Why repair ye not the breaches of the house?
2 Kings xii. 7.
The House is the Temple. We
have travelled, therefore, from the north to the south of
Palestine, from the capital of Israel to the capital of
Judah. As soon as the two great prophets, Elijah and
Elisha, are no more, the interest of the story centres no longer
in the kingdom of the ten tribes: it reverts to the stock of
David, and finds its latest gleam of beauty and glory in the
national reformations and personal pieties of Hezekiah and
Josiah.
Elisha is not yet dead: but he has ceased to occupy the sacred
page after the anointing of Jehu, until he appears once more, and
finally, in the striking incidents of his death-bed and his
grave.
Meanwhile that Baal-worship which Jehu has extirpated in the
north, has found refuge in the southern realm, under the fostering
patronage of a daughter of the house of Ahab. Jehoram, son
of Jehoshaphat, had married a second Jezebel, in the person of
her daughter Athaliah. Jehoram reigned eight years, and was
succeeded by his son Ahaziah, who perished, as we read last
Sunday, with his uncle Jehoram, son of Ahab, king of Israel,
under the hand of the avenging Jehu, the scourge of God.
Then Athaliah, seeing that her son was dead, determined to
reign for herself. She was one of those masculine spirits,
one of those heroines of pride and crime, who can brook no puny,
infant sovereigns; she could not live to be ruled by a
grandchild; and so she took the decisive step of destroying
all the seed royal, after which, it is said, Athaliah,
late the queen-mother, did reign over the land.
But it is seldom, on this earth—which is still
God’s, however much, at certain times, the devil may claim
it for his own—it is seldom, I say, that crime is quite
prosperous, quite thorough: something is forgotten in every
murder, which rises at last into a testimony; and some one, some
little babe
perhaps, is overlooked in every massacre; there is a sister, it
may be, or an aunt—as it was here—whose heart yearns
over that little cradle, and who contrives to rescue its
unconscious occupant to be the heir of the throne and the avenger
of the family.
Such was King Joash; rescued by his aunt Jehosheba from her
own mother’s fury, and by her hidden, during six years of
earliest childhood, in one of the chambers of the
Temple—for she was the wife of Jehoiada, the High
Priest.
In his seventh year, there was a conspiracy, a revolution, and
a coronation. The little King was shown to the
people in the temple-court, the crown was put upon him, the
testimony (or book of the law) was given him, he was made and he
was anointed, and all the people clapped their hands,
and said, God save the king. And when the
usurping grandmother, attracted by the tumult, came upon the
scene, with the cry, Treason, treason! the High
Priest had her forth without the ranges; she was allowed
to pass unmolested through the crowd and through the guard, till
she was outside the consecrated ground; and there she was
slain.
This was
the curious, memorable entrance of the little King Joash upon a
reign of forty years in Jerusalem. You can imagine how that
scene must have printed itself on his memory. It must have
given a strange, a solemn importance to the house of God, and all
its belongings. The recollection of that sudden command,
given by the High Priest, his uncle, preserver, and king-maker,
Have her forth without the ranges, must have written upon
his heart an indelible impression of the sacredness of that spot
which could thus arrest revolution and make the most righteous
doom impious. You will not wonder, therefore, if his young
thoughts were first turned, as a Sovereign, to the wretched, the
dilapidated state of the Temple itself. It appears that, on
the one hand, there were long, careless arrears of temple income:
people had grown indifferent to the payment of their most
unquestionable dues to the Altar and the Priesthood: on the other
hand, there was a positive as well as a negative defalcation; for
on that sacred height of Mount Zion there had arisen, side by
side with God’s Temple, a rival shrine of Baal; and the
idolatress Athaliah, with her creatures, seems to have taken from
the one to build the other: in short, the very foundation and
wall-stones of the Holy House had been gradually pillaged and
carted away, and the House itself stood a monument at once of
modern shame and ancestral glory, needing the builder’s
hand to restore it to decency and even to safety.
As for the vessels of the House—all those costly
priceless treasures with which the wealth and piety of king
Solomon had filled it—they had gone, bit by bit, to buy off
the annoyances of powerful neighbours: King Rehoboam, at the very
outset of the schism, had given Shishak Solomon’s shields
of gold, and replaced them with pitiful shameful shields of
brass: it was too late, or too soon, to think of
ornament—the present question was one entirely of use and
substantial repair.
It seems that even the efforts and injunctions of the young
King were for many years ineffectual. In the twenty-third
year of his reign the old breaches were still unrepaired.
It is astonishing—men would not believe till they had tried
it—how long it takes to re-awaken one slumbering
conscience, or indeed to make one desired work of reparation, be it never
so small—we see it ourselves at this moment in a
side-chapel of this Church—a fact accomplished. And
so King Joash, stung to the soul by the disappointment of his own
good intentions, summons before him Jehoiada the Priest, his own
uncle and benefactor, and expostulates with him and his
brother-priests in the words of the text, Why repair ye not
the breaches of the House?
And the result of it is, that, instead of leaving the money
received for this purpose in the unaccountable hands of the
Priests, they have a chest made, with a hole bored in the lid of
it, and set beside the altar; and the Priests are to put all the
money which they receive into this chest; and then they have a
civil auditor, the King’s scribe, a sort of Secretary of
State, to act with the High Priest in counting and applying the
sums thus accumulated, and so it passes direct into the hands of
the carpenters and builders, and the work is done.
My brethren, you will all perceive why I chose this text this
evening, when we are making our first collection, under altered
circumstances, for the more substantial part of our annual
expenditure upon this Church. It is true, this House of Prayer
is not in all respects like Solomon’s Temple: I mean that,
in Christian times, it is not the fabric, it is the Congregation,
which is the Temple or House of God. Nevertheless, without
a fabric a congregation is a rope of sand: there must be a place
if there is to be a worship: and therefore the distinction,
though true, may be overstrained; and I am not afraid to apply to
this Church, the building I mean, the expostulation of King Joash
with Jehoiada and the Priests, Why repair ye not the breaches
of the House?
I have not, indeed, one moment’s anxiety as to your
response. You love the place, this place at least,
where God’s honour dwelleth. I believe that
your periodical offerings on this monthly occasion will be
almost, or perhaps quite, equal to those which you make for any
work of piety or charity: and I may remind you that there is an
especial reason why your offerings should be large at the outset,
inasmuch as already four months are gone by of the current year,
and we have to supply in eight months the resources (as they
hereafter will be) of twelve.
But on
this point I feel an entire security. You will never allow
those who undertake the office of your Churchwardens to incur any
responsibility but such as you cheerfully guarantee to
them. I will rather take the opportunity of saying one word
upon the more general question.
We have never in this place—certainly not for many years
past—laid a compulsory church-rate. We have always
allowed those who would to refuse payment. Even when the
law was clearly with us, we have never taken advantage of
it. So far, we might, if we would, have regarded the new
Act as confirming and stereotyping our own local custom.
But there were these two differences. We could no longer
carry with us the influence, the persuasion, of an unenforced
compulsion. We could no longer say, as heretofore, He
that may command, entreats. Henceforth it was
lawful to refuse.
Again, we could no longer extend our payments over the whole
Town; and, with whatever abatements from caprice or principle,
hope to enlist, in the work of reparation or maintenance, the
sympathies of an entire population.
It became necessary, therefore, that we should look to the
Congregation alone; and, in one form or in another, ask those to
support, who really love and use, this House of God.
Hence our appeal to you this evening. And if on future
occasions the appeal is commonly made to you in silence, without
special enforcement from this place, yet let me hope that you
will all register it in your minds as a just claim, and not
suffer these periodical gatherings to lose their interest or to
fail in their amount.
Why repair ye not the breaches of the House? The
subject expands itself before us, and we read the remonstrance as
applying no longer to the fabric, but rather to these three
larger and more sacred topics, the Congregation, the Church, the
soul.
1. That anxiety which we do not feel about the fabric,
for we are sure that you will attend to it, we cannot stifle as
regards the Congregation.
For indeed it is this which makes the House. The
building is only valuable, only significant, for the sake of the
inmates. When it is asked of us, Why repair ye not the
bleaches of the House? we may look up indeed at our broken
pinnacles, our not watertight roof, our falling flowers, our
patchwork pomegranates, and think that these too require
attention or deserve reproach; but, after all, these are not the
real things; these altogether make not the House; the House, the
Temple, now, in these days of spirit and Gospel, is the
community, the congregation, the living body within. How is
it with this? Are there no breaches here, visible not to an
eye of flesh, but to One who seeth in secret?
For example, my brethren, is there not too great a
disproportion here between the real and the nominal
worshippers? Is it not lamentable, is it not even
discreditable, that so many should be present at one Service once
on the Lord’s Day, and so few at any other Service either
on this Holy Day or on any other? that so many should come
together here this evening to listen to music or preaching, so
few to pray and to praise, so few to break the Holy Bread, or to
drink the Sacred Wine? Is not this one of the breaches
of the House, the spiritual house, which wants
repairing amongst us?
2. But this carries me on to a somewhat wider field, which
I have called not the Congregation, but the Church. And
here, as is natural indeed in these eventful, these quickly
moving times, my thoughts are upon our own Church, that communion
which is the congregation of congregations; that communion which
we have heretofore known as the Church of England by law
established.
So rapid has been the course of events in late years—I
might single out the last ten, or the last five, or (quite by
exception) the last year of all—that Church-people must
prepare themselves, I feel sure, for a speedy, a scarcely
gradual, demolition of all that has been distinctive, all that
has been exceptionally advantageous, in their position. An
eminent man and excellent Bishop, who was laid in his grave last
Friday, was wont to say, If I live ten years, I shall
be the last Bishop of Peterborough. It is more than
probable that some of my younger hearers this evening may live
not only to see what we call the Church of England thrown
altogether upon voluntary offerings for its maintenance—in
which case some of them may remember in old age the first
collection made in the Parish Church of Doncaster for the repairs
of its fabric and the expences of its services—but also to find it
at least an open, perhaps a very doubtful, question, to whom
shall belong the Churches themselves and the
glebe-houses—whether indeed there shall be left to the old
Church of England, as we still fondly call it, any vestige of
that legal standing which has made her hitherto the calm shelter
of her children, the admiring wonder of foreigners, and the mark
of obloquy or envy (as the case might be) to thousands of her
domestic enemies.
I am far from regarding this prospect—be it far off or
near—with unmixed alarm or dismay. I never believed
that the Establishment, as such, was Christ’s Church in
England, or that the withdrawal of the favour of the State would
be the putting out in our communion of the Divine
Shechinah. It is not so much for the Church that I fear:
for I firmly believe Christ’s words, Lo, I am
with you alway, and doubt not that the old, the everlasting
benediction is able to repeat itself in many new, many diverse
forms. I do fear something for the State, when it ceases to
have a religion. I do fear something for the average tone
of religion in our cottages and in our palaces, when there is no
longer one
form of worship which has upon it the stamp of pedigree and of
custom; when it is an evenly balanced question with every man and
with every family, Whither shall I go this day for God’s
worship? whither, or whether any whither?
I do fear that there will be more and more in many houses of a
cold indifferent scepticism, a Christless education and a Godless
life. I do fear that more and more may reach old age
ignorant of a Saviour, and go to their graves without any sure
and certain hope of a resurrection to eternal life.
For the Church itself I fear not. In so far as the
Church of England (so called) has had Christ in her and God with
her, she is indestructible and immortal. In so far as she
has trusted in outward advantage, and suffered herself, in her
priests or in her people, to become sluggish, lukewarm,
contemptuous, or persecuting—in so far let a change into
adversity—God grant it—reform her. The great
question for all of us, in our several stations, more especially
in the days which are now coming, or almost come, upon our
Church, must be this one of the text, Why repair ye not the
breaches of the House?
Let the
Priests of the Temple ask it—ask it of themselves—Are
they trusting at all in the advantages of an Establishment, and
negligent, in the same degree, of that personal industry, of that
individual self-sacrifice, which alone can justify their
endowment, maintain their honour, or do their work? If the
Established Church of England, as such, be swept away, then,
along with it, will go all idle, inconsistent, scandalous
Ministers: those who are to serve at God’s Altar afterwards
must be only such as are respected by their people: let it not
have to be said that England would gain as much as she loses by
ceasing to have an endowed, an established Ministry, inasmuch as,
quite as often as not, the Parish Minister was an indolent, an
unworthy, or an inefficient man! This is the way in which
the Priests must set themselves to repair the
Temple-breaches.
Then for the People. To what end does a Church exist
amongst us? To what purpose this costly, this almost
magnificent apparatus of vestment and ritual, of Cathedral Church
and elaborate minstrelsy? Does it mean anything, or
nothing? If it represents to the country, in symbol and
form, the wants of man’s soul, and the absolute necessity of a
Divine communion, then prove it by the using! Do not talk
of the duty of the State, of the rights of the Church, of
Apostolical Succession and an authorized Ministry—and never
use any! When the Church of England ceases, with our will
or without it, to be an established, privileged, or favoured
Church at all; then, how many of you will be found to come
forward in its maintenance? How many of you will worship
here, when there is no longer any traditional or conventional
propriety in doing so? How many will accept their position,
in reference to man, as only one out of fifty or a hundred
denominations—treat with all respect and charity others who
follow not with them—and yet, for themselves, become but
the more earnest and devout Churchmen, in proportion as State aid
and legal endowment become things of the past—things, it
may be, of remote and almost forgotten history?
And, meanwhile, let me ask this of the Churchmen here
assembled this evening, Are we half as liberal—I ask it
advisedly—in giving for the maintenance of our Church, as
are many bodies of Nonconformists in their offerings for
theirs? You know that we are not. Let us look about us in this
matter. Let us rise to the emergency. Show that you
value your Church, by giving bountifully in her behalf. If
the Church is what you profess it to be, surely it is worth
something, something even of self-sacrifice, to maintain it in
its efficiency. You know that there are many amongst us to
whom the Church costs nothing. On one pretext and another,
they evade all her burdens. They grudge the very rents of
their sittings; and if those rents were exchanged to-morrow (as I
would they were) for Offertories, still they would give
nothing. My brethren, these things ought not so to
be. By this grudging, this ungenerous spirit, we are
drawing down upon ourselves, as a judgment, the sentence of
disestablishment and disendowment. Be it not so amongst
us! Count no money better spent than that which is given
for the repairing of the breaches of this House; meaning now by
the House, not only or chiefly the fabric, but rather the purpose
for which the fabric stands—the edification and salvation
of human souls. Above all, see that you rightly, earnestly,
industriously use the means of grace herein afforded you.
What would not they give, who are gone from us this last week by disease or
accident, unrepentant, unredeemed, for one such feast of love as
was accepted this morning by but six and twenty souls—for
one such opportunity as we have enjoyed this evening of drawing
nigh to the Throne of Grace through our one Divine Lord?
3. Thus, then, we pass naturally, in conclusion, to that
House, or Temple of God, which is of all the most intimate, the
most sacred, the most inaccessible; yet in which, if anywhere,
the true fire burns of an acceptable sacrifice—the real
altar is built of lively, living, devoted stones. That
House is the soul; and it, too, has its breaches.
Yes, we know it. That Temple—which ought to lie
four-square, which ought to have everything in its place,
which ought to be gleaming with the fire of the Holy Ghost, and
adorned with the precious stones of a meek and quiet and pure and
Godward spirit—that Temple, of which the light ought to be
shining through into the life, and making every act and word and
thought gracious and beneficent and God-recalling—that
Temple is all jagged and disordered and spotted and
sin-stained—that Temple lets its altar-fire go out every
half-hour, and suffers a darkness that may be felt to
settle down upon its chambers—making unbelievers at last
say, If that be faith, give me reason; if that
be piety, give me conscience; if that indeed be
religion, let me know only the heathen’s
revelation—of good sense, good nature,
and an elevated self-love!
Why repair ye not the breaches of the House?
Do we answer, I cannot? It is a reproach, it is a
calumny, upon the Gospel of Divine grace. That is the very
revelation of the Gospel—God giveth more grace:
more, as we need more; more, as we ask more; more, as we look and
wait and make room for more. I cannot? No; but
God can. Ask, and ye shall have.
Or do we answer, I need not? I am well enough
as I am—God is very merciful—He knows
our frame, and whatever deficiencies He sees in me,
Christ will make them up? Alas! it is too often the
evangelical reply—if not with the lips, then in the
heart! Christ died to make sin less sinful, to make sin
less dangerous, by substituting a figment of justification for a
reality of holiness, watchfulness, and self-control! Thus
even the Blessed Lord Himself is made a minister of sin,
and man turns the very table of his blessing into a new
occasion of falling!
Or do we answer, finally, I will not? I love
the breaches of my soul’s house; I do not wish that
the gusts of passion should be fenced out; I do not wish
that there should be no crack or cranny through which I may peep
out on the world’s vanities, nor any secret
neglected postern through which some delicious delirious lust may
creep in to intoxicate me? Oh! worst of all, most
hopeless, this last answer—the answer of many consciences,
will they but speak, in this great Congregation; the answer which
not only virtually denies, but wilfully refuses, the Gospel;
which makes the Cross an offence, and Christ to have died in
vain!
May it please God, by some one of His thousand, His myriad
agencies, to make us feel! to bring us to our knees in hearty
repentance before Him; and then, even as it is written,
humbling ourselves first under His mighty hand, at
last to exalt us in due time!