SERM. the death of their firft-born had most faX. tally convinced them they were but as dead men before them, and in danger of an utter destruction for detaining them, Accordingly it has been obferved by fome, that here is an ambiguity in the Hebrew phrase, which instead of borrowed, might as well be rendered they asked, and instead of lent, they let them have intimating, that the Egyptians did voluntarily part with whatever the Ifraelites had need of for their journey.

But what is most of all material to be taken notice of, is the exprefs authority they had from God to justify their conduct in this matter. No man can poffibly have any other claim to his property, but fuch only as is fubordinate to the disposal and will of the Creator. For, For, all property. being originally founded in that grant to mankind, which conftituted us Lords and owners of this visible creation, it was afterwards alterable at the will of the Supream Proprietor, who had not so made it over to us as to exclude himself, but referved to himself the fupream government and direction of the universe, and the dif pofal of every thing in it. Both life and fortune are fubject to his righteous will; and, as it is only by this principle that we can juftify the Wars made afterwards by the Hebrews on the inhabitants of Ca

naan

X.

naan to drive them out of their ancient pof- SER M. feffions, and utterly destroy them with the edge of the fword, because they were commiffioned to that purpose by him who ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomfoever he will*: fo the fame reason will vindicate them in the present instance of spoiling the Egyptians, because they had a fufficient right and title to their goods, manifeftly conveyed or made over to them by the supream Proprietor. But this example may never be drawn into precedent, unless where the circumftances are the fame, where the fame exprefs authority may be alledg'd from heaven to fuperfede the title of the prefent poffeffors, and inveft us with a claim of right.

2. Secondly, It is next to be enquired, whether our obligation to the payment of debts be not set aside and cancelled by that Petition in the Lord's prayer, that God would forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors where the mutual forgiveness of our debts to one another is made the condition of our asking forgiveness of our heavenly Father? The difficulty is increased by the Parable of one who threw his fellow-fervant into prifon, upon account of debt, and provoked his Lord to proceed against him with the fame rigour. Where

* Dan. iv. 32. xviii, 23, &.

+ Mat. vi. 12.

R 4

↑ Mat.

the

SERM. the whole is concluded with this fevere apX. plication, fo likewife fhall my heavenly Father do alfo unto you, if ye from your hearts forgive not every one his brother their trefpalles*. And if, by these paffages, the creditor be bound to excufe the payment of what is owing to him, the debtor may feem, by confequence, difcharged, and under no farther obligation to stand to his engagements:

In answer to this, let it be first of all obferved, that there are debts of duty and of punishment. From the non-payment of the debt of duty the debt of punishment arifes; and therefore, when we pray to God that he would forgive us our debts, we befeech him at once to pardon our deficiency in the performance of our duty, our trefpaffes and tranfgreffions against his perfect law, and likewife to remit the punishment which is due to us on that account. Confequently, when we add, as we forgive our debtors, we mean it not abfolutely of the pecuniary debts of our brethren, but of their trefpaffes or offences against us, by the forgiveness whereof we do but make payment of a debt which we ourselves owe, namely the debt of charity. But what has this to do with our demanding payment or reftitution of our juft property, unless it should happen through the decay and hard * Mat. xviii. 35.

circum

circumstances of the Debtor, that a rigo- SER M. rous infifting on it must be attended with X. the breach of charity? In that cafe indeed, it may prove to be our duty to recede a little from our right. Tho' we may ask for our own, yet we must not worry or devour our brother to obtain it: but should either entirely diffolve the obligation, or allow him longer time for payment, or come to fuch equitable terms of compofition, that he may not be utterly crushed by his infolvency, nor we feek revenge in that ruin of another, which cannot benefit ourselves.

All this may fitly be illuftrated from that Parable of the fellow-fervants already mentioned. The creditor, in the first place, was over-eager and violent in his demands, He took his fellow-fervant by the throat, Saying, Pay me that thou oweft. The debtor, on the other hand, was humble and fubmiffive; He fell down at his feet and befought him, faying, Have patience with me, and I will pay thee all. The propofal was both modeft and equitable, and had the creditor confented to it, there had been no complaint of his rigour and uncharitablenefs; but when he would hearken to no terms of pity and compaffion, but went immediately, and caft him into prifon till be fhould pay the debt, it was then that he

pro

voked

SERM. voked his Lord to vengeance, and was deX. livered himself to the tormentors *.

3. Thirdly, The laft paffage of fcripture to be objected on this occafion is, that of our bleffed Saviour in St. Luke; If ye lend to them of whom ye hope to receive, what thank have ye? for finners alfo lend to finners, to receive as much again. But love ye your enemies, and do good and lend, hoping for nothing again: and your reward fhall be great, and ye fhall be children of the highest +. Which feems again to discountenance any exaction of the jufteft debts, and require us to diffolve the obligation of the debtor.

But here it is, at first view, obvious, that this paffage of our Saviour does not abfolutely condemn all lending with an expectation to receive again, but only prefers charity to the poor as the more important duty of religion. The firft (he observes) we do in common with finners, and men that have no fenfe of duty; but the other is the diftinguishing character of the good and virtuous. In like manner, we are elfewhere advised not to make entertainments for the rich, but rather feed the poor; not as if the first were abfolutely unlawful, but because the last fhould always be in our efteem before it. Thus when it is faid, 1 will have mercy and not facrifice, when we *Mat, xviii. 28, 29, 30, 34. + Luke vi. 34,

35.

are