S. Christ As Teacher

CHRIST AS A TEACHER TEXT: Never man spake like this man. John 7:46. The theme today is Christ as a teacher. The Sunday schools of Christendom, since the first day of January, have been studying the lessons in the life of our Lord Jesus Christ. The accredited historians of that life are Matthew, Mark, Luke, John and Paul. Mark commences with the public ministry of Christ and closes with His resurrection from the dead. Matthew commences’ with the birth of Jesus, tracing His genealogy from Abraham, and closing with the giving of the Great Commission in Galilee after His resurrection. Luke commences with the birth of His forerunner, John the Baptist, giving the genealogy of Jesus and tracing His descent from Adam and closes with His ascension (Acts 1:9-11). John commences with Christ’s pre-existent state, before the foundation of the world, and closes with His state in eternity (John 1:1-51 and Revelation 1:1-20). Paul commences after Christ’s ascent into heaven, and touches only that part of the life of Christ which relates to His call to the apostleship. These are the historians. It is review day in the Sunday schools. You have reviewed many of the doctrines and of the deeds of Jesus Christ. In harmony with such review, it is my purpose today to show you Christ as a teacher. He stands before us pre-eminently as a teacher upon two special occasions. I am far from saying that on those two occasions we have the sum of his teachings. I mean that they fairly represent Him as a teacher, both as to manner and matter. The scenes of the two teachings were close together. The second one, when He taught in parables, He was in a little boat, pushed out somewhat from the shore of the Sea of Galilee, and the multitude stood around on beach I shall not discuss today the parable feature of Christ’s teaching. The first is when He was up on top of the hills, the same hills that look down on that very beach where later He spoke the parables upon the hills that formed the western shore of the Sea of Galilee. There He spoke the Sermon on the Mount. And you may, I say, gather from the parables and the Sermon on the Mount a pretty fair conception of the method and matter of Christ’s teaching. His character as a teacher might safely rest on these two. The historians of the Sermon on the Mount are Matthew and Luke, mainly Matthew. The scene of that sermon, as has just been stated, was a level place upon the mountains on the northwestern shore of the Sea of Galilee. The audience consisted of the twelve disciples whom He had just appointed and of a large number of other disciples who had been instructed somewhat in the principles of His kingdom, and of a vast multitude of people from Judea and Samaria and Phoenicia. Oh, it was an immense audience! Luke says: “The company of His disciples, and a great multitude of people out of all Judea and Jerusalem, and from the sea coast of Tyre and Sidon.” It was such an audience as you could not put in a house, any kind of a house. And it is a noticeable fact that whenever a great reformation commences, I mean a movement that has life and fire in it, then the reformers take to field preaching. I mean they quit the houses; they go into the street or fields or out in the open somewhere, for only such places as have the skies for a ceiling and the horizon for a boundary can hold the crowds of people that always gather when a deep and fiery movement of the Christian religion is in progress. So with this audience of Jesus. The occasion of the Sermon on the Mount was this: He had just selected, as has been stated, twelve men, commencing the organization of His movement. These twelve men were to share with Him the burden of responsibility and labor, and it was quite important that they should be thoroughly instructed in the first principles of the kingdom which He announced. It was equally necessary that the larger body of His disciples should understand those fundamental principles, and that the miscellaneous and ever shifting crowd, drawn together by their expectations of a king, and looking to the establishment of an earthly monarchy which would overturn Roman supremacy and give to Judea the sovereignty of the universe, that this mixed rabble should have their misconceptions concerning the nature of the kingdom of Jesus Christ removed, and forever. The setting or background of the sermon must never be overlooked. The multitudes, incited mainly by desires of relief from physical, temporal and external woes, even the better informed and more spiritually minded but dimly recognizing the great spiritual needs-these constituted the occasion of the Sermon on the Mount. The design of it has been partly suggested by the occasion, but we need to erect here a pillar of caution. The design has a negative as well as a positive aspect. First, then, negatively: It was not intended to be, as some have supposed and claimed, an epitome of doctrine and morals, neither of the one nor of the other. It falls very short of being a full synopsis of the doctrines of Jesus Christ. There is not a word in it directly of regeneration. There is nothing in it concerning the doctrine of the vicarious atonement and justification by faith so elaborately set forth both by the Saviour Himself and His apostles. So there are some departments of morals not here inculcated. Hence, one makes a very great mistake when he counts the Sermon on the Mount as a complete standard of life. You hear people say sometimes: “If I live by the Sermon on the Mount that will do.” I say that this sermon is not all of the standard. Positively, then, what was the design of it? The design of it was introductory-an opening or rudimental lecture setting forth the foundation principles of the Messianic kingdom, showing that these principles are internal, spiritual, practical, and not external, ritualistic, theoretical; setting forth first the characteristics, privileges and happiness of the Messianic subjects in the beatitudes. Showing next the importance, influence and responsibility of the Messianic subjects, comparing them to the light of the world and the salt of the earth. Then follows a discussion of the relations of the Messianic kingdom. Relations to what? Relations to the Jewish law, whether ceremonial, civil or moral; to the prophets; to rabbinical traditions; to the world; to practical life, and to destiny. Such was the design of the Sermon on the Mount, intending afterwards, as in fact He did, to unfold, to develop other doctrines related to these and letting His whole life’s teaching present the fulness of His doctrine and of His morality. So the Sermon on the Mount is not a disconnected jumble of fine sayings, but exhibits remarkable unity as a discourse, as you will observe when I briefly state the outline and analysis of it. Indeed, I much question if any speech has ever been delivered more remarkable for unity than the Sermon on the Mount. Next, as to the matter. The matter of this sermon is every bit of it every day matter, but while every day matter, as deep and as important as human life and destiny. One makes a great mistake in supposing that great teaching touches only the strange and exceptional and startling. The best and sublimest teaching upon the earth concerns the every day life, and such is the matter of this sermon. As to its style: These adjectives will convey a description of the style. It is simple, familiar, direct, sententious, paradoxical, startling, illustrative, conversational, practical, authoritative a simple talk, I mean, that every one in the audience could understand. There was no attempt at big words. The language of the common people, as they spoke it and as they understood it, was used by our Saviour. It was familiar in that it was as homely in its phrases as if He were sitting by the fireside or out on the, housetop in the cool of the evening or on the curbing of the street and talking with the passing people. It was not an oration, for there is an utter absence of declaratory theatrical elocution and rhetoric, as there must be in all great teachers. I mean to say that there is not an indication of a single strained mental effort after rounded phraseology, euphonious diction, rhetorical effect, dramatic gesticulation. It is direct; it does not intend to reach things by cannoning, hitting here and intending by glancing shot to strike out yonder. He moves right straight forward to the accomplishment of His object. The style, I say, is paradoxical. A paradox is something which seems to be contradictory and is not contradictory, as for instance, “happy are the unhappy”; that is, blessed are they that mourn. That is a paradox, but there is nothing contradictory in it. There is a comparison between present unhappiness and future happiness. As Luke keeps bringing it out, “Blessed are ye that hunger now, for ye shall be filled hereafter.” “Woe unto you that are rich now, for ye shall be poor hereafter.” Yes, it is intensely paradoxical. It is illustrative. The illustrations do not have to be explained, as some men’s illustrations. They illustrate. They preach a sermon by themselves; that is, they carry in their familiar imagery their own application. He selects objects that are perfectly well known to the people and so thoroughly familiar that when used as an illustration there can be no misconception as to the meaning. Sometimes He illustrated by a hen and chickens, sometimes by a lily, other times by rocks and thorns and sheep and birds. It is conversational in its style and unquestionably the greatest preachers are preachers who adopt the easy, off-hand, conversational style, like Doctor Broadus. But the distinguishing characteristic in style is that which most impressed His audience-because of its intrinsic power and of its marked dissimilarity to the methods of their ordinary religious teachers-He taught as one having authority, and not as the scribes and Pharisees. The style then was authoritative. Just look at the difference. A rabbi would get up before the people and with his eyes cast down would begin to say, “Rabbi Ben Israel says in the Talmud that Rabbi Joseph said that Rabbi Amos said that maybe such is the interpretation of the passage, but Rabbi Issachar quotes Rabbi Ephraim as saying that Rabbi Eleazar thought it might mean a different thing.” It was all indeterminate, uncertain; it did not take any positive shape. The pupil was perplexed by a balancing of conflicting probabilities. One leader doubtfully said, “Lo, here” while another distrustfully said, “Maybe yonder.” But Jesus spoke with authority-authority vested in himself. He leaned on no human buttresses. Did not attempt to defend His doctrine, nor to vindicate it. He spoke as God speaks, and without stopping to give an explanation of His manner and so ought man always to speak who speaks for God. Let him speak as the oracles of God. Now as to the rank of this sermon: Daniel Webster says that no mere man could have produced the Sermon on the Mount. Old age and wisdom bow before the simplicity and sublimity of this incomparable teaching. Little children sweetly imbibe its spirit as if it were milk, and aged saints draw from it the strong meat which supplies their sinews of strength. Babes in Christ by it take their first step in the practical walk of Christian life, while the man or woman in Christ Jesus by it soar on eagles’ wings into the anticipations of the heavenly world. It is peerless, matchless, divine. Now to show you the unity of the Sermon on the Mount, I will give you an outline of it that I think you can carry in your minds, as it consists of only three great heads. First, the characteristics, privileges and happiness of the Messianic subjects as set forth in the beatitudes. Second, the importance, influence, and responsibility of the Messianic subjects, as set forth in the images of salt and light. And third, the relations of the Messianic kingdom or doctrines; that is, its relations to the Jewish law, whether ceremonial, civil or moral; its relations to the rabbinical traditions; its relations to the prophecies; its relations to the outside world in its spirit and maxims and chief good; its relations to human destiny, closing with “Whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, he shall be like the man who built his house upon a rock and when the floods came and the storms hurtled, that house stood, for it was founded upon a rock.” All through it, in all of its great divisions, is brought out in clearest light that the principles of the Christian religion are internal, spiritual and practical. It is not, “Do this that you may be seen of men.” It is not to wash the outside of the cup or platter. It is not a painted sepulcher, holding inside rottenness and dead men’s bones. It consists not in meat and drink nor in observances of days and months and seasons. It has not ten thousand ordinances that touch your dress and your manner. Oh, the mass of stuff that has been imposed upon the Christian religion, which in its foundation principles was all spiritual and not ritualistic. All through it is practical, as opposed to theoretic or speculative. There is not a single part of it that is presented to the curious human mind as something calculated to entertain an idle person, not a thing. The whole of it is designated to be not abstract, but concrete, to be incarnated, to be embodied. It is practical, all of it. Now, having presented you that outline of the sermon, I want to illustrate it by considering briefly the first two divisions. First, the characteristics, privileges and happiness of the Messianic subjects, as set forth in what are called the beatitudes, commencing with a few general remarks. First, there are eight of these characteristics with eight corresponding privileges, or eight alternative woes. Every one of the privileges is based on character and every one of the particular measures of happiness is based on a privilege, showing the relation between character and happiness a fixed relation, an indissoluble bond between character and happiness. If a man possess the kingdom of God, if a man is allowed to see God and live with Him, if a man receive a reward from God at the last great day, these privileges are the springs of his happiness, but every privilege is predicated upon character in the man, upon the inside state of the man’s soul. As Burns expresses it It is no’ in titles, nor in rank; It is no’ in wealth like London bank, To purchase peace and rest; If happiness have not her seat And center in the breast We may be wise or rich or great But never can be blest. This sermon explains why Paul, covered with wounds and in prison and at midnight, and with death awaiting him in the morning, could sing praises to God. It explains how it is, as recorded in Hebrews 11:1-40, that the ancient martyrs took joyfully the spoiling of their goods, and who, while flames wrapped them about, shouted hallelujahs to God and who leaped for joy that they were counted worthy to suffer for Christ’s sake. The beatitudes express the only great philosophy as contrasted with Epicureanism and Stoicism. The Epicurean taught: “You have appetites; if you would be happy, gratify them. Eat, drink and be merry.” The Stoic said, “You have appetites; if you would be happy, extirpate them dig them up by the roots.” This sermon says, “You have appetites; if you would be happy, regulate them. Neither gratify them immoderately nor suppress them, but divert them from improper channels and fix them upon worthy objects. You want to be rich; that is right, only what kind of riches? You want to live? Yes, but when-now or hereafter? You want great substance? That is all right, but what kind evanescent or that which endures? You would treasure up yes, but where? “Where neither moth nor rust corrupt, nor thieves dig through and steal.” You will next observe that these beatitudes are all double. I mean that they have a probable sense and an absolute sense. Take this one. Luke says, “Blessed are the poor.” Matthew says, “Blessed are the poor in spirit.” The probable sense is always this, that comparing the two estates of poverty and riches, it is more probable that a poor man will get to heaven than that a rich man will. I mean to say that it is hard, very hard, for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven. I mean to say that if your rent roll is one hundred thousand dollars a year, then your chances of heaven are very slim, but that is not the absolute sense. The absolute sense is: Blessed are the poor in spirit. Again: “Blessed are they that mourn.” The probable sense is that it is, as a rule, better to go to the house of mourning than to the house of feasting; that, as a rule, afflicted people are more apt to seek the kingdom of heaven than people who are not afflicted, but its meaning in its absolute sense is not merely to be a mourner, but to mourn in spirit for spiritual things. You may next note generally that each beatitude has a corresponding woe, either expressed or implied. Luke mentions four of them. For instance, when he says “Blessed are ye poor: for yours is the kingdom of heaven,” he then adds the alternative, “But woe unto you rich, for you have had your consolation.” So with all the beatitudes. Let us examine somewhat particularly the first two. Take the first, “Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven.” What does that meant I believe in close analysis and clear definition. Now here is the way I would read that: “Happy is the man who in his inner, higher nature (that is, in his spirit) consciously feels his poverty or need of spiritual good from God.” There is poverty, yes, but it is that poverty in spirit which you consciously feel and not that which you have but do not know that you have it. Compare two Scriptures for proof: Isaiah 66:2 “To this man will I look, even to him that is poor and of a contrite spirit, and trembleth at my word.” Revelation 3:17 “Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked: I counsel thee to buy of me gold,” and so forth. Evidently the blessing is promises, not to the poverty, but to the sense of the poverty the consciousness of the need. It is quite important to observe this distinction. Now in the case of these Laodiceans there was actual poverty in the sphere of the spirit, but there was no recognition of the poverty. On the contrary, they thought themselves to be rich and that they needed nothing. The two states of mind are clearly represented in the parable of the Pharisee and the publican who went up into the temple to pray. The Pharisee had spirit need enough, but he had no consciousness of that need. The publican had the same need and he deeply felt it. He smote upon his heart and said, “God be merciful to me a sinner.” Blessed are the poor in spirit! The prodigal son illustrates both phases of the subject. When he left his father’s house, however much he might have external things, for he was richly endowed, in his inner nature, in his spirit, he was actually poor, but he did not know it. He thought he was rich and great, and was correspondingly proud, but there came a time when he began to be in want when the need of his soul broke in upon his mind, when he said, “I have sinned. I will arise and go to my Father and say to him, Father, I am not worthy to be called thy son. Let me be a servant. I have sinned.” Blessed are the poor in spirit! That means, happy is the man who in the sphere of the spirit (or inner or higher nature) feels his need of good from God, no less, no more. “I need thee every hour, most gracious Lord.” Oh, how sweet that hymn is! Poor in spirit. Oh, I have so few spiritual goods! I need. I need patience, I need strength, I need clearer views of heaven. I need more of the spirit of my Master. Poor, yea, blessed are the poor in spirit. But do not forget the contrast in the now and the hereafter. What do you need, O Dives, at the banquet? “Not a thing in the world. I have a million dollars; have the finest table in the country; every time I walk out on the streets people fawn upon me and say, ‘There goes a millionaire; look at him! Look at him!’ Why, I do not need a thing in the world. You never did see such eating as I have on my table. I am rich.” Rich, purse-proud, feeding upon external things and starving the soul. That is the now. But let me show him to you in the hereafter. You will have to look a long way down, away down into the depths of Hell. Did he take any money with him? Not a cent. Is he thirsty? Hear him: “And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my parched tongue; for I am tormented in this flame” (Luke 16:24). Do you see that chasm that separates him from God? Do you mark his apprehension that his brethren will come where he is? Do you mark the play of his memory? “But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime received thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and you are tormented” (Luke 16:25). Oh, sublime Teacher! Thou Teacher of the relation of time and eternity! “Blessed are they that mourn.” I would rather go to the house of mourning than to the house of laughing. But it refers to the sphere of the spirit. Do you mourn here? Do you mourn on account of sins? Do you mourn on account of your lack of conformity to the image of Jesus Christ? Do you mourn because of the low state of piety in the land? Like Jeremiah, is the source of your grief the fact that the health of the daughter of God’s people is not recovered? “Blessed are they that mourn.” Oh, you mourners in Zion, I say to you that you shall be comforted, and when your ashes are turned to beauty and your heaviness to the garments of praise, and your anguish to the thrilling joys of heaven, then will your consolation be deep and high and broad, with an “immeasurable” attached to every one of the adjectives. How sweet the song of Tom Moore Come, ye disconsolate, where’er ye languish; Come to the mercy seat, fervently kneel; Here bring your wounded hearts, here tell your anguish, Earth has no sorrow that heaven cannot heal. “Blessed are they that mourn.” Oh, mourners, hear the blessed Saviour: “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, to preach the acceptable year of the Lord” (Luke 4:18-19). We reach the fulness of the promise in heaven, for there are no tears in heaven, nor sorrow, nor crying, nor pain, nor death. Hear the precise words of our Lord: “And God shall wipe away all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow, nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are passed away” (Revelation 21:4). I shall not refer to any of these other characteristics. There is no time for it. I must pass over them in silence, though they all have a special meaning and each one very sweet. But let us consider somewhat the importance and influence and responsibility of the people who are poor in spirit and mourn, and are meek, and who hunger and thirst after righteousness, and who are merciful, and who are peacemakers, and who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake. What is their importance? What their responsibility? Listen: Jesus, in just one verse, answers all of these questions:“Ye are the salt of the earth: but if the salt have lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted? It is thenceforth good for nothing, but to be cast out, and to be trodden under foot of men” (Matthew 5:13). The importance or value of the Messiah’s subjects is determined by the emphasis on the pronoun “ye.” The verb-ending would in ordinary cases determine the pronoun nominative so it would not have to be expressed. But if, in the Greek you desire to know emphasis on the pronoun, it must be expressed. The Greek verb “este” by itself means “ye are”; that is, without emphasis. But to have it “YE are,” capitalizing and emphasizing the pronoun, it must be written “umeis este.” How then can I make you hear the emphasis, the deep stress our Saviour placed on that pronoun? YE-YE-YE are the salt of the earth and the light of the world. Do you not see that He meant to deny such importance and influence and responsibility to anything else or to anybody else? First, there is a constat when He says “ye.” The emphasis is on the “Ye.” Ye are the light of the world. Ye are the salt of the earth. It is as if he had said, If this world is preserved from moral corruption, if this world is wrested from the realms of darkness and bathed in light, ye will have to do it. Ye are the important ones. Oh, think of it, you mourners, you poor in spirit, you merciful ones, you that hunger and thirst after righteousness, you are more important in the sight of God and ten thousand times more valuable than all the rich, ungodly men that ever trod the face of the earth. I say unto you that not the philosophers (lightning bugs trying to outshine the sun); not the police shall keep the world from corrupting and rotting; not the public school, as the politicians would have you believe. No, you can have good public schools right over the mouth of the pit. And not Cotton Palaces and Fairs that open on Sunday. But ye are the light of the world; these whose characteristics are internal, spiritual, practical; followers of the Lord Jesus Christ. I say if the whole earth is not cracked open today it is because of you. If the cloud does not burst and bolt fall to smite it with universal flame, it is solely because of that “ye.” Ye poor in spirit; ye Christians that are scattered about on the face of the earth, ye and ye alone. Ah, me, if you were taken off of the earth it would rot and stink until heaven would be compelled to burn it! I would, like to know whenever philosophy or secular education or commerce or riches or secular science ever kept a community from morally rotting. Do you know one? Can you put your finger on one city of ancient or modern times? I say today, in, the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, that but for the humble, God-fearing men and women in any state, in any county, in any town, it would rot. You are the salt of the earth and the light of the world. As the value and importance of God’s people are determined by the emphatic “Ye,” so the character of their influence is determined by the figures, “salt and light.” Salt preserves keeps pure. Light dispels darkness. Heat expels the cold. The salt of the sea is the shore’s barrier against universal disease and death. Without the light and its accompanying heat there could be no life. No plant would germinate. Darkness that could be felt would shroud the earth. More than Arctic cold would ensue. All liquids would solidify and petrify. The rivers-earth’s arteries-would stiffen into blocks of ice. The veins of blood would become like steel wire, harder than man’s bones. What, therefore, salt and light are to the natural world even those that are Christians are to the spiritual world. And as the emphatic “Ye” expresses who are earth’s important ones, and as the “salt and light” express the kind and character of their value, so their responsibility is expressed by “putting the candle on the candlestick.” “Neither do men light a candle, and put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it giveth light unto all that are in the house. Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven” (Matthew 5:15-16). Mark the emphasis on the “so.” It is commonly misunderstood. As the candle once lighted must be put on the candlestick in order to be sufficiently visible, even so when God shines into your heart your conversion must be so positioned as to be visible. It is to position and consequent visibility that “even so” refers. I say that our responsibility is all involved in putting the candle in the right place. God Himself does the lighting. Our part is not to so misplace the light as to hide it. It therefore becomes a supreme question: How do you put it on the candlestick? I do not know how you are prepared to receive some things I am going to say, but I am going to say them with all my heart. First, then, let the divine oracles speak. Hear the Word of God:“I have not hid thy righteousness within my heart; I have declared thy faithfulness and thy salvation: I have not concealed thy lovingkindness and thy truth from the great congregation” (Psalms 40:10). “Come and hear, all ye that fear God, and I will declare what he hath done for my soul” (Psalms 66:16). “Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven. But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven” (Matthew 10:32-33). “The seven stars are the angels of the seven churches: and the seven candlesticks that thou sawest are the seven churches” (Revelation 1:20). What then do these Scriptures mean? That we must tell it. Let God’s people hear our Christian experience. Let the whole world know just where we stand. Unite with the church. On every issue between righteousness and unrighteousness, between light and darkness, between Christ and Belial, take an unmistakable position on the Lord’s side. You younger brethren and sisters, it was a joy to me when you put the lamp on the lampstand, when you took the lighted candle and put it on the candlestick. Let it shine there. Put it where men can see it. Do not put it under a bushel. Do not put it under a bed. Do not try to be a secret partner of Jesus Christ, a Nicodemus, who comes to see Him by night. Come out and take a stand. Let the world know your alignment. Put the candle on the candlestick and let the marksman of Hell try to snuff it out. To put it on the candlestick is unquestionably to on the church.? Where do you get that? Why, do you not read inn the Book of Revelation about Jesus moving among the candlesticks, and what are the candlesticks? They are the churches. The seven candlesticks are the seven churches. Why put the light there? Because the Lord Jesus Christ has made the church the pillar and ground of the truth. That is His institution. Now you can organize something, but Jesus organized the church. That is an institution which has the promise of this life and that which is to come. Yea, she it is “that looketh forth as the morning, clear as the sun, fair as the moon, and terrible as an army with banners.” Oh, but you say that means the invisible church. How on earth, if it is invisible, is it putting a candle on a candlestick? Do you mean an invisible candlestick? He is not referring to invisibility. A city that is set on a hill cannot be hid. God lighted the candle and it is eternal, but God says, Make it conspicuous, visible. Put it on the candlestick that everybody can see it shine. Unquestionably. Well, if it gets in the church it shines. How? It will help the church publish the principles of the Messianic kingdom. It will be in the church and shine and the waves of light radiating from the church will go out into the darkened heathen land upon the wings of every sermon and prayer and song. It will help advertise the truth of Jesus. In every sermon preached and prayer offered and song sung, let it be as if upon a ladder of promises it had gone up to the ceiling of the skies and placarded their whole scope with the promises of eternal life. That is the way you shine. You shine in your mission work. You shine in your example at home, in the school, everywhere. And now let me tell you, if your religion is worth a snap of the finger, take it into politics. Do not misunderstand me. I do not mean to have a religious political party, separate from every other, but I do mean, that whatever religion you have, let it be as potent in determining a political question as any other question. Let me give you a sublime illustration: William E. Gladstone was England’s prime minister. To be prime minister of England means a vast deal more than to be President of the United States, for under the present British constitution the prime minister is the sovereign, the government of England. The Queen has nothing more to do with it than you have, but the prime minister of England is the Lord of England and her Empire. The British cabinet is not like the cabinet we have here in our country, merely advisers. Now he was prime minister of England, and had attained his premiership by combining the liberal elements of the political party in England and Scotland with the Irish element. The Irish element was led by Charles Stewart Parnell. Parnell was the king and chief of the Irish contingent, and he and Gladstone stood like two brothers, working together for the accomplishment of good for the whole empire. Well, now right in the midst of their great victory, an awful thing developed. A divorce suit was instituted against Mrs. O’Shea by her husband and making Parnell a co-respondent, and the fact brought out a moral depravity of heart in the case of Parnell - oh, such a sickening state of facts that Gladstone said, “If it costs me the prime minister’s place I will not stand by the side of Charles Stewart Parnell. I will let the political party go. I am a Christian. I love God. I love God more than I love political party. I will not give this man the hand of fellowship. Ireland must select another leader.” Parnell refused to yield leadership. It divided the Irish vote and lost Gladstone’s working majority in parliament. Well, of course, he had to resign, and he is the only man I know that actually preferred to be right than to be prime minister. Why, I tell you, the time sometimes comes when instead of showing you are a Christian by being willing to shake hands with everybody, you must show your Christianity by refusing to take a bad man’s hand, even though he pose as a Christian. It may be that you cannot reach him by church discipline. It becomes necessary that he may be made to feel the force of righteous public opinion. I repeat it that there are degrees to which a church member may go in slandering his brethren, in breeding strife, in opposing or clogging the wheels of Christian progress, when to give him Christian recognition is a sin.. Such a man becomes a curse instead of a blessing. What though a man be a Baptist, and what though some church retain him in fellowship, yet he may so go astray in doctrines that this Scripture applies: “If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: for he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds” (2 John 1:10-11). Paul thus urgently entreats and exhorts the Romans: “Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple” (Romans 16:17-18). He also thus enjoins the Corinthians: “I wrote to you in an epistle not to company with fornicators of this world, or with the covetous, or extortioners, or with idolaters; for then must ye needs go out of the world. But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat” (1 Corinthians 5:9-11). He also urges Timothy “to turn away from” another class (2 Timothy 3:5). Indeed, there are men so adroit in the use of the forms and technicalities of the law they can, so far as human courts extend,’ violate with impunity the spirit of the whole moral law. Such men are to be shunned, avoided, turned from. Let no good man receive them as friends. They are incorrigible. And particularly is this true of a fomenter and breeder of strife among brethren, or one, who like Satan, is a slanderer of his brother. If he is a man that is called a brother, if he claims to be a Christian, and does certain things, turn from him and let the whole world know that you do not claim fellowship with him. Says the Apostle, “Avoid him.” If he can make you come up and stand beside him, so that he can say, “We two,” and all the time proceed in infamy, all the time reap immoral rottenness, that is all he wants. He will spread the mantle of your Christianity over his vileness. Aaron Burr, for political reasons and from very slight causes, none such as are regarded sufficiently weighty to justify a challenge, forced a duel on Alexander Hamilton although he knew Hamilton would never fire a shot at him, and he murdered Hamilton. Now, it was a sign that the United States was not absolutely rotting, when the public sentiment spoke out as to the crime of dueling, and Burr, though he had been a leading spirit in one of the great political parties of this Union, was not socially recognized. Good people by whom he would sit down would get up and move away somewhere else. Would you have taken the hand of Benedict Arnold or of Judas Iscariot? To a certain extent the public enunciating that thundered over the head of Breckenridge of Kentucky was very Godlike; but when he stood up, and. without extenuation, without denying the facts, but openly confessing them, confessing his sin and asking forgiveness, I confess then there ought to have been mercy shown him. But, I tell you, if the principles of the Christian religion are not carried into society, if they are not carried into business, if they are not carried into politics, if we do not let the light shine, then the salt has lost its savor and the light is out under a bushel. You are the light of the world and the salt of the earth, says the great Teacher. My own conclusions are never child’s play. They are always reached after profound investigation of a subject. I would rather stand up by the side of a half a dozen who were occupying the platform of that Sermon on the Mount than to be one of a million on the opposing side. Oh, put the light on the candlestick! Blessed are the poor in spirit. Blessed are these that mourn on account of sin. Blessed are the meek. Blessed are those that hunger and thirst after righteousness, personal, practical righteousness, mark you, not imputed righteousness. It means absolutely sinless perfection. Such will come after a while. Blessed are the pure in heart. That means the fulness of sanctification, in absolute deliverance from the corruption that is in the world through lust. It, too, will come after a while. It is not all attainable now. But you may move toward it and you will be filled; you will ultimately see God. And now I thank you for having listened to me so long in discussing just two divisions in the Sermon on the Mount, as illustrating the character of the teaching of our blessed Lord. Oh, what teacher is like Jesus? Who of you would come and sit at the feet of Jesus? Who would say, Lord, let me enter thy class? Oh, tell me not how to possess external religion, nor altogether in what rites and ceremonies to profess religion; but, oh, Master, show me how to be right it aide, in the spirit, in my soul. Show me how to let the light so shine that when I die, when I pass away from the world, it may be said: “He was a part of the salt of the earth and of the light of the world.”