Sarah and Hagar, Sermon 4
THE FOVRTH SERMON.
GEN. 16.3.
And Sarah, Abrahams wife, took Hagar her maid, the Egyptian, after Abraham had dwelt ten yeers in the land of Canaan.
THe three firſt verſes of this Chapter, (as I told you in the diviſion of it) contained the marriage of Abraham with Hagar, Sarahs handmaid. And therein four things obſervable.
1. The occaſion of this marriage, in the firſt verſe.
2. The proper cauſes of it, in the ſecond verſe.
3. The knitting of this knot, in this third verſe.
4. Together with the fourth thing, which is, the aſſignation of the time when this marriage was made: namely, After Abraham had dwelt ten yeers in the land of Canaan.
We have done with the Occaſion, and the Cauſes: Now we come to the knitting of the knot: And Sarah, Abrahams wife, took Hagar her maid, the Egyptian, and gave her to her husband Abraham, to be his wife.
And here two Queſtions are made:
Firſt,Two main Queſtions anſwered. Why Sarah would not rather make choice of ſome free-woman, to give unto her husband, then a bond-woman?
And it is anſwered, That by giving him a bond-woman, ſhe was ſure, that the children that ſhe ſhould bear, ſhould be accounted her own; for, as her miſtreſs, they belonged unto her: Whereas ſhe had failed of this, if the party had been a free-woman: for ſhe would not have yeelded her right unto another.
Secondly, it is demanded, How Hagar is ſaid to be given to Abraham to wife, when Sarah was his wife already? What kinde of wife was Hagar?
The Patriarchs, in the Old Teſtament, had two ſorts of wives;Two ſorts of wives among the Patriarchs. primary, and ſecundary: both of them were reputed lawful and true wives, and therefore the children of both were accounted legitimate.
The former wives were called foreign, primary wives: ſome ſay, (as I told you, not long ſince) from foreign, which is to forget; either becauſe the memory of the woman is not ſo ſtrong as the mans; or rather, becauſe the fathers family is forgotten, and in a manner extinct, in their daughters, when they are married. And it is the common ſaying of the Hebrews, Familia matris, non vocatur familia; that the mothers family, is not called the family. And for the contrary reaſon, a male-childe is called foreign, from memory; becauſe the memory of the father is preſerved in the ſon;2 Sam. 18.18. according to that ſpeech of Abſalon, 2 Sam. 18. I have no ſon, to keep my name in remembrance. And the*Euripides. heathen man could ſay, foreign: that males are the pillars of the houſe.
The other ſort of wives, they call foreign, ſecundary wives, or half-wives; from foreign, dividere, to divide; and foreign, uxor, a wife: as one would ſay, Uxor diviſa & dimidia; a divided or half wife. The Engliſh tranſlateth them concubines; and not unfitly: for ſometimes the Hebrew word it ſelf ſignifieth a ſtrumpet or harlot.
The difference between theſe primary and ſecundary wives, was this:
The differences of the two ſorts of wives.Firſt, there was a diſparity in their authority, or houſhold-government. The wife was as miſtreſs; the concubine, as an handmaid, or ſervant: ſhe had jus tori, a right to the marriage-bed, as the chief wife had; otherwiſe, ſhe was in all reſpects inferiour; as appeareth in this ſtory of Sarah and Hagar: Sarah diſpoſeth of her to Abraham; and Abraham telleth his wife, that ſhe is in her hand, to do to her as it pleaſeth her; and ſhe correcteth her: and the Angel, meeting with her when ſhe was fled, chargeth her to return, and to ſubmit her ſelf to her miſtreſs.
Secondly, the betrothing of theſe wives was different. The chief wife, at her eſpouſals, received from her husband certain gifts and tokens, as pledges and teſtimonies of the Contract. Thus Abrahams ſteward gave, in Iſaac's name, unto Rebekah, jewels of ſilver, and of gold, Gen. 24.53.and raiment, Gen. 24. This cuſtom alſo was in uſe among the Grecians, who called thoſe gifts foreign, dona ſponſalia, nuptial-tokens, (ſaith Suidas: Suidas.) foreign: gifts which the bridegroom preſented to his bride.
Again: the chief wife received from her husband a Bill of writing, or matrimonial Letters: whereas, the concubine received neither ſuch gifts, nor ſuch Letters.
Thirdly, onelyonly the children of the chief wife ſucceeded the father in his inheritance: the children of the concubine received onelyonly gifts or Legacies. Abraham gave his inheritance unto Iſaac: unto the ſons of the concubines he gave gifts, and ſent them away from Iſaac his ſon,Gen. 25.5, 6. while he yet lived, Gen. 25. Neither did it hinder, though the concubine brought forth before the chief wife; as we ſee here, in Sarah and Hagar; and afterward, in the caſe of Rachel, and Bilhah her maid,Gen. 30. Gen. 30. the children of the chief wife, though later born, were preferred before the children of the concubines. And let this be ſufficient for the ſatisfaction of the Queſtions.
Now we come to Sarahs fact.
Sarah, Abrahams wife, took Hagar her maid, the Egyptian, and gave her to her husband Abraham to wife.
Here is the knitting of the knot; and here we may obſerve,
Firſt, How ſin goeth on by degrees: Obſerv. 1. Of Polygamy, or the divers wives of the Patriarchs; how far excuſable, and why not imitableAnd
Secondly, How one degree is worſe then another.
She had, before, onelyonly had this device in her head, out of a diffidence and diſtruſt of having any children her ſelf: then, ſhe reſolveth upon the putting it in practice: then, ſhe communicateth it to her husband; and ſeeing him taken with it, haſteth to perfect it.The firſt Obſervation's twofold Sin is firſt in ſemine, in the ſeed; then it is in the blade; then it cometh to an ear, and ſo to maturity: It is in the root firſt, and then in the leaf, and then in ramo, in the branch; and laſtly, in fructu, in the fruit. The woman ſaw the fruit, and it was lovely to look upon: and then Satan ſuggeſteth, that it was good for the improvement of knowledge, and they ſhould be as gods, knowing good and evil: and then they reſolve to taſte it. Si bona, cur non tangi? ſi mala, cur in paradiſo? (as Saint Bernard makes the woman to ſpeak:) If the fruit be good,S. Bernard. why not to be touched? and if bad, what doth it in paradiſe? And ſo, at laſt, they eat it. So, there was a luſtful minde in thoſe ſons of God; and this was ſtirred, by ſeeing the daughters of men to be fair: and then they proceed to take them to be their wives. So was it in the caſe of Joſephs miſtreſs, and in the brethren of Joſeph; they came, by degrees, to perfect their ſin. And ſo in David, and the enemies of Daniel: in Haman, in the high-prieſt, and divers others.James 1.14, 15. Saint James layeth down this, Chap. 1. 14. firſt, there is luſt; that is the ſeed: then this luſt conceiveth; and then it bringeth forth ſin; that is, in outward action.
Secondly, as I obſerved, Every of theſe ſteps and degrees, Obſerv. 2. The ſerpentine motion of ſin, and how each ſin is worſe then other. Jerem. 4.14.is worſe then other. There is the ſerpents root, Iſa. 14. and out of that cometh forth a cockatrice; and that groweth to be a fiery flying ſerpent. It is very bad to have naughty thoughts: Prov. 15.26. The thoughts of the wicked are an abomination to the Lord. And Jer 4. O Jeruſalem, waſh thine heart from wickedneſs, that thou mayeſt be ſaved. How long ſhall vain thoughts lodge within thee! And it is well known, how Gods deareſt Saints are grieved with their untoward cogitations, though they come not into the eye and obſervation of the world: even in this reſpect, they call themſelves, with S. Paul, miſerable men, becauſe they are ſenſible daily, not onelyonly of ſuch thoughts as are injectae, caſt into the ſoul, on a ſudden, by Satan; but ſuch alſo as be aſcendentes, (as the School diſtinguiſheth of them;) that aſcend out of their own corrupt hearts. In this reſpect it is, that Saint Auguſtine crieth out,S. Auguſtine. Quando? ubi innocens fui, Domine? When, Lord, or where have I been innocent?
But now evil words are worſe then evil thoughts. Pro. 30. ſaith Agur, Prov. 30.32.If thou haſt been fooliſh in lifting up thy ſelf, (that is, in choler, and deſire of revenge:) and if thou haſt thought wickedly, lay thine hand upon thy mouth. And again: actions of evil, are worſe then either thoughts or words, and a greater ſigne of a wicked heart; to do ill, then onelyonly to ſpeak or think ill.Iſai. 3.8. Iſai. 3. Jeruſalem is ruined, and Judah is fallen, becauſe their tongue and their doings are againſt the Lord. The reaſon is good: For,
1. It argueth, that ſin hath got a more full dominion and ſoveraignty over a man, when it cometh into the outward man, and is perfected in outward action, then when it reſteth in the heart. There is no man can free his heart from corruption in this life: Who can ſay, his heart is clean? Prov. 20.9.Prov. 20. no more, then he can ſay of his body.
You will ſay, What man is free from ſin, in word and deed? For, In many things we ſin all, James 3.2.
But yet this is eaſier then the other: a man may more eaſily keep himſelf from the outward action, then the inward cogitation. Many a man hath thoughts of luſt, yet keepeth himſelf from the act: many a man hath thoughts of revenge, yet doth not ſhed his brothers blood. And therefore the Apoſtle adviſeth, that we ſhould not let ſin raign in our mortal bodies, Rom. 6.12.Rom. 6. and that we ſhould not make our members foreign, weapons of unrighteouſneſs: though we think evil, againſt our purpoſe; yet to take heed of bringing it forth into practice.
A ſecond reaſon is, When a mans corruption breaketh out into action, God is more diſhonoured, and men are the more damn fied. The man himſelf is onelyonly hurt by his ill thoughts: but when it breaketh out into action, men are hurt. If ill words corrupt good manners, (as the Apoſtle ſaith,1 Cor. 15.33. 1 Cor. 15.) why then ſurely, evil actions: And therefore Satan putteth on men, not onelyonly to think, but to work all iniquity with greedineſs.
For the Uſe of this:
Application1. Let our care be, to ſtop ſin in the beginning, as neer as we can; to duſh theſe children of Babylon againſt the ſtones, when they be young; to kill the cockatrice in the egge; to quench the fire while it is but a ſpark: For it is of a growing nature; and if a man give way to it, non obtinebit ut deſinat; he ſhall not conquer it into a ceſſation.
Set we our ſelves even againſt evil thoughts; pray againſt them, ſtrive againſt them, diſlike them when they riſe, and lament and mourn for them: But do not tumble this ſweet bit under thy tongue; do not take delight to dwell upon ill cogitations: for then the fire kindleth further, by this complacencie; and the next thing will be, a reſolution to ſpeak or do: Qui minima contemnit, paulatìm decidit: he that contemneth ſmall ſins, by degrees falleth into great ones. And Saint Auguſtine ſheweth it,S. Auguſtine. in the example of his mother, when ſhe was a maid; how ſhe came to be overcome with a love to wine, and was thereupon called, by a ſervant in the houſe, Meribibula, that is, a wine-bibber. A little rent in a garment, is apt to be wider; and a ſmall breach in the bank of a river, will ſoon be wrought to a greater latitude. Sin beginneth in thought, and proceedeth to ill ſpeeches, and worſe actions.
Secondly, It ſhould teach us with might and main, to withſtand the perfection of ſin; though we cannot be ſo happy, as to be without ill motions; yet let us keep us from evil practices, when we have ability and opportunity for the acting of them. Let us then do as David did, who having in his wantonneſs and curioſity, luſted after the water of the well of Bethlehem; yet when it was brought unto him, had that power over himſelf, that he would not drink it, but poured it out upon the ground. So though we have luſted and coveted, and had unclean thoughts and reſolutions; let us take heed of perfecting them, for this woundeth the ſoul the deeper, and maketh the recovery more difficult. Not to have ill thoughts is (as*Eccumenius. one ſaith;) foreign, i.e. inevitable; and therefore though they be faulty, God will be the more merciful upon our repentance; but when we proceed to action, and accompliſh our ill thoughts and purpoſes, voluntarium auget peccatum, deliberation heightneth the ſin: the more of the Will in it, the greater the ſin; and the more deliberately done, the harder ſatisfied: and when we are kept from the outward commiſſion of ſin, let us not thank our ſelves, for it is Gods grace that reſtraineth us; I kept thee (ſaith God to Abimelech, Gen. 20.) That thou ſhouldeſt not ſin againſt me: Gen. 20.6.Corruption in the ſoul knoweth no pauſe; and therefore if God keep it not back, a man ſhall not ceaſe till he come into profundum peccatorum, into the depths of ſin, and be, with Lazarus, even dead and buried in the grave of his ſin; the Stoicks that thought the Right and practice of vertue, and refrayning of evill, to be in a mans own power, did err the whole Heaven; for if God do not keep us, we ſhall fall into as fearfull precepices, as ever Cain, or Pharoah, or Ahab, or Judas, or Julian, did.
But now for the fact of Sarah and Abraham; a great queſtion is implyed, whether it were lawfull or no:lib. 22. Contra. Manich. And there be two extreams about it: Fauſtus the Manichee, as (appeareth in Saint Auguſtin,) doth make holy Abraham guilty: turpis & nefariae libidinis, of baſe and flagrant luſt; and that being mad on iſſue, he wallowed in uncleanneſs with a baſe Harlot; he doth likewiſe challenge him with infidelity, that God having promiſed him iſſue by Sarah, he would ſeek a childe by another woman:A great queſtion. But Saint Auguſtin there freeth him from both theſe imputations.
Firſt, That Abraham was not luſtfull; for he never thought of this way, till his wife did ſuggeſt it unto him, and preſs it upon him.
Secondly, He was not guilty of infidelity, or diſtruſt of Gods promiſe, (ſaith he;) becauſe though God had promiſed him ſeed, yet he had not made known unto him, whether he ſhould have it by Sarah, or ſome other woman;Gen. 17. & 18. for he revealeth it unto him in the ſeventeenth and eighteenth Chapters, that he ſhould have iſſue by Sarah. The other extream is, of thoſe that wholly acquit both Abraham and Sarah, from any fault at all in the tranſaction of this buſineſs; ſo do many of the ancients: ſome upon light grounds, others upon thoſe that are more dangerous; I will briefly ſet down ſome of their reaſons, for the excuſe of either party.
Lib. 1. Antiq. C. 11.And Firſt, for Sarah, ſo Joſephas ſaith, that ſhe did this foreign, i. e. at the call of God; God commanding her ſo to do: but how doth this appear? there is not the leaſt footſtep of it; though God approved of her advice, for the caſting out of the bond woman and her ſon:Gen. 21. Gen. 21. It followeth not, that he liked of the counſel that ſhe gave to Abraham, to go in to her maide: Bellarmine ſeemeth to come neer to this reaſon: for he ſaith, non credibile eſt, Bell. lib. de matrimoni…. C. 11.Saram faeminam ſanctiſsimam id facturam fuiſse, niſi licitum eſſe ſciviſset: It is not to be believed, that ſuch an holy woman as Sarah was, would have done this, or any thing, that ſhe had not known to be lawful. But by this reaſon, a man might defend thoſe actions of holy perſons, which are worthy of cenſure: it might be ſaid, that when Sarah laughed and denied it to the Angell, that ſhe would not have done either, if ſhe had not known it to be lawfull: This might be a ground to juſtifie David, upon both his adultery and murder.
Apologies for Sarah.A Second Reaſon is, that Sarah did what ſhe did, ſtudio quae…endae prolis: ſhe deſired only to have ſeed, that the Church of God might be enlarged, yea that the world might be bleſſed, according to Gods promiſe to Abraham: and this Saint Ambroſe, Saint Auguſtine, and Saint Chryſoſtom go upon: But this will not ſerve the turne; for as I ſhewed the laſt day: Good intentions, will not juſtifie bad actions: Rom. 3.8.and the rule is peremptory; Rom. 3. A man muſt not do evill, that good may come of it.
Thirdly, It is ſaid in defence of Sarah, that ſhe did but uſe the right that ſhe had over her husband;1 Cor. 7.4. for the Apoſtle ſaith, 1 Cor. 7. The husband hath not power over his own body, but the wife; to which I anſwer: That the wife hath a power and right, over the husbands body; but not to perſwade him, or urge him to uncleanneſs with an other, contrary to the laws of marriage: her power only extendeth, to the challenging of her husband to her ſelf; and he is ſo hers, that he hath not power or right, to offer his body to another. It is eaſie to abaſe the power and right that people have; as ſome parents to their children, and ſome maſters to their ſervants, and ſome in place of authority, to thoſe that be inferiours: and ſo ſhe here maketh a perverſe uſe of that power and right that God had given her, over her husbands body, in giving up her right to another; whereas ſhe might not alienate it, or transfer it upon any; a wife cannot give leave to the husband, to take another. Now for Abrahams part, theſe reaſons are brought.
Firſt, That he did it not out of a luſtfull minde, but of a deſire of iſſue: But this was anſwered before. Whatſoever his end was, the means is unlawfull; and not only the meaning, but the means muſt be good.
Secondly, They ſay he did not do it of his own accord,S. Auguſtine, l. 16. de. Civ. Dei. c. 25. but by the perſwaſion of his wife; and this Saint Auguſtin much ſtandeth upon; he ſaith of him, non impleviſse voluptatem ſuam, ſed Illius; accepiſse non petiiſse, feminaſse non amaſse: that herein he fulfulled not his own, but his wives will; that he accepted, but deſired not Hagar; that he uſeth her as a Seminary, not as an Amoretta: For afterward he ſaith to his wife, that the maide is in her power, and thereupon the Father magnifieth him, that he uſed vocore temperanter, Apologies for Abraham.ancilla ob temperanter, nulla intemperanter; his wife temperately, his maide obediently, neither inordinately: But this will not ſatisfie; the pleaſure of his wife was not to be hearkned unto, but the will of God; I believe that Ahab himſelf would never have taken that courſe that Jezabel did, if he had been left to himſelf, for the getting of Nabaoths vineyard; but yet it was his fault, that he lets her do what ſhe pleaſe; and uſe his ſeal to what purpoſe ſhe thought fit. Surely Moſes would have circumciſed his Son, if his wife had not diſſwaded him; but he is cenſurable for gratifying her in it. Might ſin be excuſed by the perſwaſions of wife, and friend, and brother, and the like, thouſands would be guiltleſs.
Thirdly, Saint Auguſtin ſaith, mos erat, ergo crimen non crat; it was a cuſtom, and therefore thought no crime.
But we anſwer: Firſt, That it was no cuſtome,P. Lombard. though Peter Lombard, and thoſe upon him, ſay, the Patriarchs ſay it was in uſe: For we read of no man before the floud that had two wives, but only Lamech, and he was of the ſtock of Cain; it was he firſt,S. Jerom. ſaith Saint Jerom: Qui unam coſtam primus in duas diviſit; that firſt divided one rib into two; and after the floud, not any of the holy children of Seth, till Abraham, had two wives.
Secondly, If it were a good argument, that becauſe it is a cuſtome, therefore it is not ſinfull; we might wipe out many ſins, and acquit men of them, when they are cuſtomarily committed;againſt Polygamy. for cuſtome is not to be our rule, but Gods word.
Why but then Fourthly, they ſay, there was no law to forbid more wives then one: therefore Abraham did not offend in taking of another. I anſwer, though there was no Law written, yet there was a Law of nature, or of Creation; and that contained a flat prohibition, of having more then one wife at once; as appeareth in that there was but one rib taken from the man, and but one woman made of that rib: and that it is ſaid of the man, he ſhall cleave to his wife, not wives: and again, they two ſhall be one fleſh, not three, or more: And therefore that ſpeech of Saint Ambroſe will not fit,S. Ambroſe. in Legem non commiſit, ſed Legem praevenit. He committed nothing againſt the Law, but prevented it, living before it.
And in the Fift place, the ſame Father would excuſe the fact of Abraham, Gal. 4.24.25. S. Ambroſe.becauſe it was a myſtery; as appeareth, Gal. 4. quod putas peccatum, advertis eſſe myſterium? (ſaith he:) doeſt thou conſider that to be a myſtery, which thou accounteſt to be a ſin? I anſwer, we deny not but Saint Paul maketh it an Allegory, but what then? The myſtery lyeth, not in the marriage of Abraham and Hagar, but in the ſervile condition of Hagar, and the caſting of her and her ſon out of the Family: that typified the ſervitude of the Law, and that carnal ordinances were to be caſt out of the Church. We do not (ſaith Saint Auguſtine) juſtifie the fault of Lot with his daughters; becauſe it ſignified ſomething. Becauſe there was a myſtery in Hoſea's taking a woman of fornications; is fornication juſtified? Shall we excuſe theft, becauſe the ſudden coming of Chriſt is likened unto the coming of a thief in the night? Is a man licenſed to play the unrighteous ſteward, becauſe Chriſt draweth a Parable from them likewiſe?
Sixthly, Some ſay, that Abraham offended not in this, becauſe we finde afterward, that God promiſeth; to bleſs the childe that was born.
I anſwer: It is a fallacie non cauſae; of that pretended for a cauſe, which was not the cauſe of that ſame bleſſing. God bleſſed Iſhmael for his fathers ſake; but not for the lawfulneſs of his generation. God bleſſed Jephtah, that was baſe born, and he became the ruler of the people: but this doth not juſtifie that mixture from which he ſprung.
Laſtly, that which is ſaid in juſtification of this fact, is, that Polygamy was not unlawful, and that God diſpenſed with it in thoſe times.
The Polygamy of the Fathers was a fault.But, as far as I perceive, this cannot be made good: For, beſides that, (as we ſhewed before) it was againſt the law of Nature; there is a parity of matrimonial right, between man and wife; each others body, in each others power.
And ſecondly; Would God have that to be in families, that ſhould be the cauſe of diſcord? But ſuch is Polygamy, as we ſee in the family of Abraham, in that of Jacob, and in that of Elkanah.
Thirdly, had Polygamy been lawful, ſurely it ſhould have been permitted moſt of all in the beginning of the world, for the multiplication of mankinde: But then God did not ſuffer it; for he then ſaid, For this cauſe ſhall a man leave father and mother, and cleave to his wife: not wives, but wife; as ſpeaking of one.
The Polygamy of the fathers, then, was a fault. And let not men wonder, that it ſhould never, in all that time, be reproved: For, we do not finde Lots inceſt with his two daughters, or Jacobs marriage with two ſiſters, reproved; and yet both worthy of reprehenſion.
Secondly, it is obſervable, that moſt of the Polygamiſts were reproved in deeds, if not in words; either by the vexation they had from their wives, or by the croſſes they had in their children.
Why but then, if it were a fault; what ſhall we think of the Patriarchs that lived and died in this ſin?
It is commonly ſaid, that they ſinned not againſt their conſciences, but of ignorance and infirmity, as in other things; this being not yet clearly revealed unto them; and God, in his gracious indulgence, upon their general humiliation for all their ſins, was pleaſed to paſs by this: For, who is not guilty of many ſins, that he knoweth not perfectly to be ſins? And thoſe are waſhed away, through Gods mercy, by a general repentance. Who underſtandeth his errours? Pſal. 19.12.(ſaith David:) O cleanſe thou me from my ſecret ſins.
Now for a word of Application:
Let no man dare to imitate the Patriarchs in this: For, if it were a fault in them, it ought to be avoided, not imitated: Inſtruunt nos, Application& docentes, & errantes (ſaith the Father:) They inſtruct us, at once erring and cautioning: we ſhould be warned by their falls. It is a prophane trick, to encourage our ſelves in evil, by the errours of holy men, (as too many do) pleading Noahs exceſſes, and Abrahams lying, and Lots inceſt, and Davids adultery: Si David, cur non ego? S. Aug. in enar. ſup. Pſal. 51.Saint Auguſtine maketh it the ſpeech of one; If David did thus and thus, why may not I do ſo? And ſo Peters denial of his maſter. Theſe are not ſet in exemplum cadendi; ſed, ſi cecideris, reſurg…ndi; (ſaith that Father:) Not as examples of falling; but, if thou beeſt fallen, of ariſing.
Again, for this particular that we have diſcourſed upon, much may be ſaid, to extenuate the fault of the Patriarchs. We cannot plead, if we do offend in the like kinde: Why?Matth. 19.8. Mark 10. Becauſe our bleſſed Lord hath perfectly cleared the caſe, Matth. 19. and Mark 10. ab initio non fuit ſic: From the beginning it was not ſo.
2. The Apoſtle ſaith, that every man muſt have his own wife, and every woman muſt have her own husband, 1 Cor. 7. and 1 Tim. 3.1 Cor. 7.2. 1 Tim. 3.2. a biſhop muſt be unreprovable, the husband of one wife: ſo that he is reprovable, that hath two wives; that is, together: for it is to be underſtood de Polygamia ſimultanea, of many wives at the ſame time; not of Polygamy which is ſucceſsiva, divers wives one after another: for it is not forbidden for a man to have one wife after another. Why then beware of this rock; and let us know, If, after ſuch light, we run our ſelves upon it, our fault is far greater then that of the Patriarchs; for we have a Sun, to their Candle: and, the greater light, the more perfectly ſhould our ſteps be ordered.
Well, by that which hath been ſaid, we ſee, that both Sarah and Abraham failed in this buſineſs. We will not be ſo wicked, and foul-mouthed, to charge Abraham with groſs luſtfulneſs, and laſciviousneſs or make Sarah a bawd unto him:S. Auguſtine. Saint Auguſtin might ſay it truly of the Patriarchs; Caſtiùs utebantur pluribus, quàm nunc unâ: that they did more chaſtly uſe many, then many now uſe one; but on the other ſide, we muſt needs note the infirmity of theſe holy perſons: and yet that rayling Fryer Fevardentius, Fevardentius.taxeth this in reverend Calvin; he taketh no knowledg what that holy man hath ſaid, indeed as much as can be ſaid, to extenuate the fault of this matrone: but becauſe he cannot acquit her of errour, he ſticketh not to ſay, that Saram multis vexat contumeliis; The Friers ſlanders of Calvin.that be aſperſeth Sarah with manifold reproaches; yea belyeth him in that manner, that he maketh him ſay: Saram voluiſſe domo ſua erigere lupanar, Et mariti Laenam eſſe: that Sarah would ſet up a Brothel-houſe in her own, and became vitiatour of her husband: But let him bark as long as he will, neither he nor all the world can acquit Abraham and Sarah of a fault in this matter: Saint Ambroſe that had ſaid as much for Abraham, as poſſible he could, yet maketh this fact a fault; and therefore he fell into it, ut cognoſcas non ſuperioris cujuſdam naturae & ſubſtantiae ſuiſſe, ſed è numero & fragilitate univerſorum hominum: that thou mayeſt know, that Abraham was not of any ſuperiour nature, or Angelical ſubſtance; but one of the frail number of mankinde.
Obſerv. 3. The deareſt ſervants of God have their defections: but yet with difference enough from thoſe of the ungodly.And here we may ſee, That even the deareſt Saints of God have their failings: even after they are called into the ſtate of grace, they may be overtaken with errours.
Let us turn us unto any of the Saints (as Job ſpeaketh) and we ſhall finde this made good. Righteous Noah was overcome with exceſs and inceſtuouſneſs: Jacob diſſembled, by the perſwaſion of his mother; and Judah, his ſon, polluted himſelf with Tamar: and Reuben climbed up to his fathers bed: and Simeon and Levi, how cruel were they againſt the Sichemites! Moſes was diffident at the waters of ſtrife; and Aaron and Miriam murmure againſt their brother: beſides that, Aaron was engaged in the buſineſs of the golden calf: And we know how David failed groſsly; and ſo did his ſon Solomon; ſo did Jehoſhaphat and Hezekiah; and ſo did Jonah; and ſo did the Apoſtles of our Lord; yea, even he that ſome would have to be the chief, by his being ſhaken with the blaſt of a damſels mouth, plainly diſcovered, he could not be the Rock of the Church: yea, after this, he halted between the Jews and the Gentiles, and drew many after him in his diſsimulation. I know no Saint that ever was in the world, that had not reaſon to complain in this kinde.
Now whence cometh this, that Gods people are ſo ſubject to failings?
Certainly, Firſt, Satan is moſt ſpitefully bent againſt them; and he deſireth, eſpecially, to winnow them as wheat; and doth more rejoyce in the folling of them, then in an hundred others: he ſeeketh to impair their comfort, and to bring a blemiſh upon that Truth which they profeſs.
Secondly, the beſt have corruption in them, and carry about with them a body of ſin: though they be wholly juſtified, yet they are not wholly ſanctified: perfect ſanctification is reſerved for another life: and here, corruption will be ſtill working.
Thirdly, the Lord in his wiſdom ſuffereth it to be thus
1. To abate their natural pride, by letting them have a ſenſe of their own infirmities.
2. To make them cleave more cloſely unto him. And
3. To make them more compaſſionate toward their brethren, in their weakneſſes; and foreign, to ſet them in joynt (as the word importeth) with a more eaſie hand, as a man would do a member that is diſlocated.
For the Uſe of this:
It confuteth the opinions of thoſe mad brains that think it is poſſible for men to be without ſin: yea,Application the Antinomians have not ſtuck to ſay, Be in Chriſt, and ſin if thou canſt. Saint John then muſt be a lyer, who calleth that man lyer, and ſaith the truth of God is not in him, that ſaith he hath no ſin. And Saint Ambroſe told that Cathariſt that ſaid he had no ſin, that that very word made him a ſinner. But ſuch mad ones have more need of a Phyſitian to purge them, then of a Divine to confute them.
Secondly, here is ground of comfort unto thoſe that mourn daily under their defects: it is none otherwiſe with them, then with the deareſt Saints: if they would weep their eyes out, they cannot weep themſelves free from ſin: nay, let them this day have repented never ſo ſeriouſly; by to-morrow, yea (God knoweth) long before tomorrow, they ſhall be overtaken again.
And as I deſire this may comfort the diſconſolate ſpirit; ſo I would be loath it ſhould encourage the prophane: for they are apt to bolſter themſelves in their groſs cuſtomable ſins, by ſaying, Every one hath his faults; we have all our infirmities. But let them know, there is a great and broad difference between their ſins, and the infirmities that Gods children are chargeable withal.
Firſt: What I hate, that I do, ſaith S. Paul, Rom 7.Rom. 7.15. The children of God are convinced in their judgements, that it is a ſin; and hate it. The wicked man cannot ſay ſo: for he loveth his ſin, he huggeth this Dalilah.
Secondly, at verſ. 19. Saint Paul ſaith, That which I would not, Verſe 19.that I do. The purpoſe, will, and reſolution of the children of God, is againſt ſin. So cannot the wicked ſay of himſelf; for he purpoſely and deliberately ſinneth: He doth not ſuccumbere ſomno, but vacare; he doth not nod againſt his will, but purpoſely ſetteth himſelf to ſleep.
Thirdly, Saint Paul calleth himſelf (verſ. 24.) miſerable man, Verſe 24.in regard of his ſin: The good man is much troubled and grieved, when he is overtaken; it is a great burthen to his ſoul, and he reſteth not, until he have made his peace. It is not ſo with the wicked.
Fourthly; the good man walketh not after the fleſh; he doth not make ſin a trade: but the wicked man doth; it is his daily walk. See then, whether there be not much difference between the infirmities of Gods children, and the irregularities of the wicked: and therefore little reaſon to comfort themſelves in this, That all have their failings.
Laſtly: As I would be loath the dogs ſhould ſnatch the childrens bread: ſo I would be as loath, that the children ſhould play the wantons with their bread; that becauſe they perſwade themſelves they are in the ſtate of grace, to ſlight ſin, and to be padling in thoſe dirty kennels; yea, to adventure upon ſome groſſer ones, that are ſweet and gainful: This is a piece of the devils Logick; If thou be the Son of God, caſt thy ſelf down. Oh what horrible ingratitude is this! Is he merciful, that thou ſhouldſt be ſinful? Shall the kindneſs of the father, or maſter, make the ſon or ſervant more looſe? Joſeph reaſoneth, from his maſters favour, to faithfulneſs: wilt thou reaſon, from Gods mercy, to iniquity? Why, the Pſalmiſt telleth thee, There is mercy with the Lord; that he may be feared. Mayeſt not thou ſuſpect thy ſelf, that thou haſt deluded thy ſelf with a vain hope that thou wert in the ſtate of grace? For certainly, no gracious heart can reaſon thus: God hath called me by his grace; therefore I will ſin, and will take the liberty to offend God. But if thou beeſt under grace, then be aſſured, that this thine argumentation will, after a while, ſpoil thy peace, and bring thee into ſuch anxieties and perplexities, before thou recover thy former feelings of Gods love, that thou wilt ſay, thou haſt had an hard penyworth of thy ſin. Remember but David, how his bones were broken, before he was reſtored in the fear of God. Let the ſenſe of Gods warm favours melt us into all poſſible obedience: and the neerer he hath brought us to himſelf, and the more he hath manifeſted himſelf unto us, the more obſervant let us be of him, and the more tender and fearful to do the leaſt thing that may offend him: this will ſhew the love of God to be ſhed abroad in our hearts: And that love which maketh us here holy, will make us hereafter happie.
Preached, May 26. 1641.