THE EXPOSITOR'S BIBLE
EDITED BY THE REV.
W. ROBERTSON NICOLL, M.A., LL.D.
Editor of "The Expositor," etc.
THE FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS
BY
MARCUS DODS, D.D.
SIXTH EDITION
London
HODDER AND STOUGHTON
27, PATERNOSTER ROW
———
MCM
Printed by Hazell, Watson, & Viney, Ld., London and Aylesbury.
INTRODUCTION.
"After these things Paul departed from Athens, and came to Corinth; and found a certain Jew named Aquila, born in Pontus, lately come from Italy, with his wife Priscilla; (because that Claudius had commanded all Jews to depart from Rome) and came unto them. And because he was of the same craft, he abode with them, and wrought: for by their occupation they were tentmakers. And he reasoned in the synagogue every sabbath, and persuaded the Jews and the Greeks. And when Silas and Timotheus were come from Macedonia, Paul was pressed in the spirit, and testified to the Jews that Jesus was Christ. And when they opposed themselves, and blasphemed, he shook his raiment, and said unto them, Your blood be upon your own heads; I am clean: from henceforth I will go unto the Gentiles. And he departed thence, and entered into a certain man's house, named Justus, one that worshipped God, whose house joined hard to the synagogue. And Crispus, the chief ruler of the synagogue, believed on the Lord with all his house; and many of the Corinthians hearing believed, and were baptized. Then spake the Lord to Paul in the night by a vision, Be not afraid, but speak, and hold not thy peace: for I am with thee, and no man shall set on thee to hurt thee; for I have much people in this city. And he continued there a year and six months, teaching the word of God among them. And when Gallio was the deputy of Achaia, the Jews made insurrection with one accord against Paul, and brought him to the judgment seat, saying, This fellow persuadeth men to worship God contrary to the law. And when Paul was now about to open his mouth, Gallio said unto the Jews, If it were a matter of wrong or wicked lewdness, O ye Jews, reason would that I should bear with you: but if it be a question of words and names, and of your law, look ye to it; for I will be no judge of such matters. And he drave them from the judgment seat. Then all the Greeks took Sosthenes, the chief ruler of the synagogue, and beat him before the judgment seat. And Gallio cared for none of those things. And Paul after this tarried there yet a good while, and then took his leave of the brethren, and sailed thence into Syria, and with him Priscilla and Aquila; having shorn his head in Cenchrea: for he had a vow."—Acts xviii. 1-18.
Corinth was the first Gentile city in which Paul spent any considerable time. It afforded him the opportunities he sought as a preacher of Christ. Lying as it did on the famous Isthmus which connected Northern and Southern Greece, and defended by an almost impregnable citadel, it became a place of great political importance. Its position gave it also commercial advantages. Many traders bringing goods from Asia to Italy preferred to unlade at Cenchrea and carry their bales across the narrow neck of land rather than risk the dangers of doubling Cape Malea. So commonly was this done that arrangements were made for carrying the smaller ships themselves across the Isthmus on rollers; and shortly after Paul's visit Nero cut the first turf of an intended, but never finished, canal to connect the two seas.
Becoming by its situation and importance the head
of the Achaian League, it bore the brunt of the conqueror's
onslaught and was completely destroyed by
the Roman general Mummius in the year 146 B.C. For
a hundred years it lay in ruins, peopled by few
but relic-hunters, who groped among the demolished
temples for bits of sculpture or Corinthian brass. The
all-discerning eye of Julius Cæsar, however could not
Nowhere do we see so clearly as in this Epistle the
multifarious and delicate work required of one on whom
lay the care of all the Churches. A host of difficult
questions poured in upon him: questions regarding
conduct, questions of casuistry, questions about the
It is in this Epistle we get the clearest view of the actual difficulties encountered by Christianity in a heathen community. We here see the religion of Christ confronted by the culture, and the vices, and the various social arrangements of paganism; we see the ferment and turmoil its introduction occasioned, the changes it wrought in daily life and common customs, the difficulty men honestly experienced in comprehending what their new principles required; we see how the higher aims and views of Christianity sifted the social customs of the ancient world, now allowing and now rejecting; and, above all, we see the principles on which we ourselves must proceed in solving the social and ecclesiastical difficulties that embarrass ourselves. It is in this Epistle, in short, that we see the Apostle of the Gentiles in his proper and peculiar element, exhibiting the applicability of the religion of Christ to the Gentile world and its power, not to satisfy merely the aspirations of devout Jews, but to scatter the darkness and quicken the dead soul of the pagan world.
Paul's experience in Corinth is full of significance.
On arriving at Corinth, he went, as usual, to the synagogue;
and when his message was rejected by the Jews,
he betook himself to the Gentiles. Next door to the
synagogue, in the house of a convert called Justus, the
Christian congregation was founded; and, to the annoyance
Gallio has become the synonym for religious indifference.
We call the easy-going, good-natured man who
meets all your religious appeals with a shrug of the
shoulders or a genial, bantering answer a Gallio. This
is perhaps a little hard upon Gallio, who no doubt
attended to his own religion in much the same spirit
as his friends. When the narrative says that "he
cared for none of those things," it means that he gave
no heed to what seemed a common street brawl. It
is rather the haughtiness of the Roman proconsul than
the indifference of the man of the world that appears
Now in the Englishman there is much that closely resembles the Roman character. There is the same ability for practical achievement, the same capacity for conquest and for making much of conquered peoples, the same reverence for law, the same faculty for dealing with the world and the human race as it actually is! the same relish for and mastery of the present system of things. But along with these qualities there go in both races their natural defects: a tendency to forget the ideal and the unseen in the seen and the actual; to measure all things by material standards; to be more deeply impressed with the conquests of the sword than with those of the Spirit, and with the gains that are counted in coin rather than with those that are seen in character; and to be far more intensely interested in whatever concerns politics than in anything that concerns religion. So pronounced is this materialistic, or at any rate worldly, tendency in this country, that it has been formulated into a system for the conduct of life, under the name of secularism. And so popular has this system become, especially among working-men, that the chief promoter of it believes that his adherents may be numbered by hundreds of thousands.
The essential idea of secularism is "that precedence
should be given to the duties of this life over those
which pertain to another life," the reason being that
this life is the first in certainty, and should therefore
be the first in importance. Mr. Holyoake carefully
states his position in these words: "We do not say
that every man ought to give an exclusive attention to
But if this theoretical statement, framed in view of
the exigencies of controversy, be scarcely intelligible,
the position of the practical secularist is perfectly intelligible.
He says to himself, I have occupations and
duties now that require all my strength; and if there is
another world, the best preparation for it I can have is
to do thoroughly and with all my strength the duties
now pressing upon me. Most of us have felt the
attraction of this position. It has a sound of candid,
manly common-sense, and appeals to the English
character in us, to our esteem for what is practical.
Besides, it is perfectly true that the best preparation
for any future world is to do thoroughly well the duties
of our present state. But the whole question remains,
What are the duties of the present state? These can
not be determined unless we come to some decision
as to the truth or untruth of Christianity. If there is
a God, it is not merely in the future, but now, that we
To the help of secularism comes also in our case another
influence, which told with Gallio. Even the gentle
and affable Gallio felt annoyed that so squalid a case
should be among the first that came before him in Achaia.
He had left Rome with the good wishes of the Imperial
Court, had made a triumphal procession of several
weeks to Corinth, had been installed there with all the
pomp that Roman officials, military and civil, could
devise; he had been met and acknowledged by the
authorities, had sworn in his new officers, had caused
his tesselated pavement to be laid and his chair of
state set down: and as if in mockery of all this ceremony
and display of power came this pitiful squabble
from the synagogue, a matter of which not a man of
standing in his court knew or cared anything, a matter
in which Jews and slaves alone were interested.
Christianity has always found its warmest supporters
It is always a question how far we should endeavour
to become all things to all men, to win the wise of this
world by presenting Christianity as a philosophy, and
to win the well-born and cultured by presenting it in
the dress of an attractive style. Paul as he left Athens,
where he had met with so little success, was apparently
exercised with this same question. He had tried to
meet the Athenians on their own ground, showing his
familiarity with their writers; but he seems to think
that at Corinth another method may be more successful,
and, as he tells them, "I determined to know nothing
among you save Jesus Christ and Him crucified." It
was, he says, with much fear and trembling he adopted
And so it has ever been since. As matter of fact,
it is not Christ's teaching, but His death, which has
kindled the enthusiasm and the devotion of men. It is
this which has conquered and won them, and delivered
them from the bondage of self, and set them in a larger
world. It is when we believe that this Person has
loved us with a love stronger than death that we
become His. It is when we can use Paul's words
"who loved me and gave Himself for me" that we feel,
as Paul felt, the constraining power of this love. It is
this that forms between the soul and Christ that secret
THE CHURCH IN CORINTH.
"Paul, called to be an apostle of Jesus Christ through the will of God, and Sosthenes our brother, unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus, called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both their's and our's: Grace be unto you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ. I thank my God always on your behalf, for the grace of God which is given you by Jesus Christ; that in everything ye are enriched by him, in all utterance, and in all knowledge: even as the testimony of Christ was confirmed in you: so that ye come behind in no gift; waiting for the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ: who shall also confirm you unto the end, that ye may be blameless in the day of our Lord Jesus Christ. God is faithful, by whom ye were called unto the fellowship of His Son Jesus Christ our Lord."—1 Cor. i. 2-9.
In the letter itself the designation of the writer and of those addressed first claims our attention.
The writer identifies himself as "Paul, an Apostle
of Jesus Christ by call, through the will of God." An
Apostle is one sent, as Christ was sent by the Father.
"As the Father sent Me, even so send I you." It was
therefore an office no one could take to himself, nor
was it the promotion resulting from previous service.
To the apostleship the sole entrance was through the
call of Christ; and in virtue of this call Paul became,
as he says, an Apostle. And it is this which explains
one of the most prominent of his characteristics: the
This extraordinary humility and equally remarkable boldness and authority had one common root in his perception that it was through Christ's call and by God's will he was an Apostle. The work of going to all the busiest parts of the world and proclaiming Christ was to his mind far too great a work for him to aspire to at his own instance. He could never have aspired to such a position as this gave him. But God called him to it; and, with this authority at his back, he feared nothing, neither hardship nor defeat.
And this is for us all the true and eternal source of
humility and confidence. Let a man feel sure that he
is called of God to do what he is doing, let him be
fully persuaded in his own mind that the course he
follows is God's will for him, and he will press on
undauntedly, even though opposed. It is altogether a
new strength with which a man is inspired when he is
made conscious that God calls him to do this or that,
when behind conscience or the plain requirements of
human affairs and circumstances the presence of the
living God makes itself felt. Well may we exclaim,
with one who had to stand alone and follow a solitary
path, conscious only of God's approval, and sustained
by that consciousness against the disapproval of all,
"Oh that we could take that simple view of things as
to feel that the one thing which lies before us is to
In addressing the Church at Corinth, Paul unites with himself a Christian called Sosthenes. This was the name of the chief ruler of the synagogue at Corinth who was beaten by the Greeks in Gallio's court, and it is not impossible that it was he who was now with Paul in Ephesus. If so, this would account for his being associated with Paul in writing to Corinth. What share in the letter Sosthenes actually had it is impossible to say. He may have written it to Paul's dictation; he may have suggested here and there a point to be touched upon. Certainly Paul's easy assumption of a friend as joint writer of the letter sufficiently shows that he had no such stiff and formal idea of inspiration as we have. Apparently he did not stay to inquire whether Sosthenes was qualified to be the author of a canonical book; but knowing the authoritative position he had held among the Jews of Corinth, he naturally conjoins his name with his own in addressing the new Christian community.
The persons to whom this letter is addressed are
identified as "the Church of God which is at Corinth."
With them are joined in character, if not as recipients
of this letter, "all that in every place call upon the
name of Jesus Christ our Lord." And therefore we
should perhaps not be far wrong if we were to gather
from this that Paul would have defined the Church as
the company of all those persons who "call upon the
name of Jesus Christ." Calling upon the name of any
But at once we are confronted with the difficulty that many persons who call upon the name of the Lord do so with no inward conviction of their need, and consequently with no real dependence upon Christ or allegiance to Him. In other words, the apparent Church is not the real Church. Hence the distinction between the Church visible, which consists of all who nominally or outwardly belong to the Christian community, and the Church invisible, which consists of those who inwardly and really are the subjects and people of Christ. Much confusion of thought is avoided by keeping in mind this obvious distinction. In the Epistles of Paul it is sometimes the ideal, invisible Church which is addressed or spoken of; sometimes it is the actual, visible Church, imperfect, stained with unsightly blots, calling for rebuke and correction. Where the visible Church is, and of whom composed, we can always say; its members can be counted, its property estimated, its history written. But of the invisible Church no man can fully write the history, or name the members, or appraise its properties, gifts, and services.
From the earliest times it has been customary to say
that the true Church must be one, holy, catholic, and
apostolic. That is true if the Church invisible be
meant. The true body of Christ, the company of
persons who in all countries and ages have called upon
Christ and served Him, do form one, holy, catholic, and
apostolic Church. But it is not true of the Church
visible and disastrous consequences have at various
Without concerning himself explicitly to describe the
distinguishing features of the true Church, Paul here
gives us four notes which must always be found Comp. F. W. Robertson's Lectures on Corinthians.
1. Consecration. The Church is composed of "them that have been sanctified in Christ Jesus."
2. Holiness: "called to be saints."
3. Universality: "all that in every place call on the name," etc.
4. Unity: "both their Lord and ours."
1. The true Church is, first of all, composed of consecrated
people. The word "sanctify" bears here a
somewhat different meaning from that which we commonly
attach to it. It means rather that which is set
apart or destined to holy uses than that which has
been made holy. It is in this meaning the word is
used by our Lord when He says, "For your sakes I
sanctify"—or set apart—"Myself." The Church by its
very existence is a body of men and women set apart
for a holy use. The New Testament word for Church,
ecclesia, means a society "called out" from among
other men. It exists not for common purposes, but to
witness for God and for Christ, to maintain before the
eyes and in all the common ways and works of men
the ideal life realized in Christ and the presence and
holiness of God. It becomes those who form the
Church to meet God's purpose in calling them out of
the world and to consider themselves as devoted and
set apart to attain that purpose. Their destination is
no longer that of the world; and a spirit set upon the
2. More particularly those who compose the Church are called to be "saints." Holiness is the unmistakable characteristic of the true Church. The glory of God, inseparable from His essence, is His holiness, His eternally willing and doing only what is the very best. To think of God as doing wrong is blasphemy. Were God even once to do other than the best and right, the loving and just thing, He would cease to be God. It is the task of the Church to exhibit in human life and character this holiness of God's. Those whom God calls into His Church, He calls to be, above all else, holy.
The Church of Corinth was in some danger of forgetting this. One of its members in particular had been guilty of a scandalous breach even of the heathen code of morals; and of him Paul uncompromisingly says, "Put away from among yourselves that wicked person." Even with sinners of a less flagrant sort, no communion was to be held. "If any man that is called a brother"—that is, claiming to be a Christian—"be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner, with such a one you must not even eat." No doubt there is risk and difficulty in administering this law. The graver hidden sin may be overlooked, the more obvious and venial transgression be punished. But the duty of the Church to maintain its sanctity is undeniable, and those who act for the Church must do their best in spite of all difficulty and risk.
The prime duty, however, lies with the members,
not with the rulers, in the Church. Those whose
function it is to watch over the purity of the Church
would be saved from all doubtful action were the
3. Thirdly, it is ever to be borne in mind that the true Church of Christ is to be found, not in one country nor in one age, not in this or that Church, whether it assume the title of "Catholic" or pride itself on being national, but is composed of "all that in every place call upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ." Happily the time is gone by when with any show of reason any one Church can claim to be catholic on the ground of its being coextensive with Christendom. It is true that Cardinal Newman, one of the most striking figures and probably the greatest Churchman of our own generation, attached himself to the Church of Rome on this very ground: that it possessed this note of catholicity. To his eye, accustomed to survey the fortunes and growth of Christ's Church during the early and mediæval centuries, it seemed that the Church of Rome alone had any reasonable claim to be considered the Church catholic. But he was betrayed, as others have been, by confounding the Church visible with the Church invisible. No one visible Church can claim to be the Church catholic. Catholicity is not a matter of more or less; it cannot be determined by a majority. No Church which does not claim to contain the whole of Christ's people without exception can claim to be catholic. Probably there are some who accept this alternative, and do not see it to be absurd to claim for any one existing Church that it is coextensive with the Church of Christ.
4. The fourth note of the Church here implied is its
unity. The Lord of all the Churches is one Lord; in
this allegiance they centre, and by it are held together
Paul, with his usual courtesy and instinctive tact,
introduces what he has to say with a hearty acknowledgment
of the distinctive excellences of the Corinthian
Church: "I thank my God always on your behalf, for
the grace of God which is given you in Christ Jesus,
that in everything ye have been enriched in Him, in
all utterance and in all knowledge, even as the testimony
of Christ was confirmed in you." Paul was one
of those large-natured men who rejoice more in the
prosperity of others than in any private good fortune.
The envious soul is glad when things go no better
with others than with himself, but the generous and
unselfish are lifted out of their own woes by their
sympathy with the happy. Paul's joy—and it was no
mean or shallow joy—was to see the testimony he had
borne to Christ's goodness and power confirmed by
the new energies and capacities which were developed
in those who believed his testimony. The gifts which
the Christians in Corinth exhibited made it manifest
that the Divine presence and power proclaimed by
Paul were real. His testimony regarding the risen
but unseen Lord was confirmed by the fact that those
who believed this testimony and called upon the name
of the Lord received gifts not previously enjoyed by
them. Further argument regarding the actual and
present power of the unseen Lord was needless in
Corinth. And in our day it is the new life of believers
which most strongly confirms the testimony regarding
the risen Christ. Every one who attaches himself to
the Church either damages or aids the cause of Christ,
propagates either belief or unbelief. In the Corinthians
Paul's testimony regarding Christ was confirmed by
their reception of the rare gifts of utterance and knowledge.
It is indeed somewhat ominous that the incorruptible
Paul thanked God for their gift of utterance. Perhaps
had he lived now, within sound of an utterance
dizzying and ceaseless as the roar of Niagara, he might
have had a word to say in praise of silence. There is
more than a risk nowadays that talk take the place of
thought on the one hand and of action on the other.
But it could not fail to occur to Paul that this Greek
utterance, with the instrument it had in the Greek
language, was a great gift to the Church. In no other
language could he have found such adequate, intelligible,
But utterance is well backed by knowledge. Not always has it been remembered that Paul recognises knowledge as a gift of God. Often, on the contrary, has the determination to satisfy the intellect with Christian truth been reprehended as idle and even wicked. To the Corinthians the Christian revelation was new, and inquiring minds, could not but endeavour to harmonize the various facts it conveyed. This attempt to understand Christianity was approved. The exercise of the human reason upon Divine things was encouraged. The faith which accepted testimony was a gift of God, but so also was the knowledge which sought to recommend the contents of this testimony to the human mind.
But however rich in endowments the Corinthians
were, they could not but feel, in common with all other
Let us then revive our hopes and renew our belief
in the worth of life by remembering that we are called
to the fellowship of Jesus Christ. This is satisfying;
all else that calls us in life is defective and incomplete.
THE FACTIONS.
"Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment. For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you. Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul? I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius; lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name. And I baptized also the household of Stephanas: besides, I know not whether I baptized any other."—1 Cor. i. 10-16.
Evans.
The parties in the Corinthian Church had not as yet outwardly separated from one another. The members were known as belonging to this or that party, but they worshipped together and had not as yet renounced one another's communion. They differed in doctrine, but their faith in one Lord held them together.
Of these parties Paul names four. There were first of all those who held by Paul himself and the aspect of the Gospel he had presented. They owed to him their own salvation; and having experienced the efficacy of his gospel, they could not believe that there was any other efficacious mode of presenting Christ to men. And gradually they became more concerned to uphold Paul's authority than to help the cause of Christ. They probably fell into the mistake to which all mere partisans are liable, and became more Pauline than Paul himself, magnifying his peculiarities and attaching importance to casual sayings and private practices of his which were in themselves indifferent. There was apparently some danger that they might become more Pauline than Christian, should allow their indebtedness to Paul to obscure their debt to Christ, and should so pride themselves in the teacher as to neglect the thing taught.
There was a second party, grouped round Apollos.
This learned and eloquent Alexandrian had come to
Corinth after Paul left, and what Paul had planted
he so successfully watered that many seemed to owe
everything to him. Until he came and fitted the
Gospel into their previous knowledge, and showed
them its relations to other faiths, and opened up to
them its ethical wealth and bearing on life, they had
The third party gloried in the name of Cephas; that
is, Peter, the Apostle of the circumcision. It is possible
that Peter had been in Corinth, but it is not necessary
to suppose so. His name was used in opposition to
Paul's as representing the original group of Apostles
who had companied with the Lord in His lifetime,
and who adhered to the observance of the Jewish law.
How far the party of Cephas in Corinth indulged in
disparagement of Paul's authority we cannot exactly
say. There are indications, however, in the Epistle
that they cited against him even his self-denial, arguing
that he did not dare either to ask the Church to
maintain him or to marry, as Peter had done, because
he felt that his claim to be an Apostle was insecure.
It may be imagined how painful it must have been for
a high-minded man like Paul to be compelled to defend
himself against such accusations, and with what mingled
indignation and shame he must have written the words,
"Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as
Of the fourth party, which named itself "of Christ,"
we learn more in the Second Epistle than in the First.
From a striking and powerful outburst in that Epistle
(
The Apostle hears of these four parties with dismay.
What then would he think of the state of the Church
now? There was as yet in Corinth no schism, no
secession, no outward disruption of the Church; and
indeed Paul does not seem to contemplate as possible
Now that the Church is broken into pieces, perhaps
the first step towards a restoration of true unity is to
recognise that there may be real union without unity of
external organization. In other words, it is quite possible
that Churches which have individually a separate
corporate existence—say the Presbyterian, Independent,
and Episcopalian Churches—may be one in the
New Testament sense. The human race is one; but this
unity admits of numberless varieties and diversities in
appearance, in colour, in language, and of endless subordinate
divisions into races, tribes, and nations. So the
Church may be truly one, one in the sense intended by
our Lord, one in the unity of the Spirit and the bond of
peace, though there continue to be various divisions and
sects. It may very well be argued that, constituted as
human nature is, the Church, like every other society
or institution, will be the better of a competing, if not
an opposing, rival; that schism, divisions, sects, are
necessary evils; that truth will be more thoroughly
investigated, discipline more diligently and justly
maintained, useful activities more vigorously engaged
in, if there be rival Churches than if there be one.
And it is certainly true that, so far as man can foresee,
there is no possibility, not to say prospect, of the
Church of Christ becoming one vast visible organization.
Oneness in that sense is prevented by the very
same obstacles that hinder all States and governments
on earth from being merged into one great kingdom.
Again, it is to be borne in mind that there may be
real union without unity in creed. As Churches
may be truly one though, for the sake of convenience
or of some conscientious scruple, they maintain a
separate existence, so the unity required in the New
Testament is not uniformity of belief in respect to all
articles of faith. This uniformity is desirable; it is
desirable that all men know the truth. Paul here and
elsewhere entreats his readers to endeavour to agree
and be of one mind. It is quite true that the Church
has gained much by difference of opinion. It is true
that were all men to be agreed there might be a danger
of truth becoming lifeless and forgotten for want of
the stimulus it derives from assault, and discussion,
and cross-questioning. It is undoubtedly the fact that
doctrine has been ascertained and developed precisely
in proportion and in answer to the errors and mistakes
of heretics; and were all assault and opposition even
now to cease, there might be some danger of a lifeless
But the question remains, What truths are to be made
This is a question most difficult to answer. The Church of Christ is formed of those who are trusting to Him as the power of God unto salvation. He is in communion with all who thus trust Him, whether their knowledge be great or small; and we cannot refuse to communicate with those with whom He is in communion. And it may very reasonably be questioned whether any part of the Church has a right to identify herself with a creed which past experience proves that the whole Church will never adopt, and which therefore necessarily makes her schismatic and sectarian. As manifestoes or didactic summaries of truth, confessions of faith may be very useful. Systematic knowledge is at all times desirable; and as a backbone to which all the knowledge we acquire may be attached a catechism or confession of faith is part of the necessary equipment of a Church. But no doctrinal error which does not subvert personal faith in Christ should be allowed to separate Churches. Theology must not be made more of than Christianity. We cannot pay too much attention to doctrine or too earnestly contend for the faith; we cannot too anxiously seek to have and to disseminate clear views of truth: but if we make our clear views a reason for quarrelling with other Christians and a bar to our fellowship with them, we forget that Christ is more than doctrine and charity better than knowledge.
Paul certainly was contemplating Christ, and not a
creed, as the principle and centre of the Church's unity,
when he exclaimed, "Is Christ divided?" The indivisible
unity of Christ Himself is in Paul's mind the
It is with something akin to horror that Paul goes on to ask, "Was Paul crucified for you?" He implies that only on the death of Christ can the Church be founded. If those who prided themselves on being followers of Paul were in danger of exalting him into the place of Christ, they were forfeiting their salvation, and had no right to be in the Church at all. Take away the death of Christ and the personal connection of the believer with the crucified Redeemer, and you take away the Church.
From this casual expression of Paul we see his
habitual attitude towards Christ; and more distinctly
than from any laboured exposition do we gather that
in his mind the pre-eminence of Christ was unique,
and that this pre-eminence was based upon His crucifixion.
Paul understood, and was never slow to affirm,
the indebtedness of the young Christian Churches to
himself: he was their father, and without him they
would not have existed. But he was not their saviour,
the foundation on which they were built. Not for one
moment did he suppose that he could occupy towards
men the position Christ occupied. That position was
unique, altogether distinct from the position he occupied.
No one could share with Christ in being the Head of
the Church and the Saviour of the body. Paul did not
The ever-recurring disposition then to reduce the
work of Christ to the level of comparison with the
work done for the race by other men must take account
of this expression which reveals to us Paul's thought
about it. Certainly Paul understands that between his
work and the work of Christ an impassable gulf is
fixed. Paul was wholly devoted to his fellow-men, had
suffered and was prepared again to suffer any hardships
and outrage in their cause, but it seemed to him monstrous
that any person should confound the influence
of his work with that of Christ's. And that which
gave Christ this special place and claim was His crucifixion.
We miss what Paul found in the work of
Christ so long as we look more to His life than to His
death. Paul does not say, Was Paul your teacher in
It was not, however, the mere fact of His dying which gave Christ this place, and which claims the regard and trust of all men. Paul had really given his life for men; he had been more than once taken up for dead, having by the truth he taught provoked the hatred of the Jews, even as Jesus had done. But even this did not bring him into rivalry with the unapproachable Redeemer. Paul knew that in Christ's death there was a significance his own could never have. It was not only human self-sacrifice that was there manifested, but Divine self-sacrifice. It was as God's Representative Christ died as truly as He died as man's Representative. This Paul could not do. In Christ's death there was what there could be in none other: a sacrifice for the sins of men and an atonement for these sins. Through this death sinners find a way back to God and assurance of salvation. There was a work accomplished by it which the purest of men could not help Him in, but must himself depend upon and receive the benefit of. Christ by His death is marked off from all men, He being the Redeemer, they the redeemed.
This exceptional, unique work then—what have we
made of it? Paul, probably on the whole the most
richly endowed man, morally and intellectually, the
world has seen, found his true life and his true self in
the work of this other Person. It was in Christ Paul
first learned how great a thing human life is, and it
was through Christ and His work Paul first came into
THE FOOLISHNESS OF PREACHING.
"For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect. For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God. For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent. Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe. For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom: but we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness; but unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God. Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men. For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called: but God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty; and base things of the world, and things which are despised, hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are: that no flesh should glory in His presence. But of Him are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption: that, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord."
"And I, brethren, when I came to you, came not with excellency of speech or of wisdom, declaring unto you the testimony of God. For I determined not to know any thing among you, save Jesus Christ, and Him crucified. And I was with you in weakness, and in fear, and in much trembling. And my speech and my preaching was not with enticing words of man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the spirit and of power: that your faith should not stand in the wisdom of men, but in the power of God."—1 Cor. i. 17-ii. 5.
In this section of the Epistle then it is Paul's purpose to explain to the Corinthians (1) the style of preaching he had adopted while with them and (2) why he had adopted this style.
I. His time in Corinth, he assures them, had been
spent, not in propagating a philosophy or system of
truth peculiar to himself, and which might have been
identified with his name, but in presenting the Cross
of Christ and making the plainest statements of fact
regarding Christ's death. In approaching the Corinthians,
Paul had necessarily weighed in his own mind
the comparative merits of various modes of presenting
the Gospel. In common with all men who
are about to address an audience, he took into consideration
the aptitudes, peculiarities, and expectations
of his audience, that he might so frame his arguments,
statements, and appeals as to be most likely to carry
his point. The Corinthians, as Paul well knew, were
especially open to the attractions of rhetoric and
philosophical discussion. A new philosophy clothed
in elegant language was likely to secure a number of
disciples. And it was quite in Paul's power to present
the Gospel as a philosophy. He might have spoken
to the Corinthians in large and impressive language of
the destiny of man, of the unity of the race, and of
the ideal man in Christ. He might have based all he
Paul then in this instance deliberately trusted to the
bare statement of facts, and not to any theory about
these facts. This is a most important distinction, and
to be kept in view by all preachers, whether they feel
called by their circumstances to adopt Paul's method
or not. In preaching to audiences with whom the
facts are familiar, it is perfectly justifiable to draw
inferences from them and to theorize about them for
the instruction and edification of Christian people,
Paul himself spoke "wisdom among them that were
perfect." But what is to be noted is that for doing the
work proper to the Gospel, for making men Christians,
it is not theory or explanation, but fact, that is effective.
It is the presentation of Christ as He is presented in
the written Gospels, the narrative of His life and death
without note or comment, theory or inference, argument
or appeal, which stands in the first rank of
efficiency as a means of evangelizing the world. Paul,
ever moderate, does not denounce other methods of
No doubt we may unduly press Paul's words; and
probably we should do so if we gathered that he
merely told his hearers how Christ had lived and died
and gave them no inkling of the significance of His
death. Still the least we can gather from his words is
that he trusted more to facts than to any explanation
of the facts, more to narration than to inference and
theory. Certainly the neglect of this distinction renders
a great proportion of modern preaching ineffective and
futile. Preachers occupy their time in explaining how
the Cross of Christ ought to influence men, whereas
they ought to occupy their time in so presenting the
Cross of Christ that it does influence men. They give
laboured explanations of faith and elaborate instructions
regarding the method and results of believing, while
they should be exhibiting Christ so that faith is
instinctively aroused. The actor on the stage does
not instruct his audience how they should be affected
by the play; he so presents to them this or that scene
that they instinctively smile or find their eyes fill.
Those onlookers at the Crucifixion who beat their breasts
and returned to their homes with awe and remorse
were not told that they should feel compunction; it was
enough that they saw the Crucified. So it is always;
it is the direct vision of the Cross, and not anything
which is said about it, which is most effective in producing
penitence and faith. And it is the business of
the preacher to set Christ and Him crucified clear
before the eyes of men; this being done, there will
be little need of explanations of faith or inculcation
of penitence. Make men see Christ, set the Crucified
The very fact that it was a Person, not a system of philosophy, that Paul proclaimed was sufficient proof that he was not anxious to become the founder of a school or the head of a party. It was to another Person, not to himself, he directed the attention and faith of his hearers. And that which permanently distinguishes Christianity from all philosophies is that it presents to men, not a system of truth to be understood, but a Person to be relied upon. Christianity is not the bringing of new truth to us so much as the bringing of a new Person to us. The manifestation of God in Christ is in harmony with all truth; but we are not required to perceive and understand that harmony, but to believe in Christ. Christianity is for all men, and not for the select, highly educated few; and it depends therefore, not on exceptional ability to see truth, but on the universal human emotions of love and trust.
II. Paul justifies his rejection of philosophy or
"wisdom" and his adoption of the simpler but more
difficult method of stating fact on three grounds. The
first is that God's method had changed. For a time
God had allowed the Greeks to seek Him by their own
wisdom; now He presents Himself to them in the
foolishness of the Cross (vers. 17-25). The second
ground is that the wise do not universally respond to
the preaching of the Cross, a fact which shows that it
is not wisdom that preaching appeals to (vers. 26-31).
And his third ground is that he feared lest, if he used
"wisdom" in presenting the Gospel, his hearers might
be only superficially attracted by his persuasiveness
1. His first reason is that God had changed His method. "After that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe." Even the wisest of the Greeks had attained only to inadequate and indefinite views of God. Admirable and pathetic are the searchings of the noble intellects that stand in the front rank of Greek philosophy; and some of their discoveries regarding God and His ways are full of instruction. But these thoughts, cherished by a few wise and devout men, never penetrated to the people, and by their vagueness and uncertainty were incapacitated from deeply influencing any one. To pass even from Plato to the Gospel of John is really to pass from darkness to light. Plato philosophizes, and a few souls seem for a moment to see things more clearly; Peter preaches, and three thousand souls spring to life. If God was to be known by men generally, it was not through the influence of philosophy. Already philosophy had done its utmost; and so far as any popular and sanctifying knowledge of God went, philosophy might as well never have been. "The world by wisdom knew not God." No safer assertion regarding the ancient world can be made.
That which, in point of fact, has made God known
is the Cross of Christ. No doubt it must have seemed
foolishness and mere lunacy to summon the seeker
after God away from the high and elevating speculations
of Plato on the good and the eternal and to point him
to the Crucified, to a human form gibbeted on a
malefactor's cross, to a man that had been hanged.
None knew better than Paul the infamy attaching to
As proof that God was in their midst and as a
revelation of God's nature, the Jews required a sign,
a demonstration of physical power. It was one of
Christ's temptations to leap from a pinnacle of the
Temple, for thus He would have won acceptance as the
Christ. The people never ceased to clamour for a
sign. They wished Him to bid a mountain be removed
and cast into the sea; they wished Him to bid the sun
stand still or Jordan retire to its source. They wished
Him to make some demonstration of superhuman
power, and so put it beyond a doubt that God was
present. Even at the last it would have satisfied them
had He bid the nails drop out and had He stepped down
from the Cross among them. They could not understand
that to remain on the Cross was the true proof
of Divinity. The Cross seemed to them a confession
of weakness. They sought a demonstration that the
power of God was in Christ, and they were pointed to
the Cross. But to them the Cross was a stumbling-block
they could not get over. And yet in it was the
whole power of God for the salvation of the world.
All the power that dwells in God to draw men out of
sin to holiness and to Himself was actually in the
2. As a second ground on which to rest the justification
of his method of preaching Paul appeals to the
constituent elements of which the Church of Corinth
was actually composed. It is plain, he says, that it is
not by human wisdom, nor by power, nor by anything
generally esteemed among men that you hold your
place in the Church. The fact is that "not many wise
men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble,
are called." If human wisdom or power held the gates
of the kingdom, you yourselves would not be in it. To
be esteemed, and influential, and wise is no passport to
this new kingdom. It is not men who by their wisdom
find out God and by their nobility of character commend
themselves to Him; but it is God who chooses and
calls men, and the very absence of wisdom and possessions
makes men readier to listen to His call. "God
hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound
the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the
world to confound the things which are mighty, and
base things of the world, and things which are despised,
hath God chosen, yea, and things which are not, to
bring to nought things which are; that no flesh should
glory in His presence." It is all God's doing now;
Paul thus justifies his method by its results. He uses as his weapon the foolishness of the Cross, and this foolishness of God proves itself wiser than men. It may seem a most unlikely weapon with which to accomplish great things, but it is God who uses it, and that makes the difference. Hence the emphasis throughout this passage on the agency of God. "God hath chosen" you; "Of God are ye in Christ Jesus;" "Of God He is made unto you wisdom." This method used by Paul is God's method and means of working, and therefore it succeeds. But for this reason also all ground of boasting is removed from those who are within the Christian Church. It is not their wisdom or strength, but God's work, which has given them superiority to the wise and noble of the world. "No flesh can glory in God's presence." The wise and mighty of earth cannot glory, for their wisdom and might availed nothing to bring them to God; those who are in Christ Jesus can as little glory, for it is not on account of any wisdom or might of theirs, but because of God's call and energy, they are what they are. They were of no account, poor, insignificant, outcasts, and slaves, friendless while alive and when dead not missed in any household; but God called them and gave them a new and hopeful life in Christ Jesus.
In Paul's day this argument from the general poverty
and insignificance of the members of the Christian
Church was readily drawn. Things are changed now;
Lastly, Paul justifies his neglect of wisdom and
rhetoric on the ground that had he used "enticing
Here again things have changed since Paul's day. The assailants of Christianity have put it on its defence, and its apologists have been compelled to show that it is in harmony with the soundest philosophy. It was inevitable that this should be done. Every philosophy now has to take account of Christianity. It has shown itself to be so true to human nature, and it has shed so much light on the whole system of things and so modified the action of men and the course of civilization, that a place must be found for it in every philosophy. But to accept Christianity because it has been a powerful influence for good in the world, or because it harmonizes with the most approved philosophy, or because it is friendly to the highest development of intellect, may be legitimate indeed; but Paul considered that the only sound and trustworthy faith was produced by direct personal contact with the Cross. And this remains for ever true.
To approve of Christianity as a system and to adopt
it as a faith are two different things. It is quite
possible to respect Christianity as conveying to us a
In what sense then are we Christians? Have we
allowed the Cross of Christ to make its peculiar impression
upon us? Have we given it a chance to influence
us? Have we in all seriousness of spirit considered
what is presented to us in the Cross? Have we
honestly laid bare our hearts to the love of Christ?
Have we admitted to ourselves that it was for us He
died? If so, then we must have felt the power of God
in the Cross. We must have found ourselves taken
captive by this love of God. God's law we may have
found it possible to resist; its threatenings we may
have been able to put out of our mind. The natural
helps to goodness which God has given us in the
family, in the world around us, in the fortunes of life,
we may have found too feeble to lift us above temptation
and bring us into a really high and pure life. But
in the Cross we at length experience what Divine power
is; we know the irresistible appeal of Divine self-sacrifice,
the overcoming, regenerating pathos of the Divine
DIVINE WISDOM.
"Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect: yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to nought: but we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory: which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory. But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love Him. But God hath revealed them unto us by His Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God. For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God. Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual. But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man. For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ."
"And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ. I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able. For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men? For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; we ye not carnal?"—1 Cor. ii. 6-iii. 4.
I. First, the wisdom which he speaks among the perfect, though eminently deserving of the name, is not on a level with human philosophies, nor is it of a similar origin. It is not just one more added to human searches after truth. The princes of this world, its men of light and leading, have had their own theories of God and man, and yet have really "come to nought." The incompetence of the men and theories that actually control human affairs is put beyond a doubt by the crucifixion of Christ. In the person of Christ the glory of God was manifested as a glory in which man was to partake; had there been diffused among men any true perception of the real nature of God, the Crucifixion would have been an impossibility. The fact that God's incarnate glory was crucified is a demonstration of the insufficiency of all previous teaching regarding God. But the wisdom taught by Paul is not just one theory more, devised by the speculative ingenuity of man; it is a disclosure made by God of knowledge unattainable by human endeavour. The three great sources of human knowledge—seeing, hearing, and thought—alike fail here. "Eye hath not seen, ear hath not heard, it has not entered into the heart of man to conceive," this wisdom. Hitherto it has been a mystery, a thing hidden; now God has Himself revealed it.
What the contents of this wisdom are, we can readily
perceive from such specimens of it as Paul gives us
in his Epistle to the Ephesians and elsewhere. It is
a declaration of the Divine purpose towards man, or of
This "wisdom" which Paul taught has had a larger
and more influential place in men's minds than any
other system of human thought. Christendom has
seen Christ through Paul's eyes. He interpreted Christianity
to the world, and made men aware of what
had been and was in their midst. Men of the largest
faculty, such as Augustine and Luther, have been unable
to find a religion in Christ until they entered His school
by Paul's door. Stumbling at one or two Jewish
peculiarities which attach to Paul's theology, some
modern critics assure us that, "after having been for
We may find in Paul's writings arguments which,
however convincing to the Jew, are not convincing to
us; we may prefer his experimental and ethical to his
doctrinal teaching; some estimable people can only
accept him when they have purged him of his Calvinism;
others shut their eyes to this or that which seems to
them a blot in his writings; but the fact remains that
it is to this man we owe our Christianity. It was he
who disengaged from the dying body of Judaism the
new-born religion and held it aloft in the eye of the
world as the true heir to universal empire. It was he
whose piercing intellect and keen moral discernment
penetrated to the very heart of this new thing, and
saw in it a force to conquer the world and to rid men
of all bondage and evil of every kind. It was he who
applied to the whole range of human life and duty the
inexhaustible ethical force which lay in Christ, and
thus lifted at one effort the heathen world to a new
level of morality. He was the first to show the
superiority of love to law, and to point out how God
trusted to love, and to summon men to meet the trust
Paul then used two methods of teaching. In addressing those who had yet to be won to Christ, he used the foolishness of preaching, and presented to them the Cross of Christ. In addressing those who had already owned the power of the Cross and made some growth in Christian knowledge and character, he enlarged upon the significance of the Cross and the light it threw on all moral relations, on God and on man. And even in this department of his work he disclaims any desire to propagate a philosophy of his own. The system of truth he proclaims to the Christian people is not of his own devising. It is not in virtue of his own speculative ability he has discovered it. It is not one of the wisdoms of this world, having its origin in the brain of an ingenious theorist. On the contrary, it has its origin in God, and partakes therefore of the truth and stability attaching to the thoughts of God.
II. But if it be undiscoverable by man, how does
Paul come to know it? To the Corinthian intelligence
there seemed but these three ways of learning anything:
seeing, hearing, or thinking; and if God's wisdom
was attainable by none of these, how was it reached?
Paul proceeds to show how he was enabled to "speak"
this wisdom. He does this in vers. 10-13, in which
his chief affirmations are that the Spirit of God alone
knows the mind of God, that this Spirit has been given
1. The Spirit of God alone knows the mind of God
and searches its deep things, just as none but the
spirit of man which is in him knows the things of man.
"There is in every man a life hidden from all eyes, a
world of impressions, anxieties, aspirations, and struggles,
of which he alone, in so far as he is a spirit—that is
to say, a conscious and personal being—gives account
to himself. This inner world is unknown to others,
except in so far as he reveals it to them by speech." Godet.
And still more certainly true is this of God's purposes.
Even though you flatter yourself you know a man's
nature, you cannot certainly predict his intentions.
You cannot anticipate the thoughts of an able man
whom you see designing a machine, or planning a
building, or conceiving a literary work; you cannot say
in what form a vindictive man will wreak his vengeance;
nor can you penetrate through the abstracted look of
the charitable and read the precise form his bounty will
take. Every great work even of man comes upon us
by surprise; the various inventions that facilitate
business, the new poems, the new books, the new
works of art, have never been conceived before. They
2. This Spirit, Paul declares, was given to him, and revealed to him God's purposes, "the things which are freely given to us of God." He had received "not the spirit of the world," which would have enabled him only to theorize, and speculate, and create another "wisdom of this world;" but he had received "the Spirit which is of God," and this Spirit had revealed to him "the things which God hath prepared for them that love Him."
We may think of revelation either as the act of
God or as it is received by man. God reveals Himself
in all He does, as man discloses his character in all
he does. With God's first act therefore in the remotest
past revelation began. As yet there was none
to receive the knowledge of God, but God showed His
nature and His purpose as soon as He began to do
anything. And this revelation of Himself has continued
ever since. In the world around us and the earth on
which we live God reveals Himself; "the things which
are made," as Paul says, "give us clearly to see and
understand the invisible things of God, His unseen
nature, from the creation of the world." Still more
fully is God's nature revealed in man: in conscience,
distinguishing between right and wrong; in the spirit
craving fellowship with the Eternal. In the history
But it was not enough that God be revealed objectively in Christ; there must also be a subjective revelation within the soul of the beholder. It was not enough that God be manifested in the flesh and men be allowed to draw such inferences as they could from that manifestation; but, in addition to this, God gave His Spirit to Paul and others that they might see the full significance of that manifestation. It was quite possible for men to be witnesses of the objective revelation without understanding it. The open eye is needed as well as outward light. And Paul everywhere insists upon this: that he had received his knowledge of Divine truth by revelation, not by the mere exercise of his own unaided thought, but by a spiritual enlightenment through the gift of God's Spirit.
The presence of God's Spirit in any man can of
course only be verified by the results. God's Spirit
working in and by means of man's nature cannot be
known in separation from the man's spirit and the
work done in that spirit. This inward revelation which
Paul refers to is accomplished by the action of the
Divine Spirit on the human faculties, quickening and
elevating these faculties. The revelation or new knowledge
acquired by Paul was given by God, but at the
same time was acquired by Paul's own faculties, so
In their humility, many persons shrink from making this affirmation here made by Paul; they cannot ever unhesitatingly affirm that the Spirit of God is given them or that they have the mind of Christ. Such persons should recognise that it was the very humility of Paul which enabled him so confidently to affirm these things of himself. He knew that the knowledge of Christ's purposes he had and the sympathy with them were the evidence of God's Spirit working in him. He knew that without God's Spirit he himself could never have had these thoughts. And it is when we recognise our own insufficiency most that we are readiest to confess the presence of God's Spirit.
3. But Paul makes a further affirmation. Not only
is the knowledge he has of Divine things a revelation
made by God's Spirit to him, but the words in which
he declares this revelation to others are taught him
by the same Spirit: "which things we also speak, not
in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which
This statement of Paul may be construed into a
guarantee of the general accuracy of his teaching; but
it was not intended to be that. Paul did not express
himself in this way in order to convince men of his
accuracy, still less to convince them that every word
It might indeed seem a very simple and sound
argument were we to say that Paul affirms that the
words in which he embodies his teaching are taught
him by the Holy Ghost, and that therefore there can
be no error in them. But to interpret the words of
any writer with no regard to his intention in writing
them is voluntarily to blind ourselves to their true
meaning. And Paul's intention in this passage is to
contrast two methods of teaching, two styles of language,
the worldly or secular and the spiritual, and to affirm
that the style he adopted was that which the Holy
Ghost taught him. An artist whose work was criticised
might defend himself by saying, "I have been trained
in the Impressionist school," or "I use the principles
taught me by Ruskin," or "I am a pupil of this or the
other great teacher;" but these replies, while quite
relevant as a defence and explanation of the particular
style of painting he has adopted, are not intended to
identify the work of the scholar with that of the master,
or to insinuate that the master is responsible for all
the pupil does. Similarly Paul's reply is relevant as
an explanation of his reason for refusing to use the
methods of professional rhetoricians in teaching his
spiritual truths. "Spiritual modes of presenting truth
and an avoidance of rhetorical artifice and embellishment
III. Having shown that the wisdom he teaches is spiritual, and that his method of teaching it is spiritual, he proceeds finally to show that it can be taught only to spiritual persons. "The spiritual man judgeth all things;" he can discern whether he is "among the perfect" or among the carnal, whether he may speak wisdom or must confine himself to elementary truth. But, on the other hand, he himself cannot be judged by the carnal man. It is in vain that rudimentary believers find fault with Paul's method of teaching; they cannot judge him, because they cannot understand the mind of the Lord which guides him. It would have served no purpose to teach spiritual wisdom in Corinth, for the members of that Church were as yet only babes in Christ, carnal, and not spiritual. Their carnality was proved by their factiousness. They were still governed by the passions which rule the natural man. And therefore Paul fed them with milk, and not with strong meat; with the simple and affecting Gospel of the Cross, and not with those high and far-reaching deductions from it which he divulged among prepared and sympathetic spirits.
In the distinctions of men into natural, carnal, and
spiritual Paul here shows how untrammelled he was
by theological technicalities, and how straight he
looked at facts. He does not divide men summarily
into believers and unbelievers, classing all believers as
The confidence which Paul here expresses regarding his superiority to the judgment of carnal men is a superiority inseparable from knowledge in any department. Truth carries with it always a self-evidencing power, and whoever attains a clear perception of truth in any branch of knowledge is aware that it is the truth he has attained. When the mind has been long puzzling over a difficulty and at last sees the solution, it is as if the sun had risen. The mind is at once convinced.
No one had ever greater right than Paul to say, "I
have the mind of Christ." Every day of his life said
the same thing. He at once entered into Christ's mind
and more than any other man carried it out. It was
by his moral sympathy with Christ's aims that he
entered so completely into the knowledge of His
person and work. He lived his way into the truth.
Spiritual men are those who can say, with Paul, "We
have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit
which is of God, that we might know the things that
are freely given to us of God." What men's eyes need
especially to be opened to is the bounty of God and
the consequent wealth and hopefulness of human life.
Paul's wondering delight in God's grace and loving
adaptation of Himself to human needs continually
finds utterance in his writings. His own sense of
unworthiness magnified the forgiving mercy of God.
He rejoiced in a Divine love which was passing knowledge,
but which he knew could be relied upon to the
utmost. The vision of this love opened to his hope a
vista of happiness. There is a natural joy in living
that all men can understand. This life in many ways
appeals to our thirst for happiness, and often it seems
as if we needed nothing more. But, in one way or
other, most of us learn that what is naturally presented
to us in this world is not enough, indeed only brings
in the long run anxiety and grief. And then it is that,
by God's grace, men come to find that this life is but
a small lagoon leading to, and fed by, the boundless
ocean of God's love beyond. They learn that there
is a hope that cannot be blighted, a joy that is
uninterrupted, a fulness of life that meets and satisfies
every instinct, and affection, and purpose. They
begin to see the things which God hath prepared for
them that love Him, the things that are freely given to
us of God—"freely given," given without desert of
But to know and appreciate the things which are freely given to us of God a man must have the Spirit of God. For God's gifts are spiritual; they attach to character, to what is eternally ours. They cannot be received by those who refuse the severity of God's training and are not alive to the reality of spiritual growth, of passing from a carnal to a spiritual manhood. The path to these eternal, all-satisfying joys may be hard; Christ's path was not easy, and they who follow Him must in one form or other have their faith in the unseen tested. They must really, and not only in word, pass from dependence on this present world to dependence on God; they must somehow come to believe that underneath and in all we here see and experience lies God's unalterable, unmingled love, that ultimately it is this they have to do with, this that explains all.
How soon do men think they have exhausted the one inexhaustible, the love and resources of God; how quickly do men weary of life, and think they have seen all and known all; how ready are men to conclude that for them existence is a failure and can yield no perfect joy, while as yet they know as little of the things God has prepared for them that love Him as the new-born babe knows of the life and experiences that lie before it. You have but touched the hem of His garment; what must it be to be clasped to His heart? Happy they to whom the darkness of this world reveals the boundless distances of the starry heaven, and who find that the blows which have shattered their earthly happiness have merely broken the shell which confined their true life and have given them entrance into a world infinite and eternal.
GOD'S HUSBANDRY AND BUILDING.
"Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man? I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase. So then neither is he that planteth any thing, neither he that watereth; but God that giveth the increase. Now he that planteth and he that watereth are one: and every man shall receive his own reward according to his own labour. For we are labourers together with God: ye are God's husbandry, ye are God's building. According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise masterbuilder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon. For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble; every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is. If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire. Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are. Let no man deceive himself. If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise. For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, He taketh the wise in their own craftiness. And again, The Lord knoweth the thoughts of the wise, that they are vain. Therefore let no man glory in men. For all things are your's: whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas, or the world, or life, or death, or things present, or things to come; all are your's; and ye are Christ's; and Christ is God's."—1 Cor. iii. 5-23.
Throughout this paragraph it is this thought that Paul dwells upon: that the Church is originated and maintained, not by men, but by God. Teachers are but God's instruments; and yet, being human instruments, they have each his own responsibility, as each has his own part of the one work.
From this truth that God alone is the Giver of spiritual life and that the Church is His building several inferences may be drawn.
1. Our praise for any good we have received of a
spiritual kind should be given, not solely to men, but
mainly to God. The Corinthians were conscious that
in receiving Christianity they had received a very great
boon. They felt that gratitude was due somewhere.
The new thoughts they had of God, the consciousness
of Christ's eternal love, the hope of immortality, the
sustaining influence of the friendship of Christ, the
new world they seemed to live in—all this made them
think of those who had brought them this new happiness.
But Paul was afraid lest their acknowledgment
of himself and Apollos should eclipse their gratitude
to God. People sometimes congratulate themselves
on having adopted a good style of religion, not too
sentimental, not sensational and spasmodic, not
childishly external, not coldly doctrinal; they are
thankful they lit upon the books they read at a critical
time of their spiritual and mental growth; they can
clearly trace to certain persons an influence which they
know strengthened their character; and they think with
gratitude and sometimes with excessive admiration of
2. It is to God we must look for all further growth. We must use the best books; we must put ourselves under influences which we know are good for us, whatever they are for others; we must conscientiously employ such means of grace as our circumstances permit; but, above all, we must ask God to give the increase. No doubt the use of the means God uses to increase our life is a silent but constant prayer; still we are not mere trees planted to wait for such influences as come to us, but have wills to choose the life these influences bring and to open our being to the living God who imparts Himself to us in and through them.
3. If we are God's husbandry and building, let us
reverence God's work in ourselves. It may seem a
very ricketty and insecure structure that is rising
within us, a very sickly and unpromising plant; and we
are tempted to mock the beginnings of good in ourselves
and be disappointed at the slow progress the
new man makes in us. Vexed at our small attainment,
at the poor show among Christians our character
makes, at the stunted appearance the plant of grace in
us presents, we are tempted to trample it once for all
out of sight. Grace sometimes seems to do so little
for us in emergencies, and the transformation of our
character seems so unutterably slow and shallow, that
we are disposed to think the radical change we need
can never be accomplished. But different thoughts
4. For the same reason we must hope for others as for ourselves. It is the foundation of all hope to know that God has always been inclining men to righteousness and will always do so. So often we look sadly at the godlessness, and frivolity, and deep degradation and misery that abound, and feel as if the burden of lifting men to a higher condition lay all upon us; the ceaseless flow of human life into and out of the world, the hopeless conditions in which many are born, the frightful influences to which they are exposed, the extreme difficulty of winning even one man to good, the possibility that no more may be won and that the Christian stock may die out—these considerations oppress the spirit, and cause men to despair of ever seeing a kingdom of God on earth. But Paul could never despair, because he was at all times convinced that the whole energy that ceaselessly goes forth from God goes forth to accomplish good, and nothing but good, and that among the good ends God is accomplishing there is nothing for which He has sacrificed so much and at which He so determinedly aims as the restoration of men to purity, love, and goodness.
5. But the chief inference Paul draws from the truth
When Corinth rose from its ruins, it was no uncommon
sight to see a miserable hovel reared against
the marble wall of a temple or the splendid portico of
some deserted palace rendered habitable by a patchwork
What would Paul say did he now see the super-structure
The soundness of the material which has been built
upon the foundation of Christ will, like all things else,
be tested. "The day shall declare it;" that light of
Christ's presence and dominance over all things, that
light which shall penetrate all human things when our
true life is entered on—that shall declare it. "The
fire shall try every man's work, of what sort it is. If
any man's work abide, he shall receive a reward. If
any man's work be burned, he shall suffer loss; but he
himself shall be saved, yet so as by fire." The Corinthians
knew what a trial by fire meant. They knew
how the flames had travelled over their own city, consuming
all that fire could kindle on, and leaving of the
slightly built houses nothing but a charred and useless
timber here and there, while the massive marbles stood
erect among the ruins; and the precious metals, even
though molten, were prized by the conqueror. Against
the fire no prayer, no appeal, prevailed. Its judgment
Paul, with his unfailing discernment, accepts it as
a very possible contingency that a Christian man may
do poor work. In that case, Paul says, the man will be
saved as by fire; his work shall be burned, but himself
be scatheless. He shall be in the position of a man
whose house has been burnt; the man is saved, but
his property, all that he has slowly gathered round
him and valued as the fruit of his labour, is gone. He
may have received no bodily injury, but he is so stripped
that he scarcely knows himself, and the whole thought
and toil of his life seem to have gone for nothing. So,
says Paul, shall this and that man pass into the heavenly
state, hearing behind him as he barely enters the
crash of all he has been building up as it falls and
leaves for the result of a laborious life a ghastly,
charred ruin and a cloud of dust. To have been
There is a degree of carelessness or malignity
sometimes to be found in those who profess to be
Christian teachers which Paul does not hesitate
unconditionally to doom. "If any man destroy the
temple of God, him shall God destroy." A teacher
may in various ways incur this doom. He may in
guiding some one to Christ fit him obliquely to the
foundation, so that firm rest in Christ is never
attained; but the man remains like a loose stone in
a wall, unsettled himself and unsettling all around
him. Any doctrine which turns the grace of God
into licence incurs this doom. To lift stones from the
mire they have been lying in and fit them into the
temple is good and right, but to leave them uncleansed
and unpolished is to disfigure the temple.
Any teaching that does not recognise in Christianity
the means of becoming holy, and encourages men to
But we are responsible as well as our teachers for the appearance we present in God's temple. The stone that is to occupy a permanent place in a building is carefully squared and beaten into its place, and its level adjusted with the utmost nicety. Would it not make a very obvious change in the appearance and in the strength of the Church if every member of it were at pains to set himself absolutely true to Christ? There is no doubt a good deal of anxiety about our relation to Christ, frequent examining and measuring of our actual position; but does not this too often merely reveal that conscience is uneasy? Some persons are prevented from resting satisfactorily on Christ because of some erroneous opinion about faith or about the manner in which the connection is formed, or some pet theory or crotchet has possessed the mind and keeps them unsettled. Some will not rest on Christ until they have such repentance as they judge sufficient; others so rest on Him that they have no repentance. Strange that men will so complicate the simplicity of Christ, who is the hand of our heavenly Father, stretched out to lift us out of our sin and draw us to Himself! If you wish God's love, accept it; if you long for holiness, take Christ as your Friend; if you see no greater joy than to serve in His great cause, do His will and follow Him.
But, alas! with some it is no misunderstanding that
prevents a close connection between the soul and
Christ, but some worldly purpose or some entangling
and deeply cherished sin. The foundation stone is
as a polished slab of marble, having its upper surface
And more must be done even after we are securely fitted into our place. Stones often look well enough when first built in, but soon lose their colour; and their surface and fine edges crumble and shale off, so that they need to be constantly looked to. So do the stones in God's temple get tarnished and discoloured by exposure. One sin after another is allowed to stain the conscience; one little corruption after another settles on the character, and eats out its fineness, and when once the fair, clean stone is no longer unsullied, we think it of little consequence to be scrupulous. Then the weather tells upon us: the ordinary atmosphere of this life, with its constant damp of worldly care and its occasional storms of loss, and disappointment, and social collisions, and domestic embroilment, eats out the heavenly temper from our character, and leaves its edges ragged; and the man becomes soured and irritable, and the surface of him, all that meets the casual eye, is rough and broken.
Above all, do not many Christian persons seem to
The folly of partisanship and sectarianism is finally
exhibited in the words "Let no man glory in men. For
all things are yours, whether Paul, or Apollos, or
Cephas." The man who held to Paul and would learn
nothing from Apollos or Peter was defrauding himself
of his rights. It has been the weakness of Christians
in all ages, and never more than in our own, to see
good in only one aspect of truth and listen to no form
of teaching but one. The Broad Churchman despises
the traditionalist; the Evangelical gathers up his skirts
at the approach of a Broad Churchman. Calvinist and
Arminian stand at daggers drawn. Each limits himself
to his own fortress, which he thinks he can defend,
and starves himself on siege rations while the fields
wave white with grain outside. The eye is constructed
to sweep round a wide range of vision; but men put
His own expression, "all things are yours," suggests
to Paul the whole wealth of the Christian, for whom
exist not only all those who have striven to unfold the
significance of the Christian revelation, but all things
else, whether "the world, or life, or death, or things
present, or things to come." As it is true of all
teachers, of however commanding genius, that the
Church does not exist for them that they may have
a field for their genius, and followers to applaud and
represent them, but that they exist for the Church,
their genius being used for the advancement of the
spiritual life of this and that unknown and hidden soul;
so is it true of all things,—of life and all its laws, of
death and all it leads to,—that these are ordained of
God to minister to the growth of His children. This
was the regal attitude which Paul himself assumed and
maintained towards all events and the whole world of
created things. He was incapable of defeat. The outrages
THE MINISTRY.
"Let a man so account of us, as of the ministers of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God. Moreover it is required in stewards, that a man be found faithful. But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged of you, or of man's judgment: yea, I judge not mine own self. For I know nothing by myself; yet am I not hereby justified: but he that judgeth me is the Lord. Therefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord come, who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts: and then shall every man have praise of God. And these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to myself and to Apollos for your sakes; that ye might learn in us not to think of men above that which is written, that no one of you be puffed up for one against another. For who maketh thee to differ from another? and what hast thou that thou didst not receive? now if thou didst receive it, why dost thou glory, as if thou hadst not received it? Now ye are full, now ye are rich, ye have reigned as kings without us: and I would to God ye did reign, that we also might reign with you. For I think that God hath set forth us the apostles last, as it were appointed to death: for we are made a spectacle unto the world, and to angels, and to men. We are fools for Christ's sake, but ye are wise in Christ; we are weak, but ye are strong; ye are honourable, but we are despised. Even unto this present hour we both hunger, and thirst, and are naked, and are buffeted, and have no certain dwellingplace: and labour, working with our own hands: being reviled, we bless; being persecuted, we suffer it: being defamed, we intreat: we are made as the filth of the earth, and are the offscouring of all things unto this day. I write not these things to shame you, but as my beloved sons I warn you. For though ye have ten thousand instructers in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel. Wherefore I beseech you, be ye followers of me."—1 Cor. iv. 1-16.
Paul now proceeds to demonstrate the futility of the
He who is conscious that he is the servant of Christ and must give account to Him, can always say with Paul, "It is a very small thing that I should be judged of man's judgment," whether for acquittal and applause or condemnation and abuse. He who utters what is peculiar to himself must expect to be misjudged by those who do not look at things from his point of view. A teacher who thinks for himself and is not a mere echo of other men, finds himself compelled to utter truths which he knows will be misunderstood by many; but so long as he is conscious that he is faithfully delivering what has been made known to himself, the condemnation of the many can trouble him very little or not at all. It is to his own Master he stands or falls; and if he feels sure that he is doing his Master's will, he may regret the opposition of men, but he can neither be greatly astonished nor greatly perturbed by it. And, on the other hand, the approval and applause of men come to him only as a reminder that there is no finality in man's judgment, and that it is only Christ's approval which avails to give permanent satisfaction. A sympathetic audience every teacher needs, but general approval will be his in the inverse ratio of the individuality of his teaching.
In his whole discussion of this subject Paul has named
only himself and Apollos, but he means that what he
has said of them should be applied to all. "These
things I have in a figure transferred to myself and to
Apollos for your sakes; that in us ye might learn
not to think of men above that which is written, that
no one of you be puffed up for one against another."
But great difficulty has always been experienced in
This theory of the efficacy of ministration in the
Church, with its entirely external account of its transmission,
is but one manifestation of the old superstition
that confounds the outward symbol of Christian grace
with that grace itself. It is a survival from a time in
which religion was treated as a kind of magic, in which
it was only needful to observe the right words of incantation
In some Churches reaction against the theory of
apostolical succession has led men to distrust and
repudiate ordination altogether, and to maintain that
any man may preach who can get people to listen to
him, and may administer the sacraments to any who
apply for them. No outward recognition by the Church
is deemed necessary. The middle course is safer,
which acknowledges not only the supreme necessity of
an inward call, but also the expediency of an outward
call by the Church. By an inward call it is meant
that it is the inward and spiritual fitness of any person
which constitutes his main right of entrance to the
ministry. There are certain mental and moral endowments,
But besides this inward persuasion wrought in the
mind of the individual, and which constitutes the inward
call, there must be an outward call also by the
Church's recognition of fitness and communication of
authority. Any man who at his own instance and on
his own authority gathers a congregation and dispenses
the sacraments is guilty of schism. Even
Barnabas and Paul were ordained by the Church.
As in the State a prince though legitimate does not
succeed to the throne without formal consecration and
coronation, so in the Church there is needed a formal
recognition of the title which any one claims to office.
It is not the consecration which constitutes the prince's
right; that he already possesses by birth: so, neither
is it the Church's ordination which qualifies and
entitles the minister to his office; this he already has
by the gift of Christ; but recognition by the Church
is needed to give him due authority to exercise the
functions of his office. It is a matter of expediency
and of order. It is calculated to maintain the unity
of the Church. Admission to the ministry being
regulated by those already in office, schisms are less
likely to occur. Ordination has been a bulwark
against fanaticism, against foolish private opinions and
doctrines, against divisive courses in worship and in
organization. If the Church was to be kept together
It would therefore seem to be every one's duty to
inquire, before he gives himself to another profession
or business, whether Christ is not claiming him to
serve in His Church. The qualifications which constitute
a call to the ministry are such as these: an
interest in men, in their ways, and habits, and character;
a social disposition, inclining you to mix with
other people, to take pleasure in their thoughts and
feelings, to be of service to them, to talk frankly with
them; a liking for reading, if not for hard study; some
capacity for thinking and arranging your thoughts
and expressing them, which, however, is to so great an
extent the result of study and practice that you may
find it impossible to say whether you have it or not.
There are negative qualifications equally important,
such as an indifference to money-making, a shrinking
from the eager competition and hurry of a business
life. And, above all, there are the deeper and essential
qualifications which are the fruit of the Spirit's sanctifying
energy: some genuine sense of your indebtedness
to Christ; a strong desire to serve Him; an ambition
to preach Him, to proclaim His worth, to invite men
to appreciate and love Him. If you have these desires,
and if you would fain be of use in things spiritual to
your fellow-men, then it would seem that you are
called by Christ to the ministry. I do not say that all
ministers are so qualified, but only that any one who
Paul concludes this portion of his Epistle with a pathetic comparison of his condition as an Apostle with the condition of those in Corinth who were glorying in this or that teacher. They spoke as if they needed his instructions no more, and as if already they had attained the highest Christian advantages. "Already ye are full; already ye are rich: ye have reigned as kings without us." They behave as if all the trial of the Christian life were over. With the frothy spirit of young converts, they are full of a triumph which they despise Paul for not inculcating. By one leap they had attained, or thought they had attained, a superiority to all disturbance, and to all trial, and to all need of teaching, which, in fact, as Paul's own experience taught him, could only be attained in another life. While they thus triumphed, he who had begotten them in Christ was being treated as the offscouring and filth of the world.
Paul can only compare himself and the other
Apostles to those gladiators who were condemned to
die, and who came into the arena last, after the
spectators had been sated with other exhibitions and
bloodless performances. "I think that God hath set
forth us the Apostles last, as it were appointed to
death. For we are made a spectacle unto the world,
and to angels and to men." They came into the
arena knowing they should never leave it alive, that
they were there for the purpose of enduring the worst
their enemies could do to them. It was no fight with
buttoned foils Paul and the rest were engaged in.
While others sat comfortably looking on, with curtains
to shade them from the heat and refreshments to save
And if the contrast between Paul's precarious and
self-sacrificing life and the luxurious and self-complacent
life of the Corinthians might be expected to
shame them into some vigorous Christian service, a
similar contrast candidly considered may accomplish
some good results in us. Already the Corinthians
were accepting that pernicious conception of Christianity
which looks upon it as merely a new luxury,
that they who are already comfortable in all outward
respects may be comforted in spirit as well and
purge their minds from all anxieties, questionings,
and strivings. They recognised how happy a thing
it is to be forgiven, to be at peace with God, to have
Are there none still who listen to Christianity rather
as a voice soothing their fears than as a bugle
summoning them to conflict, who are satisfied if
through the Gospel they are enabled to comfort their
own soul, and who do not yet respond to Christ's call
to live under the power of that Spirit of His which
prompted Him to all sacrifice? Paul does not
summon the whole Church to be homeless, destitute,
comfortless, outcast from all joy; and yet there is
meaning in his words when he says, "Be ye followers
of me." He means that there is not one standard of
duty for him and another for us. All is wrong with
us until we be made somehow to recognise, and make
room in our life for the recognition, that we have no
right to be lapping ourselves round with all manner
of selfish aggrandizement while Paul is driven through
life with scarcely one day's bread provided, that in
some way intelligible to our own conscience we must
approve ourselves to be his followers, and that no
right is secured to any class of Christians to stand
selfishly aloof from the common Christian cause. If
we be Christ's, as Paul was, it must inevitably come
It was Christ's own self-sacrifice that threw such a
spell over the Apostles and gave them so new a feeling
towards their fellow-men and so new an estimate of their
deepest needs. After seeing how Christ lived, they
could never again justify themselves in living for self.
After seeing His regardlessness of bodily comfort, His
superiority to traditional necessities and customary
luxuries, after witnessing how veritably He was but
passing through this world, and used it as the stage on
which He might serve God and men, and counted His
life best spent in giving it for others, they could not
settle down into the old life and aim only at passing
comfortably, reputably, and religiously through it.
That view of life was made for ever impossible to
them. The life of Christ had made a new way for
itself into a new region, and the horizon rent by the
passage never again closed to them. That life became
the only spiritual reality to them. And it is because
It might encourage us to bring our life more nearly
into the line of Paul's were we to see clearly that the
cause he served is really inclusive of all that is worth
working for. We can scarcely apprehend this with
any clearness without feeling some enthusiasm for it.
The kind of devotedness expected of the Christian is
illustrated in the lives of all men of any force of
character; the Christian's devotedness is only given
to a larger and more reasonable object. There have
been statesmen and patriots, and there still are such,
who, though possibly not absolutely devoid of some
taint of selfish ambition, are yet in the main devoted
to their country; its interests are continually on their
mind and heart, their time is given wholly to it, and
their own personal tastes and pursuits are held in
abeyance and abandoned to make room for more
important labour. You have seen men become so
enamoured of a cause that they will literally sell all
they have to forward it, and who obviously have it on
their hearts by night and by day, who live for that and
for nothing else; you can detect as often as you meet
them that the real aim and object of their life is to
promote that cause. Some new movement, political or
ecclesiastical, some literary scheme, some fresh enterprise
of benevolence, some new commercial idea, or no
matter what it is, you have seen again and again that
It is this then that our Lord does for us by claiming
our service; He gives us the opportunity of sinking
our selfishness, which is in the last analysis our sin,
and of living for a worthier object than our own
pleasure or our own careful preservation. When He
tells us to live for Him and to seek the things that are
His, He but tells us in other words and in a more
attractive and practical form to seek the common good.
EXCOMMUNICATION; OR, PURGING OUT THE OLD LEAVEN.
"For this cause have I sent unto you Timotheus, who is my beloved son, and faithful in the Lord, who shall bring you into remembrance of my ways which be in Christ, as I teach every where in every church. Now some are puffed up, as though I would not come to you. But I will come to you shortly, if the Lord will, and will know, not the speech of them which are puffed up, but the power. For the kingdom of God is not in word, but in power. What will ye? shall I come unto you with a rod, or in love, and in the spirit of meekness?"
"It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father's wife. And ye are puffed up, and have not rather mourned, that he that hath done this deed might be taken away from among you. For I verily, as absent in body, but present in spirit, have judged already as though I were present, concerning him that hath so done this deed. In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, to deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus. Your glorying is not good. Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump? Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us: therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth. I wrote unto you in an epistle not to company with fornicators: yet not altogether with the fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world. But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat. For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within? But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person."—1 Cor. iv. 17-v. 13.
The Corinthian Church had fallen into a common snare. Churches have always been tempted to pique themselves on their rich foundations and institutions, on producing champions of the faith, able writers, eloquent preachers, on their cultured ministry, on their rich and æsthetic services, and not on that very thing for which the Church exists: the cleansing of the morals of the people and their elevation to a truly spiritual and godly life. And it is the individuals who give character to any Church. "A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump." Each member of a Church in each day's conduct in business and at home stakes, not only his own reputation, but the credit of the Church to which he belongs. Involuntarily and unconsciously men lower their opinion of the Church and cease to expect to find in her a fountain of spiritual life, because they find her members selfish and greedy in business, ready to avail themselves of doubtful methods; harsh, self-indulgent, and despotic at home, tainted with vices condemned by the least educated conscience. Let us remember that our little leaven leavens what is in contact with us; that our worldliness and unchristian conduct tend to lower the tone of our circle, encourage others to live down to our level, and help to demoralize the community.
In the judgment Paul pronounces on the Corinthian
culprit two points are important. First, it is noteworthy
that Paul, Apostle though he was, did not
take the case out of the hands of the congregation.
His own judgment on the case was explicit and
But, second, the precise punishment intended by
Paul is couched in language which the present generation
cannot readily understand. The culprit is not
only to be excluded from Christian communion, but
"to be delivered unto Satan for the destruction of the
flesh, that the spirit may be saved." Many meanings Some account of the Jewish and other forms of excommunication
is given in the Encycl. Brit., art. Excommunication. Milman's
History of the Jews, Book XIX., should also be consulted, and the
Pontificale Romanum.
The necessity for keeping their communion pure, for
being a society with no leaven of wickedness among
them, Paul proceeds to urge and illustrate in the words,
"For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us;
therefore let us purge out the old leaven." The
allusion was, of course, much more telling to Jews than
it can possibly be to us; still, if we call to mind the
outstanding ideas of the Passover, we cannot fail to
feel the force of the admonition. That must be the
simplest explanation of the Passover which Jewish
parents were enjoined to give to their children, in the
words, "By strength of hand the Lord brought us out
of Egypt, from the house of bondage. And it came to
pass when Pharaoh would hardly let us go, that the
Lord slew all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, with
the firstborn of man and the firstborn of beast. Therefore
I sacrifice to the Lord all the firstborn being
males, but all the firstborn of my children I redeem."
That is to say, all the firstborn of animals they
sacrificed to God, slaying them on His altar, but
instead of slaying the human firstborns they redeemed
them by sacrificing a lamb in their stead. The whole
transaction of the night of the first Passover stood
Christ, then, is our Passover or Paschal Lamb, in the first place, because through Him there is made the acknowledgment that we belong to God. He is in very truth the prime and flower, the best representative of our race, the firstborn of every creature. He is the one who can make for all others this acknowledgment that we are God's people. And He does so by perfectly giving Himself up to God. This fact that we belong to God, that we men are His creatures and subjects, has never been perfectly acknowledged save by Christ. No individual or society of people has ever lived entirely for God. No man has ever fully recognised this apparently simple truth, that we are not our own, but God's. The Israelites made the acknowledgment in form, by sacrifice, but Christ alone made it in deed by giving Himself up wholly to do God's will. The Israelites made the acknowledgment from time to time, and with probably more or less truthfulness and sincerity, but Christ's whole spirit and habitual temper of mind was that of perfect obedience and dedication.
Only those of us, then, who see that we ought to live for God can claim Christ as our representative. His dedication to God is unmeaning to us if we do not desire to belong entirely to God. If He is our Passover, the meaning of this is that He gives us liberty to serve God; if we do not mean to be God's people, if we do not resolutely purpose to put ourselves at God's disposal, then it is idle and false of us to talk of Him as our Passover. Christ comes to bring us back to God, to redeem us from all that hinders our serving Him; but if we really prefer being our own masters, then manifestly He is useless to us. It is no matter what we say, nor what rites and forms we go through; the one question is, Do we at heart wish to give ourselves up to God? Does Christ really represent us,—represent, by His devoted unworldly life, our earnest and hearty desire and intention? Do we find in His life and death, in His submission to God and meek acceptance of all God appointed, the truest representation of what we ourselves would fain be and do, but cannot?
It is through this self-sacrifice of Christ that we can
become God's people, and enjoy all the liberties and
advantages of His people. Christ becomes the representative
of all whose state of mind His sacrifice
represents. If we would fain be of one mind and will
with God as Christ was, if we feel the degradation and
bitterness of failing God and disappointing the trust
He has confided in us His children, if our life is
wholly spoiled by the latent feeling that all is wrong
because we are not in harmony with the wise and
holy and loving Father, if we feel with more and more
distinctness, as life goes on, that there is a God, and
that the foundation of all happiness and soundness of
The Paschal Lamb then was in the first place the
acknowledgment by the Israelites that they belonged
to God. The lamb was offered to God, not as being
itself anything worthy of God's acceptance, but merely
as a way of saying to God that the family who offered
it gave themselves up as entirely to Him. But by
thus becoming a kind of substitute for the family, it
saved the firstborn from death. God did not wish
to smite Israel, but to save them. He did not wish to
confound them with the Egyptians, and make an indiscriminate
slaughter. But God did not simply omit the
Israelite houses, and pick out the Egyptian ones throughout
the land. He left it to the choice of the people
whether they would accept His deliverance and belong
to Him or not. He told them that every home would
be safe, on the door-posts of which there was visible
And now Christ our Passover is slain, and we are
asked to determine the application of Christ's sacrifice,
to say whether we will use it or no. We are not asked
to add anything to the efficacy of that sacrifice, but
only to avail ourselves of it. Passing through the
Sacrifices were in old times accompanied by feasts
But Paul's purpose in introducing the idea of the
Passover is rather to enforce his injunction to the
Corinthians to purge their communion of all defilement.
"Let us keep the feast, not with old leaven,
neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness!"
Leaven was judged unclean, because fermentation is
one form of corruption. This impurity was not to be
touched by the holy people during their festival week.
This was secured at the first keeping of the Passover
by the suddenness of the exodus when the people fled
with their kneading boards on their shoulders and had
no time to take leaven, and had therefore no choice but
to keep God's command and eat unleavened bread.
And so scrupulously did the people at all times
It is the purpose to keep the feast faithfully, and
live as those who are delivered from bondage, which
reveals in our consciousness how much we have to put
away, and how much of the old life is following on
into the new. Habits, feelings, likings and dislikings,
all go with us. The unleavened bread of holiness and
of a life bound to and ruled by the earnest and godly
life of Christ, seems flat and insipid, and we crave
something more stimulating to the appetite. The old
intolerance of regular, intelligent, continuous prayer,
the old willingness to find a rest in this world, must
be purged out as leaven which will alter the whole
character of our life. Are our holy days holidays, or
do we endure holiness of thought and feeling mainly
on the consideration that holiness is but for a season?
Patiently and believingly resist the stirrings of the
old nature. Measure all that rises in you and all that
quickens your blood and stirs your appetite by the
death and spirit of Christ. Sever yourself determinedly
from all that alienates you from Him. The old life
and the new should not run parallel with one another
so that you can pass from the one to the other. They
The old leaven is to be put away: "the leaven of malice and wickedness," the bad-heartedness that is not seen to be bad till brought into the light of Christ's spirit; the spiteful, vindictive, and selfish feelings that are almost expected in society, these are to be put away; and in their stead "the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth" is to be introduced. Above all things, Paul would say, let us be sincere. The word "sincere" sets before the mind the natural image from which the moral quality takes its name, the honey free from the smallest particle of wax, pure and pellucid. The word which Paul himself, using his own language, here sets down, conveys a similar idea. It is a word derived from the custom of judging the purity of liquids or the texture of cloths by holding them between the eye and the sun. What Paul desiderates in the Christian character is a quality which can stand this extreme test, and does not need to be seen only in an artificial light. He wants a pure transparent sincerity; he wants what is to its finest thread genuine; an acceptance of Christ which is real, and which is rich in eternal results.
Are we living a genuine and true life? Are we
living up to what we know to be the truth about life?
Christ has given us the true estimate of this world and
all that is in it, He has measured for us God's requirements,
He has shown us what is the truth about God's
love;—are we living in this truth? Do we not find
that in our best intentions there is some mixture of
foreign elements, and in our most assured choice of
Christ some remaining elements which will lead us
Let us, whatever else, be genuine. Let us not trifle with the purpose and requirements of Christ. In our deepest and clearest consciousness we see that Christ does open the way to the true life of man; that it is our part to make room for this self-sacrificing life in our own day and in our own circumstances; that until we do so we can only by courtesy be called Christians. The convictions and beliefs which Christ inspires are convictions and beliefs about what we should be, and what Christ means all human life to be, and until these convictions and beliefs are embodied in our actual living selves, and in our conduct and life, we feel that we are not genuine. Time will bring us no relief from this humiliating position, unless time brings us at length to yield ourselves freely to Christ's Spirit, and unless, instead of looking at the kingdom He seeks to establish as a quite impossible Utopia, we set ourselves resolutely and wholly to aid in the annexing to His rule our own little world of business and of all the relations of life. To have convictions is well, but if these convictions are not embodied in our life, then we lose our life, and our house is built on sand.
ON GOING TO LAW.
"Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints? Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters? Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life? If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the Church. I speak to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren? But brother goeth to law with brother, and that before the unbelievers. Now therefore there is utterly a fault among you, because ye go to law one with another. Why do ye not rather take wrong? why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded? Nay, ye do wrong, and defraud, and that your brethren. Know ye not that the unrighteous shall not inherit the kingdom of God? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God."—1 Cor. vi. 1-11.
The reasons which St. Paul adduces to give weight to his rebuke are important.
I. The saints are destined to judge the world, to judge angels; that is to say, to judge persons in separation from earthly interests, to judge unclothed detached spirits, to ascertain what is spiritually good and spiritually evil. Shall they not then be considered fit to judge little worldly matters, matters of £. s. d., matters of property and of bargain? This statement that the saints shall judge the world is one of those broad widely-suggestive statements with which St. Paul from time to time surprises us, making them casually, as if he had many more equally astounding facts in his knowledge which he might also reveal if he had leisure. It is difficult to grasp the statements which he makes in this style; it is also difficult to link a truth so revealed to the truths amid which we are now living; it is difficult even to ascertain with precision the bearing and significance of it.
It seems plain, however, that whatever else may be
implied in this statement, and in whatever way it is
to be fulfilled, St. Paul meant that ultimately, in that
final state of things towards which all present things
are growing and travelling, the men who are holy shall
be at the head of affairs, acknowledged as the fittest
to discern between right and wrong; and also that the
But equally worthy of remark is St. Paul's inference
from the fact that holiness shall eventually be supreme.
His inference is that it ought now to be regarded as
St. Paul, therefore, while he contrasts the subjects
in which a lawyer-like mind will find employment in
this world and the next, reminds us that those who
are here trained to understand character, and to discern
where right and justice lie, will be in no want of
employment in the world to come. The matters which
come before our courts, or which are referred privately
to lawyers, may often be in themselves very paltry.
A vast proportion of legal business is created by changes
from which the future life is exempt, changes consequent
on death, on marriage, on pecuniary disasters.
But underneath such suits as these the keenest of
human feelings are at work, and it is often in the power
of a lawyer to give a man advice which will save his
conscience from a life-long stain, or which will bring
comfort into a family instead of heart-burning, and
plenty in place of penury. The physician keeps us
in life; the minister of Christ tells us on what principles
we ought to live; but the lawyer takes our hand at
every great practical step in life, and it is his function
(and surely there is none higher) to insist on a conscientious
use of money, to point out the just claims
which others have upon us, to show us the right and the
wrong in all our ordinary affairs, and thus to bring justice
II. The second confirmation of his rebuke St. Paul brings forward in the fifth verse: "Is there not a wise man among yourselves?" "A wise man" was the technical term for a judge in the Hebrew courts.
To understand Paul's position we must bear in mind
that among the Jews there was no distinction between
Church and State. The courts appointed for the
determination of the minor causes in each locality were
composed of the same persons who constituted the
eldership of the synagogue. In the synagogue and by
the eldership offenders were both tried and punished.
Did Paul then mean that such legal cases as are now
tried in our civil courts should be settled by non-professional
men? Did he mean that ecclesiastical courts
should take out of the hands of the civil magistrate all
pleas regarding property, all disputes about commercial
transactions? Did he foresee none of the great evils
that have arisen wherever Church or State has not
respected the province of the other, and was he prepared
to put the power of the sword into the hand of ecclesiastics?
We think no one can read either his life
or his writings without seeing that this was not his
meaning. He taught men to submit themselves to the
powers that then were—i.e., to the heathen magistrates
of Rome—and he himself appealed to Cæsar. He had
no notion of subverting the ordinary legal procedure
and civil courts, but he would fain have deprived them
of much of their practice. He thought it might be
This rebuke is applicable even to a community like
our own, in which the courts of law are not heathen,
but Christian; and the principle on which the rebuke
is based is one that has gradually worked its way into
the heart of the community. It is felt, felt now even
by nations as well as by individuals, that if a dispute
can be settled by arbitration, this is not only cheaper,
quicker, and equally satisfactory, but that it is a more
generous and Christian way of getting justice done.
Those who hold office in the Church may not always
happen to be suitable arbitrators; they may not have
the technical and special knowledge requisite: but
Paul's counsel is acted on if disputes among Christians
be somehow adjusted in a friendly way, and without
the interference of an external authority. Christian
people may need legal advice; they may not know
what the right and wrong of a complicated case are;
they may be truly at a loss to understand how much
is justly theirs and how much their neighbour's; they
may often need professional aid to shed light on a
transaction: but when two Christians go to law in a
spirit of rancour, resolved to make good their own just
But some one will say to this, as to every unworldly,
truly Christian, and therefore novel and difficult counsel,
"It savours of theory and of romance; a man cannot
act it out unless he is prepared to be duped, and cheated,
and imposed upon. It is a theory that if carried out
must end in beggary." Just as if the world could be
regenerated by anything that is not apparently romantic!
If a greater good is to be reached, it must be by some
way that men have not tried before. The kingdoms of
this world will not become the kingdom of Christ by
the admission into our conduct of only that which men
have tried and found to be practicable, and void of all
risk, and requiring no devotion or sacrifice. If then,
any one says, "But if there is to be no going to law,
if we are not to force a man to give us our own,
we must continually be losers," the reply of a well-known
Kincardineshire lawyer might suffice, "Don't go
to law if yielding does not cost you more than forty
shillings in the pound." And from a different point of
view St. Paul replies, "Well, and what though you be
losers? The kingdom you belong to is not meat and
drink, but righteousness." If a man says, "We must
have some redress, some authority to extort the dues
that are not freely given; we must strike when we are
struck; when a man takes our coat, we must summon
him, or he will take our cloak next," St. Paul replies,
St. Paul then shows no hesitation about pushing his
doctrine to its consequences. He sees that the real
cure of wrangling, and of fraud, and of war is not
litigation, nor any outward restraint that can be laid
on the wrong-doer, but meekness, and unselfishness,
and unworldliness on the part of those who suffer
wrong. The world has laughed at this theory of social
regeneration all along; a few men in each generation
have believed in it, and have been ridiculed for their
While therefore it is a mistake to suppose that all
the laws which are to rule in the perfected kingdom of
God can find immediate and unmodified expression in
Paul knows that the Christian conscience is with
him when he declares that men should rather suffer
wrong than bring reproach on the Christian name:
FORNICATION.
"All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any. Meats for the belly, and the belly for meats: but God shall destroy both it and them. Now the body is not for fornication, but for the Lord; and the Lord for the body. And God hath both raised up the Lord, and will also raise up us by His own power. Know ye not that your bodies are the members of Christ? shall I then take the members of Christ, and make them the members of an harlot? God forbid. What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith he, shall be one flesh. But he that is joined unto the Lord is one spirit. Flee fornication. Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body. What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own? For ye are bought with a price: therefore glorify God in your body, and in your spirit, which are God's."—1 Cor. vi. 12-20.
To understand this Corinthian obliquity of moral
The great principle of Christian liberty, "All things
are lawful for me," Paul now sees he must guard
against abuse by adding, "But all things are not expedient."
The law and its modification are fully
explained in a subsequent passage of the Epistle
(viii.; x. 23, etc.). Here it may be enough to say
that Paul seeks to impress on his readers that the
question of duty is not answered by simply ascertaining
what is lawful; we must also ask whether the practice
or act contemplated is expedient. Though it may be
Again, "all things are lawful for me;" all things are
in my power. Yes, but for that very reason "I will
not be brought under the power of any." "The
reasonable use of my liberty cannot go the length of involving
my own loss of it." Godet.
Paul then proceeds more explicitly to apply these
principles to the matter in hand. The Corinthians
argued that if meats were morally indifferent, a man
being morally neither the better nor the worse for
eating food which had been offered in an idol's
temple, so also a man was neither better nor worse
for fornication. To expose the error of this reasoning
Paul draws a remarkable distinction between the digestive,
nutritive organs of the body and the body as a
whole. Paul believed that the body was an essential
part of human nature, and that in the future life the
natural body would give place to the spiritual body.
He believed also that the spiritual body was connected
with, and had its birthplace in, the natural body, so
that the body we now wear is to be represented by that
finer and more spiritual organism we are hereafter to be
clothed in. The connection of that future body with
the physical world and its dependence on material
things we cannot understand; but in some way inconceivable
by us it is to carry on the identity of our
present body, and thereby it reflects a sacredness
and significance on this body. The body of the full-grown
man or of the white-bearded patriarch is very
different from that of the babe in its mother's arms,
but there is a continuity that links them together and
gives them identity. So the future body may be very
Besides, these organs form no part of the future
spiritual body. They pass away with the meats for
But the body as a whole—for what is it made? These organs of nutrition fulfil their function when they lead you to eat such meat as sustains you in life; when does the body fulfil its function? What is its object and end? For what purpose have we a body? Paul is never afraid to suggest the largest questions, neither is he afraid to give his answer. "The body," he says, "is for the Lord, and the Lord for the body." Here also there is a mutual correspondence and fitness.
"The body is for the Lord." Paul was addressing
Christians, and this no Christian would be disposed
to deny. Every Christian is conscious that the body
would not fulfil its end and purpose unless it were
consecrated to the Lord and informed by His Spirit.
The organism by which we come into contact with the
world outside ourselves is not the unwieldy, hindering,
irredeemable partner of the spirit, but is designed to
be the vehicle of spiritual faculties and the efficient
agent of our Lord's purposes. It must not be looked
upon with resentment, pity, or contempt, but rather
as essential to our human nature and to the fulfilment
The body then is for the Lord. He finds in it His
needed instrument; without it He cannot accomplish
His will. And the Lord is for the body. Without
Him the body cannot develop into all it is intended to
be. It has a great future as well as the soul. Our
adoption as God's children is, in Paul's view, incomplete
until the body also is redeemed and has fought
its way through sickness, base uses, death, and dissolution
into likeness to the glorified body of Christ.
This body which we now identify with ourselves, and
apart from which it is difficult to conceive of ourselves,
is not the mere temporary lodging of the soul, which in
a few years must be abandoned; but it is destined to
preserve its identity through all coming changes, so
that it will be recognisable still as our body. But this
cannot be believed, far less accomplished, save by faith
in the fact that God has raised up the Lord Jesus and
will with Him raise us also. Otherwise the future of
the body seems brief and calamitous. Death seems
plainly to say, There is an end of all that is physical.
Yes, replies the resurrection of the Lord, in death there
is an end of this natural body; but death disengages
the spiritual body from the natural, and clothes the
spirit in a more fitting garb. Understand this we
The Lord then is for the body, because in the Lord the body has a future opened to it and present connections and uses which prepare it for that future. It is the Spirit of Christ who is, within us, the earnest of that future, and who forms us for it, inclining us while in the body and by means of it to sow to the Spirit and thus to reap life everlasting. Without Christ we cannot have this Spirit, nor the spiritual body He forms. The only future of the body we dare to look at without a shudder is the future it has in the Lord. God has sent Christ to secure for the body redemption from the fate which naturally awaits it, and apart from Christ it has no outlook but the worst. The Lord is for the body, and as well might we try to sustain the body now without food as to have any endurable future for it without the Lord.
But if the body is thus closely united to Christ in its
present use and in its destiny, if its proper function
and fit development can only be realized by a true
fellowship with Christ, then the inference is self-evident
that it must be carefully guarded from such
uses and impurities as involve rupture with Christ.
"Know ye not that your bodies are the members of
Christ? Shall I then take the members of Christ and
make them the members of an harlot? God forbid."
The Christian is one spirit with Christ. There is a
real community of spiritual life between them. It is
the spirit which possessed Christ which now possesses
the Christian. He has the same aims, the same
motives, the same view of life, the same hope, as his
Lord. It is in Christ he seeks to live, and he has no
Possible to every man is this personal union to
Christ, but to be united thus in one Spirit to Christ
and at the same time to be united to impurity is for
ever impossible. To be one with Christ in spirit and
at the same time to be one in body with what is
spiritually defiled is impossible, and the very idea is
monstrous. Devotedness to Christ is possible, but it
is incompatible with any act which means that we
become one in body with what is morally polluted.
If the Christian is as truly a member of Christ's body
as were the hands and eyes of the body He wore on
earth, then the mind shrinks, as from blasphemy, from
following out the thought of Paul. And if any frivolous
Corinthian still objected that such acts went no deeper
than the eating of food ceremonially unclean, that
And this is what Paul means when he goes on to say, "Every sin that a man doeth is without the body; but he that committeth fornication sinneth against his own body." He does not mean that this is the only sin committed by the body, for of many other sins the body is the agent, as in murder, lying, blasphemy, robbery, and thieving. Neither does he mean that this is the only sin to which bodily appetite instigates, for gluttony and drunkenness equally take their rise in bodily appetite. But he means that this is the only sin in which the present connection of the body with Christ and its future destiny in Him are directly sinned against. This is the only sin, he means, which by its very nature alienates the body from Christ, its proper Partner. Other sins indirectly involve separation from Christ; this explicitly and directly transfers allegiance, and sunders our union with Him. By this sin a man detaches himself from Christ; he professes to be united to what is incompatible with Christ.
These weighty reasonings and warm admonitions,
into which Paul throws his whole energy, are concluded
by the statement of a twofold truth which is of much
wider application than to the matter in hand: "Ye
are bought with a price to be the temple of the Holy
Ghost." We are bought with a price, and are no longer
our own. The realities underlying these words are
gladly owned in every Christian consciousness. God
has caused us to recognise how truly we are His by
We are not our own; we belong to Him who has
loved us most; and His love will be satisfied when we
suffer Him to dwell in us, so that we shall be His
temples, and shall glorify Him in body and in spirit.
God claims our body as well as our spirit; He has
a purpose for our body as well as for our spirit. Our
body is to glorify Him in the future and now: in
the future, by exhibiting how the Divine wisdom has
triumphed over all that threatens the body, and has
used all the present bodily experiences for preparing
a permanent spiritual embodiment of all human faculties
and joys; and now, by putting itself at the disposal of
God for the accomplishment of His will. We glorify
God by allowing Him to fulfil His purpose of love in
creating us. What that purpose is we cannot wholly
know; but trusting ourselves to His love, we can, by
obeying Him, have it more and more accomplished in
us. And it is the consciousness that we are God's
temples which constantly incites us to live worthily of
Him. To say that we are temples of God is not to use
a figure of speech. It is the temple of stone that is
the figure; the true dwelling-place of God is man. In
nothing can God reveal Himself as He can in man.
Through nothing else can He express so much of what
is truly Divine. It is not a building of stone which
forms a fit temple for God; it is not even the heaven
of heavens. In material nature only a small part of
God can be seen and known. It is in man, able to
choose what is morally good, able to resist temptation,
to make sacrifices for worthy ends, to determine his
own character; it is in man, whose own will is his
law, and who is not the mere mechanical agent of
MARRIAGE.
"Now concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me: It is good
for a man not to touch a woman. Nevertheless, to avoid fornication,
let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own
husband. Let the husband render unto the wife due benevolence:
and likewise also the wife unto the husband. The wife hath not
power of her own body, but the husband, and likewise also the
husband hath not power of his own body, but the wife. Defraud ye
not one the other, except it be with consent for a time, that ye may
give yourselves to fasting and prayer; and come together again, that
Satan tempt you not for your incontinency. But I speak this by
permission, and not of commandment. For I would that all men
were even as I myself. But every man hath his proper gift of God
one after this manner, and another after that. I say therefore to the
unmarried and widows, It is good for them if they abide even as I.
But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry
than to burn. And unto the married I command, yet not I, but the
Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband: but and if she
depart, let her remain unmarried, or be reconciled to her husband:
and let not the husband put away his wife. But to the rest speak I,
not the Lord: If any brother hath a wife that believeth not, and she
be pleased to dwell with him, let him not put her away. And the
woman which hath an husband that believeth not, and if he be
pleased to dwell with her, let her not leave him. For the unbelieving
husband is sanctified by the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified
by the husband: else were your children unclean; but now are they
holy. But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a
sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to
peace. For what knowest thou, O wife, whether thou shalt save thy
husband? or how knowest thou, O man, whether thou shalt save
thy wife? But as God hath distributed to every man, as the Lord
hath called every one, so let him walk. And so ordain I in all
churches. Is any man called being circumcised? let him not become
uncircumcised. Is any called in uncircumcision? let him not be
circumcised. Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing,
but the keeping of the commandments of God. Let every man abide
is the remonstrance of the Greek maiden against the
unnatural custom which prevailed of allowing no
intimacy, and scarcely any real acquaintance, prior to
marriage. The lack of warmth and personal interest
which characterizes the Greek plays arises mainly from
the circumstance that among the Greeks there was
Secondly, it is to be considered that not only had
Paul to speak of marriage as he found it, but also that
he was here only giving answers to some special
questions, and not discussing the whole subject in all
its bearings. There might be other points which to his
mind seemed equally important; but his advice not
having been asked about these, he passes them by.
He introduces the subject in a manner fitted to remind
us that he has no intention of propounding his views
on marriage in a complete and systematic form: "Now
concerning the things whereof ye wrote unto me."
There had arisen in the Corinthian Church certain
scruples about marriage; and as the Church was composed
of persons who would naturally take very different
views on the subject, these scruples might not be
easily removed. Among the Jews it was believed that
marriage was a duty, "so much so that he who at the
age of twenty had not married was considered to have
sinned." Among the Gentiles the tendency to celibacy
was so strong that it was considered necessary to
counteract it by legal enactment. In a community
previously disposed to take such opposite views of
marriage difficulties were sure to arise. Those who
were predisposed to disparage the married state
would throw contempt upon it as a mere concession to
the flesh; they apparently even urged that, Christians
being new creatures, their whole previous relationships
The questions referred to Paul resolve themselves into two: whether the unmarried are to marry, and whether the married are to continue to live together.
In reply to the former question, whether the unmarried are to marry, he first states the duty of unmarried persons themselves (in vers. 2, 7-9); and afterwards (in vers. 25-39) he explains the duty of parents to their unmarried daughters.
I. First then we have Paul's counsel to the unmarried.
This is summed up in the words, "I say
therefore to the unmarried and widows, It is good
for them if they abide even as I;" that is to say, if
they remain unmarried, Paul being probably the only
unmarried Apostle. But if any man's temperament be
such that he cannot settle undistractedly to his work
without marrying; if he is restless and ill at ease, and
full of natural cravings which make him think much of
marriage, and make him feel sure he would be less
distracted in married life—then, says Paul, let such an
one by all means marry. But do not misunderstand
me, he says; this is permission I am giving you, not
commandment. I do not say you must or ought to
marry; I say you may, and in certain circumstances
ought. Those among you who say a man sins if he do
not marry, talk nonsense. Those among you who feel
a quiet superiority because you are married, and think
of unmarried people as undergraduates who have not
attained a degree equal to yours, are much mistaken if
you suppose that I am of your mind. When I say,
"Let every man have his own wife, and let every
woman have her own husband," I do not mean that
every man who wishes to come as near perfection as
But this advice of Paul's proceeds, not from any ascetic tendency, but from the practical bias of his mind. He had no idea that marriage was a morally inferior condition; on the contrary, he saw in it the most perfect symbol of the union of Christ and the Church. But he thought that unmarried men were likely to be most available for the work of Christ; and therefore he could not but wish it possible, though he knew it was not possible, that all unmarried men should remain unmarried.
His reason for thinking that unmarried men would
be more efficient in the service of Christ is given in
the thirty-second and thirty-third verses: "He that
is unmarried careth for the things that belong to the
Lord, how he may please the Lord; but he that is
married careth for the things that are of the world,
how he may please his wife," an opinion quite
similar to that which Lord Bacon pronounced when
he said, "Certainly the best works, and of greatest
merit for the public, have proceeded from the unmarried
or childless men, who both in affection and
means have married and endowed the public." Given
two men with equal desire to serve Christ, but the
one married and the other unmarried, it is obvious
But while Paul makes no scruple of saying that for many purposes the unmarried man is the more available, he says also, Beware how you individually think yourself a hero, and able to forego marriage. Beware lest, by choosing a part which you are not fit for, you give Satan an advantage over you, and expose yourself to constant temptation, and pass through life distracted by needless deprivation. "Far be it from me," says Paul, "to cast a snare upon you," to invite or encourage you into a position against which your nature would unceasingly rebel, to prompt you to attempt that for which you are constitutionally unfit, and thereby to make your life a chronic temptation. "Every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, another after that." And if any man fancies that, because there are advantages in being unmarried, therefore that is the best state for him, or if, on the other hand, any man fancies that, because most men seem to find great happiness in marriage, he also needs marriage to complete his happiness, both of these men leave out of account that which is chiefly to be taken into account, viz., the special temperament, calling, and opportunities of each.
The common-sense and wise counsel of this chapter
are sometimes half jestingly put aside by the idle
remark that Paul, being himself unmarried, takes a
biassed view of the subject. But the chief merit of the
whole passage is that Paul positively and expressly
declines to judge others by himself, or himself by
others. What is good for one man in this respect
is not good, he says, for another; every man must
ascertain for himself what is best for him. And this
is precisely what is lacking in popular feeling and talk
about marriage. People start in life, and are encouraged
It is this then which not only signally illustrates
the judicial balance of the Apostle's mind, but at the
same time gives us the key to the whole chapter. The
capacity for celibacy is a gift of God to him who
possesses it, a gift which may be of eminent service,
but to which no moral value can be attached. There
are many such diversities of gifts among men, gifts of
immense value, but which may belong to bad as well
as to good men. For example, two men travel together;
the one can go without food for twelve hours, the other
But while there is no virtue in remaining unmarried,
there is virtue in remaining unmarried for the sake of
serving Christ better. Some persons are kept single
by mere selfishness; having been accustomed to orderly
and quiet ways, they shrink from having their personal
peace broken in upon by the claims of children. Some
shrink from being tied down to any definite settlement
in life; they like to feel unencumbered, and free to
shift their tent at short notice. Some dread responsibility
and the little and great anxieties of family life.
A few have the feeling of the miser, and prefer the
possibility of many conceivable marriages to the actuality
of one. For such persons to make a virtue of their
celibacy is absurd. But all honour to those who
recognise that they are called to some duty they could
not discharge if married! All honour to that eldest son
of an orphaned family who sees that it is not for him
to please himself, but to work for those who have none
to look to but him! There are here and there persons
who from the highest motives decline marriage:
persons conscious of some hereditary weakness, physical
II. St. Paul's counsel to the married. Some of the
Corinthians seem to have thought that, because they
were new creatures in Christ, their old relations should
be abandoned; and they put to Paul the question
whether a believing man who had an unbelieving wife
ought not to forsake her. Paul had shrewdness enough
to see that if a Christian might separate from an unbelieving
wife on the sole ground that he was a Christian,
this easy mode of divorce might lead to a large and
most unwelcome influx of pretended Christians into the
Church. He therefore lays down the law that the
The principle, "Let every man abide in the same calling wherein he was called," is of wide application. The slave who heard God's call to him to become His child was not to think he must resent being a slave and assert his Christian liberty by requiring emancipation from earthly servitude. On the contrary, he must be content with the inward possession of the freedom Christ had given him, and must show his liberty by the willingness and spontaneity of his submission to all his outward conditions. It is not externals that make a Christian; and if God's grace has found a man in unlikely circumstances, that is the best evidence he can have that he will find opportunity of serving God in those circumstances, if there be no sin in them. It throws great light on the relation which we as Christians hold to the institutions of our country, and generally to outward things, when we understand that Christianity does not begin by making external changes, but begins within and gradually finds its way outwards, modifying and rectifying all it meets.
But the principle to which Paul chiefly trusts, he
LIBERTY AND LOVE.
"Now as touching things offered unto idols, we know that we all have knowledge. Knowledge puffeth up, but charity edifieth. And if any man think that he knoweth anything, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know. But if any man love God, the same is known of him. As concerning therefore the eating of those things that are offered in sacrifice unto idols, we know that an idol is nothing in the world, and that there is none other God but one. For though there be that are called gods, whether in heaven or in earth, (as there be gods many, and lords many,) but to us there is but one God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in Him; and one Lord Jesus Christ, by whom are all things, and we by Him. Howbeit there is not in every man that knowledge: for some with conscience of the idol unto this hour eat it as a thing offered unto an idol; and their conscience being weak is defiled. But meat commendeth us not to God: for neither, if we eat, are we the better; neither, if we eat not, are we the worse. But take heed lest by any means this liberty of yours become a stumbling-block to them that are weak. For if any man see thee which hast knowledge sit at meat in the idol's temple, shall not the conscience of him which is weak be emboldened to eat those things which are offered to idols; and through thy knowledge shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died? But when ye sin so against the brethren, and wound their weak conscience, ye sin against Christ. Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend."—1 Cor. viii. 1-13.
"All things are lawful for me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but all things edify not. Let no man seek his own, but every man another's wealth. Whatsoever is sold in the shambles, that eat, asking no question for conscience' sake: for the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof. If any of them that believe not bid you to a feast, and ye be disposed to go; whatsoever is set before you, eat, asking no question for conscience' sake. But if any man say unto you, This is offered in sacrifice unto idols, eat not for his sake that showed it, and for conscience' sake: for the earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof: conscience, I say, not thine own, but of the other: for why is my liberty judged of another man's conscience? For if I by grace be a partaker, why am I evil spoken of for that for which I give thanks? Whether therefore ye eat, or drink, or whatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God. Give none offence, neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the Church of God: even as I please all men in all things, not seeking mine own profit, but the profit of many, that they may be saved. Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ."—1 Cor. x. 23-xi. 1.
Among the Jews it had always been considered
pollution to eat such food. Instances are on record
of men dying cheerfully rather than suffer such contamination.
Few Jewish Christians could rise to the
height of our Lord's maxim, "Not that which goeth into
a man defileth him." The Gentile converts also felt
the difficulty of at once throwing off all the old
associations. When they entered the temple where
but a few months ago they had worshipped, the
atmosphere of the place intoxicated them; and the long-accustomed
sights quickened their pulse and exposed
them to serious temptation. Others, less sensitive, could
use the temple as they would an ordinary eating-house,
without the slightest stirring of idolatrous feeling.
Some went to the houses of heathen friends as often
as they were invited, and partook of what was set
before them, making no minute inquiries as to how the
meat had been provided, asking no questions for conscience'
sake, but believing that the earth and its fulness
were the Lord's, and that what they ate they received
from God, and not from an idol. Others, again, could
not shake off the feeling that they were countenancing
idolatry when they partook of such feasts. Thus there
arose a diversity of judgment and a variance in practice
In answer to the appeal made to him on this subject, it might seem that Paul had nothing to do but quote the deliverance of the Council of Jerusalem, which determined that Gentile converts should be commanded to abstain from meats offered to idols. Paul himself had obtained that deliverance, and was satisfied with it; but now he makes no reference to it, and treats the question afresh. In the epistles of the Lord to the Churches, embodied in the Book of Revelation, the eating of things sacrificed to idols is spoken of in strongly condemnatory language; and in one of the very earliest non-canonical documents of the primitive Church we find the precept, "Abstain carefully from things offered to idols, for that is worship of dead gods." Paul's disregard of the decision of the Council is probably due to his belief that that decision was merely provisional and temporary. He had founded Churches which could scarcely be expected to go past himself for guidance; and as the situation in the Corinthian Church was different from what it had been in Antioch, he felt justified in treating the matter afresh. And while in the early Church the partaking of sacrificial food which Paul allowed was sometimes vehemently condemned, this was due to the circumstance that it was sometimes used as a test of a man's abandonment of idolatry. Of course where this was the case no Christian could possibly be in doubt regarding the proper course to follow. What a man may freely do in ordinary circumstances, he may not do if he is warned that certain inferences will be drawn from his action.
The case laid before Paul then belongs to the class known as matters morally indifferent. These are matters upon which conscience does not uniformly give the same verdict even among persons brought up under the same moral law. On mingling with society, every one finds that there are many points of conduct regarding which there is not an unanimous consent of judgment among the most delicately conscientious people, and upon which it is difficult to decide even when we are anxious to do right. Such points are the lawfulness of attending certain places of public amusement, the propriety of allowing one's self to be implicated in certain kinds of private amusements or entertainments, the way of spending Sunday, and the amount of pleasure, refinement, and luxury one may admit into his life.
The state of feeling produced in Corinth by the discussion
of such topics is apparent from Paul's mode of
treating the question put to him. His answer is addressed
to the party who claimed superior knowledge,
who wished to be known as the party which stood for
liberty of conscience, and probably for the Pauline
axiom, "All things are lawful for me." Paul does not
directly address those who had scruples about eating,
but those who had none. He does not speak to, but
only of, the "weak" brethren who had still conscience
of the idol. And apparently a good deal of ill-feeling
had been engendered in the Corinthian Church by the
different views taken. This is always the trouble in
connection with morally indifferent matters. They do
little harm if each holds his own opinion genially and
endeavours to influence others by a friendly statement
of his own practice and the grounds of it. But in
most instances it happens as in Corinth: those who
As a first step towards the settlement of this matter, Paul makes the largest concession to the party of liberty. Their clear perception that an idol was nothing in the world, a mere bit of timber, and of no more significance to a Christian than a pillar or a doorpost—this knowledge is sound and commendable. At the same time, they need not make quite so much of it as they were doing. In their letter of inquiry they must have emphasized the fact that they were the party of enlightenment, who saw things as they really were, and had freed themselves from fantastic superstitions and antiquated ideas. Quite true, says Paul, "we all have knowledge;" but you need not remind me at every turn of your superior discernment of the Christian's true position nor of your wonderfully sagacious discovery that an idol is nothing in the world. Any Jewish schoolboy could have told you this. I know that you understand the principles which should regulate your intercourse with the heathen much better than the scrupulous do, and that your views of liberty are my own. Let us then hear no more of this. Do not always be returning upon this, as if this settled the whole matter. You are in the right so far as regards knowledge, and your brethren are weak; let that be conceded: but do not suppose you settle the question or impress me more strongly with the righteousness of your conduct by reiterating that you, whom your brethren call lax and misguided, are better instructed in the principle of Christian conduct than they. Once for all, I know this.
Does this then not settle the question? If—the party
of liberty might say—if we are right, if the idol is
nothing, and an idol's temple no more than an ordinary
dining-room, does this not settle the whole matter?
By no means, says Paul. "Knowledge puffeth up,
but charity edifieth." You have as yet grasped only
one end, and that the weaker end, of the Christian rule.
You must add love, consideration of your neighbour
to your knowledge. Without this, knowledge is unwholesome
and as likely to do harm as to do good.
In very similar terms the founder of the Positive philosophy
speaks of the evil results of loveless knowledge.
"I am free to confess," he says, "that hitherto the
Positive spirit has been tainted with the two moral
evils which peculiarly wait on knowledge. It puffs up,
and it dries the heart, by giving free scope to pride
and by turning it from love." It is indeed matter of
everyday observation that men of ready insight into
moral and spiritual truth are prone to despise the less
enlightened spirits that stumble among the scruples
which, like the bats of the moral twilight, fly in their
faces. The knowledge which is not tempered by
humility and love does harm both to its possessor and
to other Christians; it puffs up its possessor with scorn,
and it alienates and embitters the less enlightened.
Knowledge without love, knowledge which does not
take into consideration the difficulties and scruples of
brethren, cannot be admired or commended, for though
in itself a good thing and capable of being used for
the advancement of the Church, knowledge dissociated
from charity can do good neither to him who possesses
it nor to the Christian community. However the
possessors of such knowledge vaunt themselves as the
men of progress and the hope of the Church, it is not
Paul's law then is that liberty must be tempered by love; that the individual must consider the society of which he forms a part; and that, after his own conscience is satisfied regarding the legitimacy of certain actions, he must further consider how the conscience of his neighbour will be affected if he uses his liberty and does these actions. He must endeavour to keep step with the Christian community of which he forms a part, and must beware of giving offence to less enlightened persons by his freer conduct. He must consider not only whether he himself can do this or that with a good conscience, but also how the conscience of those who know what he does will be affected by it.
Applying this law to the matter in hand, Paul
declares that, for his own part, he has no scruples
at all about meat. "Meat commendeth us not to
God: for neither, if we eat, are we the better; neither,
if we eat not, are we the worse." If therefore I had
to consult only my own conscience, the matter would
It is easy to imagine how this would be exemplified
at a Corinthian table. Three Christians are
invited, with other guests, to a party in the house
of a heathen friend. One of these invited Christians
is weakly scrupulous, unable to disentangle himself
from the old idolatrous associations connected with
sacrificial meat. The other two Christians are men
of ampler view and more enlightened conscience, and
have the deepest conviction that scruples about eating
at a heathen table are baseless. All three recline at
In our own society similar cases necessarily arise.
I, as a Christian man, and knowing that the earth and
its fulness are the Lord's, may feel at perfect liberty to
drink wine. Had I only myself to consider, and knowing
that my temptation does not lie that way, I might
use wine regularly or as often as I felt disposed to
enjoy a needed stimulant. I may feel quite convinced
in my own mind that morally I am not one whit the
worse of doing so. But I cannot determine whether
I am to indulge myself or not without considering the
effect my conduct will have on others. There may be
among my friends some who know that their temptation
does lie that way, and whose conscience bids them
Or again, a lad has had the great good fortune to be brought up in a Puritanic household, and has imbibed stringent moral principles, with perhaps somewhat narrow ideas. He has been taught, together with much else of the same character, that the influence of the theatre is in our country demoralizing, that one day in the week is little enough to give to the claims of spiritual education, and so forth. But on entering the life of a great city he is soon brought in contact with men whose uprightness, and sagacity, and Christian spirit he cannot but respect, but who yet read their weekly paper, or any book they are interested in, as freely on Sunday as on Saturday, and who visit the theatre without the slightest twinge of conscience. Now either of two things will probably happen in such a case. The young man's ideas of Christian liberty may become clearer. He may attain the standpoint of Paul, and may see that fellowship with Christ can be maintained in conditions of life he once absolutely condemned. Or the young man may not grow in Christian perception, but being daunted by overpowering example, and chafing under the raillery of his companions, may do as others do, though still uneasy in his own conscience.
What is to be observed about this process, which is
ceaselessly going on in society, is that the emboldening
of conscience is one thing, its enlightenment quite
another. And were it possible to get statistics of the
proportion of cases in which the one process goes on
without the other, these statistics might be salutary.
The results of this are disastrous. Conscience is
dethroned. The ship no longer obeys her helm, and
lies in the trough of the sea swept by every wave and
driven by every wind. It may indeed be said, What
harm can come of persons less enlightened being
emboldened to do as we do if what we do is right?
Is not that, most strictly speaking, edification? It is
not as if we emboldened any one to transgress the
moral law; we are merely bringing our weak brother's
conduct up to the level of our own. Do we not act
wisely and well in so doing? Again it must be
answered, No, because, while yielding themselves to
the influence of your example, these persons abandon
the guidance of their own conscience, which may be a
less enlightened, but is certainly a more authoritative,
guide than you. If the weak brother does a right
thing while his conscience tells him it is a wrong thing,
to him it is a wrong thing. "Whatsoever is not of
faith is sin;" that is to say, whatsoever is not dictated
Two permanent lessons are preserved in this exposition which Paul gives of the matter laid before him. The first is the sacredness or supremacy of conscience. "Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind;" that is the one legitimate source of conduct. A man may possibly do a wrong thing when he obeys conscience; he is certainly wrong when he acts contrary to conscience. He may be helped to a decision by the advice of others, but it is his own decision by which he must abide. He must act, not on the conviction of others, but on his own. It is what he himself sees that must guide him. He is bound to use every means to enlighten his conscience and to learn with accuracy what is right and allowable, but he is also bound always to act upon his own present perception of what is right. His conscience may not be as enlightened as it ought to be. Still his duty is to enlighten, not to violate, it. It is the guide God has given us, and we must not choose another.
The second lesson is that we must ever use our
Christian liberty with Christian consideration of others.
Love must mingle with all we do. There are many
Our conduct must be limited and to a certain extent
regulated by the narrow-mindedness, the scruples, the
prejudices, the weakness in short, of others. We
cannot say, I see my way to do so-and-so, let my
friend think what he pleases; I am not to be trammelled
by his superstition or ignorance; let my conduct have
what effect it will on him; I am not responsible for
that; if he does not see it to be right, I do, and I will
act accordingly. We cannot speak thus if the matter
be indifferent; if it be a matter we can lawfully abstain
from, then abstain we must if we would follow the
Apostle who followed Christ. This is the practical
law which stands in the forefront of Christ's teaching
and was sealed by every day of His life. It is enounced
not only by St. Paul: "Destroy not him with thy
meat for whom Christ died;" "Through thy knowledge
shall the weak brother perish, for whom Christ died,"
but also in our Lord's still more emphatic words,
"Whoso shall offend one of these little ones which
believe in Me, it were better for him that a millstone
were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned
in the depth of the sea." Paul could not look on his
weak brethren as narrow-minded bigots, could not call
them hard names and ride rough-shod over their
scruples; and to this delicate consideration he was
aided by the remembrance that these were the persons
for whom Christ died. For them Christ sacrificed, not
merely a little feeling or a little of His own way, but
His own will and self entirely. And the spirit of Christ
is still manifested in all in whom He dwells, specially
in a humility and yieldingness of disposition which is
MAINTENANCE OF THE MINISTRY.
"Am I not an apostle? am I not free? have I not seen Jesus Christ our Lord? are not ye my work in the Lord? If I be not an apostle unto others, yet doubtless I am to you: for the seal of mine apostleship are ye in the Lord. Mine answer to them that do examine me is this, Have we not power to eat and to drink? Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other Apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas? Or I only and Barnabas, have not we power to forbear working? Who goeth a warfare any time at his own charges? who planteth a vineyard, and eateth not of the fruit thereof? or who feedeth a flock, and eateth not of the milk of the flock? Say I these things as a man? or saith not the Law the same also? For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen? Or saith He it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this is written: that he that ploweth should plow in hope; and that he that thresheth in hope should be partaker of his hope. If we have sown unto you spiritual things, is it a great thing if we shall reap your carnal things? If others be partakers of this power over you, are not we rather? Nevertheless we have not used this power; but suffer all things, lest we should hinder the Gospel of Christ. Do ye not know that they which minister about holy things live of the things of the temple? and they which wait at the altar are partakers with the altar? Even so hath the Lord ordained that they which preach the Gospel should live of the Gospel. But I have used none of these things: neither have I written these things, that it should be so done unto me: for it were better for me to die, than that any man should make my glorying void. For though I preach the Gospel, I have nothing to glory of: for necessity is laid upon me; yea, woe is unto me, if I preach not the Gospel! For if I do this thing willingly, I have a reward: but if against my will, a dispensation of the Gospel is committed unto me. What is my reward then? Verily that, when I preach the Gospel, I may make the Gospel of Christ without charge, that I abuse not my power in the Gospel. For though I be free from all men, yet have I made myself servant unto all, that I might gain the more. And unto the Jews I became as a Jew, that I might gain the Jews; to them that are under the Law, as under the Law, that I might gain them that are under the Law; to them that are without law, as without law, (being not without law to God, but under the Law to Christ,) that I might gain them that are without law. To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some."—1 Cor. ix. 1-22.
Paul then had certain rights which he was resolved should be acknowledged, although he waived them. He maintains that if he saw fit, he might require the Church to maintain him, and to maintain him not merely in the bare way in which he was content to live, but to furnish him with the ordinary comforts of life. He might, for example, he says, require the Church to enable him to keep a wife and to pay not only his own, but her, travelling expenses. The other Apostles apparently took their wives with them on their apostolic journeys, and may have found them useful in gaining access for the Gospel to the secluded women of Eastern and Greek cities. He might also, he says, "forbear working;" might cease, that is to say, from his tent-making and look to his converts for support. He is indignant at the sordid, or malicious, or mistaken spirit which could deny him such support.
This claim to support and privilege Paul rests on
But not every one who had seen the Lord after His resurrection was an apostle, but those only who by Him were commissioned to witness to it; and that Paul had been thus commissioned he thinks the Corinthians may conclude from the results among themselves of his preaching. The Church at Corinth was the seal of his apostleship. What was the use of quibbling about the time and manner of his ordination, when the reality and success of his apostolic work were so apparent? The Lord had acknowledged his work. In presence of the finished structure that draws the world to gaze, it is too late to ask if he who built it is an architect. Would that every minister could so prove the validity of his orders!
2. Paul maintains his right to support on the
principle of remuneration everywhere observed in human
affairs. The soldier does not go to war at his own
And lest any one should sanctimoniously or ignorantly
say, "These secular principles have no application
to sacred things," Paul anticipates the objection,
and dismisses it: "Say I these things as a man? or
saith not the Law the same also?" I am not introducing
into a sacred region principles which rule only in
secular matters. Does not the Law say, "Thou shalt
not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn"? It must
be allowed to live by its labour. As it threshes out
the wheat, it must be allowed to feed itself, mouthful
This law that a man shall live by his labour is a two-edged law. If a man produce what the community needs, he should himself profit by the production; but, on the other hand, if a man will not work, neither should he eat. Only the man who produces what other men need, only the man who by his industry or capability contributes to the good of the community, has any right to profits. Quick and easy manipulations of money, shrewd and risky dexterities which yield no real benefit to the community, deserve no remuneration. It is a blind, sordid, and contemptible spirit that hastes to be rich by one or two successful transactions that profit no one. A man should be content to live on what he is worth to the community. Here also our minds are often confused by the complexities of business; but on that account it is all the more necessary that we firmly adhere to the few essential canons, such as that "trading ceases to be just when it ceases to benefit both parties," or that a man's wealth should truly represent his value to society. Conscience enlightened by allegiance to the Spirit of Christ is a much more satisfactory guide for the individual in trade, speculation, and investment than any trade customs or economic theories.
3. A third ground on which Paul rests his claim
to be supported by the Church is ordinary gratitude:
4. Lastly, Paul argues from the Levitical usage to the Christian. Both in heathen countries and among the Jews it was customary that they who ministered in holy things should live by the offerings of the people to the temple. Levites and priests alike had been thus maintained among the Jews. "Even so hath the Lord ordained that they which preach the Gospel should live of the Gospel." Were there no recorded command of the Lord to this effect, we might suppose Paul merely argued that this was the Lord's will; but among the original instructions given to the seventy who were first sent to preach the kingdom of heaven, we find this: "Into whatsoever house ye enter, there remain, eating and drinking such things as they give, for the labourer is worthy of his hire."
That evils may result from the existence of a paid
ministry no one will be disposed to deny. Some of
the most disastrous abuses in the Church of Christ,
as well as some of the gravest political troubles, could
Paul felt himself the more free to urge these claims because his custom was to forego them all in his own case. "I have used none of these things: neither have I written these things, that it should be so done unto me; for it were better for me to die, than that any man should make my glorying void." Here again we come upon the sound judgment and honest heart that are never biassed by his own personal circumstances or insist that what is fit for him is fit for every one. How apt are self-denying men to spoil their self-denial by dropping a sneer at the weaker souls that cannot follow their heroic example. How ready are men who can live on little and accomplish much to leave the less robust Christians to justify on their own account their need of human comforts. Not so Paul. He first fights the battle of the weak for them, and then disclaims all participation in the spoils. What a nobility and sagacity in the man who himself would accept no remuneration for his work, and who yet, so far from thinking slightingly of those who did or even being indifferent to them, argues their case for them with an authoritative force they did not themselves possess!
Nor does he consider that his self-denial is at all
meritorious. He has no desire to signalize himself
as more disinterested than other men. On the contrary,
he strives to make it appear as if this course were
compulsory and as if no choice were left to him. His
fear was that if he took remuneration, he "should hinder
the Gospel of Christ." Some of the best incomes in
Greece in Paul's day were made by clever lecturers
and talkers, who attracted disciples, and initiated them
into their doctrines and methods. Paul was resolved
he should never be mistaken for one of these. And
no doubt his success was partly due to the fact that
This, says Paul, was his case. "Though I preach
the Gospel, I have nothing to glory of: for necessity
is laid upon me; yea, woe is unto me, if I preach not
the Gospel!" His call to the ministry had been so
exceptional, and had so distinctly and emphatically
declared the grace and purpose of Christ, that he felt
bound by all that can constrain a man to the devotedness
of a lifetime. Paul felt what we now so clearly
see: that on him lay the gravest responsibilities. Had
he declined to preach, had he complained of bad usage,
and stipulated for higher terms, and withdrawn from
the active propagation of Christianity, who would or
could have taken up the task he laid down? But while
Paul could not but be conscious of his importance to
the cause of Christ, he would arrogate to himself no
credit on account of his arduous toil, for from this,
he says, he could not escape; necessity was laid upon
him. Whether he does his work willingly or unwillingly,
still he must do it. He dare not flinch. If he does it
willingly, he has a reward; if he does it unwillingly,
still he is entrusted with a stewardship he dare not
neglect. What then is the reward he has, giving
himself, as he certainly does, willingly to the work?
His reward is that "when he preaches the Gospel he
makes the Gospel of Christ without charge." The deep
satisfaction he felt in dissociating the Gospel of self-sacrifice
from every thought of money or remuneration
and in offering it freely to the poorest as his Master's
In other words, Paul saw that however it might be with other men, with him there was no alternative but to preach the Gospel; the only alternative was—was he to do it as a slave entrusted with a stewardship, and who was compelled, however reluctant he might be, to be faithful, or was he to do it as a free man, with his whole will and heart? The reluctant slave could expect no reward; he was but fulfilling an obligatory, inevitable duty. The free man might, however, expect a reward; and the reward Paul chose was that he should have none—none in the ordinary sense, but really the deepest and most abiding of all: the satisfaction of knowing that, having freely received, he had freely given, and had lifted the Gospel into a region quite undimmed by the suspicion of self-seeking or any mists of worldliness.
In declining pecuniary remuneration, Paul was acting
on his general principle of making himself the servant
of all and of living entirely and exclusively for the good
of others. "Though I be free from all men, yet have
I made myself servant unto all, that I might gain the
more." It was from Paul that Luther derived his two
propositions which he uttered as the keynote of the
resonant blast "on Christian Liberty" with which he
stirred all Europe into new life: "A Christian man
is the most free lord of all, and subject to none; a
Christian man is the most dutiful servant of all, and
subject to every one." So Paul's independence of all
men was assumed and maintained for the very purpose
of making himself the more effectually the servant of
all. To the Jew and to those under the Law he became
For Paul was no mere latitudinarian. While accommodating himself to the practice of those around him in all matters of mere outward observance, and which did not touch the essentials of morality and faith, he at the same time held very definite opinions on the chief articles of the Christian creed. No amount of liberality of sentiment can ever induce a thoughtful man to discourage the formation of opinion on all matters of importance. On the contrary, the only escape from mere traditionalism or the tyranny of authority in matters of religion is in individual inquiry and ascertainment of the truth. Free inquiry is the one instrument we possess for the discovery of truth; and by pursuing such inquiry men may be expected to come to some agreement in religious belief, as in other things. No doubt righteousness of life is better than soundness of creed. But is it not possible to have both? It is better to live in the Spirit, to be meek, chaste, temperate, just, loving, than to understand the relation of the Spirit to God and to ourselves; but the human mind can never cease to seek satisfaction: and truth, the more clearly it is seen, will the more effectually nourish righteousness.
Again, Paul had an end in view which preserved his
liberality from degenerating. He sought to recommend
himself to men, not for his sake, but for theirs. He
saw that conscientious scruples were not to be confounded
with malignant hatred of truth, and that if we
are to be helpful to others, we must begin by appreciating
the good they already possess. Hostile criticism
or argument for the sake of victory produces no results
worth having. Vain exultation in the victors, obstinacy
and bitterness in the vanquished—these are worse than
useless, the retrograde results of unsympathetic argument.
In order to remove a man's difficulties, you
must look at them from his point of view and feel the
pressure he feels. "The greatest orator save one of
antiquity has left it on record that he always studied
his adversary's case with as great, if not still greater,
intensity than even his own;" See Mill's Liberty, p. 21.
NOT ALL WHO RUN WIN.
"And this I do for the Gospel's sake, that I might be partaker thereof with you. Know ye not that they which run in a race run all, but one receiveth the prize? So run, that ye may obtain. And every man that striveth for the mastery is temperate in all things. Now they do it to obtain a corruptible crown; but we an incorruptible. I therefore so run, not as uncertainly; so fight I, not as one that beateth the air: but I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection: lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway."—1 Cor. ix. 23-27.
Paul had evidently felt this danger to be a serious one. He had found himself tempted from time to time to rest in the name and calling of an apostle, to take for granted that his salvation was a thing past doubt and on which no more thought or effort need be expended. And he saw that in a slightly altered form this temptation was common to all Christians. All have the name, not all the reality. And the very possession of the name is a temptation to forget the reality. It might almost seem to be in the proportion of runners to winners in a race: "All run, but one receiveth the prize."
In endeavouring to warn Christians against resting
in a mere profession of faith in Christ, he cites two
great classes of instances which prove that there is
often ultimate failure even where there has been considerable
promise of success. First, he cites their own
world-renowned Isthmian games, in which contests, as
they all well knew, not every one who entered for the
prizes was successful: "All run, but one receiveth the
prize." Paul does not mean that salvation goes by
competition; but he means that as in a race not all who
run run so as to obtain the prize for which they run,
so in the Christian life not all who enter it put out
sufficient energy to bring them to a happy issue. The
mere fact of recognising that the prize is worth winning
and even of entering for it is not enough. And then
he cites another class of instances with which the Jews
in the Corinthian Church were familiar. "All our
fathers," he says, "were under the cloud, and all passed
through the sea, and all were baptized unto Moses in
the cloud and in the sea." All of them without exception
The Isthmian games, then, one of the most ancient glories of Corinth, furnished Paul with the readiest illustration of his theme. These games, celebrated every second year, had in ancient times been one of the chief means of fostering the feeling of brotherhood in the Hellenic race. None but Greeks of pure blood who had done nothing to forfeit their citizenship were allowed to contend in them. They were the greatest of national gatherings; and even when one State was at war with another, hostilities were suspended during the celebration of the games. And scarcely any greater distinction could be earned by a Greek citizen than victory in these games. When Paul says that the contending athletes endured their severe training and underwent all the privations necessary "to obtain a corruptible crown," we must remember that while it is quite true that the wreath of pine given to the victor might fade before the year was out, he was welcomed home with all the honours of a victorious general, the wall of his town being thrown down that he might pass in as a conqueror, and his statue being set up by his fellow-citizens. In point of fact, the names and deeds of many of the victors may yet be read in the verses of one of the greatest of Greek poets, who devoted himself, as laureate of the games, to the celebration of the annual victories.
But however highly we raise the value of the Greek
crown, the force of Paul's comparison remains. The
To those who would win it Paul gives these directions:—
1. Be temperate. "Every man that striveth for the mastery is temperate in all things." Contentedly and without a murmur he submits himself to the rules and restrictions of his ten months' training, without which he may as well not compete. The little indulgences which other men allow themselves he must forego. Not once will he break the trainer's rules, for he knows that some competitors will refrain even from that once and gain strength while he is losing it. He is proud of his little hardships, and fatigues, and privations, and counts it a point of honour scrupulously to abstain from anything which might in the slightest degree diminish his chance of success. He sees other men giving way to appetite, resting while he is panting with exertion, luxuriating in the bath, enjoying life at pleasure; but he has scarce a passing thought of envy, because his heart is set on the prize, and severe training is indispensable. He knows that his chances are gone if in any point or on any occasion he relaxes the rigour of the discipline.
The contest in which Christians are engaged is not
less, but more, severe. The temperance maintained by
the athlete must be outdone by the Christian if he is
to be successful. There are many things in which
men who have no thought of the incorruptible prize
may engage, but from which the Christian must refrain.
All that lowers the tone and slackens the energies
must be abandoned. If the Christian indulges in the
Temperance must be continuous as well as complete.
One day's debauch was enough to undo the result of
weeks during which the athlete had carefully attended
to the rules prescribed. And we find that one lapse
into worldliness undoes what years of self-restraint have
won. Always the work of growth is very slow, the
work of destruction very quick. One indiscretion on
the part of the convalescent will undo what the care
Beware then of giving place to the world or the flesh at any point. Be reasonable and true. Recognise that if you are to succeed in winning eternal life, all the spiritual energy you can command will be required. So set your heart on the attainment of things eternal that you will not grudge missing much that other men enjoy and possess. Measure the invitations of life by their fitness or unfitness to develop within you true spiritual energy.
2. Be decided. "I run," says Paul, "not as uncertainly,"
not as a man who does not know where he is
going or has not made up his mind to go there. To
be among those who win as well as among those who
run, we must know where we are going, and be quite
sure we mean to be there. We have all some kind of
idea about what God offers and calls us to. But this
idea must be clear if we are to make for it straight.
No man can run straight to a mere will-o'-the-wisp,
and no man can run straight who first means to go to
one house or station and then changes his mind and
thinks he should go to another. We must count the
cost and see clearly what we are to gain and what we
must lose by making for the incorruptible prize. We
must be resolved to win and have no thought of defeat,
of failure, of doing something better. It is the absence
What then do the traces of our past life show?
Do we see the straight track of a well-steered ship,
which has deviated not a yard from its course nor
wasted an ounce of power? Has every footfall been
in direct advance of the last, and has all expenditure
of energy brought us nearer the ultimate goal? Or
are the traces we look back on like ground trodden
by dancers, a confused medley all in one spot, or like
the footsteps of saunterers in a garden backwards and
forwards, according as this or that has attracted them?
Has not the course of many of us been like that of
persons lost, uncertain which direction to pursue,
eagerly starting off, but after a little slackening their
pace, stopping, looking round, and then going off in
another direction? For some weeks a great deal of
ardour has been apparent, the whole man girt up, every
Are we likely ever to reach the goal thus? Will the goal come to us, or how are we ever to reach it? Are we nearer to it to-day than ever before? Are not our minds yet made up that it is worth reaching, and that whatever does not help us towards it must be abandoned? Let us be clear in our own minds as to the matters which tempt us aside from the straight path to the goal and are incompatible with progress; and let us determine whether these things are to prevail with us or not.
3. Be in earnest. "So fight I, not as one that
beateth the air," not as one amusing himself with idle
Even where there is some reality in the contest we
Paul's language suggests that possibly the reason
may be that there remains in the heart some reluctance
quite to kill and put an end to sin, to beat all the life
out of it. It is like a father fighting with his son: he
wishes to defend himself and disarm his son, but not
to kill him. We may be willing or even intensely
anxious to escape the blows sin aims at us; we may
be desirous to wound, hamper, and limit our sin, and
keep it under control; we may wish to tame the wild
animal and domesticate it, so as to make it yield some
pleasure and profit, and yet be reluctant to slay it
outright. The soul and life of every sin is some lust
The result of such unreal contest is detrimental. Sin is like something floating in the air or the water: the very effort we make to grasp and crush it displaces it, and it floats mockingly before us untouched. Or it is like an agile antagonist who springs back from our blow, so that the force we have expended merely racks and strains our own sinews and does him no injury. So when we spend much effort in conquering sin and find it as lively as ever, the spirit is strained and hurt by putting out force on nothing. It is less able than before to resist sin, less believing, less hopeful, inwardly ill at ease and distracted. It becomes confused and disheartened, disbelieves in itself, and scoffs at fresh resolves and endeavours.
Finally, Paul tells us what that enemy was against
which he directed his well-aimed, firmly planted blows.
It was his own body. Every man's body is his enemy
when, instead of being his servant, it becomes his
master. The proper function of the body is to serve
the will, to bring the inner man into contact with the
outer world and enable him to influence it. When the
body mutinies and refuses to obey the will, when it
It was probably by sheer strength of will and by the
grace of Christ that Paul subdued his body. Many in
all ages have striven to subdue it by fasting, by scourging,
by wakefulness; and of these practices we have no
right to speak scornfully until we can say that by other
means we have reduced the body to its proper position
as the servant of the spirit. Can we say that our body
is brought into subjection; that it dare not curtail our
devotions on the plea of weariness; that it dare not
demand a dispensation from duty on the score of some
slight bodily disturbance; that it never persuades us
to neglect any duty on the score of its unpleasantness
to the flesh; that it never prompts us to undue anxiety
either about what we shall eat or drink or wherewithal
we shall be clothed; that it never quite treads the spirit
under foot and defiles it with wicked imaginings? There
is a fair and reasonable degree in which a man may
and ought to cherish his own flesh, but there is also
needful a disregard to many of its claims and a hardhearted
obduracy to its complaints. In an age when
Probably nothing more effectually slackens our efforts in the spiritual life than the sense of unreality which haunts us as we deal with God and the unseen. With the boxer in the games it was grim earnest. He did not need any one to tell him that his life depended on his ability to defend himself against his trained antagonist. Every faculty must be on the alert. No dreamer has here a chance. What we need is something of the same sense of reality, that it is a life-and-death contest we are engaged in, and that he that treats sin as a weak or pretended antagonist will shortly be dragged a mangled disgrace out of the arena.
FALLACIOUS PRESUMPTIONS.
"Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; and were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea; and did all eat the same spiritual meat; and did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ. But with many of them God was not well pleased: for they were overthrown in the wilderness. Now these things were our examples, to the intent we should not lust after evil things, as they also lusted. Neither be ye idolaters, as were some of them; as it is written. The people sat down to eat and drink, and rose up to play. Neither let us commit fornication, as some of them committed, and fell in one day three-and-twenty thousand. Neither let us tempt Christ, as some of them also tempted, and were destroyed of serpents. Neither murmur ye, as some of them also murmured, and were destroyed of the destroyer. Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come. Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall. There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it. Wherefore, my dearly beloved, flee from idolatry. I speak as to wise men; judge ye what I say. The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? For we being many are one bread, and one body: for we are all partakers of that one bread. Behold Israel after the flesh: are not they which eat of the sacrifices partakers of the altar? What say I then? that the idol is anything, or that which is offered in sacrifice to idols is anything? But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils. Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lord's table, and of the table of devils. Do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? are we stronger than He?"—1 Cor. x. 1-22.
The Israelites of the Exodus are here introduced as exemplifying a common experience. They accepted the position of God's people, but failed in its duties. They perceived the advantages of being God's subjects, but shrank from much which this implied. They were willing to be delivered from bondage, but found themselves overweighted by the responsibilities and risks of a free life. They were in contact with the highest advantages men need possess, and yet failed to use them.
The amount of conviction which prompts us to form
a connection with Christ may be insufficient to stimulate
us to do and endure all that results from that
connection. The children of Israel were all baptized
unto Moses, but they did not implement their baptism
by a persistent and faithful adherence to him. They
were baptized unto Moses by their acceptance of his
leadership in the Exodus. By passing through the
Red Sea at his command they definitely renounced
Pharaoh and abandoned their old life, and as definitely
pledged and committed themselves to throw in their lot
with Moses. By passing the Egyptian frontier and
following the guidance of the pillar of cloud they professed
their willingness to exchange a life of bondage,
with its security and occasional luxuries, for a life of
freedom, with its hazards and hardships; and by that
passage of the Red Sea they were as certainly sworn
to support and obey Moses as ever was Roman soldier
who took the oath to serve his emperor. When, at
Brederode's invitation, the patriots of Holland put on
the beggar's wallet and tasted wine from the beggar's
bowl, they were baptized unto William of Orange and
their country's cause. When the sailors on board the
Swan weighed anchor and beat out of Plymouth they
And as the Israelites had thus a baptism analogous to the one Christian sacrament, so had they a spiritual food and drink in the wilderness which formed a sacrament analogous to the Christian communion. They were not shut out of Egypt, and imprisoned in the desert, and left to do the best they could on their own resources. If they failed to march steadily forward and fulfil their destiny as the emancipated people of God, this failure was not due to any neglect on God's part. The fare might be somewhat Spartan, but a sufficiency was always provided. He who had encouraged them to enter on this new life was prepared to uphold them in it and carry them through.
One of the expressions used by Paul in describing
the sustenance of the Israelites has given rise to some
discussion. "They did all drink," he says, "the
same spiritual drink, for they drank of that spiritual
Rock that followed them; and that Rock was Christ."
Paul's point is that in the wilderness the food and drink of the Israelites were "spiritual," or, as we should more naturally say, sacramental; that is to say, their sustenance continually spoke to them of God's nearness and reminded them that they were His people. And as Christ Himself, when He lifted the bread at the Last Supper, said, "This is My body," so does Paul use analogous language and say, "That Rock was Christ," an expression which gives us considerable insight into the significance of the Israelitish types of Christ, and helps to rid our minds of some erroneous impressions we are apt to cherish regarding them.
The manna and the water from the rock were given
It was in this sense that Paul could say that the
rock was Christ. The Israelites in the wilderness
did not know that the rock was a type of Christ.
They did not, as they drank of the water, think of
One who was to come and satisfy the whole thirst
of men. The types of Christ in the old times did
not enable men to forecast the future; it was not
through the future they exercised an influence for
good on the mind. They worked by exciting there
and then in the Jewish mind the same faith in God
which Christ excites in our mind. It was not
knowledge that saved the Jew, but faith, attachment
to the living God. It was not the fragmentary and
disjointed picture of a Redeemer thrown on the
screen of his hopes by the types, nor was it any
But while in the mind of the Israelite there was no
connection of the type with the Christ that was to
come, there was in reality a connection between them.
The redemption of men is one whether accomplished in
the days of the Exodus or in our own time. The idea
or plan of salvation is one, resting always on the same
reasons and principles. The Israelites were pardoned
in view of the incarnation and atonement of Christ just
as we are. If it was needful for our salvation that
Christ should come and live and suffer in human
nature, it was also needful for their salvation. The
Lamb was slain "from the foundation of the world,"
and the virtue of the sacrifice of Calvary was efficacious
for those who lived before as well as for those who
lived after it. To the mind of God it was present, and
in His purpose it was determined, from the beginning;
and it is in view of Christ's incarnation and work that
sinners early or late have been restored to God. So
These outward blessings then of which St. Paul here speaks had very much the same nature as the Christian sacraments to which he tacitly compares them. They were intended to convey greater gifts and be the channels of a grace more valuable than themselves. But to most of the Israelites they remained mere manna and water, and brought no firmer assurance of God's presence, no more fruitful acceptance of God's purpose. The majority took the husk and threw away the kernel; were so delayed by the wrappings that they forgot to examine the gift they enclosed; accepted the physical nourishment, but rejected the spiritual strength it contained. Instead of learning from their wilderness experience the sufficiency of Jehovah and gathering courage to fulfil His purpose with them, they began to murmur and lust after evil things, and were destroyed by the destroyer. They had been baptized unto Moses, pledging themselves to his leadership and committing themselves to the new life he opened to them; they had been sustained by manna and water from the rock, which plainly told them that all nature would work for them if they pressed forward to their God-appointed destiny: but the most of them shrank from the hardships and hazards of the way, and could not lift their heart to the glory of being led by God and used to fulfil His greatest purposes.
And so, says Paul, it may be with you. It is possible
that you may have been baptized and may have professedly
But while the distinction between the life we
naturally seek and that to which God calls us is felt
by all from age to age, the forms in which this distinction
makes itself felt vary as the world grows older.
To all men living in a world of sense it is difficult to
live by faith in the unseen. To every man it is the
ultimate, severest test of character to determine for
what ends he will live and to carry out this determination;
but the temptations which avail to draw men
aside from their reasonable decision are various as
the men themselves. Paul names the temptations
to which the Corinthians, in common with the Israelites,
were exposed: idolatry, fornication, murmuring, tempting
Christ. He saw clearly how difficult it was for
the Corinthians to discard all heathen customs, how
much of what had been brightest in their life they
must sacrifice if they were to renounce absolutely the
religion of their parents and friends and all the joyous,
if licentious, customs associated with that religion.
Apparently some of them thought they might pass
from the Christian communion to the heathen temple,
and after partaking of Christ's sacrament eat and
Against this vain attempt to combine the incompatible Paul warns them. Do not tempt Christ, he says, by experimenting how far He will bear with your conformity to idolatry. Some of the Israelites did so, and were destroyed by serpents. Do not murmur that you are hereby severed from all the enjoyments of life, dissociated from your heathen friends, blackballed in society and in business, excluded from all national festivals and from many private entertainments; do not count up your losses, but your gains. Your temptations are severe, but "there hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man." Every man must make up his mind to a certain kind of life and go through with it. No man can unite in his own life all advantages. He must deliberate and choose; and having made his choice, he must not lament what he loses or be tempted from striving to gain what he judges best by weakly and greedily craving for the second-best also. He may win the first prize; he may win the second: he cannot win both, and if he tries, he will win neither.
The practical outcome of all that Paul has thus
rapidly passed in review he utters in the haunting
words, "Let him that thinketh he standeth take heed
lest he fall." In this life we are never beyond the
reach of temptation. And these temptations to which
all of us are exposed are real; they do sufficiently test
character and show what it actually is. Our suppositions
regarding ourselves are often untrue. There
is no reality corresponding. Our state is actually not
such as we conceive it to be. We are at ease and
If determined wickedness has slain its thousands, heedlessness has slain its tens of thousands. Through lack of watchfulness men fall into sin which entangles them for life and thwarts their best purposes. Through want of watchfulness men go on in sin which exceedingly provokes God, till at last His hand falls heavily upon them. Every man is apt to lay too much stress on the circumstance that he has joined himself to the number of those who own the leadership of Christ. The question remains, How far has he gone with his Leader? Many an Israelite compassionated the poor heathen whom he left behind in the land of Egypt, and yet found that, with all his own apparent nearness to God, his heart was heathen still. Whoever takes it for granted that things are well with him, whoever "thinketh he standeth"—he is the man who has especial and urgent need to "take heed lest he fall."
THE VEIL.
"Be ye followers of me, even as I also am of Christ. Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you. But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God. Every man praying or prophesying, having his head covered, dishonoureth his head. But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven. For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered. For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. For the man is not of the woman; but the woman of the man. Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man. For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels. Nevertheless neither is the man without the woman, neither the woman without the man, in the Lord. For as the woman is of the man, even so is the man also by the woman; but all things of God. Judge in yourselves: is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered? Doth not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him? But if a woman have long hair, it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering. But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the Churches of God."—1 Cor. xi. 1-16.
In order to see the import and importance of this
matter of dress, we must first of all know how it came
to pass that the Christian women should have thought
of making a demonstration so unfeminine as to shock
the very heathen around them. What was their intention
or meaning in doing so? What idea was possessing
their minds? Throughout this long and interesting
letter, Paul is doing little else than endeavouring to
correct the hasty impressions which these new believers
were receiving regarding their position as Christians.
A great flood of new and vast ideas was suddenly
poured in upon their minds; they were taught to
look differently on themselves, differently on their
neighbours, differently on God, differently on all things.
Old things had in their case passed away with a will,
and all things had become new. They were made alive
from the dead, they were born again, and did not know
how far this affected the relationships with this world
into which their natural birth had brought them. The
facts of the second birth and the new life took such
hold upon them, that they could not for a time understand
how they were yet connected with the old life.
So that for some of them Paul had to solve the simplest
problems, as, for example, we find that the believing
husband was in doubt whether he should live with his
wife who remained an unbeliever, for was it not abhorrent
to nature that he, the living, should be bound to
Now one of the ideas in Christianity which was
newest to them was the equality of all before God, an
idea well calculated to take powerful and absorbing
hold of a world half slaves, half masters. The emperor
and the slave must equally give account to God. Cæsar
is not above responsibility; the barbarian who swells
his triumph and is afterwards slaughtered in his dungeon
or his theatre is not beneath it. Each man and each
woman must stand alone before God, and for himself
and herself give account of the life received from God.
Alongside of this idea came that of the one Saviour
for all alike, the common salvation accessible to all on
equal terms, and partaking of which all became brethren
and on a level, one with Christ and one therefore with
each other. There was neither Greek nor barbarian,
male nor female, bond nor free, now. These three
mighty distinctions that had tyrannized over the ancient
world were abolished, for all were one in Christ Jesus.
It dawned on the barbarian that though there was no
Roman citizenship for him nor any entrance into the
mighty commonwealth of Greek literature, he had a
citizenship in heaven, was the heir of God, and could
command even with his barbaric speech the ear of the
Most High. It dawned on the slave as his fetter
galled him, or as his soul sank under the sad hopelessness
of his life, that he was God's redeemed, rescued
In the case before us the women who had been
awakened to a sense of their own personal, individual
responsibility and their equal right to the highest
privileges of men began to think that in all things
they should be recognised as the equals of the other
sex. They were one with Christ; men could have no
higher honour: was it not obvious that they were on
an equality with those who had held them so cheap?
They had the Holy Ghost dwelling in them; might not
they, as well as the men, edify Christian assemblies by
uttering the inspirations of the Spirit? They were not
dependent on men for their Christian privileges; ought
not they to show this by laying aside the veil, which
was the acknowledged badge of dependence? This
laying aside of the veil was not a mere change of
fashion in dress, of which, of course, Paul would have
had nothing to say; it was not a feminine device for
showing themselves to better advantage among their
fellow-worshippers; it was not even, though this also,
also! falls within the range of possible supposition, the
The exact meaning of the laying aside of the veil
thus becomes plain. It was the part of female attire
which could most readily be made the symbol of a
change in the views of women regarding their own
position. It was the most significant part of the
woman's dress. Among the Greeks it was the universal
custom for the women to appear in public with the head
covered, commonly with the corner of their shawl drawn
over their head like a hood. Accordingly Paul does not
insist on the face being covered, as in Eastern countries,
but only the head. This covering of the head could be
dispensed with only in places where they were secluded
from public view. It was therefore the recognised badge
of seclusion; it was the badge which proclaimed that
she who wore it was a private, not a public, person,
finding her duties at home, not abroad, in one household,
not in the city. And a woman's whole life and
duties ought to lie so much apart from the public eye,
that both sexes looked upon the veil as the truest and
most treasured emblem of woman's position. In this
seclusion there was of course implied a limitation of
woman's sphere of action and a subordination to one
man's interests instead of to the public. It was the
man's place to serve the State or the public, the
woman's place to serve the man. And so thoroughly
was it recognised that the veil was a badge setting forth
this private and subordinate position of the woman, that
it was the one significant rite in marriage that she
assumed the veil in token that now her husband was
This movement of the Corinthian women towards independence, on the ground that all are one in Christ Jesus, Paul meets by reminding them that personal equality is perfectly consistent with social subordination. It was quite true, as Paul himself had taught them, that, so far as their connection with Christ went, there was no distinction of sex. To the woman, as to the man, the offer of salvation was made directly. It was not through her father or her husband that the woman had to deal with Christ. She came into contact with the living God and united herself to Christ independently of any male representative and on the same footing as her male relatives. There is but one Christ for all, rich and poor, high and low, male and female; and all are received by Him on the same footing, no distinction being made. While then in things civil and social the husband represents the wife, he cannot do so in matters of religion. Here each person must act for himself or herself. And the woman must not confound these two spheres in which she moves, or argue that because she is independent of her husband in the greater, she must also be independent of him in the less. Equality in the one sphere is not inconsistent with subordination in the other. "I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God."
The principle enounced in these words is of incalculable
importance and very wide and constant application.
This gradation then involves Paul's inference that
"every man praying or prophesying, having his head
covered, dishonoureth his head. But every woman that
prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth
her head." The veil being the recognised
This subordination of the woman to the man belongs
not merely to the order of the Christian Church, but
has its roots in nature. "Man is the image and glory
of God: but the woman is the glory of the man."
Paul's idea is that man was created to represent God
and so to glorify Him, to be a visible embodiment of
the goodness, and wisdom, and power of the unseen
God. Nowhere so clearly or fully as in man can God
be seen. Man is the glory of God because he is His
image and is fitted to exhibit in actual life the excellencies
which make God worthy of our love and
worship. Looking at man as he actually and broadly
is, we may think it a bold saying of Paul when he
says, "Man is the glory of God;" and yet on consideration
we see that this is no more than the truth. We
should not scruple to say of the Man Christ Jesus that
This is of course true of woman as well as of man. It is true that woman can exhibit the nature of God and be His glory as well as man. But Paul is placing himself at the point of view of the writer of Genesis and speaking broadly of God's purpose in creation. And he means that God's purpose was to express Himself fully and crown all His works by bringing into being a creature made in His image, able to subdue, and rule, and develop all that is in the world. This creature was man, a masculine, resolved, capable creature. And just as it appeals to our sense of fitness that when God became incarnate He should appear as man, and not as woman, so does it appeal to our sense of fitness that it is man, and not woman, who should be thought of as created to be God's representative on earth. But while man directly, woman indirectly, fulfils this purpose of God. She is God's glory by being man's glory. She serves God by serving man. She exhibits God's excellencies by creating and cherishing excellence in man. Without woman man cannot accomplish aught. The woman is created for the man, because without her he is helpless. "For as the woman is of the man, even so is the man also by the woman."
But as man becomes actually the glory of God when
For, as a French writer says, "her influence embraces
the whole of life. A wife, a mother—two
magical words, comprising the sweetest sources of man's
felicity! Theirs is the reign of beauty, of love, of
reason, always a reign. A man takes counsel with
his wife; he obeys his mother: he obeys her long after
she has ceased to live, and the ideas he has received See Landels' True Glory of Woman.
The position assigned to woman as the glory of man is therefore far removed from the view which cynically proclaims her man's mere convenience, whose function it is "to fatten household sinners," "to suckle fools and chronicle small beer." Paul's view, though adopted and exhibited in individual instances, is far as yet from commanding universal consent. But certainly nothing so distinguishes, elevates, purifies, and balances a man in life as a high esteem for woman. A man shows his manliness chiefly by a true reverence for all women, by a clear recognition of the high service appointed to them by God, and by a tender sympathy with them in all the various endurance their nature and their position demand.
That this is woman's normal sphere is indicated even
by her unalterable physical characteristics. "Doth
not even nature itself teach you, that, if a man have
long hair, it is a shame unto him? But if a woman
have long hair, it is a glory to her; for her hair is
given her for a covering." By nature woman is
endowed with a symbol of modesty and retirement.
The veil, which signifies her devotement to home duties,
is merely the artificial continuation of her natural gift
of hair. The long hair of the Greek fop or of the
English cavalier was accepted by the people as an
indication of effeminate and luxurious living. Suitable
for women, it is unsuitable for men; such is the
instinctive judgment. And nature, speaking through
this visible sign of the woman's hair, tells her that her
place is in private, not in public, in the home, not in
These arguments and conclusions introduced by
Paul of course apply only to the broad and normal
distinction between man and woman. He does not
argue that women are inferior to men, nor that they
may not have equal spiritual endowments; but he
maintains that, whatever be their endowments, there is
a womanly mode of exercising them and a sphere for
woman which she ought not to transgress. Not all
women are of the distinctively womanly type. A
Britomarte may arm herself and overthrow the strongest
knights. A Joan of Arc may infuse into a nation
her own warlike and patriotic ardour. In art, in
literature, in science, feminine names may occupy some
of the highest places. In our own day many careers
have been opened to women from which they had
hitherto been debarred. They are now found in Government
offices, in School Boards, in the medical profession.
Again and again in the history of the Church
attempts have been made to institute a female order The experience of the Society of Friends throws light on this
matter.
But it will be asked, Why was Paul so exact in
describing how a woman should comport herself while
praying or prophesying in public, when he meant very
shortly in this same Epistle to write, "Let your women
keep silence in the Churches: for it is not permitted
unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be
under obedience, as also saith the Law. And if they will
learn anything, let them ask their husbands at home; for
it is a shame for women to speak in the Church"? It
has been suggested that although it was the standing
order that women should not speak, there might be
occasions when the Spirit urged them to address an
assemblage of Christians; and the regulation here given
is intended for these exceptional cases. This may be
so, but the connection in which the absolute prohibition
is given rather militates against this view, and I
think it more likely that in his own mind Paul held
the two matters quite distinct and felt that a mere
prohibition preventing women from addressing public
meetings would not touch the more serious transgression
of female modesty involved in the discarding of the
veil. He could not pass over this violent assertion of
independence without separate treatment; and while he
is treating it, it is not the speaking in public which
is before his mind, but the unfeminine assertion of
Besides the direct teaching of this passage on the position of woman, there are inferences to be drawn from it of some importance. First, Paul recognises that the God of nature is the God of grace, and that we may safely argue from the one sphere to the other. "All things are of God." It is profitable to be recalled to the teaching of nature. It saves us from becoming fantastic in our beliefs, from cherishing fallacious expectations, from false, pharisaic, extravagant conduct.
Again, we are here reminded that every man and
woman has to do directly with God, who has no
respect of persons. Each soul is independent of all
others in its relation to God. Each soul has the
capacity of direct connection with God and of thus being
raised above all oppression, not only of his fellows, but
of all outward things. It is here man finds his true
glory. His soul is his own to give it to God. He is
dependent on nothing but on God only. Admitting God
into his spirit, and believing in the love and rectitude
of God, he is armed against all the ills of life, however
little he may relish them. To all of us God offers
Himself as Friend, Father, Saviour, Life. No man need
remain in his sin; none need be content with a poor
eternity; no man need go through life trembling or
defeated: for God declares Himself on our side, and
offers His love to all without respect of persons. We
are all on the same footing before Him. God does not
admit some freely, while He shrinks from the touch
of others. It is as full and rich an inheritance that
He puts within the reach of the poorest and most
wretched of earth's inhabitants as He offers to him on
whom the eyes of men rest in admiration or in envy.
Lastly, although there is in Christ an absolute levelling of distinctions, no one being more acceptable to God or nearer to Him because he belongs to a certain race, or rank, or class, yet these distinctions remain and are valid in society. A woman is a woman still though she become a Christian; a subject must honour his king although by becoming a Christian he is himself in one aspect above all authority; a servant will show his Christianity, not by assuming an insolent familiarity with his Christian master, but by treating him with respectful fidelity. The Christian, above all men, needs sober-mindedness to hold the balance level and not allow his Christian rank entirely to outweigh his social position. It forms a great part of our duty to accept our own place without envying others and to do honour to those to whom honour is due.
ABUSE OF THE LORD'S SUPPER.
"Now in this that I declare unto you I praise you not, that ye come together not for the better, but for the worse. For first of all, when ye come together in the Church, I hear that there be divisions among you; and I partly believe it. For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you. When ye come together therefore into one place, this is not to eat the Lord's Supper. For in eating every one taketh before other his own supper: and one is hungry, and another is drunken. What? have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? or despise ye the Church of God, and shame them that have not? What shall I say to you? shall I praise you in this? I praise you not. For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus the same night in which He was betrayed took bread: and when He had given thanks, He brake it, and said, Take, eat: this is My body which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of Me. After the same manner also He took the cup, when He had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in My blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of Me. For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord's death till He come. Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body. For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep. For if we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged. But when we are judged, we are chastened of the Lord, that we should not be condemned with the world. Wherefore, my brethren, when ye come together to eat, tarry one for another. And if any man hunger, let him eat at home; that ye come not together unto condemnation. And the rest will I set in order when I come."—1 Cor. xi. 17-34.
It was common in Corinth and the other cities of Greece for various sections of the community to form themselves into associations, clubs, or guilds; and it was customary for such societies to share a common meal once a week, or once a month, or even when convenient daily. Some of these associations were formed of persons very variously provided with this world's goods, and one of the objects of some of the clubs was to make provision for the poorer members in such a manner as to subject them to none of the shame which is apt to attend the acceptance of promiscuous charity. All members had an equal right to present themselves at the table; and the property held by the society was equally distributed to all.
This custom, not unknown in Palestine itself, had been spontaneously adopted by the primitive Church of Jerusalem. The Christians of those early days felt themselves to be more closely related than the members of any trade guild or political club. If it was convenient and suitable that persons of similar political opinions or belonging to the same trade should to some extent have common property and should exhibit their community by sharing a common meal, it was certainly suitable among Christians. Speedily it became a prevalent custom for Christians to eat together. These meals were called agapæ—love-feasts—and became a marked feature of the early Church. On a fixed day, generally the first day of the week, the Christians assembled, each bringing what he could as a contribution to the feast: fish, poultry, joints of meat, cheese, milk, honey, fruit, wine, and bread. In some places the proceedings began by partaking of the consecrated bread and wine; but in other places physical appetite was first appeased by partaking of the meal provided, and after that the bread and wine were handed round.
This mode of celebrating the Lord's Supper was
recommended by its close resemblance to its original
celebration by the Lord and His disciples. It was at
the close of the Paschal Supper, which was meant to
satisfy hunger as well as to commemorate the Exodus,
that our Lord took bread and brake it. He sat with
His disciples as one family, and the meal they partook
of was social as well as religious. But when the first
solemnity passed away, and Christ's presence was no
longer felt at the common table, the Christian love-feast
was liable to many corruptions. The wealthy
took the best seats, kept hold of their own delicacies,
and, without waiting for any common distribution, each For a highly coloured description of the love-feasts see Renan's
St. Paul, pp. 261-270.
Thus then arose these disorders in the celebration of the Lord's Supper. By the conjunction of this rite with the social meal of the Christians it degenerated into an occasion of much that was unseemly and scandalous. To the reform of this abuse Paul now addresses himself; and it is worth our while to observe what remedies he does not propose as well as those he recommends.
First, he does not propose to disjoin absolutely and
in all cases the religious rite from the ordinary meal.
In the case of the richer members of the Church this
disjunction is enjoined. They are directed to take
their meals at home. "Have ye not houses to eat
Again, although the wine of Holy Communion had
been so sadly abused, Paul does not prohibit its use
in the ordinance. His moderation and wisdom have
not in this respect been universally followed. On infinitely
less occasion alterations have been introduced
into the administration of the ordinance with a view to
preventing its abuse by reclaimed drunkards, and on
still slighter pretext a more sweeping alteration was
introduced many centuries ago by the Church of Rome.
In that Church the custom still prevails of receiving
communion only under one kind; that is to say, the
communicant partakes of the bread, but not of the wine.
The reason for this is given by one of their most
authoritative writers as follows: "It is well known that
this custom was not first established by any ecclesiastical
law; but, on the contrary, it was in consequence
of the general prevalence of the usage that this law Möhler's Symbolism, i., 351.
Again, Paul does not insist that because frequent
communion had been abused this must give place to
monthly or yearly communion. In after-times, partly
from the abuses attending frequent communion and
It is, however, obvious that these fears need not be verified, and that an effort on our part would prevent the consequences dreaded. Our method of procedure in all such cases is first to find out what it is right to do, and then, though it cost us an effort, to do it. If our reverence for the ordinance in question depends on its rare celebration, every one must see that such reverence is very precarious. May it not be a merely superstitious or sentimental reverence? Is it not produced by some false idea of the rite and its signification, or does it not spring from the solemnity of the paraphernalia and human surroundings of it? Paul seeks to restore reverence in the Corinthians not by prohibiting frequent communion, but by setting more clearly before them the solemn facts which underlie the rite. In presence of these facts every worthy communicant is at all times living; and if it be merely the outward equipment and presentation of these facts which solemnize us and quicken our reverence, then this itself is rather an argument for a more frequent celebration of the rite, that so this false reverence at least might be dissipated.
The instincts of men are, however, in many cases a
safer guide than their judgments; and there is a feeling
prevalent that very frequent communion is not advisable,
and that if it be advisable it should be reached not at
a bound, but step by step. The main point on which
the individual should insist on coming to some clear
understanding with himself is whether his own reluctance
to frequent communion does not arise from his
fear of the ordinance being too profitable rather than
The two most instructive writers on the sacraments
are Calvin and Waterland. The latter, in his very
elaborate treatment of the Eucharist, offers some
remarks upon the point before us. "There can," he
says, "be no just bar to frequency of communion but
the want of preparation, which is only such a bar as
men may themselves remove if they please; and therefore
it concerns them highly to take off the impediment
as soon as possible, and not to trust to vain hopes of
alleviating one fault by another.... The danger of
misperforming any religious duty is an argument for
fear and caution, but no excuse for neglect; God insists
upon the doing it, and the doing it well also.... It
was no sufficient plea for the slothful servant under
the Gospel that he thought his master hard to please,
and thereupon neglected his bounden duty, for the Waterland, Works, iv., p. 781.
The positive counsel Paul gives regarding suitable
preparation for participation in this Sacrament is very
simple. He offers no elaborate scheme of self-examination
which might fill the mind with scruples and induce
introspective habits and spiritual hypochondria. He
would have every man answer the plain question, Do
you discern the Lord's body in the Sacrament? This
is the one cardinal point on which all revolves, admitting
or excluding each applicant. He who clearly
understands that this is no common meal, but the
outward symbol by means of which God offers to us
Jesus Christ, is not likely to desecrate the Sacrament.
"This is My body," says the Lord, meaning that this
bread will ever remind the communicant that his Lord
freely gave His own body for the life of the world.
And whoever accepts the bread and the wine because
they remind him of this and bring him into a renewed
attitude of faith is a worthy communicant. The
Corinthians were chastened by sickness and apparently
by death that they might see and repent of the enormity
The brief narrative of this first institution which Paul here inserts gives prominence to the truth that the Sacrament was intended primarily as a memorial or remembrance of the Saviour. Nothing could be simpler or more human than our Lord's appointment of this Sacrament. Lifting the material of the Supper before Him, He bids His disciples make the simple act of eating and drinking the occasion of remembering Him. As the friend who is setting out on a long absence or is passing for ever from earth puts into our hands his portrait or something he has used, or worn, or prized, and is pleased to think that we shall treasure it for his sake, so did Christ on the eve of His death secure this one thing: that His disciples should have a memento by which to remember Him. And as the dying gift of a friend becomes sacred to us as his own person, and we cannot bear to see it handed about by unsympathetic hands and remarked upon by those who have not the same loving reverence as ourselves, and as when we gaze at his portrait, or when we use the very pen or pencil worn smooth by his fingers, we recall the many happy times we spent together and the bright and inspiring words that fell from his lips, so does this Sacrament seem sacred to us as Christ's own person, and by means of it grateful memories of all He was and did throng into the mind.
Again, the form of this memorial is fitted to recall
the actual life and death of the Lord. It is His body
and blood we are invited by the symbols to remember.
By them we are brought into the presence of an actual
But especially, when Christ said, "Do this in remembrance
of Me," did He mean that His people to
all time should remember that He had given Himself
wholly to them and for them. The symbols of His
body and blood were intended to keep us in mind that
all that gave Him a place among men He devoted to
us. By giving His flesh and blood He means that He
gives us His all, Himself wholly; and by inviting us
to partake of His flesh and blood He means that we
must receive Him into the most real connection possible,
must admit His self-sacrificing love into our heart as
our most cherished possession. He bade His disciples
remember Him, knowing that the death He was about
to die would "draw all men unto Him," would fill the
despairing with hopes of purity and happiness, would
cause countless sinners to say to themselves with soul-subduing
rapture, "He loved me, and gave Himself
for me." He knew that the love shown in His death
But these symbols were appointed to be for a remembrance of Christ in order that, remembering Him, we might renew our fellowship with Him. In the Sacrament there is not a mere representation of Christ or a bare commemoration of events in which we are interested; but there is also an actual, present communion between Christ and the soul. Encouraged and stimulated by the outward signs, we, in our own soul and for ourselves, accept Christ and the blessings He brings. There is in the bread and wine themselves nothing that can profit us, but we are by their means to "discern the Lord's body." When Christ is said to be present in the bread and the wine, nothing mysterious or magical is meant. It is meant that He is spiritually present to those who believe. He is present in the Sacrament as He is present to faith at any time and in any place; only, these signs which God puts into our hands to assure us of His gift of Christ to us help us to believe that Christ is given, and make it easier for us to rest in Him.
CONCERNING SPIRITUAL GIFTS.
"Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I would not have you
ignorant. Ye know that ye were Gentiles, carried away unto these
dumb idols, even as ye were led. Wherefore I give you to understand,
that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus
accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the
Holy Ghost. Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit.
And there are differences of administrations, but the same Lord. And
there are diversities of operations, but it is the same God which
worketh all in all. But the manifestation of the Spirit is given to
every man to profit withal. For to one is given by the Spirit the
word of wisdom; to another the word of knowledge by the same
Spirit; to another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of
healing by the same Spirit; to another the working of miracles; to
another prophecy; to another discerning of spirits; to another divers
kinds of tongues; to another the interpretation of tongues: but all
these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man
severally as He will. For as the body is one, and hath many
members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one
body: so also is Christ. For by one Spirit are we all baptized into
one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free;
and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. For the body is not
one member, but many. If the foot shall say, Because I am not the
hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body? And if
the ear shall say, Because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is
it therefore not of the body? If the whole body were an eye, where
were the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where were the
smelling? But now hath God set the members every one of them in
the body, as it hath pleased Him. And if they were all one member,
where were the body? But now are they many members, yet but
one body. And the eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need
of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you. Nay,
much more those members of the body, which seem to be more feeble,
are necessary: and those members of the body, which we think to
be less honourable, upon these we bestow more abundant honour;
and our uncomely parts have more abundant comeliness. For our
comely parts have no need: but God hath tempered the body together,
having given more abundant honour to that part which lacked: that
there should be no schism in the body; but that the members should
If we are disposed to question the genuineness of those
manifestations because in our own day the Spirit of
Christ does not produce them, there are two considerations
which should weigh with us. First, that which
Browning urges: that miracles which were once needed
are now no longer required, because they served the
purpose for which they were given. As when you sow
a plot in a garden you stick twigs round it, that no careless
person may tread down and destroy the young and
yet unseen plant, but when the plants have themselves
become as tall and visible as the twigs, then these are
useless, so if the miracles actually served to help the
young Church's growth, she by their means has now
become sufficiently visible and sufficiently understood
to need them no more.
And, secondly, it was to be expected that the first
impact of these new Christian forces on the spirit of
Nothing could be more natural than that these gifts
should be overrated and should almost be considered
as the most substantial and advantageous blessings
Christianity had to offer. First being accepted as
evidence of the real indwelling of the Holy Spirit, they
came to be prized for their own sake. Originally
designed as signs of the reality of the communication
between the risen Lord and His Church, and therefore
as assurances that the holiness and blessedness promised
by Christ were not unattainable, they came to be
regarded as themselves more precious than the holiness
they promised. Given to this individual and to that in
order that each might have some gift by which he
could profit the community, they came to be looked
upon as distinctions of which the individual was proud,
and therefore introduced vanity, envy, and separation,
instead of mutual esteem and helpfulness. One gift
was measured with another and rated above or below
it; and, as usual, what was useful could not compete
with what was surprising. The gift of speaking for
the spiritual profit of the hearers was little thought of
in comparison with the gift of speaking in unknown
tongues. Throughout this and the two following
Paul introduces his remarks by reminding them that
their previous history sufficiently explained their need
of instruction. "In your former heathen state you had
no experience whatever similar to that which you now
have in the Church. The dumb idols to the worship
of which you let yourselves be carried did not communicate
powers similar to those which the Spirit
now communicates to you. Consequently, novices as
you are in this domain, you need a guiding thread to
prevent you from going astray. This is why I instruct
you." Godet.
"No man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus
accursed." But was there any possibility of such an
utterance being heard in a Christian Church? It
seems there was. It seems that very early in the
history of Christianity men were found in the Church
who could not reconcile themselves to the accursed
death of Christ. They believed in the Gospel He
proclaimed, the miracles He wrought, the kingdom He
founded; but the Crucifixion was still a stumbling-block
In other words, Paul wishes them to understand that,
after all, the only sure test of a man's Christianity is
his actual submission to Christ. No wonderful works
he may accomplish in the Church or in the world prove
his possession of Christ's Spirit. "Many will say to
Me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in
Thy name, and in Thy name have cast out devils,
and in Thy name done many wonderful works? And
then will I profess unto them, I never knew you;
depart from Me, ye that work iniquity." A man may
gather and edify a large congregation, he may write ably
in defence of Christianity, he may be recognised as a
benefactor of his age, or he may be considered the most
successful of missionaries, but the only test of a man's
claim to be listened to by the Church is his actual submission
to Christ. He will seek not his own glory, but
the good of men. And as to the gifts themselves, they
should be no cause of discord, for they have everything
The new life then introduced by Christ into the individual and society was found to assume various forms and to suffice for all the needs of human nature in this world. Paul delighted to survey the variety of endowment and faculty which appeared in the Church. Wisdom, knowledge, faith, power to work miracles, extraordinary gifts of exhortation or prophecy and also of speaking in unknown tongues, capacity for managing affairs and general helpfulness—these and other gifts were the efflorescence of the new life. As the sun in spring develops each seed according to its own special kind and character, so this new spiritual force develops in each man his most intimate and special character. Christian influence is not an external appliance that clips all men after one pattern as trees in an avenue are clipped into one shape; but it is an inward and vital power which causes each to grow according to his own individuality, one with the rugged irregularity of the oak, another with the orderly richness of the plane. Variety in harmony is said to be the principle of all beauty, and it is this which the Divine Spirit in man produces. Individual distinctions are not obliterated, but developed and directed for the service of the community. At one in their allegiance to Christ, bound into one body by common affections, beliefs, and hopes, and aiming at the advancement of one cause, Christians are yet as different as other men in faculty, in temperament, in attainment.
There is no truth coming more determinedly to the front in our own day than this: that society is an organism similar to the human body. This indeed is no new idea, nor is it an exclusively Christian idea. That man was made for society and that it was each man's business to labour for the good of the whole was common Stoic doctrine. It was taught that every man should believe himself to be born, not for himself, but for the whole world. Take one out of many expressions of this truth: "You have seen a hand cut off, or a foot, or a head, lying apart from the rest of the body; that is what a man makes himself when he separates himself from others or does anything unsocial. You were made by nature a part; and it is due to the benevolence of God that, if you have become detached from the whole, you can be reunited to it." And in the very earliest days, when the populace of Rome became disaffected and seditious and retired outside the city walls to a camp of their own, Menenius Agrippa went out to them and uttered his fable which Shakespeare has helped to make famous. He related how the various members of the body—the hand, the eye, the ear—mutinied and refused to work any longer because it seemed to them that all the food and enjoyment for which they toiled went to another member, and not to them. It was of course easy for the accused member to clear itself of the charge of inactivity and show that the food it received was not retained for its own exclusive use, but was distributed through the rivers of the blood, and how "the strongest nerves and small inferior veins" from it received the natural competency whereby they lived.
But although this comparison of society to the body
is not new, it is now being more seriously and scientifically
Illustrating the relation of Christians to one another by the figure of the members of a body, Paul suggests several ideas.
1. The unity of Christians is a vital unity. The
members of the body of Christ form one whole because
they partake of one common life. "By one Spirit are
we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or
The unity of Christians is a unity of this kind, a
vital unity. The same spiritual life exists in all Christians,
derived from the same source, supplying them
with similar energy, and prompting them to the same
habits and aims. They accept the Spirit of Christ,
and so are formed into one body, being no more
isolated, self-seeking, and each man fighting for his
own hand, but banded together for the promotion of
one common cause. There is no clashing between the
interests of the individual and the interests of the
society or kingdom to which he belongs. The member
finds its only life and function in the body. It is by
the freest and most deliberate exercise of his reason Professor Jones in Essays in Philosophical Criticism.
Those who cannot philosophically reconcile the claims of society and the claims of the individual are yet enabled by their attachment to Christ and by their acceptance of His Spirit to merge self in the larger whole of Christ's body and find their truest life in seeking the good of others. It is by their acceptance of Christ's Spirit as the source and Guide of their own life that they enter into fellowship with the community of men.
2. Paul is careful to show that the very efficiency
of the body depends upon the multiplicity and variety
One important function of the Church therefore is
to elicit and utilize every faculty for good which its
members possess. In a society in which Christianity
is but beginning to take root, it may fall to one man
to do the work of the whole Christian body—to be eye,
tongue, foot, hand, and heart. He must evangelise, he
must teach, he must legislate, he must enforce law;
he must preach, he must pray, he must lead the
singing; he must plan the church and help to build
Every one therefore who is drawn into the fellowship
of the body of Christ has something to contribute
to its good and to the work it does. He is in connection
with that body because the Spirit of Christ has
possessed and assimilated him to it; and that Spirit
energizes in him. He may not see that anything the
Church is presently engaged in is work he can undertake.
He may feel out of place and awkward when he
attempts to do what others are doing. He feels himself
like a greyhound, compelled to run by scent and not
by sight, and expected to do the work of a pointer, and
not seize his quarry, or as if set to do the work of
an eye with the hand. He can do it only in a groping,
fumbling, imperfect manner. But this is only a hint
that he is meant for other work, not for none. And
it is for him to discover what his Christian instincts
lead him to. The eye does not need to be told it is
The fact then that you are very different from the ordinary members of the Church is no reason for supposing you do not belong to Christ's body. The ear is very different from the eye; it can detect neither form nor colour; it cannot enjoy a landscape or welcome a friend: but "if the ear shall say, Because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body?" Is it not, on the contrary, its very diversity from the eye that makes it a welcome addition to the body, enriching its capabilities and enlarging its usefulness? It is not by comparison with other people that we can tell whether we belong to the body of Christ, nor is our function in that body determined by anything which some other member is doing. The very difficulty we find in adjusting ourselves to others and in finding any already existing Christian work to which we can give ourselves is a hint that we have the opportunity of adding to the Church's efficiency. The Church can claim to be perfect only when she embraces the most diversely gifted individuals and allows the tastes, instincts, and aptitudes of all to be used in her work.
3. As there is to be no slothful self-disparagement
in the body of Christ, so must there be no depreciation
of other people. "The eye cannot say unto the hand,
I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet,
I have no need of you." When zealous people discover
new methods, they forthwith despise the normal
ecclesiastical system that has stood the test and is
4. Lastly, Paul is careful to teach that "the manifestation
of the Spirit is given to every man to profit
withal." It is not for the glorification of the individual
that the new spiritual life manifests itself in this or
that remarkable form, but for the edification of the
body of Christ. However beautiful any feature of a
face may be, it is hideous apart from its position among
the rest and lying by itself. Morally hideous and no
longer admirable is the Christian who attracts attention
to himself and does not subordinate his gift to the
advantage of the whole body of Christ. If in the
human body any member asserts itself and is not
subservient to the one central will, that is recognised
as disease: St. Vitus' dance. If any member ceases
to obey the central will, paralysis is indicated. And
equally so is disease indicated wherever a Christian
Let us then endeavour to recognise our position as members of Christ's body. Let us with seriousness accept Him as appointed by God to be our true spiritual Life and Head; let us consider what we have it in our power to do for the good of the whole body; and let us put aside all jealousy, envy, and selfishness, and with meekness honour the work done by others while humbly and hopefully doing our own.
NO GIFT LIKE LOVE
"But covet earnestly the best gifts: and yet show I unto you a more excellent way. Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal. And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing. And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing. Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil; rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth; beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things. Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away. For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away. When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things. For now we see through a glass, darkly; but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known. And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity."—1 Cor. xii. 31-xiii. 13.
In the preceding chapter (xii.) Paul has striven to suppress the envy, vanity, and discord which had resulted from the abuse of the spiritual gifts with which the Corinthian Church was endowed. He has explained that these gifts were bestowed for the edification of the Church, and not for the glorification of the individual; and that therefore the individual should covet, not the most surprising, but the most profitable, of these manifestations of the Spirit. "Covet the best gifts," he says: Desire the gifts which edify, the gift of exhortation, or, as it was then called, prophecy. And yet there is a more excellent way to edify the Church than even to exercise apostolic gifts; this is the way of love, which he proceeds to celebrate.
1. Love is the ligament which binds together the
several members of the body of Christ, the cement
which keeps the stones of the temple together. Without
Or take even the higher gift of prophecy. Suppose
I am enlightened by the Spirit so that I can explain
things hitherto misunderstood; suppose I can make
revelations of important truths which have been accessible
to none besides; suppose even that I have all
faith, faith, as the rabbis say, to remove mountains;
suppose I can work miracles, heal the sick, raise the
dead, set the whole world agape with astonishment,
all this without love, however it may profit others,
profits myself not at all, and neither brings me into
closer connection with Christ nor gives assurance of
my sound spiritual condition, I may be among the
number of those who, after doing wonderful works
There were, however, two Christian actions which might seem to be beyond question as evidence of a sound spiritual condition: almsgiving and martyrdom. The young man who sought guidance from Christ lacked but one thing: to sell his property and give to the poor. But, says Paul, "though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and have not love, it profiteth me nothing." It is only too possible to do great acts of charity from a love of display, or from an uneasy sense of duty which parts reluctantly and grudgingly with what it bestows. That is understood. Common-sense tells every one but the abjectly superstitious man himself that it is as impossible to buy spiritual health on a bed of death as it is to buy the cure of his mortal disease.
But martyrdom? Can a man give any stronger
proof of his faith than to give his body to be burned?
Certainly one would with great reluctance disparage
the integrity of those courageous persons who in many
ages of the Church's history have gone without flinching
to the stake. But, in point of fact, a willingness
to suffer for one's opinion or one's faith is not in every
case a guarantee of the existence of a heart transformed
Not without reason then does Paul so emphatically warn men against looking upon such exceptional actions or such extraordinary endowments as undoubted evidence of a healthy spiritual state. Gifts and conduct which bring men prominently before the eye of the Church or the world are often no index to the character; and if they be not rooted in and guided by love, their possessor has little reason to congratulate himself. Too often it is a man's snare to judge himself by what he does rather than by what he is. It is so easy comparatively to do great things supposing certain gifts be present; it is at least always possible to human nature to make sacrifices and engage in arduous duties. The impossible thing is love. No eye to advantageous consequences or to public opinion can enable a man to love; no desire to maintain a character for piety can produce that grace. Love must be spontaneous, from the soul's self, not produced by considerations of the requirements of a position we wish to reach or to maintain. It must be the unconstrained, natural outcome of the real man. Not even the consideration of Christ's love will produce love in us if there be not a real sympathy with Christ. A sense of benefit received will not produce love where there is no similarity of sentiment. Love cannot be got up. It is the result of God entering and possessing the soul. "He that loveth is born of God." That is the only account to be given of the matter. And therefore it is that where love is absent all is absent.
And yet how the mistake of the Corinthians is perpetuated from age to age. The Church is smitten with a genuine admiration of talent, of the faculties which make the body of Christ bulk larger in the eye of the world, while too often love is neglected. After all that the Church has learned of the dangers which accompany theological controversy, and of the hollowness of much that passes for growth, intellectual gifts are frequently prized more highly than love. Do we not ourselves often become aware that the absence of this one thing needful is writing vanity and failure on all we do and on all we are? If we are not yet in the real fellowship of the body of Christ, possessed by a love that prompts us to serve the whole, with what complacency can we look on other acquirements? Do parents sufficiently impress on their children that all successes at school and in early life are as nothing compared to the more obscure but much more substantial acquisition of a thoroughly unselfish, generous, catholic spirit of service?
2. Paul having illustrated the supremacy of love
by showing that without it all other gifts are profitless,
proceeds (vers. 4-7) to celebrate its own positive
excellence. It is possible, though unlikely, that Paul
may have read the eulogium pronounced on love by
the greatest of Greek writers five hundred years before:
"Love is our lord, supplying kindness and
banishing unkindness, giving friendship and forgiving
enmity, the joy of the good, the wonder of the wise,
the amazement of the gods; desired by those who
have no part in him, and precious to those who have
the better part in him; parent of delicacy, luxury,
desire, fondness, softness, grace; careful of the good,
uncareful of the evil. In every word, work, wish,
Paul's eulogium is the more effective because it exhibits in detail the various ramifications of this exuberant and fruitful grace, how it runs out into all our intercourse with our fellow-men and carries with it a healing and sweetening virtue. It imbues the entire character, and contains in itself the motive of all Christian conduct. It is "the fulfilling of the Law." Its claims are paramount because it embraces all other virtues. If a man has love, there is no grace impossible to him or into which love will not on occasion develop. Love becomes courage of the most absolute kind where danger threatens its object. It begets a wisdom and a skill which put to shame technical training and experience. It brings forth self-restraint and temperance as its natural fruit; it is patient, forgiving, modest, humble, sympathizing. It is quite true that
Thomas a Kempis dwells with evident relish on
Paul's description of the behaviour of love is drawn
in view of the discords and vanities of the Corinthians
and as a contrast to their unseemly and unbrotherly
conduct. "Love suffereth long, and is kind;" it
reveals itself in a magnanimous bearing of injuries
and in a considerate and tender imparting of benefits.
It returns good for evil; not readily provoked by
slights and wrongs, it ever seeks to spend itself in
kindnesses. Then there is nothing envious, vain, or
selfish in love. "Love envieth not; love vaunteth not
itself." It neither grudges others their gifts, nor is
eager to show off its own. The pallor and bitter sneer
of envy and the ridiculous swagger of the boastful are
equally remote from love. "It is not puffed up, and
doth not behave itself unseemly." Love saves a man
from making a fool of himself by consequential conduct,
and by thrusting himself into positions which betray
his incompetence, and by immodest, irreverent, and
eccentric actions. It balances a man and gives him
sense by bringing him into right relations with his
fellows and prompting him to esteem their gifts more
highly than his own. Neither is love ever on the
watch for its own rights, scrupulously exacting the
remuneration, the recognition, the applause, the precedence,
the deference, that may be due: "it seeketh
Another manifestation of love, and one the mention of which pricks the conscience, is that it "rejoiceth not in unrighteousness." It has no malignant pleasure in seeing reputations exploded, in discovering the sin, the hypocrisy, the mistakes, of other men. "It rejoiceth with the truth." Where truth scatters calumny and shows that suspicions were ill-founded, love rejoices. Successful wickedness, whether for or against its own interests, love has no pleasure in; but where goodness triumphs love is thrilled with a sympathetic joy. In place of rejoicing in discovered wickedness because it lowers a rival or seems to leave a more prominent position to itself, love hastens to cover the fault. "It covereth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things." It has untiring charity, making every allowance, proposing every excuse, believing that explanations can be made, accepting greedily such as are made, slow to be persuaded that things are as bad as rumour paints, hoping against hope for the acquittal, or at any rate for the reformation, of every culprit.
3. Finally, Paul shows the superiority of love by
comparing it in point of permanence, first, with the
"Love never faileth;" it is imperishable: it grows from less to more; there never comes a time when it gives place to some higher quality of soul, or when it is unimportant whether a man has it or no, or when it is no longer the criterion of the whole moral state. The most surprising spiritual gifts can make no such claim. "Whether there be prophecies, they shall be done away; whether there be tongues, they shall cease." These gifts were for the temporary benefit of the Church. However some might misapprehend their significance and fancy that these extraordinary manifestations were destined to characterise the Christian Church throughout its history, Paul was not so deceived. He was prepared for their disappearance. They were the scaffolding which no one thinks of or inquires after when the building is finished, the schoolbooks which become the merest rubbish when the boy is educated, the prop which the forester removes when the sapling has become a tree.
But knowledge? The knowledge of God and of
Divine things in which good men delight, and which
is esteemed the stamina of character—is not this permanent?
No, says Paul. "Knowledge also shall be
done away." And to illustrate his meaning Paul
uses two figures: the figure of a child's knowledge,
which is gradually lost in the knowledge of the man,
and the figure of an object dimly seen through a
semi-transparent medium. We shall understand the
significance and the bearing of these figures if we
consider that when we speak of imperfect knowledge we
may mean either of two things: we may either mean
that it is imperfect in amount or that it is imperfect
Both the figures used by Paul imply that our knowledge
of Divine things is of this latter kind. They
loom, as it were, through a mist. Many of their details
are invisible. We have not got them under our hand
to examine at leisure. Our present knowledge is as
the light of a lantern by which we can pick our way,
or as the starlight, for which we are thankful in the
meantime; but when the sun of a wider, deeper, truer
knowledge rises, what we now call knowledge shall be
quite eclipsed. "When I was a child," says Paul,
"I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought
as a child: but when I became a man, I put away
childish things." That is to say, Paul was distinctly
aware that much of our present knowledge is provisional.
We do not know the very truth, but only
such approximations to the truth and such symbols
of it as we are able to understand. We are at present
in the state of childhood, which cherishes many notions
destined to be exploded by maturer knowledge. We
The other figure is still more precise, although there
is great difference of opinion as to what Paul means
by seeing now "through a glass, darkly." The word
here rendered "glass" is used either for the dim
metallic mirror used by the ancients, or for the semi-translucent
talc which was their substitute for glass
in windows. Of these two meanings it is the latter
which in this passage gives the best sense. It was a
common figure among the rabbis to illustrate dimness
of vision. If they wished to denote direct and clear
vision, they spoke of seeing a thing face to face; if they
wished to denote uncertain and hazy vision, they spoke
of seeing through a glass—that is, through a substance
only a little more transparent than our own dimmed
glass, through which you can see objects, but cannot
tell exactly what they are or who the persons are who
are moving. Thus they had a common saying, "All
other prophets saw as through nine glasses, Moses as
through one." The rabbis, too, had another saying See the passages in Wets ein and Schöttgen.
Interpreting Paul's language then by the language of his own kith and kin and of the schools in which he had been educated, his meaning is that in this life we can see Divine things only dimly and as through a veil, but hereafter we shall see them without the intervention of any obscuring medium. Here and now we can make out only the general outline of the unseen realities; but hereafter we shall know even as we are known, shall see God as directly as He now sees us. We shall not have even then the same perfect knowledge of Him that He has of us, but shall see Him as immediately and directly as He sees us. Now He wears a veil through which He can see, but through which we cannot see; hereafter He will lay aside this. Our present knowledge of God and of all things unseen is necessarily vague, not susceptible of exact definition. There are some things of which we may be quite sure, others of which we must be content to remain in uncertainty. We may be quite sure that God exists, that He loves us, that He has sent His Son to save us; but if we attempt to run a sharp and clear outline round the truths thus dimly seen, we shall inevitably err.
It may be added that while Paul warns us against
supposing that our knowledge is perfect, he does not
mean to brand it as useless or delusive. On the
Paul's crowning testimony to the worth of love is
given in the thirteenth verse: "But now abideth faith,
hope, love, these three; and the greatest of these is
love." He does not mean that love abides while faith
becomes sight and hope fruition. Rather he indicates
that faith and hope are also imperishable, and hereby
distinguished from the spiritual gifts of which he has
been speaking. Both in this life and in that which
is to come faith, hope, and love abide. For faith and
hope pass away only in one aspect of their exercise.
If by faith be meant belief in things unseen, this
passes away when the unseen is seen. If hope be
taken as referring only to the future state in general,
then when that state is reached hope passes away.
But faith and hope are really permanent elements of
human life, faith being the confidence we have in
God, and hope the ever-renewed expectancy of future
good. But while faith maintains us in connection with
God, love is the enjoyment of God and the partaking
of His nature; and while hope renews our energy and
To see the beauty, fruitfulness, and sufficiency of love is easy, but to have it as the mainspring of our own life most difficult, indeed the greatest of all attainments. This we instinctively recognise as the true test of our condition. Have we that in us which really knits us to God and our fellow-men and prompts us to do our utmost for them? Have we in us this new affection which destroys selfishness and brings us into true and lasting relations with all we have to do with? This is the root of all good, the beginning of all blessedness, because the germ of all likeness to God, who Himself is love.
SPIRITUAL GIFTS AND PUBLIC WORSHIP.
"Follow after charity, and desire spiritual gifts, but rather that ye
may prophesy. For he that speaketh in an unknown tongue speaketh
not unto men, but unto God: for no man understandeth him; howbeit
in the Spirit he speaketh mysteries. But he that prophesieth
speaketh unto men to edification, and exhortation, and comfort. He
that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth himself; but he that
prophesieth edifieth the Church. I would that ye all spake with
tongues, but rather that ye prophesied: for greater is he that
prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret,
that the Church may receive edifying. Now, brethren, if I come unto
you speaking with tongues, what shall I profit you, except I shall
speak to you either by revelation, or by knowledge, or by prophesying,
or by doctrine? And even things without life giving sound, whether
pipe or harp, except they give a distinction in the sounds, how shall
it be known what is piped or harped? For if the trumpet give an
uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle? So likewise
ye, except ye utter by the tongue words easy to be understood,
how shall it be known what is spoken? for ye shall speak into the
air. There are, it may be, so many kinds of voices in the world, and
none of them is without signification. Therefore if I know not the
meaning of the voice, I shall be unto him that speaketh a barbarian,
and he that speaketh shall be a barbarian unto me. Even so ye,
forasmuch as ye are zealous of spiritual gifts, seek that ye may excel
to the edifying of the Church. Wherefore let him that speaketh in an
unknown tongue pray that he may interpret. For if I pray in an
unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.
What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will
pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I
will sing with the understanding also. Else when thou shalt bless
with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned
say Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth not what
thou sayest? For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is not
edified. I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all:
yet in the Church I had rather speak five words with my understanding,
that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten
thousand words in an unknown tongue. Brethren, be not children
A difficulty, however, meets us at the outset. We
have no opportunity of observing these gifts in exercise,
and cannot readily understand them. With prophecy
indeed there need be no great difficulty. Prophesying
is speaking for God, whether the utterance regards
present or future matters. When Moses complained
that he had no gift of utterance, God said, "Aaron shall
be thy prophet;" that is, shall speak for thee, or be thy
spokesman. Prediction is not necessarily any part of
the prophet's function. It may be so, and often it
was so, but a man might be a prophet who had no
revelation of the future. In the sense in which Paul
uses the word, a prophet was "an inspired teacher and
exhorter who revealed to men the secrets of God's will
and word and the secrets of their own hearts for the
purpose of conversion and edification." The function
of the prophet is indicated in the third verse: "He that
But the gift of tongues is involved in greater obscurity. On its first occurrence, as recorded in the book of Acts, it would seem to have been the gift of speaking in foreign languages. We are told that the strangers from Asia Minor, Parthia, the shores of the Black Sea, Africa, and Italy, when they heard the disciples speaking, recognised that they were speaking intelligible languages. One man was attracted by the sound of his native Arabic; another heard the familiar Latin; a third for the first time in Jerusalem heard a Jew speaking the language he was accustomed to hear on the banks of the Nile. Naturally they were confounded by the circumstance, "every man hearing," as it is said, "his own language, the tongue wherein he was born." It would certainly seem probable, therefore, that, whether the gift afterwards changed its character or not, it was originally the power of speaking in a foreign language so as to be intelligible to any one who understood that language.
This gift was of course communicated, not as a
permanent acquisition, to fit men to preach the Gospel
in foreign countries, but merely as a temporary impulse
to utter words which to themselves had no meaning. All
If then this gift was intermittent and did not qualify
its possessor to use a foreign language for the ordinary
purposes of life or for preaching the Gospel, what was
its use? It served the same purpose as other miracles;
it made visible and called attention to the entrance of
new powers into human nature. As Paul says, it was
"for them that believe not, not for them that believe."
It was meant to excite inquiry, not to instruct the mind
of the Christian. It produced conviction that among
the followers of Christ new powers were at work. The
evidence of this took a shape which seemed to intimate
that the religion of Christ was suitable for every race
of mankind. This gift of tongues seemed to claim all
nations as the object of Christ's work. The most remote
and insignificant tribe was accessible to Him. He
It must, however, be said that the common opinion of scholars is that the gift of tongues did not consist in ability to speak a foreign language even temporarily, but in an exalted frame of mind which found expression in sounds or words belonging to no human language. What was thus uttered has been compared to the "merry, unmeaning shouts of boyhood, getting rid of exuberant life, uttering in sounds a joy for which manhood has no words." These ecstatic cries or exclamations were not always understood either by the person uttering them, or by any one else, so that there was always a risk of such utterances being considered either as the ravings of lunatics, or, as in the first instance, the thick and inarticulate mutterings of drunkards. But sometimes there was present a person in the same key of feeling whose spirit vibrated to the note struck by the speaker, and who was able to render his inarticulate sounds into intelligible speech. For as music can only be interpreted by one who has a feeling for music, and as the inarticulate language of tears, or sighs, or groans can be comprehended by a sympathetic soul, so the tongues could be interpreted by those whose spiritual state corresponded to that of the gifted person.
At various periods of the Church's history these manifestations have been reproduced. The Montanists of the early Church, the Camisards of France at the close of the seventeenth century, and the Irvingites of our own country claimed that they possessed similar gifts. Probably all such manifestations are due to violent nervous agitation. The early Quakers showed their wisdom in treating all physical manifestations as physical.
Comparing these two gifts, prophecy and speaking with tongues, Paul very decidedly gives the preference to the former, and this mainly on the score of its greater utility. It often happened that when one of the Christians spoke in tongues there was no one present who could interpret. However exalted the man's own spirit might be, the congregation could derive no benefit from his utterances. And if a number of persons spoke at once, as they seemed to do in Corinth, on the pretext that they could not control themselves, any unbeliever who came in and heard this Babel of sound would naturally conclude, as Paul says, that he had stumbled into a ward of lunatics. Such disorder must not be. If there were no one present who could interpret what the speakers with tongues were saying, they must be silent. Apart from interpretation speaking with tongues was mere noise, the blare of a trumpet sounded by one who did not know one call from another, and which was mere unintelligible sound. Prophesying was not liable to these abuses. All understood it, and could learn something from it.
From this preference shown by Paul for the less
showy but more useful gift, we may gather that to
make public worship the occasion of self-display or
sensational exhibitions is to degrade it. This is a
hint for the pulpit rather than for the pew. Preachers
must resist the temptation to preach for effect, to make
a sensation, to produce fine sermons. The desire to
be recognised as able to move men, to say things
smartly, to put the truth freshly, to be eloquent, or to
be sensible is always striving against the simple-minded
purpose of edifying Christ's people. Worshippers as
well as preachers may, however, be so tempted. They
Again, we here see that worship in which the understanding bears no part receives no countenance from Paul. "I will pray with the spirit; I will pray with the understanding also." Where the prayers of the Church are in an unknown tongue, such as Latin, the worshipper may indeed pray with the spirit, and may be edified thereby, but his worship would be better did he pray with the understanding also. Music unaccompanied by words induces in some temperaments an impressible condition which has an appearance of devoutness and probably something of the reality; but such devoutness is apt to be either hazy or sentimental or both, unless by the help of accompanying words the understanding goes hand in hand with feeling.
No countenance can be found in this chapter to the
idea that worship should exclude preaching and become
the sole purpose of the assembling together of Christian
people. Some temperaments incline towards worship,
but resent being preached to or instructed. The
reverential and serious feelings which are quickened
into life by devotional forms of prayer may be scattered
by the buffoonery or ineptitudes of the preacher.
Exasperation, unbelief, contempt, in the mind of the
hearer may be the only results achieved by some sermons.
It may occasionally occur to us that the Christian
world would be very much the better of some years of
silence, and that results which have not been reached
by floods of preaching might be attained if these floods
were allowed to ebb and a period of quiet and repose
Having given expression to his preference for
prophesying, Paul goes on to indicate the manner in
which the public services should be conducted. The
picture he draws is one which finds no counterpart
in the greater modern Churches. The chief distinction
between the services of the Corinthian Church and
those we are now familiar with is the much greater
freedom with which in those days the membership of
the Church took part in the service. "When ye come
together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine,
hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation."
Each member of the congregation had something to
contribute for the edification of the Church. The
experience, the thought, the gifts, of the individual
were made available for the benefit of all. One with
a natural aptitude for poetry threw his devotional feeling
into a metrical form, and furnished the Church with
her earliest hymns. Another with innate exactness
of thought set some important aspect of Christian truth
so clearly before the mind of the congregation that it
at once took its place as an article of faith. Another,
fresh from contact with the world and intercourse with
unbelieving and dissolute men, who had felt his own
feet sliding and renewed his grasp on Christ, entered
the meeting with the glow of conflict on his face, and
And yet, as Paul observes, there was much to be desired in those Corinthian services. Had there been some authorized official presiding over them, the abuses of which this letter speaks could not have arisen. To appeal to this chapter or to any part of this letter in proof that there should be no distinction between clergy and laity would be very bad policy. It is indeed obvious that at this time there were neither elders nor deacons, bishops nor rulers of any kind, in the Church of Corinth; but then it is quite as obvious that there was great need of them, and that the want of them had given rise to some scandalous abuses and to much disorder. The ideal condition would be one in which authority should be lodged in certain elected office-bearers, while the faculty and gift of each member in some way contributed to the good of the whole Church. In most Churches of our own day, efforts are made to utilize the Christian energies of their membership in those various charitable works which are so necessary and so abundant. But probably we should all be the better of a much freer ventilation of opinion within the Church and of listening to men who have not been educated in any particular school of theology and hold their minds closely to the realities of experience.
We cannot but ask in passing, What has become of
all those inspired utterances with which the Corinthian
While Paul abstains from appointing office-bearers
to preside at their meetings, he is careful to lay down
two principles which should regulate their procedure.
First, "let everything be done decently and in order."
This advice was greatly needed in a Church in which
the public services were sometimes turned into tumultuous
exhibitions of rival gifts, each man trying to make
himself heard above the din of voices, one speaking
with tongues, another singing a hymn, a third loudly
addressing the congregation, so that any stranger who
might be attracted by the noise and step into the
house could think this Christian meeting nothing else
than Bedlam broke loose. Above all things, then, says
Paul, conduct your meetings in a seemly fashion.
Observe the rules of common decency and order. I
The other general principle Paul lays down in the
words, "Let all things be done unto edifying." Let
each use his gift for the good of the congregation.
Keep the great end of your meetings in view, and you
need no formal rubrics. If extempore prayer is found
inspiring, use it; if the old liturgy of the synagogue
is preferred, retain its service; if both have advantages,
employ both. Judge your methods by their bearing
on the spiritual life of your members. Make no boast
of your æsthetic worship, your irreproachable liturgy,
your melting music, if these things do not result in
a more loyal service of Christ. Do not pique yourselves
on your puritanic simplicity of worship and the
absence of all that is not spiritual if this bareness and
simplicity do not bring you more directly into the
presence of your Lord. It matters little what we eat
or in what shape it is served if we are the better for
our food and are maintained in health and vigour. It
matters little whether the vehicle in which we travel
be highly decorated or plain so long as it brings us
It might be difficult to say whether the somewhat
selfish ambition of those Corinthians to secure the
surprising gifts of the Spirit or our own torpid
indifference and lack of expectation is less to be
commended. Certainly every one who attaches himself
to Christ ought to indulge in great expectations.
Through Christ lies the way out from the poverty and
futility that oppress our spiritual history. From Him
we may, however falsely modest we are, expect at least
His own Spirit. And in this "least" there is promise
of all. They who sincerely attach themselves to Christ
cannot fail to end by being like Him. But lack of
expectation is fatal to the Christian. If we expect
nothing or very little from Christ, we might as well not
be Christians. If He does not become to us a second
conscience, ever present in us to warn against sin
and offer opposing inducements, we might as well call
ourselves by any other name. His power is exerted
now not to excite to unwonted exhibitions of abnormal
faculties, but to promote in us all that is most stable
and substantial in character. And the fact is that they
who hunger after righteousness are filled. They who
expect that Christ will help them to become like Himself
do become like Him. All grace is attainable.
Nothing but unbelief shuts us out from it. Do not
be content until you find in Christ more abundant life,
until you have as clear evidence as these Corinthians
had that a new spirit of power dwells within you.
He Himself encourages you to expect this. It is to
receive this He calls us to Him; and if we are not
THE RESURRECTION OF CHRIST.
"Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the Gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; by which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures; and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the Scriptures: and that He was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve: after that, He was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep. After that He was seen of James; then of all the Apostles. And last of all He was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time. For I am the least of the Apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the Church of God. But by the grace of God I am what I am: and His grace which was bestowed upon me was not in vain; but I laboured more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me. Therefore whether it were I or they, so we preach, and so ye believed. Now if Christ be preached that He rose from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead? But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen: and if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain. Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that He raised up Christ: whom He raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not. For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised: and if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins."—1 Cor. xv. 1-17.
I. Its Place in the Christian Creed.
It will be most convenient to consider first the
place which the resurrection of Christ holds in the
Christian creed; but that we may follow Paul's argument
and appreciate its force, it will be necessary to make
First, by the resurrection of Christ Paul meant His rising from the grave with a body glorified or made fit for the new and heavenly life He had entered. Paul did not believe that the body he saw on the road to Damascus was the very body which had hung upon the cross, made of the same material, subject to the same conditions. He affirms in this chapter that flesh and blood, a natural body, cannot enter upon the heavenly life. It must pass through a process which entirely alters its material. Paul had seen bodies consumed to ashes, and he knew that the substance of these bodies could not be recovered. He was aware that the material of the human body is dissolved, and is by the processes of nature used for the constructing of the bodies of fishes, wild beasts, birds; that as the body was sustained in life by the produce of the earth, so in death it is mingled with the earth again, giving back to earth what it had received. The arguments therefore commonly urged against the Resurrection had no relevancy against that in which Paul believed, for it was not that very thing which was buried which he expected would rise again, but a body different in kind, in material, and in capacity.
But yet Paul always speaks as if there were some
connection between the present and the future, the
natural and the spiritual, body. He speaks, too, of the
body of Christ as the type or specimen into the likeness
of which the bodies of His people are to be transformed.
Now if we conceive, or try to conceive, what passed in
that closed sepulchre in the garden of Joseph, we can
only suppose that the body of flesh and blood which
Secondly, we must understand the position occupied
by those whom Paul addressed in this chapter. They
doubted the Resurrection; but in that day, as in our own,
the Resurrection was denied from two opposite points
of view. Materialists, such as the Sadducees, believing
that mental and spiritual life are only manifestations
of physical life and dependent upon it, necessarily
concluded that with the death of the body the whole
But many who opposed materialism held that the resurrection of the body, if not impossible, was at all events undesirable. It was the fashion to speak contemptuously of the body. It was branded as the source and seat of sin, as the untamed bullock which dragged its yokefellow, the soul, out of the straight path. Philosophers gave thanks to God that He had not tied their spirit to an immortal body, and refused to allow their portrait to be taken, lest they should be remembered and honoured by means of their material part. When Paul's teaching was accepted by such persons, they laid great stress on his inculcation of the mystical or spiritual dying with Christ and rising again, until they persuaded themselves this was all he meant by resurrection. They declared that the Resurrection was past already, and that all believing men were already risen in Christ. To be free from all connection with matter was an essential element in their idea of salvation, and to promise them the resurrection of the body was to offer them a very doubtful blessing indeed.
In our own day the resurrection of Christ is denied
both from the materialist and from the spiritualist or
idealist point of view. It is said that the resurrection
of Christ is an undoubted fact if by the resurrection it
be meant that His spirit survived death and now lives
in us. But the bodily resurrection is a thing of no
account. Not from the risen body flows the power
that has altered human history, but from the teachings
On the other hand, it may be meant that although
the body of Christ remained in the tomb, His spirit
survived death, and lives a disembodied but conscious
and powerful life. One of the profoundest German
critics, Keim, has expressed himself to this effect. The
Apostles, he thinks, did not see the actual risen body
of the Lord; their visions of a glorified Jesus were
not, however, delusive; the appearances were not the
creations of their own excitement, but were intentionally
produced by the Lord Himself. Jesus, it is believed,
had actually passed into a higher life, and was as full
of consciousness and of power as He had been on
This view, although erroneous, can do little harm to experimental or practical Christianity. The difference between a disembodied spirit and a spiritual body is really unappreciable to our present knowledge. And if any one finds it impossible to believe in the bodily resurrection of Christ, but easy to believe in His present life and power, it would only be mischievous to require of him a faith he cannot give in addition to a faith which brings him into real fellowship with Christ. The main purpose of Christ's appearances was to give to His disciples assurance of His continued life and power. If that assurance already exists, then belief in Christ as alive and supreme supersedes the use of the usual stepping-stone towards that belief.
At the same time, it must be maintained that not only
did the Apostles believe they saw the body of Christ,
by which indeed they first of all identified Him, but
also they were distinctly assured that the body they
saw was not a ghost or a telegram, but a veritable body
that could stand handling, and whose lips and throat
could utter sound. Besides, it is not in reason to suppose
that when they saw this appearance, whatever it
was, they should not at once go to the sepulchre and
see what was there. And if there they saw the body
while in various other places they saw what seemed to
be the body, what a world of incomprehensible and
It is a fact then that those who knew most both about the body and about the spirit of Jesus believed they saw the body and were encouraged so to believe. Besides, if we accept the view that though Christ is alive, His body remained in the grave, we are at once confronted with the difficulty that Christ's glorification is not yet complete. If Christ's body did not partake in His conquest over the grave, then that conquest is partial and incomplete. Human nature both in this life and in the life to come is composed of body and spirit; and if Christ now sits at God's right hand in perfected human nature, it is not as a disembodied spirit, but as a complete person in a glorified body, we must conceive of Him. No doubt it is a spiritual influence which Christ now exerts upon His followers, and their belief in His risen life may be independent of any statements made by the disciples concerning His body; at the same time, to suppose that Christ is now without a body is to suppose that He is imperfect: and it must also be remembered that the primitive faith and restored confidence in Christ, to which the very existence of the Church is due, were created by the sight of the empty tomb and the glorified body.
In the face of such chapters as this and other passages
equally explicit, modern believers in a merely
spiritual resurrection have found some difficulty in
reconciling their views with the statements of Paul.
Mr. Matthew Arnold undertakes to show us how this
may be done. "Not for a moment," he says, "do we
deny that in Paul's earlier theology, and notably in
the Epistles to the Thessalonians and Corinthians, the
physical and miraculous aspect of the Resurrection,
and by this alone are we truly characterised." This, however, is not to interpret an author, but to make him a mere nose of wax that can be worked into any convenient shape. Probably Paul understood his own theology quite as well as Mr. Arnold; and, as his critic says, he considered the physical resurrection of Christ and the believer an essential part of it.
Considering the place which our Lord's risen body
had in Paul's conversion, it could not be otherwise.
At the very moment when Paul's whole system of
thought was in a state of fusion the risen Lord was
pre-eminently impressed upon it. It was through his
conviction of the resurrection of Christ that both Paul's
theology and his character were once for all radically
altered. The idea of a crucified Messiah had been
abhorrent to him, and his life was dedicated to the
extirpation of this vile heresy that sprang from the
Cross. But from the moment when with his own eyes
he saw the risen Lord he understood, with the rest of
And, generally speaking, this place is assigned to it both by believers and by unbelievers. It is recognised that it was the belief in the Resurrection which first revived the hopes of Christ's followers and drew them together to wait for the promise of His Spirit. It is recognised that whether the Resurrection be a fact or no, the Church of Christ was founded on the belief that it had taken place, so that if that had been removed the Church could not have been. This is affirmed as decisively by unbelievers as by believers. The great leader of modern unbelief (Strauss) declares that the Resurrection is "the centre of the centre, the real heart of Christianity as it has been until now;" while one of his ablest opponents says, "The Resurrection created the Church, the risen Christ made Christianity; and even now the Christian faith stands or falls with Him.... If it be true that no living Christ ever issued from the tomb of Joseph, then that tomb becomes the grave, not of a man, but of a religion, with all the hopes built on it and all the splendid enthusiasms it has inspired" (Fairbairn).
It is not difficult to perceive what it was in the resurrection of Christ which gave it this importance.
1. First, it was the convincing proof that Christ's
It was the resurrection of our Lord, then, which
convinced His disciples that His words had been true,
that He was what He had claimed to be, and that He
was not mistaken regarding His own person, His work,
His relation to the Father, the prospects of Himself and
His people. This was the answer given by God to the
doubts, and calumnies, and accusations of men. Jesus
at the last had stood alone, unsupported by one favouring
voice. His own disciples forsook Him, and in their
bewilderment knew not what to think. Those who Milligan, The Resurrection of our Lord, p. 150.
This contrast between the treatment Christ received
at the hands of men and His justification by the Father
in the Resurrection fills and colours all the addresses
delivered by the Apostles to the people in the immediately
succeeding days. They evidently accepted the
Resurrection as God's great attestation to the person
and work of Christ. It changed their own thoughts
about Him, and they expected it would change the
thoughts of other men. They saw now that His death
was one of the necessary steps in His career, one of
the essential parts of the work He had come to do.
2. Secondly, the resurrection of Christ occupies a
fundamental place in the Christian creed, because by
it there is disclosed a real and close connection between
this world and the unseen, eternal world. There is
no need now of argument to prove a life beyond; here
is one who is in it. For the resurrection of Christ was
not a return to this life, to its wants, to its limitations,
to its inevitable close; but it was a resurrection to a
life for ever beyond death. Neither was it a discarding
of humanity on Christ's part, a cessation of His acceptance
of human conditions, a rising to some kind of
existence to which man has no access. On the contrary,
it was because He continued truly human that in
human body and with human soul He rose to veritable
human life beyond the grave. If Jesus rose from the
dead, then the world into which He is gone is a real
world, in which men can live more fully than they live
here. If He rose from the dead, then there is an
unseen Spirit mightier than the strongest material
powers, a God who is seeking to bring us out of all
evil into an eternally happy condition. Quite reasonably
is death invested with a certain majesty, if not
terror, as the mightiest of physical things. There may
be greater evils; but they do not affect all men, but only
some, or they debar men from certain enjoyments and
3. For, lastly, it is in the resurrection of Christ we see at once the norm or type of our life here and of our destiny hereafter. Holiness and immortality are two aspects, two manifestations, of the Divine life we receive from Christ. They are inseparable the one from the other. His Spirit is the source of both. "If the Spirit that raised up the Lord Jesus from the dead dwelleth in you, He that raised up Christ Jesus from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies through His Spirit that dwelleth in you." If we have now the one evidence of His indwelling in us, we shall one day have the other. The hope that should uplift and purify every part of the Christian's character is a hope which is shadowy, unreal, inoperative, in those who merely know about Christ and His work; it becomes a living hope, full of immortality, in all who are now actually drawing their life from Christ, who have their life truly hid with Christ in God, who are in heart and will one with the Most High, in whom is all life.
Therefore does Paul so continually hold up to us the risen life of Christ as that to which we are to be conformed. We are to rise with Him to newness of life. As Christ has done with death, having died to sin once, so must His people be dead to sin and live to God with Him. Sometimes in weariness or dejection one feels as if he had seen the best of everything experienced all he can experience, and must now simply endure life; he sees no prospect of anything fresh, or attractive, or reviving. But this is not because he has exhausted life, but because he has not begun it. To the "children of the Resurrection," who have followed Christ in His path to life by renouncing sin, and conquering self, and giving themselves to God, there is a springing life in their own soul that renews hope and energy.
II. Its Proof.
Paul, having affirmed that the resurrection of Christ is an essential element of the Gospel, proceeds to sketch the evidence for the fact. That evidence mainly consists in the attestation of those who at various times and in various places and circumstances had seen the Lord after His death. Other evidence there is, as Paul indicates. In certain unspecified passages of the Old Testament he thinks a discerning reader might have found sufficient intimation that when the Messiah came He would both die and rise again. But as he himself had not at first recognised these intimations in the Old Testament, he does not press them upon others, but appeals to the simple fact that many of those who had been familiar with the appearance of Christ while He lived saw Him after death alive.
As a preliminary to the positive evidence here
adduced by Paul, it may be remarked that we have no
record of any contemporary denial of the fact, save
only the story put in the mouths of the soldiers by the
chief priests. Matthew tells us that it was currently
reported that the soldiers who had been on guard at
the sepulchre were bribed by the priests and elders to
The evidence thus unintentionally furnished by the
authorities is important. Their action after the Resurrection
proves that the tomb was empty; while their
action previous to the Resurrection proves that it was
emptied by no ordinary interposition, but by the actual
rising of Jesus from the dead. So beyond doubt was
this that when Peter stood before the Sanhedrim and
affirmed it no one was hardy enough to contradict
him. Had they been able to persuade themselves that
the disciples had tampered with the guard, or overpowered
them, or terrified them in the night by strange
appearances, why did they not prosecute the disciples
for breaking the official seal? Could they have had a
more plausible pretext for exploding the Christian faith
and stamping out the nascent heresy? They were
perplexed and alarmed at the growth of the Church;
what hindered them from bringing proof that there had
been no resurrection? They had every inducement to
do so, yet they did not. If the body was still in the
grave, nothing was easier than to produce it; if the
grave was empty, as they affirmed, because the disciples
had stolen the body, no more welcome handle against
The idea that there was only a pretended resurrection, vamped up by the disciples, may therefore be dismissed; and indeed no well-informed person nowadays would venture to affirm such a thing. It is admitted by those who deny the Resurrection as explicitly as by those who affirm it that the disciples had a bonâ fide belief that Jesus had risen from the dead and was alive. The only question is, How was that belief produced? And to this question there are three answers: (1) that the disciples saw our Lord alive after the Crucifixion, but He had never been dead; (2) that they only thought they saw Him; and (3) that they did actually see Him alive after being dead and buried.
1. The first answer is plainly inadequate. We are
asked to account for the Christian Church, for the
belief in a risen Lord which animated the first disciples
with a faith, a hope, a courage, whose power is felt to
this day; we ask for an explanation of this singular
circumstance that a number of men arrived at the conclusion
that they had an almighty Friend, One who
had all power in heaven and on earth; and we are
told, in explanation of this, that they had seen their
Master barely rescued from crucifixion, creeping about
This explanation then may be dismissed. It is neither in harmony with the facts, nor is it adequate as an explanation.
It is not in harmony with the facts, because the fact of His death was certified by the surest authority. There was in the world at that time, and there is in the world now, nothing more punctiliously accurate than a soldier trained under the old Roman discipline. The punctilious exactness of this discipline is seen in the conduct both of the soldiers at the cross and of Pilate. Though the soldiers see that Jesus is dead, they make sure of His death by a spear-thrust, a handbreadth wide, sufficient of itself, as they very well knew, to cause death. And when Pilate is applied to for the body, he will not give it up until he has received from the centurion on duty the necessary certificate that the sentence of death has actually been executed.
Neither is the supposition that Jesus survived the
Crucifixion and appeared to His disciples in this rescued
2. The belief of the disciples is explained with
greater appearance of insight by those who say that
they imagined they saw the risen Lord, although in
reality they did not. There are, it is pointed out,
several ways in which the disciples may have been
deceived. For example, some clever and scheming
person may have personated Jesus. Such personations
have been made, but never with such results.
When Postumus Agrippa was killed, one of his slaves
secreted or dispersed the ashes of the murdered man,
to destroy the evidence of his death, and retired for a
time till his hair and beard were grown, to favour a
certain likeness which he actually bore him. Meanwhile,
taking a few intimates into his confidence, he
spread a report, which found ready listeners, that
Agrippa still lived. He glided from town to town,
showing himself in the dusk for a few minutes only at
a time to men prepared for the sudden apparition,
until it came to be noised abroad that the gods had
saved the grandson of Agrippa from the fate intended
for him, and that he was about to visit the city and
claim his rightful inheritance. But no sooner did the
vulgar imposture take this practical shape and come
into contact with the realities of life than the whole
trick exploded. Imposture, in fact, does not fit the case
before us at all; and the more we consider the combination
Again, one of the most reasonable and influential of our contemporaries ascribes "the great myth of Christ's bodily revival to the belief on the part of the disciples that such a soul could not become extinct. In a lesser way the grave of a beloved friend has been to many a man the birthplace of his faith; and it is obvious that in the case of Christ every condition was fulfilled which would raise such sudden conviction to the height of passionate fervour. The first words of the disciples to one another on that Easter morn may well have been 'He is not dead. His spirit is this day in paradise among the sons of God.'" Quite so; they of course believed that His spirit was in paradise, and for that very reason fully expected to find His body in the tomb. No ordinary visit to a grave, nor any ordinary results flowing from such a visit, throw light on the case before us, because in ordinary circumstances sane men do not believe that their friends are restored to them, and are standing in bodily palpable shape before them. There is no likelihood whatever that their belief in the continued existence of their Master's spirit should have given rise to the conviction that they had seen Him. It might have given rise to such expressions as that He would be with them to the end of the world, but not to the conviction that they had seen Him in the body.
Here, again, is Rénan's account of the growth of this
belief: "To Jesus was to happen the same fortune
which is the lot of all men who have riveted the
attention of their fellow-men. The world, accustomed
Besides, it should be observed that all these hypotheses
which explain the belief in the Resurrection by
supposing that the disciples imagined they had seen
Christ, or persuaded themselves that He still lived,
omit altogether to explain how they disposed of the
Is there then no possibility of the disciples having
been deceived? May they not have been mistaken?
May they not have seen what they wished to see, as
other men have sometimes done? Men of vivid fancy
or of a boastful spirit sometimes come really to believe
they have done and said things they never did or said.
Is it out of the question to imagine that the disciples
may have been similarly misled? Had the belief in
the Resurrection depended on the report of one man,
had there been only one or a few eyewitnesses of the
matter, their evidence might have been explained away
on this ground. It is possible, of course, that one or
two persons who were anxiously looking for the resurrection
of Jesus might have persuaded themselves they
saw Him, might persuade themselves that some distant
figure or some gleam of morning sunshine among the
trees of the garden was the looked-for person. It
requires no profound psychological knowledge to teach
us that occasionally visions are seen. But what we
have here to explain is how not one but several
persons, not together but in different places and at
different times, not all in one mood of mind but in
various moods, came to believe they had seen the risen
Lord. He was recognised, not by persons who expected
to see Him alive, but by women who went to anoint
This supposition, therefore, that the disciples were prepared to believe in the Resurrection and wished to believe it, and that what they wished to see they thought they saw, must be given up. It has never been shown that the disciples had such a belief; it formed no part of the Jewish creed regarding the Messiah: and the idea that they actually were in this expectant state of mind is thoroughly contradicted by the narrative. So far from being hopeful, they were sad and gloomy, as witness the melancholy, resigned despair of the two friends on the road to Emmaus.
Such was the state of mind of the bereft disciples.
They thought all was over. The women who went
with their spices to anoint the dead—they certainly
were not expecting to find their Lord risen. The men
to whom they announced what they had seen were
3. There remains, therefore, only the third explanation
of the disciples' belief in the Resurrection: they
did see Him alive after He had been dead and buried.
Plainly it was no phantom, or ghost, or imaginary
appearance which could personate their lost Master and
rouse them from the despondency, and inaction, and
timidity of disappointed hopes to the calmest consistency
of plan and the firmest courage. It was no
vision created by their own imagination which could at
The testimony of Paul himself is in some respects
more convincing than that of those who saw the Lord
immediately after the Resurrection. Certainly he was
neither anxious to believe nor likely to be ignorant of
the facts. He had devoted himself to the extermination
of the new faith; all his hopes as a Pharisee and
as a Jew were banded against it. He had the best
means of ascertaining the truth, living on terms of
friendship with the leading men in Jerusalem. It is
simply inconceivable that he should have abandoned all
his prospects and entered on a wholly different life
without carefully investigating the chief fact which
influenced him in making this change. It is of course
said that Paul was a nervous, excitable creature, probably
epileptic, and certainly liable to see visions. It
is insinuated that his conversion was due to the combined
No one, so far as I know, who has taken a serious
interest in the evidence adduced for this event, has
denied that it would be quite sufficient to authenticate
The first business of scientific men is to look at facts.
Many facts which at first sight seemed to contradict
Besides, those who reject the resurrection of Christ as impossible are compelled to accept an equally astounding moral miracle—the miracle, I mean, that those who had the best means of ascertaining the truth and every possible inducement to ascertain it should all have been deceived, and that this deception should have been the most fruitful source of good, not only to them, but to the whole world.
We are brought then to the conclusion that the disciples believed in the resurrection of Christ because it had actually taken place. No other account of their belief has ever been given which commends itself to the common understanding which accepts what appeals to it. No account of the belief has been given which is at all likely to gain currency or which is more credible than that which it seeks to supplant. The belief in the Resurrection which so suddenly and effectively possessed the first disciples remains unexplained by any other supposition than the simple one that the Lord did rise again.
CONSEQUENCES OF DENYING RESURRECTION.
"Now if Christ be preached that He rose from the dead, how say some among you that there is no resurrection of the dead? But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is Christ not risen: and if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching vain, and your faith is also vain. Yea, and we are found false witnesses of God; because we have testified of God that He raised up Christ: whom He raised not up, if so be that the dead rise not. For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised: and if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins. Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished. If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable. But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept. For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at His coming. Then cometh the end, when He shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when He shall have put down all rule and all authority and power. For He must reign, till He hath put all enemies under His feet. The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death. For He hath put all things under His feet. But when He saith, all things are put under Him, it is manifest that He is excepted, which did put all things under Him. And when all things shall be subdued unto Him, then shall the Son also Himself be subject unto Him that put all things under Him, that God may be all in all. Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead? And why stand we in jeopardy every hour? I protest by your rejoicing which I have in Christ Jesus our Lord, I die daily. If after the manner of men I have fought with beasts at Ephesus, what advantageth it me, if the dead rise not? let us eat and drink; for to-morrow we die. Be not deceived: evil communications corrupt good manners. Awake to righteousness, and sin not; for some have not the knowledge of God: I speak this to your shame."—1 Cor. xv. 12-34.
1. "If the dead rise not at all, what shall they do
who are baptized for the dead?" (ver. 29)—an enquiry
of which the Corinthians no doubt felt the full force,
but which is rather lost upon us because we do not
know what it means. Some have thought that as
baptism is sometimes used in Scripture as equivalent
to immersion in a sea of troubles, Paul means to ask,
The plain meaning of the words, however, seems to
point to a vicarious baptism, in which a living friend
received baptism as a proxy for a person who had died
without baptism. Of such a custom there is historical
trace. Even before the Christian era, among the Jews
when a man died in a state of ceremonial defilement it
was customary for a friend of the deceased to perform
in his stead the washings and other rites which the dead
man would have performed had he recovered. A similar
practice prevailed to some small extent among the primitive
Christians, although it was never admitted as a
valid rite by the Church Catholic. Then, as now, it
sometimes happened that on the approach of death the
thoughts of unbelieving persons were strongly turned
towards the Christian faith, but before baptism could
be administered death cut down the intending Christian.
Baptism was generally postponed until youth or even
middle life was passed, in order that a large number
of sins might be washed away in baptism, or that
fewer might stain the soul after it. But naturally
miscalculations sometimes occurred, and sudden death
anticipated a long-delayed baptism. In such cases the
If Paul meant to say, On the supposition that death ends all, what is the use of any one being baptized as proxy for a dead friend? he could not have used words more expressive of his meaning than when he says, "If the dead rise not at all, why are they then baptized for the dead?" The only difficulty is, that Paul might thus seem to draw an argument for a fundamental doctrine of Christianity from a foolish and unjustifiable practice. Is it possible that a man of such sagacity can have sanctioned or countenanced so absurd a superstition? But his alluding to this custom in the way he here does, scarcely implies that he approved of it. He rather differentiates himself from those who practised the rite. "What shall they do who are baptized for the dead?"—referring, probably, to some of the Corinthians themselves. In any case, the point of the argument is obvious. To be baptized for those who had died without baptism, and whose future was supposed thereby to be jeopardized, had at least a show of friendliness and reason; to be baptized for those who had already passed out of existence was of course, on the face of it, absurd.
2. The second consequence which flows from the
denial of the resurrection is, that Paul's own life is
a mistake. "Why stand we in jeopardy every hour?
What advantageth it me to risk death daily, and to
suffer daily, if the dead rise not?" If there is no
resurrection, he says, my whole life is a folly. No day
passes but I am in danger of death at the hands either
of an infuriated mob or a mistaken magistrate. I am
Paul's meaning is plain. By the hope of a life beyond, he had been induced to undergo the greatest privations in this life. He had been exposed to countless dangers and indignities. Although a Roman citizen, he had been cast into the arena to contend with wild beasts: there was no risk he had not run, no hardship he had not endured. But in all he was sustained by the assurance that there remained for him a rest and an inheritance in a future life. Remove this assurance and you remove the assumption on which his conduct is wholly built. If there is no future life either to win or to lose, then the Epicurean motto may take the place of Christ's promises, "Let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we die."
It may indeed be said that even if there be no life
to come, this life is best spent in the service of man,
however full of hazard and hardship that service be.
That is quite true; and had Paul believed this life
was all, he might still have chosen to spend it, not on
sensual indulgence, but in striving to win men to something
better. But in that case there would have been
no deception and no disappointment. In point of fact,
however, Paul believed in a life to come, and it was
because he believed in that life he gave himself to the
work of winning men to Christ regardless of his own
pains and losses. And what he says is that if he is
mistaken, then all these pains and losses have been
gratuitous, and that his whole life has proceeded on a
Besides, it must be acknowledged that the mass of
men do sink to a merely sensual or earthly life if the
hope of immortality is removed, and that Paul did not
require to be very guarded in his statement of this
truth. In fact, the words "Let us eat and drink, for
to-morrow we die" were taken from the history of his
own nation. When Jerusalem was besieged by the
Babylonians and no escape seemed possible, the people
gave themselves up to recklessness and despair and
sensual indulgence, saying, "Let us eat and drink, for
to-morrow we die." Similar instances of the recklessness
produced by the near approach of death may very
readily be culled from the history of shipwrecks, of
pestilences, and of besieged cities. In the old Jewish
book, the Book of Wisdom, it finds a very beautiful
expression, the following words being put into the
mouth of those who knew not that man is immortal:
"Our life is short and tedious, and in the death of man
is no remedy; neither was any man ever known to
return from the grave: for we are all born at an
adventure, and shall be afterwards as though we had
never been; for the breath of our nostrils is as smoke,
and a little spark is the moving of our heart, which,
being extinguished, our bodies will be burnt to ashes,
and our spirit vanish as the soft air: and our name
shall be forgotten in time, and no man shall hold our
works in remembrance, and our life shall pass away
like the trace of a cloud, and shall be dispersed as a
mist that is driven away with the beams of the sun,
and overcome with the heat thereof.... Come on
therefore, let us enjoy the good things that are present,
and let us speedily use the creatures like as in youth,
It is obvious therefore that this is the conclusion
which the mass of mankind draw from a disbelief in
immortality. Convince men that this life is all, that
death is final extinction, and they will eagerly drain
this life of all the pleasure it can yield. We may say
that there are some men to whom virtue is the greatest
pleasure: we may say that to all the denial of appetite
and self-indulgence is a more genuine pleasure
than the gratification of it: we may say that virtue is
its own reward, and that irrespective of the future it
is right to live now spiritually and not sensually, for
God and not for self: we may say that the judgments
of conscience are pronounced without any regard to
future consequences, and that the highest and best life
for man is a life in conformity to conscience and in
fellowship with God, whether such life is to be long or
short, temporal or eternal. And this is true, but how
are we to get men to accept it? Teach men to believe
in a future life and you strengthen every moral sentiment
and every Godward aspiration by revealing the
true dignity of human nature. Make men feel that
they are immortal beings, that this life, so far from
being all, is the mere entrance and first step to
existence; make men feel that there is open to
them an endless moral progress, and you give them
some encouragement to lay the foundations of this
progress in a self-denying and virtuous life in this
world. Take away this belief, encourage men to think
Apparently the Corinthians themselves had argued
that morality was quite independent of a belief in
immortality. For Paul goes on: "Be not deceived:" you
cannot, however much you may think so, you cannot
hear such theories without having your moral convictions
undermined and your tone lowered. This he
conveys to them in a common quotation from a heathen
poet—"Evil communications corrupt good manners;"
that is to say, false opinions have a natural tendency
to produce unsatisfactory and immoral conduct. To
keep company with those whose conversation is frivolous
or cynical, or charged with dangerous or false
views of things, has a natural tendency to lead us to a
style of conduct we should not otherwise have fallen
into. Men do not always recognise this; they need
the warning, "Be not deceived." The beginnings of
conduct are so hidden from our observation, our lives
are formed by influences so imperceptible, what we
hear sinks so insidiously into the mind and mingles
so insensibly with our motives, that we can never say
what we have heard without moral contamination. No
doubt it is possible to hold the most erroneous opinions
3. But the most serious consequence which results
if there be no resurrection of the dead, is that in that
case Christ is not risen. "If there be no resurrection
of the dead, then is Christ not risen." For Paul refused
to consider the resurrection of Christ as a miracle in
the sense of its being exceptional and aside from the
usual experience of man. On the contrary, he accepts
it as the type to which every man is to be conformed.
Precedent in time, exceptional possibly in some of its
accidental accompaniments, the resurrection of Christ
may be, but nevertheless as truly in the line of human
development as birth, and growth, and death. Christ
being man must submit to the conditions and experience
of men in all essentials, in all that characterises man as
human. And, therefore, if resurrection be not a normal
human experience, Christ has not risen. The time at
which resurrection takes place, and the interval elapsing
between death and resurrection, Paul makes nothing of.
A child may live but three days, but it is not on that
Both here and elsewhere Paul looks upon Christ as the representative man, the one in whom we can see the ideal of manhood. If any of our own friends should veritably die, and after death should appear to us alive, and should prove his identity by remaining with us for a time, by showing an interest in the very things which had previously occupied his thought, and by taking practical steps to secure the fulfilment of his purposes, a strong probability that we too should live through death would inevitably be impressed on our mind. But when Christ rises from the dead this probability becomes a certainty, because He is the type of humanity, the representative person. As Paul here says, "He is the firstfruits of them that sleep." His resurrection is the sample and pledge of ours. When the farmer pulls the first ripe ears of wheat and carries them home, it is not for their own sake he values them, but because they are a specimen and sample of the whole crop; and when God raised Christ from the dead, the glory of the event consisted in its being a pledge and specimen of the triumph of mankind over death. "If we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with Him."
And yet while Paul distinctly holds that resurrection
is a normal human experience, he also implies that but
for the interposition of Christ that experience might
Paul is carried on from the thought of the resurrection of "them that are Christ's," to the thought of the consummation of all things which this great event introduces and signalizes. This exhibition of the triumph over death is the signal that all other enemies are now defeated. "The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death;" and this being destroyed, all Christ's followers being now gathered in and having entered on their eternal condition, the work of Christ so far as this world is concerned is over. Having reunited men to God, His work is done. The provisional government administered by Him having accomplished its work of bringing men into perfect harmony with the Supreme Will, it gives place to the immediate and direct government of God. What is implied in this it is impossible to say. A condition in which sin shall have no place and in which there shall be no need of means of reconciliation, a condition in which the work of Christ shall be no longer needed and in which God shall be all in all, pervading with His presence every soul and as welcome and natural as the air or the sunlight,—that is a condition not easy to be imagined. Neither can we readily imagine what Christ Himself shall be and do when the term of His mediatorial administration is finished and God is all in all.
One idea conspicuous in this brief and pregnant
passage is that Christ came to subdue all the enemies
of mankind, and that He will continue His work until
His purpose is accomplished. He alone has taken a
perfectly comprehensive view of the obstacles to human
happiness and progress, and He has set Himself to
remove these. He alone has penetrated to the root
of all human evil and misery, and has given Himself
to the task of emancipating men from all evil, of
restoring men to their true life, and of abolishing for
ever the miseries which have so largely characterised
man's history. Slowly indeed, and unseen, does His
work proceed; slowly, because the work is for eternity,
and because only gradually can moral and spiritual
evils be removed. "It is by no breath, turn of eye,
wave of hand, salvation joins issue with death," but
by actual and sustained moral conflict, by real sacrifice
and persistent choice of good, by long trial and
development of individual character, by the slow
growth of nations and the interaction of social and
religious influences, by the leavening of all that is
human with the spirit of Christ, that is, with self-devotement
in practical life to the good of men. All
this is too great and too real to be other than slow.
The tide of moral progress in the world has often
seemed to turn. Even now, when the leaven has
been working for so long, how doubtful often seems
the issue, how concerned even Christian people are
about the merest superficialities and how little labouring
to put down in Christ's name the common enemies.
Can any one who looks at things as they are find
it easy to believe in the final extinction of evil?
Whither tend the prevalent vices, the empty-souled
love of pleasure and demand for excitement, the
THE SPIRITUAL BODY.
"But some man will say, How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come? Thou fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die: and that which thou sowest, thou sowest not that body that shall be, but bare grain, it may chance of wheat, or of some other grain: but God giveth it a body as it hath pleased Him, and to every seed his own body. All flesh is not the same flesh: but there is one kind of flesh of men, another flesh of beasts, another of fishes, and another of birds. There are also celestial bodies, and bodies terrestrial: but the glory of the celestial is one, and the glory of the terrestrial is another. There is one glory of the sun, and another glory of the moon, and another glory of the stars: for one star differeth from another star in glory. So also is the resurrection of the dead. It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption: it is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power: it is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body. There is a natural body, and there is a spiritual body. And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit. Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual. The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven. As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they also that are heavenly. And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly. Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; neither doth corruption inherit incorruption. Behold, I show you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory. O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory? The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law. But thanks be to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore, my beloved brethren, be ye steadfast, unmovable, always abounding in the work of the Lord, forasmuch as ye know that your labour is not in vain in the Lord."—1 Cor. xv. 35-58.
Paul answers both inquiries by referring to analogies
in the natural world. Only by death, he says, does
seed reach its designed development; and the body
or form in which seed rises is very different in appearance
from that in which it is sown. These analogies
have their place and their use in removing objections
and difficulties. They are not intended or supposed
to establish the fact of the Resurrection, but only to
remove difficulties as to its mode. By analogy you
can show that a certain process or result is not impossible,
you may even create a presumption in its favour,
Even outside the circle of Christian thought these
analogies in nature have always been felt to remove
some of the presumptions against the Resurrection and
to make room for listening to evidence in its favour.
The transformation of the seed into the plant and the
development of the seed to a fuller life through apparent
extinction, the transformation of the grub into the
brilliant and powerful dragon-fly through a process
which terminates the life of the grub—these and other
natural facts show that one life may be continued
through various phases, and that the termination of one
form of life does not always mean the termination of
all life in a creature. We need not, these analogies
tell us, at once conclude that death ends all, for in
some visible instances death is only a birth to a higher
and freer life. Neither need we point to the dissolution
of the natural body and conclude that no more perfect
body can be connected with such a process, because
in many cases we see a more efficient body disengaged
from the original and dissolving body. Thus far the
It is not impossible, then, nor even quite improbable,
that the death of our present body may set free a new
and far more perfectly equipped body. The fact that
we cannot conceive the nature of this body need not
trouble us. Who without previous observation could
imagine what would spring from an acorn or a seed
of wheat? To each God gives its own body. We
cannot imagine what our future body, subject to no
waste or decay, can be; but we need not on that
account reject as childish all expectation that such a
body shall exist. "All flesh is not the same flesh."
The kind of flesh you now wear may be unfit for
everlasting life, but there may await you as suitable
and congenial a body as your present familiar tenement.
Consider the inexhaustible fertility of God, the endless
varieties already existing in nature. The bird has a
body which fits it for life in the air; the fish lives
with comfort in its own element. And the variety
already existing does not exhaust God's resources.
We read at present but one chapter in the history of
life, and what future chapters are to unfold who can
imagine? A fertile and inventive man knows no bound
to his progress; will God stand still? Are we not
but at the beginning of His works? May we not
reasonably suppose that a truly infinite expansion and
Paul does not attempt to describe the future body, but contents himself with pointing out one or two of its characteristics by which it is distinguished from the body we now wear. "It is sown in corruption; it is raised in incorruption: it is sown in dishonour; it is raised in glory: it is sown in weakness; it is raised in power: it is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body." In this body there is decay, humiliation, weakness, a life that is merely temporary; in the body that is to be decay gives place to incorruptibility, humiliation to glory, weakness to power, animal life to spiritual.
The present body is subject to decay. Not only is
it easily injured by accident and often rendered permanently
useless, but it is so constituted that all
activity wastes it; and this waste needs constant repair.
That we may constantly seek this repair, we are
endowed with strong appetites, which sometimes overbear
everything else in us and both defeat their own
ends and hinder the growth of the spirit. The organs
by which the waste is repaired themselves wear out,
so that by no care or nourishment can a man make
out to live as long as a tree. But the very decay of
this body makes way for one in which there shall be no
waste, no need of physical nourishment, and therefore
no need of strong and overbearing physical appetites.
Instead of impeding the spirit by clamouring to have
its wants attended to, it will be the spirit's instrument.
A great part of the temptations of this present life
arise from the conditions in which we necessarily exist
as dependent for our comfort in great measure on the
The present body is for similar reasons characterized by "weakness." We cannot be where we would, nor do what we would. A man may work his twelve hours, but he must then acknowledge he has a body which needs rest and sleep. Many persons are disqualified by bodily weakness from certain forms of usefulness and enjoyment. Many persons also, though able to do a certain amount of work, do it with labour; their vitality is habitually low, and they never have the full use of their powers, but need continually to be on their guard, and go through life burdened with a lassitude and discomfort more difficult to bear than passing attacks of pain. In contradistinction to this and to every form of weakness, the resurrection body will be full of power, able to accomplish the behests of the will, and fit for all that is required of it.
But the most comprehensive contrast between the
two bodies is expressed in the words, "It is sown a
natural body; it is raised a spiritual body." A natural
body is that which is animated by a human life and is
fitted for this world. "The first man Adam was made
a living soul," or, as we should more naturally say, an
animal. He was made with a capacity for living; and
because he was to live upon earth, he had a body in
which this life or soul was lodged. The natural body
is the body we receive at birth, and which is suited for
its own requirements of maintaining itself in life in this
world into which we are born. The soul, or animal life,
of man is higher than that of the other animals, it has
richer endowments and capacities, but it is also in
The spiritual body, which is reserved for spiritual men, is a body in which the upholding life is spiritual. The natural life of man both forms to a human shape and upholds the natural body; the spiritual body is similarly maintained by what is spiritual in man. It is the soul, or natural life, of man which gives the body its appetites and maintains it in efficiency; remove this soul, and the body is mere dead matter. In like manner it is the spirit which maintains the spiritual body; and by the spirit is meant that in man which can delight in God and in goodness. The body we now have is miserable and useless or happy and serviceable in proportion to its animal vitality, in proportion to its power to assimilate to itself the nutriment this physical world supplies. The spiritual body will be healthy or sickly in proportion to the spiritual vitality that animates it; that is to say, in proportion to the power of the individual spirit to delight in God and find its life in Him and in what He lives for.
We have already seen that Paul refuses to consider
the resurrection of Christ as miraculous in the sense of
Sometimes, however, it occurs to one to question the
law "first that which is natural, afterward that which
is spiritual." If the present body hinders rather than
helps the growth of the spirit, if at last all Christians
are to have a spiritual body, why might we not have
had this body to begin with? What need of this
mysterious process of passing from life to life and from
body to body? If it is true that we are here only for
a few years and in the future life for ever, why should
we be here at all? Why might we not at birth have
been ushered into our eternal state? The answer is
obvious. We are not at once introduced into our
eternal condition because we are moral creatures, free
to choose for ourselves, and who cannot enter an eternal
state save by choice of our own: first that which is
natural, first that which is animal, first a life in which
we have abundant opportunity to test what appears
good and are free to make our choice; then that
which is spiritual, because the spiritual can only be a
thing of choice, a thing of the will. There is no
Human nature is a thing of immense possibilities
and range. On the one side it is akin to the lower
animals, to the physical world and all that is in it, high
and low; on the other side it is akin to the highest
of all spiritual existences, even to God Himself. At
present we are in a world admirably adapted for our
probation and discipline, a world in which, in point of
fact, every man does attach himself to the lower or to
the higher, to the present or to the eternal, to the
natural or to the spiritual. And although the results
of this may not be apparent in average cases, yet in
extreme cases the results of human choice are
obtrusively apparent. Let a man give himself unrestrainedly
and exclusively to animal life in its grosser
forms, and the body itself soon begins to suffer. You
can see the process of physical deterioration going on,
deepening in misery, until death comes. But what
follows death? Can one promise himself or another
a future body which shall be exempt from the pains
which unrepented sin has introduced? Are those who
have by their vice committed a slow suicide to be
clothed hereafter in an incorruptible and efficient body?
It seems wholly contrary to reason to suppose so.
And how can their probation be continued if the very
circumstance which makes this life so thorough a probation
to us all—the circumstance of our being clothed
with a body—is absent? The truth is, there is no
subject on which more darkness hangs or on which
Scripture preserves so ominous a silence as the future
On the other hand, if we consider instances in which the spiritual life has been resolutely and unreservedly chosen, we see anticipations here also of the future destiny of those who have so chosen. They may be crushed by diseases as painful and as fatal as the most flagrant of sinners endure, but these diseases frequently have the result only of making the true spiritual life shine more brightly. In extreme cases, you would almost say, the transmutation of the tortured and worn body into a glorified body is begun. The spirit seems dominant; and as you stand by and watch, you begin to feel that death has no relation to the emotions, and hopes, and intercourse you detect in that spirit. These, which seem, and are, the very life of the spirit, cannot be thought of as terminated by a merely physical change. They do not spring from, nor do they depend upon, what is physical; and it is reasonable to suppose that they will not be destroyed by it. Looking at Christ Himself and allowing due impression to be made upon us by His concernment about the highest, and best, and most lasting things, by His recognition of God and harmony with Him, by His living in God, and by His superiority to earthly considerations, we cannot but feel it to be most unlikely that such a spirit should be extinguished by bodily death.
This spiritual body we receive through the intervention
of Christ. As from the first man we receive
animal life, from the second we receive spiritual life.
"The first man Adam was made a living soul, the
last Adam a quickening spirit. And as we have
borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the
The mode of Christ's intervention is more fully described in the words, "The sting of death is sin; and the strength of sin is the law. But thanks be to God, which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ." Everywhere Paul teaches that it was sin which brought death upon man; that man would have broken through the law of death which reigns in the physical world had he not by sin brought himself under the power of things physical. And this poisonous fang was pressed in by the Law. The strength of sin is the Law. It is positive disobedience, the preference of known evil to known good, the violation of law whether written in the conscience or in spoken commandments, which gives sin its moral character. The choice of the evil in presence of the good—it is that which constitutes sin.
The words are no doubt susceptible of another meaning. They could be used by one who wished to say that sin is that which makes death painful, which adds terror of future judgment and gloomy forebodings to the natural pain of death. But it must be owned that this is not so much in keeping with Paul's usual way of looking at the connection between death and sin.
Christ's victory over death is thus explained by
Godet: "Christ's victory over death has two aspects,
the one relating to Himself, the other concerning men.
It is then with joy and triumph Paul contemplates
death. Naturally we shrink from and fear it. We
know it only from one side: only from seeing it in the
persons of other men, and not from our own experience.
And what we see in others is necessarily only the
darker side of death, the cessation of bodily life and
of all intercourse with the warm and lively interests of
But to "faith's foreseeing eye" the other side of
death becomes also apparent. The grave becomes the
robing room for life eternal. Stripped of "this muddy
vesture of decay," we are there to be clothed with a
spiritual body. Death is enlisted in the service of Christ's
people; and by destroying flesh and blood, it enables
this mortal to put on immortality. The blow which
threatens to crush and annihilate all life breaks but
the shell and lets the imprisoned spirit free to a larger
life. Death is swallowed up in victory, and itself
ministers to the final triumph of man. Our instincts
tell us that death is critical and has a determining
power on our destinies. We cannot evade it; we may
depreciate or neglect, but we cannot diminish, its importance.
It has its place and its function, and it will
operate in each one of us according to what it finds
in us, destroying what is merely animal, emancipating
what is truly spiritual. We cannot as yet stand on
the further side of death, and look back on it, and
recognise its kindly work in us; but we can understand
Paul's burst of anticipated triumph, and with him we
can forecast the joy of having passed all doubtful
struggle and anxious foreboding, and of finally experiencing
But if we have any fit conception of the magnitude of the triumph, we shall also cherish some worthy idea of the reality of the conflict. Those who have felt the terror of death know that it can be counterbalanced only by something more than a surmise, a hope, a longing, only indeed by a fact as solid as itself. And if to them the resurrection of Christ approves itself as such a fact, and if they can listen to His voice saying, "Because I live, ye shall live also," they do feel themselves armed against the graver terrors of death, and cannot but look forward with some confident hope to a life into which the ills they have here experienced cannot follow them. But at the same time, and in proportion as the reality of the future life quickens hope within them, it must also reveal to them the reality of the conflict through which that life is reached. By no mere idle naming of the name of Christ or resultless faith in Him can men pass from what is natural to what is spiritual. We are summoned to believe in Christ, but for a purpose; and that purpose is that, believing in Him as the revelation of God to us, we may be able to choose Him as our pattern and live His life. It is only what is truly spiritual in ourselves that can put us in possession of a spiritual body. From Christ we can receive what is spiritual; and if our belief in Him prompts us to become like Him, then we may count upon sharing in His destiny.
This is the permanent incentive of the Christian life.
THE POOR.
"Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given order to the Churches of Galatia, even so do ye. Upon the first day of the week let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come. And when I come, whomsoever ye shall approve by your letters, them will I send to bring your liberality unto Jerusalem. And if it be meet that I go also, they shall go with me. Now I will come unto you, when I shall pass through Macedonia: for I do pass through Macedonia. And it may be that I will abide, yea, and winter with you, that ye may bring me on my journey whithersoever I go. For I will not see you now by the way; but I trust to tarry a while with you, if the Lord permit. But I will tarry at Ephesus until Pentecost. For a great door and effectual is opened unto me, and there are many adversaries. Now if Timotheus come, see that he may be with you without fear: for he worketh the work of the Lord, as I also do. Let no man therefore despise him: but conduct him forth in peace, that he may come unto me: for I look for him with the brethren. As touching our brother Apollos, I greatly desired him to come unto you with the brethren: but his will was not at all to come at this time; but he will come when he shall have convenient time. Watch ye, stand fast in the faith, quit you like men, be strong. Let all your things be done with charity. I beseech you, brethren, (ye know the house of Stephanas, that it is the first-fruits of Achaia, and that they have addicted themselves to the ministry of the saints,) that ye submit yourselves unto such, and to every one that helpeth with us, and laboureth. I am glad of the coming of Stephanas and Fortunatus and Achaicus: for that which was lacking on your part they have supplied. For they have refreshed my spirit and yours: therefore acknowledge ye them that are such. The Churches of Asia salute you. Aquila and Priscilla salute you much in the Lord, with the Church that is in their house. All the brethren greet you. Greet ye one another with an holy kiss. The salutation of me Paul with mine own hand. If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be Anathema Maran-atha. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you. My love be with you all in Christ Jesus, Amen."—1 Cor. xvi.
In our own day poverty has assumed a much more
serious aspect. It is not the poverty which results
from accident, nor even that which results from wrong-doing
or indolence, which presses for consideration.
Such poverty could easily be met by individual charity
or national institutions. But the poverty we are now
confronted with is a poverty which necessarily results
from the principle of competition which is the mainspring
of all trade and business. It is the poverty
which results from the constant effort of every man
to secure custom by offering a cheaper article, and to
secure employment by selling his labour at a cheaper
rate than his neighbour. So overstocked is the labour-market
that the employer can name his own terms.
Where he wants one man, a hundred offer their services;
and he who can live most cheaply secures the place.
So that necessarily wages are pressed down by competition
to the very lowest figure; and wherever any
trade is not strong enough to combine and resist this
constant pressure, the results are appalling. No slaves
were ever so hunger-bitten, no lives were ever more
crushed under perpetual and hopeless toil, than are
thousands of our fellow-countrymen and countrywomen
in our own time. It is the fact that in all our
large cities there are thousands of persons who by
The most painful and alarming feature of this condition
of things is, as every one knows, that it seems
the inevitable result of the principles on which our
entire social fabric is built. Every invention, every
new method of facilitating business, every contrivance
or improvement in machinery, makes life more difficult
to the mass of men. The very advances made by
civilised nations in the rapid production of needful
articles increase the breach between rich and poor,
throwing larger resources into the hands of the few,
but making the lot of the many still darker and more
poverty-stricken. Every year makes the darkness
deeper, the distress more urgent. Here individual
charity is unavailing. It is not the relief of one here
or there that is needed; it is the alteration of a system
of things which inevitably produces such results. Individual
charity is here a mere mop in the face of the
tide. What is wanted is not larger workhouses where
the aged poor may be sheltered, but such a system as
will enable the working man to provide for himself
against old age. What is wanted is not that the
charitable should eke out by voluntary contributions
the earnings of the labouring classes, but that these
earnings should be such as to amply cover all ordinary
human wants. "Money given in aid of wages relieves
the employer, not the employed; reduces wages, not
misery." What is wanted is a social system which
tends to bring within the reach of all the comforts and
the joys of life which men legitimately desire, and
That a change is desirable no one who has spent
two thoughts on the subject can doubt. The only
question is, What change is desirable and possible? Is
there any organization or social system which could
check the evils resulting from the present competitive
system, and secure that every one who is willing to
work should be furnished with remunerative employment?
Socialists are quite convinced that the whole
problem would be solved were private capital to be
converted into co-operative or public capital. Socialism
demands that society shall be the only capitalist, and
that all private captains of industry and capital be
abolished. No return is possible to the state of things
in which every man worked by himself with his own
hands and at his own risk, producing his one or two
webs, tilling his one or two acres. It is recognised
that far more and better products can be produced
when manufactures are carried on in large factories.
But on the socialistic principle these factories must be
owned, not by private capitalists, but by the State, or
at any rate by co-operative societies of some kind.
This is the essence of the demand of Socialism: that
"whereas industry is at present carried on by private
The difficulty in pronouncing judgment on such a demand arises from the fact that very few men indeed have sufficient imagination and sufficient knowledge of our complicated social system to be able to forecast the results of so great a change. In the present stage of human progress personal interest is undoubtedly one of the strongest incentives to industry, and to this motive the present system of competition appeals. And although Socialists declare that their system would not exclude competition, it is difficult to see what field it would have or at what point it would find its opportunity. Certain departments of industry are already in the hands of the State or of co-operative societies, but the organization of all industries and the management and remuneration of all labour demand a machinery so colossal that it is feared it would fall to pieces by its own weight. Still it is possible that ways and means of working a socialistic scheme may be devised; and it is quite certain that if any system could be devised which is really workable, and which should at once save us from the disastrous results of competition and yet evoke all the energy which competition evokes, that system would forthwith be adopted in every civilised country.
As yet, however, no such social system has been
elaborated. General principles, ruling ideas, theories,
paper plans, have been enunciated by the score; but, in
point of fact, there is no system yet devised which
appeals either to the common-sense and instincts of
the masses, or which stands the criticism of experts.
And some of those who have given greatest attention
Appeal is confidently made to the mind of Christ
by both parties, both by those who trust to the
enforcement of a socialistic scheme, and by those who
believe only in the social improvement which results
from the improvement of the individual. By the one
party it is confidently affirmed that were Jesus Christ
now on earth He would be a communist, would aim
at equalizing all classes and at commuting private
property into a public fund. Communism has been
tried to some extent in the Church. In monastic
societies private property is surrendered for the good
of the community, and this practice professes to find
It is perhaps of more importance to observe that in
probably the most critical period of the world's history
our Lord took no part in any political movement; nay,
He counted it a temptation of the devil when He saw
how much inducement there was to head some popular
party and compete with kings or statesmen. He
was no agitator, although He lived in an age abounding
in abuses. And this limitation of His work was due
to no superficial view of social movements nor to any
mere shrinking from the rougher work of life, but
to His perception that His own task was to touch
what was deepest in man, and to lodge in human
nature forces which ultimately would achieve all that
was desirable. The cry of the poor against the
oppressor was never louder than in His lifetime;
slavery was universal: no country on earth enjoyed
a free government. Yet our Lord most carefully
abstained from following in the steps of a Judas the
In any case the duty of individual Christians is
plain. Whether needless and unjust poverty is to
be relieved by social revolution or by the happier and
surer, if slower, method of leavening society with the
spirit of Christ, it is the part of every Christian man
to inform himself of the state of his fellow-citizens
and to bring himself in some practically helpful way
into connection with the wretchedness in the midst
of which we are living. To shut our eyes to the
squalor, and vice, and hopelessness which poverty too
often brings, to seclude ourselves in our own comfortable
homes and shut out all sounds and signs of
misery, to "abhor the affliction of the afflicted," and
practically to deny that it is better to visit the house
of mourning than the house of feasting—this is simply
to furnish proof that we know nothing of the spirit
of Christ. We may find ourselves quite unable to
rectify abuses on a large scale or to discern how
poverty can be absolutely prevented, but we can do
something to brighten some lives; we can consider
those whose hard and bare lives make our comforts
The method of collecting which Paul recommends
was in all probability that which he himself practised.
"Upon the first day of the week let every one of you
lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that
there be no gatherings when I come." This verse has
sometimes been quoted as evidence that the Christians
met for worship on Sundays as we do. Manifestly
it shows nothing of the kind. It is proof that the first
day of the week had a significance, probably as the day
of our Lord's resurrection, possibly only for some trade
reasons now unknown. It is expressly said that each
was to lay up "by him"—that is, not in a public fund,
but at home in his own purse—what he wished to give.
But what is chiefly to be noticed is that Paul, who
ordinarily is so free from preciseness and form, here
enjoins the precise method in which the collection
The Epistle concludes with an overflowing expression
of affection from Paul and his friends to the Church of
Corinth; but suddenly in the midst of this there occur
the startling words, "If any man love not the Lord
Jesus Christ, let him be Anathema." "Anathema"
means accursed. What induced Paul to insert these
words just here, it is difficult to see. He had taken
the manuscript out of the hand of Sosthenes and written
the salutation with his own hand, and apparently still
with his own hand adds this startling sentence. Probably
his feeling was that all his lessons of charity and
every other lesson he had been inculcating would be
in vain without love to the Lord Jesus. All his own
love for the Corinthians had sprung from this source;
and he knew that their love for the Jews would prove
hollow unless it too was animated by this same principle,
They are serious words for us all—serious
Printed by Hazell, Watson, & Viney, Ld., London and Aylesbury.
3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399