man is able to enjoy the blessings of others as though they were his own. Thus, the Apostle, in all his weariness and persecutions, was, nevertheless, always rejoicing with his Churches; and especially he rejoiced over the gifts and graces given to the Corinthians, of which he here enumerates three: first, Utterance, then Knowledge, and then the grace of that peculiar attitude of Expectation with which they were looking for the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ. He speaks of the gift of Utterance, and we shall understand his reason for calling it a gift rather than a grace, when we remember that, in his conception, Charity was far above Knowledge. To him a blessing was nothing, unless it could be imparted to others. Knowing a truth is one thing; being able to express it, is quite another thing: and then again, to be able to express a truth is one thing, but to dare to do it is another thing altogether. The Apostle unites both of these in the expression, "utterance: " it is, at the same time, an intellectual gift and a spiritual grace. St. Paul also thanks God for their Knowledge; for utterance without knowledge is worthless. He did not value these things merely for themselves, but only as they were means to an end channels for conveying truth to others.

The last gift for which the Apostle thanks God in this place was their attitude of Expectation they were waiting for the coming of the Lord - he says, "So that ye come behind in no gift, waiting for the coming of the Lord;" as though that were the highest gift of all; as if that attitude of expectation were the highest posture that can be attained here by the Christian. It implies a patient, humble spirit, one that is waiting for, one that is looking forward to, something higher and better. The Apostle seems by this to tell us that the highest spirit is shown rather in calm expectation, than in disputing how that Kingdom shall come, in believing that it must come, and silently waiting for God's own time for the revealing. St. Paul's congratulation contains a ground of hope for the continuance of those blessings "God shall confirm you to the end;" and again, "God is

faithful." He relies not on any stability of human goodness, he knows that he cannot trust to their inherent firmness or fidelity; his ground of confidence for the future is rather in the character of God. This is our only stay, our only hope, the unchanging faithfulness of God. True it is, that doctrine may be abused, we may rest upon it too much, and so become indifferent and supine; but, nevertheless, it is a most precious truth, and without some conviction of this, I cannot understand how any man dares go forth to his work in the morning, or at evening lay his head on his pillow to sleep.

We now pass on, secondly, to consider the Apostle's warning and reproof - Parties had risen in Corinth: let us endeavor briefly to understand what these parties were. You cannot have read the Epistles without perceiving that the Apostles taught very differently-not a different gospel, but each one a different side of the gospel. Contrast the Epistles of St. Paul with those of St. Peter or St. John. These were not contrarieties, but varieties, and so together they made up the unity of the Church of Christ. The first party in Corinth of which we shall speak was that one which called itself by the name of Paul; and the truths which they would chiefly proclaim would doubtless be those of Liberty and Universality. Moreover, St. Paul was not ordained like other teachers, but was called suddenly by special revelation of the Lord. He frequently refers to this, and declares that he was taught not of man, but of God only. Now, the party calling itself by the name of Paul would doubtless exaggerate this, and teach, instead of liberty, licentiousness; and so with the other peculiarities of his teaching. There was also a party naming itself after Apollos; he had been educated at Alexandria, the university of the world, and we are told that he was mighty in the Scriptures, and remarkable for eloquence. The difference between Apollos and St. Paul seems to be not so much a difference of views as in the mode of stating those views: the eloquence of St. Paul was rough and burning; it stirred men's hearts,

kindling in them the living fire of truth: that of Apollos was more refined and polished. There was also the party called by the name of Peter. Christianity in his heart had been regularly and slowly developed; he had known Jesus first as the Son of Man; and afterwards as the Son of God. It was long before he realized God's purpose of love to the Gentiles-in his conception the Messiah was to be chiefly King for the Jews; therefore all the Jewish converts, who still clung to very much that was Jewish, preferred to follow St. Peter. Lastly, there was the party calling itself by the name of Christ Himself. History does not inform us what were the special views of this party; but it is not difficult to imagine that they set themselves up as superior to all others. Doubtless, they prided themselves on their spirituality and inward light, and looked down with contempt on those who professed to follow the opinion of any teacher. Perhaps they ignored the apostolic teaching altogether, and proclaimed the doctrines of direct communion with God without the aid of ministry or ordinances; and these, as well as the others, the Apostle rebuked. The guilt of these partizans did not lie in holding views differing from each other; it was not so much in saying "this is the truth," as it was in saying "this is not the truth;" the guilt of schism is when each party, instead of expressing fully his own truth, attacks others, and denies that the others are in the Truth at all.

Avoid, I pray you, the accursed spirit of sectarianism: suffer not yourselves to be called by any party names; One is your Master, even Christ, and all ye are brethren. Let each man strive to work out, bravely and honestly, the truth which God has given to him; and when men oppose us and malign us, let us still, with a love which hopeth all things, strive rather to find good in them— truths special to them but which as yet they — perhaps unconsciously- - falsely represent.

LECTURE IV.

JUNE 22, 1851.

1 CORINTHIANS, i. 13-22. -"Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul? I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius;Lest any should say that I had baptized in my own name. — And I baptized also the household of Stephanas; besides, I know not whether I baptized any other. - For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the Gospel; not with wisdom of words, lest the Cross of Christ should be made of none effect. For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God. For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent. - Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? - hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world? For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe. - For the Jews require a sign,

and the Greeks seek after wisdom."

LAST Sunday we endeavored to arrive at a right understanding respecting the different parties in the Church of Corinth: let us now pass on to consider the argument by which St. Paul met these sectarians. It was an appeal to Baptism, and to understand the force of that appeal, we must endeavor to understand what Christian Baptism is. It contains two things: something on the part of God, and something on the part of man. On God's part it is an authoritative revelation of His Paternity on man's part it is an acceptance of God's covenant. Now there is a remarkable passage in which we find St. Paul expressing the meaning of Baptism as symbolizing submission, discipleship to any particular teacher: "Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant how that all our fathers were baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea." When the Israelites passed through the Red Sea they cut

themselves off for ever from Egypt, so that, figuratively speaking, the Apostle teaches that in that immersion they were baptized unto Moses, for thereby they declared themselves his followers, and left all to go with him. And so, just as the soldier who receives the bounty money is thereby pledged to serve his sovereign, so he who has passed through the Baptismal waters, is pledged to fight under the Redeemer's banner against sin, the world, and the devil. And now the argument of St. Paul becomes plain. He argues thus: To whom were ye then baptized? To whom did you pledge yourselves in discipleship? If to Christ, why do ye name yourselves by the name of Paul? If all were baptized into that Ŏne Name, how is it that a few only have adopted it as their own?

Upon this we make two remarks; first, the value and blessedness of the Sacraments. It will be asked, To what purpose are the Sacraments of the Church? if they work no miracle, of what avail are they? Our reply is, Much every way; among others, that they are authoritative signs and symbols. Now there is very much contained in the idea of a recognized authoritative symbol; for instance, in some parts of the country it is the custom to give and receive a ring, in token of betrothal; but that is very different from the marriagering, it being not authoritative, and being without the sanction of the Church.

It would have been perfectly possible for man to have invented for himself another symbol of the truth conveyed in Baptism, but then it would not have been authoritative, and consequently it would have been weak and useless. Now, there is another thing, and that is, that these Sacraments are the epitomes of Christian Truth. This is the way in which the Apostle frequently makes use of the Sacraments. From the Epistle to the Romans we find that Antinomianism had crept into the Church, and that there were some who said, that if only they believed, it did not matter that they sinned. How does St. Paul meet this? By an appeal to Baptism? He says, " God forbid, how shall