Matthew 6:14-15

DISCOURSE: 1319
A FORGIVING SPIRIT NECESSARY TO OUR ACCEPTANCE WITH GOD

Matthew 6:14. For if ye forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you: but if ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.

THE different petitions of the Lord’s Prayer are collected from different parts of the Old Testament, and concentered so as to form a concise and comprehensive summary of all that we need to pray for. But there is annexed to one of the petitions a limitation, which was altogether new, and which greatly needed some elucidation. Our Lord however did not stop to explain it at the time, but finished the prayer first, and then added, in confirmation of it, the words which we have now read; shewing us thereby that the clause had not been lightly introduced, but was of great importance, and indispensable necessity. It certainly appeared strange, that we should presume to make our own compassion towards others the pattern and the measure of God’s compassion towards us: but our Lord would have us to know, that it will be in vain to expect mercy at God’s hands, unless we exercise it towards our fellow-creatures: on this condition, and on this only, can we hope for acceptance with him in the day of judgment.
Having already had repeated occasion to consider the subject of forgiveness of injuries, we shall now advert rather to the manner in which that duty is here enjoined; and shall shew,

I. In what sense the salvation of the Gospel may be called conditional—

This subject has been a fruitful source of controversy in the Church of Christ: but both sides of the question are true according to the sense which we annex to the word “condition.”
Salvation is not conditional in a way of compact—

[There are those who think that God engages to give us heaven, if we will perform so many good works; and that, when we have performed those good works, we may claim heaven as a debt. But to affirm that salvation is conditional in any such sense as this, would entirely make void the Gospel of Christ. Salvation would then be of works, and not of grace. It would be to no purpose to say, that these terms were procured for us by Jesus Christ, and that we must therefore refer the honour of our salvation unto him, and accept our reward as the purchase of his blood: for, though the procuring of the terms might be his act, the performing of them must be ours: and when we had performed them, we should have whereof to glory before God. But by the Gospel all glorying is excluded [Note: Romans 3:27.]: and therefore salvation cannot be conditional in the way that we are now speaking of.]

But salvation is conditional in a way of inseparable connexion—

[“God has chosen men to salvation;” but it is “through sanctification of the Spirit, and through belief of the truth [Note: 2 Thessalonians 2:13.].” Faith and holiness are required of us; but the performance of them gives us a claim upon God only so far as he has freely engaged himself by his own gracious promises: it does not warrant us to expect any thing on the ground of merit: we cannot go to God, as labourers that have performed their task, and say, “Pay me that thou owest:” on the contrary, “if we had done all that was commanded us, we should still account ourselves unprofitable servants;” and must accept life as the free gift of God for Christ’s sake [Note: Romans 6:23.]. But still we must do these things; and without doing them we cannot possibly be saved. God has appointed the means as well as the end; and the end is to be attained only in and by the means. It is certainly true that “the purpose of God according to election shall stand [Note: Romans 9:11.];” but it is no less true, that it shall be effected only in the way that he has appointed; and that, whatever men may fancy about their predestination to eternal life, “except they repent they shall all perish;” and “if they believe not, they shall not see life;” and “without holiness no man shall see the Lord.” In this sense therefore salvation is conditional: the obligations that are upon us are indispensable; and no person whatever shall be saved who disregards them.]

The import of the term condition being fixed, we shall proceed to shew,

II.

The reasonableness of the condition here imposed—

Here it will be proper to mark the precise nature and limits of the condition imposed—
[The forgiving of others is not so to be understood as to supersede the exercise of magisterial authority. God has appointed magistrates as his vicegerents in the world, and has put the sword into their hands “for the punishment of evildoers, and the support of them that do well:” and if they should forbear “to execute wrath” upon those who violate the laws, they would themselves be guilty of a dereliction of their public duty. Such lenity therefore is not comprehended in the duty which is here inculcated. Neither does the duty here spoken of altogether prohibit us from the personal exercise of our just rights, either for self-defence, or for the obtaining of legal redress. The Apostle Paul pleaded his right as a Roman citizen in order to protect himself against the injuries with which he was menaced; and appealed to the tribunal of Caesar to obtain that justice which was denied him in the inferior courts. He has indeed expressed his disapprobation of a litigious spirit, and especially such a shameful exercise of it as led Christians to drag one another before the tribunals of Heathens. But he does not prohibit Christians from submitting their claims to the arbitration of judicious persons among themselves; and consequently he does not require us so to forgive those who injure us, as in no case to seek redress. If the only alternative be to suffer an injury, or by angry contention to embroil ourselves in difficulties and quarrels, our Lord has determined the point for us, and bidden us to “turn the other cheek to a man who has smitten us,” rather than retaliate the injury, or do ourselves a still greater injury by yielding to a vindictive spirit. But to a certain extent, the support of our just rights is necessary for the preservation of the peace of the community; and consequently we not only are permitted, but bound, in some instances, to maintain our rights, and to punish those who would rob us of them.

But nothing is ever to be done from a vindictive spirit. The smallest disposition to revenge is strictly prohibited. We not only must not avenge ourselves, but must not for a moment be pleased with the news that any evil has happened even to our most inveterate enemy. So fax from wishing him evil, we ought to the uttermost to do him good: to love and bless him when he hates and curses us; and to pray fervently to God for him, at the very time he is doing us all the injury in Iris power. The work of retribution must be left to God, “to whom alone vengeance belongeth;” and we must content ourselves with “heaping coals of fire upon his head,” to melt him into love.
Now on our performance of this duty God suspends the salvation of our souls.]
The reasonableness of this condition will easily appear—
[If we exercise this grace of forgiveness from proper motives, and in a becoming manner, it will be a clear evidence that we are renewed in the spirit of our minds. There are, it is true, some persons of so easy and gentle a disposition, that they would rather pass by an offence than be at the trouble to resent it. But the forgiving spirit of which we are speaking must proceed from a sense of our own utter unworthiness, and of the exceeding greatness of that debt which has been forgiven us. It must proceed also from a sense of love and gratitude to our Lord and Saviour, and from a desire to honour him by treading in his steps and “walking as he walked.” Now where such principles and such conduct are found, there will every other grace be found also: there is in an eminent degree the image of God enstamped upon the soul; and there is “a meetness for the inheritance of the saints in light.” It is reasonable therefore that such a person, possessed of such humility, such faith, such love, such patience, such self-denial, and such an obediential frame, should be forgiven by his God. There is a perfect correspondence between his work and his reward.
On the contrary, a person of an unforgiving spirit shews, beyond a doubt, that he is altogether unhumbled for his own sins. If he had a proper consciousness of the guilt which he himself has contracted, he would feel no disposition to cast a stone at others: nor would he take a fellow-servant by the throat for a few pence, when he was sensible how many talents he himself owed unto his God. Who, that reads the parable by which our Lord has illustrated this subject, does not see the equity of the sentence passed upon the unforgiving servant [Note: Matthew 18:23.]? So must also that universal sentence be accounted reasonable by every dispassionate man, “He shall have judgment without mercy, who hath shewed no mercy [Note: James 2:13.].”

On whichever side then we view the condition, it appears most reasonable: it is most reasonable that the forgiving should be pardoned, and the unforgiving punished: and knowing as we do, the determination of God to act agreeably to this rule, we must prepare to expect our sentence of condemnation or acquittal according to it.]

From this one subject we may obtain a deep insight into Christianity: we may behold,
1.

Its consistency—

[Persons from different motives are apt to represent the declarations of God in his word as at variance with each other; and, according to their respective views, to wrest the meaning of them for the purpose of maintaining their own particular system. Some, because the grace of God is freely proclaimed to sinners, will not endure the mention of a condition, or admit that there is any kind of conditionality in such passages as that before us. Others, because of such passages, will not endure to hear of God’s electing grace, which they suppose to be inconsistent with them. Others again, because of the difficulty of reducing every thing to their comprehension, are ready to reject Christianity as altogether inconsistent with itself. But there are no two positions in the whole book of God, which are inconsistent with each other. That there are difficulties, we admit: but so there are also in every other work of God, whether of creation or providence: and if there were none in the work of redemption, we should have reason to think that it was not really of divine original. No man that ever lived could reconcile the existence of sin with the holiness of God: but is there therefore an absolute inconsistency between them? Does not every one see that the inability to reconcile them arises from the weakness of our intellect and the narrow limits of our knowledge? The same difficulty is complained of by some in reference to the subject before us; but it is obvious, from the statement we have made, that enough may be said to satisfy an humble mind, though there may still be difficulties left for the confounding of a proud spirit. This is really the case with respect to every other doctrine in the Bible: there may be, as in some works of human art, wheels moving in a variety of directions, and appearing to an ignorant person to obstruct each other; but there is an unity in the whole design, and a subserviency in every part to the production of one common end.
Let us then be on our guard against that controversial spirit that leads men to wrest or stumble at the word of God: and, if there be difficulties which we cannot reconcile, let us be content to say, “What I know not now, I shall know hereafter.”]

2. Its equity—

[It is astonishing to hear with what presumption many will arraign the justice of God: ‘If he has not elected me, how can I help myself? If he imposes on me conditions which I cannot perform, with what equity will he condemn me?’ The Apostle’s answer to such proud objectors is that which most befits their state: “Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God?” Yet the subject before us may suffice to shew, that “God will be justified in his sayings, and be clear when he judgeth:” the day of judgment is called “the revelation of the righteous judgment of God;” and such it will appear to all. Those who now quarrel with the deep doctrines of predestination and election, will then find, that God has ordered every thing in perfect wisdom and equity. None will then presume to arraign his counsels. None will then object that any are saved or condemned contrary to strict justice. Not one ungodly person will be found amongst those that are saved, nor one godly person amongst those that perish. Both the forgiving and unforgiving will have judgment “measured to them, according as they have meted unto others;” and every man’s happiness or misery will be exactly apportioned to him, according to his works. The godly indeed will feel no difficulty in ascribing their salvation to God and to the Lamb; but the ungodly must for ever ascribe their condemnation to their own incorrigible folly and wickedness.]

3. Its excellency—

[The evils which Christianity is intended to remedy, are guilt and wickedness: and these it does remedy most effectually. Forgiveness of sins is freely offered to every penitent believer, without any respect to the number or greatness of his offences: “the blood of Jesus Christ shall cleanse him from all sin:” if only the sinner believe in Jesus, “he shall be justified from all things,” without exception. But does Christianity make no provision for holiness? Does it leave men a prey to evil dispositions, and a torment to each other? No: it requires a change both of heart and life: it requires the exercise of universal love: it requires a conformity to God himself: it saves not one single person, whom it does not first of all change into the image of God, and make “perfect as God himself is perfect.” Were Christianity universally prevalent, and if it had its full operation in every heart, there would be no unkindness in men towards each other, nor any trouble in their own minds. O that its influence were more generally known, and more deeply felt! Let those at least who profess to have embraced it in sincerity and truth, shew forth its power. Let them shew what amiable tempers it produces in the mind, and what a lovely carriage it produces in the life. If at any time they receive an injury, instead of meditating revenge, let them say, ‘Now has my God given me an opportunity of recommending religion, and of glorifying his name: now has he called me to display the excellency of his Gospel and the efficacy of his grace.’ Such conduct would serve as an evidence to our own minds that we are the Lord’s, and would constrain others also to acknowledge that God is with us of a truth.]