ST. LUKE, XVII., 16.

“And he was a Samaritan.”

THE people known as Samaritans had their origin from certain Gentile

tribes sent into the country of Samaria early in the Babylonish

captivity. They were of course idolaters, and they continued to be mere

idolaters, until, being troubled with lions, which had become very

numerous in Samaria, and understanding that these were let loose among

them by the god of the country (for various countries in their creed had

various gods) to punish them for neglect of his worship, they applied to

King Shalmanezer for one of the captive priests to teach them the

Levitical law. Then they began to combine with their own superstition

the acknowledgment and ceremonial service of Jehovah. “They feared the

LORD,” we read, “and served their own gods.”

On the return of the Jews, these Samaritans, who, it would appear, had

now relinquished much of their idolatry, sought permission to take part

in the rebuilding of the temple; but being properly rejected, they in

revenge hindered and harassed the builders, and at length, by false

representations to the Syrian King, procured a decree which suspended the

continuance of the devout work. This naturally made the Jews bitterly

hostile to the Samaritans: and the building of a rival temple on Mount

Gerizim—the rejection of all the inspired Books, excepting those of

Moses—the encouragement given to Jewish criminals and outlaws to seek

refuge among them, and many other provocations, had so sustained and

deepened the feeling against them, that, in our LORD’S time, the Jews

would have no dealings with the Samaritans; and in any want or danger,

would much rather have suffered death, than receive succour at their

hands.

Thus were the Samaritans despised and shunned; and that there was at

least some measure of justice in their treatment, we may safely infer

from our LORD’S rebuke of them—“Ye worship ye know not what;” and from

His charge to the apostles, “Into any city of the Samaritans enter ye

not.” Their creed was heretical, their worship schismatic. They

belonged not to the covenanted people of GOD. And yet the _only one_ out

of ten miraculously healed lepers, who discharged the religious

obligation of rendering thanks and glorifying GOD, and who received

spiritual benefit from Christ, was a _Samaritan_. The model neighbour to

the man who had fallen among thieves, was a _Samaritan_. They were

Samaritans who so early and so openly professed, “We have heard Him

ourselves, and know that this is indeed the Christ, the Saviour of the

world.” And when the Jews persecuted the disciples, and thrust them out

of Jerusalem, Samaria readily and largely received the Word of GOD at

their mouths. Thankful and acceptable adoration of GOD, exemplary

brotherly love, enlightened faith, prompt renunciation of error, and

acceptance of truth—these were graces which shone conspicuously in

heretical and schismatic Samaritans, and won for them from the Saviour of

Israel approbation, and love, and blessing.

Remarkable as these things are in themselves, they become much more so by

contrast with the several cases of the Jews mentioned in their respective

contexts. Thus nine _Jewish_ lepers were unthankful; a priest and a

Levite passed by on the other side; the Prophet returning from Samaria,

where He had been confessed, was not respected in His own country;

Jerusalem had but lately rejected the Word which Samaria received. How

was this? How came heterodoxy to be productive of acceptable fruit,

while orthodoxy in the same circumstances was barren and unfruitful? The

pursuit of this inquiry would doubtless be very interesting, but it would

necessarily occupy much time, and lead us into the regions of

speculation. I prefer, therefore, just now, to deal with the history of

our text as a _fact_, and to endeavour to deduce from that fact three or

four plain and profitable lessons. Nine professors of the true religion,

members of the covenanted people of GOD, to whom pertained all the

privileges, and gifts, and evidences, and responsibilities of a

manifested Divine rule, were undutiful and unblessed in the very

circumstances in which a stranger, an alien, belonging to a sect unsound

in doctrine, and schismatic in practice, _volunteered_ to GOD most

acceptable service, and received from Him the highest spiritual

benediction.

Now, what does this teach us—us, the members of the Church of England?

First, with respect to ourselves, it teaches us not to pride ourselves

in, or to rest satisfied with, a mere profession of the true faith.

There is indeed but one true faith—that, namely, which GOD has delivered

to us in His Word, and maintained by the testimony of His Church. To

accept this faith in its integrity, is to set one’s seal to the testimony

that GOD is true; to reject deliberately one article of it, no matter how

small, how apparently unimportant, is to make GOD a liar, inasmuch as it

is to refuse as false what He has offered us as true. Common _duty_

then, and ordinary fear lest we should become blasphemers, render it

imperative that we should most anxiously inquire what is the true faith,

and then most implicitly receive its every article. We _may not choose_

(heresy means choice) what we will believe, and what reject. To alter,

or accept less than what GOD has propounded, is to act in defiance of

Him, and to cast a slur upon His infallible truth. Is it reason to

suppose that we can do this with impunity? Besides, remember, what GOD

reveals to us as articles of faith, are no mere abstract truths for the

philosopher to muse upon, and no more. They are the impelling force, the

germ and embodiment of principles and ways of life, on the observance of

which our very salvation depends. “How can this man give us His flesh to

eat?” Whosoever says, “I do not _choose_ to believe that He can in any

way,” does not, as he imagines, merely deny a subtle dogma, he gives up a

vital principle of godliness, without which of course he will not seek to

eat Christ’s flesh; and so, if Christ be true, can have no spiritual life

in Him.

For these two reasons, then—because they are revealed by GOD as verities,

and because they are the foundations of godliness—it is essentially

important to receive every article of the faith: and we, who find

ourselves members of a communion in which the faith is thus received,

which is apostolic in doctrine, and primitive in practice, have therefore

much indeed to be thankful for, and may harmlessly, so as it be humbly,

rejoice in the possession of such great privileges. But let us not be

high-minded. “Let him that thinketh he standeth, take heed lest he

fall.” The Jews were a highly privileged people; they received the whole

inspired Word; their priests were all called of GOD, as was Aaron; they

worshipped in the appointed place, and observed all the enjoined times

and ceremonies; yet with many of them GOD was not well pleased. They

were unreal, hollow, formal, hypocritical; their service was listless and

unmeaning; and so, notwithstanding all their privileges and all their

orthodoxy, a Samaritan, a dog of the Gentiles, a publican, a harlot was

often nearer to the kingdom of heaven than they were, and met Christ,

when they missed Him.

Is not this a warning to us? What though we possess the pure and entire

faith, though we have an appointed ministry, and continue in the

apostles’ fellowship, though the spirit of Christ be present in our

ordinances, and all our forms and ceremonies be after an approved

pattern, yet may we not any of us be unreal in our use of these things,

hollow, formal, listless, and so go away unaccepted and unblessed, while

the less privileged Romanist or Dissenter is receiving the sweet

assurance, “Thy faith hath made thee whole?” Depend upon it this may be,

and often is the case. GOD would have us _intellectually_ wise, but He

would also have us _heartily_ good. A good heart and a right mind

_united_, form the being who is most blessed; with whom the covenant is

surest, and in whom GOD takes most delight; but better, far better, a

good heart alone, than a right mind alone.

Christ, as He walked on earth the messenger of peace and love to all men,

had a special interest in the Jews (His own people), but it was in Jews

whose practice corresponded with their profession, whose heart and life

illustrated what their understanding received. On such as these, His

highest favours would have been most readily bestowed; but wanting these

qualities, He estimated their orthodoxy at nothing; and, on the other

hand, finding these qualities among strangers and aliens, He allowed not

their heterodoxy to prove an obstacle to their blessing. In many cases

uncircumcision was counted for circumcision, and circumcision for

uncircumcision.

My dear brethren, value ordinances greatly, but rest not, I charge you,

in them. Boast not that you are Anglo-Catholics; that your ministers

have an Apostolic succession; that you were regenerated in baptism; that

you are regular communicants and worshippers at the daily service. These

are, indeed, great privileges; but connected with them are great

responsibilities. Is your pure faith illustrated by a pure life? Do you

make the best use of an Apostolic ministry? Are you growing in the

spirit of which you were born again? Do you feel and sustain the

communicated presence of Christ within you? When you go down from the

sanctuary, does your life shine, as Moses’s face did, with the reflected

glory of GOD? If not, talk not of your high privileges—your case would

be better without them. When GOD ceased to wink at the errors and

ungodliness of mankind, He began by punishing, and with much severity,

the errors and ungodliness of the privileged Jews. Yes, and whenever He

takes account, and passes judgment, it is on the principle that to whom

much has been given, of him shall much be required. “You only have I

known of all the families of the earth: therefore I will punish you for

all your iniquities.” “To him that knoweth, to do good and doeth it not,

to him it is sin.”

The second thought which the fact of our text suggests, is one of great

comfort to the benevolent heart. It is, that GOD will make a way through

a bad system, to the disciple of that system who has been trying to reach

Him. When one reflects on the grave and blinding errors of modern

Romanism; on the awful denial of our blessed LORD’S Divinity by the

Unitarians; on the capricious choice, what to believe, what to deny,

which each Protestant sect ventures to make and maintain; on the disuse

of a ministry, the ignoring of sacraments, and other holy ordinances by

the Society of Friends, what a comfort is there in our text, “And he was

a Samaritan;” in feeling that GOD condescends to get through all this, to

the yearning, would-be faithful heart; ay, that He even accepts the

purblind visions and stammering utterances of such an one as _faith_.

“Thy faith hath made thee whole”! Most of us know some members of such

sects with whom we should wish to dwell together in heaven, for whom our

heart is rejoiced to feel that there are such prospects, in whose

sanctified lives we have the present proof, that (however _originators_

of heresy and schism may be regarded) in every nation and every sect, he

that heareth GOD, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with Him.

But, thirdly, are we therefore to make no difference between orthodoxy

and heterodoxy? Are we to be indifferent to truth and error? Are we to

frequent Romish chapels or Dissenting conventicles with as little

compunction as though they were our proper sanctuaries? Are we to

promote the schemes of other communions, by contributing to them out of

our substance, or by lending our names or presence to them? No,

brethren, we are not to confound Jew and Samaritan, nor to regard the

schismatic building on Gerizim, as equally an approved sanctuary with the

temple at Jerusalem. We are not to gather professors of different sects

together; by concessions and suppressions to produce an outward

conforming, and then to proclaim, “This is what Christians should be.

This is an Evangelical alliance.” Evangelical alliance! alliance,

_i.e._, according to the Gospel! Christ, indeed, willed us to be one;

but it was by all receiving the whole truth, not by paring and cropping

it each one as he will, and then calling the hacked and deformed thing of

our own shaping His glorious Gospel. Judge for yourselves:—one man

believes that the Blessed Virgin and other saints are his mediators with

GOD; another, that Christ alone is the Way, the Truth, and the Life, but

that Christ must be sought in His own appointed sacraments, or not found

at all; a third completely ignores all sacraments. Shall these three

stand side by side, and say, “We are allied according to the Gospel—we

all believe alike”? Surely such a thing is a mockery of common sense,

and an act of treason against their respective communions.

Yes, and it is worse. For, first of all, as I have already said, there

is but one faith propounded in Holy Scripture. Men may differ in their

perception of that faith—the Romanist regards it in one light, the

Anglican in another, the “Friend” in a third. But each of these believes

himself to be right, and he _must therefore_ regard the others as wrong.

Now, if they are wrong, then by slurring over their error, he makes it

his own; he joins in the choosing of a creed other than that GOD has

framed, and so insults the Infallible Truth. Again, there are no sins

more strictly forbidden, more severely denounced in the Bible than those

of heresy, _choosing_ what to believe, instead of adopting the Apostolic

faith, without increase or diminution, and schism, separating oneself,

that is, without most strong reason from worship in appointed places,

conducted by appointed officers, according to the prescribed form. These

sins are classed by St. Paul with the grossest works of the flesh, and it

is said of those that cause them, that they shall not inherit the kingdom

of GOD.

It is evident, then, that patronising or encouraging in any way a

religious community from which we personally honestly differ, is

disobeying a positive command of GOD, and incurring awful risk of His

displeasure. And there is another argument against seeming recognition

of heresy or schism: namely, that we thereby often cause the weak brother

to offend, and hinder the anxious inquirer after truth from renouncing

error. If those who look up to us for guidance—and there are very few of

us but are accepted as guides by some—see us _once_ among the Samaritans,

they will take license and encouragement from us to be there

_frequently_; and so, if those who are in doubt between remaining aloof

from the Church and joining it, see Churchmen in their assemblies, they

will assuredly gather that there is no difference of importance between

them and us, and will remain where they are. For all these reasons, it

is of the utmost importance that the Churchman, while entertaining the

most benevolent feelings towards those who differ from him, while

gratefully acknowledging the good they do, while inwardly rejoicing that

wandering sinners should be proselytised by them, and have a faith of

some kind rather than none at all; while, too, hoping and praying that

our blessed LORD’S prayer may yet be realised, and that all who call upon

His name may ultimately be of one heart and one mind, and with one mouth

glorify GOD; should still most strictly abstain in presence, in deed, in

speech, and in look, from the remotest encouragement, or sanction of

erroneous doctrine, or religious disunion and division. Meet these men

in business you often must; meet them in friendship, in secular

consultation, in practical benevolence, you may; but meet them in their

religious capacity, frequent their places of worship, forward the objects

of their sect you must not, unless you are prepared to go over to them

altogether; to maintain that theirs is _the_ faith, and _the_ fellowship;

and that all not in communion with them are heretics or schismatics.

Give no uncertain sound. Halt not between two opinions. “He that is not

with Me is against Me.”

One more lesson to guard against misinterpretation of the last. I have

used some strong words in speaking of those that differ. Do not, pray,

suppose that I would have you regard them with any but kind feelings,

much less that I would teach you to cry out against their errors, in

railing or contemptuous tones. The Christian minister intent upon laying

down clearly the line of right thought and practice, has occasion to

speak plainly, and for his hearers’ sake to call things by their right

names, however grating they may sound; but with the private individual it

is otherwise. In his ordinary course, he has no need to speak of these

things, or to think of them, further than to prompt his earnest prayers

for the decay of error and dissension, and the establishment of truth and

union. And if at any time it becomes his duty or desire to stay a soul

from error, or to convert him from it, let him remember, and be sure it

is true, that one ounce of love will do more good than many pounds of

controversy. {38}

Loud cries of “No popery,” invectives against High Church or Low Church,

sneers against “cant,” imputations of unworthy motives to those who

differ, contemptuous pity of their ignorance or inferiority, are all

carnal. They will unspiritualise yourselves; they will retard, rather

than advance the good work on others; they will drive away from you the

only power in which you can hope to prevail, that of the Spirit of

holiness, and love, and peace.

While then as Churchmen, it is your bounden duty to regard other systems

of religion as inferior, perhaps erroneous; be sure that in dealing with

the individual disciples of those systems, you remember the history of

the thankful Samaritan, and consider that like him, they may be approved

and sanctified followers of your common LORD.

Resolve to put away all animosity, and strife, and captiousness; to take

the best rather than the worst view of what you dislike, or do not

understand; in short, while maintaining as far as possible the orthodoxy

of Him who was a true Israelite; like Him, and for His sake, endeavour to

love men for themselves, if you cannot love their system; and to rejoice

in the opportunity of treating the Samaritan as a brother, and of

bringing him within nearer reach of abiding blessedness.

SERMON IV.

ETERNAL ABODE WITH GOD.—(A FUNERAL SERMON.)

Plain Sermons, Preached at Archbishop Tenison's Chapel, Regent Street · 第 13 / 23 题