PART IV.

The more deeply we ponder the subject which has been for some time engaging our attention, and the more we consider the state of the entire Church of God, the more convinced we are of the urgent need of a thorough awakening every where in reference to the question of prayer. We cannot—nor do we desire to—shut our eyes to the fact that deadness, coldness, and barrenness seem, as a rule, to characterize our prayer-meetings. No doubt we may find here and there a pleasing exception, but speaking generally, we do not believe that any sober, spiritual person will call in question the truth of what we state, namely, that the tone of our prayer-meetings is fearfully low, and that it is absolutely imperative upon us to inquire seriously as to the cause.

In the papers already put forth on this great, all-important, and deeply practical subject, we have ventured to offer to our readers a few hints and suggestions. We have briefly glanced at our lack of confidence, our failure in cordial unanimity, the absence of definiteness and importunity. We have referred in plain terms—and we must speak plainly if we are to speak at all—to many things which are felt by all the truly spiritual amongst us to be not only trying and painful, but thoroughly subversive of the real power and blessing of our reunions for prayer. We have spoken of the long, tiresome, desultory, preaching prayers which, in some cases, have become so perfectly intolerable, that the Lord's dear people are scared away from the prayer-meetings altogether. They feel that they are only wearied, grieved, and irritated, instead of being refreshed, comforted, and strengthened; and hence they deem it better to stay away. They judge it to be more profitable, if they have an hour to spare, to spend it in the privacy of their closet, where they can pour out their hearts to God in earnest prayer and supplication, than to attend a so-called prayer-meeting, where they are absolutely wearied out with incessant, powerless, hymn-singing, or long preaching prayers.

Now, we more than question the rightness of such a course. We seriously doubt if this be at all the way to remedy the evils of which we complain. Indeed, we are thoroughly persuaded it is not. If it be right to come together for prayer and supplication—and who will question the rightness?—then surely it is not right for any one to stay away merely because of the feebleness, failure, or even the folly of some who may take part in the meeting. If all the really spiritual members were to stay away on such a ground, what would become of the prayer-meeting? We have very little idea of how much is involved in the elements which compose a meeting. Even though we may not take part audibly in the action, yet if we are there in a right spirit—there really to wait upon God, we marvelously help the tone of a meeting.

Besides, we must remember that we have something more to do in attending a meeting than to think of our own comfort, profit, and blessing. We must think of the Lord's glory; we must seek to do His blessed will, and try to promote the good of others in every possible way; and neither of these ends, we may rest assured, can be attained by our deliberately absenting ourselves from the place where prayer is wont to be made.

We repeat, and with emphasis, the words, "deliberatelyabsenting ourselves"—staying away because we are not profited by what takes place there. Many things may crop up to hinder our being present—ill-health, domestic duties, lawful claims upon our time if we are in the employment of others,—all these things have to be taken into account; but we may set it down as a fixed principle thatthe one who can designedly absent himself from the prayer-meeting is in a bad state of soul. The healthy, happy, earnest, diligent soul will be sure to be found at the prayer-meeting.

But all this conducts us, naturally and simply, to another of those moral conditions at which we have been glancing in this series of papers. Let us turn for a moment to the opening lines of Luke xviii. "And He spake a parable unto them to this end,that men ought always to pray, and not to faint: saying, 'There was in a city a judge, which feared not God, neither regarded man. And there was a widow in that city, and she came unto him, saying, Avenge me of mine adversary. And he would not for a while; but afterward he said within himself, Though I fear not God, nor regard man, yet, because this widow troubleth me, I will avenge her, lest by her continual coming she weary me.' And the Lord said, 'Hear what the unjust judge saith. And shall not God avenge His own elect, which cry day and night unto Him, though He bear long with them? I tell you that He will avenge them speedily.'" (Ver. I-8.)

Here, then, we have pressed upon our attention the important moral condition ofperseverance. "Men oughtalwaysto pray, andnot to faint." This is intimately connected with the definiteness and importunity to which we have already referred. We want a certain thing; we cannot do without it. We importunately, unitedly, believingly, and perseveringly wait on our God until He graciously send an answer, as He most assuredly will, if the moral basis and the moral conditions be duly maintained.

But we must persevere.We must not faint, and give up, though the answer does not come as speedily as we might expect. It may please God to exercise our souls by keeping us waiting on Him for days, months, or perhaps years. The exercise is good. It is morally healthful; it tends to make us real; it brings us down to the roots of things. Look, for example, at Daniel. He was kept for "three full weeks" waiting on God, in profound exercise of soul. "In those days I Daniel was mourning three full weeks. I ate no pleasant bread, neither came flesh nor wine in my mouth, neither did I anoint myself at all, till three full weeks were fulfilled."

All this was good for Daniel. There was deep blessing in the spiritual exercises through which this beloved and honored servant of God was called to pass during those three weeks. And what is specially worthy of note is, that the answer to Daniel's cry had been despatched from the throne of God at the very beginning of his exercise, as we read at verse 12, "Then said he unto me, 'Fear not Daniel; forfrom the first day that thou didst set thine heart to understand, and to chasten thyself before thy God, thy words were heard, and I am come for thy words. But"—how marvelous and mysterious is this!—"the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me one and twenty days; but, lo, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me; and I remained there with the kings of Persia. Now I am come to make thee understand what shall befall thy people in the latter days."

All this is full of interest. Here was the beloved servant of God mourning, chastening himself, and waiting upon God. The angelic messenger was on his way with the answer. The enemy was permitted to hinder; but Daniel continued to wait: he prayed, and fainted not; and in due time the answer came.

Is there no lesson here for us? Most assuredly there is. We, too, may have to wait long in the holy attitude of expectancy, and in the spirit of prayer; but we shall find the time of waiting most profitable for our souls. Very often our God, in His wise and faithful dealing with us, sees fit to withhold the answer, simply to prove us as to the reality of our prayers. The grand point for us is, to have an object laid upon our hearts by the Holy Ghost—an object as to which we can lay the finger of faith upon some distinct promise in the Word, and to persevere in prayer until we get what we want. "Prayingalwayswith all prayer and supplication in the Spirit, andwatchingthereuntowith all perseveranceand supplication for all saints." (Eph. vi. 18.)

All this demands our serious consideration. We are as sadly deficient in perseverance as we are in definiteness and importunity. Hence the feebleness of our prayers and the coldness of our prayer-meetings. We do not come together with a definite object, and hence we are not importunate, and we do not persevere. In short, our prayer-meetings are often nothing but a dull routine—a cold, mechanical service—something to be gone through—a wearisome alternation of hymn and prayer, hymn and prayer, causing the spirit to groan beneath the heavy burden of mere profitless bodily exercise.

We speak plainly and strongly: we speak as we feel. We must be permitted to speak without reserve. We call upon the whole Church of God, far and wide, to look this great question straight in the face—to look to God about it—to judge themselves about it. Do we not feel the lack of power in all our public reunions? Why those barren seasons at the Lord's table? Why the dullness and feebleness in the celebration of that precious feast which ought to stir the very deepest depths of our renewed being? Why the lack of unction, power, and edification in our public readings—the foolish speculations and the silly questions which have been advanced and answered for the last forty years? Why those varied evils on which we have been dwelling, and which are being mourned over almost every where by the truly spiritual? Why the barrenness of our gospel services? Why are souls not smitten down under the Word? Why is there so little gathering-power?

Brethren, beloved in the Lord, let us rouse ourselves to the solemn consideration of these weighty matters. Let us not be satisfied to go on with the present condition of things. We call upon all those who admit the truth of what we have been putting forth in these pages on "Prayer and the Prayer-Meeting," to unite in cordial, earnest, united prayer and supplication. Let us seek to get together according to God; to come as one man and prostrate ourselves before the mercy-seat, and perseveringly wait upon our God for the revival of His work, the progress of His gospel, the ingathering and upbuilding of His beloved people. Let our prayer-meetings be really prayer-meetings, and not occasions for giving out our favorite hymns, and starting our fancy tunes. The prayer-meeting ought to be the place of expressed heed and expected blessing—the place of expressed weakness and expected power—the place where God's people assemble with one accord, to take hold of the very throne of God, to get into the very treasury of heaven, and draw thence all we want for ourselves, for our households, for the Whole Church of God, and for the vineyard of Christ.

Such is the true idea of a prayer-meeting, if we are to be taught by Scripture. May it be more fully realized amongst the Lord's people every where. May the Holy Spirit stir us all up, and press upon our souls the value, importance, and urgent necessity of unanimity, confidence, definiteness, importunity, and perseverance in all our prayers and prayer-meetings.

Yes, there's a power which man can wield,When mortal aid is vain;That eye, that arm, that love to reach,That list'ning ear to gain.That power is prayer, which soars on high,Through Jesus, to the throne,And moves the hand which moves the worldTo bring deliverance down.

Yes, there's a power which man can wield,When mortal aid is vain;That eye, that arm, that love to reach,That list'ning ear to gain.

That power is prayer, which soars on high,Through Jesus, to the throne,And moves the hand which moves the worldTo bring deliverance down.

C. H. M.

Note.—It may perhaps be useful to notice that in the foregoing most needful pages, the beloved author has been speaking of theprayer-meeting, and the moral basis and conditions of prayer in general, not of personal, secret prayer. The importance of it can hardly be overestimated. The lack or neglect of this soon tells in the spiritual life of the Christian. Is not the lack of this the explanation of much leanness of soul, from which knowledge alone is not able to lift us up? It is, as it were, the spiritual gauge of our soul's condition. There, in the secret of the closet, the godly soul ever loves to pour out in its Father's ear its trials, its fears, its desires, its wants, its thanksgivings, in all their details. And what comfort, what joy, what godly strength and purpose, the soul carries from thence! what preparation to go through the daily toil, and testings of the day! Beloved of the Lord, let us wait on God, that we may know more of this secret power, gotten in our closet with Him.

[Ed.]

FOOTNOTES:[1]The reader should be informed that the word which is rendered "perfect," in the above passage, occurs but this once in the entire New Testament. It is [Greek: artios] (artios) and signifies, ready, complete, well fitted; as an instrument with all its strings, a machine with all its parts, a body with all its limbs, joints, muscles, and sinews. The usual word for "perfect" is [Greek: teleios] (teleios) which signifies the reaching of the moralend, in any particular thing.[2]The reader will distinguish between the expression "in the flesh" as used in Gal. ii. 20, and in Rom. viii. 8, 9. In the former, it simply refers to our condition as in the body. In the latter, it sets forth the principle or ground of our standing. The believer is in the body, as to the fact of his condition; but he is not in the flesh as to the principle of his standing.[3]["Thou hast magnified Thy word (or saying) according to all Thy Name," seems more exactly to give the meaning of the passage.Ed.][4]It is deeply interesting to note that neither the Jews' best Friend nor their worst enemy is once formally named in the book of Esther; but faith could recognize both the one and the other.[5]When the jailer at Philippi inquired of Paul and Silas, "What must I do to be saved?" they simply replied, "Believeon the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved, and thy house" (Acts xvi. 30, 31). It would, surely, be well if this method of dealing with an anxious inquirer were more faithfully adopted.[6][There are three very distinct aspects of the death of Christ which, to apprehend clearly, is of unspeakable value to the soul.1st. That which is typified in the blood of the paschal lamb on Israel's doors in Egypt. This is the judgment of God against the sinner in the person of the Substitute provided for him. Rom. iii. 23-27 applies to this.It brings peace to the soul who believes, for his judgment is passed. Christ has borne it in our stead.2nd. As revealed at the passage of the Red Sea. There it is fully manifested that God isforHis people; He has completely overcome their enemy and freed them from his power forever. The prince and his hosts, who ruled over them unto death, are drowned in the sea. God's people have passed out of his dominions, and can now go on with God in perfect freedom. No condemnation remains. Henceforth, to faith, Satan is a vanquished foe. God's people are delivered; they can now, in settled peace, worship, praise, and serve their God. Blessed, holy deliverance and service! Rom. vi.-vii. gives the full teaching of this aspect of the death of Christ.3rd. As seen in the passage of Jordan. There is no judgment to escape there; no foe pressing behind. It is a question of entering the good land which is just across. It is the death of Christ here asthe ending of His people's historyas children of Adam; that, by resurrection, He may now introduce them, as having died and risen with Him, into the place of glory where He has gone. By this it can be said, "As He is, so are we in this world" (I John iv. 17).Col. ii. 10-iii. 4, is the New Testament doctrine of this precious truth.Ed.][7]The reader may here remark that "the old corn of the land of Canaan" is a type of Christ risen and glorified. The manna is a type of Christ in His humiliation. The remembrance of Him in the latter is ineffably precious to the soul. It is sweet to look back and trace His way as the lowly, humble, self-emptied man. This is to feed upon the hidden manna—"Christ, once humbled here." Nevertheless, a risen, ascended and glorified Christ is the true object for the heart of the Christian; but to enjoy Him there, the reproach of this present evil world—all conformity to it—must be rolled away from us by the spiritual application of the circumcision of Christ. He was not conformed to this world, and we must be prepared to identify ourselves with Him in this.[8]There is a passage in the book of Deuteronomy which, as it may present a difficulty to some minds, should be noticed here. "And the Lord heard the voice of your words, when ye spake unto me; and the Lord said unto me, I have heard the voice of the words of this people which they have spoken unto thee:they have well said all that they have spoken" (Deut. v. 28). From this passage, it might seem as though the Lord approved of their making a vow; but if my reader will take the trouble of reading the entire context, from verse 24 to 27, he will see that it has nothing whatever to say to the vow, but that it contains the expression of their terror at the consequences of their vow. They were not able to endure that which was commanded. "If," said they "we hear the voice of the Lord our God any more, then we shall die. For who is there of all flesh that hath heard the voice of the living God speaking out of the midst of the fire, as we have, and lived? Go thou near, and hear all that the Lord our God shall say; and speak thou unto us all that the Lord our God shall speak unto thee; and we will hear it and do it." It was the confession of their own inability to encounter Jehovah in that awful aspect which their proud legality had led Him to assume. It is impossible that the Lord could ever commend an abandonment of free and changeless grace for a sandy foundation of works of law. (See "Notes on the book of Exodus," page 253. Same publishers.)[9][That is, as many as are on that principle—of "law," "works of law."Ed.][10][The Greek word translated "show" is more exactly rendered "announce" or "proclaim"—same word as in I Cor. ix. 14.Ed.][11]It is needful to bear in mind that, while the blood of Christ is that alone which introduces the believer, in holy boldness, into the presence of God, yet it is nowhere set forth as our centre, or bond of union. Truly precious is it for every blood-washed soul to remember, in the secret of the divine presence, that the atoning blood of Jesus has rolled away for ever his heavy burden of sin. Yet the Holy Ghost can only gather us to the person of a risen and glorified Christ, who, having shed the blood of the everlasting covenant, is gone up into heaven in the power of an endless life, to which divine righteousness inseparably attaches. A living Christ, therefore, is our centre and bond of union. The blood having answered for us to God, we gather round our risen and exalted Head in the heavens. "I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men untoMe." We behold in the cup in the Lord's Supper the symbol of shed blood; but we are neither gathered round the cup nor the blood, but round Him who shed it. The blood of the Lamb has put away every obstacle to our fellowship with God; and in proof of this the Holy Ghost has come down to baptize believers into one body, and gather them round the risen and glorified Head. The wine isthe memorialof a life shed out for sin: the bread isthe memorialof a body broken for sin: but we are not gathered round a life poured out, nor round a body broken, but round a living Christ, who dieth no more, who cannot have His body broken any more, or His blood shed any more. This makes a serious difference; and when looked at in connection with the discipline of the house of God, the difference is immensely important. Very many are apt to imagine that when any one is put away from or refused communion, the question is raised as to there being a link between his soul and Christ. A moment's consideration of this point in the light of Scripture will be sufficient to prove that no such question is raised. If we look at the case of the "wicked person" in I Cor. v., we see one put away from the communion of the Church on earth who was nevertheless a Christian, as people say. He was not, therefore, put away because he was not a Christian: such a question was never raised; nor should it be in any case. How can we tell whether a man is eternally linked with Christ or not? Have we the custody of the Lamb's book of life? Is the discipline of the Church of God founded upon what we can know, or upon what wecannot? Was the man in I Cor. v. linked eternally with Christ, or not? Was the Church told to inquire? Even suppose we could see a man's name written in the book of life, that would not be the ground of receiving him into the assembly on earth, or retaining him there. That which the Church is held responsible for, is to keep herself pure in doctrine, pure in practice, and pure in association, and all this on the ground of being God's house. "Thy testimonies are very sure; holiness becometh Thy house, O Lord, for ever." When any one was separated, or "cut off," from the congregation of Israel, was it because of not being an Israelite? By no means; but because of some moral or ceremonial defilement which could not be tolerated in God's Assembly. In Achan's case (Josh. vii.), although there were six hundred thousand souls ignorant of his sin, yet God says, "Israel hath sinned." Why? Because they were looked at as God's Assembly, and there was defilement there which, if not judged, all would have been broken up.[12]Those who are competent to do so can look at the original of this important chapter, where they will see that the word translated "approved" (ver. 19) comes from the same root as that translated "examine himself" (ver. 28). Thus we see that the man who approves himself takes his place amongst the approved, and is the very opposite of those who were amongst the heretics. Now the meaning of a heretic is not merely one who holds false doctrine, though one may be a heretic in so doing, but one who persists in the exercise ofhis own will. The apostle knew that there must be heresies at Corinth, seeing that there were sects: those who were doing their own will were acting in opposition to God's will, and thus producing division; for God's will had reference to the whole body. Those who were acting heretically were despising the Church of God.[13]It may be well to add a word here for the guidance of any simple-hearted Christian who may find himself placed in circumstances in which he is called upon to decide between the claims of different tables which might seem to be spread upon the same principle. To confirm and encourage such an one in a truthful course of action, I should regard as a most valuable service.Suppose, then, I find myself in a place where two or more tables have been spread; what am I to do? I believe I am to inquire into theoriginof these various tables, to see how it became needful to have more than one table. If, for example, a number of Christians meeting together have admitted and retained amongst them any unsound principles, affecting the person of the Son of God, or subversive of the unity of the Church of God on earth; if, I say, such principles be admitted and retained in the assembly, or if persons who hold and teach them be received and acknowledged by the assembly; under such painful and humiliating circumstances the faithful can no longer be there. Why? Because I cannot take my place at it without identifyingmyself with manifestly unchristian principles. The same remark, of course, applies if the case be that of corrupt conduct unjudged by the assembly.Now, if a number of Christians should find themselves placed in the circumstances above described, they would be called upon to maintainthe purity of the truth of Godwhile acknowledging as ever the oneness of the body. We have not only to maintain the grace of the Lord's table, but theholinessof it also. Truth is not to be sacrificed in order to maintain unity, nor willtrueunity ever be interfered with by the strict maintenance of truth.It is not to be imagined that the unity of the body of Christ is interfered with when a community based upon unsound principles, or countenancing unsound doctrine or practice, is separated from. The Church of Rome charged the Reformers with schism because they separated from her; but we know that the Church of Rome lay, and still lies, under the charge of schism because she imposes false doctrine upon her members. Let it only be ascertained that the truth of God is called in question by any community, and that, to be a member of that community, I must identify myself with unsound doctrine or corrupt practice, and then it cannot be schism to separate from such a community; nay, I am bound to separate.[14]It is usual to apply the term "unworthily," in this passage, topersonsdoing the act, whereas it really refers to themannerof doing it. The apostle never thought of calling in question the Christianity of the Corinthians; nay, in the opening address of his epistle, he looks at them as "the Church of God which is at Corinth, sanctified in Christ Jesus, called saints" (or saints by calling). How could he use this language in the first chapter, and in the eleventh call in question the worthiness of these saints to take their seat at the Lord's Supper? Impossible. He looked upon them as saints, and as such he exhorted them to celebrate the Lord's Supper in a worthy manner. The question of any but true Christians being there, is never raised; so that it is utterly impossible that the word "unworthily" could apply topersons. Its application is entirely to themanner. The persons were worthy, but their manner was not; and they were called, as saints, to judge themselves as to theirways, else the Lord might judge them in theirpersonsas was already the case. In a word, it was as true Christians they were called to judge themselves. If they were in doubt as to that, they were utterly unable to judge anything. I never think of setting my child to judge as to whether he is my child or not; but I expect him to judge himself as to his habits, else, if he do not, I may have to do, by chastening, what he ought to do by self-judgment. It is because I look upon him as my child, that I will not allow him to sit at my table with soiled garments and disorderly manners.[15]The reader will bear in mind that the text does not touch the question of Scriptural discipline. There may be many members of the flock of Christ who could not be received into the Assembly on earth, inasmuch as they may possibly be leavened by false doctrine, or wrong practice. But, though we might not be able to receive them, we do not, by any means, raise the question as to their being in the Lamb's book of life. This is not the province nor the prerogative of the Church of God. "The Lordknoweth them that are His; and let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity" (2 Tim. ii. 19).[16]The church of Rome has so entirely departed from the truth set forth in the Lord's Supper, that she professes to offer, in the mass, "an unbloody sacrifice for the sins of the living and the dead." Now, we are taught, in Heb. ix. 22, that "without shedding of blood is no remission;" consequently, the church of Rome has no remission of sins for her members. She robs them of this precious reality, and instead thereof, gives them an anomalous and utterly unscriptural thing, called "an unbloody sacrifice, or mass." This, which, according to her own practice and the testimony of Heb. ix. 22, can never take away sin, she offers day by day, week by week, and year by year. A sacrifice without blood must, if Scripture be true, be a sacrifice without remission. Hence, therefore, the sacrifice of the mass is a positive blind raised by the devil, through the agency of Rome, to hide from the sinner's view the glorious sacrifice of Christ, "once offered," and never to be repeated. "Christ, being raised from the dead, dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over Him" (Rom. vi. 9). Every fresh sacrifice of the mass only declares the inefficiency of all the previous sacrifices, so that Rome is only mocking the sinner with an empty shadow. But she is consistent in her wickedness, for she withholds the cup from the laity, and teaches her members that they have body and blood and all in the wafer. But, if the blood be still in the body, it is manifestly not shed, and then we get back to the same gloomy point, namely, "no remission." "Without shedding of blood is no remission."How totally different is the precious and most refreshing institution of the Lord's Supper, as set before us in the New Testament. There we find the bread broken, and the wine poured out—the significant symbols of a body broken, and of blood shed. The wine is not in the bread, because the blood is not in the body, for, if it were, there would be "no remission." In a word, the Lord's Supper is the distinct memorial of an eternally accomplished sacrifice; and none can communicate thereat, with intelligence or blessing, save those who know the full remission of sins. It is not that we would, by any means, make knowledge a term of communion, for very many of the children of God, through bad teaching, and various other causes, do not know the perfect remission of sins, and were they to be excluded on that ground, it would be makingknowledgea term of communion, instead oflifeandobedience. Still, if I do not know, experimentally, that redemption is an accomplished fact, I shall see but little meaning in the symbols of bread and wine; and, moreover, I shall be in great danger of attaching a species of efficacy to the memorials, which belongs only to the great reality to which they point.[17]I can only feel myself responsible to present myself in the assembly when it is gathered on proper Church ground, i. e., the ground laid down in the New Testament. People may assemble, and call themselves the Church of God, in any given locality, but if they do not exhibit the characteristic features and principles of the Church of God as set forth in Holy Scripture, I cannot own them. If they refuse, or lack spiritual power, to judge worldliness, carnality, or false doctrine, they are evidently not on proper Church ground: they are merely a religious fraternity, which, in its collective character, I am in no wise responsible before God to own. Hence the child of God needs much spiritual power, and subjection to the Word, to be able to carry himself through all the windings of the professing Church in this peculiarly evil and difficult day.[18]The same Greek word,ecclesia, has been rendered both "church" and "assembly" in our English translation—"assembly" gives the true meaning.[19]It is of the utmost importance to distinguish between what Christ builds, and what man builds. "The gates of hell" shall assuredly prevail against all that is merely of man; and hence it would be a fatal mistake to apply to man's building words which only apply to Christ's. Man may build with "wood, hay, stubble," alas! he does; but all that our Lord Christ builds shall stand forever. The stamp of eternity is upon every work of His hand. All praise to His glorious name![20]There is no such thing in Scripture as being a member ofachurch. Every true believer is a member oftheChurch of God—the body of Christ, and can therefore no more be, properly, a member of anything else, than my arm can be a member of any other body.The only true ground on which believers can gather is set forth in that grand statement, "There is one body, and one Spirit." And again, "We being many are one loaf, and one body" (Eph. iv. 4; I Cor. x. 17). If God declares that there is but "one body," it must be contrary to His mind to own more than that one.Now, while it is quite true that no given number of believers in any given place can be called "the body of Christ," or "the assembly of God;" yet they should be gathered on the ground of that body and that assembly, and on no other ground. We call the reader's special attention to this principle. It holds good at all times, in all places, and under all circumstances. The fact of the ruin of the professing Church does not touch it. It has been true since the day of Pentecost; is true at this moment; and shall be true until the Church is taken to meet her Head and Lord in the clouds, that "there is one body." All believers belong to that body; and they should meet on that ground, and on no other.[21]The reader will need to ponder the distinction between the Church viewed as "the body of Christ," and as "the house of God." He may study Eph. i. 22; I Cor. xii. for the former. Eph. ii. 21; I Cor. iii.; I Tim. iii. for the latter. The distinction is as interesting as it is important.[22]The reader will do well to note the fact that, in Matt. xvi., we have the very earliest allusion to the Church, and there our Lord speaks of it as a future thing. He says, "On this rock Iwillbuild My Church." He does not say, "Ihavebeen, or Iambuilding." In short the Church had no existence until our Lord Christ was raised from the dead and glorified at the right hand of God. Then, but not until then, the Holy Ghost was sent down to baptize believers, whether Jews or Gentiles, into one body, and unite them to the risen and glorified Head in heaven. This body has been on the earth since the descent of the Holy Ghost; is here still, and shall be until Christ comes to fetch it to Himself. It is a perfectly unique thing. It is not to be found in Old Testament Scripture. Paul expressly tells us it was not revealed in other ages; it was hid in God, and never made known until it was committed to him. (See, carefully, Rom. xvi. 25, 26; Eph. iii. 3-11; Col. i. 24-27.) True it is—most blessedly true—that God had a people in Old Testament times. Not merely the nation of Israel, but a quickened, saved, spiritual people, who lived by faith, went to heaven, and are there "the spirits of just men made perfect." But the Church is never spoken of until Matt. xvi., and there only as a future thing. As to the expression used by Stephen, "The Church in the wilderness" (Acts vii. 38), it is pretty generally known that it simply refers to the congregation of Israel. Theterminiof the Church's earthly history are Pentecost (Acts ii.), and the rapture (I Thess. iv. 16, 17).[23]Let the reader note this title, "Son of Man." It is infinitely precious. It is a title indicating our Lord's rejection as the Messiah, and leading out into that wide, that universal sphere over which He is destined in the counsels of God, to rule. It is far wider than Son of David, or Son of Abraham, and has peculiar charms for us, inasmuch as it places Him before our hearts as the lonely, outcast Stranger, and yet as the One who links Himself in perfect grace with us in all our need—One whose footprints we can trace all across this dreary desert. "The Son of Man hath not where to lay His head." And yet it is as Son of Man that He shall, by-and-by, exercise that universal dominion reserved for Him according to the eternal counsels of God. See Daniel vii.[24]The intelligent reader does not need to be told that all believers are priests; and, further, that there is no such thing as a priest upon earth, save in the sense in which all true Christians are priests. The idea of a certain set of men, calling themselves priests in contrast with the people—a certain caste distinguished by title and dress from the body of Christians, is not Christianity at all, but Judaism or intelligently worse. All who read the Bible and bow to its authority will be perfectly clear as to these things.[25]The reader will notice that in Matthew vi. I, the marginal reading is the correct one: "Take heed that ye do not yourrighteousnessbefore men, to be seen of them." Then we have the three departments of this righteousness, namely, alms-giving (ver. 2); prayer (ver. 3); fasting (ver. 16). These were the very things Cornelius was doing. In short, he feared God, and was working righteousness, according to his measure of light.[26][An evangelist will not travel far in our day to find persons who will take him warmly by the hand, and profess lively interest in his work. A moment's intercourse with them, however, will disclose them to be agents of "Christian Science," of "Millennial Dawn" of "Seventh Day Adventism" or of some one or other of like systems—messengers of Satan, all professing Christianity, though in reality destroyers of it; pluming themselves with its name, only to get inside and work destruction the more easily.Ed.][27]For a fuller exposition of the doctrine of the sabbath, see "Notes on Genesis" (chap. ii.); also, "Notes on Exodus" (chaps. xvi. and xxxi.).[28]We would here offer a remark in reference to the appointment of deacons in Acts vi. This case has been adduced in proof of the rightness of a congregation electing its own pastor; but the proof fails in every particular. In the first place, the business of those deacons was "to serve tables." Their functions as deacons were temporal, not spiritual. They might possess spiritual gift independently altogether of their deaconship. Stephen did possess such.But more than this. Although the disciples were called upon to look out for men competent to take charge of their temporal affairs, yet the apostles alone could appoint them. Their words are, "Whomwemay appoint over this business." In other words, although there is a vast difference between a deacon and a pastor, between taking charge of money and taking the oversight of souls, yet even in the matter of a deacon the appointment in Acts vi. was entirely divine; and hence it affords no warrant for a church electing its own pastor.We might further add thatofficeandgiftare clearly distinguished in the word of God. There might be, and were, many elders and deacons in any given church, and yet the fullest and freest exercise of gift when the whole church came together into one place. Elders and deacons might or might not have the gift of teaching or exhortation. Such gift was quite independent of their special office. In I Cor. xiv., where it is said, "Ye may all prophesy one by one," and where we have a full view of the public assembly, there is not a word about an elder or a president of any kind whatever.[29]Let the reader carefully note thatgifts, as evangelists, pastors, teachers, prophets, being given directly by the Head of the Church for the edification of His people on earth (see Eph. iv. 8-13) were never appointed or "licensed" by apostolic hands or any others. Elders and deacons were to act as guides and to serve in the assemblies in which they had their place. To this position orofficethey were appointed by an apostle, or one sent by him. [Ed.][30]How interesting to find "Mary the mother of Jesus" named here, as being at the prayer-meeting! What would she have said if any one had told her that millions of professing Christians would yet be praying to her?

[1]The reader should be informed that the word which is rendered "perfect," in the above passage, occurs but this once in the entire New Testament. It is [Greek: artios] (artios) and signifies, ready, complete, well fitted; as an instrument with all its strings, a machine with all its parts, a body with all its limbs, joints, muscles, and sinews. The usual word for "perfect" is [Greek: teleios] (teleios) which signifies the reaching of the moralend, in any particular thing.

[2]The reader will distinguish between the expression "in the flesh" as used in Gal. ii. 20, and in Rom. viii. 8, 9. In the former, it simply refers to our condition as in the body. In the latter, it sets forth the principle or ground of our standing. The believer is in the body, as to the fact of his condition; but he is not in the flesh as to the principle of his standing.

[3]["Thou hast magnified Thy word (or saying) according to all Thy Name," seems more exactly to give the meaning of the passage.Ed.]

[4]It is deeply interesting to note that neither the Jews' best Friend nor their worst enemy is once formally named in the book of Esther; but faith could recognize both the one and the other.

[5]When the jailer at Philippi inquired of Paul and Silas, "What must I do to be saved?" they simply replied, "Believeon the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved, and thy house" (Acts xvi. 30, 31). It would, surely, be well if this method of dealing with an anxious inquirer were more faithfully adopted.

[6][There are three very distinct aspects of the death of Christ which, to apprehend clearly, is of unspeakable value to the soul.1st. That which is typified in the blood of the paschal lamb on Israel's doors in Egypt. This is the judgment of God against the sinner in the person of the Substitute provided for him. Rom. iii. 23-27 applies to this.It brings peace to the soul who believes, for his judgment is passed. Christ has borne it in our stead.2nd. As revealed at the passage of the Red Sea. There it is fully manifested that God isforHis people; He has completely overcome their enemy and freed them from his power forever. The prince and his hosts, who ruled over them unto death, are drowned in the sea. God's people have passed out of his dominions, and can now go on with God in perfect freedom. No condemnation remains. Henceforth, to faith, Satan is a vanquished foe. God's people are delivered; they can now, in settled peace, worship, praise, and serve their God. Blessed, holy deliverance and service! Rom. vi.-vii. gives the full teaching of this aspect of the death of Christ.3rd. As seen in the passage of Jordan. There is no judgment to escape there; no foe pressing behind. It is a question of entering the good land which is just across. It is the death of Christ here asthe ending of His people's historyas children of Adam; that, by resurrection, He may now introduce them, as having died and risen with Him, into the place of glory where He has gone. By this it can be said, "As He is, so are we in this world" (I John iv. 17).Col. ii. 10-iii. 4, is the New Testament doctrine of this precious truth.Ed.]

[6][There are three very distinct aspects of the death of Christ which, to apprehend clearly, is of unspeakable value to the soul.

1st. That which is typified in the blood of the paschal lamb on Israel's doors in Egypt. This is the judgment of God against the sinner in the person of the Substitute provided for him. Rom. iii. 23-27 applies to this.

It brings peace to the soul who believes, for his judgment is passed. Christ has borne it in our stead.

2nd. As revealed at the passage of the Red Sea. There it is fully manifested that God isforHis people; He has completely overcome their enemy and freed them from his power forever. The prince and his hosts, who ruled over them unto death, are drowned in the sea. God's people have passed out of his dominions, and can now go on with God in perfect freedom. No condemnation remains. Henceforth, to faith, Satan is a vanquished foe. God's people are delivered; they can now, in settled peace, worship, praise, and serve their God. Blessed, holy deliverance and service! Rom. vi.-vii. gives the full teaching of this aspect of the death of Christ.

3rd. As seen in the passage of Jordan. There is no judgment to escape there; no foe pressing behind. It is a question of entering the good land which is just across. It is the death of Christ here asthe ending of His people's historyas children of Adam; that, by resurrection, He may now introduce them, as having died and risen with Him, into the place of glory where He has gone. By this it can be said, "As He is, so are we in this world" (I John iv. 17).

Col. ii. 10-iii. 4, is the New Testament doctrine of this precious truth.Ed.]

[7]The reader may here remark that "the old corn of the land of Canaan" is a type of Christ risen and glorified. The manna is a type of Christ in His humiliation. The remembrance of Him in the latter is ineffably precious to the soul. It is sweet to look back and trace His way as the lowly, humble, self-emptied man. This is to feed upon the hidden manna—"Christ, once humbled here." Nevertheless, a risen, ascended and glorified Christ is the true object for the heart of the Christian; but to enjoy Him there, the reproach of this present evil world—all conformity to it—must be rolled away from us by the spiritual application of the circumcision of Christ. He was not conformed to this world, and we must be prepared to identify ourselves with Him in this.

[8]There is a passage in the book of Deuteronomy which, as it may present a difficulty to some minds, should be noticed here. "And the Lord heard the voice of your words, when ye spake unto me; and the Lord said unto me, I have heard the voice of the words of this people which they have spoken unto thee:they have well said all that they have spoken" (Deut. v. 28). From this passage, it might seem as though the Lord approved of their making a vow; but if my reader will take the trouble of reading the entire context, from verse 24 to 27, he will see that it has nothing whatever to say to the vow, but that it contains the expression of their terror at the consequences of their vow. They were not able to endure that which was commanded. "If," said they "we hear the voice of the Lord our God any more, then we shall die. For who is there of all flesh that hath heard the voice of the living God speaking out of the midst of the fire, as we have, and lived? Go thou near, and hear all that the Lord our God shall say; and speak thou unto us all that the Lord our God shall speak unto thee; and we will hear it and do it." It was the confession of their own inability to encounter Jehovah in that awful aspect which their proud legality had led Him to assume. It is impossible that the Lord could ever commend an abandonment of free and changeless grace for a sandy foundation of works of law. (See "Notes on the book of Exodus," page 253. Same publishers.)

[9][That is, as many as are on that principle—of "law," "works of law."Ed.]

[10][The Greek word translated "show" is more exactly rendered "announce" or "proclaim"—same word as in I Cor. ix. 14.Ed.]

[11]It is needful to bear in mind that, while the blood of Christ is that alone which introduces the believer, in holy boldness, into the presence of God, yet it is nowhere set forth as our centre, or bond of union. Truly precious is it for every blood-washed soul to remember, in the secret of the divine presence, that the atoning blood of Jesus has rolled away for ever his heavy burden of sin. Yet the Holy Ghost can only gather us to the person of a risen and glorified Christ, who, having shed the blood of the everlasting covenant, is gone up into heaven in the power of an endless life, to which divine righteousness inseparably attaches. A living Christ, therefore, is our centre and bond of union. The blood having answered for us to God, we gather round our risen and exalted Head in the heavens. "I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men untoMe." We behold in the cup in the Lord's Supper the symbol of shed blood; but we are neither gathered round the cup nor the blood, but round Him who shed it. The blood of the Lamb has put away every obstacle to our fellowship with God; and in proof of this the Holy Ghost has come down to baptize believers into one body, and gather them round the risen and glorified Head. The wine isthe memorialof a life shed out for sin: the bread isthe memorialof a body broken for sin: but we are not gathered round a life poured out, nor round a body broken, but round a living Christ, who dieth no more, who cannot have His body broken any more, or His blood shed any more. This makes a serious difference; and when looked at in connection with the discipline of the house of God, the difference is immensely important. Very many are apt to imagine that when any one is put away from or refused communion, the question is raised as to there being a link between his soul and Christ. A moment's consideration of this point in the light of Scripture will be sufficient to prove that no such question is raised. If we look at the case of the "wicked person" in I Cor. v., we see one put away from the communion of the Church on earth who was nevertheless a Christian, as people say. He was not, therefore, put away because he was not a Christian: such a question was never raised; nor should it be in any case. How can we tell whether a man is eternally linked with Christ or not? Have we the custody of the Lamb's book of life? Is the discipline of the Church of God founded upon what we can know, or upon what wecannot? Was the man in I Cor. v. linked eternally with Christ, or not? Was the Church told to inquire? Even suppose we could see a man's name written in the book of life, that would not be the ground of receiving him into the assembly on earth, or retaining him there. That which the Church is held responsible for, is to keep herself pure in doctrine, pure in practice, and pure in association, and all this on the ground of being God's house. "Thy testimonies are very sure; holiness becometh Thy house, O Lord, for ever." When any one was separated, or "cut off," from the congregation of Israel, was it because of not being an Israelite? By no means; but because of some moral or ceremonial defilement which could not be tolerated in God's Assembly. In Achan's case (Josh. vii.), although there were six hundred thousand souls ignorant of his sin, yet God says, "Israel hath sinned." Why? Because they were looked at as God's Assembly, and there was defilement there which, if not judged, all would have been broken up.

[12]Those who are competent to do so can look at the original of this important chapter, where they will see that the word translated "approved" (ver. 19) comes from the same root as that translated "examine himself" (ver. 28). Thus we see that the man who approves himself takes his place amongst the approved, and is the very opposite of those who were amongst the heretics. Now the meaning of a heretic is not merely one who holds false doctrine, though one may be a heretic in so doing, but one who persists in the exercise ofhis own will. The apostle knew that there must be heresies at Corinth, seeing that there were sects: those who were doing their own will were acting in opposition to God's will, and thus producing division; for God's will had reference to the whole body. Those who were acting heretically were despising the Church of God.

[13]It may be well to add a word here for the guidance of any simple-hearted Christian who may find himself placed in circumstances in which he is called upon to decide between the claims of different tables which might seem to be spread upon the same principle. To confirm and encourage such an one in a truthful course of action, I should regard as a most valuable service.Suppose, then, I find myself in a place where two or more tables have been spread; what am I to do? I believe I am to inquire into theoriginof these various tables, to see how it became needful to have more than one table. If, for example, a number of Christians meeting together have admitted and retained amongst them any unsound principles, affecting the person of the Son of God, or subversive of the unity of the Church of God on earth; if, I say, such principles be admitted and retained in the assembly, or if persons who hold and teach them be received and acknowledged by the assembly; under such painful and humiliating circumstances the faithful can no longer be there. Why? Because I cannot take my place at it without identifyingmyself with manifestly unchristian principles. The same remark, of course, applies if the case be that of corrupt conduct unjudged by the assembly.Now, if a number of Christians should find themselves placed in the circumstances above described, they would be called upon to maintainthe purity of the truth of Godwhile acknowledging as ever the oneness of the body. We have not only to maintain the grace of the Lord's table, but theholinessof it also. Truth is not to be sacrificed in order to maintain unity, nor willtrueunity ever be interfered with by the strict maintenance of truth.It is not to be imagined that the unity of the body of Christ is interfered with when a community based upon unsound principles, or countenancing unsound doctrine or practice, is separated from. The Church of Rome charged the Reformers with schism because they separated from her; but we know that the Church of Rome lay, and still lies, under the charge of schism because she imposes false doctrine upon her members. Let it only be ascertained that the truth of God is called in question by any community, and that, to be a member of that community, I must identify myself with unsound doctrine or corrupt practice, and then it cannot be schism to separate from such a community; nay, I am bound to separate.

Suppose, then, I find myself in a place where two or more tables have been spread; what am I to do? I believe I am to inquire into theoriginof these various tables, to see how it became needful to have more than one table. If, for example, a number of Christians meeting together have admitted and retained amongst them any unsound principles, affecting the person of the Son of God, or subversive of the unity of the Church of God on earth; if, I say, such principles be admitted and retained in the assembly, or if persons who hold and teach them be received and acknowledged by the assembly; under such painful and humiliating circumstances the faithful can no longer be there. Why? Because I cannot take my place at it without identifyingmyself with manifestly unchristian principles. The same remark, of course, applies if the case be that of corrupt conduct unjudged by the assembly.

Now, if a number of Christians should find themselves placed in the circumstances above described, they would be called upon to maintainthe purity of the truth of Godwhile acknowledging as ever the oneness of the body. We have not only to maintain the grace of the Lord's table, but theholinessof it also. Truth is not to be sacrificed in order to maintain unity, nor willtrueunity ever be interfered with by the strict maintenance of truth.

It is not to be imagined that the unity of the body of Christ is interfered with when a community based upon unsound principles, or countenancing unsound doctrine or practice, is separated from. The Church of Rome charged the Reformers with schism because they separated from her; but we know that the Church of Rome lay, and still lies, under the charge of schism because she imposes false doctrine upon her members. Let it only be ascertained that the truth of God is called in question by any community, and that, to be a member of that community, I must identify myself with unsound doctrine or corrupt practice, and then it cannot be schism to separate from such a community; nay, I am bound to separate.

[14]It is usual to apply the term "unworthily," in this passage, topersonsdoing the act, whereas it really refers to themannerof doing it. The apostle never thought of calling in question the Christianity of the Corinthians; nay, in the opening address of his epistle, he looks at them as "the Church of God which is at Corinth, sanctified in Christ Jesus, called saints" (or saints by calling). How could he use this language in the first chapter, and in the eleventh call in question the worthiness of these saints to take their seat at the Lord's Supper? Impossible. He looked upon them as saints, and as such he exhorted them to celebrate the Lord's Supper in a worthy manner. The question of any but true Christians being there, is never raised; so that it is utterly impossible that the word "unworthily" could apply topersons. Its application is entirely to themanner. The persons were worthy, but their manner was not; and they were called, as saints, to judge themselves as to theirways, else the Lord might judge them in theirpersonsas was already the case. In a word, it was as true Christians they were called to judge themselves. If they were in doubt as to that, they were utterly unable to judge anything. I never think of setting my child to judge as to whether he is my child or not; but I expect him to judge himself as to his habits, else, if he do not, I may have to do, by chastening, what he ought to do by self-judgment. It is because I look upon him as my child, that I will not allow him to sit at my table with soiled garments and disorderly manners.

[15]The reader will bear in mind that the text does not touch the question of Scriptural discipline. There may be many members of the flock of Christ who could not be received into the Assembly on earth, inasmuch as they may possibly be leavened by false doctrine, or wrong practice. But, though we might not be able to receive them, we do not, by any means, raise the question as to their being in the Lamb's book of life. This is not the province nor the prerogative of the Church of God. "The Lordknoweth them that are His; and let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity" (2 Tim. ii. 19).

[16]The church of Rome has so entirely departed from the truth set forth in the Lord's Supper, that she professes to offer, in the mass, "an unbloody sacrifice for the sins of the living and the dead." Now, we are taught, in Heb. ix. 22, that "without shedding of blood is no remission;" consequently, the church of Rome has no remission of sins for her members. She robs them of this precious reality, and instead thereof, gives them an anomalous and utterly unscriptural thing, called "an unbloody sacrifice, or mass." This, which, according to her own practice and the testimony of Heb. ix. 22, can never take away sin, she offers day by day, week by week, and year by year. A sacrifice without blood must, if Scripture be true, be a sacrifice without remission. Hence, therefore, the sacrifice of the mass is a positive blind raised by the devil, through the agency of Rome, to hide from the sinner's view the glorious sacrifice of Christ, "once offered," and never to be repeated. "Christ, being raised from the dead, dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over Him" (Rom. vi. 9). Every fresh sacrifice of the mass only declares the inefficiency of all the previous sacrifices, so that Rome is only mocking the sinner with an empty shadow. But she is consistent in her wickedness, for she withholds the cup from the laity, and teaches her members that they have body and blood and all in the wafer. But, if the blood be still in the body, it is manifestly not shed, and then we get back to the same gloomy point, namely, "no remission." "Without shedding of blood is no remission."How totally different is the precious and most refreshing institution of the Lord's Supper, as set before us in the New Testament. There we find the bread broken, and the wine poured out—the significant symbols of a body broken, and of blood shed. The wine is not in the bread, because the blood is not in the body, for, if it were, there would be "no remission." In a word, the Lord's Supper is the distinct memorial of an eternally accomplished sacrifice; and none can communicate thereat, with intelligence or blessing, save those who know the full remission of sins. It is not that we would, by any means, make knowledge a term of communion, for very many of the children of God, through bad teaching, and various other causes, do not know the perfect remission of sins, and were they to be excluded on that ground, it would be makingknowledgea term of communion, instead oflifeandobedience. Still, if I do not know, experimentally, that redemption is an accomplished fact, I shall see but little meaning in the symbols of bread and wine; and, moreover, I shall be in great danger of attaching a species of efficacy to the memorials, which belongs only to the great reality to which they point.

How totally different is the precious and most refreshing institution of the Lord's Supper, as set before us in the New Testament. There we find the bread broken, and the wine poured out—the significant symbols of a body broken, and of blood shed. The wine is not in the bread, because the blood is not in the body, for, if it were, there would be "no remission." In a word, the Lord's Supper is the distinct memorial of an eternally accomplished sacrifice; and none can communicate thereat, with intelligence or blessing, save those who know the full remission of sins. It is not that we would, by any means, make knowledge a term of communion, for very many of the children of God, through bad teaching, and various other causes, do not know the perfect remission of sins, and were they to be excluded on that ground, it would be makingknowledgea term of communion, instead oflifeandobedience. Still, if I do not know, experimentally, that redemption is an accomplished fact, I shall see but little meaning in the symbols of bread and wine; and, moreover, I shall be in great danger of attaching a species of efficacy to the memorials, which belongs only to the great reality to which they point.

[17]I can only feel myself responsible to present myself in the assembly when it is gathered on proper Church ground, i. e., the ground laid down in the New Testament. People may assemble, and call themselves the Church of God, in any given locality, but if they do not exhibit the characteristic features and principles of the Church of God as set forth in Holy Scripture, I cannot own them. If they refuse, or lack spiritual power, to judge worldliness, carnality, or false doctrine, they are evidently not on proper Church ground: they are merely a religious fraternity, which, in its collective character, I am in no wise responsible before God to own. Hence the child of God needs much spiritual power, and subjection to the Word, to be able to carry himself through all the windings of the professing Church in this peculiarly evil and difficult day.

[18]The same Greek word,ecclesia, has been rendered both "church" and "assembly" in our English translation—"assembly" gives the true meaning.

[19]It is of the utmost importance to distinguish between what Christ builds, and what man builds. "The gates of hell" shall assuredly prevail against all that is merely of man; and hence it would be a fatal mistake to apply to man's building words which only apply to Christ's. Man may build with "wood, hay, stubble," alas! he does; but all that our Lord Christ builds shall stand forever. The stamp of eternity is upon every work of His hand. All praise to His glorious name!

[20]There is no such thing in Scripture as being a member ofachurch. Every true believer is a member oftheChurch of God—the body of Christ, and can therefore no more be, properly, a member of anything else, than my arm can be a member of any other body.The only true ground on which believers can gather is set forth in that grand statement, "There is one body, and one Spirit." And again, "We being many are one loaf, and one body" (Eph. iv. 4; I Cor. x. 17). If God declares that there is but "one body," it must be contrary to His mind to own more than that one.Now, while it is quite true that no given number of believers in any given place can be called "the body of Christ," or "the assembly of God;" yet they should be gathered on the ground of that body and that assembly, and on no other ground. We call the reader's special attention to this principle. It holds good at all times, in all places, and under all circumstances. The fact of the ruin of the professing Church does not touch it. It has been true since the day of Pentecost; is true at this moment; and shall be true until the Church is taken to meet her Head and Lord in the clouds, that "there is one body." All believers belong to that body; and they should meet on that ground, and on no other.

The only true ground on which believers can gather is set forth in that grand statement, "There is one body, and one Spirit." And again, "We being many are one loaf, and one body" (Eph. iv. 4; I Cor. x. 17). If God declares that there is but "one body," it must be contrary to His mind to own more than that one.

Now, while it is quite true that no given number of believers in any given place can be called "the body of Christ," or "the assembly of God;" yet they should be gathered on the ground of that body and that assembly, and on no other ground. We call the reader's special attention to this principle. It holds good at all times, in all places, and under all circumstances. The fact of the ruin of the professing Church does not touch it. It has been true since the day of Pentecost; is true at this moment; and shall be true until the Church is taken to meet her Head and Lord in the clouds, that "there is one body." All believers belong to that body; and they should meet on that ground, and on no other.

[21]The reader will need to ponder the distinction between the Church viewed as "the body of Christ," and as "the house of God." He may study Eph. i. 22; I Cor. xii. for the former. Eph. ii. 21; I Cor. iii.; I Tim. iii. for the latter. The distinction is as interesting as it is important.

[22]The reader will do well to note the fact that, in Matt. xvi., we have the very earliest allusion to the Church, and there our Lord speaks of it as a future thing. He says, "On this rock Iwillbuild My Church." He does not say, "Ihavebeen, or Iambuilding." In short the Church had no existence until our Lord Christ was raised from the dead and glorified at the right hand of God. Then, but not until then, the Holy Ghost was sent down to baptize believers, whether Jews or Gentiles, into one body, and unite them to the risen and glorified Head in heaven. This body has been on the earth since the descent of the Holy Ghost; is here still, and shall be until Christ comes to fetch it to Himself. It is a perfectly unique thing. It is not to be found in Old Testament Scripture. Paul expressly tells us it was not revealed in other ages; it was hid in God, and never made known until it was committed to him. (See, carefully, Rom. xvi. 25, 26; Eph. iii. 3-11; Col. i. 24-27.) True it is—most blessedly true—that God had a people in Old Testament times. Not merely the nation of Israel, but a quickened, saved, spiritual people, who lived by faith, went to heaven, and are there "the spirits of just men made perfect." But the Church is never spoken of until Matt. xvi., and there only as a future thing. As to the expression used by Stephen, "The Church in the wilderness" (Acts vii. 38), it is pretty generally known that it simply refers to the congregation of Israel. Theterminiof the Church's earthly history are Pentecost (Acts ii.), and the rapture (I Thess. iv. 16, 17).

[23]Let the reader note this title, "Son of Man." It is infinitely precious. It is a title indicating our Lord's rejection as the Messiah, and leading out into that wide, that universal sphere over which He is destined in the counsels of God, to rule. It is far wider than Son of David, or Son of Abraham, and has peculiar charms for us, inasmuch as it places Him before our hearts as the lonely, outcast Stranger, and yet as the One who links Himself in perfect grace with us in all our need—One whose footprints we can trace all across this dreary desert. "The Son of Man hath not where to lay His head." And yet it is as Son of Man that He shall, by-and-by, exercise that universal dominion reserved for Him according to the eternal counsels of God. See Daniel vii.

[24]The intelligent reader does not need to be told that all believers are priests; and, further, that there is no such thing as a priest upon earth, save in the sense in which all true Christians are priests. The idea of a certain set of men, calling themselves priests in contrast with the people—a certain caste distinguished by title and dress from the body of Christians, is not Christianity at all, but Judaism or intelligently worse. All who read the Bible and bow to its authority will be perfectly clear as to these things.

[25]The reader will notice that in Matthew vi. I, the marginal reading is the correct one: "Take heed that ye do not yourrighteousnessbefore men, to be seen of them." Then we have the three departments of this righteousness, namely, alms-giving (ver. 2); prayer (ver. 3); fasting (ver. 16). These were the very things Cornelius was doing. In short, he feared God, and was working righteousness, according to his measure of light.

[26][An evangelist will not travel far in our day to find persons who will take him warmly by the hand, and profess lively interest in his work. A moment's intercourse with them, however, will disclose them to be agents of "Christian Science," of "Millennial Dawn" of "Seventh Day Adventism" or of some one or other of like systems—messengers of Satan, all professing Christianity, though in reality destroyers of it; pluming themselves with its name, only to get inside and work destruction the more easily.Ed.]

[27]For a fuller exposition of the doctrine of the sabbath, see "Notes on Genesis" (chap. ii.); also, "Notes on Exodus" (chaps. xvi. and xxxi.).

[28]We would here offer a remark in reference to the appointment of deacons in Acts vi. This case has been adduced in proof of the rightness of a congregation electing its own pastor; but the proof fails in every particular. In the first place, the business of those deacons was "to serve tables." Their functions as deacons were temporal, not spiritual. They might possess spiritual gift independently altogether of their deaconship. Stephen did possess such.But more than this. Although the disciples were called upon to look out for men competent to take charge of their temporal affairs, yet the apostles alone could appoint them. Their words are, "Whomwemay appoint over this business." In other words, although there is a vast difference between a deacon and a pastor, between taking charge of money and taking the oversight of souls, yet even in the matter of a deacon the appointment in Acts vi. was entirely divine; and hence it affords no warrant for a church electing its own pastor.We might further add thatofficeandgiftare clearly distinguished in the word of God. There might be, and were, many elders and deacons in any given church, and yet the fullest and freest exercise of gift when the whole church came together into one place. Elders and deacons might or might not have the gift of teaching or exhortation. Such gift was quite independent of their special office. In I Cor. xiv., where it is said, "Ye may all prophesy one by one," and where we have a full view of the public assembly, there is not a word about an elder or a president of any kind whatever.

But more than this. Although the disciples were called upon to look out for men competent to take charge of their temporal affairs, yet the apostles alone could appoint them. Their words are, "Whomwemay appoint over this business." In other words, although there is a vast difference between a deacon and a pastor, between taking charge of money and taking the oversight of souls, yet even in the matter of a deacon the appointment in Acts vi. was entirely divine; and hence it affords no warrant for a church electing its own pastor.

We might further add thatofficeandgiftare clearly distinguished in the word of God. There might be, and were, many elders and deacons in any given church, and yet the fullest and freest exercise of gift when the whole church came together into one place. Elders and deacons might or might not have the gift of teaching or exhortation. Such gift was quite independent of their special office. In I Cor. xiv., where it is said, "Ye may all prophesy one by one," and where we have a full view of the public assembly, there is not a word about an elder or a president of any kind whatever.

[29]Let the reader carefully note thatgifts, as evangelists, pastors, teachers, prophets, being given directly by the Head of the Church for the edification of His people on earth (see Eph. iv. 8-13) were never appointed or "licensed" by apostolic hands or any others. Elders and deacons were to act as guides and to serve in the assemblies in which they had their place. To this position orofficethey were appointed by an apostle, or one sent by him. [Ed.]

[30]How interesting to find "Mary the mother of Jesus" named here, as being at the prayer-meeting! What would she have said if any one had told her that millions of professing Christians would yet be praying to her?

Transcriber's Notes:Due to confusing page numbering, page numbers were excluded and Table of Contents reformatted.Periods placed at different headings for consistancy.Obvious punctuation errors repaired.Obvious typos repairedThe remaining corrections are hypelinked to their respective locationsAn "a" added " I shall only prove a hindrance,aweight, a cause of weakness.heavy laden changed toheavy-laden"thradom" misspelledthralldom"diciples" misspelleddisciplestrue hearted changed totrue-heartedwell regulated changed towell-regulated"O death, where is thy sing changed to O death, where is thysting"The breaking of break changed to The breaking ofbread"decalogue" should be a proper noun (Ten Commandments), changed toDecalogue"compentency" misspelledcompetency"eucharist" is a proper noun, changed toEucharist"paraylzed" misspelled, changed toparalyzed

Due to confusing page numbering, page numbers were excluded and Table of Contents reformatted.

Periods placed at different headings for consistancy.

Obvious punctuation errors repaired.

Obvious typos repaired

The remaining corrections are hypelinked to their respective locations

An "a" added " I shall only prove a hindrance,aweight, a cause of weakness.

heavy laden changed toheavy-laden

"thradom" misspelledthralldom

"diciples" misspelleddisciples

true hearted changed totrue-hearted

well regulated changed towell-regulated

"O death, where is thy sing changed to O death, where is thysting

"The breaking of break changed to The breaking ofbread

"decalogue" should be a proper noun (Ten Commandments), changed toDecalogue

"compentency" misspelledcompetency

"eucharist" is a proper noun, changed toEucharist

"paraylzed" misspelled, changed toparalyzed

Back to Index Next