And, that such is probably the true sense of the text, we have been considering, may further be concluded from the light it throws on the following and last verse of this chapter; the meaning of which will now be very plain and consequential, as may be shewn in few words.
For, having spoken of Christian discipline under the name of salt, which preserves what it searches, our Lord very naturally takes advantage of this idea, and transfers the appellation to Christian faith, which was necessary to support his followers under that discipline, and has this property, in common with salt, that it gives soundness and incorruption to the subject on which it operates. Salt, says he, is good: but, if salt have lost its saltness, wherewith will ye season it? That is, faith in me (for by salt, you easily perceive, I now mean that faith, which is your true seasoning, and can alone maintain your firmness and integrity under all trials; this faith, I say) is a salutary principle: but take notice, if you suffer that principle, so active and efficacious, to decay and lose its virtue, there are no means left to retrieve it. Like salt, grown insipid, it can never recover its former quality, but is for ever worthless and useless104. Therefore, adds he, take care to have, that is, retain, this salt, this good seasoning of your Christian principles, in yourselves; which will preserve you incorrupt, as individuals: and, as salt, from its necessary use at the table, is further an emblem of union and friendship, give proof of these principles in your intercourse with all Christians, so as to keep peace one with another; for, by this seasoning of peace, ye will best preserve yourselves entire, as a body of men, or society105.
We see, then, that understanding this fire, with which every one shall be salted, of the fire of affliction only, which, like salt, is to try and preserve the moral integrity of all believers, and not of the fire which dieth not, and, according to the former interpretation, was to preserve offenders in a perpetual capacity of enduring future punishment; understanding, I say, this metaphor in the former sense, we have an easy, elegant, and extremely useful sense in the words of the text: a sense, which perfectly agrees with what precedes the text, and illustrates what follows it: whereas, in the other way of explaining these words, it will be difficult to shew their coherence with the subsequent verse, though they admit an application to the foregoing.
On the whole, I leave it to yourselves to judge, which of the two interpretations, now proposed to you, is the proper one. I know of no other, that so well deserves your notice, as these two: and, if either of them be admissible, we have gained the satisfaction of understanding a very obscure passage of holy Scripture. But we have gained more, than this: for, whichever we prefer, a momentous inference may be drawn from it. Either, we must resolve to stick close to our Christian faith and principles, as the only means of preserving our integrity, and making us fit for the favour of God, to whatever trials of any kind they may expose us: OR, we shall have to reflect, what SUFFERING, terrible beyond imagination, is reserved for obstinately impenitent and incorrigible sinners.
If a man think himself to be something, when he is nothing, he deceiveth himself.
This is one of those many passages in the sacred writings, in which the simplicity of the expression is apt to make us overlook the profound sense contained under it. Who doubts, it may be said, the truth of so general an axiom, as this? and what information, worth treasuring up in the memory, is conveyed by it?
In answer to such questions, as these, it may be observed, That the inspired writers are not singular in this practice; the moral wisdom of all nations, and, in particular, that of the ancient Pagan sages (whom these objectors, no doubt, reverence) being usually conveyed in such large and general aphorisms: and, further, that many good reasons may be given for this mode of instruction.
First, the necessity of the thing, in times, when men have not been accustomed to refine on moral subjects: it is also necessary in another sense, in order to convey the rules of life in some reasonable compass. Good sense in moral matters is but the experience of observing men, the result of which must be given in compendious parcels or collections; otherwise the memory is loaded too much; besides that neither the leisure, nor the talents of those, for whom these lessons are designed, will serve for nicer disquisitions.
Secondly, if this mode of teaching were not necessary, it would still be preferable to any other for its own proper dignity. A philosopher in the schools, or a divine in his closet, may deduce the laws of morality with a minute exactness. But the authority of an Apostle disdains this care, and awakens the consciences of men by some general precept, by some large and comprehensive observation. It becomes the majesty of his character to deliver the principles of right conduct in few and weighty words: his precepts are Laws; and his observations, Oracles: it is for others to speculate upon them with curiosity, and draw them out into systems.
Thirdly, sometimes the very address of a writer leads him to generalize his observations. It is, when a more direct and pointed manner would press too closely on the mind, and, by making the application necessary, indispose us to conviction; whereas, when a reproof presents itself in this form, less offence is likely to be given by it, the application being left, in a good degree, to ourselves.
This last, we shall find, was the case of St. Paul in the text; in whose behalf, therefore, we need not, in the present instance, plead the necessity, the convenience, or the dignity of this method of instruction; though these reasons, we see, might, on other occasions, be very justly alledged.
For, to come now to the aphorism in the text—If a man think himself to be something, when he is nothing, he deceiveth himself—as trivial as this general truth may appear at first sight, we shall perceive, by turning to the context, that the inspired writer applies it with infinite address to mortify the pride of some persons, against whom the tenour of his discourse is there directed. For certain false teachers, it seems, had very early crept into the churches of Galatia, who arrogated a superior wisdom to themselves, and, on the credit of this claim, presumed to impose the yoke of Jewish ordinances on the Gentile converts: in direct opposition to the injunctions of the Apostle, who had lately planted these churches; and in manifest violation of Christian charity, which forbad those grievous burthens to be laid on the consciences of believers.
One natural feature in the character of these vain-glorious boasters, was the contempt with which they treated the more infirm Christians, and the little consideration they had for such of their brethren as happened to be overtaken with any fault. This proud, unchristian temper he therefore takes upon him to correct—Brethren, says he, if any man be overtaken with a fault, you, that are spiritual, restore such a one in the spirit of meekness, considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted: Bear ye one another’s burdens, and so fulfil the law of Christ. And then follows the observation of the text—for, if a man think himself to be something, when he is nothing, he deceiveth himself: leaving the conceited Doctors and their admirers to apply these general words, as they saw fit; but clearly enough pointing to some persons among them, who took themselves to be something, and yet miserably deceived themselves, in that, indeed, they were nothing. In what respects their conduct shewed them to be so, he leaves to their own sagacity, quickened by the poignancy of this covert reproof, to find out.
Such is the Apostle’s address in this divine admonition; and such the force (the greater, for the address) of the reprehension conveyed in it!
But now, what those RESPECTS are, in which these sufficient men shewed themselves to be nothing, though St. Paul thought it not fit to specify them to the Galatians, it may be useful to us, as it certainly is left free for us, to inquire.
First, then, their very Conceit was a certain argument of their Folly. For, what surer indication of a weak and shallow man, than his proneness to think highly of himself! Wise men understand themselves at another rate. They are too conscious of their own infirmities; they know their judgment to be too fallible, their apprehension too slow, their knowledge too scanty, their wills too feeble, and their passions too strong, to give way to this insolent exultation of heart, to indulge in this conceit of their own importance, and much less to form injurious comparisons between themselves and others. They understand, that the only question is concerning the different degrees of weakness and imperfection; and that, where the best come far short of what they should be, all pretence of boasting is cut off.
Secondly, these superior airs of importance were unsuitable to the nature of their religion, and shewed how little proficiency they had made in it; BECAUSE, as Christians, whatever light and knowledge they laid claim to, they must needs confess was not their own, but derived to them from above. All, these spiritual men could pretend to know of divine things, had been freely and solely revealed to them by the Spirit of God; a distinction, which ought indeed to fill their hearts with gratitude, but could be no proper foundation of their pride or vain-glory. For, as the Apostle himself argues in another place, Who maketh thee to differ from another? And what hast thou, which thou didst not receive? Now, if thou didst receive it, why dost thou glory, as if thou hadst not received it106?
Whatever temptation, therefore, there might be to a poor vain heathen to pride himself in his pittance of knowledge or virtue, a Christian should, by the very principles of his religion, be more modest, and ascribe his proficiency in either, not to himself, but to the indulgent favour and good pleasure of God.
Thirdly, these boasters betrayed themselves by the fruits, which this self-importance produced, namely, their contemptuous and unfeeling treatment of their brethren under any instance of their weakness and frailty. Such behaviour was doubly ridiculous: first, as it implied an ignorance of their own infirmity, and liableness to temptation; and, then, as it argued a total want of Charity, the most essential part of their religion, without which a man is nothing, whatever gifts and graces of other kinds he may possess107.
Fourthly, whatever merit a man may possess, this fond complacency of mind can hardly fail to deprive him of it. For this conceit of his own sufficiency puts him off his guard, and makes him more liable to fall into any misconduct, when, apprehending no danger to himself, he employs no care; just as nothing is more fatal to an army, than a confidence in its own strength, inducing a neglect of that watchfulness and discipline, by which alone its security can be maintained.
This sufficiency also leads to ignorance, as well as misconduct, by cutting off all hopes of further improvement. For he, that is proud of his own knowledge, is not anxious to extend it; and, indeed, does not easily apprehend there is much room or occasion for his so doing. Now, from the moment a man stands still, and interrupts his intellectual, as well as moral course, by the known constitution of things, he necessarily goes backward; and, for his just punishment, relapses fast into that ignorance, in a freedom from which he had before placed his confidence and triumph.
Lastly, this presumptuous conceit is belyed in the EVENT, I mean in the opinion of those very persons, to whom the vain man would willingly recommend himself. For the natural effect of such presumption is, to excite the contempt of the wise, and the envy of the rest. Men of discernment easily penetrate the delusion, and, knowing how little reason there is for any man to pride himself in his knowledge or virtue, are provoked to entertain an ostentatious display of those qualities with that ridicule, it so well deserves: while the weaker sort always take themselves to be insulted by superior accomplishments; and rarely wait the just provocation of vain-glory to malign and envy those, to whom they belong.
But the misfortune does not stop here. Contempt and Envy are active and vigilant passions; they are quick at espying a weakness, and spare no pains to expose it: and where can this merciless inquisition end, but in the proud man’s mortification to see his best faculties slighted, or traduced, and all his imperfections laid bare and exposed? So good reason had the Apostle to warn the Galatian teachers against vain-glory, in the close of the preceding chapter—Let us, says he, not be vain-glorious, provoking one another, envying one another; an exhortation which the vain-glorious among them should have listened to, even for their own sakes.
We see, then, that, in these several respects, a man, who takes himself to be something, in effect proves himself to be nothing. So full of instruction is the plain unpretending aphorism in the text to the persons concerned!
The Apostle adds—that such a man DECEIVETH HIMSELF—which must needs be, and cannot want to be enlarged upon; since it appears in the very instances, in which his nothingness has been shewn. The vain-glorious Christian is manifestly and notoriously deceived in thinking himself something—while that very conceit shews the contrary—while it shews that he overlooks the very principles of his religion—while it proves him to be void of Christian charity, the very end of the commandment—while it betrays him into ignorance and folly, and therefore tends to subvert the very foundation, on which his vain-glory is raised—while, lastly, in the event, it deprives him of that very consideration to which he aspires.
“Such are the mischiefs of Self-conceit!” a vice, which Reason universally condemns, but which our Christian profession renders most contemptible and ridiculous. Even in the pursuits of human Science, where Reason can do most, all the efforts of the ablest understanding penetrate but a little way. We know enough of the nature of things, to serve the purposes of common life; and enough of the nature of man, to discover our duty towards each other. And within this narrow circle all our knowledge, be we as proud of it as we please, is confined. Clouds and darkness cover the rest; and this the ablest men of all times have seen and confessed. If there be a man, whom Heaven has formed with greater powers and stronger faculties than are commonly met with in the species, he is the first to discover, and to lament, his own blindness and weakness: a Socrates and a Pascal have been considered as prodigies of parts and ingenuity; yet, while the meanest Sophister is puffed up with the conceit of his own knowledge, these divine men confess nothing so readily as their own ignorance.
And, if this be the case of human learning, what must we think of divine? where Reason teaches nothing, beyond the existence and attributes of God, and, as to every thing else, without the aid of Revelation, is stark-blind. The things of God knoweth no man but the Spirit of God—is an assertion, to which common sense and common experience must assent. Yet shall every idle Speculatist, who has but the confidence to call himself a Philosopher, treat the divine word, as freely as any ordinary subject; and pronounce as peremptorily of the revealed will of God, which the Angels themselves adore in silence, as if he knew for certain that his poor and scanty understanding was commensurate with the councils of the most High!
To these professors of Science, whether human or divine, who know so little of themselves as to presume they know every thing, may the Apostle’s aphorism be most fitly addressed—If a man think himself to be something, when he is nothing, he deceiveth himself;—and, through all the simplicity of the expression, the good sense of the observation must be felt by the proudest understanding.
Not, that the proper remedy for this evil, of Self-conceit, is a vile subjection of the understanding, which our holy Religion disdains, and to which none but slaves will submit—nor yet Scepticism, another vice, to which the less sanguine disputers of this world are much addicted—but a modest use of the faculties we possess, and above all, charity. It is but another species of pride, to pretend that we know nothing; Christian humility is best expressed in referring, what we know, to the good of others. Without this reference, all our claims of superior wisdom are vain and delusive: for it is with knowledge, as with faith, unless it work by charity, it is nothing.
To return to the text, then, and to conclude.
Let the ignominy of this Self-delusion deter us, if nothing else can, from the unseemly arrogance, it so well exposes and condemns. And let us learn to revere the wisdom of the great Apostle, who, by couching so momentous an admonition in so plain terms, has taught us, That, as conceit and vain-glory terminate in shame and disappointment; so the modesty of unpretending knowledge may be entitled to our highest esteem.
We dare not make ourselves of the number, or compare ourselves, with some that commend themselves: But they, measuring themselves by themselves, and comparing themselves among themselves, are not wise.
I shall not inquire, who the persons were, to whom these words are applied. It is enough, for the use I intend to make of them, to observe, that they contain a censure of some persons, “who, conscious of certain advantages, and too much taken up in the contemplation of them, came to think better of themselves, and, consequently, worse of others, than they had reason to do; demonstrating, by this, their partiality (as the Apostle gently remonstrates), that they were not wise.”
But this censure admits a more extensive application. Measuring themselves by themselves, and comparing themselves among themselves, whole nations, and even ages, as well as individuals, are, sometimes, misled in the estimate they make of their own worth; and never more easily, or remarkably, than when the object of their partial fondness is their proficiency in knowledge, and, above all, in religious knowledge: for nothing flatters the pride of human nature so much, as an idea of superiority in the exercise of its best faculties, on the noblest subjects.
It would be easy to illustrate this observation by many examples, that have occurred in the history of mankind. But ONE, only, will sufficiently employ your thoughts at this time; and that one (to make it the more interesting and useful) shall be taken from OURSELVES.
The improvements, that have been made, for two or three centuries past, in almost every art and science, seem to authorize the present age to think with some respect, of itself. It accordingly exults in the idea of its own wisdom: and this country, in particular, which has contributed its full share to those improvements, may well be thought as forward, as any other, to pay itself this tribute of self-esteem. It would not be strange, if it appeared, on inquiry, That some presumption had, in either case, been indulged; and had even operated, according to the nature of presumption, to the prejudice of that claim, which, with so much confidence, has been set up. But I have now in view, only, one effect of this presumption; I mean, the complacency which many take in supposing, That the present age excels equally in sacred and secular learning; and, with regard to ourselves, That our theological knowledge as much surpasses that of our forefathers at the Reformation, as their knowledge did, the thick and gross ignorance of the monkish ages.
It concerns us, for more reasons than one, not to mistake in this matter. The direct way to decide upon it, would, no doubt, be, To compare the best modern writers, with the ablest of those among the Reformers, on the subject of religion. But, till ye have the leisure or curiosity to make this comparison for yourselves, ye will pay some regard, it may be, to the following considerations; which, at least, I think, make it questionable, whether our claims, in particular (for the inquiry shall, for the present, be confined to them), whether, I say, our pretensions to religious knowledge have not been carried too far. And,
1. One is tempted to ask, whether it be credible, that we of this age should have much advantage over our Reformers, in respect of religious knowledge, when both had an opportunity of deriving it from the same source? You will apprehend the meaning of this question, if you reflect, that our Reformers had not their religious system to fetch out of the dark rolls of ancient tradition, and much less to create, or fashion for themselves, out of their own proper stock of ingenuity and invention. Had such been their unhappy circumstances, there would be reason enough to presume that their system was defective. For the first attempts towards perfection in any art, or science, will not bear a comparison with those happier and more successful efforts, which a length of time and continued application enable men to make. But the case of those good men, we know, was wholly different. They had only to copy, or, rather, to inspect, a consummate model, made to their hands; I mean, the sacred scriptures, which lay open to them, as they do to us; and, being taken by them, as we understand they were, for their sole rule of faith, what should hinder them, when they read those scriptures, from seeing as distinctly, as we do at this day, what the Gospel-terms of salvation are, and what the erudition of a Christian man should be?
Did the primitive Christians, a plain people, and taken, for the most part, from the lowest ranks of life, did they understand their religion, when it was proposed to them, so as to have no doubt concerning its great and leading principles; nay, so as to be the standard of orthodoxy to all succeeding ages of the Church? and shall we think that the ablest Doctors at the Reformation, when they had once turned themselves to the study of the sacred volumes, could be at a loss about the contents of them?
“Yes, it will, perhaps, be said; the primitive Christians had the advantage of reading the scriptures in the languages in which they were composed, or of hearing them explained, at least, by learned and well-instructed teachers: whereas, at the Reformation, those languages were understood by few, or none; and consequently, in those days, there could be no persons sufficiently skilled in the sacred scriptures to ascertain their true meaning.”
But to this charge of ignorance you will easily reply, by asking,
2. In the next place, whether it can consist with a known fact, namely, That the revival of letters had preceded the Reformation every-where, especially in England; and that the excellent persons who took the lead in that work, were all of them, competently, and, some of them, deeply, skilled in the learned languages?
Indeed, in the nature of the thing, it is scarce possible, that the Reformers should be so little versed, as the objection supposes, in the original scriptures. For, whether the new learning as it was called, had, or had not, been cultivated, before the Reformation began, we may be sure it would then be cultivated with the utmost assiduity; both, because it was a new learning, that is, because the charms of novelty would naturally engage many in the study of it; and, because no step could be taken in the Reformation, without some proficiency in that learning. Now, if you consider, of what the human mind is capable, when pushed on by two such active principles, as learned curiosity, and religious zeal, you will conclude with yourselves, even without recurring to positive testimony, that the Reformers must needs have made an acquaintance with the authentic text: such an acquaintance, as would let them into a clear apprehension, at least, of those doctrines, which are the elementary, as we may say, or necessary ingredients in the constitution of a truly Christian Church.
If you hesitate about coming to this conclusion, the reason, I suppose, is, that you consider the Reformers as just then emerging from the darkness of Popery, and therefore so far blinded by the prejudices of that church108, or by their own109 prejudices against it, as not to see distinctly, and at once, the true sense of Scripture, though they might be competently skilled in the learned languages. And, possibly, there is some truth, as well as plausibility, in this suggestion, as applied to the case of the foreign Protestant Churches, which were formed with too much haste, and in a time of too much heat, to be quite free from all such exceptions. But, then, you will call to mind,
3. Thirdly, that the Reformation was not carried on with us in a precipitate tumultuary manner, as it was, for the most part, on the Continent. On the other hand, it advanced, under the eye of the magistrate, by slow degrees; nay, it was, more than once, checked and kept back by him. Hence it came to pass, that there was time allowed for taking the full benefit of all discoveries, made abroad; for studying the chief points of controversy, with care; and for getting rid of such mistakes, as might arise from a hasty or passionate interpretation of holy Scripture. In short, you will reflect, that, between the first contentions in Germany; on the account of Religion, and the first establishment of it in the Church of England, under Elizabeth, there was the space of near half a century: a space, sufficient, you will think (especially, if the activity of those times be considered) to admit all the improvements of learning, that were necessary to those who had the charge of conducting the Reformation; and all the deliberate circumspection, with which it was fit that so great a work should be finally completed.
If it be said, “that the Reformers are convicted of ignorance in one important part of scriptural knowledge, that of Toleration, and that therefore, possibly, they have erred in others;” I reply, that this subject had never been understood, from the first establishment of Christianity down to the æra of the Reformation; and that the mistakes about it had, chiefly, arisen, not from a want of seeing what the Scriptures had revealed, but of knowing how to reconcile the New Testament to the Old. If we are, now, able to do this, it is well. In the mean time, let it be acknowledged, that no peculiar charge of ignorance can be brought against the Reformers for misapprehending a subject, not only difficult in itself, but perplexed with endless prejudices, and not yet, as appears, quite disentangled of them. After all, this doctrine of intolerance, though it unhappily affected the personal conduct of our Reformers, has no place in the Liturgy and Articles of our Church.
Still, perhaps, the main point, on which this question, concerning the comparative skill of the two periods, in matters of religion, turns, is yet untouched; which is, that the amazing progress, confessedly made, since the æra of the Reformation, in all true Philosophy, must have contributed very largely to the increase of religious knowledge; and that so much light of science, as we now enjoy, must have served to give us a clearer insight, than our benighted ancestors had, into the revealed doctrines of Christianity.
But to this so flattering, and, at first view, not improbable, assumption, it may be replied,
4. In the last place, That the doctrines in question, being purely Christian, that is, such as it pleased God to reveal to mankind concerning his eternal purpose in Christ Jesus,—that the doctrines, I say, having this original, and being of this nature, have, possibly, no communication with the discoveries of later times: that, of the divine councils, on such a subject, we could have known nothing, if the Revelation had been silent; and that all we do know, when it speaks clearest, is only what those councils are, not on what grounds of reason they stand; whether it be, that such knowledge is unattainable by our faculties, or that it was seen to be improper for our situation: that, to say the least, all the efforts of the ablest men to explain the peculiar fundamental doctrines of our religion, on the principles of our philosophy, have not hitherto been so successful, as to make it certain that these doctrines are indeed cognisable by human reason: that possibly, therefore, those doctrines are the objects of faith, simply, and not of knowledge; in other words, that they are no clearer to us at this day, than they were to those plainer men, who lived in the sixteenth century110.
And now, if we recollect the substance of what has been said—That our Reformers had only to consult the Scriptures for a just idea of the Christian Religion—that they were likely enough to understand those Scriptures, being invited, or rather impelled, to the study of them, by the most active principles of human nature—that they could not but understand those Scriptures in all the more important points of doctrine, which they had so much time and occasion to consider, and which there wanted no more than a common skill in the language of Scripture to understand—and that, lastly, they could not have understood those points better, than they did, even with all our real or fancied skill in philosophy, because, in truth, philosophy is not applicable to those points, being matters of pure Revelation, and not susceptible of any additional clearness from the exertion of our best faculties, however improved:—If these things, I say, are put together, we shall conceive it possible for our Reformers to have acquired such a knowledge, at least, of their religion, as not to deserve that utter contempt, with which, on a comparison with ourselves, they are, sometimes, treated.
But a single FACT will, perhaps, speak more conviction to you, than all these general presumptive reasonings. When the question is, therefore, concerning the degree of religious knowledge, which such men as Cranmer and Ridley possessed, let it be remembered, “That Erasmus (who lived and died before the English Reformation had made any considerable progress, and the benefit of all whose light and knowledge those Reformers, therefore, had) that this learned man, I say, had, in those days, explained himself as reasonably, on almost every great topic of revealed religion, as any writer has since done; or is now able to do.”
This fact, however, does not imply, that the age of the Reformation was equally enlightened with the present; or that the clearer light, we enjoy, is of no service to religion. Our improved Criticism has been of use in ascertaining the authority, and, sometimes, in clearing the smaller difficulties, of the sacred text; and our improved Philosophy has enabled many great men to set the evidences of revealed religion, in a juster and stronger light: but, with the doctrines themselves, our improvements, of whatever kind, have no concern. Be our proficiency in human science what it may, those doctrines are the same still. Reason, under any degree of cultivation, may if we please to misapply it, perplex and corrupt our faith; but will never be able to see to the bottom of those judgments, which are unsearchable, nor to clear up those ways, which are past finding out111.
To conclude: I am not, now, making the panegyric of those venerable men, to whom we are indebted for our religious establishment. They were our inferiors, if you will, in many respects. But, if, measuring ourselves by ourselves, and comparing ourselves among ourselves, we overlook their real abilities and qualifications; if we pronounce them ignorant of good letters, because they lived in an age, which we have learned to call barbarous; and ignorant of the Christian religion, because they were not practised in our philosophy; we, probably, do THEM great injustice, and take, it may be, not the best method of doing honour to OURSELVES.
Faith, says the Apostle, cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God112. The assertion was strictly true in the early days of the Gospel, before books were yet written and spread abroad for the edification of the Church. The inlet of faith was, then, the ear: through that organ only was conveyed, from the tongue of the preacher, the word of God. But the case is much the same at all times; even now, when books are enough multiplied, and perhaps more than enough, in the Christian world. For, it having pleased God, that a standing ministry should be kept up for the instruction of mankind in the faith, and a woe being denounced against such, as have received this commission, and yet preach not the Gospel113, the sole way by which faith cometh to most men, and the principal, by which it cometh to almost all, is still that of hearing. It is still by the word preached, that men, in general, come to the faith of Christ, and are confirmed in the profession of it.
Our Lord, then, foreseeing how much would depend on this faculty of hearing, and finding by experience how liable it was to be abused, thought fit to give his Disciples a particular, and what may almost seem a new, precept, for their conduct in this respect. The ancient masters of rhetoric, and of morals, had frequently warned their scholars to take heed what they speak: but our Divine Master carries his attention still farther; and while his ministers are required, to speak, as the oracles of God, the people are very properly instructed by him, to take heed what they hear.
Now, that this admonition may have its full effect, it will be proper to explain the reasons, on which it is founded; to lay before you the several considerations which shew of what infinite concern it is to those, who hear the word, to be attentive in hearing.
And it naturally occurs, as the
I. First reason for this attention, that what is spoken, is delivered to them, as the word of God.
When a person in high place and authority thinks fit to honour us with a message, though it be in a matter of no great importance, with what submission is it received! How diligently do we listen to it! How circumspectly is every sentence, and even syllable, weighed! We do not stand to make exceptions to the messenger, who may have nothing in his own person to command our respect; we do not much consider the grace with which he delivers his message; we are not curious to observe in what choice or elegant terms it is expressed. We are only concerned to know, that the message has been faithfully related, and then a due regard is immediately paid to it. And shall God speak to us by the mouth of his ministers, in terms which himself dictates, and which we may verify, if we please, by comparing them with his own written word,—shall, I say, the God of Heaven thus address himself to us, and we not take heed what and how we hear?
Or, suppose the opinion of a man learned in any secular profession is reported to us, on a point which falls within his province, and of which it concerns us to form a right apprehension, Is not such opinion received with respect by us, and studied with care?
And shall our Divine Master be negligently heared, when he condescends to instruct us in the way of life and salvation, a subject, of all others, the most interesting to us; a subject, which he alone perfectly understands, and concerning which he will not and cannot mislead us?
Still further, besides the authority of the divine word, there is something in the nature of it, which deserves, and, if we be not wholly insensible, must command our attention.
For shall a little superficial rhetorick be listened to with regard, perhaps with admiration? And shall not the heart-felt truths of the Gospel warm and affect us? Shall a few spiritless periods, ranged in measure, and coloured with art, mere sound and paint, throw an assembly, sometimes, into joy or grief, or transport it with indignation? And can we lend a careless ear to the word of God, which is quick and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart114?
Such is the attention due to the word of God, when acknowledged under that character. But
II. A SECOND reason for hearing with caution, is, that the hearers are required to judge for themselves whether what is delivered to them be, indeed, the word of God. Without this care, impostures may be endless, and the effect of them fatal.
When we give up ourselves with an implicit trust to others in mere temporal concerns, the mischief, although considerable, may yet be checked by experience; or, at most, as it respects this life only, is not conclusive and irreparable: but in matters of religion, if we accept that as the word of God, and act upon it, which has no higher authority than the word of fallible and presumptuous men, we may be led into all the visions of fanaticism or superstition, and into all the crimes which so naturally spring from both, to the loss of our future, as well as present happiness.
It pleased God, therefore, from the time that miracles ceased to be the credentials of his ministers in the Christian Church, to secure the faithful from these dangers by the guidance of the written Word; in which, besides special rules there given for the trial of the spirits, whether they are of God, such general principles are delivered as may direct our judgment. And by the help of these, interpreted by the tenor of that word, and the analogy of faith, we may be secured from all deception or surprize.
It is true, all men cannot apply these rules and principles, or not with full knowledge and effect. Woe, therefore, be to him who abuses the incapacity of such hearers, by obtruding on their easy belief his own fancies, as the doctrines of God! But to the abler hearers of the word, to all, indeed, who are competently instructed in their Religion, the task is not difficult to avoid gross and dangerous delusions, to determine for themselves whether the doctrine be of God, or not. This task, I say, is not difficult; yet it implies care and circumspection; and the necessity of discharging it must be allowed a good argument for taking heed what we hear.
III. A further reason for this diligence in hearing is, That the hearers are expected and required to profit by the word spoken.
The word of wisdom and of knowledge is given to every man to profit withal115. It is not a curious problem, a fine lecture, a trial of wit, or play of ingenuity, calculated to entertain us for the time, and to be laid aside and forgotten by us again, when the occasion is over. The ministry of the word is of another kind, and destined to higher purposes. It is an instrument of reproof, of exhortation, of instruction in righteousness. The sword of the spirit is put into the hands of men for no ends of pageantry and amusement. The minister of God bears it not in vain. He is entrusted with it to smite the hearts of the wicked, to pierce through the souls of unrighteous men, and to flash conviction in the face of unbelievers. It is an ordinance of God, by which he would humble the proud, and convert the obstinate; strengthen the weak, and confirm the wise, hearer. Whatever our condition, it is to be corrected or improved by the word of God; whatever our necessities, they are to be relieved by it. But every gift of the spirit, as well as faith, cometh by hearing: and that not in the instant, but by degrees; for the Gospel does not illuminate and sanctify men at once; but by successive improvements, according to the care with which we listen to its admonitions, and the impression they make upon us. Hence it concerns the hearer, that nothing be lost, and that the good seed be not committed to the ground in vain. One truth received, prepares the mind to entertain a second; that, a third; and so on, till we become perfect in the knowledge of the faith. Our moral advances are made in the same manner: one good resolution begets another, which again produces succeeding ones, till, through several intervening states, we arrive, or almost arrive, at perfect obedience.
And this consideration, indeed, seems to have been immediately present to our Lord, when he delivered the admonition in the text. For so he comments upon, and enforces his own words—Take heed what ye hear: [for] with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you, and TO YOU THAT HEAR, SHALL MORE BE GIVEN: that is, plainly and certainly, your proficiency in faith and virtue will depend upon the degree of attention ye pay to my word, and shall be proportioned to it; therefore it cannot be too strict and earnest. Nay, our Lord goes farther, and in his jealousy, as it were, for the honour of the word spoken, threatens the listless hearer, that he should not only not advance in religious qualifications, but that he should even lose those, which he already possessed. For he that hath, to him shall be given: AND HE THAT HATH NOT, FROM HIM SHALL BE TAKEN AWAY EVEN THAT HE HATH. And this dispensation of Providence, as severe as it may seem, is, I suppose, confirmed by too certain experience, and is analogous to the rest of God’s moral government.
It is no slight matter then, how we hear. And let no idle prejudices prevent or mislead us. The preacher of the Gospel may, on various pretences, be unacceptable to us. Still, the Gospel itself is not his, but God’s; to which no circumstance should indispose us. Nay, in spite of this indisposition, the preacher, if we resolve to hear, may profit us. For it is not, I conceive, without example, that such as come to amuse themselves with a stated discourse, or perhaps to censure the discourser, have found their hearts touched by the quickening power of the word, and have returned with serious thoughts and better resolutions.
This, I say, is not too much to expect from the Gospel of Christ, and the grace which attends it, since we find it recorded of a Pagan moralist, that, when a young reveller came into his school, flushed with wine, and (as the custom of such was) crowned with flowers, and therefore in no disposition, we may presume, to profit by his instructions; the philosopher, however, chose his topics so well, and pressed them on his gay disciple with such effect, as to send him away in a graver mood, and without his garland116. But,
IV. The last and most important reason of all why we should give an attentive ear to the word of God, is, That we shall finally be judged by it.
If the Gospel had only proposed to instruct us in the knowledge of God, that so we might speculate more ably on divine subjects; or, at most, refer the knowledge we acquire to present use; though it could not be denied that such purpose was an important one, yet, if it went no further, we might, if we could allow ourselves in such imprudence, make light of this, as we do of so many other kinds of instruction. We should be ignorant, indeed, and unaccomplished in a very sublime science; but so we are of many others, and yet are contented to remain in that ignorance. We might conduct ourselves foolishly and perversely, and might suffer much inconvenience, and even misery, for want of acting on the principles of this science; but so we do, in many other instances, for want of acting on the maxims of art and prudence in the management of our common concerns, and yet we make a shift to satisfy ourselves with our condition. But if the Gospel follow us into another world; if this immortal volume must be laid open in the presence of men and angels, and our eternal doom pronounced out of it, though we would not obey, or so much as listen to its commands, when they were so earnestly, so repeatedly, in this life pressed upon us; if such be the effect of not hearing, how shall we excuse our indifference in this respect, or what can support us under the consciousness of it?
Hear then the awful sentence of Christ himself, denounced in that Gospel—He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him; THE WORD that I have spoken, the same shall judge him at the last day117.
Go now, ye careless hearers, ye despisers of the WORD, and justify to yourselves, if ye can, your neglect and scorn of it!
When our Lord himself taught in the streets of Jerusalem, many a supercilious Pharisee, we may suppose, passed by, without so much as stopping to hear what this divine teacher had to say to them: others, if they gave attention to his words, were only gratifying an idle, perhaps a malignant curiosity; they sought occasion from what he said to intrap him in his discourse, to accuse him to the rulers, or to vilify him in the eyes of the people. Again: when this same doctrine was taught by the Apostle Paul in another proud city, as proud of its philosophic schools, as Jerusalem was of its temple, many a contemptuous sophist, we may believe, disdained to listen, at all to the foolishness of preaching; and of those few who did, some, we know, mocked, while others negligently asked their companions, What would this babbler say? But how will both these be astonished in the last day to find themselves judged by that word which they neglected, or contemned; by that word, which they would not hear, though it was brought home to their doors, or which they rejected with scorn, when they did hear it!
Nor think, because neither Jesus nor Paul hath preached in person to us, that therefore our case is much different. Jesus and Paul still speak in the ministers of the word: or, what if the speakers be widely different, the word is the same: this treasure we still have, though in earthen vessels118. Nay, in one respect, our guilt exceeds theirs. The Pharisees and Philosophers were, alike, ignorant and unbelieving. We profess to know, and to believe.
Let US, then, take heed what we hear; lest our knowledge and belief add terrors to that day, when the neglected word shall sit in judgment upon us.
I would have you wise unto that which is good, and simple concerning evil.
Our blessed Lord had given it in charge to his followers to be wise as serpents, and harmless as doves119. And the Apostle explains and enforces this command of his Master, when he enjoins us in the words of the text, To be wise unto that which is good, and simple concerning evil.
I confine myself, at present, to the former part of the text, and shall enquire into the properties or characters of Christian Wisdom.
This wisdom consists in the prosecution of what the Scriptures declare to be the true end of man, and by such means as they prescribe to us.
That end is the SALVATION of our souls; and the means, which lead to it, are FAITH and OBEDIENCE. Thus far there can be no mistake. The wise Christian is he who is intent on securing his eternal interest; and who, to that end, fortifies his mind with a firm belief of the doctrines, and conducts his life according to the precepts, of the Gospel.
I. But PERFECT WISDOM, which consists in a strict attention to these several particulars, and according to the true worth of each, is rarely the lot of human nature. And there are two ways, in which we are most apt to forfeit our pretensions to it. One is, when our minds, wholly taken up with the ultimate object of their hopes, neglect the means which are appointed to bring them to it: The OTHER, when we rest in the intervening means themselves, without a due regard to that final purpose, for the sake of which they were appointed.
1. The FORMER of these defects we may observe in those persons who, from a too warm and enthusiastic turn of thought, are for subliming all piety into the trances of mystic contemplation; as if morality and faith scarce deserved their notice; and the beatific vision were as well the object, as end of the Christian life. Here the fault lies in an impatience to come at the point we propose to ourselves, without observing the proper methods which are to put us in possession of it; and is much the same phrenzy as we should charge on those travellers, who, being on their way towards a distant country, stop short in the contemplation of all the wonders they have heard reported of it, without pursuing their journey, or indeed without taking one step towards it.
2. The OTHER defect of wisdom is seen in those less sanguine, and, in truth, lukewarm Christians, who do not, indeed, altogether neglect the subservient duties of their profession, but, as not enough considering the prize of their high calling, grow remiss in the exercise of them: in which they too much resemble those same travellers; who, when taking the ordinary means of arriving at their journey’s end, fall into an idle way of loitering on the road, and use not that dispatch and diligence in their stages, which an earnest consideration of the end, they have in view, should naturally inspire.
II. But this duty of Christian wisdom is further violated, when, with a full respect to our final hopes and expectations, and a general intention to pursue them by the means appointed in holy Scripture, we do not, however, observe the due bounds and measures of each; that is, when, of the two appointed means of salvation, a pure faith, and right practice, we chose to ourselves a favourite, and incline too much to one, at the expence of the other. For,
1. With regard to the distinct provinces of FAITH and MORALITY, we know there are those, who, provided they are but sound and orthodox in their opinions, that they give an entire assent to the several articles of their creed, and submit their faith to the entire direction of Scripture, or perhaps of the church with which they communicate, suppose the affair of moral practice of much less importance; and conclude their devotion for this acceptable sacrifice of a right faith will excuse their making somewhat too free with the article of obedience. Such persons there have been and still are in all churches; but we know what sect of Christians is most deeply infected with this error.
2. On the contrary, they who have shaken off this bondage of superstition, and have observed the mischiefs which arise in abundance from this exclusive attachment to creeds and confessions, are very apt to run into the other extreme; and, because they find morality to be of eternal obligation, make the less account of faith and right opinion. As the former excess is the peculiar disgrace of Popery, this other has frequently been objected to Protestantism. Both are manifest violations of Christian wisdom; which, besides that it commands an equal reverence for the two tables of the divine law, should further instruct us, that as faith without works is vain, so good works themselves, unassisted and unsanctified by faith, are either not so perfect, or not so acceptable from us Christians, as otherwise they might be. Not to observe, that as the articles of our holy faith may be founded on reasons, which we do not know; so the belief or rejection of them may have consequences, which we cannot foresee.
III. And with this preparation, let us now descend to still more particular reflexions on the duty which lies upon us to approve our wisdom in the public profession of that faith, and the manifestation of that practice. Christian wisdom requires an attentive regard to the main end we have in view, and to the methods by which we are instructed to obtain it. But still there is great room for discretion to shew itself in the management and pursuit of those methods. One manner of doing the good, we are appointed to do, will be preferable to another. And it is a great part of Christian prudence to be ready and expert in discovering and acting upon that preference. This indeed is a large field; nor is it possible to enumerate all the cases which fall within this province of true wisdom. But to prescribe to ourselves some plan, however defective, we may consider, that, if a constant regard be had to ourselves, to our own character and circumstances, our virtues will then be most GRACEFUL; if to the exigencies of the times and places in which we live, most SEASONABLE; and, lastly, if to the persons, conditions, and characters of other men, they will thus become most ATTRACTIVE and EFFICACIOUS.
1. It was a point the masters of ancient wisdom took a singular pleasure to inculcate, and we find an equal stress laid upon it by the sacred writers, that a strict decorum be observed in the exercise of our virtues; or, in other words, that the good we do be that which is fit and decent, considering our circumstances and characters. Thus we find one set of duties more especially recommended to the young, another to the aged; some to private persons, others to such as are in place and authority. Different professions in life have also different sets of offices belonging to them; or in such as are common to all, propriety demands, that they be evidenced in very different manners. The virtues we expect in the poor man, are humility, industry, and resignation. These too are virtues, from the obligation of which no rich man is exempted; but it would be strangely misbecoming, if he did not surpass the other in acts of charity and beneficence. And in respect of the same common virtue, suppose charity, what the one would very commendably discharge by little acts of service and assiduity towards his distressed neighbour, might require a very considerable expence of wealth or labour in the other. Nay, the several humours and dispositions of men will occasion a difference, if not in the matter of their duty, yet in the way in which it will become them to express it. An eminent moralist, indeed, carried this point of decorum very far when he would justify so bad an action, as suicide, and which he owns he should have condemned in any other, from the singular turn of Cato’s temper and virtue120. But thus much may be said with great truth: that an action, good in itself, may come with a better grace from one man than another. A lesson of good advice, for instance, might be requisite from the liveliest man to his friend; but it would have additional weight and propriety from one of a graver disposition: and certainly what the former could only hint with address, the latter might be allowed to enforce with much earnestness and authority.
In short, if we study ourselves, and reflect what our station, character, or nature is, we shall best discern what the virtues are, and in what manner to be expressed, which sit most properly and gracefully upon us. And to give a diligent attention to these is no mean part of moral wisdom. But,
2. We must look beyond ourselves; we must consider what the condition of the times, what the state of the places in which we live, may require of us. I do not mean that religion is a matter of policy; or that virtue is a mere local consideration. But when the question is, how we may do the most good by our religious or moral conduct, a prudent accommodation of ourselves to time and place will be very necessary121. The primitive Christians were not wise unto that which is good, when they provoked the cruelty of their enemies, and offered themselves without cause to the racks and fires of persecution. Nor would they be less blameable, who, in a careless, prophane age, when silence would be readily taken for assent: when, not to profess the faith would be construed to renounce it, should, from a too scrupulous fear of giving offence, forbear to make an open confession of their religion. The exigencies of times, we see, are very different. A wise man would have endeavoured to moderate the excessive zeal, which prevailed in the former of these periods: he would apply himself to raise and quicken it, were he to find himself in the circumstances described in the latter. Or, to explain myself by a case which may still more nearly affect us. There was a time, when the religion of our country consisted too much in a zeal for unintelligible articles and superstitious ceremonies; when Popery had enslaved both mind and body, had bent the one to an implicit acquiescence in the doctrines of the Church, and burthened the other with a constant unprofitable exercise of its worship. How then was the wisdom of a good man to express itself in these circumstances? In dispelling, it will surely be said, the gloom of superstition; in asserting the great privileges of natural reason, and in pressing the obligation and necessity of a good life, as of more worth than all ceremonial observances.
This was the service rendered by the best men of those days to true Religion; and we have reason to bless and revere their memories for it. But should the liberty into which we are called, degenerate into licentiousness; should it ever be common for men, in the fear of believing too much, not to believe what the Scriptures themselves plainly require of them; and from the apprehension of relapsing into their old superstitious practices, to give little or no regard to the duties of external worship: should this at any time be the case, those truly wise men, who laboured so profitably to check the other extreme, would certainly, in this different state of things, apply themselves with equal earnestness to correct this. Not that their former practice was not good in itself, but that, by a change in the disposition of the times, it was now become less seasonable.
3. We are, lastly, to have a regard to the conditions, characters, and persons of those with whom we converse; this attention being especially requisite to render our virtues attractive and efficacious.
The philosopher that took upon him to discourse on the science of war, did not enough consider his own character. If he chose to do this in an age which wanted no such instructions, his conduct was certainly unseasonable. But when he presumed to instruct the greatest general and commander in the world, he deserved the censure which has disgraced him with all posterity122. A decorum like this is required in our attempts to promote truth and virtue. To dictate in such matters to persons wiser than ourselves, or to persons, who by their stations and characters should, in all reason, be supposed wiser, is a manifest indiscretion, and can never be attended with any good consequences. Were we ever so able to instruct, or were they ever so much in want of instruction, prudence would suggest a very different conduct. It would recommend to us all the honest arts of insinuation and address; it would oblige us to watch the fittest seasons and opportunities; or, perhaps, to content ourselves with the silent admonition of a good example. Or, were there nothing in the rank and condition of those we would work upon, to restrain us to this caution, we might even be required to shew a condescension to their very prejudices and humours. The errors of men may sometimes be removed by arguing with them on their own mistaken principles; by allowing all that truth and reason will warrant to their opinions; by putting the fairest construction upon their designs; by hinting objections to their wrong tenets, instead of fiercely declaiming against them; above all, by testifying a sincere disposition to advance truth and goodness, without any indirect views to our own interest. Or, were all other considerations out of the case, we could never be excused from proceeding in the way of gentleness and civility, from treating them with due respect, and expressing the sincerest good-will to their persons. Be their moral or religious defects what they will, we should hardly be wise; that is, we should take very improper methods of reclaiming them from either, if we reproved with bitterness, advised with insolence, or condemned with passion. In all addresses to mistaken or bad men, where our purpose is to inform or amend them, the gentlest applications are surely the best, because these excite no passion to counteract their virtue.
And now, at length, should it be asked who is that WISE CHRISTIAN whom the text designs and recommends to our imitation, we are able to furnish, at least, the outline of his character.
“He is one who sets before him the great END and prize of his high calling; who, in his progress through the various stages of this life, keeps in constant view the immortal happiness which his religion holds out in prospect to him in another: who, in humble adoration of his God and Saviour, is content to wait the appointed season which is to crown his hopes and expectations; and, for the present, is sollicitous to work out his salvation with fear and reverence, by an earnest application of his time and pains to those subservient duties, which are to qualify him for the enjoyment of Heaven; who subjects all the towering conceits of his understanding, to the doctrines of the Gospel, and the impetuous sallies of his will, to the precepts of it; who makes no audacious separation of what the wisdom of God hath joined together; but, whilst he adores the mysteries of his holy FAITH, walks on in the plain and humble path of moral OBEDIENCE. He is one, who thinks it not enough to rest in the mere MATTER of his duty, but performs it in such a MANNER as will render it most exemplary and efficacious. He knows it to be a great precept of his religion, to see, that his good be not evil spoken of. He would not disgrace the best cause in the world by the neglect of those decencies, which, as he observes, have sometimes the strange power to recommend the worst. The good he intends, therefore, is attempted in such a way, as is most BECOMING of himself; most SEASONABLE in respect of the opportunities which are offered to him; and most agreeable and PERSUASIVE to other men. In short, HE is one who, taking Prudence for his guide, and Innocence for his companion, thinks himself secure in these attendants; and therefore neglects no decorum, which the best philosophy prescribes; no art, which the soundest policy suggests; and no address, which the politest manners recommend: and so, in the high emphatic sense of the words, approves himself a WISE MAN; wise unto that which is good, to all purposes in this world, as well as in a better.”