Pagina-afbeeldingen
PDF
ePub

him whom God anointed to redeem Israel; but you are forgiven, when, from the heart, you believe on him as your King; and the PLEDGE of this forgiveness you receive ve in the in immersion now commanded. Moreover, it is the "promise" of the Lord that they who obey the proclamation of his mercy shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. Some might be staggered and hesitate for a moment, and he therefore exhorted them to compliance in terms which implied that submission to the call would be "salvation." They who complied were "saved" by the "washing of regeneration and the renewing of the Holy Spirit."

It is now time to ask, what had these persons experienced? Their belief, and consequent feelings and affections towards Jesus had changed from hatred to love and confidence; they were prepared to run all risks and go all lengths to secure his friendship and favor. They now loved the Lord Jesus Christ. What was their condition or state? Their sins were forgiven for Christ's sake, of which they were assured by being buried together with their Lord. What! buried? Yes, they had become dead to Moses-now married to another lawgiver—— dead to sin, and alive to righteousness-dead to the letter, and alive by the spirit-dead to all old things, and alive to the new kingdom, its glory, progress, and universal extension. Therefore, they were buried, and, as new creatures, admitted into God's house or family, which is the congregation of the saved. They were now separated unto God—that is, SAINTS; having been called into the hope and liberty of the gospel by the Apostle's word. O how simple and plain! level to the apprehension of a child, and most efficacious to give peace, joy, and assurance to the obedient disciple! Well, what is next to be done? Walk with the church, in steadfast continuance in the Apostles' doctrine, fellowship, breaking of bread, and in prayers. Now come difficulties:-1. What was the nature or cause of the "fear" which fell upon every soul? 2. Why is it that the believers now have no "spiritual gifts," or ability to do "mighty signs and wonders?" 3. Why is it that the subjects of the present "restoration of the ancient order" still live in separate dwellings, and feel as other men on the subject of private proverty? 4. In what way could or should christians now pretend to imitate the conduct of those saints who were "every day" in the temple? Had they no secular employment or business? 5. Is the phrase "breaking of bread" of the same import in both places? And why not? And is not the fact that the primitive disciples attended to the breaking the loaf every day-daily; nay, associated "the institution" with some one of their common meals every day, doing all to the glory of God? The holy sacrament was celebrated every day in one or other of the christian's houses, so that the Eucharist may be called the "daily bread" of the first christians. [Vide Eusebius' Demon. Evang. lib. 1.]

Be kind enough to remark on the above statement, and resolve me these doubts. If the darkness be past, and the true light be now shining, verily, the eyes of many are held that they should not see olearly. Waiting your reply, I remain yours in the best bonds, INTEGER VITAE

.

A Solution of the Difficulties presented by Integer Vitae. Difficulty 1. "Great fear and trembling came upon every soul in Jerusalem," as sundry old manuscripts and versions read it. Acts v. 5. After the punishment inflicted on Ananias and Sapphira, "great fear came upon all that heard these things," and verse 11th, "Great fear came upon all the church and upon as many as heard these things;" and verse 23d, “Of the rest durst no man join himself to them, but the people magnified them."

After all the wonderful displays of divine power, from Pentecost to the punishment of these two disciples, Ananias and Sapphira, it is not at all surprising that a solemn awe and terror should seize every mind in Jerusalem, and all who heard of these stupendous displays. Enemies were terrified in the midst of their plots and schemes to suppress them. Like the soldiers who went to apprehend Jesus, whose voice prostrated them to the ground, impelled by their own passions or by those in authority, there was a secret and internal awe which startled at the rustling of a leaf. But amongst the disciples there was a profound religious awe and veneration which chastened their joy. Fear and joy, trembling and mirth are not incompatible. "They served the Lord with fear and rejoiced with trembling." Ps ii. 11.

Difficulty 2. Because believers have no need of them. Tongues have ceased, prophecies have failed, and the gifts of knowledge have vanished away: for the revelation is complete; that which is perfect has supplanted that which was in part. And now abide faith, hope, love, these three. If they will not now hear Jesus and the Apostles, they would not be persuaded though one rose from the dead.

Difficulty 3. Because there is no order for a creative community. No congregation, not even that in Jerusalem, co-operated in the creation of a common stock. There was a community in consuming, not in creating the bounties necessary to life. And, moreover, it was accidental, growing out of circum stances, as was their meeting daily for a time in the temple, that the saints in Jerusalem eat at a common table, or feasted from house to house. But in all the congregations distant from the temple and the metropolis, it is obvious there was no community in either consuming or creating the necessaries of life. Such a community is incompatible with the admonitions to hospitality, providing for one's own house, the care for strangers, widows, and the poor brethren. Besides, no divine institution ever sets aside the first divine institution, marriage; nor the duties, relations, and obligations arising from the family compact. Private property is necessary to liberality, sympathy, alms-giving, hospitality, and many other christian duties. The family community has its foundation in nature and revelation, and depends equally upon the reason and fitness of things, and the authority of God.

The Jews were long accustomed to such communities about the times of their Pentecosts and great festivals, as appears from their own history. On some great occasions, as in the reign of Hezekiah, they doubled the time of their observances, and, instead of seven days, counted fourteen days. The rich made great presents, or free will offerings on such occasions. On the single occasion just alluded to, the King presented to the congregation one thousand bullocks and seven thousand sheep; and the Princes gave to the congregation one thousand bullocks and ten thousand sheep, and "there was great joy in Jerusalem." The children of Israel about this time brought such an abundance of corn, wine, oil, and honey, that "the heaps" were so great as to call for a general council to dispose of them. No wonder, then, that a people whose religion infused the greatest liberality by the most perfect system, should prolong their stay in Jerusalem and superabound in the fellowship after the blessings of this most illustrious Pentecost, under the heavenly genius of a spiritual economy. But he mistakes, in my humble opinion, the genius of the christian religion, who would make a community, destructive of private property, an essential part of the ancient order of things.

The 4th difficulty is removed in the preceding remarks. They are to meet together, as did all the churches, every first day of the week, in order to their communion in all the ordinances of the Lord's house-reading, teaching, exhorting, singing, praying, showing forth the Lord's death, attending to the discipline of the congregation, and to the fellowship for the poor, and for those who labor in the word and teaching.

Difficulty 5. "Breaking of bread," in our judgment, is not of the same signification in verse 42 and verse 46. It is "breaking the loaf" in connexion with the worship and practice of the congregation in verse 42. It is there associated with apostolic institutions belonging to the whole christian community; but in verse 46 it is simply "breaking bread," without such association, and connected with social parties from house to house, and trophe, common food. In this breaking of bread they took their food: while in the breuking of the loaf they continued in the Apostles' teaching, praying, and praising

So in Acts xx. 7. The brethren assembled on the first day of the week for "breaking the loaf" and verse 10, after Paul had raised up Eutychus in the night, and had broken bread, i. e. taken a refreshment, he continued his discourse till the morning, and departed on his journey.

As to the daily communion in breaking the loaf, it is unprecedented in the New Testament; and whether it was in Eusebius' time a superstitious observance or not, certain it is that we have no hint of the sort in the New Testament. We are not, however, prepared to censure them who meet during the week for this purpose; but, in the mean time, would rejoice to see all the disciples meeting cordially and joyfully every weekly return of the day of the resurrection of the Saviour to celebrate his death, and to keep all his social institutions. Weekly assemblies certainly were appointed by the Apostles; but other than weekly consociations are rather free-will assemblies than divinely authorized convocations of the disciples. Space forbids a longer reply. In the mean time, should these hints prove satisfactory to the querist, they are, with all respect, though without much regard to arrangement, hastily tendered.

QUERY ON FASTING-[From Georgia.]

EDITOR.

"Should christians at any time attend to religious fasting?"

ON this subject the Scriptures are plain, and, we think, very satisfactory. The Saviour taught his disciples in his sermon on the mount how they should demean themselves in their private fastings. Farther on in his history, in answer to some questions concerning the apparent neglect of fasts among his disciples, he informed them that although it would then be inconsistent for his disciples to fast under the present circumstances, according to the current views of fasting among the Jews, yet a time should come, after his departure from them, when fasts would be every way seasonable, consistent, and commendable.

We discover that fasting was frequent amongst the primitive disciples. As the brethren in Antioch ministered to the Lord and fasted, the Holy Spirit said, "Separate me Barnabas and Saul," &c. and when they had fasted and prayed, and laid their hands upon them, they commended them to the Lord. The church was fasting at the time this order was given. In the 14th chapter of the Acts, it reads, in the old English Bibles, 225 years ago, "And when they had ordained them elders by election in every church, and prayed and fasted, they commended them to the Lord in whom they believed" Even fasting, in its full import, is spoken of by Paul, not only in reference to churches and individuals, but in reference to the connubial relation. 1 Cor. vii 5. "That you may give yourselves to fasting and prayer.' I has fasting is alluded to in reference to the privacy of the closet, to the family relation, and to the whole congregation. So hat not only did pious Jews, like Anna, "serve God with fastings and prayers," but so did the primitive christians.

[ocr errors]

It was not positively enacted in the five books of Moses to the Jews; nor is it in the form of a positive command enjoined in the New Testament. Nor,

indeed, could it so be, in reference to that delicate propriety which characterizes all the divine institutions; but it is so commended and enjoined by the examples of Jesus and christians, and so approbated by God, as to leave no doubt that it contributes much to the sanctification of christians to deny even their natural and necessary appetites occasionally, that they may glorify God with their bodies and spirits which are God's, be more spiritually-minded, and be more consecrated to the Lord. Concerning the utility and necessity of fasting, more hereafter. EDITOR.

S. C. JENNINGS AND THE CHRISTIAN HERALD. THIS gentleman boasted some ago that he was "a Presbyterian by descent" as well as by profession. How far back he can trace his Presbyterian blood I am not able to say--whether he is of the "order of Wandsworth" or of the "order of 1648," I know not. I would presume, however, from the general character of the "Christian Herald," that he is of the genuine blood of 1648, which is the true and best Presbyterian blood. What affection this order had for blood will appear from the following ordinance:

"All persons who shall willingly maintain, publish, or defend, by preaching or writing, that the Father is not God; that the Son is not God; that the Holy Ghost is not God; or that these three are not one eternal God, &c. shall, upon complaint or proof by oath of two witnesses, before two justices of the peace, be committed to prison without bail or mainprize till the next jail delivery; and in case the indictment shall then be found, and the party upon his trial shall not abjure the said error, he shall suffer the pains of death, as in case of felony, without benefit of clergy."

This decree was passed in May, 1648, by the true and best Presbyterian blood in Great Britain. The heresies which grew up in the Presbyterian church since that time, only 184 years, have drunk up most of this best Presbyterian blood; but now and then there is one like the aforesaid Mr. Jennings, who boasts of being a genuine Presbyterian by descent, or by flesh, blood, and bones.

I should not have complimented this fleshly Presbyterian Editor by noticing his illustrious ancestry, had he not taken great pains to obtain t. He has been telling his readers how heretical I have been, and many other good things concerning my fates; as for example, how his uncle Obadiah discomfited me at Nashville, and how somebody else terrified me into silence. He now ranks me amongst the deceivers which were to precede the Millennium, &c. &c. Being a son of the flesh, a Presbyterian by birth, and an Editor upon the same footing, (for he claims patronage as well as orthodoxy on the ground of descent) he is most denouncing against those who are for faith before baptism, and who put the spirit before the flesh. Coming into the church according to the flesh by virtue of both father and mother, it is not passing strange that he should denounce us, as well as claim subscribers from the same fleshly principle. Hagar's son was only half blood, and yet Paul said, "he that was born after the flesh persecuted hint

that was born after the Spirit." What mercy, then, can we expect from a full-blooded Presbyterian according to the flesh!

I am happy to say that I have the honor of an acquaintance with many Presbyterians, who are not so pure in the blood as Mr. Jennings of Pittsburg, who are much more in accordance with the spirit of this age; and, although from a Presbyterian ancestry, neither so fleshly nor so bloody as he of the order of 1648.

As this gentleman has enough to do to keep things straight in his own Presbyterian family, I hope he will not so repeatedly call for a notice from us: if he do, we shall have to tell him some truths which, 1 fear, will not be so acceptable as this compliment to his lineage and pretensions, EDITOR

THE TENDENCY OF THE PREACHING OF THE ANCIENT GOSPEL.

WHAT evil tendency has the teaching that the blood of Jesus is the only sacrifice which can take away sin; that faith in the person and mission of Jesus, or, in other words, faith in his sacrifice, is necessary to bring us to the blood of Jesus; and that immersion into this faith is necessary to our actually receiving the assurance, or the pledge, or, if any one prefers, the enjoyment of the remission of our sins. Will this doctrine depreciate the value of the blood of Jesus, of faith in that blood, or of christian immersion? Does not this view fix a just estimate upon the blood, the faith, and the water!

The hue and cry of damnable heresy is as unmerited in this case as it ever was in any case. We do not think any man is sincere in raising it, unless he is in the grossest ignorance of the whole matter. Our maxim is, "What God has joined together letno man put asunder.” The divine nature of Jesus, the unparalleled dignity of his person as the only begotten Son of God, must be believed before his blood can be appreciated. His sacrifice must be regarded in its true value before faith in it can purify the heart, and immersion into his name must be regarded in connexion with his person, mission, death, burial, and resurrection, before it can bring us into the enjoyment of its benefits. What condemnable tendency has thus holding up to view the blood of Jesus, faith, and immersion, and urging mankind not to separate the things which God in his infinite wisdom and goodness has so intimately united! Will it lead mankind to disparage any one, or to regard any one of these as alone sufficient, and thus make all the others void? If blood alone will suffice, then faith and immersion are clouds without rain, empty and unmeaning. If faith alone will suffice, then blood and water are superfluous. If water alone is alone suffi→ cient, then faith and blood are mere ceremonies.

We challenge the world to show any mischievous tendency, any condemnable bearing that the gospel which we preach can have upon the minds or morals, the persons or characters of mankind. Its tendency is, indeed, to induce all who have faith in the testimony of God immediately to be immersed. If this be more injurious than pro

[ocr errors]
« VorigeDoorgaan »