men’s laws before obedience to God. As God hath an undoubted right, as
the Lawgiver and Ruler of the world, to enact laws without consulting
the pleasure of men, or requiring their consent to the verifying and
establishing his edicts, so are men obliged, by their allegiance as
subjects, to observe the laws of their Creator, without consulting
whether they be agreeable to the laws of his revolted {b434} creatures.
To consult with flesh and blood whether we should obey, is to authorize
flesh and blood above the purest and most sovereign Spirit. When men
will obey their superiors, without taking in the condition the apostle
prescribes to servants (Col. iii. 22), “In singleness of heart fearing
God,” and postpone the fear of God to the fear of man, it is to render
God of less power with them than the drop of a bucket, or dust of the
balance. When we, out of fear of punishment, will observe the laws of
men against the laws of God, it is like the Egyptians, to worship a
ravenous crocodile instead of a Deity; when we submit to human laws,
and stagger at Divine, it is to set man upon the throne of God, and
God at the footstool of man; to set man above, and God beneath; to
make him the tail, and not the head, as God speaks in another case of
Israel (Deut. xxviii. 13). When we pay an outward observation to Divine
laws, because they are backed by the laws of man, and human authority
is the motive of our observance, we subject God’s sovereignty to
man’s authority; what he hath from us, is more owing to the pleasure
of men than any value we have for the empire of God: when men shall
commit murders, and imbrue their hands in blood by the order of a
grandee; when the worst sins shall be committed by the order of papal
dispensations; when the use of his creatures, which God hath granted
and sanctified, shall be abstained from for so many days in the week,
and so many weeks in the year, because of a Roman edict, the authority
of man is acknowledged, not only equal, but superior, to that of God;
the dominion of dust and clay is preferred before the undoubted right
of the Sovereign of the world; the commands of God are made less than
human, and the orders of men more authoritative than Divine, and a
grand rebel’s usurpation of God’s right is countenanced. When men
are more devout in observance of uncertain traditions, or mere human
inventions, than at the hearing of the unquestionable oracles of God;
when men shall squeeze their countenances into a more serious figure,
and demean themselves in a more religious posture, at the appearance
of some mock ceremony, clothed in a Jewish or Pagan garb, which
hath unhappily made a rent in the coat of Christ, and pay a more
exact reverence to that which hath no Divine, but only a human stamp
upon it, than to the clear and plain word of God, which is perhaps
neglected with sleepy nods, or which is worse, entertained with profane
scoffs;――this is to prefer the authority of man employed in trifles,
before the authority of the wise Lawgiver of the world: besides, the
ridiculousness of it is as great as to adore a glow‑worm, and laugh at
the sun; or for a courtier to be more exact in his cringes and starched
postures before a puppet than before his sovereign prince. In all this
we make not the will and authority of God our rule, but the will of
man; disclaim our dependence on God, to hang upon the uncertain breath
of a creature. In all this God is made less than man, and man more
than God; God is deposed, and man enthroned; God made a slave, and man
a sovereign above him. To this we may refer the solemn addresses of
some for the maintenance of the Protestant religion according to law,
the law of man; not so much minding the law of God, resolving to make
the law, the church, the state, the rule of their religion, and {b435}
change that if the laws be changed, steering their opinions by the
compass of the magistrate’s judgment and interest.
(2.) The dominion of God, as a _Proprietor_, is practically contemned.
[1.] By envy. When we are not flush and gay, as well spread and
sparkling as others, this passion gnaws our souls, and we become the
executioners to rack ourselves, because God is the executor of his own
pleasure. The foundation of this passion is a quarrel with God; to envy
others the enjoyment of their propriety is to envy God his right of
disposal, and, consequently, the propriety of his own goods; it is a
mental theft committed against God; we rob him of his right in our will
and wish; it is a robbery to make ourselves equal with God when it is
not our due, which is implied (Phil. ii. 6), when Christ is said “to
think it no robbery to be equal with God.” We would wrest the sceptre
out of his hand, wish he were not the conductor of the world, and that
he would resign his sovereignty, and the right of the distribution
of his own goods, to the _capricios_ of our humor, and ask our leave
to what subjects he should dispense his favors. All envy is either a
tacit accusation of God as an usurper, and assuming a right to dispose
of that which doth not belong to him, and so it is a denial of his
propriety, or else charges him with a blind or unjust distribution,
and so it is a bespattering his wisdom and righteousness. When God doth
punish envy, he vindicates his own sovereignty, as though this passion
chiefly endeavored to blast this perfection (Ezek. xxv. 11, 12): “As I
live, saith the Lord, I will do according to thy anger, and according
to thy envy, and thou shall know that I am the Lord.” The sin of envy
in the devils was immediately against the crown of God, and so was
the sin of envy in the first man, envying God the sole prerogative in
knowledge above himself. This base humor in Cain, at the preference of
Abel’s sacrifice before his, was the cause that he deprived him of his
life: denying God, first his right of choice and what he should accept,
and then invading God’s right of propriety, in usurping a power over
the life and being of his brother, which solely belonged to God.
[2.] The dominion of God, as a proprietor, is practically contemned
by a violent or surreptitious taking away from any what God hath given
him the possession of. Since God is the Lord of all, and may give
the possession and dominion of things to whom he pleaseth, all theft
and purloining, all cheating and cozening another of his right, is
not only a crime against the true possessor, depriving him of what
he is entrusted with, but against God, as the absolute and universal
proprietor, having a right thereby to confer his own goods upon whom
he pleaseth, as well as against God as a Lawgiver, forbidding such a
violence: the snatching away what is another’s, denies man the right
of possession, and God the right of donation: the Israelites taking
the Egyptians’ jewels had been theft had it not been by a Divine
license and order, but cannot be slandered with such a term, after
the Proprietor of the whole world had altered the title, and alienated
them by his positive grant from the Egyptians, to confer them upon the
Israelites.
[3.] The dominion of God, as a proprietor, is practically contemned
{b436} by not using what God hath given us for those ends for which he
gave them to us. God passeth things over to us with a condition to use
that for his glory which he hath bestowed upon us by his bounty: he is
Lord of the end for which he gives, as well as Lord of what he gives;
the donor’s right of propriety is infringed when the lands and legacies
he leaves to a particular use are not employed to those ends to which
he bequeathed them: the right of the lord of a manor is violated when
the copyhold is not used according to the condition of the conveyance.
So it is an invasion of God’s sovereignty not to use the creatures for
those ends for which we are entrusted with them: when we deny ourselves
a due and lawful support from them; hence covetousness is an invasion
of his right: or when we unnecessarily waste them; hence prodigality
disowns his propriety: or when we bestow not anything upon the
relief of others; hence uncharitableness comes under the same title,
appropriating that to ourselves, as if we were the lords, when we were
but the usufructuaries for ourselves, and stewards for others; this
is to be “rich to ourselves, not to God” (Luke xii. 21), for so are
they who employ not their wealth for the service, and according to
the intent, of the donor. Thus the Israelites did not own God the true
proprietor of their corn, wine, and oil, which God had given them for
his worship, when they prepared offerings for Baal out of his stock:
“For she did not know that I gave her corn, and wine, and oil, and
multiplied her gold and silver, which they prepared for Baal” (Hos. ii.
8); as if they had been sole proprietors, and not factors by commission,
to improve the goods for the true owner. It is the same invasion of
God’s right to use the parts and gifts that God hath given us, either
as fuel for our pride, or advancing self, or a witty scoffing at God
and religion; when we use not religion for the honor of our Sovereign,
but a stool to rise by, and observe his precepts outwardly, not out of
regard to his authority, but as a stale to our interest, and furnishing
self with a little concern and trifle; when men will wrest his word
for the favor of their lusts, which God intended for the checking of
them, and make interpretations of it according to their humors, and not
according to his will discovered in the Scripture, this is to pervert
the use of the best goods and _depositum_ he hath put into our hands,
even Divine revelations. Thus hypocrisy makes the sovereignty of God a
nullity.
(3.) The dominion of God, as a _Governor_, is practically contemned.
[1.] In idolatry. Since worship is an acknowledgment of God’s
sovereignty, to adore any creature instead of God, or to pay to
anything that homage of trust and confidence which is due to God,
though it be the highest creature in heaven or earth, is to acknowledge
that sovereignty to pertain to a creature, which is challenged by God;
as to set up the greatest lord in a kingdom in the government, instead
of the lawful prince, is rebellion and usurpation; and that woman
incurs the crime of adultery, who commits it with a person of great
port and honor, as well as with one of a mean condition. While men
create anything a god, they own themselves supreme above the true God,
yea, and above that which they account a god; for, by the right of
creation, they have a superiority, {b437} as it is a deity blown up by
the breath of their own imagination. The authority of God is in this
sin acknowledged to belong to an idol; it is called loathing of God as
a husband (Ezek. xvi. 45), all the authority of God as a husband and
Lord over them: so when we make anything or any person in the world the
chief object and prop of our trust and confidence, we act the same part.
Trust in an idol is the formal part of idolatry; “so is every one that
trusts in them” (Ps. cxv. 8), _i. e._ in idols: whatsoever thing we
make the object of our trust, we rear as an idol. It is not unlawful to
have the image of a creature, but to bestow divine adoration upon it;
it was not unlawful for the Egyptians to possess and use oxen, but to
dub them gods to be adored, it was: it is not unlawful to have wealth
and honor, nor to have gifts and parts, they are the presents of God;
but to love them above God, to fix our reliance upon them more than
upon God, is to rob God of his due, who, being our Creator, ought to
be our confidence. What we want we are to desire of him, and expect
from him. When we confide in anything else we deny God the glory of his
creation; we disown him to be Lord of the world; imply that our welfare
is in the hands of, and depends upon, that thing wherein we confide; it
is not only to “equal it to God” in sovereign power, which is his own
phrase (Isa. xl. 25), but to prefer it before him in a reproach of him.
When the hosts of heaven shall be served instead of the Lord of those
hosts; when we shall lackey after the stars, depend barely upon their
influences, without looking up to the great Director of the sun, it
is to pay an adoration unto a captain in a regiment which is due to
the general. When we shall “make gold our hope, and say to the fine
gold, Thou art my confidence,” it is to deny the supremacy of that God
that is above; as well as if we kiss our hands, in a way of adoration,
to the sun in its splendor, or “the moon walking in its brightness,”
for Job couples them together (ch. xxxi. 25‒28); it is to prefer the
authority of earth before that of heaven, and honor clay above the
Sovereign of the world: as if a soldier should confide more in the rag
of an ensign, or the fragment of a drum, for his safety, than in the
orders and conduct of his general; it were as much as is in his power
to uncommission him, and snatch from him his commander’s staff. When
we advance the creature in our love above God, and the altar of our
soul smokes with more thoughts and affections to a petty interest than
to God, we lift up that which was given us as a servant in the place
of the Sovereign, and bestow that throne upon it which is to be kept
undefiled for the rightful Lord, and subject the interest of God to
the demands of the creature. So much respect is due to God, that none
should be placed in the throne of our affections equal with him, much
less anything to perk above him.
[2.] Impatience is a contempt of God as a governor. When we meet with
rubs in the way of any design, when our expectations are crossed, we
will break through all obstacles to accomplish our projects, whether
God will or no. When we are too much dejected at some unexpected
providence, and murmur at the instruments of it, as if God divested
himself of his prerogative of conducting human {b438} affairs; when
a little cross blows us into a mutiny, and swells us into a sauciness
to implead God, or make us fret against him (as the expression is, Isa.
viii. 21), wishing him out of his throne; no sin is so devilish as this;
there is not any strikes more at all the attributes of God than this,
against his goodness, righteousness, holiness, wisdom, and doth as
little spare his sovereignty as any of the rest: what can it be else,
but an impious invasion of his dominion, to quarrel with him for what
he doth, and to say, What reason hast thou to deal thus with me? This
language is in the nature of all impatience, whereby we question his
sovereignty, and parallel our dominion with his. When men have not
that confluence of wealth or honor they greedily desired, they bark
at God, and revile his government: they are angry God doth not more
respectfully observe them, as though he had nothing to do in their
matters, and were wanting in that becoming reverence which they think
him bound to pay to such great ones as they are; they would have
God obedient to their minds, and act nothing but what he receives a
commission for from their wills. When we murmur, it is as if we would
command his will, and wear his crown; a wresting the sceptre out of his
hands to sway it ourselves; we deny him the right of government, disown
his power over us, and would be our own sovereigns: you may find the
character of it in the language of Jehoram (as many understand it),
“Behold, this evil is of the Lord; what should I wait for the Lord any
longer?” (2 Kings vi. 33). This is an evil of such a nature, that it
could come from none but the hand of God; why should I attend upon him,
as my Sovereign, that delights to do me so much mischief, that throws
curses upon me when I expected blessings? I will no more observe his
directions, but follow my own sentiments, and regard not his authority
in the lips of his doting prophet. The same you find in the Jews,
when they were under God’s lash; “And they said, There is no hope:
but we will walk after our own devices, and we will every one do the
imagination of his evil heart” (Jer. xviii. 12): we can expect no good
from him, and therefore we will be our own sovereigns, and prefer the
authority of our own imaginations before that of his precepts. Men
would be their own carvers, and not suffer God to use his right; as if
a stone should order the mason in what manner to hew it, and in what
part of the building to place it. We are not ordinarily concerned so
much at the calamities of our neighbors, but swell against heaven at a
light drop upon ourselves. We are content God should be the sovereign
of others, so that he will be a servant to us: let him deal as he will
himself with others, so he will treat us, and what relates to us, as we
will ourselves. We would have God resign his authority to our humors,
and our humors should be in the place of a God to him, to direct him
what was fit to do in our cause. When things go not according to our
vote, our impatience is a wish that God was deposed from his throne,
that he would surrender his seat to some that would deal more favorably,
and be more punctual observers of our directions. Let us look to
ourselves in regard of this sin, which is too common, and the root of
much mischief. This seems to be the first bubbling of Adam’s will; he
was not content {b439} with the condition wherein God had placed him,
but affected another, which ended in the ruin of himself, and of
mankind.
[3.] Limiting God in his way of working to our methods, is another
part of the contempt of his dominion. When we will prescribe him
methods of acting, that he should deliver us in this or that way, we
would not suffer him to be the Lord of his own favors, and have the
privilege to be his own director. When we will limit him to such a
time, wherein to work our deliverance, we would rob him of the power of
times and seasons, which are solely in his hand. We would regulate his
conduct according to our imaginations, and assume a power to give laws
to our Sovereign. Thus the Israelites “limited the Holy One of Israel”
(Ps. lxxviii. 41): they would control his absolute dominion, and, of
a sovereign, make him their slave. Man, that is God’s vassal, would
set bounds to his Lord, and cease to be a servant, and commence master,
when he would give, not take, directions from him. When God had given
them manna, and their fancies were weary of that delicious food, they
would prescribe heaven to rain down some other sort of food for them.
When they wanted no sufficient provision in the wilderness, they
quarrelled with God for bringing them out of Egypt, and not presently
giving them a place of seed, of figs, vines, and pomegranates (Numb. xx.
5), which is called a “striving with the Lord” (ver. 13), a contending
with him for his Lordship. When we tempt God, and require a sign of him
as a mark of his favor, we circumscribe his dominion; when we will not
use the means he hath appointed, but father our laziness upon a trust
in his providence, as if we expected he should work a miracle for our
relief; when we censure him for what he hath done in the course of his
providence; when we capitulate with him, and promise such a service,
if he will do us such a good turn according to our platform, we would
bring down his sovereign pleasure to our will, we invade his throne,
and expect a submissive obedience from him. Man that hath not wit
enough to govern himself, would be governing God, and those that cannot
be their own sovereigns, affect a sovereignty over heaven.
[4.] Pride and presumption is another invasion of his dominion. When
men will resolve to go to‑morrow to such a city, to such a fair and
market, to traffic, and get gain, without thinking of the necessity
of a Divine license, as if ourselves were the lords of our time and
of our lives, and God were to lackey after us (James iv. 13, 15):
“Ye that say, To‑day we will go into such a city, and buy and sell,
whereas ye ought to say, If the Lord will, we shall live;” as if they
had a freehold, and were not tenants at will to the Lord of the manor.
When we presume upon our own strength or wit to get the better of our
adversaries; as the Germans (as Tacitus relates) assured themselves,
by the numerousness of their army, of a victory against the Romans,
and prepared chains to fetter the captives before the conquest, which
were found in their camp after their defeat;――when we are peremptory in
expectations of success according to our will; as Pharaoh (Exod. xv. 9),
“I will pursue, I will overtake, I will divide the spoil, my lust shall
be satisfied upon them, I will draw my sword, my hand shall destroy
them:” he speaks more like a {b440} god than a man, as if he were the
sovereign power, and God only his vicar and lieutenant; how he struts,
without thinking of a superior power to curb him!――when men ascribe to
themselves what is the sole fruit of God’s sovereign pleasure; as the
king of Assyria speaks a language fit only to be spoken by God (Isa.
x. 13, 14, &c.), “I have removed the bounds of the people; my hand
hath found as a nest the riches of the people; I have gathered all
the earth;” which God declares to be a wrong to his sovereignty by the
title wherewith he prefaceth his threatening against him (ver. 16):
“Therefore shall the Lord, the Lord of hosts, send among his fat ones
leanness,” &c. It is indeed a rifling, if not of his crown, yet of
the most glittering jewel of it, his glory. “He that mocks the poor
reproacheth his Maker” (Prov. xvii. 5). He never thinks that God made
them poor, and himself rich; he owns not his riches to be dropped upon
him by the Divine hand. Self is the great invader of God’s sovereignty;
doth not only spurn at it, but usurp it, and assume divine honors,
payable only to the universal Sovereign. The Assyrian was not so
modest as the Chaldean, who would impute his power and victories to his
idol (Hab. i. 11), whom he thought to be God, though yet robbing the
true God of his authority; and so much was signified by their names,
Nebuchadnezzar, Evil‑Merodach, Belshazzar, Nebo, Merodach, Bel, being
the Chaldean idols, and the names signifying, Lord of wealth, Giver of
riches, and the like.――When we behave ourselves proudly towards others,
and imagine ourselves greater than our Maker ever meant us;――when we
would give laws to others, and expect the most submissive observances
from them, as if God had resigned his authority to us, and made us,
in his stead, the rightful monarchs of the world. To disdain that any
creature should be above us, is to disdain God’s sovereign disposition
of men, and consequently, his own superiority over us. A proud man
would govern all, and would not have God his Sovereign, but his subject;
to overvalue ourselves, is to undervalue God.
[5.] Slight and careless worship of God is another contempt of his
sovereignty. A prince is contemned, not only by a neglect of those
reverential postures which are due to him, but in a reproachful and
scornful way of paying them. To behave ourselves uncomely or immodestly
before a prince, is a disesteem of majesty. Sovereignty requires awe in
every address, where this is wanting there is a disrespect of authority.
We contemn God’s dominion when we give him the service of the lip,
the hand, the knee, and deny him that of the heart; as they in Ezekiel
xxxiii. 31, as though he were the Sovereign only of the body, and not
of the soul. To have devout figures of the face, and uncomely postures
of the soul, is to exclude his dominion from our spirits, while we own
it only over our outward man; we render him an insignificant Lord, not
worthy of any higher adorations from us than a senseless statue; we
demean not ourselves according to his majestical authority over us,
when we present him not with the cream and quintessence of our souls.
The greatness of God required a great house, and a costly palace
(1 Chron. xxix. 11, 16); David speaks it in order to the building God
a house and a temple; God being a great King expects {b441} a male
the best of our flock (Mal. i. 14), a masculine and vigorous service.
When we present him with a sleepy, sickly rheumatic service, we betray
our conceptions of him to be as mean as if he were some petty lord,
whose dominion were of no larger extent than a mole‑hill, or some
inconsiderable village.