IT was one of the principles of the ancient Jewish law, that “in the
mouth of two or three witnesses shall every word be established.” I have
already exceeded that requirement in having brought before you no less
than five “witnesses” to establish the truth and inspiration of the
Scriptures; but I propose, if God permit, to conclude my series with two
more:
They shall be very simple witnesses, and to the eye of man quite
insignificant. They shall not have in themselves any apparent power of
testimony; but yet I believe they are intended to speak in words of
irresistible argument to all thinking men, and I trust will carry home to
the hearts of those who are not “willingly ignorant” the most conclusive
evidence of the truth of God. I refer to the two Sacraments of the
Lord’s appointment—Baptism and the Lord’s Supper. In 1 John v. there
appears to be a distinct reference to the Jewish rule, and there are
three witnesses mentioned as bearing testimony upon earth—“the Spirit,
and the water, and the blood.” The passage is not an easy one, and it
behoves us to speak with caution. But I cannot help believing that by
“the Spirit” is meant the testimony of the Holy Ghost in His inspired
Word; and by “the water and the blood,” the two Sacraments, Baptism and
the Lord’s Supper. It is to the testimony of these two latter witnesses
that I now propose to refer; but we must remember there is nothing in
either of them of a conspicuous or ostentatious character. In neither
one nor the other is there anything like a material monument, nor
anything to attract the attention of “the world;” there is no erection of
granite or marble, nor any inscription like those on the stones from
Nineveh; but they are both simple acts of the simplest possible
character. A little water is all that is visible in the one, and a
little bread and wine in the other; and yet, though so simple, so
insignificant, and so absolutely without any visible monument, for the
last eighteen hundred years they have been bearing their testimony as
“witnesses” for Christ. Let us then conclude our series by the
examination of their evidence, and let us consider two points: (1) Their
present position; and (2) When and how did they acquire it? May God so
bless our study by the Holy Ghost as to bring home conviction to all our
hearts and understandings.
(1.) _Their present position_.
In order to realise this we must not confine our thoughts to our own
personal enjoyment of our own sacred privileges. We may come to the
Lord’s table as individuals, and find in the sacred feast such “a
strengthening and refreshing of our souls” as may be to us the most
conclusive and satisfactory evidence of the certain reality of the grace
of God; but our personal experience would be no evidence to others, and
our own enjoyment would not be regarded by the sceptic as a proof; it
would be evidence to ourselves, but not to him, nor to the world at
large. We must therefore take a wider range, and consider only such
evidence as lies within the cognizance of all observing men. For this
reason I have selected their position in the Church of Christ at this
present time. I am not about to ask you to consider past history, but
present facts; facts that may be tested by every one, facts belonging to
this enlightened nineteenth century; and what I ask you to do is quietly
and patiently to investigate facts.
Taking then our standpoint in this year of our Lord, 1883, we find that
the Church of Christ has been extending for just 1850 years, and that
throughout that time it has been spread by countless agents, and in
countless manners, in every direction throughout the world. Starting as
it did from Palestine, it has now taken root on every continent, and it
has borne the sacred Name of our blessed Saviour into every quarter of
the globe.
But while there has been this world-wide spread of Christianity, and
while there is at this present time this widely-extended acknowledgment
of the Name of the Lord Jesus, it is at the same time perfectly obvious
that there are within the Church of the baptized immense diversities both
of creed and practice. There are different Churches standing aloof from
each other. There is the Church of Rome in conflict with what is called
the Greek Church on the one hand, and with us Protestants on the other.
What is commonly called the Greek Church consists again of many branches,
or is rather an aggregate of many independent Churches not united under
any one head. There is the original Greek Church, the Russian, the
Syrian, the Coptic, and the Abyssinian. So in the Church of Rome there
are various orders, besides the great division between the secular and
regular clergy; while we all know, to our heartfelt sorrow, how those who
are united in their love for the great Scriptural principles of
Protestant truth are still divided into various denominations. Thus,
looking at the Church of Christ as a whole, we find it spread into so
many places that it encircles the world; and broken up into so many
sections that it is hard to trace what we may term any visible corporate
union. There is separation as to place, and divergence as to Church
organisation.
But now we come to the wonderful and indisputable fact that,
notwithstanding all this separation and all this divergence in all
countries and many systems, wherever we find the name of Christ there we
find His own two Sacraments; and wherever we meet with Christianity there
we are sure to meet with Baptism and the Holy Communion, God’s two
witnesses to His inspired truth.
This is sufficiently wonderful if you think merely of the geographical
extension of the Church. The visible Church is spread amongst different
nations, in different climates, and with different habits; some of which
are leading the way in civilization and science, while some are sunk in
barbarism; some leading the thoughts of the world, and some apparently
never thinking at all; some absorbed in trade, and some so completely
without trade that they have not even a currency. In some there are old
churches that have existed for centuries, and in some churches of modern
formation recently called into being through colonization and missions;
and yet, though the two Sacraments are so perfectly simple that there is
nothing in themselves to spread or perpetuate themselves, wherever you go
you find them. Place and space have made no difference. Go to Europe,
Asia, Africa, or America, it makes no difference; wherever you go there
you find God’s two Sacraments essentially bound up with the Christianity
of the people.
But what is more wonderful still, the divergences in the faith have not
destroyed them. There are different Churches most earnestly opposed to
each other, as the Church of England to that of Rome, and the Church of
Rome to that of Constantinople; but all have the two Sacraments. So at
home there are various denominations, sadly disunited, and in some cases,
I fear I must say, opposed; but yet amidst them all there remains this
remarkable fact, that, with one or two perfectly insignificant
exceptions, they all observe these same two Sacraments. And what makes
this more remarkable still is the fact that throughout Christendom there
are immense diversities of opinion on the particular subject of these
Sacraments; and there is scarcely any subject around which controversy
has raged more fiercely. Both Baptism and the Lord’s Supper have been
the subject of sharp contention; and they have both been misinterpreted,
misrepresented, and misused. Desperate heresies have been attached to
them both, and they have become the battle-field for most determined
theological conflict; but, notwithstanding all this confusion of tongues,
the great fact still remains, that after eighteen centuries of conflict,
here they are still. Controversy has not destroyed them; perversion has
not put an end to them; separation has not divided them; but in the midst
of all disturbing forces they remain. Wherever you find Christianity,
there you find them. In all parts of the world, and in all Churches on
the face of the earth, they are inseparably connected with the confession
of Christ; and, as a matter of fact, there is not a Church in Christendom
which in some mode or other does not observe them both.
Now in the study of this fact we must remember, as I said at the outset,
that they are not like solid marbles set up by some great men, and so
remaining as national monuments; but they consist in very insignificant
actions, and their existence depends on their being observed by millions
of insignificant individuals. They are preserved, not by state authority
or church councils, but by the loving hearts of millions of scattered
individuals, who, though it may be in much confusion, desire to act on
the bidding of their Lord. Thus they become exceedingly like the rainbow
spanning the heaven. That beautiful bow, the token of the covenant, is
formed by the reflection of the sun from unnumbered millions of minute
drops of falling rain. Each drop is in itself a mere speck, a nothing,
falling rapidly, but shining as it falls; and all these millions of
falling drops combine to form the one beautiful arch, which remains
perfectly still, and bridges the interval between earth and heaven. So
these two Sacraments are maintained throughout the world by the faith and
piety of millions of insignificant and short-lived individuals, each one
undesignedly fulfilling his own little part; while the grand combination
of all these millions of little individualities maintains in all places
and in all ages the twofold token of the everlasting covenant of God.
(II.) Thus far I have spoken simply of facts, of facts open to the
observation of all men, and, as far as I know, denied by none. I cannot
imagine that even an infidel would deny any of them. I may proceed then
to my next question: _When and how did these two Sacraments acquire this
position_? As a matter of fact they are observed throughout Christendom;
when then were they introduced, and how did this observance begin? To
this question our answer is simple; for we believe that they were
ordained by Christ Himself, the one as His last act before His
crucifixion, and the other before His ascension. To us therefore who
receive the Scriptures the whole thing is perfectly clear, and the fact
is explained by the principle that all who receive the Lord Jesus Christ
must receive, in obedience to His will, the two Sacraments which He
Himself ordained.
But suppose there were any one who did not receive the Scripture account,
it would be extremely interesting if such an one would endeavour to
explain the introduction of either Sacrament, and would tell us who
introduced it, and when, and how. If any person were now to endeavour to
invent a third Sacrament he would find it very difficult to obtain for it
a general acceptance through the world. The Church of Rome endeavoured
to establish a new dogma respecting the Pope’s infallibility, and what
was the result? They split off a large body of their own people, and
they totally failed to introduce their dogma amongst any of the other
churches of Christendom. In this respect the divisions of Christendom
tend greatly to confirm the evidence of the Sacraments; for they show the
complete impossibility of the introduction of these Sacraments at a later
date than that claimed for them in the Scriptures. If Protestants had
invented them, Roman Catholics would never have received them; or, to go
back to a later date, if they had been invented by Rome they would never
have been received at Constantinople. The Church of God is like a
multitude of channels, all radiating from one centre. If you pour water
into one channel you produce no effect on all the others, for the water
will not pass across from channel to channel; but if there be a spring in
the centre itself, then they are all filled together, for they all draw
from one fountain-head. Just so it is with the Sacraments. If they had
sprung up in any one branch of the scattered Church, they might have
remained there; but there is no power on earth that could have carried
them across into the other branches. So that now, as they are found in
every branch, and in every part of every branch, the only possible
explanation is that they have come direct from the fountain-head; that
therefore the Scriptural narrative is perfectly true; and that they were
founded, as there recorded, by our Lord Himself, and none other. As they
came from Christ, the original centre, they spread through Christendom;
as they were founded by the Author of Christianity, they are observed
wherever Christianity exists. If any one doubt this conclusion, let him
tell us where, when, and by whom they were first invented, and how after
that they were spread through the world.
But we have not done yet; for if we believe that the two Sacraments were
founded by our Lord Himself at the time and in the manner recorded in the
Scriptures, there are certain very important results which follow.
Let us confine our thoughts to the Lord’s Supper. It was clearly
declared at the time of its institution to be a memorial of the death and
passion of our blessed Lord and Saviour. It was founded, moreover, on
the night before His suffering, and that amongst men who were
eye-witnesses of all that passed. Such is the statement of the
Scriptures, which we now follow up by the fact that, from that day to
this, wherever the name of Christ is named, there has never been a break
in the observance of that memorial. Now what is the plain, simple, and
obvious conclusion from all this? Is it not surely this, that the facts
actually took place? The Lord’s Supper is a memorial of the crucifixion,
and it was founded among persons who were eye-witnesses of the whole
transaction. Now if these facts had never occurred, and if the Book
recording them had not been a true Book, how could the memorial have ever
got its hold on the Church? The truth of the Book is proved by the
existence of the memorial. The Book and the memorial are bound the one
to the other. They stand and fall together; they cannot be separated.
But the memorial may be seen throughout Christendom as a visible fact.
It is, and always has been, co-extensive with Christianity. It is at
this present time open to the observation of any one; so, seeing the
memorial, we believe the Book, and are fully, perfectly, and historically
satisfied as to all the great facts of the crucifixion.
But we must not stop there; for the memorial is not merely a proof of the
facts of the crucifixion, but is also a proof of the doctrine of the
cross. We have found that the memorial could not possibly have been
introduced at any subsequent date, but that its institution must be
traced up to the fountain-head, even to the Lord Jesus Christ Himself,
and those words of His, “Do this in remembrance of me.” But this is not
the whole of the passage, and we must not forget those other words, “This
is my body, which is given for you,” and, “This cup is the new testament
in my blood, which is shed for you.” The memorial, therefore, is not
merely a memorial of the death, but of the purpose of it, and of the
great principle which underlies the whole. It is a monument of those two
sentences, “given for you” and “shed for you.” If it were a granite
column instead of a simple service, these would be the two sentences to
be engraved upon it; or if men wished to make the inscription shorter
still, they might be content with two words, and write “For you;” for
these two words contain the pith and marrow of the whole matter. It is
not, therefore, merely the fact that He died of which the Lord’s Supper
is a divinely-appointed witness, but the fact that He died as a vicarious
satisfaction for sin—“a propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only,
but also for the sins of the whole world.” It is well for us, therefore,
to look carefully at the certain and undeniable fact, that in this
nineteenth century the Lord’s Supper is observed in some form or other
wherever the name of the Lord Jesus Christ is known; to consider well the
utter impossibility of its being introduced at any period subsequent to
the foundation of the Gospel, or by any person except by Him who said,
“This do in remembrance of me;” and so to accept the assurance of its
testimony that the body there given was given _for us_, and the blood
there shed was shed _for us_. Divine atonement then is the great truth
visibly signed and sealed to us by God’s divine memorial; and when we
kneel together before that table of His, we may accept for our own soul’s
everlasting peace, not merely the fact that He died, but the truth that
He died as a propitiation for our sins; that His body was given in our
behalf, or _for us_, and His blood shed in our behalf, or _for us_; and
that therefore, without any further propitiatory sacrifice, or any
supplementary mode of reconciliation, believing in Him, we are perfectly,
immediately, and eternally free.
* * * * *
LONDON:
THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND BOOK SOCIETY,
11, ADAM STREET, STRAND.
* * * * *