Pagina-afbeeldingen
PDF
ePub

finally obliged to refuse, still we shall refuse upon better ground, and with more satisfaction, after we have yielded as far as we are able, than on the first attack; and our yielding, being attended with an examination into each case, will at the same time encourage real indigence, and discourage that which is fictitious: it will be the best remedy against that impudent intrusion, the appearance of which, is apt to make us impatient.

As giving to those who beg, is not so much out of the way of our customary notions as yielding to insults, it would be needless to examine here any difficulties, or objections; it may suffice to repeat, that no petitioner must be allowed to claim our assistance, as a matter of strict justice. And I may conclude my observations on this verse by a short paraphrase, the chief purpose of which is, to mark out limitations, and some variety of cases. These our Lord seems to have left to common sense; they were not in the stile of his admonitions, and would have greatly weakened their spirit and force.

[ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors]

When men professing to be in want, apply to you for pecuniary assistance, and beseech you, either that you would make them an absolute gift, or entrust them with the use of your property for a time, though their application may discompose you at first, by carrying an appearance of dissolute and impertinent intrusion, not without suspicion of imposture; yet do not suffer your irritation to influence you so far as to make you treat them with contemptuous neglect, or contumelious arrogance; but in candor and benevolence make some concessions to them; yield some attention to their professions; seriously endeavour to relieve them; and if circumstances will not permit such an indulgence, in the particular case, consider it as a mortification and a disappointment. Do not allow yourselves to repel unheard any persons pleading distress, as if they were so unconnected with you that they could have no claim to your attention; or so vicious as to merit punishment rather than relief; but endeavour to give every distressed person his proper place and rank in your beneficent calculations, so as wholly to exclude no one, without a conscientious conviction,

that your funds ought preferably to be allowed to ⚫ other objects of charity.'

How enlarged snd rational, as well as benevolent, must have been the sentiments of our Saviour, so to reform the errors of the Jews! so to instruct the whole race of mankind! Was "this the carpenter's son ?" "Truly this man was the Son of God". See Matt. xiii. 55. Mark xv. 39.

29. Let us now take the passage immediately following the words last explained. Matt. v. 43, 44. "Ye "have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love "thy neighhour, and hate tbine enemy: But I say "unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for "them which despitefully use you, and persecute you".

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

30. That the Law of Moses ordered men to love their neighbours, Lev. xix. 18. is not doubted; but where is it said, that a man ought to hate his enemy? I do not find such an injunction. The precept, consisting of two parts, to which our Lord refers, seems only to have been collected by the Scribes from different parts of the Mosaic Scriptures, partly moral, partly historical. The poetical writings might also supply such passages as this; "I hate them right sore; even as though they were mine enemies". Psalm cxxxix.

86

(Part i. 18.) In the two preceding cases we did find the words referred to, in the Law itself, though perverted in their interpretation, or application; "Thou

shalt not kill"-"eye for eye, tooth for tooth";-but here, the error of Tradition could not be expressed in scriptural terms; we may, however, form a very probable conjecture from what parts of Scripture it had been derived: from those, which commanded the Israelites to take possession of a Region pointed out to them by Jehovah himself, and to possess it in such a manner as should in effect secure them from becoming Idolaters: we may add also, from those Scriptures, which provide for a continuance of divine worship free from Idolatry. The expressions made use of in order to answer these

purposes, might possibly, when the circumstances came to be neglected, in which they had been used originally, give occasion to hatred of idolaters as a Duty, and so to hatred of other enemies. We have already seen some of these expressions when we spoke of Resentment as a check upon the excesses and perversions of benevolence. (Part vi. 18.)

The first six verses of the seventh chapter of Deuteronomy are here to be noticed: "When the Lord thy "God shall bring thee into the Land whither thou goest to possess it, and hath cast out many nations "before thee", "thou shalt smite them and utterly

[ocr errors]

66

destroy them thou shalt make no covenant with "them; nor shew mercy unto them: Neither shalt "thou make marriages with them".-For they will "turn away thy Son from following me, that they may serve other Gods”. "Ye shall destroy their altars "and break down their images"-" For thou art an "holy people unto the Lord thy God"-" a special people".

[ocr errors]

66

[ocr errors]

This seemingly severe measure of divine providence has been justified by many able advocates: but it seems sufficiently justified by the reflexion, that the plan of separating a people from the rest of mankind for the purpose of maintaining spiritual worship somewhere on the earth, and of preparing the world for the universal religion of Christ, is clearly beneficial to mankind; and that such special or peculiar people must have a region to inhabit that the reasons of driving out the inhabitants are openly declared; and that no conduct was enjoined towards them but such as was necessary to answer the kind and gracious purposes of Heaven. Had the Israelites been tempted to intermarry with the idolaters, or to make agreements or compromises with them, so that they should have continued to inhabit the region, and to be idolaters, there was not the least probability of the plan succeeding: and the same is true had the Israelites been induced to to let them continue idolaters in the country merely from compassion. At the same time it appears to me, from this and other passages of Scripture, (k) that the destruction of these

Idolaters was only to take place on the supposition of their warlike resistance, and on their refusing to cede the territory allotted to the Israelites, whose right and title to possess it appeared from an astonishing series of miracles: Nay it seems, that the force to be used was also on supposition of the seven nations continuing to be Idolaters; for from the manner in which the grounds of the invasion are expressed, I should not scruple to infer, that any of the inhabitants might have been admitted as proselytes to the religion of Moses, and thereby have continued in their own country. But however this might be, there can be no doubt that the hostile treatment of the seven nations was a public and national measure, intended to answer a particular end, and a good end; and that it was a single measure, not an instance of a general plan: and therefore, that it could not, with any shew of reason, be made a constant rule of conduct for private individuals.

Nevertheless it must be acknowledged, that even down to our Saviour's time a notion did prevail amongst the Jews, that they were not to keep up the same intercourse with heathens which they did with one another. St. Peter says, to Cornelius and his friends, Acts x. 28. "Ye know that it is an unlawful thing for a man that "is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of ano"ther Nation". And Peter is afterwards thus accused; "Thou wentest into men uncircumcised, and didst eat "with them". Acts xi. 3. Gal. ii. 12. And, no doubt, much caution and reserve must have been requisite, in all ages, toprevent the Jews from relapsing into Idolatry, to which their propensity was but too great. They are sharply reprimanded for it, especially by the Prophets: their intercourse with Heathens is termed whoredom and fornication. But reserve in associating with any man is a very different thing from hating him as an enemy. Indeed an enemy as such, is not, in strictness, the object of pure hatred, but how he may hated, and how a compound sentiment towards an enemy may be called by the name of hatred, has before been shewn. (Part i. 18. Part v. 12.) The idea of hating an enemy might possibly in part arise from its seeming to be implied in the precept to love a neighbour: if we are to love our

neighbour, it may have been said, we are to feel the opposite sentiment towards the opposite character; but a Christian is secure from such a fallacious inference, because he is commanded to love both his neighbour and his enemy. Indeed the word neighbour means the same sometimes as the word man, or as human being; because in fact the human being to whom wet perform Duties, is ordinarily our neigh bour, or lives near us; and language arises from actual circumstances.

There are several natural expressions in scripture of mens sentiments respecting their enemies; describing uneasiness under persecution, triumph on victory, and others; but these cannot reasonably be the ground of an injunction to hate an enemy, generally. Amongst the the Jews the word enemy seems to have had two senses; it sometimes seems to denote a stranger, at other times an enemy who is also a neighbour, according to our ordinary use of the word. The Latin word Hostis, which usually signifies an enemy, once signified a stranger. (1) The Ægyptians had grievously oppressed the Israelites; yet the Law of Moses says, "Thou shalt not abhor an Ægyptian". Deut. xxiii. 7. It also says, at the same time, "Thou shalt not abhor an Edomite". Yet the Psalmist tells us, that Edom had said of Jerusalem, "Down with it, down with it, even to the ground". Psalm cxxxvii. 7. And for abstaining from ill offices to an enemy, in the common sense of the word, we may refer to what has been before cited concerning attention to his Ox or his Ass; as also concerning revenge ;

66

Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against "the children of thy people". Lev. xix. 18. Moreover, whatever Solomon advises must be considered as in the spirit of the old Law; and we have already produced his precept, "If thine enemy be hungry, give him "him bread to eat; and if he be thirsty give him water "to drink". Prov. xxv. 21. To which might be added, "Rejoice not when thine enemy falleth, and let not "thine heart be glad when he stumbleth". Surely these things are far from the injunction, Thou shalt hate thine enemy'. Neither need we scruple to allege our Saviour's authority in the case of the good

A a

[ocr errors]
« VorigeDoorgaan »