THE FIRST CHURCH AND PAUL.*

We are briefly to review a battle-field, on which was fought out one of the greatest conflicts of the world,- a battle-field where was determined one of the great onward steps of religious liberty. If one to-day should walk over the battle field of Gettysburg, and did not know something of the history that was enacted there apart from the monuments that have been raised in commemoration of it, he might not notice that any battle had ever been fought at all. Nature hastens to cover up the traces of human devastation. Some one, looking a little more carefully, might note here and there a trace of something that was not Nature's work, and might be able, by the power of his imagination, to call up something of the scenes of past years. If one journeys through certain parts of the world, in tropic regions more especially, he sees round him only scenes of peace,- a luxuriant vegetation, lofty trees, beautiful mountains, green to the summits, lifting themselves against the blue of a lovely sky, and the sunshine. bathing it all in a blessed calm. And, if he knew nothing of the history of the earth, the methods by which the world. has grown, he might think that this was all, that it had been so from the beginning. But, when he is able to read something of the meaning of the appearances of the surface of the earth, he would be able to call up a scene of devastation, of convulsion, and picture to himself a time when the whole surface of the earth was upheaved and trembling, when the inner fires were bursting forth and blighting the fair vegetation.

* Stenographically reported.

So, when one walks over this spiritual battle-field with only a superficial vision, he see nothing but peace. If he notices some unusual phrase or expression here or there, having been taught to read the New Testament not with a critical eye, but only for certain spiritual benefits supposed to be derived. from it, he will perhaps have only a passing wonder in his mind as to what this means, and then will go about his way. But, when he critically and carefully studies the New Testament, he will find indications all over its surface of a tremendous primeval upturning and overturning, the symptoms of a battle fought out, of victory won for human liberty, for the religious growth of mankind.

I wish to call your attention to a few of these superficial indications that appear in the New Testament, preliminary to taking you back to the scene itself, just to show you of what kind of conflict they are traces.

I read to you this morning, as our lesson, the fourth chapter of Paul's letter to the churches of Galatia. Unless you have had your attention called especially to this matter, I doubt if there is a single person in all this audience who did not wonder what it was all about. What did it mean? What is all this talk about the heir at one time being a bond-servant, though he was the heir of everything, of being treated like a servant? What about being under bondage to the rudiments of this world? What about this new spirit of sonship being sent forth to supersede that condition of bondage? What about their desire to come back to these weak and beggarly rudiments, that Paul seems to despise and protest against so vehemently? What about the observance of days and months and seasons and years? What about this having been under the law, and their desire to get back under it, and his protest against it? What about this allegory of his, in which he talks about being the son of a bond-woman or of a free woman, and compares Mount Sinai, in Arabia, to Hagar, the bond-woman of Abraham, the mother of them that have been in bondage from that day to this? And what about his protest at last, and his bidding them stand fast in the liberty that had been granted to them?

Let me call your attention to a few of the points.

Most of them are in this very epistle. There are traces in other parts of the New Testament that are quite as significant to one who carefully inquires as to their meaning.

In the first chapter of Galatians, sixth verse, Paul talks about certain people that had come to these churches of Galatia, bringing in a gospel which he denounces as no gospel at all, and calls upon them to reject. In the second chapter, fourth verse, he tells about certain persons coming down from somewhere to spy out their liberty, as though they wished to deprive them of it. Then in the sixth verse of the second chapter, referring to some persons supposed to occupy high position in the Church, he speaks of them with a touch of covert sarcasm as those who "were reputed to be somewhat." Three verses later in the same chapter, speaking of such notable men as Peter and James and John, again with underlying tones of sarcasm, he talks about certain ones "who seemed to be pillars," and yet with an air that tells you their authority is nothing to him. Again, in this same chapter, the eleventh and twelfth verses, he speaks in outright terms of condemnation of certain actions on the part of Peter. He says, "I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed." What had he done? Paul goes on to say. Peter came down to visit him in some of those churches that he had organized, and while there he joined in eating with the Gentiles; but, the minute that certain people from the Jerusalem First Church came down, he withdrew himself, and had nothing to do with Paul. He was afraid of his reputation on the part of the central church at home. Then in the first verse of the fifth chapter there is that grand bugle-call, "Stand fast, therefore, in the liberty with which the Christ has made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage."

There are one or two traces of the same thing in the First Epistle to the church in Corinth. He talks about certain persons coming to Corinth, and charging him with establishing a religious organization in his own name, to

be called by his own name, and that he was baptizing into his, the name of Paul, instead of into the name of Christ. And in one place, ninth chapter, first verse, he says, "Am I not an apostle?" which implies that somebody had been saying that he was no apostle, although he claimed to be one. He indignantly declares that he is an apostle, though not of the original twelve; and then, to confirm this claim, he goes on to detail at length, begging pardon for his boasting, the works of an apostle that he had wrought, how great things he had achieved, how many churches he had established, what persecutions he had gone through, and closes by saying that he had accomplished more than all of them put together. There must have been some deep underlying cause that led Paul to this apparently unseemly self-assertion.

One more trace of this I will mention, not by any means that this exhausts the number. That is the Book of James. That is supposed to have been written by James, the brother of Jesus; and it is anti-Pauline from beginning to end, as though it were a pamphlet launched directly at the head of the apostle. Paul had taught, and had become distinguished through the early Church for teaching, salvation by faith,not, mark you, as it is sometimes charged, salvation by mere intellectual belief, the acceptance of certain intellectual propositions, but something far deeper and grander than that. He had become well known as a champion of this doctrine of salvation by faith; and the whole Book of James is directed squarely against that, saying that faith in itself alone is dead, is of no account, and that it accomplishes nothing unless associated with works. James is the great apostle who stands for salvation by deeds instead of by faith. When Luther came and revived the great Pauline doctrine, making it the mighty weapon in his hands to fight the battle of liberty anew, he poured contempt on the Epistle of James. Could he have had his own way, he would not have allowed it to remain in the New Testament. He calls it an epistle of straw, for the reason that it opposes this grand doctrine,

which he held as the supreme one in Christianity, salvation by faith.

Here, then, I have sufficiently indicated to you these superficial appearances of the New Testament which indicate that it was not all peace, not all quiet and calm, among the early Christians during the middle of the first century. What had happened? What is the cause of these appearances? Let us go back and find out.

There existed in Jerusalem at this time the great first Christian Church,- a church presided over by the apostles, those of them that still remained in Jerusalem, they naturally having the greatest authority. Here was Peter, here was James, the brother of the Lord himself, here were James and John. James, the brother of Jesus, afterward came to be recognized as bishop or head or leader, or whatever title you choose to call him, of this first church in Jerusalem. This church, of course, would claim that it had in its keeping the original, true tradition as to what Christianity ought to be. Naturally enough, it would claim that it stood nearest to Jesus. They had seen him, they had talked with him, they claimed to understand what he meant and what he wanted done.

But, in opposition to them, what was being done, what was taking place? Why, here was a certain man named Paul, originally, Saul of Tarsus,-a Jew who had been a persecutor, who had suddenly been converted to Christianity, who had never been up to Jerusalem since his conversion, who had had no talk with these men, who claimed to represent Jesus at first hand, but had never seen him, who had not then seen Peter or James or John. What was he doing? This Paul had gone down into Galatia, and had established what he called Christian churches. He had gone to different parts of the country, and had established these churches, without the consent of the men at Jerusalem, without their authority, without their guidance. Not only that, but he was teaching doctrines which they declared to be subversive of the fundamental principles of Christianity itself. In other words, he was saying to them, It does not make any differ