But in what sense could the Apostles rule now? Paul and Peter in their writings speak of their departure from this world, and prophetically announce the utter ruin of the Church in the latter times.
Even the sway of the Pope is more rational than the notion that the Apostles are governing the Church. There certainly is not much appearance of their doing so by their writings (even if there could be sense in saying so), for never were their writings more slighted. Paul indeed makes it a charge against the Corinthian saints, “Ye have reigned as kings without us.” Did they begin to reign when he died and went to heaven? “I would to God,” says he, “ye did reign, that we also might reign with you.” True believers are now, in title, kings and priests unto God, and as already they exercise priestly functions, so in God's own good time will they exercise that of ruling as kings. For this honor we await our changed or resurrection bodies, and glorified with Christ shall then reign with Him over (we do not say on) this earth. We are “begotten again unto a living hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, to an inheritance incorruptible and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for you who are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation,” &c. And by what means or process are we thus begotten? “Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the Word of God, which liveth and abideth forever.... And this is the word, which by the gospel is preached unto you.” (1 Peter 1:23, 2523Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever. (1 Peter 1:23)
25But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you. (1 Peter 1:25).) Again, James says, “Of his own will begat he us with the Word of truth;” i.e. the word of truth is the incorruptible seed, as in Luke 8:1111Now the parable is this: The seed is the word of God. (Luke 8:11), “The seed is the Word of God.” How then can any one be either so mistaken or so wicked as to corrupt divine truth, and speak about a germ imparted at baptism? The error arises from the endeavor to bolster up another error, that of a sacerdotal order in the church, and thus it ever is, that one error begets another. The germ is the Word of God. “That on the good ground are they which in an honest and good heart having heard the Word keep it, and bring forth fruit with patience.”
As regards “the kingdom of heaven,” this phrase occurs only in Matthew's Gospel—its equivalent—in the other Gospels being “The kingdom of God,” though the terms are not entirely synonymous. To be in the kingdom as a true subject, one must be born again, as we have been reading in Peter, and as is stated in John 3:33Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. (John 3:3). But, till that kingdom comes in manifested power and glory, mere professors may enter it, and hence we have “the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven.” Christ's people are made by baptism All this confusion and error arises from a depreciation of the gospel, an exaltation and abuse of the ordinances of baptism and the Lord's supper, and the introduction of the fiction of sacramental grace.
To this is added the extraordinary notion for any Christian to entertain, that we enter into covenant with God in the sacraments. That the blood of Christ is the blood of the new covenant is true, but we are expressly told that the new covenant is with the house of Israel, whilst Paul says he is a minister of the new covenant, “not of the letter, but of the spirit,” 2 Cor. 3:66Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life. (2 Corinthians 3:6), that is, we have the blessings of the new covenant, but are not the subjects of the covenant itself. All this grievous and mischievous error arises from ignorance of the grace of God in the gospel, with which in fact it is irreconcilable. Another perversion of the truth we may briefly glance at before closing, that of referring Mal. 1:1111For from the rising of the sun even unto the going down of the same my name shall be great among the Gentiles; and in every place incense shall be offered unto my name, and a pure offering: for my name shall be great among the heathen, saith the Lord of hosts. (Malachi 1:11) to the Christian dispensation, “and in every place incense shall be offered unto my name, and a pure offering,” i.e. the Mincha, or meat offering. The Roman Catholics think that they carry this out in both clauses, i.e. as regards both incense and offering. But the only application of this text to the church is in a spiritual sense. Praise and thanksgiving—offered to God by those who are cleansed from their sins in the precious blood of Christ, and hence who are “accepted in the Beloved,” —does ascend to God through Christ, and with the fragrance of His Person and work. These and acts of charity are the sacrifices, which the true priests of God offer to Him, on the altar which sanctifies the gift,—viz., Christ: see Heb. 13:10, 15, 1610We have an altar, whereof they have no right to eat which serve the tabernacle. (Hebrews 13:10)
15By him therefore let us offer the sacrifice of praise to God continually, that is, the fruit of our lips giving thanks to his name. 16But to do good and to communicate forget not: for with such sacrifices God is well pleased. (Hebrews 13:15‑16). Properly speaking, however, Mal. 1:1111For from the rising of the sun even unto the going down of the same my name shall be great among the Gentiles; and in every place incense shall be offered unto my name, and a pure offering: for my name shall be great among the heathen, saith the Lord of hosts. (Malachi 1:11), has no reference to the present economy, but will be fulfilled literally, during the Millennium.
The boldness with which Roman Catholicism asserts her dogmas has at least the merit of a certain amount of consistency, though it is sometimes very inconsistent where they least expect it. For instance, if the so-called sacrifice of the mass is an unbloody sacrifice, then it is a sacrifice of non-redemption, for “without the shedding of blood is no remission.” But again, if in virtue of transubstantiation, the wine is turned into the blood of Christ, how can it be an unbloody sacrifice? The attenuated Anglican sense is, of all, the most irrational; though the word of the minister, on delivering the elements to the communicants, happily avoids reference to it, and beautifully says, “The body of our Lord Jesus Christ, which was given for thee, preserve thy body and soul unto everlasting life. Take and eat this, in remembrance that Christ died for thee, and feed on Him in thy heart by faith, with thanksgiving.” In this sense only, do we eat the flesh of Christ and drink His blood, but in this sense the elements are no vehicles or channels of divine grace; the feeding is, in no sense or manner, a physical process.
The wretched notion that the sacraments are an extension or continuation of the Incarnation is very easily disposed of, by remembering that the sacraments bring before us the death of Christ, that baptism symbolizes not only His death, but that by it we too are dead and buried, according to the Christian doctrine, and as raised to newness of life we should walk according to that new life. The commencement of the Christian career is, death to the old man, by baptism figuratively; and baptism is unto Christ's death. But death having terminated Incarnation, how can the sacraments be a continuation of that, the end of which they commemorate and figuratively exhibit? The truth connected with baptism makes a clean end of the old man; and as to life in Christ and union with Him, it is as dead, risen and ascended, it is to a Christ in glory that we are united by the Holy Spirit, for “unless a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone, but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit.” For there must be the judgment of sin. Are we Christians in reality and truth? Then Christ on the cross suffered, at the hands of God, the judgment of our sins, He was there made sin for us, personally and individually. This is what is properly called Substitution, i.e. suffering in our stead. The death of the body we may know; death as the wages of sin, death in its spiritual power and effect, we never can know, for (blessed be God!) Jesus has borne that for us, and has said, “Verily, verily, I say unto you, if a man keep my saying, he shall never see death.” Again, “My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: and I give unto them eternal life, and they shall never perish, neither shall any one pluck them out of my hand.” Let us leave those to carp at Divine grace, who are so willfully ignorant of it, as were those to whom the Lord said, “But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.” The mock humility, which says it is presumptuous to feel sure that God hath saved us, will find its true worth at last. Weakness of faith, or want of spiritual intelligence, one can understand and sympathize with; the systematic denial of the words of Scripture, and the maintenance of what is nothing short of a counterfeit Christianity, is altogether another thing, and deserving only of our abhorrence. Yet, sad to say, the latter is increasingly and deliberately preferred. That evangelical spirit, which once was true and strong in the land, is almost if not quite gone; everything which was good seems to be waning and fading, falsehood and corruption carry all before them, and the Savior's gracious promise to the individual, for a day which He foresaw, is now our resource, “Behold I stand at the door and knock: if any man hear my voice and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.”
With this as our present portion, our sure and certain hope is to see Him as He is and to be with Him and like Him forever: “Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come Lord Jesus.”
J. B. P.