Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

36

SERMON III.

INTEREST DEPOSED, AND TRUTH RESTORED.

MATTHEW X. 33.

But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven.

As the great comprehensive gospel duty is the denial of self, so the grand gospel sin that confronts it is the denial of Christ. These two are both the commanding and the dividing principles of all our actions: for whosoever acts in opposition to one, does it always in behalf of the other. None ever opposed Christ, but it was to gratify self; none ever renounced the interest of self, but from a prevailing love to the interest of Christ. The subject I have here pitched upon may seem improper in these times, and in this place, where the number of professors and of men is the same; where the cause and interest of Christ has been so cried up; and Christ's personal reign and kingdom so called for and expected. But since it has been still preached up, but acted down; and dealt with, as the eagle in the fable did with the oyster, carrying it up on high, that by letting it fall he might dash it in pieces: I say, since Christ must reign, but his truths be made to serve; I suppose it is but reason to distinguish between profession and pretence, and to conclude, that men's present crying, "Hail, king," and bending the knee to Christ, are only in order to his future crucifixion.

For the discovery of the sense of the words, I shall inquire into their occasion. From the very beginning of the chapter we have Christ consulting the propagation of the gospel; and in order to it (being the only way that he knew to effect it) sending forth a ministry; and giving them a commission, together with instructions for the execution of it. He would have them fully acquainted with the nature and extent of their office; and so he joins commission with instruction; by one he conveys power, by the other knowledge. Supposing, I conceive, that upon such an undertaking, the more learned his ministers were, they would prove never the less faithful.* And thus having fitted them, and stripped them of all manner of defence, v. 9, "he sends them

*In the parliament 1653, it being put to the vote, whether they should support and encourage a godly and learned ministry, the latter word was rejected, and the vote passed for a godly and faithful ministry.

3

forth amongst wolves;" a hard expedition, you will say, to go amongst wolves; but yet much harder to convert them into sheep and no less hard even to discern some of them, possibly being under sheep's clothing; and so by the advantage of that dress, sooner felt than discovered: probably also such as had both the properties of wolves, that is, they could whine and howl, as well as bite and devour. But, that they might not go altogether naked among their enemies, the only armour that Christ allows them is prudence and innocence: "Be ye wise as serpents, but harmless as doves," v. 16. Weapons not at all offensive, yet most suitable to their warfare, whose greatest encounters were to be exhortations, and whose only conquest, escape. Innocence is the best caution, and we may unite the expression, to be "wise as a serpent" is to be "harmless as a dove." Innocence is like polished armour; it adorns, and it defends. In sum, he tells them, that the opposition they should meet with, was the greatest imaginable, from ver. 16 to 26. But in the ensuing verses he promises them an equal proportion of assistance; and, as if it were not an argument of force enough to outweigh the forementioned discouragements, he casts into the balance the promise of a reward to such as should execute, and of punishment to such as should neglect, their commission: the reward in the former verse, "Whosoever shall confess me before men," &c., the punishment in this, "But whosoever shall deny," &c. Ás if by way of pre-occupation, he should have said, Well: here you see your commission; this is your duty, these are your discouragements never seek for shifts and evasions from worldly afflictions; this is your reward, if you perform it; this is your doom, if you decline it.

As for the explication of the words, they are clear and easy; and their originals in the Greek are of single signification, without any ambiguity; and therefore I shall not trouble you, by proposing how they run in this or that edition; or straining for an interpretation where there is no difficulty, or distinction where there is no difference. The only exposition that I shall give of them will be to compare them to other parallel scriptures, and peculiarly to that in Mark viii. 38, "Whosoever therefore shall be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, of him also shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he cometh in the glory of his Father with the holy angels." These words are a comment upon my text.

[ocr errors]

1. What is here in the text called a "denying of Christ," is there termed a "being ashamed of him ;" that is, in those words. the cause is expressed, and here the effect; for therefore we deny a thing, because we are ashamed of it. First, Peter is ashamed of Christ, then he denies him.

2. What is here termed a denying of "Christ," is there called a being ashamed of "Christ and his words;" Christ's truths are

D

his second self. And he that offers a contempt to a king's letters or edicts, virtually affronts the king; it strikes his words, but it rebounds upon his person.

3. What is here said, "before men," is there phrased, " in this - adulterous and sinful generation." These words import the hinderance of the duty enjoined; which therefore is here purposely enforced with a non obstante to all opposition. The term "adulterous," I conceive, may chiefly relate to the Jews, who being nationally espoused to God by covenant, every sin of theirs was, in a peculiar manner, "spiritual adultery."

4. What is here said, "I will deny him before my Father," is there expressed, "I will be ashamed of him before my Father and his holy angels;" that is, when he shall come to judgment, when revenging justice shall come in pomp, attended with the glorious retinue of all the host of heaven. In short, the sentence pronounced declares the judgment, the solemnity of it the

terror.

From the words we may deduce these observations:

I. We shall find strong motives and temptations from men, to draw us to a denial of Christ.

II. No terrors or solicitations from men, though never so great, can warrant or excuse such a denial.

III. To deny Christ's words is to deny Christ.

But since these observations are rather implied than expressed in the words, I shall waive them, and instead of deducing a doctrine distinct from the words, prosecute the words themselves under this doctrinal paraphrase:

Whosoever shall deny, disown, or be ashamed of either the person or truths of Jesus Christ, for any fear or favour of man, shall with shame be disowned, and eternally rejected by him at the dreadful judgment of the great day.

The discussion of this shall lie in these things.

I. To show how many ways Christ and his truths may be denied; and what is the denial here chiefly intended.

II. To show what are the causes that induce men to a denial of Christ and his truths.

III. To show how far a man may consult his safety in time of persecution, without denying Christ.

IV. To show what is imported in Christ's denying us before his Father in heaven.

V. To apply all to the present occasion.

But before I enter upon these, I must briefly premise this; that though the text and the doctrine run peremptory and absolute, "Whosoever denies Christ shall assuredly be denied by him;" yet still there is a tacit condition in the words supposed,unless repentance intervene. For this and many other scriptures, though as to their formal terms they are absolute, yet as to their sense they are conditional. God in mercy has so framed and

tempered. his word, that we have, for the most part, a reserve of mercy wrapped up in a curse. And the very first judgment that was pronounced upon fallen man, was with the allay of a promise. Wheresoever we find a curse to the guilty expressed, in the same words mercy to the penitent is still understood. This premised, I come now to discuss the first thing, viz.

I. How many ways Christ and his truths may be denied; and what is the denial here chiefly intended. Here first in general I assert, that we may deny him in all those acts that are capable of being morally good or evil; those are the proper scene in which we act our confessions or denials of him. Accordingly, therefore, all ways of denying Christ I shall comprise under these three.

1. We may deny him and his truths by an erroneous, heretical judgment. I know it is doubted whether a bare error in judgment can condemn; but since truths absolutely necessary to salvation are so clearly revealed, that we cannot err in them, unless we be notoriously wanting to ourselves; herein the fault of the judgment is resolved into a precedent default in the will; and so the case is put out of doubt. And here it may be replied, Are not truths of absolute and fundamental necessity very disputable; as the deity of Christ, the Trinity of persons? If they are not in themselves disputable, why are they so much disputed? Indeed, I believe, if we trace these disputes to their original cause, we shall find, that they never sprung from a reluctancy in reason to embrace them. For this reason itself dictates, as most rational, to assent to any thing, though seemingly contrary to reason, if it is revealed by God, and we are certain of the revelation. These two supposed, these disputes must needs arise only from curiosity and singularity; and these are faults of a diseased will. But some will farther demand, in behalf of these men, whether such as assent to every word in scripture (for so will those that deny the natural deity of Christ and the Spirit) can be yet said in doctrinals to deny Christ? To this I answer, Since words abstracted from their proper sense and signification lose the nature of words, and are only equivocally so called; inasmuch as the persons we speak of take them thus, and derive the letter from Christ, but the signification from themselves, they cannot be said properly to assent so much as to the words of the scripture. And so their case also is clear. But yet more fully to state the matter, how far a denial of Christ in belief and judgment is damnable: we will propose the question, Whether those who hold the fundamentals of faith may deny Christ dannably, in respect of those superstructures and consequences that arise from them? I answer in brief, By fundamental truths are understood, (1.) Either such, without the belief of which we cannot be saved: or, (2.) Such, the belief of

which is sufficient to save: if the question be proposed of fundamentals in this latter sense, it contains its own answer; for where a man believes those truths, the belief of which is sufficient to save, there the disbelief or denial of their consequences cannot damn. But what, and how many these fundamentals are, it will then be agreed on, when all sects, opinions, and persuasions, do unite and consent. 2dly, If we speak of fundamentals in the former sense, as they are only truths, without which, we cannot be saved: it is manifest that we may believe them, and yet be damned for denying their consequences: for that which is only a condition, without which we cannot be saved, is not therefore a cause sufficient to save: much more is required to the latter than to the former. I conclude, therefore, that to deny Christ in our judgment, will condemn, and this concerns the learned: Christ demands the homage of your understanding; he will have your reason bend to him, you must put your heads under his feet. And we know, that heretofore, he who had the leprosy in this part was to be pronounced unclean. A poisoned reason, an infected judgment, is Christ's greatest enemy. And an error in the judgment is like an imposthume in the head, which is always noisome, and frequently mortal.

2. We may deny Christ verbally, and by oral expressions. Now our words are the interpreters of our hearts, the transcripts of the judgment, with some farther addition of good or evil. He that interprets, usually enlarges. What our judgment whispers in secret, these proclaim upon the housetop. To deny Christ in the former imports enmity; but in these open defiance. Christ's passion is renewed in both; he that misjudges of him condemns him; but he that blasphemes him spits in his face. Thus the Jews and the pharisees denied Christ: "We know that this man is a sinner," John ix. 24; "and a deceiver," Matt. xxvii. 63; "and he casts out devils by the prince of devils," Matt. xii. 24. And thus Christ is daily denied, in many blasphemies printed and divulged, and many horrid opinions vented against the truth. The schools dispute whether in morals the external action superadds any thing of good or evil to the internal elicit act of the will; but certainly the enmity of our judgments is wrought up to a high pitch, before it rages in an open denial. And it is a sign that it is grown too big for the heart, when it seeks for vent in our words. Blasphemy uttered is error heightened with impudence; it is sin scorning a concealment, not only committed, but defended. He that denies Christ in his judgment, sins; but he that speaks his denial, vouches and owns his sin; and so, by publishing it, does what in him lies, to make it universal, and by writing it, to establish it eternal. There is another way of denying Christ with our mouths, which is negative; that is, when we do not acknowledge and confess him: but of this I

« AnteriorContinuar »