far profounder interest. "Take heed," said he, "and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees." The meaning of this injunction will be collected from what follows: "And they reasoned among themselves, saying, It is because we have taken no bread. Which when Jesus perceived, he said unto them, O ye of little faith, why reason ye among yourselves, because ye have brought no bread? Do ye not yet understand, neither remember the five loaves of the five thousand, and how many baskets ye took up? neither the seven loaves of the four thousand, and how many baskets ye took up? How is it that ye do not understand that I spake it not to you concerning bread, that ye should beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees? Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees." (Matthew xvi, 6–12.)

The words of the text, thus interpreted, are recommended to our serious attention by the very solemn manner in which they are introduced. From a compassionate solicitude for our salvation, Jesus Christ himself, the incarnate Word and wisdom of God, warns us against the influence of certain doctrines and opinions which he sees to be highly injurious and dangerous. Now, as this caution, coming from such authority, and delivered in such a manner, must obviously be of high importance, let us earnestly entreat God to direct and bless us while we inquire into its import.

The doctrines of the Pharisees and the Sadducees are here compared to leaven. For, as leaven by its fermentative action circulates its principle and quality throughout the whole mass into which it is put, and assimilates that mass to itself, so these doctrines have a corrupting, contagious, and assimilating power; and are, moreover, so congenial to the depraved propensities of the unregenerate heart that it is extremely difficult to avoid being tainted by them.

This being premised, let us proceed to speak, first, of the leaven of the Pharisees, and, secondly, of the leaven of the Sadducees; showing, as we proceed, the antichristian character and dangerous tendency of each of these systems, which

may perhaps appear, on examination, to have been revived and propagated, though under new names, in our own age and country.

I. The leaven of the Pharisees.

It appears from both sacred and profane history that the Pharisees were by far the most numerous and popular sect among the Jews. For almost all the learned men of that nation, who are in the New Testament called scribes, and who claimed to be eminent for their knowledge of the Mosaic law, and its interpretation by the traditions of the elders, belonged to this sect. Accordingly we find that the scribes and Pharisees are generally mentioned together.

The corruptions of the Pharisees may, for the sake of distinction, be summed up under three heads:

1. It appears that, like the sect of Stoics so celebrated in ancient history, they were rigid predestinarians, or believers in what modern language calls philosophical necessity. Like most advocates for that doctrine, they were not altogether consistent with themselves. For it seems, from the account of Josephus, that they pretended to ascribe some kind of free will and free agency to man; though, at the same time, they asserted that God has bound everything fast in fate, and has preordained all actions, circumstances, and events. Now, does not this doctrine inevitably make God the author of sin? And if man be not able (not, indeed, of himself, but by the grace and Spirit of God) to avoid sin and follow holiness, how can it be consistent with justice to punish the wicked for what he could not help, or to reward the righteous for walking in that path of virtue in which he was absolutely compelled to walk? Does not the system of necessity, or absolute unconditional predestination, make man to be a piece of mere mechanism? And is not such a view diametrically opposite to that of the Scriptures, which uniformly appeal to us as accountable creatures, and therefore free agents? Is it not plainly asserted or intimated in many passages of the sacred book that we have, by God's grace, a power to choose either life or death; and that our eternal salvation or ruin will depend, not upon any fancied

VOL. I.-25

decrees of the Most High, but upon the right or wrong use which we make of our own free will?

I am led to insist on the antichristian tendency of this Pharisaic doctrine more strongly than I might otherwise have done, because I am persuaded that the speculative opinions of men respecting it sometimes, though not always, materially influence their practice. This was remarkably instanced in the case of an obdurate highwayman, mentioned by Mr. Fletcher, who was sentenced to death at Shrewsbury in the year 1774, and who, on the morning of his execution, in order to excuse his crimes, and comfort himself under his punishment, quoted from Jeremiah, "I know that the way of man is not in himself: it is not in man that walketh to direct his steps." Much to the same purpose, it is remarked by Dr. Cudworth, who wrote in the latter part of the seventeenth century, that the skepticism which flourished in his time grew up from the doctrine of the fatal necessity of all actions and events, as from its proper root.

Take heed, therefore, and beware of this part of the leaven of the Pharisees. Do not imagine for one moment that you may live in sin without danger, because if God has absolutely decreed your salvation it must be accomplished. And, on the other hand, do not despair of obtaining salvation at God's hands through any false fear which Satan may suggest, that you are included in that most ungodlike decree by which some think the Most High has unconditionally bound down a large portion of mankind to perdition, so as to "consign their unborn souls to hell." God" will have all men to be saved;" and if any be not saved, it is because they reject his counsel against themselves. "Ye will not come unto me," says Jesus, "that ye might have life." God therefore will be clear when he judges you, and just in the condemnation of such as refused his proffered mercy, and neglected to "work out" their "salvation with fear and trembling," while God was "working" in them "to will and to do of his good pleasure."

2. Another characteristic of the Pharisees was their rejection of the written word of God as the only and sufficient standard of religious truth and the guide of religious practice; and their

zeal in observing, besides the law of Moses, the traditions of the elders, which often made this written law of none effect. They asserted that, in addition to the written law recorded in the Pentateuch, Moses received from God on Sinai an oral law, that is, a law given by word of mouth; and that this oral law, handed down from age to age by tradition, (but afterward collected together in the twelve large folio volumes of the Talmud,) was of equal or of greater authority than the written law. To these traditions of the elders, therefore, in cases of competition, they paid more regard than to the law of Moses: which latter they thought themselves bound to observe only as interpreted by the former. Several instances of this kind occur in the Gospel history. (See Mark vii, 2-8; Matthew xxiii, 16, 22.)

Now, brethren, is there not great need, even in this day, to take heed and beware of the very same leaven? Are we not in danger from this source both as to doctrines and to practice? Do none in our own age and country pay equal or greater attention to "visions" and "new revelations" than to the written word of God? And has not the cause of Christianity suffered almost as much from these unscriptural reveries of its well-meaning but mistaken advocates as from all the attacks of open infidels? Do none among us pin their faith on the traditions they received from their parents or teachers, accepting with implicit confidence the decrees of popes or councils, or the creeds and confessions of Churches, without stopping, like the noble Bereans of old, to search the Scriptures whether these things are so? And is not our practice, in many important particulars, founded more on the traditions of men-on the corrupt maxims, customs, and fashions of an ungodly worldthan on the sure and unerring rule? For instance: Do none in our day accumulate riches upon riches, (like the "fool" mentioned in the Gospel,) continually adding house to house, and land to land, to a degree far beyond anything that a due regard to their own future exigences and a necessary provision for the comfortable and respectable establishment of their children or dependants can justify? Do we see none getting as much and saving as much, but giving as little as they can

plunging themselves, in quest of money, into such a variety of business and worldly care as leaves them neither time nor inclination to live to God, or to be useful in promoting the true welfare of their fellow-creatures? And is not this diametrically opposite to the teaching of Scripture? Let us listen: "They that will be rich fall into temptation and a snare, and into many foolish and hurtful lusts, which drown men in destruction and perdition. For the love of money is the root of all evil: which while some coveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves through with many sorrows." (1 Timothy vi, 9, 10.) "Go to now, ye rich men, weep and howl for your miseries that shall come upon you. Your riches are corrupted, and your garments are motheaten. Your gold and silver is cankered; and the rust of them shall be a witness against you, and shall eat your flesh as it were fire. Ye have heaped treasure together for the last days." (James v, 1-3.) "Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, and where thieves break through and steal: but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal." (Matthew vi, 19, 20.) All such notorious violation of express Scripture men will vindicate by appealing to the customs and usages of the world. What is this but downright Pharisaism? Do none of you make a practice of using, or countenancing by their attendance, certain diversions, assemblies, and parties which are altogether hostile to holiness, and plainly at variance with Scripture rule? Listen again: "Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God." (1 Corinthians x, 31.) "See then that ye walk circumspectly, not as fools, but as wise; redeeming the time, because the days are evil." (Ephesians v, 15, 16.) "Pray without ceasing. In everything give thanks." (1 Thessalonians v, 17, 18.) The amusements in question, and others of a like nature, are not only in themselves vain, often worse than vain, and irreconcilable with the purity of the Christian character; but they also tend to produce actual evils of the worst kind. They cherish pride and vanity ;