If we look more closely at the details, we find that the glad tidings are not limited,—
1. By nationality.
When Wilberforce pleaded in the House of Commons for the admission of missionaries to India, it was argued that the Gospel was not adapted to the Indian mind, and that it was not in the nature of things that Hindoos should be converted to God. So persons, laying claim to great anthropological wisdom, appear to regard the Gospel as something never meant for the African. But there is no limitation in Scripture. African, Indian, American, New Zealander, are all alike included in the message as found there. The Jew of old believed that it was only for the Jews, and some English in modern times seem to regard it as intended only for the European. But the Word of God says it is for all; experience proves it to be for all; and the comparatively recent missionary efforts of the Church of Christ have been sufficient to prove that climate makes no difference as to faith; and, whether it be under a tropical sun, or in an arctic frost, the knowledge of Christ is followed up by the same results,—the same change of heart, the same love, the same fruits of the Spirit, the same joy and peace in believing, and the same blessed hope to fill the soul in the dying hour. Our missionary spirit therefore should be wide as the world; and those who boast of the superior broadness of their principles, ought to lead the way in a large-hearted effort to follow up the directions of their Saviour:—“Go ye into all the world, and preach the Gospel to every creature.”
2. It is not limited by ecclesiastical order.
God forbid that I should say one word that should appear for one moment to make light of Christian order, for I believe it to be a subject far too much forgotten by devoted men in the present day. Evangelical zeal is considered by some to have full license to override all authority, and break through every regulation. There are many excellent, zealous, faithful, and fervent spirits, who are contending manfully for the inspiration of the whole of Scripture, but who appear completely to ignore such words as those by St. Paul, in 1 Thess. v. 12, 13. I believe therefore, that it is one of the special duties of the day to urge devoted Christians to investigate what Scripture says of order. But, however important it be, we must still remember that the glad tidings of the Gospel are not limited to any order or any system whatever. Our episcopacy is gathered from facts recorded in Scripture, but is never established by the authority of a command. We adopt it because we believe it to be in harmony with Apostolic practice as revealed in Scripture; but we dare not pronounce it an essential: for it is not so pronounced in Scripture. There is not one word there to lead us to suppose that episcopacy is like one great conduit pipe, through which alone grace can flow. The blessed message is not limited to any one channel. The Holy Spirit is free as the winds of heaven; and it is perfectly clear that God, in saving souls, has not tied Himself down to the employment of any particular Church organization. As the message is sent to all men, in all countries, and under all circumstances, so also is it conveyed through all kinds of instrumentalities;—Episcopalian and Nonconformist,—ordained and unordained,—Churchmen, Dissenters, Presbyterians,—Churches at home and Churches abroad,—teachers, preachers, pastors and evangelists; for there is a breadth in the agency as well as in the sphere of action, and the same Lord over all, who is rich unto all that call upon Him, is rich also unto all who labour for His Name.
3. Once more: there is no doctrinal limitation.
I presume that we are perfectly agreed as to the Scriptural truth,—that our salvation in Christ Jesus is to be ascribed entirely to the Father’s electing love. We know that it was not our fallen, ruined, sin-corrupted will which chose Him, but His own boundless grace which chose us to life. In other words, we know that salvation is the result of God’s election, and we believe in the words of our Lord,—“No man can come to Me except the Father which hath sent Me draw him.” But we have all probably felt, at some time or other, the difficulty of reconciling such a fact with the free offer of life to all. It is not unnatural that men should argue, that if the elect alone are saved, to them alone must the salvation be offered. I am not prepared to find any fault with the logical process which leads to this conclusion, for I fully admit that to my own mind the logic seems correct; but God’s eternal counsels rise high above all human logic, and there are deep mysteries in His infinite mind, which we finite thinkers are utterly unable to unravel. So it is in this instance. Our logic breaks down, but His Word stands fast; and that Word teaches us that God’s election does not neutralize the free offer, any more than the Godhead of the Lord Jesus Christ neutralized His Manhood. How it is we cannot explain, any more than we can the union of two natures in the one Person of our Blessed Saviour. But, thanks be to God, we find in Scripture the universal offer side by side with electing love; so that, accepting Scripture as we find it, we learn that election does not narrow the breadth of the offer, or take away its universality. It does not blot out the “whosoever” from the words of our Saviour. It does not contract the glad tidings; but it leaves the Gospel perfectly open to every man, without qualification, without limitation, and without the necessity of any evidence of election to precede a trust in the Lord Jesus for pardon, life, and immortality.
II. But we must pass on to the freeness. For there might be an offer made to every one, but yet on such terms that no one could accept it; and so would this have been, had God required that there should be one act of sinless obedience on our part, as a preliminary qualification to our being saved in Christ Jesus. The person who is possessed of nothing is as little able to pay one pound as a hundred; and the ruined man, dead in sin, is as little able to produce one act of life as a hundred. So long as he is dead he can produce nothing; for he is not only without God, but also without strength. Oh, the depth of the riches of the tender lovingkindness of our God! Oh, the wonders of that grace that does not wait till the sinner can produce a something, however small that something be; but freely, and graciously, and mercifully, and lovingly, bestows a free, full, perfect, complete, and everlasting reconciliation on the poor ruined sinner, even at the very time of his utter ruin! I do not pretend to know all the various religious systems of the world; but this I can most safely say,—that I never yet heard of anything but the blessed Gospel of the grace of God, which proclaims reconciliation to men without a claim, and at the very time that they are without a claim. In every other system the order is amendment first, and forgiveness second: but in the Gospel the order is reversed, and we find the forgiveness first, as a free gift, while the amendment follows, as the blessed fruit of the Spirit in a repentant and loving heart. The language of Scripture is not what any natural moralist would have written,—“There is forgiveness with Thee if I can but fear Thee sufficiently:” but God reverses the order, so that those who cannot, for one moment, stand before Him, are taught to say,—“There is forgiveness with Thee that Thou mayest be feared.” I should like to know from those who boast of the superior benevolence of their system, what that system does for the helpless,—for the man whose soul is paralyzed, and whose power to rise is gone, being deadened by his sin. I fearlessly ask the advocate of mere natural religion, what the religion of nature can do for such an one. His moral sense may teach him his duty, and his conscience may bring him in guilty of not having fulfilled that duty; but what does natural religion do to reinstate and restore him? Our Gospel proclaims to him pardon, and our Saviour gives him life, even at the time of the deepest ruin. But what does nature do for him? What does conscience do to restore him? It leaves him condemned, ruined, sunk, and helpless; and holds out to him nothing better than the hope, that when he has got out of the pit, he may find mercy through the benevolence of God. If that were the Gospel, it would be glad tidings to those only who have already recovered themselves from their ruin. The Lord Jesus would be a Saviour for only such as do not need one. It would be a promise of life to those only who have already raised themselves from death; but it would be a sentence of everlasting exclusion against all those who have failed as often as we have done, and have had to learn from bitter experience the sad lesson of their utter helplessness. But, praised be God, the whole ransom has been paid, the whole claim of the law satisfied, the utmost depth of ruin fully provided for; so that now there is life in the midst of death, and full, complete, and final reconciliation presented to the sinner, at the very time when he is lost in his fall. Did the world ever produce an offer so free? and was there ever yet a religious system in the world which presented such a salvation, on such terms, to the sinner?
III. But still there is an exclusiveness in the Gospel.
Let us however clearly understand, when we speak of exclusiveness, that we do not mean exclusiveness in the glad tidings, for, as already shown, these glad tidings are freely sent to every man; but what we do mean is,—that Christ Jesus is the only Saviour, and that “there is none other name under heaven, given amongst men, whereby we must be saved.” We do mean that God has not promised salvation through a conscientious devotion to Buddha, or Vishnu, or Mahommed, or reason, or the light of nature; but that God, in giving Christ as our life, gave Him as the only Source of life, and not as one amongst many Saviours.