MARK xvi. 15.
Go ye into all the world, and preach the Gospel to every creature.
This was nearly the last command of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, addressed to his disciples: and to it was annexed in another gospel, a promise, which shows that this was not only intended as a commandment for that period, but for the present day. “Lo I am with you alway” (he said at the same time) “even unto the end of the world.” The command then extends to as long a period as the support is promised to be continued, i.e. to the end of the world.
In placing myself therefore as an advocate for a society, the purpose of which is, the distribution of the word of God, I have not thought that I could choose a text which more strongly and persuasively urges upon you a zealous promotion of this great work, than a command so directly laid down upon this subject, and to the fulfilment of which such large assistance is promised. For what is the gospel which the disciples of our Lord are commanded to preach? The Gospel in its strictest sense is good news; it is all that good news of happiness now, which is promised in the ways of religion, and of salvation hereafter. The gospel which is here recommended is all the communication of God to man, which has been made to us in the holy Scriptures. It conveys all the information which man has of his condemned state by nature before God, and points out at the same time a prospect of a full propitiation for his sins in the death of Jesus Christ. It offers to sinners, to all who are weary and heavy laden, a free invitation to come, without any merit of their own, to receive the benefits of Jesus Christ’s death; it affords to those who are assured of their salvation, a measure by which they can determine whether their hope of salvation be reasonable, or whether it be founded upon their own delusions; it gives us a standard for every duty, an encouragement for every exertion, a wanting against every sin; and whilst on the one hand it declares that “without holiness no man shall see the Lord,” on the other it testifies that “there is no condemnation with God to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh but after the spirit.” Such is the gospel which we are commanded to preach to every creature, and which is unfolded to us in the word of God.
I cannot in a Christian congregation for a moment suppose that any command of our Lord can be disputed; I need, therefore, scarcely feel that it is necessary to do much more than to take for granted that it is one of the great leading duties of every Christian, to spread abroad this gospel, or in other words, to promote the circulation of the Scriptures. What can be the objection to circulating the simple word of God? Is it that some work ought to accompany it, in order to protect, or give it a right application? The command of our Lord has no limitation of this kind. “Go” says my text “and preach the gospel;” (this gospel which the apostles have delivered down to us in the Scriptures,) “go and preach it to every creature.” Is an objection started that all the word of God ought not to be circulated, that some part of it is needless, some unintelligible? We have in answer to this, the words of an apostle, who declares to us that “all Scripture is given by inspiration from God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.” Thank God that very few have started the notion, that the Scriptures alone should not be spread abroad, and it seems to me wonderful that any should presume to determine, that what God has sent forth for the salvation of mankind, is not sufficient for that purpose, or would, without the assistance of the works of fallible men, lead his creatures into error. As Christians then, we must admit that the Scriptures should be universally circulated. We are also called upon to circulate them as members of a Protestant church; for we must not forget, that in distinction from those, from whom we as a church dissented, that the great maxim upon which our fathers acted, and for which so many of them gave up their lives, was “that the Bible, and the Bible alone is the religion of Protestants.” As Protestants therefore we are called upon to circulate the word of God. As members also of the Church of England, we are bound to engage in the same work. Our church has called herself the daughter of the Bible. This was the holy origin from which it was all its boast to have sprung. Our church certainly had its origin at a time, when, of all others in this country, the Bible was the best understood, and was the most simply interpreted; it was constructed moreover by men who with their blood, sealed the commentary which they made upon the Scriptures, when they compiled the liturgy, articles, and discipline of our establishment. Whether then we come to the consideration of the question of distributing the sacred Scriptures without note or comment, as Christians, as Protestants, or as members of the established Church, we must admit that it is our duty, our high and bounden duty to do it; and, as the apostle said, “Woe is me if I preach not the gospel,” so we must say, Woe is me, if I do not, as much as in me lies, seek to give the Bible to every creature. The question now is, what are the best means to effect this end? and this, I venture to suggest, is the British and Foreign Bible Society.
I shall endeavour to establish in the first place as a principle, that it is only by a system of co-operation of all parties that the work of universally distributing the Scriptures can be effected. Let us look to a fact upon this point. In our own country, a society was instituted, about a century since, which is now called the Bartlett’s Buildings’ Society, or Society for promoting Christian knowledge. The object of this society was to distribute the word of God over the world, and to promote the preaching of the gospel. This society is confined to our own church, for it admits no members who do not give good security that they are churchmen. The object of this society was as pure as possible; the administration of that branch of it at least which has been employed in the circulation of the Scriptures, has, as far as I know, continued faultless; but the operations of the whole society have been necessarily contracted, because it was confined to the church. The effect produced by this society may be seen by examining the result of an hundred years’ trial. It was found about twelve years since, that in many villages of England, the Bible, except in the churches, was hardly known; within a mile of its depository, not one half of the families were in possession of the word of God; and in this diocese it was calculated, that ten thousand families were without a Bible. At this period the principle of the co-operation of all parties, who took the Bible as the basis of their religion, began to be understood, and the Bible Society was formed, which admitted all subscribers of whatever denomination into its ranks; the most astonishing results have thus been obtained. This society has distributed, in the course of eleven years, nearly one million four hundred thousand Bibles and Testaments; and the Bible has been translated and printed, in whole or in part, in fifty-five different languages or dialects. By this fact we may see the comparative power of the two societies; and also it is manifest, that a society, even carried on by the largest and most opulent part of the community, could not effect the object intended; and that therefore no society, made up of only one class in the country, could accomplish the great work which it is our hope to perform. [6]
Now conceive a man contriving some great work which he hopes will be a national blessing; which will cure the diseases, or lessen the sorrows of his countrymen, and which work requires the exertion of all his countrymen to carry into effect. Would he stop short in his design, because he might, by bringing all parties to bear upon the common object, unite them in that object. Would he say, My object is indeed of the highest importance, but I cannot consent to unite all parties in it, because the union of all parties, although for a good purpose, would be an evil? Would he say, for example, I cannot bring all a country together to build an hospital, or to erect an infirmary, because by doing so, I should make peace amongst discordant neighbours, or I should heal political breaches? Would he not account the union, even the partial and temporary union of all parties, to be in itself a great benefit? Would he not be glad, if by any influence, and especially by a good influence, he could lay to rest the evil spirit of bigotry or malevolence? He would surely say, My plan has in it two great benefits: in the first place, by bringing all persons together, I shall be enabled to effect my purpose; and secondly, I shall unite those persons between whom discord and rancour prevailed.
It is just in this way I would reason about the Bible Society. We have a great work to perform, a work which, as I have shewn, can alone be effected by the co-operation of all parties. We are bound to this work by the most solemn and unequivocal command of our Saviour. But now the question arises, whether to effect this great point, we may admit of an union of all parties to accomplish it? An unprejudiced person would say, this union is an additional motive for my exertion.
But opposers have said, that by all parties being brought together, Christians have been led to feel less distinctly the points upon which they disagreed, and that thus great evils have arisen amongst Christians in general, and to the Establishment in particular. I will now then endeavour shortly to examine the effect of the union of all parties, which is produced by this institution, upon Christians in general and upon the Church.
What, in the first place, has been the effect upon the general body of dissenters? But a few years since, within the recollection of many of us, the consequences of a thoroughly dissenting spirit, in politics and religion, were to be seen. No temper was then preserved, either on the side of the church, or the dissenters. Each party was employed in discovering all that was objectionable in the other: little evils were magnified—particular faults generalized: a spirit of envy and hatred reigned in the meetings of men, who, as Christians, might have taken “sweet counsel together.” Now, this is certainly not the case. Both amongst churchmen and dissenters, a considerable abatement of hostility has taken place. Whilst, on the one hand, churchmen have, in general, fulfilled more carefully the duties of their profession; I may say, that on the other, the spirit of dissenters has exceedingly changed. Dissenters may have had some well-grounded blame to attach, in many cases, to the members of our church; yet, it is likely that they by no means gave the church itself credit for the good which now they find to be in it. They thought that the lamp of our temple had gone out, that the branch was withered which once produced that glorious fruit, in the time of the Reformation. But now I believe that the dissenters are undeceived; and that the Bible Society has tended to undeceive them. They have seen that want of zeal, is not the effect of the system, but of the individuals; and, as they have discovered this, I may say, most honourably to themselves, they seem to have laid down the weapons of controversy against us, and are engaged in fighting our common enemies, in wielding that sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God. Now the meetings which we have of dissenters and churchmen, are not to wrangle and dispute with each other, but to take new pledges that we will oppose the enemies of our common Christianity; they are to join in consuming the brand, which once might have been pointed against one another, upon an altar of unity, piety, and peace.
But now, in the second place, what has been the effect of this union upon the members of the Established Church? It may be said, that such meetings will tend to unfix our decided approbation of the doctrines and discipline of the Established Church. But they can know nothing of the nature of these meetings who urge this objection. There is nothing in them either to convert a churchman or a dissenter. The churchman will come away still a churchman; and the dissenter still a dissenter. No one church-principle, or church-feeling; no one point of doctrine, of discipline, or of practice, will be the least affected, or called in question, by attending a meeting of the Bible Society. The sole object for which churchmen and dissenters are united, is to distribute the word of God; but can the distribution of the word of God be injurious to the establishment? If we believe that the tenets of dissenters are plainly contradicted in the Bible, should we not then as churchmen, be thankful that they are willing to circulate, throughout the world, a refutation of their own system? Can the distribution of the word of truth, under any circumstances, be injurious to a true church? To say that the circulation of the Bible can injure the Establishment, seems to me an unwarranted scandal upon it; and perhaps no notion would be more injurious to the interests of the Church of England, than that it cannot bear examination, if brought to the test of the word of God.