Alexander Maclaren - 3

That is the true ground of our unity, and of our obligation to love all who are begotten of Him.  You cannot safely put them on any other footing.  All else - identity of opinion, similarity of practice and ceremonial, local or national ties, and the like - all else is insufficient.  It may be necessary for Christian communities to require, in addition, a general identity of opinion, and even some uniformity in government and form of worship; but, if ever they come to fancy that such subordinate conditions of visible oneness are the grounds of their spiritual unity, and to enforce these as such, they are slipping off the real foundation, and are perilling their character as churches of Christ.  The true ground of the unity of all Christians is here: “Have we not all one Father?”  We possess a kindred life derived from Him.  We are a family of brethren because we are sons.

From: Expositions of Holy Scripture, at Romans 16:23.

Alexander Maclaren Week - 2

In considering the Jewish sacrificial system, it is important to distinguish the symbolical from the typical value of the sacrifices.  The former could scarcely be quite unnoticed by the offerers; but the latter was only gradually made plain, was probably never very generally seen, and is a great deal clearer to us, in the light of Christ, the Antitype, than it could ever have been before His coming.  As symbols, the sacrifices expressed great eternal truths as to spiritual worship and communion, its hindrances, requisites, manner, and blessings.  They were God’s picture-book for these children in religious development.  As types, they shadowed the work of Jesus Christ and its results.

The value of the sacrifices in either aspect is independent of modern questions as to their Mosaic origin; for, at whatever period the Priest’s Code was promulgated, it equally bears witness to the ruling ideas of the offerings and, in any case, it was long before Christ came and, therefore, its prophecy of Him is as supernatural, whether Moses or Ezra were its author.  I make this remark, not as implying that the new theory is not revolutionary, but simply as absolving a student of the religious significance of the sacrificial system from entering here on questions of date.

The “burnt offering” stands first in Leviticus for several reasons.  It was derived from patriarchal times; it was offered twice daily, besides frequently on other occasions; and, in its significance, it expressed the complete consecration which should be the habitual state of the true worshipper.  Its name literally means “that which ascends,” and refers, no doubt, to the ascent of the transformed substance of the sacrifice in fire and smoke, as to God.  The central idea of this sacrifice, then, as gathered from its name and confirmed by its manner, is that of the yielding of the whole being in self-surrender, and borne up by the flame of intense consecration to God.  Very beautiful is the variety of material which was permitted.  The poor man’s pair of pigeons went up with as sweet an odor as the rich man’s young bull.  God delights in the consecration to Him of ourselves and our powers, no matter whether they be great or small, if only the consecration be thorough, and the whole being be wrapped in the transforming blaze.

From: Expositions of Holy Scripture, at Leviticus 1:1-9.

Alexander Maclaren Week - 1

The other Gospels begin with Bethlehem; John begins with “the bosom of the Father.”  Luke dates his narrative by Roman emperors and Jewish high-priests; John dates his “in the beginning.”  To attemp adequate exposition of these verses in our narrow limits is absurd; we can only note the salient points in this, the profoundest page in the New Testament.

The threefold utterance in verse 1 carries us into the depths of eternity, before time or creatures were.  Genesis and John both start from “the beginning” but, while Genesis works downwards from that point and tells what followed, John works upwards and tells what preceded - if we may use that term in speaking of what lies beyond time.  Time and creatures came into being and, when they began, the Word “was.”  Surely no form of speech could more emphatically declare absolute, uncreated being, outside the limits of time.  Clearly, too, no interpretation of these words fathoms their depth, or makes worthy sense, which does not recognize that the Word is a person.  The second clause of verse 1 asserts the eternal communion of the Word with God.  The preposition employed means accurately “towards,” and expresses the thought that, in the Word, there was motion or tendency towards, and not merely association with, God.  The last clause asserts the community of essence, which is not inconsistent with distinction of persons, and makes the communion of active Love possible; for none could, in the depths of eternity, dwell with and perfectly love and be loved by God, except one who Himself was God.

From: Expositions of Holy Scripture by Alexander Maclaren; reprint (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1932), 10:1-2.  This series was originally published in 32 volumes (1904-1910).  Most reprints since that time have constituted 32 volumes in 17.  Today’s quotation is from the beginning of Maclaren’s on John 1:1-14.

Alexander Maclaren (1826-1910), was pastor of Portland Baptist Chapel in Southampton, England (1846-185 and of Union Baptist Chapel in Manchester, England (1858-1903).  He and C. H. Spurgeon were the two most famous Baptist preachers of the 19th century.

For the Lord’s Day (27)

If there is found in your midst, in any of your towns which the Lord your God is giving you, a man or a woman who does what is evil in the sight of the Lord your God, by transgressing His covenant, and has gone and served other gods and worshipped them, or the sun or the moon or any of the heavenly host, which I have not commanded and, if it is told you and you have heard of it, then you shall inquire thoroughly.  Behold, if it is true, and the thing certain, that this detestable thing has been done in Israel, then you shall bring out that man or that woman who has done this evil deed to your gates, that is, the man or the woman, and you shall stone them to death.  On the evidence of two witnesses or three witnesses, he who is to die shall be put to death; he shall not be put to death on the evidence of one witness.  The hand of the witnesses shall be the first against him to put him to death and, afterward, the hand of all the people.  So you shall purge the evil from your midst.  (Deuteronomy 17:2-7, NASB)

Heresy - Honest and Dishonest

Honesty is as important in theology as in trade and commerce, in a religious denomination as in a political party.  Denominational honesty consists, first, in a clear unambiguous statement by a Church of its doctrinal belief; and, second, in an unequivocal and sincere adoption of it by it members.  Both are requisite.  If a particular denomination makes a loose statement of its belief which is capable of being construed in more than one sense, it is so far dishonest.  If the creed of the denomination is well-drawn and plain, but the membership subscribes to it with mental reservation and insincerity, the denomination is dishonest.  Honesty and sincerity are founded in clear conviction, and clear conviction is founded in the knowledge and acknowledgement of the truth.  Heresy is a sin, and is classed by St. Paul among the “works of the flesh,” along with “adultery, idolatry, murder, envy, and hatred,” which exclude from the kingdom of God (Galatians 5:19-21). 

But heresy is not so great a sin as dishonesty.  There may be honest heresy, but not honest dishonesty.  A heretic who acknowledges that he is such is a better man than he who pretends to be orthodox while subscribing to a creed which he dislikes, and which he saps under pretence of improving it and adapting it to the times.  The honest heretic leaves the Church with which he no longer agrees; but the insincere subscriber remains within it in order to carry out his plan of demoralization.

From: Calvinism Pure and Mixed: A Defence of the Westminster Standards by William G. T. Shedd; reprint (Edinburgh: The Banner of Truth Trust, 1986 [1893]), p. 152.

William Greenough Thayer Shedd (June 21, 1820 - November 17, 1894) was both a Congregational and, later, a Presbyterian pastor.  He had a distinguished career as a Professor of English Literature prior to his work at the theological seminaries of Auburn, Andover and, finally, at Union Seminary, New York - back when all these schools were conservative, of course!

Imitating Christ

When transitory things are possessed and greatly multiplied in the world, they do not always help a man’s soul to peace.  But they help, rather, when they are despised and fully cut away from the love and desire of the heart.  And this is to be understood not only of gold and silver and other worldly riches, but also of the desire for honor and praise in the world, which shortly vanish and pass away as smoke upon the wind.

Place helps little if the spirit of fervor is absent, and the peace a man gains outwardly will not long stand whole if it lacks true inward peace of heart.  Though you change your place, it will improve you little unless you stand firm and steadfast in Me.  For by new occasions that daily arise you will find the very things from which you fled, and perhaps they will be much more perilous and much more harmful than the first verse.

From: Of the Imitation of Christ by Thomas a Kempis; translated from the Latin by Richard Whitford (1530); translation updated by Edward J. Klein (Garden City: Hanover House, 1955), pp. 145-146 = 3.27 (Book III, “The Inward Speaking of Christ to a Faithful Soul” and Section 27, “That Private Love Most Withholds a Man from God”)

Thomas Haemerken (1379-1471), knows as Thomas a Kempis, is the author of the book quoted above, which was the most popular Christian book in the world until the publication of John Bunyan’s The Pilgrim’s Progress.

The Romantic Movement and General Revelation

The romantic school of theology, literature, and music was characterized by several common commitments.  In the first place, a thoroughgoing subjectivity characterized the movement.  Truth was seen to be a function of the inner world of ineffable self-consciousness.  The romantics stressed the aesthetic rather than the intellectual side of human nature.  Human imagination, feeling, and intuition disclose that there is more to reality than a mechanical universe operating according to fixed physical laws.  In this regard, Wordsworth could speak of “sensations sweet, felt in the blood, and felt along the heart.”  The almost sensual beauty of the natural world was an important theme in romanticism.  Mountains, rivers, seas, clouds, and flowers represent a richly variegated phenomenon pulsating with life and splendor. 

Secondly, the romantic spirit focused on the element of mystery in experience.  The summum bonum was posited in life’s intangible realities that defy rational formulation.  The romantic commitment involved an intuitive sense of nature’s grand mysteries. 

Romanticism, thirdly, played on the fringes of pantheism.  God was envisaged as “the vital Spirit immanent in all things, the creative eros in which everything moves and has its being.”  The Infinite was perceived in every impulse of human consciousness, in every relationship and action. 

Finally, following the older deism, the romantic movement conceived of religion as variegated and diverse in its manifold expressions.  Whatever the external shape of his creed or religion, man’s most fundamental drive was to be in communion with the infinite Spirit of the universe.

From: General Revelation: Historical Views and Contemporary Issues by Bruce A. Demarest (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1982), p. 94.

Romans 12 and 13

In the following pages, I have expounded these two chapters of Romans at considerably greater length and with more attention to the work of previous commentators, from patristic times up to the present day, than will be possible in the commentary on the whole epistle I have undertaken to write for the new series of The International Critical Commentary.  At a time of widespread uncertainty and confusion with regard to ethical questions, and when the Church, at any rate in Britain, seems, often, only to reflect the uncertainty and confusion of the world instead of being able to speak a clear guiding word, the choice of these particular chapters for such fuller treatment seemed especially appropriate.  Of this, at least, I am quite certain, that there are few things which could make a more valuable contribution toward the clarification of Christian thinking in the sphere of ethics than would a really serious and patient study of these two chapters of St. Paul.  If the present work helps to stimulate such a study, I shall be well content.

I decided to stop at the end of chapter 13 because 14.1 - 15.13, while part, of course, of the same main division of the epistle, is of a somewhat different character from chapters 12 and 13.  I have, naturally, been conscious all the time of the fact that no part of Romans can be properly understood except in relation to all the rest of it.

From: A Commentary on Romans 12-13 by C. E. B. Cranfield; Scottish Journal of Theology Occasional Papers No. 12 (Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd, 1965), p. ix.

Charles Ernest Burland Cranfield (born in 1915) was Professor of Theology at the University of Durham in Durham, England (1950-1980).  His A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, alluded to in the quotation, was published in two volumes (1975, 1979).  Professor Cranfield will be 93 this September 13th.

G. K. Chesterton is Born

Gilbert Keith Chesterton was born on May 29, 1874 at a house in Sheffield Terrace, Campden Hill, just below the great tower of the Waterworks which so much impressed his childish imagination.  Lower down the hill was the Anglican Church of St. George, and, here, he was baptized.  When he was about five, the family moved to Warwick Gardens.  As old-fashioned London houses go, 11 Warwick Gardens is small.  On the ground floor, a back and front room were, for the Chestertons, drawing-room and dining-room with a folding door between, the only other sitting-room being a small study built out over the garden.  A long, narrow, green strip, which must have been a good deal longer before a row of garages was built at the back, was Gilbert’s playground.  His bedroom was a long room at the top of a not very high house.  For what is, in most London houses, the drawing-room floor is, in this house, filled by two bedrooms, and there is only one floor above it.

Cecil was five years younger than Gilbert, who welcomed his birth with the remark, “Now I shall always have an audience,” a prophecy remembered by all parties because it proved so singularly false.  As soon as Cecil could speak, he began to argue, and the brothers’ intercourse, thenceforward, consisted of unending discussion.  They always argued; they never quarrelled.

From: Gilbert Keith Chesterton by Maisie Ward (London: Sheed & Ward, 1944), p. 13.  This was, as far as I know, the first full-scale biography of Chesterton to be published after his death in 1936.

A Short Biography

The Pilgrim’s Progress, from this world to that which is to come, an allegory by John Bunyan (167

The allegory takes the form of a dream by the author.  In this, he sees Christian, on the advice of Evangelist, fleeing from the City of Destruction.  Part I describes his pilgrimage through the Slough of Despond, the Valley of Humiliation, the Valley of the Shadow of Death, Vanity Fair, the Delectable Mountains, the House Beautiful, the country of Beulah, to the Celestial City.

Part II relates how Christian’s wife, Christiana, moved by a vision, sets out, with her children, on the same pilgrimage, accompanied by her neighbor, Mercy.

The work is remarkable for the beauty and simplicity of its language (Bunyan was permeated with the English of the Bible), the vividness and reality of the impersonations, and the author’s sense of humor and feeling for the world of nature.

From: The Concise Oxford Dictionary of English Literature, John Mulgan, editor (Oxford: At the Clarendon Press, 1939), p. 416.