as is sometimes done, the same reverence for their words as the Apostles claimed rightfully for themselves. Much mistake, too, is made in drawing the parallel, or expecting it in the mutual affection of ministers and people. For gifts differ, and more than all, circumstances of trial differ; and it is only when dangers are undergone together, like those of the Apostles, that the cases can be parallel. Doubtless, in the early Church, and among the persecuted Covenanters, similar instances have occurred, but rarely do they happen in prosperous times.

Yet let me call attention to one point, in which the connection is equally solemn. I waive the question of personal affection and private influence. In the public ministry of a Church, week by week, a congregation listens to one man's teaching; year by year, a solemn connection is thus formed; for so, thoughts are infused, perforce absorbed. They grow in silence, vegetate, and bear fruit in the life and practice of the congregation; and a minister may even trace his modes of thinking in his people's conversation not as mere phrases learnt by rote, but as living seed which has germinated in them. A very solemn thing! for what is so solemn as to have that part of a man which is his most real self — his thoughts and faith - grow into others, and become part of their being! Well, that will be his rejoicing in the judgment day; for that harvest he will put in his claim. "We are your rejoicing." It was to be theirs that St. Paul had taught them in simplicity and godly sincerity, truly and fearlessly. It was to be his that spiritual thoughts and contrite feelings had been through him infused into them, and this though they partially denied it. Still, deny it as they might, they could not rob him of his harvest.

My Christian brethren, may that mutual rejoicing be yours and mine in the day of Jesus Christ!

24

LECTURE XXXVII.

2 CORINTHIANS, ii. 6-11.

AUGUST 1, 1852.

"Sufficient to such a man is this punishment, which was inflicted of many. - So that contrariwise ye ought rather to forgive him, and comfort him, lest perhaps such a one should be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow. - Wherefore I beseech you that ye would confirm your love toward him. For to this end also did I write, that I might know the proof of you, whether ye be obedient in all things. To whom ye forgive anything, I forgive also for if I forgave anything, to whom I forgave it, for your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ; - Lest Satan should get an advantage of us; for we are not ignorant of his devices."

THE main defence of the Apostle against the charge of fickleness in the non-fulfilment of his promise was, that he had abstained from going to Corinth in order to spare them the sharp rebuke he must have administered had he gone thither. A great crime had been committed the Church had been compromised, more especially as some of the Corinthians had defended the iniquity on the ground of Liberty, and St. Paul had stayed away after giving his advice, that not he, but they themselves, might do the work of punishment. He gave sentence that the wicked person should be put away, but he wished them to execute the sentence. For it was a matter of greater importance to St. Paul that the Corinthians should feel rightly the necessity of punishment, than merely that the offender should be punished. It was not to vindicate his authority that he wrote, but that they should feel the authority of right; and the Corinthians obeyed. They excommunicated the incestuous person; for the Epistle of the Apostle stirred up their languid consciences into active exercise. Accordingly, he applauds their conduct, and recommends them now to forgive the offender whom

they had punished; so that, in this section, we have St. Paul's views respecting

I. The Christian Idea of Punishment. II. The Christian Idea of Absolution.

I. The Christian idea of punishment includes in it, first, the Reformation of the Offender.

This is the first and most natural object of punishment; and we infer it to have been part of St. Paul's intention, because when this end had been attained, he required that punishment should cease: "Sufficient to such a man is this punishment." Now herein consists the peculiar spirit of Christianity, that whereas the ancient system of law sacrificed the individual to the society, and feeble philanthropy would sacrifice society to the individual, Christianity would save both. It respects the decencies of life and its rights: it says the injurer must suffer: but it says, too, he also is a living soul, we must consider him: we must punish, so that he shall be made not worse, but better. So it was not only the dignity of the Corinthian Church that St. Paul thought of: he thought also of the the fallen, guilty state of his spirit, who had degraded that Church. He punished him, that his spirit might be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus.

The second thing included in this idea, is the Purification of Society. Punishment was also necessary for this reason that sin committed with impunity corrupts the body of men to which the sinner belongs. This St. Paul declares in the First Epistle: "A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump." Now the purification of society is effected partly by example, and partly by removal of the evil. The discipline by which this removal was effected was called excommunication. At that time, apostolic excommunication represented to the world God's system of punishment. I do not say that it does so now, for the Church and the World have become so mixed, Church and State so trench upon each other's functions, that we know not where the

division is. But I conceive that, in early times, the Church discipline was representative of the true idea of punishment: clearly St. Paul thought it was so. He did not think of extending it beyond the Church, for his idea of the Church was that of a pure society in the world, representing what the world should be; and so he does not require this separation to be rigidly enforced with respect to worldly men. This point is dwelt on in the fifth chapter of the First Epistle, in the tenth verse, and also in the thirteenth verse of the twelfth chapter. For God judged those without, while the Church, God's representative, judged and exhibited this principle of punishment on those within.

These two-to reform, and to serve as an example, are the only views of punishment which are found in the popular notion of it. But if we think deeper on the subject, we shall find, I believe, that there is another idea in punishment, which cannot be lost sight of. It is this that punishment is the expression of righteous indignation: God's punishment is the expression of God's indignation, man's punishment is the expression of man's indignation. In the fifth verse of this chapter, as explained once before, St. Paul evidently thought that the guilty man had grieved that is, offended — him partly, and partly the whole Church. Accordingly, their punishment of him was an expression of their indignation against him, as is clear from the eleventh verse of the seventh chapter, in which we must mark particularly the word "revenge," and compare it with the text of Rom. xiii. 4,- a revenger to execute wrath," where the word is used, not in its evil meaning, but in the sense of righteous resentment expressing itself in punishment. For there is a right feeling in human nature, which we call resentment: it exists equally in the best and the worst natures; although in the worst, it becomes malice. It existed in Christ Himself, for it is not a peculiarity of fallen human nature, but it is an inseparable element of human nature itself. Now let us mark what follows from this: Man is the image of God: all spirits are of the same

66

family. So there is something in God which corresponds with that which we call resentment, stripped, of course, of all emotion, selfishness, or fury.

It is for this reason that we should strongly object to explain away those words of Scripture, "the wrath of God:" "God is angry with the wicked every day: " "the wrath of God is revealed from heaven." These sayings contain a deep and awful truth. God's punishment is God's Wrath against sin; and is not merely the consequence of lifeless laws, but the expression of the feeling of a Living Spirit. It would be most perilous to do away with these words; for if the Wrath of God be only a figure, His Love must be but a figure too. Such, therefore, is the true idea of human punishment. It. exists to reform the offender, to purify society, and also to express God's and man's indignation

at sin.

II. The Christian Idea of Absolution.

Before we go further, it will be well to explain some terms. Forgiveness is one thing, absolution is another. Absolution is the authoritative declaration of forgiveness. For example, when Christ said to the sick of the palsy, "Son, be of good cheer; thy sins be forgiven thee," He did not at this moment forgive him he was forgiven already, but it was then that He declared his forgiveness.

Now the case before us is a distinct, unquestionable instance of ecclesiastical absolution. You are aware that many utterly deny the possibility of such a power existing in man, beyond a mere declaration of God's promises to faith; and the assurance of forgiveness on the part of any man would be counted, by some persons, as blasphemy. At once the cry of the Pharisees Iwould be raised "Who can forgive sins but God only?". Now here, in the Church of Corinth, is a sin : it is an offence not only against man, but also against God, not a crime merely against society, but a sin, and yet St. Paul says "I forgive." "I forgive." This is absolution:

-