NOTES2 Corinthians 1:1. Timothy.—“Not later (see 1 Corinthians 4:17) and perhaps rather earlier than he wrote the First Epistle, Paul sent (Acts 19:22) Timothy to Macedonia, with instructions to go on to Corinth if he could, of which, however (1 Corinthians 16:10), Paul was uncertain. We now find Timothy with Paul in Macedonia. But Paul’s anxiety (2 Corinthians 2:13; 2 Corinthians 7:5) makes us quite certain that, before his own arrival in Macedonia and his meeting with Titus, Timothy had not brought him tidings about the reception of the First Epistle by the Church at Corinth. Now the warmth of the Second Epistle suggests that it was written very soon after the arrival of Titus; and its silence about the coming of Timothy makes it unlikely that he arrived from Corinth with Titus or between the arrival of Titus and the writing of this letter. Consequently, either, contrary to Paul’s expectation, Timothy arrived at and left Corinth before the First Epistle, or he was, for reasons unknown to us but easily conceivable, unable to go there. In either case, we have no certain indication whether Timothy remained in Macedonia till Paul’s arrival, or returned to Paul before he left Ephesus, was with him there during the tumult, and went with him to Troas and to Macedonia. But this latter supposition would more easily account for the absence (except 2 Corinthians 1:19) of any further reference to Timothy in this Epistle. Doubtless he was with Paul when Titus arrived. And his close connection with the founding of the Church at Corinth (2 Corinthians 1:19; Acts 18:5) accounts sufficiently for the presence of his name here, supporting the Apostle’s earnest pleading.” (Beet.) Notice margin, “the brother.” Achaia.—Not the whole Roman province, but the smaller, classical Achaia. Of the former, not Stephanas (1 Corinthians 16:15), but Dionysius and Damaris and others (Acts 17:34) were the “firstfruits.” Notice the evidence of a widespread work beyond Corinth (cf. 1 Thessalonians 1:7-8). .—2 Corinthians 1:1-2[This Salutation traverses much the same ground as that of 1 Corinthians 1:1-3, which see. Dr. Lyth’s collection of Homiletic Suggestions gives:] 2 Corinthians 1:1-2. The Happiness of the Church. I. Its ministers are messengers of Christ; are chosen by God; are diversely gifted as Paul and Timothy. [The twelve in the ship (Mark 6:45-50) were the Church in germ, and in miniature. “The ship carried” the Church “and its fortunes.” The diversity of the twelve men, all apostles, was anticipatory and typical. No type of character, no diversity, or capacity, or education, etc., comes amiss to the hand of the Great Builder. Every style of man may be an instrument with which He can build something, if only the man be willing simply to be used.] II. Its constitution is Divine; holy; catholic [“with all the saints,” etc.]. III. Its wealth of privilege.—Rich in its variety [“grace and peace”?]. Divine in its communication. Inexbaustible in its supply. [Such a source cannot “run dry.” “All my fresh springs are in Thee” (Psalms 87:7).] Also:— 2 Corinthians 1:1. The Christian Ministry is— I. Ordained by the will of God [i.e. not only the “order of the ministry,” but the man, Paul or other]. II. United by bonds of brotherhood.—[Pares all, though there be a primus]. III. Devoted to the service of the Church—[I.e. the greeting “unto the Church” is typical of Paul’s whole relation to the Corinthians. The ministry is not the Church. It exists for the sake of the Church. It exists to bring “grace and peace” to the Church. If it do not, its raison d’être is gone. If a minister do not, his raison d’être is gone.] NOTES2 Corinthians 1:3.—John calls the Son a “Comforter” (1 John 2:1). Christ calls the Spirit a “Comforter” (John 14:16, “another” also implying that He Himself had been such to the disciples). Here Paul calls the Father a “Comforter.” Notice how “comfort” runs through 2 Corinthians 1:3-7 (disguised as “consolation” in A.V.); parallel to the repeated “affliction” (same in original as “tribulation,” “trouble”). Mercies.—Also Romans 12:1; Philippians 2:1; Colossians 3:12; Hebrews 10:28.2 Corinthians 1:5.—Notice the contrasted “of” and “through.” As to “of,” see 2 Corinthians 4:10; Hebrews 13:13; Philippians 3:10; Colossians 1:24; Mark 10:38; (Matthew 10:40; Acts 9:4). (Also Homily on 1 Corinthians 12:27.) Notice “unto us,” not “in”; external trouble mainly.2 Corinthians 1:6.—Then Paul is no such masterful, self-seeking, worthless man as some at Corinth would represent (cf. 2 Corinthians 1:24). His “afflictions” as well as the “comfort” are (not strictly “vicarious,” but) directly, and in the intention of God, for the Corinthians’ sake,—“on behalf of your,” etc. Is effectual.—I.e. the “comfort” works out with practical effect in … (patient) enduring.—Good expository use and example of the word, and the thing, “patience” as exhibited in New Testament; there being always, and here, an element of fortitude in the patience.2 Corinthians 1:7. Stedfast, knowing, etc.—Q.d. “I speak hopefully, as a man who has tried it, and who knows what to expect for you.” .—2 Corinthians 1:3-7 Great Theme: Comfort and Affliction. I. Two counterpart facts of life.— 1. It is a world of “affliction,” but over it there rules a God of “comfort.” This pair of facts is but a special form, of another pair: “sin,” “grace.” Directly or indirectly, affliction springs from sin; not necessarily a man’s personal sin, but from the presence of evil in the world. The Bible traces “evil,” the manifest and painful disorder which has affected that which was as manifestly meant to be God’s beneficent scheme of things, to the intrusion of moral evil; and in parallel fashion, there is no “comfort” which, directly or indirectly, is not “grace,”—it “abounds through Christ,” just as the “affliction” is but a lower result of the moral evil whose climax was reached in “the sufferings of Christ,”—part of that work of God in Christ whose aim and goal is a “restitution of all things” (Acts 3:21). 2. Accordingly “comfort” is very much more than a palliative; it is the beginning of a cure.—“All comfort” is thoroughly in Paul’s manner. It means “all forms and kinds and aspects of comfort,” reminding us of the many sidedness of the grace. Such “comfort” as God gives is not merely an anodyne for a smart; nor only a balm for a wound, a solace for sorrow, rest for weariness; not words of reassurance for fear and for distressful thoughts. It is a mother folding her crying babe to her bosom (Isaiah 66:13); but it is more. It is not merely tender help; it is strong help. It gives not only relief and ease; it gives strength. It is not only that the young one flies to the mother’s wing for shelter and cowers away under it, almost as full of fears there as it was when outside. It is the weak man taking his stand boldly by the side of the friend who has come to his help in answer to his call, and in the company of his strong helper finding himself strong to fight and do. Not merely pitying, sympathetic words which give solace under crushing burdens, so that the spirit is not crushed, though the strength may be overborne (2 Corinthians 7:6; Philippians 2:27); but new strength given, and help which takes hold of the burden or the cross along with us at the opposite end [see this, perhaps, in the work of the “Comforter” in the original word of Rom 8:26], so that we carry better the load of affliction. And, which comes still nearer to the root purpose of all God’s comfort, the “Comforter” gives a transformed view of, and meaning to, all “affliction,” till at last we “rejoice (exultantly) in tribulations [same word as afflictions here] also” (Romans 5:3). Thus we are not simply conquerors, but “more than conquerors,” of all the “affliction” of life; we have not simply escaped, nor escaped unharmed, nor even come off with victory, but have been served by all that came against us to hinder or overwhelm; and this is the beginning of a reconstitution of the broken order, so that all things once more serve man, their designated king (Hebrews 2:7-8). Παράκλησις in its fullest range covers no less than this. Strength must never be omitted from our conception and our expectation of it. But, no doubt, through this section the tenderness is very prominent, and it should never be forgotten in our conception of God. II. The Divine source of comfort.— 1. Pointed out in the Critical Notes that here, and here only, the Father is made a Paraclete, a Comforter. As how should He not be, seeing that He is “the God of our Lord Jesus Christ”? I.e. as we know Him He is the God, the very thought of Whom is inseparably bound up with that of His love in the gift of Christ. We never think of Calvary but we think of Him Whose love gave us that Saviour; we never think of that Mercy but our quick heart-instinct traces all up to God. Our helper in “afflictions” is, then, the God Who is the sworn enemy of Sin, Who therefore gives a gracious help for what is fundamentally a moral evil. He comforts, as part of the work He set Himself to accomplish in the Lord Jesus Christ. 2. So His other names here describe Him as well as indicate Him.—All the names of God do so. They are in detail that “Name” of God which His people know, and trust in Him accordingly (Psalms 9:10). Each several name is given according to the special phase of His one work of grace which may happen to be prominent. Manifestly the name is not here chosen at haphazard, or even for its beauty [“a nice name to use”], but is appropriate. He has always an appropriate “name” for every need of our life. He is “the Father,” Whose unfailing characteristic is so surely to be merciful, that mercies must spring from His heart in Christ toward us. [What men may find Him apart from Christ and redemption grace, is another matter altogether.] [Cf. “root of bitterness” (Hebrews 12:15), which is more than “a bitter root.” A bitter root might bring forth pleasant fruit or flowers. A “root of bitterness” can bear nothing but bitterness. So] a “God of comfort” or “a Father of mercies” is much more than a Father Who is merciful, or a God Who is merciful, or a God Who actually comforts. It is a God, a Father, Who, as we know Him in connection with the “Lord Jesus Christ,” cannot be conceived of in any contrary association of ideas. As is His name, so is He. 3. What a plea then is “For Thy Name’s sake”!—If He were to deny His “comfort” to an “afflicted” soul, He would give the lie to His very Name. There is a promise in such a name as this which He has put into Paul’s lips, for the use of the whole Church. The man who in his need calls to his help the “God of all παράκλησις,” may take his stand on the very name he invokes. He has there a hold, so to say, upon God. III. The end of all comfort.— 1. The immediate purpose was no doubt the help of Paul himself. One man is worth God’s helping; not only a man “of so much importance” to the world as Paul, “so necessary” to the work of Christ, but every man for whom Christ “thought it worth while” to die. “Through Christ,” the Christ Who is that man’s Christ as truly as He belongs to any other, that humblest, poorest, most obscure man may expect the “comfort,” and that “abounding.” 2. But very characteristic of the Spirit of Christ in St. Paul that he rather fastens attention upon the service which both his trials and his strength did to the Corinthians and to all believers. “We live for you” (2 Corinthians 4:15; 2 Corinthians 5:12-13); “we suffer affliction for your sake; we are comforted for your benefit.” The word “vicarious” has acquired a special application in the vocabulary both of formal theology and of the experimental life. It would be using words to confuse thought, therefore, to speak of Paul’s sufferings or comfort as vicarious. It would be apt to set up the idea of a parallel or a community where “the sufferings of Christ” are unique. His are all that Paul’s are here. But Paul’s sufferings stop short of being all that His were for the Corinthians. The suggestion of the very conception of such a parallelism fills Paul with horror (1 Corinthians 1:12). With that reservation, note how a Christian is partaker with Christ, in that what he suffers, and the help he gets, may benefit—and are taken up into the many-sided purpose of God’s government “that” they may benefit—others who are under tribulation. 3. The martyrdoms of the Church’s history have not been waste of life, even when some of the choicest of its men and women have gone to death. “Take, brethren, for an example of suffering and of patience,” etc. (James 5:10). Their comfort “is effectual,” in that they who behold them suffer and triumph are able in their turn to endure and go through with the like sufferings. Every sick saint, perhaps for years a sufferer, helpless,—“useless,” such are tempted to say,—has a distinct field of service open in that he is made the concrete example, the specimen case, by which God teaches those who wait upon, or who in any way come into contact with, the sufferer, how true and how real is the “comfort” of which the promises stand written in the Word (2 Corinthians 1:20), and are pledged in the very gift of Christ. The careless, the young, the incredulous, who dismiss preaching as “professional,” or at best as a beautiful but very chimerical idea, the fearful though believing Christian,—these all see and believe what they would not hear and expect for themselves. An afflicted sufferer, full of the “comfort,” is a Fact. Many turn away from a sick-room with a firmer belief in the supernatural, and Divine, and gracious; with a settled expectation that they also, after all, shall find sufficient “comfort.” Without a word being spoken, the sufferer is a sermon, a message, a revelation, a gospel, to many a visitor. If words are spoken, with what force do they come! That sufferer is an expert. He speaks out of the fulness of knowledge. You may silence an advocate, but can do nothing against a witness. How a preacher understands Paul’s logic in 2 Corinthians 1:4. With such specimen “cases” in his mental note-book, he pronounces, he preaches, he exhorts, he encourages, he pledges “the God of comfort” to the afflicted soul, with the assurance of the experienced physician who has in his own profession studied a variety of cases, of many types, ages, conditions. He speaks no theories merely, but verified truth. And if he too has been the subject upon whom the Great Teacher has been pleased to make His experiment, by him to teach the students of God’s ways gathered round his sick-bed, with what power does he afterwards, in his pulpit, or in his pastoral round, “comfort others with the comfort wherewith,” etc. None can speak with such prevalent authority. At least, God can make noblest use of, men listen most readily to, the man who “knows.” It is worth the affliction, to be able to stand by another afflicted soul and bring one’s comfort to the help of his burdened strength or failing faith. Thus God designs to make men “comforters” of men. IV. Hope springing from “comfort” in “affliction.”—[The, supplying “are” instead of the “shall ye be” of the A.V., leaves the object of Paul’s hope unexpressed, and more than a little uncertain. Still, it may perhaps be taken as a hope of their safe and victorious passage through the afflictions just then pressing upon them. The difference between the A.V. and the will simply be that in the A.V. this is expressed, and the ground of his hope is his own experience; whereas in the it is left unexpressed, and the ground of his hope is what he knows to be actually their experience. In either case the general principle of the argument remains the same. In the words of Rom 5:3 sqq., “experience works hope.”] 1. A Christian’s “hope” is a very much stronger thing than sometimes expresses itself in the very equivocal phrase, “I hope so”; very much more than an earnest wish, a longing glance of desire, with perhaps a half-expectation. “Hope is everywhere in Scripture the inspiring grace of the great conflict, being both passive and active. It is a grace that, like Patience, has many aspects. The word itself has a wide range of meanings.… Hope is one of the theological graces, with Faith and Charity, being a blessed combination of the two others. It is Faith looking only to the future, but looking at it with the expectation of love” (Pope, Compendium, iii. 214; who also says, p. 118:) “As it regards the future faith is hope; its confidence somewhat changes its character. Absolute confidence as to the present, it may increase as it regards the future.… It becomes, indeed, the full assurance of hope; a subtle and most beautiful expression that only experience can comprehend; the substantiation of things hoped for.” If faith gives strength to expectation, hope gives elasticity. Faith upholds under pressure or in face of conflict; hope gives buoyancy of spirit, which itself is a strength. 2. Paul reminds us that its “stedfastness” is no mere half-enthusiastic persuasion up to which men “work themselves” until they come to believe certain what they strongly desire. It is a most reasonable inference from facts. It rests (1) upon the character of God, “His Name,” and (2) on the accumulated facts of the past. It says: “Because of what we know in our own life, and have passed through [A.V.], and because of what we see and know in your life [], we have no doubt as to the future. What has been will be. ‘The God of all comfort’ has never yet suffered ‘affliction’ to arrive unaccompanied. These facts of life ‘hunt in couples.’ If ‘affliction’ is near, comfort is not far away. Look for it; lift up head and heart, and look around for it; you will surely see it drawing nigh. You are not going to be left to be overwhelmed. We know the past too well! And we know Him too well!” “Stedfast!” 3. No surer sign that this “hope” is not nature but grace than this, that after long years of “comfort” the heart so readily sinks under the newest pressure or in presence of the latest tribulation. Naturally, the Christian heart has perpetually to begin again with its lesson, and after nine hundred and ninety-nine deliverances quakes and fails at the thousandth trial. In fairness to the accumulated “proof” (Romans 5:3) of our God through many years of “experience” and “experiment”—indeed, in fairness to Him—accumulating experience should work accumulating hope, till at last the Christian man “exults in tribulations also, knowing that,” etc. But it is not often so. The heart argues with itself that such growing confidence is very logical, and condemns itself for doubting and fearing where it ought to hope and believe. But logic is powerless. The strength of hope is a gift, a grace, a Divine thing, not natural—the grace of the “God of hope” (Romans 15:13). NOTES2 Corinthians 1:8.—No certainty as to the “affliction” referred to, whether some outward persecution at Ephesus (query at Ephesus at all?) known to his readers (query that of Rom 16:4; cf. 1 Corinthians 16:9) (“brethren”), or such acute distress about the state of things at Corinth as nearly killed him, and at any rate utterly broke down his health and threatened to interrupt his work. [How little the Acts tell of the life of Paul: cf. chaps. 4, 11, 2 Corinthians 7:5. Notice, “mere weighed down exceedingly,” closely parallel to the original of 2 Corinthians 4:17.2 Corinthians 1:9.—Little to choose between “answer” and “sentence.” [In A.V. and text and margin change places.] “We ask ourselves ‘Shall this end in life or in death?’ Our ‘answer,’ our ‘sentence’ upon ourselves, is ‘Death.’ ” “If we live, it will be a real resurrection by the power of God.” Cf. “I die daily” (1 Corinthians 15:31).2 Corinthians 1:10.—Notice in, “will deliver,” variant reading for “doth deliver.” If this be accepted, then the latter clause only reiterates “will” with an expression of strong “hope.” The nature of the “deliverance” is as uncertain to us as is that of the peril. “From” is almost, “out of the hand of.”2 Corinthians 1:11.—Cf. for the thought Philippians 1:19. See the Corinthians working with and for Paul. Gift.—I.e. the “deliverance” primarily, but not excluding the “comfort,” or the “trust” (2 Corinthians 1:9), which had sustained him until deliverance came; and all is “grace,” a real “charism.” Persons.—Perhaps too technical a translation of what literally means “faces”; as if we saw a whole company with uplifted eyes and hands, and upturned faces, interceding for Paul. Also 2 Corinthians 4:15; 2 Corinthians 9:12 are parallel in thought. .—2 Corinthians 1:8-11 Death and Deliverance. I. Unrecorded dangers.— 1. What a glimpse of the life of Paul is given here. The Acts gives no “Life of St. Paul.” It is a chapter in the history of the growing “kingdom of God”; the things which Jesus went on to do and to teach after He was taken up. [But this lays precarious emphasis on “began” (Acts 1:1).] Paul, like Peter, is introduced, and dismissed, just when, and just so far as, the exigencies of that history demand. The whole story of the revelation and the historic evolution of the Kingdom is, in Old Testament and New Testament, written historically, and very largely biographically. But the men are secondary, the kingdom is first. 2. What adequate motive other than devotion to a Christ for the actuality of Whose life Paul had abundant evidence, would have carried him through so much? What he had surrendered is well known. What he gained in exchange he is now, and will eternally be, learning in the presence of his Christ. But the immediate return for the exchange was to be “in deaths oft,” as the climax of all other hardships. Yet through how much the love of Christ will carry a man! For wealth, or honour, or from fear of disgrace, men will do great things and will dare deaths. But to live a life of perpetual, “killing” hardship and peril, of obloquy and ignominy, of privation, of thankless and unthanked labour,—a “far more exceeding weight” of work and self-denial and shame and danger,—the only price with which to purchase such devotion is this: “The love of Christ constraineth me.” 3. The unrecorded martyrdoms, the unrecorded heroisms, of the Church are suggested. There are martyrdoms of daily life [“I die daily”] in the workshop, where one man has, with all wisdom and beauty of life, for years stood out a witness for, and a servant of, Christ; in the schoolroom and dormitory,—and there are no ingenuities of persecution and torture greater, in their proportion, than those devised by schoolboys and schoolgirls for a Christian confessor in their midst; at the table, where for years the husband has never broken a sullen silence towards his faithful wife except to complain, or sneer, or stab with keen words, because, and only because, she is a Christian; and the like. It is heroic, and has stirred the heart of the very persecutor, to see men, or even tender women, go to the stake with a song or a least a cheerful word, and stand quietly until the spirit escaped away, as in a chariot of fire, out of the midst of the flames which leaped up after it like disappointed hounds baulked of their prey. But the daily burden that presses “out of measure” until the most cheerful begin to say, “This will kill me”; the daily racking which tortures all that is finest and most sensitive in the nature; the daily danger which is faced in perilous mission-fields or in unhealthy city slums, as for Christ’s sake men and women go quietly forth morning after morning to the daily round,—this is carried, or borne, or done, without much comment, without indeed much notice. But One Heart knows it and rejoices in it. There is romance enough, heroism enough, martyrdom enough, in many quiet lives to kindle the enthusiasm of a Church or of a world, if it could only be known and read and written as He knows it, for Whom it is undertaken and faced and wrought. 4. He has a record where nothing is unwritten, nothing unrecorded; down to the last detail all is “entered up” in most perfect completeness; not a name which has borne anything, or been anything, for Him is omitted. So, too, there are— II. Unrecorded deliverances.—What a story will some unknown saints have to tell in heaven, of their daily death indeed, but also of their daily deliverances! Not alone such foremost heroes as Paul, but many a hard-pressed, yet triumphant, “nobody,” in the knowledge and reckoning of even their Christian fellows, will have a story which is really one of perpetual miracle, a perpetual “resurrection.” Often, literally, “as good as dead” on all human lines of estimation, taking death into practical, near account every day, in the laying out of plans and the undertaking of work for Christ. Each new morning a new Easter morning, a life renewed as by a real raising up of God’s own hand. Many a burden, many a battle, many a danger, is never known outside the secrecy of the man’s own heart; and many a deliverance too. There must, moreover, be many deliverances unrecorded in even the privacy of the man’s own knowledge. In each day’s common life there must be for every man many occasions when danger, and even death, has been very really near, but, just because the deliverance has been so complete, he has passed through all in the happy, secure confidence of ignorance. Every ordinary journey has its peril. Every day’s duty offers at many points opportunity to “death.” Men could not bear to think of, or to know, through, and out of, how much they are daily being delivered. III. Indirect blessing from these experiences.— 1. We may narrow 2 Corinthians 1:9 a little, and press its teaching with a particular application. The near prospect of death, if sanctified, (1) Destroys all trust in ourselves. At that moment the vanity of all human endeavour and resistance to “fate,” is palpable. If the grace of God be yielded to, all trust in self for salvation may at that moment be destroyed. No lesson harder to learn, or more urgently necessary than this. Fundamental that the man should learn to put all reliance for salvation, not on anything within the circle of his own life and character, but wholly and entirely to make salvation depend upon Christ and His work. Yet not until face to face with eternity—and not always even then—is fully seen the unreliableness of everything within the man himself—everything he has been and has done, or has not been and has not done—as a resting-place for hope of acceptance before God. Thus it (2) Disposes to trust in God. “ ‘To whom should we go?’ One moment more, and the mystery of the future will be a mystery no longer; where men have hitherto been inquiring, and speculating, and hoping or fearing, I shall know. One moment more and the world of which I do know something will have slipped from me, and I shall find myself in a world of which I know nothing. At home here, I shall be a stranger there, in a strange world. I am a sinner, and in one moment more, I shall find—what? What can I trust to for my ‘leap into the darkness’; what can assure me that I shall ‘light on my feet,’ and on sure ground of rest and peace? When I loose my hold, perforce, of a world of knowledge, and drop into a world which is entirely a matter of faith, what am I to trust to?” Nothing, except the promises of God in connection with the work of Christ. Invaluable and secure, or valueless and deceiving, will these in that supreme moment be. Trust in God, or nothing except a huge venture with an eternal risk. Happy if a man, thus shut up to trusting in his God in Christ does trust. But further there is (3) The hope of resurrection. And this rests securely on the power and declared will of the “God who raises the dead.” “The (declarations of the) Scriptures and the power of God” were the two “heads” of an argument which Christ presented for the consideration of Sadducee doubters or unbelievers (Matthew 22:9). An argumentum ad homines, of course, like the appeal of Paul to Agrippa. The Jew, such a Jew as even Agrippa, could hardly “think it i credible that God—God—should raise the dead” (Acts 26:8). 2. The knowledge of others is to be enriched by our experience of deliverance.—“We would not have you ignorant,” etc. And so, too, God would not have them ignorant, and, for the sake of the glory of the God of the deliverance, and for the strengthening of their faith, would have His people communicate their experiences. A widely applicable principle. A reticence on such subjects, partly the result of temperament, and partly a tradition in many sections of the Christian Church, seals the lips of many, whose experience of the ways of God is most extensive, and would be most precious and helpful to other souls. A groundless and not very natural idea that such things are “too sacred to speak about,” coupled with a dislike, which has its honourable side, to be made the object of attention and to be the subject of one’s own talk, robs the Church of much testimony which would be its wealth. It is not a question of speaking of such deliverances before unsympathetic persons, “casting pearls before swine,” but of imparting them to those who are often in the like perils and trials, and need the same help and encouragements. To such hearers, often hungry for such help as testimony of deliverance would afford, and finding not their smallest difficulty in the thought that they are singular in their own experiences, it is a revelation and an inspiration to hear a fellow Christian—crucifying self, doing violence to habit and temperament, for the sake of glorifying the Deliverer and of helping souls—break the silence and tell his story of “death” and “deliverance.” 3. A wonderful unity of heart and effort is called out by Paul’s experiences (see fuller Homily on 2 Corinthians 1:11). The Pauls always owe much to the unknown pleaders in the Corinths; to those who can only “help together” by their pleading and “supplication.” How many deliverances did Paul owe to the fact that in every Church there were some who loved him, and who followed him wherever he went with “supplications.” How much of such a man’s success was by the Divine Eye—which alone can analyse the intricacies of such a problem—traceable to the many prayers put up for Paul by grateful hearts in his many Churches. “Success” is a very complex thing in itself, and in the causes which contribute to it. But not the least of these are the prayers of helpers who can only help by prayers. Paul and his work, with its accompaniments of danger, “death,” “deliverance,” rises up in a towering eminence in the view of the past of the Church’s history. But it rested upon a broad-spread, and in great part hidden, base, not the least solid stratum of which was laid in the prayers of his many helpers, “fellow-wrestlers,” with each other and with him, in their prayers for him (Romans 15:30). 2 Corinthians 1:10. The God of Deliverance.—Psalms 68:28, “He that is our God is the God of Salvation.” An old “note” of the God of the Bible; ever true. I. Our lesson in grammar in God’s school.— 1. Can our heart conjugate the verb “deliver”? Yes. Present: “Doth deliver” [But query the reading?] Past: “Hath delivered.” Future tense: “Will deliver.” “God” in every case the “subject.” Whatever lesson we are slow to learn, we have had occasion enough to know this excellently well. He has given us plenty of practice. Yet the future tense does not at all times come very readily to our lips; we stammer at “Will deliver.” Our slow heart easily forgets “Hath delivered.” In the story of the goodness of our life, we find it hard to pick out in the sentence, in the incidents of to-day, the present tense with its nominative: “God doth deliver.” We will ask, as not the least mercy of His hand, a heart quick to pick Him out in the story, and to see His “deliverance” in every day’s common, commonplace, safety and help. 2. The difficulty is not all of our own heart’s creating. The very completeness of the “deliverance” in part creates it. We are brought through in such complete safety that we pass through in happy security, entirely ignorant that danger or need of help has been so near and so great. The monotonously ordinary security of a common day is sometimes—if only we saw it as He does who accomplishes it—a most marvellous “deliverance.” [Very often, indeed, He spreads “a table” for His people “in the presence of” their “enemies” (Psalms 23:5). He holds these back—in their impotent malice—while His guests eat His banquet of plentiful “goodness and mercy.” We see them, but banquet in peace, crying, “See how He doth deliver.”] 3. The Present is so closely linked with Past and Future that the present deliverance cannot be considered alone. It is rooted in the mercy of the past; it projects itself, inserts itself, [mortises itself,] into that of the future. The mercy of to-day—“doth deliver”—is only the newest, latest link of a chain of deliverances which reaches back to my earliest need, and will stretch onward to the latest moment of my life’s necessity. No mercy stands by itself; no deliverance is an isolated piece of goodness. No matter where the musing heart takes hold of the mercies of life, at whatever point it locates the Present Tense, it is led on backward, forward, by links of the closest association. Psalms 59:10 gets quoted with more than a verbal inaccuracy. It is false to the thought to say, “The God of my mercies.” The Psalmist says, and feels, more justly, “of my mercy.” Each incident of mercy is so closely linked with what precedes and follows, they follow so closely one upon another, that, in the review, they coalesce into one long “mercy” (Psalms 40:5). Indeed, to speak humanly, in the grammar of God’s thought there is no present, past, future. We use the words; we distinguish between the times. The deliverances emerge and present themselves to us, in order and temporal succession. But they are by no means separate and independent “deliverances.” They are incidents in one continuous deliverance. It is only human feeling which says, “Awake to help me!” (Psalms 59:4). Our God has no need to arouse Himself for each new emergency, to consider how to make at the moment some new provision for the new demand. [As in Creation, so in Grace,—and the two are one Work,—the “Father worketh hitherto” (John 5:17); He never takes His hand from the thing He is creating, from the life He is regulating and guiding. There are no briefest pauses in His attention and interest. There is no intermission, even for an instant, in His ceaselessly operative activity to “deliver.”] Must not be so overpressed as to become fatalism, with its inevitable, unalterable, predetermined order of incidents and persons, in a Christian man’s life and course. But he should thankfully remember that the daily new “deliverances” (in the widest sense) are parts of a lifelong Deliverance, details in the working out of “a Purpose” “to bring His many sons unto glory” (Romans 8:28; Hebrews 2:10). [Should be remembered also how central—as in the chapter, Romans 8., so in thought and fact—is the word “good” in Romans 8:28. The mere temporal “deliverance,” from perplexity, or persecution, or death, is not the main thing in the mind of the God of our “Deliverance.” These, indeed, are not always granted. [Sometimes the real “deliverance” is effected rather by His shutting up against us paths, doors, which we begged to be allowed to enter.] Such providential deliverances are given or withheld, according as will best subserve the “good,” the definition of which is the “conforming” each son of His family of adopted ones “to the image of the Son, the Firstborn amongst many brethren.” Such a deliverance from danger as Paul is thinking of, is not an unworthy thing for God to consult for, but its real purpose falls in with His larger plan of gracious working, in Paul and all whom his life may affect and influence, the goal of which is the perfected holiness of His people.] Present, past, future, are our human expression; the fact—of our deliverance, as of His purpose and love, Who is “I AM”—is a perpetually extended present of grace and power. II. Paul’s confidence rests upon the God who delivers.—One lifelong deliverance; because One Mind, One Heart, One God, in all the deliverances of life. For this reason Paul counts upon deliverance; he counts upon Him! The future is as certain as the past, or present, because He may as certainly be reckoned with. “He cannot deny Himself”—i.e. He cannot at any point be unfaithful to His pledged word in the past, to His proved character in the past, to the precedents He has set in the past. His past acts and deliverances are “words” from His heart; He has declared in them what manner of God He is, and will be. He cannot turn His back upon the Self of past days, or upon His past principles of action. He can do no other, and can be no other, than His record in the past. Present, Past, Future, therefore, proceed in orderly, secure development. He can so guide and deliver His people to-day that the present shall fit harmoniously on to the past, and prepare the way for the future, with perfect sequence and adaptation; and the future deliverance is a certainty. [Has stamped His own unity upon His work in creation. This truth in modern theories of “development” is that no new created thing is isolated, a mere new beginning; it is always in close relation to the past; it is the next stage in the unfolding of an Idea upon which the Creator is ceaselessly at work; however modified, the lines of the preceding forms are in it; in its turn it preludes, and suggests, the coming forms. So His own unity is stamped upon the working of His delivering providence. Deliverance follows upon, grows out of, deliverance; deliverance preludes, and leads up to, deliverance. The heart that knows God finds the analogy run very closely; and the argument in it is: “One God; the God of my mercy.”] [Or, with another natural analogy. Give the astronomer six weeks, six months, six years—the longer the better—to make and collate and study observations of a new planet; and he will soon tell you where it may be looked for six years, or sixty, or six hundred years hence. He has “found the law” of its orbit and its motion. Paul records: “Hath delivered,” and “doth deliver.” Not two observations, but many a thousand, are embodied in that; he has “found the law” of the providence of his God. He says “Will deliver” with all confidence. He knows where to look for and to find his God.] I. “We’ll praise Him for all that is past,II. We’ll trust Him for all that’s to come.”—Hymn by J. Hart. 2 Corinthians 1:11. Two Features in the Life of Citizens of the Kingdom of God. I. “Circulation” in the life of the kingdom of God.—The cycle of life begins in, and returns to, prayer. “Prayer” first wins a “Gift”; then, the “Gift” won, and exhibited in its blessed fruits, calls out “Praise.” Then the-grateful, adoring Church begins the round again: making known its fresh requests once more; again getting the new answer; and then again acknowledging the mercy with new Praise. [Observe how the objective efficacy of Prayer is here assumed; prayer which is petition, and not merely adoration, contemplation, communion, with God, etc. Prayer—the consentaneous prayer of many persons—prevails, not only to their own blessing, but to secure for another person, Paul, not merely a spiritual grace, but an actual deliverance from very extreme peril.] II. Union in the life of the kingdom.—The gift is bestowed in answer to the prayers of many; the thanks are given by many; many then help together in praying for the new deliverance. 1. There is solitary prayer which is of the mightiest; there is an offering of thanksgiving, in the holy privacy of the sanctuary within the heart, which is grateful exceedingly to God, but is a holy secret between the heart and Himself. But united prayer has a power all its own; united thanksgiving has a beauty and value all its own. [Cf. the strong figure in Romans 15:30 : “that ye strive [wrestle, agonise] together with me in your prayers for me.” As though, not one “wrestling Jacob,” but a Church every member of which is a “wrestling Jacob,” had all taken hold of, and were hanging upon, God, with “We will not let Thee go.”] 2. No Church is strong unless its individual members are strong, for prayer and for work. It is in secret prayer that they learn to pray. But the Church, meeting as such, for prayer and for thanksgiving, has a mighty power. United waiting upon God brought Pentecost; united waiting upon God had secured “deliverance” for Paul. There is a principle in the Church prayer meeting; a special promise belongs to it (Matthew 18:19). 3. The missionary agents of the Churches, in difficulty and peril, should be remembered in Church prayer, and thanksgiving rendered for their “gift” and mercy. [ 4. All the efficacy of Sympathy is utilised by such united prayer and thanksgiving; the Church does well to have its thanksgiving meetings, as well as its prayer meetings; sluggish hearts are stirred, flagging interest in one is aroused by zeal in another; beginners learn to pray, and learn to discover matter for praise, as they listen to the older and more experienced members.] [Further, remember that this “agreeing to ask” is very much more than that a given number of persons, all convinced that some certain object of desire is laudable or needful, concur in making request for the same thing. It goes deeper; it is a union of conviction and desire and petition, born of the common presence in each of them of One and the Same Spirit of prayer. They are one in the Body and in the Head. It is the one Mind, Life, Heart, of the Body breathing out its desire through each of the company who “agree to ask.” (“Prayer in the Holy Ghost,” Jude 1:20.)] NOTES2 Corinthians 1:12. Rejoicing.—stronger and more correct. Cognate word in Romans 5:2-3; Romans 5:11, where notice the varying translation; an exultant, sometimes defiantly exultant, joy. The “rejoicing” looks not backward to 2 Corinthians 1:17, but forward to the “testimony” etc., which occasions it. For.—Q.d. “You will thus pray, and give thanks, for us; we are not yet estranged; I have done, so far as I know, nothing on my part to estrange us.” Notice “holiness,” by a better reading; and “sincerity of God,” by a more literal translation; i.e. no sincerity of any innate goodness of character, but such sincerity as is the gift and work “of God.” “Unfolded, open, patent motive; pure and holy simplicity of motive; transparent sincerity of motive,” the three illustrations. Fleshly.—See 1 Corinthians 3:1, where, however, the reading is discredited. In … in.—For “with” and “by”; by a more exact translation and exposition of Paul’s thought of the contrasted life elements in which conduct might be rooted, and from which it might derive its inspirations and strength. Conversation.—In the wide sense of “conduct”; “If we so bore ourselves to any Church, much more did we to you at Corinth, although we be so misunderstood and misrepresented amongst you.”2 Corinthians 1:13.—“There is no double sense, no under-thought, no arriθre pensιe, in either what I write, or what you read in the words. What you yourselves know or by my letters and speech may know, of the writer;—that is all.”2 Corinthians 1:14. Glorying.—I.e. the matter of “glorying”; in 2 Corinthians 1:12, the act. “You were once proud of us, as you knew us; at least, ‘part’ of you were; you will have as good reason to be proud of us, to the end, I hope [cf. 1 Corinthians 13:12]; we were your boast, as you are ours.” No insincerity in such words of praise. They were true, and there was good reason that they should be true.2 Corinthians 1:15-16. In this confidence.—“I had no reason to fear to come, as some fancy and allege, when I changed my plan.” The change of plan referred to in 1 Corinthians 16:6-7. “Before” going to Macedonia, instead of to Corinth viβ Macedonia. In his original plan he had intended to return to Corinth from Macedonia, thus giving them a “second” visit, a “second grace” (“benefit”). As a fact, therefore, they had what was to have been the “second,” without having had the “first.” The “journey to Judζa” was in Paul’s mind in Acts 19:21, and, in spite of the passing uncertainty mentioned in 1 Corinthians 16:6, it was accomplished, Acts 21:15.2 Corinthians 1:17. Flesh.—Cf. “fleshly wisdom,” 2 Corinthians 1:12. “Was I a ‘Yes’ and ‘No’ man? Not knowing my own mind, or not keeping to my decisions, when I thought I did know it.”2 Corinthians 1:18.—The personal matter is of importance, because the character of the messenger may involve that of the message. “It was not a ‘Yes’ and ‘No’ Gospel.”2 Corinthians 1:19.—Observe the accumulated names of Christ. No “Yes” and “No” Christ either! (Cf. 2 Corinthians 11:10.) Silvanus.—The “Silas” of the Acts. Trace him in Acts 15:22; Acts 15:27; Acts 15:32; Acts 15:34; Acts 15:40; Acts 16:19; Acts 16:25, etc., Acts 17:4; Acts 17:10; Acts 17:14; Acts 18:5. (Cf. 1 Thessalonians 1:1; 2 Thessalonians 1:1.) Then he suddenly disappears from the Acts and Epistles, unless he be intended in 1 Peter 5:12.2 Corinthians 1:20.—See Separate Homily. gives well the corrected readings here and exact translation. Through us.—By whose instrumentality all this is proclaimed to men.2 Corinthians 1:21.—Notice the margin “into” for “in Christ.” The process of uniting which ends in union with, and life “in, Christ” is made prominent and, so to speak, visible. Cf. Ephesians 1:13-14. Prefer the text of A.V. and to the margin of the These are not, even in the order of thinking, respectively antecedent and consequent blessings, but one blessing, one gift of the Spirit, under two aspects.2 Corinthians 1:23.—Chap. 2 should begin here; no break after 2 Corinthians 1:24. Notice that the principle of a judicial oath is here, as in Matthew 26:63-64; as bearing upon Matthew 5:34. Notice “witness” for “record” in To spare you.—Q.d. the penalties he must have inflicted if he had come and been witness of their flagrant offences against Church order and even morality. What an implied power lies behind this restraint! (1 Corinthians 4:21). So he felt, and hastens to guard this claim to authority and to power to punish, against misconception and misrepresentation.2 Corinthians 1:24. Dominion.—For the (original) word, cf. 1 Peter 5:2, and for the thought Mark 10:42. Faith.—Q.d. the personal life of which faith is the characteristic (they are believers if they are Christians at all), and the great foundation secret. No question of their “creed” here. Not “lords” over, but “helpers” with, that their life might be made bright with “joy” (an object worth aiming at in itself). By faith ye stand.—Not, as used here, a general maxim, one of the axioms of the Gospel, but a statement of fact in regard to the Corinthians. I.e. the emphasis is not upon “faith” but upon “stand”; not, “It is by faith that you win and keep your status” but, “Imperfect as you are, yet you are still so far believers that you do keep your standing in Christ.” Q.d. (also) “We cannot overthrow you; you overthrow yourselves, if ye be overthrown at all.” .—2 Corinthians 1:12-22I. Observe how Paul meets criticism.— 1. Every public man gets it; invites it. We are perpetually, whether public persons or private, running the gauntlet of somebody’s scrutiny and “judgment.” If criticism be that of those who presumably are competent critics, a wise man will pocket his resentment at any unfair animus which may be associated with it, and, with the aid of the objective estimate of him, not too graciously furnished, will endeavour to see how much of truth there is in it. 2. Paul shows no bitterness against his Corinthian critics, nor does he “ride off on the high horse” and disdain reply altogether. There is a silence in the presence of criticism which is really obstinacy and pride. “If I cannot be trusted, I will say nothing.” To play at “despising criticism” is a game at which two parties can play, so far as the “despising” goes. Paul explains. It was not an unreasonable demand that he should explain his change of plan. The Christian minister, above all, must not “cut” or “drop” hastily, or in personal pique, even his unfairest critic. This may prove to be the necessity of the case in the end. But it should be the last step, reluctantly taken. If, moreover, he is the man’s pastor, he is under obligation to the man’s soul, even that man’s. Better to answer him temperately, and offer all reasonable explanation. Anybody can cut men off from friendship or from a Church. It is a greater thing to conquer, or keep, by winning the opponent’s judgment or respect and perhaps his esteem or affection. Sometimes—not always—patience, transparent sincerity, holiness, and explanation will do this. 3. Not resentfully, but solemnly, Paul offers his conduct to God’s examination. “I call God for a witness” etc. He can look himself in the face; he has “the testimony of his conscience,” etc. Under the penalty of God’s judgment “upon his soul,” he can challenge God to look into his heart and to examine his motives. We are reminded of the frequent protestations of innocence made by David in the Psalms [early in his life], made as before God. No real difficulty in them, to any man with any practical experience of life. It is one thing to lay bare before God that inmost life, which is for the most part only known to God, and to confess its sinfulness, not daring or desiring to do anything else; it is quite another thing, in regard to the official life, or even the private life so far as it is known (“acknowledged,” 2 Corinthians 1:14) to men by ordinary observation, and in regard to particular charges, to lay it before God for His verdict, appealing from man’s unfair, or prejudiced, or malicious, judgment of it to His perfect knowledge of the inmost motive and heart. In doing this there is no Pharisaism, no spiritual pride, no self-righteousness. God is on the side of right; the man who has walked in “holiness and sincerity of God” before Him may claim His judgment, and will not claim it in vain. 4. Happy then the man who has the “testimony of his conscience,” and can appeal even to his very critics in their honest mood (2 Corinthians 1:14). If a man will keep conscience and character right before God, he may leave God to take care for his reputation amongst men. If he can confront God, he may carry his head, not “high,” but with calm assurance, in the face of men. II. Observe for what reason Paul is sensitive to criticism.— 1. For one thing only. It is not necessary to suppose that he cared nothing for the goodwill, or even the good opinion, of his Corinthian people. “I don’t care for anybody’s judgment” need not necessarily be a Christian indifference (cf. 1 Corinthians 4:3). But there is a sensitiveness as to “what people think,” which is vanity and pride, hungry for praise. 2. To Paul his character is here a matter of concern chiefly because of his responsibility in connection with the Gospel he had in trust for God. “I don’t care about the character of the preacher, if I get a good sermon!” “The seed will grow, if it be real and have the life in it, whoever sows it!” “Cannot God save—has He not before now saved—by the word of wicked men?” All these are heard, and have enough truth in them to make them serviceable. But, as usual, they need a complementary truth to balance and guard them, and to give the whole round of what is true in the matter. Paul at any rate felt that if he were a man whose promises could not be relied upon—lightly made, lightly kept, lightly broken—there might be a question whether his view of the Gospel had been lightly come by, and accepted; whether it were a thing lightly held. A man who says and unsays in a breath, or in quick succession, who is shallow and fickle in the simple matters of everyday life, is he the man to whom God will really have revealed His Son and His Gospel? [For it is to be remembered that Paul, like every apostle, was not simply an expositor of a fixed and complete body of teaching, a record quite independent of him; as the modern preacher is. He was an original source, through which God was giving new truth to the world; through Paul, in part, was being given the growing Gospel of God in Christ. His character therefore stood in closer relation to his preaching than a modern preacher’s can. Still, it is true that] a minister may, must, be specially jealous of his good name, inasmuch as, justly or unjustly, any imputation upon him will be reflected upon the Gospel he preaches. Equivocation, falsehood, acted deception, no dependence to be placed upon principles, or character, or promises, are serious blots on the ministerial character. The mere suspicion of such things were serious. 3. And this goes higher. As the Gospel, so the Giver of the Gospel. If it were not Truth, absolute, reliable (1 Timothy 1:15), infallible, it might either compel us to modify our idea of the Christ Himself, or at best might be discredited or dismissed, as not from Him at all. Christ’s character cannot, as Paul’s conceivably might, be dissociated from that of the Gospel. As He is, it is. He repeatedly—it is one of the marked characteristics of His teaching—identifies Himself with the Gospel. He is the Gospel. 4. And yet again, as is the Gospel, as is the Christ of the Gospel, so is the God who gives the Christ. God is faithful, Christ is faithful, every promise is faithful, the Gospel which contains them all is faithful, and the very preachers are not unworthy of the Gospel they represent and proclaim. 2 Corinthians 1:12. [May be made the occasion of a sermon upon] Conscience. I. 1. Man, alone of God’s earthly creation, can know himself.—Paul can be the subject and object of an act of cognition and reflection. Paul can talk to himself about himself. One of the marks of his personality; one thing which marks in him the “image of God.” Also Godlike in this: can know and judge between “right” and “wrong,” in the moral sense, and according to God’s standard. [The creatures find out what brings pleasure, or what brings their master’s punishment. Men quickly find what is advantageous, or what means pain, trouble, loss. But moral “wrong” and “right” are more than this.] By self-consciousness man can know himself; by conscience can judge of himself, his thoughts, words, acts. Conscience can even judge conscience! [ 2. The “cor—” is a real personification. A man can, if he will, keep his inner self a secret, locked up from those who know and love him best; an inner shrine of privacy whose door he can close against all comers (1 Corinthians 2:11). “All,” except another Self who shares this knowledge along with him; from whom no secret can be hid; who knows everything, and will “have its say,” and pronounce its judgment, upon everything.] 3. Very little use in discussing whether this be a distinct faculty, or only the judgment exercising itself upon moral questions, as it might upon the wisdom or unwisdom of actions or motives. “Words, to no profit” (2 Timothy 2:14). Surest basis of any attainable knowledge is found in the Scriptural distinction between “soul” and “spirit.” [Primary text on this topic, 1 Thessalonians 5:23; the only complete enumeration of the elements of the (so-called) trichotomy of man’s nature. All three are mentioned elsewhere. Scripture consistent throughout in the distinctive use of “soul” and “spirit,” in both Old and New Testament. All Paul’s vocabulary of the religious life is built up upon the distinction. Notably in 1 Corinthians 2).] No animal is more than body + “soul.” The life of “body + soul,” with all their powers and faculties, in varying degrees of development and training, is the “natural” life. The “natural man’s” life finds there its range and limit. What is (often only in very rudimentary, but germinal, form) found in the activities of the material and immaterial part of the animal, “from the oyster to the eagle” (Alford), but developed, cultured, to largest range and highest pitch of perfection,—these are the life of the “natural man,” except that in him also there remains personality, with its self-knowledge and its self-determining will,—part of the “image of God” not lost. [But some would include this within the life of the “spirit” also. The line of demarcation is not easy, perhaps not possible, to draw. Certainly] the conscience belongs to the “spirit,” the Godlike, God-capable, side of human nature. It is its “eye” (Matthew 6:22; Ephesians 1:18 [N.B. var. reading]). It is the organ of all knowledge of “spiritual” things; its possession puts man into communication with that “spiritual” world, in which God, sin, redemption, guilt, holiness, are ruling facts. The judgment of the intellect is per se, neutral, non-moral; the judgment of the conscience is moral, concerned with the ethics whose basis is the law of God. II. In any case a distinction must, very helpfully, be drawn between the faculty for knowing moral differences and the actual and correct knowledge of them.— 1. Conscience is the Judge seated on the bench, ready to administer, and apply to any cases and questions proposed, any law supplied to It. It makes no law; It may administer a bad, or imperfect, or mistaken law; It may judge by an imperfect standard. It is the Eye, made for the purpose of distinguishing Light from Darkness; possessing the power to distinguish, even while there is no Light actually given. It can of itself supply no Light; of itself it can enact no code, can establish no tests of Beauty or Deformity. It is a moral sense, analogous, say, to the ζsthetic sense (Philippians 1:9, Greek). The Law and all knowledge of it, what actually is Beautiful or Evil, Light or Darkness,—these must come, must be given, to Conscience from without. It recognises, but cannot by itself originate or discover, truth. Truth is a revelation; Conscience is only organon. [Said Rabbi Duncan, similarly, of Reason: “It is certainly more of an instrument of discovery than a discoverer. At least, I don’t think it has discovered much. It is of use to show its own impotence, and of use to welcome revelation” (Colloquia Peripat., 62).] 2. No race, no man, is ever actually found with nothing but the bare faculty; the Judge is never left without some knowledge of the law and will of God; the eye is always visited with some light with which to deal. But this is grace, not conscience. It is something added to, an endowment of, the bare faculty. “Innate” ideas of morals are really implanted ideas. The most elementary knowledge of “right” and “wrong” according to the mind of God; the response which the heart and conscience sooner or later always make—approving, accepting, applauding—to the “right” as God estimates it, whenever it is proposed to their judgment,—these are the fruits of the Redemption of the Race by Christ; part of the “free gift which has come upon all men,” designed to issue in, and lead “unto, justification of life” (Romans 5:18); they are rays, dim and scanty perhaps, of “the light that lighteth every man” (John 1:9). The heathen have some (Romans 2:14-15); it needs supplementing, guiding, training, by the use of the written Word. The inner light needs the check, the direction, the interpretation of the objective Standard. And if, of the two selves and their utterances and judgments, there can be no doubt to a man in any degree of spiritual health which is the worthy and true; if the Judge knows God’s law at all, and responds to it, and gives right judgment as before God; if the Eye has any light, and recognises it, and loves it,—this is all grace, the working and gift of the Holy Spirit, Whom the death of Christ has made in some measure the birthright privilege and possession of every human soul. III. How far are the judgments of conscience authoritative and final?— 1. As the ζsthetic sense, the sense for beauty, may, by being accustomed to bad models, be perverted or depraved, until it may even come to prefer the poor, and mean, and unworthy, and ugly; or as it may be developed, and its sensitiveness may be cultivated, to a very high pitch of delicacy, till it judges rightly, by a swift, infallible instinct which does not stop to reason, nor could always give its “reasons”; so may the moral sense, the Conscience. As the judge from the bench may grow accustomed to a bad, defective, or iniquitous law, or may even come to rejoice in injustice, whilst knowing it unjust; or, as he may get continually a wider knowledge of a perfect Code, and may develop a growing readiness and delicacy of just perception of its applicableness to particular cases; so may the inward judge, the Conscience. The eye may grow diseased until the very light is painful, and it seeks darkness; so may the moral eye, the Conscience. [Hence Paul’s perfectly conscientious persecution was sin. Its conscientiousness did not make it right. “Forgive them, for they know not what they do,”—but they needed “forgiving.” Ignorance in their case, conscientiousness in Paul’s, left the door open for mercy. In him the judge wanted a better law; though how much of pride, self-will, hatred of Jesus of Nazareth, mingled with his conscientious, zealous activity in persecution, perhaps only his Lord could tell.] Hence the need for the objective, absolute, Divine Standard. The “light within” may “become darkness.” The eye may cease to be “single.” [“Right by my clock.” But what of the “clock”? “Correct by my scales,” “true by my yard measure.” But what of the “scales” and “measure”? They need bringing constantly before the (Divine) Office of Weights and Measures for examination, and perhaps adjustment. Tell me the moral company you make your Judge keep—both in reading and in actual social intercourse; he may have become corrupted, and be giving, not the judgments of God, but the foolish or wicked decisions of an evil age or set, and may even have come to judge as your own wicked heart desires. (In some handicrafts the workers always, day and night, wear gloves, so as to keep the delicate sensitiveness of touch unimpaired).] IV. Hence conscience may be trained.—Like any other faculty. We learn not only to walk, but to see with eyes which, as organs for sight, -were perfect at birth. Give more and more of knowledge; keep the best standard before conscience; live in the company of holy people, and of the Holy One Himself; conscience will thus learn to think and judge after the standard of God. V. The only morally hopeless man is the man who has so grieved the Spirit of God that He has withdrawn not the capacity, indeed, but the modicum of knowledge—which was His original gift, and was only maintained, like all “good,” by His ceaseless grace. The eye may die with ill-usage, or with disuse. The judge who is never appealed to, or is disregarded, may slumber on the bench more and more deeply, until he seems past awakening, or sits practically dead upon the very judgment seat; representative of the King though he is, he may cease to speak, or may be past speech. Yet note, these are figures which may be pushed until they become falsehoods. The eye may seem dead from disease or disuse, yet we should never assume that it is past awakening to its old activity. If the light return, it may, except in the rarest instances, still be opened, and may resume its old function of seeing and distinguishing. Perhaps the judge seldom or never really vacates his seat; he may be roused, and indeed will rouse himself, at the sound of the judgment trumpet, if not before. He will resume his office, if it be only eternally to condemn. [Manhood came into the world in its complete equipment, personal, capable of God, and will go complete into eternity. Children had a conscience before they knew it. The lost have not lost it. The saved in heaven have it still, though there it has only occasion to approve.] VI. Conscience may approve, as well as condemn; may be a real comfort, a very effective strength.—So here. Through misconceptions and misrepresentations and opposition Paul holds on his way. Men at Corinth or elsewhere may say and do what they please in regard to him, he can look them, and still more can look himself, in the face and say, “In simplicity” etc. [In a qualified sense: “Which of you convicteth me of sin?”] Majorities do not settle morals for the Christian man; he may have to be solitary, singular, with nobody on his side, or agreeing with his judgment, except his Master above him, and his Judge within him. “Our rejoicing is this,” etc. [May illustrate the topic by the barometer on board the vessel sailing between the Tropics. It is the soul’s aneroid, giving early, decisive warning of danger otherwise perhaps unseen. Or by the little dog which lies carved in marble at the feet of his master, on the tomb of William the Silent at Delft. By barking, and scratching his face, he had awoke his master and so saved his life, on the occasion of a night attack on the tent of William by the Spaniards in the camp before Mons. William had only just time to escape. Good to have such a friend. Men have, in Conscience.] [Some men have this “candle of the Lord” only to put it out, that they may better sleep sin’s sleep in undisturbed darkness.] [“A stony, benumbed, bribed, deluded, muzzled conscience” (Bunyan).] 2 Corinthians 1:20. Christ the “Yea” and the “Amen.”I. The promises of God.— 1. “How many soever be,” etc. What a suggestion of their number. No stint in His measure in this, as there is in nothing else which He provides for man. He gives promises “with both hands earnestly” (Micah 7:3). “Good measure, pressed down, running over, into our bosom” (Luke 6:38). It is God’s style of dealing with us. He promises worthily of Himself. 2. What a suggestion of their variety. Such old-fashioned books as Clarke’s Faithful Promiser may have been too mechanical in their tabulation of the promises, and their apportionment to the different needs and occasions, so that the reader might look for a promise, as it were, docketed and put away in a labelled “pigeon-hole,” ready for reference and production at a moment’s notice. But such a book was at least the product of a familiar and thorough knowledge of the Word of God, which had led up to the conviction that no need could arise, or had ever arisen, in the life of a child of God, but it had been anticipated by the Father, and that for it the Father had said the exactly right and sufficient thing. The style of book may go out of fashion—and may come into fashion again—but the fact remains. St. Paul’s Bible—the Old Testament Scriptures—is a mine of wealth for the heart of the child of God. He hardly had in his thought here any cento of promissory “texts” from the Old Testament, though the fulness and appropriateness of these is a fact which every year’s fuller knowledge of the Word of God will confirm, with more abundant reason for strong conviction. In every direction in which need may lead or drive us, we find words which “might have been”—is that all we should say?—“written for the occasion.” [An old missionary in Fiji (known to H. J. F.), crossing over the island where he resided, to his Sunday morning’s work, found, at the crest of a long and toilsome hill which he had to climb in the sun’s full heat, and in the enervating, relaxing atmosphere, a stick planted in the ground, and to it were attached two or three fresh-gathered cocoa-nuts, whose sweet, cool “milk” might refresh him on his journey to preach. A paper tied to the stick explained that a native, knowing that the preacher must needs pass that way that morning, had so provided beforehand refreshment for his wearied teacher.] [Or the illustration may be the cache of preserved meats or vegetables, put away beneath a cairn of stones by Arctic explorers, as a provision for any lost or starving party who may pass that way.] Turn we in any direction, in the day of any distress, a promise confronts us, made for the occasion. The promise is at any rate the paper tied to the stick, the flag left flying over the cache, to call attention to the substantial help which is “laid up for those that fear God” (Psalms 31:19). The promise is there, the help is there. [Often difficult to defend in cool reason such a use of a mere “scrap” of Scripture, torn away from all context and history, as Bunyan once made, when greatly distressed as to what might become of his family if he were taken from them. He found comfort in Jeremiah 49:11, “Leave thy fatherless children, and let thy widows trust in Me”; words spoken to Edom, the enemy of the people of God. Yet such a use of a fragment of Scripture is but one of innumerable examples in the life and practice of some of the wisest, holiest, most spiritual people in every age and Church, and is not lightly to be despised or set aside as unwarranted. Does not the Spirit of God in such cases guide the instincts of God’s people, and give intuitions of truth which reason afterwards justifies? In this particular instance there is at any rate in the words a revelation of the heart of God which, if thus disposed even to Edomite enemies, surely warranted the faith and hope of the Bunyans of all time.] No need without its promise of supply, in infinite variety. 3. What a suggestion of the “exceeding great and precious promises” (2 Peter 1:4). Stars of first magnitude in the expanse of revealed mercy, which overarches all the need and weakness of man’s life. [There are many of smaller magnitude. With the trained eye, the closer scrutiny, the more help, the more of such “stars” are brought into view. Heaven would be poorer without any one smallest “star.” Not the magnitude, but the steadiness, of the pole-star makes it valuable to steer by.] Extraordinary promises of extraordinary help for extraordinary needs, needs perhaps occurring but once in a lifetime, but not forgotten or left unprovided against. [In a banker’s private room may now and again be seen a £10,000 bank-note; a rare thing, a curiosity—cancelled, of course. “I promise to pay,” etc. “An exceeding great and precious promise.” There are £5 promises, £10, £100, in the Word—and still more truly in the heart—of God; and there are £10,000 promises, and these never “cancelled”!] Their number, variety, fulness, and sufficiency are all worthy of, and quite “natural” to expect from. II. The God of the promises.— 1. They are worth nothing, they are nothing, but for their connection with Him. The cheque or the bank-note is in itself a nearly valueless piece of a rather special make of paper, but it passes from hand to hand, as full of value, not only because “there is money at the back of it,” but because there is a person at the back of it somewhere. It is part of that “transfer of credit” which forms so much of the money-settlements of modern business; the credit is that of the credible and solvent person somewhere. So the heart does not so much rely upon a promise as upon a Promiser. Behind the word of promise there is indeed the store of provision for its redemption; but the real guarantee and ground of its helpfulness is that it is His promise, who is the “faithful God” (2 Corinthians 1:18). There is no ultimate rest in propositions, or in promises, but in a Person. 2. What a view of God’s character. May dwell with adoring, grateful wonder upon the reputation He has earned in the story of the Church, or in our personal life as a “promise-keeping God.” Filled with astonishment as we see how perfectly, and in face of what “difficulties” (as we humanly speak), He has fulfilled His promises; so that, with accumulating wealth of proof, the testimony always is, “There failed not ought of any good thing which the Lord had spoken, … all came to pass” (Joshua 21:45). “There hath not failed one word of all His good promise” (1 Kings 8:56). But there is an earlier, perhaps a greater wonder, that He is a “promise-making God.” Moreover, not waiting to be asked to promise to help or to save, but promising [“answering,” Isaiah 65:24] before men ask; providing for our fears and our needs before they have arisen, and in that fact binding Himself to help, or bless, or make holy. His are the promises of a God Who has volunteered them; Who in His loving forwardness towards us, proffers His help. And since the words are from His lips, promises are prophecies. He promises that things shall be; then they shall be. There is no doubt, so far as the fulfilment depends upon Him. And in cases where man’s own act or his moral attitude is the necessary condition of the fulfilment, then the very moment the condition is fulfilled on man’s side, there is no delay, no reluctance, on God’s side to finish the matter—He does not need a moment’s persuasion to induce Him to follow up the fulfilment of the condition by doing his own part; He fulfils His part on the instant. He is a God Whose willingness to give is indicated by His unsolicited readiness to promise. A promise-making God! 3. It may almost be said that He is a God of more promises than there are in the Bible. Let the old-fashioned bookmaker compile laboriously, and classify, and codify, every scrap of Scripture language which can be made to exhibit the shape of a promise, yet the book would not meet all needs of man’s life. So far as finding an explicit and applicable “text” goes, many an emergency may arise which does not readily range itself under any of the categories for which corresponding promises have been selected. There is something—if not exactly “a text”—in the many-sided, perfect Word of God for every heart in every demand which its life makes. But if it should not be at once, or readily to be found, at least there is something in God. His very nature and character are a fruitful ground of new promises. If it were so, that an absolutely unique and novel need had arisen, not provided with its discoverable written promise in the storehouse of the Bible, the heart might turn with its need to God. The certain, prompt, sufficient response of the heart of God would be, as it were, a new promise coined at the instant. A promise is His will expressing itself toward the cry of man’s need. The up-leaping of His ready heart and will towards the soul that seeks Him with its appeal for help, is an offer of help, a promise of it. The heart of the promise-making God bears within itself, and brings forth on the occasion, an infinite wealth of new “promises.” In all this He is the God the highest expression, and the most complete, of Whose will and heart toward mankind is Christ. Which leads to III. Christ the great Promise and the Ratification of all other promises besides.— 1. “How many … be the promises” they are all in Him. All approach of God to man has always, and only, been in Christ. He is the Condition sine quβ non of all intercourse between God and man, in both directions. In Him God has approached man, has offered to man, has promised to man, not so much this or that gift or grace or mercy or help, as in effect all gifts, all grace, all mercy and help. The whole attitude of God toward redeemed Humanity is “bodily-wise” (Colossians 2:9) expressed and exhibited in Him Whose significant name is “Immanuel.” A God in His holiness arrayed against a sinful Race in necessary antagonism, is a thing more than conceivable. A God holding aloof in supreme indifference would not be an impossibility. In point of happy fact, the God with whom our Race has had to do has been a “God with us.” The whole attitude of God towards man, as we know Him in Christ, is a proffer and a promise, containing within it implicitly a promise for every need of man’s soul. Each single promise with its fulfilment is but a particular expression of all that whole approach, that volunteered offer of Himself—with all the infinite “contents” of that thought—which is made in the very fact of the gift of Christ. Each single promise and its fulfilment is a detail of the one first, summarising gift and grace—Christ. [Romans 8:32 approaches this, but translating the ineffable fact into human thought with a difference, rather argues: “If He began with the greatest He had to give, He has so set the fashion and precedent of His bounty that, after that Gift, man may well expect anything. He who has given the thousands of pounds, will not hesitate to add the odd shillings and make them into guineas. After the first Gift, every smaller bounty man may need or ask, is a trifle.” Here we go beyond this.] Every new promise, and every new gift or mercy or deliverance by which it is redeemed and fulfilled, is not here conceived of as an additional act of God’s bounty. It was already given in Christ. To speak in human language, it would be inconsequent, illogical, for the God Who gave “His Son Jesus Christ” (2 Corinthians 1:19), to refuse to fulfil any word of promise which may be pleaded by a soul in need of help. It would be to “go back upon” what was said and done, upon “the Word” which God uttered, when He sent His Son, “His unspeakable Gift,” into the world. The One Gift was in effect a Promise; it anticipated, summarised, pledged, all subsidiary detailed promises besides; it also pledged their fulfilment. 2. So then Christ is God’s “Yes.” Men come asking large things. “Is it really of any use to ask or expect so much?” they say with honest misgiving. They come asking again and again; He never denies them, but their heart wonders whether “by their continual coming they may not weary Him.” They are filled with a sense of unworthiness, none more deeply than the holiest of His people: “I am not fit to come, not worthy to be heard.” They have ill-employed grace given in the past: “He might justly ‘upbraid’ (James 1:5) for our neglect or waste of past bounty.” And so on, through all the round of the varying and abundant reasons for doubt, for expecting nothing. Here is one abundant reason for expecting anything, everything. Like His own “in no wise” (John 6:37) which anticipates all difficulties, answers beforehand all disheartening “reasons,” takes in every variety of case and age and sin, among the guilty souls who “come” to Him, so this word by anticipation silences all questions, meets all fears, replies to all misgivings, makes all unfitness and past unfaithfulness to be of no practical bearing upon the matter in hand. Is there a real need? Is there an actual promise of supply and help? That is all. Or do men half hope that they may find the heart of God to be willing, and yet hardly dare to come with much definite hope? God has said “Yes” beforehand, in the gift, and the very person and work, of Christ. He gave the petitioner the answer, before the petitioner brought his prayer. “In Him is the Yea.” 3. “Through Him is the ‘Amen.’ ” Granted that a man wins his answer, has his need supplied, his promise fulfilled to him, what guarantee has he of secure enjoyment, of long possession of his blessing? The answer is once more, “Christ.” God’s mercy in Christ both anticipates the gift, and rounds it off, when given, with a holy ratification. The same Heart which desired to give, and actually gave, desires that the gift should be kept and added to; desires, moreover, to give further grace to keep the first grace. God clenches His gift with His own “Amen.” If such a distinction must be made, the Spirit Himself, the Author of all strength to follow up and keep any grace given in, and for the sake of, Christ, is a gift bestowed “through” the Mediator-work of the Son. God’s acceptance of the prayer is a very real “Amen” to it, but the following it up and sealing it by further grace, is a very real ratification of the fulfilled promise. And this is through Christ. And as such glorious truth is preached, is it not “to the glory of God”? 2 Corinthians 1:21-22. A Fourfold Grace of the Spirit.—[Three homilies may be here suggested.] 1. The Spirit gives strength and stability to Christian character.— 1. The figure here implied in the word is different, but the thought is the same as in “rooted and grounded” (Ephesians 3:17), “rooted and built up” (Colossians 2:7). The Christian is no “chaff driven before the wind” (Psalms 1:4); he is the “tree planted.” He is no tent or frail tabernacle of boughs, easily set up, as easily struck or swept down by the violence of a storm; he is a solid and substantial building. He is no mere “house upon the sand,” but “founded upon a rock.” 2. Our word here says that the grafting “into Christ has made no temporary union, nor one easily destroyed. There is strength in it; it gives strength to the character, stability and fixedness of purpose and principle and course. Men can “count upon” such a Christian. They know what to expect from him. He is a fixed quantity in all their reckoning. They know that he will always act as “a man in Christ.” 3. The man is, to himself and to others, reliable. An old pastor returning to his former Church is not afraid to ask about him, lest he should have sadly to learn that he has fallen out of his place in the Church and “in Christ.” Rather the “tree planted” (Psalms 1), “rooted in” Christ, is like those age-old olives and terebinths of Palestinian landscape, which, amidst the ephemeral growths that clothe the hillsides for a few brief weeks after the spring rains have fallen, stand ever in the same place by “the rivers of water”; Christians once, Christians to the end. 4. In the jungle at the mouth of the Ganges are whole forests of luxuriantly growing trees whose roots spread widely, but barely take hold of the soil; the burst of the monsoon uproots them by the hundred: as the first rush of temptation or persecution sweeps down or roots up the men in Christ who are not “stablished.” Great havoc in some Churches is wrought by a time of sharp testing! 5. How the pyramids of Egypt sit age after age foursquare to every wind, bearing indeed the marks of years and violence, but unmoved by earthquake or time. That broad based, immovable stability is the very ideal of the steadfastness of the Christian life; not the unstable equilibrium of the “pyramid upon its apex” or even of the beautiful but slender column. There are characters in every Church which need buttress and prop and “under-pinning”; and, when pastor and Church have done all they can for such, they never arrive at any real steadiness or stability. 6. A false idea of “humility” has often misled sincere souls in this matter. The will and grace of God, Who by His Spirit “stablished us in Christ” have, without intention, been dishonoured. Men have expected to fall, at least “occasionally.” They have supposed that only spiritual pride or presumption could claim to have stood firm for a whole day, or still less for a whole week or year. It has been deemed “humble” to understate, when bearing testimony, the measure of strength and stability which the Spirit of God has actually wrought in them. But God’s Spirit deserves the credit of all He has wrought; other souls need the testimony to encourage and hearten them to expect larger possibilities, a keeping and a strength not unworthy of the grace of God. If only all the glory be given to “God Who stablisheth,” the man in Christ cannot expect, or get, and testify to, too much of stability. 7. Or conceive of it as the strength of full and healthy life; the strength of a branch in a healthy vine, of a vigorous limb in a healthy body; the stability of a strength-bringing, life-giving, lifelong union to Christ. 8. Also the connection between the steadiness of union with Christ, and steadiness of belief in the great doctrines which are of the foundation of the Faith, is of the closest. The settled experience does something to give or to keep a settled faith. The great doctrines of the Christian Gospel are by no means matters of correct knowledge only, even on such supremely important themes; they are translated into experience in every spiritual man. When he speaks of or engages in discussion or controversy about the Atonement or the Trinity, it is not chiefly his creed that is in question, but his very life. The articles of his Creed are the elements of his life; really “vital” points. The man who year after year is steadily “in Christ” is at this immense advantage in controversy, that with a growing, experimental knowledge he knows the great foundation truths of Christianity to be truths indeed. He is a witness, and his testimony cannot readily be shaken. He himself is not easily “shaken in mind, nor troubled neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter” (2 Thessalonians 2:2). With “an experience,” he may, if need require, hear or read what would grievously unsettle many souls. He is “stablished.” II. The Spirit gives an “anointing.”— 1. The foundation of this frequently asserted truth is laid deep in the community, the unity of Christ and His people. He is par excellence the Anointed of God. It is His Name as Messiah. All that anointing meant in history, and symbol, and ritual in Israel; all that it meant to king or priest to receive the outpouring of the sacred oil,—that it meant in pre-eminent fulness of meaning to Him. “He is anointed … above His fellows” (Hebrews 1:9; [Psalms 45:7]) indeed, but they are “His fellows,” in this as in all besides. The “thing is true in Him and in them” (1 John 2:8). It is one of the many instances where New Testament language, used of the Incarnate Son of God, may be applied to and used by the “adopted” (Romans 8:15) “sons of God.” In a very pregnant sense they too are “Christs”; anointed ones, like Him. “Ye have an unction from the Holy One” (1 John 2:27). 2. They have a very real “priesthood,” not in heaven only [Revelation 1:6, if this be not retrospective; but see again Revelation 1:10, and (? in the opposite direction) Revelation 20:6], but on earth. They fulfil better, though not perfectly, the ideal which was scarcely more than a beautiful ideal in ancient Israel; they are a “kingdom of priests” [Exodus 19:6; which Peter expounds correctly as “a royal priesthood” (1 Corinthians 3:9)], i.e. a royal dynasty, every one of whom is a priest. The gift of the Holy Ghost is the privilege and the endowment of their high character and function amongst men and toward God. 3. Their “royalty” it one of dignity of character, rather than of function. “Royal” because their Father is King. So far as they may be said to rule mankind, it is by moral force and by the power of ideas. So far as each Christian man is so “filled with the Holy Ghost and power” that he moves in and out amongst his fellows, in the home, or the world, or the Church, a power to repress evil and banish it by his very presence, and a power to encourage good to declare itself and be bold in the assurance of his support; so far is he king. [The artisan in the workshop, the medical student in the dissecting-room, the clerk in the office, the very schoolboy in the playground, who so bear themselves that foul language or foul doing or selfishness are ashamed in their presence, and hide themselves or are silenced, are in their circle in virtue of the royalty of holiness true kings. “The meek shall inherit the earth.” What a real victory and supremacy does the quiet but thorough Christian girl enjoy in many a home!] Christian ideas rule the world, and, along with that active, progressive civilisation which owes so much to, and is found in so nearly exclusive association with, Christianity, surely, though too slowly, are taking possession. So far as in the senate, in the press, in the business, in the daily labour, in the family and personal life, each Christian man is exhibiting them, and so is propagating them, and helping forward their wider predominance and sway, so far is he sharing in His Master’s dominion and royal rule in the earth; in his little measure he is a king. God’s modern Israel, with their sacred deposit of Christian truth, are, like ancient Israel amongst the nations, and like Him who gathers up into Himself all the characteristics of the Ideal Israel, given for “leaders and commanders to the peoples” (Isaiah 55:4). There is a very real rule over evil in their own hearts, exercised in virtue of the Spirit poured out upon them. In the dim perspective of the future the “saints shall take the kingdom” (Daniel 7:18); and there are mysterious suggestions of a share with Christ in the royal rule of the consummated “kingdom of God” [e.g. Revelation 3:21; and, earlier, Matthew 19:28]. Two things are to be noted. First, if the character be lost, the royalty is lost. They are only kings thus, in so far as, and so long as, the “anointing” rests upon them. [Saul’s royalty lingered later in historical fact, but, theocratically, his royalty was gone when “the Spirit of God departed from him.”] There is no caste of men to-day by birth an indefeasibly royal Israel. Secondly, noblesse oblige. The Christian man should live up to his character. With all humility will he wear his honour, because it is all of grace; but he has an honour to wear, and in his friendships, his pleasures, his business, every occupation of his life, should remember that there are things this Divine “royalty” cannot do, places to which it cannot go, there is company which it cannot keep, there are friends which it may not choose to cultivate. If one of this royal race will persist in forgetting his high honour, he will grieve, and may grieve away, the Spirit Whose anointing is his patent of royal dignity. 4. Their priesthood is one of function.—For a special purpose the Law “came in beside,” came in episodically (Romans 5:20), in the course of the development of God’s ideas. Its specialised priesthood was a necessity, and relatively a good thing. Absolutely it was a retrogression from the more perfect ideal of a priesthood, which belonged to manhood, though in patriarchal days it was accidentally and prudentially localised in the father of the family or the head of the tribe. Still, the idea was not forgotten in Israel. Not to quote again Exodus 19:6, the slaying of the Passover lamb by the head of the family was contemplated as a permanent point of the Passover ritual, and the lamb was a true sacrifice, though not that alone; it had other meanings also. Prophets like Samuel or Elijah might offer their sacrifices, though in, e.g., Samuel’s days these were priests fully appointed. David once wore the ephod of the priesthood (2 Samuel 6:14); and there is no need to reconstruct the religious history of Israel in order to account for 2 Samuel 8:18, where David’s sons are called “priests” [so literally, Heb.]. The older, wider, patriarchal idea of priesthood, and the, true priesthood of every Israelite—perfectly valid, although, as a matter of convenient and didactically serviceable arrangement, it had been concentrated in a special, representative order of men chosen out of one tribe—made it possible for at least a titular honorary priesthood to be conferred upon the king’s sons. The analogy of all this to the priesthood of Christian men is exceedingly close. The ministerial and teaching office is seen, e.g., in 1 Corinthians 14, early to have begun to specialise and localise itself in particular men amongst the whole body of believers. But this means no “clerical” caste in the Church; it is but a prudential and, as things are, salutary, necessary concentration of a ministry belonging to every believer. And there is no “priestly” caste at all which has any office or prerogative that may not on occasion, at the call of God, be exercised by any member of a Church. It would be an ill day for any Church when the ministry was recruited only from the families of the ministry; when ministers’ sons should, in any degree as a matter of course, “take up their fathers’ profession.” So, too, every “lay preacher,” and in lower degree every Sunday-school teacher, every one who speaks to a soul for Christ, keeps up the needful protest that the teaching, saving function is no special right of any clerical order. (As to woman’s part in public worship, see under 1 Corinthians 14:34.) In the Christian Church manhood-priesthood is again the order; the original order, obscured by the episodic priesthood and ritual of Mosaic Law, is now once more brought into prominence and use. The priesthood is inherent in every “anointed,” every “spiritual,” man. 5. With one marked and emphatic reservation.—Christ does not share with His people the atoning work of His priesthood. He alone makes atonement for guilt. Needing to make none for Himself [unlike the old High Priest (Hebrews 9:7)], He reserves to Himself the offering of the one sacrifice “for sins for ever” [query, better connect “for ever” with “sat down” (Hebrews 10:12)]. The Christian year has become one long “Day of Atonement”; the yearly cycle of the old sacrificial order has gathered itself up into one, the Sin-offering of that Day, now made perpetual after the one first and final consummation upon the Cross. And, as of old, the sacrifice and its presentation in our Christian Day of Atonement are the unshared act and honour of our High Priest. A guilty conscience, or a heart full of fear, must look to, and rely on, Him and His good offices alone. Guilty souls have “their access unto the Father” only by Him (Ephesians 2:8; Ephesians 3:12; Hebrews 4:14; Hebrews 4:16). 6. But, with that exception, His people share His priesthood.— (1) In a very true sense their intercession for the world around them is effectual for the world’s great blessing. If the Church ceased to pray for the world, or were removed from out of it altogether; if the world were left to its own evil, godless heart (Ephesians 2:8), the very world itself would account it no small calamity and curse. The Church says, as did Samuel of Saul, “God forbid that I should sin in ceasing to pray for you” (1 Samuel 12:23). One of the most precious prerogatives of the manhood priesthood of the “anointed” believer is “to make prayers and supplications, and to give thanks for all men,” etc. (1 Timothy 2:1-4). God would have all men saved; the Church of God should never cease to have a heart with a world-wide outlook and yearning. Priesthood should mean no aloofness or exalted separateness from the general mass; the truest priesthood means the closest brotherhood, the most intimate nearness. Christ in heaven, His people on earth, interceding for the world,—in that is the world’s hope. Every Christian priest may covet and cultivate, as part of his “anointing” for his office, the fulness of “the Spirit of grace and supplication” (Zechariah 12:10). A noble work, open to the simplest, poorest, humblest; and very mighty are some such in every Church in their pleading, interceding prevalence with God. (2) Several passages bring out other typical characteristics of the priesthood of “anointed” believers; e.g. 1 Peter 2:5, “To offer up spiritual sacrifices,” i.e. sacrifices which are not, as aforetime and now in heathenism, things fleshly or material at all. They present themselves before God with hearts full, e.g., of praise [“whoso offereth praise,” Psalms 50:23]. Any material gift is valueless unless it embody and express a “spiritual” sacrifice. No point more needful for the Christian priest to note and guard than this. The heart always gravitates towards the material; it is easier to bring the gift than the heart. [1 Samuel 15:22, where “better than” means that “sacrifice,” be it never so costly, abundant, slavish in its devotion, is of no value without “obedience.”] Hebrews 13:15 well comments on this: “By Him [i.e. Christ; our praises, as our prayers, can only come up to God in virtue of His mediation] let us offer the sacrifice of praise continually, that is, the fruit of our lips [cf. Hosea 14:2, which anticipates this thought, the “calves of our lips”], giving thanks to [“making confession to,” margin and R.V.] His name.” Every anointed priest has his temple, with its altar of this incense, within his own heart. Within him is a shrine in whose holy secrecy there may go on the perpetual offering of a man who “prays without ceasing, and in everything gives thanks.” Paul is a priest at an altar in Philippians 2:17, but with another kind of offering. His offering, his sacred service, is the body of Philippian believers, or, more exactly, their “faith,” which, by the blessing of his Master, he can bring and show as the fruit of his work in Philippi. He asks his Master’s gracious acceptance of their “believing” life and character. His life is in danger; any day may see him brought to trial; the issue may be death. If his Master ask his life as the crowning act of a career of self-devotion, well and good. Paul is more than content; he will “rejoice” to pour out—as (in heathen phrase) a libation, or (in Hebrew ritual order) a drink-offering—by the altar, or even as it were “over the sacrifice” which he brings and lays upon it, his very life. The type of a “priesthood” fulfilled by many a busy, fruitful toiler, whose life may not, indeed, have issued in a technical “martyrdom,” but which has not less really been “spent and spent out” over the work, accumulated results of which are the offering with which he appears at the altar before his Lord. Unhappy that “priest” whose “anointing” has been practically in vain, and who appears before God empty-handed, having no fruit to show, nothing to lay upon the altar for acceptance and reward. Romans 12:1 takes up the self-devotion which perhaps culminates in some day of martyrdom, but which in every case will have been the keynote of the whole life, the great foundation principle of it all: “Present yourselves a living sacrifice.” [So the text is naturally quoted, with a perfectly correct appreciation of its force. But there is terrible point and force in “present your bodies.” Paul’s readers were only too familiar with fact that (as in some Oriental cults of to-day) women—“sacred slaves”—and even men, literally “presented their bodies” to the divinity of a temple, and enriched its treasury with the proceeds of abominable and unnameable lusts. “Present your bodies … a sacrifice … holy.” Heathen sin often ran into sensual sin; the fact in part gives a colour and emphasis to Paul’s use of the phrase “the flesh” (see under 2 Corinthians 7:1); his exhortation here is but the summary of many an injunction such as Romans 6:12-13; Romans 13:14. Heathen sin had showed itself most obviously open to observation and censure, in fleshly sins; Christian holiness would most obviously begin and would be appreciable in a sanctification of the very body itself. “Present your bodies.”] The man who thus “presents his body” has first offered much more; he has devoted himself. The offering of the body is the act of a man who is himself an offering, and is himself the priest who presents it. And such a daily, detailed consecration (John 17:19) of self and activities and life—needs a perpetual “anointing.” It is the offering of a man “filled with the Spirit.” In the Old Testament, Samuel was an early and beautiful example of a life thus wholly given to do nothing and to be nothing except for the Lord, its Tabernacle, its service. His mother “presented his body,” presented her boy, as her offering to the Lord. Nor, we may believe, did he go back from the spirit and the terms of his mother’s gift [“I have returned him to the Lord; as long as he liveth he shall be lent unto the Lord” (1 Samuel 1:28)], when he came out from “dwelling in the house of the Lord” (Psalms 23:6) into the busy life of practical government, and into the “secularities” of the life of a family and household. The happy days spent in ceaseless ministration in the tabernacle with Eli were days of a “living sacrifice.” Happy those on whom rests continually the Spirit’s “anointing” for this form of priestly function. John 17:19, above quoted, brings such a life into very close parallelism to that of “God’s Anointed One.” Is not He—are not His people—both Sacrifice and Priests? III. The Spirit is a “seal” and an “earnest.”—Upon this word “sealed,” thus simply introduced and left for the pondering of the Corinthians, we may cast the illumination of Paul’s fuller explanation of his thought in Ephesians 4:30, itself lighted up, as Ephesian listeners on whose ears the word fell for the first time would instinctively light it up, by 2 Corinthians 1:13-14. Indeed, Ephesians 1:14 is only a little fuller statement of what is, evidently, from its occurrence here, a sample of Paul’s habitual thought about the work of the Holy Spirit. 1. The “seal” is a person, the same Divine Person Who is the “earnest.”—Ephesians 4:30 contributes to make that clear. We might not infer very much from the word “grieve,” if it were an isolated turn of phraseology; though, whilst one could speak, not unnaturally, of “resisting” or of “yielding to” an influence or a personified Force, it would not be as natural to speak of “grieving” it. Poetically one might speak of “obeying” a force; but men “grieve” a person. But the expression is not isolated. It is a sample case of a whole group of New Testament terms of expression, beginning with John 15, 16, which assume, imply, and so indicate, a personal Holy Spirit. Men not infrequently can gather with utter certainty—very frequently in a court of justice will a shrewd counsel do so—from a passing phrase or a single word, spoken or written, what is in the mind of the speaker or writer, though he did not intend it to be discovered. Very often may be thus inferred a man’s habitual opinion upon a topic. When the disciples in the upper room heard Jesus speaking of “the other” Comforter, repeatedly say, “He,” “Himself,” “Whom,” they could only believe that to their Teacher the Comforter was not something, but somebody, another personal Friend for them comparable to Himself. [The geologist may find a deep lying and extensive stratum “crop up” at the surface, only in one very narrow area. He follows the indication of the one single narrow spot, and finds the vast beds beneath. The silver mines of Peru were discovered because, where a dislodged rock had rested, an Indian noticed the shining metal showing.] In Paul’s word “grieve” there is the cropping up of a great underlying and extensive and precious truth, the personality of the “sealing” Spirit. 2. The sealing has been done in view of a “day of redemption,” i.e. of “the redemption of the purchased possession.”—Thus is the matter viewed from the side of Him Who “seals.” Viewed from our side who are the “sealed” persons, that “day of redemption” is the day of coming into “our inheritance” (Eph., ubi supr.). The “purchased possession” is God’s or Christ’s (Acts 20:28). The “inheritance” is that of His people. When in “the Day” He enters into full possession, they enter into possession also. (1) Man’s “day of redemption” was the Friday of Calvary; Christ’s “day of redemption” is in the future. (See the fuller, future sense of “redemption” in 1 Corinthians 1:30.) On the cross, for man’s sake, was Christ with His own blood “paying down the price” [an expression which has hardly more than this one point of contact and analogy with the fact] of man’s freedom from the results of the curse and penalty of sin. For His own sake He was also paying down the purchase money for a “peculiar people” [1 Peter 2:9, lit. “a people of possession”], an Israel which, in a world where all are “His own,” should be His “very own” acquired for Himself, specially precious to His heart. In the manward aspect of the “redemption,” it was complete at Calvary, when He said “It is finished.” Yet all that He intended “redemption” to include, will not be fulfilled until, in the resurrection morning, the very body itself stands, like the whole redeemed Manhood, freed from the latest trace and touch of the curse of sin. In the Godward, Christward aspect, “redemption” will not be complete till the whole company of those whose faith in His atoning death turned their “redemption” into “salvation,” stand thus gloriously complete by His side in their “inheritance,”—that “of the saints in light” (Colossians 1:12). [Roughly illustrate by the purchase in the factory of a vase of costly marble, which is as yet in the rough. Price paid, purchase complete, ownership absolute; but a sense in which the purchaser does not regard possession or ownership realised until the finished vessel is safely delivered at his home. Or the buyer in the cattle market chooses, pays for, becomes the owner of, sheep from the “pens” of several sellers. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/phc/ NOTES(N.B.—The paragraph really begins at 2 Corinthians 1:23.) 2 Corinthians 1:1. Determined.—As in 1 Corinthians 2:2. For myself.—So R.V., meaning, “For my own sake as well as for yours.” Again.—To be linked with “come” only? (q.d. “To come again, and to have a sorrowful visit”); or with “with sorrow”? (q.d. “a second sorrowful visit,” like a former one). Answer variously given, according as an intermediate visit, unmentioned in the Acts, is not, or is, supposed. Agreed that the visit recorded in Acts 18 was not specially a sorrowful visit. In heaviness.—“With sorrow” (R.V.). Here also external considerations very much decide whether this shall mean, “with sorrow in my heart” or “to inflict sorrow on you.” [See Introduction, more fully.]2 Corinthians 1:2. He that is made sorry.—Probably not the particular offender of these verses; but quite general. Paul can grieve them all; each one of them, thus grieved, must make him glad. 2 Corinthians 1:3 confirms this.2 Corinthians 1:3. This very thing.—Viz. 1 Corinthians 5:1 sqq. (Waite, in Speaker, however, thinks rather the decision announced in 2 Corinthians 1:1.) Paul means, “I wrote, rather than come at once.”2 Corinthians 1:4.—Another concurrent and quite consistent reason, “I wrote with tears, in order that,” etc.2 Corinthians 1:5.—Very difficult to translate with any certainty. Ambiguous for two reasons: (1) What does “in part” belong to? Answer not certainly clear; (2) What is the grammatical object of “overcharge,” “overweight”? Answer again not certainly clear. (2) is answered in opposite ways by the and A.V., the two being typical of many more commentators. So is (1). The A.V. means, “The grief has not fallen entirely and only upon me, but on you also. Not to think so, would on my part be to charge upon you all the heavy sin of indifference to his sin.” means, “But in part (let me say)—not to make too grave a matter of it against him—he has grieved you all.” Four variants are supported:“He hath not grieved me “but in part; that I may not overcharge you all.”“but in part, that I may not overcharge (him), you all.”“but in part, that I may not overcharge you, all (of you).”“but in part, that I may not overcharge all, you.”2 Corinthians 1:6.—Note, “the many” (R.V.). The sentence was the act of a (voting) majority.2 Corinthians 1:7.—Note “His … sorrow.” accurately.2 Corinthians 1:9.—How many, perfectly true, concurrent, motives go to one act.2 Corinthians 1:10.—He concurs in what the majority had, previously to his writing, determined; “concurs” surely is not the spirit of one who “played the Lord” over them (2 Corinthians 1:24). Choose between “presence” and “person,” [The homiletics that follow assume “person,” because of Mat 18:20.2 Corinthians 1:11.—Beet makes more of Satan’s endeavouring to compass some harm, not to the poor penitent offender, but, by means of him, and using him and other evil circumstances of their case, to the Church. Unwise discipline, and tolerated evil within, perhaps equally give an open door to the adversary of souls. [Cf. 1 Corinthians 7:5 for the need of wise watchfulness against a real, evil Personality, full of very wise “devices.”] But preferable to understand as of Satan directly seeking opportunity of harming the penitent man. .—Chap. 2 Corinthians 1:23 to 2 Corinthians 2:11 Paul and the Now Penitent Offender of 1 Corinthians 5:1-5. I. The penitent man is an instructive study.— 1. The interval had been brief since chap. 5 of the former letter was written, and from that brief interval must be deducted the time from writing until it was read at Corinth, and from the time of the man’s manifest repentance until the news of this reached Paul in Ephesus. But in the brief interval, thus narrowed, had occurred a marvellous, a revolutionary, moral change in the man,—from a form of fornication abhorrent even to Corinthian heathen ideas, to repentance so deep, that he who was to have been “delivered to Satan,” might now safely be restored to the Church and to Christ. And not the least remarkable point in the case is that a man living in such sin, apparently with as little sense as had some of his fellow-members, of the shame it brought upon the Church, should, by the very fact of the Church having laid upon him a “sufficient” “punishment” [though (perhaps) one something short of the full penalty prescribed in the former letter; his alarm and repentance may have been so quick and so genuine that the need for this was averted], have been so filled with “sorrow,” that there was danger of a true penitent being driven to despair, and (we may say?) “delivered to Satan” by the very “overmuch” of his grief. 2. The case is not an uncommon one in mission-fields in heathen countries, or even in “home mission” work amongst the lowest or the degraded population of a nominally Christian land; and, as one of the typical, didactic instances by which, rather than by abstract discussions or elaborate theses upon given topics, God has been pleased to reveal His thought, it has many divinely authoritative suggestions. For example, it reminds us how widely the degrees of moral enlightenment and of moral sensitiveness may differ, whilst yet there is equally a relation to Christ which, though gravely imperilled by the sin, is worth caring for and endeavouring to strengthen. In a Christian land, in circles where Christian standards of morality have largely influenced even “society” ethics, such a sin as this of the Corinthian offender is reprobated with the utmost weight of verbal and practical censure; whilst a persistent refusal to forgive a fellow-Christian for a comparatively small offence, is hardly condemned at all. No doubt a practical difficulty occurs in judging of a sin “of spirit” (2 Corinthians 7:1); it is not easy to verify the facts, as can be done in (say) a palpable lapse into sensuality; it is not easy to pronounce judgment upon the moral worth of often very complex “feelings”[no virtue, and no sin, is single; all is complex]; whereas a plain act, manifestly incompatible with the most elementary law of God, can be both verified and judged. But this should not so affect our estimate of sin, as to make us forget that for a reclaimed drunkard to fall back grossly into his old sin, or for a man saved from profanity to break out, like Peter, in oaths and imprecations, or for a heathen, half in habit and heedlessness, to be led back into some gross but customary sin of his old life, may argue less of downright evil of heart than for a professedly Christian man persistently to cherish envy or pride, or to indulge in evil-speaking, or to become thoroughly of the world, in principle and spirit, in aims and affections. Remembering the men remembering the history of the men, their opportunities, their surroundings, the worldliness of the one may be a more grievous “fall” than the gross sin of the other. [The one is certainly as little compatible with the perfect law of life in Christ as is the other, the open and gross.] Our relative estimate of sin and of sinners needs continually reviewing in the light of that holiness which condemns sins “of the flesh” and “of the spirit” with at least equal censure. Rebellion in Saul may be more than the witchcraft in some wretched hag of Endor; stubbornness in Saul may be a worse sin than that idolatry which he had prosecuted in others with a Puritan rigour (1 Samuel 15:23). Sin may not be extenuated. [Certainly, even consummate genius must not excuse sensualism and impurity, in poetry or art, or laxity in morals.] An Ananias and a Sapphira may so deliberately and distinctly “lie unto the Holy Ghost” (Acts 5:3), that there is for them no forgiveness, and nothing but excision from the body [query Galatians 5:12] is on all accounts possible. Such discipline, sharp and swift, may be the only means of educating a pure public opinion in the Church, and for teaching a man of low type like the fornicator at Corinth to see himself as others see him, and as God sees him and his sin. An objective conscience, thus forcing its decision upon the attention of the wrong-doer, may be the only awakener and educator of his own. But “Father, forgive them, for they know what they do,” is high authority for a tender handling of some whose actual sin is flagrant and open. They needed forgiving, but their ignorance left the door open for forgiveness. Their guilt who actually, and perhaps with some coarse delight in giving pain, drove in the nails, was not so great as that of Caiaphas, who stood by, laying not a finger of his unsoiled hands upon the Sacred Sufferer, yet who in his heart was perhaps more truly than any other one man there present His real murderer. There is more grace in the repentance of a Corinthian fornicator, than in the largely conventional purity of some English or American “Christians.” There is more to love in the repentant prodigal, with all his “riotous living” and the waste of his patrimony, than in the grudging elder brother, whose life is blameless, save for the one lifelong sin of a loveless heart. This Corinthian sinned grossly, but he repented graciously. The sin needed every word of sternest rebuke which Paul had written; the fair name of the Church, and of Christ, must at all costs be kept clear before the world. If there had been no repentance, then the mysterious penalty of “deliverance to Satan” must righteously have been enforced to its uttermost of consequence [though even this contemplated the “saving of the spirit” (1 Corinthians 5:5)]. But gross and unexampled as was this man’s sin, there was much grace in a man, and hope for a man, who so promptly and unreservedly, with tears and broken heart, bowed before the censure of his pastor and his brethren, and in whom conscience was so easily awakened and so entirely obeyed. The “bruised reeds” (in Matthew 12:14-21) were as helpless as they were evil, in the presence of the power of Jesus; the “smoking flax” of the wick of the lamp of their expiring religious life was as offensive as it was easily to be “quenched.” But if the “reed” is humbled at its weakness and sin, if the “smoking flax” will bear to be rekindled, Paul loves to restore such a one. His sin was a grievous offence; yet such a gross, but easily convinced and deeply penitent offender as this man of Corinth, is not the greatest sinner, nor the hardest to win and keep or recover for Christ. And all this not indistinctly outlines the judgment of God in Christ upon some “chief of sinners.” II. The “tears of” Paul.— 1. In no letter do we get so near to Paul as in this “Second” to Corinth, or see and hear his very self. And, of all the letter, this is truer of no section more than of 2 Corinthians 1:23 to 2 Corinthians 2:11. First and foremost stand his “tears.” The Corinthians had imagined “a man lording it over their faith”; and all the while he was weeping over the loss of their love! They imagined, and maligned or decried, a self-seeking man, not above enriching himself and his companions and emissaries out of funds given to the Jerusalem poor (2 Corinthians 8:16-23); and all the while this “masterful,” “tyrannical,” “self-seeking” man was toiling at his tentmaking in Ephesus, and instead of arranging for an immediate visit was dictating to his amanuensis a letter [assuming with some that 2 Corinthians 1:4 alludes to an intermediate, “lost” letter], because, if he were to come, he must use an Apostolic severity of power such as he was unwilling to inflict upon those whom he had led to Christ, and whom he loved as only a spiritual father loves spiritual children. The unmarried [or widower], childless Paul is as tender as a mother. “I am only happy when I see you happy; I am sure that you are only happy when I am so; I could not bear to think of your making me unhappy by your own sorrow (2 Corinthians 1:3); I must have used the ‘rod’ if 1 had come, and I could not bear your tears.” This man, whose words thunder and flash lightnings, has written “out of much affliction and anguish of heart”; [and according to a strongly favoured interpretate of 2 Corinthians 1:8-10 was quite prostrated, overburdened, broken-hearted, fit for no work, nearly killed, by the tidings of their wrong-doing and of their factious jealousy against himself]. They thought, or said, that they found a man strong, stern, to the point of hardness; we know a man tender, tearful, perhaps even constitutionally timid [so Howson suggests: Character of St. Paul, lecture ii.; and if so, then naturally drawn to Timothy, around whom he so often in these letters throws the arm of his guaranteeing, guarding, strengthening love], doing all he did with a great and often violent strain upon himself, and all simply in the strength of the grace of God. It is imperfect manhood that cannot weep; and if in our undemonstrative, self-repressed days, tearful eyes be out of fashion for men, a perfect man will have a heart that can weep. Strong men are tender; tender men are strong. Their very tenderness is a helpful strength to many who lean upon them. 2. And, once more, as in the case of the Penitent Wrong-doer, there comes back the lesson to be very cautious in judgment. Naturally it is not easy for one who is smarting under the lash, to think very kind things of him who must needs wield it. The child hardly appreciates at the moment the love or wisdom which blames sharply or punishes severely. But the love is there. Do not sit in Corinth and hastily misread as a hard man Paul weeping at Ephesus. Experience shows, as it accumulates with years, how tender a heart may guide a stern tongue or move a strong hand. [See a tender delicate “weed” springing up from between the flagstones of a courtyard. Under those cold, hard stones its roots have found, and now witness to, soft, moist soil, where it may nourish its strength. So, see a strong, rough-spoken man bending over a fallen child to pick it up, perhaps with an awkward kiss before he carries it to a place of safety. That kiss is the “weed” which tells of the tender heart underneath the stone-cold, stone-hard surface of the manner and the life. That man is not wholly bad. These few verses—even these two, 3, 4—with their “tears,” are precious; they reveal the true Paul to us, as we should not have known him from the Acts, nor from the First Epistle to Corinth. How many a worker must be content to go forward year after year misread, misjudged, and feeling in some degree crippled in his usefulness by the wrong estimate formed of him by those to whom he would be useful! 3. May we not rise higher, with the suggestion of Paul’s “tears” whilst he writes words of sharp rebuke, to help us? From Paul’s tears may we not rise to the tears of Christ, and, yet higher, once more to the heart of God? By no forced or chance analogy. Paul, like every Christian man, of necessity reproduces more or less perfectly his Pattern, because the Spirit of Christ is within him the Life of his life, the Former of his character. And “he that hath seen” Christ “hath seen the Father.” We remember how Christ once at least “looked around” on a gathering in a Capernaum synagogue with a holy “anger” in His eyes (Mark 3:5); but the sentence continues, “being grieved with the hardness of their hearts.” The wail of disappointed love cries, “How often would I have gathered.… Ye would not”; but words of stern, irrevocable doom follow: “Your house is left unto you desolate.” As we see them in the “Son who has revealed Him,” anger and grief are never far apart in God. He has no love for inflicting pain. He has no love for the future punishment of creatures whom He has made. If it must be—if they make it a necessity—it must and will be. Holiness must be vindicated; sin is a peril to the good order, and so to the happiness, of the universe. “He must reign,” even if this must mean “enemies put beneath His feet.” But one can believe that there are tears in the heart of the very Judge, as He sets some “on the left hand” for whom He shed His blood. One may almost venture reverently to imagine Him following them as they “depart,” with His word, “Ye would not, ye would not, come to Me that ye might have life!” [Can we not see in His face the sorrow of the love of Christ, as He follows with His eyes the departing young ruler, so lovable, and yet so unready for “eternal life”? (Luke 18:23-24).] Men say of God, “I know Thee, that Thou art hard, … reaping where,” etc. (Matthew 25:34). But they “know” God as little as the Corinthians knew Paul, the man of “many tears.” They do not know Him, as they may see Him, if they will, in Christ. III. Paul the pastor.— 1. How careful he is that his motives should be understood. “I call God for a record upon my soul,” etc. Quite consistent with all said above (under 2 Corinthians 1:17 sqq.), that his personal character, and what they thought of it and of him, were only matters of concern so far as they might be supposed to affect their estimate of the Gospel he preached, or of the Christ Who is the very heart and burden of it. And quite consistent also with the words of the Divine Legislator for “the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 5:37). Paul is not a “yes and no” man; but his word here is not simply, “Yea, yea; nay, nay.” He strengthens it with an affirmation (cf. Romans 1:9) which one could have supposed too serious for “a mere personal matter” like this, his motive in making a change in his itinerary. The Master had said, “Whatsoever is more than these”—the plain “yes” and “no”—“cometh of evil.” In a world of evil, where men are evil, and where sin has put the relations of social intercourse so much out of joint, a strengthened “Yea” or “Nay” may be inevitable. And in this particular instance it is no “merely personal matter.” It is for the Gospel’s sake still. A pastor’s good understanding with his people is to him a power which he can use for their sakes. If they distrust his character, or lose confidence in his word, he will be of little use to them. A transparent simplicity of act and word and motive will give him a hold upon their hearts, if even they question, or differ from, his judgment. But such a protest as this, such a purgation of himself on oath, is a rare thing; Paul’s normal attitude is in 1 Corinthians 4:3,—“A small thing with me that I,” etc. Since, however, those words were written, new circumstances had arisen, which wrung from him this protest, for his people’s sake even more than for his own. Says the Great Shepherd: “I know My sheep, and am known of Mine!” Paul wants his flock to know him. 2. Not a lord over faith, but a helper of joy.— (1) They are believers; even these Corinthians are (2 Corinthians 1:24). He is only a believer himself; in Christ, as man and man, every Corinthian and he have the same standing. Their faith is the vital link holding them to Christ; every man believes alone—by and for himself. It is his own unshared act. And the status in Christ is retained by believing; it may be forfeited by sin—sin which is fatal to faith, because grieving to the Spirit by Whose help alone men do, or can, savingly believe. If not, “if we (continue to) walk in the light as He is.… We have fellowship, and the blood … cleanseth,” etc.; with a continuous efficacy it puts a bar between us and our native guilt, and we retain our new status of grace. We are “justified by faith,” and by the same faith “we have our access into grace whereby we stand” (Romans 5:1-2) and “rejoice.” The grafting into Christ, the abiding in Christ, the joy in Christ,—all hinge upon faith. No Paul, nor any other wise pastor, will venture to “lord” it over the life of faith. “One is Master, even Christ; the rest are all brethren” (Matthew 23:8). (2) But it is brotherly in the highest degree to help the “joy” of another. “To add sunshine to daylight,” as Wordsworth says, is no small honour to a successful pastor. To be able so to bring a living, bright, realised Christ near to them, as that fear gives place to rest, and gloom to joy; so to be used to open up Scripture, with its teachings as to the “style” of life possible to, becoming in, provided for, children of God, as that they rise to the higher level, and with a glad and free heart, which has lost everything of merely obligatory and mechanical, all sense of bondage and constraint, in religion, go forward, “glad in the Lord”; by his own testimony and experience, so to be helpful as to clear away difficulties, and to encourage and embolden fearful hearts to hope for more, and to dare more, in the life of godliness;—it may well be an ambition of a worthy pastor, as, when won, it will be a cause of unspeakable thankfulness. IV. The pastor exercising discipline.— 1. He does it in the spirit just sketched out,—not as a lord, but as a helper. A pure Church is a glad Church. Offences purged away, Achans sought out and put away, then conquests and work proceed apace, and all share the joy of success. If also discipline be exercised upon the individual, it is not for his destruction, or even for his exclusion, but for his recovery from his fall, and his restoration to his place in Christ; and thus is really working towards the joy of even the offender. It might be difficult, without undue straining, to find any analogical suggestion of God or Christ in Paul’s disclaimer of “lordship” over their faith; though when we remember how sacredly the liberty of the will is guarded in all the relations between God and man, and how that most Godlike characteristic of the human personality is (may we say?) so “respected” by God Himself, that all the loving, mighty constraint used by the Spirit of God, when endeavouring to lead a man to Christ, always stops short of compulsion; and when we remember how, assisted though it be by the grace of God, the act of believing is a man’s own, for which he is responsible; we might almost say that God Himself has chosen to refrain from exercising lordship over men’s faith. There would be no morality, no value to Him, in a compelled believing, or in a compulsory creed—a thing which, if accepted at all, must be accepted by a hypocrite or a machine. He would not care for the offering of such a faith. So far as there is surrender to His yoke, it is the surrender of a convinced understanding or of an instructed heart. But it needs no forcing of analogy to see God as the supreme “helper of” His people’s “joy,” even when exercising the discipline of rebuke and sharp chastening. It is the happy paradox of the Christian life: “Count it all joy when ye fall into divers temptations.” “We ‘exult’ in tribulations also, knowing that,” etc. (James 1:2; Romans 5:3). If the foundation of the Christian character be right, if the heart be sound toward God, then all His providential discipline of habit and character, all the keen pruning away of excrescences and blemishes, everything which smites, and delivers from, sin,—all work together for a holiness which is, in part, joy. “The happy God” [so literally 1 Timothy 1:11; 1 Timothy 6:15] works towards His own happiness in His children. He loves to have them “rejoice evermore”; it is part of His “will in Christ Jesus concerning them” (1 Thessalonians 5:16-18). “That your joy may be full” is a distinct desire and purpose of that Son, Who in all things has revealed to us the Father, by what Himself is, quite as much as by what He says about the Fattier (John 16:24). Cf. also John 17:13 : “That they might have My joy fulfilled in themselves.” The pastoral office of the Great Shepherd may not infrequently demand words as sharp, and discipline as severe, as those of Paul the pastor towards his Corinthians; but it aims at their joy. Their religious life can never realise fully how the “fruit of the Spirit is … joy,” if there be, in any degree or form, sin. Yet He would have their life not a restraint, or a series of self-denials, or a round of stern obligations, nor even a hoping and striving forward and upward, without ever being quite satisfied; but, rather, a “joyous” life, full of assurance and buoyancy and victory. Indeed, the “joy” is not only a thing desirable in itself; it is a means to something yet more desirable. “The joy of the Lord is strength” to the Lord’s people, as certainly now as in the days of Nehemiah (Nehemiah 8:10). It is a view of the Heavenly Father as unworthy and untrue as was the Corinthian view of Paul, to imagine Him without care for His people’s happiness. He is not the God to grudge “joy” to His creatures. They should not think of Him as, if anything, predisposed to take away rather than to give; as likely to meet their devotion to Him of themselves and of all they are and have, by a demand for the surrender of something very dear. He cares for their holiness first; if that can be secured, and yet even their natural “joy” be untouched or enhanced, He will assuredly so order it, in His disposition of their life. Holiness is before all; but joy through holiness is certain; and He will always work towards this, with a minimum of discipline and of pain. Did this passage in the letter so reveal the heart of the real Paul to the Corinthian Church that they doubted, or maligned him, no more? “Do believe it, brethren, that in writing as I did, and in all I have done for you, I desired to be a helper of your joy.” If His people will look into the heart of God, as it has been laid bare to them in the words and work, and in the very self, of His Son, they will see in Him also One Who by all His dealings with them heartily desires their joy. And when at last they “enter into the joy of their Lord” (Matthew 25:21), the “good and faithful servants” will be realising the fulfilment of all their Divine Master’s purposes and leading in their life. 2. He delays, and is reluctant to exercise discipline at all. “To spare you, I came not as yet,” etc.—Here again is a trait of that God in Christ Whom Paul, as it were, reproduces, as a consequence of the union, the unifying, the real fellowship of life, which are his “in Christ.” Anybody can drive away or cut off a sheep from the flock (Ezekiel 34:4, etc.; John 10:12). The “Wolf” can do that admirably; it is his work. “We are not ignorant of his devices.” If he could have picked up this poor Corinthian thrust out of the fold, nothing would have served his turn better than an excessive discipline, carried beyond what the repentance of the offender now had made necessary. Accordingly, Paul would have the Corinthian Church follow the lead of his own action towards them as a whole. “A minimum of discipline, brethren, and that reluctant, and delayed. Take your penitent back again. You have chastened him sufficiently. Your concurrent (2 Corinthians 1:6) censure has had its effect. He is in danger of being swallowed up by the very excess of the sorrow of his repentant shame. You have been yourselves put to the test.” [As every case of wrongdoing in a Church does put the members to the test. What is their attitude towards sin? What towards this particular sin? Can it be said by their Lord, “Ye cannot bear them which are evil”? (Revelation 2:1, of the very Ephesus from which Paul is writing). Is there that sure sign of health in a body, that it is restless, and cannot suffer a wound to heal up, so long as any diseased bone or foreign body lodged in its tissues is unexpelled?] “I wanted [did not their Lord also desire?] to see whether you felt with me about such sin, and whether, indeed, my word would command your obedience.” [Not “lording it over” them, indeed, yet “having rule,” such rule as a shepherd must needs exercise over a flock (Hebrews 13:7; Hebrews 13:17).] “You have stood the test well. Now we must not play the game of Satan, and leave to him a soul for his prey. Restore the man; confirm your love toward him. As little discipline as possible; as little putting away as possible. That was in my heart towards yourselves, when I changed my route, and did not come direct to you. I did not want to be necessitated to visit sharply sin such as I should have found if I had come then, but which you now have put away.” It is wise pastoral policy, it is wise paternal rule in a family, as it is wise political government, to govern as little as possible, to punish as seldom as possible, to aim at recovery and restoration rather than penal infliction or exclusion. It is the wisdom, it is the heart of “a good shepherd;” it is once more the heart of God. Again the analogy needs no forcing, and it is based upon a real unity of purpose and life. As the weeping pastor at Ephesus, so the patient, but often deeply grieved, Father in heaven: “To spare you I came not,” etc. Hear Him speaking of old: “I will not be always wroth, for the spirit should fail before me, and the souls which I have made” (Isaiah 57:16). “The longsuffering of God leadeth thee to repentance” (Romans 2:4). Remembering the holy intensity of God’s necessary antagonism [“hatred”] to sin; remembering the flagrant, and insolent, offence to His holiness which every day goes up to Him from earth; remembering the fearful propagatory power of evil and of the prolonged life of an evil-doer; do not men naturally wonder that the just Judge “bears so long,” not only with His people, to whom all this sin is an offence, a temptation, a trial, and sometimes an acute and oppressive persecution, but with the evildoers themselves? (Luke 18:7). When men have seen some culminating and outrageous piece of cruelty, or treachery, or fraud committed, have they not primâ facie reason to say, as the wrong-doer seems not only to escape penalty, but even to prosper as the fruit of his sin, “Him doth God know? Is there knowledge in the Most High?” [Psalms 73:11; but note that the question has in that verse a boldly unbelieving turn and tone given to it]. God can afford to wait, and to be silent, however misunderstood and misjudged. [“Patiens, quia æternus” (Augustine).] And His answer to His Church in the day of His own vindication will be: “To spare the sinners, I came not,” etc. It is the appeal of His forbearance to the individual sinner. Why was he not cut off, cast off, the very first time he deliberately, and with clear understanding of his act, refused to obey the will or call of God? Why did not a stroke of judgment make his first sin his last—at any rate, his last on earth? “To spare thee, I came not,” etc. Judgment must come some day. God’s patience is holy, and therefore cannot be infinite. But holy wrath lingers. “The times of this ignorance God winked at, but now,” etc. (Acts 17:30). How often has Paul’s turning aside from a visitation, which could have had no room in it for anything but punishment, been reproduced on a scale of Divine enlargement of love and patience, in His turning aside from the sinner, desiring that respite and delay might mean a repentance which should make judgment needless, and mercy and restoration possible to the Divine Love? V. The pastor’s absolution.—Two Gospel passages underlie, or are well illustrated by, 2 Corinthians 1:7; 2 Corinthians 10:1. In Matthew 18:18 a power of “binding” and “loosing” is made one of the prerogatives of the Church of Christ within its own borders. To whom is such a power to sit in judgment upon their fellow-men to be entrusted? To even “two or three,” if they be “met in [unto] the name” of their Lord; in which case He also is with them “in the midst,” and thus, with Him, two or three—with no restriction to apostles or “official” members—are a quorum which may form an assembly of the Church, valid for discipline whether to bind or loose sentence and penalty. Inherent in the whole body,—for the terms are perfectly general,—it may be from time to time, and from case to case, specially localised in the particular Church, or even in the two or three along with whom is the Fourth, the First, the Lord. [So John 20:22-23, spoken, both as to mission and disciplinary power, to a much larger company than “the twelve.”] Accordingly “the many” at Corinth had “inflicted the punishment.” It is “ye forgive”; Paul follows the lead, or adopts the act, of the Church. There is no need to suppose that, even at a date so early, there were not elders, or officers of some sort, at Corinth, who in the disciplinary action would be the mouthpiece of the Church. But convenience and seemly order, not principle, would govern and dictate such a specialisation of function. Their forgiveness would be the forgiveness of the whole Church. The Church has acted, without waiting for Paul, or even for his directions to forgive the man. 2. Matthew 17:19-20 is also in his mind. Rather, it is his working theory of discipline in the Church, as was seen in 1 Corinthians 5:3-5. The gathering which he there instructed them to arrange for, in regard to this very offender, was to be composed of the Church, plus Paul’s “spirit,” plus the power of the presence of “the Lord Jesus Christ.” Then their discipline became the discipline of Christ; and now that they have forgiven, Paul concurs and forgives, just as if he had been actually with them. But the forgiveness of the Church, met “in that Name,” and the forgiveness of Paul thus exercised to ratify theirs, are neither ecclesiastical nor sacerdotal, but representative; it is, as it were, “in the person of Christ” [to keep to the translation which falls in so perfectly with the passage in the Gospels and that in the preceding Epistle]. As in the original enactment of this power of “binding” and “loosing,” the act is His Who is “in their midst,” answering by His very presence and direction the prayer for guidance, as touching which the little company have “agreed to ask.” Christ is the supreme and sole fount of forgiveness. All human forgiveness is declaratory only. The priest who “cleansed” the leper [Psalms 51:2, “cleanse me”; the quasitechnical word for the act of the priest in such a case] could only declare him physically clean, and give official recognition to the fact that ipso facto he had become released from all the restrictions binding on a leper. “Loosing” him meant declaring him “loosed.” It is a pastoral absolution; the forgiveness of a shepherd who cares most that a sheep shall not be thrust into the power of Satan, the master of many “devices,” subtle as of old. NOTES(N.B.—The paragraph really begins at 2 Corinthians 1:23.) 2 Corinthians 1:1. Determined.—As in 1 Corinthians 2:2. For myself.—So R.V., meaning, “For my own sake as well as for yours.” Again.—To be linked with “come” only? (q.d. “To come again, and to have a sorrowful visit”); or with “with sorrow”? (q.d. “a second sorrowful visit,” like a former one). Answer variously given, according as an intermediate visit, unmentioned in the Acts, is not, or is, supposed. Agreed that the visit recorded in Acts 18 was not specially a sorrowful visit. In heaviness.—“With sorrow” (R.V.). Here also external considerations very much decide whether this shall mean, “with sorrow in my heart” or “to inflict sorrow on you.” [See Introduction, more fully.]2 Corinthians 1:2. He that is made sorry.—Probably not the particular offender of these verses; but quite general. Paul can grieve them all; each one of them, thus grieved, must make him glad. 2 Corinthians 1:3 confirms this.2 Corinthians 1:3. This very thing.—Viz. 1 Corinthians 5:1 sqq. (Waite, in Speaker, however, thinks rather the decision announced in 2 Corinthians 1:1.) Paul means, “I wrote, rather than come at once.”2 Corinthians 1:4.—Another concurrent and quite consistent reason, “I wrote with tears, in order that,” etc.2 Corinthians 1:5.—Very difficult to translate with any certainty. Ambiguous for two reasons: (1) What does “in part” belong to? Answer not certainly clear; (2) What is the grammatical object of “overcharge,” “overweight”? Answer again not certainly clear. (2) is answered in opposite ways by the and A.V., the two being typical of many more commentators. So is (1). The A.V. means, “The grief has not fallen entirely and only upon me, but on you also. Not to think so, would on my part be to charge upon you all the heavy sin of indifference to his sin.” means, “But in part (let me say)—not to make too grave a matter of it against him—he has grieved you all.” Four variants are supported:“He hath not grieved me “but in part; that I may not overcharge you all.”“but in part, that I may not overcharge (him), you all.”“but in part, that I may not overcharge you, all (of you).”“but in part, that I may not overcharge all, you.”2 Corinthians 1:6.—Note, “the many” (R.V.). The sentence was the act of a (voting) majority.2 Corinthians 1:7.—Note “His … sorrow.” accurately.2 Corinthians 1:9.—How many, perfectly true, concurrent, motives go to one act.2 Corinthians 1:10.—He concurs in what the majority had, previously to his writing, determined; “concurs” surely is not the spirit of one who “played the Lord” over them (2 Corinthians 1:24). Choose between “presence” and “person,” [The homiletics that follow assume “person,” because of Mat 18:20.2 Corinthians 1:11.—Beet makes more of Satan’s endeavouring to compass some harm, not to the poor penitent offender, but, by means of him, and using him and other evil circumstances of their case, to the Church. Unwise discipline, and tolerated evil within, perhaps equally give an open door to the adversary of souls. [Cf. 1 Corinthians 7:5 for the need of wise watchfulness against a real, evil Personality, full of very wise “devices.”] But preferable to understand as of Satan directly seeking opportunity of harming the penitent man. .—Chap. 2 Corinthians 1:23 to 2 Corinthians 2:11 Paul and the Now Penitent Offender of 1 Corinthians 5:1-5. I. The penitent man is an instructive study.— 1. The interval had been brief since chap. 5 of the former letter was written, and from that brief interval must be deducted the time from writing until it was read at Corinth, and from the time of the man’s manifest repentance until the news of this reached Paul in Ephesus. But in the brief interval, thus narrowed, had occurred a marvellous, a revolutionary, moral change in the man,—from a form of fornication abhorrent even to Corinthian heathen ideas, to repentance so deep, that he who was to have been “delivered to Satan,” might now safely be restored to the Church and to Christ. And not the least remarkable point in the case is that a man living in such sin, apparently with as little sense as had some of his fellow-members, of the shame it brought upon the Church, should, by the very fact of the Church having laid upon him a “sufficient” “punishment” [though (perhaps) one something short of the full penalty prescribed in the former letter; his alarm and repentance may have been so quick and so genuine that the need for this was averted], have been so filled with “sorrow,” that there was danger of a true penitent being driven to despair, and (we may say?) “delivered to Satan” by the very “overmuch” of his grief. 2. The case is not an uncommon one in mission-fields in heathen countries, or even in “home mission” work amongst the lowest or the degraded population of a nominally Christian land; and, as one of the typical, didactic instances by which, rather than by abstract discussions or elaborate theses upon given topics, God has been pleased to reveal His thought, it has many divinely authoritative suggestions. For example, it reminds us how widely the degrees of moral enlightenment and of moral sensitiveness may differ, whilst yet there is equally a relation to Christ which, though gravely imperilled by the sin, is worth caring for and endeavouring to strengthen. In a Christian land, in circles where Christian standards of morality have largely influenced even “society” ethics, such a sin as this of the Corinthian offender is reprobated with the utmost weight of verbal and practical censure; whilst a persistent refusal to forgive a fellow-Christian for a comparatively small offence, is hardly condemned at all. No doubt a practical difficulty occurs in judging of a sin “of spirit” (2 Corinthians 7:1); it is not easy to verify the facts, as can be done in (say) a palpable lapse into sensuality; it is not easy to pronounce judgment upon the moral worth of often very complex “feelings”[no virtue, and no sin, is single; all is complex]; whereas a plain act, manifestly incompatible with the most elementary law of God, can be both verified and judged. But this should not so affect our estimate of sin, as to make us forget that for a reclaimed drunkard to fall back grossly into his old sin, or for a man saved from profanity to break out, like Peter, in oaths and imprecations, or for a heathen, half in habit and heedlessness, to be led back into some gross but customary sin of his old life, may argue less of downright evil of heart than for a professedly Christian man persistently to cherish envy or pride, or to indulge in evil-speaking, or to become thoroughly of the world, in principle and spirit, in aims and affections. Remembering the men remembering the history of the men, their opportunities, their surroundings, the worldliness of the one may be a more grievous “fall” than the gross sin of the other. [The one is certainly as little compatible with the perfect law of life in Christ as is the other, the open and gross.] Our relative estimate of sin and of sinners needs continually reviewing in the light of that holiness which condemns sins “of the flesh” and “of the spirit” with at least equal censure. Rebellion in Saul may be more than the witchcraft in some wretched hag of Endor; stubbornness in Saul may be a worse sin than that idolatry which he had prosecuted in others with a Puritan rigour (1 Samuel 15:23). Sin may not be extenuated. [Certainly, even consummate genius must not excuse sensualism and impurity, in poetry or art, or laxity in morals.] An Ananias and a Sapphira may so deliberately and distinctly “lie unto the Holy Ghost” (Acts 5:3), that there is for them no forgiveness, and nothing but excision from the body [query Galatians 5:12] is on all accounts possible. Such discipline, sharp and swift, may be the only means of educating a pure public opinion in the Church, and for teaching a man of low type like the fornicator at Corinth to see himself as others see him, and as God sees him and his sin. An objective conscience, thus forcing its decision upon the attention of the wrong-doer, may be the only awakener and educator of his own. But “Father, forgive them, for they know what they do,” is high authority for a tender handling of some whose actual sin is flagrant and open. They needed forgiving, but their ignorance left the door open for forgiveness. Their guilt who actually, and perhaps with some coarse delight in giving pain, drove in the nails, was not so great as that of Caiaphas, who stood by, laying not a finger of his unsoiled hands upon the Sacred Sufferer, yet who in his heart was perhaps more truly than any other one man there present His real murderer. There is more grace in the repentance of a Corinthian fornicator, than in the largely conventional purity of some English or American “Christians.” There is more to love in the repentant prodigal, with all his “riotous living” and the waste of his patrimony, than in the grudging elder brother, whose life is blameless, save for the one lifelong sin of a loveless heart. This Corinthian sinned grossly, but he repented graciously. The sin needed every word of sternest rebuke which Paul had written; the fair name of the Church, and of Christ, must at all costs be kept clear before the world. If there had been no repentance, then the mysterious penalty of “deliverance to Satan” must righteously have been enforced to its uttermost of consequence [though even this contemplated the “saving of the spirit” (1 Corinthians 5:5)]. But gross and unexampled as was this man’s sin, there was much grace in a man, and hope for a man, who so promptly and unreservedly, with tears and broken heart, bowed before the censure of his pastor and his brethren, and in whom conscience was so easily awakened and so entirely obeyed. The “bruised reeds” (in Matthew 12:14-21) were as helpless as they were evil, in the presence of the power of Jesus; the “smoking flax” of the wick of the lamp of their expiring religious life was as offensive as it was easily to be “quenched.” But if the “reed” is humbled at its weakness and sin, if the “smoking flax” will bear to be rekindled, Paul loves to restore such a one. His sin was a grievous offence; yet such a gross, but easily convinced and deeply penitent offender as this man of Corinth, is not the greatest sinner, nor the hardest to win and keep or recover for Christ. And all this not indistinctly outlines the judgment of God in Christ upon some “chief of sinners.” II. The “tears of” Paul.— 1. In no letter do we get so near to Paul as in this “Second” to Corinth, or see and hear his very self. And, of all the letter, this is truer of no section more than of 2 Corinthians 1:23 to 2 Corinthians 2:11. First and foremost stand his “tears.” The Corinthians had imagined “a man lording it over their faith”; and all the while he was weeping over the loss of their love! They imagined, and maligned or decried, a self-seeking man, not above enriching himself and his companions and emissaries out of funds given to the Jerusalem poor (2 Corinthians 8:16-23); and all the while this “masterful,” “tyrannical,” “self-seeking” man was toiling at his tentmaking in Ephesus, and instead of arranging for an immediate visit was dictating to his amanuensis a letter [assuming with some that 2 Corinthians 1:4 alludes to an intermediate, “lost” letter], because, if he were to come, he must use an Apostolic severity of power such as he was unwilling to inflict upon those whom he had led to Christ, and whom he loved as only a spiritual father loves spiritual children. The unmarried [or widower], childless Paul is as tender as a mother. “I am only happy when I see you happy; I am sure that you are only happy when I am so; I could not bear to think of your making me unhappy by your own sorrow (2 Corinthians 1:3); I must have used the ‘rod’ if 1 had come, and I could not bear your tears.” This man, whose words thunder and flash lightnings, has written “out of much affliction and anguish of heart”; [and according to a strongly favoured interpretate of 2 Corinthians 1:8-10 was quite prostrated, overburdened, broken-hearted, fit for no work, nearly killed, by the tidings of their wrong-doing and of their factious jealousy against himself]. They thought, or said, that they found a man strong, stern, to the point of hardness; we know a man tender, tearful, perhaps even constitutionally timid [so Howson suggests: Character of St. Paul, lecture ii.; and if so, then naturally drawn to Timothy, around whom he so often in these letters throws the arm of his guaranteeing, guarding, strengthening love], doing all he did with a great and often violent strain upon himself, and all simply in the strength of the grace of God. It is imperfect manhood that cannot weep; and if in our undemonstrative, self-repressed days, tearful eyes be out of fashion for men, a perfect man will have a heart that can weep. Strong men are tender; tender men are strong. Their very tenderness is a helpful strength to many who lean upon them. 2. And, once more, as in the case of the Penitent Wrong-doer, there comes back the lesson to be very cautious in judgment. Naturally it is not easy for one who is smarting under the lash, to think very kind things of him who must needs wield it. The child hardly appreciates at the moment the love or wisdom which blames sharply or punishes severely. But the love is there. Do not sit in Corinth and hastily misread as a hard man Paul weeping at Ephesus. Experience shows, as it accumulates with years, how tender a heart may guide a stern tongue or move a strong hand. [See a tender delicate “weed” springing up from between the flagstones of a courtyard. Under those cold, hard stones its roots have found, and now witness to, soft, moist soil, where it may nourish its strength. So, see a strong, rough-spoken man bending over a fallen child to pick it up, perhaps with an awkward kiss before he carries it to a place of safety. That kiss is the “weed” which tells of the tender heart underneath the stone-cold, stone-hard surface of the manner and the life. That man is not wholly bad. These few verses—even these two, 3, 4—with their “tears,” are precious; they reveal the true Paul to us, as we should not have known him from the Acts, nor from the First Epistle to Corinth. How many a worker must be content to go forward year after year misread, misjudged, and feeling in some degree crippled in his usefulness by the wrong estimate formed of him by those to whom he would be useful! 3. May we not rise higher, with the suggestion of Paul’s “tears” whilst he writes words of sharp rebuke, to help us? From Paul’s tears may we not rise to the tears of Christ, and, yet higher, once more to the heart of God? By no forced or chance analogy. Paul, like every Christian man, of necessity reproduces more or less perfectly his Pattern, because the Spirit of Christ is within him the Life of his life, the Former of his character. And “he that hath seen” Christ “hath seen the Father.” We remember how Christ once at least “looked around” on a gathering in a Capernaum synagogue with a holy “anger” in His eyes (Mark 3:5); but the sentence continues, “being grieved with the hardness of their hearts.” The wail of disappointed love cries, “How often would I have gathered.… Ye would not”; but words of stern, irrevocable doom follow: “Your house is left unto you desolate.” As we see them in the “Son who has revealed Him,” anger and grief are never far apart in God. He has no love for inflicting pain. He has no love for the future punishment of creatures whom He has made. If it must be—if they make it a necessity—it must and will be. Holiness must be vindicated; sin is a peril to the good order, and so to the happiness, of the universe. “He must reign,” even if this must mean “enemies put beneath His feet.” But one can believe that there are tears in the heart of the very Judge, as He sets some “on the left hand” for whom He shed His blood. One may almost venture reverently to imagine Him following them as they “depart,” with His word, “Ye would not, ye would not, come to Me that ye might have life!” [Can we not see in His face the sorrow of the love of Christ, as He follows with His eyes the departing young ruler, so lovable, and yet so unready for “eternal life”? (Luke 18:23-24).] Men say of God, “I know Thee, that Thou art hard, … reaping where,” etc. (Matthew 25:34). But they “know” God as little as the Corinthians knew Paul, the man of “many tears.” They do not know Him, as they may see Him, if they will, in Christ. III. Paul the pastor.— 1. How careful he is that his motives should be understood. “I call God for a record upon my soul,” etc. Quite consistent with all said above (under 2 Corinthians 1:17 sqq.), that his personal character, and what they thought of it and of him, were only matters of concern so far as they might be supposed to affect their estimate of the Gospel he preached, or of the Christ Who is the very heart and burden of it. And quite consistent also with the words of the Divine Legislator for “the kingdom of heaven” (Matthew 5:37). Paul is not a “yes and no” man; but his word here is not simply, “Yea, yea; nay, nay.” He strengthens it with an affirmation (cf. Romans 1:9) which one could have supposed too serious for “a mere personal matter” like this, his motive in making a change in his itinerary. The Master had said, “Whatsoever is more than these”—the plain “yes” and “no”—“cometh of evil.” In a world of evil, where men are evil, and where sin has put the relations of social intercourse so much out of joint, a strengthened “Yea” or “Nay” may be inevitable. And in this particular instance it is no “merely personal matter.” It is for the Gospel’s sake still. A pastor’s good understanding with his people is to him a power which he can use for their sakes. If they distrust his character, or lose confidence in his word, he will be of little use to them. A transparent simplicity of act and word and motive will give him a hold upon their hearts, if even they question, or differ from, his judgment. But such a protest as this, such a purgation of himself on oath, is a rare thing; Paul’s normal attitude is in 1 Corinthians 4:3,—“A small thing with me that I,” etc. Since, however, those words were written, new circumstances had arisen, which wrung from him this protest, for his people’s sake even more than for his own. Says the Great Shepherd: “I know My sheep, and am known of Mine!” Paul wants his flock to know him. 2. Not a lord over faith, but a helper of joy.— (1) They are believers; even these Corinthians are (2 Corinthians 1:24). He is only a believer himself; in Christ, as man and man, every Corinthian and he have the same standing. Their faith is the vital link holding them to Christ; every man believes alone—by and for himself. It is his own unshared act. And the status in Christ is retained by believing; it may be forfeited by sin—sin which is fatal to faith, because grieving to the Spirit by Whose help alone men do, or can, savingly believe. If not, “if we (continue to) walk in the light as He is.… We have fellowship, and the blood … cleanseth,” etc.; with a continuous efficacy it puts a bar between us and our native guilt, and we retain our new status of grace. We are “justified by faith,” and by the same faith “we have our access into grace whereby we stand” (Romans 5:1-2) and “rejoice.” The grafting into Christ, the abiding in Christ, the joy in Christ,—all hinge upon faith. No Paul, nor any other wise pastor, will venture to “lord” it over the life of faith. “One is Master, even Christ; the rest are all brethren” (Matthew 23:8). (2) But it is brotherly in the highest degree to help the “joy” of another. “To add sunshine to daylight,” as Wordsworth says, is no small honour to a successful pastor. To be able so to bring a living, bright, realised Christ near to them, as that fear gives place to rest, and gloom to joy; so to be used to open up Scripture, with its teachings as to the “style” of life possible to, becoming in, provided for, children of God, as that they rise to the higher level, and with a glad and free heart, which has lost everything of merely obligatory and mechanical, all sense of bondage and constraint, in religion, go forward, “glad in the Lord”; by his own testimony and experience, so to be helpful as to clear away difficulties, and to encourage and embolden fearful hearts to hope for more, and to dare more, in the life of godliness;—it may well be an ambition of a worthy pastor, as, when won, it will be a cause of unspeakable thankfulness. IV. The pastor exercising discipline.— 1. He does it in the spirit just sketched out,—not as a lord, but as a helper. A pure Church is a glad Church. Offences purged away, Achans sought out and put away, then conquests and work proceed apace, and all share the joy of success. If also discipline be exercised upon the individual, it is not for his destruction, or even for his exclusion, but for his recovery from his fall, and his restoration to his place in Christ; and thus is really working towards the joy of even the offender. It might be difficult, without undue straining, to find any analogical suggestion of God or Christ in Paul’s disclaimer of “lordship” over their faith; though when we remember how sacredly the liberty of the will is guarded in all the relations between God and man, and how that most Godlike characteristic of the human personality is (may we say?) so “respected” by God Himself, that all the loving, mighty constraint used by the Spirit of God, when endeavouring to lead a man to Christ, always stops short of compulsion; and when we remember how, assisted though it be by the grace of God, the act of believing is a man’s own, for which he is responsible; we might almost say that God Himself has chosen to refrain from exercising lordship over men’s faith. There would be no morality, no value to Him, in a compelled believing, or in a compulsory creed—a thing which, if accepted at all, must be accepted by a hypocrite or a machine. He would not care for the offering of such a faith. So far as there is surrender to His yoke, it is the surrender of a convinced understanding or of an instructed heart. But it needs no forcing of analogy to see God as the supreme “helper of” His people’s “joy,” even when exercising the discipline of rebuke and sharp chastening. It is the happy paradox of the Christian life: “Count it all joy when ye fall into divers temptations.” “We ‘exult’ in tribulations also, knowing that,” etc. (James 1:2; Romans 5:3). If the foundation of the Christian character be right, if the heart be sound toward God, then all His providential discipline of habit and character, all the keen pruning away of excrescences and blemishes, everything which smites, and delivers from, sin,—all work together for a holiness which is, in part, joy. “The happy God” [so literally 1 Timothy 1:11; 1 Timothy 6:15] works towards His own happiness in His children. He loves to have them “rejoice evermore”; it is part of His “will in Christ Jesus concerning them” (1 Thessalonians 5:16-18). “That your joy may be full” is a distinct desire and purpose of that Son, Who in all things has revealed to us the Father, by what Himself is, quite as much as by what He says about the Fattier (John 16:24). Cf. also John 17:13 : “That they might have My joy fulfilled in themselves.” The pastoral office of the Great Shepherd may not infrequently demand words as sharp, and discipline as severe, as those of Paul the pastor towards his Corinthians; but it aims at their joy. Their religious life can never realise fully how the “fruit of the Spirit is … joy,” if there be, in any degree or form, sin. Yet He would have their life not a restraint, or a series of self-denials, or a round of stern obligations, nor even a hoping and striving forward and upward, without ever being quite satisfied; but, rather, a “joyous” life, full of assurance and buoyancy and victory. Indeed, the “joy” is not only a thing desirable in itself; it is a means to something yet more desirable. “The joy of the Lord is strength” to the Lord’s people, as certainly now as in the days of Nehemiah (Nehemiah 8:10). It is a view of the Heavenly Father as unworthy and untrue as was the Corinthian view of Paul, to imagine Him without care for His people’s happiness. He is not the God to grudge “joy” to His creatures. They should not think of Him as, if anything, predisposed to take away rather than to give; as likely to meet their devotion to Him of themselves and of all they are and have, by a demand for the surrender of something very dear. He cares for their holiness first; if that can be secured, and yet even their natural “joy” be untouched or enhanced, He will assuredly so order it, in His disposition of their life. Holiness is before all; but joy through holiness is certain; and He will always work towards this, with a minimum of discipline and of pain. Did this passage in the letter so reveal the heart of the real Paul to the Corinthian Church that they doubted, or maligned him, no more? “Do believe it, brethren, that in writing as I did, and in all I have done for you, I desired to be a helper of your joy.” If His people will look into the heart of God, as it has been laid bare to them in the words and work, and in the very self, of His Son, they will see in Him also One Who by all His dealings with them heartily desires their joy. And when at last they “enter into the joy of their Lord” (Matthew 25:21), the “good and faithful servants” will be realising the fulfilment of all their Divine Master’s purposes and leading in their life. 2. He delays, and is reluctant to exercise discipline at all. “To spare you, I came not as yet,” etc.—Here again is a trait of that God in Christ Whom Paul, as it were, reproduces, as a consequence of the union, the unifying, the real fellowship of life, which are his “in Christ.” Anybody can drive away or cut off a sheep from the flock (Ezekiel 34:4, etc.; John 10:12). The “Wolf” can do that admirably; it is his work. “We are not ignorant of his devices.” If he could have picked up this poor Corinthian thrust out of the fold, nothing would have served his turn better than an excessive discipline, carried beyond what the repentance of the offender now had made necessary. Accordingly, Paul would have the Corinthian Church follow the lead of his own action towards them as a whole. “A minimum of discipline, brethren, and that reluctant, and delayed. Take your penitent back again. You have chastened him sufficiently. Your concurrent (2 Corinthians 1:6) censure has had its effect. He is in danger of being swallowed up by the very excess of the sorrow of his repentant shame. You have been yourselves put to the test.” [As every case of wrongdoing in a Church does put the members to the test. What is their attitude towards sin? What towards this particular sin? Can it be said by their Lord, “Ye cannot bear them which are evil”? (Revelation 2:1, of the very Ephesus from which Paul is writing). Is there that sure sign of health in a body, that it is restless, and cannot suffer a wound to heal up, so long as any diseased bone or foreign body lodged in its tissues is unexpelled?] “I wanted [did not their Lord also desire?] to see whether you felt with me about such sin, and whether, indeed, my word would command your obedience.” [Not “lording it over” them, indeed, yet “having rule,” such rule as a shepherd must needs exercise over a flock (Hebrews 13:7; Hebrews 13:17).] “You have stood the test well. Now we must not play the game of Satan, and leave to him a soul for his prey. Restore the man; confirm your love toward him. As little discipline as possible; as little putting away as possible. That was in my heart towards yourselves, when I changed my route, and did not come direct to you. I did not want to be necessitated to visit sharply sin such as I should have found if I had come then, but which you now have put away.” It is wise pastoral policy, it is wise paternal rule in a family, as it is wise political government, to govern as little as possible, to punish as seldom as possible, to aim at recovery and restoration rather than penal infliction or exclusion. It is the wisdom, it is the heart of “a good shepherd;” it is once more the heart of God. Again the analogy needs no forcing, and it is based upon a real unity of purpose and life. As the weeping pastor at Ephesus, so the patient, but often deeply grieved, Father in heaven: “To spare you I came not,” etc. Hear Him speaking of old: “I will not be always wroth, for the spirit should fail before me, and the souls which I have made” (Isaiah 57:16). “The longsuffering of God leadeth thee to repentance” (Romans 2:4). Remembering the holy intensity of God’s necessary antagonism [“hatred”] to sin; remembering the flagrant, and insolent, offence to His holiness which every day goes up to Him from earth; remembering the fearful propagatory power of evil and of the prolonged life of an evil-doer; do not men naturally wonder that the just Judge “bears so long,” not only with His people, to whom all this sin is an offence, a temptation, a trial, and sometimes an acute and oppressive persecution, but with the evildoers themselves? (Luke 18:7). When men have seen some culminating and outrageous piece of cruelty, or treachery, or fraud committed, have they not primâ facie reason to say, as the wrong-doer seems not only to escape penalty, but even to prosper as the fruit of his sin, “Him doth God know? Is there knowledge in the Most High?” [Psalms 73:11; but note that the question has in that verse a boldly unbelieving turn and tone given to it]. God can afford to wait, and to be silent, however misunderstood and misjudged. [“Patiens, quia æternus” (Augustine).] And His answer to His Church in the day of His own vindication will be: “To spare the sinners, I came not,” etc. It is the appeal of His forbearance to the individual sinner. Why was he not cut off, cast off, the very first time he deliberately, and with clear understanding of his act, refused to obey the will or call of God? Why did not a stroke of judgment make his first sin his last—at any rate, his last on earth? “To spare thee, I came not,” etc. Judgment must come some day. God’s patience is holy, and therefore cannot be infinite. But holy wrath lingers. “The times of this ignorance God winked at, but now,” etc. (Acts 17:30). How often has Paul’s turning aside from a visitation, which could have had no room in it for anything but punishment, been reproduced on a scale of Divine enlargement of love and patience, in His turning aside from the sinner, desiring that respite and delay might mean a repentance which should make judgment needless, and mercy and restoration possible to the Divine Love? V. The pastor’s absolution.—Two Gospel passages underlie, or are well illustrated by, 2 Corinthians 1:7; 2 Corinthians 10:1. In Matthew 18:18 a power of “binding” and “loosing” is made one of the prerogatives of the Church of Christ within its own borders. To whom is such a power to sit in judgment upon their fellow-men to be entrusted? To even “two or three,” if they be “met in [unto] the name” of their Lord; in which case He also is with them “in the midst,” and thus, with Him, two or three—with no restriction to apostles or “official” members—are a quorum which may form an assembly of the Church, valid for discipline whether to bind or loose sentence and penalty. Inherent in the whole body,—for the terms are perfectly general,—it may be from time to time, and from case to case, specially localised in the particular Church, or even in the two or three along with whom is the Fourth, the First, the Lord. [So John 20:22-23, spoken, both as to mission and disciplinary power, to a much larger company than “the twelve.”] Accordingly “the many” at Corinth had “inflicted the punishment.” It is “ye forgive”; Paul follows the lead, or adopts the act, of the Church. There is no need to suppose that, even at a date so early, there were not elders, or officers of some sort, at Corinth, who in the disciplinary action would be the mouthpiece of the Church. But convenience and seemly order, not principle, would govern and dictate such a specialisation of function. Their forgiveness would be the forgiveness of the whole Church. The Church has acted, without waiting for Paul, or even for his directions to forgive the man. 2. Matthew 17:19-20 is also in his mind. Rather, it is his working theory of discipline in the Church, as was seen in 1 Corinthians 5:3-5. The gathering which he there instructed them to arrange for, in regard to this very offender, was to be composed of the Church, plus Paul’s “spirit,” plus the power of the presence of “the Lord Jesus Christ.” Then their discipline became the discipline of Christ; and now that they have forgiven, Paul concurs and forgives, just as if he had been actually with them. But the forgiveness of the Church, met “in that Name,” and the forgiveness of Paul thus exercised to ratify theirs, are neither ecclesiastical nor sacerdotal, but representative; it is, as it were, “in the person of Christ” [to keep to the translation which falls in so perfectly with the passage in the Gospels and that in the preceding Epistle]. As in the original enactment of this power of “binding” and “loosing,” the act is His Who is “in their midst,” answering by His very presence and direction the prayer for guidance, as touching which the little company have “agreed to ask.” Christ is the supreme and sole fount of forgiveness. All human forgiveness is declaratory only. The priest who “cleansed” the leper [Psalms 51:2, “cleanse me”; the quasitechnical word for the act of the priest in such a case] could only declare him physically clean, and give official recognition to the fact that ipso facto he had become released from all the restrictions binding on a leper. “Loosing” him meant declaring him “loosed.” It is a pastoral absolution; the forgiveness of a shepherd who cares most that a sheep shall not be thrust into the power of Satan, the master of many “devices,” subtle as of old. NOTES2 Corinthians 2:12. Troas.—Acts 20:1-6. Note, “for the Gospel,” literally exact. Door.—Cf. 1 Corinthians 16:9, and material there.2 Corinthians 2:13.—See Homily, “Conqueror; Captives; Incense.” Assumed in the homiletics, with most, that, although festive processions in honour of Bacchus are closely connected with the earliest root of the word “triumph,” yet the word had been borrowed and was in common use for the triumph of a victorious Roman general; which Roman triumph, moreover, alone supplies the figure with the touch of “incense.” [See these points, and nearly all others, dealt with in the various homilies which follow.] Cf. Luke 20:18. “Men must build with the Stone, or be crushed beneath it.” Also Luke 2:24. “This Child is set … for the fall and for the rising again of many.” Men fall, or rise, whenever they come into contact with Christ in a faithful Gospel. [Happily, all who rise have first “fallen.” The “fall” is the first thing. Men may do both; they must, in order to a full salvation.] The triumph of Memmius, a century earlier, after the sack of Corinth, had been a very remarkable and famous triumph, certain to be in the minds of Paul’s readers. .—2 Corinthians 2:12-17(Nearly all the details of interpretation of 2 Corinthians 2:14-16 will be found more fully taken up in the detailed Homiletics which follow.) I. “Paul turning away from ‘an open door’!”— 1. A marvel! This is the man who in his former letter could not leave his work at Ephesus because there was “a great door and effectual” opened to him (1 Corinthians 16:9). In this very Troad and its neighbourhood he had on a former journey tried many “doors,” only to find that they were not “open”; closed against him by the “Spirit of Jesus” (Acts 16:6-8). Now the door was open, and apparently he did enter and begin his work, and in a brief while with much success; for on the return journey from Corinth he found a little Church in Troas with whom he spent the Sunday (Acts 19:5-12). Yet he put his work down, left the open door, and in “restlessness” of spirit, and in anxiety about Corinth, from which there came no tidings, he crossed over into the Macedonian region to meet Titus, as he hoped, the sooner [as he, in fact, did (2 Corinthians 7:6)]. 2. Such a detail, with its self-revelation, has no small value from the point of view of the historical student. Just such touches as these make it impossible, without a scepticism which puts the sceptic altogether out of court, as not deserving to be listened to, to doubt that we are dealing with a document historically veracious to the last degree, the real letter of a real man, of the date which is professed and claimed; with all the evidential consequences which flow from the genuineness and the contemporary testimony of such a letter from such a competent witness. Such details are important credentials of a revelation which is nothing if not historic. 3. But they are parts of the revelation.—God reveals His mind partly in selected histories and biographies, “stories with a purpose,” those points being brought out in the telling which best help the purpose of the Divine Narrator. Plainly, then, the highest type of worker is not above “moods” and almost uncontrollable emotion; such moods and deep emotion as may unsettle him, and even render it impossible for him to continue his work. “The peace of God which is to guard heart and thoughts” (Philippians 4:7), standing sentry, as it were, at the heart’s door and preventing the entrance of distressing or mischievous thought, is no such mechanical defence as to produce mere insensibility. There is in perfect service no such mechanical labour, no such mechanical fulfilment of duty, as might be got from a machine wound up to do a set task, and going rigorously through with it, without interest or without feeling. “But, Paul cannot you trust your work at Corinth in the hands of your Master? After all, is it not more His work than yours? You did your part at Corinth whilst you lived there; you have done your part in this unhappy business about the incestuous man, by writing your letter and by sending Titus. Cannot you now leave the issues, and go quietly on with your work? We know, indeed, that your personal stake in the matter is not small, but we know, too, that your reputation has long ago been put into the hands of your Lord. What the Corinthians will have thought and done, when they got your letter, whether they will obey you, or whether this will have inflamed the factious party into fresh opposition, or even have given them a means of bringing over to their side some who have hitherto been ‘of Paul,’—we know how little you regard this for your own sake. Cannot you ‘rest in the Lord, and wait patiently for Him’? and meanwhile work on, within this open door in the Troad?” There is nothing in such thoughts which is not truth, and the high privilege of the life consecrated so entirely to Christ that everything in it, like the man himself, is Christ’s, not his own. No life was ever more utterly removed from all self-centering thought or work or care than was Paul’s: “to him to live was ‘Christ.’ ” Yet we love him none the worse, nor is he the less valuable a detail of God’s revealed will on such matters, that his very example here checks all unhealthy and exaggerated application of such truths as were just now suggested. There is not the rigid support of, and compliance with, a relentless code which takes no account of human nature. In the illustrative and didactic instance which Paul supplies there is the perfect naturalness and elasticity of simple, real life. No man more certainly than he would subordinate all personal considerations to the interests of the work of Christ. But neither did His Lord expect him not to feel, to feel acutely, to feel with a depth of emotion which was a real disqualification for going on with his work in Troas. We serve a profoundly reasonable Master, Who knows exactly how much to expect from His servants, of submission in days of sorrow, of acquiescence in days of disappointment, of peace and rest as well as trust in days when, naturally, circumstances would keep brain and heart in a whirl of anxiety, or strained to their utmost tension. After all, the work of Christ at Corinth was the main thing at stake. To this, even in Paul’s mind, everything else stood second. We love Paul none the less, nor did his Lord, we may well believe, condemn him, that his distress turned him away from “an open door.” II. Paul in the train of Christ’s triumph.— 1. Such details as we have been studying are part of God’s Revelation, taken up into it, made the vehicle of a distinct addition to our knowledge of the mind of God, and of His will on such questions of the practical conduct of Christian men. So, similarly, such changes of plan, hingeing on such trivial occasions, are all parts of the progress of the Gospel. They are all contributory to the great plan of campaign, according to which Christ is subduing the world to Himself. They all fall in with the movement of His march to ultimate victory over “things in earth” (Philippians 2:10). They are small details of a great progress whose goal is the day when it shall be proclaimed that “the kingdoms of this world are become the kingdoms of God’s Christ” (Revelation 11:5). It is a progress which seems often retarded. The ground occupied in this very Asia and Troas and Macedonia, is hardly retained for Him to-day. It is often difficult for faith to see any movement at all; more difficult to see any plan at all. The faith which does see the plan, and hold fast to its hope in the triumph, is a grace, the gift of the “Spirit of faith.” It is one subordinate manifestation of the supreme faith, which that Spirit also alone gives, that “Jesus is the Lord” (1 Corinthians 12:3). If that truth be grasped, all else is held. “We see not yet all things put under Him. Though the name of Christ rises ever more loudly above the tumult, the day of victory seems far off. But by the Holy Ghost we know that ‘nothing which ought not to be need be.’ We look back and see forms of evil dead—it may be dead for ever. Evil itself lives, and may even seem after some triumph of good to close in more pitilessly than before, but to those who take the large outlook it is clear that progress is being made. To say that the fight is hopeless is to deny the Lordship of Christ.… There is danger unfathomable and unending in admitting that any wrong is inevitable, that anything is too hard for the Lord” (Editorial, British Weekly, October 26th, 1893). Every conversion has this significance and this importance to the history of the very world itself, that one more life which lay athwart, or ran counter to, the line of the movement of the will of God, and the progress of King Jesus to His final and universal victory, is brought into parallelism, and moves with the Divine movement. And then, all the details of that life, all its activities and aims, in proportion as they are pervaded with the spirit of consecrated service and are made a perpetually renewed offering to Christ, for His service and glory, become details in the triumph of the Great Conqueror. In the old phrase, all such turnings away from Troas and crossings over into Macedonia, are “overruled” for the advantage of the work of God. At the least, the “knowledge of Christ and its savour” are thus “made manifest” in a greater number of cities and centres. No man is on that account to indulge “moods” and “feelings”; to pick up this work, or lay down the other, according as he may, or may not, “feel in the spirit of it”; to enter one door “because he is happy in the work” there, and turn aside from another, or quit it, when he has entered it, because “he was not happy.” But Paul’s quick faith triumphs over the record and the memory of his keen distress at Troas. “It is all right! Thank God! The triumph moves on nevertheless. And we with it! Glory be to God!” 2. The triumph sweeps everybody into its course.—There are no mere spectators. Paul was an enemy once. He is a trophy of the Great Imperator now. He is indeed (by a quick transformation) a soldier sharing, in some humble part, the triumph. It is Christ’s triumph, indeed. The Lord is the Centre of the spectacle. But every subaltern and private is the object of somebody’s regard; to them, he is triumphing. To himself, at any rate, he is triumphant. Nobody who comes into contact with Christ remains indifferent. Triumphed over, and that only, and dragged onward “to death”; or triumphed over, and led onward, triumphing also, “to life.” If Christ’s triumph “comes our way,” we must, in one way or another, “fall in.” To Paul himself the “savour,” so far as he knew of it, was once “of death, unto death”; now “the savour” of his living Lord—not lying dead or corrupting in Joseph’s new tomb—was “of life,” as, himself “saved by the Lords life” (Romans 5:10) and diffusing a Gospel “of life” wherever he went, he moved onward “to life,” “to lay hold of the life which is Life indeed” (1 Timothy 6:19). III. Paul a genuine man dispensing a genuine Gospel.— 1. Other men might, and did, use an incense whose “savour” was not simply and only “of Christ.” There was in most cases much of Christ in it, or at least something. [Even the men at Rome who were preaching with “by-motives, not sincerely,” and indeed in a spirit “of contention,” were at least so “preaching Christ” that Paul rejoiced at their work, though only with a modified joy and satisfaction (Philippians 1:18).] Whilst they bade men “Come buy and eat” (Isaiah 55:1), there was adulteration in their bread, there was admixture in their wine. [The “milk” was not “the sincere milk of the Word” (1 Peter 2:2).] Like dishonest hucksters, for their own gain, or at best for some personal satisfaction, they dealt in a “Word of God” which was not “incorrupt” [Titus 2:7; but quite another word and figure from that of the text here]. Jewish admixture everywhere; half-heathen, childish superstition in Colosse; rationalising treatment of fundamental truths at Corinth; “many” dealt deceitfully with the Word they preached. [See Homiletics on “Charity,” 1 Corinthians 13:5, “thinketh no evil.”] By-motives in the preaching, even if the truth preached were tolerably pure. “Many!” What a view of “Primitive Christianity”! [Shall the figure be pushed so far as to suggest that some diffusers of the incense try so to compound it that it shall not be a “savour of death,” even to the “natural” man? Try so to flavour the wine that the “natural” palate likes it, or at least makes no great objection to it?] 2. Not so Paul.—He returns to the protest he made in 2 Corinthians 1:12, that his whole character and conduct had been at the uttermost remove from any of the self-seeking, the vacillation, or tricky change of purpose with which he was charged at Corinth. But he lifts the whole matter of his personal vindication up to a higher level here than there. Then he protested his “sincerity” as between himself and them; here he protests it in respect of his dealing with “the Word.” Yet even on that lower level it was a “sincerity of God,” which he here also claims; his phrases here analysing that of the earlier verse. He speaks in God’s hearing, conscious of a Listener before Whom he stands, seen through and through, heard through and through. No falsehood of heart but will ring in the voice, to that Ear! No unsoundness, no evil admixture, in his teaching can escape the scrutiny of that Eye. The Great Analyst knows that he does not deal falsely with the Gospel, the “Word of God” put into his mouth to speak. He can “call God to witness upon his soul,” he said (2 Corinthians 1:23). He can lay bare his inmost heart and thought, and challenge that scrutiny. He may well do so, for his “sincerity” is a grace, a gift “of God” by His Spirit. Happy that teacher of Divine truth who is sustained under calumny, or in the midst of misunderstanding, by such a confidence! “The Lord God of gods, the Lord God of gods, he knoweth, and Israel he shall know” (Joshua 22:22). Happy if he never be betrayed into conduct in his office, if never a word come from his lips, concerning which he needs to falter as he faces his own conscience, and concerning which also, as far as man may, he may not look up into the face of God, and claim even His witness that he has not knowingly dealt falsely with his trust, “the Word” which has been given to him to administer. What a check upon everything but supreme loyalty to God’s Truth! What a defence against temptation to man-pleasing! And against self-pleasing! And against any dishonest retailing of old formulas which, rightly or wrongly, no longer represent a man’s beliefs! Honesty, honesty, before all things honesty, in the man who deals with the honest, genuine “Word of God”! Is any most unprincipled, adulterating tradesman so base as the man who adulterates the Bread by which men Live, the “Word which proceedeth out of the mouth of God”? Let the world have at least that as genuine as the apostle, the prophet, the teacher, can give it. This sincere man deals out a genuine Gospel. 2 Corinthians 2:14-16. The triumph; the Captives; the Incense.—[Probably, if not certainly, imagery derived from a Roman triumph.] One of the grandest spectacles of ancient world. All Rome kept holiday; everybody in the streets. Sometimes the show for three whole days winding its way along up to the temple of Jupiter on the Capitol. All ranks and ages watching the long procession hour after hour, with unflagging interest. The Victorious Army, with the spoil heaped up upon long trains of waggons; piles of gold and silver coin; magnificent dresses and ornaments; statues and pictures, such as Memmius had carried off from plundered Corinth; arms and armour from the battle-field. Then the Captives; of strange garb and look and speech. Then the Conqueror, the man of the Day. Not seldom, in golden fetters, bound to, and walking behind, his chariot, the unhappy general, or king, or queen of the conquered foes; often overwhelmed with ridicule, reproach, abuse, by the merciless, civilised brutality of the spectators. The procession moved along amidst clouds of Incense; many in the procession swung censers; burning braziers of charcoal fed with it along the line of route; a fragrance grateful to all! No, not to all. To some of those captives the fate appointed at the end of the day is Death. To the public eye the end of the spectacle will be the conqueror’s sacrifice in the temple of Jupiter. To the victorious troops, dismissal with rewards, each to become a hero in his little home circle. To the mass of captives, slavery, but life. To the condemned ones, death in the rock-hewn dungeons close by the Capitoline Hill. To these the “grateful” incense smells foul as the breath of a charnel-house. To all besides, “a sweet savour,” a “savour of life,” as they move on towards, at least life, if not liberty. To these “a savour of death,” as they move onwards “unto death.” [Most of these points are used in the passage; with some confusion of metaphor, or rather an intentional change in the use of the illustration, characteristic of Paul.] I. What a Christian’s life is to himself.— 1. He is being led, by God, from place to place, in the triumphal procession of Christ. Paul is writing from Macedonia. At Troas, just before, he had found “an open door,” but had, strangely, turned away from it and had crossed over into Europe. Such a sudden change and movement was a sample of his life. “Found no rest for his spirit” in Troas; found no rest for his body anywhere! His life was an incessant movement. Antioch one day; Ephesus almost the next; Ephesus to Corinth; Corinth to Jerusalem; Jerusalem to Rome—the other end of the world of that day! Traversing the Roman Empire in journeys which were rather flights than journeys. To us it seems a wearing, restless, anxious life. To him God’s hand was in all such changes. Even a trivial change like this in question is part of God’s will and plan for Paul’s life. He accepted all such incessant change with acquiescence; indeed, with thankfulness and rejoicing. “Thanks be to God” who is thus leading him about from place to place in the train of the triumph of Jesus Christ! He only waits to know where God would have him go next. He follows gladly, since he follows Christ! 2. So for every Christian man. In every change of station, of circumstances, of abode, he should seek and follow the leading of God. Then even the most perplexing, harassing diversion from his own plans will be no matter of chafing discontent and fretful irritation, but of glorying acquiescence in the plan of God. 3. How grand this makes even the humblest life! The procession, the train of Christ’s triumph, is moving onward with majestic march, swelling in numbers as it advances. He is sweeping onward in triumph; the humblest of His people is moving on in triumph with Him—onward to the consummate day of His triumph. 4. From place to place he is being exhibited as one of Christ’s trophies. Grammatically, it may be either, “Maketh us to triumph,” or “Triumpheth over us.” Both are true. He is shown in the triumph; he shares in the triumph. The army and the captives are here one and the same company. Christ has been God’s General, sent to reduce rebellious earth to submission. Began the war single-handed. Every slain enemy becomes a living helper and a soldier. Other conquerors begin with an army, and lessen or lose it as the war proceeds. Our Captain began without an army, and wins and makes one as the war goes on. Has no victorious army but of conquered captives. Every enemy who submits, falls into the ranks of those who obey His command. The marvel of the mercy of the Gospel this. Every soldier has been an enemy. Rebels not only forgiven and allowed to live, but enlisted, and richly rewarded for service. Those over whom Christ triumphs, triumph with Him in His march to heaven. By-and-by, when He enters in glory through the “everlasting doors” the “King of Glory,” they shall appear with Him in, and with Him enter into, glory. 5. The victory of a Christian is the victory of one first vanquished. A soul’s victory begins in Christ’s victory over it. “Thanks to God who triumphs over us in Christ, for in Christ He makes us to triumph with Christ too!” II. What a Christian’s life is to God.— 1. A grand exhibition of His conquering power, but also of His gracious heart in Christ towards all who submit. His method of advertising, of diffusing “in every place, the knowledge of Christ.” Paul a consummate example of this principle. Did his worst in rebellion against God’s Christ. A pre-eminent persecutor; a zealot of the zealots. Then what a change! Preaches the faith he once destroyed; preaches it, as he persecuted it, “unto strange cities” (Acts 26:11). Paul was in himself a fact which was a consummate testimony for Christ. In himself he was text and preacher and sermon. [“A pattern,” 1 Timothy 1:15-16. To see Paul was to see what Christ could do. Not only his preaching, but his exhibition in this place and that, a captive chained to the chariot of Christ, was diffusing “the knowledge of Christ in every place.” If God be pleased so to use him, so to lead him hither and thither, he acquiesces, he glories. [Same turn of thought in 2 Corinthians 10:5. Read Paul, and see how this Rabbi’s whole system of thought—doctrinal, exegetical, ethical—wears the bonds of Christ. “Every thought led captive.” See Homilies, in loco.] 2. A work for God within the reach of all. Let Christ conquer; put His yoke upon natural pride, anger—“natural” everything; subdue, in business, home, all; then let God exhibit the man, parade him up and down the world, an example of His conquering power, His matchless grace. The great business of life. After some great change in life, involving a new home, perhaps, a new surrounding, a new beginning in everything; thrust, perhaps into an unintended, unexpected, unwelcome destination; after the earliest, inevitable, adjustment to the new conditions in which life to be spent, livelihood to be won, then ask: “Why am I put here? I have been led here in the train of Christ’s triumph, to diffuse here the knowledge of Christ.” A purpose that, to which every other stands second. “To be a savour.” Anybody can swing, can be, a censer! Men see the smoke of the incense. Cannot see the “savour.” Invisible, impalpable, unmistakable! So, how fine to meet these about whose every act, word, movement, hangs something defying analysis, impalpable, intangible, unmistakable, and all Christ! Nothing so much appeals to a non-Christian. [A “sweet savour.” Would that it were always sweet! Religion real, obvious, respected, in some Christians, but not “sweet.”] “Of Christ;” this important. Many lives, lovely, beloved, giving out a sweet savour. What is wanting? The trained “scent” of the spiritual man misses something from the incense! Christ wanting! III. What a Christian’s life is to others.— 1. Everybody will not like the incense even when its savour is loveliest, perfect. To the captives it made all the difference whether it were the accompaniment of the march “to life,” or the march “to death.” 2. Note the sharp division of mankind into “those that are being saved”; and “those that are [now] perishing.” Here a ready test is provided. When a man comes across the “savour” of the incense, does he like it—or not? To “those who are perishing” the Gospel is loathsome as death. Is full of “death.” A dead (“crucified”) Christ; “dead in sins”; “dead to sin”; “dead with Christ.” A “savour of death” seemed to such to hang about all Paul’s preaching. 3. More than that, the Christian man and his testimony help “to life,” or help “to death.” No man can be neutral in the presence of Christ, or of the Gospel, or of a true Christian. Better—or worse—for knowing even one such. [Like his Lord, every Christian man is “come for judgment” (John 9:39). I.e. inevitably forces every man with whom associated, to take up an attitude, for or against, God and Christ; is inevitably a present test of character; necessarily ranges men as either “unto life” or “unto death.”] Well may Paul add, “Who is sufficient?” The issues, the responsibility, of a life full of the savour of Christ are terrible! How much more of one where the testimony is marred by inconsistency, the “savour” mingled with what is not “of Christ”! 2 Corinthians 2:16. “Who is sufficient?” I. The minister of the Gospel speaks in these words, as they stand in the Epistle. But they leap to the lips, they are the sigh of the deepest heart, of many another besides a minister.—There are responsibilities for all. There is no worthy life which has none. The self-sufficient heart that never feels them any burden, that in mere shallow light-heartedness, or slight-heartedness, feels itself at a moment’s notice “equal to anything,” that with the mechanical imperturbability of a Nasmyth steam-hammer is as ready without a misgiving “to forge an anchor as to crack a nut,” has no sense of the meaning of “Life.” The sense of insufficiency with which worthier souls must often go forward to meet and assume responsibilities, is one of the keenest and most daunting pains; none causes more exquisite suffering to a soul filled with a tender conscientiousness. Yet no worthy Man would purchase exemption, at the price of less sensitiveness or a duller conscience. But it makes, not dying but, living the awfully solemn thing. It is easier to die once, and “to die well” and to have done with it, than to live, “once” indeed also, but a “once” which is extended over twenty, forty, eighty years, at every point of which may be danger of failure, at every point responsibility, new burdens gathering as we go, old ones persistently pressing upon our heart, till life is often one long-drawn strain upon the brain and heart, themselves already tense with the sense of responsibility and of inadequacy. The solemnity of life is not that with untarrying pace it is leading to death—death which crowns all with a swift and irreversible “judgment”; nor that it is doing so much to determine what that death and its issues shall be. In the true view of life, it is a continuous thing, beginning here, but stretching on unbroken through the veil of “death,” into the unseen aud eternal. It is a continuous existence, in which dying is a momentary, and not the most important, incident, one of which the most that can be said is that it introduces to, and marks the commencement of, a new section of the new life—“new” because transacted in new conditions and surroundings. To a Christian man dying has been almost emptied of meaning, as well as of dread. It is not only that the “sting” is gone; the thing itself is practically “abolished” (2 Timothy 1:10). The eternal life has begun, but its real solemnity arises from the responsibilities of living, responsibilities before men and towards God. There are those, e.g., II. Of the individual.— 1. Nous mourrons seuls. One might say with equal truth, “We live alone.” “Thou art the man,” is the word of God, in all rebuke of sin, in all calls to duty, in all believing unto salvation, in the day of Christ’s judgment of men. God’s claims, our duties—with them each man has singly to do; for them each one of us must “give account of himself to God” (Romans 14:12). As in creation no two atoms really touch each other, so souls are essentially apart. There are collective duties for which there is a collective responsibility, of co-extensive area of incidence. But even then a personal responsibility accrues for the assuming of one’s own share in the collective work and obligation. In the end, everything comes back to the individual. “When I remember, in view of this, with what unmeasured powers our Creator has endowed us, and that I am not only responsible for what is done by them, but for what they might do if I rightly used them; when I remember that God has an unquestionable right to all my activities, all my thoughts, all my love; and when withal I am conscious of Sin and Satan so often engrossing and mastering me, that I am daily ‘robbing God’ (Malachi 3:8) upon His own earth, under His very eye,—in a word, when I think of all that I ought to do, and all that I ought to be, as contrasted with what I really am, I feel that, in the face of every fact concerning my responsibility as an individual merely, I may well exclaim with trembling, ‘Who is sufficient for these things?’ ” Then there are responsibilities arising from— 2. His relationships.—“By connection with our fellow-men none of our old obligations to God are abrogated. There is not one code of morals for the man and another for the merchant, not one law for the individual and another for the statesman, warrior, king. All God’s claims are binding on us always—wrong is wrong, right is right, everywhere. By entering on new relationships we can never free ourselves from the moral laws that are authoritative upon us as individuals; on the contrary, new relationships create new responsibilities. Who can measure the responsibilities of a parent? To the father and mother of that infant are committed most of its preparation for the stern and deadly struggle with sin, which is to decide its eternal destiny. The privilege of training a child for a beautiful and true life here, and for a yet more beautiful and true life hereafter, is the most surpassingly glorious a parent’s heart can desire; the responsibility of having by lip or life ruined a child here, leaving it to wander, lost, homeless, for ever, will be the most crushing a parent’s heart can bear.” No father or mother who remembers how pliable and how delicate a thing is the young character, but will cry out, “Who is sufficient?” A single slip of the seal engraver’s tool, or too deep a cutting, may mar the labour of months. Parents are cutting an image in a most precious gem. A weight or a bond too many may give a warp to the young branch, which shall never be straightened out all life through. A wrong word or a wrong act may make its indelible mark upon the fearfully “spoilable” material, and yet so valuable, entrusted to us to work upon. And who can measure the responsibilities of a preacher? Men talk lightly of the preacher’s life, as if he had “light work, good position, good pay”! There is honour, truly. Every man worthy to be in the ranks of the ministry, understands the privilege of being the confidant and comforter of souls, and their helper in sorrow. It is no mean honour to be in an office where he may speak words welcome to weary hearts as water to the thirsty traveller in an Arabian desert, or words which may send on the hearer into the week of worry and toil with new energy and hope. To send away singing some heart that came sad; to say words which in another heart shall ring on many following days like a trumpet-call to duty; or which in a moment of danger shall recur to another, perhaps to a young man in his hour of temptation, like the gentle voice of a warning friend; to be permited to speak words which shall for many a day feed men and women as with supernatural strength, or which may even awaken some soul that is slumbering on, heedless of its high destiny and its awful progress toward eternity, marking the turning-point of a life,—all this is an honour angels might covet; the dignity of being God’s ambassador yields to none other. But the responsibility of it! If the congregation come and go and no soul be cheered, or fed, or warned; if no lesson be taught, and no impetus given to the good in any life; what then? The man’s “service” is a failure, if no heart is lifted to God, if the sheep turn away hungry still; if the children gather round their elder brother, and he give them the stone of mere lecturing, or the husks of mere brilliance. There is a partial failure if the hearer be only instructed, and not persuaded. The heart may be moved, the intellect satisfied; but, if the will be not moved? “Who is sufficient?” Men understand what it is in business to pay high salaries for trustworthiness and responsibility. Money, life, depend upon one man’s skill and judgment and fidelity, and men pay accordingly. But for how much “pay” will a man intelligently undertake to “watch for souls as one that must give account”? Stand at the great “Day” by a preacher confronted with a man once in his congregation who says, and truly, “I came hungry, or perplexed, or indifferent,—or under deep conviction of sin, and you had no word for me. I passed on; my disappointed heart made me sceptical. I doubted God, or hated Him.” Another, “I passed on, hardening under your powerless word, and now am lost.” Another, “I, too, passed on, and my convictions died away.” Certainly the responsibility of the loss of a soul never lies entirely at a preacher’s door. Every man knows that, at the very heart of the matter, the responsibility is his own, however others may have contributed to the conditions of his life. But if in that Day that minister says: “Ah! that was the day when I had made ‘scamped,’ hasty preparation; when in mere spiritual indolence my closet devotion had been slurred over, when my own tone was low, and I went into the pulpit powerless. It was my opportunity with that man; I was not that day the man to seize it. I am saved here; but he—” As those that must give account of the sermons of a year, of a ministry; and of that incessant ministry of pastoral and personal character. For how much “pay” will a man undertake this? Then, further, are to be added the considerations here specially pressing upon Paul. On the most faithful ministry of the most spiritual man hangs not only life, but death. Some hearers he will certainly not save; as certainly will their heart pervert his ministry into the occasion of “death.” “For judgment Christ came into the world,” etc. (John 9:39). “For judgment” is every man come into the world. Every man is a test of character, swift, decisive, inevitable, to every other man with whom he comes into contact. Goodness will reveal and help goodness; but it may awaken and irritate into hatred the evil which it finds. And the minister is a test, and his word is a test, to men and women. The more faithful he is to the ideal and the responsibility of his office, the more surely is he set for “judgment” amongst his fellows. Life and death hang upon mere individual living; who dares live? Life and death depend on parental wisdom and love; who dares train a child? Life and death hang upon the ministry of the Gospel; who dares speak in the name of Christ? “Who is sufficient?” “Brethren, pray for us!”—Slightly suggested by “Homilist,” New Series, iv. 385. 2 Corinthians 2:16. “Who is sufficient?” I. These words express a sense of the greatness of the work undertaken.—The ministry is a work 1. Great in its nature.—There is the exposition of the Bible. In His word He has given us the highest teaching, the divinest doctrine. He has taught us concerning our own past, and the world’s past, our own and the world’s future. Above all, He has given light on our relationship to Himself;—ourselves, Himself, and the Mediator between us. Hence there is here the greatest truth that can possess man’s mind, truth that the angels desire to look into, and which take us an eternity to understand; truth, too, whose distinguishing glory it is to be remedial in its nature, restorative in its aim. Every man is bound to be a student of the Holy Book and a learner for himself at the feet of the Great Teacher; the minister pre-eminently should acquaint himself with its truths, and aid those around him to understand them and feel their power. And all this statement and enforcing of truth must be in Paul’s spirit,—Christ’s. When the study of the preacher is unfaithful, unfilial, and his preaching unloving, unsympathetic, unchristian; when there is medley doctrine, or a forced, unnatural earnestness in its promulgation, the pulpit is weak. Not only does Christ claim that His spirit shall be present in the work of His servants; the very world of “society” demands it, and triumphs if it be absent, or lost. To misrepresent the truth of God, the life of Christ; to be erroneous in teaching and inconsistent in character,—the possibility makes a man cry: “Who is sufficient?” 2. Great in its influence.—To influence and mould deathless souls! To have to do with the understanding, heart, will, of man, with all their outworkings now and for ever! “The preaching is to bless or curse all who listen. It is to save those who receive it, from sin, self, hell; to save them by means of the truth, through the love of Christ, by the Spirit of God. It is to unshackle every undying power of the enslaved soul. It is to heal the diseased, to raise the dead. But those whom it will not bless it will curse; it will harden them in sin. It will add to their privileges and responsibilities new ones which will utter for ever a condemning cry against them. This continual, inevitable, twofold effect make the work awfully responsible, momentously great.” II. The insufficiency of man to perform the work.— 1. How inadequate is man to expound the Scripture. “Easy work to preach the Gospel; it is so simple!” So they say; but is it? If an intelligent, harmonious representation of truth be given, there is material for the highest thought, scope for every faculty. Every power is challenged to the work, for also, in a true sense, man’s reason must be satisfied; the truth must be so presented as to do homage to the Book and persuade the man. 2. Is it “easy,” again, for feeble man to cherish the spirit essential to the work, a living sympathy with all that is holy and true, and a righteous hatred to all that is corrupt and false, unswerving loyalty to the claims of God, unchangeable love to the souls of men? It is impossible to interpret the Book without a spirit too real for pietism, too earnest for fearfulness, too holy for dalliance with sin; is it easy to retain such a spirit? 3. Who has ever taught even a Sabbath scholar, and, much more, who has tried to win an adult for Christ by direct, personal effort, but has learned this lesson, most quickly and most surely of all—the pitiable powerlessness of human strength to dislodge Satan from the hearts which we would bless? To attempt to guide the judgment or move the will of some wayward youth, or hardened profligate, or utter, though “blameless,” worldling,—it is a child’s attack upon a garrisoned fortress. It is hard to bless; and if the word do not bless “unto life,” it must hurt “unto death.” “Who is sufficient?” III. The qualification for the work.—The great, primary qualification is this very spirit of conscious inefficiency. “When I am weak, then am I strong.” The old heathen believed that their heroes were strengthened to dare and to do, by becoming possessed of the skill and might of the gods of their special devotion. Their dream may be our reality. Only with them the gods favoured the cunning, the vaunting, the strong; our God “increaseth strength”—for work, as well as for journeying or endurance—“to them that have no might” (Isaiah 40:29). Depressing want of apparent success may often be needed to crush out egoism, self-sufficiency, pride, until in helplessness the man is at last flung upon God and His might. When men “have toiled all night and have caught nothing,” then are they ready to be helped and guided by their Master to a “catch” whose success is His, not theirs. To succeed, men must work and teach and live in this spirit of conscious insufficiency. “That no flesh should glory in His presence!”—Founded on homily by U. R. Thomas, “Homilist,” New Series, ii. 387 sqq. 2 Corinthians 2:15-16. Manward and Godward Aspects of the Gospel Ministry. I. Manward.—It may have a vivifying effect. It may have a deadly influence. Because of three unalterable principles: 1. The greater the mercy abused the greater the condemnation. 2. The susceptibility to good impressions decreases in proportion to the resistance against them. 3. Man’s moral suffering will be increased in proportion to his consciousness that he once had the means of being happy. [“Woe unto thee, Chorazin,” etc.] II. Godward.—A true ministry is unto God “a sweet savour,” whatever be its effects upon humanity. [Query is this the meaning of “unto God”? and not rather, “for God’s purposes (and glory)?”] It is in itself, therefore, for good, for good exclusively. It may be the occasion of evil, but it is the cause of good. [Cf. a similar, though not parallel, thought in Romans 7:10. Therefore, 1. It saves by design; it destroys, if at all, in spite of its design. 2. It saves by its inherent tendency; it injures, if at all, in spite of that tendency. 3. It saves by Divine agency; it destroys, if at all, in spite of that agency. [“Ye do resist the Holy Ghost.”]—Extracted with modifications from “Homilist,” New Series, ii. 468. 2 Corinthians 2:17. The Word is Corrupted. I. By introducing error, human philosophy, private opinions, irrelevant matter, by the omission or misrepresentation of important truths, selfish aims. II. How it ought to be preached—faithfully, sincerely, humbly, earnestly.—[J. L.] [Or start by inquiring what in common life is “adulteration,” and what are the motives of it.] NOTESN.B. A continuous outpour of argument and appeal, all “alive,” and quivering, thrilling, with quick emotion, from 2 Corinthians 2:17 to 2 Corinthians 6:10.2 Corinthians 3:1.—Q.d. “There, he is at it again! [2 Corinthians 2:17, or perhaps cf. 1 Corinthians 9:1-6; 1 Corinthians 9:15; 1 Corinthians 9:21; or something he had said at Corinth, known to his readers]. Praising himself!” [Familiarly, “Blowing his own trumpet, since no one else will do it for him.”] “Am I?” (q.d. in 2 Corinthians 2:17). Letters of commendation.—Such as Apollos brought to Corinth (Acts 18:27); or such as this very letter became to Titus (2 Corinthians 8:17-19). Romans 16:1 is a good example; for Ph�be. These Christians travelling from Church to Church appear in 2 John 1:10-11, 3 John 1:5-9 [“I wrote unto the Church”]. Seen also in the Didache, xii., xiii. Perhaps such as came “from James” to Antioch (Galatians 2:12) carried such “letters.” These became a very common institution in the early Church. N.B., Paul himself had once asked the “authority and commission” of such letters to the synagogue of Damascus (Acts 26:12). Note the shorter reading.2 Corinthians 3:2.—“Certainly, ‘to you’ we need none. We, who know what place yon occupy ‘in our hearts,’ know that we do not; you—‘all’ of you—can ‘read’ our love to you, and you ‘know’ that we do not.” In our hearts.—Others carry theirs in their hands.2 Corinthians 3:3.—New turn given here to the figure. The Corinthians are a letter of commendation for him, not to themselves only, but to other Churches and the world. The Christians at Corinth are a credential for him so conspicuous that it is “known and read of all men.” Notice the adroit, courteous, ad homines argument. In 1 Corinthians 15 he urges that they cannot deny Christ’s resurrection without abandoning all hope of their own, and all reality in their salvation from sin. So here, they cannot deny his apostleship without also denying the work of the Spirit of God in their own heart. Ministered.—“Carried about” as his rivals did their letters. An epistle of Christ.—I.e. written by, and given to His servant Paul by, Christ Himself. The argument is that of 1 Corinthians 9:2-3. In the phraseology, rather than in the thought, are reminiscences of such Old Testament passages as Proverbs 3:3; Proverbs 7:3; Ezekiel 11:19; Ezekiel 36:26. So also the application of the metaphor, like the use of the original figure of “letters of commendation,” is modified almost from sentence to sentence. Thus a letter written with “ink” passes over into the “tables of stone” at Sinai (Jeremiah 31:33). Flesh … stone.—Plainly not here in any moral sense: “fleshen” [analogous to “wooden”] would exactly represent the thought. By the Spirit.—Note the capital letter rightly in the; His work, the “new creation” of 2 Corinthians 5:17, the experiences of their new life,—these are the writing of the “Living God.” Note the name, “Living God,” in 2 Corinthians 6:16; was Paul in Ephesus, as once he had been in Athens, “stirred … when he saw the city full of idols”? [Another impressively used Old Testament name in 2 Corinthians 6:18, “the Lord God Almighty.”]2 Corinthians 3:4.—See Appended Note from Stanley. Such confidence, etc.—A real answer to the cry of 2 Corinthians 2:16, “Who is sufficient?” etc. The word “sufficient” and its cognates is here resumed in 2 Corinthians 3:5-6. [Say, “adequate to, competent to, up to the level (measure) of.”] He looks “toward God,” the source of his commission, the giver of adequate grace to fulfil it, the giver of his success at Corinth or elsewhere; he expects all from God, the source, “through Christ,” the channel.2 Corinthians 3:5. To think … of ourselves.—Misleading to our modern English ears; clearer in Q.d. “to give ourselves any such confident encouragement, drawing our confidence of sufficiency from any presumed resources within ourselves.”2 Corinthians 3:6.—“Proof that this competency comes from God. God gave him a further and a greater competency, which involves the less. God made him competent (2 Corinthians 1:22) to be a minister of a dispensation, which from its very nature must produce, when it took effect, exactly such a result as he counts the Corinthian Church to be” (Waite, in Speaker). Ministers.—Reverts to the word of 2 Corinthians 3:3; but the personal purpose of that “ministration” is gone from his thought; he is “carrying about and dispensing”—“administering”—something far greater and of more importance than any personal credentials, even of the best. A New Covenant—N.B. this in, correctly. To be studied with Matthew 26:28 [and this with Exodus 24:8]; Jeremiah 31:33-34. [This last in Hebrews 10 is the pivot around which turns an exposition of the “first” and the “second” (2 Corinthians 3:9), and in Hebrews 8 clenches the discussion as between the “new” and the “old”; both of which comparisons should themselves be compared with this of “letter” and “spirit,” which is also found in Romans 2:27-29; Romans 7:6. The letter.—The Law of Moses, graven in so many letters and words on the tables of stone. [The Decalogue is, then, practically “the Law,” throwing light on Paul’s frequent discussions of “the law,” as affecting Christian thought and life.] The Spirit.—Capital S; the Holy Ghost, Who is the characteristic and crowning glory of the Gospel order. In the argument of Gal 3:2; Galatians 5:5, “the Spirit” is the summary gift of that whole continuous “covenant” of which believers, pre- and post-Pentecostal both, are Abraham’s heirs. Killeth.—He explains how, in Romans 3:19; Romans 5:20, and, particularly, Romans 7:9-24. [See especially Romans 7:9; Romans 7:11; Romans 7:24, and Romans 8:2,] of which this verse—this word—is a summary. Giveth life.—John 6:63; 1 Corinthians 15:45 (very interesting), Galatians 6:8, cast light on this; as does Romans 8:11, where the action of the life-giving Holy Ghost is carried further.2 Corinthians 3:7. Of death.—Though this was not its purpose (Romans 7:10), but its incidental result. Keep “written” distinct from “graven on stones”; not “written on stones.” “Written” is opposed to “glorious”; lit. “in letters,” “in glory,” respectively. From this point the chapter is framed on the lines of the narrative of Exo 34:28-35; many words and terms of expression being borrowed from the LXX.2 Corinthians 3:8. Glorious.—“With glory,” slightly changed from 2 Corinthians 3:7. Shall be.—Beet carries this forward into a future revelation of a glory for believers analogous to that which clothed Moses’ face. But is the “glory” in the second case anything but spiritual, and analogous to that in the first? “Shall be” occupies the (mental) point of time just before the advent of the “glorified” order which was just then becoming actual.2 Corinthians 3:9.—Moses was a dispenser, administrator, of “condemnation,” in that he brought a Law to men which in issue, if not purpose, condemned them.2 Corinthians 3:10.—The phraseology here is full of reminiscences of the LXX. In this respect.—Stanley: “In this instance of Moses”: “In this particular instance was fulfilled the general rule, that a greater glory throws a lesser glory into the shade.” Beet: “In this matter; in the comparison of the two Covenants.” Waite: “In this particular of comparative or relative glory.” Conybeare [and Howson]: “Literally, For that which has been glorified in this particular, has not been glorified, because of the glory which surpasses it.” “The moon is as bright after sunrise as before, but, practically, its brightness is set aside by that of the sun” (Beet).2 Corinthians 3:11. Is done away.—“Is being done away,” now, historically, in that Pauline age. Prepositions changed; see how tries to show this. “The two prepositions … do not necessarily express the difference between transitoriness and duration [? permanence, as Farrar and others], but they may do so as matter of language, and the distinction is too much in accordance with the context to be set aside” (Waite, in Speaker). Beet says well: “In the history of the world, as in the experience of each individual, God speaks first in the form of Law, ‘Do this or die.’ When we hear the good news, ‘He that believes shall not die,’ the voice of condemnation loses its dread power, and comes to nought. But the good news of life will remain sounding in our ears for ever.”2 Corinthians 3:12.—Returns to 2 Corinthians 3:4, but “confidence” is now “filled out into hope.” Also he was charged with insincerity; he repudiates the charge, “I speak openly, plainly, confidently; there is no concealment, nothing underneath.”2 Corinthians 3:13.—Note that the A.V. of Exodus 34:33 inserts “till”; reading the story as that Moses hid the refulgence of the glory whilst he was speaking. The LXX. and Vulgate translate Exodus 34:33 otherwise. Paul follows for his purpose their account, that Moses put on the veil after he had finished speaking, to hide, not the unbearable refulgence of the glory, but its waning brightness. In 2 Corinthians 3:13 that which was passing away (R.V.) does not very definitely go beyond the literal glory mentioned in the narrative. But the further application to which the words so aptly lend themselves, is beginning to come into view.2 Corinthians 3:14.—Like the “letters of commendation,” or the “triumph and the incense bearers” (2 Corinthians 2:14), the figure of the veil, even whilst he is using it, suggests to Paul another distinct, but related, use of it. Like the Tallith—the curious fringed scarf which to this day every born Israelite wears on head or shoulders at public worship—there is a veil on the heart of Israel as they read even the Law. Not merely is its waning glory concealed from them, but even its real Secret, “the Lord.”2 Corinthians 3:15. Moses.—As in Acts 15:21.2 Corinthians 3:16. Shall turn.—“Turn in,” as Moses did (Exodus 34:34). What is the nominative? Choose between (1) “it” [=their heart]; (2) “a man,” margin; (3) “Moses” [=The Old Covenant, or the people of Israel]. (1) most in favour; (2) and (3) are of course true, whether expressed here or not. Note: “But whensoever,” etc. (R.V.).2 Corinthians 3:17.—“The Lord” in the passage and story from the Pentateuch “is,” practically, “the Spirit.” [Query, “corresponds to the Spirit in my allegory.” Thus, accepting (3), As Moses turns in to the Lord (in the narrative), so the Old Covenant turns in to “the Spirit” (=the New Covenant, symbolised by its characteristic blessing, as in 2 Corinthians 3:6). So “is” (Galatians 4:25).] To Christians the Lord [=Jehovah] of the Old Testament is Christ. He who turns to Christ, finds that he has met with, and received, the Spirit. Remember the deep unity of Son and Spirit in the undivided Trinity; so that, e.g. in Romans 8:9-10—in redemption language and in regard to redemption facts, the one may often be interchanged with the other. “An administrative, not a personal, identity” (Beet). Liberty.—Once more, in a word a paragraph of another letter is condensed: here Galatians 4:1 to Galatians 5:1 are thus “packed away” into a single phrase.2 Corinthians 3:18.—Note again the changing phrases; “The Spirit of the Lord” Christ is also Himself “the Lord the Spirit.” The name “Lord” belongs to Him also, equally with Father and Son. Observe “unveiled,” keeping up the story of Exodus. Also notice the “face” not the “heart,” is in this instance without the veil. Difficult, on lexical or grammatical grounds only, to decide between “beholding” and “reflecting.” Each is supported. [Winer (Moulton), p. 318, thinks that the middle voice fixes the sense as “Beholding (for ourselves) the glory of the Lord (as in a mirror).”]. Both are needed for the facts of Christian experience; we must first, like Moses, go in and “behold,” before we can come forth and “reflect.” Paul is, however, insisting that he (=“we”) has nothing to conceal, as Moses had; that, in fact, he had used “great boldness of speech.” Without a veil he had let what glory of the New Covenant he had received, and had to communicate, shine forth; reflecting it as Moses did, but not veiling it, as did Moses. On the other hand, Farrar, carrying on the thought into 2 Corinthians 4:3; 2 Corinthians 4:6 : “For God had shone in the hearts of His ministers only in order that the bright knowledge which they had caught from gazing, with no intervening veil, on the glory of Christ, might glow for the illumination of the world.” In favour of “beholding” is the progressive transformation, by assimilation, into conformity to the glory of Christ. [Stanley makes “from glory” the terminus a quo of the process; “to glory” the terminus ad quem; the completeness rather than the progressive character of it being in view.] 2 Corinthians 4:6 fixes, and expounds, “the glory of the Lord.” —Chap. 2 Corinthians 3:1 to 2 Corinthians 4:6 This section has as the unifying thought, “Openness.”—We find I. Open letters. II. A law now open [unveiled]. III. An open [unveiled] Gospel. IV. Open character and conduct of the ministers of the Gospel. I. 1. The Corinthians are “letters patent” for Paul.—Not credentials merely to themselves, assuring them of his true Apostolic standing. [Nor are they merely a letter for his own personal reassurance, in any moment of faintness or discouragement.] They are carried about by him unsealed, “open,” to be his credentials to all who will take pains to examine them. [When Sanballat sent “an open letter” to Nehemiah (Nehemiah 6:5), the privacy of its contents unsecured by a seal, it was, and was meant to be, an insult. Paul is glad that, as part of the issues of his work, men should read “the epistle from Christ” with which his Divine Master has accredited him.] Happy that ministry whose “fruit” guarantees that there has been no mistake as to the “call.” Happy that people whose personal experience of blessing and life received through the human messenger, and whose joyful observation that newly quickened souls are by his words ever being added to the Church, agree to assure them that his letters of ordination, his commission of apostleship, still run in unabated validity. No need, as between them and him, that he should continually be vindicating his true ministerial status. “We know what he has done for us; we can no more doubt that he is a true minister, than that through him we have a place in Christ ourselves. Our Paul no true apostle? Nonsense! Look at us! Read us! You who depreciate him may bring your letters from Jerusalem and James, [from Rome or Lambeth, or Conference, or College]; his credentials are sufficient for us. We are his seals.” 2. A real reason, though not the strongest, for an open profession of Christ.—“Secret discipleship,” if such a thing were long possible, would be of no service as a “letter of commendation.” Something is due to the man, and to the Church, by whose instrumentality the life-giving Spirit has been “ministered” to a Christian man. [Very much is due, for the sake of those whom the preacher has still to quicken by his ministry. “Let your minister be manifestly, and to the gaze of all, a many-lettered man. They will hear him the more attentively, if your quickened life in the Spirit accredit him to their heart. For their salvation’s sake, be ye an unsealed ‘letter,’ which all may peruse, if they will.”] Something is due to Christ Who sends him. He also needs accrediting to the unsaved. [Though the words do not mean “a letter of commendation for Christ” (2 Corinthians 3:3).] A man’s changed life should be an open lettter. 3. It should be legibly and beautifully written.—[Drunken man, rolling up against a bishop: “You converted me.” “Yes, it looks like my work, not my Master’s.”] Too many Christians are at their best badly written letters; often the writing—though true enough—needs some discovering and deciphering. [Like the shabby, thumbed, torn “references” which the professional beggar brings out of his dirty pocket.] Some of these open letters accredit nobody, with any satisfactory evidence. [Poor credentials of the Gospel itself. When God’s Love first came to men, with what a perfect Open Letter it came “commended”! (Romans 5:8).] Because they are a letter not for Paul’s sake only, he might read fairly the most faulty Corinthian and understand him and do him justice, recognising in him a real work of the “quickening Spirit.” But others need to read these “letters,” and will not always do it with favourable eyes. 4. Moses came down from Sinai bearing two God-inscribed slabs of granite, as the tokens that he had been with God, Who made him His Mediator for Israel; he bore them in his hands. [As Paul’s rivals so bore their imposing credentials, perhaps from James.] “Look in my heart, Corinthians. See yourselves written there, deeply graven in my affection. ‘I have you in my heart’ (Philippians 1:7), ‘in my heart, to die and live with you’ (2 Corinthians 7:3). My love writes you there, on fleshen tables. Your witness, indeed, is not for me only, or chiefly. The tables of Sinai accredited Moses; but they were also Jehovah’s ‘testimonies’ to His own holy nature and will, and the standard of the holiness required of His people. Your ‘quickened’ life—‘quickened’ by no mere ‘letter’ of my message, but by ‘the Spirit’ who infused Himself into it—not only accredits me, but is a witness for Christ, of His mind and good pleasure towards His people. It is an exposition, it ought to be a standard of measurement, of the blessed purpose and contents of the ‘new Covenant.’ What is this purpose? To give life; to give the Spirit Who gives that life. The embodiment for the new Order is no mere formal, external Code of rules for conduct, but a Life, with a new Life principle in it. [A βίος which is the outgrowth of a ζωή, as Galatians 5:25. The “letter” of the code will have its office and its necessary place in such a life, at least in that life’s earlier, weaker, formative stages. But the “glory” of the new life, and of the new Order to which it belongs, will be realised, partly in the very independence of such helps because of the better, higher, all-comprehending Law of the life within,—the life of the Spirit Who quickens. II. The very Law itself was now unveiled.—Paul and his readers were living in one of the transition times of the world’s history. Ceaseless change, death and birth, the New springing out of the Old,—such are the invariable characteristics of the life story of Man and his World. But these were times of specially rapid and significant change. [There are “times and seasons” (Acts 1:7), periods of time, and points of time; the stretches of duration wherein the great clock is quietly, surely ticking on, and the marked moments when It strikes. Paul lived in a “season”; at one of the points when the striking of the clock proclaimed a new “time” begun.] One of those complete, but not violently, openly, cataclysmatic abolishings of the Old was taking place. [At the cession of Corfu by England to the Greeks, a large and costly and important fortification had first to be demolished. Gun-cotton, then a somewhat new thing in such use, was the agent employed; much curiosity to know what its action would be Fired by electricity. A dull, deep rumbling heard, but no great, earth-heaving convulsion seen or felt; no masonry flying into the air. But after a few moments it was seen that the immense fortification had quietly disappeared. The destruction of Jerusalem and its temple, the historic cessation of the sacrifices and the Jewish polity, were more really an end visible and catastrophic; but these had not yet taken place. Paul knew that on Calvary and at Pentecost the spark had been fired. He saw the old System disappearing; his Jewish-Christian brethren would not see, and so could not. “Their eyes were blinded.” Such critical periods always have men with clearer vision than their fellows; before the rest they discern the times.] The Old System, with its Shekinah-glory, its Sacrificial routine, its laws of clean and unclean, its separate nation physically sealed by circumcision, was fading away, dissolving before men’s eyes, becoming plainly a shadowy thing. There was appearing [projected like a new Image, a new picture, on Time’s great screen] a New System, in which the one conspicuous thing was a Person, Christ: “the end of the Law.” The old system was coming to an end, because its various lines of suggestion and teaching had arrived at Christ. The streams of history, prophecy, type, had found their way to the Sea, the end of their journey. The very Decalogue itself had arrived at Christ, to stand henceforth by His side, with a John Baptist voice and office, pointing, sending the guilty souls whom it “condemned” and “killed,” to the “Lamb of God” with a “Behold!” Moreover, it had reached One in Whose “Day” the Spirit was to secure for it a new glory, a fulfilment such as it had never received while itself was the distinctive, central fact of the old order. 2. The old had been a glorious system. The new was to surpass it.—In no other had God been so clearly revealed to men; as much as Mahometanism is vaunted as an advance upon African fetishism and idolatry, so much was Judaism more gloriously in advance of every other system, past, present, to come, except Christianity. No nation was “so great, or had God so near to them,” as Israel (Deuteronomy 4:7), until in Christ God created a Church, a new Israel, and came nearer still. Sin and Holiness had hardly any meaning outside the Old Order of the Law; holiness had hardly any existence. God’s character, God’s will, God’s redeeming purpose, His remedy for the ruin which even the heathen saw, but did not understand,—the light in Israel, at its most dim, had on all these points been a “glory” for the old Covenant, with which there was nothing in the world to compare. It is not Christian thought, to depreciate the Old Testament. It had been a moon and stars ruling and illuminating the deep night of earth. Now the Sun was arisen, and moon and stars were to lose their lustre in competition with His. [It had been a glorious illuminant for earth’s night; now one still better had come. The gas-jet shows as a dull silhouette, when seen projected upon the white, electric-lighted globe.] The revelation of God, of Sin and its Remedy, of the significance and the true goal of man’s Life, given to the world in Christ, has no serious competitor amongst the religions of the world. All this was dramatically told upon the top of Hermon. For a few brief moments human eyes saw Law, Prophets, Christ, side by side, speaking together of His “decease.” Men saw and heard the transfer of testimony and office from the lesser to the Greater. The Shekinah-cloud enveloped all three in its glory; it belonged to them all. When it was past, Moses was gone, and Elijah. The day of the Law and the Prophets was past. “Jesus only with themselves.” Something of this had been dramatically told at Sinai. Moses had veiled his resplendent face; the glory had waned and waned away beneath the veil; if men might have been permitted to see, they would have seen an ending of the glory caught on the Mount of the Law; though even then it would not have been given to them to see the End of that which was revealed. His day was not yet. And the Old, though God-given and “made glorious,” became a bondage, became an idol. Men gazed upon it, and saw nothing in it but itself. Men studied it; they had to defend it, to die for it; they began to pique themselves upon being its faithful guardians. They hugged the dying or dead thing the closer to their hearts, when the life was departing or gone. Their affection became mechanically rigid in its grasp. Their eye grew accustomed to the moonlight night; they resented and refused the day. Their devotion became a slavery; it fettered thought; it blinded the eye; it wove a veil for the very heart. [All partial truth may. (To be remembered that God’s “partial truth” is absolutely true so far as it goes. Unlike our “partial truth,” nothing in it needs unlearning before the new, complementary truth can be added. Our “partial truth” is often false because only relative, and is out of proportion, needing much adjustment before it can be made to fit into a new discovery.) The eye must not lose its power to receive new light, must not fill its vision with the familiar and precious thing so fully that it can see no new object.] How had Paul and his Christian readers escaped? “With unveiled face” they beheld with equanimity the glory fading fast from an unveiled Law; nay, with a new sense of “liberty” and a larger life. Why? The Spirit had led them into the presence of “the Lord” Christ. [Shall He one day so lead Israel in, into the Holy Place where “the Lord” dwells? (2 Corinthians 3:16).] They have come forth again, transformed into the same image, each of them a Moses with resplendent face; [albeit many of them know not how resplendent. See Separate Homily on “Unconscious Goodness.”] Their heart has a strange new sense of freedom. The old is still interesting, precious, glorious, not lightly to be cast away; but they have grown into something larger. [The man remembers vividly the day when the youth found himself to have grown past running after his boyish hoop; the woman the day when, with a little shock, she found herself grown too big to play with her splendid doll.] Liberty has come with the manhood of the days of the Spirit. 3. They see the ending of the Old, because they see that it has reached its End and has lost itself in its Fulfilments.—Now they see and understand the Law, indeed the entire Old Testament, and see it full of Christ. Familiar experience to every Christian reader of Old Testament. In it he (say) reads some passage, and passes on into the New Testament. Returning to the Old Testament, with his mind and his vision filled with the Christ he has seen there, he comes across his passage again, and finds himself saying, “Why, this might be written of Christ. It is truer of Christ than of the man to whom it originally belongs. Truer of Christ than of any man besides.” Or, it is an incident of the narrative; he rubs his eyes and looks wonderingly, “Is this David’s history, or Jonah’s, that I am reading,—or Christ’s?” Or, it is a priest, a prophet, a man, a child; familiar enough; yet, again and again, when, with eyes and heart full of the Christ into Whose presence he has “turned,” he reads the Old Testament, he finds the familiar features somehow transfigured. The same, yet somehow different. As if the Old Testament face had become tenanted, possessed, by another personality; as if Another looked out of the eyes of the Old Testament man. And this happens so often, and with such consistency of system and harmony, that a principle establishes itself, “The Old Testament is full of Christ.” A tentative, working hypothesis at first, each added fact that falls in with it strengthens the probability of its truth, till it rises to a practical certainty. In the end, the man whose unveiled heart has been in and gazed upon the glory of Christ in the New Covenant revelation—a glory which does not wane and die away as we are gazing on it—finds the presence of Christ, so constantly and so clearly, in the unveiled Law; sees so often the glory of the Old fade away, and almost the very Old itself, until only Christ, “the Lord” in His glory, is left visible; that he wonders how any heart can miss Him in the Old Testament, in its reading and its search. [The man who has the key is almost ashamed of proposing the riddle to another man, it seems so obvious. The hidden face once discovered in the puzzle pictures which amuse childhood, it is then impossible not to see it.] Sometimes language so obviously adapted to contain a larger meaning than was contemplated by the first who used or wrote it,—a vessel so obviously adapted for something larger and fuller than its Old Testament contents; sometimes a “staringly like” anticipation of Christ’s person, or work, or Sacrifice, unexpectedly flashing out upon the New Testament reader of the Old Testament; sometimes a real, but fitful, flash of resemblance [like those seen in a “family likeness”], seen, and then disappearing when looked for with closer purpose to discover it; sometimes highways, sometimes byways, of history or suggestion, leading with surprising and unlooked-for directness to Christ;—these things so continually occur and recur, that one cannot “turn in unto” even the Old Testament without at every turn meeting Him Who is its End, and therefore its Ending. All this pre-eminently true of “The Law” in its narrower sense. Its ritual system, the very details of its Sanctuary, so persistently, so consistently, lend themselves to suggest Christ and the Gospel; and often with such minuteness of complete suggestion; that, as the instances accumulate, it becomes, even mathematically calculated, almost as 2 Corinthians 8:1, that they should merely be coincidences; that the correspondences should be accident, and not Divine design. But to see the Christ there, in the midst of the passing away of the glory of the unveiled “Law” needs the unveiled heart, which as yet Israel does not possess. Such a heart is a gift, part of the life given by the quickening Holy Spirit, Who is the characteristic of the New Covenant. [III. and IV. belong to chap. 4. .—2 Corinthians 3:4-6 Responsibility and Sufficiency. I. The responsibility of ministering the “New Testament.”— 1. The Responsibility of ministering the Old was great. It was a sacred deposit from God; with real, if incomplete, truth in it. It had a “glory” of origin, of history, of office, and above all it was the root from which sprung Christ and the Gospel (Romans 9:4-5). Judaism was the providential nidus of Christianity. When the Virgin Israel had brought forth a Son, “born under the Law,” then she had done her greatest work. The Old Covenant had not existed in vain when it yielded up its life in giving historic birth to the New. The “librarians of the world” had had a weighty charge upon them in that age after age they “ministered” the written Truth and Law of God. Mosaism had been an episodic fact; for a special purpose it had been grafted on to the main stem of God’s redeeming purpose and work (Galatians 3:19). It had run its course by the side of that main purpose; an “after-thought,” a by-thought, providing for a special emergency which had arisen, so far as we may speak thus of any work and thought of God. Yet intrinsically it had been a great, a glorious system, and the responsibility of its “ministers,” from Moses onward, had been great. And because of the deeper issue which lay in the Law—its condemning effect—does every Christian preacher feel a new responsibility of being in any degree a minister of the “killing letter.” That it issued in death was a disparagement to the Law, only as this stood compared with the Gospel. Intrinsically it was an honour to the Law that it bore such clear, unflinching testimony to God’s holiness of nature and requirement, and also, indirectly, to the honourable possibilities of human nature. (“Man was made to live, then, up to that standard! Man can be commanded to live up to that, and the command have the reasonableness of possibility!”) It was no real disparagement to the Law that it could only guard and train and correct growth, and not give life. Law per se can do no more, under any conditions. It is itself a real forerunner, “preparing the way of the Lord” Christ, when it “condemns” and “kills.” The Gospel preacher of “the Spirit” needs to build upon the work of the Law. Just in proportion as he knows how, evangelically, to “minister the letter,” is his work thorough. And no part of his work presses more heavily upon the worthy minister than that of so preaching as to bring the sense of sin home to the conscience. Nothing needs more a sanctified judgment; some consciences are abnormally indurated, some morbidly tender; under the Gospel the demand of the Law must not be overpressed, any more than it must be understated. If his words may not only kill self-righteousness, but may even slay hope, “who is sufficient”? Whether to preach Law or Gospel, man’s sin or God’s grace, we feel keenly: “not sufficient of ourselves,” etc. Much greater, then,— 2. The responsibility of ministering the New is greater.—The treasure entrusted to him for distribution is more precious than the former. If the Old order had many “goodly pearls,” yet the New has the “one pearl, of great price.” Is it not easier to misrepresent the Gospel of life than the Law of death? Is there not more liability to make the Gospel too easy than to make the Law too stern? If a man needs wisdom and strength above his own, to preach the Law and to bring men to a sense of sin, how much more to awaken their death into life! To know that men are “dead”; that they must live again in the Spirit, or must abide in death eternally; that upon his skill and fidelity, in some one instance, or upon some one occasion, “life” (or death) may depend,—brings him back to Paul’s burdened sense of inadequateness for such a task. A responsibility so great becomes to some men a real temptation not to “use great plainness of speech,” to soften their tongue, to conciliate their hearers, to modify their message. 3. There is a “sufficiency,” however, even for this. “Through Christ,” “To Godward.”—Very graphic. He “stands in the presence of God.” All the minister’s work is done as though He were seen looking on. At every point the worker offers his work to God, with a perpetually renewed devotion of it to His glory and service. He has himself been “converted to God” (Acts 15:19), turned about, and set Godward. He does his work, facing Godward always. “Sets the Lord always before him,” and so is not “moved” even by a sense of personal inadequateness to his task, or by the fear of man, or by the consideration of the fateful issues which hang upon his ministry. He turns all his work toward God; seeks to give it a Godward direction. There is a supply of strength, in this realisation of Him Who is invisible. The man whose life and thought are filled with, and lifted up to the level of, “the powers of the world to come,” feels little force, whether deterrent or alluring, in the opinion of man, be it favourable or unfavourable. His soul is liberated from the slavery to which regard for man’s favour subjects the heart. He speaks out fearlessly, clearly, without diminishing or admixture, with “great boldness of speech,” the message he has first heard from God. [He who “sanctifies Christ as Lord in his heart” will not fear “men’s fear” (1 Peter 3:14-15).] That man has laid hold of the secret of steadfastness in opinion, of courage in utterance, of stability of character, of unwearying continuance in labour, who has come into, and abides in, the presence of God, and who directs himself and his every act Godward. He sees God; he is blind to man. “The Master praises; what are men?” And this is “through Christ.” Paul comes in nowhere! All communication between God and man has from the first been mediatorial, “through Christ.” All God’s advances toward man have been made along that path of approach; man has not—never has had—any way to “a Father” but this. Christ has all along been the great underlying Condition, the great Presupposition, in all intercourse between God and man. Paul’s strength, his endowment of adequacy for his responsible task,—he expects it, and receives it through this one, only Channel. He is “Strong in the strength which God suppliesThrough His Eternal Son.”This alone ever makes a man “able” as a “minister of the new covenant.” This may co-exist with, and be the infused life and efficiency of, great natural fitness,—of gift, temperament, education, social position, sacred office; it can make all these its vehicles and organs, and in so doing puts on them their highest honour. But it is independent of these; and whether with or without them is the essential requisite. There is no “sufficiency,” where this is not found. The regard steadfastly directed Godward, the ceaselessly renewed supply of grace through the one Channel, Christ,—these alone will enable a man to bear the burden of the ministration, whether of Law or Gospel; certainly of the Gospel, and of an ambassadorship wherein his words force men upon sharp, decisive verdicts and issues; this alone will sustain a man who bears about a Gospel in whose words are certainly inherent a power to kill, or to quicken with the fulness of the life of the Spirit. .—2 Corinthians 3:7-11“Glorious and More Glorious.” Introduction.— 1. The Infinite Father has made a special revelation of Himself to His human offspring. 2. This has mainly come through two great general channels—Moses and Christ. 3. The special revelation of Himself, as it came through Christ, far transcends in glory the form it assumed as it came through Moses. I. Glorious as it came through Moses.—Evidenced by four things. 1. The wonderful display of Divinity attending the expression of it on Mount Sinai. 2. The magnificence of its religious scenes and celebrations. 3. The stupendous miracles that stand in connection with it. 4. The splendid intellects which were employed in connection with it. II. More glorious as it appears in connection with Christ.—1. The Christian form of revelation is more adapted to give life than is the Mosaic. “Millions, I will hope, were quickened by” the Mosaic. But men frequently died spiritually under it. Cf. the effect of an address from an ancient prophet, with the words of Christ, spoken through Peter on the Day of Pentecost. 2. The Christian form of revelation is more emphatically spirit than the Mosaic. In the Mosaic there was spirit; the elements of eternal truth, ethical and religious, were there, but nearly overlaid with ceremonial. In Christianity only Baptism and the Supper; and it throbs through every sentence with the eternal spirit of truth. [This is all very inadequate and inexact exegesis. It should be “Spirit.”] 3. Is more restorative. 4. Is more lasting. Moses is no longer our Master. Christianity is the permanent system; the final revelation of God to our world. There is nothing to succeed it. Application.— 1. Do not go to Moses to expound Christ. 2. Nor to support opinions (e.g. war, slavery, etc.) which cannot be supported from Christ’s Gospel. 3. The immense responsibility of men who have the Gospel. 4. The glorious position of a true Gospel minister.—In abstract, from “Homilist,” New Series, ii. 421. 2 Corinthians 3:6. The Deadly Letter; the Life-giving Spirit. I. What this does mean. II. What it does not mean. I. 1. Like many another phrase in this chapter, this particular saying is a summary of an extended paragraph found elsewhere in the pages of St. Paul. Romans 7 is concentrated into it. Not that this is a germ afterwards deliberately expanded into a paragraph. The truth which underlies germ and expansion, is habitual, fundamental, to all Paul’s thinking about Christian experience. Here it crops up at the surface in a phrase; there it lies, of set purpose all laid bare and exposed to examination. 2. Paul’s own experience is concentrated into it. Acts 9, with its companion, complementary, accounts in 22 and 26, give the externals of Paul’s “conversion.” In Philippians 3:4-11 (particularly 2 Corinthians 3:7) he analyses the inner process, and in 2 Corinthians 3:7 precisely fixes the critical point around which his new relation to God and the outflowing new life turn. In Romans 7:7 to Romans 8:4, whilst no doubt sketching a universal programme of the moral revolution culminating in Regeneration, and stating a universal formula of the conversion process, he is nevertheless drawing upon his memories of the heart-searchings of the three days’ darkness in Damascus, and of the earlier days when he felt the prick of the Master’s goad and kicked against it. Every man’s conversion is “universal.” 3. He had “profited in the Jew’s religion above many his equals” (Galatians 1:14). He had “lived a Pharisee,” and that, we may believe, of the best type. Christ’s charges of hypocrisy by no means lay against all Pharisees. These were not all “whited sepulchres.” Yet “blameless as he was in all the righteousness of the Law,”—and, let it be noted, it is with a Christian conscience reviewing these days, that he thus pronounces upon his Jewish life,—the Talmud and the New Testament, with fullest agreement in their evidence enable us to appreciate how almost entirely external was the righteousness he thus recalls; how very largely it amounted to a minutely faithful fulfilment of Rabbinical refinements upon the original legislation of Moses, which were childishly frivolous, when they were not an actual offence to the Divinity of that sacred code. 4. There arrived a day when the “commandment came,” particularly the “Tenth” of the “Words” of the Decalogue, which in effect sums up all the prohibitive enactments of the Divine Law; laying its forbiding hand upon every “coveting” of the natural heart for that which is against the mind and will of God, and the beneficent moral order of His world. For the first time, any adequate “knowledge of sin” awoke within the heart of Paul; it “came by the law.” He had hardly known that such a thing as sin was in him; he had done it so naturally that it excited no notice. Now the Law had been the revealer of sin. In the light of this new discovery the robe of his own righteousness showed seamy, “shabby,” utterly unfit for a garment in which a man might present himself before God. He discovered that whilst he had been busy in fulfilling a round of minutiζ of ordinances, even to learn which was an exercise and a study to fill a long and laborious lifetime, he had missed altogether the reality of obedience; that sin and righteousness lay quite apart from any mere mechanical fulfilment of such a code, or of any code, as such; that the very motives of the fulfilment, and the complacent satisfaction into which it was reviewed, were self-centered,—“gains to me”;—pride! Saul the Pharisee fell slain at the feet, and by the stroke, of the Law, as it stood before him for the first time “spiritual,” “holy, just, and good.” All self-complacency was gone from, and was from that moment impossible to, the man who now learned, “I am carnal, sold under sin.” 5. And a further stage was reached immediately. To attempt to set things right was the death of hope; the discovery of the wrong had been the death of peace. The man discovered himself helpless and a slave. Sin held him under its power. Resolve as he might, hate himself for his moral impotence as he might, bewail the moral division within him as he might, struggle as he might, he seemed to have no power but to sin. The discrepancy between the holy Law of God and his own unholy life and heart grew more and more glaring as the light came more clear and full. A new sinfulness was added to sinful acts, in that they were now done in the full light of a known command. And the deepest depth of self-slaying discovery was touched when he found the very commandment, whether precept or prohibition, arousing an innate opposition to its holy requirement; adding a new attractiveness to the forbidden fruit; and with a consuming intensity inflaming desire for it. And such sinfulness stood out clearly as “death,” in the new light of the unveiled Law. What had he ever done but sin! What could he hope to do but sin! What could he promise or purpose or perform,—he whose very heart found a new desireableness given to prohibited action! [No “bread so pleasant” as that “eaten in secret.” (“But you often want to change your baker!” said Jackson Wray.) No liquor so good as that which was smuggled. No garden so fair as that which is over the fence!] 6. This a universal experience. Even moralists, who are only half serious, like Gay in his fable of the young cock, or whose society verse lapses into occasional earnestness like his who cried, “Meliora video proboque, deteriora sequor.” But all noble souls feel it. “I certainly have two souls, for if there were only one, it surely could not be at the same time good and bad, nor could it at the same time love good and base actions, and also at the very same time wish the very same thing, and not desire to put the wish into action; but evidently there are two souls, and if the good soul gets the upper hand, then good will be done, and if the evil than shameful actions will be perpetrated” (Xenophon, Cyropedia, vi.). Action is always lower than knowledge, in the noblest heathen. “I should have lived better than I have done, if I had always followed the monitions of the gods” (Marcus Aurelius, Conf.). “The wages of sin is death.” And not that only, but, “To be carnally minded is death.” 7. Why could there not have been “a commandment given bringing life”? (a) Partly from the very nature and office of Law. It is directory, educational, not enabling. It is the model which trains the artistic sense; but the artistic sense and faculty cannot be given by the most perfect model. It is the standard which enables the student to measure his progress and to set before him the goal at which he is to aim. But the real conforming power, the real source of effort and endeavour, are within himself. Truth, beauty—at all events, moral truth, moral beauty—are external to the man, external to all men; and are altogether independent of personal, or racial, or interested estimate and approbation. They are of no school, of no age, of no one heart or intellect; they are universal, and of God. The Law is the fingerpost which points out, the wall of definition and of defence on either side of, the one Way of Life, as the Creator understands “Life” and designed “Life” for man. But the will and power to walk in the “Way” are within the man himself. The Law declares with authority what is Obedience, but only in a secondary sense does it offer any help to Obedience; just in that it makes the path definite, and would at once indicate divergence. The actual, concrete, Jewish “Law” said little about forgiveness, and offered no direct help to holiness. (b) But the more effectual reason why not, is found in the morally perverted heart and will of man. What was in design educational, for that reason became in fact condemnatory. The directorial rule reveals and convicts the discrepancies of the actually irregular line of life. The rebellion of the heart against restraint makes the Law irksome instead of helpful. The hedge which marks out the path for the willing traveller must pierce with its sharp thorns the man who is bent upon breaking through into the wide space—the “liberty”—on either hand beyond. The silly bird which will take its cage for a prison instead of a home; which will dash itself, perhaps even to its death, against bars which were intended for a protection, but in which it will only see a restriction upon its freedom; must hurt itself. If the letter “kills,” it is because the evil heart in man will not accept and use it as the guide of wise, safe, happy living, the guide to Life; because the heart resents its attempt to support inexperience and weakness, and to educate the moral sense, and its necessary exposure of moral immaturity, or failure, or revolt. 8. “To be spiritually minded—to mind the things of the Spirit—is Life.” “It is the Spirit that quickeneth.” He Who said so, and also that “the Flesh profiteth nothing,” is Himself the High Priest of a system, a new Law, “not of a carnal commandment, but of an endless life” (Hebrews 7:16). “Who shall deliver me from the body of this death?” [The cry of the shipwrecked man straining his eyes for the token of a sail, or for the breaking of the day. It is the eager longing of Wellington at Waterloo for the promised Prussian help.] The answer comes, “Through Jesus Christ our Lord!” which is expounded further on (2 Corinthians 8:2). “The law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death.” “In Christ Jesus;” the secret of Life and of the unity between Law and Life is there. (More of this under 2 Corinthians 3:17.) A new motive springs up in the heart where “the love of God is shed abroad by the Spirit which He hath given” (Romans 5:5). “We love Him because”—as on that Spirit’s authority we are made to know—“He first loved us.” And there is a new hope; for the same Spirit who brings peace, brings also power. The will is enabled with a new force. Sin no longer “has dominion”; the man is no longer “sold under sin.” A new direction to thought; a new attraction for the affections; a new bias and bent to the will. All the life, all the natural life, obeys a new directing principle, and becomes interfused with that yet truer life which is Life indeed. Peace, hope, liberty, victory,—all by the indwelling of the quickening Spirit. Deep problems of mental science underlie the method by which the fact of the adopting love of God towards the penitent, pardoned sinner is communicated to the heart; or by which the will is reinforced as with a power coming distinctly ab extra. But the fact is abundantly verified. Experience in every Church and age, and in thousands of cases of every variety of type and temperament, lights up the Scripture declaration. The Scripture declarations guard, in their turn, from the vagaries of unregulated, extravagant, or merely viciously personal, “experience.” And that a new idea should be a new motive, transforming a man, transfiguring his life, begetting a new life, is but a particular instance of a widely obtaining law. The new idea, the new power, are the gift and work of the Spirit Who is in the man who is in “Christ.” “The Spirit giveth life.” II. 1. Kingsley wrote to one of his curates—“a very new curate”—what has an applicability far beyond its original occasion: “Let not Swedenborg, or any other man, argue you out of the scientific canon that to understand the spirit of Scripture or any other words, you must first understand the letter. If the spirit is to be found anywhere, it is to be found by putting yourself in the place of the listeners, and seeing what the words would have meant to them. Then take that meaning as an instance (possibly a lower one) of a universal spiritual law, true for all men, and may God give you wisdom for the process of induction by which the law is to be discovered” (Life, ii. 95). Allegorising has run mad, and has in some quarters given a bad name to everything but the barest, most meagre, historical, naturalistic reading of what are indeed ancient books, but are very much besides. The Philonian method dealt with the Old Testament, the Origenic dealt with New and Old, in a fashion which made the stories of the Book very little more than so much convenient framework, and the persons so many happily serviceable starting-points, for fine theorising or fanciful moralising, whose value in no way depended upon the historicity or otherwise of the story or the saying which gave form and colour to the teaching. Sound allegorising is nothing but the sober, Spirit-guided development of the general principles which are carried by particular instances. The Scripture teaches by the concrete—the story, the biography—rather than by the abstract. [E.g. we need, and might have had, a chapter in A Treatise of Christian Ethics headed, “The Relation between Ignorance and Responsibility, and between Conscientiousness and Guilt.” Instead, we have the conscientious “chief of sinners,” Saul of Tarsus, and the prayer of the Redeemer on His cross for those who “knew not” what they did.] There are widening circles of application, all starting from the one central fact or truth, with a widening radius. The mischievous, untrue allegorising forsakes the centre, or disdains and denies it. The “letter” is the merely accidental, and more or less convenient, literary vehicle; the “spirit,” so called, the truth to be taught, is the alone really valuable and important. The erroneous thing is, so to say, a literary Gnosticism which refines away, or denies, the historic Word, hoping to retain the Idea; as the theologic Gnosticism refined away, or denied, the real humanity of the Divine Christ, and tried to retain a Divinity whose manifestation to man was but a phantom. Yet, as the Divinity of the Incarnate One must not be denied, and the humanity overprized; so the Letter is not all. 2. Loyalty to the written Word.—There is a “spirit” which has become incarnate in the “letter.” Whatever be the philosophic decision of the question whether or not words are, to the man himself, indispensable to thought; as a fact God’s thoughts have come to us in words. They have come to us in a Book. The experiment of the race all goes to show that outside this Book there is no certain, no clear knowledge, of the mind and will of God. Nature speaks with a stammer, and is intelligible, to any practical effect, only to those who have heard from the Book what it is she has to say. As indistinct, as variable, as scanty, of as little practical service, are the utterances of the “natural” conscience. Its “truths,” “innate ideas,” need interpreting and checking by the external Word. The witness of no two consciences agrees long together. God, duty, right, the hereafter of man,—if on these topics men forsake the written Word, there is no verifiable truth, none authoritative except to the man who propounds it—if even to him. It is not slavery to the “letter,” to refuse to go beyond the distinct teaching of the Bible, either by direct statement or by fair and necessary inference. That Book certainly gives but a narrow standing ground of dry land amidst a far-stretching, surrounding ocean of mystery. It is but a question of a step or two more beyond his fellows, when, forsaking this, the tallest man amongst them wades out into the depths, and finds himself out of his depth, and progress impossible. Or, to change the figure, there is no sure, safe walking out into these depths, except so far as the inquirer keeps hold of the rope which is fast to the Bible. Practically all the facts upon which religion can base itself, have for all the Christian centuries been long complete; all lie within the area of the completed “letter.” No new facts can be looked for; all that can be done is to examine these with ever fresh scrutiny, to see whether there may be in them anything which has hitherto escaped discovery. No such supplement, no such corrective appendix, is from time to time issued, whether in the larger knowledge of the universe, or in the intuitions of man’s heart, as may yield us something, or all, of the original Work. Christianity can never dispense with its foundation documents. The Christian speculator, during his excursions into the regions of the mysterious or the unknown, must never lose touch with his base, as the soldiers say. To be loyal to the Word is not to “kill,” but to assist, to nourish, to protect, knowledge. Not, “What do I think? what do my intuitions, my moral sense, teach me.” Not, “What do I feel must be true?” But, “What does God—not merely a Book—say?” 3. The historical Christ and “the Christian idea.”—Schelling (quoted in Luthardt, Saving Truths, p. 252), on the analogous hope to preserve the “ideas” of Christianity, whether or not the historical Christ be believed in and retained, says: “How frequently has not the historical character of Christianity been declared to be heathenish (not its external, but its higher facts, e.g., the pre-existence, the pre-mundane being of Christ, His position as Son of God), and on that account, as that which is no longer compatible with modern thought? The very essence of Christianity is, however, its historical character, not the ordinary part of its history, as, e.g., that its Founder was born under Augustus, died under Tiberius, but that higher history on which it properly rests, and which is its peculiar matter. I call it a higher history, for the true subject-matter of Christianity is a history in which divinity is implicated—a Divine history. That would be but a poor explanation, and entirely destructive of the peculiarity of Christianity, which should distinguish between the doctrinal and the historical, and consider the former the essential and special matter, and the latter as mere form and clothing. The history is not merely incidental to the doctrine, it is the doctrine itself. The doctrinal matter, which might perhaps remain after the excision of the historical, as, e.g., the general doctrine of a personal God, such as even rational theology sometimes admits, or the morality of Christianity would be nothing peculiar, nothing distinctive; … the history is the distinctive feature of Christianity. It is altogether incongruous to speak only of the teaching of Christ. The chief matter of Christianity is Christ Himself; not what He says, but what He is, what He did. Christianity is not directly a body of doctrine, it is a thing, an object; doctrine is but the expression of the thing.” [Schelling in some degree thus meets by anticipation the position of Ritschl. Luthardt goes on to speak of a “so-called liberal theology, which really sees nothing more in Christianity than a certain general religious feeling, or the mere force of civilisation.”] 4. Dogma and religion.—There is an embodiment of truth in formal statements of doctrinal confessions and creeds which is sometimes regarded as not helpful to, but as the death of, religious life, and indeed of the interests of truth itself. And in this connection the text is often quoted. [The use of this verse sometimes made, with that application, is a flagrant instance of the employment of the mere words of Scripture, apart from the context and connection, and without regard to the rule which requires some real analogy between the primary meaning of the passage and the matter to which it is sought to apply it. It was not because the Law of Moses was written, and so was fixed in unchanging record upon the tables of Sinai, that it wrought death; the Spirit which works life uses as His instrument a written Word.] It is, in reply, pointed out that what is known of any truth, can be stated inexact form, and demands to be so stated, and that the mind inevitably seeks to systematise its knowledge—to unify it. It is pointed out that if truth be objective, if, e.g., it be a real disclosure of a fact of God’s government of mankind in Christ, then once made, once ascertained to man, it abides true, and that putting it into formal shape and statement, or embodying it in a creed, is no more than Science does with its accumulating corpus of ascertained truth. It endeavours unceasingly to put into exact expression, and to co-ordinate into systematic relationship and statement, the results at which, from its own data, and by its own proper methods, it from time to time definitely arrives. It is urged that if Theology too be a science, if it deals with a section of the whole universe of facts which is capable of exact study, with its own appropriate methods, then results once arrived at abide valid, and not less so that formal, or confessional, expression has been given to them. If “Justification by faith” be really the method of a sinner’s acceptance with God, then it is of no age or Church; and if that formulation of God’s method be Scriptural, it is not to be challenged or set aside as a passing, or only relatively true, form of statement. If between the death of Christ and the pardon of sin there once be revealed or ascertained a relation which is independent of any act or feeling or change in the sinner himself, then true once this is true always. In this instance well appears what gives occasion to, and such justification as there may be found for, the revolt against the letter. In endeavouring to state this relation between the death of Christ and sin, it has been forgotten that all the phraseology, even though borrowed from Scripture, is analogical, drawing from the relations between man and man, a mutually corrective, mutually expository, and complementary series of illustrations for the relation between the sinner and God. It has been forgotten how imperfectly the whole “scheme” of the Atonement is revealed or comprehensible. There has been an unwise insistence on some particular mode of statement; there has above all been a zeal for one’s own particular phraseology and confessional form which has made the form everything, or at least has made it overshadow altogether the truth which this was designed to express or guard. But to remember this is far removed from any demand that all creeds, and the very statements of Scripture themselves, should be thrown afresh into the melting-pot, and be continually in a state of flux, nothing ever cast into permanent mould; and this only lest instead of the living, “growing” thing, there should come out the dead cult, to be the object of a truth-dishonouring, God-dishonouring idolatry of the “letter.” The “letter” is the body of “the spirit.” Can the spirit exist without a body? Without its own body? Is the identity of the body part of the unchanging identity of the truth? [As in the case of the ceaseless change of the component particles of the human body, whose ceaseless flux does not affect the identity, so in this case the essential form remains; the changing “body” does clothe the same truth; and receives its shape from the same informing truth. A spirit freed from, and independent of, the letter—is it parallel to the grotesque idea of Carroll in Alice in Wonderland, who imagines a grin which remains when the cat has faded away?] 2 Corinthians 3:6. “Letter and spirit.”—“Able ministers” misleading, to our ears. Connect closely with “sufficient,” “sufficiency.” “Killeth” cannot have so inadequate a reference as to the frequency of the death penalty under the Law. I. Divine commands alone cannot produce obedience.—Owing to an imperfection not in the Law, but in human nature, which does not yield to the obligation: Conscience is on the side of the Law, but is overborne by the baser nature. The habitual failure of conscience produces habitual disquiet and misery, a constant sense of discord, a consciousness of powerlessness against evil;—Death. The Law even became the occasion of sin. Prohibition pro vokes the natural heart and irritates it to impatience of restraint. The restive horse rears against the bridle; at last throws off its rider. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/phc/ NOTES2 Corinthians 4:1. This ministry.—Viz. that in 2 Corinthians 3:3; 2 Corinthians 3:6-9; and more definitely expounded at the end of this long section, in 2 Corinthians 5:18-19; 2 Corinthians 6:3-4. Therefore.—Looks back to the substance of chap. 3, and returns, with a new phase of connection, to 2 Corinthians 3:4; 2 Corinthians 3:12. Yet, again a half-parenthetical passage intervenes before “we faint not” is expanded in 2 Corinthians 4:7 sqq. Note the comma in the after “mercy.” See the “mercy” and the “ministry” closely connected in 1 Timothy 1:12-13, with the same link of thought as here. Faint.—Word peculiar to Paul and his friend Luke, in the New Testament. “Flag, ‘give out.’ ”2 Corinthians 4:2.—Hidden things (of which it is) shame (to speak or to be guilty). Yet hardly so much as is suggested in Ephesians 5:12. Underhand, insincere, double-minded motives, such as he was accused of. No “veil” on his conduct at all events; cf. “manifest,” 2 Corinthians 4:10-11. No “veil” upon “the truth,” as he “ministers” it. Handling deceitfully.—Same thought as 2 Corinthians 2:17. Commending ourselves.—True reply to 2 Corinthians 3:1.2 Corinthians 4:3.—“Hid” is “veiled,” q.d. if there be a veil it is as with Moses and Israel, rather upon “the hearts” of readers and hearers than upon the minister, or than upon the Law or Gospel themselves. Note “are perishing” (R. V.); 2 Corinthians 2:16.2 Corinthians 4:4. The god of this world.—Not “Rabbinical” teaching, but absolute truth of the revealing Holy Ghost. Christ leads the way with His most definite “prince of this world” (John 12:31; John 14:30). Paul follows in Ephesians 2:2, “the prince of the power of the air,” etc. (2 Corinthians 6:12). “World” is “age”; “minds” may be “thoughts.” [These are “blinded” here; “hardened” in 2 Corinthians 3:14. Shine.—“Dawn” (R.V.). Note, specially, this word is cognate with “the brightness of His glory” (Hebrews 1:3). Also note the fuller, and exact, and significant “Gospel of the glory of Christ.” [So again, and close to the “ministry” and “mercy” combination, we have the “Gospel of the glory” in 1 Timothy 1:11.2 Corinthians 4:5. “Lord.”—, with most moderns, makes this a predicate: “We preach Him as Lord.” In that case, obviously, it could not be appended also to the parallel “ourselves”; unless in reply to the charge of 2 Corinthians 1:24 (cognate word), “we do not propose [proclaim] ourselves to you as masters, but Him as the only Master; ourselves only your slaves [not διάκονοι as throughout chap. 3, in relation to God and the Gospel]; indeed, we do not commend ourselves to your notice or acceptance at all, but Him.” Note the variant reading “through Jesus.”2 Corinthians 4:6.—Genesis 1:3 is directly quoted (so R.V.). Note how he again contrasts the things of “shame” and this awakening to the “light” in Ephesians 5:11-14.2 Corinthians 4:7.—Gold, in a common jar of earthenware. Excellency is “exceeding greatness of the power.” Similar in cognate language, and in thought, to Ephesians 1:19. .—2 Corinthians 4:1-7[Section continued from chap. 3] III. An open [unveiled] Gospel.— 1. Observe the phrase, “Gospel.” (1) In regard to the Old Order, and to the New alike, Paul’s phraseology is noteworthy; in its variety of designations for each, and in their practical interchangeableness. Not that the various designations are used at haphazard or for the mere sake of an assonance. There is a propriety in the particular phrase used in each case; yet in use one readily passes over into another. (2) There is a strangely modern sound about the words, “The reading of the old testament.” It would be going too fast for the development of Paul’s thought and God’s revealing order to print, “The reading of the Old Testament”; yet such a meaning is coming fast into view; a distinct, complete Book, or Literature, which may be called—from its main subject and contents—“The Old Testament.” As yet, however, the Subject—the Old Covenant—is to the forefront in Paul’s mind. To “minister the old testament” and to “minister the new testament” [not yet “New Testament”] are to “minister condemnation” and to “minister righteousness” respectively; these are the issues of the two testaments in their effect upon those who come into testing, decisive relation with them. The characteristic “note” of the one is that it is “a letter,” external, exact, unalterable, formulated into a definite code of rules; of the other, that it is internal to the man, governing not by rules, but by principles; not with the rigidity of half-mechanical, external regulation and control, but the elasticity and freedom of Life within; unfettered, yet not irregular or morally abnormal, because the Life and the Liberty are those of the indwelling Spirit of God. (3) So here. Moses brought down a Law from Sinai; Paul and his brethren have received “a Gospel.” This is described more fully as “the Gospel of the glory of Christ.” He is its great Subject; His glory in it puts glory upon it. Yet the Gospel which reveals Him reveals Him as Himself a Revealer of God and of His glory. By the help of “the Gospel” we know Christ, and, yet more, we come to know “God’s glory.” And, further, this Gospel of the knowledge of the glory of God is “the truth.” Then is it good tidings to know the truth about God and His glory? It is, seeing that that knowledge comes to men through Christ as its medium. To come into direct contact with the “bare,” unveiled glory of God were death to sinners. Israel saw the glory of God on the face of Moses, absorbed, reflected; we see “the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ,” inherent, but, as it were, shining through the humanity. 2. The contents of the Gospel.— (1) Perfectly true as a “working” statement, that the Gospel reveals the way of salvation, “God’s righteousness” for sinners. But the better, larger, truer, whole, view, is that it reveals God. As a redeeming God, for the race; as a pardoning God, for the penitent sinner. “Have faith in God” is, in the deepest analysis, the true formula for saving faith. “Faith in Christ” is the shape which it naturally and serviceably assumes in the evangelistic work of the Church, and in which it offers itself to the sinner’s most easy apprehension. But underneath the faith in Christ is a faith in God. Christ is the object of faith, truly; but in laying hold of Him the sinner lays hold of God’s promise of a mercy which is by express proclamation attached to the act of believing in Him. Christ is God’s Word—of promise; He is a Promise incarnate; faith which takes hold of Christ, takes hold of God, Who in Christ has expressed Himself and His will and heart. (2) God reveals Himself, as well as His will and heart, in the Gospel. We have seen “God in the face of Jesus Christ.” In homely phrase, He is the Father “over again.” Whatsoever things the Father doeth [and saith] those things doeth [and saith] the Son likewise [=in similar manner], John 5:19. We hear of God from Christ; we also hear God in the words of Christ. The manner and the principles of the works of God are seen in those of Christ, e.g. such as belong to the matter here in hand. The Son pardons the sins of (say) the paralytic (Mark 2) because the Father pardons sin; the act of Christ is intended to reveal to men a God Who pardons. Study Christ pardoning sin, and see how God pardons sin. The faith of the friends of the paralytic [“their faith,” the man being, no doubt, included] is closely connected with the word of Christ, “Thy sins be forgiven thee.” There is then an efficiency about faith which brings others to God for pardon. The paralytic comes to Christ and finds forgiveness; then men may come to God and find forgiveness. He goes out from the presence of Christ, knowing that his sin is forgiven. Then men may go forth from the presence of God also, knowing that sin is forgiven. Every miracle of Christ is more than an act of benevolence toward suffering or sorrow or need; it is this, but also, and still more, a carefully chosen, deliberately done [and with special authenticity recorded] part of Christ’s whole revelation of God. Works, words, character, motives, principles underlying and governing acts and words,—in them all, as we study them in Christ, we see God. (3) And this is a revelation of the “glory of God.” The only “glory” belonging to Him which sinners could bear to see. The one “glory” which they need to see. To a sinner the revelation [as to Moses (Exodus 33:18-19)] of the “goodness,” specially as “showing mercy, pardoning iniquity,” etc., is the revelation of God’s truest “glory” to such as he. The heart which “turns to the Lord” Christ, goes into a sanctuary where it gazes upon a real glory of God. The written Gospel is such a sanctuary. Not every foot treads its floor, even of those who diligently read the evangelical narratives, or even write upon their sacred Topic. In reading this revelation of God, “we have our access, our introduction, unto the Father, through Christ, by the Spirit” (cf. Ephesians 2:22). 3. The veiling of the Gospel.— (1) Not by its ministers. They “manifest the truth.” (a) They do not obtrude themselves, but “preach Christ Jesus as Lord.” To do otherwise—as perhaps Paul’s rivals at Corinth [or in Galatia] did—would be a most effectual veiling of the Gospel. They would be lamps calling attention to, and arresting it at, their own form and pattern and beauty, instead of to the light which it is their business to exhibit. The perfect lamp lets the light shine, whilst itself inviting the least attention possible. The ministry is for the sake of the light, and for the sake of those on whom it needs to be shed. “Ourselves your servants.” And yet with no slavish subserviency; not as mere creatures of those to whom they bring the illuminating Gospel. “Yours, as being first Christ’s; your servants, as, in so serving you, fulfilling our service to Him and bringing glory to Him. Yours for Jesus’ sake.” The personality of the man is a valuable element in every successful ministry; it must needs stamp itself upon every real man’s “manifestation of the truth.” [The burner will give shape and size to the gas-flame, but it must not affect the quality of the light.] But the moment the ministry becomes an end, and not a means; the man a stopping-point, and not a point of “new departure,” and of assistance, to help men on their way to the knowledge of God in Christ; the minister then becomes a “veil” to the Gospel. (Yet he is himself only a sinner who has “obtained mercy”; the personal mercy of acceptance with God, and the official mercy which has made even him a “minister.”) Moses and his system had thus become a veil instead of a medium; as a popular man or a Church system may come to intervene between the soul and God. “Cannot see God, or hear the Gospel, for the Man.” Only One may thus interpose Himself; Jesus Christ may, did, preach Himself. “I am the Way,” and not a hindrance on the way to God, and to the knowledge of Him and to the vision of His “glory” of grace, (b) They use no veil of reserve, or insincerity, or crafty handling of the Word, in their acts or teaching. Have “renounced” all this, for the Gospel may very effectually in that way be “veiled.” There is no arriθre pensιe about their proclamation. They have no selfish ends to serve, in the way they teach it. There is no dishonest suppression of any part of the whole Gospel, from a fear that the whole truth might be awkward for a theological system or an ecclesiastical theory. Truth may be made falsehood, not only by positive additions of alleged “truth,”—perhaps by development, but by omitting complementary truth, or by giving exaggerated prominence to what needs balancing by other aspects of the whole Divine revelation. And if this were done for the sake of courting a reputation for being “progressive”; or of shunning the reproach of being a “fossil,” or “retrograde,” or “obscurantist”; or, more unworthily, for the sake of avoiding “the offence of the Cross,” or of winning the good word of the unchanged heart; it would be a real, terrible “veiling” of “the Gospel” and of its “truth.” [A wise ministry, of course, practises a (perfectly honest) “economy” of teaching. The babes must have milk. They do not need more. But this not akin to the (technical) “Reserve.” True and false “development” have been thus discussed: “There is a modern Romish ‘Theory of Development’ of which Newman’s celebrated essay is the classical exposition, and there is a rationalistic theory which is an application of the hypothesis of evolution to the religious ideas of man. According to the former, the process of development is the expansion, under an infallible directing authority, of doctrinal germs and ideas into a variety of new forms and aspects, ‘and the existing belief of the Roman Communion is its mature result.’ According to the other theory, all religious conceptions have their origin in the human mind, and Christian doctrine is but one branch of its general progress, the Scriptures themselves, and all belief arising from them, being the natural outgrowth and product of the mind acted upon by surrounding conditions. These opposing theories have much in common, and this among the rest—that truth is not made the test of dogma. In the one case authority is the sole criterion; in the other there is strictly speaking no criterion at all, seeing that, from the rationalistic point of view, dogma can possess no other kind of truth than a temporary and relative adaptation to the religious consciousness from which it springs. Between these … there is room for a theory of doctrinal development … distinguished by the following ‘notes.’ First, development does not consist in additions to the Revelation contained in Holy Scripture; … it does not call new doctrines into existence [above all, to support or complete any dogmatic system or Church claim]. Second, it is development, not of doctrine in its subject-matter, but in the understanding and apprehension of the Church. Third, neither for the process nor for the results … is infallibility claimed, or anything beyond the general guidance and blessing [of the Church’s great Head], … which … does not preclude the possibility of error in His people.” (F. W. Macdonald.) The personal character of the ministry, too, as well as all their dealings with their fellows, show that they have “renounced,” etc. No denser “veil” to the Gospel than a questionable or damaged reputation in its ministers, in regard to their transparent honesty of speech, their simple directness of motive, their entirely “above-board” action. Many seekers after God and after truth have failed to find both, even in the Gospel, as they have read it or have heard it preached, by reason of the known ill-repute of the minister. If the idolised minister, or system, may become a veil, the discredited or discreditable, man, or system may as certainly be so. The ministers need to be thoroughly transparent in life and character and teaching. (c) The true ministry has but one aim,—so to let “the light shine” upon the path, and into the mind and heart, of the “lost,” as that they may best be brought out of their darkness and into the presence of “the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.” It originally “shone out of darkness.” The primal fact of the material creation was repeated in the moral. It was the ray of the dawn of a day, ever since shining more and more unto its perfection of noontide light. That dawn sprang forth from the bosom of darkness, flashing into a world dark in ignorance. Now the Sun Himself was arisen. His light had shone into the darkness of the “heart” (and intellect and life) of Paul and his fellow-workers; into and “in,” for it was an abiding day within them. Now they have but one simple, open, unveiled purpose, open to the scrutiny of men and of God—to “manifest the truth,” all unveiled, to every dark mind and heart which could be induced to gaze. They know of no “handling the Word of God” but such as will contribute to this end. (2) Not by its Divine Author.—He is the God who loves to “make light shine out of,” and upon, “darkness.” A God of light; a God Who is light; Whose attitude is, “If … not so, I would have told you”; Who loves to reveal, rather than to conceal. Silent, He has spoken by His Word; invisible, He has shown Himself in His Image. God is working in and with the soul which craves to see the light. (3) By the hearers themselves.—(a) The “open” Gospel needs to be met by “open” thoughts and hearts. The “spiritual man” is in thorough rapport with the “spiritual” minister. [“He that knoweth God, heareth us; he that is not of God, heareth not us” (1 John 4:6; where note also the following sentence. A noteworthy claim!) A true minister may borrow the words of a Higher Teacher: “My sheep know My voice; … they know not the voice of strangers.”] The conscience in man leaps [like the unborn Baptist at the approach of the unborn Christ] in response to the truth. Even in the unsaved there is so much of grace that they know, and, at least secretly, honour, even if they do not love, the man who plainly speaks truth. Even in such conscience has from the beginning some power to recognise the truth when it meets with it. It is an eye made for the light. “It is a pleasant thing for this eye to behold this Sun.” The sincere Nathanael is ready to welcome and follow new light. Much more does the enlightened man respond to, and go out towards, the man whose truth commends him to his conscience. The man who is in Christ, and even the sincere inquirer for Christ, knows a true minister of Christ when he meets him and hears him; for him that minister carries letters of “commendation” of unimpeachable, unquestionable validity. The true minister “commends himself” to such. He blamelessly asks their endorsement of his credentials, and their acceptance of himself and his message. He must conciliate the unsaved man if he is to do him good. If he cannot gain his ear, he will not make the light reach his dark “mind.” He appeals thus with hope of success; the “conscience” in “every man” is the preacher’s hope; it is the starting-point of his work. Were it originally absent; let it be blinded or killed; the minister of the Gospel has then nothing to appeal to; “he cometh and hath nothing in” the man. (b) It is actually met with “veiled” minds. The “veiled” heart in the Israelite made the Law a veil, and not a mirror or a medium; the “veiled” mind of “the world,” puts a veil upon the Gospel. Nothing more sadly wonderful to the man who sees, than to find how utterly unable to see what is so clear to him, are the “lost” men and women about him. Nothing, unless it be that himself once did not see what is now so plain. There may be many causes of blindness. Prejudice, whether induced by early educational bias, or—more than a man is always conscious—by subtle love of sin and dislike of holiness. [“Men love darkness rather than light” (John 3:19 sqq.).] Moral indolence, which will not “be bothered” about such things, and turns away, with an indifference that is as weary as it is worldly, from The Truth [Pilate-like, John 18:38]; an indolence which has an uncomfortable misgiving that to listen might involve inquiry, and inquiry compel to action, and that in a direction in which the heart has no desire to look or go. Preoccupation; for the mind and heart need to be kept free from entanglement; too eager, too close, contact with any secular pursuit becomes an entanglement, a bondage, a “veil” to the heart; art, music, business, home, may swallow up a man until he has neither leisure nor desire for “the light.” [The value of the Sabbath to even the “lost,” and to the young, consists not a little in this, that it is a “break” in the engrossing, enslaving round of secular life, enslaving even its noblest types and forms. The Sabbath does something towards preventing the “veil” from becoming too densely impervious to the light.] Idolatry, in its many modern forms; sensuality, and in its varying degrees even the sensuous; any sinful habit indulged; mental pride, which cannot brook “backing down” from a position once openly taken up; worldliness of life and temper, in its widest sense,—all veil the mind and heart. The “man in Christ” sees Christ in Law and Gospel; he understands, too, why the man who is “lost” does not, cannot. And to the man living under the gracious influences of the Spirit of God, there is not infrequently given a revelation—from which he shrinks in horror—of the nearness of a Power of Evil,—a very “god of this world.” That evil Power is behind, and in, all the veiling of the heart, as the good Spirit is analogously behind, and in, all opening of the eyes and all clearness of disclosure and vision. In neither case is man’s personal responsibility destroyed. The veiling is man’s own doing, whilst it is also the work of the great Anti-God, “the god of this world.” 2 Corinthians 4:4. “The god of this world.”—[“Grandis et horribilis descriptio Satanζ” (Bengel, in loc.)]. I. His dominion.—Usurped. Extensive. Powerful. II. His subjects.—The lost. Who believe not. III. His work.—To blind their minds. By ignorance, error, delusion. IV. His object.—To hinder the grace of God. To ruin souls.—[J. L.] 2 Corinthians 4:4. “Through Christ to Godward.” I. Godward.— 1. A Godward look.—Standing with face toward God. Having God in full view in all his life. Everything else then adjusts itself accordingly; everything falls into due, true proportion; truth, man, earthly interests, etc. 2. A Godward hope.—[Cf. 1 John 3:21; different word for “confidence”; thought related.] Hemmed in hopelessly on all sides, but can look and hope upwards. Hated by his Jewish fellow-countrymen; mistrusted, disliked, even hated, by many of his fellow-Christians; only a few understanding and loving him. But One does understand him; he can commit his cause to that One, and go on in hope. 3. A Godward plea.—Looks Godward for inspiration; looks toward Him for help. His look is an appeal. [So Hebrews 12 is really “looking at Jesus,” but leads up to “looking unto Jesus” for help.] His need is an appeal; the very sight of his need will not fail to move God’s heart. [As the blind or crippled street mendicant stands and says nothing, but simply shows himself to the gaze and heart of the benevolent passers-by. To show himself is itself an appeal.] II. Through Christ.—Can only see God when he gazes upon Him in Christ. Can only see God when he looks in a Christward direction. Down that road also, by that channel, must His help be expected to reach Paul. In John 1:51 all intercourse between heaven and earth is “upon the Son of Man,” the New Testament Jacob’s ladder. All communication between man and God is through the Mediator. His intervention is the middle term supposed in every “transaction” between God and man. Observe how this makes all religious life Christian. All has the Christian tinge; everything—hope included—has taken on a Christian colour. 2 Corinthians 4:5-10. The Preacher’s— I. Duty, II. Qualifications, III. Triumphs.—[J. L.] NOTES2 Corinthians 4:8.—“Pressed for room, and still having room” (Stanley). “Perplexed, but not utterly perplexed” (Beet). Apparent, not real, contradiction to 2 Corinthians 1:8 (same word).2 Corinthians 4:9.—“Pursued in our flight, but not left behind as a prey to our pursuers; struck down (as with a dart, or thrown down as in wrestling), yet not perishing” (Stanley).2 Corinthians 4:10. Dying.—Note margin. See under 2 Corinthians 1:5 for the thought.2 Corinthians 4:11. Live.—In more than the physical sense. See, a few months later, first clause of this verse exemplified at Corinth (Acts 20:3).2 Corinthians 4:12.—Might almost personify, and write “Death,” “Life.” “The preachers daily felt themselves sinking into the grave [query, rather being led by a Via Dolorosa to a cross on a Calvary]; and their daily deliverance was daily working eternal life among their converts” (Beet). The thoughts recur in 1 Corinthians 4:8-10 and Philippians 1:19.2 Corinthians 4:13.—“The same (Holy) Spirit of faith” as is implied in the thought of Psa 116:10, LXX. [Perowne says this is an impossible rendering of the Hebrew. He submits (1) “I believe when I speak,” i.e. when I break forth into the complaint which follows in the next clause; but he prefers (2) “I believe”—emphatic, i.e. I do believe, I have been taught trust in God by painful experience—“for I must speak”—I must confess it, “I, even I (pronoun emphatic), was greatly afflicted; I myself,” etc. “The Psalmist declares that he stays himself upon God (‘I believe’), for he had looked to himself and there had seen nothing but weakness; he had looked to other men, and found them all deceitful, treacherous as a broken reed.”] Is there anything more intended than a “happy quotation” of a familiar phrase, quite apart from its correctness as representing the Hebrew? Nothing depends on that correctness, though in some phrases of the context in the Psalm there is an appropriateness to Paul’s peril and deliverance. As it stands in the LXX., the phrase happily expresses a very great principle.2 Corinthians 4:14. With Jesus.—Not “by,” or, as often, “in,” but exactly “along with,” as 1 Thessalonians 4:14. More than “sharing His condition” (Stanley). More truly Beet says: “Since our resurrection is a result of Christ’s resurrection, wrought by the same power, in consequence of our present spiritual union with Christ, and is part of that heritage which we share with Christ, Paul overlooks the separation in time, and thinks of his own resurrection and Christ’s as one Divine act.”2 Corinthians 4:15. All (these) things.—“If I live such a life, it is in order that there may be more souls partaking of the grace, and then the more to thank God for it.” Similar to 2 Corinthians 1:11 and 2 Corinthians 9:12-14.2 Corinthians 4:16. The inward man.—Same original as “the inner man” in Ephesians 3:16, or Romans 7:22; but hardly in the same sense; the moral aspect is there prominent, here only the immaterial character of it. So “renewed” is not prominently the moral renewal of Col 3:10.2 Corinthians 4:17.—Note the While.—“If we cease to look, it ceases to work.” This verse helps to fix exegetically the meaning of “eternal.” If Restoration were a certainty in the ultimate future for the lost, they might in hell quote 2 Corinthians 4:17-18. Dean Plumptre wrote to Archdeacon Farrar: “I have never been able to attach any great importance to the discussions which have turned upon the meaning of the word αἰώνιος. I cannot, on philological grounds, agree with Mr. Maurice in thinking that our Lord’s teaching in John 17:3 excludes from it the idea of duration, and the whole history of the word shows that it cannot of itself denote, though it may suggest, the idea of endlessness.” [Spirits in Prison, p. 338. He repeats all this expressly, p. 336 (in an essay ad hoc).] .—2 Corinthians 4:7-18I. The outer life of an apostle (2 Corinthians 4:7-12). 1. A distressed life; 2. A vicarious life. II. The inner life of an apostle (2 Corinthians 4:13-18). 3. A believing life; 4. A victorious life. Who is in the “succession”?I. 1. Distressed.— (1) Not an unmixed good to get too vivid or realistic a view of the externals of the earthly life of Jesus. [See Homily, “Knowing Christ after the flesh” (2 Corinthians 5:16).] It is a great, and unmixed, good to realise the externals of Paul’s life. “Troubled,” “perplexed,” “persecuted,” “cast down,” to a reader’s heart, and for the purposes of his practical encouragement, gain very helpful force, if from (say) the Acts, read with such instructive side-lights as in 2 Corinthians 6:3-10, these words be filled out by the realising imagination. “Persecuted,” e.g., falls lightly from the lips of a reader, and only lightly impresses the attention of the hearers. But it should be remembered how from the day of his conversion Paul was the object of persistent, deep, malicious, murderous hatred, which never relaxed its pursuit until his head fell beneath the sword of the executioner, somewhere on the Appian Way. [It was really Jewish persecution which led to his journey “on appeal” to Rome; the influence of Poppζa, the wife of Nero, and a Jewish proselyte, was possibly one of the factors which made his imprisonment to end in death.] Hunted out from city to city. Not safe for long together anywhere. “Smuggled out” of Damascus by night; hurried secretly away from Thessalonica [to Athens (Acts 17:14)]; stoning attempted (Acts 14:5) or actually accomplished (ib. 19); and the examples in the Acts are only the cases which “happen” to be mentioned, out of an unrecorded mass of facts illustrative of this word. [Just before this time (Acts 19:31); a little after it (Acts 20:3).] He was the fox hunted from hole to hole; the bird of the air not suffered to shelter long in even a temporary nest. Very graphic (see Critical Notes) are the other words. “Troubled” [“tribulated;” it is, radically, the word so frequent in chap. 1] “in everything,” “at all points,” perpetually under the threshing-drag; within him, as well as around him, were the instruments, or the occasions of, perpetual, crushing pressure. [One thinks of the martyrdoms by crushing between boards or plates of iron, under heavy weights. There are daily martyrdoms, not suffered just once, for a short, sharp hour or two of agony, and then done with, but prolonged through a lifetime of distress. See the crowding, pushing, pressing, choking cares of his life graphically illustrated, Luke 8:45 (cognate word), as also in Mark 5:24; Mark 5:31. To the very limit of endurance. [“Patience” in its New Testament sense of “pressing on, bearing up,” is the counterpart of this “pressure.”] “Perplexed.” “What next? Where next? Hemmed in; where is the way of escape? At our wits’ end; what is the wise and right thing to do? Is there anything that can be done?” And this when something “must” be done; for time is slipping on, circumstances are closing in around, the last door of escape will soon be closed up. Yet what to do? To see advancing trouble or disaster draw nearer and nearer, yet to stand hanging down helpless hands. “Cast down;” thrown in the wrestle, struck down in the conflict [as Christian by Apollyon in the Valley of Humiliation]; lifted, in the strong grip of circumstances or of the Tempter himself, “clean off” one’s feet, off one’s foothold on the promises and faithfulness of God; blow following on blow, buffet raised on buffet in quick succession; “facts” arising in fertile crop, which seem to “compel” doubts and questions that it is an agony to be obliged to entertain, even though only that they may be dismissed; until all strength to fight on, or even to follow on, seems lost. Reason, trust, hope, sinking, “stricken down” by the quick succession of staggering “facts,” in even the providential path; or of disheartening circumstances in the work of God. Every reader adapts to his own special circumstances the words of Paul; they are a frame which will hold many a picture of a distressed life. It is as much his personal, as his official, life which is in question. [ (2) In it we meet the time-old, world-wide fact, and the problem which is at its heart,—how scant a recognition the greatest men of their time get; how often the truest benefactors are unrecognised; how often, indeed, goodness, and the holiest life, are only recognised to be met with rebuff, to be made to suffer; how they are persecuted even to the death. This alone is, of course, no complete or adequate account of the life and death of Jesus of Nazareth, but, at the least, it is an account which falls in with and exemplifies this “law.” If God’s people do not really serve Him “for nought,” at least they do not serve Him for what the earthly life has to give. [Some lives only show their full beauty when “distressed.” The incense only gives out its full savour when cast upon the burning coals.] What is the rationale of persecution? For no man ever seriously entertained the thought of changing opinion by external, or physical, compulsion. There has been an element of political, governmental action in much persecution of Christianity. In the Roman Empire religiones illicit� were always obnoxious to the State. The necessary, regulative effect of Christianity upon the action and conduct of its professors has sometimes inevitably involved disobedience to some State legislation, and very much oftener a disconformity to the informal, social, customary legislation of the world in which they were citizens. To any form of absolute government, individualism, particularly such as seems aggressive and in conflict with the established order, is a thing to be repressed, if it cannot be destroyed. But this by no means accounts for all persecution, even organised and quasi-governmental. It by no means explains the elaborated ingenuity of cruelty in punishment which is no necessary accompaniment of (even mistaken) justice. It by no means explains the elaborately ingenious and the subtly invented pain inflicted, in cases of personal, as distinguished from quasi-official, persecution. One sentence of Paul is a summary formula for the answer to the question proposed. “As then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now” (Galatians 4:29). John traces the matter further back. In the Book of Origins—Genesis—he sees in the slaying of Abel by Cain his brother the origin and first example of the deep, innate, inevitable, murderous antipathy between “the world” and “the children of God” (1 John 3:12). The Roman State persecuted the Church; the heathen state in Madagascar persecuted the Christian community; the Romish Church persecuted its fellow-Christian Albigenses and Vaudois; the Greek Church persecutes its fellow-Christians and fellow-subjects, the Stundists; Episcopal Church government persecuted Presbyterian, or Quaker, or Methodist nonconformity; in the same congregation, the lax—“worldly”—section if in the majority, will give practical, painful, penal effect to its dislike of the spiritual minority; in the same household, “the world” pursues “the Church” with its effective, pain-dealing dislike. It is, in fact, the same “world” everywhere, though it may be a baptized “world” called a Church or a section of one, hating “the spiritual”; it is the same “natural” heart everywhere, which cannot simply be indifferent to, and leave alone, “the spiritual,” the pure, the holy, the Divine. The mere contrast is exasperating; it arouses antagonism; the antagonism becomes active. And, finally, the deep underlying “animal” or “devil,” of which there is too much in every natural heart, may make its persecution the occasion to display its love of inflicting and witnessing pain. In much persecution there has been seen that “streak” of the cruel, of the savage, which is a possibility of universal human nature, apart from the grace of God.] 2. Vicarious. “All things are for your sakes.”— (1) Living for others. Except this corn of wheat had fallen into the ground and died, it would have abode alone. Paul must be killed daily, so that Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippian gaolers, Lystran Timothys (Acts 14:5; Acts 14:19; Acts 16:1-2; 2 Timothy 3:11; ib. 2 Corinthians 1:8; 2 Corinthians 1:12; 2 Corinthians 2:1-2; 2 Corinthians 3:12; 2 Corinthians 2:11-13; a Bible-reading in germ), may have life. “Through death to life” is the “law” for a man’s own life. If a man will live for himself, introverting upon himself all thought and action—“will save his life” for himself—he will “lose it” and die. [There is no life that can more utterly be selfishness and death than that of self-culture.] “Through the death of one to the life of others” is the “law” for the life of all. Christ’s death the highest exemplification of this, though it is unique quβ the link of connection between His death and our life; there is no analogy in this between the solitary case of Christ and the common cases of ordinary mankind, though both may be stated in terms of the same great “law.” “For your sakes.” Not for Paul’s own? Certainly. They no doubt had a sanctifying and sanctified efficacy in the training and development of his own Christian life. [Below, they are seen, at the least, “dissolving the tabernacle,” and “working out the exceeding weight of glory” for him.] But in the fulness of his Christlikeness of affection, he for the moment sees this no longer; it disappears out of all reckoning. He approximates very closely to Him Who could alone say with full and exact truth, “All things are for your sakes.” [On lower planes of illustration are seen instances of the same “law” at work. Some must sacrifice the sorely needed rest of the Sabbath, that others may hear the Gospel and find “life” on the Sabbath. Any life which is to be a blessing and a comfort and a joy in a family, must be continually putting aside its own work or plans or ease, giving itself up to others, and indeed, in its highest types, be “laying itself out” with loving ingenuity, to contrive the pleasure or the convenience of others. Birth, in many ways, and in many instances, means death to the giver of the new life. No man permanently blesses his race with even new thought, except by sore pangs of mental “labour.” Etc.] “For your sake.” So that in two directions Paul’s life is the very opposite of self-centered; Christward—“to me to live is ‘Christ’ ”; manward—“all for your sakes” [cf. “beside ourselves … to God; sober … for your cause” (2 Corinthians 4:13)]. Poised between, pointing toward, these two poles, the Paul who hangs central between them is forgotten! (2) Especially, suffering for others. So, probably, 2 Corinthians 4:12. The daily “dying” is the price—by him thankfully paid—for their daily “life.” (To extend Alford’s remark:) God shows death in the living in order that he may through them awaken and show life in the dying. Yet, as if an instinctive perception, that vicarious dying in its fullest sense was the propriety of Christ alone, guarded his language, where it trod on the very precipice-edge of error, he never says, “We die for you, or for your sakes.” Only this: “We are delivered daily unto death for Jesus’ sake.” [Farrar does indeed paraphrase: “So then death is working in us—seeing that for Christ’s sake and for your sakes we die daily—but life in you. The trials are mainly ours; the blessings yours.”] [The “vicarious” idea (in an inexact sense of the word) is suggested in 2 Corinthians 4:5-7. The Gospellers have themselves been illumined, as from a central fount of Light, that so in their turn they may show light to, and shed light upon, other dark hearts. They are filled—earthen vessels though they be—with treasure, in order that they may “make many rich.” Or as some see the picture in the words, they are the soldiers of a greater captain than Gideon, carrying each of them his light in his earthen pitcher. But “earthen” then conveys no thought of disparity between means used and ends accomplished, between contents and vessel; yet such a disparity seems required by the concluding clause of 2 Corinthians 4:7. II. 3. Believing.— (1) With the same faith, begotten of “the same Spirit of faith,” which prompted, and breathes in, the declaration of the Psalmist. The whole drift of Hebrews 11 is to exhibit this real unity of the principle of faith, through all the ages and dispensations. Believers are all of a pattern; they conform to a distinctly marked and permanent type, to whatever Church they belong, in whatever age they live, how much or how little soever of light they have upon the matters for which they exercise faith, and upon Him Who, to them all, is the Object towards which faith directs itself, and on which, having reached It, faith rests. It may have the distinctly Gospel colouring and character, but that is rather gained from the matter with which it is concerned. Concerned with “providential” things, or with distinctly “evangelical,” faith’s hand is in either case “subdued unto the colour” of the thing it works upon, but it is the same hand, and the same grasp upon the same God. [Indeed, it is specially noteworthy how, e.g., the faith of Noah is declared to have won for him a grace which is described in a very “Pauline” phrase, “Became heir of the righteousness which is of God by faith.” And so in other instances. The examples of Hebrews 11 are in the closest connection with the critical points of the developing history of Redemption,—the “nodes” in the growing stem, at which miracles (and prophecy) and faith all blossom in fullest profusion.] Old Testament psalmist, New Testament apostle, both belong to the same “set”; [they are of the true Abrahamic stock;] they are “believers.” In every age, and in every sense, does God’s “just man live by faith.” In every age, in every believer, faith’s activity conforms to the general formula of Heb 11:1; it makes things hoped for and future to be working realities, assumed, taken for granted, in all reckoning and action in the present; it makes things unseen into elements and factors in the daily life, as powerful and as real as the things seen. [So 2 Corinthians 4:18. Indeed, God and His word of faithful promise are more certainly assured conditions of life’s problem, than are man and his character or words. [E.g. the purpose and the protection of God are more potent considerations than is the wrath of Pharoah (Hebrews 11:27).] “Begotten of the same Spirit.” Exegesis, and the whole strain of Scripture, growing clearer as the Pentecostal age advances, require the “S.” Faith is not natural to the human heart; it is induced; it is the Spirit’s grace. No better, surer proof of this than the fluctuations in its strength, of which every believer is conscious. So unreasonable are they; and yet so little amenable to, or to be put away by, reasoning. After all the experiment of a long lifetime, with its resulting, accumulated “experience,” what more logical than “hope”? (Romans 5:4). What more reasonable, and right, than that the One Friend Who has never failed His people in any slightest particular; Whose resources of wisdom and power, and Whose love and character, have, absolutely without exception, always responded adequately to every demand made upon them by man’s need and faith; should be met with a perfectly restful trust? And yet, no! After years of accumulated experience; in the very presence of a great deliverance; with the very greatest mercy only a recent memory; still the heart, ungratefully, illogically, will doubt and be distressed, as if it were only beginning to learn the lesson of faith, instead of being already a lifelong pupil. Faith is a gift, a grace, to be used and cultivated by man, but needing to be created by God’s Spirit. Whatever “grieves the Spirit” weakens faith. (2) The immediate object of Paul’s faith is the resurrection of Jesus Christ. It is accepted by faith as a fact; its consequences are also a fact to faith. In His being raised is contained and involved the further miracle that Paul and his fellows shall be raised up also. The daily deliverance from the daily, deadly peril is involved in it too. That peril is a foretaste of death; the life, thus daily guarded and renewed, is, in principle and in foretaste, a real raising up again. Whether in now daily renewing and preserving that life, or in raising it up from the grave hereafter, He Who is the God of Paul’s life is really doing one and the same great work. The daily deliverance is a simple corollary of the truth that the eternal life, in which resurrection is just one episode and incident, is already begun, and is to be kept “unto the Day.” Faith accepts the premiss—Christ’s resurrection—as fact; faith draws the inference, with its own sure logic; and accepts, and rests in the consequence—Paul shall be raised up. This strength of assurance affects his whole life; in its every expression of character. Such a faith, resting on such a God, “stiffens” the man; “puts a backbone” into him. When Paul speaks he “uses great boldness of speech”; he does not need to speak in equivoque or doubt, with bated breath or qualified certainty, or in “adulterated” Gospel. [He is a preacher who preaches not doubts, or speculations, or hopes, but what to him are certainties—“I believe, therefore have I spoken.”] And so, finally, 4. Victorious.— (1) The “earthen vessel” is “troubled,” is “perplexed,” is “persecuted,” is “cast down”; it “always bears about the dying of Jesus”; it “perishes”; naturally it would “faint.” Yet it is not “distressed,” nor “in despair,” nor “forsaken,” nor “destroyed”; the treasure enriches many; the words are bold, with a confidence victorious over doubt or any human and unworthy motive whatever; it “looks” away from the “seen” and “temporal” to the “unseen” and “eternal”; it pursues its way, in the midst of all and in the face of all, accounting all as but “the momentary lightness of our affliction.” It is, on the one side, the victory of the vessel of frailest “earthen” mould and material; on the other, it is the victory of the resurrection-working power of God. The “excellency” of the power which works the daily wonder, guarantees, and will by-and by make real, the weight of glory which grows from “excellency” to “excellency.” [Same words. Note also 2 Corinthians 1:8. The eternal victory is but the present daily victory “writ large.” (2) “Not distressed;” there is always “the way of escape.” The close-hemming foes—men and circumstances—are never suffered to complete and close up their environing circle. The threshing-roller has its limit of weight; our strength of patient endurance is always just a little more than the heaped-up burdens. Frail as is the vessel, it is always made strong enough for its purpose. “Not in despair;” the word is alway heard; “I have given thee the valley of Achor for a door of hope” (Hosea 2:15); somehow it is always possible for the pilgrims to walk out of Giant Despair’s castle; they have a master key for every door. “Not forsaken;” the army of Christ has no stragglers who are left behind to perish; the weakest, who falls out of the ranks when the pursuit is hot, is never abandoned. The Captain Himself is the rear-guard for His host. “Not destroyed;” the touch of mother earth, when they are stricken down or thrown in the wrestle, seems to set them, Antζus-like, on their feet again. The wrestler is flung upon the ground, but never appeals in vain to his King and Master, Who from His throne is watching the struggle; it is not He Who, with thumb turned down, will leave him to his adversary and his fate. (3) “Worketh out.” Which is more than merely victory, and much more than deliverance. It is the strain of the pζan of Rom 8:37, “more than conquerors.” The trials have helped the afflicted man. He has not only been through them, but on them has levied contribution toward his best welfare. He has not only escaped, but they have helped and enriched him. “One more such victory, and I am ruined,” cried Pyrrhus. There have been to this conqueror, Paul, no victories “only less calamitous than” defeats. Conquerors! “More than conquerors!” (4) Whilst we look. [“Whilst Peter looked” at His Master, he could tread the waves; they bore him toward his Master.] Let a man become secular in temper and view and outlook, he will soon find that life’s burdens are becoming crushing in their “weight.” If he focus (as the photographer says) for the near, the distant will become faint and indistinct. To get his picture right, he must focus by the things “eternal.” He focusses for an unseen object, but the earthly, temporal foreground somehow always thus comes right. In life’s scheme and picture all is then in due and true proportion and definition. 2 Corinthians 4:2. The Sphere of the Pulpit.—“Commending ourselves to every man’s conscience.” Of all who teach the religious teacher occupies the highest position. Others are giving in the school the lessons whose actualisation shall be the principles and habits and conduct of the men of the coming generation. They have to do with mind, and that in its most impressible condition. They may give to very much of the stream of the world’s moral and social life a tinge and a direction, as they please. But the religious teacher ought to be, might be—every faithful one is—one who deals with the conscience. I. With the conscience in every man.—Without the physical senses, I could never feel my connection with this material system,—the green earth beneath my feet, and the blue heavens that encircle me, would be nothing without these; so without this conscience, this moral sense, I could have no idea either of moral government or God. Had you no conscience, I might as well endeavour to give to one that is born blind and deaf the idea of beauty and sweet sounds, as to give you the idea of duty and God. To this the religious teacher appeals. Expect him to appeal to it. Honour him in proportion as he does. 1. There is a ministry which reaches the conscience through the passions.—Hope and fear are appealed to; emotions are stirred, tears flow; the fear of wrath leads up to a sense of sin and guilt. There is a ministry which aims at the imagination. Beauty is the idea. Whatever in thought or form, in sentiment or style, will please the taste or charm the fancy are freely introduced. Truth is cast into sonorous periods, and presented in poetic pictures. No reason why not, if only all be consecrated to the use of reaching, in order to awaken, the conscience. The attention must first be arrested, somehow; else the preacher is a dead failure. The wrong is done, when the catching and satisfying of the imagination becomes in itself the goal of the aim of the preacher, and the only desire of the hearer. So of the ministry which aims mainly at the intellect. Verbal criticism, philosophic discussions, subtle distinctions, ingenious hypotheses, are the staple of its discourses, with the accompanying danger that the whole should be exclusively an intellectual performance. “Commending ourselves to every man’s intellect,” by all means. Religion has nothing to fear—revealed doctrine has nothing to fear—from fair, sober, reasonable reason and intellectual scrutiny. But neither the preacher nor the hearer should be satisfied if the intellectual exercise and the satisfaction it gives, be all. This should be made one of the approaches, one of the “parallels,” by which the spiritual engineer seeks to get near, that so he may seize the stronghold of the conscience for his Master, Christ. “The weapons of our warfare are not carnal” (2 Corinthians 10:4); the aims must not be carnal either. In the day of his “success” and gathered applause and goodwill, let the preacher ask, “Did I aim at, did I reach, the conscience?” In the day of his “failure,” and accompanying despondency, let him pray that the “poor performance” may—perhaps the better for its poverty—have reached a conscience. Let the hearer ask for a preacher who is mighty with the conscience. 2. “Every man’s conscience.”—The torpid; those that have never been awakened, or who, having been once aroused, have relapsed into insensibility again. Unhappily the most commonly occurring condition of the conscience. Turn over the pages of universal history; look the world through; search its literature, institutions, trades, professions, amusements; you see the flames of passion reddening the sky of ages; the creations of the imagination filling the horizon; the inventions of genius, the theories of intellect, piled mountains high on every hand; but the activity of Conscience all but absent and unknown. The alarmed and guilty conscience, with its fear of wrath, vain struggles against the tyranny of Sin, all the experiences of Romans 7, consciousness of accumulating transgression, and so of accumulating guilt. The peaceful, victorious conscience. From which the sense of guilt has been removed; which has won a conquest over all the inner antagonists of the soul; which soul has ascended the throne within the man, grasped the sceptre, and is ever carrying out the will of God, and rejoicing in God through Christ, by Whom it has “received the Atonement.” For each of these the true pulpit must have its message; the true Christian teacher is the man who has the word for each, which it at once recognises as the message from God, just adapted to its necessity. II. Through the medium of “the truth.”—Paul saw “truth” everywhere, breathing in pagan systems, sparkling in philosophic speculations, circulating in the general current of common language and common life. But to his mind, The Truth—that which humanity wanted to raise it from its fallen state—the sin-correcting, soul-saving truth, was this: The special revelation of God developed in the teaching, embodied in the life, illustrated and concentrated and energised in the death, of Christ. This central Truth alone could uncover in daylight the awful heavens of being, and bless with new life and beauty this fallen earth. Paul could move, he knew, the conscience of his age by this potent instrument. With this he was an Archimedes who could move a world. Truth “as truth is in Jesus” (Ephesians 4:21). III. As under the felt inspection of Almighty God.—Paul “set the Lord always before him”; he toiled and suffered “as seeing Him Who is invisible.” This abiding consciousness of the Divine inspection would remove three hindrances to the work of the preacher. 1. Man fear. By all means let the preacher—every thoughful man will—have a deep awe as he stands in the presence of souls, every one of them an heir of the interminable hereafter, every one an originating fountain of everlasting, ever-effective influence—good or evil. He may well tremble as he presumes to influence for eternity deathless intelligences. “In the sight of God” will deepen this, but it would destroy the enervating, enslaving, inordinate over-anxiety to avoid the hearer’s disfavour, and to ensure his praise and approbation. 2. Affectation. In the felt presence of the conscience, and, still more, of God, a man will become, and will be kept, real. 3. Dulness. The man who is desperately in earnest to get at, and grapple with, the conscience, and that by means which he can honestly employ as “in the sight of God,” will never be dull. And there will be no “commendation” to the best sense of the hearer like this of the evident aim, and still more of the success, at reaching and blessing the conscience. That is the type of minister who will always command an audience. He may offend some, may lose many, but he will be sought by the men of conscience. He will always have a clientele. There is always amongst “the masses” the demand for a man who can reach, and teach, and guide to rest, the conscience in men.—Suggested by “Homilist,” ii. 225. 2 Corinthians 4:3. Veiling the Gospel.—Two noteworthy things here:— A. A veiled revelation. B. A redeemed man lost. I. 1. Amazing! Two purposes of God crossed and thwarted. “Re-vel-ation?” The very word means the drawing back of a veil. An evil will is seen interposing a veil again! A man “for whom Christ”—mark that, no other, no less, than Christ—“died,” “lost.” Now in the process of being lost,—such is the force of Paul’s present participle. It is the mystery to thought; a mystery which sooner or later “brings us up” sharply, as if before a dead wall that stops all further progress in our knowledge, in all inquiries on moral questions. The Problem of Evil; the Problem of Will. The marvel that the Creator has made so many of His own handiwork to possess a Self so like His own in its self-determining power, that it can use its power to say “No” to its very Maker and His purpose and desire. 2. The revelation is a Gospel.—Thoroughly, and only, practical in its object and scope; not at all to help speculation, or merely to give certain knowledge, even on the topics most urgent to the inquiring intellect. For ages, behind the veil, God had been preparing for the day when it should please Him that “the mystery hidden from ages and generations,” “the mystery which had been kept in silence through times eternal,” should at last be “made manifest” (Romans 16:25). At last, like some completed statue beneath its covering, it stood waiting for the moment—it came at Pentecost—when the veil should be lifted, and The Gospel stand out in all its perfection of salvation-beauty. [A sub-section of this revelation is in Isaiah 27:7, and 2 Timothy 1:10. All heathen, all natural life—to some extent even Jewish life—was spent under the overspreading “shadow of death.” A terror and a bondage (Hebrews 2:15) to thought and heart. In the Gospel of Christ—of the dying and risen Christ—the meaning of death, and the certainty of a life beyond death, and the hope of blessedness in that life—all stood out in the only certain, serviceable light which mankind possesses. It was revelation of the morning, when “Light shines out of darkness.” Night is a “covering” cast over all creation. What under its veil the great creative forces are silently producing, is unseen till the day dawns, and “brings to light” what was there all the while, but under the veil.] 3. The central Fact, the central Figure, of the Gospel is Christ.—He is in Himself a Revelation; His very appearance amongst men is a Gospel. The ambassador of England resident in Paris is, in his very residence there, a token of peace and amity between the two nations. [His absence or withdrawal would be understood to mean ruptured relations.] Christ going in and out amongst men for thirty-three years was in Himself a message of peace, a message of goodwill, from God to men. [Then, as below in 2 Corinthians 4:6, He discloses God to men’s mind and heart; in a fashion also which is “good-news” of God, as well as from Him.] II. But there is a velation, over against this revelation. There is a veiler as well as a Revealer. 1. The blindness is moral.—The “mind” is “blinded”; but the mischief goes deeper; to the “conscience” (2 Corinthians 4:2), and the “heart” (2 Corinthians 4:6). The man who on these topics is enlightened in mind, knows that the light reached the mind through these channels. “After all, it is to moral causes that we must assign a main influence in the … prevalence of unbelief. ‘Our systems of philosophy,’ said Fichte, ‘are very often but the reflex of our hearts and lives.’ … Each man’s position towards Christianity is ultimately determined by the inward condition of his heart and will.… Action must go before knowledge (John 7:17), and a certain inward condition prepare the way for the Gospel message. To understand the truth we must first stand in it (Jeremiah 23:18; 2 John 1:9), or at least be willing to enter and submit to it. Wherever there is a real [ignorance of and] aversion to the Gospel, ethical causes have much to do with it. There is something humiliating in the first aspect of all Christian truth. It reminds us of personal responsibility, of personal shortcomings. It wounds our natural pride and self-sufficiency.… How hard it is to many great and aspiring spirits to come down from their high estate and confess to guilt and error! For others Christianity has too much that is alarming. It makes of human life so serious a thing; it warns so solemnly of the nearness of eternity, and the certainty of future judgment; its sign of the cross reminds us so awfully of the Divine holiness and the hatefulness of sin. Too many also are not prepared to fight their way through all these terrors to real and solid peace, and catch at the idlest doubts and shallowest surprises to escape from the pressure of unwelcome truths. What pride does for the former class, fear does for those in deterring them from embracing the faith of the Gospel. And as for both these classes the entrance to the way of life is found too strait, so for many others the way itself has proved too narrow. Their love of ease refuses to engage in the striving after holiness; their love of gain and worldly honour shrinks from the thorny path of humility and self-denial. With many, alas! sins of sensuality are either parents or offspring of unbelief; nay, every sin may be regarded as a step in that direction.” (Christlieb, Modern Doubt, p. 26.) Vice, worldliness, self-worship are most common, and most fatally dense “veils.” [Even as renunciation of self, consecration to Christ, holy and serviceable living amongst men, gracious submission to God’s hand when under trial, are most fruitful preparatives of a heart for receiving the revelation.] 2. Men can blind their own eyes.—To see requires light and eyes. God has given both. Man can close his eyes to the light. [Has eyelids as well as eyes.] Cannot give himself light; but can make darkness for himself. But— 3. Their action is referred to a power, a person, behind them, “the god of this world.”—His culminating temptation to the Representative of mankind was that he should be accepted as “the God of our Lord Jesus Christ!” “Fall down and worship me!” The world is found bowing before his seat (Revelation 2:13); as Shadrach, Meshach, Abed-nego stood erect amidst a plain-ful of prostrate “peoples, nations, and languages,” so the man “not of the world even as” his Master was not, stands erect, exceptional, singular, to be in consequence cast into the furnace for his disconformity. And the bait is still: “If thou wilt, … all shall be thine!”] As behind, and in, and through, the mind of the inspired man, and the will of the ordinary Christian, there stands and works a Holy Spirit, prompting all good, giving all susceptibility; so it is the constant, and self-consistent, teaching of Scripture that in perfect but evil analogy, there stands and works behind, and in, and through, the mind, heart, will of man an Evil Personality, an Evil Spirit, who has made it his business to counterwork the work of God; who is the opponent, and in himself the antithesis, of God—the anti-God, the anti-Christ. Good Spirit and evil,—both are disclosures of Revelation. And, in closest analogy, just in the same sense, and so far, as all good is referable to the Holy Spirit, without (in a true sense) taking any merit from the man; so, without taking any responsibility from the man, all evil is referable to the Evil Spirit. Man blinds his own eyes; yet “the God of this world blinds the eyes of them, that believe not.” In all the moral causes above suggested, he is at work. III. “The eyes … them that believe not … them that are (being) lost.”—These stand in closest connection in the text, and in the closest relation in fact. Man has eyes for the supernatural world; eyes which may “see God.” To believe is to use these eyes. They who see not, who believe not, are already “the lost.” To have these things eternally “hidden from the eyes” is to be “lost” for ever. [Though this may include more than the mere penalty of loss, the p�na damni.] 2 Corinthians 4:6. The Glory of God. I. Revealed. II. Received. III. Reflected. I. Revealed in the face of Christ.—We are the gazing Israel; Christ is more than our Moses. He is showing no reflected “glory”; He is an original source of the “glory”; it is His own. When, with Peter and His brethren, we are caught up to some Mount of Tranfiguration, and see the face of Christ glorified, it is not that, like Moses’ face, His has been shone upon. It is shone through. The native glory within—“the glory of God”—permeates, penetrates, irradiates, the features. The clearest, fullest, altogether peculiar, manifestation of God is made to “every creature” in Christ and His Gospel. Herein is— 1. The one real and direct expression of God.—The Infinite brought down, softened, adapted to man’s capacity. [Can bear to gaze at the sun when reflected in the still pool.] In nature we have the indirect, inferential revelation of God; in Judaism the typical, illustrated revelation; in Jesus Christ the direct and true. 2. An embodiment of Divine excellencies in a living person.—In their abstract presentation the attributes of God are too little effective with the heart and conscience. Men cannot rest in abstractions, nor find much help in them. They want the concrete; they can only rest in a Person. 3. This personal exhibition is human in character.—The essential holiness proper to the Godhead is shown, though in the midst of the ordinary conditions and surroundings of humanity. 4. All this is in perfect exhibition.—In other revelations of God men have the divided, in some the distorted, beam; here in the face of Jesus Christ shines the whole, pure, perfect light of God. II. Received into human hearts.—Analogy, Scripture, Fact, all show the necessity of a heart preparation for receiving the glory. The light shines on the material world; it shines into the adapted manhood with its eye. 1. This is specially a heart preparation.—The carnal mind, at enmity against God’s law, cannot perceive the beauty of holiness; how should it? Or how should the narrow, petrified, selfish heart realise a love as wide as the world, stooping from the highest glory to the deepest abasement, giving itself unto death that others may have eternal life? 2. This preparation is a great and Divine work.—“Religious truths do not grow out of logic; but pre-supposing certain spiritual tendencies and affections, they arise from immediate contact of the soul with God, from a beam of God’s light, penetrating the mind that is allied to Him.” The heart’s eyes sometimes unclose as if under the brightening beams of the morning, gently and almost unconsciously. Sometimes a lightning-flash arouses and alarms. But the opening of the eye is of God. “Whose heart the Lord [Christ] opened” (Acts 16:14). All the capacity for this revelation found in the child or in the heathen is of God, the work of His Spirit upon the universal heart. III. Reflected upon, and into, other eyes and hearts.—The Son of Righteousness shines upon men largely through the instrumentality of men. All who have received are under obligation to reflect upon, and impart to, others the light. [“Holding forth the word of life” (Philippians 2:15-16) as “lights (=light bearers) in the world,” suggests a company holding out and up, at arm’s length, high above their head, the Light which may guide other souls through the darkness to the source of Light for themselves. “Take up the torch, and wave it wide, The torch that lights life’s thickest gloom.”] —Some suggestions from “Homilist,” vii. 253. 2 Corinthians 4:7. “Treasure in earthen vessels.” I. The Gospel a treasure.—An unexpected, suddenly new illustration. It was “light” in 2 Corinthians 4:6. 1. As there it first illumined the preachers’ hearts, so here it is treasure which has first enriched themselves; there, they next must endeavour to make it shine into other hearts; here, they must endeavour with the Gospel to “make many rich.” The preacher can only give what he has first received; can only enrich others with what is first riches to himself; can only preach what he knows, if his preaching is to have the power even of reality, to say nothing of spirituality. 2. It is the one knowledge, happiness, power, which is an eternal possession to man. All else is valuable relatively to the time and the man, only: this absolutely, in relation to God and eternity. “Wealth is what has exchange value.” No other has exchange value at the bar of God, or even it the hour of death. There are men with barns full to bursting, yet “not rich toward God” (Luke 12:21). Many a wise, fair, lovable life in the congregation is enriched with many “goodly pearls,” but not with that “one pearl of great price,” with which it is natural to link this text. “Cold water to a thirsty soul” is this “good news from the heavenly country” to an anxious sinner. What is the “wealth” of a caravan crossing a desert? Water, before all things besides; water, just then, and just there; as the Gospel is wealth to a soul unsatisfied with anything that earth can give. [“What best gift shall I get for my children?” See to it that they are enriched with this.] It has enriched the world with its grandest ideas of God, of immortality, truth, purity; giving the highest certainty and authority available to man in regard to these high themes. [“What is the world’s greatest possession to-day?” Before every other answer, Paul would put his own: “The Gospel of God in Christ.”] [See how this enriching of the world with hope, and light, and moral power, and God (Ephesians 2:12), is interwoven with the rejection of Israel (Romans 11:12).] II. The preachers are earthen vessels.— 1. Like the earthen crock in which, perhaps, the ploughman found the “treasure hid in a field.” It had no value comparatively, and very little intrinsically. The lucky discoverer of the “treasure” would not preserve the pot; if indeed his ploughshare did not, by breaking this, reveal the gold within. [In the “great house” of 2 Timothy 2:19-20 there are “for the master’s use” “vessels” (N.B. not necessarily vases only; the word is vaguely wide and all-inclusive) of “gold and silver,” as well as wooden and earthen ones. All “unto honour” and “fit” for service if “purified,” those of humbler material as well as of costlier. No necessity to force into comparison two quite independent uses of the same figure of “vessel.” If one is to illustrate the other at all, it may perhaps be said that oftener, for the reason which concludes this verse, God uses the earthen rather than the golden or silver vessel, for this particular purpose. (The golden and the silver ones have their use.)] The humble “vessel” may often enrich with its contents a soul of far nobler calibre in all natural capacities. The humble “local preacher,” or perhaps only “exhorter”—in Primitive Methodist terminology—is forgotten, was forgotten almost immediately, his name a matter since of vehement dispute, who “enriched” the soul of Charles Haddon Spurgeon. Many a man who received the treasure from Paul himself would hardly see more than the Tarsian Jew, the tent-maker, in poor health, full of “tears,” beyond most men dependent upon sympathy, talking a provincial sort of Greek, scouted and hunted by his own nationality. Paul was by no means to many converts the “vessel of gold” we prize in him; in himself a real wealth to the universal Church; set high in the “Great House” as not only useful, but as a glorious adornment to it. 2. Treasure holders.—That only. [As the sun in Genesis 1 is only a light-bearer; light is independent of the sun, and known in Genesis, as in science, to be anterior to it.] Paul and his fellow-workers do not make the Gospel which they carry about and dispense. The “vessel” is the mere “holder”; containing, until it can pour out, the treasure. Simply first filled and then kept full, that they may fill the need of others. Without intrinsic value; containers; and besides— 3. Frail.—Yet, as 2 Corinthians 4:8-12 show, endowed with a wonderful tenacity, kept by “the excellency of the power”; sorely “knocked about yet not broken,” so long as the Master needs them to hold and carry about His “treasure.” Still only “earthen.” The minister is a man. The Spirit of God must do His work through his manhood, and through his particular type of manhood; through his specialties (and frailties) of mental—and to some extent of moral—characteristics. The human medium will affect the Truth in no small degree. This treasure takes something from the human “vessel” which contains it. The make and temper of the “vessel” will affect the delivery of the riches. (1) The minister will remember this; nor be too absolute and positive, as though he could not err. (2) The people will remember this; nor expect anything but an earthen,—very human—vessel. It will save mistake on both sides, and disappointment, to remember that the “vessels” are men. Committees and ordaining boards must remember that no ideally perfect men are to be found for the ministry. They must take “earthen vessels,” or none at all. However, they are frail, fragile. The daily failing of the “earthly [though, N.B., not “earthen,” as here] house of the tabernacle” is already in Paul’s thought. (See Critical Notes, 2 Corinthians 4:12.) Every year sees the “vessel” the worse for wear. “He is breaking,” men say of the old minister; whether with a loving tenderness of charity that understands and allows for failing powers, or with an impatience that would hastily put the old “vessel” aside for one of a newer pattern or stronger make. III. This secures the fulfilment of a great purpose.—It is so plainly the treasure, and not the “vessel,” which has value; it is so manifest that the man himself is not an adequate explanation of the success of the work, that the thought and heart of man “enriched” turns instinctively elsewhere for explanation. “This is the finger of God” must be the verdict in every conversion. Nobody more than the true minister of Christ rejoices to stand back and be forgotten in the first joy of the soul who has found the riches. “Earthen vessels,” so manifestly inadequate in themselves to accomplish the evangelising of a world, or even of a Roman empire, that the success of Christianity becomes an argument for its Divine origin. Now that the issue is no longer doubtful, Gamaliel’s argument has new point. 2 Corinthians 4:17-18. A Contrast and a Connection.—“Our light affliction,” etc. I. A contrast.—“Affliction;” “glory.” “Light;” “far more exceeding weight.” (Observe in Critical Notes.) “For a moment;” “eternal.” 1. What an exposition of “our light affliction” is given in Paul’s own case in 2 Corinthians 4:8-11, and more wonderfully in 2 Corinthians 11:23 to 2 Corinthians 12:10! In the experience and observation of the people of God nothing puts greater strain upon faith in the wisdom and love of God than the convergence of many, and many kinds of, trial upon one single head. Any one would have been enough, we think; yet they are cumulative. [Before the smart of one stroke has ceased to be acute, and whilst indeed the heart is still smarting, another stinging stroke seems to fall; another follows quickly, and sometimes on the same place, on the old wound.] Faith, too, is tested by the fact that the accumulation is often upon the head of that one of God’s children who, it seem to others, might best have been spared any stroke at all; who seems to need it least, for rebuke or for education in holiness. The burdens are heaped, it sometimes appears, heaviest and most numerous upon the holiest. Paul says, “Our light affliction.” 2. Set over against this a “weight of glory.” Perhaps not very definitely conceived even in Paul’s own mind. At most, probably, there is suggestion of a balance, in whose scales the Now and the Then, the “affliction” and the “glory,” are poised one against the other. [As in Romans 8:18, “not worthy to be compared with.”] He watches the scale heaped up on the affliction side, yet rising outweighed, and he cries to it triumphantly: “Ah! afflictions mine, ye are weighed in the balances and found wanting!” Yet, as the afflictions are a burden, so we may suggest what, measured by our earthly standards and strength, a burden would even glory itself be. The vessel often all but breaks, with even the foretaste of the future given into the heart of the child of God. Yet see how the immortal vigour of that life contains, carries, that weight of glory! “Heavy” and “light” are relative terms to strength: The “light afflictions” are all but overwhelming to earthly powers, even when reinforced by the grace of God. That “exceeding weight” sits “light” upon the strength of the life eternal. Everything is revised in the presence of the eternal world: “Whilst we look,” etc. Turn away the eyes from that, and everything adjusts itself to the earthly standard; the strength reverts to the earthly measurement. The vision of the “things eternal” is a real power to us amidst “the things temporal.” Let a man be lifted to the level of those and look down upon these; let a man’s life be enlarged to the scale of the “eternal,” with all his views and standards of judgment enlarged accordingly, and he understands “this light affliction.” He anticipates the estimate of the eternal world. The principle of the process is seen at work on a small scale in every-day life. With what leaden feet the hours creep along when aching temples count the number by their throbs! Or when a man must stand awaiting the fall of certain calamity, and can only hang down helpless hands and wait. Or when his heart carries day after day a load of anxiety or sorrow, or smarts under wrong, or slander, or persecution, or misconception, or misrepresentation. Or when, hour after hour, the mind is chained to thoughts which will not be shaken off. Such a day takes a great deal of living through! Every such hour seems lengthened to a day; a day, and much more a year, of perplexity, of tried faith, of walking in darkness,—they seem an eternity! By-and-by, when the cloud is gone; when pain is over; when all perplexing circumstances are resolved into clear, plain providential love; when the year that seemed endless has become only one of the thirty, forty, fifty in the review of the past life; then all becomes simply a passage in the story of life,—“the tale that is told,”—exceptional and brief. Even a year becomes by-and-by only a bar of shadow—rather broad, perhaps, but only a bar—thrown across a path whose whole extent beside shows as a line of light. After a little lapse of time the proportions of things come out more clearly; the “endless” day, the “interminable” year, become mere episodes and incidental passages in the whole life-story. Let a man write to a sympathetic friend, out of “the thick” of it all; he fills sheet after sheet; every detail is of importance. Yet even then he realises, and almost resents the fact, that it is more to live through than to write about. And in a year he will summarise in a page or two all that is salient in the review; in a few years all goes into a sentence, or is dismissed in a written line. So, in the review from the standpoint of the things eternal [“whilst we look,” etc.; cf. Romans 8:18], whether actually occupied or only mentally and by anticipation; if the life be all shadowed over; if the pain last as long as the man lasts; if the one crushing sorrow never be lifted, an “affliction” to the end; if the long strain never be relaxed; yet a very brief space in eternity, a very short section of the story there, and that whole long life will become dwindled down to a mere episode in the eternally continuous life of which “death” is also merely an incident not far away from the commencement of its course. The story of the years which meant so much to live through will become merely a page or two prefatory to the main story, to be gathered up and dismissed in a thought, hardly indeed to be accounted of at all in the longer review of life. The burden whose weight was carried along a road which itself was measured out by its painful steps, will have been decreased “to scale,” to fit into the new proportions of life, and will be remembered as “that light affliction” which we once carried “just for a moment.” In view of eternity nothing is long which is terminable; in the presence of, and actual enjoyment of, heaven, nothing is heavy which only belongs to the burdens of earth. II. A connection.—The one “works out” the other. 1. The course of Paul’s thought, especially as disclosing itself in the opening of chap. 5, makes it evident that he, at any rate, had mainly in mind the ultimate release into “glory” by reason of the body’s “death.” Sickness, a “thorn in the flesh,” hunger, wounds, weariness, all in the broadest sense are forms of death. They hasten—they are—the destruction of the bodily frame, each in its measure. Not one of them but contributes something to expedite the loosing of the immortal part from its mortal companion. Did the young generation of Israelites look with unfriendly eyes upon the last lingering few of the old generation who lived on in the wilderness? “When will you old men die off? We cannot enter into the land whilst you live.” So the Christian, though honouring his redeemed body, yet says to it: “Body, I cannot enter into my glory, whilst I am tied fast to you. You are yourself a burden, and you bind me to a world of ‘afflictions’ each of which is a burden!” Everything which helps forward “dissolution” (2 Corinthians 4:1) brings Paul nearer to the “weight of glory” which is before him; everything which expedites bodily death is not mourned over, shrunk from, counted an evil, but a good, an assistance; “works out” the happy issue which is “glory.” 2. That may have been his thought; but the thought of the Holy Ghost, Who so guided the true and natural expression of a real man’s actual feeling that it became a saying, permanent, normal, for all Christian experience, was more than this. More than the quasi-mechanical removal of a physical disability for entering into the awaiting “glory.” When even Paul exclaims, “Now is … salvation nearer,” etc. (Romans 13:11), there is more than the rejoicing that by mere lapse of time it has every night come nearer. “A day’s march nearer home” is true, but not all the truth of any Christian “hope” worthy the name. If some “lotus-eater” Christian simply folds his arms and lets his vessel drift with the stream of time, then if he be finally saved at all, it is true that he is each night “a day’s drift nearer home.” The very day’s drift has in that sense “worked out” something towards the attainment and enjoyment of the “glory.” But “nearer than when we believed” includes a ripening for the approaching heaven. Men grow readier as they get nearer. And everything which tends to ripen, to develop, to educate character, and put it upon what are essentially “heavenly” lines even here, is “working out” the “glory.” There would be no “glory” for a man who is not made heaven-like beforehand. To an unprepared, uncongenial, non-correlated man heaven—the place—would be intolerable, a hell. Everything which makes the man receptive, prepared for the ready hereafter of a prepared glory, is so far “working out,” etc. 3. There is a suggestion in the figure of a “life-story,” employed above. The old epic, or dramatic, unities were made a bondage to authors, yet there was reason in them when they required that a “plot,” a plan, a motive, should run through and bind together into a real oneness every story, or poem, or drama which was to take rank as a work of art and genius. So in strictness no incident but such as would really help forward this “plot” to its development, was rightfully admissible; it was a redundance, perhaps an excrescence or deformity. So, further, every personage who comes upon the page should in some direct way be contributory to the unfolding and to the fulfilment of the author’s purpose. Only a childish reader of a story is plunged into inconsolable distress over the troubles of the personages whose futures are being followed. An “old hand” knows that this is a common writer’s artifice, and reads on calmly, knowing that such imbroglios of trouble always come out right. A seasoned student of such literature knows that in the midst of such embroilment of fortunes and circumstances the author is not forgetting his “plot” and its destined ending, but is steadily pursuing his way to it. Indeed, he is pursuing it by means of these. Such pages, such incidents, are as really part of the whole machinery by which he is “working out” for his personages the happy issue, as are those where all goes smoothly and without a cross. So Paul’s faith is that, though he is the maker and writer of his life’s story, there is a conjoint, supreme Worker and Author, Who has His own “plot” in the story, and by means of the “afflictions” of life is helping forward the accomplishment of that purpose. By means of even the most “untoward” incidents—not in spite of, or merely in the midst of them—He is leading on His man to, and making him ready for, “glory” designed for him. These afflictions are working out the glory, which, when it comes, shall prove so preponderantly great above all earthly suffering. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/phc/ NOTES2 Corinthians 5:1.—Flow of thought quite continuous from 2 Corinthians 4:18. For (2 Corinthians 4:15).… For (17).… For (2 Corinthians 5:1).… For (2).… For (4).… For (10), etc.; a chain of “fors.” We know.—Partly from having seen the glorified Christ wearing His resurrection body; Paul and the other Apostolic “witnesses of the resurrection” (Acts 1:22) could on this ground all say “we.” [Note how Peter is led from the “putting off” of his own “tabernacle” (cognate word) to the glorified body of Christ as seen on the Mount of Transfiguration (2 Peter 1:13-18).] Earthly.—Belonging to, located upon this earth, contrasted with “in the heavens”; not “made of earth,” earthen. If.—Must not be pressed, to carry an inference that Paul doubted whether he should die, and indeed hoped he should not. 2 Thessalonians 2:3, written earlier than this, postpones into the far future the Day of the Lord; and must govern all exegesis of other passages relating to the time of the Parousia. Tabernacle.—Remember he was a tent-maker. The garment and the tent occur together in Psalms 104:2. [In later (and medical) Greek commonly used for the human body.] The tabernacle is a temporary dwelling; the “building” is for a permanence; like “mansions” (= abiding dwellings) in John 14:2. Observe in “from God” (“an immediate outworking of His miraculous power”); and also the comma after “eternal”; “in the heavens” is not merely appended to “eternal,” but is an additional predicate, parallel with “of God” and “eternal.” Building.—Four current views of this: (1) Heaven; (2) the Resurrection Body; (3) a supposed bodily organisation clothing the soul in the interval between death and the resurrection; (4) a spiritual enduement with the image of God; this last a Rabbinical use of the idea of being clothed. Against (3) remember that this would not be “eternal,” and that Paul only knows of two kinds of body (1 Corinthians 15:44). For (4) is pleaded the simpler sense thus given to “not be found naked”; of. Psalms 17:15. For (1) such parallels are adduced as Hebrews 11:10, and the surface impression of the phrase, “in the heavens,” coupled with John 14:2. (2) now most in favour. Best explains “clothed,” “clothed upon,” “unclothed” (cf. “bare,” 1 Corinthians 15:37-38); better certainly than does (1). Difficulty of (2) is in “in the heavens.” For this and “we have,” choose between, e.g., Stanley: “The moment that our present house is destroyed, that very moment a new habitation awaits us in heaven”; and, e.g., Beet: “A secure place in which the dead have, though they do not yet wear, the resurrection body. Cf. Philippians 3:20; 1 Peter 1:4. It is practically in heaven; for the power which will raise it is there. When Christ appears from heaven we shall receive our permanent bodily abode. Hence it is … from heaven, 2 Corinthians 5:2.”2 Corinthians 5:2. For.—Argument of Rom 8:22 sqq. The groaning is wrought in us by God’s Spirit, and is thus a ground for belief that there is awaiting us a real fulfilment of our desire. Groan.—“With numberless afflictions, infirmities, temptations” (Wesley).2 Corinthians 5:3.—The nearest Paul’s language brings us to a strong expression of hope that he should not know any “unclothed” interval of existence, but should put over him the new investment of his immaterial part, beneath which, as it were, the old should be stripped off or pass away. But perhaps desire rather than hope. The language is so guided by the Spirit that Paul’s expression of personal feeling, whatever it imply, is universally suited to the longing of the Church, even where there is no expectation of survival to the Parousia.2 Corinthians 5:4. Not for that.—Difficult to trace link of thought; hence alternative of margin. Stanley: “The groans … are uttered, not so much because of the oppression of this outward frame, not so much from a wish to be entirely freed from the mortal part of our nature, as from the hope that it will be absorbed into a better life.” Swallowed up.—Recalls 1 Corinthians 15:54. Observe “what is mortal”; more exact than A.V.2 Corinthians 5:5. This very thing.—Choose between (1) the change just described; (2) the yearning for it; (3) the spiritual preparation for it. (3) is true, but beside the mark here. Perhaps Paul’s thought wavered between, or comprised, both (1) and (2). Earnest.—Romans 8:23; Romans 5:5; Romans 8:11, are apposite, closely related, parallels to the argument here.2 Corinthians 5:6.—Observe the broken construction: “Being of good courage … we are of good courage.” [The fact of these Epistles having been dictated may (as Dean Vaughan suggests in his Romans) account for many of these breaks in grammatical sequence of clauses.] Of good courage.—“Though troubles assail and dangers affright;” though death be in prospect. Philippians 1:20-23 a good practical illustration.2 Corinthians 5:7.—See Separate Homily. Here, morally, the nobler walk is that of faith; yet walking by sight will, intrinsically, be a nobler thing there.2 Corinthians 5:8. Willing.—With an active desire. Present.—“At home,” as in 2 Corinthians 5:5. “Absent” in Greek is also cognate in root; meaning “from home.”2 Corinthians 5:9-10. Labour.—“Make it a point of honour with ourselves to accomplish this, viz.,” etc. Used in Romans 15:20; 1 Thessalonians 4:11 [“Be ambitious to be unambitious”] “At home or from home;” in both their alternatives of meaning and relation. Observe, “well pleasing to Him,” i.e. to Christ, before Whose judgment seat (John 5:22; John 5:27) “we must appear”; not only standing there as arraigned before Him, but as being read through and through by Him, and then being by His judgment exhibited in our true character; whether as better or worse than men thought us. Illustrate by 1 John 2:28 to 1 John 3:3. Receive.—“Reap the fruits of” (Stanley). In the body.—Observe margin. Not bodily sins only, the excesses of its appetites, or acts wrought by the aid of its members; but wrought during the occupation by the soul. Good or bad.—Future rewards, as well as future punishments, are part of the Christian doctrine of retribution. Judgment seat.—The thing is Roman, not Greek; in Greek the word meant the orator’s pulpit. “The ‘Bema’ was a lofty seat, raised on an elevated platform, usually at the end of the Basilica, so that the figure of the judge must have been seen towering above the crowd which thronged the long nave of the building” (Stanley). The Corinthians would remember Gallio.2 Corinthians 5:11. Persuade.—“You say we do, in a bad sense [as Acts 12:20, and Galatians 1:10]. I say I do, in a true sense,” viz. as 1 Corinthians 9:22; Romans 15:2. Terror.—“Fear” in, with many commentators. Yet even Stanley says: “Knowing that there is this fearful aspect of the Lord.” At most, “conscious that we walk in the fear of the Lord” [in the Old Testament sense] is only half the meaning. “Remembering also what a terror to the ungodly will in that day be the Lord Whom now we reverently fear.” I hope also.—As 2 Corinthians 1:14-15.2 Corinthians 5:12. Commending ourselves.—“Ourselves” emphatic, q.d. as our enemies say we do, because we have no other letters of commendation (2 Corinthians 3:1; 2 Corinthians 4:2). “He assumes, with something of an ironical tone, that all they wished was to vindicate him” (Stanley).2 Corinthians 5:13.—Takes up charges made by his enemies at Corinth. His “madness” was a fault to some; his “sobriety” to others. [Cf. the generation whom nothing could please (Matthew 11:17).] The steadily-held middle course is often a rebuke, and often an offence, to the extremes on either side. Unto God.—Like a stream which moves unto Ocean but blesses all along its banks by the way, the Christian life is unto God, but on its way it is for man’s cause. If not unto God, then, like stream ceasing to flow, it makes marsh and miasma.2 Corinthians 5:14-15. The love of Christ.—Choose between (1) His love to us; (2) our love to Him; (3) His love for men, found in us (cf. Philippians 1:8). In fact, (3) is uppermost, foremost, most apparent; but grows out of (1) and (2). As matter of experience the three are never dissociated. Constraineth.—“Christ’s love left him no choice as to what he should live for, brought him under the control of an irresistible yet most gracious necessity, hedged him in on the right hand and on the left, controlled him with a constancy like that with which the great forces of the universe rule the planets, and determine the orbit in which every one of them must move” (Dale, Atonement, p. 260). Note the use of the same verb in Philippians 1:23; and, most appositely, by Christ Himself (Luke 12:50). Judge.—In Romans 6:11, “reckon.” Paul does here of himself and others what he there urges each to do in regard to himself. All died.—See Appended Note from Dale. All.—Not to be pressed, to prove universal, saving, efficacy for the death of Christ. Still, every man may by grace bring himself within the circle of the “all” who “died.” Romans 6:1-11 compares throughout with this.2 Corinthians 5:16. After the flesh.—As ordinary men do, in whom “the flesh” permits of no apprehension or understanding of anything but what is “natural.” As His enemies knew Him; as even His earthly relatives knew Him, until the Spirit taught them more about Him; as the party “of Christ” at Corinth knew Him; as His very disciples knew Him before His resurrection (with such occasional flashes of a deeper insight as Matthew 16:17, “Flesh … not revealed, … but.”) The same expression used of the same opponents, 2 Corinthians 10:3; 2 Corinthians 11:18; Galatians 6:12.2 Corinthians 5:17.—See Homily. New creature.—In Galatians 6:15 also. Common Rabbinical expression for the conversion of a proselyte. Observe the variant reading, which omits “all.” Passed away.—Study with this Matthew 24:35; 2 Peter 3:10. Go back also to Isaiah 43:18-19, and its New Testament derivative, Revelation 21:4-5.2 Corinthians 5:18-19.—See Homilies. Reconciled us to Himself.—This English phrase, somewhat archaic in form, must not be pressed into the service of any “Theory of the Atonement” which minifies or denies any real “wrath” in God, and makes the aversion which needs removing in order to a state of reconciliation, only to exist in man. 1. The modern English equivalent for the thought of the older English phraseology would, indeed, be more nearly “Reconciled Himself to us.”The formula for our verse is A reconciles B to A;In 1 Samuel 29:4 it is D reconciled D to S.The aversion, the estrangement, which needs removing is, as we now oftener think of reconciliation, in the offended party, not in the offending one.We should now rather say, C reconciles A to B, D reconciles S to D.As between older and modern English the polarity of the word has got reversed. 2. So, again, the formula for 2 Corinthians 5:20 is: Let B be reconciled to A. Just as for 1 Corinthians 7:11 it is, Let Wife be reconciled to Husband (see below). And for Matthew 5:24, Let Offending brother be reconciled to Offended. Where again the polarity needs, to our habit of thought, reversing. A needs reconciling to B. Heathen Husband (unjustly) offended needs reconciling to Christian Wife. Offended (justly) needs reconciling to Offender. 3. Clearly, however, “Be reconciled” in these latter cases—perhaps in all—means hardly anything more precise than, “Take the steps needed on your side to seek and to enjoy a new, reconciled relation between yourself and the offended party.” And, as clearly, the force of the Greek word, and not that of the English phrase, carries with it the final decision of interpretation. This (e.g. as Cremer, Lexicon, p. 91 sqq. shows) rather lays stress upon the reconciled, and now amicable, relations arrived at, than upon the process by which it has been reached, and, still less, upon the question which of the parties needed bringing to the other [or which of them made the first move towards a restored, happier relationship]. Of our text he says: “Neither the word, in and by itself, nor the grammatical connection can decide whether God is to be regarded as the antagonist of man or man of God.” [On 1 Corinthians 7:11 he thinks that the heathen husband has some cause of complaint that his Christian wife has left him.] “It is [in point of fact] God who forms the relation between Himself and humanity anew; the part of humanity is to accept this reinstatement (2 Corinthians 5:20).… It is a relation which is changed, which God changes, in that He desists from His claims.”2 Corinthians 5:20-21.—These verses expound the method of the reconciliation; both so far as depends upon God, and so far as depends on man. —2 Corinthians 5:1-21 Wishing and Working. A. Looking into the Future (2 Corinthians 5:1-10). Key words: “Clothed upon” (1–5); “At home, from home” (6–8); “Christ the Judge” (9, 10). B. Labouring in the Present (2 Corinthians 5:11-21). A. I. 1. Often not a very profitable occupation.—The Present is our field, our life. “Do with thy might what thy hand findeth—close at hand—to do” is the first direction for all Christian activity. Dreaming over the Past—pleasurable, or mis-spent; peering into the Future—in hope, or fear, or curiosity; may be the idlest of occupations; fruitless, and diverting from the immediate fruit-bearing of to-day. “What shall this man do? What is that to thee? Follow thou Me.” “Forgetting the things behind,” is a good deal done towards securing “This one thing I do,” with its strength—not of “narrowness,” but—of concentration and of consequent intensity and force. The best life-builder lays to-day’s “course” well and strongly, as the best security for the next, and the next, and all following “courses” in his work. Yet not without reference to the superposed “courses”; the design running through from foundation to topstone, will be traceable in to-day’s work—continued from the lower, preparatory for the upper. The climber is helped to make firm the step he is actually taking, by looking upward. Living in the future is useless, mischievous, to the strength and activities of to-day. Living for the future is essential to a large life. Paul draws strength for bearing the “burdens” of the Present, from the hopes of the Future. Paul “labours” in the Present, with a prospect in the Future which—whether to incite or encourage—“keeps him up to the mark” for present duty. 2. Paul is a prophet.—His teaching, his visions, of the future have so become the commonplaces of Christian thought about it, that it is hard to realise what amazing disclosures they are. One value of classical, philosophical literature to our time is that there is recorded the utmost which man could do for himself in the way of purifying life and making it happy,—the experiment whose results stand recorded having been conducted by some of the noblest minds of the race, with all material advantages for the trial, and with the ability to record in the most perfect fashion their methods and results. So, too, in regard to the future, it records for us, in most perfect form, all the best hopes and arguments of the best types of mind and heart, at the very best of their powers, and the “results,” such as they were, to which, under the most favourable conditions, they were able to arrive. And it is matter of common knowledge that not one ever got so far as to say, “We know that if,” etc. The humblest Christian has in the fact of a Risen Christ an evidence for, and a sample and a pledge of, a future life such as non-Christian thinkers and inquirers, ancient or modern, have never attained. Yet Paul is not merely falling back upon History. He may have known all the little that we know about the Risen Life, and the Risen Body of the Lord Christ, during the Forty Days. The one certain fact for us, in regard to the “house not made with hands,” is that His Body is the norm and pattern for ours. Yet we hardly assert even that much without questions arising, and qualifications accruing around our “certainty.” We cannot, for example, be certain that the Body of the Forty Days has not undergone further change and increase of glory since it passed into “the heavens.” On this bare fact alone can our hope or desire put its foot: Whatever His body in the heavenly places is to-day, that ours is to be by-and-by = “fashioned like unto the body of His glory” (Philippians 3:21). Paul is, however, carried in his confidence beyond mere argument and inference. The link given in the text just quoted, is one that must have been supplied to him as part of his prophetic message. Matter of course as it almost seems to us, we could have had no assurance of that,—he could have had none, “except it were given him from above.” With the facts of the Lord’s Resurrection and Glorified Life; with Paul’s revelations; with the assurance of our being “in Christ,” and, in all the senses and degrees of which our human nature is capable, of becoming thus “partakers with Him”; the believer of to-day looks forward to the future and to death and judgment, saying—singing—“We know,” etc. He works on “until the evening” (Psalms 104:23), and then lies down for the long sleep, saying, “We know,” etc. 3. Are we to say of His Pattern-Body that it is “not made with hands,” “eternal” [happily, yes!] “in the heavens”? It is to “strive after wind” to attempt to fill out the hints of Scripture as to the nature of the “future house.” It is to try to solve a problem, where there are hardly any data at all. It is to attempt to be certain, where the scanty materials available to us for consideration are themselves of uncertain significance. Not that there is gratuitous or arbitrary reserve. “I would have told you” is entirely the mind of One Who said the strongest things He could, and all He could—we may be sure—to comfort friends whose faces, as they gazed at Him in a silence, which only now and again ventured to give birth to a question, showed them nearly broken-hearted, stunned, at the certainty now forced upon their unwilling heart, that they were to lose their Friend. The reserve, the reticence, is unavoidable. We have no experiences, no things, to be the alphabet, or the vocabulary, of the language in which a Revealer of more would need to speak. It is easy to speculate upon a body in which every power now possessed by us will be enhanced, and to which new powers will perhaps be given; “percipient all over.” It is much to know that the “groaning” will be done with; that the body will be no “burden” in itself, nor shall our life need to carry any “burden”; to live will be no “burden” then, as often, to very many, it is now. Tears gone; no pain, no death; all such hints full of sweetest suggestion to suffering, weeping, dying humanity. Here the very work of Christ overwhelms the servant of Christ with physical weariness, until he can only drop his unfinished task, too exhausted to collect his jaded mind for a word of prayer in which to commend himself to his Master. [Your strong arm and strong bow shoot its arrow up into the air; the perfected rifle may speed its bullet upward. Away they soar, as if they had done with earth altogether, and were never going to return. But gravitation has its grip upon them, and slowly, surely, asserts itself; they slacken, they stop, they are dragged down with accelerating speed. In the all eagerness of their upward rush, they still belonged to earth!] The body is made bitterly to feel the fetters of the gravitation earthward. But done with then! The very intensity of spiritual emotion cannot long be endured; body and mind would break down under long-continued afflux of large communications from God. 4. “In the heavens.”—Not to be too precise in exposition. Even now “in the heavens”? In what sense? Anything more in the “we have” than the confident expectation which makes “things hoped for” to be substantial, dealt with as confidently in the business of life, wrought into all our calculations with as much security, as if they were the actualities of to-day instead of the possibilities of the morrow? Anything more than the faith which counts the reversionary interest present-day wealth, an arithmetic of faith which makes no abatement from the future Principal Sum, but reckons its Present Worth as equal to the full amount? To faith, God’s bills of longest date are cash in hand without any discount. As in Hebrews 11 throughout, the heroes of faith accept and deal with the things unseen or future, on the assumption that they are as certainly assured realities as any most obviously real facts of the present and the seen. “We have” is faith’s anticipation; overleaping the interval, thinking itself into the future, when literally we shall “have,” and shall be wearing and using and enjoying. “We have” Him there, Whose body is the guarantee of our own. Ours is a certainty because His is a fact (2 Corinthians 4:14). 5. This strengthens us for the burdens and the labour.—“We are saved by (our) hope.” Hope gives a resilience to the spirit, so that when the burden is for the moment lifted off, the elasticity of vigorous life is found unimpaired; even whilst under the burden the spring is still elastic. The burdened Christian is not broken-spirited. “Cast down, but not destroyed.” From the top of the occasional Delectable Mountains a descent must be made to the River; but the glimpse of the distance and its glory (in which the central figure is to Paul his Glorious Lord, robed in a glorified human nature) is a real force, sustaining and urging onward, as the travellers go down into the valley and plunge into the river. Or, as John (1 John 2:28; 1 John 3:3) turns the truth, our hope is a purifying force. [As the boy at school in England is continually hearing from his father in India: “I am coming home” at such a date. “I want to find my son in education and manners and character worthy of me. I want to have joy in him when I see him again.” And the boy responds: “Father is coming home” at such a time. “I must try and be just such as he would like me to be.” (“Found of Him in peace, without spot and blameless,” 2 Peter 3:14).] 6. “Not for that we would be unclothed,” etc.—This is not the heathen shrinking from the very conception of a disembodied spirit’s condition, as Achilles scorned the idea of being a king amongst the “shades.” [Hardly to be connected with the craving for embodiment, which Isaac Taylor, (Phys. Theory, chap. 17), sees suggested in the request of the demons, dispossessed from their human abode, to be allowed to enter into other bodies, though they were only those of swine.] Paul has grasped the New Testament—Christian—truth that the man is no complete man apart from his body. It is good to be “at home”—even whilst disembodied—“with the Lord.” But the perfected fellowship of the man who is even now “in Christ” with that Risen, Glorified God-man, will only begin in the day of the Parousia and Resurrection. We shall only have our “perfect consummation and bliss” when it is both “in body and in soul.” 7. The marvel of the revelation is that in the very “groaning” there is ground of hope. “He hath wrought us for the selfsame thing.” [Developed in Romans 8:19-27; where we have a groaning “creature”; a groaning Church, even though it is enriched with “the firstfruits,” viz. “the Spirit”; indeed, the very “groanings” after full release and full felicity are the breathings of a groaning Holy Spirit within the “sons of God.”] The “groaning” under the manifold burden—the flesh, the multiplied trials of the earthly lot, the burdensome conflict with the sin which the saved man hates—is no mere sigh of helpless oppression; it is a look, out, up, forward, toward the realised hope. What he is made to groan after, he is created to enjoy; and he is going to enjoy all that he is created to enjoy. His groans and his glory are “all of one piece”; they are parts of one whole scheme of a spiritual education of the children of God, Whose goal for the whole manhood—the body included—is anticipated and assured in the risen glory of the eternally embodied Christ, “eternal in the heavens.” II. “At home; from home.”—[“Where is your home, little one?” “Where mother lives.” Not much help in the answer for one who sought to restore to its mother the lost child. But, for the child itself, the answer went to the root of the matter.] 1. The presence of Christ makes heaven real, and makes it dear to His people.—The son of an English family goes to India. All the family have learned the geography of India; what they were taught at school has been supplemented by newspapers and by general reading. The leading points are known. But the city to which his Government appointment takes the son of the house, if even “known,” has only been a name on a map, until he goes there. Then it becomes real, for he is real; it is the material setting of his very “material” life. The streets are real, and the people, for he sees them; the houses real, for he lives in one; the village tank and temple,—they see them with his eyes. His letters and himself enable them almost to live there too. And interesting as well as real. If even it were real before, it had no real hold upon them; it mattered nothing to them, practically. Now every bit of news of it is noted. Even the commonest engraving of it has a value. The stranger who has seen it is almost a friend of the family. The youngest child of the house shyly “sidles up” to the visitor, with a half-opened atlas, abundantly rewarded if he can attract attention that he may show the map of India, and point to the strange-sounding name; “My brother lives there.” So the visible, bodily departure—rather than a mere vanishing away, or a quitting of the disciples after some visit, never to return—has helped to make heaven real, and full of interest to the Christian. He loves his Elder Brother, and the place where He lives is dear for His sake. It is real, the real setting and environment of a tangible, visible Body, which, in full view, one fine May morning, went up into the heaven from the top of Olivet, and was not lost, but only hidden behind a veil of cloud. We hear the music with His ears; they are filled with its real melody. We see and deal with its very real inhabitants, for He very really sees and deals with them. His presence there locates “home” there. 2. “We,” “we.”—For the man of the world has no practical interest in, no sense of the reality of, any world but this. To the Christian man this is the way home; to the non-Christian this is home, so far as his life has any real home. “We are (only) journeying to the place.… Come with us” (Numbers 10:29). There were Amalekites and other desert tribes, to whom the wilderness was home; to Israel it was a mere place of passing sojourn. Canaan was Rest. There has been exaggeration of this. Paul’s feeling is the healthy one. If this world were wholly and merely evil, he would have been in no “strait betwixt two”; what to choose he would have known very well. He is in a difficulty just because, whilst that is “better,” this is good. And to live in either is Christ; “labour” for Christ, and “fruit” for Christ, and help to his dear Philippians, if he remain here; “to be with Christ,” if he go. Either way, “to live is Christ”; death only divides the one life in Christ into two sections (Philippians 1:21-24). The wise Christian man will “seek the peace of this (earthly) city,” where for a while His Master wishes him to reside and do His work (Jeremiah 29:7). Yet as real an exaggeration to ridicule the “unworldliness” or “other worldliness” of Christian men. They who rise highest in “conformity to the image of” Christ feel most keenly the profound cleavage between the very bases of their life and the bases of the world’s life; they feel most sensitively the utter discrepancy of the whole direction of their life from, and its irreconcilableness with, that of the very men whose work they do, whose occupations they share. They often meet, as it were, at the same station, but are going in opposite directions; “up,” and “down.” As they many times stand side by side, their hands engaged in the same task, their faces are in opposite directions. The spirit of life is different. The saint cannot be entirely “at home” (in the homely sense of the phrase) with those to whom the Elder Brother is nothing, and whose interests and life are circumscribed by the horizon of time. The Christian man is a faithful servant of his generation (Acts 13:36), or he is no true Christian. But he does not belong to it. [Cf. a German employι in a London business house. Faithful, competent, successful, taking a hearty interest in English life, having a home here. But “Where is home?” The eye kindles as you show him a photograph of his native place, or of the capital of the state to which he belongs, or of his Prince. He has a house in England, but Germany is “home.”] Where Paul’s Prince and Saviour and Elder Brother is, there is “home.” The Christian man should be interested in, faithful to, busy for, this temporary dwelling-place of his; his Master puts him here for a while; but he must keep his spirit detached; not rooting here. At length he will be summoned to go and live “at home” “with the Lord.” 3. Here again is “confidence.” “We know.”—In fact, to Paul, “walking not by sight” yet, “but by faith,” this world, which imprisons the thought, and enslaves the heart, and absorbs all the energies of the man who belongs to it only, often becomes the unreal, “recedes and disappears” into shadowiness; the Eternal becomes the real, not only seen through, but hiding altogether, the world of passing interests and dying men. To him there stands in clear vision the One Man; the circle which contains his life is struck from that Centre. He can bear up under anything; he can go through with anything; when the best desire of his best life, to be at home with Him, is every moment being brought nearer to its realisation. III. “Willing rather.” And yet the first fact of the hereafter is to appear before Christ.— 1. Without discriminating between the successive incidents of the eschatological programme, extending from death to resurrection and judgment, it is to be remembered that a very real discrimination and pronouncement upon character, a real, immediate “judgment,” takes place as often, and in so far, as a man is brought into contact with Christ. He is even now the supreme Test of character. The touchstone-question for an unsaved man is, “What thinkest thou of Christ; whose Son is He?” (Matthew 22:42). To the Christian man also is proposed, with perpetual, searching reiteration, the similar query, “Who say ye that I am?” Every man, saved and unsaved, is revealed,—perhaps to himself—certainly to observers “taught of God”—by the practical answer, as given and written out in his life. Every man who comes into contact with Christ is now in that very fact “judged.” Not only is a very real decision being made, and a verdict being pronounced; not only does the man inevitably pass “right” or “left” of Christ; but a very real sentence is being executed. Every man receives already a very real blessedness or punishment, according to the attitude he takes up toward Christ. [“For judgment I am come,” etc. (John 9:39).] Christ is even now the Test of character, the Norm of judgment, the Arbiter of destiny. 2. The first fact of the unseen world is the sight of Christ.—A man suddenly cut off in mid-career, falling shot in battle, dropping with heart-weakness upon the flagstones of the Exchange, in an instant steps out of the roar and rush of life’s busy street into the hush and calm of the solemn presence-chamber where He sits, before Whom the first and supreme question for the new comer is, “What was your attitude toward Christ, what did you do for Him, outside there, in that busy world of so many interests?” Outside there men were classified according to all sorts of tests. Within, standing before Christ, one only basis of classification is known and brought into use: “How did you stand related to Christ?” Men are already being set on “His right hand” or on “His left.” His final revelation is only the consummation of a judicial work which has been ever proceeding in the world. But further— 3. There is a Day of Judgment in which the Central Figure, the Judge, is Christ.—May strip away much as we will of the figurative, analogical dress of the truth; may acknowledge how often the continuous, present judgment, and the immediate judgment in the hour of death, and the final, open judgment, are hard to keep apart as matter of exegesis. Yet we cannot escape this irreducible minimum of fact. “Probation does not lead to probation, but to issues.” “Devil and his angels have hitherto proved but indifferent reformers” (Edw. Irving, Oration, Judgment, 7). “The last function of mediatorial sway will be the final judgment, when the High Priest shall no longer intercede for the world, nor the Prophet teach mankind, but the Son of Man shall sit upon the throne of His glory … all nations; gathered for the first and last time that He may separate them again to be united no more” (Pope). This is no delegation of universal judgment to a creature. “If the Redeemer were appointed Judge as simply man, … His function would only be the visible accompaniment of the judgment and sentence of the invisible God; but that is not the style of Scripture.” Yet we need the manhood. “In relation to no part of His office is the manhood of Christ more necessary to our failing hearts, and of no office is it more expressly declared.… Not of like passions with us, but flesh and blood. His experience of temptation—notwithstanding His necessary sinlessness—makes Him a sympathising High Priest and a merciful Judge, in whose Divine-human soul, now and ever, to the last extreme of what is consistent with inscrutable holiness and law, mercy rejoiceth against judgment.” (Pope.) Would you not hear the sentence “Depart!” from the lips of anybody rather than of Christ? The Christ Who has “died in vain for you” (cf. Galatians 2:21; 1 Corinthians 8:11), Who for years lavished on you a grace you would not return or repay, etc. “The wrath of the Lamb—the Lamb”—is the crowning terror of that day (Revelation 6:16). There is, even amongst men, no displeasure so terrible as that of justly offended, slighted, insulted goodness,—calm, judicial, pitiful, but inexorable, inflexible; not to be turned aside from executing the necessary sentence which it did not desire, and did its best to render unnecessary. 4. Those judged. “We all.”— (1) What an assemblage is suggested! Wonderful for size. The most impressive sight which London has to offer is a London crowd; the tens of thousands of orderly people in the streets, when some civic pageant or royal procession is passing. But no man ever saw all the inhabitants of London gathered together. Overwhelming; hard even to conceive five million people in one vast concourse. The mind is baffled as it tries to conceive of a thousand millions assembled, the present inhabitants of earth. Yet to realise this “all,” there must be added all the millions of the generations of the past, all those of the future. Wonderful for composition. Stand with Addison in Westminster Abbey, and imagine the day when these buried dead that people nave, aisles, transepts, chapels, shall all stand together to be contemporaries through an eternal existence. Hardly a mean person among them. Kings, queens, many more of royal stock. The greater kings and nobility of science, art, literature—the “pick” of the greatest, wisest, most eloquent, most good—and the worst!—of this richly dowered England for a thousand years. In this “all” are not only the “pick,” but the bulk, of not one nation only, but of a world, for all the ages since men were first found upon earth; not only the great, mighty, rich, learned, good, but the humble, poor, weak, ignorant, evil,—everybody. No escape possible. No personation possible. No obtaining a substitute. Writer, readers; preacher, hearers. Mary Queen of Scots and Elizabeth at the Abbey. Pilate, finding himself confronted with Jesus, and their relation reversed. [Men do not so easily wash their hands of wrong done to Christ.] Judas, to get a “look” far other than that with which the eye of Jesus broke the heart of Peter. (2) “Every one.” The judgment is individual as well as universal. It is “the only thing absolutely both individual and universal; not even sin and sorrow can compare with this.” “It is hard to reconcile the infinite detail with the Divine dignity; but not harder to receive a special judgment than a special providence. Moreover, there is no common conscience; the conscience of every living man is the sure pledge and earnest of an individual judgment.” (Pope.) “Thou art the man” is the word of Redemption, Providence, Mercy, Judgment. We are born alone, we are saved by a personal faith, “we die alone.” There is no salvation en masse. [There was corporate redemption.] There is no judgment en masse. (3) “Or bad” makes it clear that the “all” includes the wicked, who appear for punishment.The rebel citizens and the wicked servants (Luke 19:14; Luke 19:22) are all to be there. Yet with an obvious distinction from the judgment of the “saved.” It will not be true hereafter that the righteous shall “scarcely be saved” (Pope). Their ordeal will not then have in it anything of a doubtful issue; its peculiar severity and strictness belong only to the present life. The righteous “shall not come into condemnation” (John 5:24). The Judge is their Brother and Friend, Whom, when they awake from the dead, they shall find upon the throne of judgment. It is their glory that in that day judgment will to them be only the ratification and publication of a deliverance from curse and condemnation which long before, in the moment of their faith in Christ, was passed in the court of their consciousness. The real crisis, when they passed from condemnation to justification of life, is in their case behind them. [Just as, though they were long ago adopted, and received the Spirit of Adoption, they nevertheless “wait for the adoption,” the publication in the Great Forum, in that Day, of a gracious act which the Father had long ago intended and accomplished, a holy secret of love between Him and their soul.] These appear before the “judgment seat of Christ” without fear; they shall “stand in the judgment”; these may “dwell with the devouring fire” of “the Day,” which tests men and their work (Isaiah 33:14; 1 Corinthians 3:13). But, whether His people or His enemies, all “appear” therein, so to speak, transparent presence. An end of all hypocrisy, of all misconception and misjudgment and misrepresentation. An end of all self-deception. An end of all perplexity about the strange complex of one’s own motives and character and status. Everything—every man—stands there, revealed to himself and to all standing around; known at last in the very character which God has all along known. The light of the real world, the light of eternity, is turned upon even the hidden things of the heart. How some cower away from the blinding, searching scrutiny of the light of the Presence of the Judge! How some guilty ones—their own judges—will shrink away from themselves as they there “appear”! How amazed some humble one to find himself there “appearing” in the judgment of His Lord nothing less than a “saint,” a “good and faithful servant”! 4. Retribution follows; in both its phases, reward as well as penalty.—[Many tests of desert; many standards of reward; many aspects in which is presented the connection between the act and its recompense. Conscience and light; how much of the latter? How blessed with, how affected by, revealed truth? Faith. Works; these not as basis of merit, but as indications of character, and as measuring the amount of a reward which is all of grace.] “According to works,” “By thy words,” and the like expressions, all are distinct in idea from this of our paragraph: “Shall receive the things done.” [Perhaps over-subtle to press this too much; yet in other places more is said than “shall receive for the things done”; more is apparently asserted here.] Men’s reward does not only follow upon conduct, but is a harvest from seed which was sown by conduct, and springs out of conduct. Heaven and hell are life continued, and intensified, on lines essentially projected here, in position and direction, and only “produced” eternally there. Men are now making no small part of their own heaven and their own hell. Men do here literally often “receive the things done in the body.” No worse specimens of misery than old sinners, past the possibility of gratifying sinful appetites, yet still cursed with them, clinging to them; squeezing the sucked orange, in hope of getting a drop of the old pleasant juice. “Filled with his own ways” (Proverbs 14:14), abandoned to the curse of his own sins. Like, as Maclaren suggests, the man in Thalaba, who suffered the devil to kiss his shoulders, and from the kissed spot sprang serpents, fed by, and feeding upon, his very life. [Not the entire truth. There must be some form of punishment ab extra, or there is in no proper sense a pardon of sin. If the only hell is that which a sinner prepares for himself, within himself by his alienation of his heart and mind and will from God, and by the choosing and cherishing all things evil (“Myself am hell”), then the only pardon possible is through, if it is not itself, renewal and regeneration. The mere penalty of loss is a true penalty ab extra, whilst underneath all the symbolism and analogic language of judgment there is something beyond “loss.”] “Always the dreadful burden is laid upon the sinner himself. He is viewed as the author of his own character, and as responsible for his own ruin. In the integrity of his body and soul he reaps the fruit of his own devices; part of his sin was the sensuous misuse of his body; part … the turning away of his spirit from God; in the reunion of body and soul he suffers the result.… The final condemnation is that of a nature now fitted for it [self-“fitted for destruction” (Romans 9:22)]. The harvest is the character formed by the seedtime.… Not that the Judge assigns eternal punishment for temporal sin; but that sin is taken confirmed into eternity.… Not because man has sinned only, but because his nature is turned away from God.” (1) [Pope, Compend. of Theol., 3:421. Remark the best reading in Mark 3:29, “eternal sin.” Also, in connection with the question raised,—perhaps, too urgently pressing the grapes in the wine-press of exegesis,—ΰ propos of the Unmerciful Servant (Matthew 18:23-34, with its commentary “so,” “thus,” Matthew 18:35), whether sins once pardoned return upon the forgiven man, if by new sin he fall away from his mercy; remark that men are not punished, merely or chiefly, for having done such and so many sins, but for their whole attitude towards God and His Son. They are, in each one single act, sinners. (I.e. they are so now by their own choice, as well as by inborn bias. It may be questioned whether sin as a birth-principle is ever punished, now that the race has been redeemed by Christ.)] Men have “treasured up for themselves wrath” [like a huge reservoir at the head of a valley, behind whose retaining dam is accumulating a mass of water which one day bursts the barrier and sweeps down, carrying everything before the rush of its irresistible flood]. “Their sin—itself—finds them out.” On the other hand, a man’s life and faithful service “returns into his bosom.” “Their works do follow them.” “They receive the things done;” which is according to many analogies of God’s methods of reward and punishment on this side of death. (2) It is also suggested that, whilst “done in the body” limits the matter of judicial inquiry to the actions of this earthly life, yet that these may be dealt with, not only in themselves, but, constructively, pregnantly; that, not the actions only, but their fruits, good or evil, in other characters and lives, reproductive also in successive generations, long after the actor himself is dead, are to be taken into account. The time occupied in committing a sin is in no sort of relation to the length of the punishment which it deserves. Yet if “an eternal penalty for a temporal sin” be a difficulty, this suggestion may perhaps lessen the difficulty. Certainly, to make new punishment continually accrue because of new sin committed in eternity, may be truth; but our passage limits the direct and immediate recompense of the Day of Christ’s Judgment to the “deeds done in the body.” And in any case the consummate reward is, to be “accepted of Him.”B. Labouring in the Present (2 Corinthians 5:11-21). I. A new man is labouring to bring other men into II. A new relation to God, “reconciliation”; and this from III. New motives and springs of action. [In addition to the material given under Separate Homilies may be said:—] I. The new creation of the individual is no isolated act of grace.—The Church is no aggregate of such individuals each of whom is a specimen of God’s work, whose significance begins and ends with that particular instance. Each single conversion is part of a great plan. “What does it matter that I should get converted? What if I do not?” It matters this, that God is straightening out the sin-entangled course of human history, and that each single life is one of the threads. It must be made to lie even with the rest. The new direction given to the “new man’s” life is but one of many lines, all convergent towards God’s goal for humanity and the world. [Hence the Saviour justifies His act of healing at Bethesda, by paralleling it with God’s incessant operativeness in the world which He has made, which Sin has marred, and He is making anew. God is spending the Sabbath of His rest from creation, in ceaseless recovery of man, soul and body, from the consequence and curse of the intruding Moral Evil in His world. The healing of the lame man was one act of the great Redeeming Activity, which reproduced in the physical sphere, and on a tiny scale, the great Work of God. Hence it was suitable work for the earthly Sabbath of the Son of God (John 5:17-30).] When His voice sounds through “the new heaven and the new earth” the proclamation “I make all things new,” these words will only be the latest, largest, grandest, of a series of such utterances. In every “new creature’s” heart it will have been anticipated long before. The man “in Christ” was made “a new creature,” that he might fall in with the march and movement of God’s fulfilment of His Redeeming Purpose, whose climax and consummation and goal are a new earth, peopled by a new Human Race, headed up by a new Adam. Man and environment, by a convergence of many lines of restorative operation, then find themselves brought together, each perfectly fitted for the other and both for God. II. Travelling backward, the first step of the recovery is reached.—“Be reconciled to God.” Man’s relation to God, his attitude toward God, is all awry and out of joint. But the Recovery really began farther back. God needed to make reconciliation on His own side. God’s first advance needed making; now it needs meeting by a responsive advance by men. The balance of truth must be held even. A mechanical scheme—one which, at all events, became stiffened, hardened, into mechanical—may have set a wrathful God over against a merciful Son, in an exaggerated vividness of “dramatic” representation of a transaction between Father and Son re mankind. But all wrath must not be denied to God. The difficulty lies in adjusting what is true of the timeless being of God, to the historical sequence in the story of the world and in the life-story of the sinner. Historically we say that reconciliation was effected at Calvary; yet it was earlier proclaimed, in the Immanuel-Child of Bethlehem; and, as happy matter of fact, the fallen race has never had to do with a God out of—apart from—Christ. All His dealings with the race, all His dealings with the individual, have had reconciliation-grace as their background. Much “broad” theology, in endeavouring to find adequate expression for this truth, is apt to forget that this gracious leaning of God towards mankind, and towards the man, is from the first represented in Scripture as an altered relation. We cannot date the alteration by our chronology; it is certainly no later historically than the protevangelion of Gen 3:15. “Then all died.” Who shall say, in the profoundest sense, when? But in speaking of God thus “reconciling the world to Himself,” we look, naturally enough, to Calvary, but we hear—as not fathoming the meaning—of “a Lamb slain from the foundation of the world” (Revelation 13:8). [“My blood boils when I see a Frenchman,” said Nelson, a typical Englishman of his time in this. God is not Nelson; but the words illustrated and exhibited an antagonism not against the individual as such—the particular Frenchman was not in issue—but against the very nation and race of Frenchmen.] Conceivable—necessary as matter of clear thinking to conceive of—a wrath against the race as such, to which the individual was of necessity obnoxious and exposed. Not only conceivable, but certain, that now “in Christ” the world is so reconciled, that to be a man is no barrier to peace; there is no “wrath” against the race as such [the race are now “the men of God’s good will”]; nor any against the individual, unless he awaken it by his personal sin and personal evil character. It is for him now to say whether there shall be “reconciliation.” The ambassadors plead, “Be reconciled.” III. New motives actuate and urge them.—And all centre in, radiate from, converge towards, Christ. “Constrain them.” The love of Christ constrains them. (See Critical Notes on this great word.) The “new man” now knows Christ in a new way. The very love of Christ is in him. Love understands love. And love begets an overmastering passion for saving men, and makes the plea “Be reconciled” intense in its earnestness of entreaty. “The terror of the Lord” rules them. No need to exclude either “fear” or “terror”; we want both, for faithful exegesis and for complete fact. “The Lord” is Christ. To the enemy His holiness is a terror, or should be. To the very reconciled man himself there is an awe, a reverence, a godly fear, in that same holiness, with all his love for his Master. He looks at himself who was once a rebel; he fears to grieve, or lose, the love which was, and is, such free grace. He looks at the rebel who will not “be reconciled”; and he trembles to think of the terror for him when, whether he will or no, he must come into contact—conflict—with the holiness of Christ the Judge. And he therefore persuades men; runs through all the gamut of a “changing voice” (Galatians 4:20), if he may win them to surrender and reconciliation. No motion lower than these, or less intense, will keep the evangelist-heart in perpetual vigour in the settled pastor. The new man must see men who are what he was, with the new eyes; must feel towards them with the new heart and the new passion, which are those of Christ Himself. No wonder that he tries to be “sober.” Still less wonder if men call him “mad.” Sober or mad, men are in view; God is in view; that God and those men are somehow, if he can compass it, to be brought together “reconciled.” The Church, the world, the Redeeming Work of God, want a succession of such “madmen”! .—2 Corinthians 5:13-17A Man in Christ a New Man.—He has three things new. I. A new imperial impulse.—Wonderful is the power of a strong passion over our natures. It fires the brain, stirs the blood, bends every energy to its own use. The love of Christ thus filled and fired, pressed, urged, overbore Paul. It carried him on like a resistless torrent. It was the regnant impulse—everything else was subject to it. [“It is impossible to read his Epistles without discovering that Christ’s love had been so revealed to him that it had taken possession of his thought and of every active energy of his nature, and stirred the profoundest depths of his emotion. Sometimes in a long passage the name of Christ occurs in almost every alternate line; sometimes he breaks away from an argument at the bare mention of Christ’s name, unable to govern the vehement impulse to dwell upon Christ’s glory and grace; at other times just as a ship is gradually swept out of her course by a strong and silent current in the sea, St. Paul is gradually carried away from the point for which he seemed to be making, by the habitual drift of all his deepest affections towards Christ.” (Dale, Atonement, pp. 260, 261.)] This is incomprehensible to those who have it not. The Apostle’s contemporaries thought him, under its influence, to be “mad.” They could have understood ambition. [Paul’s only ambition was “to be accepted of Christ.”] They could have understood avarice. [When Lord Macaulay went to India it was evident that he felt keenly the parting from England and his family circle. “The pains—acute enough sometimes, God knows—of banishment.” But he went a vowedly to make a fortune—£10,000 a year; could save several thousands every year. Had hope of return at end of five or six years. “Comfortable, though modest, home; certain of a good fire, a good joint of meat, a good glass of wine, without incurring obligations to anybody, and perfectly indifferent—at least as far as our pecuniary interest is concerned—to the changes in the political world.” Not a bad set-off to the pangs of parting! Yet with none of these prospects for his days of return, with only isolation in his work, and a status by no means too highly accounted of in India, many a missionary has cast away bright prospects in England or Scotland or the States, and buried himself in that same Indian land, because the Love of Christ—Christ’s own love for souls—had got hold of him with a force the man of the world does not understand. See Trevelyan, Life of Macaulay.] A man must have this feeling to interpret it. This love alone understands itself. It arises from reflection upon the death of Christ. It is not an inbred passion or a blind impulse; it comes thus: “We thus judge,” etc. “All.” Take this away, and it is a mutilated Gospel. That all are not saved is no objection. In material nature much seems wasted. Rain and dew fall on the rock and on the desert sand. Light falls day after day, where no living thing seems to need or use it. “Full many a gem of purest ray serene,” etc.—Gray’s “Elegy.”Fruit ripens and falls and rots where there has never been a man. Wealth sufficient to enrich the millions who die in want is buried beneath the mountains or the seas. Medicine for half the ills of life is shut up in minerals and plants, whilst generations die without knowing of the remedy which nature has provided. [See this in Butler, Analogy, part ii., chap. 3. There are men coming after us who will discover and enjoy these; and who will similarly avail themselves of the blessings of that atonement which generations have either ignorantly rejected or wickedly despised. This contemplation suggested two strong reasons why Paul should be so zealous in the cause of Christ. The whole world was in a ruined condition [see Critical Notes on this]. The principle of self-sacrifice is the binding principle of action. Selfishness is the death of the world. We are all “links in being’s endless chain,” and we cannot move without influencing others. Yet man seeks to do so, and this is his sin and ruin. He who would help the world must get this love of Christ, and work by it. No other labour is of any service. Love to Christ is the Christian’s royal passion. II. A new social standard.—The world has a variety of such standards—rank, wealth, social influence; by these canons it estimates and appraises men. Christianity regards such standards as false and evanescent. It estimates man by his righteousness, not by his rank; by his principles, not by his possessions. Paul once so knew men “after the flesh”; now he sees them all in the light of the Cross, as sinners dead in trespasses and sins. Let us try our own religion by this test. What kind of sympathy have we with Christ? There are views of His material condition adapted to awaken our mere natural sympathies. What kind of understanding of Him? There is no necessary religion in such sensuous sympathy with Him, and with the mere beauty of His human life and character. Our zeal for spreading Christianity will be regulated and guided by this new standard. Sufficient for us to know that men are men and morally dead; in any country, of any faith, in any social position. On this principle a Christian will form his friendships. Godly people rather than merely rich or influential or cultured people will be his choice for his own friends, for his children’s friends, wives, husbands. Godliness and all these, if he can have them; but godliness first. By this new standard of valuation he will regulate his activities. Principles before persons; spiritual considerations before material ones. When we are ruled by considerations of worldly interest or by the opinions of men, merely because they have secular influence or authority, we “judge after the flesh.” We should “know no man after the flesh” as authorities in creed or conduct; their spiritual excellence should alone influence us. [This wants guarding.] III. A new spiritual history.—“A new creation.” 1. Unlike the old in some respects. That was out of nothing; here conversion only turns the head of the same vessel round, and gives it a new direction—[“converted to God”]. The same essential, neutral, natural manhood simply obeys the new law in all its faculties and their activities. The first creation presented no difficulties to the Creator. “Spake: done.” In the moral change there are resisting forces; the material is refractory under the Creator’s hand. 2. Yet like the old in some points. Something new is produced. This passion for Christ, for example, is a new thing in the universe. This new thing is produced by Divine agency. Man works with pre-existent materials; he rearranges in new order; makes ever new combinations. But in Nature, or in character, only God can create. Logic, eloquence, force of interest or will, can reform, rearrange a life, but not call forth a new one. This new something is produced according to a Divine Plan. In the moral creation we know not the plan, but all beings, under the Great Architect, are working for its accomplishment. [History for ages converged upon the Redemption of the world by Jesus Christ, and so really also upon the new creation of the individual Christian.] Heaven, earth, matter, mind, even hell unwittingly, working for it. This is for the Divine glory. To a gazing universe the new Race in Christ, and the new man “in Christ,” are the most consummate exhibition of “the manifold wisdom of God” (Ephesians 3:10; Ephesians 1:12, etc.). The new creation is the greatest marvel of all God’s works. So then the things without do not change. Nature, society, events around,—these are only the setting of the man and of life; they may remain the same, but the change is within. He sees with a new eye, hears with a new ear, interprets all things with a new judgment. The moment we look at the universe through the new medium of love to Christ, it becomes new, the old universe passes away, a “new heavens and a new earth” appear. And all “very good.”—Founded upon “Homilist,” Third Series, vii. 362, with added material. 2 Corinthians 5:7. Faith v. Sight. I. The world of “sight,” of “appearances,” revealed to sense, a very narrow one.—Taste knows nothing more distant than the tongue-tip. Touch only tells of a world whose radius is the reach of the arm. Hearing only widens it by the few thousand feet over which the vibrating air will still quiver with its message before trembling away into silence. Smell carries knowledge no farther than the winds may waft an odour. It may bring to a Columbus in mid-ocean tidings of a continent as yet below the horizon. Yet a narrow world, at its farthest. But sight, queen of the senses! It makes us free of worlds most distant, and puts us into communication with far depths in space which even the flashing light needs years to traverse. It can even carry us back into a world that is really past. Men have seen from earth the fires of a conflagration which perhaps long ages before destroyed a world. The rays of light have only just arrived at their eye, and make them, as it were, contemporary spectators of the climax of its history. In mere physical extent the world of the eye is widest, and wonderfully vast. Yet, how narrow! Within the sphere swept by sight how many things escape it. How many things, moreover, are hidden from each of the senses in turn, and known only to some other one of the five. And when man is armed with all five, and all at their best, they only tell him of the world of space and matter and time. There is a world close about him, of which these have nothing to say. Underneath the world of “appearances,” there lies another world which does not appear. The whole world of mind is there. Sight shows one man a flower: “A primrose by the river’s brim,” etc. An ox sees that much. Another man sees it, and behind, beneath, within it, imagination reveals to him another world. He speaks of this in words taught him not by sense, and he is a poet. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/phc/ NOTESThis chapter wrongly isolated at both ends by the customary division of the book. Connection quite closely continuous between 2 Corinthians 5:20-21 and 2 Corinthians 6:1; as also between 2 Corinthians 6:17-18 and 2 Corinthians 7:1.2 Corinthians 6:1. Workers together.—With whom? Choose between (1) God, and (2) Christ. For (1) is the repeated use of “beseech,” in 2 Corinthians 5:20; 2 Corinthians 6:1; for (2) the “scheme” of the passage (see Homily on 2 Corinthians 5:20), according to which Paul and his fellow-ambassadors are doing in His (bodily) absence the work of the Great Ambassador. But for (I) it is pointed out that what Paul here urges is not precisely His message, “Be reconciled,” but an exhortation to those who are “reconciled.” (Also cf. 1 Corinthians 3:9.) “Receive,” “acceptable,” “receive” (2 Corinthians 6:17) [but not 2 Corinthians 7:2], have all the same root, and give a real link of thought. Beseech.—In the (usual) threefold sense of entreaty, exhortation (and consolation). In vain.—Cf. 1 Corinthians 15:13; 1 Corinthians 15:17; Galatians 2:2; Philippians 2:16.2 Corinthians 6:2.—Isaiah 49:8, as in LXX. Paul’s comment begins at “Behold,” etc. A new section of Isaiah begins at 49. Cheyne heads 49–57, “Vicarious Atonement” (cf. 2 Corinthians 6:2). Kay, in Speaker, points out that in Isaiah 58:5 the Day of Atonement is joined with the idea “day of acceptance.” He adds: “The word for ‘answered’ is the same that occurs in Psalms 22:21; where a Sufferer, who had been ‘a reproach of men and despised of the people’ (Psalms 22:6), receives an answer from God in the crisis of His agony, and proclaims that ‘all the ends of the earth’ shall remember and turn to the Lord (Psalms 22:27).”2 Corinthians 6:3.—Connect closely with 2 Corinthians 6:1; 2 Corinthians 6:2 parenthetical. Giving.—Viz. Paul (and his fellow-ambassadors); not the Corinthians. Offence.—“Occasion of stumbling.” Ministry.—I.e. the administration, the discharge, of his function as “an ambassador.” Note, close (verbal) parallel with 2 Corinthians 8:20. “The original does not mean that he succeeds in giving no offence, but only that he tries to give none” (Waite, in Speaker). Blamed.—By the human observer, whether Christian or non-Christian.2 Corinthians 6:4. Commending.—Cf. 2 Corinthians 3:1; illustrate by Romans 5:8. Ministers.—Not “the ministers” (1 Corinthians 3:5). Stanley paraphrases somewhat: “Crushing afflictions, pressure of difficulties, narrow straits. The prevailing idea is of pressure and confinement; each stage narrower than the one before, so that no room is left for movement or escape.” [Illustrate the imagery by Luke 12:50; Philippians 1:23; the word is different.] Cf. with this enumeration 2 Corinthians 11:23 sqq. The outer life of an apostle.2 Corinthians 6:5. Tumults.—Possibly “unsettlement of life” (cf. 1 Corinthians 4:11) (Stanley). More likely such as Acts 14:5; Acts 14:19; Acts 19:24. “These probably stand last [of the hardships inflicted by men], partly because they were attended with peril of life and were often designed to destroy him, and partly because they were the occasion of a peculiar injustice, for the first Christian missionaries were accused of raising them and had to bear the infamy and the punishment” (Waite). [Examples of this are in Acts 17:6 (Acts 21:38).] Watchings.—“Spells of sleeplessness” (Farrar), whilst working for bread. Fastings.—Involuntary, from sheer poverty. Cf. 2 Corinthians 11:9; Philippians 4:10-12.2 Corinthians 6:6.—Stanley compares the rhythmic form of this whole passage with Romans 8 sub. fin, and 1 Corinthians 13. Here the form of the words, rather than the thought, governs the order. “Each word stands singly without any apparent connection, as it came uppermost in his thoughts” (Stanley). Note, keep “in,” as in 2 Corinthians 6:4-5; not “by.” Purity.—Of conduct and heart and motive. Longsuffering, kind.—As in 1 Corinthians 13:4. Unfeigned love.—As Romans 12:9.2 Corinthians 6:7. By.—Accurate from “armour” onward. Armour.—See in Romans 6:13 (which is literally “weapons [=armour here] of unrighteousness”), 2 Corinthians 13:12 (where “works” stands contrasted with “armour”), 2 Corinthians 10:4. “Armour” is, of course, a soldier’s whole armament, offensive and defensive. “In Paul’s usual sense of righteousness by faith” (Beet), is surely too specialised a meaning; rather, integrity of speech and action, are sword and shield, “on right hand and on the left.”2 Corinthians 6:8.—“By the approbation which his conduct evokes in good men, and by the dishonour it provokes from the bad, Paul recommends himself. For the approval of the good and the hostility of the bad alike proved that he was doing God’s work.” (Beet.) He had had both “honour and dishonour” at Corinth (1 Corinthians 4:12). Deceivers.—2 Corinthians 2:17; 2 Corinthians 4:2; the very word is used of him in the Clementine Homilies, though he is not named. [The quotation and an account of the Homilies are readily accessible in Stanley, Apostolic Age, pp. 378–379.2 Corinthians 6:9. Dying.—“So great is their peril that they seem actually falling into the grave.… Yet in the moment of apparent destruction suddenly comes deliverance.… Behold.… Graphic picture (as in 2 Corinthians 6:17), retaining even the exclamation of wonder at the unexpected deliverance.” (Beet.) Acts 14:19-20 almost exactly gives the sentence pictorial embodiment. Chastened.—Well illustrated by Isaiah 53:4 (as suggested by Beet).2 Corinthians 6:11.—“The veil, which had hitherto been hung between the Apostle and his readers, is suddenly rolled away; we see them standing face to face; his utterance, so long choked by the counter-currents of contending emotions, is now, for the first time, clear and distinct (‘our mouth is opened’), and for the only time in the two Epistles he calls them by name. With the loosing of his tongue his heart opens also; that heart, which was ‘the heart of the world,’ opens to receive in its large capacities his thousand friends: whatever narrowness of affection, whatever check to the yearnings of the soul, between them might exist, was not on his part, but on theirs; the only reward which he claimed for his paternal tenderness was a greater openness from them, his spiritual children.” (Stanley.)2 Corinthians 6:12. Straitened.—Same word radically as in 2 Corinthians 6:5. Bowels.—I.e. practically, “heart” (Philippians 2:1).2 Corinthians 6:13. In the same.—“In like kind” (R.V.).2 Corinthians 6:14.—In any voluntary companionship; marriage is only one particular case of a general rule. Be not.—Really “become not,” as if to assume that there was as yet no actual union (?). Yoked.—On a similar principle of discovering a world-wide principle in a Levitical enactment, as in 1 Corinthians 9:9, here Deuteronomy 22:10 is widened, “spiritualised.” [Waite adduces Leviticus 19:19, and notes the strong antipathy of the Levitical code to any interference with the original ordinance, “after their kind.” See the “Johannean” antithesis of “light” and “darkness.”]2 Corinthians 6:15. Belial.—Not really a proper name. Such a use of the word is due to the Vulgate. Very frequent in the Old Testament for “worthlessness,” “recklessness,” “lawlessness” (see 2 Corinthians 6:14). “The term as used in 2 Corinthians 6:15 is generally understood of Satan, as the personification of all that is bad; Bengel explains it of Antichrist, as more strictly the opposite of Christ” (Smith, B.D., sub. v.). Infidel.—Only means as much as “unbeliever.”2 Corinthians 6:16. Temple.—“The,” not “a”; 1 Corinthians 3:16-17 shows this symbolism one of the “stock”—the staple—ideas of Paul’s religious thought. Leviticus 26:11-12, freely quoted from LXX.; part of a solemn summing up of the blessings and the real scope of the Mosaic economy.2 Corinthians 6:17-18.—Isaiah 52:11, freely quoted from LXX., and continued still more freely with reminiscences of Eze 20:34 (which refers to the same gathering out from Babylon), and perhaps of 2 Samuel 7:14. “Daughters” may be a reminiscence of Isa 43:6; the sexes are equal “in Christ.” [The manner of quotation has no necessary bearing upon the views of the New Testament writers re the Inspiration of the Old Testament. Preachers and writers who have believed in the strictest “dictation” theory of Inspiration, have nevertheless always felt free to quote either freely from memory, or intentionally ad sensum only, or paraphrastically, or with verbal exactness, as might be needed for their purpose.] .—2 Corinthians 6:1-10 The Work and Outer Life of Ambassadors (2 Corinthians 5:20). I. Their appeal (2 Corinthians 6:1-3). II. Their credentials (2 Corinthians 6:4-10). I. 1. Mark’s Gospel, as usually read, closes with a good epitome of the Acts of the Apostles, and indeed of all the subsequent history of the Christian Church (Mark 16:19-20). “He was received up into heaven.… They went forth and preached everywhere … the Lord working with them.” Question of exact exposition, rather than of any practical moment, with whom these “co-workers” labour (see Critical Notes). In point of fact it is raised only between two aspects of the same great truth. The earthly workers do not labour in any isolation of merely human strength or wisdom. They are not left by their Divine Lord “to their own devices,” or to their own resources. They are directed from above; they draw their supplies of strength from above; the communication is close and continuous between the Great Ambassador, Who in bodily presence has withdrawn from men’s sight, and the human representatives who are carrying on and carrying out His work below (see Homily on 2 Corinthians 5:20). In all review of the conditions of the work, and in all estimates of its “chances” of success at any given juncture, or in the face of any given combinations of obstacles, account must be taken of the Divine Worker, Who is not simply looking on at the workers, but is actively engaged in it all. They are “workers together with Him.” The appeal, therefore, is not theirs, but His; like that in 2 Corinthians 5:20. 2. (1) The appeal is to those who have already responded to that earlier one. They are “reconciled”; they have “received the grace of God.” But that did not finish the work of their “salvation.” “Salvation” in its full sense only began when they were “reconciled to God” in the moment of their faith in the Sinless Substitute. True they were then “saved,” in regard to the penalty of sins; in that moment they came into a new relationship to God. But the Gospel contemplates a larger salvation than this: “that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him.” In the moment of—in Pauline phrase—their justification, a work began, in which they “co-operate” with the Spirit and grace of God throughout all their after-course. In Birth a Life began. To what shall it grow? How far shall life develop? Shall it develop to nothing? Born “in vain.” After many fights and many victories shall life end in defeat and death? Fighting “in vain.” Shall the Exodus from Egypt end in death in the wilderness, even seeing Canaan from some Nebo-top of vision and yet not entering? Brought out of bondage “in vain.” Shall tho Seed of the Great Sower be “received” [a related word, in Mark 4:20] in good soil, indeed, but so choked with thorns, or so thin a covering of the unbroken rock, that, after a hasty, or a rankly vigorous growth, the seed flags and withers, and the sower has sown in these particular hearts “in vain”? In the first Gift indeed were all subsequent gifts; the first Grace had in it the possibility of all gifts besides. But it is a Talent, a Pound, with which a man must trade, or it has been received in vain. God’s work well begun may end in “failure,”—“failure,” that is, so far as the individual is concerned; no doubt what in their proximate purpose are “failures,” serve some larger end, and contribute to the success of God’s whole Great Plan. (2) “In vain” may carry the analysis of failure further back. The very message “Be reconciled” may never be responded to. It is “grace” that such a message is committed at all to ambassadors who may bear it even to unwilling, unready ears. It is “grace” that there ever was a Great Ambassador, Who has also been “made sin for us,” etc. Very many know the fact, hear the message, but never give any practical response to it. So far as they are concerned, and for any use they make of it, Christ’s death might have been non-existent. They pass by the Cross, and “die in their sins” (John 8:21; John 8:24). For them the grace of God has been “received in vain,” to no purpose. It has ended in an empty issue. (3) By persistent inattention the heart may lose its ear for God’s voice. By persistent worldliness, and much more by continued sins of sense, or covetousness, or unholy anger, and the like, the Spirit is grieved. He may be grieved away. If He withdraw,—the case is, one hopes, exceedingly rare,—the power to take the “grace of God,” offered as it is, is gone. By neglected prayer, by ill-spent Sabbaths, by secret omissions of, perhaps at first, small duties, the Spirit of reconciling “grace” may be constrained to withdraw His aid. Willing as He is to co-operate, He is never simply at men’s call and bidding; the power to fulfil man’s part in making lastingly fruitful use of “the grace of God,” is not guaranteed to be always at man’s absolute command. “If we fail to put to practical use in the details of life the spiritual benefits received by the favour of God, even His favour to us becomes to us a useless and empty thing. An unread Bible, a wasted Sunday, and such knowledge of the truth as does not mould our life are the grace of God received in vain.” (Beet.) (4) This appeal agrees with all those cautions and warnings of the Word of God which proceed upon the assumption that “the grace of God” may really be “received” and yet not be suffered to issue in a final salvation. The racer may run for a great part of his course, and never finish it, so missing the prize of the calling which reached him from on high (Philippians 3:14). Salvation wants “making sure.” 3. The encouragement they give to their hearers.—Provision is abundantly secured for their making “a good finish”; provision against every emergency which may arise. Prompt, present, sufficient help. They need never yield, need never be overcome, need never be entangled or overwhelmed. There is always a “now” salvation (see Separate Homily). 4. Their appeal is παράκλησις.—A preacher’s matter needs to be as varied as the varied aspects of Divine truth. He must also speak not only in many portions, but in many manners. A preacher’s method must be varied: entreaty, exhortation, consolation,—all will be needed by the varying types of hearers, and their ceaselessly varying moods or circumstances. [An associate pastorate ought to supply this better than any but a few exceptionally many-sided men can do. Many ambassadors are needed to express and represent the One Great, and only Universal, Ambassador.] But he will never be satisfied, who is a true co-worker with God, unless by every variant of tone and manner and method of appeal he succeeds in so arousing, or hastening, or heartening those to whom he is sent, as that the “grace” of reconciliation once “received” shall end in the abundant success of the heavenly life. 5. Observable here, as everywhere, how Paul grounds his appeals upon, or strengthens his instructions by, references to the Old Testament Scriptures. It is hardly sufficient to say: “Of all the Epistles, however clear the evidence in some instances that they are addressed to those who have been originally heathens, there is not one which does not imply a familiar acquaintance with Jewish Customs and with the Scriptures of the Old Testament” (Stanley, Apostolic Age, p. 200). Paul’s practice is exactly that of a modern missionary to a heathen land. He, like Paul, believes that in even the Hebrew Scriptures he has a word of universal address; an instrument of universal applicability and force; a message, to listen to which is an obligation upon all men, Jews or Gentiles, and which, as matter of experiment, has vindicated its universal cogency by the demonstration of the Spirit, which accompanied it, and before which even Gentile Christians bowed; in acknowledgment of the Divine force of argument and appeal; in acknowledgment of the Divine truth of a teaching which based itself, even for them, upon Scriptures which hitherto only their Jewish brethren had been accustomed to accept and submit to, as being of God. Paul knew no better arguments for Gentiles than those he would have used, and did use, for his fellow-Israelites. It was as illogical, but as self-justifying, as the similar use of the same Scriptures by a Christian missionary in his appeals to a heathen or a Mahometan heart. The historical occasion or embodiment is local, national, but the teaching of the Old Testament is part of God’s revelation for all men. The principles of His action, and especially of His redemptive action, never change. In Old Testament or New Testament He is the same God in Christ. The Old Testament quotations of which this chapter is so remarkably full, carry with them, and contain within them, universal truth. Paul is no Jew merely dealing as a Rabbi with a great literary monument of the past of his nation. He is a Christian ambassador who finds that “every scripture inspired of God is profitable” for Gentile as well as for Jew. II. The ambassador’s credentials.— 1. He carries credentials. Paul claimed that he needed no credentials to Corinth, except the witness in every Corinthian Christian’s heart of the effectiveness with which the human ambassador had discharged his function. Every “reconciled” Corinthian, rejoicing that he had “received the grace of God,” welcomed Paul without further “letters commendatory” (2 Corinthians 3:1). But to others, the ambassador, “the minister of God,” commends himself as such by the many tokens which, in almost rhythmic array, he proceeds to enumerate. Saved men are seals to a man’s ministry; but until they are saved, he must have a commission whose validity is attested by many another seal. 2. And what a series!—The first is negative, but not a thing of small moment. He is careful that nothing in his personal conduct, and nothing in the manner of his official life, shall be a stumbling-block to Jew or Gentile. No thoughtless, inconsistent, offensive behaviour; e.g. no “lording it over the heritage of God”; no selfish, self-indulgent use of his Christian liberty or of his Apostolic privileges to their fullest extent, regardless, reckless, of the consequences, direct or indirect, to others. His life and example, who is an ambassador, a minister, of Christ will for that reason carry weight beyond those of an ordinary Christian, whether for good or evil, for helpfulness or occasion of stumbling. Each particular case of inconsiderateness, or inconsistency, or sin in him will be generalised—as good example will usually not be!—and made representative of the class to which he belongs. Their “administration” of the commission to exhort men to “be reconciled to God,” with all that such a reconciliation carries with it, will be brought into disrepute, and “blamed,” if the “ministers of Christ” be unworthy or unfaithful in their personal or official life. Note how careful Paul is of the reputation of the whole body of fellow-workers. There is none of that self-centered strength, or pride, which, calling itself “independence,” goes forward on its own course, whatever be the bearing of its action upon the world’s estimate of the ministry and its work. This noble man acts as if put in trust with the reputation of the whole number. “He felt that the influence of Christianity upon the world depended very much upon the collective impression made by its prominent advocates, and that this impression would be determined in no small measure by his personal conduct. He was therefore careful so to act in everything as to cause no spiritual injury to any one, lest such injury might lessen the collective influence of the leaders of the Church.” (Beet.) He is wanting in one of the first credentials of the true minister, who is not sensitive lest his own discharge of his function should in any way prejudice his brethren in the ministry of the word of reconciliation. The true ambassador will feel that the honour, first of the Great Ambassador, and next of his human co-workers, is in some degree in his hands. Responsibility for holding it high rests upon each single man. 3. Then follow, in startling series, the positive seals of a valid commission, the notes of a true ambassador. (Consult Critical Notes upon these.) Observe in 2 Corinthians 6:4-6 how the very “penalties” of his Apostolic character and work, the strokes of man’s injustice, and even of his own people’s niggardliness, are by a wondrous alchemy of grace transformed into tokens by which he knows, and by which others know, himself a true ambassador. [In Galatians 6:17 the scars which mark his body, every one of them with a memory and a history to himself, are the brands of Christ’s ownership.] “If I had none of these troubles, I should begin to doubt whether I were in the ministry. If the world, or the Church, saw none of these things in me, if I slipped through cheaply, escaping all such hardships, they might ask whether indeed I really belonged to the body of ambassadors.” The “popular preacher” who gets everybody’s good word may well pray to be kept on his guard against his Master’s woe (Luke 6:26). 4. These are credentials which others make for him, though he wears them as his badge of service. But next follow some for which himself must take thought. A man needs to watch his own spirit with closest vigilance, in the midst of the persecution of the cruel world, under their false accusations, and when even within the Church he is opposed by “unreasonable and wicked men” (2 Thessalonians 3:2), when an ungrateful Church leaves him to toil far into the night for the bread which his labour spent on them in the daytime deserved that they should provide. “Longsuffering” will have much occasion to train it in full beauty and strength. “Love unfeigned,” indeed “love” at all, will be a triumphant vindication of the grace of God in a Paul whose apostleship is challenged. He will take care that, so far as depends upon himself, “the Holy Ghost” shall dwell within him in fulness of power. In motive and act he will “keep himself pure.” It will be a further credential, appealing to any critic or opponent who will think, “This man is growing and ripening, day by day, in knowledge of Divine things. He is certainly qualified to be a minister of Christ to me.” And, above all, when such an opponent sees an ungrudging “kindness” which, Godlike, spends itself upon even “the unthankful and the evil,” he says rebuked and self-convicted, “That man is really a minister of Christ.” 5. Then come the many points on which true ministers, whose commission still runs in full validity, will guard their own spirit and inner life. Misunderstood, condemned of men, they will so keep themselves blameless that, whilst “righteousness” of motive and dealing may now and then be the weapons of offence and defence, they may far oftener leave their reputation in the hands of Him Who knows them to be no “deceivers,” etc., and meanwhile go steadily on with their work and “ministry.” Even life itself, often endangered, shall be safe in His keeping, Who will give many a startling deliverance, which shall be rather a resurrection than a mere deliverance. But no credential will be more forcible in its appeal for recognition than this: “We possess all things. We make many rich.” “Great poverty, but great peace.” “Always rejoicing!” Paul’s Epistle to the Philippians is a fine illustration of the true Christian cheerfulness, written as it was amidst circumstances naturally calculated to distress and depress and daunt. [Says Bradburn, an intimate associate of John Wesley’s later days: “It was almost impossible to be dull or dissatisfied in his company.… I never saw him low-spirited in my life.… When speaking of any who imagined religion would make people morose and gloomy, I have heard him say in the pulpit ‘That sour godliness is the devil’s religion.’ In his answer to a letter I had written to him (in a time of strong temptation) he has these words: ‘That melancholy turn is directly opposite to a Christian spirit. Every believer ought to enjoy life.’ … I heard him say, ‘I dare no more fret than curse and swear.’ ”] 6. What is the argument from all these marks? “Each side of these contrasts commends the apostles as ministers of God. That men whom some decry as deceivers are found to be true, that men set aside as unknown become day by day more fully known, that men who seem to be in the jaws of death are rescued and men apparently smitten by God live still, that underneath visible sorrow there is constant joy, and that utter poverty is but a mask hiding infinite wealth, is abundant proof that they in whom these contradictions meet are indeed servants of God. Thus amid many and various hardships, in a spotless and kindly life animated by the Holy Spirit and by sincere love to men, and armed with a word which commends itself as the truth and is confirmed by the manifested power of God, in everything Paul and his companions claim respect and act as becomes ministers of God.” (Beet.) 2 Corinthians 6:2. A “Now!” Salvation. I. Pivot word of passage.—Make pictorial by parallel of our tiny earth, crowded with its tiny dwellers, borne along in its orbit, hanging poised in space; infinite space above it, below it, around it, in every direction; a point, a minute island in a sea of space. So our life. Of how much are we masters? Think backward,—to the day of Adam; of “the beginning”; of the creation of the “sons of God” who rejoiced over the birth of earth (Job 38:7). And there, at the Land’s End of creaturely being, we gaze out into limitless, past duration. Think forward,—to Judgment; to the end of some vast measure of heavenly happiness; forward again; stop anywhere, yet away there still stretches limitless future duration. A midway parenthesis, the history of Earth; a midway parenthesis within this again, a man’s life—our own; and of this we possess, have, know, only the midmost point; an instant, coming, here, gone, with more than arrow’s swiftness; just now the earliest moment of the Future; whilst we speak of it, the Present; before the words are finished, the latest moment of the Past. Life to us is “Now.” The present moment, hanging poised, like earth, midway in the infinite; duration unmeasured behind, duration unmeasured before. “The dead past;” “the living present;” the future just coming to birth. Our needs, dangers, temptations, duties, all belong to the “Now” of life. God’s “salvation” (in largest sense,—all conceivable, and needed, grace and help) belongs accordingly to the present. Other help may be too early or too late; God’s salvation is stamped with “Now.” “ ‘Now’ is the day of salvation;” our necessary time is God’s “accepted time.” II. The elementary salvation of pardon is a present blessing.— 1. Glorious Gospel this, but needs guarding. May not take any chance, indifferent, unaffected man who will give attention and intellectual assent to the proposition that there is salvation through Jesus Christ for him, and thereupon assure him that he is “saved.” No man who has not learned his sinfulness, guilt, peril—only relieved by the redeeming grace of Christ—has mastered the A B C of religion. 2. Yet even to such a man we might say, “Come forthwith—now—ask for the sense of sin.” The moment of beginning to inquire after God is the “now” of salvation, so far as this that, No seeking soul was ever left to seek or to perish without finding. 3. Urge even upon such, “Why not seek now? In peril of ‘judgment’ now, your need is ‘now.’ Terms will never be more favourable. Conditions in yourself may become less and less favourable. All the Father’s love; all the Son’s grace; all the Spirit’s help; you have them all,—now!” 4. Young people speculate: “Time enough! Many things may happen! Special wave of ‘revival’ influence, perhaps, bearing many, and ourselves, with it, with less of singularity when ‘everybody’ is seeking salvation.” 5. True use of Paul’s word is to an aroused, truly repentant soul, seeking earnestly; to whom “salvation” is matter of urgent present concern. “Save me, O God!” “I have heard thee in a time accepted; that time accepted is Now.” Or, “I must first do this, or that.” “Now is the day of salvation.” The moment salvation becomes matter of present concern on the soul’s part, it is matter on God’s part of present, offered grace. When man says “Now,” God says “Now” also. III. The after, many-sided, “salvation” of the believer is a “Now” blessing.— 1. This nearer to the purpose of Paul here. Quotes Isaiah 49:8; addressed originally to Messiah, discouraged in His work. Paul is encouraging men who were in danger, under pressure or seduction of temptation, of making a poor finish to the “gracious” beginning of a Christian life, “receiving grace of God in vain.” “You need never give way, or give up, or fail. At every moment of new need, God will be near with new help.” The “salvation” of pardon only the first link in a chain of “salvations” reaching up to glory; the first round of a Jacob’s ladder reaching to threshold of heaven. Shall need new help, defence, strength, at each new step, as well as at the first and lowest. At, with, in, each new “now” 2. E.g. Luther at Worms. (Psalms 46, “A very present help in time of trouble.”) In hall of Diet; greatest and wisest of Germany, of Europe, there; greatest prince of the Continent presiding. For most part hostile; many itching to lay hands on audacious monk, hardly restrained by emperor’s “safe conduct.” Only a few venturesomely sympathising. Luther had shrunk; overheard in his chamber (D’Aubignι, Pt. ii., c. 8) crying out before God: “How … the world … gapes to swallow me up!… How weak the flesh!” etc. Men saw in the hall the lion-like man. God saw in the chamber the helpless soul laying hold of the “now” salvation needed in that supreme hour. E.g., better, 2 Timothy 4:16-18. Paul before “the lion” Nero; life depending on the drunken whim of a deified monster. “No man stood by me.” Peril so extreme that not a Christian in Rome dared to show himself in Court-house, (more Romano) to stand by the dock, a friend of the prisoner. But “the Lord” (not forgetting how He once stood before His judges, and not a disciple dared show himself—except, perhaps, John) “stood by me,” took His stand (aor.; q.d. in the dock), an unseen, but real, present Helper, and “delivered,” at least in that “first appearing” for trial, with a “now” salvation. “I am with you always,—all the days, each successively, and as each new day needs Me.” E.g. day of commercial reverse. Mansion gives place to modest villa; villa to mere cottage; careless affluence exchanged for close-calculating straitness; comforts for necessaries. Father looks round table; no fewer, nor less hungry, mouths. Yet no hard words about “luck,” or God, or man. Strange calm on faces; light in eyes, as if rather some piece of good fortune had happened. Why? “Now is day of salvation.” E.g. battling—perhaps on knees—with our own characteristic temptation. Cry, “Help now!” He answers, “I have heard thee, … now!” So always: with the need, the succour; with the foe, the Friend; with the grief, the grace. Only one moment to live at once, and that the moment of God’s “now” salvation. IV. Present condition—saved or unsaved—is, our true standing before God.—“Now,” not “yesterday” nor “once,” is the day of any “salvation” that avails us. 1. German poem: Mother holding in arms dying child; its breath going out in short gasps; mother clings tighter, as if to retain the fleeting spirit; when all is over, still clings, as if refusing to believe that she only holds body of her child. So Christian man clings to old membership, old routine of service and worship, long after “spirit” which gave these any value or meaning has departed; clings the more closely, as if to silence the misgiving that all is not as it used to be, nor so well. Our Salvation status before God is a thing of “now.” 2. Oscillating lives, swinging between “Near to God,” “Far from God”; “Near to God,” “Far from God.” Can photograph a swinging pendulum, with instantaneous shutter and rapid plate. What if the “call” which fixes record of our relation to God for ever, photograph us at wrong end of the oscillation? 2 Corinthians 6:9. “Unknown.” I. This ought never to be true, absolutely.— 1. No persons know this better, or insist upon it more strongly, than the men of the world. They expect of a Christian a character which will not let him slip through the world “unknown” as a Christian. Speak to a non-professor about another, known to you as a professor of religion, and with whom he is in daily business contact, but whose religion is so deep down in the heart that it never finds its way to the surface in the life. Perhaps you get a look of surprise; if, indeed, all the man’s courtesy can repress a long-drawn “Oh!” of astonished incredulity. No greater humiliation, no deeper sorrow, to a Christian minister, who has been, perhaps warmly, commending one of his people, than to hear: “So-and-so a Christian? We who are with him every day would never have found it out. He can be passionate with the most hasty of us! Unforgiving as the hardest! Men say ugly things about his business ways too! Thought you Christians ‘renounced the world’! But So-and-so is thoroughly one of us in all our amusements. So far as we see, he judges by our standards and lives on our principles.” The world knows as well as the Church, that a servant should be more diligent and trusty for being a Christian; that a mother’s conversion should be known by her husband and family. They do not understand a “light of the world,” which is not visible, nor makes perceptible difference in the darkness around. They will ask whether a man can be of the “salt of the earth,” whilst nobody tastes any saltness in his conversation, and he imparts no savour by his life. The world demands that, if religion be what preachers and Bible say it is, the effects on religious men should be palpable and patent, even in the home and in the world; always felt in the life; sometimes, at least, heard from the tongue. 2. Christian is professedly seeking another world than this (Hebrews 11:14). Go with a crowd; you may escape notice. Go against the direction of the movement of a crowd; you cannot but attract attention, perhaps not the most favourable. Become “a marked man” at once. How is he to escape notice, and perhaps not too gentle or friendly notice, whose life-theory implies, “You are going ruin-wards; for safety and life turn [be converted] and go my way”? Live with American or German resident in England for business purposes. Soon discoverable that these are not English fellow-countrymen. Not to speak of the un-English accent, the talk is of “home”—in the States or Germany. The standard for everything is how things are done in America or Germany. Among us, but evidently not of us. So Christians are not seeking a country, “another world”; they already belong to it. Philippians 3:20, “Citizenship is in heaven.” Speech should bewray them. The “home” ought to be yonder; this only the temporary abode for our Master’s purposes and business and work. Judge of men and things by that world’s standards. In India, devotees have their god-mark in ashes upon their foreheads; an experienced observer can tell at once to what god a man is devoted. “Servants of God sealed,” even now, “in their foreheads.” So long as the “spirit of world” (1 Corinthians 2:12) and Spirit of God are so diverse, they in whom they dwell will be as manifestly distinct; the man “in Christ” and the man “of the world” can never be mistaken one for the other. A Christian unknown and unknowable is an anomaly. 3. The Lord is the pattern.—“In the world; world knew Him not” (John 1:10). True; but, literally, they knew Him well enough! He affected no singularity of dress or manners, as John did; yet “He could not be hid.” The centre of attraction, whether of love and gratitude, or of wonder or hate. The best known, loved, hated personage in History to-day. Best known, loved, hated man in Palestine in His time. “As He is, so are we in this world.” “Unknown, yet well known, by holiness in all manner of conversation.” II. In what sense the words are true.—Look again at the Divine Pattern. They understood not His dignity. The boy in Nazarene village; the young carpenter who had been an ordinary workman and synagogue worshipper amongst His family and neighbours; the young teacher who admitted Peter and his friends to most familiar intercourse;—He is God’s Well-beloved Son tabernacling in flesh. A stupendous fact this, claiming a stupendous faith. Hardly anybody around Him recognised the fact. Brothers thought Him beside Himself, and would not, for a long time, believe in Him. His mother knew the secret of His birth, yet never interposed without bringing on herself His gentle rebuke for her dull, earthly conceptions of Him and of His work. “His own” Nation had expected Him for ages, and with unusual intensity was just then longing for His Advent. He came, and they gave God’s Son, their King, only mockery and a cross. Not a case where “world knows nothing of its greatest men” until they are gone from its midst. A spiritual blindness hid Him from their eyes, and made Him “unknown.” Pilate is typical of the universal “world.” The King stood before him in the judgment hall of Herod’s palace. Pilate only saw a peasant, weary with a night of sleeplessness, anxiety, mockery. Eyes weary; face bruised with stripes and blows; a prisoner with bound hands. He speaks of His kingdom. In unfeigned astonishment Pilate says, “Thou a king, then? Thou!” When the King spoke of a kingdom not of this world, a kingdom whose subjects were “of the truth,” the secret came out. “What is Truth? What do I know, or want to know, about Truth? My business is politics. Thy concern is not truth, but thy life.” Such a King, such a kingdom, such topics, were hidden from the mind and heart of His judges. “Unknown.” So “the Christian is the highest style of man”; the humblest Christian is invested with a true royalty, the highest, the eternal. “Partakers of Divine nature” (2 Peter 1:4); free access to the King of kings; all His support and interest at their disposal at every step. “Great expectations” indeed, and the title-deeds in their heart. The world understands pride of “birth,” but being born of God is a thing “unknown” to it. It knows greatness based on power, or wealth, or intellectual endowments; but a greatness based on holiness is “unknown.” An inheritance in the future, in heaven, whose title-deeds are only in the strong-room within the heart, is dreamy, visionary, unpractical, outside its range, and of value only according to a standard of which it knows nothing: it all goes for nothing, when, indeed, it is not subject of ridicule or contempt. Sons of God have a life which is a mystery to themselves: “Wind bloweth where it listeth,” etc. To them, the mystery is how it is; to the world, what it is. Christians must be prepared for misconstruction, misrepresentation, scorn, persecution, because their life, experiences, principles, are “spiritual things” unknown by the “natural” man (1 Corinthians 2:14). Conviction of sin is an unaccountable melancholy, a fuss without adequate reason. The peace which follows and crowns his faith in Christ; his new “sonship” and its joy, etc., these are enthusiasm. If the world is bitter, it denounces all these experiences as delusion or worse; if courteous, it says, as one of Sir J.Y. Simpson’s professional friends did of him on his conversion, “I don’t understand this new turn of Simpson’s; yet he is a man of good sense.” “Unknown.” The ignorance may be dense and full of enmity. “Enthusiasm!” “Hypocrites, humbugs.” Their devotion to bringing men to God “must be interest, or money profit of some sort”; their life is “folly” or “pretence”; their religious vocabulary “cant”; their abstinence from worldly pleasures “Pharisaism, moroseness, fanaticism”; their denunciation of “worldly” sin is bigotry, fanaticism. The world knows nothing of such aims, nothing of a soul’s life and its dangers, nothing of the real meaning of sin. 1. What, then, of the “Christians” who are not in this sense “unknown,” whom the world does understand and approve? 2. What of such as are known, rather by a pungent, acrid smoke emitted from the fire within their breast, than by any heat or light from it? 3. What, also, of the world to which Christians are “unknown”? 2 Corinthians 6:10. Rich Poverty.—How necessary to hear the whole of a matter. Hearing only “as poor” we should say: “Here is as sad and drear a lot as mortal ever inherited. The man has lost all heart.” If we heard only the second; “Here is Fortune’s favourite, intoxicated with his uncounted treasures.” The first part of the text must not be explained away; the second cannot be. Paul was not even owner of as much land as would serve him for a grave; yet was a greater possessor than the wealthiest or mightiest of the world. No juggler with words, no maddened enthusiast, rich only in imaginary possessions, was Paul; the houseless wanderer was really possessor of all things. I. “Having nothing.” Then 1. The truly great are not essentially the visibly rich.—Needs proclaiming in our materialistic age. To a man “well off” many mansions open their doors, whilst they exclude poverty like leprosy. There are circles where wealthy vice has the ready entrιe, if only the vice be decently veiled, or not too obtrusive, but where virtue without its £10, 000 would not be admitted for a moment. [And would not desire to be!] How often has the Church in this imitated the world! Paul, as he was, would hardly to-day excite notice or win wide admiration. Self-impoverishment crowns with greatness. His poverty was voluntarily incurred, for Jesus’ sake. 2. It becomes us to make greater self-denials.—There is only worth in our self-denials when ourselves really deny self. It is not often for the reason that we have taken it up, that the cross is heavy. 3. God does not reward His servants with material pay.—He does not attach to material possessions the importance we do. [If they were the “good” men account them, depend upon it “there would be no want” of that good “to them that fear Him.”] He will let us dare and do for Him without a bribe. 4. God’s poor are the “best off.” The Master promised that whoever for Him left houses, lands, or the like, should “receive a hundredfold” here, and then “eternal life.” If there is a servant of Christ bemoaning his poverty, let him lift up his head, and grasp the title-deeds of his rightful heritage, and read in them “as having nothing, yet” II. “Possessing all things.”— 1. By holding a true relation to them all. The true possession is much more than ownership, or occupation, or merely having. The “possession” of a series of fine paintings is much more than that they are in the man’s gallery, while he has never felt their power, or been enlarged and uplifted by them. He is no “possessor” of a library to whom his books are unread and unreadable. His employe librarian, or his poor, scholarly, neighbour who borrows them, has far more truly a “possession” of them. The Christian man may not own a house or an acre; but the world is for him, as much as for the owner who hath nothing but “the beholding with his eyes” (Ecclesiastes 5:11). 2, It is an entirely false relation to things when their only value or desirableness is to have them to the exclusion of anybody else, which is what “ownership” too often means. The man to whom they are full of God, and who is himself in right relation to God, has the joy they can give and were meant to give. Many a man is really immured in a real dungeon whilst he inhabits his mansion. There is many a man who never walks under the shadow of “his” noble trees, or by the side of “his” lake, or through “his” lovely gardens, but with an aching or empty heart, or with a guilty conscience, or a memory which is a perpetual scourge. The Christian labourer on “his” estate has a far more real heart possession than has the “owner.” 3. Men who fret for what they have not do not own what they have.—[Ahab (1 Kings 20); the kingdom has no value because the little vineyard of Naboth is not his.] 4. If a man’s nature is ripened, enriched by things, what like that can make him in such a great sense their owner? Above all 5. By holding a true relation to Christ he becomes possessor of all things (Romans 8:17; Revelation 3:21).—Adapted from H. Martyn, “Homilist,” Third Series, ix. 270. 2 Corinthians 6:10. “Poor, yet making many rich.”—Then want of money is not the greatest, nor an insuperable, hindrance to the success of the Gospel. Else would not He have left the gold-mines a legacy to the Church? There is a something which the Church may have, which will enable it to do the work with little or no money. I. “The triumphs of the first ages were won by men too poor to claim a home.… The days of the Church’s temporal poverty were the brightest days of its victories. Never did the chariot of the Gospel move on with such celerity and stately moral grandeur, as when it rolled on undrawn by golden chains.” II. Without this something money will be of no service.—“Money can only give machinery; … a great deal more, already, than is used. Money is constantly creating new machinery and tinkering the old; so that we hear more of the creakings of the human engines in the Church than of the flowing and the soul-stirring music of a Divine life. Money can only do for religion what it can do for art,—it can furnish the paint, the brush, the studio; but the genius, to create a breathing beauty on the canvas, it cannot supply. The true evangelising genius [and the power of the Holy Ghost], without which Churches, colleges, books, [committees, Church legislation, organisation] are so much cumbrous machinery, no wealth can purchase.” III. The constant cry for money indicates the want of this necessary something.—“Real love is communicative.… The office of love is always that of a priest, evermore presenting itself at the shrine of its object. Don’t ask me to give to objects I love; I can’t help it—love will communicate.”—Extracted from a longer sermon on 1 Corinthians 9:12 by Dr. Thomas, “Homilist,” 6:154, 155. 2 Corinthians 6:10. Cf. “Such as I have give I thee” (Acts 3:6). I. How much the world owes to Christianity!—Some of its noblest art inspirations and ideals; some of the most elevated and true principles of a real, healthy Socialism; some of its best thoughts about God and about morals. It has given a very real “culture” to the lowest, and otherwise “dangerous,” classes, whom nothing else would have reached or saved from narrow, gross animalism of life and practice. Its thoughts and hopes about God and Christ and salvation and eternity must be acknowledged to be grand, enlarging, ennobling, if even they be not accepted as true. The life of an artisan or a slave in Corinth could not be mean, base, or dangerous to society, where the teachings and life of Christianity were truly apprehended and exemplified. “The stone which the builders rejected,” even many of themselves now acknowledge to have been “the head of the corner.” Christ’s religion is the needed completion of all science; of all education; of all personal character. “Not even now would it be easy, even for an unbeliever, to find a better translation of the rule of virtue, from the abstract to the concrete, than to endeavour so to live that Christ would approve our life” (John Stuart Mill, Essays on Religion, 253–255). II. How much a Church often owes to its godly poor!—These are worth, in many ways, all the money and the ministrations spent over them. They keep sympathies tender and active, which might else die for lack of objects on which to spend themselves. They keep the Church life from growing sordidly rich, or hard and worldly; they exemplify another style of “wealth,” constantly reminding their “more fortunate” fellow-members that there is another, larger, worthier life than that which “consisteth in the abundance of the things which a man possesseth.” Happy the wealthy Church which has many poor members to whom Wordsworth’s words may be applied: “How oft high service is performed withinWhen all the external man is rude in show,—Not like a temple rich with pomp and gold,But a mere mountain chapel, that protectsIts simple worshippers from sun and shower.”—Prelude, book xiii. How much of blessing does a Church owe to those who can only contribute their ceaseless prayers to the Church’s wealth! III. How much, in a similar way, does personal character often owe to contact with a poor, but pious Christian life!—The Christian servant is made an unspeakable, eternal blessing to the master or mistress or to the children, [and perhaps through one of these to a whole generation or age; e.g. how many did the Christian servant “make rich” who led to Christ the child who became “Lord Shaftesbury”!] The rich visitor gets more from the sick sufferer, of ripe grace and bright patience, than the “money’s worth” of what is given in charity! How many will have to say, “My life is richer, infinitely, than it was, since I knew—,” viz. some poor saint of God. 2 Corinthians 6:10. “Poor, yet making many rich. Then— 1. The Gospel is a system intended to enrich men.—Some systems of religion impoverish mind, body, estate. They invade a man’s secular rights, and extort the product of his labour; blind his spiritual sensibilities, fetter his intellect, warp his judgment, ruin his soul. The Gospel enriches the soul with noble thoughts, high purposes, elevating hopes; with Divine fellowship, purity of heart, harmony of being. This soul-wealth is inalienable; it becomes part of the man; Omnia sua secum portat; it is a treasure laid up in the imperishable heavens of his spiritual being. Its value is absolute; for all worlds and ages, for time, for eternity. 2. It enriches man through the agency of “poor men.”—Of men. The treasure is put into earthen vessels. The man who really receives the Gospel, moreover, becomes at once a willing agent to communicate. Of poor men. The poor can, and in fact do, receive the Gospel to a greater extent than any other class. The Saviour, opening His commission at Nazareth, declared Himself anointed—made a Christ—specially that He might preach the Gospel to the poor. There is no special decree indeed which places a barrier before any one class; the door of mercy is thrown open to all. It is that the influence of worldly wealth biases the heart against the true riches. The poor can become morally rich. And it is a more glorious fact that they can propagate the Gospel which enriches them. The Master and His fishermen-disciples were its first missionaries; and in all ages some of its finest theologians, organisers, missionaries, pastors, have sprung from the ranks of the poor. We see, then,— I. The kind of instrumentality on which the diffusion of God’s Gospel necessarily depends.—It manifestly does not depend on legislative enactments, worldly influence, high culture, great literary attainment. It can use these; it puts their highest honour upon them by using these; their chief glory is to serve the Gospel of Christ. Certainly not even money is indispensable. It may be well, and nobly, used; but Paul could dispense with it. It can provide the men, the means, the machinery, for the work. With these—but without these, if need be—the man filled with the Spirit, burning with love to Christ, taught of God, walking in all holiness, though he may speak no language but his own, and even that imperfectly, has the power to propagate the Gospel. II. No Christian man is freed from the obligation to diffuse the Gospel of God.—Even the poor man is not. He may not in over-diffidence dream of devolving what even he can do, upon the rich or wise or great. The responsibility of wealth, of leisure, of education, is very great; they who have these must give account for five talents. But the poor man must be a faithful servant with his one. The poor can “make many rich”; then their ability is their responsibility. III. There is no ground for self-gratulation upon success.—When the poorest and simplest men prove capable of achieving the grandest spiritual results, there is no alternative but to trace success to God. And then from such instances we learn to eliminate from all combinations of contributary causes, God’s power, as the primary and essential cause. The men in all ages who have been most successful in imparting spiritual riches, have always been distinguished by their self-abnegating spirit. Then— IV. This highest honour is within the reach of all.—What higher honour than to be the human instrument in the regeneration of a soul? Even to awaken and train a sleeping intellect is great. The patient, skilful love which put the deaf, blind, mute Laura Bridgman into real communication with a world in which she lived, but which seemed hopelessly shut off from her, was no mean glory to Dr. Howe, of Boston, U. S. A. But to awaken a soul to a desire after God; to bring it into touch with the surrounding, but unknown, spiritual world; to bring it definitely into the possession of Christ,—is the highest honour, and fills him who accomplishes the task with the purest, grandest joy which a man can taste outside heaven’s gate. To make a beggar, orphan, lost soul the happy possessor of “the unsearchable riches of Christ,” the happy child of the Divine Father, recovered from the initial, present death and ruin of sin, is an honour angels might covet. But it is granted to men only: “When thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren.” It has been again and again granted to poor men. All necessary ministrations of man to man are level to the ability of every man to render. This most necessary ministration is open to every man who is himself a happy possessor of the kingdom within his own soul. V. Happily then we may hope for the universal diffusion of the Gospel.—For suitable instruments, at least in one particular, are sure to be always available in plenty; there will at least never be any dearth of men who are qualified to say, “As having nothing.” If, too, it had depended on a learned caste, or a wealthy class, or a political power, there might have been justification for a priesthood, an oligarchy, an Establishment. To spread the Gospel, in the first instance only needed men who had little, or none, of such accompaniments and accessories to their work. And the Gospel can use them or can dispense with them still.—In part adapted from “Homilist,” New Series, iv. 217. 2 Corinthians 6:2. Now; because— I. The business is urgent: Finding God’s salvation.—Enter some Galilζan village in the Spring of A.D. 27 or 28. Whole village astir. Everybody in the streets. Some hobbling along on crutches; some tottering and shaking with palsied limbs, glad to lean on some stronger arm; some blind, groping their way as if in midnight darkness; some minus a limb altogether; some with withered limbs that hang stiff like dead branches on a living trunk; some dragging themselves wearily; some borne on their little mattress-“bed” by sturdy bearers. A field day of the cripples and the sick of that Galilζan village! What does it mean? Why all converging to one particular house? Or, the Passover of A. D. 29. Crowds throng every high-road in Palestine. One largest company of pilgrims, like a living flood, reaches, rolls through, and soon leaves, Jericho. A shady nook near the city gate; a beggar—two—blind Bartimζus and his companion. They hear the crowd. They learn the cause. Spite of the hushing of bystanders, again and again before the Chief Pilgrim reaches them, their shrill cry is raised: “Son of David! Son of David!” Those are “seeking the Lord while He may be found.” These latter are “calling upon Him while He is near.” The business is urgent. Try to detain one of those cripples or blind men with a good story; tempt him to turn back with you for a good dinner or a handful of money. Not he! It is only sinners who commit the folly of suffering themselves to be detained or diverted from Christ by some tempting amusement, by sensuous enjoyment, by worldly business. The bystanders sought to hush down the beggars. As pride, or shame, or fear, or social or domestic pressure put on, would suppress or silence the demonstrative concern and the unconventionally urgent outcry of a guilty soul, which wants Christ’s help. “No; I cannot tarry for you. I cannot hush for you. Until I have made this sure, I have no ear, no leisure, for anything else. What must I do to be saved? Leave me to find Christ!” Bunyan not drawing a fancy picture when he makes Christian flee “at full stretch” from City of Destruction, fingers in ears, crying, “Life! Life! Eternal Life!” He had known it himself. Every man under the Spirit’s conviction of sin knows how urgent the business. II. The time is fitting.—Every stage of life is; youth; opening manhood and womanhood; maturity of strength and prime of vigour or beauty of character; days of waning power, but of sobering thought and heart. No age to which this present salvation is not congruous. Early morning, rising noon, fulness of afternoon light and warmth, evening’s chastened daylight; all are right times. But the earliest is the best. Religion never unsuitable; becomes a man at any stage of life. Life wants its final touch of completeness and beauty, so long as it has not this. “Comes harder” at each later stage. Numa Pompilius and the Sibylline books. III. The circumstances are favourable.—Particularly the primary condition of all. God says “Now.” He is pledged to “Now,” but to no other time. On this word a soul may plead: “Remember this word unto Thy servant, in which Thou hast caused me to hope.” IV. The opportunity is limited.— 1. True of nations, so far as history can be read with human eyes. They have their “day of salvation” (Luke 19:44). Perhaps, e.g., we may think that France knew not of its “now” opportunity in the sixteenth century, when Reformation activities and life and grace were neglected and finally put away in massacre and murder. 2. True of individuals. May not limit the power and freedom of God’s grace further than He limits it. But the complete offer of the Gospel always includes, expressly or by implication, a limit to the availableness of the offer. E.g. in Isaiah 55:6-7, referred to above. Men may seek when He is not to be found, may call when He is not near. A limit seems irrevocably placed sometimes. Thus: Man cooperates with God in this “salvation,” by repentance and faith. What then of the senile decay of mind which seems to make the very conception of repenting and believing no longer possible, and which makes it impossible to arouse attention for the very name of Jesus? What of the breathing, but paralysed body and hopelessly senseless brain, to which the minister is sometimes asked to come in to offer prayer beside it? What of the fixed habits, the world-indurated heart, impervious to, impracticable for, man’s appeal, and from which the very Spirit of God seems “grieved” away? Let it be noted that this closing of the opportunity is never in this life a matter of the mere (arbitrary) will of God. As in salvation, so in this limitation,—whenever it occurs,—man has cooperated with God, and has by his own choice and act contributed to it. [Also: “Now” in “Remember now thy Creator,” etc., must not be emphasised if the appeal is being made to the young. It is only the particle of entreaty, and is not temporal in sense.] 2 Corinthians 6:2. God hath spoken once; yea, twice have I heard Him.” I. An offer twice repeated.—A “time of acceptance”; a “day of salvation.” II. A double summons to attention.—“Behold”; “behold.” III. A double indication of time.—“Now!” “now!”—[J. L.] 2 Corinthians 6:2. A Present Salvation. I. It needs to be; you want it now. II. It ought to be; God offers it now. III. It may be; all things are ready now. IV. It must be; to-morrow is not yours.—[J. L.] 2 Corinthians 6:4-10. “Approved” [N. B. not the frequent Pauline word in, e.g., Romans 16:10] Ministers of God. I. Their work. II. Their trials. III. Their conduct. IV. Their consolations.—[J. L.] 2 Corinthians 6:7. A Shield of “Triple Brass.”I. The word of truth defends a Christian’s faith. II. The power of God defends his experience. III. The armour of righteousness defends his practice.—[J. L.] 2 Corinthians 6:11-13. What shall we Ministers have, therefore?I. Ministerial zeal. II. Ministerial disappointment. III. Ministerial recompense.—[J. L.] Then, further, the passage may be lifted to a higher plane. Thus does God appeal to His people. Their thoughts, views, hopes, life, experiences, are narrow. He would have them know, enjoy, a larger life and larger hope and liberty. The narrowness is in themselves, not in His heart or design or Gospel provision. They enter Canaan, indeed; but having taken their Jericho, and having won their first victories, they are content to camp about Gilgal; whilst “there remaineth much land to be possessed” (Joshua 13:1). Their enlargement, both of affection and receptiveness, is the “recompense” God desires, for all His “enlarged” heart of merciful design and provision for their well-being. Carey’s motto: “Do great things for God; expect great things from God.” Bring a big vessel when you come to receive God’s bounty. “Open thy mouth wide”—i.e. “sitting a guest at His table, let Him dip His hand in the dish, and, in token of favour and honour, give thee a large portion into thy opened mouth.” .—2 Corinthians 6:14 to 2 Corinthians 7:1 The paragraph may be gathered up round the central figure— The Temple of the Living God.—The Church collectively, then, is:— I. The scene of special Divine manifestation.— 1. His manifestation makes “holy ground.” The flame which played harmless around the Bush in Horeb made a spot where, for the nonce, every man must tread with bare feet. [I.e. he is no better than the poorest or than a slave when he stands there in the presence of God; seen from God’s elevation all disparities of rank are merged in one common lowliness.] So whilst God is manifest in all His works,—in Nature to those who have eyes opened to see Him; in mankind,—for there is no need to deny, no honour done to God or the Church in denying, that God by the redemptive Gift of the Spirit, is amongst all men, of every race and religion and age; yet He is most conspicuously manifest in His choicest Work, His Church. So also a Church has no holiness unless He be in its midst, in its means of grace, in its success, in its members: all, in all. Solomon built his Palace for Jehovah, as Moses’ workmen had, long before, made the Tent; but, until God entered, and in both “dwelt amongst them,” the one was a Palace only, and not a Temple, and the other was only a tent, larger and of more costly materials than the others round it, but not the Tabernacle. [Cf. even the theory of classical heathenism (Smith, Dictionary of Antiq.): “It was necessary then for a temple to be sanctioned by the gods, whose will was ascertained by the augurs, and to be consecrated or dedicated by the will of man (pontiffs). When the sanction of the gods had not been obtained, and where the mere act of man had consecrated a place to the gods, such a place was only a sacrum, sacrarium, or sacellum.”] So, also, let there be an organisation of the most thorough and perfect, part and part closely articulated, wisely related, admirably adapted to its high purpose; let wealth, numbers, influence, all fill the Church roll; yet if there be no presence of God, there is no Church. If He be not amongst them, they are not His people. “Your house—not My—is left unto you,” was said when the material fabric was at its culmination of beauty and glory, the treasury never better filled, the ritual never better observed, the show of religiosity never greater in all the history of Israel. But no Shekinah, though a Holy of Holies was there still; no Presence, to be hid by as splendid a Veil as had ever been wrought. Pompey was amazed to find the inmost shrine empty. The world sometimes makes proof of the Church; the inquirer penetrates within, and within again; is it only to find a Most Holy without a God? Then that “Church” is no Temple of God; or is one no longer. The inquirer finds in even a half-organised Church like that of Corinth: “God is among you of a truth” (1 Corinthians 14:25). 2. This is the glory of the Church.—When Solomon substituted Temple for Tabernacle, everything was new, with one exception; everything but that was more costly and on a larger scale. The same ark was brought into the new Sanctuary from the old. Looked, perhaps, small, unsuitable, unworthy, “mean”; its art very far beneath that of the grand new shrine of Solomon’s “advanced” days. But he dared not change that. The throne of Jehovah, His mercy-seat [=“throne of grace,” with the elements of the name reversed], the testimony of His Law,—all these must be the same. The same God must own, hallow, inhabit, the new Who had in that way made the old a dwelling-place of God on earth. [As, then, the continuous connection with the same personality year after year is no small note of the identity of the body; so also, that the organisation should, age after age, be the dwelling-place (or, to change the figure, the ὄργανον) of the same God, is one of the notes of the One Church, in all the Churches, ages, creeds, lands.] II. Separated that it may be this.— 1. Here again the Jewish idea coincided with the heathen; it was universal. In classical heathenism, e.g., the separateness was of the essential of a temple. In strictness the templum, like the Greek τέμενος, was the separated area, within which usually rose the special building that came to appropriate the name of Temple. It was, literally, marked off, as well as hallowed by rite and sacrifice, from the outside area beyond. Tabernacle and Temple in Israel had their surrounding court and open space, as well as the true shrine [the ναός of this passage] which stood in its midst. [Cf. the “bounds” set round the base of Sinai.] If God is to dwell in the midst of a people, peculiarly His own (Titus 2:14), His own purchased possession, they must “come out and be separate.” 2. Separateness is inevitable, whether we start from the requirement of the nature of God, or from the innate difference between the “sons and daughters” and the “enemies” of God (James 4:4). “What communion? What fellowship? What part?” It lies in the ἐκ-of ecclesia. The congregation called together, is first of all called out from the world. Singularity is not necessarily the true separateness; oddity is not certainly or invariably holiness, or a mark of it. No virtue in mere disconformity. But given the holiness, given the real heart separateness, then outward distinction, of perhaps a very marked type, is inevitable. None know it, or expect it, with a more sure instinct than do the excluded “world.” If the figure be pushed so far, as it may, and—to correspond with the facts—must often be; if, in the very Temple of the Church there be, as in the literal Temple of sacred antiquity, an outer court of inferior holiness, and an inner court, and again an inmost building, with its shrine; yet even the outer court must have its wall. It cannot be left the mere open ground, undistinguishable from the space beyond. Certainly the Church is not co-extensive with the redeemed Race. “Come out from among them.” 3. The customary code of distinctions between Christians and non-Christians, between Church and world,—not only formulated in registered membership, or in attendance at the Lord’s Table, but in amusements, books, friendships, and the like,—is no gratuitous limitation of liberty or pleasure,—which are naturally as desirable to Christians as to anybody else; it is only the orderly statement of the issue of repeated, numerous, varied experiments, and these often made by those who would not unwillingly have discovered, if it had been possible, a modus vivendi under which Church and world need not have stood so sharply apart. The things “tabooed” are only so put under ban, because often verified experiment has shown, either that they are the expressions of a heart-alienation from God, or that they minister to it; a heart which cannot be that of “sons and daughters of the Lord God Almighty.” 4. Particular case of this, often drawn out from 2 Corinthians 6:14 : Mixed marriages. [Obviously there are many other cases, analogous in the principle which governs them.] It is a false start in “building the house” (Psalms 127:1), when a young couple stand side by side before God, to “plight their wedding troth either to other,” perfectly fitted for each other, physically, in education, in character, in social status,—perfectly, in all but the one thing. For years, perhaps, to have every taste, every interest, in common, their two wills working together in perfect harmony, the “twain one,”—until they come to the deepest interest of all; then, deeply sundered! Not a secret between them, except here. They can talk about everything else together, with the most open-hearted confidence, but on the Dearest Friendship, upon the deepest joys and sorrows, the closest interests of all, the lips of one are closed. It is a poor fulfilment of the ideal of marriage, when, as the two travel side by side on life’s journey, there is between them the deep and far-reaching cleavage which parts between the new creation and the old nature. A poor finish to the married life, when, after fifty, sixty years, during which husband and wife have lovingly lived one life, the wife, perhaps, goes forward to her part in the “inheritance incorruptible,” etc., and he, to find that he has been “treasuring up wrath against the Day of wrath.” Peter (1 Peter 3:7) has a fine expression: “Heirs together of the Grace of Life,” i.e. heirs of the “Life which is life indeed” (1 Timothy 2:15, best reading), and which is a “grace” of God. An ideal marriage is suggested there. Husband and wife marrying with “great expectations” indeed! Jointly heirs of Life; both with Life eternal as a holy, glorious reversion. Fellow-travellers, helpers of each other’s weary footsteps. Held together by the profound common understanding which “spiritual” have with “spiritual.” An “unequally yoked” marriage usually either means “a cross” for life for the Christian—a cross of his own making, never designed for him by God—or that Christian turning back again into the world. Some Christian business men will take no partner but a Christian, on the very intelligible ground that, since religion is to come into business, as into all else in their life, it may occur—in fact, it does—that they should on principle be divided as to the acceptance or non-acceptance of a business proposal, or as to the following up, or the turning aside from, a promising opening. In all such matters, the Christian man is accustomed to do nothing without reference to a great Adviser, Whose “advice,” once obtained, he is bound to follow. But if his partner can be told nothing of this Divine Counsellor? If all such motives and reasons seem to him amiable but unpractical “ideals,” with which he has scant patience? “What communion?” etc. Take the best specimen of the man of the world in business, and take a poor specimen of Christian,—it may be possible to show the “worldling” more admirable. But take one of the many fine samples of Christian men of business, one whose religion permeates and pervades, and has a real hold upon, every transaction with the outside world, and upon all his dealings with his employιs; “yoke” him—not by any means with the worst specimen of worldly man, but—with a man of fair, or very good, business character who, however, makes no claim or attempt to “mix up religion with business”; it is inevitable, either that the Christian man must sooner or later adjust himself to the standard of his yoke-fellow, or that their relations will be strained till they both discover, “What part hath he that believeth?” etc. “Unequally yoked” in pleasure-taking will follow similar lines. More decidedly than in other cases must the word often be used in regard to this, “the unclean thing.” Novels whose motif is some irregular relation between man and woman; “irregular” being euphemistic for adultery or fornication, at least such as is condemned in the Court of the Great Judge of hearts (Matthew 5:27-28). Plays whose code of morality will not bear being laid by the side of the rule of even the surface reading of the Ten Commandments, to say nothing of their deeper, searching significance, touching motive and secret thought. Places whose atmosphere and associations are notoriously unfriendly to the spiritual life; where the non-Christian does not expect to find a Christian man. Say to him: “What are you doing, reading that book,—you, a Christian?” Or, “What affinity can bring you here,—you, a Christian?” “What possible liking can you have for the atmosphere of this place?” Of no practical service to discuss or defend what “might be”; to discuss ideals of books, pleasures, places, friendships, which are simply visionary, and “in the air.” Of very much of the actual, concrete recreation (in the widest sense) of the non-Christian community, one must say to the Christian, “Come out, … be separate.” The healthy, vigorous, spiritual life will secure, will create, a definite, far-reaching separateness, befitting the “temple of God.” On no other conditions can God dwell amongst His people. The Temple must be kept for Him, and for Him alone. III. The obligation lies on every Christian man to keep the Temple separate from sin.—There are no merely official guardians of the holiness of the Temple of God. Christ made Himself a pattern of the duty of every Christian to vindicate the holiness of Jehovah’s sanctuary. He had no official authority, to purify the Temple courts as He did. At most, it was the extraordinary, self-vindicating prerogative of a Zealot or a Prophet. But every man who is a member of the new Israel of God must regard himself as a guardian of the sanctity of Jehovah’s dwelling-place. The Temple is nothing, as distinct from its component “sons and daughters of the Lord God Almighty.” It has indeed a corporate holiness which each one of them must guard; but their personal holiness underlies the corporate. Unholy Christians cannot make a holy Church. Hence the illustration of the Temple passes over into that of a holy Family, whose every “son and daughter” is to be jealous for the family honour; and this again passes over in 2 Corinthians 7:1 to that of a personal “cleansing from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit.” The Temple in this paragraph is the actual Temple-building only. But it is noteworthy how Christ would have even the Outer Court hallowed. What He cleansed was the great marble-paved Court of the Gentiles. “Would suffer no man to carry any vessel through it” (Mark 11:16). The life of the Church, like the life of the individual Christian, has its outer court, as well as its inner and its inmost shrine. All lies within the holy precinct; all is part of the Temple; and even the outer-court life—the business-meeting, the finance, the organisation, and much more the philanthropy and social work—must be kept holy. “Separateness” is the law throughout; “no touching of the unclean” thing must be tolerated, even in these. The Church must, e.g., have clean hands when she touches money, and must handle none which would defile her. The Church, the Christian Temple, has its outer court of personal attachments. There is a Church within the Congregation. See in Acts 21:28-29 a vivid illustration of a zeal which should find its higher, its highest, embodiment in the Christians to whom our paragraph appeals. They thought Paul had brought the Gentile Trophimus, not only into the Court of the Gentiles, but beyond, into the inner court reserved for Israelites. M. Clermont Ganneau some years ago found built into a door-jamb in Jerusalem one of the marble tablets which were inserted into the boundary-wall of the Court of Israel in the Temple of Herod: “LET NO MAN OF OTHER RACE ENTER HERE ON PAIN OF DEATH.” Whatever welcome into its outer court the Church may give to all who care to come thus far from the outside into a holy precinct of approach to God, she must have an inner Court of Israel. If the “unequally yoked” man may bring his partners in the yoke so far as into the outer court, they may come no farther. No heathen alliance must find lodging within the holy Temple itself (Nehemiah 13:4-9). Every man will be a Christian Zealot for the honour and the purity of the Temple; every son of God Almighty will regard himself as charged with the care of the honour of the family for holiness; he will “cleanse himself,” lest he be the occasion of defilement or dishonour to the Temple in which he has a place. Note, that all this is put by way of exhortation, and not of obligation only. Paul reasons; God calls; He allures to separateness and holiness by gracious promises. Every man of God’s Church shall be a Solomon, to whom Jehovah will be “a Father.” [Further material on this Temple topic may be found under 1 Corinthians 3:16-17; 1 Corinthians 6:19. NOTES2 Corinthians 7:1. Therefore.—This verse a branch broken from 2 Corinthians 6:16-18. This word is like the jagged fibres which tell of the violence, and point back to the parent stem. Having.—Observe, the evangelical generalising of the scope of, and ownership in, these Old Testament sentences (see Appended Note). Cleanse ourselves.—“Deliverance from sin, although … God’s work in us, is yet obtained by our own moral effort and our own faith. It therefore depends upon ourselves whether we are made clean.” (Beet.) Beet adds: “The aor. subj. exhorts us, not to a gradual and progressive, but to a completed, cleansing from all defilement. So Ephesians 4:22; Ephesians 4:25; Colossians 3:5; Colossians 3:8; 1 John 1:9.” Spirit.—Observe, even the Godward, most Godlike part of our (tri-partite) nature may be “defiled.” All filthiness.—As usual in St. Paul, “all” is “All kinds, types, aspects, degrees, of,” etc. Not this or that one particular pollution. Cf. condemning “sins we have no mind to,” excusing those “we’re most inclined to.” A very subtle temptation is this moral partiality when we are cutting off our sins. [We “spare the best of the sheep and of the oxen,” etc. (1 Samuel 15:3; 1 Samuel 15:9).]2 Corinthians 7:2. Receive.—Verbally distinct from 2 Corinthians 6:17; related in suggestion. R R.V. has “open your hearts to us”; cf. 2 Corinthians 6:11-13 and Acts 20:3. See how Paul repeats Samuel’s challenge of old (1 Samuel 12:3) (cf. also John 8:46). As to these charges against Paul (perhaps not very distinctly formulated, but rather gathered from hints, and from their bearing towards Titus), see under 2 Corinthians 12:16-18. Corrupted.—Perhaps not stronger than in 1 Corinthians 3:17.2 Corinthians 7:3.—Observe, “I” begins here in the Epistle. Ye … in our hearts. Cf. the curiously (grammatically) ambiguous sentence, Philippians 1:7. Stanley compares Horace: “Tecum vivere amem, tecum obeam libens.”2 Corinthians 7:4. Boldness.—Reverts to 2 Corinthians 3:1 to 2 Corinthians 4:6, particularly 2 Corinthians 3:12. “To them he speaks without reserve strong words of warning; to others he speaks about them glowing words of joy and confidence” (Beet).2 Corinthians 7:5.—“Observe, “even” (R.V.); the “afflictions” of “Asia,” 2 Corinthians 1:8-11—the story of which is continued up to Troas, in ii. 13—were not at an end even when he crossed over into Macedonia. No rest.—Cf. 2 Corinthians 2:13. “Rest” in the sense of the unstringing of a bow, or of the strings of a lyre; “no relief from the constant tension” (2 Thessalonians 1:7). Fightings.—Human opponents, unknown to us (cf. 1 Corinthians 15:32). Fears.—One can bear anything from without, if only the heart be light; but to have fears within!2 Corinthians 7:6-7.—Observe, the Father a Paraclete, as in 2 Corinthians 1:4 [making Paul in his turn a Paraclete to others]. Cast down.—Note (as in R.V.) an adjective—“the lowly”—not a participle. [The combination of “affliction,” “reft,” “comfort by the parousia of Titus,” recalls 2 Thessalonians 1:7 again.] Observe, “while” he was telling his good news, and describing what he had seen at Corinth, the “comfort” with which Titus had left the city, was visibly renewed and intensified, to the added comfort also of Paul himself, who was already greatly cheered by the very presence of Titus with him. “Longing” for me; “Mourning” that you had grieved me, “zeal” to do my wishes.2 Corinthians 7:8.—“Regret” (R.V.) better than “repent” (A. V.). My Epistle.—Viz. 1 Cor. (2 Corinthians 5:1-8).2 Corinthians 7:9.—Sorrow (like joy, or like self-denial) is of no moral worth in itself; only worth anything as a means to an end,—here “to repentance,” Asceticism makes sorrow and self-mortification to be ends, of worth in themselves. Receive damage.—“Suffer loss” (R.V.); i.e. “Had their sorrow been without result, it would have been an injury, a small and under-signed one, caused to them by Paul. God designed [?] their sorrow to be a means of blessing, so that not even in the least degree they might receive injury from the Apostle.” (Beet.)2 Corinthians 7:10.—Choose between (1) “Repentance,” and (2) “Salvation,” “not to be regretted” The play upon the word and thought turns the balance in favour of (1). Observe, “the world” can share in sorrow; God cannot sorrow. Hence “the sorrow of the world”; but “sorrow according to (the mind of) God.”2 Corinthians 7:11. “This … thing, viz., that ye sorrowed,” etc.; “carefulness” not now so good a word as “earnest care” (R.V.); “vehement desire” same word as “earnest desire” (2 Corinthians 7:7); both give way to “longing” (R.V.). “Carefulness” is expounded in the six following particulars (as in Conybeare and Howson): “What eagerness to clear yourselves from blame, what indignation (against the offender), what fear (of the wrath of God), what longing (for restoration to Paul’s approval and love), what zeal (on behalf of right and against wrong), what punishment of wrong.” Somewhat differently, Stanley draws out a “conflict of feelings”: “Self-defence (for their sin), self-accusation (against it), fear (of Paul’s arrival), longing (for it), zeal (against the offender), punishment (of his sin).” More briefly Farrar: “Self-defence and indignation against wrong, and a fear and yearning toward me, and zeal for God, and punishment of the offender.” Surely not (as some) that they had—even a majority of them—been pure all along in this matter; else his strictures were undeserved, or his informants had overstated the facts. Surely rather, approved themselves—manifestly showed themselves—to be now clear in the matter of the incestuous person.2 Corinthians 7:12. His cause, etc.—Viz. the father of the offender (1 Corinthians 5:1). Cf. again, the many concurrent, consistent motives in chap. 2. See how one object out of many is stated so strongly as to seem the only object, and also how the conception of an object indirectly secured runs into that of an object distinctly contemplated. (Cf. Winer, Grammar, on ἵνα, Part III., § liii., 6.) Observe the change in R.V., on account of the reading which makes the first and second personal pronoun change places. For (1) the R.V. is the recurrence of the word in 2 Corinthians 7:11; for (2) the A. V., the greater simplicity of sense; and “unto you” is in (2) superfluous, unless with some far-fetched idea that he desired to show to the Corinthians their truer, better selves qua their feelings toward him.2 Corinthians 7:15.—Cf. their reception of Titus with that which Paul deprecated in the case of Timothy (1 Corinthians 16:10).2 Corinthians 7:16. I have confidence.—Meaning not, “I trust in you,” but, “I am now entirely reassured about you.” .—2 Corinthians 7:11. 2 Corinthians 7:1 really belongs by all right to the preceding chapter, and in any continuous exposition should be taken along with it. There is no Divine inspiration about the division of the Bible into chapters and verses. Indeed, there seems sometimes to have been a very sudden failure of human “inspiration” about the apportionment of the matter into such sections. 1 Corinthians 11:1 plainly belongs to chap. 10; the new paragraph before us as plainly commences at 2 Corinthians 7:2. This verse is just a summary conclusion drawn from several Old Testament promises to Solomon and to Israel, in which Paul, taught by the guiding and illuminating Spirit of God, sees promises for every man who has become a son of God by his faith in Christ Jesus,—every man of the spiritual Israel. 2. The gist of these promises is that men may be admitted into the Favour, the Family, the Fellowship, of God. “I will be their God; they … My people.” “I … their Father; they My sons and daughters.” “I will be to them an indwelling God; they shall be, soul and body, a temple for Me.” Dominion and defence on God’s side; obedience and reverence and love on man’s side. Indeed, love on both sides; fatherly on this, filial on that. Then comes the indwelling, bringing illumination, purity, and glory. 3. And as Paul remembers what these Corinthians had been, his heart is kindled and glows within him, as promise after promise rises to his view and is dictated to his amanuensis. He found them without God, almost at the farthest remove from Him of all the heathen world. Yet, “I will be their God; they shall be My people.” A few years before he had found them utterly unholy; unlike, and hateful to, a holy God. Yet here is an offer: “I will be a Father to them; they, the wretched and vile, shall be My—My—sons and daughters.” Their hearts had been the temples of indwelling devilry; they should become the shrines of indwelling Deity. 4. “Having therefore these promises,” etc. [Illustrate by the advertisements of unclaimed dividends; of articles found for which owners are wanted; the tempting lists of heirs wanted for unclaimed estates. So] shall these promises, these so great blessings, such fellowship with God, lie unapplied for, unclaimed, unappropriated? Shall the “sons of God” live beggars and in want, when all this is open, and “on offer”? 5. Only, all “filthiness of flesh and spirit must be put away.” [This link of thought lies condensed into the one word “for,” in 1 Peter 1:16, where God’s holiness is the foundation reason for the holiness of His people. The “for” may be read: (1) Vindicate your sonship; show the family likeness, the likeness to your Father. “Ye shall be, … because I am.” (2) “Let us have fellowship. I want it; your heart needs it. But there can be none unless ye are holy “for I am holy.” (3) “Do not force Me to withdraw from the fellowship. Put away sin, or I must. Ye shall be, … for I am,” etc.] 6. “Flesh” and “spirit” is only a quasi-popular statement of an all-inclusive range of requirement. Perhaps, if any line of division is to be traced, it will be this: There are sins which depend upon a bodily organisation for their occasion and possibility, whereas there are many forms of sin which could as easily be, and actually are, committed by devils and the disembodied spirits of the lost.] Sorrow upon Sorrow; Comfort upon Comfort (2 Corinthians 7:2-7; 2 Corinthians 7:13-16). I. Sorrow upon sorrow.— 1. An apostle is himself “in heaviness through manifold temptations” (James 1:2). No man certainly had a richer Christian life than he. No man understood more fully than Paul how “the peace of God—passing understanding—could guard the heart and the thoughts, through Christ Jesus” (Philippians 4:7). No man more fully accepted and embraced the truth that “All things work together for good.” Surely no man was more entirely lifted above all self-centering of life than he who said, “Neither count I my life dear unto me,” etc. (Acts 20:24). Yet he is deeply “moved” by the experiences of these painful months. This Second Epistle is an itinerary, where every step of the way is connected with trouble. This Apostolic sower goes forth into the field of the world, with his seed basket of precious seed, weeping every step of the way he just now takes. Many adversaries at Ephesus; trouble there until he despaired of life (chap, i.); himself going about for weeks a man as good as sentenced to death, his life seeming to be worth no longer purchase than that of a condemned criminal; perhaps in poor health through excessive anxiety about his Corinthian Church, certainly greatly distressed about the news he has received of the condition of that Church. And now he has made for himself a new anxiety, by sending his sharp letter of rebuke and disciplinary instruction, the nature of the reception of which is a very uncertain matter indeed. His departure from Ephesus has been precipitated by the riot of Demetrius and the guild of silversmiths, though he had intended in any case soon to finish his work at Ephesus (1 Corinthians 16:8); at Troas he is so distressed about Corinth, and at not meeting Titus there with news from that city, that, restless in spirit, he cannot settle down to work, but with an anxious heart hurries across to Macedonia. And now even Macedonia is no asylum. There is no rest for his flesh there. “Fightings without, fears within.” Beset and burdened, he has almost come to the end of all strength. He is only just “not destroyed” (2 Corinthians 4:9). And to any man of sensitive honour, such suspicions or accusations as are suggested in 2 Corinthians 7:1 will not be the least heavy burden. True his own conscience does not accuse him; before God he is clear; his reputation may be left with God. Yet it were folly to attempt not to feel such charges, unwelcome addition as they are to the distresses of the time. 2. Such a sample case is serviceable as a standard of the possibilities of Christian experience, for the comfort of many distressed children of God. Distressed most of all by the fear that their “heaviness” is dishonouring to God’s grace and its keeping and sustaining power; afraid that they are grieving the Spirit of God by not so “rejoicing evermore” that, though perhaps sorrow be accumulated upon their head and heart, or though circumstances be such as to put faith and endurance to an uttermost test, or though they be alone, friendless, misunderstood by those who ought to know them and respect or love them, they are not lifted up to a level of insensibility to, of inaccessibility to, such “natural” considerations and feelings. “Ought they not to feel nothing?” they ask. Well, at any rate there was no such Stoical indifference in Paul; his was no American Indian insensibility to torture; no statuesque impassiveness, no matter what happened, blow heat, blow cold, be it sunshine or storm. Paul felt—felt keenly—with distressing, and almost killing, intensity; and showed it too. His heart hungered for human sympathy. The days seemed terribly long till Titus came! “Ought not a Christian man to be able to disregard all human opinion, whether censure or praise; to care nothing whether men understand him or not, so long as the Master smiles upon him?” At all events, Paul was no such cast-iron, machine-made man with a merely mechanical heart, to which everything was simply a matter of indifference, and which, with unaffected regularity, went rigorously on with its beating, as the man might do with his work. The possibilities of grace are unspeakably large. The peace of God might “keep” us, with a power too seldom even apprehended by the people of God. Most of them set the standard too low, and hope for too little; and they live lower than even their low standard, and on a more narrow scale than even their meagre hopes. Yet exaggerated expectations are an evil and a mischief. Grace is above nature, and lifts nature up gloriously; but it works through nature. It does not dehumanise the saint. Neither Paul, nor Paul’s Divine Master, was indifferent to pain. Nor does God expect His people not to feel. He is entirely reasonable (to use a human word) in what He expects from them. Heaviness is one thing; darkness is another. The lowliest child of God need never come into darkness. “He that followeth Me shall not walk in darkness.” An apostle may be in heaviness. And no fulness of gifts or grace will, or need be expected to, exempt a man from feeling and smarting and sorrowing. [All will be bright and warm and “tight” within, yet the storm that howls around the house and thunders against the barred door and tightly closed shutters will not be a matter of indifference when its mighty force makes the very house tremble to its foundations, until more than a passing fear visits the heart of those who cheer themselves with its fire and light, lest their very shelter should after all fall about their ears. And if “fears within” seem to make it hard to keep the fire blazing and the lamp burning!] The storm will indeed not disturb the deepest depths of “the peace of God,” but its “surface” commotion may go far down. There will be a holy of holies of peace and security within a Paul, into which no foot of distressing circumstance shall ever intrude; but all the outer courts of the temple of the humanity may, for a while, be in possession of an overwhelming mob of anxious, distressing thoughts. 3. Yet there is a limit beyond which these shall not pass. [Weights may be heaped upon the strong steel spiral spring until it snaps, or at least until its elasticity is gone, and until there is no resilient power left when the pressure is removed.] “Sorrow upon sorrow,” but there is a ne plus ultra. [Cf. Philippians 2:27 for a beautiful case in point.] All but up to the breaking-point, but never beyond it. “My feet had well nigh slipped;” well nigh, no more. The night may darken, and darken, and darken; bad in Ephesus, no better in Troas; no relief in Macedonia. But the light comes at last; Titus comes, for one thing. There is always a daybreak to a man of God (Psalms 112:4). They who wait, even “out of the depths,” watching “as they who watch for the morning,” watch for what is certain to come. An apostle, as well as many a humbler member of the great Church of Christ, may be brought, pushed, driven, to “man’s extremity.” But never beyond! As we see here. II. Comfort upon comfort.— 1. The Lord of Paul’s life knew the limit of the endurance of His servant. He knew him no Stoic, but keenly sensitive; he saw him on the rack in his anxiety about Corinth; he understood the hungry longing for friendship, and the not unworthy desire for the favourable judgment of the Corinthians themselves (2 Corinthians 7:2). Titus came; even to have him back was comfort; Paul’s affectionate nature made him greatly dependent upon human friendships. Then Titus brought good news; the strain of these long weeks upon Paul’s spirit was off, the tension was relaxed, in a moment. In the reaction and revulsion of feeling, he is overflowing with an exuberant sense of relief, of joy about Corinth, of affection for his people there; indeed, he is proud of them! (2 Corinthians 7:3-4). Not that the surrounding “tribulation” is any less, or less real; but he is “exceeding joyful in the midst of it.” Nor is this all. Whilst Titus is telling him the good news,—how well himself had been received as representing Paul, how they “longed” to see Paul also, how deep had been the “mourning” over wrong-doing, whose aggravated evil, and their own complicity with which, they had hardly appreciated until Paul’s stern letter gave them an “outside” view of it (2 Corinthians 7:7),—his face glows whilst he “recalls” it (2 Corinthians 7:16); it gives him renewed “comfort” to remember and to tell of the “comfort” he had received at Corinth. And it is comfort—added comfort—to Paul to see Titus so gladdened. “He rejoices with him that doth rejoice” (2 Corinthians 7:12). Yet more, all his misgivings and fears about Corinth are gone. He is entirely reassured about them (2 Corinthians 7:16). Now he only wants one thing more, and “his joy will be full”: will the Corinthians not open their hearts to make him room? Love lives and makes its home in other hearts. And we may believe that the “God of all comfort” did not deny His hard-pressed servant even this. 2. “Sorrow upon sorrow; comfort upon comfort;” that is always God’s rule, and the latter half of it obtains as certainly and as universally as the former. Need and supply always are kept at the same level. There is neither sense nor faith in a pessimist view of the world or of one’s own life. And the measure of the comfort is no stinted or meagre one. “I am exceedingly joyful.” “My cup runneth over.” God’s rule for man’s dealing with man is what has first of all been His own rule in dealing with man: “Good measure, pressed down, running over” is dealt into the bosom (Luke 6:38). There is also neither sense nor grace in clinging to the memory of sorrow. “Thou shalt remember thy misery as waters that have passed away” (Job 11:16). But when the flood has subsided there is no need to nurse the sorrow of the days of inundation. Be natural. Be thankful for the comfort. [Archbishop Trench’s poem, in Appended Note, may be useful.] 3. The capacity for keen sorrow like this of Paul is the price to be paid—the penalty—of a finely made humanity. Yet they need not be envied who pass through life incapable of woe; to whom nothing seems greatly to matter. They have their price to pay too; they are incapable of the comfort upon comfort. The very avenues which permit the assault and entrance of invading pain give access also to the relieving forces which bring God’s comfort. 4. The heart full of Christ, and that loves His appearing, will catch at the suggestion of the word “parousia,” used by Paul in regard to Titus’s arrival (2 Corinthians 7:6). As Paul longed for Titus, as there are days coming when, as never till then, even in the days of sharpest, darkest tribulation, the hearts of the faithful Church shall look longingly for the coming of Jesus. [2 Thessalonians 2:6-7 has the “tribulation” and the “rest” of this passage. And—it may be only a coincidence—this passage was written from Macedonia, perhaps from Thessalonica itself.] The night will have worn away until the “third watch” (Luke 12:38); the servants listen with strained eagerness for any sound of His approach. For, strangely, the sub-final times are not by any means times of faith and of favour for the Church, but of persecution and of daring blasphemy against “all that is called God or is worshipped.” Never so dark a night for the Church as that which is broken in upon by the sudden, lightning-quick (Matthew 24:27), flashing, blinding glory of the Dawn of His Appearing and Presence. Sorrow upon sorrow until that moment. The few faithful ones can hardly hold their footing amidst the rushing flood of persecution and unbelief and distress. But in a moment, more welcome than Titus to the strained heart of Paul, He comes, and “God, who comforteth them that are cast down,” shall give “rest.” The crisis is then for ever past; the tension is eternally removed; the “fightings” cease; the “fears” are swallowed up in “exceeding joy.” And may a loving fancy venture to carry the parallel so far as to sketch out moments of happy, privileged intercourse, which shall repeat the joy which Paul caught from Titus’ face so full of comfort? Any hours of converse, when the face of the servants shall light up with new comfort, as they hear and see the Master’s own complacent satisfaction in the remembrance of the welcome given Him, by the few faithful ones who were waiting for Him amidst a world of unfaithful or revolted ones? This, however, is for the reverently imaginative heart, rather than for the preacher. .—2 Corinthians 7:8-12 The Purification of a Church.—This is accomplished— I. By Paul’s disciplinary action. II. By a thorough Church repentance. I. 1. It was the sharp, stinging stimulant, applied not from any love of giving pain, but to arouse the sluggish Church life and Church conscience into healthier activity. Which is exactly the purpose of all the chastening of God. All pain which He now sends is disciplinary, and, if it may be, reformatory. By-and-by pain shall be—not vindictive, but—calm, righteous, simple execution of penalty and sentence, upon persistent, impenitent violators of law. Paul’s action had in it the parental pain of giving pain to those who, even in their wrong-doing, are beloved (2 Corinthians 7:8). Touchingly natural is this confession of Paul that, after his letter had been despatched he could have wished he had not despatched it. Like the heart of God [wo might say that Paul’s writing, its motive, its result, were, like the Corinthian sorrow, “after the mind of God” (κατὰΘεόν)], in its measure did his heart yearn over Corinth. If less of pain, if words less severe, might have served the purpose, how gladly would he have taken the tenderer course, and abated his paternal sharpness! [“God loved the world” (John 3:16); where it should be remembered how “the world” has always an ethical colouring in John’s writings. It is not merely the human race in its entirety which God is said to have loved, but the “worldly” world, as John and Paul have taught us to speak. In its worldliness, and in its antagonism to God, He nevertheless “loved” it.] Paul loved Corinth, even when he was threatening “a rod,” and the exercise of his powers of miraculous punishment. 2. When Paul’s letter had served its immediate turn, its usefulness was not exhausted. Hear what Paul saith to Corinth; hear what Christ saith to Ephesus and the rest; and, in all this, “hear what the Spirit saith to the Churches” (Revelation 2, 3). The written Word is the admonitory, didactic, comforting, stimulant, disciplinary letter to the larger Church, of every land and of all time. 3. A conjoint motive appears. “Not for his cause,” etc. It seems narrower, personal; but it is not an unworthy one. The letter would make it “appear” clearly, even to the most perverse and factious Corinthian who said, “I am of Cephas,” that although Paul had been a long time away from them, his heart was unchanged, his interest in them had not diminished, his “care for them” was still real, and was felt as a real burden of obligation lying upon him. For he bore the obligation to care for them as “in the sight of God.” Whether they gave it recognition or not, God did. Yet he was not above desiring that it should be recognised by them also. Why not? It would be happier for his own sake if he thought that they understood his disciplinary sternness. And the letter would have a greater chance of accomplishing its object, if it were seen to come from a heart which cared for them even in the fact of writing it. [Even the most narrowly restrictive commands of God are “for our good alway” (Deuteronomy 6:24). They are proofs of His “care for us.”] Had he no thought for the wrong-doer as well as for the suffering father-in-law? Yes; but an act is never in man [it is in an animal, or in a child hardly come to a stage beyond that of mere impulse] the result of one single, direct, uncombined motive; it is, speaking in mathematical phrase, the resultant of many motives. It is, further, in the inscrutable mystery of the co-working of the two free volitions, the human and the Divine, always full of the purpose and will of God. Sometimes the one motive may, with perfect truth, be so insisted upon, that for the time it eclipses or casts out any other; or the Divinely secured result may be so fully in view, that the human motive and purpose may sink out of sight in comparison. 4. “Corporations have no conscience;” so it is said, in half pleasantry. But the Church corporate has, and a responsibility, and it may have a corporate sin in that it tolerates sin in its midst, and may fall into a corporate indifference on all moral questions. The letter of Paul, the written Word of God, stands out an objective standard of unalterable force, an abiding rebuke or an awakening cry, and an abiding witness to the care which cannot simply or indifferently look on while good is slackening in its hatred toward evil, or is itself becoming corrupted. The sharp surgery of the excising-knife which cuts off Ananias and Sapphira, is God’s care for His Church, that it should be holy, and should share and keep His own sensitiveness to sin. II. A Church repentance—the disciplinary action of a Church upon itself.— 1. A very healthy and successful issue. The physician succeeds best when he can awaken or stimulate the recuperative force of the body. That Church life is healthiest which “cleanses itself from all filthiness” that may have gathered around its corporate life, and which indeed cannot bear persons or things that are evil (Revelation 2:2). The true discipline of the Church is that which grows out of and expresses the revolt of the Church conscience against evil. [The analogy between this and personal holiness is obvious and close. The healthiest holiness is the expression of a healthy moral life; personal holiness also may need the stimulus or the rebuke from the outside.] No discipline will long survive the weakening or decay of this. Discipline, like any other legislation, cannot be carried out far in advance of public opinion. The officials of a Church are but the pre-eminent exponents of its life. They lead the Church, indeed, or should lead it; but they are of it, and their disciplinary zeal will never far outrun the disciplinary life of the whole Church. The responsibility lies, then, upon each single member of a Church, to be himself so spiritual, and to keep himself in such a holy sensitiveness to sin, that his contribution to the collective moral standard is of the very highest. Corporate holiness is co-operative personal holiness. Each member is thus the guardian of the purity of the whole. That body is safest in the presence of infection, of which each component unit is in fulness of vigour and health. Paul’s Epistle is, under God, a sharp tonic which, happily, arouses “carefulness” in this Corinthian Christian body. 2. The details of the various phrases used by Paul are given in the Critical Notes, above. The interpretation of some, as may be seen, is variously given by different readers of the Epistle. But the general drift is clear, and follows closely the lines of the repentance of an individual sinner. There is the same awakening of “earnest care,” where there has been a mortal torpor, or indeed a criminal indifference. This awakened feeling is translated into prompt and decisive action, instead of being allowed to spend itself in mere “confessions,” and in deprecations of Divine wrath; and, above all, the sorrow is “after God.” There is “a sorrow of the world.” The shame of sin before men is lamented; the sin itself before God is eclipsed by the shame; there is no real sense of sin. The consequences, rather than the evil character, of the act, are the only matter of regret. The world’s sorrow turns away from God and the very thought of Him, and may easily harden either into a more hopeless indifference than before, or into a Judas-like despair; the true, “godly” affection turns the soul, with contrition, with confession, with appeal, with hope, to God. 3. And there is a Church “salvation.” And for a Church as for the individual, there is no “salvation” where there has been no practical repentance. Joshua lay prostrate, in his grief that Israel seemed weak, and that six-and-thirty slain men of Israel lay on the steep path down from the gate of Ai. The answer of Jehovah came with startling definiteness: “Get thee up; wherefore art thou fallen upon thy face? Israel hath sinned” (Joshua 7:10). There are times when it is of no use to go on confessing, or to go on praying; when the first thing is to go and seek out sin and to cut off the offender. If the Church is to be “saved,” then the self-acting discipline of a life of real, intense, corporate godliness must be vigorously at work, whether under the stimulus of a Paul or not, and making a thorough “Church repentance.” 2 Corinthians 7:1. Promises, Purity, Perfection. I. God’s requirement in order to fellowship. II. Our encouragement in seeking to fulfil it. I. “Cleanse yourselves; perfect holiness.”—Put away the sins which are in plain contradiction to God’s will; put away the sin which is in plain contradiction to His nature. A. 1. The principle of this, and the necessity of this, are seen in earthly friendships.—Two cannot walk together unless they be so far agreed that each abstains from what he knows will offend the other. There can be no association, no bond, where each disregards the feelings of the other, and does not hesitate to offend his prejudices; and, much more, if his practice traverse some of the principles dearest to his convictions. Indeed, if the connection is to be at all close and to be lasting, there must not only be this reciprocal self-denial; there will also need to be some similarity of tastes, opinions, habits, character. The two friends must not be copies of each other. The helpfulness of friendship lies just there, that each contributes something to the character of the other. Yet there must be so much in common that neither shall have to say, “I cannot make a friend of that man. His habits and tastes and whole disposition are an offence to me.” 2. All this holds as between men and God.—Sins are the negative of His holy law; sin is the negative of the holiness of His nature. God and sin are light and darkness. To hold fast to worldly or sinful pleasures or associates, and to hope to be ranged amongst the sons and daughters; to hope to continue the prodigal life in the far country, or even to remain a swineherd and to eat the swinish husks, and yet to hope for the fulness of the complacent love of the Father and for the life of a son in the Father’s home; is impossible on the very face of it. “The friendship of the world is enmity with God” (James 4:4). The words came indeed from that apostle who has the reputation of being the sternest moralist of them all, but they owe nothing to the presumed character of him who writes them; they simply lift up into the higher, the spiritual, region what men feel is inevitable in all human friendships. Everything must be put away which has about it even the suspicion of sin. “Cleanse yourselves.” As he is, the gutter child would never be taken, to put him at the table, amongst the children. With all their pity for his rags and misery, there is not a father or mother who would not shrink from his dirt and rags and depravity. They would insist upon the washing, and the clothing in decent raiment; upon the giving up of the old associates, the slang, the profanity, the pilfering. Not less must be expected of God. Decent people feel such a child vulgar, disgusting; God feels, as we cannot feel, man’s sinful condition abhorrent. To feel less strongly, to abate His rigidity of requirement, would be to be untrue to Himself. 3. The human heart was designed to be a temple; but it cannot be a temple of two Gods jointly. Certainly no Christian heart can be like the private Pantheon of Alexander Severus, a temple of all the gods, including Christ. From the first moment of a man’s seeking Him, and throughout the whole course of his Christian life, God’s sine quβ non is, “All, or not at all.” [The need of all this very patent in Corinth. A city exceedingly profligate in a profligate world. Old habits too strong for many young converts. Converts they were, but the heathen husband, or wife, or friend often led them astray. Thoughtlessly or ignorantly they continued, or fell back into, old habits and practices which entangled them, and compromised great principles; some were indulging in gross sin. Between them in their impurities and complicity with idolatry, and even in their party spirit, and the holy God, there could plainly be no lasting, perfect communion.] The average world of the member of a Christian congregation is widely removed, and for the better, from that of a Corinthian convert; but there are still sins of the flesh and of the spirit to be renounced. The temptation to idolatry in its coarsest forms is gone. The temptation to impurity or gluttony or drunkenness may be slight in power or rare in occurrence, with the members of an average congregation. Yet there is vanity in personal advantages, whether original or acquired; there is the widely inclusive group of sins called in the old Evangelical dialect “softness and needless self-indulgence”; there are sins of eye and tongue. There is the heart’s idolatrous love of the creature—wife, or child, or friend—more than the Creator; there is the worship of man’s favour rather than God’s. Covetousness is a sin far more seriously estimated in the New Testament—in the judgment of God—than in the customary estimate of even Christian judgment; it is utterly unlike that God Who is always giving, Who spared not His costliest, His very Only-begotten, for those who could give Him in return nothing which was not first His gift. There is pride, of all sins the most of the very nature of the devil; and anger; and uncharitableness; and indolence,—all “sins of the spirit” alone. These things, and the like, are defilements of the temple. If the heart be unwilling that these should be cleansed away, then the Holy God cannot consent to enter. If His house has once been “emptied, swept, and garnished,” but these things are again being suffered, or perhaps encouraged, to accumulate, He cannot long remain, or fulfil such promises as are here. 4. “Cleanse yourselves!”—“I cannot.” True, and not true. No native power is in any man, to put away sin; but in all men is something of grace, to work along with, and to work upon. Is the will by grace set upon the cleansing? Then the words mean: “Use the appointed means of cleansing; the fountain is open for sin and for uncleanness.” If the man lying helpless by the side of the pool, desires to plunge in and be healed, then he has a gracious Helper near at hand to enable him. If God has awakened the will, He enables that will. He lays commands upon dead souls, and bids them “Arise,” and “Come forth”; and with the word there goes life to obey. He must give, and does give, the will and the means to cleanse; His grace is in the resolving, and praying, and struggling, and lifelong watchfulness, and self-denial, and self-discipline. But a responsibility for all these is still upon men themselves. “Cleanse yourselves.” B. This is only the negative requirement. There is a positive one. “Perfecting holiness.”— 1. The gutter child not only consents to, and assists in, the stripping off of the old clothes, and the laying aside of the old street habits and talk and play and friendships, if he is to be adopted even into the service of the kitchen, and much more into the sonship of the drawing-room, but more is required of him. If he is to be a friend or a son, if there is to be any real communion between him and his adoptive parents, then day after day he must cultivate his mind, at least up to their standard; he must submit to, and co-operate in, a training of manners and habits; he must study the ways of those about him, until he loses all the low, mean mind of the street Arab, and becomes so thoroughly one of the new circle, that his very instincts are theirs. He must aim at copying the very mind of those who have made him their son. 2. Paul brings out man’s part in the sanctification of life. In the progress of a Christian man’s sanctification are two closely related, but perfectly distinct, elements—the creation of holiness, and the cultivation of holiness. The first God alone can effect; in the second man works together with God [though never without Him] under His guidance and relying on His help. The plant is not created full-grown. God never creates at a stroke the result of growth of character. He creates the seed in nature; He puts into it the inscrutably mysterious thing, Life. He creates what man must cultivate. Man must clear away weeds and give full play to all the genial influences of air and sun and rain upon the soil; man must guard the growing seed from injury, and must feed the plant, till it expand into full beauty of flower and fruit. The work of moral renewal is all wrought on the lines of the ordinary, natural laws of mind. To shed abroad in our hearts a sense of His love to us (Romans 5:5) is directly and alone His. It is in accordance with the most ordinary and natural “law” that this should call forth in us an answering love to Himself (1 John 4:19). Only He can create the sense of His love to us. But the answering love which “naturally” springs up within us, is the seed-motive, and the seed-power, out of which may grow all the many-sided holiness of principle and of practice. It is man’s business, then, to tend and cultivate this new and precious germ. He must pray for “the fruitful rain from heaven”; he must cleanse away all the choking weeds of habit or practice which, as matter of experiment or observation or instruction, he learns, do actually hinder the growth of this germ-like love, and help to keep his holiness a dwarfed and stunted thing. He must do his part to get a “perfected” plant. 3. God’s creation of love, and of perfected love, may be the work of a moment.—The gracious communication of the fact of His own, and man’s answering, grateful, love, may be a graciously “short work,” in most perfect accord with the normal working of mind and heart. Man’s cultivation of this love and its fruit will fill a lifetime. One of the earliest and most bitter lessons of a soul, full of its “first love” and striving to live like Christ the pattern, is to find that it is full of things which hinder the attainment of even its own standard of a holy life. The painter tries to copy the Face he loves, but at first has not the perfect mastery of brush and materials and technique, and he cannot embody upon the canvas what in his awakened artist mind he sees clearly enough. And when by-and-by artistic skill is perfected, and he can at once put upon the canvas all he sees, he will not stop there. No; his perception will grow finer; every day he will see more to see; he will find more in his Face—more beauty, new lines of character; there is no reason why he should not go on growing artistically, and go on “perfecting” incessantly the transcript of what he understands with ever more “perfect” insight, and with ever “perfecting” skill can fix in permanent record. So there are many “perfect” stages in this “perfecting” of holiness; there is no ne plus ultra stage of “perfection.” When full consecration on man’s part has been met by full acceptance on God’s part, and “a perfected love” has been given and awakened which “casta out fear” and the very principle of sin (1 John 4:18), the work is not by any means done. The man has got rid of all within that hindered the copying of the Divine Pattern; the power is coming, has come, to put into life all he sees in his Bible and his Christ. But every day will still have its external hindrances; every day, moreover, will bring new insight into duty, new sensibility of conscience to sin, new views of God’s will. And all these new discoveries must be put in; “perfecting” in the practical living what in germ God “perfected” in principle in the heart. It is one stage of “perfection” when the plant no longer grows a dwarfed and stunted thing, but healthy, symmetrical, beautiful, not a thwarted growth about it. There is still open an ever perfecting perfection year after year, of larger growth and more abundant fruitfulness; “your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life” (Romans 6:22). The adopted gutter lad’s new life will from the first spring out of his abounding grateful love to his new parent. So long as the old life has any charm for him, it will be hard work to bring himself to the new, though the love of his benefactor will be a perpetually operative force and assistance. Yet, when the love of the old life is gone, the work is not done; the training and the educating may go on without end, though more easily than before. The “perfecting” is never done. 4. Hence learn what in this business is the place of: “In the fear of the Lord.” It would be a long time before the lad would feel the confident security of a born son; for a long time he would always remember his true origin, and the wide interval that once was between his new parents and himself. He is in their home by mere favour; unworthy conduct or disobedience might in a moment justly forfeit all. His sense of obligation would be a strong motive to obedience; and it might be an almost tremulous sense. The remembrance of the true footing on which he stands in the house, would be a check upon presumption and carelessness in fulfilling the wish of the benefactors to whom he owes so much. The little parable needs no explanation. It is the “reverence and godly fear” with which His people “serve God acceptably” (Hebrews 12:28). It is the fear in which they “perfect their holiness.” There is no such reverent love as “perfect love.” II. Encouragements.—If the fear is to be the guard, and even upon occasion the spur, the promises are to be a lure. Paul does not so much feel, “If we do not cleanse ourselves, we shall have no fellowship here or hereafter,” as, “Here is an honour for sinners. Our heart should leap at the very thought of being Sons and Temples of the living God.” 1. In order to claim such promises.—We cannot claim them without seeking to cleanse ourselves. 2. Stimulated by such honour.—We cannot, like Esther, win any love or favour by putting on any finest apparel of our own. But at least we should seek to retain favour by putting on the “best robe” our Father has given us. [Cf. 1 John 3:3; though this strictly is in view of the Coming of Christ.] 3. Staying our hearts on such promises.—“We can, then, be clean; we can, then, perfect holiness in His fear.” It is hard to think it, if men look at the world’s sin, environing so closely; if they look at the average success, or failure, of other Christian men; if they remember how inadequately all their own effort and vowing and praying and determining have ended in the past; if they see how little others, even the most successful, sometimes hope for. They despond and despair. But let them look at Him and listen to His promises. He does not bid us climb to any inaccessible height if He calls at all. Long fight? Wearisome climb? Perhaps; but He does not simply sit on high and watch: “Come on, higher yet; I will receive you!” No; but at every point 4. He gives help in obeying, in climbing, in cleansing ourselves, in perfecting holiness.—[Prodigal lad in America not only hears from his father in England, “I will receive you; come home,” but the father sends the passage money, that he may respond to the invitation.] 2 Corinthians 7:10. Sorrow, Repentance, Salvation.—A quite general maxim, interjected into, growing out of, a special discussion. One of the standing formul� of the philosophy of religion. I. Closely connected, but not by any means identical.—Very vital and of practical necessity to keep them distinct. Deeply stirred feeling is by no means always part of, or a preliminary to, repentance, though true repentance always begins in “godly sorrow.” Even “godly sorrow” is not “salvation.” [There has always been preached in the Christian Church an “only believe” pattern of Gospel. Very popular often, and often very useful. It cannot be, therefore, wholly a false Gospel. But it is an imperfect one. It is the exaggeration, the unbalanced presentation, of a truth. It is right, and has its strength, here. The passage from condemnation to glory is through repentance to faith, and from faith, through all holiness of heart and life, to heaven. Faith which saves, thus stands guarded on the one hand by repentance, and on the other by holiness. There is no saving faith where there has been no sense of sin; there is no saving faith where a holy life does not grow out of “believing.” But the repentance which prepares for faith does not save. The holiness which is the fruit of faith does not save. The penitent man is saved when he believes, and not till then. The holiest man living is saved as a sinner believing in Christ, and only as a believer. The real penitent may be cheered by “Only believe.” The holiest man needs cautioning, “Only by believing.” “Only believe” is no message for the man who feels no “godly sorrow”; nor for the careless, or inconsistent, man who calls himself a Christian, but who is presuming on a past faith. “Only believe” is no medicine to be dealt out indiscriminately at every stage of spiritual sickness or spiritual recovery, valuable and exactly suitable as it is at a particular point. Similarly,] without ever being formulated into a distinct and express type of theology or preaching, there is an “only repent” Gospel. The natural heart always tends to find, and claim, merit in any right doing or right feeling. It seems natural to rest and to hope in the “godly sorrow.” But it is “unto salvation,” and only “unto.” It works towards it. It leads a man towards it. It need not, and does not always, lead into it. It may, it is likely to, it is meant to, issue in his salvation; but that is all. Examine in more detail— II. Godly sorrow.—Literally “sorrow according to God”; in contrast with the “sorrow of the world.” [Dean Vaughan suggested, at a Greek Testament lecture, me pr�sente, H. J. F.,] “God-wise, God-wrought, God-ward”; after the mind of God; after the manner of God; leading towards God. 1. God’s way of looking at sin, at everything, is different from the world’s way; the standard, the standpoint, are different. God hates sin for its own sake; the world hates, is angry at, mourns over, its consequences. Accordingly “godly”—“godwise”—“sorrow” sees sin with God’s eyes, measures by His standard, learns to hate with His heart; and this, even though sin be pleasant, or pay well, or be trivial, or “done by everybody.” “Godly sorrow” makes a man grieve that he has sinned; the world, that sin has brought suffering. Even the abandonment of a sin is on different lines: this sorrow “according to” God’s mind and heart loathes sin, and leaves it because it is sin; the sorrow of the world fears hell and the penalty of holding on in an evil way, and only gives up a sin as a captain may alter his course, and turn his vessel’s head from a prize which he cannot capture, and which he may only attack or continue to pursue, to his own damage and perhaps destruction. 2. The difference begins here: it is God-wrought. Men take up some specially characterised piece of work, and say, “That is in So-and-so’s manner.” Or, “That shows the hand of a master workman.” Or, “That speaks of great wealth of resource and invention.” So, to look at a sample-case of “godly sorrow,” so widely differenced from mere sorrow at the results of sin—to note its pattern (so to speak), its depth and thoroughness and abundant measure—is to say, “That shows the hand of God. That is His characteristic method and manner.” A frivolous nature made serious; a worldling made to know the sin of mere worldliness; stolid indifference stirred to its depths with shame and fear; a hardened heart suddenly dissolving into tears of uncontrollable grief; a proud man openly bowing in confession that he is “a great sinner”; the high walls of pride of self, which have been the despair of preacher or godly friend, falling flat,—all the marvels of moral change, all the variants upon the one theme, “Repentance,” make an observer say, “Only God’s power could have done that! That sorrow is after God’s manner of working!” Tell a man the right. Will he see himself wrong? Not at all of necessity. Conscience will find fifty “refuges of lies” [i.e. refuges which are lies, and delusions to the sinner himself (Isaiah 28:15; Isaiah 28:17)], to be shelters from condemnation. The hard heart will not feel, or “fires up” at reproof. The subterfuges of conscience, the blindness and perversity of the judgment, defeat the human rebuke. Suddenly the veil is torn away which hid the man from himself. “Secret faults,” so “secret” that they eluded the notice even of the man’s own heart (Psalms 19:12), are set in the condemning light of the man’s own awakened judgment. He who could not be awakened by the roughest shake or the loudest appeal, now is awake at a whisper; but it is a whisper of the voice of God’s convincing Spirit. God has done it! “That is God at work!” 3. All through, then, this sorrow is God-ward. God is working to bring the soul to Himself. It is all “God, God, God” now. “I have broken God’s law; I have sinned against God’s love. What man thinks, or will do, is nothing. What will God think?” And the prodigal, who has “come to himself,” next returns to his Father. [See this possession of the mind with the thought of God and God’s holy displeasure in Psalms 51:4 : “Against Thee, Thee only, have I sinned, and done this evil in Thy sight!” Had he not sinned, and that grievously, against the poor murdered Uriah? Or against Bathsheba herself? For what greater sin can man do against man than to tempt him to sin, and lead him into its committal? Or against his people? For it is a grave sin against the well-being of a nation when its very rulers do evil, with all the teaching power of their position and its great influence. Yes. But the godly sorrow has brought David into God’s presence (2 Corinthians 7:11), to God’s feet. He sees God, and hears. He is face to face with God. Man sinks back, is excluded, forgotten. Bathsheba, Uriah, Israel,—these are lost sight of. God fills all the field of vision, and of David’s thought and fear. What man thinks,—that is nothing. What will God do? His sin has shut him up in a terrible isolation, a guilty soul alone with God. “Thee only!” God-ward sorrow.] He returns in some degree of hope. The “sorrow of the world” is oftener “despair.” [We may add to Vaughan’s analysis of the phrase] 4. Intensified by the worthier appreciation of God’s holiness and patience and love. Measured by these standards, sin is exceeding sinful. On the background of these it shows out the more staringly, glaringly evil. “Against Thee!” means against such love as David had received from Jehovah. But especially does (3) approve the sorrow the genuine work of the Spirit of God. It moves God-ward in an active “repentance.” A real repentance is always “repentance towards God” (Acts 21:21), just as conversion is “turning to God” (Acts 26:20). [“Fruits meet for repentance;” “fruit worthy of repentance” (R.V. reading), Matthew 3:8. III. Repentance growing out of this.—[This is not formally theological language. In the accustomed and necessary definitions of systematic theology, “Repentance” includes the “godly sorrow” in the ground it covers. But they may be distinguished.] The tree may be distinguished from the root; the root may be reckoned part of the tree. Paul’s words only distinguish between what the penitent feels and what he does. The godly sorrow is first indeed to awaken, but it runs on side by side with the doing, until it is swept away in the “joy of God’s salvation” (Psalms 51:12). The deeper the sorrow the more active the doing and the undoing. The exposition by Paul of his own term, given in 2 Corinthians 7:11, is the pattern of a corporate, a Church, “repentance.” But the repentance of a Church is traced on the same lines as the repentance of a soul. All feeling, unless it is translated, and that quickly, into action, evaporates, leaving the heart less susceptible, less easily aroused, than before. The new attitude of thought and view and feeling towards sin wants making permanent, wants making the concrete habit of the life. When godly sorrow goes no further than itself, and is not crowned by the salvation which is the designed goal, it will frequently be found that it has been arrested in its growth, and has never been suffered to take shape in the activities which Paul here groups under the word “Repentance.” Penitent souls sometimes lose their godly sorrow, because they will not put away friend, or pleasure, or practice in business, which they see to be evil. The penitent, indeed, has not learned to triumph over heart sin (Romans 7:14-24); that victory belongs to the man who has found salvation. But many a soul loses even the godly sorrow, because it will not “clear” itself from this friendship; or it listens to a plea for keeping that sin; sparing, instead of “revenging upon,” itself; and, indeed, turning away from the light of the leading Spirit, from an uncomfortable misgiving that the road to which He invites, would lead to some very little welcome conclusions in the direction of putting away sin. “Not measure penitence by tears, but by grief. Grief not by sensitive trouble, but by hatred and avoidance of sin.” IV. All this is only “preparing the way of the Lord.—Note the two sequences: “Sorrow to repentance” (2 Corinthians 7:9); “repentance to salvation” (2 Corinthians 7:10). It issued in a corporate, Church salvation, at Corinth. But the formula is general. One gracious operation in the purpose and working of God, who loves to finish His work. [On all these topics we are at the very heart of the whole business of the Gospel and of Redemption. The minute study of this Divine directory of the practice of soul-healing, and the minute study of the ever-varying phases of the one spiritual process in the ten thousand “cases” which come under the notice of the spiritual physicians, have compelled an analysis of the “plan of salvation” which, when exhibited in a bare, tabulated set of results and doctrines, is to many moods and minds very repellent. But the urgency of the proved necessity has compelled an exact analysis of the relation between repentance and faith, and between both and salvation. Paul’s formula is not, nor is intended to be, complete; he does not interject faith between repentance and salvation. [As in Acts 16:31, he said nothing about “repentance.”] His analysis of the process is the dissection of the “living subject” before him in Corinth. The theologian is too often practising his dissection upon (what to him are) dead dicta of a Bible page. Indeed, a living thing is apt to die under the dissecting process. But the whole, co-ordinated teaching of the New Testament agrees with, and gives light to, and receives light from, the experience derived from an infinite variety of co-ordinated and closely studied facts, to make it clear that repentance only brings a soul to the threshold of the city of refuge, within which is “salvation.” The one step which definitely takes a sinner over the threshold and into safety is the act of faith; of penitent faith always, that lays hold of Christ. The whole penitent heart is in the faith that saves. Without, in some sense, a faith that hopes for the mercy of God, repentance is despair, and may be a foretaste of hell itself. A degree of faith in God goes hand in hand with godly sorrow. But the faith that exactly and precisely saves, is that which lays an appropriating, desperately clinging hand on Christ.] 2 Corinthians 7:10. Profitable and Unprofitable Sorrow.— 1. Paul suggests that not only had this Church sorrow done them no harm, but it had done them a service; he had done them a service in causing it (2 Corinthians 7:9). Sorrow is worth nothing in itself. Its value and its moral character are fixed by (1) the origin, and (2) by the issue of it. If God-wrought, and sanctified into a preliminary of salvation, it has been profitable. 2. The world’s unprofitable sorrow.— (1) It plays only on the surface of the matter. It only understands crime. Its balances are not sensitive enough, the reagents of its spiritual chemistry are not efficient enough, to detect and appraise sin. (2) Its thought mounts no higher than man. Shame, vexation, mortification, annoyance at discovery, are often the world’s “repentance.” It tends to make a man careful only to guard against being betrayed into such sins as are liable to be found out. Hence its standard of judgment is my personal convenience, or social convention. [“Bad form” is the unpardonable sin.] 3. The sorrow that is after God.— (1) Sin, as sin, is the trouble. See how in the night of Jacob’s wrestling, as the struggle proceeds, Esau is lost sight of, and the one prayer is, “Tell me Thy Name.” The day breaking brings the danger; no matter, “Let the day break, let Esau come, let him slay, let him take all, I will not let Thee go unless,” etc. (2) It measures by God’s standard, and scourges for what was not condemned at the time, or was only noted to be defended and applauded, but which now starts up, “Sin!” It is as grieved about secret, heart sins, as about overt acts, which nevertheless man might not know, or condemn if he did know. (3) It always leads to the putting away of sin. The people cried, “Jehovah, He is the God!” “Then take the prophets of Baal; let not one escape.” The soul whose repentance is to lead to salvation, must slay every prophet of the Baal-sin which has ousted Jehovah from His place in heart and life. Many a soul’s godly sorrow evaporates, because the heart could not put away some one last thing, and simply turn to God. 4. Repentance unto salvation.— (1) No man is saved because he repents; he is not saved unless he repents. He who excuses himself excludes himself. (2) Repentance is the act of a poor fellow bitten by a fiery serpent in the wilderness, and fallen in his last agony with his back towards the serpent Turn him over so that his glazing eye can look and he be healed. Turning toward God in order to look to His mercy in Christ, that is repentance; just as the “look” was essentially faith. The lame man can move no step of the way to God. God meets him. His Spirit is in the very desire to meet God and to win His peace. That desire is help given by the grace of God in Christ, preparing the soul to make an effort to draw near to God. It is John Baptist coming before Christ. Not always leading up to Christ. Pointing Jesus out, “Behold the Lamb of God,” in order that the soul may go to Him and find rest. John Baptist must precede Christ. Repentance is the Old Testament stage of life, leading up to the New Testament, the Gospel, stage. NOTES2 Corinthians 7:1. Notice carefully that God’s words to Israel in the wilderness and through Isaiah are promises now possessed by Christian believers. For God acts always on the same principles, and therefore His words to one man are valid for all in similar circumstances. Moreover, the Mosaic ritual and the Old Testament history are symbolic of the Christian life. God’s visible presence in the midst of Israel was an outward pattern of His spiritual presence in the hearts of Christians; and the obligations which His presence laid upon Israel [e.g. in even a matter concerning the sanitation of the camp (Deuteronomy 23:13-14)] were a pattern of those resting upon His people now. And when, through the pen of Isaiah, God called the exiles returning from the dominion of idolaters His sons and daughters, He taught plainly that in days to come He would receive as such those whom He rescued from sin. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/phc/ NOTESObserve: 1. 2 Corinthians 8:1 to 2 Corinthians 9:15 is one continuous section, concerned with the completion of the Corinthian contribution to Paul’s great Jerusalem Christian Poor Relief Fund. Mentioned 1 Corinthians 16:1. where see for this Collection generally. 2. The section is characterised by a specialised use of χάρις (= grace, generally, but here also) “gift,” or “bounty,” as in 1 Corinthians 16:3 (2 Corinthians 8:1; 2 Corinthians 8:4; 2 Corinthians 8:6-7; 2 Corinthians 8:19; 2 Corinthians 9:14). In lesser degree also by similar specialisation of εὐλογία (= “blessing,” but here) “bounty” (2 Corinthians 9:5-6), and a like turn given to ἁπλότης (= “simplicity,” “sincerity” [cf. a “single” eye, Matthew 6:22], but here) “liberality” (2 Corinthians 8:2; 2 Corinthians 9:11; 2 Corinthians 9:13). The key to this specialised sense impressed upon the first pair of words is evidently this: What God’s grace is to man, that is the Corinthians’ grace to the poor saints at Jerusalem,—a spontaneous, unearned, free gift, out of a loving heart; man’s grace to his fellow-man is his copy of God’s grace to himself; and, going deeper, such a heart of grace in man is thus expressing its sense of God’s grace in his own case; the human grace has sprung from the blessed effect of God’s grace in the heart. Similarly, as to εὐλογία. (See homiletic exposition.)2 Corinthians 8:1. Do you to wit.—See R.V.; or 1 Corinthians 15:1, or Galatians 1:11, A. V. Cf. the words of the old writs, “Scire facias A. B.,” i.e. “You are to let A. B. know,” etc., “Faire savoir.” Grace.—Obviously in the more usual sense. Macedonian Churches.—From whose midst he was writing. Writing the First Epistle from Ephesus, and many months earlier, perhaps before the Macedonians had even heard of the Fund, he speaks of setting the Galatian Churches to work (1 Corinthians 16:1). We know of Philippi, Ber�a, Thessalonica; there may have been others.2 Corinthians 8:2.—Take the grammar of the sentence as, e.g., A. V. or R.V. Something may be said for taking thus: “That the abounding of their joy is in the very time of their much trial by their afflictions, and the depth of their poverty has abounded,” etc. Trial.—See the same word in Romans 5:4, “experience.” The word wavers between, or includes, the trying and the result of it; the proving and the proof; the “experiment” (2 Corinthians 9:13) and the “experience” acquired by the “experiment.” Here the process, rather than the result arrived at. The “trying” was going on. What the “afflictions” were is unknown; suggestions may be found in Acts 17:5 sqq.; 1 Thessalonians 2:14; 1 Thessalonians 3:2-3; 1 Thessalonians 3:5 (written some years, earlier). Abundance.—Notice this word running through the section (2 Corinthians 8:2; 2 Corinthians 8:7; 2 Corinthians 9:8; 2 Corinthians 9:12). Deep.—“Reaching deep down” (Stanley); “deep-searching” (Speaker’s Commentary). N. B.—“Abundance of … poverty … abound unto riches of liberality” (if verse is so to be construed).2 Corinthians 8:3 Of their own accord.—Beet suggests: Moved by what Paul told them of the Corinthian zeal (2 Corinthians 9:2), though without his laying any injunction on them to do anything similar.2 Corinthians 8:4. Gift.—“Grace.” The Macedonian gift was their “grace” (as above), and was also their opportunity and their method of taking a practical share in the reciprocal fellowship of all believers No need to distinguish between (1) a fellowship with the Corinthians in giving, and (2) a fellowship manifested by the gift between themselves, though Gentile Christians, with the Jewish Christians at Jerusalem. “Fellowship” all round, in widest sense, is here. No new feeling in them (1 Thessalonians 2:14).2 Corinthians 8:5. Not as, etc., but, obviously also, “better than.” Hoped is more than merely “expected.” To us.—Surely not “as travelling companions” (Stanley); meagre, and only true of the elected deputation. “Not money, but [also] themselves; not to men, but [also] to Christ,” and this first. “Their self-surrender to Christ was also a surrender to those whom Christ had set in authority in His Church” (Beet). By the will of God.—As 1 Corinthians 1:1; 2 Corinthians 1:1; a practical recognition of Paul’s authority as an apostle.2 Corinthians 8:6. Insomuch that.—Too subtle to press this to mean a real fulfilment of a Divine design. Not said in First Epistle that Titus had initiated the local Fund at Corinth. [Not named at all in First Epistle.]2 Corinthians 8:7.—There is also “abundance” at Corinth; but how different. Love to us—In 2 Corinthians 7:11 we see this happy effect of the First Epistle. Note the R.V. margin. Grace.—Inclining rather to the meaning of “gift” here. “Abound in your giving also.” Also.—Q. d. “as well as (not the good works of 2 Corinthians 7:11-12, but) in these good points and qualities” just mentioned.2 Corinthians 8:8. By (way of) commandment.—They were in a good mood just now, even toward himself, and had been very obedient to his first letter; but it was very uncertain how far they would bear much “telling” from him. “I don’t order you to do this, but.…” (See under 1 Corinthians 7:6) To prove.—The poor Macedonians have had their “proof” (2 Corinthians 8:2); now here I have a little proof for you! Your love.—That of 2 Corinthians 8:7, primarily, but not only.2 Corinthians 8:9.—Cf. the appeal implied in 2 Corinthians 9:15; a higher basis of appeal than even that of 2 Corinthians 9:8. [ 1. An Article of Faith; 2. A Matter of Experience; 3. A Principle of Action.—J. L.] Observe, “The Grace of … Christ.” Not, as more often, “of God” Romans 5:15 is a remarkable expository illustration; Galatians 1:6 [and 2 Corinthians 8:4] should be looked at. [Cf. Colossians 3:13, even with the variant reading, where forgiveness is attributed directly to Christ. So also, whilst the Father gave Him, the Son “gave Himself” (Titus 2:14; Ephesians 5:25; 1 Timothy 2:6).] Poor.—Not merely in His human circumstances, as dependent during His three years ministry upon charitable gifts, but in the far larger sense of Php 2:6-8. Therefore also “became poor” is better than “was poor.” [Stanley refers to Milman, Lat. Christ, Book XII., chap. vi, for the wonderful growth, at the beginning of fourteenth century, of the Mendicant Orders, indirectly, from this verse; and, more directly, of the rule and life of Francis of Assisi, earlier.]2 Corinthians 8:10. Advice.—R.V. is truer, “judgment”; 1 Corinthians 7:25. This is expedient.—Viz. (not “that I do not command but rather give my judgment,” but) that they “should abound,” etc. (2 Corinthians 8:7). Note, their precedence in collecting, and their precedence in thinking of such a collection: “ye were the first to” (R.V.). The Galatians were before them only in the particular point of adopting the method of weekly offerings (1 Corinthians 16:1).2 Corinthians 8:11.—As R.V.; also emphasise “now” in contrast to “a year ago.”2 Corinthians 8:12.—See special Homily.2 Corinthians 8:13.—“God is just in His requirement; so am I.” Too narrow to make this only mean: “I do not desire at your expense to relieve the Macedonian Churches from their share of giving.” This, so far as true, would only be a particular incidence of his (supposed) principle of action. “I do not want to throw burden—all the burden—on you, to the exemption of others.” The Jerusalem Church could hardly, with any appropriateness, be included amongst those giving Churches, which were in his mind in making the remark. Yet 2 Corinthians 8:14 seems to carry the suggestion that even the then beneficiary Church and the benefactor Churches might in some sense, or under some circumstances, come to change places, and benefactors of to-day become the beneficiaries in their turn. Best comment is Romans 15:27.2 Corinthians 8:15.—“So far as the Christian life permeates church members and churches will there be reproduced this ancient and beautiful ideal of a company in which each has sufficient, an ideal never realised in material good so completely as in Israel in the wilderness. For all men are but gatherers of food freely given by God.” (Beet, very admirably.) More than a mere happy quotation, or apt parallel.2 Corinthians 8:16. Putteth into.—Same phrase as, and well explains, “given in,” 2 Corinthians 8:1. More earnest.—Q. d. “than to need it.”2 Corinthians 8:18.—Quite uncertain who “the brother” was. No intentional concealment of his name; the Corinthians knew him, or would very soon, when he arrived in Corinth. Curious old fancy, based on a misunderstanding of “in the Gospel,” that this was Luke. (So Ignat., Epp., and Jerome.) Three Macedonians are mentioned as travelling from Corinth again (with the collection, probably), Acts 20:4; Stanley thinks Tychicus perhaps “the brother” in 2 Corinthians 8:22, and, more confidently, Trophimus here. N. B.—He of 2 Corinthians 8:22 is a second, additional to, not the same as this of 2 Corinthians 8:19; see “brethren,” 2 Corinthians 8:23; Titus is mentioned, and two others. Probably he of 2 Corinthians 8:22 is not a Macedonian, but some usual, business-like, useful travelling companion of Paul.2 Corinthians 8:20.—Lit “taking in sail to avoid the danger that.”2 Corinthians 8:21. Honest.—In the old sense: “What looks, and is, honourable.”2 Corinthians 8:22. Confidence.—Note R.V., rightly, “which he hath”; perhaps having been to Corinth with Titus, and gained confidence from what he had seen. This had increased his earnestness in the matter.2 Corinthians 8:23.—Good example of the “letters” commendatory (2 Corinthians 3:1). Messengers.—Really “apostles”; but not yet in the technical, specialised sense. (Cf. of Barnabas, Acts 14:14; but not Romans 16:7.) It had been a Jewish, official name for such accredited messengers from Sanhedrin or synagogue, as, e.g., Saul of Tarsus was when sent to Damascus. Glory of Christ.—Q. d. “They and their errand will bring glory to Him and His religion” (as 2 Corinthians 8:19). .—Whole ChapterFour names are the nuclei around which the chapter organises itself:— A. Macedonia (2 Corinthians 8:1-5). B. Our Lord Jesus Christ (2 Corinthians 8:6-11). C. Corinth (2 Corinthians 8:12-15). D. Titus (2 Corinthians 8:16-24). A. Macedonia.—We have, concerning the Macedonian Churches:— I. Their circumstances.—They were poor, in deep poverty; their country was at that time notoriously poor. The civil wars of the preceding century [including the battle of Philippi] had laid the country waste, and in Paul’s day it had not recovered. Thessalonica was becoming a busy centre, but the country had petitioned Tiberius for some relief from its heavy taxation, and, to lighten its burdens, Macedonia [with Greece; but this was restored by Claudius to the Senate, so that Luke is right; Gallio was proconsul (Acts 18:12)] had been made an imperial, instead of a senatorial, province. If Lydia were even still at Philippi, she was hardly a sample of Macedonian Christians; she was an immigrant, and her dyeing establishment, with its household servants, may not have been large. And the rest were mostly humble people, in Thessalonica, Ber�a, Philippi, as elsewhere. 2. They were being sorely tried by afflictions. Lost to us as this is in detail, all was then very real, every detail was then fully known to Paul, who was writing in their midst. And fully known to their Lord also, Who was then suffering them to be put to the proof. [Cf. Exodus 3:7, “I have seen, I have seen.… I have heard.… I know,” etc.] Not a stroke fell on them without His sympathetic knowledge, Who was making their circumstances His testing, purifying fire for the gold of their faith and patience (1 Thessalonians 1:4). With better show of reason than some Churches, they might have said: “It is of no use coming to us to beg, Paul. We have nothing; we are a set of poor people. And this is a bad time”—it always is, to unwilling hearts—“to come raising a fund here; we have enough to think about, holding our own amidst the persecution and the steady, active disfavour of our neighbours to us as Christians.” But we have II. Their generosity.— 1. Out of the assayer’s furnace, heated with sevenfold fires, flowed—overflowed—a stream of most precious, most pure, grace, in the shape of a most liberal and eagerly spontaneous gift. If there had been any tendency to selfishness or to the scanty giving of fearful hearts and narrow faith, their own poverty had cast it out. They “must” help the deep poverty of their brethren at Jerusalem. Much fear, narrow faith? How could these live in hearts full of abundant joy? Did they count it all joy that they were fallen “into divers trials”? (James 1:2). And “exult in tribulations also”? (Romans 5:3, same Greek word). They were “cheerful givers.” Their cup was abundantly full; but their hearts were abundantly full also. They were full to the overflow; running over in simple-hearted, unhesitating benevolence, and that richly. The fountain ran over in a stream; the very stream ran over the banks of expectation, and also of human “prudence” and ability. Very poor, greatly tried, abundantly generous! 2. “Abundantly.” Measured by their power, what could have been expected? A small gift would have been great for them to give. Hardly anything at all was to be looked for, much less hoped for. Paul had indeed told them of the collection, and of the eager zeal with which Corinth had taken the matter up; but not by way of command, or injunction, or exhortation, and scarcely even of suggestion. They needed no suggestion; they were willing of themselves. Corinthian zeal provoked very many (2 Corinthians 9:2) in other Churches; but here, to mention the object of the Fund, and the need of the mother Church, was sufficient. The torrent of their charity had poured over, from hearts that only needed a touch [no flinty rock that needed smiting, perhaps twice], and the grace gushed forth, carrying away before it Paul’s prudence and reluctance and care for them. There was no “screwing it out” of unwilling givers. There was no “whipping up” the last few pounds, as at Corinth. No need for it. Good cause shown; then their heart and hand were ready. Paul had tried to stay it, or to keep it within narrower bounds. But no. He must, and should, let them have a share in the ministering to the saints. If it did not mean this, what was the worth to them of the fellowship and the brotherhood? If really “Jew” or “Gentile” counted for nothing in Christ, if really Macedonia as well as Jerusalem were common partakers in the same Christ, then Paul must let them give their grace; and he must receive their gift, along with the rest. They begged him that he would. They would not be said nay. And they gave, and gave beyond their power. 3. They gave with the most blessed completeness. There was a “finish” about their benevolence; from first to last it was most admirably thorough; intelligent, orderly, gracious principle ran through it all. They began at the right place, and at the right end. The true gift is the expression of the man, as between man and man; as between God and man it is the embodiment of the man too. God of old asked for Isaac; but He wanted Abraham; and Abraham himself really lay upon the altar by which he stood. A gift loses much, whilst yet it may be worth something to man, if the heart of the giver be not in it; to God it is worth nothing, if the man’s self be not in it. All the overflowing readiness of the Macedonians was, after all, no such torrent of resistless, impetuous impulse as that they should forget, before doing anything in actually putting their gifts together, to devote themselves afresh to God. So eager to begin, and to give, and yet they pause [at the beginning of their effort, not like the Corinthians at nearly the end of it] solemnly to consecrate themselves to the Giver of all grace. In modern phraseology, before a single subscription was announced, the Church held a consecration meeting. Then all they had, all their poverty too, was avowedly the Lord’s; they were His stewards, for little or much; they then proceeded to give “of His own” (1 Chronicles 29:14), not their own. [A model for all Church financial efforts, Memorial Funds, Jubilee Funds, and the like.] After that, it was comparatively a small touch of excellence that they unreservedly put themselves under the direction of Paul in their effort; accepted him as their almoner to Jerusalem; and in the most ungrudging, unquestioning, unqualified way recognised him as Paul the Apostle by the will of God (2 Corinthians 1:1), falling in with that will, in their very act and its heartiness. It was not his first experience of Macedonian generosity and affection to himself (Philippians 4:10-19). But he had not looked for such a display of grace as this, even in them. Of “grace,” for III. All this was grace of God bestowed upon Macedonia.—Human nature was not in itself of different material and quality in Macedonia to what it was elsewhere. It was grace which had bred grace. Their open hand and open heart were the reflection, the offspring, of God’s own. Giving is good for Churches and for men, as checking any tendency to selfishness, and as enlarging the heart and keeping sympathy tender. No change of medical opinion can ever make this kind of “bleeding” anything but good for the soul’s health. Good even for the mind, to have something to check self-centering of thought and purpose. Self-interest might conceivably urge to beneficence. But before the initial act, and the impulse to it, can arise in the heart, grace must have begun its work. A bit of beneficence fills the heart with blessing, and in turn this full heart of blessing will flow over in beneficence. And so on, in reciprocal action. But this action and reaction needs starting. And this, grace must needs do. All good begins there. The grace of God bestowed upon the Church at Corinth (same words as here, 1 Corinthians 1:4) assumed a noble form, and enriched them with gifts which called forth Paul’s thanksgiving, and made them the paragon Church of the world in such endowments. But this grace of God … upon … Macedonia, was it less noble or less fruitful? B. The Lord Jesus Christ and His grace. I. One is ashamed of some of the motives urged and methods employed, to raise money for religious and benevolent purposes. The money is contaminated by its source and by the process of extraction. See here A model appeal. 1.To Paul “to live is Christ,” and naturally, instinctively, by the necessity of his new heart, his thought turns to, rises to, Him. “In Christ” traces the sphere within which Paul “lives and moves and has his” soul’s “being.” It is no narrow range which is so traced out; abundance of range, abundance of interests, a large, free, happy life; and everything within it is bound by a happy gravitation to Christ the Sun and Centre. Every plan and purpose derives from that Source motive and strength. In this, Paul is an Archimedes who has found his place to stand, and his lever and his fulcrum. With “the Grace of our Lord Jesus Christ” he can move the world, not to say a reluctant, or negligent, or laggard Church. 2. This appeal is a sample of the way in which the highest themes find place in his letters, in the midst of topics of temporary, and comparatively slighter, interest. [Striking example of this in 1 Corinthians 7:29-31. “Great texts” occur in the midst of “less useful” material. They occur suddenly; they occur en passant; he rises to them, and quits their high level again, without effort; there is no appearance of any feeling of “rising” to them, or of “sinking” from them to a lower plane of thought or feeling. All his life, its plans, its motives, its activities, are “of a piece.” He lives at the high level [probably without remembering that it was “high”]. He can pass from the temporary theme to a topic of eternally vital interest, and can resume his temporary theme without any shock at the moment of transition. By such motives as this of 2 Corinthians 8:9 he regulated his own life; by such motives did he seek to train his people to regulate theirs. He did not disdain auxiliary motives of a lower order. As we see, he uses Corinth to stir up other Churches to zeal and liberality; he uses Macedonia to spur on Corinth. [So again, descending yet lower, but not unworthily, in 2 Corinthians 9:4. II. [See Separate Homily on 2 Corinthians 8:9. But remark here:] The model of all beneficence.—Without much forcing, point by point of parallelism can be found between it and the Macedonian and Corinthian bounty. 1. Was He not “willing of Himself”? The Father had not spoken to Him “by way of commandment”; He came not to do His own will, indeed, but had “accepted the exhortation,” and willingly had been sent on His Father’s errand. He stood before the throne a servant waiting for commands, with loving, eager, volunteering readiness, proposing Himself for the service: “Then said I, Lo, I come … to do Thy will, O God” (Psalms 40:7-8); “I delight to do Thy will.” 2. One cannot say, indeed, “beyond His power,” but, very emphatically, “to His power” was He thus willing. His whole Divine-human resources and heart of love have been unreservedly drawn upon for us. There is no limit; however much we may have drawn upon Him, we have never even approached, much less touched, any limit to the sufficiency of His grace and power. A limit is inconceivable. In Him is “all the fulness of God” (Ephesians 3:19; with Colossians 1:19; Colossians 2:9-10), in order that we may be filled with it. He gives Himself to our need unstintingly, and to the measure of His power to bless and save. [May even borrow another word of human giving in this chapter, and say that as there was readiness to will, so there was a performance also out of that which He had (2 Corinthians 8:11). He did not rest, nor does He find His satisfaction, until He can say, “It is finished.”] 3. It belongs to the bottomless depths of truth beneath what we read in this Book, and then formulate into our doctrine of the Incarnation, to ask whether there were any original fellowship between the Son, the “Firstborn of all creation,” and our race, which made possible His assumption of the Redemption fellowship with our race in its deep need. At all events He has created a fellowship which now appeals to Him, as the new fellowship in Him did to the Macedonians and Corinthians, and as it should still appeal to Christian judgments and hearts. The need itself is a powerful appeal to all right hearts; and to His heart too. He cannot see need of any kind, and only see it. But this was a need of brethren in a real fellowship with Himself, and He “takes upon Him the … ministering to the saints.” 4. May we venture to use Psalms 40:6-7 again, and say that He, too, “first gave Himself to the Lord, and then”? etc. The psalm is the voice of a human heart; of all true servants of God; but it belongs also to Him, in that whatever of motive or excellence is found in His people is also found in its original, and most perfect, exemplification in Him. 5. May we say that the “abundance of His joy and of His deep poverty abounded to the riches,” etc. (as 2 Corinthians 8:1)? Or that as He “abounded in everything … He abounded in this grace also”? It would hardly be tracing too minutely the features of the correspondence between all highest Christian service and charity and His, Who is the Model. III. A model of Christian completeness.— 1. “Abound in this grace also.” Every point of Christian character needs cultivating. All are not equally adapted for any one form of Christian service; nor is any given Christian equally well adapted for all his own forms of service. But there should be no systematic neglect or omission of any. The aim of Church education and of Christian self-culture should be an all-round, harmonious completeness of service and character. Natural enough to do most what we like best, what costs least of sacrifice or effort, what involves least of unpopularity or singularity. In many Churches, and in very many Christians, there are exaggerated graces, and there are defective, imperfectly developed graces. There are fashions in Christian work. Special forms take the fancy of a generation, and are pushed to the overshadowing of others very needful to be kept up. “Abound in this grace also.” Hard to preserve the balance of work and growth; but any point cultivated at the expense of other good ones, is apt to become a blemish. [The beautiful arm of the deformed boarder in The Autocrat of the Breakfast-table. A noble head, upon a body which has not grown beyond childish stature and strength. And so on.] 2. Specially, the showy gifts and activities must not be allowed to overshadow or lead to the neglect of less obtrusive ones. “Faith … utterance … knowledge … (even) diligence,” will not find their completeness without prompt, perfected benevolence. [A suggestion of the same danger may be found in a letter to a Macedonian Church, Thessalonica. 1 Thessalonians 5:20, “Despise not prophesyings”; a very serviceable gift, but then everybody could understand the “prophet,” talking clear sense in ordinary, intelligible language, though under the special influence of the Spirit. On the contrary, “tongues” was a showy gift, attracting attention to its possessor, who was greatly admired and envied, although it was true that only a man with another gift, “interpretation of tongues,” could understand him!] 3. Above all, a Christian character is wanting in completeness, if there be no heart to give and no practice of giving. High professions, great gifts, even abundant activities, cannot cover this deficiency. To omit this is not only to deny the fellowship, to lose the reflex blessing of giving to the givers themselves, but it is to leave out of the “Imitation of Christ” a most conspicuous feature. God is a Giver. The Lord Jesus Christ is a Giver. Corinthians must be givers too. “Let Titus finish in you this grace also.” “Also” is a leading word in the paragraph. Do not forget the “also” in life and service. C. Corinthians, and the true Christian communism. I. An ideal of social supply.—Israel was the “kingdom of God” on earth; amongst the other states and monarchies this was His. When actual kings were permitted to Israel, they were understood to be only viceroys; the real King of Israel was Jehovah. Divine law was State law; in the legislation of God for Israel are embodied in temporary, occasional forms the great principles which secure the wise government and well-being of all community-life. The ideal Israel would be an ideal state. But Israel never was ideal; the ideal of a kingdom under Jehovah never existed outside Deuteronomy. Still, in the wilderness God so ordered the life of His own special subject people that their wilderness life becomes a perpetual parable. Paul’s quotation is no mere felicitous parallel, adduced from an old classic of this people’s literature. He is guided to fasten upon and bring forward a case in which the very ideal of provision for the needs of a community was forcibly suggested, and in a small degree was actually carried into effect. There was no want, there was no waste; to-day had sufficiency for its needs, without stint, yet there was nothing over for the morrow. Each day brought its due supply, out of God’s fulness of resource; the morrow must to-day be trusted for, but each new morning justified the trust; and ended it, for the supply believed for was there, waiting to be gathered. Indeed, simplicity, and utterness, of dependence upon God were the very root principles of living. Men went forth morning by morning, not to make anything, but to gather what God had made and had brought to them. They went morning by morning; the act of the host said, “Give us this day, again, our bread.” The faith which underlay the dependence was kept alive in the very fact that, whether they would or not, they could not accumulate anything over. It was the simple life of a great family, where morning by morning the children rise, counting upon finding the renewed, sufficient provision of the father. It is the lovely ideal of Mat 6:25-34, the children fed and clothed as the birds and lilies are, and “taking no” more “thought for the morrow” than they do. [In fact, the Sermon on the Mount is really the great, fundamental, Constitutional Document, the Magna Charta, of a new and more perfect embodiment than Israel had been of the Kingdom of Heaven, God’s Ideal State.] The Ideal was again in partial embodiment for a short time after Pentecost attempted in the Christian Church at Jerusalem. Not “attempted” in any sense of organising a modern “movement” or “scheme.” The thing was the spontaneous, instinctive growth of the new life of the Spirit. Hearts filled with the Holy Ghost were filled with brotherliness and charity. Rich landowners like Barnabas, and smaller people like Ananias—but with truer heart—“sold lands or houses.” None of them called anything he had his own. All was put into the common stock. With the happy result that “neither was there among them any that lacked.” In so far, it was Exodus 16:18 again realised. [Acts 2:44-45; Acts 4:32; Acts 4:35. [N.B.—The general principle that no Christian has any of God’s gifts simply for his own use and help and enjoyment, goes very far. It is true of anything he may have learned from Scripture or from Providence; of any richer or new blessing to his own soul which may really have been a fresh disclosure to him of the will of God, or of the possibilities of a holy life. His “experiences” are for the common stock and the help of others. Thus H. W. Beecher: “I always feel as though, if a man has a fine garden, it is mean for him to build around it a close fence, so that nobody but himself and his friend can enjoy it. But, oh, it is a great deal meaner when the Lord has made a garden of Eden in your soul, for you to build around it a great dumb wall, so close and so high that nobody can look through it or over it, and nobody can hear the birds singing in it. And yet there are persons who carry a heart full of sweet gardenesque experiences all the way through life, only letting here and there a very confidential friend know anything about the wealth that is in them.”] But this already is passing over to II. The real and its supply.— 1. A world or a Church where none have a surplus and none want, where there are neither “poor” nor “rich,” is only a beautiful vision. The ideal kingdom of God will only in the eternal world be the actual; and only there will man’s world, the world of the new race that finds its head in the new Adam, coincide with the kingdom. The very beneficence of Pentecostal days was based upon the fact that there was not “an equality”; there needed an equalisation. And the typical Christian remedy is Almsgiving, in the broadest sense of the word. Divested of all its unfortunate associations; regarded apart from unfortunate embodiments and expressions of the principle; the essential thing, the loving voluntary overflow of fulness into need, is the remedy. It is the copy of the Divine benevolence. It is the Divine order. 2. Political economy easily, and, from its point of view, rightly, makes out the economic unwisdom of almsgiving. Indiscriminately employed, it has promoted an unhealthy and indolent dependence, and even created a new sense of “right” to the dole. The monastery gate and the squire’s kitchen have fostered mendicancy. The mechanical almsgiving of a modern Poor Law system hardens giver and receiver. But the instinct of almsgiving is Christian, and was from the first a notable outgrowth of the new fellowship and fraternity in the Church. [See, e.g., Cave’s Primitive Christianity, Part III., chap. 2; or, more recent, Pressensι, Early Years of Christianity, “Life and Practice,” pp. 412–419. The Eucharistic free-will offertory frequently went to the poor. The early Church historians and biographers are full of eminently “charitable” personages, official and private members alike. Poor were charitable, like the rich, each according to their means. “The community of spiritual things leads naturally to a community also of the inferior necessaries of life. There is no compulsion, but the simple application of the law of solidarity, that all those who live by the same life of the Word should have all things in common.” (Clement, summarised by Pressensι.) Wealth, in the broadest sense, and of every kind,—whatever one has and another needs,—is held as a trust from God, the Giver, for, not the possessor only, but for the sake of those who need. And the obligation to this larger “Almsgiving” lies equally upon those who to-day are the receivers. Tomorrow they may be able, in some other way, to be the givers; to-day’s givers may need to be the receivers. Spiritual benefits may repay the temporal. Indeed, true charity brings its own repayment in the enlarged sympathy, the tenderer heart, the check to selfishness. The principle of our paragraph tends to a self-acting redress of all need. As in the ocean, so here, any inequalities of level tend always to adjustment and equalised fulness in every direction. III. Unwise methods and motives are suggested by 2 Corinthians 8:8; 2 Corinthians 8:10; 2 Corinthians 8:13. E.g. “not by way of commandment.”—Compulsory legislation; violent reorganisation of the existing social system, with all its crude or selfish and unequally pressing methods of division of comfort or “wealth”; enforced Socialism or Communism, as a necessary preventive of undue poverty or undue riches, or as promising perfect contentment and happiness, and fairer sharing of labour and its rewards; must all fail, for the same reason that the Christian plan of the benevolence of God’s stewards towards God’s needy ones, fails in securing an ideal society. The fallen heart in man must be taken into account. If Capital be selfish, Labour may be selfish too. The social struggle is too often poor selfishness organising itself against rich selfishness. [Indeed, the oldest political economies formulated “laws” which proceeded on the supposition that self-interest, enlightened or not, was the one motive which could be relied upon as certain, always and in all men, to operate.] There must be no “commandment” on the one side; there must be “the willing mind” on the other. Else the issue may be, as the aim of some violent proposals seems of necessity to be, that a new inequality may be produced, in which the “haves” and the “have-nots” of the old order simply exchange positions. Christianity says all round, “I mean not that other men be eased and you burdened.” To enrich a “Jerusalem” by the impoverishment of a “Corinth”; to make a “Corinth” bear all the burden of helping a “Jerusalem,” whilst some “Macedonia” or “Galatia” or “Ephesus” goes free,—this is as imperfect a social order and supply as that which it is attempted to redress. In this also, “The foolishness of God”—the Christian “almsgiving” principle, condemned by the political economies, repudiated by the communising re-organisers of the existing order of society—“is wiser than men.” If this could only pervade a society of men, themselves first renewed by the grace of God, then a continuously self-renewing equalisation would be secured by Christian benevolence better than by the mechanical equality of systems or law. [The poorest give their rich benefactors very much, directly and indirectly.] D. Titus and his fellow-deputies.—[For Titus, see Galatians 2:3, uncircumcised, a Gentile; converted by Paul, Titus 1:4; associated in work with Paul, Acts 15:2; Galatians 3:1; 2 Corinthians 2:13; 2 Corinthians 8:23; 2 Corinthians 12:18; sent to Crete, Titus 1:5; called to Nicopolis, Titus 3:12; sent from Rome to Dalmatia, 2 Timothy 4:10; not named in the Acts.] 1. Note the remarkable fact that Titus is only known to us by the incidental references of four letters of Paul, one of them addressed to himself. Unmentioned in the direct narrative of the Acts, and even in the first letter to Corinth, though he was, probably, one of the bearers of it [1 Corinthians 16:11; 2 Corinthians 12:18; neither Timothy (1 Corinthians 16:10), nor Apollos (ib. 12) was], and not now for the first time associated with the Corinthian collection (2 Corinthians 8:6). Paul’s “fellow-helper concerning” the Corinthians. It may also not be too precarious a conjecture that he was a “stronger man” in every way, except goodness, than Timothy, who is mentioned repeatedly in the Acts. No such emphatic and recurrent words about courage are addressed to him, as 1 Timothy 1:18; 1 Timothy 3:15; 1 Timothy 4:14; 1 Timothy 5:21; 1 Timothy 6:12 (cf. also 1 Corinthians 16:10-11). Indeed, he had needed courage, as much as tact, in dealing with the Corinthians and their bearing towards Paul, and, more recently, with the business of their lagging collection. He was beyond suspicion, even by the Corinthians (2 Corinthians 12:18), of any malversation in dealing with their money, or of anything but most perfectly disinterested and above-board conduct in any particular. He was plainly not only full of affection for Paul, but a warm-hearted, zealous man, troubled about wrong, rejoicing over good, “comforted” when he saw it (2 Corinthians 7:7; 2 Corinthians 7:13; 2 Corinthians 7:15, etc.). One may infer his good sense from the fact that he was Paul’s trusted agent in the delicate task of “handling” these Corinthians and their affairs; as, later on, when he was despatched to regulate the ill-organised Churches of Crete, the native material of which was drawn from a coarse type of nationality [“liars, evil beasts, slow bellies,” 2 Corinthians 1:12]. [Methodist readers may compare such men as Alexander Mather,—Wesley’s “right-band man,”—Samuel Bradburn, Adam Clarke, Henry Moore, William Thompson, Joseph Benson, Joseph Bradford, a cluster of companions and fellow-helpers around the venerable Wesley in his later years, often sent on such errands as this of Titus.] Significant and suggestive that such a man—with strength of character, real piety, tact, courage, and altogether above the most sensitive suspicion; with lively sympathy for the work of God; the very ideal of a man who must bear responsibility and carry out the extension of the work of God (what pastor does not say, O si sic omnes?)—should be unmentioned in the Acts, and even in the first Corinthian Epistle. It is significant of the character of the Scripture record. It is historical; its record gives many a point of verification of the truth of the history in which the Revelation is rooted. One touch of historical veracity is found in the very informality of the record and the inequality of treatment. It is so far presumptively a genuine contemporary narrative, in that it moves with the insouciance of the consciousness of truth and of transparent simplicity of purpose, in and out amongst historical personages, scenes, events, dates; touching en passant; including quite incidentally; dealing fully, or by allusion only; or omitting altogether; just as may happen, whilst it pursues its course and its simple purpose. A simple, inartificial narrative, such as can omit any mention of an important worker like Titus without any suspicion of design attaching to the fact, carries with it a primβ facie credential of its truth. 2. The omission of Titus from the Acts is suggestive of much more of holy, valuable labour, which has found not even a chance mention in an Epistle, and of much, very much, the greater part of the work of the Church, which finds no earthly record at all; it is suggestive of workers whose only memorial is in the “book of life” (Philippians 4:3). In the modern, true Acta Sanctorum, the (holy “catholic”) continuation of the Acta Apostolorum, how many Titus-like men find no mention. But their work is no more lost than his; they are no more forgotten than Hebrews 3. This group of Christian men is completed by two other character portraits, anonymous, known only conjecturally by us, and yet so vividly hit off in a stroke or two that we feel as if we were very well acquainted with them. Here is one who has every one’s good word throughout all the Churches for his work in the Gospel. He is a successful evangelist, we may presume; and his gifts are not more the praise of every one than is his character. He, like Titus, is a trusted man. The “Churches”—not one only, but several—have accepted him as their trustee to hold, and in due course to administer, the accumulated relief fund. [There is no greater honour which can be paid to character than to give a man one’s trust. It “honours him that gives and him that takes.” The more complete the trust; above all, if it has to be unusually “blindfold” trust, or if there be risk involved; the greater the honour. (Trust speaks almost as well for him who gives it. The man who seems to count it a virtue and a boast that “He never trusts anybody any further than he can see them”; who poses as a universal sceptic as to the existence of any thorough and absolute honour and honesty in any man; is not himself the noblest type of man. His boasted shrewdness, which never allows him to commit himself to any other man, reveals a narrow, mean soul, which has not even in itself a witness to anything nobler in human nature. He honours his own heart, who can and does trust, without foolish credulity, and without dishonouring self-scepticism.) (Nothing pays greater honour to God’s word and character than our faith; hence, perhaps, so much is made to turn upon Faith.) Trophimus, or any other,—this man is rich and honoured in the trust of the Churches. Is the other unnamed portrait that of Tychicus? It may be; later on (Acts, ubi supra.) we find him and Trophimus travelling together in Paul’s company. (Paul and his band of companions moving from place to place recall the Master and His company of twelve moving up and down the land of Israel years before; personal attendants, messengers on occasion, learners, workers, friends.) As the other is the choice of the Churches, so is this one the choice of Paul. Trusty, with ability in practical affairs not now for the first time proved by Paul; the very man for the work just now in hand. 4. Men, all these, made for the work; and many such made by the work. In every Church are examples of men whose abilities lay dormant, hardly known—even to themselves—until the call and claim of the work of Christ revealed them—a discovery to themselves. How much of such many-sided fitness lies obvious enough, but unemployed and not available; because the possessors will not hear the call, and respond to the claim. And the fitness is a presumptive call. In the very correspondence between the work and the instrument, lie a cogent argument and appeal, which a fit man should require a very good reason indeed for declining to yield to. 5. Such men, with their proved ability, and, still more, with their trusted character, are no small gift to the Churches. “Thanks be to God” for them and for their readiness—like that of Titus—to present themselves living sacrifices to the Lord and His work. It is no small service that such men, in office and carrying responsibility, turn the edge of criticism and silence all possible suggestions affecting the honour of the Church and the fidelity of its administration, especially in the financial “abundance which is administered.” Their ability is a guarantee of the wisdom, their character of the honesty, of the management. The responsible leaders in the Churches not only must stand clear before the most searching light of the scrutiny of their Lord, Christ; they must also, so far as may be, “provide” that all commends itself as “honest,” honourable, to all reasonable human observation and examination. The Church should be a corporation with a more than ordinarily sensitive conscience. The honour of their Lord is involved. Such men, so administering the Church’s affairs “to the glory of the same Lord,” are not only a strength and a wealth to the Church, but they “are the glory of Christ.” [ 1. The Churches should have properly audited accounts. 2. There needs be no undue sensitiveness about mere gossip or ill-natured talk (such as against Wesley or General Booth re finance). Do right, and let the rest go (2 Chronicles 25:9). “Hew a true line, and let the chips fall as they may” (saying of Feilden, the Lancashire merchant-prince). There will be plenty of criticism, do what the Church may.] 2 Corinthians 8:9. Christ; Poor, yet making Many Rich. I. 1. Apart from the circumstances which are its setting, this text is a gem of truth. The very stratum in which it is found has its value; it can be worked to a real spiritual profit. But the gem is priceless. 2. It is instructive as revealing (see Homiletic Analysis, B.) the habitual region of Paul’s thought. He enters and quits such a high theme, as one well accustomed to the heights; his manner of introducing and employing this great truth is incidental disclosure of the close relation in which such “doctrinal” grandeurs stood in his own life to practical conduct. 3. Doctrine may be presented with a forbidding rigidity; it ought to underlie, and be clothed by, the beauty of Christlike living. It is the firm basis of all Christian hope and the experimental life. [Beneath the most beautiful face is a hard, grinning skull. The most beautiful body is built up upon a skeleton, rigid, hard, strong; which may be exhibited—as doctrine sometimes has been—in its bareness and rigidity, stern, certainly not beautiful, even forbidding. Yet the face needs the skull; the body needs the skeleton. Teaching and experimental life which have beneath them no firm, strong skeleton of doctrine are apt to be feeble, fatally pliable, shapeless, unserviceable.] 4. Seems sometimes “cruel” to such a text, to dissect it for its underlying skeleton. The botanist sacrifices the flower, as he pulls it to pieces to examine and exhibit its structure. Yet the first topic in this text is— II. The theology.— 1. Difficult to use any formulated language on this topic, as on many others, which is not open to legitimate criticism, or which would not, with very slight variation, swerve right or left into mischievous error. Difficult to use any which is not rather a protest against the assertion, or acceptance, of some point, or against some development or “consequences,” which are already, and in advance, negatived by some Scripture statement. Difficult to allow for the effect upon Scripture statements of the fact that everything relating to the manner of the Divine existence is exhibited in connection with the activity of the Trinity in the work of human Redemption. 2. “He was rich, … He became poor” is the practical, workaday shape of the Kenosis of Php 2:7. [The “poor” are to have “the Gospel preached to them”; they must have even its theology in a form apprehensible by the youngest and the simplest.] “The form of God” was not eagerly clutched and retained. He forewent it, and presented Himself to human observation in the “form of” man the “servant” of God, assuming to Himself, possessing, exhibiting, the characteristics of manhood, and in His intercourse with men normally conforming Himself to, confining Himself within, the conditions of man’s life; in many particulars of His work and mission submitting to be “a prophet raised up in the midst” of Israel, acting as the old prophets did, as the servants of Jehovah (Acts 3:22), [though He stands forth as the highest and most glorious example of the Prophetic Order, receiving the Spirit “without measure” (John 3:34),] only drawing upon the reserve possibilities of His proper “form of God,” and only speaking without a veil over His face of glory, just so far as might be needful for the accomplishment of His redeeming errand. And He further stooped to a yet lower level. Manhood was low, far beneath Godhead; man’s death was lower; the death of a crucified man, cruel, shameful, the death of a criminal or a slave,—man could even in death hardly go lower than that lowest; yet “even to” that point—death, death upon a cross—did He carry His “obedience,” the “Lord of all” Who had consented, had chosen, to become His Father’s “servant” for man’s sake. Paul thus expounds, in the passage where he most fully approaches the Incarnation topic, his words here. 3. There are depths beyond the sounding of the wisest beneath these quasi-popular expositions of the inscrutable Divine Fact. Subtle theories of wide-spreading consequence have been spun, in spider fashion, out of the bowels of the simple phrase, “Emptied Himself,” or that other, “The Word was made [became] flesh.” “One element is common to them all; … a literal merging of the Divinity of the Son into the finite spirit of the Man Christ Jesus. The general idea takes many forms: sometimes simply Pantheistic, the Eternal Spirit thinking itself as a Person in Christ; sometimes purely Eutychian, God the Son contracted into humanity, and both growing together to perfection; sometimes Apollinarian, the Potency of the Son working dynamically in the psychical soul and flesh of Jesus.” (Pope, Theology, ii 194.) Attempts all these to be precise where precision is impossible; where the Fact passes our apprehension altogether. 4. His own words make one thing clear: the “I” Whom men heard and saw in His “poverty” carries His life backward [as our text does] into eternal depths of the past, and forward into eternal distances of the Future, with an unbroken continuity of existence and of personal self-consciousness. “I came forth.… I am come.… Again … I go” (John 16:28). In every sense is “Jesus Christ the same yesterday, and to-day, and for ever” (Hebrews 13:8). Theological statement must in its rotundity of systematised completeness find room for all such Scripture statements as make a Godhead, “emptied,” even temporarily, of those characteristics which are part of the very definition of God, untrue and inconceivable. He was never so “poor” as to cease to be Himself. [Hebrews 1:1-4 is a Divine “Life of the Son of God,” going back to the date when “He” made the world, and yet earlier, to those undated, dateless ages when He was (essentially and all along) Brightness and Image; continuing through the years—the midway episode—of His redeeming work; and forward to, and past, His (resumed) session on “the throne of the Majesty on high.” Noteworthy is this: “Being the Brightness, … upholding, … when He had purged, … He sat down.” The continuous, native, inherent condition is contemporaneous with the acts wrought on the stage of human history at a definite, earthly date. As though the Royal Son, and Co-regent, and Prime Minister, of a Sovereign, without ceasing to be anything belonging to his nature and birth, or to his relation to his father, and without ceasing to uphold all the empire by his adminstra-tion, should add to his labours the special task of going to a remote and rebellious and ruined province, and himself winning, or reducing, its people to submission.] Human illustration is of course imperfect. Peter the Great of Russia is in personal character not even for a moment’s passing comparison, to be put beside the “Lord of glory.” Yet he may help to such apprehension as may be possible, of One Who, for the sake of His people’s well-being, “became poor,” though all the while He never ceased to be “rich” in His own proper right and in fact. Peter narrowed his life, in all respects needful for his purpose—in dress, in residence, [in a shipwright’s cottage in Holland,] in style of living, in manual labour as a shipyard operative—within the conditions of the life of a working-man. Yet, if need were, for the safeguarding of his true Imperial honour and the welfare of his people, he could and did, assert in word and act, and draw upon, his state and power and position as Czar of the Russias. Becoming a ship-wright; taking upon him the form of a servant; without ceasing to be the ruler of his empire and the possessor of all its resources. III. The experience.— 1. The word “ye know” must not be unfairly pressed, to contain more necessarily than “Ye are aware of”; “ye remember that ye have been told of,” etc. Not necessarily more in it than an intellectual apprehension and recalling of the fact. But to serve Paul’s purpose the knowing must not stop there. The truth must by the understanding be brought to bear upon the heart, and, in the next step, upon the will, arousing the flagging activity of the Corinthian Church. No truth in the whole round of Christian doctrine is ever effective, if it be merely admitted into the region of the understanding. That is the mere outer Court of the Gentiles in the temple of our being. If it is to affect practice, to assist the life of fellowship with God, to promote the perpetual offering of self and life upon the altar, it must go into the inner court, the court of God’s Israel of to-day, the new Israel of the Spirit. It must enter the heart. The heart must “know the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ.” No Divine truth is known merely by the understanding. [Pectus facit theologum.] “Flesh and blood had not revealed” to Peter even the momentary and imperfect glimpse he had gained of the true dignity of his Master (Matthew 16:17). It was, directly, from “My Father which is in heaven.” A man may carefully collect and collate the statements of Scripture as to the Deity of Jesus of Nazareth; he may weigh the statements which seem, or are made, difficulties or objections to the truth; he may determine calmly, coolly, that for these there is sufficient explanation; and, in the end, he may regard, and accept, the Godhead of Jesus as the teaching of Scripture, arrived at by fair induction. But he does not know the truth. “No man can call Jesus Lord but by the Spirit” (1 Corinthians 12:3). In like manner, no real knowledge of the meaning of this grace of Christ, which wrought His poverty, is ever gained by reading, by induction from Scripture facts and testimonies, by mere intellectual apprehension of any kind. Knowledge comes by “the demonstration of the Spirit” (1 Corinthians 2:4). He takes of “the things of Christ” and “shows them” to men (John 16:14). Christ summarised in a sentence the teaching of many “prophets,” “They shall be all taught of God” (John 6:45). The only man to whom “doctrine” is “truth” is the man thus “convinced” by the Spirit. To him only is it an operative reality, and not a speculative opinion merely. The man who in himself is being “made rich” through the poverty of the humbled Christ, comes to the truth with a new, peculiar illumination upon it, with a new and peculiar verification of it. The road by which, perhaps intellectually, he arrived at the doctrine is by him re-travelled with the new light of heart knowledge, and is only properly known in that light; the truth he arrived at was a goal reached in the dark or the dim dawning, only seen clearly when the “Sun of Righteousness” Himself had “shined into his heart” (2 Corinthians 4:6). All this may not lie in the surface, argumentative use of the word by Paul; but it underlies the word, and is implicitly there. His argument will have no real force, where the knowledge is not that which has been gained by experience; it is knowledge which has been lived into. IV. The purpose of the poverty.— 1. The enrichment of His people. Such “enrichment” as in 1 Corinthians 1:5 (and 2 Corinthians 8:7 here) is one aspect, one phase, of the many-sided blessing. But all the life of grace, from its first inception in a germinal life, through the growing maturity of the “perfect,” “spiritual” man, until the utmost earthly wealth of knowledge and of blessing enlarges into a new beginning of “enrichment” in the world of eternity; all its accompaniments of knowledge, communion, victory, light, peace, joy,—all is included. All that “grace” brings; all that “glory” means; all that is contained in the marvel of love “that we should be called sons of God”; all that is given and is pledged in that God calls Himself ours (see the argument in Matthew 23:32); all the eternally unfolding possibilities of a redeemed, restored Manhood, restored after the pattern of Him Who is the “firstborn amongst many [similar “sons” and so] brethren” (Romans 8:21);—all is included. Whether any other way of restoration and enrichment were possible we may hardly, and we need not, inquire. It should be ours to see that we explore, and allow ourselves to be led into, all the meaning of our heritage of wealth through His poverty. [If we have given a present, which has cost (for us) not a little, and which has only been possible for us to give at the price of some self-denial; into whose choosing, and perhaps whose making, we have put the most valuable thing we had to give,—our loving thought and labour,—how are we disappointed if the receiver thanks us perfunctorily, or in a conventional heartiness of phraseology which evidently covers an absence of appreciation of our gift, or of ourselves; if we find it put away into some drawer or casket, and only now and again for decency’s sake, or to save our feeling, worn or used, whereas we hoped it might be in constant use, a daily joy or service. Then what of His “disappointment” (to use a human word, and to think humanly also) when the “riches,” which He made available for us, at such cost of pains and sacrifice and loving design, lie plainly little appreciated, seldom appropriated, and never appropriated in any full measure, even by those who thank Him in a heart-betraying, cold, formality of eucharistic phraseology. Let us gladden Him and recompense His love by putting to the utmost experimental proof the meaning and contents of the “riches” which are His dear-bought “grace.”] [N.B.—He does mean that Himself “be burdened and others eased.”] 2 Corinthians 8:12. A Collection Sermon.—In reading the text the case of the Widow and her Mite immediately recurs to mind, as illustrating and embodying Paul’s statement. (See Homiletic Analysis.) Like so many other sayings, of temporary occasion, this embodies a great principle of abiding and many-sided applicability in our dealings with God. I. 1. The real offering to God is the “readiness,” the “willing mind.”—The word “it” is supplied in translating. It must not be insisted on with too definite a reference in exposition. The sense is general: “If there be … on man’s side, there is an acceptance on God’s side, according to,” etc. Yet whole drift of the passage shows that the thing which gives any value to the gift is the willing mind. It is the gift; all else is expression, accessory, robing, drapery. Unless “the willing mind” go before and lie evident before God’s eye, the rest counts for nothing. It must infuse gift and service with its own quality. If this spirit of the deed be absent, all else is a dead thing to offer to the living God. The silver and the gold are His; He neither needs nor cares for our money, nor is benefited by it. He Who has all power in heaven and earth, and all for the needs of His Church, does not depend, by any necessity, upon our puny labour or our gifts. Of old He did not for Himself want the carcases whose death made His Temple courts one great shambles. The life was the true offering. The willing mind is the life of the gift or service, the one true offering. 2. If we could see God’s copy of the subscription and collection lists of the Churches, we should find that His revision and appreciation had made marked discrepancies between His copy and ours. Ciphers struck off from some swelling printed amounts; thousands dwindled to the hundreds or the tens. Many of the shillings and the pence, on the other hand, standing entered at values which would surprise nobody more than the, perhaps humble, givers. The cup of cold water, forgotten by even the giver, remembered gratefully by Him Whose reminder and recognition call out the unfeigned amazement which cries, “Lord, when saw we Thee thirsty?” It is possible that the life’s work of some prominent Diotrephes will shrivel up into very modest bulk and receive the Master’s barest thanks. Yet, to be fair, remember: Let there be the willing mind and the liberal gift; let there be the thoroughly right heart and motive and the abundant labour; such a man’s deed is doubly, gloriously acceptable. Let us have a care how we give, and why; how we serve, and in what spirit; lest in the reckoning we be amongst those whose gift or work is used, who are themselves blessed (for God is no man’s debtor), but who do not find the best blessing of final, full, personal acceptance. Indeed, unwilling and unwitting instruments get used. Some are the mere conduit-pipe, the mere vessel, conveying blessing in which they have no share. 3. For our sakes—independent as He is of our labour or gifts—God seeks our co-operation. That there is any acceptance and reward at all, is altogether a matter of grace; but seeing that there is reward, He graciously allows us in this way to determine how large the reward shall be, how abundant the acceptance. Also: Every time we put the willing mind into practical embodiment, we cultivate the willingness. The impulse to do or to give, which takes no practical shape is not merely aroused in vain, but is weakened by the vain stimulation. Parents could as well, or better, do the little tasks which they give their children; they need sometimes after all to be done over again. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/phc/ NOTES2 Corinthians 9:1—Connected, in word [περί, in both cases] and in fact, with 1 Corinthians 15:1, which belongs to the initiation of this “collection,” this “ministration” for the poor “saints” of the Church at Jerusalem, as this does to the conclusion of the financial effort. Superfluous.—Yet he had been dealing with it, in chap, 8, and here urges motives to liberality (2 Corinthians 9:6 sqq.). Was there no need to speak of it? Was this Christian simplicity of truth? Yes (see Homiletic Analysis). Connect 2 Corinthians 8:24; 2 Corinthians 9:1; 2 Corinthians 9:6. “Show ye them.… I have no need to speak to you.… Yet I will remind you that,” etc. Cf. 1 Thessalonians 4:9; 1 Thessalonians 5:1.2 Corinthians 9:2. Forwardness of mind.—This clears the “readiness” of from doubt. Not their preparedness of arrangement to make up and send their contribution (2 Corinthians 8:19). Provoked.—As the occasion of the journey of Epaphroditus to Rome once stirred up these same Macedonians, always liberal-hearted, and proving it by repeated gifts to himself, and called forth their generosity to him in his prison in Rome, so that the winter-dormant stem of their liberality was touched as with the breath of spring, and “flourished again,” i.e. broke out into blossom and practical fruit (Philippians 4:10 sqq., A.V.). Your behalf (R.V.).—Of course not implying any desire or request of theirs that he would.2 Corinthians 9:3. The brethren.—Viz. mentioned in 2 Corinthians 8:16 sqq. In this behalf.—In this particular detail, on this point, viz. your having all in readiness.2 Corinthians 9:5. Covetousness.—Which would hold back even the devoted, promised, collected money to the last moment; not releasing, or paying over, one moment earlier than was necessary.2 Corinthians 9:6. Bountifully.—See margin, and notice how this verse takes up the word for “bounty “in 2 Corinthians 9:5. Really, literally, “blessing” (2 Corinthians 9:5) “with blessings” (2 Corinthians 9:8). Thence, makes “blessing,” full of associations of God’s gifts in measure and manner of bestowment, lead on to the style and spirit of giving in 2 Corinthians 9:7.2 Corinthians 9:7. Grudgingly.—Out of (a heart filled with) sorrow at having to part with the gift. Proverbs 22:8 is quoted from LXX., not the Hebrew.2 Corinthians 9:8. All.—Good instance of Paul’s (instinctive, not formal) rhetoric. Always tends to amplificative, cumulative phraseology. Piles up prepositions only slightly differentiated, or phrases nearly synonymous (e.g. Romans 10:12), or vaguely large (as here, “all”). “All might” (Colossians 1:11), “all prayer” (Ephesians 6:18), “all knowledge” (1 Corinthians 13:2), “all acceptation” (1 Timothy 1:15), etc.; q.d. “Whatever the meaning in which you need to conceive of it, whatever the form in which it needs to shape itself in manifestation—I mean all that!” Grace.—Here in a special, narrowed sense; nearly equivalent to “the means wherewith you may be able to give.” Connection: “Do not hesitate to give; do what is right; God will see to it that your own need is supplied.” Cf. the same principle illustrated in Malachi 3:10, and—less closely parallel—in Philippians 4:19 : “You have supplied all my need; my God will supply all your need.” [Compare also the four-faced cherubim of the Chariot, Ezekiel 1:15-17; and the really connected “foursquare” of the Heavenly City, Ezekiel 21:16. Everything of God is foursquare in its completeness; His City approachable, and giving entrance on all sides, from all quarters, to redeemed man. Similarly, “all grace” in its widest meaning stands in the midst of man’s needs, foursquare, exactly meeting our need and our request, from whatever side we approach it.]2 Corinthians 9:9.—Psalms 112:9, quoted from LXX. (111). Abideth.—Q.d. “is never to be exhausted” (Stanley). Too narrow.2 Corinthians 9:10. Supplieth.—The usage lying at the root of this word in Greek may furnish the preacher with vivid illustration of (say) Philippians 1:19. A wealthy Greek citizen had to assume, as a public duty, the whole expense of the training and maintenance of the Chorus for a new play. “God will provide all the needed expense.” Seed … food.—Clear reminiscence of Isa 55:10. (See homiletic development.) Righteousness.—In the narrow sense of the Psalm quoted, primarily.2 Corinthians 9:11.—Difficult to choose between “bountifulness” and “simplicity,” as in Romans 12:8; 2 Corinthians 8:2, and 2 Corinthians 9:13. The direct, and simply open, mind runs close with the simply opened hand; no after-thought, or reserve, or regret in either. Everything … all.—A cumulative phrase again.2 Corinthians 9:12. Administration.—Same word, in slightly varied aspect, as “ministering” in 2 Corinthians 9:1. Service.—The word (classically) used of a public burden assumed and discharged as in 2 Corinthians 9:10. But must not be pressed here. Aboundeth.—Note how this word recurs, 2 Corinthians 9:1 (Greek), 2 Corinthians 9:8.2 Corinthians 9:13.—Sense made clear in “Professed” means “openly avowed and confessed”; not, of course, “pretended subjection.” Distribution.—“Your contribution,” Literally, your “fellowship,” or “communion.” Word is polar; at the action end it is “communicating,” at the feeling end it is “community” of heart. Includes both, for the Corinthian contribution was an emphatic expression of the new community between Jew and Gentile.2 Corinthians 9:15.—At first sight unsuggested, irrelevant. So much so, that Speaker’s Commentary, in loc., pronounces the application to Christ “too wide a deviation from the immediate context” to be admissible. (But see Homily under 1 Corinthians 16:22.) .—Whole ChapterWe have:— A. Christian courtesy exemplified (2 Corinthians 9:1-5). B. Christian giving described (2 Corinthians 9:6-14). C. God’s giving and gift the model and motive (2 Corinthians 9:15). A. I. Consistent with thorough, transparent simplicity of truth.— 1. The Christian is to be courteous (1 Peter 3:8, not to be quoted). Yet is to “speak the truth” (and “do the truth” also), though “in love” (Ephesians 4:15). Often a real, practical difficulty to discover the exact line, between the nicely balanced conditions and the closely pressing, subtle perils, of unfaithful kindness, on the one side, and of harsh and repellent fidelity on the other. Truth at all costs, and with all risks, of course; but, wherever possible, loving, or at least courteously spoken, truth; and this both for the sake of the person concerned, and for the success of rebuke administered, or the improvement desired. A friend may in kindness wound; an enemy may in malice kiss (Proverbs 27:6). If the friend can do his work with a kiss, so much the better. 2. Paul himself shows how possible it is to pay a well-turned, serviceable compliment with the most perfect truth. Acts 24:10 (to Felix), Acts 26:2-3 (to Agrippa), were quite true and appropriate things to say; Acts 24:2-3 (Tertullus to Felix) was notoriously untrue. [Very courteously—accepting the correction (though not too courteously made), and acknowledging a measure of fault in himself—did he recover himself, after his outburst of not unjustifiable indignation before the High Priest (Acts 23:5). On Paul’s courtesy, see Howson, Hulsean Lectures, Character of St. Paul, ii.] Jowett, Stanley, and others call Paul “a gentleman,” who, in 1 Corinthians 13:4-7, draws “The Portrait of a Gentleman.” 3. Here Paul, dealing with these suspicious, proud, touchy Corinthians, some of them not too well affected towards himself, displays Tact and Truth. (1) “I, not to say you” (2 Corinthians 9:4), delicately shifts the heavier pressure of possible “shame” to the shoulders which ought not to have it to bear. (2) Quite true that both would certainly have to share the burden, if by their unreadiness they make its incidence necessary at all; his Christian love offers, as it were, to assume the heavier share, whilst, suggestively leaving the way open to their own love, to save “shame” both to him and them. (3) Also it was quite true that, as matter of absolute necessity, it was “superfluous” for him to say even as much as he had said in chap. 8 The Corinthian contribution to the Relief Fund was evidently substantially ready, and had been “ready a year ago.” At most, what was wanted was the closing up of the accounts. What he adds here is to quicken the finishing up of the business; there never had been any need to suggest to, or press upon, their “forward mind” the making of a collection. His courtesy is perfectly truthful. So also 2 Corinthians 9:6, “I want you to have what you really deserve, the credit of seeming, not covetous but, liberal.” II. Gives full recognition of excellence.—And this both to themselves and to other Churches. [Rising to a higher example: The Head of the Churches (Revelation 2:3, passim), even in the case of the most unfaithful Church, gladly acknowledges every point which can be praised, even though He must (like Paul here) complain of half-finished work (2 Corinthians 3:2, R.V.). See how He (to Ephesus, 2 Corinthians 2:6, after 2 Corinthians 9:4-5) returns to praise a point of excellence, so to speak forgotten in 2 Corinthians 9:2-3. No need for a Christian to stint or grudge deserved praise. To many temperaments a very needful factor in their improvement. May, as here, be consecrated to the subserving of the interests of the work of God. III. Is prudent and business-like.— 1. He has used Corinthian “forwardness” as his lever, to move the not illiberal or tardy, Macedonian Churches. He now lays his plans, and takes his measures, to ensure that there shall be no miscarriage, after so much has actually been done towards the desired result. His repeated and confident laudation of them must not have a not very creditable conclusion and comment, in an only almost ready collection. “Beforehand, beforehand, beforehand” is, and has been, his watchword (2 Corinthians 9:5-6, Stanley); a true “business principle.” [Nelson said he beat the French fleets by always being a quarter of an hour before time.] No need for a Christian man to be worse than a man of the world, “wise in (and for the purposes of) his generation,” in such points of practical sagacity. Friction would be saved within the Church, and often scandal from without, if business prudence and good sense were always consecrated to the management of its finances. Business as well as Courtesy may be sanctified to the highest ends. 2. Is there any suggestion of prudence in “handling” even his friend Titus, in the fact that, in regard to this business, he always speaks of “exhorting” Titus, rather than enjoining or directing? (2 Corinthians 8:6; 2 Corinthians 8:17; 2 Corinthians 12:18; 1 Corinthians 16:12; but so also Timothy, 1 Timothy 1:3). 3. The need of such courtesy of character, and good sense and business aptitude, in the management of men and affairs in the Church, is a strong appeal and claim for their consecration to Christ by those who are endowed with them. [Cf. Numbers 10:31 : “Thou (Hobab) mayest be to us instead of eyes;” i.e. his experience and training in desert life were wanted, though the host had Jehovah and the Pillar in their midst.] B. Christian giving is described.— 1. It is literally “blessing” (= “bounty”), in this section of the New Testament, and here only. [So LXX., Genesis 33:11; cf. the beautiful Hebrew of Pro 11:25, “a soul of blessing.”] As in the similar use of “grace” for this Corinthian gift, the Divine word is borrowed for the expression of human love between brethren and brethren, Church and Church. [So in the Psalm quoted (2 Corinthians 9:9), “his righteousness (with special application to this almsgiving) endureth for ever,” is the repetition as to man of the same phrase in the preceding Psalm (Psalms 111:3) used of God, “His righteousness endureth for ever.” (May we venture to give this a similar speciality of application, and say, “His almsgiving to a needy world endureth unwearied and inexhaustible”?) No doubt “righteousness” means more than this, in both instances.] The Christian giver is God’s almoner and representative, if his gift is the outcome of a love in his heart for man caught from God’s philanthropy (Titus 3:4). His gift mirrors God’s gift on a smaller scale; his giving should, in his purpose and manner, be like God’s “blessing.” 2. (1) It is “sowing”; a disposing of one’s wealth which brings back again itself with interest, itself multiplied manifold. The old epitaph has truth in it:— “Here lies a man, men thought him mad;The more he gave the more he had.”The giver is not the poorer by so much, when he has parted with his gift; he is the richer by so much, in that he has that and all it is to bring by God’s blessing. (2) Does the farmer return from his field saying “grudgingly,” and with a sorrowful heart (2 Corinthians 9:7), “There! All that good seed thrown away and lost”? Yet some Christian givers “go forth weeping bearing this precious seed,” forgetting that they may complete (in this borrowed sense) the sentence of the Psalm. (3) The wise sower does not even sow “of necessity,” only going out to his fields in the Spring because, if he do not, he will starve in Winter; and, still less, because of what his neighbour farmers are doing, and what they will think and say of him, if he too do not scatter some seed! (4) The giver who understands that he is a sower goes forth to his giving “cheerful”; a holy hilarity may rightly pervade every heart, when a Church is assembled to make some great financial effort for the cause of God. (5) Like sowing, too, in this: Sowing and Harvest are connected in two ways. In Galatians 6:8 Paul reminds the Galatians [who, as Caesar testifies of the Western Gauls, their kindred, were inclined to be money-loving] that, in kind, what a man sows he reaps. Here he says that, in measure, as a man sows so he reaps; whether “sparingly,” or, as God Himself sows when He gives, “with blessings” (R.V. margin), i.e. with a heart in his sowing, his giving, which would gladly make all he gives, in intention and effect a blessing. Stint your field of seed, you stint your barn of sheaves. You may choose the measure of your reaping. 3. Such almsgiving is a “service” (2 Corinthians 9:12), a “liturgy” in the classical sense, a burden which is obligatory upon those citizens of the kingdom of God whom God has made able, and has officially and formally appointed by making them able, to sustain it for the good of others, their less able fellow-citizens. And yet, 4. It is a “ministration,” a “diaconate.” The wealthy man, or Church, must not remember too vividly his superiority in ability, even whilst he serves and discharges his liturgy (= “administers this service,” 2 Corinthians 9:12), lest he become the Lord Bountiful to his poorer fellow-citizens in the kingdom of God, instead of the almoner of the true Bountiful Lord. He is the servant on Christ’s behalf, of his brethren, fulfilling the office which was first, and most gloriously, held by his Master (Matthew 20:28, same root word). Again, 5. Here are the motives which should encourage and regulate giving. (1) “As he purposeth in his heart” (2 Corinthians 9:7), admirably expository of the meaning “simplicity” (2 Corinthians 9:11); no by-motives, no consideration of any reflex effect, such as winning the commendation of his fellows; his giving should be the simple, direct, unaffected, unmodified expression of himself (for “as the man thinketh in his heart so is he,” Proverbs 23:7). (2) If the stress be laid upon “purposeth,” there come into view some further considerations. There is giving which is almost without purpose; it is done upon the spur of the moment, the mere offspring of the passing impulse, aroused, and dying, with the momentary, accidental occasion which appealed to it. There is no thought of the gift before the moment of its bestowal, hardly any a moment after. There is no principle of benevolence appealed to or trained; and such giving easily becomes the refined selfishness which cannot bear to see or hear of what is painful, and merely buys off the unwelcome, momentary contact with it. There is none of the loving, careful thought about the gift or the assistance, which often gives to even a small kindness its chief value to the recipient, and is always one of its most valuable features to the giver, in its effect upon his own heart and character. Such giving is not rooted in character at all; it is the merest, hasty, perishable, fungoid growth upon the surface of impulse. It does not belong to a plan and habit of benevolence, carefully and considerately formed as in the sight of God, and as an expression of gratitude to Him and a recognition of our stewardship. [Such purposeless giving does some good, and has sometimes a beauty. But it is only the fitful, wild, chance music called forth from the strings of an Ζolian harp by the variable force of the breath of impulse or occasional appeal. A settled, steady, purposeful, provided-for benevolence, which chooses its objects, and “considereth (say) the poor,” is the more beautiful, ordered, coherent melody and harmony of a trained player upon a well-tuned heart.] “Purposeth” speaks, then, of the judgment, as well as of the will, brought into consecrated service. (3) The “covetous” man (2 Corinthians 9:6) does as he purposeth in his heart, indeed. Covetousness may betray itself, as Paul suggests, not only by entirely refusing to part with anything, but by slowness to give, or to redeem one’s promise to give; by not making up the last amounts of the total, until the latest moment when shame or necessity makes it possible to keep the gift in one’s own power. The antidote to this incipient covetousness is the heart of “blessing” (2 Corinthians 9:6). (4) To encourage giving, the fulness of resource and supply we have in God is suggested. (See Separate Homily.) Little faith, much fear, in regard to their own future and its supply, rather than little love or benevolence, may narrow the liberality of a man or a Church. “Can’t afford to part with so much.” Paul’s words (2 Corinthians 9:8) extend far beyond the immediate occasion; they are a great principle opening out, leading us out, in many directions; in the direction of every conceivable need; but in this place they mean: “Do what is right, what His work or the needs of the poorer brethren call for. Trust Him that, however much you spend, you shall not be spent out. He is able to supply you with all needed ‘grace,’ that you may supply them your gift and ‘grace.’ No matter what demand may be made upon you, you may cast back your demand upon Him; He will respond, and see to it that, for this requirement, as for ‘all’ others, you shall ‘always’ have ‘all sufficiency.’ Nay, it shall be no mere question of sufficiency, whether of His giving or your ability. He will give, and ‘abound,’ that you also may ‘abound’ for and in view of ‘every good work’ which may present its claim upon you. He will not simply make you a full reservoir, from which others may be supplied. He will fill you to the overflow, and will make you a living well, which is itself always full, and is also ever flowing over, to supply needy ones around. Your ‘righteousness’ [cf. the variant reading in Matthew 6:1] shall be an inexhaustible fountain for others. Let His ability and full supply embolden you to large doing and to large ventures in benevolence. I called it ‘sowing,’ and, even so, all you ‘sow’ shall not only keep you in necessary ‘food’; it shall provide more ‘seed’ for more sowing of the same sort (2 Corinthians 9:10).” [Observe “may abound unto every good work”; “enriched unto all bountifulness.” It is an end in itself, worthy that God should provide you against it, that you should be able to exercise benevolence. Giving is no ad libitum, dispensable accompaniment of a Christian life. The Christian should work (Ephesians 4:28), plan, gain, that he may have something to give. Also observe—a large general principle also—that God’s gifts, of all kinds, are not given only for our own sake; our temporal good, our gifts of character, of religious knowledge and experience, are all to be the means of bounty to others; they were given for that.] Lastly, 6. We have the happy issue and effect of such Christian benevolence. The need of the poor saints is supplied—that is much; but it is more that God’s altar is loaded with the offering of their thanks. God Himself is “glorified” by this abundant praise, for it is His grace in you which prompts the charity; you are manifestly a triumph of the power of the Gospel, and not least does it glorify Him that, Jewish Christians though they are, their heart goes out in grateful, admiring, yearning affection to you Gentile Christians. Your gift draws closer the bounds of living, loving unity in the Church of your common Lord. C. God’s giving and gift the model and motive (2 Corinthians 9:15).— 1. God’s Christ is also, like theirs, a “grace” and a “blessing.” How it has “enriched us”; and how He Himself was first “enriched unto all bountifulness”! Rich beyond our expression or conception, but not for Himself only; to Himself it was an end in itself that He might “sow” in our needy world “bountifully” “with blessings.” He, too, had “all self-sufficiency” [see the Greek word, 2 Corinthians 9:8] “in all things” which His nature and happiness required. In Himself there was (to speak in children’s stammerings) another Self, the “Son of His love” (Colossians 1:13), Who could receive and give love, as love must in its very nature desire. Yet He created, and so provided Himself with new objects upon which His heart might pour out its “bounty.” He must be giving; must be going out of Himself to make others happy. Further, 2. (1) His gift is the expression of His “character.” It “sits well” upon him, this habit of giving. He is clothed with bounty in all His manifestation of Himself, and the robing fits perfectly; it is the expression of Himself. He has put Himself into His unspeakable Gift, and into the manner of His giving. As the Corinthians should do. [Note also that the consummate expression of God’s character, His greatest mercy, is a Gift. His children speak as if He loved to take away, rather than to let them keep, anything dear to them. They are afraid to make full surrender of their Isaacs, lest they should really have to “slay their sons”; though God does not want the Isaac, unless it has become an idol; He wants them, their will, their whole heart, and whole self. They half-look out for some trial or bereavement, after a great blessing. Yet the one great Precedent He has set for all His dealing with us, the one conclusive Index to His real mind and heart toward us, is a Gift—an unspeakable gift. He had rather give, or let us keep, than take from us, if it be safe for our welfare. He had rather say “Yes” than “No” to our prayers. He does not value or enjoin upon us sacrifice, self-denial, for their own sakes; they are only means to an end. He will accomplish His training of His children with the minimum of pain and surrender and loss. His love is donative rather than privative. God is by His very nature a Giving God.] [Note also, 1. A Gift, not a Loan. We shall need, and may keep, the Christ He gives us, to all eternity. Neither in caprice, nor in change of plan, will He ever revoke, or take back, His bounty. We may cast it away; He has no purpose to take it away. 2. A Gift, for which nothing has to be paid by us. Nothing, of course, could buy it; but we may have Christ, and all that goes along with and is contained in Him (2 Corinthians 1:20, R.V.), for the asking and the taking.] (2) He gives “as He purposeth.” His “purpose” (Romans 8, passim, etc.) is of course an anthropomorphism. To Him Who sees at once perfectly, in all its completeness, first and last, His whole design, any such word as implies consideration, possible modification of first thoughts, laborious comparison of ends with means, patient, persistent maturing of a plan, is quite inapplicable. Yet we see Him act as men do when they “purpose,” and in this Gift of His we see an end carefully considered, proposed to Himself, secured by admirably chosen means, “in the fulness of time,” after being prepared for through many centuries, each of which, in its whole character and conditions, contributed something to the perfection of the execution of God’s purposed bounty to fallen man. His was no impulsive Giving, the act of a moment without consideration or after-care. (3) “In His heart.” Human language again. But there is human giving which is admirable and very effective in its well-judged, well-timed assistance, but which is hard, stern, and apt to become mechanical. On the other hand, there is giving which has all these elements, contributed by a perfect judgment, but which has them all made warm and tender with a pervasive love. The heart infuses itself into the judgment. God’s mercy is tender mercy. (4) His bounty also “aboundeth, by many thanks givings, unto God.” Indeed, when human bounty calls them forth, it is awakening part of that great chorus of praise, whose increasing volume will fill heaven to eternity. 3. His Gift is the motive of all acceptable, all real, Christian feeling. Other motives may be consistent, and may co-exist with his; some motives are entirely incompatible with this, and will either expel or be expelled by this; e.g. ostentation, mere love of praise, the deliberate laying oneself out to win a reputation for bountifulness [as did Ananias and Sapphira, desiring to have the praise which everybody was giving to Barnabas, but to have it at the cheapest possible rate]; the more sordid aim to make a profit out of such a reputation. But even the sympathy, pity, love, etc., which are consistent with it, lose their last touch of perfectness and of acceptableness with God, if they are not accompanied by, and indeed are not born of, the grateful love which springs from a sense of our indebtedness for the Unspeakable Gift. To awaken real, active, Christian benevolence let men betake themselves to Calvary, and stand beneath the cross; considering what, in all directions, it means that He should hang there. (See this followed out in Separate Homily.) 2 Corinthians 9:8, first clause. A general truth, which may be pressed, beyond the particular, immediate application of it by Paul. Widen also “Grace.” “God is able … all grace abound.”—This rebukes, I. Narrow Giving.— 1. “God loveth a cheerful giver;” He has amongst His children many fearful ones. They restrict their gifts to religious and charitable purposes, not because they are niggard, but because timid. [Old, sadly true witticism applies to many: “Some men give, according to their means; some according to their meanness.” Not so here, but] they are apprehensive about the possibilities of the future. It is not one umbrella, but a stock of them, which can alone give them any approach to rest and security against the “rainy days” which, to them, loom many and dark in the future. Addison has acutely noted in the Spectator how the fear of seeming poor makes some men prodigal beyond their means, whilst the fear of being poor makes some save beyond their need. It makes some Christians narrow in their givings. They do not feel comfortable without a fair, growing reserve behind them. If they are “close-handed,” it is not primarily from want of love, but from want of faith. 2. Text bids them remember that they have behind them a Reserve,—God; and then let them launch out into all suitable, all needful, liberality to poverty or the cause of religion. Let Him, His fulness of supply, His ability to provide in any possible emergency, become real to them, and their fearful heart will readily yield to its truer, its native instinct, and open their hand more widely. [The possibility of being stripped of all, except God, is however often met with the same instinct of heart, as prompted the lady-passenger’s reply to the captain of a steamer in great peril at sea; said he, “We must now trust in God, Madam.” Said she, “Captain, has it come to that?”] It rebukes, II. Narrow Living, in a spiritual sense. 1. All Churches are weakened, their work is often crippled, by the meagre, narrow, ineffective life of their members. Very much of the effort of the pastorate has to be expended in keeping them not below what is the minimum of requirement and experience, if there is to be a definitely, distinctively, Christian life at all. 2. Such members lament their own failures, and “shortcomings” (calling by this too-indulgent name some plain faults and sins). Yet they have no idea of being, or doing, better. They have no hope of any “higher life,” whether in the half-technical sense or in any other. At most that “is a beautiful ideal, but quite unattainable by ordinary people, under the ordinary conditions of life.” They admire a higher, larger, fuller, more satisfying, victorious life in a far-off way, but without making effort or extending hope towards it. With the best type of them it is not spiritual indolence, though it may degenerate into it. The confession of failure may by often repetition lose its original contrition or compunction, and even become to them a virtuous humility. “They do not pretend to the great things, the great doings, of some people! God forbid such spiritual blindness or pride!” 3. But there is no virtue in being poor in attainments when God would have them rich, and has made provision for their enrichment. Or in being hampered by evil habits, enshackled and embarrassed and made ineffective, when God can give, and desires to give, liberty and victory (1 John 5:4; 1 John 5:18, etc.). There is no modesty, or humility, if the son of a wealthy father lives in narrow circumstances, half-starving, in rags, when he may draw upon his father’s wealth. “What cannot your Father do? Is such a life His probable ideal and purpose for His children? Will it even enable them to answer His design in having a Church? Is it any glory to Him that such should be the best lives the world sees in His family?” [This may be enlarged upon.] 4. Call things by their right names. Some things grace does not pretend to remedy—these are infirmities; some things it is meant to remedy—these are sins, if allowed. “Shortcomings” may mean that Christians are human, or that they are low down in grace; these latter grace is meant perfectly to remedy. “God is able.” There is no humility in repeatedly yielding to, even though confessing and bewailing, temptations or habits, which God has made provision for overcoming. Connect with Christ’s words: “That they might have [life] more abundantly.” (Same root word as here.) Words-worth wrote to Lady Beaumont, in May 1807, of the purpose of his poetry: “To add sunshine to daylight, by making the happy happier.” In higher fashion, that is God’s desire for us Therefore: It rebukes, III. Narrow prayer and faith.— 1. Ask and expect large supplies of mercy, peace, strength, providential guidance,—everything. (1) “According to His riches in glory” (Philippians 4:19). As the boys at a public school are provided with clothes, pocket-money, etc., more or less liberally as their fathers can afford to do it; each providing for his son “according to his riches,” greater or less. So God “according to His riches.” (2) “According to your faith,” “according to Thy word”; couple these. See man and God looking into each other’s heart. Man sees the willingness; God sees the want. Utter need here; all supply there. “Help me; fill me!” “Let Me help; let Me fill.” Is all that infinite, ready, pledged fulness, to be constrained, constricted, hindered, measured by, the gauge of man’s faith? An ocean can only pour into the vessel plunged into it what the vessel can hold, or the neck will admit. God promises; God is able to give, abundantly to give; how large is, not the need, but the basket of faith? He is honoured by expecting more from Him. Elizabeth said laughingly to importunate Raleigh, “When will you have done asking?” “When your Majesty has done giving!” God loves that kind of “shamelessness” (Greek of Luk 11:8). Meer Jaffier, Nabob of Bengal, took Clive into his treasury at Moorshedabad, set open before him door after door of treasure-chambers full of gold, silver, gems, and bade him ask for his own present. Clive, when charged in after-years with wrongful enrichment at the expense of native princes, replied, as to this particular instance, “By—, I am astonished at my own moderation. I asked twenty lacs of rupees, when a word would have made it forty.” Paul’s words lead us into God’s treasury of “all grace,” and invite us to ask and receive, that our need may be filled. God is not honoured by any “moderation” in our prayers or faith. There are limits to the literal, crudely conceived “answer” to prayer. God is not merely the obedient worker-out of every erroneous, selfish, or whimsical wish of His people [like the familiar of some mediζval Faust]. But, in the larger view of the purpose and scope of His promise, and provision of “all Grace,” within the wide, all-including, lines of the life of grace, there is nothing needful we may not ask, and should not ask. May add, IV. “Not as the world giveth give I;” true of the Father as of the Son. World gives such gifts as it has, up to a certain point; sufficient for some surface needs of our nature, and going a certain way; but not “all grace,” nor going all the way, “to the uttermost.” [In the summer days we may do with an empty grate, or gilded shavings; but when the winter time for age and heart come upon men, the world cannot give the real fire which alone can serve the soul’s necessity.] 2 Corinthians 9:15. The Unspeakable Gift.— 1. “Unspeakable” a wonderful word. The root is also in “exegesis.” The two-fold prefix to this root is graphic in the idea it suggests. “A gift of whose whole meaning there can be no adequate exegesis,” we might say; or, more exactly, whose whole contents no guide can explore and open up, and exhibit to his fellow-explorers. They may strike paths across the whole extent of thought covered by it; may strike them out in many, intersecting directions. They will discover much; on either side of any path so marked out and followed, will be a wealth of beautiful and helpful truth. But they are never at an end of all discovery. They never will be. Even the study and scrutiny of heaven, with its wider knowledge and appreciation of, not only the facts and the mercy in any individual redeemed life, but of the bearings of the Gift upon the history of our whole Race, and, perhaps, of unknown and unnamed races in other worlds, and that study pursued with new helps, and new powers, and with Himself perpetually before their eyes, will only bring mind and heart back again and again to the same conclusion,—“Unspeakable.” 2. (1) Stand at the Cross and think backward along the line of His one continuous existence, in glory which He had with His Father before the world was, in the bosom of the Father, before all things began to be through Himself; think forward, as again He leaves the world and goes to the Father, and He assumes the throne of the majesty on high; forward again through, and past, the mysterious moment when He delivers up the kingdom to God, even the Father, only to receive and exercise the more glorious authority of a yet greater, an eternal, kingdom. At the Cross remember that the three-and-thirty years on earth are an episode, a subsection of the whole unbroken life of The Son, stretching backward and forward with the absolute eternity of God. Remember that He is at that point touching His lowest of voluntary kenosis; that that humiliation is the mid-point of the history of the Son of God, obedient, even to this degree, that He should die on a cross, a malefactor, and forsaken even of God. Remember Who He is; why He is there, thus; what it means of self-surrender on His part, and of devoting love (Romans 8:32) on the Father’s part;—“Unspeakable!” (2) Consider—as He had done—the case of fallen, lost manhood, in its sin; and that sin the source of an outflowing stream of consequent misery, shame, fear, suffering, here; consider how it must have flowed on through eternal ages, broadening, deepening, darkening, and must still flow on, except so far as modified by His grace and its blessed effects. Consider what, in even one redeemed life, here and hereafter; and what in the totality of all redeemed humanity; are the happy effects of that Gift, another stream, broadening, deepening, more and more gloriously bright, through eternal ages. “Unspeakable!” Endeavour to conceive the revolutionising change which would come over, and pervade, everything in human life and in the world’s condition, if now the grace of this Gift, and its whole effect upon Life, History, Providence, Morals, were withdrawn. What a cataclysmic deterioration and ruin of all! The gift which gives so much, and holds back so much,—“Unspeakable!” (3) Ephesians 3:10 widens the view almost beyond our grasping. What if the thirty-three years of His earthly life, and if, especially, the Friday afternoon of Calvary, be the central point, around which turns and pivots the history of “the principalities and powers in the heavenly places,” and indeed of the whole creaturely Universe? “Unthinkable,” not to say “Unspeakable!” 3. Yet where is the wonder, when remembered that it is “God’s unspeakable gift”? If He has expressed Himself in it, how can the contents of the gift be put into human thought and language? And, with a more homely turn to the thought, “Such a gift is just like Him,” as said an old believer, of some smaller and yet heart-astonishing mercy. The principle of his words is true of this crowning, consummate gift. Only it is not “like all else He does”; “All else He does is like this.” What shall we not expect after this! (Romans 8:32 again). “All grace, abounding,” indeed! What shall we not do, and give, having such an Example, and debtors for such a mercy! 2 Corinthians 9:15. (Alternative suggestion for a Homily.)—We may take the last subsidiary thought suggested by this verse, and follow on this line: “This first, greatest, unspeakable, Gift is a measure of all God’s after-gifts to us. What, how much, may we not expect?” I. God has thus set a precedent.—The principle lies in Psalms 68:10, when the whole verse is quoted. Thus: The deliverance from Egypt was the birthday, and in a sense the greatest day of the nation’s life. It receded farther and farther into the past, but never sank out of sight below the horizon of the national view. The remotest distance of long antiquity never became a dim distance in the case of this event. It stood out, vast, clearly definite. That beginning of all God’s dealings with the covenant nation, as such, fixed the style and the scale of all His dealings with them. The prophets, e.g., who cheered the hopes of the Babylonian exiles, appealed to this. It was a Godlike beginning of their history; every after-step might be expected to be Godlike too. So Calvary and the Lamb of God are in thought, though not in time, the starting-point of God’s redemption for, not one nation, but the race. That was the World’s Passover and Exodus. It had been seen, dimly, from the gate of Eden. It grew clearer as the race, in its four thousand years’ pilgrimage, approached it. We have passed it to-day. Time is leaving it behind. But it, too, does not grow dim in the distance. And we may measure every hope of redemption, every petition for mercy, every request for even temporal deliverance, by that Precedent, The Unspeakable Gift. He began with that! He will not fall below that level! II. God then began what He designed and desires to finish.—Jesus never more Godlike than when He bowed His head and cried, “It is finished!” Finished work is the characteristic of God’s work. Just as the deliverance from Egypt (Psalm quoted above) was not intended to stand alone, but was the beginning of a great redeeming work whose crowning particular was to be a Settlement in Canaan; so that unspeakable gift and the finished work of Calvary, with its imitative sequel in the new birth in our own heart, was not intended to stand alone. A perfected moral renewal, a life in perfectly renewed surroundings, and fitted for a perfected, eternal service—Holiness in Heaven—was the intended, the implied, sequel of the Gift. “Into Canaan” was the corollary of “out of Egypt.” “Into Holiness, up to Heaven,” is the corollary of the Gift on Calvary. We are only asking, then, for what is in effect provided and assured, when we ask for “all grace abounding,” “all sufficiency,” etc.,—all needful to bring us into all the Holy Consequences, our whole Heritage of blessing. God laid such a glorious Foundation; will He not finish the building? III. [Is it too human to say it?] God sunk so much—invested so much—in the gift of His Son to our race, that He will not lose all, for lack of following it up. We may “receive the grace of God in vain,” certainly (2 Corinthians 6:1). But we may, at all events, count upon Him. It cost that much to bring a believer up to his present point. God will not willingly let go all that the God of the Unspeakable Gift! 2 Corinthians 9:15. A subordinate thought may be developed into a Christmas sermon—God’s Unspeakable Gift. The benevolence of Church to Church recalled to Paul’s mind the benevolence of God to a needy, lost world; the root and source of all human benevolence, and especially of all Christian bounty. (Develop as in previous homiletics.) The bounty of the Christmas season necessarily recalls it to us. Christmas is pre-eminently the children’s festival. The overflow of affection to the children at this season is closely connected with the fact that when God blessed the world with His Unspeakable Gift, that Gift was a Child, and not at once a full-grown man. Why? The reason is in its fulness unspeakable, no doubt; past human exegesis. Yet we may see some reasons:— I. He was thus “grafted into,” “welded to,” the race upon which we spring.—He thus sprang from it also. Cf. the angels. They are so many independent creations of God’s will; men spring generation out of generation. Angels are, probably, from the first all contemporaries in age. We are successive. They are many; we are One. A full-grown Christ sent into the world, would have been one more individual added to the millions of the race; a man with men. But He is born of the race, Man with men. Perhaps He could not really have been our Redeemer had He not thus been of us. II. His life thus better parallels our spiritual life.—He shares temptation with us; we share the cross with Him. In a Christian life as well as in Christ’s life there are a Crucifixion, a Resurrection, an Ascension into the heavenly places (Ephesians 2:6, etc.). Our life is hid in God, along with Christ. And to make the parallel—the more than a mere parallel—complete from the first, there is a Birth for Him, as there is a new birth for us. It is only in John’s Gospel that we find the words, “Ye must be born again.” But in the Synoptics Christ put the truth into visible form. “Took a little child and set him in the midst, and said, ‘Except … as little children ye shall not enter into the kingdom.” The man enters into the kingdom as a child; he must be born again. The lesson is thus symbolised to the very eye, when we see the King entering the kingdom by the gate of birth. God’s Gift was born into the world. III. He has thus ennobled humility.—His religion has had to ennoble the word itself. The world scorned the thing and depreciated the word. Christianity brought Humility forth from obscurity, robed her in honourable garments, and made her a queen amongst the virtues, the flower and perfecting of holiness. Socially, Jesus chose to begin at the lowest round of the ladder. The child of a country carpenter’s wife is the Redeemer of the race. Pride cannot live where that fact tells. Pride is subtle; may be strongest in the very class from which Christ sprung. “No pride like poor folks’ pride.” But whether high-class or poor-class pride, it must die in the presence of the fact that God’s Unspeakable Gift made His appearance amongst us, a peasant’s swaddled infant lying helpless in a mere make-shift cradle, a manger in an Eastern khan. IV. He has thus learned, by living it, a perfect sympathy with our human life, and that from the beginning of it.—Has “skipped” no stage of it, up to manhood’s prime. When man has passed his prime, the forces which make for disintegration and death begin to turn the scale against those which make for recuperation, nutrition, growth, life. The man begins to die from the earliest moment when the balance turns against life. Jesus never passed the point of prime, but in the prime of manhood met Death in its prime of strength and conquered it. From birth to manhood life is victorious; it is the best of our life. And all that best He knew, knew from its beginning. There is no stage of our life—its infancy, its childhood, youth, early years of gathering strength, first years of toil, manhood of breadwinning and responsibility and struggle—which He has not learned to understand, as having lived through it. When we pray for help, He has the sympathy of experience with all stages, even the earliest. V. Above all, the Gift thus became the children’s Christ.—If Christian children have so happy a Christmas Day, they owe it to Christ. At the very best, no father or mother in heathen lands, of old time or now, quite think of children and deal with them as true Christian parents do. No classical poet ever drew poetry from childhood. Infanticide cannot live in lands where a Christ is known, Who was God’s Unspeakable Gift, and yet was a baby. A baby is a holy thing for His sake. Childhood is a happy time and holy, because of His childhood. Every boy may feel that Christ understands him. And every girl too; for just as no woman ever feels that, because He is a man, Christ does not understand her, so no girl need fear that, because He was a boy, Jesus does not understand her. In His perfect manhood there was perfect childhood, boyhood and girlhood all in Him. Say to the child: “Jesus was once exactly of your age, to a minute; He was exactly your height once, to a hair’s breadth. If you had gone, A.D. 5 or 6, into Nazareth to seek God’s Unspeakable Gift, you would have found a lad of eight or nine at school, wearing a little close-fitting cap, and a loose garment tied round with a sash, sitting on the ground, spelling His letters from a passage copied out of the Hebrew Bible, or writing upon a piece of board with chalk. He understands about going to school, and holidays, and play. He understands children’s troubles, and what children’s sins are, though He never did any. Gentle and obedient, patient and diligent and truthful, we may depend He was; the model of all that is right for boys and girls, as well as for men and women.” God gave His Unspeakable Gift to children. V. The wonder of it! The central figure of History is Jesus of Nazareth, God’s Christ. When the time was come to bring His Only Begotten into the world, God “took a little Child and set Him in the midst.” NOTESRemarkable change of tone here, and henceforward. So remarkable that—in last century, for the first time, then in beginning of this, and again, after a respite, during the last fifty years—from time to time Higher Criticism has suggested, or claimed, 10–13 as a distinct document, perhaps a letter between the two extant Epistles. But Textual Criticism knows of nothing but an unbroken connection with 1–9. The change [from “we” to “I” (generally); “the conciliatory and affectionate strain of entreaty which pervaded the first part is here exchanged for a tone of stern command and almost menace; there is still the same expression of devotion to the Corinthian Church; but it is mixed with … a sarcasm and irony” paralleled in the First Epistle, but not up to this point in the Second (Stanley); also, “the Corinthians are no longer commended for their penitent zeal, but rebuked for their want both of love and penitence” (ib.). The confident hopes of the first part of the letter give place to gloomy forebodings] may be sufficiently accounted for by supposing a pause here in the writing of the letter. [Say, a new day’s dictation beginning here; or a new amanuensis to be found; or anything else which may conceivably have made a break, during which perhaps new tidings may have come from Corinth; or Paul’s mood may have changed, and the darker aspect of matters may have reasserted a predominance over a more hopeful view, during the interval.] Romans 14, 15 in less degree contrast with 1–13 (Farrar). 2 Corinthians 10:2; 2 Corinthians 10:7; 2 Corinthians 10:10 [if translate literally “says he”], 11, 12, 18, and 2 Corinthians 11:4, by (e.g.) Farrar, Conybeare and Howson, are supposed, but not necessarily, to point out some pre-eminent opponent of Paul. Have to infer from Paul’s language—certainly once (2 Corinthians 10:11), and perhaps in other cases (e.g. 2 Corinthians 10:1), quoting the words and thoughts of opponents—who these were and what were their charges against him. [Like calculating the disturbing cause—perhaps a new planet—from the perturbations it originates in the path and movements of one already known.]2 Corinthians 10:1. Gentleness.—Same as “moderation” (Philippians 4:5); also in Acts 24:4; 1 Peter 2:18. “Moderation which recognises the impossibility cleaving to formal law, of anticipating and providing for all cases that will emerge; … recognises the danger that … waits upon the assertion of legal rights, lest they should be pushed into moral wrongs; … pushes not its own rights to the uttermost.” [Philippians 4:5 excellent example.] “All” God’s “going back from the strictness of His rights as against men; … all His refusals to exact extreme penalties,” are the archetype and “pattern of this grace in us.” (Trench. Syn., § xliii.) Also, “meekness” is passive; seated in the inner spirit; shown by the superior to the inferior; “gentleness” is active; exhibited in conduct; shown by man to man, without distinction of higher or lower. “Meekness” is that “temper of spirit in which we accept God’s dealings with us without disputing or resisting; … does not fight against God, and more or less struggle and contend with Him.” (Trench, xiii.) He says, further, that this attitude before God makes us bear meekly [e.g. as David from Shimei] human provocation. See this in Matthew 11:29; hence Paul’s appeal here. Q.d. “Let me still have room to exhibit towards you the meekness and gentleness of Christ; do not oblige me to put these aside and bear myself otherwise toward you.” I Paul myself.—“Think of me, me. ME; you know me; you did love me; you owe much to me.” Perhaps latter part to be read as if quoted: “Who am (as they go about saying) base.” Base.—, “lowly”; this and “meek” found together in Matthew 11:29; significantly. This rendering, however, requires the verse to be read as Paul’s own sentiments.2 Corinthians 10:2.—“I beseech you, so reform and change [before I come] that,” etc. Notice, “Show courage”; not same word as in 2 Corinthians 10:1. “Count,” “reckon,” for “think.” “They have formed their judgment of me and my probable action; I too have considered my plan of campaign against these high-speaking and high-exalted gentlemen and their doings.”2 Corinthians 10:3-4.—Cf. Galatians 5:16; Galatians 5:25, “Walk in the Spirit.” Paul not afraid of a verbal inconsistency, with a real consistency underneath. According to (2 Corinthians 10:3), same word as “after” (2 Corinthians 10:4). Cf. Romans 8:5-9. Flesh, here, for sake of antithesis, used first in a morally neutral sense, and then [“after the flesh”] with the more usual evil connotation. “In the flesh,” more than “in the body,” of course, but not more than, “as conditioned by the limitations, liabilities, weaknesses, of innocent, non-moral, human nature; the conditions under which all human workers must do all human work.” Carnal.—See under 1 Corinthians 3:1; 2 Corinthians 3:3. Weapons.—Includes defensive armour; not weapons of attack only. “Fleshly lusts war against the soul.” Its “instruments” (Romans 4:12) are literally “weapons.”2 Corinthians 10:5.—Note, not to the “obedience” of Paul, but “of Christ.” Also “bringing into captivity” conveys more than merely making captive; rather “leading captive,” as in a triumphal procession. Suggested that the form of the imagery here is local, with a colouring drawn from the ruined hill-forts of Rough Cilicia, the western half of the province. Paul may have heard old people in Tarsus tell how, sixty years before he was born, the mountains were infested with pirates, who swept the Levantine seas, sallying forth from many little ports and coves on the coast, and retiring with their booty to inaccessible hill-forts; till at last Pompey the Great had organised a formidable expedition and cleared out the nest of robbers, reducing a hundred and twenty forts to ruins, and carrying captive over ten thousand prisoners. [Must not make too definite or precise; language very general.]2 Corinthians 10:6.—Note the happy adroitness of “your”; as if suggesting, “You, of course, will not do anything but obey, ‘fulfilling’ obedience to me—and to Him—completely. Those others, who will not,—well, I shall be prepared,” etc. A “gentlemanly” turn of thought.2 Corinthians 10:7. Appearance.—Same word as “in presence” (2 Corinthians 10:1). “They say that, as to appearance, I look to be nothing and nobody.… These very wise people, are they so superficial in their grounds of judgment as that? Do they—you—only go by the surface look of a man, or of things?” [Both indicative and imperative are supported strongly], Christ’s.—Too definite to refer this to 1 Corinthians 1:12 : “I of Christ.” Note [with Beet] that Paul does not allow any personal feeling, or heat of controversy, to lead him to deny that even his opponents may be Christ’s; he himself is, at all events, and that is all he insists upon. Think.—“Count,” “reckon,” as 2 Corinthians 10:2; and so “thoughts” (2 Corinthians 10:5) is “reckonings.” Note small change of reading and rendering.2 Corinthians 10:8. Boast.—First of sixteen occurrences of this word in this section. More abundantly.—Than even in 2 Corinthians 10:1-5. Does he revert to “we,” as expressing what is true of all apostles? A significant characteristic of apostolic authority. (Repeated in 2 Corinthians 13:10.)2 Corinthians 10:9.—Facts will justify Paul. His Master will see to that for him, so that his “letters” (generalised from the First) may not seem mere empty thunder.2 Corinthians 10:10.—Keep “say they”; not “says he,” of an individual. Singular; but like on dit, man sagt.; was “weighty and strong” ironical? Or a real concession, not to be refused even by his opponents? Perhaps (ironically): “He writes very effectively and with vigour—does he not?” Presence.—His Parousia (literally); the word used of Christ’s “appearing.” But “appearance.” in our colloquial sense, is in the word, as well as “appearing.”2 Corinthians 10:12.—tries to keep one of Paul’s (favourite) assonances. “Pair, or compare” (Waite, in Speaker). His own type of man, and, above all, each man himself, was to each his standard of excellence; self-instituted, self-applied. “A mutual-admiration and self-admiration society” (Waite). “We dare not” [same word as 2 Corinthians 10:2 : “There is one thing I dare not do”] “take up our place in the ranks of such self-satisfied gentlemen—oh, dear, no!” Note the polished sarcasm at the end: “are not wise.” One expects something very caustic as the conclusion. “What shall I say of these brethren? They—they—they—are—without understanding! We will not say more!” The “weakness” of the remark is its strength and sting.2 Corinthians 10:13-16.—“Why do these men come to Corinth at all? They have their province; I have mine.” [Perhaps appointed in Acts 15; see Galatians 2:7; Galatians 2:9]. Each of us has his “measure,” his “boundary,” marked out as with a “measuring rod.” [Cf. for the thought, Acts 17:26. Also, more than a verbal coincidence with the A.V. will be found in comparing Psalms 19:4 (Hebrew) with Romans 10:18. Yet in Antioch, in Galatia, as in Corinth, they dog my footsteps, and only work at undoing my work; on trespass the while! If I am at Corinth, or come to it, I am on my own ground (2 Corinthians 10:14). God put you clearly within my part of the world’s field. Indeed, I am intending to make you my base of operations, if you will help me, for a new venture into regions beyond, as yet untouched by anybody, but mine to occupy. See Romans 15:18; Romans 15:24. Illyricum his limit. Nicopolis in Epirus he did perhaps reach, (Titus 3:12). [Suggested that his Greek language would not carry him beyond, into Illyricum.] See this man, “of no appearance,” pushing back farther and farther the borderland between “Gospel” light and heathen darkness!2 Corinthians 10:17-18.—Another of Paul’s parenthetic escapes, from the oppressiveness of an unwelcome topic into a region of broader, clearer, freer, spiritual thought. “Away from men’s jealousies, narrownesses, enmities, rivalries; away even from my own enforced boasting! Let us all stand together a moment before Him. Who will boast there?” .—Whole ChapterIn these two Epistles Paul reveals himself, more clearly than in any other of his writings. This section, 10–13, is pre-eminent in this self-portraiture. [As Rousseau’s, so these] Paul’s “Confessions.” In this chapter two companion, complementary portraits of him and his work. In the first a soldier, armed, ready to go on a warlike expedition against his opponents. In the second a pioneer missionary, carrying the knowledge of his Lord into regions appointed as his sphere, where no other had as yet even named Him. A. Paul going on campaign (2 Corinthians 10:1-11). 1. This section is really the Ultimatum before War is declared and opened.—He still hopes that it may be averted. He begs (2 Corinthians 10:1-2) that the necessity of strong measures may not be forced upon him. He had rather come in civilian than in military array, wearing “the meekness and gentleness of Christ.” That very spirit, indeed, displayed for eighteen months when he was amongst them, had been misunderstood. The very unobtrusiveness of demeanour, the very silence as to any Apostolic claim to maintenance, the simple, unadorned presentation of the Gospel of a Crucified Saviour,—had all been perversely interpreted as a consciousness of official and personal inferiority to some other apostles and teachers. Yet he is loth to do otherwise, or to bear himself otherwise amongst them, if he comes again. He is willing even yet to hope—against all he hears from his informants—that (2 Corinthians 10:6, latter clause), before he comes, all this big, boastful talking—so bitter against himself,—and all the many shameful and disorderly doings in the very Church, will be put away, and “the obedience of Christ fulfilled” by them, at least by all but an insignificant minority of “disobedient” ones. The very mildness of such an appeal will, he knows, be again misinterpreted to his disadvantage; this very letter will hardly seem so “weighty and powerful” as usual. Yet he does not want to “destroy.” Anybody can cast a soul out of the fellowship; nothing is easier than to strike a refractory man off a Church roll; with a word he, as an apostle, can “deliver a man to Satan,” with all the awful consequences of such handing over; but this after all is not the main, or his favoured, use of Apostolic power and authority. [So, very rarely did Christ use His power otherwise than for beneficent ends, and never merely to vindicate Himself, or to punish an enemy.] It is given “to build up, not to pull down,” or to ruin (2 Corinthians 10:8). It is the glory of an apostle “not to destroy men’s lives, but to save them” (Luke 9:56). Any hireling can abandon or scatter a flock; a shepherd loves to collect or recover them, even to recover one obstinate, persistent wanderer. It is far more difficult to keep a waverer, or a fallen one, in connection with the Church, and to bring him again into living union with the Head; such work is more congenial to Paul’s heart. Why will they force matters to an extremity by their persistent wrongdoing? (2 Corinthians 10:2). [As above suggested, how all this echoes and embodies the very spirit and attitude of Christ—and so of God—towards rebel sinners. How many an “ultimatum” is sent, full of warning and appeal, before the doom at last falls. God wants peace; the name “Immanuel” is the expression of His desire and effort. If men will have it “God against us,” then they must know all the fulness of His power, moving to execute the sentence of His righteous “wrath.” That power, too, is “in readiness to revenge all disobedience, when the obedience of the Church is fulfilled.” How mighty to destroy; yet how unwilling to set destruction in motion! How lingering His anger; how loth to strike! See, e.g., Christ simply “withdrawing Himself” (Matthew 12:15), and the occasion of it (2 Corinthians 10:14), and the reason (2 Corinthians 10:17).] He is willing even to acknowledge that some of his self-constituted opponents are really “Christ’s” (2 Corinthians 10:7), in a sense comparable to (“even so”) that in which he himself is so. They should be allies, not enemies. A very noble trait this in Paul’s conduct of the controversy. A very high development of grace in a man, that he can hopefully include amongst those who, however erring or mistaken, belong to the Master, his own, even bitter, personal opponents. Difference of judgment too often dims the eyes of love, till it can recognise no brother in the opposite ranks. 2. (1) Still he can, if occasion demand it, and the issue be forced upon him, come to Corinth “travelling in the greatness of his strength.” [Like his Lord again (Isaiah 63:1).] Like the Gospel itself, his Apostolic power has two aspects, according as it looks upon those “who are saved” and those “who perish” (2 Corinthians 2:15). [All goodness has its condemning aspect. It can kill, as well as make alive.] He can be the man of daring boldness (2 Corinthians 10:2). The letters were a truer exposition of the man than was that “weak” bodily appearance because of which they had undervalued him. He has “weapons” in his hand; he is armed for a conflict to the uttermost,—if it comes to that. (What is he thinking of as his weapons of warfare? He could inflict sickness, or death. Yet he can hardly contemplate any extensive use of such an awful prerogative. When he did use it, there was certainly nothing personal in the judicial act; but how easily does such excommunication become “carnal”!) They will find him fearless in condemnation, unmoved by the fear or the favour of any in the Church; they will find a force of will they hardly gave him credit for. The disorders in their midst, the sensuality, the party-spirit, the incipient rationalism (to use the modern word),—these must, and should, be done away with. “Authority”—against authority,—he would take care to make his prevail. [Again we are reminded of the certain, if delayed, victory of the holiness of God, let evil be borne with long as it may, perhaps only to grow bolder because of the very forbearance. See it “exalting itself against the knowledge of God,” in an extreme, an aggravated form just before the final crisis (2 Thessalonians 2:8). So the room in Jairus’s house was filled with scornful laughter, not five minutes before Christ, with the Divine ease of Omnipotence, raised the maiden from death (Matthew 9:24, and || s).] There are evil days in every Church, when no discipline can be too sharp or prompt, no penalty too severe. There are cancers on the moral life of the Church, for which there is only the knife. Gentle means, gentle remonstrance, calm discussion, are no longer admissible. We pity the offender, but at all costs we must put him out of the ministry or out of the Church. So, also, we may be very sensible of the room there is for varying apprehensions of the same truth, and for varying presentations of it; hardly any one mind, or Church, or age, sees all round it; but there may be “heresy,” so obviously such, and so deadly to all spiritual life, or so full of real dishonour to Christ, that no considerations of “liberality,” of “breadth,” no fear of being called “uncharitable,” “narrow,” “heresy-hunter,” must prevent stern denunciation of error, or the most vigorous action against its teachers. “Peace” is worth much, but not worth the sacrifice of principle. [“First pure, then peaceable” (James 3:17).] “Reformation” times, “Disruption” times, all times of conflict for Truth, are rough times. [Campaigning always is. No war is waged without wounds and death.] There must be many things to grieve those who love peace, to whom anything like conflict with brethren is anguish. Bearing witness can always be called obstinate self-pleasing. Discipline will always entail what some will represent as hardship or “carnal” revenge. But a Paul must go right on, marching against the stronghold of Falsehood—practical or doctrinal; the builder-up must sometimes be a fighter, a conqueror, a destroyer. (2) Yet as always remembering that, however personal the temporary, accidental occasions and issues may be, the deep underlying thing at stake is “the obedience of Christ.” Paul is only representative in this matter. He stands only for the Apostolic authority to rule or teach or exercise discipline. “War” against him, resistance to his word and authority, is no personal offence merely, or chiefly; it is resistance to “Christ speaking in him” (2 Corinthians 13:3). Thoughts that exalted themselves against himself only,—they would be nothing; but they exalt themselves “against the knowledge of God.” Paul is the temporary embodiment of the two principles of a Divine Revelation from God through His Son, and by His Spirit through His accredited human messengers; and, next, of the Government of the Church by Christ, through His Spirit and the Discipline of the Church,—whatever form that may, from time to time and from Church to Church, assume. [Cf. the principle which explains many of the imprecations of the Psalms. In assailing God’s Anointed, God’s government was assailed. The righteous Sufferer is often suffering, only because men hate Righteousness. It is personal wrong indeed, but the serious aspect of it is the whole attitude towards God and goodness which it reveals; and on that account is God appealed to to punish it.] It is very hard to be thus impersonal, and indifferent quâ the bearing of the matter upon oneself; but the aim must not be lower than, nor aside from, this. Paul is not engaging in the campaign on his own account. He is hardly the Commander, except as under his Chief, and as winning a victory for his King. It is hard to purify a Church, or to engage in controversy for the Truth, and yet to keep the motive pure! Very difficult to war for truth or for the purity of the Church, without warring “after the flesh,”—very difficult for men who, the holiest and wisest of them, “walk in the flesh,” with all the limitations and liabilities of poor human nature! [“The wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God” (James 1:20).] The “weapons” must not be “carnal.” Passion must not be met with passion nor pride with pride. Intemperate language must be met with temperate; overstated orthodoxy will be no defence against overstated, crude unbelief. Discipline must be dispassionate. Force will be no remedy against doubt. Coercion will not save faith. Fulmination of anathemas and excommunications, petty parochial or domestic persecution,—“carnal” all! 3. The enemy is personal at Corinth.—[I.e. it is no mere vague teaching or spirit he has to deal with; but persons, though (see Critical Notes) it is not necessary to suppose that some one prominent man is singled out in these chapters.] Yet the Corinthian opponents are as representative as himself. The real enemy is the “imaginations” and “high things” which exalt and entrench themselves against God. It is the natural heart and the natural intellect—vitiated by the root sin, Pride—arraying themselves against Authority, the authority of God. Hence the form of the passage (2 Corinthians 10:4-5), which makes it a declaration finding many fulfilments, apart altogether from the particular, historical occasion and exposition. The “imaginations,” the “thoughts,” of the natural heart are not morally neutral; the heart is in them. However it may be in mathematics or in natural science, in theology and ethics there is no “dry light,” or colourless. Everything is studied, accepted, criticised, rejected, in light which is coloured, either at its source, or by the intellectual or heart medium through which it passes. To bow to authority in any sense is repugnant, because of the proud heart. “Independence” seems noblest; [albeit a perfectly impossible ideal for life or thought;] each man, each faculty, will set up its own particular little hill-fort and stronghold within the man. 4. How calmly assured of victory is this Paul, of no imposing presence, with no rhetorical address, coming to a powerful, numerous, wealthy Church whose greater part rejected his authority and sneered at his words, only ironically indeed (?) allowing his written words to have force. Paul did clear away the hill-fortresses. Clement’s epistle to Corinth shows a Church of a wholly different character and temper. B. Paul a pioneer worker. I. He has his province.— 1. Appointed by God (2 Corinthians 10:13); 2. Suited to his natural capacities; 3. This he will occupy to the fullest of its extent (2 Corinthians 10:16); 4. Readily accepting co-operation and support (2 Corinthians 10:15). II. His relations to fellow-workers in other fields.— 1. He recognises that they have a sphere appointed to them (2 Corinthians 10:15). 2. Will not interfere with theirs, and expects that they shall not interfere with his (2 Corinthians 10:13-14). 3. Recognises theirs; not depreciating or envying, or boasting of his own (2 Corinthians 10:17-18). 4. Does his own work, and gives little or no thought to any comparative estimating of men or of success (2 Corinthians 10:12). III. Principles applicable to: 1. Churches and their fields of labour; 2. Different types of workers in same field; 3. Different orders of work for God. I. 1. Has his province: “according to the measure” marked out by God’s measuring-“rule” [rod]. For special reasons, Peter had the honour of first reaping in the Gentile harvest-field (Acts 15:7). He was the real pioneer both to Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2, 10). But at and after the Council, the field was apportioned (Galatians 2:8-9). The act of the United Church only recognised and ratified a Divinely-designed division of the world’s great field. In the central highlands of Asia Minor, on its western coast, in Macedonia, in Greece, Paul touched virgin soil, dealt with untouched heathenism [except so far as, e.g., in Lydia’s case, the presence of Judaism had sent some light into the otherwise unrelieved darkness]. Dangerous work [“have hazarded their lives,”—said of the first missionary inroad into such unevangelised districts (Acts 15:26)], difficult work, but how honourable to bring the Gospel, and to mention the name of Jesus, for the first time to a country, a city, a soul! [Like the honour of the first captain to break through the boom at Derry and to bring supplies to the famishing people (Macaulay, History, chap. 7). Giving a joy like that of the discoverer of a new remedy, who offers it, and sees its success, in some despairing and desperate case.] 2. The work and the man were fitted for each other. It is not accident or caprice, what worker God chooses for a task. For every task, for every enterprise, there is somewhere the very instrument, the man or woman best of all suited by natural equipment, or by the training of education and surroundings, to accomplish it. It is part of the ever-present, all-complicating “problem of evil,” that the Church—and even God—often seem to have to do the work with “second-best” agents. The best are not to hand, or discoverable, by us; He knows indeed where they are, He calls for their service, but they in their awful freedom disregard or refuse the call. Work seems sometimes to languish, because the—obviously well-fitted—worker is unconverted altogether, or, at best, is not entirely devoted to Christ’s cause. [Given natural adaptation, then the needful grace may be had, “for the asking”; prayer will always win this. The natural fitness is a primâ facie call from God. Esther’s fitness was God’s claim upon her (Esther 4:14). He had made her beautiful, and put her upon the throne, with unbounded influence over what heart Xerxes had, “for such a time as this.”] Paul had been trained for his special work. His Roman citizenship put him en rapport with the Empire; his thorough Jewish culture gave him entrée to the Synagogue and the Jewish quarter of a town; the Greek influences of Tarsian boyhood, and, still more, the thoroughness with which he was—beyond perhaps any other apostle or early Christian preacher—emancipated from the prejudice of early training and honest Jewish conviction, so that he apprehended the Gospel with more nearly Christ’s own world-wide view of its adaptation and reach of offer, made him the best to be the pioneer in Gentile lands. [Of natural, physical suitableness, we should have said he had less than some others. Perhaps of no commanding presence; often in poor health; sensitive to slights; unhappy when without sympathetic companionships; soon depressed. His very courage is rather the boldness born of grace, than any special natural courage, which in, e.g., some pioneer travellers seems incapable of feeling fear, or indeed of appreciating danger.] 3. Like his Lord, he desires to say when he lays work down, “It is finished.” Literally this can never be. Work grows as it is being done. But, at least, he desires that no part of his special province shall be unvisited [even to utmost Spain (Romans 15:24; Romans 15:28)]; no part without its centre of light, to radiate illumination through the environing darkness; no mass of population without its lump of the new leaven deposited in its centre. He has a holy ambition to be the first to carry the Light of “the Gospel of Christ.” So, see him; eagerly hurrying hither and thither as the work calls, and openings (Acts 16:6-10) invite; never staying long in any one place [eighteen months in Corinth and three years in Ephesus were his longest voluntary residences in any one centre]; tasting continually the joy of “firstfruits” (Romans 16:5, “Asia”; 1 Corinthians 16:15, Achaia) in the harvest-field. 4. Yet he makes no unwise attempt to do everything himself. Even the pioneer will be stronger and more successful, if behind him there is a company of praying, sympathising supporters, whom first he led to faith, and whose “faith is” now “increased,” and who can now spare him, and “enlarge” him, i.e. can set him at liberty to strike out, and can support him “abundantly” with their contributions whilst he strikes out into “(regions) beyond” Corinth. [The pioneer first makes the Church, and then uses it as a basis. The Church should thank God for its pioneer agents, prize them, stand by them, supply the needful means for carrying on and extending the work. No more precious gift of God to His Church than men suitable to be pioneer-men.] II. 1. Sometimes the pioneer is ensnared by his very consciousness of pioneer gifts and grace. He wants, with a “covetousness” which has its noble side, to cover all the field, and not simply his own special section of it. No man has a monopoly of God’s work. God has other labourers, as well adapted to their own apportioned province as he himself is to his. His intense preoccupation with his own work, and his very consciousness of special aptitude, prevent him from appreciating other men’s work, or from recognising fully that he is not himself fitted for every field and for every form of service. Not so Paul. “Another man” has also “his line”; [not at all in the modern colloquial sense, but] the measuring-“rod” has apportioned a sectional “field” to him. No one man—no one Church—can do everything. Paul has none of that narrowness, which, e.g., cannot say a good word for another man’s methods and work, and indeed cannot see them. 2. Hence he refrains from trespassing upon their ground, though he expects [he did not get it!] the like consideration. 3. His “independence” of spirit (2 Corinthians 10:16) is by no means the subtle self-complacency, the vanity, which makes a man “boast,” “Ah! I was the first to enter Corinth for Christ! No man had proclaimed Jesus in Galatia until I went! Everybody had missed such-and-such a man, until I took him in hand!” That would be a spirit fatal to success, because cutting the man off from the Spirit of God, in Whose strength he can alone hope to succeed. He will not boast of what he is honoured to do even within his own “line.” The Lord does it all! (2 Corinthians 10:17-18). Much less will he intrude into another man’s, and then boast of what he has done “without” (i.e. outside) his “measure.” [As the Judaisers did: “See how many more of Paul’s people we have won over to ‘circumcision as well as Christ’! Galatians 6:13 : “glory in your flesh.”] Depreciation, envy, boasting,—all these are strangers to his work and motives. No; it is the Lord’s errand, the Lord’s field, the Lord’s work, the Lord’s labourers, the Lord’s success. He will “make his boast” only “in the Lord.” 4. He therefore simply goes on with his Master’s work. He will neither make himself the standard for others, nor for himself; his own ways and plans and even mannerisms of success shall not be made the absolute Right; nor will he trouble himself very much about the “comparison” which men are drawing—and his own heart would naturally help them—between him and his fellow-workers. The Lord keep him and them all humble together, and bless their labour with all success, even as he desires to be blessed in his own! [Real danger for workers, nervously anxious about their own qualifications and progress in work, to be continually looking away from themselves—their own spiritual life and their own diligence—and eagerly scrutinising others. Very easily leads to distrust of God, to envy, to despondency, if they suffer by comparison; and to self-sufficiency, if the result of their examination seem flattering to themselves. Better to leave others to themselves and to their work and their Master; to go quietly on with our own, leaving nothing undone that we can compass, to fulfil our own task and cultivate our own special field. “Comparison” work is poor work, ill-spent time and thought!] III. The Churches should carry out the principles, 1. In the arrangement of their work. In some mission-fields, and very often at home, there is waste of activity, of appliances, of plant, of men, by “overlapping.” There are, indeed, calls to enter, which no Church may refuse to listen to. “Open doors” of circumstance and providence compel new enterprises in towns, in mission-fields, where some workers at least are already labouring. But usually the special, temporary call (like that of Peter above) is soon superseded by the paramount considerations which the common sense and the right, catholic, heart of the Church, being herein the expression of the mind of the Lord, dictate; securing some mutual concession and arrangement, dividing the field, leaving each Church in possession of its own “measure” and “line” and province. The spirit which brought Paul’s rivals to Galatia and Corinth,—to reap where he had sown—to pull up, rather, what he had sown, in order to put in their own seed—to steal away from him for themselves, and for their own particular shape of “the Gospel,” the converts whom he had first won for Christ; the selfish competition that follows into a field already brought under cultivation, rather than begin on the untouched forest or the mere waste moorland, in some “regions beyond” the area occupied by the Churches;—these have too often had their individual and their Church embodiment in later ages. Even intense zeal should respect the (perhaps very different kind of) work of other men. 2. God has embodied the principle of apportionment of province and work, in the history of the Truth in His Church. The Churches—the local, national, confessional subsections of The Church—have in the occasions of their divisions, and in their relations to each other, given reason for scorn to the World and pain to every heart which is true to the Unity of the Body. Yet, as always, the historical, providential fact has had its Divine as well as its human aspect. Namely this: Truth is too large a thing for any one mind, or Church, or age to grasp and present, in its all-round completeness. Men, Churches, centuries, have been complementary in their testimony and their work. They have emphasised (have often had their Divine raison d’être for origin and continuance as separate communions, in the need that they should emphasise) now this aspect, now that; perhaps one which was neglected by the rest, or which, by an undue emphasis upon some complementary aspect, had been obscured, or thrust into unmerited discredit; or perhaps one which was specially needed by the man or the time. [Hardly a heresy which has not been an attempt, at first, to recover or express some forgotten phase or portion of truth; becoming a “heresy,” erroneous or mischievous, because, in its turn, crude or ill-balanced in its representation, and failing to do justice to the part of the Whole which others saw and tried to utter.] We may conceivably hold a Church, one in Creed and in organisation, to be in ideal the Best. As matter of fact, the Churches, the ages, the teachers, have each borne their witness to the phase and portion of the Truth which God’s work needed. True Catholicity of spirit recognises that each has a “measure,” a “line,” a province. 3. True Charity as between worker and worker demands the recognition of the principle, “to every man his work” (Mark 13:34). The pulpit will understand the student’s desk, the student will understand the preacher, the evangelist the expositor, the expositor the red-hot evangelist; the worker amongst the facts of criticism of Revelation will not in his library undervalue the country pastor, with his crudely simple, “old-fashioned” views of the Bible, nor will the plain, homely, believing worker be suspicious of the critic; the theologian will give and may ask patient, trustful respect for motives and work, in his relations with the man of science. Each is cultivating his own portion of the field, for the advantage of the Lord of the Whole field; there will therefore be mutual respect, reciprocal non-intrusion in any hostile sense, no mere self-centered comparison of worker and worker, with disparaging thoughts and words concerning “the other” as the issue. There are different types of worker and different orders of work for God. Also IV. (2 Corinthians 10:17-18). The end of the day of toil brings all the Churches, and the workers in all the ages and fields and methods, together before their Common Master. Each brings in his “results”; converts won; fields of knowledge and branches of inquiry secured for Christ; ages or countries and nationalities Christianised, in their literature, their legislation, their social life and its daily moralities; each lays all down before the Lord Christ; and even as His “Well done” is heard, acknowledges that all the success has been His Gift. To-day, and in that day, the man, the Church that glorieth, must let the glorying be “in the Lord.” [“So that, as in my former letter (1 Corinthians 1:31), I said to you of your own personal standing and life in and before God—‘He that glorieth,’ ” etc.] Applause from our own Church, or contemporaries, or coterie, will be valued only as it bears bringing into the presence of Him Whose “approval” is the one absolute, eternally true verdict. His “approval” after His “proving” of the work and the worker,—that only is the satisfying, safe ground of self-gratulation. If He say, “Well done,” then only, whatever be the verdict from others, may our heart say to itself, “Well done.” 2 Corinthians 10:5. The Conflict of Faith with Undue Exaltation of Intellect. I. 1. N.B. Undue exaltation. Religion can have no quarrel with really moral and reasonable intellect, or with human thought that recognises its own weakness and limitations. The arrogance of the pretensions of human thought speaks of a fall, an early, radical convulsion and upheaval which has disturbed the original harmony between reason and revelation. Intellect is the ally, and discoverer, of truth; its highest employment is to be the instrument of religious truth. 2. Also fallen reason is generally enslaved to desire; not free, but unconsciously working at the secret bidding of an irritated passion. Or, working half-conscious of its bondage, for that reason asserts its freedom especially as against the Revelation of God, with nervous, exaggerated vehemence. 3. There is (1) Mercenary Intellect, in bondage to sharp necessity (as it, sometimes reluctantly, thinks), or to the mere spirit of gain. “Cannot afford to have a conscience.” (2) Self-advertising Intellect. Will be “original,” at whatever cost. Takes some subtle delight in perturbing the religious world with its startling assertions, made to win notoriety. (3) Sensualised Intellect. Whole literatures, with their fertility of thought, beauty of language, ample power, aiming to excite basest passions. (4) Self-reliant, cynical Intellect; the slave of a sublime egotism. But its enslavement is disguised, and its cold, clear, incisive energy passes for the very bloom and majesty of perfect intellectual freedom. 4. True there are nobler types amongst the opponents. Their true house is the Church; but they have not yet found the way to Damascus. They may safely be left to God. II. Note, intellectual opposition to Revelation, in the second generation, when the great occasions are over, and the great captains are gone, oftenest takes refuge on some natural heights, or behind some artificial earthworks—some unproved assumption, some disputed principle. E.g. (1) Will admit no room for faith; assumes to know and command the whole field of truth; assumes that there is no higher sphere accessible to man than those of sense and reason. But science never fixes limits to its possible range of inquiry and knowledge. Above the reach of telescope, below that of microscope, it believes in regions of fact hitherto unexplored. No reasonable ground of jealousy if beyond the farthest reach of natural science there be a region real, but unknowable by its powers and instruments of observation. Reason can prove much: an immaterial soul; freedom of will; the righteousness of the judgment of conscience; a First Cause, Who is One, personal, infinite, free, to be obeyed by His creatures. This much, perhaps; with a progress assisted by supernatural guidance, but also disputed at every step. But no more. Death, the Trinity in Godhead, Sin, its removal; of these reason knows nothing that can help the deepest need of the soul of man. She should be faith’s handmaid, not its substitute. (2) Granted a supernatural, revealed sphere of truth; then, next, reason will have no mystery in it, nothing unverifiable or beyond the grasp of reason. An unreasonable assumption to take; we no judges beforehand of what a Revelation should contain. Further, a mystery is a truth, though one hidden from direct knowledge or unassisted inquiry. Also nature is full of mysteries; Life is a thing really unknown to us. So is Force. The higher we mount in the scale of being, the more there are of these hidden truths. To have rid our thought about these great truths of all objection because they are full of mystery, is to have “cast down” an entrenched fortress, with great powers of resistance. (3) Granted a revelation, granted some mystery inevitable; then, next, reason will have no dogmatic form, propounded on authority. But impossible to assert definitely any one belief without dogmatically denying its opposite; without limiting intellectual liberty in regard to it. “The real crime of dogma is that it treats as settled and certain that which unbelief would fain regard as doubtful or false.” Prejudice against dogma the last stronghold of the enemy. If religion is to be practical, it must give truth in a form which will give strength for motive and resistance. If Christian truth had not been definite and dogmatic, it would not for eighteen centuries have satisfied the supreme necessities of the human soul.—Condensed from Liddon, “Univ. Sermons,” 1869, sermon vii. 2 Corinthians 10:3-5. Topic: The Victory of Christ over Thought; or, The Self-sufficiency of Christianity to fulfil its Mission. Note, the Gospel defined as “the knowledge of God”;—knowledge, clear, systematic, defined, adapted to the constitution, circumstances, destiny, of man. Of God; its author, subject, end. Note, further, this Gospel is to bring men’s thoughts into subjection to Jesus Christ; to enthrone Christ in the soul of humanity. Note, also, the Gospel recognises man as a thinker. Man’s thought may be regarded in three aspects:— I. The distinguishing attribute of his nature.—Therefore in seeking to purify and ennoble it, and through it to stir and rule the world, the Gospel is performing a noble function. II. The great parent of his character.—Man is what his thoughts are: false, true, feeble, or vigorous, independent, progressive,—so the man. Nations obey, first Force, and then, as they advance, Thought. No durable prosperity where men’s minds are dormant. III. The chief instrument of his influence.—No influence man can wield is like this. Can only remove corrupt thought by free and loving thought. Christ set His thoughts circulating; is influencing by His thought every part of the world, every factor of the world’s life. So, then, the noblest task of Christianity is to bring thought into subjection to Christ. How? Not by infringing upon freedom of thought or will. By (1) Arousing thought into life and action. The first action of Christ on the mind is to make men think; there are some who had no thoughts until they knew Him. By (2) Removing obstacles. Pulling down, “casting down,” “bringing into captivity,” human depravity. This depravity manifesting itself in (a) Sensuous materialism; the despotism of matter over mind. You cannot hope for, cannot touch, the sensuous man. (b) False philosophy; not this or that system, but the spirit of all wrong systems; proud, mystical, arrogant, forgetting or disdaining the necessary limitations of human mind. (c) Religious superstition; which is indolent; substitutes mechanical action for mental activity (“Don’t think; leave thinking to the priest,” etc.); encourages idleness;—in every religion. (d) Secular authority. (3) On the other hand: “Our weapons,” etc. “It is no secular principle that guides us. We lean on no material, visible power whatever, but the weapons we do use are ‘mighty.’ No matter what the stronghold may be called, its dimensions, its resources, its popularity, down it must go! Mighty to ‘pull down.’ We have only one thing to bear in mind, namely, to be on the side of Christ and truth and spirituality, and, whatever may become of us, our cause must rise and triumph. Have we confidence in spiritual weapons for the truth?… Shall policy, earthly considerations and schemes and measures, however well intended, be able to sustain the religion of Christ, or the truth that came down from heaven? Shall the Bible, or shall something else, be our guide through the voyage of life? Thanks be to God, I have no difficulty in … taking my side as the humblest of the humble in this war, and whatever fortifications may be erected against the truth a breach shall be made. The citadel shall be taken, and the people’s thoughts be made captive to Christ.”—Caleb Morris, “Homilist,” Third Series, vi. 216 (condensed). 2 Corinthians 10:4-5. True Soldiership.—The warlike instinct is in its usual embodiment no more justified by its persistence in human nature than is idolatry or falsehood. Yet there is lawful, urgent use for it. Not against his fellow-man, but, e.g., against nature, to subject it to his use; against his physical propensities; against ignorance, crime, disease, poverty. Plenty to fight against, without fighting man! So then:— I. The weapons of true soldiership.—First, they are “not carnal”; as opposed to (1) Miraculous agency; though employed at first, miracles are not the regular weapons with which Christianity fights her battles; (2) All coercive instrumentality, by the civil power, or other; (3) All crafty inventions, anything which, to exalt a man or forward a sect, accommodates Christianity to the sensuousness, prejudices, credulity, superstition, of mankind. Next, they are “mighty.” (1) They are of God—His productions. (2) They are His instruments. Unlike men and their books, God goes with His ideas, and works by them. Mighty “not through the enactments of law, force of eloquence, cogency of reasoning; not through imposing rituals and thrilling music; not through human zeal, however fervid; not through human sacrifices, however costly; not through human efforts, however adapted and persevering; but through God.” II. The victories of true soldiership.—They are (1) Mental. A storm or a wild beast will more readily overcome the body than you will; unless you conquer the mind, you have not conquered the man. (2) Corrective. Pulling down the fortresses; “prejudices, worldly maxims, associations, passions, habits; behind which the mind entrenches itself against God.” “Infidel thinkings, superstitions, selfish, dishonest, vain, sensual thinkings.” Every anti-theistic feeling and passion. He who strikes at these root-evils of the world, pursues the best plan to conquer all the evils that afflict humanity. (3) Christian. “The forms of the universe come to man mirrored in his thoughts. The great God comes to him only in the reflections of his thoughts. The million forms of civilisation are thoughts embodied. Of thought man weaves his web of destiny, cultivates, his paradise, or kindles his hell; it is the millstone beneath which he shall sink, or the pinions on which he shall rise for ever. Now the work of a true soldier is to bring this fontal force into an entire subjection to Christ—to make all men like Christ; and then, what a world will this be!”—“Homilist,” iv. 32 (condensed). 2 Corinthians 10:1-2. A Christian— I. Must expect reproach.—Can do very little—certainly very little extended work for God—in which will not occur many things capable of diverse estimate and representation, by opposite types of mind, by equally honest judgments, or by those whose acquaintance with the facts is, in varying degree, partial and incomplete. John the Baptist and Christ Himself could not please everybody (Matthew 11:16-19), nor were understood by everybody. Must also take account of the world’s distinct bias against the spiritual man; it always presumes the most unfavourable interpretation. No undue perturbation or astonishment, therefore, if the thing most simply intended, with the most direct aim at doing right, and that as in the sight of God and of Christ, is the very thing made matter of severest and (as we feel and know) “most unjust” animadversion. II. Must endure it meekly.—Too easy for self-esteem—wounded, and not without cause of just complaint—to ruffle itself up, and becloud our judgment of our critics, and put us as utterly in the wrong as they, in our feelings towards them, or in our words about them, or in the method of our self-vindication. III. Yet may meet it with the courage of conscious integrity.—There is time, and occasion, for bearing in silence, and going quietly forward, taking little heed. But there comes time, and necessity for the Gospel’s sake, for simple, direct, bold avowal of what we know to be the truth of the case. (See further, under 1 Corinthians 4:3.) 2 Corinthians 10:3. Our Warfare; our Conditions, our Foes, our Weapons. I. In the flesh.—Weakness, ignorance, infirmity. Do not always do or say the wisest thing. “If only we knew better—” II. Against the flesh. III. Not after the flesh.—E.g. 1. Bodily austerities fail to subdue the evil heart. 2. Physical coercion, persecution to the death, are no right, or serviceable, methods of securing right opinion or right morals. 3. Human passions are no weapons for doing the work of our campaign against error or sin. 2 Corinthians 10:3-5. A true application of this to the war whose purpose and whose issue is the subdual of our own inner self and its life to the yoke of Christ. I. We are part of the “world” which is alienated from, and in revolt against, the mind and will of God. There is a “world” within us, as there is to be a “kingdom of God” within us; the Individual summarises, focusses as into a small, but very vivid, picture the “world,” or “the kingdom,” as seen on the larger scale in the Race. “Spirit” and “flesh” at ceaseless war within. [Galatians 5:17. Observe, not, “So that ye are not in fact able to,” etc., but, “So that ye may not,” etc.; each aiming to restrain the natural aim and action of the other.] The “world” within us is our first, hardest problem. We respond to Matthew 11:28-30, and find “rest” from guilty fear and shame, and from any necessary (Romans 7:18-19; Romans 7:21, etc.) obedience to sinful impulse and habit (Romans 7:25). But only to find a new conflict arising, a new and deeper—deepening—appreciation of the presence and evil of sin cleaving to imagination, judgments, purposes, motives. Hate ourselves for the ignorance, pride, envy, jealousy, self-will, love of sin, indolence in service, inertness towards God and good, which we discover. II. Enemy strongly entrenched.—Sin “native” to us. A usurper, indeed, with no right to possession. [Sin no designed or necessary accompaniment of humanity. Christ’s sinless human life “condemned sin in the flesh” (Romans 8:3). The foundation of all hope of our ultimate triumph in the struggle lies there,—“the Prince of this world”—of this little “world” within us—is “judged,” and shall be “cast out” (John 16:11).] But it has made nearly every faculty and power—bodily or mental—a stronghold. [As, in the days of Stephen’s weak rule, the barons covered England with their strong castles, each of which became a centre of revolt against authority, and of cruel, violent oppression.] Physical appetites—natural, neutral, necessary, per se—have become its seat. Imagination, memory, curiosity, joy in new conquests and acquirements, fear, love, anger (which has a rightful sphere and exercise), ambition (which in itself is a tribute to the nobility of human nature, and has saved the world from stagnation),—all have been fastened upon by sin; need reconquering for Christ. Yet, to measure hope by much of our past experience, or by our observation of others, is to say: “The complete conquest is hopeless! A modus vivendi is all we can expect. Must be content that in the hill-country of Canaan there will to the last remain many unsubdued enemies, of whom the most we can expect is that they submit to tribute, and are kept in fairly continuous subjection. No absolute conquest, or perfect peace, until death puts an end to our strife.” III. Weapons divine.—If it depended upon our watching, praying, effort, our fidelity as against ourselves, our untiring zeal in the warfare; then there would really be no hope of perfect victory; the inner battle-field will never thus be completely cleared of enemies. But remembering the Captain, under Whom we wage the war; the Spirit, our active Ally and Strength; remembering the Key to obtain all needed grace, which, in Faith and Prayer, is put into our hands; remembering the sanctifying power of the Truth (John 17:17); there is hope, there is certainty, of IV. Complete triumph for Christ.—Everything intrinsically and of necessity evil, cast out, cast down; everything in itself natural, neutral, brought under the obedience of a new law—the new thing, “love to Christ,” taking possession of, and regulating all the use and exercise of, every natural endowment, faculty, power, appetite; all that is compatible with loving God with “all the heart,” used, cultivated, indulged, within the limits of His design and law, within the limits where His smile can rest upon us in their indulgence and use. Imagination purified, and turning away from old, evil objects, with a new repulsion; old links of association broken, and new and holier ones set up; all the necessary laws of human thought made to work in new associations and to serve new purposes. [In the parliament of the inner life of the natural man, the government in power belongs to the side of evil; though there is a small, impotent, protesting minority of votes in opposition (e.g. conscience will bear its witness for God from time to time). In conversion Christ comes into power. His “bills” get passed, sometimes in the face of a dogged opposition, and by a narrow majority of votes. When “every thought is brought into the obedience of Christ,” the minority will have disappeared or been utterly silenced. All the votes then go for Christ, and for His will and purposes. He has captured the whole House by His love and by the spell of His cross, and “leads all in His train,” an absolute Master of all.] [When Christ has captured the fort, He will put a garrison in it, to keep it for Himself. Similarly, and in very close analogy, as to anxious thoughts, see Philippians 4:6-7, made very clear in the R.V.] 2 Corinthians 10:5. [Special application to] “Wandering Thoughts.”—Older sense of phrase was wider than ours; equivalent to “all thoughts which wandered from God,” thus covering all the workings of the natural heart. Customary use to-day is rather for “all thoughts which wander from the point in hand.” Really the wandering of attention. Can the attention be perfectly “brought into the obedience of Christ”?I. Analyse the process.—[Great relief to some consciences to know that very largely, very frequently, “wandering thoughts” are not per se sinful, but are the consequence of want of that mental discipline, for which every student, on every subject, finds it necessary to struggle; the acquisition of the power of giving fixed attention, at will, for any length of time, being of the first necessity in all serious learning, and accounted by a student worth any price to obtain.] (Say) in prayer. In the morning, when going to ask for the coming day’s help, we consider the circumstances likely to arise, the persons likely to be met with. The thought of no one of these comes alone, but linked with memories of former occasions, difficulties, deliverances, failures. An undisciplined attention finds every one of these memories the possible beginning of a train of thought which is followed, one thing suggesting another, until some sudden recollection shows the person who is bowed in prayer that, for he hardly knows how long, he has forgotten the matter he began with, and has reached a point at which he can hardly understand how he arrived. Pulls himself together and begins again; only to find every new request, every memory of past need or help, becoming “points” on a railway which “shunt” his mind on to a “siding,” leaving him far away from his destination and his business. Or in reading the Word, or listening to a preacher; attention wanders. [Sometimes the preacher’s fault. Does not know his business; viz. how to speak so as to win attention for his topic and his message. Very often result of mere physical weariness, which God perfectly understands, and does not condemn. Too weary—quite blamelessly—after a hard day, or a hard week, to give fixed attention to the reading or the sermon. This entry is longer than a Bible module can hold. The rest is at https://www.sermonindex.net/commentary/phc/ NOTES2 Corinthians 11:1.—Small change of rendering, “a bit of foolishness,” because of small variation of reading. “For, on my own principle (2 Corinthians 10:18), it is foolishness.” To appreciate how “foolish” such talking about himself is, look at the (eight) occurrences of the word (or its cognates) here, and in Romans 2:20; Ephesians 5:17; 1 Corinthians 15:36. “Yet only a little bit will I indulge in, and that because I love you.” Choose between (indic.), “I will not say would that; ye do”; and (imper.), “Would that …; yea, I beg of you, do.” No “to God” in Greek.2 Corinthians 11:2. Godly.—Lit. as margin; as 2 Corinthians 1:12. [Cf. 2 Corinthians 7:9-11 (but not Hebrews 12:28); also cf. Acts 7:20. Espoused.—Paul is the Friend of the Bridegroom (like the Baptist, John 3:29. The Rabbis called Moses the “Friend” between Israel and God). The Church is to be the Virgin-wife by-and-by. We are here in the interval between the betrothal, which Paul has effected, and the actual bringing of the Bride to her Husband, when his office shall be perfected. [“Between … betrothal and … marriage … the bride-elect lived with her friends, and all communication between herself and her future husband was carried on through the medium of a friend deputed for the purpose, termed the ‘friend of the bridegroom (John 3:29). She was now virtually regarded as the wife of her future husband.… Faithlessness was punishable with death.” (Smith, B. D., s.v. “Marriage.”] Hence Paul’s “jealousy.” He is responsible for bringing to the “one man” Christ an unspotted, “virgin” Church.2 Corinthians 11:3. The “corrupters” being the bride’s “friends” (ut supr.) or other “suitors,” viz. the rival teachers of Corinth. Same idea of rival aspirants to a damsel’s hand and heart in Galatians 4:17, “They are hot in their courting,” etc. 1. Observe, he is not concerned lest himself, Paul, should be robbed of their love, but that the Husband, Christ, should be. 2. Observe, also, “the purity” (by a better reading) and “unto Christ” not “in.” The virgin simplicity and purity are to be kept inviolate for the sake of the love of the Husband. 3. Observe, the story of Eve and the serpent is (unquestionably) to Paul a real, historical event. Not quoted merely as a scholar might quote an apposite parallel from classical mythology in (say) Ovid or Virgil. That the Holy Spirit likewise sets His attestation upon it, also follows, to all who accept Paul as in these letters the organ of the “Spirit unto the Churches” (Revelation 2, 3); Paul is here used by Him to trace in a sample instance the daily, ordinary workings of evil back to him whose first, and too successful, attempt has been the pattern and germ of all since. [“Serpent” only mentioned in Genesis; Wisdom (Wis 2:24) first makes the serpent the Devil; cf. Revelation 12:9; Revelation 20:2.2 Corinthians 11:4. Observe, “Jesus,” “Spirit” (not “spirit”), “Gospel.” Well.—Ironically (as perhaps Mark 7:9). Conybeare and Howson think, “bear with me.” Observe indicative. Also, no particular person meant.2 Corinthians 11:5. Very chiefest.—As in 2 Corinthians 12:11. Q.d. “Therefore you should much rather bear with me, for,” etc.2 Corinthians 11:6.—Very old question, e.g. between Jerome (“Yes”) and Augustine (“No”), whether Paul seriously means this, or is only quoting his enemies. In any case the want of rhetorical grace was a voluntary abnegation [an “emptying of himself”] (1 Corinthians 2:1-5). [Cf. John Wesley: “I could even now write as floridly and rhetorically as the admired Dr. B—; but I dare not; because I seek the honour that cometh of God only.… I dare no more write in a fine style than wear a fine coat” (Works, vi. 186).] Observe the better reading. Knowledge.—The special “gift” (1 Corinthians 1:5; 1 Corinthians 13:2; 1 Corinthians 12:18). .—2 Corinthians 11:1-6 We have Paul the Paranymph (the Friend of the Bridegroom). I. His work.—To deliver, in her virgin purity and simplicity, the betrothed Church to her expectant Lord and Husband. [Cf. “bring us to God” (1 Peter 3:18).] 1. Marriage, closest of earthly unions, intended by its Great Ordainer to be a permanent, lifelong union, is the suggestive hint in the world of things natural of that closest spiritual union, between Christ and His people, which makes them a Unit, “Christ” (Galatians 3:16; 1 Corinthians 12:12). That revealed, the key is given to the significance and sanctity of marriage. [So, in connection with counsels as to husbands and wives, Ephesians 5:27, Paul says: “To present … to Himself a glorious Church,”—as His “Bride, the Lamb’s Wife” (Revelation 21:9)—“not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing, … without blemish.” All the Old Testament figurative language about marriage, adultery, divorce, restoration, as regards God’s people and their relation to Him, is not simply a happy use of a natural fact, but rests on this deep, original, designed fitness in marriage to exhibit the spiritual relations.] 2. What a day of joyous memory to the soul itself, and to the human instrument, is that when he stood by and saw the “love of espousals” (Jeremiah 2:2), when the soul first got to know its Christ, to whom from that hour it was to be united;—the first tender love, so sensitive to anything which would grieve Him; the simplicity of heart, judgment, purpose, desiring nothing but to think what He thought, and desire what He desired, and to please the new, and so dear, Friend in everything; nothing kept back, no after-thoughts, or under thoughts, nothing but a simple, loving, pure opening-up of all the heart and life to the knowledge and guidance of Christ. Then the yet earlier memories of the incidents, the providences, the drawings of the Spirit, the half-understood going-out of the heart, the meeting with Paul or some other,—all leading up to the introduction and espousal. [How Lydia would remember “the first day” (Philippians 1:5).] One of the earthly anniversaries never to fade away into oblivion, but still to be kept most joyously even in eternity! 3. What a day of joyful, holy anticipation that, when for the first time I see, literally and “face to face” (1 Corinthians 13:12), the Christ of Whom I have been hearing, thinking, speaking, so long; “Whom not having seen I have loved” (1 Peter 1:8), and Who has loved me so much better than I have deserved, or could ever have expected. How joyous to Him, “satisfied” at last (Isaiah 53:11), to look into the face of His Bride, “resting in His love, rejoicing over her with joy” (Zephaniah 3:17); repaid at last for Gethsemane and Calvary; reaping at last the fruit of the age-long “purpose” of His Father’s heart and His own (Revelation 13:8; Ephesians 3:11); tasting in full draught the cup of “the joy that was set before Him” (Hebrews 12:2), having now all He desired and died for. And how joyous to the Paranymph, glad to stand aside and see Bride and Bridegroom meet, she brought safely at last to her Husband’s home, himself forgotten by them in their mutual joy. [So John Baptist, “This my joy is fulfilled.”] His responsibility is then over; the “care of the Churches” will no longer press, even as a not ungrateful burden. “I present to Thee, Lord, a chaste, virgin Church.” [In all this, “Church,” “Church,” practically means “Christian,” “Christian.” The Church and its history are only multiples of the Christian and his history. Or, conversely, the individual reproduces, in miniature but complete copy, the history of the whole.] II. His feelings: “jealousy,” “fear.”— 1. Jealousy often has in us an evil connotation and colouring. It is selfish. Pride is touched when the transferred love, won from us by another, tells that we are not first, or counted best. In God (or Christ) it is not “selfish,” except with the “selfishness” of the king who cannot tolerate a rival king in his realm or on his throne. God may, must (as we may not), claim that all the heart shall, unshared, be His. Paul’s jealousy has no selfish tinge. No great matter whether converts transfer their love for him to rival teachers or not, but a great matter whether these rival teachers come courting the Lord’s betrothed One, and steal her love from Him; a great matter if they tamper with the simple, pure, direct love of her heart for Him. 2. The pain to a minister of Christ to see his converts “leave their first love,” become worldly, return to, and guilefully plead for and defend, forms of sin which the healthier love of their betrothal condemned by instinct, because it grieved the Lord,—it is a great pain, not chiefly because his own work seems ending in failure, but because the Lord will be “so disappointed,” and the unfaithful souls are preparing for themselves such eternal loss. 3. Very well to be tolerant, broad, towards other forms of teaching and other types, or Churches, of Christian workers; but there is no virtue in a toleration which can stand by and with silent equanimity see the beautiful promise of early, tender love to Christ spoiled, the simple conscience being sophisticated and entangled in worldly sophistries, the life being “brought again into bondage” to once forsaken sins. 4. Let the soul itself beware of the “corrupting” process (1 Corinthians 15:33). Lend no ear, Eve-like, to the arguments, suggestions, “more liberal” reasonings and practice of the world, or of a worldly Church; the old Serpent is in them all, at his old work, with his old “craftiness.” It is Eden and the Fall in perpetual repetition. The very (necessary) contact with evil and evil men is corrupting, or at least perilous; even mental contact with evil in books is not without danger. The tender susceptibility of conscience is easily impaired; it “takes a fine edge,” and loses it readily. Let a “jealous” guard be kept over the loyalty of the heart to Christ; let the first sign of a waning sense of His being supremely “dear,” be noted, confessed, forgiven. Intercourse with Him, though He be unseen, must be frequent. Only thus can love to Him breathe or live in the corrupt atmosphere; only a vigorous inner life of consecration to Him can throw off the infection around, and live through it unharmed. The sense of duty to Him must be cultivated—“I am reserved for Him”; every disregard of Duty dulls the perception of Duty. Acts make habits of mind and heart [and body]. Every betrothed soul “that hath its hope set upon Him, purifieth itself,” etc. (1 John 3:3). [Cf. 1 John 2:28; 2 Peter 3:14. III. His methods.— 1. He is a “preacher.” [1 Corinthians 1:21 not to be used here.] 2. He preaches a Jesus, through Whom his hearers receive a Spirit. [In this case the personal Holy Ghost (1 Corinthians 2:12).] 3. His message is a Gospel. It is good news for an outcast world, that God sends His servants to say, “Come to the wedding,” even as guests. Good news that to alienated man it is proclaimed that a [marriage] fellowship with God is again possible, resting on two great facts, resting upon the work of two Divine Persons. Outside us, and abiding here, whether men avail themselves of it or not, is the work of Christ,—the basis of all. Within us, and depending for its actuality and continuity upon our acceptance of it and co-operation with it, are the gift, the indwelling, the work, of the Spirit. No fellowship without the Spirit; no Spirit without Christ; no Gospel without a “Jesus” and a “Holy Ghost.” A “Gospel” which should ignore either Person, or His office and work, would be no Gospel at all. A “Gospel” which should undervalue or understate (say) the doctrine of the Holy Spirit—though, on the other hand, it should “proclaim” the “blood,” the “cross,” the “atonement” of Christ never so loudly and earnestly—would be an imperfect Gospel. There can be “another Gospel” [not “another,” i.e. a companion, parallel, Gospel; it is a “different” Gospel, Galatians 1:6-7, and here, as R.V.], “another Jesus,” “another Spirit.” [This last in 1 Corinthians 2:12—in accordance with that parallelism of phrases and facts which in Scripture obtains between the kingdom of light and the kingdom of darkness—seems almost to imply an action of the Evil One upon the soul, comparable to that of the Holy One upon it.] A “Gospel” which should minify or suppress an Atonement for guilt by a Sacrifice upon the Cross; which should deal with men as though there were no guilt, and no Sacrifice were needed; a “Gospel” whose appeal to men should assume that they can, if they will, rise out of and above their old and evil self, and by self-originated, self-sustained effort can improve some inherent, natural “goodness,” and that they need no external, Divine help and grace; a “Gospel” which should propose to renovate the world, to regenerate the man, by sanitation, art, music, intellectual culture; such—true or false, as their exponents or opponents may deem them—are at all events “different Gospels” from that preached by, and successful in the hands of, Paul and the “Evangelical” preacher. They are proved such experimentally; for they do not bring about any “betrothal” of the soul to Christ. Not the phrase only, but the thing, is scouted by some of the human “Gospels of the age.” There is some help in some of them; much help in a few; but they miss the deepest need of human hearts. They do not take into sufficient account [e.g. in denying a vicarious atonement] some instincts of human hearts which Paul’s—Christ’s—Gospel has been proved to meet. Only one Gospel, yet men scarcely tolerate it; many deceivers and false Gospels, and men “bear them finely”! There may be “a different Christ.” E.g. one something less than Divine as the Father is Divine; one who is the Head, the Crown, the Flower, the mediating Origin of all creaturely existence, nearest the Creator, and yet all the great gulf between Creator and Creature between him and God. Or one who is only “Jesus,” the very flower of the Race, the choicest exponent and embodiment of all that is most lovely and noble in Manhood, a human teacher, who spake indeed “as never man spake” save himself, but yet with a wisdom and knowledge only different in degree—not in kind—from that which “inspires” the highest type of human teachers. Or, still lower, an amiable, well-intentioned, philanthropic, enthusiastic soul, in full communion with nature, who could, and did, make mistakes in conduct and judgment; who could [and perhaps did] sin, at least in spirit and temper; who was hurried into unadvised, unintended courses by the force of circumstances, and played into the hands of enemies who compassed his death. [The growing prevalence of the use of “Jesus” instead of “Christ” is significant. It means (frequently, happily) a clearer, truer realisation of the historical side of the life and work of the Incarnate Redeemer, with the aid of a wealth of geographical, historical, literary, antiquarian knowledge which never was available until to-day, till we see and hear Jesus of Nazareth and His surroundings of persons and circumstances, almost as if we had lived amongst His contemporaries. A good thing, but needing to be watched, lest we see “Jesus” so clearly that we cannot see the “Christ.” The very apostles needed not only that the Spirit should purify their eyes, and enable them to understand the true dignity of their Divine Friend, but also that the embarrassment and obscuration of close everyday intercourse with the man, should be removed by time and absence, and they be left free to see “their Lord and their God.” The change of name often means also a “naturalism” of estimate and of representation of Christ and His work, whose tendency is so to overstate the “emptying” of Philippians 2:7 that human limitations, and even liabilities, leave too little room for the Divine Son in the teaching and the work.] [The believing heart needs to watch against the “corruption” of the “simplicity” of adoring, worshipping belief in a Jesus, Who is Incarnate God as certainly as He was the (to-day more vividly known) Jesus of Nazareth. The closest intercourse between the soul and her Betrothed must be kept up. The “Spirit” must take that Godhead of her Lord which only He can really reveal (1 Corinthians 12:3), and which is a holy “secret” of love between the Lord and the soul (cf. Psalms 25:14); the soul’s life must so rest upon a Divine Christ, that it can bear to know the historic Jesus better, without any peril of knowing the Divine, Redeeming, Incarnate Son of God less well. Hard to balance, to combine, both. But semi-naturalist “Lives of Christ” must not leave us with “another Jesus.”] Paul in Philippians 1:18 is very “liberal,” “broad,” rejoicing that men who would not otherwise do so, are hearing of Christ, and this though the preachers—many of them his opponents the Judaisers—preach an aspect, exhibit a form, of the Gospel which was by no means his own, or that which he thought truest and best. Yet, with perfect consistency, he is very “narrow” and intolerant of another Gospel or another Christ (1 Corinthians 3:11; Galatians 1:6-9; Galatians 5:11-12; and, in effect, here). The same supreme loyalty to Christ, the same ardent devotion to Him, rules in both cases, but is conditioned differently in its resulting expression. IV. His qualifications.— 1. “Rude in speech.” Some justification for this, though the phrase is the phrase of detraction and depreciation. The portrait drawn by an enemy must have some measure of resemblance. We know that he had deliberately refused to himself even the liberty to employ the aid of rhetoric to win attention and acceptance for his Master and his Message. Others, even his friend Apollos, might, blamelessly, use any rhetorical power, inborn or acquired, laying it under contribution for the service of Christ. Succeed or fail, he would not. [Too much must not be made of any supposed discouragement over a “failure” at Athens, just before coming to Corinth. The address on Mars’ Hill was not without its converts; nor was it specially ornate in form; it was, moreover, just coming to (very Evangelical) talk about Resurrection and Judgment, when it was suddenly broken off by the hearers’ outburst of laughter. It was not that he had tried the rhetorical method at Athens, and had failed to make converts; it was rather the imperviousness of the intellectual mood to serious appeal, manifest in the majority of his Athenian audience, which made so emphatic his determination that at Corinth nothing should even seem to aim at flattering the “intellect” or tickling the “cultured” ear of the Corinthians.] [See further, under 1 Corinthians 2:13; and in Farrar, St. Paul, Appendix, Excursus I., II., III., are very full discussions and quotations of opinion, as to the style of Paul’s writing (and so, probably, of his speaking also).] Ought we to call this “rudeness” rather a disqualification? No. He wished to make souls hear and love not his voice, but the voice of the Bridegroom. [Sometimes a preacher will preach so “well,” that, like John Alden pleading or Miles Standish, the pleader, all unintentionally, wins the ear and heart for himself, and holds them back from the Lord for Whom He pleads. So the “execution” and voice of the singer will sometimes make the very song to be almost unheeded. Cf. Ezekiel 33:32; the prophet’s message went for nothing.] A successful winner of souls may, should, bring every natural or acquired ability into the service of his Master. But always with a most watchful jealousy over himself lest he himself should thus “corrupt” his hearers “from the simplicity and purity,” and really do the work of the Tempter. Always with a completeness of consecration of all gifts to the supreme, sole, glory Christ; and this for some hearers, and with the personal liability of some preachers, may sometimes mean the disuse of some gifts, or their very sparing employment. The glory of success will then be manifestly due, not to the eloquence of the preacher, but to the power of God. [This all more fully under 1 Cor. ut supr.] The man who is willing to be nothing, that the Lord may be everything, is qualified for the work of bringing souls and Christ together. Provided that he be “not rude in knowledge”; for above all in the things of God, the man who is shallow and crude will only be a workman “to be ashamed.” No knowledge ever comes amiss to a preacher; like Sir Walter Scott, he will learn never to talk to any man without picking up something which he may turn to good account; he cannot know too well men and affairs and the world of nature or the arts, if only all his knowledge be laid before Christ as gifts upon the altar. But with or without this he must know “the things of God.” [The preacher who is well-read, well-informed, about everything except the very subjects which are the materials of his “business,” makes a mistake. The Bible is the text-book of his spiritual Medicine; Theology is the Science of his Art of Healing; men are “cases” of heart-sickness, for his physicianly study and help. So far as study and hard work can do it, he should “qualify,” “with honours” if he can, as a soul-physician. Poor talk to hear a preacher cry down “theology”; poor praise that he be better at everything than at soul-saving preaching.] No premium must be put upon coarseness or vulgarity of thought or expression; this is no qualification for a minister of Christ. But want of polish, or defective utterance, is consistent with real ability, deep knowledge, great success. Many of the least “gifted” are the very “little children” to whom is given entrance into, and foremost place in, the kingdom of God (Matthew 18:1-4). With what persuasive power do some, “little qualified,” speak of the blessedness of fellowship with Christ into which they desire to bring other men. How they “know Christ,” with a knowledge, an intimacy, only given to “disciples whom Jesus loves.” Not only is their motto, “This one thing I do,” but, “This one thing I know.” They are not “rude in” the experienced “knowledge” of Divine things. Paul was not. It is no empty boast in 2 Corinthians 11:5. It is no boast, in any sense of self-assertion or exaltation. It is simple fact that, not only in comparison with the “super-eminent” (but “false,” “sham”) “apostles” at Corinth, but in competition with the true apostles of Christ, he has left his mark most deeply on the form of Christian revelation, or is only approached by John. More than any other, did he seem to “know” the mind and will of Christ. And, as always happens, there was a “native,” prearranged fitness in the “vessel,” to receive and convey the truth. 2 Corinthians 11:2. Espoused to Christ. I. Your privilege;—implies believing union with Christ; special duties and enjoyments; entire consecration as to one husband. II. Your espousals effected by the grace of God; through the ministry of the Word. III. Your obligations, to preserve your purity; that we may present you to Christ; for this we are jealous over you.—[J. L.] [Cautiously, use may be made of the experiences or memories of the days of “engagement,” to make vivid the nature and effects of the love for our absent, but real, Friend. Is there no “engagement ring,” and no “marriage ring,” between Christ and His soul-bride? A first pledge of love and a second given in the beginnings of their closer acquaintance and mutual affection; to be far outdone by another love-token which shall be given when first the Bride steps with Him over the threshold into the heaven which is eternally to be their Home together. How love works:—There is the frequent interchange of messages by letter whilst apart. Each lives in the constant thought of the other; each is prompted to be thinking for, contriving little pleasures for, the other, even in absence. Each is trying to be, and to do, what the other would like. Also ask: “Soul, has thy Lord had to give His Betrothed One a bill of divorcement, for any unfaithfulness to Him?”] 2 Corinthians 11:2. The work of the Ministry needs for its completeness— I. Winning souls for Christ.—Yet some men, some Churches, do not follow this up by— II. Keeping and preparing them for Christ.—[As Esther under the care of Hegai, was being got ready for the day of her actual marriage to the King.] By thorough training, educating, in holiness. Watching over them, watching against men, or habits, or books, which would “corrupt.” Never will minister say, or Church, “It is finished,” until— III. They are presented, none missing, all pure, to Christ. [Concerning some converts, many a minister says: “I am almost thankful to hear they are gone to heaven. I never felt safe about them until now.”] 2 Corinthians 11:3. (Put on the Blackboard for an Address: S[atan]. S[ubtlety]. S[implicity.]) I. An adversary.—Count on him as against you; against all your best interests; against all that is best in your character; against all which makes Christ look with complacency on His Bride that is to be. Practically believe in a devil. A fool’s Paradise for you if you don’t. He comes even into a real Paradise. No place is sacred to him; no state of life, no work, no pleasure. Christian soldier is never doing a “sham fight.” Never can afford to “stand at ease.” II. Favourite weapon and method.—Not often open attack; but bush-fighting warfare. Secret aim; deadly shots before we know danger near. “Resist the Devil?” Yes, when he gives the chance. But often has done us mischief before we knew of the danger. Hidden behind a plausible suggestion of excuse for doing less for Christ, or behind a plea for breadth; lurking in some natural affection; hidden in the sensuous fiction, which “everybody is reading.” “Having done all” (Ephesians 6:13),—when the open attack has been foiled, the seen danger escaped, the obvious sin refused,—when the battle seems over and the enemy has drawn off, and you, weary, want to rest from the strain of incessant watching,—“stand!” Just then have a care of the subtlety. You have passed safely through the temptation of illness? Take care of the subtle temptations of recovery. Have outlived unpopularity or persecution? Take heed of the subtle temptations of popularity and honour! etc, etc. III. Your defence, and so his point of attack, will be your simplicity. (See Homiletic Analysis.) “Singleness of purpose, integrity, generosity, impartiality; that openness and sincerity of heart which repudiates duplicity in thought or action. No idea of simplicity in the ordinary use of the word, except … simple concerning evil, simple in respect of any attachment which might seduce them from the singleness of devotion, the undivided homage and affection due to Christ.” (Rev. W. Webster, M. A) A wonderful Ithuriel-spear-like touch has such a simplicity of thought and heart, in detecting sin in practice or proposal, and even such error in doctrine as would affect the glory or work of Christ. The little child has an instinct which unmasks the subtle Tempter. Let there be no touching or looking at the “apple,” lest the heart be drawn aside. In the face of Temptation you are undone if you reason; the swift, simple instinct will guide and save. Subtlety against subtlety,—you will be no match for Satan. Simplicity against subtlety,—you will conquer. Let the oldest Christian, with all the increase of knowledge and experience which years bring, keep the first tenderness of the little child stage; when the new-born love feared to do, or say, anything that would grieve Christ,—in friendships, business, pleasures, books. NOTES2 Corinthians 11:7. Or.—Turning to another topic. Offence.—Lit. “Sin.” Freely.—I.e. “without charge.” Cf. Philippians 4:12.2 Corinthians 11:8. Other Churches.—E.g. Philippi (Philippians 4:15). But, for another reason, not Thessalonica (2 Thessalonians 3:8-9). Beet suggests that he accepted the second Philippian contribution, which reached him in Thessalonica, expressly with the Grecian journey and its expenses in his view. Robbed.—Cf. Romans 2:22; Acts 19:37. Wages.—A soldier’s “pay,” as Romans 6:23.2 Corinthians 11:9. Wanted.—I.e. “was in want.” Graphic touch of incidental fact, as to his residence in Corinth. Did not (perhaps his work did not leave him time to) earn enough for his necessities! The man who at that moment was the most important factor in the world’s progress. Burdensome.—See 2 Corinthians 12:13-14 (Separate Homily).2 Corinthians 11:10.—The very truthfulness of Christ Himself. Like, “I say the truth in Christ” (Romans 9:1). A man who is “in Christ,” who is a member of Christ’s very body,—how shall anything but the true Christ who is in him find expression on his lips?2 Corinthians 11:11.—Some said, perversely: “Yes; it shows plainly that you do not care for us, as you do for the Philippians.” .—2 Corinthians 11:7-11[Dr. J. Lyth, Homil. Treas., suggests:—] I. Honest robbery (2 Corinthians 11:8). II. Honourable poverty (2 Corinthians 11:9). III. Honourable independence (2 Corinthians 11:7; 2 Corinthians 11:9-10). I. 1. The labourer is worthy of his “wages.” [Opposite to “gift” Romans 6 ult.] A true minister earns his stipend; though the happier, higher theory is that his people see that he wants for nothing, whilst, without interruption or care, he gives all his time and strength to the work of God. But there are always “unreasonable men” (2 Thessalonians 3:2) with whom, whatever he does, whatever course he adopts, the minister always “commits a sin.” If he take, or ask, for support, he is “mercenary” (2 Corinthians 12:17-18). If he do not ask, or refuses, support, he “does not care for” his people, or for their love, and will not let them show it (2 Corinthians 11:11). Again and again he can only carry his case by appeal to a higher court: “God knoweth.” Though, like Paul, he may now and then be compelled to speak out, to explain and defend himself and his conduct,—generally he does most wisely to see that his character is right before God, and to leave God to care for his reputation before men. Paul takes or refuses as may in any given case seem expedient. His is the true unchangeableness [like God’s own]; not that he never varies from one line of action, but that he never varies from the unchanging principles of his conduct. 2. Hence it is quite honest to have accepted the gifts of the Philippians. It is part of the privilege of the ministerial office to live more directly than does any other man, not actually a recipient of charity, upon the love of human hearts. There can be no “business payment” for what the true minister of Christ has done for a convert, or for what he gives to his people in his continuous ministrations. It is no exchange of values, as in business payments or wages. The true minister, nevertheless, does give full value for all he receives. The people, on the other hand, of their free-will and grateful love “minister once and again to his necessity” (Philippians 4:16). If a minister “will not work, neither should he eat” (2 Thessalonians 3:10). But if he do his work, he may take “wages,” that are no wages, but the gifts of love. 3. Especially may he receive what may support him as he strikes out (like Paul setting out for work in Achaia) into regions where his reception and maintenance are doubtful. To shame a people, so well able to fulfil their obligation to the man who has led them to Christ as were the Corinthians, Paul may call it a quasi-sacrilegious “robbery” of the Church treasury at Philippi. But the Philippians love to see, the Corinthians ought to see, that Paul wants for nothing. II. Honourable poverty.—A man like Paul in want, in a city like Corinth! Yet of all men in the empire then receiving their “wages,” this man—if only the “age” had known—was better worth his “salt,” and his salt-money—his salary—than the emperor, or his soldiers, or the philosophers, or the artists. It is the old paradox of Providence. Tiberius on the throne, feasted to the weariness of satiety; the Son of God hungry in the wilderness! Truly “the world is out of joint.” The Maker of the world, the Ordainer of the fundamental laws of human society, “meant it not so.” “I know how to … be abased; I know how to be … hungry … and to suffer need” (Philippians 4:12). Not every man does. It is a grace. The “poverty” of the ministry may mar a man’s character and impede his usefulness, if he allow it to occasion a perpetual anxiety, if it feed a continual bitterness against God and the Church, if he nurse a continual sense of “humiliation,” at being “poor” amongst the prosperous men in his church, if he be frequently talking of the “sacrifice” he made to enter the Christian ministry. Paul had “learned the secret.” It needs great grace “to be full”; but it needs great grace “to be hungry.” The minister “can do all things”—even wear ministerial poverty “honourably”—“through Christ who strengthened him” (Phil, ut supr.). Yet the beauty and right of such liberality as that of the poor Macedonians, the expression of their sympathy and love, and a precious fruit of their faith, remains equally honourable; whilst the wealthy indifference of Corinth, which should have seen to it that the Apostle had no need to practise the lesson of wearing poverty with honour, remains utterly selfish and blamable. III. Honourable independence.— 1. “Honourable,” because it better enabled Paul “to do the Corinthians service,” and to silence the cavillers whose suggestions and cavils might impinge upon his character, and, through him representatively, upon that of the ministry generally. “No man shall stop me of this boasting.” “So will I keep myself.” 2. Such “independence” needs watching; needs perpetually bringing into review in the presence of Christ. It easily grows to be really a pride which will not take the gifts of those from whom real, or imaginary, slights may have been received. Very easily does sin creep in and make the boast of “independence” a piece of self-pleasing, and even of simple obstinacy of character. 3. “Independence” is only worth anything to a Christian minister so far as it means, or ministers to, a perfect freedom to speak the message of God in its fulness, without regard to men’s pleasure or displeasure. If, for the glory of Christ and his freedom to be faithful, the minister seek or keep independence, it may be “honourable.” It is then a just matter of “boasting,” and may be worth keeping at any price. 4. If the “truthfulness of Christ,” that perfect simplicity and directness of heart and judgment and will which were part of His perfect holiness, be in a man, it will dignify and sanctify his “independence” of character, opinion, circumstances. If a man’s motives bear bringing under the scrutiny of the eye of “God Who knoweth,” then though they be misjudged, as by somebody they certainly will be, or maliciously misrepresented, he may go on his way unmoved. It is often a good piece of holy strategy, by timely foregoing of rights—catching suggestion even from the very enemy—to destroy the very basis of operations, from which the assault of the unfriendly criticism or judgment is made. Only, once more, neither in the strategy, nor in the success of it, must Self find a foothold. All must be for the sake of Christ and to facilitate, or to remove hindrances to, His work. NOTES2 Corinthians 11:12. Occasion.—General drift clear, particular application difficult, from our ignorance of facts. Hard to reconcile some of the presumed cavils and accusations; which have to be inferred from Paul’s replies. But consistency in perversity is not to be looked for. [Cf. “We have piped; … we have mourned”; q.d. “Whatever we do, there is no pleasing you anyway.”] Last clause plainly means: “That they and we may be made to stand on same footing, as to our worthiness and our rights.” This, however, is ambiguous to us, for lack of the key of actual facts. Found does not mean “found out” in any sense of being “unmasked,” but (as it were, judicially) “found” [cf. the “findings” of a court] in the opinion of others (Galatians 2:17; 1 Corinthians 4:2; 1 Corinthians 15:15; 2 Corinthians 5:3 [?]).2 Corinthians 11:13.—Contrast with “supereminent app.” (2 Corinthians 11:5), “I say, They are no apostles at all! They say, I am ‘catching you with guile.’ Nay, they are workers full of guile [related word] in all they do.” good.2 Corinthians 11:14.—The only Jewish parallel adduced is a solitary opinion of a Rabbi that the angel who wrestled with Jacob was a so-transformed evil spirit! Perhaps Job 1 may have been in Paul’s mind. Or a perfectly general assertion. Light.—Cf. Epb. 2 Corinthians 5:8; 1 Thessalonians 5:5; 1 John 1:5, etc. No marvel.—“If the Prince of Darkness can stride over the vast gulf which separates his real nature from the outward appearance of an angel of light, his agents can step over the narrower chasm which divides them from apostles of Christ.… Beings of darkness and beings of light are opposites, whereas human beings are capable of living and moving in either … darkness or light. They are flexible to either element, although they cannot belong to both at the same time. Satan, who is ‘the ape of God,’ counterfeits the Divine, and his strategy is a terrible caricature of the Almighty’s ordinances.” (Waite, in Speaker’s Commentary.)2 Corinthians 11:15. Ministers.—Cf. of Paul, 2 Corinthians 11:8. End.—Philippians 3:19. .—2 Corinthians 11:12-15“Like Master, like Servants.”I. What sternness of denunciation!— 1. Quite alien to the spirit of our time, with its “breadth” of view, its “tolerance” of all shades of opinion and of almost all types of practice, and with its euphemistic condemnation when it does condemn. It means the intensity of conviction; the intolerance of loyalty to “light,” and truth, and Christ; the necessary, inevitable detection and condemnation of falsehood and ignorance by “knowledge.” [See “we know,” four times, in 1 John 5:18-20. “We know … sinneth not” (“What dangerous spiritual presumption!” cries even the half-hearted Church); “We know … we are of God, … world lieth in the Wicked One” (“What wretched narrowness of judgment; how uncharitable!”); “We know … Son of God is come,” etc. (“Yes,” says the agnostic temper of all ages; “you theologians and metaphysicians are dreadfully sure; you ‘know’ this, and that, and the other; we don’t; we neither affirm nor deny”); “We know Him that is true” (“Impossible; God is unknowable; and His Son, if He have one, is unknowable too!”) Nevertheless, John and the Church say, “We know.” Christ and His people say, “We know” (John 3:11; John 9:25).] Need to take care lest our milder words, and “more charitable” judgments, betray a less hearty allegiance to truth and holiness, an enfeebled appreciation of the questions at issue, and of their importance, or even a degree of cool indifference to the fundamental distinctions which underlie the sharply defined judgments of such words as Paul’s. Yet— II. Any apparent change, any seeming approximation between good and evil, is only upon the surface; the real distinction beneath abides unalterable.—[Remember the distinction between “form” and “fashion” (Trench, Syn., § lxx.); very marked in Romans 12:1-2; Philippians 2:6-8. “Fashion” (the root of word used here; see R.V.) is (Bengel) “habitus, cultus, vestitus, victus, gestus, sermones et actiones”; what offers itself, upon the surface, to observation.] Satan cannot be “transformed into” [A. V., inaccurately]; he can only be “fashioned like.” The deep gulf, the necessary antagonism in their very nature, between “darkness” and “light,” he can never pass, nor does he desire to. At the most, he can only assume some show of “light.” His ministers can only “be fashioned as ministers of righteousness.” The Christian conscience and heart must not allow moral distinctions to be obscured or confused; the instinct of holiness must be kept in full sensitiveness of touch and perception [“quick of scent,” Isaiah 11:2 (literally)]. Such self-fashioning on the part of evil is a tribute to the beauty of “light,” goodness, holiness. It acknowledges, too, that evil is no dress to wear openly, or in which to do “Satan’s” work. Goodness never pretends to be Evil. The Tempter once dared shamelessly to ask Incarnate Purity to fall down—just for a moment—and worship him. Conversely, in the very fact that he must needs borrow the livery of the servants—angelic and human—of that Pure One, to do some at least of his evil work, he is ever bowing before Him, with a very real acknowledgment of supremacy. “Hypocrisy is the homage Vice pays to Virtue.” III. No practical use in speculating as to what particular case of “transfashioning” on the part of Satan is in Paul’s mind.—The working of the principle of such a change, such an assuming of “goodness,” is common enough, and clear. 1. Bad men, for selfish, or even malicious ends, put on the life, speak the language, do something of the work, of the good. Not many mere, and downright, hypocrites in the world. Far oftener the discrepancy between profession and fact, which, when discovered, is denounced as “hypocrisy,” has been largely mixed with self-deception. Good and evil are sharply distinguishable in their salient, conspicuous examples. Like two neighbouring mountains [as Guesses at Truth suggests] which stand clearly apart so long as attention is only directed to their summits, but are hard to discriminate lower down, where their bases mingle in almost unapportionable stretches of nearly level ground; so on the ordinary level of common life, in the thousand questions of the minute ethics of daily conduct which are perpetually presenting themselves for solution, right and wrong are seldom so sharply divisible but that a man may sometimes find some real difficulty in keeping them apart, and in not transgressing across the boundary-line; whereupon the first step seems to lead on to, or even “to necessitate” another, and that another; till the man is involved in a position which he never meant to reach, and, to the last, may try to persuade himself is not wholly untenable. He is not therefore blameless, or to be simply pitied, but he is hardly the mere hypocrite. Yet there is such a thing as the life which is the calculated, persistent, clever, devilish lie; the garb of righteousness is worn for evil ends, known from the first to be evil, distinctly proposed to himself by the “deceitful worker,” and deliberately followed up to the last. Rare, but not unknown. So in morals, evil is disguised, made to speak fair, plausibly pleaded for, or excused until excuse passes over into defence; until young, inexperienced minds and hearts, without fixed principles, or any definite principles at all, begin to think the sterner judgments “narrow,” “old-fashioned,” “bigoted,” “unfair”; and yield themselves to the blandishments of the “angel of light.” The poets, the novelists, the dramatists, the secular newspapers, greatly help the dangerous disguise of evil. How, for example, has Lust been glorified under the stolen name “Love”! The oft-sung praise of “Wine” has covered with “light” the mere, animal, filthy Drunkenness. Such talking and writing readily catches the public ear in every age. The same principle is at work in the details of individual life. A business opening; a marriage-proposal; a form of relaxation; essentially evil, but so proposed that social advantage, or profit, or pleasure, disguises the true character of the thing; and not until the soul has yielded and the “deceitful work” is done, does the disguise drop off, and the “darkness” stand revealed. IV. In the special application of the passage we note: 1. “False apostles” are self-constituted, having no real “call” from God; their real and only commission is from Satan, who puts his own stamp upon them, so that they work upon his lines, copying his falsehood of claim, and of methods, and of purpose. They assume an unwarranted position, and have no real authority. 2. “Such,” i.e. they, like these Corinthian examples, are selfish, ambitious of men’s honour, malignant towards the real servants of God, tyrannical in their assumed authority (2 Corinthians 11:20), preach error (2 Corinthians 11:4), are full of party spirit. [“Then none was for a party, but all were for the State,”—for “the Church of Christ.”] 3. Yet their “end” is a certain, swift, just detection and destruction. The “world,” with all its evil, is even now so far God’s world that the issue of its course and history must be a victory and a full vindication of goodness and truth and of God’s Christ. The white robe must be stripped off from the falsehood sooner or later, and evil and evil men stand revealed in all their native “darkness.” The servants share with their Master “fire prepared for him.” Every Church should keep jealous watch over the door into its ministry; and should keep in full working order a door out of the ministry. Every minister of Christ, every worker, of every order and degree, should [not be perpetually scrutinising, suspecting his neighbours, but, better, like the apostles at the Supper-table] be asking, “Lord, is it I?” 2 Corinthians 11:15. “According to their works.”—God’s penalties are inflicted. [In many forms directly and ab extra. Else what is “forgiveness”? The indirect and providential—“natural”—penalties of sin are often only very slowly, and very incompletely, reversed or negatived, even to a pardoned, happy, holy child of God. These are taken up into the sanctified disciplinary life of the pardoned man.] Yet never merely arbitrary in their connection with the sin, but congruous. I. “In kind.”—This most nearly Paul’s point here. Fruit corresponding to seed sown; prepared for, and growing out of, seed sown. II. “In measure”: God never will overdo the penalty. No one indiscriminate punishment of sin; as no indiscriminate, undistinguishing reward of righteousness; there are degrees of suffering, as of heavenly joy, though in all cases of equal, eternal duration. [“Many stripes, few stripes.”] May vary from something scarcely more than privation of His favour and presence, up to the most intense suffering of which mind and body in eternity capable. [Doctrine of rewards and penalties must be studied as one indivisible, homogeneous subject with strictly parallel branches, the principles in each strictly analogous to those in the other.] NOTES2 Corinthians 11:16. Again.—After 2 Corinthians 11:1. “You can very well let a foolish fellow like me be in the fashion, and do a bit of boasting.”2 Corinthians 11:17. After the Lord.—Not to be compared with 1 Corinthians 7:10; 1 Corinthians 7:25. (See Critical Notes and Bible-class Note there.) Compare rather “After Rubens,” “After Reynolds.” Christ is the model. But no boaster ever was, in so doing, copying Christ; his conduct was no picture “after Christ.” In 2 Corinthians 11:10 he is speaking as conformable to, and partaking of, Christ’s own truthfulness. But not the tone, or the mind, of Christ—this self-assertion and laudation.2 Corinthians 11:19. Bitterly ironical. “Your wisdom is rather set off as by a good foil, in these fools whom you clever Corinthians can patronisingly tolerate.”2 Corinthians 11:20. Bitterly serious. Bondage.—“Lord it over you;” and more, as in Galatians 2:4 (cf. 2 Corinthians 11:1); Acts 15:10. Taketh.—See Or “take” as in a snare; such a case, e.g., as 1 Corinthians 8:9. Smiteth.—As Paul, Acts 23:2; Christ, John 18:22; 1 Kings 22:24; perhaps as a piece of, assumed, disciplinary power. [As an Irish peasant will bear castigation from his priest, or a low-caste Hindoo a blow from a Brahmin.]2 Corinthians 11:21. As concerning.—Same word as “after” (2 Corinthians 11:17). “I am speaking after the fashion, in the strain, of your customary ‘reproach’ (disparagement) of me, as though I acknowledged as fact,” etc. [Cf. Philippians 3:4 sqq. for a more extended parallel. “Counted loss;” and yet how, on occasion, he can bring out, and use, and find useful, for his Master’s service, his Roman citizenship, or his Jewish advantages. No “gains” to him, as a sinner needing acceptance, but great, and frequent, “gains” to the Gospel, of which he was the exponent and defender.]2 Corinthians 11:22. Hebrews.—With a little of the implied contrast to Hellenist Jews (Acts 6:1, etc.). An old style, Conservative Jew [sprung from old style, Conservative Jews (Philippians 3:5)], born in a Greek city indeed, but keeping up the stricter ways of an orthodox Jewish house, not like Hellenists, in practice and in thought assimilating to Gentile laxity, forgetting even their Hebrew, and using a Greek translation of the Word of God. Israelites.—Cf. John 1:45. “So am I,” in a double sense. Seed of Abraham.—Cf. Galatians 3:29. “So am I,” with a new and better right also to the name, as well as that I inherited.2 Corinthians 11:23. Fool.—As Stronger word than (say) in 2 Corinthians 11:16. Some (e.g. Beet) would press more exactly than others (e.g. Stanley), the word “more.” As if “more than these boasters.” Observe, as to “deaths” [= many occasions, and forms, of imminent peril, when life was “worth no purchase” at all, “as good as a dead man”] there is no comparison expressed. Here he is hors de concours; he has no competitor, or is beyond even apparent competition.2 Corinthians 11:24.—Deuteronomy 25:3. Thirteen on the breast, thirteen on the right shoulder, thirteen on the left. One omitted, lest the law should be transgressed by mistake and forty exceeded. Picture Paul bound, bent, to a pillar in the synagogue; reader standing by, during the flogging, reading Deuteronomy 28:58-59; Deuteronomy 29:8; Psalms 78:38. The officer wielding a four-tailed whip, two thongs of calf’s skin, two of asses’ skin. (Sometimes such a scourging was fatal.) Five times such a flogging!2 Corinthians 11:25-27. Rods.—Although a Roman citizen (Acts 16:22; Acts 22:24). Remember we are here only at the date of Acts 19; Acts 20. All these sufferings lie between Acts 9, 19. Up to this point, the only record of imprisonment is Acts 16:24; of beating with rods of lictors—the Roman scourging (ib.); of stoning, Acts 14:19; of perils from Jews, Acts 9:23; Acts 9:29; Acts 13:50; Acts 14:5; Acts 14:19; Acts 17:5; Acts 17:13; Acts 18:12; from Gentiles (= “heathen”), Acts 16:20; Acts 19:23. May illustrate “shipwreck,” “night and a day [lit. “a night-day,” period of twenty-four hours] in deep,” by Acts 27, which is later; “perils from … countrymen,” by Acts 23:20-21, later also; “rivers,” by the Calycadnus, not far from Tarsus, a sudden flood in which (“a spate,” such as is common in all such short-coursed mountain streams) swept away Frederick Barbarossa; “watchings” (i.e. sleepless nights), by Acts 16:25; Acts 20:7; Acts 20:11, and (better still) by Acts 20:31; 2 Thessalonians 3:8. [Much of this well given in Stanley.]2 Corinthians 11:28.—Notice the change of reading; and also choose between (1) (or A.V.), and (2) margin. See how this daily interest, a burden, and an inrushing care, led him to incessant prayers for them (Romans 1:9; Philippians 1:4; Colossians 1:3; 1 Thessalonians 1:2). [How happy Paul, how happy the Philippians! In their case, every thought for them was a prayer, every thought of them a joy.] .—2 Corinthians 11:16-32 Boasting Dogmatism. I. See Paul descending to the level where his adversaries strut themselves before their admirers, boasting of their credentials and super-apostolic authority; see him snatching up their own style of weapon, and on their own ground, with their own arms, vanquishing them. Then (2 Corinthians 11:30-32) see him flinging away the unaccustomed weapon of parade of his doings, sufferings, services, natural advantages, and taking up a “boast” in which none of them will care to follow him,—his “infirmities.” See how this “glorying” is, as it were, wrung out of him, with many a protest to them and to his own heart that it is “folly,”and that he knows it is. Indeed, his own severest word is that such talk, such enumeration of one’s titles to honour and respect, is “not after the Lord”; it is “after the flesh.” [There is peril in it, to a man himself. In that arena, where such boasting matches come off, there is an unseen Adversary, who may find many an unguarded weakness of the soul laid open to a shaft or a thrust, whilst the Christian champion displays himself. On the morning of Trafalgar Nelson’s captains remonstrated respectfully with him against his determination on that day to put on his many orders—the tokens of his services and successes—fearing, as proved too true, that these would make him an inviting mark for the enemy’s fire.] The very “gentleman” does not willingly do it; and how much less willingly does the Christian. What society stamps as against “good form,” religion stamps as sin,—sin against the Norm and Pattern given in Christ. Social “Modesty” is, in fact, Humility severed from its Christian root-principle. [It lives for a while, as a cut flower may, in strength derived from its root in the time of their union. But only the abiding union with Christ will for any length of time keep either humility or its social analogue, modesty, a living feature of character. In fact, Paul’s phrase finds its true, deep exposition in this:] The traits in a Christian character are the traits of Christ’s character (to use of Him a word which properly belongs only to His human brethren) manifesting themselves in it. They are Christ expressing Himself in the men and women who are members of His Body. Their life, and so their words, are “in Christ.” They should, normally, only speak as He can be conceived to have spoken. A very comprehensive test of—rule for—speech! All glorification of Self, all self-centering of thought and word, is “after the flesh.” The natural heart, unchanged, unrenewed “after” the Pattern of the New Manhood, speaks thus, and betrays its presence in such self-extolling phraseology. It is “folly” before God; He knows how baseless it all is. It is “folly” before man; men “think” the boaster “a fool,” and give him no real respect; not to say that every braggart, by his implied or openly claimed superiority, wounds the self-esteem of his hearers,—the one unpardonable offence to “the flesh”! And yet, the inconsequence of things in the world! The inconsistency of the natural man! Let a man only be confident enough in himself, let him only boast boldly enough, let him only parade his credentials long enough, and the very effrontery has a strange success. They call the man “a fool”; they call themselves “fools” [to themselves; for openly they claim to show “wisdom” in their very ability to estimate such a paragon of excellence; and sometimes in their hearts also they plume themselves on the “wisdom” with which they can see through all his “boasting”!]—for submitting to such a man. But they submit; they “suffer fools finely”! Men accept truth on three grounds,—intuition, or ratiocination, or authority. For most the readiest, commonest, and (to them) most rest-giving, is Authority. All learning begins in accepting, on the authority of the teacher, some necessary basal assertions. These may afterwards be verifiable by our cultivated judgment, or sustainable by our wider knowledge. But unless there be faith in the teacher’s authority, learning is made impossible at the outset. Very many never get beyond this point. Let the Teacher only assert Authority long enough, loudly enough, he will find not a small clientèle who will become his faithful, ready disciples. It is made a reproach to Christians that they are “dogmatic”; in the same (not too accurate) sense, and with the same accidental associations attached to the word, so are many scientific teachers. It is true that, e.g., Sacerdotalism does find that its readiest way to secure acceptance with a large class of minds in a solemn, repeated, emphatic assertion of its claims. It is equally true that persistent, emphatic, widely published, influentially supported assertion is the “reason” for much popular acceptance of non-Christian or even anti-Christian unbelief. There are as many disbelievers on authority as there are believers on authority. There is great convincing power in such verbal “blows on the face” as, “Every qualified person thinks,” etc., “Nobody with the slightest pretension to judge but believes,” etc., “Professor This, Doctor That, assures us,” etc. If religious teachers descend to the arena where such methods obtain of “bringing into bondage” an obedient following, they may not complain if their opponents by the same. me methods obtain their following too. But Paul’s caustic remark remains true. Down beneath the loudest vaunt of “wisdom,” of “culture,” of “independence of thought,” there lie a deep-seated ignorance and self-distrust, which are eager for certainty, and which are only waiting for some loud enough boaster of his authority to claim and to get their eagerly given, all-enduring, very faithful, enslaved obedience (2 Corinthians 11:20). II. 1. Hear Paul conning over his quarterings of nobility.—For the Jew had been the nobleman amongst the Gentile commoners. [As Brahmin to low-caste or no-caste man, religiously, socially, and by birth, so (in his own esteem) had been the Jew to the Gentile.] Do his adversaries of the Jewish section in the Church boast of their pure blood, “sons of Abraham”? He can show that. Or, of their place in God’s Israel? He has that. Old style, Conservative, Hebrew-speaking Jews—none of your Gentilising sort, loose in thought, too free in practice? So were he and his father before him [“a Hebrew” sprung “of Hebrews”]. If birth in a covenant people—himself wearing the seal of the covenant upon his very body from earliest infancy; if loyal pride in his people and their history; if godly, strict education in the Word and fear of God; could have availed a man anything before God or man;—Paul had them all. What Judaiser amongst them could show a fuller shield of arms than he—if a man is to found upon his quarterings of nobility? [Note how, in Philippians 3, he counted, and still counts, all these as “loss.” When it comes to be a question of finding a ground of acceptance as a sinner before God, not one of these, nor all together, is of any value as a set-off against his guilt; they may as well, they must, be written off—“loss.” He must find something else. He takes Christ, and relies wholly on Him. Yet (as in Critical Notes) as between him and men, especially for the Gospel’s sake, he can fetch out and use—what for his own sake he values at nothing—these early points of national prestige. Schiller one day opened a drawer, and carelessly tossed out to a visitor standing by a patent of nobility. “ ‘Von Schiller!’ Did you know I was a nobleman?” said he laughingly. A University man may now and again remind contemptuous opponents that he is a scholar and a gentleman; whilst ordinarily he never invites attention or remark to the point, but quietly goes on with work amongst the poor, to whom he says nothing of his college and his degrees.] 2. In such points he is the equal of the best of them. In work for Christ, and in titles to be counted a fully credentialled apostle, “a minister of Christ,” none of them is his equal. In sufferings for Christ he is alone; there is no competitor, no one to compare with him. Indeed, which of them cares to enter the lists here, and to compete for the honour of being accredited “a minister of Christ,” if these be the marks of an apostle? (2 Corinthians 11:23-27). What an exposition of his own phrase, “our light affliction which is but for a moment”! (2 Corinthians 4:17). If this accumulation of sufferings be “light,” what would “heavy” be! What a pre-eminence amongst the servants of Christ! To have given up what he had, and to bear all this, for the sake of a Master Whom he had barely seen—if there were “folly” in Paul, the world would so reckon this. [Yet (whether he wrote the Hebrews or not), he would have said, “Looking unto Jesus, … Who … endured the cross.” In mere physical suffering, Christ suffered less than Paul, and was never in such perils. Yet how unique are His sufferings in the Word of God. They have a solitary, unshared, unapproached significance. We feel that in studying the sufferings of Paul we are on our level, familiar ground. If in number and aggravation they are more, in kind they are the same, sufferings as other men feel. But we feel that Christ’s are on another level, and of another order.] 3. Yet such a life—this one life—has its uniqueness, in another sense. Take Stanley’s putting of the point: “It represents a life hitherto without precedent in the history of the world. Self-devotion at particular moments, if for some special national cause, had been often seen before; but a self-devotion, involving sacrifices like those here described, and extending through a period of at least fourteen years, and in behalf of no local or family interest, but for the interest of mankind at large, was, up to this time, a thing unknown. The motive of the Apostle may be explained in various ways, and the lives of missionaries and philanthropists may have equalled his in later times; but the facts here recorded remain the same. Paul did all this, and Paul was the first man who did it” (p. 562). Yet see how the very mention of all this is wrung out of the man; and with many a protest against his folly in letting himself down thus. 4. Where had Paul learned this? For “original” as such a life-lesson, a life-example, may be, quâ man and man, our mind goes back inquiring where he had caught his inspiration. He would have said in a moment, “To me to live is Christ.” The scars and manifold physical traces upon him, which these perilous and painful experiences had left, are to him matters of laudable self-gratulation. They are the “marks of the Lord Jesus” upon him (Galatians 6:17), the brand which his Master, Christ, has set upon the very body of his bondman, in token of His ownership. He almost parades them, on occasion, as a veteran may on occasion display his medal and its clasps. In quite as true a sense may we regard the whole style of such a life, its spirit, its purpose and aim,—the first so glorious an exhibition of a lifelong, often thankless and unthanked, self-devotion for the sake of others who had but scanty, or no, claim for it, as a “mark of the Lord Jesus.” Christ has set His seal, His own likeness, upon such a man. [How much of all this is lost to history! Yet the Paul known by Christ knew all these; in Christ’s “Life of Paul, My Apostle” not an item of all these would be omitted. “My times are in Thy” knowledge!] 5. And yet another mark of his Lord comes out: He is daily beset with the caring for the Churches. As is his Master, Whose words these verses, 28, 29, might well be. See what had just now come upon his sensitive spirit, in consequence of the visit of “them of Chloe’s household” (1 Corinthians 1:11). A letter which proposed sundry important questions of practical Christian ethics in which, not Corinth only, but all the Churches, in all the Christian centuries, were vitally interested,—questions which needed careful, complete reply; and still more disquieting verbal reports. These two letters catch and exhibit in permanent photography, all the acute distress of this sympathetic Paul, jealous for the honour of His Master and His Church, anxious about the souls who were his work in the Lord. Multiply such instances; add such cases as the Galatian Epistle may stand for, where his heart longs for friendship, and only finds a fickle affection which once burned hot and eager, but is now as eagerly transferring itself to others who made it their business to decry him and to undo his work (Galatians 1:6; Galatians 4:12-20); an Epistle where he is seen to be above all distressed at hearing of the success of teaching which seemed to him to strike at the very heart of the Gospel, and at the honour of his Christ (ib. 2 Corinthians 1:7-9). Referee, arbitrator, organiser, pastor, financier (chap. 8); “many coming and going,” each with something that needed swift, decisive, just direction or advice; letters to be written, friends to be guided; his work on the spot to be kept going; often in poor health; always environed with, or liable to, such experiences as in 2 Corinthians 11:23-27; much to try patience; more to daunt heart; often much to wound love. No wonder that he speaks of the ceaseless inrush of such cares, with their incessant onset, almost as if every new-comer were an enemy bent upon destroying his peace. [Yet this man—as witness his letters, by their example enforcing his own precept (1 Thessalonians 5:16-18) in the first of them—is ever rejoicing. His is a bright life. These things do not obscure or quench the sunshine of the favour of his Master, ever poured into his heart. Grace makes him a victor in, and over, all. Nay, “more than a conqueror” (Romans 8:37).] No man need envy the man in the front, or at the head, of a Church; the focus of all envy, jealousy, grumbling; the first to hear, and to feel, if anything goes wrong. [Also let this human instance be a stepping-stone to a realisation how at every moment everything reaches the Lord of the Church Himself, enthroned above it, watching, watching over, its welfare. Every daily incident, the great crisis, the trivial detail,—they are alike flashed up to Him Who sits at the Centre of Government of the Universe, where all its wires of Intelligence converge at His throne, and whence all its lines of issued Command and despatched Force radiate. What must He know, must hear, see, feel! The unfaithfulness of a Church, the break-down of a member, the battle of the Truth for very life, reaches Him; may we say, hurts Him? Of necessity seeing, knowing, all; unable to exercise the (to us merciful) power of ignoring or forgetting,—the care of all His Churches coming upon Him!] 6. And yet another mark of his Lord.—A tender sympathy for all who are wronged. [Cf. Matthew’s (“targumed”) quotation in 2 Corinthians 8:17 of Isaiah 53:4; “infirmities,” “sicknesses” put instead of “griefs,” “sorrows.” As if Christ, Who Himself only knew death, not sickness, so entered into the suffering of the crowds thronging that night around Him for healing, that He felt their pain as if it had been His own.] (1) The “weak” are not always in the right, or deserving of unqualified sympathy and defence. Yet the minister of Christ will be ready to give the presumption in their favour, until their unworthiness be proved. He may not entertain an unreasoning, partisan sympathy with any one class [working-men, or any other]; yet if the “weak” have no other champion, they should find one in him. (2) Nothing should more quickly set his righteous indignation “burning” than that traps should be set, and stumbling-blocks placed, in the way of a brother in Christ, into which or over which, in ignorance or weakness he falls. (3) The man who cannot “burn” at wrong is strangely deficient in qualification for a minister of Christ. Slow to take fire [not “as the flint bears fire, Which being struck gives out a hasty spark And then grows cold again:” Brutus (of himself), Shakespeare, Julius Cæsar], but burning with sustained intensity of enkindled principle. [See how sternly Christ could feel and speak of the “offender” of even “a little one” (Matthew 18:6).] (4) Every single soul of his flock will be so dear to a true shepherd that no greater wrong can be done to him and no greater pain given, that nothing more surely will arouse a holy indignation in him, than that its weakness or ignorance or inexperience should be taken advantage of, e.g., by a malicious worldling, or (worse) by an older, wiser, but fallen-hearted fellow-Christian. [Or even that an older Christian, by sheer, self-pleasing laxity should ruin a soul not yet established (Hebrews 12:13).] 2 Corinthians 11:19. A Common Sequence. I. “Wisdom,” pluming itself that it is so wise. II. Self-conceit, which leaves the door open for— III. Humiliating slavery to egregiously foolish touching, to obviously shallow, but very confident, loud-asserting, leaders of opinion or practice. For self-gratification how much will men endure; for, and from, Christ, how little. 2 Corinthians 11:21-31. I. What sufferings. II. What devotion. III. What faith. IV. What triumph.—[J. L.] [Notice how he puts a godly ancestry and a place amongst the covenant people of God, in the very forefront. It may be an occasion of everlasting thanksgiving to a man. Or, like a noble name inherited by an unworthy scion of a great house, a shame now, and a source of everlasting shame.] NOTES2 Corinthians 11:31.—Grammar makes certain that the ejaculated benediction belongs to the Father. He who is.—The emphatic Greek recalls the Greek equivalent for Jehovah. Look at the Divine present tense in Romans 9:5, and in John 1:18; John 3:13; John 6:46; John 8:47; Revelation 1:4; Revelation 1:8. I lie not.—Choose between (1) an asseveration in regard to what he intended (but in fact has only begun) further to relate of his life; and (2) “This purpose” (of boasting about “weakness”) “is from a human point of view so unlikely, that in asserting it Paul appeals to Him Who alone knows his motives” (Beet).2 Corinthians 11:32. Aretas (i.e. Hareth).—Father-in-law of Herod Antipas; his capital Petra (in Edom). Antipas had put away Aretas’ daughter; when Aretas cut off Herod’s army, Jewish sympathy with Aretas made it a “judgment on him for executing John the Baptist.” Help under Vitellius’ command was sent from Rome to Herod. Just then Tiberius died; Caligula (perhaps) gave Damascus to Aretas, or in the frontier wars Aretas seized it whilst Vitellius was absent, occupied with the changes consequent on Tiberius’ death. Thus the same occupation of Damascus by a pro-Jewish ruler, which favoured, or occasioned, Paul’s persecuting mission to Damascus, gave help to his Jewish enemies when he returned (combine Galatians 1:17 with Acts 9:22 sqq.) a Christian. Governor.—Lit. ethnarch, a mere provincial lieutenant. Farrar says that ethnarch was also a title of Jewish governors, permitted in heathen cities to exercise an authority over the Jewish community; e.g. such an official may have ordered one of Paul’s Jewish “scourgings” at Damascus. No date for Paul’s life can be very exactly fixed by all this (Tiberius died, A.D. 37). There are no Roman coins of Damascus belonging to this period.2 Corinthians 11:33. Window.—Overhanging the town wall. Basket.—Not same word as in Acts 9:25, where it is that mentioned in the feeding of the four thousand. (Different word, again, for. the “basket” of the five thousand.) .—2 Corinthians 11:30-32 An Unwelcome Memory of the Past. Perhaps this is only the first item in an intended recital of dangerous and humiliating experiences, from which—the whole topic of himself and his doings being distasteful—he turns aside when thus has only begun to touch it. “Damascus!” 1. What a name to him! There are days and places known and famous in heaven, but according to a scale of interest and importance very different from that which regulates the notice given to days, and persons, and places, in the news of the day or the history of the century. [The sites and dates of, e.g., “Decisive Battles of History,” are known there, or are little regarded, according as they bear upon the fate and progress of the kingdom of Christ. That little company travelling to Damascus with Saul; that same Saul in darkness, bewilderment, prayerful repentance; all the struggle in his heart;—these were watched in heaven, as no royal pageant, or even dynastic struggle, nor perhaps, a famous fight or political contest, would be.] There are days and places which even in the eternal retrospect will stand out, never fading into oblivion, even when the most permanent landmarks of earthly history are grown dim, or have disappeared. The soul will never forget where, when, how, it first met Christ. In heaven the interest of the city Damascus is now, and eternally will be, this,—Saul of Tarsus there first bowed the knee to Jesus of Nazareth. 2. Paul never forgot it. Yet another memory is associated with it,—that of his extreme peril and his escape by the wall. Confessedly a little difficult to see why this was so distasteful a memory to him; why this in particular should be accounted one of his “infirmities.” Perhaps the key to his feeling was some detail, some matter of vivid reminiscence, which was clearly present to his own mind as he dictated the sentences to his amanuensis, yet which he forgot to mention, and the omission of which may have been as perplexing to the Corinthians as to us. It was certainly his first taste of the deadly opposition which he was to meet with from his own countrymen and co-religionists, now that he had become a Nazarene. It may be allowable to fill out the brief narrative of Act 9:20-22 and to conceive of him returning from “Arabia” full of new convictions and knowledge and experience—full of his new Lord—and pleading with the Damascene Jews with an earnestness as full of hope of success as it was full of zeal. [As “young Philip Melancthon” expected that his testimony and his arguments would win “Old Adam” in other men for Christ, right away.] And then to see him in the reaction of comparative “failure”—for to confound men in argument, as he did abundantly, is only one-half of “success”; to see him obliged to go into hiding and to skulk about, until he could one night be dropped stealthily over the wall and fly. “After all, then, Rabban Saul is one thing, and Saul the Nazarene is another. Saul the Nazarene is ‘weak’ like other men; even he is not going to take a world by storm for his new Christ.” The first check to new zeal, the first disappointment and rebuff to the hope of soon bringing others to Christ; to win victories in argument, and then to find that the beaten foe can do mischief, and one must beat hasty retreat;—such are in one’s native “weakness” humiliating lessons to a proud, fervid spirit, a hard breaking-in for some temperaments; perhaps for his. [Especially if we know that our Damascene enemies are triumphing over the flight of the Nazarene champion; and that for years we shall hear the story told again and again, to our scornful disadvantage.] Perhaps his own feeling, more than appears on the surface of the letter here, or some mocking reference to it [if it became a sort of stock story of his opponents, to be told mirthfully to his prejudice] at Corinth, made the very mental recurrence to it, and much more this direct reference to it in writing, a painful thing. 3. Yet Paul will snatch the incident from the very mocking adversary, or from the rebelliously proud heart within him, which does not like even a reference to this. If it be a cross to self, the better, then, to crucify self upon! If his enemies taunt him with the “glorious retreat” he made from Damascus, he will make a “glory” of it. It was a shame put upon him, just because he had become Christ’s. And for that reason only does he refer to it. 4. And he makes oath and says, “Thus and thus did I escape.” There was going to be a sworn list of painful, humiliating reminders that he was only “weakness” before God. But he breaks off; the first incident stands alone; too small a finish for the solemn exordium. A good man speaks truth: (a) Always: “I lie not,” neither habitually, nor in this special instance; (b) As standing before a listening Judge. Israel’s God “shall know.” Every light—every more solemnly serious—word is spoken as in the presence of God. To him the very thought of that God is, in fact, in theology, in habitual memory, bound up with the most loving expression of His true Self,—He is “the God of” His “Lord Jesus Christ.” His name is “Father.” Yet is He a God of truth, Who neither speaks nor tolerates falsehood. To Him lying is awfully great in its sinfulness; it is mean, detestable, mischievous. He searches hearts; He hates falsehood; He will assuredly visit it. The character of the preacher of the Gospel is bound up with the character of the Gospel itself. If the preacher be only a lying braggart, how shall anything he preaches claim acceptance? (c) He can then, when fitting, call God to witness. But Paul passes off; something shunts him on to another line, a “thorn in the flesh,” concerning which the truth of all he says is only too notoriously and (to himself) painfully obvious. [The apologetic value of all such very human turns of thought in these letters is very great. These letters are valueless as bases of Christian Faith unless they be genuine and authentic. In just such traits as these does every competent student discover the indubitable marks of a document of unassailable historical character and value.] HOMILY2 Corinthians 11:30. We have more than a revelation of Paul’s personal character here; we also have a revelation of Divine power, bestowed through Christ, acting upon, elevating, that character. His rebuke is chastened; his boasting is mingled with modesty; both show the guiding influence of the Spirit of Christ. Further, (1) he has been permitted to suffer, (2) he has thus learnt to sympathise. These are his credentials. So also “as One who suffers and … who can sympathise … our Lord is best known to us.” I. As One who suffers.—The heart-broken—where not heart-dead—world needs for its Loader One acquainted with grief. “To the Cross, to Gethsemane, to the sacred Face wet with tears and furrowed with agony, the soul turns in its hours of darkness, and never in vain.” II. In that suffering it sees sympathy.—Not merely suffering for us, but with us. The gracious purpose of the Incarnation. “The Incarnation is that touch of God which makes the whole world kin.” “The gods of classic heathendom knew nothing of sympathy with the wants and woes of man; they stood aloof in sublime indifference; had they possessed some touch of humanity, they might have gained a hold over the affections of the people, which they never possessed. It was left for the Gospel to reveal to us a God who could love with so mighty and yearning a love that it brought Him down … that He might be … of us. It is in this revelation that the Gospel has conquered. Such are the marks of the Lord Jesus; suffering and sympathy. It is of these [?] St. Paul boasts.” Borne as they were in the spirit of his Master, these sufferings had not made him morose or hard. They had nourished a tender, thoughtful care for the sufferings of others, and even for their weaknesses also. “Had so entered into the mind of Christ that he could be tempted in all points even as his brethren were. Could make himself one with the over-scrupulous man, in a matter which to his own spiritual robustness was not of the slightest importance. Could so enter into this man’s weakness that in sympathy with him he was weak also, feeling the grievance almost as if it were his own. Could feel another man’s temptation, and battle with it, as if it attacked him personally. His rivals led men with glib tongues, ready manner, flattering speech; Paul by acts of sympathy, not words. If you are called to suffer for Christ’s sake, remember that the Hand which is laid upon you to sustain you is a Hand that has been itself pierced. Suffering and Sympathy! Such are the Arms of the Cross. On these the Son of Man is stretched out. In these arms He would embrace a fallen humanity.”—From Canon Hutton, “Clerical World,” i. 353. 2 Corinthians 11:19. A Common Sequence. I. “Wisdom,” pluming itself that it is so wise. II. Self-conceit, which leaves the door open for— III. Humiliating slavery to egregiously foolish touching, to obviously shallow, but very confident, loud-asserting, leaders of opinion or practice. For self-gratification how much will men endure; for, and from, Christ, how little. 2 Corinthians 11:21-31. I. What sufferings. II. What devotion. III. What faith. IV. What triumph.—[J. L.] [Notice how he puts a godly ancestry and a place amongst the covenant people of God, in the very forefront. It may be an occasion of everlasting thanksgiving to a man. Or, like a noble name inherited by an unworthy scion of a great house, a shame now, and a source of everlasting shame.] NOTES(No break, except that of a new paragraph.) 2 Corinthians 12:1.—Note reading; probably, as in R.V. Remember how full is Paul’s sense of “expedient” (1 Corinthians 6:12; 1 Corinthians 10:23; 1 Corinthians 8:10, here); deep moral inexpediency is here involved. “Glory” here (almost) = “brag.” Visions, revelations.—“Various kinds of visions, and (to use a wider word) revelations in any mode, imparted by Christ” (Beet); who also compares as “interesting parallels,” Acts 26:19; Galatians 1:16, visions vouchsafed to Paul that he might make, or upon which he made, a quasi-revelation to men. But query? Whole section (2 Corinthians 12:1-10) moves in a world of supersensuous things, where knowledge is scanty [even Paul’s own (2 Corinthians 12:2), and how much more, then, ours]; and where much precision of interpretation is unattainable [as, in “doth not yet appear,” etc., 1 John 3:2, it is not altogether, or in any great degree, an intentional concealment or withholding, that creates the mystery. Rather the impossibility of telling us more of what has nothing in our experience or in the analogies of earth to help us, even to knowledge “in part”]. Choose between (1) revelations of which Christ is the subject, and (2) revelations of which Christ is the Giver.2 Corinthians 12:2.—Note “know” (accurately), more clearly connecting the (intentionally) oblique reference with himself. I.e. “I knew the man at the time, and how he was …; and I still know the man who was then,” etc. Third heaven.—Talmudic references to seven [not always consistently enumerated] heavens are common. Quite uncertain [since “Talmud” unwritten until after this] whether this opinion is as old as, or older than, Paul’s day. There is also found a simpler Rabbinic view based on Deuteronomy 10:14, making three spheres: (1) “heaven,” i.e. that of birds and clouds; (2) “heaven of heavens,” i.e. the clear sky beyond; (3) the invisible world beyond. [Aërial, astral, angelic.] Also it may be a question whether Paul makes “Paradise” a fourth sphere, or only the same as the “third heaven.” Perhaps something behind the distinction of prepositions (equivalent to) “up to,” “into.” [“Questions of words, to no profit, but to the subverting of (at best the attention of) the hearers” (2 Timothy 2:14).] Only certain Scriptural facts are: (1) that “heaven” is often “heavens” as if a complex conception (e.g. in Lord’s Prayer, Matthew 6:9-10; Ephesians 4:10); (2) Paradise; most definite indication being that to dying thief, Luke 23:43 (only use of word by Christ, and that rather as an adoption of the man’s standpoint); also found in Revelation 2:7, which probably (remembering how the symbolism of the Revelation is saturated with Old Testament histories and imagery) links the future world of happiness with the lost (ideal) world of unfallen man in Eden. “The present abode of the faithful dead” (Beet).2 Corinthians 12:4.—“Unutterable utterances” imitates Paul’s Greek phrase. “Words, and no words” (Stanley). “Expression taken from the secrecy of the Greek mysteries” (ib.); but this, taken with the former phrase of Stanley, combines (1) impossible to utter, and (2) not allowable to utter. Usually, a choice made between (1) and (2). He adds: “Man cannot speak them; God may.”2 Corinthians 12:5.—Waite (in Speaker) makes “such a one” (2 Corinthians 12:2) and “such a one” (2 Corinthians 12:5) not reiterative, but cumulative. “I knew a man caught up to third heaven.… Further, I knew a man, so caught up, also caught up into Paradise; and further, hearing there.… Of a man so caught up, and indeed, so caught up into Paradise, and there, moreover, hearing.… I will glory.” “On behalf of one, who in all this was entirely passive and recipient, without exertion or merit of his own, he will boast, but not on behalf of his personal self, his own will, work, and service, except with regard to his infirmities.”2 Corinthians 12:6.—Oblique reference to the Corinthian “boasters.” Q. d. “If I were disposed to enter into a boasting-match with your braggarts, I should win; at least (unlike them) I should only need to speak facts about such a man as that” (cf. 2 Corinthians 10:7; 2 Corinthians 11:21 sqq.; Philippians 3:4-6). Of me.—As R.V.; not “about me,” but “from me” (“his letters, say they,” etc., 2 Corinthians 10:10).2 Corinthians 12:7. Exceeding greatness (R.V.).—Cf. cognate words (and thoughts) in 2 Corinthians 3:10; 2 Corinthians 4:17; 2 Corinthians 9:14; Ephesians 1:19; Ephesians 2:7; Ephesians 3:19; Ephesians 4:7; also 2 Corinthians 11:23; 2 Corinthians 1:8; Galatians 1:13 (also 1 Corinthians 12:31; Romans 7:13). Note also, the broken grammar (as in R.V.), as if the rush of feelings and memories confused utterance. Thorn.—See Separate Note (3). Lit. “ ‘Thorn’ for the flesh.”2 Corinthians 12:8.—As “the Lord” had Himself done in Gethsemane. [I. e. taking this as a thrice repeated request, on some one occasion. Farrar (and others) would make three separate occasions of recurrence (perhaps of “special revelations” and) of the physical visitation, and three occasions of prayer. This depends, in part, on (precarious) deductions as to the chronology of Paul’s life.] Besought.—Lit. “entreated”; vivid sense of personal communication with Christ. Clear case of prayer to Christ. Good illustration of meaning of Paraclete (same root); he called to his aid Christ and His help.2 Corinthians 12:9. Said.—“Hath said” (R.V.). As if the assuring word were ever freshly being spoken; true when first given, and abidingly true; a standing law of Paul’s continuous life. Sufficient.—Cf. cognate word, 2 Corinthians 9:8 [also (for thought) cf. Philippians 4:10-19]. “Don’t press thy request; sufficient for thee that thou hast My grace.” Made perfect.—“Has its full development” (Conybeare and Howson); q.d. comes to its full-grown, adult strength. Keep “weakness” and “weaknesses” (for “infirmities”). Observe “My” (in “My strength”) is doubtful; the omission makes the passage a perfectly general truth (so Stanley. But is this so generally true? Is it not true simply when spoken of Divine strength relatively to human weakness?). Rather.—Rather boast than complain (Stanley); rather boast than seek to have removed (Beet, Waite). That.—“A purpose which in his boasting Paul cherishes, and which is to some extent attained by his boasting” (Beet). [Rather too forced, too close, a connection? Query, more loosely, “I will not (I say) ask for their removal; that would rob me of a great honour, and blessing, and joy; I will keep them, if thus the power,” etc. Rest.—Lit. “tabernacle.” “To come to a place for the purpose of fixing one’s tent there” (Conybeare and Howson). Cf. Exodus 40:34; Exodus 40:36 (where both “upon” and “in” are found conjoined (as in Acts 2:3-4, “upon,” “filled with”); John 1:14; Revelation 7:15; Revelation 12:12; Revelation 13:6; Revelation 21:3 [John 2:21 (see also 11); 2 Peter 1:13-14 (also Matthew 17:4, and parallels]). [Cf. 2 Corinthians 4:7.2 Corinthians 12:10.—“Four outward circumstances in which Paul often felt his weakness … Acts of purposeless cruelty, repeated lack of the most needful things, the repeated pursuit of enemies, positions in which there seemed no way of escape.” (Beet.) “For Christ’s sake” belongs to each of the four.2 Corinthians 12:11.—Verdict, self-pronounced: “How foolish I am to boast.” Yet “with extenuating circumstances.” “It was your doing, not mine (you ought to have saved me the task of commending myself)” (Stanley). “For their good he condescends to say things which, but for their motive, would be unworthy of an intelligent man. Than this, no kind of self-denial is to sensible persons more difficult or more noble.” (Beet.) Return to point quitted at 2 Corinthians 10:7. “This concluding section … filled with traces of the torrent which has passed through his mind in the interval” (Stanley). Very chiefest.—“Ever so much of apostles” (Stanley); “superlative apostles” (Speaker); “super-apostolic apostles,” “super-eminent apostles” (Conybeare and Howson). Nothing.—In his own reckoning? or theirs? Both; “as you say … and I in a deeper sense agree with you.”2 Corinthians 12:12. Signs, wonders, mighty deeds.—Three Scripture words for miracles, in complete enumeration. Complete definition of a “miracle” given by them. Signs of an apostle.—I.e. characteristic credentials of an apostle. Cf. “John heard in the prison the” characteristic “Messiah-works” reported as done by Jesus (Matthew 11:2). In all patience.—Meaning, probably, refraining again and again, when under great provocation to use His miraculous power to silence or punish opponents? (Waite, in Speaker). How easily and certainly would this challenge have been met and this claim refuted if miracle is an impossibility, or if Paul had wrought none. His opponents could do none; fell short here, at least.2 Corinthians 12:13.—Ironical, “this wrong.” Forgive me.—Prospective, as well as retrospective, “for I am going to do it again. Don’t think of giving me anything, now that we are to be friends again.”2 Corinthians 12:14.—Understand, “to come a third time”; not merely “am ready a third time.” Two visits to Corinth? Or three? Most, “three.” Some: two, viz. (1) Acts 18:1; (2) The visit now impending, and, between, the intended visit of 2 Corinthians 1:15-16. “I ought to do this, as a parent. What do children, then, give their parents in return? Children, give me your hearts.”2 Corinthians 12:15.—Notice the R.V., and its margin. How Christ may borrow these words!2 Corinthians 12:16.—“You say,—I will not dispute,—I did not ask you to maintain me. But that was only ‘the depth of the fellow’! It amounted to ‘pretty much the same thing,’ if I asked you to support my friends, Titus and the rest! Indeed, what if they ‘all helped themselves out of this collection money,’ pretending to be so extremely disinterested!”2 Corinthians 12:18. Spirit.—As usual, the Holy Ghost. Cf. Galatians 5:25. This secures the walking in the same “spirit,” in the feeble, modern sense.2 Corinthians 12:19.—Observe new and better reading, and consequent vivid rendering. “Whilst you have been reading this (apologetic-seeming) letter.” “To you? O dear no! Not at all! Before a seeing, listening God I speak!” Beloved.—A relapse into love; cannot bear to keep up the tone of rebuke or irony: “Beloved.”2 Corinthians 12:21.—A residual section, not even now penitent or submissive, as most who had been rebuked in the First Epistle now were.FULLER NOTES ON SPECIAL POINTS 1. [Good note in Stanley upon 2 Corinthians 12:1-10. “The description of his vision … throws light upon similar ecstasies … as Acts 10:10; Acts 8:39; and especially of John in the Apocalypse (2 Corinthians 1:10; 2 Corinthians 4:1, etc.); the ‘dreams and visions’ … in Acts 2:16; and the speaking with tongues in 1 Corinthians 14:2. The details may be different, but this description contains their common characteristics; the loss of self-consciousness [?], the sense of being hurried into a higher sphere, and the partial and mysterious glimpses of the invisible world. And it illustrates especially the ecstatic state in which he himself largely partook, as appears from the attacks of his enemies, still preserved in the Clementines.… Compare also the facts in Acts 9:12; Acts 22:17, and his expression in 1 Corinthians 14:8.… And further, the strong line of demarcation which he has drawn between bis ecstasy and his ordinary state, is a warrant to us that he does not needlessly confound things human and Divine, things earthly and things spiritual. What he does say gives us a picture, at least conceivable, of the mode in which he may have received his ‘revelations from the Lord’ (1 Corinthians 11:23; 1 Corinthians 15:3; Galatians 1:12; Galatians 1:16). What he does not say—the silence respecting the things which cannot be uttered—furnishes a remarkable contrast to the elaborate description given by Mahomet, of his nocturnal journey to Jerusalem and to paradise” (p. 563).]2. [So also this sobriety of language and thought marks off Paul’s experiences from those “parallels” often adduced to discredit him, as a half-epileptic whose brain was affected by his sickness. E.g. as enumerated by Farrar, p. 713: “The trances of Socrates, the fits of Mohammed, accompanied by foaming at the mouth, and followed by the sleep of exhaustion, the faintings and ecstasies of St. Bernard, St. Francis, and St. Catherine of Siena, have been adduced as parallels.… We may add the cases of George Fox, Jacob Behmen, of Swedenborg, etc.”]3. [2 Corinthians 12:7. Thorn in flesh. In the pulpit, the general result of the inquiry is alone of much service. In the Bible-class, the detailed process may be useful.I. “Thorn,” or “stake.” Some Eastern thorns are much larger than ours; long, stout spines, capable of penetrating a thick leather boot. (Force given to Hosea 2:6.) Word does mean stake, e.g., for military palisade, or for impaling criminals. Also, literally, Paul says, “A stake for the flesh.” Hence the suggestion that this stake is practically (as the word was lexically) equivalent to a cross (which had not necessarily a cross beam); and the thought here is then linked with “I am crucified with Christ.” But in Numbers 33:55 Paul’s word is used for “pricks in the eyes.” In both cases, therefore, the idea may be a thorn buried in the flesh, but large enough, or giving pain enough, to be rather a stake than a thorn.II. Nature of the affliction. Physical (almost universal consensus of opinion amongst non-Romanist expositors). But not (1) Sensual temptation; later Patristic, monastic, Romanist view. He would not “glory” in these, for any reason, direct or indirect. Remember also how he (perhaps) claims to be little affected by these (1 Corinthians 7:8-9). 1 Corinthians 9:27; Romans 7:23 quite general in reference; latter scarcely personal. Also not (2) Spiritual temptation, e.g stings of conscience about past life, temptations to pride [N.B. the thorn itself was a check to pride in spiritual gifts], or discouragement, or doubt, in connection with his work (Calvin, Luther, Imitation of Christ). No trace of these in his writings. Lias (in loco) thinks Paul suffered from irritability of temper, and a consequent asperity of manner. But this would not be in “the flesh,” in the physical sense required here. Also, again, would anything, even the glory of Christ (indirectly secured), have made him “glory” in these? Further, not (3) Opponents, particularly the opponent (possibly) mentioned in 2 Corinthians 10:7; Greek fathers’ view. Not personal enough nor definite enough for “thorn,” “in the flesh.” Nor (4) Afflictions and persecutions. Would he have prayed—could he have hoped—for the removal of (3) or (4)? (5) Facts are: (a) Probably (not certainly) this to be identified with Galatians 4:14. (b) Something which made his appearance less impressive than, for his work’s sake, he could have desired. [Lystrans “called Barnabas,” not Paul, “Jupiter,” perhaps as the nobler-looking, as well as because Paul was a better representative of the eloquent “Mercury.” Some foundation for what Corinthian depreciators said, “bodily presence weak” (2 Corinthians 10:10). Observe, “despised not” (Galatians 4:14); he might have expected that they would.] (c) This “buffeted” him. [Not the boxer’s blow as in 1 Corinthians 9:27; but the “slap” as given to Christ (Matthew 26:67); and 1 Corinthians 4:11; 1 Peter 2:20. Not only, or chiefly, Satan’s hindrance to his work; also, and first, it was expressly something from God, overruled as a rebuff and check to (possible) spiritual pride. (d) Too precarious to decide precisely for (say) acute ophthalmia. [Very common in East; aggravated by the excessive light and glare; very sharply painful, recalling Numbers 33:55 again.] Not certain that his three days’ blindness at Damascus left any effects. Galatians 4:15 does not (in Greek) say “your own eyes,” but “your eyes.” Galatians 4:11 may mean “in how large letters”; but, even so, this may have been for emphasis, to exhibit vividly, and call special attention to, his unusual concern about them. Still, he did for some reason generally employ an amanuensis; a defective sight well explains Acts 23 (a saying for which he never expresses any degree of regret, as he does for another on the same occasion, Acts 12:6, cf. Acts 26:5, as if it were not quite consistent with Christian sincerity and simplicity). Nothing must be inferred from, e.g., 2 Corinthians 13:9, which is used of others also, (e) Earliest Patristic identifications were headache, earache, etc.—all physical. Much modern favour toward epilepsy. [Sometimes with a plain animus.] A parallel with the case of Alfred the Great (whose mysterious sickness may have been epilepsy) very tempting. [See in Lightfoot, Galatians. Also Napoleon said of Archduke Albert, who, with great tactical genius, was often at critical moments in a campaign or battle rendered helpless by it, “If it had not been for that, the Archduke would have been the greatest general of us all.”] An acutely painful, visible, humiliating, (hindering), chronic, physical visitation.] .—2 Corinthians 12:1-10 Human Life circumscribed by Limitations. I. (2 Corinthians 12:1.) Paul repeatedly points out how Expediency is a limitation upon Liberty (1 Corinthians 6:12 and ‖ ? s). Here Necessity is a limitation to, and overrules, Expediency. 1. As a general, safe rule for conduct and speech, “glorying” is “inexpedient.” Between man and man it is “bad form.” The gentleman “vaunteth not himself” (1 Corinthians 13:4). This Modesty—self-suppression, self-effacement—is a social virtue, sometimes severed from its true Christian root, Humility. The Christian is modest before men because he knows that before God he is, and has, nothing of himself. 2. Between God and man “glorying” is out of place altogether; a sin against the very relation between them; of whom the One is all Giver, the other entirely a receiver, and has, indeed, in himself nothing to give status before, or acceptance with, God at all. 3. Boasting manifests self; ministers to self; gives Devil an opening for further temptation; to self-exaltation in the man himself; to man-worship in his friends and partisans (2 Corinthians 12:6). Yet, 4. May need to do violence to the instincts of modesty and humility, and speak out plainly and fully one’s character and position. Principle may be involved. Paul is compelled to speak and “glory” by charges and insinuations which not only, or principally, impinged upon him, but really struck at Christ, Who had made him an apostle, and had charged him with work which could only be done if he were really such. “Of such a one, … but not of myself.” I speak of him, because I must, as if he were some other man, to whom God was wonderfully gracious (2 Corinthians 12:5). If I begin about myself, I must play on another theme, “weaknesses.” A man may represent principles. A minister may need, for his Church’s sake and his brethren’s, to defend his status and ordination. For his converts’ sake, he may need to assert the validity of his and their position, and the truth of his preaching. His personal character may have to be asserted. “We were not ‘Yes and No’ men among you; else, perhaps, you had a ‘Yes and No’ Gospel, a ‘Yes and No’ Christ” (2 Corinthians 1:18 sqq.). 5. Above all, when what one is, and has become, and accomplished, is needed as a testimony for Christ. If it will preach Him to put oneself forward; if others will be encouraged to hope in Him for larger blessings, and through Him to accomplish larger service,—then one must crucify modesty, reticence, reserve, and must say out, and give Him credit for, all He has done in one’s own case. But always reluctantly, always with prayerful guard upon one’s spirit, and always “dropping” it, as soon as may be (2 Corinthians 12:1; 2 Corinthians 12:5-6). II. Limitations of knowledge. “I know … I know not” (2 Corinthians 12:2-3).— 1. Our known area is very narrow, a little rock standing up out of midst of waves of a sea of mystery, not absolutely bottomless, (ours is finite ignorance); but soon too deep for our stature. We wade out from our little bit of dry ground; we soon are out of our depth; the only difference between “wise” and “ignorant” is that some are taller than the rest, and can go little farther out before losing their footing or sinking overhead. If we quit the little, clear, light area, we soon find ourselves lost in pathless fog, and must turn back. We soon beat our wings against the bars of our imprisonment. [Origin of being, of creaturely being; ultimate meaning of “matter,” etc. In theology, or philosophy, no matter what track of inquiry is pursued, or in what direction, we very soon find ourselves face to face with dead walls, impassable, e.g. the Problem of Evil.] 2. Here an inspired man, supernaturally assisted, has been led to depths ordinarily beyond man; has been taken, indeed “caught up,” to heights, as yet, usually inaccessible. Indeed, he has been led through the Veil—lifted over one of the highest of the Barrier-walls that environ us—and now comes back, knowing where he has been, and what he has seen and heard; but not knowing how he got there; nor whether indeed all of him went there, or whether the body was left behind. And as to telling his experiences—no! 3. He cannot; or if he could, he may not. Human language, human thought, have no vessels to hold and carry and convey such contents. We ask him many questions, but in vain; and he breaks off, and leaves us to wonder, and query, and perhaps to chafe against the limitations of our knowledge. [“Foolish and unlearned questions avoid.” See how Christ dealt with useless inquiries, impossible or unprofitable to answer. (1) “Few that be saved?” “There are many that be lost! See that thou enter in at strait gate.” (2) “What shall this man do?” “Rather, this would I have thee do: follow thou Me!” (3) “Who did sin, this man or his parents?” “We must work the works … whilst it is day!” Sir Henry Wootton was asked, “Can a Papist be saved?” “You may be saved without knowing that; look to yourself.”] 3. Our inquiries may only mean curiosity, that (Pilate-like) plays with big questions, and has hardly enough of serious interest in them to make us wait for answer. God has nothing to say, or show, or give, to such. To equip a Paul He will give, with all their limitations, wondrously large “visions and revelations of the Lord.” III. Limitations to the blessedness of large and gracious communications from God.—Paul was soon brought back to the body. He was soon made to know “whether in the body,” ordinarily, or not. His body will not let him forget it. The “thorn” is a perpetual reminder. 1. Not even Paul is to be trusted to hold third-heaven converse with God and Divine things, without some compensating abatement. [So after Abraham’s victorious waiting in faith for the promised Isaac during a whole quarter of a century, we might have thought that he would have been left peacefully alone, to enjoy his home-life with his boy. No, not even God’s tested “friend” must be left many years without some disciplinary circumstances. So, “Offer Isaac up, a burnt offering.” If the physical “thorn” were in any way the result of the manifestation on the road to Damascus, or of the breaking down of human nature beneath the strain of ecstatic feeling; and thus consequent upon, and not simply subsequent to, the “revelations”; it would be fully analogous to many ordinary experiences of believers. Such pre-eminent gifts bring their penalties, or must be had at their price. A great access of holy exaltation in the sanctuary, e.g., or at the Lord’s Table, will exhaust the frame, and leave the system dead to all spiritual impression for some time after. The temperament capable of much blessing is also capable of and liable to great depression. 2. But the limitations are safeguards. They indicate no grudging of God to see us perfectly happy; no mere “stone put by Him into the other pocket,” as if from any “evil eye” towards our pleasure. He means our safety. Such limitations remind us of the “perishing” life; the uncertain tenure of all our earthly good; the vanity of self and human strength. If known to others, they are a salutary, objective check upon self-complacency; they keep the worker from any self-reliance which would dishonour God’s sole might working through him; they train habits of dependence upon God. This calls out prayer and faith; these secure Divine strength. And, 3. Best of all, if on His whole view of the conditions of the case, God sees that thus, and only thus, can we be best utilised for the exhibition and glory of His grace; if, to others, and to ourselves, the results and success of our life are so manifestly not to be accounted for on “natural” grounds, or by any “natural” equipment and advantages, (say) of personal appearance, voice, intellectual power; then the limitation which in one direction seems an evil becomes a good, and a new occasion of glorying. And the man who, for such a reason, rejoices in his very limitations, or even gives thanks for them, always finds new power resting upon him. IV. One thing in our life is without limitation.—The “sufficiency” of the “grace” of Christ. 1. Generally, “Sufficient for thee, that thou hast behind thee My strength.” The presence of Christ and His strength is a background on which all the detailed working out of life is superposed; a general truth, to be assumed and reckoned with in all the working out of the problem of our life; whatever may or may not be, that is; other persons may enter into or pass out of my life; their help may vary in its adequacy, or may fail altogether, and that at a critical moment,—this is a permanent condition of my life, and as unvarying as permanent. This is a spring never failing, and constant in quantity. I shall find His supply accompanying my Needs, in absolute continuity, two parallel lines running in continuous adaptation. “Because He ever liveth,” “saving (continuously) by His (continuous) life”; sending me continuous, sufficient, saving help, to the uttermost moment and extent of my need. 2. In detail. Not merely a general correspondence, Need and Supply lying side by side as two series of incidents. They also correspond in minute detail, new help arising, as new needs are arrived at in one’s life-course. Every page in our story shall have its counterpart page in the story of Christ’s “sufficient grace.” Needs will be many, troublesome, recurrent, petty, urgent, unexpected, unprecedented,—“He shall supply all your need.” No draft upon this Friend’s supply is ever returned bearing the words, “No effects.” 2 Corinthians 12:7-10. The Thorn in the Flesh. I. Threefold combination of personalities.—Christ; Paul; Satan. 1. Personality of last matter of pure revelation. Belief in it stands or falls with degree of final authority accorded to statements of Scripture. Acknowledged that Scripture [and Christ] assume a personal Devil. The “proof texts” from Scripture are (not quite as abundant but) precisely parallel in kind to those by which a personal Holy Ghost is established from Scripture. [ 1. Personal name given to him; 2. Personal will and intelligence ascribed to him; 3. Personal acts done by him.] In the Order of Evil he is the counterpart of God,—“the god of this world.” 2. Paul is here midway; the object of the Lord’s care; the object of Satan’s attack. (Cf. Luke 22:31.) Every man is the centre of attention to the unseen world of good and the world of evil; the prize of conflict for which they strive together. [Cf. perhaps, as to the very body of Moses (Jude 1:9).] Every Christian man takes into account another world and another set of agencies, for both danger and deliverance, besides those which enter into the reckoning of the “man of this world.” 3. This Evil One is his enemy; he can (under permission; he is a “chained lion,” who may not go beyond the radius of activity his Maker and Master and King, for His own larger purposes, permits; no such co-ordinate power of evil, an Ahriman parallel to an Ormuzd, as in many heathen religions and philosophies was assumed or taught) inflict physical suffering [assumed also in the case of discipline (1 Corinthians 5:5)]. Or, at least, makes the “natural” incidence of physical disorder the occasion and opportunity and basis of his attack. 4. Christ is a mightier Friend. Observe how, as by instinct, Paul cries out for help to Christ; as, a very short while before the first access of Paul’s “thorn,” he had seen and heard dying Stephen do. No neglect of, or dishonour to, the Father: “all men should honour the Son even as they honour the Father” (John 5:23). To Paul “to live is Christ.” A Christian has One most real, unseen Friend, Whom some day he shall actually see, with Whom even now he has most intimate, constant communication. His life, thought, heart, prayers, turn (sunflower-like) towards Christ. Christian children have no “God” but “Jesus,” and the “perfect man” may be a little child in this. Expand this: II. A twofold contrast of purposes.— 1. Same set of physical circumstances, Janus-like, has two faces, wears two aspects. From the Christward side they are a safeguard, a piece of moral training, “lest I should be exalted,” etc. From the Satanward side, they are an “angel” of his “to buffet.” 2. All our life is complex; no single, simplest incident, but has many-sided relations to every other—equally many-sided—incident. All is ethical. Everything is “a providence,” i.e. an item, a factor, in God’s great “providence,” i.e. His wise, loving scheme for our life, designed, ordered, executed for our “good” (Romans 8:28). Even physical, natural disadvantages, which “handicap” in the race, or disable one hand for the conflict, or make us (Jacob-like) halt upon our thigh for the pilgrimage, have wise, loving, high place amongst the elements of the education of God’s children. “Thorns” are “given” by God; but it is the business of the Evil One to take each of these and endeavour to make it serve his evil turn. Thus each is of God, or of Satan, according as it may be regarded. We may say with equal truth, and with equal devoutness, “God is in this”; or “Devil has a hand in this.” (Cf. 2 Samuel 24:1; 1 Chronicles 21:1.) (How far any of them is permitted to originate with him, we cannot say. Part of the insoluble Problem of Evil which sooner or later blocks the way of moral inquiry, in every religion, in every philosophy.) 3. Particularly, such a sharply painful reminder of his physical limitations may appeal in one of two ways to an earnest, holy worker for Christ. [E.g. excessive nervousness which will not allow the full heart and competent brain to deliver with any sort of effect its urgently needed message; or want of stamina, which prevents any continuous or trying work being undertaken, for which in all other respects the man is admirably qualified, or which gives way even under great spiritual exaltation and blessing such as would effectively equip him for service, or which perpetually lays him aside in the midst of successful work, or relegates him altogether to invalid-couch or sick-room; or some actual disease or defect, blindness, deafness, lameness, skin affection, crippling or rendering free intercourse with others almost impossible; and the like.] (1) It may come like a smart “slap in the face” to a busy talker, or worker; like a sharp blow upon the ankle to the eager runner; like the sharp prick of a big thorn in the hand, which makes the worker drop his work, or the carrier his vessel. It may “pull up,” by the want of natural “capital,” the man of eager, large heart, and broad views, who sees how to do a large business for Christ. The work must go undone, the scheme be only in part carried out. “If only I had So-and-so’s five talents of natural endowment!” Less work seems done than might otherwise be: Satan’s aim seems thus well served! Then if the man chafes, or begins to “wonder” about the wisdom and love of his limitations—why he has not five talents like So-and-so, why he must have this thorn in the flesh, he sets the door open for Satan to find an almost invited entrance. Or (2) he may rise higher, and so get a broader view. “See the perils of five talent men! If I had the treasure in So-and-so’s vessel, instead of my poor earthen one (2 Corinthians 4:7), I might be tempted to …! Perhaps I ‘cannot carry corn.’ Perhaps my Master knows that the build of my ship will not let me carry a large cargo of blessing and revelation without a big ballast of compensating limitations. If I had that man’s personal presence, and address, and social gifts, and clearness of thought, and readiness of utterance, and faculty of persuasion, and skill in organisation, and abundant, unbroken health, perhaps my Lord could not also trust me with the spiritual equipment, the disclosures of His heaven, and of Himself, and the unspeakable words of our close fellowship, which are so often a holy secret between Him and my soul; and I should from that side be disabled for the work He honours me to do.” So rather he is led to— III. One blessed issue.—Paul is saved from personal, spiritual peril; he is brought down to the perfect fitness for a display in Him of Christ’s strength; Christ is glorified. 1. Think of Paul in danger of pride, “boasting of what he received, as though he had not received it” (1 Corinthians 4:7), in regard to his full experiences. See how near great blessing is to great danger; “thin partitions do the bounds divide.” A man of great “revelations” is “in slippery places.” No great wonder if the men of great reputation, or profession, sometimes make a great fall. Sin is never far away, nor Satan. Paul’s physical disqualifications kept others from unduly exalting him, and kept him from unduly exalting self. He learns to thank Christ for what keeps him from going too near the giddy edge. 2. Better still, his own manifest limitations leave the field clear for the display of Christ’s strength. He learns to make a new occasion of “boasting” out of the very “infirmities” [afflictions, not sins], which are a foil the better to set off the “grace of Christ” in perfect display. Our “strength” is sadly in the way of our being “successful”; we cannot be trusted with success; there must not even be the danger that the glory of “success” should even seem to be shared with man. It must be evidently Christ, not Paul. Christ reduces His best workers to “nothing” (2 Corinthians 12:11), that they may plainly be nothing except His instruments. “Dost thou desire the work done perfectly, in My perfected strength?” “Yes, Lord.” “Then I must say ‘no’ to thy prayer. Thou must keep thy ‘thorn’; must do thy—My—work, conditioned by it; I will perfectly strengthen thee; thou shalt not be useless; and I shall be glorified.” 3. All leads up to this. Paul’s prayer turns to Christ; Satan’s buffeting is ruled, conditioned, utilised by Christ; above all, Paul’s weakness sets him aside, so that the figure in full view, and the strength in palpable evidence, are Christ and His strength. [“How heroic,” we say of an ordinary worker in some secular field, who persists and triumphs and leaves the world better, in the face of some great natural, physical, painful limitation. Paul was really “heroic,” to do what he did, with a perpetual, hampering “thorn.” Yet he says, not “heroism” but, “grace.”] 2 Corinthians 12:7. “Lest … lest.” The Perils of Great Grace. I. The privilege of it.—“Caught up into Paradise, hearing unspeakable words.” Whatever they meant to Paul, these words suggest the many moments of wonderful exaltation of spirit to believers; of close communion, when “the secret of the Lord” is told to “them that fear Him”; of mountain-top fellowship, when the unseen is revealed, and Moses and Elijah speak of the atoning “decease,” and hearts cry, “Good to be here!” The Word speaks things to our inner ear, which call up suggestions, and waken hope and desire, “groanings which cannot be uttered.” The Spirit leads out in desire vaguely large, too large to be apprehended or clothed in language. Preacher’s heart gets filled with his theme, with yearning over his hearers beyond what is common. Regions where very few walk; into which very few Christians penetrate at all. On our knees, in the Sanctuary, at the Lord’s Table. II. The peril of it.—Must be remembered that perfect holiness would include perfect humility. 1. Lest: begin to carry head high, as one of the privileged ones who have the entrée into the Presence, looking down upon the common run of fellow-Christians, the Mordecais at the gate, who never hear, see, get, care for, “nor are capable of,” such things; begin to despise these less richly favoured ones, or uncharitably esteem them as “less devoted, less earnest, a poor half-hearted set of people”; begin to forget that all such special blessing is only a means to greater usefulness, that all is given that we may give, not that we may simply felicitate ourselves, or enjoy our portion alone; such gifts are—as after Pentecost—to be brought into the common stock, for the help of the Church. [Peril of losing oneself and of losing the blessing in over-subtle analysis of “the blessing”; of dilettante-like expositions of it, till nothing is left but the œsthetics of “experience,” and a sensuous self-indulgence in the mere joy of the “revelations.”] Then comes peril lest Satan get advantage, and the Spirit be with-drawn. The fall of the highest is the lowest. Don’t envy the five-talent man; pray for him! 2. Yet even at the price of such a peril, we shall welcome and glory in the revelations. “He revealed His Son in me.” III. The safeguard.—Perhaps 1. Some “buffet in the face,” some “thorn in the flesh. Note (1) Paul was in fact kept safe from the peril. Much grace can always be kept by getting more grace. No necessity that after exaltation should come pride, or self-complacency, or contempt and harsh judgment of others. Christ can keep the highly honoured man, though both his own heart and Satan put him into peril. Note (2) No need in times of specially “abundant revelations” to begin to look out for the sending of some “thorn in the flesh.” Or after some unusual blessing to say, “Ah! now I shall have some big trial.” As if some unusually bright weather in our pilgrimage were bound to bring a storm. 2. Always the grace of Christ. “This sufficeth, sufficeth, sufficeth, for thy soul: viz. thou hast My grace! Say no more; fear no more; rest there.” 2 Corinthians 12:8. “Unanswered Prayer.”I. An apparent contradiction.—How many Scripture passages run in the strain of: “Him that cometh … I will in no wise cast out.” “Whatsoever things ye desire, … believe that ye receive them” [not “will receive”; indeed, R.V. “received”], etc. Yet did not Christ in effect “cast out” the rich young ruler? Did not Paul thrice ask—like his Lord in Gethsemane—what, in the terms of the request, was not granted? Do not we ask much, and strongly “believe” [often this only means strongly persuade ourselves] that we shall have, yet we do not receive it? Sometimes we “ask amiss” (James 4:3). Sometimes, like the ruler, we will not accept our blessing upon Christ’s terms and fulfil His conditions. Such must be cast out. Further: II. The real harmony.— 1. There are no unanswered prayers. “No” is an answer, real, true, kind. Prayers, petitioners, are never simply disregarded, nor apply to a God who looks, hears, knows, yet makes no response. Always “attends to our voice.” God’s refusal does not mean indifference or rebuff. 2. God’s promise to hear prayer, by no means binds Him to be mechanically at the mere service of His client’s wish. [As Faust’s “familiar” must obey his every command, however capricious or foolish.] 3. Prayer does include petition; definite requests may be, should be, made; to make them honours God; but they are the requests of children addressed to a greater, wiser Father. He had rather say, ‘Yes’ than ‘No’; always says ‘Yes,’ if that may fall in with His purpose and training for His child. If He say ‘No,’ it is that He may take up the desire we imperfectly clothe or conceive, and give it a better embodiment, and one consistent with His larger view of the present conditions, and the future developments of the particular life and its “education.” 4. Immediately, and for Paul’s mere comfort, the better thing seemed to be to take away the “thorn.” Remotely, more widely, with larger consequences of blessing to Paul and to others, and with more glory to the Master Christ, it was better to leave the “thorn” and to add the “sufficient grace.” Take in all the conditions, then the balance of advantage, blessing, glory to Christ, is very preponderantly in favour of saying “No” to the mere letter of the request, and giving a larger “Yes” of eternal blessing. III. No wrong in tedly urging our request.—Christ did it. Only be careful not to suffer our urgency to lose submissiveness, and become dictation. Keep an ear, a heart, ready to catch the first, plain, tender denial: “Don’t ask that any longer.” Then “be silent unto the Lord” (Psalms 62:5, Heb.). Acquiesce in, until this grows to embracing (2 Corinthians 12:10), His will; until this grows to “glorying” in the very “infirmities.” Especially, if they may be the occasion, the vehicle, the theatre, of a glorious display of the power of Christ. And if the acquiescence be more than mortal strength can compass, grace will bear in upon the soul a strong peace. “An angel from heaven strengthening,” over against the “angel from Satan buffeting.” [No need to “take pleasure,” or to pretend to take pleasure, in such things (as in 2 Corinthians 12:10), unless they be “for Christ’s sake” (1 Peter 2:9-10)]. 2 Corinthians 12:9. “Tabernacling.”—One of the many lines of reiterated, recurrent, continuous teaching by symbolism which bind Revelation and its Record together into an organic whole. One Mind is in such lines of symbolism seen pursuing Its theme, fulfilling Its purpose, through the ages. I. Bible begins and ends with a garden, a “Paradise of God.” God vouchsafing, desiring, free intercourse with man; “walking in the garden in the cool of the day,”—at the one end of one Book. At the other, the garden (like the Paradises of Persian Kings) is in a city, New Jerusalem; a great voice proclaims that God and man are in perfect fellowship again (Revelation 21:3). “The tabernacle of God is with men,” etc. (Zechariah 8:8 is fulfilled.) (And earlier: Revelation 7:15, “tabernacle upon them.”) In the earlier Paradise the idea of “tabernacling” does not yet, of course, appear. The actual, illustrative Tabernacle is in date midway between the two Paradises. II. God has been all through testifying to desire for the renewal of communion.— 1. In Israel’s camp, Moses had his tent, but there was also another, larger, more costly Tent; understood to be Jehovah’s tent; the tent of the True Chief in the camp. Jehovah “spread His tabernacle” among them. Over it, and within it, hung a cloud of glory, the King’s symbol, occupying His tent amidst the tents of His nation. 2. “When the earthly house of “His “tabernacle was dissolved,” there arose “a building of” Solomon’s. The people are in houses; Solomon lives in a palace; the King must therefore no longer have a tent, but a Palace. Again the cloud comes upon and abides within; the King is resident, and holds His court in His capital, Jerusalem. 3. Just as the earthly house of His dwelling was passing wholly away, to have no structural successor, there came amongst men “a Building of God,” an Incarnate Word, “setting up His tabernacle” (John 1:14) “amongst us.” John and his fellow-believers are permitted to enter and “behold His glory,” the Shekinah-cloud of Godhead discernible in Him. (The two veils were rent together.) No such emphatic sign of His desire and heart had God hitherto given. This Word is Immanuel, and, by what He is, says “Immanuel.” 4. All this is blessedly reproduced in His people. We have “seen the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.” The man in Christ has “the earthly house of his tabernacle” (2 Corinthians 5:1), and he looks for a day when he shall have a body, a nature, which shall be no (temporary) tent, but a (permanent) “building,” a temple, fitted to be the eternal sphere of a communion with God which shall be eternal and perfect in Christ. III. Meanwhile he walks in and out amongst his fellows, bearing in himself a shrine; being himself a shrine, in which God dwells by His Spirit [or in the person of Christ (Ephesians 3:17; 1 Peter 3:15)]. He turns within, and finds a light and a glory: “God’s Son revealed in him.” Also the power of Christ spreads a tent over him; invests him, covers him, as did the glory which took possession of Solomon’s Temple, with a power and an awful beauty of holiness, evidently not his own. He has been “endued with power from on high” (Luke 24:49). Such a life,—as, for example, Paul’s,—no wonder that it is a centre of power and prevalent influence. It only rests upon him; it is not inherent; he can be divested of it, if unfaithful to it; but while he wears it, how mighty he is for Christ. [Shall we call it the official garment of the ambassador for Christ?] 2 Corinthians 12:9; 2 Corinthians 12:11. Strength and Weakness. I. “A distinct principle is announced of universal significance. ‘Strength is made perfect in weakness,’ ‘When I am weak, then am I strong,’ are expressions which have now passed almost into the proverbial language of man-kind. It was true, in the highest sense, of Him that uttered it, that ‘His strength was made perfect in the weakness of His sufferings.’ The Cross of Christ is, indeed, the strength of Christianity. [His sceptre was a reed; not yet the rod of iron (Psalms 2).] It was true, also, though not in the highest sense, yet still in a sense so great as to be a lesson and an example to all the world, that His strength was perfected in the weakness of the Apostles, above all, of St. Paul. ‘I thank Thee, O Father, that Thou hast concealed these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes.’ Who can say how much of the purity and simplicity, and therefore universal strength of the first teaching of the Gospel, we owe (humanly speaking) to the humble station and uneducated character of the first Apostles, which thus received, at once, and without perversion or intrusion of alien thoughts, the original impression of the Word made flesh? Who can say how great would have been the loss to the world had the Gospel originated, not in the weakness of Palestine and Galilee, but in the learning of Alexandria or the strength of Rome? And again, in St. Paul himself, it might have seemed at the time to all, as it did on this occasion seem to him, that the cause of the Gospel would have been better served, had he been relieved from his infirmity and gone forth to preach and teach with unbroken vigour of body and mind, his bodily presence strong, his speech mighty and powerful. But history has answered the question otherwise, and has ratified the Divine answer, in which the Apostle acquiesced. What the Apostle lost for himself, and Christianity lost for the moment, has been more than compensated by the acknowledgment that he was beyond doubt proved to be, not the inventor of Christianity, but its devoted and humble propagator. In his own weakness lies the strength of the cause. When he was weakest as a teacher of the present, he was strongest as an apostle of the future. And what his trial was to him and to the world on a large scale, that the trial of each individual Christian may have been ever since, the means in ways inconceivable to him now, of making himself and others strong in the service of God and man.” (Stanley, Corinthians, 569.) II. 1. Compare also: “The meek”—not the self-assertive, masterful men, insistent on “rights,” combative in their assertion and maintenance, tolerating no smallest slight—“shall inherit the earth.” Like their Lord, “Who shall not strive nor cry … until (in the midst of, and by means of, the work of ‘weakness’) He bring forth judgment unto victory.” The triumph of Christianity in the Roman Empire was the “victory of the vanquished.” 2. How often the preacher, the teacher, the worker, do most when they have gone to their work trembling, discouraged, but the more flung upon God’s strength. History of some men, some ministries, some Churches, is summarised in Hosea 13:1. (“Baal” has been some idol of self-sufficiency, or human reliance; before which they have bowed down, turning aside from Jehovah to do so.) 3. How the women, the very children, have found all fear vanish, and the flesh strengthened, to walk to the stake for Christ! Sometimes even shaming the men! How the simple women, in Marian days, silenced the cavil and the argument, strong in their only learning,—the Word of God! How they will bear the daily persecution, strong in their very humility, till the very malice of the world gives way, beaten! “Galilæan, thou hast conquered!” 4. Secret of all is, that conscious weakness turns to Infallible Might. (Storm breaks or uproots the oak that will not bend; the pliant sapling escapes, and is the more deeply rooted because of the storm.) Everything that grieves (as does self-sufficiency or reliance on human wisdom or strength) the Spirit, Whose indwelling is our only strength, weakens us. Everything that leaves room for Him to be exalted, brings His strength increasingly. [Illustrate by bar of soft iron, forming the core of an electro-magnet; cold, and in itself powerless to attract or support. Set the current circulating around it, it is full of power,—which disappears, and is gone, in an instant, if the current stop. “Out of weakness” it “is made strong.”] 2 Corinthians 12:14-15. God’s Appeal to the Soul.—May fairly borrow these Pauline words and make them the words of God in Christ appealing to the sinner. For “he that hath seen a Christian hath seen Christ” (cf. John 14:9; more than a mere rhetorical parallel). He is a replica of Christ, and so of God. If Paul feels and does this, he has learned it from Christ. He is “in Christ,” in it all. I. God makes the advances; not man first.— 1. Always the “law” of His dealings. “I said, Thy face … will I seek, because thou saidst (first), Seek ye My face” (Psalms 27:8). After sin’s alienation, He makes the first approaches: “I seek you.” “The Father seeketh” spiritual, sincere worshippers (John 4:23). We do not solicit the mercy of a reluctant God. No need to “beg Him into the mind” to bless. He is forward, beforehand, with us, proffering, pressing upon our acceptance, His love. 2. Persistently does this.—“This third, tenth, thirtieth time I am coming to you, soul!” Through long years of merciful waiting, rebuffed affection, long-tired patience. [“Came seeking fruit these three years.”] If His patience had not been His, it would have given way long ago. “Come to me.… I am meek, (and therefore have borne your slight of my love)” (Spurgeon). No runaway knock: “I stand at the door, and knock.” 3. “Spent” is “spent out.”—“ ‘It is finished’; He gave up the ghost.” The last was spent, and paid down then. “What could your Redeemer do,More than He hath done for you?”The Father “spared not His own Son,” His unique One, the only “Son” of that kind, the only-begotten. Our sin and need required even That Gift; and He would not stop at even That, when it was a question of our “souls.” How He lavishes love; as if by His gifts to awaken and win for Himself our reluctant, indifferent heart! 4. “More abundantly.”—Another Divine word. John 10:10; Hebrews 6:17; Romans 15:13; Romans 5:15 (our word or its cognates). “My cup” is not simply full but, “runneth over.” Man’s measure for man is God’s measure to man (Luke 6:38). 5. Think of the ages of preparation for Christ, during which God was “laying up for the children.” II. How man meets the advances.—[This is the bitter wail of some aged fathers, who have slaved, saved, given life, for sons who think the “old man” a burden: “Why does he not take himself off to heaven or some-where!”] 1. Think God a “burden.” [Word (so Jerome in Stanley) a local, Cicilian word, root of which was the name of the torpedo-fish.] His clinging love, hanging around our neck, caressing, wooing, pleading, is unwelcome; it is counted a dead weight, the cling of a torpedo that shocks, and paralyses, and spoils all our possibility of enjoyment! We grudge what His house and service cost us! Grudge what He asks us to give up, if we are to be His. Yet He does not want it, or want to take it, for His own sake. He seeks “not yours, but you.” 2. The more He loves, the less He is loved. Heart gets harder under the very impact of His streaming sunshine! How Nazareth thrust back into the heart of Jesus the love that came unsolicited to do “many mighty works”! 3. Happy for us, that “more abundantly.” We build the dykes, and shut the floodgates [as the Dutchmen, for their good, shut out the ocean]; but the flood of love flows right over the barrier, and brings life into our barren death. 2 Corinthians 12:10. “Pleasure!” 1. Submission may be much, and more than merely sitting to bear whatever is laid upon us, but with an attitude of heart that means, “I would not if I had any choice. Must bear it; all right, I suppose, but—” 2. Wonderful power of accepting, adjusting self to surroundings. Can accommodate, accustom ourselves to anything; until we move amidst and under the burden of discomfort or deprivation, with a mere indifference that stolidly holds on its way, “blow, hail, shine”! 3. Embracing the will of God is much more. 4. But “take pleasure in”! Unnatural, incredible, impossible,—True! 5. “For His sake” makes the difference. What a reality, and a power, is Christ in Paul’s life! No teacher, no compeller, no enabler, for unwelcome burdens or impossible tasks, like Grateful Love! 2 Corinthians 12:10. May we make a counter-part saying, “When Paul is strong, then is he weak”? Two suggestions then: I. Weakness in strength. II. Strength in weakness. Or:— I. “Strong” have “no need” of help, and do not seek it. II. “Weak” know their need and lay hold of Almighty strength. 2 Corinthians 12:11-13. “In all patience.”—May be made central word of paragraph. As usual, “patience” is not merely “endurance,” but “pressing on and bearing up.” I. His own converts, who owe him everything, will not say a word for him,—say many against him. “Be patient, Paul.” Down, proud heart! Stoop, for the cause’ sake, to commend yourself. Crucify personal feeling. Be “a fool.” II. His enemies resist him, and decry, and depreciate. Yet he has a credential none of them possess. It might become a weapon against them. But no! “Be patient, Paul!” Never use miracle-working power for a weapon of revenge or self-vindication! [Cf. “Withdrew Himself from them,” when He could have slain such murderous-hearted wretches, with the same power that had healed the withered hand (Matthew 12:14-15). Simply went out of their way!] III. His Churches are ready to think the worst, if he ask an apostle’s rightful maintenance. “Be patient, Paul!” Let Philippi help thee, indeed, “once and again” (Philippians 4:16). But for Corinthians (and Ephesians),—well, thou hast a trade in thy hand; turn to thy tentmaking! 2 Corinthians 12:14. (See another line of suggestion homiletically dealt with more fully below.) I. “Not yours”: your gifts; applause; influence. “I am your minister for Christ’s sake,”—your servant; not “lording it” over the Lord’s “heritage” (1 Peter 5:13). II. “You.” “Watching for your souls as one who must give an account” (Hebrews 13:17). “Your love, for my own sake. And that, because I cannot help you unless I have it. Your welfare, here and hereafter; by your conversion and your perfecting in holiness.” 2 Corinthians 12:16-19 (first clause). I. Self-vindication sometimes necessary for the credit of religion.—[Cf. Samuel’s self vindication (1 Samuel 12:2-4). Yet higher Example: “Which of you convicteth Me of sin?” (John 8:46). David’s assertions of innocence are no personal boasting; they are the appeal of a smarting sense of injustice, involving the cause of God and its credit, to a Higher Court.] II. Man who does it should be very sure that he can offer (1) a clear conscience to the examination of God and (2) clear accounts, and a clean record, to the examination of man. 1. “In sight of God speak we.” [Then use may be made of “boasting,” and of irony,—both edged tools to deal with, and dangerous to a man’s own spiritual life. Did Christ ever use irony? F. W. Robertson thought so; “Full well” (Mark 7:9).] 2. Christian men should be more particular than others in money matters. Mercenary motives will be charged; because of the misconduct of some; because the world understands no higher motive; or from pure maliciousness. Poor excuse for muddle, hard to distinguish from dishonesty: “He meant no wrong!” Particularly in dealing with money of others, or of the Church. In even such secularities, “temporals,” Paul and Titus “walk in the Spirit.” As the early “deacons” (Acts 7) were to be “full … of the Holy Ghost.” Oh for spiritual treasurers, secretaries, stewards! 3. There are sins in a man’s past record which, though pardoned, and not affecting his present standing or holiness before God, render it inexpedient that he should be in the ministry. Paul and Titus should have clean hands, and a clean record. [Rev. Thomas Collins, on platform of a meeting full of opponents: “Mr. Chairman, Christian friends, I am a man who neither fears the frown, nor courts the smile, of any living. I am a man through whose soul the light of the Sun of Righteousness beams all day and all night.” (Coley, Life of Collins, 308.) In similar circumstances at Truro he said: “[You say] ‘you are designing men.’ That is true. I am a designing man.… I have a design to draw my family closer to God, and to get my hearers into the same mind. These are my chief designs at present. All others that I have bow down to them and serve them. Could you this moment scan the naked hearts of my brethren, you would, I doubt not, find some such designs in them.” (Ib. 309.) Very close parallels, even in form, to Paul’s case here.] 2 Corinthians 12:19 (second clause)—21. A New Testament Nehemiah. I. 1. I am coming to Corinth; “to build you up” (2 Corinthians 12:19). 2. I hear, and fear, that I shall find sad havoc and ruin in the Church of God; “walls broken down”; “gates burnt with fire.” 3. I shall be such as ye would not: a stern, authoritative, authorised reformer, sparing no wrong, or wrongdoer; as every true minister of Christ must on occasion be. 4. I fear I shall have a bitter hour of speechless humiliation among you (Nehemiah 1:4; good parallel in Ezra 9:3-4). II. Man who loves, and understands, the true methods and meaning of the Work of God, finds no keener distress, no greater humiliation before God, than in the sins which are the weakness and the shame of the Church. III. How easily old sins, or the customary sins of our world and our time, regain ascendency over Church members, and creep into the Church. [See again how Nehemiah kept the gates, nor would even suffer the expelled traders to tempt his citizens by remaining even in the neighbourhood of the walls (Nehemiah 13:21).] NOTES2 Corinthians 13:1-13.—[Good paraphrase, exhibiting connection of thought, from Stanley: “Once, twice, thrice, as in the Mosaic Law of the three witnesses; by my first visit—by this Epistle, as though I had accomplished my second visit—by the third visit, which I now hope to accomplish [this personifying the three (?) visits as three witnesses, somewhat forced and fantastic]—I warn you that I shall not spare my power when I come. You are always seeking for a proof of my Apostleship; you shall have it. For Christ who speaks in me, though in the weakness of humanity He died the shameful death of the cross, in the strength of God He lives and acts still; and in Him, weak and poor as I seem to be, I shall still live and act towards you. But why do I speak of myself? You yourselves, my converts, are the best witnesses of my Apostolical power; and long may you be so! If, indeed, you should have lost this best proof of my Apostleship in the reformation of your own lives, then indeed you shall have the proof of my severity. But my earnest prayer is that there may be no occasion for it. May my power and the proof of it perish if you prove that you do not need it. Against a true and blameless life the highest Apostolical power is powerless; and if you have this power of truth and goodness, I am well content to part with mine. It is to draw you to a sense of this that I write this whole Epistle, in the hopes that my Apostolical authority may be turned to its fitting purpose of building up, not of pulling down.”2 Corinthians 13:1.—Strong presumption in this verse of two actual previous visits; second unrecorded in Acts; opportunity for it during the long stay at Ephesus (Acts 20:31). Quotation from Deuteronomy 19:15. “Prepare for a calm, thorough, judicial inquiry when I come, into the facts of all these ugly reports about you which reach me.”2 Corinthians 13:2. Before, foretell, heretofore; only by prefixes to the verbs. Note, as to first case, R.V. margin; a very possible rendering. Better: “Before my second visit I said; and now, before my third, I say.” Choice between: “As if I were,” etc., and “When I was,” depends on view taken as to two, or three, visits. (Best discussion of this is Conybeare and Howson, chap. xv. Also see Introduction.) Heretofore, repeated from 2 Corinthians 12:21; i.e. “up to now, and to the rest, if they be inclined to follow the bad lead of these first sinners.” Cf. “I spare you” (1 Corinthians 7:28). Omit, “I write.”2 Corinthians 13:3. In me.—Emphatic in position; q.d. “My opponents say He speaks in them, and that He does not speak in me. You ask my proof that He does.” Observe the style of an ancient prophet. Paul is the mouthpiece of Christ, and, further, Christ is the Inspiring God (cf. 2 Samuel 23:2). (Observe “who,” not “which”) Similarly Ananias and Sapphira “sought a proof” of the Holy Ghost speaking in Peter. Notice “toward you” and “in you.”2 Corinthians 13:4.—An unfaithful convert thought: “Not much to fear from this Christ; Himself He could not save (cf. Luke 23:35); us He cannot punish.” [Cf. διά, Galatians 4:13; ἐξ here.] Weakness.—“As you call it, and His enemies esteemed it. As we know it, He was so crucified, under conditions of humanity and its physical limitations which He had chosen to assume and submit to; He died as part of the ‘emptying’ of Himself. He chose not to draw upon His Divine reserve of power.” We also.—2 Corinthians 4:10; 2 Corinthians 12:10. Paul’s familiar thought; shares with our Lord in His redemption history. We have our weakness, our crucifixion, our resurrection, our strength as of a heavenly, enthroned life.2 Corinthians 13:5. Connect, “proof” (2 Corinthians 13:3); “examine” (here); “reprobate” (2 Corinthians 13:5-6); “approved”; all cognate in root; evidence during trial; act of trial; rejected after trial; approved and accredited, as result of standing the trial well. “Whether they had suggested this word, or the Apostle only attributed it to them, … it certainly had seized his mind, and he dwells upon the idea, after his manner, with all kinds of variations. This one word ‘proof’ is the key to the whole passage, and solves every difficulty.” (Pope, Prayers of St. Paul, 168.)] [Good illustration of “approved” in Romans 16:10 : “Apelles approved in Christ,” i.e. a man in Christ (= a Christian) who has been tried by trials, by labours, by persecutions, by time (hardest test of all, to some!), and who has come forth, not “reprobate silver” (Jeremiah 6:30) or gold, but (to coin a parallel word) approbate, a vessel on which the Great Assay-master can set His hall-mark “Approved.”] Your (own) selves.—Not me (2 Corinthians 13:3). “If you want such a proof, the test will be that you should turn out able to stand examination.”2 Corinthians 13:6. I trust.—“Hope.” Partly: “I should like to think that your self-examination will so end as to be the best proof that I am an apostle.” Partly, and more sternly: “I shall in any case, if you compel me, hope to show you that I have an apostle’s power and authority.”2 Corinthians 13:7.—“The bearing of your self-examination upon me personally is, however, a small matter. Let me be ‘approved’ or ‘reprobate,’ I care not; what I do care about is, that you may really be such as need fear no scrutiny.” Self would say: “I hope they may be shown up badly; and may so vindicate me, and give me a chance of punishing.”2 Corinthians 13:8. As Stanley above.2 Corinthians 13:9. Perfecting.—Not the τέλειος word, but καταρτίζω word. Trace it from (literal) “Mending the nets” (Mark 1:19). “A body … prepared Me” (Hebrews 10:5; Hebrews 11:3); through, e.g., Galatians 6:1 (“replace the dislocated member of Christ”) to 1 Thessalonians 3:10; [a fearful use, in Romans 9:22] 1 Corinthians 1:10 = Restoration to corporate perfectness. “Perfect restoration to ecclesiastical order, and … perfect recovery of moral purity; the corporate or Church idea predominating in the word, as its etymology … indicates” (Pope, Prayers St. Paul, 169).2 Corinthians 13:10.—Note R.V.; very clear. Repeated from 2 Corinthians 10:8. .—2 Corinthians 13:1-10 Three antitheses:— A. Present and absent (2 Corinthians 13:1-2; 2 Corinthians 13:10) B. Strong and weak (2 Corinthians 13:3-4; 2 Corinthians 13:8-9). C. Reprobate and approved (2 Corinthians 13:5-7). A. I. How hard to get at truth! We may be intentionally deceived, or undesignedly misled. It is not enough to go upon what the “household of Chloe” reported. Very natural, in the (honourable) revolt against such sin as they described, to rush into an emphatic judgment, which may prove, when more facts are known, too strong or unwarranted altogether. Yet it is very hard to recant, especially if we have published our judgment to the world. No hasty, impulsive judgments; especially in apostles or persons responsible for the discipline and purity of a Church. Nor on mere hearsay evidence. Judge gives the presumption on the prisoner’s side, until he hears all. Weigh, wait, watch for new facts; inquire patiently. “Against an elder,” etc. (1 Timothy 5:19). Eliminate thus the personal, in regard to the testimony, and to the verdict. The “two or three witnesses” were rather jury, assessors to the judge, than witnesses in modern judicial sense. Good rule also for private conduct, as well as for official and disciplinary. “First, tell him his fault, between thee and him alone” (Matthew 18:15). Get face to face with the man, and, as far as possible thus, with the facts. “Then take with thee one or two more,” etc. (ib.). II. When truth is ascertained, then action must be decisive. Sin is in itself a grievous evil, and damaging to the Church; a cancer eating its inner life, a leprosy making it offensive to the outer world. Faithfulness to God—the Holy—and faithfulness to men, require prompt, decisive action; faithfulness to the faithful membership, to the unfaithful member (who may thus be made to see his sin, and be led to repentance; it is no kindness to the sinner to deal with his offence with unholy tenderness), and to the outside world (to which it is important that “the Salt” should have its full and unmixed “savour” of grace and holiness) requires it. Remedial measures, if it may be; excision (Galatians 5:12) if nothing less severe will suffice. As of the magistrate, so of the Church discipline: “Wouldst thou have no fear of the power?” etc. (Romans 13:3). And all this in the presence of the offender, if possible. (The Apostle is a “Visitor” in the old Church and college sense; to inquire into abuses, or offences, and to remedy or punish.) III. Note how all this reflects God’s method. “Swift to hear” [knowing everything that can be said for the wrong-doer; giving full, loving, gracious weight to it; perhaps, now and then, judging more leniently than even the awakened conscience itself does]. “Slow to wrath” [Paul’s “longsuffering”—his reluctance to hasten to Corinth until all wrong was put away—“leading them to repentance” (Romans 2:4)]; “waiting” if so be He, “may be gracious” (Isaiah 39:8). Paul did, God does, we should, “lay the axe at the root of the trees”; for use, if it must be; but also rather that the tree may take heed and make the axe needless. But in the “day of visitation” (as above) He too will “use sharpness.” “If He come again (in that day) He will not spare.” [I. Christ absent; II. Christ present.] The “wrath” of the tenderest natures; the indignation against wrong which is born of the deepest loyalty to, and love of, right (as in Paul); are the most “sharp” and terrible. [“Wrath of the Lamb” (Revelation 6:16).] In all that Paul says, in the lines on which he acts and proposes to act, we see “Christ speaking in him.” B. Paul is “in Christ.— 1. He lives Christ’s life over again: “Crucified with Christ.” And his crucified life is modelled on the lines of his Lord’s; it was “weakness” to suffer Himself to be crucified; it seems to the wrong-doers at Corinth “weakness” in Paul, whom they may ignore or defy, that he does not come as in the First Epistle he had said he would, but holds his hand from executing the punishment he threatened. [So men think and speak of God and His Christ in this the day of forbearance. “Weakness!” “Sentence … not executed speedily” (Ecclesiastes 8:11). “Thoughtest … such a one as thyself” (Psalms 50:21). He suffers them “to crucify Him afresh and put Him to an open shame”; yet generally “makes no sign.” Intellectual revolt against His Divine Authority, heart revolt against His holy Law; political refusal of recognition of Christian principle in legislation; He sits, above them all, “keeping silence.” World grows defiant; Church grows impatient and fearful. But no! Don’t misinterpret the weakness!] 2. Notwithstanding the seeming weakness, behind and beneath there is reserve strength in Paul. Comparable to His Who even now “lives” again—the day of His humiliation and “weakness” over—through the power of God [“through,” for this raised Him (e.g. Acts 2:33; Acts 5:31, “by” and “at”), and dwells in Him, inherent, native, His own] Comparable to, and also really derived from, connected with, it. “We shall live” (in the like strength) “with Him” (if we come to Corinth to punish). The executive hand is “strong” or “weak,” according as the whole body, the whole man, is “strong or “weak.” A twofold reserve in Christ: “wrath treasured up against day of wrath” (Romans 2:5) [as if in a huge reservoir, gathering behind the dam of His forbearing, longsuffering mercy in Christ; to burst some day in sweeping, overwhelming might, carrying all evil away before it]; and a fulness of “the power of God,” for the defence of His Church and His Truth, for the support of His servants in their conflicts, for the vindication of the needful authority of Church discipline, and for “bringing forth the judgment” between Him and “the world” “unto victory.” A very real “moral” support all this to the loyal, righteous party in Church and world. They may count on Him and His strength. The day of His “weakness” is really also a day of His Divine might. 3. This present-day “power” He would rather make remedial; “weak against you; strong in you, if you will”; would rather “edify” than “destroy.” The one supreme concern to Paul, to Christ, to all who are responsible for the government, the purity, of a Church, is “that ye do no evil,” but “do that which is honest”. No Jonah-like “anger,” if all the threatenings end in nothing, turned aside by reformation of Nineveh, or Corinth. “We are content to be ‘weak,’ helpless, on these conditions. Do you do ‘the truth,’ and then we can do nothing. In that way you can make us ‘powerless.’ ” The very heart and purpose of God are seen here! “Not willing that any should perish, but,” etc. (2 Peter 3:9). “This we wish: Your perfection.” “Behold the Goodness and the Severity of God” (Romans 11:22). C. Reprobate or approved.—(See Separate Homily on 2 Corinthians 13:5.) 1. Can the ministry stand its trial, and the challenge of friends or foes? Yes, if the people can! Does Christ speak in the ministry? Well, answer by another question,—Is Christ in the people! And are they in the faith? A living Church is the best credential of a real ministry. 2. A faithful minister will, laudably, desire to be evidently “approved”: (1) Before God, Who knows his heart, and observes his conduct, and tries his work. (2) In the knowledge and conscience of his brethren and his people,—by the power which accompanies his word, the immediate success which crowns his efforts, and the abiding fruitfulness which follows them. 3. He will not allow himself or his people to have their attention diverted to other so-called tests: “Good financier”; “Capital with young people”; “See the numerical increase”; “During his pastorate the Church has raised so much, has spent so many thousands over building”; “Great influence in the city”; “What an intellectual or wealthy and important congregation gather round him.” All good, in varying degree; every one in excellence which may be laid under contribution to do admirable service for Christ; all efficient equipments, if thoroughly consecrated, for a minister of Christ. Yet they may only be “proofs” of an “able” man. No true minister will be satisfied to gather round him a mere aggregation of hearers at a popular preaching centre, with hardly sufficient community of interest or life to make them a congregation; and still less to gather anything but a real Church, whose members are by his ministry being led to a life of which the secret is that they “are in the Faith,” and that “Christ is in them.” All other may be “proofs” of secular, “natural” success unsatisfying to a “spiritual” man, or to the “spiritual” judgment. Perish everything; even let him be accounted “reprobate” [“a poor preacher; ought never to have entered the ministry!”], if only, “strong” in Christ’s “strength,” he gather and train an “approved” people! 2 Corinthians 13:5. The Faith. I. “In the Faith” may come only to mean that men accept the Creed. (Fides qu� creditur.) Do not be satisfied unless you are in the bonds of the community whose unity rests on the Faith which saves into, and in, Christ. (Fides quβ creditur, and more.) II. Test of this true faith is: “Is Christ in you?” Evidenced, to your own consciousness, and to the observation of others. All articles of the Creed centre finally in Him. Does an indwelling Christ make all the articles living truths, which you know and believe, because you have lived, and are living, your way into knowledge and faith. Are they each verified by your experience? 2 Corinthians 13:5. Self-examination. I. Paul’s immediate point is self-examination.—[So, in Galatians 6:4, we have: 1. Scrutiny of self; 2. Joy in self; 3. Responsibility for self.] Corinthians were ready to put him to “proof.” General rule: More ready to sit in judgment upon others than upon ourselves. [Look at 1 Corinthians 11:31; Matthew 7:1. This ministers to curiosity, love of gossip, tends to a subtle self-complacency after comparison of others with ourselves. Yet really the harder thing. We do know some, if not all, the facts about ourselves; are, or may be, cognisant of even our most secret motives, know all that would tell against, and all that would tell for, us, if others knew us so far “completely” as we ourselves do. We cannot know all the facts about others. Every man is a problem to himself; how much more to others who only know what he chooses to allow to come to the surface in character and life. Sometimes this scrutiny of others is merely one of many forms of occupation for a mind afraid to begin seriously to examine itself. How often does fuller, subsequent light show how useless our judgments of others were, and how wrong our conclusions; what waste of time over our inquiry, and what waste of words and of “heroic” display of virtuous indignation and condemnation! Utterly beside the mark, and a great sin against the Spirit of Christ. Cannot help knowing many facts about others; cannot help passing judgment upon, and drawing conclusions from, the facts. But we shall remember how incomplete our data, how imperfect our methods, how little we often are really concerned in the matter. Self-examination very profitable; mere curious examination of others very perilous to the soul. II. What is self-examination?—Two words here found significantly together: “examine,” “prove” (πειράζω, δοκιμάζω). [Good article on them in Trench, Syn., lxxiv.] First is the common word for “tempt,” in the original, neutral sense (both in Greek and English; so in Malachi 3:10; Malachi 3:15 “prove” and “tempt” are same word), as well as with the evil associations which have gathered (accidentally) around it. Second is the technical word in classical Greek for putting money to the proof; the foundation idea being to prove whether a thing is worthy to be received or not. In New Testament use, latter generally implies a successful endurance of the proving, and, indeed, a desire and hope and purpose on the part of the person testing, that such should be the issue; the former predominantly (evidently not so here) suggests endeavour and hope to discover, awake, strengthen, existing evil. [Familiar illustrations of πειράζω are: boring to examine strata, or find water or minerals or gold; putting in the cheese-taster (“taste” and “test” are akin). Cf. δοκιμάζω, which suggests the fire and crucible of the goldsmith, “the refiner and purifier of silver” (Malachi 3:3), to show purity, or to secure it by removal of dross or alloy; the periodical Trial of the Pyx at the Abbey, Westminster; the testing of chains or springs at the factory before sending out for use; not in order to discover or make flaws or weakness, but to vindicate soundness or strength.] Q.d. “Bore down into your life-strata; see what your foundation is, what store of worth and goodness grace has put within you. Try your quality and your gracious ‘flavour,’ ‘savour.’ See whether you be the genuine article, according to the name upon you ‘Christian’; by this time the fine metal, or at least getting purer by the sanctifying effect of the processes of Providence and Life. Try your strength for resistance and for weight-carrying, for the service of man and of Christ.” III. Need of it.— 1. Same need, as in business, for going over stock, balancing moneys, watching wear and tear. Many (spiritually) trading long after insolvent. Going on, keeping up the business name: “A. B., a man in Christ”; dealt with by others, employed in the Church on that basis, long after original capital—the grace of acceptance into Christ and the Family, of regeneration after Christ—has been sinned away by the man himself, or has been, in his negligence, stolen away by the world, or by secret, heart sins which grieved the Spirit. Constant wear and tear, lass and gain, going on in the religious life. No headway is ever made without perpetual, unrelaxing effort. [All our progress is against stream; against all the current of tendencies within and of influences from without. Cease rowing vigorously; your boat slackens, stops, is borne backward and downward. “Non aliter quam qui adverso vix flumine lembumRemigiis subigit; si brachia forte remisit,Atque illum in praeceps prono rapit alveus amni.”—Virg., Georg., I., 201–203. Status quo is not maintained without constantly new grace given, and constant, watchful, prayerful effort. Old impressions fade; old motives lose power; old vows are not felt with old obligation. Ever-wakeful Enemy, ready to “pounce,” or to enter by a long-disused, almost forgotten entrance of susceptibility or liability. 2. Easier, more natural, to lie, like lotus eaters, idly in our boat and drift, not even noticing the drift. “Drifting” the subtlest, commonest danger of the ordinary Christian life. To be holy or earnest, even to maintain one’s status in Christ, means taking trouble. No inherent grace; any implanted grace must be renewed unceasingly; no possibility of accumulating a capital stock of grace [and then “retiring from business,” “living on the dividends” of the accumulated grace and work of earlier Christian life. Many seem trying to do so]. Yet “deceitfulness of sin,” indolence, pride, fear to know the unwelcome, half-suspected truth, incline a man to slur over or to avoid altogether any examination of present position, the only one worth anything before God. Liability to ignorance and error, dangerous in their practical consequences, to be reckoned with. “Know ye not?” Forgotten? Not examined lately? IV. Methods and tests— 1. Supreme one this: You prove me to see whether Christ speaks through me. Look within: Does Christ dwell in you? (cf. Romans 8:9-10), i.e. by His Spirit? Have you the “witness”? (Romans 8:15-16; Galatians 4:6-7). Have you the “fruit”? [N. B. one and indivisible; not “fruits”; a cluster of grapes on a branch of the Vine; not so many independent figs or apples.] “The hope” (Colossians 1:27, = “Christ in you,” or in-separable from it). 2. The Word is an objective test; our memory and Consciousness supply facts on which Conscience sits as judge (2 Corinthians 1:12; you need the objective standard, unaffected by any “personal equation” of mood, or prejudice, or bias—1 Corinthians 4:4, “I know nothing against myself, yet,” etc.). Experience will often interpret Scripture to a man; Scripture will always interpret and value experience for him. 3. Should be done with prayer for Divine light upon Self and Scripture. Neither can be understood without the other. [Woollen manufacturer, examining cloth, wants a north window with clear, open, steady light; brings cloth to the window.] 4. Should be done in solitude, if possible; soul alone with God. The true and useful element in “retreats.” “As of God, in the sight of God speak” to ourselves in examining and judging ourselves (2 Corinthians 2:17). Humbling ourselves before Him; holding ourselves ready to hear all He has to tell us, and to act upon it, following it in any direction, to any length of consequence. 5. “Any time is no time.” Some need a fixed rule and fixed times. Some best avail themselves of (say) birthdays, times of sorrow, or of blessing; some of the quiet of the House of God. V. There are dangers attending.—Unwilling heart, or worldly, exaggerates these as “reasons” for discontinuance. Real danger: lest it grow (1) mechanical, as when done by “a Method,” with scheduled questions for self-examination, or, as to time, become a mere bit of routine, done without heart or earnestness; or (2) morbid, a very common liability to the most sensitive souls, of tender, but not very enlightened, conscience; e.g. they set up an impossible standard, not found in Scripture, drawn from their (perhaps mistaken) interpretation of what they hear or read as the “experience” of others; forget (as their profoundly reasonable Lord never does) the differences of temperament, of training, and in the sense of value of words; scourge themselves needlessly because they do not exactly correspond with their self-imposed standard. Or they are distressed because they do not see distinct “progress” as between the examination of one evening and that of the next. [This like looking to see growth in child or plant after every few minutes. Rather measure the rising of the tide after some little interval, and by the test of some definite mark upon the shore—some definite habit or point of character; e.g. can they at a year’s end discover a manifest increase of self-control by grace of God?] Yet greater danger, and more ordinary, is not to examine at all. Also, the broad lines which mark and identify a Christian are recognisable at any moment. It is also to himself a matter of direct and immediate knowledge whether or not a man have “the love of God shed abroad in his heart.” VI. If we will not.— 1. May wake up in eternity finding ourselves bankrupts; with no true foundation on the Rock. May be “reprobate” when God tests finally, “castaway” (same word) when we come before the Judge hoping for a crown. 2. Short of this extreme issue, the Adversary will do his “trying,” with his evil intention. Not to “tempt” ourselves (so literally) invites him to “tempt” us. 3. Also God must put us to proof, finally using “fire” (1 Corinthians 3:12, δοκιμάζω) upon work whose quality we would not ourselves test; sending, before that, many sharp providences which are the acids and other reagents of His Divine chemistry, to test or purify what, though sadly alloyed, is really gold. (As Apelles, Critical Notes.) [“Deus tentat, ut doceat; diabolus, ut decipiat” (Augustine). “Da, Domine, ut per tentationem probemur, non reprobemur” (Abelard, on Lord’s Prayer).] 2 Corinthians 13:8. Nothing against, Everything for, the Truth. I. 1. Paul’s immediate meaning.—“Corinthians who can endure the self-applied, or God-applied, tests; who have ‘come forth as gold’ when tried, ‘true’ according to standard, have nothing to fear from me. My Apostolic power is for ‘building up’ (2 Corinthians 13:10). My work, my Master’s design, is constructive, not destructive. If I do ‘destroy’ (‘cast down,’ R.V.), it is only to prepare for construction. I am a helper of all good men; it is their fault if I seem against evil ones.” Every minister should so bear himself amongst his people that they feel this; he should plainly be to them a rallying-point and a support of “true” men and women, whoever may “bear hard upon” them. They should feel that he will never, at any rate in intention, frown upon, or discourage, persons, character, work, that are “true.” Will help it, sympathise with it, encourage it, guide it, train it, but never check it. God and Truth are on the same side. The Pastor and Truth should be on the same side, too. 2. Rise higher. “We are of the truth;” therefore even the Law of the True God will not condemn, but justify, us. [Justification is pardon in conformity to the requirements of the Christ-satisfied law.] “Law not made for—does not lie against—a righteous man” (1 Timothy 1:9). We were by nature false to God’s ideal of manhood, and in life a living negation of His righteous requirement. In Him Who is “the Truth” we are being brought into fuller and fuller accord with the Law of Righteousness—being made “true.” In the Day of Christ the very Law will say, “I can do nothing against the truth, but for the truth.” II. Principle so stated as to be of wide, general application.— 1. True of truth in art, natural science, every embodiment of the true. There are fashions in music or form; there is the music, the painting, the poetry of an age, and of that only. Author, painter, composer, each hits the fancy of his age, because he wears its “dress” and speaks its thought in its dialect. All this passes away with the age, or the country for there are localisms in all these fields of work. Out of every country, and every land, out of every true artist’s work, there emerges for permanent survival at least one thing that survives because it is of no one age or country or individual. It is universal, true. New fashions come and go, but they can “do nothing against” these slowly emerging, accumulating masterpieces, which command the allegiance and growing admiration of all qualified to judge, age after age. Time can do nothing against them. So in our knowledge of the natural world. Hypotheses and theories are exalted or hardened into the dogmas of a century (or of a decade). Hastily formed, too eagerly accepted; the acceptance itself being a fashion, or a “craze.” They are challenged in their turn, discredited (perhaps unduly, and without discrimination), succeeded by others as crudely true or altogether baseless. Or, more often, are modified substantially, as new facts reward close observation. (Hardly any entirely baseless hypothesis ever gets wide, even though temporary, acceptance; generally it is a stammering endeavour to speak out “truth”; a blunderingly tentative groping after truth, stretching blind hands into darkness, grasping mingled truth and error.) After, and out of, challenge, discussion, modification, rejection; out of too eager triumph of opponents, too hasty fears of supporters; whatever is truth emerges; a growing corpus of ascertained truth accumulates. Nothing that was really true perished in the process; the accidental, the experimental which did not stand verification, the temporary, the idiosyncrasy of the observer or the theory-maker, passed, and left Truth. Could do nothing against it; indeed, all worked for it. Christian should remember this, even when Science or some scientists may seem arrogantly, aggressively, perilously antagonistic to Revelation. Christian can do nothing against what is true in Science; Science also can do nothing against what is true in Religion. 2. Note this last. The lesson of the experience of the ages. The Bible emerges from the special attack of each century with undiminished, increased authority and acceptance. Whatever is Truth in its statements about God or man, or the relations between them, emerges age after age, with a new claim to acceptance in the very fact of its newest survival. In any new challenge of even the historicity of the record, the presumption derived from the past is that “as the last time, only more so,” will again be the end of the battle. Each new century sees it win the allegiance of a new set of hearts. Human hearts say, “That book is true; it finds me; it is a key whose correspondence with my heart and the facts of my life, argues that it was made to unlock me.” Repeatedly has attack upon historical details only ended in new verification, perhaps at that very point. Unfair treatment; unwise, untenable defence of it by too hasty friends; open attack of enemies; subtle or traitorous assault; have—as matter of fact—never done anything against the Truth as embodied in Bible; have all worked for the Truth. So the great doctrines of Christianity emerge time after time unharmed from the fiery testing of inquiry and assault. They take temporary fashions of statement, adapted to the need or to the assault of their time or age; now one, now another, aspect of them needs emphasis; always with the peril of undue emphasis, and of discrediting, or decrying the complementary aspects, seen and needed by other Churches or ages or men. Every Church creed or confession gains something, loses something, after every controversy. Truth, as God sees and knows it, loses nothing, always gains. God is taking care of the Truth. All truth of every kind is of Him. [With deep significance, worth expanding, one may borrow, and say:] “God is in the midst of her; she shall not be moved.” Often we can do nothing but “stand still and know that He is God,” as we see Him taking the defence of Truth out of the hand of the Church, or of a (sectional) Church, and Himself vindicating it. Enemies and friends may say: “We can do nothing against,” etc. [May borrow again, with no remote connection,] “All things work together for good to” the Truth of God, as a whole, and for every partial embodiment of it. Pre-eminently true of Him Who is The Truth. “Whosoever shall fall upon this Stone” (by way of assault) “shall be broken.” Psalms 2. shows dramatically God and His Anointed sitting above the tumult of revolt, and “laughing.” “Yet—yet—I have set My King, “etc. This shall be the issue of the last and most daring endeavour against Him (2 Thessalonians 2:8-9). “Magna est Veritas—artistic, scientific, Biblical, dogmatic, Christ—et prζvalebit.” [ (1) This conviction always is a strong presumption, fairly based on the past. (2) It is also rooted in the reason of the thing. Whatever is part of God’s Truth, in any special aspect, may be overlaid, disfigured, by temporary accretions, or erroneous additions, by the mistake, or the enmity, or the misjudged, misdirected support of an Age, a Church, a Man; but it is there, and will survive, to stand clear when all of temporary has disappeared. [Cf. Egyptian temples surviving, and standing clear of, the less permanent domestic edifices once built around them. Man goes, cities go; they stand.] 3. Whatever meets the perennial need of man’s intellect, conscience, heart—especially those of sinful men—vindicates itself anew perennially, as having Truth in it. E.g. freedom of will; sense of Sin (no mere passing or personal access of emotion); existence of a Creator and Moral Governor; the objective value of Prayer; an objective efficiency in the death of Christ to procure pardon; Vicarious Sacrifice; possibility of falling finally; all these, and others, may have their temporary, local, ecclesiastical, imperfect way of being stated. They may be unwisely defended. But they meet, under all the varying fashions of statement, the need of the universal heart in man. They have their root deep in the instincts and conscience of universal man. They “are of God,” and cannot be overthrown (Acts 5:38-39). They are Truth.] [Renan avows: “Quant au vrai Dieu de la conscience humaine, celui-lΰ est inattaquable. Il a sa raison d’κtre dans une foi invincible et non dans les raisonnements plus ou moins ingιnieux.” Similarly he does not consider religion “une duperie subjective de notre nature,” but believes “qu’elle rιpond ΰ une rιalitι extιrieure.” Therefore Religion also is really un-assailable. (Les Apτtres, Introd.) So Emerson, in his dialect, says: “The World-spirit is a good swimmer, and storms and waves cannot drown him.”] NOTES2 Corinthians 13:11.—Calm sunset after a stormy passage! Observe margin (better). Perfected.—As in 2 Corinthians 13:9. Comforted.—With the fuller meaning found, e.g., in “Paraclete.” Live in peace.—“Peacing it together,” like “truthing it” (Ephesians 4:15).2 Corinthians 13:1-13.—[Good paraphrase, exhibiting connection of thought, from Stanley: “Once, twice, thrice, as in the Mosaic Law of the three witnesses; by my first visit—by this Epistle, as though I had accomplished my second visit—by the third visit, which I now hope to accomplish [this personifying the three (?) visits as three witnesses, somewhat forced and fantastic]—I warn you that I shall not spare my power when I come. You are always seeking for a proof of my Apostleship; you shall have it. For Christ who speaks in me, though in the weakness of humanity He died the shameful death of the cross, in the strength of God He lives and acts still; and in Him, weak and poor as I seem to be, I shall still live and act towards you. But why do I speak of myself? You yourselves, my converts, are the best witnesses of my Apostolical power; and long may you be so! If, indeed, you should have lost this best proof of my Apostleship in the reformation of your own lives, then indeed you shall have the proof of my severity. But my earnest prayer is that there may be no occasion for it. May my power and the proof of it perish if you prove that you do not need it. Against a true and blameless life the highest Apostolical power is powerless; and if you have this power of truth and goodness, I am well content to part with mine. It is to draw you to a sense of this that I write this whole Epistle, in the hopes that my Apostolical authority may be turned to its fitting purpose of building up, not of pulling down.” .—2 Corinthians 13:11-14I. “Brethren!”—After all he has had to rebuke, to threaten, to denounce. If we wait for ideal men, or Churches, shall never have any Christian fellowship. In even the most imperfect embodiment of the Church ideal, or the ideal of Christian manhood, Christ sees, and the Christlike heart and judgment do not undervalue or overlook, possibilities of better things. Only Death is hopeless; imperfect life may be healed, trained, perfected. Ourselves are not ideal; we need that other “brethren” should be patient with, helpful of us; let us say and feel, to even the most imperfect: “Brethren.” Christ knew, when He first accepted them (and us), and still knows, whilst He continues to accept them (and us), very much more that is evil, than they or we know of each other or of ourselves. How patient He is; remembering what (Corinthian) training has been, and (Corinthian) surroundings are. Not tolerating, or conniving at, sin; yet not disowning or casting off (until all help is refused, all remedial grace spent in vain) His “brethren!” It will do us good, and will often enable us to help others better, to overlook, or underlook, the Actual, and believe in, and see, and work with, the Ideal in them. [See how taking the best for granted is made to regenerate the Earl in Little Lord Fauntleroy.] II. Yet this charity to persons will not be laxity in regard to principles.—The Ideal must be held up in all its beauty—imperiously, exactingly, demanding that we should “obey” its truth (Galatians 3:1). Christian or Church well-being means nothing less than, nothing lower than, Peace. 1. A peace within, in the renewal of our own natures. No “peace” without “holiness” (cf. 1 Thessalonians 5:23; He who “sanctifies” is “the God of peace,” as here). “Peace” is only absolute when reached through “perfection.” [An artist says that beauty in his work includes and rests upon a perfect balance and harmony between its parts, nothing jarring or discordant; corporate unity (so to speak) is secured in the picture.] 2. Peace with the fellow-members. “Be (imperative) of one mind” [men can choose to be of one mind, if they will, to a larger extent than they do and are]; “one hope,” the Same “Comforter” in them all; one aim; one heart. 3. Peace with the three-one God, through grace, by love, in fellowship. There must be Personal Experience, Unity with the Church, Fellowship with God through His grace. (See Separate Homilies on 2 Corinthians 13:14.) 2 Corinthians 13:11. “The God of peace.”—The names of God in Paul’s prayers are never chosen at random—however true in themselves—but always with a close relation of appropriateness to the blessing asked or the work He does. So here. What a name! No heathen divinity ever wore, or at any rate deserved to wear, it. God of Truth, of Power, of Holiness, of Peace. I. Characteristic of His very being.—“Internal,” absolute harmony and rest, because of absolute holiness. The “peaceful” God. [God could not give His peace to, or plant it within, an unholy nature. Circumstances are not the root-disquiet of our life; our own hearts and their pride, or selfishness, etc., give us all our real trouble.] II. He loves peace.—[Profoundly significant that we “like” what is “like” us.] He is grieved at, and can hardly “be with,” a Church that is not “of one mind.” III. He works for peace.—All the drift of His providential and redemptive government of the world tends to, aims at, this. The Gift of Christ is the supreme witness to His heart in this respect. [So the “peacemakers” are pre-eminently “the children of God,” the Great Peacemaker (Matthew 5:9).] IV. He gives peace: to our hearts by the Atonement of His Son, and by the Work of His Spirit. It is the “peace of God” which is to “guard heart and thoughts through Christ Jesus” (Philippians 4:7, R.V.). 2 Corinthians 13:11. “Be perfected.”—Prayer for restoration to corporate perfectness. I. Negatively.—Perfect recovery which would result from “not doing evil,” “doing what is honest” (2 Corinthians 13:7). The vices which infected Corinthian Church exhibit in epitome those which have been the bane of the Church of Christ generally from the beginning. (1) Fundamental disorder was rebellion against the supreme authority of the Divine Revealer and the Divine Inspirer and their Apostolic representative. Paul’s aim is “to bring … into captivity,” etc. (2 Corinthians 10:5). His final appeal, in the hearing not only of Corinthians, but of Christendom to the end of the world, is “we have the mind of Christ” (1 Corinthians 2:16). The Scriptures of revelation contain this. Rebellion against Paul—against these Scriptures—is a virtual rejection of Christianity. “As a principle in the individual, this is fatal to religious stability and growth. As a principle in the Church, it is the root of all disorganisation; and it must be put away, with all its forms of manifestation, before the community bearing the name of Christ can put on its ‘perfection.’ ” (2) A direct result of (1),—a lax maintenance of some of the vital doctrines of the Christian confession.” [E.g. in 1 Corinthians 15, with its bearing upon the Atonement, and the whole basis of Christian hope and salvation.] “It was not without reference to corruptions of doctrine that the dejected Apostle expressed his fear (2 Corinthians 12:20). His vehement desire to preserve them ‘a chaste virgin to Christ’ (2 Corinthians 11:2-4), undefiled by doctrinal error, as he himself explains its meaning, gives a peculiar tremulousness and tumult to his diction.… The integrity of their faith was in his thought when he ‘prayed that they might be perfect’ ” [James 1:4, a good equivalent of the word]. (3) “Neglect and irreverence in the Divine service invariably follow hard upon laxity of doctrine.” Disorganisation in worship … to an extreme almost inconceivable by us; the supper of the Lord so desecrated as to call down upon the Church such visitations as sickness and death. Second Epistle shows “the same leaven at work in other directions; and the final prayer included the removal of the spirit of disorder and the observance of all that was ‘honourable.’ ” Two kinds of dishonour are actualities, or perpetual liabilities, in Divine service: To take away its simplicity, and discern in the ordinances more than they have to show; to rob everything external and symbolical of its true value, and reduce religious ceremonial to the level of mere human arrangement. Both equally distant from Church “perfection.” (4) Closely connected is the spirit of faction. He sets no limit to his righteous indignation against the disturbers of the unity of the Church. The first paragraphs of the First Epistle and the last in the Second Epistle unite in this. The strong references to his severity as the minister of the Saviour’s wrath … explained by his resentment at this deadly sin. (5) Violation of Christian morality. In xii. there is obvious reference to those two classes of moral offence from which 2 Corinthians 7:1 exhorted them to cleanse themselves. Sins “of the spirit” are summed up here (2 Corinthians 12:20) more completely than anywhere else; and here only as marking the conduct of professing Christians. The true, only means of recovery were neutralised by infidelity and the haughty spirit of Rationalism. II. Perfection positively considered.—His good wish is not to be limited to the removal of the “evil” marring “perfection”; he longed for their attainment of all the completeness that may belong to a Church. Note the wonderful fact that such a Church should be thought capable of perfect amendment, a restoration to soundness not at some distant time, but as it were immediately, and by an energetic co-operation with Divine grace.… Certain it is that for a season the Corinthian Church enjoyed great prosperity. 1. The bond of Church perfectness is … a compact organisation vivified and kept in living unity by the Holy Spirit. One regimen and discipline; factions suppressed, divisions abolished; all the Corinthian Christian sections one corporate body. To-day, whilst recognising the great divisions of Christendom, each section should cultivate this unity within itself. Perfection means that lawlessness within a Church, and bitterness toward other Churches, are gone. 2. A certain standard of perfection even in order of worship. This not unattainable, or of slight importance. 3. “Perfection” includes a noble theory of mutual help in the Christian fellowship. Corinthian Epistles a complete depository of the social principles of Christianity, and of the preceptive details of its system of mutual edification. This the purpose and beauty of chap. 13, “Charity.” “Every member of the body must in his vocation and stewardship render back to Christianity all that in Christianity he receives, and give to the community the fullest advantage of whatever talent he as an individual may possess.… A perfection not attainable by the community on earth, but the nearer the approach to this, the nearer the Church to the realisation of its calling.… No Apostolical test of ‘perfectness’ in the Church community more easily applied, or more generally forgotten.” 4. High standard of morality. “The Church that does not prosecute to [ecclesiastical] death every capital offence against its purity is very far from ‘perfection.’ But the more effectual discipline is a high standard in the common sentiment of the people through the sedulous instruction of the ministry.” 5. Strong spirit of charity in the community. Note the fulness of detail, and the great interest, Paul gives to the “collection.” The “corporate” is only worked out through the “personal.”—Condensed from Pope, “Prayers of St. Paul,” vii. 2 Corinthians 13:14. Final Benediction.—In homiletic use the stress may either be laid upon the threefold grace invoked, or upon the personal names and their theological suggestions. Accordingly two lines of treatment are suggested. I. 1. Verse like a coin which often needs calling in and reminting, in our thought and heart. In constant, current use, much of the clearness and sharpness of the impression upon it, and something of the weight and value, are worn away and lost. We tend to use it also without much thought; as we pass a coin from hand to hand, without very distinctly adverting to its pattern or value. 2. An important text in point of doctrine (see next homily). This and the baptismal formula are the two most definitely orderly statements of what little we know [and perhaps could be told] about the doctrine of the Trinity of Persons in the Oneness of the Nature of God. [They are lamps in our hand flashing light backward upon, and downward into, obscurities in the Old Testament, which otherwise must have remained dark.] Many texts guard us from thinking of three or of many Gods; these two gather up into a focus rays of teaching found scattered and separate elsewhere, and give us three personal names; equal, or their co-ordination here would be blasphemous; Divine, for each is here prayed to to give His characteristic blessing; and yet, One standing mysteriously first amongst three equals, as if having Godhead so peculiarly His own, that He is specially called not “the Father,” but “God.” II. Christ’s gift, grace.— 1. Bearing in mind the close connection always found between the doctrine of Trinity and the life of the soul, it is easy to see why “grace” specially associated with Christ. We might, we do, call the love of the Father grace, for it is free, unmerited favour to sinners who only deserved penalty and “wrath.” We do call the “communion of the Holy Ghost” grace. We might, with propriety, speak equally freely of the love of our Lord Jesus Christ, of communion with, and in, the Son or the Father. 2. But Paul, like John (2 Corinthians 1:17), specially associates grace with Christ. A double antithesis in John (loc. cit.); not only between grace under Christ taking the place of law under Moses, but between “was given” and “came.” Moses only “gave,” he did not make, nor do more than hand on, as any other man appointed ad hoc might have done, what he had received from God. But grace, though originating in the Father’s “good will to man,” in as true a sense sprung from the Son’s tender compassion for our lost and unhappy case. He did not simply convey, He wrought grace, as only He could have wrought. Moses was not indispensable to the Law; Christ is indispensable to Grace. 3. Sin meant alienation, separation, antagonism. Christ reconciled, bridged the gulf, made peace. To appreciate His grace, suppose Him and His whole work eliminated from the conditions of man’s life as related to a holy God. There must have been despairing certainty of wrath, instead of hope; helplessness, instead of moral power, which is from its earliest beginnings, through all its growth and activities, to its perfection, a thing entirely a gift ab extra, grace. To Him we owe days of grace, in a kingdom of grace, a life in an atmosphere of grace. He is pre-eminently the Lord and Giver of Grace. 4. Peculiar emphasis of blessing in all this to the ex-Israelite, Paul, remembering, and sympathetically understanding, his Israelite brethren’s case under the yoke of the law. “Good news for you weary and heavy laden men of Israel. A yoke and a burden for you still, indeed, easy and light. Rest to your souls in Jesus of Nazareth, the Lord Jesus the Messiah, in His grace.” [This is the primary connection of thought between Matthew 11:28, and the preceding part of chapter.] 5. For Gentiles, slaves of their sins, haunted by conscience, fearing the worst in regard to the unknown, dark future, morally impotent and condemning vainly their own impotence, he had no higher wish than: “I pray that Jesus Christ may show you, in all their fullest reach, all the possibilities of His Gospel of grace; that they may be the elements of your habitual life. Power, perfect and continuous; peace, perfect and undoubted; holiness, perfect and continuously growing, till grace merges in, broadens into, glory.” III. The Father’s gift, love.— 1. Observe the significant, necessary order. The “grace of …, [then] the love of,” etc. Picture broad valley lying parched, scorched, beneath fierce sun-rays of weeks of unclouded, unbroken, midsummer weather. Picture high up in hills at head of valley huge reservoir, full of water, which would save and fertilise all below. But no outlet; dam is strong; doors are closed; waters cannot flow. “Thy love unknown has broken every barrier down, … O Lamb of God.” Illustration so far applicable as this, that though, naturally and unhindered, the “gravitation” of that love would have meant an eager outpouring of itself down to our level, the full heart of God could only (so the matter is revealed to us) empty its fulness upon a perishing, dying world through the work of Christ, which broke down the twofold “dam,” of God’s holiness and law, and of man’s sin. Now, by the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, the love of God, in all its Divine fulness, may flow down in free unstinted abundance into our needy life. 2. Now: “May God give you the wealth, the honour, of His love in all its lavish fulness, according to your need, ‘according to His riches’; His love in every form that it can assume or that you may require that it shall,—comfort, or rebuke, or guidance, or relief in difficulty, or solution of perplexities. God puts Himself, in all that His love can be or do, at the call of your necessity, to bring all He has into operation for your welfare, if need be.” [Paul says, “My God” (Philippians 4:19).] The soul may say: “All He has, and is, is mine. Beyond the love I had from Him when I was forgetful and rebellious, I have the love of God.” IV. 1. The “grace,” and the “love,” are personal blessings; a man may enjoy them alone. The Spirit’s gift, fellowship, reminds of a brotherhood in the love of God, a common sharing in the grace of Christ; no selfish isolation in the heritage of blessing. 2. This is more than a prayer that all fellow-Christians may share together in the gifts and graces of the Spirit. Not merely are they persons who have received the like gifts and blessings; not merely children sitting at same table, enjoying each a like portion; the bond is closer. All Paul’s and Christ’s teaching about the unity of the branches of a vine, the limbs and parts of a body, all is in concentrated implication in this: “The communion of the Holy Ghost.” “The selfsame Spirit who is in me is Himself also in you. You and I are members of the same ‘Christ,’ each of us alive, not with a similar life,—even exactly similar,—but with one and the same Life-giver, thrilling in you, stirring in me. [When your light shines, and mine, it is not as in old days of candles and lamps, each a co-ordinate, independent source of precisely similar light, but as now, when the basis of the light-giving is concurrently derived from one common reservoir and source, one common element distributing itself into each of us, without division of itself. (Illustration to be used with caution in presentation.)] If further, e.g., you love souls and I love them, it is the manifestation and working of the same Holy Ghost, and consequently the same ‘love in the Spirit’ (Colossians 1:8).” 3. Happy fellowship, closer, and binding closer, than common interests, temperaments, sympathies, tastes, affections, blood, so that they who have it are really nearer to strangers who have it, than to their very kin if these have it not. Wonderful the common understanding it sets up, and the oneness of instinct, love, purpose, He creates amongst these in each and all of whom He dwells. 4. What a remedy for Corinthian factions, jealousies; for all class or social divisions in any Church. Hand cannot hurt, and must help, hand in the same body. Foot and head must feel and work together for each other’s life and good. 5. In a family no unity like this; no such bond, no other absolutely secure bond between husband and wife, parents and children, employers and servants, but this common sharing in the indwelling of the same Holy Ghost. 6. Amidst all “conditions of membership,” whether proposed or actually employed, this is to be presupposed. It underlies all. It over-rides all other methods of Church discipline. He is admitted into the Church who has a part in the fellowship; he is automatically excluded who loses it; however the imperfectly accurate, imperfectly administered, arrangements of any particular Church may affect him. Or thus: the occasion of a Homily upon The Trinity and Redemption. I. Why do men hold the doctrine?—Because we believe it. We believe it because we find it in the Bible. It is, on our part, entirely a case of Faith in what, in the other, is a matter of pure Revelation. But for the Bible we should know nothing about the question. We know nothing of it except what we find in the Bible. No man can be expected to receive it to whom the Bible is no final authority. No man can be compelled to believe it to whom the Bible is not supreme. No argument can be held at all, unless on the common understanding that the disputants are not to go behind the Bible. The question is always, not “What thinkest thou?” but, “What readest thou? What does the Book—God, through the Book—say?” [And, Do read. Do not take beliefs on authority. And do not take doubts on authority, either! Be neither a believer nor a sceptic, merely as relying on some human teacher.] II. What do we hold?— 1. First, we find the Bible very express in the sense: “One God, one only.” The Old Testament made “Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord” (Deuteronomy 6:4), the creed of an Israelite. To this day it is nearly the first lesson in the instruction of a Jewish child. In the midst of a world given up to multiplying its gods—and degrading itself and them, as they were multiplied—very nobly, in its later history particularly, did Israel uphold that truth as its testimony. It is the emphasised part of the whole truth in the Old Testament. In this the Old Testament bore its witness against Israel itself. When the world’s danger was polytheism, and when Israel itself was always ready to descend to idolatry, this was the side of the truth which needed prominence and emphasis. 2. This Old Testament testimony has never been withdrawn or qualified. When we come to the New Testament we find just as clearly its doctrine, “To us … one God,” etc. (2 Corinthians 8:6). Yet in our text it is the same Paul who has given to the Church of Christ its benediction, beneath whose sweet spell the child is baptized, the Christian man and woman are wedded, the dead are buried, the assembly for Christian worship is dismissed. This verse, with Matthew 28:19, gives the most complete and explicit summary form of the Bible doctrine. 3. In the clearer light of the New Testament we see that Old Testament believers mainly knew God in Him Whom we call “the Father,” now that we have seen and known “the Son.” And, in fact, three names have come into view, “Father, Son, Holy Spirit.” Three, not more, not fewer. Here they stand all, side by side. They were for the first time ranged thus in significant co-ordination when Jesus spoke the words above quoted (Matthew 28:19). What are we to think of them? God; a man; an influence, which is not even a person? Is that likely? Or possible? Or are we to think of the third as “personal,” as really as the first and second? And the second and third, are they as truly Divine as the first? A believer in “the Trinity” thinks he finds this Book often speaking of each of the three as we speak of other personal names, and as we speak of the Divine Person Whom we call “the Father.” Not always: but a good reason can in every instance be found for that. 4. So, then, here is the fact: From end to end this Book says, “One God; one only”; whilst more and more clearly as the revelation draws near to its close, there emerge three Names, each a person, each God. Questions start up; speculations multiply; a child can see difficulties; every responsible teacher of the doctrine has had to see and discuss every one of them. His position is that he bows before this Book, with its two groups of statements. Without it he knows nothing; with it he does not know much, but he knows that much. 5. “Do not understand their relations to each other?” Nor does the believer in the doctrine. But he finds express statements, and teachings by the help of mutually supplementary, mutually complimentary analogies, which make it reasonable to say: “Begotten of the Father,” “Proceeding from the Father (and the Son).” Imperfect expressions, and needing guarding and qualifying exposition; all very obvious to criticism. But they have emerged from the controversies of the early centuries, surviving because found on the whole the fittest. “Person,” e.g., is confessedly a very imperfect summary expression of the facts it is connected with. But where we find a personal name, self-knowledge, and a will which can will and can do as it will,—the best word we have is “person,” though not in this particular case perfectly applicable all round. 6. Very many of our creed statements are only negations of assertions which overstate one aspect of the whole Truth, or which omit to take into account some group of Scripture sayings or facts. “You make three Gods?” No; for Scripture which reveals the Three, insists also upon the One. “One person, and that one He Whom in the flesh we know as Jesus Christ,” says the Swedenborgian form of the old Sabellianism, varying from its ancient model in making the Second, and not the First of the Three, that of which the others are aspects or relational presentations. No; for He says, “The Comforter, Whom the Father will send in My name,” as one person may speak of two others, not himself. The heart of the matter is there. III. Why do we care to hold the doctrine?—“What does it matter?” 1. Generally, it may be said that Scripture never tells us anything as matter of mere correct doctrine, and of right information; but always so much, and in such a manner, as may be of practical service to our spiritual life. 2. The doctrine under notice is bound up most closely with (a) our distinctively Christian Worship, and (b) our Christian Experience. (a) The Mahometan and the Jew come in worship to our one God. The latter will not have our Mediator; the former accepts one who is (he thinks) a prophet come from God to reveal His will, but who is no priest to go in for him to God to make atonement for sin. The Scheme of Christian Worship is: “Through the Son we have our access by one Spirit unto the Father.” Isaiah and John both heard the threefold note in the heavenly worship (Isaiah 6; Revelation 4); earthly and heavenly worship agree in this. The old congregations were dismissed with a threefold blessing (Numbers 6:24-26); as our text has for ages been the best formula whose lingering sound may die away last of all that has been said, into silence and peace, when a Christian congregation breaks up, and departs to suffering, service, life. (b) 1. The most nearly external and relative initiation into the Christian life is stamped with the Name—three, and one (Matthew 28:19). And if the doctrine be not true, our Mediator is only a creature, perhaps only a man; our Sanctifier is only a figure of speech, the creation of our poetical faculty. 2. But, most of all, it is not upon a text here or there that the doctrine rests. The three names pervade, permeate, give form and colour to, whole passages of the Epistles. Look for them, and we find all the experimental work and language of the New Testament wrought with their golden thread running through all. 3. Nearly all the statements culled out, and urged against the doctrine, are explained by this fact: We are told next to nothing as to what, in the inner being of God and the manner of His existence, lies behind these three names, and the analogies which indicate or suggest the relations between them; everything is exhibited in connection with the working out of Redemption. With the slightest exceptions we only see the gracious work in process: “Let us make man anew in Our image.” “The Son says, ‘The Father is greater than I.’ ” So He is, in the same sense as a son, admitted by his father into a subsidiary partnership in his father’s work, must say it; because so far as he is acting under orders, to that extent he is only an employee of his father. As to manhood and manhood, father and son are equal. As between senior, managing partner, and junior, executant partner; the father is greater than the son. As to Godhead and Godhead, Father and Son are equals; as executant of “not His own will [independently, or possibly divergently] but the will of Him Who sent Him,” and as effectuating our Redemption, the Son yields precedence to the Father. And the Spirit reveals Himself more clearly in, and to, the soul He sanctifies, than He does in those Scriptures where His self-suppressing work is to exhibit and glorify Christ. We scarcely know anything of the Trinity except as active in the work of Human Redemption. 4. Our salvation, therefore, and our experimental life depend most intimately upon, and are most closely interwoven with, the specific offices of each “Person” of the Trinity. Our experimental life is full of the Trinity. Experiment shows that, as a rule, the doctrine has maintained, and been associated with, the fullest, freshest, most widely accepted hymnology, devotional literature, and religious life. For that reason, as well as for its truth, does the Church care to hold the doctrine.