SERMON XV.

RELIGIOUS INDIFFERENCE.

LUKE XVii. 26, 27.

"And as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be in the days of the Son of Man. They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark; and the flood came, and destroyed them all."

In these verses and the few following ones that relate to the destruction of Sodom, our Lord describes the state of persons who have been selected as the most signal examples of God's vengeance. Next to the universal destruction of the human race by water, the overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah occupies the most prominent place in the records of His judgments. And to both of them there is given an additional and fearful interest by the manner in which our Lord here associates them with that last judgment of all: like as it was in the days of Noe, so shall it be in the Son of Man's days.

It cannot, then, but concern us intimately, to examine what was the peculiarity in the temper

prevalent among these persons, which rendered them so peculiarly offensive in the sight of God; in what respect their guilt differed from that of other men, so as to merit such a pre-eminence of punishment. And it may perhaps at first appear a matter of some surprise to us, that in our Lord's account of the occupations in the midst of which their fate overtook them, we should find nothing mentioned which shocks our feelings, either by its uncommonness or enormity. He does not say they murdered, they stole, they worshipped idols, they dealt abominably, nor, which is very remarkable, does He characterise their condition by those crimes which the sacred historian lays to their charge.

The features of their behaviour, which He in both instances selects, are these: "They did eat, they drank, they married, and were given in marriage; they bought, they sold, they planted, they builded."

It is true, indeed, that the condition which these words describe is not insisted on as the crime of these most guilty persons, yet surely they are meant to convey some idea beyond that of the mere surprise which attended the lighting down of God's vengeance. If this had been the only thing intended to be impressed on us, the description would have lost nothing of its force by mentioning the crimes which the book of Genesis relates, instead of these seemingly innocent occupations; nor is it at all likely that such fearless abominations would

have been passed in silence, unless our Lord had had a farther end in view, beyond giving force to the picture of unprepared destruction.

We are left, then, to infer that the words of the text convey a deeper meaning; that they are intended to divert our thoughts from what we suppose the crying sins of that guilty generation, to some other feature in their moral condition, some temper in itself especially displeasing to God, however apparently innocent may be the actions which result from it.

Nor, indeed, need we feel much at a loss to discover what this temper was; this additional feature of finished wickedness which fills up the measure of their guilt. Our Lord is evidently describing a state of religious indifference, an utter alienation of mind from all serious thoughts, a forgetfulness of every motive but pleasure and interest, a complete surrender of themselves to this world. And as far as we can judge, from the short narrative of the book of Genesis, we may infer this to have been their spiritual condition.

We are told of the generation before the flood, that "The sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair, and they took them wives of all that they chose;" a peculiar emphasis seems to belong to the words " of all that they chose;" they were withheld by no consideration from executing their will, and in consequence we hear that "God

saw the wickedness of man, that it was great in the earth; and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually." Jesus Christ describes these imaginations in the words of the text, "they did eat, they drank, they married, and were given in marriage:" that is, these were the only objects which they kept in view; they pursued these as the sole ends of life, and disregarded all restraints which the love of their neighbour or the fear of God could impose on them. Their sin does not seem so much to have consisted in an avowed opposition to God, as in an utter disregard of Him; it was not so much that they defied His power to punish them, as that the very notion of His exerting it against them seemed absurd and impossible. Of this the history of the destruction of Sodom furnishes a striking example. "Two Angels were sent to summon Lot and his family out of Sodom. And the men said unto Lot, Hast thou here any besides? son-in-law, and thy sons, and thy daughters, and whatsoever thou hast in this city, bring them out of this place. For we will destroy this place, because the cry of them is waxen great before the face of the Lord: and the Lord has sent us to destroy it. And Lot went out and spake unto his sons-in-law which married his daughters, and said, Up, get you out of this place, for the Lord will destroy this city. But he seemed as one that mocked unto his sons-in-law." The thing

seemed to them utterly impossible, such as was not worth even the thought of any but a fool.

Such was the temper of the men before the flood, and of the inhabitants of those devoted cities; and how deeply it is displeasing to God the manner in which He has in these instances dealt with it is

sufficient to show. It may not have been of itself enough to draw down the wrath of God so signally; it may not perhaps have held the first place in the catalogue of crimes, which together constituted their guilt. Yet it holds a place among them sufficiently marked and prominent, to have its proof embodied in the sacred narrative, and to have been alone selected in the comment of our Saviour.

Against such a temper, then, it becomes us to be most seriously on our guard, and we shall do well not merely to watch and examine our own condition with a view to trace its progress in ourselves, but also, as much as we can, to realise to ourselves the situation of those unhappy persons, and see how far we have room to hope that under the same circumstances we might have escaped the same destruction.

The second of these considerations is not less necessary to us than the first. For one of the commonest obstacles to our deriving benefit from the experience of others, especially if they have lived in an age or state of society very different from our own, is the vague and indistinct way in which we are in the habit of regarding all that we