« PreviousContinue »
quest of the dying Redeemer not regarded! Who would have believed it? I wonder those words, “ broken for you," do not break the heart of every one who refuses.
Men treat no other being so. Out of their own mouths I will judge them. They know the sacred regard they pay to last wishes and dying injunctions; and that, though they are under no particular obligations to the persons expressing them, and though the things desired be often unreasonable, yet, because they are last wishes—-dying requests, the individuals expressing them being about to make the awful transition to eternity, how solemnly they charge the memory with them! how punctiliously they comply with them!
We feel as if persons in such circumstances had a right to command us. I never knew one such request, if it was practicable, and at all reasonable, that was not complied with. I ought to say, I never knew but one. The last request of Jesus Christ his last solemn injunction on those whom he bled to save, forms the solitary exception! Oh, it is too bad! It were a neglect unpardonable, but for the mediation of the very being who is the object of it. Nothing but his blood can cleanse from the sin of putting away from us the offered emblem of it. I know not how to make any apology for it. Jesus pleaded for his murderers, that they knew not what they did. But those who disregard his dying injunction, know what they do.
Excuses, it is true, they make; but to what do they amount? Can
doubt that Christ said, : Do this ?" Can any doubt that he meant it to be done by all who believe on him? What reason can be imagined why one redeemed sinner should partake of the embleins of the body and blood of Christ, which does not equally apply to every redeemed sinner? Should not as many as the body was broken and the blood shed for, partake of the memorials of that transaction? What propriety is there in limiting the command, “Do this,” and not the declaration, “ This is my body broken for you?" If we put it on the ground of right to command, questions any one the right of Christ to issue mandates ? What duty plainermore peremptory? Do some pay respect to this, who do not obey other commands of Christ? What if it be so ? Is that a reason why you should add another to your acts of disobedience ? Do you
refrain because it is a solemn transaction? Far more solemn are death, judgment, and eternity, from which, nevertheless, you cannot refrain. Do you feel yourself to be too unworthy? But will this neglect make you less unworthy? A sense of unworthiness is a grand part of the qualification. Are you afraid of sinning, should you in this
remem ber Christ? But you are certain of sinning by not remembering him. Say you, "I cannot trust my. self ?" But can you not trust Christ? If there is danger that you will prove faithless, yet is there any danger that he will? It is because you are not to be trusted, that you should trust him who is able to keep that which is committed to him. If you trust him for strength, you are as sure of being supplied as of being pardoned, if you trust him for that. Why should not you remember Christ? He remembers you--yes, practically remembers you ; nor one thing merely does in remembrance of you, but many. What if he should make excuses for not remembering you?
But perhaps you will cut short the interview by saying, “I am now quite unprepared for this act; hereafter I mean to attend to it.” Be it known to you, then, that there are greater things for which you are unprepared, and they are things which you cannot evade or defer, as you can this; and as to that hereafter on which you count, who art thou that boastest of to-morrow ?
8. I don't like Professions.
This is the reason which many give for not acknowledging Christ. They say, when urged upon the point, that they "don't like professions." A strange reason this for not obeying the express command os the Divine Savior! What if they do not like pro. fessions, do they equally dislike obeying commands ? If so, they had better say, " I don't like obedience to the commands of God.” But they profess to be well disposed to obey: it is only to professing that they object. Well, then, let them obey all the precepts which they find in the Bible, and we will not trouble them about a profession. Why should we? In that case they will obey the precept which enjoins a profession; they will do the thing appointed in remembrance of Christ.
But " I don't like professions.". And who does like mere professions? Who ever contended in favor of a man's professing to have what he has not ? Professions are very different from mere professions. Suppose a person has what he professes to have, what then? What is the objection to a profession in that case? I see none. If a man loves the Lord Jesus, I can see no harm in his professing or declaring his attachment to him. It is very natural to declare it. We profess attachment to others—to relatives, friends, benefactors, pastors, civil rulers. Why not to Christ? How does his being the subject of the profession con. stitute such an objection to it? Is he the only being to whom we may not profess attachment ?
“ Don't like professions ?" Why yes, they do. Professions of friendship, of patriotism, and of loyalty they like. Why not of religion? Why should not religion be professed as well as other things? Are attachment to the Gospel, love to Christ, regard
it is re
for the authority of Jehovah, and adherence to his government, the only things never to be professed ?
I do not see any objection to professions, but I see propriety and utility in them, even if it were optional with us to make them or not. If it were left to our choice, it strikes me, we ought to choose to profess love and obedience to Christ. But
suppose quired, does not that alter the case? Will these persons say they do not like what God requires ? And does he not require a profession? His inspired apos tle twice exhorts Christians to hold fast their profession. Does not that imply that it is made, and ought to be made? How is a person to hold on to that of which he has never taken hold ? Is not the public confession of Christ required when it is made a condition of salvation ? Rom. 10 : 9, “ If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.” Does not divine authority require it, when to the doing of it is made one of the most precious promises in the whole Bible ? Whosoever therefore shall confess me be fore men, him will I confess also before
Father which is in heaven." Is not that duty, against the omission of which such a threatening lies as this, " But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven?" Matt. 10: 32, 33. It is very plain that God requires professions, though some men do not like them,