spirit against what they are pleased to call a whimsical or superstitious prejudice. There are professors of religion among those who take the lead in fashionable life: they seem to breathe freely only when they are in circles of gayety; and if they were taken out of the ranks of pleasure, the language of their hearts, if not of their lips, would doubtless be, "ye have taken away my gods, and what have I more?" I am willing to hope that the number to whom this can apply, in all its extent, is, at this day, comparatively small-certainly it is becoming smaller; but there are many who are ready to make a partial compromise with conscience on this subject; and who, in keeping aloof from the extreme of too great strictness, slide too near, to say the least, to the confines of the opposite error. these different classes, if their conduct is a fair basis for an opinion, have the world, in some form or other, uppermost. They are quite absorbed with the things which are seen and are temporal. Their conversation is not in heaven. It breathes not the spirit of heaven. It does not relate to the enjoyments of heaven, or the means of reaching those enjoyments. The world take knowledge of them, not that they have been with Jesus, but that like themselves, they love to grovel amidst the things below.

That the evil which I have here described existing in a church, must be a formidable obstacle to a revival of religion, none of us probably will doubt. Let us see for a moment, how it is so.

The individuals concerned constitute the church, or a portion of the church-the very body in which, according to the common course of God's providence, we are to expect a revival to begin. But the prevalence of this worldly spirit of which I have spoken, is the very opposite of the spirit of a revival; and can have no more communion with it than light with darkness. So long as it exists then, it

must keep out that general spirituality and active devotedness to the cause of Christ in which a revival, as it respects Christians, especially consists; and of course must prevent all that good influence, which a revival in the church would be fitted to exert upon the world.

But suppose there be in the church those who are actually revived, and who have a right estimate of their obligations to labor and pray for the special effusions of divine influences, how manifest is it that this spirit of worldliness must, to a great extent, paralyze their efforts? How painfully discouraging to them must it be, to behold those who have pledged themselves to co-operate with them in the great cause, turning away to the world, and virtually giving their sanction to courses of conduct directly adapted to thwart their benevolent efforts! And how naturally will careless sinners, when they are pressed by the tender and earnest expostulations of the faithful to flee from the wrath to come, shelter themselves in the reflection that there is another class of professors who estimate this matter differently, and whose whole conduct proclaims that they consider all this talk about religion as unnecessary-not to say fanatical. I know that a few Christians, have, in some instances, been enabled by God's special blessing, to stem such a current as this: and have been permitted to witness the most glorious results from their persevering labors; but I know too that nothing is more disheartening to a few devoted disciples of Christ--nothing more directly fitted to render their exertions of no effect, than for the mass of professors around them to be buried up in the world; to be found with them at the communion table commemorating the death of Christ, but never to go with them in any effort for the advancement of his cause.

But while this spirit of worldliness mocks in a great degree the efforts of the faithful, it exerts a direct and most

powerful influence upon those who are glad to find apologies to quiet themselves in sin. I know that it is a miserable fallacy that the inconsistent lives of professed Christians constitute any just ground of reproach against the gospel; nevertheless, it is a fact of which no one can be ignorant, that there are multitudes who look at the gospel only as it is reflected in the character of its professors; and especially in their imperfections and backslidings. These are all strangely looked at, as if religion were responsible for them; and whether it be a particular act of gross transgression, or a general course of devotedness to the world, it will be almost sure to be turned to account in support of the comfortable doctrine that religion does not make men the better, and therefore it is safe to let it alone altogether or else it is inferred that, if religion be any thing, it may be safely delayed; for it is so small a matter that it may be taken up at any time or possibly the individual referring his own character to the low standard which he may observe among professors, may charitably conclude that he is already a Christian; and thus by playing off upon himself the arts of self-deception, may lull himself into a lethargy, out of which he will never awake, until he is roused by the light of eternity both to conviction and despair. None surely will question that whatever exerts such an influence as this on the careless and ungodly, must constitute a powerful barrier to a revival of religion.

But this worldly spirit is to be looked at moreover in the relation which it bears to the Spirit of God; for God's Spirit, let it always be remembered, is the grand agent in every revival. What then do professing Christians virtually say to the Holy Spirit when they lose sight of their obligations, and open their hearts and their arms to the objects and interests of the world? Do they thereby invite him to come, and be with them, and dwell with them, and to diffuse his

convincing and converting influences all around? Or do they not rather proclaim their indifference, to say the least, to his gracious operations; and sometimes even virtually beseech him to depart out of their coasts? But it is the manner of our God to bestow his Spirit in unison with the desires and in answer to the prayers of his people—can we suppose then, that where the spirit of the world has taken the place of the spirit of prayer, and the enjoyments of the world are more thought of than the operations of the Holy Ghost-can we suppose, I say, that He who is jealous of his honor, will send down those gracious influences which are essential to a revival of religion?

Whether, therefore, we consider a worldly spirit among professed Christians, in its relation to themselves, to their fellow professors who are faithful, to the careless world, or to the Spirit of God, we cannot fail to perceive that it must stand greatly in the way of the blessing we are contemplating.

III. The want of a proper sense of personal responsibility among professed Christians, constitutes another obstacle to a revival of religion. You all know how essential it is to the success of any worldly enterprise, that those who engage in it should feel personally responsible in respect to its results. Bring together a body of men for the accomplishment of any object, no matter how important, and there is always danger that personal obligation will be lost sight of; that each individual will find it far easier to do no: thing, or even to do wrong, than if, instead of dividing the responsibility with many, he was obliged literally to bear his own burden. And just in proportion as this spirit pervades any public body, it may reasonably be expected either that they will accomplish nothing, or nothing to any good purpose.

Now let this same spirit pervade a church, or any com

munity of professed Christians, and you can look for nothing better than a similar result. True it is, as we have already had occasion to remark, that, in a revival of religion, there is much of divine agency and of divine sovereignty too; but there is human instrumentality also; and much of what God does is done through his people; and if they remain with their arms folded, it were unreasonable to expect that God's work should be revived. Let each professor regard his own personal responsibility as merged in the general responsibility of the church, and the certain consequence will be that the church as a body will accomplish nothing. Each member may be ready to deplore the prevalence of irreligion and spiritual lethargy, and to acknowledge that something ought to be done in the way of reform; but if, at the same time, he cast his eye around upon his fellow professors, and reflect that there are many to share with him the responsibility of inaction, and that, as his individual exertions could effect but little, so his individual neglect would incur but a small proportion of the whole blame-if he reason in this way, I say, to what purpose will be all his acknowledgments and all his lamentations? In order that God's work may be revived, there must be earnest prayer; but where is the pledge for this, unless his people realize their individual obligations? There must also be diligent, and persevering, and self-denied effort; but where are the persons who are ready for this, provided each one feels that he has no personal responsibility? Who will warn the wicked of his wicked way, and exhort him to turn and live? Who will stretch out his hand to reclaim the wandering Christian, or open his lips to stir up the sluggish one? Who, in short, will do any thing that God requires to be done in order to the revival of his work, if the responsibility of the whole church is not regarded as the responsibility of the several individuals