Church of England -- Sermons; David, King of Israel; Sermons, English
Transcribed by David Price, email ccx074@coventry.ac.uk
DAVID: FIVE SERMONS
NOTE:--The first four of these Sermons were preached before the
University of Cambridge.
SERMON I. DAVID'S WEAKNESS
Psalm lxxviii. 71, 72, 73. He chose David his servant, and took him
away from the sheep-folds. As he was following the ewes great with
young ones, he took him; that he might feed Jacob his people, and
Israel his inheritance. So he fed them with a faithful and true
heart, and ruled them prudently with all his power.
I am about to preach to you four sermons on the character of David.
His history, I take for granted, you all know.
I look on David as an all but ideal king, educated for his office by
an all but ideal training. A shepherd first; a life--be it
remembered--full of danger in those times and lands; then captain of
a band of outlaws; and lastly a king, gradually and with difficulty
fighting his way to a secure throne.
This was his course. But the most important stage of it was
probably the first. Among the dumb animals he learnt experience
which he afterwards put into practice among human beings. The
shepherd of the sheep became the shepherd of men. He who had slain
the lion and the bear became the champion of his native land. He
who followed the ewes great with young, fed God's oppressed and
weary people with a faithful and true heart, till he raised them
into a great and strong nation. So both sides of the true kingly
character, the masculine and the feminine, are brought out in David.
For the greedy and tyrannous, he has indignant defiance: for the
weak and helpless, patient tenderness.
My motives for choosing this subject I will explain in a very few
words.
We have heard much of late about 'Muscular Christianity.' A clever
expression, spoken in jest by I know not whom, has been bandied
about the world, and supposed by many to represent some new ideal of
the Christian character.
For myself, I do not understand what it means. It may mean one of
two things. If it mean the first, it is a term somewhat
unnecessary, if not somewhat irreverent. If it mean the second, it
means something untrue and immoral.
Its first and better meaning may be simply a healthy and manful
Christianity, one which does not exalt the feminine virtues to the
exclusion of the masculine.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account