Miscellaneous
Writings Vol. Two
LECTURE III.
ESTABLISHMENTS, AND A MONEY BASIS
(Rev. 2:
12-17).
WE have seen, beloved friends, two main steps in the
Church's outward decline, after the loss of first love had made any departure
possible. First of all, the divine idea of the Church was lost. Instead of its
being a body of people having, in the full and proper sense, eternal life and
salvation, children of God, members of Christ, and called out of the world, as
not belonging to it, it became a mere "gathering together" of people, for whom
indeed the old names might in part remain, but who were in fact the world
itself, with true Christian people scattered through it. Children of God they
might be reckoned by baptism, and by it have forgiveness of sins also, but that
was no settlement for eternity at all. They were confessedly under trial, and
uncertain as to how things would finally turn out - a ground which all the
world could understand and appreciate, with sacraments and means of grace to
help them on, and prevent them realizing the awfulness of their position. Of
course, this immense change from Church to Synagogue was not at once effected.
Yet the Church historically known to us, outside of the New Testament, is but
in fact essentially the Synagogue. The fire of persecution helped to prevent
for a while the extreme result, and to separate mere professors from the
confessors of Christ. Still through it all the leaven of Judaism wrought its
deadly work; and no sooner was persecution stopped than the world's overtures
for peace and alliance were eagerly listened to; and with Constantine, for
many, the millennium seemed to have arrived. Could the Church of the apostles
have fallen into the world's arms so? Their voice would have rebuked the
thought as of Satan, as indeed it was: "Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye
not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God?"
The second
step we saw in the rise of a clergy, a spiritual or priestly class, replacing
the true Christian ministry, the free exercise of the various gifts which
resulted from the various places of the membership of the body of Christ. The
clerical assumption displaced the body of Christian people - now a true "laity
"- as at least less spiritual and near to God; a place, alas, easily accepted
where Christ had lost what the world had gained in value with His own. As
Judaism prevailed, and the world came in through the ever-opening door, the
distance between the two classes increased, and more and more the clergy became
the channels of all blessing to the rest. Practically, and in the end almost
openly, they became the Church; and the Church became, from a company of those
already saved, a channel for conveying a sacramental and hypothetical
salvation.
We come now to look at the issue of all this, when
circumstances favoured. In Pergamos (where the Lord presents Himself no longer
in the tender and gracious sympathy He manifests for His suffering ones in
Smyrna, but as having the sharp sword with two edges - His Word to judge the
state of things among them)- in Pergamos, the characteristic thing is, they are
"dwelling where Satan's throne is." "Throne," not "seat," is confessedly the
word used. The translators apparently shrank from the use of the stronger word:
for, according to current belief, Satan reigns in hell, not on earth ; that is,
in the prison in which God has put him, but from which he has strangely broken
loose. Milton's picture is the popular one, and with it, no doubt, you are
familiar. But it is as unscriptural as it is unreasonable. What would be
thought of a government which allowed a chief malefactor to reign in his prison
over his fellow culprits, and to break prison and roam freely where he would?
God's government is not chargeable with this. In hell Satan will be the lowest
and most miserable there; and when committed to it there will be no escape
permitted. But that will not be until after the millennium, as Rev. xx. assures
us.
This idea, however, permits people to escape from the appalling
thought that Satan is now the "prince of this world," and the "god of this
world" (or age) which Scripture plainly declares him to be. It is over the
world he exercises authority, and this gives to the "world" and "dwelling in
the world" an exceedingly solemn character. For, "dwelling in the world" is
quite another thing, of course, from being in it. We are in the world perforce,
and in no wise responsible for that; but to be a dweller in it is a moral
state; it is to be a citizen in it - the condition which the apostle speaks of
in Philippians as obtaining among professing Christians: "For many walk of whom
I have told you before, and now tell you, even weeping, that they are the
enemies of the cross of Christ: whose god is their belly, whose glory is in
their shame, who mind earthly things. For our conversation (or citizenship) is
in heaven; from whence also we look for the Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ"
(iii. 18-20).
Their characteristic is, that they are enemies, not of
Christ personally, but of the Gross, that Cross by which we are "crucified to
the world, and the world to us." Their hearts were on earthly things, which,
not satisfying them, as earthly things cannot, made their god to be their
belly;- that inward craving became their master, and made them drudges in its
service. The Christian's citizenship is "in heaven." That forms his character,
and delivers him from the unsatisfying pursuit of earthly things. But little,
indeed, is this understood now. Even where people can talk and sing of the
world being a wilderness, you will find that in general their idea of it is a
place of sorrow and trial, to which all the world and the Christian alike are
exposed. Pilgrimage, in their minds, is a thing perforce. The world passes
away, and they cannot keep it; but, if honest, they would own that they would
keep it if they could. As they cannot, they are glad enough to think there is
such a place as heaven at the end of it; in the meanwhile they go on trying
(honestly, no doubt, if you can call such a thing honest in a Christian) to get
as much of it as they can - or, at least, as much as will make them comfortable
in it.
It is a different thing to be a pilgrim really - a man
journeying on earth with an absorbing purpose to reach a fixed point beyond:
not one whom the world is leaving, but one who is leaving it. By the very fact
that the stream of time is carrying us all down with it, if that constituted a
pilgrim it would make all the world pilgrims; and so, in fact, people do talk
of the "pilgrimage of life:" but this is the abuse of a term, and not its use.
We can be pilgrims in that sense, and find all the world companions; and such,
indeed, had got to be the idea of pilgrim-age in the Pergamos state of the
Church. They talked of it, no doubt, and built their houses the more solidly to
stand the rough weather: if they owned there were "rainy days" ahead, it was
the more their duty to lay by for a rainy day. God said they were dwelling
where Satan's throne was.
The history of old Babel was repeating
itself. You may find the vivid type of it in Gen. xi., where men " journeyed"
indeed, but not as pilgrims, or as only that till they could find some smooth
place in which to settle down. "They journeyed" as colonists or immigrants on
the lookout for land, from the rough hills where human life beyond the flood
began; "from the east" (that is, with their backs toward the blessed dawn), and
"they found a plain in the land of Shinar; and they dwelt there."
That
was, alas, the Church's progress: from the rough heights of martyrdom down to
the smooth level where were no difficulties to deter the most timid souls.
There the Church multiplied, and there they began to build "a city and a tower
whose top should reach to heaven:" but the city was not Jerusalem, but
Jerusalem's old enemy; not the "possession of peace," but the city of
"confusion "- Babel.
Yet it prospered. They built well. True, they were
away from the quarries of the hills, and could not build with the stone they
had there been used to. They did the best thing they could with the clay which
was native in the soil of that lower land. "They had bricks for stone, and
slime for mortar." We have seen some of this work already. It looks well, and
lasts, in the fine climate of those regions, quite a long time - human
material, not divine -" bricks," man's manufacture, "for stones," God's
material. They cannot build great Babylon with the "living stones" of God's
producing. Men-made Christians, compacted together, not by the cementing
Spirit, but by the human motives and influences whereby the masses are
affected, but which the fire of God will one day try - so is great Babylon
built.
Now it is remarkable that the word Pergamos has a double
significance. In the plural form it is used for the citadel of a town, while it
is at least near akin to Purgos, "a town." Again, divide it into the two words
in which it naturally separates, and you have "per" (although) a particle which
"usually serves to call attention to something which is objected to" (Liddell
and Scott), and "gamos," (marriage). It was indeed by the marriage of Church
and world that the "city and tower" of Babylon the Great was raised. And such
are the times we are now to contemplate.
They were the times of the
great Constantine - the time of what is significantly called the "establishment
of the Church;" but not, alas, its establishment upon its Rock-foundation,
where the gates of hades could not prevail against it, but its establishment in
the world's favour, and under its protection. It was the success of Satan, the
triumph of his plan by which the Church became the synagogue; but not now
God's, but in opposition to God. As a consequence, you find not only
Nicolaitanism now fully accepted, but the "doctrine of Balaam" also. They were
still what is called orthodox. "Thou holdest fast My name, and hast not denied
My faith, even in those days wherein Antipas was My faithful martyr, who was
slain among you, where Satan dwelleth." They maintained, in general, (the truth
of Christ as against Arianism, which denied His proper deity. It was the period
of the creeds - of Nicene orthodoxy. But it was an orthodoxy which, while
maintaining (thank God for it) the doctrine of the Trinity, could be, and was,
very far astray as to the application of Christ's blessed work to the salvation
of man - orthodox as to Christ, most unorthodox as to the gospel.
Where, in the Apostles' Creed (so called), do you find the gospel? "The
forgiveness of sins" is an article of belief, no doubt; but how and when? In
the Nicene Creed there is "I acknowledge one baptism for the remission of
sins," and entire silence as to any other. In the Athanasian it is owned that
Christ suffered for our salvation," but how we are to obtain the salvation is
again omitted. Practically, the belief of the times was in the efficacy of
baptism, and so painful and uncertain was the way of forgiveness for sins
committed afterwards, that multitudes deferred baptism to a dying bed, that the
sins of a lifetime might be washed away together. The Lord goes on to say: "But
I have a few things against thee, because thou hast there them that hold the
doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balak to cast a stumbling-block before the
children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed unto idols, and to commit
fornication." Balaam, the destroyer of the people, is a new graft upon
Nicolaitanism - a prophet in outward nearness to the Lord, while his heart went
after his own covetousness;- a man having no personal grudge against the
people, but whose god was his belly, and who would curse them if his god bade
;-one whose doctrine was to seduce Israel from their separateness, into guilty
mixture with the nations and their idolatry around. The type is easily read,
and the examples of it distressingly numerous. When the Church and the world
became on good terms with one another, and the Church had the things of the
world wherewith to attract the natural heart, the hireling prophet was a matter
of course, who for his own ends would seek still further to destroy all godly
separateness.
How glad one would be, to be able to think that a thing
of the past! But it is one step only in a persistent departure from God on the
part of the professing Church at large, never retraced or repented of. Nor,
solemn to say, however much individuals may be delivered, is such decline ever
recovered from by the body as such. Every step downwards only accelerates the
progress down. In the wilderness Israel tock up the tabernacle of Moloch, - and
the star of their god Remphan, and the Lord's word appended is,"I will carry
you away beyond Babylon." There were many reformations afterwards, more or less
partial, but no fresh start. So with the Church. People talk about a second
Pentecost. There never really was. The true Pentecostal times lasted for how
brief a moment!
It is a sad and terrible thing to speak of evil, and we
have indeed ever to watch ourselves, lest in fact we should be rejoicing in
that which we affect to judge. But if the Lord has pronounced, woe will it be
to us if we are not with Him in His judgment. It would be unfaithfulness and
dishonesty, as well as real breach of charity, not to say what the Lord says.
To modify or alter it would be dishonest. "He that hath My word, let him speak
My word faithfully," He Himself says.
From Constantine's day to the
present, Pergamos has characterized the state of things. World and Church have
been one in Christendom at large; and wherever this is found, there in truth is
Babylon, although Rome may be head of Babylon, as indeed she is. Let us look
about us with the lamp the Lord has given us, and see whereabouts we are with
regard to these things. How far are we individually keeping the Church and the
world separate? How far are we really refusing that yoke with unbelievers which
the passage in 2 Cor. vi. so emphatically condemns? Our associations are judged
of God as surely as any other part of our practical conduct; and "be not
unequally yoked together with unbelievers" is His word. He cannot, He declares,
be to us a Father as He would except we come out and be separate. Solemn,
solemn words in the midst of the multiplicity of such confederacies in the
present day! Can we bear to be ourselves searched out by them, beloved
breth-ren? Oh, if we value our true place as sons with God, shall we not be
only glad to see things as they are?
Now this forbidden yoke has
various applications. It applies to anything in which we voluntarily unite with
others to attain a common object. Among social relations, marriage is such a
yoke; in business relations, partnerships, and such like; and in the foremost
rank of all would come ecclesiastical associations.
To take these
latter now: there are certain systems which, as we have already seen, mix up
the Church and the world in the most thorough way possible. All forms of
ritualism do - forms wherein a person is made by baptism "a member of Christ
and a child of God." Where that is asserted, separation is impossible, for no
amount of charity, and no extravagance of theological fiction, can make the
mass of these baptized people other than the world.
All national
churches in the same way mix them up by the very fact that they are national
churches. You cannot by the force of will, or act of Parliament, make a nation
Christian. You can give them a name to live, while they are dead. You can make
them formalists and hypocrites, but nothing more. You can do your best to hide
from them their true condition, and leave them under an awful delusion from
which eternity alone may wake them up. All systems Jewish in character mix them
up of necessity. Where all are probationers together it is not possible to do
otherwise. All systems in which the Church is made a means to salvation,
instead of the company of the saved, necessarily do so. When people join
churches in order to be saved, as is the terrible fashion of the day, these
churches become, of course, the common receptacle of sinners and saints alike.
And wherever assurance of salvation is not maintained, the same thing must
needs result.
Systems such as these naturally acquire adherents, and
rapidly; money and worldly influence prevail, and among such the doctrine of
Balaam does its deadly work. The world, not even disguised in the garb of
Christianity, is sought for the sake of material support. Men that have not
given themselves to the Lord are taught that they can give their money. It is
openly proclaimed that God is not sufficient as His people's portion; His cause
requires help, and that so much that He will accept it from the hands of His
very enemies. There is an idolatry of means abroad. Money will help the
destitute; money will aid to circulate the Scriptures; money will send
missionaries to foreign parts; money will supply a hundred wants and get over a
host of difficulties. We are going to put it to so good a use we must not be
over-scrupulous as to the mode of getting it. The church has to be maintained,
the minister to be paid. They do not like the principle that "the end
sanctifies the means," but still, what are they to do? God is sufficient, of
course, in theory, but they must use the means, and this century no longer
expects miracles.
But why go over the dreary round of such godless and
faithless arguments? Is it a wonder that infidelity bursts out into a
triumphant laugh as Christians maintain the impotence of their God, and violate
His precepts to save His cause from ruin? Nay, do you not in fact proclaim it
ruined, irredeemably ruined, when His ear is already too dull to hear, and His
arm shortened that it cannot save? Money will build churches, will buy Bibles,
will support ministers - true. Will it buy a new Pentecost? or bring in the
Millennium? Will you bribe the blessed Spirit to work for you thus? or make
sheer will and animal energy do without Him? Alas, you pray for power, and
dishonour Him who is the only source of power! But what is the result of this
solicitation of the world? Can you go to it with the Bibles you have bought
with its own money, and tell it the truth as to its own condition? Can you tell
them that "the whole world lieth in wickedness?" that "all that is in the world
- the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life - is
not of the Father, but is of the world?" Can you maintain the separate place
that God has given you, and the sharp edge of the truth that "they that are in
the flesh cannot please God?" Of course you cannot. They will turn round upon
you and say: Why then do you come to us for our money? You ask us to give, and
tell us our giving will not please Him! It is not reasonable, we do not believe
it, and you cannot believe it yourselves! No: the world does not believe in
giving anything for nothing. Whatever the word of God may say, whatever you may
think of it in your heart, you must compromise in some way. You must not
maintain the rigid line of separation. Balaam must be your prophet. You must
mix with the world, and let it mix with you: how else will you do it good? You
must cushion your church seats and invite it in. You must make your building
and your services attractive; you must not frighten people away, but allure
them in. You must be all things to all men; and as you cannot expect to get
them up to your standard, you must get down to theirs. Do I speak too strongly?
Oh, words can hardly exaggerate the state of things that may be everywhere
found, not in some far-off land, but here all around us, in the present day. I
should not dare to tell you what deeds are done in the name of Christ by His
professing people. They will hire singers to sing His praises for admiration,
and to draw a crowd. They will provide worldly entertainments, and sit down and
be entertained in company. And, as more and more they sink down to the world's
level, they persuade themselves the world is rising up to theirs; while God is
saying, as of His people of old, "Ephraim, he hath mixed himself among the
people; Ephraim is a cake not turned. Strangers have devoured his strength, and
he knoweth it not: yea, gray hairs are here and there upon him, yet he knoweth
it not. And the pride of Israel testifieth to his face: and they do not return
to the Lord their God, nor seek Him for all this" (Hos. vii. 8-io).
It
is a downward course, and being trod at an ever-increasing pace. Competition is
aroused, and it is who can be the most successful candidate for the world's
favours. The example of one emboldens another. Emulation, envy, ambition, and a
host of unholy motives, are aroused, and Scripture, the honour of Christ, the
jealous eyes of a holy, holy God - ah, you are antiquated and Pharisaic if you
talk of these!
There is one feature in this melancholy picture I cannot
pass by briefly thus. The ministry, or what stands before men's eyes as such,
how is it affected by all this? I have already said that Scripture does not
recognize the thought of a minister and his people. Upon this I do not intend
to dwell again. But what, after all, in the present day, has got to be the
strength of the tie between a church and its ministry? Who that looks around
can question that money has here a controlling influence? The seal of the
compact is the salary. A rich church with an ample purse, can it not make
reasonably sure of attracting the man it wants? The poor church, however rich
in piety, is it not conscious of its deficiency? People naturally do not like
to own it. The ministers persuade themselves, successfully enough, no doubt,
that it is a wider and more promising field of labour that attracts them. But
the world notoriously does not believe this; and it has but too good reason for
its unbelief.
The contract is ordinarily for so much money. If the
money is not forthcoming, the contract is dissolved. But more: the money
consideration decides in another way the character of man they wish to secure.
It is ordinarily a successful man that is wanted, after the fashionable idea of
what is success. They want a man who will fill the church, perhaps help to pay
off the debt upon it. Very likely the payment of his own salary depends upon
this. He will not be likely most to please who is not influenced by such
motives: and thus it will be only God's mercy if Balaam's doctrine does not
secure a Balaam to carry it out. But even if a godly man is obtained, he is put
under the influence of the strongest personal temptation to soften down the
truth, which, if fully preached, may deprive him of not only influence, but
perhaps even subsistence. Will the most godly man be the most popular
man?
No: for godliness is not what the world seeks. It can appreciate
genius, no doubt, and eloquence, and amiability, and benevolence, and
utilitarianism; but godliness is something different from the union of even all
of these. If the world can appreciate godliness, I will own indeed it is no
longer the world. But as long as the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the
eyes, and the pride of life, still characterize it, it is not of the Father,
nor the Father of it. And why, in that passage, does the apostle say "the
Father?" Is it not because, in thinking of the Father's relation to the world,
we must needs think of the Son? As he says again, in another place, "Who is he
that overcometh the world but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God?"
And why? Because it is the Son of God the world has crucified and cast out; and
that Cross which was the world's judgment of the Son of God, is for faith God's
judgment of the world.
Was Christ popular, beloved friends? Could He,
with divine power in His hands, and ministering it freely for the manifold need
appealing to Him on every side - could He commend Himself to men, His
creatures? No, assuredly. But you think, perhaps, those peculiarly evil times.
They understand Him better now, you think. Take, then, His dear name with you
to men's places of business and to their homes to-day, to the workshop and the
counting-houses and the public places. Do you doubt what response you would
get? "In the churches?" Oh yes; they have agreed to tolerate Him there. The
churches have been carefully arranged to please the world. Comfortable,
fashionable, the poor packed in convenient corners, eye and ear and intellect
provided for: that is a different thing. And then it helps to quiet conscience
when it will sometimes stir. But oh, is there much sign of His presence whose
authenticating sign was, "To the poor the gospel is preached?"
Enough
of this, however. It will be of no profit to pursue it further. But to those
with whom the love of Christ is more than a profession, and the honour of
Christ a reality to be maintained, I would solemnly put it how they can go on
with what systematically tramples His honour under foot, yea, under the world's
foot - falsifies His gospel, and helps to deceive to their own destruction the
souls for whom He died? The doctrine of Balaam is everywhere: its end is
judgment upon the world, and judgment too upon the people of God. If ministers
cannot be supported, if churches cannot be kept up without this, the honestest,
manliest, only Christian course is, let the thing go down! If Christians cannot
get on without the world, they will find at least that the world can get on
without them. They cannot persuade it that disobedience is such a serious thing
when they see the light-hearted, flippant disobedience of which it is so easy
to convict the great mass of professors, while it is so utterly impossible to
deter them from it. " Money" is the cry; "well, but we want the money." Aye,
though Christ's honour is betrayed by it, and infidels sneer, and souls perish!
Brethren, the very Pharisees of old were wiser! " We may not put it into the
treasury," they whispered, "because it is the price of blood."
It will
be a relief to turn to Scripture, and to examine what we have there upon this
subject. It is very simple. There was no organized machinery for supporting
churches; none for paying ministers; no promise, no contract upon the people's
part, as to any sum they were to receive at all. There were necessities of
course, many, to be provided for, and it was understood that there was to be
provision. The saints themselves had to meet all. They had not taken up with a
cheap religion. Having often to lay down their lives for it, they did not think
much of their goods. The principle was this: "Every man as he is disposed in
his heart, so let him give: not grudgingly, or of necessity; for God loveth a
cheerful giver." It was to be to God, and before God. There was to be no
blazoning it out to brethren, still less before the world. He that gave was not
to let his left hand know what his right hand was doing.
It is true
there were solemn motives to enforce it. On the one side, "He that soweth
sparingly shall reap also, sparingly; and he that soweth bountifully shall reap
also bountifully." But on the other side - most powerful, most influential of
all - was this: "Ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, who, though He was
rich, yet for your sakes became poor, that ye through His poverty might become
rich."
Such was the principle; such was to be the motive. There was no
compulsory method of extraction, if this failed. If there was not heart to
give, it was no use to extract. So as to the labourer in the Word, it was very
clearly announced, and that as what God had ordained, that "they which preach
the gospel should live of the gospel," and that "the labourer is worthy of his
hire." But although here also God used the willing hands of His people, it was
not understood that they "hired" him, or that he was their labourer. What they
gave, it was to God they gave it, and his privilege it was to be Christ's
servant. His responsibility was to the Lord, and theirs also. They did not
understand that they were to get so much work for so much money. They did not
pay, but "offered." - There is a wonderful difference: for you cannot "pay"
God, and you do not "offer" (in this sense of offering) to man. The moment you
pay, God is out of the question. Do you think this is perhaps a little unfair
on both sides? that it is right that there should be something more of an
equivalent for the labour he bestows - for the money you give? That is good
law, bad gospel. What better than simony is it to suppose, after this fashion,
"that the gift of God can be purchased with money?" Would you rather make your
own bargain than trust Christ's grace to minister to your need? Or is it hard
for him that he who ministers the Word should show his practical trust in the
Word by looking to the Lord for his support? Ah, to whom could he look so well?
and how much better off would he be for losing the sweet experience of His
care?
No: it is all unbelief in divine power and love, and machinery
brought in to make up for the want of it. And yet, if there is not this, what
profit is there of keeping up the empty profession of it? If God can fail, let
the whole thing go together; if He cannot, then your skilful contrivances are
only the exhibition of rank unbelief.
And what do you accomplish by it?
You bring in the Canaanite (the merchantman) into the house of the Lord. You
offer a premium to the trader in divine things - the man who most values your
money, and least cares for your souls. You cannot but be aware how naturally
those two extremes associate together, and you cannot but own that if you took
the Lord's plan, and left His labourers to look to Him for their support, you
would do more to weed out such traffickers than by all your care and labour
otherwise. Stop the hire, and you will banish the hirelings, and the blessed
ministry of Christ will be freed from an incubus and a reproach which your
contracts and bargainings are largely responsible for. And if Christ's servants
cannot after all trust Him, let them seek out some honest occupation where they
may gain their bread without scandal. In the fifteenth century before Christ,
God brought a whole nation out of Egypt, and maintained them forty years in the
wilderness. Did He, or did He not? Is He as competent as ever? Alas! will you
dare to say those were the days of His youth, and these of His
decrepitude?
So serious are these questions. But the unbelief that
exists now existed then. Do you remember what the people did when they had lost
Moses on the mount awhile, and lacked a leader? They made a god of the gold
which they had brought out of Egypt with them, and fell down and worshipped the
work of their own hands. History repeats itself. Who can deny that we have been
looking on the counterpart of that?
It may be well to ask here, Is
there any measure of the Christian's giving, for one who would be right with
God about it?
The notion of the tithe, or tenth, has been revived, or with
some two tithes, as that which was the measure of one Israelite's giving. Jacob
has been propounded to us as an example, as he stood before God in the morning
after that wonderful night at Bethel, when God had engaged to be with him and
to be his God, and to multiply his seed, and bring him again into the land from
which he was departing. "If God will be with me," he says, "and will keep me in
the way that I go, and will give me bread to eat and raiment to put on, so that
I come again to my father's house in peace, then the Lord shall be my God; and
this stone, which I have set for a pillar, shall be God's house; and of all
that Thou shalt give me, I will surely give the tenth unto Thee."
God's
ways are so little like our ways, His thoughts so little like our thoughts, it
is not very wonderful man does not understand them. But, surely, Jacob does not
here enter into the blessedness of God's thoughts. I need not dwell now upon
his case, but only notice it to say that for a Christian at least the whole
principle is a mistake. You are not to ransom nine-tenths from God by giving
one. You are bought with a price, you and yours. In a double way, by creation
and redemption too, you belong, with all you have, to God. Many people are
acting upon the perfectly wrong idea that whether as to time, money, or
whatever else, God is to have His share, and the rest is their own. They
misunderstand the legal types, and do not realize the immense difference that
accomplished redemption has brought in with it.
Before "Ye are bought
with a price" could yet be said, it was impossible to deduce the consequences
that result from this. Grace goes beyond law, which made nothing, and could
make nothing, perfect. The very essence of the surrender of the life to God is
that it must be a voluntary one. Like the vow of the Nazarite, (which was a vow
of separation to the Lord, and which reads, "when any one will vow the vow of a
Nazarite,") that surrender must be of the heart, or it is none. Nor is it a
contradiction to this that there were born Nazarites - Nazarites from the womb,
as Samson and the Baptist. Christians are all born (new-born) to Nazariteship,
which is implied, and necessitated, in a true sense, by the life which we
receive from God. But the necessity is not one externally impressed upon it: it
is an internal one. "A new heart will I give you," says the Lord: but the new
heart given is a heart which chooses freely the service of its Master. A legal
requirement of the whole would have been unavailing, and a mere bondage. "Not
grudgingly, or of necessity," is, as we have seen, the Scripture rule for the
Christian. But that does not at all mean what people characterize as "cheap
religion." It does not mean that God will accept the "mites" of the niggard, as
the Lord did those of the woman in the Gospels. Chrisi does not say, "Give as
much or as little as you please: it is all one." No: He expects intelligent,
free surrender of all to Him, as on the part of one who recognizes that all is
really His.
If you will look at the sixteenth chapter of Luke, you will
find the Lord announcing very distinctly this principle. The unjust steward is
our picture there - the picture of those who are (as we all are as to the old
creation) under sentence of dismissal from the place they were originally put
in, on account of unrighteous dealing in it. Grace has not recalled the
sentence, "Thou rnayest be no longer steward." It has given us far more, but it
has not reinstalled us in the place we have thus lost. Death, in fact, is our
removal from our stewardship, although it be the entrance for us as Christians
into something which must be confessed "far better." But grace has delayed the
execution of the sentence, and meanwhile our Master's goods are in our hand.
All that we have here are His things, and not ours. And now God looks for us to
be faithful in what is, alas, to men as such (creature of God, as indeed it is)
"the mammon of unrighteousness" - the miserable deity of unrighteous
man.
Moreover, grace counts this faithfulness to us. We are permitted
to "make friends of this mammon of unrighteousness" by our godly use of it;
whereas it is naturally, through our fault, our enemy and our accuser. It must
not be imagined that the "unjust steward" is to be our character literally all
through. The Lord shows us that this is not so when He speaks of "faithfulness"
being looked for. No doubt the unjust steward in the parable acts unjustly with
his master's goods, and it must not be imagined that God commends him - it is
"his lord" that does so-man as man admiring the shrewdness which he displayed.
Yet only so could be imaged that conduct which in us is not injustice, but
faithfulness to our Master - grace entitling us to use what we have received,
for our own true and eternal interests, which in this case are one with His own
due and glory.
But then there are things also which we may speak of as
"our own." What are these? Ah, they are what the Lord speaks of as, after all,
"the true riches." "If ye have not been faithful in the unrighteous mainmon,
who will commit to your trust the true riches? And if ye have not been faithful
in that which is another's,- not "another man's," but God's, of course,-" who
will give you that which is your own?"
Thus our own things are distinct
altogether; and I need not tell Christians what they are. I need only remind
you that if you have in your thoughts, as men down here, a quantity of things
as your own possessions, to be liberal with, or to hoard up - in both cases you
misapprehend the matter. As to things here, you have your Master's goods,
which, if you hoard up here, you surely lose hereafter, and turn them into
accusers. On the other hand, you are graciously permitted to transfer them
really to your own account, by laying them up amid your treasure, where your
treasure is -" in heaven."
The rich man, in the solemn illustration at
the end of the chapter, was one who had made his lord's "good things" his own
after another fashion; and in eternity they were not friends, but enemies and
accusers. "Son," says Abraham to him, "remember that thou in thy life-time
receivedst thy good things; "- that was all. But what a solemn memory it was!
How once again the purple and fine linen and sumptuous fare met the eyes they
had once gratified, and now appalled. Lazarus had been at his gate, but it was
not Lazarus that accused. And oh, beware of having things your own down here.
There was a man who had his "good things" here, and in eternity what were they
to him?
I know this is not the gospel. No, but it is what, as the
principle of God's holy government, the gospel should prepare us to understand
and to enter into. Have you observed that the most beautiful and affecting
story of gospel-grace, the story of the lost son received, is what precedes the
story of the unjust steward? The Pharisees, who in the fifteenth chapter stand
for the picture of the elder son, are here rebuked in the person of the rich
man. Will not the prodigal received back to a Father's arms be the very one who
will understand that he owes his all to a Father's love? Is not "ye are bought
with a price" the gospel? But then ye are bought: ye are not your own.
Put it in another way. You remember that when God would bring His people out of
Egypt, Pharaoh wanted to compromise - of course by that compromise to keep the
people as his slaves. Three separate offers he makes to Moses, each of which
would have prevented salvatidn being, according to God's thought of it,
salvation at all. The first compromise was "worship in the land."
"And
Pharaoh called for Moses and for Aaron, and said, Go ye, sacrifice to your God
in the land."
And still the world asks why need you go outside it? You are
entitled to your opinions, but why be so extreme? Why three days' journey into
the wilderness? Why separate from what you were brought up in, and from people
as good as you? Ah, they do not know what that three days' journey implies, and
that the death and resurrection of Christ place you where you are no more of
the world than He is ! Egypt - luxurious, civilized, self-satisfied, idolatrous
Egypt - and the wilderness! what a contrast! Yet only in the wilderness can you
sacrifice to God.
Then he tries another stratagem :- "And he said unto
them, Go serve the Lord your God; but who are they that shall go?
"And
Moses said, We will go with our young and with our old, with our sons and with
our daughters, with our flocks and with our herds we will go; for we must hold
a feast unto the Lord.
"And he said unto them, Let the Lord be so with you,
as I will let you go, and your little ones: look to it; for evil is before you.
Not so: go now ye that are men, and serve the Lord; for that ye did
desire."
By their little ones he had them safe, of course - a perfectly
good security that they would not go far away. And so it is still. How many are
brought back into the world by the children they did not bring with them out of
the world.
One last hope remains for Pharaoh :- "And Pharaoh called unto
Moses, and said, Go ye, serve the Lord; only let your flocks and your herds be
stayed: let your little ones also go with you."
"Leave your possessions,"
he says: and how many leave their possessions ! Themselves are saved; but their
business, their occupation, these are still not sacred things, they are
secular: what have these things to do with the salvation of the soul? But God
says, No: bring them all out of Egypt: yourselves, your families, your
property, all are to be Mine. And, in point of fact, His it must be if we would
ourselves keep it, for we cannot keep it of ourselves. The man out of whom the
demon went is our Lord's own illustration of the fact that an empty house will
never lack a tenant. The sweeping and garnishing, and all that, will not keep
out the devil, but perhaps only make him more earnest after occupation. Nothing
will save from it but the positive occupation of it by another, who will not,
and need not, give it up. So we must bring Christ into everything; or, by that
in which He is not, we shall find we have but made room for another - Christ's
opposite. The parable has application in many ways, and in many degrees, to
those who are Christ's people, as well as to those who are not. Our idle hours
are not idle. Our useless occupations have a use - if not for Christ then
against Him. Our so-called recreations may be but the frittering away of
energy, and seeds of distraction. We are in a world where on every side we are
exposed to influences of the most subtle character; where corruption and decay
are natural; and where all that is not permeated by divine life becothes the
speedy subject of decay and death. To a beleaguered garrison a holiday may be
fatal. We cannot ungird our loins here, or unbuckle our armour. It is not
enough to withstand in the evil day, but having done all, still you must stand.
So, if you leave Christ at the door of the counting-house, you will have to
contend alone, or give place to the devil within the counting-house. No, Christ
must be a constant Saviour as to every detail of our walk and ways.
How
important it is to be right here! It is not a mere question of points of
detail; it is a question of truth of heart to Him, which affects every detail -
the whole character and complexion of our lives, indeed. So you must not wonder
at a question of cattle being concerned with a deeper question of salvation
itself - looking at salvation as not merely being from wrath and condemnation,
but of salvation from the sin also which brings in these. Be persuaded of it,
beloved friends, that only thus can we find, in the full power of it, what
salvation is.
We have been looking at this from the side of
responsibility. Surely it is good to look at it also from the side of
salvation. Until you are clean delivered in these three respects you cannot be
happily with God, nor even safe. Of course, I am not talking about reaching
heaven: you may be safe in that respect. But whatever you have that is not
Christ's, that is the world's still, will drag you back into the world. Can you
go to your business and shut the door upon Him and He not feel it, and you not
feel it? Can you say to Him: Lord, Sunday is yours, and Monday is mine; or,
Lord, there is your tenth, and these nine are mine - and feel perfectly
satisfied that all is right with Him? Better keep it all back, than give in
that fashion; for the amount given just hinders from realizing where we are.
In this great world of sorrow and of evil, Christ has interests dear
to His heart - how dear, no one of us has perhaps a notion of. Souls lie in
darkness to whom His Word would give light, and in bondage to whom it would
bring deliverance. He says to us, I count upon my people to do this. How can we
answer to Him for this confidence He has placed in us? Shall we say, Lord, I
have had to keep up with my neighbours, to provide for the future, to do a
great many things which I thought of more importance? Or, shall we say, Lord,
Thou art so great, so high, so powerful, Thou surely canst not want my help in
a matter like this! Or, Lord, Thou art so gracious, I am sure Thou wilt accept
anything I may bring. I would not suppose Thee a hard Master, to want me to
bring Thee much? Alas, what shall we say? Shall we not rather own with broken
hearts how little we have valued Him?
The "doctrine of Balaam" thrives
upon the heartlessness of God's pwn people. Do not let us imagine, because we
denounce the mercenary character of what is current all around, that we can
have no share in upholding what we denounce. It is far otherwise. If we have,
or are giving cause to those who sneer at the advocates of "cheap religion," we
are giving it the most effectual possible support.
Beloved, I have
spoken out my heart, and I must pray you bear with me. Who that looks around,
with a heart for Christ, upon all the abominations practiced in His name, but
must be led to ask, Did not all this evil spring out of the failure of His own
people, of those who at heart loved Him? And further, how far are we perhaps
now, unsuspectedly, helping on the very evils we deplore? Do we not pray for
Him to search out our hearts, and shall we shrink from having them searched
out? If the search detects nothing, we need not fear it. If it shows us
unanticipated evil, it is well to realize that the truthful judgment of the
evil is ever the truest blessing for our souls. It will cost us something, no
doubt, to walk in what is ever a narrow way-a race, a warfare, calling for
energy and self-denial. But ah, beloved, it will cost us more, much more, to
have Christ walk as a stranger to us, because our paths and His do not
agree.
But the door is open, beloved, to come back. He has never shut
it. The one thing so greatly lacking now is whole-hearted integrity. So few
without some secret corner in their hearts they would not like to have searched
out by Him. That corner must be searched out, for He must be a Saviour after
His own fashion; and if we would not have it, we can have little apprehended
the fullness and reality of His salvation. Not alone does He save from wrath -
He saves from sin. It is in subjection to His yoke that we find rest.
God
grant it to us for His name's sake even now.
LECTURE IV. THE WOMAN JEZEBEL,
Home | Links | Literature