Chapter 6: Verses 2–5

Chapter 6: Verses 2–5

seem) did not reprove his brethren, because he knew well they would not be bettered by him (seeing they hated him); but "he brought unto his father their evil sayings" (Gen. 37:2). Albeit others say, that their sin was public, and therefore needed no private admonition. And others, that he did admonish them secretly before he did relate it to his father (although it be not expressly set down in the text).

Howsoever this example be understood, the rule is certain, that private reproof is to be omitted, when it will either do hurt or no good.

Chapter 6: Verses 2-5 2 Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ.

In this verse, the apostle propounds another rule touching brother love, and it depends upon the former, as an answer to a secret objection, which might be made upon the former doctrine in the first verse, in this manner. You enjoin us we should restore our brother, if he fall by occasion into any sin, in the Spirit of meekness. But there are some infirmities in our brethren which cannot be amended nor redressed by brotherly correction. What is to be done in such a case?

The apostle answers such infirmities must be borne and tolerated, in these words: "Bear ye one another's burdens." And this rule is enforced by an argument taken from the excellency thereof, in that the practicing of it is the keeping and fulfilling of the whole law, in these words: "And so fulfill the law of Christ."

First, for the rule. The apostle calls slips, infirmities, and sins, by the name of "burdens," taking his metaphor from travelers who use to ease one another by carrying one another's burden, either wholly or in part, that so they may more cheerfully and speedily go on in their journey. Men's burdens are of two sorts. Either such as every man is

to bear by himself alone, without shifting them off his own shoulder and laying them upon other men (of which we are to entreat, when we come to the fifth verse); or such as may be borne of others, as well as of ourselves. Of these the apostle speaks in this place, when he says, "Bear ye one another's burdens." And there are four sorts of them. First, those whereof our brethren may either be wholly disburdened or in part eased, such is the heavy burden of poverty, sickness, nakedness, hunger, thirst, banishment, imprisonment, etc.

Secondly, the outward and bodily wants that are in sundry persons, as blindness, deafness, maimedness, lameness, envy, etc. Thirdly, personal or actual sins of men, as anger, hatred, jealousy, envy, etc.

Lastly, outward frailties in the actions of men's lives (which are not felt oftentimes of those that are subject unto them, but are heavy burdens to others with whom they converse) as curiousness, niceness, slowness, self-conceitedness, frowardness, hastiness, and such like.

The two first sorts are to be borne three ways. First, by having a holy sympathy and a fellow feeling of them, in "weeping with those that weep." And in "remembering those that are in bonds, as though we were bound with them; those that are in affliction, as if we were also afflicted in the body" (Heb. 13:3). This was Paul's practice, "Who is weak, and I am not weak? Who is offended and I burn not?" (2 Cor.

11:29). Secondly, by bearing with them in their wants and infirmities, according to that of the apostle, "Bear with the weak" (1 Thess. 5:14).

Thirdly, by putting under our shoulders and bearing part of the burden with them—in helping and easing of them in their necessities. "Distributing unto the necessities of the saints" (Rom.

12:13). The two latter sorts (being principally meant in this place) are not to be borne by dissembling of them or yielding to them, much less by bolstering men up in them or by partaking with them. For albeit the adulterer and unclean person would gladly make Christ a

baud, the thief would make him his receiver. And many there are who would be content to shift off their sins in whole or in part, and lay them upon the shoulders of others. Yet in God's cause and quarrel, in matters of faith, we are not to yield a hair breadth. Moses told Pharaoh that he would "not leave so much as a hoof behind him"

(Ex. 10:26). And Paul would not give place to Peter and them that were with him, no "not for a moment, that the truth of the gospel might continue with them" (Gal. 2:5). They must therefore be borne by disburdening them of them by gentle and mild admonition, or if they cannot be redressed, by bearing and tolerating of them, in passing by them as though we did not perceive them [Rom. 14:1;

15:1], for as Solomon says, "It is the glory of man to pass by infirmity" [Prov. 19:11]—or lastly, by praying for them. For if we shall break the bond of brotherly love and Christian society by reason of these or such like infirmities which we see to be in our brethren, we walk not in love, in that we bear not their burdens as the apostle commands in this place, and, "Support one another, through love"

(Eph. 4:2). And surely this is a most necessary precept, of great use and consequence in the life of man. For except we bear and tolerate the frailties of men, in passing by them in such sort as I have said, it is impossible we should lead a quiet or comfortable life in any society. We must seek for a new world, or leaving the fellowship of men betake ourselves to some solitary desert, as sundry Eremites and Anchorites have done, because they could not (by reason of their froward and wayward natures) digest the manifold inconveniences which they saw to be amongst men in public societies.

This duty therefore of bearing one another's burdens, albeit it be difficult, yet it must be practiced, specially of those that are strong men in Christ. For as in architecture, all stones are not fit to be laid in every place of the building, but some below, as the fundamental and chief cornerstones to bear up the weight and burden of the

building; others above in the wall, that so the whole building may be firm and compact in itself. So in the church, which is the house of God (where all believers are lively stones, built upon Christ Jesus the chief cornerstone [1 Peter 2:5], bearing up the whole burden, even all the infirmities of the church)—those that are strong must support the infirmities of the weak, that so the whole building being compact and knit together may grow up to a holy temple in the Lord. For otherwise the whole frame of the building must needs be dissolved and come to ruin. It is a common proverb among the Italians, that "hard with hard, never makes a good wall." By which is signified that as stones cobbled up one upon another, without mortar to combine them, make but a tottering wall that may easily be shaken; but if there be mortar betwixt them, yielding to the hardness of the stones, it makes the whole like a solid continued body, strong and stable, able to endure the shock of the ram, or the shot of the cannon. So that society, where all are as stiff as stones which will not yield a hair one unto another, one being as fast, as froward, as hasty, as another, cannot be firm and durable. But where men are of a soft, a yielding, and relenting nature, giving place to the stiffness of others, and yielding to the tempest for a time, that society is compact in itself, and so cannot but continue, because one does bear the infirmities of another.49

Do you therefore see your brother to be overtaken with some sin, or to be overcurious, very froward, too self-conceited, abounding in his own sense, exceeding hasty, etc., bear this his infirmity now; and so he (perhaps) may bear with you in the like case another time. Or bear you with his curiousness; he will bear with your dullness. Bear with his fickleness; he will bear with your forwardness. Bear with his hastiness; he will bear with your self-conceitedness. For it is to be observed that the apostle says not that those only which are strong should bear the frailties of the weak, but that both strong and weak

should bear one another's burdens, it being a mutual and reciprocal duty imposed upon all, because there is none so strong, but one time or other he may slip and fall, and so may stand in need to be supported even of the weak. The palsy man being sick had his burden

(to wit, his bed) borne, but being restored could help to bear another man's burden. So if you bear another man's burden that is weak, when he is strong he will be ready to bear yours, if need require. God commands that if we find our neighbor's beast lying under his burden, we must lift him up. How much more ought we to help our brethren, lying under the burden of sin? Therefore the strong are to support the weak, and the weak must (upon occasion) support the strong. As in the arch of a building, one stone does bear mutually, though not equally, the burden of the rest. Or as harts swimming over a great water do ease one another in laying their heads one upon the back of another—the foremost that has none to support him changing his place and resting his head upon the hindermost.51 Thus in a family, the husband must bear with the niceness and frowardness of his wife; the wife, with the fastness or hastiness of her husband. Those magistrates and ministers which are too cold and backward in good things must bear with the over great heat and forwardness of their fellow-magistrates or fellow-ministers. And those must bear with them again, seeing both aim at the same end, the edification of the church and the good of the commonwealth.

Thus in God's providence, Luther and Melanchthon were happily joined together and did bear with one another—Luther with his softness; Melanchthon with his hastiness; he with his boldness; he with his timorousness. Melanchthon did well temper the heat and zeal of Luther with his mildness, being as oil to his vinegar; and Luther on the other side did warm his coldness, being as a fire to his frozenness.

Thus the apostle commands that "we should bear with the infirmities of those that are weak" and not sufficiently catechized in the doctrine of our spiritual liberty purchased unto us by Christ, "and not to please our selves" too much, "but rather to please our neighbor as that which is good to edification" (Rom. 15:1–2). For amongst other properties of love reckoned up by St. Paul (1 Cor. 13), this is not the least, that "it suffereth all things" (v. 7)—that is, all such things as may be borne and suffered with good conscience, for the good of our brother. For look as a lover does suffer all things in regard of his love, in three respects. First, in undergoing any labor that may be for her good, as Hercules did for the love of Omphale. Secondly, in bearing patiently all hard measure that is offered him for her sake, as Jacob did for the love of Rachel. Thirdly, in enduring anything that is imposed upon him, and putting up what wrong soever is done unto him by her, as Samson did for the love of Delilah. So Christian charity causes us to suffer all things. First, pro fratribus, to endure any labor, cost, or travel, for their good. Secondly, propter fratres, to bear all afflictions for their sakes, as Paul says he did for the church

(2 Tim. 2:10). Thirdly, a fratribus, to bear wrongs and put up injuries at their hands, as he did, being shamefully entreated at Philippi, stoned, scourged, etc. This must be considered of us all, but specially of such as will give a man as good as he brings, who are but a word and a blow; a lie, and a stab; a word, and a writ54—such as cannot bear coals (as they say) nor brook any little wrongs, nor endure any small frailty in their brethren. These men must remember that in bearing coals, that is, in suffering and forbearing, "they heap up coals of fire upon their heads," as Paul speaks (Rom. 12:20); as also that God does bear with them in greater matters, even when they wound

Him with their oaths (Lev. 24:11) and give Him the lie through unbelief (1 John 5:10), as He bare the manners of the Israelites in the wilderness. That Christ, whose example we are to follow, "hath borne our infirmities" (Isa. 53) and "doth ease them that travail and are

heavy laden" (Matt. 11:28); and therefore we treading in His steps "must forbear one another, and forgive one another, if any man have a quarrel against another, even as Christ forgave us" (Col. 3:13).

Thus, if when we see any sin in our brother, we reclaim him from it by reproofs, exhortations, admonitions, we are God's instruments to "save a soul from death, and so do cover a multitude of sins" (James

5:20), even before God. And if, when we perceive common frailties in our brethren, we shall not stand too much upon our right, but shall yield unto them in bearing, forbearing, and forgiving, we "shall cover a multitude of sins" (1 Peter 4:8) before men.

Thus much touching the rule. Now I proceed to the reason, whereby the apostle urges the practice of his precept, in these words: "and so fulfill the law of Christ." The reason stands thus. That which is the fulfilling of the law of Christ must be practiced of us. But the bearing of one another's burdens is the fulfilling of the law of Christ.

Therefore we ought to bear one another's burdens. For the clearing of this text, sundry things are to be considered.

I. It may be demanded, what the apostle understands by "the law of Christ"? Answer. Nothing else but the doctrine, precept, or commandment of Christ, enjoining the love of our brethren. "A new commandment give I unto you, that ye love one another, as I have loved you, etc." (John 13:34–35). And it is all one, as if he had said, bear you one another's burdens and so fulfill the commandment of Christ, who has after a special manner commanded the love of your brethren. Now the apostle rather uses the word "law" than

"commandments" because he would make a clearer antithesis betwixt the law of Christ and the law of Moses, so vehemently urged by the false apostles. As if he should have said, You Galatians are taught to observe the law of Moses, circumcision, days, and times, months, and years, and so you do indeed. Well, if you will needs be

observing of laws, here is a law for you to observe, bear with the frailties one of another, and so you shall fulfill the most excellent law that ever was, the law of Christ, which is necessary to be kept, whereas the keeping of the ceremonial law is but in vain.

II. Question. Why does Paul call the love of our brethren the law of Christ rather than the law of nature, or the law of God, or the law of Moses? Seeing it was written in the mind of man in the creation, was given by God Himself in Mount Sinai, was written by Moses, the relics whereof are yet remaining in the mind of man? Answer. It is so called because it is a new commandment given by Christ Himself, after a special manner. But it is hereupon further demanded, why this commandment of loving our brethren should be called a new commandment? To which some make answer that it is so called only because it shows a new manner of loving our brethren, after the example of Christ, "as he hath loved us." Now this manner of loving our brethren (as Chrysostom expounds it) is this, that as Christ loved us freely, not moved by any amiable thing in us, nor for any profit that should redound unto Himself thereby, so we should freely love one another, not for any benefit received or expected. But as Cyril of Alexandria upon John expounds it, it stands in this, that as Christ loved us more than Himself, so we should love our brethren more than ourselves. But this cannot be the meaning. For St. John in his first epistle chapter 2 and second epistle,57 repeating this new commandment, says only, "This is a new commandment, that ye love one another," and never adds, "as Christ loved us"—the which he should have done if these words ("as I have loved you") be an essential part of the new commandment, which He enjoins us to observe.

Besides, our Savior Himself says a little after, "By this shall all men know, that ye are my disciples, if ye love one another," not adding,

"as I have loved you." Therefore, the new commandment is laid down in these words, "Love one another," not respecting those that follow, are modification or limitation, "as I have loved you." Besides, this exposition takes it for granted that the moral law, "Love thy neighbor as thyself," is a certain rule by which we are to square our love, that is, that we must begin at ourselves and look how much we love ourselves, so much we ought to love our neighbor and no more, and that therefore Christ should give a new commandment of greater perfection than that in the law, to wit, that we love one another as He loved us, that is, more than ourselves. But this is a flat mistaking of the Scripture. For the commandment, "Love thy neighbor as thyself," is no exact rule whereby we are to try and examine our love (as the popish doctors, and some others teach). For then Paul and divers of the saints of God should have done works of supererogation, more than the law requires, in loving their neighbors more than themselves (Rom. 9:3). And if it were a rule, it were but a leaden and false rule. For we are in some cases bound to love our neighbor more than ourselves, especially if he be a greater instrument of God's glory in procuring the good of the church or commonwealth, as to love our godly king more than ourselves, and prefer his safety and life before our own, as the Israelites did David: "Thou art worth ten thousand of us" (2 Sam. 18:3). For ὡς is a note of similitude and not of equality, signifying that as we love ourselves heartily, and earnestly, and inwardly, willing all good to ourselves—with the like sincerity of affection we should love our brethren. So that Christ has added nothing to the law in commanding to love one another as He loved us. Others say it is called a new commandment because it ought to be kept with as great care and diligence as though it were new and had been now first given. For new laws (we know) are commonly precisely kept at the first, but after a while, they begin to be neglected. And men do (as it were) antiquate them, accounting them as though they were not.

Others by a new commandment understand another divers or different commandment; for Christ in the beginning of the chapter had given them a commandment to flee pride, to be humble, to live at peace and concord one with another. And then He says, "But I give you a new commandment," a commandment differing from the former, "that ye love one another."

The word "new" is often taken in Scripture in this sense, as, "There arose up a new king which knew not Joseph" (Ex. 1:8); that is, as the seventy interpreters and St. Luke (Acts 7:18) translate it, "another king." "They shall speak with new tongues" (Mark 16:17), that is,

"other," divers, or different languages from their usual tongue. For the meaning is not that they invented a new language which was never spoken before, but that they spoke in a language divers from that which they used before. For it is said, "They began to speak with other tongues" (Acts 2:4). Thus our Savior Christ tells His apostles that He "will not drink any more of the fruit of the vine," till He

"drink it new with them in the kingdom of God" (Matt. 26:29), where by "new wine," He means not the liquor or juice of the grape to preserve animal life, but another different drink, wherewith He would entertain all that were invited and came unto His table. But these expositions are not so fit.

I take it therefore to be called "a new commandment," either in respect of Christ or of us. In respect of Christ two ways. First, because He renewed it, not only by freeing it from the false glosses and interpretations of the scribes and Pharisees, the Jewish Rabbins, but also in fulfilling it most perfectly, whereas it was obliterated and almost antiquated by the great corruption of man. For none did never so perfectly observe and keep the law as He did. Therefore in regard of the new manner of fulfilling it, it is called "a new commandment." Secondly, because He abrogating the ceremonial

law and many judicials, only renewed this precept of the moral law in commanding it as His law to the church, "This is my commandment, that ye love one another" (John 15), as if He should say, Though I have abrogated the ceremonial law and antiquated the judicial, yet this commandment shall never be abrogated. And this I commend unto you again and again as My commandment, which above all others I would have you carefully to observe as that whereby you shall be known to be My disciples.

In regard of us it is called "a new commandment," and that in two respects: (1) because it being defaced and almost clean blotted out of the mind of man by original sin, is renewed again in the hearts of believers by the powerful operation of the Spirit of God, both in their minds and affections. In their minds, because they are daily enlightened with the true knowledge thereof, in being taught whom they ought to love—viz. not only their friends, but even their enemies. With what kind of love, to wit, with a fervent love, not in word or tongue only, but in deed and truth—and that with free, sincere, and constant love. In their wills and affections—in that they are persuaded by the inward working of the Spirit to love, and are inclined thereto, being turned by grace. Secondly, because it does after a peculiar manner belong unto us who are under the New

Testament in the kingdom of grace, seeing that this commandment only is renewed by Christ as His own proper commandment, many others being abrogated. As also because it is daily written by the Spirit of Christ after a new manner in the hearts of new converts, so that they have not only a new, that is, a true knowledge thereof, but also a new, that is, a true sense and feeling of the power of it in their hearts. In that they are become new creatures in Christ Jesus. For in Him "all old things pass away, and all things become new" (2 Cor. 5).

For to them the law is no killing letter, written in tables of stone; but a quickening spirit, as being written in the fleshy tables of their

hearts. This seems to be the true, full, and proper meaning of these places. For thus St. John's first epistle does expound it when he says that "it is true in him and in you" (1 John 2:8) in the sense before specified—both in regard of Christ and the believers in Christ.

III. Question. Seeing the commandment of loving our brethren is called the law of Christ and a new commandment, is not the gospel a new law? Answer. In no wise. For albeit the law and the gospel agree in sundry things, as first in the author, God being the author of them both; of the gospel (Rom. 1:1), of the law (Rom. 7:22). Secondly, in that both of them were preached, known, and understood in both testaments. The law being written in the heart of man in the creation; the gospel preached to our first parents in paradise immediately after the fall, and repeated again and again to the patriarchs and prophets from time to time. Thirdly, in the general matter and end of them both, in that both the law and the gospel require righteousness in him that would come to life eternal.

Fourthly, in this, that they confirm and establish one another, in that the law commanding justice and justifying none shows that a man is justified by the free gift and grace of God, and that Christ is the end of the law to everyone that believes. In that the gospel justifies not by works but by faith, and yet so as that we do not by our faith abrogate the law or make it of none effect, but rather establish it, and that in two respects. First, because by faith we apprehend the righteousness of Christ, and so in Him (who has fulfilled the law for us) we fulfill it and so establish it. Secondly, because having our hearts purified by faith, we live no more according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit, and so by inchoate obedience we fulfill the law.

Lastly, in the end, in that both the law and the gospel tend directly to the manifestation of the glory of God.

Yet they differ in five things. First, in the manner of revealing. The law before the fall was perfectly known by nature, and since the fall in part (Rom. 2:15). The gospel is not known by nature, neither was it ever written in man's heart, before or after the fall, as Paul says,

"Those things which the eye has not seen, nor the ear heard, nor the heart of man conceived, are they which God has prepared for them that love him" (1 Cor. 2:9). Therefore the gospel is called "a mystery"

(Rom. 16:25–26). First, because the doctrine of the gospel was made known to men and angels by the revelation of God (Eph. 3:5, 9).

Secondly, because there is required a special revelation and work of God's Spirit before a man can yield assent unto it. Therefore Paul says, "We have not received the spirit of the world, but the Spirit of God, that we might know the things that are given to us of God" (1

Cor. 2:12). Secondly, in the subject or doctrine itself, and that in two respects. First, the law preaches nothing but absolute justice to the transgressors thereof. The gospel shows how justice is qualified with mercy: "from all things from which ye could not be absolved by the law of Moses, by him every one that believeth is justified" (Acts

13:39). Secondly, the law teaches what manner of men we ought to be, and what we ought to do, that we may come to eternal life, but shows not how we may become so indeed. The gospel teaches that by faith in Christ, we may be such as the law requires. "God hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin, that we might be made the righteousness of God in him" (2 Cor. 5:21).

Thirdly, in the object: "The law is given to the unjust and lawless, ungodly, and profane" (1 Tim. 1:9–10), that it may show them their sins and the punishment thereby deserved, and so may accuse and condemn them. The gospel is to be published and dispensed only to the penitent, which are contrite and broken in heart and mourn for their sins (Matt. 11; Isa. 57; Luke 4).

IV. The law promises eternal life upon condition of works. "Do this, and live. If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments." The gospel promises eternal life freely without any condition of works.

"To him that worketh not, but believeth in him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted to him for righteousness" (Rom. 4:5).

"The righteousness of God is made manifest without the law, by the faith of Jesus Christ, unto all, and upon all that believe" (Rom. 3:21–

22).

V. In the effects. The law is no instrumental cause of faith, repentance, or any saving grace. It is "the minister of death" (2 Cor.

3:7), "causing wrath" (Rom. 4:15). But the gospel causes life. It is "the grace of God which bringeth salvation" (Titus 2:11). For this cause Paul calls the law "a dead" or "killing letter"; the gospel, "a quickening spirit" (2 Cor. 3).

Fourthly, it may be demanded, whether any man be able to fulfill the law, considering that Paul bids us bear one another's burdens "and so fulfill the law of Christ." Answer. No mere man can perfectly fulfill the law in this life. This conclusion St. Paul proves in sundry of his epistles, specially by these arguments.

First, by the great and general depravation of nature which remains in part even in the regenerate, staining their best actions and making them like a menstruous cloth—confessing withal that his best works are not answerable to the law, by reason of the remainders of original corruption (Rom. 7). Now perfect fulfilling of the law cannot stand with corruption of nature and transgression in life. For a corrupt fountain cannot send forth sweet waters. Neither can a corrupt tree bear good fruit. St. James says, "He that offendeth in one, is guilty of all." And the Scripture pronounces him accursed "that abideth not in all things written in the book of the law to do them."66 Popish

doctors answer, first, that original corruption (which they call the fuel of sin) and the first motions to evil, preventing all consent of will, are indeed in the regenerate; but they are no sins properly. But it is false which they teach. For every transgression of the law is a sin, as St. John defines it (1 John 3:4). But these are transgressions of the tenth commandment. For it either forbids these first motions, whether they be primo primae, or secondo primae (as schoolmen speak), or it forbids nothing but the motions which are with consent of will, which were forbidden in the former commandments, and so in effect there are but nine commandments, the tenth forbidding no special sin.

Again, Paul teaches that these motions preventing all consent of will are formally opposed to the law. "I see another law in my members, rebelling against the law of my mind" [Rom. 7:23]. Secondly, they answer, that Paul (Rom. 7) speaks not of himself but in the person of the unregenerate, according to the opinion of St. Augustine. Answer.

Augustine indeed was once of that judgment, but he after retracted that opinion (as it is manifest out of his book of Retractations, and the sixth book against Julian the Pelagian), and that for these reasons. First, because Paul says, "To will is present with me." And,

"I do not the good I would." And, "I delight in the law of God, concerning the inward man"—all which are proper to the regenerate and cannot be affirmed of the wicked. Secondly, because he makes mention of "the inward man," which is all one with the new man or the new creature, which agrees only to the regenerate. Thirdly, because he says he is "led captive to sin" (v. 24), whereas the wicked are not drawn to sin by force against their wills, but run riot of their own accord into all wickedness, as the horse rushes into the battle

(Jer. 8:6). Lastly, in that he cries out in a sense and sorrow for his sins, "O wretched man that I am, who shall deliver me from the body of this death?" (v. 25), which cannot be the voice of the unregenerate,

for they feel not the burden of their sin nor desire to be eased of it, but take delight and pleasure in it. His second reason is this. Such as our knowledge is, such is our love of God and man. But our knowledge is only in part. Therefore our love is but in part, and therefore there is no perfect fulfilling of the law. The advocates of the Romish church answer that our knowledge, love, and obedience are perfect for the condition and estate of this life, as we are viatores, which is sufficient—though they be not perfect for the condition of the life to come, when we shall be comprehensores, which is not required at our hands in this life. For they make a double perfect fulfilling of the law. One, for the term of this life, which is to love God above all things and our neighbor as ourselves. The other after this life, and that is to love God with all the soul, and with all the powers and faculties of the soul, and with all the strength and vigor of all these powers.

And this distinction they make to be the ground of their opinion touching the fulfilling of the law and justification by works, etc. But it is a sandy foundation, and therefore that which is built upon it cannot stand. For besides that it is a fond and frivolous distinction forged by schoolmen without warrant of Scripture or consent of antiquity; it is manifestly false. For there is one only rule of righteousness, and not two. One only general sentence of the law, more unchangeable than the laws of the Medes and Persians, even as unchangeable as God Himself. Which is, that "he which continueth not in all things written in the law to do them, is accursed." So that he which loves not God with all his soul, mind, and might, with all his valde suo, that is, with all the faculties of his soul, and all the powers of all these faculties, and that in this life, is accursed. And it is absurd which they teach, that a man is not bound for the term of this life, thus to love God, but only in the life to come. For look what man could do by creation in the estate of innocency, the same and so

much the law requires at his hands in the state of apostasy. But Adam by creation could love God with all his soul, with all the faculties of his soul, and all the powers of all these faculties.

Therefore the same perfect, absolute, and entire obedience is now required at his hands. For the sentence of the law, "Cursed is he that continueth not in all things, etc." is not only given to men glorified, but to those that are in the state of grace. And St. Paul does so apply this sentence to men even in this life, that he pronounces all that are of the works of the law to be under the curse. Again, if this were so, the Jews had no cause to fear the severity and strictness of the law, as they did, when they said, "If we hear the voice of the Lord any more, we shall die" [Ex. 20:19; Deut. 18:16]—considering they were able to keep and fulfill it, according to this popish opinion. Neither would God have promised them a Messiah or Mediator to redeem them from the curse of the law [Deut. 18:18], but would rather have comforted them in that their so great fear and astonishment, by giving them to understand that they were not bound to the full and perfect fulfilling of the law for the time of this life.

Besides, the pathetical exclamation of Paul, "O miserable man that I am," etc. (Rom. 7:24) and that saying of Peter in calling the law "a yoke" which neither we nor our fathers were able to bear (Acts 15) should be childish and ridiculous, if "that which is impossible in the law" (Rom. 8:3), as Paul speaks, did not appertain unto us.

The third argument. If a man could fulfill the law, he should not stand in need of a mediator. "For if righteousness be by the law,

Christ died in vain" (Gal. 2:21). It is answered that Christ died in vain, if men by the strength of nature could fulfill the law. But the fulfilling of the law is by grace, and so His death is not in vain. For by virtue of the obedience of Christ, we are enabled to fulfill the law. But this were to make Christ no Savior, but only an instrument, whereby

we fulfill the law and are our own saviors; whereas the Scripture says, that "he is made unto us righteousness" (1 Cor. 1:30), not that we are made righteousness by Him. That "we are made the righteousness of God in him" (2 Cor. 5:21), not "by him," as an instrument. That "we are complete in him" (Col. 2:10), and not complete of ourselves, by Him.

Lastly, the Scripture shuts up all men under sin, even the most sanctified (Prov. 20:9; 1 John 1:8). Job confesses he cannot answer one of a thousand (Job 9:3). And David says, "If thou, Lord, shalt mark what is done amiss, who can abide it? (Ps. 130:3). And Paul says of himself that "he found no means to perform that which is good" (Rom. 7:18). He says further, that "it is impossible" to be kept, by reason of original corruption (Rom. 8:3). It is answered that all these places and examples must be understood of venial sins, which make men sinners indeed, yet are not against, but beside the law, and therefore though a man commit them, yet he may fulfill the law for all that. Answer. The common received opinion in schools that some sins are mortal, others venial of their own nature, is a witless distinction. For if all sins deserve death, as Paul teaches (Rom. 6:23), either venial sins are no sins, or they must needs deserve death.

Moses says that "he that abideth not in all things written in the law, is accursed" (Deut. 27:26), where the words "this law" may not be restrained only to the catalogue of great and heinous sins which are there reckoned up, but extended to all sins, as Paul applies it, pronouncing him accursed "that continueth not in all things written in the law" (Gal. 3:10), not "this law." So that every sin, even the least sin in thought, makes a man subject to the curse, and so in rigor of divine justice deserves eternal death. And it is but a poor shift to say that some sins are against the law, as all mortal sins, and others besides the law, as venial. For the doing of that which God forbids is a sin, not beside, but against the law. But idle words, jesting, and

jibing, etc. (which the popish doctors account venial sins) are expressly forbidden in the word, "Of every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account at the day of judgment" (Matt. 12:36).

And Paul forbids all "foolish talking, and jesting" (Eph. 5:4), as things uncomely. Therefore they are not beside, but flat against the law. Secondly, they answer that these places and the like are to be understood of several works and actions of the saints, whereof some were good, as David's sparing of Saul, etc.; some, evil, as his adultery, murder, and numbering of the people—and not of the same particular works. Answer. It is false. For Paul speaking of the same individual work, says that it is partly good and partly evil, "I find, when I would do good, that evil is present with me" (Rom. 7:21). "In my mind I serve the law of God, in my body the law of sin" (v. 25).

And the prophet says that "all our righteousness is as a menstruous cloth" (Isa. 64:6). Therefore every good work is stained with sin.

This much shall suffice to show that it is impossible for any man in the time of this life to fulfill the law. The reasons alleged to the contrary are sufficiently answered before. To which place I refer the reader.

It may further be said, if we cannot perfectly fulfill the law, why does Paul command us to bear one another's burdens and "so to fulfill the law of Christ?"

Answer. The law is said to be fulfilled three ways. First, by personal obedience, and thus Christ only fulfilled it. Secondly, by imputed obedience, thus the regenerate fulfill it in Christ, He being "their righteousness" (1 Cor. 1:30) and they "complete in him" (Col. 2:10).

Thirdly, by inchoate obedience, thus Zacharias and Elisabeth are said to walk in all the commandments of the Lord without reproof (Luke

1:6). And thus all the faithful fulfill the law in laboring to obey God in

all the commandments; according to the measure of grace received.

And thus we are said to fulfill the law in this place, God accepting the will for the deed. We are further to consider that fulfilling of the law is sometime opposed to the transgression of the law (as James 2:10), in which sense no man ever did or can fulfill it, except Christ, God and man, who for this cause is said to be "the end of the law for righteousness, to everyone that believeth" (Rom. 10:4). Sometimes it is opposed to hypocrisy and dissimulation (as 1 John 2:4–5), and thus all the saints fulfill it, in that they endeavor to mortify their corruptions and in all things to approve their hearts and lives to God in keeping faith and a good conscience. In which sense, Paul here bids us to fulfill the law of Christ in performing duties of love and bearing one another's burdens. It will be said, if the law can no otherwise be fulfilled than by inchoate obedience, to what end serves it? Answer. It has a threefold use even since the fall. First, it serves to restrain the outward man by keeping men in order through the fear of punishment, of which use Paul speaks when he said that "the law is not given to a righteous man, but to the lawless and disobedient," etc. (1 Tim. 1:9). Secondly, to arouse the drowsy conscience. And this it does many ways. (1) By revealing sin; "for by the law cometh the knowledge of sin" (Rom. 3:20). (2) By revealing the wrath and anger of God for sin, for "the law causeth wrath" (Rom. 4:15). (3) By convicting the conscience of sin. "When the commandment came, sin revived" (Rom. 7:9). (4) By arraigning and condemning us for sin, for "the law causeth death" (2 Cor. 3:6) and so putting us out of all heart in ourselves, it causes us to flee to the throne of grace, and so is "our schoolmaster" to bring us "to Christ" (Gal. 3:24). Thirdly, it serves as a rule of good life. David says that "the word of God" (specially the law) "is a lantern to his feet, and a light to his paths" (Ps. 119:105). So that though a regenerate man be not under the law in regard of justification, or accusation, or coaction, or condemnation; yet he is under it in regard of direction and instruction, for it shows what is

good, what is evil, what we ought to do, and what to leave undone.

Lastly, whereas Paul says, "Bear ye one another's burdens, and so fulfill the law of Christ," the word so has great emphasis, for it implies the manner how the Galatians and all men are to fulfill the law, not by observing circumcision, days, or times, months, or years as the false apostles taught, but by bearing, forbearing, and tolerating the infirmities of their brethren. It may not unfitly be applied to the religious orders of Franciscans, Dominicans, Carthusians, etc. Let them not think that they keep the law, by abstaining from flesh, by whipping themselves, by single life, counterfeit fasts, voluntary poverty, regular obedience, etc. But let them comfort the afflicted, relieve the distressed, bear with the weak, support one another in love, and so they shall fulfill the law of Christ.

3 For if any man seem to himself, that he is somewhat, when he is nothing, he deceiveth himself in his imagination.

In this verse the apostle removes an impediment which hinders most from performing the former duty of bearing other men's burdens, and that is, a vain conceit and imagination they have of their own excellency far above their brethren—in thinking themselves too good to do any duty or service unto them, to be their packhorses to bear their burdens. This vain imagination and swelling conceit (which puffs up the most) the apostle labors to purge in this place, when he says, "He that seems to himself," where by the way we may observe the method of the apostle, first, to give rules of direction; after to remove impediments which may hinder our obedience. Second, we see here the force of the Word, which "searcheth the secrets of the heart" (Heb. 4:12) "in that it casteth down the imaginations, and every high thing that is exalted against the knowledge of God: and bringeth into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ" (2

Cor. 10:5). In the words we may observe these four things: (1) that

men are nothing of themselves. (2) That though they be nothing, yet they seem to themselves to be somewhat, and that of themselves. (3)

That in so doing, they deceive themselves. (4) The remedies against the overweening of ourselves.

For the first, it may be demanded how it can be truly said that men are of themselves mere nothing? Is he nothing that is created after the image of God, in holiness and righteousness? Are princes and potentates nothing that are called gods in Scripture? Are they nothing that prophesy and work miracles? Answer. Paul speaks not of the gifts of God bestowed upon men, but of the men themselves— and of them, not as they were in the state of innocency before the fall, but as they are now in the state of corruption and apostasy, or in the state of grace as they are considered of, in, and by themselves.

Thus even spiritual men are nothing of themselves (for of them especially the apostle speaks, as it may appear out of the first verse).

For first, all are by nature the children of wrath, and firebrands of hell. (2) The gifts of God bestowed upon us, whether of nature or of grace, are not ours, but God's, the giver of them. Therefore no man may arrogate more unto himself, than another in regard of them, seeing all of us are but stewards, and the things we have are but talents left us to employ to our Master's advantage. "If thou hast received them" (says Paul) "why boastest thou thyself, as though thou hadst not received them?" (3) Be it that a man be in Christ, and sanctified, yet he has no greater right to the merits of Christ, nor greater part in them, than he which is less sanctified. For though sanctification has degrees and a certain latitude, yet justification has none. So that a man is in truth nothing of himself. (1) Because he has his being and beginning of nothing, and tends of his own nature to corruption and nothing.74 (2) In that he is not that which he imagines himself to be. (3) Though he have some gifts and graces of

God, yet is he nothing because he is far short of that which he ought to be (1 Cor. 8:2). Upon these considerations Abraham acknowledges himself to be but "dust and ashes" (Gen. 18:27). David, comparing himself with the magnificence of Saul, says, "What am I, or what is my father's house?" (1 Sam. 18:18). Nay, whether we consider man absolutely in himself, or relatively in respect of other creatures, as those glorious bodies, the sun, moon, stars, we may say with the prophet David, "Lord what is man, that thou art mindful of him, or the son of man, that thou regardest him?" (Ps. 8:4).

Paul confesses himself to be nothing in, of, or by himself, but "by the grace of God" (says he) "I am that I am" (1 Cor. 15:10). And again, "I was nothing inferior to the very chief apostles, although I am nothing" (2 Cor. 12:11). The apostle affirms of every man "which thinketh he knoweth something, that he knoweth nothing as he ought to know" (1 Cor. 8:2), and of many that they are puffed up and know nothing (1 Tim. 6:4). For a swelling conceit and emptiness usually go together.

The second general thing to be observed in the words is this, that it is natural for men to think too well of themselves, to magnify themselves above others in their conceits, and in a manner to deify themselves, and to nullify others in comparison of themselves. And this overweening of a man's self is a branch of pride. For a man looking upon himself through the spectacles of self-love does think every small gift of God which he sees to be in himself to be far greater than in truth it is, imagining mere shadows to be substances, or molehills to be as big as mountains. For as a man that is in love does think the blemishes and deformities in his love to be ornaments which make her more beautiful, so those with Narcissus are in love with themselves and dote upon their own gifts, judge the vices which they see to be in themselves to be virtues. Simon Magus, though a

wicked wretch, a limb of the devil, a sorcerer, etc., yet had this conceit of himself and gave it out also that "he was some great man"

(Acts 8:9), to wit, "the great power of God" (v. 10). The church of Laodicea thought she was "rich and increased with goods; and had need of nothing." Whereas she was "wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked" (Rev. 3:17). And so the scarlet strumpet thought herself a queen, and that she was out of all danger of downfall when she was already fallen (Rev. 18:2, 7). Yea this corruption is so natural, that even the regenerate themselves, who are in part sanctified, are stained therewith. And generally, they that have received greater gifts of knowledge, of sanctification, etc., are most ready to overween their own gifts, except God give them grace to resist this temptation. For "knowledge puffeth up" (1 Cor. 8:1).

The apostles themselves contended "which of them should seem to be the greatest" (Luke 22:24). Yea in all ages there have been some in the church overweening themselves, as in Christ's time the justiciary

Pharisees. After them, the Catharists or Puritans, who both proudly and odiously called themselves by that name, thinking themselves without sin. The Donatists, that they were a church without spot or wrinkle. The Jovinianists, that a man cannot sin after the laver of regeneration. The Pelagians, that the life of a just man in this world has no sin in it at all. And of later times, the semi-Pelagian heretic, who will be something of himself, and will have some stroke in his first conversion, and will concur with Christ in the work of justification. It will be said, papists ascribe all the praise to God.

Answer. So did the Pharisee (Luke 18:11), and yet a wicked justiciary for all that. Now all this arises from sundry causes. The first is the bitter root of pride that was in our first parents when as they affected a higher place, in desiring (through discontentment of their own estate) to deify themselves, and become equal the highest Majesty in knowing good and evil.

The second is the overmuch considering the good things we have, as when the Pharisee considered that he gave tithe of all that he possessed, that he fasted twice a week, that he was not thus and thus, as other men (Luke 18).

The third is the comparing of ourselves with the infirmities that we see to be in others. The Pharisee was puffed up by comparing himself with extortioners, unjust men, adulterers, and with the publican.

The fourth is the false flattering and applause of men, which soothe us up in our humors, in persuading us to be that which in truth we are not, as the people flattered Herod when they gave a shout and said, "The voice of God, and not of man" (Acts 12:22).

The third point is that they which thus overween their gifts, in thinking themselves somewhat when they are nothing, do notably deceive themselves. As those that think they have the substance, when they have but the shadow; as those that dream they are kings or princes, being in truth but base persons; or, to use the prophet's similitude, "Like as a hungry man dreameth and behold he eateth, and when he awaketh his soul is empty: or like as a thirsty man dreameth, and lo he is drinking, and when he awaketh behold he is faint, and his soul longeth" (Isa. 29:8). Men are deceived two ways, either by others or by themselves. By others, as by flatterers, they are deceived occasionally; by themselves, causally or properly. For he that does judge himself to be that which indeed he is not, he may haply please himself, but he does but please himself in an error. For in truth he deceives himself in his imagination. The apostle James says, "If any man seem" (specially to himself) "to be religious, and yet refraineth not his tongue, he deceiveth his own heart,77 his religion is vain" (James 1:26). So likewise, they that are only hearers of the word (and therefore think that all is well enough with them,

though they be not doers thereof) "deceive their own selves" (James 1:22). And verily this corruption is so great, that as men can be content to be deluded by flatterers and clawbacks which please them in their itching humors, so they willingly suffer themselves to be deceived even by themselves, to the end that they may appear to others to be that which in truth they are not—that so they may advance and magnify themselves in the account of the world. For as Alexander the Great, being in India, caused his soldiers to make and leave behind them bits and horse-shoes of an extraordinary greatness; huge spears, massy shields, big helmets, long swords, and other furniture for horse and man, fitting rather hippocentaurs80 or giants than men of ordinary stature; and all to the end it might be said in future time, that "Alexander was a mighty monarch indeed"— so many there be who (setting the fair side outward) make goodly glorious shows in the eyes of men, and so would have other to think of them accordingly (far above their desert) that posterity might judge them to be that which indeed they are not. And so with Alexander in deceiving others, they wittingly deceive themselves.

Which spiritual guile of deceiving ourselves in matters touching our salvation is most dangerous, when men delude themselves, in persuading themselves falsely that they know sufficiently that God is to be loved above all, our neighbor as ourselves (which is as much as all the preachers in the earth can say) that they believe; when instead of faith, there is nothing but damnable pride and presumption—that they repent, when it is nothing but deceitful counterfeiting and hypocrisy. Besides the danger, consider the indignity of it. Men can abide nothing less, than to be deceived and circumvented by others; and yet, behold, they are deluders and deceivers of themselves. And that which does more aggravate the indignity of it, in such things as ought to be best known and most familiar unto them, wherein it is a shame they should be deceived, viz. in the knowledge of themselves, and that which is yet more, in a matter of greatest moment, in the

salvation of their souls. What marvel therefore is it, that men should be deceived by the seducer of all seducers, the devil, who are so easily deceived of themselves, or rather willing to deceive themselves?

Further observe that proud conceited persons, such as have an overweening of themselves and their gifts, and of all men think foul scorn to be deceived, even they are easiest deceived, yea and that of themselves. For so the apostle says, "He that thinketh that he is somewhat, etc., deceiveth himself in his imagination."

Again, mark hence that no man, be their gifts never so rare, their callings never so high, their places never so great, are too good to bear other men's burdens; for they that think themselves to be somewhat, some great men, that is, too good to put under their shoulders to bear the frailties and infirmities of their brethren, do nothing herein but deceive themselves. Princes and potentates of the earth are prophesied by Isaiah 49:23 to be nursing fathers and nursing mothers unto the church, not only by nourishing and defending it (as the nurse her child), but also by bearing with the frailties and wants which are therein.

Lastly, consider that this self-conceitedness and overweening of a man's self is the very bane and poison of love. For it makes proud men think themselves too good to become packhorses or drudges to bear other men's burdens, to become serviceable unto them in any duty of love, or to tolerate their frailties, or to yield of their right, or to suffer injuries at their hands, or to put up any little indignity, without stomach and discontent, because they imagine themselves every way better than their brethren, and therefore ought to be tolerated, but not so bound to tolerate and bear with others. So that where self-love is, there is no true brotherly love. It was well said of the poet, Non bene conveniunt, etc., majestas et amor.

It may be said, may not he that is privy to his own virtues, in conscience of his own worth, judge himself to be somewhat, that is, to be that which indeed he is, or to have a greater measure of knowledge, grace, and other gifts, than they that have less?

Answer. He may. For humility is not sottish. The master in humility cannot think his scholar more learned than himself, except he shall think against his conscience. For that saying, "Let every man think better of another, than of himself" (Phil. 2:3), must be restrained only to equals, and not extended to superiors in regard of their inferiors. Secondly, I answer that the apostle in that place speaks not of the gifts and graces bestowed upon men, but of the persons themselves, and of them not so much as they are in the account of men, as in the account of God. For he says not, "Let every man think another more learned, wise, discrete, sober than himself" (for so he may think against his conscience), but, "Let every man think another" (that is, any other that is his brother in the Lord) "better than himself," to wit, before God. And this every man may do with good conscience; for albeit another shall outwardly seem more ignorant, negligent, backward, in matters of religion than himself, yet for anything he knows, he may be higher in the favor of God than he. And therefore though a man err in thinking of another better than of himself, yet he shall not do anything against his conscience.

Thus the publican accounted the proud Pharisee better than himself.

For he held him as just, himself not worthy to look up to heaven. Yet herein he sinned not, nay, he is commended for it, though he erred in his judgment of the Pharisee. And so if the Pharisee had reputed the publican better than himself, that is, higher in God's favor than himself, he had not sinned, nor done against his conscience. For though he might judge himself more just than the publican, in regard of his life past, yet for his present state before God he could not.

Though David knew in the particular quarrel betwixt Saul and him,

that Saul was unjust, and he innocent; yet if he should have thought better of Saul in general, than of himself, he should but have done his duty.

The fourth and last point contains the remedies of this evil, which are the rather to be considered, because it is a great sin, one of those seven which the Lord most of all detests (Prov. 6:17), a dangerous sin, having a heavy woe attending upon it, "Woe to them that are prudent in their own eyes" (Isa. 5:21); a sin almost incurable, "Seest thou a man that is wise in his own eyes? There is more hope of a fool than of him" (Prov. 26:12). Therefore the remedies are more carefully to be known and applied. The remedies are specially five.

The first is to look ourselves in the glass of the law, which will show what we are without flattery or partiality. And by it we shall see nothing in ourselves but the ugly shape of Satan, clean defacing the image of God, and that in us there dwells no good thing (as Paul says of himself, Rom. 7:18). That there is nothing but vanity in our minds, rebellion in our wills, a confused ataxy in all our affections, transgression in our lives. The viewing of our hearts and lives in the law, and the considering of our wretched estate in that we are under the fearful curse, which is a thunderbolt annexed to every breach thereof, will drive us out of all conceit of ourselves, from our self-love and self-liking. Nay, it will make us go out of ourselves, not only "to deny ourselves," as Christ commands, but even to "abhor our selves, repenting in dust and ashes," as Job did (Job 42:6), causing us to become flat nothing in ourselves, that we may be something in Christ, as Paul says, "Let no man deceive himself: if any among you seem to be wise in this world, let him be a fool, that he may be wise"

(1 Cor. 3:18).

Secondly, when we feel ourselves to be tickled with the itching humor of self-love and self-liking arising from our hidden corruption, either in regard of outward gifts or inward graces, we must make our own evils, sins, blemishes, imperfections (for there is no man but has one or other) a sovereign remedy against it, and so (as it were) drive away one poison with another. As to call to mind some great deformity that is in our bodies, some great infirmity that is in our mind, some cross or misery in our outward estate, some vile and abominable sin which we have committed, and the horrible punishment, to the which we are liable by reason thereof. And no doubt but the serious consideration of these, or any of these, will be available to nip pride in the bud and kill the serpent in the shell. And in so doing we shall with the peacock now and then cast our eyes downward to our feet, the foulest and ugliest things we have—and not always stand in admiration of our gay feathers and glorious train.

Thirdly, we must consider that the things for which we look so high, and swell so in our own conceits, are not our own, but lent us for a time. "For what is there, that thou hast not received," whether in gifts of body, or graces of mind? Nay, whether thou speak of soul or body itself? "And if thou hast received it, why boastest thou thyself as if thou hadst not received it?" What vanity is it, for a man to be proud of another man's garment? Or for a woman to boast of her borrowed hair? The wicked persecutors of the church are reproved for "sacrificing to their nets, and burning incense to their yarn"84 (Hab.

1:16). Further, we must consider we have not only received them, but that we have so received them, as that they are not our own, with which we may do what we list, but talents lent us for a time, and left with us to employ, over which we are but stewards and bailiffs, not lords or masters, and that we must be countable for the smallest gift, even the least farthing—how we have got it, kept it, bestowed it. The time will come when it shall be said unto you, "Give an account of thy

stewardship" (Luke 16:2). Therefore we ought not so much to be puffed up with the greatness of our talents, as to be humbled with the consideration of the strict reckoning that God will require at our hand, seeing that "of him, to whom much is committed, much shall be required."

Fourthly, to the end we may avoid this overweening of ourselves, let us compare ourselves with the majesty of God in whose sight we are but as silly worms, crawling upon the ground; nay, in comparison of whom we are less than nothing and vanity itself. Consider, that "to him every knee doth bow, of things in heaven, in earth, and under the earth" [Phil. 2:10]; and you will not be so conceited of yourself, that a silly man does crouch unto you; that "to him every tongue doth confess" [v. 11], and sing His praises, the blessed angels crying continually, Holy, Holy, Holy, Lord God of Sabaoth, heaven and earth are full of Thy glory. And then a short blast of wind or popular applause shall not so easily puff you up like an empty bladder,88 or carry you away, as it did Herod (Acts 12). But to omit this odious comparison betwixt a frail mortal man and the glorious ever-living

God (there being no comparison betwixt finite and infinite), let us never compare ourselves with our inferiors, but with our superiors and betters, who are eminently above us in every gift and blessing of God, in regard of whose honors and preferments we are but base and contemptible; in regard of whose knowledge, we are but children and know nothing; in regard of whose riches we are but beggars and have nothing. For as David, when he beheld the wonderful frame of the heavens, those glorious creatures, the sun, the moon, and the stars, by and by made this use of it to himself, to consider his own vileness in regard of them: "What is man, that thou art mindful of him? Or the son of man, that thou visitest him?" (Ps. 8:4). So when we compare ourselves with others that are as far above us as the heavens are above the earth, whose gifts and graces do as far excel ours as the

bright sunshine the dim candle light, we cannot choose but be ashamed and confounded in ourselves, acknowledging that there is no such cause why we should so magnify ourselves above others, and nullify others in comparison of ourselves.

4 But let every man prove his own work, and then shall he have rejoicing in himself only, and not in another.

Here the apostle lays down another remedy against self-love and overweening of ourselves, and it is the fifth and the last of which I purpose to entreat, and it stands in proving and examining of a man's own work by itself, without comparing it with another man's work, and withal in the approving of it unto God. "Let every man approve his own work." And he gives two reasons why every man ought to approve his own works unto God, and to consider them absolutely in themselves and not relatively in respect of others. The first reason is in this verse, "Then shall he have rejoicing in himself only, and not in another"; the second, in the next verse, "For every man shall bear his own burden."

Touching the remedy, "Let every man prove his own work," the word translated "prove" signifies also the "approve," as, "Blessed is he that condemneth not himself in the thing that he approveth"90 (Rom.

14:22); "whosoever ye shall approve or allow of by letters" (1 Cor.

16:3). And so the word is used in English, when we say, such a one is to prove a will, that is, to approve it.

The word in this place (I take it) may be understood in both senses:

"to prove our works" and "to approve them." How we are to prove our works, by taking trial and examination of them, I have already showed in the former verse. But we are further "to approve them to God," according to Paul's commandment, "Study to show thyself approved unto God" (2 Tim. 2:15), and his practice, in coveting

always "to be acceptable unto him" (2 Cor. 5:9). This approving of our works is a sovereign remedy against overweening of ourselves, for he that always stands upon his trial and God's approbation cannot be puffed up with self-love of himself, or self-liking of his own works; but rather humbled with the consideration of God's absolute justice and his own imperfections and so stirred up with great diligence to work out his salvation with fear and trembling.

Now we shall approve our works unto God, if we observe these three things. First, that all our actions specially (in the worship and service of God) be grounded upon the will and word of God, and not upon will-worship or human inventions. Otherwise it will be said, "Who required these things at your hands?"

Secondly, that we perform all our actions sincerely and uprightly, as in the presence of God, with an honest heart and a good conscience, as Abimelech protests of himself (Gen. 20:5), and Hezekiah (Isa.

38:3), and Paul (Acts 23:1).

Thirdly, that they always tend to a good end, as the glory of God, "Whether ye eat or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God" (1 Cor. 10:31), and the good of our brethren, "Let all things be done to edification" (1 Cor. 14:26).

It may here be demanded, whether we may not approve ourselves and our actions to men? To which I answer, that we may and ought.

For although we may not be men-pleasers, that is, such as frame and temper our actions and our speeches so as they may always be pleasing to the corrupt humors and wicked affections of men (for then we were not the servants of God, Gal. 1:10), yet we are to please them in that which is good to edification (Rom. 15:2; 1 Cor. 10:33).

And Christ commands that "our light should so shine before men, that they may see our good works" [Matt. 5:16]. And Paul bids us to

"procure honest things in the sight of all men" [Rom. 12:17]. And "whatsoever things are true, and honest, and just, and pure; whatsoever appertain to love, and are of good report, we must think on them, and practice them" (Phil. 4:8). Yet we must seek for the approbation of men with these cautions.

First, we must so seek for the approbation of men, as that we do not seek it nor rest in it alone, but withal seek to be approved of God.

"For he that praiseth himself" (and so consequently, he that is praised of others) "is not approved, but he whom the Lord praiseth"

(2 Cor. 10:18). "How can ye believe" (says our Savior Christ) "which receive honor one of another, and seek not the honor that cometh of God alone?" (John 5:44).

Secondly, we must seek for the approbation of God in the first place; and in the second place, to be approved of men, as Christ did. For He

"grew in favor" first "with God," and after "with men" (Luke 2:52), and the elders, "who by faith obtained a good report" (Heb. 11:2).

Read Rom. 14:18.

Thirdly, we must never look for the approbation of the multitude, or acclamation of the most. For that cannot be done without ambition and vain glory, in seeking popular applause. "Woe be to you when all men speak well of you" (Luke 6:26). Thus Christ says He "sought not praise of men" (John 5:41). For those that are addicted to popular applause and are over-curious of their credit, immoderately seeking to get and keep a good name with all sorts of men, while they seek for fame, they lose a good name, in seeking fame from the wicked, which is but a shadow, and losing a good name in the opinion of the godly, which is the substance.

Fourthly, we must so far seek for the approbation of the wicked, that we minister no not the least occasion of offence unto them, "Give no

offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentile" (1 Cor. 10:32)—but to convict their consciences and to stop their mouths by our godly and unblameable conversation, which may be a preparative for them against the day of their visitation. "Have your conversation honest among the Gentiles, that they which speak evil of you, as of evil doers, may by our good works which they shall see, glorify God in the day of visitation" (1 Peter 2:12).

Fifthly, in doing our duties, we must not respect the judgment of the world, neither fearing the faces nor the censures of men. This was

Paul's practice, "I pass very little to be judged of you, or of man's judgment" (1 Cor. 4:3); we must go "through good report, and evil report" (2 Cor. 6:8).

Lastly, we must seek to be approved of men, not so much in regard of ourselves, as that by this means God's glory may be more and more advanced. For "our light must so shine before men, that they may see our good works, and glorify our Father which is in heaven" (Matt.

5:16). If we observe these six cautions, we may with good conscience seek to get a good name, which will be unto us as a precious ointment, refreshing us with the comfort of a godly life (Prov. 22:1;

Eccl. 7:1).

Thus much of the remedy. The reason follows, "And then shall he have whereof to rejoice in himself, and not in another." The words translated "rejoice" signify to "glory"—which is more than to rejoice.

There is a double ground of glorying. One, out of a man's self.

Another, in himself. Out of himself, in God alone, "Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, nor the strong man in his strength, nor the rich man in his riches. But let him that glorieth, glory in this, that he understandeth and knoweth me" (Jer. 9:23–24; 1 Cor. 1:31). In himself, in the comfortable testimony of a good conscience. "Our

glorying is this, the testimony of our conscience, that in simplicity and godly pureness, we have had our conversation in the world" (2

Cor. 1:12). The one is glorying before God; the other, before men. The one, of justification; the other, of holy conversation for time past and constant resolution for time to come. The one in the testimony of our conscience (2 Cor. 1:12); the other, in the testimony of God's Spirit witnessing to our spirits that we are the sons of God (Rom. 8:16). The first is not meant in this place, but only the second, "For no flesh can glory in his presence" (1 Cor. 1:29).

It will be said, this glorying in a man's self is vain glory and a branch of pride. Answer. It differs from vain glory. First, in the foundation.

For vain glory has for his ground our own virtues and gifts considered as coming from ourselves and not from God. Whereas this true glorying is grounded upon them as they are fruits of regeneration, proceeding from our justification by Christ and reconciliation with God. Secondly, in the end. Vain glory tends to the advancing of ourselves, in an opinion of our proper justice and desert. This true glorying aims at the glory of God alone.

Objection. Paul reproves those that consider their own gifts only, never comparing themselves with others. "They understand not that they measure themselves with themselves, and compare themselves with themselves" (2 Cor. 10:12). Therefore it seems that a man by comparing himself with others, may have whereof to rejoice. Answer.

He reproves the false apostles in that place for glorying in the gifts which they had, and the number of proselytes which they had won, never comparing themselves with himself, or any other apostle, which was the cause they were so puffed up with pride. For to compare ourselves with those that are eminently above us is a notable means to abate pride—as I have already showed. Whereas the measuring of ourselves by ourselves with our inferiors is the only

way to increase it. And this is it which the apostle reproves in this place.

Further, we may rejoice or glory in the testimony of a good conscience, if we observe these rules.

I. In our best desires, endeavors, actions, we must labor to feel our own defects—that we do not the good we should, nor in that manner we ought.

II. We must labor to have even our best works (our alms, prayers, etc.) covered with the righteousness of Christ. For it is the sweet odor of His sacrifice that does perfume all our actions, that they may be acceptable to God, being "offered with the prayers of the saints upon the golden altar" (Rev. 8:3).

III. We must acknowledge all the good things we have, the will and the work, the purpose and the power, to proceed from God alone

(Phil. 2:13; James 1:17).

IV. We must rejoice in them not as causes but as fruits of justification, so that if the question be whether we be justified by them or not, we must renounce them, tread them under our feet, and account them as dung, as Paul did (Phil. 3:8).

Hence we learn sundry things.

I. That if we would have a light heart and pass our time merrily with comfort and content, we must look to approve our hearts to God in all our actions.

II. It confutes the opinion of the multitude, who judge those that make conscience of sin and lead a more strict life than the common sort, endeavoring with Paul to have always a clear conscience toward

God and toward men [Acts 24:16], of all others to lead a most melancholic, sad, and uncomfortable life. For the truth is, this is the only true joy, all other joy is but counterfeit in comparison. It is radical, proceeding from the heart. The other but superficial, from the teeth outward. It comforts a man in the midst of afflictions.

Whereas a man may have the other, and yet in the midst of mirth his heart will be sorrowful. This is permanent and during; the other, transitory and fading. It is like the joy in harvest (Ps. 4:7), and which they have that divide a spoil (Isa. 9:3). Therefore Solomon says, it is

"a continual feast" (Prov. 15:15); and Peter calls it "joy unspeakable, and glorious" (1 Peter 1:8).

III. This shows that there is much false joy in the world, consisting wholly in honors, profits, pleasures. None of which have their ground in a man's self. And therefore being out of a man's self, they are not true and durable, but false and vanishing joys. Now those which have no comfort but out of themselves are of four sorts. First, such as rejoice and glory in the opinion that the world has of them and not in the testimony of their own conscience. Secondly, such as rejoice, not in their reconciliation with God, but in their blameless conversation, in that they have not been open offenders or men of scandalous life

(Luke 18:11). Thirdly, such as rejoice in the virtues of their ancestors, as the Jews bragged they were the seed of Abraham (John 8:33), which vain glorying of other men's virtues, John the Baptist reproves when he says, "Think not to say with your selves, we have Abraham for our father," etc. (Matt. 3:9). Fourthly, such as rejoice and think themselves in a good case, because they see others worse than themselves—this is right the Pharisees' joy, "O God, I thank thee, I am not thus, and thus, or like this publican" (Luke 18:11). This is it which the apostle directly aims at in this place: when men think themselves just, because others are more wretched than themselves, and pure, because others are more defiled. Whereas other men's

heinous sins shall not justify us and our lesser sins, save only as Jerusalem justified her sisters, Sodom, and Samaria (Ezek. 16:51).

But so a man may be justified, and yet condemned.

5 For every one shall bear his own burden.

Here Paul lays down a second reason of his assertion in the former verse, why every man ought to prove his own work, rather than to be curious in searching into the lives and scanning the actions of other men, because "every man shall bear his own burden," which is all one with that, "to bear a man's own judgment" (Gal. 5:10), and that "to give an account to God for himself" (Rom. 14:12). It is a proverbial speech, the meaning whereof is expressed by the like, "Every man that eateth the sour grape, his teeth shall be set on edge" (Jer. 31:30).

And by that which is common amongst us, "Every vessel shall stand upon his own bottom." That is, every man shall bear the punishment of his own sin. For as the Indian is not therefore white, because the Morian is more black, or as the sand-blind97 is not therefore sharp sighted, because some other is stone blind. So no man is therefore acquit of his sins because others are greater sinners, or exempt from punishment because others shall undergo a deeper condemnation.

Therefore considering that every man must bear the guilt and punishment of his own sin, he ought more narrowly to look to himself than to others and to be a more severe censurer of himself than of another.

For the better understanding of the words, sundry questions are to be discussed.

First, it may be demanded, how every man should bear his own burden, seeing we are commanded to bear one another's burdens?

Answer. There are two sorts of burdens. The first is of giving an account to God. Thus every man shall bear his own burden, "for

every man must give an account of himself unto God" (Rom. 14:12).

The second is of bearing one another's infirmities, of which Paul speaks (v. 2). In this sense a man is not to bear his own burden, but every man his brother's. For the apostle (to cross the opinion of those which thought a man was polluted with other men's sins) says,

"Every man shall bear his own burden." And to meet with the carelessness of others, who respect themselves alone, never minding the good of their brethren, he says, "Bear ye one another's burdens."

Objection II. By bearing of our own burdens is understood giving an account for ourselves unto God. Now every man is not to give account for himself alone, but for those also that are committed to his charge, as the father for his child, the master for his servant, the magistrate for the subject, the shepherd for the sheep. "His blood will I require at thy hand" (Ezek. 33). "They watch over your souls, as they that must give account" (Heb. 13:17). Answer. Governors and superiors are not to give account for the sins of those that are committed unto them, but for the sins which [they] themselves commit in not looking unto them, not admonishing them, not restraining them, not taking condign punishment of them for their offenses. This is plainly taught, "If thou dost not admonish the wicked of his way, he shall die for his iniquity, but his blood will I require at thy hand. Nevertheless, if thou warn the wicked of his way, to turn from it, if he do not turn from his way, he shall die for his iniquity, but thou hast delivered thy soul" (Ezek. 33:8–9).

Objection III. Infants which have not sinned after the manner of the transgression of Adam, do bear the burden of Adam's sin. Therefore all do not bear their own burden. Answer. First, the words are properly to be understood of personal or actual sins, which are proper to every man in particular, and not of original sin or the sin of our nature, which is common to all mankind, being propagated

together with nature. Secondly, I answer that Adam's sin was our sin.

And therefore seeing infants partake with him in the sin, it is just with God, they should partake with him in the punishment, and so bear their own burden. For albeit the transgression of Adam was his actual and personal sin, yet it is our original sin or the sin of our nature—seeing it is ours by imputation and propagation of nature together with corruption. For as Levi was in the loins of Abraham when Melchizedek met him and paid tithes in Abraham (Heb. 7:9–

10), so all mankind was in the loins of Adam when he sinned, as the branches are in the root or in the seed. And therefore when he sinned, we also sinned, as the apostle says, "In whom all sinned"

(Rom. 5:12). For so are the words in the original, not as it is commonly translated, "For as much as all men have sinned."

Objection IV. In the second commandment, the Lord threatens to visit the sins of the fathers upon the children to the third and fourth generation. Therefore they bear not their own burden, but part of their parents' burden. And parents do not bear their own whole and entire burden, but their children for them. Answer. The clause in the second commandment, of visiting the sins of the fathers upon the children, does not contradict that of Ezekiel 18:20, "The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son; the same soul that sinneth, that shall die." For they are reconciled, "If he" (that is, a wicked man) "beget a son that seeth all the father's sins, which he hath done, and feareth, neither doeth the like.… he shall not die in the iniquity of his father, but shall surely live" (vv. 14, 17). Therefore the threatening in the second commandment is not to be understood absolutely, as though God would always plague the children for the father's sin, but conditionally, if they persist and continue in their sins, walking in their ways and treading in their steps. And the same answer is given in the second commandment, that God will not visit the sin of the

fathers upon the children, save "upon those that hate him." It may be said, the sins of the parents are not vindicated upon the children because the punishment inflicted upon their posterity is not felt of the parents. Answer. First, children are (as it were) a part of their parents, and therefore they being punished, their parents are punished with them. Secondly, it is a corrosive and a torment to parents, to know that their children shall be severely punished and afflicted. Thirdly, the punishment of posterity has a relation to the parent, seeing God has threatened He will punish the children which walk in the wicked ways of their forefathers, that so He may testify how extremely He abhors both their sin and the sin of their progenitors. Fourthly, the parents' sin is oft a cause of the children's sin, seeing that God in His just judgment curses a wicked man's posterity by leaving them to themselves, to blindness of mind and hardness of heart, that so they may fulfill the measure of their fathers, as our Savior Christ speaks (Matt. 23:32). And by their own sins may justly pull upon them condign punishment. Lastly, God does more manifest His wrath against the sin of the parent, by punishing the child.

Objection V. The chiefest of the Israelites were hanged up before the Lord for the fornication and idolatry of the people (Num. 25:4).

Therefore they did not bear the burden of their own sin. Answer.

They were punished for their own sin, for they consented to worship the idol and commit folly with the daughters of Moab—or rather, were principal ringleaders, and first actors in this comic tragedy, as may appear by the practice of Zimri, prince of the family of the Simeonites (v. 6), in bringing Cozbi, a Midianitish woman into his tent, in the sight of Moses and the whole congregation. Therefore, because they did not hinder them from committing this fact, as they might, being in place of government, but did partake with them in the sin, they are first punished, and that more severely. For a

thousand of them were hanged up the same day (v. 4); the rest of the people, to the number of three and twenty thousand, were slain by the sword at the commandment of God (v. 5), to which Paul had an eye, when he said that "there fell in one day twenty three thousand"

(1 Cor. 10:8), meaning of the common sort, excluding those that were hanged up. For in all there were 24,000 (Num. 25:9). Thus the contrariety which seems to be betwixt these two places may be better accorded, than to say (as some do) that the penmen, or scribes, failed in copying out the books. Or (as others), that it was ἁμάρτημα μνημονικὸν in Paul. Or as others, that Paul is not contrary to Moses, seeing that if there were 24,000 (as Moses says), there were 23,000; for there is no reason why the apostle should use the less number rather than the greater (except that which I have said), considering the greater is as round a number as the less.

Objection VI. David sinned in numbering the people, and they were punished for his sin. Achan sinned, and the people fell slain before the men of Ai. Therefore every man does not bear his own entire burden. The like may be said of the children of the Sodomites, and of the first born of the Egyptians, who bore the burden of their parents' sin. Answer. The people were punished for their own sins. And so was David, albeit not in his own, but in their persons. For God punished him in his kind, in destroying the people with that fearful plague, in whose great multitude he had gloried so much. Indeed their punishment was occasioned by his sins, but caused by their own. For no man, though never so holy, is without sin, and therefore none but deserve punishment. Nay, "It is God's mercy, that we are not consumed" (Lam. 3:22).

And albeit all the infants perished in the deluge and in the overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah, which could neither imitate nor approve the actions of their fathers, yet their death was deserved. For though

infants be truly called innocents, in regard of actual sin, yet they are not innocents in regard of original. For from the womb they carry a wolfish nature, which prepares them to the spoil, though they never did hurt. The scorpion has his sting within him, though he do not always strike. And though a serpent may be handled while the cold has benumbed him; yet when he is warmed, he will hiss out his venomous poison. Man's practice does clear God of injustice in this behalf, in killing the young cubs, as well as the old fox; the wolves' whelps, as well as the dam. Albeit if we speak of their final estate, and come to particulars, we are to leave secret judgments to God.

The example of Achan is more difficult, seeing that for his sin, thirtyfive of the people were slain (Joshua 7:5), and his whole family rooted out (vv. 24–25), who were not consenting to his fact nor guilty of his sin. Yet something may probably be said in this case. First, that they were guilty of this his sin in part, in not punishing theft so severely as they ought to have done, which was a means to embolden

Achan to steal the execrable thing. Secondly, that private good must yield to the public, as the life of every particular person to the general good of the whole commonwealth. Thus soldiers in the wars redeem the public peace by the loss of their own lives. Now, the manifestation of the glory of the wisdom, power, and justice of God is the public good of the whole church. Therefore men's private good, even their lives, must give place to it, especially considering He never inflicts temporal punishment for the public good, but He respects therein the private good of His elect, whom He corrects in judgment, nor in fury. Thirdly, howsoever Achan did bear the burden of his own sin, this judgment might be inflicted upon them for their good. For temporal punishment, yea, death itself is sometimes inflicted for the good of those that are punished, as we see in the children of the Sodomites, many whereof (no doubt) were taken away in mercy, lest malice should have changed and corrupted their minds. And sometime for the terror of others, to be a warning piece to make

them take heed; and sometime for both—as it may be it was in this particular. Fourthly, sin committed by a particular man, that is a member of a politic body, does after a sort belong to the whole body.

Thus the Lord says that "blood defileth the land, which cannot be cleansed of the blood that was shed therein, but by the blood of him that shed it" (Num. 35:33). And thus Achan's sin, though not known to the people, made the whole army guilty before God, till he was put to death (Josh. 7:11–12). Lastly, if the tithing of an army for the offence of some few have been thought lawful and just, why should the death of thirty-six men seem unjust for the sin of Achan, especially considering it was to make the people more provident, to prevent and take heed of the like evil? If these reasons satisfy not, yet let us rest in this, that God's judgments are often secret, but always just. See August. lib. quaest. in Josh. q.8. and Calvin in 7. cap. Josh.

Objection VII. If every man must bear his own burden, David shall as well bear the burden of his murdering of Uriah by the sword of the children of Ammon, as Saul, the murdering of himself with his own sword; Peter, his denying Christ, as Judas, his betraying him, etc.

Answer. By the sentence of the law, every one is to bear his own burden and to satisfy for his own sin in his own person. But the gospel (the second part of God's Word) makes an exception, which is, that they which have their sins set upon Christ's reckoning shall not give account for them again. And those that have the burden of them laid upon His shoulders (who has borne our sins in His body upon the cross, 1 Peter 2:24) shall not bear the burden of them themselves at the last judgment. Therefore true believers, which have Christ their surety, satisfying the rigor of God's justice for them, shall not answer or satisfy for them themselves. For they are freed by Him from a threefold burden. First, from the burden of ceremonies (and so consequently of human laws and ordinances) which were a yoke

(as Peter says) "which neither we, nor our fathers were able to bear"

(Acts 15). Secondly, from the burden of miseries or crosses, which befall men in this life. He does ease us of this burden by His word and Spirit, either in removing them away (Ps. 81:7), or in giving strength and patience to bear them (2 Cor. 12:9), or in mitigating and proportionating them to our strength (1 Cor. 10:13). Thirdly, from the burden of sin, as well original as actual, in being made sin [2 Cor.

5], that is, accounted a sinner, and made a sacrifice for sin, for us—as also by easing them that are heavy laden, in pacifying the perplexed conscience (Matt. 11:28). It will be said, if Christ bear the burden of our sins, every man shall not bear his own burden. Answer. Both be true, and may well stand together. For legally, every man is to bear his own burden, the law requiring personal obedience or satisfaction, or both. Evangelically, Christ, our surety, does bear the burden of them, and satisfy the justice of God for them (1 Peter 2:23).

Use. Hence we learn, first, that no man can pay a ransom for his brother, or redeem his soul from death, or satisfy the justice of God for his sin, seeing that every man by the tenor of the law is to bear his own burden. And by the gospel, none can be our surety, but Christ.

Secondly, here we see the nature of sin, that it is a burden to the soul.

For it is heavier than the gravel of the earth and the sand of the sea.

It is a burden to the wicked angels, for it weighed them from the highest heaven and made them fall like thunderbolts into the lowest hell. To man—for as David says, it is "like a grievous burden, too heavy for him to bear" (Ps. 38:4). To God—for the hypocritical and ceremonial service of the Jews, was such "a burden unto him, that he was weary to bear it" (Isa. 1:14). "Behold, I am pressed under you, as a cart is pressed that is full of sheaves" (Amos 2:13). To the creatures, who groan under this burden, being by man's sin subject to vanity and corruption (Rom. 8:20–21). Hence it follows then that those

which feel not the weight and burden of their sins are dead being alive, as Paul speaks in another case (1 Tim. 5:6).

Thirdly, we are not to wonder that sin being so heavy a burden should be made so light a matter by carnal men. For it is a spiritual burden, and therefore no marvel though it be not felt of them that are all flesh and no spirit.

Fourthly, this shows that the more a man does bear the burden of his sins, the greater measure of grace and spiritual life he has. The less he feels it, the more he is to suspect himself, that the graces of God do want and decay in him. For corruption is not felt by corruption, but by grace. And therefore the more a man does feel the burden of his own corruptions, the more grace he has.

Fifthly, by this we see that the greatest part of the world are dead in their sins, in that they have no sense nor feeling of this heavy burden.

There is indeed great crying out of the stone in the reins, because it is felt to be a great torment to the body. But there is little or no complaining of the stone in the heart, because men want spiritual life and sense to discern it. All men can take pity upon a beast, if he lie under his burden, and will be ready to help him up again. But all have not the like sight and sense of the spiritual burden of sin, nor sympathy of the misery of their brethren groaning under it.

Sixthly, whereas Paul says, "Every man must bear his own burden," he meets with the profaneness and atheism of our time, when men make a mock at the day of judgment, and the strict account that every man is to give for himself. The Jews were wont to jest at the threatenings of God denounced by the prophets, and to call the visions of the prophets, onus Jehovae, "the burden of the Lord," in a merriment, using it as a by-word (Jer. 23:34, 36, 38). Thereby signifying that the threats of God were but vain bugs or scarecrows,

which might perhaps terrify children but could not hurt them. The like profaneness, infidelity, atheism has crept into the minds of many who otherwise profess the gospel, which they testify by their speeches, in saying, they are sure sin is nothing so ugly, hell is not half so hot, or the devil half so black, as preachers say they are. Or if they be, they are sure they shall not go loaded alone with the burden of their sins, but shall have company and shall perhaps abide the brunt as well as their fellows. But alas, they know not that the burden of sin is intolerable, that it will eternally press them down to the gulf of hell, and that they shall never be able to be rid or eased of it.

Seventhly, we are here admonished to take heed of every sin, for there is no sin so small but has his weight, and such a weight as will press down to the bottomless pit (Rev. 20:1). And though some be greater than others, and sink a man deeper into condemnation, yet many small sins will as easily condemn as a few great. Like as sands, though but small in quantity, yet being many in number, will as soon sink the ship, as if it were laden with the greatest burden.

Eighthly, seeing the guilt and punishment of sin is so heavy a burden, we are to ease and disburden ourselves thereof. And that we may do this, we must labor to feel the intolerable weight of it, pressing and oppressing the conscience. Therefore as those who in their sleep are troubled with the Ephialtes or mare, feeling (as it were) a great mountain lying upon them and pressing them down, would give all the world [that] the weight might be removed—so we feeling the weight and burden of our sins, are to labor to be disburdened and eased thereof. And this we shall do by our repentance toward God and faith in Christ, "Come unto me, all ye that are weary and laden, and I will ease you" (Matt. 11:28).

↑ Back to top