6. “J. Η.,” Ferniehirst. Jesus, having accomplished eternal redemption (John 20:21), and being raised from the dead, first spoke peace (having made it) to His disciples. Then “he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost.” This seems to us to be as the spirit of life. (See Rom. 8:2.) How expressive of the new creation! As God breathed into Adam before Eve was formed, so the disciples received the Holy Ghost as the Spirit of life. By the Holy Ghost the Lord imparted to them the risen life. As individuals they were made partakers of the risen life of Jesus by the Holy Ghost. They could not then be baptized by the Holy Ghost, that is, joined, as the one body of Christ, to Him, the Head in heaven, until He, the Head, was there. If they had been baptized to Christ by the Holy Ghost whilst Christ was on earth, then the church would have been an earthly institution. It is of the first importance to see that the public descent of the Holy Ghost from heaven, and the forming of the body of Christ by the baptism of the Holy Ghost, was consequent on Jesus having ascended above all heavens. Thus these two passages not only do not contradict each other, but each contains an equally important truth. He first breathes into them the new-creation spirit of life; He must then ascend to heaven. The Holy Ghost is then personally sent to form and unite the body to the Head in heaven. The Lord be praised for the blessing He has been pleased to make this little magazine to your soul, and to others you name.
7. “J. C,” Lincoln. We believe it to be a most blessed thing in these last terrible days, wherever the Lord, in His sovereign grace, is pleased to gather a few of His redeemed ones to Himself. There is nothing on earth so blessed to us, or so pleasing to Him. But let us beware of all self-importance. The Lord added such as should be saved on the first day of the church. (Acts 2:47.) Has He “added” the few you speak of? Then surely it becomes us to rejoice, and own His work. How soon we may become a sect, making a company, instead of discerning the work of the Lord, by whatever instruments! Some gatherings may be in such a condition that the Lord may not be able to use them as centers of blessing.
8. “J. C,” near Storehouse. We know similar cases, where the poor sheep of Christ are hindered from going to hear the gospel. But surely our path is to meet in prayer, and do as you did. The case is so solemn, we will quote your words: “The poor ritualist priest I wrote to you respecting has gone to his account. The poor were so interfered with, as to liberty of conscience, and the name of the squire used to coerce them, that I consulted with a christian friend as to whether it would not be right to inform him of the use made of his name; however, we decided it was better to jay it before the Lord. Two days after, the poor ritualist was numbered with the dead!”
9. “A Salisbury Reader.” The quotation you give from a ritualist paper reminds us of 2 Tim. 3:9. We give an extract: “Diotrephes, who, it is clear, was not a mere presbyter, or layman, who took the lead.... amongst his equals, for he is represented as wielding the power of excommunication. It would seem to follow that by his time diocesan episcopacy bad been established, that Diotrephes was a bishop, and that he asserted his authority against the apostle himself.” It is quite true, that if we search through the New Testament, this is the only person that answers to the modern bishop. Gaius was baptized at Corinth, and also lived there. (1 Cor. 1:14; Rom. 16:23.) Such a person also was at Corinth as Diotrephes, and withstood Paul. (See margin, 2 Cor. 10:10, 11.) And there was more than one. (Chap. 11:13.) Even as early as 2 Thess. 2:7 the mystery of iniquity began to work. No one can doubt that the papacy has been the working out of that mystery of iniquity. God has, in His infinite wisdom, allowed every form of evil to appear before the close of inspiration. He allowed this evil to be developed in this self-willed, self-exalted man, Diotrephes. Call it what we may—episcopacy, or any other name—he exalted himself, he set aside the authority of Christ over the assembly, and practically denied the presence and operation of the Holy Ghost. Compare his conduct with Matt. 18:20, 1 Cor. 12:4-11. We thus have an inspired epistle to give us the Lord’s own thoughts on what the ritualist paper calls a bishop. If diocesan episcopacy had been established by the Holy Ghost, how is it that John did not write to the bishop? He recognized no such person, but, owning all the gifts of Christ, he wrote to the church. It is a fearful evil to set aside Christ’s authority, and the Holy Ghost; and hence the strong condemnation of the inspired John. His words need no comment of ours. May we take heed to his exhortation, “Beloved, follow not that which is evil.”