SCRIPTURE STUDIES

VOLUME SIX - THE NEW CREATION

 STUDY VI

ORDER AND DISCIPLINE IN THE NEW CREATION

Meaning of Ordination — Only the Twelve Ministers Plenipotentiary — “Clergy” and “Laity” — Choosing Elders and Deacons — Ordaining Elders in Every Ecclesia — Who May Elect Elders and How — Majorities not Sufficient — Various Ministries — A Paid Ministry? — Discipline in the Ecclesia — Mistaken Calls to Preach — “Warn Them that are Unruly” — To Admonish not a General Order — Public Rebukes Rare — “See that None Render Evil for Evil” — Provoking to Love — “The Assembling of Ourselves” — Variety and Character of our Meetings — Doctrine Still Necessary — Opportunities for Questions — Profitable Meetings Illustrated — “Let Every Man be Fully Persuaded in His Own Mind” — Funeral Services — Tithes, Collections, Charities.

            IN CONSIDERING this subject it is well that we keep clearly before our minds the oneness of the Church, and that while the entire Church throughout the world is one, yet in another sense of the word each separate gathering, or company, of believers is a representation of the whole.  Each separate Ecclesia, therefore, is to consider the Lord as its Head, and to consider the twelve apostles as the twelve stars, bright ones, teachers, whom the Lord specially held in his hand and controlled—using them as his mouthpieces for the instruction of his Church in every place, in every gathering, throughout the entire age.

          Each congregation or Ecclesia—even if composed of only two or three—is to seek to recognize the will of the Head in respect to all of its affairs.  It is to feel a oneness with all the dear ecclesias of “like precious faith” in the dear Redeemer’s sacrifice and in the promises of God—everywhere.  It is to be glad to hear of their welfare, and to recognize the fact that [page 274] the Lord, as the overseer of his work, may today, as in every period, use some special instruments for the service of the Church as a whole, as well as use certain members of each little local company.  Looking thus to the Lord and recognizing the character of the servants he would use—humble, zealous, well reported of, clear in the Truth, giving evidence of having the anointing and the unction of the Spirit—they would be prepared to expect such general ministries to the needs of the whole Church, and to seek a share in the general blessing and dispensation of the “meat in due season” promised us by the Master.  They will specially remember, too, how he promised special blessings in the end of this age, and that he would provide things new as well as old to the household of faith through appropriate channels of his own choosing. Matt. 24:45-47 

          The means, the channels of these blessings, the Lord himself will oversee and direct.  All the members of the body united to the Head are to have confidence and to look for the fulfilment of his promises; but, nevertheless, are to “try the spirits”—to test the doctrines from whomsoever they emanate.  The proving does not imply a lack of confidence in those recognized as divinely directed channels of the Truth; but it does imply a faithfulness to the Lord and to the Truth as superior to all human teachers and their utterances; it implies also that they are not listening for the voice of man, but for the voice of the Chief Shepherd; that they feast upon his words and love them—love to masticate them and to digest them.  Such members of the body grow stronger and more rapidly in the Lord and in the power of his might than do others, because more attentive to the Lord’s leading and instruction. 

          This general unity of the body, this general sympathy, this general teaching through a general channel which the Lord has provided for the gathering together of his jewels to himself at his second presence (Mal. 3:17; Matt. 24:31), does not interfere, however, with a proper recognition of order in each of the little companies, or ecclesias.  However small the company, there should be order in it.  By this word [page 275]  “order” we do not, however, mean stiffness or formalism. The order which works best and most satisfactorily is that which works noiselessly, and of which the machinery is quite out of sight.  If the meeting be so small as three or five or ten, it should, nevertheless, look to the Lord to ascertain his guidance as to which of the number should be recognized as elders, seniors, or most advanced ones in the Truth, possessing the various qualifications of an Elder as we have already seen these outlined in the inspired Word—clearness in the Truth, aptness for teaching it, blamelessness of life as respects moral character, and ability to preserve order without unnecessary friction, as might be exemplified in his family, etc. 

          If the little company thus have the Word and Spirit of the Lord before them and actuating them, the result of their united judgments, as expressed in an election of servants, should be accepted as the mind of the Lord on the subject—the persons chosen as elders would, in all probability, be the best and most suitable in the number.  However, care needs to be observed that such selections are not made without due consideration and prayer; hence, it is advisable that due announcement be made in advance, and that it be recognized that only those who claim to be members of the New Creation (male and female) shall attempt to express the mind of the Lord on the subject—in the vote. These should be such as have passed the point of repentance for sin and restitution to the extent of their ability and acceptance of the Lord Jesus’ sacrifice as the basis of their harmony with God, and who then have made a full consecration of themselves to the Lord, and thus have come under the anointing and all the privileges of the “house of sons.” These alone are competent to appreciate and to express the mind, the will, of the Head of the body.  These alone constitute the Church, the body of Christ, though others, who have not yet taken the step of consecration, but who are trusting in the precious blood, may be counted as members of “the household of faith” whose progress is to be hoped for, and whose welfare is to be considered. [page 276]

Ordaining Elders in Every Ecclesia

          “And when they had ordained them elders in every church [Ecclesia], and had prayed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord.” Acts 14:23

          The form of this statement, with other frequent references to elders in connection with all churches, justifies the inference that this was the invariable custom in the early Church.  The term “elders,” as seen in the text, includes evangelists, pastors, teachers, and prophets (or public exponents); hence, it is important that we learn what is meant by this word “ordained.”  At the present time this word is generally used in reference to a ceremony of installation; but this is not the significance of the Greek word kirotoneo used in this text.  It means, “to elect by stretching out the hand,” still the usual form of voting.  This definition is given in Prof. Young’s Analytical Bible Concordance.  As that may be considered a Presbyterian authority, we will give also the definition set forth in “Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance,” which may be considered a Methodist authority.  The latter defines the root of the word—“A hand-reacher, or voter (by raising the hand).” 

          A totally different Greek word is used when our Lord declared of the apostles, “I have chosen you and ordained you.” (John 15:16)  This is the same word, tithemi, used by the Apostle when, speaking of his ordination, he says: “I am ordained a preacher and an apostle.” (1 Tim. 2:7)  But this ordination, the Apostle distinctly declares, was “not of men, nor by man, but by Jesus Christ and God the Father.” (Gal. 1:1) All of the members of the Anointed Body, united with the Head and partakers of his Spirit, are thereby similarly ordained, not indeed to apostleship like Paul, but to be ministers (servants) of the Truth, each to the extent of his talents and opportunities (Isa. 61:1)—the twelve only were ordained to be apostles, or special representatives—ministers plenipotentiary. 

          Recurring to the ordination or recognition of elders by the vote of the congregation (Ecclesia) of the New Creation, by “stretching forth the hand,” as seen above, we note that [page 277] this was the customary mode; for the Apostle uses the same Greek word in telling how Titus became his helper.  He says, “who was also chosen of the churches to travel with us.”  The words italicized are from the Greek word kirotoneo which, as above shown, signifies “to elect by stretching out the hand.” And, further, the word “also” here implies that the Apostle himself was chosen by a similar vote.  Not chosen or elected to be an apostle, but to be a missionary—a representative of the churches on this occasion, and, doubtless, at their expense. 

          Evidently, however, some of the Apostle’s subsequent tours were without the vote or support of the Antioch Church. (2 Tim. 1:15)  Primitive Church regulations left all free to exercise their talents and stewardship according to their own consciences.  The ecclesias (congregations) could accept or decline the services of apostles, even, as their special representatives; and the apostles could accept or reject such engagements—each exercising his own liberty of conscience. 

          But, is there no ordination of elders, etc., mentioned in the New Testament other than this—an election?  Is there nothing signifying to give authority or permission to preach, as the English word ordain is now generally used in all denominations in connection with licensing and ordaining elders, preachers, etc.?  We will examine into these questions. 

          The word ordain, in respect to elders, is used in one other place, only, and it is the translation of a different Greek word, viz., kathestemi, which signifies—“To place, or set down”—Young.  “To place down”—Strong.  This word occurs in Titus 1:5: “Set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee”—i.e., as I arranged.  Revised Version, “as I gave thee charge.”  On the face of it this text seems to imply that Titus was empowered to appoint these elders, regardless of the wishes of the congregations (churches, ecclesias); and it is on this view that the Episcopal theory of church order rests.  Catholics, Episcopalians and Methodist-Episcopals all claim for their [page 278] bishops an apostolic authority to set, to place or appoint, elders for the congregations—without the stretching forth of the hand, or vote of the Church. 

          This text is the bulwark of this idea; but it appears to be rather a weak support when we notice the last clause—“As I gave thee charge”—and reflect that the Apostle would surely not give Titus “charge” or instruction to do differently from what he (the Apostle) did in this matter.  The account of the Apostle’s own procedure, rightly translated, is very explicit: “And when they had elected them elders by a show of hands in every Ecclesia, and had prayed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord.” Acts 14:23 

          No doubt the Apostle’s advice and the advice of Titus, whom he specially commended to the brethren as a faithful minister of the Truth, would not only be desired, but sought by the brethren, and very generally followed; nevertheless, the Apostle and all who followed in his steps sought to place the responsibility where God placed it—on the Ecclesia, whose concern it should be to “Try the spirits [teachings and teachers] whether they be of God.” (1 John 4:1)  “If any speak not according to this Word it is because there is no light in them”; and “from such turn away,” the Apostle advises; they are not to vote for such, nor in any manner to accept them as teachers, elders, etc. 

          In any event the concurrence of the Ecclesia would be necessary—whether expressed by vote, as stated, or not; for suppose that Titus had appointed elders not congenial to the brethren, how long would peace have prevailed?—how much pastoral or other service would such an Elder, obnoxious to the sentiments of the Church, accomplish?  Practically none. 

          Priest-craft, and not the teachings of our Lord and his twelve apostles, is responsible for the division of the saints into two classes, called “clergy” and “laity.”  It is the spirit of priest-craft and antichrist that still seeks to lord it over God’s heritage in every way possible—proportionately to the density of the ignorance prevailing in any congregation. [page 279] The Lord and the Apostle recognize not the elders, but the Church (Ecclesia) as the body of Christ; and whatever dignity or honor attaches to faithful elders, as servants of the Lord and the Church, is not merely their recognition of themselves nor their recognition by other elders.  The congregation choosing must know them, must recognize their Christian graces and abilities in the light of God’s Word, else they can grant them no such standing or honor.  No Elder, therefore, has any authority by self-appointment.  Indeed, the disposition to ignore the Church, the body of Christ, and to make himself and his judgment superior to the whole, is first-class evidence that such a brother is not in the proper attitude to be recognized as an Elder—humility, and a recognition of the oneness of the Ecclesia as the Lord’s body, being prime essentials for such a service. 

          Nor should any brother assume public duties in the Church as leader, representative, etc., without an election—even though assured that there is no question respecting his acceptability.  The Scriptural method of ordaining elders in all the churches is by congregational election—by stretching forth the hand in a vote.  To insist on such an election before serving is to follow Scriptural order; it fortifies the Elder, and, additionally, reminds the Ecclesia of its duties and responsibilities as appointees of the elders in the Lord’s name and spirit—as expressing God’s choice, God’s will. Additionally, this Scriptural arrangement interests the members of the Ecclesia in all the words and deeds of the elders, as their servants and representatives.  It opposes the too prevalent idea that the elders own and rule the congregation and puts an end to their thinking of them and speaking of them as “my people”—rather than as “the Lord’s people whom I serve.” 

          Why are not these matters, so clearly Scriptural, more generally understood and set forth?  Because human nature is pleased to have honor and preferment, and falls readily into wrong conditions favorable to these; because they have been popular for seventeen centuries; because the people [page 280] yield to these conditions and prefer them to the liberties wherewith Christ makes free.  Then, too, many have felt so confident that the customs of Babylon must be right that they have never studied the Word of the Lord on this subject.

The Period of Eldership

          Nothing is said by inspiration respecting the period for which an Elder should be chosen: we are, therefore, at liberty to exercise reason and judgment on the question.  Many persons may be esteemed elders, or developed brethren in the Church, and may be useful and highly appreciated, and yet not be of the chosen elders set forth by the Ecclesia as its representatives—evangelists, teachers, pastors.  The “elder women”* are thus several times referred to honorably by the apostles, without the least suggestion that any of them were ever chosen as representative elders or teachers in the congregation (Ecclesia).  Some chosen as suitable to the Ecclesia’s service might cease to possess the stipulated qualifications; or others might, under divine providence, advance to greater efficiency for the service of the Church. A year, or its divisions—a half or a quarter year—would seem appropriate periods for such services—the latter if the persons were less tried, the former if well tried and favorably known.  In the absence of law, or even of advice or suggestion, it would be for each congregation to determine as best they can the Lord’s will in each case.

—————

*Woman’s place in the Church is treated in Chap. v.

The Number of Elders

          The number of elders is not limited in the Scriptures; but, reasonably, much would depend on the size of the Ecclesia, as well as upon the number available—competent, etc.  (None should be assumed to be a believer and to be fully consecrated; both by word and act he should have given unmistakable evidences of both his faith and consecration long before being chosen an Elder.)  We favor having as [page 281] many as are possessed of the outlined qualifications, and the dividing of the services amongst them.  If the proper zeal actuates them, some kind of missionary or evangelistic work will soon claim some of them, or portions of the time of many.  Each Ecclesia should thus be a theological seminary from which efficient teachers would continually be going forth to wider fields of service.  The Elder who would manifest jealousy of others and a desire to hinder them from ministering should be considered unworthy of continuance; yet, no one either incompetent or a novice should be chosen—to satisfy his vanity.  The Church, as members of the body of Christ, must vote as they believe the Head would have them vote. 

          A caution should perhaps be given against electing an Elder where none is found competent for the service, under the qualifications set forth by the apostles—far better have no elders than incompetent ones.  In the interim, until a brother shall be found competent for the service, let the meetings be of an informal kind, with the Bible as the textbook and with Brother Russell representatively present as teacher in the Scripture Studies—your chosen Elder, if you so prefer.

Who May Elect Elders and How?

          Only the Ecclesia (the body—male and female), the New Creatures, are electors or voters.  The general “household of faith,” believers who have not consecrated, have nothing to do with such an election; because it is the Lord’s choice, through his “body,” possessing his Spirit, that is sought.  All of the consecrated body should vote, and any of them may make nominations at a general meeting called for the purpose—preferably a week in advance of the voting, so as to afford time for consideration. 

          Some have urged that the voting should be by ballot, so that all might be the more free to express their real choice. We answer that whatever advantage there is in this is offset by a disadvantage: namely, in the loss of the discipline and character-building accomplished by the apostolic mode of [page 282]  “stretching forth the hand.”  Each should learn to be candid and straightforward, yet, at the same time, loving and gentle.  The vote, be it remembered, is the Lord’s choice—expressed by members of his body to the extent of their ability to discern it.  No one is at liberty to shirk this duty, nor to favor one above another except as he believes he has, and expresses, the mind of the Lord.

Majorities Not Sufficient

          In worldly matters the voice of a bare majority decides; but evidently it should not be so in the Lord’s Ecclesia, or body.  Rather, so far as practicable, the jury-rule should prevail and a unanimous verdict or decision be sought.  The brother receiving a bare majority in the vote could scarcely feel comfortable to accept that as “the Lord’s choice,” any more than could the congregation.  Another candidate able to draw the support of all, or nearly all, should be sought for, by vote after vote, week after week, until found or the matter abandoned; or let all agree on the two or three or more who could serve in turn and thus meet the ideas of all. But if fervent love for the Lord and the Truth prevail, with prayer for guidance and the disposition to prefer one another in honor, where talents are on an equality, it will generally be found easy to unite in judgment respecting the divine will on the subject.  “Let nothing be done through strife or vainglory.”  “Preserve the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.” Phil. 2:3; Eph. 4:3 

          The same order should prevail in respect to the choice of helpers called deacons and deaconesses, whose good repute should also be noted as a qualification.  (See 1 Tim. 3:8-13.) These may be for any service required—and they should have as many of the qualifications of eldership as possible, including aptness in teaching, and graces of the Spirit.

Variety of Ministries

          As already seen, elders may have special qualifications in one or another particular—some excelling in exhorting, [page 283] some in teaching, some in prophesying or oratory, some as evangelists, in interesting unbelievers, and some as pastors taking a general oversight of the flock in its various interests, local or general.  The Apostle Paul’s address to the Elders of the Ecclesia at Ephesus gives us the general scope of the ministry to which each individual must adapt and fit his talents as a steward.  His words are well worthy of careful and prayerful consideration by all accepting the service of an Elder in any department of the work.  He said: “Take heed, therefore, unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over which the holy Spirit hath made you overseers [the word elsewhere misrendered bishops] to feed the Church [Ecclesia] of God.” (Acts 20:28)  Ah, yes! the elders need first of all to watch themselves, lest the little honor of their position make them proud and lordly, and lest they assume to themselves authority and honors belonging to the Head—the Chief Shepherd.  To feed the flock is the Lord’s province; as it is written, “He shall feed his flock like a shepherd.” (Isa. 40:11) When, therefore, one is chosen an Elder it is that he may represent the Chief Shepherd—that he may be the instrument or channel through whom the great Shepherd of the flock may send to his own “meat in due season,” “things new and old.” 

          “Woe be unto the pastors [shepherds] that destroy and scatter the sheep of my pasture! saith the Lord.  Therefore, thus saith the Lord God of Israel against the pastors [shepherds] that feed my people: Ye have scattered my flock and driven them away, and have not visited them: behold I will visit upon you the evil of your doings, saith the Lord....I will set up shepherds over them which shall feed them: and they shall fear no more nor be dismayed.” Jer. 23:1,2,4

Laying On of Hands of the Presbytery

          (1) “Neglect not the gift [endowment] that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy [prediction], with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery [assembled elders].” 1 Tim. 4:14 

          (2) “Whom [the seven deacons chosen by the Church] they set before the apostles: and when they had prayed, they laid their hands upon them.” Acts 6:6 

          (3) “In the Church [Ecclesia] that was at Antioch,...the holy Spirit said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto [page 284] I have called them.  And when they had fasted and prayed and laid their hands on them, they sent them away.” Acts 13:1-3 

          (4) “Lay hands hastily on no man, and be not partaker of other men’s sins.” 1 Tim. 5:22 

          (5) “And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the holy Spirit came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied [preached].” Acts 19:6 

          (6) Then laid they [the apostles] their hands on them, and they received the holy Spirit.” Acts 8:17-19 

          (7) “Stir up the gift of God that is in thee, by the laying on of my hands.” 2 Tim. 1:6

          We thus aggregate the inspired testimony respecting laying on of hands in the Ecclesia of the New Creation.  In the last three (5,6,7) the reference to the imparting of the “gifts” common in the early Church is evident.  Apostolic hands were thus laid on all consecrated believers and some one or more gifts followed—“tongues,” etc.  “A measure of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal.”*  The first four texts (1,2,3,4) may be grouped together as of one general teaching; namely, as a mark of approval or indorsement—but not as a sign of permission or authorization. 

—————

*See Volume V, Chap. viii.

          (1) Timothy, Paul’s adopted “son” in the ministry, had already been baptized and had already received a gift of the holy Spirit at the hands of the Apostle Paul (see 7) when he went with Paul to Jerusalem. (Acts 21:15-19)  Doubtless, there and then “James and all the elders,” apostolic-elders, recognizing Timothy’s devotion and close affiliation with Paul, unitedly blessed him, laying their hands upon him by way of indorsement; and the account implies that they did this, not according to a usual custom nor to all of Paul’s companions, but “by prophecy”—indicating that they were led to do it by some prediction by, or instruction from, the Lord. 

          (2) These deacons were not commissioned, or authorized to preach, by the apostles’ laying hands on them, for they were not elected to be preachers, but to serve tables; and, anyway, they already, by virtue of their anointing of the [page 285] holy Spirit, had full authority to preach to the extent of their talents and opportunity.  And without any mention of license, or permission, or other ordination from anybody, we find Stephen, one of these deacons, preaching so zealously that he was the first after the Master to seal his testimony with his blood.  This laying on of hands evidently signified merely the apostolic approval and blessing. 

          (3) The laying on of hands on Paul and Barnabas could not have been a permission to preach; for they were already recognized as elders and had been teaching in the Antioch Church for over a year.  Besides, they had both been preaching elsewhere, previously.  (Compare Acts 9:20-29; 11:26.) This laying on of hands could only mean the indorsement of the missionary work about to be undertaken by Paul and Barnabas—that the Antioch Ecclesia joined in the mission with them and probably defrayed their expenses. 

          (4) Here the Apostle intimates that a laying on of Timothy’s hands upon a fellow-laborer in the vineyard would signify his approval, or indorsement: so that if the man turned out poorly in any respect, Timothy would share in his demerit.  He must, so far as possible, make sure that he did not give his influence to introduce one who would do injury to the Lord’s sheep, either morally or doctrinally. 

          No risk should be run; caution should be exercised either in giving a letter of recommendation or a public indorsement in the form of a public God-speed.  The same advice is still appropriate to all of the Lord’s people in proportion to the degree of their influence.  Nothing in this, however, implied that any were dependent upon Timothy’s indorsement before they would have the right to preach: that right according to ability being granted by the Lord to all who receive the holy Spirit of anointing.

A Paid Ministry?

          The custom of a paid ministry, now so general and considered by many unavoidable and indispensable, was not the usage of the early Church.  Our Lord and his chosen twelve were, so far as we are able to judge from the inspired [page 286] records, poor—except, perhaps, James and John and Matthew. Accustomed to voluntary giving to the Levites, the Jews evidently extended this usage to everything religious that appealed to them as being of God.  The disciples had a general treasurer, Judas (John 12:6; 13:29), and evidently never lacked; though it is equally evident that they never solicited alms.  Not a hint of the kind is even suggested in the record of our Lord’s words.  He trusted to the Father’s provision, and certain honorable women ministered unto him (and his) of their abundance.  See Matt. 27:55,56; Luke 8:2,3. 

          Had our Lord’s sermons and parables been interlarded with appeals for money, it would have sapped their life. Nothing appeals to us more than does the evident unselfishness of the Master and all his specially chosen ones, Judas being the only exception, and his avarice cost him his fall. (John 12:5,6)  The love of money and show and the begging system of Babylon today is much against its powerful influence; and the absence of this spirit amongst the Lord’s faithful now, as at the first advent, tells much in their favor with those who study them as living epistles, not fully appreciating their teachings.  In a most remarkable manner the Lord has provided thus far for his “harvest” work without one solitary appeal being made for money; and we trust it will never be otherwise, believing that this is the Lord’s mind. 

          Let those ambitious for this world’s luxuries and wealth seek them in the fields of trade or in the lucrative professions; but let none become ministers of the Gospel of Christ from any other motive than love for God and for his Truth and for his brethren: a love that will rejoice in sacrificing ease and wealth and honor of men—not grudgingly, but heartily.  But alas! nominal Christianity has grown great and worldly, and her servants are honored with the titles Reverend, Very Reverend, Most Reverend and Doctor of Divinity; and with these honors and titles go salaries—not according to the minister’s needs, but on the commercial basis of his ability to attract large congregations and [page 287] wealthy people.  The natural result has followed—“The priests thereof teach for hire and the prophets thereof divine for money: yet will they lean upon the Lord and say, Is not the Lord among us?  None evil can come upon us.”  “His watchmen are blind: they are all ignorant, they are all D———D———s, they cannot bark; dreaming or talking in their sleep; lazy, loving slumber [ease].  Yea, they are greedy dogs which can never have enough; and they are shepherds that cannot understand: they all look to their own way [welfare], every one for his gain from his own quarter [denomination].”  “They shall gather to themselves teachers having ears itching [for praise of men]; and they shall turn their ears from the Truth and shall be turned unto fables.” Isa. 56:10,11; Micah 3:11; Phil. 3:2; 2 Tim. 4:3,4 

          Some may reason that both extremes ought to be avoided—large salaries and no salaries—and may call to mind the Lord’s words, “The laborer is worthy of his hire;” and the Apostle’s words, “If we have sown unto you spiritual things, is it a great thing if we reap your carnal things?” Yet we must remember that even these strongest statements of Scripture refer not to princely salaries, but to bare necessities. This the Apostle illustrates by the quotation, “Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn.”  The ox was to be free to provide for his necessities, but no more. The Apostle has given us the keynote of his own successful ministry, saying: “I will not be burdensome to you: for I seek not yours, but you....And I will very gladly spend and be spent for you; though the more abundantly I love you the less I be loved.” 2 Cor. 12:14,15 

          Following in the footsteps of Jesus will not lead us in the direction of salaries: neither will the footsteps of his chief apostle, Paul.  The latter, after showing that to ask earthly remuneration for spiritual services would in no sense violate justice, tells us of his own course in the matter in these words: 

          “I have coveted no man’s silver or gold or apparel.  Yea, yourselves know that these [my] hands have ministered unto my necessities, and [page 288] to them that were with me.  I have shewed you all things, how that so laboring ye ought to support the weak, and to remember the words of our Lord Jesus, how he said, It is more blessed to give than to receive.” Acts 20:33-35 

          “We have not used this right [over you to require temporal things in exchange for spiritual]: but we bear all things that we may cause no hindrance to the gospel of Christ.” (1 Cor. 9:12)  “When I was present with you and wanted, I was chargeable to no man: for that which was lacking to me the brethren which came from Macedonia [voluntarily] supplied.” 2 Cor. 11:9

          Our liberties are just the same as were those of the apostles in these respects; and fidelity to the cause should lead us to follow their steps in this as in all matters.  The Lord, the apostles, and their associates, who traveled and gave their entire time to the ministry of the truth, did accept voluntary contributions from the brethren to meet their expenses; and, as already intimated, the laying on of the hands of the Antioch Church upon Paul and Barnabas, when they were about to start on their first missionary tour, seems to have implied that the Church became responsible for their expenses, and correspondingly participated in their work. 

          There is no intimation, direct or indirect, that the elders serving the Church at home received either salary or expense money; and we believe that it will generally be found advantageous to each local Church to use the voluntary services of its own members—few or many, great or insignificant. This Scriptural method is spiritually healthful: it tends to draw out all the various members in the exercise of their spiritual gifts, and leads all to look more to the Lord as the real Shepherd, than does the hiring method.  As the number of qualified teachers increases, let the example of the Antioch Church be imitated—let some be sent forth as missionaries, colporteurs, pilgrims, etc. 

          Nevertheless, if any congregation considers that its field of usefulness is a large one and that a brother could advantageously give his entire time to ministering to it and to [page 289] mission work, and if they voluntarily tender him money sufficient for his expenses, we know of no scripture that would forbid its acceptance.  But both the serving Elder and the supporting Ecclesia should see to it that the amount provided is not more than reasonable living expenses for the servant and those properly dependent on him.  And both should see also that all the members of the Ecclesia be exercised, and particularly such as possess qualifications for eldership; otherwise the spirit of Babylon, churchianity, will be sure to develop.

Discipline in the Ecclesia
—Matt. 18:15-18—

          The administration of discipline is not the function of the elders only, but of the entire Church.  If one appears to be in error or in sin, his supposed wrong should be pointed out to the erring one only by the one he has injured, or by the member first discovering the wrong.  If the reproved one fails to clear himself, and continues in the error or sin, then two or three brethren without previous prejudice should be asked to hear the matter and advise the disputants.  (Elders they may or may not be, but their eldership would add no force or authority in the case except as their judgment might be the riper and their influence the more potent.)  If this committee decide unanimously with either party, the other should acquiesce and the matter be wholly at an end—correction, or restitution, so far as possible, being promptly made.  If either of the original disputants still persists in the wrong course, the one who made the original charge or one of those called in committee or, preferably, all of these together, may then (but not sooner) exercise their privilege of bringing the matter before the Ecclesia, the body, the Church.  Thus it is evident that the Elders were in no sense to be judges of the members—hearing and judgment were left to the local body, or Church. 

          The two preliminary steps (above mentioned) having been taken, the facts being certified to the elders, it would [page 290] be their duty to call a general meeting of the Ecclesia, or consecrated body, as a court—to hear the case in all of its particulars, and in the name and reverence of its Head to render a decision.  And the matter should be so clear, and the condemned should have such generous treatment, that the decision would be a unanimous one, or nearly so.  Thus the peace and oneness of the body (the Ecclesia) would be preserved. Repentance even up to the moment of the Church’s condemnation is possible.  Nay, to secure repentance and reform is the very object of every step of these proceedings—to reclaim the transgressor; his punishment not at all the object. Punishment is not ours but God’s: “Vengeance is mine, I will repay, saith the Lord.” (Rom. 12:19)  Should the wrongdoer repent at any step in this proceeding, it should be a cause of thanksgiving and rejoicing to all who possess the Lord’s Spirit, and no others are members of his body. Rom. 8:9 

          Indeed, even if the transgressor refuse to hear (obey) the decision of the entire Church, no punishment is to be inflicted or even attempted.  What then?  Merely the Church is to withdraw from him its fellowship and any and all signs or manifestations of brotherhood.  Thenceforth the offender is to be treated “as a heathen man and a publican.” Matt. 18:17 

          At no time in these proceedings are the faults or failings of the offender to be made public property—scandalizing him and the Church, and the Lord, the Head of the Church.  Nor is he to be harshly spoken of even after the separation; just as we are not to berate, or rail against, heathen men and publicans, but are to “speak evil of no man” and to “do good unto all men.” (Titus 3:2; Gal. 6:10)  Love is the quality which insists on the strictest obedience to these last two requirements to “all men”: how much more will love insist that a “brother,” a fellow-member in the Ecclesia, the body of Christ, shall not only not be injured by false or garbled statements, but that additionally, his weaknesses or blunders or sins be carefully covered, not from the unsympathetic world only, but also from “the household of [page 291] faith” and from even the Church—until the final step of “telling it to the Church” should be found absolutely necessary. At every step the spirit of love will hope that the wrongdoer is laboring under some misapprehensions, and will be praying for wisdom and grace to turn a sinner from the error of his way and thus (possibly) to save a soul from death. James 5:20 

          Oh, that the holy Spirit, the spirit of love, might dwell in every member of the Ecclesia so richly that it would give pain to hear a defamatory tale about any one, and especially about a fellow-member!  This would at once eliminate one-half the friction, or more.  Nor would the following of the above procedure, outlined by our Lord, lead to frequent church trials: rather, while removing the ground for animosities, it would inculcate a respect for the judgment of the Church as being the judgment of the Lord, and the voice of the Church would be heard and obeyed accordingly. Furthermore, with order and love thus prevailing we may be sure that each would seek as far as possible to “mind his own business” and not attempt to reprove his brother or correct him, or bring the matter before a committee or the Church, unless the matter were one of some importance as concerned himself or the Church or the Truth. 

          Unquestionably, the majority of the Church troubles (and society and family troubles as well) spring not from a desire to wrong, nor even from a wrong unintentionally committed, but from misunderstandings and, at least, partial misinterpretations of intentions or motives.  The tongue is the general mischief-maker; and it is part of the spirit of a sound mind, therefore, to set a guard upon the lips as well as upon the heart, from which proceed the ungenerous sentiments which, the lips expressing, set fire to evil passions and often injure many.  The New Creation—the Church—has strict instructions from their Lord and Head on this important subject.  His spirit of love is to fill them as they go alone, privately, to the injuring person without previous conference or talking with anyone.  They go not to make him (or her) ashamed of his conduct, nor to berate him or otherwise [page 292] punish, but to secure a cessation of the wrong and, if possible, some recompense for injury already received.  Telling others of the wrong, first or afterward, is unkind, unloving—contrary to the Word and Spirit of our Head.  Not even to ask advice should the matter be told: we have the Lord’s advice and should follow it.  If the case be a peculiar one, the wisest of the elders should be asked for advice along the lines of a hypothetical case, so as not to disclose the real trouble and wrongdoer. 

          Unless the trouble is serious, the matter ought to stop with the personal appeal to the erring one, whether he hears or forebears to hear—to yield.  But if the second step be deemed necessary, no explanation of the trouble should be made to those asked to confer until they gather in the presence of the accuser and the accused.  Thus slanderous “talk” will be avoided and the committee of brethren will come to the case unbiased and be the better able to counsel both parties wisely; for the trouble may be on both sides, or, possibly, wholly on the side of the accuser.  At all events, the accused will be favorably impressed by such fair treatment and will be much more likely to yield to such counselors if his course seems to them also to be wrong.  But whether the one deemed by the committee to be in error shall yield or not, the whole matter is still strictly private, and not a mention of it should be made to anyone until, if thought sufficiently important, it is brought before the Church, and passed upon finally.  Then for the first time it is common property to the saints only, and in proportion as they are saints they will desire to say no more than necessary to anyone respecting the weaknesses or sins of anybody.*  

—————

*Additionally see Chap. ix—“If thy brother trespass against thee.”

          In carrying out the findings of the Church court, the matter rests with each individual; hence, each must discern the justice of the decision for himself.  The penalty of withdrawal of fellowship is designed to be a correction in righteousness, and is of the Lord’s prescribing.  It is to serve as a protection to the Church, to separate those who walk disorderly, [page 293] not after the spirit of love.  It is not to be esteemed a perpetual separation, but merely until the reproved one shall recognize and acknowledge his wrong and to the extent of his ability make amends.

Accusations Against Elders

  “Against an Elder receive not an accusation, except at the mouth of two or three witnesses.” 1 Tim. 5:19, R.V.

          The Apostle in this statement recognizes two principles. (1) That an Elder has already been recognized by the congregation as possessing a good and noble character, and as being specially earnest for the Truth, and devoted to God. (2) That such persons, by reason of their prominence in the Church, would be marked by the Adversary as special objects for his attacks—objects of envy, malice, hatred and strife on the part of some, even as our Lord forewarned—“Marvel not if the world hate you”; “ye know that it hated me before it hated you”; “If they have called the Master of the house Beelzebub, how much more shall they call them of his household!” (Matt. 10:25; 1 Jno. 3:13; Jno. 15:18) The more faithful and capable the brother, the more nearly a copy of his Master, the more proper his choice as an Elder; and the more faithful the Elder, the more sure he will be to have as enemies—not Satan and his messengers only, but as many also as Satan can delude and mislead. 

          These reasons should guarantee an Elder against condemnation on the word of any one person, if otherwise his life appeared consistent.  As for hearsay or rumor, they were not to be considered at all; because no true yokefellow, cognizant of the Lord’s rule (Matt. 18:15), would circulate rumors or have confidence in the word of those who would thus disregard the Master’s directions.  To be heard at all, the accusers must profess to have been witnesses.  And even if two or more witnesses made charges there would be no other way of hearing the case than that already defined. Any one person charging wrong against the Elder, should, after personal conference failing, have taken with him two or three others who would thus become witnesses to the contumacy. [page 294] Then the matter, still unamended, might be brought by Timothy or anyone before the Church, etc. 

          Indeed, this accusation before two or three witnesses, being the requirement as respects all of the members, leaves room for the supposition that the Apostle was merely claiming that an Elder should have every right and privilege guaranteed to any of the brethren.  It may be that some were inclined to hold that since an Elder must be “well reported,” not only in the Church, but out of it, an Elder should be arraigned upon the slightest charges, because of his influential position.  But the Apostle’s words settle it that an Elder’s opportunities must equal those of others. 

          This matter of witnesses needs to be deeply engraved on the mind of every New Creature.  What others claim to know and what they slanderously tell is not even to be heeded—not to be received.  If two or three, following the Lord’s directions, bring charges against anyone—not back-bitingly and slanderously but as instructed—before the Church, they are not even then to be believed; but then will be the proper time for the Church to hear the matter—hear both sides, in each other’s presence; and then give a godly decision and admonition, so phrased as to help the wrongdoer back to righteousness and not to push him off into outer darkness.

Mistaken Calls to Preach

          A considerable number of people declare that they received of the Lord a call to preach the Gospel; perhaps they add in the next breath that they never knew why, or that they are aware that they have no special qualifications for the service, or that circumstances have always seemed to hinder them from responding to the call.  Questioning them respecting the nature of the “call,” develops the fact that it was merely an imagination or conjecture.  One felt impressed at some time in his experience (perhaps before becoming a Christian at all) that he ought to devote himself to God and his service, and his highest ideal of God’s service was drawn [page 295] from his nominal church experiences, represented in the preacher whose services his family attended.  Another felt his organ of approbativeness impressed, and said to himself—How I would like to be able to wear the cloth and receive the respect and titles and salary of a preacher—even a second or third-rate one.  If possessed of large self-esteem, too, he probably felt still further impressed that as the chosen apostles were “untalented and ignorant men,” so, possibly, God had him specially in mind because of his lack of talent and education.  God has favored many such, and his cause as well, in not opening the way to their ambitions, misconstrued to be his call to preach. 

          As already pointed out, every member of the New Creation is called to preach; not by his ambitions or imaginations, but by the Word, which calls upon all who receive the grace of God not in vain to “show forth the praises of him who has called us out of darkness into his marvelous light.” (1 Pet. 2:9) This call includes, therefore, all begotten of the spirit of the Truth—male and female, bond and free, rich and poor, educated and uneducated—black, brown, red, yellow and white.  What further commission is needed than this—“He hath put a new song into my mouth,” even “the loving kindness of Jehovah”? Psa. 40:3; 107:43 

          True, the Lord did specially choose and specially call the twelve apostles for a special work; true also he has proposed that in so far as his people will hearken to his words he will “set the various members in the body” as pleases him—some to one service and some to another, “to every man according to his several ability.” (Matt. 25:15)  But he clearly shows us that many will seek to “set” themselves as teachers; that it is the duty of the Church to look continually to him as their true Head and Leader, and not to favor the self-seeking ambitious brethren; that neglect of this duty will mean neglect of his words; deficiency, therefore, of love and obedience; and will surely be to the spiritual disadvantage of such an Ecclesia, as well as to the disadvantage of the self-set teacher. [page 296]

         The Lord’s rule on this subject is clearly set forth to be—“He that humbleth himself shall be exalted; and he that exalteth himself shall be abased.” (Luke 14:11)  The Church is to follow this rule, this mind of the Spirit, in all matters in which she shall seek to know and obey her Lord. The Lord’s method is to advance only him whose zeal and faithfulness and perseverance in well-doing have shown themselves in little things.  “He that is faithful in that which is least is faithful also in much.” (Luke 16:10)  “Thou hast been faithful over a few things: I will make thee ruler over many things.” (Matt. 25:21,23)  There is always plenty of room at the bottom of the ladder of honor.  Whosoever wills, need not for long be without opportunities for serving the Lord, the Truth and the brethren in humble ways which the proud-spirited will disdain and neglect, looking for service more honorable in the sight of men.  The faithful will rejoice in any service, and to them the Lord will open wider and yet wider doors of opportunity.  Thus his will, exemplifying the wisdom from above, is to be carefully followed by every member of the New Creation—especially in his vote, in his stretching forth of his hand as a member of the body of Christ to express the will of the Head. 

          A self-seeking brother should be passed by, however capable; and a less capable, but humble, brother should be chosen for Elder.  So gentle a reproof should be beneficial to all—even though not one word be uttered respecting the reasons governing.  And in the case of a capable Elder giving evidence of a dictatorial spirit, or inclining to regard himself as above the Church and of a separate class, or implying a divine right to teach not coming through the Ecclesia (Church), it would be a kindness as well as a duty to such an one to drop him to some less prominent part of the service or from all special services for a time, until he shall take this gentle reproof and recover himself from the snare of the Adversary. 

          All are to remember that, like other faculties, ambition is necessary in the Church as well as in the world; but that in [page 297] the New Creation it must not be a selfish ambition to be something great and prominent, but a loving ambition to serve the Lord and his people, even the very humblest.  We all know how ambition led to Satan’s fall—from the favor and service of God to the position of an enemy of his Creator and an opponent of all his righteous regulations.  Similarly, all who adopt his course, saying, “I will ascend above the stars of God [I will set myself above others of the sons of God], I will be as the Most High—[a ruler amongst them, a usurper of divine authority without divine appointment, and contrary to the divine regulation],” are sure to suffer divine disapprobation, and proportionate alienation from the Lord.  And the influence of such, like Satan’s, is sure to be injurious.  As Satan would be an unsafe teacher, so are all who have his disposition sure to lead into darkness for light; because they are not in the proper attitude to receive the light and be used as messengers of it to others. 

          Whenever, therefore, any brother feels sure that he is called to preach in some public capacity when no door of service has been opened to him in the appointed manner—if he is inclined to force himself upon the Church, without its almost unanimous request—or if having been chosen to the position of a leader or Elder he seeks to hold the position and consider it his by right, without regular votes of the Church from time to time requesting his service continued, we may set it down either that the brother has not noted the proprieties of the case, or that he has the wrong, self-seeking spirit unsuitable to any service in the Ecclesia.  In either event it will be the proper course to make a change at the first proper occasion for holding an election: and, as already suggested, the first Sunday of a year or in a quarter would be an appropriate time easily remembered.

“Warn Them That Are Unruly”

          “We exhort you, brethren, warn them that are unruly, comfort the feebleminded, support the weak, be patient toward all men.  See that none render evil for evil unto any, but ever follow that which is good, both among yourselves and to all men.” 1 Thess. 5:14,15

[page 298]

          This exhortation is not to elders, but to the entire Church, including the elders.  It takes cognizance of the fact that although the entire Church, as God’s New Creation, has a perfect standing before him as New Creatures in Christ Jesus, nevertheless each and all of them have their imperfections according to the flesh.  It shows, further, what we all recognize; viz., that there are differences in the degrees and in the kinds of our fleshly imperfections; so that, as in children of an earthly family different dispositions require different treatment by the parents, much more in the family of God there are such wide differences of disposition as to require special consideration one for the other.  To take notice of each other’s imperfections, from the standpoint of criticism, would be to do ourselves much injury, cultivating in our hearts a faultfinding disposition, keenly awake to the weaknesses and imperfections of others, and proportionately, perhaps, inclined to be blind to our own defects. Such criticism is entirely foreign to the spirit and intention of the Apostle’s exhortation. 

          Those are addressed who have been begotten of the spirit of the truth, the spirit of holiness, the spirit of humility, the spirit of love.  Such as are thus growing in the graces of the Spirit, will fear and criticize chiefly their own defects; while their love for others will lead them to make as many mental excuses and allowances for them as possible.  But while this spirit of love is properly condoning the offenses and weaknesses of the brethren, it is to be on the alert, nevertheless, to do them good—not by bickering, strife, contention, chiding, faultfinding and slandering one another, but in a manner such as the Golden Rule, would approve.  With gentleness, meekness, long-suffering and patience, it will seek to make allowance for each other’s weaknesses, and at the same time to help each other out of them, each remembering his own weaknesses of some kind. 

          The unruly are not to be comforted and supported and encouraged in their wrong way; but in kindness, in love, they are to be admonished that God is a God of order; and that [page 299] in proportion as we would grow in his likeness and favor we must observe rules of order.  They should be admonished that nothing is further from the divine arrangement than anarchy; and that as even worldly people recognize the principle that the worst form of government imaginable is preferable to anarchy, so much the more should God’s people, who have received the spirit of a sound mind, the holy Spirit, recognize this same principle in the Church; and the Apostle exhorts us to submit ourselves one to the other, for the sake of the general interests of the Lord’s cause.  If we were all perfect, and our judgment of the Lord’s will perfect, we would all think exactly the same—there would be no particular necessity for submitting one to another; but since our judgments differ, it is necessary that each consider the other and the other’s standpoint of observation and judgment, and that each seek to yield something in the interest of general peace—yea, to yield everything so as to preserve the unity of the Spirit in the bonds of peace in the body of Christ, except where principle would be infringed by such a course. 

          The unruly or disorderly are not entirely to blame for their condition, perhaps.  Many people are born disorderly and inclined to be so in their dress and in all their affairs in life.  Disorderliness, therefore, is a part of their weakness, which should be thought of sympathetically, kindly, but, nevertheless, should not be permitted to do injury to the Church of God, to hinder its usefulness, to prevent its cooperation in the study and service of the Truth.  It is not the will of God that his people should have that meekness which would amount to weakness in dealing with disorderly persons. Kindly, lovingly, but firmly, they should be shown that, as order is heaven’s first law, so it must be highly esteemed amongst those who are heavenly-minded; and that it would be sinful for the congregation to permit one or two or more of its members to do violence to the divine regulations, as expressed in the Word of God and as generally understood by the congregation with which he is associated. [page 300]

Admonishing Not a General Order

          It would be a great mistake, however, to suppose that the Apostle, in using this general language to the Church, meant that every individual of the Church was to do such admonishing.  To admonish wisely, helpfully, is a very delicate matter indeed, and remarkably few have a talent for it. The election of elders on the part of congregations is understood to signify the election of those of the number possessed of the largest measure of spiritual development, combined with natural qualifications to constitute them the representatives of the congregation, not only in respect to the leading of meetings, etc., but also in respect to keeping order in the meetings and admonishing unruly ones wisely, kindly, firmly.  That this is the Apostle’s thought is clearly shown in the two preceding verses, in which he says:

          “We beseech you, brethren, to know them which labor among you, and are over you in the Lord, and admonish you; and to esteem them very highly in love for their works’ sake.  And be at peace amongst yourselves.” 1 Thess. 5:12,13

          If divine wisdom has been properly sought and properly exercised in the choosing of elders of a congregation, it follows that those thus chosen were very highly esteemed; and since novices are not to be chosen, it follows that these were appreciated and selected for their works’ sake, because it was discerned by the brethren that they had a considerable measure of the holy spirit of love and wisdom and meekness, besides certain natural gifts and qualifications for this service.  To “be at peace amongst yourselves,” as the Apostle exhorts, would mean that, having chosen these elders to be the representatives of the congregation, the body in general would look to them to perform the service to which they were chosen, and would not attempt to take it each upon himself to be a reprover, or admonisher, etc.  Indeed, as we have already seen, the Lord’s people are not to judge one another personally; and only the congregation as a whole may exclude one of the number from the fellowship and privileges of the meeting.  And this, we have seen, can come only after the various steps of a more private kind have been taken—after [page 301] all efforts to bring about reform have proved unavailing, and the interests of the Church in general are seriously threatened by the wrong course of the offender.  But in the text before us the Apostle exhorts that the congregation shall “know”—that is, recognize, look to—those whom they have chosen as their representatives, and expect them to keep guard over the interests of the Church, and to do the admonishing of the unruly, up to the point where matters would be serious enough to bring them before the Church as a court.

Public Rebukes Rare

          This admonishing, under some circumstances, might need to be done publicly before the congregation, as the Apostle suggests to Timothy: “Them that sin [publicly] rebuke before all, that others also may fear.” (1 Tim. 5:20) Such a public rebuke necessarily implies a public sin of a grievous nature.  For any comparatively slight deviation from rules of order the elders, under the law of love, and the Golden Rule, should surely “consider one another to provoke unto love and to good works,” and so considering they would know that a word in private would probably be much more helpful to the individual than a public rebuke, which might cut or wound or injure a sensitive nature where such wounding was entirely unnecessary, and where love would have prompted a different course.  But even though an Elder should rebuke a grievous sin publicly, it should be done, nevertheless, lovingly, and with a desire that the reproved one might be corrected and helped back, and not with a desire to make him odious and to cast him forth.  Nor, indeed, does it come within the Elder’s province to rebuke any to the extent of debarring them from