Images de page
PDF
ePub
[ocr errors]

Quest. VIII. May one take a house over another's head (as they speak), or take the land which he is a tenant to, before he be turned out of possession?'

Answ. Not out of a greedy desire to be rich, nor coveting that which is another's: nor yet while he is any way injured by it: nor yet when the act is like to be so scandalous, as to hurt men's souls more than it will profit your body. If you come with the offer of a greater rent than he can give, or than the landlord hath just cause to require of him, to get it out of his hands by over-bidding him, this is mere covetous oppression. But in other cases it is lawful to take the house and land which another tenant hath possession of; as 1. In case that he willingly leave it, and consent. 2. Or if he unwillingly (but justly) be put out; and another tenant must be provided against the time that he is to be dispossessed. 3. Yea, if he be unjustly put out, if he that succeeded him have no hand in it, nor by his taking the house or land do promote the injury, nor scandalously countenance injustice. For when a tenement is void, though by injury, it doth not follow, that no man may ever live in it more but if the title be his that is turned out, then you may not take it of another; because you will possess another man's habitation. But if it should go for a standing rule, that no man may in any case take a house over another man's head, (as country people would have it,) then every man's house and land must be long untenanted, to please the will of every contentious or unjust possessor; and any one that hath no title, or will play the knave, may injure the true owner at his pleasure.

Quest. Ix. May a rich man put out his tenants, to lay their tenements to his own demesnes, and so lay house to house, and land to land?'

Answ. In two cases he may not, 1. In case he injure the tenant that is put out, by taking that from him which he hath right to, without his satisfaction and consent. 2. And in case it really tend to the injury of the commonwealth, by depopulation, and diminishing the strength of it: otherwise it is lawful; and done in moderation by a pious man, may be very convenient; 1. By keeping the land from beggary through the multitudes of poor families, that overset it. 2. By keeping the more servants, among whom he may keep up

a better order and more pious government in his own house, (making it as a church,) than can be expected in poor families; and his servants will (for soul and body) have a much better life, than if they married and had families, and small tenements of their own; but in a country that rather wanteth people, it is otherwise.

[ocr errors]

Quest. x. May one man be a tenant to divers tenements?'

Answ. Yes, if it tend not, 1. To the wrong of any other. 2. Nor to depopulation, or to hinder the livelihood of others, while one man engrosseth more than is necessary or meet: for then it is unlawful.

Quest. XI. 'May one man have many trades or callings?'

Answ. Not when he doth, in a covetous desire to grow rich, disable his poor neighbours to live by him on the same callings, seeking to engross all the gain to himself: nor yet when they are callings which are inconsistent or when he cannot manage one aright, without the sinful neglect of the other. But otherwise it is as lawful to have two trades as

one.

Quest. XII. Is it lawful for one man to keep shops in several market towns?'

Answ. The same answer will serve as to the foregoing question.

CHAPTER XXI.

Cases about, and Directions against, Prodigality and Sinful Wastefulness.

BECAUSE men's carnal interest and sensuality, is predominant with the greatest part of the world, and therefore governeth them in their judgment about duty and sin, it thence cometh to pass that wastefulness and prodigality are easily believed to be faults, so far as they bring men to shame or beggary, or apparently cross their own pleasure or commodity but in other cases, they are seldom acknowledged to be any sins at all; yea, all that are gratified by them, account them virtues, and there is scarce any sin which is so

commonly commended; which must needs tend to the increase of it, and to harden men in their impenitency in it; and verily if covetousness, and selfishness or poverty did not restrain it in more persons than true conscience doth, it were like to go for the most laudable quality, and to be judged most meritorious of present praise and future happiness. Therefore in directing you against this sin, I must first tell you what it is; and then tell you wherein the malignity of it doth consist: the first will be best done in the definition of it, and enumeration of the instances, and examination of each one of them.

Direct. 1. Truly understand what necessary frugality, or parsimony, and sinful wastefulness are.'

Necessary frugality or sparing is an act of fidelity, obedience and gratitude, by which we use all our estates so faithfully for the chief Owner, so obediently to our chief Ruler, and so gratefully to our chief Benefactor, as that we waste it not any other way.

As we hold our estates under God, as Owner, Ruler and Benefactor, so must we devote them to him, and use them for him in each relation: and Christian parsimony cannot be defined by a mere negation of active wastefulness, because idleness itself, and not using it aright, is real wastefulness.

Wastefulness or prodigality is that sin of unfaithfulness, disobedience and ingratitude, by which either by action or omission we misspend or waste some part of our estates to the injury of God, our absolute Lord, our Ruler and Benefactor; that is, besides and against his interest, his command, and his pleasure and glory, and our ultimate end.

These are true definitions of the duty of frugality, and the sin of wastefulness.

Inst. 1. One way of sinful wastefulness is, In pampering the belly in excess, curiosity or costliness of meat or drink, of which I have spoken Chap. viii. Part i.'

Quest. I.

Are all men bound to fare alike? or when is it wastefulness and excess?'

Answ. This question is answered in the foresaid Chapter of Gluttony, Part iv. Tit. 1. 1. Distinguish between men's several tempers, and strength, and appetites. 2.

And between the restraint of want, and the restraint of God's law. And so it is thus resolved:

1. Such difference in quantity or quality as men's health or strength, and real benefit requireth, may be made, by them that have no want.

2. When want depriveth the poor of that which would be really for their health, and strength, and benefit, it is not their duty who have no such want to conform themselves to other men's afflictions; except when other reasons do require it.

3. But all men are bound to avoid real excess in matter, or manner, and curiosity, and to lay out nothing needlessly on their bellies; yea, nothing which they are called to lay out a better way. Understand this answer and it will suf

fice you.

Inst. 11. Another way of prodigality is by needless, costly visits and entertainments.

Quest. JI.

'What cost upon visits and entertainments is unlawful and prodigal?'

Answ. 1. Not only all that which hath an ill original, as pride or flattery of the rich, and all that hath an ill end, as being merely to keep up a carnal, unprofitable interest and correspondency; but also all that which is excessive in degree. I know you will say, But that's the difficulty to know when it is excessive: it is not altogether impertinent to say, when it is above the proportion of your own estate, or the ordinary use of those of your own rank, or when it plainly tendeth to cherish gluttony or excess in others: but these answers are no exact solution. I add therefore, that it is excess when any thing is that way expended, which you are called to expend another way.

Object. But this leaveth it still as difficult as before.' Answ. When in rational probability a greater good may be done by another way of expence, consideratis considerandis;' and a greater good is by this way neglected, then you had a call to spend it otherwise, and this expence is sinful.

[ocr errors]

Object. It is a doubt whether of two goods it be a man's duty always to choose the greater.'

Answ. Speaking of that good which is within his choice, it is no more doubt than whether good be the object of the

will. If God be eligible as good, then the greatest good is most eligible.

Object.' But this is still a difficulty insuperable: how can a man in every action and expence discern which way it is that the greatest good is like to be attained? This putteth a man's conscience upon endless perplexities, and we shall never be sure that we do sin: for when I have given to a poor man, or done some good, for aught I know there was a poorer that should have had it, or a greater good that should have been done.'

Answ. 1. The contrary opinion legitimateth almost all villany, and destroyeth most good works as to ourselves or others. If a man may lawfully prefer a known lesser good before a greater, and be justified because the lesser is a real good, then he may be feeding his horse, when he should be saving the life of his child or neighbour, or quenching a fire in the city, or defending the person of his king: he may deny to serve his king and country, and say, I was ploughing or sowing the while. He may prefer sacrifice before mercy : he may neglect his soul, and serve his body. He may plough on the Lord's day, and neglect all God's worship. A lesser duty is no duty, but a sin, when a greater is to be done. Therefore it is certain that when two goods come together to our choice, the greater is to be chosen, or else we sin. 2. As you expect that your steward should proportion his expences according to the necessity of your business, and not give more for a thing than it is worth, nor lay out your money upon a smaller commodity, while he leaveth your greater business unprovided for: and as you expect that your servant, who hath many things in the day to do, should have so much skill as to know which to prefer, and not to leave undone the chiefest, while he spendeth his time on the least: so doth God require that his servants labour to be so skilful in his service, as to be able to compare their businesses together and to know which at every season to prefer. If Christianity required no wisdom and skill, it were below men's common trades and callings. 3. And yet when you have done your best here, and truly endeavour to serve God faithfully, with the best skill and diligence you have, you need not make it a matter of scrupulosity, perplexity, and vexation: for God accepteth you, and pardoneth your infirmities, and reward

« PrécédentContinuer »