The DAUGHTER.

AVING in the first volume treated of the several vices that are apt to corrupt Hlife in general, but always with a parti cular view to the fofter fex, I fhall now addrefs myself to them in the several re

lations of Daughter, Wife, Mother, Widow, and Miftrefs; and inquire a little into the extent and exercife of their relative duties, as fuch: Beginning with that of children to their parents.

To our parents we in the first place owe reverence and respect. We must behave ourselves towards them with all humility and obfervance; and muft not, upon any pretence of infirmity in them, defpife or contemn them; either in outward behaviour, or fo much as inwardly in our hearts. If indeed they have infirmities, it must be our business to cover and conceal them, as Shem and Japhet, who covered their father's nakedness, while the accurft Cham difclofed it. This must be done in fuch a manner as even themselves might not behold it. We are, as much as may be, to keep ourselves from looking on thofe nakedneffes of our fathers, which VOL. II.

B

may

may tempt us to think irreverently of them. This is very contrary to the practice of too many children, who do not only publish and deride the infirmities of their parents, but pretend they have those infirmities which they have not. There is commonly fuch a pride and headiness in youth, that they cannot bear fubmiffion to the counfels and cirections of their elders, and therefore to shake them off, are willing to have them pass for the effects of dotage, when they are indeed the fruits of fobriety and experience. "Hearken to thy father "that begat thee," fays the wife man, and defpife "not thy mother when she is old " But the youth of our age fet up for wifdom the quite contrary way, and think that by defpifing and ridiculing their parents, they fhall acquire the reputation of wits. If fuch will not prac

66

tife Solomon's exhortations, let them remember his threats. "The eye that mocketh his father, and defpifeth to obey his mother, the ravens of the valley fhall pluck it out, and the young eagles shall eat it.

Love is another duty which we owe our parents: we are to be heartily defirous of all manner of good to them, and to abhor to do any thing that may grieve or difquiet them. This will appear by common gratitude, when it is remembered what our parents have done for us, how they were not only the inftruments of bringing us into the world, but alfo of futaining and fupporting us after. Certainly they that rightly weigh the cares and fears that go to the bringing up of a child, will judge the love of that child to be but a tolerable feturn for them. This love is to be expreft in all kindness of behaviour. We muft gladly and readily do those things which may bring joy and comfort to them. And since the debt a child owes a parent is fo great, that he can never hope himfelf to discharge it, he is therefore to call on God by prayer, and to beg of him that he will reward all the good his parents have done for him, by multiplying his bleffings upon them. What shall we then say to thofe children, who, inftead of calling on Heaven for bleflings

bleffings on their parents, ranfack hell for curfes on them, and pour out the blackeft execrations against them? This is fo horrid a thing, that one would think there needed no perfuafive against it; because none could be fo vile as to fall into it. But we fee God himself, who best knows mens hearts, faw it poffible, and therefore laid the heaviest punishment upon it. “He that curfeth "his father or mother, let him die the death." And alas! our daily experience tells us, that this curfing of parents is not only poffible, but common. How many children are there, that either through impatience of the government, or greedinefs of the poffeffions of their parents, have wifhed their deaths? Let thofe that do it remember, how fairly and plaufibly they carry it before men, there is one who fees thofe fecret wishes of their hearts, and in his fight they affuredly pafs for thofe heinous offenders, curfers of their parents, whofe punishment it is to die the death. Let them confider, that God hath as well the power of punishing as of feeing, and therefore fince he has pronounced death to be the reward of that fin, it is not unreasonable to expect he may himself inflict it: that they who watch for the death of their parents, may untimely meet their own. Whereas to thofe that honour their father and their mother, is promised the bleffing of long life.

Another duty we owe to parents is obedience. This is not only injoined us by the fifth commandment, but exprefsly in other places of the Scripture. "Children, obey your parents in the Lord." We owe them obedience in all things, unless where their commands are contrary to the commands of God, in which case our duty to God muft be preferred. If any parent shall be fo wicked as to require his child to fteal, or lye, or to do any unlawful thing, the child then offends not against his duty, if he difobeys that command. On the contrary, he must difobey, or elfe he offends against a higher duty, that which he owes to God his heavenly father. However, when it is thus neceffary to refufe obedience, it fhould be done in

B 2

fuch

tis

fuch a modeft refpectful manner, that it may appear confcience only, and not ftubbornness, which moves him to it. But when the commands are lawful, that is, when the thing commanded is either good, or not evil, there the child is bound to obey, be the command, in a weightier or lighter matter. How little this duty is regarded, is too manifeft every where in the world, where parents generally have their children no longer under command, than they are under the rod. When they are once grown up. they think themfelve free from all manner of obedience to them, or if fome continue to pay it, yet let the motive of it be examined, and it will in too many be found to be wordly prudence. They fear to difplease their parents, not for fear of difpleafing God, but left they should fhorten their hand towards them, and they fhould lofe fomewhat by it. How few are there that obey purely becaufe obedience is a du'y? How few that are as much afraid of the curfe of difobedience, as of the misfortune of difinheritance.

Children never more highly difobey their parents than in marrying against their confent. They are fo much the goods, the Poffeffions of their fathers and mothers, that they cannot, without a kind of theft, give away themfelves. They must have the allowance of those that have the right in them, and therefore we fee under the Mofaical law, the maid that had made any vow, was not fuffered to perform it, unlefs fhe had the parents confent, whofe right was thought of force enough to cancel and make void the obligation even of a vow; which ought to be fo much confidered by us, as to keep us from making any fuch, by which that right is infringed.

Another duty to parents is to affift them in all their wants, of what kind foever, whether weakness and fickness of body, decay of understanding, or poverty and lowness in eftate: in all thefe the child is bound according to his ability, to relieve and affift them. For the two former, weakness of body and infirmity of mind, none can doubt of the duty, when they remem

ber

ber how every child did in his infancy receive the very fame benefit from their parents. The child had then no ftrength to fupport, no understanding to guide itself, the care of the parents was fain to fupply both thefe to it; and therefore, in common gratitude, whenever either of these becomes the parents cafe, as fometimes by great age, or fome accident, both do, the child is to perform the fame offices back again to them. As to that of relieving their poverty, there is the very fame obligation to that with the former: It being but an act of justice to fuftain your parents, as your parents fultained you. Befides, Chrift teaches us that this is contained within the precept of honouring our parents; for when he accufes the Pharifees of rejecting the commandment of God, to cleave to their own tradition, he inftances in this particular concerning the relieving of parents, where it is manifeft, that this is a partof he duty injoined by the Fifth Commandment: as may be feen at large in the feventh chapter of St. Mark.

How then fhall thofe anfwer it, who deny relief to their poor parents? who cannot part with their own exceffes and fuperfluities, which are indeed their own fins, to fatisfy the neceffities of thofe to whom they owe their being? Some are fo very wicked, that out of pride they fcorn to own their parents in their poverty. Themselves being advanced to dignity and wealth, they often think it a difparagement to them to look on their parents in their low condition, it being, as they think, the betraying to the world the meanness of their birth; and thus the poor parent fares the worfe for the profperity of the child. This is fuch a pride and unnaturalnefs together, as will furely find a fharp vengeance from God, it being a double fin, and double, without repentance, will be the punishment.

No unkindness, no fault of the parents, can acquit the child of this duty; tho' the gratitude due to a kind parent be a very forcible motive to make the child pay it, yet that is not the only nor chiefeft ground of it,

B 3

which