4. Consider, what little cause you have to indulge your own mur- muring ; guilt is enough to silence any creature. Thou art a creature, and a guilty creature, and God is the sovereign Lord of heaven and earth ; let this stop thy mouth. There is always cause from God, and we may still say, as in Ezra ix. 13, ' Thou hast punished us less than our iniquities have deserved.' "We are now in Babylon, and we might have been in hell. Consider, God is too just to do us wrong. Certainly there is a cause ; if he will exchange hell for Babylon ; there is much of mercy, but nothing of injustice. But suppose there were no cause visible, God may resolve the reason of his actions into his own will. God is under no law, and thou hast no tie and engagement on him ; why should he give an account of his matters ? If afiliction is not deserved from men, it is to be borne more cheerfully. Whose cross would we bear, the cross of Christ or the thieves ? When we suffer as malefactors, we bear the thieves' cross. There is no cause why we should allow our murmuring. Consider the evil of murmuring, search it to the head, and you will find it always comes from pride. The devil is the proudest creature, and the most discontented with his con- dition. Murmuring is always a fruit of supposed merit, we think we have deserved better. Alas ! we are worthy of nothing, and if we have ever so little, we have cause enough to be content. Though you can- not fare as others — though you have not such good trading — though you have not houses so well furnished, yet what have you deserved ?
5. Do but interpret your murmuring, what is it ? It is but a taxing of God, and it is an high presumption for creatures to tax their creator, as if they were wiser than he ; it is, in efi'ect, to say, this is not well done ; there is an error in providence, which we would fain correct. If it be good, and best, why should we repine ?
6. Consider, what little good will murmuring do us ? We should never argue against providence, because we cannot counterwork it. It is best to do that voluntarily which we must otherwise do by force. Submit to God ; God will have the better in all contests with the creature : Job ix. 22, * Who can hinder him ? ' Your comforts, and children, and estates, are in his hands ; if he will take them away, who can hinder him ? Therefore why should we murmur against him.
The next branch of self-denial is denying self-love. God is the chief est good and highest object of the creature's respect, and therefore we are to deny self, that is, self-love. A necessary doctrine. It is said, 'In the 1 after times, that men should be lovers of themselves,' 2 Tim. iii. 1
Book I.] a treatise of self-denial. 259
Men have been always lovers of themselves, in every age of the church ; but in the lees and dregs of time this evil shall most reign and prevail. The latter times are inflamed with wars, and so all love to our neigh- bour is devoured ; and with heresies, and so God is neglected, and then there remains nothing but self to be respected and adored. In the abbreviation of divinity, or in a moral consideration, there are made to be but three general persons or beings, God, thy neighbour, and thyself. Now when men have lost their reverence to God, and their charity to their neighbour, self is only left to devour all the respect of the creature.
In treating of self-love we must —
1. See how far it is criminal.
2. Then speak of the branches and kinds of criminal self-love. First, How far self-love is criminal. To love ourselves is a dictate
of nature, and not disallowed by grace. We read not that man is expressly commanded to love himself, because every man is naturally inclined to it — ' No man hath ever hated his own flesh, but loveth it, and cherisheth it,' Eph. v 29. By natural instinct all creatures move and act to their own good and preservation. But though there be not an express command, yet there is an allowance, it is implied in that precept ' Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.' The thing enforced is love to our neighbour, but the thing implied is love to our- selves. There is an innocent affection planted in nature moving every man to procure his own welfare. In procuring this welfare we have a liberal allowance ; nature aimeth only at things necessary, but in grace God hath been indulgent, enlarging the bounds of allowance, and besides necessaries, hath afforded us the conveniences and moderate pleasures and delights of the present life. Therefore the motions of self-love are regular and tolerable as long as they do not entrench upon the privilege of God, but are subject to his will and the laws of sancti- fied reason.
But when are they vicious and sinful ? I answer, when they go beyond the limits prescribed, when self-love encroacheth upon the love of God, or the love of our neighbour, when a man loves no other but himself^ and makes religion and all to stoop to his private com- modities or pleasure. Aristotle in his ' Ethics,' defining self-love, saith, ' he is a lover of himself that doth all he doth for his own sake, and with respect to himself, to his own pleasure and profit.' But let us rather take the description from the apostle, in two places : Phil. ii. 21, * Those that seek their own things and not the things of Jesus Christ ; ' and 1 Cor. x. 24, ' That seek their own, and not another's welfare.' Who mind the conveniency of their own life, and their own private profit, without any respect to the glory of God and the salva- tion of others. This is self-love that is prejudicial both to God and our neighbour, when a man makes himself the centre of all his actions, with- out any respect to God or the good of others. But because par- ticulars are most sensible, therefore let me tell you —