SERMON XXIX.

THE INFLUENCE OF WEALTH.

ECCLESIASTES IX. 16.

THE POOR MAN'S WISDOM IS DESPISED, AND HIS WORDS ARE NOT

HEARD.

THE incidents connected with this scripture very forcibly illustrate the manner in which the world is blinded, and its moral decisions perverted by the influence of wealth or of poverty. There was, says the sacred writer, a little city, and a few men within it; and there came a great king against it and besieged it; and built great bulwarks against it. Now there was found in it a poor wise man, and he by his wisdom delivered the city; yet no man remembered that same poor man. Then, said I, wisdom is better than strength; nevertheless the poor man's wisdom is despised, and his words are not heard.

It comports neither with sound philosophy nor with Christian principle to complain of the distinctions, which inevitably grow out of the possession of different measures of intellectual power, or of the ordinary gifts of providence. The arrangements, by which these distinctions are produced, have their foundation in the counsels of Heaven, and we doubt not that they contribute, where the counsels of Heaven are not counteracted by human perversity, to swell the amount of human happiness. There is, however, no earthly good, no principle of human nature, which may

not be abused. High intellectual endowments may be devoted as well to the service of unprincipled ambition, as to the cause of virtue. Wealth too may be made an instrument of pride, sensuality, oppression and moral death; or it may be the reward of honorable industry and frugality, the minister of personal improvement and comfort, the means of awakening a devout religious gratitude, and of sending needed relief to the poor and distressed. It is the office of the religious instructor both to teach the value and the uses of God's gifts, and to hold up to view the dangers which attend their possession, and the guilt which attaches to the abuse of them. One thing ought ever to be held distinctly in view, and that is, that every gift of God is designed to produce some good moral effect. The moral and religious influence is ever the great thing to be regarded. Other effects may pass away; but moral influences reach the soul, and are to go with it, and to decide its happiness through eternity.

It is my present purpose to consider the moral influence of wealth, and particularly this influence so far as it is dangerous to the cause of Christian virtue. My design, however, is not so much to bring into view the corrupting influence of wealth over those who possess it, as its general influence on society at large in perverting the sentiments of virtue and vice. In this way it is hoped, that instructions may be dispensed not only consistent with the purposes of Christian teaching, but adapted to advance the great and permanent interests of Christian piety. My subject then is the influence, which wealth exerts in corrupting the moral sentiments of men.

1. What I shall offer upon this subject will be founded upon the facts, that mere wealth as such is courted and honored, and that poverty as such is treated with indifference. To illustrate these facts will be my first purpose. I do not mean to assert, that every individual in every community courts and honors wealth as such, or

neglects and despises poverty as such. Yet such is the prevailing sentiment in all communities.

Nor are we disposed to complain that of two men, the one rich and the other poor, but of equal moral worth, the rich man should receive greater honor than the poor man. If the degree of favor, with which the rich man is distinguished, be not excessive, we can very readily perceive that there may be even a moral use in bestowing it. There may at least be something gained to the social interests of man by yielding more honor to him than to the other. But whenever, in such circumstances, one man is courted and the other despised, then there exists palpable injustice, and then the interests of virtue and of religion are endangered. But this is not a full statement of the case. The danger to the moral sentiments of a community arises chiefly from the honor paid to wealth, when it is in the hands of men whose vices are great and notorious. Here is not only respect shown to wealth as such, but to wealth associated with guilt. This is the case, which I wish to place distinctly before you.

The question then is, whether such a state of things does exist. If it exists at all, it may exist in different communities in very different degrees. Where there is comparatively little inequality of property, the moral influence of wealth cannot be so striking as where all the refinements of luxury and taste are exerting their full power. But in all states of civilized society, there is an inequality of condition, and the comparison is made between the rich and the poor. He, who is only able to provide comfortably for the wants of his family, may in one community be denominated rich, and may exert all the influence of wealth, though in another he would be regarded as poor. The moral danger then may be found in some degree in every place, if it exist at all.

Now that there is a strong tendency to honor wealth as such, and to neglect poverty as such, can hardly be

It

doubted. Ask your children, after you have been giving them grave lessons upon the infinite importance of Christian principle and Christian obedience, and upon the comparative worthlessness of all distinctions but those which virtue confers, whether your personal conduct corresponds with these lessons. There is great reason to fear that many a child, even of Christian parents, will have practical objections to such lessons, arising out of the very manner, in which they have seen the virtuous and vicious regarded by those from whom these lessons have been received. will be no surprising thing, if they should have seen those, who are distinguished by wealth, though indifferent to religion, and even notorious for their vices, courted and honored, while the poor man, though of equal intellectual endowments, and of a pure, blameless and holy life, has been regarded with entire indifference and even contempt. It will require no great sagacity to find examples like this; and they go much farther than this. How often even with those, who profess to be religious, is wealth made to outweigh all moral qualities in the arrangements which they make for their children! Poverty casts a shade over every fine trait of character, and wealth conceals the most hideous moral deformities. Not only so, the habits of society are generally such, that many vices, which in the poor are regarded as odious and detestable, are easily overlooked and pardoned in those, on whom the sun of prosperity shines. Is it not so? And might we not make our statement still stronger than we have attempted to do?

2. It must then be important to inquire what must be the moral influence of such a state of things.

We will endeavor to place this subject in the clearest possible light. Suppose then a family of children to be guided by parents, who feel deeply the worth of religious principles, and whose hopes for themselves and their offspring are built on the influence of these principles in forming the character. Suppose that these children see

nothing in the domestic circle, which is unfriendly to the delicacy of their moral feelings. They, while thus guarded, while thus instructed, encouraged and aided, both by precept and example, are in a situation favorable to virtue. The influence, to which they are subjected, is all of one character; it is not contradictory and embarrassing, but harmonious and all tending to the same results. But these children are soon to see society in its various forms. How will their moral sensibilities be shocked, when they first behold prosperous wealth courted, and pious poverty treated with neglect, when they first witness the distinction between vice in mean apparel, and vice set off by the showy trappings of wealth! They may, indeed, be told that this honor paid to wealth is mere external, heartless homage; that the virtuous poor man has still a deeper hold upon veneration and respect than his rich and profligate neighbor. It may be so. But, if it be so, what influence will this fact have upon the moral sentiments of a community? Little or none. The honor paid to wealth, whether deserved or not, is real. It brings to him who enjoys it, real advantages. It is the same to him, as if it were the homage of the heart, and it will be regarded as the same. What then must be the moral danger of those, who are now supposed to witness this departure from the strict demands of moral principle, nay, of common justice? The world will be constantly pouring upon them an influence, which is adapted to confound the distinctions between right and wrong; and is there no danger, when this influence comes to them with all the dazzling splendor of wealth, that they will learn to regard virtue as of inferior worth, and to unite in paying their worship to the god, who rewards with popular favor so many thousands around them?

If this be the tendency of the public sentiment, as it communicates its polluting influence to those who have been carefully guarded by the just estimates and pious