"The Sermons of Swift," says Scott, "have none of that thunder which
appals, or that resistless and winning softness which melts, the hearts
of an audience. He can never have enjoyed the triumph of uniting
hundreds in one ardent sentiment of love, of terror, or of devotion. His
reasoning, however powerful, and indeed unanswerable, convinces the
understanding, but is never addressed to the heart; and, indeed, from his
instructions to a young clergyman, he seems hardly to have considered
pathos as a legitimate ingredient in an English sermon. Occasionally,
too, Swift's misanthropic habits break out even from the pulpit; nor is
he altogether able to suppress his disdain of those fellow mortals, on
whose behalf was accomplished the great work of redemption. With such
unamiable feelings towards his hearers, the preacher might indeed
command their respect, but could never excite their sympathy. It may be
feared that his Sermons were less popular from another cause, imputable
more to the congregation than to the pastor. Swift spared not the vices
of rich or poor; and, disdaining to amuse the imaginations of his
audience with discussion of dark points of divinity, or warm them by a
flow of sentimental devotion, he rushes at once to the point of moral
depravity, and upbraids them with their favourite and predominant vices
in a tone of stern reproof, bordering upon reproach. In short, he tears
the bandages from their wounds, like the hasty surgeon of a crowded
hospital, and applies the incision knife and caustic with salutary, but
rough and untamed severity. But, alas! the mind must be already
victorious over the worst of its evil propensities, that can profit by
this harsh medicine. There is a principle of opposition in our nature,
which mans itself with obstinacy even against avowed truth, when it
approaches our feelings in a harsh and insulting manner. And Swift was
probably sensible, that his discourses, owing to these various causes,
did not produce the powerful effects most grateful to the feelings of
the preacher, because they reflect back to him those of the audience.

"But although the Sermons of Swift are deficient in eloquence, and were
lightly esteemed by their author, they must not be undervalued by the
modern reader. They exhibit, in an eminent degree, that powerful grasp
of intellect which distinguished the author above all his
contemporaries. In no religious discourses can be found more sound good
sense, more happy and forcible views of the immediate subject. The
reasoning is not only irresistible, but managed in a mode so simple
and clear, that its force is obvious to the most ordinary capacity. Upon
all subjects of morality, the preacher maintains the character of a rigid
and inflexible monitor; neither admitting apology for that which is
wrong, nor softening the difficulty of adhering to that which is right; a
stern stoicism of doctrine, that may fail in finding many converts, but
leads to excellence in the few manly minds who dare to embrace it. In
treating the doctrinal points of belief, (as in his Sermon upon the
Trinity,) Swift systematically refuses to quit the high and pre-eminent
ground which the defender of Christianity is entitled to occupy, or to
submit to the test of human reason, mysteries which are placed, by their
very nature, far beyond our finite capacities. Swift considered, that, in
religion, as in profane science, there must be certain ultimate laws
which are to be received as fundamental truths, although we are
incapable of defining or analysing their nature; and he censures those
divines, who, in presumptuous confidence of their own logical
powers, enter into controversy upon such mysteries of faith, without
considering that they give thereby the most undue advantage to the
infidel. Our author wisely and consistently declared reason an
incompetent judge of doctrines, of which God had declared the fact,
concealing from man the manner. He contended, that he who, upon the
whole, receives the Christian religion as of divine inspiration, must be
contented to depend upon God's truth, and his holy word, and receive
with humble faith the mysteries which are too high for comprehension.
Above all, Swift points out, with his usual forcible precision, the
mischievous tendency of those investigations which, while they assail
one fundamental doctrine of the Christian religion, shake and endanger
the whole fabric, destroy the settled faith of thousands, pervert and
mislead the genius of the learned and acute, destroy and confound the
religious principles of the simple and ignorant."

In 1744, Faulkner printed three sermons as a single volume; these were
"On Mutual Subjection," "On Conscience," and "On the Trinity." The other
sermons appeared in the various editions issued by Nichols and others.
The text here given is that of the volume of 1744, of Hawkesworth and
Scott.

[T.S.]




ON MUTUAL SUBJECTION.


I PETER, V. 5.

"--Yea, all of you be subject one to another."


The Apostle having in many parts of this epistle given directions to
Christians concerning the duty of subjection or obedience to superiors;
in the several instances of the subject to his prince, the child to his
parent, the servant to his master, the wife to her husband, and the
younger to the elder; doth here, in the words of my text, sum up the
whole, by advancing a point of doctrine, which at first may appear a
little extraordinary: "Yea, all of you," saith he, "be subject one to
another." For it should seem, that two persons cannot properly be said
to be subject to each other, and that subjection is only due from
inferiors to those above them: yet St Paul hath several passages to the
same purpose. For he exhorts the Romans, "in honour to prefer one
another:"[1] and the Philippians, "that in lowliness of mind they should
each esteem other better than themselves;"[2] and the Ephesians, "that
they should submit themselves one to another in the fear of the
Lord."[3] Here we find these two great apostles recommending to all
Christians this duty of mutual subjection. For we may observe by St
Peter, that having mentioned the several relations which men bear to
each other, as governor and subject, master and servant, and the rest
which I have already repeated, he maketh no exception, but sums up the
whole with commanding "all to be subject one to another." From whence we
may conclude, that this subjection due from all men to all men, is
something more than the compliment of course, when our betters are
pleased to tell us they are our humble servants, but understand us to be
their slaves.

[Footnote 1: Rom. xii. 10.]

[Footnote 2: Philip. ii. 3.]

[Footnote 3: Ephes. v. 21.]

I know very well, that some of those who explain this text, apply it to
humility, to the duties of charity, to private exhortations, and to
bearing with each other's infirmities: And it is probable, the apostle
may have had a regard to all these: But however, many learned men agree,
that there is something more understood, and so the words in their plain
natural meaning must import; as you will observe yourselves, if you read
them with the beginning of the verse, which is thus: "Likewise ye
younger submit yourselves unto the elder; yea, all of you be subject one
to another." So, that upon the whole, there must be some kind of
subjection due from every man to every man, which cannot be made void by
any power, pre-eminence, or authority whatsoever. Now, what sort of
subjection this is, and how it ought to be paid, shall be the subject of
my present discourse.

As God hath contrived all the works of nature to be useful, and in some
manner a support to each other, by which the whole frame of the world
under his providence is preserved and kept up; so, among mankind, our
particular stations are appointed to each of us by God Almighty, wherein
we are obliged to act, as far as our power reacheth, toward the good of
the whole community. And he who doth not perform that part assigned him,
toward advancing the benefit of the whole, in proportion to his
opportunities and abilities, is not only a useless, but a very
mischievous member of the public: Because he taketh his share of the
profit, and yet leaves his share of the burden to be borne by others,
which is the true principal cause of most miseries and misfortunes in
life. For, a wise man who doth not assist with his counsels, a great man
with his protection, a rich man with his bounty and charity, and a poor
man with his labour, are perfect nuisances in a commonwealth. Neither is
any condition of life more honourable in the sight of God than another;
otherwise he would be a respecter of persons, which he assureth us he is
not: For he hath proposed the same salvation to all men, and hath only
placed them in different ways or stations to work it out. Princes are
born with no more advantages of strength or wisdom than other men; and,
by an unhappy education, are usually more defective in both than
thousands of their subjects. They depend for every necessary of life
upon the meanest of their people: Besides, obedience and subjection were
never enjoined by God to humour the passions, lusts, and vanities of
those who demand them from us; but we are commanded to obey our
governors, because disobedience would breed seditions in the state. Thus
servants are directed to obey their masters, children their parents, and
wives their husbands; not from any respect of persons in God, but
because otherwise there would be nothing but confusion in private
families. This matter will be clearly explained, by considering the
comparison which St Paul maketh between the Church of Christ and the
body of man: For the same resemblance will hold, not only to families
and kingdoms, but to the whole corporation of mankind. "The eye," saith
he,[4] "cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee; nor again the
head to the feet, I have no need of thee. Nay, much more, those members
of the body which seem to be more feeble, are necessary. And whether one
member suffer, all the members suffer with it; or one member be
honoured, all the members rejoice with it." The case is directly the
same among mankind. The prince cannot say to the merchant, I have no
need of thee; nor the merchant to the labourer, I have no need of thee.
Nay, much more those members, &c. For the poor are generally more
necessary members of the commonwealth than the rich: Which clearly
shews, that God never intented such possessions for the sake and service
of those to whom he lends them: but because he hath assigned every man
his particular station to be useful in life; and this for the reason
given by the apostle, "that there should be no schism in the body."[5]

[Footnote 4: 1 Corin. xii. 21, 23, 26.]

[Footnote 5: 1 Corin. xii. 25.]

From hence may partly be gathered the nature of that subjection which we
all owe to one another. God Almighty hath been pleased to put us into an
imperfect state, where we have perpetual occasion of each other's
assistance. There is none so low, as not to be in a capacity of
assisting the highest; nor so high, as not to want the assistance of the
lowest.

It plainly appears from what hath been said, that no one human creature
is more worthy than another in the sight of God; farther, than according
to the goodness or holiness of their lives; and, that power, wealth, and
the like outward advantages, are so far from being the marks of God's
approving or preferring those on whom they are bestowed, that, on the
contrary, he is pleased to suffer them to be almost engrossed by those
who have least title to his favour. Now, according to this equality
wherein God hath placed all mankind, with relation himself, you will
observe, that in all the relations between man and man, there is a
mutual dependence, whereby the one cannot subsist without the other.
Thus, no man can be a prince without subjects, nor a master without
servants, nor a father without children. And this both explains and
confirms the doctrine of the text: For, where there is a mutual
dependence, there must be a mutual duty, and consequently a mutual
subjection. For instance, the subject must only obey his prince, because
God commands it, human laws require it, and the safety of the public
maketh it necessary: (For the same reasons we must obey all that are in
authority, and submit ourselves, not only to the good and gentle, but
also to the froward, whether they rule according to our liking or no.)
On the other side, in those countries that pretend to freedom, princes
are subject to those laws which their people have chosen; they are bound
to protect their subjects in liberty, property, and religion; to receive
their petitions, and redress their grievances: So, that the best prince
is, in the opinion of wisemen, only the greatest servant of the nation;
not only a servant to the public in general, but in some sort to every man
in it. In the like manner, a servant owes obedience, and diligence and
faithfulness to his master, from whom, at the same time, he hath a just
demand for protection, and maintenance, and gentle treatment. Nay, even
the poor beggar hath a just demand of an alms from the rich man, who is
guilty of fraud, injustice, and oppression, if he doth not afford relief
according to his abilities.

But this subjection we all owe one another is nowhere more necessary
than in the common conversations of life; for without it there could be
no society among men. If the learned would not sometimes submit to the
ignorant, the wise to the simple, the gentle to the froward, the old to
the weaknesses of the young, there would be nothing but everlasting
variance in the world. This our Saviour himself confirmed by his own
example; for he appeared in the form of a servant, and washed his
disciples' feet, adding those memorable words: "Ye call me Lord and
Master, and ye say well, for so I am. If I then your Lord and Master
wash your feet, how much more ought ye to wash one another's feet?"
Under which expression of washing the feet, is included all that
subjection, assistance, love, and duty, which every good Christian ought
to pay his brother, in whatever station God hath placed him. For the
greatest prince and the meanest slave, are not, by infinite degrees so
distant, as our Saviour and those disciples whose feet he vouchsafed to
wash.

And, although this doctrine of subjecting ourselves to one another may
seem to grate upon the pride and vanity of mankind, and may therefore be
hard to be digested by those who value themselves upon their greatness
or their wealth; yet, it is really no more than what most men practise
upon other occasions. For, if our neighbour who is our inferior comes to
see us, we rise to receive him, we place him above us, and respect him
as if he were better than ourselves; and this is thought both decent and
necessary, and is usually called good manners. Now the duty required by
the apostle, is only that we should enlarge our minds, and that what we
thus practice in the common course of life, we should imitate in all our
actions and proceedings whatsoever; since our Saviour tells us, that
every man is our neighbour, and since we are so ready in the point of
civility, to yield to others in our own houses, where only we have any
title to govern.

Having thus shewn you what sort of subjection it is which all men owe
one to another, and in what manner it ought to be paid, I shall now draw
some observations from what hath been said.

And _first_: A thorough practice of this duty of subjecting ourselves to
the wants and infirmities of each other, would utterly extinguish in us
the vice of pride. For, if God hath pleased to entrust me with a talent,
not for my own sake, but for the service of others, and at the same time
hath left me full of wants and necessities which others must supply; I
can then have no cause to set any extraordinary value upon myself, or to
despise my brother, because he hath not the same talents which were lent
to me. His being may probably be as useful to the public as mine; and,
therefore, by the rules of right reason, I am in no sort preferable to
him.

_Secondly_: It is very manifest, from what hath been said, that no man
ought to look upon the advantages of life, such as riches, honour,
power, and the like, as his property, but merely as a trust, which God
hath deposited with him, to be employed for the use of his brethren; and
God will certainly punish the breach of that trust, although the laws of
man will not, or rather indeed cannot; because the trust was conferred
only by God, who hath not left it to any power on earth to decide
infallibly whether a man maketh a good use of his talents or no, or to
punish him where he fails. And therefore God seems to have more
particularly taken this matter into his own hands, and will most
certainly reward or punish us in proportion to our good or ill
performance in it. Now, although the advantages which one man possesseth
more than another, may in some sense be called his property with respect
to other men, yet with respect to God they are, as I said, only a trust:
which will plainly appear from hence. If a man doth not use those
advantages to the good of the public, or the benefit of his neighbour,
it is certain he doth not deserve them; and consequently, that God never
intended them for a blessing to him; and on the other side, whoever doth
employ his talents as he ought, will find by his own experience, that
they were chiefly lent him for the service of others: for to the service
of others he will certainly employ them.

_Thirdly_: If we could all be brought to practise this duty of
subjecting ourselves to each other, it would very much contribute to the
general happiness of mankind: for this would root out envy and malice
from the heart of man; because you cannot envy your neighbour's
strength, if he maketh use of it to defend your life, or carry your
burden; you cannot envy his wisdom, if he gives you good counsel; nor
his riches, if he supplieth you in your wants; nor his greatness, if he
employs it to your protection. The miseries of life are not properly
owing to the unequal distribution of things; but God Almighty, the great
King of Heaven, is treated like the kings of the earth; who, although
perhaps intending well themselves, have often most abominable ministers
and stewards; and those generally the vilest, to whom they entrust the
most talents. But here is the difference, that the princes of this world
see by other men's eyes, but God sees all things; and therefore whenever
he permits his blessings to be dealt among those who are unworthy, we
may certainly conclude that he intends them only as a punishment to an
evil world, as well as to the owners. It were well, if those would
consider this, whose riches serve them only as a spur to avarice, or as
an instrument to their lusts; whose wisdom is only of this world, to put
false colours upon things, to call good evil, and evil good, against the
conviction of their own consciences; and lastly, who employ their power
and favour in acts of oppression or injustice, in misrepresenting
persons and things, or in countenancing the wicked to the ruin of the
innocent.

_Fourthly_: The practice of this duty of being subject to one another,
would make us rest contented in the several stations of life wherein God
hath thought fit to place us; because it would in the best and easiest
manner bring us back as it were to that early state of the Gospel when
Christians had all things in common. For, if the poor found the rich
disposed to supply their wants; if the ignorant found the wise ready to
instruct and direct them; or if the weak might always find protection
from the mighty; they could none of them with the least pretence of
justice lament their own condition.

From all that hath been hitherto said, it appears, that great abilities
of any sort, when they are employed as God directs, do but make the
owners of them greater and more painful servants to their neighbour, and
the public; however, we are by no means to conclude from hence, that
they are not really blessings, when they are in the hands of good men.
For first, what can be a greater honour than to be chosen one of the
stewards and dispensers of God's bounty to mankind? What is there, that
can give a generous spirit more pleasure and complacency of mind, than
to consider that he is an instrument of doing much good? that great
numbers owe to him, under God, their subsistence, their safety, their
health, and the good conduct of their lives? The wickedest man upon
earth taketh a pleasure in doing good to those he loveth; and therefore
surely a good Christian, who obeys our Saviour's command of loving all
men, cannot but take delight in doing good even to his enemies. God, who
giveth all things to all men, can receive nothing from any; and those
among men, who do the most good, and receive the fewest returns, do most
resemble their Creator: for which reason, St Paul delivereth it as a
saying of our Saviour, that "it is more blessed to give than to
receive." By this rule, what must become of those things which the world
valueth as the greatest blessings, riches, power, and the like, when our
Saviour plainly determines, that the best way to make them blessings, is
to part with them? Therefore, although the advantages which one man hath
over another, may be called blessings, yet they are by no means so in
the sense the world usually understands. Thus, for example, great riches
are no blessing in themselves; because the poor man, with the common
necessaries of life enjoys more health, and hath fewer cares without
them: How then do they become blessings? No otherwise, than by being
employed in feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, rewarding worthy
men, and in short, doing acts of charity and generosity. Thus likewise,
power is no blessing in itself, because private men bear less envy, and
trouble, and anguish without it. But when it is employed to protect the
innocent, to relieve the oppressed, and to punish the oppressor, then it
becomes a great blessing. And so lastly even great wisdom is in the
opinion of Solomon not a blessing in itself: For "in much wisdom is much
sorrow;" and men of common understandings, if they serve God and mind
their callings, make fewer mistakes in the conduct of life than those
who have better heads. And yet, wisdom is a mighty blessing, when it is
applied to good purposes, to instruct the ignorant, to be a faithful
counsellor either in public or private, to be a director to youth, and
to many other ends needless here to mention.

To conclude: God sent us into the world to obey his commands, by doing
as much good as our abilities will reach, and as little evil as our many
infirmities will permit. Some he hath only trusted with one talent, some
with five, and some with ten. No man is without his talent; and he that
is faithful or negligent in a little, shall be rewarded or punished, as
well as he that hath been so in a great deal.

Consider what hath been said; and the Lord give you a right
understanding in all things. To whom with the Son and the Holy Ghost, be
all honour and glory, now and for ever.




ON THE TESTIMONY OF CONSCIENCE.


2 CORINTHIANS, I. 12. PART OF IT.

"----For our rejoicing is this, the testimony of our conscience."


There is no word more frequently in the mouths of men, than that of
conscience, and the meaning of it is in some measure generally
understood: However, because it is likewise a word extremely abused by
many people, who apply other meanings to it, which God Almighty never
intended; I shall explain it to you in the clearest manner I am able.
The word conscience properly signifies, that knowledge which a man hath
within himself of his own thoughts and actions. And, because, if a man
judgeth fairly of his own actions by comparing them with the law of God,
his mind will either approve or condemn him according as he hath done
good or evil; therefore this knowledge or conscience may properly be
called both an accuser and a judge. So that whenever our conscience
accuseth us, we are certainly guilty; but we are not always innocent
when it doth not accuse us: For very often, through the hardness of our
hearts, or the fondness and favour we bear to ourselves, or through
ignorance or neglect, we do not suffer our conscience to take any
cognizance of several sins we commit. There is another office likewise
belonging to conscience, which is that of being our director and guide;
and the wrong use of this hath been the occasion of more evils under the
sun, than almost all other causes put together. For, as conscience is
nothing else but the knowledge we have of what we are thinking and
doing; so it can guide us no farther than that knowledge reacheth. And
therefore God hath placed conscience in us to be our director only in
those actions which Scripture and reason plainly tell us to be good or
evil. But in cases too difficult or doubtful for us to comprehend or
determine, there conscience is not concerned; because it cannot advise
in what it doth not understand, nor decide where it is itself in doubt:
but, by God's great mercy, those difficult points are never of absolute
necessity to our salvation. There is likewise another evil, that men
often say, a thing is against their conscience, when really it is not.
For instance: Ask any of those who differ from the worship established,
why they do not come to church? They will say, they dislike the
ceremonies, the prayers, the habits, and the like, and therefore it goes
against their conscience: But they are mistaken, their teacher hath put
those words into their mouths; for a man's conscience can go no higher
than his knowledge; and therefore until he has thoroughly examined by
Scripture, and the practice of the ancient church, whether those points
are blameable or no, his conscience cannot possibly direct him to
condemn them. Hence have likewise arisen those mistakes about what is
usually called "Liberty of Conscience"; which, properly speaking, is no
more than a liberty of knowing our own thoughts; which liberty no one
can take from us. But those words have obtained quite different
meanings: Liberty of conscience is now-a-days not only understood to be
the liberty of believing what men please, but also of endeavouring to
propagate the belief as much as they can, and to overthrow the faith
which the laws have already established, to be rewarded by the public
for those wicked endeavours: And this is the liberty of conscience which
the fanatics are now openly in the face of the world endeavouring at
with their utmost application. At the same time it cannot but be
observed, that those very persons, who under pretence of a public spirit
and tenderness towards their Christian brethren, are so zealous for such
a liberty of conscience as this, are of all others the least tender to
those who differ from them in the smallest point relating to government;
and I wish I could not say, that the Majesty of the living God may be
offended with more security than the memory of a dead prince. But the
wisdom of the world at present seems to agree with that of the heathen
Emperor, who said, if the gods were offended, it was their own concern,
and they were able to vindicate themselves.[1]

[Footnote 1: The saying of Tiberius as given by Tacitus ("Annals," bk.
i., c. lxxiii.), _Deorum offensa diis curæ_. [T.S.]]

But although conscience hath been abused to those wicked purposes which
I have already related, yet a due regard to the directions it plainly
giveth us, as well as to its accusations, reproaches, and advices, would
be of the greatest use to mankind, both for their present welfare and
future happiness.

Therefore, my discourse at this time shall be directed to prove to you,
that there is no solid, firm foundation for virtue, but on a conscience
which is guided by religion.

In order to this, I shall first shew you the weakness and uncertainty of
two false principles, which many people set up in the place of
conscience, for a guide to their actions.

The first of these principles is, what the world usually calls _Moral
Honesty_. There are some people, who appear very indifferent as to
religion, and yet have the repute of being just and fair in their
dealings; and these are generally known by the character of good moral
men. But now, if you look into the grounds and the motives of such a
man's actions, you shall find them to be no other than his own ease and
interest. For example: You trust a moral man with your money in the way
of trade; you trust another with the defence of your cause at law, and
perhaps they both deal justly with you. Why? Not from any regard they
have for justice, but because their fortune depends upon their credit,
and a stain of open public dishonesty must be to their disadvantage. But
let it consist with such a man's interest and safety to wrong you, and
then it will be impossible you can have any hold upon him; because there
is nothing left to give him a check, or put in the balance against his
profit. For, if he hath nothing to govern himself by, but the opinion of
the world, as long as he can conceal his injustice from the world, he
thinks he is safe.

Besides, it is found by experience, that those men who set up for
morality without regard to religion, are generally but virtuous in part;
they will be just in their dealings between man and man; but if they
find themselves disposed to pride, lust, intemperance, or avarice, they
do not think their morality concerned to check them in any of these
vices, because it is the great rule of such men, that they may lawfully
follow the dictates of nature, wherever their safety, health, and
fortune, are not injured. So, that upon the whole, there is hardly one
vice which a mere moral man may not upon some occasions allow himself to
practise.

The other false principle, which some men set up in the place of
conscience to be their director in life, is what those who pretend to
it, call _Honour_.

This word is often made the sanction of an oath; it is reckoned a great
commendation to be a man of strict honour; and it is commonly
understood, that a man of honour can never be guilty of a base action.
This is usually the style of military men; of persons with titles; and
of others who pretend to birth and quality. It is true, indeed, that in
ancient times it was universally understood, that honour was the reward
of virtue; but if such honour as is now-a-days going will not permit a
man to do a base action, it must be allowed, there are very few such
things as base actions in nature. No man of honour, as that word is
usually understood, did ever pretend that his honour obliged him to be
chaste or temperate; to pay his creditors; to be useful to his country;
to do good to mankind; to endeavour to be wise, or learned; to regard
his word, his promise, or his oath; or if he hath any of these virtues,
they were never learned in the catechism of honour; which contains but
two precepts, the punctual payment of debts contracted at play, and the
right understanding the several degrees of an affront, in order to
revenge it by the death of an adversary.

But suppose, this principle of honour, which some men so much boast of,
did really produce more virtues than it ever pretended to; yet since the
very being of that honour dependeth upon the breath, the opinion, or the
fancy of the people, the virtues derived from it could be of no long or
certain duration. For example: Suppose a man from a principle of honour
should resolve to be just, or chaste, or temperate; and yet the
censuring world should take a humour of refusing him those characters;
he would then think the obligation at an end. Or, on the other side, if
he thought he could gain honour by the falsest and vilest action, (which
is a case that very often happens,) he would then make no scruple to
perform it. And God knows, it would be an unhappy state, to have the
religion, the liberty, or the property of a people lodged in such hands,
which however hath been too often the case.

What I have said upon this principle of honour may perhaps be thought of
small concernment to most of you who are my hearers: However, a caution
was not altogether unnecessary; since there is nothing by which not only
the vulgar, but the honest tradesman hath been so much deceived, as this
infamous pretence to honour in too many of their betters.

Having thus shewn you the weakness and uncertainty of those principles
which some men set up in the place of conscience to direct them in their
actions, I shall now endeavour to prove to you that there is no solid,
firm foundation of virtue, but in a conscience directed by the
principles of religion.

There is no way of judging how far we may depend upon the actions of
men, otherwise than by knowing the motives, and grounds, and causes of
them; and, if the motives of our actions be not resolved and determined
into the law of God, they will be precarious and uncertain, and liable
to perpetual changes. I will shew you what I mean, by an example:
Suppose a man thinks it his duty to obey his parents, because reason
tells him so, because he is obliged by gratitude, and because the laws
of his country command him to do so; but, if he stops here, his parents
can have no lasting security; for an occasion may happen, wherein it may
be extremely his interest to be disobedient, and where the laws of the
land can lay no hold upon him: therefore, before such a man can safely
be trusted, he must proceed farther, and consider, that his reason is
the gift of God; that God commanded him to be obedient to the laws, and
did moreover in a particular manner enjoin him to be dutiful to his
parents; after which, if he lays due weight upon those considerations,
he will probably continue in his duty to the end of his life: Because no
earthly interest can ever come in competition to balance the danger of
offending his Creator, or the happiness of pleasing him. And of all this
his conscience will certainly inform him, if he hath any regard to
religion.

_Secondly:_ Fear and hope are the two greatest natural motives of all
men's actions: But, neither of these passions will ever put us in the
way of virtue, unless they be directed by conscience. For although
virtuous men do sometimes accidentally make their way to preferment, yet
the world is so corrupted, that no man can reasonably hope to be
rewarded in it, merely upon account of his virtue. And consequently, the
fear of punishment in this life will preserve men from very few vices,
since some of the blackest and basest do often prove the surest steps to
favour; such as ingratitude, hypocrisy, treachery, malice, subornation,
atheism, and many more which human laws do little concern themselves
about. But when conscience placeth before us the hopes of everlasting
happiness, and the fears of everlasting misery, as the reward and
punishment of our good or evil actions, our reason can find no way to
avoid the force of such an argument, otherwise than by running into
infidelity.

_Lastly_: Conscience will direct us to love God, and to put our whole
trust and confidence in him. Our love of God will inspire us with a
detestation for sin, as what is of all things most contrary to his
divine nature; and if we have an entire confidence in him, _that_ will
enable us to subdue and despise all the allurements of the world.

It may here be objected, if conscience be so sure a director to us
Christians in the conduct of our lives, how comes it to pass, that the
ancient heathens, who had no other lights but those of nature and
reason, should so far exceed us in all manner of virtue, as plainly
appears by many examples they have left on record?

To which it may be answered; first, those heathens were extremely strict
and exact in the education of their children; whereas among us this care
is so much laid aside, that the more God hath blessed any man with
estate or quality, just so much the less in proportion is the care he
taketh in the education of his children, and particularly of that child
which is to inherit his fortune: Of which the effects are visible enough
among the great ones of the world. Again, those heathens did in a
particular manner instil the principle into their children, of loving
their country; which is so far otherwise now-a-days, that, of the
several parties among us, there is none of them that seems to have so
much as heard, whether there be such a virtue in the world; as plainly
appears by their practices, and especially when they are placed in those
stations where they can only have opportunity of shewing it. Lastly; the
most considerable among the heathens did generally believe rewards and
punishments in a life to come; which is the great principle for
conscience to work upon; Whereas too many of those who would be thought
the most considerable among us, do, both by their practices and their
discourses, plainly affirm, that they believe nothing at all of the
matter.

Wherefore, since it hath manifestly appeared that a religious conscience
is the only true solid foundation upon which virtue can be built, give
me leave, before I conclude, to let you see how necessary such a
conscience is, to conduct us in every station and condition of our
lives.

That a religious conscience is necessary in any station, is confessed
even by those who tell us, that all religion was invented by cunning
men, in order to keep the world in awe. For, if religion, by the
confession of its adversaries, be necessary towards the well-governing
of mankind; then every wise man in power will be sure not only to choose
out for every station under him such persons as are most likely to be
kept in awe by religion, but likewise to carry some appearance of it
himself, or else he is a very weak politician. And accordingly in any
country where great persons affect to be open despisers of religion,
their counsels will be found at last to be fully as destructive to the
state as to the church.

It was the advice of Jethro to his son-in-law Moses, to "provide able
men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness," and to place
such over the people; and Moses, who was as wise a statesman, at least,
as any in this age, thought fit to follow that advice. Great abilities,
without the fear of God, are most dangerous instruments, when they are
trusted with power. The laws of man have thought fit, that those who are
called to any office of trust should be bound by an oath to the faithful
discharge of it: But, an oath is an appeal to God, and therefore can
have no influence except upon those who believe that he is, and that he
is a rewarder of those that seek him, and a punisher of those who
disobey him: And therefore, we see, the laws themselves are forced to
have recourse to conscience in these cases, because their penalties
cannot reach the arts of cunning men, who can find ways to be guilty of
a thousand injustices without being discovered, or at least without
being punished. And the reason why we find so many frauds, abuses, and
corruptions, where any trust is conferred, can be no other, than that
there is so little conscience and religion left in the world, or at
least that men in their choice of instruments have private ends in view,
which are very different from the service of the public. Besides, it is
certain, that men who profess to have no religion, are full as zealous
to bring over proselytes as any Papist or fanatic can be. And therefore,
if those who are in station high enough to be of influence or example to
others; if those (I say) openly profess a contempt or disbelief of
religion, they will be sure to make all their dependents of their own
principles; and what security can the public expect from such persons,
whenever their interests, or their lusts, come into competition with
their duty? It is very possible for a man who hath the appearance of
religion, and is a great pretender to conscience, to be wicked and a
hypocrite; but, it is impossible for a man who openly declares against
religion, to give any reasonable security that he will not be false and
cruel, and corrupt, whenever a temptation offers, which he values more
than he does the power wherewith he was trusted. And, if such a man doth
not betray his cause and his master, it is only because the temptation
was not properly offered, or the profit was too small, or the danger was
too great. And hence it is, that we find so little truth or justice
among us, because there are so very few, who either in the service of
the public, or in common dealings with each other, do ever look farther
than their own advantage, and how to guard themselves against the laws
of the country; which a man may do by favour, by secrecy, or by cunning,
although he breaks almost every law of God.

Therefore to conclude: It plainly appears, that unless men are guided by
the advice and judgment of a conscience founded on religion, they can
give no security that they will be either good subjects, faithful
servants of the public, or honest in their mutual dealings; since there
is no other tie through which the pride, or lust, or avarice, or
ambition of mankind will not certainly break one time or other.

Consider what has been said, &c.




ON THE TRINITY.


I. EPIST. GEN. OF JOHN, V. 7.

"For there are three that bear record in Heaven, the Father, the Word,
and the Holy Ghost; and these Three are One."


This day being set apart to acknowledge our belief in the Eternal
Trinity, I thought it might be proper to employ my present discourse
entirely upon that subject; and, I hope, to handle it in such a manner,
that the most ignorant among you may return home better informed of your
duty in this great point, than probably you are at present.

It must be confessed, that by the weakness and indiscretion of busy (or
at best, of well-meaning) people, as well as by the malice of those who
are enemies to all revealed religion, and are not content to possess
their own infidelity in silence, without communicating it to the
disturbance of mankind; I say, by these means, it must be confessed,
that the doctrine of the Trinity hath suffered very much, and made
Christianity suffer along with it. For these two things must be granted:
First, that men of wicked lives would be very glad there were no truth
in Christianity at all; and secondly, if they can pick out any one
single article in the Christian religion which appears not agreeable to
their own corrupted reason, or to the arguments of those bad people, who
follow the trade of seducing others, they presently conclude, that the
truth of the whole Gospel must sink along with that one article; which
is just as wise, as if a man should say, because he dislikes one law of
his country, he will therefore observe no law at all; and yet, that one
law may be very reasonable in itself, although he does not allow it, or
does not know the reason of the law-givers.

Thus it hath happened with the great doctrine of the Trinity; which word
is indeed not in the Scripture, but was a term of art invented in the
earlier times to express the doctrine by a single word, for the sake of
brevity and convenience. The doctrine then, as delivered in Holy
Scripture, although not exactly in the same words, is very short, and
amounts only to this, that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, are
each of them God, and yet there is but one God. For, as to the word
Person, when we say there are three Persons; and as to those other
explanations in the Athanasian Creed this day read to you (whether
compiled by Athanasius or no) they were taken up three hundred years
after Christ, to expound this doctrine; and I will tell you upon what
occasion. About that time there sprang up a heresy of a people called
Arians, from one Arius the leader of them. These denied our Saviour to
be God, although they allowed all the rest of the Gospel (wherein they
were more sincere than their followers among us). Thus the Christian
world was divided into two parts, until at length, by the zeal and
courage of St Athanasius, the Arians were condemned in a general
council, and a creed formed upon the true faith, as St Athanasius hath
settled it. This creed is now read at certain times in our churches,
which, although it is useful for edification to those who understand it;
yet, since it containeth some nice and philosophical points which few
people can comprehend, the bulk of mankind is obliged to believe no more
than the Scripture doctrine, as I have delivered it. Because that creed
was intended only as an answer to the Arians in their own way, who were
very subtle disputers.

But this heresy having revived in the world about a hundred years ago,
and continued ever since; not out of a zeal to truth, but to give a
loose to wickedness, by throwing off all religion; several divines, in
order to answer the cavils of those adversaries to truth and morality,
began to find out farther explanations of this doctrine of the Trinity,
by rules of philosophy; which have multiplied controversies to such a
degree, as to beget scruples that have perplexed the minds of many sober
Christians, who otherwise could never have entertained them.

I must therefore be bold to affirm, that the method taken by many of
those learned men to defend the doctrine of the Trinity, hath been
founded upon a mistake.

It must be allowed, that every man is bound to follow the rules and
directions of that measure of reason which God hath given him; and
indeed he cannot do otherwise, if he will be sincere, or act like a man.
For instance: If I should be commanded by an angel from heaven to
believe it is midnight at noon-day; yet I could not believe him. So, if
I were directly told in Scripture that three are one, and one is three,
I could not conceive or believe it in the natural common sense of that
expression, but must suppose that something dark or mystical was meant,
which it pleased God to conceal from me and from all the world. Thus, in
the text, "There are Three that bear record," &c. Am I capable of
knowing and defining what union and what distinction there may be in the
divine nature, which possibly may be hid from the angels themselves?
Again, I see it plainly declared in Scripture, that there is but one
God; and yet I find our Saviour claiming the prerogative of God in
knowing men's thoughts; in saying, "He and his Father are one;" and,
"before Abraham was, I am." I read, that the disciples worshipped him;
that Thomas said to him, "My Lord and my God." And St John, chap, 1st,
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word
was God." I read likewise that the Holy Ghost bestowed the gift of
tongues, and the power of working miracles; which, if rightly
considered, is as great a miracle as any, that a number of illiterate
men should of a sudden be qualified to speak all the languages then
known in the world; such as could be done by the inspiration of God
done. From these several texts it is plain, that God commands us to
believe that there is an union and there is a distinction; but what that
union, or what that distinction is, all mankind are equally ignorant,
and must continue so, at least till the day of judgment, without some
new revelation.

But because I cannot conceive the nature of this union and distinction
in the divine nature, am I therefore to reject them as absurd and
impossible; as I would, if any one told me that three men are one, and
one man is three? We are told, that a man and his wife are one flesh;
this I can comprehend the meaning of; yet, literally taken, it is a
thing impossible. But the apostle tell us, "We see but in part, and we
know but in part;" and yet we would comprehend all the secret ways and
workings of God.

Therefore I shall again repeat the doctrine of the Trinity, as it is
positively affirmed in Scripture: that God is there expressed in three
different names, as Father, as Son, and as Holy Ghost: that each of
these is God, and that there is but one God. But this union and
distinction are a mystery utterly unknown to mankind.

This is enough for any good Christian to believe on this great article,
without ever inquiring any farther: And, this can be contrary to no
man's reason, although the knowledge of it is hid from him.

But there is another difficulty of great importance among those who
quarrel with the doctrine of the Trinity, as well as with several other
articles of Christianity; which is, that our religion abounds in
mysteries, and these they are so bold as to revile as cant, imposture,
and priestcraft. It is impossible for us to determine for what reasons
God thought fit to communicate some things to us in part, and leave some
part a mystery. But so it is in fact, and so the Holy Scripture tells us
in several places. For instance: the resurrection and change of our
bodies are called mysteries by St Paul: and our Saviour's incarnation is
another: The Kingdom of God is called a mystery by our Saviour, to be
only known to his disciples; so is faith, and the word of God by St
Paul. I omit many others. So, that to declare against all mysteries
without distinction or exception, is to declare against the whole tenor
of the New Testament.

There are two conditions that may bring a mystery under suspicion.
First, when it is not taught and commanded in Holy Writ; or, secondly,
when the mystery turns to the advantage of those who preach it to
others. Now, as to the first, it can never be said, that we preach
mysteries without warrant from Holy Scripture, although I confess this
of the Trinity may have sometimes been explained by human invention,
which might perhaps better have been spared. As to the second, it will
not be possible to charge the Protestant priesthood with proposing any
temporal advantage to themselves by broaching or multiplying, or
preaching of mysteries. Does this mystery of the Trinity, for instance,
and the descent of the Holy Ghost, bring the least profit or power to
the preachers? No; it is as great a mystery to themselves as it is to
the meanest of their hearers; and may be rather a cause of humiliation,
by putting their understanding in that point upon a level with the most
ignorant of their flock. It is true indeed, the Roman church hath very
much enriched herself by trading in mysteries, for which they have not
the least authority from Scripture, and were fitted only to advance
their own temporal wealth and grandeur; such as transubstantiation, the
worshipping of images, indulgences for sins, purgatory, and masses for
the dead; with many more: But, it is the perpetual talent of those who
have ill-will to our Church, or a contempt for all religion, taken up by
the wickedness of their lives, to charge us with the errors and
corruptions of Popery, which all Protestants have thrown off near two
hundred years: whereas, those mysteries held by us have no prospect of
power, pomp, or wealth, but have been ever maintained by the universal
body of true believers from the days of the apostles, and will be so to
the resurrection; neither will the gates of hell prevail against them.