SERMON XV.

1 CORINTHIANS V. 8.

BUT WITH THE UNLEAVENED BREAD OF SINCERITY AND TRUTH.

THE Apostle appears here to be giving directions as to the mode of observing the communion. In imitation of the feast of the passover, before which the Jews were required to remove all leaven out of their houses, and to eat the festival with unleavened bread, the Apostle exhorts the Corinthians to observe the distinguishing rite of ther religion, which commemorates their deliverance from sin and death by the sacrifice of Christ, "with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth." This injunction, which is here particularly applied to the celebration of the Supper, it is my intention to consider in its importance to the whole character of a Christian; for he, who has come forward to this characteristic ceremony hypocritically, or in the spirit of imposition, cannot be supposed to be more sincere in the rest of his conduct.

Sincerity is a word which is often used in an indeterminate and unsatisfactory manner, so that we often hear men called sincere who have no other quality in the world to recommend them. A man may be sincerely impious, or sincerely intolerant. He may be following his judgment, and even his conscience, when he is offending against the laws of God and man. In the common sense of the

word, as it is opposed merely to dissimulation, the quality is negative, indifferent, not much to be desired, and sometimes dangerous. When it is applied, however, to religion, it is used in a good sense, and usually includes the idea of unqualified and hearty devotion to the will of God. Still, even when used with reference to religion, it is sometimes made a convenient substitute for some more specific description of men's character and motives; and we are glad to avoid a close scrutiny of the justice of the opinions or conduct of ourselves or others, by saying, when we can say nothing else, that they are sincere.

Thus it happens, that, when the subject of religious opinions is discussed, and some one is found who deviates from the common standard, and question is made of his correctness, the conclusion often heard is, "He may be erroneous, but he gives proof of his sincerity." When the principle, on which a man acts, is canvassed, and doubts are raised of the religious or moral character of another, and some are proposing one test of character, and some another, the inquiry is usually terminated by saying, "Though he may be imperfect or mistaken, yet we have reason to think him sincere."

A word of such common and convenient application deserves to be thoroughly understood and cautiously used. Especially in our examination of ourselves, as well as of others, it is of importance, that we know what it is we pretend to, when we lay claim to sincerity.

In this discourse it will be my object to ascertain what is implied in the character of religious sincerity; and, in doing this, I shall first consider with what imperfections sincerity is consistent, and, in the next place, endeavor to point out some of the most sure and indispensable tests of this quality.

In the first place, then, sincerity is not inconsistent with some degree of prejudice. Such are the constitution of human nature and the circumstances of our education, that the best of men find it impossible to grow up without receiving many prejudices against individuals or descriptions of men, as well as against opinions, which greater age and further information are necessary to correct. Thus we find in the evangelists that the excellent Nathaniel, when he is first informed of the origin of Jesus, to whom he is introduced, cries out, in the true spirit of a Jew of that age, "Can there any good thing come out of Nazareth?" This appears to us a most absurd and unworthy prepossession; yet it did not prevent our Savior's immediately giving this very Nathaniel that memorable character, "Behold, an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile." This instance in the evangelical narrative should teach us candor in our judgments of men, and encourage us to make every allowance for inevitable prejudice, where it is not obstinately and unjustly cherished. The true difference between a sincere and insincere opinionist is this: that the former, though he is not free from unfortunate biases, is yet willing to be free from them. He neither flies from conviction, nor does he close his eyes against evidence. He is a friend, perhaps, of particular men, or attached to particular opinions; but he is neither afraid of the progress of truth, nor does he place impediments in the way of examination. The insincere bigot, on the contrary, stifles his convictions, and perverts testimony. He is angry, when he is found in the wrong; and dissembles, when he is really convinced of his error. His prejudices are personal, and his views are selfish and malignant. Not so the guileless Nathaniel; for he came, at the invitation of Jesus, saw, and was convinced.

Again; religious sincerity is not inconsistent with considerable ignorance. The whole history of pious men bears witness to and illustrates the all-comprehensive nature of true religion. We find in the Gospels that the apostles, who were most sincerely attached to their Master during his life, were yet ignorant of his real character till after his resurrection. They could not be persuaded that he was to suffer; and, even after he had suffered, their minds were full of his royal character, and they were expecting to see him "restore the kingdom to Israel.". Before the vision granted to Peter, the disciples had no suspicion that the favor of God was to be extended to the Gentiles; and, if we may judge from the language of some of them in their epistles, they seem to have expected the end of the world during their own lives, and the return of Christ from heaven. Now, whoever will consider the importance of these facts and doctrines, such as the suffering of Christ, his real character as Messiah, the comprehension and extension of his church, and the time of his second advent, must acknowledge that they were subjects of what we should call fundamental importance in the Christian dispensation. If, then, the early disciples could remain under such gross misapprehensions on these subjects, and yet be regarded as the sincere followers and friends of Christ, it is, surely, too presumptuous in us, to say of one another that a denial of this or that tenet, which to us appears plainly revealed, is yet inconsistent with another man's religious sincerity, or a state of acceptance with God. It may be, that unity of sentiment, as far as some would wish to carry it, has become necessary to unity of affection; but we ought to inquire, whether we are not wrong in harboring that temper of mind, which makes this

unity of opinion necessary to Christian affection. You, perhaps, have attained to certain fundamental principles of Christian belief, which appear to you so clear that you are astonished how any one, who reads the Scriptures, can, for a moment, doubt them. You are conscious of your own sincerity, and it is enough; and, therefore, it is natural for you to conclude that he, who does not think like yourself, cannot be sincere. But let us remember, that, when we once begin to make that a test of others' sincerity, which we know would have been of our own, we go beyond our Christian liberty; for no one but God has a right to say what is fundamental to any individual, or what extravagances or errors may coëxist with humility and honesty of mind.

Religious sincerity is not inconsistent with occasional lapses, or considerable infirmities. "There is not a just man upon earth, that doeth good and sinneth not;" and if God should be strict to mark iniquity even in the most sincere, who could stand before him? Thus it may happen, that the most devout Christian may find his affections sometimes languid, and his thoughts sometimes wandering; but, if this were the habitual state of his mind in prayer, he would have reason to be alarmed, and we should doubt his sincerity. The meek may sometimes be betrayed into passion, and the temperate into excessive indulgence; but the proof of his insincerity, in such cases, would be, not that he fell into the sin, but that he fell into it without remorse, or exposed himself again without precaution. There are some faults to which the most ardent and open dispositions are peculiarly exposed; and there are others, of the habitual temper, which never appear in the ordinary and public deportment. If, then, you would know what