“If there be first a willing mind, it is accepted according to that a man hath, and not according to that he hath not.” 2 Cor. viii. 12.
1 Men may be divided into two great classes, those who profess religious obedience, and those who do not; and of those who do profess to be religious, there are again those who perform as well as profess, and those who do not. And thus on the whole there are three classes of men in the world, open sinners, consistent Christians, and between the two, (as speaking with the one, and more or less acting with the other,) professing Christians, or, as they are sometimes called, nominal Christians. Now the distinction between open sinners and consistent Christians is so clear, that there is no mistaking it; for they agree in nothing; they neither profess the same things nor practise the same. But the difference between professing Christians and true Christians is not so clear, for this reason, that true Christians, however consistent they are, yet do sin, as being not yet perfect; and so far as they sin, are inconsistent, and this is all that professing Christians are. What then, it may be asked, is the real difference between true and professing Christians, since both the one and the other profess more than they practise? Again, if you put the question to one of the latter class, however inconsistent his life may be, yet he will be sure to say that he wishes he was better; that he is sorry for his sins; that the flesh is weak; that he cannot overcome it; that God alone can overcome it; that he trusts God will, and that he prays to Him to enable him to do it. There is no form of words conceivable which a mere professing Christian cannot use,—nay, more, there appears to be no sentiment which he cannot feel,—as well as the true Christian, and at first sight apparently with the same justice. He seems just in the very position of the true Christian, only perhaps behind him; not so consistent, not advanced so much; still, on the same line. Both confess to a struggle within them; both sin, both are sorry; what then is the difference between them?
There are many differences; but, before going on to mention that one to which I shall confine my attention, I would have you observe that I am speaking of differences in God’s sight. Of course, we men may after all be unable altogether, and often are unable, to see differences between those who, nevertheless, are on different sides of the line of life. Nor may we judge anything absolutely before the time, whereas God “searcheth the hearts.” He alone, “who searcheth the hearts,” “knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit.” We do not even know ourselves absolutely. “Yea, I judge not mine own self,” says St. Paul, “but He that judgeth me is the Lord.” God alone can unerringly discern between sincerity and insincerity, between the hypocrite and the man of perfect heart. I do not, of course, mean that we can form no judgment at all upon ourselves, or that it is not useful to do so; but here I will chiefly insist upon the point of doctrine, viz., how does the true Christian differ in God’s sight from the insincere and double-minded?—leaving any practical application which it admits, to be incidentally brought out in the course of my remarks.
Now the real difference between the true and the professing Christian seems to be given us in the text,—“If there be a willing mind, it is accepted.” St. Paul is speaking of almsgiving; but what he says seems to apply generally. He is laying down a principle, which applies of course in many distinct cases, though he uses it with reference to one in particular. An honest, unaffected desire of doing right is the test of God’s true servant. On the other hand, a double mind, a pursuing other ends besides the truth, and in consequence an inconsistency in conduct, and a half-consciousness (to say the least) of inconsistency, and a feeling of the necessity of defending oneself to oneself, and to God, and to the world; in a word, hypocrisy; these are the signs of the merely professed Christian. Now I am going to give some instances of this distinction, in Scripture and in fact.
For instance. The two great Christian graces are faith and love. Now, how are these characterised in Scripture?—By their being honest or single-minded. Thus St. Paul, in one place, speaks of “the end of the commandment being love;” what love?—“love out of a pure heart,” he proceeds, “and of a good conscience;” and still further, “and of faith,“—what kind of faith?—“faith unfeigned;” or, as it may be more literally translated, “unhypocritical faith;” for so the word means in Greek. Again, elsewhere he speaks of his “calling to remembrance the unfeigned faith” which dwelt in Timothy, and in his mother and grandmother before him; that is, literally, “unhypocritical faith.” Again, he speaks of the Apostles approving themselves as the ministers of God, “by kindness, by the Holy Ghost, by love unfeigned,” or, more literally, “unhypocritical love.” Again, as to love towards man. “Let love be without dissimulation,” or, more literally, as in the other cases, “let love be unhypocritical.” In like manner, St. Peter speaks of Christians “having purified their souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unhypocritical love of the brethren.” And in like manner, St. James speaks of “the wisdom that is from above, being first pure …” and, presently, “without partiality, and without hypocrisy.” [2 Cor. vi. 6. Rom. xii. 9. 1 Pet. i. 22. James iii. 17.] Surely it is very remarkable that three Apostles, writing on different subjects and occasions, should each of them thus speak about whether faith or love as without hypocrisy.