Page images
PDF
EPUB

SERMON XI.

OF CHURCH COMMUNION.

LUKE ix. 49, 50.

AND JOHN ANSWERED AND SAID, MASTER, WE SAW ONE CASTING OUT DEVILS IN THY NAME, AND WE FORBAD HIM, BECAUSE HE FOLLOWETH NOT WITH US. AND JESUS SAID UNTO HIM, FORBID HIM NOT: FOR HE THAT IS NOT AGAINST US, IS FOR US.

(

WHEN Jesus, in the entrance on his Ministry,

had thought fit to confirm the truth of his Gospel, by the EVIDENCE OF MIRACLES, he was graciously pleased to contrive, that that which was the credential of his Mission should, at the same time, minister relief and consolation to the bodily infirmi ties of those, whose spiritual disorders he was sent to heal. On this account, as well as to give ad ditional lustre to his Character, he communicated of this divine power to his Followers.

But these gross and carnal-minded men considered their gifts and graces, not as a trust imparted to them for the benefit of others; but as a prerogative given them in proper to adorn their own personal VOL. IX.

Q

characters.

characters. So that, on seeing a man dispensing the same blessings, though in the name of their common Master, yet because he followed not with them, they forbad him the exercise of his ministerial function; as if they themselves had been erected into a Society or Company, with the privilege of an exclusive trade: And, with great satisfaction in this their conduct, they acquaint their heavenly Master with the silence they had imposed upon this presuming Schismatic. But they were surprised at their reception, when, instead of applause, they were received with this cold admonition, Forbid him not: for he that is not against us, is for us. Yet they would have seen reason to be thankful for the moderation and gentleness of the reproof, had they reflected on the absurdity, as well as iniquity, of their behaviour. For it was but just before that these very men, who now restrained a Follower of Christ from exercising the virtue communicated to him, because he was not of their Society, had themselves essayed the very same power, and, through the deficiency of their faith, had essayed it in vain. So that we may reasonably conclude, there was in this first exertion of uncharitable restraint, what has been found in it ever since; not a little envy mingled with a great deal of zeal.

Yet as carnal as this temper is, and as seasonably as it was reproved, it has rarely failed to shew itself in every age, and almost in every country, to stop the progress of the Gospel, and narrow the Communion of Saints.

* Ver. 40.

And

And here, as in all other cases, where the genius of our holy Faith is violated, a text was at hand, to flatter their prejudices, and support them in their delusions. For St. Matthew* tells us, that Jesus, on a certain occasion, delivered himself in the following manner, HE THAT IS NOT WITH ME IS AGAINST ME. A declaration so opposite to the former, that it will require to have the two texts accorded, before we can draw any certain conclusion from either of them.

It is to be observed, then, that these different propositions are delivered by Jesus at very different junctures so that we may presume they were directed to different objects; and may therefore be well reconciled, and made to stand quietly together. This is indeed the case; they bear a very friendly aspect towards each other.

The words of my text were occasioned by the disciples forbidding a man the exercise of his ministry, though he professed his faith in Jesus, because he conformed not to the discipline of the Twelve. But the words in St. Matthew were directed to another sort of men, his enemies, the Pharisees who, when they were convinced of the truth of his miracles, were yet so prejudiced against his mission, that they affected to believe, he cast out Devils by Beelzebub, the Prince of the Devils. The absurdity of which impious subterfuge, when Jesus had exposed as it deserved, he subjoined this general truth, He that is not with me is against me.

[ocr errors]

Here we see it is the dissenting from the FAITH

• Ch. xii. 30.

OF JESUS, not from the DISCIPLINE OF A CHURCH denominated from him, which deprives the Dissentient of any share in him. And, indeed, as it . would seem to violate the strong Benevolence of our holy Religion, to debar the faithful of their claim to its benefits, on account of their separating from, or rather not associating with, some of its professors, in Church-fellowship ; so it would appa-: rently dishonour its dignity, and defeat its peculiar virtue, to imagine that the opposers of it had a right to its privileges, on this only title, that they stood upon the common foundation of the moral Law.

These two texts, therefore, do not only agree well together, but do indeed imply the truth of one another... For if the benefits be so great, and so necessary to humanity, it is not fit they should depend on so precarious a ground, as this or that mode of discipline: And if it be the proper virtue of Christianity, to bestow them, it would not be. just that any other mode of belief should share in the honour of conveying them.

apt

These reciprocal Truths, likewise, have a commodious application: and we may properly oppose them. to those two extremes; one of which is to bewilder the zealots for the national Religion; the other, the lukewarm professors of Christianity at large: While one side supposeth, there is no Salvation out of the pale of his own Church; and the other, that there is no happiness which moral virtue alone is not able to procure.

These errors are equally hurtful to true Religion. But the former only is my present subject: It is

that

that which my text condemns. How justly, we shall now see.

This narrow, intolerant Spirit, which excludes from the benefits of the Gospel, all without the national or established pale, notwithstanding their profession of the common faith of Jesus, is alike injurious to GoD and MAN.

I. For first, it alters the TERMS OF SALVATION, as they are delivered in the Gospel; which are, Faith in Christ, and repentance towards God; by adding others to them, such as fellow-membership in Church Communion. To change the fundamental Laws of Christ's spiritual Kingdom, where he is the only Lawgiver, is an offence of the highest nature, as not only implying simple disobedience, but usurpation likewise. A Church acting with this Spirit, not only throws off. Subjection, but assumes the Sovereignty: And is no longer the Sheep-fold of the good Shepherd, but the den of Anti-Christ, the Thief and Robber.

Again, This innovation is opposite to the doctrine of REDEMPTION, and foreign to the whole genius of the Gospel. They were not the sins of men, as they make collective bodies in Communities, but the sins of each individual of our common species, for which Christ died. The descendants of Adam had, through his transgression, lost the free gift of immortality; which was as freely restored by the death and sufferings of Christ. But to whom was it restored? not to collective bodies, who should worship this Restorer with public Rites and Ceremonies;

Q 3

« PreviousContinue »