Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

66

'yielding seed after his kind;" and just as leaven does not change the mass into something new, but makes elastic, and firm, and springy, that which was dull and heavy before: so the Spirit of Christ develops each nation, sex, and individual, according to their own nature, and not the nature of another -making man more manly, and woman more womanly. And thus, in all those questions which belong to equality, the ultimate decision is not by theoretical abstractions, but by an appeal to nature and to fact. But let us not forget that here too, there are exceptions. Beware of a dead, hard rule. Let each develop himself, according to his own nature. Whatever contradicts feelings which are universally received is questionable, to say the least.

Observe however, there are modifications in this doctrine of liberty. Theoretically all men are equal, and all have equal rights, but when we apply this to daily life, we are clouded in uncertainty. Therefore, the only remedy is that given by St. Paul in this chapter-that the abstract principle shall be modified by common sense, human nature, and holy Christian experience.

There is also the modification of the right of private judgment. It is a well-known rule that that which has been held everywhere, and at all times, is to be received as true; this modifies, though it does not destroy, the right of private judgment. There have been many instances in which one man standing against the world has been right, and the world wrong, as Elijah, Athanasius, Luther and others. Therefore these two things must modify each other. But in questions of morality, propriety, decency, when we find ourselves—our own individual desires and private judgment-contradicted by the general experience, habit, and belief of all the purest and the best around us, then most assuredly Christian modesty and the doctrine of this chapter command us to believe that the many are right, and that we are wrong.

LECTURE XXII.

I CORINTHIANS, xi. 18-34.- -March 28, 1852.

`HE remainder of this chapter treats of an abuse in the

THE ministration of the Lord's Supper, as practised in the

Church of Corinth. It may be necessary here to go a little into historical investigation.

Every Church has a right to introduce new forms and ordinances; and the Church of Corinth, taking advantage of this right, introduced what was called a love-feast, in which the Churches met together previous to the reception of the Lord's Supper, to partake of a common meal-rich and poor bringing their own provisions. This idea seemed in strict accordance with the original institution of the Lord's Supper, for that certainly was preceded by a common meal. There was a great beauty in this arrangement, because it showed the conviction of the Church of Corinth that differences of birth and rank are not eternal but temporary, and are intended to join by reciprocal bonds the different classes together. Still, beautiful as the idea was, it was liable to great abuse. Thus there arises a perpetual lesson for the Church of Christ: it is never good to mix things religious with things worldly. In the highest conceivable form of the Church of Christ, the two will be identified, for the kingdoms of the world are to become the kingdoms of God and of His Christ. In order to make these two one, the Christian plan has been to set apart certain days as holy, that through these all other days may be sanctified: to set apart a certain class of men, through them to sanctify all

other men: to set apart one particular meal, that all meals through that one may be dedicated to God.

The World's way is rather this: to identify things religious and worldly by throwing the spirit of the week-day into the Sabbath; to make Christian Ministers like other men, by infusing into them its own secular spirit; and to eat and drink of the Lord's Supper in the spirit of a common meal.

In order to rectify the abuses which had grown out of these love-feasts, the Apostle recalls to their remembrance the reasons for the original institution of the Lord's Supper, and from them deduces the guilt and responsibility of their desecration of that ordinance. He says that it was meant as a memorial of the Redeemer's sacrifice.

There may appear to us something superfluous in this; we should be inclined probably to say, "We need no memorial of that; it is graven on our hearts as on the rock for ever." The Son of Man knew our nature far too well to trust to such a pledge, even if it could have been given. He knew that the remembrance of it would fade without perpetual repetition, and without an appeal to the senses; therefore by touch, by taste, by sight, we are reminded in the Sacrament that Christianity is not a thing of mere feeling, but a real historical actuality. It sets forth Jesus Christ evidently crucified among us.

Let us draw something practical from this. Memory depends on two things-on repetition, and on the impression being a sensible one, that is, one of which the senses take cognizance.

Does any man wish to forget God? Does any man wish to live in sin without being disturbed by the painful thought of Judgment? We can tell him how he may insure that—for a time at least. Let him attempt to be wiser than his Maker: let him say, "I can read my Bible at home, and worship God in the open beauties of Nature, as well as in a church: " let him give up private prayer, and never attend the Lord's table,

giving up all that is symbolical in religion. and we will insure him most terrible success;

for so 66

Let him do this, judgment to come" will be to him only a hypothesis, and God's own existence merely a perhaps.

The second reason for the institution of the Lord's Supper was to keep in mind Christ's second Advent:-" Till He come." When Christ left this world, it was with a promise that He would return again. Ever since that time have the souls of the faithful been preparing and watching for that coming. So, then, there are two feelings which belong to this Supper-abasement and triumph: abasement, because everything that tells of Christ's sacrifice reminds us of human guilt; and triumph, because the idea of His coming again," without sin unto salvation," is full of highest rapture. These two feelings are intended to go hand in hand through life, for that sadness which has not in it a sense of triumph, is not Christian but morbid; neither is that joy Christian which is without some sense of sorrow. We dearly love the way in which the Church of England celebrates the Supper of the Lord, with a solemn stillness so well befitting the feelings and the occasion.

The next reason for the institution of the Lord's Supper is to teach the communion of saints. The symbolic elements themselves are intended to teach the Church's unity. The feeling of unity in the Church is that which belongs to fellowcountrymen meeting in a foreign land, or to ancient warriors who have fought side by side in the same battle, and meet in recollection of dangers shared together. So it is with us: we are fellow soldiers and fellow pilgrims. This relationship can alone be perpetual. The relation between father and child changes even in this short existence to friendship; even the marriage relationship is only for this life, for in heaven they neither marry nor are given in marriage. While all other ties shall be dissolved, God stamps on this alone something of His own Eternity: united in Christ, you are united for ever.

IN

LECTURE XXIII.

I CORINTHIANS, xii. 1-31.—April 4, 1852.

N the course of this exposition, we have often had to remind ourselves that this Epistle was addressed to a Church in a state of faction. One cause of rivalry was respecting the merits of their respective teachers; another cause of rivalry was the endowments of various kinds given. to the members of the Church. Instead of occupying and spending themselves in the blessed work of using these endowments to the edification of the Church, they spent their time in quarrelling about the precedence which should be given to these different gifts. This was the natural result of great spiritual activity: it is so in politics: wherever there is freedom and earnestness in debate, there will assuredly arise dissensions. Well did St. Paul know that there must be heresies and factions among them; but he would not say that schism was a trifle; it might be that earnestness could not exist without it, but yet he refused to say that schism was right.

This chapter teaches two things: In it St. Paul sets himself to discuss spiritual gifts and inspiration.

First, the Apostle lays down a broad general principle respecting spiritual inspiration; secondly, he determines the place and value of different degrees of spiritual inspiration.

First, he lays down the general principle respecting inspiration in the third verse. "No man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost!" This made the broad separation between the Christian Church and the Gentile world.

« AnteriorContinuar »