o.tS**^

THE CAVIL OF JUDAS;

OE

FALSE TPKETENCES.

O. E. DAGGETT.

NEW HAVEN: vrf.
J. H. BENHAil & SON, PEINTEBS, GLEBE BUILDING.
1868.

This sermon was preached, in the ordinary course of the author's Sunday \
ministrations, in the First Congregational Church, Canandaigua, N. Y., of
which he was pastor almost twenty-three years, and more recently to the
congregation now under his care in the Chapel of Yale College. It is
printed now at the repeated request, and by the liberality, of his esteemed
parishioner and friend in the former place, James Paton, Esq., as a memo- '
rial of his kindness, as well as with the hope that in this form it may
do some further good.
Yale College, March, 1868.

SERMON,

Then saith one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot, Simon's son, which should
betray him, Why was not this ointment sold for three hundred pence, and
given to the poor f This he said, not that he cared for the poor, tut be
cause he was a thief, and had ihe bag, and bare what was put therein. —
John xii : 4-6.
The incident which occasioned tins inquiry and comment,
was probably the same that we find related by the evangelists
Matthew and Mark,* the agreement and the difference in the
narratives being such as might be expected of three several
writers separately and honestly describing the same scene. On
comparing them, it appears that our Lord was at supper in
Bethany, in the house of Simon the leper, where Martha waited
on him, and Lazarus among others was with him at the table.
As the Master reclined, according to the ancient custom of the
East, Mary, the other sister of Lazarus, came behind him, and
breaking the sealed mouth of an alabaster vase which contained
a pound of ointment of spikenard, very costly, she poured it on
his head, and also anointed his feet, and wiped his feet with her
hair, the rich perfume filling the house. There could be no
question as to her design. She was moved by adoring love to
* Compare Matt, xxvi : 6-13, and Mark xiv : 3-9. — Luke vii : 36-50 evidently
relates to a different occasion.

the Saviour who had raised her brother Lazarus from the grave.
His disciples, however, or at least some of them, were indignant,
and complained aloud, on account of what seemed to them ex
travagance. Two of the evangelists represent other spectators,
besides Judas, as offended by what they regarded as her waste
ful expenditure. We may believe that several, if not all, of the
disciples present, took exception to her conduct, in the ques
tion raised among them, "Why was this waste of the ointment
made ? For it might have been sold for more than three hun
dred pence, and have been given to the poor." The Master
vindicated her against the cavil. " Let her alone," he said,
" why trouble ye her ? she hath wrought a good work on me.
For ye have the poor with you always, and whensoever ye will
ye may do them good ; but me ye have not always. She hath
done what she could : she is come aforehand to anoint my body
to the burying." Then he adds the beautiful prediction, whose
fulfilment has made her memory as a precious perfume to this,
hour : — " Yerily I say unto you, wheresoever this gospel shall be
preached in the whole world, there shall also this that this
woman hath done be told for a memorial of her."
The use of oils and perfumes on the head, or the feet, or the
whole body, was common in ancient times among the Jews,
and among the Greeks and Eomans, in the ceremonies of feasts,
as on various religious and civil occasions. For a guest to be
anointed at the table, was evidently a special mark of hospital
ity and respect. Hence Mary distinguished the Saviour in this
manner. But her regard for his presence was no mere defer
ence, which a servant might formally express in tlie round of
his duties. He alone was to receive the honor, and she chose
to render it personally and spontaneously; she selected the
most costly offering of the kind which her means would afford ;
she lavished it profusely, not only on his head but on his feet,
and then wiped his feet with her hair ; and in all this she only
did what she could, to pay him hearty homage, to express her
ardent thankfulness for the miracle that had restored to her
a brother, to signify beyond all doubt the enthusiasm with
which she devoted herself to his service. The act was not a

result of calculation, or forethought, but the utterance of earnest,
affectionate emotion, and thence derived its whole character.
The value of the offering was of no account except as it served
to signify the strength of her love, and in this view she would
only have made it still more costly if she had been able.
The disciples, it would seem, were in a colder mood, pre
pared rather to reason about the offering than to sympa
thize with the worshiper. Putting computation in the place
of feeling, they saw chiefly the worth of the spikenard expended
. at once in the air. There were more than three hundred pence
wasted — or, as it might be estimated in our currency, more than
forty dollars expended in a present, instead of being given to
the poor. In their circumstances it seemed a large sum ; it
was such on the part of Mary, and for that reason . she gave it ;
but so long as they did not feel as she felt, they had no arith
metic by which to estimate the use to which it was now devoted.
They needed a finer sense to appreciate the fragrance it was
made to exhale and diffuse from a fervent heart. And this in
stance is not the first, nor the last, in which deeds like hers
have been subjected to a like unworthy judgment. Besides the
contempt which might be expected from selfishness in the world
and in the church, the spirit of loyalty to Christ has often had
to encounter discouragement and censure from a class of per
sons in whom calculation or prudence displaced all earnest im
pulse or generous sympathy. There have always been those
who claim to be benevolent, and who are so in a certain way,
who are yet incompetent to judge worthily of an action or a
hfe which proceeds directly from a heart warmly intent on one
noble end. In their eyes, profuse liberality, opinions and prac
tices that incur unpopularity or pecuniary loss, acts of heroism,
the sterner forms of self-denial, martyrdoms of every kind,
appear like partial insanity or infatuation. If time allowed, it
would be interesting to show how, in other instances as well as
in the case before us, there may be a propriety and reasonable
ness, an excellence and nobleness of conduct, which yet some
good people can neither approve nor understand.
A very different view, however, is to be taken of what was

said by Judas on this occasion. The evangelist John repre
sents him alone as finding fault with Mary's offering, and hence
some have understood the other writers to relate what was said
among the disciples, allowing us to suppose that it was said by
Judas only. It seems more probable that, as might be inferred
from the other accounts, several of the disciples either uttered
the same complaint, or partook of the wonder and disapproba
tion it expressed, while Judas was more forward than the rest.
We may consider them as honestly in error, doing injustice to
Mary by a cold and narrow judgment ; and we might say the
same of him, if we knew nothing else of his character, and if
the evangelist had not explained his motive. He said only
what the other accounts ascribe to more sincere and disinter
ested observers of the scene. " Why was not this ointment sold
for three hundred pence, and given to the poor ? " The ques
tion, on the face of it, was entirely proper. It could not be
answered in ordinary instances of lavish expenditure. It pre
sented a scruple which a benevolent and prudent man might
really entertain, even on that occasion. The majority of good
people might have fallen in with the suggestion, or at least
would have pronounced it timely and worthy of consideration.
The plea of regard for the poor was plausible enough to deceive
the very elect. We see it to have been a pretence, because we
know Judas too well to suspect him of any feeling but selfishness,
and because the evangelist has set his design in the strongest
light. " This he said, not that he cared for the poor ; but because
he was a thief, and had the bag, and bare," or carried, or, as
some would construe the word, bore away or carried off, " what
was put therein." He, was the treasurer of tbe disciples, as
appears also from a verse in the following chapter.* As an
interpreter observes, " It is remarkable that tlie only one among
them that seems to have been naturally avaricious should have
been intrusted with this " charge. " It shows us that every man
is tried according to his native propensity."! However this may
be, he was on this occasion true to his instinct, and mindful of
his office. It was his business to make provision for the com-
* Chap, xiii : 29. f Barnes.

pany of disciples, and to dispense tlieir charities to the poor.
He sincerely preferred that the perfumed oil should be turned
into three hundred pence, instead of being poured on the
Saviour. He alleged a respectable reason for the preference —
that the money might be distributed among the poor ; but his
real motive was that he might appropriate it to his own use.
His motive was avarice, while his pretext was charity. " Blessed
is he that considereth the poor," and many a good man might
withhold this costly offering through such consideration ; but
O Judas Iscariot, why do you talk of the poor, while you
are thinking not of them, but only of the bag and what is put
therein !
This saying of Judas is thus clearly seen to be of that kind
which we call false pretences. A man may offer a good reason
for what he says, which yet is not his reason for saying it. His
motive, or that which moves him, is one that he is not willing
to acknowledge ; and hence he pretends some other considera
tion by which he is willing to have it supposed he is governed,
rather than that which really governs him. And whatever
may be the motive he would conceal, in pretending another, he
will of course choose one that may be believed and respected ;
and the more readily, if it happens to be the real motive of
other persons in saying the same thing. Thus Judas alleged a
reason which in itself was plausible, and which, in the minds of
other disciples, may have been honestly objected to Mary's
offering. And further, he who attempts thus to deceive others,
may in the same way attempt to beguile himself, by thinking
of some good reason for what he says, rather than of his motive
in saying it, refusing to reflect on the latter, or to own even to
himself that it is his sole or chief consideration. It is possible
for him to blind himself as well as others, when his comfort
requires that he should not see. Thus even Judas, while he
was speaking, may have resolutely thought of the poor that
could have been relieved by the cost of the ointment, adjourn
ing for the time all question as to the use he would have made
of it had it come into his keeping. The same pretences are
employed in respect to conduct as to conversation. Nothing,

however, is more generally admitted than the truth that the
moral character of all that is done or said must be determined
by the motives that govern it. Whatever reasons may be
assigned for one's words or actions, they have no moral worth
except so far as they enter into his motives. Though he should
be able to allege the best of reasons, if they are not his motives,
they cannot recommend or justify him. He may demonstrate
the utility of the course which [he adopts or recommends, and
it may be the very reason which he ought to have regarded, but
if that utility be not the reason why he adopts or recommends
such a course, his arguments to that effect are false pretences.
With the aid of this illustration, let us advert to some other
of the many instances in which men allege reasons or apologies
for what they say and do, which are more or less plausible, yet .
are pretended for effect on others or on themselves, rather than
felt as the governing motives of their conduct.
The largest class of instances may be found among avaricious
and illiberal persons, whose predominant character assimilates
them in this, as in some other particular habits, to Judas.
The case perhaps most nearly resembling the one before us is
when money is expended on houses of worship, beyond the
limit of bare necessity, with a view to agreeableness and ele
gance. There have always been those who would make the
sanctuary a secure shelter from the weather, and in some sense
comfortable, but nothing more, so far as their contributions are
required, and they deprecate all expense about such a building
which they can pronounce unnecessary, reckoning propriety in
architecture an idle notion, and beauty a superfluity. They
have a favorite argument against solicitations for such purposes :
" How much good might be done with the money lavished in
this manner ! It might be given to the poor. To what pur
pose is this waste?" But when we see that they do not limit
themselves so narrowly in building or furnishing their own
houses, or that the money they withhold from such uses does
not go to the poor after all, we are compelled to believe that
they say this, not because they care for the poor, but because
they care more for their money.

Thus too a particular call for charity is often refused on the
ground that there are so many other calls, or some of them are
more urgent, when yet those others are not regarded any more
than this. If a beggar is sent away empty from our door
because there are so many beggars, some others must be relieved,
or what becomes of the excuse ? It is not forethought or judg
ment, but hardness of heart, that refuses every particular appli
cation on account of all the rest. So one religious enterprise is
sometimes unfairly alleged against another, while both are left
alike unaided. In times past there have been not only indi
viduals but whole churches and communities — and verily the
race is not extinct even at this day — that would do nothing to
send the gospel to the heathen because so much needed to be
done for the ignorant in their own country. Of course there
may have been instances in which the apology was sincere and
just, and they who gave it supported domestic missions accord
ingly. But when it appears that the gospel is as necessary, and
we are as much required to send it, to the one class as to the
other ; that, with few or no exceptions, the people who support
foreign missions are the very people wbo also support home
missions ; and that those who give less than others to enlighten
the heathen because their own countrymen are ignorant, do yet
give no more but rather less than others to enlighten their own
countrymen; — what can we think of their apology, but that
this they say not because they care for domestic missions, but
because they care more for their money than for any missions or
for the gospel !
Then it is no new thing for men to follow a lucrative busi
ness eagerly, and hoard their gains closely, doing little or noth
ing for any charities, religious or secular, on the plea that they
can afterwards do so much good when they come to have wealth
at their command. A shallow pretext indeed, — as if it were no
duty or privilege to do good except on the largest scale ; as if
they had no other natural and sufficient motive for accumula
tion ; as if, being really intent on the great interests of human
ity and religion, they would yet deny themselves the present
gratification of their benevolent desires while opportunity is

10
afforded, for the sake of a larger indulgence which the uncer
tainties of life and business may allow them at some time to
come !
And what shall we think of persons, in good pecuniary cir
cumstances, who refuse charity because they have no money.
then at their command, when it so happens that they manage
their affairs so as to contrive never to have it on hand just when it
is asked . If a merchant invests every considerable sum, as soon
as it comes into his possession, in the enlargement of his business,
or a farmer in adding another parcel to his land, or a capitalist
in purchasing new stock, with what conscience can they answer
to the claims of benevolence, " I have not the money now " ?
To put it out of their reach for the present, and then say that
at present they cannot reach it, is a poor as well as a false
pretence. And when prosperous men withhold their contributions on
the plea of " hard times," because money is scarce, or business
is dull, or the harvest is small, or taxes are high, do they always
mean that the times bear so hard on them individually as to
disable them, or only that " the times " may pass with the ap
plicant for a reason why he should let them off? It is not un
charitable to suppose that in some cases they who complain of
hard times might more ingenuously complain of hard hearts.
Another class of instances may be found in the excuses given
for the neglect of public worship, and of its proprieties.
Sickness or infirmity is of course a valid apology for absence
from the house of God, but what shall we think of that which
often passes under this name ? The illness that falls on a Sun
day oftener than any other day, and keeps one away from pub
lic worship rather than from his business or pleasure ; the head
ache, or other ailment, that costs nothing, secures leisure and
quiet at home, and does not break in upon the week ; the mys
terious indisposition that makes an hour and a half spent in a
spacious edifice peculiarly oppressive, — this must be reckoned a
moral malady, not likely to be cured at home. Soberly, when
they who at other times go everywhere else, often stay at home
on the Sabbath, complaining that they are ill, we must believe

11
they say this not because they care for their health, but because
they care little or nothing for the worship of God.
The weather too may be a valid apology ; and it may be a
false pretence. An inclement sky, a gentle rain, an excess of
heat or cold, seem to be feared more on the Lord's day than any
other. It is true that persons who attend church in bad weather
are seldom known to take cold from the exposure ; and ministers,
who must always encounter it, and who are the more liable to
injury from their exercise in speaking, almost never suffer from
that cause ; yet among those who profess to shrink from the
danger or the inconvenience, besides invalids, are some who, on
any other day, go through all weather to their shops or offices,
to a neighbor's house, a concert, a fire, or a show. And here is
the test to be applied to such an excuse : you cannot honestly
say that the weather which allows you to go abroad for secular
purposes on other days, keeps you away from church on the
Lord's day ; and if you pretend it, you say so, not because you
care for the weather, but because you care for your dress, or
ease, or slumber.
As to other religious services besides those of the Sabbath, the
excuse most frequently given for neglecting them is want of
time. I am sorry to say there are church-members who, if they
are to be believed, can find no time for public worship except on
that day when they can find nothing else to do with time. They
are seldom or never seen at a weekly lecture or prayer-meeting ;
and they excuse themselves just as if they were busier than the
regular attendants, or as if that season were more inconvenient
for them than any other. They have time for other things that
promise profit or pleasure ; time for business all day and even
ing, for as much more as they can get, and for recreation too ;
for shopping and sporting, sight-seeing and tale-bearing, a
political meeting, or a new novel, a trial in court which they
nave nothing to do with, an election, or a party of friends ; but
they cannot appropriate an hour, one or two evenings in the
week, to religious worship and instruction. The folly of such
pretences provokes smiles now, but, as the Lord liveth, the day
will come when it must provoke tears. Why do not such pro-

12
fessors of religion own that they use this pretext, not because
they are without the time required, but because they are without
the inclination ?
And then the proprieties of public worship are neglected under
still different pretences. When one whispers and laughs in the
house of God because another does the same, or on account of
some singularity in another's dress, or of a new face; instead of
calling these trifles causes of the impropriety, how much more
honest it would be to say that they are occasions which an
empty mind or an irreverent heart uses for congenial entertain
ment before the altar of God ! And when persons who can
stand up an hour in a shop, or at an auction, or an evening
entertainment, cannot stand up ten minutes during public wor
ship in token of reverence for Jehovah, how much more honest
it would be to account for it by saying that to them worship is
a dull business, than by pleading their bodily infirmity !
Another instance may be observed in dissensions and contro
versies, when the parties show bad temper, and attempt to justify
it under the name of appropriate zeal. An angry man may
tell us that he is ardently supporting some great principle or
truth, and quote the scripture that " it is good to be zealously
affected always in a good thing ; " yet we may be sure that he
cares not so much for carrying out the scripture as for carrying
out his will. And if the controversy is of a theological nature,
he may plead for his wrath or bitterness that we are exhorted
to " contend earnestly for the faith which was once delivered to
the saints ; " yet, even though we think him on the right side of
the question, we may be sure that just then he cares not so
much for the faith as for the victory.
Yet another instance appears in the cavils and reproaches
employed against professed Christians. Whatever truth there
may be even in the severest imputations from irreligious men, — ¦
though it must be confessed that not only hypocrites, and seli*
fish or frivolous church-members, but even real disciples of
Christ, do often give the world too much occasion to speak evL-
of their name and of his cause, — yet can there be any doubt as
to the principal motive in such accusations ? Surely they are

not friends of Christ who eagerly detect and exultingly proclaim
the faults of his friends. They are not friends of true religion
in this world who take pleasure in discrediting the institutions
and influences with which it stands most closely connected. Yet
they often speak as if they were mainly concerned for the honor
of Christ, the purity of his church, and the prevalence of his
gospel. Is it not evident that in making the most of the faults
of church-members, they aim chiefly to divert attention from
their own delinquencies, and to stop the mouths of such as
would remind them of their duty ? These things they say, not
that they would make Christians better, but because they would
have the satisfaction of thinking themselves, or of being
thought, no worse than others.
And two other instances deserve to be noticed in the case of
detraction generally, where there is no falsehood. One of the
most common apologies for evil-speaking is, that what is said is
true. This may be admitted, but what then ? It only shows
that in that case the speaker is not a liar, but it leaves him an
evil-speaker still. The truth of a sfatement or report, to the
disadvantage of another, is not alone a sufficient reason why I
should communicate it to you. What right have you to tell
me, or what right have I to learn, his faults or infirmities, or
misfortunes, except as it maybe of some service to him, or you,
or me ? A thousand things are true against himself or his
friends, which nevertheless the evil-speaker does not utter.
That is not the motive then from which he speaks. His motive
is not the love of the truth, but the love of mischief, or of ex
citement. But sometimes he makes the more artful apology,
that it is useful to have the character and conduct of every
person fully understood. Though this general assertion is not
true, doubtless there are circumstances in which such a consid
eration is just, and furnishes a sufficient reason for exposing a
fault. It may be sometimes my duty to speak against another
in my own defence, or for his correction, or for the security of
third persons. Yet, even then, some such benevolent reason
must not only exist but be my real motive, or it cannot jus
tify my words. And who can believe that a thousandth part

14
of all the tale-bearing and back-biting that disturb families and
communities, is prompted by any consideration of utility, or
any impulse of benevolence ? As well might children, when
amusing themselves with tormenting flies, pretend that they
do it to rid the house of such annoyances. And when evil-
speakers plead a supposed utility for their practice, it is not
that they care for utility, but because they do not care for the
feelings or reputation of others.
Of course many other illustrations to the same effect might
be drawn from every department of human action ; but I have
cited enough, I hope, and of a pertinent character, to leave some
salutary impression. Many a fair reason is given, and that too
among good people, as well as of old by Judas, which yet is no
real motive on the part of him who offers it, and is therefore a
false pretence. It may mislead others, as perhaps did his sug
gestion in behalf of the poor ; it may, to some extent, for the
time, beguile himself ; yet the moral quality of his conduct lies
not in the reasons he can allege, but wholly in the motives by
which he is really governed.
I would have you reminded by this subject of the conflict
going on in the human mind between the conscience and the
heart. When Judas would have had the very costly ointment
sold for money, instead of being lavished on the Saviour, why
did he not avow his real motive rather than pretend a better
reason ? Because that motive was avarice, which in him, as in
others, was a " root of all evil," and because there was a tribunal
in his own breast, and in the breasts of those around him, be
fore which that motive was condemned, and before which it
made him ashamed. Veiling that evil thing, and if possible,
thrusting it back into the darkness of self-delusion, he con
structed in its place the semblance of a divine charity, that the
temporary substitute might get him the esteem of his brethren,
and possibly leave him contented with himself. His conscience,
seared but not dead, and his depraved heart, could not agree.
Some similar conflict is ever going on in mankind, except so far
as they are renewed hy the Spirit of God. According to a
celebrated maxim, " Hypocrisy is the homage that vice pays

15
to virtue." In Hke manner false pretences are so many conces
sions and evasions by which men of selfish purposes betray the
sense of a frowning virtue in others and in themselves. Reason
and conscience on the one hand, and on the otlier selfish pas
sions and depraved principles are at war in the world of man
kind. The human soul is a contested empire. Man is as a
" son of the morning," fallen, yet arrested midway between
heaven and hell, a prize between the powers of light and
darkness. And finally, let this subject warn you that the day of judg
ment will exhibit the characters of men in a new light. That
day will expose the craft of selfishness and the flattery of self-
love. It will annihilate every false pretence, and lay bare, and
hold up, the real motive of every act and word, to the eyes of
him in whose hfe it stands recorded, and of all whom it con
cerns. The light of an omniscient inspection will be concen
trated on every man's whole life, and all the recesses of his
heart. He will be made to see himself as God sees him. The
sins not only of the world but of the church will be dragged
forth to a fiery trial, and among them that foremost sin of the
church as well as of the world, avarice, the radical iniquity that
came with Judas into the company of the disciples, and was not
all expelled with him when he went to his own place. Every
sort of guile will be unmasked. In that day it will appear
what we have done, or had the heart to do, for the relief of the
poor, and for the promulgation of the gospel ; how faithfully
we have worshiped God, and kept his ordinances ; what spirit
we have been of, even in holding the truth; how we have
treated sincere disciples [of Christ ; whether the " law of kind
ness," " the royal law" of charity, has been on our tongues and in
our hearts. " God shall bring every work into judgment, with
every secret thing, whether it be good or whether it be evil."
In the expectation of that day, we must all be doomed and des
perate, had we no Advocate with the Father ; and that day will
show whether we have really believed in, and aimed to follow
him " who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth."

0289