« PreviousContinue »
be called to suffer for him and his cause, rather than deny him. "Be thou faithful unto death," saith the Lord Jesus, "and I will give thee a crown of life." And again, "whosoever will save his life shall lose it; and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it." Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? These calamities were no proof that Christ did not love his suffering disciples, did not separate them from his grace and love; nor could these dreadful afflictions force the disciples to deny Jesus. Their love, through grace, was proof against these attacks: "as it is written, for thy sake we are killed all the day long; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter,' (Rom. viii. 36); nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us." And again, in the book of Revelation, it is said, "that they overcame their enemy," the evil one, "by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony, and they loved not their own lives unto the death."-Rev. xii. 11. What manner of love is this? It is our love to that Saviour who died for us, and whose love to us passeth knowledge. How are we to testify our love to God? By keeping his commandments: "this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments." How are we to testify our love to Christ? By keeping his commandments: "If ye love me," says Christ, "keep my commandments. He that sayeth I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him. But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected."
I shall conclude this discourse with some observations upon the ordinances of baptism and the Lord's supper; for in these ordinances the Lord Jesus is religiously worshipped. They prove that he is the object of religious worship, and this proves that he is our Lord and our God.
And what is baptism? Is it a civil institution? or is it a holy ordinance, a religious rite, a sacrament
of the new testament, a sign and seal of the new covenant? For our present purpose it is sufficient to consider baptism as a religious ordinance_instituted by the Lord Jesus Christ. Indeed, as to the present argument, it is sufficient that it is a religious institution, the observance of which is enjoined in the word of God: and that in the celebration of this ordinance God is obeyed, honoured, and worshipped. If the Father is worshipped in this ordinance, how is he worshipped? The person who administers baptism, and the person baptised, if adult, and the believing parent dedicating his child to God the Father, in the bonds of his holy covenant, acknowledge him to be their God, and profess their faith and hope in him. If to baptise, or to receive baptism, in the name of God the Father, is an act of religious worship, what is it to baptise, or to be baptised, in the name of the Son, and in the name of the Holy Ghost? are there three distinct baptisms-one in the name of the Father, who is acknowledged to be the true God, and is to be worshipped; and two other baptisms, in the name of two persons not Divine, and therefore not to be worshipped? The Christian baptism is one, and is administered in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. In this ordinance, according to the words of institution, these names are used conjointly and co-ordinately it is not lawful to omit the name of the Father, or the name of the Son, or the name of the Holy Ghost: and if these names must be used conjointly, they must be used co-ordinately. The question at present is this; is there any act of religious worship exercised towards the Son? is he worshipped in this ordinance? I answer that he is; because it is unlawful to baptise in the name of one who is not the object of religious worship. The apostle abhorred the idea of baptising in his own name. "Was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptised in the name of Paul ? I thank God that I baptised none of you, but Crispus and Gaius, lest any man should say that I had bap
tised in mine own name."-I. Cor. i. 14. If it should be objected, that the children of Israel were baptised unto Moses, in the cloud, and in the sea, let it be observed that Moses was a type of Christ, and that this baptism in the cloud and in the sea was typical. The word baptism does not always signify a religious institution to be observed by the church; it sometimes signifies a particular dispensation of Divine providence. The children of Israel were all under the cloud, and all passed through the sea, and were all baptised unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea. By this dispensation of Divine providence Israel was taught to consider Moses as the person that God had raised up and appointed to be their leader, and were encouraged to follow him, as one having a Divine commission to bring them out of the land of their captivity. But will any one say that the children of Israel were baptised unto Moses as we are baptised into Christ? were they baptised in the name of Moses? did they put on Moses, as Christians put on Christ? were they baptised into his death? was Moses crucified for them? or was he the author and finisher of their faith? Moses was not that spiritual meat of which all Israel ate; nor was he that spiritual rock of which all Israel drank; but Christ was. The Lord Jesus Christ is the bread of life, and that spiritual rock of which Israel drank; that rock was Christ. Cor. x. 3, 4. But, to bring this matter to a short issue, we are either bound to worship Christ in this ordinance, or we are not: if not, why is his name used objectively in a religious ordinance? and why did Ananias exhort Paul to be baptised, and to wash away his sins, calling upon the name of the Lord? If Christ is to be worshipped in this ordinance, is it an inferior worship that he is entitled to? It is not. This is evident from the nature of religious worship, and made level to every capacity by an express revelation of the Divine will; namely, "that all men should honour the Son, even as they honour the Father." Religious worship, in a certain sense, admits
of degrees: some are by grace enabled to worship more fervently, and with more exalted affections than others are; but as the object of religious worship is infinitely perfect, infinitely glorious, and infinitely worthy to be worshipped, there cannot be any worship to which he is not entitled.
With regard to the sacrament of the Lord's supper, let it be considered as a religious commemorative institution, and this is the very least that can be said of it, unless we take it to be a human invention, or a state test to be used in qualifying for civil offices. I do not mean to enquire by what authority the Lord Jesus Christ instituted this ordinance, nor to argue, from his being the institutor, in favour of his divinity: all that is necessary for our present purpose is, that the Lord's supper is a religious commemorative ordinance. And who will deny that it is? That it is a very solemn ordinance of our holy religion will not be denied by any one that pays due regard to these words of the apostle: "As often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do show the Lord's death till he come. Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup. For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation" or, as the word may be render ed, judgment, "to himself, not discerning the Lord's body. For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep." I. Čor. xi. 26. This ordinance of our holy religion is commemorative: do this, saith Christ, in remembrance of me. The person who is commemorated in a religious ordinance, is religiously commemorated. And what is a religious commemoration? It is religious worship; a duty which we owe to God alone. The end of religious commemoration is thanksgiving: "sing unto the Lord, O ye saints of his, and give thanks at the remembrance of his holiness. Return, O Lord, deliver my soul; Oh!
save me for thy mercies' sake. For in death there is no remembrance of thee: in the grave who shall give thee thanks?" If thanksgiving is the chief end of religious commemoration, then the Lord Jesus Christ, who is religiously commemorated in the Lord's supper, is to be praised with thanksgiving for his redeeming love. To what purpose do we show forth his death? to what purpose do we remember him? to what purpose do we commemorate his dying love, over the symbols of his body broken, and his blood shed, for the remission of sins, if we do not acknowledge him to be our redeeming Saviour, and if we do not praise him with thanksgiving? Is it not our duty to praise the Lord Jesus at his table, and to give thanks at the remembrance of his loving kindness and his tender mercies? "Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood, and hath made us kings and priests unto God and his father, to him be glory and dominion for ever—Amen."