Christ’s Eternal Existence (Manton) Sermon 1.4

27 Monday Mar 2023

Posted by memoirandremains in Colossians, Thomas Manton

Tags

C. None was fit to give this ransom but Jesus Christ, who was God-man.

1. He was man to undertake it in our name, and God to perform it in his own strength;

a. a man that he might be made under the law, and humbled even to the death of the cross for our sakes;

b. and all this was elevated beyond the worth of created actions and sufferings by the divine nature which was in him, which perfumed his humanity, and all done by it and in it.

2. This put the stamp upon the metal, and made it current coin, imposed an infinite value upon his finite obedience and sufferings. [Since the obedience of Jesus was the obedience of the God-man, God incarnate, the human obedience had infinite worth.]

a. [Proof of the point] By taking human nature a price was put into his hands to lay down for us:

i. Heb. 10:15, and his divine nature made it sufficient and responsible, for it was the blood of God:

ii. Acts 20:28, ‘Feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood;’ and

iii. Heb. 9:13, ‘For if the blood of bulls and goats, and the ashes of an heifer, sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh, how much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?’

b. It was that flesh and blood which was assumed into the unity of his person—as a slip or branch grafted into a stock is the branch of the stock, and the fruit of it is the fruit of the stock.

3. A naked creature without this union [of God and mand] could not have satisfied the justice of God for us. This made his blood a precious blood, and his obedience a precious obedience….

D. Nothing performed by Christ could be a sufficient ransom for this end, unless he had crowned all his other actions and sufferings by laying down his life, and undergoing a bloody and violent death.

1. [Why?]

a. Partly to answer the types of the law, wherein no remission was represented without a bloody sacrifice;

b. partly from the nature of the thing, and the fulness of the satisfaction required until all that was finished, John 8:20. Death was that which was threatened to sin, death was that which was feared by the sinner.

2. [It was not just his blood per se, for any bleeding would have been sufficient then. It was the sacrificial death which matter.] ….Surely his death was necessary, or God would never have appointed it; his bloody death suited with God’s design.

3. God’s design was to carry on our recovery in such a way as might make sin more hateful, and obedience more acceptable to us.

a. Sin more hateful by his agonies, blood, shame, death; no less remedy would serve the turn, to procure the pardon and destruction of it….His design was for ever to leave a brand upon it, and to furnish us with a powerful mortifying argument against it, by the sin-offering and ransom for souls….

b. To commend obedience. …. All his former actions, together with his death and sufferings, make but one entire act of eminent obedience; ….

E. From this ransom and act of obedience there is a liberty resulting unto us, for the redeemed are let go when the ransom is paid.

1. [Here is an interesting comment on the effect of our being freed “from the law”]

a. Christ came not to free us from the duty of the law, but the penalty and curse thereof.

b. To free us from the duty of the law is to promote the devil’s interest.

c. No; he freed us from the wrath of God that we may serve him cheerfully, to establish God’s interest upon surer and more comfortable terms,

2. [The relation of this freedom to the work of the devil] and so by consequence from the power of the devil, which is built on the curse of the law and reign of sin. Satan’s power over us doth flow from the sentence of the condemnation pronounced by the law against sinners, and consists in that dominion sin hath obtained over them. If the curse of the law be disannulled, and the power of sin broken, he is spoiled of his power. Col. 2:14-15

[a. Another verse relevant here is Heb. 2:14-15. Christ destroyed him who had “the power of death, that is, the Devil, and deliver all those who through of death were subject to lifelong slavery.” The fear of death created by the law creates the power to enslave by sin, seems to be the idea here.]

F. That we are not partakers of this liberty, nor of the benefit of this ransom, till we are in him, and united to him by faith, …

1. Certainly we must be turned from Satan to God before we are capable of receiving the forgiveness of sins,

2. We do not actually partake of the privileges of Christ’s kingdom till we be first his subjects:

3. Man’s recovery to God is in the same method in which he fell from him. It is first brought about by a new nature, and communication of life from Christ. He regenerateth that he may pardon, and he pardoneth that he may further sanctify and make us everlastingly happy.

Christ’s Eternal Existence (Manton) Sermon 1.3

24 Friday Mar 2023

Posted by memoirandremains in Atonement, Thomas Manton

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Christ's Eternal Existence, redemption, Sermon, Thomas Manton

The prior post on this sermon may be found here.

II. Secondly, The nature of redemption.

What is redemption by the blood of Christ?

[He gives the overview to follow]

In opening it to you, I shall prove six things:—

A. A captivity or bondage.

B. That from thence we are freed by a ransom, or price paid.

C. That none but Christ was fit to give this ransom.

D. That nothing performed by Christ was sufficient till he laid down his life.

E. That thence there is a liberty resulting to us.

F. That we do not actually partake of the benefit of this ransom till we be in Christ.

A. Our being redeemed supposeth a captivity and bondage.

1. All men in their unrenewed estate are slaves to sin and Satan, and subject to the wrath of God. Titus 3:3, John 8:23

a. [But isn’t doing what you want freedom?] Men imagine a life spent in vanity and pleasure to be a very good life; it were so, if liberty were to be determined by doing what we list [desire/wish] rather than what we ought.

b. [Even when they desire to leave these things, they care still held captive. The language of “addiction” is not used by Manton, but the inability to stop is described.]

c. [Satan has power in this] Now as they are under sin, so they are under Satan, ‘who worketh in the children of disobedience,’ Eph. 2:2; 2 Tim. 2:26

d. [Such people are both prey for Satan, the roaring lion; and will suffer the wrath of God. Eph. 2:3]

2. [We would suffer the same]if grace had not opened a way for us to escape, what should we have done?

B. To recover us, there was a price to be paid by way of ransom to God.

1. [We are not rescued by our begging, God’s mercy without justice, or any such thing] but by the payment of a sufficient price, and just satisfaction to provoked justice.

2. [The ransom was not paid to Satan.]

a. [We sinned against God.]

b. [Satan has no power when God justifies us.]

c. That redemption implieth the paying of a price is clear, because the word importeth it. [This is a logical implication from the language of redemption. The words translated “redemption” was used to describe the process of buying back a slave or captive of war”

“ἀπολύτρωσις, εως, ἡ orig. ‘buying back’ a slave or captive, i.e. ‘making free’ by payment of a ransom (λύτρον, q.v.; prisoners of war could ordinarily face slavery).”Arndt, William, et al. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd ed., University of Chicago Press, 2000, p. 117.] Matt. 20:28; 1 Tim 2:6

d. God could have saved men by the grace of confirmation, but he chose rather by the grace of redemption. [I assume by “confirmation” God could have kept us from sinning.]

e. This recovery was not by a forcible rescue, but by a ransom.

f. [With us, Christ is a lamb. With his enemies, he is a lion.]

3. But why was a ransom necessary? Because God had made a former covenant, which was not to be quit and wholly made void but upon valuable consideration, lest his justice, wisdom, holiness, veracity, authority should fall to the ground. [God told Adam that by violating the law, he would die. If God were to merely forgive without fulfilling the demands of the law, God would fail in several respects]

a. [God’s justice would suffer]. The honour of his governing justice was to be secured and freed from any blemish, that the awe of God might be kept up in the world [Rom. 3, 5, 6, 25, 26; Gen. 18:25. This is an interesting argument: upholding God’s justice was necessary to secure God’s honor.

b. [God’s wisdom would suffer. If God gave a law to Adam, and Moses, and then simply ignored his own law, that would mean God did not understand what he was doing.]

The law was not given by God in jest, but in the greatest earnest that ever law was given. Now, if the law should be recalled without any more ado, the lawgiver would run the hazard of levity, mutability, and imprudence in constituting so solemn a transaction to no purpose.

c. [God by nature cannot ignore sin.] His holy nature would not permit it. There needed some way to be found out, to signify his purest holiness, his hatred and detestation of sin, and that it should not be pardoned without some marks of his displeasure. His soul hates the wicked, and the righteous God loveth righteousness, Ps. 11:6.

d. [God’s authority would suffer.] It would be a derogation from the authority of his law, if it might be broken, and there be no more ado about it.

e. [God’s truth would suffer. If he declared death and then changed his mind, he had not told the truth.]. We look upon the threatenings of the law as a vain scarecrow; therefore, for the terror and warning of sinners for the future, God would not release his wrath, nor release us from the power of sin and Satan, which was the consequent of it, without a price and valuable compensation.

Christ’s Eternal Existence, Manton Sermon 1.2

09 Thursday Mar 2023

Posted by memoirandremains in Thomas Manton

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Colossian 1:14, Thomas Manton

[Next Manton considers at length what is implied by the language of “forgiveness.” Notice that this is not explicitly in the sermon text. Manton is working with the concepts of redemption and forgiveness and then working out what must be implied within those concepts. He does not merely quote ten verses with the word forgiveness, nor give a definition of forgiveness. Instead he works out the logic of forgiveness being offered by God.]

4. It remaineth, therefore, that forgiveness of sin is a dissolving the obligation to punishment ….

a. [He considers first the cause-effect relationship between crime-punishment, one gives rise to the other] …. There can be no punishment without a preceding fault and crime.

[This creates a new implication: if the crime is not present, the cause for the punishment is likewise set aside.] Therefore, if the judge will not impute the fault, there must needs be an immunity from punishment, for the cause being taken away, the effect ceaseth, and the sin committed by us is the meritorious cause of punishment.

[This leads to divine relationship]. If God will cover that, and overlook it, then forgiveness is a dissolving the obligation to punishment.

b. [If I am punished, I cannot be forgiven at the same time. Therefore, the offer of forgiveness implies the absence of punishment.

c. [He next argues on the character of God. If God tells the truth, then forgiveness must mean an absence of punishment] It would seem to impeach the justice and mercy of God, if he should exact the punishment where he hath pardoned the offence. His justice, to flatter men with hopes of remitting the debt, where he requireth the payment; his mercy, in making such fair offers of reconciliation, when still liable to his vindictive justice. There may be indeed effects of his fatherly anger, but not of his vindictive wrath.

d. [Having considered the logic of the matter he reviews some passages Ps. 32:1, 51:2; Is. 38:17; Jer. 31:34; Micah 7:19, which all speak of God’s extravagant mercy and grace in forgiving and forgetting sin. He takes these passages as metaphorical, and then asks what must be true if these are the metaphors used to describe the forgiveness? It must be complete, which is consistent with analysis of the logic or mercy and forgiveness.]

[What do we take from this first section? He proves the point he raised at first: Forgiveness is not merely an incidental, I was not punished. It is analysis of what must be true if I am forgiven, and can I truly conclude that God offers actual forgiveness. The result is the forgiven sinner knows himself to be free of punishment for sin, even if he may be corrected by this Father.]

Christ’s Eternal Existence (Manton), Sermon 1.1

08 Wednesday Mar 2023

Posted by memoirandremains in Thomas Manton

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Christ's Eternal Existence, Colossians 1:14, Thomas Manton

Sermon I

In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins.—Col. 1:14.

The apostle, in the former verse, had spoken of our slavery and bondage to Satan, from which Christ came to deliver us; now, because sin is the cause of it, he cometh to speak of our redemption from sin: ‘In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins.’ Here is—

I. The author.

II. The benefit.

III. The price.

[This is a standard Manton introduction. There is a brief mention of the context for the text. He then provides a breakdown of the text. First, there is the overall break of the text based upon the grammatical structure: Author: “His” Benefit: “redemption” Price: “his blood”. Now he is going to consider the text as a matter of propostional doctrine]

The point is this:—

Doct. That one principal part of our redemption by Christ is remission of sins.

[The statement of a doctrine explicitly someplace in the sermon is common throughout the Puritans. But having made the statement of the doctrine, there is the necessity of breaking down that proposition. The questions here are similar to the sort questions suggested by Joseph Hall on the subject of meditation https://memoirandremains.com/2015/04/06/how-to-think-about-a-subject-according-to-melanchthon-joseph-hall/

This is the sort of analysis which one will not find in standard exegesis. This is an additional step which asks questions of the text such as “why is this here” “what I am supposed to do with this information”. Many limp sermons tell a proposition and then leave the listener with the question, “So what?” Manton does not just want you to know that Christ has redeemed you. He wants you to know what it means to be redeemed.]

Here I shall show you:—

1. What remission of sins is.

2. The nature of redemption.

3. That remission of sins is a part, and a principal part of it.

[Now begins a very methodical presentation of his information. I have formatted the material to make the outline clear. Manton did not use a Roman I, bold offset heading, for example. Also I have redacted portions of the sermon. The following is an outline with comment.]

I. First, What remission of sins is. Both terms must be explained—what sin is, and what is the forgiveness of sin.

[A. What is Sin?]

1. For the first, sin is a violation of the law of the eternal and living God:

a. [Proof] 1 John 3:4

b. [Explanation] God is the lawgiver, who hath given a righteous law to his subjects, under the dreadful penalty of a curse. In his law there are two things—the precept and the sanction.

i. The precept is the rule of our duty, which showeth what we must do, or not do.

ii. The sanction or penalty showeth what God will do, or might justly do, if he should deal with us according to the merit of our actions.

iii. Accordingly, in sin, there is the fault and the guilt.

I. The fault: that man, who is God’s subject, and so many ways obliged to him by his benefits, instead of keeping this law, should break it upon light terms.

A. [He brought to sin by] being carried away by his own ill-disposed will and base lusts. [Here a motivation for sin. It comes from within the human being. It is a surely refusal to obey and a desire for something which he was not granted. There is a theory of moral action embedded in this statement. First, human beings are subject to their own subjective determinations, whether thought or desire. Second, it is a desire to act. The bare event is not the sin but the “swerving” from God’s law.

B. [Therefore, we are culpable] It is a great and heinous offence, for which he becometh obnoxious to the judgment of God.

II. The guilt: which is a liableness to punishment, [That is, the punishment has been earned and is deserved.]Where there is sin, there will be guilt; and where there is guilt, there will be punishment, unless we be pardoned. [Manton here adds an interesting image: The sin has created guilt which binds us with chains to the punishment. The picture of Morley at the beginning of a Christmas Carol speaking of forging chains in life seems similar] and God looseneth the chains wherewith we be bound.

B. Secondly, Forgiveness of sin is a dissolving the obligation to punishment, or a freedom, in God’s way and method, from all the sad and woful consequences of sin. Understand it rightly.

1. It is not a disannulling the act. [God does not disappear the sin. The sinful event has a historical reality binding upon the actor. Manton holds it is “impossible” for the event to be undone. This raises an interesting question about the nature of sin and history. ] yet that must not be understood as if God would abolish the action, and make it as if it had never been, for that is impossible. [What is removed is not the act but the punishment due to the act.]

2. [God does not change the moral status of the event. If an event is a sin, it is always a sin, even if forgiven.] An accused person may be vindicated as innocent, but if he be pardoned, he is pardoned as an offender.

3. [We must not think that our forgiveness means that we do not deserve the punishment. In fact, we must be clear on this point, because it makes our status as recipients of grace clear to us. [We must still own ourselves deserving the wrath of God, which maketh for our constant humiliation and admiration of grace; so that he that is pardoned still deserveth punishment.’’]

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

10 Thursday Dec 2020

Posted by memoirandremains in Thomas Manton

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

Anselm, Sermon, Temptation of Christ, Thomas Manton

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 memoirandremains in Matthew, Thomas Manton, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Matthew 4, Preaching, Sermon, Temptation of Jesus, Thomas Manton

SERMON I

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

Matt. 4.1

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.

Thomas Manton Sermon on Titus 2:11-14 1.3

21 Wednesday Nov 2018

Posted by memoirandremains in Grace, Thomas Manton, Titus, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Grace, Thomas Manton, throne of grace, Titus 2, Titus 2:11

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 memoirandremains in Puritan, Thomas Manton, Titus, Uncategorized

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

Grace, Sanctification, Sermons on Titus 2, thankfulness, Thomas Manton, Titus 2:11-14

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.

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.

Thomas Manton on daily life and happiness

25 Saturday Aug 2018

Posted by memoirandremains in Thomas Manton, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

Happiness, Spurgeon, Thomas Manton

Manton ends his sermon the blessedness of being forgiven as follows. If happiness is to be a goal of life (and religion), then what is meant by “happiness:

Christians, a man that flows in wealth and honour, till he be pardoned, is not a happy man. A man that lives afflicted, contemned, not taken notice of in the world, if he be a pardoned sinner, oh, the blessedness of that man! They are not happy that have least trouble, but they that have least cause; not they that have a benumbed conscience, but they that have a conscience sound, established, and settled in the grace of God, through Jesus Christ our Lord, and bottomed upon his holy covenant, and that peace and grace he offers to us; this is the happy man.

Happiness is not merely the immediate emotional state of being pleased. Earlier in the sermon he actually drew an opposing argument, “We may lull the soul to sleep with carnal delights”. It is not immediate pleasure which constitutes happiness — because that “happiness” will soon disappear (that worm has famously eaten away happiness). Manton points at happiness as something which cannot be lost: pardon for sin (which is the enemy of happiness).

What then must we do to enjoy that happiness of being pardoned?

Let me entreat you, if this be such a blessed thing, to make it your daily, your earnest, your hearty prayer to God, that your sins may be pardoned, Mat. 6:12.

At this point, he makes a very pointed counseling application: We should be constantly bringing ourselves to forgiveness, to the receive the fruit of pardon:

Our Lord hath taught us to pray (for we make but too much work for pardoning mercy every day), ‘Every day forgive us our trespasses.’ To-day, in one of the petitions, is common to all that follow; as we beg daily bread, we must beg daily pardon, daily grace against temptations. Under the law, they had a lamb every morning and every evening offered to God for a daily sacrifice, Num. 28:4–6. We are all invited to look to the Lamb of God, that taketh away the sins of the world. Surely we have as much need as they—more cause than they; because now all is clear, and openly made known unto us.

He here uses a number of biblical illustrations to drive home his point:

God came to Adam in the cool of the day; he would not let him sleep in his sins: before night came, he comes and rouseth his conscience, and then gives out the promise of the seed of the woman that should break the serpent’s head. In reconciliation with God, let not the sun go down upon God’s wrath, Eph. 4:26. A man should not sleep in his anger, nor out of charity with man; surely we should make our peace with God every day. If a man, under the law, had contracted any uncleanness, he was to wash his clothes before evening, that he might not lie a night in his uncleanness. We should daily earnestly come to God with this request, Lord, pardon our sins.

He then clears the text. In this point he does something very near to the technique which Spurgeon will develop where he says, “Someone will say”. Manton does this here, but not by saying, “Maybe you are asking” — that is a poor way to put it. If you say, Perhaps you are thinking, I respond, “Not me — I guess it doesn’t matter”. Now make it third person: someone cares about this:

But what! must those that are already adopted into God’s family, and taken into his grace and favour, daily pray for pardon of sin? Though upon our first faith our state be changed, and we are indeed made children of God, and heirs of eternal life by faith in Christ Jesus; yet he that is clean, need wash his feet. We contract a great deal of sinful defilement and pollution by walking up and down here in a dirty world; and we must every day be cleansing our consciences before God, and begging that we may be made partakers of this benefit.

In fact this is so important, that God may force us to the work by stirring our memory. In this section he again employs illustrations — I find the illustration of the ghost particularly evocative:

The Lord may, for our unthankfulness, our negligence, our stupid security, revive the memory of old sins, and make us look into the debt-book (that hath been cancelled) with horror, and make us ‘possess the sins of our youth.’ An old bruise is felt upon every change of weather. When we prove unthankful, and careless, and stupid, and negligent, and do not keep our watch, the Lord may suffer these things to return upon our consciences with great amazement. Guilt raked out of its grave is more frightful than a ghost, or one risen from the dead. Few believers have, upon right terms, the assurance of their own sincerity; and though God may blot sins out of the book of his remembrance, yet he will not blot them out of our consciences. The worm of conscience is killed still by the application of the blood of Christ and the Spirit. This short exhortation I would give you, the other would take up too much time.

Thomas Manton, The Complete Works of Thomas Manton, vol. 2 (London: James Nisbet & Co., 1871), 188–189.

Thomas Manton Exegeting the Heart.2

21 Tuesday Aug 2018

Posted by memoirandremains in Exegeting the Heart, Thomas Manton, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

anxiety, conscience, Exegeting the Heart, Fear, Psalm 32, Thomas Manton, Twenty Sermons

An interesting aspect of Puritan Preaching is much of it was deeply, if you will, psychological. An earlier post on this can be found here.

It routinely probed the heart of the hearers, picking apart the mechanisms and relationships between affections, behavior and thought in a way that rarely happens afterwards. It works at the human heart more like a novelist (at their best, novelists are far better psychologists than academic psychologist). Anyway here is Manton teasing out the relationships between fear, conscience, the Gospel, sin, et cetera.

Here, Manton tackles two issues: (1) What is the reason that human beings care not for the proclamation of the Gospel, (2) what lies behind fear. Manton relates the two issues in one paragraph:

Whose nature engageth him to hate sin and sinners: Hab. 1:13, ‘He is of purer eyes than to behold iniquity.’

I urge this for a double reason: partly because I have observed that all the security of sinners, and their neglect of seeking after pardon by Jesus Christ, it comes from their lessening thoughts of God’s holiness; and if their hearts were sufficiently possessed with an awe of God’s unspotted purity and holiness, they would more look after the terms of grace God hath provided; Ps. 50:21, ‘Thou thoughtest I was altogether such an one as thyself.’ Why do men live securely in their sins, and do not break off their evil course? They think God is not so severe and harsh, and so all their confidence is grounded upon a mistake of God’s nature, and such a dreadful mistake as amounts to a blasphemy: ‘Thou thoughtest I was altogether such an one as thyself.’

Sin has as a primary mechanism, the ability to reject the knowledge of God’s holiness and wrath. In making this point, Manton is echoing Romans 1: First we reject the knowledge of God’s hold wrath against sin; then we fall into every sort of sin.

Well, if rejecting knowledge of God’s holy wrath leads to such ill, why do we do it: because we are afraid to consider the alternative:

The other reason is this, particularly because I observe the bottom reason of all the fear that is in the hearts of men is God’s holiness: 1 Sam. 6:20, ‘Who is able to stand before this holy God?’ and ‘Who would not fear thee? for thou art holy,’ Rev. 15:4. We fear his power; why? because it is set on work by his wrath. We fear his wrath; why? because it is kindled by his justice and righteousness. We fear his righteousness, because it is bottomed and grounded upon his holiness, and upon the purity of his nature.

Manton seems to be making a broader point, however. He speaks of all fear having as its base the fear of God’s holiness. This then creates a prison:

I observe, that the law-covenant is in the scripture compared to a prison, wherein God hath shut up guilty souls, Rom. 11:32, ‘He hath concluded or shut them up, that he may have mercy upon them;’ Gal. 3:21, ‘He hath shut them up under sin.’ The law is God’s prison, and no offenders can get out of it till they have God’s leave; and from him they have none, till they are sensible of the justice and righteousness of that first dispensation, confess their sins with brokennness of heart, and that it may be just with God to condemn them for ever.

This creates an interesting series of conflicting motives and irrationalities within the human heart. On one hand there is the fear of God exposing one’s sin — because such exposure is dreadful: it is the door to all doom and thus creates a constant fear. Yet, to not expose that sin creates a prison in the other direction.

This precarious position is made worse by the “danger” of a tender conscience:

What kind of hearts are those that sin securely, and without remorse, and are never troubled? Go to wounded consciences, and ask of them what sin is: Gen. 4:13, ‘Mine iniquity is greater than I can bear;’ Prov. 18:14, ‘A wounded spirit, who can bear?’ As long as the evil lies without us, it is tolerable, the natural courage of a man may bear up under it; but when the spirit itself is wounded with the sense of sin, who can bear it? If a spark of God’s wrath light upon the conscience, how soon do men become a burden to themselves; and some have chosen strangling rather than life. Ask Cain, ask Judas, what it is to feel the burden of sin. Sinners are ‘all their lifetime subject to this bondage;’ it is not always felt, but soon awakened: it may be done by a pressing exhortation at a sermon; it may be done by some notable misery that befalls us in the world; it may be done by a scandalous sin; it may be done by a grievous sickness, or worldly disappointment. All these things and many more may easily revive it in us. There needs not much ado to put a sinner in the stocks of conscience. Therefore do but consider to be eased of this burden; oh the blessedness of it!

That last bit could lead to a fascinating psychological question: what sort “ado” must be kept in place to protect the conscience from sin?

But there is another problem with sin: not only is it dangerous to be exposed, but it is loathsome. Manton proves this by an interesting point: we despise sin when we see it in another — but we do not want to see it ourselves:

a wicked person is a vile person in the common esteem of the world: horrible profaneness will not easily down. Nay, it is loathsome to other wicked men. I do not know whether I expound that scripture rightly, but it looks somewhat so, ‘Hateful and hating one another.’ We hate sin in another, though we will not take notice of it in ourselves. The sensuality and pride and vanity of one wicked man is hated by another; nay, he is loathsome to himself. Why? because he cannot endure to look into himself. We cannot endure ourselves when we are serious. ‘They will not come to the light, lest their deeds should be reproved.’ And we are shy of God’s presence; we are sensible we have something makes us offensive to him, and we hang off from him when we have sinned against him; as it was David’s experience, Ps. 32:3. That was the cause of his silence: he kept off from God, having sinned against him, and had not a heart to go home and sue out his pardon. Oh, what a mercy is it, then, to have this filth covered, that we may be freed from this bashful inconfidence, and not be ashamed to look God in the face, and may come with a holy boldness into the presence of the blessed God! Oh, the blessedness of the man whose sin is covered!

Thomas Manton, The Complete Works of Thomas Manton, vol. 2 (London: James Nisbet & Co., 1871), 185. This makes an interesting bit of comparison with Nietzsche’s ressentiment (but that is for another time). There is also an interesting question here about those who are peculiarly offended by another’s pride, or envy, or anger (even when it is not directly directed to them).