Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

THE GOODNESS AND MERCY OF GOD.

"He is rich in mercy to all who call upon him."

THERE is a richness in this sentence, refreshing to the soul of the humble penitent, which encourages and confirms his confidence in God, reminds him that the fountain of everlasting love, is ever full, and overflowing, and that the gracious command, "Open thy mouth wide," is accompanied with the encouraging promise, “And I will fill it." What an anxiety is shown by the Saviour in the following passage, that no bruised reed should be broken, but that all should see, understand, accept, strive after, and obtain, the spiritual blessings which he longs to bestow on every humble supplicant, and which they enjoy not because of their ignorance and unbelief-" Ask, and it shall be given to you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you; for every one that asketh, receiveth; and he that seeketh, findeth; and to him that knocketh, it shall be opened."

Sinner! what further encouragement, or assurance, can you desire? That if you use the means, a prayerful investigation of God's word, you will obtain the end-an admittance into his heavenly kingdom, and an inheritance amongst all them that are sanctified.

REPLY TO QUERIES.

R.

QUERY 1. Will you, Mr. Editor, be so kind as to reconcile any seeming contradiction that there may be in the following passages of Scripture, in reference to the duty of congregations to pay their Pastors-Acts xx. 33, 34, 35-1 Tim. v. 17, 18, Gal. vi. 6? and furnish an answer to the question, Is it, or is it not, the duty of Pastors to support themselves? T. B.

ANSWER. The two passages cited by brother T. B. from Paul's letters to the Galatian church, and to Timothy, assert the right which pastors, and all those who labour in the household of God possess, of receiving support from its treasury; and in those quoted from the Acts, the labours and advice of Paul imply the suspension of this power. That Paul did only forego his right of being maintained by his labours in the gospel, when for support he plied his tent-maker's needle, is evident from his words in 2 Thess. iii. 8, 9-" Neither did we eat any man's bread for nought; but wrought with labour and travail night and day, that we might not be chargeable to any of you: not because we have not power, but to make ourselves an example unto you to follow us." And, in allusion to the right he asks the Corinthians," Or I only and Barnabas, have not we power to forbear working?" ix. 6. That the Ephesian elders expected a remuneration for labouring in the pastoral duties, is evident from the quotation which Paul made to them of Christ's words, "It is more blessed to give than to receive." It is also apparent, that these words do not affirm that expectation to be either unjust or groundless. They do but assert that it is more blissful, or, produces greater happiness in the mind, when a man imparts to him that needeth, than when he receives the requisites of life from another's hand. Every noble spirit, at once perceives and feels the strength of this truth. Christ himself experienced its force; he is assuredly in the enjoyment of higher felicity now he is pouring the blessings of heaven into the souls of his

disciples, than when he subsisted upon the donations of his friends. But this axiom does not deny, that he had not the right to be supported by those to whom he bountifully administered the bread of life: consequently, does not deny that those have not a claim for sustenance, who, like him, devote their time and energy in vivifying the souls of men with the manna of God's word.

It is evident, by reasoning from Scripture principles, that when Paul exhorted the Ephesian elders to imitate his example, by labouring in their avocations, that he, in fact, advised them to imitate him by suspending their power of deriving the sustenants of life from their spiritual toils. Their claim for support arose from the same cause as did Paul's, and consequently was as righteous and substantial. The Saviour had laid it down as a principle upon which his church was to act, that the labourer was worthy of his reward." But no one was thus to be rewarded who did not sweat and toil in tilling the Lord's vineyard, and widening its circle. All, therefore, who received support from the gospel, did so, because they were arduous workers in its duties. In this respect, the Apostles, Evangelists, and Pastors, stood on equal ground. Their claims upon the church were based upon the same principle.

[ocr errors]

When, therefore, Paul added the labours of tent-making to those of the gospel, and maintained himself by the products of his trade alone, it was, because he had suspended his right ofliving by his spiritual employment; if the Ephesian Pastors, therefore, or any other of God's husbandmen, toiled in their mundane callings, as well as in their ministerial duties, and lived by their vocations, it was because they had suspended the same right.

We shall, ere long, return to this subject again.

EDITOR.

QUERY 2. How is Life and Immortality brought to light by the Gospel? 2 Tim. i. 10.

M. E. C.

ANSWER. During the dispensations preceding the Gospel, the knowledge of an immortal life beyond the grave, was obscure and intricate. Immortality was but faintly pencilled in the back grounds of these drawings of human destiny. Glory, honour, and happiness, in this present state, glow resplendent in their fore grounds.

It

The seers and holy men, whose visions had been empowered to penetrate through the death-bounds of time, saw the glimmering of an eternal day beyond the charnel valley of death; but the great herd of mankind, had all their thoughts, hopes, and affections concentrated within the circle of their earthly existence. A resurrection from the dead to eternal happiness and life was not proclaimed to them, as the great hope of man, as the inspiring motive which should impel him to fulfil the duties of life. It is true, that there were allusions to it in the Psalms and Prophets, and it is also true that from these the Jews gathered the idea that man should again burst into being, but it could not be come grounded in the soul, as the centre-hope, till it was supported by facts. may be argued, that there were truths expressed by the lips of the Eternal to produce and confirm the belief, but death and corruption were great facts seen perpetually in full action. Now, the power of truths is never equal to that of facts; when, therefore, these two influences struggle for supremacy in the soul of man, the first will not be able to crush the strength of the latter: although when the truths are affirmed by Jehovah, as in this case, his faithful followers will believe and hope in them; consequently, the facts which they oppose, will not gain the ascendancy, yet still the power of the facts will always enfeeble, and oft well nigh destroy, the influence of the truths. Facts alone can destroy the power of facts. These remarks are exemplified in the conduct of Martha and Mary, the sisters of Lazarus. They were indeed two of the small number in the Jewish nation which God had reserved for himself. Love and righteousness shone resplendent in their character, and taught by the Prophets, they believed in a resurrection. Yet their conduct at the death of Lazarus proved how little

their belief in a new life beyond the grave fortified their souls against the fears of death. They mourned" as those who have no hope." Before this idea could become a living hope, two things were required→→

1. That a being, "bone of our bone, and flesh of our Resh," after suffering all the sorrows incident to human nature, should die, descend into the prison-house of death, and then breaking through the iron gates, ascend to heaven. These then would be three facts.

2. That he should be presented by God to mankind as their great Example, by the imitation of whom, they should obtain eternal life.

The Gospel displays such a being in the person of Christ. It proclaims him to be "one of us;" the destroyer of death and the faultless pattern whom those must imitate who desire to belong to that order of beings, who shall live for ever in peace and happiness. Life and Immortality are, therefore, brought to light through the Gospel. EDITOR.

Correspondence.

STRICTURES ON B. B.'S LETTER ON CAMPBELLISM.

MR. EDITOR.-Our friends here have pressed me to add a few remarks to your strictures on B. B.'s letter, in the last month's Banner; and the more, because he told them, that his objections had not been answered. But we must remember that he is judge in his own ease; I consider they were fully answered. But in truth, there is not much in his letter to answer; he has been careful to avoid specifications, and those particulars he has named, are worded so that it is difficult to apprehend his real meaning. What does he mean by his "dissenting from Mr. Campbell and his religious system?" If we contemplate Mr. C. apart from his religious system, I know not in what respect he dissents from him, nor does it matter much what, as it is a private affair. Again, he "refuses to become a follower, either of Mr. C. or his religious system." Here again he makes a distinction between Mr. C. and his religious system; then, I conclude, he will not be a follower of Mr. C. with respect to his intellectual and moral character. If Mr. C. be, as B. B. says he is, "a great and good man," then B. B. will not follow the example of a great and good man!! But B. B. will not " follow Mr. C.'s religions system." I never yet learned that Mr. C. invented one. He has indeed, with mighty power, by his writings, called attention to the primitive order of the Christian church, and shown the necessity of a return thereto, and has made many difficult things pertaining to Christian doctrine plain, by his lucid compositions; but he repudiates the building of any sect, or being the head of any party.

If B. B. insinuates that we have formed onr churches on our present model, in obedience to Mr. Campbell's authority, he does us great wrong. I believe we are no more the followers of Mr. C. than B. B. himself is. Like him, we only esteem him "a great and good man," and have found his writings profitable and instructive. To impute any thing more to us, is dishonourable and unjust. Touching the doctrine of baptism for the remission of sins, as advocated by Mr. C., our friend B. B. had better dispose of him who had the power of the keys first. For my part I see nothing in Mr. Campbell's views inconsistent with the Apostle Peter's doctrine. The Essay on baptism, or remission of sins, is unanswered, and I believe unanswerable.

If Mr. B. would pay a stricter regard to truth, his objections would be more worthy of attention. Mr. Campbell no where says that "baptism is the procuring cause of our salvation." Nor is it true that Mr. C. represents himself as the forerunner of the millennium. Such a charge is utterly without foundation.

But there is nothing in B. B.'s letter that surprises me more, than the grave charge of denying the hope of the gospel, which he prefers against those who do not believe in the pre-millennial advent. It is the first time I have heard any one affirm that time destroyed or altered the nature of any fact. For B. B. to say that Mr. Campbell rejects the doctrine of the glorious appearing of our Saviour to raise the dead and judge the world, because he does not expect him yet, is a singular conclusion for any one to arrive at. He might as well charge Paul with similar heresy, when he taught the Thessalonians, that Christ their hope would not come before the rise and reign of the man of sin.

In conclusion I would beg of B. B., if he should again favour us with the rod, to be a little more explicit, and avoid such dark insinuations about the working of the system, &c., and if he sees errors to point them out, and we shall then have reason to thank him as being instrumental to our further reformation. Your brother in the hope of eternal life, N. H.

Bury.

REMARKS.-We are much surprised to hear that friend B. B. has stated his objections were not answered, for in a letter we received from him he thanked us for the reply. The letter was marked "private," and so it would have been kept had he not thus assumed this air of triumph. It is true, we only attacked his principal positions, nor did we much regard his "hard speeches," believing in charity, that they proceeded from a "warm heart" and not from a "cool head." If he thought our arguments vain and pointless, why did he not assault them, and prove their weakness? Brother Harrison has noticed the minor points of B. B.'s letter, and laid bare their futility.

We may here remark, that it is a fixed resolution in our minds, never to treat any of our opponents with severity, till we perceive that their nobler feelings are seared, and that they permit their passions and prejudices to reign over them. So long as a man possesses an excellency of character and a nobility of soul, he is entitled to respect in the same proportion as he manifest these qualities, let his ideas be what they may, and although he may sometimes use expressions containing more heat than light. Now we considered B. B. was such an individual, and our conduct towards him was dictated by the idea; nor yet is our good opinion of him departed.

Should we ever meet in our editorial path, an obstreperous, self-willed, and unscrupulous man, we shall then certainly use the sledge hammer.

THOUGHTS ON THE LORD'S SUPPER.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE GOSPEL BANNER:

ED.

Dear Brother. The Lord's supper was instituted by himself at the pass. over feast with unleavened bread and the liquid fruit of the vine. Matt xxvi. 17— 29; Mark xiv. 12-25. There are devoted followers of the Lamb who think it wrong to use either leavened bread or any other liquor than the product of the vine in this ordinance. Some such are attached to the Churches of the Reformation, who, notwithstanding this attachment, decline holding communion with these churches, solely on this account. They declare that they cannot eat the Lord's supper with leavened bread, and other than the liquid fruit of the vine, with a good conscience.

I stop not to inquire whether they are warranted to take this position, suffice it to state that there are such, and that they have been reasoned with long and earnestly on this subject, without change. After a very long contemplation of this question, I conclude, that since unleavened bread and the fruit of the vine

can easily be got for this ordinance; it is the duty of every congregation where such persons are hindered by conscientious scruples, immediately to adopt that which all can use with a good conscience. I submit the matter to your readers in the following propositions:

I. The Lord Jesus Christ used unleavened bread and the liquid fruit of the vine when he instituted this supper, therefore it cannot be wrong for his disciples to use the same.

It was while eating the passover that Jesus took bread, and blessed and brake and gave to the disciples, saying, This is my body which is broken for you. Matt. xxvi. 26. If it can be proved that no other than unleavened bread was to be used at the passover feast, then it necessarily follows that the supper was instituted with unleavened bread; and that no other was allowed is evident from many portions of Scriptures. Ex. xii. 15, abundantly proves the necessity of using unleavened bread only. "Seven days shall ye eat unleavened bread; even the first day ye shall put away leaven out of your houses: for whosoever eateth leavened bread from the first day until the seventh day that soul shall be eut off from Israel." The Lord's supper was therefore instituted with unleavened bread. Having given his disciples the cup and invited them to drink of it, he adds "I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until," &c. Matt. xxvi. 29. We are even called to suffer for Christ's sake, "because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example that we should follow his steps." 1 Pet. iii. 21. But where is the suffering in doing as Christ did in this institu tion? I know nothing that would suffer but our prejudices, and when once these yield to the voice of truth and duty, we ourselves will be glad of it. We have thus proved the rectitude of the first proposition, viz. That the Lord Jesus Christ used unleavened bread and the liquid fruit of the vinefwhen he instituted the supper, therefore it cannot be wrong for his disciples to use the same.

II. There are laws in the New Testament which bind the followers of Jesus to yield to the conscientious scruples of their brethren.

"Let us not therefore judge one another any more: but judge this rather, that no man put a stumblingblock, or an occasion to fall in his brother's way. I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean. But if thy brother be grieved with thy meat, now walkest thou not charitably, (or, as in the new version, you no longer walk as truth requires.) Destroy not him with thy meat, for whom Christ died. Let not then your good be evil spoken of. It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak." Rom. xiv. 13 -16, 21. The principle here taught is Christian law, and so plain that he who runs may read. Those, therefore, who refuse to use unleavened bread and the unfermented fruit of the vine, in the Lord's supper, when the conscience of a brother requires it, should ponder "when ye sin so against the brethren, and wound their (WEAK?) conscience, ye sin against Christ." I Cor. viii. 12. What nobility of soul is exemplified by the great Apostle to the Gentiles in the suc ceeding verse, "Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend." And what a painful contrast is the conduct of some, who, rather than use unleavened bread and the unfermented fruit of the vine, in the Lord's supper, allow their brethren in the Lord to wander at will, and find or not find those with whom they can associate. It appears to me that, if ever there was sectarianism, it is obvious in such a case. The fate of all opposers of reform in the churches is before such as thus stand in the way of Christian union. Let them beware.

SIGMA.

« ZurückWeiter »