Quest. CXLIII., CXLIV., CXLV.
Quest. CXLIII. What is the ninth Commandment?
Answ. The ninth Commandment is, [Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour.]
Quest. CXLIV. What are the duties required in the ninth Commandment?
Answ. The duties required in the ninth Commandment are, the preserving and promoting of truth between man and man, and the good name of our neighbour as well as our own. Appearing, and standing for, and from the heart, sincerely, freely, clearly, and fully, speaking the truth, and only the truth, in matters of judgment and justice, and in all other things whatsoever; a charitable esteem of our neighbours; loving, desiring, and rejoicing in their good name, sorrowing for, and covering of their infirmities; freely acknowledging their gifts and graces; defending their innocency; a ready receiving of a good report, and unwillingness to admit an evil report concerning them, discouraging tale-bearers, flatterers, and slanderers; love and care of our own good name, and defending it when need requireth, keeping of lawful promises, studying and practising of whatsoever things are true, honest, lovely, and of good report.
Quest. CXLV. What are the sins forbidden in the ninth Commandment?
Answ. The sins forbidden in the ninth Commandment, are, all prejudicing the truth, and the good name of our neighbours as well as our own, especially in public judicature, giving false evidence, suborning false witnesses, wittingly appearing and pleading for an evil cause, out-facing and over-bearing the truth, passing unjust sentence, calling evil good, and good evil, rewarding the wicked according to the work of the righteous; and the righteous according to the work of the wicked; forgery, concealing the truth, undue silence in a just cause, and holding our peace when iniquity calleth for either a reproof from ourselves, or complaint to others; speaking the truth unseasonably, or maliciously to a wrong end, or perverting it to a wrong meaning, or in doubtful and equivocal expressions, to the prejudice of truth or justice, speaking untruth, lying, slandering, back-biting, detracting, tale-bearing, whispering, scoffing, reviling, rash, harsh, and partial, censuring, misconstruing intentions, words, and actions, flattering, vain-glorious boasting, thinking or speaking too highly or too meanly of ourselves or others, denying the gifts and graces of God, aggravating smaller faults, hiding, excusing, or extenuating of sins when called to a free confession, unnecessary discovering of infirmities, raising false rumours, receiving and countenancing evil reports, and stopping our ears against just defence, evil suspicion, envying or grieving at the deserved credit of any, endeavouring or desiring to impair it, rejoicing in their disgrace and infamy, scornful contempt, fond admiration, breach of lawful promises, neglecting such things as are of good report, and practising or not avoiding ourselves or not hindering, what we can in others, such things as procure an ill name.
In this Commandment we are to consider,
I. What are the duties required? These are,
1. Our endeavouring to promote truth in all we say or do; and that, as to what either concerns ourselves, or others. As to what concerns ourselves, we are to fence against every thing that savours of deceit or hypocrisy; and, in our whole conversation, endeavour to be what we pretend to be; or to speak nothing but what we know, or believe to be true, upon good evidence, the contrary whereunto is lying. As to what concerns others, we must not neglect to reprove sin in them, how much soever our worldly interest may lie at stake. Thus Azariah reproved Uzziah, 2 Chron. xxvi. 18. and Elijah, Ahab; though this could not but be an hazardous attempt in each of them. Moreover, we must endeavour to undeceive others, who are mistaken; especially if the error, they are liable to, be of such a nature, that it endangers the loss of their salvation. We are also to vindicate those who are reproached by others, to the utmost of our power, according as the cause will admit of it.
2. This Commandment obliges us, to endeavour to promote our own, and our neighbour’s good name.
(1.) Our own good name; which consists, not in our having the applause of the world, but in our deserving the just esteem thereof, and in our being loved and valued for our usefulness to mankind in general. And this esteem is not to be gained by commending ourselves, or doing any thing, but what we engage in with a good conscience, and the fear of God. And in order hereto, we must, take heed that we do not contract an intimacy with those, whose conversation is a reproach to the gospel, Prov. xxviii. 7. Also we must render good for evil, and not give occasion to those, who watch for our halting, to insult us as to any thing, besides unavoidable infirmities, 1 Pet. ii. 12. Phil. iv. 8.
This degree of honour in the world, we ought first to endeavour to gain, especially so far as it is necessary to our honouring God, and being useful to others. And then we must be careful to maintain our good name; forasmuch as the loss thereof, especially, in those who have made a public profession of religion, will reflect dishonour on the ways of God, from whence his enemies will take occasion to blaspheme, 2 Sam. xii. 14. But if all our endeavours to maintain our character and reputation are to no purpose; being, nevertheless, followed with reproach as well as hatred and malice, from an unjust and censorious world; let us look to it, that if we suffer reproach, it be wrongfully; not as evil doers, but for keeping a good conscience in the sight of God; which may be a means to make those that reproach us, ashamed, 1 Pet. iii. 16. Moreover, let us count the reproach of Christ, that is, for his sake, a glory, chap. iv. 14. Acts v. 41. Again, let us always value their good opinion most, who are Christ’s best friends; and expect little else but ill treatment from his enemies; and then we shall be less disappointed, when we are exposed to it. And let us not decline any thing that is our duty, in which the honour of God, and the welfare of his people, is concerned, for fear of reproach; but in this case, leave our good name in Christ’s hand; whose providence is concerned, for, and takes care of, the honour, as well as the wealth and outward estate of his people.
(2.) We are to endeavour to maintain the good name of others; and in order thereto, we must render to them those marks of respect and honour, which their character, and advancement in gifts, or grace, calls for; yet without being guilty of servile flattery or dissimulation. And if they are in danger of doing any thing that may forfeit their good name, we are carefully to reprove them, while we have a due regard to any good thing that is in them, towards the Lord their God; and, in maintaining their good name, we are to conceal their faults, when we may do it without betraying the interest of Christ; and especially when the honour of God, and their good, is, by this means, better promoted, than by divulging them, 1 Pet. iv. 8. Prov. xvii. 9.
However, this is not without some exceptions; and therefore it may be observed, that we are not to conceal the crimes committed by others.
[1.] If private admonition for scandalous sins committed, prove ineffectual, and the discovering them to others may make the offender ashamed, and promote his reformation; then we are not to conceal his crimes, though the divulging them may lessen the esteem which others have of him, since it is better for him to be ashamed before men, than perish in his hypocrisy, Matt. xviii. 16, 17.
[2.] If the crime committed be such, that shame, and the loss of his good name, be a just punishment due to it, we are not to conceal it, thereby to stop the course of justice.
[3.] When the honour and good name of an innocent person cannot be maintained, unless by divulging the crimes of the guilty, he that, in this case, has forfeited his good name, ought to lose it, rather than he that has not.
We shall close this head by considering what reason we have to endeavour to maintain the good name of others. To take away our neighbour’s good name, is to take away one of the most valuable privileges he is possessed of, the loss whereof may be inexpressibly detrimental to him. And sometimes it may affect his secular interest; so that hereby we may be said to take away his wealth and outward estate, and prevent his usefulness in that station of life in which providence has fixed him. Accordingly we are to express a due concern for the honour and reputation of others as well as ourselves. Thus concerning the duties required in this Commandment.
II. We proceed to consider the sins forbidden therein; which are contained in that general expression bearing false witness: This may either respect ourselves or others. A person may be said to bear false witness against himself; and that either in thinking too highly or meanly of himself; in the former respect we value ourselves, or our supposed attainments, either in gifts or graces, too much, in which we are, for the most part, mistaken, and pass a wrong judgment on them, and are ready to say, with the church at Laodicea, I am rich and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and know not that we are wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked, Rev. iii. 17. These, on the one hand, mistake the common gifts of the Spirit, for grace, and conclude themselves to be something, when they are nothing: And, on the other hand, many conclude, that they have no grace, and rank themselves among hypocrites and unbelievers, when their hearts are right with God, and they have had large experience of the powerful influences of his Spirit, but are not sensible thereof. Thus Christ says to the church in Smyrna, I know thy poverty; but thou art rich, chap. ii. 9. In these respects persons may be said to bear false witness against themselves.
But that which is principally forbidden in this Commandment, is, a person’s bearing false witness against his neighbour; and that when he either endeavours to deceive, or do him prejudice, as to his reputation in the world; the one is called lying, the other back-biting or slandering. As to the former of these, when we speak that which is contrary to what we know to be truth, with a design to deceive, this is what we call telling a lye; and when we act that which is contrary to truth, it may be deemed a practical lye; both of which are very great sins.
1. A person is guilty of lying, when he speaks that which is contrary to truth, with a design to deceive: This the old prophet at Bethel did, to the prophet of the Lord; upon which occasion it is said, that he lyed unto him, 1 Kings xiii. 18. That this may be farther considered, let it be observed, that it is not barely a speaking what is contrary to truth; for that a person may do, and be guiltless; as,
[1.] When there is some circumstance that discovers him to speak ironically; and therefore he does not appear to have a design to deceive those, to whom he addresses his discourse. Thus when the prophet Micaiah said to Ahab, Go and prosper, for the Lord shall deliver it, viz. Ramoth-Gilead, into the hands of the kings, chap. xxii. 15. it is plain that he spake the language of the false prophets, and that Ahab understood him in this sense, or suspected that he spake ironically; and therefore says, How many times shall I adjure thee, that thou tell me nothing but that which is true? ver. 16. Upon which, the prophet tells him, without an irony, though in a metaphorical way, which Ahab easily understood; I saw all Israel scattered upon the hills, as sheep that have not a shepherd: And the Lord said, These have no master, let them return every man to his house in peace, ver. 17. which was an intimation, that, if he went up to Ramoth-Gilead, he should fall in battle: Upon which occasion Ahab says to Jehoshaphat, Did I not tell thee, that he would prophesy no good concerning me, but evil, ver. 18. by which it appears, that the prophet did not deceive him, notwithstanding the mode of speaking, which he at first made use of, without considering it as an irony, seemed to intimate as much.
[2.] A person may speak that which is contrary to truth, being imposed on himself, without any design to deceive another. This cannot, indeed, according to the description before given, be properly called a lie: However, he may sin by asserting too positively, that which he thinks to be true from probable circumstances, or uncertain information; especially if what he reports, carries in it that which is matter of scandal, or censure. This was the case of Job’s friends, who did not tell a lie against their own consciences: Nevertheless, they were too peremptory in charging him with hypocrisy, without sufficient ground; therefore God imputes folly to them, in that they had not spoken of him the thing which was right, Job xlii. 8.
Here it may be enquired, whether a person, who designs not to deceive, nor speaks contrary to the dictates of his own conscience; yet if he promises to do a thing, and does it not, is guilty of lying? To which it may be replied,
1st, That if a person promises to do a thing, which, at the same time he really designs, and afterwards uses all the endeavours he could, to fulfil his promise, and something unforeseen happens, in the course of providence, which prevents the execution thereof, he cannot, properly speaking, be said to be guilty of a lie; though we ought not to promise any thing but upon this supposition, that God enables us to perform it.
2dly, If a person intends to do a thing, and, accordingly, promises to do it, but afterwards sees some justifiable reason to alter his mind, he is not guilty of a lie; since all creatures are supposed to be mutable. Thus the angels told Lot, that they would abide in the street all night; but afterwards, upon his intreaty, they went into the house with him, Gen. xix. 2,
3. And our Saviour, when he walked with his disciples to Emmaus, made as though he would have gone farther: But they constrained him, saying, abide with us; and he went in to tarry with them, Luke xxiv. 28, 29. But, notwithstanding this if a person promises to do any thing that is of advantage to another, as the paying a just debt, &c. it is not a sufficient excuse, to clear him from the guilt of sin, if he pretends that he has altered his mind, supposing that it is in his power to fulfil it: For this is, indeed, a breach of the eighth Commandment, and in some respects, it will appear to him, to be a violation of this.
That we may more particularly speak concerning the sin of lying which multitudes are chargeable with, let it be observed, that there are three sorts of lies,
1st, When a person speaks that which is contrary to truth, and the dictates of his own conscience, with a design to cover a fault or excuse himself or others: This we generally call an officious lie[[6]].
2dly, When a person speaks that which is contrary to the known truth, in a jesting way; and embellishes his discourse with his own fictions, designing hereby to impose on others: This they are guilty of, who invent false news, or tell stories for truth, which they know to be false. This is to lie in a jesting, ludicrous manner[[7]].
3dly, There is a pernicious lie, viz. when a person raises and spreads a false report with a design to do injury to another; which is a complicated crime, and the worst sort of lying[[8]].
Here there are two or three enquiries which it may not be improper to take notice of;
(1.) Whether the midwives were guilty of an officious lie, when they told Pharaoh, in Exod. i. 19. that the Hebrew women were delivered of their children ere they came in unto them; concerning whom it is said, in the following verse, that God dealt well with the midwives for this report, which carries in it the appearance of a lie.
Answ. To this it may be replied,
[1.] That they seem not to have been guilty of a lie; for it is not improbable, that God in mercy to the Hebrew women, and their children, might give them uncommon strength; so that they might be delivered without the midwives assistance: Or,
[2.] If this was not the case of all the Hebrew women, but only of some, or many of them, the midwives report contains only a concealing part of the truth, while they related in other respects, that which was matter of fact. Now a person is not guilty of telling a lie, who does not discover all that he knows. There is a vast difference between concealing a part of the truth, and telling that which is directly false. No one is obliged to tell all he knows, to one, who, he is sure, will make a bad use of it. This seems to be the case of the midwives; and therefore their action was justifiable, and commended by God, they being not guilty, properly speaking, of an officious lye.
(2.) Another enquiry is, what judgment we must pass concerning the actions of Rahab, the harlot, who invented an officious lye, to save the spies from those who pursued them, in Josh. ii. 4, 5. it is said, she took the two men and hid them; and, at the same time, pretended, so those who were sent to enquire of her concerning them, that she wist not whence they were; but that they went out of the city about the time of the shutting of the gate; though whither they went she knew not. The main difficulty we have to account for, is what the apostle says, in which he seems to commend this action, in Heb. xi. 31. By faith Rahab perished not with them that believed not, when she had received the spies with peace.
Answ. To which it may be replied, that the apostle says, indeed, that she received the spies with peace, that is, she protected, and did not betray them into the hand of their enemies: But this act of faith does not relate directly to the lie that she invented to conceal them; for, doubtless, she would have been more clear from the guilt of sin, had she refused to give the messengers any answer relating to them, and so had given them leave to search for them, and left the event hereof to providence. This, indeed, was a very difficult duty; for it might have endangered her life; and her choosing to secure them and herself, by inventing this lie, brought with it a degree of guilt, and was an instance of the weakness of her faith in this respect.
But, on the other hand, that faith which the apostle commends in her, respects some other circumstances attending this action; and, accordingly, it is not said, that by faith she made the report to the messengers concerning the spies; but she received them with peace: And there are several things in which her faith was very remarkable, as,
[1.] That she was confident that the Lord would give them the land, which they were contending for, Josh. ii. 9.
[2.] In that she makes a just inference relating to this matter, from the wonders that God had wrought for them in the red sea, ver. 10. And,
[3.] In that noble confession which she makes, that the Lord their God, is God in heaven above, and the earth beneath, ver. 11.
[4.] Her faith appears, in that she put herself under their protection, and desired to take her lot with them; which was done at the hazard of her own life; which she might have saved, and probably, have received a reward, had she betrayed them. This, I conceive to be a better vindication of Rahab’s conduct, than that which is alleged, by some who suppose, that by entering into confederacy with the spies, she put herself into a state of war with her own country-men, and so was not obliged to speak truth to the men of Jericho; since this would have many ill consequences attending it, and give too much countenance to persons deceiving others, under pretence of being in a state of war with them. And, as to what the Papists say in her vindication, that a good design will justify a bad action; that it is not true in fact; and therefore not to be applied to her case.
(3.) It might be farther enquired, what judgment ought we to pass on the method that Jacob took to obtain the blessing, when he told his father, I am Esau, thy first-born; I have done according as thou badest me, Gen. xxvii. 19. whether he was guilty of a lie herein?
Answ. There is not the least doubt but that he was. Some, indeed, endeavour to excuse him, by alleging, that he had, before this, bought the birth-right of Esau; and, upon this account he calls himself Isaac’s first-born. But this will not clear him from the guilt of a lye; since it was an equivocation, and spoken with a design to deceive. Others own it to have been a lye; but extenuate it, from the consideration of God’s having designed the blessing for him before he was born, chap. xxv. 31. But these do not at all mend the matter: For, though God may permit, or over-rule the sinful actions of men to bring about his own purpose; yet this does not, in the least, extenuate their sin.
That which may therefore be observed, with reference to this action of his, and the consequence thereof, is, that good men are sometimes liable to sinful infirmities, as Jacob was; who, was followed with many sore rebukes of providence, which made the remaining part of his life very uneasy.
1st, In his living in exile twenty years, with Laban, an hard master, and an unjust and unnatural father-in-law.
2dly, In the great distress that befel him in his return; occasioned first by Laban’s pursuit of him, and then by the tidings that he received of his brother Esau’s coming out to meet him; (being prompted hereto by revenge which he had long harboured in his breast) with four hundred men, from whom he expected nothing less than the destruction of himself, and his whole family.
3dly, He did not obtain deliverance from the hand of God without great wrestling, chap. xxxii. 24-25. and this attended with weeping, as well as making supplication, Hos. xii. 4. and, though he prevailed, and so obtained the blessing, and therewith forgiveness of his sin; yet God so ordered it, that he should carry the mark thereof upon him, as long as he lived, by touching the hollow of his thigh, which occasioned an incurable lameness.
(4.) Another enquiry is, whether the prophet Elijah did not tell a lie to the Syrian host, who were before Dothan, in quest of him, when he said, in 2 Kings vi. 19. This is not the way, neither is this the city: Follow me, and I will bring you to the man you seek. But he led them to Samaria?
Answ. If what he says to them be duly considered, it will appear not to be a lie; for he told them nothing but what proved true, according to the import of his words; for,
1st, He does not say, I am not the man ye seek, which would have been a lie; neither does he say, the man is not here: but he tells them, I will lead you to the place where ye shall find him, or have him discovered and presented before you.
2dly, When he says, This is not the way; neither is this the city; he does not say, this is not the way to Dothan; neither is this the city so called; for then they would have been able to have convicted him of a lie; for they knew that they were at Dothan before they were struck with blindness: But the plain meaning of his words is, that this is not your way to find him; since the men of this city will not deliver him to you; but I will lead you to the place where you shall see him; and so he led them to Samaria, upon which their eyes were opened, and they saw him: So that this was not a lie. And the reason of his management was, that the king of Israel, and the Syrian host, might be convinced, that they were poor creatures in God’s hand, and that he could easily turn their counsels into foolishness, and cause their attempts to miscarry with shame, as well as disappointment.
(5.) It may be farther enquired, whether the apostle Paul was guilty of a lie; when, being charged, in Acts xxiii. 4, 5. with reviling God’s high priest, he says, I wist not that he was the high priest? How was it possible that he should entertain any doubt concerning his being the high priest; which none, who were present, could, in the least, question?
Answ. We may suppose, that the apostle, when he says, I wist not that he was the high priest, intends nothing else, but I do not own him to be the high priest, as you call him; for he is not an high priest of God’s appointing or approving; which, had he been, he would have acted more becoming that character; and then I should have had no occasion to have told him, God shall smite thee, thou whited wall; for that would have been a reviling him; since I know that scripture very well, that says, Thou shalt not speak evil of the ruler of thy people; therefore he intimates, that, though he was an high priest of man’s making, he was not one of God’s approving; and accordingly he was to be treated with contempt, instead of that regard which was formerly paid to the high priests, when they were better men, and acted more agreeable to their character. No one, that deserves to be called God’s high priest, would have ordered a prisoner, who came to be tried for his life, instead of making his defence, to be smitten on the mouth.
But, suppose we render the words agreeably to our translation, I did not understand that he was the high priest, he may be vindicated from the charge of telling a lie, if we consider,
1st, That this was a confused assembly, and not a regular court of judicature, in which the judge, or chief magistrate, is known to all, by the place in which he sits, or the part he acts in trying causes.
2dly, The high priest, in courts of judicature, was not known by any robe or distinct habit that he wore, as judges now are; for he never wore any other but his common garments, which were the same that other people wore, except when he ministered in offering gifts and sacrifices in the temple. Therefore the apostle could not know him by any distinct garment that he wore.
3dly, Through the corruption of the times, the high priest was changed almost every year, according to the will of the chief governor, who advanced his own friends to that dignity, and oftentimes sold it for money; it is therefore probable, that Ananias had not been long high-priest; and Paul was now a stranger at Jerusalem, and so might not know that he was high priest. Thus, if we take the words in this sense, in which they are commonly understood, the apostle may be sufficiently vindicated from the charge of telling a lie.
(6.) It may be farther enquired, what judgment we may pass concerning David’s pretence, when he came to Abimelech, in 1 Sam. xxi. 2. that the king commanded him a business, which no one was to know any thing of; and that he had appointed his servants to such and such a place; and also of his feigning himself mad, before the king of Gath, ver. 13. which dissimulation can be reckoned no other than a practical lie.
Answ. In both these instances he must be allowed to have sinned, and therefore not proposed as a pattern to us; and all that can be inferred from it is, that there is a great deal of the corruption of nature remaining in the best of God’s people. What he told Abimelech was certainly a lye; and all that he expected to gain by it, was only a supply of his present necessities; the consequence whereof was, the poor man’s losing his life, together with all the priests’, except Abiathar, by Saul’s inhumanity. And David seems to be truly sensible of this sin, as appears from Psal. xxxiv. which, as is intimated in the title thereof, was penned on this occasion; in which he arms others against it, in ver. 13. Keep thy tongue from evil, and thy lips from speaking guile: And in ver. 18. he seems to relate his own experience, when he says, The Lord is nigh unto them that are of a broken heart, and saveth such as be of a contrite spirit.
As to his behaviour before the king of Gath, which was a visible lie, discovered in his actions; it can, by no means, be excused from being a breach of this Commandment. It is, indeed, alleged by some, to extenuate his fault; that he was afraid that his having killed Goliah, would have induced Achish to take away his life; as appears from what is said in ver. 11, 12. Nevertheless, it may be considered as an aggravation of his sin,
[1.] That his fear seems to have been altogether groundless; for, why should he suppose that the king of Gath would break through all the laws of arms and honour, since Goliah had been killed in a fair duel, the challenge having first been given by himself? why then should David fear that he would kill him for that, more than any other hostilities committed in war? Besides, it is plain from what Achish says, in ver. 15. Have I need of mad-men, that ye have brought this fellow to play the mad-man in my presence? should this fellow come into mine house? that the king of Gath was so far from designing to revenge Goliah’s death on him, that he intended to employ him in his service, and take him into his house; but this mean action of his made him despised by all; for it seems probable, by Achish’s saying, Have ye brought this fellow to play the mad-man? that he perceived it to be a feigned, and not a real distraction. And this was overruled by the providence of God, to let the Philistines know, that the greatest hero is but a low-spirited man, if his God be not with him.
[2.] If we suppose that there had been just ground for his fear, the method taken to secure himself, contained a distrust of providence; which would, doubtless, have delivered him without his dissembling, or thus demeaning himself, or using such an indirect method in order thereunto. Thus concerning the violation of this Commandment, by speaking that which is contrary to truth.
2. This Commandment is farther broken, by acting that which is contrary to truth; which is what we call hypocrisy: And this may be considered,
(1.) As that which is a reigning sin, inconsistent with a state of grace; in which respect an hypocrite is opposed to a true believer. Such make a fair shew of religion; but it is with a design to be seen of men, Matt. vi. 5. They are sometimes, indeed, represented as seeking God, and enquiring early, or with a kind of earnestness after him, when under his afflicting hand; but this is deemed no other than a flattering him with their mouth, and a lying unto him with their tongues; inasmuch as their heart is not right with him, Psal. lxxviii. 34,-37. And elsewhere, they are said to love the praise of men more than the praise of God, John xii. 43.
(2.) It may be farther considered, as that which believers are sometimes chargeable with, which is an argument that they are sanctified but in part; but this rather respects some particular actions, and not the tenor of their conversation: Thus the apostle Paul charges Peter with dissimulation, Gal. ii. 11,-13. though he was far from deserving the character of an hypocrite, as to his general conversation. And our Saviour cautions his disciples against hypocrisy, as that which they were in danger of being overtaken with, Luke xii. 1. though he does not charge them with it as a reigning sin, as he did the Scribes and Pharisees, whom he compares to painted sepulchres, Matt. xxiii. 27, 28. nor were they such as the apostle speaks of, whom he calls double-minded men, who are unstable in all their ways, James i. 8.
As to that hypocrisy which we may call a reigning sin, this may be known,
[1.] By a person’s accommodating himself to all those whom he converses with, how much soever this may tend to the dishonour of Christ and the gospel: And this may give us occasion to enquire,
First, Whether the apostle Paul was in any respects, chargeable with this sin, when he says, in 1 Cor. ix. 20-22. Unto the Jews, I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the law, as under the law, that I might gain them that are under the law; to them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ) that I might gain them that are without law. To the weak, became I as weak, that I might gain the weak; I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some. For the understanding of this scripture, and vindicating the apostle from the charge of hypocrisy, let it be considered,
1st, That this compliance he here speaks of, was not with a design to gain the applause of the world, but to serve the interest of Christ; neither did he connive at, or give countenance to, that false worship, or those sinful practices of any, that were contrary to the faith, or purity of the gospel. Therefore when he says, Unto the Jews, I became as a Jew; he does not intend that he gave them the least ground to conclude, that it was an indifferent matter, whether they adhered to, or laid aside the observation of the ceremonial law: For, he expressly tells some of the church at Galatia, who were supposed to Judaize, that this was contrary to the liberty wherewith Christ had made them free, a being again entangled with the yoke of bondage; and that if they circumcised, Christ should profit them nothing; and, that they were fallen from grace; that is, turned aside from the faith of the gospel, Gal. v. 1,-4. Therefore, in this sense he did not become as a Jew, to the Jews. Neither did he so far comply with the Gentiles, as to give them ground to conclude, that the superstition and idolatry, which they were guilty of, was an harmless thing, and might still be practised by them. Therefore,
2dly, The meaning of his compliance with the Jews or Gentiles, is nothing else but this; that whatever he found praise-worthy in them, he commended; and if, in any instances, they were addicted to their former rites, or modes of worship, he endeavoured to draw them off from them, not by a severe, and rigid behaviour as censuring, refusing to converse with, or reproaching them, for their weakness; but using kind and gentle methods, designing rather to inform than discourage them; while at the same time, he was far from approving of, or giving countenance to any thing that was sinful in them, or unbecoming the gospel.
Secondly, From what has been before said concerning an hypocrite’s being one who performs religious duties with a design to be seen of men, as our Saviour says of the Pharisees, that they love to stand praying in the synagogues, or in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men, Matth. vi. 6. We may enquire, what may be said in vindication of the prophet Daniel, from the charge of hypocrisy? concerning whom it is said, in Dan. vi. 10. that when Darius had signed a decree prohibiting any one from asking a petition of any god or man, save of the king, he should be cast into the den of lions: He went into his house; and his windows being open in his chamber, towards Jerusalem, he kneeled upon his knees three times a day, and prayed, and gave thanks before his God, as he did aforetime. In answer to this we may observe,
1st, That this was not done to gain the esteem or applause of men, which they are charged with, who are guilty of hypocrisy; but he did it in contempt of that vile decree of the Persian monarch.
2dly, He did it at the peril of his life; and hereby discovered, that he had rather be cast into the den of lions, than give occasion to any to think that he complied with the king in his idolatrous decree.
3dly, Though it is said, that he prayed, and gave thanks before his God, as he did aforetime; yet this is not to be understood as though he set open his windows aforetime; so that his praying publicly at this time, was to shew that he was neither ashamed, nor afraid to own his God, whatever it cost him; therefore he was so far from being guilty of hypocrisy, that this is one of the most noble instances of zeal for the worship of the true God, that we find recorded in scripture.
[2.] Hypocrisy is a reigning sin when we boast of the high attainments in gifts or grace, or set too great a value on ourselves, because of the performance of some religious duties, while we neglect others, wherein the principal part of true godliness consists. Thus the Pharisee paid tithe of mint, annise, and cummin, while he omitted the weightier matters of the law; judgment, mercy and faith, chap. xxiii. 23, 24.
[3.] It farther consists, in exclaiming against, and censuring others, for lesser faults, while we allow of greater in ourselves; like those whom our Saviour speaks of, who behold the mote that is in their brother’s eye, but consider not the beam that is in their own, Matt. vii. 3, 5. or, according to that proverbial way of speaking, strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel. These are very fond of exposing the ignorance of others; though they have no experimental, saving knowledge of divine truth in themselves; or they are very forward, to blame the coldness and lukewarmness which they see in some, while at the same time, that zeal which they express in their whole conduct, is rather to advance themselves, than the glory of God.
[4.] When persons make a gain of godliness, 1 Tim. vi. 5. or of their pretensions to it. Thus Balaam prophesied for a reward; and accordingly it is said, that he loved the wages of unrighteousness, 2 Pet. i. 15.
5. When persons make a profession of religion, because it is uppermost, and are ready to despise and cast it off, when it is reproached, or they are like to suffer for it. Thus the Pharisees, how much soever they seemed to embrace Christ, when attending on John’s ministry; yet afterwards, when they saw that this was contrary to their secular interest, they were offended in him, and prejudiced against him; and therefore they say, Have any of the rulers, or of the Pharisees, believed on him, John vii. 48.
This sin of hypocrisy, which is a practical lie, has a tendency to corrupt and vitiate all our pretensions to religion. It is like the dead flie, mentioned by Solomon, that causeth the ointment of the apothecary to send forth a stinking savour, Eccl. x. 1. and it will, in the end, bring on those who are guilty of it, many sore judgments; some of which are spiritual. Thus it is said of the Heathen, that because, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, and did not like to retain him in their knowledge; he gave them up to a reprobate mind, to do those things that are not convenient, &c. Rom. i. 21, 22, 28. And as for the false hope, and vain confidence, which the hypocrite entertains, this shall leave him in despair and confusion, Job viii. 13,-15. and be attended with unspeakable horror of conscience, chap. xxvii. 18. Isa. xxxiii. 14. Upon which account such are said to heap up wrath, and bring on themselves a greater degree of condemnation than others, Job xxxvi. 13. Matt. xxiii. 14. Thus we have considered this Commandment as broken by speaking or acting that which is contrary, or prejudicial, to truth; which leads us,
II. To consider it as forbidding our doing that which is injurious to our neighbour’s good name, either by words or actions; and this is done two ways, either before his face, or behind his back.
1. Doing injury to another, by speaking against him, before his face. It is true, we give him hereby the liberty of vindicating himself. Nevertheless, if the thing be false, which is alleged against him, proceeding from malice and envy, it is a crime of a very heinous nature; and this is done,
(1.) By those, who, in courts of judicature, commence; and carry on malicious prosecutions, in which the plaintiff, the witness, the advocate that manages the cause, the jury that bring in a false verdict, and the judge that passes sentence contrary to law, or evidence, as well as the dictates of his own conscience, with a design to crush and ruin him, who is maliciously prosecuted; these are all notoriously guilty of the breach of this Commandment.
(2.) They may be said to do that which is injurious to our neighbour’s good name, who reproach them in common conversation; which is a sin too much committed in this licentious age, as though men were not accountable to God for what they speak, as well as other parts of the conduct of life. There are several things which persons make the subject of their reproach, viz.
[1.] The defect and blemishes of nature; such as lameness, blindness, deafness, impediment of speech, meanness of capacity, or actions, which proceed from a degree of distraction. Thus many suppose that the apostle Paul was reproached for some natural deformity in his body, or impediment in his speech, which is inferred from what he says, when he represents some as speaking to this purpose; His letters, say they, are weighty and powerful; but his bodily presence is weak, and his speech contemptible, 2 Cor. x. 10. And elsewhere, he commends the Galatians for not despising him on this account; My temptation which was in my flesh, ye despised nor rejected; but ye received me as an angel of God, even as Christ Jesus, Gal. iv. 14.
Here we may take occasion to speak something of the childrens sin, who reproached Elisha for his baldness, and the punishment that ensued upon it; namely, his cursing them in the name of the Lord; and two and forty of them being torn in pieces by two she-bears out of the wood, in 2 Kings ii. 23, 24. It may be enquired, by some, whether this was not too great an instance of passion in that holy man, and too severe a punishment inflicted; inasmuch as they who reproached him, are called little children. To this it may be answered,
1st, That the children were not so little, as not to be able to know their right hand from their left, or to discern between good and evil; for such are not usually trusted out of their parents sight; nor would they have gathered themselves together in a body, or went some distance from the city, on purpose to insult the prophet, as it is plain they did, understand that he was to come there at that time. This argues that they were boys of sufficient age, to commit the most presumptuous sin; and therefore not too young to suffer such a punishment as ensued thereupon.
2dly, Their sin was great, in that they mocked a grave old man, who ought to have been honoured for his age, and a prophet, whom they should have esteemed for his character; and in despising him, they despised God, that called and sent him.
3dly, Bethel, where they lived, was the chief seat of idolatry, in which these children had been trained up; and it was a prevailing inclination to it, together with an hatred of the true religion, that occasioned their reproaching and casting contempt on the prophet.
4thly, The manner of expression argues a great deal of profaneness, Go up thou bald head; that is, either go up to Bethel, speaking in an insulting way, as though they should say, You may go there, but you will not be regarded by them; for they value no such men as you are; or rather, it is as though they should say, you pretend that your predecessor Elijah is gone up to heaven, do you go up after him, that you may trouble us no longer with your prophecies; so that those children, though young in years, were hardened in sin; and this was not so much an occasional mocking of the prophet for his baldness, as a public contrivance, and tumultuous opposition to his ministry; which is a very great crime, and accordingly, was attended with a just resentment in the prophet, and that punishment which was inflicted as the consequence thereof.
The aggravations of this sin of reproaching persons for their natural infirmities, are very great. For, it is a finding fault with the workmanship of the God of nature, the thinking meanly of a person for that which is not chargeable on him as a crime, and which he can, by no means redress. It is a censuring those who are, in some respects, objects of compassion; especially if the reproach be levelled against the defects of the mind, or any degree of distraction; and it argues a great deal of pride and unthankfulness to God, for those natural endowments which we have received from him, though we do not improve them to his glory.
[2.] Some reproach persons for their sinful infirmities, and that in such a way, as that they are styled fools, who make a mock of sin, Prov. xiv. 9. This is done,
1st, When we reflect on persons for sins committed before their conversion, which they have repented of, and God has forgiven; and accordingly they should not be now charged against them, as a matter of reproach. Thus the Pharisee reproached the poor penitent woman, who stood weeping at our Saviour’s feet, and said within himself; If this man were a prophet, he would have known what manner of woman this is that toucheth him, for she is a sinner, Luke vii. 37-39. which respected not her present, but her former condition.
2dly, When they reproach them with levity of spirit, for the sins they are guilty of at present; as when the shameful actions of a drunken man are made the subject of laughter; which ought not to be thought of without regret or pity.
Object. To this it may be objected, that sin renders a person vile, and is really a reproach to him; and therefore it may be charged upon him as such; especially since it is said, concerning the righteous man; in his eyes a vile person is contemned, Psal. xv. 4.
Answ. We are far from asserting, that it is a sin to reprove sin, and shew the person who commits it his vileness, and the reason he has to reproach and charge himself with it, and loath himself for it; therefore,
1st, The contempt that is to be cast on a vile person, does not consist in making him the subject of laughter, as though it was a light matter for him thus to dishonour God as he does; for this should occasion grief in all true believers, as the Psalmist says, I beheld the transgressors and was grieved; because they kept not thy word, Psal. cxix. 158. But,
2dly, When the Psalmist advises to contemn such an one, the meaning is, that we should not make him our intimate, or bosom-friend; or if he be in advanced circumstances, in the world, we are not to flatter him in his sin; whereby, especially when it is public, he forfeits that respect which would otherwise be due to him. In this sense we are to understand Mordecai’s contempt of Haman, Esther iii. 2.
Here we may take occasion to distinguish, between reproving sin, and reproaching persons for it; the former of these is to be done with sorrow of heart, and compassion expressed to the sinner; as our Saviour reproved Jerusalem, and, at the same time, wept over it, Luke xix. 41, 42. But, on the other hand, reproach is attended with hatred of, and a secret pleasure taken in his sin and ruin. Again, reproof for sin ought to be with a design to reclaim the offender; whereas reproach tends only to expose, exasperate, and harden him in his sin. Moreover, reproof for sin ought to be given with the greatest seriousness and conviction of the evil and danger ensuing hereupon; whereas they who reproach persons, charge sin on them, as being induced hereunto by their own passions, without any concern for the dishonour which they bring to God and religion hereby, or desire of their repentance and reformation.
[3.] Sometimes that which is the highest ornament, and greatest excellency of a Christian, is turned to his reproach; more particularly,
1st, Some have been reproached for extraordinary gifts, which God has been pleased to confer on them. Thus the spirit of prophecy was sometimes reckoned, by profane persons, the effect of distraction, 2 Kings ix. 11. And Joseph was reproached by his brethren, in a taunting way, with the character of a dreamer; because of the prophetic intimation which he had from God, in a dream, concerning the future estate of his family, Gen. xxxvii. 13. And when the apostles were favoured with the extraordinary gift of tongues, and preached to men of different nations, in their own language; Some were amazed, and others mocked them, and said, These men are full of new wine, Acts ii. 13.
2dly, Raised affections, and extraordinary instances of zeal for the glory of God, have been derided as though they were matter of reproach. Thus Michael reproached David, when he danced before the ark, 2 Sam. vi. 20. being induced hereunto by an holy zeal, and transport of joy on this occasion; though he was so far from reckoning it a reproach, that he counted that which she called vile, glorious.
3dly, Spiritual experiences of the grace of God, have, sometimes, been turned by those who are strangers to them to their reproach and termed no other than madness. Thus when the apostle Paul related the gracious dealings of God with him in his first conversion, Festus charged him with being beside himself, Acts xxvi. 24.
4thly, A person’s being made use of by God, to overthrow the kingdom of Satan, has been charged against him, as though it were rebellion. Thus the Jews tell Pilate, when he sought to release Jesus, If thou let this man go, thou art not Cesar’s friend, John xix. 12. and that reformation which the apostles were instrumental in making in the world, by preaching the gospel, is styled, turning the world upside down, Acts xvii. 6.
5thly, Humility of mind in owning our weakness, as not being able to comprehend some divine mysteries contained in the gospel, is reckoned matter of reproach by many, who call it implicit faith, and admitting of the greatest absurdities in matters of religion.
6thly, Giving glory to the Spirit, as the author of all grace and peace, and desiring to draw nigh to God in prayer, or engage in other holy duties, by his assistance, is reproached by some, as though it were enthusiasm, and they who desire or are favoured with this privilege, were pretenders to extraordinary revelation.
7thly, A being conscientious in abstaining from those sins which abound in a licentious age, or reproving and bearing our testimony against those who are guilty of them, is reproached with the character of hypocrisy, preciseness, and being righteous overmuch.
8thly, Separating from communion with a false church, and renouncing those doctrines which tend to pervert the gospel of Christ, is called, by some, heresy. Thus the Papists brand the Protestants with the reproachful name of heretics; to whom we may answer, that this is rather our glory, and confess, that after the way which they call heresy, so worship we the God of our fathers, Acts xxiv. 14.
This sin is attended with many aggravations; for God reckons it as a contempt cast on himself, Luke x. 16. and it is a plain intimation, that they who are guilty of it, pretend not to be what they reproach and deride in others, who, if they be in the right way to heaven, these discover that they desire not to come hither. And, in their whole conduct, they act as though they were endeavouring to banish all religion out of the world, by methods of scorn and ridicule; which, if it should take effect, this earth would be but a small degree better than hell.
However, when we are thus reproached for the sake of God and religion, let us not render railing for railing; but look on those who revile us, as objects of pity, 1 Cor. iv. 12, 13. 1 Pet. ii. 23, who do more hurt to themselves than they can do to us, thereby. Moreover, let us reflect on our own sins, which provoke God to suffer this; and beg of him that he would turn this reproach to his own glory, and our good. Thus David did, when he was unjustly and barbarously cursed and railed at by Shimei, 2 Sam. xvi. 10-12. We ought also to esteem religion the more, because of the opposition and contempt that it meets with from the enemies of God; which may, indeed, afford us some evidence of the truth and excellency thereof; as our Saviour says concerning his disciples, If ye were of the world, the world would love his own; but because you are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you, John xv. 19.
Again, when we are reviled for the sake of Christ and religion, let us take encouragement from hence, that herein we have the same treatment that he, and all his saints, have met with, Heb. xii. 2, 3. chap. xi. 36. And let us also consider that there are many promises annexed hereunto, Matt. v. 11, 12. 1 Pet. iv. 14. It is also an advantage to our character as Christians; for hereby it appears, that we are not on their side, who are Christ’s avowed enemies; and therefore we should reckon their reproach our glory, Heb. xi. 26, or, as the apostle says, Take pleasure in reproaches for Christ’s sake, 2 Cor. xii. 10. or, as it is said elsewhere, Rejoice, that we are counted worthy to suffer shame for his name, Acts v. 41. Thus concerning our doing injury to our neighbour, by speaking against him before his face. We shall now consider,
2. The injury that is done to others by speaking against them behind their backs. This they are guilty of, who raise or invent false reports of their neighbours, or spread those which ought to be kept secret, with a design to take away their good name; these are called tale-bearers, back-biters, slanderers, who offer injuries to others, that are not in a capacity of defending themselves, Lev. xix. 16. These malicious reports are oftentimes, indeed, prefaced, with a pretence of great respect to the person whom they speak against. They seem very much surprised at, and sorry for what they are going to relate; and sometimes signify their hope, that it may not be true; and desire, that what they report may be concealed, while they make it their business themselves to divulge it. But this method will not secure their own reputation, while they are endeavouring to ruin that of another. This is done various ways;
(1.) By pretending that a person is guilty of a fault which he is innocent of. Thus our Saviour, and John the Baptist were charged with immoral practices, which there was not the least shadow or pretence for, Matt. xi. 18, 19.
(2.) By divulging a real fault which has been acknowleged and repented of, and therefore ought to be concealed, chap. xvii. 15. or when there is no pretence for making it public; but what arises from malice and hatred of the person.
(3.) By aggravating, or presenting faults worse than they are. Thus Absalom’s sin in murdering Amnon, was very great; but he that brought tidings thereof to David, represented it worse than it was, when he said, that Absalom had slain all the king’s sons, 2 Sam. xiii. 30.
(4.) By reporting the bad actions of men, and, at the same time, over-looking and extenuating their good ones, and so not doing them the justice of setting one in the balance against the other.
(5.) By putting the worst and most injurious construction on actions that are really excellent. Thus, because our Saviour admitted Publicans and sinners into his presence, and did them good by his doctrine, the Jews reproached him as though he were a friend of publicans and sinners, Matt. xi. 19. taking the word friend in the worst sense, as signifying an approver of them.
(6.) By reporting things, to the prejudice of others, which are grounded on such slender evidence, that they themselves hardly believe them, or, at least, would not, had they not a design to make use thereof, to defame them. Thus Sanballat, in his letter to Nehemiah, tells him, that ‘he and the Jews thought to rebel; and built the wall of Jerusalem, that he might be their king,’ Neh. vi. 6. which, it can hardly be supposed, that the enemy himself gave any credit to. Thus concerning the instances in which persons back-bite, or raise false reports on others.
And, to this we may add, that as they are guilty who raise them; so are they who listen to, and endeavour to propagate them. It is not, indeed, the bare hearing of a report, which, we cannot but think to be attended with malice and slander, that will render us guilty; for that we may not be able to avoid; but it is our encouraging him that raises or spreads it, which renders us guilty; and, particularly, we sin when we hear malicious reports.
[1.] If we conceal them from the party concerned therein, and so deny him the justice of answering what is said against him, in his own vindication.
[2.] When we do not reprove those who make a practice of slandering and back-biting others, in order to our bringing them to shame and repentance; and, most of all, when we contract an intimacy with those who are guilty of this sin, and are too easy in giving credit to what they say, though not supported by sufficient evidence; but, on the other hand, carrying in it the appearance of envy and resentment. Thus concerning the sins forbidden in this Commandment. We shall close this head by proposing some remedies against it. As,
1st, If the thing, reported to another’s prejudice, be true, we ought to consider, that we are not without many faults ourselves; which we would be unwilling, if others knew them, should be divulged. And if it be doubtful, we, by reporting it, may give occasion to some, to believe it to be true, without sufficient evidence, whereby our neighbour will receive real prejudice from that, which, to us, is only matter of surmize and conjecture. But if, on the other hand, what is reported be apparently false, the sin is still the greater; and the highest injustice is hereby offered to the innocent, while we, at the same time, are guilty of a known and presumptuous sin, by inventing and propagating it.
2dly, Such a way of exposing men answers no good end; nor is it a means of reclaiming them.
3dly, Hereby we lay ourselves open to the censure of others, and by endeavouring to take away our neighbour’s good name, endanger the loss of our own.