The devils believe.
Ib. p. 166.
Hence learn that true conversion is not so slight a work as we
commonly account it. It is not the outward change of some bad customs,
which gains the name of a reformed man in the ordinary dialect; it is
new birth and being, and elsewhere called a new creation. Though it
be but a change in qualities, yet it is such a one, and the
qualities so far distant from what they before were, &c.
I dare not affirm that this is erroneously said; but it is one of the
comparatively few passages that are of service as reminding me that it
is not the Scripture that I am reading. Not the qualities merely, but
the root of the qualities is trans-created. How else could it be a
birth,—a creation?
Ib. p. 170.
This natural life is compared, even by natural men, to the vainest
things, and scarce find they things light enough to express it vain;
and as it is here called grass, so they compare the generations of men
to the leaves of trees. * * * Man that is born of a woman is of few
days, and full of trouble. He cometh forth like a flower and is cut
down. Job xiv. 1, 2. Psalm xc. 12; xxxix. 4.
It is the fashion to decry scholastic distinctions as useless
subtleties, or mere phantoms—
entia logica, vel etiam verbalia
solum
. And yet in order to secure a safe and Christian
interpretation to these and numerous other passages of like phrase and
import in the Old Testament, it is of highest concernment that we should
distinguish the personeity or spirit, as the source and principle of
personality, from the person itself as the particular product at any one
period, and as that which cannot be evolved or sustained but by the
co-agency of the system and circumstances in which the individuals are
placed. In this latter sense it is that
man
is used in the
Psalms, in Job, and elsewhere—and the term made synonymous with flesh.
That which constitutes the spirit in man, both for others and itself, is
the real man; and to this the elements and elementary powers contribute
its bulk (
Greek: tò
videri et tangi
) wholly, and its phenomenal
form in part, both as co-efficients, and as conditions. Now as these are
under a law of vanity and incessant change,
Greek: tà màe ónta, all' aèi ginómena
—so must all be, to the production and continuance of
which they are indispensable. On this hangs the doctrine of the
resurrection of the body, as an essential part of the doctrine of
immortality;—on this the Scriptural (and only true and philosophical)
sense of the soul,
psyche
or life, as resulting from the
continual assurgency of the spirit through the body;—and on this the
begetting of a new life, a regenerate soul, by the descent of the divine
Spirit on the spirit of man. When the spirit by sanctification is fitted
for an incorruptible body, then shall it be raised into a world of
incorruption, and a celestial body shall burgeon forth thereto, the germ
of which had been implanted by the redeeming and creative Word in this
world. Truly hath it been said of the elect:—They fall asleep in earth,
but awake in heaven. So St. Paul expressly teaches: and as the passage
(1.
Cor
. xv. 35—54,) was written for the express purpose of
rectifying the notions of the converts concerning the Resurrection, all
other passages in the New Testament must be interpreted in harmony with
it. But John, likewise,—describing the same great event, as subsequent
to, and contra-distinguished from, the partial or millennary
Resurrection—which (whether we are to understand the Apostle
symbolically or literally) is to take place in the present
world,—beholds
a new earth
and
a new heaven
as antecedent
to, or coincident with, the appearance of the New Jerusalem,—that is,
the state of glory, and the resurrection to life everlasting. The old
earth and its heaven had passed away from the face of Him on the throne,
at the moment that it gave up the dead.
Rev
. xx.-xxi.
Ib. pp. 174-5.
But the word of the Lord endureth for ever.
And with respect to those learned men that apply the text to God, I
remember not that this abiding for ever is used to express
God's eternity in himself.
No; nor is it here used for that purpose; but yet I cannot doubt but
that either the Word,
Greek: Ho Lógos en archae
, or the Divine
promises in and through the incarnate Word, with the gracious influences
proceeding from him, are here meant—and not the written
Greek:rháemata
or Scriptures.
Ib. p. 194.
If any one's head or tongue should grow apace, and all the rest stand
at a stay, it would certainly make him a monster; and they are no
other that are knowing and discovering Christians, and grow daily in
that, but not at all in holiness of heart and life, which is the
proper growth of the children of God.
Father in heaven, have mercy on me! Christ, Lamb of God, have mercy on
me! Save me, Lord, or I perish! Alas! I am perishing.
Ib. p. 200.
A well-furnished table may please a man, while he hath health and
appetite; but offer it to him in the height of a fever, how unpleasant
it would be then! Though never so richly decked, it is then not only
useless, but hateful to him. But the kindness and love of God is then
as seasonable and refreshing to him, as in health, and possibly more.
To the regenerate;—but to the conscious sinner a source of terrors
insupportable.
Ib. p. 211.
These things hold likewise in the other stones of this building,
chosen before time: all that should be of this building are
fore-ordained in God's purpose, all written in that book beforehand,
and then in due time they are chosen, by actual calling, according to
that purpose, hewed out and severed by God's own hand from the quarry
of corrupt nature;—dead stones in themselves, as the rest, but made
living by his bringing them to Christ, and so made truly
precious, and accounted precious by him that hath made them so.
Though this is not only true, but a most important truth, it would yet
have been well to have obviated the apparent carnal consequences.
Ib. p. 216.
All sacrifice is not taken away; but it is changed from the offering
of those things formerly in use, to spiritual sacrifices. Now these
are every way preferable; they are easier and cheaper to us, and yet
more precious and acceptable to God.
Still understand,—to the regenerate. To others, they are not only not
easy and cheap, but unpurchaseable and impossible too. O God have mercy
upon me!
Ib. p. 229.
Though I be beset on all hands, be accused by the Law, and mine own
conscience, and by Satan, and have nothing to answer for myself; yet
here I will stay, for I am sure in him there is salvation, and no
where else.
"Here I
will
stay." But alas! the poor sinner has forfeited the
powers of willing; miserable wishing is all he can command. O, the
dreadful injury of an irreligious education! To be taught our prayers,
and the awful truths of religion, in the same tone in which we are
taught the Latin Grammar,—and too often inspiring the same sensations
of weariness and disgust!
Vol. II. p. 242.
And thus are reproaches mentioned amongst the sufferings of Christ in
the Gospel, and not as the least; the railings and mockings that were
darted at him, and fixed to the Cross, are mentioned more than the
very nails that fixed him. And (Heb. xii. 2,) the shame
of the Cross, though he was above it, and despised it, yet that shame
added much to the burden of it.
I understand Leighton thus: that though our Lord felt it not as
shame
, nor was wounded by the revilings of the people in the way
of any correspondent resentment or sting, which yet we may be without
blame, yet he suffered from the same as sin, and as an addition to the
guilt of his persecutors, which could not but aggravate the burden which
he had taken on himself, as being sin in its most devilish form.
Ib. p. 293.
This therefore is mainly to be studied, that the seat of humility be
the heart. Although it will be seen in the carriage yet as little as
it can * * *. And this I would recommend as a safe way: ever let thy
thoughts concerning thyself be below what thou utterest; and what thou
seest needful or fitting to say to thy own abasement, be not only
content (which most are not) to be taken at thy word, and believed to
be such by them that hear thee, but be desirous of it; and let that be
the end of thy speech, to persuade them, and gain it of them, that
they really take thee for as worthless a man as thou dost express
thyself.
Alas! this is a most delicate and difficult subject: and the safest way,
and the only safe general rule is the silence that accompanies the
inward act of looking at the contrast in all that is of our own doing
and impulse! So may praises be made their own antidote.
Vol. III. p. 20. Serm. I.
They shall see God. What this is we cannot tell you, nor can
you conceive it: but walk heavenwards in purity, and long to be there,
where you shall know what it means: for you shall know him as he
is.
We say; "Now I see the full meaning, force and beauty of a passage,—we
see them through the words." Is not Christ the Word—the substantial,
consubstantial Word,
Greek: ho ôn eis tòn kólpon tou patrós
see previous image
—not as
our words, arbitrary; nor even as the words of Nature phenomenal merely?
If even through the words a powerful and perspicuous author—(as in the
next to inspired Commentary of Archbishop Leighton,—for whom God be
praised!)—I identify myself with the excellent writer, and his thoughts
become my thoughts: what must not the blessing be to be thus identified
first with the Filial Word, and then with the Father in and through Him?
Ib. p. 63. Serm. V.
In this elementary world, light being (as we hear,) the first visible,
all things are seen by it, and it by itself. Thus is Christ, among
spiritual things, in the elect world of his Church; all things are
made manifest by the light, says the Apostle, Eph. v.
13, speaking of Christ as the following verse doth evidently testify.
It is in his word that he shines, and makes it a directing and
convincing light, to discover all things that concern his Church and
himself, to be known by its own brightness. How impertinent then is
that question so much tossed by the Romish Church, "How know you the
Scriptures (say they) to be the word of God, without the testimony of
the Church?" I would ask one of them again, How they can know that it
is daylight, except some light a candle to let them see it? They are
little versed in Scripture that know not that it is frequently called
light; and they are senseless that know not that light is seen and
known by itself. If our Gospel be hid, says the Apostle, it
is hid to them that perish: the god of this world having blinded
their minds against the light of the glorious Gospel, no wonder if
such stand in need of a testimony. A blind man knows not that it is
light at noon-day, but by report: but to those that have eyes, light
is seen by itself.
On the true test of the Scriptures. Oh! were it not for my manifold
infirmities, whereby I am so all unlike the white-robed Leighton, I
could almost conceit that my soul had been an emanation from his! So
many and so remarkable are the coincidences, and these in parts of his
works that I could not have seen—and so uniform the congruity of the
whole. As I read, I seem to myself to be only thinking my own thoughts
over again, now in the same and now in a different order.
Ib. p. 68.
The Author of the Epistle to the Hebrews calls him (Christ) Greek: apaúgasma, the brightness of his Father's glory, and the character
of his person, (i. 3.) And under these expressions lies that
remarkable mystery of the Son's eternal relation to the Father, which
is rather humbly to be adored, than boldly to be explained, either by
God's perfect understanding of his own essence, or by any other
notion.
Certainly not by a transfer of a notion, and this too a notion of a
faculty itself but notional and limitary, to the Supreme Reality. But
there are ideas which are of higher origin than the notions of the
understanding, and by the irradiation of which the understanding itself
becomes a human understanding. Of such
veritates verificæ
Leighton himself in other words speaks often. Surely, there must have
been an intelligible propriety in the terms,
Logos
, Word,
Begotten before all creation
,—an adequate idea or
icon
,
or the Evangelists and Apostolic penmen would not have adopted them.
They did not invent the terms; but took them and used them as they were
taken and applied by Philo and both the Greek and Oriental sages. Nay,
the precise and orthodox, yet frequent, use of these terms by Philo, and
by the Jewish authors of that traditionalæ wisdom,—degraded in after
times, but which in its purest parts existed long before the Christian
æra,—is the strongest extrinsic argument against the Arians, Socinians,
and Unitarians, in proof that St. John must have meant to deceive his
readers, if he did not use them in the known and received sense. To a
Materialist indeed, or to those who deny all knowledges not resolvable
into notices from the five senses, these terms as applied to spiritual
beings must appear inexplicable or senseless. But so must spirit. To me,
(why do I say to me?) to Bull, to Waterland, to Gregory Nazianzen,
Basil, Athanasius, Augustine, the terms, Word and generation, have
appeared admirably, yea, most awfully pregnant and appropriate;—but
still as the language of those who know that they are placed with their
backs to substances—and which therefore they can name only from the
correspondent shadows—yet not (God forbid!) as if the substances were
the same as the shadows;—which yet Leighton supposed in this his
censure,—for if he did not, he then censures himself and a number of
his most beautiful passages. These, and two or three other
sentences,—slips of human infirmity,—are useful in reminding me that
Leighton's works are not inspired Scripture.
Postscript
On a second consideration of this passage, and a revisal of my marginal
animadversion— yet how dare I apply such a word to a passage written by
a minister of Christ so clearly under the especial light of the divine
grace as was Archbishop Leighton?—I am inclined to think that Leighton
confined his censure to the attempts to "explain" the Trinity,—and this
by "notions,"—and not to the assertion of the adorable acts implied in
the terms both of the Evangelists and Apostles, and of the Church before
as well as after Christ's ascension; nor to the assent of the pure
reason to the truths, and more than assent to, the affirmation of the
ideas.
Ib. p. 73.
This fifth Sermon, excellent in parts, is yet on the whole the least
excellent of Leighton's works,—and breathes less of either his own
character as a man, or the character of his religious philosophy. The
style too is in many places below Leighton's ordinary style—in some
places even turbid, operose, and catechrestic;—for example,—"to
trample on smilings with one foot and on frownings with the other."
Ib. p. 77. Serm. VI.
Leighton, I presume, was acquainted with the Hebrew Language, but he
does not appear to have studied it much. His observation on the
heart
, as used in the Old Testament, shews that he did not know
that the ancient Hebrews supposed the heart to be the seat of intellect,
and therefore used it exactly as we use the head.
Ib. p. 104. Serm. VII.
This seventh Sermon is admirable throughout, Leighton throughout. O what
a contrast might be presented by publishing some discourse of some Court
divine, (South for instance,) preached under the same state of affairs,
and printing the two in columns!
Ib. p. 107. Serm. VIII.
In all love three things are necessary; some goodness in the object,
either true and real, or apparent and seeming to be so; for the soul,
be it ever so evil, can affect nothing but which it takes in some way
to be good.
This assertion in these words has been so often made, from Plato's times
to ours, that even wise men repeat it without perhaps much examination
whether it be not equivocal—or rather (I suspect) true only in that
sense in which it would amount to nothing—nothing to the purpose at
least. This is to be regretted—for it is a mischievous equivoque, to
make 'good' a synonyme of 'pleasant,' or even the
genus
of which
pleasure is a
species
. It is a grievous mistake to say, that bad
men seek pleasure because it is good. No! like children they call it
good because it is pleasant. Even the useful must derive its meaning
from the good, not
vice versa
.
Postscript.
The lines in p. 107, noted by me, are one of a myriad instances to prove
how rash it is to quote single sentences or assertions from the
correctest writers, without collating them with the known system or
express convictions of the author. It would be easy to cite fifty
passages from Archbishop Leighton's works in direct contradiction to the
sentence in question—which he had learnt in the schools when a lad, and
afterwards had heard and met with so often that he was not aware that he
had never sifted its real purport. This eighth Sermon is another most
admirable discourse.
Ib. Serm. IX. p. 12.
The reasonable creature, it is true, hath more liberty in its actions,
freely choosing one thing and rejecting another; yet it cannot be
denied, that in acting of that liberty, their choice and refusal
follow
A the sway of their nature and condition.
A
: I would fain substitute for 'follow,' the words, 'are most often
determined, and always affected, by.' I do not deny that the will
follows the nature; but then the nature itself is a will.
Ib.
As the angels and glorified souls, (their nature being perfectly holy
and unalterably such,) they cannot sin; they can delight in nothing
but obeying and praising that God, in the enjoyment of whom their
happiness consisteth.
If angels be other than spirits made perfect, or, as Leighton writes,
"glorified souls,"—the "unalterable by nature" seems to me rashly
asserted.
Ib.
The mind, Greek: phrónaema. Some render it the prudence or wisdom of
the flesh. Here you have it, the carnal mind; but the word signifies,
indeed, an act of the mind, rather than either the faculty itself, or
the habit of prudence in it, so as it discovers what is the frame of
both those.
I doubt.
Greek: phrónaema
. signifies an act: and so far I agree with
Leighton. But
Greek: phrónaema sarkòs
is
the flesh
(that is, the
natural man,) in the act or habitude of minding—but those acts, taken
collectively, are the faculty—the understanding.
How often have I found reason to regret, that Leighton had not clearly
made out to himself the diversity of reason and the understanding!
Ib. Serm. XV. p. 196.
A narrow enthralled heart, fettered with the love of lower things, and
cleaving to some particular sins, or but some one, and that secret,
may keep foot a while in the way of God's commandments, in some steps
of them; but it must give up quickly, is not able to run on to the end
of the goal.
One of the blessed privileges of the spiritual man (and such Leighton
was,) is a piercing insight into the diseases of which he himself is
clear.
Greek: Eléaeson Kyrie!
Ib. Serm. XVI. p. 204.
Know you not that the redeemed of Christ and He are one? They live one
life, Christ lives in them, and if any man hath not the Spirit of
Christ, he is none of his, as the Apostle declares in this
chapter. So then this we are plainly to tell you, and consider it; you
that will not let go your sins to lay hold on Christ, have as yet no
share in him.
But on the other side: the truth is, that when souls are once set upon
this search, they commonly wind the notion too high, and subtilize too
much in the dispute, and so entangle and perplex themselves, and drive
themselves further off from that comfort that they are seeking after;
such measures and marks they set to themselves for their rule and
standard; and unless they find those without all controversy in
themselves, they will not believe that they have an interest in
Christ, and this blessed and safe estate in him.
To such I would only say, Are you in a willing league with any known
sin? &c.
An admirable antidote for such as, too sober and sincere to pass off
feverous sensations for spiritualities, have been perplexed by Wesley's
assertions—that a certainty of having been elected is an indispensable
mark of election. Whitfield's ultra-Calvinism is Gospel gentleness and
Pauline sobriety compared with Wesley's Arminianism in the outset of his
career. But the main and most noticeable difference between Leighton and
the modern Methodists is to be found in the uniform selfishness of the
latter. Not "Do you wish to love God?" "Do you love your neighbour?" "Do
you think, 'O how dear and lovely must Christ be!'"— but—"Are you
certain that Christ has saved
you
; that he died for
you—you—you—yourself
?" on to the end of the chapter. This is
Wesley's doctrine.
Lecture IX. vol. IV. p. 96.
For that this was his fixed purpose, Lucretius not only vows, but also
boasts of it, and loads him (Epicurus) with ill-advised praises, for
endeavouring through the whole course of his philosophy to free the
minds of men from all the bonds and ties of religion.
But surely in this passage
religio
must be rendered superstition,
the most effectual means for the removal of which Epicurus supposed
himself to have found in the exclusion of the
gods many and lords
many
, from their imagined agency in all the
phœnomena
of
nature and the events of history, substituting for these the belief in
fixed laws, having in themselves their evidence and necessity. On this
account, in this passage at least, Lucretius praises his master.
Ib. p. 105.
They always seemed to me to act a very ridiculous part, who contend,
that the effect of the divine decree is absolutely irreconcilable with
human liberty; because the natural and necessary liberty of a rational
creature is to act or choose from a rational motive, or spontaneously,
and of purpose: but who sees not, that, on the supposition of the most
absolute decree, this liberty is not taken away, but rather
established and confirmed? For the decree is, that such an one
shall make choice of, or do some particular thing freely. And whoever
pretends to deny, that whatever is done or chosen, whether good or
indifferent, is so done or chosen, or, at least, may be so, espouses
an absurdity.
I fear, I fear, that this is a sophism not worthy of Archbishop
Leighton. It seems to me tantamount to saying—"I force that man to do
so or so without my forcing him." But however that may be, the following
sentences are more precious than diamonds. They are divine.
Ib. Lect. XI. p. 113.
For that this world, compounded of so many and such heterogeneous
parts, should proceed, by way of natural and necessary emanation, from
that one first, present, and most simple nature, nobody, I imagine,
could believe, or in the least suspect * * *. But if he produced all
these things freely, * * how much more consistent is it to believe,
that this was done in time, than to imagine it was from eternity!
It is inconceivable how any thing can be created in time; and production
is incompatible with interspace.
Ib. Lect. XV. p. 152.
The Platonists divide the world into two, the sensible and
intellectual world * * *. According to this hypothesis, those parables
and metaphors, which are often taken from natural things to illustrate
such as are divine, will not be similitudes taken entirely at
pleasure; but are often, in a great measure, founded in nature, and
the things themselves.
have asserted the same thing, and more fully shown wherein the
difference consists of symbolic and metaphorical, in my first Lay
Sermon; and the substantial correspondence of the genuine Platonic
doctrine and logic with those of Lord Bacon, in my Essays on Method, in
the Friend
.
Ib. Lect. XIX. p. 201.
Even the philosophers give their testimony to this truth, and their
sentiments on the subject are not altogether to be rejected; for they
almost unanimously are agreed, that felicity, so far as it can be
enjoyed in this life, consists solely, or at least principally, in
virtue: but as to their assertion, that this virtue is perfect in a
perfect life, it is rather expressing what were to be wished, than
describing things as they are.
And why are the philosophers to be judged according to a different rule?
On what ground can it be asserted that the Stoics believed in the actual
existence of their God-like perfection in any individual? or that they
meant more than this—"To no man can the name of the Wise be given in
its absolute sense, who is not perfect even as his Father in heaven is
perfect!"
Ib. Lect. XXI. p. 225.
In like manner, if we suppose God to be the first of all beings, we
must, unavoidably, therefrom conclude his unity. As to the ineffable
Trinity subsisting in this Unity, a mystery discovered only by the
Sacred Scriptures, especially in the New Testament, where it is more
clearly revealed than in the Old, let others boldly pry into it, if
they please, while we receive it with our humble faith, and think it
sufficient for us to admire and adore.
But surely it having been revealed to us, we may venture to say,—that a
positive unity, so far from excluding, implies plurality, and that the
Godhead is a fulness,
Greek: plaeroma
Ib. Lect. XXIV. p. 245.