The Spirit of Covetousness

CovETOusNESs in Ministers has almost grown to a proverb. Judas is an awful example of its consistency with the highest Ministerial gifts. It is not the fault of any Ecclesiastical system, but the natural principle of a corrupt and selfish heart. It readily appended itself to Popery, from the transfer of the aggrandizing spirit of the system to individuals. But Judas and Demas had been its victims, long before “the Man of sin” sprang up in the Church. It has attached itself to Protestant Establishments, in the higher departments, from the influx of wealth: and in the lower departments, from the want of sufficient means to meet the present demands, and future exigencies. In this latter view especially, it allies itself to every system of Protestant dissent, with an influence as habitual and destructive, as in any Ecclesiastical Establishment.

The frequent Scriptural connexions of this selfish principle with the sacred office,’ were doubtless intended to warn the servant of God of a most prevalent temptation. Our Church, without any express mention, has pointedly alluded to it in each, of her Ordination services. She warns her deacons from the word of God, that they be “not greedy of filthy lucre.” She exhibits to her priests the awful picture of “an hireling;’“* at the same time instructing them” how they ought to forsake and set aside (as much as they

Sec the description of the Jewish teachers, Isaiah lvi. 11. Jer. vi. 13. Ezekiel xxxiv. 1 — 3. Micah iii. 11. Matt. xv. 5, 6; xxiii. 11 — the contrast of Ti iiothy with the Christian teachers, (Phil. ii. 20, 21.) the frequent warnings of Ministers against “filthy lucre” — 1 Tim. iii. 3, 8; vi. 9 — 11. Titus i. 7; 1 Peter v. 2; also 2 Peterii. 3; Jude 11. ‘He enters not by Jesus Christ (into the sheepfold), who enters with a prospect of any other interest besides that of Christ and his Church. Ambition, avarice, love of ease, or desire to be distinguished from the crowd, to enjoy the conveniences of life, or to promote the interests of our family, and even the sole design of providing against want — these are all ways, by which thieves find robbers enter — and whoever enters in by any of these ways, or by simony, craft, &c., he deserves no better name.’ Quesnel on John X. 1.

2 ‘Hireling, not one who performs the office or duty of a Minister for hire or reward, (for the Apostle, or rather our blessed Lord himself says — The labourer is worthy of his hire, or reward, 1 Tim. v. 18; Luke x. 7.) but one who endeavours to make a gain of godliness,’ &c. Brewster, quoted in Bishop Mant’s Prayer Book. ‘He is not an hiremay) all worldly cares and studies;” and questioning them again more closely, upon their diligence and readiness in “laying aside the study of the world and the flesh P She deems it necessary to give to her highest order of Ministers this solemn charge — “Be to the flock of Christ a shepherd, not a wolf; feed them; devour them, not.’^^ It was a blot upon the celebrated heathen moralist,^ that, while he vehemently declaimed against covetousness, he was, throughout his life, a slave to the base traffic of usury. And how discreditable is earnest preaching against this besetting sin, if our personal habits, or family appurtenances, should exhibit its pollution! When we warn our people against “the love of money, as the root of all evil,”^ they will look into our own garden for this destructive weed; which may possibly be growing there, even while we are seeking to root it out of every garden in our parish.

Covetousness is very distinct from frugaUty”, which is a real duty — implying a well-directed and moderate use of the things of this life — “owing no man any thing” — “using the world, as not abusing it,” — like a good steward, making such provision for the present necessity, as shall prevent our families from becoming burdensome to the church. This, with Christian contentment, forms a right character. But covetousness is an inordinate thought of, desire after, and employment in, the care of this world. Its palpable exhibition is seen in a habit of saving — or a watching too closely over what we have, and a rooted reluctance to part wath it. This is generally connected with a want of consideration and sympathy for the calls of distress, and of a very limited consecration of our substance to the extension of our Redeemer’s kingdom. The reports of our Religious Societies often mark a somewhat unaccountable average of subscriptions from those, whose capabilities are so widely disproportionate. This may often arise from the great variety of channels into which the benevolent fund is distributed; but does it in no cases originate in a want of economy, in self-indulgence, or covetousness?

limr, who, faithfully feeding the flock, is maintained by his Ministry: but he to whom the “filthy lucre” IS the great object or inducement.’ Scott in loco. Pluralities, (with some disinterested, and some necessary exceptions) have, to say the least, a plausible connexion with this hateful character.

‘Sre the Ordination and Consecration services. ‘Colligimus, neminem probum verhi Ministrum, quin non idem sit pecunia; contemptor.’ Calv. in Acts xx. 33. ‘The moment a strong and governing desire of accumulating property takes possession of a Minister’s niind — preach with orthodoxy, and some degree of animation, he may — visit his parishioners to a certain extent, he may — but a devoted labourer in the vineyard, who has one object in view — the extension and glory of his Master’s kingdom — and who makes all his pursuits subservient to that object, he will not be. It is just as impossible for a maji to be a great accumulator of property, and at the same tunc a faithful devoted Minister of Christ, as it is to estabhsh a fellowship between light and darkness, Christ and Belial.’ Professor Miller’s Letters, pp. 433, 431.

2 Seneca. 1 Tim. vi. 10.

Specious forms of this principle often belong to those who are highly connected in the world; and the injury — unconscious perhaps to the individuals themselves — is generally exhibited in a lowered standard of separation from the world, in an unspiritual cast of mind, walk, and conversation, and in a straitened Divine influence upon their work. In Mr. Cadogan, the dignity of the Ministerial character rose superior to the adventitious circumstances of elevated rank, without any degradation of his personal claim to respect: and the spirit of simplicity and holiness maintained throughout his course, was honoured with peculiar tokens of his Master’s approbation.*

In the more ordinary walks of the Ministry we may discern “the cloak of covetousness” — in a mean attention to small matters — in the motives that influence our plans of economy — in carefulness to maintain present appearances — in contrivances to shift off expenses upon others — in the pleasurable excitement from the prospect of gain — in an undue depression from the disappointment of it — in the natural current of our thoughts in the direction of the world — in the readiness in lesser matters to put it upon a level with religion. All or any of these actings of this detestable principle must deaden the exercises of the Christian life and of Ministerial energy.

We may advert also to a rigorous enforcement of ecclesiastical claims — a litigious and unconciliating spirit, ending in a fatal loss of our most important influence. Without any fair ground for the charge of injustice or extortion — there may be a want of tenderness and recollection of the main ends of our office, and of the sole purpose, for which a maintenance is secured to us.^ Whatever consideration may belong to the due support of our family, yet the no-

1 Massillon has a remarkable sermon on the temptation of Christ, which he transfers to the temptations of the Ministry. It is hoped that the instruction (unsuitable indeed to the gravity of the pulpit) will not be rejected on account of the eccentric form of deduction in which it is given. I. A scheme to live like gentlemen — “Command these stones to be made bread. ‘This danger belongs to the first entrance of the Ministry. II. Presumption to aspire after preferment — “He set him on a pinnacle of the temple.” This belongs to an aspiring Minister: the second degree. III. A boundless desire of riches and honour in elevated stations, by which a man is induced to submit to abject services for the sake of elevation — “All this will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me.”

2 Mr. Grimshaw is said to have been ’ not rigorous in his exacting his dues, but contented with what his parishioners brought him.’ He would say to them — ‘I will not deserve your curses when I am dead for what I have received for my poor labour among you. I want no more of you than your souls for my God, and a bare maintenance for myself Newton’s Life of Grimshaw, p. 124. If he carried this principle beyond its legitimate bounds, yet the spirit of it is admirable. The truth of Archbishop Seeker’s remark will be generally axlmitted — ‘A due measure of disinterestedness is one main requisite for the success of a Clergyman’s labours.’ Charges, p. 248. “/ seek not your’s, hut yau.” 2 Cor. lii. 13, 14. See Scott on 1 Cor. ix. 13 — 18.

ble spirit of the ministry rises above selfish considerations, and fixes upon the great trust committed to us.’ In prospectively regarding also the rites of our successors, we may keep in mind Bishop Taylor’s wholesome caution — “Let not the name of the church he made a prete7ice for personal covetousness — by saying, you are willing to remit many things, but you must not wrong the Church; for though it be true, that you are not to do prejudice to successors, yet many things may be forgiven upon just occasions, from which the Church shall receive no incommodity; but be sure, that there are but few things, which thou art bound to do in thy personal capacity, but the same also, and much more, thou art obliged to perform as thou art a public person. ‘^ Even a heathen has remarked, that ’ there is no more plain sign of a narrow and little mind, than the love of riches.’^ And what need is there for a constant guard against those inclinations and occasions of temptations, that feed the power of this subtle principle! How hard is it habitually to maintain a practical belief of the Scriptural declarations of the fearful influence of riches upon our spiritual interests, and, by consequence, upon our Ministry! —” Thou, O man of God,” (is the fatherly counsel to a young Minister) “ee these thmg-s.^’* In the return of Apostolical simplicity, self-denial, and ove, we may anticipate a Pentecostal effusion of the spirit upon our Ministrations.

Covetousness is far more specious than worldly conformity. It has much to plead under the cover of necessity, justice, prudence, and economy. Yet we may detect its real character under all its deceptive garbs. Is not the straitness of means often an excuse from the exercise of Christian charity, while little or no restraint is laid upon the expensiveness of the dress, the table, furniture, or mode of living? Is not the charitable fund sometimes, in seasons of depression, the first that is curtailed? And do we not continue to “dwell,” as before “in ceiled houses, while the house of God lies waste?”•

Self-denial in the family oeconomy must also exercise a whole-

1 The following memorandum of Bishop Wilson, for the use of his children, is in the most elevated spirit of primitive disinterestedness — ‘If I do not live to tell you, why I have saved no more for you out of my bishopric, let this satisfy you — that the less you have of poods gathered from the church, the better the rest that I leave you will prosper. Church livings were never designed to raise families, or to make portions out of them, but to maintain our families, to keep up hospitality, to feed the poor, &c. and one dav you will be glad that this was my settled opinion, and God grant, that I may act accordingly.’ Stowelfs Life, pp. 58, 59.

2 Advice to his Clergy. It may be found in Bishop Randolph’s Enchiridion Theologicon, vol. i. or in the Clergyman’s Instructor.

3 Nihil est tam angusti tamque parvi animi, quam amare divitias. Cic. de Officiis. Lib. L 1 Tim. vi. 11. 5 Compare Hag. i. 4.

some restramt. The pupilizing system, (when engaged ii. principally for keeping up appearances, or the worldly advantage of chil’ dren,) and the adoption of worldly maxims in the education and disposal of our families, (which in Mr. Scott’s judgment ‘constitutes a considerable part of the sins of the church in the present day ‘) come under this animadversion. It is also but too plain that the families of Clergymen are sometimes brought up to worldly expectations, rather than as disciples of the cross, and citizens of heaven. Too much weight can scarcely be given to Mr. Scott’s inestimable instructions, as the embodied and most successful principles of his domestic system. ‘We are to live ’ (he remarked) ’ at the altar; but a living, a bare decent maintenance, icithout any avaricious or ambitious views of advancing ourselves or our fatnilies, should content us.’ It was upon this principle (his son informs us) ’ he acted through life — not that he in any way reflected upon clergymen who were born to wealth, or on whom Providence otherwise conferred it, if only they made a proper use of it. Aspiring after it was what he condemned.’ His favourite maxim was — ’ what is best for the soul is really best for us,’ and ’ he ever looked upon worldly possessions with a jealous eye, for his family as well as for himself.’ — ‘The grand secret of his success,’ (that which gave him, as he tells us, the most satisfaction in the retrospect at the close of his life), appears to have been this — ’ that I always “sought “/or my children as well as for myself in “the first place, the kingdom of God and his righteousness.” ’ This view,’ — his son observes — ’ would extend to the value, practically and evidently set upon eternal in preference to temporal things: and very particularly to the disposal of his children in life, the places of instruction to which they should be sent, the families they should visit, the connections which they should form, and the openings which should be embraced or rejected for them.’^

Covetousness in all its varied forms is more easily detected in a Minister than in private Christians. The sources of his clerical income, being drawn from his people, are generally known; and consequently its capabilities and disposal are matters of public animadversion. Besides, “as a city set upon a hill, he cannot be hid.”* Any marks of vicious indulgence upon the appearance of his house-

Scott’s Life, pp. 591, 611 — 614. Compare pp. 91, 396 — 398. Works, pp. 225, 226. liUther’s dying prayer breathes the spirit of a man who had trampled the world under his feet — Domine Deus, gratias ago tibi, quod volueris me esse pauperem super terram, et mendicum. Non habeo domum, agrum, possessiones, pecuniam, quae relinquam. Tu dedisti mihi uxorcm et filios. Tibi reddo. Nutri, doce, serva — ut hactenus me — O Pater pupiloruai et judex viduarum.’ Adam in Vita Lutheri. See also similar testimonies respecting Calvin, and the conviction produced upon the mind of the infidel Bayle, Scott’* Contin. of MLlner, iii. 486 — 488. 2 Matt. v. 14.

hold will be “known and read of all men.” The Apostle’s appeal to God on this point’ doubtless opens to us one of the grand main-’ springs of his success. On the other hand, there is no more fatal hindrance to the Ministry, none that makes our person and labours more contemptible in the eyes of the world, than this idolatrous principle. It counteracts the grand design of our office, which is to draw men from earth to heaven. It cankers many sources of our usefulness — such as simple devotedness to the work, charity and hospitality, according to the extent of our means. It hinders the spiritual elevation of the soul, and defiles the consecrated character of our office. 2 George Herbert’s primitive Parson, therefore, ’ labours most in those things, which are most apt to scandalize his parish. He is very circumspect in avoiding all covetousness; neither being greedy to get, nor niggardly to keep, nor troubled to lose, any worldly wealth; but in his words and actions slighting and disesteeming it; even to a wondering that the world should so much value wealth, which in the day of wrath hath not one drachm of comfort for us.’^ The most effectual preventions of this corroding passion are — to have but few wants — to learn from our poor Christian day-labourers to cultivate faith for the future — to live not for men or for time, but for eternity — to have the glory of God, and the good of our fellow-creatures constantly in view — to study our Master’s life and example — to obtain by habitual eyeing of the cross a gradual conformity to its spirit — and to remember, as Ministers, that an earnest desire to gain continually more souls to God is the sole avarice permitted to a pastor.*

‘See 1 Thess. ii. 5. Compare also Acts xx. 33 — 35. “*

2 Comp. Gregory dc Cura Past. Part. i. ch. xi. Mr. Scott states the impression on his own mind on perusing the memoirs of Luther and Mclancthon, of the disinterested spirit common to most of the eminent men, employed in the great work of the Reformation. His own applicatory remarks are well deserving of attention — Yes, and if we would aspire to be employed with success on such high and holy services, we must become detached more than we are from the interests of this life. Oh! are we not become too much given to contrive the means of a good provision, and of maintaining a hantlsomo style of living 1 This was never the spirit, which wrought great things in the Church of God. Let us beware, lest we fall under the sentence, though in somewhat varied sense — “Ye have vour reward” — in improved circumstances, but in blighted labours.’ Continuation of Milner, vol. ii. pp. 181, 182. The closeness and accuracy of observation of the heathen on this point is very remarkable. They consider freedom from the love or care of money the strongest proof of the influence of Christianity. It was remarked by one of the most intelligent among them, of a native teacher — ‘There was only one flaw he discerned — in every thing else he was perfectly brought under the power of thn gospel — he was not covetous; but he had a decree of reluctance in ■partins; with his money.’ Swartz’s remarkable usefulness was manifestly connected with his high and uniform standard of personal disinterestedness. See Dean Pearson’s interesting Life of Swartz.. 2 Herbert’s Country Parson, chap. iii.

Quesnel on Tit. i. 7. The subject of this Chapter suggests the notice of the opposite spirit of improvidence. Distressing embarrassments have often arisen from imprudent marriages, from wasteful wives, or from personal habits of negligence; by which iIinisters have been degraded before their people, in the loss of their respectability, the true dignity and independence of their office, and their usefubiess in the church. Whether