Page images
PDF
EPUB

tian, we recognise a brother-a member of the family of Christ. And hence they exhibited a union not merely of individual Christians, but of churches. Having professed by baptism their faith in Christ, they were cordially received to the communion of the Lord's-supper; and having joined in that feast of Christian fellowship with one church, they were deemed eligible to communion with every other church.* Tokens of Christian salutation, and offices of brotherly love, were familiarly interchanged.t They were ready to unite in the Church on earth with all with whom they hoped to meet and mingle in the worship of the Church in heaven. Minor differences they do not appear to have thought of; but in the exercise of that comprehensive regard which taught them to "love the brotherhood," they included in their large and complacent embrace "all who in every place called upon the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, both theirs and ours." If ever the prayer of Christ, "that they all might be one," was answered, it was then; when, what

* And hence Chrysostom complains of Epiphanius, that when he came to Constantinople, "he came not into the congregation according to custom and the ancient manner; he joined not with us, nor communicated with us in the word, and prayer, and the holy communion."-Chrys. ad Innoc. P. Ep. 122.

"Both common charity and reason require, most dear brethren, that we conceal nothing from your knowledge of those things which are done among us, that so there may be common advice," &c.—Cyp,. Ep. 29. (Ad Cler. Rom.)

9

1

ever the internal state of particular churches, they exhibited to the world the sublime and glorious spectacle of a universal agapa, to which every Christian brother, on presenting the tessera of discipleship, received the cordial welcome of a friend of Christ.

CHAPTER III.

SCHISM, THE BREACH OF THE UNION OF THE CHURCH.

As the union of the Christian Church is twofold, consisting of faith in Christ and love to the brethren, it is evident that it must be capable of a twofold rupture. The breach of the former is heresy or apostacy, the violation of the latter is schism. But as apostacy, or a departure from God, necessarily includes schism, or a departure from the brethren; so schism, in its scriptural import, argues an impaired state of faith in Christ, and tends to impair it still farther. Schism, therefore, is to be regarded as the breach of the unity of the Church.

But as this is an inquiry relating entirely to a scriptural question, our first concern should undoubtedly be to ascertain "the mind of the Spirit." Let us then appeal "" to the law and

to the testimony."

The term 66 schism," though it occurs but once* in its untranslated form in our English version of the New Testament, occurs in the Greek, either as a noun or a verb, in eighteen

* 1 Cor. xii. 25.

instances. In ten of these it is applied literally to denote the violent divulsion of some material substance, such as the rending of the rocks, or of the vail at the crucifixion of Christ. In five instances the word is applied figuratively, to denote states of mind in which difference of opinion was attended with eruptions of temper, and consequent altercation. In only three instances is the term applied to the Church; and all of these are in the first Epistle to the Corinthians. Here, then, if any where, we may expect to learn the nature of schism.

The first is as follows:-"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 (ozouara) among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment. For it hath been declared to me of you, my brethren ...... 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."* That the unanimity which the apostle enjoins, is not a mere identity of opinion on matters of faith is evident, for to such no allusion is made, nor does it appear that on such any difference of opinion existed. The Corinthians would have instant

* 1 Cor. i. 10-13.

1 Theophylact. Since many may be united in matters of intellect, and yet differ in sentiment; for when we believe the same things, but yet are not knit together in charity, we hold the same notions, but differ in sentiment :—this being the case, the apostle, by adding to the words τω αυτω vol, the words, τη αυτή

ly inferred, even without any explanation, that the subject on which the apostle would have them to be one, was that on which, at the time, they were many. But by adverting expressly to the nature of their "contentions," he places the question beyond a doubt. Four parties, at least, existed in this Christian church. And having divided, contentions arose respecting the superiority of the leaders whose names they had adopted, and the way in which they endeavored to strengthen their several factions. Adverting to the subject of their disputes again in the third chapter, the apostle speaks of their (διχοστασιαι) factions. What then was the nature of the "schisms" which the apostle here sought to extinguish? A factious preference of the ministers by whom they had believed, to the loss of that brotherly love which they owed to each other. An exclusive regard for the members of a party, when they ought to have been affectionately embracing the whole Church. And hence his aim is to remove their partyregards from himself, and Apollos, and Cephas, and to centre them on Christ alone, as the only way of restoring their love to each other. He reminds them in the verse immediately preceding, that they have been "called into the fellowship of Jesus Christ our Lord;" he tenderly entreats them all as brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ;" and pointing them to the cross, touchingly reminds them that Christ alone has poured out for them his blood. Thus

[ocr errors]

groun, expresses a wish that they might differ neither on points of faith, nor on matters of sentiment.-See also Chrysostom."-Professor Billroth in loco.

« PreviousContinue »