Sermons on Various Important Subjects Part 31

Pretending to honor G.o.d by direct disobedience is peculiarly affrontive. Such worshippers "provoke him to his face. Their offerings his soul hateth. They are a smoke in his nose, and a fire that burneth all the day." Every thing of this nature, whatever may be its design, is rebellion against G.o.d. Against no other sin hath he manifested greater indignation.

No instance can be adduced of such homage being accepted, or of good resulting from such worship. Yea, it hath commonly been followed with the severest marks of the divine resentment. Witness the evils which came upon Israel when they made the golden calf, to help their devotions. Witness those which fell on the family and kingdom of Jeroboam, when he forsook the appointed worship of G.o.d, and the ministry of the Levites whom G.o.d had appointed to wait at the altar.

Jeroboam did not introduce the worship of Baal, or the other heathen G.o.ds. This was done afterwards by the influence of Jezebel. He only appointed other places of worship, beside that which G.o.d had chosen, and consecrated others to minister who had not the attachments of the Levites to the house of David and city of Zion, and made images to help the devotion of his people; and lo! his family perish; a brand of infamy is set on his name; and because his people walk in his ways, they are finally "broken and cease to be a people!"

The divine resentment of attempts to change the ordinances of G.o.d, or make innovations in his worship even where they seem _to have been done out of concern for his honor_, is left on record in his word.

Saul once offered sacrifice. The necessity of his affairs seemed to require it. He professed to have done it with reluctance, but to have thought it his duty--"I said the Philistines will come down upon me, and I have not made supplication unto the Lord: I forced myself therefore, and offered a burnt offering." But Saul was not of the family of Aaron, to whom the right of sacrificing solely appertained by divine appointment. Hence instead of conciliating the divine favor, his officious zeal offended heaven--for that act of disobedience he was threatened with deposition; and a repet.i.tion of attempting to improve on divine orders, in sparing the best cattle of Amelek to sacrifice unto the Lord, confirmed the sentence, * placed another on the throne, and led to the ruin of the rebellious prince. Uzzah only put forth his hand to steady the trembling ark, and was struck dead for his rashness, beside the ark of G.o.d. +

* 1 Samuel xiii. 1-14, xv. 15-13. + 2 Samuel vi. 6, 7.

Some spoiled through philosophy and vain deceit, have made changes in the divine inst.i.tutions, and attempted improvements upon them, since the commencement of the gospel day. This hath been a leading trait of character in the chiefs of the Romish church. Many of the heads of that communion have signalized themselves in this way. And some of their alterations have operated to impress what was thought to be religion, as hath been observed. Another way in which they have manifested the same disposition hath been the multiplying of holy days.

Under various pretences, nearly half the days in the year have been consecrated to religion, by order of those G.o.ds on earth. Some real, and many fict.i.tious saints, have days consecrated to their memory.

Here is a great shew of wisdom, and zeal for G.o.d, and his cause in the world; calling men so often from their temporal concerns to attend to the duties of religion! Who can do other than approve it? Doubtless many have been deceived by appearances, and considered those as wise and good who have done these things. But this is far from being their character. These have been the doings of "Antichrist, the Man of sin --the Son of perdition! Because of these things cometh the wrath of G.o.d, on the children of disobedience!" All these specious measures are no better than Saul's sacrificing, Uzzah's steadying the ark, and the use of images in divine worship! They are opposition to the orders of the Most High, and rebellion against him.

"Six days shalt thou labor and do all thy work, but the seventh day is the sabbath of the Lord thy G.o.d; in it thou shalt not do any work"

--Whoever takes it on himself to alter this appointment, "thinks to change times and laws;" which was foretold of him who should "speak great words against the Most High." *

* Daniel vii. 25.

The Lord's day, is the only day which G.o.d hath sanctified under the gospel dispensation. This infinite wisdom judged sufficient. Had more been requisite, more would have been consecrated by divine order. But not a hint of any other holy day is to be found in the New Testament. +

+ Neither the day of Christ's birth, death, resurrection or ascension appear to have been regarded as holy time, or any way distinguished from the other days of the year, during the apostolic age. The former of these is not marked in the scriptures. Whether it happened on the twentyfifth of December, or at some other season is uncertain. So are the times in which the apostles and primitive Christians suffered martyrdom. These events are veiled. Divine providence hath hidden them from mankind, probably for the same reason that the body of Moses was hidden from Israel--to prevent its being made an object of idolatrous worship--or for the same which is supposed to have occasioned our Lord's seeming neglect of his mother, and his severer reproof given to Peter, than to any other of his disciples--"Get thee behind me Satan;"

namely, that idolatrous honor, which he foresaw would be afterwards paid them by some called Christians.

Easter is once mentioned in our translation of the New Testament; but it is not found in the Greek original. The word there used is "Pasxa,"

the Pa.s.sover. It is mentioned only to note the time in which Herod intended to have brought forth Peter and delivered him up to his enemies. *

* Acts xii. 4.

Occasional calls there may be to fasting and thanksgiving; and we have scripture warrant for attending them in their seasons. But fixing on certain days of the year, or month, statedly to call men from their secular business to attend to religion, and requiring the consecration of them to religion is adding to the book of G.o.d. However well intended, it goes on mistaken principles, and however specious in appearance, is affronting the wisdom and authority of heaven.

Most of the errors referred to above, are found among Pagans or Catholics; but is nothing of the same kind chargeable on Protestants?

"Are there not with us sins against the Lord our G.o.d?" And of the same nature with those we have been contemplating? The knowledge of other's errors in ay be for our warning; but the knowledge of our own is requisite to our reformation. Where then are we directed of G.o.d, religiously to observe Christmas, Lent, or Easter? Where to attend the eucharist only twice or thrice a year; and never without one, or more preparatory lectures? * Where to add a third prayer at the administration of that ordinance, when our divine pattern only blessed the bread before he distributed it to his disciples, and gave thanks to the Father, before he divided to them the cup? Where are we directed to attend quarterly seasons of prayer, or to hold weekly conferences for religious purposes?

* We would not be understood to intend that all religious meeting on week days are unlawful. Special occasions often require them. But the Lord's day is the only time set apart by divine order for the stated attendance. No other hath he consecrated to the business of religion.

Neither would we be considered as denying the legality of ever uniting to seek the Lord previous to the celebration of eucharist. We may look to G.o.d to a.s.sist and accept us in every duty. But if we consider these preparatory exercises as indispensibly requisite, and as const.i.tuting a part of the duty, we do it without divine warrant.

From an attention to the gospel history, we are induced to believe that the celebration of that ordinance const.i.tuted a part of the common duties of every Lord's day, while the apostles ministered in the Christian church; + and that an attendance at the sacramental table, was not distinguished by any special preparatory exercises, diverse from those which anteceded other sanctuary duties. No trace of distinction, in these respects, is to be found in scripture; neither precept nor example can be adduced to support it. Whence then its origin?

+ Acts xx. 7.

Did not it derive from Rome? We know the errors of the Romish church relative to the eucharist; and their tendency to induce a belief that it is more holy, and requires greater sanct.i.ty in communicant, than is requisite to an attendance on other ordinances. And the same notion is prevalent and many who have withdrawn from the communion of that church. Many serious people who attend other religious duties with pleasure and advantage, are afraid to obey Christ's dying command! Is not this a relic of popery? When Luther left the papal communion, his reformation, particularly relative to this ordinance, was but partial.

Many other protestants retain a tinge of catholic leaven. Is not the distinction respecting the sanct.i.ty of divine ordinances from this source? It is not found in the gospel. If the exercises under consideration serve to perpetuate this unscriptural distinction, and to drive men from a plain and important duty, they have a baleful effect. They may be well intended. Doubtless they are so by the generality of those who attend them. It is painful to be obliged to dissent from men whom we receive as brethren, and revere as Christians. But after much deliberation, such are our views of the subject before us; and we offer them to the serious consideration of the followers of Christ.

But these are well intended. So probably was Uzzah's steadying the ark--But some of these do help on the cause of G.o.d, and even more than the stale attendance on Lord's day duties. So thought those who introduced images and paintings into churches. [Some indeed attend those who neglected Lord's day duties.]

Have we then discovered defects in the divine plan! And do we feel ourselves capable of making emendations in it!--Of "teaching eternal wisdom how to rule!"--How to effect its purposes of mercy!

Beware _lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of the world and not after Christ_. Vain man would be wise--He naturally thinks himself qualified, even to ameliorate divine inst.i.tutions. Temptation to this sin coincides with a natural bias in depraved humanity. Many and very mischievous errors have issued from it. Would we escape the snare, we must listen to the apostle speaking in the text. The sum of his advice is to keep to the divine directions, especially in matters of religion. These are contained and plainly taught in the holy Scriptures, which we have in our hands, and of the sense of which we must judge for ourselves; remembering that we are accountable to G.o.d the judge of all.

As some are _spoiled through philosophy and vain deceit_, others are corrupted by regard to _the tradition of men and rudiments of the world_. This endangered the Colossians, and eventually ruined the church at Rome. The leading errors of paganism were thereby introduced into that Christian church, and rendered it completely antichristian.

Errors which seemed to have been destroyed by Christianity, were again revived, and the abominations which they had occasioned, were acted over again with enlargements!

The _traditions of men and rudiments of the world_, have still their seducing influence. Most men swim down with the current of the times --adopt the sentiments and conform to the usages of those with whom they live. The popular scheme of religion, they consider as the orthodox scheme, and the religion of the land, the true religion.

Therefore is one nation Papists, another Protestants, one Calvinists, another Lutherans. These differences of sentiment do not arise from differences in the mental const.i.tutions of nations, but from the accidental differences of situation.

Few have sufficient independence of mind to "judge of themselves what is right." Many who "call Christ Lord, receive for doctrines the commandments of men." Therefore doth religion vary like the fashions of the world. Was the fashion of the world to be the rule of judgment, it might be wise to follow it: But "we must every one give an account of himself to G.o.d," and be judged by the rule which be hath given us.

It becomes as therefore to "call no man master, because one is our Matter, even Christ." To him we are accountable. At our peril do we neglect obedience to his commands.

It concerns us to do all things according to the pattern drawn out before us in the Scriptures. Against the natural bias to affect improvements on divine inst.i.tutions, and against the prevalence of fashion and contagion of popular opinion, we should be particularly on our guard. "For cursed is every one who confirmeth not all the words of G.o.d's law to do them, and all the people shall say, Amen."

SERMON XXIX.

The Sins of Communities Noted and Punished.

Matthew xxiii. 36.

"Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation."

This is predicated of the judgments of G.o.d on those who had shed the blood of his saints. The Savior declares that all the righteous blood which had been shed on the earth from that of Abel down to the gospel day, should come on that generation!

But is not this unreasonable and contrary to the Scriptures? "Far be wickedness from G.o.d and iniquity from the Almighty. For the work of man shall be render unto him, and cause every man to find according to his ways--The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him." Such is the language of revelation.

And is not that of reason the same? Will reason justify punishing some men for other men's sins? Those who lived in the days of our Savior had no share in the murder of Abel, or of many others who had died by wicked hands. Those dire events had been accomplished before they had existence. How then could they be answerable for them? To solve this mystery we must consider man in a twofold view--as an individual and as the member of a community.

As individuals mankind are solely accountable for the parts which they act personally. In the judgment of the great day, they will only be judged for the use which they shall have made of the talents committed to them here--"We must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in the body, according to that he hath done, whether good or bad,"

But every individual is a member of the human race, and of some community. The race, as such, and the larger branches of it, the nations and empires into which it is divided, are amenable to the Supreme Governor, and liable to punishment, if in their public characters, they rebel against him. And righteous individuals, may be involved in the judgments sent to punish the sins of the community to which they belong. They often are so. Personal rect.i.tude is not designated by an exemption from national calamities. Discriminations will eventually be made in its favor, but not here. Here "all things come alike unto all, and there is one event to the righteous and the wicked."

To _shew such to be the general rule of the divine administration in the government of the world, is the design of the following discourse_: Which will explain the text.

The world, and the communities into which it is divided, have their probation no less than persons; and there are reasons in which G.o.d enters into judgment with them and adjusts retributions to their moral states.