One Body in Christ
We, being many, are one body IN Christ.” — Pwom. xii. 5. yANY folds, “one flock” (John x. 16): — not, as rendered in our English version, “one fold “: — many branches, one tree: manystones, one temple: many regiments, one army: many planets, one system: many flowers, one garden: many members, one body.
Such is the true ideal of the Christian Church. The Apostle’s illustration or metaphor, in our mottoverse, is from the last of these; the human body, with its different members; each member occupying its appropriate place and fulfilling its appointed function in the system. His object is to inculcate, that, diversity of offices and gifts among Christians, so far from being inconsistent with this union, is necessary to its perfection and usefulness. “The eye cannot say unto the hand, I have no need of thee: nor again the head to the feet, I have no need of you!” (i Cor. xii. 21). Yet, each and all the members of this spiritual frame-
‘Greek, fiia Troifiyrj, not fiia avXrj.
work are absolutely powerless and effete, but for the divine life that throbs and pulsates through every vein: a corporate union with the living Head. It is “one body IN Christ.” God hath given Him “to be the Head over all things to the Church, which is His body, the fulness of Him that filleth all in all” (Eph. i.
22, 23).
The same expressive image is perhaps more fully expanded in an afterpart of this same epistle. “The Head, even Christ, from whom the whole body, fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love” (iv. 15,16). Or yet again, in his Epistle to the Colossians, during the same period of his later life — (showing that the. favourite metaphor had taken deep hold of the mind of the writer) — “The Head, from which all the body by joints and bands having nourishment ministered, and knit together, increaseth with the increase of God” (Col. ii. 1 9).
To a certain extent, what the Apostle had averred regarding the gifts and graces of individual members, holds true regarding the organization of churches. Multiform in every age have been the projects and aspirations after “Church union;” identity of Church rule and symbolism: — many, if not most of which aspirations, it is to be feared are alike false in theory, and unattainable, if not undesirable, in practice. All honour indeed to every faithful and conscientious attempt to diminish painful and unworthy antagonisms between sect and sect; and shame on those who, by prating words, do their best to promote or perpetuate schisms which all who love Christ’s Name must deplore. At the same time, experience has amply shown the impracticability and worthlessness of any mere external uniformity — that little reliance can be placed on man-made devices to secure such outward unity, the demolition of mere outer lines of distinction. Synodical conferences. Evangelical alliances, and Church congresses, may serve successfully to lop the branches of the Ecclesiastical forest into temporary and artificial sameness; but, as in Nature, they will, sooner or later, resent the attempt at identity, — and assert the free outgrowth of varying shape and form. In truth, the divine idea and ideal seems rather to be an echo of Nature’s parable. It seems to discountenance the fusing of principles into one stereotyped, unchanging system. It is “Mani, members one hod]/.” Co-operation, without necessarily incorporation; union, without necessarily communion; Zechariah’s symbolic Lamp (Zech. iv. 2, 3) “all of gold” fed from the same reservoir, — the oil distilled from the same “two olive-trees;” — but seven- branched: — the noblest and grandest illustration of the oft-quoted aphorism — “unity in diversity, and diversity in unity.” One candlestick, but “seven lamps thereon.” One flock certainly; but not the absorption of all folds into one. Within limits that were expedient and possible, no one was doubtless a more thorough lover and advocate of union than the Great Apostle. Note how he speaks of the most marvellous example he himself lived to see consummated, and in the completion of which he was the most honoured instrument. It was that of two elements whose amalgamation seemed so incredible and impossible, that he speaks of it as “the mystery” (Eph. iii. 3): — “That the Gentiles should be fellow-heirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the Gospel.” Hear his terse and vivid description of this joint participation of Jew and Gentile in the privileges of the new faith. The words he employs are remarkable: denoting so very prolonged and so very wide a separation; but now brought so very near IN Christ. “Co-heirs” — “co-incorporated,” “co-partakers.” Words, as has been suggested, which appear coined by himself in order to deepen and intensify his meaning.^ Let them remain, as containing a vivid picture of the true spiritual union he would seek to have realised, at all events among the individual members of Christ’s Church, purchased with His blood: — the oneness of all who love the Lord Jesus in sincerity, ’ holding the Head ‘: — “fellow-partakers,” as he expresses it (rising to the climax), “of his promise in Christ by the Gospel.” “Salute,” says he, in words of noble catholicity, “every saint IN Christ Jesus” (Phil. iv. 21). For, after all, the grand, and superlatively momentous question is — -
The cvv is thrice repeated, avyKkytpovbiia cixraua, ffviifiiToxa. See Dr. Eadie on Ephesians, pp. 207-209.
not that of Church System, and Church life, and partycolours, but of personal relation to Him; — the consciousness of this incorporation which makes us individually participators in the life of God’s dear Son. Let us listen, from the Eedemption-Song of the Old Testament, to what has been called “the bleat of Messiah’s true sheep:” It is a longing after no denominational pasture — no artificial enclosure or fold; but for fellowship with the Great, the Divine Shepherd Himself: — “Tell me, 0 Thou whom my soul loveth, where Thou feedest, where Thou makest Thy flock to rest at noon; for why should I be as one that turneth aside by the flocks of Thy companions?” (Sol. Song i. 7). Or, returning to our Apostle, let us listen, under a different metaphor, to the words of this great ‘Athlete ’ as he runs the Christian race. His first concern is ‘Am I in Christ?” Have I secured in Him my high calling? ‘And then (but not till then) he proclaims, as a sequel to that individvM experience, what may be called his theory of Church union, and one in its results eminently alike desirable and practicable. The whole passage is worth quoting and pondering: “I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus. Let its therefore, as many as be perfect, be thus minded; and if in anything ye be otherwise minded, God shall reveal even this unto you. Nevertheless, whereto we have already attained, let us walk by the same rule, let us mind the same thing” (Phil, iii. 14, 15, 16). “I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God IN Christ Jesus!” All outward and accidental Church life is nothing to this. John lay in his Master’s bosom. Peter saw his Master’s glory on the Mount. But the humblest Christians who can claim living union and communion with their divine Lord, have, in truth, if not loftier at least surer credentials of their high calling. Judas enjoyed an external Church fellowship and Church privilege which fell to the lot only of a select few. Alas! it was of no avail to him. Whereas, the lowliest martyr of the catacombs who had never seen Christ’s face in the flesh, but on the tablet of whose forgotten grave ‘In Christo ’ could be inscribed by loving faithful hands, was a true member of “the Holy Church throughout all the world.”
Thanks be to God, there is a glorious inner, real unity dominating all artificial barriers: a sect-mark not of man’s device: God’s own unmistakable symbolism of holiness of character. There is a golden chain of true Apostolic succession, linking, in indissoluble bonds, men of every varying age and varying ecclesiastical party, wio own the distinguishing badge of one of Paul’s most loved companions — “Tychicus, a faithful minister in the Lord:” — Puritanism and Anglicanism, Priest and Presbyter, Prelacy and Dissent; names, and times, and schools, as diverse as those of Ambrose and Augustine, Pascal and Fenelon, Luther and Calvin, Martyn and Pattison, Knox and Chalmers. They are worshippers in a great invisible and indivisible Temple, with this as its superscription — “One lodij IN Christ.” “Ye are all one in Christ Jesus.” Party and conventional distinctions disappear before the words of the Master — “All Mine are Thine, and Thine are Mine; and I am glorified in them” (John xvii. lo). Well has the object and divine mission of the true Church of God on earth been defined — “to destroy evil, and to assimilate Humanity to God: to penetrate and purify the world, and as salt, preserve it from corruption. It has an existence continuous throughout the ages; continuous however, not on the principles of hereditary succession or of human election, as in an ordinary corporation, but on the principle of spiritual similarity of character ( I John i. 3). The Apostle Paul asserted this spiritual succession when he said that the seed of Abraham were to be reckoned, not as his lineal descendants, but as inheritors of his faith. And Christ, too, meant the same, when He told the Jews that out of the stones before Him God could raise up children unto Abraham.”
How striking is the same Apostle’s address, contained in the opening words of his earliest inspired Epistle: — “Unto the Church of the Thessalonians which is... * m the Lord Jesus Christ’” (ver. i). y Then mark his introductory salutation. How perfect a definition of the House of God below — a body of true
Rev. F. W. Robertson on Corinthians, pp. 16, 17.
58 IN CHRISrO.
believers: — “Remembering without ceasing your work of faith, and labour of love, and patience of hope in OUR Lord Jesus Christ, in the sight of God and our Father” (i Thess. i. 3). Here we have, not the poor unity of opinion, or formula, or ritual, but of hope, and affection, and common interest. “It is between Christ and His Church,” says old Thomas Brooks, “as between two lute strings; no sooner is one struck than the other trembles.” There is a mutual glow and thrill of sympathy between heart and heart: — “And whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it; or one member be honoured, all the members rejoice with it. Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular” (i Cor. xii. 26, 27). “For ye are all the children of God by faith IN Christ Jesus. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus” (Gal. iii. 26-28).
The day at least is coming, when the impossibility of the Church militant will become the certainty and triumph of the Church triumphant — “complete IN Him.” In the words of a deceased scholar, as devout as he was learned — “Under Jesus, as universal Regent, harmony will be restored to the universe. The anthem to God and the Lamb begins with saints, is taken up by angels, and re-echoed by the wide creation” (Rev. V. 9-14). Then indeed will the Apostle’s ardent longings regarding true brotherhood be gloriously and literally realised: — “That we may present every one perfect IN Christ Jesus” (Col. i. 28). Then will the ideal of a Greater than Paul be reached: for the prayer of the Divine Intercessor Himself will be fulfilled — “That they all may be one; as Thou, Father, art in Me, and I in Thee, that they also may be one in us” (John xvii. 21).
IN HOC VINCES
( 6o )