Page images
PDF
EPUB

Literary

"a band of conspirators," and they will go back to those councils which the universal Church acknowledges as such.

The Christian Legacy; Peace, in Life,
Death, and Eternity. Fifteen Dis-
courses. By the Rev. J. HOUGH, A.M.,
Minister of Ham, Surrey. London:
Seeley. 1836. Pp. 279.

THESE are useful discourses; but we are sure the writer will find few, either Churchmen or Dissenters, either Calvinists or Armenians, who will agree with him in confounding justification with the final acquittal at the day of judgment; which he does in his second sermon. The Scriptures, and our own formularies, speak of justification as taking place in the present life.

Fifty-two Lectures on the Church Catechism. By S. WALKER, A.B., Curate of Truro. A New Edition, with four additional Sermons on the Creed, by the Rev. J. LAWSON; and a brief introductory Memoir, by the Rev. E. BICKERSTEITH, Rector of Watton, Herts. London: Hamilton. 1836. Pp. 551.

THIS volume is dedicated to the Rev. C. Simeon, of Cambridge. They are able and powerful discourses; but we cannot give them an unqualified recommendation, as they, in many respects, inculcate the views of a School of Theology, which we cannot cordially approve.

Sermons on some leading Points of
Christian Doctrine and Duty. By
the Rev. J. BOYLE, B.C.L., Curate
of St. Peter's and St. Mary's, Bar-
ton-upon-Humber. London:
ker. 1836. Pp. 310.

Par

THESE are very excellent and useful sermons. We observe, however, an occasional use of language, which— although in this instance counteracted by the general tone of the sermons,

Report.

and probably arising from inattention
to the great scheme of Christian doc-
trine on certain points, as come down
to our Church from the earliest times
of Christianity-we think ought care-
fully to be avoided. In the first ser-
mon especially, we find the distinction
insisted on between the Visible and
Invisible Church. If Mr. Boyle knew
the mischief which had arisen from
this distinction, we are persuaded he
would have eschewed it. After all, is
such a distinction justified by Scrip
ture? We are persuaded it is not.
True, many Christians are so in name
only; but cannot this awful fact be
insisted on, without having recourse
to the unscriptural language about an
Invisible Church? There is one only
body, just as much as there is one
only spirit: and "we, being many, are
one body."

The Life and Character of John Howe,
M.A. With an Analysis of his
Writings. By H. ROGERS. Lon-
don: Ball. 1836. Pp. 568.

To those who are fond of the lives of
the early Non-conformists, this book
will be very acceptable. Here they
will find all the whole controversy
which was stirred up at the Restora-
tion, dished up anew for the gratifica-
tion of their appetite. Howe professed
his belief in the immortality of the
Non-conformists' principles: if he had
possessed our experience, he would
have been less prophetic. If he had
'seen the principles of Dissent gradually
perishing among the English Presby-
terians, in Socinianism, and among
the descendants of the first settlers in
the United States, as we have seen;
and especially if he had seen the
we have lately seen, in the celebrated
principles of Dissent exemplified, as
trial about Lady Hewley's Charity,
perhaps he would have conformed,
and thereby been the subject of abuse
among the Dissenters, even as he is
now of their praise. There are seve
ral interesting scenes and anecdotes
in the bok

A SERM O N.

JOHN VI. 53.

Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye cat the flesh of the Son of Man, and drink his blood, ye have no life

in you.

Or all the discourses of our blessed Lord, that contained in this sixth chapter of St. John's Gospel, from which the text is taken, is perhaps the most difficult and obscure. Now, it is an interesting subject of inquiry, why our Lord should thus speak obscurely, instead of speaking with clearness and precision; particularly as there are some passages of Scripture likely to mislead us in judging of his conduct in this respect. In the fourth chapter of St. Mark's Gospel it is recorded, that, when he was asked by his more intimate disciples and the twelve apostles, to explain one of his parables, he said, "Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of heaven; but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables; that seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them." Now, I need not observe that such expressions as these seem to imply that our Lord concealed the great truths of religion, in order to prevent the salvation of those that heard him, lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them; that, in fact, he sought and desired their ruin. He who has contemplated the character of Christ as delineated in his Gospel, will at once reject such a thought as impious that the merciful and compassionate Jesus, who shed tears at the grave of Lazarus, and wept over the impending destruction of Jerusalem, and who proclaimed it as his very office to seek and to save that which was lost, should have sought the ruin even of his bitterest enemies, would be a thing incredible. In all his words and actions, and in the whole tenor of his life, we can conceive him to have had but one object in view, that, viz. of promoting the salvation of all. If Jesus did not desire the salvation of all, he would no longer be the mericful Jesus of the New Testament; and we may boldly say, that any one who should represent him as speaking in parables, lest men should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them, spoke in terms the most injurious to his real character and design. And the fact is, that when St. Mark gives this reason for his speaking in parables, whatever our English translation of the Scriptures may seem to imply, he means to assert the direct contrary of this: he means to say, that the very object of his speaking in parables was to promote, and not to hinder, the salvation of his hearers the words ought thus to be regarded. To the great bulk of the people these truths are spoken only in parables, on account of their prejudices; because, that seeing they see, and yet do not thoroughly perceive, and hearing they hear, and yet do not

properly understand, so that their souls are not converted and their sins forgiven them; therefore I use parables, that the great and saving truths of the gospel may sink into their hearts in spite of their prejudices; and whereas, if literally propounded to them, they would at once reject them; therefore I present them under such a form, that they may receive them in spite of their prejudices, and that thus their salvation may be promoted. Hespake, therefore, obscurely, and in parables, not that the saving truths of the gospel might be concealed from them, but because they could receive them in no other form: it was not in order that when they saw, they might not see; for the word should not be rendered in order that, but because, which totally changes the whole sense of the passage. He spake in parables, because that when they saw they did not perceive, and when they heard they did not understand, so that after all they were not converted, and their sins forgiven them. Their conversion, and their pardon, and justification, were the very ends our Lord had in view in thus speaking to them in parables. They were not yet fully prepared for the gospel; and therefore he most mercifully propounded it to them in such terms as should not unnecessarily shock their prejudices, and hinder their salvation, but which might, as it were, gently insinuate into their minds such saving truths as they were able to bear; and which, after the full revelation of it on the day of Pentecost, might at once bring it home to their hearts, as having been the doctrine all along preached by himself from the beginning.

Now, we may well suppose that our Lord had a similar reason for using such peculiarly obscure language as that contained in the text, and in the whole sixth chapter of St. John, whence it is taken. And, in the explanation of these words, the first thing to be especially attended to, is the meaning of the phrase of eating the flesh and drinking the blood of the Son of Man. And here I shall, 1st, show what these words do not signify; 2dly, what they really do signify.

1st, then, I am to show what these words do not signify. Now, the common opinion of their meaning is, that they have an immediate reference to the holy sacrament of the altar. It is commonly supposed that they exclusively refer to that; but all the best expositors of Scripture have long been agreed, that so far from being exclusively spoken in reference to the sacrament of the body and blood of Christ, they have no reference to it whatsoever, or, at least, contain only a remote and distant allusion to it, and by way of anticipation; for, at the time these words were spoken, the sacrament was not yet instituted, and therefore his hearers could never have, by the utmost stretch of imagination, understood them in such a sense. They were spoken, then, absolutely, and at once, with reference to the general plan of salvation, and not with an exclusive reference to any ordinance or institution of the gospel. We must not seek for their meaning in any rite or institution, but solely in the general doctrines of the gospel. It is true that they who receive the holy sacraments of Christ's body and blood, do by faith eat the flesh and drink the blood of the Son of Man; but it is not the outward ordinance, but the inward faith of the partakers, which effects this; and therefore we may conclude, that wherever this faith is, there men partake of the body and blood of Christ, even though they have not the outward ordinance. For this participation in the body and

[blocks in formation]

blood of Christ is not exclusively confined to the holy sacrament of the altar; it belongs equally to every ordinance in which faith is exercised. They who hear the word of God in faith, they who pray in faith, they who are baptised in faith (either in their own faith, or the faith of their parents and sponsors),—are all alike partakers of the body and blood of Christ, as well as those who receive the holy sacrament of the altar. When, in baptism, I consecrate the water of the font, repeating over it the words of Christ's own institution, and solemnly, and in faith, invoking over it the awful name of the holy and ever-glorious Trinity, three Persons in one God; when, I say, Brethren, I thus consecrate the waters of baptism, I see with the eye of faith the blood of Christ; the waters become to the eye of my faith tinged, as it were, with the blood of Christ, and the baptised are not baptised with water, but with the precious blood of Christ; they are buried with him in his baptism of blood, and rise together with him to newness of life; yea, they no longer are regarded by the eye of faith as citizens of this lower world, but they are so united by this holy ordinance to Christ, that they ascend up into heaven with him, their head, and sit as members, and limbs, and portions of his body, on the very throne of Majesty in the heavens, for Christ is the great object of faith; and wherever faith is, there is Christ; not merely Christ in one character or office, but Christ in all his glorious perfections and offices; not merely Christ crucified, dead, and buried, but Christ in his exaltation-the risen, the ascended, the glorified Jesus. Thus, you see, that by baptism we are made partakers of the body and blood of Christ, as well as in his holy sacrament of the altar. To be washed in baptism is to be purified by the blood of Christ, by his grace, and by his spirit.

To see this, however, is not the office of our bodily eyes, but of our inward eyes-the eyes of our soul; and (to use the words of the 29th Article of our Church) as "the wicked, and such as be void of a lively faith, although they do carnally and visibly press with their teeth (as St. Augustine saith) the sacrament of the body and blood of Christ; yet in nowise are they partakers of Christ, but rather to their condemnation do eat the sign or sacrament of so great a thing;" so, in baptism, it is only by faith that its waters become the precious blood of the Lamb, slain from the beginning of the world. But if faith is thus powerful to make the soul see Christ crucified and glorified in baptism, so also is it equally efficacious in every other act in which we approach to God. He that reads the word of God, and hears it preached, in the spirit of faith, is sprinkled with the blood of Christ by the very act of reading or hearing; the words of revelation are to him the body and blood of Christ. And so, again, in approaching God in prayer, whether it be private prayer or family prayer, or public prayer in the Church, he who prays in faith, thereby draws near to that throne of grace, which is sprinkled with the blood of our atonement; he approaches the altar of the cross, on which is offered up the crucified body of the spotless Lamb of God; and by this very act of worshipping in faith, he eats the flesh and drinks the blood of the Son of Man!

I have said thus much, brethren, in order to show you that these words of our Lord are to be applied generally to the whole of the gospel, and to every act of homage which Christians pay to their Almighty

Benefactor, and not to be exclusively applied to the sacrament of the Lord's Supper. Yet, God forbid that any one should be led to conclude from hence that that sacrament is unnecessary; for though in every act of homage performed in faith, the Christian really does partake of the body and blood of Christ, yet, no doubt, that holy sacrament is more peculiarly the sacrament of Christ's body and blood; it sets this peculiar doctrine before us in a more lively and special way than any other act of christian worship. The wine which is poured forth is expressly emblematical of Christ's precious blood-shedding, and the broken bread, of his pierced and broken body; and therefore in this act of Christ's own institution, we are more especially invited to contemplate and believe in the doctrine of the text. Still, as this holy rite was not yet instituted at the time when our Redeemer spake the words of the text, and as those words are applicable to every part and every act of christian worship, they must not be confined to that alone, but must be equally extended to every doctrine of the gospel, and to every act of christian worship.

In considering what these words do not signify, we have seen that they do not especially relate to the Lord's Supper; and there is yet, under this head, another observation to be considered. In Scripture, doctrine and instruction are frequently represented under the emblems of meat and drink; and to receive such instruction, or to believe in such doctrine, is often represented under the image of eating and drinking. It might, therefore, at first sight, be supposed that our Lord merely designed to represent, in a general and lively manner, the necessity of a belief in his doctrines; but the words of the text, and the whole discourse whence they are taken, forbid us to think that this was all that was intended by them. Christ represents the work of God to be, not merely believing the doctrines he taught; but this was the work of God to believe on Him whom he had sent; it was a belief in himself personally which he claimed: whilst the extraordinary expressions employed, of eating his flesh, &c., clearly force us to give some more special and definite meaning to them, than a bare and general belief in the doctrines of the gospel. And thus we are brought at once to consider the second object I proposed, viz. what is the precise and particular meaning of the text?

2dly. Now the expressions here used are evidently derived from the sacrifices of the Jewish temple. In those which were peculiarly sacrifices of atonement, the blood of the victim was sprinkled on the altar, and its whole body reduced to ashes; but in others, which were those called peace-offerings, only a part of the victim was offered, whilst the worshippers eat of the remainder, in token of their peace and reconciliation with God. The paschal Lamb, however, was a sacrifice which partook of the nature both of atonement and a peace-offering: its blood was an atonement, and its flesh was eaten as a peace-offering. But even here its blood was sprinkled, and though the worshippers ate its flesh, they did not partake of the blood. And this is the great distinguishing point between the christian sacrifices of Christ, and those of the Jewish temple. The Jews feasted on the flesh only; but our Lord here declares that Christians must not only eat the flesh, but drink the blood of the Son of Man. In these words, then, he proposed himself to

« PreviousContinue »