be disobedient in a moral sense, but industrious as a member of civil society; and suppose again, this person, prior to his conversion to God, to be poor, and after it, to prosper in the world, would there be any thing unreasonable in ascribing his prosperity to the special blessing of God upon his exertions? The supposition is not extravagant; the thing has been realized in various instances, even where habits of industry were contracted antecedent to habits of piety. I am not certain whether something of this is not included in God's address to David by Nathan: "If that had been too little, I would moreover have given unto thee such and such things."* Obedience, on some occasions, invites Providence to add to its blessings. In the Divine Being, there is infinite kindness, and he will not suffer those, in spirit at least, to remain a wilderness, who resemble Carmel for fruitfulness. Reverse the subject; look at an apostate from God. This man was in a state of affluence when pious; he sinks into poverty and wretchedness, when he becomes wicked. Would there, in this case, (and many there have been,) be any thing improper in attributing this change of circumstances to God's displeasure? To a judgment, though not upon the man's soul or his body, upon his property? Is there any thing antiscriptural in the opinion, that the Supreme Being may change his favours when we change our conduct? I do not now refer to the reverses of fortune to which good and bad men are subject, continuing the same in character; but when a manifest change in God's dealings, succeeds a change of moral conduct. These remarks, Sir, are not intended, as you will perceive, to favour the charge already denied, that temporal prosperity is a necessary result of piety. You are sensible of a wide distinction between a natural consequence and a reward; between the blessing of God upon our labours, and that which must follow as an effect from a cause. In the reward, it is optional with the Divine Being to bless or not to bless, since no positive promise binds him to confer it; in the other case, the doctrine * 2 Sam. xii. 8. of imperious necessity is involved. While the Methodists maintain the former, general observation compels them to renounce the latter. The Lord gave Cyrus the treasures of darkness, the hidden riches of the Babylonian temple, for having discharged his duty.* Because Nebuchadnezzar performed a great service at Tyre, he was rewarded with the whole land of Egypt; for, says the prophet, he and his army had no wages at Tyre; the Tyrians escaping by sea with all their effects, while he besieged their city by land.† Does God reward men who know him not, in the discharge of duty, and will he not occasionally reward his faithful servants, in consideration of their obedience? "Seek ye first the kingdom of God," says our Lord, "and all these things shall be added to you." Professor Turretin has made some just and necessary observations on this subject, which, while they will act as a safe-guard against any undue advantage of an opponent, will help to explain the views of the Methodists on the general state of the question. "Hence arises," says he, in reference to the last text, "this inquiry, In what manner ought Christian ministers to enforce the doctrines of religion by motives taken from temporal advantages? Some divines describe the state of believers in this life as a state of perpetual affliction and infelicity. Others enlarge too much on the temporal advantages of piety, and Bellarmine makes the temporal felicity of the defenders of the church one evidence of the true church. In regard to the first extreme, the thesis is unwarrantable; for 1. It is contrary to experience. 2. The passages, from which they, who maintain it, reason, regard only some particular seasons. 3. It is injurious to the goodness of God. 4. It is hurtful to piety, for it discourages the weak. The second method is an opposite extreme, for, 1. Jesus Christ and his apostles proposed different motives. 2. It does not accord with the genius and design of the gospel. 3. It confounds the dispensation of the gospel with that of law. 4. It is contrary to experience. * Isai, xlv. 3. Ezek. xxix. 18, 19, 20. 5. It is injurious to a great many pious persons, who are oppressed with afflictions. 6. It gives infidels an occasion to redicule religion-What then, are we never to use motives taken from temporal advantages? Yes, they ought to be used but used, however, with the following precautions. Previous to these, remark two plain principles: 1. Temporal advantages, strictly speaking, are not evangelical promises. 2. Piety and virtue naturally, and by a wise constitution of things, are attended with many temporal advantages; and, on the contrary, vice induces misery. Preachers, then, should, 1. Consider these advantages only as (not necessary) consequences of the natural constitution of things, and not as Gospel promises. 2. Allow there are many exceptions. 3. Exhort Christians to pray for these advantages conditionally, if their enjoyment of them may be for the glory of God. 4. Never propose them as principal motives to piety; but always fix the attention of their auditors on spiritual and eternal blessings. Finally, observe how Jesus Christ proposes these advantages in the text. He speaks of only the necessaries of life; he proposes them only as appendages of greater blessings; and he does so rather to accommodate himself to our weakness, than to express any dignity in the objects themselves."* Though Christians have no positive promise, upon which to establish a belief, that temporal prosperity will invariably follow them, yet they have ground to expect the special care of Him, who says, "When thou passest through the waters, I will be with thee; when thou walkest through the fire, thou shalt not be burnt :"+ a care occasionally manifested in remarkable interpositions. They are encouraged in this from a review of the many extraordinary providences recorded in the sacred writings, and from a consideration of the many parallel cases which have engaged the attention of the Christian world since the apostolic age. Notwithstanding Mr. W.'s hostility to an extraordinary providence Turretin's Theolog. Dis. vol. II. dis. 4. + Isai. xliii. 2. in the present day, I cannot, with the Bible as my interpreter, close my eyes to the subject; cannot but trace resemblances to the same cause. A few parallel cases may not be altogether uninteresting. There are few who are not impressed with the subject of a retaliating Providence. Of this doctrine, the Scriptures furnish us both with assertions and examples. "Judge not, that ye be not judged. For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. Woe to thee that spoilest, and thou wast not spoiled, and dealest treacherously, and they dealt not treacherously with thee: when thou shalt cease to spoil, thou shalt be spoiled; and when thou shalt make an end to deal treacherously, they shall deal treacherously with thee. He that leadeth into captivity, shall go into captivity: he that killeth with the sword, must be killed with the sword."* Let us turn, Sir, to examples. The first-born of Egypt were slain, and Pharaoh and his hosts were drowned in the Red Sea; circumstances which seemed to look that horrible edict full in the face, which was issued for the purpose of drowning the Hebrew children, "Samuel said," (to Agag,) "as thy sword hath made women childless, so shall thy mother be childless among women." Edom was visited with vengeance; and why? Because Edom had wreaked his vengeance upon Judah. "O Jerusalem, Jerusalem," said our Lord, "which killest the prophets, and stonest them that are sent unto thee; behold your house is left unto you desolate." In reference to the martyrdom of the saints, it is said, "They have shed the blood of saints and prophets, and thou hast given them blood to drink, for they are worthy." The case of Adoni-bezek, too, who had cut off the thumbs and great toes of three score and ten kings, is very striking. He attributes it entirely to a retaliating Providence, and says, on having his own amputated, * Matt. vii. 1, 2; Isaiah xxxiii. 1; Rev. xiii, 10. "As I have done, so God hath requited me."* Having established the doctrine, my attention is next arrested with the case of John the Baptist. He was beheaded at the request of a young female, who was instigated to the work by her mother. This base woman, on the testimony of Jerom, treated the Baptist's head in a very disdainful manner, pulling out the tongue which she imagined had injured her, and piercing it with a needle. Mark the sequel, and you will see Providence interesting itself in the most remarkable manner, in the revenge of this murder on all concerned. Herod's army was defeated in a war occasioned by his marrying Herodias, which many Jews thought a judgment sent upon him for the death of John:+ both he and Herodias, whose ambition occasioned his ruin, were afterwards driven from their kingdom with great regret, and died in banishment at Lyons in Gaul:‡ and Salome, the young person who requested the Baptist's head, fell into the ice, as she was walking over it, which, suddenly closing, cut off her own. The latter part, though not recorded in sacred history, leaves an impression on the mind almost equal to the case of Adoni-bezek; and, till the credit of the historian is destroyed, must remain as an extraordinary retaliation of the providence of God. Perhaps this may occupy a niche in the belief of Mr. W. from the age of its occurrence; though remote from the scene of miracles, unconnected with the Apostles and primitive Christians, and unrecorded in the New Testament. By descending the stream of time, we shall find on our way, the dreadful massacre at Paris returned with blood for blood. Cassin, the field-marshal, with twenty thousand men, were slain at the siege of Rochelle: Charles the Ninth wallowed in his own blood, issuing from every part of his body: the Duke of Guise was murdered in the King's chamber: the Duke of Anjou, who was .* Exod. i. 16, 22; chap. xii. 29; chap. xiv. 13; 1 Sam. xv. 33; Ezek. xxv. 12-14; Luke xiii. 34, 35; Rev. xvi. 6; Judges i. 6—8. Ibid, p. 107. The edition of Josephus § Niceporus's + Joseph. Antiq. vol. iv. p. 85. referred to is the Edinburgh one, Duod. 6 vols. 1815. |