SERMON IV.

Acts, Chap. xvii. Verse 11th and part of the 12th.

THE JEWS OF BEREA WERE MORE NOBLE THAN THOSE IN THESSALONICA, IN THAT THEY RECEIVED THE WORD WITH ALL READINESS OF MIND, AND SEARCHED THE SCRIPTURES DAILY, WHETHER THOSE THINGS WERE SO. THEREFORE MANY OF THEM BELIEVED.

THE

HE preceding verses of this chapter, acquaint us with the ill reception which St. Paul and his doctrine met with at Thessalonica. He went thither into the Jewish synagogue, and for three sabbath days reasoned with them out of the Scriptures, concerning the nature and efficacy of the sufferings of Christ, and of his resurrection from the dead. Some of the Jews were converted by his arguments, and several also of the devout Greeks; but those Jews who believed not stirred up the populace assaulted the house of Jason, and in the end drove Paul and Silas out of the city. The only reason they gave for this conduct was, that the preachers had done contrary to the decrees of Cæsar, saying there is another king, one Jesus. A plain proof, that they were merely

moved by prejudice and envy, and had not in the least attended to the Apostle's doctrine; otherwise the crucified Saviour, whom he preached, could never have been supposed to be set up by St. Paul, as a rival of the earthly empire of Cæsar. The character of the Jews of Berea, as described in the text, is a fine contrast to these; I shall therefore beg leave to enlarge a little on the particulars of it.

First, We are told that they were more noble than the former," In that they received the word with all readiness." And what greater proof can a man give of a noble and ingenuous disposition, than that of lending a ready unprejudiced attention to any person who offers new arguments to be examined, new doctrines to be ascertained? How liable is the generality of mankind to be misled by appearances, and biassed by old prepossessions? How apt to reject even truth itself, unheard, if it come either unexpectedly, or unsupported by personal authority? Novelty indeed has its charms, but these only when it clashes with no favourite passions, or does not counteract any established opinions; but if this happen, disgust generally arises, and the doctrine, and he who delivers it, are treated with ignominy and contempt. Not such was the behaviour of the Bereans to St. Paul; they heard him readily, and therefore without partiality: and though he asserted several things contrary to their preconceived notions, yet as they found he did not

merely assert them, but pretended, at least, to have scripture authority to found them upon, they had too much nobleness of mind to reject his doctrines, before they had tried them by that sacred touchstone, and found whether they bore its test.

Hence we may observe, secondly, that though they received the Apostle's doctrine with all that calmness and impartiality which is inherent in ingenuous minds, they did not assent to it with that blind temerity which prevails only on weak ones. While their candor led them to lend him a due attention, their prudence prompted them to give all he said a strict examination: willing to reject nothing that had reason and argument for its support, they were yet resolute to try whether all he offered was thus supported: and, as the Apostle had pointed out to them on what foundation his system was built, and had appealed to their own inspired writings for the truth of all he asserted, they studied those writings daily and with indefatigable attention, to discover whether "these things were so;" the result of this search, we find, was favourable to the Apostle's doctrine, for many of them therefore believed.

If I have justly explained the sense of the text, the three following propositions will seem naturally to arise from it:

I. That, in our enquiries after truth, all opinions ought to be heard with readiness, and received with candor, freedom, and impartiality;

II. That diligence should be used in the search after truth, and the arguments on both sides scrutinized with accuracy and precision;

III. That the truth of the Christian religion demands this test, and receives advantage from it.

These propositions may, perhaps, seem to a Christian audience, to have too much the nature of self-evidence and axiom, to require a formal proof; yet as, in the present age, the Enthusiast on the one hand, and the Libertine on the other, are apt to proceed in a manner diametrically opposite to them, I shall take the liberty to address them both in their turn on these two points.

I. And, first, I would ask the Enthusiast, if he be not at all times too apt to condemn, under the opprobrious denomination of worldly wisdom, that species of religious enquiry, which is employed in fixing the great objects of our faith and practice upon just and rational foundations? If he be not too prompt to despise, and even reprobate, the learned labours of some of the best and wisest of his species, when employed on this important task, and,

1

without meaning it, to take part with the infidel, and to imagine Christianity not founded on argument? I would ask him if sometimes, on the bare assertion of the overheated leader of his sect, he has not been led to brand many respectable persons with peculiar heretical names, at the same time without so much as understanding the meaning of the terms he employed for their reprobation? I would question him, whether he has not, at one time, taken the unintelligible jargon of some mad mystic for divine sublimity; at another, the vulgar cant of some illiterate fanatic, for apostolical simplicity? Again, with respect to the writers or preachers, whom he either condemns or approves, I would enquire what degree of examination he has bestowed on their several doctrines; has he read their works attentively, or listened to their discourses calmly and dispassionately? That he reads the Scriptures I will readily allow, but does he read them in their order, observe the connection of their parts, and thence deduce the true meaning of the whole? Are not a few detached passages, separated from their context, and consequently too often from their meaning, sufficient grounds for those opinions which he had before fancied true; and if he receive these from his favourite preacher, delivered with a sanctimonious look and fanatical tone, do they not come to him with a force of conviction, which makes all other explications of their sense in his eyes heretical, if not damnable?