A Body of Divinity, Vol. 4 (of 4) Wherein the doctrines of the Christian religion are explained and defended, being the substance of several lectures on the Assembly's Larger Catechism
A Body of Divinity
A BODY OF DIVINITY:
WHEREIN THE DOCTRINES OF THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION ARE EXPLAINED AND DEFENDED.
BEING THE SUBSTANCE OF SEVERAL LECTURES ON THE ASSEMBLY’S LARGER CATECHISM.
BY THOMAS RIDGLEY, D. D.
WITH NOTES, ORIGINAL AND SELECTED, BY JAMES P. WILSON, D. D.
IN FOUR VOLUMES.
VOL. IV.
FIRST AMERICAN, FROM THE THIRD EUROPEAN EDITION.
PHILADELPHIA:
PRINTED BY AND FOR WILLIAM W. WOODWARD, CORNER OF CHESNUT AND SOUTH SECOND STREETS.
1815.
THE CONTENTS OF THE FOURTH VOLUME.
QUEST. CXXXVII, CXXXVIII, CXXXIX. An Explication of the Seventh Commandment. Page 9
THE government of the affections 10
All uncleanness forbidden ibid
Polygamy was ever unlawful 11
The aggravations of uncleanness 13
The occasions of it 14
Of Theatres—a note 15
QUEST. CXL, CXLI. An Explication of the Eighth Commandment 16
Of frugality and diligence 17
Of justice in our dealings 19
Of charity to the poor 20
To whom to be extended ibid
And in what proportion 21
QUEST. CXLII. The Sins forbidden in the Eighth Commandment 22
Of theft and breach of trust 23
Of borrowing and not paying ibid
Whether Israel was guilty of it 24
Of plunder in war and oppression 25
Of unjust law-suits 26
Of sinful usury 27
Restitution a duty. Objections answered ibid
QUEST. CXLIII, CXLIV, CXLV. An Explication of the Ninth Commandment 28
The duties required 29
Sins forbidden 31
Of bearing false witness 32
Of lying. The definition of a lie 33
Its various kinds ibid
The midwives report, in Exod. i. 19. no lie 34
Of Rahab’s lie, Josh. ii. 4, 5. ibid
Of Jacob’s deceit, in Gen. xxvii. 19. 35
Elijah’s treatment of the Syrian host 36
Paul’s answer relating to the high priest 37
David’s lie to Ahimelech, in 1 Sam. xxi. 2. 38
His feigned madness at Gath, ver. 13-15. ibid
Of hypocrisy 39
Paul and Daniel vindicated 40
Of reproach. It differs from reproof 42
Things unjustly made the matter of it 43
Aggravations thereof 44
Elisha reproached at Bethel Ibid
Of backbiting. Instances of it 48
QUEST. CXLVI, CXLVII, CXLVIII. An Explication of the Tenth Commandment 50
Contentment required in every state 50
Motives to it under various troubles 51
The corruption of Nature forbidden 56
Of covetousness and its aggravations 58
Excuses for it answered 59
Remedies against discontent 61
QUEST. CXLIX. Of man’s inability to keep the Commandments of God 62
How man sins daily 63
Of sinful thoughts 64
The kinds, causes and cure of them ibid
Of sinful words and actions 66
QUEST. CL. All sins not equally heinous 67
QUEST. CLI. The aggravations of sin, and whence they arise 67
From the parties offending or offended 68
From the nature and quality of the offence 70
From the circumstances of it 72
QUEST. CLII, CLIII. Of the Desert of Sin, and of the means of escaping God’s wrath 74
Wrath of God not passion 75
How faith and repentance are the means of salvation 76
Note on procrastination 78
QUEST. CLIV. Of the Ordinances, or outward means of grace 79
Ordinances described ibid
By what ordinances Christ communicates his benefits 81
Singing God’s praises of divine institution 82
A gospel ordinance 83
To be public and united 84
Of musical instruments, a note 85
It is necessary to sing with understanding ibid
David’s Psalms still proper to be sung 89
Imprecations therein how used 91
Of hymns of human composure 95
Scripture Psalms and hymns preferable 96
QUEST. CLV. How the Word is made effectual to salvation 99
It enlightens and convinces of sin 101
It humbles and drives out of self 102
It draws to Christ 103
Other instances of its efficacy 104
QUEST. CLVL, CLVII. The Word of God to be read by all 106
The Word is to be read publicly 107
In families also, and in private 108
How the Papists oppose this 109
Their objections answered 110
Translation of scripture vindicated 112
How the scripture should be read 113
Expositions to be consulted 117
And various translations ibid
Of marginal references 118
Of supplemental additions 119
Texts to be compared with their contexts 121
One part of scripture illustrates another 122
Parallel scriptures to be compared 124
Rhetorical figures used in scripture 130
References there to different governments 135
To the civil affairs of Jews and others 136
To civil and religious officers 139
Of Publicans, Pharisees, Sadducees, Samaritans 140
General rules for explaining scripture 144
QUEST. CLVIII, CLIX, CLX. Of preaching and hearing the Word 146
The qualifications of ministers 147
How the word is to be preached 151
Diligently, plainly, faithfully 152
Wisely. Wherein this consists 154
Zealously and sincerely 155
Duties to be performed 157
Before hearing 158
In hearing, and after it 159
QUEST. CLXI, CLXII, CLXIII, CLXIV. Of the Sacraments 160
Sacrament. Its meaning 161
Its nature and matter ibid
How a sign or seal 163
To whom to be administered 166
Benefits conveyed therein 167
How effectual to salvation ibid
By whom to be administered, in note 168
Various sacraments of old 171
Now but two 172
QUEST. CLXV. Of Baptism. 174
Baptism a gospel ordinance ibid
Instituted by Christ 177
Note, Βαπτιζω a generic term 175
In whose name to be performed 178
What signified in it 179
An expectation of privileges 181
An acknowledgment of obligations ibid
The right of children to it—in a note 182
QUEST. CLXVI. Of the subjects and mode of Baptism 183
To whom Baptism is not to be administered ibid
Infants of believers, their right to baptism 186
By covenant—a note 187-193
May be dedicated in faith 187
Are included in the covenant 194
Are termed holy 196
Were circumcised 198
And ought to be baptized 199
Objections answered, taken
From infants’ want of grace 200
From the want of precept or example 201
From Christ’s own Baptism 206
Infant baptism no novelty 207
Practised by the ancient church ibid
Baptism an ordinance of dedication 186
An objection answered ibid
How believers may dedicate their infants in faith 187
An objection answered 194
Of the mode of Baptism 216
Baptism, the meaning of the word ibid
To be performed by pouring or sprinkling 218
Objections answered 219
Persons going down into the water 220
John’s baptizing at Ænon 222
Our being buried with Christ 225
Of the sign of the cross 228
Of sureties in Baptism ibid
QUEST. CLXVII. How Baptism should be improved 229
QUEST. CLXVIII, CLXIX, CLXX. Of the Lord’s supper 234
The Lord’s supper is a gospel ordinance 236
It was instituted by Christ ibid
By whom to be administered 237
Of the elements, how consecrated ibid
The actions to be performed 238
The gesture to be used 239
Of some Popish irregularities 240
Things signified in the Lord’s supper 242
What faith should then fix on 244
Qualifications of communicants 245, 263
QUEST. CLXXI. Of preparation for the Lord’s supper 246
Of self examination ibid
Things to be enquired into. Our state 247
How this may be known ibid
Our sense of sin 248
Our wants 249
Our knowledge of divine things 251
The truth and degree of our graces 253
Our love to the brethren 255
How this may be discerned 256
QUEST. CLXXII, CLXXIII. Who fit to be Communicants 258
Doubting Christians, their case 259
Encouragement for them ibid
Promises made to them 260
Advice offered them 262
The wicked to be kept from the Lord’s table 263
Objections answered 264
QUEST. CLXXIV, CLXXV. Of the duties required in and after receiving the Lord’s supper 268
What meditations proper at this ordinance 269
Graces to be then exercised 270
We are to rejoice in Christ’s love 273
Properties of his love ibid
To renew our covenant, and how 275
To express a love to all saints 276
What behaviour unsuitable ibid
Vows, how to be made there 278
How to be fulfilled ibid
A frequent attendance, how encouraged 280
QUEST. CLXXVI, CLXXVII. Wherein Baptism and the Lord’s supper agree, and wherein they differ 281-284
QUEST. CLXXVIII. Of Prayer 285
Of the kinds and parts of prayer 287
Confession of sin the duty of all 288
An objection answered ibid
How to be performed 290
What sins to be confessed ibid
The sin of our nature ibid
And all actual transgressions 291
Thankfulness for mercies, a duty 293
In every age and condition of life ibid
For relative and personal mercies 294
QUEST. CLXXIX, CLXXX, CLXXXI. To whom, and in whose name we must pray 298
We are to pray to God only 299
What it is to pray in Christ’s name 300
Why we are to pray in his name 301
QUEST. CLXXXII, CLXXXIII, CLXXXIV. Of the Spirit’s help in prayer; for whom and for what we are to pray 302
The Spirits assistance in prayer 303
What this supposes ibid
It respects the matter of prayer ibid
The inward frame of heart 304
And the success of the duty 306
Of raised affections in prayer 308
Persons to be prayed for, are
The whole church militant 309
The ministers of Christ 311
Our enemies, and all men living 312
Purgatory a fiction 315
The dead are not to be prayed for 314
The opinion of the ancients about it 315
Nor they who have sinned the sin unto death 318
What that sin is ibid
Whether now committed 319
Doubts about it resolved 320
What things we are to pray for 322
QUEST. CLXXXV. How we are to pray 323
With a suitable frame ibid
In the exercise of grace 324
What necessary thereunto 334
Of faith in prayer 329
Promises of help in prayer 330
Promises of God’s hearing prayer 331
Objections against praying answered 332
Love to God to be exercised in prayer 333
Discouragements from praying removed 336
QUEST. CLXXXVI, CLXXXVII. Of the Rule for our direction in prayer 338
How the word of God directs herein 339
What expressions equivalent to promises 342
Promises of outward blessings 344
Of spiritual and temporal 345
Promises to the afflicted 346
To the depressed in prayer 347
Respecting ordinances 349
Of grace and peace 350
How these are of use in prayer 351
Reproofs are of use in prayer 353
So are prayers recorded in Scripture 354
Inferences from these directions 355
The Lord’s prayer a special direction 356
QUEST. CLXXXVIII, CLXXXIX. The Preface of the Lord’s Prayer explained 359
God, how a Father to men 360
First known, then addressed as such 362
How to be prayed to as being in heaven 365
Child-like dispositions required in us 364
QUEST. CXC. The first Petition explained 368
God’s name, what meant by it 369
How he sanctifies it himself ibid
How sanctified in redemption 370
How under the legal dispensation 371
How under the gospel 373
What intended by, Hallowed be thy Name 375
What to be prayed for, that we may do it 376
What to be deprecated to that end 379
When God’s name is hallowed 381
How, when things are disposed to his glory 382
QUEST. CXCI. The second Petition explained 384
Of God’s providential kingdom 385
Of his kingdom of grace 386
Satan’s kingdom, how to be destroyed 387
How we are to pray for its destruction 388
Christ’s kingdom, how to be advanced 389
How we are to pray for its advancement 390
And that his kingdom of glory may come 394
QUEST. CXCII, The third Petition explained 396
Of prayer to an unchangeable God—in note 397-402
Our averseness to the will of God 402
Of praying that his will may be done 403
QUEST. CXCIII. The fourth Petition explained 407
What supposed in praying for daily bread 407
What intended in praying for bread 409
Why we call it ours 410
What we are to understand by this day 411
This petition respects ourselves and others 412
QUEST. CXCIV. The fifth Petition explained 414
The case of man when charged with guilt 415
Pardon, none but God can give it 417
All are to pray for it 418
How God is to be considered when we pray thus 420
Of our forgiving others 425
What meant thereby 424
Arguments to induce thereunto 426
Of doing it without satisfaction ibid
An objection answered 428
When a sign of God’s forgiving us 429
QUEST. CXCV. The sixth Petition explained 431
What this Petition supposes 432
How God tempts, and why 433
God not the cause of sin—in note 433-435
Deliver us from evil, how understood 438
Temptations arise from prosperity 439
From adversity 441
From the flesh 442
From Satan 443
When from him, and when from ourselves 445
Remarks upon Satan’s temptations 446
They increase sin 448
Are suited to every age 449
And to the tempers of men 451
He endeavours to prevent conviction 452
To hinder preaching the gospel 453
To prevent closing with Christ 454
He injects blasphemous thoughts 457
He tempts to despair 458
How we are to pray against temptation 461
QUEST. CXCVI. What the conclusion of the Lord’s Prayer teacheth 465
The Doxology explained 466
The pleas contained in it 467
The meaning of the word Amen 468
Whether all should say aloud, Amen 471
THE DOCTRINES OF THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION EXPLAINED AND DEFENDED.
Quest. CXXXVII., CXXXVIII., CXXXIX.
QUEST. CXXXVII. Which is the seventh Commandment?
ANSW. The seventh Commandment is, [Thou shalt not commit adultery.]
QUEST. CXXXVIII. What are the duties required in the seventh Commandment?
ANSW. The duties required in the seventh Commandment, are, chastity in body, mind, affections, words, and behaviour; and the preservation of it in ourselves and others; watchfulness over the eyes, and all the senses; temperance, keeping of chaste company, modesty in apparel, marriage by those that have not the gift of continency; conjugal love, and cohabitation, diligent labour in our callings, shunning all occasions of uncleanness, resisting temptations thereunto.
QUEST. CXXXIX. What are the sins forbidden in the seventh Commandment?
ANSW. The sins forbidden in the seventh Commandment, besides the neglect of the duties required, are, adultery, fornication, rape, incest, sodomy, and all unnatural lusts, all unclean imaginations, thoughts, purposes, and affections, all corrupt or filthy communications, or listening thereunto; wanton looks, impudent, or light behaviour; immodest apparel; prohibiting of lawful, and dispensing with unlawful marriages, allowing, tolerating, keeping of stews, and resorting to them; intangling vows of single life; undue delay of marriage, having more wives or husbands than one, at the same time; unjust divorce, or desertion; idleness, gluttony, drunkenness, unchaste company, lascivious songs, books, pictures, dancings, stage plays, and all other provocations to, or acts of uncleanness, either in ourselves or others.
This Commandment respects, more especially, the government of the affections, and the keeping our minds and bodies in such an holy frame, that nothing impure, immodest, or contrary to the strictest chastity, may defile, or be a reproach to us, or insinuate itself into our conversation with one another. And, in order thereunto, we are to set a strict watch over our thoughts and actions, and avoid every thing that may be an occasion of this sin, and use those proper methods that may prevent all temptations to it. Therefore we ought to associate ourselves with none but those whose conversation is chaste, and such as becomes Christians, to abhor all words and actions that are not so much as to be named among persons professing godliness. As for those who cannot, without inconveniency, govern their affections, but are sometimes tempted to any thing that is inconsistent with that purity of heart and life, which all ought religiously to maintain, it is their duty to enter into a married state; which is an ordinance that God has appointed, to prevent the breach of this Commandment. And this leads us to consider the sins forbidden therein, together with the occasions thereof.
I. Concerning the sins forbidden in this Commandment. And,
1. Some are not only contrary to nature, but inconsistent with the least pretences to religion; which were abhorred by the very Heathen themselves, and, by the law of God, punished with death; which punishment, when it has not been inflicted, God has, by his immediate hand, testified his vengeance against sinners, by raining down fire and brimstone from heaven, as he did upon the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrha, Lev. xviii. 22,—25. chap. xx. 13, 15, 16. Rom. i. 24, 26, 27, 28. Gen. xix. 24. These sins are called in this answer, incest, sodomy, and unnatural lusts. To which we may add, offering violence to others, and thereby forcing them to do what they could not even think of, but with abhorrence; this is called rape; and, by the law of God, the guilty person was punished with death, Deut. xxii. 25.
2. There are other sins, whereby this Commandment is violated; which, though more common, are, nevertheless, such as are attended with a very great degree of guilt and impurity. These are either, such as are committed by those who are unmarried, viz. fornication, or by those who are married, as adultery; the latter of which, by the law of God, was punished with death, Lev. xx. 10. as contained in it several aggravating circumstances; inasmuch as hereby the marriage contract is violated; that mutual affection, which is the end of that relation broken; and thereby the greatest injury is done to the innocent as well as ruin brought on the guilty. However, both these sins agree in this, that they proceed from a corrupt heart; as our Saviour says, Mat. xv. 19. and argue the person that is guilty of them, alienated from the life of God. And to this we may add,
3. That, another sin forbidden in this Commandment is, polygamy, or a having more husbands, or wives, than one, at the same time; together with that which often accompanies it, viz. concubinage. It is beyond dispute, that many good men have been guilty of this sin, as appears by what is recorded, in scripture, concerning Abraham, Jacob, David, &c. and we do not find that they are expressly reproved for it, which has given occasion to some modern writers, to think that it was not unlawful in those ages, but was afterwards rendered so by being prohibited under the gospel-dispensation[1]. This, indeed, cuts the knot of a very considerable difficulty; but it contains another that is equally great; inasmuch as hereby it does not appear to be contrary to the law of nature; and therefore I would rather chuse to take another method to solve it, viz. that many bad actions of good men are recorded in scripture, but not approved of, nor proposed for our imitation. Of this kind I must conclude the polygamy and concubinage of several holy men, mentioned in scripture, to have been. And that it may appear that this practice was not justifiable, let it be observed,
(1.) That, some sin or other is often expressly mentioned, as the occasion hereof. Thus Abraham’s taking Hagar, was occasioned by Sarah’s unbelief; because the promise of her having a son was not immediately fulfilled, Gen. xvi. 1, 2. And Jacob’s taking Rachel to wife after Leah, and his own discontent arising from it, was occasioned by Laban’s unjust dealing with him, and his going in unto Bilhah, was occasioned by Rachel’s unreasonable desire of children; and his taking Zilpah, by Leah’s ambitious desire of having pre-eminence over Rachel, by the number of her children, chap. xxix, and xxx.
(2.) This was generally attended with the breach of that peace, which is so desirable a blessing in families, and many disorders that ensued hereupon. Accordingly, we read of an irreconcilable quarrel that there was between Sarah and Hagar; and Ishmael’s hatred of Isaac, which the apostle calls persecution, Gal. iv. 39. And to this we may add, the contentions that were in Jacob’s family, and the envy expressed by the children of one of his wives, against those of another; and the opposition which one wife often expressed to another as that of Peninnah, one of the wives of Elkanah, to Hannah, the other. Therefore we must conclude, that Isaac’s example is rather to be followed in this matter, who had but one wife, and he loved her better than many of the patriarch’s did theirs; whose love was divided among several.
Object. 1. If polygamy was a sin against the light of nature, it is strange, that it should be committed by good men; and, that they should live and die without repenting of it, nor be, in the least, reproved for it; as we do not find that they were, in scripture.
Answ. It was indeed, a sin, which they might have known to be so, had they duly considered it, in all its circumstances and consequences; but this they did not; and therefore it was not so great a sin in them, as it would be in us, who have clearer discoveries of the heinous nature of it. Therefore, if we suppose they repented of all sin agreeably to the light they had, they might be saved; and this, though unrepented of, was no bar to their salvation, supposing they knew it not to be a sin; and God’s not having explicitly reproved them for it, argues only his forbearance, but not his approbation of it.
Object. 2. It is farther objected, that God says, by Nathan, to David, I gave thee thy master’s wives into thy bosom, 2 Sam. xii. 8. therefore, that which God gives, it is not unlawful for man to receive.
Answ. The meaning of that scripture in general, is, that God made him king; and then, according to the custom of the eastern kings, he took possession of what belonged to his predecessor, and consequently of his wives. Therefore God might be said to give David Saul’s wives providentially, in giving him the kingdom; so that they were his property, that he might take them for his own, according to custom, if he was inclined so to do. And this the kings of Judah generally did; though it does not follow from hence that God approved of it; in like manner as tyrants may be said to be raised up by God’s providence and permission; nevertheless, he does not approve of their tyranny.
All that we shall add, under this head, to what has been suggested, concerning the disorders that polygamy has occasioned in families, is, that it is contrary to the first institution of marriage. God created but one woman as an help-meet for Adam; though, if ever there were any pretence for the necessity of one man’s having more wives, it must have been in that instance, in which it seemed necessary for the increase of the world; but he rather chose that mankind should be propagated by slower advances, than to give the least dispensation, or indulgence to polygamy, as being contrary to the law of nature, Gen. ii. 22,-24. And the prophet, in Mal. ii. 15. takes notice of God’s making but one; though he had the residue of the Spirit; and therefore could have given Adam more wives than one. And the reason assigned for this was, that he might seek a godly seed, i. e. that the children that should be born of many wives, might not be the result of the ungodly practice of their father, as it would be, were this contrary to the law of nature; which we suppose it to be. This I rather understand by a godly seed, and not that the character of godly refers to the children; for these could not be said to be godly, or ungodly, as the consequence of their parents having one or more wives.
There is one scripture more that I cannot wholly pass over, which, to me, seems a plain prohibition of polygamy, in Levit. xviii. 18. Thou shalt not take a wife to her sister, to vex her, to uncover her nakedness, besides the other in her life-time. This respects either incest or polygamy; one of which must be meant by taking a wife to her sister. Now it cannot be a prohibition of incest; because it is said, Thou shalt not do it in her life-time; which plainly intimates, that it might be done after her death. Whereas it is certainly contrary to the law of God and nature, for a person to take his wife’s sister after her decease, as well as in her life-time. Therefore the meaning is, Thou shalt not take another wife to her whom thou hast married; by which means they will become sisters. And here is another reason assigned hereof, viz. the envy, jealousy, and vexation that would attend such a practice, as the taking another wife would be a means of vexing, or making her uneasy. And therefore the sense is, as is observed in the marginal reading; Thou shalt not take one wife to another; or, Thou shalt not have more wives than one. This is a plain prohibition of this sin; but whether some holy men, in following ages, understood the meaning of this law, may be questioned; and therefore they were not sensible of the guilt they hereby contracted. Thus we have considered some of the sins forbidden in this Commandment. Every particular instance of the breach hereof, would exceed our intended brevity, on the subject we are treating of. Therefore,
We shall proceed to consider the aggravations, more especially, of the sins of fornication and adultery; which may also with just reason, be applied to all other unnatural lusts; which have been before considered as a breach of this Commandment. And,
[1.] They are opposite to sanctification, even as darkness is to light, hell to heaven; thus the apostle opposes fornication and uncleanness, to it, 1 Thes. iv. 3, 7.
[2.] These sins are inconsistent with that relation, we pretend to stand in, to Christ, as members of his body; inasmuch as we join ourselves in a confederacy with his profligate enemies, 1 Cor. vi. 15, 16. And to this we may add, that they are a dishonour to, and a defilement of our own bodies, which ought to be the temples of the Holy Ghost, and therefore should be consecrated to him.
[3.] They bring guilt and ruin on two persons at once, as well as a blot and stain on each of their families, and a wound to religion by those who make any profession of it, as it gives occasion to the enemies of the Lord to blaspheme, Prov. vi. 33. 2 Sam. xii. 14.
[4.] They bring with them many other sins; as they tend to vitiate the affections, deprave the mind, defile the conscience, and provoke God to give persons up to spiritual judgments, which will end in their running into all excess of riot.
And to this we may add, that many sad consequences will ensue on the commission of these sins; as they tend to blast and ruin their substance in the world, Job xxxi. 9, 11, 12. debase and stupify the soul, and deprive it of wisdom, Hos. iv. 11. Prov. vi. 32. chap. vii. 22. wound the conscience, and expose the person who is guilty hereof, to the utmost hazard of perishing for ever, chap. vi. 33. chap. vii. 13, 19, 26, 27. And if God is pleased to give him repentance, it will be attended with great bitterness, Eccl. vii. 26.
II. We are now to consider the occasion of these sins to be avoided by those who would not break this Commandment, and these are,
1. Intemperance, or excess in eating or drinking; the former of which is a making provision for the flesh, to fulfil the lusts thereof; the latter confounds and buries the little reason a person was master of, and makes him an easy prey to temptation. This was Lot’s case, who kept his integrity in Sodom; yet being made drunk by his daughters in Zoar, he committed the abominable sin of incest with them, Gen. xix. 31.
2. Idleness, consisting either in the neglect of business, or indulging too much sleep, which occasions many temptations. Thus David first gave way to sloth, and then was tempted to uncleanness; and it is observed, that at the time when kings go forth to battle, 2 Sam. xi. 1, 2. and he ought to have been with his army in the field, he tarried at Jerusalem, and slept in the middle of the day; for in the evening tide he arose from off his bed; And the heinous sin he was guilty of, which was the greatest blemish in his life, ensued hereupon.
3. Pride in apparel, or other ornaments, beyond the bounds of modesty, or for other ends than what God, when he clothed man at first, intended; when our attire is inconsistent with our circumstances in the world, or the character of persons professing godliness: This God reproves the Jews for, when grown very degenerate, and near to ruin, Isa. iii. 16, &c. seq. And Jezebel, when Jehu came in quest of her, painted her face, and tired her head; but this did not prevent his executing God’s righteous judgments upon her. All these things are mentioned as the sins for which Sodom was infamous; and gave occasion to those other abominations, which provoked God to destroy them, Ezek. xvi. 49. And to this we may add,
4. Keeping evil company: Thus it is said of the lewd woman, she hath cast down many wounded, Prov. vii. 26. This will hasten our own ruin; especially if we associate ourselves with such persons out of choice: for it is a sign that our hearts are exceedingly depraved and alienated from God: Nevertheless, if Providence cast our lot amongst bad company, we may escape that guilt and defilement, which would otherwise ensue, if we bear our testimony against their sin, and are grieved for it, as Lot was for the filthy conversation of the Sodomites, among whom he dwelt, 2 Pet. ii. 7, 8. Moreover, the frequenting those places where there are mixed dancing, masquerades, stage-plays, &c. which tend to corrupt the principles and practices, and seldom fail of defiling the consciences, and manners of those who attend on them: These are nurseries of vice, and give occasion to this sin, and many others, Prov. vi. 27, compared with 32.
As for the remedies against it, these are, an exercising a constant watchfulness against all temptations thereunto, chap. viii. 9. avoiding all conversation with men or books which tend to corrupt the mind, and fill it with levity, under a pretence of improving it: But more especially a retaining a constant sense of God’s all-seeing eye, his infinite purity and vindictive justice, which will induce us to say as Joseph did, in the like case, How can I do this great wickedness and sin against God, Gen. xxxix. 9.[2]
Footnote 1:
Vid. Grot. de jur. bell. & pacis, Lib. ii. cap. v. § 9.
Footnote 2:
The Theatre is said to have commenced at Athens, but to have been so much disapproved of, both in Greece and at Rome, that it was allowed no permanency till the days of Pompey. Minutius Felix derided the Christians for abstaining from this amusement. It is not probable therefore that the first Christians required any reproof in any of the Epistles for this vice. But every abuse of it may find its correction in scripture. Morals and piety may be thrown into Dialogue without reasonable objection. But to turn these things into play, and the amusement of the reprobate, cannot be justified.—There is no fairness in arguing from what they might be, to prove the lawfulness of plays in the state in which they are, always have been, and will probably always be. That they are, and tend to evil is proved by the avidity with which they are frequented by even the worst members of society. They are calculated to excite the affections and passions in the highest manner, and so to render private happiness, domestic enjoyments, and religious observances insipid or disgusting. The reiteration of scenes of impurity, illicit amours, extravagant passions, jealousy, and revenge, will make a silent and secret impression upon the mind, and if they do not promote the same wickedness, they will at least render the mind less abhorrent of such crimes. True religion requires the exclusion of such imaginations, the immediate banishment of such thoughts, that we should mortify and deny ourselves; “Blessed are the pure in heart for they shall see God.” The cruelty and bloodshed frequently threatened, or resorted to in defence of false honour; the pomp, pride, and ambition not unfrequently exhibited upon the stage, must necessarily prompt to like feats in vindication of character, or at least lead to self-importance and fastidiousness; but the gospel teaches humility, self-denial, lowliness of mind; “Blessed are the poor in spirit.” When such representations please, they prove the mind corrupt, and become an index of the morals of those who are entertained with such spectacles. The Christian duties of meekness, silence, forbearance, humility, bearing the cross, faith, and repentance, are either incapable of being transferred to the stage, or if seen there are exposed to contempt, and ridicule. The addresses to Deity, and prayers there offered, are surely Heaven-provoking blasphemies. The Theatre interrupts religious, domestic, and public duties; it dissipates and fascinates the mind; weakens conscience, grieves the Holy Spirit, wastes property, and time; and unqualifies both for this, and the world to come.
Every one who attends is chargeable with the evil which obtains before him, for he goes voluntarily, he submits himself as to the matter of his amusement to others, and thus with the blessings of Providence, bribes the enemies of God to blaspheme him.
Some men of character for morals have countenanced, and some have written for the stage, perhaps they calculated upon what it might be, and aimed to correct the evil by drawing to it the more respectable of society. But the great majority of men are enemies to God, these will only be pleased with evil, and their pleasure will always be sought, because interest will compel to this. This is therefore doing evil that good may come; if indeed it can under any circumstances be good, to turn even correct performances, if such there were, into publick amusement.
After all there can be no hope of a total removal of this evil, yet we are on this account no more excused from bearing testimony against it, than from opposing other crimes which cannot be wholly prevented.
Quest. CXL., CXLI.
QUEST. CXL. Which is the eighth Commandment?
ANSW. The eighth Commandment is, [Thou shalt not steal.]
QUEST. CXLI. What are the duties required in the eighth Commandment?
ANSW. The duties required in the eighth Commandment are, truth, faithfulness, and justice in contracts, and commerce between man and man; rendering to every one his due; restitution of goods unlawfully detained from the right owners thereof; giving, and lending freely, according to our abilities, and the necessities of others; moderation of our judgments, wills, and affections, concerning worldly goods; a provident care and study to get, keep, use, and dispose those things which are necessary and convenient for the sustentation of our nature, and suitable to our condition; a lawful calling, and diligence in it; frugality, avoiding unnecessary law-suits, and suretyship, or other like engagements; and an endeavour, by all just and lawful means, to procure, preserve, and further the wealth and outward estate of others, as well as our own.
This Commandment supposes, that God has given to every one a certain portion of the good things of this world, that he may lay claim to as his own; which no other has a right to. The general scope and design thereof, is to put us upon using endeavours to promote our own and our neighbour’s wealth and outward estate. As to what concerns ourselves, it respects the government of our affections, and setting due bounds to our desires of worldly things, that they may not exceed what the good providence of God has allotted for us, in order to our comfortable passage through this world. Thus Agar prays, Give me neither poverty nor riches; feed me with food convenient for me, Prov. xxx. 8.
As to what respects our endeavours to gain the world; it requires a due care and diligence, to get, and keep a competency thereof; that we may not, through our own default, expose ourselves to those straits and necessities which are the consequence of sloth and negligence, chap. xxiii. 21. chap. xxiv. 30, 31. God may, indeed, give estates to some without any pains, or care to get them, Deut. vi. 10, 11. yet, even in this case, sloth is a sin which brings with it many hurtful lusts, that render riches a snare, and hindrance to their spiritual welfare: Therefore they, who are in prosperous circumstances in the world, ought not to lay aside all care and industry to improve, what they have to the glory of God. But, on the other hand, they who are in a low condition, ought to use a provident care and diligence, in order to their having a comfortable subsistence therein. Accordingly this Commandment obliges us to use all lawful endeavours to promote our own and our neighbour’s wealth, and outward estate.
I. To promote our own wealth and estate. This we are to do,
1. By frugality in our expences, avoiding profuseness; and that, either in giving away our substance to unfit objects, to wit, those who are in better circumstances than ourselves, who ought to be givers rather than receivers, Prov. xxii. 16. or else in making large contributions to support a bad cause, and in consuming our substance on our lusts. Likewise when we are unwarily profuse in those expences, which would be otherwise lawful, did they not exceed our circumstances or income in the world, which contains a disregard of the future estate of our families, and taking a method to reduce ourselves and them to poverty, 1 Tim. v. 8. Or, if our circumstances will admit of large expenses; yet, to abound therein, merely out of ostentation, and at the same time, to withhold our liberality from the poor is inconsistent with frugality.
2. We ought also to be diligent, and industrious in our calling; and, in order thereunto,
(1.) We are wisely to make choice of such a calling, in which we may glorify God, and expect his blessing, in order to the promoting our wealth and outward estate; therefore that business is to be chosen which we are most capable of managing, and has in itself the fewest temptations attending it; especially such wherein the conscience is not burdened by unlawful oaths, or prostituting solemn ordinances, not designed by Christ as a qualification for them. Moreover, we are not to choose those callings wherein the gain is obtained by oppression or extortion, and which cannot be managed without danger of sinning; which will bring the blast of providence on all our undertakings. Therefore we are earnestly to desire God’s direction in this weighty concern, as well as depend on him for success therein, Eccl. ix. 11. Deut. viii. 18.
(2.) When we have made choice of a lawful calling, we are to manage it in such a way, that we may expect the blessing of God, in order to the promoting our wealth and outward estate. Accordingly,
[1.] Let us pursue and manage it with right and warrantable ends, to wit, the glory of God; and, in subordination thereunto, our providing for ourselves and families, that we may be in a capacity of doing good to others, and serving the interest of Christ in our day and generation.
[2.] Let us take heed that our secular employments do not rob God of that time, which ought to be devoted to his worship; and that our hearts be not alienated from him, so that while we are labouring for the world, we should live without God therein.
[3.] Let us take heed that we do not launch out too far, or run too great hazards in trade, resolving that we will be suddenly rich or poor, which may tend to the ruin of our own families, as well as others, 1 Tim. vi. 9.
[4.] Let us bear disappointments in our callings, with patience and submission to the will of God, without murmuring or repining at his wise and sovereign dispensations of providence herein.
II. This Commandment obliges us to promote the wealth and outward estate of our neighbour. This we are to do, by exercising strict justice in our contracts and dealings with all men; and by relieving the wants and necessities of those who stand in need of our charity.
1. As to what respects the exercise of justice in our dealings.
(1.) We must take heed, that we do not exact upon, or take unreasonable profit of those whom we deal with, arising from the ignorance of some, and the necessities of others, Jer. iii. 15. Neither, must we use any methods to supplant and ruin others, against the laws of trade, by selling goods at a cheaper rate than any one can afford them, thereby doing damage to ourselves with a design to ruin them, who are less able to bear such a loss.
(2.) Those goods, which we know to be faulty, are not, by false arts, or deceitful words, to be sold, as though they were not so, Amos viii. 6. And, on the other hand, the buyer is not to take advantage of the ignorance of the seller, as it sometimes happens; neither is he to pretend that it is worth less than he really thinks it to be, Prov. xx. 14.
(3.) Nothing is to be diminished in weight or measure, from what was bought, worse goods to be delivered than what were purchased, Amos vii. 5. nor the balances to be falsified by deceit, Deut. xxv. 13, 14, 15.
2. We are to promote the good of our poor distressed neighbour, in works of charity; and that not only by inward sympathy, or bowels of compassion towards him; but according to our ability, by relieving him. To induce us hereunto, let us consider, that outward good things are talents given us, with this view, that hereby we may be in a capacity of helping others, as well as be needing help ourselves. And when we do this, we may be said to improve what we have received from God, as those who are accountable to him for it, and testify our gratitude to him for outward blessings. It may also be considered, that Christ takes such acts of kindness, when proceeding from an unfeigned love to him, as done to himself, Matt. xxv. 40. Prov. xix. 17. And, to this we may add, that there are many special motives, taken from the objects of our charity, namely, the pressing necessities of some, the excelling holiness of others; and, in some instances, we may consider, that, by an act of charity, whereby we relieve one, we do good to many; or the tendency that this may have to promote the interest of Christ in general, when we relieve those that suffer for the sake of the gospel. This leads us to consider,
(1.) Of whom works of charity are required. If this be duly weighed, we shall find, that scarce any are exempted from this duty, except it be those of whom it may be said, there are none poorer than themselves, or who have no more than what is absolutely necessary to support their families, or such as are labouring hard, to spare out of their necessary expenses, what will but just serve to pay their debts; or they who are reduced to such straits as to depend upon others, so that they can call nothing they have their own.
Nevertheless, this duty is incumbent;
[1.] On the rich, out of their abundance.
[2.] On those who are in middle circumstances in the world, who have a sufficiency to lay out in superfluous expenses: And,
[3.] Even the poor ought to give a small testimony of their gratitude to God, by sparing a little, if they can, out of what they get in the world, for those who are poorer than themselves; which, if it be but a few mites, it may be an acceptable sacrifice to God, Luke xxi. 2, 4. and, if persons have nothing before hand in the world, they ought to work for this end, as well as to maintain themselves and families, Eph. iv. 28.
(2.) We are now to consider, who are to be reckoned objects of our charity. To which it may be answered; Not the rich, who stand in no need of it, from whom we may expect a sufficient requital, Luke xiv. 12, 13, 14. nor those who are strong and healthy, but yet make a trade of begging, because it is an idle and sometimes a profitable way of living, 2 Thess. iii. 10-12. But such are to be relieved, who are not able to work; especially if they were not reduced to poverty by their own sloth and negligence, but by the providence of God not succeeding their endeavours; and if, while they were able, they were ready to all works of charity themselves, 1 Tim. v. 10. and to these we may add, such who are related to us, either in the bonds of nature, or in a spiritual sense, Gal. vi. 10. This leads us to enquire,
(3.) What part, or proportion of our substance, we are to apply to charitable uses? In answer to this, let it be considered, that the circumstances of persons in the world being so various, as well as their necessary occasions for extraordinary expenses, it is impossible to give a general rule, to be observed by all. However, it must be premised,
[1.] That our present contributions, ought not to preclude all thoughts, about laying up for ourselves or families, for time to come.
[2.] Whatever proportion we give of our gain in the world, some abatements may reasonably be made for losses in trade; especially if what we give was not determined, or laid aside, for that use before the loss happened. As to what may farther be observed concerning this matter, it ought to be left to the impartial determination of every one, who is to act, as being sensible that he is accountable to God herein. The apostle lays down one general rule; Every man, according as he purposeth in his heart, so let him give; not grudgingly, or of necessity; for God loveth a cheerful giver, 2 Cor. ix. 7. But though we pretend not to determine the exact proportion which ought to be given, viz. whether it be a tenth part of their profits, or more, or less; yet it is highly reasonable, that every one should contribute as much in works of charity, as he lays out in mere superfluities; or, at least, spare a part out of his superfluous expenses, for charitable uses. And there are some occasions which may call for large contributions. Thus the churches in Macedonia are commended, not only for their giving according to, but beyond their power, chap. viii. 1, 2, 3. Three things may be here considered,
1st, The extreme necessities of those whom we are bound to take care of; and, sometimes, the distressed circumstances of the church of God, in general, require larger contributions than ordinary; which was the occasion of the Command mentioned by our Saviour, of selling all, and giving to the poor, which was put in practice in the infancy of the church, or the first planting of the gospel, at Jerusalem.
2dly, Extraordinary instances of the kindness of God, in prospering us, either in worldly or spiritual concerns, beyond our expectation, call for extraordinary expressions of gratitude to God, in laying by for the poor, 1 Cor. xvi. 2.
3dly, When we have committed great sins, or are under very humbling providences, whether personal or national, as being exposed to, or fearing the judgments of God, which seem to be approaching; this calls for deep humiliation, and, together therewith, proportionable acts of charity.
(4.) We are now to consider, with what frame of spirit works of charity are to be performed? To which, it may be answered, that they are to be performed prudently, as our own circumstances will permit, and the necessity of the object requires; also seasonably, not putting this duty off till another time, when the necessities of those, whom we are bound to relieve, call for present assistance, Prov. ii. 28. It is also to be done secretly, as not desiring to be seen of men, or commended by them for it, Matt. vi. 3, 4, and cheerfully, 2 Cor. ix. 7. also with tenderness and compassion to those whose necessities call for relief, as considering how soon God can reduce us to the same extremity which they are exposed to, who are the objects of our charity. It ought to be done likewise with thankfulness to God, that has made us givers, rather than receivers, Acts x. 35. and, as a testimony of our love to Christ, especially when we contribute to the necessities of his members, Matt. x. 42.
Quest. CXLII.
QUEST. CXLII. What are the sins forbidden in the eighth Commandment?
ANSW. The sins forbidden in the eighth Commandment, besides the neglect of the duties required, are, theft, robbery, man-stealing, and receiving any thing that is stolen, fraudulent dealing, false weights and measures, removing landmarks, injustice and unfaithfulness in contracts between man and man, or in matters of trust; oppression, extortion, usury, bribery, vexatious law-suits, unjust inclosures, and depopulations; ingrossing commodities to enhance the price, unlawful callings, and all other unjust, or sinful ways of taking, or withholding from our neighbour what belongs to him, or of enriching ourselves. Covetousness, inordinate prizing and affecting worldly goods; distrustful and distracting cares and studies in getting, keeping, and using them, envying at the prosperity of others. As likewise idleness, prodigality, wasteful gaming, and all other ways whereby we do unduly prejudice our own outward estate; and defrauding ourselves of the due use and comfort of that estate which God hath given us.
This Commandment forbids, in general all kind of theft; and may include in it that which is very seldom called by this name, to wit, the robbing of ourselves and families; which we may be said to do, by neglecting our worldly calling, or by the imprudent management thereof. Also, by lending larger sums of money than our circumstances will well bear, to those who are never like to pay it again; or, which is in effect the same, by being surety for such. Moreover we rob ourselves and families, by being profuse and excessive in our expenses; and by consuming what we have, while pursuing our pleasures more than business; or by gaming, whereby we run the risque of losing part of our substance, and thereby reducing ourselves, or others, to poverty. On the other hand, we rob ourselves and families, when, out of a design to lay up a great deal for the time to come, we deprive ourselves and them, of the common necessaries of life, which is, in effect, to starve for the present, to prevent our starving for the future. But, passing this by, we shall consider this Commandment more especially, as it respects our defrauding others; and this is done,
I. By taking away any part of their wealth, or worldly substance. This is generally known by the name of theft, and that, with the greatest severity, in proportion to its aggravations; and they who are guilty of it, are, without repentance, excluded from the kingdom of God, 1 Cor. vi. 9, 10. However, let it be considered, that every kind of theft does not deserve an equal degree of punishment from men; for sometimes hereby the owner of what was stolen, receives but little damage; though in this case, some punishment, short of death, ought to be inflicted, to reform the wicked person, and deter him from going on in the breach of this Commandment, from less to greater sins.
By the law of God, a simple theft was punished with restitution of double, and sometimes, four times as much as the damage amounted to, which was sustained thereby, Exod. xxii. 1, 4, 7. Yet, in other cases, the theft was punished with death, when it had in it some circumstances that aggravated it in an uncommon degree; as if an house, which ought to be reckoned a man’s castle, be broke open, and that, in the night-time, when he is in no condition of defending himself, or his worldly substance. In this case the law is not unjust, that punishes the thief with death; and this is supposed in that law which says, that he that kills such an one who breaks up his neighbour’s house by night, shall have no blood shed for him, ver. 2. But, in other instances, confinement, and hard labour, may be as effectual a way to put a stop to this sin; and is rather to be chosen than punishment with death. Thus concerning this Commandment, as broken by theft.
II. It is farther broken, by unfaithfulness, or breach of trust; whether the trust he devolved on us by nature, as that of parents towards their children; or by contract, as that of servants, who are entrusted with the goods and secrets of their masters; or, that which is founded in the desire and request of those who constitute persons executors to their wills, or guardians to orphans, under age, provided they accept of this trust; I say, if these violate their trust, by embezzling or squandering away the substance of others, defrauding them, to enrich themselves. This is not only theft, but perfidiousness, and highly provoking to God; and deserves a more severe punishment from men, than is usually inflicted.
III. This Commandment may be said to be broken, by borrowing, and not paying just debts; as the Psalmist says, The wicked borroweth and payeth not again, Psal. xxxvii. 21. Nevertheless, there are some cases in which a man is not guilty hereof, though he borrows and does not pay, viz. If, when he borrowed, there was a probability of his being able to repay it; or otherwise, if he discovered his circumstances fully to him, of whom he borrowed, to whom it would hereby appear, whether there was any likelihood of paying him or not; or if he gave full conviction, when he borrowed, that he was able to pay, but the providence of God, without his own default, has rendered him unable; in this case mercy is to be shewn him, and he is not to be reckoned a breaker of this Commandment. However, a person is guilty of the breach hereof, in borrowing, and not paying debts.
1. If the borrower pretends his circumstances to be better than they are, and so makes the lender believe, that, in a limited time, he shall be able to repay him; when, in his own conscience, he apprehends that there is no probability hereof.
2. When a person was in such circumstances at the time of his borrowing, that by industry in his calling, he might be able to pay the creditor; but, by neglect of business, or embezzling his substance, he renders himself unable to pay, such an one is chargeable with the breach of this Commandment.
3. If pity be shewn, by compounding for a part, instead of the whole debt, in case of present insolvency; though the debtor, in form of law, be discharged, with the creditor’s consent; yet the law of God and nature, obliges him to pay the whole debt, if providence makes him able hereafter; or else he can hardly be excused from the breach of this Commandment.
This leads us to enquire, what judgment we may pass on the Israelites borrowing of the Egyptians jewels of silver, and jewels of gold; which we read of in Exod. xii. 35. whether they were herein guilty of the breach of this Commandment.
Answ. The word[3] which we render borrowed, might as well be rendered asked, or demanded. And so we must suppose, that the Egyptians were so desirous that the Israelites should be gone, apprehending, that if they continued, they were all dead men, that they might have of them whatever they demanded, as necessary for this expedition; and, if they came back again, as they supposed they should, they would be obliged to return them. If this be the sense of the Hebrew word, there is no difficulty in the text, nor any appearance of the breach of this Commandment.
But since the sense of the word is indeterminate, signifying to demand, as well as to borrow, as was before observed, God’s order imports the former; though they might understand it in the latter, as denoting a borrowing with a design to restore. Therefore, let it be considered,
(1.) That they did this by God’s command, who has a right to take away the goods that one possesses, if he pleases, and give them to another; for he takes away nothing but his own. Now, that they had his warrant for borrowing or demanding these things of the Egyptians, appears from the second verse.
(2.) The reason why God ordered them to do this, if we look beyond his absolute sovereignty, was, because the Israelites deserved them as wages, for their hard service; and this might be reckoned a reward of the good offices that Joseph had done to that kingdom; which had been long since forgotten.
(3.) As to what concerns the Israelites, it is probable, they expected nothing else but to return again, and restore to the owners what they had borrowed of them, after they had sacrificed to God in the wilderness; at least, they were wholly passive, and disposed to follow the divine conduct, by the hand of Moses. And when they were in the wilderness, they could not restore what they had borrowed, since the owners thereof, as is more than probable, were drowned in the Red Sea, whose revenge and covetousness, as well as Pharaoh’s orders, prompted them to follow them. Or if some of the owners might have been heard of, as yet surviving, their right to what was borrowed of them, was forfeited, by reason of the hostile pursuit of Pharaoh and his hosts, which put them into a state of war.
This may lead us farther to enquire, what judgment we may pass on the many ravages and plunders that are generally made by armies engaged in war; whether they may be reckoned a breach of this Commandment? And,
[1.] It is beyond dispute, that, if the war be unjust, as all the blood that is shed, is murder, or a breach of the sixth Commandment; so all the damage that is done by burning of houses, or taking away the goods of those against whom it is carried on, is a breach of this Commandment. But,
[2.] If we suppose the war to be just, and the damage done only to those who are immediately concerned in it, and that it is an expedient to procure peace; it is unquestionably lawful, and no breach of this Commandment. Thus when the Israelites were commanded to destroy the inhabitants of the land of Canaan, as criminals, they were admitted to seize on the spoil of other nations, who were remote from them, Deut. xx. 14, 15. when conquered by them.
[3.] As for those plunders and robberies which are committed on private persons, who are not concerned in the war any otherwise than as subjects of the government, against which it is undertaken; and especially, if their loss has no direct tendency to procure peace; this can hardly be justified from being a breach of this Commandment.
IV. This Commandment is also broken by oppression; whereby the rich may be said to rob, and even swallow up the poor, Psal. xiv. 4. Psal. x. 9. Micah iii. 2, 3. Now there are various ways by which persons may be said to oppress others.
1. By engrossing those goods which are necessary for food or clothing, thereby to enhance the price thereof, whereby the poor are brought into great extremities.
2. When persons enrich themselves out of the unmerciful labour exacted of their servants, whom they will hardly suffer to live, to eat the just reward of their service. Such a master was Laban to Jacob, Gen. xxxi. 41, 42.
3. When landlords turn their tenants out of their houses or farms, when they find that they get a comfortable subsistence by their industry, taking occasion from thence, to raise their rent, in proportion to the success God gives them therein.
4. When the rich make the poor suffer by long delays, to pay their debts, that they may gain advantage by the improvement of that money which they ought to have paid them.
V. A person may be said to break this Commandment, by engaging in unjust and vexatious law-suits. However, it is to be owned, that going to law is not, at all times, unjust; for it is sometimes a relief against oppression; and it is agreeable to the law of nature for every one to defend his just rights; and for this reason God appointed judges, (to determine such-like causes) to whom the people were to have recourse, that they might shew them the sentence of judgment, Deut. xvii. 8, 9. Nevertheless, we must sometimes conclude law-suits to be oppressive; as,
1. When the rich make use of the law, to prevent, or prolong the payment of their debts, or to take away the rights of the poor, who, as they suppose, will rather suffer injuries than attempt to defend themselves.
2. When bribes are either given or taken, with a design to pervert justice, 1 Sam. viii. 2. And to this we may add, that the person who pleads an unrighteous cause, concealing the known truth, perverting the sense of the law, or alleging that for law or fact, which he knows not to be so; and the judge who passes sentence against his conscience, respecting the person of the rich, and brow-beating the poor; these are all confederates in oppression; and such methods of proceeding, are beyond dispute, a breach of this Commandment.
Obj. Our Saviour forbids going to law, though it were to recover our just rights; when he says, If any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloke also, Matt. v. 40.
Answ. To this it may be replied; that some things may be omitted for prudential reasons, which would not otherwise be unlawful to be done. Our Saviour does not forbid using our endeavours, in a legal way, to recover our right in all cases; but more especially at that time, when his followers could hardly expect to meet with justice. And, it may be, they were oppressed by fines, or distress, laid on them, for their embracing Christianity; in this case he advises them, patiently to bear injuries, when they could hardly expect relief from their unjust judges.
VI. This Commandment is broken by extortion, or oppressive usury. Thus it is said of the righteous man, He putteth not out his money to usury, Psal. xv. 5. The word[4] signifies biting usury; which is, beyond dispute, unlawful. We have elsewhere considered in what cases the Israelites might take usury, and when not[5]. And, upon the whole, it is certainly unlawful, to exact more than the legal rate or worth of the loan of money; or to exact any usury of the poor; especially for that which was borrowed to supply them with the necessaries of life.
Having considered in what instances this Commandment is broken, we proceed to shew, what a person ought to do, who has been guilty of the breach thereof, in any of the forementioned instances, in order to his making restitution for the injuries he has done to his neighbour. This ought always to attend the exercise of sincere repentance in those who have been guilty of this sin, of which we have an instance in Zaccheus, Luke xix. 8. and the neglect hereof will be like a worm at the root of ill gotten estates, and will be little better than a continual theft.
Obj. 1. To this it is objected, that this may be a prejudice to our reputation, by making our crime public, which before was only known to ourselves.
Answ. To this it may be replied;
1. That, what we do in this matter, is not really a reproach, but an honour; and it is hardly to be supposed, that he, to whom we perform so just and unexpected a duty, will be so barbarous as to divulge or improve this against us, to our disadvantage.
2. There are private ways of retaliation, whereby the injured party may receive what is sent to him, in a way of restitution, and not know from whom it comes; or, good turns may be done to him, in a way of compensation for the damages he has received, and he not know, that they are done with this design; and, by this means, we disburden our consciences, perform a necessary duty, and, at the same time, prevent the supposed ill-consequences that might attend it.
Obj. 2. It is farther objected, that sometimes the making restitution is impracticable; as when the person injured is dead, and we know of none that has a right to receive it. And sometimes we may have been guilty of so many instances of fraud and oppression, and, that to such a great number of persons, that it is next to impossible, to make restitution.
Answ. To this it may be replied; that when it is impossible for us to make restitution to those whom we have injured; or, when we know of none that survive them, who have a right to receive it, the best expedient, I apprehend, we can make use of, is, to give it to the poor; for, since it is not, in justice, our own, we do, as it were, hereby give it to the Lord, who is the original proprietor of all things.
Footnote 3:
The Hebrew word שאל which is here used, does not only signify commodavit, or usui dedit, or accepit, but petiit, or postulavit; in the last of which senses it is to be understood, in Deut. x. 12. What doth the Lord require or demand of thee, &c. And in Judges v. 25. where the same word is used, it is said, that Sisera asked water of Jael; not as one that was borrowing it of her, but as a gratuity for former kindness which he had shewn to her.
Footnote 4:
From נשך, momordit.
Footnote 5:
See 3 vol. p. 422.
Quest. CXLIII., CXLIV., CXLV.
QUEST. CXLIII. What is the ninth Commandment?
ANSW. The ninth Commandment is, [Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.]
QUEST. CXLIV. What are the duties required in the ninth Commandment?
ANSW. The duties required in the ninth Commandment are, the preserving and promoting of truth between man and man, and the good name of our neighbour as well as our own. Appearing, and standing for, and from the heart, sincerely, freely, clearly, and fully, speaking the truth, and only the truth, in matters of judgment and justice, and in all other things whatsoever; a charitable esteem of our neighbours; loving, desiring, and rejoicing in their good name, sorrowing for, and covering of their infirmities; freely acknowledging their gifts and graces; defending their innocency; a ready receiving of a good report, and unwillingness to admit an evil report concerning them, discouraging tale-bearers, flatterers, and slanderers; love and care of our own good name, and defending it when need requireth, keeping of lawful promises, studying and practising of whatsoever things are true, honest, lovely, and of good report.
QUEST. CXLV. What are the sins forbidden in the ninth Commandment?
ANSW. The sins forbidden in the ninth Commandment, are, all prejudicing the truth, and the good name of our neighbours as well as our own, especially in public judicature, giving false evidence, suborning false witnesses, wittingly appearing and pleading for an evil cause, out-facing and over-bearing the truth, passing unjust sentence, calling evil good, and good evil, rewarding the wicked according to the work of the righteous; and the righteous according to the work of the wicked; forgery, concealing the truth, undue silence in a just cause, and holding our peace when iniquity calleth for either a reproof from ourselves, or complaint to others; speaking the truth unseasonably, or maliciously to a wrong end, or perverting it to a wrong meaning, or in doubtful and equivocal expressions, to the prejudice of truth or justice, speaking untruth, lying, slandering, back-biting, detracting, tale-bearing, whispering, scoffing, reviling, rash, harsh, and partial, censuring, misconstruing intentions, words, and actions, flattering, vain-glorious boasting, thinking or speaking too highly or too meanly of ourselves or others, denying the gifts and graces of God, aggravating smaller faults, hiding, excusing, or extenuating of sins when called to a free confession, unnecessary discovering of infirmities, raising false rumours, receiving and countenancing evil reports, and stopping our ears against just defence, evil suspicion, envying or grieving at the deserved credit of any, endeavouring or desiring to impair it, rejoicing in their disgrace and infamy, scornful contempt, fond admiration, breach of lawful promises, neglecting such things as are of good report, and practising or not avoiding ourselves or not hindering, what we can in others, such things as procure an ill name.
In this Commandment we are to consider,
I. What are the duties required? These are,
1. Our endeavouring to promote truth in all we say or do; and that, as to what either concerns ourselves, or others. As to what concerns ourselves, we are to fence against every thing that savours of deceit or hypocrisy; and, in our whole conversation, endeavour to be what we pretend to be; or to speak nothing but what we know, or believe to be true, upon good evidence, the contrary whereunto is lying. As to what concerns others, we must not neglect to reprove sin in them, how much soever our worldly interest may lie at stake. Thus Azariah reproved Uzziah, 2 Chron. xxvi. 18. and Elijah, Ahab; though this could not but be an hazardous attempt in each of them. Moreover, we must endeavour to undeceive others, who are mistaken; especially if the error, they are liable to, be of such a nature, that it endangers the loss of their salvation. We are also to vindicate those who are reproached by others, to the utmost of our power, according as the cause will admit of it.
2. This Commandment obliges us, to endeavour to promote our own, and our neighbour’s good name.
(1.) Our own good name; which consists, not in our having the applause of the world, but in our deserving the just esteem thereof, and in our being loved and valued for our usefulness to mankind in general. And this esteem is not to be gained by commending ourselves, or doing any thing, but what we engage in with a good conscience, and the fear of God. And in order hereto, we must, take heed that we do not contract an intimacy with those, whose conversation is a reproach to the gospel, Prov. xxviii. 7. Also we must render good for evil, and not give occasion to those, who watch for our halting, to insult us as to any thing, besides unavoidable infirmities, 1 Pet. ii. 12. Phil. iv. 8.
This degree of honour in the world, we ought first to endeavour to gain, especially so far as it is necessary to our honouring God, and being useful to others. And then we must be careful to maintain our good name; forasmuch as the loss thereof, especially, in those who have made a public profession of religion, will reflect dishonour on the ways of God, from whence his enemies will take occasion to blaspheme, 2 Sam. xii. 14. But if all our endeavours to maintain our character and reputation are to no purpose; being, nevertheless, followed with reproach as well as hatred and malice, from an unjust and censorious world; let us look to it, that if we suffer reproach, it be wrongfully; not as evil doers, but for keeping a good conscience in the sight of God; which may be a means to make those that reproach us, ashamed, 1 Pet. iii. 16. Moreover, let us count the reproach of Christ, that is, for his sake, a glory, chap. iv. 14. Acts v. 41. Again, let us always value their good opinion most, who are Christ’s best friends; and expect little else but ill treatment from his enemies; and then we shall be less disappointed, when we are exposed to it. And let us not decline any thing that is our duty, in which the honour of God, and the welfare of his people, is concerned, for fear of reproach; but in this case, leave our good name in Christ’s hand; whose providence is concerned, for, and takes care of, the honour, as well as the wealth and outward estate of his people.
(2.) We are to endeavour to maintain the good name of others; and in order thereto, we must render to them those marks of respect and honour, which their character, and advancement in gifts, or grace, calls for; yet without being guilty of servile flattery or dissimulation. And if they are in danger of doing any thing that may forfeit their good name, we are carefully to reprove them, while we have a due regard to any good thing that is in them, towards the Lord their God; and, in maintaining their good name, we are to conceal their faults, when we may do it without betraying the interest of Christ; and especially when the honour of God, and their good, is, by this means, better promoted, than by divulging them, 1 Pet. iv. 8. Prov. xvii. 9.
However, this is not without some exceptions; and therefore it may be observed, that we are not to conceal the crimes committed by others.
[1.] If private admonition for scandalous sins committed, prove ineffectual, and the discovering them to others may make the offender ashamed, and promote his reformation; then we are not to conceal his crimes, though the divulging them may lessen the esteem which others have of him, since it is better for him to be ashamed before men, than perish in his hypocrisy, Matt. xviii. 16, 17.
[2.] If the crime committed be such, that shame, and the loss of his good name, be a just punishment due to it, we are not to conceal it, thereby to stop the course of justice.
[3.] When the honour and good name of an innocent person cannot be maintained, unless by divulging the crimes of the guilty, he that, in this case, has forfeited his good name, ought to lose it, rather than he that has not.
We shall close this head by considering what reason we have to endeavour to maintain the good name of others. To take away our neighbour’s good name, is to take away one of the most valuable privileges he is possessed of, the loss whereof may be inexpressibly detrimental to him. And sometimes it may affect his secular interest; so that hereby we may be said to take away his wealth and outward estate, and prevent his usefulness in that station of life in which providence has fixed him. Accordingly we are to express a due concern for the honour and reputation of others as well as ourselves. Thus concerning the duties required in this Commandment.
II. We proceed to consider the sins forbidden therein; which are contained in that general expression bearing false witness: This may either respect ourselves or others. A person may be said to bear false witness against himself; and that either in thinking too highly or meanly of himself; in the former respect we value ourselves, or our supposed attainments, either in gifts or graces, too much, in which we are, for the most part, mistaken, and pass a wrong judgment on them, and are ready to say, with the church at Laodicea, I am rich and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and know not that we are wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked, Rev. iii. 17. These, on the one hand, mistake the common gifts of the Spirit, for grace, and conclude themselves to be something, when they are nothing: And, on the other hand, many conclude, that they have no grace, and rank themselves among hypocrites and unbelievers, when their hearts are right with God, and they have had large experience of the powerful influences of his Spirit, but are not sensible thereof. Thus Christ says to the church in Smyrna, I know thy poverty; but thou art rich, chap. ii. 9. In these respects persons may be said to bear false witness against themselves.
But that which is principally forbidden in this Commandment, is, a person’s bearing false witness against his neighbour; and that when he either endeavours to deceive, or do him prejudice, as to his reputation in the world; the one is called lying, the other back-biting or slandering. As to the former of these, when we speak that which is contrary to what we know to be truth, with a design to deceive, this is what we call telling a lye; and when we act that which is contrary to truth, it may be deemed a practical lye; both of which are very great sins.
1. A person is guilty of lying, when he speaks that which is contrary to truth, with a design to deceive: This the old prophet at Bethel did, to the prophet of the Lord; upon which occasion it is said, that he lyed unto him, 1 Kings xiii. 18. That this may be farther considered, let it be observed, that it is not barely a speaking what is contrary to truth; for that a person may do, and be guiltless; as,
[1.] When there is some circumstance that discovers him to speak ironically; and therefore he does not appear to have a design to deceive those, to whom he addresses his discourse. Thus when the prophet Micaiah said to Ahab, Go and prosper, for the Lord shall deliver it, viz. Ramoth-Gilead, into the hands of the kings, chap. xxii. 15. it is plain that he spake the language of the false prophets, and that Ahab understood him in this sense, or suspected that he spake ironically; and therefore says, How many times shall I adjure thee, that thou tell me nothing but that which is true? ver. 16. Upon which, the prophet tells him, without an irony, though in a metaphorical way, which Ahab easily understood; I saw all Israel scattered upon the hills, as sheep that have not a shepherd: And the Lord said, These have no master, let them return every man to his house in peace, ver. 17. which was an intimation, that, if he went up to Ramoth-Gilead, he should fall in battle: Upon which occasion Ahab says to Jehoshaphat, Did I not tell thee, that he would prophesy no good concerning me, but evil, ver. 18. by which it appears, that the prophet did not deceive him, notwithstanding the mode of speaking, which he at first made use of, without considering it as an irony, seemed to intimate as much.
[2.] A person may speak that which is contrary to truth, being imposed on himself, without any design to deceive another. This cannot, indeed, according to the description before given, be properly called a lie: However, he may sin by asserting too positively, that which he thinks to be true from probable circumstances, or uncertain information; especially if what he reports, carries in it that which is matter of scandal, or censure. This was the case of Job’s friends, who did not tell a lie against their own consciences: Nevertheless, they were too peremptory in charging him with hypocrisy, without sufficient ground; therefore God imputes folly to them, in that they had not spoken of him the thing which was right, Job xlii. 8.
Here it may be enquired, whether a person, who designs not to deceive, nor speaks contrary to the dictates of his own conscience; yet if he promises to do a thing, and does it not, is guilty of lying? To which it may be replied,
1st, That if a person promises to do a thing, which, at the same time he really designs, and afterwards uses all the endeavours he could, to fulfil his promise, and something unforeseen happens, in the course of providence, which prevents the execution thereof, he cannot, properly speaking, be said to be guilty of a lie; though we ought not to promise any thing but upon this supposition, that God enables us to perform it.
2dly, If a person intends to do a thing, and, accordingly, promises to do it, but afterwards sees some justifiable reason to alter his mind, he is not guilty of a lie; since all creatures are supposed to be mutable. Thus the angels told Lot, that they would abide in the street all night; but afterwards, upon his intreaty, they went into the house with him, Gen. xix. 2,
3. And our Saviour, when he walked with his disciples to Emmaus, made as though he would have gone farther: But they constrained him, saying, abide with us; and he went in to tarry with them, Luke xxiv. 28, 29. But, notwithstanding this if a person promises to do any thing that is of advantage to another, as the paying a just debt, &c. it is not a sufficient excuse, to clear him from the guilt of sin, if he pretends that he has altered his mind, supposing that it is in his power to fulfil it: For this is, indeed, a breach of the eighth Commandment, and in some respects, it will appear to him, to be a violation of this.
That we may more particularly speak concerning the sin of lying which multitudes are chargeable with, let it be observed, that there are three sorts of lies,
1st, When a person speaks that which is contrary to truth, and the dictates of his own conscience, with a design to cover a fault or excuse himself or others: This we generally call an officious lie[6].
2dly, When a person speaks that which is contrary to the known truth, in a jesting way; and embellishes his discourse with his own fictions, designing hereby to impose on others: This they are guilty of, who invent false news, or tell stories for truth, which they know to be false. This is to lie in a jesting, ludicrous manner[7].
3dly, There is a pernicious lie, viz. when a person raises and spreads a false report with a design to do injury to another; which is a complicated crime, and the worst sort of lying[8].
Here there are two or three enquiries which it may not be improper to take notice of;
(1.) Whether the midwives were guilty of an officious lie, when they told Pharaoh, in Exod. i. 19. that the Hebrew women were delivered of their children ere they came in unto them; concerning whom it is said, in the following verse, that God dealt well with the midwives for this report, which carries in it the appearance of a lie.
Answ. To this it may be replied,
[1.] That they seem not to have been guilty of a lie; for it is not improbable, that God in mercy to the Hebrew women, and their children, might give them uncommon strength; so that they might be delivered without the midwives assistance: Or,
[2.] If this was not the case of all the Hebrew women, but only of some, or many of them, the midwives report contains only a concealing part of the truth, while they related in other respects, that which was matter of fact. Now a person is not guilty of telling a lie, who does not discover all that he knows. There is a vast difference between concealing a part of the truth, and telling that which is directly false. No one is obliged to tell all he knows, to one, who, he is sure, will make a bad use of it. This seems to be the case of the midwives; and therefore their action was justifiable, and commended by God, they being not guilty, properly speaking, of an officious lye.
(2.) Another enquiry is, what judgment we must pass concerning the actions of Rahab, the harlot, who invented an officious lye, to save the spies from those who pursued them, in Josh. ii. 4, 5. it is said, she took the two men and hid them; and, at the same time, pretended, so those who were sent to enquire of her concerning them, that she wist not whence they were; but that they went out of the city about the time of the shutting of the gate; though whither they went she knew not. The main difficulty we have to account for, is what the apostle says, in which he seems to commend this action, in Heb. xi. 31. By faith Rahab perished not with them that believed not, when she had received the spies with peace.
Answ. To which it may be replied, that the apostle says, indeed, that she received the spies with peace, that is, she protected, and did not betray them into the hand of their enemies: But this act of faith does not relate directly to the lie that she invented to conceal them; for, doubtless, she would have been more clear from the guilt of sin, had she refused to give the messengers any answer relating to them, and so had given them leave to search for them, and left the event hereof to providence. This, indeed, was a very difficult duty; for it might have endangered her life; and her choosing to secure them and herself, by inventing this lie, brought with it a degree of guilt, and was an instance of the weakness of her faith in this respect.
But, on the other hand, that faith which the apostle commends in her, respects some other circumstances attending this action; and, accordingly, it is not said, that by faith she made the report to the messengers concerning the spies; but she received them with peace: And there are several things in which her faith was very remarkable, as,
[1.] That she was confident that the Lord would give them the land, which they were contending for, Josh. ii. 9.
[2.] In that she makes a just inference relating to this matter, from the wonders that God had wrought for them in the red sea, ver. 10. And,
[3.] In that noble confession which she makes, that the Lord their God, is God in heaven above, and the earth beneath, ver. 11.
[4.] Her faith appears, in that she put herself under their protection, and desired to take her lot with them; which was done at the hazard of her own life; which she might have saved, and probably, have received a reward, had she betrayed them. This, I conceive to be a better vindication of Rahab’s conduct, than that which is alleged, by some who suppose, that by entering into confederacy with the spies, she put herself into a state of war with her own country-men, and so was not obliged to speak truth to the men of Jericho; since this would have many ill consequences attending it, and give too much countenance to persons deceiving others, under pretence of being in a state of war with them. And, as to what the Papists say in her vindication, that a good design will justify a bad action; that it is not true in fact; and therefore not to be applied to her case.
(3.) It might be farther enquired, what judgment ought we to pass on the method that Jacob took to obtain the blessing, when he told his father, I am Esau, thy first-born; I have done according as thou badest me, Gen. xxvii. 19. whether he was guilty of a lie herein?
Answ. There is not the least doubt but that he was. Some, indeed, endeavour to excuse him, by alleging, that he had, before this, bought the birth-right of Esau; and, upon this account he calls himself Isaac’s first-born. But this will not clear him from the guilt of a lye; since it was an equivocation, and spoken with a design to deceive. Others own it to have been a lye; but extenuate it, from the consideration of God’s having designed the blessing for him before he was born, chap. xxv. 31. But these do not at all mend the matter: For, though God may permit, or over-rule the sinful actions of men to bring about his own purpose; yet this does not, in the least, extenuate their sin.
That which may therefore be observed, with reference to this action of his, and the consequence thereof, is, that good men are sometimes liable to sinful infirmities, as Jacob was; who, was followed with many sore rebukes of providence, which made the remaining part of his life very uneasy.
1st, In his living in exile twenty years, with Laban, an hard master, and an unjust and unnatural father-in-law.
2dly, In the great distress that befel him in his return; occasioned first by Laban’s pursuit of him, and then by the tidings that he received of his brother Esau’s coming out to meet him; (being prompted hereto by revenge which he had long harboured in his breast) with four hundred men, from whom he expected nothing less than the destruction of himself, and his whole family.
3dly, He did not obtain deliverance from the hand of God without great wrestling, chap. xxxii. 24-25. and this attended with weeping, as well as making supplication, Hos. xii. 4. and, though he prevailed, and so obtained the blessing, and therewith forgiveness of his sin; yet God so ordered it, that he should carry the mark thereof upon him, as long as he lived, by touching the hollow of his thigh, which occasioned an incurable lameness.
(4.) Another enquiry is, whether the prophet Elijah did not tell a lie to the Syrian host, who were before Dothan, in quest of him, when he said, in 2 Kings vi. 19. This is not the way, neither is this the city: Follow me, and I will bring you to the man you seek. But he led them to Samaria?
Answ. If what he says to them be duly considered, it will appear not to be a lie; for he told them nothing but what proved true, according to the import of his words; for,
1st, He does not say, I am not the man ye seek, which would have been a lie; neither does he say, the man is not here: but he tells them, I will lead you to the place where ye shall find him, or have him discovered and presented before you.
2dly, When he says, This is not the way; neither is this the city; he does not say, this is not the way to Dothan; neither is this the city so called; for then they would have been able to have convicted him of a lie; for they knew that they were at Dothan before they were struck with blindness: But the plain meaning of his words is, that this is not your way to find him; since the men of this city will not deliver him to you; but I will lead you to the place where you shall see him; and so he led them to Samaria, upon which their eyes were opened, and they saw him: So that this was not a lie. And the reason of his management was, that the king of Israel, and the Syrian host, might be convinced, that they were poor creatures in God’s hand, and that he could easily turn their counsels into foolishness, and cause their attempts to miscarry with shame, as well as disappointment.
(5.) It may be farther enquired, whether the apostle Paul was guilty of a lie; when, being charged, in Acts xxiii. 4, 5. with reviling God’s high priest, he says, I wist not that he was the high priest? How was it possible that he should entertain any doubt concerning his being the high priest; which none, who were present, could, in the least, question?
Answ. We may suppose, that the apostle, when he says, I wist not that he was the high priest, intends nothing else, but I do not own him to be the high priest, as you call him; for he is not an high priest of God’s appointing or approving; which, had he been, he would have acted more becoming that character; and then I should have had no occasion to have told him, God shall smite thee, thou whited wall; for that would have been a reviling him; since I know that scripture very well, that says, Thou shalt not speak evil of the ruler of thy people; therefore he intimates, that, though he was an high priest of man’s making, he was not one of God’s approving; and accordingly he was to be treated with contempt, instead of that regard which was formerly paid to the high priests, when they were better men, and acted more agreeable to their character. No one, that deserves to be called God’s high priest, would have ordered a prisoner, who came to be tried for his life, instead of making his defence, to be smitten on the mouth.
But, suppose we render the words agreeably to our translation, I did not understand that he was the high priest, he may be vindicated from the charge of telling a lie, if we consider,
1st, That this was a confused assembly, and not a regular court of judicature, in which the judge, or chief magistrate, is known to all, by the place in which he sits, or the part he acts in trying causes.
2dly, The high priest, in courts of judicature, was not known by any robe or distinct habit that he wore, as judges now are; for he never wore any other but his common garments, which were the same that other people wore, except when he ministered in offering gifts and sacrifices in the temple. Therefore the apostle could not know him by any distinct garment that he wore.
3dly, Through the corruption of the times, the high priest was changed almost every year, according to the will of the chief governor, who advanced his own friends to that dignity, and oftentimes sold it for money; it is therefore probable, that Ananias had not been long high-priest; and Paul was now a stranger at Jerusalem, and so might not know that he was high priest. Thus, if we take the words in this sense, in which they are commonly understood, the apostle may be sufficiently vindicated from the charge of telling a lie.
(6.) It may be farther enquired, what judgment we may pass concerning David’s pretence, when he came to Abimelech, in 1 Sam. xxi. 2. that the king commanded him a business, which no one was to know any thing of; and that he had appointed his servants to such and such a place; and also of his feigning himself mad, before the king of Gath, ver. 13. which dissimulation can be reckoned no other than a practical lie.
Answ. In both these instances he must be allowed to have sinned, and therefore not proposed as a pattern to us; and all that can be inferred from it is, that there is a great deal of the corruption of nature remaining in the best of God’s people. What he told Abimelech was certainly a lye; and all that he expected to gain by it, was only a supply of his present necessities; the consequence whereof was, the poor man’s losing his life, together with all the priests’, except Abiathar, by Saul’s inhumanity. And David seems to be truly sensible of this sin, as appears from Psal. xxxiv. which, as is intimated in the title thereof, was penned on this occasion; in which he arms others against it, in ver. 13. Keep thy tongue from evil, and thy lips from speaking guile: And in ver. 18. he seems to relate his own experience, when he says, The Lord is nigh unto them that are of a broken heart, and saveth such as be of a contrite spirit.
As to his behaviour before the king of Gath, which was a visible lie, discovered in his actions; it can, by no means, be excused from being a breach of this Commandment. It is, indeed, alleged by some, to extenuate his fault; that he was afraid that his having killed Goliah, would have induced Achish to take away his life; as appears from what is said in ver. 11, 12. Nevertheless, it may be considered as an aggravation of his sin,
[1.] That his fear seems to have been altogether groundless; for, why should he suppose that the king of Gath would break through all the laws of arms and honour, since Goliah had been killed in a fair duel, the challenge having first been given by himself? why then should David fear that he would kill him for that, more than any other hostilities committed in war? Besides, it is plain from what Achish says, in ver. 15. Have I need of mad-men, that ye have brought this fellow to play the mad-man in my presence? should this fellow come into mine house? that the king of Gath was so far from designing to revenge Goliah’s death on him, that he intended to employ him in his service, and take him into his house; but this mean action of his made him despised by all; for it seems probable, by Achish’s saying, Have ye brought this fellow to play the mad-man? that he perceived it to be a feigned, and not a real distraction. And this was overruled by the providence of God, to let the Philistines know, that the greatest hero is but a low-spirited man, if his God be not with him.
[2.] If we suppose that there had been just ground for his fear, the method taken to secure himself, contained a distrust of providence; which would, doubtless, have delivered him without his dissembling, or thus demeaning himself, or using such an indirect method in order thereunto. Thus concerning the violation of this Commandment, by speaking that which is contrary to truth.
2. This Commandment is farther broken, by acting that which is contrary to truth; which is what we call hypocrisy: And this may be considered,
(1.) As that which is a reigning sin, inconsistent with a state of grace; in which respect an hypocrite is opposed to a true believer. Such make a fair shew of religion; but it is with a design to be seen of men, Matt. vi. 5. They are sometimes, indeed, represented as seeking God, and enquiring early, or with a kind of earnestness after him, when under his afflicting hand; but this is deemed no other than a flattering him with their mouth, and a lying unto him with their tongues; inasmuch as their heart is not right with him, Psal. lxxviii. 34,-37. And elsewhere, they are said to love the praise of men more than the praise of God, John xii. 43.
(2.) It may be farther considered, as that which believers are sometimes chargeable with, which is an argument that they are sanctified but in part; but this rather respects some particular actions, and not the tenor of their conversation: Thus the apostle Paul charges Peter with dissimulation, Gal. ii. 11,-13. though he was far from deserving the character of an hypocrite, as to his general conversation. And our Saviour cautions his disciples against hypocrisy, as that which they were in danger of being overtaken with, Luke xii. 1. though he does not charge them with it as a reigning sin, as he did the Scribes and Pharisees, whom he compares to painted sepulchres, Matt. xxiii. 27, 28. nor were they such as the apostle speaks of, whom he calls double-minded men, who are unstable in all their ways, James i. 8.
As to that hypocrisy which we may call a reigning sin, this may be known,
[1.] By a person’s accommodating himself to all those whom he converses with, how much soever this may tend to the dishonour of Christ and the gospel: And this may give us occasion to enquire,
First, Whether the apostle Paul was in any respects, chargeable with this sin, when he says, in 1 Cor. ix. 20-22. Unto the Jews, I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law; to them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ) that I might gain them that are without law. To the weak, became I as weak, that I might gain the weak; I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some. For the understanding of this scripture, and vindicating the apostle from the charge of hypocrisy, let it be considered,
1st, That this compliance he here speaks of, was not with a design to gain the applause of the world, but to serve the interest of Christ; neither did he connive at, or give countenance to, that false worship, or those sinful practices of any, that were contrary to the faith, or purity of the gospel. Therefore when he says, Unto the Jews, I became as a Jew; he does not intend that he gave them the least ground to conclude, that it was an indifferent matter, whether they adhered to, or laid aside the observation of the ceremonial law: For, he expressly tells some of the church at Galatia, who were supposed to Judaize, that this was contrary to the liberty wherewith Christ had made them free, a being again entangled with the yoke of bondage; and that if they circumcised, Christ should profit them nothing; and, that they were fallen from grace; that is, turned aside from the faith of the gospel, Gal. v. 1,-4. Therefore, in this sense he did not become as a Jew, to the Jews. Neither did he so far comply with the Gentiles, as to give them ground to conclude, that the superstition and idolatry, which they were guilty of, was an harmless thing, and might still be practised by them. Therefore,
2dly, The meaning of his compliance with the Jews or Gentiles, is nothing else but this; that whatever he found praise-worthy in them, he commended; and if, in any instances, they were addicted to their former rites, or modes of worship, he endeavoured to draw them off from them, not by a severe, and rigid behaviour as censuring, refusing to converse with, or reproaching them, for their weakness; but using kind and gentle methods, designing rather to inform than discourage them; while at the same time, he was far from approving of, or giving countenance to any thing that was sinful in them, or unbecoming the gospel.
Secondly, From what has been before said concerning an hypocrite’s being one who performs religious duties with a design to be seen of men, as our Saviour says of the Pharisees, that they love to stand praying in the synagogues, or in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men, Matth. vi. 6. We may enquire, what may be said in vindication of the prophet Daniel, from the charge of hypocrisy? concerning whom it is said, in Dan. vi. 10. that when Darius had signed a decree prohibiting any one from asking a petition of any god or man, save of the king, he should be cast into the den of lions: He went into his house; and his windows being open in his chamber, towards Jerusalem, he kneeled upon his knees three times a day, and prayed, and gave thanks before his God, as he did aforetime. In answer to this we may observe,
1st, That this was not done to gain the esteem or applause of men, which they are charged with, who are guilty of hypocrisy; but he did it in contempt of that vile decree of the Persian monarch.
2dly, He did it at the peril of his life; and hereby discovered, that he had rather be cast into the den of lions, than give occasion to any to think that he complied with the king in his idolatrous decree.
3dly, Though it is said, that he prayed, and gave thanks before his God, as he did aforetime; yet this is not to be understood as though he set open his windows aforetime; so that his praying publicly at this time, was to shew that he was neither ashamed, nor afraid to own his God, whatever it cost him; therefore he was so far from being guilty of hypocrisy, that this is one of the most noble instances of zeal for the worship of the true God, that we find recorded in scripture.
[2.] Hypocrisy is a reigning sin when we boast of the high attainments in gifts or grace, or set too great a value on ourselves, because of the performance of some religious duties, while we neglect others, wherein the principal part of true godliness consists. Thus the Pharisee paid tithe of mint, annise, and cummin, while he omitted the weightier matters of the law; judgment, mercy and faith, chap. xxiii. 23, 24.
[3.] It farther consists, in exclaiming against, and censuring others, for lesser faults, while we allow of greater in ourselves; like those whom our Saviour speaks of, who behold the mote that is in their brother’s eye, but consider not the beam that is in their own, Matt. vii. 3, 5. or, according to that proverbial way of speaking, strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel. These are very fond of exposing the ignorance of others; though they have no experimental, saving knowledge of divine truth in themselves; or they are very forward, to blame the coldness and lukewarmness which they see in some, while at the same time, that zeal which they express in their whole conduct, is rather to advance themselves, than the glory of God.
[4.] When persons make a gain of godliness, 1 Tim. vi. 5. or of their pretensions to it. Thus Balaam prophesied for a reward; and accordingly it is said, that he loved the wages of unrighteousness, 2 Pet. i. 15.
5. When persons make a profession of religion, because it is uppermost, and are ready to despise and cast it off, when it is reproached, or they are like to suffer for it. Thus the Pharisees, how much soever they seemed to embrace Christ, when attending on John’s ministry; yet afterwards, when they saw that this was contrary to their secular interest, they were offended in him, and prejudiced against him; and therefore they say, Have any of the rulers, or of the Pharisees, believed on him, John vii. 48.
This sin of hypocrisy, which is a practical lie, has a tendency to corrupt and vitiate all our pretensions to religion. It is like the dead flie, mentioned by Solomon, that causeth the ointment of the apothecary to send forth a stinking savour, Eccl. x. 1. and it will, in the end, bring on those who are guilty of it, many sore judgments; some of which are spiritual. Thus it is said of the Heathen, that because, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, and did not like to retain him in their knowledge; he gave them up to a reprobate mind, to do those things that are not convenient, &c. Rom. i. 21, 22, 28. And as for the false hope, and vain confidence, which the hypocrite entertains, this shall leave him in despair and confusion, Job viii. 13,-15. and be attended with unspeakable horror of conscience, chap. xxvii. 18. Isa. xxxiii. 14. Upon which account such are said to heap up wrath, and bring on themselves a greater degree of condemnation than others, Job xxxvi. 13. Matt. xxiii. 14. Thus we have considered this Commandment as broken by speaking or acting that which is contrary, or prejudicial, to truth; which leads us,
II. To consider it as forbidding our doing that which is injurious to our neighbour’s good name, either by words or actions; and this is done two ways, either before his face, or behind his back.
1. Doing injury to another, by speaking against him, before his face. It is true, we give him hereby the liberty of vindicating himself. Nevertheless, if the thing be false, which is alleged against him, proceeding from malice and envy, it is a crime of a very heinous nature; and this is done,
(1.) By those, who, in courts of judicature, commence; and carry on malicious prosecutions, in which the plaintiff, the witness, the advocate that manages the cause, the jury that bring in a false verdict, and the judge that passes sentence contrary to law, or evidence, as well as the dictates of his own conscience, with a design to crush and ruin him, who is maliciously prosecuted; these are all notoriously guilty of the breach of this Commandment.
(2.) They may be said to do that which is injurious to our neighbour’s good name, who reproach them in common conversation; which is a sin too much committed in this licentious age, as though men were not accountable to God for what they speak, as well as other parts of the conduct of life. There are several things which persons make the subject of their reproach, viz.
[1.] The defect and blemishes of nature; such as lameness, blindness, deafness, impediment of speech, meanness of capacity, or actions, which proceed from a degree of distraction. Thus many suppose that the apostle Paul was reproached for some natural deformity in his body, or impediment in his speech, which is inferred from what he says, when he represents some as speaking to this purpose; His letters, say they, are weighty and powerful; but his bodily presence is weak, and his speech contemptible, 2 Cor. x. 10. And elsewhere, he commends the Galatians for not despising him on this account; My temptation which was in my flesh, ye despised nor rejected; but ye received me as an angel of God, even as Christ Jesus, Gal. iv. 14.
Here we may take occasion to speak something of the childrens sin, who reproached Elisha for his baldness, and the punishment that ensued upon it; namely, his cursing them in the name of the Lord; and two and forty of them being torn in pieces by two she-bears out of the wood, in 2 Kings ii. 23, 24. It may be enquired, by some, whether this was not too great an instance of passion in that holy man, and too severe a punishment inflicted; inasmuch as they who reproached him, are called little children. To this it may be answered,
1st, That the children were not so little, as not to be able to know their right hand from their left, or to discern between good and evil; for such are not usually trusted out of their parents sight; nor would they have gathered themselves together in a body, or went some distance from the city, on purpose to insult the prophet, as it is plain they did, understand that he was to come there at that time. This argues that they were boys of sufficient age, to commit the most presumptuous sin; and therefore not too young to suffer such a punishment as ensued thereupon.
2dly, Their sin was great, in that they mocked a grave old man, who ought to have been honoured for his age, and a prophet, whom they should have esteemed for his character; and in despising him, they despised God, that called and sent him.
3dly, Bethel, where they lived, was the chief seat of idolatry, in which these children had been trained up; and it was a prevailing inclination to it, together with an hatred of the true religion, that occasioned their reproaching and casting contempt on the prophet.
4thly, The manner of expression argues a great deal of profaneness, Go up thou bald head; that is, either go up to Bethel, speaking in an insulting way, as though they should say, You may go there, but you will not be regarded by them; for they value no such men as you are; or rather, it is as though they should say, you pretend that your predecessor Elijah is gone up to heaven, do you go up after him, that you may trouble us no longer with your prophecies; so that those children, though young in years, were hardened in sin; and this was not so much an occasional mocking of the prophet for his baldness, as a public contrivance, and tumultuous opposition to his ministry; which is a very great crime, and accordingly, was attended with a just resentment in the prophet, and that punishment which was inflicted as the consequence thereof.
The aggravations of this sin of reproaching persons for their natural infirmities, are very great. For, it is a finding fault with the workmanship of the God of nature, the thinking meanly of a person for that which is not chargeable on him as a crime, and which he can, by no means redress. It is a censuring those who are, in some respects, objects of compassion; especially if the reproach be levelled against the defects of the mind, or any degree of distraction; and it argues a great deal of pride and unthankfulness to God, for those natural endowments which we have received from him, though we do not improve them to his glory.
[2.] Some reproach persons for their sinful infirmities, and that in such a way, as that they are styled fools, who make a mock of sin, Prov. xiv. 9. This is done,
1st, When we reflect on persons for sins committed before their conversion, which they have repented of, and God has forgiven; and accordingly they should not be now charged against them, as a matter of reproach. Thus the Pharisee reproached the poor penitent woman, who stood weeping at our Saviour’s feet, and said within himself; If this man were a prophet, he would have known what manner of woman this is that toucheth him, for she is a sinner, Luke vii. 37-39. which respected not her present, but her former condition.
2dly, When they reproach them with levity of spirit, for the sins they are guilty of at present; as when the shameful actions of a drunken man are made the subject of laughter; which ought not to be thought of without regret or pity.
Object. To this it may be objected, that sin renders a person vile, and is really a reproach to him; and therefore it may be charged upon him as such; especially since it is said, concerning the righteous man; in his eyes a vile person is contemned, Psal. xv. 4.
Answ. We are far from asserting, that it is a sin to reprove sin, and shew the person who commits it his vileness, and the reason he has to reproach and charge himself with it, and loath himself for it; therefore,
1st, The contempt that is to be cast on a vile person, does not consist in making him the subject of laughter, as though it was a light matter for him thus to dishonour God as he does; for this should occasion grief in all true believers, as the Psalmist says, I beheld the transgressors and was grieved; because they kept not thy word, Psal. cxix. 158. But,
2dly, When the Psalmist advises to contemn such an one, the meaning is, that we should not make him our intimate, or bosom-friend; or if he be in advanced circumstances, in the world, we are not to flatter him in his sin; whereby, especially when it is public, he forfeits that respect which would otherwise be due to him. In this sense we are to understand Mordecai’s contempt of Haman, Esther iii. 2.
Here we may take occasion to distinguish, between reproving sin, and reproaching persons for it; the former of these is to be done with sorrow of heart, and compassion expressed to the sinner; as our Saviour reproved Jerusalem, and, at the same time, wept over it, Luke xix. 41, 42. But, on the other hand, reproach is attended with hatred of, and a secret pleasure taken in his sin and ruin. Again, reproof for sin ought to be with a design to reclaim the offender; whereas reproach tends only to expose, exasperate, and harden him in his sin. Moreover, reproof for sin ought to be given with the greatest seriousness and conviction of the evil and danger ensuing hereupon; whereas they who reproach persons, charge sin on them, as being induced hereunto by their own passions, without any concern for the dishonour which they bring to God and religion hereby, or desire of their repentance and reformation.
[3.] Sometimes that which is the highest ornament, and greatest excellency of a Christian, is turned to his reproach; more particularly,
1st, Some have been reproached for extraordinary gifts, which God has been pleased to confer on them. Thus the spirit of prophecy was sometimes reckoned, by profane persons, the effect of distraction, 2 Kings ix. 11. And Joseph was reproached by his brethren, in a taunting way, with the character of a dreamer; because of the prophetic intimation which he had from God, in a dream, concerning the future estate of his family, Gen. xxxvii. 13. And when the apostles were favoured with the extraordinary gift of tongues, and preached to men of different nations, in their own language; Some were amazed, and others mocked them, and said, These men are full of new wine, Acts ii. 13.
2dly, Raised affections, and extraordinary instances of zeal for the glory of God, have been derided as though they were matter of reproach. Thus Michael reproached David, when he danced before the ark, 2 Sam. vi. 20. being induced hereunto by an holy zeal, and transport of joy on this occasion; though he was so far from reckoning it a reproach, that he counted that which she called vile, glorious.
3dly, Spiritual experiences of the grace of God, have, sometimes, been turned by those who are strangers to them to their reproach and termed no other than madness. Thus when the apostle Paul related the gracious dealings of God with him in his first conversion, Festus charged him with being beside himself, Acts xxvi. 24.
4thly, A person’s being made use of by God, to overthrow the kingdom of Satan, has been charged against him, as though it were rebellion. Thus the Jews tell Pilate, when he sought to release Jesus, If thou let this man go, thou art not Cesar’s friend, John xix. 12. and that reformation which the apostles were instrumental in making in the world, by preaching the gospel, is styled, turning the world upside down, Acts xvii. 6.
5thly, Humility of mind in owning our weakness, as not being able to comprehend some divine mysteries contained in the gospel, is reckoned matter of reproach by many, who call it implicit faith, and admitting of the greatest absurdities in matters of religion.
6thly, Giving glory to the Spirit, as the author of all grace and peace, and desiring to draw nigh to God in prayer, or engage in other holy duties, by his assistance, is reproached by some, as though it were enthusiasm, and they who desire or are favoured with this privilege, were pretenders to extraordinary revelation.
7thly, A being conscientious in abstaining from those sins which abound in a licentious age, or reproving and bearing our testimony against those who are guilty of them, is reproached with the character of hypocrisy, preciseness, and being righteous overmuch.
8thly, Separating from communion with a false church, and renouncing those doctrines which tend to pervert the gospel of Christ, is called, by some, heresy. Thus the Papists brand the Protestants with the reproachful name of heretics; to whom we may answer, that this is rather our glory, and confess, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship we the God of our fathers, Acts xxiv. 14.
This sin is attended with many aggravations; for God reckons it as a contempt cast on himself, Luke x. 16. and it is a plain intimation, that they who are guilty of it, pretend not to be what they reproach and deride in others, who, if they be in the right way to heaven, these discover that they desire not to come hither. And, in their whole conduct, they act as though they were endeavouring to banish all religion out of the world, by methods of scorn and ridicule; which, if it should take effect, this earth would be but a small degree better than hell.
However, when we are thus reproached for the sake of God and religion, let us not render railing for railing; but look on those who revile us, as objects of pity, 1 Cor. iv. 12, 13. 1 Pet. ii. 23, who do more hurt to themselves than they can do to us, thereby. Moreover, let us reflect on our own sins, which provoke God to suffer this; and beg of him that he would turn this reproach to his own glory, and our good. Thus David did, when he was unjustly and barbarously cursed and railed at by Shimei, 2 Sam. xvi. 10-12. We ought also to esteem religion the more, because of the opposition and contempt that it meets with from the enemies of God; which may, indeed, afford us some evidence of the truth and excellency thereof; as our Saviour says concerning his disciples, If ye were of the world, the world would love his own; but because you are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you, John xv. 19.
Again, when we are reviled for the sake of Christ and religion, let us take encouragement from hence, that herein we have the same treatment that he, and all his saints, have met with, Heb. xii. 2, 3. chap. xi. 36. And let us also consider that there are many promises annexed hereunto, Matt. v. 11, 12. 1 Pet. iv. 14. It is also an advantage to our character as Christians; for hereby it appears, that we are not on their side, who are Christ’s avowed enemies; and therefore we should reckon their reproach our glory, Heb. xi. 26, or, as the apostle says, Take pleasure in reproaches for Christ’s sake, 2 Cor. xii. 10. or, as it is said elsewhere, Rejoice, that we are counted worthy to suffer shame for his name, Acts v. 41. Thus concerning our doing injury to our neighbour, by speaking against him before his face. We shall now consider,
2. The injury that is done to others by speaking against them behind their backs. This they are guilty of, who raise or invent false reports of their neighbours, or spread those which ought to be kept secret, with a design to take away their good name; these are called tale-bearers, back-biters, slanderers, who offer injuries to others, that are not in a capacity of defending themselves, Lev. xix. 16. These malicious reports are oftentimes, indeed, prefaced, with a pretence of great respect to the person whom they speak against. They seem very much surprised at, and sorry for what they are going to relate; and sometimes signify their hope, that it may not be true; and desire, that what they report may be concealed, while they make it their business themselves to divulge it. But this method will not secure their own reputation, while they are endeavouring to ruin that of another. This is done various ways;
(1.) By pretending that a person is guilty of a fault which he is innocent of. Thus our Saviour, and John the Baptist were charged with immoral practices, which there was not the least shadow or pretence for, Matt. xi. 18, 19.
(2.) By divulging a real fault which has been acknowleged and repented of, and therefore ought to be concealed, chap. xvii. 15. or when there is no pretence for making it public; but what arises from malice and hatred of the person.
(3.) By aggravating, or presenting faults worse than they are. Thus Absalom’s sin in murdering Amnon, was very great; but he that brought tidings thereof to David, represented it worse than it was, when he said, that Absalom had slain all the king’s sons, 2 Sam. xiii. 30.
(4.) By reporting the bad actions of men, and, at the same time, over-looking and extenuating their good ones, and so not doing them the justice of setting one in the balance against the other.
(5.) By putting the worst and most injurious construction on actions that are really excellent. Thus, because our Saviour admitted Publicans and sinners into his presence, and did them good by his doctrine, the Jews reproached him as though he were a friend of publicans and sinners, Matt. xi. 19. taking the word friend in the worst sense, as signifying an approver of them.
(6.) By reporting things, to the prejudice of others, which are grounded on such slender evidence, that they themselves hardly believe them, or, at least, would not, had they not a design to make use thereof, to defame them. Thus Sanballat, in his letter to Nehemiah, tells him, that ‘he and the Jews thought to rebel; and built the wall of Jerusalem, that he might be their king,’ Neh. vi. 6. which, it can hardly be supposed, that the enemy himself gave any credit to. Thus concerning the instances in which persons back-bite, or raise false reports on others.
And, to this we may add, that as they are guilty who raise them; so are they who listen to, and endeavour to propagate them. It is not, indeed, the bare hearing of a report, which, we cannot but think to be attended with malice and slander, that will render us guilty; for that we may not be able to avoid; but it is our encouraging him that raises or spreads it, which renders us guilty; and, particularly, we sin when we hear malicious reports.
[1.] If we conceal them from the party concerned therein, and so deny him the justice of answering what is said against him, in his own vindication.
[2.] When we do not reprove those who make a practice of slandering and back-biting others, in order to our bringing them to shame and repentance; and, most of all, when we contract an intimacy with those who are guilty of this sin, and are too easy in giving credit to what they say, though not supported by sufficient evidence; but, on the other hand, carrying in it the appearance of envy and resentment. Thus concerning the sins forbidden in this Commandment. We shall close this head by proposing some remedies against it. As,
1st, If the thing, reported to another’s prejudice, be true, we ought to consider, that we are not without many faults ourselves; which we would be unwilling, if others knew them, should be divulged. And if it be doubtful, we, by reporting it, may give occasion to some, to believe it to be true, without sufficient evidence, whereby our neighbour will receive real prejudice from that, which, to us, is only matter of surmize and conjecture. But if, on the other hand, what is reported be apparently false, the sin is still the greater; and the highest injustice is hereby offered to the innocent, while we, at the same time, are guilty of a known and presumptuous sin, by inventing and propagating it.
2dly, Such a way of exposing men answers no good end; nor is it a means of reclaiming them.
3dly, Hereby we lay ourselves open to the censure of others, and by endeavouring to take away our neighbour’s good name, endanger the loss of our own.
Footnote 6:
Mendacium officiosum.
Footnote 7:
This is called mendacium jocosum.
Footnote 8:
This is called mendacium pernitiosum.
Quest. CXLVI., CXLVII., CXLVIII.
QUEST. CXLVI. Which is the tenth Commandment?
ANSW. The tenth Commandment is, [Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife, nor his man-servant, nor his maid-servant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy neighbour’s.]
QUEST. CXLVII. What are the duties required in the tenth Commandment?
ANSW. The duties required in the tenth Commandment are, such a full contentment with our own condition, and such a charitable frame of the whole soul toward our neighbour, as that all our inward motions and affections touching him tend unto and further all that good which is his.
QUEST. CXLVIII. What are the sins forbidden in the tenth Commandment?
ANSW. The sins forbidden in the tenth Commandment, are, discontent with our own estate; envying, and grieving at the good of our neighbours, together with all inordinate motions and affections to any thing that is his.
The general design of this commandment, is, to regulate and set bounds to our desires; and it contains a prohibition of coveting those things, that belong not to us. It is not to be split into two Commandments, as the Papists pretend; supposing that, Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s house, is the ninth, and, Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour’s wife, &c. is the tenth Commandment; since these are only particular instances of the breach of the same Commandment, and the argument taken from the repetition of the words, Thou shalt not covet, is so very weak and inconclusive, that it would hardly have been made use of by them, had they not thought it necessary, some way or other, to make up the number ten; having as was observed, under a foregoing head, determined the second Commandment, not to be distinct from, but an appendix to the first[9]. But passing this by, we proceed to consider,
I. The duties required therein, which may be reduced to two heads;
1. Contentment with our own condition; by which we are not to understand that we are to give way to indolence or stupidity, but to exercise a composure of mind, acquiescing in the divine dispensations in every condition of life. Thus the apostle says, I have learned in whatsoever state I am, therewith to be content, Phil. iv. 11. And this being applicable to all sorts of men, we may consider it,
(1.) As a grace that is to be exercised by those who are in prosperous circumstances in the world. Thus the apostle says, I know how to abound, ver. 12. and to be full, as well as to suffer need. We often find, that they who have the greatest share of the good things of this world, are so far from being satisfied with it, that their covetousness increaseth in proportion to their substance. But such ought to consider, that this is most unreasonable and ungrateful; and may justly provoke God to take away the blessing which he has given them, or add some circumstances thereunto, that will tend to embitter them; and it is a giving way to such a temper of mind as renders them really miserable in the midst of their abundance. But that which we shall principally consider, is,
(2.) How this grace of contentment is to be exercised by those who are in an afflicted state, together with the motives and inducements leading thereunto. And,
[1.] We will suppose persons under bodily weakness or pain, which tends much to embitter the comforts of life, by which means they are made uneasy; and, indeed, it is impossible, from the nature of the thing, for them not to complain, or groan under the burdens that are laid on them, as the Psalmist did, who speaks of himself as weary of his groaning, Psal. vi. 6. nor is it unlawful, provided they do not repine at, or find fault with, the methods of God’s providence, in his dealing with them. Nevertheless there are some things that may induce them to be contented.
1st, When they consider, that the body gave occasion to the first entrance of sin into the world, and bears a part with the soul in all the sins committed, and guilt contracted thereby. It is therefore no wonder, when we find that it has its share in those miseries that attend it.
2dly, Bodily diseases are our monitors, to put us in mind of the frailty of our present state; and therefore, since they are the harbingers of death, we are hereby forwarned, to prepare for it, as making sensible advances towards it.
3dly, The greatest pains that we are liable to, are far short of what Christ endured for us; in which respect our afflictions are comparatively light, and a convincing proof, that they are not certain indications of our being rejected by God, Eccl. ix. 1.
4thly, As God will not lay more on us than he will enable us to bear; so none of these afflictive dispensations shall have a tendency to separate the soul from Christ. Though we sometimes complain that this is a great interruption to the exercise of grace; yet this shall not be charged upon us as our fault, any otherwise than as it is the effect of that sin, which is the procuring cause of all affliction.
5thly, The heavier our afflictions are at present, the more sweet and comfortable the heavenly rest will be, to those who have a well-grounded hope that they shall be brought to it, Job iii. 17. 2 Thess. i. 7. 2 Cor. iv. 17.
[2.] If our condition be low and poor in the world, we are not without some inducements to be content. For,
1st, Poverty is not, in itself, a curse, or inconsistent with the love of God, since Christ himself submitted to it, 2 Cor. viii. 9. Matt. viii. 20. and his best saints have been exposed to it, and glorified God, more than others, under it, 2 Cor. vi. 10.
2dly, How poor soever we are, we have more than we brought into the world with us, or than the richest person can carry out of it, Job i. 21.
3dly, They who have least of the world, have more than they deserve, or than God was under any obligation to give them.
[3.] Suppose we are afflicted in our good name, and do not meet with that love and esteem from the world, which might be expected; but, on the other hand, are censured, reproached, and hated by those with whom we converse. This should not make us, beyond measure, uneasy. For,
1st, We have reason to conclude, that the esteem of the world is precarious and uncertain; and they who most deserve it, have oftentimes the least of it. Thus our Saviour was one day followed with the caresses of the multitude, shouting forth their hosannah’s to him; and the next day the common cry was, crucify him, crucify him. And when the apostle Paul and Barnabas, had healed the cripple at Lystra, they could, at first, hardly restrain the people from offering sacrifice to them; but afterwards they joined with the malicious Jews in stoning them, Acts xiv. 18, 19. And Paul tells the Galatians, that ‘if it had been possible, they would have plucked out their eyes, and have given them to him;’ but a little after this, he complains that he was ‘become their enemy, because he told them the truth,’ Gal. iv. 15, 16.
2dly, The esteem of men is no farther to be desired, than as it may render us useful to them; and if God is pleased to deny this to us, we are not to prescribe to him, what measure of respect he shall allot to us from the world, or usefulness in it.
3dly, Let us consider, that we know more evil abounding in our own hearts than others can charge us with. Therefore, how much soever they are guilty of injustice to us; yet this affords us a motive to contentment. Besides we have not brought that honour to God that we ought; therefore, how just is it for him to deny us that esteem from men which we desire?
[4.] Suppose we are afflicted in our relations; there are some motives to contentment. Thus if servants have masters who make their lives uncomfortable, by their unreasonable demands, or unjust severity, such ought to consider, that their faithfulness and industry will be approved of, by God, how much soever it may be disregarded, by men; and a conscientious discharge of the duties incumbent on them, in the relation in which they stand, will give them ground to expect a blessing from God, to whom they are herein said to do service, which shall not go unrewarded, Eph. vi. 7, 8.
On the other hand, if masters are afflicted, by reason of the stubborn and unfaithful behaviour, or sloth and negligence, of their servants; let them enquire, whether this be not the consequence of their not being so much concerned for their spiritual welfare as they ought, or keeping up strict religion in their families? or, whether they have not been more concerned that their servants should obey them, than their great master, which is in heaven?
Again, if parents have undutiful children, which are a grief of heart to them; let them consider, as a motive to contentment, whether they have not formerly neglected their duty to their parents, slighted their counsels, or disregarded their reproofs? so whether they have not reason to charge themselves with the iniquity of their youth? and enquire, whether God be not, herein, writing bitter things against them for it? or, whether they have not neglected to bring up their children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord? These considerations will fence against all repining thoughts at the providence of God, that has brought these troubles upon them. And, as a farther inducement to make them easy, let such consider, that if this does not altogether lie at their door, but, they have been faithful to their children, in praying for, and instructing them, God may hear their prayers, and set home their instructions on their hearts, when they themselves are removed out of the world.
On the other hand, if children have wicked parents, whose conversation fills them with great uneasiness; let such consider, that this has been the case of many of God’s faithful servants; such as Hezekiah, Josiah, and others; and they may be assured, that they shall have no occasion to use that proverb, ‘The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set on edge,’ Ezek. xviii. 2.
[5.] If we are afflicted, by reason of the treachery and unfaithfulness of pretended friends, which wound us in the most tender part, Psal. lv. 12, 13. we may be induced to be content. For,
1st, We have no ground to expect perfection in the best of men, nor that their love and favour is immutable; neither is our conduct always such, that we do not often forfeit the respect, which we once had from others.
2dly, If our friends deal deceitfully with us, or are unfaithful to us, without just ground; this is not without the permission of the wise and over-ruling providence of God, who, sometimes, orders it to take us off from a dependence upon men, or expecting too much happiness from them; which is to be sought for only in himself, Isa. ii. 22.
3dly, This is our encouragement, when we find a change in the behaviour of friends towards us, that our chief happiness consists in the unchangeable love of God, Mal. iii. 6.
[6.] When we are afflicted in the loss of friends, or near relations; let us consider, as a motive to contentment,
1st, That there is no reversing or altering the decree of God, which fixes the bounds of men’s continuance in this world, Job xiv. 9.
2dly, All the comfort we have in friends and relations is a peculiar blessing from God; and he sometimes afflicts us in the loss of them, that he may draw off our affections from the best creature-enjoyments, and we may take up our rest intirely in himself. Moreover, we had never any reason to look on our friends as immortal, any more than ourselves; and therefore ought to say as David did when he lost his child, I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me, 2 Sam. xii. 23. and so far as self-love is concerned herein, we have reason to give a check to the excess thereof, by the exercise of self-denial, and say with David, I was dumb, and opened not my mouth, because thou didst it, Psal. xxxix. 8. or follow the example of Aaron, concerning whom it is said, that, when he lost two of his sons at once, by a public and awful stroke of divine justice, he held his peace, Lev. x. 3.
[7.] If we are afflicted by the want of success, or the many disappointments that attend us, in our lawful callings, in the world, we have reason, notwithstanding, to be content, if we consider,
1st, That it is the sovereign hand of God that orders our condition therein, as to what respects the success or disappointments that attend it; therefore we are not to strive against our Maker, or find fault with his will, who may do what he pleases with his own.
2dly, A man’s happiness does not really consist in the abundance of what he possesses, Luke xii. 15. but rather in his having a heart to use it aright; therefore we ought to say to ourselves, as God did to Baruch, Seekest thou great things for thyself? seek them not, Jer. xlv. 5.
3dly, The world is a scene of vanity; we have no reason to expect too much from it; and therefore ought not to be dejected at the loss of it; especially considering that such disappointments are the common lot of all sorts of men.
4thly, The providence of God sometimes denies us the good things of this world, that we may think it our duty and interest to lay up treasures in heaven.
[8.] Suppose we meet with afflictions, as to what relates to our spiritual concerns, as being under divine desertion, or decays of grace, or want of a sense of the love of God, or those spiritual comforts, which we once enjoyed from him; in this condition no believer can or ought to be easy, at least, stupid and unconcerned about it; but, on the other hand, he ought to be humbled for those sins which may give occasion to it, and press after the enjoyment of what he is, at present, deprived of: Nevertheless, contentment, as it is opposed to repining or quarrelling with God, is his present duty; and there are some inducements tending thereunto; as,
1st, A person may have the truth of grace, when he is destitute of the comfortable sense thereof.
2dly, There are some great and precious promises made to believers, in this condition, Isa. liv. 7, 8. Psal. cxii. 4.
3dly, God has wise ends in this dispensation; for hereby he brings sin to remembrance, humbles us for it, fences against presumption and confidence in our own strength, Psal. xxx. 6, 7. He also puts us upon the exercise of suitable graces, Psal. xlii. 6. and lxxvii. 6. and when he is pleased to comfort us after such afflictions, we are better furnished to comfort others in the like case.
2. The next thing required in this Commandment, is, a charitable frame of spirit towards our neighbour; so that all our inward motions and affections should lead us to promote and rejoice in his good, 1 Cor. xiii. 4-7. This charitable frame of spirit ought to be exercised,
(1.) Towards those who excel us in gifts or graces: These they receive from the hand of providence, as talents to be improved; and therefore, if they have a greater share thereof than ourselves, more is required of them in proportion thereunto, Luke xii. 48. If they excel us in grace, we ought rather to rejoice, that though we bring but little glory to God, others bring more; and it will afford us an evidence of the truth of grace, if, while we are humbled under a sense of our own defects, we are thankful for the honour that is brought to God by others, Gal. i. 23, 24. John iii. 26, 27, 28, 30.
(2.) We ought to exercise a charitable frame of spirit towards those who are in more prosperous circumstances in the world; not envying, grieving, or repining at the providence of God, because their condition therein is better than ours. We are therefore to consider, that the most flourishing and prosperous condition in the world, is not always the best, Psal. xxxvii. 16. nor is it without many temptations that often attend it, 1 Tim. vi. 9. and if it be not improved to the glory of God, this will bring a greater weight of guilt on their consciences: Whereas, on the other hand, if we enjoy communion with him, and the blessings of the upper springs, this is much more desirable than the most prosperous condition in the world, without it, Psal. xvi. 5, 6. This leads us to consider,
II. The sins forbidden in this Commandment. And these include in them, that corrupt fountain from whence the irregularity of our desires proceeds; or the streams that flow from it, which discover themselves in the lusts of concupiscence in various instances, as well as in our being discontented with our own estate.
1. As to the former of these, to wit, the corruption of nature; this must be considered as contrary to the law of God, and consequently forbidden in this Commandment. The Pelagians and Papists, indeed, pretend that the law of God only respects the corruption of our actions which is to be checked and restrained thereby; and not the internal habits or principle from whence they proceed; accordingly they take an estimate hereof from human laws, which only respect the overt acts of sin, and not those internal inclinations and dispositions which persons have to commit it: But when we speak of the divine laws, we must not take our plan from thence; for though man can only judge of outward actions, God judgeth the heart; and therefore that sin which reigns there, cannot but be, in the highest degree, offensive to him; and though the corruption of our nature cannot be altogether prevented or extirpated, by any prescription in the divine law; yet, this is the means which God takes, to reprove and humble us for it, Rom. vii. 9.
Object. It is objected that the apostle James, in chap. i. 15. distinguishes between lust and sin; when lust hath conceived it bringeth forth sin; therefore the corruption of nature is not properly sin; and, consequently not forbidden by the law.
Answ. To this it may be replied; that lust may be distinguished from sin, as the habit or corrupt principle is from the act which it produces; and therefore, the apostle’s meaning in this scripture is, that lust, or irregular desires, are first conceived in the heart; and then actual sins proceed from them in the life; and both of them are abhorred by God, and contrary to his law: And they seem to be forbidden, in particular, in this tenth Commandment.
Here we may observe the various methods that corrupt nature takes, in order to its producing and bringing forth sinful actions. First, the temptation is offered, either by Satan, or the world, with a specious pretence of some advantage which may arise from our compliance with it; and, at the same time we consider not whether it be lawful or unlawful; and regard not the threatnings that should deter us from it. And, we sometimes take occasion, from the pernicious examples of the falls and miscarriages of others, to venture on the commission of the same sins; pretending that they are, many of them, more acquainted with scripture, than we are; and there seems to be no ill consequence attending their commission of those sins: therefore, why may we not give way to them? And also, that many, who have had more fortitude and resolution than we can pretend to, have been overcome by the same temptations; therefore it is in vain for us to strive against them.
Again, corrupt nature sometimes fills the soul with a secret dislike of the strictness and purity of the law of God; and, at other times, it suggests that there are some dispensations allowed, in compliance with the frailty of nature; and therefore, we may venture on the commission of some sins; At length we take up a resolution that we will try the experiment, whatever be the consequence thereof. Thus lust brings forth sin; which, after it has been, for some time indulged, is committed with greediness, and persisted in with resolution; and, in the end, brings forth death. And this leads us to consider,
2. The irregularity of those actions, which proceed from the corruption of our nature, which are sometimes, called the lusts of concupiscence; whereby, without the least shew of justice, we endeavour to possess ourselves of those things which belong to our neighbour. Thus Ahab was restless in his own spirit, till he had got Naboth’s vineyard into his hand; and, in order thereto, joined in a conspiracy, to take away his life, 1 Kings xxi. 4. And David coveted his neighbour’s wife; which was one of the greatest blemishes in his life, and brought with it a long train of miseries, that attended him in the following part of his reign, 2 Sam. xii. 9-12. And Achan coveted those goods which belonged not to him, the wedge of gold, and the Babylonish garment, Josh. vii. 21. which sin proved his ruin.
This sin of covetousness arises from a being discontented with our present condition, so that whatever measure of the blessings of providence we enjoy, we are notwithstanding, filled with disquietude of mind, because we are destitute of what we are lusting after. This must be considered as a sin that is attended with very great aggravations. For,
(1.) It unfits us for the performance of holy duties; prevents the exercise of those graces, which are necessary in order thereunto; and, on the other hand, exposes us to manifold temptations, whereby we are rendered an easy prey to our spiritual enemies.
(2.) It is altogether unlike the temper of the blessed Jesus, who expressed an entire resignation to the divine will, under the greatest sufferings, John xviii. 11. Luke xxi. 42. And, indeed, it is a very great reproach to religion, in general, and a discouragement to those who are setting their faces towards it, who will be ready to conclude, from our example, that the consolations of God are small, or that there is not enough in the promises of the covenant of grace, to quiet our spirits under their present uneasiness.
(3.) It is to act as though we expected, or desired our portion in this world, or looked no farther than these present things; which is contrary to the practice of the best of God’s saints, 2 Cor. iv. 18.
(4.) It tends to cast the utmost contempt on the many mercies we have received or enjoy, at present, which are, as it were, forgotten in unthankfulness; and it is a setting aside those blessings which the gospel gives us to expect.
(5.) It argues an unwillingness to be at God’s disposal, and a leaning to our own understandings, as though we knew better than him, what was most conducive to our present and future happiness; and therefore, it is a tempting God, and grieving his Holy Spirit, which has a tendency to provoke him to turn to be our enemy, and fight against us, Isa. lxiii. 10.
(6.) It deprives us of the present sweetness of other mercies; renders every providence, in our apprehension, afflictive; and those burdens which would otherwise be light, almost insupportable.
(7.) If God is pleased to give us what we were discontented and uneasy for the want of, he often sends some great affliction with it: Thus Rachel, in a discontented frame, says, Give me children, or else I die, Gen. xxx. 1. she had, indeed, in some respects, her desire of children; but died in travail with one of them, chap. xxxv. 19.
(8.) It is a sin, which they, who are guilty of, will find it very difficult to be brought to a thorough conviction of the guilt which they contract hereby, or a true repentance for it: Thus Jonah, when under a discontented and uneasy frame of spirit, justified himself, and, as it were, defied God to do his worst against him; so that when this matter was charged upon his conscience; Dost thou well to be angry? he replied, in a very insolent manner, I do well to be angry, even unto death, Jonah iv. 9. The justifying ourselves under such a frame of spirit, cannot but be highly provoking to God; and whatever we may be prone to allege in our own behalf, will rather aggravate, than extenuate the crime.
There are several things which a discontented person is apt to allege in his own vindication, which have a tendency only to enhance his guilt. As,
[1.] When he pretends that his natural temper leads him to be uneasy, so that he cannot, by any means, subdue his passions, or submit to the disposing providence of God.
To which it may be replied; that the corruption of our nature, and its proneness to sin, is no just excuse for, but rather an aggravation of it; whereby it appears to be more deeply rooted in our hearts; and, indeed, our natural inclinations to any sin are increased, by indulging it. Therefore, in this case, we ought rather to be importunate with God, for that grace which may have a tendency to restrain the inordinacy of our affections, and render us willing to acquiesce in the divine dispensations, than to paliate and excuse our sin; which only aggravates the guilt thereof.
[2.] Some, in excuse for their discontented and uneasy frame of spirit, allege; that the injuries which have been offered to them, ought to be resented, that they are such as they are not able to bear; and not to show themselves uneasy under them, would be to encourage persons to insult and trample on them.
But to this it may be replied; that while we complain of injuries done us by men, and are prone to meditate revenge against them, we do not consider the great dishonour that we bring to God, and how much we deserve to be made the monuments of his fury, so that we should not obtain forgiveness from him, who are so prone to resent lesser injuries done to us by our fellow-creatures, Matt. xviii. 23. & seq.
[3.] Others excuse their discontent, by alleging the greatness of their afflictions; that their burden is almost insupportable, so that they are pressed out of measure, above strength, and are ready to say with Job, Even to day is my complaint bitter; my stroke is heavier than my groaning, Job xxiii. 2.
But to this it may be replied; that our afflictions are not so great as our sins, which are the procuring cause thereof; nor are they greater than some that befal others, who are better than ourselves; and, indeed, by indulging a discontented frame of spirit, we render them heavier than they would otherwise be.
[4.] Some pretend, that they are discontented and uneasy because the affliction they are under, was altogether unexpected; and therefore they were unprovided for, and so less able to bear it. To this it may be replied;
1st, That a Christian ought daily to expect afflictions in this miserable and sinful world, at least, so far as not to be unprovided for, or think it strange that he should be exercised with them, 1 Pet. iv. 12.
2dly, We have received many unlooked for mercies; and therefore, why should we be uneasy because we meet with unexpected afflictions, and not rather set the one against the other.
4thly, Some of God’s best children have oftentimes been surprized with afflictive providences, and yet have been enabled to exercise contentment under them. Thus the messengers who brought Job heavy and unexpected tidings of one affliction immediately following another, Job i. 13, & seq. did not overthrow his faith, or make him discontented under the hand of God; for, notwithstanding all this, he worshipped and blessed the name of the Lord, ver. 20, 21.
[5.] Others allege, that the change which is made in their circumstances in the world, from a prosperous to an afflicted condition of life, is so great, and lies with such weight upon their spirits, that it is impossible for them to be easy under it. But to this it may be answered,
1st, That when God gave us the good things we are deprived of, he reserved to himself the liberty of taking them away when he pleased, as designing hereby, to shew his absolute sovereignty over us; and therefore, before this affliction befel us, it was our duty, according to the apostle’s advice, to rejoice as though we rejoiced not, and to use the world as not abusing it, 1 Cor. vii. 30. and not to think it strange, that we should be deprived of it, inasmuch as the fashion thereof passeth away.
2dly, The greater variety of conditions in which we have been, or are, in the world, afford more abundant experience of those dealings of God with us, which are designed as an ordinance for our faith; and therefore, instead of being discontented under them, we ought rather to be put hereupon, on the exercise of those graces that are suitable to the change of our condition, as the apostle says, I know both how to be abased, and I know how to abound, Phil. iv. 12.
[6.] Some allege, that they have the greatest reason to be discontented, because of the influence which their afflictions have on their spiritual concerns, as they tend to interrupt their communion with God; and they are often ready to fear, that these are indications of his wrath, and, as it were, the beginning of sorrows; which leads them to the very brink of despair.
To this it may be replied; that it is certain nothing more sharpens the edge of afflictions, or has a greater tendency to make us uneasy under them, than such thoughts as these; and not to be sensible hereof, would be an instance of the greatest stupidity; yet let us consider,
1st, That if our fears are ill-grounded, as they sometimes are, the uneasiness that arises from them is unwarrantable.
2dly, If we have too much ground for them, we are to make use of the remedy that God has provided; accordingly we are to have recourse by faith, to the blood of Jesus, for forgiveness; and this ought to be accompanied with the exercise of true repentance, and godly sorrow for sin, without giving way to those despairing apprehensions, that sometimes arise from a sense of the greatness of the guilt thereof, as though it set us out of the reach of mercy; which will add an insupportable weight to our burden; and,
3dly, If under the afflicting hand of God, we are rendered unfit for holy duties, and have no communion with him therein; this may be owing, not to the affliction, but that discontented, uneasy frame of spirit which we too much indulge under it. Therefore we are not to allege this as an excuse for that murmuring, repining frame of spirit which we are too apt to discover while exercised therewith.
The last thing to be considered is, the remedies against this sin of being discontented with our present condition; and these are,
1st, A due sense of that undoubted right which God has to dispose of us, and our condition in this world, as he pleases; inasmuch as we are his own, Matt. xx. 15.
2dly, Uneasiness under the hand of God, or repining at his dealings, when he thinks fit to deprive us of the blessings we once enjoyed, is not the way to recover the possession of them; but the best expedient for us to regain them, or some other blessings that are more than an equivalent for them, is our exercising an entire resignation to the will of God, and concluding that all his dispensations are holy, just, and good.
3dly, Let us consider, that God oftentimes designs to make us better by the sharpest trials, which are an ordinance to bring us nearer to himself. Thus David says, Before I was afflicted, I went astray; but now have I kept thy word, Psal. cxix. 67.
4thly, We ought to consider that God’s design in these dispensations is, to try our faith, and that it may found afterwards unto praise, honour, and glory, as it will be, with respect to every true believer, at the appearing of Jesus Christ, 1 Pet. i. 7. And to this we may add,
5thly, That there are many promises of the presence of God, which have not only a tendency to afford relief against uneasiness or dejection of spirit; but to give us the greatest encouragement under the sorest afflictions; particularly, that comprehensive promise, I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee, Heb. xiii. 5.
Footnote 9:
See Page 509.
Quest. CXLIX.
QUEST. CXLIX. Is any man able perfectly to keep the Commandments of God?
ANSW. No man is able, either in himself, or by any grace received in this life, perfectly to keep the Commandments of God, but doth daily break them in thought, word, and deed.
Having considered man’s duty and obligation to keep the Commandments of God; we are now led to speak of him as unable to keep them; and, on the other hand, chargeable with the daily breach thereof, which is an argument of the imperfection of this present state. We have, under a foregoing answer[10], endeavoured to prove that the work of sanctification is imperfect in this life; so that all the boasts of the Pelagians, and others, who defend the possibility of attaining perfection therein, are vain and unwarrantable. We have also considered the reasons why God orders that it should be so. And therefore we shall, without enlarging so much on this subject, as otherwise we might have done, principally take notice of what is to be observed in this answer, under two general heads.
I. In what respects, and with what limitations, man is said to be unable to keep the Commandments of God; and, accordingly it is said, that no man is able, perfectly, to keep them. By which we are to understand, as it is observed in the Shorter Catechism[11], no mere man, whereby our Saviour is excepted, who yielded perfect obedience in our nature. This is farther explained, with another limitation, namely, that no man is able to do this since the fall; to denote that man, in his state of innocency, was able, perfectly to keep the Commandments of God. For he was made upright, and had the image of God instamped on his soul; which consisted in knowledge, righteousness, and holiness, Eccl. vii. 29. Gen. i. 27. having the law of God written in his heart, and power to fulfil it[12]. And, indeed, to suppose the contrary, would be a reflection upon the divine government, and would argue man to have been created under a natural necessity of sinning, and perishing; which is contrary to the goodness, holiness, and justice of God. It is farther observed, that no man is able, in this life, thus to keep God’s Commandments, which contains an intimation that the glorified saints, in heaven, will be enabled to yield perfect obedience; notwithstanding the many imperfections they are now liable to. Moreover, as man is not able, of himself, or without the aids of divine grace, to obey God; so he is not to expect such assistance from him as shall enable him to obey him perfectly. There is no doubt but the grace of God could free us from all the remainders of sin in this world, as well as in our passing from it to heaven; but we have no ground to conclude that it will. For,
1. The whole creation is liable to the curse,[13] (which was consequent upon man’s first apostasy from God,) under which it groaneth, unto this day, Rom. viii. 22, 23. and shall not be delivered from it, till the scene of time, and things shall be changed, and the saints shall be fully possessed of what they are now waiting for, to wit, the adoption, or the redemption of their bodies.
2. God is pleased to deny his people that perfection of holiness here, which they shall attain to hereafter, that he may give them daily occasion to exercise the duties of self-denial, mortification of sin, faith, and repentance, which redound to his own glory, and their spiritual advantage. This leads us,
II. To consider that we daily break the Commandments of God, in thought, word, and deed.
1. In thought; to wit, when the mind is conversant about sinful objects, in such away, as that it contracts defilement. It is a sign that the wickedness of man is very great, when, every imagination of the thoughts of his heart is only evil, and that continually, Gen. vi. 5. Now the sinfulness of the thoughts of men, consists in four things;
(1.) When they chuse, delight in, and are daily conversant about things that are vain, empty of what is good, and have no tendency to the glory of God, or the spiritual advantage either of ourselves or others. The least vain thought which contains an excursion from our duty to God, brings some degree of guilt with it; but when the mind is wholly taken up with vanity, so that it is turned aside from, or takes no delight in those things that are of the highest importance, this will have a tendency to vitiate the mind, and alienate it from the life of God.
(2.) The thoughts of men may be said to be sinful, when they are not fixed, or intensely set, on God and divine things, when engaged in holy duties; and that either, when worldly cares or business, how lawful soever they may be at other times, have a tendency to divert our thoughts from them, being altogether inconsistent therewith. Or when our minds are conversant about spiritual things unseasonably, so as to be diverted from our present design; as, when we are joining with others in prayer, instead of bearing a part with them, in having the same exercise of faith, and other graces, which supposes that our thoughts are employed about the same object with theirs, we are meditating on some other divine subject, foreign to the present occasion.
(3.) Our thoughts may be said to be sinful, when they are conversant about spiritual things, without suitable affections, and, consequently, meditating on them as common things, in which we are not much concerned; as when we are destitute of those holy desires after, or delight in God, when drawing nigh to him in holy duties, which his law requires. And this will more evidently appear, when, by comparing the frame of our spirit therein, with what we observe it to be in other instances, we find, that our affections are easily raised, when engaged in matters of less importance, but stupid, and unconcerned about our eternal welfare, in holy duties; which is accompanied with hardness of heart and impenitency, and sometimes with uneasiness and weariness, as though they were a burden to us.
On the other hand, our affections may be raised in these duties, and yet we be chargeable with a sinfulness of thought therein; as,
[1.] When the affections are raised by things of less importance, while other things that are more affecting, are not regarded. As, supposing a person is meditating on Christ’s sufferings, and he is very much affected with, and enraged at the treachery of Judas, that betrayed him, or the barbarity of the Jews, that crucified him; but not in the least with the sin of the world, that was the occasion of it, or the greatness of his love, that moved him to submit to it.
[2.] When our affections are raised in holy duties, and this is all that we depend upon, for justification and acceptance in the sight of God, vainly supposing that our tears will wash away our sins, being destitute of faith in the blood of Christ.
[3.] When we are concerned about the misery consequent on our sins, but are not in the least inclined to hate them, nor grieved at the dishonour brought to the name of God thereby.
This leads us to consider the causes hereof, and remedies against it. If we do not find that our affections are raised in these religious exercises, as they have been in times past, we ought to enquire into the reason thereof; whether this be not attended with some great backslidings from God, which might first occasion it. Sometimes it proceeds from a neglect of holy duties, either public or private; at other times, from presumptuous sins, committed, or continued in, with impenitency. And we often find, that our being too much embarrassed with, or immoderately engaged in our pursuit of the profits or pleasures of this world, stupifies and damps our affections, as to religious matters, so that they are seldom or never raised therein.
As to the remedies against this stupid and unaffected frame of spirit; we must not only repent of, but abstain from those sins, that have been the occasion thereof; meditate on those subjects, that are most suitable to our case, which have a tendency to enflame our love to Christ, and desire after him, and our zeal for his glory; and often confess and bewail our stupidity and unbecoming behaviour in holy duties; earnestly imploring the powerful influence of the Spirit of God, to bring us into, and keep us in a right frame of spirit for them.
(4.) We have reason to charge ourselves with sin, when guilty of blasphemous thoughts; as,
1st, When we have, by degrees, brought on ourselves a disregard of God, either by living in the neglect of holy duties, or allowing ourselves in the practice of known sins.
2dly, When, before we were followed with these thoughts, we have found that we gave way to some doubts about the divine perfections; or, through the ignorance, pride and vanity of our minds, have contracted an habitual disregard to, or neglect of that holy reverence with which we ought to meditate on them.
3dly, When we can hear those execrable oaths or curses, by which some profanely blaspheme the name of God, without expressing our resentment with the utmost abhorrence and detestation.
4thly, When we find, that being followed with blasphemous thoughts, our hearts are too prone to give in to them, as though they were the sentiments of our mind; whereby we do, as it were, consent to them, instead of rejecting them with the utmost aversion.
But, on the other hand, blasphemous thoughts are not always to be charged on us as a sin. Sometimes they are chargeable on Satan, who herein acts according to his character, as God’s open enemy; and endeavours to instil into us the same ideas that he himself has. These thoughts may be charged on him; when they are hastily injected into our minds, not being the result of choice or deliberation; but are a kind of violence offered to our imagination, and, we cannot but discover the greatest detestation of them, as well as of that enemy of souls, from whom they take their rise; and when, at the same time, we are enabled to exercise the contrary graces, and betake ourselves to God with faith and prayer, that he would rebuke the Devil, and preserve our consciences undefiled, under this sore temptation, which we cannot but reckon one of the greatest afflictions that befal us in the world. Thus concerning the sinfulness of our thoughts.
2. We are farther said, daily to break the Commandments of God in word. Thus the apostle James speaks of the tongue as an unruly evil full of deadly poison, James iii. 8. Evil-speaking, as was before observed concerning the sinfulness of our thoughts, is attended with a greater or less degree of guilt, as the vanity of the mind, and the wickedness of the heart, more or less discovers itself therein. Our Saviour speaks of the accountableness of man in the day of judgment, for every idle word, Matt. xii. 36. to denote, that there is no sin so small, but what is displeasing to an holy God, a violation of his law, and brings with it a degree of guilt, in proportion to the nature thereof. These indeed, are the lowest instances of the sinfulness of words. There are others that are of so heinous a nature, that they can hardly be reckoned consistent with true godliness. viz. defaming, and malicious words; which are sometimes compared to a sword, or arrows, Psal. lvii. 4. or to a serpent’s tongue, that leaves a sting and poison behind it, Psal. cxl. 3. Again, the sinfulness of our words extends itself yet farther, as they are directed against the blessed God; when persons set their mouth against the heavens, and their tongue walketh through the earth, Psal. lxxiii. 9. when they give themselves the liberty to talk profanely about sacred things, and openly blaspheme the name and perfections of God. This degree of impiety, indeed, all are not chargeable with. Nevertheless, we may say, should God mark the iniquity of our words, as well as of our thoughts, who could stand?
3. We are said to break the Commandments of God, by deeds, i. e. by committing those sins which are contrived in the heart, and uttered with our tongues. These have been considered under their respective heads, as a violation of each of the ten Commandments, or doing those things that are forbidden therein; and therefore we pass them over in this place, and proceed to speak concerning the aggravations of sin.
Footnote 10:
See Quest. LXXVIII. Vol. III. 170.
Footnote 11:
See Quest. LXXXII.
Footnote 12:
See Vol. II. 44.
Footnote 13:
Κτίσις these mean the animal part of man.
Quest. CL.
QUEST. CL. Are all transgressions of the law of God equally heinous in themselves, and in the sight of God?
ANSW. All transgressions of the law of God are not equally heinous. But some sins in themselves, and by reason of several aggravations, are more heinous in the sight of God than others.
Though all sins be objectively infinite, and equally opposite to the holiness of God; yet there are some circumstances attending them, which are of that pernicious tendency, that they render one sin more heinous than another; so that it is not to be thought of, without the greatest horror and resentment; as well as expose the sinner to a sorer condemnation, if it be not forgiven. These are such as strike at the very essentials of religion, and tend, as much as in us lies, to sap the foundation thereof; as when men deny the being and perfections of God, and practically disown their obligation, to yield obedience to him. And some sins against the second table, which more immediately respect our neighbour, are more heinous than others, in proportion to the degree of injury done him thereby. Thus the taking away the life of another, is more injurious, and consequently more aggravated than barely the hating of him; which is, nevertheless, a very great crime. Moreover, the same sin, whether against the Commandments of the first or second table, may be said to be more or less heinous, in proportion to the degree of obstinacy, deliberation, malice, or enmity against God, with which it is committed; but these things will more evidently appear under the following answer; which we proceed to consider,
Quest. CLI.
QUEST. CLI. What are those aggravations which make some sins more heinous than others?
ANSW. Sins receive their aggravations,
I. From the persons offending, if they be of riper age, greater experience, or grace, eminent for profession, gifts, place, office; guides to others, and whose example is likely to be followed by others.
Sins are greater than otherwise they would be when committed by those whose age and experience ought to have taught them better. Thus Elihu says, A multitude of years should teach wisdom, Job xxxii. 7. Many things would be a reproach to such persons, which are more agreeable to the character of children, than those who are advanced in age. Again, if they have had large experience of the grace of God, and been eminent for their profession, or gifts conferred on them. These circumstances will render the same sin more aggravated; for where much is given, an improvement is expected in proportion thereunto; and where great pretensions are made to religion, the acting disagreeable thereunto, enhances the guilt, and renders the sin more heinous. Again, if the person offending be in an eminent station, or office in the world, or the church; so that he is either a guide to others, or the eyes of many are upon him, who will be apt to follow and receive prejudice by his example. When such an one commits a public and open sin, it is more aggravated than if it had been committed by another. Thus God bids the prophet Ezekiel see what the ancients of the house of Israel do in the dark, every man in the chambers of his imagery, Ezek. viii. 12. And the prophet Jeremiah speaks of those who ought to have been guides to the people, viz. the priests and the prophets, Jer. xxiii. 11. 14. who transgressed against the Lord; and charges this on them as an extraordinary instance of wickedness; which their character in the world, and the church rendered more heinous, though it was exceeding heinous in itself.
II. Sins receive their aggravations, from the parties offended; if immediately against God, his attributes, and worship, against Christ, and his grace; the holy Spirit, his witness, and workings, against superiors, men of eminency, and such as we stand especially related and engaged unto; against any of the saints, particularly weak brethren, the souls of them, or any other, and the common good of all or many.
There is no sin but what may be said to be committed against God; yet,
1. Some are more immediately against him, as they carry in them a contempt of his attributes and worship; whereby his name and ordinances are profaned, and the glory that is instamped thereon, little set by, Mal. i. 3, 4. Other sins reflect dishonour on our Lord Jesus Christ; and that either on his person, when we conclude him to be, or, at least, act as if he were no other than a mere creature; or, on his offices; when we refuse to receive instruction from him as a prophet, or depend on his righteousness as a priest, in order to our justification and acceptance, in the sight of God; or to submit to him as a King, who is able to subdue us to himself, and defend us from the assaults of our spiritual enemies; or when we despise his grace, and neglect that salvation which he has purchased, and offers in the gospel, Heb. ii. 3.
Again, our sins are aggravated when they are committed against the person of the Holy Ghost; when we deny him to be a divine Person, or the author of the work of regeneration, as supposing that grace takes its rise from ourselves, rather than him; or when we do not desire to be led by the Spirit, or seek his divine influence in order thereunto. But, on the other hand, resist his holy motions and impressions, and act contrary to those convictions which he is pleased to grant us; by which means we are said to grieve and quench the spirit, Eph. iv. 7. 1 Thess. v. 19. Also, when we reject and set ourselves against the witness of the Spirit, and that, either by concluding, that assurance of our interest in the love of God, may be attained without it, and reckon all pretences to it no better than enthusiasm; or, when on the other hand, we suppose that the Spirit witnesses with our spirits, that we are the children of God, without regard had to the work of sanctification, that always accompanies, and is an evidence thereof; whereby we take that comfort to ourselves which does not proceed from the Spirit of holiness.
2. Sins are aggravated as committed more immediately or directly against men, and particularly those, to whom we stand related in the bonds of nature, or, who have laid us under the strongest obligations, by acts of friendship to us. This is applicable to inferiors, who ought to pay a deference to their superiors; those sins that are committed by such, contain the highest instance of ingratitude, and are contrary to the laws or dictates of nature, and therefore aggravated in proportion thereunto.
Moreover, if they are committed against the saints; this is reckoned, by God, an instance of contempt cast on himself, (whose image they are said to bear;) much more, if we oppose them as saints, Luke xvi. 16. Matt. xii. 6. And though we do not proceed to this degree of wickedness, our crime is said to be greatly aggravated, when we lay a stumbling-block before those who are weak in the faith, which may tend to discourage them in the ways of God; and, by this means, we do what in us lies, to destroy those for whom Christ died, Rom. xiv. 15. 1 Cor. viii. 11. This is an injury done, not so much to their bodies, as their souls; which are wounded, and brought into great perplexity thereby.
However, we must distinguish between an offence given, and unjustly taken; or, it is one thing for persons to be offended at that which is our indispensible duty, in which case we are not to regard the sentiments of those who attempt to discourage us from, or censure us for the performance of it; and our giving offence in things that are in themselves indifferent, and might, without any prejudice, be avoided; in which case a compliance with the party offended, seems to be our duty; especially if the offence takes its rise from conscience, rather, than humour and corruption; and our not complying with him herein, would tend very much to discourage and weaken his hands in the ways of God; and therefore may be reckoned an aggravation of this sin.
Moreover, it is a farther aggravation of sin committed, when it appears to be contrary to the common good of all men. This guilt may be said to be contracted by them who endeavour to hinder the success of preaching of the gospel, 1 Thess. ii. 15. or otherwise, when the sin of one man brings down the judgments of God on a whole church or body of people; of this kind was Achan’s sin, Josh. vii. 20, 21, 25.
III. Sins are aggravated from the nature and quality of the offence; if it be against the express letter of the law, break many commandments, contain in it many sins; if not only conceived in the heart, but breaks forth in words and actions, scandalize others, and admit of no reparation; if against means, mercies, judgments, light of nature, conviction of conscience; public or private admonition, censures of the church, civil punishments, and our prayers, purposes, promises; vows, covenants, and engagements to God or men; if done deliberately, wilfully, presumptuously, impudently, boastingly, maliciously, frequently, obstinately, with delight, continuance, or relapsing after repentance.
1. Sin is aggravated when it is committed against the express letter of the law, so that there remains no manner of doubt, whether it be a sin or duty. To venture on the commission of what plainly appears to be unlawful, is to sin with great boldness and presumption, whereby the crime is very much aggravated, Rom. i. 32.
2. When it contains a breach of several of the Commandments; and therefore it may be reckoned a complicated crime. Of this kind was the sin of David, in the matter of Uriah; in which he was guilty of murder, adultery, dissimulation, injustice, &c. Also Ahab’s sin against Naboth; which included in it not only covetousness, but perjury, murder, oppression, and injustice.
3. Sins are more aggravated, when they break forth in words, or outward actions, than if they were only conceived in the heart. It is true, sin in the heart has some peculiar aggravations, as it takes deeper root, becomes habitual, and is entertained with a secret delight and pleasure, and as it is the source and fountain, from whence actual sins proceed. Nevertheless, when that, which was before conceived in the heart, is discovered by words or actions, this adds a farther aggravation to it, as it brings a more public dishonour to God, and often-times a greater injury to men.
4. Sins are farther aggravated, when they are of such a nature, that it is impossible for us to repair the injuries done thereby, or make restitution for them. Thus nothing can compensate for our taking away the life of another, or for our casting a reproach on the holy ways of God; and thereby endeavouring to bring his gospel into contempt; or, when we entice others to sin, by which means we turn them aside from God, and endeavour to ruin their souls; which is an injury that we cannot, by any means, repair; and therefore the crime is exceedingly aggravated.
5. If the sin committed be contrary to the very light of nature, such as would be offensive, even to the Heathen, 1 Cor. v. 1.
6. Sins receive their aggravations, when committed against means, mercies, and judgments; as when we break through all the fences which are set to prevent them; and the grace of God, revealed in the gospel, is not only ineffectual, to preserve from sin, though designed for that end, Tit. ii. 11, 12. but turned into lasciviousness, Jude, ver. 4. When mercies are misimproved, undervalued, and, as it were, trampled on, Rom. ii. 4. Isa. i. 3, Deut. xxii. 6. and judgments, whether threatened or inflicted are not regarded, nor were claimed thereby.
7. Sins are farther aggravated, when they are committed against the checks and convictions of conscience; which is a judge and a reprover within our own breasts. This is an offering violence to ourselves, and making many bold advances towards judicial blindness, hardness of heart, and a total apostacy.
8. When the sins committed are against public or private admonitions, censures of the church or civil punishments, which are God’s ordinance to bring men to repentance; and if they prove ineffectual, to answer that end, they will be left more stupid than they were before.
9. Sins are farther aggravated, when they are contrary to our own prayers, vows, covenants, and promises made either to God or men. When we confess sin, or pretend to humble ourselves before God in prayer, and yet, at other times, indulge the same sins, and are proud, self-conceited, and exalt ourselves against him; or when we pray for strength against corruption, or grace to perform holy duties, when, in reality, we have no love to, nor desire after them; or when we praise him for mercies received, while we are habitually unthankful, and forgetful of his benefits. Moreover, when we are very forward to make vows, covenants, or engagements, to be the Lord’s; whereby we often lay a snare for ourselves, from some circumstances that attend this action; and more especially from our disregarding it afterwards.
10. Sins are aggravated from the manner of our committing them, viz. If they are done deliberately, with fore-thought or contrivance: As when persons are said to devise mischief upon their beds; and then as to their conversation, to set themselves against that which is good, Psal. xxxiv. 5. Again, if it be done wilfully, that is, with the full bent of the will, making it the matter of our choice, and resolving to commit it, whatever it cost us. When we do it presumptuously, either when we take encouragement hereunto from the grace of God, Rom. vi. 1. or when his hand is lifted up against us, or when we see his judgments falling very heavy upon others, and are not disposed to take warning thereby; but grow more hardened and stupid than before.
Again, when sin is committed maliciously impudently, and obstinately; this argues a rooted hatred against God. Or, when it is committed with delight arising either from the thoughts we entertain thereof, before we commit it; or the pleasure we take in what we have done, afterwards. Again, when we boast of what we have done, which is to glory in our shame, Psal. x. 3. and lii. 1. when we do, as it were, value ourselves for having got rid of the prejudices of education, and all former convictions of sin, that so we may go on therein with less disturbance. And when persons boast of their over-reaching others in their way of dealing in the world, Prov. xx. 14. which they very often do in their secret thoughts, when they are ashamed to let the world know how remote they are from the practice of that justice, that ought to be between man and man. Again sins are aggravated when they are frequently committed, or when we relapse into the same sin, after having pretended to repent of it, 2 Pet. ii. 20,-22. Matt. xii. 43,-45.
IV. Sins are aggravated from circumstances of time, and place; if on the Lord’s-day, or other times of divine worship, or immediately before, or after these, or other helps, to prevent or remedy such miscarriages, if in public, or in the presence of others who are thereby likely to be provoked or defiled.
When sins are committed by us on the Lord’s-day, it is a profaning that time which he has sanctified for his service, and so renders us guilty of a double crime; or, when they are committed at any other time, which we occasionally set apart for divine worship; or, in those seasons, when God calls for fasting and mourning for our own sins, or those that are publicly committed in the world, Isa. xxii. 12,-14. or, at other times, when we have lately received signal deliverances, either personal or national, Psal. cvi. 7. or, when they are committed immediately before or after we have engaged in holy duties; the former renders us very unfit for them; the latter will effectually take away all those impressions, which have been made on our spirits therein.
Again, sins receive aggravation from the place in which they are committed: As for instance, if they are committed in those places, in which the name of God is more immediately called on, which if visible, will afford great matter of scandal to some, and an ill example to others; and if secretly committed, will tend to defile our souls, and argue us guilty of great hypocrisy. Moreover, when we commit those sins, which are generally abhorred in the place where providence has cast our lot: This is to render ourselves a stain and dishonour to those with whom we converse. Thus the prophet speaks of some, who, in the land of uprightness, will deal unjustly, Isa. xxvi. 10. and especially when they are committed in the presence of others, who are likely to be provoked or defiled thereby; by which means we contract the guilt of other men’s sins, as well as our own; and are doubly guilty, in that we are, in many respects, the cause of their transgressing.
There are several instances in which we may be said to contract the guilt of other men’s sins, which I shall only mention briefly, viz. when superiors lay their commands on inferiors, or oblige them to do that which is in itself sinful; or, when we advise those who stand upon a level with us, to commit sin, or give our consent to the commission of it, Acts vii. 58. chap. vii. 1. Again, when inferiors flatter superiors, or commend them for their sin: Thus when Herod had courted the applause of the people, by the oration which he made to them; they, on the other hand, flattered him, when they gave a shout, saying, It is the voice of a god, and not of a man, chap. xii. 22. Again, when we have recourse to those places, where sin is usually committed, and desire to associate ourselves with them, whose conversation is a reproach to religion, Prov. xiii. 20. or, when we are sharers, or partakers, with others, in their unlawful gains; first encouraging, abetting, and helping them therein; and then dividing the spoil with them, chap. i. 23,-25. Again, when we connive at sin committed; or, if it be in our power, do not restrain or hinder the commission of it; or, when we conceal it, when the farther progress thereof might be prevented by our divulging it. Again, when we provoke persons to sin. And hereby draw forth their corruptions; and when we extenuate sin, whether committed by ourselves or others; which is a degree of vindicating, or pleading for it. And lastly, when we do not mourn for, or pray against those sins which are publicly committed in the world, that are like to bring down national judgments[14].
Footnote 14:
These several heads, concerning the aggravations of sin, are contained in three or four lines, which are helpful to our memories. Most of the heads of this answer, are contained in that verse, Quis? Quid? Ubi? Quibus auxiliis? Cur? Quomodo? Quando? And those that relate to our contracting the guilt of other men’s sins, in the following lines; Jussu. Consilio. Consensu. Palpo. Recursu. Participans. Nutans. Non obstans. Non manifestans. Incessans. Minuens. Non mærens. Solicitansve.
Quest. CLII., CLIII.
QUEST. CLII. What doth every sin deserve at the hands of God?
ANSW. Every sin, even the least, being against the sovereignty, goodness, and holiness of God, and, against his righteous law, deserveth his wrath and curse, both in this life, and that which is to come, and cannot be expiated, but by the blood of Christ.
QUEST. CLIII. What doth God require of us, that may escape his wrath and curse due to us by reason of the transgression of the law.
ANSW. That we may escape the wrath and curse of God due to us by reason of the transgression of the law, he requireth of us repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ, and the diligent use of the outward means whereby Christ communicates to us the benefits of his mediation.
In the former of these answers, we have an account of then demerit of sin; in the latter, we have the character and disposition of those who have ground to conclude that they shall be delivered from the wrath and curse of God due to it. We have already considered one sin as greater than another, by reason of several circumstances that tend to enhance the guilt of those who commit them: Nevertheless, there is no sin so small but it has this aggravation in it, that it is a violation of the law of God, and is opposite to his holiness; and therefore it cannot but render the sinner guilty in his sight; and guilt is that whereby a person is liable to suffer punishment in proportion to the offence committed: Therefore it follows, that there is no ground for that distinction which the Papists make between mortal and venial sins; whereof the former, they suppose, deserves the wrath and curse of God both in this and another world; but as for the latter, namely, venial sins, they conclude that they may be atoned for by human satisfactions, or penances; and that they are, in their own nature, so small, that they do not deserve eternal punishment. This is an opinion highly derogatory to the glory of God, and opens a door to licentiousness, in a variety of instances; the contrary to which, is contained in the answer we are now explaining.
For the understanding whereof, let it be considered; that it is one thing for a sin to deserve the wrath and curse of God, and another thing for the sinner to be liable and exposed to it. The former of these arises from the heinous nature of sin, and is inseparable from it; the latter is inconsistent with a justified state. Nothing can take away the guilt of sin, but the atonement made by Christ; and that forgiveness or freedom from condemnation, which God is pleased to bestow as the consequence thereof, Rom. viii. 1, 33. It is this that discharges a believer from a liableness to the wrath and curse of God. Though one sin be greater than another, by reason of various circumstances that attend, or are contained in it, as was observed under the last answer: yet the least sin must be concluded to be objectively infinite, as it is committed against a God of infinite perfection, since all offences are great in proportion to the dignity of the person against whom they are committed. Thus the same sin that is committed against an inferior, or an equal, which deserves a less degree of punishment, if it be committed against a king, may be so circumstanced, as that it will be deemed a capital offence, and render the criminal guilty of high treason; though, at the same time, no real injury is done to, but only attempted against him. In like manner we must conclude, that though it be out of our own power to injure or detract from the essential glory of the great God; yet every offence committed against him is great, in proportion to his infinite excellency; and is therefore said to deserve his wrath and curse. Wrath or anger, when applied to God, is not to be considered as a passion in him, as it is in men; but denotes his will to punish sin committed, which takes its first rise from the holiness of his nature, which is infinitely opposite to it. And the degree of punishment that he designs to inflict, is contained in his law; which, as it denounces threatnings against those who violate it, the sinner is hereby said to be exposed to the curse or condemning sentence thereof, agreeably to the rules of justice, and the nature of the offence. This is what we are to understand, in this answer, by sin’s deserving the wrath and curse of God.
And this is farther considered, as what extends itself to this life, and that which is to come. Punishments inflicted in this life, are but the beginning of miseries; but they are sometimes inexpressibly great, as the Psalmist says, Who knoweth the power of thine anger? even according to thy fear, so is thy wrath, Psal. xc. 11. Sometimes there is but a very short interval between sin and the punishment; as in the case of Nadab and Abihu, Korah, and his company, Achan, and many others; whereas, at other times, it is long deferred; nevertheless, it will fall with great weight, at last, on the offender. Thus God sometimes punishes the sin of youth in old age; and when a greater degree of guilt has been contracted, writes bitter things against them, Job xiii. 26. But the greatest degree of punishment is reserved for sinners in another world; which is styled the wrath to come, 1 Thess. i. 10. But these things having been insisted on in some foregoing answers[15], we shall add no more on that head; but proceed to what is farther observed, viz. that this punishment cannot be expiated any otherwise than by the blood of Christ. This is fitly inserted after the account we have had of man’s liableness to the wrath of God, by reason of sin: for when we have an afflicting sense of the guilt we have exposed ourselves to, nothing else will afford us relief.
The next thing to be considered is, how it may be removed, or by what means the justice of God may be satisfied, and an atonement made for sin. This is said to be done no other way but by the blood of Christ, as has been considered elsewhere, under a foregoing answer; in which we endeavoured to prove the necessity of Christ’s making satisfaction, and the price that he paid in order thereto[16]. We have also considered the fruits and effects thereof, as it has a tendency to remove the guilt of sin, and procure for us a right to eternal life:[17] Therefore, we shall pass over the consideration thereof in this place; only we may observe, that, since this can be brought about by no other means but Christ’s satisfaction; it is not inconsistent with what is contained in the following words, if rightly understood by us, to assert that God requires of us, repentance, faith, and a diligent attendance on the outward means of grace; though we must not conclude them to be the procuring cause of our justification, or a means to expiate sin. They are certainly very much unacquainted with the way of salvation by Christ, as well as the great defects of their repentance and faith, who suppose, that God is hereby induced to pardon our sins, or deliver us from the wrath we have deserved thereby; nevertheless, we are not to think, that impenitent unbelieving sinners have a right to determine that they are in a justified state, or have ground to claim an interest in the benefits of Christ’s redemption. Therefore, these graces are necessary to evince our interest in what he has done and suffered for us, and they are inseparably connected with salvation; though they do not give us a right and title to eternal life, as Christ’s righteousness doth. We have, in two foregoing answers, given a particular account of repentance and faith. Concerning repentance, we have observed, that it is a special saving grace, wrought in us by the Holy Spirit, and have shewn in what way he works it; and also the difference between legal and evangelical repentance, as the former is often found in those who are destitute of the latter. We have considered the various acts of repentance unto life[18]; what the objects and acts of saving faith are; and how it differs from that which is not so; and the use of this grace, in the whole conduct of our lives, and how it gives life and vigour to all other graces, and enables us to perform duties in a right manner[19]. Therefore we shall not insist on this subject at present, but only speak of repentance and faith as means appointed by God, in order to our attaining compleat salvation.
The means conducive hereunto, are either internal or external; the former of these are inseparably connected with salvation; so that none, who repent and believe, shall perish, John iii. 16. These graces, together with all others, that accompany or flow from them, are the fruits and effects of Christ’s mediation; and therefore they are sometimes called saving graces. As they are wrought in the hearts of believers, and have a reference to salvation; they may be truly styled internal means of salvation; and, as such, they are distinguished from those outward and ordinary means of grace, by which God is pleased to work them. And these are the ordinances which we are diligently to attend on, in hopes of attaining those graces under them, till God is pleased to give success to our endeavours, and work grace under these means; the efficacy whereof, is wholly owing to his power, and is to be resolved into his sovereign will.
This may be fitly illustrated by what is said concerning the poor, impotent, blind, halt, and withered persons, waiting at the pool of Bethesda, for the angels troubling the water; after which, he that first stepped in, was made whole, John v. 2-4. Nevertheless, we do not find that every one who waited there embraced the first opportunity, and received a cure; for some were obliged to wait many years; and if they were made whole at last, they had no reason to think their labour lost. This may be applied to those who have the means of grace. Many sit under them who receive no saving advantage thereby, till God is pleased, in his accepted time, to work those graces which render these ordinances effectual to salvation. This blessed success attending them, is from God; he could, indeed, save his people without them, as he converted Paul, when going to Damascus, with a design to persecute the church there; being not only unacquainted with, but prejudiced against the means of grace. But this is not God’s ordinary method. He has put an honour on his own institutions, so as to render it necessary for us to pray, wait and hope for saving blessings, in attending on them. Thus when he promises to put his Spirit within his people, and cause them walk in his statutes, he adds; yet for this will I be enquired of by the house of Israel, to do it for them, Ezek. xxxvi. 27, 37. accordingly we are commanded to seek the Lord while he may be found, and to call upon him while he is near, Isa. lv. 6. Hereby we testify our approbation of that method which he has ordained for the application of redemption; and by our perseverance therein, as determining not to leave off waiting till we have obtained the blessing expected, we proclaim the valuableness thereof, and subscribe to the sovereignty of God, in dispensing those blessings to his people, which they stand in need of, as well as pray and hope for them in his own time and way. Thus we are to wait on the means of grace.
And it is farther observed, that this is to be done with diligence; not in a careless and indifferent manner, as though we neither expected nor desired much advantage from them. This implies in it an embracing every opportunity, and observing those special seasons, in which God is pleased, in his gospel, to hold forth the golden sceptre of grace; as also our having earnest desires and raised expectations of obtaining that grace from him which he encourages us to wait and hope for[20]. Which leads us to speak particularly concerning those outward means, as contained in the following answer.
Footnote 15:
See Vol. II. Quest. XXVIII, XXIX, and Vol. III. Quest. LXXXIX.
Footnote 16:
See Vol. II. Quest. XLIV. Page 273-290.
Footnote 17:
See Quest. LXX, LXXI. Vol. III. p. 66-96. and what was said under those answers, to explain the doctrine of justification.
Footnote 18:
See Quest. LXXVI. Vol. III. p. 166.
Footnote 19:
See Quest. LXXII., LXXIII. Vol. III. p. 98.
Footnote 20:
To affect to honour the mercy of God, by supposing this is sufficient for all our sins, however persevered in, is to disparage his truth which has proposed terms of mercy, connected our salvation with them, and pronounced them exclusive. It is to imagine that Deity shall change his purposes; it is an affront to his wisdom to suppose that after he has placed us in a state of probation and made us accountable, no retribution should be made. It indicates insincerity, and not a real regard for the divine glory, to set up such a substitute for the gospel scheme of salvation.
To excuse sin by alleging our impotency to good, is disingenuous; because the party can be conscious of no obstacle, unless his own inclinations to evil can be so denominated. This excuse casts the blame on God. To persist in sin under such pretences, is to do evil that good may come, which, the Apostle of the Gentiles declares renders condemnation just; it is to sin that grace may abound.
To defer the acceptation of offered mercy, and put off the work of repentance, is unwise, as it is heaping sorrows against the day of bitterness; it is imprudent, because it is to remain at enmity with Him upon whom we depend, and to be liable at every moment of this uncertain life to be involved in everlasting despair. It is evidence of a very sordid mind to prefer the base gratifications of the senses, to the refined pleasures of virtue, and the beauty, peace, and comforts of holiness.
If the procrastination proceed from a dread of the labour of acquiring the knowledge of the truth, this will be increased by every hour’s delay, as the mind becomes thereby the less susceptible of religious impressions. The time in which the work should be accomplished also becomes the shorter; like a traveler, who has mistaken his course, the impenitent has every step to tread back again, and his time is proportionally curtailed. The truths of natural science flatter our pride and ambition, but those of religion humble and crucify them; the latter, being opposed to the carnal mind, disgust; if such disgust produce a delay of conversion, the truths which have once excited such aversion will be more likely afterwards to do it, because the mind by once having rejected them has become more sensual, and opposed to moral good.
The cares and business of life not merely pre-occupy the mind, and exclude the thoughts of religion, but augment our addictedness to earthly objects, and render progressively the mind more insensible to lessons of piety. In old age avarice or sensuality are often at the highest pitch; the man has become more impatient and irritable, tenacious even of his errours, and averse to changes, no change can be looked for but the great one, when the messenger arrives, who brings a scythe in his hand.
To defer conversion till death, that its terrors may dissolve the charms of the world, besides the hazard of surprise, is unreasonable, as it supposes mercy when we have persisted in rebellion as long as we can; it is to expect that God’s Spirit shrill always strive with man; it is highly presumptuous; and it exposes also to self-deception, as religion in that late hour must be the effect of necessity, and destitute of the fruits and proofs of holiness.
Quest. CLIV.
QUEST. CLIV. What are the outward means whereby Christ communicates to us the benefits of his mediation?
ANSW. The outward and ordinary means whereby Christ communicates to his church the benefits of his mediation, are, all his ordinances; especially the word, sacraments, and prayer; all which are made effectual to the elect for salvation.
In explaining this answer, we shall consider,
I. What we are to understand by the ordinances, which are here styled outward and ordinary means of grace. The first idea contained in them is, that they are religious duties, prescribed by God, as an instituted method, in which he will be worshipped by his creatures; but that which more especially denominates them to be ordinances, is, the promise which he has annexed to them of his special presence, and the encouragement that he has given to his people in attending on them, to hope for those blessings that accompany salvation. As God works grace by, and under them, they are called means of grace; and because he seldom works grace without first inclining persons to attend on him therein, and wait for his salvation; therefore they are called the ordinary means of grace; and because they have not in themselves a tendency to work grace, without the inward and powerful influences of the Holy Spirit, accompanying them, they are distinguished from it, and accordingly styled the outward means of grace.
That which may be observed concerning the ordinances as thus described, is,
1. That they may be engaged in, pursuant to a divine appointment; therefore no creature hath a warrant to enjoin any modes of worship, pretending that this will be acceptable, or well-pleasing to God; since he alone, who is the object of worship, has a right to prescribe the way in which he will be worshipped. To do this would be an instance of profaneness and bold presumption; and the worship performed pursuant thereunto would be in vain; as our Saviour says concerning that which has no higher a sanction than the commandments of men, Matt. xv. 9. and whatever pretence of religion there may be therein, God looks upon such worshippers as well as those whose prescriptions they follow herein, with the utmost contempt, and will punish them for, rather than encourage them in it. Thus the prophet reproves Israel, as being guilty of defection from God, who engaged in that worship which he had not ordained, when he says, The statutes of Omri are kept, and all the works of the house of Ahab, and ye walk in their counsels, that I should make thee a desolation, and the inhabitants thereof an hissing. Therefore shall ye bear the reproach of my people, Mic. vi. 16. And Jeroboam is often branded with this character, that he made Israel to sin, for instituting ordinances of divine worship, and setting up calves in Dan and Bethel, making an house of high places, and priests of the lowest of the people, and appointing sacred times, in which they should perform this worship; all which were of his own devising, and became a snare to the people, Exod. xx. 24. It is certain, that such appointments cannot be reckoned means of grace, or pledges of God’s presence; and it would redound to his dishonour, should he be obliged to communicate the benefits of Christ’s redemption hereby, to any who, (under a pretence of worshipping him in a way of their own devising,) offer the highest affront to him.
2. If God is pleased to reveal his will concerning the way in which we are to worship him, and hope for his presence, it is our indispensable duty to comply with it, and implore his acceptance of us herein; and be importunate with him, that he would put a glory on his own institutions, and grant us his special presence and grace, that we may be enabled to perform whatever duty he enjoins, in such a manner, that the most valuable ends may be answered, and our spiritual edification and salvation promoted thereby.
3. Though we consider the ordinances as instituted means of grace; yet, a bare attendance on them will not, of itself, confer grace, as is very evident from the declining state of religion, in those who engage in the external part of it, and attend upon all the ordinances of God’s appointment, and yet remain destitute of saving grace; who are stupid under the awakening calls of the gospel, and regard not the invitations given therein, to adhere stedfastly to Jesus Christ, whom in words they profess to own, though in works they deny him. This is a convincing evidence, that it is God alone, who appointed those ordinances, that can make them effectual to salvation. Thus concerning the nature of an ordinance, and in what respect it may be called an outward and ordinary means of grace. We are now,
II. To consider what are those ordinances by which Christ communicates to us the benefits of his mediation. These may be considered,
1. As engaged in by particular persons, as subservient to their spiritual welfare, in order to the beginning or carrying on the work of grace in their souls; such as meditation about divine subjects, self-examination, and all other duties, which are performed by them in their private retirement, in hope of having communion with God therein. Or,
2. There are other ordinances which God has given to worshipping assemblies, which are founded in that general promise, In all places where I record my name, I will come unto thee, and I will bless thee, Exod. xx. 24. Those mentioned in this answer, are the words, sacraments and prayer; of which the sacraments are particularly given to the churches; the word and prayer, to all who are favoured with the gospel-dispensation. And to these we may add, singing the praises of God; which, though it be not particularly mentioned in this answer, is, nevertheless, a duty wherein we may expect to meet with his presence and blessing; and accordingly is an ordinance which God makes effectual to promote our salvation. Therefore, before we enter on the subject-matter of the following answers, we shall speak something concerning this duty, as an ordinance which he has instituted; together with the way and manner in which it is to be performed. And,
(1.) We may enquire what ground we have to reckon it among the ordinances of God. This must not be taken for granted, but proved; because there are many who deny it to be so. That it was an ordinance enjoined to, and practised by the church, under the Old Testament-dispensation, appears from the many songs and psalms given, by divine inspiration, to be used by the church, in their solemn acts of worship; some of which were not only sung by particular persons; but the whole church is represented as joining therein with united voices. Thus when Pharaoh’s host was drowned in the red sea, it is said, Moses and the children of Israel sang the song that was given by divine inspiration for that purpose, contained in Exod. xv. And when he was inspired with that song, in Deut. xxxii. he was commanded, in chap. xxxi. to write it for them, and teach it to them, and put it in their mouths; that they might sing it in their public worship; which he did accordingly, ver. 22. And from the days of David, when public worship was more settled than it had been before; and many things relating to the order, beauty and harmony thereof, brought into the church by divine direction, then there was an order of men called Singers, who were to preside over, and set forward the work. And there was also a book of psalms, given by divine inspiration, for the use of the church therein, that they might not be at a loss as to the subject-matter of praise in this ordinance; as may be inferred from the style thereof, the words being often put in the plural number; which argues, that they were to be sung, not by one person in the church, but by the whole congregation, in their solemn and public acts of worship; and accordingly we often find the whole multitude of them exhorted to sing the praises of God. Thus it is said in Psal. xxx. 4. Sing unto the Lord, O ye saints of his, and give thanks at the remembrance of his holiness. And elsewhere, Sing aloud unto God our strength. Make a joyful noise unto the God of Jacob. Take a psalm, &c. For this was a statute for Israel, and a law of the God of Jacob, Psal. lxxxi. 1, 2, 3, 4. And sometimes the church are represented as exciting one another to this duty. Thus it is said, O come let us sing unto the Lord; let us make a joyful noise to the rock of our salvation. Let us come before his presence with thanksgiving, and make a joyful noise unto him with psalms, Psal. xcv. 1, 2.
And it may be observed, that how much soever the use of musical instruments, which were in this worship may be concluded to be particularly adapted to that dispensation, as they were typical of that spiritual joy, which the gospel church should obtain by Christ; yet the ordinance of singing remains a duty, as founded on the moral law; and accordingly we find, that the practice hereof was recommended, not only to the Jews, but to all nations. Thus it is said, Make a joyful noise unto the Lord all the earth, Psal. xcviii. 4. And he speaks to this purpose, when he presses this duty upon all lands, whom he exhorts to serve him with gladness; and to come before the Lord with singing, Psal. c. 1, 2. And besides, it seems to be preferred before some other parts of worship, which were merely ceremonial. Thus the Psalmist says, I will praise the name of God with a song. This also shall please the Lord better than an ox or bullock, Psal. lxix. 30, 31. that is, God is more glorified hereby than he is by the external rites of ceremonial worship; especially when abstracted from those acts of faith, which add an excellency and glory to them.
And this leads us to consider it as an ordinance practised by the New Testament-church. Some had songs given in to them by inspiration; as the virgin Mary, Zacharias, and Simeon, Luke i. 46, 47, & seq. chap. ii. 28, & seq. and sometimes the members of particular churches had a psalm given in by extraordinary revelation, 1 Cor. xiv. 26. and we can hardly suppose this to have been without a design that it should be sung in the church for their edification; especially considering it as an extraordinary dispensation of the Spirit: And, as the singing of a psalm in the church, is an act of public worship, it is reasonable to suppose, that the whole assembly joined together therein; and therefore this ordinance was not only practised by them, but had also a divine sanction, in that the Spirit was the author of the psalm that was sung: And we sometimes read of the church’s singing an hymn, which was no other than a psalm or spiritual song, at the Lord’s-supper: Thus our Saviour, in the close of that ordinance, sung an hymn with his disciples, that small church with whom he then communicated, Mark xiv. 26. And at another time, when he was come nigh to the descent of the mount of olives, it is said, that the multitude of the disciples began to rejoice, and to praise God with a loud voice, Luke xxix. 37. where, by the multitude of the disciples, we must understand all that followed him, who had, at that time, a conviction in their consciences, that he was the Messiah, from the miracles which they had seen him work; and we have an account of the short hymn which they sang; Blessed be the king that cometh in the name of the Lord; peace in heaven, and glory in the highest, Luke xix. 38. This was not, indeed, sung in a church-assembly; however, it was with a loud voice, and herein they gave glory to God: And though some of the Pharisees were offended at it, ver. 39. yet our Saviour, in the following words, vindicates their practice herein; which argues, that it was a branch of religious worship, performed by them at that time; and a duty approved of by him. All that I would infer from hence, is, that our Saviour gave countenance to the singing the praises of God, with united voices. Therefore it follows, that we ought, on all occasions, to do the same thing; and consequently, singing is an ordinance, whereby the church ought to glorify God, and shew forth his praise. Thus we have considered singing to be an ordinance, or a branch of instituted worship.
(2.) There are several things in which this ordinance agrees with some others; particularly with prayer in all the parts thereof; and with reading and preaching of the word. That it has something in common with prayer, appears from the subject-matter of several of the psalms of David; some of which are called prayers, and accordingly they contain in them several petitions, for blessings that the church stood in need of, together with various instances of confession of sin, as well as thanksgiving for mercies received. As to the agreement of this ordinance, with preaching or reading the word; that, I think, may be inferred in general, from one of the ends thereof, mentioned by the apostle, namely, in that we are herein to teach and admonish one another, Col. iii. 16. This is what the Psalmist styles talking of all his wondrous works, Psal. cv. 1, 2. And elsewhere, the church are said to speak to themselves, or to one another in this duty, Eph. v. 19. This may be observed in the subject-matter of some of the psalms, in which the Psalmist is represented as speaking to the church, and they as making their reply to him: Thus he advises them to lift up their hands in the sanctuary, and bless the Lord, Psal. cxxxiv. 2. and answer him, The Lord that made heaven and earth bless thee out of Zion, ver. 3. The name may be observed in many other psalms, in which there is a frequent change of the person speaking; and the subject-matter of the whole book contains many admonitions or cautions necessary to be observed by others, which they who sing, direct and apply to each other. Again, this ordinance agrees with preaching and reading the word, in that we are, in singing the praises of God, to take notice of, or celebrate the dispensations of his providence, either in a way of judgment or mercy; of this we have many instances in the book of Psalms, as is very evident in all those that are properly historical.
(3.) We must, notwithstanding, suppose singing to be a distinct ordinance from preaching, prayer, or reading the word; for it is mentioned in scripture, as such; and that wherein it principally differs, is, that it is designed to raise the affections: and it is certain, that the modulation, or tone of the voice, has oftentimes a tendency so to do. And because the performing religious worship, with raised affections, is a great duty and privilege; therefore God has appointed this as an ordinance, in some degree conducive to answer that end.
Obj. 1. If the tone of the voice be to be reckoned an ordinance, to raise the affections; then vocal or instrumental music may be deemed sufficient to answer this end, without making use of those words in singing, which God has ordained, whereby it may be denominated a religious duty.
Answ. To this it may be replied; that to have the affections raised, is no branch of religion, unless they are excited by those ideas of divine things, in which it principally consists: Therefore, that which is a means of raising the affections, may not have a tendency to excite religious affections; and, consequently, it is not barely singing, but celebrating the praises of God therein, with raised affections, that is the duty and ordinance which we ought to engage in: These two, therefore, must be connected together; and if God is pleased, not only to instruct us as to the matter about which our faith is to be conversant, but to give us an ordinance conducive to the exciting our affections therein, it must be reckoned an additional advantage, and an help to our praising him in a becoming manner.
Obj. 2. Those arguments that have been taken from the practice of the Old Testament-church, to prove singing an ordinance, may, with equal justice, be alleged to prove the use of instrumental music therein; since we very often read of their praising God with the sound of the trumpet, psaltery, harp, organ, and other musical instruments, Psal. cl. 3, 4, 5. which is the principal argument brought for the use of them by those who defend this practice, and conclude it an help for devotion.[21]
Answ. To this it may be replied; that though we often read of music being used in singing the praises of God under the Old Testament; yet if what has been said concerning its being a type of that spiritual joy which attends our praising God for the privilege of that redemption which Christ has purchased be true; then this objection will appear to have no weight, since this type is abolished, together with the ceremonial law. And it may be farther observed, that though we read of the use of music, in the temple-service, yet it does not sufficiently appear, that it was ever used, in the Jewish synagogues; wherein the mode of worship more resembled that which is, at present, performed by us in our public assemblies. But that which may sufficiently determine this matter, is, that, we have no precept or precedent for it in the New Testament, either from the practice of Christ, or his apostles. And inasmuch as this is alleged, by some, to overthrow the ordinance of singing, who pretend, that it ought to be no more used by us than the harp, organ, or other musical instruments: It might as well be objected, that, because incense, which was used under the ceremonial law, together with prayer in the temple, Luke i. 9, 10. is not now offered by us; therefore prayer ought to be laid aside; which is, as all own, a duty founded on the moral law.
(4.) In singing those psalms or songs, which are given by divine inspiration, we are not to consider the subject-matter thereof, as always expressive of the frame of our own spirits, or denoting the dispensations of providence, which we, or the church of God are, at present exercised with. This is necessary in order to our singing with understanding; and it may be inferred from what is observed under the second of those heads, before laid down, relating to the agreement which there is between singing and reading any of David’s psalms.
It must be allowed by all, that we ought to have the same acts of faith in one, as we have in the other. This is evident from all composures in prose or verse, whether divine or human. If the subject-matter be historical, whatever the form be in which it is laid down, the principal things to be considered are, those matters of fact which are therein related. If an history be written in prose, and the same should be turned into verse; its being laid down in the form of a poem, though it adds something of beauty to the mode of expression, yet the ideas, that are conveyed thereby, or the historical representation of things, are the same as though they had not been written in verse. It may be, the reading the same history in verse, may add something of pleasure and delight to those ideas which we have of it, in like manner as singing, according to the third head before mentioned, is a distinct ordinance from reading (though the matter be the same, as it respects the exciting the affections;) yet this does not give us different ideas of it; much less are we to take occasion from thence, to apply those things to ourselves that are spoken of others; unless parallel circumstances require it. If this rule be not observed, I do not see how we can sing many of the psalms of David. Sometimes the subject-matter thereof is not agreeable to every age of life, or the universal experience of particular persons. It would be very preposterous for a child, in singing those words, I have been young, and now am old; yet have I not seen the righteous forsaken, nor his seed begging bread, Psal. xxxvii. 25. or what is elsewhere said; Now also, when I am old and gray-headed, O God, forsake me not, Psal. lxxi. 18. to apply them, in particular to himself. And when some other psalms are sung in a public assembly, in which God’s people are represented as dejected, disconsolate, and, as it were, sinking in the depths of despair; as when the Psalmist says, My soul refused to be comforted. I remembered God, and was troubled; I complained, and my spirit was overwhelmed, Psal. lxxvii. 2, 3. and elsewhere, I am counted with them that go down into the pit. Thy wrath lieth hard upon me. While I suffer thy terrors, I am distracted, Psal. lxxxviii. 4, 7, 15. This cannot be applied to every particular person in a worshipping assembly; as denoting that frame of spirit in which he is, at present, any more than those expressions which we meet with elsewhere, which speak of a believer, as having full assurance of God’s love to him, and his right and title to eternal life; as when it is said, Thou shalt guide me with thy counsel, and afterward receive me to glory, Psal. lxxiii. 24. can be applied to those who are in a dejected, despairing, or unbelieving frame of spirit.
And those psalms which contain an historical account of some particular dispensations of providence towards the church of old, cannot be applied to it in every age, or to the circumstances of every believer; as when it is said, By the rivers of Babylon there we sat down; yea, we wept when we remembered Zion, Psal. cxxxvii. 1. This is not to be considered as what is expressive of our own case, when we are, in the present day, singing that psalm, Or, when, on the other hand, the church is represented as praising God for particular deliverances, as in Psal. cvii. or expressing its triumphs in the victories obtained over its enemies, as in Psal. cxlix. these are not to be applied, by particular persons, to themselves; especially at all times. And when the Psalmist makes use of those phrases which are adapted to the ceremonial law, as when he speaks of binding the sacrifice with cords, even unto the horns of the altar, Psal. cxviii. 27. or elsewhere, of their offering bullocks upon it, Psal. li. 19. this cannot be taken in a literal sense, when applied to the gospel-state. And when we are exhorted to praise God with the psaltery, &c. Psal. cl. we are to express those acts of faith which are agreeable to the present gospel-dispensation, which we are under; and the general rule, which is applicable to all psalms of the like nature, is, that with the same frame of spirit with which we read them, we ought to sing them. Sometimes we are to consider the subject-matter of them, as containing an account of those providences which we are liable to, rather than those which we are, at present, under; or what we desire, or fear, rather than experience; and improve them so as to excite those graces which ought to be exercised in like circumstances, when it shall please God to bring us under them. With this frame of spirit the psalms of David are to be sung, as well as read; otherwise we shall be obliged to exclude several of them as not fit to be used in gospel-worship, which I would assert nothing that should give the least countenance to,[22] any more than I would affirm that such-like psalms are not to be read in public assemblies.
Obj. 1. To what has been said concerning our using David’s psalms in singing the praises of God, it is objected, that some of them contain such imprecation, or desires, that God would destroy his enemies, Psal. lv. 15. and lix. 13-15. and lxix. 22-25, 27, 28. as are inconsistent with the spirit of the gospel, or that love which we are, therein, obliged to express towards our enemies, agreeably to the command and practice of the holy Jesus, Matt. v. 44, 46. Luke xxiii. 34.
Before I proceed to a direct answer to this objection, it may be observed, that this is generally alleged, by the Deists, with a design to cast a reproach on divine revelation; and from hence they take occasion, outrageously to inveigh against David, as though he was of a malicious and implacable spirit; upon which account they will hardly allow him to have been a good man, since these, and such-like imprecations of the wrath of God on the church’s enemies, are reckoned by them no other than the effects of his passion and hatred of them; and therefore it is a preposterous thing to suppose, that his psalms were given by divine inspiration.
And there are others, to wit, some among the Socinians, who give a different turn to such-like expressions; and pretend, that under the Old Testament dispensation, it was not unlawful for persons to hate their enemies, or curse, or imprecate the wrath of God upon them, whereas, our Saviour thought fit, under the New Testament-dispensation, to command what was directly contrary thereunto. That it was formerly lawful, they argue from what is said in Matt. v. 43. Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour, and hate thine enemy. And the new Commandment which he substituted in the room thereof, is contained in the following words, in which he obliges them, to love their enemies, &c. But this is a gross mistake of the sense of that scripture, which speaks of hating their enemies; since our Saviour does not, in mentioning it, design to refer to any thing said in the Old Testament, but only to expose the corrupt gloss of the Scribes and Pharisees, given on some passages contained therein. Therefore, we must conclude, that it was equally unlawful to hate our enemies before, as it is now, under the gospel-dispensation. These things I could not but premise, before we come to a direct answer to this objection; and, if what is contained therein were true, it would certainly be unlawful to sing David’s psalms; yet, at the same time, it would be a very difficult matter, to substitute any hymns and songs in their room, which would be altogether unexceptionable; and then the ordinance of singing would be effectually overthrown.
Answ. But to this it may be replied; that the words being spoken by David, under divine inspiration, some of those scriptures referred to, may, agreeably to the rules of grammar, be understood as a prediction of those judgments which God would execute on his implacable enemies; especially when the word, that is supposed in the objection, to contain the form of an imprecation, is put in the future tense, as it often is. And if it be put in the imperative mood, as in other places, in which it is said, Let death seize on them; let them go down quick into hell; let them be blotted out of the book of the living; this mode of speaking, especially when applied to God, contains an intimation of what he would do, or the wrath which he would pour forth, as a punishment of sin, committed, persisted in, and not repented of. And, indeed, in one of these psalms, viz. Psal. lxix. in which the righteous judgments of God are denounced against sinners, the Psalmist plainly speaks in the person of our Saviour, to whom the 9th and 21st verses are expressly applied in the New Testament, John ii. 17. Matt. xxvii. 34. Therefore, when he says, ver. 22. Let their table become a snare, the meaning is, that God would deny some of his furious and implacable enemies, that grace, which alone could prevent their waxing worse and worse under outward prosperity. And when he says, ver. 23. Let their eyes be darkened; the meaning is, they shall be given up to judicial blindness, as the Jews were; the providence of God permitting, though not effecting it. And when it is said, ver. 23. Pour out thine indignation upon them, it is an intimation that this should come to pass. And, in ver. 25. Let their habitation be desolate; the meaning is, that the land, in which they dwelt, should be destitute of its former inhabitants, and so contains a prediction of the desolate state of the Jewish nation, after they were destroyed, and driven out of their country by the Romans. And when he farther says, Add iniquity to their iniquity; this may be accounted for consistently with the divine perfections, and the sense thereof is not liable to any just exception; as has been observed elsewhere. This I only mention, to shew that it is not necessary to suppose that these imprecations are always to be understood as what will warrant, or give countenance to private persons to wish, or pray for the destruction of their enemies.
Moreover, if the evil denounced be of a temporal nature; as when the Psalmist is represented as desiring that his enemies may be consumed as the stubble before the wind, or as the wood that fire burneth, Psal. lxxxiii. 13, 14. these are not the desires of one who meditates private revenge, or wishes to see the ruin of those whom he hates. But they contain the language of the church of God in general, as acquiescing in his righteous judgments, which should be poured forth on those that hate him, and persecute his people; and, if either the church must be ruined, or those that set themselves against it, removed out of the way, they cannot but desire the latter, rather than the former. If such expressions be thus understood, there would be no sufficient reason for that exception that is taken against the book of the psalms; nor will any one have just occasion to lay aside a part of them, as what cannot be sung by a Christian congregation.
Object. 2. It is farther objected, that if singing could be proved to be an ordinance, to be used by particular persons; it will not follow from thence, that the whole congregation ought to join with their voices together. It is sufficient if one person sings, and others make melody in their hearts; whereas, united voices in singing, will occasion confusion in the worship of God; and, when a mixed multitude join in this ordinance, it can hardly be supposed that they, all of them, sing with the spirit, and with the understanding also. Therefore, if one should sing, it is sufficient for them who are qualified to join in this ordinance, to say, Amen; or, to have their hearts engaged therein; as they have who join in public prayer, in which, one is the mouth of the whole assembly.
Answ. To this it may be replied;
[1.] That to insinuate that singing with united voices, is confusion, is to cast a great reproach on that worship which we often read of in scripture, which was performed in this manner. Thus Moses and the children of Israel sang the praises of God upon the occasion of their deliverance from the Egyptians, in Exod. xvi. 1. which was certainly an act of public worship, not performed by Moses alone, but by the whole congregation.
And, in the New Testament, there is a very remarkable example of singing with united voices, our Saviour himself being present, Mark xiv. 26. thus it is said, that he and his disciples sang an hymn. The word is in the plural number[23]; therefore they all joined with their voices in singing; and some observe, that it is not without design that it is said, He, that is, Christ, blessed the bread, and He gave thanks, Mat. xxvi. 26, 27. they only joining with him in their hearts, as the congregation joins with the minister, who is their mouth in public prayer. But when he speaks of the ordinance of singing, they all join with their voices therein; and therefore, the word, as was but now observed, is in the plural number, ver. 30.
[2.] As to that part of the objection, which respects the congregation’s joining in the heart, with one that sings with the voice, in like manner as we do in prayer; let it be considered, that though he that joins with the heart, with another that prays, may be said to perform the duty of prayer, though he does not express his desires with his own voice; yet joining with the heart, while one only sings, cannot properly speaking, be called singing; much less singing with the voice, or singing with a loud voice, as it is often expressed in scripture. The apostle, indeed, speaks of singing and making melody in our hearts, to the Lord, Eph. v. 19. which, in some measure, seems to favour the objection. And it is inferred from hence, that, if one sings with the voice, others may make melody in the heart. But I take the meaning of that scripture to be this; the apostle is pressing the church to sing, that is, to make melody to the Lord; and, that this ordinance may be performed in a right manner, the heart ought to go along with the voice; hereby intimating, that there ought not only to be a melodious sound, by which the praises of God are sung, but, together with this, suitable acts of faith ought to be put forth, whereby we worship him with our hearts, as well as our voices. This does not therefore prove, that the melody here spoken of, only respects the frame of spirit, as excluding the use of the voice in singing.
[3.] As to what is objected against the inexpediency of joining in singing, with a mixed multitude, in which, some must be supposed to want two necessary qualifications for singing, namely, the Spirit and understanding; this is to join in the external ordinance, where there is no harmony, as to the internal frame of spirit, or the exercise of faith, which alone makes it pleasing to God.
To this it may be replied; that, if a mixed multitude may join together in prayer, and particularly the Psalms of David, may be read in the public congregation; though, perhaps, there are many present who do not understand the meaning of every particular phrase used therein: yet it does not follow, that because we do not fully understand the Psalms of David, therefore they ought not to be sung by us. We have before observed, that there is no essential difference, especially as to what concerns the frame of our spirit, between singing and reading[24]. Therefore it follows, that whatever psalm may be read, may be sung. He that is not qualified for the latter is not qualified for the former. The apostle, indeed, speaks of his praying and singing with the Spirit, as well as with the understanding; but the meaning of that is, that we ought to desire the efficacious influences of the Spirit, and press after the knowledge of the meaning of the words we use, either in prayer or singing; yet the defect of our understanding, or having a less degree thereof than others, or, than we ought to have, does not exempt us from a right to engage in this ordinance. Therefore, we are not to refuse to join with those in singing the praises of God, whom we would not exclude from our society, if we were reading any of the Psalms of David in public.
(5.) We are now to consider the matter to be sung. There are very few who allow singing to be an ordinance, that will deny it to be our duty to sing the Psalms of David, and other spiritual songs, which we frequently meet with in scripture. Some, indeed, have contested the expediency of a Christian assembly’s making use of several Old Testament-phrases, that are contained therein. And others have alleged, that the phrase ought to be altered in many instances, (especially in those which have a peculiar reference to the Psalmist’s personal circumstances,) and others substituted in their room, which are matter of universal experience. But, if what has been said under the last head, be true, this argument will appear to have less weight in it; inasmuch as all the arguments that are brought in defence of making these alterations in the Psalms, as they are to be sung by us, will equally hold good, as applicable to the ordinance of reading them, and, it may be, will as much evince the necessity of altering the phrase of scripture, in several other parts thereof, as well as in these, if what has been said under the second head be allowed of. For it will follow from thence, that if some psalms are not to be sung by a Christian assembly, in the words in which they were at first delivered, and consequently are not to be read by them; because the phrase thereof is not agreeable to the state of the Christian church; and therefore it is to be altered, when applied to our present use; the same may be said concerning other parts of scripture; and then the word of God, as it was at first given to us, is no more to be read, than to be sung by us[25].
As to what is objected concerning the inexpediency of our making use of those words, and applying them to our case, in our devotions, that David used in his, with a peculiar view to his own condition. What has been said under the fourth head, relating to the frame of spirit with which the psalms are to be sung, will very much weaken the force of it; and this is what, in a great measure, determines my sentiments as to the ordinance of conjoint singing, as well as the matter of it; for, I am well persuaded, that if the words were to be considered as our own, (as they ought to be, when joining with another, who is our mouth, to God in prayer,) there are very few psalms, or hymns of human composure, that can be sung by a mixed assembly. But as a divine veneration ought to be paid to the psalms, and they are to be read with those acts of faith which are the main ingredients in our devotions; we are to sing them with the same view, only with this difference; as making use of the tone of the voice, as a farther help to the raising our affections therein, as has been before observed.
The next thing to be considered is, what version of the Psalms is to have the preference in our esteem, as it is subservient to the design of this ordinance. It is not my business, under this head, to criticise on the various versions of the Psalms; nor can it be supposed, that I have a regard to those poetical beauties in which one version exceeds another; for then I should be inclined to think some of them, which I do not make use of in the ordinance of singing, much preferable to others, for the exactness of their style and composure. But when I am singing the praises of God, in, or as near as I can to, the words of David, or any other inspired writer; that which I principally regard is, the agreeableness of the version to the original; and then they may be sung with the same frame of spirit with which they are to be read; and I am not obliged in singing, to consider the words as expressive of my own frame of spirit, any more than I am in reading them. But if the composure cannot properly be called a version, but an imitation of David’s Psalms, then I make use of it in the ordinance of singing, with the same view as I would an hymn; of which, more hereafter[26].
The versions which, I think, come nearest to the original, are the New-England and the Scots; the latter of which, I think, much preferable to the former; inasmuch as the sentences are not so transposed in this, as in the other, and the lines are much more smooth and pleasant to be read. I should be very glad to see a version more perfect, that comes as near the sense of the original, and excels it in the beauty or elegancy of style. And it would be a very great advantage if some marginal notes were added, as a comment upon it; which would be a help to our right understanding thereof.
I shall now give my thoughts concerning the singing of hymns. These, according to the common acceptation of the word, are distinguished from psalms, and they generally denote a human composure, fitted for singing; the matter whereof, contains some divine subjects, in words agreeable to, or deduced from scripture. The arguments that are generally brought in defence thereof, are, that though scripture be a rule of faith, from whence all the knowledge of divine things is primarily deduced; and therefore it has the preference, as to the excellency and authority thereof, to any other composure; yet it is not only lawful, but necessary to express our faith in the doctrines contained therein, in other words, as we do in prayer or preaching. Therefore, if it be a duty to praise God with the voice, it is not unlawful to praise him in words agreeable to scripture, as well as in the express words thereof; accordingly it is argued, that both may be proved to be a duty, viz. praising God in the words of David, and by other songs contained in scripture, and praising him in words agreeable thereunto, though of human composure. This is the best method of reasoning that I have met with in defence of the lawfulness of singing hymns, not as opposed to, or excluding David’s Psalms, but as used occasionally, as providence directs us; that so our acknowledgments of benefits received, may be insisted on with greater enlargement than they are in the book of Psalms; wherein, though it may be, there is something adapted to every case, yet the particular occasion of our praise is not so largely contained in the same section or paragraph; and therefore an hymn may be composed on that occasion, in order to our praising God thereby. But, when on the other hand, persons seem to prefer hymns to David’s Psalms, and substitute them in the room thereof, I cannot but disapprove of their practice.
A late writer[27] speaks on this subject with a great deal of moderation; when, though he proves that scripture psalms should be preferred before all others, and more ordinarily sung; yet he thinks that hymns of human composure, ought not wholly to be excluded, provided they be exactly agreeable to, and as much as may be, the words of holy scripture. There are other writers whom I pay equal deference to, who have concisely, though with a considerable degree of judgment, proved singing to be a gospel-ordinance[28], who argue against singing of hymns: and, indeed, what they say in opposition to those who defend the practice thereof from Eph. v. 19. and Col. iii. 16. wherein hymns are supposed to be distinct from psalms and spiritual songs; and, consequently, that we are to understand thereby human composures, agreeable to scripture, as by psalms and spiritual songs, we are to understand those which are contained in the very words of scripture, seems very just. And herein they speak agreeably to the mind of several judicious and learned men, who assert that these three words signify nothing else but those psalms or songs that are contained in scripture[29]. The question in debate with me, is not whether the psalms, hymns, or spiritual songs, that are contained in scripture, are designed to be a directory for gospel-worship; for that, I think, all ought to allow; but, whether it be lawful to sing a human composure that is agreeable to scripture, either as to the words or sense thereof; especially when the subject-matter of our praise is not laid down so largely in one particular section of scripture, as we desire to express it. In this case, if we were to connect several parts of scripture together, so that the design of enlarging on a particular subject might be answered thereby; it would render it less necessary to compose an hymn in other words. But, inasmuch as the occasions of praise are very large and extensive, and therefore it may be thought expedient, to adore the divine perfections, in our own words in singing, in like manner as we do in prayer, considering the one to be a moral duty as well as the other; I will not pretend to maintain the unlawfulness of singing hymns of human composure, though some of much superior learning and judgment have done it.
I would, however, always pay the greatest deference to those divine composures, which are given as the principal rule for our procedure herein. Nevertheless, I cannot but express my dislike of several hymns that I have often heard sung; in some of which the heads of the sermon have been comprised; and others, which are printed, are so very mean and injudicious, and, it may be, in some respects, not very agreeable to the analogy of faith, that I cannot, in the least, approve of them. But if we have ground to conclude the composure, as to the matter thereof, and mode of expression, unexceptionable, and adapted to raise the affections, as well as excite suitable acts of faith in extolling the praises of God, it gives me no more disgust, though it be not in scripture-words, than praying or preaching do when the matter is agreeable thereunto. Yet, inasmuch as when we confess sin, acknowledge mercies received, or desire those blessings that are suited to our case, we always suppose, that the words, which he, who is the mouth of the congregation, uses, ought to be such, in which all can join with him (and in this, the reading one of David’s prayers, and putting up a prayer in the congregation, differ as to a very considerable circumstance in each of them) the same ought to be observed in hymns. But, if an hymn be so composed, as that all that sing it are represented as signifying their having experienced those things which belong not to them, or as blessing God for what they never received: this, I conceive, would be an unwarrantable method of singing hymns of human composure, as much as if the expressions were used in public prayer. There are, indeed, many hymns which have in them a great vein of piety and devotion, but are not adapted to the experience of the whole assembly that sings them; therefore, though they may join in signing some hymns, I do not think they can well join in singing all; notwithstanding the subject-matter of them may be agreeable to the analogy of faith; and this principally depends upon what we have before laid down, concerning the difference between making use of a divine and human composure, in the former of which, the words are not always to be considered as our own, or expressive of the frame of our own spirits; whereas this is universally true, with respect to the latter.
Thus concerning the ordinance of singing; which we cannot but think included among those whereby Christ communicates to his church, the benefits of his mediation. And this leads us to consider the other ordinances, which are particularly insisted on in the remaining part of this work. And that which next comes under our consideration, is the word read and preached.
Footnote 21:
I come now to say somewhat of the antiquity of Musical Instruments. But that these were not used in the Christian Church in the primitive times, is attested by all the ancient writers with one consent. Hence they figuratively explain all the places of the Old Testament, which speak of Musical Instruments; as I might easily shew by a thousand testimonies, out of Clement of Alexandria, Basil, Ambrose, Jerom, Augustine, Chrysostom, and many others. I can hardly forbear laughing, when I meet with some of their allegorical interpretations. Thus an Instrument with ten strings, according to them, signifies the Ten Commandments, as the unknown author of the Commentary upon the Psalms, among Jerom’s works, often explains it, In Ps. xxxii. 2. xliii. 4, &c. But the pleasantest fancy is the explication of those words: Praise him with stringed Instruments and Organs. Ps. cl. 4. “That the guts being twisted by reason of abstinence from food, and so all carnal desires being subdued, men are found fit for the kingdom of God, to sing his praises.” But Chrysostom talks more handsomly; “As the Jews praised God with all kind of Instruments; so we are commanded to praise him with all the members of our bodies, our eyes, &c.” In Ps. cl. And Clement of Alexandria talks much to the same purpose. Pædag. lib. ii. c. 4.
Besides, the ancients thought it unlawful to use those Instruments in God’s worship. Thus the unknown author of a Treatise, among Justin Martyr’s works: “Q. If songs were invented by unbelievers with a design of deceiving, and were appointed for those under the Law, because of the childishness of their minds; why do they, who have received the perfect instructions of grace, which are most contrary to the foresaid customs, nevertheless sing in the Churches, just as they did, who were children under the Law? Answ. Plain Singing is not childish, but only the Singing with lifeless Organs, with Dancing and Cym-bals, &c. Whence the use of such Instruments, and other things fit for children, is laid aside, and Plain Singing only retained.” Resp. ad Orthodox. Q. 107.
Chrysostom seems to have been of the same mind, and to have thought, the use of such Instruments was rather allowed the Jews in consideration of their weakness, than prescribed and commanded. In Ps. cl. But that he was mistaken, and that Musical Instruments were not only allowed the Jews, as he thought, and Isidorus of Pelusium, (whose testimony I shall mention presently) but were prescribed by God, may appear from the Texts of Scripture I have before referred to.
Clement, as I have mentioned already, thought these things fitter for beasts, than for men. And though Basil highly commends, and stifly defends the way of Singing by turns; yet he thought musical Instruments unprofitable and hurtful. He calls them, the inventions of Jubal of the race of Cain. And a little after, he thus expresses himself: “Laban was a lover of the harp, and of music, with which he would have sent away Jacob: If thou hadst told me, said he, I would have sent thee away with mirth, and musical instruments, and an Harp. But the Patriarch avoided that music, as being a thing that would hinder his regarding the works of the Lord, and his considering the works of his hands.” Comment. in Is. c. v. p. 956, 957. And a little before, he says thus “In such vain arts, as the playing upon the Harp, or Pipe, or dancing, as soon as the action ceases, the work itself vanishes. So that really, according to the Apostle’s expression, The end of these things is destruction.” page 955.
Isidore of Pelusium, who lived since Basil, held, music was allowed the Jews by God, in a way of condescension to their childishness: “If God” says he, “bore with bloody sacrifices, because of men’s childishness at that time; why should you wonder, he bore with the music of an harp and a psaltery?” Epist. lib. 2. ep. 176.
Nay, there are some ecclesiastical officers in the Church of England, who, for their very profession and employment, would have been kept from the communion of the Church, except they desisted from it. So we are informed by the Apostolical Constitutions: “If any come to the mystery of godliness, being a player upon a pipe, a lute, or an harp; let him leave it off, or be rejected.” Lib. viii. c. 32.
From what has been said, it appears, no musical instruments were used in the pure times of the Church. It became Antichristian, before they were received. Bellarmine himself does not deny, they were late brought into the Church. “The second ceremony,” says he, “are the Musical Instruments, which began to be used in the service of the Church, in the time of Pope Vitalian, about the year 660, as Platina relates out of the Pontifical; or, as Aimonius rather thinks, lib. iv. De gestis Francorum, c. 114. after the year 820, in the time or Lewis the Pious.” De Missa, lib. ii. c. 15. Item, De bon. Oper. lib. i. c. 17.
Dr. N. would hardly have denied, the Church of Rome was become Antichristian, when they were first brought in; even though we should allow Bellarmine’s first date of them to be the true one. But a Reformed Divine may well be ashamed of that antiquity, that does not exceed the rise of Antichrist. But I am fully satisfied both Bellarmine’s dates are false, and that instrumental music, in the worship of God, is much later than either of those accounts allow. For as to Platina, he seems to suspect the truth of what he wrote: “Vitalian,” says he, “being careful about the worship of God, made an ecclesiastical rule, and ordered the singing, with the addition (as some think) of organs.” In Vital. Again, Bellarmine’s Aimonius is not the true Aimonius. For (as Dr. Cave says) Aimonius of Fleury, who wrote, De gestis Francorum, flourished about the year 1000; and his History, which begins at the destruction of Troy, is brought down as far as the coronation of King Pipin, or to the year 752. For what comes after that, and makes up the fifth book, and the latter part of the fourth, is the continuation of another hand. Hist. Liter. p. 597.
Farther, that these instruments were not used in God’s worship, in Thomas Aquinas’s time, that is, about the year 1250, he himself is witness. “In the old Law,” says he, “God was praised both with musical instruments and human voices, and according to that Psalm xxxiii. Praise the Lord with harp, sing unto him with the psaltery, and an instrument of ten strings. But the Church does not use musical instruments to praise God, lest she should seem to judaize. Therefore, by parity of reason, she should not use singing.” Secunda secundæ Questio 91, art. 4. & conclus. 4. The like objection is made by our author. But Thomas answers: “As to this objection, we must say, as the philosopher, Lib. viii. Polit. that Pipes are not to be used for teaching, nor any artificial instruments, as the harp, or the like: but whatever will make the hearers good men. For these musical instruments rather delight the mind, than form it to any good disposition. But under the Old Testament such instruments were used, partly because the people were harder and more carnal; upon which account they were to be stirred up by these instruments, as likewise by earthly promises; and partly because these bodily instruments were typical of something.” Upon which place Cardinal Cajetan gives us this Comment: “’Tis to be observed, the Church did not use organs in Thomas’s time. Whence, even to this day, the Church of Rome does not use them in the Pope’s presence. And truly it will appear, that musical instruments are not to be suffered in the ecclesiastical offices we meet together to perform, for the sake of receiving internal instruction from God; and so much the rather are they to be excluded, because God’s internal discipline exceeds all human disciplines, which rejected these kind of instruments.” Cit. Hoffm. Lex. voce Musica.
If any one objects the practice of some foreign churches, I answer with Mr. Hickman: “They are laid aside by most of the reformed churches; nor would they be retained among the Lutherans, unless they had forsaken their own Luther; who, by the confession of Eckard, reckoned organs among the ensigns of Baal. That they still continue in some of the Dutch churches, is against the minds of the Pastors. For in the National Synod at Middleburg, in the year 1581, and in the Synod of Holland and Zealand, in the year 1594, it was resolved, That they would endeavour to obtain of the magistrate the laying aside of organs, and the singing with them in the churches, even out of the time of worship, either before or after sermons: so far are those Synods from bearing with them in the worship itself.” Apol. p. 139.
The Church of England herself had formerly no very good opinion of these musical instruments; as may appear by her Homilies: “Lastly, God’s vengeance hath been, and is daily provoked, because much wicked people pass nothing to resort unto the church; either for that they are so sore blinded, that they understand nothing of God or godliness, and care not with devilish malice to offend their neighbours; or else for that they see the church altogether scoured of such gay gazing sights, as their gross phantasie was greatly delighted with; because they see the false religion abandoned, and the true restored, which seemeth an unsavory thing to their unsavory taste, as may appear by this that a woman said to her neighbour: Alas! gossip, what shall we now do at church, since all the Saints are taken away; since all the goodly sights we were wont to have are gone; since we cannot hear the like piping, singing, Chaunting, and playing upon the organs that we could before? But, dearly beloved, we ought greatly to rejoice and give God thanks, that our churches are delivered out of all those things, which displeased God so sore, and filthily defiled his holy house, and his place of prayer.” Hom. of the place and time of prayer, part. 2. p. 131.
A great number also of the Clergy in the first convocation of Queen Elizabeth in 1562, earnestly laboured to have organs, and that pompous theatrical way of singing laid aside, and missed the carrying it but by one vote, as I observe elsewhere. And in this Archbishop Parker concurred with them, or at least did not oppose them.
I will add one or two testimonies of Papists against this cathedral way of worship. The first shall be Polydorus Virgilius.
Having taken notice of Austine’s dislike of that way of singing in his time, he thus proceeds: “But in our time, it seems much less useful to the commonwealth, now our singers make such a noise in our churches, that nothing can be heard, beside the sound of the voice; and they who come there (that is all that are in the city) are satisfied with the concert of music, which their ears itch for, and never mind the sense of the words. So that we are come to that pass, that in the opinion of the common people, the whole affair of religious worship is lodged in these singers; although, generally speaking, there is no sort of men more loose or wicked: and yet a good part of the people run to church, as to a theatre, to hear them bawl: they hire and encourage them; and look upon them alone as ornaments to the house of God. Wherefore, without doubt, it would be for the interest of religion, either to cast these jackdaws out of the churches; or else to teach them when they sing, they should do it rather in the manner of reading, than bawling; as Austine says Athanasius ordered, &c.” De Invent. Rer. lib. vi. c. 2. p. 379.
Next hear the judgment of Erasmus: “Let a man be more covetous than Crassus, more foul-mouthed than Zoilus, he shall be reckoned a pious man, if he sings those prayers well, though he understands nothing of them. But what, I beseech you, must they think of Christ, who can believe he is delighted with such a noise of men’s voices? Not content with this, we have brought into our churches a certain operose and theatrical music; such a confused disorderly chattering of some words, as I hardly think was ever heard in any of the Grecian or Roman theatres. The church rings with the noise of trumpets, pipes and dulcimers; and human voices strive to bear their part with them.—Men run to church as to a theatre, to have their ears tickled. And for this end organ-makers are hired with great salaries, and a company of boys, who waste all their time in learning these whining tones. Pray now compute how many poor people in great extremity might be maintained by the salaries of those singers.” In 1 Cor. xiv. 19.
Lastly, Lindanus says: “Who will compare the Music of this present age, with that which was formerly used? Whatever is sung now, signifies little for informing the people; which ’tis certain the ancients always designed.” Panopl. lib. iv. c. 73.
PIERCE’S VINDICATION.
Footnote 22:
The first hymns of Gospel churches, were neither rythm, nor metre; and there was no version of David’s psalms, that could be sung before Calvin’s time.
Footnote 23:
Ὑμνήσαντε.
Footnote 24:
There is a difference between praising God, and instructing men.
Footnote 25:
The first christians composed and set to music their hymns.
Footnote 26:
Grotius thought the first Gospel hymns were extemporary. Basnage from Tertullian says; “neither the prayers they made to God, nor the hymns which they sung to his honour were reduced to rule; every one drew them from the Holy Scriptures, or from his own treasure, according to his genius.” A council of 70 bishops, A. D. 272. charged among other things against Paulus bishop of Antioch, that he abolished the Psalms, which were sung in gloriam Christi.—When the Ariam sang the doxology Glory be to the Father, the orthodox added, and to the Son and Spirit. Vide Dr. Latta, and Mr. Tod, on Psalmody.
Footnote 27:
See Mr. Richard Allein’s essay on singing, chap. iv. who seems, in my opinion, in the whole of his short performance, to argue with a considerable degree of candor and judgment.
Footnote 28:
See Sidenham’s gospel ordinance concerning singing, &c. and Hitchen’s scripture proof for singing, &c.
Footnote 29:
It cannot be denied that the Psalms of David are called indifferently by these three names, psalms, hymns, and songs שיר, מזמר, תהלה, ψαλμὸς, ὑμνὴ, ὀδη, and sometimes the same psalm is called a song or psalm, as in the title of Psalm. lxv. or a song of a psalm [as the LXX. render it, ὀδη ψαλμοῦ.] And in Psalm cv. 2. when it is said, Sing unto him, sing psalms unto him; שירו לו זמרו לו the former word signifies to sing a spiritual song; the latter to sing a psalm; or, as the Septuagint render the same word, in 1 Chron. xvi. 9. an hymn [Ἀσατε αυτω και υμνησατε.] See Sidenham’s gospel-ordinance, &c. chap. ii. and Ainsworth on the title of Psalm liii. whom he therein refers to.
Quest. CLX.
QUEST. CLV. How is the word made effectual to salvation?
ANSW. The Spirit of God maketh the reading, but especially the preaching of the word, an effectual means of enlightening, convincing, and humbling sinners, of driving them out of themselves, and drawing them unto Christ, of conforming them to his image, and subduing them to his will, of strengthening them against temptations and corruptions, of building them up in grace, and establishing their heart in holiness and comfort through faith unto salvation.
Having had an account, in the foregoing answer, of the ordinances by which Christ communicates the benefits of redemption to his church, and what they are; as also, that singing the praises of God is one of those ordinances. We are now to consider another ordinance that is made effectual to salvation, viz. the word read, or preached. We have, under some foregoing answers, had occasion to speak of the word of God as contained in the scriptures of the Old and New Testament, and considered it as the only rule of faith and obedience, and as having all the properties that are necessary thereunto, so that we may depend upon it as a perfect and infallible revelation of all things necessary to be believed and done, in order to our enjoying God here, and attaining eternal life hereafter[30]. And now we are to consider the word as made the subject of our study and enquiry; without which it would be of no use to us. Accordingly we may observe in this answer,
I. Something supposed; namely, that the word of God is to be read by us, and explained by those who are qualified and called hereunto, by whom it is to be preached. We are not, indeed, to conclude, that the explications of fallible men, how much soever they are fitted to preach the gospel, are of equal authority with the sacred oracles, as transmitted to us by those who received them, by infallible inspiration from the Spirit of God; and therefore, the text is much more to be depended on than the comment upon it; the truth whereof is to be tried thereby, Isa. viii. 20. 1 Thess. v. 21. Acts xvii. 11. Nevertheless, this is to be reckoned a great blessing, which God is pleased to bestow upon his church, in order to our understanding and making a right use of the written word. Accordingly, preaching, as well as the reading of the word, is an ordinance which the Spirit of God makes subservient to the salvation of them that believe; and in order thereunto, it is farther supposed, that the word is to be read by us, and we are to attend to the preaching thereof; to neglect either of which, is to despise our own souls, and deprive ourselves of the advantage of God’s instituted means of grace. Therefore, we are not to content ourselves, barely, with the reading of the word of God, in our closets or families; but we must embrace all opportunities, in which we may hear it preached in a public manner, one being no less an ordinance of God than the other.
Obj. It is objected, by some, that they know as much as ministers can teach them; at least, they know enough, if they could but practise it.
Answ. This objection, sometimes, savours of pride and self-conceit, in those who suppose themselves to understand more, of the doctrines of the gospel, than they really do; and it can hardly be said, concerning the greatest number of professors, that they either know as much as they ought, or that it is not possible for them to make advances in knowledge, by a diligent attendance on an able and faithful ministry. However, that we may give the utmost scope to the objection, we will allow, that some Christians know more than many ministers, who are less skilful than others in the word of truth. Nevertheless, it must be observed that there are other ends of hearing the word, besides barely the gaining of knowledge, viz. the bringing the doctrines of the gospel to our remembrance, John xvi. 26. and their being impressed on our affections; and for this reason the wisest and best of men have not thought it below them, to attend upon the ministry of those who knew less than themselves. Our Saviour was an hearer of the word before he entered on his public ministry, Luke ii. 46. and though it might, I think, truly be said of him, that though he was but twelve years old, he knew more than the doctors, in the midst of whom he sat, in the temple, yet he heard and asked them questions. And David, though he professes himself to have more understanding than all his teachers, Psal. cxix. 99. yet he was glad to embrace all opportunities, to go up into the house of the Lord; this being God’s appointed means for a believer’s making advances in grace.
II. There are several things particularly mentioned in this answer, in which the Spirit of God makes the word, read or preached, effectual to salvation.
1. Hereby the mind is enlightened and furnished with the knowledge of divine truths, which is a very great privilege, for as faith is inseparably connected with salvation; the knowledge of the doctrines of the gospel is necessary to faith; and this is said to come by hearing, Rom. x. 17. Acts viii. 30, 31. However, we must not content ourselves with a bare assent to what is revealed in the word of God; but must duly weigh the tendency thereof, to our sanctification and consolation, and admire the beauty, excellency, and glory that there is in the great doctrines of the gospel, as the divine perfections shine forth therein, to the utmost. We must also duly consider the importance of those doctrines that are contained therein, and how they are to be improved by us, to our spiritual advantage; and when we find our hearts filled with love to Jesus Christ, in proportion to those greater measures of light, that he is pleased to impart to us, so that we grow in grace as well as in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, 2 Pet. iii. 18. then the word may be said to be made effectual to our salvation, as our minds are very much enlightened and improved in the knowledge of those things that lead thereunto.
2. The word is made effectual to bring us under conviction, by which means we see ourselves sinful and miserable creatures; particularly we are hereby led to see those depths of wickedness that are in our hearts, by nature, which otherwise could not be sufficiently discerned by us, much less improved to our spiritual advantage, Jer. xvii. 9. Rom. vii. 9. Would we take a view of the manifold sins committed in our lives, with all their respective aggravations, so as to lay to heart the guilt that we have contracted hereby, or, if we would be effected with the consideration of the misery that will ensue hereupon; as that, hereby, we not only deserve the wrath and curse of God, but without an interest in forgiving grace, are bound to conclude ourselves liable to it: These things we are led into by the word of God. And if we would know whether these convictions of sin are such as have a more immediate reference to salvation; let us enquire, whether they are attended with that grief and sorrow of heart for the intrinsic evil that there is in sin, as well as the sad consequences thereof? Psal. xxxviii. 18. compared with ver. 4. or, whether, when we have taken this view thereof, we are farther led to enquire after the remedy, and seek forgiveness through the blood of Christ, and strength against those corruptions that we have ground to charge ourselves with, which have so much prevailed over us? Acts xvi. 30. Psal. xix. 13. xxv. 11. Jer. viii. 22.
3. The word is made effectual to salvation, when what is contained therein tends to humble and lay us low at the foot of God; when we acknowledge, that all his judgments are right, or whatever punishments have been inflicted, pursuant to the threatenings which he has denounced, have been less than our iniquities deserve, Ezra ix. 13. And when we receive reproofs for sins committed, with a particular application thereof to ourselves, and are sensible of the guilt we have contracted thereby.
But that we may make a right use of the word, to answer this great end, let us consider, what humbling considerations are contained therein, that may have a tendency to answer this end.
(1.) The word of God represents to us that infinite distance that there is between him and us; so that the best of creatures are, in his sight, as nothing, Isa. xl. 17. less than nothing, and vanity. Herein we behold God as infinitely perfect, and men as very imperfect, and unlike to him; and in particular, we behold him as a God of infinite holiness, spotless purity, and ourselves as impure, polluted creatures; which is a very humbling consideration, Prov. xxx. 2. Isa. lxiv. 6.
(2.) The word of God discovers to us the deceitfulness and desperate wickedness that there is in our hearts, whereby we are naturally inclined to rebel against him; and should, had it not been for his preventing and renewing grace, have run with the vilest of men, in all excess of riot. It also leads us into the knowledge of the various kinds of sin, which we have ground to charge ourselves with, in the course of our lives; the frequent omission of those duties which are required of us; our great neglect of relative duties, in the station in which God has fixed us; and the injury we have done to others hereby, whom we have caused to stumble, or fall by our example, or, at least, by our unconcernedness about their spiritual welfare. It also discovers to us the various aggravations of sins committed, as they are against light, love, mercies, and manifold engagements, which we are laid under; and the great contempt which we have cast on the blessed Jesus, in disregarding, or not improving, the benefits of his mediation. All these things duly considered, have a tendency to humble us, and we are led into the discovery hereof by the word of God.
4. The word of God is made effectual to salvation, as it has a tendency to drive sinners out of themselves, and to draw them to Jesus Christ. On the one hand, it shews them the utter impossibility of their saving themselves, by doing any thing that may bring them into a justified state, and so render them accepted in the sight of God; and, on the other hand, it draws or leads them to Christ, whom they are enabled to behold by faith, as discovered in the gospel, to be a merciful and all-sufficient Saviour. The former of these is not only antecedent, but necessary to the latter: For, so long as we fancy that we have a sufficiency in ourselves, to recommend us to God, and procure for us a right and title to eternal life, we shall never think of committing our souls into Christ’s hand, in order to our obtaining salvation from him in his own way. Thus the prophet brings in a self-conceited people as saying, We are lords, we will come no more to thee, Jer. ii. 31. No one will seek help or safety from Christ, who is not sensible of his own weakness, and being in the utmost danger without him. The first thing then that the Spirit of God does in the souls of men, when he makes the word effectual to salvation, is, his leading them into a humble sense of their utter inability to do what is spiritually good, or acceptable to God, or to make atonement for the sins that they have committed against him; that so they might be brought into a justified state. It is, indeed, an hard matter to convince the sinner of this; for he is very prone to be full of himself, sometimes to glory with the Pharisee, Luke xviii. 11. in some religious duties he performs; at other times in his abstaining from those gross enormities that others are chargeable with: Or, if he will own himself to have exceeded many in sin; yet he is ready to think, that, by some expedient or other, he shall be able to make atonement for it. This sets him at a great distance from Christ; as it is said, They that be whole need not a physician, but they that are sick, Matt. ix. 12. So these do not see their need of a Saviour, till they are convinced that they have nothing in themselves that can afford any relief to them, so as to deliver them from the guilt of sin, and the misery that will ensue thereupon. On this account our Saviour observes, that publicans and harlots go into the kingdom of God, chap. xxi. 31. i. e. are more easily made sensible of their need of Christ, being convinced of sin, when the chief priests and elders, who thought they had a righteousness of their own to justify them, and therefore refused to comply with the method of the gospel, in having recourse to Christ alone for this privilege.
Now the word of God is made use of by the Spirit, to drive the sinner out of these strong holds, and to shew him that he cannot, by any means recover himself out of that state of sin and misery, into which he is plunged. It is a very hard thing for a person to be convinced of the truth of what our Saviour says, viz. That which is highly esteemed amongst men, is an abomination in the sight of God, Luke xvi. 15. when it is put in the room of Christ and his righteousness. This is one of the great ends to which the word is made subservient when rendered effectual to salvation.
Moreover, the word of God draws the soul to Christ, so that it is persuaded and induced, from gospel-motives, to come to him; and, at the same time, enabled so to do by the almighty power of God, without which he cannot come to him, John vi. 44. the former draws objectively, the latter subjectively and internally.
As to what the gospel does in order hereunto, let it be considered, that it sets before us the excellency and glory of Christ, as our great Mediator; represents him as a divine person, and, consequently, the object of faith, and as such, able to save, to the uttermost, them that come unto God by him, Heb. vi. 25. It considers him as having purchased salvation for his people; so that they may obtain forgiveness through his blood. It also discovers him as not only able, but willing to save all that come to him by faith; so that he will in no wise cast them out, John vi. 37. It also represents him as having a right to us; we are his by purchase; and therefore it is our indispensible duty to give up ourselves unto him. It also makes known to us the greatness of his love, as the highest inducement hereunto; the freeness, riches and extensiveness of his grace, as ready to embrace the chief of sinners, and pass by all the injuries that they have done against him, and as giving them the utmost assurance, that, having loved them in the world, he will love them to the end. Thus Christ is set forth in the gospel; and when it is made effectual to salvation, the soul is induced, or, as it were, constrained hereby, to love him, and yield the obedience of faith unto him in all things.
5. The word is made of use by the Spirit, as a means to conform the soul to the image of God, and subdue it to his will. The image of God in man, is defaced by sin; so that he is not only rendered unlike, but averse to him, stripped of all his beauty, and become abominable and filthy in his sight; and, as long as he remains so, is unmeet for communion with, or obtaining salvation from him. Now, when the Spirit of God communicates special grace to sinners, he instamps this image afresh upon the soul, which he renews in knowledge, righteousness, and holiness, sanctifies all the powers and faculties thereof, and subdues the will, so that it yields a cheerful obedience to the will of God, and delights in his law after the inward man; and its language is, Speak, Lord, for thy servant heareth. This change the Spirit of God works in the heart, by his internal efficacious influence; as has been formerly observed, when we considered the work of conversion and sanctification, as brought about by him[31]. And this effect is also ascribed to the word as a moral instrument thereof; so that it is not attained without it, it being, indeed, the principal end of the preaching the gospel; as the apostle says, The weapons of our warfare are not carnal, but mighty through God, to the pulling down of strong holds, casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, 2 Cor. x. 4, 5. and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ.
6. The word is farther said to be made effectual to salvation, as hereby we are strengthened against temptation, and corruption. By the former, those objects are presented to us that have a tendency to alienate our affections from God; by the latter, these temptations are complied with, and the affections entangled in the snare that is laid for them, Satan, or the world, present the bait, and corrupt nature is easily allured and taken by it. The tempter uses many wiles and stratagems to ensnare us, and our own hearts are deceitful above all things, and without much difficulty, turned aside thereby; and so led captive by Satan at his will. But when the Spirit of God makes the word effectual to salvation, he takes occasion hereby to detect the fallacy; lays open the design of our spiritual enemies, and the pernicious tendency thereof; and internally fortifies the soul against them, whereby it is kept from the paths of the destroyer, Psal. xvii. 4. and this he does by presenting other and better objects to engage our affections, and leading us into the knowledge of those glorious truths, that may prevent a sinful compliance with the solicitations of the devil. And, according to the nature of the temptation that may occur, we are directed to the precepts or promises contained in the word of God; which, being duly improved by us, have a tendency to keep the heart steady, and fixed in the ways of God.
7. The word of God is made effectual by the Spirit, as he thereby builds the soul up in grace, and establishes it in holiness and comfort, through faith unto salvation. The work of grace is not immediately brought to perfection, but is, in a progressive way, making advances towards it; and therefore we are first made holy by the renovation of our hearts and lives, and made partakers of those spiritual consolations that accompany or flow from the work of sanctification; and then we are built up in holiness and comfort, whereby we go from strength to strength, and are more and more established in the ways of God; and this is done by the preaching of the word, whereby we are said to grow in grace, and the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, 2 Pet. iii. 18. so that every step we take in our way to heaven, from the time that our faces are first turned towards it, we are enabled hereby to go on safely and comfortably, till the work of grace is perfected in glory.
Footnote 30:
See Vol. I. 48. 69. Quest. III. and IV.
Footnote 31:
See Quest. LXVII, LXVIII. Vol. III. p. 16.
Quest. CLVI., CLVII.
QUEST. CLVI. Is the word of God to be read by all?
ANSW. Although all are not to be permitted to read the word publicly to the congregation, yet all sorts of people are bound to read it apart by themselves, and with their families, to which end the holy scriptures are to be translated out of the original, into vulgar languages.
QUEST. CLVII. How is the word of God to be read?
ANSW. The holy scriptures are to be read, with an high and reverend esteem of them; with a firm persuasion that they are the very word of God, and that he only can enable us to understand them, with desire to know, believe, and obey the will of God revealed in them, with diligence and attention to the matter and scope of them; with meditation, application, self-denial, and prayer.
The word’s being made effectual to salvation, which was the subject last insisted on, not only supposes that we read it as translated into vulgar languages, but that we understand what we read, in order to our applying it to our particular case, and improving it for our spiritual advantage. These things are next to be considered as contained in the answers we are now to explain. Accordingly,
I. We have an account, in the former of them, of the obligation that all persons are under to read, or at least, attend to the reading of the word of God; more particularly,
1. It is to be read publicly in the congregation, by those who are appointed for that purpose. This is evident, inasmuch as the church, and all the public worship that is performed therein, is founded on the doctrines contained in scripture; and every one who would be made wise to salvation, ought to be well acquainted with it; and the reading it publicly, as a part of that worship that is performed in the church, is not only a testimony of the high esteem that we have for it; but it will be of great use to those, who, through a sinful neglect to read it in families, and their not being disposed to do this in their private retirement; or, through the stupidity of their hearts, and the many incumbrances of worldly business, will not allow themselves time for this necessary duty, by reason whereof they remain strangers to those great and important truths contained therein.
That this is a duty appears from the charge that the apostle gives, that the epistle which he wrote to the church at Thessalonica, should be read unto all the holy brethren, 1 Thess. v. 27. And he gives the like charge to the church at Colosse, Col. iv. 16. And to this we may add, that the scripture is not only to be read, but explained; which is the principal design of the preaching thereof. This is no new practice; for the Old Testament was not only read, but explained in the synagogues every Sabbath-day; which is called, by a metonymy, a reading Moses, Acts xv. 21. viz. explaining the law that was given by him. Thus Ezra stood upon a pulpit of wood, opened the book in the sight of all the people; and he, with some other of his brethren that assisted him herein, read in the book in the law of God distinctly, and gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading, that is, the meaning thereof, Neh. viii. 4,-8. In like manner our Saviour went into the synagogue the Sabbath-day, and stood up and read, that part of the holy scriptures, taken from the prophecy of Isaiah; which, when he had done, he applied it to himself, and shewed them how it was fulfilled in their ears, Luke iv. 16,-24. So that it is supposed that the word is to be publicly read.
The only thing in this answer, that needs explaining is, what is meant by those words, all are not to be permitted to read the word publicly to the congregation. We are not to suppose that there is an order of men that Christ has appointed to be readers in the church, distinct from ministers; therefore the meaning of this expression may be, that all are not to read the word of God together, in a public assembly, with a loud voice; for that would tend rather to confusion than edification. Nor ought any to be appointed to do it, but such as are grave, pious, and able to read it distinctly, for the edification of others. And who is so fit for this work, as the minister whose office is not only to read, but explain it in the ordinary course of his ministry?
2. The word of God is to be read in our families; which is absolutely necessary for the propagating religion therein. This, indeed, is shamefully neglected; which is one great reason of the ignorance and decay of piety in the rising generation; and the neglect hereof is contrary to God’s command, Deut. vi. 6, 7. as well as the example of those who are highly commended for this practice; as Abraham was for commanding his children, and his household after him, that they should keep the way of the Lord, Gen. xviii. 19. Psal. lxxviii. 3, 4.
3. The word of God ought to be read by every one, in private; and that not only occasionally, but frequently as one of the great businesses of life. Thus God says to Joshua, Josh. i. 8. This book of the law shall not depart out of thy mouth; but thou shalt meditate therein day and night, Psal. i. 2. And our Saviour commands the Jews to search the scriptures, John v. 39. and, in some of his discourses with them, though he was sensible that they were a degenerate people; yet he takes it for granted, that they had not altogether laid aside this duty, Matt. xii. 5. chap. xxi. 42. Luke vi. 3. This practice, especially where the word of God has not only been read, but the meaning thereof sought after, and attended to with great diligence, is commended as a peculiar excellency in Christians, who are, in this respect, styled more noble than others, who are defective in this duty, Acts xvii. 11.
Now it appears, that it is the duty of every one to read the word of God, inasmuch as it is given us with this design. If God is pleased, as it were, to send us an epistle from heaven, it is a very great instance of contempt cast on it, as well as on the divine condescension expressed therein, for us to neglect to read it. Does he impart his mind to us herein, and is it not our indispensable duty, to pay the utmost regard thereto? Rev. i. 11. compared with chap. ii. 29. Moreover, our own advantage should be a farther inducement to us, to read the word of God; since his design in giving it, was, that we might believe, and that believing, we may attain life, through the name of Christ, John xx. 31. Rom. x. 17. chap. xv. 4. It is sometimes compared to a sword, for our defence, against our spiritual enemies, Eph. vi. 17. and is therefore designed for use; otherwise it is no advantage for us. It is elsewhere compared to a lamp to our feet, Psal. cxix. 105. which is not designed for an ornament, but to guide us in the right way; therefore we must attend to its direction. It is also compared to food, whereby we are said to be nourished up in the words of faith and good doctrine, and as new-born babes we are exhorted, to desire the sincere milk of the word, that we may grow thereby, 1 Pet. ii. 2. but this end cannot be attained, unless it be read and applied by us to our own necessities.
This leads us to take notice of the opposition that the Papists make hereunto, inasmuch as they deny the common people the liberty of reading the scriptures in their own language, without leave given them from the bishop, or some other spiritual guides, who are authorized to allow or deny this privilege, as they think fit; but without this, the reading of it is strictly prohibited. And, as an instance of their opposition to it, they have sometimes burnt whole impressions of the Bible, in the open market-place; as well as expressed their contempt hereof, by burning particular copies of scripture, or dragging them through the streets, throwing them in the kennels, and stamping them under feet, or tearing them in pieces, as though it was the vilest book in the world; and some have been burned for reading it. And, that it may be brought into the utmost contempt, they have cast the most injurious reproaches upon it, by calling it a bending rule, a nose of wax, a dumb judge. And some have blasphemed it, by saying, that it has no more authority than Esop’s fables; and have compared the psalms of David to profane ballads. And, they pretend, by all this, to consult the good of the people, that they may not be misled thereby.
That which they generally allege in vindication of this practice, is, that they do not so much oppose the reading the scripture, as the reading those translations of it, which have been made by Protestants; and that it is our Bible, not that which they allow to be the word of God, that they treat with such injurious contempt.
But to this it may be replied; that the objections they bring against scripture, are not taken so much from such passages thereof, which they pretend to be falsely translated; but their design is, plainly, to keep the people in ignorance, that they may not, as the consequence of their reading it, imbibe those doctrines, that will, as they pretend, turn them aside from the faith of the church; and therefore, they usually maintain, that the common people ought to be kept in ignorance, as an expedient to excite devotion; and that, by this means, they will be the more humble, and pay a greater deference to those unwritten traditions that are propagated by them, and pretended to be of equal authority with scripture, which the common people must take up with instead of it. And, indeed, the consequence hereof, is agreeable to their desire; for they appear to be grossly ignorant, and think themselves bound to believe whatever their leaders pretend to be true, without exercising a judgment of discretion, or endeavouring to know the mind of God relating thereunto.
That which they generally allege in opposing the common people’s reading the Bible, is, that it contains some things in it that are hard to be understood; as the apostle Peter expresses it, in 2 Pet. iii. 16. which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their destruction.
But to this it may be replied; that it must be allowed that some things contained in scripture, are hard to be understood; inasmuch as the gospel contains some mysteries which finite wisdom cannot comprehend; and the great doctrines of the gospel, are sometimes unintelligible by us, by reason of the ignorance and alienation of our minds from the life of God, as well as from the imperfections of this present state, in which we know but in part. Notwithstanding, they, who with diligence and humility, desire, and earnestly seek after the knowledge of those truths that are more immediately subservient to their salvation, shall find that their labour is not lost; but in following on to know the Lord, shall know as much of him as is necessary to their glorifying and enjoying him, as the prophet says, Then shall ye know if ye follow on to know the Lord, Hos. vi. 3. It is to be owned, that there are some depths in scripture, that cannot be fathomed by a finite understanding; which should tend to raise our admiration, and put us upon adoring the unsearchable wisdom of God, as well as an humble confession that we are but of yesterday, and know, comparatively, nothing, Job viii. 9. Yet there are many doctrines that we may attain to a clear knowledge of, and improve, to the glory of God, in the conduct of our lives. Thus the prophet speaks of an high way, that is called the way of holiness; concerning which it is said, that way-faring men, who walk therein, though fools, that is, such as have the meanest capacity, as to other things, shall not err therein, Isa. xxxv. 8. that is, they who humbly desire the teaching of the Spirit, whereby they may be made acquainted with the mind and will of God, shall not be led out of the way by any thing that he has revealed to his people in his word. It is very injurious to the sacred oracles to infer, that because some things are hard to be understood, therefore all that read them, must necessarily wrest them to their own destruction. And besides, the apostle does not say, that all do so, but only those who are unlearned and unstable; unlearned, that is, altogether unacquainted with the doctrines of the gospel, as not making them the matter of their study and enquiry; and unstable, that is, such as give way to scepticism, or they whose faith is not built on the right foundation, but are inclined to turn aside from the truth, with every wind of doctrine. This God’s people may hope to be kept from, while they study the holy scriptures, and earnestly desire to be made wise thereby unto salvation.
As to what the Papists farther allege against the common people’s being permitted to read the scriptures, because, as they pretend, this will make them proud, and induce them to enquire into those things that do not belong to them, whereby they will soon think themselves wiser than their teachers; and that it has been the occasion of all the heresies that are in the world.
To this it may be answered, that whatever ill consequences attend a person’s reading of scripture, these are not to be ascribed to the use, but the abuse of it. Will any one say, that we ought to abstain from eating and drinking, because some are guilty of excess therein, by gluttony and drunkenness? No more ought we to abstain from reading the scriptures, because some make a wrong use of them. But, inasmuch as it is supposed that hereby some, through pride, will think themselves wiser than their teachers; this, we will allow, they may do, without passing a wrong judgment on themselves; and it is injurious treatment of mankind, to keep the world in ignorance, that they may not detect the fallacies, or expose the errors of those who pretend to be their guides in matters of faith.
As to what is farther alleged, that the reading of scripture has been the occasion of many heresies in the world, I am rather inclined to think, that this ought to be charged on the neglect thereof, or, at least, on their not studying them with diligence, and an humble dependence on God for his blessing to attend it.
It may be observed, that whatever reasons are assigned for their denying the people the liberty of reading the scriptures, these seem to carry in them a pretence of great kindness to them, that they may not, hereby, be led out of the way, and do themselves hurt by this means; as it is a dangerous thing to put a knife, or a sword, into a child’s, or madman’s hand; by which they suppose the common people to be ignorant, and would keep them so. But, whatever reasons they assign, the true reason why they so much oppose the reading of scripture is this, because it detects and exposes the absurdity of many doctrines that are imbibed by them, which will not bear to be tried by it. If they can but persuade their votaries, that whatever is handed down by tradition, as a rule of faith, is to be received, without the least hesitation, though contrary to the mind of God in scripture, they are not like to meet with any opposition from them, let them advance doctrines never so absurd, or contrary to reason.
If it be enquired, whether they universally prohibit the reading of scripture? It must be allowed, that the Vulgar Latin version thereof may be read by any one that understands it, without falling under their censure. But this they are sensible of, that the greatest part of the common people cannot understand it; and if they do, it is so corrupt a translation, that it seems plainly calculated to give countenance to the errors that they advance[32]. So that it appears from their whole management herein, that their design is to deprive mankind of the greatest blessings which God has granted to them; and to discourage persons from the performance of a duty, which is so absolutely necessary to promote the interest of God and religion in the world. Therefore we must conclude, that it is an invaluable privilege that we are not only permitted, but commanded to read the scriptures, as translated into that language that is generally understood by us.
And this leads us to consider the inference that is deduced from hence, contained in the latter part of the answer which we are explaining, viz. that the scriptures are to be translated out of the original into vulgar languages. This is evident, inasmuch as reading signifies nothing, where the words are not understood; and every private Christian is not obliged to addict himself to the study of the languages in which the scriptures were written; and it is, indeed, a work of so much pains and difficulty, that few have opportunity, or inclination, to apply themselves, to any considerable purpose, to the study thereof. Therefore, the words of scripture must be rendered intelligible to all, and consequently, translated into a language they understand.
This may be argued from the care of providence, that the scriptures should be delivered, at first, to the Jews, in their own language; as the greatest part of the Old Testament was written in Hebrew, and those few sections or chapters in Ezra and Daniel, that were written in the Chaldee language, were not inserted till they understood that language[33]. And, when the world generally understood the Greek tongue, so that there was no necessity for the common people to learn it in schools, and the Hebrew was not understood by those nations, for whom the gospel was designed; it pleased God to deliver the New Testament in the Greek language. So that it is beyond dispute that he intended, that the scriptures should not only be read, but understood by the common people. And when the gospel was sent to various nations of different languages, the Spirit of God, by an extraordinary and miraculous dispensation, furnished the apostles to speak to every one in their own language, by bestowing on them the gift of tongues; which would have been needless, if it were not necessary for persons to read or hear the holy scriptures with understanding.
II. We are now to consider, how the word of God is to be read, that we may understand, and improve what is contained therein to our spiritual advantage; and in order thereunto, there are several directions given in the latter of the answers we are explaining.
1. We must read the scriptures with an high and reverent esteem of them, arising from a firm persuasion, that they are the word of God. That they are so, has been proved by several arguments[34]; therefore we will suppose them that read them, to be persuaded of the truth thereof; and this will beget an high and reverent esteem of them. The perfections of God, and particularly his wisdom, sovereignty, and goodness, shine forth with equal glory in his word, as they do in any of his works; and therefore it has a preference to all human composures; in that whatever is revealed therein, is to be admired and depended on for its unerring wisdom and infallible verity; so that it is impossible for them, who understand and improve it, to be turned aside thereby, from the way of truth. We are also to consider the use that God makes of it, to propagate his kingdom and interest in the world. It is by this means that he convinces men of sin, and discovers to them the way of obtaining forgiveness of it, and victory over it, and thoroughly furnishes them unto every good work, 2 Tim. iii. 16. For this reason the wisest and best of men have expressed the highest esteem and value for it. The Psalmist mentions the love he had to it, as a person that was in a rapture; O how love I thy law! it is my meditation all the day, Psal. cxix. 97. And elsewhere he speaks of it as more to be desired than gold, yea, than much fine gold; sweeter also than honey and the honey comb, Psal. xix. 16. which argues the high veneration he had for it. This we all ought to have; otherwise we may sometimes be tempted to read it with prejudice, and thereby, through the corruption of our nature, be prone to cavil at it, as we sometimes do at those writings that are merely human, which savour of the weakness and imperfection of their authors, and consequently, it will be impossible for us to receive any saving advantage thereby.
2. We must, in reading the word of God, be sensible that he alone can enable us to understand it. To read the scriptures and not understand them, will be of no advantage to us; therefore it is supposed, that we are endeavouring to have our minds rightly informed and furnished with the knowledge of divine truths: But by reason of the corruption, ignorance, and depravity of our natures, this cannot be attained without a peculiar blessing from God attending our endeavours; therefore we ought to glorify him, by dependence on him, for this privilege, (as being sensible that all spiritual wisdom is from him,) if we would see a beauty and glory in those things that are revealed therein, and be thoroughly established in the doctrines of the gospel, so as not to be in danger of being turned aside from them; or, especially, if we would improve them to our being made wise unto salvation, we must consider this as the gift of God. It is he alone who can enable us to understand his word aright; this is evident, inasmuch as it is necessary that there be an internal illumination, as well as an external revelation, which is the subject-matter of our studies and enquiries. Thus our Saviour not only repeated the words of those scriptures that concerned himself, to the two disciples going to Emmaus; but he opened their understandings, that they might understand them, Luke xxiv. 45. Without this, a person may have the brightest parts, and most penetrating judgment in other respects, and yet be unacquainted with the mind of God in his word, and inclined to embrace those doctrines that are contrary to it; and especially if God is not pleased to succeed our endeavours, we shall remain destitute of the experimental knowledge of divine truths, which is absolutely necessary to salvation.
3. We must read the word of God with a desire to know, believe, and obey his will, contained therein. If we do not desire to know, or understand the meaning of scripture, it will remain no better than a sealed book to us; and, instead of receiving thereby, we shall be ready to entertain prejudices against it, till we lay it aside, with the utmost dislike; and, as the consequence thereof, we shall be utterly estranged from the life of God, through the ignorance and vanity of our minds. We must also read the word of God with a desire to have our faith established thereby, that our feet may be set upon a rock, and we may be delivered from all manner of doubts and hesitations, with respect to those important truths which are revealed therein; and we ought to desire, not only to believe, but yield a constant and cheerful obedience to every thing that God requires of us therein.
4. Our reading the word of God ought to be accompanied with meditation, and the exercise of self-denial. Our thoughts should be wholly taken up with the subject-matter thereof, and that with the greatest intenseness, as those who are studiously, and with the greatest earnestness, pressing after the knowledge of those doctrines that are of the highest importance, that our profiting herein may appear to ourselves and others, 1 Tim. iv. 15.
As to the exercise of self-denial, all those perverse reasonings which our carnal minds are prone to suggest against the subject-matter of divine revelation, are to be laid aside. If we are resolved to believe nothing but what we can comprehend, we ought to consider that the gospel contains unsearchable mysteries, that surpass finite wisdom; therefore we must be content to acknowledge, that we know but in part. There is a deference to be paid to the wisdom of God, that eminently appears in every thing which he has discovered to us in his word; so that we must adore the divine perfections that are displayed therein, whilst we retain an humble sense of the imperfection of our own knowledge. Our reason is not to be considered as useless; but we must desire that it may be sanctified, and inclined to receive whatever God is pleased to impart. We are also to exercise the grace of self-denial, with respect to the obstinacy of our wills; whereby they are naturally disinclined to acquiesce in, approve of, and yield obedience to the law of God, so that we may be entirely satisfied, that every thing that he commands in his word, is holy, just, and good.
5. The word of God is to be read with fervent prayer; as the apostle says, If any man lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally, and upbraideth not, and it shall be given him, James i. 5. The advantage we expect hereby, is as was before observed, his gift; and therefore we are humbly to supplicate him for it. There are many things in his word that are hard to be understood; therefore we ought to say, whenever we take the scriptures into, our hands, as the Psalmist does, Open thou mine eyes that I may behold wondrous things out of thy law, Psal. cxix. 18. We may, in this case, humbly acknowledge the weakness of our capacities and the blindness of our minds, which renders it necessary for us to desire to be instructed by him, in the way of truth. We may also plead, that his design in giving us this word, was, that it may be a lamp to our feet, and a light to our paths; therefore we dread the thoughts of walking in darkness, when there is such a clear discovery of those things which are so glorious and necessary to be known. We may also plead, that our Lord Jesus is revealed to his people as the prophet of his church; and that whatever office he is invested with, he delights to execute it, as his glory is concerned therein; therefore we trust, and hope that he will lead us, by his Spirit into his truth. We may also plead the impossibility of our attaining the knowlege of divine things, without his assistance; and how much it would redound to his glory, as well as our own comfort and advantage, if he will be pleased to lead us into the saving knowlege of the truth, as it is in him: This we cannot but importunately desire, as being sensible of the sad consequences of our being destitute of it; inasmuch as we should remain in darkness, though favoured with the light of the gospel.
6. The word of God is to be read with diligence and attention to the matter and scope thereof. We have hitherto been directed in this answer, to apply ourselves to the reading of scripture, with that frame of spirit which becometh Christians, who desire to know the mind and will of God therein, viz. that we ought to have our minds disengaged from those prejudices which would hinder our receiving any advantage from it, and to exercise those graces that the nature and importance of the duty requires; that we ought to depend upon God, and address ourselves to him by faith and prayer for the knowlege of those divine truths contained therein. But, in this last head, we are led to speak of some other methods conducive to our understanding the scriptures; which are the effects of diligence and attendance to the sense of the words thereof, and the scope and design of them.
This being an useful head, I shall take occasion to enlarge on it more than I have done on the former, and to add some other things, which may serve as a farther means to direct us, how we may read the scriptures with understanding. I might here observe, that they who are well acquainted with the languages in which they were written, and are able to make just remarks on the words, phrases, and particles used therein, some of which cannot be expressed in another language without losing much of their native beauty and significancy, these have certainly the advantage of all others: But since this cannot be done by the greatest part of mankind, who are strangers to the Greek and Hebrew languages; they must have recourse to some other helps for the attaining this valuable end. And in order thereunto,
(1.) It will be of great use for them to consult those expositions, which we have of the whole, or some particular parts of scripture; of which some are more large, others concise; some critical, others practical. I shall forbear making any remarks tending to depreciate the performance of some, or extol the judgment of others; only this must be observed, that many have passed over some difficulties of scripture, which omission has given a degree of disgust to the more inquisitive part of Christians: But this may be attributed in some instances, to a commendable modesty, which we find not only in those that have written in our own, but in other languages; whereby they tacitly confess, either that they could not solve the difficulty; or, that it was better to leave it undetermined, than to attempt a solution, which, at best, would amount to little more than a probable conjecture. It may also be observed, that others, who have commented on scripture, seem to be prepossessed with a particular scheme of doctrine, which, if duly considered, is not very defensible; and they are obliged, sometimes, to strain the sense thereof, that it may appear to speak agreeably to their own sentiments; however, their expositions, in other respects, may be used with great advantage.
To this we may add, that the word preached, being designed to lead us into the knowledge of scripture-doctrines, we ought to attend upon, and improve it, as a means conducive thereto, and to bless God for the great helps and advantages we have to attain it; but more of this will be considered under some following answers relating to the preaching and hearing the word:[35] therefore we proceed to consider,
(2.) That we ought to make the best use we can of those translations of scripture, that we have in our own language; which, if we compare together, we shall find, not only that the style in which one is written, differs from that of another, agreeably to the respective times in which they were written; but they differ very much in the sense they give of many places of scripture; which may easily be accounted for from the various acceptations of the same Hebrew or Greek word, as may be observed in all other languages; and there are other difficulties relating to the propriety of translating some particular phrases, or the various senses in which several particles made use of, are to be understood. However, by comparing these translations together, they who are unacquainted with the original, will be sometimes led into a sense more agreeable to the context and the analogy of faith, by one of them, than by another. But we will suppose the English reader to confine himself to the translation that is generally used by us; which, as it cannot be supposed to be of equal authority with the original, nor yet so perfect, as that it is impossible to be corrected, as to every word or phrase contained therein; yet I would be far from taking occasion from hence to depreciate it, or say any thing that may stagger the faith of any, as though we were in danger of being led aside thereby, from the way of truth, as some have pretended, who plead for the necessity of a new translation of the Bible; whereas it is much to be feared, that if any such thing should be attempted, it would deviate more from the sense of the Holy Ghost, than that which we now have, and have reason to bless God for, which, I cannot but think, comes as near the original as most that are extant. We shall therefore consider how this may be used to the best advantage, for our understanding the mind of God therein. And here we shall observe,
[1.] That there is another translation of words referred to in the margin of our Bibles; which will sometimes give very great light to the sense of the text, and appear more emphatical, and rather to be acquiesced in. I shall give a short specimen of some texts of scripture, that may be illustrated this way; in which the marginal reading differs from the words it refers to: Thus it is said, in Job iv. 18. He put no trust in his servants, and his angels he charged folly: In the margin, it is observed, that the words may be read, He put no trust in his servants, nor in his angels in whom he put light; which denotes the excellency of their nature, and the wisdom with which they are endowed: Nevertheless, God put no trust in them, not having thought fit to make use of them in creating the world, nor committing the government thereof to them.
Again, in Isaiah liii. 3. it is said, We hid, as it were, our faces from him, speaking of our Saviour; but in the margin, it is, He hid, as it were, his face from us; which implies, that, as he bore our grief, so he was charged with our guilt; and accordingly is represented, as having his face covered, as an emblem hereof; or else it denotes his concealing or veiling his glory, as he, who was really in the form of God, appeared in the form of a servant.
Again, in Jer. xlii. 20. the prophet reproving the people, says, Ye dissembled in your hearts, when ye sent me unto the Lord your God, saying, Pray for us; but, in the margin, it is, You have used deceit against your souls; which contains a farther illustration of the sense of the words; as it not only denotes their hypocrisy, but the consequence thereof, to wit, their destruction; which agrees very well with the threatning denounced in verse 22. that they should die by the sword, the famine, and by the pestilence. And the same prophet in chap. x. 14. speaking of idolaters, says, Every man is brutish in his knowlege; but in the margin it is, Every man is more brutish than to know; in which their stupidity is rather assigned to their ignorance than their knowlege.
Again, in Zechariah xii. 5. it is said in the text, The governors of Judah shall say in their hearts, The inhabitants of Jerusalem shall be my strength in the Lord of hosts their God; but in the margin it is, The governors of Judah shall say, There is strength to me, and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, in the Lord of hosts; and this reading seems more agreeable to what follows; which contains several promises of deliverance and salvation, which God would work for the inhabitants of Jerusalem; So that we are not to suppose them saying, Jerusalem shall be our strength; but, the Lord of hosts, who is a safe-guard to it, as well as to the governors of Judah.
Again, in Acts xvii. 23. it is said in the text, As I passed by, and beheld your devotions; but, in the margin it is, The gods whom you worship, or, the things ye pay divine honour to; which is very agreeable to the context, and the design of the apostle therein. Again, in chap. xxii. 29. it is said in the text, that they departed from him, which should have examined him, meaning Paul, in the margin it is, tortured him; which is agreeable to the Roman custom of scourging, and thereby tormenting one that was under examination for supposed crimes.
Again, in Gal. i. 14. the apostle says, I profited in the Jews religion, above many my equals; in the margin it is, My equals in years; which seems much more agreeable to the apostle’s design.
Again, in Heb. ii. 7. it is said in the text, Thou madest him, viz. our Saviour, a little lower than the angels; in the margin it is, A little while inferior to them; as referring to his state of humiliation; which continued comparatively, but a little while.
[2.] In order to our making a right use of our English translation, that we may understand the mind of God contained therein, let it be farther observed, that by reason of the conciseness of the Hebrew and Greek texts, there are several words left out, which must be supplied, to complete the sense thereof; which are inserted in an Italic character. And it will not be difficult for us to determine whether the insertion be just or no; when we consider that the translators often take their direction herein from some words, either expressed or understood in the context; as in Heb. viii. 7. it is said, If the first covenant had been faultless, &c. where the word covenant is inserted; as it is also in verse 13. because it is expressly mentioned, in verses 8, 9, 10.
Again, in chap. x. 6. it is said, in sacrifices for sin thou hadst no pleasure. The word sacrifices is supplied from the foregoing verse; and, for the same reason, offerings might as well have been supplied, as in ver. 8. And, in ver. 25. we are commanded to exhort one another; where one another is supplied from the foregoing verse.
Again, in 1 Pet. iv. 16. it is said, If any man suffer as a Christian, let him not be ashamed; where the words, any man suffer, are inserted as agreeable to what is mentioned, ver. 15.
And, in Eph. ii. 1. You hath he quickened who were dead in trespasses and sins; the words, hath he quickened, are supplied from ver. 5. and our translators might as well have added, you hath he quickened together with him, viz. Christ. These things I only mention as a specimen of the insertions, to complete the sense in our translation; and we shall find, that the words supplied in other scriptures, are for the most part, sufficiently just; but if they be not so, they are subject to correction, without the least imputation of altering the words of scripture, while we are endeavouring to give the true sense thereof; and we may be allowed, without perverting of the sacred writings, sometimes, to supply other words instead of them, which may seem more agreeable to the mind of the Holy Ghost therein. Thus, in Eph. vi. 12. it is said, We wrestle against spiritual wickedness in high places. The word places, is supplied by our translators; and, in the margin, it is observed, that it might as well be rendered heavenly places. Now because there is no spiritual wickedness in heavenly places, therefore they choose, without regard to the proper sense of the Greek word, to render it high places. Whereas, in chap. iii. 10. where there is no appearance of such an objection, they render the same word, heavenly places; though, I think, the words in both those scriptures, might better be rendered in what concerns heavenly things.
Again, in 2 Cor. vi. 1. it is said, We, as workers together with him, beseech you, &c. where, with him, is supplied to complete the sense; but, I think, it might better have been left out, and then the sense would have been, ministers, are workers together with one another, and not together with God; they are honoured to be employed by God, as moral instruments, which he makes use of; but they have no other casuality in bringing about the work of grace. The principal reason why the words with him, are supplied, is because it seems agreeable to the apostle’s mode of speaking, in 1 Cor. iii. 9. We are workers together with God; but, I think, those words might better be rendered, labourers together of God[36]; or we are jointly engaged in his work; therefore there is no reason from hence to supply the words with him, in the text but now referred to.
(3.) If we would understand the sense of a particular text of scripture, we must consider its connexion with the context. Accordingly we must observe,
1st, The scope, design, or argument insisted on, in the paragraph, in which it is contained. Thus in Rom. viii. the apostle’s design in general, is to prove that there is no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, and to shew who they are, that may conclude themselves to be interested in this privilege; together with the many blessings that are connected with, or flow from it, which the subject matter of that chapter principally relates to.
And, in Heb. i. the apostle’s principal design is, to prove the excellency and glory of Christ, as Mediator, above the angels, as he intimates ver. 4. which argument is principally insisted on, and illustrated, in the following part of the chapter.
And, in chap. xi. his design is, to give an account of the great things the Old Testament church were enabled to do, and suffer, by faith, of which, there is an induction of particulars in several parts of it.
And, in Rom. v. the apostle insists on the doctrine of original sin, and shews how sin and death first entered into the world, and by what means we may expect to be delivered from it; and so takes occasion to compare Adam and Christ together, as two distinct heads and representatives of those who were included in the respective covenants which mankind were under; by the former of which, sin reigned unto death, and, by the latter, grace and righteousness, unto eternal life.
Again, in chap. vii. especially from ver. 5. the general argument insisted on, is, the conflict and opposition there is between sin and grace, and the manner in which corrupt nature discovers itself in the souls of the regenerate, together with the disturbance and uneasiness that it constantly gives them. And, in Psal. lxxxviii. we have an account of the distress that a soul is in, when under divine desertion, and brought to the very brink of despair. And, in Psal. lxxii. under the type of the glory of Solomon’s kingdom, and the advantages his subjects should receive thereby, the glory and excellency of Christ’s kingdom is illustrated, together with the gospel-state, and blessings thereof. And, in Psal. li. David represents a true penitent as addressing himself to God for forgiveness; though particularly applied to his own case, after he had sinned in the matter of Uriah. Again, the general argument in Isa. liii. is to set forth the sufferings of Christ, whereby he made satisfaction for sin, together with the glory redounding to himself, and the advantages that believers derive from it.
2dly, We must consider the method made use of in managing the argument; whether by a close way of reasoning and consequences deduced from premises, or, by an explication of what was designed to inform the judgment, and laid down before in a general proposition. Or, whether the principal design of the paragraph be, to regulate the conduct of our lives, awaken our consciences out of a stupid frame, or excite in us becoming affections, agreeable to the subject-matter thereof. And, we are to observe how every part of it is adapted to answer these ends.
3dly, We are to consider who is the person speaking, or spoken to; whether they are the words of God, the church, or the inspired writer; and, whether they are directed to particular persons, or to all men in general? Here we may often observe, that in the same paragraph there is an apostrophe, or turning the discourse from one person to another. Nothing is more common than this in the poetical writings of scripture. Thus, in the Psalms of David, sometimes God is represented as speaking to man, and then man as speaking to, or concerning God, as we may observe, in Psal. cxxxvii. 1-4. there is a relation of the church’s troubles in Babylon; and, in verses 5 and 6. the Psalmist addresses his discourse to the church; If I forget thee, O Jerusalem, let my right hand forget her cunning. And, in ver. 7. he speaks to God, praying that he would remember the children of Edom, in the day of Jerusalem; who said, Raze it, raze it, even to the foundation thereof. And, in ver. 8, 9. he turns his discourse to Babylon, as a nation destined to destruction.
Again, in Psal. ii. he speaks concerning the rage of the Heathen, against Christ and his church, and that disappointment and ruin that they should meet with for it. And, in ver. 6. he represents God the Father as speaking concerning Christ; yet have I set my King upon my holy hill of Zion. And, in ver. 7, 8. Christ is brought in as speaking or making mention of the decree of God relating to his character and office, as Mediator, and the success of his kingdom, as extended to the uttermost parts of the earth, pursuant to his intercession, which was founded on his satisfaction. And, in ver. 10-12, the Psalmist turns his discourse to those persecuting powers, or the kings of the earth, whom he had spoken of in the former part of the Psalm, and instructs them what methods they should take to escape God’s righteous vengeance. Such-like change of persons speaking, or spoken to, may be observed in many of the Psalms, Psal. xvi. 1, &c. and cxxxiv.
And throughout the whole book of Canticles, there is an inter-changeable discourse between Christ and his church, which is sometimes called his spouse, at other times his sister; sometimes he speaks to the church, and at other times of it. And, in other places, the church is represented as speaking to him, or to the daughters of Jerusalem, namely, those professors of religion, that had little more than a form of godliness.[37]
Again, we often find, that there is a change with respect to the persons speaking, spoken to, or of, in the writings of the prophets, as well as in the poetical writings; as may be observed in Isa. lxiii. throughout the whole chapter. And, in Micah vii. 18, 19, 20. there is a change of persons in almost every sentence; Who is a God like unto thee that pardoneth iniquity, &c. He retaineth not his anger for ever; he will subdue our iniquities; and thou wilt cast all our sins into the depths of the sea. Thou wilt perform the truth to Jacob, and the mercy to Abraham, which thou hast sworn unto our fathers from the days of old.
4thly, We are farther to consider the occasion of what is laid down in any chapter, paragraph, or book of scripture, which we desire to understand. Thus the particular occasion of the book of Lamentations, was the approaching ruin of Judah, and the miseries that they should be exposed to when Jerusalem was besieged by the Chaldeans; as appears by the subject-matter thereof; though, it may be, that which was the more immediate occasion of its being delivered at that time, was, that the prophet might lament the death of good Josiah, 2 Chron. xxxv. 25. which, probably, he had a peculiar eye to, when he says, The crown is fallen from our head, Lam. v. 16. as well as the destruction of the whole nation, which would ensue soon after it, in which their civil and religious liberties would be invaded by their enemies, who would oppress and lead them captive.
And the principal occasion of the apostle’s writing the epistle to the Galatians, was, that he might establish some among them, in the faith of the gospel, who were so much disposed to turn aside from him that called them, and embrace another scheme of religion that was subversive of it; as he observes, in chap. i. 6. where, by this other gospel, which he dissuades them from turning aside unto, we are to understand those doctrines that they had imbibed from those false teachers who endeavour either to re-establish the observation of the ceremonial law, or to put them upon seeking righteousness and life, from their observing the precepts of the moral law, which tended to overthrow the doctrine of justification by Christ’s righteousness; which is a subject often insisted on by the apostle, both in this and his other epistles.
This method of enquiring into the occasion of what is mentioned in particular paragraphs of scripture, will often give light to some things contained therein. Thus we read, in Matt. xxi. 23-27. that the chief priests and elders ask our Saviour this question, By what authority dost thou these things? which, had it proceeded from an humble mind, desirous to be convinced by his reply to it; or, had he not often, in their hearing, asserted the authority by which he did those things, he would, doubtless, have told them, that he received a commission to do them from the Father; and, that every miracle which he wrought, was, as it were, a confirming seal annexed to it. But our Saviour, knowing the design of the question, and the character of the persons that asked it, he does not think fit to make any reply to it, rather chusing to put them to silence, by proposing another question to them, which he knew they would not be forward to answer, relating to the baptism of John, viz. whether it was from heaven, or of men. And this was certainly the best method he could have taken; for he dealt with them as cavillers, who were to be put to silence, and made ashamed at the same time.
(4.) In order to our understanding the sense of scripture, we must, so far as it is possible, compare the phrases, or modes of expression, as well as the subject insisted on, with what occurs in other parallel places. Thus, in several of the historical parts of scripture, we have the same history, or, at least, many things tending to illustrate it; as the history of the reign of the kings of Judah and Israel, is the principal subject of the book of Kings and Chronicles; one of which often refers to, as well as explains the other, and, by comparing them together, we shall find, that one gives light to the other. Thus it is said, in 2 Kings xii. 2. that Jehoash did that which was right, in the sight of the Lord all his days, wherein Jehoiada the priest instructed him; by which it is intimated, that, after the death of Jehoiada, he did that which was evil in the sight of the Lord; but this is not particularly mentioned in this chapter, which principally insists on that part of his reign which was commendable. But if we compare it with 2 Chron. xxiv. we have an account of his reign after the death of Jehoiada, how he set up idolatry, ver. 17, 18. being instigated hereunto by his princes that flattered, or, as it is expressed, made obeisance unto him, and disregarded the prophets sent to testify against these practices; and how he stoned Zachariah in the court of the house of the Lord, for his faithful reproof and prophetic intimation of the consequence of the idolatry, in which he shewed the greatest ingratitude, and forgetfulness of the good things that had been done for him by his father, who set him on his throne. We have an account of the time when the Syrians came up against him, and how they overcame him with a small company of men; and, that the Lord delivered a very great host into their hand, because they had forsaken the Lord God of their fathers, ver. 23, 24.
Again, in the book of Kings, we have but a short history of the reign of Azariah, otherwise called Uzziah, and of his being smitten by the Lord, so that he was a leper until the day of his death, and dwelt in a several house, 2 Kings xv. 1-5. but in 2 Chron. xxvi. there is a larger account of him, as successful in war, and of the honour and riches that he gained thereby; and also we have a particular account of the reason of the Lord’s smiting him with leprosy, namely, for his invading a branch of the priest’s office.
Again, in the history of the reign of Manasseh, in 2 Kings xxi. we have only an account of the vile and abominable part thereof; whereas, in 2 Chron. xxxiii. we have not only an account of his wickedness, but of his repentance, together with the affliction that occasioned it, ver. 12-19.
Moreover, when we read the prophetic writings, we must, for our better understanding them, compare them with the particular history of the reign of those kings, in whose time they prophesied, and the state of the church at that time, their alliances or wars with neighbouring princes, and the sins that they were guilty of, which gave occasion to their being sometimes insulted, and overcome by them, till their ruin was completed in being carried captive into Babylon. Thus when we read Isa. vii. which gives an account of Rezin, king of Syria, and Pekah, the son of Remaliah, against Ahaz, and contains a prediction of their miscarriage in this attempt; and also, that the king of Asyria should be hired to assist Ahaz, but should, instead thereof, deal deceitfully with him, so that he should deprive Judah of their ornaments, and impoverish, instead of being helpful to them. This we have a farther explication of in the history of Ahaz’s reign, in 2 Kings xvi. and 2 Chron. xxviii.[38]
Again, we ought to compare the account of Sennacherib’s invading Judah, and the blasphemous insult of Rabshakeh sent for that purpose, together with his defeat, and the remarkable hand of God that brought this about, as an encouragement of Hezekiah’s piety, in the xxxvith and xxxviith chapters of Isaiah, with the historal account of the same thing, in 2 Kings xviii. and xix. and 2 Chron. xxxii.
Again, we must compare the Psalms of David with his life, or the state of the church, which is particularly referred to in some of them; which may be very much illustrated from other scriptures, that have relation to the same dispensations of providence, or contain an historical account thereof. As for those psalms that were penned on particular occasions, mentioned in the respective titles prefixed to them, these will be better understood if we compare the subject-matter thereof with the history they refer to. Moreover, we shall often find, that when the same thing is mentioned in different places of scripture, there is something added in one, which farther illustrates what is contained in the other. Thus, in the account we have of the life of Joseph, in Gen. xxxix. 20. it is said, that he was put into the prison, the place where the king’s prisoners were bound; and, in chap. xli. 14. that he was kept in the dungeon, which is the worst part of the prison. But the Psalmist speaking of the same matter, in Psal. cv. 18. adds, that his feet were hurt with fetters, and he was laid in iron; which contains a farther illustration of the history of his troubles.
Again, when we read in Numb. xi. 31, 32. of God’s feeding Israel, upon their murmuring in the desert, for want of flesh, with quails in great abundance; this is mentioned elsewhere, in Psal. lxxviii. 27. in which we have an account, that these quails were a sort of feathered fowl, which could not have been so well understood by the sense of the Hebrew word, which we render quails[39]. We have also an account, in Exod. xvii. 6. of God’s supplying them with water out of the rock in Horeb; and if we compare this with Psal. cv. 41. we shall find that this water issued from thence in so large a stream, that it was like a river. And the apostle Paul gives farther light to it, when he says, speaking in a figurative way, that the rock followed them, 1 Cor. x. 4. that is, the water that ran from it like a river, did not flow in a right line; but, by a continued miracle, changed its course, as they altered their stations, in their various removes from place to place in the wilderness. And he also adds, that God designed this to be a type of Christ.
I might also observe, that there were many things in the life of David, after his expulsion from Saul’s court, that would argue him an usurper; inasmuch as he did not barely fly to secure his life, which he might lawfully do, as a private person; but he raised a small army; and accordingly it is said, in 2 Sam. xxii. 2. that every one that was ‘in distress, or in debt, or discontented, gathered themselves unto him; and he became a captain over him; and there were with him about four hundred men.’ And Jonathan, who was heir apparent to the crown, is forced to capitulate with, and take an oath of him, that he would grant him his life, as concluding, that he would be king after his father’s death, 1 Sam. xx. 14, 15. compared with the 42. and Saul’s jealousy hereof, which was attended with rage, amounting to a kind of destraction, was not altogether without ground; as he intimates to him, when he tells him, ‘Behold, I know well that thou shalt surely be king,’ chap. xxiv. 20. and accordingly, in the following verses, he makes him ‘swear to him, that he would not cut off his seed after him, or destroy his name out of his father’s house.’ Now this could hardly be justified, if we did not consider what we read in another part of scripture, that, before that time, God had taken away the kingdom from Saul, and anointed David to be king in his stead, in 1 Sam. xvi. 13. though he had not the actual possession of it till after Saul’s death.
I might farther observe, that when we read the account contained in the books of Moses, of the ceremonial law, and the various rites and ordinances of divine service contained therein, or meet with any expressions in the Old Testament that refer to it; these ought to be compared with several things that are recorded in the writings of the apostle Paul, and, particularly, a very considerable part of his epistle to the Hebrews[40], in which we have an account of the signification thereof, as ordained to be types of the gospel-dispensation. And, indeed, there are many scriptures of the Old Testament, which will be better understood by comparing them with others that refer to them in the New. Thus it is said, in Isa. xvi. 23. Unto me every knee shall bow; which appears to be very agreeable to what is said concerning our Saviour, in Phil. ii. 10. and it is not only spoken of the divine honour that should be paid to him; but it relates, in a peculiar manner, to that glory which all shall ascribe to him, when they stand before his tribunal, as appears by comparing it with Rom. xiv. 10, 11.
Again, when we read, in Isa. vi. 10. of God’s sending the prophet to make the heart of the people fat, and their ears heavy, and shut their eyes, lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their hearts, and convert, and be healed. It is not to be supposed that God is represented hereby as the author of their sin; which will plainly appear, if we compare it with Matt. xiii. 15. in which this text is cited, and farther explained, as it is said, This people’s heart is waxed fat, and their eyes have they closed, lest they should see with their eyes, &c. And it is also referred to, and explained in the same sense as charging their sin, and the consequence thereof upon themselves, in Acts xxviii. 26, 27. By this method of comparing the Old and New Testament together, we shall be led to see the beautiful harmony of the scriptures, and how the predictions thereof have been accomplished; which will tend very much to establish our faith in the truth of the Christian religion, that is founded on them. But this having been insisted on elsewhere[41], we pass it over at present, and proceed to consider,
That there are several places, in the New Testament, which being compared together, will give light to one another. Thus, in the four Evangelists, which contain the history of the life and death of Christ, we may observe, that some things are left out, or but briefly hinted at in one of them, which are more largely insisted on in another. Thus we read, in Matt. xii. 14, 15. that ‘the Pharisees went out and held a counsel against our Saviour, how they might destroy him;’ upon which occasion ‘he withdrew himself from thence. And great multitudes followed him, and he healed them all.’ But Mark, chap. iii. 17, & seq. speaking concerning the same thing, intimates that the Herodians were joined with the Pharisees in this conspiracy; and that he ‘withdrew himself to the sea,’ viz. of Tiberias; where he ordered that ‘a small ship should wait on him, lest the multitude should throng him.’ And we have also an account of several places from whence they came, namely, Galilee, Jerusalem, Idumea, and from beyond Jordan, and they about Tyre and Sidon, so that a great part of them were Gentiles; and this gives light to what follows in Matt. xii. 18, 21. in which it is intimated, that this was an accomplishment of what was foretold by the prophet Isaias, that he should shew judgment to the Gentiles; and that, in his name should the Gentiles trust; therefore he wrought miracles for their conviction that he was the Messias.
Again, it is said, in Matt. xiii. 12. ‘Whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance. But whosoever hath not from him shall be taken away, even that he hath.’ Some will be ready to enquire, how can that which he hath be said to be taken away, when he is supposed to have nothing? or, how can a person be said to lose that which he never had? But if compare this with a parallel scripture, in Luke viii. 18. there it is said, Whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken, even that which he seemeth to have; or, as it is in the margin, that which he thinketh he hath. Now, though a man cannot lose grace, that had it not; yet an hypocrite, who seems to have it, may lose that which he supposeth himself to have.
This method of comparing the four Evangelists together, is attempted by several divines; and, among them, a late writer, who is deservedly esteemed by all the reformed churches[42], thinks, that the inscription, on the cross of Christ, can hardly be determined, without what is said of it, by all the four Evangelists. Mark says these words were written, The king of the Jews, Mark xv. 26. and Luke says, This is the king of the Jews, Luke xxiii. 38. and Matthew adds another word, This is Jesus, the king of the Jews, Matt. xxvii. 37. and John expresses it thus, Jesus of Nazareth, the king of the Jews, John xix. 19. So that, by comparing them all together, and supplying those words from one, which are left out by others of them, we must conclude, that the inscription was, This is Jesus of Nazareth, the king of the Jews.
Again, as the Acts of the Apostles contains a brief history of the first planting the gospel-church, and of the travels and ministry of the apostle Paul, in particular; this ought to be compared with some things, occasionally mentioned in his epistles, which will give farther light to them. Thus the apostle says, in 1 Cor. xv. 8. Last of all, he was seen of me also, as one born out of due time; and speaks of himself in ver. 9. as the least of the apostles, not meet to be called an apostle; because he persecuted the church of God. This ought to be compared with Acts ix. 1-6. which gives an account of him as a persecutor before his conversion, and shews how our Saviour was seen of him; which is not to be taken in the same sense as he was seen by the rest of the apostles, before his ascension into heaven; but of his being seen of him, after his ascension, when, on this occasion, he appeared to him. And, if this be compared with 1 Cor. ix. 1. he considers this sight of Jesus as a necessary qualification for the apostleship; therefore, when he speaks of himself as born out of due time, he means, called to, and qualified for the apostleship, out of due time; that is, not at the same time in which the other apostles were, but by this extraordinary dispensation of providence.
Again, when the apostle, in 1 Thes. ii. 2. speaks of his having been shamefully entreated at Philippi. This will be better understood if we compare it with Acts xvi. 16, 21, 22, & seq. And when he tells the Thessalonians, in the following words, that we were bold in our God, to speak unto you the gospel of God with much contention; this should be compared with Acts xvii. 1, & seq. Many instances of the like nature might be given, by which, the usefulness of comparing one scripture with another, would farther appear. But, I design this only as a specimen, to assist us in the application of this direction; which a diligent enquirer into the sense of scripture, will be able, in reading it, to make farther improvements upon.
(5.) In order to our understanding the scriptures, we must take notice of the several figurative modes of speaking that are used therein. As,
1st, The part is often put for the whole[43]. Thus the soul, which is one constituent part of man, is sometimes put for the whole man; as in Gen. xlvi. 26. we read of the souls that came with Jacob into Egypt; and, in Rom. xii. 1. the body is put for the whole man; I beseech you, brethren, by the mercies of God, that you present your bodies, that is, yourselves, a living sacrifice to God. So the blood of Christ, which is often spoken of, in scripture, as that by which we are redeemed, justified, and saved, is to be taken for the whole of his obedience and sufferings, both in life and death, to which our salvation is to be ascribed, as well as to the effusion of his blood.
2dly, The thing containing, is put for that which is contained therein[44]; so the cup in the Lord’s supper, is put for the wine, 1 Cor. xi. 25. And the thing signified is put for the sign thereof. Thus when it is said, This is my body, ver. 24. the meaning is, this bread is a sign of my body, to wit, of the sufferings endured therein.
3dly, Places are, by way of anticipation, called by those names, which in reality, were not given them, or, which they were not commonly known by, till some time after. Thus it is said, that, as soon as Israel had passed over Jordan, they encamped in Gilgal, Josh. iv. 19. that is, in the place which was afterwards so called; for it is said, that it was called Gilgal because there they were circumcised; and so the reproach of Egypt, occasioned by the neglect of that ordinance, was rolled away, chap. v. 9. Again, it is said, The kings that came up against Sodom, when Lot was taken prisoner, had smitten all the country of the Amalekites, Gen. xiv. 7. whereas, the country that was afterwards known by that name, could not be so called at that time; since Amalek, from whom it took its name, was not born till some ages after, he being of the posterity of Esau, chap. xxxvi. 11.
4thly, The time past, or present, is often, especially in the prophetic writings, put for the time to come; which denotes the certain performance of the prediction, as much as though it were actually accomplished. Thus it is said, He, that is, our Saviour, is despised and rejected of men; he hath born our griefs, he was wounded for our transgressions, Isa. liii. 4, 5. And elsewhere, The people that walked in darkness have seen a great light, chap. ix. 2. and unto us a child is born, chap. v. 9. &c.
5thly, One of the senses is sometimes put for another. Thus it is said, I turned to see the voice that spake to me, Rev. i. 12. where seeing is put for hearing, or, understanding the meaning of the voice that spake.
6thly, Positive assertions are sometimes taken in a comparitive sense. Thus God says to Samuel, the people in asking a king, have not rejected thee, but me, 1 Sam. viii. 7. that is, they have cast more contempt on me than they have on thee, q. d. they have offered a greater affront to my government, who condescended to be their king; though they have been uneasy under thine administration, as appointed to be their judge. And, in Psal. li. 4. David says, Against thee, thee only, have I sinned. Whereas he had sinned against Uriah and Bathsheba, as having murdered the one, and tempted the other to commit adultery with him; he had sinned against the army, whom he occasioned to fall in battle, pursuant to the orders he gave Joab, with a design to destroy Uriah; yet says he, against thee, thee only, have I sinned; that is, the greatest aggravation of my sin is, that it contains rebellion against thee. And elsewhere, God says, I desired mercy, and not sacrifice, Hos. vi. 6. that is, more than sacrifice.
7thly, There are several hyperbolical ways of speaking in scripture, whereby more is expressed than what is generally understood. Thus the vessel in the temple, in which things were washed, which was ten cubits from one brim to the other, is called a molten Sea, 1 Kings vii. 23. because it contained a great quantity of water; though, indeed, it was very small, if compared with the dimensions of the sea: And in 1 Kings x. 27, it is said, that Solomon made silver to be in Jerusalem, as stones; and cedars as the sycamore-trees, which are in the vale for abundance. Silver was not, strictly speaking, as plentiful as stones; but it implies, that there were vast treasures thereof, heaped up by the king, and many of his subjects, and no lack of it in any one. And, in Judges xx. 16. it is said, there were some of the Benjamites left-handed, every one of whom could sling stones at an hair-breadth, and not miss; which only signifies that they had an uncommon expertness in this matter; and when we read of some of the cities in the land of Canaan, that were great, and walled up to heaven, Deut. i. 28. it only denotes that their walls were very high: And, in Kings i. 43. it is said upon the occasion of Solomon’s being anointed king, that the people rejoiced with great joy; so that the earth rent with the sound of them; the meaning of which is only this, that the shouts of the people were so great, that if the concussion of the air, that was made thereby, could have rent the earth, this would have done it.
8thly, We sometimes find ironical expressions, and sarcasms used in scripture, with a design to expose the wickedness and folly of men. Thus, when our first parents sinned by adhering to the suggestions of Satan, who told them, that they should be as gods, knowing good and evil, Gen. iii. 5. God says in an ironical way, Behold the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil, &c. ver. 22. And the prophet Elijah exposes Baal’s worshippers; and Micaiah, Ahab’s false prophets, by using a sarcastic way of speaking, 1 Kings xviii. 27. and chap. xxii. 15. And Job uses the same figurative way of speaking, when he reproves the bitter invectives, and false reasonings of his friends; No doubt but ye are the people, and wisdom shall die with you, Job xii. 2. And Solomon uses the same way of address, when he says, Rejoice, O young man, in thy youth, and let thy heart cheer thee in the days of youth, and walk in the ways of thy heart, and in the sight of thine eyes: But know thou, that for all these things God bring thee into Judgment, Eccl. xi. 9. And, the man that trusts in his own righteousness for justification, is also exposed in the same way, ‘Behold, all ye that kindle a fire, that compass yourselves about with sparks; walk in the light of your fire, and in the sparks that ye have kindled: This shall ye have of mine hand, ye shall lie down in sorrow,’ Isa. l. 11. And when our Saviour says to his disciples, having found them asleep, in Matt. xxvi. 45, 46. ‘Sleep on now, and take your rest; behold the hour is at hand, and the Son of man is betrayed into the hands of sinners,’ it is plain from the following words, that he uses this figurative way of speaking; for he immediately adds, without an irony, Rise, let us be going.
This, some think to be the method of speaking which our Saviour makes use of, when he reproves his disciples for that fond conceit that they had, that his kingdom was of this world; and contending sometimes among themselves, who should be greatest therein: Upon which occasion he bids them make provision for war; and take care to secure those two things that are necessary thereunto, money and arms: Thus he says, in Luke xxii. 36. ‘He that hath a purse, let him take it; and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one;’ they did not, indeed, immediately perceive that he spake in an ironical way; and therefore replied, in ver. 38. Lord, behold here are two swords: Upon which he says, still carrying on the irony, It is enough. So that, whether they understood his meaning or no, it seems to be this; if you are disposed to contend who shall be greatest, as though my kingdom were of a temporal nature, and to be erected and maintained by force of arms, do you think you have sufficient treasure to hire forces to join with you, or buy arms for that purpose? or, do you imagine that you have courage enough to attack the Roman empire, and gain it by force? You say, you have two swords, can you suppose that these are enough? what a ludicrious and indifferent figure would you make, if you expected to come off conquerors by this means? No, they that take the sword shall perish with the sword; for my kingdom is not of this world: So that all the advantages and honours that you are to expect therein, are of a spiritual nature. This seems rather to be the meaning of this scripture, than that which the Papists generally acquiesce in, namely, that by the two swords, are meant the civil and ecclesiastical; both which, as they pretend, are put into the Pope’s hands.
9thly, The scripture often makes use of a figurative way of speaking, generally called an hendyadis, whereby one complex idea, is expressed by two words, which is very common in the Hebrew language. Thus in Jer. xxix. 11. when God promises his people, that he would give them an expected end, intending hereby their deliverance from the Babylonish captivity; the words, if literally translated, ought to be rendered, as it is observed in the margin, an end and expectation; whereas, our translators were apprized that there is such a figurative way of speaking contained in them, and therefore they render them, an expected end: And this figure is sometimes used in the New Testament; as when our Saviour tells his disciples, in Luke xxi. 15. I will give you a mouth and wisdom; that is, I will give you ability to express yourselves with so much wisdom, that all your adversaries shall not be able to gain-say it. And some think, that there is the same way of speaking used in John iii. 5. ‘Except a man be born of water, and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God;’ that is, except a man be born of the Holy Spirit, or regenerated, which is signified by being born of water, he cannot, &c.
10thly, Nothing is more common than for the Holy Ghost, in scripture to make use of metaphors, which are a very elegant way of representing things, by comparing them with, and illustrating them by others, and borrowing such modes of speaking from them, as may add a very considerable beauty to them. Thus repentance and godly sorrow, together with the blessed privileges which shall hereafter attend them, are compared to sowing and reaping, in Psal. cxxvi. 5, 6. ‘They that sow in tears, shall reap in joy. He that goeth forth and weepeth, bearing precious seed, shall doubtless come again with rejoicing, bringing his sheaves with him.’ And the prophet sets forth the labour and pains which Israel had taken in sin; and exhorts them, by a metaphor taken from husbandry, to be as industrious in pursuing what would turn to a better account, in Hos. x. 12, 13. where he speaks of their having plowed wickedness, and reaped iniquity; and advises them to sow to themselves in righteousness, and reap in mercy; which, as he farther adds, they should do by seeking the Lord; and it is time, says he, to seek him, till he come and rain righteousness upon you; which is necessary to a plenteous harvest of blessings, which you may hope for in so doing. And, in chap. vii. 4. he reproves their adulteries by a metaphor, taken from an oven heated by the baker; and their hypocrisy by another, taken from a cake not turned, ver. 8. and their being weakened, and almost ruined hereby, he compares to the gray hairs of those who are bowed down under the infirmities of age, ver. 9. and for their cowardice and seeking help from other nations, and not from God, he calls them a silly dove without an heart, ver. 11.
And we may observe, that there is oftentimes a chain of metaphors in the same paragraph. Of this kind is that elegant description of old age, sickness, and death, which Solomon gives, in exhorting persons to remember their Creator in the days of their youth, Eccl. xii. 1-6. while the sun, or the light, or the moon, or the stars be not darkened; by which, it is probable, he intends the impairing the intellect, the loss of those sprightly parts which once they had, or, of the memory and judgment; upon which account men are sometimes said to, out-live themselves. And he speaks of the keepers of the house trembling; that is, the hands and arms, designed for the defence of the body, being seized with paralytic disorders; the strong men bowing themselves; that is, those parts which are designed to support the body being weakened, and needing a staff to bear up themselves; the grinders ceasing because they are few, signifies the loss of teeth; and they that look out of the windows being darkened, a decay of sight; their rising up at the voice of the bird, implies their loss of one of the main props of nature, to wit, sleep; so that they may rise early in the morning, when the birds begin to sing, because their beds will not afford them rest: And the daughters of music being brought low, denotes a decay of the voice and hearing, and being not affected with those sounds which were once most delightful to them. The almond-tree flourishing, plainly signifies the hoary head; the grashopper being a burden, is either a proverbial speech, importing a want of courage, strength, and resolution to bear the smallest pressures; or, as others understand it, their stooping, when bowed down with old age. The silver cord loosed, or, the golden bowl broken at the fountain, or the wheel broken at the cistern, signifies a decay of the animal spirits, a laxation of the nerves, the irregular circulation of the blood, or the universal stoppage thereof; and then the frame of nature is broken, and man returns to the dust[45].
In the New Testament there are several metaphors used; some of which are taken from the Isthmian and Olympic games, practised by the Greeks and Romans. Thus the apostle Paul compares the Christian life to a race in which many run; but they do not all receive the prize, 1 Cor. ix. 24. And, in ver. 25. he alludes to another exercise, to wit, wrestling; and recommends temperance as what was practised by them, as a means for their obtaining the crown. And, ver. 26. he uses a metaphor, taken from another of the games, to wit, fighting, in hope of victory; by which he illustrates his zeal in the discharge of his ministry. And in Heb. xii. 1. he speaks of the Christian race, and the necessity of laying aside every weight, to wit, allowed sins, which would retard our course, or hinder us in the way to heaven. And in Phil. iii. 13, 14. he speaks of himself both as a minister and a Christian, as ‘forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before,’ and, ‘pressing towards the mark, for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus;’ where he plainly alludes to the purpose, industry, and earnestness of those who run in a race. And, in Eph. vi. 11-16. he speaks of the difficulties, temptations, and opposition that believers are exposed to, in the Christian life; and advises them, to put on the whole armour of God; and so carries on the metaphor or allegory, by alluding to the various pieces of armour, which soldiers make use of when engaged in battle, to illustrate the methods we ought to take, that we may come off conquerors at last.
(6.) It will be very useful, in order to our understanding scripture, for us to know some things, relating to the different forms of civil government, and the various changes made therein, among the Jews, and other nations, with whom they were conversant. At first we find, that distinct families had the administration of civil affairs committed unto them, and the heads thereof were, as it were, the chief magistrates, who had the exercise of civil power, in some instances; especially if it did not interfere with that of the country wherein they lived. Some think, indeed, that it extended to the punishing capital crimes with death; and that Judah, who was the head of a branch of Jacob’s family, when he passes this sentence concerning Tamar, in Gen. xxxviii. 24. Bring her forth, and let her be burnt, does it as a civil magistrate: But, if it be not deemed a rash and unjustifiable expression in him, when he says, Let her be brought forth, and burnt, we must suppose the meaning to be, let her first be confined till she is delivered of her child, and then tried by the civil magistrate, the consequence whereof will be, her being burnt, when found guilty of the adultery that was charged upon her. So that it does not appear that the heads of families, when sojourning in other countries, had a power distinct from that of the government under which they lived, to punish offenders with death; though, I think, it is beyond dispute, that they had a government in their own families, that extended, in many respects, to civil affairs, as well as obliged them to observe those religious duties which God required of them.
It may be farther observed, that this government extended so far, as that the Patriarchs, or heads of families, had, sometimes, a power of making war, or entering into confederacies with neighbouring princes, for their own safety, or recovering their rights when invaded. Thus when Lot and the Sodomites, were taken prisoners by the four kings that came up against them, we read, in Gen. xiv. 13, 14. that Abraham called in the assistance of some of his neighbours, with whom he was in confederacy, and armed his trained servants, three hundred and eighteen, born in his house, and rescued him, and the men of Sodom from the hands of those that had taken them prisoners.
We have little more light as to this matter, so long as the government continued domestic, and the church in the condition of sojourners: But, when they were increased to a great nation, their civil, as well as religious government, was settled, by divine direction, under the hand of Moses, in the wilderness. The first form thereof, was a theocracy, in which God gave them laws in an immediate way; condescended to satisfy them, as to some things, which they enquired of him about; gave them particular intimations how they should manage their affairs of war and peace; and appeared for them in giving them victory over their enemies, in a very extraordinary, and sometimes, miraculous way. But, besides this great honour that God put on them, he established a form of government among them, in which they were divided into thousands, hundreds, fifties, and tens, Exod. xviii. 31. Deut. i. 15. each of which divisions had their respective captain or governor; who are, sometimes, styled the nobles of the children of Israel, Exod. xxiv. 11. And these governors were generally heads of considerable families among them; which were also divided in the same way, into thousands, fifties, and tens, in proportion to the largeness thereof; thus Gideon, speaking of his family, in Judges vi. 25. calls it, as the Hebrew word signifies, his thousand. And, in the same manner, their armies were divided, when engaged in war; thus when Jesse sent David with a present, into the army, to his brethren, he bade him deliver it to the captain over their thousand, 1 Sam. xvii. 18. and chap. xviii. 13. And we read, that Saul made David his captain over a thousand; which is the same with what we, in our modern way of speaking, call a commanding officer over a regiment of soldiers. Again, when David’s soldiers went out to war against Absalom, it is said, They came out by hundreds and by thousands, 2 Sam. xviii. 4. each distinct company, or regiment, having their commanding officer.
Thus the government was settled as to civil and military affairs, in such a way, that the head of the respective division, had a power of judging in lesser matters. But since there were some affairs of the greatest importance to be transacted in the form of their government, by divine direction, God appointed seventy men of the children of Israel, to assist Moses in those matters, in which they had more immediately to do with him; and accordingly he gave them the Spirit, Numb. xi. 16, 17. that is, the extraordinary inspiration of the Spirit; whereby he communicated his mind and will to them. This was the first rise of the Sanhedrim; and these had a power of judging in civil matters, throughout all the ages of the church till the Jews were made tributary to the Romans; and after that, this body of men were as vile and contemptible as they had before been honourable in the eyes of just and good men, as appears by their tumultuous and unprecedented behaviour in the trial of our Saviour, and the malicious prosecutions, set on foot by them, against the apostles, without any pretence or form of law.
After the death of Joshua, and the elders that survived him, there was an alteration in the form of government, occasioned by the oppression which they were liable to from their enemies, who insulted, vexed, and sometimes plundered them of their substance. Then God raised up judges, who first procured peace for them, by success in war; and afterwards governed them; though without the character or ensigns of royal dignity. And, this government not being successive, they were, on the death of their respective judges, brought into great confusion, every one doing that which was right in his own eyes, till another judge was raised up, as some future emergency required it. Thus the posture of their affairs continued, as the apostle observes, about the space of four hundred and fifty years, Acts xiii. 20. and then it was altered, when, through their unsettled temper, they desired a king, in conformity to the custom of the nations round about them; which thing was displeasing to God: nevertheless, he granted them their request, 1 Sam. viii. 5-7. and so the government became regal. And then followed a succession of kings, set over the whole nation, till the division between Judah and Israel; when they became two distinct kingdoms, and so continued, till their respective captivity. These things being duly considered, will give great light to several things contained in scripture; especially as to what relates to the civil affairs of the church of God.
And, for our farther understanding thereof, it will be necessary that we take a view of the government of other nations, with whom they were often conversant. We read almost of as many kings in scripture, as there were cities in several of those countries which lay round about them; thus, in Gen. xxxvi. we read of many dukes and kings, (whose power was much the same) who descended from Esau. These had very small dominions, each of them being, as it is probable, the chief governor of one city, or, at most, of a little tract of land round about it; and, indeed, besides the Assyrian, and other monarchies, that were of a very large extent, and had none who stood in competition with them, under that character, while they subsisted; all other kingdoms were very small; therefore four kings were obliged to enter into a confederacy, to make war with Sodom, and the four neighbouring cities, which a very inconsiderable army might, without much difficulty, have subdued, Gen. xiv. 1, &c. One of them, indeed, is called king of nations; not as though he had large dominions, but because he was the chief governor of a mixed people, from divers nations, who were settled together in one distinct colony; and the king of Shinar, there spoken of, is not the king of Babylon, who was too potent a prince to have stood in need of others to join with him in this expedition; but it was a petty king, who reigned in some city near Babylon, and was tributary to the Assyrian empire. These four kings, with all their forces, were so few in number, that Abraham was not afraid to attack them; which he did with success.
Again, we read, that in Joshua’s time, the kings in the land of Canaan, whom he subdued, had, each of them, very small dominions, consisting of but one capital city, with a few villages round about it. Thus we read of thirty one kings that reigned in that country, which was not so big as a fourth part of the kingdom of England, Josh. xii. And afterwards most of these kingdoms were swallowed up by the Assyrian empire. Thus the king of Assyria, as Rabshakeh boasts, had entirely conquered the kings of Hamath, Arphad, Gozan, and Haran, with several others, 2 Kings xix. 12, 13. these had very small dominions, and therefore were easily subdued by forces so much superior to any that they could raise. Egypt, indeed, was more formidable; and therefore we often read in scripture of Israel’s having recourse to them for help, and are blamed for trusting in them more than God: And, in Arabia, there were some kings who had large dominions, as appears by the vast armies that they raised: Thus Zerah the Ethiopian came forth against Asa, with a thousand thousand men, 2 Chron. xvi. 19. Nevertheless, the church of God was able to stand its ground; for, whether the neighbouring kings were many of them, confederate against them, or the armies they raised, exceeding numerous, like the sand on the sea shore; they had safety and protection, as well as success in war, from the care and blessing of providence; of which we have an account in the history of scripture relating thereunto.
(7.) It will be of some advantage, in order to our understanding the sense of scripture, for us to enquire into the meaning of those civil and religious offices and characters, by which several persons are described, both in the Old and New Testament. Concerning the Priests and Levites, we have had occasion frequently to insist on their call and office: Among the former of these, one is styled high-priest; who was not only the chief minister in holy things under the Jewish dispensation; but presided over the other priests in all those things that respected the temple-service. There was also another priest, who had pre-eminence over his brethren, that was next to the high-priest in office, who seems to be referred to, in 2 Kings xxv. 18. where we read of Seriah, the chief priest, and Zephaniah the second priest. This office is not often mentioned in scripture, but is frequently spoken of by Jewish writers: They call him, who was employed therein, as the author of the Chaldee paraphrase does on that text, the Sagan: And, some think, that this office was first instituted in Numb. iii. 32. in which Eleazar, the son of Aaron the priest was to be chief over the chief of the Levites, and to have the oversight of them, that kept the charge of the sanctuary: And elsewhere, we read of Zadok and Abiathar, being, by way of eminency, priests at the same time, 2 Sam. xv. 35. by which, it is probable, we are to understand, as many expositors do, that one was the high priest, the other the Sagan; who was to perform the office that belonged to the high priest in all the branches thereof, if he should happen to be incapacitated for it.
Besides these, there were others who were styled chief-priests, as being the heads of their respective classes, and presided over them when they came to Jerusalem, to minister in their courses. There was also the president of the Sanhedrim, who is generally reckoned one of the chief priests. Moreover, when any one was by the arbitrary will of the governors, in the degenerate and declining state of the Jewish church, deposed from the high-priesthood, barely to make way for another favourite to enjoy that honour, he was, though divested of his office, nevertheless called chief priest. This will give light to several scriptures in the New Testament, in which we often read of many chief priests at the same time, See Luke iii. 2. Mark xiv. 53.
Again, as to the Levites, these were not only appointed to be the high priest’s ministers in offering gifts and sacrifices in the temple; but many of them were engaged in other offices; some in instructing the people, in the respective cities where they dwelt, who were to resort to them for that purpose, or in synagogues, erected for this branch of public worship. Others were employed as judges in determining civil or ecclesiastical, matters.
Again, we often read, in scripture, of Scribes: These were of two sorts; some were employed only in civil matters; and we sometimes read of one person, in particular, who was appointed to be the king’s scribe. Thus in David’s reign, we read of Shemaiah the scribe, and in Hezekiah’s of Shebna, 1 Chron. xxiv. 6. 2 Kings xviii. 18. This seems to have been a civil officer, not much unlike a secretary of state among us; and we seldom find mention made of more than one scribe at a time, except in Solomon’s reign in which there were two, 1 Kings iv. 4.
But besides this, we often read of scribes who were engaged in other works; thus it is generally supposed, that many of them were employed in transcribing the whole, or some parts of scripture, for the use of those who employed them therein, and gratified them for it; which was necessary for the propagating religion in those ages, in which printing was not known.
There were others who explained the law to the people. Thus Ezra is styled, a ready scribe in the law of Moses, Ezra, vii. 6. This was an honourable and useful employment, faithfully managed by him and many others, in the best ages of the church. But, in our Saviour’s time, there were scribes who pretended to expound the law, and instruct the people; but the doctrines they propagated, were very contrary to the mind of the Holy Ghost in Moses’s writings; and their way of preaching was very empty and unprofitable: Upon which occasion it is said, that our Lord taught as one having authority, and not as the scribes, Matt. vii. 29.
Moreover, we sometimes read in the New-Testament, of Lawyers, against whom our Saviour denounces woes, for opposing him and his gospel. This is supposed by some, to be only a different name given to the scribes; inasmuch as they practised the law in public courts of judicature, and pleaded causes in the Sanhedrin, or taught in their schools or religious assemblies; both which the scribes did. And the evangelist Matthew, speaking concerning a lawyer, who asked our Saviour a question, Which is the great commandment, chap. xxii. 35, 36. Mark mentioning the same thing, calls him one of the scribes, Mark xii. 28. So that the same thing, for substance, seems to be intended by both of them; or if there was any difference between them, as others suppose there was, from what is said in Luke xi. 44, 45. that when our Saviour had been reproving the scribes and Pharisees, One of the lawyers said unto him, thus saying thou reproachest us also, where they speak as though they were distinct from them: yet it is evident from hence, that however they might be distinguished from them, in other respects, they agreed with them as engaged in expounding the law, and herein are said to lade men with heavy burdens and grievous to be born; which they themselves would not touch with one of their fingers.
As for those civil officers which we read of in the Old Testament before the captivity, especially in David and Solomon’s reign, they were either such as were set over the tribute, the principal of which was at the head of the treasury, 1 Kings iv. 6. and others were employed under them, to see that the taxes were duly levied and paid: These are called receivers, Isa. xxxiii. 18. Others were employed in keeping and adjusting the public records, of which, one was the chief; who, by way of eminence, is called the recorder: And others were appointed to manage the king’s domestic affairs, of which, the chief was set over the household, 2 Kings xviii. 18. Another is said to be set over the host, 1 Kings iv. 4. who either had the chief command of the army, or else was appointed to muster and determine who should go to war, or be excused from it. And there is another officer we read of once in scripture, viz. he that counted the towers, Isa. xxxiii. 18. whose business seems to have been to survey and keep the fortifications in repair; but these not being so frequently mentioned in scripture as others, we pass them over, and proceed more especially to consider some characters of persons we meet with in the New Testament.
There was one sort of officers who were concerned in exacting the public revenues, after the Jews were made tributary to the Roman empire: These are called publicans; the chief of which were generally persons of great honour and substance, who sometimes farmed a branch of the revenue, and they were, for the most part, Romans of noble extract, of whom we have an account in Cicero[46], and other heathen writers; but there is no mention of them in scripture. This honourable post was never conferred on the Jews; nevertheless, we read of Zaccheus, who is said to have been one of the chief among the publicans, though a Jew, Luke xix. 2. the meaning of which is, that he was the chief officer in a particular port, who had other publicans under him; whose business was, constantly to attend at the ports, and take an account of the taxes that were to be paid there, by those of whom they were exacted. Of this latter sort was Matthew, who is called the publican, i. e. one of the lowest officers concerned in the revenue, Matt. x. 3. compared with chap. ix. 9. These were usually very profligate in their morals, and inclined to oppress those of whom they received taxes, probably to gain advantage to themselves; and were universally hated by the Jews.
There was another sort of men often mentioned in the New Testament, that made the greatest pretensions to religion, but were most remote from it, and justly branded with the character of hypocrites, to wit, the Pharisees, who made themselves popular by their external shew of piety. There is not, indeed, the least hint of there being such a sect amongst the Jews before the captivity; though, it is true, the prophet Isaiah, Isa. lxv. 5. speaks of a sort of people that much resembled them, which said, Stand by thyself, come not near to me, for I am holier than thou; from whence, it seems, that there were some of like principles in his day; unless we suppose that this scripture had its accomplishment when the sect of the Pharisees appeared in the world in a following age; which was not long after the reign of Alexander the great[47], between two and three hundred years before our Saviour’s time. They are generally described in scripture, as pretending to be more expert than all others in the knowledge of the law; but, in reality, making it void, by establishing those oral traditions, which were contrary to the true intent and meaning thereof, and, as setting up their own righteousness, and depending on the performance of some lesser duties of the law, as that from whence they expected a right to eternal life. These were the greatest enemies, in their conduct, as well as their doctrines, to Christ, and his gospel.
There was another sect that joined with the Pharisees, in persecuting and opposing our Saviour; though otherwise they did not, in the least, accord with one another; and these were the Sadducees, who appeared in the world about the same time with the Pharisees: These were men generally reputed as profligate in their morals, and for that reason, as much hated by the common people, as the Pharisees were caressed by them. They adhered to the Philosophy of Epicurus; and took occasion, from thence to deny the resurrection, angels, and spirits, as they are said to do in scripture, Acts xxiii. 8. It is true they did not desire to be thought irreligious, though they were really so; yet our Saviour describes them, as well as the Pharisees, as hypocrites, and inveterate enemies of the gospel.
There was another sort of people sometimes mentioned in the New Testament, viz. the Samaritans, who separated from the Jews, out of a private pique, and built a distinct temple on mount Gerizzim[48]; and for this they were excommunicated by the Jews, and universally hated, so that there was no intercourse between them, John iv. 9, especially in those things in which one might be said to be obliged to the other: These did very much corrupt the worship of God, so that Christ charges them with worshipping they knew not what, ver. 12. and it is observed concerning them, after the ten tribes were carried captive into Assyria, and they who were left in the land feared not the Lord, that he sent lions amongst them, 2 Kings xvii. 25. upon which occasion a priest was dismissed by the king of Assyria, under pretence of instructing them in the manner of the God of the land; and he erected a strange medly of religion, consisting partly of those corruptions therein, which had been practised by the Israelites for some ages past, and partly of the Heathen idolatry, which they brought from Assyria; upon which account it is said, They feared the Lord, and served their own gods after the manner of the nations whom they carried away from thence, 2 Kings xvii. 33.
There is another sort of men, mentioned in the New Testament, who are called Herodians: These seem to have been a political rather than a religious sect. Some of the Fathers, indeed, think that they were so called because they complimented Herod with the character of the Messiah[49], who, as they supposed, would be a very flourishing prince, who was to reign over them, according to the ancient prediction of the patriarch Jacob, after the sceptre was departed from Judah: But this seems to be a very improbable conjecture; for Herod the Great was dead, before we read any thing of the Herodians in scripture: And the Jews had an opinion, about this time, that the Messiah should never die, John xii. 34. Therefore, the most probable opinion is, that these Herodians were, in their first rise, the favourites and courtiers of Herod, and disposed to give into any alterations that he was inclined to make in the religious or civil affairs of the Jews[50]. By what is said concerning them in scripture, it is supposed, that they were, for thy most part, Sadducees; for if we compare Matt. xvi. 6. with Mark viii. 15. our Saviour warns his disciples upon the same occasion, to wit, their having forgot to take bread, to beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees; as the former evangelist expresses it, and of the leaven of Herod, viz. the Herodians, as it is in the latter: Now, though these Herodians, or court-parasites, might take their first rise in the reign of Herod the Great; yet there was a party of men succeeded them, who held the same principles, and were disposed to compliment their governors with their civil and religious rights; but they more especially distinguished themselves, by their propagating principles of loyalty among the people: And, whereas the Jews, under a pretence that they were a free nation, were very unwilling to give tribute to Cesar, (though they would not venture their lives as Judas of Galilee, and some others had done, by refusing it;) these Herodians laid it down as an article of their faith, that they ought to pay tribute to Cesar; and therefore, when they came with this question to our Saviour, Is it lawful to give tribute to Cesar, or not? Matt. xxii. 17. he soon discovered their hypocrisy, and knew the design of that question as he might easily do from their being Herodians. Thus concerning the various characters of persons mentioned in scripture, as subservient to our understanding thereof.
(8.) After all these helps for the understanding the sense of scripture, there is one more which is universally to be observed; namely, that no sense is to be given of any text, but what is agreeable to the analogy of faith, has a tendency to advance the divine perfections, stain the pride of all flesh, in the sight of God, and, promote practical godliness in all its branches.
1st, Scripture must be explained agreeably to the analogy of faith. It is supposed that there is something we depend on, which we can prove to be the faith of scripture, or demonstrably founded upon it: This we are bound to adhere to; otherwise we must be charged with scepticism, and concluded not to know where to set our feet in matters of religion. Now, so far as our faith herein is founded on scripture, every sense we give of it must be agreeable thereunto; otherwise we do as it were suppose that the word of God in one place destroys what, in another, it establishes, which would be a great reflection on that which is the standard and rule of our faith. I do not hereby intend, that our sentiments are to be a rule of faith to others, any farther than as they are evidently contained in, or deduced from scripture: Yet that which we believe, as thinking it to be the sense of scripture, is so far a rule to us, that, whatever sense we give of any other scripture, must be agreeable to it; or else, we must be content to acknowledge, that we are mistaken in some of those things which we called articles of faith, as founded thereon.
2dly, No sense given of scripture, must be contrary to the divine perfections: Thus, when human passions are ascribed to God, such as grief, fear, desire, wrath, fury, indignation, &c. these are not to be explained, as when the same passions are ascribed to men, in which sense they argue weakness and imperfection. And when any phrase of scripture seems to represent him defective in power; as in Jer. xiv. 9. ‘Why shouldst thou be as a man astonied, as a mighty man that cannot save?’ we are to understand it as a charge that would be unjustly brought against God, if he did not appear in the behalf of his people, by those who are disposed to reproach and find fault with the dispensations of his providence: But, since we have taken occasion, in explaining many scriptures and doctrines founded upon them, to apply this rule; I shall content myself, at present, with the bare mentioning of it.
3dly, We are to explain scripture in such a way, as that it may have a tendency to promote practical godliness in all its branches; which is the main end and design thereof. Many instances might be given, in which this rule is to be applied; as when we are said, in Rom. vii. 14. not to be under the law, but under grace; we are not to understand this as though we were discharged from an obligation to yield obedience to whatever God commands; but either, as denoting our being delivered from the condemning sentence of the law; or, from the ceremonial law, to which the gospel-dispensation, which is a display of the grace of God, is always opposed. And when it is said in Eccl. vii. 16. ‘Be not righteous overmuch, neither make thyself overwise: Why shouldst thou destroy thyself?’ We are not to understand thereby, that there is any danger of being too holy, or strict in the performance of religious duties; but as forbidding an hypocritical appearing to be more righteous than we are, or entertaining a proud and vain-glorious conceit of our own righteousness, because we perform some duties of religion.
Again, there are other scriptures which are sometimes perverted, as though they intimated, that prayer, or other religious duties, were not incumbent on wicked men; as when it is said, in Prov. xxi. 27. The sacrifice of the wicked is an abomination to the Lord: And, chap. xxviii. 9. that his prayer is so, or that he has nothing to do with those duties; because it is said to such, in Psal. l. 16. What hast thou to do to declare my statutes, or, that thou shouldst take my covenant in thy mouth. But these scriptures do not imply, that they are not obliged to perform religious duties; but, that it is contrary to the holiness of God, and a great provocation to him when they regard not the frame of spirit with which they perform them, who draw nigh to him with their lips, when their heart is far from him, or lay claim to the blessings of the covenant of grace, while continuing in open hostility against him. To apply this rule fully, would be to go through the whole scripture, and to shew how all the great doctrines of religion which are founded upon it, are conformed thereunto; But this we have endeavoured to do in all those instances in which we have had occasion to give the sense thereof; and therefore shall content ourselves with this brief specimen, and leave it to every one to improve upon it in his daily meditations, in enquiring into the sense of scripture, in order to his being farther established in that religion which is founded thereon.
Footnote 32:
Many instances of this might be produced, viz. Gen. iii. 15. instead of, it shall bruise thy head, they render it she; by which they understand the Virgin Mary, shall bruise thy head, that is, the serpent’s. And, Gen. xlviii. 16. instead of, my name shall be named on them, which are the words of Jacob, concerning Joseph’s sons; it is rendered, my name shall be invoked, or called upon by them; which favours the doctrine of invocation of saints. And, in Psal. xcix. 5. instead of exalt the Lord thy God, and worship at his holy hill, they read, worship his footstool; which gives countenance to their error of paying divine adoration to places or things. And, in Heb. xi. 21. instead of, Jacob worshipped leaning on the top of his staff, they render it, he worshipped the top of his staff. And, in Heb. xiii. 16. instead of, with such sacrifices God is well pleased, they render it, with such sacrifices God is merited; which they make use of to establish the merit of good works.
Footnote 33:
There is indeed, one verse in Jeremiah, chap. x. 11. that is written in Chaldee; which, it is probable, they did not, at that time, well understand; but the prophet, by this, intimates to them, that they should be carried into a country where that language should be used; and therefore the Holy Ghost furnishes them with a message, that they were to deliver to the Chaldeans, from the Lord, in their own language. The gods, that have not made the heavens and the earth, even they shall perish from the earth, and from these heavens.
Footnote 34:
See Vol. I. Quest. IV. p. 69, & seq.
Footnote 35:
See Quest. CLIX, CLX.
Footnote 36:
Θεοῦ και ἐσμεν συνεργο.
Footnote 37:
Vide T. Williams on the Song of Solomon.
Footnote 38:
Vide Table of the Order of the Prophecies. Vol. I. p. 55.
Footnote 39:
The word is שלו, which being neither a root to any other word, nor derived from any other root, by which the sense of Hebrew words is generally known, nor found any where in scripture, excepting in those two or three places which refer to this particular dispensation of providence; it is an hard matter to determine the sense of it, without comparing these two scriptures together.—It occurs Numb. xi. 31, 32. Exod. xvi. 13. Psa. cv. 40.
Footnote 40:
See the epistle to the Hebrews, chap. v. to the x. inclusive, and 2 Cor. x. 1-6.
Footnote 41:
See Vol. I. p. 78.
Footnote 42:
See Lightfoot’s Harmony of the Four Evangelists. And his Harmony of the New Testament, Vol. I. p. 268.
Footnote 43:
This is called Synecdoche.
Footnote 44:
This is called a Metonymy.
Footnote 45:
See more of this in an ingenious discourse on this subject by Smith in Solomon’s portraiture of old age.
Footnote 46:
Vid. Cic. in Orat. pro Planc. florem equitum Romanorum ornamentum civitatis, firmamentum reipublicæ publicanorum ordine contineri. And in his oration, ad Quintum Fratrem, he has many things concerning the dignity of the publicans, and their advantage to the commonwealth: accordingly he says, Si publicanis adversemur ordinem do nobis optime meritum, & per nos cum republica conjunctum, & a nobis, & a republica disjungimus. And, in his familiar epistles, Lib. xix. Epist. x. he calls them, Ordinem sibi semper commendatissimum; & ad Atticum, Lib. vii. Epist. vii. he says, Cæsari amicissimos fuisse publicanos.
Footnote 47:
See Joseph. Antiquit. Lib. xiii. Cap. ix. And we have an account of their pride and insolence in the same author, chap. xviii. and of the great disturbance that they made in civil governments, if chief magistrates did not please them.
Footnote 48:
See Joseph. Antiquit. Lib. xi. Cap. viii.
Footnote 49:
See Tertull. in præscrip. adv. Hær. Cap. xlv. and Epiphanius, in Hær. Cap. xx.
Footnote 50:
That Herod was disposed to make alterations in the Jews religion, by adding to it a mixture of several rites and ceremonies, taken from the Heathen, is affirmed by some. See Cunæus de Rep. Hœb. Lib. i Cap. xvi. who quotes Josephus as saying, that he altered the ancient laws of their country.
Quest. CLVIII., CLIX., CLX.
QUEST. CLVIII. By whom is the word of God to be preached?
ANSW. The word of God is to be preached only by such as are sufficiently gifted, and also duly approved and called to that office.
QUEST. CLIX. How is the word of God to be preached by those that are called thereto?
ANSW. They that are called to labour in the ministry of the word, are to preach sound doctrine, diligently; in season, and out of season; plainly, not in the enticing words of man’s wisdom, but in demonstration of the spirit, and power, faithfully, making known the whole council of God; wisely, applying themselves to the necessities and capacities of the hearers; zealously, with fervent love to God, and the souls of his people; sincerely, aiming at his glory, and their conversion, edification, and salvation.
QUEST. CLX. What is required of those that hear the word preached?
ANSW. It is required of those that hear the word preached, that they attend upon it with diligence, preparation, and prayer, examine what they hear, by the scripture, receive the truth with faith, love, meekness, and readiness of mind, as the word of God; meditate, and confer of it; hide it in their heart, and bring forth the fruit of it in their lives.
Having considered, what method we are to take, in our private station, or capacity, to understand the word of God; we have great reason to be thankful, that he has ordained that it should be publicly preached, or explained, as a farther means conducive to this end. And accordingly we are led, in these answers, to shew, who they are that God has called to this work; and how such ought to perform it; and with what frame of spirit we ought to attend on it.
I. The persons by whom the word of God is to be preached; and these are only such, whom he has qualified with gifts sufficient for it; and they ought also to be duly approved of, when called hereunto, by those among whom the providence of God directs them to exercise their ministry.
1. Concerning the qualifications which are necessary, in those that are employed in preaching the gospel. Here it is to be observed in general, that they must be sufficiently gifted for it; which is so evident, that it would be unreasonable for any one to deny it, since no one is to attempt any thing that he is not able to perform; especially if it be a work of the highest importance, and the unskilful managing thereof may have a tendency to do prejudice to, rather than advance the interest of Christ. It would be a reflection on the wisdom of a master, to employ his servant in a work that he has no capacity for, or entrust him with an affair that is like to miscarry in his hands. In like manner, we are not to suppose that God calls any to preach the gospel, but those whom he has, in some measure, furnished for it; though, it is true, the best may say, as the apostle does, We are not sufficient of ourselves, to think any thing as of ourselves; but our sufficiency is of God: Yet he adds, that they who are employed by him in this work, are made able ministers of the New-Testament, 2 Cor. iii. 5, 6. It is, indeed, a difficult matter to determine who are sufficiently gifted for it; the work being so great and our natural and acquired endowments very small, if compared with it. But that we may briefly consider this matter, it may be observed,
(1.) That some qualifications are moral, without which, they who preach the gospel, would be a reproach to it. These respect, more especially, the conversation of those who are engaged in this work, which ought to be blameless and exemplary; not only inoffensive, but such as they, whom they are called to instruct, may safely copy after. Thus the apostle makes a solemn appeal, when he says, Ye are witnesses, and God also, how holily, and justly, and unblameably we behaved ourselves among you that believe, 1 Thess. ii. 10. And he advises the Corinthians to be followers of him, 1 Cor. iv. 16. and commends the church elsewhere, for conforming themselves to his example, so far as it was agreeable to that of our Saviour, 1 Thess. i. 6. in which respect alone the best of men are to be followed, 1 Cor. xi. 1. Now this supposes that they have that which we call the moral qualifications, necessary to the work of the ministry, without which, a person will do more hurt, by his example, than he can do good by his doctrine; inasmuch as he will lay a stumbling-block in the way of Christians, who would be ready to say, as the apostle does to some of those who were teachers among the Jews; Thou which teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? Rom. ii. 21. or, dost thou live in the practice of those crimes, which thou condemnest in others, and exhortest them to avoid? This qualification therefore, must be supposed to be necessary; and, indeed, an experimental knowledge of divine truths, will greatly furnish them to communicate the same to others, and spirit them, with zeal, in using their utmost endeavours, that they may be made partakers of the same experiences which they themselves, have been favoured with. Nevertheless, we are not to suppose that this alone will warrant a person’s engaging in the work of the ministry; for then every one who has experienced the grace of God, might attempt it, how unable soever he be to manage it to the glory of God, and the edification of the church. Therefore,
(2.) There are other qualifications more directly subservient hereunto. These the apostle speaks of, when he describes a gospel-minister as one who is apt to teach, 1 Tim. iii. 2. and able rightly to divide the word of truth, 2 Tim. ii. 15. and, by sound doctrine, to exhort and convince gainsayers, Tit. i. 9. They who take upon them to explain scripture, and apply it to the consciences of men, ought, certainly, with great diligence and hard study, to use their utmost endeavours to understand it. And to this we may add, that they ought to be able to reason, or infer just consequences from it; whereby they may appear to be well versed in those great doctrines, on which our faith and religion is founded. This, indeed, must be confessed to be a work of difficulty; and, they who think themselves best furnished in this respect, will have reason to conclude, as the apostle says, that they know but in part, and prophesy in part, 1 Cor. xiii. 9.
To this we may add, that there are various parts of learning, that may be reckoned, in some respects, ornamental, which would tend to secure him that preaches the gospel from contempt; and others, that are more immediately subservient to our understanding scripture, namely, a being well acquainted with those languages, in which the Old and New Testament were written, and able to make critical remarks on the style and mode of expression used in each of them, and a being conversant in the writings of those, whether in our own or other languages, who have clearly and judiciously explained the doctrines of the gospel, or led us into the knowledge of those things that have a tendency to illustrate them. And, inasmuch as preaching contains in it an address to the judgments and consciences of men, I cannot but reckon it a qualification necessary in order hereunto, that all those parts of learning that have a tendency to enlarge the reasoning faculties, or help us to see the connexion or dependence of one thing upon another, should be attended to, that we may hereby be fitted to convey our ideas with judgment and method. These qualifications are to be acquired. We pass by those that are natural, to wit, a sufficient degree of parts, and such an elocution as is necessary for those who are to speak to the edification of an audience, without which all other endeavours to furnish themselves for this work, will be to very little purpose.
2. They, by whom the word of God is to be preached, are to be duly approved and called to that office. A person may think himself qualified for it without sufficient ground; therefore this matter ought to be submitted to the judgment of others, by whose approbation he is to engage in this work. The first thing that is to be enquired into, is; whether he is called to it by God, not only by his providence, which opens a door for his preaching the gospel, but by the success which he is pleased to grant to his endeavours, in order to his being duly qualified for it? Notwithstanding, since persons may be mistaken, and think they have a divine call hereunto, when they have not; it is necessary that they should be approved by those who are sufficient judges of this matter, that they may not be exposed to temptation, so as to engage in a work which they are not deemed sufficient for. Not that it is in the power of ministers, or churches, especially according to the present situation of things, to hinder an unqualified person who has too high thoughts of his own abilities, from preaching to a number of people that is disposed to hear him; yet no one is bound or ought, in prudence, or faithfulness to God or man, to own any to be a minister, whose gifts do not render him fit to be approved; nor, on the other hand, can any judgment be passed on this matter, without sufficient acquaintance or conversation with him, that thereby it may be known whether he be a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, and able rightly to divide the word of truth.
Here, I think, there is some difference between the approbation that ought to be passed on those who first engage in the work of preaching, and the call to the pastoral office; the latter supposes the former; and therefore a person ought first to be approved of, as fit to preach the gospel, in the opinion of those who are allowed to be competent judges hereof, which is necessary to his entrance on that work with reputation and acceptance; without which, he is to stand and fall to his own master, and acquiesce in the approbation of those who are willing to sit under his ministry; while others are not bound (as being destitute of sufficient evidence) to conclude him furnished for, or called to it.
As to the call to the pastoral office; though no one has a right to impose pastors on churches; yet it is the indispensible duty of every church not barely to enquire; whether the person, whom they have a desire to call to that office, be such an one as is approved by the greater number of them; but, whether the step they are taking herein, is such as has a tendency to secure their reputation as a church of Christ, without exposing them to the just blame and censure of others, who are in the same faith and order with themselves? that they may do nothing that is in the least offensive, or that has a tendency to weaken the interest of Christ in his churches. It is true, no one can put a stop to their proceeding, if they are resolved to set over them one that is not only scandalous in his conversation, but inclined to preach what is subversive of the fundamental articles of our faith; yet they cannot hereby act as a church that has obtained mercy from God to be faithful, or engage in this important work with judgment. It is therefore expedient, that churches should set over them ministers approved by others as sound in the faith, as well as reckoned, by themselves, able to preach to their edification; and, in order hereunto, it is expedient that some ministers, and members of other churches, should be present at their investiture in that office, to which they have called them, not barely as being witnesses of their faith and order, in common with the whole assembly, but as testifying hereby their approbation of their proceedings, and giving ground to the world to conclude, that that person, whom they have called, is owned by others, as well as themselves.
And, in order thereunto, it is necessary that ministers, who are to join in begging the blessing of God on their proceedings, and giving a word of exhortation to them, should be satisfied concerning the fitness of him whom the church has called to that office; which is supposed by their being present, and bearing their respective parts therein. This, I think, is intended by that expression of the apostle, in which he advises Timothy, to lay hands suddenly on no man; nor to be partaker of other men’s sins; but to keep himself pure, 1 Tim. v. 22. that is, without guilt, as being active in approving those that he ought not to approve of. I do not, by this, take the power out of the hands of the church, of setting a pastor over themselves; but only hereby argue the expediency of their consulting the honour of the gospel herein, and acting so, as that they may have the approbation of other churches in that solemnity.
II. We are now to consider how the word of God is to be preached by those who are qualified, approved, and called thereunto; and that, both as to doctrines to be insisted on, and the manner in which they are to be delivered.
1. What they are to preach, ought to be sound doctrine, and that not barely what is deemed to be so by him that preaches it; since there is scarce any one but thinks himself sound in the faith, how remote soever his sentiments may be from the true intent and meaning of the word of God. But hereby we understand those doctrines which are so called by the apostle, Tit. i. 9. such as are agreeable to that form of sound words which is transmitted to us by divine inspiration, 2 Tim. i. 13. the doctrine which is according to godliness, 1 Tim. vi. 3. as having a tendency to recommend and promote it. This is styled elsewhere, The faith once delivered to the saints; which is not only to be preached, but earnestly contended for, Jude, ver. 3. These are such doctrines as have a tendency to advance the glory of God, and do good to the souls of men, that are relished and savoured by sincere Christians, who know the truth, as it is in Jesus; and are nourished up, as the apostle says, in the words of faith and of good doctrine, 1 Tim. iv. 6. This, as it has a peculiar reference to the gospel, and the way of salvation contained therein, is called preaching Christ, Col. i. 18. or a determining to know nothing; that is, to appear to know, or to discover nothing, save Jesus Christ and him crucified, 1 Cor. ii. 2. or deliver nothing but what tends to set forth the person and offices of Christ, either directly, or in its remote tendency thereunto. Our Saviour advises the church, to take heed what they hear, Mark iv. 24. as signifying, that we are to receive no doctrines but what are agreeable to the gospel. And this is a sufficient intimation that such only are to be preached, the contrary to which method of preaching, the apostle calls perverting the gospel of Christ; and adds, that though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel than that which we have preached, let him be accursed, Gal. i. 7, 8. These are the only doctrines that God will own, because they tend to set forth his perfections, as they were at first communicated by him for that end.
2. We are now to consider the manner in which these doctrines are to be preached. This is laid down in several heads,
(1.) Diligently and constantly, in season and out of season, considering this work as the main business of life, that which a minister is to give himself wholly to, 1 Tim. iv. 15. and all his studies are to be subservient to this end. He is to rejoice in all opportunities, in which he may lead those whom he is called to minister to, in the way to heaven, and be willing to lay out his strength, and those abilities which God has given him, to his glory. Thus the apostle says, I would very gladly spend, and be spent for you, 2 Cor. xii. 14. This argues, that the word is not barely to be preached occasionally, as though it were to be hid from the world, or only imparted, when the leisure or inclination of those who are called thereto, will admit of it. The character which the apostle gives of gospel-ministers, is, that they watch for the souls of those to whom they minister; that is, they wait for the best and fittest seasons to inculcate divine truths to them. This is particularly expressed by preaching the word, and being instant in season, and out of season, reproving, rebuking, and exhorting with all long-suffering and doctrine, 2 Tim. iv. 2. which implies, that it ought to be preached, not only on that day, which God has sanctified for public worship, of which preaching is a part; but on all occasions, when they are apprehensive that the people are desirous to receive and hear it.
(2.) It is to be preached plainly. Thus the apostle says, We use great plainness of speech, 2 Cor. iii. 12. This method of preaching is inconsistent with the using unintelligible expressions: which neither they nor their hearers well understand. The style ought to be familiar, and adapted to the meanest capacities; which may be done without exposing it to contempt. And it is particularly observed, that it ought not to be, in the enticing words of man’s wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power; as the apostle says concerning his method of preaching, 1 Cor. ii. 14. The great design hereof, is, not to please the ear with well turned periods, or rhetorical expressions, or an affectation of shewing skill in human learning, in those instances in which it is not directly adapted to edification, or rendered subservient to the explaining of scripture. A demonstrative way of preaching, is not, indeed, opposed to this plainness that is here intended but it is the demonstration of the Spirit; which, though it differs from that which the apostles were favoured with (who were led into the doctrines they preached, by immediate inspiration;) yet we are to endeavour to prove, by strength of argument, that what we deliver is agreeable to the mind and will of God therein; and yet to do this with that plainness of address, as those who desire to awaken the consciences of men, and give them the fullest conviction, proving from the scripture, that what we say is true. This account the apostle gives of his ministry, 2 Cor. iv. 2. as what was most adapted to answer the valuable ends thereof.
(3.) The word of God is to be preached faithfully; which supposes that they who are called to this work, have the souls of those whom they preach to, committed to their care; so that, if they perish for want of due instruction, they are, for this neglect, found guilty before God. Thus God says to the prophet, Son of man, I have made thee a watchman to the house Israel, Ezek. iii. 17, &c. and therefore he was to give them warning, which, if he did, he delivered his own soul; but if not, God intimates to him that their blood should be required at his hand. This supposes that they are accountable to God for the doctrines they deliver; for which reason the apostle speaks of them, as stewards of the mysteries of God, of whom it was required that they should be found faithful, 1 Cor. iv. 1, 2. and, as a particular instance thereof, he makes a solemn appeal to the elders of the church of Ephesus, that he had kept back nothing that was profitable unto them, nor shunned to declare all the counsel of God, Acts xx. 27. This faithfulness in the exercise of the ministry, is opposed to their having respect of persons from some obligation which they are laid under to them, or the prospect of some advantage that they expect from them, which makes them sparing in reproving those who are blame-worthy, for fear of giving offence, or losing their friendship. It is also opposed to preaching those doctrines which are suited to the humours and corruptions of men, and neglecting to insist on the most necessary and important truths; because they apprehend that they will be entertained with disgust. This is to act as though their main design were to please men rather than God. And it is very remote from the conduct of the prophet Isaiah; who, when he was informed that the people desired that the prophets would prophesy smooth things to them, and cause the holy one of Israel to cease from before them, Isa. xxx. 10, 11. he takes occasion to represent God as the holy one of Israel, in the following words, and to denounce the judgments which he would bring upon them, how unwilling soever they were to receive this doctrine from him.
And, to this we may add, that they are to be reckoned no other than unfaithful in their method of preaching, who, under a pretence of pressing the observance of moral duties, set aside the great doctrines of faith in Christ, and justification by his righteousness, which is the only foundation of our acceptance in his sight. Concerning which we may say, without being supposed to have light thoughts of moral virtue; that the one ought, in no wise to exclude the other. Neither can they be reckoned faithful, who shun to declare those important truths, on which the glory of God, and the comfort of his people depend; and therefore, if morality be rightly preached, it ought to be inculcated from evangelical motives, and connected with other truths that have a tendency more directly to set forth the Mediator’s glory; which ought not to be laid aside as controverted doctrines, which all cannot acquiesce in, as supposing that the tempers, or rather the ignorance and corruption of men, will not bear them.
(4.) The word of God is to be preached wisely. This wisdom consists,
[1.] In the choice of those subjects, that have the greatest tendency to promote the interest of Christ, and the good of mankind in general. There are many doctrines which must be allowed to be true, that are not of equal importance with others; nor so much adapted to promote the work of salvation, and the glory of God therein. There are some doctrines which the apostle calls the present truth, 2 Pet. i. 12. in which he instructs those to whom he writes. Accordingly, those truths are to be frequently inculcated, which are most opposite to the dictates of corrupt nature and carnal reason; because of their holiness, spirituality, beauty, and glory. Again, those doctrines are to be explained and supported by the most solid and judicious methods of reasoning, which are very much perverted and undermined by the subtle enemies of our salvation. And whatever truth is necessary to be known, as subservient to godliness, which multitudes are ignorant of, this is to be frequently insisted on, that they may not be destroyed for lack of knowledge; and those duties, which we are most prone to neglect, in which the life and power of religion discovers itself, these are to be inculcated as a means to promote practical godliness.
[2.] The wisdom of those that preach the gospel farther appears, in suiting their discourses to the capacities of their hearers; of whom, it must be supposed,
1st, That some are ignorant and weak in the faith who cannot easily take in those truths that are, with much more ease, apprehended and received by others; for their sake the word of God is to be preached with the greatest plainness and familiarity of style. Thus the apostle speaks of some who needed to be fed with milk, being unskilful in the word of righteousness, and, as it were, babes in knowledge, Heb. v. 12-14. whereas others, that he compares to strong men, were fed with meat, that was agreeable to them. By which he doth not intend, as I apprehend, a difference of doctrines, as though some were to have nothing preached to them but moral duties: while others were to have the doctrines of justification, and faith in Christ, &c. preached to them; but rather a different way of managing them, respecting the closeness and connexion of those methods of reasoning by which they are established which some are better able to improve and receive advantage by, than others.
2dly, Some must be supposed to be wavering, and in danger of being perverted from the faith of the gospel; for their sakes the most strong and cogent arguments are to be made use of, and well managed, in order to their establishment therein, and those objections that are generally brought against it, answered.
3dly, Others are lukewarm and indifferent in matters of religion; these need to have awakening truths, insisted on with great seriousness and affection, suited to the occasion thereof.
4thly, Others are assaulted with temptations, and subject to many doubts and fears, about the state of their souls, and the truth of grace; or, it may be, their consciences are burdened with some scruples, about the lawfulness or expediency of things, and some hesitation of mind, whether what they engage in is a sin or duty. Now, that the word may be adapted to their condition, the wiles of Satan are to be discovered, cases of conscience resolved, evidences of the truth of grace, or the marks of sincerity and hypocrisy are to be plainly laid down, and the fulness, freeness, and riches of divine grace, through a Mediator, to be set forth as the only expedient to fence them against their doubts and fears, and keep them from, giving way to despair.
5thly, The word of God is to be preached zealously, with fervent love to God, and the souls of his people. Thus it is said, in Acts xviii. 25. concerning Apollos, that being fervent in the Spirit, he spake and taught diligently in the things of the Lord. This zeal doth not consist in a passionate, furious address, arising from personal pique and prejudice; or, in exposing men for their weakness; or expressing an undue resentment of some injuries received from them; but it is such a zeal, that is consistent with fervent love to God, and the souls of men. The love which is to be expressed to God, discovers itself, in the concern they have for the advancing his truth, name, and glory, and the promoting his interest in the world, which is infinitely preferable to all other interests; and their love to the souls of men induceth them to preach to them, as considering that they have not only the same nature in common with themselves, in which they must either be happy or miserable, for ever: But they are liable to the same infirmities, difficulties, dangers, and spiritual enemies, which should incline those that preach the gospel, to express the greatest sympathy with them in their troubles, while they are using their utmost endeavours to help them in their way to heaven. They are to be considered as being, by nature, in a lost, undone condition; and the success of the gospel, as being the only means to prevent their perishing for ever. And, with respect to those, in whom the word of God is made effectual for their conversion, ministers are to endeavour to build them up in their holy faith, as those who, they hope, will be their crown of rejoicing in the presence of our Lord Jesus Christ, at his coming, 1 Thess. ii. 19.
6thly, The word is to be preached sincerely, aiming at the glory of God, and the conversion, edification, and salvation of his people. Accordingly,
1st, Ministers must firmly believe the doctrines they deliver, and not preach them because they are the generally-received opinion of the churches; for that is hardly consistent with sincerity; at least, it argues a great deal of weakness, or want of judgment, as though they were wavering about those important truths, which they think in compliance with custom, they are obliged to communicate.
2dly, They must have no by and unwarrantable ends in preaching, namely, the gaining the esteem of men, or promoting their own secular interest. Though what the apostle says be true, that the labourer is worthy of his hire, and, they that preach the gospel, must live of the gospel, 1 Cor. ix. 14. Yet this ought not to be the principal end inducing them hereunto; for that is like what is threatened against the remains of the house of Eli, who were exposed to such a servile and mercenary temper, as to crouch for a piece of silver; and to say, put me, I pray thee, into one of the priest’s offices, that I may eat a piece of bread, 1 Sam. ii. 36. The glory of God is to be the principal end of the ministry; and, accordingly, they are to endeavour to approve themselves to him in the whole of their conduct therein. Thus the apostle speaks of himself, as not seeking to please men; which, if I do, says he, I should not be the servant of Christ, Gal. i. 10. This method of preaching will be a means to beget, in the minds of men, the highest esteem of him. And, more especially, the glory of God is to be set forth as it shines in the face of Jesus Christ, or discovers itself in the work of salvation, brought about by him. This is the only expedient to render the preaching of the gospel conducive to answer the most valuable ends.
And, inasmuch as next to the glory of God, the conversion, edification, and salvation of men, is to be aimed at; such a method of preaching is to be used, as is best adapted hereunto. Therefore,
(1st,) In order to the promoting the conversion of sinners, they are to be led into a sense of their guilt and misery, while in an unconverted state; together with the necessity of their believing on Christ, to the salvation of the soul; as also the methods prescribed in the gospel for their recovery, and escaping the wrath they are liable to. They are to be made acquainted with the gospel-call, in which sinners are invited to come to Christ, and his willingness to receive all that repent and believe in him. And, since this is the peculiar work of the Spirit, they are to pray and hope for his grace, to give success to his ordinances, in which they wait for his salvation. And if God is pleased to set home these truths on the consciences of men, and enable them to comply with this call, then the word is preached in a right manner, and their labour is not in vain in the Lord.
(2dly,) As for those who are converted, their farther establishment, and edification in Christ is designed, together with the increase of the work of grace that is begun in them. Accordingly they are to be told of the imperfection of their present state, and what is still lacking to fill up the measure of their faith and obedience; and they are to be warned of the assaults that they are like to meet with from their spiritual enemies, of the wiles and devices of Satan, to interrupt the actings of grace, overthrow their confidence, or disturb their peace. They are also to be directed how they may improve the redemption purchased by Christ, for the mortifying of sin, obtaining the victory over temptation, and increasing their faith in him. And, in addressing themselves to them, they are to explain difficult scriptures, that they may grow in knowledge, and discover to them the evidences of the strength and weakness of grace, tending to promote the one, and prevent the other. Also, the promises of the gospel are to be applied to them for their encouragement, and they excited to go on in the ways of God, depending on, and deriving strength from Christ, for the carrying on the work that is begun in them. This leads us to consider what is contained in the last of the answers we are explaining, viz.
III. What is the hearer’s duty, who desires to receive spiritual advantage by the word preached; and this respects his behaviour before, in, and after his hearing the word.
1. Before we hear the word, we are to endeavour to prepare ourselves for the solemn work which we are to engage in, duly considering how we need instruction, or, at least, to have truths brought to our remembrance, and impressed on our hearts; as also, that this is an ordinance which God has instituted for that purpose; and, as it is instamped with his authority, so we may depend on it, that his eye will be upon us, to observe our frame of spirit under the word. And we ought to have an awful sense of his perfections, to excite in us an holy reverence, and the exercise of other graces, necessary to our engaging in this duty, in a right manner; and inasmuch as these are God’s gift, we are to be very importunate with him in prayer for them. And, among other things, we are to desire that he would assist his ministers in preaching the word; so that what shall be delivered by them, may be agreeable to his mind and will; and, that this may be done in such a way, that it may recommend itself to the consciences of those that hear it; that their understandings may be enlightened, and they enabled to receive it with faith and love; and that all those corruptions, or temptations, that hinder the success thereof, may be prevented. These, and such-like things are to be desired of God in prayer; not only for ourselves in particular, but for all those who shall be engaged with us in this ordinance.
We might here consider the arguments or pleas that we may make use of, with relation hereunto, viz. such as are taken from those promises which God has made of his presence with his people, when engaged in public worship, Exod. xx. 24. Matt. xviii. 20. We may also plead the insufficiency of man’s instructions, without the Spirit’s teaching, or leading us into all truth; and that Christ has promised that his Spirit shall be given to his people for this end, John xvi. 13, 14. We may also plead our own inability to hear the word of God in a right manner, and the violent efforts that are made by our corrupt nature, to hinder our receiving advantage by it, and what endeavours Satan often uses in conjunction with it, by which means, as our Saviour expresses it in the parable, Matt. xiii. 19. he catches away that seed which was sown in the heart; whereby it will become unfruitful. And to this we may add, the afflictive sense we have of the ill consequences which will attend our hearing the word, and not profiting by it, whereby the soul is left worse than it was before; as the apostle says, that he was, in the course of his ministry, to some, the saviour of death unto death, 2 Cor. ii. 16. We may also plead the glory that will redound to God, by the displays of his grace, in making the word effectual to salvation, and the great honour he hereby puts on his own institution, inasmuch as, herein, he sets his seal thereunto. We may also plead that this is God’s usual way in which he dispenses his grace, and accordingly he has encouraged us, to hope and wait for it therein; and, that multitudes of his saints, both in earth and heaven, have experienced his presence with them under the word; whereby they were first enabled to believe in Christ, and afterwards established more and more in that grace, which they were made partakers of at first from him. Therefore we hope and trust that we may be admitted to participate of the same privilege.
2. There are several duties required of us in hearing the word; particularly we are to try the doctrines that are delivered, whether they are agreeable unto, and founded on scripture, that we may not be imposed upon by the errors of men, instead of the truths of God. Moreover, we are to endeavour to exercise those graces that are suitable to the work we are engaged in; and, as the apostle says, mix the word with faith, 2 Cor. ii. 16. and express the highest love and esteem for the glorious truths which are contained therein, discovering the greatest readiness to yield obedience to every thing God commands, and thankfulness for whatever he has promised to us. Moreover we are to hear the word with a particular application of it to our own condition, whether it be in a way of admonition, reproof, exhortation or encouragement, and to see how much we are concerned to improve it, to our spiritual advantage.
3. We are now to consider those duties which are to be performed by us, after we have heard the word preached. Some of these require privacy or retirement from the world; by which means we may meditate on, digest, and apply what we have heard; and, together with this, examine ourselves, and thereby take a view of our behaviour, whilst we have been engaged in public worship, in order to our being humbled for sins committed, or thankful for grace received. But this having been particularly considered under another answer, relating to our sanctifying the Sabbath in the evening thereof[51], I shall pass it over at present.
There is another duty incumbent on us, after we have heard the word, which may conduce to the spiritual advantage of others, as it is to be the subject of our conversation; upon which account we are to take occasion to observe the excellency, beauty, and glory of divine truths, that are communicated in scripture: We are to hear the word, not merely as critics, making our remarks on the elegancy of style, the fluency of expression, or other gifts, which we are ready to applaud in the preacher, on the one hand, nor exposing and censuring the defects which we have observed in his method of address, on the other. We are rather to take notice of the suitableness of the truths delivered to the condition of mankind in general, or our own in particular, and observe how consonant the word preached has been to the holy scriptures, the standard of truth, and the agreement thereof, with the experiences of God’s people. We are also to take occasion from hence, to enquire into the meaning of scripture, especially some particular texts that have been insisted on, or, in some measure, explained, in the preaching of the word, in order to our farther information and improvement in the knowledge of divine things.
The last thing that is observed in this answer, is, that after having heard the word of God, we are to endeavour to bring forth the fruit of it in our lives: This consists in a conversation becoming the gospel; and being induced hereby to deny ungodliness and worldly lusts, and to live soberly, righteously, and godly in this present world, Tit. ii. 13. And we ought to express a becoming zeal for divine truths, defending them when opposed, and endeavouring to establish others therein; that so we may recommend religion to them, as that which is the most solid foundation for peace, and leads to universal holiness, that hereby we may adorn the doctrine of God, our Saviour, in all things.
Footnote 51:
See Vol. III. p. 495.
Quest. CLXI., CLXII., CLXIII., CLXIV.
QUEST. CLXI. How doth the sacraments become effectual means of salvation?
ANSW. The sacraments become effectual means of salvation; not by any power in themselves, or any virtue derived from the piety and intention of him by whom they are administered; but only by the working of the Holy Ghost, and the blessing of Christ, by whom they are instituted.
QUEST. CLXII. What is a sacrament?
ANSW. A sacrament is an holy ordinance, instituted by Christ in his church, to signify, seal, and exhibit, unto those that are within the covenant of grace, the benefits of his mediation; to strengthen and increase their faith, and all other graces; to oblige them to obedience; to testify and cherish their love and communion one with another, and to distinguish them from those that are without.
QUEST. CLXIII. What are the parts of a sacrament?
ANSW. The parts of a sacrament are two; the one an outward and sensible sign, used according to Christ’s own appointment; the other, an inward and spiritual grace, thereby signified.
QUEST. CLXIV. How many sacraments hath Christ instituted in his church, under the New Testament?
ANSW. Under the New Testament Christ hath instituted in his church only two sacraments; Baptism, and the Lord’s Supper.
It has pleased God, in setting forth the glory of his wisdom and sovereignty to impart his mind and will to man, various ways, besides the discovery which he makes of himself in the dispensations of his providence. These are, more especially, reducible to two general heads, viz. his making it known by words, which is the more plain and common way by which we are led into the knowledge of divine truths; or else, by visible signs, which are sometimes called types, figures, or sacraments. The former of these we have already insisted on; the latter we now proceed to consider. And, in order hereunto, we are first to explain the nature, and shew what are the parts of a sacrament, as we have an account thereof in the two last of these answers; and then consider, how the sacraments become effectual means of salvation, as contained in the first, of them.
I. Concerning the nature and parts of a sacrament: In order to our understanding whereof, we shall consider,
1. The meaning of the word. It is certain, that the word sacrament is not to be found in scripture, though the thing intended thereby, is expressed in other words; and, for this reason, some have scrupled the use of it, and choose rather to make use of other phrases more agreeable to the scripture mode of speaking: But, though we are not to hold any doctrine that is not founded on scripture; yet those which are contained therein, may be explained in our own words, provided they are consonant thereunto. The Greek church knew nothing of the word sacrament, it being of a Latin original; but, instead thereof, used the word mystery; thereby signifying, that there is in the sacraments, besides the outward and visible signs, some secret or hidden mystery signified thereby. The Latin church used the word sacrament, not only as signifying something that is sacred; but as denoting, that thereby they were bound as with an oath, to be the Lord’s; as the Psalmist says, I have sworn, and I will perform it, that I will keep thy righteous judgments, Psal. cxix. 106. and God, by the prophet, says, Unto me every knee shall bow, and every tongue shall swear, Isa. xlv. 23.
The word Sacrament was used, indeed, by the Romans, to signify that oath which the soldiers took, to be true and faithful to their general, and to fight courageously under his banner; but the primitive Christians signified hereby, that, when they were called to suffer for Christ, which was, as it were, a fighting under his banner, they did in this ordinance, as it were, take an oath to him, expressing their obligation not to desert his cause. Now, since this is agreeable to the end and design of a sacrament, whatever be the first original of the use of the word, I think we have no reason to scruple the using of it, though it be not found in scripture: Nevertheless, Christians ought not to contend, or be angry with one another about this matter, it being of no great importance, if we adhere stedfastly to the explication given thereof in scripture.[52]
2. We shall now consider the nature of a sacrament, as described in one of the answers we are explaining. And here,
(1.) It is observed, concerning it, that it is an holy ordinance, instituted by Christ. What we are to understand by an ordinance, and its being founded on a divine institution, which is our only warrant to engage therein, has been before considered; and, indeed, every duty that is to be performed by God’s express command, which he has designed to be a pledge of his presence, and a means of grace, is a branch of religious worship, and may be truly styled an holy ordinance. Now, that the sacraments are founded on Christ’s institution, is very evident from scripture. Thus he commanded his apostles, to baptize all nations, Matt. xxviii. 19. and, as to the sacrament of the Lord’s supper, he commanded them to do what is contained therein, in remembrance of him, Matt. xxvi. 26, 27. compared with 1 Cor. xi. 24, 25.
(2.) The persons, for whom the sacraments were instituted, are the church, who stand in an external covenant-relation to God, and, as the apostle says, are called to be saints, Rom. i. 7. It is to them, more especially, that Christ, when he ascended up on high, gave ministers, as a token of his regard to them, that hereby they may be edified, who are styled his body, Eph. iv. 16. And, though these ministers are authorized to preach the gospel to all nations, which is necessary for the gathering churches out of the world; yet they are never ordered to administer the sacraments to all nations, nor, indeed, to any, especially the sacrament of the Lord’s supper, till they profess subjection to Christ, and thereby join together in the fellowship of the gospel. As the sacraments under the Old Testament dispensation, were to be administered to none but the church of the Jews, the only people in the world that professed the true religion; so, under the gospel dispensation, none have a right to sacraments but those who are therein professedly devoted to him.
3. We are now to consider the matter of the sacraments, which is set forth in general terms; and it is also called in one of the answers we are explaining, the parts of a sacrament; these are an outward and visible sign, and an inward and spiritual grace, signified thereby; or, as it is otherwise expressed, it signifies, seals, and exhibits to those who are within the covenant of grace, the benefits of Christ’s mediation. These words are often used, but not so well explained as might be desired.
(1.) It is called a sign, in which, by a visible action, some spiritual benefits are signified: This is undoubtedly true; and it is a reproach cast on God’s holy institutions, in some who deny sacraments to be divine ordinances, when they style them all carnal ordinances, beggarly elements, or a re-establishing the ceremonial law, without distinguishing between significant signs, that were formerly ordinances to the Jewish church, but are now abolished; and those that Christ hath given to the gospel church. In this idea of the sacraments, we must consider, that they agree, in some things, with the preaching of the word; namely, that hereby Christ and his benefits, are set forth as objects of our faith; and the same ends are desired and attained by both, viz. our being affected with, and making a right improvement of the blessings purchased by him, together with our enjoying communion with him; and they are, both of them, sacred ordinances, instituted by Christ, and therefore to be attended on in an holy manner: But, on the other hand, they differ, with respect to the way or means by which Christ and his benefits are set forth; inasmuch, as in the preaching of the word, there is a narration of what he hath done and suffered; and, upon this account the apostle says, Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God, Rom. x. 17. whereas, in the sacraments, there is a representation thereof by signs; in which case we may apply the words of the prophet, Mine eye afflicteth mine heart, Lam. iii. 51. as there is the external symbol of Christ’s dying love, which is an inducement to us to love him again. They also differ, in that the sacraments are not only designed to instruct; but, by our act and deed, we signify our engagement to be the Lord’s.
(2.) The sacraments are also said to seal the blessings that they signify; and accordingly they are called, not only signs, but seals. It is a difficult matter to explain, and clearly to state the difference between these two words, or to shew what is contained in a seal, that is not in a sign: Some think that it is a distinction without a difference. The principal ground which most divines proceed upon, when they distinguish between them is, what we read in Rom. iv. 11. in which the apostle, speaking concerning Abraham, says, he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of faith[53]. But the same thing might have been affirmed concerning it, or any other significant ordinance, if the words sign and seal were supposed to be of the like import; for it is not said he received the ordinance of circumcision, which is not only a sign, but a seal; but he received that which was a sign, or a seal of the blessing about which his faith was conversant. However, that we may explain this matter, without laying aside those words that are commonly used and distinguished in treating on this subject, it may be observed, that a sign is generally understood as importing any thing that hath a tendency to signify or confirm something that is transacted, or designed to be published, and made visible: Accordingly some signs have a natural tendency to signify the things intended by them; as the regular beating of the pulse is a sign of health, smoke the sign of fire. And other things not only signify, but represent that which they give us an idea of, by some similitude that there is therein, as the picture doth its original. Other things only signify as they are ordained or designed for that use, by custom or appointment; thus, in civil matters, a staff is a sign of power to exercise an office; the seal of a bond, or conveyance, is the sign of a right that is therein conveyed, or made over to another to possess: It is in this respect that the sacraments are signs of the covenant of grace: They do not naturally represent Christ and his benefits; but they signify them, by divine appointment.
But, on the other hand, a seal, according to the most common acceptation of the word, imports a confirming sign[54]: Yet we must take heed that we do not, in compliance with custom, contain more in our ideas of this word, than is agreeable to the analogy of faith: Therefore, let it be considered, that the principal method God hath taken for the confirming our faith in the benefits of Christ’s redemption, is, his own truth and faithfulness, whereby the heirs of salvation have strong consolation, Heb. iv. 17, 18. or else the internal testimony of the Spirit of God in our hearts. The former is an objective means of confirmation, and the latter a subjective; and this the apostle calls our being established in Christ, and sealed, having the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts, 2 Cor. i. 21, 23.
This is not the sense in which we are to understand the word as applied to the sacraments; since if we call them confirming seals, we intend nothing else hereby, but that God has, to the promises that are given to us in his word, added these ordinances; not only to bring to mind this great doctrine, that Christ has redeemed his people by his blood; but to assure them, that they who believe in him, shall be made partakers of this blessing; so that these ordinances are a pledge thereof to them, in which respect God has set his seal, whereby, in an objective way, he gives believers to understand, that Christ, and his benefits, are theirs; and they are obliged, at the same time, by faith, as well as in an external and visible manner, to signify their compliance with his covenant, which we may call their setting to their seal that God is true; as we may allude to that expression of our Saviour, He that hath received his testimony, hath set to his seal that God is true, John iii. 33. The sacraments are God’s seals, as they are ordinances given by him for the confirmation of our faith, that he would be our covenant-God; and they are our seals, or we set our seal thereunto, when we visibly profess, which ought to be done also by faith, that we give up ourselves to him, to be his people, and desire to be made partakers of the benefits which Christ hath purchased, in his own way. Thus concerning the sacraments, as being signs and seals of the covenant of grace.
There is another expression, used in this answer, that needs a little explication; namely, when the sacraments are said, not only to signify and seal, but to exhibit the benefits of Christ’s mediation. To exhibit, sometimes signifies to shew, or present to our view; which word, if it be so understood in this place, imports the same as when it is said, that the sacraments are signs or seals thereof, or significant ordinances for the directing and exciting our faith, as conversant about what we are to understand thereby. Again, to exhibit, sometimes signifies to give, communicate, or convey; and because it is not only distinguished from signifying and sealing in the definition which we have of a sacrament in the Shorter Catechism; but is described as that by which Christ and his benefits are applied unto believers; therefore, I am inclined to think, that it is in this latter sense that the word is to be taken in the answer which we are explaining; and if so, we must distinguish between Christ’s benefits being conveyed, made over, exhibited, or applied, by the gift of divine grace, through the effectual working of the Spirit; and this being done by an ordinance, as an external means of grace; accordingly I am bound to conclude, that as the Spirit of God gives these blessings to believers, who engage in a right manner therein; so this grace is represented, and God’s people have ground to expect, as far as an ordinance can be the means thereof, that they shall be made partakers of these benefits.
We may also observe, that, though the sacraments are appointed to signify to all that partake of them, that Christ has purchased salvation for his people; or, that the work of redemption is brought to perfection: Yet it is they alone that engage herein by faith, who can look upon them as signs or seals to confirm their faith, that they have a right to the benefits of Christ’s redemption, as not only signified, but exhibited or applied to them: In this sense the sacraments are signs to them that believe, in such a way as they are to no others.
4. We are now to consider the persons to whom the sacraments are given; and these are described as those who are within the covenant of grace. To be within the covenant of grace, implies in it, either a being externally in covenant with God, or a being internally and spiritually so, as interested in the saving blessings thereof.
(1.) They who are externally in covenant, are such as are visibly so; who are called by his name, professedly devote themselves to him, and lay claim to him as their God: These, if they are no otherwise in covenant, are said to be in Christ, as the branch which beareth no fruit, is said to be in the vine, John xv. 2. like those whom the prophet speaks of, when he says, Hear ye this, O house of Jacob, which are called by the name of Israel, which swear by the name of the Lord, and make mention of the God of Israel, but not in truth nor in righteousness, Isa. xlviii. 1. they have, indeed, the ordinances which must be reckoned a very great privilege; they have the external overtures of divine grace, the convictions and strivings of the Spirit; and accordingly they are, in God’s way, in which he is sometimes pleased to work special grace, which, when he does, they may conclude themselves to have more than the external blessings of the covenant, which is what we are next to consider: Therefore,
(2.) Others are internally or spiritually in covenant, children of God by faith: These are such as are true and real members of Jesus Christ, by a federal or conjugal union with him: They have the same mind as was in him, and receive vital influences from him, being made partakers of the Spirit. They have, not only professedly, but by faith, embraced him in all his offices, surrendered up themselves unto him, to be entirely his; their understandings to be guided and directed, their wills and affections to be governed by him, and are desirous to be disposed of by him, in the whole conduct of their lives. And, as to the privileges which they partake of, they have not merely a supposed, but a real interest in all the benefits which Christ hath purchased, have a right to his special care and love, which will render them safe and happy, both here and hereafter.
Now, with respect to both these; they are, each of them, supposed to attend on the sacraments: The former, indeed, have not a right to the saving blessings signified thereby, and therefore, if they know themselves to be strangers to the covenant of promise, they profess, by engaging in this ordinance, to lay claim to that which they have no right to: However, if this be not discernible in their conversation, which is blameless in the eye of the world, men, who are not judges of their hearts, have no warrant to exclude them from the sacraments. But, on the other hand, they who are savingly, or internally in covenant, have not only a right to those ordinances in common with others; but Christ and his benefits, as was before observed, are exhibited and applied to them, as they have ground to conclude, by faith, that they have an interest in all the blessings which he has purchased.
5. We are now to consider, what those benefits are that Christ communicates to his people in the sacraments, which are signified thereby: These are either,
(1.) Such as are common to the whole church, which are relative and external, rather than internal, as hereby they are distinguished from those that are without. These are advantages, though not of a saving nature: Thus the apostle says, What advantage hath the Jew, or, what profit is there in circumcision, Rom. iii. 1, 2. To which he replies, much every way, or in many respects, q. d. it is an honour which God has put on the church, as taking them into a visible relation to himself, and giving them the means of grace, in which they are more favoured than the rest of the world: Or,
(2.) There are those benefits of Christ’s mediation, which are more especially applicable to believers; and, in this respect, God makes every ordinance, and the sacraments in particular, subservient to the increase of their faith, and all other graces. As faith is wrought under the word, it is farther established and increased by the Lord’s supper, as will be considered under a following answer; and as they have herein an occasion to exercise their mutual love to one another, so they have communion with Christ, which has a tendency to carry on the work of grace begun in the soul, and farther to enhance their love to Christ, who is eminently set forth and signified herein; and, from the view they have of their interest in him, arises a stronger motive and inducement to hate all sin, that tends to dishonour him, in the whole course of their lives. We are now to consider,
II. How the sacraments become effectual means of salvation; or from whence their efficacy is derived, to answer that great end.
1. Negatively. They do not become effectual means of salvation by any power in themselves to answer this end; for we are not to suppose, that they are more than ordinances, by which God works those graces which we receive under them; which it is his prerogative alone to confer. Again, it is farther observed, that this privilege is not derived from the piety or intention of them by whom the sacraments are administered; who, though they are styled stewards of the mysteries of God, 1 Cor. iv. 1. as persons to whom the administration thereof is committed; yet they have not the least power to confer that grace which is Christ’s gift and work: Thus the apostle says, Who then is Paul, or who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave unto every man, chap. iii. 5.[55]
This is contrary to what the Papists maintain, who suppose that the efficacy of the sacraments arises, partly from an internal virtue which there is in them, to confer grace, (which they illustrate by a far-fetched similitude, taken from the virtue which there is in food, to nourish the body, which is nothing to the purpose, since no external act of religion can have a tendency to nourish the soul, without the internal efficacious grace of the Spirit accompanying it;) and partly from the design or intention of the priest that administers them, as they are consecrated and designed, by him, for that end.
There is also an absurd notion which is maintained by some Protestants, as well as the Papists, viz. that the sacrament of baptism, administered to infants, washes away the guilt of original sin, and gives them a right and title to heaven, so that by virtue thereof they are saved, if they happen to die before they commit actual sin: But this account of the manner in which the sacraments become effectual to salvation, is absurd to the last degree; for it puts a sanctifying and saving virtue into that which is no more than an outward and ordinary means of grace. And as to what respects the efficacy of the sacraments, arising from the intention of him that administers them; that is, to lay the whole stress of our salvation on the secret design of men, in whose power it is supposed to be, to render or prevent these ordinances from being means of grace; which is in the highest degree derogatory to the glory of God.
2. Positively. The sacraments become effectual means of salvation only by the working of the Holy Ghost, and the blessing of Christ, by whom they were instituted. As, without Christ we can do nothing, John xv. 5. so without his blessing we can receive nothing. Ordinances are only the channel through which grace is conveyed; but Christ is the author and finisher of faith; and this he does by his Spirit, when he brings the heart into a good frame, and excites suitable acts of faith and love in those who are engaged in those ordinances, and maintains the lively impressions thereof, which have a tendency to promote the work of grace in the whole conduct of their lives.
III. We proceed to consider, what sacraments Christ has instituted under the New Testament-dispensation. It hath pleased God, in every age of the world, to instruct his people by sacramental signs, as an addition to those other ways, in which he communicates his mind and will to them. Even our first parents, in their state of innocency, had the tree of life; which was a sacrament or ordinance for their faith, that if they retained their integrity, and performed the conditions of the covenant which they were under, they might hereby be led into a farther conviction that they should certainly attain the blessings promised therein: And, some think, that the tree of knowledge, of good and evil, was another sacramental sign, whereby they were given to understand, that if they sinned, they should die. And paradise, in which they were placed, was a sacrament, or a kind of type of the heavenly state; inasmuch as there is an allusion to it in that promise, to him that overcometh, will I give to eat of the tree of life, that is in the midst of the paradise of God, Rev. ii. 7. and heaven is, in another place called paradise, Luke xxiii. 43. Others think the Sabbath was a sacramental sign to our first parents, of that eternal sabbatism which they should celebrate in a better world, in case they yielded perfect obedience as being the condition of the covenant they were under. However, I desire not to be too peremptory as to this matter; it is enough to my present purpose, to consider the tree of life as a sacrament; whereby it appears, that God instituted such signs from the beginning of the world: But this having been insisted on elsewhere[56], we pass it over, and proceed to consider,
That, after the fall of man, there were sacramental signs, instituted as ordinances for the faith of the church in the promised Messiah; especially sacrifices, which signified their expectation that he would make atonement for sin, by the shedding of his blood. Under the ceremonial law there was a large body of sacramental ordinances, or institutions, otherwise called, types of Christ, and the way of salvation by him; some of which were occasional; as manna, the water of the rock, and the brazen serpent in the wilderness, &c. others were standing ordinances in the church, as long as the ceremonial law continued; as circumcision, the passover, and many things contained in the temple-service. These were the sacraments under the Old Testament: But, having taken occasion to speak something concerning them elsewhere[57], I shall confine myself to those sacraments which Christ has instituted under the New Testament; which are only two, baptism, and the Lord’s supper.
The Papists, indeed, have added five more to them, though without a divine warrant; to give countenance to which, they pervert the sense of some scriptures, occasionally brought for that purpose. One of the sacraments which they have added, is, what they call holy orders; whereby they authorize persons to perform the office of priests, or deacons: This they do by the imposition of hands, and at the same time pretend to confer the Holy Ghost: The former, they suppose to be the sign, the latter the thing signified; but this was not designed to be a sacrament given to the church; for the sacraments are ordinances that belong to all believers, and not only ministers. And, as for the imposition of hands, whether it be considered as an ancient form of praying for a blessing on persons, or as used in setting others apart to an office; it seems principally to have respect to these extraordinary gifts, which they expected to qualify them for the discharge thereof; which gifts being now ceased, the imposition of hands cannot be reckoned a sacramental sign; and the blessing conferred, to wit, the Holy Ghost, from whom they received those extraordinary gifts, is no longer to be signified thereby.
Another sacrament which the Papists add, is that of confirmation; by which they pretend, that children, who, in baptism, were made members of Christ, are strengthened and confirmed in the faith; and receive the Holy Ghost, in order to their performing their baptismal vow: But, whatever engagement they are laid under, by this ordinance, it is God alone that can confirm or strengthen, and enable them to walk answerable thereunto; which is a grace not in the power of man to bestow, nor can it be by any ordinance.
Another sacrament they speak of, is pennance; in which, after auricular confession made to the priest, and some external marks of sorrow expressed by the penitent, he is to perform some difficult service enjoined, which they call pennance; whereby he makes satisfaction for his sins, upon which, he is absolved from them. But this is an abominable practice, by which persons are rather hardened in sin, than delivered from it. It is derogatory to Christ’s satisfaction, and has not the least appearance of a sacrament, or ordinance of God’s appointment.
Another sacrament that they have added, is extreme unction; taken from James v. 14, 15. where the apostle speaks of sick persons being anointed with oil in the name of the Lord; and it is said, the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and, if he has committed sins, they shall be forgiven him. But to this it may be replied, that though this practice of anointing the sick with oil, was observed in the first age of the church, while the miraculous gift of healing was continued; yet it is now ceased; therefore no such significant sign is to be used. And, as for forgiveness of sins, mentioned by the apostle that seems not to have been conferred by the use of that sign; but it was humbly expected and hoped for, as an answer of prayer: It is therefore a very preposterous thing to reckon this among the sacraments, under the gospel dispensation.
Another Sacrament that the Papists add, is that of matrimony; for which, they have very little shadow of reason; but, because, they suppose, the apostle calls it a great mystery, Eph. v. 32. which word, the Greek church used to signify a sacrament: But he does not intend hereby, that marriage is a mystery; but the union between Christ and his church, which is illustrated by the conjugal union, is so called[58]; and, indeed, it is not an ordinance given to the church, but to mankind in general, heathens as well as Christians. Therefore nothing can be more absurd than to suppose, that it is one of the sacraments Christ hath instituted in the gospel-church; and, according to their opinion, the priests are excluded from this sacrament, inasmuch as they are forbidden to marry, as the laity are excluded from the sacrament of holy orders; so that when they pretend to add to those institutions, which Christ hath given to the church, or invent sacraments, which he hath not ordained, they betray not only their own folly, but bold presumption; therefore we must conclude, that there are only two sacraments that Christ hath given to his church, to wit, baptism, and the Lord’s supper; which are particularly considered in some following answers.
Footnote 52:
Sacrament is the word used by the Vulgate for mystery, and this is a much more probable meaning of the term as used by the early christians.
Footnote 53:
Και σημειον ελαβε περιτομης, σφραγιδα της δικαιοσυνης της πίστεως.
Footnote 54:
When these two are distinguished by divines, the one is generally called, signum significans; the other signum confirmans; or, the former is said, significare; the latter, obsignare.
Footnote 55:
It were to be wished, the inspired books had been more generally honoured, as the only sufficient rule of judgment, by those who have wrote in favor of episcopacy, upon the plan of a DIVINE RIGHT; and the rather, as they speak of it, not merely as an institution of the gospel, but an essentially necessary one: insomuch, that gospel ordinances will be invalid, unless administered by those, who have been episcopally vested with holy orders.
In a matter of such momentous concern, they would not have acted an unworthy part, if they had confined their pleas to the sacred writings; producing such passages from them as speak to the point, not implicitly and darkly; but in peremptory and express terms, so as to leave no reasonable room for hesitation or doubt. It would be dishonourary to the BIBLE, and a gross reflection on the penman of it, to call that an “appointment of Christ,” and an “essentially necessary” one, which is not contained in this sacred volume, and with such clearness and precision, that sober and impartial inquirers may readily perceive it to be there, without foreign help to assist their sight. And yet, such help is made necessary by episcopal writers. They scarce ever fail of turning us to the FATHERS in vindication of their cause; hereby virtually reflecting disgrace on the scriptures, as though they were insufficient, simply of themselves, to bring this controversy to an issue.
In order to reconcile the appeal that is so often made to the FATHERS with that honour which is due to the scriptures, the episcopalian plea is, that they consider these fathers, not as judges, but witnesses only in their cause. But what are they brought to witness? Is it, that episcopacy is an institution of Jesus Christ? If this is witnessed to in the sacred books, of which we, having these in our hands, are as good judges as they, it is sufficient. There is no need of any foreign testimony. If it is not, no other testimony can supply this defect. Are these fathers cited as witnesses to what was the practice in their day? This is now generally the pretence. They may, say the episcopalians, be properly appealed to, in order to know the truth of FACT in the ages in which they lived. And if, from their unanimous testimony, even from the first days of Christianity, it appears, that GOVERNING and ordaining AUTHORITY was exercised by Bishops ONLY, in distinction from Presbyters, and as an order in the church above them, it would argue great arrogance, if not obstinate perverseness, to dispute the divine original of episcopacy. But we must be excused, however perverse we may be accounted, if we cannot bring ourselves to think, that the practice of the church, since the apostles’ days, however universal, will justify our receiving that as an institution of Christ, and an essentially important one, which he himself hath not clearly and evidently made so, either in his own person, or by those inspired writers, whom he commissioned and instructed to declare his will: nor can we believe the great Author of christianity would have put the professors of it to the difficult, I may say, as to most of them, the impossible task of collecting any thing essential to their salvation from the voluminous records of antiquity. We are rather persuaded, he has ordered every article that is necessary, either in point of faith or practice, to be so fairly and legibly wrote by the sacred penman, as that there should be no need of having recourse to the ancient Fathers as WITNESSES, any more than judges, to ascertain his mind. To suppose the contrary, would, in reality of construction, substitute TRADITION the rule of essential truth, in the room of the SCRIPTURES, which were “given by inspiration of God;” or, at least make the former so much a part of this rule, as that the latter, without it, would not be sufficiently complete. Such dishonour ought not to be cast on the one only standard of the real mind of Christ.
The Bishop, in whose defence an appeal is made to antiquity, is not related, by his office, to a single congregation of christians only, with one or more Presbyters belonging to it; but his charge is a diocess, consisting of a number of congregations, greater or less, with their respective Presbyters. The inquiry therefore is, whether it be an UNIVERSALLY ATTESTED FACT, that episcopacy, in this sense, took place in, and through, the two first ages? A Bishop, at the head of a number of congregations, greater or less, is an officer in the church of Christ quite different from the pastor of a single congregation; though he should be called Bishop, as being the HEAD-PRESBYTER, or vested with the character of PRIMUS INTER PARES. It should be particularly noted, which of these kinds of episcopacy has the voice of the specified antiquity in its favour. It is willingly left with every man of common understanding, after he has gone over the following testimonies, to say, whether he thinks, that Bishops, after the DIOCESAN-MODE, were known in the first ages of the church?
The Bishop, for whom the fathers are called in as WITNESSES, is an officer in the church of an ORDER SUPERIOR to that of Presbyters, and as distinct from it as the order of Presbyters is from that of Deacons; the pretence being this, that Presbyters were thought to have, in primitive times, no more right to meddle with the peculiar work of Bishops, than Deacons have to concern themselves with the peculiar work of Presbyters. The question therefore is, Whether it will appear from the following evidence, to be at all a FACT, much less an UNIVERSALLY known, and certainly attested one, that there were Bishops, in this sense, in any church, in any part of the christian world, within the two first centuries?
The Bishop, in whose favour the ancient Fathers are said universally to speak, is one to whom the EXCLUSIVE RIGHT OF GOVERNMENT has been committed by the appointment of Jesus Christ, or his apostles as commissioned by him. Says the famous Bishop Hoadly, treating of the government of the church, as belonging to Bishops only, in the above appropriated sense, “And here—I think I may say, that we have as universal and as unanimous a testimony of all writers, and historians from the apostles’ days, as could reasonably be expected or desired: every one, who speaks of the government of the church, in any place, witnessing, that episcopacy was the settled form; and every one, who hath occasion to speak of the original of it, tracing it up to the apostles’ days, and fixing it upon their decree.—Were there only testimonies to be produced, that this was the government of the church in all ages, it would be but reasonable to conclude it of apostolical institution;—but when we find the same persons witnessing, not only that it was episcopal, but that it was of apostolical institution, and delivered down from the beginning as such, this adds weight to the matter, and makes it more undoubted. So that here are two points to which they bear witness, that this was the government of the church in their days, and that it was of apostolical institution. And in these there is such a constancy and unanimity, that even St. Jerom himself traces up episcopacy to the very apostles, and makes it of their institution.”—He adds, “All churches and christians, as far as we know, seem to have been agreed, in this point, amidst all their other differences, as universally as can well be imagined.” One would suppose, from the peremptory manner in which this citation is expressed, that the FACT it affirms was so evidently clear, as to leave no room for the least doubt. Those, who may think it worth while to look over the testimonies brought to view, in the following pages, will perhaps, by critically observing their real and just import, be surprized, that any man of learning, who professes a regard to truth, should speak of it, and with such a degree of assurance, as the UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF ALL AGES from the apostles, that episcopacy, in the impleaded sense, was the “form of government in the church in their day,” and that it was by “apostolical institution;” especially, if they should not be able to find, as it is certain they will not, so much as a single witness, for two hundred years, whose evidence is clear, direct, express, and full, in affirming, either that this was the form of government in the church, or that it was ever instituted by Christ, or his apostles: so far is it from the truth, that this is a FACT UNANIMOUSLY and CONSTANTLY TESTIFIED TO, even from the beginning, and through all ages.
The Bishop, for the support of whose claims antiquity is repaired to, is one with whom the SOLE POWER of ORDINATION is lodged; insomuch, that he only can convey holy orders conformably to the appointment of Jesus Christ; and should Presbyters presume to do this, they would take that upon them which they have no more a right to, than Deacons have to baptise, or administer the Lord’s supper. This part of the UNANIMOUS report of ALL AGES concerning the EXCLUSIVE RIGHT of Bishops deserves most of all the special notice of the reader; and he is particularly desired, as he goes along, to point out to himself, for his own satisfaction; or to others, for their information, any one among all the testimonies he will have placed before his view, that plainly and directly affirms the RIGHT OF ORDINATION to be peculiar to Bishops as a distinct order from Presbyters, and superior to them; or that this right was ever thus exercised by them. If he should not be able to do this, as unquestionably he will not, how strange must that affirmation appear, which says in the most positive terms, not only that this is FACT, but a fact CONSTANTLY and UNANIMOUSLY witnessed to by the fathers, in ALL AGES from the days of the apostles.
The Bishop, in whose defence antiquity is pleaded, is vested with the power of CONFIRMATION, according to the mode of the church of England; and it is appropriated to him as his right in distinction from all others. But I need not assure the reader, he will in vain look to find it a FACT, within the two first ages, that Bishops were either vested with, or ever exercised this power. For he must come down below these ages, before a word is said, by any one of the fathers, relative to this superstitious practice. Tertullian is the first that mentions it; and he mentions likewise some other corruptions, which had got mingled with christianity in that day.
In short, the question in debate, so far as it relates to FACT, is, not whether there were officers in the christian church, known by the name of Bishops in the apostolic age, and down along through the two first centuries? We join with the episcopalians in affirming this to be a truth universally testified to in those times: but the proper question is, what is FACT with reference to the ORDER of these Bishops, and the POWERS PECULIAR TO THEIR OFFICE, and as EXERCISED by them in it? The name of Bishop is one thing, and the POWER claimed for, or exercised by him, is another. The dispute is, not about the name, but the power appropriated to it. This therefore should be heedfully attended to by all, in their examination of the evidences that will be produced; and they may, in this way, clearly and satisfactorily determine, each one for himself, whether it be at all an attested FACT, much less a CONSTANT and UNANIMOUSLY ATTESTED ONE, from the apostles days, and down along through the two first ages, as well as after ones, that Bishops were vested with, and did actually exercise, the above specified powers, which are at this day claimed for them, as the appropriate work of their office by divine appointment?
CHAUNCY’S VIEW OF EPISCOPACY.
Footnote 56:
See vol. II. page 86.
Footnote 57:
See vol. III. page 424-426. and vol. II. page 205.
Footnote 58:
See Vol. III. p. 12.
Quest. CLXV.
QUEST. CLXV. What is baptism?
ANSW. Baptism is a sacrament of the New Testament, wherein Christ hath ordained the washing with water, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, to be a sign and seal of ingrafting into himself, of remission of sins by his blood, and regeneration by his Spirit; of adoption and resurrection unto everlasting life; and whereby the parties baptized are solemnly admitted into the visible church, and enter into an open and professed engagement, to be wholly and only the Lord’s.
The method in which we shall endeavour to explain this answer shall be,
I. To prove that baptism is a sacrament of the New Testament, instituted by Christ, in which there is to be, some way or other, the application of water.
II. That this is to be performed in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. And,
III. What is signified therein, and what engagements are laid upon the person baptized.
I. To prove that baptism is a sacrament of the New Testament, instituted by Christ, in which there is to be, some way or other, the application of water. Here let it be considered,
1. That there must be the application of water; and that either by dipping the person that is to be baptized into the water, or by pouring or sprinkling water upon him; otherwise it doth not answer the proper and literal sense of the word baptize.[59] It is true, we sometimes find the word used in a metaphorical sense; as when our Saviour speaks of the baptism that he was to be baptized with, Matt. xx. 22. Luke xii. 50. whereby he intends the sufferings he was to endure in shedding his blood upon the cross: And it is elsewhere taken, by a metonymy, for the conferring the extraordinary gifts of the Holy Ghost, which they were given to expect after Christ’s ascension into heaven, and the apostles were first made partakers of at the day of Pentecost, which immediately followed it; wherein there appeared unto them cloven tongues, like as of fire, that sat upon each of them, as a sign that they should be filled with the Holy Ghost, and speak with other tongues, and be enflamed with a holy zeal for Christ’s glory and interest; which was accordingly fulfilled, and seems to be the sense of the word baptism, as taken in this figurative sense; but we understand the word in the most proper sense thereof; and therefore suppose that it must be performed with water.
As to what respects the mode of baptism, or the application of water, whether the water is to be applied to the person baptized, or he put into it, that, I purposely wave the consideration of, till we are led to speak concerning the subjects of baptism, that we may insist on the several matters in controversy, between those that maintain, and others that deny infant baptism, together, which we shall have occasion to do under the next answer: Whereas, I am ready to persuade myself, that what I shall advance under this, together with that which respects the improvement of baptism, will not be much contested by those who are in a different way of thinking, with respect to the subjects of baptism, and the mode of administering it.
2. We are now to consider, that baptism is a sacrament of the New Testament; and therefore it differs from those baptisms, or washings, that were frequently practised under the Old Testament dispensation; concerning which, the apostle says, that it stood in meats and drinks, and divers washings, Heb. ix. 10. or baptisms[60]. Thus we read of many instances in which persons were washed under the ceremonial law: This was an ordinance used in the consecration of persons to holy offices; as it is said, that Aaron and his sons were to be brought to the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, and washed with water, Exod. xxix. 4. and Lev. viii. 6. when they were consecrated to be priests. Again, when they ministered in holy things, or came near unto the altar, it is said, they washed, as the Lord commanded Moses, Exod. xl. 32. for this reason the laver was set between the tent of the congregation and the altar, and water put therein to wash in; and they washed their hands and their feet therein, ver. 30, 31. And this ceremony was used by them, when they were subject to divers uncleannesses; thus, in the method of cleansing the leper, he was to wash himself, and, after that might come into the camp, Lev. xvi. 8, 9. The same thing was to be done by those who were liable to uncleannesses of another nature, Deut. xxii. 10, 11.
These ceremonial washings, when applied to persons, seem to be ordained to signify their consecration, or dedication, to God, in some of the instances before mentioned; and in others, they signified the means which God had ordained to cleanse the soul from moral impurity; which was denoted by the ceremonial uncleannesses which they desired to be purified from. These ordinances, indeed, expired together with the rest of the ceremonial law: Nevertheless, it is very evident, from the institution of gospel-baptism, that the sign is retained; though there are some circumstances in the thing signified thereby, in which it differs from those baptisms which were formerly used by the Jewish church. They were hereby devoted to God, to observe that peculiar mode of worship which he prescribed by the hand of his servant Moses; we are devoted to God, as those who hereby signify our obligation to walk according to the rules prescribed by Christ in the gospel. They also used this ordinance, to signify the cleansing virtue of the blood of Jesus, who was to come, and the Spirit that was to be poured forth, as consequent thereupon; we use it to signify or express our faith in what Christ has accomplished, and in the grace which the Spirit works pursuant thereunto; therefore we call it an ordinance of the New Testament.
3. Baptism was instituted by Christ. This is evident from the commission he gave to his apostles, not only to preach the gospel to all nations, but to baptize them in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, Matt. xxviii. 19.[61] and this he appointed to be a standing ordinance in the church, throughout all the ages thereof; on which account he promises, in the following words, that he will be with his ministers, in fulfilling the commission that he gave them to execute, unto the end of the world: Therefore, we must conclude, that it is a standing ordinance in the church, and not designed to be observed only during the first age thereof, till Christianity universally obtained. This we assert in opposition to the Socinians, who suppose, that baptism was, indeed, instituted by Christ; but the design hereof, was only to be an external badge, or sign, of the heathens embracing the Christian religion, as they were formerly initiated into the Jewish church by that ceremonial washing that was then in use: But the contrary to this will appear from what we shall have occasion to speak to, under a following head, when we consider what baptism was a sign and seal of; which is equally applicable to the church in our day, as it was to those who lived in the first planting thereof.
II. It is farther observed, that baptism is to be performed in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. This contains in it a professed acknowledgment, in this solemn act of dedication of the divine Trinity; and accordingly it is an act of religious worship, in which God’s right to the persons baptized, is publicly owned, and an intimation given, that all saving blessings, which are desired or expected in this ordinance, are given by the Father, through a Mediator, purchased by the Son, and applied by the Holy Spirit. This includes in it much more than a being baptized by the authority of these divine persons; which is all that some of the Antitrinitarians will allow to be meant by, in their name: For though no ordinance can be rightly performed but by a divine warrant, yet this warrant is equally extended to the administering, or engaging in any other ordinance; and therefore, a being baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, signifies more than this; namely, a person’s being dedicated to them; in which dedication, a solemn profession is made, that they have a right to all religious worship, which we are obliged to perform as well as that all our hope of salvation is from them: Therefore, some think, that this idea, which is principally intended in the form of baptism, would be better expressed, if the words of institution[62] were rendered into the name of the Father, &c. as it is rendered elsewhere, Gal. iii. 27. where the apostle is speaking of a person’s being baptized into Christ[63], and explains it as denoting a putting on Christ; or a professing, as it is said, ver. 29. that we are Christ’s. Thus they who are baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, are denoted hereby, to be professedly their servants and subjects; under an indispensible obligation to put their trust in, and hope for, all saving blessings from them, according to the tenor of the gospel.
It is enquired, by some, whether it be absolutely necessary, in the administration of this ordinance, explicitly to make mention of the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost? and some assert, that it is not; because we read of persons being baptized in the name of Jesus, in Acts xix. 5. without any mention of the name of the Father, or Holy Ghost; and in chap. viii. 16. the same thing is mentioned, as it is said, They were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. But to this it may be replied, that it does not appear, that this was the express form of words used in baptizing those that are here mentioned; but it only argues, that the ordinance was administered, and that Christ’s name and glory was proclaimed therein: So that, though the other divine persons are not particularly mentioned, it does not follow from thence, that they did not adhere to the express words of institution, which were given to the apostles; it might as well be argued, that John did not baptize in the name of any of the Divine persons; since when we read of his baptism, it is said, I baptize you with water; but it does not thence follow, that he did not baptize them in the name of God; inasmuch as he plainly confesses that God sent him to baptize with water, John i. 33.
But, that this matter may be set in a just light, we must distinguish between a person’s omitting to mention the Son or Holy Ghost, in the form of baptism, as denying them to be divine persons, (in which case the ordinance is invalid;) and his doing this for no other reason, but because he thinks that we are not to be tied up to a particular form of words, but may sometimes baptize in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; and, at other times, in the name of Jesus: In this case, I will not say that the ordinance is invalid; but yet, his manner of administering it, will be highly offensive to many serious Christians, and can hardly be reckoned an instance of faithfulness to Christ; who has, by an express command, intimated what words are to be used therein.
III. We are now to consider, what is signified in baptism, and what engagements are laid on the person baptized. There are some, especially among the Socinians, who maintain, that it is only an external, or visible badge of Christianity in general, signifying a person’s right to be called a Christian, or a professor of that religion, which was instituted by our Saviour; and their design herein seems to be, that they might evade the force of the argument which we bring to prove the divinity of the Son and Spirit, from their being the object of that religious worship, which according to our explication thereof, is contained in it. Did they intend, by being a Christian, the same thing as we do, namely, a subjection to Christ, as a divine person, or a professed obligation which we are laid under, to worship God the Father, through the Son, by the Spirit, we should have no contention with them about this matter: But since we are not agreed as to the meaning of being a Christian, especially, since they intend no more hereby than our being obliged to adhere to a certain scheme of religious worship prescribed by Christ, of what kind soever it be, in like manner as a person is called a Mahometan, because he embraces Mahomet’s Alcoran as a rule of faith, we cannot think this general account of baptism, as an external badge of Christianity, to be a sufficient explication of what is intended by it as a sign, or significant ordinance.
There are several things mentioned in this answer, of which, it is said, to be a sign and seal, viz. of our engrafting into Christ, and obtaining remission of sins by his blood, of our regeneration by his Spirit, our adoption, and resurrection unto eternal life, which include in them all the benefits of Christ’s mediation; which have been particularly explained under some foregoing answers: But there is one that contains in it all the rest; and accordingly it is generally expressed, by divines, as that which is a sign and seal of the covenant of grace, and all the duties, obligations, and privileges that are either enjoined or bestowed therein. What this covenant is, together with the blessings thereof, and how the grace of God is manifested therein, has been likewise considered under some foregoing answers[65]. Therefore all that I shall now add concerning it, is, that it contains all the promises in which our salvation is included, of which there is one that comprehends all the rest, whereby it is often expressed, namely, that God will be a God unto his people, Gen. xiv. 1. their shield, and exceeding great reward, chap. xvii. And elsewhere that he will put his laws into their minds, and write them in their hearts, and will be to them a God; and they shall be to him a people, Heb. viii. 10. There are very great privileges contained in this relation, namely, our being under the special care and protection of Christ, having a right to what he has purchased, and that inheritance which he has laid up in heaven for his children, their enjoying communion with him here, and being made happy with him hereafter.
Now the main thing to be considered, is, how baptism is a sign and seal thereof? To this it may be answered, that we are not to suppose that this, or any other ordinance, confers the grace of the covenant, as the Papists pretend[66]; for it is, at most, but a significant sign or seal thereof; whereas, the grace of the covenant is the thing signified thereby. There are, as has been before observed two ways, by which persons may be said to be in covenant with God, namely, professedly, or visibly, which is the immediate intent and design of this ordinance; and there is a being in covenant, as laying hold on the grace of the covenant, when we give up ourselves to Christ, by faith; and, as the consequence thereof, lay claim to the blessings of his redemption. Now baptism is a sign and seal of the covenant of grace in both these senses, though in different respects. The ordinance itself is a professed dedication to God, or an acknowledgment that the person baptized is obliged to be the Lord’s; and signifies his right to the external blessings of the covenant of grace, which are contained in the gospel-dispensation. There is also more than this contained in a person’s being given to God in baptism, whether it be by himself as in those who are baptized when adult; or by his parents, as in the case of infants, in that the person who dedicates, expresses his faith in Christ, the Mediator of the covenant, and hopes for the saving blessings which he has purchased for his people. It is one thing, for this ordinance to confer these blessings, and another, for it to be an instituted means, in which we express our faith and hope, that these blessings shall be bestowed, the person being devoted to God with that view.
There are other two things that are more especially signified in baptism, namely, privileges expected, and obligations acknowledged.
1. The privileges expected are such as accompany salvation, which are the special gift of the Holy Ghost, viz. the taking away the guilt and pollution of sin, and our being made partakers of all the blessings that Christ hath purchased, and God the Father, in him, has promised to the heirs of salvation. I do not say, that all who are baptized are made partakers of these privileges; but they are given up to God, or give up themselves to him in this ordinance, in hope of obtaining them.
2. Here is a public profession, or acknowledgment of our obligation to be the Lord’s. This is, from the nature of the thing, implied in its being a dedication to God. When we make a surrender of ourselves to him, we do hereby declare, that we are willing to be his servants and subjects, and entirely at his disposal: This is contained in a fiducial act of self-dedication to God, and cannot be done by one in the behalf of another: And, it is to be feared, that many, who give up themselves to God in this ordinance, when adult, though they make a profession of their faith, yet do not give up themselves by faith; but that is only known to the heart-searching God: Nevertheless, as we express our faith and hope, in this ordinance, concerning the privileges but now mentioned; so we, in this act of dedication, confess, that God has a right to us, and that it is our indispensible duty to be his, so that hereby we are, either by our own consent, as in self-dedication, professedly the Lord’s; or this is acknowledged by those who have a right to dedicate, and thereby to signify this obligation; which, because it is highly just and reasonable, the persons devoted are obliged to stand to, or else are brought under a great degree of guilt, in not being stedfast in God’s covenant.
There is one thing more mentioned in this answer, namely, that the person baptized, is solemnly admitted into the visible church, which I rather choose to pass over; since it is hard to understand what some mean by the visible church, and a person’s becoming a member thereof by baptism. We have elsewhere considered the difficulties that are contained in the description of the visible church; together with the qualifications for, and admission of persons into church-communion.[67] If, by being admitted into the visible church, we are to understand that a person has a right to all the ordinances of the church by baptism, without being admitted afterwards into it by mutual consent; this is contrary to the faith and practice of most of the reformed churches. And if, on the other hand, they mean hereby, that here is a public declaration of our hope, that the person baptized shall be made partaker of those privileges which Christ has purchased for, and given to his church: This is no more than what has been already explained in our considering the baptismal expectations and obligations; but, whether this can be properly called an admission into the church, I rather leave to be determined by those who better understand what they mean, when they say that this is done in baptism, than I do.[68]
Footnote 59:
Βαπτιζω, has been said to signify immergo and exclusively when applied to sacred baptism. And this is necessary to establish immersion as the only mode. The question is not, therefore, whether Βαπτιζω, sometimes signifies to immerse, but whether it never signifies any thing else. This can be proved, it is presumed, by no Lexicographer, and no version of the New Testament. In the New Testament it is taken in different senses, for example we read of a Baptism with the Holy Ghost and with fire. It is therefore a generic term and not specific, as immerse cannot be substituted for it in all places. If a specific Greek term signifying to plunge had occasionally been used for it, in the New Testament, yet baptism being in our Saviour’s commission to his disciples, should not have been confined to one mode, but this is never the case. The numerous admissions of our divines, that Βαπτιζω, primarily signifies to immerse, and which are disingenuously collected to impose on the ignorant; do not weaken our cause, as they did neither influence the practice nor sentiments of those who used them.
If Βαπτιζω, signifies to immerse totally, or partially; to dip, to cleanse, or purify, &c. it leaves the mode to our convenience or choice; and reason also accords, that the mode is unimportant with respect to moral defilement.—Porphery has “Βαπτιζεται μεχρι κεφαλης.” The oracle said “Βαπτιζη him as a bottle” (of leather, which could swim) “but it is not lawful to plunge him wholly under water.” Strabo says, “Βαπτιζομενων up to the waist.” Aristotle says “Βαπτεικαι ανθιζει τηνχειρα,” it stains and renders florid the hand. Aristophanes says, “Βαπτομενος Βραχειοις,” stained with tawny colours. Homer says, “¨Εβαπτετο δ᾽᾽ αιματι λιμνω,” And the fountain was tinged with blood. Rev. xix. 13. “Ιματων Βεβαμενον αιματι.” Isaiah xxi. 4. “Fearfulness Βαπτιζει me.”
Footnote 60:
Διαφοροις βαπτισμοις.
Footnote 61:
The promulgation of this command marks a new and important era in the history of the church and of the world. These words may be considered as the public and formal abrogation of the Mosaic economy; and the authoritative annunciation of the new order of things under the gospel.
The first communications of divine truth, through Adam and Noah, were made indiscriminately to the human family; but, in both instances, the precious deposit was generally adulterated, and nearly lost. The wisdom of God, therefore, saw it to be necessary to select and separate from the idolatrous world, a particular family which might serve as a repository of the divine oracles and institutions; until that ‘Seed of the woman’ should come, of whom it was predicted, that he should ‘bruise the serpent’s head:’ and that ‘seed of Abraham’ in whom all the families of the earth should be blessed.
But when JESUS CHRIST, our great high-priest of good things to come, had, through the eternal Spirit, offered himself without spot to God, to bear the sins of many; and had by this one offering of his own body, perfected them that are sanctified, the service of the first tabernacle was set aside, and as to any utility, or divine authority, ceased forever; as an emblem of which, the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom, at the very moment of expiation; when Christ our high-priest, by sheding his vital blood and pouring out his soul unto death, offered his one great sacrifice for sins.
So great, however, was the power of early and national prejudice, that the apostles did not, for some time, understand the extent of their commission. They had, before, been sent on a short mission, on which occasion it was ordered, that they should not go into the way of the Gentiles, nor even enter into any city of the Samaritans; and they seem to have thought, that by going into all the world, and preaching to every creature, no more was intended, than that they should go to the seed of Abraham now widely dispersed among the nations. But this veil was soon removed, by a particular revelation made to Peter in a vision; and by the calling of Paul to the apostleship, who, from the beginning, received commission to go to the Gentiles, and was, in a peculiar manner, designated and directed, to preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ.
DR. ALEXANDER’S MISSIONARY SERMON.
Footnote 62:
Εις τὸ ὁνομα.
Footnote 63:
Εις Χριστόν.
Footnote 65:
See vol. II. Quest. XXXI, XXXII. Page 167, & 185.
Footnote 66:
There is a common aphorism among them, that the sacraments, and baptism in particular, confer grace, ex opere operato.
Footnote 67:
See vol. II. page 166-216.
Footnote 68:
The Gospel is glad tidings of great joy, not a system of new and terrifying restrictions and exclusions; so far from retracting formerly conceded privileges, and confining the church within narrower limits, it publishes peace and salvation, and invites the whole human family to participate in these blessings. It must either be referred to the impressions it has made, or to uninterrupted usage that females have, by a general consent, been deemed to possess an unquestionable right to approach the holy communion, though neither precept for it is found, nor an example of it recorded in the Scriptures. This baptism of infants was still less necessary to be enjoined by, and less likely to have been noticed in the short history given us of apostolical transactions.
He who gave parental affection, and is the Lord of his church under every dispensation, conferred on children at an early age of the world the privilege of sharing with their parents in the seals of grace, and bearing the tokens of his covenant. Jewish christians having themselves experienced such benignity, and been given to the same God, whom they now served under brighter displays of his eternal and unchangeable love, could not have expected, that, an entrance into the milder gospel-church would have been denied to the seed whom God had given them, and whom they had devoted to him not only in prayer, but in that ordinance which he had appointed for the purpose. An ordinance which being now obsolete was supplied by another, apparently as proper for their children as themselves. Because infants are incapable of repenting and believing, these duties were not required nor expected of them, either under the old, or new dispensation; but though incapable of actual sin, and therefore free from obligations of obedience unto the law, yet their nature is not pure, and consequently needs the sanctifying influence of divine grace, which can correct the latent enmity, and renew the soul. They are capable, therefore, of spiritual blessings, and may consequently be members of the invisible church, and received into the church triumphant. The obvious reasonableness of the privilege of being received with their parents into the society of the worshippers of God, a privilege publicly known to have been conferred by the great Head of the church, equally prevented the supposition of an implied repeal, and the necessity of a renewal of the right.
If indeed there had been a different religion introduced; if christians were not engrafted into the old stock; if they worshipped some other than the God of Israel; if there was another moral law, another Christ than he whose day the fathers anticipated, and another faith; this privilege of receiving infants into the church might have been interrupted; and in that case unless expressly again enjoined, it ought not to have been regarded in practice. But if the christian religion is founded upon the prophets; if the peculiarities of the Jewish worship were but shadows of gospel things; if both were directed to the same glory of God and salvation of men; if they both enjoined the same holiness and presented the same object of faith; if those who were saved under the Old Testament shall be associated with those who are saved under the New; the privileges formerly granted to children will remain the same; and it is not wonderful that the first christian should obey the dictates of parental tenderness; and that desiring the salvation of their children as well as their own, should cause their households to be baptized as well as themselves. To have affirmed in the gospel history expressly, that children were a part of the household, could have answered no purpose in the first days of christianity, but would have been thought repetitions and unmeaning until modern times. In the fifth, in the third and even so early as in the second century, the baptism of infants was the established usage of the church, and it was then thought, and not disputed, to have been the practice of the apostles themselves.
Quest. CLXVI.
QUEST. CLXVI. Unto whom is baptism to be administered?
Answ. Baptism is not to be administered to any that are out of the visible church, and so strangers from the covenant of promise, till they profess their faith in Christ, and obedience to him; but infants descending from parents, either both, or but one of them, professing faith in Christ, and obedience to him, are in that respect within the covenant, and to be baptised.
In this answer, which principally respects the subjects of baptism, we have,
I. An account of those who are excluded from this privilege, viz. such as are out of the visible church, and so strangers from the covenant of promise. The visible church is here considered in the most large and less proper acceptation of the word, as denoting all who profess the true religion; and in this respect is opposed to the Jews and heathen, and those who, though they live in a Christian nation, are grossly ignorant of the gospel, and act as though they thought that it did not belong to them, not seeing themselves obliged to make any profession thereof: These may be ranked among infidels, as much as the heathen themselves; and, according to this sense of the word, are not members of the visible church; and, consequently, while they remain so, are not to be admitted to baptism. This is agreeable to the sentiments and practice of most of the reformed churches; and it cannot but be reckoned highly reasonable, by all who consider baptism as an ordinance in which a public profession is made of the person’s being devoted to God the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; and, if he be considered as adult (and of such we are now speaking) there is a signification, and thereby a profession made, that he gives up himself to God; and, if the ordinance be rightly applied, there must be an harmony between the inward design of the person dedicating, and the true intent and meaning of the external sign thereof; which, by divine appointment, is a visible declaration of his adhering by faith, to the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, and embracing that salvation which takes its rise from them. This therefore must be done by faith; or else the ordinance is engaged in after an hypocritical manner; which will tend to God’s dishonour, and the prejudice rather than the advantage of him, to whom it is administered.
II. We are now to consider the necessity of their making a profession of their faith in Christ, and obedience to him, who being adult, are admitted to baptism. It was supposed, under the last head, that if there be not an harmony between the internal frame of spirit, in the person baptized, and the intent of the external sign thereof, the ordinance is not rightly applied to him, inasmuch as he pretends to dedicate himself to God; but, in reality does not do this by faith: And now it may be farther considered, that it is necessary that he should make it appear, that he is a believer, by a profession of his faith; otherwise, he that administers the ordinance, together with the assembly, who are present at the same time, cannot conclude that they are performing a service that is acceptable to God; therefore, for their sakes, as well as his own, the person to be baptized, ought to make a profession of his subjection to Christ, as what is signified in this ordinance.
This is agreeable to the words of institution, in Matt. xxviii. 19. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them, &c. and in Mark xvi. 15. Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature; he that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved, &c. I am sensible that some, who have defended infant-baptism, or rather attempted to answer objection taken from this, and such like scriptures against it, have endeavoured to prove the Greek word[69] signifies, make persons disciples; and accordingly it is a metaphor taken from the practice of a person’s being put under the care of one who is qualified to instruct him, whose disciple he is said to be, in order to his being taught by him; and therefore they suppose, that we are made disciples by baptism, and afterwards to be taught to observe all things whatsoever Christ hath commanded; and this is taken notice of in the marginal reading of our Bibles; which supposes that the word may be rendered, make disciples of all nations: But, I cannot think this sense of the word so defensible, or agreeable to the design of our Saviour, as that of our translation, viz. Go teach all nations; which agrees with the words of the other evangelist, Go preach the gospel to every creature: And besides, while we have recourse to this sense to defend infant-baptism, we do not rightly consider that this cannot be well applied to adult-baptism, which the apostles were first to practise; for it cannot be said concerning the heathen, that they are first to be taken under Christ’s care by baptism, and then instructed in the doctrines of the gospel, by his ministers[70].[71]
Moreover, a profession of faith in those who are baptized when adult, is agreeable to the practice of the Christian church in the first planting thereof: Thus it is said, in Acts ii. 41. They that gladly received the word were baptized: And this might also be observed in the account we have of the jailor and the Eunuch’s being first converted, and then baptized, in Acts xvi. 31-33. chap. viii. 37, 38. But, if it be retorted upon us, as though we were giving up the cause of infant-baptism, it must be observed, that this does not, in the least, affect it; for when our Saviour gave forth his commission to the apostles, to teach or preach the gospel to all nations, and baptize them, it is to be supposed, that their ministry was to be exercised among the adult, and that these then were utter strangers to Christ and his gospel; therefore it would have been a preposterous thing to put them upon devoting themselves to him, before they were persuaded to believe in him: neither could they devote their children till they had first dedicated themselves to him, and this leads us to consider,
III. The right of infants to baptism, provided they, who are required to dedicate them to God therein, are believers; and particularly, that such may be baptized who descend from parents of whom only one is a believer. This will appear,
1. If we consider baptism as an ordinance of dedication: Accordingly, let it be observed,
(1.) That it is the indispensible duty of believers, to devote themselves and all they have, to God, which is founded in the law of nature, and is the result of God’s right to us and ours. Whatever we have received from him, is to be surrendered or given up to him; whereby we own him to be the proprietor of all things, and our dependence upon him for them, and that they are to be improved to his glory. This is, in a particular manner, to be applied to our infant-seed, whom it is our duty to devote to the Lord, as we receive them from him: However, there is this difference between the dedication of persons, from that of things, to God, that we are to devote them to him, in hope of their obtaining the blessings which they are capable of, at present, or shall stand in need of from him, hereafter. This, I think, is allowed, by all Christians. Nothing is more common, than for some who cannot see that it is their duty to baptize their children, to dedicate or devote them to God, by faith and prayer; which they do in a very solemn manner; and that with expectation of spiritual blessings, as an encouragement of their faith, so far as they apprehend them capable of receiving them.
(2.) We shall now consider, that baptism, in the general idea thereof, is an ordinance of dedication or consecration of persons to God. If this be not allowed of, I cannot see how it can be performed by faith, in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost; or how this can be a visible putting on of Christ, as the apostle styles it, Gal. iii. 27.
Object. This proposition would not be denied, if baptism were to be considered as an ordinance of self-dedication, but then it would effectually overthrow the doctrine of infant-baptism; for since infants cannot devote themselves to God in this ordinance, therefore it is not to be applied to them.
Answ. To this it may be replied, that as there is no other medium, which, I apprehend, can be made use of to prove that the solemn acts of consecration or dedication to God in baptism, is to be made only by ourselves, but what is taken from a supposition of the matter in controversy, by those who assert that infants are not to be baptized: So if this method of reasoning be allowed of, we might as well say, on the other hand; infants are to be baptized; therefore baptism is not an ordinance of self-dedication, since they cannot devote themselves to God; and that would militate against what, I think, is allowed of by all, that baptism, when applied to the adult, is an ordinance of self-dedication. That which I would therefore more directly assert, in answer to this objection is, that baptism is an ordinance of dedication, either of ourselves, or others; provided the person who dedicates, has a right to that which he devotes to God, and can do it by faith. When I do, as it were, pass over my right to another, there is nothing required in order hereunto, but that I can lawfully do it, considering it as my property; and this is no less to be doubted concerning the infant-seed of believers than I can question, whether an adult person has a right to himself, when he gives up himself to God in this ordinance.[72]
(3.) It follows, from the last head, that parents, who have a right to their infant-seed, may devote them to God in baptism, provided they can do it by faith; and therefore a profession of faith, is only necessary in those who are active, in this ordinance, not in them that are merely passive. This we are obliged to maintain against those who often intimate that children are not to be baptized, because they are not capable of believing: Or when it is replied hereunto, that they are capable of having the seeds of faith, though not the acts thereof; this is generally reckoned insufficient to support our argument, by those who are on the other side of the question; inasmuch as it cannot well be determined, what infants have the seeds of faith, and what not; and, I think those arguments which are generally brought to prove that the infants of believing parents, as such, have the seeds of faith, on the account whereof they are to be baptized can hardly be defended; because many good men have wicked children.
Therefore what we insist on in this argument, is, that believing parents may give up their children to God in baptism, in hope of their obtaining the blessings of the covenant,[73] whether they are able to conclude that they have the seeds of grace or no; they may devote them to God in hope of regeneration; though they cannot know them to be regenerate, as all ordinances are to be performed with this view, that they may be rendered effectual means of grace. And from hence it may be inferred, as is observed in this answer, that infants descending from parents, either both, or but one of them, professing faith in Christ, are to be baptized; since one parent has as much a right to the child as the other: Therefore, the unbelief of one does not exclude the other from giving it up to God by faith, in hope of its obtaining the saving blessings of the covenant of grace. 1 Cor. vii. 14.
2. The right of the infant-seed of believers to baptism, may be farther proved, from their being capable of the privileges signified therein; and under an indispensable obligation to perform the duties which they, who dedicate them to God, make a public profession of, as agreeable to the design of this ordinance. None are to be excluded from any of those ordinances, which Christ has given to the church, but they who are either in a natural or a moral sense, to be deemed incapable subjects thereof. Some, indeed, are incapable of engaging in ordinances, by reason of a natural unmeetness for them, as infants are not to be admitted to the Lord’s supper, as being under a natural incapacity; and, ignorant and profane persons are not to be admitted to it, as being under a moral incapacity; and, for the same reason, a wicked man, when adult, is not a proper subject of baptism: But if there be neither of these bars to exclude persons, they are not to be denied the advantage of any ordinance. This, I think will be allowed by all; and therefore, the only thing I need prove is, that infants are not incapable of the principal things signified in baptism. That they are not incapable of being dedicated to God, has been proved under the last head; and now we shall consider several privileges that are signified therein, which they are equally capable of; as,
(1.) Baptism is an external sign of that faith and hope which he has, that dedicates a person to God, that the person dedicated, shall obtain the saving blessings of the covenant of grace; Now, that infants are capable of these blessings, none will deny, who suppose them capable of salvation. If we suppose infants not to have regenerating grace, which is neither to be affirmed or denied, it being a matter, at present, unknown to us; yet they are capable of having it, for the reason but now assigned; and though they cannot at present, put forth any acts of grace, they will be capable thereof, as soon as they are able to discern between good and evil.
They are not excluded by their infant-state, from being under Christ’s special care; which is, doubtless, to be extended to elect infants as well as others; and they are capable of being discharged from the guilt of original sin, though not of laying claim to this privilege, which they may be enabled to do afterwards. Now, if infants are capable of these privileges, certainly the person who dedicates them to God, (who has a right to do it, inasmuch as they are his property, and he is able to do it by faith) may devote them to him, with the exercise of this grace, and a fiducial expectation that they shall obtain these privileges: And, indeed, when we engage in this ordinance, we ought to expect some saving blessings, as the consequence hereof, as much as when we engage in any other ordinance of divine appointment.
Object. It is objected to this, that though a person may devote his child to God in hope of his obtaining saving blessings; yet he cannot exercise any act of faith, that he shall obtain them: Therefore though he may perform this duty with a degree of hope, or, at least, with a desire hereof; yet he cannot do it by faith: Therefore, if children are to be devoted to God by faith, they are not the subjects of this ordinance.
Answ. To this it may be replied, that some things may be said to be done by faith, when we have not a certain ground to expect the saving fruits and effects thereof. Suppose an infant was expiring and the tender parent concerned about its salvation, whether he has a certain expectation that it shall be saved or no; yet he may, and ought to be earnest with God by faith and prayer, that the child may be happy when taken out of the world; and, if he finds that he has the lively exercise of faith, with respect to this matter, this will afford him some degree of hope, that God, who excited this grace in him, will own it by giving the blessings which he desires; which is the only comfort that a parent can take in the loss of his infant-seed: And, may there not be this act of faith, when he dedicates him to God in baptism? Did we assert that giving up our children to God by faith, necessarily infers their obtaining saving blessings, the objection would have some force in it; or if there could be no faith exercised, without our being certainly persuaded that this should have a saving effect; then it might be argued, that because we are not certain that infants shall be saved, therefore we cannot give them up to God by faith: But if there may be faith, where there is not this certain persuasion, or any ground by which this matter may be determined, then, I think, it will follow, that infants may be devoted to God by faith, as well as with a desire of their obtaining saving blessings, and, consequently, this objection does not take away the force of our argument. We are far from supposing that baptismal dedication necessarily infers these saving blessings, or is inseparably connected with them, so that the one cannot be without the other. Therefore, it is sufficient to our purpose, to suppose that they are capable of those blessings which faith desires, and, it may be, hopes for; and, consequently, of those things which are principally signified in baptism.
(2.) Infants are under an indispensable obligation to perform the duties which are incumbent on those who are given up to God in baptism, and signified thereby. This respects some things future, (they being, at present, incapable of performing any duty) and, indeed, obligations to perform duties may respect the time to come, as well as the time present; as when a person is bound to pay a just debt, this obligation is valid though it is not expected that it should be immediately paid. Thus infants are professedly bound, when given up to God, to be the Lord’s: Whether ever they will give up themselves to him by faith, or no, is unknown to us, nevertheless, the obligation will take place as soon as they are capable of doing good or evil. Therefore it follows, that the parent may bind his child to be the Lord’s, inasmuch as the obligation is just, as being founded in God’s right to obedience, and when he has laid his child under it in this ordinance, he ought afterwards strictly to charge him to stand to it, as he would not contract double guilt; not only in neglecting to perform an indispensable duty, but to pay that debt of obedience which has been so solemnly acknowledged in this ordinance. These arguments taken from the nature and design of the ordinance of baptism, give me the fullest conviction concerning our warrant to apply it to infants: But there is one more which is not wholly to be passed over, viz.
(3). It appears, that the infant-seed of believers, are to be consecrated or devoted to God in baptism, because they are included in the covenant wherein God has promised that he will be a God to his people, and to their seed; who are, upon this account, styled holy Ezra. ix. 2. And it is said concerning Israel, that they are the seed of the blessed of the Lord, and their off-spring with them, Isa. lxv. 23. the branch is said to be holy, together with the root, Rom. xi. 16. and the children of the promise are counted for the seed, chap. ix. 8. that is included in that covenant in which God promised that he would be a God to children, together with their parents, as he says to Abraham; I will establish my covenant between me and thee, and to thy seed after thee, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee, Gen. xvii. 7. And, in this sense, I think, we are to understand the apostle’s words, in 1 Cor. vii. 14.[74] The unbelieving husband is sanctified by the believing wife, and the unbelieving wife by the believing husband; else were your children unclean, but now are they holy. By these, and other expressions of the like-nature, we are not to understand the special saving grace of regeneration and sanctification; for that is not a privilege that descends from parents to children by birth, as our Saviour says, We are born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God, John i. 13. Therefore, when some, who are on the other side of the question, think that we intend hereby the saving blessings of the covenant, or that holiness which is an internal qualification or meetness for heaven, they do not rightly understand our meaning. Some, indeed, may have given occasion to conclude that they intend this, who speak of the grace of regeneration as conferred in baptism; and assert, that it intitles persons to salvation, if they happen to die before they are adult: Whereas, if afterward they appear to be in an unconverted state, by the wickedness of their conversation, they are said to fall from that grace. This is what I do not well understand; nor do I intend, when I speak of the infants of believers as an holy seed, that they are all internally regenerate or sanctified from the womb; but they are included in the external dispensation of the covenant of grace; which must be reckoned a greater advantage than if they had descended from Indians, who are strangers to it.
I am sensible, indeed, that they who deny infant-baptism, suppose that the holiness of the children spoken of by the apostle in the scripture but now referred to, who descended from parents, of whom one only was a believer, implies nothing else but their being legitimate: But that does not seem to be his meaning; inasmuch as marriage is an ordinance of the law of nature, which all, without distinction, have a right to, heathens as much as Christians; and the children of the one, are as legitimate as those of the other. Therefore, there is something else intended by their being holy, namely, the same thing that is meant in those other scriptures that we but now referred to, as taken for an external relative holiness, whereby God must be supposed to have a greater regard to them than to others who are styled unclean; and, if this does not infer, as was before observed, their being internally regenerate or sanctified: yet it is not a word without an idea affixed to it: Therefore we must understand thereby, an holiness in the lowest sense of the word; as children, are said to be an heritage of the Lord, and the fruit of the womb his reward, Psal. cxxxvii. 7. or, it denotes the obligation they are laid under, by the privilege of their descending from believing parents, to adhere to their fathers’ God; which obligation is professed or acknowledged, when they are dedicated to him in baptism, as has been before observed; and this is the use which I would make of this account which we have of them in scripture, to prove their right to be devoted to God in this ordinance.
And, I think, we do not assert this without some warrant from scripture; for when God told Abraham, in the promise but now mentioned, that he would be a God unto him, and to his seed, which is the foundation of their federal holiness; this is assigned as a reason why they should be devoted to God in circumcision, Gen. xvii. 10. for we cannot but conclude circumcision, as we do baptism, to have been an ordinance of dedication or separation to God: And, in Acts ii. 39. when the apostle had been pressing those Jews, amongst the mixed multitude, to whom he had preached, to repent and be baptized; and encouraged them to hope for the gift of the Holy Ghost; he assigns this as a reason, namely, that the promise was to them and to their children, which refers to the promise of the covenant made with Abraham, and his seed; and it immediately follows, and to them that are afar off, that is, the Gentiles, who might claim this promise, when they believed, whom the apostle calls elsewhere, children of the promise, as Isaac was, Gal. iv. 28. These who are styled, before conversion, a people afar off, were after it reckoned the spiritual seed of Abraham, and so had a right to the blessings of the covenant, that God would be a God to them; and, by a parity of reason, in the same sense in which the seed of Abraham were children of the promise, the seed of all other believers are to be reckoned so, till by their own act and deed, they renounce this external covenant relation: Now, from hence it may be inferred, that if they stand in this relation, to God, this is publicly to be owned; and accordingly they are to be given up to him in baptism, as there is therein a professed declaration thereof.
As to what was but now inferred from the infant-seed of believers under the Old Testament having a right to circumcision, because they were included in the covenant which God made with their fathers, that therefore they have a right to baptism; this is not to be wholly passed over; though, I am sensible, they who deny infant-baptism, will not allow of the consequence. Some have argued, in opposition to it, that circumcision was ordained to be a sign and seal of that covenant of peculiarity, which God made with the Jewish church, or of those blessings which they were made partakers of, as a nation excelling others, in name, honour, and glory: But this, I think, comes far short of what the apostle says on that subject, viz. that it was a seal of the righteousness of faith, Rom. iv. 11. And, indeed, when we call that dispensation a covenant of peculiarity, we intend nothing else thereby, but some external privileges annexed to the saving blessings of the covenant of grace; and therefore, Abraham’s faith was conversant on both of them; the righteousness of faith, which respected his own salvation, and that of his spiritual seed; and those privileges of a lower nature, which they who were, in other respects, his seed, were made partakers of, by virtue of the covenant, in which God promised that he would be a God to him, and to his seed. Moreover, it is generally denied, by those who are on the other side of the question, that baptism comes in the room of circumcision. This therefore remains to be proved, in order to our establishing the consequence, that since children were to be devoted unto God by circumcision under the law, they are to be devoted unto him by baptism, under the gospel-dispensation.
Now, that this may appear, let it be considered, that God has substituted some ordinances, under the gospel-dispensation, in the room of others, which were formerly observed under the ceremonial law. Thus the Lord’s supper is instituted in the room of the passover; otherwise the apostle would never have alluded to one when he speaks of the other, and says, Christ, our passover, is sacrificed for us; therefore let us keep the feast, &c. 1 Cor. v. 7, 8. And we have as much ground to conclude, that baptism comes in the room of circumcision, as we have that any gospel-ordinance comes in the room of another, that belonged to the ceremonial law, from what the apostle says, in whom ye are circumcised by the circumcision made without hands, buried with him in baptism, Col. ii. 11, 12. where he speaks of the thing signified by circumcision and baptism, as being the same, namely, our communion with Christ in his death; so that the thing signified by baptism, is styled, as it were, a spiritual circumcision: Therefore, since these two ordinances, signify the same thing for substance, and are set one against the other in this scripture, we may, I think, infer from thence, that baptism comes in the room of circumcision.
And, it is farther argued, that baptism being the only initiating ordinance, at present, as circumcision was of old; so that the first visible profession that was made, especially by any significant ordinance, that they were the Lord’s, was made therein, which is what we understand by an initiating ordinance under the gospel, as circumcision was under the law, then it follows, that it comes in the room thereof; or else no other ordinance does: But if it be said, that no ordinance comes in the room of circumcision, then the privileges of the church under this present dispensation, would be, in a very disadvantageous circumstance, less than they were under the former; and if infants received any advantage by being devoted to God by circumcision of old, but are not to be devoted to him by baptism now, their condition is much worse than that of those who were the children of such as lived under the legal dispensation; whereas, on the other hand, God has not, under this present dispensation, abridged the church of its privileges, but rather increased them.
Obj. 1. It is objected, that infants have no right to baptism, because they cannot believe and repent, since these graces are often mentioned in scripture, as a necessary qualification of those who have a right to this ordinance, as might be sufficiently proved from those scriptures in which persons are said first to believe and repent, and then to be baptized; and, in order thereunto, the gospel was first to be preached, according to our Saviour’s direction, Mark xvi. 15, 16. And we read of persons gladly receiving it, and then being baptized, Acts. ii. 41. therefore Philip would not baptize the Eunuch till he professed his faith in Christ, chap. viii. 37, 38. Moreover, this is called an ordinance of repentance, as none have a right to it, but those who repent: Thus it is said, John preached the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins, Mark i. 4. and elsewhere, that he baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying to the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus, Acts. xix. 4.
Answ. We do not deny the necessity of faith and repentance to baptism, in them who are adult, as appears by those concessions which have been made under a foregoing head; in which we considered, that none are to be baptized if adult, till they profess faith in Christ and obedience to him; and this ought to be accompanied with repentance, otherwise it is not true and genuine; therefore we freely owned also, that the gospel was to be preached by the apostles, to those who were immediately concerned in their ministry, before they were either to be baptized themselves, or their infant-seed. Nevertheless this does not overthrow the doctrine of infant-baptism, since that, as has been before proved, depends upon different qualifications. Faith is, no doubt, necessary in the person that dedicates, or devotes to God: But, if what has been said concerning the obligation which every one that is able to dedicate his child to God by faith, is under, to do it, (as much as he that is able to dedicate himself to him by faith, when adult, is bound to do it,) be true; then we are to have regard only to the faith of him that dedicates, and to hope for the saving privileges of faith and repentance, and all other graces, as divine blessings to be bestowed on the person devoted to God, as the great end which we have in view in this solemn action.[75]
Obj. 2. There is another objection which is concluded, by some, to be unanswerable, viz. that there is neither precept, nor example in the New Testament, that gives the least countenance to our baptizing infants; therefore it cannot be reckoned a scripture doctrine, and consequently is not from heaven, but of men.[76]
Answ. To this it may be replied, that consequences justly deduced from scripture, are equally binding with the words or examples contained therein. If this be not allowed of, we shall hardly be able to prove many doctrines which we reckon not only to be true, but of great importance. It would be endless to enter into a detail of particulars, to illustrate and confirm this matter; and I cannot but think it unnecessary, since they who deny infant-baptism, do not deny the validity of just scripture-consequences.[77]
Therefore, all that I need say to this is, that if the method we have taken to prove infant-baptism, appears to be just; and if the premises be true, the conclusion deduced from them, must be allowed of; namely, that the infants of believing parents are to be baptized, though this be not contained in so many express words in scripture: And, I cannot but think that the objection would equally hold good against Christ’s dying for infants, as well as others, or of their being capable of justification, regeneration, and the saving blessings of the covenant of grace; and it might as well be inferred from hence, that they are not to be devoted to God in other instances, besides that of baptism; or that we have not the least ground to expect their salvation; for it would be as hard a matter to find this contained in express words of scripture, as that which is the matter in controversy, to wit, that they are to be baptized.
Here I cannot but take notice of the method which the learned Dr. Lightfoot takes to account for the silence of scripture, as to this matter[78], which is, for substance, as follows, viz. that baptism was well enough known to the Jews, as practised by them under the ceremonial law; by which he means the ordinance in general, as including in it a consecration to God, to worship him in that way which he then instituted; and accordingly they are said to have been baptized into Moses. He also adds, that the apostle speaking concerning this matter, as referring to what was done in the cloud, and the sea, 1 Cor. x. 2. supposes that the whole congregation, of which the infants which they had in their arms, were a part, were solemnly devoted to God at that time; which, I cannot but conclude to be more agreeable to the sense of the word baptize, than that which some critics give, who suppose that nothing is intended by it, but their being wet, or sprinkled with the water of the sea, as they passed through it; for that was only an occasional baptism, which could not be well avoided. But, if I may be allowed a little to alter or improve on his method of reasoning, I rather think, that the apostle’s meaning is, that the whole congregation was baptized into Moses, soon after they were delivered from the Egyptians, while they were encamped at the sea-shore; at which time, God, for their security, spread a cloud for a covering to them; and then, as the kind hand of Providence had led the way, and brought them under a renewed engagement, they hereupon expressed their gratitude and obligation to be God’s people, by this universal dedication to him in baptism. But to return to the author but now mentioned; he adds, that when Jacob was delivered from Laban, and set about the work of reforming his household, he ordered them, not only to put away the strange gods that were among them, but to be clean, Gen. xxxv. 2. by which, as he observes, the Jews confess, that baptism, or a dedication to God by washing, is intended. He also observes, that the ordinance of baptism in general, before Christ instituted gospel-baptism, was so well known by the Jewish church, that they no sooner heard that John baptized, but they came to his baptism; and they did not ask him, why dost thou make use of this rite of baptizing? but, what is thy warrant, or, who sent thee to baptize? He further adds, that both John and Christ took up baptism as they found it in the Jewish church; by which he means the ordinance in general, without regard to some circumstances, in which Christ’s baptism differed from that which was practised under the ceremonial law; and this was, as he observes, applied by the Jewish church to infants as well as grown persons; therefore, our Saviour had no occasion, (when he instituted this ordinance with those circumstances, agreeable to the gospel-state, in which it differs from the baptism which was before practised,) to command them to baptize all nations, that is, all who were the subjects of baptism, and infants in particular.
Obj. 3. It is further objected, that our Saviour was not baptized in his infancy; therefore his example is to be followed, and, consequently, no one is to be baptized till he be adult.
Answ. To this it may be replied, that every circumstance or action in the life of Christ, is not designed to be an example to us; and, indeed, there were some things signified in his baptism, that are not in ours, inasmuch as in its application to him, it did not signify his being cleansed from the guilt and power of sin. The only thing wherein that which was signified in his baptism, agrees with ours, is in that he devoted himself unto God, not as expecting salvation through a Mediator as we do, but as denoting his consent to engage in the work that he came into the world about; which he now began to perform in a public manner, which he fulfilled in the course of his ministry, while he went about doing good. Now it was not convenient that this should be done in his infancy; for though the work of redemption began from that time; yet his proving himself to be the Messiah, especially his doing this in a public manner, did not take place till he was thirty years of age, and then he was baptized, that this might be an ordinance for the faith of his church, that he was engaged in the work of our redemption. Moreover, it must be considered, that John’s baptism, which circumstantially differed from that which was practised in the Jewish church, as well as our Saviour’s, was not instituted till the year before Christ was baptized; therefore he could not be baptized agreeably to the alteration that was made in baptism at this time, had he been baptized in his infancy.
Obj. 4. It is further objected, that infant baptism is a novelty, and not practised by the church in the earliest ages thereof from the apostles’ time.
Answ. To this it may be replied, that if this could be proved to be true, I should regard arguments deduced from scripture-consequences, much more than the sense of antiquity to determine this matter. The principal use of the writings of the Fathers, in my opinion, is to lead us into the knowledge of what relates to the historical account of the affairs of the church in their respective ages. The main thing supposed in this objection is, that infant-baptism was not practised in the early ages of the church; the contrary to which will appear, if we consider some things mentioned by the Fathers concerning this matter: Thus Justin Martyr says, we have not received the carnal but circumcision by spiritual baptism; and all persons are, in like manner, enjoined to receive it, as they were to receive circumcision of old, wherein he refers to that of the apostle, in Coloss. ii. 11, 12. We are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, buried with him in baptism; and, consequently, he supposes that baptism comes in the room of circumcision, as has been observed elsewhere; and he likewise speaks of their being brought to the water, and there regenerated; by which he means, baptized, in the same manner as we are, in the name of the Father, our Lord and Saviour, and the Holy Ghost[79]. And Cyprian, in a council, wherein there were sixty-six bishops convened, delivered it not only as his opinion, but supposes it to have been received by them all, that infants ought to be baptized before the eighth day, in answer to a question under debate, whether the time in which this ordinance was to be performed ought to be the same with that in which children were circumcised under the law[80]. And, Irenæus[81], speaks of Christ’s sanctifying and saving persons of every age, infants not excepted; and therefore they are to be regenerated; by which he means, baptized; as the Fathers often put the thing signified for the sign: And Gregory Nazianzen speaks to the same purpose[82], that baptism may be performed as circumcision was, on the eighth day; but that it ought not to be omitted any longer, than till the children are two, or three years old. And to this I might add, the testimony of Augustin; who asserts, that it had been practised by the church, in foregoing ages, from our Saviour’s time; which, had it not been matter of fact, he would, doubtless, have been disproved by Pelagius, and his other antagonists[83].
It is further objected, by those who deny infant-baptism, that the practice of many in the ancient church, who deferred baptism till they were adult, argues, that they did not think it lawful for any to be baptized in infancy. Thus Constantine the great, as Eusebius observes, was not baptized till a little before his death: And, it is well known, that Gregory Nazianzen, and Chrysostom, Ambrose, Augustin, and others of the Fathers, were not baptized till they came to a state of manhood; and Tertullian, who lived in the second century, exhorts persons to defer baptism, and adds, that it is the safest way to delay the baptism of infants, till they are capable of engaging for themselves, being arrived to years of discretion[84].[85] But to this it may be answered, that particular instances, or the sentiments of some of the Fathers are not sufficient to prove that infant-baptism was not practised by the ancient church. As to what is alleged concerning Constantine’s not being baptized till a little before his death, and Gregory Nazianzen, Chrysostom, &c. not till they were adult: This may be accounted for, by supposing that their parents did not embrace the Christian religion while they were infants: and, if that were true, they ought not to be baptized till they could give up themselves to God by faith: This a late learned writer attempts to prove[86]. Moreover, some who have been converted, have neglected baptism, out of a scruple they have had of their unfitness for it, as many, in our day, do the Lord’s supper; and others, it may he, might have neglected to baptize their infants, or to be baptized themselves, till they apprehended themselves near to death, as being misled by a false supposition, which was imbibed by several, that baptism washed away sin; therefore, the nearer they were to their end, the more prepared they would be, by this ordinance, for a better world. However, whether it was neglected for this, or any other reason, it does not much affect the argument we are maintaining, our design being principally to prove, that it was practised in the early ages of the church; and, in what instances soever it was omitted, it was not because they denied that the infants of believing parents had a right to it. As to several things mentioned by the authors before cited, and others that treat on that subject, whereby they seem to maintain the absolute necessity thereof, to wash away the pollution of sin; or, when they assert, that it is as necessary to salvation as regenerating grace, we have nothing to say as to this method of reasoning: However, whatever they speak in defence of it, is a sufficient evidence that it is not a practice of late invention.
As to what respects Tertullian’s advice to defer baptism till persons were capable to engage for themselves; this caution argues, that it was practised by some, which is the principal thing designed to be proved. And the reason assigned by him for the neglect of baptism, being this, because the sureties, who undertook to instruct them in the doctrines of religion, often promised more than they made conscience of performing, and so brought themselves into a snare thereby; therefore, for their sakes, infant-baptism, which could not be administered without sureties, had better be delayed; this only proves that he was against infant-baptism for some prudential reasons, as it was attended with this inconvenience, not that he thought it was in itself unlawful to be practised by them. From hence we may conclude, that the objection taken from infant-baptism, being supposed to be a novelty, does not weaken the cause we are maintaining[87]. Thus concerning the subjects of baptism.
We are now to consider the mode thereof, or what we are to understand by the word baptism. It is said, in the foregoing answer, to be the washing with water, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. There has been a great dispute in the world, concerning the meaning of the word βαπτιζω, by which this ordinance is expressed; from whence arises the different mode of the administration thereof. Some think, that it only signifies the putting a person, or thing, into the water, whereby it is covered, or, as it were, buried in it; which is otherwise expressed by the word dipping. Others (whose opinion I cannot but acquiesce in) conclude that it may as well be performed by the application of water, though it be in a different manner, either by pouring or sprinkling; and accordingly, that it signifies the using the means of cleansing by the application of water, whatever be the form or mode thereof. This argument depends very much upon the sense in which the word is applied to the action intended thereby, either in scripture or other writers. And, inasmuch as the sense thereof, as used in scripture, and other writings, is well explained by the learned and judicious Dr. Owen, agreeably to the sense we have given of the word; I have no occasion to make any other critical remarks upon it, by referring to those writings in which the word is found[88].
But, since the greatest number of christians are not so well versed in the Greek language, as to be able to judge whether those methods of reasoning that are taken from the use of the word which we render baptize, are sufficiently conclusive: And, when it is asserted, that many who are undoubtedly very good masters of the Greek tongue, have determined that it signifies all manner of washing with water, as well as dipping into it, this will be reckoned, by them, a very fruitless and unprofitable subject; however, we are obliged to mention it, because great stress is usually laid on the sense of this word, to establish that mode of baptism which is always used by those who are on the other side of the question.
I shall take leave to add, to what that learned author, but now quoted, refers to, has observed on this subject; that it does not appear to me that the word Βαπτιζω always signifies to wash, by dipping into water, but by the application of water some other way; because it is sometimes applied to those things which were too large and cumbersome, and therefore could not well be cleansed that way. Thus it is said, in Mark vii. 4. that the Pharisees not only held the washing, or, as it is in the Greek, the baptism of cups and pots, and brazen vessels, which might, indeed, be washed by immersion, but of tables, or, as it may be rendered, of beds, or those seats on which the Jews, according to the custom of the eastern nations, lay at their ease, when they eat their meals. These, I conceive were washed some other way, different from that of dipping or plunging in water; And if it was possible that they might be washed that way, yet the word may be applied to innumerable things, that cannot be baptized by immersion: Therefore, the general sense that we have given of it, that it signifies to wash, whether by dipping into the water, or by the application of water to the thing washed, may justify our practice, with respect to the mode of baptism, commonly used by us.
Object. 1. It is objected hereunto, that the mode used by us, is not properly baptism, but rantism; or, that to sprinkle, or pour, is not to baptize.
Answ. To this it may be replied, that this method of begging the question in controversy, is never reckoned a fair way of arguing. If baptism be a using the means of cleansing, by the application of water, which is the thing we contend for, then the word baptize may as well be applied to it as to any other mode of washing. That which may be further replied to this objection is, that if the thing signified by the action of baptizing, namely, the blood of Jesus, together with those gifts and graces of the Spirit, which are applied to those to whom God makes this a saving ordinance, be sometimes set forth by sprinkling or pouring clean water upon a person, then it cannot be well concluded, that sprinkling, or pouring, is not baptizing, though it differ very much from that which they who contend with us about this matter generally call baptizing. That sprinkling or pouring, is sometimes used in scripture, to signify the conferring of those spiritual gifts and graces which are signified in baptism, is very evident; inasmuch as it is said in John i. 17. The blood of Jesus Christ his Son, cleanseth us from all sin; and this is called the blood of sprinkling, in Heb. xii. 24. 1 Pet. i. 2. Therefore, in a spiritual sense, sprinkling is called cleansing from sin; and the graces of the Spirit conferred in regeneration, are represented in Ezek. xxxvi. 25-27. by sprinkling clean water; which mode of speaking would never be used, were not sprinkling a means of cleansing. And, some think, that the apostle when he speaks of our drawing near to God, having our bodies washed with pure water, Heb. x. 22, intends the ordinance of baptism; yet it alludes to the ceremonial cleansings that were under the law, which were often done by sprinkling: Therefore we cannot but assert, that sprinkling water in baptism, is as much cleansing as any other mode used therein.
Moreover, sometimes the thing signified in baptism, is represented by a metaphor taken from pouring; which, if our mode of baptizing be just, will not seem disagreeable to it; and, it may be, the explication is taken from it, as the conferring the Holy Ghost, which they who were baptized were given to expect, is often called pouring out the Spirit, Acts ii. 17, 18. chap. viii. 38.
Obj. There is another objection which is concluded by many, to be unanswerable, viz. that when we read of baptism in the New Testament, the person baptized is said to go down into the water. Thus the Eunich did, chap. viii. 38. and immediately after this, he is said to come up out of the water; which can be applied, as is supposed, to no other mode of baptism but that of immersion.
Answ. To this it may be replied, that the whole strength of this objection depends upon the sense that is given of the Greek particles, which we often render into, and out of[90]. But this will have no weight with any but those who are unacquainted with the Greek language, since it is so well known to all that understand it, that the former of these particles often signifies to, as well as into; and the latter from, as well as out of; as innumerable instances might easily be given, was it needful, from scripture, and other Greek authors, in which the words are applied to those things, that according to the natural signification thereof, cannot be understood as denoting into, or out of. There is one scripture which no one can suppose is to be taken in any other sense but what is agreeable to our present purpose, viz. Mat. xvii. 27. wherein our Saviour bids Peter Go to the sea[91], and cast an hook, and take the fish that first cometh thence, &c. where, by go to the sea, we can understand nothing else, but go to the sea-shore; and yet the word is the same with that which is, in some other places, rendered into. There are other scriptures in which persons are said to go to the mountain, or some other places, wherein it would be very improper to say, that they went into the place; though the word be the same with that which in other instances we render into. And the word[92] which is sometimes rendered out of, is frequently rendered from, and can be understood in no other sense: As when it is said, in Luke xi. 31. The queen of the south came from the utmost parts of the earth, to hear the wisdom of Solomon; which cannot be understood of her coming out of, but from thence. But, this matter being so well known to all that read the New Testament in the original, it is needless for me to give any other instances.[93]
As to what concerns the Eunuch’s going into the water, I cannot think any thing else is intended by it, but that he descended or lighted down from his chariot, to the water, that is, by a metonymy, to the water-side, in order to his being baptized by Philip. It is no uncommon mode of speaking, to say, that a person goes down to the river-side, to take water, or to the well, to draw it; therefore, this is no strain on the sense of the word; and I am the rather inclined to give into this opinion, because some modern travellers, taking notice of the place where this was done, intimate, that it was only a spring of water; and therefore without sufficient depth to plunge the body in: And some ancient writers, who lived between three and four hundred years after our Saviour’s time, as Jerom and Eusebius, intimate the same thing. If it be said, that these may be mistaken as to the place, inasmuch as the particular spot of ground in which this water was, is not mentioned in scripture: I will not lay much stress upon it; however, I cannot but observe, that it is represented by a diminutive expression, as it is said, they came to a certain water, that is, probably, a brook, which was by the way-side; not a river, or a great collection of water. And it is further observed, that Philip, as well as the Eunuch, went down into the water; though none suppose that he was plunged in the water; therefore it does not certainly appear, from the sense of the word, that the Eunuch was, unless the matter in controversy be taken for granted, that baptism can be performed in no other way, but by plunging.
Moreover, to go down to the water, does not always signify in other scriptures, going down to the bottom of the water; as when the Psalmist, in Psal. cvii. 23. speaks of them that go down to the sea in ships, he does not mean them that go down to the bottom of it; therefore, going down to the water does not always signify being plunged in it. As for what is said concerning Philip and the eunuch’s coming up out of the water, it may very fairly be understood of their returning from the water-side, and the eunuch’s going up again into his chariot. Moreover, I cannot but think, that in this, and all other places, where persons are said to come up out of the water, it denotes an action performed with design, and the perfect exercise of the understanding in him that does it; which seems not agreeable to one who is at the bottom of the water, and cannot well come up from thence, unless by the help of him that baptized him. The sense of the words, coming out of the water, is agreeable to what is said concerning our Saviour at his baptism, in Matt. iii. 16. Jesus went up straightway out of the water; which seems to be a mistake in our translation; where the words απὸ τοῦ ὑδαλος, have been rendered, from the water; which is of the same import with the sense of the Greek particle ἐκ when a person is said to come up out of the water.
Obj. 3. It seems very evident, that John the Baptist used no other mode but that of immersion; because he chose those places to exercise this part of his ministry in, that were well supplied with water, sufficient for this purpose. Accordingly, we first read of his removing from the wilderness of Judea, in which he preached the doctrine of repentance; and told the people, that the kingdom of heaven, that is, the gospel-state, which was to begin with the appearing of the Messiah, was at hand; and then we read of his removing to the banks of the river Jordan, for the conveniency of baptizing those who came to him for that purpose: And, after that, we read of another station in which he resided, viz. Enon, near to Salim; and this reason is assigned; because there was much water there, John iii. 23. Now, if he had baptized by sprinkling, or pouring a little water on the face, he had no need to remove out of the wilderness of Judea: For, whatever scarcity of water there might be there, it was no difficult matter for him to be supplied with enough to serve his occasion, had this been his mode of baptizing.
Answ. To this it may be replied, that though John removed to Jordan and Ænon, that he might be well supplied with water, as he daily wanted large quantities thereof; yet it doth not necessarily follow from hence, that this was done for the sake of immersion therein: And it doth not sufficiently appear to me, that Ænon afforded water deep enough for a person to be baptized in it after this manner; for it seems to be but a small tract of land, in which it is hardly probable, that there were many lakes, or rivers of water contained; which is as much as can be said concerning a well watered country. Therefore, I think, the words[94] ought to have been rendered many waters; by which we are to understand, as Dr. Lightfoot observes, that it was a place of springs[95], or small brooks of water. This place John chose, that he might be supplied with water for his use; but it doth not, I think, necessarily, follow from hence, that he baptized by immersion; Besides, if there had been a great collection of waters there, there would have been some indications thereof at this day; which, I believe, it would be hard to prove that there are.
As to the other part of the objection, that it was a very easy matter for him to have been supplied with water in the wilderness of Judea, to baptize by sprinkling or pouring, by his having it brought to him in vessels for that purpose: It may be replied, that if he had only poured water on the head or face, there is no need to suppose that he was so sparing of it, as not to use above a spoonful, especially when it was so easy a matter for him, by his removing to another station, to be better supplied. If there was but a little water poured on every one that came to be baptized by him, it would require a very great quantity of water to baptize the vast multitudes that came to him; inasmuch as it is said, that Jerusalem, and all Judea, and all the region round about Jordan, were baptized of him: It is one thing for a little water to be brought in a bason to baptize a person or two, and another thing for this to be done in the case under our present consideration. Moreover, it is certain, that in hot countries, and particularly in Judea; and more especially in the wilderness thereof, there was a very great scarcity of water; accordingly we read, sometimes, that water was so valuable a thing, that it was reckoned a very considerable part of a man’s estate: Thus Isaac was envied by the Philistines, for all the wells his father’s servants had digged; and then we read of their stopping them up, and his digging other wells; and also of the strife between the herdsmen of Gerar, and his herdsmen, for the possession thereof, Gen. xxvi. 14,-20. And we read, in Gen. xxi. 14,-16. that when Abraham sent Hagar away from him with Ishmael, he gave her bread, and a bottle of water; and when the water was spent in the bottle, she cast the child under one of the shrubs, despairing of his life; which she need not have done, if water was so easy to come by as it is supposed in this objection. It is certain, that a person may travel many miles without finding water to quench his thirst, in those desert places. This farther appears from Samson’s being ready to die for thirst, after the great victory he had obtained over the Philistines, on which occasion God wrought a miracle to supply him, Judges xv. 18, 19, which can hardly be accounted for, if there had been so great plenty of water in that country, as there is in ours; this then, I apprehend to be the reason of John’s removal to Jordan and Ænon; therefore it doth not necessarily prove that his design was to baptize in that way that is pleaded for by those on the other side of the question.
Moreover, as it doth not sufficiently appear to me, from any thing contained in the objection, that John used immersion in baptism, so it seems most agreeable, to some circumstances that attended it, to conclude that he did not; inasmuch as there was no conveniency for the change of their garments, nor servants appointed to help them therein; which seems necessary to answer this occasion. And some have supposed, that it might endanger the health of those who were infirm among them, and John’s much more, who was obliged to stand many days together in the water, or, at least, the greatest part thereof, while he was administering this ordinance. And they who were baptized must immediately retire when the ordinance was over, or it would endanger their health; unless we have recourse to a dispensation of providence, that is next to miraculous: Though I am sensible, some say, that none ever suffered hereby in our day; which, if the observation be true, is a kind providence that they ought to be thankful for.
But if, after all that has been said on this matter, it will not be allowed that baptism signifies any thing else but dipping in water: Then I might farther allege, that this might be done by dipping the face, which is the principal part of the body, without plunging the whole body; and this might answer the design of the ordinance as well as the other; since it is not the quantity used in a sacramental sign that is so much to be regarded, as the action performed, together with the matter of it; if the smallest piece of bread, and a spoonful of wine are used in the Lord’s supper, this is generally reckoned as well adapted to answer the design of the ordinance, as if a great quantity of each were received by every one that partakes of it. Now, as to what concerns our present argument, the washing a part of the body is deemed sufficient to signify the thing intended, as much as though the whole body had been washed. Thus when our Saviour washed his disciples’ feet, and told Peter, If he washed him not, he had no part in him, John xiii. 5. wherein (by the way) we may observe, that he calls washing his feet, washing him, by a synecdoche, for a part of the whole; upon which occasion Peter replies, not my feet only, but also my hands and my head; and Jesus answered, He that is washed needeth not, save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit, ver. 10. by which, I think, he intends, that this signifies that cleansing, which is the spiritual meaning thereof, as much as though the whole body had been washed with water; for though one design hereof might be to teach them humility, and brotherly kindness; yet it also signifies their being washed or cleansed by his blood and Spirit.