صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

be baptized, which is called "the washing of regeneration; but that greater renovations must take place in the heart, than what water can produce on the surface of the body.

With regard to the other expression, "To be born again," it is susceptible of a double sense. The original term may perhaps be so translated; so is its import in various places, which are not of moment to recite here. It may also be rendered, born from above; as in the third chapter of St. James, "The wisdom from above is first pure, then peaceable." In this text, the original term is the same as that which we here translate born again; but though the variation might attract the critic's attention, it ought not to divert the preacher; for to whichsoever of the readings we may give the preference, the idea of our version invariably corresponds with the design of the Holy Ghost, and with the sense of the original. The uniform intention of Jesus Christ must be to distinguish our state of grace from that of nature. The state of nature is low and grovelling; that of grace is noble and sublime; consonant to what our Saviour said unto the Jews, "Ye are from beneath, I am from above," John viii. 23. Now for men whose birth is mean and grovelling, to acquire a great and noble descent, they must be born anew; thus to be born from above, and to be born again, are the same thing; and both these readings, how different soever they may appear, associate in the same sense. It is of much more importance to remark on the words which follow, "Born of water and of the Spirit;" first, that they are Hebraisms; and we have found the authorities so numerous, that we have had more difficulty in rejecting the less pertinent than in making the selection.

The Jews call the change which they presume their proselytes had experienced a spiritual birth; a new birth; a regeneration. It was one of their maxims, that the moment a man became a proselyte, he was regarded as a child, once born in sin, but now born in holiness. To be born in holiness, was, in their style, to be born in the covenant; and to this mode of speaking, St. Paul apparently refers in that remarkable passage in the first Epistle to the Corinthians, vii. 14. "The unbelieving husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified by the husband; else were your children unclean, but now are they holy."-"Now are they holy;" that is, they are accounted as born within the covenant. Consonant to this notion, the Jews presumed that a man on becoming a proselyte, had no longer any consanguinity with those to whom nature had joined him with indissoluble ties; and that he had a right to espouse his sister, and his mother, if they became proselytes like himself! This gave Tacitus, a pagan historian, occasion to say, that the first lessons the Jews taught a proselyte was, to despise the gods, to renounce his country, and to regard his own children with disdain.t And Mai

[blocks in formation]

monides affirms, that the children with which an Egyptian woman is pregnant at the time she becomes a proselyte, are of the second birth. Hence some Rabbins have had the odd and confused refinement to suppose, that there is an infinity of souls born of I know not what ideal mass; that those destined to the just, lodge in a certain palace; that when a pagan embraces Judaism, one of those souls proceeds from its abode, and appears before the Divine Majesty, who embraces it, and sends it into the body of the proselyte, where it remains; that as an infant is not fully made a partaker of human nature, but when a pre-existent spirit is united to its substance in the bosom of its mother, so a man never becomes a true proselyte but when a new spirit becomes the substitute of that he derived from nature.*

Though it be not necessary to prove by numerous authorities the first remark we shall make on the words of Christ, "To be born of spiritual water," and to be "born again," it is proper at least to propose it; otherwise it would be difficult to account for our Saviour's reproving Nicodemus, as being "a master in Israel and not knowing these things." For a doctor in the law does not seem reprehensible for not understanding a language peculiar to Jesus Christ, and till then unheard of; whereas the blame naturally devolved on this Jew for exclaiming at expressions familiar to the Rabbins. No doubt, Nicodemus was one of those men, who, according to an ancient and still existing abuse, had superadded to his rank and dignity, the title of doctor, of which he was rendered unworthy by his ignorance. Hence the evangelist expressly remarks, that he was "a ruler of the Jews;" "a ruler of the Jews!" here are his degrees; here are his letters; here is his patent.

But Jesus Christ, and this is my second remark, in borrowing, corrected the language of the Jews. He meant not literally what he said to Nicodemus, that to enter the kingdom of God, or according to the language of Scripture and of the Jews, to be a disciple of the Messiah, one "must be born again:" he never imbibed the notion, that a man on embracing Christianity, receives a new soul to succeed the one he received from nature; he had not adopted the refinement of the Jewish cabalists, concerning the pre-existence of souls. The expressions are figurative, and consequently subject to the inconveniences of all similes, and figurative language in general. The metaphor he employs, when representing by the figure of "a new birth," the change which must take place in the soul of a man on becoming a Christian; this metaphor I say, must be 1. Restricted.

2. It must be justified. 3. It must be softened. 4. It must be fortified.

1. The expression of Jesus Christ must be restricted. We cannot well find the import of any metaphor, unless we separate whatever is

* When our Saviour says, that neither the blind man, nor his parents, had sinned in a pre-existent state, he obviously decides against this doctrine of Pythagorus and the Rabbins. How can a holy God send a holy soul into a sinful body? And St. Paul says, that Levi paid tithes in the loins of Abraham.-J. S.

extraneous to the subject to which it is applied. The ideas of all authors whatever would be distorted, did we wish to extend their figures beyond the just bounds. What is indisputable with regard to all authors, is peculiarly so with regard to the orientals, for excelling other nations in a warm imagination, they naturally abound in bolder metaphors. Hence the bolder the metaphors, the more is the need to restrict them; the more they would frustrate the proposed design, should we not avail ourselves of this precaution. What absurd systems have not originated from the license indulged on the comparison of Jesus Christ concerning the ties which unite us to himself, with the connexion they have with the aliments which nourish us, and which by manducation, are changed, if we may so speak, into our own substance? Properly to understand this comparison, we must restrict it. We must be aware that it turns on this single point, that as food cannot nourish us, unless it be received into the body by eating; just so, the religion of Jesus Christ will be unavailing, if we content ourselves with regarding it in a superficial manner; neglect a profound entrance into all its doctrines, and a close application of its maxims to the heart. Of other similes we may say the same. How many are the insipid notions which arise from straining the comparisons between the mystical significance of the ritual law, and the mysteries of the gospel? I here refer to the types; those striking figures, of which God himself is the author, and which in the first ages of the church traced the outlines of great events, which could not take place till many ages after they had been adumbrated by those figures. On contemplating those types in a judicious manner, you will find support for your faith, and indisputable proofs of the truth of your religion. But to contemplate them in a just point of view, they must be restricted in a thousand respects, in which they can have no connexion with the object they are designed to represent. Into how many mistakes should we run on neglecting this precaution; and on straining the striking metaphors taken from the priests, the victims, and other shadows in the ritual law? To understand those types and figures, we must restrict them; we must be aware that they bear on this single point; I would say, that as the office of the high-priest under the law was to reconcile God to the tribes of Israel, whose name he bore engraved on his mysterious pectoral; just so, the mediatorial offic of Christ consisted in reconciling God to the men, with whose nature he was clothed.

Never had figure more need of this precaution; never had figure more need to be restricted than that employed by Jesus Christ in the words of my text. The restriction has a double bearing. First, it must be restricted to the persons of the unregenerate who are not in communion with his people; and secondly, to the things which Jesus Christ requires of the unregenerate. The comparison of Jesus Christ must be restricted to the profligate, or to the self-righteous, who are not in communion with his people. If we fail to make this distinction, but indiscriminately apply the expression to all, we confound the change required of a man VOL. II.-50

who has not yet embraced Christianity, with that required of a weak and wandering Christian, who makes daily efforts to attain the knowledge of the truth, and to practise virtue; or, who recovers from his errors and deviations. It would be unfair to say, that such a Christian has need to "be born again," at least, in the sense which Jesus Christ attaches to the words of my text.

2. The comparison must be restricted to the change itself, which Jesus Christ requires of those to whom it ought to be applied. But in what respects are those things called a new birth? The metaphor concentrates itself on a single point; that as an infant on coming into the world, experiences so great a change in its mode of existence in regard of respiration, of nourishment, of sight, and of all its sensations, and so very different from what was the case prior to its birth, as in some sort to seem a new creature; so a man on passing from the world to the church, is a new man compared with what he was before. He has now other ideas, other desires, other propensities, other hopes, other objects of happiness. If you should not make this restriction: but extend the metaphor, you would make very injudicious contrasts between the circumstances of the new, and of the natural birth; and you would form notions, not only unworthy of reception, but deemed unworthy of refutation in a place like this.

II. But the change here represented by the idea of a new birth, is not the less a reality, for being couched in figurative language. Hence we have said in the second place, that the expression of Jesus Christ must be justified. In what does the change required of those that would enter into fellowship with him consist? In what does this new birth consist? We have just insinuated, that it is a change of ideas; a change of desires; a change of taste; a change of hope; a change of the objects of happiness.

1. A change of ideas. An unregenerate man, unacquainted with Jesus Christ, is wishful to be the arbitrator of his own ideas. He admits no propositions but what are proved at the bar of reason; he takes no guide but his own discernment, or that of some doctor, often as blind, and sometimes more so, than himself. On the contrary, the regenerate man sees solely with the eyes of his Saviour: Jesus Christ is his only guide, and if I may so speak, his sole reason, and his sole discernment.

I have no clear idea of the manner in which my soul can subsist after the ties which unite it to matter are dissolved. I do not properly know my soul by idea; I know it solely by sentiment, and by experience; and I have never thought without the medium of my brain; I have never perceived objects without the medium of my eyes; I have never heard sounds without the organs of my ears; and it does not appear to me that these sensations can be conveyed in any other way. I believe, however, that I shall hear sounds when the organs of my ears are destroyed; I believe that I shall perceive objects when the light of my eyes is extinguished; I believe that I shall think, and in a manner more close and sublime when my brain shall exist no more.

I believe that my soul shall perform all these operations when my body shall be cold, pale, immovable, and devoured of worms in the tomb: I believe it;-but why? Because this Jesus to whom I have commended my spirit, has said to the penitent thief, and in him to every true Christian, "Verily I say unto thee, to-day shalt thou be with me in paradise," Luke xxiii. 43.

I have no idea of this awful mystery, whereby a God, a God essentially One, associates in his own essence a Father, a Son, and a Holy Ghost; that as the distinction with regard to Paternity, Filiation, and Spiration, is as real as the union with regard to the Godhead. These mysteries have no connexion with my knowledge; yet I believe them: and why? Because I have changed my ideas, because this Jesus to whom I have yielded up my spirit, this Jesus, after preaching the doctrine of the unity of God, has decided, that the Father is God, that the Son is God, that the Holy Ghost is God: and he has said to his apostles, "Go, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."

SERMON XCVIII.

ON REGENERATION.
PART II.

JOHN iii. 8.

The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hear est the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.

No one is ignorant of the noise which the doctrine of grace excited in the ages which followed; of the schisin of Pelagius, and of the immense volumes which the ancient fathers heaped on this heretic.-The doctrines of grace have been agitated in the church of Rome: they formed in its bosom two powerful parties, which have given each other alternate blows, and alike accused each other of overturning Christianity. No sooner had our reformers raised the standard, than the disputes concerning the doctrines of grace were on the point of destroying the work they had begun with so much honour, and supported with success; and one saw in the communion they had just formed, the same spirit of division, as that which existed in the communion they had left. The doctrines of grace have caused in this republic as much confusion as in any other part of the Christian world: and what is more deplorable is, that after so many questions discussed, so many battles fought, so many volumes written, so many anathemas launched, the dispositions of the public are not yet conciliated, and the doctrines of grace often remain enveloped in the cloud they endeavoured to dissipate; and so much so that the efforts they made to illustrate so interesting a subject, served merely to confuse and envelope it the

more.

But how notty soever this subject may be, it is not my design to disturb the embers, and revive your disputes. I would endeavour, not to divide, but to conciliate and unite your minds: and during the whole of this discourse, in which the Holy Spirit is about to discover himself to you under the emblem of a wind, I shall keep in view the revelation with which a prophet was once honoured: God said to Elijah," Go forth, and stand on the mountain My brethren, it is not in our power to dis- before the Lord. And behold, the Lord passed cuss the subject on which we now enter, with- by, and a great and strong wind rent the mounout deploring the contests it has excited in the tains, and brake in pieces the rocks before the christian world. In our preceding discourses Lord; but the Lord was not in the wind: and you have seen the nature, and the necessity of after the wind, an earthquake; but the Lord regeneration: we now proceed to address you was not in the earthquake: and after the earthon its Author; and to call your attention to quake, a fire; but the Lord was not in the fire: this part of Jesus Christ's conversation with and after the fire, a still small voice: (a sound Nicodemus; "The wind bloweth where it list-coy and subtle.) Then Elijah, awed with reeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit." How often has this subject armed Christian against Christian, and communion against communion? How often has it banished from the church that peace which it seems so much calculated to cherish? No sooner had the apostles entered on their ministry, than they magnified the doctrines of grace; but in magnifying them, they seemed sent to set the world on fire. The Jews and the philosophers, prepossessed in favour of human sufficiency, revolted at a doctrine so opposed to their pride: they presumed on making a progress in virtue, that they owed the praise solely to their own efforts of personal virtue.

*The rest of this posthumous sermon is not in the original; neither is there any apology for the loss by the presbyters and deacons who edited the volume. The arguments being resumed in the next sermon, and especially the sermon on "A Taste for Devotion," will, in some sort, develope the author's sentiments.

verence at the divine presence, wrapped his face in his mantle," and recognised the token of Jehovah's presence. The first emblems of this vision have been but too much realized in the controversies of the Christian church: but when shall the latter be realized? Long enough; yea too long, have we seen "the great and strong wind which rent the mountains, and brake in pieces the rocks." Long enough; yea too long, has the earthquake shook the pillars of the church; but the Lord was not in the wind; the Lord was not in the earthquake. Yet at this very day the Vatican kindles the fire, and with thunderbolts in its hand, it presumes to determine, or rather to take away, the laws of grace: "but the Lord was not in the fire."

*The Vatican is a most magnificent palace at Rome; the residence of the Popes, and celebrated for its library. The learned Varro says it took its name from the answers or oracles called by the Latins vaticinia, which the Roman people received there from a god of the same name, who was said to be the author of the first sounds of infants, which is va, from vagire, to cry.—J. S.

May this still small voice, the precursor of the Divinity, and the symbol of his presence, be heard to-day in the midst of this assembly! Excite thy hallowing accents, in these tabernacles we have built for thy glory, and in which we assemble in thy name, O Holy Spirit, Spirit of peace: may thy peace rest on the lips and heart of the preacher; may it animate all those that compose this assembly, that discord may for ever be banished from our churches, and be confined to the abyss of hell from whence it came, and that charity may succeed. Amen. We must now illustrate the doctrine of the text, and state at large the ideas of the gospel respecting the aids of the Spirit of God, to which regeneration is here ascribed by Jesus Christ, and without which we might justly exclaim with Nicodemus at our Saviour's assertion, "How can these things be?" With that view I shall propose certain maxims, which shall be as so many precautions one should take when entering on this discussion, and which will serve to guide in a road that controversies have rendered so thorny and difficult. We shall afterward include in six propositions all which seems to us a Christian ought to know, and all he ought to do on this subject. This is all that remains for me to say.

Maxim 1. In the selection of passages on which you established the doctrine of the aids of the Holy Spirit, be more cautious to choose those that are pertinent, than to amass a multitude that are inconclusive. The rule prescribed in the beginning of this discourse, and which we shall inviolably follow to the end, not to revive the controversy, prevents my assigning all the reasons that induce me to begin with this precaution. It is a general fault, and indeed a very delicate propensity in defending a proposition, to adopt with avidity, not only what favours it in effect; but what seems to favour it. In the warmth of conversation, and especially in the heat of debate, we use arguments of which we are ashamed when reason returns, and when we calmly converse. Divines are not less liable to this fault than other men. By how many instances might we support this assertion? But not to involve myself in a discussion so delicate and difficult, I only remark, that if there be in our Scriptures an equivocal term, it is that of spirit. It is equivocal not only with regard to the diversity of subjects to which it is applied, but also because of the diversity of its bearings on the same subject. And what ought to be the more carefully noticed in the subject we discuss, is, that it has significations without number when applied to the aids of the Holy Spirit which heaven accords to men. Do not imagine that every time it is said the Spirit of God is given to man, the gifts of sanctifying grace are to be understood. In very many places it signifies the gift of miracles. Select, therefore, the passages on which you would establish the doctrine of sanctifying grace; and be less solicitous of amassing a multitude, than of urging those which are pertinent and conclusive.

Maxim 2. In establishing the doctrine of the operation of grace, be cautious of overturning another not less essential to religion. When you establish this part of our Saviour's theo

logy, be careful not to injure his moral code; and under the plea of rendering man orthodox, do not make him wicked. As there is nothing so rare in the intercourse of life, as a certain equanimity of temper, which makes a man always appear like himself, and unfluctuating, how much soever he may fluctuate in circumstances; so there is nothing more rare in the sciences than that candour of argument, which in maintaining a proposition, we leave in full force some other proposition we had maintained, and which we had had some particular reason for so doing. There are some authors constantly at variance with themselves. What is requisite to refute what a certain author advances in a recent publication? We have but to adduce what he has presumed to establish in a former work. By what means may we refute what a preacher has just advanced in the last sentences of a discourse? By adducing what he presumed to confirm but a moment before in the same discourse. Now, my brethren, there is one point of the Christian doctrine, on which this caution is very necessary; it is that on which we spake to-day. Let us take care that we do not merit the censure which has been made on the most celebrated of the ancient advocates of grace* (whether correct or incorrect I do not undertake to determine;) the censure is, that when attacking the Manicheans, he favoured the cause of the Pelagians; and when attacking the Pelagians, he favoured the cause of the Manicheans. Let us detest the maxims of certain modern preachers concerning the doctrines of grace; that a preacher should be orthodox in the body of his sermon, but heretic in the application. No; let us not be heretics either in the body or in the application of our sermons. Let us neither favour the system of Pelagius, nor that of the Manicheans. Let us have a theology and a morality equally supported. Let us take heed not to establish the doctrine of the divine aids, in a way that attacks the other doctrines, as those men do; for God, who is supremely holy, is not the author of sin. Let us take heed in expounding the passages which establish the doctrine of grace, not to do it in a way which makes them impugn those passages of Scripture, where God "invites all men to repentance:" Rom. ii. 4. and where it is said, that "he is not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance," 2 Pet. iii. 9; where he declares that "if we do perish," "it is of ourselves," and only of ourselves, Hos. xiii. 9; where he calls upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem to confess, that he had taken all the proper care that his "vineyard should bring forth grapes, though it brought forth wild grapes," Isa. v. 3, 4; where he introduces himself as addressing to mankind the most pathetic exhortations, and entreaties the most ardent, to promote their conversion, and as shedding the bitterest tears on their refusal; as saying in the excess of his grief, "O that thou hadst known, at least in this thy day, the things that belong to thy peace," Luke xix. 41, 42. "O that my people had hearkened unto me," Ps. lxxxi. 13;

* Augustin.

"O that they were wise; that they understood | nor to make a crime of remaining where I am." this; that they would consider their latter end," Deut. xxxii. 29.

Maxim 3. Do not abandon the doctrine of grace, because you are unable to explain all its abstruse refinements, or because you cannot reply to all the inquiries it may have suggest ed. There is scarcely a proposition which could claim our assent, were we to give it to those only whose several parts we can clearly explain, and to whose many questions we can fully reply. This maxim is essential to all the sciences. Theology has what is common to all human sciences: and in addition, as its object is much more noble and exalted, it has more points, concerning which it is not possible fully to satisfy the mind. This is especially the case with regard to the doctrine we now discuss. I might, were it required, give you many demonstrations, that the nature of the doctrine is such that we cannot perfectly comprehend it. We know so little of the manner in which certain ideas and certain sentiments are excited in the soul; we know so little how the understanding acquiesces, and how the will determines, that it is not surprising if we are ignorant of what is requisite for the understanding to acquiesce, and the will to determine, in religion: we especially know so little of the various means God can employ, when he is pleased to work on our soul, that it is really a chance to hit on the right one by which he draws us from the world: it may be by his sovereignty over our senses; it may be by an immediate operation on the substance of our souls. But without having recourse to this mode of reasoning, the doctrine of my text is quite sufficient to substantiate the maxim I advance. I presume that you ought to admit the doctrine of grace, though you can neither perfectly explain it, nor adequately answer all the questions it may have excited. This is the precise import of the comparison Jesus Christ makes between the agency of the Holy Spirit and the operations of the wind. "The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit."

Maxim 4. When two truths on the doctrines of grace are apparently in opposition, and cannot be reconciled, sacrifice the less important to that which is of greater moment. Two truths cannot in reality be in opposition. It is a fact demonstrated, that two contradictory propositions cannot both be true; but the limits of our understanding often present a contradiction where in reality none exists. I frequently hear learned men expound the gospel, but adopting different methods to attain the same end, they suggest difficulties alternately. Some press the duty of man; others enlarge on the inability of man, and on the need he has of divine assistance. The former tax the latter with giving sanction to the corruption of man: and the latter charge the former with flattering the pride of man. The first object to the second, that in totally destroying the faculties of man, and in straining the necessity of grace, they authorize him to say, "Seeing literally that I can do nothing, I ought not to blame myself for doing nothing;

The second charge the first that in conferring too much honour on the powers of man, and in affording him too much reason to believe he is still the arbitrator of his own will, they throw the temptation in his way to crown himself with his own merits, and to become the worker of his own salvation. Now, supposing we were obliged to choose either to lean to the pride of man, or to his corruption, for which must we decide? I am fully convinced that the necessity of diligence, which is imposed upon us, should not give any colour to our pride: and you will see it instantly; you will see that however great the application which the best of saints may have made to the work of their salvation, humility was their invariable sentiment. You will see that after having read, and thought, and reflected; that having endeavoured to subdue their senses, and to sacrifice the passions God requires in sacrifice, they have believed it their duty to abase their eyes to the earth, and to sink into the dust from which they were made; yea, always to say with the profoundest sentiments of abasement, "O God, righteousness belongeth unto thee, but unto us shame and confusion of face," Dan. ix. 7. Hence, if we were obliged to choose either a system which apparently favours the pride of man, or a system which apparently favours his corruption, we could not hesitate, we must sacrifice the last to the first. The reason is obvious, because in leaning to the pride of man, you do but favour one passion, whereas, by leaning to the corruption of man, you favour every passion; you favour hatred, revenge, and obduracy; and in favouring every passion, you favour this very pride you are wishful to destroy. Now, it must be incomparably better to favour but one passion, than to favour them all in one.

Maxim 5. In pressing the laws of grace, do not impose the law of making rules so general as to admit of no exceptions. I know indeed that God is always like himself, and that there is a certain uniformity which is the grand character of all his actions; but on this occasion, as on many others, he deviates from common rules. There are miracles in grace, as in nature: so you shall presently see, my brethren, in the use of this maxim, and in the necessity of this precaution.

II. Entering now on the doctrine of grace, and with the precautions just laid down, do not fear to follow us into this troubled sea, how dangerous soever it may appear, and how abundant soever it may be, in shipwrecks. I proceed to associate practice with speculation, and to comprise in six propositions all that a Christian ought to know, and all he ought to do, in regard to this subject.

1. Nature is so depraved, that man, without supernatural aids, cannot conform to the conditions of his salvation.

2. That how invincible soever this corruption may be, there is a wide difference between the man who enjoys, and the man who is deprived of revelation.

3. That the aids which man can neither derive from the wreck of nature, nor from ex terior revelation, are promised to him in the gospel.

« السابقةمتابعة »