of the Saviour, when after having fed the multitude, he directed the disciples to gather up the fragments, that nothing be lost, taken in connection with the circumstances under which, and with the character of the person by whom, they were uttered. At those times, when the provisions, by which life is sustained are scarce, and when men feel that, if the scanty supply be exhausted, it is uncertain whence it can be replenished, at such times, all will say, "gather up the fragments that nothing be lost," at such times all would regard the practice of economy as a solemn duty, and would feel that the individual who, under such circumstances, could be wasteful or extravagant, would be doing wrong, would be guilty of sin. But still, the feeling is, that the duty grows out of the peculiar circumstances, and that, if these circumstances could once be changed, the duty would be no longer binding. But not so thought our Saviour. He was sur

He

rounded by about five thousand men. made them seat themselves upon the grass, and then took the five barley loaves and the two small fishes, and, after giving God thanks, he break and distributed them to the hungry multitude. All partook and were filled. For, by the exertion of miraculous power, he so increased the quantity, that there was enough, and more than enough for all. By this act, he shewed that he possessed the power of supplying the wants of his followers, to any extent. And, from what we learn from other parts of his history, we have reason, I think, to believe that, whenever it might be necessary and consistent with the spirit of his mission, and with his duty to God, he could, by a single word, change the very stones around him into bread to feed the hungry and fainting crowds, who might throng him. The first promptings of those who should act only from impulse and feeling, would be to scatter the fragments to

the four winds of heaven, or to leave them to their fate upon the spot where the multitude had been fed. What need such would say, what need can there be of gathering up and saving these insignificant and broken bits. He, who has, in this wonderful, this miraculous manner, supplied our wants, must be possessed of inexhaustible resources, and can, at any moment, and from the most unpromising materials, supply them again. By a single word, he can change the stones around us into nourishing food, and, without even a word, but by a single exercise of his power, he can increase the smallest supply to an abundance. What need, then, of gathering up and saving these broken bits, these fragments of the loaves and fishes? And indeed, if we look at the subject only in relation to want and necessity, may we not all, in truth, say, what need of gathering up and saving these fragments? But not so said our Saviour. His direction

was, "Gather up the fragments." And why so? Was this done that the multi

tude, by seeing the twelve baskets filled with the fragments, might be more deeply impressed with the miracle which had been wrought? This was, undoubtedly, one of the effects produced by the act upon their minds. But, if we believe that our Saviour spoke in the plain honesty of his soul, we must regard that, as the reason of the direction, which he assigned as such," that nothing be lost."

From this single incident, we may learn, I think, one of the general principles of Christ's character, and may conclude that it was with him a pervading feeling, a fixed principle, that nothing, adapted to be useful, is ever to be wasted. Nay further, may we not conclude that, with him, it was a pervading feeling, a fixed principle, that no power or facility in creating supplies, can ever warrant or justify a waste even of seemingly unimportant frag

ments, which can be rendered useful. Such, I believe, to be a principle of Christ's character. And, as his character is ever to be regarded as a living representation of his religion, I believe this to be a principle of his religion. And therefore I draw the conclusion that, under the christian dispensation, every one, whatever may be his circumstances, how great soever may be his wealth, how unlimited soever his resources, is solemnly bound to practice, at all times, the virtue of economy.

My second argument, in proof of my position, I draw from the generally admitted principle of stewardship, in regard to property. I say the generally admitted principle. For, I presume, that all who believe that there is a God, believe, also, that men are dependent upon and accountable to God. But if these two points, dependance and accountability, be admitted, it will follow, as a natural, if not as a necessary inference, that men are but stew