THE

PRIMITIVE CHURCH

(OR BAPTIST)

MAGAZINE.

No. CCLII.-DECEMBER 1, 1864.

Essays, Expositions, &c.

SACRIFICE.-ITS PRINCIPLE.

WE have already endeavoured to show that sacrifice must have originated in the Divine Will. And yet, on the other hand, it is equally true that "it has its ground in something deeper than legal enactments." The statute or ordinance that first enjoined it was not of the order of those "the reason of which we do not see." It was very different from the prohibition given respecting the tree of the "knowledge of good and evil." It was not given simply as a test of obedience. The neglect of it by one man did not necessarily involve a whole race in calamitous consequences. There is no need, therefore, that it should stand out boldly on the face of the record. It would be a grievous misunderstanding to consider it as a statutory enactment requiring nothing on the part of man but mere mechanical action. On the contrary, it implied in its very nature the intelligent and free "consent of the will of man.” ́It implied divine teaching, and a state of mind in accordance with the thing taught. It was a sense of this that led Eusebius to think that the origin of sacrifice might be accounted for apart from any statutory enactment. Pious persons (he says), who had their minds enlightened by the Divine Spirit, saw that they needed a remedy for deadly sins, and concluded that a ransom for their salvation ought to be presented to God, the disposer of life and death; and having nothing to consecrate to him more valuable than their own lives, they offered the beasts in their stead." It was probably also a sense of this that made Chrysostom suppose that "Cain's sacrifice sprang from a desire to testify the gratitude of his heart to God for the enjoyment of his beneficence." But, though we think these authors might have traced sacrifice to a higher origin, they were doubtless right in considering it as the embodiment of a principle. What is that principle?

66

There can be no doubt that a loving obedience to God under all circumstances covers the whole field of our duty. "Love is the fulfilling of the law." Hence it is that "he that offends in one point is guilty of all." Not that he who once breaks one command is as guilty as he who once breaks each of them in detail. But the principle involved in any one command is precisely the same as that involved in any other, so that if a man disregards the principle involved in any one command, he disregards the principle involved in all the rest, for it is one and the same in all. And so it may be said, in the same sense, that he who keeps one command keeps all the rest, inasmuch as, if a pure love to God and

VOL. XXI.-NO. CCLII.

2 F

regard to his authority outweighs all other considerations in regard to any particular course of action, he is animated by that principle which is the spirit and essence of the law, and without which nothing is acceptable to God.

But what has this to do with sacrifice? Much every way. It shows its animating principle, and the reason of its acceptance. It shows that it has both a divine and a human side, that it originates in the Divine Will, and is worked out through the enlightenment of the human conscience. It explains why God is pleased with it at one time, and displeased with it at another. One man may bring an offering, with unreserved submission to God and an earnest desire to please him, entreating him to "cleanse the thoughts of his heart by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit," and another may bring the like offering in order to purchase the right to retain a favourite passion, and to escape from unpleasant obligations.

Now, the one thing that God in all ages has required of man is loving obedience. When He placed our first parents in Eden, innocent as they were, he did not say to them, "I have given you so many bodily and mental powers; do with them what you find them adapted for. Consult your tastes, and gratify them. Consult your dispositions, and indulge them." He did not say, "I have written all my laws upon your heart; only listen to the voice that is within you, and obey its mandates." But He said, "Hearken unto my voice. Thou shalt not eat of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden." And when God redeemed his ancient people from Egypt, this was the first message sent them by Moses:-" Ye have seen what I did unto the Egyptians, and how I bore you on eagles' wings, and brought you unto myself. Now, therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me. Accordingly, when they offered sacrifice instead of obedience, God sent his prophet to expostulate with them in these terms:-"I spake not unto your fathers, nor commanded them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt concerning burnt-offerings or sacrifices; but this thing commanded I them, saying, Obey my voice, and I will be your God, and ye shall be my people." Obedience was what He required of them; and sacrifice, offered as a substitute for it, was always offensive and insulting. "To what purpose is the multitude of your sacrifices unto me, saith the Lord." Obedience is the thing required, and an offering, of whatever kind, that is not animated by the spirit of obedience, is never acceptable to Him. It is as if one should bring to the door of the tabernacle of the congregation a putrid carcase, instead of a living and healthy victim. Hence the value of Abraham's sacrifice. "Because thou hast not withheld thy son, thine only son, from me, in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of heaven, and in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice." And is not the sacrifice of Christ, in one respect of it, an illustration of the same principle? In this sacrifice shines conspicuously the highest obedience of which human nature in its purest and most dignified form is capable-an obedience which every form of horror and the utmost degree of agony only served to bring out into bolder relief. Christ's "obedience unto death was the perfection of his sacrifice, and his sacrifice of himself the crowning point of his obedience. His sacrifice was “a sweet smelling savour" unto God, not simply because it was a sacrifice, but because that sacrifice was the sweetest flower and ripest fruit of obedience, the clearest manifestation of its spirit and life, the evidence of its unlimitedness.

It appears, then, that the sacrifice which is of divine origin is that, and only that, which is offered in the spirit of loving obedience, and doubtless such was the character of the first sacrifice. But the extent of obedience to be rendered is limited according to the nature and circumstances of the creature required to render it. Contrition and penitence are not required of unfallen beings. broken and a contrite heart" is out of place in a state of innocence. The sacrifices God appoints for man are such as are appropriate to a fallen condition "the sacrifices of God are a broken spirit,"—and it surely needs no proof that

'A

there is some divine connection between the broken heart and the bleeding victim. This connection is so patent, that Bishop Warburton thonght it sufficient to "lead us to the true rationale of the rite of sacrifice." He endeavours to account for the origin of it in the following manner :-" Some chosen animal, precious to the repenting criminal who deprecates or is supposed to be obnoxious to the Deity, was offered up and slain at the altar, in an action which, when translated into words, speaks to this purpose:'I confess my transgressions at thy footstool, O my God! and with the deepest contrition implore thy pardon, confessing that I deserve death for these my offences; and I own (striking the victim) that I myself deserve the death which I now inflict on this animal."" We do not think that this "speaking by action," as the bishop terms it, taken in connection with the defects of early language, will account for the origin of the rite; but it seems very clear that the offering of slain victims was intended from the first to embody a confession of sin, and this is in perfect accordance with the whole of the Levitical law. But not only does bloody sacrifice imply the fall of man: it implies also his redemption. It regards him not simply as fallen, nor simply as redeemed, but as at once fallen and redeemed. If it pointed only to man's fall, it would leave no room for contrition on the part of man; if it pointed only to his redemption, it might be nothing more on God's part than a " declaration of peace."

We cannot here enter into the dispute as to "whether the fall or the redemption is the ground on which humanity rests." Suffice it to say, that so far as bloody sacrifice is concerned, they are both equally involved. The offering of such sacrifices implied confession, and the acceptance of them a return of the divine favour. On the one hand, they could meet with no acceptance without a "broken and a contrite heart;" and on the other hand, when true contrition was experienced, the Lord did good in his good pleasure unto Zion, and then" he was "pleased with burnt offering, and whole burnt offering."

66

On the whole, then, we conclude that the obedience involved in the shedding of blood must be a deeper obedience than that which is required from an innocent being. Sacrifice opens up to view a new field of obedience appropriate to man's condition as fallen and redeemed. This gleams out even in the firstrecorded sacrifices. Cain brought of the “fruit of the ground," and Abel "the firstlings of his flocks." Compare these offerings with the terms in which the sentence against man is recorded. "In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread till thou return unto the dust." Was not Cain's sacrifice the fruit of toil, and did not Abel's speak of "returning to the dust"? Were not these sacrifices the outward expression of acceptance of the punishment, of submission to an offended Father, and of hope in the promise that the "seed of the woman should bruise the head of the serpent"?

If this be true, the fall and redemption imply a large augmentation of the divine claims upon us. We are laid under deeper obligations. God requires of us now broken-hearted penitence. He requires of us now nothing short of "obedience unto death.' Thus the institution of sacrifice ushers in a new era in the history of man. Before the fall man knew that all his active powers should be dedicated to God's service; but his offering to God of the fruit of the ground, and the blood of slain victims, after the fall, implies an acknowledgment of further obligation, viz.—an obligation to consecrate to God's service his whole being, not only in all its active powers, but also in all its capabilities of suffering. It is an acceptance of the curse pronounced, with child-like faith in Him who can turn it into a blessing. The blood of every sacrifice speaks this language. Christ in us acknowledges the claim. A hearty recognition of this claim is a well-spring of unutterable bliss. The more extensive God's claims upon the creature, the fuller is the creature's enjoyment when these claims are heartily admitted. Such an admission brings the soul into a beatific union with the God of love-a union, the bonds of which are closer drawn in proportion as a Father's claims deepen and expand.