Monday, January 22, 2018

The Nature And Remedy of Sinful Shame

THE NATURE AND REMEDY OF SINFUL SHAME.

Psalm119:6.—“Then shall I not be ashamed, when I have respect unto all thy commandments.” 

To be able to look up to God with humble confidence, and to obey his commands with freedom and fidelity before the world, is, at once, the comfort and the glory of a Christian. This, however, is an attainment not to be made without a vigorous conflict—“For the flesh lusteth against the spirit and the spirit against the flesh, and these are contrary the one to the other; so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.” The pleadings of corrupt nature, conspiring with the temptations of the world, and the suggestions of the great enemy of souls, seduce the Christian to the omission or violation of duty; and thus deprive him of the light of the divine countenance, and of firmness and activity in the divine life. The inspired Psalmist seems to have contemplated this evil, and to have intended to prescribe its remedy, when he exclaimed, in the words of the text—“Then shall I not be ashamed, when I have respect unto all thy commandments.”—In discoursing on the words, therefore, I will, in reliance on divine assistance, endeavour
  1. To explain the nature and operations of the sinful shame which the inspired writer appears so desirous to avoid.
  2. Show how a regard to all God’s commandments will destroy the existence of such shame, or prevent its embarrassments.

After this, a few practical reflections will conclude the address.

I. First, then, I am to endeavour to explain the nature and operations of that shame, which the sacred writer appears so desirous to avoid.

Shame has been defined—“the passion which is felt when reputation is supposed to be lost.” This is no doubt the popular import of the term; and yet it is not, as we shall presently see, the only sense in which it is used by the sacred writers. I would remark, however, that con sidering it merely as a principle of the mind, which renders us sensible to the ill opinion of our fellow men, it is no inconsiderable guard on our virtue. It is, indeed, true, that this, in common with every other useful principle of our nature, may, by being turned into a wrong channel, produce injury instead of benefit. It too often happens, in fact, that good men, from being unduly influenced by a regard to the opinion of the worldly or profane, are brought to be ashamed of their duty; and this is a part of the very evil against which the text is directed. Still, however, it must be admitted, that a sense of shame is, in itself, extremely useful, and when suitably regulated and rightly directed, is a restraint against vice and an incentive to virtue. A destitution of this principle is ever considered as marking the extreme of human depravity—We usually join together the epithets shameless and abandoned. The extirpation or extinction of the sentiment of shame, therefore, is by no means to be attempted. Our endeavours are only to be directed against suffering it to be perverted, and against laying ourselves open to those wounds which it may justly inflict. Now, with this view, we are looking for the origin and source of these evils; and I think we shall find them, by turning our attention from the creature to the Creator—from man to God.

In the sacred writings, the word we consider is frequently used to denote those painful feelings of the mind, which are produced by a conviction of our offences against the Majesty of Heaven; especially when those offences partake peculiarly of the nature, or are seen re markably in the light of baseness, unreasonableness, and ingratitude. Thus, when the Jews, who had been mercifully restored from the Babylonish captivity, violated the command of the Most High, by improper connexions with the idolatrous nations, Ezra thus addresses Jehovah—“Oh my God! I blush and am ashamed to lift up my face to thee my God, for our iniquities are increased over our heads, and our trespass is gone up unto the heavens”—Here shame is used to denote little else than the operations of conscience; or the oppression of soul which is produced by the sense of being guilty and vile in the sight of a holy God: And you will carefully observe, that the effect of this is, the destruction of all freedom and confidence in addressing the Father of mercies, and almost of the hope of pardon and acceptance with him. This, my brethren, is undoubtedly the origin of the evil which the text contemplates. It takes its rise from this point, and its baneful influence is extended through a long train of unhappy consequences. We may trace them thus—

All practical religion has its very foundation in a realizing belief of an all-seeing God, who, while he is perfectly acquainted with all the secrets of the soul, and with every action of life, is also of purer eyes than to behold any iniquity, but with detestation and abhorrence. But the mind, we say, in which this belief and apprehension exists, is conscious of dealing treacherously with the Most High; conscious that its affections are shamefully divided between him and inferior objects; conscious of not seeking his favour in secret with that holy earnestness which its value demands; conscious that its penitence for sin is miserably imperfect; conscious that hidden lusts and corruptions, not only rise and plead for indulgence, but actually obtain it; conscious that certain duties have been most criminally neglected and certain sins allowed; conscious of presumptuous sinning against light and know ledge; conscious of repeated violations of the most solemn resolutions and engagements; conscious, in a word, not merely of remaining pollution, but of inexcusable neglect, unfaithfulness and insincerity, in duty to God and devotion to his service. How, I ask, can he whose mind informs him of all this, look up, with any confidence, to that infinite Being who, he realizes, is perfectly acquainted with all this baseness? He cannot do it:—shame and confusion drive him away from the divine throne. He fears to draw near to God; or if he at tempts it, the service is hasty and superficial. The mind is afraid of its own reflections, and seeks temporary and imperfect ease by overlooking or endeavouring to forget its state. Still, a secret uneasiness continually preys upon it, nor will ever cease to corrode it, while it remains thus unsettled and divided.

Follow, now, this victim of shame before God, into his intercourse among men. Suppose that he has never openly professed a religious character. Then you see him most piteously embarrassed, confounded and distressed. Wicked companions solicit and endeavour to lead him into vice. His conscience is too much awake to permit him to comply with pleasure, and yet he is sensible of too much insincerity to allow him to refuse with firmness. He half refuses and half complies; and thus becomes the scorn of the licentious, without obtaining the countenance of the pious. Those who are strictly religious regard his friendship as uncertain; those who are openly profane consider his con duct as dastardly; and thus the hesitating wretch is covered with shame before the world, as well as before his Maker.

Or suppose—and, alas! that it is not a mere supposition—that the unhappy state of mind we have described, belongs to one who publicly professes to be a follower of Christ. How painfully must he feel the inconsistency of his profession, with the inward temper of his heart? How misgiving and wavering must be his mind? How unfurnished is he, while destitute of inward support, for all those conflicts with the world, and all those reproaches from it, with which he will be sure to meet? With what face can he reprove others, while secretly he condemns himself? When called to speak for God, how will his mind misgive him, and his face crimson with blushes, while his heart in forms him, that he is espousing a cause in which his own sincerity is doubtful? How will it often seal his lips in silence, when he ought to speak? When censured and condemned by the profligate, how will he be wounded by the recollection that the sentence is partly merited? When his good works, themselves, are evil spoken of, how will he be dismayed by seeing the just chastisement of heaven for the improper disposition with which he performed them? When charged with the black crime of hypocrisy, how will he be confounded to think that, in the sight of God, the charge is bottomed on truth? When called to suffer for conscience sake, or to hazard his life in the discharge of duty, how will he be appalled and shrink back with fear, while conscience tells him that he is a backslider from God, if not a settled enemy to him? When only called to the open avowal of his Christian character, in the solemn acts of religious worship, how will inward upbraidings fill him with trembling and embarrassment, and mar the performance, by a diffidence equally distressing and dishonourable?—Nay, will not these causes drive him altogether from attempting many duties, and go near to turn him wholly from his Christian course? Yes, my brethren, these are the consequences of the shame of which I have spoken, as they take place in the discharge of religious obligations in the sight of men. The summary of its history, therefore, is—that it originates in a sense of guilt, arising from the consciousness of being unfaithful to God; which first destroys or prevents a filial intercourse with him, and confidence of his favour; and then, as a necessary consequence, abashes and confounds its subject, when in the eye of the world, he assumes a character, or attempts a practice, which is contrary to the feelings of his heart. This is the evil contemplated in the text—an evil of unspeakable magnitude, in the estimation of all who have not wholly lost their regard both to their duty and their comfort, in the Christian life. Listen, then, to the remedy prescribed—while I attempt to show -

II. How a regard to all God’s commandments will destroy the existence, or prevent the embarrassments, of this sinful shame.

In entering on this part of the subject, it may be of some importance to endeavour to obtain clear and distinct ideas of what was in tended to be conveyed by the expression—“having a respect unto all God’s commandments.” Does it intend a perfect obedience to all the divine laws, or a sinless observance of them? Certainly not—For the inspired penman evidently fixed his views on an attainment, which he not only proposed to labour after, but which he actually hoped to make, in the present life;—and we have the unequivocal testimony of revelation “that there is not a just man on earth, who doth good and sinneth not,” and that “if we say we have no sin we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us.” Neither can it be intended, that any man will ever yield such an obedience to the divine requisitions as shall, of itself, be the just ground of his confidence before God; or so place him on the , footing of merit, as that he may claim the approbation and favour of heaven, as a matter of right. The impossibility of this is, indeed, implied in the last remark; for nothing less than an unsinning respect to the commands of God, through the whole of our existence, could entitle us to this claim. The finished work of the Redeemer,—his atoning sacrifice, his complete and perfect righteousness, and his prevalent intercession, constitute the only meritorious cause of par don and acceptance with God, for any of the apostate race of Adam —It is only in Christ Jesus that God is “reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them;” because “he hath made him to be sin for us who knew no sin, that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.” The first freedom, which any soul that has been suitably convinced of sin obtains, to look up to a holy God with a measure of filial confidence, is wholly derived from seeing the ample provision which is made in the plan of salvation, for extending pardon and eternal life to the sinner, in consistency with the divine honour; and from a disposition to embrace this plan with thankfulness, and to trust it in faith. It is, therefore, so far from being true that the expression warrants any reliance on our own merits, that it necessarily implies the opposite doctrine: “As it is written, behold I lay in Zion a stumbling stone and rock of offence, and whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed”—Not to be ashamed, is here predicated, and it is certainly true, only of those who believe in Christ. It is, moreover, written, “This is his commandment, that we should believe on the name of his Son Jesus Christ,” and therefore we cannot have respect unto all the commandments of God, while a compliance with this is wanting.

I detain you with this statement, my brethren, because it is to be regarded, not merely in the light of a negative, or as intended to guard against a misapprehension" of the truth, but because it contains the essence of the truth itself. It is an undoubted fact, as I am sure every exercised Christian will testify, that when he has wandered from God, and is sunk down into despondence under a sense of his backsliding and unworthiness, the first and only relief that he obtains is, from a heart melting, and a heart attracting view of the infinite fulness of his Redeemer, and the freeness of the riches of his grace. It is this view that encourages him to return; it is this that brings him back with true brokenness of heart; it is this that enables him to cherish hope though most undeserving; and it is this that sweetly constrains him to devote himself more unreservedly to God than ever he had done before, from a strong sense of gratitude and obligation. In having such respect, therefore, unto all God’s commandments as will deliver us from the influence of shame, a lively exercise of faith in Christ, lies at the bottom of all. It is also the constraining influence of the love of Christ, which is the source of that new obedience, which reaches the extent of the requisition—It produces what has sometimes been called a gracious sincerity, in the heart of the believer. It awakens in him a strong desire to be delivered from the dominion of all sin; so that he will not knowingly and allowedly indulge in any transgression; he will desire that every lust and corruption may be mortified, and subdued; and will pant after greater conformity to God. He will be so far from desiring to rest short of any thing which Christ requires of his people, that he will press forward, and ardently long after the highest attainment, and lament that higher attainments are not made. He will, in short, seek his supreme happiness in communion with God, in the diligent use of all the appropriate means of holy intercourse with him. Thus the author of the text, in the 8th verse of the psalm where it is found, says—“Let my heart be sound in thy statutes, that I be not ashamed.” It is this soundness of heart—this gracious sincerity in the sight of God—this impartial regard or respect to every command of the Most High, without taking one and leaving another—this careful employment of all the means and methods of avoiding transgression that answers completely the condition of the assertion on which I dis course. And let us now see how strictly the assertion will be verified, in those who comply with the condition.

I remark then, in the first place, that a compliance with this condition removes, naturally and radically, the cause of all the guilty shame, and embarrassment of which I have spoken, by producing a consistent character. Shame is the natural consequence and proper punishment of guilt. The only methods of getting rid of the pain which it occasions are, to extinguish the principle, or to avoid the causes of its excitement. The former of these methods is actually and frequently pursued by the abandoned. By plunging into the excesses of vice, and familiarizing themselves with all its pollutions, they extinguish shame and conscience together—On the middle character, contemplated in the former part of this discourse, that character in which there is still a sensibility to the demands of duty, and where, notwithstanding, those demands are disregarded or left unsatisfied, it is here that the principle of shame inflicts, as we have seen, all its chastisements. But where the demands of duty are satisfied, there the cause of shame itself is taken away; and though the utmost sensibility be retained, it creates no uneasiness, because it meets with no violation. This is the case of those who have that respect unto all God’s commandments, which we have just considered. Through the peace speaking blood of Jesus, they have received the full remission of all their sins. By maintaining a close and humble walk with God, they preserve an habitual persuasion of this comfortable truth; or rather they experience a daily and habitual renewal of its effects. In the exercise of the spirit of adoption, they draw near with a holy confidence, and cry “Abba, Father”— They have a blessed assurance, that God will realize to them all the benefits of the covenant of grace; and esteeming “his favour as life, and his loving kindness as better than life,” they rejoice in him “with a joy which is exceeding great and full of glory.” In one word, they verify in their own experience the declaration of the Apostle, where he says—“Beloved, if our heart condemn us not, then have we confidence toward God: and whatsoever we ask we receive of him, because we keep his commandments, and do those things that are pleasing in his sight”—And thus when that which we have seen to be the very fountain of shame, namely, a want of confidence in God, is dried up in the heart of a Christian, it can send forth none of its bitter streams to poison his pleasure, or to wither his strength, in the public discharge of his duty. “His heart is fixed, trusting in God.” His heart is in all that he says, and in all that he does; and therefore he becomes—as we are told the righteous shall become—“bold as a lion.” Is it incumbent on him to reprove the vicious and profane? he can do it without embarrassment, for he only speaks against that which his soul abhors. Is an occasion offered to speak for God? his mouth speaketh from the abundance of his heart, and therefore he speaks freely, pertinently, and composedly; and he is ever ready to speak, when a fit opportunity occurs. Is he branded as a hypocrite? he is sensible that his all-seeing Judge knows the charge to be groundless, and therefore it disturbs him not he pities and forgives his accuser. Is he called to avow his Christian character? he does it freely and cheerfully, for it is the character in which he most of all glories. Is he subjected to reproach for the cause of Christ? he even glories that “he is counted worthy to suffer shame for his name,” remembering that “if any man suffer as a Christian, he is not to be ashamed, but to glorify God in this behalf.” Or if he is called to give up life itself, in an adherence to his duty, he can do it cheer fully, even though it were amidst the scoffs of a deriding world; for he knows that the honour which cometh from God, and of which he is sure, is infinitely greater than that which cometh from man only.

Brethren, the history of the church is a continual confirmation of these truths. Supported by the principles I have explained, three unprotected young men could face an assembled nation, could face a burning fiery furnace, could face the mightiest monarch on earth, and say—“Be it known unto thee, O king! that we will not serve thy gods, nor worship the golden image which thou hast set up.” Supported by these principles, two ignorant and unlearned fishermen, dragged from prison, and from chains before the Jewish Sanhedrin, could say—“Be it known unto you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, doth this man stand here before you whole.” Supported by these principles, a host of martyrs, in later ages, have courted a scaffold, or been consumed at the stake. And, without recurring to such striking instances, it is the support of these principles which enables every Christian, who leads a life of real nearness to God, to adorn the doctrine of his Saviour in all things—The blessed assurance which he habitually maintains that his God is his friend, makes him fearless of the world—It raises him far above its influence, and puts, without his seeking it, a dignity into his conduct and his very presence, which nothing else can confer.

2. By having respect to all God’s commandments, we acquire the advantage which arises from a decided character, and are thus delivered from many temptations to those sinful compliances which are the cause of shame. The person who cherishes the inward sentiments, and maintains the outward deportment which has been explained, will unavoidably assume, in the eye of the world, an appearance and character which will distinguish him as one who is not governed by its maxims, and who does not follow its fashions. It will no longer be doubtful to whom he belongs—Those who are conformed to this world, will see and feel that he is guided by other principles than those which influence them, and pursues a totally different system of living and of happiness, from that which they have adopted. Hence they will not so licit an intimacy with him; for intimacies exist only between parties of a similar taste. When thrown together by the calls of business, or in the intercourse of life, (for this character by no means requires austerity or abstractedness,) it will not be expected that the decided friend of piety will relish or take part in questionable liberties. His presence will even prove a restraint on others; or to say the least, his character will be a protection to himself, from solicitations to unlawful practices. That character will also be both a guard on himself against doing or saying any thing that might wound his conscience, and will afford him an advantage in speaking or acting against every thing improper. The desire of appearing consistent, will be a natural call on him to defend what he professes to esteem, and the expectation that he will act this part, will enable him to do it with freedom and with advantage. And thus will temptations to those sinful compliances which are the cause of shame, be greatly diminished, and the principles of religion be guarded, even by the care of reputation.

This decided character for piety, will moreover, render its possessor extremely dear to all who are Christians indeed; and from this cause he will gain an immense advantage. The influence of social inter course, on all our opinions and practice, is ever great; and it is not less in regard to religion, than in reference to any other subject. Christians inform each other by their conversation, encourage and animate each other by their exhortations, assist each other by a comparison of their exercises, embolden each other by a recital of their hopes, and help and strengthen each other by their prayers. He who is joined to this happy society, is continually imbibing more of the spirit which distinguishes and animates it, and is therefore less in danger of acting unworthily of his Christian character, and of wounding his own peace.

3. A respect unto all God’s commandments, will deliver us from the influence of sinful shame, inasmuch as it will exceedingly lower the world, and every created object, in our estimation and regard. This idea has been a little anticipated, but it is of so much importance, that it deserves to be brought distinctly into view. When men are conscious of guilt, it has been admitted that they ought to blush and be con founded—But whence proceeds that fear of man which bringeth a snare? why are men timid and abashed in the discharge of duty? in doing that which their consciences dictate and approve? In some individuals, this, no doubt, must be in part resolved into constitutional make, or natural infirmity. But after every just allowance, much will still remain to be attributed to the high estimation in which we hold the opinions of our fellow men, even when they come in competition with duty and conscience. If it were with us, as it was with the apostle, “a small thing to be judged of man’s judgment,” we should be wholly delivered from this inconvenience, as far as it arises from principle; and should go far to get the victory over it, even as a natural infirmity. Now, a life of nearness to God, will assuredly give us this estimation of all human opinions, so far as they militate with our Christian obligations. The fear of man whose breath is in his nostrils, will be absorbed in the fear of him “who is able to destroy both body and soul in hell.” The mind which takes clear and frequent views of an infinite God, and a boundless eternity; which places them often be fore it, brings them into ideal presence, and dwells as it were sur rounded by them; such a mind will look down on the world with a holy indifference. Its censure or its applause, its smiles or its frowns, will be regarded as matters of small estimation:

“His hand the good man fastens on the skies,
Then bids earth turn, nor feels the idle whirl.”

He feels that his heart and his treasure are in heaven; his thoughts, his hopes, his desires, are principally there. Not setting a high estimation on earthly possessions or human applause, he is not much agitated with anxiety when he contemplates them, nor when they are denied him. This appears to have been eminently the temper of the Psalmist, when he said—“Whom have I in heaven but thee, and there is none on earth that I desire beside thee.” This was the temper of the great apostle of the Gentiles, when he said—“I am crucified to the world and the world to me—Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung that I may win Christ.” This, in fine, is the temper which every one will, in a good degree, possess, whose conversation is in heaven; and possessing this, he will, as a natural consequence, rise above a sinful and ensnaring fear of man, and be able, with comfort and composure, to support and adorn his Christian profession.

Thus, it appears that a respect to all God’s commandments, by giving us a consistent character-producing confidence in God; by rendering that character decided, in the view of the world; and by lessening our estimation for the things of time and the opinions of men; will deliver us from shame and embarrassment in the discharge of every duty.

In how strong a light, my brethren, does this subject place the folly of those, who are balancing in their minds between the demands of religion and the allurements of the world; and endeavouring to reconcile a regard to both? We see that, in fact, they obtain satisfaction from neither—they are the most unhappy persons upon earth. If I speak to any of this description; to any who are doubting and hesitating about coming forward to an open avowal of a Christian character; to any who are half inclined to this, but are held back by a fear of the world; I would entreat them to lay aside their hostility to their own happiness, by a resolute discharge of duty. Believe it, your efforts to reconcile the service of God and the friendship of the world, will be forever vain, and you will be forever tormented while you attempt it. If you will be for God, you must be for him wholly and unreservedly; without seeking to accommodate his service to the opinions and feelings of unsanctified men. Your interest, no less than your duty, en joins this—“Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing, and I will receive you, and will be a father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty.”

In a still stronger light does this subject place both the folly and impiety of professing Christians, who are stealing away to the forbidden pleasures of sin; as if religion were not able to afford them happiness. Be it known that the very reason why it does not afford you happiness, if I speak to such, is because you are not devoted to it; because you mingle it so much with the world, that you debase its nature; because you only retain enough of it to wound your consciences, and to cover you with shame and confusion, but have not enough to enable you to take hold of its divine supports, and to taste its heavenly consolations. Cease then to pierce yourselves through with many sorrows—Return unto the Lord, and cleave unto him with all your heart, and with all your soul, and you shall find that it is not a vain thing to serve him.

On the whole, let us all be exhorted to endeavour to walk more with God—We cannot wander from his presence, without unspeakable in jury to ourselves. In his presence only is the light of life—While we remain here, we bring down a portion of heaven to earth. Let us, therefore, set it as our mark to obey all God’s commandments, without choice or exception. Let us pray unceasingly for the aids of his Holy Spirit, that we may be enabled to do so; and let us guard against every thing that might have a tendency to interrupt our intercourse with our Father in heaven. Amen.

From: Practical Sermons, Extracted From “The Christian Advocate”

Thursday, January 18, 2018

Pierre Allix on the Psalms

Pierre Allix (1641-1717) was a French Protestant pastor and author. The revocation of the Edict of Nantes in 1685 compelled him to take refuge in London. There he set up a church in Jewin street, Aldersgate. He was the most celebrated Huguenot preacher of the 1680s in England. In 1690 Allix was created Doctor of Divinity by Emmanuel College, Cambridge, and was given the treasurership and a canonry in salisbury Cathedral by Bishop Gilbert Burnet.

The work is composed of two parts: First Allix presents an essay describing the correct method of interpreting the Psalms. The second part is the whole book of Psalms itself, supplied with short explanatory notes before each one.

The introductory essay by Allix, explaining the proper method of interpreting the Psalms, is an outstanding work. He argues conclusively, that the idea of “double meaning” is foolish. Neither Christ, nor His apostles ever understood the Psalms to have a double meaning (applied to David or Solomon, and also to Christ).

Allix write: “Nothing is more ordinary among the interpreters of the scripture, than to explain the Oracles of the Old Testament in the first place according to the Letter, and afterwards according to the spirit. They carefully refer to David, for instance, or to solomon, what they think belongs to them in the Psalms, and then what they find is non-applicable to David or to solomon, they pretend it has a regard to the Messias. The ground these Divines go upon-is, that the Holy Ghost in the New Testament has referred to our Lord Jesus Chris divers Prophesies, which seem to have been pronounced under the Old Testament with respect to David and to Solomon, and which indeed seem to befit them in some measure, though they have not an exact fulfilling in those Princes, but only in the Person of the Messias. “They assert therefore, that no inconvenience will follow from referring to the Type what belongs to it, and to the Antitype what concerns it; nay, they look upon this duplicity of sense in the same Prophecy, as worthy of the spirit of God, being an instance of the care he has taken to give his ancient People Types of the time to come...“I affirm that method to be absolutely unknown to the holy Writers; it is an human fancy, grounded only upon the invention of the Interpreters. And indeed, as it is not agreeable to natural Principles for God to grant a Revelation treating and speaking of two different Subjects and of two different Persons in the same speech, and with the same words, so one could never have guessed the Spirit of God did intend his Predictions should be so understood, without his particular Revelation that they had two senses this respected two Persons very different from each other in all the circumstances of place, time, and actions.”

Allix goes on to show how Peter, for instance, when citing Psalm 16, argues that it would be absurd to interpret it of David. Also, the Apostles refer more than once to David as “a prophet,” signifying that what he wrote could not possibly be about himself. It was the normal practice of Christ and His apostles to refer all of the Psalms to Christ – and to assert – in no uncertain terms - that they spoke of Him.

The early church did the same thing. This is seen in Justin Martyr's Dialogue with Trypho, in Tertullian's Treatise Against the Jews, and Cyprian's books to Quirinius. Allix says, in essence,
“You can't go wrong interpreting the Psalms the way that the Apostles did – mainly because they did so under the inspiration of the same Holy Spirit who put the original words in the mouth of David.”

The power of the predictive nature of the Psalms is blunted, Allix maintains, by this double method of interpreting them. So he says, “And truly, supposing that method of interpreting Scripture by a double sense to be true, they could never have been able to persuade anybody from the old Prophecies. Go and tell an Heathen or a Jew that there are Prophecies in the Old Testament that speak of two persons; viz. of David and of the Messias; at the same time, without any difference in the Stile, but distinguished only by this characteristic: that what has been fulfilled in David in a lower sense, was to he fulfilled in the Person of the Messias in a much higher and more magnificent sense, and I am sure he will appear not at all satisfied. with the Proposition...So long as Divine Revelation is brought in to declare a fact which is at a distance, and which cannot be known and which cannot be known otherwise, the efficacy of the Prophecy is much weakened by supposing that the Holy Ghost has expressed himself concerning two Facts, one present, and the other more remote, in the same terms, this thing would naturally confound the sense of the Prophecy, and seems to want a new revelation for the distinguishing of its senses.”

There are some valuable insights in the prefatory notes for each Psalm, but the real gold is the introductory essay on interpreting the whole book. 

The book can be accessed here

Saturday, January 13, 2018

H.P. Liddon on the Timeless Nature of Scripture

“Some instruction, no doubt, is to be gathered from the literature of every people; the products of the human mind, in all its phases, and in circumstances the most unpromising, have generally something to tell us. But, on the other hand, there is a great deal in the wisest uninspired literatures that cannot properly be described as permanently or universally instructive; much in that of ancient Greece; much in that of our own country. And therefore, when an Apostle says of a great collection of books of various characters, and on various subjects —embodying the legislation, history, poetry, morals, of a small Eastern people —that whatsoever was contained in them had been set down for the instruction of men of another and a wider faith, living in a later age, and, by implication, for the instruction of all human beings, —this is certainly, when we think of it, an astonishing assertion. Clearly, if the Apostle is to be believed, these books cannot be like any other similar collection of national laws, records, poems, proverbs; there must be in them some quality or qualities which warrant this lofty estimate. 

“Then we may observe that, as books rise in the scale of excellence, whatever their authorship or outward form, they tend towards exhibiting a permanence and universality of interest; they rise above the local and personal accidents of their production, and discover qualities which address themselves to the mind and heart of the human race. 

This is, as we all know, the case to a great extent with Shakespeare. The ascendancy of his genius is entirely independent of the circumstances of his life, of which we know scarcely anything, and of the dramatic form into which he threw his ideas. He has been read, re-read, commented on, discussed, by nine generations of Englishmen; his phrases have passed into the language, so that we constantly quote him without knowing it; his authority as an analyst and exponent of human nature has steadily grown with the advancing years. Nay, despite the eminently English form of his writings, German critics have claimed him as, by reason of the wealth of his thought, a virtual fellow-countryman; and even the peoples of the Latin races, who would have greater difficulty in understanding him, have not been slow to offer him the homage of their sympathy and admiration. 

“And yet, by what an interval is Shakespeare parted from the books of the Hebrew Scriptures His grand dramatic creations, we feel, after all are only the workmanship of a shrewd human observer, with the limitations of a human point of view, and with that restricted moral authority which is all that the highest human genius can claim. But here is a Book which provides for human nature as a whole and which makes this provision with an insight and comprehensiveness that does not belong to the capacity of the most gifted men. Could any merely human authors have stood the test which the Old Testament has stood? Think what it has been to the Jewish people throughout the tragic vicissitudes of their wonderful history. Think what it has been to Christendom. For nineteen centuries it has formed the larger part of the religious handbook of the Christian Church; it has shaped Christian hopes; it has largely governed Christian legislation; it has supplied the language for Christian prayer and praise. The noblest and saintliest souls in Christendom have one after another fed their souls on it, or even on fragments of it; taking a verse, and shutting the spiritual ear to everything else, and in virtue of the concentrated intensity with which they have thus sought, for days, and weeks, and months, and years, to penetrate the inmost secrets of this or that fragment of its consecrated language, rising to heroic heights of effort and endurance. Throughout the Christian centuries the Old Testament has been worked like a mine, which is as far from being exhausted today as in the Apostolic age. Well might the old Hebrew poet cry, 'I am as glad of Thy Word as one that findeth great spoils.' 'The Law of the Lord is an undefiled Law, converting the soul the testimony of the Lord is sure, and giveth wisdom unto the simple. The statutes of the Lord are right, and rejoice the heart: the commandment of the Lord is pure, and giveth light unto the eyes. More to be desired are they than gold, yea, than much fine gold: sweeter also than honey, and the honeycomb.'

“Even those parts of the Old Testament which seem least promising at first sight have some instruction to give us, if we will only look out for it. Those genealogies which occur in historical books sometimes remind us of the awful responsibility which attaches to the trans mission, with the gift of physical life, of a type of character, which we have ourselves formed or modified, to another, perhaps a distant generation or sometimes they suggest the care with which all that bore on the human ancestry of our Lord was preserved in the records of the people of revelation. Those accounts, too, of fierce war and indiscriminate slaughter, such as the extermination of the Canaanites, pourtray the vigour and thoroughness with which we should endeavour to extirpate sins that may long have settled in our hearts. Those minute ritual directions of the Law, which might at first sight read like the rubrics of a system that had for ever passed away, should, as they might, bring before us first one and then another aspect of that to which they pointed the redeeming work of our Lord Jesus Christ.”

H.P. Liddon, The Worth of the Old Testament, A sermon preached Second Sunday of Advent (December 8, 1889)

Friday, December 15, 2017

John 6 Is Not About The Sacrament Of The Lord's Supper

By corporal manducation, we understand the eating of bread and wine, which Jesus Christ honoured with the title of bis body and blood, because they are the sacrament and commemoration of them. But our opponents pretend actually to eat the body of Jesus Christ with the mouth, and to transmit it into the stomach; and to support this very gross and Capernaitical manducation, they allege the sixth chapter, where Jesus says that he is the bread come down from heaven, and promises to give them his flesh to eat.
  1. To believe that, we must purposely shut our eyes and contradict the Son of God, — for the whole discourse is ad dressed to the Jews of Capernaum, to whom he promises to give his flesh to eat. If by these words he promised to give them the Eucharist, he deceived them, for he never administered nor presented to them the Holy Supper.
  2. That even appears by the time at which Jesus Christ pronounced this discourse. The Holy Supper was not then instituted, nor till about two years after. How could our Lord's disciples know that he spoke to them of the Eucharist which had yet no existence, and which had never yet been mentioned any where throughout this discourse?
  3. Does our Lord make the slightest mention of the table, or of the cup, or of the supper, or of the breaking of bread, or of the distribution of bread among many? In short, there are none of those actions wherein the ad ministration of sacrament consists.
  4. It is to be remarked, that Jesus Christ often speaks in the present tense. He does not say, "I shall be the bread of life, — I shall be the bread come down from heaven;" but "I am the bread come down from heaven, — I am the bread of life; and he who eats my flesh hath eternal life." He was, therefore, the bread of life before the Holy Supper was instituted; and this bread could be eaten, and was the nourishment of the soul, at the time when the Holy Supper was not yet in existence.
  5. Now, that by eating and drinking the Lord means believing and confiding in himself, and thereby being made alive and sustained, he himself shews, saying, (verse 35,) "I am the bread of life; he who comes unto me shall never hunger; and whosoever believes in me shall never thirst." Who does not see that in this passage believe is put for drink, since thirst is quenched by believing; and as by the word come he speaks of a spiritual coming, so by the word drink he means a spiritual mode of drinking?
  6. And when the Lord says, (verse 47,) "He that believeth on me hath eternal life, — I am the bread of life," who does not see that this bread is received by believing? For Jesus Christ shews how he is the bread of life, viz. that they who believe on him have eternal life.
  7. Even the words on which our adversaries found the most, are those which are most adverse to them. The Lord says, (verse 53,) "Except ye eat the flesh, and drink the blood of the Son of Man, ye have no life in you." — Here it is evident that he speaks of a manducation necessary to salvation, and without which no one can be saved. He does not, therefore, speak of a corporal and oral manducation of the Sacrament, seeing that without it so many are saved. To say that this manducation is not necessary in the fact, but in wish and desire, is to approach to our belief, and to reduce the necessity to a spiritual manducation. Besides, to say that no one is saved without desiring to partake of the Lord's Supper, is to exclude John the Baptist and the malefactor who was crucified with our Lord, from salvation, neither of whom partook of it either by act or wish. And we might bring the example of many Pagans and idolaters who, by hearing the words of martyrs, were suddenly converted, and were executed the same hour, without ever having heard of this Sacrament, and consequently without having formed any wish to partake of it. Many suffered martyrdom without even being baptised, and therefore were far from being prepared to partake of the Eucharist.
  8. The same thing likewise appears by what Jesus Christ adds in verse 54: "Whoso eateth my flesh hath eternal life." He does not speak of the manducation of the Sacrament, for many who eat of it have not eternal life. The usual evasion is, that Jesus Christ speaks of such as eat of this flesh worthily; from which it appears how clearly the truth is on our side. For, according to our be lief, the words of the Lord are true without any addition. — But our opponents, to extricate themselves, add their glosses, which proceed from their own invention, and not from the word of God. We may indeed eat of the bread unworthily, as Paul says, (I Cor. xi.) "whosoever shall eat this bread unworthily." But it is impossible to eat of the flesh of the Lord unworthily, since, as. we have shewn, to eat is to believe. We can no more believe in Jesus Christ unworthily than than we can love God unworthily, seeing that our worthiness consists in believing in Jesus Christ, and in loving God. This is what Cardinal Cajetan remarks on John vi. saying, "Jesus Christ does not say, whoso eats my flesh and drinks my blood worthily, but whoso eats and drinks; that we might know that he speaks of an eating and a drinking that has no need of modification," &c. It, therefore, clearly appears, that this discourse ought not to be understood literally; and that the Lord does not speak of eating and drinking the Sacrament, but of believing, and of being spiritually nourished by faith in his death.
  9. The Lord adds, in v. 56: "He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him." These words are decisive of the controversy. For they would be false if they were understood of the manducation of the Sacrament, it being a thing certain that hypocrites and the profane, who participate in the Sacrament, do not dwell in Christ, nor Christ in them. They receive the Sacrament into their stomach, and there it is soon destroyed by digestion. But to dwell in Christ is to be united to him by the constant, lasting, and reciprocal union, between him and believers. — For Cornelius Jansenius very justly remarks, that "he who eats my flesh, and drinks my blood, dwells in me, and I in Him; that is to say, he is intimately united to me, and I to him." And then he proves it by other passages: "He that dwelleth in love, dwelleth in God, and God in him." 1 John iv. 16. And again: "He that keepeth his commandments, dwelleth in him, and he in him; and hereby we know that he abideth in us, by the Spirit he hath given us." Chap. iii. 24. Thence he infers that the Lord speaks in John vi. concerning a manner of eating peculiar to those who have faith working by love, and not of a corporal manducation, in which the wicked are partakers.
  10. If, to have Christ dwelling in us, it be necessary to eat him with our mouths; for the same reason, it will be necessary that he should eat us, that we may dwell in him.
  11. To direct our minds from carnal thoughts, Jesus adds, v. 63; "It is the Spirit that quickeneth, the flesh profiteth nothing." Since by Spirit he means his Spirit, by which we are regenerated, so also by flesh he means his human body. But it, he assures us, profits nothing — viz. by being taken in the way in which the Capernaites imagined. What would it profit a man to have Christ's head and feet in his stomach: or whether he swallowed it entire or by morsels? The absurdity is in each way equally great.
  12. Jesus adds: "The words that I speak unto you are spirit and are life;" that is to say, life-giving and spiritual. They are quickening only to those who understand them spiritually, and who fancy no corporal or carnal manducation. This doctrine was maintained by Augustine, in his twenty-seventh Treatise Upon John. He asks: "What are we to understand by these words, they are spirit and life?" He replies: "It is necessary to understand them spiritually. Hast thou understood them spiritually? They are spirit and life to thee. Hast thou understood them carnally? In this manner, also, they are spirit and life, but not unto thee."
  13. At this the Capernaites and some of his disciples were offended, and said, It is a hard saying. Then he answered, "What if ye shall see the Son of Man ascend up where he was before?" Augustine favours us with an explanation of these words, also, in the Treatise just quoted: "What does he mean in these words? He there solves the question that perplexed them. They thought he would give them his body; but he said unto them he would certainly ascend entire into heaven. When ye see the Son of Man ascending into heaven, where he was before, then, at least, you will surely see that he does not give you bis body as ye thought, — then, at least, ye will understand that his grace is not consumed by morsels."

- Pierre Du Moulin, Anatomy of the Mass, Chapter 37

Wednesday, December 13, 2017

Roman Catholicism is novel, and was invented for the benefit of the Pope and the Clergy.

It is not with a very good grace that our opponents, after having disfigured and entirely changed the Christian religion, venture to accuse us of novelty. For, in truth, the Romish religion is a garment patched up with new pieces, — a heap of doctrines, invented and amassed from age to age, forged upon the anvil of avarice and ambition. We are ready to submit to all sorts of punishment, if, in five hundred years after Christ, and we could descend lower, it be proved that there was a single man who had a religion in the least resembling the religion of the Romish Church, such as it is at the present time. Can a single Church be found in antiquity, which deprived the people of the cup in communion? Did the Ancient Church forbid the people to read the Holy Scriptures? Did she believe in purgatory? Did any one then speak of Romish indulgences, and of the treasure of the Church, in which the Pope stows the superabundant satisfactions and penal works of saints and monks, and distributes them to others by his indulgences? Were images of God and the Trinity, in stone or in painting, then made? Were the images of saints worshipped? Were penitents seen whipping themselves in public, not only for their own sins, but also for the sins of others? Did the bishops of Asia, Egypt, or Africa, swear fidelity to the bishop of Rome, or accept letters of inves titure from him? Was the public service performed in a language which the people did not understand? Was the bishop of Rome then called God? Did he claim worship? Did he canonize saints? Did be pluck souls out of purgatory? Did he grant pardons for two or three thousand years? Did he depose kings, or vaunt of having the power to give and take away kingdoms? Had he the power to dispense with oaths and vows, and of dissolving marriages legitimately contracted, under pretence of the monastic profession? Did any then talk of chaplets, rosaries, blessed grains, Agnus Dei, &c.? I say the same of the titles, Queen of Heaven and Mistress of the World, given to the Virgin Mary; and of the various charges given to the saints, to one over a country, to another over a sickness, to another over a disease, to another over this or that trade. The power which the priests arrogate to themselves of pardoning sins in their quality of judges is likewise new, and is part of the iniquity of the later ages. In like manner, there is not a vestige to be found throughout antiquity, of private Masses, where there are no communicants and no hearers, said at the instance of those who pay for them. — The book, entitled the Tax of the Apostolic Chancery, shews at what price absolutions may be obtained for murder, parricide, incest, perjury. So many groats or ducats for having killed a father, and so many for maternal incest. A Romish Jesuit, named Sylvester Petra Saneta, lately wrote a book against me, from which I learn one thing I did not know before. He mentions, in chap. xiii. that during the time of Advent and Lent, the Pope does not permit any one in Rome to pass a whole night in a brothel, which would be a violation of the sanctity of Lent. On this account, during these days of devotion, it is permitted only to pass the day and part of the night with bawds. Are such laws to be found in the Ancient Church? In short, this religion is wholly of a late date — it is a confused collection of doctrines and laws, which were never heard of in ancient times, and were invented expressly for the pro fit and extension of the Papal Empire, — for the establishment of a monarchy, which had no existence in the first ages of the Church, — and for retaining the people in ignorance, lest the mystery of iniquity should be discovered. — The Pope and the Clergy find indulgences, private masses and prayers for trespasses, to be exceedingly lucrative. By means of auricular confession, the priests obtain knowledge of family secrets, and hold the conscience in bondage. They do not grant absolutions for nothing. The supererogatory works and satisfactions of monks replenish the spiritual treasury, of which the Pope keeps the key, and distributes them to the people by his indulgences, so lucrative to him , self and clergy. By granting absolutions, the priests make themselves judges of souls and judges in the cause of God. By reserving the communion cup to themselves and to kings, they make themselves the companions of kings, and assume a rank above the people. By the celibacy of bishops and other clergy, the Pope prevents the dissipation of the ecclesiastical treasures, and their being applied to the support and enriching of their children. 

By painting God the Father in the apparel of the Pope, the opinion is instilled into the people that God is like the Pope, and has a vast intimacy with him, since he has borrowed his robes. By the canonization of saints the Pope causes his valets to be worshipped by the people, and gives them the title of saints in recompense for their services.— By the sacrament of penance, the Pope and the priests usurp the power of imposing upon sinners pecuniary fines and corporal punishments, even to the flogging of kings. By performing the service in the Latin language, the people are retained in ignorance; by having it imposed upon them, they are taught that they are within the pale of the papal empire. The Roman language is bestowed on them for the purpose of subduing them to the Roman religion.— The power of the Pope to dethrone kings, makes him king of kings, and erects for him an empire, where he is elevated above all the grandeur of the world. The images, called the books of the ignorant, accustom men to neglect the Scriptures, which are utterly unknown in those countries where the inquisition reigns. By transubstantiation, the priests can make Jesus Christ, and keep him under their control. The Pope, by ordaining holy days during the week, regulates the civil police, causes the shops to be shut, and the sittings of the Courts of Justice and King's Council to be suspended. When merchants shut their shops, the clergy open theirs; and then it is that the people obtain pardons, visit relics, and sprinkle themselves with holy water, which is always at hand. The Pope, by the distinction of meats and fast-days, regulates the markets and stomachs, kitchens and tables, of kings and people. The more numerous the prohibitions are, the more frequently are applications made to Pope and Prelates for dispensations. The Pope decreed marriage to be a Sacrament, that he might take the cognizance of it away from judges and magistrates: for Sacraments are under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Church.

The Pope, by dispensations for the degrees of consanguinity within which marriages are forbidden in the word of God, obliges the children of Princes, (for such dispensations are granted to none but the great,) born of such marriages, to defend his authority, that their own legitimacy may be maintained. From Annats and Archiepiscopal cloaks, the Pope derives incredible gain. For a mantle of this kind he draws sixty thousand ducats. The Pope, by the power he has assumed of being able to change the commandments, of God, and of absolving from oaths and vows made to God, exalts himself above God. For he who can absolve men from fidelity and obedience to God, must be greater than God. 

The invocation of saints, the worship of relics, and the miracles said to have been wrought by them, serve to build many churches and monasteries, which powerfully support the domination of the Pope; in short, all the crafty devices in the world has been employed to this end. Never was an empire raised with so much artifice. The doctrine which teaches us that Jesus Christ, by his death, delivers us from the guilt and punishment of sins committed before baptism, but that we must bear the punishment of the sins commit ted after baptism, either in this life or in purgatory, takes from the merits of Christ to make room for vile traffic, and to give credit to indulgences, and masses for the dead: every thing, in short, is turned to profit—even death itself is tributary to the Romish clergy.

Pierre Du Moulin, Anatomy of the Mass, Chapter 22

Visitor Counter

Flag Counter