« EelmineJätka »
the degree of knights, not having 1002 yearly in land, shall not wear any cloth above 4 1-2 marks the whole piece. Neither shall they or their females use cloth of gold, silver or embroidery, &c. But esquires, having 2001 per annum or upwards, of rent, may wear cloth of 5 marks: the whole piece of cloth, and they and their females may also wear stuff of silk, silver ribbons, girdles, or furs. Merchants or citizen burgers, and artificers of tradesmen, as well of London as elsewhere, who have goods and chattels of the clear value of 5001 and their females, may wear as is allowed to gentlemen and esquires of 1001 per; annum. And merchant citizens and burgesses, worth above 10002 in goods and chattels, may (and their females) wear the same as gentlemen of 2001 per annum. Knights of 200 marks yearly may wear cloth of six marks the cloth, but no higher; but no cloth of gold, nor furred with ermine: but all knights and ladies having above 400 marks yearly, up to 1000l per annum, may wear as. they please, ermine excepted: and they may wear ornaments of pearl and precious stones for their heads only.. Clerks having degrees in cathedrals, colleges, &c. may wear as knights and esquires of the same income. Plowmen, carters, shepherds, and such like, not having 40s value in goods or chattels, shall wear no sort of cloth but blanket and russet lawn of 12d, and shall wear girdles and belts; and they shall only eat and drink suitable to their stations. And whosoever useth any other apparel than is prescribed in the above laws shail forfeit the same." Vol. III.
THE MISTAKEN DOCTOR.
A LADY being visited with a violent disorder, was under the necessity of applying for me. dical assistance. Her doctor, being a gentleman of great latitude in his religious sentiments, endeavoured, in the course of his attendance, to persuade his patient to adopt his creed as well as to take his medicines. He frequently insisted, with a considerable degree of dogmatism, that repentance and reformation were all that either God or man could require of us, and that consequently there was no necessity for an atonement by the sufferings of the Son of God. As this was a doctrine the lady did not believe, she contented herself with following his medical perscriptions without embracing his religious or rather irreligious creed. On her recovery, she forwarded a note to the doctor, desiring the favour of his company to tea, when it suited his convenience, and requested him to make out his bill. In a short time he made his visit, and, the tea table being removed, she addressed him as follows: “My long illness has occasioned you a number of journeys, and I suppose, doctor, you have procured my medicines at considerable expence." The doctor acknowledged that . “ good drugs were not to be obtained but at a very high price.” Upon which she replied, “I am extremely sorry that I have put you to so much labour and expence, and also promise, that on any future indisposition, I will never trouble you again. So you see that I both repent and reform, and that is all you require.” The doctor immediately, shrugging up his shoul. « ders, exclaimed, “ that will not do for me." The words of the wise are as goads. Ecc. xii. 11.
How many are there, like the above-mentioned gentleman, who mistake on this grand point! but, as Bishop Porteus justly observes (see his sermons, vol. ii, p. 41), “ From whence do they learn that repentance alone will obliterate the stains of past guilt ; will undo every thing they have done amiss; will reinstate them in the favour of God; will make satisfaction to his insulted justice, and secure respect and obedience to his authority, as the moral governor of the world?. Do the scriptures teach them this? No: they plainly tell us, that without shedding of blood there is no remission of sins.' But perhaps they collect it from the very nature of the thing itself. Consider, then, what repentance is. It is nothing more than sorrow for what we have done amiss, and a resolution not to do it again. But can this annihilate what is past? Most assuredly it has no such power. Our former transgressions still remain uncancelled: they are recorded in the books of heaven, and it is not our future good deeds can wipe them out. We may as well affirm,' says a learned divine, 'that our former obedience atones for our present sins, as that our present obedience makes amend for antecedent transgressions.
“ The antient Pagans themselves did not entertain such notions as these. When they had offended their gods, they thought of nothing but oblations, expiations, lustrations, and animal sacrifices. This shews that they believed something else as necessary beside their own repentance and reformation—Nay, some of the greatest and wisest, and best among them, declared in express terms, that there was wanting some universal method of delivering men's souls, which no sect of philosophy had ever ret found out.'” [Porphyry.]
MODESTY. " A JUST and reasonable modesty," says Addison,“ sets off every great talent a man may be possessed of. It heightens all the virtues which it accompanies; like the shades in paintings, it raises and rounds every figure, and makes the colours more beautiful, though not so glaring as they would be without it. Modesty is not only an ornament but a guard to virtue. It is a kind of quick and delicate feeling in the soul, which makes her shrink and withdraw herself from every thing that has danger in it.
“I have read somewhere,” says he, “ in the history of Greece, that the women of the country were seized with an unaccountable melancholy, which disposed several of them to make away with themselves. The senate after having tried many expedients to prevent this self-murder, which was so frequent among them, published an edict, that, if any woman whatever should lay violent hands upon herself, her corpse should be exposed naked in the street, and dragged about the city in the most public manner. This edict immediately put a stop to the practice which was before so common. We may see in this instance the strength of modesty, which was able to overcome the violence of madness and despair.”
Instances of modesty are to be found among the wise and learned, as well as others. The Rev. Mr. Hooker was a man so bashful and modest by natural disposition, that he was not able to outface his own pupils.
Mr. Thomas Gouge, though so great a man, never put any value upon himself, or hunted for applause from man ; and this was very observable in him, that the charities which were procured chiefly by his interest and industry, where he had occasion to speak, or to give an account of them, he would rather impute it to any one that had but the least hand and part in the procuring of them, than assume any thing of it to himself. “ Another instance of his modesty (says Archbishop Tillotson) was, that when he had quitted his living of St. Sepulchre's, upon some dissatisfaction about the terms of conformity, he willingly forebore preaching, saying, “ There was no need of him here in London, where there were so many worthy ministers; and that he thought he might do as much or more good in another way, which could give no offence.”
Modesty may be thought by some a barrier to preferment; but it is not always so; for, as one observes, “there is a call upon mankind to value and esteem those who set a moderate price upon their own merit; and self-denial is frequently attended with unexpected blessings, which, in the end, abundantly recompense such losses as the modest seem to suffer in the ordinary occurrences of life.” Dr. Sanderson was a man of great modesty, and, yet, purely by the