And then conclude with a brief improvement.
I. I would show what this spiritual and divine light is. And in order to
it, would show,
First, In a few things what it _is not_. And here,
1. _Those convictions that natural men may have of their sin and misery_,
is not _this_ spiritual and divine light. Men in a natural condition may
have convictions of the guilt that lies upon them, and of the anger of God
and their danger of divine vengeance. Such convictions are from light or
sensibleness of truth. That some sinners have a greater conviction of
their guilt and misery than others, is because some have more light, or
more of an apprehension of truth than others. And this light and
conviction may be from the Spirit of God; the Spirit convinces men of sin:
but yet nature is much more concerned in it than in the communication of
that spiritual and divine light that is spoken of in the doctrine; 'tis
from the Spirit of God only as assisting natural principles, and not as
infusing any new principles. Common grace differs from special, in that it
influences only by assisting of nature; and not by imparting grace, or
bestowing anything above nature. The light that is obtained is wholly
natural, or of no superior kind to what mere nature attains to, though
more of that kind be obtained than would be obtained if men were left
wholly to themselves: or, in other words, common grace only assists the
faculties of the soul to do that more fully which they do by nature, as
natural conscience or reason will, by mere nature, make a man sensible of
guilt, and will accuse and condemn him when he has done amiss. Conscience
is a principle natural to men; and the work that it doth naturally, or of
itself, is to give an apprehension of right and wrong, and to suggest to
the mind the relation that there is between right and wrong and a
retribution. The Spirit of God, in those convictions which unregenerate
men sometimes have, assists conscience to do this work in a further
degree than it would do if they were left to themselves: he helps it
against those things that tend to stupefy it, and obstruct its exercise.
But in the renewing and sanctifying work of the Holy Ghost, those things
are wrought in the soul that are above nature, and of which there is
nothing of the like kind in the soul by nature; and they are caused to
exist in the soul habitually, and according to such a stated constitution
or law that lays such a foundation for exercises in a continued course, as
is called a principle of nature. Not only are remaining principles
assisted to do their work more freely and fully, but those principles are
restored that were utterly destroyed by the fall; and the mind
thenceforward habitually exerts those acts that the dominion of sin had
made it as wholly destitute of, as a dead body is of vital acts.
The Spirit of God acts in a very different manner in the one case from
what he doth in the other. He may indeed act upon the mind of a natural
man, but he acts in the mind of a saint as an indwelling vital principle.
He acts upon the mind of an unregenerate person as an extrinsic,
occasional agent; for in acting upon them, he doth not unite himself to
them; notwithstanding all his influences that they may be the subjects of,
they are still sensual, having not the Spirit, Jude 19. But he unites
himself with the mind of a saint, takes him for his temple, actuates and
influences him as a new, supernatural principle of life and action. There
is this difference, that the Spirit of God, in acting in the soul of a
godly man, exerts and communicates himself there in his own proper nature.
Holiness is the proper nature of the Spirit of God. The Holy Spirit
operates in the minds of the godly by uniting himself to them, and living
in them, and exerting his own nature in the exercise of their faculties.
The Spirit of God may act upon a creature, and yet not in acting
communicate himself. The Spirit of God may act upon inanimate creatures;
as the Spirit moved upon the face of the waters in the beginning of the
creation; so the Spirit of God may act upon the minds of men many ways,
and communicate himself no more than when he acts upon an inanimate
creature. For instance, he may excite thoughts in them, may assist their
natural reason and understanding, or may assist other natural principles,
and this without any union with the soul, but may act, as it were, as upon
an external object. But as he acts in his holy influences and spiritual
operations, he acts in a way of peculiar communication of himself; so that
the subject is thence denominated spiritual.
2. _This_ spiritual and divine light _don't consist in any impression made
upon the imagination_. It is no impression upon the mind, as though one
saw any thing with the bodily eyes: 'tis no imagination or idea of an
outward light or glory, or any beauty of form or countenance, or a visible
lustre or brightness of any object. The imagination may be strongly
impressed with such things; but this is not spiritual light. Indeed when
the mind has a lively discovery of spiritual things, and is greatly
affected by the power of divine light, it may, and probably very commonly
doth, much affect the imagination; so that impressions of an outward
beauty or brightness may accompany those spiritual discoveries. But
spiritual light is not that impression upon the imagination, but an
exceeding different thing from it. Natural men may have lively impressions
on their imaginations; and we can't determine but that the devil, who
transforms himself into an angel of light, may cause imaginations of an
outward beauty, or visible glory, and of sounds and speeches and other
such things; but these are things of a vastly inferior nature to spiritual
light.
3. _This_ spiritual light is _not the suggesting of any new truths or
propositions not contained in the word of God_. This suggesting of new
truths or doctrines to the mind, independent of any antecedent revelation
of those propositions, either in word or writing, is inspiration; such as
the prophets and apostles had, and such as some enthusiasts pretend to.
But this spiritual light that I am speaking of, is quite a different thing
from inspiration: it reveals no new doctrine, it suggests no new
proposition to the mind, it teaches no new thing of God, or Christ, or
another world, not taught in the Bible, but only gives a due apprehension
of those things that are taught in the word of God.
4. _'Tis not every affecting view that men have of the things of religion
that is this_ spiritual and divine light. Men by mere principles of nature
are capable of being affected with things that have a special relation to
religion as well as other things. A person by mere nature, for instance,
may be liable to be affected with the story of Jesus Christ, and the
sufferings he underwent, as well as by any other tragical story: he may be
the more affected with it from the interest he conceives mankind to have
in it: yea, he may be affected with it without believing it; as well as a
man may be affected with what he reads in a romance, or sees acted in a
stage play. He may be affected with a lively and eloquent description of
many pleasant things that attend the state of the blessed in heaven, as
well as his imagination be entertained by a romantic description of the
pleasantness of fairy-land, or the like. And that common belief of the
truth of the things of religion that persons may have from education or
otherwise, may help forward their affection. We read in Scripture of many
that were greatly affected with things of a religious nature, who yet are
there represented as wholly graceless, and many of them very ill men. A
person therefore may have affecting views of the things of religion, and
yet be very destitute of spiritual light. Flesh and blood may be the
author of this: one man may give another an affecting view of divine
things with but common assistance; but God alone can give a spiritual
discovery of them.
But I proceed to show,
Secondly, Positively what this spiritual and divine light _is_.
And it may be thus described: _a true sense of the divine excellency of
the things revealed in the word of God, and a conviction of the truth and
reality of them thence arising_.
This spiritual light primarily consists in the former of these, viz., a
real sense and apprehension of the divine excellency of things revealed in
the word of God. A spiritual and saving conviction of the truth and
reality of these things arises from such a sight of their divine
excellency and glory; so that this conviction of their truth is an effect
and natural consequence of this sight of their divine glory. There is
therefore in this spiritual light,
1. _A true sense of the divine and superlative excellency of the things of
religion_; a real sense of the excellency of God and Jesus Christ, and of
the work of redemption, and the ways and works of God revealed in the
gospel. There is a divine and superlative glory in these things; an
excellency that is of a vastly higher kind and more sublime nature than in
other things; a glory greatly distinguishing them from all that is earthly
and temporal. He that is spiritually enlightened truly apprehends and sees
it, or has a sense of it. He does not merely rationally believe that God
is glorious, but he has a sense of the gloriousness of God in his heart.
There is not only a rational belief that God is holy and that holiness is
a good thing, but there is a sense of the loveliness of God's holiness.
There is not only a speculatively judging that God is gracious, but a
sense how amiable God is upon that account, or a sense of the beauty of
this divine attribute.
There is a twofold understanding or knowledge of good that God has made
the mind of man capable of. The first, that which is merely speculative or
notional; as when a person only speculatively judges that anything is,
which, by the agreement of mankind, is called good or excellent, viz.,
that which is most to general advantage, and between which and a reward
there is a suitableness, and the like. And the other is that which
consists in the sense of the heart: as when there is a sense of the
beauty, amiableness, or sweetness of a thing; so that the heart is
sensible of pleasure and delight in the presence of the idea of it. In the
former is exercised merely the speculative faculty, or the understanding,
strictly so called, or as spoken of in distinction from the will or
disposition of the soul. In the latter, the will, or inclination, or
heart, are mainly concerned.
Thus there is a difference between having an opinion that God is holy and
gracious, and having a sense of the loveliness and beauty of that holiness
and grace. There is a difference between having a rational judgment that
honey is sweet, and having a sense of its sweetness. A man may have the
former, that knows not how honey tastes; but a man can't have the latter
unless he has an idea of the taste of honey in his mind. So there is a
difference between believing that a person is beautiful, and having a
sense of his beauty. The former may be obtained by hearsay, but the latter
only by seeing the countenance. There is a wide difference between mere
speculative rational judging anything to be excellent, and having a sense
of its sweetness and beauty. The former rests only in the head,
speculation only is concerned in it; but the heart is concerned in the
latter. When the heart is sensible of the beauty and amiableness of a
thing, it necessarily feels pleasure in the apprehension. It is implied in
a person's being heartily sensible of the loveliness of a thing, that the
idea of it is sweet and pleasant to his soul; which is a far different
thing from having a rational opinion that it is excellent.
2. There arises from this sense of divine excellency of things contained
in the word of God _a conviction of the truth and reality of them_; and
that either indirectly or directly.
First, _Indirectly_, and that two ways.
1. As the _prejudices that are in the heart_ against the truth of divine
things _are hereby removed_; so that the mind becomes susceptive of the
due force of rational arguments for their truth. The mind of man is
naturally full of prejudices against the truth of divine things: it is
full of enmity against the doctrines of the gospel; which is a
disadvantage to those arguments that prove their truth, and causes them to
lose their force upon the mind. But when a person has discovered to him
the divine excellency of Christian doctrines, this destroys the enmity,
removes those prejudices, and sanctifies the reason, and causes it to lie
open to the force of arguments for their truth.
Hence was the different effect that Christ's miracles had to convince the
disciples from what they had to convince the Scribes and Pharisees. Not
that they had a stronger reason, or had their reason more improved; but
their reason was sanctified, and those blinding prejudices, that the
Scribes and Pharisees were under, were removed by the sense they had of
the excellency of Christ and his doctrine.
2. It not only removes the hinderances of reason, but _positively helps
reason_. It makes even the speculative notions the more lively. It engages
the attention of the mind, with the more fixedness and intenseness to that
kind of objects; which causes it to have a clearer view of them, and
enables it more clearly to see their mutual relations, and occasions it to
take more notice of them. The ideas themselves that otherwise are dim and
obscure are by this means impressed with the greater strength, and have a
light cast upon them; so that the mind can better judge of them: as he
that beholds the objects on the face of the earth, when the light of the
sun is cast upon them, is under greater advantage to discern them in their
true forms and mutual relations than he that sees them in a dim starlight
or twilight.
The mind having a sensibleness of the excellency of divine objects, dwells
upon them with delight; and the powers of the soul are more awakened and
enlivened to employ themselves in the contemplation of them, and exert
themselves more fully and much more to the purpose. The beauty and
sweetness of the objects draws on the faculties, and draws forth their
exercises: so that reason itself is under far greater advantages for its
proper and free exercises, and to attain its proper end, free of darkness
and delusion. But,
Secondly, A true sense of the divine excellency of the things of God's
word doth more _directly_ and _immediately_ convince of the truth of them;
and that because the excellency of these things is so superlative. There
is a beauty in them that is so divine and godlike, that is greatly and
evidently distinguishing of them from things merely human, or that men are
the inventors and authors of; a glory that is so high and great that, when
clearly seen, commands assent to their divinity and reality. When there is
an actual and lively discovery of this beauty and excellency, it won't
allow of any such thought as that it is a human work, or the fruit of
men's invention. This evidence that they that are spiritually enlightened
have of the truth of the things of religion is a kind of intuitive and
immediate evidence. They believe the doctrines of God's word to be divine,
because they see divinity in them; i.e., they see a divine, and
transcendent, and most evidently distinguishing glory in them; such a
glory as, if clearly seen, does not leave room to doubt of their being of
God, and not of men.
Such a conviction of the truth of religion as this, arising, these ways,
from a sense of the divine excellency of them, is that true spiritual
conviction that there is in saving faith. And this original of it is that
by which it is most essentially distinguished from that common assent
which unregenerate men are capable of.
II. I proceed now to the second thing proposed, viz., to show _how this
light is immediately given by God_, and not obtained by natural means. And
here,
1. _'Tis not intended that the natural faculties are not made use of in
it._ The natural faculties are the subject of this light: and they are the
subject in such a manner that they are not merely passive, but active in
it; the acts and exercises of man's understanding are concerned and made
use of in it. God, in letting in this light into the soul, deals with man
according to his nature, or as a rational creature; and makes use of his
human faculties. But yet this light is not the less immediately from God
for that; though the faculties are made use of, 'tis as the subject and
not as the cause; and that acting of the faculties in it is not the cause,
but is either implied in the thing itself (in the light that is imparted)
or is the consequence of it: as the use that we make of our eyes in
beholding various objects, when the sun arises, is not the cause of the
light that discovers those objects to us.
2. _'Tis not intended that outward means have no concern in this affair._
As I have observed already, 'tis not in this affair, as it is in
inspiration, where new truths are suggested: for here is by this light
only given a due apprehension of the same truths that are revealed in the
word of God; and therefore it is not given without the word. The gospel is
made use of in this affair: this light is the "light of the glorious
gospel of Christ," 2 Cor. iv. 4. The gospel is as a glass, by which this
light is conveyed to us, 1 Cor. xiii. 12: "Now we see through a
glass."--But,
3. When it is said that this light is given immediately by God, and not
obtained by natural means, _hereby is intended, that 'tis given by God
without making use of any means that operate by their own power, or a
natural force_. God makes use of means; but 'tis not as mediate causes to
produce this effect. There are not truly any second causes of it; but it
is produced by God immediately. The word of God is no proper cause of this
effect: it does not operate by any natural force in it. The word of God is
only made use of to convey to the mind the subject matter of this saving
instruction: and this indeed it doth convey to us by natural force or
influence. It conveys to our minds these and those doctrines; it is the
cause of the notion of them in our heads, but not of the sense of the
divine excellency of them in our hearts. Indeed a person can't have
spiritual light without the word. But that don't argue that the word
properly causes that light. The mind can't see the excellency of any
doctrine, unless that doctrine be first in the mind; but the seeing of the
excellency of the doctrine may be immediately from the Spirit of God;
though the conveying of the doctrine or proposition itself may be by the
word. So that the notions that are the subject matter of this light are
conveyed to the mind by the word of God; but that due sense of the heart,
wherein this light formally consists, is immediately by the Spirit of God.
As for instance, that notion that there is a Christ, and that Christ is
holy and gracious, is conveyed to the mind by the word of God: but the
sense of the excellency of Christ by reason of that holiness and grace, is
nevertheless immediately the work of the Holy Spirit.--I come now,
III. To show _the truth of the doctrine_; that is, to show that there is
such a thing as that spiritual light that has been described, thus
immediately let into the mind by God. And here I would show briefly, that
this doctrine is both _scriptural_ and _rational_.
First, 'Tis _scriptural_. My text is not only full to the purpose, but
'tis a doctrine that the Scripture abounds in. We are there abundantly
taught that the saints differ from the ungodly in this, that they have the
knowledge of God, and a sight of God, and of Jesus Christ. I shall mention
but few texts of many. 1 John iii. 6, "Whosoever sinneth hath not seen
him, nor known him." 3 John 11, "He that doeth good is of God: but he that
doeth evil hath not seen God." John xiv. 19, "The world seeth me no more;
but ye see me." John xvii. 3, "And this is eternal life, that they might
know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom thou hast sent." This
knowledge, or sight of God and Christ, can't be a mere speculative
knowledge; because it is spoken of as a seeing and knowing wherein they
differ from the ungodly. And by these Scriptures it must not only be a
different knowledge in degree and circumstances, and different in its
effects; but it must be entirely different in nature and kind.
And this light and knowledge is always spoken of as immediately given of
God, Matt. xi. 25, 26, 27: "At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank
thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these
things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes. Even
so, Father: for so it seemed good in thy sight. All things are delivered
unto me of my father: and no man knoweth the Son, but the Father: neither
knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son
will reveal him." Here this effect is ascribed alone to the arbitrary
operation and gift of God, bestowing this knowledge on whom he will, and
distinguishing those with it, that have the least natural advantage or
means for knowledge, even babes, when it is denied to the wise and
prudent. And the imparting of the knowledge of God is here appropriated to
the Son of God as his sole prerogative. And again, 2 Cor. iv. 6: "For God,
who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our
hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face
of Jesus Christ." This plainly shows that there is such a thing as a
discovery of the divine superlative glory and excellency of God and
Christ, and that peculiar to the saints: and also, that 'tis as
immediately from God, as light from the sun: and that 'tis the immediate
effect of his power and will; for 'tis compared to God's creating the
light by his powerful word in the beginning of the creation; and is said
to be by the Spirit of the Lord, in the 18th verse of the preceding
chapter. God is spoken of as giving the knowledge of Christ in conversion,
as of what before was hidden and unseen in that, Gal. i. 15, 16: "But when
it pleased God, who separated me from my mother's womb, and called me by
his grace, to reveal his Son in me." The Scripture also speaks plainly of
such a knowledge of the word of God as has been described, as the
immediate gift of God, Psal. cxix. 18: "Open thou mine eyes, that I may
behold wondrous things out of thy law." What could the Psalmist mean when
he begged of God to open his eyes? Was he ever blind? Might he not have
resort to the law and see every word and sentence in it when he pleased?
And what could he mean by those "wondrous things"? Was it the wonderful
stories of the creation and deluge, and Israel's passing through the Red
Sea, and the like? Were not his eyes open to read these strange things
when he would? Doubtless by "wondrous things" in God's law, he had respect
to those distinguishing and wonderful excellencies, and marvellous
manifestations of the divine perfections and glory, that there was in the
commands and doctrines of the word, and those works and counsels of God
that were there revealed. So the Scripture speaks of a knowledge of God's
dispensation, and covenant of mercy, and way of grace towards his people,
as peculiar to the saints, and given only by God, Psal. xxv. 14: "The
secret of the Lord is with them that fear him; and he will show them his
covenant."
And that a true and saving belief of the truth of religion is that which
arises from such a discovery, is also what the Scripture teaches. As John
vi. 40: "And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which
seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life;" where it
is plain that a true faith is what arises from a spiritual sight of
Christ. And John xvii. 6, 7, 8: "I have manifested thy name unto the men
which thou gavest me out of the world. Now they have known that all things
whatsoever thou hast given me are of thee. For I have given unto them the
words which thou gavest me; and they have received them, and have known
surely that I came out from thee, and they have believed that thou didst
send me;" where Christ's manifesting God's name to the disciples, or
giving them the knowledge of God, was that whereby they knew that Christ's
doctrine was of God, and that Christ himself was of him, proceeded from
him, and was sent by him. Again, John xii. 44, 45, 46: "Jesus cried and
said, He that believeth on me, believeth not on me, but on him that sent
me. And he that seeth me seeth him that sent me. I am come a light into
the world, that whosoever believeth on me should not abide in darkness."
Their believing in Christ, and spiritually seeing him, are spoken of as
running parallel.
Christ condemns the Jews, that they did not know that he was the Messiah,
and that his doctrine was true, from an inward distinguishing taste and
relish of what was divine, in Luke xii. 56, 57. He having there blamed the
Jews, that though they could discern the face of the sky and of the earth,
and signs of the weather, that yet they could not discern those times--or,
as 'tis expressed in Matthew, the signs of those times--he adds, yea, and
why even of your own selves judge ye not what is right? i.e., without
extrinsic signs. Why have ye not that sense of true excellency, whereby ye
may distinguish that which is holy and divine? Why have ye not that savor
of the things of God, by which you may see the distinguishing glory and
evident divinity of me and my doctrine?
The Apostle Peter mentions it as what gave them (the apostles) good and
well grounded assurance of the truth of the gospel, that they had seen the
divine glory of Christ, 2 Pet. i. 16: "For we have not followed cunningly
devised fables when we made known unto you the power and coming of our
Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty." The apostle has
respect to that visible glory of Christ which they saw in his
transfiguration: that glory was so divine, having such an ineffable
appearance and semblance of divine holiness, majesty and grace, that it
evidently denoted him to be a divine person. But if a sight of Christ's
outward glory might give a rational assurance of his divinity, why may not
an apprehension of his spiritual glory do so too? Doubtless Christ's
spiritual glory is in itself as distinguishing, and as plainly showing his
divinity, as his outward glory; and a great deal more: for his spiritual
glory is that wherein his divinity consists; and the outward glory of his
transfiguration showed him to be divine, only as it was a remarkable image
or representation of that spiritual glory. Doubtless, therefore, he that
has had a clear sight of the spiritual glory of Christ, may say, I have
not followed cunningly devised fables, but have been an eyewitness of his
majesty, upon as good grounds as the apostle, when he had respect to the
outward glory of Christ that he had seen.
But this brings me to what was proposed next, viz., to show that,
Secondly, This doctrine is _rational_.
1. 'Tis rational to suppose that _there is really such an excellency_ in
divine things, that is so transcendent and exceedingly different from what
is in other things, that, if it were seen, would most evidently
distinguish them. We cannot rationally doubt but that things that are
divine, that appertain to the Supreme Being, are vastly different from
things that are human; that there is that godlike, high and glorious
excellency in them, that does most remarkably difference them from the
things that are of men; insomuch that if the difference were but seen, it
would have a convincing, satisfying influence upon any one, that they are
what they are, viz., divine. What reason can be offered against it? Unless
we would argue, that God is not remarkably distinguished in glory from
men.
If Christ should now appear to any one as he did on the mount at his
transfiguration; or if he should appear to the world in the glory that he
now appears in in heaven as he will do at the day of judgment; without
doubt, the glory and majesty that he would appear in, would be such as
would satisfy every one that he was a divine person, and that religion was
true: and it would be a most reasonable and well grounded conviction too.
And why may there not be that stamp of divinity or divine glory on the
word of God, on the scheme and doctrine of the gospel, that may be in
like manner distinguishing and as rationally convincing, provided it be
but seen! 'Tis rational to suppose that when God speaks to the world,
there should be something in his word or speech vastly different from
men's word. Supposing that God never had spoken to the world, but we had
noticed that he was about to do it; that he was about to reveal himself
from heaven and speak to us immediately himself, in divine speeches or
discourses, as it were from his own mouth, or that he should give us a
book of his own inditing: after what manner should we expect that he would
speak? Would it not be rational to suppose that his speech would be
exceeding different from men's speech, that he should speak like a God;
that is, that there should be such an excellency and sublimity in his
speech or word, such a stamp of wisdom, holiness, majesty and other divine
perfections, that the word of men, yea of the wisest of men, should appear
mean and base in comparison of it? Doubtless it would be thought rational
to expect this, and unreasonable to think otherwise. When a wise man
speaks in the exercise of his wisdom, there is something in every thing he
says that is very distinguishable from the talk of a little child. So,
without doubt, and much more, is the speech of God (if there be any such
thing as the speech of God) to be distinguished from that of the wisest of
men; agreeable to Jer. xxiii. 28, 29. God having there been reproving the
false prophets that prophesied in his name and pretended that what they
spake was his word, when indeed it was their own word, says, "The prophet
that hath a dream, let him tell a dream; and he that hath my word, let him
speak my word faithfully. What is the chaff to the wheat? saith the Lord.
Is not my word like as a fire? saith the Lord; and like a hammer that
breaketh the rock in pieces?"
2. If there be such a distinguishing excellency in divine things, 'tis
rational to suppose that _there may be such a thing as seeing it_. What
should hinder but that it may be seen! It is no argument, that there is
no such thing as such a distinguishing excellency, or that, if there be,
that it can't be seen, that some don't see it, though they may be
discerning men in temporal matters. It is not rational to suppose, if
there be any such excellency in divine things, that wicked men should see
it. 'Tis not rational to suppose that those whose minds are full of
spiritual pollution, and under the power of filthy lusts, should have any
relish or sense of divine beauty or excellency; or that their minds should
be susceptive of that light that is in its own nature so pure and
heavenly. It need not seem at all strange that sin should so blind the
mind, seeing that men's particular natural tempers and dispositions will
so much blind them in secular matters; as when men's natural temper is
melancholy, jealous, fearful, proud, or the like.
3. 'Tis rational to suppose that _this knowledge should be given
immediately by God_, and not be obtained by natural means. Upon what
account should it seem unreasonable, that there should be any immediate
communication between God and the creature? It is strange that men should
make any matter of difficulty of it. Why should not he that made all
things, still have something immediately to do with the things that he has
made? Where lies the great difficulty, if we own the being of a God, and
that he created all things out of nothing, of allowing some immediate
influence of God on the creation still? And if it be reasonable to suppose
it with respect to any part of the creation, it is especially so with
respect to reasonable, intelligent creatures; who are next to God in the
gradation of the different orders of beings, and whose business is most
immediately with God; who were made on purpose for those exercises that do
respect God and wherein they have nextly to do with God: for reason
teaches, that man was made to serve and glorify his Creator. And if it be
rational to suppose that God immediately communicates himself to man in
any affair, it is in this. 'Tis rational to suppose that God would
reserve that knowledge and wisdom, that is of such a divine and excellent
nature, to be bestowed immediately by himself, and that it should not be
left in the power of second causes. Spiritual wisdom and grace is the
highest and most excellent gift that ever God bestows on any creature: in
this the highest excellency and perfection of a rational creature
consists. 'Tis also immensely the most important of all divine gifts: 'tis
that wherein man's happiness consists, and on which his everlasting
welfare depends. How rational is it to suppose that God, however he has
left meaner goods and lower gifts to second causes, and in some sort in
their power, yet should reserve this most excellent, divine and important
of all divine communications in his own hands, to be bestowed immediately
by himself, as a thing too great for second causes to be concerned in!
'Tis rational to suppose that this blessing should be immediately from
God; for there is no gift or benefit that is in itself so nearly related
to the divine nature, there is nothing the creature receives that is so
much of God, of his nature, so much a participation of the deity: 'tis a
kind of emanation of God's beauty, and is related to God as the light is
to the sun. 'Tis therefore congruous and fit, that when it is given of
God, it should be nextly from himself, and by himself, according to his
own sovereign will.
'Tis rational to suppose that it should be beyond a man's power to obtain
this knowledge and light by the mere strength of natural reason; for 'tis
not a thing that belongs to reason, to see the beauty and loveliness of
spiritual things; it is not a speculative thing, but depends on the sense
of the heart. Reason, indeed, is necessary in order to it, as 'tis by
reason only that we are become the subjects of the means of it; which
means I have already shown to be necessary in order to it, though they
have no proper causal influence in the affair. 'Tis by reason that we
become possessed of a notion of those doctrines that are the subject
matter of this divine light; and reason may many ways be indirectly and
remotely an advantage to it. And reason has also to do in the acts that
are immediately consequent on this discovery: a seeing the truth of
religion from hence is by reason; though it be but by one step, and the
inference be immediate. So reason has to do in that accepting of, and
trusting in Christ, that is consequent on it. But if we take reason
strictly, not for the faculty of mental perception in general, but for
ratiocination, or a power of inferring by arguments; I say, if we take
reason thus, the perceiving of spiritual beauty and excellency no more
belongs to reason than it belongs to the sense of feeling to perceive
colors, or to the power of seeing to perceive the sweetness of food. It is
out of reason's province to perceive the beauty or loveliness of any
thing: such a perception don't belong to that faculty. Reason's work is to
perceive truth and not excellency. It is not ratiocination that gives men
the perception of the beauty and amiableness of a countenance, though it
may be many ways indirectly an advantage to it; yet 'tis no more reason
that immediately perceives it than it is reason that perceives the
sweetness of honey: it depends on the sense of the heart. Reason may
determine that a countenance is beautiful to others, it may determine that
honey is sweet to others; but it will never give me a perception of its
sweetness.--I will conclude with a very brief