Individuality; or, The apostolic twelve before and after Pentecost

Front matter

I!) MMIIIIimmiUUUUDHIIIIIKillMIMIIIIIIIIIIIII

Division. -^sCf.rr Section i.*5„./ ( No,™ _ .

4-40 fntit^ttiuaUt?

II Ci)e Composite Cljurcj^

Men make up Man; Churches make up the Church;

Truths make up Truth ; and it is only by a complete combination of the parts that the majesty and luster of the whole can be secured. —Joseph Parker ^ D. D.

Cl^e Compositte €^mt^

1. That the intention of Jesus was to found a Church is sufficiently proved by the calling of the apostles. After a night of prayer, he chooses the Twelve, whom he designs to employ in an especial manner as his ambassadors. Up to this time it can hardly be said that the kingdom of God was set up. But from that moment the Church of Christ is revealed in miniature, as it has stood before the world for eighteen centuries. The Apostolic Twelve, so to speak, are the normal representation of primitive Christianity — of the Church which saw Christ face to face, which directly heard his voice, and received from him the great commission of preserving his memory to the world. They formed the first nucleus of the Church, that which came closest to the center of all truth and life. Hence the unwearied labors of Jesus devoted to the spiritual education of the Twelve.

2. The choice of these particular men was made in true wisdom. Some have taken exception to the selection made; it has been charged that the men were ill-suited to Christ's purpose. In answer to this, others have undertaken to defend the selection by teaching that our Savior made choice of twelve simple and unlettered men, that the greater their lack of natural wisdom was, the more admirable might appear the supernatural gifts with which God endowed them. We take exception to this view. It was not a question of kindred, or of letters, or of education, that determined their selection. We hold the Twelve were selected as representative types; each was well suited to Christ's purpose, which purpose was to represent human nature in its entirety.

Of course, Jesus had to select from disciples; they were the only materials at hand. He wanted zvitnesses. That some of the apostles were comparatively obscure, inferior men, can not be denied ; but it does not take a great man to make a good witness, and to be witnesses of Christian facts was the main business of the apostles. Those facts were largely matters of experience, as they shone out through them as typal individualities. Professor Bruce, in his ^'Training of the Twelve," says : ''That even the humblest of them rendered important service in that capacity we need not doubt, though nothing is said of them in the apostolic annals. It was not to be expected that a history so fragmentary and so brief as that given by Luke should mention any but the principal actors, especially when we reflect how few of the char-

The Co7nposite Church 25

acters that appear on the stage at any particular crisis in human affairs are prominently noticed even in histories which go elaborately into detail. The purpose of history is secured by recording the words and deeds of the repxes^ntative men, and many are allowed to drop into oblivion who did nobly in their day. The less distinguished members of the apostolic band are entitled to the benefit of this reflection/*

3. The Apostolic College, as a whole, is illustrative of composite human nature. As Christ was the Ideal Man, and was in all points what men can be, so the apostles shadow forth all the possible dispositions and temperaments of human nature. In the truest sense of the word, the Twelve constitute the Composite Church. Twelve rare stones once burned in the breastplate of the high priest; a glorious mass, the richest symbol of value, honor, and glory. The twelve apostles were like these gems. There was no duplicate stone, no duplicate apostle, and one could never be mistaken for another. Each was a man of pronounced individuality. But with all their diversities, these twelve live stones were all wrought into one symmetrical whole.

The Church is one. But it is one as the body is one. "We have many members in'* the *'one" natural "body;" and just so we, being diverse Christian members of His redeemed flock, "are one" mystical "body in Christ." In the natural body every part is not so much a distinct unit in itself as a fraction of one great whole ; and so in the Church, not the individuality of the member, but the oneness of the whole community, is to demonstrate the truth of Christ*s mission.

One of the happiest definitions of life is this ^ by Professor Guyot: 'Xife is the mutual exchanging of relations." And the higher the life, the intenser the exchanging. "Behold, how good and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity !" The formula of definition is, Unity in diversity, and diversity in unity. The Christian Church began in this way, and began gloriously. The Day of Pentecost supplied the mold in which it was to be cast.

All Church life and service are interdependent. There is nothing like Christianity to individualize mankind. But at the same time, much of what we can do that is best in the world we must do by close connection and interaction one with another. Timothy is necessary to Paul; the least essential to the great. Priscilla and Aquila ! what a power they were • for early Christianity, when they took that eloquent young Alexandrian, Apollos, and taught him in private the way of God more perfectly! Priscilla, that devout woman, stood, in fact, before delighted assemblies in Corinth, and spoke to

The Composite Church 27

them the perfect way of God through the eloquent man whom she had taught.

In the valley of Chamounix there stands a very interesting monument ; it presents two fig- j^. ures — Saussure, the great scientist, and Balmat, '"^ the guide, who was the very first to stand on the summit of Mont Blanc. Saussure, on the summit of the mighty mountain, could do what the poor guide could not do; he could observe the structure of the rocks, take observations of barometrical variations, note the intensity of the solar rays, the mode of formation of clouds, and he could describe the superb scenery unfolded to his view with the feeling of an artist and the pen of a poet. Balmat could do nothing of all this ; but had it not been for his skill and daring, Saussure had never scaled the glorious height. So on the monument both are immortalized — the lowly guide and the famous philosopher; for by their mutuality they triumphed, and gave mankind a new world of science and poetry. So it is in the Church. The Church, the body of Christ, is an organic whole. Its work is one. All its members mutually help in the common work. No one has a right to say to another, "I have no need of you." All are needful. Comparisons as to value of service are odious. Each in his place is best. The difficulty we have with ourselves and with one another is that of not perceiving that every one of us is needful to make up the sum total of God's meaning. The men in the Apostolic College belong to one another.

4. Of the apostles chosen there are given in the New Testament four lists: one by St. Matthew (x, 2-4); another by St. Mark (iii, 16-19); and two by St. Luke (Luke vi, 14-16; Acts i, 13). St. Matthew and St. Luke in their Gospels enumerate the apostles in an order which answers to the date of their calling ; St. Mark ranges them according to their personal influence before the Savior's death; and in the Acts they are set in their order of importance after the ascension. The order taken in this work is that found in St. Matthew's Gospel. The record is: "And when he had called unto him his twelve disciples, he gave them power against unclean spirits, to cast them out, and to heal all manner of sickness and all manner of disease. Now the names of the twelve apostles are these ; the first, Simon, who is called Peter, and Andrew his brother; James the son of Zebedee, and John his brother; Philip, and Bartholomew; Thomas, and Matthew the publican; James the son of Alphaeus, and Lebbaeus, whose surname was Thaddaeus ; Simon the Canaanite, and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him."

The Composite Church 29

In the following table the names are arranged into four groups, each group centering around a characteristic key-thought :

I Group Key- word: Impulse.

Simon Peter.

Andrew.

James (son of Zebedee).

II Group Key-word: Affection.

John.

Philip.

Bartholomew (Nathanael).

III Group Key-word: Intellect.

Thomas (Didymus).

Matthew (Ivevi).

James (son of Alphseus).

IV Group Key-word : Administrative Ability.

Lebbseus (Thaddaeus, Judas).

Simon (Canaanite, Zelotes).

Judas Iscariot.

These four groups, in their distinctive features, cover all our complex nature. Of the first group, Peter, the man of impulse, is the representative ; of the second, John, the man of affection; of the third, Thomas, the man of reason; of the fourth, Judas Iscariot, the man of administrative ability. In the first group we naturally expect to find the impulsive type of Christianity ; they are the pioneers; and this expectation is justified by subsequent events. In the second group we have the intuitive type of Christianity— men of contemplation. In the third group we have the intellectual type of Christianity. They are all reflective men. The fourth group constitutes the administrative type of Christianity. All the apostles of this group were men of evidently practical gifts.

Each group fell through its representative, and through the predominant strength of its chief characteristic, or that for which Christ selects the group. The most signal failures of Peter, John, Thomas, and Judas Iscariot took place in those points of character for which they were remarkable in excellence. In the words of Robertson : ''St. John was the apostle of charity ; yet he is the very type to us of religious intolerance, in his desire to call down fire from heaven. St. Peter is proverbially the apostle of impetuous intrepidity; yet twice he proved a craven." We see this same fact illustrated in certain Old Testa- W ment characters. So eminent as Abraham was ^' \ in faith, it was in faith that he most signally failed ; remarkable as Job was for patience, it was in that very thing that he gave way ; and though Moses was ''meek above all the men that dwell

The Cofnpostte Church 31

upon the earth," his meekness gave place to irritability at Meribah, and that, too, before a provocation which seems to us to have been the smallest of his life. Let us not forget that our greatest danger does not always lie where we are weakest, but is sometimes where we are usually strongest. Men and women are never in more imminent danger than when they meet with temptations exactly suited to their master-disposition or temperament.

5. The apostles were in this condition. Christ recognized this fact. He chided them very gently. He told them that they were as yet incomplete men, and charged them that they should ''wait for the promise of the Father." No doubt they were new creatures in Christ. They loved and served him. But if you consider the mistakes that they made regarding Christ's kingdom, their prejudices, their fears, the shock which they had received, and the panic into which they had been thrown by Christ's death, you will admit that they were not yet ready for their work. They were to "wait" for a special preparation. Hence at that solemn moment, in which Christ turns over mankind into their hands, his last service is to tell them of the power which shall be wrought in them by the Holy Ghost, and what they shall do with it. ''Ye shall receive power after that the Holy Ghost is come i upon you; and ye shall be witnesses unto me;" and power they did receive. The disciples, as we see them in the Gospels, are cowards ; in the Acts, they are heroes. In the Gospels, they are full of speculation and doubt; in the Acts, they are marked by a strong, unwavering faith. In the Gospels we have the source of life; in the Acts, the source of service and testimony. Christ saves; the Holy Ghost empowers. The Rev. John MacNeil says, "Life begins at the Cross, but service begins at Pentecost." And again, "God wants us to be living this side Pentecost, not the other side." The glory of the Apostolic Church was not merely in her faith, zeal, conversions, or martyrdoms; but above all, and as their source, in the possession of the Holy Ghost. This will appear more and more clearly as we study each of the four apostolic groups.

Ill

Key-word: Impulse Simon Peter Andrew James the Son of Zebedee

Does he take inspiration from the Church,

Directly make her rule his law of life?

Not he: his own mere impulse guides the man.

— Browning.

He abandoned himself to the impulse of the moment, whether for good or evil. —Prescott.

The stram of passion is particularly marked and emphatic in this group. The key-word is impulse. The representative is Peter.

I. Peter was a man essentially of impulses. He was distinguished from the rest of our Lord's followers by an impetuosity which seems to have been born with him, and which showed itself by obstinately holding any opinion which the mind once embraced. None of the disciples gainsaid our Lord so often as Peter. Over and over again, Peter's temperamental disposition asserts its power. His full heart put force and promptitude into his every movement. From the many instances recorded, we need select only a few in which this impulsiveness of his nature asserts itself.

It was his impulsive faith that attempted to walk on the sea. Jesus had just performed the miracle of feeding the multitude with five loaves and two fishes. So great was the impression made on their minds by this extraordinary act of benevolence and power, that he thought it best, in order to avoid the hindrance of his great task by any popular commotion in his favor, to go away in such a manner as to be effectually beyond their reach for the time. With this view, he constrained the disciples to get into the ship, and go before him to the other side of the lake, while he sent the people away. After sending the multitude away, he wxnt up into a mountain, apart, to pray. And after nightfall the vessel was in the midst of the sea, and he alone on the land. Weary with a night of rowing, for ''the wind was contrary," the disciple-crew had lost courage; and about three or four o'clock in the morning, Jesus came to them, walking on the sea. They supposed it to have been a spirit, and "cried out with fear." It was the cry of men tossed and toiling on the wild deep in the gloom of night. But immediately Jesus spoke to them, and said, "It is I: be not afraid." That voice stilled their terrors, and at once they were eager to receive him into the ship; but Peter's impetuous love can not even await his approach, and he passionately exclaims, "Lord, if it be thou, bid me come unto thee on the water." And he said, "Come." And over the vessel's side into the troubled waves he sprang. It was a courageous faith. A timid faith would not have ventured even to think of doing that which Peter asked to do. But, beginning to sink, he cried for aid; aid was immediately given by the Savior, who said, "O thou of little faith, wherefore

Impidse 37 didst thou doubt?" It is not difficult to discover the characteristics of Simon Peter as they come out here. Whatever he felt for the moment was sure to come out in his words or actions. It is easy to blame and say that Peter should not have been so eager to meet his Lord, or he should have maintained his faith to the last. But we must not forget that the very height to which his faith had for the moment attained, exposed him, more than any others, to the temptation of unbelief. ''Those who sit securely in their boats'; are not liable to sink. The men of even temperament can not know an experience like this. They know nothing of ups and downs. Where the hills are highest, the ravines are deepest." Peter, therefore, must not be unduly blamed. It is better to dare a noble thing for Christ and fail, than not to dare at all. Had any one else but Peter attempted this, it would have appeared awkward and ungraceful ; had he refrained from rushing off to Jesus, we should have felt that it was not like Peter.

The same generous, impetuous spirit shows itself in Peter's first and second confessions of Christ. The first confession was made when many false or half-sincere disciples had left the Master. In deep sadness of heart he addressed to the Twelve the touching question, "Will ye also go away?" It was Simon Peter whose warm heart spoke out impetuously for all the rest: "Lord, to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life. And we believe, and are sure that thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God." This was the grandest act of Peter's life. He enthroned Christ. It is the grandest act of any soul to enthrone Christ. And yet we can scarcely conceive of any but Peter speaking these words. They would not have been the first answer of the critical Thomas or the more philosophical John. Their sudden, unqualified utterance could only have broken from the lips of Peter. At the bare mention of the possibility of departure from Christ, Peter's soul was on fire, and the utterance of his heart outran the slower processes of the intellect, and he spoke with the voice of one who had experienced the power of the words of eternal life.

The same unhesitating spirit is seen in his second confession. Jesus took advantage of a quiet time with his disciples to ask them what were men's thoughts about him in the countries through which they had just passed. When they replied that the people saw in him one of the old prophets, whose return w^as looked for at the epoch of the Messiah, the Master asked, *'Whom say ye that I am?" "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God," exclaims

Peter, in one of those ecstasies of faith which raise him for the moment above himself, and reveal that ardent courage which characterizes all the mighty men of action and enthusiasm. With this prompt, definite confession, Jesus was satisfied. He solemnly pronounced Peter ''blessed" on account of his faith.

Christ blesses enthusiasm when it is in the way, and does not check it. But see how he rebukes it when not in the way ! When the Lord warned his disciples of his approaching death, "they understood not his saying, and it was hid from them, that they perceived it not." "And they feared to ask him." But Peter, in his impetuosity, thought that he understood, and that he could prevent; and so he interrupted those solemn utterances by his ignorant and presumptuous zeal. He took Jesus aside, and began to rebuke him, saying, "Be it far from thee. Lord ; this shall not be unto thee." It was kindly meant. But he knew not what he said. With a flash of sudden indignation, our Lord rebuked his worldliness and presumption : "Get thee behind me Satan: thou art an offense unto me; for thou savorest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men."

Passing over the intervening incidental notices of Peter's actions, the next great occasion on which his impulsive nature shows itself was in the Upper Room. At the appointed hour I the thirteen sat down to eat. And when the Passover meal was served, Jesus rose from his seat, and proceeded to wash his disciples' feet, ''performing for them the meanest offices of hospitality." Awe and shame kept the others silent until he came to Peter, whose irrepressible emotions found vent in the surprised, half-indignant question, ''Lord, dost thou seek to wash my feet?" To this the Savior replied, 'What I do, thou knowest not now, but thou shalt know hereafter." Peter was over-hasty in judging Christ's action, for he was ignorant. Had he waited, Christ would have made it clear. Still the erratic disciple would not consent; he impetuously exclaims, ''Thou shalt never wash my feet." On the whole, Peter was a good man, and his language here expresses something that was really good, just that sense of Christ's greatness and his own unworthiness as appears in Luke V, 8, "Thy condescension overwhelms me." But associated with this is Peter's want of reflection, of ready acquiescence, and his characteristic impulsiveness. He should have felt such unbounded confidence in Christ as to submit without resistance or reluctance. But the Master would not argue with him. He simply said, "If I wash thee not, thou hast no part with me." That calm word changed the whole current of thought and feeling in the warm-hearted, passionate disciple. The idea of being cut off from his dear Master's favor through his waywardness drove him in sheer fright to the opposite extreme of overdone compliance: ''Lord, not my feet only, but also my hands and my head." But that again was too much. How characteristic of the man! He goes swinging, like a pendulum, from one extreme to another. "If you drive nature out with a fork, yet it will come back again." That was an old Roman saying, and one can not but be reminded of it in the case of Peter. ''J^sus saith unto him. He that is washed needeth not save to wash his feet, but is clean every whit." Peter learns first that he must yield an unquestioning obedience, and then that the general purification of the soul obtained by pardon, does not dispense with the daily cleansing; for the pilgrim bound for heaven can not pursue his journey without the dust of the way cleaving to his feet. "He who is washed needeth not save to wash his feet."

And now the Savior proceeded to institute the perpetual feast commemorative of his death, observing sadly that his death would not merely / be accelerated by the treachery of one, but by the desertion of all. Again the spirit of positive assertion obtains the mastery over Peter, not yet taught the lesson of self-mistrust. He asks,

''Lord, whither goest thou?" Jesus answered him, "Whither I go, thou canst not follow me now; but thou shalt follow me afterward." Peter said unto him : ''Lord, why can I not follow thee now? I will lay down my life for thy sake." Again, when the Master said, "All ye shall be offended because of me this night," the words spring to Peter's lips, "Though all men shall be offended because of thee, yet will I never be offended." Peter's sins, like his virtues, were in a large measure due to his temperament. When Jesus was in the garden, and about to be apprehended, Peter, readiest in action as in word, drew his sword, and cut off the ear of Malchus, one of the servants of the high priest. Instantly Jesus rebuked the ill-timed action. "Return that sword of thine into its place," he said to Peter, "for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword." Soon followed his threefold denial of the Master, with its sad and suggestive history. At this period of his life, Peter's easy, impressionable nature was ever liable to be molded by the influence of the moment, and he passed readily into passionate extremes. At different times during the Last Supper, and in the conversations which followed, Peter expressed himself after this fashion: "Though I should die with thee, yet will I not deny thee," "Although all shall be offended, yet will not I," "I am ready to go with thee, both into prison and to death," "I will lay down my life for thy sake." And when he said these things he was sincere. He felt all he said. And yet this was the man who denied his Lord. Peter was not content with one denial. First of all, there was the square falsehood, "I know not the man." Then, as Mark puts it, there was a second denial, with perjury; for, with an oath, he said the second time, ''I know riot the man." And then, under the third challenge, the third denial comes with dreadful imprecations and curses — "He began to curse and to swear, saying, I know not this man of whom ye speak." But at that fatal moment of guilt, ''the Lord turnedand looked upon Peter." It was enough; Peter went out and wept bitterly, and, as the story soon tells us, returned to the Lord.

There is a peculiar silence in the narrative about him through all the remaining passion of Christ. He does not appear in the story when the Savior was crucified, nor when he was laid in Joseph's tomb; and nothing is said of him during the three days of great suspense endured by all the believers at Jerusalem. But he comes to light again on the morning of the third day. On hearing the news of the resurrection of Jesus, Peter and John started at once for the sepulcher. John outran Peter, but stood looking into the

44 IndividMality sepulcher; then Peter came up, and with his usual impetuosity, heedless of ceremonial pollution, and of every consideration but his love and his astonishment, plunged in at once. Then followed John, and while they were there, they saw in a moment what had occurred.

And now the scene shifts once more to the familiar shores of the Sea of Galilee. The disciples had toiled all night in fishing, but in vain. At early dawn there stood on the shore the figure of One whom they did not recognize. He called to them, ^'Children, have ye any meat?" They answered him, ''No," and he called to them again, "Cast the net on the right side of the ship, and ye shall find." They cast at once, and ''they were not able to draw the net for the multitude of fishes." Then we are told that John whispered to Peter, "It is the Lord." Instantly the warm-hearted Peter, his whole character coming out in the act, girds around him the fisher's coat and leaps into the sea, to swim across the hundred yards which separated him from Jesus, and casts himself, all wet from the waves, before his Master's feet. John was the first to perceive Christ, but Peter was the first to struggle to him. John's love was quickest to discern, but Peter's impulse was quickest to stir.

And here we must close with the history of the Peter of the Gospels. His character is a very marked one. We notice at once his natural sincerity and boldness; his vehemence and self-confidence; his liability to be hurried away by the tide of events and the current of prevailing feeling. His love to Jesus was genuine and sincere ; for with all his failings, Peter was no hypocrite ; but as Dr. McCosh says : ''His zeal is often unthinking and impetuous, and proceeds from a self-confident and self-righteous, rather than a humble and trustful, spirit of dependence on God; and it comes forth when it should be restrained, and fails when it should flow.'*

He stands out, however, as a born leader of men ; a man of boundless energy ; invaluable to every new movement ; an extremist, in the most emphatic sense of that term. Such are the men who head great reforms, and lead the way to better things.

2. "One of the two which heard John speak, and followed him, was Andrew, Simon Peter's brother." Thus is introduced the second apostle of this first group. The notices of Andrew are extremely rare, but nearly all of them exhibit him introducing others to Christ. Bede has given him the appropriate name of "Introductor to Christ." On almost every occasion where he appears at all, it is in the capacity of a missionary.

First, it is his own brother whom he brings. He ''first findeth his own brother Simon."

There are two kinds of people : those who go and do the thing, and those who stand and wonder why it was not done after some other fashion. Andrew can not keep the blessed discovery to himself. There is no postponement for a complete plan, or for times. He begins at the nearest point— "his own brother." As devout Jews they had often talked of the coming Messiah ; as companions in fishing on the Sea of Galilee they had often discussed the state of religion in their nation; and as brothers they had often revealed to each other the longing of their hearts after a brighter hope, a purer life. Andrew knew what a blessing it would be for Simon to know Jesus, and so he hastens to bring them together. His heart is full, and he does what he can.

We next meet with Andrew at the miraculous feeding of the five thousand. When Jesus said unto Philip, ''Whence shall we buy bread, that these may eat?" Philip answered him, ''Two hundred pennyworth of bread is not sufficient for them, that every one of them may take a little." But Andrew said unto Jesus, "There is a lad here, which hath five barley loaves, and two small fishes: but what are they among so many?" Philip's answer betrays his impatience with the apparent unreasonableness of the question. But as F. W. Macdonald says : "Andrew's reply was a great advance on Philip's. From Philip's nonexistent two hundred pennyworth to Andrew's actual five loaves is certainly to make progress. It is moving out of the negative into the positive, out of the region in which our cynicism and despair so often tarry, into the region of practical endeavor." That is the spirit of every true pioneer, that sees the possibilities of things and ventures. "Philip is wilHng to begin if he has a grand start ; Andrew is willing to begin with a small capital."