JACKSON'S, BLENCOWE'S, AND OTHER RECENT

SERMONS.

1. Repentance: its Necessity, Value, and Aid, a course of Sermons preached in Lent. By JOHN JACKSON, M.A., Rector of S. James', Westminster, and Chaplain in Ordinary to the Queen. Skeffington and Southwell.

2. Plain Sermons addressed to a Country Congregation. (Third Series). By the late Rev. EDWARD BLENCOWE, M.A., Curate of Teversal, Nottinghamshire, and formerly Fellow of Oriel College. 3. Sermons. By the Rev. W. VAUGHAN, Head Master of Harrow School. Murray.

4. The Church in the School Room, being discourses to Schoolboys. By the Rev. T. J. BERNAYS, M.A., late Fellow of S. John's College, Oxford. London: Sampson Lowe.

In this paper we propose to bring under a combined review some volumes which we believe may be considered fair types of prevailing schools of sermon writers. To begin with Mr. Jackson's little volume.

The first sermon is upon the text, "Except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish," and commences in this way :

"There can be little doubt, that these words were intended to be of universal application. Our LORD, indeed, was correcting the error of supposing, that the amount of men's guilt may be estimated by the calamities they suffer, and was warning His hearers, at the same time, that their sins, if not repented of, would inevitably bring their punishment on them. There were present at that season some that told Him of the Galileans, whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices. And JESUS answering said unto them, Suppose ye that these Galileans were sinners above all the Galileans, because they suffered such things? I tell you, Nay: but except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish. Or those eighteen, upon whom the tower in Siloam fell, and slew them, think ye that they were sinners above all men that dwelt in Jerusalem? I tell you, Nay: but except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.' There is, however, nothing in the circumstances to restrict His words to those to whom He spoke. They were the crowd attending on His teaching, comprising probably the usual varieties of human character, with perhaps (if one may conjecture from the fact of their coming to hear our LORD) a somewhat large proportion of the candid and earnest-minded. To them He spoke universally, and without distinction: 'Except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.'"-pp. 1, 2.

Now we are not speaking at random when we declare our belief that it would be difficult to parallel this most gross misapplication of Scripture. It is really quite a marvel how a man in the very same breath that he relates the circumstances under which the words were really spoken could venture to say that there "can be little doubt that they were intended to be of universal application." It is true that they were addressed not to a few individuals whose characters were known to the Speaker, but to a "crowd who attended His teaching"-but a crowd of what kind of persons? Of Christians, who may be supposed to be like the average of a common congregation? No; but of persons who were come there to mock and spurn those words of life by which alone they could be saved. "Repent" indeed they must all, if they would not "perish;" "repent and be baptized every one of them" (as S. Peter urged those others of his countrymen who heard him on the day of Pentecost), "in the name of JESUS CHRIST for the remission of sins in order that they might receive the gift of the HOLY GHOST." To such in truth, to Jews, whose eyes were blinded and their hearts hardened, CHRIST did speak "universally and without distinction." But to attempt to press the same awful alternative with precisely the same rigour upon a mixed congregation of Christians, betokens a want of discrimination and an habitual absence of precision in thought truly surprising. And yet we are quite aware that Mr. Jackson is very far from standing alone. He is a type of a most multitudinous class, the class of inaccurate thinkers, or rather of a class equally numerous, who are slaves to the letter of holy Scripture. The Word of GOD is reckoned of course by us as the "end of controversy," and to such an extent has the principle prevailed to the exclusion of the Church's Voice as its Interpreter, that persons shrink so instinctively from seeming to doubt when a text is quoted against them, that they do not venture even to inquire whether it really means what it is alleged to prove. And scarcely better is holy Scripture treated by too many who have yet been ordained to be its "faithful dispensers." They have a dread of dogmatism, they dare not look into the depth of doctrine, and so having made an easy, and as they think practical track for themselves, avoiding every thing that is mysterious or exclusive, they set themselves to enforce as persuasively as they may, just those views of religion which all good men will tolerate. They have no wish to disturb, they would not for the world offend, they content themselves with eloquent or pretty generalities, as it may be. And so they come to use Scripture mainly for illustration. They must not dive into its depths, or else they are sure to bring up some unearthly mystical truth which their congregation cannot receive; they must not take too close a measure of its meaning, or they will be condemning some custom or practice that is well esteemed in the world. But the more they can quote Scripture, as an orna

ment to their language or as helping the rounding of a period, the better are they thought to succeed.

So, to take this subject of repentance, we can imagine a person who was about to compose a sermon thinking with himself: "Repentance is very necessary, it is continually spoken of in holy Scripture, many of my parishioners I am sure want it, and of those who think themselves very righteous not a few are no better than their neighbours. I will write a sermon upon repentance." And then he reaches down his Concordance and finds that the prophets, S. John the Baptist, our LORD Himself, and His apostles, all pressed repentance as a great and primary duty. All these passages of course he extracts and works up into his sermon, and then feels quite assured that at all events his doctrine will be scriptural.

Will it? We will take the Rector of S. James' in the volume before us; and he is, we needly scarcely say, a preacher whom his diocesan would point to as a model not only of eloquence and moderation and popularity and practical talents, but also of orthodoxy. He does argue in the very way we have been supposing :

"John the Baptist came to prepare the way for the Redeemer; he preached repentance. Our blessed LORD went out to preach the Gospel; He preached repentance. He sent out His disciples two by two; still they preached repentance. He was 'delivered for our offences and raised again for our justification;' but it was 'that repentance and remission of sins should be preached among all nations.' The HOLY GHOST fell on the Apostles to guide them into all truth; and Peter stood up and preached repentance. Repent and be baptized;' 'repent and be converted.' S. Paul was converted from heaven to preach the Gospel, and he taught publicly and from house to house, testifying both to the Jews and also to the Greeks, repentance toward GOD, and faith toward our LORD JESUS CHRIST.' Nay, whatever excuses men might have before, the Gospel was to put an end to all doubt, and to declare expressly the necessity of repentance. The times of' the former ignorance GOD winked at; but now commandeth all men everywhere to repent.' The Gospel is the message of mercy and pardon to sinners; but only to penitent sinners. Except we repent, all must' still 'likewise perish.'"-pp. 12, 13.

"You think that you do not require repentance, and you may be mistaken. 'GOD,' says His Word, commandeth all men everywhere to repent' and 'except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish." "-p. 19.

And then he applies all this :

"And now, dear brethren, are not these solemn words to each of us? Is it not of infinite importance the duty of this present season? If we repent not, we perish-perish eternally. They are not the words of exaggerated warning, the rhetorical artifice of some human orator.

They are the words of truth, the deliberate and repeated declaration of Him who cannot lie; who Himself, if we repent, will deliver us as our Saviour; who Himself, if we do not repent, will condemn us as our Judge. They must be true, if the Bible is true; if CHRIST is true; if God is true."—p. 15.

And if there should be any one in the congregation who might venture to think that his case was not exactly the same as that of the unconverted heathen, he is admonished that his is " a state of heart which betrays the most urgent need of true repentance."

Doubtless Mr. Jackson is better acquainted with the moral and spiritual condition of the parishioners of S. James' than we can be. It may be quite necessary to call every man, woman, and child in the parish to repentance; and certainly we should not quarrel with their Rector for urging that duty too strongly upon them by every motive whether of love or fear. Our question is simply whether the use here made of Holy Scripture is right and just. And it will be plain upon a moment's consideration that it is not. Of the passages quoted in the first sermon as the groundwork of the appeal to repentance, we can remember but one that was really addressed to Christians, and that one is so misquoted as to convey an entirely erroneous apprehension of the apostle's argument.

The preaching of S. John the Baptist cannot of course be a model for the Christian preacher; neither as regards doctrine, can even the preaching of our LORD, when His kingdom was only yet "at hand" and not established, and when the Sacraments were not yet instituted. The Church was not founded till the great day of Pentecost: nothing therefore that was said before can be considered a model for addresses to Christians. In the same manner the addresses quoted from the Acts of the Apostles were addressed exclusively to persons who had not yet received the initiatory Sacrament of the Gospel.

This view appears so important as corrective of the ordinary vague and undogmatic notions in theology that we will quote a passage at length from Mr. Chamberlain's recently published Theory of Christian Worship :"

"The bulk of things, whether done or said, the narrative of which we call the Gospels, were all necessarily prospective or conditional, as it may be said, they all had reference to an event yet future and known only to the Divine Mind, to give them any force. Take for example many of our LORD's words: I, if I be lifted up, will draw all men unto Me:''The Son of Man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister, and to give His life a ransom for many:' 'I am not come to destroy the law and the Prophets, but to fulfil them: It behoveth Me to fulfil all righteousness.' The whole 6th chapter of S. John's Gospel was to all at the time when our LORD spoke it, an enigma: ‘I am that bread of life. Your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness

and are dead.

This is that bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof and not die.' Again to the woman of Samaria, If thou knewest the gift of GOD and who it is that saith to thee, Give Me to drink, thou wouldest have asked of Him, and He would have given thee living water.' Again, He that believeth on Me, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.' But this He spake (adds the Evangelist) of the SPIRIT, which they that believe on Him should receive; for the HOLY GHOST was not yet given, because that JESUS was not yet glorified.' And once more, take the conversation with Nicodemus, and what meaning could there attach to our LORD's words, till they were interpreted by the institution of that Holy Sacrament, after the resurrection, by which it pleases GOD to regenerate by His HOLY SPIRIT those who duly receive the outward sign of that Sacrament through which His SPIRIT acts? Salvation manifestly was not wrought until the SON of GOD had died upon the Cross and been restored to life, and therefore our LORD did not say, 'I have built My Church,' but, I will build it;' and when He commenced His preaching He seems to have adopted the very formula of S. John, which was manifestly only introductory or preparatory, saying, 'Repent ye; for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

"In like manner consider our LORD's actions, those I mean which appear to have had anything of a ministerial or significant character in them. They too had inherent in them something of incompleteness. For example, He ordained the seventy presbyters to go and preach the kingdom of GOD; and yet it appears only to have been a shadow or figure of something permanent to be appointed hereafter; for we do not hear of their making anything more than a kind of trial or experiment, if one may so speak, of their divine office. So He ordained the Apostles apparently with the still higher attributes which belonged to their office, telling them that Whosesoever sins they forgave, should be forgiven, and whosesoever sins they retained, should be retained.' Yet we read not of their exercising their office at that time; or when they endeavoured to act in His name, as in the case of the man possessed with a devil, they appear to have failed. The words, in fact, were as yet only prophetic, and waited their accomplishment in that more positive institution which took place after the resurrection, which I shall have occasion to mention presently. Or look to that most touching action which may be said to have formed the conclusion of His life anterior to His resurrection, the celebration of His last Passover with the twelve: Take eat, (He says) this is My body; drink ye all of this; for this is My Blood in the New Testament, which is shed for many, for the remission of sins.' But the very words themselves show that they were spoken in a degree by an anticipation of the morrow which should witness His death; and in the words which follow He again points to something as yet wanting for the completion of the Christian Sacrament when He says, 'I will not drink of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in My FATHER'S kingdom.'"-pp. 70-72.

And now we come to the one passage which alone had any right to be quoted, and which, we repeat, is misquoted. It is from S.