*2. And can we expect it to be any otherwise now? Although what we preach is the gospel of peace, yet if you will violently and illegally hinder our preaching, must not this create disturbance? But observe, the disturbance begins on your part. All is peace, till you raise that disturbance. And then you very modestly impute it to us, and lay your own riot at our door!
But of all this, our Lord hath told us before. Think not that I am come to send peace upon earth: that this will be the immediate effect, wherever my gospel is preached with power. I am not come to send peace, but a sword: this (so far as the wisdom of God permits, by whom the hairs of your head are all numbred) will be the first consequence of my coming, whenever my word turns sinners from darkness to light, from the power of Satan unto God.
I would wish all you who see this scripture fulfilled, by disturbance following the preaching the gospel, to remember the behaviour of that wise magistrate at Ephesus on the like occasion. He did not lay the disturbance to the preacher’s charge, but beckoned to the multitude and said, ye men of Ephesus—Ye ought to be quiet, and to do nothing rashly. For ye have brought these men, who are neither robbers of temples, nor yet blasphemers of your goddess: (not convicted of any such notorious crime, as can at all excuse this lawless violence.) But if Demetrius hath a matter against any, the law is open, and there are deputies (or proconsuls, capable of hearing and deciding the cause) let them implead one another. But if ye enquire any thing concerning other things, it shall be determined in a lawful assembly.
3. “But you create divisions in private families.” Accidentally, we do. For instance, suppose an entire family to have the form but not the power of godliness; or to have neither the form nor the power; in either case, they may in some sort agree together. But suppose, when these hear the plain word of God, one or two of them are convinced, “This is the truth. And I have been all this time in the broad way that leadeth to destruction:” These then will begin to mourn after God; while the rest remain as they were. Will they not therefore of consequence divide, and form themselves into separate parties? Must it not be so, in the very nature of things? And how exactly does this agree with the words of our Lord? Suppose ye that I came to send peace upon earth? I tell you nay: But rather division. For from henceforth there shall be five divided in one house, three against two, and two against three. The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father: the mother against her daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother-in-law against the daughter-in-law, and the daughter-in-law against the mother-in-law. (Luke xii. 51, 52, 53.) And the foes of a man, shall be they of his own houshold. (Matthew x. 36.)
Thus it was from the very beginning. For is it to be supposed, that a Heathen parent, would long endure a Christian child? Or, that a Heathen husband would agree with a Christian wife? Unless either the believing wife could gain her husband; or the unbelieving husband prevailed on the wife to renounce her way of worshipping God: at least, unless she would obey him in going no more to those societies or conventicles, (ἑταιρίαι) as they termed the Christian assemblies.
*4. Do you think now, I have an eye to your case? Doubtless I have; for I do not fight as one that beateth the air. “Why have not I a right to hinder my own wife or child, from going to a conventicle? And is it not the duty of wives to obey their husbands? And of children to obey their parents?” Only set the case seventeen hundred years back, and your own conscience gives you the answer. What would St. Paul have said to one whose husband forbade her, to follow this way any more? What directions would our Saviour have given to him whose father enjoined him, not to hear the gospel? His words are extant still, He that loveth father or mother more than me, is not worthy of me. And he that loveth son or daughter more than me, is not worthy of me. (Matthew x. 37, 38.) Nay more, If any man cometh to me, and hateth not (in comparison of me) his father, and mother, and wife, and children, yea and his own life, he cannot be my disciple. (Luke xiv. 26.)
*“O, but this is not a parallel case. For they were Heathens; but I am a Christian.” A Christian! Are you so? Do you understand the word? Do you know what a Christian is? If you are a Christian, you have the mind that was in Christ; and you so walk as he also walked. You are holy as he is holy, both in heart, and in all manner of conversation. Have you then the mind that was in Christ? And do you walk as Christ walked? Are you inwardly and outwardly holy? I fear, not even outwardly. No; you live in known sin. Alas! How then are you a Christian? What a railer, a Christian? A common swearer, a Christian? A sabbath-breaker, a Christian? A drunkard or whoremonger, a Christian? Thou art a Heathen barefaced; the wrath of God is on thy head, and the curse of God upon thy back. Thy damnation slumbereth not. By reason of such Christians it is that the holy name of Christ is blasphemed. Such as thou they are, that cause the very savages in the Indian woods to cry out, “Christian much drunk, Christian beat men, Christian tell lies, Devil-Christian! Me no Christian.”
*And so thou wilt direct thy wife and children in the way of salvation!—Woe unto thee, thou Devil-Christian! Woe unto thee thou blind leader of the blind! What wilt thou make them? Two-fold more the children of hell than thyself? Be ashamed, blush, if thou canst blush. Hide thy face. Lay thee in the dust. Out of the deep cry unto God, if haply he may hear thy voice. Instantly smite upon thy breast. Who knoweth but God may take thee out of the belly of hell?
*5. “But you are not one of these. You fear God, and labour to have a conscience void of offence. And it is from a principle of conscience, that you restrain your wife and children from hearing false doctrine.” But how do you know it is false doctrine? Have you heard for yourself? Or, if you have not heard, have you carefully read what we have occasionally answered for ourselves? A man of conscience cannot condemn any one unheard. This is not common humanity. Nor will he refrain from hearing what may be the truth, for no better reason than fear of his reputation. Pray observe, I do not say, every man (or any man) is obliged in conscience to hear us. But I do say, every man in England who condemns us, is obliged to hear us first. This is only common justice, such as is not denied to a thief or a murderer. Take your choice therefore. Either hear us, or condemn us not. Either speak nothing at all, or hear before you speak.
But suppose you have both read and heard more than you like: Did you read and hear fairly? Was not you loaden with prejudice? Did you not read or hear, expecting no good; perhaps desiring to find fault? If so, what wonder you judge as you do? What a poor mock-trial is this? You had decided the cause in your own breast, before you heard one word of the evidence. And still do you talk of acting out of conscience? Yea, a conscience void of offence?