108. “C. II. W.,” Windsor. You ask, “Can there be no acceptable service where there is constraint, or mere sense of duty uppermost in the mind as cause of action?” The apostle, in 2 Cor. 5 says, “The love of Christ constraineth us; because we thus judge, that if one died for all, then were all dead: and he died for all, that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them and rose again.” Now where service is the result of this sort of constraint, it is, we may rest assured, most acceptable. As to the words “duty and responsibility” some persons seem to object strongly to them. We must confess we have no sympathy with any such objection. We have heard it said, “Do not talk to us of duties,” and “Do not load life with responsibilities.” We reply, the word of God talks to us very largely of duties. A considerable portion of the apostolic epistles is devoted to the unfolding of christian duties; and it is remarkable that the very epistle which gives us the fullest insight into the Church’s true place, gives us also the fullest statement of christian duty. (See Eph. 4-6.) The fact is, duty and responsibility flow out of life and relationship. I must have christian life ere I can fulfill christian duty; and I must be in a relationship, ere I can know the affections or discharge the responsibilities which belong to it. Nothing can be simpler. There is a vast difference between the “deadly doings” of a sinner looking for salvation, and the lively doings of a saint who knows he has it. It is when the former are cast off that the latter are really taken up. The precious blood of Christ purges our conscience from dead works, that we may, in peace and liberty, serve the living God. It is our bounden duty and our holy responsibility to serve. We really tremble for those people who object to such truly wholesome words as duty and responsibility. We can only say, May the Lord give us grace to think more deeply and to fed more solemnly as to this great practical question!
109. “Windermere.” Why have you not given your name, or even your initials? Perhaps you felt ashamed to own yourself the writer of such an uncharitable note. We could, not wonder at this; but then you should either not have written at all, or have boldly and frankly appended your name. The fact is, your supposition is as unfounded as it is uncalled for. As God is our witness, the passage which you have quoted was not “meant as a thrust” at any one. It contains a plain wholesome truth to which we believe every spiritual person will yield a hearty assent. You, yourself admit that it is “perfectly true in its general application,” and that is precisely the way in which we meant it to be taken. We should like to ask you if you think your letter was dictated by that charity that thinketh no evil?
110. “A Troubled One.” It is but a small thing to say we deeply sympathize with you, and pray the Lord to comfort you. If you would put your case a little more plainly we might be able, through the Lord’s mercy, to offer you a word of counsel.
111. “Alphonse,” Stafford. We do not feel called upon to pronounce a judgment as to the practice to which you refer, or as to those who adopt it. Phil. 2:10, 1110That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; 11And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. (Philippians 2:10‑11) will have its full accomplishment by and by, when all shall own the One who took the lowly place, and made Himself of no reputation. No doubt those who are taught of God do, even now, anticipate that glorious moment, and yield the homage of their hearts to Him who alone is worthy; but this is in spirit and in truth, and not merely by bodily attitude.
112. “E. S.,” Paignton. We judge it would be more becoming for a brother to discharge the duty to which you refer. We merely suggest an opinion. We are not aware of any definite scripture on the point; but we would say, in the language of the apostle, “Doth not even nature itself teach you?” If however, there is no brother capable of rendering the service, it is a question whether a sister might not, with grace and modesty, render seasonable help in the matter. But let us in all things seek to walk in meekness and forbearance.
113. “Emma,” North Brixton. Judging from the tone of your letter, we feel assured the Lord will guide you into the right path of service. We are not told in what specific way “those women labored with Paul in the gospel,” but we know there are a thousand ways in which a woman may serve in the gospel without ever stepping out of that sphere which properly belongs to her. As to the married woman, we feel increasingly persuaded that home is preeminently her place; there she has a hallowed and elevated sphere in which she can serve in the full consciousness of being exactly where the hand of God has set her, and where His word directs her. May the Lord bless and keep you!
114. “A Learner,” Queen’s Co. The different grades of sin offering, in Lev. 4 and 5 set forth, as we believe, the varied measure of our apprehension of Christ as the sin bearer. That measure may be so feeble as to find its illustration in “a handful of flour;” but God’s estimate of Christ’s atoning work is ever the same, and He acts towards us according to His estimate, and not according to ours. Hence, in the great atonement, in Lev. 16 blood, not flour, was carried in within the veil. It was a question of the claims of God, and He declares that “without shedding of blood is 110 remission.” “A handful of flour” could never shadow forth God’s apprehension of the cross. As to John 5:1414Afterward Jesus findeth him in the temple, and said unto him, Behold, thou art made whole: sin no more, lest a worse thing come unto thee. (John 5:14), we do not exactly see the force of your question. It is very possible that his bodily affliction had been the result of some special sin, and. our Lord tells him to sin no more, lest, in the governmental dealings of God, a worse thing should come upon him.
115. “An Inquirer,” near Stonehouse. We are most fully persuaded that the expression “that day” in 2 Thess. 2 refers to the Lord’s coming in judgment on the world; and that ere it comes the Church will he gathered to her heavenly home. The apostle beseeches the saints, by the Lord’s coming and by their gathering unto Him, not to be agitated about “the day.” It seems exceedingly plain if we will only read it with simplicity.
116. “S. B.” Thanks for your note and the accompanying lines.
117. “A Believer.” It would not comport with the character and object of this Magazine to discuss your question.
118. “E. S.” We assuredly judge that Peter’s going to fish was a return to that which he had given up for Christ’s sake. The expression, “more than these,” we believe refers to the disciples and not to the fish. Peter had said “Though all should deny thee, yet will not I;” and the Lord’s question was designed to test the heart of His poor servant. May the Lord keep us humble and watchful!
119. “S. J.,” Ν. B. You ask, “In what sense did Moses endure reproach for Christ?” We believe it was by identifying himself with the people of God in all their misery and degradation. He might have kept himself apart, and used his influence on behalf of the people; but this would not have been like Christ, who, in perfect grace, not of necessity but voluntarily, threw Himself into all the circumstances of His people. “In all their afflictions he was afflicted.” He not merely acted for them; but He identified Himself with them. This is a great practical truth for the soul. It is one tiling to patronize Christianity, and quite another thing to have fellowship with a rejected Christ. Let us remember this. Christ invites us to taste the privilege of having heart fellowship with Him. He does not want patronage. There may be a quantity of the latter without one atom of the former; indeed it will often be found that persons patronize Christianity merely to exalt self. This is terrible. We have not space for your other queries.