Category Archives: Thomas Manton

Thomas Manton, The Temptation of Christ, Sermon 1.c

17 Thursday Dec 2020

Posted by in Thomas Manton

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , ,

The prior post on this sermon may be found here.

Here, Manton ends with the practical application:

III. The good of this to us. 

It teacheth us divers things, four I shall instance in.

1. To show us who is our grand enemy, the devil, who sought the misery and destruction of mankind, as Christ did our salvation. (Matt. 13:19 & 39; John 8:44)

2. That all men, none excepted, are subject to temptations. (If Jesus was not exempt form temptation, than neither shall we)

3. It showeth us the manner of conflict, both of Satan’s fight and our Saviour’s defence.

[1.] Of Satan’s fight. It is some advantage not to be ignorant of his enterprises: …He assaulted Christ by the same kind of temptations by which usually he assaults us. The kinds of temptations are reckoned up: 1 John 2:16, ‘The lusts of the flesh, the lusts of the eye, and the pride of life.’ …

What then shall we do, knowing that we will be tempted and knowing something of how we will be tempted. The answer comes from the way in which Christ defendanted himself

[2.] The manner of Christ’s defence, and so it instructeth us how to overcome and carry ourselves in temptations. And here are two things whereby we evercome:—

(1.) By scripture….

But not as a talisman which is raised to chase off the Devil. That is evident, because the Devil quoted Scripture as part of his temptation. 

It is good to have the word of God abide in our memories, but chiefly in our hearts, by a sound belief and fervent love to the truth.

The Scripture is effective because it is embedded and is an automatic element of our thinking. It sets out an intellectual habit. This leads to the next element of defense noted by Manton:

(2.) Partly by resolution: 1 Pet. 4:1, ‘Arm yourselves with the same mind,’ viz., that was in Christ. When Satan grew bold and troublesome, Christ rejects him with indignation. Now the conscience of our duty should thus prevail with us to be resolute therein; the double-minded are as it were torn in pieces between God and the devil: James 1:8, ‘A double-minded man is unstable in all his ways.’ Therefore, being in God’s way, we should resolve to be deaf to all temptations.

He ends with encouragement. This sermon could easily be discouraging: The Devil will assault you. He is powerful and intelligent. If it was merely make sure you remember enough Bible and stiffen you spine, this could easily become a matter of discouragement, because then it would make it seem as the power lay wholly with us. Instead, he sets out the example as proof that we will prevail:

4. The hopes of success. God would set Christ before us as a pattern of trust and confidence, that when we address ourselves to serve God, we might not fear the temptations of Satan. We have an example of overcoming the devil in our glorious head and chief. If he pleaded, John 16:33, ‘In the world ye shall have tribulation, but be of good cheer, I have overcome the world;’ the same holdeth good here, for the enemies of our salvation are combined. He overcame the devil in our natures, that we might not be discouraged: we fight against the same adversaries in the same cause, and he will give power to us, his weak members, being full of compassion, which certainly is a great comfort to us.

Having provided a general statement of the case, he proceeds to some particulars. 

Use. Of instruction to us:—

1. To reckon upon temptations. As soon as we mind our baptismal covenant, we must expect that Satan will be our professed foe, seeking to terrify or allure us from the banner of our captain, Jesus Christ. 

He then tallies up the types that immediately give way to temptation and return to “Satan’s camp.”

One type do not renounce Christ. Rather, they merely live as if Christ did not matter.

Now these are the devil’s agents, and the more dangerous because they use Christ’s name against his offices, and the form of his religion to destroy the power thereof; 

A second sort give way in a passive manner. They are not set against Christ in any obvious way; Christ simply does not matter to them.  They

tamely yield to the lusts of the flesh, and go ‘like an ox to the slaughter, and a fool to the correction of the stocks,’ Prov. 7:22 ….

A third sort begin well:

But then there is a third sort of men, that begin to be serious, and to mind their recovery by Christ: they have many good motions and convictions of the danger of sin, excellency of Christ, necessity of holiness; they have many purposes to leave sin and enter upon a holy course of life, but ‘the wicked one cometh, and cateheth away that which was sown in his heart,’ Matt. 13:19. He beginneth betimes to oppose the work, before we are confirmed and settled in a course of godliness, as he did set upon Christ presently upon his baptism. Baptism in us implieth avowed dying unto sin and living unto God; now God permitteth temptation to try our resolution. 

A fourth sort may not fall like the first three, but they will not leave the battle without a battle:

There is a fourth sort, of such as have made some progress in religion, even to a degree of eminency: these are not altogether free; for if the devil had confidence to assault the declared Son of God, will he be afraid of a mere mortal man? No; these he assaulteth many times very sorely: pirates venture on the greatest booty. These he seeketh to draw off from Christ, as Pharaoh sought to bring back the Israelites after their escape; or to foil them by some scandalous fall, to do religion a mischief: 2 Sam. 12:14, ‘By this deed thou hast given great occasion to the enemies of the Lord to blaspheme;’ or at least to vex them and torment them, to make the service of God tedious and uncomfortable to them: Luke 22:31, ‘Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he might sift you as wheat’—to toss and vex you, as wheat in a sieve. So that no sort of Christians can promise themselves exemption; and God permitteth it, because to whom much is given, of them the more is required.

Second, we need to realize that anything can and will be used to temptation, wealth or poverty. We are tempted by ease and affliction.

Third, 

His end is to dissuade us from good, and persuade us to evil. 

On one hand, he 

Dissuade[s] us from good by representing the impossibility, trouble, and small necessity of it. 

He also tempts us to evil:

He persuadeth us to evil by profit, pleasure, necessity; we cannot live without it in the world. He hideth the hook, and showeth the bait only; he concealeth the hell, the horror, the eternal pains that follow sin, and only telleth you how beneficial, profitable, and delightful the sin will be to you:

This quotation is remarkably similar to a passage in Thomas Brooks

Device (1). To present the bait and hide the hook; to present the golden cup, and hide the poison; to present the sweet, the pleasure, and the profit that may flow in upon the soul by yielding to sin, and by hiding from the soul the wrath and misery that will certainly follow the committing of sin. By this device he took our first parents: Gen. 3:4, 5, ‘And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: for God doth know, that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened; and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.’ Your eyes shall be opened, and you shall be as gods! Here is the bait, the sweet, the pleasure, the profit. Oh, but he hides the hook,—the shame, the wrath, and the loss that would certainly follow!

Thomas Brooks, The Complete Works of Thomas Brooks, ed. Alexander Balloch Grosart, vol. 1 (Edinburgh; London; Dublin: James Nichol; James Nisbet and Co.; G. Herbert, 1866), 12–13.

And again, Manton returns to a note of encouragement to close the entire sermon:

4. While we are striving against temptations, let us remember our general. We do but follow the Captain of our salvation, who hath vanquished the enemy, and will give us the victory if we keep striving: ‘The God of peace shall bruise Satan under your feet shortly,’ Rom. 16:2. Not his feet, but ours: we shall be conquerors. Our enemy is vigilant and strong: it is enough for us that our Redeemer is merciful and faithful in succouring the tempted, and able to master the tempter, and defeat all his methods. Christ hath conquered him, both as a lamb and as a lion: Rev. 5:5, 8. The notion of a lamb intimateth his sacrifice, the notion of a lion his victory: in the lamb is merit, in the lion strength; by the one he maketh satisfaction to God, by the other he rescueth sinners out of the paw of the roaring lion, and maintaineth his interest in their hearts. Therefore let us not be discouraged, but closely adhere to him.

Thomas Manton, The Temptation of Christ, Sermon 1.b

10 Thursday Dec 2020

Posted by in Thomas Manton

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , ,

II. The reasons why Christ submitted to it.

A. With respect to Adam, that the parallel between the first and second Adam might be more exact. … 

Manton draws out a series of parallels here:

And as in other respects, so in this;

 in the same way we were destroyed by the first Adam, in the same way we were restored by the second. 

Christ recovereth and winneth that which Adam lost. 

Our happiness was lost by the first Adam being overcome by the tempter; 

so it must be recovered by the second Adam, the tempter being overcome by him. 

He that did conquer must first be conquered, that sinners might be rescued from the captivity wherein he held them captive. 

The first Adam, being assaulted quickly after his entrance into paradise, was overcome; and therefore must the second Adam overcome him as soon as he entered upon his office, and that in a conflict hand-to-hand, in that nature that was foiled. 

The devil must lose his prisoners in the same way that he caught them. Christ must do what Adam could not do. 

The victory is gotten by a public person in our nature, before it can be gotten by each individual in his own person, for so it was lost. 

Adam lost the day before he had any offspring, so Christ winneth it in his own person before he doth solemnly begin to preach the gospel and call disciples; and therefore here was the great overthrow of the adversary.

2. In regard of Satan, who by his conquest got a twofold power over man by tempting, he got an interest in his heart to lead him ‘captive at his will’ and pleasure, 2 Tim. 2:26; and he was made God’s executioner, he got a power to punish him: Heb. 2:14, ‘That through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is, the devil.’ 

The note on Hebrews 2:14 is interesting, because it is a passage which receives strikingly little comment by preachers or commentators. 

Therefore the Son of God, who interposed on our behalf, and undertook the rescue of sinners, did assume the nature of man, that he might conquer Satan in the nature that was conquered, and also offer himself as a sacrifice in the same nature for the demonstration of the justice of God. 

This argument has affinity with Anslem:

The argument is briefly this: man must render satisfaction, and he cannot do it; but only man ought to, and only God can; hence, God became man in Jesus Christ. “This cannot be done except by a complete satisfaction for sin, which no sinner can make” (ii. 4, 3). “There is no one therefore who can make this satisfaction except God Himself.… But no one ought to make it except man; otherwise man does not make satisfaction.… If, therefore, as is evident, it is needful that that heavenly state be perfected from among men, and this cannot be unless the above-mentioned satisfaction be made, which no one can make except God, and no one ought to make except man; it is necessary that a God-man make it” (ii. 6, 4 and 5). Christ is God-man, not by conversion of the Divine nature into the human, nor by the blending of the two natures into a tertium quid, but by the co-existence of the two natures in one person (ii. 7). He must be of the race of Adam, in order to make satisfaction for it (ii. 8). Being sinless, He did not need to die (ii. 10). “But there is nothing more severe and arduous that a man can suffer for the honour of God of his own accord, and not as a matter of debt, than death. And a man can in no way more entirely give himself up to God, than when he delivers himself up to death for His honour” (ii. 11, 21). Christ’s death was therefore voluntary, and herein consisted its supreme value: His merits are infinite, hence superabundant and available for man’s rescue. It is then shown “how His death outweighs the number and greatness of all sins” (ii. 14, 1). The merit of His death is derived from the uniqueness of His personality; “because a sin which is committed against His person surpasses beyond comparison all those which can be conceived of apart from His person” (ii. 14, 7). “The life of this Man was so exalted and so precious, that it may suffice to pay what is due for the sins of the whole world, and infinitely more” (ii. 17, 40).

George Cadwalader Foley, Anselm’s Theory of the Atonement: The Bohlen Lectures, 1908 (London; Bombay; Calcutta; New York: Longmans, Green, and Co., 1909), 129–130.

Manton then draws an interesting observation concerning Christ as an example. There is a school which reads all of Christ’s work as solely exemplary. But Manton here states example then merit:

First, Christ must overcome by obedience, tried to the uttermost by temptations; and then he must also overcome by suffering. By overcoming temptations, he doth overcome Satan as a tempter; and by death he overcame him as a tormentor, or as the prince of death, who had the power of executing God’s sentence. 

So that you see before he overcame him by merit, he overcame him by example, and was an instance of a tempted man before he was an instance of a persecuted man, or one that came to make satisfaction to God’s justice.

And how that example can act as a comfort to us: We can trust Jesus:

C. With respect to the saints, who are in their passage to heaven to be exposed to great difficulties and trials. Now that they might have comfort and hope in their Redeemer, and come to him boldly as one touched with a feeling of their infirmities, he himself submitted to be tempted. [Heb. 2:18, 4:15] …..

Christ hath experienced how strong the assailant is, how feeble our nature is, how hard a matter it is to withstand when we are so sorely assaulted. His own experience of sufferings and temptations in himself doth entender his heart, and make him fit for sympathy with us, and begets a tender compassion towards the miseries and frailties of his members.

This also has a hint of Anselm in it: The value of Christ’s obedience was increased because it was given in the face of temptation:

4. With respect to Christ himself, that he might be an exact pattern of obedience to God. The obedience is little worth, which is carried on in an even tenor, when we have no temptation to the contrary, … Now Christ was to be more eminent than all the holy ones of God, and therefore, that he might give an evidence of his piety, constancy, and trust in God, it was thought fit some trial should be made of him, that he might by example teach us what reason we have to hold to God against the strongest temptations.

Thomas Manton, The Temptation of Christ, Sermon 1.a

08 Tuesday Dec 2020

Posted by in Matthew, Thomas Manton, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

SERMON I

Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit into the wilderness, to be tempted of the devil.—

Matt. 4.1

Jesus Tempted, Giovanni Battista

The first step in exegesis is an examination of the grammatical/logical elements of the text:

This scripture giveth us the history of Christ’s temptation, which I shall go over by degrees.

In the words observe:—

1. The parties tempted and tempting. The person tempted was the Lord Jesus Christ. The person tempting was the devil.

2. The occasion inducing this combat, Jesus was led up of the Spirit.

3. The time, then.

4. The place, the wilderness.

Following this outline of the elements, he proposes an observation of what is to be learned from the text:

From the whole observe:—

Doct. The Lord Jesus Christ was pleased to submit himself to an extraordinary combat with the tempter, for our good.

Next he provides the elements of his sermon, which will be both an examination of the elements and an exhortation based upon the same:

1. I shall explain the nature and circumstances of this extraordinary combat.

2. The reasons why Christ submitted to it.

3. The good of this to us.

Now the examination:

I. The circumstances of this extraordinary combat. And here—

Manton looks at the Who, What, How, When

A. The persons combating—Jesus and the devil, the seed of the woman and the seed of the serpent. It was designed long before. Gen.3:15 ….

B. The manner of the combat. It was not merely a phantasm, that Christ was thus assaulted and used: no, he was tempted in reality, not in conceit and imagination only. It seemeth to be in the spirit, though it was real; as Paul was taken up into the third heaven, whether in the body or out of the body we cannot easily judge, but real it was. I shall more accurately discuss this question afterwards in its more proper place.

He emphasizes that this was a historical reality. Even though it involved at one non-physical being (the Devil), we should not consider spiritual engagements as less real. Next he considers, how did this come about:

C. What moved him, or how was he brought to enter into the lists [who arranged for this combat to take place] with Satan? He was ‘led by the Spirit,’ meaning thereby the impulsion and excitation of the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of God. Luke 4:1.

From this, Manton draws a deduction: 

He did not voluntarily put himself upon temptation, but, by God’s appointment, went up from Jordan farther into the desert.

At this point, Manton begins to draw a lesson. He presumes that the life of Jesus is exemplary for the conduct of our life. This is consistent with Peter’s teaching that Jesus’ conduct [at the passion] is exemplary for our life. 1 Peter 2:21. Paul writes that we are being conformed into the image of Jesus. Col. 3:10. Paul applies this in particular to our response to difficulties. Rom. 8:28-29. And so, Manton’s application in this manner is warranted. 

We learn hence:—

1. That temptations come not by chance, not out of the earth, nor merely from the devil; but God ordereth them for his own glory and our good.

He then provides examples, Job 1:12; Luke 22:31; Matt. 8:31

If we be free, let us bless God for it, and pray that he would not ‘lead us into temptation:’ if tempted, when we are in Satan’s hands, remember Satan is in God’s hand.

2. Having given up ourselves to God, we are no longer to be at our own dispose and direction, but must submit ourselves to be led, guided, and ordered by God in all things. So it was with Christ, he was led by the Spirit continually. Luke 4:1; Romans 8:14.

From the factual conclusions, Manton draws a conclusion as to our conduct:

3. That we must observe our warrant and calling in all we resolve upon. To put ourselves upon hazards we are not called unto, is to go out of our bounds to meet a temptation, or to ride into the devil’s quarters. Christ did not go of his own accord into the desert, but by divine impulsion, and so he came from thence. We may, in our place and calling, venture ourselves, on the protection of God’s providence, upon obvious temptations; God will maintain and support us in them; that is to trust God; but to go out of our calling is to tempt God.

And finally an observation as to human will and the power of God:

4. Compare the words used in Matthew and Mark, chap. 1:12, ‘And immediately the Spirit driveth him into the wilderness.’ That shows that it was a forcible motion, or a strong impulse, such as he could not easily resist or refuse, so here is freedom—he was led; there is force and efficacious impression—he was driven, with a voluntary condescension thereunto. There may be liberty of man’s will, yet the victorious efficacy of grace united together: a man may be taught and drawn, as Christ here was led, and driven by the Spirit into the wilderness.

Manton now come to when this took place.

D. The time.

1. Presently after his baptism. Now the baptism of Christ agreeth with ours as to the general nature of it. Baptism is our initiation into the service of God, or our solemn consecration of ourselves to him; and it doth not only imply work, but fight. (Rom. 6:13, 13:12 ….).  

Which raises the question of why would Jesus be baptized?

….His baptism was the taking of the field as general; we undertake to fight under him in our rank and place.

What is the connection between the baptism and the temptation? The temptation comes immediately upon the baptism and the Father’s recognition of Jesus as the Son (Mark 3:16-17)

2. Thus many times the children of God, after solemn assurances of his love, are exposed to great temptations.…God’s conduct is gentle, and proportioned to our strength, as Jacob drove as the little ones were able to bear it. He never suffers his castles to be besieged till they are victualled.

Why does the temptation come immediately before his public preaching ministry (his prophetical office):

3. … Experience of temptations fits for the ministry, as Christ’s temptations prepared him to set a-foot the kingdom of God, for the recovery of poor souls out of their bondage into the liberty of the children of God: … Christ also would show us that ministers should not only be men of science, but of experience.

4. The place or field where this combat was fought, the wilderness, where were none but wild beasts: … In this solitary place Satan tried his utmost power against our Saviour.

This teacheth us:—

a. That Christ alone grappled with Satan, having no fellow-worker with him, that we may know the strength of our Redeemer, who is able himself to overcome the tempter without any assistance, and to ‘save to the uttermost all that come unto God by him,’ Heb. 7:25.

b. That the devil often abuseth our solitude. It is good sometimes to be alone; but then we need to be stocked with holy thoughts or employed in holy exercises, that we may be able to say, as Christ, John 16:32, ‘I am not alone, because the Father is with me.’ Howsoever a state of retirement from human converse, if it be not necessary, exposeth us to temptations; but if we are cast upon it, we must expect God’s presence and help.

c. That no place is privileged from temptations, unless we leave our hearts behind us. David, walking on the terrace or house-top, was ensnared by Bathsheba’s beauty: 2 Sam. 11:2–4. Lot, that was chaste in Sodom, yet committed incest in the mountain, where there were none but his own family: Gen. 19:30, 31, &c. When we are locked in our closets, we cannot shut out Satan.

What is to pray without ceasing

04 Friday Dec 2020

Posted by in Prayer, Thomas Manton

≈ Leave a comment

From Thomas Manton’s sermon on 1 Thess. 5:17.

Since to pray “without ceasing” could misunderstood, Manton works the possibilities and then concludes

“This praying without ceasing is to be interpreted of the universality and the frequency of the return of the occasions and opportunities of prayer; and we may be said to do that without ceasing which we do very often. So that though the act of prayer be intermitted, the course of prayer should not be interrupted; for we are to pray at all times, in all conditions, and in all businesses and affairs.”

As for all times means at the least daily

“We need daily bread, daily pardon, daily strength against temptations. Yea, there seemeth to be a double standing occasion; every day in the morning for direction, in the evening for protection; as God appointed a morning and evening sacrifice: Num. 28:4,”

It is also in every condition in which we may find ourslef

“In all estates and conditions, afflicted and prosperous. In an adverse or afflicted estate: James 5:13, ‘Is any among you afflicted? let him pray.’ That gives vent to our sorrow, and turneth it into a spiritual channel. In a prosperous estate we are to pray that we may not forget God.”

And finally prayer is not to spiritual matters alone

“In every business, civil or sacred: ‘In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths,’ Prov. 3:6. In business secular. Abraham’s servant beggeth success in his errand: Gen. 24:12, ‘O Lord God of my master Abraham! I pray thee send me goodspeed this day.’ In matters sacred: 2 Thes. 3:5, ‘The Lord direct your heart into the love of God.’ So that a serious sensible christian seldom wanteth an errand to the throne of grace, and if we be not strangers to ourselves, we cannot be strangers to God.”

Prayer as Desire

04 Friday Dec 2020

Posted by in Prayer, Thomas Manton

≈ Leave a comment

Thomas Manton in his sermon on 1 Thess. 5:17 (pray without ceasing) defines prayer as desire

“It is an offering up of our desires. Desires are the soul and life of prayer, words are but the body. Now as the body without the soul is dead, so are prayers unless they are animated with our desires: Ps. 10:17, ‘Lord, thou hast heard the desire of the humble.’ God heareth not words, but desires.”

He then further specifies the nature of this offering up of prayer.

First the desire is offered with the right heart.

“These desires are offered unto God, or brought before the Lord in this solemn way: Zeph. 3:10, ‘My suppliants, even the daughters of my dispersed, shall bring mine offering;’ that is, shall reverently express their desires to God. An offering was either a sacrifice, and prayer is a spiritual sacrifices: 1 Peter 2:5,”

The prayer is offered up not on our own account but we come bearing Christ’s name

“They are desires presented in the name of Christ, in whom alone we are acceptable to God: John 16:23, ‘Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name, he will give it you.’”

Finally these are agreeable to God

“All our desires must be regulated by his revealed will, and subordinated to his secret will, so far as God seeth it fit for his glory and our good; for upon other terms he is not bound to us.”

Philip Rieff, The Triumph of the Therapeutic, 4.1

09 Thursday Jul 2020

Posted by in Freud, Thomas Manton

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

Chapter 4: In Defense of the Analytic Attitude

This chapter concerns Freud’s defense of his analysis. To understand this, Rieff notes two distinct understanding of the “theory of theory”.  First, there was the understanding of theory bringing the human into conformity with reality: “They being what we know them to be, the intellectual and emotional task of life is to make our actions confirm to the right order, so that we too can be right.”  The model is the true paradigm. 

There is a natural inherent order which we seek to understand and then order life. The underlying order the “model” (as Rieff) calls it is the point. There is a final end, and that end is God. 

But there is another understanding of theory which sets out to destroy gods. This sort of theory “arms us with the weapons for transforming reality instead of forcing us to conform to it.” (73) There is no purpose, no final cause. Theory is merely a way of navigating an otherwise incomprehensible universe and mitigating the pain of life. “A good theory becomes the creator of power.” (Ibid.)

It is such a power creating, reality bending theory that produces Freud and Marx. 

At this point, Rieff distinguishes Adler and Jung from Freud. Freud sought merely to set forth a theory which would give on the power to choose to live any sort of life.  He would not “cure” anyone: cure was a “religious category.”  (74) “He merely wanted to give men more options than their raw experience of life permitted them.” (74)

Freud’s mechanism leaves one nowhere: you finally kill off the old gods but there is nothing with which to replace it. Rieff notes that Adler and Jung sought to construct a basis for establishing a new cure on the other-side of analysis despite their attempts. 

The end point was the Genesis 3 promise of the Serpent, “You shall be as gods knowing good and evil.” “Freud risked the correlative implication: that healthy men need no gods.” (76)

This second form of theory and its Freudian aim of a man who no longer needs the consolation of religion or the search of a pre-existing meaning and order in nature leaves man as a carver of his good.

Freud’s concept of a world freed of gods leaves every person the one who decides his own good, which has profound implications for law. In a series of cases, the courts have found this power to create one’s own “meaning” as the basis for constitutional rights: 

The Casey decision again confirmed that our laws and tradition afford constitutional protection to personal decisions relating to marriage, procreation, contraception, family relationships, child rearing, and education. Id., at 851. In explaining the respect the Constitution demands for the autonomy of the person in making these choices, we stated as follows: 

[“These matters, involving the most intimate and personal choices a person may make in a lifetime, choices central to personal dignity and autonomy, are central to the liberty protected by the Fourteenth Amendment.] [At the heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life.] Beliefs about these matters could not define the attributes of personhood were they formed under compulsion of the State.” Ibid.

Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558, 573-74 (2003). In the dissent of Lawrence, Justice Scalia wrote:

And if the Court is referring not to the holding of Casey, but to the dictum of its famed sweet-mystery-of-life passage, ante, at 13 (“`At the heart of liberty is the right to define one’s own concept of existence, of meaning, of the universe, and of the mystery of human life'”): That “casts some doubt” upon either the totality of our jurisprudence or else (presumably the right answer) nothing at all. I have never heard of a law that attempted to restrict one’s “right to define” certain concepts; and if the passage calls into question the government’s power to regulate actions based on one’s self-defined “concept of existence, etc.,” it is the passage that ate the rule of law. 

Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558, 588 (2003). Scalia’s point is that all law defines some sort of public character: it is a “theory” in the first sense referenced above. But in a series of decisions involving human sexuality and procreation, the courts have adopted a Freudian theory of law, in which freedom from the “gods” of any culture can be set aside. 

But such self-carving of happiness does remain a personal decision – however personally the decision is made:

Incorporating the “mystery of life” logic into these spheres deludes individuals into thinking that personal failures in socially important roles only have personal consequences. Society thus lacks the authority to explain how the personal choice of one hurts the wellbeing of others.

In other words, society cannot say whether marriage ensures that children have the benefit of a mother and a father—marriage is whatever a person wants it to be. Society cannot say whether a child suffers from no-fault divorce—divorce is a personal choice. Society cannot say whether a child is raised by parents in a relationship that society needs to survive—relationships are personal.

Should the detriments of a child’s upbringing become a social harm when he takes society’s reins as an adult, that new adult now also lacks the right moral framework to refine social standards for the benefit of his children.  Life’s “mystery” about what crafts and constitutes good conduct thus endures—even when harmful consequences counsel society to encourage some choices over others from reason and experience.

William Haun, “The “mystery of Life” Makes Law a Mystery,” The Public Discourse (July 26, 2013), https://www.thepublicdiscourse.com/2013/07/10091/.  The justification for Freud’s freeing men from deformed gods is that the culture simply no longer functions nor does it provide the ability to define character and human good. These commitment therapies are simply outdated. 

Now perhaps when an occasional person behaves along their on lines there is little communal effect. Indeed, even the most prolific murderer or robber will have only limited effect upon a society of any size. But when there is no communal standards for even the most basic means of living, then the results will profoundly damaging. Freud’s theory made constitutional right will not end well when extended to all. 

As Justice Scalia noted, the doctrine applied consistently means there can be no order, which is precisely the duty of law and culture. But, as Freud contends, there is no order to be had. 

I know that an utterly chaotic society would have been a horror to Freud. I have read nowhere that he was a anarchist. But the results of his analytic theory aim in only one direction. Indeed, he felt that Adler and Jung were wrong to try find a new basis for order. 

On the other side is the first understanding of theory, that human happiness and well-being are defined not by ourselves but by God:

Men would be happy with that kind of happiness which is true happiness, but not in the way which God propoundeth, being prepossessed with carnal fancies. It is counted a foolish thing to wait upon God in the midst of straits, conflicts, and temptations: 1 Cor. 2:14, ‘The natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness unto him; neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.’ More prejudices lie against the means than the end; therefore, out of despair, they sit down with a carnal choice, as persons disappointed in a match take the next offer. Since they cannot have God’s happiness, they resolve to be their own carvers, and to make themselves as happy as they can in the enjoyment of present things

Thomas Manton, The Complete Works of Thomas Manton, vol. 6 (London: James Nisbet & Co., 1872), 7.

Some thoughts on Stoicism

11 Tuesday Feb 2020

Posted by in Thomas Manton, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, ,

I read quite a bit of Stoic philosophy and thus realize that it is far more nuanced than simply detachment and reserve. But detachment and reserve; a purposeful attempt to avoid all trouble is the popular form of the concept. A cheaper and American version is to simply avoid all thoughts of something “negative”; which is a kind of ostrich happiness. I will be happy by simply not knowing. We have even medicalized this, so that feeling bad is a disease (and yes, I know there are severe cases of depression which are quite different than merely feeling sadness, loss, and such).

There is a tacit belief among som Christians, that a stoic dullness to trouble; a complete equanimity to all things is a kind of holiness.  If something bad takes place, I should not care. This is matched by a kind of stoicism to trouble as a sign of mental health.

There is much to be said for not being troubled; but that standard alone is insufficient to respond to all things. Should we be untroubled at injustice? She we be untroubled at death of those whom we love? The examples are easy to multiply.

The fault would not be in sorrow, fear, love, anger, et cetera. The trouble is the whether and when of such affections. The trouble as Christianity would have it is not that one expresses some emotion, but rather the question of whether the affection is based upon a true and right understand.  What we need is not a placid soul. What we need are rightly calibrated affections:

In this psalm you find the man of God under divers passions, sometimes of joy, sometimes of sorrow, sometimes of hope and courage, and sometimes of fear. As there is a time for all things in this world, there are several conditions and duties that we run through, and we have affections planted in us that suit with every condition. Religion doth not nullify, but sanctify our affections. Some have vainly thought affections to be an after-growth of noisome weeds in our nature corrupted; whereas they are wholesome herbs, implanted in us by God at our first creation, of great use to grace when rightly stirred and ordered:

Thomas Manton, The Complete Works of Thomas Manton, vol. 8 (London: James Nisbet & Co., 1872), 230.

Thomas Manton on the Two Ways of Giving Thanks to God

30 Friday Aug 2019

Posted by in Thomas Manton, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

,

First, The substance, or act of it, ‘Giving thanks.’ Praise relateth to God’s excellencies, thanksgiving to God’s benefits. There is a twofold thanksgiving—(1.) By way of celebration or commemoration, when we speak of God’s mercies one to another; (2.) By way of invocation, adoration, or worship, when we express them to God himself.

1. A thanksgiving by way of commemoration, when we communicate to others what experience we have had of God: Ps. 22:22, ‘I will declare thy name, unto my brethren; in the midst of the congregation will I praise thee.’ The name of God is that by which he is made known in his word or works. As we are to propagate to others what knowledge we get of God by his word, so also what we have found of him in his works, how God hath made known his name to us by acts of grace and mercy: Ps. 66:16, ‘Come and hear, all ye that fear the Lord, and I will declare what he hath done for my soul.’ This is one part of the communion of saints, to call upon others to praise God with us, as one bird sets the whole flock a chirping. We are usually barren, vain, foolish in our communications with one another. This celebration and commemoration should be our cure and solace: Eph. 5:4, ἀλλὰ μᾶλλον ἐυχαριστία, ‘But rather giving of thanks.’ Speaking to each other of God’s goodness is a christian’s mirth, and a choice remedy against foolish talking, jesting, and other sins. To put down idle and sinful talk, he prescribeth giving of thanks.

2. There is thanksgiving by way of adoration, or direct address to God himself. This is a special part of christian worship, therefore the whole is expressed by it: 1 Cor. 14:16, ‘Else when thou shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest?’ where the whole christian worship is expressed by ‘blessing with the spirit,’ or ‘giving of thanks.’ And thence God is said to ‘inhabit the praises of Israel,’ Ps. 22:3, because he is often magnified and praised by his church: the praises of Israel, that is the subject of it. Yea, it is doctrinally declared by God himself: Ps. 50:23, ‘He that offereth praise glorifieth me.’ The Lord taketh it as an honour to himself when we praise him for his excellencies or bless him for his benefits.

This thanksgiving is an acknowledgment of benefits received to the praise of the bestower.

There is included in it partly notice and observation of what God hath done for us. The contrary is taxed, Isa. 1:3, ‘The ox knoweth his owner, and the ass his master’s crib; but Israel doth not know, my people doth not consider.’ The brute beasts know such as feed them and make much of them, but men take no notice of what great things God hath done for them: Hosea 2:8, ‘For she did not know that I gave her corn, and wine, and oil, and multiplied her silver and gold.’ Little notice is taken of God’s kindness in the world.

And partly too an esteem of the benefits received; for we cannot give thanks for what we value and prize not. Solomon gave cities to Hiram, but they pleased him not; and therefore he called them Cabul, that is, displeasing or dirty, 1 Kings 9:12, 13, because they stood in low and moorish places. So God vouchsafeth many mercies, but most men are discontented with their portion; the mercies of God please them not: Mal. 1:2, ‘I have loved you, saith the Lord; yet ye say, Wherein hast thou loved us?’ What love is it to be restored to bare hills and mountains, or to be brought home to a wasted land, where they were to begin the world again? On the contrary, they that esteem the effects of God’s love will bless him, and praise him: Ps. 63:3, ‘Because thy loving-kindness is better than life, my lips shall praise thee.’

They that are affected with mercies received cannot but be affectioned towards the God of their mercies, and therefore will speak good of his name. And partly actual acknowledgment; they excite and stir up their hearts to give God the glory these mercies call for: Ps. 103:1, 2, ‘Bless the Lord, O my soul; and all that is within me bless his holy name. Bless the Lord, O my soul, and forget not all his benefits.’ This acknowledgment, if it be serious, will excite and urge them to make some recompense, as to consider what they may do for God: Ps. 116:12, ‘What shall I render unto the Lord for all his benefits towards me?’ And it was Hezekiah’s fault, 2 Chron. 32:25, compared with Isa. 38:9, when he had been sick, and was recovered of his sickness, that ‘he rendered not according to the benefit done him.’ Therefore unless this acknowledgment doth excite us and urge us to honour, please, serve, and glorify God, it is not right. They do anew devote themselves to him upon every eminent mercy.

Thomas Manton, The Complete Works of Thomas Manton, vol. 19 (London: James Nisbet & Co., 1874), 417–419.

Thomas Manton Sermon on Titus 2:11-14 1.3

21 Wednesday Nov 2018

Posted by in Grace, Thomas Manton, Titus, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

For the previous post on this sermon see here: 

DOCTRINE 2:

Hath appeared unto all men.—The word ἐπεφάνη, appeared, signifies it is broken out of a sudden, like a star, or like a light that was not seen before; and so it refers to the late manifestation of the gospel in the apostle’s days. Now on a sudden it broke out. So Luke 1:78, 79, ‘Through the tender mercy of our God, whereby the day-spring from on high hath visited us, to give light to them that sit in darkness, and in the shadow of death.’ It is meant of the breaking out of the gospel, as the day doth after a dark night; so here the word ἐπεφάνη implieth the same.
Doct. 2. That grace in the discoveries of the gospel hath shined out in a greater brightness than ever it did before.

This grace appeareth in the gospel; there and there only is it clearly manifested.
In the prosecution of this point I shall show—
1. What darkness there was as to the knowledge of grace before.
2. How much of grace is now discovered.

I. First, What a darkness there was before the eternal gospel was brought out of the bosom of God. There was a darkness both among Jews and Gentiles. In the greatest part of the world there was utter darkness as to the knowledge of grace, and in the church nothing but shadows and figures.

A. This grace was not known in the world, only a little of it was:

1. [Common Grace]: Ps. 33:5, ‘The earth is full of the goodness of the Lord.’ Some inferior grace was made known to them in the creation and in the course of providence, by showers of rain and fruitful seasons, grace on this side heaven; but nothing of the secrets of God’s bosom, of the incarnation of God, of the expiation of sin by his death, of salvation by faith in the Mediator.

2. [Special Grace] This depends not upon the connection of natural causes, but the free pleasure of God; therefore the angels knew it not till it was revealed in the church. Eph. 3:10

a. The gentiles, by looking into the order of causes, could never find it out.

b. They might find a first being, and the chiefest good, but not a Christ, not a saviour;

c. Much of God may be seen in the known courses of nature, rain from heaven and fruitful seasons, but nothing of Christ. …Though he gave them not the gospel, yet he gave them the light of nature, and the looking-glass of the creatures.

B. To the Jews this grace began to dawn, but it was veiled in figures and shadows, that they could not see clearly….

1. Grace is opposed to the condemnation of the moral law, and truth to the shadows of the ceremonial law.

2. Christ’s offices, his benefices, his person, were but darkly propounded to them. Take but one place for all.

II. Secondly, What and how much of grace is now discovered? I answer—

A. The wisdom of grace. The gospel is a mere riddle to carnal reason, a great mystery: 1 Tim. 3:16, ‘Great is the mystery of godliness.’

1. There we read of God and man brought together, and justice and mercy brought together by the contrivance of grace; here only we see this mystery, that is without controversy great, for these things could not come into the heads of any creatures.

2. If angels and men had been put to study, and set down their way of reconciliation to God, how it should be, they could never have thought of such a remedy as the bringing of God and man together in the person of Christ, and justice and mercy together by the blood and satisfaction of Christ; this came out of no breast but God; he brought the secret out of his own bosom. …

3. When God redeemed the world, he had a greater work to do than to make the world at first. The object of creation was pure nothing, but then, as there was no help, so no hindrance; but now, in redemption, there was sin to be taken away, and that was worse than anything.

B. We discern the freeness of grace in the gospel, both in giving and accepting.

1. Whatever God doth is a gift, and what we do, it is accepted of grace. In giving there is a great deal of grace made known there. The Lord doth all freely: John 1:16, ‘And of his fulness have all we received, and grace for grace;’ that is, for grace’s sake he gives Christ, gives faith, gives pardon; he gives the condition as well as the blessing.

2. Certainly now we have to do with a God of grace, who sits upon a throne of grace, that he might bestow freely

3. Under the law it was figured out by the mercy-seat between the cherubims, from whence God was giving out answers; but there the high priest could enter but once a year, and the way within the veil was not fully made manifest, Heb. 9:8. There was a throne of grace then, but more God’s tribunal of justice; there was smoke and thundering about his throne; but now let us draw near that we may obtain grace, take all freely out of God’s hand.

C. The efficacy and power of grace is discovered in the gospel. Christ sendeth his Spirit to apply what he himself hath purchased. One person comes to merit, and the other to accomplish the fruit of his merit. Mark, to stop the course of grace, divine justice did not only put in an impediment, but there was our infidelity that hindered the application of that which Christ was to merit; and therefore, as the second person is to satisfy God, so the third person is to work upon us. There was a double hindrance against the business of our salvation—God’s justice, for the glory of God was to be repaired, therefore Christ was to merit; and there was our unbelief, therefore the Spirit must come and apply it. First, Christ suffered, and when he was ascended, then was the Spirit poured out. Had it not been for the gospel, we should never have known the efficacy and power of grace.

D. We are acquainted with the largeness and bounty of grace.

1. The benefits that come by Christ were not so clearly revealed in the law; there was no type that I know of which figured union with Christ.

2. The blood of Christ was figured by the blood of bulls and goats, justification by the fleeing away of the scape-goat, sanctification by the water of purification.

3. But now eternal life is rarely mentioned in express terms;

a. sometimes it is shadowed out in the promise of inheriting the land of Canaan, as hell is by going into captivity; but otherwise it is seldom mentioned: 2 Tim. 1:10, ‘But now it is made manifest’ (speaking of the grace of God) ‘by the appearing of our Saviour Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel.’

b. The gentiles had but glimmerings and gross fancies about the future state.

c. Life and immortality was never known to the purpose till Christ came in the flesh; and therefore heaven is as sparingly mentioned in the Old Testament as temporal blessings are in the new.

d. In the New Testament we hear much of the cross, of sufferings, and afflictions. Why? Because there is much of heaven discovered. The eternal reward is strong enough, but temporals are not of consideration. Carnal men are of a temper quite contrary to the gospel; they could be content to be under the old dispensation, to have temporal blessings, and let God keep heaven to himself.

But this is the great privilege of the gospel, that life and immortality, the blessed hope, the eternal recompenses are now mentioned so expressly, and propounded to our desires and hopes.

E. In the gospel we learn the sureness of grace. God will no more be disappointed; the whole business lies without us, in other hands. In the first covenant, our salvation was committed to the indeterminate freedom of man’s will; but now Christ is both a redeemer and a surety.

Thomas Manton Sermon on Titus 2:11-14 1.2

19 Monday Nov 2018

Posted by in Puritan, Thomas Manton, Titus, Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , , , ,

The first post on this sermon may be found here: 

Part Two: Use

I. Use 1. To persuade us, if grace be the cause of all the good we enjoy, not to wrong grace.

A. Why? For this is to close and stop up the fountain; yea, to make grace our enemy; and if grace be our enemy, who shall plead for us?

B. But how do we wrong grace? I answer—five ways—

1. By neglecting the offers of grace. Such make God speak in vain, and to spend his best arguments to no purpose: 2 Cor. 6:1,

a. It is a great affront you put upon God to despise him when he speaks in the still voice. Look, as when David had sent a courteous message to Nabal, and he returns a churlish answer, it put him in a fury: 1 Sam. 25:34,

b. It may be you do not return a rough and churlish answer, and are not scorners and opposers of the word, but you slight God’s sweetest message, when he comes in the sweetest and mildest way. … It is great salvation that is offered; there is an offer of pardon and eternal life, but it worketh not if you neglect it. There is a sort of men that do not openly deny, reject, or persecute the gospel, but they receive it carelessly, and are no more moved with it than with a story of golden mountains, or rubies or diamonds fallen from heaven in a night-dream. You make God spend his best arguments in vain if you neglect this grace.

….They do not absolutely deny, but make excuse; they do not say, non placet, but non vacant—they are not at leisure; and this made the king angry. When all things are ready, and God sets forth the treasures and riches of his grace, and men will not bethink themselves, their hearts are not ready. How will this make God angry? Such kind of neglecters are said to ‘judge themselves unworthy of eternal life,’ Acts 13:46. …Grace comes to save them, and God makes them an offer as though they were worthy; and they judge themselves unworthy, and plainly declare they were altogether not worthy of this grace.

2. Another sort of men that wrong grace are those that refuse grace out of legal dejection.

(a) Many poor creatures are so vile in their own eyes that they think it impossible they should ever find favour in God’s eyes. Oh! but consider, cannot the riches of grace save? When God shall set himself on purpose to glorify grace to the full, cannot it make thee accepted? Wherefore doth God bring creatures to see their unworthiness, but that grace might be the more glorious? Grace would not be so much grace if the creature were not so unworthy; therefore you should be glad you have your hearts at that advantage, to be sensible of your own vileness.

(b) It is a wrong to grace if you do not fly to it; you straiten the riches and darken the glory of it. It is as if an emperor’s revenue could not discharge a beggar’s debt. …
Take heed of slighting the grace of God; it is God’s treasure: so far as you lessen grace, you make God a poor God. Mark that expression, Eph. 2:4, ‘God, who is rich in mercy.’ God is lord of all things, but he counts nothing to be his treasure but his goodness and mercy. He doth not say, rich in power, though he is able to do beyond what we can ask or think; nor rich in justice, though he be righteous in all his ways and just in all his works; nor doth he say rich in creatures, though his are the cattle of a thousand hills; but rich in mercy. Therefore take heed of straitening mercy, for so far you lessen God’s wealth and treasure.

3. Grace is wronged by intercepting the glory of grace.

(a) It is the greatest sacrilege that can be to rob God of his glory, especially the glory of his grace.

(b) Grace is wronged also when you are puffed up with anything you have done for God, as if it were done by your own power and strength.

(c) So, when we have done anything for the glory of God, let us send for God to take the honour.

4. Grace is wronged by turning it into wantonness.

(a) It is a heavy charge, and a black note is set on them: Jude 4, ‘Ungodly men, turning the grace of God into lasciviousness;’ …It is a mighty wrong to grace when we make it pliable to such a vile purpose.

(b) You dishonour God and disparage grace when you would make it to father the bastards of your own carnal hearts. You are vile and sinful, and you are so under the encouragements of grace, and the rather because of the abundance of grace; and, like the spider, suck poison out of the flower, and turn it into the nourishment of your lust;

( c) Grace giveth no such liberty to sin. This is done grievously by the Antinomians, who say grace gives them freedom from the moral law. It is true, grace makes us free, but to duty, not to sin.

(d) A man hath never the more carnal liberty for being acquainted with the gospel. This is the great thing which puts us upon duty and watchfulness, and melts the heart for sin, and awes it, and disposeth it to obedience.

5. Grace is wronged by slighting it after a taste, as carnal professors do: 1 Peter 2:3, ‘If so be you have tasted that the Lord is gracious.’

(a) A man hath at first a taste, that he may have trial how sweet the ways of God are. Now, if after trial, you are not satisfied, but make choice of the world again, it is a mighty wrong and contempt you put upon grace; for you do as it were declare and pronounce that you have made trial, and upon experience have found the pleasures and profits of the world are better than all the comforts that flowed from the grace of God.

(b) The whole aim of the word is to persuade men to make trial of the sweetness of grace: Ps. 34:8, ‘O taste and see that the Lord is good,’ and that his grace is good. But now your experience is a flat negative and contradiction to the word, and you do as it were say, I have made trial, and I find no such sweetness in it. None wrong grace so much as they that have tasted of grace, and yet have turned aside to the profits and pleasures of the world again, and grow weary after some strictness of profession.

II. Use 2. To press you to glorify grace.

A. This is the glory God expects from you. ..Certainly he that is a partaker of it must needs be most affected with it. Let us see a little what cause we have to praise God, above the angels, and above other men.

1. Above the angels. I do not mean the bad angels, with whom God entered not into treaty; he dealeth with them in justice, not in grace; but even the good angels. …

(a) In some respects we have more cause to bless God than even the good angels…. It is true God hath been exceeding good and bountiful to the angels, in creating them out of nothing, that they are the courtiers of heaven; but mark how good and gracious he is to us above them. The angels never offended him, but he is bountiful and gracious to us, notwithstanding the demerits of our sin; his wronged justice interposed and put in a bar, yet grace breaks out, and is manifested to us unworthy creatures.

2. Above other men.

(a) There is a common and inferior sort of grace, which is made known to all the world. [“Common grace”]

(b) The whole earth is full of his goodness, but this grace that bringeth salvation, that is peculiar to the elect, to a few poor base creatures in themselves, a little handful whom God hath chosen out of the world.’’

But when God comes to look among the sons of men, many times he chooseth the most crabbed pieces, and calls them with a holy calling, according to the purpose of his grace. It is a wonder sometimes to see how grace makes the difference between two persons involved in the same guilt. Justice can make no separation; when men are in a like case, they must look for the same judgment; but grace makes a great separation. Many of God’s elect are as deep in sin as those now in hell, yet God makes a difference. Both the good and bad thief were involved in the same condemnation, yet one is taken into paradise, and the other went unto his own place. Thus praise and glorify grace.