Page images
PDF
EPUB

SERMON XV.

ON THE CAUSES OF UNTHANKFULNESS.

Rom. i. 21.

Neither were thankful.

THE heathen world is condemned by the Apostle, not for the want of knowledge which they could not possess, for no man will be condemned for wanting that which he had not the opportunity of attaining, but for not acting up to the knowledge which they either did possess or might have possessed; in other words, for their criminal negligence and inattention. They in a measure, he says, "knew God." From beholding his works they might easily infer him to be a gracious and compassionate Being. For "the invisible things of him," that is, his attributes, “are clearly seen in the creation of the world;"-for this the words evidently mean;-"being understood" (or manifested) "by the things that are made" (by the whole frame and order of the world), "even his eternal power and godhead." They were, therefore, inexcusable when, knowing him to be a Being of eternal power, glory, and goodness, they did not glorify him as such

a Being ought to be glorified; they did not offer him a worship corresponding to these glorious attributes, "neither were thankful;"-they did not, as they ought, feel grateful for his goodness, nor render to him the homage of obedience for the innumerable benefits which they had received at his hands. And, in consequence of their thus criminally neglecting to act up to the light they possessed, God "gave them up" to the folly of their own minds. "Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools" in their religion, and profligate in their conduct; till, at length, they were abandoned by God and given over to condemnation. Of such importance is it, my brethren, to be faithful to the light imparted to us, and thankful for the blessings we have received from God.

Now the blessings which those heathen nations had received were only those which God has given to all mankind; the blessings of light, of heat, of fruitful seasons, of health, of the faculties and senses of the mind and body. They understood, comparatively, very little of the real goodness of God. His mercy in the redemption of mankind, the Gospel of his Son, the influence of his Spirit, were not made known to them. Still, however, they were highly culpable in their want of thankfulness. They knew enough of the goodness of God to demand gratitude at their hands, and therefore to justify their condemnation for the want of it. But with how much more force does this argument apply to us, who have the Gospel, with so many other blessings, committed to us! If they were condemned for their unthankfulness, surely our guilt, if we are thankless, infinitely exceeds theirs.

Gratitude to others for benefits received is so plainly a duty, that it is superfluous to establish it by argument. Neither is it less obvious that the duty is great in proportion to the number and value of those benefits. It follows, therefore, that the duty of thankfulness to God is of the highest and most binding nature, since the number and value of his favours are infinitely great. I

do not think, indeed, that any persons will, in plain terms, deny the obligation of gratitude to God. Their want of thankfulness does not spring from any doubt, either as to the abstract principle or as the particular duty of gratitude to God. But the fact is, that they do not perceive God to be so truly a benefactor to them as he is. This point, then, requires to be made the subject of our consideration. I shall, therefore, in the present discourse, endeavour to assign some of the causes from whence this mistake as to the beneficence of God arises.

1. One cause of our thanklessness to God is, that we are apt rather to rest in second causes than to trace our blessings to their Primary Source.-The view of man is generally too confined. He looks at what is near and imniediate, rather than at what is more remote. Does he receive any good, it appears to be the fruit of his own labour, of his prudence, his exertions, or of the kindness of his friends. To these, then, the gratitude appears to be due; and to these, and these alone, it is generally offered. The fact, however, is, that the Original Mover and First Cause is the Being to whom our thanks are chiefly due. For-take a similar case. I am desirous of serving a friend. Perhaps the way in which I can most effectually serve him, is by persuading a third person to do something for his benefit; and I accordingly urge this person, and prevail with him. To whom, in this case, is my friend really indebted? Is it to me, or to the third person? While his thanks ought undoubtedly to be given to him, they are yet principally due to me. I am the grand mover and author of this benefit. My kindness is not diminished by the intervention of the means I have chosen to employ. But although the validity of this reasoning may be admitted in the case of a human benefactor, it is too apt not to be admitted in considering the agency of the Almighty. The man who obtains food and raiment by his own labour does not always ascribe it to the bounty

[blocks in formation]

of God. He feels little gratitude to him who first gave fertility to the earth; who waters the grain with his showers; who ripens it with his suns; and who adapts it to the powers of digestion and the purposes of nourishment. Suppose then you deemed it right, before you conferred a favour upon your child, to require of him, as a condition of the gift, some previous exercise or labour -would he, when he received it, argue justly, if he were to say, "I do not owe this to my parent, but to my own labour?" Would you not answer-"I appointed that labour as the means by which the end was to be secured: I promised the blessing; I pointed out the means, and ensured success to them." The fact is, the favour is enhanced by the appointment of the means where a merciful end is secured to the use of those means. This we discover in other cases, but not where God is the Author of our success. But for the blindness of our understanding, or rather, perhaps, the ingratitude of our hearts, we should, at once, refer every mercy to the Supreme Cause, and observe with astonishment the variety, the extent, and the uniformity of his goodness. We should trace to his love for man the system of the universe. To give light to man, he created the splendour by which we are surrounded. To feed him, he caused food to spring out of the earth. To gratify him, he strewed the face of nature with flowers, and planted it with groves. To recruit his wearied body, he appointed rest and sleep. He gives success to our labours, and he breathes kindness into our friends. The day approaches, my brethren, when we shall see that all blessings of all kinds, in all places, and at every period-the tenderness of parents, the affection of friends, blessings apparently the most spontaneous and the most costly, the comforts of life, and the joys of eternity-are all the gifts of a heavenly Hand. Would to God, that we could at once make this discovery! This indeed would open to us new prospects, would almost replace us in Paradise, would display to us its Author walking again amidst the scenes

[ocr errors]

of his own creation, and pronouncing every thing to be good. Why should we doubt his presence, merely because he is not revealed to the bodily eye? Why should we doubt his goodness, because he is pleased to impart it by the intervention of means and instruments? Paradise was not less replenished by his bounty, because he appointed Adam to dress the garden. The bounty of the monarch is not the less, because he distributes it by the hands of his ministers.

II. A second cause of our unthankfulness to God is our defective view of his Providence.-We feel grateful to God when we can readily and distinctly trace any mercy to his Providence. And this is at once recog nized in peculiar and striking instances, as in cases of remarkable deliverance or unusual success. But it is greatly to be lamented, that even our acknowledgement of the agency of God, in some instances, should become a means of diminishing our sense of his agency in others. And this is the case, if, by acknowledging him to act only in particular cases, we exclude the sense of his general interference. The fact is, that God does not act in one case more than in another. He indeed more distinctly reveals to us his agency in some instances, that we may learn to recognize it in all. He sometimes ceases to employ instruments, in order to shew us, that when instruments are used, it is still he who works. Far be it from me to check the grateful emotions felt by any person who has experienced what is termed a particular Providence. But this I must say, that the very idea of a particular providence arises merely from the weakness of our understanding, and our imperfect conception of the Divine agency. For, if we saw the agency of God as it is seen in heaven, we should discover that his providence is as distinct, as particular, as minute in one case as another; that "particular" and "general" are the language of human infirmity; that what is signal and peculiar in our eyes, is common in his; that his hand is

« PreviousContinue »