Sermons: Selected from the Papers of the Late Rev. Clement BailhacheBailhache, Clement
Religion
Sermons: Selected from the Papers of the Late Rev. Clement Bailhache
Bailhache, Clement
Sermons
But how is this faith obtained? Must not God give it? Yes. So Paul,
writing to the Philippians, tells them it was "given" to them "to
believe in Christ." Must we, then, listlessly wait until it comes to
us? No. Paul again says to these same Philippians, "Work out your own
salvation with fear and trembling." The reconciliation of these two
truths into one theory may be difficult, but in practice it is easy
enough. _We recognise them both when we ask for faith._ For to ask is
to recognise our need of that for which we ask; it is also to
recognise the fact that we do not possess it of ourselves; and it is
also to seek and to act. Ask, then, for faith, and God will say: "Wilt
thou be made whole?" Will you--not as a vague desire, but as the most
earnest determination of your heart and will? Ask for faith; God will
grant it. Ask largely; you cannot ask too much. And even if you sigh
over the weakness of desire, press the old and never-failing prayer:
"Lord, I believe; help Thou my unbelief."
Faith saves, and grace saves. This is scarcely a contradiction in
terms, and certainly it is no contradiction in principle. Faith is the
instrument; grace is the primary and efficacious power. Faith is the
channel; grace is the stream. Faith touches the hem of the Saviour's
garment; grace is the virtue that passes forth from Him in response to
the touch. Christ reaches down from heaven; faith reaches up from
earth; each hand grasps the other--the one in weakness, the other in
power--and salvation is in the grasp. Take--oh, take that pierced
hand! Amen.
II.
_PROPITIATION._
"He is the propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only, but also
for the sins of the whole world."--1 John ii. 2.
It is easier to attack than to defend. An objection may be stated in a
single sentence which shall require many pages for an adequate reply.
Those who reject Christianity generally adopt this method, but I know
not why they should be allowed to monopolise it. Why should not
believers, instead of simply proving that there is a God, and that the
Bible is His Word, insist upon positive proof from their opponents
that there is no God, and that the Bible is nothing more than a human
book? Why should we not impose upon them the more difficult task of
defending their position, by attacking it with all earnestness at
every point? For Christian defence, we have need to be both really and
consciously very strong in the truth. On the other hand, to be an
unbeliever, a man can do without either knowledge or goodness. He has
only to ply you with his eternal "_Why?_" _Why_, because the universe
exists, must it have ever been _created_? _Why_ may it not have always
existed? _Why_ are we bound to accept the teaching of the Bible? _Why_
was it necessary that Christ should suffer to expiate our sins? _Why_
did Christ come so late in the history of the world? _Why_ are there
no miracles now? _Why? Why? Why?_--
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account