find no other to answer my purpose so well; it is borrowed from the times of the early Christian Church: "Economic," when used in reference to the management of a household, means a frugal use of provision in opposition to extravagant expenditure. An economist apportions to each department the sum necessary, and no more.

And in the spiritual dispensation of truth, economy means. that prudent distribution which does not squander it uselessly away when it can do no good, but which apportions to each age, and to each capacity, the amount it can turn to good account. It implies a prudent, wise reserve. Now the principle of this we find stated in the second verse: "I have fed you with milk, and not with meat." And although, in its application, some errors might be committed by withhold ing truths which should be granted, and by failing to distribute them at the required time, still the principle is a simple and a true one. For different ages, different kinds of food. For childhood, or "babes in Christ," milk. For them that are of full age, or who have the power of discerning both good and evil, "strong meat." strong meat." But reverse this, and the child becomes sick and fevered. And the reason of this is, that what is strength to the man is injury to the child-it can not bear it.

The doctrine which the apostle calls "strong meat," if taught at first, would deter from further discipleship; and Christ expresses the same thing when He says: "No man putteth a piece of new cloth unto an old garment, for the rent is made worse. Neither do men put new wine into old bottles, else the bottles break, and the wine runneth out." Now this, remember, was said immediately after the disciples of John had asked why Jesus had not taught the same severe life (the type of which was fasting) which John had. And so, too, Christ did not preach the Cross to His disciples at first. The first time He did preach it, it shocked them. For it was not until after Peter's memorable acknowledgment of Him in these words, "Thou art the Christ," that He revealed to them His coming death, which even then resulted in a kind of revolt against Him, drawing from Peter the exclamation, "That be far from thee, Lord.".

Such a case of defection actually did occur in the behavior of the young ruler, who forced, as it were, from Christ a different method of procedure. At first Jesus would have given him mere moral duty: "Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery: Do not kill." But not satisfied with this, he asked for Perfection. "What lack I yet?" And then there was nothing left but to "If thou wilt

say:

66

be perfect, go and sell that thou hast and give to the poor, and come and follow Me." For, observe, strong meat does not mean high doctrine, such as Election, Regeneration, Justification by Faith, but "Perfection:" strong demands on self, a severe, noble life. St. Paul taught the Corinthians all the doctrine he had to teach, but not all the conceptions of the Blessed Life which he knew of. He showed them that, leaving the principles of doctrine, they were to keep themselves in the love of Christ, and be strengthened more and more with His Spirit in the inner man, growing up unto Him in all things. But all this by degrees. And thus of the weak we must be content to ask for honesty, justice; not generosity, not to sell all, but simple moral teaching: "Thou knowest the commandments."

From a child we must not ask sublime forgiveness of injuries. That which would be glorious in a man might be pusillanimity in a boy. But you must content yourself at first with prohibiting tyranny. There is no greater mistake in education than not attending to this principle. Do not ask of your child to sacrifice all enjoyment for the sake of others; but let him learn, first, not to enjoy at the expense, or the disadvantage or suffering of another.

Another reason for not neglecting this is, the danger of familiarizing the mind with high spiritual doctrines to which the heart is a stranger, and thus engendering hypocrisy. For instance, self-sacrifice, self-denial, are large words, which contain much beauty, and are easily got by rote. But the facility of utterance is soon taken for a spiritual state; and while fluently talking of these high-sounding words, and of man's or woman's mission and influence, it never occurs to us that as yet we have not power to live them out.

Let us avoid such language, and avoid supposing that we have attained such states. It is good to be temperate; but if you are temperate, do not mistake that for self-denial, or for self-sacrifice. It is good to be honest, to pay one's debts; but when you are simply doing your duty, do not talk of a noble life. Be content to say, 66 We are unprofitable servants

--

we have done that which was our duty to do."

The danger of extreme demands made on hearts unprepared for such is seen in the case of ananias. These demands were not, as we see, made by the Apostles; for nothing could be wiser than St. Peter's treatment of the case, representing such sacrifice as purely voluntary, and not compelled. "While it remained, was it not thine own: and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power?" But public opinion, which had made sacrifice fashionable, demanded it. And it

was a demand like strong meat to the weak, for Ananias was "unable to bear it."

II. The second remedy in this factious state was to depreciate the part played by man in the great work of progress, and to exhibit the part of God.

Who, then, is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed?" "Ye are God's husbandry, ye are God's building." In all periods of great social activity, when society becomes conscious of itself, and morbidly observant of its own progress, there is a tendency to exalt the instruments, persons, and means by which it progresses. Hence, in turn, kings, statesmen, parliaments: and then education, science, machinery, and the press, have had their hero-worship. Here, at Corinth, was a new phase," minister-worship." No marvel, in an age when the mere political progress of the Race was felt to be inferior to the spiritual salvation of the Individual, and to the purification of the Society, that ministers, the particular organs by which this was carried on, should assume in men's eyes peculiar importance, and the special gifts of every such minister, Paul or Apollos, be extravagantly honored. No marvel, either, that round the more prominent of these partisans should gather.

St. Paul's remedy was simply to point out God's part: "Ye are God's husbandry," we are only laborers-different only from wheels and pivots, in that they do their work unconsciously, we consciously. We execute a plan which we only slightly understand-nay, not at all, till it is completed, like workmen in a tubular bridge, or men employed in Gobelin tapestry, who can not see the pattern of their work until the whole is executed. Shall the hodman boast? the laborer saying of some glorious piece of architecture: Behold my work! or some poet, king, or priest, in view of some progress of the race, See what I have done! Who is Paul, but a servant of higher plans than he knows? And thus we come to find that we are but parts in a mighty system, the breadth of which we can not measure.

Conceive

This is the true inspired remedy for all party spirit: "He that planteth and he that watereth are one. Each in his way is indispensable. To see the part played by each individual in God's world, which he alone can play; to do our own share in the acting, and to feel that each is an integral, essential portion of the whole, not interfering with the rest; to know that each church, each sect, each man, is co-operating best in the work when he expresses his own individuality (as Paul and Cephas, and John and Barnabas did), in truths

of word and action which others, perhaps, can not grasp— that is the only emancipation from partisanship.

Again, observe St. Paul held this sectarianism, or partisanship, to amount virtually to a denial of their Christianity. For, as Christians, it was their privilege to have direct access to the Father through Christ; they were made independent of all men but the one mediator Christ Jesus. Whereas this boast of dependence upon men, instead of direct communion with God, was to glory in a forfeiture of their privileges, and to return to the Judaism or Heathenism from which they had been freed. He says: "While one saith I am of Paul, and another I am of Apollos, are ye not carnal, and walk as men ?" So that all sectarianism is slavery and narrowness, for it makes us the followers of such and such a leader. Whereas, says St. Paul, instead of your being that leader's, that leader is yours; your minister, whom you are to use. For "All things are yours;" the whole universe is subservient to your moral being, and progress. Be free, then, and use them do not be used by them.

Remark, therefore, how the truest spiritual freedom and elevation of soul spring out of Christian humility. All this liberty and noble superiority to life and death, all this independence of men, of Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas, as their masters, arises from this, that "ye are Christ's, and Christ is God's;" that ye, as well as they, are servants only of Christ, who came not to do His own will, but the will of Him who sent Him.

As the last time we treated of the first ten verses of this chapter, to-day we shall go on to the end, merely recapitulating, beforehand, the leading subjects we were then led to enlarge upon; which were, first-St. Paul's treatment of the Corinthian Church when it was in a state of schism, broken up into parties; one party following Apollos, attracted by his eloquence; another, St. Paul, attracted by his doctrine of Christian liberty; another, St. Peter, whom they looked on as the champion of the Judaistic tendency; while another called themselves by the name of Christ. And the schism which thus prevailed was no light matter, for it was not only a proof of carnal views, but it amounted also to a denial of Christianity. For men emancipated by Christ, and given di

rect access to God, to return again to an allegiance to men, and dependence upon them, was voluntarily to forfeit all Christian privileges. It is very interesting to observe the difference in St. Paul's treatment of the Corinthian Church from his treatment of other Churches. He says to them: "I have fed you with milk; for hitherto ye were not able to bear meat, neither yet now are ye able." There is a remarkable difference between this Epistle to the Corinthians and that to the Ephesians. It is not in the former that we find the apostle speaking of the breadth, and length, and depth, and height of the love of Christ, which passeth knowledge; nor do we there find him speaking of the beauty and necessity of self-sacrifice. These were subjects too high for them as yet, but instead we find him dealing almost entirely with the hard, stern duties and commandments of every-day life. St. Paul's twofold method of dealing with the Corinthian Church in their state of faction was:

1. Through an economic reserve of truth.

By which we understood that first principles only were distributed to feeble minds, to men who were incapable of the Higher Life; that they were fed with these, in the same way as children, incapable of receiving meat, are nourished with milk.

2. The depreciation of the human, through the reduction. of ministers to their true position; by pointing out that they were only laborers, servants in God's world-only a part of the curious clock-work of this world of His. Thus each would be a part of one great whole, each would be called upon to work, as essential to this, but not to exhibit his own idea; each would best preserve his own individuality, when most acting as a fellow-worker with God.

Now observe! Here was a true notion of Christian unity as opposed to schism. "He that planteth and he that watereth are one." This is the idea I have so often given you— unity in variety. St. Paul did not say, You are wrong, you ought to be all of one way of thinking. No; he said rather, There is one truth, the ritualistic truth, in St. Peter's and St. James's mind. There is another, the truth of Christian liberty, which I teach you. There is another, the truth of grace and beauty, in Apollos. And all together build up a Church. And he made use of two metaphors, drawn from agriculture and architecture. How foolish it would be to dispute about the respective merits of planting and watering! Could there be a harvest without either? How foolish to talk of the superiority of capital over labor, or labor over capital! Could any thing be done without both? Again, who would