“But it is plain, peace is broke and disturbances do arise, in consequence of your preaching.” I grant it. But what would you infer? Have you never read the bible? Have you not read, that the Prince of peace himself was, in _this_ sense, a disturber of the public peace? _When he came into |Jerusalem|_, (Matthew xxi. 10.) _all the city was moved_, (ἐσείσθη) shaken as with an earthquake. And the disturbance arose higher and higher, till _the whole multitude_ cried out together, _Away with him, away with him; crucify him, crucify him, and Pilate gave sentence, it should be done_. Such another disturber of the public peace, was that _Stephen_, even from the time he began _disputing with the Libertines and Cyrenians_, till the people _stopped their ears, and ran upon him with one accord, and cast him out of the city and stoned him_. Such disturbers of the peace were all those ringleaders of the sect of the _Nazarenes_, (commonly called _apostles_) who wherever they came, _turned the world upside down_. And above all the rest, that _Paul_ of _Tarsius_, who occasioned so much disturbance at _Damascus_, (Acts ix.) at _Antioch_ of _Pisidia_ (chapter xiii.) at _Iconium_ (chapter xiv.) at _Lystra_ (verse 19.) at _Philippi_ (chapter xvi.) at _Thessalonica_ (chapter xvii.) and particularly at _Ephesus_. The consequence of his preaching there was, That _the whole city was filled with confusion_. And _they all ran together with one accord, some crying one thing, some another_: inasmuch _as the greater part of them knew not wherefore they were come together_.
*2. And can we expect it to be any otherwise _now_? Although what _we_ preach is the gospel of peace, yet if you will violently and illegally hinder our preaching, must not this create disturbance? But observe, the disturbance begins on _your_ part. All is peace, till you raise that disturbance. And then you very modestly impute it to _us_, and lay your _own_ riot at _our_ door!
But of all this, our Lord hath told us before. _Think not that I am come to send peace upon earth_: that this will be the immediate effect, wherever my gospel is preached with power. _I am not come to send peace, but a sword_: this (so far as the wisdom of God permits, by whom _the hairs of your head are all numbred_) will be the first consequence of my coming, whenever my word turns sinners from darkness to light, from the power of _Satan_ unto God.
I would wish all you who see this scripture fulfilled, by disturbance following the preaching the gospel, to remember the behaviour of that wise magistrate at _Ephesus_ on the like occasion. He did not lay the disturbance to the preacher’s charge, but _beckoned to the multitude and said, ye men of Ephesus――Ye ought to be quiet, and to do nothing rashly. For ye have brought these men, who are neither robbers of temples, nor yet blasphemers of your goddess_: (not convicted of any such notorious crime, as can at all excuse this lawless violence.) _But if |Demetrius| hath a matter against any, the law is open, and there are deputies_ (or proconsuls, capable of hearing and deciding the cause) _let them implead one another. But if ye enquire any thing concerning other things, it shall be determined in a lawful assembly._
3. “But you create divisions in private families.” Accidentally, we do. For instance, suppose an entire family to have the form but not the power of godliness; or to have neither the form nor the power; in either case, they may in some sort agree together. But suppose, when these hear the plain word of God, one or two of them are convinced, “This is the truth. And I have been all this time in the broad way that leadeth to destruction:” These then will begin to mourn after God; while the rest remain as they were. Will they not therefore of consequence divide, and form themselves into separate parties? Must it not be so, in the very nature of things? And how exactly does this agree with the words of our Lord? _Suppose ye that I came to send peace upon earth? I tell you nay: But rather division. For from henceforth there shall be five divided in one house, three against two, and two against three. The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father: the mother against her daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother-in-law against the daughter-in-law, and the daughter-in-law against the mother-in-law._ (Luke xii. 51, 52, 53.) _And the foes of a man, shall be they of his own houshold._ (Matthew x. 36.)
Thus it was from the very beginning. For is it to be supposed, that a _Heathen_ parent, would long endure a _Christian_ child? Or, that a _Heathen_ husband would agree with a _Christian_ wife? Unless either the believing wife could gain her husband; or the unbelieving husband prevailed on the wife to renounce _her way_ of worshipping God: at least, unless she would obey him in going no more to those _societies_ or _conventicles_, (ἑταιρίαι) as they termed the Christian assemblies.