by it? Were the solution of this question, What is implied in being rich? left to those who are inordinately attached to the goods of this life, the answers would be strangely various; as each would give a definition according to the quantum of the covetous principle which ruled his own. heart. We must, therefore, find some general definition which will explain the import of the word and determine its meaning.

As riches are put in opposition to poverty; and we know that poverty implies being destitute of the necessaries, conveniences, and comforts of life; then we may safely infer, that to be rich implies being possessed of all the necessaries, all the conveniences, and all the comforts of life. He who possesses these is indisputably a rich man. But what are these? By the necessaries of life we must understand, a sufficiency of nourishing meat and drink, with such clothing as is suited to the state of the body, the nature of the climate, and a man's circumstances in life. By the conveniences of life, a proper habitation, decent furniture, and suitable attendance. And by the comforts of life, we may understand what pleases the eye and gratifies all those reasonable desires, which contribute in the most effectual manner to promote the health of the body, preserve it in vigour, and prolong its life. A man, it is true, may possess all these and not think himself rich, but be a continual prey to earnest longings after more; for,

Crescit amor nummi quantum ipsa pecunia crescit, the love of money increases in proportion to what a man gains, but these unreasonable desires do not belong to the question, 1st, Because the gratification of them could not contribute to his happiness, who has already all the necessaries, conveniences, and comforts of life; and 2dly, Because such gratification would infallibly injure, if not ruin him, as whatever is forced upon nature beyond what it needs, must impair the health, enfeeble the constitution, and, in the end, destroy life. In the above sense

a man may be innocently rich: but there is a sense in which to be rich is criminal: i. e. when a man gets all he can, suppose even by honest means; and though he acquires much more than he needs, yet keeps all he gets: and he is more especially criminal when he expends any portion of his affluence on foolish, unreasonable, and sinful desires, neglecting the poor in whose behalf God has put him in trust with this extra property. How awful are riches when we find they are so difficult to be managed, and what a most solemn account must be given of them to God in the day of judgment! The person in the text is said to have been rich: to this circumstance our Lord adds nothing: he neither says that he was born to a large estate, nor that he had acquired one by unjust means; nor that he was proud, insolent, and oppressive in the possession of it: nothing of this kind is intimated in the text, it would be utterly improper to attempt to deduce it by way of inference. This alone appears pretty plain he got all he could, kept all to himself, and lived without God in the world: This was the first step to, and cause of his perdition.

2. The matter of his clothing should be particularly considered. The text says, He was clothed with purple and fine linen. Purple, (Togoʊpa) Pliny says, is a species of marine shell fish, which has a white vein between its jaws, in which a small portion of that precious liquor is contained, which was made use of to dye garments.* The finest species of this shell fish was found at Tyre: hence the Tyrian Purple so celebrated through all antiquity; and this was so costly, that the same author tells us a pound of it could not be bought for a thousand denarii,† equal to 317. 5s. sterling. This costly clothing was worn principally by emperors, princes, and generals; and

*Sed purpuræ florem illum tingendis expetitum vestibus, in mediis habent faucibus: liquoris hic minimi est in candida vena unde pretiosus ille bibitur, &c. Hist. Nat. lib. ix, cap. 36.

Dibapha Tyria, quæ in libras denariis mille non poterat emi. Hist. Nat. lib. ix, c. 39.

was originally used as an emblem of illustrious birth; or, to designate some important office. But in the times of Roman degeneracy, it became an article of dress. He was clothed also, the text says, in fine linen, Budrov. The Byssus, according to Pliny, was a species of fine flax that grew about Elis in Achaia, and was as precious as gold, for a scruple of it, he says, was sold for four denarii,* about 2s. 6d. Calmet contends that the Byssus, called in Hebrew, pra buts, (and mentioned for the first time, 1 Chron. xv, 27, as that with which David was clothed when he brought the Ark from the house of Obededom,) was that silky tuft adhering to the Pinna Magna, a species of large muscle, sometimes more than four feeț in length, and by which it attaches itself to other bodies.† This shell fish, Mr. Tournefort says, is found along the coast of the Mediterranean sea, from Constantinople to Egypt. Of this beautiful substance it is certain, that very splendid garments were made among the ancients; and it is likely that from this the sacerdotal garments of the Jews were made. St. Basil and Procopius particularly mention it. We have thus seen the matter of which the clothing of this rich man was composed: and though the whole was extremely costly, yet it is not intimated that his purple and fine linen were unsuitable to his place, birth, or official dignity. If he were a ruler, his rank in life might have required this clothing: but be this as it may, it is not at all insinuated that he followed any ridiculous fashion, exceeded the bounds of his income, clothed himself at the expense of others, or endeavoured to debauch the heart of the giddy and unexperienced, or ever made his love of dress an agent to greater crimes. Nevertheless, our Lord lays this down as the second cause of *―circa Elim in Achaia genito; quaternis denariis scrupula ejus permutata quondam, ut auri reperio. Ibid. lib. xix, c. 1, in fine.

Harum Pinnarum altitudo aliquando quatuor pedes excedit. Lanam seu Byssum, ex ea parte, qua in terra figitur emittit. Vid. Index Conchylior. N. Gualteri, Tab. lxxviii, fig. A. where the reader may see the figure of this extraordinary shell.

his perdition: He was clothed in purple and fine linen; and probably felt little, if any concern, for those who were destitute of necessary covering.

3. Having examined his clothing, we may next con. sider his daily fare. Though the matter and quality of the first are particularly noticed by our Lord, yet in reference to the second, he says no more than this, that He fared sumptuously every day, ευφραινομένος καθ' ημέραν λαμπρώς. He had splendid feasts daily, accompanied with great hilarity, for this the original word, supgave, imports; and in this sense it is frequently used: See chap. xv, 23; Acts ii, 26, vii, 41; Rom. xv, 10; Gal. iv, 27, &c.

From the whole account it is plain that this man kept what is termed, a good table, and no doubt had constant companions in his daily festivities. But let us inquire how far all this appears from the letter of the text, to be criminal. It is well known that the law of Moses, under which this man lived, forbad nothing but excess in eating and drinking. Indeed, it seems that a person was authorized by that law to enjoy the sweets of an abundance which it promised to those who faithfully observed its precepts. "The Lord shall make thee plenteous in goods, in the fruit of thy cattle, and in the fruit of thy ground, and in the fruit of the land which the Lord sware unto thy fathers to give thee," Deut. xxviii, 11, xxx, 9. "If they obey and serve him, they shall spend their days in prosperity, and their years in pleasures," Job xxxvi, 11. From these and similar promises, it is evident the Jews were led to expect great temporal prosperity and abund ant pleasure; and therefore, faring sumptuously every day, might be considered by this man in the light of a duty, and not in that of a crime. Besides, it is not said that he ate any kind of food prohibited by the law; nor is he accused of neglecting any of the abstinences or fasts prescribed by it. His daily sumptuous fare is not said to have been carried to any kind of excess; nor to have ministered to any species of debauch. He is not accused

of licentious discourse, of gaming, of frequenting places of illicit entertainment or pleasure; nor of speaking one irreverent word against divine revelation, nor against the providence, ordinances, or people of God. It is not even intimated that he got drunk at his festivities, or held the bottle to his neighbour's head to intoxicate him. In a word, his probity is unimpeached; nor is he even in the most indirect manner accused of any of those crimes which pervert the simple from the way of truth, or injure any of the orders of civil society. As Christ has described this man, does he appear a monster of iniquity as some have represented him? No. He is a comparatively innocent character. Yet in the sight of God he is culpable, deserves hell, and gets it. What then were his crimes? Why, 1st. He was rich. 2dly. He was superbly clothed; and 3dly. He fared sumptuously every day; i. e. He sought his happiness in this life in the gratification of animal desires. He made no provision for his soul, living without God in the world.

Now, as to most this does not appear any sufficient reason why a soul should be sent to hell, because they think, that only the most profane and the most profligate ever go thither, therefore men have toiled from their own conjectures to represent the person in the text as an impious man; an uncharitable, hard-hearted and unfeeling wretch. But of all this, is there one word either spoken or intimated by Christ? Not one. And I again assert it, that it is unjust, unfair, and highly dangerous to put such meanings on the word of God, as it cannot, and will not, by proper construction bear and he that does it does it to the peril of his soul. But let us consider the leading circumstances, and we shall be convinced that our blessed Lord has not represented this man as a mon. ster of inhumanity; but merely as an indolent man, who sought and had his portion in this life, was unconcerned about another, lived without piety to God, and without usefulness to man.