Oldalképek
PDF
ePub

of God is the firft commandment, is no manner of reason to think that it ever is, or can be, inconfiftent with the fecond.

The love of God is properly ftyled the first commandment, in respect to God who is the object of the love, and because it is indeed the foundation of all religion, even of that commandment which is styled the second. But this is fo far from fhewing that the love of God may ever clash with the love of our neighbour, that it proves the contrary; for, if the love of our neighbour is deducible from the love of God, it must ever be confiftent with it.

I know very well that the ancient writers of morality have not gone higher for principles to build their precepts on, than to the common defires of nature, and the feveral relations of man to man : but that is their fault; for they might have looked farther with very good fuccefs: for, if we confider God as the common father of mankind, and (as from his goodness and impartiality we must needs judge) equally concerned for the welfare of all his children, we shall have a very fure foundation for all the moral duties. No man, who thinks himself bound to love and obey God, can think himself at liberty to hurt or opprefs thofe whom God has taken under his care and protection: no man, who believes it his intereft as well as his duty to please God, but muft likewife believe it his interest and duty to be kind and tender towards those who are the children of God, and in whofe happiness he is not an unconcerned fpectator. For this reason the love of God is called the firft and great commandment; and for this reafon it never can be inconfift

depend upon it

2 ent with the love of our neighbour, which is the fecond. In all cafes therefore where your duty to your neighbour is plain and clear, your duty to God concurs with it. All fcruples to the contrary are wicked, perhaps wicked hypocrify; for it is the greatest indignity to God to ufe his name, and pretend his honour, to cover the injuries you are doing to his creatures, and your own brethren.

The fecond obfervation I would make from the text is, that, our Saviour having declared that on these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets, it is certain that nothing is or ought to be efteemed religion, that is not reducible to one or other of these principles.

But what then, you will fay, muft become of the inftitutions of religion, which, confidered in themfelves, and according to their own nature, are not properly to be referred either to the love of God, or our neighbour? for, if all that is religion may be fo referred, it fhould feem that thefe inftitutions, which cannot be fo referred, are no part of religion. It is certain that mere pofitive inftitutions are not founded upon any moral reason of the actions themselves: if they were, they might eafily be drawn from thefe general precepts without the help of a pofitive command: for the whole moral reafon of religion is either the love of God, or the love of our neighbour; and to make any thing else to be religion, strictly speaking, that does not partake of this moral reason, is ignorance and fuperstition. But then there is a very manifeft difference between religion and the means of religion: and what

ever is part of our religion, and yet not fo upon the account of the moral reason, can only be efteemed as a means of religion; not ordained for its own fake, but for the fake of that religion which is founded upon moral reason.

This diftinction between religion and the means of religion would be of ufe, if carefully attended to; it would teach men where to point their best endeavour, and where to place their hopes and expectations: for, if your zeal and fervour be spent only upon the means of religion, and goes no farther, ye are still in your fins.

And from hence it is plain, that there can be no competition between the duties called moral, and those called pofitive: for, if the pofitive duties are the means and inftruments appointed by God for preferving true religion and morality, true religion and morality can never be at variance with the means appointed to preferve them. And, as to the obligation of obferving thefe duties, it is on all fides equal: for, fince we are bound to obey God by all the ties of moral duty, and fince the inftitutions of religion are of God's appointment, whatever the matter of the inftitution be, the obligation to obey is certainly a moral obligation: which, duly confidered, will fhew, that the text extends to all parts of religion, and that on these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.

DISCOURSE XIV.

PART I.

HEBREWS iii. 12.

Take heed, brethren, left there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief in departing from the living God.

THE words of the text contain an earnest exhortation, as is evident upon the first view: and the fubject of the exhortation is faith towards God; for faith is the principle deftroyed by an evil heart of unbelief. But faith, as fome think, is no proper fubject for exhortation: for, if faith is a mere act of the mind judging upon motives of credibility, it is as reasonable to exhort a man to fee with his eyes, as to judge with his understanding; and the warmeft admonition will not enlarge the fight, which will ftill depend upon the goodness of the eye, and the distance and pofition of the object. In faith the cafe is much the fame: if the affections are throughly raised, and made eager to embrace the faith, they may chance indeed to step in between the premises and conclufion, and make men profefs to believe, without knowing or confidering the reasons of belief; which is to deftroy the founda

2

tion of faith: or, if they keep their due distance, and leave the cause to be decided by reason and understanding, their influence will be nothing, and they might as well have been left out of the case; fince faith will follow the judgment the mind makes upon the motives of credibility.

But then, if this be the true notion of faith, that it is merely an act of the mind affenting to a truth upon motives of credibility, how comes it that in every page we find the praises of it in the Gospel ? What is there in this to deferve the bleffings promised to the faithful? Or, whence is it that the whole of our falvation is put upon this foot? Abraham, we are told, was juftified by faith, and by faith inherited the promifes: by faith we become the fons of · Abraham, and heirs together with him of the hope which is through Chrift Jefus: by faith we have admittance to God, and are entitled through the Spirit of adoption to cry Abba, Father: by faith we are delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the fons of God: by faith we wait for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body. But how come all these prerogatives to belong to faith, if faith be nothing else but believing things in themfelves credible? Why are we not faid to be justified by fight, as well as by faith? For is there not the fame virtue in feeing things vifible, as in believing things credible? Is not the understanding as faulty when it rejects things credible, as the eye when it does not perceive things vifible? Tell me then, what is faith, that it fhould raise men above the level of mortality, and make them become like the angels of heaven?

« ElőzőTovább »