ftantly before them, been difpofed, in after life, to regard the rules of morality? Have those, who have been thus taught to do evil, learnt to do well? Left to their own management in early life, the ufages and establishments of any age or country, however favourable to virtue, have been disregarded. The laws have been infufficient to reftrain them. The principles of ingenuousness, gratitude, honour, fhame, have been wanting. Grown up ignorant of religion, full of disgust to it, they continue to be worse and worse. In fome inftances, no care of pious parents is effectual to restrain and control the folly in the hearts of children. What then may be looked for where no care has been taken of them? where they lie open to thofe, who fpare no means and endeavours to poifon their minds with the worst principles?

The first stage of life looks up with reverence and confidence to parents and inftructors. It is hopeful, that wisdom may then enter into the heart, and knowledge be pleasant to the foul. Evil propenfities of nature may then be checked; but, if unchecked, may acquire ftrength, which no after pains can fubdue. Many evil propensities are acquired from evil customs and examples, through the neglect of education. A prompt genius and amiable natural endowments have been ruined for want of culture; while fome of but an ordinary genius have made good proficiency, and a froward difpofition has been mended, by proper education.

Parents, whose instructions in religion come recommended by a correfpondent example, restrain and awe by their presence fuch as are viciously inclined. They cherish the first openings of virtue. A contrary character, at the head of a family, may root out any fense of piety, which may have been excited in the young members of the household; or it may prevent any fenfe of it from being once awakened.

How far it belongs to the head of a family to direct the religion of it, we shall not here tarry to enquire. The enquiry will have a different anfwer according to the variation of circumftances. The head of a family is furety, in a measure, for the principles and conduct of his household. God ordinarily improves means and inftruments in imparting knowledge and grace. It is incumbent on parents to guide their family alike in the things of life and godliness-to be, in both refpects, minifters of God for good.

The importance of religion is especially manifeft from the immortality of the foul, our relation to GOD as moral Governour, and our intimate concern with JESUS CHRIST, the MEDIATOR between God and men. Hath God condefcended to speak to us from heaven, by his own Son? What he hath spoken must be of the higheft moment. Shall we not then apply our hearts to it, and train up our children to an acquaintance with it? Doth it, in no meafure, depend on parents, whether their children are acquainted with the doctrine of Chrift? the words of eternal life? The greater part die while under age. Shall they die without inftruction, when, through the inftrumentality of parents and others, they might become wife to falvation? Thofe who have been inftrumental to their exiftence, appear to be under the strongest bonds to lead them in the way everlasting. Early imbibed principles and early manners may extend beyond the bounds of time. The importance of that period cannot be too often and too feriously confidered by those who have the education of children and youth.

Parents, doubtlefs, will inculcate their own ideas of religion. And though they prefume that their ideas are taken from the fcriptures, yet it is their own conftruction of them-except that a confiderable part may be delivered in the language of the Holy Ghoft. Is it probable, then, that, in a Proteftant country, where the fcriptures are recurred to as the only rule of faith

and practice, parents will give fuch inftruction to their children as is materially wrong? Attached to the principles of civil and religious liberty, having no inclination to educate in errour those who are fo dear to them, it is very improbable that they should train them up in any errours which affect the fubftance of Christian doctrine. What profeffion of faith is there among the churches of the reformation, which does not, for fubftance, accord with holy writ? Though none be exempt from errour, it may be difficult to fix the charge of effential errour on any. All may bold the head. The things in which they differ from one another are of small moment compared with those wherein they are agreed. Notwithstanding the hold which fuperftition has of the mind, is there occafion, in this enlightened age, to be fo very jealous of its fway? Does not the pretended jealoufy proceed from an averfion to the paths in which our ancestors found reft to their fouls? in which they trained up a godly feed? Is there not more occafion to fear new errours than old? Further, are the prefumed errours of education in religion of fuch a description, and fo riveted, that those, who may be educated in them, will not be able, with the improvements of this age of the world, to extricate themfelves-to feparate the chaff from the precious grain? Many juft and important fentiments may be connected with erroneous ones. If fome great and good men have held great errours, their practical fenfe of piety has been fuperiour to the influence of their abftract theories, and oberbalanced the influence of them. When the fpirit of vital piety fhews that fome wrong opinions do not corrupt their hearts, the bias to thofe opinions is not fo dangerous, as, at first view, might be fufpected: It fhews that they do not view them in the manner, connection and confequences which others do. It fhould further be confidered, whether the errours and imperfections of good men furnifh objections, which bear any comparison with the

open neglect and contempt of religion-whether the former differve the cause of truth and virtue as do the latter.

Candour must grant that the danger is not from religious education, but from its neglect. Those who are taught, are not precluded the right of private judgment: It is their privilege and duty to study the fcriptures, and compare one part with another, fo far as they are able, and in the use of the best means. Nothing can be more pleafing to a pious parent, than to obferve a thoughtful, inquifitive mind in his children on the fubject of religion. May he not take pains to fow good feed, while the enemy is bufy to fow tares? To prevent prejudices of education, would you hazard the experiment of their early imbibing ruinous principles, and contracting unconquerable propenfities to vice and impiety of every kind? To guard against bigotry in religion, would you make them bigots to infidelity?

You well know, and therefore need only to be reminded, that if you neglect to train up a child to fome fuitable employment, and to his civil duties; if you fuffer him to wafte his time, and are inattentive to the company he keeps, the confequences will be most injurious to him, and to mankind. Will the confequences of a neglect of religious education be lefs injurious? The natural foil, if not cultivated, will be overgrown with briers and thorns, which will prevent the growth of good feed. The moral foil, without culture, will yield a luxuriant growth of noxious fruit. The principles of religion not being fown in it, those of irreligion will naturally fpring up. Growing up without information in religion, what fhould hinder children from following the bad examples which every where abound? from liftening to the inftruction which caufeth to err from the words of knowledge? The season to imbue their minds with honourable and virtuous fentiments, with wife and prudent counsel, has been

neglected; and no fuch advantage will return. Conscience will be defiled and wasted. They will have little or no regard to character-will, with the unclean fpirit, walk through dry places in pursuit of rest, but find none. Seeking whom they may devour, they will become intolerable to fociety, and be victims to its juftice. A mere civil education may prevent many of these evils. Shall then the children of this world be wifer in their generation than the children of light?

Some, with much art and pains, would educate children and youth in the fyftem of fatality-the fyf tem of human perfectibility-the fyftem of political justice, which gives to all a common right to the poffeffions of individuals-" the favage philofophy, which "teaches its difciples to look with perfect indifference "on" all the tender relations of life; "to forget and "infult friends and benefactors, to diveft themselves "of all that is human, that they may be better pre"pared for the disinterested love of their fpecies." There are those who are affiduous thus to educate the rifing generation. We hope there are but few of this defcription. We believe and know that there are parents, who, though openly iminoral and impious themfelves, with their children a very different education. Though religious and moral inftruction must come with an ill grace from fuch mouths, yet they choose to put their children under the care of thofe who will pay particular attention to good morals.

I need not ask any of my hearers, whether they would choose to have their children trained up in the fober habits of our ancestors? or in the way of Voltaire and Godwin? If the apoftles of the vileft errour compass fea and land to diffeminate their poison, fhall the friends of truth provide our children and youth with no antidote against the poifon? Should they, by means of early inftruction, acquire a bias to the fide of piety and found morals, and an averfion to licentious principles and conduct, Satan and his fervants