THE TRUE INHERITANCE OF THE SAINTS.
By J. N. Andrews
"Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth." Matt. v, 5. So says the dear Saviour, and so said the Holy Spirit by the sweet psalmist in Israel. Ps. xxxvii, 11. This then is a promise of God, given by his Spirit, and ratified by his Son Jesus Christ. Who then will say, this promise will never be consummated? Many, my kind reader, have said what is tantamount to a denial of this promise, or to an unbelief in its fulfillment. The kings of the earth have opposed it, and will as long as the devil is prince of the power of the air, and ruler over the children of disobedience in the earth. The great men and mighty men of the earth, have, and will oppose this glorious promise, so long as the world is governed by physical force, and war, rapine, and lust are the instruments of power. The proud clergy will oppose this good promise, as long as they seek to please men, to lord it over the heritage of God, to obtain notoriety over their fellows; or to gratify their lust by sanctimonious names or titles, which our Saviour forbade his followers to receive, or wear. All impenitents will oppose it, so long as they possess reason or judgment: for they well know if none but the meek should inherit the earth, they themselves must be thrust out: and this is the very reason why a certain class of men never quote this text to prove universal salvation; because their reason tells them that shame would mantle their cheek with a blush, to claim this appellation for all men. Then let me discuss my subject in the following order: I. I will inquire, Who are the meek? II. What earth is promised as their inheritance? And when, and how, this blessing will be accomplished? I. Who are the meek? They are not the proud Pharisees, who think themselves better than others; for this would be a contradiction of terms.—To say a proud man is a meek man, would be putting evil for good, and I should meet with the wo pronounced by the prophet Isaiah. (Chap. v, 20.) "Wo unto them that say concerning evil, it is good." And the wise man says, Prov. xvi, 5, "Every one that is proud in heart, is an abomination to the Lord." It cannot be a bigoted man; for the prophet has pronounced a solemn wo against all such. Isa. v, 21: "Wo unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight." It cannot be to those who are seeking honor of men, or one of another; for Christ says of such, "But I know you, that ye have not the love of God in you." It cannot be those who are fond of titles, love the uppermost rooms at feasts, chief seats in the assemblies, greetings in the markets, and to be called of men, Doctor, Doctor, or Rabbi, Rabbi; for Jesus says of the like, "Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers! how can ye escape the damnation of hell?" Matt. xxiii, 1-23. Who then can it be? you may inquire; for there is no sect in Christendom, at the present day, but are seeking for the honors and emoluments of the world. I acknowledge your charge is apparently just, but not universally true. As it respects the leaders and most active men, as the world would judge, in all the sects of Christendom, I fear your objection would hold good in the main; and the reason is plain: meekness is modesty; it "vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up;" and, of course, in the bustle of the present day, meekness would not be found in the world's first ranks. It is only in a time of severe trial, or great persecution, that you will discover the meek man in the front rank; and then he "doth not behave unseemly, seeketh not his own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil." Therefore, not many mighty, nor many noble, or rich, will be found in the company of the meek, in such a time as this. Yet God has reserved, in my opinion, more than seven thousand, who have not bowed the knee to Baal, (the god of honor.)—But, who are the meek? I answer, Christ was meek, as he tells us: "Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart, and ye shall find rest to your souls."—Again; "Behold thy king cometh unto thee, meek," &c. Christ, also, has the same promise from the Father, [Ps. ii, 8.] "Ask of me, and I shall give thee the heathen for thine inheritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for thy possession." The children, which are born of the Spirit of God, are meek, because they possess the same spirit which was in Christ. Isa. xxix, 19.—"The meek also shall increase their joy in the Lord, and the poor among men shall rejoice in the Holy One of Israel." Those who are given to Christ by the Father, are called the meek. Ps. xxii, 26, 30, 31. "The meek shall eat and be satisfied; they shall praise the Lord that seek him; your heart shall live forever. A seed shall serve him; it shall be accounted to the Lord for a generation. They shall come, and shall declare his righteousness unto a people that shall be born, that he hath done this." Those who obey the commandments of God. Ps. xxv, 9, 10. "The meek will he guide in judgment: and the meek will he teach his way. All the paths of the Lord are mercy and truth unto such as keep his covenant and his testimonies." Those who obtain salvation through faith, and are saved from wrath in the day of the Lord's vengeance. Ps. lxxvi, 9.—"When God arose to judgment, to save all the meek of the earth." In one word, the meek are penitent, humble followers of Christ—obedient in word and doctrine—lovers of truth and righteousness, of a contrite spirit, a broken heart, and a reconciled mind to God; a poor and a persecuted people, hated by the world, despised of men, but chosen of God, and precious. And now, my friend, where shall we go to find such a people as this? There is a people somewhere on the earth that will answer to the description of character given by our blessed Master in Matt. v, 3-12, inclusive, or the promise of God would be of no effect. What sect or denomination shall we visit, to find a people of this description? Let us go to the Baptist—a sect to which the writer belongs. What do we see? A people "poor in spirit?"—If so, they are making great efforts not to remain so much longer; for they are seeking anxiously for a good share of worldly goods and popular applause, and are very successful in their calling, in those things. Do they "mourn?" Yes, for the want of more riches and honors of this world. Are they "meek?" Many of them would blush to claim that appellation. Do they "hunger and thirst after righteousness?" I fear many of us are hungering and thirsting after the wisdom of the world, and to favor tyrants and slaveholders, more than to seek righteousness and truth. Will they show mercy? Not if you differ with them in the least article of their creed, or oppose the least of their popular schemes of the present day. But are they not pure in heart? Dare they claim this grace? No; unless a man can claim it, while his heart is full of self-love, a love of the world, and pride, avariciousness and covetousness. Surely you will give them some praise as a sect. Are they not peace-makers; and may they not be called the children of God? They make no peace with one another, nor with other sects, if they cross their path. They plead for, and support war as a sect; and I would be very thankful to know in what sense they can be called peace-makers at the present day. Are they not "persecuted for righteousness' sake?"—If they are, then to be persecuted, is not what I have supposed persecution meant: but this, as a sect, they will not, dare not claim. "Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely for my sake." May they not claim this blessing as a sect? Where is the world saying all manner of evil against the Baptists? If we should claim this, the world would have reason to call us liars. To what sect shall we go, where we may find the meek? To Presbyterians? No, no, say all the other sects, they cannot be the meek; for they are much more anxious to obtain good names from men, and honors of the world. Yes, yes, none seek for these things more. They cannot be the meek. And if we should give them the preference, still there is a difficulty, we cannot well surmount;—there are two parties there; and until they make peace, we could not call them meek; I refer to the old school, and the new school. Where shall we find the meek? for they must inherit the earth. Shall we find them in the Church of England? Methinks I hear a rush, and all the other sects cry out, at once, no, no. Why, what's the matter now? Shame, shame, to call them meek. They do not even pretend to have their members all born of the Spirit; and if pride,82if this 'laying by in store' was not a gathering, a collection of money by the church for the poor saints, no such collection was taken, and Paul forbade it and commanded each individual to lay up for himself on the first day all that he had made the previous week? No; the meaning is obvious: the churches in those places were accustomed to meet on the first day of the week, and Paul directed them to make their collections for the poor saints at Jerusalem at their meetings on that day, so that the money would be ready for him to take when he should come and apply it to the object for which it had been contributed.' Before presenting the words of the Review to which you refer, a brief statement may be to the point: 1. Instead of referring to the language of the Review that 'this laying by in store' was by 'each one at his own house.' Why did you not dare to introduce and explain the language of Paul that settles this point? He says expressly, 'Upon the first day of the week let every one of you LAY BY HIM in store, as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come.' This language is explicit, and is exactly the reverse of placing what they had to give in one common stock. Those who should thus, from week to week, lay by themselves, would have their bounty ready at the coming of Paul. 2. Even the Doway (Romish) Bible is explicit on this: 'On the first day of the week let every one of you put apart with himself, laying up what it shall well please him; that when I come, the gatherings be not then to be made.' 3. Sometime since I attended an Advent meeting, where a public collection was taken. As the hat was passed round and each threw in what he saw fit, the following question proposed itself: Are 'each one' of these persons 'LAYING BY HIM' in store, or are they doing exactly the reverse of this? I submit the question to yourself for an answer. 4. Your remark that if the Review is correct, Paul forbade the collecting of money for the poor saints, and commanded each to lay up for himself, is utterly destitute of foundation in truth, as the words of the Review will show. They are as follows: 'The text quoted above [1 Cor. xvi, 2] does not, to be sure, prove that the people might not have gone to meeting AFTER every one had laid by him in store, though it does not even intimate any thing of the kind, but it does prove that at the time when this injunction, every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, should be obeyed, each must be at his own home!! Having done this they could, when Paul should come, each take to him what they had gathered, as easily as we can take our Bibles with us to meeting. There would be nothing ostentatious about this manner of acting. Public contributions were forbidden by our Lord. Matt. vi. 3, 4. 'But when thou doest alms, let not thy left hand know what thy right hand doeth; that thine alms may be in secret, and thy Father which seeth in secret, himself shall reward thee openly.' Paul did not contradict this injunction of our Lord, nor does he even seem so to do. (We would commend the direction of Paul to conscientious observers of the fourth commandment.) 'Thus easily,' as J. B. Cook remarks, 'is ALL the wind taken from the sails of those who sail, perhaps unwittingly, under the Pope's Sabbath's flag.' This uses up all the inferences presented by C. with which to construct a first-day institution out of apostolic 'preference.' If C. be still bent on doing this, we now suggest that 'the successor to the chief Apostle' can furnish any amount of evidence desired. ('The Catholic church commands all her children to keep the Sunday, and the festivals of the saints.')—The Sabbath of the Elders rests(?) upon a rolling pebble; the Sabbath of Jehovah rests upon a solid ROCK. They are now submitted for choice. 1 Kings xviii, 21." And now in conclusion, May I not be allowed to invite you to throw away, entirely and for ever, this 'rag of the Mother of harlots,' and to embrace and delight in the Sabbath of Jehovah, which he hallowed for man at Creation? J. N. ANDREWS.
Port Byron, Cayuga Co., N. Y., June, '52.