Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB
[blocks in formation]

Ir does not come within the scope of these papers to enumerate all the Jewish offerings, or to make any minute distinction between them. The object is rather to elucidate the great principle which they embody, and to show the high place assigned to it by GoD Himself in the Jewish Church.

The offering of the half-shekel mentioned at the conclusion of the last paper, was of a strictly compulsory character. It was said to be an atonement for the soul, and this undoubtedly from its having some mysterious connection with that Grand Atonement, which effected the redemption of Jew and Gentile, but at a far higher cost than silver and gold.* GOD has made a covenant with the world in CHRIST, and offerings as well as all acts of worship being accepted in Him, may be said to be an atonement for the soul. It may be necessary to guard such expressions as these from being misunderstood, but to suppress them or to find fault with them, is to suppress and find fault with the Word of God and the language of Scripture.

In connection with the compulsory offering of the half-shekel exacted from every one, we may mention those voluntary offerings which were made at the building of the Tabernacle, and made in such abundance, that Moses was obliged to stop the people from giving. The system best suited to the nature of man, is that which contains a mixture of compulsion and liberty. The history of the Christian as well as of the Jewish Church, attests the truth of this observation. Our own experience and the condition of our manufacturing towns, prove that the Gospel cannot be propagated, much less any magnificent temples or tabernacles built, by the effort of the mere voluntary principle. But when Christians were trained to worship GoD with a portion of their substance as an essential duty, the voluntary principle rising out of this foundation was in its right place, and our Cathedrals and Churches are so many monuments of its efficacy. It would be well for us if we would “search the Scriptures,” and endeavour to discover how far the voluntary principle is right, and how far it is wrong. The errors of private judgment are bad enough, but here public judgment is to blame for confirming and conniving at the present ignorance and neglect of an essential element of Christian truth. But such remarks as these must not be continued here, or we shall be forestalling the conclusion of our subject.

Our business is now with the Jewish offertory, the design of which was to direct the mind to God as the Author of all things, and to rest in Him as the end or object to which all things are to be referred. By offerings the Jew was to praise GOD for His great

* 1 S. Pet. i. 18, 19.

glory, or to pray for fresh blessings, or for a continuance of present blessings, or to express thanks for mercies already received, or to fulfil vows. Every part of the Old Testament shows that the doctrine of offerings occupied a most distinguished place in the scheme of Jewish worship. Expressions apparently incidental are sometimes more forcible than direct arguments, and this because it is assumed that the truth is so well known that direct arguments are not required. Thus fruitful fields are called (2 Sam. i. 21) fields of offerings, it being assumed that if a field produced fruit, it produced offerings. This expression seems to be the counterpart of that passage of the Book of Joel ii. 14, which speaks of the return of plenty as a meat-offering and a drink-offering unto the LORD God. When the "garners were full with all manner of store," GOD's storehouse was full with all manner of offerings.

But to find some more direct and plain attestation of the Pentateuch doctrine relating to offerings, we must refer to the Book of Psalms, of Chronicles, of Ezekiel, of Nehemiah, and of Malachi. There is also something extremely significative and instructive in David's refusing to accept the threshing-floor of Araunah the Jebusite, and to offer a burnt-offering of that which cost him nothing. (1 Kings xxiv. 24.) David knew that his worship would not be accepted unless it was accompanied with a sacrifice of his own substance. This principle, or rather the voluntary results of this principle, showed themselves in the magnificent preparations which he made for the building of the temple. The thousands and ten thousand talents of silver, gold, brass, and iron, were the freewill offerings of his mouth, whereby he thanked GoD and praised His glorious Name. (1 Chron. xxix. 7-13.) When we consider then this circumstance and the elements of which Jewish worship was composed, it is quite clear that such expressions in the Psalms

as

"remember thy offering," "the sacrifice of thanksgiving," “offer thanksgiving," "bring presents," "offer gifts," must mean something more substantial than praying unto God and praising Him with the voice. Those who content themselves with nothing but vocal worship, have "unconsciously a lie on their lips and in their right hand," when they use words which must have reference to material worship or worship with the substance. But if we may thus explain away the meaning of the Psalms, why may not others explain away all the practical parts of the Sacred Volume, and make them to mean nothing but speculative faith or barren contemplation? When the offertory expressions of the Psalms are viewed in connection with the offertory service of the Church, they have an intelligible meaning; but considered in any other view, they are nothing but expressions of hypocrisy. If we are to plead rightly for the offertory, we must not merely appeal to the rubrics in the Communion Service, but also to the rubrics which prescribe the daily use of the Psalms of David. Here, too, it should be

observed, that the expressions "statutes and judgments,” are used with reference to the law of offerings in the Pentateuch, and it must then be more than probable, that these expressions when used in the Psalms, must at least sometimes apply to the same subject.

The Prophet Ezekiel, (xx. 40,) alluding, as the heading of the chapter tells us, to Gospel times, speaks of the people serving GOD, and of His accepting and requiring their "offerings, and the firstfruits of their oblations, with all their holy things."

The history of the reformation effected under Nehemiah, puts the same truth most prominently forward. Amongst other things there were ordinances requiring the Jews to bring the first-fruits of all trees, year by year, unto the house of the LORD. They were to bring also the first-fruits of their dough, the offerings, the tithes of their ground unto the Levites. (Neh. x. 35—38.)__The same principle everywhere shows itself where any mention of GOD'S worship is made. This has been already shown by a reference to the beginning and middle of the Old Testament, and it may be shown also by a reference to the end. For the canonical books of the Prophets close with Malachi, and this prophecy contains the most encouraging promises to those who honour GoD with tithes and offerings, and the most fearful threats against those who rob Him of this tribute which He claims as His especial due. (iii. 8, 9, 10.) The testimony of the Apocrypha, which has canonical authority in practical matters, occupies its place in the string of authorities. Here we are told not to " appear empty before the LORD," that the offering of the righteous maketh the altar fat; that we must dedicate our tithes with gladness, and give unto the MOST HIGH according as He has enriched us. (Ecclus. xxxv. 4—10.)

The principle has now been traced from the days of righteous Abel to the era of the Son of Sirach. We presume then it will not be dismissed as a Judaizing rite, or discarded upon the score that it finds no acceptance in the schools of modern prophets.

The direct testimony in its favour from the New Testament and from Christian authorities, shall be considered on some future occasion. That such testimony should be forthcoming, the authorities and arguments already adduced are a sufficient guarantee. So great a principle as that which requires every one to honour GOD with his substance, could not but be incorporated in the scheme of Christianity. The very statement of the truth is sufficient to produce conviction in the minds of all who would give their unprejudiced attention to the subject. But perhaps it may be well to put forward here two or three considerations which are of some importance.

It is well known that there are many passages of the Old Testament which indicate a change of the law of sacrifices, on the introduction of the New Testament; e. g., "sacrifice and meat-offering Thou wouldest not, but mine ears hast Thou opened.” (Ps. xl.8.)

"Thou requirest no sacrifice, else would I give it Thee: but Thou delightest not in burnt-offerings." (Ps. 1. 16.) Offerings of this kind are always called Zebachim and Mincha. But that sort of offering by which we honour GOD as the Creator of the world, is called Terumah. These terms Mede (Sermon 51) observes, are never confounded with each other. Terumah is about sixty times found in the Bible: it is never confounded with Zebachim and Mincha, nor is there ever one word said about its change or abolition on the expiration of the Old Covenant.

Another very striking circumstance is the language of prophecy. The conversion of the Gentiles is described in the prophecy of Micah, by the consecration of their gain unto the LORD, and of their substance unto the LORD of the whole earth. (iv. 13.) The kings of Arabia were to testify their conversion "by gifts." (Ps. lxxii. 10.) The Ethiopians were to do homage to God as their Sovereign, by bringing presents. (Isa. xviii. 7.) The HOLY GHOST Speaking by the Prophet Zephaniah, says, "From beyond the rivers of Ethiopia My suppliants, even the daughter of My dispersed, shall bring Mine offering." (iii. 10.) The Prophets Malachi and Ezekiel have already been quoted.

Enough has been said to convince those whom the Bible can convince. Yet we cannot conclude without observing that the sacrifices of the Jewish Church could not be procured without considerable expense. Bullocks, and rams, and goats were sacrifices that cost something. Now since the sacrifice in the Eucharist involves in itself no outlay of silver and gold, it would seem from this circumstance that Christians would have an additional reason to pay the hire of the spiritual labourer, and to endow the altar from whence the Eucharistic Feast is dispensed. Burnt-offerings are not required of us, therefore we have the greatest reason to do homage, express gratitude, and provide for all the wants of the Church by "dedicating our tithes with gladness," and making "the altar fat" with the first-fruits of all our increase.

CHAPTERS ON CHURCHES AND CHURCH
BUILDERS.

CHAP. V. BELLS, CLOCKS, AND BELL-TOWERS.

THE bell-tower, and the noisy sisterhood which inhabit it, are among the most picturesque and interesting accessories of our Churches, and the introduction of bells well deserves to be recorded.

That bells were applied to their present ecclesiastical offices, even before the erection of parish Churches in England, there

66

can be no doubt. Bede, speaking of the death of S. Hilda, A.D. 680, tells us that one of the sisters of the distant monastery of Hackness thought she heard, as she slept, the well known sound of the bell which called them to prayers, when any of them had departed this life. Turketul gave to Croyland a great bell called Guthlac, and afterwards six others, which he called Bartholomew and Betelin, Turketul and Tatwin, Pega and Bega; "Non erat," says Ingulphus, tunc tanta consonantia campanarum in tota Anglia;" there was not then such another "ring of bells" in all England, and if not in all England, certainly not in the world, for the English alone have ever known the use of a ring of bells." Dunstan, who doubtless himself cast them, gave bells to many of the Churches in Somersetshire. And bell-ringing made a part of his rule in the reformation of monasteries; for he directs" that at mass, nocturns, and vespers, from the Feast of Innocents to the Circumcision, all the bells should be rung, as was the custom in England.* Of this custom, with many little matters relating to the bells, it would be easy to fill several pages: we shall, however, limit ourselves to a few scattered notices.

66

Archdeacon Churton tells us that the Bell-rock, now remarkable for its lighthouse, is so called from the bell which the monks of Aberbrothock+ tolled, to warn the mariner of his danger as he sailed past. At the murder of Thomas à Becket, the bells are said to have rung of their own accord.

Paul de Caen, first abbot of S. Alban's, after the Conquest furnished the town with bells. "A certain English nobleman, named Litholf, who resided in a woodland part of the neighbourhood, added two still larger and more laudable than the rest. Having a good stock of sheep and goats, he sold many of them, and bought a bell, of which, as he heard the new sound, when suspended in the tower, he jocosely said, ‘Hark! how sweetly my goats and my sheep bleat!' But his wife procured another for the same place, and the two together produced a most sweet harmony, which when the lady heard, she said, 'I do not think that this union is wanting of the Divine favour, which united me to my husband in lawful matrimony, and the bond of mutual affection." "§

In later times, we still find the gift of bells thankfully recorded. Bishop Hythe placed four bells in the tower of Rochester Ca

*Life of S. Stephen, Abbot, p. 3.

"When the rock was hid by the surge's swell,

The mariners heard the warning bell;

And then they knew the perilous rock,

And bless'd the Abbot of Aberbrothock."-SOUTHEY.
Early English Church, p. 120.

Buckler's S. Alban's, p. 5.

« ZurückWeiter »