Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit · Sermon No. 377
“A jealous, just concern For His immortal praise! A pure desire that all might learn, And glorify His Grace.”
And whatever would magnify the Savior, add luster to His many crowns, and bring the world to His feet—that would be the object of the Church’s prayerful and devout effort. There would then be an earnest desire to grow more and more like the Savior, and as far as possible to follow in His steps; and as the Church, by its individual members, sought to act in the Spirit of the Savior, more and more of His Spirit would be imbibed, and as they sought to grow more and more like the Head, they would more readily recognize His likeness in any of His members wherever they were, and under whatever circumstances. There would also be an honor placed upon the poor, humble and afflicted members of Christ’s flock which they sometimes did not now obtain. The charity which gives the cup of cold water to the disciple would no longer be dashed by the expectation of human applause, but it would be given to the disciple in the name of the disciple for the sake of the Master. There would be an increase of the spirit of charity. We would have large eyes for each other’s excellencies, and small vision for each other’s defects. Oh, for more of the charity that forgives, the charity that covers the fault! Another effect would be the ability to rejoice in each other’s success. What a hard matter that is to some of us! Again, there would be a disposition to work together where practicable, or still, if not practicable, together, yet in such a spirit that Judah should not envy Ephraim, nor Ephraim vex Judah. There would be, too, the quickening of our zeal, and faith, and love. We would rejoice to help each other, to bear one another’s burdens. We would learn to speak lovingly, and kindly, and honorably, and respectfully of each other, and not detractingly and as though we were glad to hear a whisper of any delinquency
The REV. ROBERT BUSHNELL, Free Methodist, next addressed the meeting in a very humorous speech. After some preliminary observations, he said he very much rejoiced in the erection of the building in which they were assembled for one or two important reasons. The first was, he believed it would be the birth place of immortal souls. There was a spot in old England—he knew it quite well, the likeness of it was gratefully embalmed in his memory—he did not mean to say that it was a bit better than any other spot, but it was better to him. He could remember the shape of the windows and the doors; he knew the look of that old building altogether, and there was not such a house in old England as that house was to him. He would tell them why. He was born there, and he was born-again there. A short time ago he visited that spot—he went to follow his poor mother to the grave. He looked at the house, and could have wept over it, and if the people there would not have thought him superstitious, he would not have minded giving a shilling to go to the very room and kneel upon the very spot where he was when God converted him. It was the second birth which made it glorious. And so he had no doubt at all that this house of prayer would be dear to thousands of souls, because they would be there born to God! But then, that was not all. He believed it would also be a place of spiritual refreshment for saints. He quite thought, notwithstanding all that people said to the contrary, that if they wanted a bit of good substantial food, they might get it there. He came on Good Friday morning, and he confessed that he felt it was God’s house. He did not mean to say that they would get very many flowers there, they did not need them. Food was the sort of thing that they needed. Flowers looked very well upon the tables, but they would not like the flowers if there was not food as well. There were two men on a road one day, and they had had a very long journey, and were awfully hungry. At length, one of them saw what he conceived to be an inn. “This is it, Brother,” he said, “come on.” So in they went, and the waiter came with an apron, just as they do, and he looked very natty, and there was a table very beautifully spread, and the dishes and silverware, and all there. So these men said to the waiter, “What have you got?” “Well”—he hardly knew. “Have you got any ducks?” they asked. “No.” “Chickens?” “No.” “Beef steaks?” “No.” “Why, what in the world do you keep, then?” they said. “Well,” he said, “we keep a tavern.” Now, there were some buildings in which there were all the things necessary except the one thing necessary. He believed that in this house of prayer there would be meat for men, milk for babies, and spiritual nourishment for the fainting and the dying! To come to the subject of unity, they all knew that unity was strength. A little drop of water might fall upon the face of a delicate lady, and she would hardly know it, but put a mass of drops together, and you have got the ocean big enough to bear or bury the Leviathan! Mr. Bushnell then gave several illustrations of the manifestations of unity, concluding with that afforded by the erection of the Tabernacle itself.
The REV. W. G. LEWIS, of Bayswater, said the subject entrusted to him was one so vast in its extent, and so weighty in its consequences, that he almost felt guilty of temerity in attempting to handle it. It was, “What are the limits of practical union?” There could be no union without a creed. Let it be distinctly understood that beautiful and fair, and celestial as charity was, Truth was her lifeblood. Without it, she could not exist. All associations of men of whatever kind existed upon sympathy of belief. Moral, political, scientific or religious associations all had one common center, one basis of belief. So long, however, as men were built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets, Jesus Christ, Himself, being the chief Cornerstone, all their differences were cast into the shade. The old axiom of the Reformers was, “In essentials, unity; in doubtful things, liberty; in all things, charity.” For his own part, he hesitated not plainly to announce that he could have no practical union with a man unless he believed the Inspiration of God’s Holy Word, though he might feel charity towards him. He was not speaking of the limits of love, or attempting to put boundaries to the exercise of brotherhood and regard for the welfare of his fellow men, but for all purposes of concerted usefulness, and cooperation, he could have no Christian fellowship with the man who did not firmly hold the Inspiration of God’s Word. They would have no platform upon which to stand; no standard to which to appeal in their differences. Such a man would go beneath the foundation of his (Mr. Lewis’s) belief, and in these days the great enemy of our souls was very busy in deluding and impelling men to make attacks upon the sacred Word. He had no fear for the safety of the Ark of God. It had already survived darker storms than those which seemed at this day to impend upon it. It was only 70 years ago that Voltaire, the high priest of infidelity, published that blasphemous threat, “In 60 years there shall be no Bible.” And tonight, where was the priming press that was employed in publishing the threat—in the city of Geneva, printing Bibles! All that infidelity had at present accomplished in regard to the Bible had been to prove the bitterness of its malice, and utter impotency of its own attacks! He could have no practical communion with a man who did not believe in the utter degeneracy of the entire human race in consequences of sin. He would not reiterate the statements of the Word of God to the effect that all have sinned and come short of the Glory of God. He need not point to the lives of men to illustrate it from their personal or individual history—it stood impressed upon every conscience that was not utterly seared, and dead! It was written on every page that recorded human life—whether that page were sacred or profane—and his own experience led him to the firm belief that no man ever yet did embrace the Gospel of Jesus Christ until he had a deep conviction of his condition as a lost sinner in the sight of God. Neither could he have fellowship with a man who did not hold the Doctrine of the Deity of the Lord Jesus Christ. The Doctrine of the Trinity, to his mind, was essential to the very structure of the Sacred Oracles. The man who impugned the Doctrine of the Trinity, to his (Mr. Lewis’s) mind, impugned the veracity of God! Nor could he hold union and co-operate with any man who did not stand fast by the Doctrine of the Atonement. Catholicity was not compromise. Catholicity and Christian unity must imply “No surrender of vital Doctrines.”
The REV. C. H. SPURGEON, who was introduced as the representative of the Primitive Methodist and Presbyterian Churches, made a few remarks upon the subject. It was among the Primitive Methodists that he first found the Savior. It was by one of their local preachers that he learned to look unto Jesus and be saved, and now he was really a Primitive Methodist, for he practiced Baptism after the most primitive form! But next he claimed to represent the Presbyterians because their Church was based on the Presbyterian model, and maintained the Eldership. The union of which they spoke was a union of the Church; and as the limit of union, the Church had no spiritual union with the world, with worldly professors, nor with carnal men, although they might be in the Church. The Church might sometimes be compelled to use worldly men, but any union with them would deceive and beguile her. The Church might have to use men for her purpose, that she might achieve her temporal and political liberties; but her real fellowship never extended beyond herself. It was an awful Truth, perverted and therefore forgotten, that there was no salvation out of the pale of the Church. But what was the Church? Those who believed in the Lord Jesus Christ—this was their visible character; those who were filled with the Holy Spirit—that was their secret character. It was utterly impossible to narrow the limits of Christian fellowship. He concluded by expressing his satisfaction at the meeting, and said it was a sweet and refreshing season.
A vote of thanks was then unanimously accorded to the Chairman, which was acknowledged by him, and the meeting separated.