LESSON XXIV.

Previous

(Scripture Reading Exercise.)

THE CHRISTIAN INSTITUTIONS.

ANALYSIS.

REFERENCES.

I. Ordinances:

1. Baptism.

2. Confirmation.

3. Eucharist.[A]

Heb. vi:1[B]; Acts ii:37-38. Acts viii:4-20. Note 1 and 2.

Matt, xxviii:19. Mark xvi:16. John iii:3-5. Heb. vi:2; II Cor. iii:6 cf. Acts xix:6; II Tim. i:6; Acts viii:15-20. Notes 3, 4.

Matt, xxvi:26-28. Mark xvi:22-24. Luke xxii:19, 20. John xiii. I Cor. xi. 23-25. Note 5, 6.

[Footnote A: Eucharist. The Lord's Supper, a solemn rite commemorating the dying of Christ for the salvation of men; the holy sacrament; the communion of the body and blood of Christ. (Funk & Wagnall Diet.)]

[Footnote B: On all the above subdivisions the Bible Dictionaries, Kitto's Biblical Literature, Smith's New Testament History, etc., can be consulted to advantage, though it should always be remembered that the utterances of these authorities are to be carefully weighed.]

NOTES.

1. The Baptism of John and Christian Baptism: "The relation of the baptism of John to the Christian baptism gave rise to a sharp controversy in the sixteenth century. Zwingle and Calvin were in favor of the essential equality of the two; while Luther, Melanchthon, and the Catholic church (Concil. Trent. Sess. vii), maintained the contrary. The only difference Calvin allowed was, that John baptized in the name of the future Messiah, while the apostles baptized in that of the Messiah already come. But this difference could be of little moment; the less so, since a step towards the manifestation of the Messiah was already made in the appearance of John himself (comp. John i. 31). On the other hand, Calvin considers the most important point of equality between the two to exist in the fact, that both include repentance and pardon of sin in the name of Christ." (Kitto's Cyclopaedia of Biblical Literature, p. 283.) Kitto's whole article may be studied with profit.

The fact is that there was no difference between the baptism administered by John and Christian baptism, except, as allowed by Calvin, according to the above; one baptized in the name of a future Messiah, and the other in the name of one already come. But general baptism was for the same purpose in all dispensations—it was Christian baptism—i. e. baptism for the remission of sins—baptism to which the atonement of the Christ gave efficacy whether administered in view of his anticipated coming or in realization of the fact of his having come and completed his work of atonement.

2. Baptism of the Disciples of Jesus: "Whether our Lord ever baptized has been doubted. The only passage which may distinctly bear on the question is John iv. l, 2, where it is said "that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John, though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples." We necessarily infer from it, that, as soon as our Lord began his ministry, and gathered to Him a company of disciples, He, like John the Baptist, admitted into that company by the administration of baptism. Normally, however, to say the least of it, the administration of baptism was by the hands of his disciples. Some suppose that the first-called disciples had all received baptism at the hands of John the Baptist, as must have pretty certainly been the case with Andrew (see John i. 35, 40); and that they were not again baptized with water after they joined the company of Christ. Others believe that Christ himself baptized some few of his earlier disciples, who were afterwards authorized to baptize the rest. But in any case the words above cited seem to show that the making of disciples and the baptizing of them went together; and that baptism was, even during our Lord's earthly ministry the formal mode of accepting his service and becoming attached to his company." (Smith's Bible Dictionary, p. 235.)

3. Confirmation: "The Laying on of Hands" was considered in the ancient church as the 'Supplement of Baptism.' 1. Imposition of hands is a natural form by which benediction has been expressed in all ages and among all people. It is the act of one superior either by age or spiritual position towards an inferior, and by its very form it appears to bestow some gift, or to manifest a desire that some gift is symbolically bestowed, as when guiltiness was thus transferred by the high-priest to the scape-goat from the congregation (Lev. xvi. 21); but, in general, the gift is of something good which God is supposed to bestow by the channel of the laying on of hands. Thus, in the Old Testament, Jacob accompanies his blessing to Ephraim and Manasseh with imposition of hands (Gen. xlviii. 14); Joshua is ordained in the room of Moses by imposition of hands (Num. xxvii. 18; Deut. xxxiv. 9); cures seem to have been wrought by the prophets by imposition of hands (2 K. v. ii); and the high priest, in giving his solemn benediction, stretched out his hands over the people (Lev. ix. 22). The same form was used by our Lord in blessing and occasionally in healing, and it was plainly regarded by the Jews as customary or befitting (Matt. xix. 13; Mark viii. 23, x. 16). One of the promises at the end of St. Mark's Gospel to Christ's followers is that they should cure the sick by laying on of hands (Mark xvi. 18); and accordingly we find that Saul received his sight (Acts ix. 17) and Publius's father was healed of his fever (Acts xxviii. 6) by imposition of hands. In the Acts of the Apostles the nature of the gift or blessing bestowed by Apostolic imposition of hands is made clearer. It is called the gift of the Holy Ghost (viii. 17, xix. 6) * * * By the time that the Epistle to the Hebrew was written we find that there existed a practice and doctrine of imposition of hands, which is pronounced by the writer of the Epistle to be one of the first principles and fundamentals of Christianity, which he enumerates in the following order: (1) The doctrine of Repentance; (2) of Faith; (3) of Baptism; (4) of Laying on of Hands; (5) of the Resurrection; (6) of Eternal Judgment (Heb. vi. 1, 2). Laying on of Hands in this passage can mean only one of three things—Ordination, Absolution, or that which we have already seen in the Acts to have been practiced by the Apostles, imposition of hands for the gift of the Holy Ghost on the baptized. The meaning of Ordination is excluded by the context. We have no proof of the existence of the habitual practice of Absolution at this period nor of its being accompanied by the laying on of hands. Everything points to that laying on of hands which, as we have seen, immediately succeeded baptism in the Apostolic age, and continued to do so in the ages immediately succeeding the Apostles. * * * The Fathers, says Hooker, "everywhere impute unto it that gift or grace of the Holy Ghost, not which maketh us first Christian men, but, when we are made such, assisteth us in all virtue, armeth us against temptation and sin. * * * The Fathers therefore, being thus persuaded, held confirmation as an ordinance Apostolic, always profitable in God's Church, although not always accompanied with equal largeness of those external effects which gave it countenance at the first." (Smith's Dictionary of the Bible, Vol. I, p. 242-244.)

4. The Time of Confirmation: "Originally Imposition of Hands followed immediately upon Baptism, so closely as to appear as part of the baptismal ceremony or a supplement to it. This is clearly stated by Tertullian (De Bapt. vii, viii), Cyril (Catech. Myst. iii. I), the author of the Apostolic Constitutions (vii. 43), and all early Christian writers." (Smith's Bible Dictionary, pp. 242, 3, 4.)

5. Eucharist: Paul's account of the establishment of this Christian institution is perhaps the earliest written and the most complete: "For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus the same night in which he was betrayed took bread; and when he had given thanks, he brake it, and said, take, eat: this is my body, which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. After the same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying, this cup is the new testament in my blood; this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me. For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come."

Comment on the Above: From Paul's description of the ordinance, it is clear that the broken bread was an emblem of Messiah's broken body; the wine an emblem of his blood, shed for sinful man; and his disciples were to eat the one and drink the other in remembrance of him until he should return; and by this ceremony show forth the Lord's death. It was designed as a memorial of Messiah's great Atonement for mankind, a token and witness unto the Father that the Son was always remembered. It was to be a sign that those partaking of it were willing to take upon them the name of Christ, to always remember him, and keep his commandments. In consideration of these things being observed, the saints were always to have the Spirit of the Lord to be with them. In this spirit and without great ceremony the sacrament was administered for some time in the early Christian church.

7. Prayer of Consecration Given to the Nephites: "The manner of the Elders and Priests administering the flesh and blood of Christ unto the church. And they administered it according to the commandments of Christ; wherefore we know the manner to be true; and the Elder or Priest did minister it. And they did kneel down with the church, and pray to the Father in the name of Christ saying, 'Oh God, the Eternal Father, we ask thee in the name of thy Son Jesus Christ, to bless and sanctify this bread to the souls of all those who partake of it, that they may eat in remembrance of the body of thy Son, and witness unto thee, O God, the Eternal Father, that they are willing to take upon them the name of thy Son, and always remember him, and keep his commandments which he hath given them, that he may always have his Spirit to be with them. Amen." (Moroni iv. 3.)

"The manner of administering the wine. Behold, they took the cup, and said, O God, the Eternal Father, we ask thee, in the name of thy Son Jesus Christ to bless and sanctify this wine to the souls of all those who drink of it, that they may do it in remembrance of the blood of thy Son, which was shed for them, that they may witness unto thee, O God, the Eternal Father, that they do always remember him, that they may have his Spirit to be with them. Amen." (Moroni v. 12.)

Comment: Of the above prayer I may say what Arch Deacon Paley has so well said of the Lord's Prayer: "For a succession of solemn thoughts, for fixing the attention upon a few great points, for suitableness, for sufficiency, for conciseness without obscurity, for the weight and real importance of its petitions"—this prayer so far as I am aware is without an equal excepting, perhaps, the Lord's prayer.

8. Eucharist in the Second Century. "When the Christians celebrated the Lord's supper, which they were accustomed to do chiefly on Sundays, they consecrated a part of the bread and wine of the oblations, by certain prayers pronounced by the president, the bishop of the congregation. The wine was mixed with water, and the bread was divided into small pieces. Portions of the consecrated bread and wine were commonly sent to the absent and the sick, in testimony of fraternal affection towards them. There is much evidence that this most holy rite was regarded as very necessary to the attainment of salvation." (Mosheim's Ecclesiastical History, p. 137.)

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           

Clyx.com


Top of Page
Top of Page