6. The ordiniation of Christ. "Even so hath the Lord ordained that they which preach the gospel should live of the gospel" (see Matthew 10:10). "Should live of the gospel," not grow rich on the gospel, but have from it that which is needful for subsistence. Looking at all that Paul says on that question here, and at the immense service that a true minister renders to society, the conviction cannot be avoided that no man has a stronger claim to a temporal recompense for his labour than a true gospel minister. Albeit no claims are so universally ignored. What Churches in these modern times tender to their ministers as an acknowledgment of their service is regarded as a charity rather than a claim. Charity, indeed! Call the money you pay to your butcher, baker, lawyer, doctor, charity; but in the name of all that is just, do not call that charity which you tender to the man who consecrates his entire being and time to impart to you the elements of eternal life.
V. The greater the minister of Christ, the MORE READY TO SURRENDER HIS CLAIMS FOR THE SAKE OF USEFULNESS. Great as were the claims of Paul, he magnanimously surrenders them all in order to become more useful. He would not feast at banquets, enjoy conjugal life, or take payment for his services, lest his usefulness should be in the least impaired. "But I have used none of these things: neither have I written these things, that it should be so done unto me; for it were better for me to die, than that any man should make my glorying void." I would sooner die than be dependent on you for a livelihood. Grand man! He stood before his congregations and said, "I have coveted no man's silver, or gold, or apparel. Yea, ye yourselves know, that these hands have ministered unto my necessities, and to them that were with me."
1 Corinthians 9:22, 1 Corinthians 9:23
Moral identification with others a qualification of the evangel.
These verses and the context are sometimes taken as expressive of the accommodating spirit of the apostle in his endeavours to save men. Hence he is regarded as acting in a somewhat Jesuitical way, pretending to be what he was not, coming down to the prejudices of men, and taking them as it were by guile. Such a view of the apostle is utterly untrue. From his very constitution, to say nothing of his Christianity, he could not bend to any temporizing expediency. There was nothing of the Jesuit or the diplomatist in him. All that he means, I think, by the words is that he endeavoured to put himself into the place, or rather into the views and feelings, of those whom he endeavoured to win to Christ. He transmigrated himself, so to speak, went into their souls, clothed himself with their feelings, and argued from their standpoint. Now, this way of influencing men is both right and wise. As a debater, whether in politics, philosophy, or religion, he only acts fairly and with power who endeavours to put himself into the very position of his opponent, to look at the points in dispute from the opponent's standpoint, with the opponent's eyes, and through the opponent's passions. Such a man becomes mighty in debate. This is what Paul did. He made "himself all things to all men." In arguing with the Jew he made himself a Jew in feeling, with the Greek a Greek in feeling, with a slave a slave in feeling, with a master a master in feeling. Thus he was a philosopher when he spoke to the Athenians, and a Jew when he spoke to the Jews. Now, we regard this power of moral transmigration, this power of passing into another man's soul and taking another man's experience, as an essential qualification for a successful evangel; and this power implies at least three things.
I. A HIGHLY IMAGINATIVE TEMPERAMENT. The phlegmatic man, whose nature is incapable of taking fire, who moves with the creeping legs of logic rather than on the wings of moral intuition, would find it all but impossible to realize another man's experiences. He could not be a dramatist. He could not show another man to himself. No one can enter into the experience of another only on the strong warm current of social sympathy. Hence no young men should be encouraged to assume the work of the Christian ministry who have not that fervid imagination, that glowing temperament, that constitute a dramatic genius,
II. A KNOWLEDGE OF HUMAN LIFE. It is necessary that we should make ourselves thoroughly acquainted, not merely with the outward circumstances of the men we seek to influence, but with their inner life—their moods of thought, their habits of mind, their leading passions, their strongest proclivities. This requires study of men, not as they appear in books, but as they appear in their circle; and men, not in the mass, but in their individual character and idiosyncrasies. Can an Englishman so know a Hindoo, a Chinese, or a Japanese, as to put himself into his experience? I trow not.
III. A PASSIONATE LOVE FOR SOULS. Nothing but the constraining love of Christ can invest man either with the disposition or the power for such a work—a work requiring self sacrifice, patience, tenderness, invincible determination, and hallowed devotion. This is what gave Paul the power to be "made all things to all men." "I please all men in all things," he says, "not seeking mine own profit, but the profit of many, that they may be saved."
CONCLUSION. The work of a moral redeemer is, of all works, the greatest and the most arduous. There is no work in all the departments of human labour that requires such high qualifications as the work of bringing souls to Christ.
1 Corinthians 9:24-26
The Christian race.
"Know ye not that they which run in a race, run all, but one receiveth the prize? So run, that ye may obtain. And every man that striveth for the mastery is temperate in all things. Now they do it to obtain a corruptible crown; but we an incorruptible. I therefore so run, not as uncertainly; so fight I, not as one that beateth the air." The Christian life is a race, and we are exhorted to run that the prize may be obtained. "So run." How?
I. Run in the PRESCRIBED COURSE. The course is marked out and measured. The starting place is at the foot of the cross, and the goal is planted in the grave.
II. Run WITHOUT INCUMBRANCE. "Lay aside every weight," all worldly cares, and inordinate sympathetic embarrassing prejudices, and fettering habits.
III. Run WITH ALL POSSIBLE CELERITY. Shake off sloth and languor, stretch every muscle and limb, throw the whole force of your being into the effort.
IV. Run WITH UNTIRING PERSISTENCY. Pause not, nor loiter a moment until the end is obtained. "So run, that ye may obtain."
1 Corinthians 9:27
Hell after preaching.
"But I keep," etc. These are terrible words, and they teach at least three things.
I. THAT DELIVERANCE FROM HELL DEMANDS THE MOST EARNEST SELF DISCIPLINE. "I keep under my body." I subdue the flesh by violent and reiterated blows. The reason for this mortification of the flesh is, "lest that by any means, when I have preached to others, I myself should be a castaway." Self discipline may be said to consist of two things.
1. The entire subjugation of the body to the mind. The body was intended to be the organ, the servant, and the instrument of the mind, but it has become the master. The supremacy of the body is the curse of the world and the ruin of the man.
2. The subjugation of the mind to the Spirit of Christ. Though the mind governs the body, if the mind is false, selfish, unloyal to Christ, there is no discipline. The mind must be the servant of Christ in order to be the legitimate sovereign of the body. These two things include spiritual discipline.
II. THAT THE NECESSITY OF THIS SELF DISCIPLINE CANNOT BE SUPERSEDED BY THE MOST SUCCESSFUL PREACHING. "When I have preached to others." Paul had preached to others. He had preached to many in different lands, preached earnestly and successfully, preached so that thousands were converted by his ministry, preached so as no one else has ever preached; yet his preaching, he felt, did not do the work of self discipline. Indeed, there is much in the work of preaching that has a tendency to operate against personal spiritual culture.
1. Familiarity with sacred truths destroys for us their charm of freshness.
2. A professional handling of God's Word interferes with its personal application.
3. The opinions of audiences, favourable or otherwise, exert an influence unfavourable to spiritual discipline. In connection with all this, Satan is especially active in opposing the growth of spiritual piety in the preacher's tone. So that there is a terrible danger that, whilst the preacher is cultivating the vineyards of others, he is neglecting his own.
III. THE MOST SUCCESSFUL PREACHING MAY BE FOLLOWED BY ULTIMATE RUIN. "I myself should be a castaway!"—rejected! Who shall fathom the meaning of this word? A successful preacher a "castaway"—be rejected! The Tophet of him who has offered mercy to others which he has despised, urged truths on the credence of others that he has disbelieved, enforced laws on others which he has transgressed, will burn with severer fires and peal with more awful thunders. A magnifying glass held in a certain position by the hand of a child may convey sufficient fire through it to wrap the neighbourhood in conflagration, albeit the glass through which the fire has passed remains unheated, cold as flint. So a man may convey to others the rays of the sun of Righteousness, and yet his own heart remain cold as ice. Truly a terrible fact this.
HOMILIES BY C. LIPSCOMB
1 Corinthians 9:1-14
How St. Paul regarded his apostleship and its rights.
To induce the Corinthians to deny themselves the exercise of a liberty they had in things indifferent, St. Paul bad made the argument in the eighth chapter. Liberty was amenable to conscience, knowledge secondary to love, and love was the constructing or building up power of the new spiritual edifice. Not one of these could be spared, for they were all constituents of manhood in Christ; but they must be adjusted to one another under the supremacy of love. If one had a true reverence for his own conscience, he would reverence conscience in others. The conscience of another might be weak, and he might pity the weakness, and yet this pity, if genuine, would not allow scorn or contempt. The argument was a lesson in patience and forbearance, a lesson in self abnegation, and a lesson, furthermore, in responsibility for our example; So far as the immediate issue is concerned (meats offered to idols and participating in feasts held in heathen temples), the logic is direct and conclusive. At no moment does the apostle confine himself to individual rights on the part of such as had enlightened views as to the nothingness of idols. He looks also at community rights and discusses a special duty on the ground of general interests. Here, as in the former chapters, the community man, the community Christian, is before him; and he shows the great characteristic of a teacher in the fact that his business is to mould a body of men into unity. Of what value are minds of large endowments, in their social relations, if they stand for a narrow and cramped individualism? If a man has a finer eye than others, it is that he may see further into the needs of the race. If he has more ardent sympathies, it is for their wider outgoing. Genius is nature's protest, not against ordinary talents, but against the littleness and selfish absorption of individuality. And so far, genius is an instinctive yearning in the direction, of a world wide appreciation and love, and is one of those innumerable parables m which Christianity lies imbedded till the human mind can be prepared to receive it. Now, St. Paul was the foremost representative, in a certain sense, of this community idea, and, unquestionably, Corinth put its strength and compass to a very severe test. At his time of life, at that era in his ministry, and from just such a mixed people, this grand sentiment of universality was destined by Providence—so we may conjecture—to undergo a thorough discipline. Each truth has its own peculiar test. Some truths need a hotter furnace than others to separate the human dross and bring out the refined gold. If, then, St. Paul was experiencing a special mental and spiritual training in respect to this transcendent doctrine, we have an insight into his mode of argument, and even into the style of his illustrations and enforcement. Identified with his doctrine, he himself merging, as it were, his personality in its nature and operations, his own fortunes bound up inseparably with its fortunes,—how could he avoid citing his own example to confirm the views he so fervently advocated? One paragraph, at least, must be given to his individual portraiture as a community man, a race man, intent with his whole heart on bringing a world to the Lord Jesus. And he had sprung to this high level of his own experience and history when he said in the thirteenth verse of the previous chapter, "I will eat no flesh," etc. On that ground, remote as it was from that occupied by some of his Corinthian friends, he was perfectly at home; he knew his strength in God; he saw precisely what to say of grace and its workings in his soul, and how to say it with unanswerable force—straightforward, vivid, incisive. The movement of thought, even for him, is uncommonly rapid. Sentences are short; the words simple, intense, and closely linked. Interrogation abounds. He is an apostle; a tree apostle; an apostle who saw not Christ in his humiliation, and never knew him after the flesh, but has seen him in his glorification, and dates his conversion from the spectacle of his Divine exaltation; and, last of all, an apostle whose success among the Corinthians ("my work in the Lord;" "the seal of mine apostleship") has vindicated and verified his claims as Christ's chosen servant. Self assertion becomes under some circumstances a very important duty, and, if self be surrendered to God, there is no way more effective to exemplify humility. One who can ascend to a height so lofty, and stand among the sublimities of the universe apart from self and even dead to self, is a far greater man in the moral scale than one who, on the low plain of this world, merely foregoes his selfishness and acts disinterestedly to comply with an earthly contingency. Full of the infinite and eternal, St. Paul's thoughts are God's thoughts finding tone and accent in his utterance. There is no faltering, no nice qualifyings, no hesitating apprehension lest self should insinuate its pretensions. But the view given of himself is large, massive, and, for its purpose, strikingly complete. Men cannot speak of themselves in such a strain unless an utter self forgetfulness be precedent. A thinker's illustrations show what hold a thought has on him. In this instance St. Paul's illustrations are significant as well as diversified. Soldiers in the field, husbandmen in the vineyard, shepherds with their flocks, supply his imagination with analogies to establish the right claimed by himself "to eat and to drink," "to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles," and "to forbear working." On all grounds, natural and civil and religious, he maintains the right, and then advances to Old Testament authority. "Doth God take care for oxen?" Yea, not only for their sakes as animals, but for man's benefit, the providence over the lower creation being tributary to the providence that looks to man's welfare as the final earthly cause of all arrangements in the kingdom of nature. Yea, verily, we are in the song of the bird and the muscle of the horse and the fidelity of all domesticated creatures, as surely as in the grass and the cereals and the luscious fruits of the ground. Most true it is that
"More servants wait on man
Than he'll take notice of; in every path
He treads down that which doth befriend him
When sickness makes him pale and wan.
Oh, mighty love! Man is one world, and hath
Another to attend him."
The prefigurations and the wondrous homologies are all from below, so that whatever may be found by industry, by science and art, in the amplitude and beneficence of material things and of animal existence, are but so many prophecies of man's natural position of headship. Yet what incompleteness were in all this, and what a mockery of man's exaltation, if it were all!—a vast pyramid enclosing a mummy—a magnificent temple, like the heathen temples, in which you walk through portico and corridor and hall to confront at last a worthless image in stone. To perfect this idea of man shadowed forth beneath him and ever advancing towards him, there must be a counterpart. The counterpart is the archetype above. It descends to man in Christ—Son of man because Son of God. "For our sakes, no doubt, this is written;" and all the writings, below and above, on the earth's strata, in the Holy Scriptures, are alike in this: "for our sakes." It is all a unity or it is all nothing. And this power of manhood St. Paul declares to belong to him, and vested to the full in his apostleship. If, now, St. Paul had exhorted the Corinthians so urgently to obey the dictates of conscience in a matter clearly harmless, and thus avoid a wrong to the weaker brethren and a wrong to their own souls; and if he had avowed his own inflexible resolution to "eat no flesh" (the meat of which he bad been speaking) "forever;" it was a fit occasion to testify to his own self denial for the sake of the gospel. The solace of domestic life, the special tenderness of close sympathy, the offices of watchful affection, ministerial support, "carnal things" that might have lightened the burden of poverty and made his toil much easier,—these were cheerfully resigned. Others allowed themselves these aids and comforts; he refused them, one and all. From the common order of apostolic life he would stand aside in his own isolated lot, and "my gospel" should have in his own career the most forcible demonstration of his glorious individuality. And then, recollecting the law of the temple service which provided for the support of the priests, he would strengthen the analogical argument already presented in favour of his rights. At every touch the individual portrait of the community and race man glows more vividly on the canvas. The contrast had cost him much. Poverty, loneliness, sorrow, had been intensified, but there it was—a contrast with the soldier, the husbandman, the shepherd, the priest, the apostles—self assumed and a perpetual obligation—"lest we should hinder the gospel of Christ."—L.
1 Corinthians 9:15-23
Reasons for this self denial.
The rights had been resigned, the power to use his privileges had been unused, and the obligation, self assumed, was to be perpetual. Did any one suspect otherwise? "Better for me to die" than this matter of boasting should be taken from me. No ground for boasting existed in the mere preaching of the gospel; but he could claim and did claim that, in renouncing his right to a support and making other exceptional sacrifices, he was entitled to the boast of preaching a free gospel. A woe is upon him if he preach not the gospel, a necessity he cannot evade while true to his moral nature, and yet a necessity which he will transmute and glorify by his magnanimity in serving without remuneration. Rights; what were they? Where there was such an overpowering sense of the goodness of God and the grace of Christ as had been manifested in his personal salvation and in conferring upon him the apostleship, "better die" than measure duty by mere equivalence of action. Out of the depths of gratitude the man rises, not to the attitude of an apostle, but an apostle who felt with the utmost intensity the obligations of sentiment no less than those of principle. Freely had he received, and freely would he give, so freely indeed as to part with a portion of freedom and to gain by his loss; and in this and by means of this he had his reward. Relinquishing his rights and descending to the condition of a slave, he accommodated himself to the infirmities and prejudices of others so as to save the greater number. Whenever he could evince his regard for the Jewish nation and conform to its customs and usages without compromising Christianity, he became "as a Jew unto the Jews." Nor did he limit his concessions to his own countrymen, but he became "all things to all men," never yielding the truth, never compromising a principle, never making conscience subservient to prudence, never finding the supreme law of action in any utility, and always resolute to concede points only indifferent and equally resolute to maintain that things indifferent involved no moral obligation. And why all this? There were two reasons for it: one was for the good of the large number, "gain the more;" and the other was the benefit to himself—a follow "partaker with you" in the blessings of the gospel. "Up to this point he has been speaking of his self denial for the sake of others; here he begins to speak of it for his own sake. It is no longer 'that I may save some,' but 'that I may be a partaker of the gospel with you'" (Stanley).—L.
1 Corinthians 9:24-27
Self denial urged in view of the heavenly crown.
Power is no self guiding instinct in itself. To be true power, it must be directed by something higher than its own nature. A vast fund of power is laid up within us, and of it two things may be said, viz. the amount of power abstractly considered is far greater than we can use; and, again, our available power must be held under check. As to the former, capacity in every man exceeds ability, and much of our education consists in converting capacity into actual ability. And this latency of power serves another purpose, inasmuch as it is a reserved fund held for an emergency. At times, sudden calls are made on our energies, drafts at sight, which demand extraordinary effort. Feats of physical strength are then performed which are amazing. The same is true of the mind; we witness its faculties, under some tremendous pressure, yielding a wisdom, a patience, a persistency, that surpass all expectation. On the other hand, our available power that can be brought any moment into play must be restrained, or injury results. The harm is manifold. It is pernicious to others. Power antagonizes the power of our fellow men much oftener than it conciliates, and, acting as a repellent instead of an attractive force it destroys unity, which is the great end of all existence, Nor is it less hurtful to the man himself, for, in pushing his power to extremes, he exhausts the very ability concerned in using the power. An undue use of power, therefore, overtaxes others and ourselves. And, accordingly, St. Paul takes both these facts into consideration, advancing from self denial for the sake of others to self denial for his own good, and in this way perfecting the argument. Was he not a philosopher of profound insight in this method of mental procedure? Dismiss, for an instant, the view of him as a Christian apostle, and look at him as an ethical thinker. To induce men to practise the self denial of power, he marshals all the social and sympathetic virtues to its aid; brings pity and compassion as humane instincts to its service, enlists the imagination and its sensibilities as a higher form of emotional energy, and crowns the ascending series of influences by conscience and moral affection in behalf of our fellow men. This is the first training of self denial. Thence it proceeds to its other task. It gathers up its strength and resources, and turns them to its self culture. Was this the method of Stoicism? Was not the method of Stoicism the precise opposite of this? If Seneca had observed this law of culture, would not his exile have presented a very different spectacle? If Marcus Aurelius had trained himself to discern the image of humanity in others, instead of looking into the mirror of Stoicism to see his own image, could he have been guilty, a man of such beautiful and noble virtues, of persecuting Christianity? Return to St. Paul as a Christian apostle. The true philosopher is here, but not complacently studying his own image in the glass that Stoicism held up before its disciples. What he first sees is the Christ of humanity in others, who, in a religious sense, are bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh. And there is an expression of pain on the brow, and of the sorrow of the heart in his fixed eye, as he realizes that these men are not fully conscious of their relationship to Christ, and therefore very imperfect in their appreciation of others and themselves. But he comprehends them in Christ, and he can bear their infirmities since his love is no mere aesthetic sentiment. Now, then, he can show the extent of that self denial required to attain the reward of the gospel. Of course, this must be done by figurative language, images being the perfection of language and most necessary when spiritual things are to be made clear. Naturally enough, the Grecian games occurred to him; and as the pomp and splendour of these national shows passed before him, was it the gathered multitude, the high enthusiasm, the thrilling suspense, the heart of Achaia throbbing with pride and exultation, that enlisted his interest? What a sense it was to the senses, and even more than to the senses, as Greeks interpreted its meanings! The very landscape lent a charm to the contests, and conspired with the Corinthian citadel, the sloping hills, the marble seats, and the eager crowds, to perpetuate the historic memories of a vanished Greece. Even here, degenerate as the age was, moral elements were at work. A better past had not left itself without a witness in the present. Recollections of ancestry, traditions of virtue and heroism, honourable emulation, an energetic will, hard and continuous discipline for ten months, were associated with the occasion. But St. Paul's mind was engrossed by the symbolism of the Isthmian games. The metaphor of the racecourse attracts his attention. The preparatory training, the diet, the willing temperance and moderation, the regimen of the athlete, and the studious care to observe the conditions of success, furnish a forcible illustration of what was essential to those who would run the Christian race and win an immortal crown. Between the two there is a resemblance. Between the two there is a vast dissimilarity. "They do it to obtain a corruptible crown; but we an incorruptible.'' Once more, St. Paul introduces himself; he is an earnest athlete bent on victory; all his energies are in training and have long been in training; and, changing the figure at this point, the boxer is mentioned: "So fight I, not as one that beateth the air"—not as one who wastes strength in random strokes, but one whose blows are delivered with skill and an achieving purpose. And now, just as one who has toiled up to some mountain summit brings back to the plain a finer light of beauty in his eye and a larger play of strength in the muscle of the heart, so St. Paul returns from the figurative to the literal with his thought enhanced in vigour. "I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection"—"buffet the body," "beat it," and "bring it into bondage." What! is the body a contestant against us? Is it an adversary to be bruised and beaten, made to know its place? So indeed St. Paul argues in respect to his own body, and the fact in his case is the fact in all cases. Ideally, the body is the soul's helper, furnishing the soul with very many true and lofty ideas, giving it much it could never have if disembodied or in an organization less sensuous, and securing it a grandeur of development not possible otherwise. Practically, the body is so sensitive to itself, so in love with its own enjoyments, so enslaved to its lusts and appetites, that it must be kept under and brought into subjection. The law is very plain. It has to be obeyed in some measure by. every one. If the epicure is nothing but an epicure and always an epicure, nature is soon in violent revolt. To be an epicure, he must have some prudence in his indulgence, and order times and seasons into the service of his pleasures. To be students, poets, artists, philosophers, ay, to be mechanics, tradesmen, farmers, we must put the body under by asserting, in a certain degree, the inherent superiority of the mind. For the most part, however, there are reactions, fearful in some, hazardous to all. Suppose, now, that the gross forms of sensuality or even the fascinating forms of sensuousness, are held under mastery. What then? Is the Divine ideal of the body realized? Nay; the body may be made a most efficient and admirable servant to the business man, to the student, to the artist, to the philosopher, and may answer all the earthly and social ends of the intellect and the natural affections, and yet be an undeveloped human body. Only in conforming to spiritual relations, only in sharing Christ's humanity, can it be developed. Faith, hope, love, Christian principles, Christian sentiments, Christian impulses, are just as requisite to form and shape the material body to the companionship of the redeemed spirit, as food, air, sleep, are necessary for its physical existence. The argument of St. Paul implies all this, nor could it imply less and be congruous with his purpose and aim. And, therefore, when he says, "I keep under my body, and bring it into subjection," he means to say," I am not making my body less a part of the universe, but more a part thereof, and I am lifting this lower nature towards the higher, and developing my body in the direction of the nature and functions of the resurrection body."—L.
HOMILIES BY J.R. THOMSON
1 Corinthians 9:1, 1 Corinthians 9:2
Signs of apostleship.
Why should Paul, departing from his usual custom, speak here of himself and of his claims? Undoubtedly because in this Christian society at Corinth there were those, prompted by Judaizing teachers, who called in question his apostleship, his equality with those who had been the companions of Jesus in his ministry, and had received their commission before his ascension. Wishing to incite the Corinthians to self denial, Paul put himself forward as an example of this virtue. But to make this example effective, it was necessary that he should assert and vindicate his position and rights. If he had no special commission from Christ, there was no virtue in renouncing privileges which were never his. That an apostle should live as he did—a life of celibacy and manual labour—for the Church's good, was very significant. Such was Paul's position; he sets out, therefore, by establishing his apostolic claims and position.
I. THE VISION OF THE LORD CHRIST. Not that every one who saw Jesus became an apostle; but that none became an apostle who had not seen him, who had not received the commission from his lips. In all likelihood, some of Paul's opponents at Corinth had contrasted the past history of the apostle of the Gentiles with that of the twelve, to his disadvantage. The others, it was well known, had seen the Lord; but was it certain that Paul had been so favoured? Now, Paul would not submit to an imputation which must needs weaken the authority of all he might say or do. He had seen the Lord on the way to Damascus, had heard his voice, and had by him been then entrusted with a special commission to the Gentiles. It was not simply that Paul had seen Jesus; he had been endowed with his Spirit and with his authority. He was not preaching the gospel at the instigation of his own inclinations, but in obedience to a command laid upon him by the highest authority.
II. SUCCESS IN APOSTOLIC LABOUR. The craftsman proves his ability by the work he does; the sailor by his navigation of the vessel; the soldier by his bravery and skill in war. So the apostle acknowledges the justice of the practical test, and subjects himself thereto accordingly. There may be a shade of difference in the meaning of the words employed.
1. Paul appealed to his work. Labour is misspent when no results ensue. But this man's labour had not been in vain in the Lord. Jews and Gentiles had been brought to the faith of Christ and to the hope of life eternal.
2. The workmanship of the apostle was also his seal, i.e. it bore the mark, impress, and witness of his own character and ability and office. A competent judge, looking to the Churches Paul had founded, would admit them to be evidence of his apostleship.
3. It is observable that the signs were manifest in the very community in which his authority was questioned. There is irony and force in the appeal made to the Corinthians, whether they themselves were not, in their own Christian position, proof of Paul's apostleship. Whoever raised a question, whoever offered opposition, the Christians of Corinth should certainly have honoured the founder of their Church and the bearer of the gospel to their souls.—T.
1 Corinthians 9:11, 1 Corinthians 9:12
Rights asserted and foregone.
No passage in Paul's writings more reveals to us the nobility of the man's nature than this. As we read, we feel that such a character could not fail to command the admiration and sympathy of all who were capable of appreciating it. The apostle's abilities were great; but his moral qualities towered more loftily above those of other men, even than did his intellectual powers. Such a servant of God was well fitted to be the first and the greatest preacher of Christ to the nations; for he so shared the mind of the Master, that they who saw, heard, and knew him must have been brought by such experience very near to the Saviour whose Spirit he possessed and whose gospel he preached.
I. THE JUST RIGHTS THE APOSTLE ASSERTED. Paul claimed that, like other teachers, he had a claim upon his scholars for recompense and support.
1. He supported this by striking illustrations. The soldier has his rations provided by his country on whose behalf he fights; the vine dresser eats of the produce of the vineyard; the shepherd shares in the profit of the flock which he feeds; the husbandman who ploughs, sows, and threshes does so in the expectation that he shall eat of the corn he grows.
2. He adds an argument from Scripture. Ingeniously does he apply the principle involved in the humane regulation which forbids the ox to be muzzled when it treads out the corn. A principle which holds good even with regard to cattle is surely valid when applied to men, to Christian labourers.
3. He urges the superiority of the advantages bestowed by the teacher over those which he is justified in expecting by way of acknowledgment if not of return. They who receive spiritual things may surely yield carnal things.
4. This right Paul claims for all ministers and evangelists, himself included.