"G.o.d IS NO RESPECTER OF PERSONS"
"And Cornelius said, Four days ago I was fasting until this hour; and at the ninth hour I prayed in my house, and, behold, a man stood before me in bright clothing, 31. And said, Cornelius, thy prayer is heard, and thine alms are had in remembrance in the sight of G.o.d. 32. Send therefore to Joppa, and call hither Simon, whose surname is Peter; he is lodged in the house of one Simon a tanner by the sea-side: who, when he cometh, shall speak unto thee. 83. Immediately therefore I sent to thee; and thou hast well done that thou art come. Now therefore are we all here present before G.o.d, to hear all things that art commanded thee of G.o.d. 34. Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that G.o.d is no respecter of persons: 35. But in every nation he that feareth Him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with Him.
35. The word which G.o.d sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ: (He is Lord of all:) 37. That word, I say, ye know, which was published throughout all Judaea, and began from Galilee, after the baptism which John preached; 38. How G.o.d anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for G.o.d was with Him. 39. And we are witnesses of all things which He did both in the land of the Jews, and in Jerusalem; whom they slew and hanged on a tree: 40. Him G.o.d raised up the third day, and shewed Him openly; 41.
Not to all the people, but unto witnesses chosen before of G.o.d, even to us, who did eat and drink with Him after He rose from the dead. 42. And He commanded us to preach unto the people, and to testify that it is He which was ordained of G.o.d to be the Judge of quick and dead. 43. To Him give all the prophets witness, that through His Name whosoever believeth in Him shall receive remission of sins. 44. While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word."--ACTS x. 30-44.
This pa.s.sage falls into three parts: Cornelius"s explanation, Peter"s sermon, and the descent of the Spirit on the new converts. The last is the most important, and yet is told most briefly. We may surely recognise the influence of Peter"s personal reminiscences in the scale of the narrative, and may remember that Luke and Mark were thrown together in later days.
I. Cornelius repeats what his messengers had already told Peter, but in fuller detail. He tells how he was occupied when the angel appeared. He was keeping the Jewish hour of prayer, and the fact that the vision came to him as he prayed had attested to him its heavenly origin. If we would see angels, the most likely place to behold them is in the secret place of prayer. He tells, too, that the command to send for Peter was a consequence of G.o.d"s remembrance of his prayer ("therefore," verse 32). His prayers and alms showed that he was "of the light," and therefore he was directed to what would yield further light.
The command to send for Peter is noteworthy in two respects. It was, first, a test of humility and obedience. Cornelius, as a Roman officer, would be tempted to feel the usual contempt for one of the subject race, and, unless his eagerness to know more of G.o.d"s will overbore his pride, to kick at the idea of sending to beg the favour of the presence and instruction of a Jew, and of one, too, who could find no better quarters than a tanner"s house. The angel"s voice commanded, but it did not compel. Cornelius bore the test, and neither waived aside the vision as a hallucination to which it was absurd for a practical man to attend, nor recoiled from the lowliness of the proposed teacher. He pocketed official and racial loftiness, and, as he emphasises, "forthwith" despatched his message. It was as if an English official in the Punjab had been sent to a Sikh "Guru" for teaching.
The other remarkable point about the command is that Philip was probably in Caesarea at the time. Why should Peter have been brought, then, by two visions and two long journeys? The subsequent history explains why. For the storm of criticism in the Jerusalem church provoked by Cornelius"s baptism would have raged with tenfold fury if so revolutionary an act had been done by any less authoritative person than the leader of the Apostles. The Lord would stamp His own approval on the deed which marked so great an expansion of the Church, and therefore He makes the first of the Apostles His agent, and that by a double vision.
"Thou hast well done that thou art come,"--a courteous welcome, with just a trace of the doubt which had occupied Cornelius during the "four days," whether this unknown Jew would obey so strange an invitation.
Courtesy and preparedness to receive the unknown message beautifully blend in Cornelius"s closing words, which do not directly ask Peter to speak, but declare the auditors" eagerness to hear, as well as their confidence that what he says will be G.o.d"s voice.
A variant reading in verse 33 gives "in thy sight" for "in the sight of G.o.d," and has much to recommend it. But in any case we have here the right att.i.tude for us all in the presence of the uttered will and mind of G.o.d. Where such open-eared and open-hearted preparedness marks the listeners, feebler teachers than Peter will win converts. The reason why much earnest Christian teaching is vain is the indifference and non-expectant att.i.tude of the hearers, who are not hearkeners. Seed thrown on the wayside is picked up by the birds.
II. Peter"s sermon is, on the whole, much like his other addresses which are abundantly reported in the early part of the Acts. The great business of the preachers then was to tell the history of Jesus.
Christianity is, first, a recital of historical events, from which, no doubt, principles are deduced, and which necessarily lead on to doctrines; but the facts are first.
But the familiar story is told to Cornelius with some variation of tone. And it is prefaced by a great word, which crystallises the large truth that had sprung into consciousness and startling power in Peter, as the result of his own and Cornelius"s experience. He had not previously thought of G.o.d as "a respecter of persons," but the conviction that He was not had never blazed with such sun-clearness before him as it did now. Jewish narrowness had, unconsciously to himself, somewhat clouded it; but these four days had burned in on him, as if it were a new truth, that "in every nation" there may be men accepted of G.o.d, because they "fear Him and work righteousness."
That great saying is twisted from its right meaning when it is interpreted as discouraging the efforts of Christians to carry the Gospel to the heathen; for, if the "light of nature" is sufficient, what was Peter sent to Caesarea for? But it is no less maltreated when evangelical Christians fail to grasp its world-wide significance, or doubt that in lands where Christ"s name has not been proclaimed there are souls groping for the light, and seeking to obey the law written on their hearts. That there are such, and that such are "accepted of Him,"
and led by His own ways to the fuller light, is obviously taught in these words, and should be a welcome thought to us all.
The tangled utterances which immediately follow, sound as if speech staggered under the weight of the thoughts opening before the speaker.
Whatever difficulty attends the construction, the intention is clear,--to contrast the limited scope of the message, as confined to the children of Israel, with its universal destination as now made clear. The statement which in the Authorised and Revised Versions is thrown into a parenthesis is really the very centre of the Apostle"s thought. Jesus, who has. .h.i.therto been preached to Israel, is "Lord of all," and the message concerning Him is now to be proclaimed, not in vague outline and at second hand, as it had hitherto reached Cornelius, but in full detail, and as a message in which he was concerned.
Contrast the beginning and the ending of the discourse,--"the word sent unto the children of Israel" and "every one that believeth on Him shall receive remission of sins." A remarkable variation in the text is suggested by Bla.s.s in his striking commentary, who would omit "Lord"
and read, "The word which He sent to the children of Israel, bringing the good tidings of peace through Jesus Christ,--this [word] belongs to all." That reading does away with the chief difficulties, and brings out clearly the thought which is more obscurely expressed in a contorted sentence by the present reading.
The subsequent _resume_ of the life of Jesus is substantially the same as is found in Peter"s other sermons. But we may note that the highest conceptions of our Lord"s nature are not stated. It is hard to suppose that Peter after Pentecost had not the same conviction as burned in his confession, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living G.o.d." But in these early discourses neither the Divinity and Incarnation nor the atoning sacrifice of Jesus is set forth. He is the Christ, "anointed with the Holy Ghost and with power." G.o.d is with Him (Nicodemus had got as far as that). He is "ordained of G.o.d to be the judge of quick and dead."
We note, too, that His teaching is not touched upon, nor any of the profounder aspects of His work as the Revealer of G.o.d, but His beneficence and miraculous deliverances of devil-ridden men. His death is declared, but without any of the accusations of His murderers, which, like lance-thrusts, "p.r.i.c.ked" Jewish hearers. Nor is the efficacy of that death as the sacrifice for the world"s sin touched upon, but it is simply told as a fact, and set in contrast with the Resurrection. These were the plain facts which had first to be accepted.
The only way of establishing facts is by evidence of eye-witnesses. So Peter twice (verses 39, 41) adduces his own and his colleagues"
evidence. But the facts are not yet a gospel, unless they are further explained as well as established. Did such things happen? The answer is, "We saw them." What did they mean? The answer begins by adducing the "witness" of the Apostles to a different order of truths, which requires a different sort of witness. Jesus had bidden them "testify"
that He is to be Judge of living and dead; that is, of all mankind.
Their witness to that can only rest on His word.
Nor is that all. There is yet another body of "witnesses" to yet another cla.s.s of truths. "All the prophets" bear witness to the great truth which makes the biography of the Man the gospel for all men,--that the deepest want of all men is satisfied through the name which Peter ever rang out as all-powerful to heal and bless. The forgiveness of sins through the manifested character and work of Jesus Christ is given on condition of faith to any and every one who believes, be he Jew or Gentile, Galilean fisherman or Roman centurion.
Cornelius may have known little of the prophets, but he knew the burden of sin. He did not know all that we know of Jesus, and of the way in which forgiveness is connected with His work, but he did know now that it was connected, and that this Jesus was risen from the dead, and was to be the Judge. His faith went out to that Saviour, and as he heard he believed.
III. Therefore the great gift, attesting the divine acceptance of him and the rest of the hearers, came at once. There had been no confession of their faith, much less had there been baptism, or laying on of Apostolic hands. The sole qualification and condition for the reception of the Spirit which John lays down in his Gospel when he speaks of the "Spirit, which they that believe on Him should receive," was present here, and it was enough. Peter and his brethren might have hesitated about baptizing an uncirc.u.mcised believer. The Lord of the Church showed Peter that He did not hesitate.
So, like a true disciple, Peter followed Christ"s lead, and though "they of the circ.u.mcision" were struck with amazement, he said to himself, "Who am I, that I should withstand G.o.d?" and opened his heart to welcome these new converts as possessors of "like precious faith" as was demonstrated by their possession of the same Spirit. Would that Peter"s willingness to recognise all who manifest the Spirit of Christ, whatever their relation to ecclesiastical regulations, had continued the law and practice of the Church!
PETER"S APOLOGIA
"And the apostles and brethren that were in Judaea heard that the Gentiles had also received the word of G.o.d. 2. And when Peter was come up to Jerusalem, they that were of the circ.u.mcision contended with him, 3. Saying, Thou wentest in to men uncirc.u.mcised, and didst eat with them. 4. But Peter rehea.r.s.ed the matter from the beginning, and expounded it by order unto them, saying, 5. I was in the city of Joppa praying: and in a trance I saw a vision, A certain vessel descend, as it had been a great sheet, let down from heaven by four corners; and it came even to me: 6. Upon the which when I had fastened mine eyes, I considered, and saw fourfooted beasts of the earth, and wild beasts, and creeping things, and fowls of the air. 7. And I heard a voice saying unto me, Arise, Peter; slay, and eat. 8. But I said, Not so, Lord: for nothing common or unclean hath at any time entered into my mouth. 9. But the voice answered me again from heaven, What G.o.d hath cleansed, that call not thou common. 10. And this was done three times: and all were drawn up again into heaven. 11. And, behold, immediately there were three men already come unto the house where I was, sent from Caesarea unto me. 12. And the Spirit bade me go with them, nothing doubting. Moreover these six brethren accompanied me, and we entered into the man"s house: 13. And he shewed us how he had seen an angel in his house, which stood and said unto him, Send men to Joppa, and call for Simon, whose surname is Peter; 14. Who shall tell thee words, whereby thou and all thy house shall be saved. 15. And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning. 16. Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that He said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost. 17.
Forasmuch then as G.o.d gave them the like gift as He did unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand G.o.d? 18. When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified G.o.d, saying, Then hath G.o.d also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life."--ACTS xi. 1-18.
Peter"s action in regard to Cornelius precipitated a controversy which was bound to come if the Church was to be anything more than a Jewish sect. It brought to light the first tendency to form a party in the Church. "They... of the circ.u.mcision" were probably "certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed," and were especially zealous for all the separating prescriptions of the ceremonial law. They were scarcely a party as yet, but the little rift was destined to grow, and they became Paul"s bitterest opponents through all his life, d.o.g.g.i.ng him with calumnies and counterworking his toil. It is a black day for a Church when differences of opinion lead to the formation of cliques.
Zeal for truth is sadly apt to enlist spite, malice, and blindness to a manifest work of G.o.d, as its allies.
Poor Peter, no doubt, expected that the brethren would rejoice with him in the extension of the Gospel to "the Gentiles," but his reception in Jerusalem was very unlike his hopes. The critics did not venture to cavil at his preaching to Gentiles. Probably none of them had any objection to such being welcomed into the Church, for they can scarcely have wished to make the door into it narrower than that into the synagogue, but they insisted that there was no way in but through the synagogue. By all means, said they, let Gentiles come, but they must first become Jews, by submitting to circ.u.mcision and living as Jews do.
Thus they did not attack Peter for preaching to the Roman centurion and his men, but for eating with them. That eating not only was a breach of the law, but it implied the reception of Cornelius and his company into the household of G.o.d, and so destroyed the whole fabric of Jewish exclusiveness. We condemn such narrowness, but do many of us not practise it in other forms? Wherever Christians demand adoption of external usages, over and above exercise of penitent faith, as a condition of brotherly recognition, they are walking in the steps of them "of the circ.u.mcision."
Peter"s answer to the critics is the true answer to all similar hedging up of the Church, for he contents himself with showing that he was only following G.o.d"s action in every step of the way which he took, and that G.o.d, by the gift of the divine Spirit, had shown that He had taken these uncirc.u.mcised men into His fellowship, before Peter dared to "eat with them." He points to four facts which show G.o.d"s hand in the matter, and thinks that he has done enough to vindicate himself thereby. The first is his vision on the housetop. He tells that he was praying when it came, and what G.o.d shows to a praying spirit is not likely to mislead. He tells that he was "in a trance,"--a condition in which prophets had of old received their commands. That again was a guarantee for the divine origin of the vision in the eyes of every Jew, though nowadays it is taken by anti-supernaturalists as a demonstration of its morbidness and unreliableness. He tells of his reluctance to obey the command to "kill and eat." A flash of the old brusque spirit impelled his flat refusal, "Not so, Lord!" and his daring to argue with his Lord still, as he had done with Him on earth. He tells of the interpreting and revolutionary word, evoked by his audacious objection, and then he tells how "this was done thrice," so that there could be no mistake in his remembrance of it, and then that the whole was drawn up into heaven,--a sign that the purpose of the vision was accomplished when that word was spoken. What, then, was the meaning of it?
Clearly it swept away at once the legal distinction of clean and unclean meats, and of it, too, may be spoken what Mark, Peter"s mouthpiece, writes of earthly words of Christ"s: "This He said, making all meats clean." But with the sweeping away of that distinction much else goes, for it necessarily involves the abrogation of the whole separating ordinances of the law, and of the distinction between clean and unclean persons. Its wider application was not seen at the moment, but it flashed on him, no doubt, when face to face with Cornelius. G.o.d had cleansed him, in that his prayers had "gone up for a memorial before G.o.d," and so Peter saw that "in every nation," and not among Jews only, there might be men cleansed by G.o.d. What was true of Cornelius must be true of many others. So the whole distinction between Jew and Gentile was cut up by the roots. Little did Peter know the width of the principle revealed to him then, as all of us know but little of the full application of many truths which we believe. But he obeyed so much of the command as he understood, and more of it gradually dawned on his mind, as will always be the case if we obey what we know.
The second fact was the coincident arrival of the messengers and the distinct command to accompany them. Peter could distinguish quite a.s.suredly his own thoughts from divine instructions, as his account of the dialogue in the trance shows. How he distinguished is not told; that he distinguished is. The coincidence in time clearly pointed to one divine hand working at both ends of the line,--Caesarea and Joppa.
It interpreted the vision which had "much perplexed" Peter as to what it "might mean." But he was not left to interpret it by his own pondering. The Spirit spoke authoritatively, and the whole force of his justification of himself depends on the fact that he knew that the impulse which made him set out to Caesarea was not his own. If the reading of the Revised Version is adopted in verse 12, "making no distinction," the command plainly referred to the vision, and showed Peter that he was to make no distinction of "clean and unclean" in his intercourse with these Gentiles.
The third fact is the vision to Cornelius, of which he was told on arriving. The two visions fitted into each other, confirmed each other, interpreted each other. We may estimate the greatness of the step in the development of the Church which the admission of Cornelius into it made, and the obstacles on both sides, by the fact that both visions were needed to bring these two men together. Peter would never have dreamed of going with the messengers if he had not had his narrowness beaten out of him on the housetop, and Cornelius would never have dreamed of sending to Joppa if he had not seen the angel. The cleft between Jew and Gentile was so wide that G.o.d"s hand had to be applied on both sides to press the separated parts together. He had plainly done it, and that was Peter"s defence.
The fourth fact is the gift of the Spirit to these Gentiles. That is the crown of Peter"s vindication, and his question, "Who was I, that I could withstand G.o.d?" might be profitably pondered and applied by those whose ecclesiastical theories oblige them to deny the "orders" and the "validity of the sacraments" and the very name of a Church, to bodies of Christians who do not conform to their polity. If G.o.d, by the gift of His Spirit manifest in its fruits, owns them, they have the true "notes of the Church," and "they of the circ.u.mcision" who recoil from recognising them do themselves more harm thereby than they inflict on these. "As many as are led by the Spirit of G.o.d, these are the sons of G.o.d," even though some brother may be "angry" that the Father welcomes them.
THE FIRST PREACHING AT ANTIOCH
"And some of them were men of Cyprus and Cyrene, which, when they ware come to Antioch, spake unto the Grecians, preaching the Lord Jesus. 21.
And the hand of the Lord was with them: and a great number believed, and turned unto the Lord."--ACTS xi. 20, 21.
Thus simply does the historian tell one of the greatest events in the history of the Church. How great it was will appear if we observe that the weight of authority among critics and commentators sees here an extension of the message of salvation to Greeks, that is, to pure heathens, and not a mere preaching to h.e.l.lenists, that is, to Greek-speaking Jews born outside Palestine.
If that be correct, this was a great stride forward in the development of the Church. It needed a vision to overcome the scruples of Peter, and impel him to the bold innovation of preaching to Cornelius and his household, and, as we know, his doing so gave grave offence to some of his brethren in Jerusalem. But in the case before us, some Cypriote and African Jews--men of no note in the Church, whose very names have perished, with no official among them, with no vision nor command to impel them, with no precedent to encourage them, with nothing but the truth in their minds and the impulses of Christ"s love in their hearts--solve the problem of the extension of Christ"s message to the heathen, and, quite unconscious of the greatness of their act, do the thing about the propriety of which there had been such serious question in Jerusalem.
This boldness becomes even more remarkable if we notice that the incident of our text may have taken place before Peter"s visit to Cornelius. The verse before our text, "They which were scattered abroad upon the persecution that arose about Stephen travelled, ... preaching the word to none but unto the Jews only," is almost a _verbatim_ repet.i.tion of words in an earlier chapter, and evidently suggests that the writer is returning to that point of time, in order to take up another thread of his narrative contemporaneous with those already pursued. If so, three distinct lines of expansion appear to have started from the dispersion of the Jerusalem church in the persecution--namely, Philip"s mission to Samaria, Peter"s to Cornelius, and this work in Antioch. Whether prior in time or no, the preaching in the latter city was plainly quite independent of the other two. It is further noteworthy that this, the effort of a handful of unnamed men, was the true "leader"--the shoot that grew. Philip"s work, and Peter"s so far as we know, were side branches, which came to little; this led on to a church at Antioch, and so to Paul"s missionary work, and all that came of that.
The incident naturally suggests some thoughts bearing on the general subject of Christian work, which we now briefly present.
I. Notice the spontaneous impulse which these men obeyed.
Persecution drove the members of the Church apart, and, as a matter of course, wherever they went they took their faith with them, and, as a matter of course, spoke about it. The coals were scattered from the hearth in Jerusalem by the armed heel of violence. That did not put the fire out, but only spread it, for wherever they were flung they kindled a blaze. These men had no special injunction "to preach the Lord Jesus." They do not seem to have adopted this line of action deliberately, or of set purpose. "They believed, and therefore spoke."
A spontaneous impulse, and nothing more, leads them on. They find themselves rejoicing in a great Saviour-Friend. They see all around them men who need Him, and that is enough. They obey the promptings of the voice within, and lay the foundations of the first Gentile Church.
Such a spontaneous impulse is ever the natural result of our own personal possession of Christ. In regard to worldly good the instinct, except when overcome by higher motives, is to keep the treasure to oneself. But even in the natural sphere there are possessions which to have is to long to impart, such as truth and knowledge. And in the spiritual sphere, it is emphatically the case that real possession is always accompanied by a longing to impart. The old prophet spoke a universal truth when he said: "Thy word was as a fire shut up in my bones, and I was weary with forbearing, and I could not stay." If we have found Christ for ourselves, we shall undoubtedly wish to speak forth our knowledge of His love. Convictions which are deep demand expression. Emotion which is strong needs utterance. If our hearts have any fervour of love to Christ in them, it will be as natural to tell it forth, as tears are to sorrow or smiles to happiness. True, there is a reticence in profound feeling, and sometimes the deepest love can only "love and be silent," and there is a just suspicion of loud or vehement protestations of Christian emotion, as of any emotion. But for all that, it remains true that a heart warmed with the love of Christ needs to express its love, and will give it forth, as certainly as light must radiate from its centre, or heat from a fire.
Then, true kindliness of heart creates the same impulse. We cannot truly possess the treasure for ourselves without pity for those who have it not. Surely there is no stranger contradiction than that Christian men and women can be content to keep Christ as if He were their special property, and have their spirits untouched into any likeness of His divine pity for the mult.i.tudes who were as "sheep having no shepherd." What kind of Christians must they be who think of Christ as "a Saviour for me," and take no care to set Him forth as "a Saviour for you"? What should we think of men in a shipwreck who were content to get into the lifeboat, and let everybody else drown? What should we think of people in a famine feasting sumptuously on their private stores, whilst women were boiling their children for a meal and men fighting with dogs for garbage on the dunghills? "He that withholdeth bread, the people shall curse him." What of him who withholds the Bread of Life, and all the while claims to be a follower of the Christ, who gave His flesh for the life of the world?
Further, loyalty to Christ creates the same impulse. If we are true to our Lord, we shall feel that we cannot but speak up and out for Him, and that all the more where His name is unloved and unhonoured. He has left His good fame very much in our hands, and the very same impulse which hurries words to our lips when we hear the name of an absent friend calumniated should make us speak for Him. He is a doubtfully loyal subject who, if he lives among rebels, is afraid to show his colours. He is already a coward, and is on the way to be a traitor. Our Master has made us His witnesses. He has placed in our hands, as a sacred deposit, the honour of His name. He has entrusted to us, as His selectest sign of confidence, the carrying out of the purposes for which on earth His blood was shed, on which in heaven His heart is set.