In the strictest sense of the word, self-denial is the subjection to the will of God as expressed in his word and providence, of our personal tastes and feelings, in distinction from those which are social; because the interest which we take in the happiness of others is not, in the first instance, self-interest. Our love to friends desires nothing immediately but their happiness. And yet as the happiness of every one consists in the gratification of his tastes and affections, much of our own happiness is ultimately drawn from the happiness of our friends. Therefore to subject their interest to the will of God, is, so far as our own happiness is involved, self-denial. So far as our happiness consists in the enjoyment of their society, a consent to part with them when God ordains it, is self-denial. As far as Abraham's happiness would have been affected in both ways by the death of Isaac,—a death inflicted too by his own hand, his obedience on this occasion was an act of self-denial. But perhaps you deny that the crossing of our affection for others is self-denial. You say, the happiness of Gabriel consists in the prosperity of God's kingdom; and in promoting that prosperity he finds his own happiness: would it be self-denial in him to cease to promote that prosperity or even to consent to its destruction? This is an entirely different case. The happiness which Gabriel derives from the prosperity of God's kingdom, is not a thing which is to be subjected to God's will. It is subjection itself. Nor is it a thing which can be set up in opposition to that will or to that prospe

rity. Surely that happiness which is drawn from the public good, cannot be erected against the public good. Nor can he be called upon by his Maker to sacrifice that happiness, because there is nothing higher than the prosperity of God's kingdom at which he can aim. There is no way in which he can sacrifice this happiness but by ceasing to love this kingdom and yielding himself up to the government of a private interest; which, instead of being self-denial, would be the very essence of selfishness. But Abraham's love to Isaac could be arrayed against the interest of God, and needed to be subjected to his will. And that subjection, so far as the parental happiness of Abraham was sacrificed, was self-denial.

But there is such a thing as sacrificing our happiness without self-denial. The drunkard sacrifices his happiness; but so far from denying himself, he produces the effect by refusing to deny a depraved appetite. The superstitious wretch who yields to self-torture, sacrifices, for the time, his happiness; but he does not deny himself; for he is merely feeding pride and self-righteousness and the hope of reward. You might as well elevate to self-denial the labors of the husbandman, or the fatigues and exposures of the soldier, or the hazards of the duellist. To feast one appetite or evil passion at the expense of another, is not self-denial. Nothing is self-denial but the subjection of our natural feelings generally to the will of God and all our interests to his interest.

There are two sets of tastes or feelings belong

ing to human nature in its present state. One consists of those which existed before the fall, and which still remain perfectly innocent unless indulged unseasonably or to excess. The other consists of those which were introduced by the fall, and which, in every degree and modification of them, are sinful. Such are pride, malice, envy, hatred, and the like. These must, at all times and under all circumstances, be crossed. There can be no religion any further than it is a self-denial in regard to these. The other set of tastes and affections which belong to human nature, comprises those which, not being introduced by the fall, are sinful only in excess, or when, by existing circumstances, we are called to deny them and do not. Such is the love of happiness. Such are all the animal appetites and the domestic affections. Such is the taste for the beauties of nature, for music, and for all those objects which would have gratified Adam in innocency. These tastes and feelings may be lawfully gratified with no other restrictions than these. When God has made express rules to regulate them, as in the case of the animal appetites, they are to be restricted by these rules. Or when God in his providence calls us to cross these propensities, we must deny ourselves. Thus Abraham was called to cross his natural affection for Isaac. Thus Paul was called to give up his ease, the happiness of a family state, and most of the common comforts of life. All these tastes and feelings become sinful when indulged to excess; every solicitation to which must be resisted. When the objects

of them are removed by the providence of God, we must not repine, but show our self-denial in cheerful submission.

In all these respects we are to deny ourselves; but beyond these limits we may not go. For a person, when not called to it by the law or providence of God, to cross his natural tastes, or in any way to afflict himself, betrays more pride and self-righteousness than any thing else. Self-love, or the love of happiness, is innocent when subjected by supreme love to God, and when opposed to no higher good; and to cross it without a sufficient cause, is an instance of superstitious austerity which is by no means guiltless. Though Abraham was praiseworthy in pursuing as far as he did the purpose of offering up his son; yet the neighboring heathen, who, from his example misunderstood, did, unbidden, sacrifice their children to Moloch, incurred enormous guilt.

II. I am to adduce some arguments to enforce the duty of self-denial.

1. It is suitable that we should deny ourselves in all respects in which the law and providence of God call for it. It is suitable in the nature of things that God should govern his own world, appoint all our circumstances, and arrange all our crosses; and that we should submit to them or voluntarily take them up as he appoints. The world is his property; we are his creatures; he is our sovereign, and has a right to appoint; and it is our duty to submit however crossing to the flesh. He is infinitely benevolent and wise, and full of mercy, and always

faithful; and there is reason for unbounded joy that he is on the throne and that we are in his hands. It is our greatest privilege to be ruled by him. And for us to refuse to be governed by his laws and to take up our cross at his bidding, is folly and ingratitude and rebellion in the highest degree.

2. His commands to self-denial are explicit and urgent. "If any man will come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross daily and follow me." Shall we be conscientious not to break any of the commands of the two tables, and have no scruples in regard to this? Hear and remember: "Whosoever shall keep the whole law and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all."

3. Without a principle that will lead us to deny ourselves habitually and in all respects for Christ, we have no religion. This comes from high authority. "If any man come to me and hate not his father and mother, and wife and children, and brethren and sisters, yea and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple. And whosoever doth not bear his cross and come after me, cannot be my disciple." What manner of love is that compared with which the tenderest charities of social life are hatred? Yet such love to Christ we must possess, (it comes from his own lips,) or we have no part in him. We must have for him that clearly supreme affection which will not stand wavering whether to make trifling sacrifices for his cause. The father of the faithful did not hesitate a moment whether to sacrifice his beloved Isaac; and shall we demur about giving up trifling objects, and yet rank ourselves