Category Archives: Richard Sibbes

Listening to Ourselves (a comparison of some recent psychology and a Puritan and a 20th Century Preacher)

14 Tuesday Aug 2018

Posted by in Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Psychology, Richard Sibbes, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

Suicide because we “listen to ourselves”:

the consistent finding of the role of the destructive inner voice in suicide. This voice drives suicidal tendencies, deceptively convincing people that it is better to end their lives than to find an alternate solution to their suffering

This author picks up on that idea and applies to other self-destructive behavior short of suicide:

For many, understanding there is an innate voice that wishes for death and destruction can help to separate, and thereby distance, one from these thoughts. Distance from the thoughts helps one disown them and take away their power. You are not your thoughts. Once these thoughts are recognized, they can be challenged, minimized, and disregarded. Healthier thoughts can be put in their place.

This observation is actually much older than these psychologists realize. First, Richard Sibbes in “The Soul’s Conflict With Itself”, writing of depression, explains:

Whence we may further observe, that we are prone to cast down ourselves, we are accessory to our own trouble, and weave the web of our own sorrow, and hamper ourselves in the cords of our own twining. God neither loves nor wills that we should be too much cast down. We see our Saviour Christ, how careful he was that his disciples should not be troubled, and therefore he labours to prevent that trouble which might arise by his suffering and departure from them, by a heavenly sermon; ‘Let not your hearts be troubled,’ &c., John 14:1. He was troubled himself that we should not be troubled. The ground, therefore, of our disquiet is chiefly from ourselves, though Satan will have a hand in it. We see many, like sullen birds in a cage, beat themselves to death. This casting down of ourselves is not from humility, but from pride; we must have our will, or God shall not have a good look from us, but as pettish and peevish children, we hang our heads in our bosom, because our wills are crossed.

And as for speaking to ourselves about such things, Martyn Lloyd-Jones, taking his cue from Sibbes, formulates the answer thus:

The main art in the manner of spiritual living is to know how to handle yourself. You have to take yourself in hand, you have to address yourself, you have to preach to yourself, question yourself. You must say to your soul, “Why art thou cast down?” — what business have you to be disquieted? You must turn on yourself, upbraid yourself, condemn yourself, exhort yourself, and say to yourself: “Hope thou in God” — instead of muttering in this depressed unhappy way. And you must go on to remind yourself of God, Who God is, and God is and what God has done, and what God has pledged Himself to do. Then having done that, end on this great note: defy yourself, and defy other people, and defy the devil and the whole world, and say with this man: “I shall yet praise Him for the help of His countenance, who is also the health of my countenance and my God.”

Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Spiritual Depression, “General Consideration”

Balaam’s Wish.3 (Richard Sibbes)

26 Thursday Jul 2018

Posted by in Preaching, Richard Sibbes, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , ,

John_Linnell_-_The_Prophet_Balaam_and_the_Angel_-_Google_Art_Project

At this point, Sibbes takes a turn which is contrary to the thinking of most people in this world at this time. Everything thinks that he will gain heaven. I one-time spoke with members of a gang, whose fellow had been murdered in a shooting. They were quite certain he was in some sort of “heaven”, where he evil actions could be taken with full vent to his desires and without the fear of the police or rival gangs. The men and women with whom I spoke seemed quite certain that his end was not in doubt – but to make sure, a few had lit the candles bearing a supposed picture of Mary, which candles can be purchased at a dollar store.

But Sibbes makes plain, it matters quite a bit whether one is “godly” or “wicked” at death:

Obs.3. There is a wide, broad difference between the death of the godly and of the wicked.

Even Balaam knows this – but he seems unable to see the way there:

The godly are happy in their death, for here we see it is a matter desirable. This caitiff, this wretched man Balaam, Oh, saith he, ‘let me die the death of the righteous, and let my last end be like his.’ It being the object of his desire, it is therefore certainly precious, ‘the death of the righteous.’

However, unlike Balaam, the godly have a happiness which begins here and which fully comes to fruition after death:

And indeed so it is; holy and gracious men, they are happy in their life. While they live they are the sons of God, the heirs of heaven; they are set at liberty, all things are theirs; they have access to the throne of grace; all things work for their good; they are the care of angels, the temples of the Holy Ghost. Glorious things are spoken of these glorious creatures even while they live.

But they are more happy in their death, and most happy and blessed after death.

In their death they are happy in their disposition, and happy in condition.

That is, there is a subjective (disposition) and objective (condition) basis for the happiness of the godly. Sibbes does not present this as mere wish fulfillment or psychological word-games, but as an incontestable fact. I wonder the extent to which our apologetics suffers at this point with the question of “proof”. Very few people have much reason at all for those things which they assuredly believe. The default of a culture is not the product of consideration, but rather the laziness of the people who have other things taking their attention. Even though I have not taken a statistically significant survey, I would imagine that most people have more certain reasons for their expectations of a sports team or their enjoyment of a movie than they have believe in some god – or do not – or believe their morals are rights, and other are wrong, or any of the other things which one would think are “most important.”

Anyway, Sibbes first asserts, that faith in God itself creates a subjective disposition of happiness:

(1.) Happy in their disposition. What is the disposition of a holy and blessed man at his end? His disposition is by faith to give himself to God, by which faith he dies in obedience; he carries himself fruitfully and comfortably in his end. And ofttimes the nearer he is to happiness, the more he lays about him to be fruitful.

His last point is certainly true. I have often seen Christians who know they will die soon possessed of an ease and joy, coupled to a profound desire to work for God. It is not an urgent hope to be good enough at the end – that question of “good enough” seems to not enter their thinking. They know salvation is of grace, and think nothing of their works. Indeed, the harder they work at their end, the less their works hold “merit” for them.

What then are the blessings which come with death:

(2.) Besides his disposition, he is happy in condition;for death is a sweet close. God and he meet; grace and glory meet; he is in heaven, as it were, before his time. What is death to him? The end of all misery, of all sin of body and soul. It is the beginning of all true happiness in both. This I might shew at large, but I have spoken somewhat of this point out of another text. They are happy in their death, for ‘their death is precious in God’s sight.’ The angels are ready to do their attendance, to carry their souls to the place of happiness. They are happy in their death, because they are ‘in the Lord.’ When death severs soul and body, yet notwithstanding neither soul nor body are severed from Christ. ‘They die in the Lord;’ therefore still they are happy. Much might be said to this purpose, and to good purpose, but that the point is ordinary, and I hasten to press things that I think will a little more confirm it. They are blessed in death.

And even death is not the end of their hope and expectation:

(3.) And blessed after death especially;for then we know they are in heaven, waiting for the resurrection of the body. There is a blessed change of all; for after death we have a better place, better company, better employment; all is for the better.

Here he makes a kind of digression: he backs up and examines the matter from a slightly different vantage point. He explains the life of the godly as an ever increasing freedom; it is a movement toward greater liberty (and the wicked are moving toward the close world of the grave):

There are three degrees of life:

The life in the womb, this world, heaven.

The life in the womb is a kind of imprisonment; there the child lives for a time. The life in this world, it is a kind of enlargement; but, alas! it is as much inferior to the blessed and glorious life in heaven, as the life in the womb is narrower and straiter and more base than this life wherein we behold the blessed light and enjoy all the sweet comforts of this life. They are happy after death; then the image of God is perfect in the soul. All graces are perfected, all wants supplied, all corruptions wrought out, all enemies subdued, all promises accomplished, waiting their time for the resurrection of the body; and then body and soul shall sit as judges upon the wretches that have judged them on earth, and they shall be both together ‘for ever with the Lord.’ I might enlarge the point much. It is a comfortable meditation; and before I pass it, let us make some use of it.

What then does all this amount to:

If godly men be blessed and happy, not only before death, in the right and title they have to heaven, but in death, because then they are invested into possession of that that makes them every way happy,

What do we do with this promise of happiness? Sibbes makes two applications: a correction of our thinking, and an encouragement toward our action. First, are thinking:

 Use1. Therefore this may teach us who are truly wise. A wise man is he that hath a better end than another, and works to that end.

Having made the assertion, Sibbes then explains the basis of his meaning by drawing in brief the nature of the contrast. This is a good example of how to teach well. State the proposition to be known. Then explain the proposition at some length – here by dividing it into its two parts to better see the wisdom of the godly by contrasting it with the foolishness of the “worldling”. He will then repeat and expound the original point: tell them what you’re going to say, say it, tell them what yous said. First, the Christian:

A true Christian man, he hath a better end than any worldling. His end is to be safe in another world, and he works and carries his forces to that end. ‘Let my last end be like his,’ saith Balaam, insinuating that there was a better end in regard of condition and state than he had aimed at. A gracious man, his end is not to be happy here; his end is to enjoy everlasting communion with God in the heavens, and he frames all his courses in this world to accomplish that end, and he is never satisfied in the things that make to that end.

Here he raises the worldling; he does not over pain the worldling’s vice (this is a common filler of many preachers; it is easier to ramble on about sin, because it is easier to know and describe; it is also an error in almost all cases). Notice how he says the worldling “prowls”; this both makes the worldling more an animal than a man; second, it alludes to the Devil prowling about as a lion:

A worldling he hath no such end. He hath a natural desire to be saved,—as we shall see afterwards,—but a man may know that is not his end, for he works not to it. He is not satisfied in prowling for this world; he is not weary of getting wealth; he is not satisfied with pleasure. So that his end is the things of this life.

He then concludes and repeats:

Therefore let him be never so wise, he is but a fool, for he hath not the true end, nor works to it. Wicked men are very fools in the manner of their reasoning; for they will grant that there is a happy estate of godly men in death, and after death better. If it be so, why do they not work and frame their lives to it? Herein they are fools, because they grant one thing and not another which must needs follow. They do believe there is such a happiness to God’s children, and yet seek not after it.

Note that last bit: their foolishness exists because they will not seek that which they hope to obtain. Rather than seek the life which cannot end, they prowl about.

Next, he makes an exhortation to live in accordance with wisdom:

Use2. If there be such a blessed estate of God’s children in death and after death, I beseech you let us carry ourselves so as that we may be partakers of that happiness;let us labour to be righteous men, labour to be in Christ, to have the righteousness of Christ to be ours, to be out of ourselves, in Christ; in Christ in life, in Christ in death, and at the day of judgment in Christ, ‘not having our own righteousness,’ as the apostle saith, ‘but his righteousness,’ Philip 3:9, and then the righteousness of grace and of a good conscience will alway go with the other. For this makes a righteous man to be in Christ, and to have his righteousness, and to have his Spirit, and the beginnings of the new creature in us. Let us labour to be such as may live and die happily and blessedly, and be for ever happy. So much for that third point.

 

Balaam’s Wish.2 (Richard Sibbes)

21 Saturday Jul 2018

Posted by in Preaching, Richard Sibbes, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , ,

John_Linnell_-_The_Prophet_Balaam_and_the_Angel_-_Google_Art_Project
Having faced the fact that we must die, Sibbes now turns to the fact that we must live:

Obs. 2. The estate of the soul continues after death.

This point is nearer to what Balaam desires. If he merely desired the death of the righteous, and if the righteous died in precisely the same way as the wicked, that would be nothing. Balaam did not desire the death, but the life which surpasses death:

For here he wisheth to die the death of the righteous, not for any excellency in death, but in regard of the subsistence and continuance of the soul after death.

This, of course, raises the question, is there life which consists after death? The near contemporary of Sibbes, Shakespeare has his hero Hamlet ask this question:

But that the dread of something after death,
The undiscovered country, from whose bourn
No traveller returns, puzzles the will,
And makes us rather bear those ills we have
Than fly to others that we know not of?
Thus conscience does make cowards of us all,

Sibbes affirms that life does persist – and he makes two points, both Scripture and reason:

Scripture and reason and nature enforceth this, that the soul hath a subsistence of itself, distinct from the life it communicates to the body. There is a double life, a life proper to the soul, and the life it communicates to the body. Now when the life it communicates to the body is gone to dissolution, itself hath a life in heaven. And indeed it is in a manner the whole man; for Abraham was Abraham when he was dead, when his soul was in heaven, and his body in the grave. It is the whole man.

First, there is a principle in the soul which is segregable from the body:

Reas. 1. And it discovers, indeed, that it hath a distinct life and excellency in itself, by reason that it thwarts the desires of the body when it is in the body. Reason, if there be no grace in the soul, that crosseth the inclination of the body, grace much more.

Second, the soul seems to operate separate from and above (if you will) the operation of the body:

Reas. 2. And we see ofttimes, when the outward man is weak, as in sickness, &c., then the understanding, will, and affections, the inward man, is most sublime, and rapt unto heaven, and is most wise. Take a man that hath been besotted all his lifetime, that hath been drunk with the pleasures of a carnal life, that hath been a covetous wretch, an earth-worm, that enjoys not heaven, but lives as his wealth and lusts carry him in slavery, yet at the hour of death, when he considers that he hath scraped together, and considers the way that his lusts have led him, and that all must leave him, now he begins to be wise, and speaks more discreetly. He can speak of the vanity of these things, and how little good they can do. Indeed many, nay the most men, are not wise until that time. Therefore the soul of itself hath a distinct being, because, when the body is lowest, it is most refined and strong in its operations.

There is a principle of the soul which concerns itself with the future. If we were merely animals confined to a single life, then there would be no purpose in the soul:

Reas. 3. Likewise it appears by the projects that it hath of the time to come. The soul, especially of men that are of more elevated and refined spirits, it projects for the time to come what shall become of the church and commonwealth, what shall become of posterity and of reputation and credit in the world. Certainly, unless there were a subsistence of itself, it would never look so much beforehand, and lay the grounds of the prosperity of the church and commonwealth for the time to come. I will not stand further on it, but rather make some use of it.

If the soul continues to exist, then we must be careful of how it is used now:

Use. Let us know which is our best part, namely, the soul, that hath a being after death, that we do not employ it to base uses, for which it was not made nor given us.

First, our soul must be used for that which it was created:

Do we think that these souls of ours were made and given us to scrape wealth? to travel in our affections to base things worse than our souls? Are they not capable of supernatural and excellent things? Are they not capable of grace and glory, of communion with God, of the blessed stamp of the image of God? Let us use them, therefore, to the end that God gave them. And let us not deserve so ill of our souls as to betray them, to cast them in the dirt, to lay our crown in the dust. This is our excellency.

Living merely for the bestial operation of the body (which is a misuse of the body) is the life of too many men:

What can keep our bodies from being a deformed, loathsome thing, if the soul be taken away? Yet so we abase this excellent part! Ofttimes we abase it to serve the base lusts of the body, which is condemned to rottenness. What is the life of most men but a purveying and prowling for the body? The lusts of the body set the wit and affections on work to prowl for itself. What a base thing is this! Were our souls given us for this end? And especially considering this, that our souls are immortal, that they shall never die, but be forever.

If our soul lives forever, the proper object of its happiness must be something fitting to an eternal existence. If our soul is fitted to a happiness which is dependent upon things which will perish with our death, then our soul will outlive its happiness:

Let us not altogether spend this precious time that is given us to save our souls, and to get the image of God stamped upon them, I say let us not spend this precious time in things that will leave us when our souls shall live still; let us not carry the matter so, that our souls shall outlive our happiness. All worldlings and base creatures, they outlive their happiness. For where do they plant it? In the base things of this life. All their life long they are prowling for those things that they must leave when they die, whereas their souls shall not die, but everlastingly subsist.

Here is a basis for eternal sorrow, to have souls fitted for that only which has perished and which shall never be regained:

What a misery is this, that these souls of ours shall have a being when the things wherein we placed our happiness, and abused our souls to gain them, they shall have an end! The souls of such men that seek the things of this life shall have a being in eternal misery. Indeed, so it is; for these souls of ours, the same degree they have in excellency if they be used as they should, if we do not abase them, the same degree they shall have in baseness and misery if we abuse them, and make them slaves to earthly things.

This degeneracy is seen in the devils who fell from their height of glory:

For as the devils, the same degree they had of excellency when they were angels, the same degree they have in misery now they be devils. The more excellent the creature is when it keeps its excellency, the more vile it is when it degenerates. So these souls of ours that next to angels are the most excellent creatures of God, the more excellent it is if it get the image of God stamped upon it, and the new creature, and have the life of grace, the more cursed is the state of the soul if it subsist to everlasting misery.

This again is theme sounded in Shakespeare, Sonnet 94, which ends with the lines,

For sweetest things turn sourest by their deeds;
Lilies that fester smell far worse than weeds.

Sibbes ends with a closer application of the point: it is not only those who are utterly outside the church, but often those within the church who live as if their souls would not continue after their death:

It were happy if the souls of such creatures were mortal that labour for a happiness in this life. Oh that we would think of this! Most men in the bosom of the church, which is lamentable to think, they live as if they had no souls. They overturn the order that God hath set, and hath given us our bodies to serve our souls. They use all the strength and marrow of their wits, all the excellencies in their souls, for the base satisfaction of the lusts of the body. So much for that point.

In making this point, Sibbes echoes and applies a point from Paul:

1 Corinthians 9:24–27 (ESV)
24 Do you not know that in a race all the runners run, but only one receives the prize? So run that you may obtain it. 25 Every athlete exercises self-control in all things. They do it to receive a perishable wreath, but we an imperishable. 26 So I do not run aimlessly; I do not box as one beating the air. 27 But I discipline my body and keep it under control, lest after preaching to others I myself should be disqualified.

Richard Sibbes’ Balaam’s Wish.1

20 Friday Jul 2018

Posted by in Preaching, Richard Sibbes, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, ,

John_Linnell_-_The_Prophet_Balaam_and_the_Angel_-_Google_Art_Project

Richard Sibbes’ sermon “Balaam’s Wish” published in 1639 considers the statement of Balaam recorded in Numbers 23:10, Let me die the death of the righteous, and let my last end be like his!

To consider this verse, Sibbes begins by making observations. Before we look at what he writes, just look at the text itself: It concerns life (by implication) and death. He speaks of the righteous dying (which is a common experience); and the death of the righteous has unique element – which Balaam desires. When we come to a text, the first thing we must do is simply observe: what is this like? What is unlike this? What the parts? What causes this, and what does it cause? Any number of such questions should applied to the text.

Sibbes offers four observations:

First, That the righteous men die, and have an end as well as others.
Secondly, That the state of the soul continues after death. It was in vain for him to desire ‘to die the death of the righteous,’ but in regard of the subsistence of the soul.
Thirdly, That the estate of righteous men in their end is a blessed estate, because here it was the desire of Balaam, ‘Oh that I might die the death of the righteous!’
Fourthly, There is an excellent estate of God’s people, and they desire that portion: ‘Oh let me die the death of the righteous.’ These are the four things I shall unfold, which discover the intendment of Balaam in these words.

Concerning the first observation, he begins by answering a possible objection: if Christ came ot free us from death, then why do we still die?

For Christ, in his first coming, came not to redeem our bodies from death, but our souls from damnation. His second coming shall be to redeem our bodies from corruption into a ‘glorious liberty.’ Therefore wise men die as well as fools.

Next he draws our the observation (from Ecclesiastes 2, that all men will die, wise and fool) and makes it concrete. Good preaching always makes concrete observations; it draws ideas down in the world in which we live:

Those whose eyes and hands have been lift up to God in prayer, and whose feet have carried them to the holy place, as well as those whose eyes are full of adultery, and whose hands are full of blood, they die all alike, in manner alike. Ofttimes it is the same in the eye of the world.

So far Sibbes makes the point of Ecclesiastes describing life under the sun. But he then points to what will come after (for death is not an end in itself; but rather a summons to judgment):

Death comes upon good and bad, but to the good for their greater glory; for the shell must be broken before they come to the pearl. Death it fits them for the blessed life after the body lying a while in the grave, the soul being in the hands of God. And death now it makes an end of sin, that brought in death; and it makes us conformable to the Son of God, our Elder Brother, that died for us.

Death is an end of the body’s life in this age, but it is also the end of sin. Sibbes then stops and urges meditation:

The point is pregnant, and full of gracious and serious meditations.

This is point too little considered: you are, I am, going to die. Consider this carefully – it will change how we consider this life. To this end, Sibbes offers two “uses”, that is applications of the text – and in particular, applications of this meditation:

The first use is that we make use of this life: this is the question of why do you live? There are two answers, what you will say and what you actually believe. What you actually believe is shown by what you do. Sibbes gives the answer which should be given:

Use 1. It should enforce this excellent duty, that considering we have no long continuance here, therefore, while we are here, to do that wherefore we come into the world. As a factor, that is sent into a place to provide such goods beforehand, let us consider that here we are sent to get into a state of salvation, to get out of the state of nature into the state of grace, to furnish our souls with grace, to fit us for our dissolution to come. Let us not forget the main end of our living here. Considering we cannot be here long, let us do the work that God hath put into our hands quickly and faithfully, with all our might.

Having shown us how we should live, Sibbes then cautions against abuse of this life. This gets to the second question above – how do we show what we believe about life, based upon the way we live. What should the knowledge of death do to us:

Use 2. And let it enforce moderation to all earthly things. ‘The time is short, therefore let those that use the world be as if they used it not,’ &c., 1 Cor. 7:29. Those friends that have been joined together will part. Therefore let us use our bodies and souls so, that we may present them both comfortably to God. Let us beg of God to make a right use of this fading condition. But I hasten.

Think of different Sibbes answers the question than is common in culture, which would exult following after whatever we desire. He councils, do you duty and do not be much taken with the pleasure of earthly things, since you are going to leave.

Richard Sibbes, The Art of Self-Humbling.3

17 Wednesday Jan 2018

Posted by in Humility, Richard Sibbes, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, ,

Sibbes then provides six directions on how one is to obtain humility. In a nutshell, humility will flow from knowing who God is and who we are. The first direction is a summary of the rest, “First, Get poor spirits.” He then defines what is meant by a “poor spirit”,

[1]to see the wants [that is, what we lack] in ourselves and in the creature;

[2]the emptiness of all earthly things without God’s favour;

[3]the insufficiency of ourselves and of the creature at the day of judgment;

for what the wise man saith of riches may be truly said of all other things under the sun: they avail not in the day of wrath, but righteousness delivereth from death, Prov. 11:4.

We need to consider what we are as a creature, we come from the dirt and we will return to the dirt and we are not able to do anything without the power of God. We need to consider how guilty we are before God, due to our sin. We need to see how liable we are to sin.

The second direction is to see ourselves before God,  “[L]et us bring ourselves into the presence of the great God: set ourselves in his presence, and consider of his attributes, his works of justice abroad in the world, and open* ourselves in particular.” Having thought of how lowly we are in ourselves, let us think of how great God is. I do not know the reference off hand, but in one place Spurgeon speaks of having a thought of God before creation — before anything when there was only God. As we try to consider the greatness of God in every way, we cannot persist in great thought of ourselves.

Third, we must be content to receive the words of others that exposure our sin. We “naturally” repel at anyone who points to our sin — Yes, but what about yours! We love flattery, but, “a true, wise man, will be content to hear of anything that may humble him before God.”

Fourth, remember you will die, you will come to dust and you will be brought to judgment, “look to the time to come, what we shall be ere long, earth and dust; and at the day of judgment we must be stripped of all. What should puff us up in this world? All our glory shall end in shame, all magnificency in confusion, all riches in poverty.” How strange that such creatures with such an end should ever be proud — yet we are idolaters, “We are both idols and idol-worshippers, when we think highly of ourselves, for we make ourselves idols. Now God hates idolatry; but pride is a sacrilege, therefore God hates pride.”

Fifth, if we would be humble, let us consider Christ:  For this he relies upon Phil. 2:

Philippians 2:5–11 (ESV)

5 Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, 6 who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but emptied himself, by taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men. 8 And being found in human form, he humbled himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross. 9 Therefore God has highly exalted him and bestowed on him the name that is above every name, 10 so that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

No Christian can truly hold this knowledge in contemplation and not become humble. “I say, is it possible that he which considers of this, should ever be willingly or wilfully proud? Do we hope to be saved by Christ, and will we not be like him?”

Sixth, reason with yourself — let us speak to ourselves. Consider our plight: other men can bring us low. What will we do when we stand before God? What will we do when we with our sins, with our body of dust are called to judgment? We cannot even keep our breath in our bodies, how will we stand? What can we do without Christ? How can we be proud when we have nothing in ourselves?

Further, There is an order, method, and agreement in these reflected actions, when we turn the edge of our own souls upon ourselves and examine ourselves; for the way that leads to rest is by the examination of ourselves. We must examine ourselves strictly, and then bring ourselves before God, judge and condemn ourselves; for humiliation is a kind of execution. Examination leads to all the rest. So, then, this is the order of our actions; there is examination of ourselves strictly before God, then indicting ourselves, after that comes judging of ourselves.

Richard Sibbes, The Art of Self-Humbling.2

12 Friday Jan 2018

Posted by in Humility, Richard Sibbes, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, ,

Now to the “what” of humility.

Humility (before God) is a proper realization of our sinfulness before God. No degree of pomp, wealth or power can free us from selfishness, covetousness, anger, lust, greed. This is the cognitive realization which is the basis for our humility:

To begin with the first inward humiliation in the mind, in regard of judgment and knowledge, is, when our understandings are convinced, that we are as we are; when we are not high-minded, but when we judge meanly and basely of ourselves, both in regard of our beginning and dependency upon God, having all from him, both life, motion, and being; and also in regard of our end, what we shall be ere long. All glory shall end in the dust, all honour in the grave, and all riches in poverty. And withal, true humiliation is also in regard of spiritual respects, when we judge aright how base and vile we are in regard of our natural corruption, that we are by nature not only guilty of Adam’s sin, but that we have, besides that, wrapt ourselves in a thousand more guilts by our sinful course of life, and that we have nothing of our own, no, not power to do the least good thing.

Humility is not merely an intellectual apprehension, it also includes one affections.

Again, Inward humiliation, besides spiritual conviction, is when there are affections of humiliation. And what be those? Shame, sorrow, fear, and such like penal afflictive affections. For, upon a right conviction of the understanding, the soul comes to be stricken with shame that we are in such a case as we are; especially when we consider God’s goodness to us, and our dealing with him. This will breed shame and abasement, as it did in Daniel.

Sibbes combines these two elements in humility enlisting the fear of God:

The third penal affection is, fear and trembling before God’s judgments and his threatenings, a fear of the majesty of God, whom we have offended, which is able to send us to hell if his mercies were not beyond our deserts. But his mercy it is, that we are not consumed. A fear of this great God is a part of this inward humiliation. So we see what inward humiliation is: first, a conviction of the judgment; and then it proceeds to inward afflictive affections, as grief, shame, fear, which, when upon good ground and fit objects, they are wrought in us by the Holy Ghost, they are parts of inward humiliation.

He then notes as an aside: if we not humble ourselves, we will be humbled by another:

But as for the wicked, they drown themselves in their profaneness, because they would not be ashamed, nor fear, nor grieve for them. But this makes way for terrible shame, sorrow, and fear afterwards; for those that will not shame, grieve, and fear here, shall be ashamed before God and his angels at the day of judgment, and shall be tormented in hell for ever.

Next, Sibbes notes that such knowledge and affection will result in conduct, “It was not a dumb show, but done with his outward expression and his inward affection.” There will be some sorrow, some action or conduct consonant with the affection and knowledge which are the basis for humility.

 

Richard Sibbes, The Art of Self-Humbling.1

11 Thursday Jan 2018

Posted by in Humility, Richard Sibbes, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , ,

Sibbes sermon, “The Art of Self-Humbling” sets forth the “what”, “how” and “why” of humility: why should we humble ourselves.  We should not that “humiliation” and humbling are not matters which are prized by our culture. In “Humiliation: Its Nature and Consequences” (Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online June 2010,  38 (2) 195-204) note that humiliation takes place when, ” an individual suffers humiliation when he makes a bid or claim to a certain social status, has this bid or claim fail publicly, and has it fail at the hands of another person or persons who have the status necessary to reject the claim. Finally, what is denied is not only the status claim itself, but also and more fundamentally the individual’s very status to have made such a claim at all.”  The results of such humiliation are substantial: “Suffering severe humiliation has been shown empirically to plunge individuals into major depressions, suicidal states, and severe anxiety states, including ones characteristic of posttraumatic stress disorder.”

Yet, Sibbes in this sermon commends humbling oneself. How can such things be squared? How can humility be good and yet humiliation be troublesome? Before we get into Sibbes’ help on this issue, we should consider this point. The trouble of humiliation is that one claims to a social status which cannot be maintained: it is an attack upon one’s identity. The identity is predicated upon what other people think of you.  When you fail to maintain your anticipated status, you feel humiliation.

Jesus, in the Sermon on the Mount repeatedly warns against being “seen” by others and establishing some status on the basis of what others think about you (or what you cause others to think about you). Matt. 6:1. When it comes to any sort of good work, giving alms, praying, fasting, he warns against doing such things so that others can see you and praise you. Jesus calls these people hypocrites.

Our identity is to be grounded in God’s judgment — not the judgment of others. Paul can so far as to say that no charge can be brought against God’s elect, “It is God who justifies”. Rom. 8:33. When it comes to what others think of him, Paul writes, “If I must boast, I will boast of the things which show my weakness.”  2 Cor. 11:30.

The humility of a Christian is our humility before God. We measure ourselves before God and care only of God’s judgment: that is the basis of our humility and our honor. If we are right before our king, then we are freed to disregard what other think of us.

The humility of a Christian frees one from the psychological “need” to be thought well of by others.  But we must humble ourselves before God — even a king who has the greatest social status of any group:

Therefore it is not unbefitting kings to humble themselves before God, seeing they have to deal with him who is a ‘consuming fire,’ Heb. 12:29, before whom the very angels cover their faces. I say it is no shame for the greatest monarch of the earth to abase himself when he hath to do with God; yea, kings, of all other persons, ought most to humble themselves, to shew their thankfulness to God, who hath raised them from their brethren to be heads of his people. And considering the endowments which kings usually have, they are bound to humble themselves, as also in regard of the authority and power which God hath put into their hands, saying, ‘By me kings reign,’ Prov. 8:15. But usually we see, from the beginning of the world, that kings forget God. Where there is not grace above nature, there kings will not stoop to Christ; but so far as it agrees with their pleasure and will, so far shall Christ be served, and no farther.

 Richard Sibbes, “The Art of Self-Humbling”, The Complete Works of Richard Sibbes, ed. Alexander Balloch Grosart, vol. 6 (Edinburgh; London; Dublin: James Nichol; James Nisbet and Co.; W. Robertson, 1863), 45.

God is God in all places

21 Thursday Sep 2017

Posted by in Fear, Fear of the Lord, Richard Sibbes, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , ,

It is a curious thing, but true that even we professors (those who profess, not teachers) Christ can more easily be frightened of the knowledge of other people rather than the knowledge of God:

Examine what affections we have to God: for it is affection that makes a Christian. Single out some few that we are most offending in. As, first, for fear, it may shame us all. Indeed, a Christian upon his best resolution is better. But the ordinary carriage of men is, they fear men more than God; they fear everything more than him that they should fear above all. For instance, is the retired carriage of men to God such as their carriage is to the eye of the world? Will not they do that in secret ofttimes that they will not do openly? In secret they will commit this or that sin, and think, Who seeth? There are secret abominations in the closet of their hearts. They will not fear to do that in the eye of God, that they fear to do in the eye of a child of six years old, that is of any discretion. Is this to make God our God, when we fear the eye of a silly mortal creature more than the eye of God, that is ten thousand times brighter than the sun, that is our judge? Is God our God the whiles? Undoubtedly, when God is made our God, there is an awe of the eye of heaven upon a man in all places. Therefore this is the condition of the covenant, ‘Walk before me,’ or ‘Walk as in my sight,’ 1 Sam. 2:30. How do we walk before God as in his sight, when there is such a great deal of difference in our carriage secretly, and before the eyes of men? when we labour more to approve our carriage to men, than we make conscience of our spirits to God? This may shame us. Even the best of us who are in covenant with God, and have made God our God, we have cause to be abased for this: and surely one of the best ways to make God’s children abased and humbled, is to compare the different proportion of their carriage; how they carry themselves to men whom they respect, and to outward things in the world, and how they carry themselves to God. If God be our God, there will be an universal fear and care to please God in all times and in all places, because he is everywhere; darkness and light are all one to him.

Richard Sibbes, The Complete Works of Richard Sibbes, ed. Alexander Balloch Grosart, vol. 6 (Edinburgh; London; Dublin: James Nichol; James Nisbet and Co.; W. Robertson, 1863), 10.

Richard Sibbes: God is a Relationship

16 Thursday Mar 2017

Posted by in Biblical Counseling, Richard Sibbes, Sanctification, Sanctifictation, Uncategorized, Worship

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

But you will say, How shall we know that this covenant belongeth to us? that we are such as we may say, God is our God?
I answer, first—to lay this for a ground—you must know that to be a God is a relation. Whosoever God is a God to, he persuadeth them by his Spirit that he is a God to. The same Spirit that persuadeth them that there is a God, that Spirit telleth them that God is their God, and works a qualification and disposition in them, as that they may know that they are in covenant with such a gracious God. The Spirit as it revealeth to them the love of God, and that he is theirs, so the Spirit enableth them to claim him for their God, to give up themselves to him as to their God.

Richard Sibbes, “The Faithful Covenanter” in The Complete Works of Richard Sibbes, ed. Alexander Balloch Grosart, vol. 6 (Edinburgh; London; Dublin: James Nichol; James Nisbet and Co.; W. Robertson, 1863), 8.

This is a profound bit of theology and needs some thought to be understood.

Consider first, “you must know that to be a God is a relation”. We too easily abstract God: God is a being with a set of attributes. Another sort of one has an idea of a celestial butler, the god of moral therapeutic deism:

As described by Smith and his team, Moralistic Therapeutic Deism consists of beliefs like these: 1. “A god exists who created and ordered the world and watches over human life on earth.” 2. “God wants people to be good, nice, and fair to each other, as taught in the Bible and by most world religions.” 3. “The central goal of life is to be happy and to feel good about ones self.” 4. “God does not need to be particularly involved in one’s life except when God is needed to resolve a problem.” 5. “Good people go to heaven when they die.” (As Dr. Mohler summarized Smith’s findings.)

Or some other god. But consider what Sibbes is saying: The “God” part of our understanding of God is relational. For instance, Moses speaks to Pharaoh of the “LORD our God.” There is a particular person(s) who is our God. Since He is God, we have a particular relationship toward him.

The abstract God is a powerful being, but we have little relationship to him. He have created us, but he may also have forgotten us: he is not God to us. The Therapeutic god is no God at all. He is a powerful helper, but he is not a God to anyone. That is why the Christian confession is that Christ is Lord.

The remainder of Sibbes’ discussion speaks about how God himself, God the Spirit, brings the human being into a right relation to God. God is there for everyone, but not everyone is God-worshipper relationship with God (indeed, one can think of sanctification as merely the process of turning human beings into right worshipers).

Whosoever God is a God to,
1) he persuadeth them by his Spirit that he is a God to.
2) The same Spirit that persuadeth them that there is a God,
3) that Spirit telleth them that God is their God,
4) and works a qualification and disposition in them,
5) as that they may know that they are in covenant with such a gracious God.
6) The Spirit as it revealeth to them the love of God, and that he is theirs,
7) so the Spirit enableth them to claim him for their God,
8) to give up themselves to him as to their God

Each of these elements makes plain what is in the relationship of “God”. There is a God. This God stands in some sort of relationship to the human being. The human being is in a covenantal relationship to this God. The human being’s affections, thoughts, dispositions, actions are brought into a correspondence to the covenant (that is also known as sanctification: note that sanctification is not merely morally appropriate behavior, although it is not less). Counseling/preaching is the process of using the Word of God (assisted by the Spirit of God) to bring about this relational process.

The loss of God and the terrors of life

14 Tuesday Feb 2017

Posted by in Original Sin, Richard Sibbes, Sin, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

The loss of God results in all the terrors and troubles of this life. Therefore, it is a restored relationship to God that our “happiness” consists:

GOD having framed man an understanding creature, hath made him fit to have communion and intercourse with himself; because he can by his understanding discern that there is a better good out of himself, in communion and fellowship with which, happiness consists. Other creatures—wanting understanding to discern a better good out of than in themselves, their life being their good—desire only the continuance of their own being, without society and fellowship with others. But man, having the knowledge of God, the Creator of heaven and earth, but especially of God the Redeemer, providing for him a second being better than his first, understandeth that his best and chiefest good dependeth more in him than in himself; and because his happiness standeth in acquaintance and fellowship with this God, which is the chief good, he desireth a communion with him, that he may partake of his good.

Richard Sibbes, “The Faithful Covenanter”, The Complete Works of Richard Sibbes, ed. Alexander Balloch Grosart, vol. 6 (Edinburgh; London; Dublin: James Nichol; James Nisbet and Co.; W. Robertson, 1863), 3.

Imagine it this way: a small child wanders into the forrest alone is not injured by the loss of his father, but his father’s absence is the ultimate cause of his loss. Conversely, the child finding his father does not directly make the forrest less dark, the wolves less dangerous, the night less cold. But return of the father makes it possible to be rescued from all these things.