James Buchanan
2 The circumstances which accompanied the change in the centurion’s views and profession and the means which brought them about – when he became a Christian convert rather than a Jewish proselyte. In the accompanying circumstances, many of them miraculous, we have a beautiful example of means concurring towards one end in God’s providence.
One day, a vision appeared to Cornelius at Caesarea, about 75 miles from Jerusalem, instructing him to send messengers to Joppa to call for one Simon, whose surname was Peter. Next day, while the messengers were on their way, Peter went up to the housetop to pray about the sixth hour, and he had a vision of a great sheet descending from heaven, containing all manner of beasts. He was commanded: “Arise, Peter, kill and eat”. When he objected: “Not so, Lord, for I have never eaten any thing common or unclean,” the voice answered, “What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common”. This was done three times, and the vessel was received up again into heaven.
While Peter doubted in himself what this vision should mean, the messengers arrived and unconsciously furnished a key for its explanation. Their words seem to have suggested immediately the true meaning of the vision, as appears from his language to Cornelius and his friends: “Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath showed me that I should not call any man common or unclean”. And when, after he declared the gospel, “the Holy Ghost fell on all them that heard the word”, so that they began to “speak with tongues and magnify God”, the whole purpose of God in these visions was made clear. It was to show that the Gentiles, as well as the Jews, should he admitted to the privileges and hopes of the Christian Church.
The distinction between clean and unclean animals had been purposely adopted as a mark of separation between the Jews and the Gentiles, as we learn from the law of Moses: “I am the Lord your God, who have separated you from all other people. Ye shall therefore put difference between clean beasts and unclean, and between unclean fowls and clean: and ye shall not make your souls abominable by beast, or by fowl, or by any manner of living thing that creepeth on the ground, which I have separated from you as unclean. And ye shall be holy unto Me: for I the Lord am holy, and have severed you from other people, that ye should be Mine.”
1This is the final part of a chapter, reprinted with editing, from the “Illustrative Cases of Conversion” in The Office and Work of the Holy Spirit. It is based on Acts 10. The first part, last month, dealt with the state and character of Cornelius before Peter came to him.
So long as this distinction existed, a wall of partition separated the Gentile from the Jew. When Peter was told: “What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common”, he was thereby informed, not merely that the distinction of meats should now cease, but that the Old Testament dispensation was passing away and that the separation between Jew and Gentile, which that distinction marked, was now to be completely abolished. This great lesson was taught by a series of successive, yet independent, events, concurring marvellously to accomplish the same end – so that Peter’s mind must have been as much impressed by the leadings of God’s providence as by the express declaration of His will in coming to believe the great truth that the Christian Church was to include both Jew and Gentile, and that they were all “one in Christ”.
While these circumstances accompanied the change which was wrought on the views of Cornelius, the means by which it was properly effected was the truth, declared by the Apostle and applied by the Holy Spirit. The message which Peter delivered was, in all respects, suitable to his case. It contained (1) an unequivocal recognition that Cornelius and other believing Gentiles belonged to the Church of God and were accepted of Him. “Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons; but in every nation he that feareth Him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted of Him.”
In these words the Apostle clearly intimates the delightful truth that the Church of God is catholic – it comprehends all believers, of whatever country, colour or climate. This is a truth which the Jews and the Apostles themselves were slow to accept and which probably were first carried home to Peter’s mind by the memorable incidents recorded in this chapter. Peter was an agent in effecting a great change in the constitution of the Church by admitting Gentiles to the privilege of Baptism. It is clear that Peter now understood and declared the great truth, that the middle wall of partition between Jews and Gentiles had been removed, and that, “in every nation he that feareth God, and worketh righteousness, is accepted of Him”.
These words have, however, been grievously perverted, and several false inferences have been drawn from them. Some, on the basis that Cornelius was a Gentile and was accepted by God, have inferred that mere natural religion is sufficient and that all the various creeds are unimportant, provided those who profess them are sincere. This monstrous heresy, which prevails so extensively in the world – and has sometimes been presented to the public mind with the fascination of poetry: “For forms of faith let senseless bigots fight, / His faith cannot be wrong, whose life is in the right,” – is utterly repudiated by every Christian mind which really believes the truth and appreciates the value of the gospel.
The Articles of the Church of England do not hesitate to say that “they are to be held accursed who presume to say that every man shall be saved by the law or sect which he professeth, so that [that is, if] he be diligent to frame his life according to that law, and the light of nature”. Most assuredly the sentiment which is here so pointedly denounced derives no support from the case of Cornelius. His religion was not derived solely, or even chiefly, from the volume of nature; it was drawn from the revelation of God’s truth in the Old Testament Scriptures, which had already converted him to the Jewish faith.
So far from representing the knowledge and belief of the truth as a matter of indifference, the narrative shows the care with which God provided further instruction for Cornelius, when he gave a series of supernatural visions, used the ministry of Peter, and granted the gift of the Holy Ghost, in order that the Jewish proselyte might become a Christian convert – a baptized professor of the gospel. When therefore Peter says, “Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons; but in every nation he that feareth Him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted of Him,” he did not mean that the privileges of salvation were extended indiscriminately to all, as if they might be safe under a form of natural religion while ignorant of the gospel. He simply meant that these privileges, and the knowledge and faith with which they are inseparably connected, were not confined to the Jews but extended to true converts from every nation under heaven.
Still less does the narrative afford any countenance to another erroneous opinion which it has sometimes been used to support – that a moral life will render a man acceptable to God, independently of religion; and that it matters little whether he is religious or not, provided only his conduct is decent. Whatever virtues are here ascribed to Cornelius – his justice, his charity and his social respectability – were the fruits of religious principle and inseparably combined with the fear of God, the faith of divine truth, and the habit of prayer. Thus those men of mere morality who, from taste or education or the influence of worldly prudence or the example of others, maintain a decent exterior, while they are utterly irreligious, living without prayer and without God in the world, have no right to found any hope of acceptance on the case of Cornelius, of whom it is said that he was a devout, or godly, man, “and one that feared God with all his house, and gave much alms to the people, and prayed to God alway”.
Nor does this narrative afford any support for the self-righteous doctrine that the virtues of a man’s character are the ground of his acceptance with God. It is true that the angel refers to the devotion, alms and prayers of Cornelius and declares that they had “come up for a memorial before God” – just as we learn that, at the last day, the Judge will refer to the conduct of
His believing people in feeding the hungry and clothing the naked as the proper evidence of their faith and love. But the sole ground of their acceptance is the redemption of Christ. And surely no one can imagine that the good qualities here ascribed to Cornelius merited his salvation, for Peter was sent to tell him, as a sinner, that, “through Christ’s name, whosoever believeth in Him shall receive remission of sins”. The prayers and alms of Cornelius are not referred to as the grounds of his pardon, for that rested solely on the redemption of Christ, but as the evidences of his faith in the promise of a Saviour, a faith which God graciously rewarded by making known to him the fulfilment of that promise in Christ.
Peter’s message, while containing an unequivocal recognition that Cornelius and other Gentile believers belonged to the Church of God, presented also (2) a summary of gospel truth, accompanied with appropriate evidence, to convince him that what God had promised to the fathers He had fulfilled in the Person of Christ. The gospel properly consists in the doctrine of Christ, in His Person, offices, work and reward; and all these points of gospel truth are presented in the Apostle’s short but comprehensive statement.
He intimates the personal dignity of Christ: “He is Lord of all”; His humiliation, as “Jesus of Nazareth”; His divine mission, for God sent the Word “unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ”; His divine unction with the Holy Ghost, whereby He became the Christ, the Lord’s Anointed, for “God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost, and with power”; His holy life and ministry of kindness, “who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil, for God was with him”; His miraculous power: “we are witnesses of all things which He did, both in the land of the Jews and in Jerusalem”; His ignominious and painful death, “whom they slew, and hanged on a tree”; His resurrection from the dead and manifestation to His disciples: “Him God raised up the third day, and showed Him openly, not to all the people, but unto witnesses chosen before of God; even to us”; His commission to the Apostles: “He commanded us to preach unto the people, and to testify that it is He who was ordained of God to be the Judge of quick and dead”; and finally the sum and substance of the gospel: “To Him give all the prophets witness, that through His name whosoever believeth in Him shall receive remission of sins”.
Even this brief analysis may suffice to show how full it is of gospel truth and how admirably suited to the case of Cornelius. He was a devout man, a proselyte to the Jewish faith, one that waited for the consolation of Israel. He had even heard – for the Apostle speaks of him as knowing – the Word which God sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ. But probably he had not had an opportunity of satisfying himself as to the
truth of the gospel and was waiting, in a prayerful spirit, for clearer light. And while he waited and prayed, God sent those visions and this message, which afford such a touching proof of God’s care for every humble inquirer. And the message was in every respect suited to his case, for it made known to him the substance of the gospel in two brief but comprehensive summaries. It is described (1) as God’s proclamation of peace through Jesus Christ and (2) as a message which declares “that through His name whosoever believeth in Him shall receive remission of sin”.
The message also made known to him the evidence by which the truth as it is in Jesus is certified as of divine and infallible authority. Peter appeals to God’s testimony, who anointed Him “with the Holy Ghost” and who was with Him in His mighty works. He appeals to the testimony of the Apostles, who were eye-witnesses of His miracles and conversed with Him after His resurrection. And he appeals to the witness of ancient prophecy, for “the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy”. And, when this reference to the evidence which arises from all this testimony was immediately followed up by the descent of the Holy Ghost – so that “they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost; for they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God” – need we wonder that Cornelius at once embraced the gospel and, by baptism, entered the Christian Church?
The Holy Spirit was the agent by whom Cornelius was convinced and established. This was partly by His miraculous gifts, which are no doubt intended in the narrative, and which afforded evidence on which the faith of Cornelius might securely rest; but partly also by the power of the Spirit accompanying the preaching of the Word, by which Cornelius was enabled to believe to the saving of his soul.
3. The nature of the change wrought on the mind of Cornelius, and its practical results in his life. As a believer in Old Testament prophecy, he had long expected the Messiah. The change properly consisted in Cornelius being enabled to believe that the Messiah had actually come, and that Jesus of Nazareth was the Messiah. The whole of Peter’s message was directed to establishing this great truth, that “Jesus is the Christ”; and the cordial reception of that truth, in its full gospel meaning, constituted the change in the mind of the devout centurion.
In the case of one who had previously been so conscientious, and whose whole character was consistent with his profession as a Jewish proselyte, there was no room for such a striking manifestation of the change which is wrought by conversion as in the case of the Philippian gaoler or even of Saul of Tarsus. But it was doubtless attended with a very great change. Not only
is it said that “he was baptized”, in token alike of his faith in Christ and his submission to Christ’s command, but he and his household “glorified God”.
We have here a beautiful example of the way in which the providence of God works in different places, for the same object. The concurrence of events at Joppa and at Caesarea demonstrated the activity of Him “who is wonderful in counsel, and excellent in working”. We have also an interesting example of personal and family religion, under the less perfect dispensation of the Old Testament, one which may well put to shame many who enjoy far higher privileges among ourselves. Cornelius was a godly man, caring for the souls of those who were committed to his care: “he feared God with all his house”; “he prayed in his house”; he had “a devout soldier” as his servant; and he collected his whole household to listen to the Apostle, saying, “Now, therefore, are we all here present before God, to hear all things that are commanded thee of God”.
Again, the case of Cornelius affords a memorable proof of the efficacy of prayer, and how much prayer is involved in the advancement of believers, as well as in the conversion of sinners. Cornelius was praying when “the man in bright clothing stood before him”; Peter was praying when the sheet descended from heaven; and the centurion’s kinsfolk and friends were assembled for the same purpose when Peter arrived. The instruction of Cornelius and his family, important as it was, was not the chief object of God in this wonderful interposition. It was designed to remove the prejudice which the Jews, and even the Apostles themselves, still entertained against the Gentiles, and to open the door for their admission into the Christian Church.