Fath. But what is this to my correcting my son;

Neigh. I shall bring it home directly to you: if any of these predominate inclinations govern you,-pray how can you, under their evil influence, pretend to be a good governor of your children? Is it possible, that which is evil in itself can direct you to that which is good? Can you gather grapes of these thorns,-or figs of these thistles? Can these corrupt trees bring forth good fruit? Can you, under the influence of a demented 'rage, give a child a paternal, a conscientious correction? Is it a temper fit to go about that work in? Can you think to bring your child to himself, when you are not master of your own self? Can you reason with the youth, when you are out of your reason yourself? Passion divests the soul of" the use of its reason for the time: and is a man that cannot act his own reason, a proper person to reduce a rebellious child to reason? Nature forbids it, as well as religion,-it cannot be.

Fath. But I am not so out of myself in my passion, as you may imagine.

Neigh. I'll suppose you are not, first for argument sake; and then prove you are afterwards, for your conviction. 1. Suppose you are not,—that is, you are not so much out of yourself as I have mentioned; if so, it is because you are not in so great a passion, or so much moved as those that are so. But as every such passion, is a degree of that madness, you are more or less unfit to correct your children while it lasts, as that passion is more or less hot,—but still absolutely unfit, while one grain of passion remains; and you ought by no means so much as speak to, much less strike your child.

Fath. What, must I neglect correcting him then when he is faulty?

Neigh. No, no, by no means.

Fath. What then? Your rules are very obscure,-1 must correct him, and I must not correct him; perhaps I am in a passion, his wickedness has provoked me; I am justly angry with him,-nor is it in the power of flesh and

blood to avoid being angry at such obstinate, rebellious, insolent carriage: it is my duty to resent it, and it is my duty to correct him, and you say, I must not correct him, because I am angry, though it is my duty to be angry too at such crimes; this does not hang together at all.

Neigh. You crouded it too fast together,—distinguish fairly, and you will see your duty clearly: you are allowed to abhor the crime which your son may have committed; a just detestation of sin is no part of your passion; that is, as before, to be angry and sin not. But you must distinguish between abhorring the sin, and being in a rage at the child; all your anger against the child, that is not founded upon a paternal pity, and a zeal for his amendment, is sinful,— It is a degree of rage; and so far as you suffer that rage to influence you in his correction, so far you sin. Pity, not passion, should influence you in the conduct of your child, and a sincere zeal for his soul's good, should be the only motive of correction; all the warmth that is not founded upon this principle is sinful, and is a mere gratification of your own rage,-nor does it deserve the name of correction; it is a quarrel with your child, not a paternal action it is a tyrannical usurpation, not a patriarchal or paternal exercise of legal authority.

Fath. Well then, I must not meddle with him in my passion, must I ?

Neigh. No, not touch him.

Fath. And I am sure I can't when I am out of my passion; so the boy mnst be ruined.

Neigh. No, the boy must not be ruined neither,—and let such parents remember, that if they neglect the due government of their families, there is a hand that can remove them from the seat of that government, and provide better and more faithful overseers in their room, that the children may be taken care of,-and I question not, but many fathers are removed from their families, either by death or disaster, by the direction of providence, that their children may fall into better hands.

Fath. I do confess I see some weight in the direction, but no capacity, of taking the counsel,-what must I do when I am provoked beyond the power of all the patience I am trusted with?

Neigh. Do! why forbear till your passion is over: retire yourself from the provocation, or lift up your heart to God, to grant you power to restrain your own passions, that you may not do an unseemly improper thing in your rage,—and when you are perfectly calm, when your blood flows cooly, and your pulse beats truc, then take your son to task, reason with him, argue with him, persuade, exhort, threaten, and punish, as your cool thoughts think proper, and not the last otherwise than as necessity and duty oblige.

Fath. You are right indeed, but who can practise this rule? No flesh and blood can pretend to it.

Neigh. Whoever it pleases God to influence with a sense of its being a duty, will practise it; and I need not put you in mind that every christian ought to study his duty, and conscientiously endeavour to perform it: nor need I tell you, that we ought to pray daily to God to teach us our duty, and for his assistance to enable us to do it in such a method you cannot doubt but you shall be assisted; nay, you may venture to say, you will practsie it, God assisting, according to that text, Teach me thy way O Lord, I will walk in thy truth, Psalm 119.

Fath. But do you not carry it too far? Sure I may be a little angry, a little in a passion, and not be so unfit to correct as I should be, if it came on to what you call rage: I may talk to the boy, and correct him too without sin, though I am a little moved.

Neigh. I affirm the contrary, it is against the nature of the thing: correction, I tell you, is an act of love, pity, duty; duty to God, duty as a parent, as a christian; love to the child, to his soul, to his body,-it is the greatest instance of paternal affection; it is the highest token of a sincere concern for his prosperity here, and his salvation

hereafter, it is an instance of zeal for the honour of God and of religion; for the preservation of virtue and humanity; what concern can the passion of a man have in these things? We know, says the scripture, that the wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God. The rage and fury with which men correct slaves, is acted upon another principle it aims at breaking the spirit, subduing the will, and obtaining an absolute entire subjection in the poor bond's. man, to the tyrannical authority of his patron: there is neither concern for soul or body expected in the muster; no love to his slave's person, or concern for his future state; nothing is in view but to have his work done, and his commands be without reserve obeyed: to treat a child with passion and rage, is the same thing as other men treat slaves, But the nature of correction, as it respect a father to a child, or a christian master to a servant, is quite different,--passion can bear no share in it. Nor ought you to touch the child, while one spark of the flame is left unextinguished.

Fath. What rule have you for this strict injunction? 1 see nothing of it in the scripture.

Neigh. I readily acknowledge that the scripture seems to be more silent in this case than any other of like consequence, and yet the scripture is not altogether empty of directions: but it is true, that children are so apt to lay hold of every thing that abates the subjection they are commanded to be in to their parents, that the wisdom of the apostles was not a little seen, in touching so lightly the danger of parent's mistakes, in the manner of exercising their authority. But the nature of the thing directs it so evidently, that there seems to be the less occasion,-the natural affection to, and the concern and care of all fathers for the welfare of their children, makes it rational, that correction must consist with those tendernesses; and what share have our passions in those paternal principles? How does the rage of the man, as a man, consist with his bowels, as a father?

Fath. Well, but a little anger may be so natural that it cannot be avoided.

Neigh. I cannot abate a tittle: no anger! no not the least, in correction; the nature of the office of a father is inconsistent with it: it may be correction indeed, but it is not paternal,-a father's correction must be all in love, mere kindness and tenderness; if one spark of anger be in your breast, touch not your child, at your peril be it: the principles are directly contrary, and will clash; in a word, they cannot be consistent one with another. Besides, by being calm and cool in your correction, you leave room for the pleading of your children; perhaps, sometimes for a just vindication, which in your passion you will not allow : perhaps, sometimes you may see less reason for correction than at first you imagined, and the blows might be spared; for parents, like the great parent of the world, should not willingly correct,-should be always glad to find, that the child did not deserve what he thought at first he did : correction is an act of necessity, not of satisfaction, and by ȧ wise and tender parent, is done with reluctance, not with delight.

Fath. But you forget what I said, I say you do not allow for unavoidable anger; there may be some passions rise either by the grossness of the offence, or the frequent repetition of it, which may force anger, so that a man cannot help it.

Neigh. It is true, a man may be so provoked, that he cannot help being angry; but he can help correcting his child, while that anger is upon him,--he may defer the execution, when he cannot defer the sentence. Nor can I say, but even that anger that cannot be helped or suppressed, is an evil, be the cause ever so provoking: but to go about to correct the child while the fit of anger is not off, is making that smaller evil a very great one. I once saw a father act in a manner which I would recommend as an example to all Christian parents: he was provoked exceedingly by an insolent and obstinate child, who in a