them by Jews, Deists, Papists, Arians, Socinians, and all other sectaries, who more or less corrupt or cauponize the word of God? Am I ready to give a satisfactory answer to each of these objections? And have I learned to apply every part of the sacred writings, as the various states of my hearers require?
2. Do I understand Greek and Hebrew? Otherwise how can I undertake (as every minister does) not only to explain books which are written therein, but to defend them against all opponents? Am I not at the mercy of every one who does understand, or even pretends to understand the original? For which way can I confute his pretence? Do I understand the language of the Old Testament? Critically? At all? Can I read into English one of David’s psalms? Or even the first chapter of Genesis? Do I understand the language of the New Testament? Am I a critical master of it? Have I enough of it even to read into English the first chapter of St. Luke? If not, how many years did I spend at school? How many at the university? And what was I doing all those years? Ought not shame to cover my face?
*3. Do I understand my own office? Have I deeply considered before God the character which I bear? What is it to be an ambassador of Christ? An envoy from the King of heaven? And do I know and feel what is implied in watching over the souls of men, as he that must give account?