66

day. It must be admitted, that it is the bounden duty of every man to worship his Maker, and to worship him socially. Now, whatever may be his devotions in the closet, if he, of his own accord, refuse to join the “ communion of saints" in some place appropriated for the purpose, he does not reach the scriptural idea of "bowing before the Lord." And it is much to be doubted, whether they who absent themselves from the open expression of divine worship, do really "wait continually upon God" in the mean time in secret. May not such an excuse arise from the disrelish of the service of God altogether? But there are others who are partially culpable here: they will attend, perhaps, once on the Sabbath, and no more. They cannot plead distance, or illness, or a paucity of the outward means; but it is their custom to appear before God” only once a day. I would, however, beg permission to ask them, what would become of divine service in the temple, if all the congregation were to act like this? I could, moreover, inquire, whether it be really keeping holy the Sabbathday-to spend about two hours of it only in the "courts of the Lord?" In many places there is social worship for prayer, and hearing the word, on the evening of some day in the week; and it is not pretended that attendance on such an occasion is absolutely required by the law of God. If, however, the members of the congregation expect their pastor to offer public prayer, and to preach the gospel, it becomes, to say the least, a duty, to which they are bound in honour, to wait "upon his ministration;" and, if possible, to suffer nothing to prevent it. But on the Sabbath, the case is otherwise; and while some men are all for the sanctuary and never found in the closet, yet they who voluntarily devote two-thirds of its precious moments to any thing but the worship of the Lord with his people, are two-thirds Sabbath-breakers.

But the worship of God in private is also fairly to be

R

inferred from this passage. The Jew, when he went to the temple to offer his free-will offerings, went in his individual capacity. Under that dispensation, "Jerusalem was the place where men ought to pray;" and the people went into the house of God even to offer their secret devotions. In this light we are to understand the circumstances recorded of the Pharisee and publican; and the remembrance of this fact may help us to a right view of their respective characters and conduct,-why they severally addressed the Almighty, as if alone, on their own personal affairs. But under the gospel it is not so. The direction is plain,-" When thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father, which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly."" Now, although the offerings of the Jews are not to be presented to the Almighty as in the former dispensation, yet the sacrifice of a grateful heart is still to be made; and every Christian will endeavour to perform it as his highest privilege. There is, indeed, a reciprocal union and influence between all the acts and duties of religion. Private devotion, family worship, and the public exercises of the sanctuary, mutually aid each other: neither should be neglected, or receive a disproportionate attention. Each is beautiful in its season, and proper in its place: and he that would live in the fear of God, and walk in the "comfort of the Holy Ghost," must observe them all, and render to each its due.

Secondly. The frame of heart necessary to acceptable worship is here declared. Under the economy of the gospel we have no gifts of frankincense and myrrh, to offer up to heaven as a part of our homage. If we have been cured of the leprosy of sin, we are commanded to "present our bodies a living sacrifice, holy,

*Matt. vi. 6.

acceptable unto God, which is our reasonable service."* But there are certain duties to be discharged, even before we make this required dedication. If we have done our brother any wrong, either unintentionally, or by design, we are to adjust the injury before we can reasonably hope to be accepted.

The duty here specified is, perhaps, one of the most difficult which the Christian religion requires. In the case of personal disputes, both parties consider themselves equally right, and equally aggrieved. The first thing, therefore, necessary for us, is an impartial spirit. Solomon remarks" He that is first in his own cause seemeth just: but his neighbour cometh and searcheth him out."+ Self-love blindeth our eyes, and conceals our own defects, so that we are hard to believe that we are in the wrong. But this opinion must be corrected, and we must be ready to conceive that we are as likely, perhaps more likely, to err than our brother, if we would faithfully discharge this duty. And there is a second thing we should do we should be willing to acknowledge our mistake, and seek forgiveness for it. To human nature this is a severe trial. There seems scarcely one sentence which the mouth of man is more reluctant to utter than-"I was mistaken." Many would consider such a confession, however true, an act of meanness and cowardice; but the Scripture pronounces it justice to man, and obedience to God. Let me illustrate the sentiment by an anecdote recorded in ancient history. Aristippus, a heathen, and Æschines, who had been his friend, were at variance; at length Aristippus went, of his own accord, to Eschines, and thus saluted him," Shall we not be reconciled till we become a table talk to all the country?" Eschines replied, "I would gladly be at peace with you." "Remember, therefore,"

* Rom. xii. 1.

+ Prov. xviii. 17.

said Aristippus, "that I, the elder, have first sought unto you." "Thou art, indeed,” rejoined the other, "not only the elder, but the better man, for I began the quarrel, and thou the reconciliation." This was noble, and may put some implacable professors of Christianity to the blush," who can never suppose themselves on the wrong side. But why should men be so unwilling to a business of this nature? Doth not the Lord God Almighty beseech sinners to be reconciled unto him? And doth he not invite us to return? Suppose thy brother is the aggressor, is that a reason why there should be no attempt to adjust the unhappy disagreement? Peter was the first to offend and deny his Lord; but the "Lord turned and looked on Peter;" and one of the earliest messages. delivered to his brethren, after his resurrection by the angels, was,"Go your way, tell his disciples and Peter, that he goeth before you into Galilee.”* And has he not "left us an example that we should follow his steps."+ Go then, Christians, and do likewise.

There is, however, one other important thing, necessary to this work :-It is the difficult duty, not only of acknowledging our error, but of making all proper reparation of the injury we have done. The Levitical law required restitution; and, according to the spirit of this text, all reasonable satisfaction should be given to the offended brother. The moral law is peremptory on this point. "And the Lord spake unto Moses, saying, If a soul sin, and commit a trespass against the Lord, and lie unto his neighbour in that which was delivered him to keep, or in fellowship, or in a thing taken away by violence, or hath deceived his neighbour; or hath found that which was lost, and lieth concerning it, and sweareth falsely: in any of all these that a man doeth, sinning therein: then it

shall be, because he hath sinned and is guilty, that he shall restore that which he took violently away, or the thing which he hath deceitfully gotten, or that which was delivered him to keep, or the lost thing which he found. Or all that about which he hath sworn falsely; he shall even restore it in the principal, and shall add the fifth part more thereto, and give it unto him to whom it appertaineth, in the day of his trespass offering."* No sooner had the power of divine grace touched the heart of Zaccheus, than he immediately resolved to act on this principle: "And Zaccheus stood, and said unto the Lord; Behold, Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor: and if I have taken any thing from any man by false accusation, I restore him four fold." The spirit of this law is likewise enforced under the gospel. Let us hear St. Paul on the point: "Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head. Be not overcome of evil, but overcome evil with good." These are the sublime morals of the New Testament; and where the grace of God is received in truth, they will be próduced in the life. Now it seems probable that our Saviour, by deducing the exhortation in the text from the foregoing explication of murder, had particular reference to the three species of injury there specified. And we may, therefore, suppose Him to say, Has thy brother aught against thee for angry feelings, reproachful epithets, or villifying accusations? Hast thou wronged him by causeless anger, or by calling him raca, or thou fool? go, then, and acknowledge thy fault, and make all the amends in thy power for thy aggression. Heal, by thy contrition, the wound thou hast made in his peace; and repair, by thy tongue and thy substance, the breach thou hast made

66

*Lev. vi. 1-5.

Luke xix. 8.

Rom. xii. 20, 21.