Return to N listings
in the Library
Return to the course main page
Church Polity and Order
LESSONS SIX thru TEN
As a
prerequisite for this course you must have completed
and passed the courses
Salvation
The Church
The Bible
This course is based upon and
uses the entirety of the classic book:
The New Directory for Baptist
Churches
by Edward T. Hiscox
Edited by Dr. T.E. VanBuskirk
That book has been divided into lessons with questions; and,
links to the tests have been added where necessary.
The text itself has been edited only slightly and then mostly for
purposes of clarification or arrangement into lesson form and
correction of spelling and punctuation errors caused when
the book was originally scanned into electronic medium.
Archaic spelling of words has been left intact.
Some small amount of editing of
content has also been done to
bring the book into exact agreement with the scriptures.
These places are clearly marked as "Ed. Note."
CONTENTS
BACK TO MAIN TABLE OF CONTENTS
Is there any particular form of Church government revealed in the New Testament; and if so, what is it?
These questions will be variously answered by Christian scholars and Bible students. Some hold that no specific form can be deduced from the sacred records, and that no one form is best suited for all people and for all places; and that it was purposely left for Christian wisdom and prudence, guided by experience, to decide that question. But the greater part believe that a specific form is at least outlined in the New Testament; and, naturally enough, each one believes the form with which he is identified is that divinely given form. It may be safely allowed that no one class or company of Christians has attained to all the truth, leaving all others exclusively in error; and it is a comfort to know that, however believers may differ in opinion as to any matter of doctrine or of duty, if with loving hearts they sincerely desire to know the right and do it, they are blessed of God. As Peter said at the house of Cornelius we may say, "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 with him." – Acts 10:34, 35.
If, however, there be any definite plan plainly taught or clearly deducible from the words of Christ or His inspired Apostles, we should, if possible, ascertain that fact and be guided accordingly. Or if – what would be equivalent – we can ascertain how the Apostles, under the guidance of the Spirit, organized and ordered the churches they founded, with what regulations they were instituted, and what polity was impressed upon them, our questions will be substantially, and, it should seem, satisfactorily answered. Indeed, there appears to be light on the subject in this direction; for though no formal plan of government is detailed, yet there are numerous incidental references in the Epistles which clearly disclose formative and conclusive facts in the case.
Three principal forms of Church government are in current use among the denominations:
1. The Prelatical; in which the governing power is in the hands of prelates or bishops, and the clergy generally, as in the Roman, Greek, English, and most of the Oriental communions
2. The Presbyterian; in which the governing power resides in Assemblies, Synods, Presbyteries, and Sessions; as in the Scottish Kirk, the Lutheran, and the various Presbyterian bodies.
3. The Independent; in which the governing power rests entirely with the people, i. e., the body of the members of each local Church, each being entirely separate from and independent of all others, so far as authority and control are concerned; as among Baptists, Congregationalists, Independents, and some others.
Now, is either of these forms taught in the New Testament? And if so, which. And which best accords with the genius of the gospel, and with what we know of the constitution and government of the apostolic churches?
Baptists claim that a Christian Church is a congregation of baptized believers associated by mutual covenant, self-governing, and independent of all others; having no ecclesiastical connection with any other, though maintaining friendly and associational intercourse with all of like faith and order. It has no power to enact laws, but only to administer those which Christ has given.
The government is administered by the body acting together, where no one possesses a preeminence but all enjoy an equality of rights; and in deciding matters of opinion, the majority bears rule. The pastor exercises only such control over the body as his official and personal influence may allow, as their teacher and leader and the expounder of the great Lawgiver's enactments. His influence is paramount, but not his authority. In the decision of questions he has but his single vote. His rule is in the moral force of his counsels, his instruction and guidance in matters of truth and duty, and also in wisely directing the assemblies whether for worship or business. Much less have the deacons any authoritative or dictatorial control over Church affairs. Matters of administration are submitted to the body and by them decided.
As has been said, each particular and individual Church is actually and absolutely independent in the exercise of all its churchly rights, privileges, and prerogatives; independent of all other churches, individuals, and bodies of men whatever, and is under law to Christ alone. The will and law of the great Lawgiver are to be found in the New Testament, which is the only authoritative statute book for His people.
This statement is broad and comprehensive, and needs not defense, but explanation only. That Independency is the true form of Church government, as opposed to Prelacy and Presbyterianism, will not now be argued, but is assumed, as accepted by all Baptists, taught in the New Testament, verified by history, and justified by the genius of the gospel itself. But all human liberty is under limitations; strictly speaking it is not absolute.
How is Church Independence Limited?
1. The liberty which the independence of churches exercises is limited by the laws of Christ as expressed or clearly implied in the Scriptures. A Church is not a legislative body, but administrative only. It cannot make laws, but it is the interpreter of the laws of Christ; the interpreter for itself, not for others. Nor can others interpret laws for it. The opinions of the wise and good have their weight, but no man or body of men external to itself, has the right to become authoritative interpreters of the word of God to a Church, and compel submission to their dictation a Church, or indeed to an individual, even.
Churches may perform many unwise and unjustifiable acts. They may misapply or misinterpret, or openly do violence to both the letter and spirit of law. But there is no human tribunal to which they can be brought for trial and punishment, except that of public opinion. Others, in the exercise of their personal or Church liberty, may condemn their acts and disclaim all responsibility in connection with them; may withdraw all fellowship and intercourse from them. But farther than this they cannot go, except by the moral force of their dissent and condemnation. And it is fortunate that such is the case, since to crush liberty and destroy independency in the churches of Christ would be a greater calamity than to bear all the evils which may spring from a misunderstanding of the one, or a misuse of the other.
2. The independence of the churches is limited, so far as its corporate acts are concerned, or any matters of personal rights or legal equity may be in question, by the laws of the State in which they are located. This, however, has reference only to the temporalities of Church life, and cannot touch any question of doctrine, worship, or Christian duty. Most churches, by an organized "society," or in some other way, hold relations to civil law, in order to enjoy its protection in rights of property. To this extent they are subject to civil authority, and both as bodies and as individuals they should be law-keepers and not law-breakers. But as to all matters of spiritual concern in questions of religious faith and practice, the State and civil law have no rights of control over, or interference with, the churches in any manner whatever, except to protect them in the enjoyment of all their lawful privileges.
It may also happen that in the exercise of its ecclesiastical functions in acts of discipline or exclusion, a Church or even a Council may be charged with decisions which are defamatory in their nature, calculated to injure the reputation or interfere with the secular interests of the individual, and he may seek redress at the civil courts.* Such occurrences have sometimes transpired, and under stress of circumstances, are liable to take place. Civil courts usually observe this rule when appealed to in ecclesiastical matters, viz.: that the established usages of any body of Christians have a right to be followed, and if these have been carefully observed and not transcended, the courts will not interfere. But if from passion, prejudice, or ignorance, these have been disregarded, and the precedents and customs of the denomination have been violated, the court may interfere to give relief, only so far, however, as to require that the case have a new trial, in which their own established rules and precedents shall be strictly observed.**
* [Ed. Note: This statement by brother Hiscox is just that, a statement of what sometimes happens. However, the biblical mandate is that Christians do NOT take other Christians before the secular courts.
References:
I Cor 6:1-7
"Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints?
Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters?
Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life?
If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church.
I speak to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren?
But brother goeth to law with brother, and that before the unbelievers.
Now therefore there is utterly a fault among you, because ye go to law one with another. Why do ye not rather take wrong? why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded?"This biblical precept cannot be plainer concerning disagreements among brothers and sisters in the Lord.
However, brother Hiscox was right stating that this fault does happen in churches. And that was over a hundred years ago when he wrote that statement. Today (2009) disobedience of this biblical precept is much more common than it was back then in the late 1800's.]
** [Ed. Note: Do not expect the secular courts today to take any cognizance of Church rules and procedures in any shape or form. The courts now try all cases strictly by secular law- alone.]
3. By some it has been held, that, while each Church is independent in theory, its liberty is somewhat abridged by its relations to other churches, and because of that fellowship and comity which exists between them. By such it is claimed that the relation of each Church to the great body of churches is similar to the relation of each member of a Church to the body of members which constitute that Church; and, therefore, as each member relinquishes something of his personal liberty on becoming a member, and consents to be subject to the authority of the body, so the individual Church does on becoming one of the general fellowship of churches. Or, they argue, to take another figure; as each particular State, though in a sense sovereign and independent, yet has its independency limited by being a member of the federation of States, and submits in certain matters to be subject to the general government, while represented in it, so is it with a single Church in the federation of churches.
This condition of affairs has sometimes been called the interdependence of churches. Precisely what that term means is not easily explained. But it is safe to pronounce it a fiction. There is no such thing as interdependence in the sense of a limitation of the self-governing right and authority of a Church. And that is the sense in which their interdependence is asserted. One Church may be poor and need help from one that is rich; or it may be in perplexity and need advice from one supposed to be more experienced – as the Church at Antioch sought counsel of the older and more experienced Church at Jerusalem, or as the churches in Macedonia and Achaia contributed to the poor saints in Judea. But these facts do not touch the question of polity or government; their relations to each other in these respects remain the same. Fellowship and fraternal concord may be strengthened; the helpfulness of the one and the gratitude of the other may be increased, but the one is none the more independent, nor the other any the less so, because of these friendly interchanges.
But this whole course of argument alluded to is fallacious and misleading, and the illustrations used are unauthorized, inapplicable, and contrary to the facts. There is no such relation subsisting between the various churches constituting a general fellowship as exists between the individual members of a single Church. No hint or intimation of any such similarity is found in the New Testament, where the constitution and polity of a Church is taught. There is no other and larger organization provided for, with officers, orders, and regulations, including many smaller ones, called churches, as its units. If this similarity of relation be insisted on, then we shall have this comprehensive confederacy of churches claiming authority over the individual churches, receiving, disciplining, and excluding them, and otherwise exercising powers similar to those exercised by the individual Church over its members. Admit so much, and we have prelacy or papacy at once, in spirit and in fact.
Nor is there any relation subsisting between the separate churches, which can be fitly compared to the union of States in a federal government. If it were so we should have a de facto Presbyterianism. This whole course of reasoning, if carried out to its logical results, would not leave a vestige of Church independency. The only limitation, the only check upon the exercise of Christian liberty required by the Gospel, is loyalty to Christ as King in Zion, fidelity to His truth, and a constant exercise of that kindly courtesy which is innate in the Gospel and essential to the true Christian life, whether individual or organic, whether personal, social, or official. This spirit dominant will give all the fellowship which churches need or can demand; and all which a Scriptural polity can render or allow.
4. It is sometimes objected that Baptist are too independent, and that their liberty degenerates into license. Now, on calm reflection, all this must be denied. They cannot, as churches, be too independent, using that word in a true Christian sense. Nor can liberty become license.
Ignorant and foolish men may be charged with many wrong acts. They may practice injustice and oppression in the name of liberty, and under pretense of independence. But liberty and independence are, at the very most, only the occasion, and are in no sense to be made responsible for the evils which perverse and wrong-headed persons perpetrate under the shelter of their name. Church independency has its peculiar liability to misuse and abuse, but it cannot be shown that its difficulties are any more numerous, or any more serious than those to which other forms of Church government are liable. Indeed, if this be the true, the divine plan, then it is the best plan, with the fewest evils and the most advantages. The defects lie not in the plan, but in those who administer the government; and, as a matter of fact, it can be shown that churches acting under the independent polity, actually suffer from fewer and less serious difficulties than those subject to strangers and more centralized governments.
5. The independence of a Church is limited by the personal rights of its individual members. That is to say, the liberty of the body to act cannot lawfully be used to infringe the lawful liberty of its members. A Church, as a body, has no right to violate the rights of its members in the exercise of its authority. These rights need to be clearly defined and well understood on both sides. If the morals of the member do not coincide with the morals of the Gospel, the Church has the right to put him away from it, if he cannot be reclaimed. But the body cannot properly interfere with the rights of faith, or conscience, on the part of the individual. If his faith be judged heretical, and an element of discord, they can withdraw fellowship from him; but they can neither compel uniformity nor punish dissent – except by separation.
6. And still further, the liberty of a Church is limited by the terms of the great Commission, and by its divine institution, to the pursuits and the purposes contemplated in the Gospel. Whatever its members may do in their individual capacity as citizens and members of society, the Church as such must confine itself to the mission for which it was founded – the spread of the Gospel, and the advancement of the Kingdom of God in the world. It cannot become a corporation for mercantile or manufacturing pursuits; it cannot become a political organization; it cannot become a scientific or literary association. On all moral questions, however, the Church as a body, as well as its individual members, should be plainly pronounced and clearly understood as standing for the defense of virtue, purity and good order, since these are essential elements of Christianity. Also it should have an unmistakable record as an abettor and helper of good works, charitable and benevolent endeavors, since these are inherent in, and grow out of, the gospel. The Church cannot dictate what a member shall eat or drink or wear; what shall be his business or his pleasure. But if, in any of these matters, questions of morals and religion come to be involved to the reproach of truth and the Christian profession, then the Church has the right to interpose.
Wherein lies the proof that the primitive Church government was an independency?
In Matthew, chap. 18:15–17, where our Saviour for the first time, and, with one exception, the only time, in His personal conversation, speaks of the Church distinctively, His recognition of it as the only source of ecclesiastical authority is positive and complete. In giving directions for the adjustment of difficulties among brethren and the pacification of their social disturbances, He first expounds their personal duties; but when He speaks of authoritative action, that belongs to the Church. And the Church's action is final. That action admits of no reversal and of no review. There was to be no court beyond or above the single Church. He recognized no hierarchy, no presbytery, no synod, no assembly, no council; but "tell it unto the Church..." That ends the matter of appeal. "... but if he neglect to hear the Church, let him be unto thee as a heathen man and a publican."
The course pursued by the Church at Antioch, in Syria is suggestive. When a difficulty arose pertaining to the engrafting of Jewish customs upon a Christian polity, respecting which they were in doubt, they sent a delegation to the Church at Jerusalem, as being not only at the seat of the Jewish cultus, but of the earliest Christian knowledge as well, besides having in their fellowship the apostles. From this source, therefore. they would obtain authoritative instruction. – Acts 15. This deputation, including Paul and Barnabas on their arrival did not appeal to any select company of officials not even to the inspired Apostles; but to the whole Church, inclusive of these. "And when they came to Jerusalem, they were received of the Church, and of the apostles and elders." – Acts 15:4. After a full statement and discussion of the case, and an expressed opinion by James, the pastor of the Church, they agreed on what reply to make to the Church at Antioch. "Then pleased it the apostles and elders, with the whole Church, to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch, with Paul and Barnabas..." – v. :22. In addition to this delegation they sent letters also conveying their judgment in the case. And these letters recognized the Church in its three estates. "... The apostles and elders and brethren send greeting unto the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch..." – v. :23. And they added: "it seemed good unto us, being assembled with one accord." And "it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us..." – vs. :25, 28.
One independent Church, wishing advice, sought counsel of another independent Church, in whose experience and wisdom they had more confidence than in their own. And the Church appealed to, in the exercise of their independence, gave the advice sought. Nor did the Apostles, though inspired, assume to dictate in this matter, or to act without the cooperation of the elders and brethren. Nor yet did the Apostles and elders assume to act alone; "all the multitude," and "the whole Church," were present to hear and act with their leaders.
The Apostles regarded and treated the churches as independent bodies, having the rights of self-government, without subjection to any other authority. They reported their own doings to the churches, and addressed their epistles to them, as to independent bodies, and not to a confederacy, including many distinct congregations; nor yet to any official representatives of these congregations. In communicating with them the Apostles recognized their right to choose their own officers, to admit, discipline, and exclude members; primary and fundamental rights, which, being conceded, imply all other rights necessary to a self-governing community, acting under divinely enacted laws. They also enjoined upon them, as the responsible and authoritative executives of this power, the exercise of these functions, especially in the discipline and exclusion of unworthy members.
And nothing could more distinctly or more emphatically declare what is here claimed, than the fact that the Lord, in the Apocalyptic Epistles, addressed specifically the individual churches of Asia, through the angels, or pastors of these churches. The counsels, warnings, reproofs and commendations are in each case for the particular Church addressed, as responsible, censurable, or commendable. They were not addressed as a combination, or system of churches, either hierarchical or synodical; not as "the Church of Asia," but the churches, individual and separate.
Mosheim, the Church historian, says of the first century:
"In those primitive times each Christian Church was composed of the people, the presiding officers, and the assistants or deacons. These must be the component parts of every society. The principal voice was that of the people, or the whole body of Christians." "The assembled people therefore elected their own rulers and teachers." Of the second century, he adds: "One president or bishop presided over each Church. He was created by the common suffrages of the whole people." "During a great part of this century all the churches continued to be, as at first, independent of each other. Each Church was a kind of small independent republic, governing itself by its own laws, enacted or at least sanctioned by the people." – Eccl. Hist. Cent. I. part I. Ch. II. secs. 5, 6; Cent. II. Ch. II. secs. 1, 2.
Gieseler, in his Church history, speaking of the changes which occurred in ecclesiastical order during the second century, says:
"Country churches, which had grown up around some city, seem, with their bishops, to have been usually, in a certain degree, under the authority of the mother Church. With this exception, all the churches were alike independent; though some were especially held in honor, on such ground as their Apostolic origin, or the importance of the city in which they were situated." – Ch. Hist. Period I. Div. I. Ch. 3 Sec. 52.
Schaff, in his history, says:
Thus the Apostolic Church appears as a free, independent, and complete organization; a system of supernatural divine life, in a human body. It contains in itself all the offices and energies required for its purpose. It produces the supply of its outward wants from its own free spirit. Instead of receiving protection and support from the secular power, it suffers deadly hatred and persecution. It manages its own internal affairs with equal independence. Of union with the State, either in the way of hierarchical supremacy or of Erastian subordination, the first three centuries afford no trace." – Ch. Hist. Vol. I. sec. 45, p. 138. N. Y., 1871
Waddington, on this subject, says:
"It is also true that in the earliest government of the first Christian society, that of Jerusalem, not the elders only, but the whole Church, were associated with the apostles. And it is even certain that the terms bishop and elder or presbyter, were in the first instance, and for a short period, sometimes used synonymously." – Hist. of the Ch. p. 41.
Whately says of the primitive churches:
"Though there was one Lord, one Faith, and one Baptism for all of these, yet they were each a distinct independent community on earth, united by the common principles on which they were founded by their mutual agreement, affection and respect." – Kingdom of Christ, pp. 101-156 N. Y. Ed.
Dr. Burton says:
"Every Church had its own spiritual head, or bishop, and was independent of every other Church, with respect to its own internal regulations and laws." – Cited by Coleman, Primitive Christianity, p. 50.
Dr. Barrow says:
"At first every Church was settled apart under its bishops and presbyters so as independently and separately to manage its own affairs. Each was governed by its own head, and had its own laws." – Treatise on the Pope's Suprem. Works Vol. I. p. 662. Col. Prim. Christ.
Dr. Coleman says:
"These churches, wherever formed, became separate and independent bodies, competent to appoint their officers and administer their own government without reference or subordination to any central authority or foreign power. No fact connected with the history of the primitive churches is more fully established or more generally conceded." – Prim, Christ'y Exemp. Ch. 4, sec. 4, p. 95.
Dr. Francis Wayland says:
"The Baptists have ever believed in the entire and absolute independence of the churches. By this we mean that every Church of Christ – that is, every company of believers united together according to the laws of Christ – is wholly independent of every other. That every Church is capable of self-government; and that therefore no one acknowledges any higher authority under Christ, than itself; that with the Church all ecclesiastical action commences, and with it all terminates." "The more steadfastly we hold to the independency of the churches and abjure everything in the form of a denominational corporation, the more truly shall we be united, and the greater will be our prosperity." – Princ's and Pac's of Bap. Chs., pp. 178, 190.
Dr. David Benedict, the Baptist historian, says:
"The doctrine of absolute Church independence has always been a favorite one with our people. Under it they have greatly flourished, and very few have complained of its operation." – Fifty Years among the Baptists, p. 399.
That the apostolical churches, therefore, were independent in their form of government, seems to be clearly proven. Many prelatist, as well as others besides those here cited, concede this point. In this respect, therefore, and so far as their independency is concerned, Baptists are manifestly founded on the New Testament order of Church building and Church life; and, so far, are true successors of the Apostles. Nor does it avail to urge objections to this independency, or magnify the difficulties to which it is liable. It can be shown that other forms have inherent in them even greater liabilities to misuse; while this, if it were established by divine wisdom, must be the best fitted to its purpose, and is the one to be used and preserved.
STOP
HERE and TAKE TEST!
Should the test fail to open properly, please use F5 to reload or click the refresh symbol on the top of your browser page.
If you fail the test,
then restudy this lesson and retake the test on or after the next day.
Once you have passed the test, do not take it
again.
If you miss any questions
on the test, then restudy the section and find all of the correct answers to any
questions that you missed. A copy of your test was sent to you with the
correct answers on it. You may use that for comparison purposes to make
sure you have found the correct answers.
You may begin the next Section the day after you passed the test for this
Section.
Every organization which proposes to work smoothly, and yet efficiently, must have certain rules and regulations to be followed; certain laws for the individual members to obey. Failing in this – either without laws or with laws disregarded – all effort will go wide of the mark, and all endeavors, instead of succeeding and furthering each other, will counteract and interrupt each other; confusion will ensue, the wisest designs be frustrated, and the best-laid plans become abortive. This is true everywhere. In the State, in the family, every association whether for business, politics, scientific, literary or art research or improvement, all must be regulated by laws adopted for the common good, to which obedience is to be rendered by the members. And the object sought to be attained must fail unless there be conformity to the laws by which the organization is bound together, and obedience to which constitutes its vital force.
There is no society to which these remarks apply more appropriately and with more emphasis, than to that one divinely constituted organization, the "Society of Jesus," the Church of Christ. It has its laws, not human enactments, but divine. They are few and simple, not difficult to be understood or obeyed. "His commandments are not grievous;" and on conformity to them, both by the Church as a body, and by the individual members as well, depend the peace, harmony and efficiency of the society. When these regulations fall into disuse, and the good order of the body is neglected, it becomes weak and inefficient, neither commanding the confidence of its own members, nor the respect of the world. It is true that mere laws are a dead letter without the indwelling spirit of life in Christ Jesus. But the indwelling spirit of life becomes effectual only as it works to its purpose in harmony with those laws given for its guidance. Law and life! Life and law! Life to energize; law to guide. This is the philosophy and the method of the universe, both in nature and in grace.
To some the word discipline has an unpleasant sound. It seems punitive. It savors of transgression, conflict and punishment. But Church Discipline is not to be taken in this narrow sense alone; nor does it develop these unlovely features, except where, by the culpable neglect of pastors and others, it has fallen into decay, good order and the well-being of the body have been long disregarded, and the Church has become a lawless and disorderly company. Then a very hasty, and possibly an intemperate effort to make matters right, without sufficient prudence and precaution, may develop difficulties.
As chronic disorder and disregard of lawful regulations in every society tend not only to a decay of efficient action, but to the ultimate destruction of the society itself, and prepare for conflict, if a vigorous effort be made to reestablish good order and the reign of law; so many a Church has declined even to imbecility, if not to death, by long neglect of judicious and healthful discipline. Many a Church has found serious trouble in reestablishing a healthful order and discipline, after long-continued neglect and disorder. But many a Church has also found that a thorough course of Christian labor, and the reestablishment of a healthful scriptural discipline has brought back to the body order and harmony, reinvigorated its wasted energies, has produced a better tone of practical piety, and become the precursor of a revival of religion.
Discipline, in its larger sense, means training, cultivation, improvement, according to prescribed rules; subordination to law; administration of government and submission to lawfully constituted authority.
[ Ed. Note: Merriam Webster online dictionary- disciple is from Latin disciplina teaching, learning, from discipulus pupil, training that corrects, molds, or perfects the mental faculties or moral character, disciple, Middle English, from Old English discipul & Anglo-French disciple, from Late Latin and Latin; Late Latin discipulus follower of Jesus Christ in his lifetime, from Latin, pupil. Def. #4, training that corrects, molds, or perfects the mental faculties or moral character. Greek mathaytayss (maqhthV) a learner, pupil, disciple, one under discipline (in the sense of learning), taught and trained.]
Church discipline is sometimes distinguished as formative and corrective; the former having reference to culture, training and development according to Christian law, and the latter to the management of difficulties, and the correction of offenses as they arise in Church life and practice. It is to the latter, more especially, that attention is given in discussions on the subject and one latter is usually understood to be meant when Church discipline is mentioned. To this more particularly is attention here given. But this is not because formative and cultural discipline for edification and development is less important, but these ends are largely attained by instruction from the pulpit, the various departments of worship and the general activities of Christian life.
That corrective discipline may be carried to an unwise and an injurious extent is not denied; but the prevailing tendency among our churches is in another direction. It is to too great laxity, and not to too great severity. Pastors and official members find it easier to let things drift than to attempt the unpleasant task of correcting abuses. But pastors do not wisely forecast their own comfort, nor the honor of the Church, who do not strive to preserve the purity of the body while they keep out and cast out everything that can justly become a scandal to the Christian Church, or a disgrace to the Christian profession.
The Church is the school of Christ; let the school be controlled with strict, yet wise and kindly discipline, or the pupils will learn more of evil than of good, and anarchy and confusion will supplant good government. The Church is a family; let there be law and order in the household, tempered with tenderness and discretion, otherwise the family fails of its mission, and becomes a reproach rather than a blessing to society. The Church is the organic representative of the kingdom of Christ; unless law prevail in the kingdom and order be maintained, how shall the King be honored, the kingdom be advanced, or the world be blessed by its coming and triumph?
It is therefore of the utmost importance that a correct scriptural discipline be strictly maintained. The neglect of it fills a Church with evils which check the growth of piety, hinder the success of the Gospel, and reproach the Christian name, while from an injudicious and unscriptural exercise of it, more dissensions have arisen than perhaps from any other single cause. Every well-organized society has its regulations, in which each one, on becoming a member, acquiesces, to which he pledges his support, and by which he submits to be governed, so long as he shall belong to it; and leave it, if he ever does leave it, according to its stipulated forms.
A Christian Church is the most perfectly constructed society known to men, and its system of government the most simple and complete. As each member on entering it, solemnly covenants to maintain, defend and abide by these regulations, so he should consider himself bound by the most sacred considerations to honor and keep his covenant inviolate.
I. THREE LAWS OF CHRIST'S HOUSE
There are three laws of Christ's house, royal decrees, given by Him who is "Head over all things to the Church," which stand invested with all the sanctions of divine authority, and which, could they be known, loved and obeyed, if they did not absolutely prevent all offenses, would obviate the necessity for private labor and public discipline. They would make churches "households of faith," where Christians should abide "in the unity of the Spirit, and in the bond of peace." Green pastures where the flock should rest in safety, and feed with joy. Will not every Church member make them the guide of his life?
First law: for every disciple; the law of Love. "A new commandment I give unto you, That ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another." – John 13:34. This, if strictly obeyed, would prevent all cause of grief and offense, either personally to brethren or publicly to the Church. It would prevent cold indifference to each other's welfare, unfounded suspicions, causeless accusations, jealousies, animosities, bitterness, hatred, and strife, and cause each to love the other "with a pure heart fervently."
Second law: for the offender; the law of Confession. "... if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath aught against thee; leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift." – Matt 5:23, 24. This law makes it obligatory on every one who supposes that a brother has aught against him, to go to such an one without delay and secure, if possible, a reconciliation. And this he must do, whether there be, in his opinion, just cause or not for that brother to be offended; whether or not he has given occasion for offense. But knowing that a brother has grief on his account, he must go and attempt a reconciliation. Nor must he suppose that his gift will be acceptable to God, while he is unreconciled to man.
Third law: for the offended; the law of Forgiveness. "... if thy brother trespass against thee, rebuke him; and if he repent, forgive him. And if he trespass against thee seven times in a day, and seven times in a day turn again to thee, saying, I repent; thou shalt forgive him." – Luke 17:3, 4. This law enjoins a perpetual personal forgiveness of injuries; of injuries repented of and confessed. It does not enjoin that the often transgressor be held in the same esteem as before, for that might be impossible. Nor does it require that a Church should abstain from the exercise of a needed and healthful discipline, nor that it should discontinue a course already begun because the individual declares his repentance. In some cases this may be done; but instances not unfrequently occur when it is not required. In another form, the substance of this law was affirmed by Jesus, when, in answer to Peter's question as to how often he should forgive a brother, He replied, "I say not unto thee, Until seven times: but, Until seventy times seven." – Matt. 18:22. That is, constantly. But this has no reference to Church action.
Note 1. It is true that Jesus did not proclaim these statutes for just the occasion for which, nor in just the relation to each other, in which they have been placed here. But they cover all the ground of social Christian intercourse, whether in or out of Church relations, and apply with preeminent fitness to that intercourse which may involve matters of discipline.
Note 2. - Some have mistakenly inferred that because perpetual personal forgiveness is enjoined by our Lord, therefore all corrective Church discipline is needless, if not out of place. This is doing violence to common sense and plain facts. Because a father is bound constantly to forgive an erring but penitent child, is that a reason why all family government should be abrogated, and the sinning child not be called to account for his repeated offenses? Certainly not.
Note 3. An erring brother may not, and probably will not, be able to regain at once the confidence forfeited by his offense, and especially if his offense be repeated. Confidence lost is slowly restored. Nevertheless, if his repentance seem sincere he should be treated with hearty good will, and not be regarded with suspicion.
Note 4. It is not always satisfactory or sufficient evidence of penitence that one says he is sorry. He must "do works meet for repentance," in order that the Church should be under obligation to restore him to its favor, particularly where the offense has been grievous, or oft-repeated.
II. THE SCOPE OF DISCIPLINE
Unhappily, offenses do come, and these royal decrees are not always strictly observed. Hence the nature, scope and purpose of these administrative methods need to be well understood.
The object and purpose of discipline is to prevent, restrain, or remove the evil that may exist, to encourage and protect the right, and cherish the good, "for the edifying of the body of Christ," that it may be "perfect in love," and without reproach. It is not to gratify personal prejudice, or secure any selfish ends, but to reclaim the wandering, guide the wayward, and secure the best spiritual interests of each member, and the purity, good order, and efficiency of the entire body. That Church is always held in higher esteem by its own members, and more respected and honored by the world, where a high standard of Christian morals is maintained, and a jealous watch-care is exercised over the faith and conduct of its members.
The justification and the effectiveness of discipline depend not a little on the spirit with which it is exercised. It must not be exercised in a spirit of arrogance, nor of dictation, nor of assumed superiority, much less of vindictiveness, but of fraternal solicitude, of gentleness and love. If the impression be given to the offender that there is a disposition to condemn and punish, the whole purpose is frustrated. Paul's injunction to the Galatians was, "Brethren, if a man be overtaken in a fault, ye which are spiritual, restore such an one in the spirit of meekness; considering thyself, lest thou also be tempted." – Gal 6:1. This should be a perpetual guide to the temper of Christian labor with erring disciples, and is worthy to be inscribed in gold on the walls of every Church; or, better still, written by the Spirit of God on every Christian heart. The work of restoration is to be done, and not neglected; but it is to be done in a spirit of meekness, with a sense of one's own liability to err.
That churches have a right to exercise a watchful supervision over their members, to reprove them when erring, and withdraw fellowship from them when incorrigible, is a necessity arising from the very constitution of their organization. The right to exercise discipline inheres in the very nature of government, whether the government be in the hands of one, the few, or the many. This right was recognized by Christ and His Apostles, and was exercised by the first churches. "... but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as a heathen man, and a publican." – Matt 18:17. "Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us." – II Thess 3:6. "A man that is an heretic after the first and second admonition reject." – Titus 3:10
Not only has a Church the right to exercise discipline, in the milder forms of fraternal labor, for the removal of evils, but to the extreme of excision it is the imperative duty of every Church to administer this needed and salutary part of government. That Church is unfaithful to itself, to its members and to its living Head, that neglects it. Not that it should seek opportunity to find faults, or to deal with the weak and the wandering, but it should be faithful to do this when occasion calls for it. "... If thy brother trespass against thee, rebuke him; and if he repent, forgive him." – Luke 17:3. "Them that sin rebuke before all, that others also may fear." – I Tim. 5:20. "Wherefore come out from among them..." – II Cor 6:17; because "... whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it..." – I Cor 12:26. "Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them." – Rom. 16:17. "... Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person." – I Cor 5:13.
The exercise of discipline is limited in its range, by the laws of Christ as applied to Christian faith and morals, kindly and generously interpreted, in the spirit of fraternal affection, and yet with fidelity to the purity of truth, and the honor of the Gospel. Also it is limited to such matters of covenant agreement as were understood by each member on entering the Church, as forming the rules and regulations of the body. Evidently it would not be expected that such matters as were purely personal to the individual, not violations of any law of the New Testament, not transgressions of Christian morals, nor yet of covenant obligations, should be deemed offenses for which discipline should be invoked.
Personal rights are to be held sacred, and no unauthorized yoke placed upon the necks of the disciples, no yoke but His. "Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you." I Cor 11:2.
Discipline has a positive and definite purpose. It is not an aimless and vagrant administration. Its design is to heal the offense, or remove the offender; the correction of the evil, or the expulsion of the evil-doer; so far, at least, as corrective discipline is concerned. So soon as the erring one can be induced to turn from his evil way, making acknowledgment of it, with promise of a better course, the labor with him is to cease, the proper result having been attained; that is, in all ordinary cases. Some exceptions may be hereafter mentioned. "... if he repent, forgive him." – Luke 17:3. "... if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as a heathen man and a publican." – Matt. 18:17 "Purge out therefore the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump, as ye are unleavened. ..." – I Cor 5:7.
Offenses are usually considered as of two kinds, private and public; or personal and general. These terms do not very accurately define the distinction, or indicate the nature of the offenses themselves. Nor are these classes of evils very clearly defined, since they often run into each other. There are other terms which would perhaps more accurately express the two classes; but as these are in common use, they will be retained here.
It has been already intimated, that in the social relations of Church life, personal peculiarities on the part of some may appear, which to others are unpleasant and even offensive, but which can in no sense be amenable to discipline. Such are to be endured with patience, as disagreeable things in the family are borne with, and remedied, if remedied at all, by the molding influence of kind and genial intercourse. Not every infelicity of character or of conduct is to be regarded as an occasion for disciplinary labor. Great wisdom and discretion are needed in order to judge, both when such labor shall be attempted, and how it shall be directed.
Note 5. There are in most churches certain persons with so keen a scent for defects in others, and with such a stern almost relentless, sense of judicial orthodoxy in matters of order, that they are always finding somebody who deserve to be disciplined. These severe censors of their brethren never seem so much at home as when actively engaged in bringing to justice some offender. Then they appear at their best. They are probably honest and conscientious, and mean only to guard the purity and good name of the Church. But they need watching and moderating. Not less deplorable is the influence of those who are opposed to all disciplinary action.
Note 6. In judging of the gravity of offenses, the condition in which the offender is placed, the influences under which he acts, and the peculiar provocations that affect him are to be considered. One man may be much more guilty for the same act than another, since he may have had fewer incentives to evil, and more strength to withstand temptation. All palliations should have due weight.
A private offense has reference to the personal relations of individual members. It may not be an act which scandalizes the Christian name, or injures the Church as a body; but an injury done – or claimed to have been done – by one member vs. another, intentionally or unintentionally, by which his feelings are pained or in some way he believes himself to have been wronged in person, reputation, or estate. The offense is therefore personal, and the matter rests between those two members alone. Except that, when it becomes known, others may become interested in it or affected by it.
So long as such matters of difficulty are treated as personal and kept private – that is between the parties themselves concerned, and are not made public, or brought to the notice of the Church, they are reckoned as private offenses; but when, in any case, they cannot be settled privately, they are referred to the Church to be adjudicated, then they become public offenses.
The course of treatment in all cases of private offenses is the one prescribed by our Saviour, and to be found in Matthew 18:15-17. The course there prescribed is to be followed; and any departure from that rule is itself an offense deserving notice. Also any deviation from it would modify subsequent action which the Church might take if appealed to in the case. This course consists of three steps, and the final results.
First step. The one who considers himself inured must go to the offender, tell him his cause of grief, and between themselves alone adjust the matter, if possible, and settle the difficulty. "... If thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother." (Matthew 18:15)
Note 7. It is thus made obligatory on the injured or offended one, to go to the offender, and not the reverse. This is wisely ordained, since, although the offender is bound by every consideration of justice to go to the offended brother, and confess his sin, yet possibly he may not be aware of the evil he has done, or he may be so perverse and evil-minded as to be unwilling to do justice to an injured brother. But the offended one, having done no wrong himself, would be likely to go in a kindly and forgiving temper of mind, prepared to "gain a brother." Moreover, for him to take the initiative in the movement would be likely to moderate any exasperation he might feel under a sense of wrong suffered.
Note 8. This rule requires that the interview should be between themselves alone. No other persons should be present, either to help or to hinder, or to spread abroad the knowledge of the trouble. No fear or false delicacy must prevent his telling the offender his fault. He must tell it to him, but to no one else, till this step has failed to effect a reconciliation. He must not tell it in the presence of a third person; nor must he plead that because the other is the offender therefore the first step must be taken by him. And his object must be to "gain his brother," not to humiliate, accuse, or condemn him.
Second step. If the previous step shall fail of success, then the offended one must take one or two of the brethren with him. Seek another interview with the offender in their presence, and with the aid of their united wisdom and piety hope to succeed where he himself alone had failed. He is not to abandon the effort with the failure of the first step, nor throw the responsibility of further effort on the offender. "But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established." (Matthew 18:16)
Note 9. The offended one must not make the matter public with the failure of the first attempt, nor must he abandon it, unless, indeed, he has " gained his brother;" nor tell it to any, except the "one or two more."
Note 10. The object of taking the "one or two more," is chiefly that the Church, should the matter come before them, may have witnesses, and not depend on the complainant, whose testimony very likely would be contradicted by the defendant. They could witness to the temper and spirit of the two, and to the facts, so far as ascertained. Moreover, they could act as mediators between the parties, and possibly aid in a friendly adjustment of the trouble, without an appeal to the Church.
Third step. Should the second attempt be in like manner unsuccessful, and no reconciliation be effected, then the offended one must tell the whole matter to the Church, and leave it in their hands to be disposed of, as they shall judge best. His personal efforts failed; his effort, with one or two for witnesses and helpers, was unsuccessful; he has but one other appeal; that is to the Church. And this is ultimate. "And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the Church." (Matthew 18:17a)
Note 11. Having gone so far, the effort to gain a brother and to remove an offense is not to he abandoned. The offended brother is not to say he is sufficiently vindicated by the witness of the "one or two more," and he will drop the matter. The end is not yet gained. The influence is not salutary on either of the brethren nor on the body, to leave it incomplete. The Church is the final arbiter, and its decision is to be invoked. The matter is not a trifle now, even if it were such at the first; let the voice of the Church be heard.
Note 12. When told to the Church its private character disappears, and it becomes a public offense, to be treated as such. Both parties are then in the hands of the body, to await and abide by their decision. No further action on the part of either is to be expected, except for the offended to make his statement, and the offender to make his defense; as to both of which the "one or two more" are witnesses.
The result. The Church is to pass the final sentence, after a full and fair hearing of the whole case. There is no higher tribunal, and no further appeal. The great Head of the Church has directed what that decision shall be, if the offender be still unmoved and incorrigible. The object all the way through is to "gain a brother." Failing in this he is to be no longer a brother. As he will not show a brother's spirit, and will not act a brother's part, he is to be removed from the fellowship of the brotherhood. "... but if he neglect to hear the Church, let him be unto thee as a heathen man and a publican." (Matthew 18:17)
Note 13. Let it be borne in mind that the mere neglect to hear the complainant, brings it before the "one or two more," and a neglect to hear the "one or two more," brings the matter before the Church; and a neglect to " hear the Church" ends in exclusion. No offensive deportment, no other insubordination to authority, no vindictive spirit on the part of the accused, is necessary to secure this final sentence, but simply a " neglect to hear." That becomes a refusal to submit to lawfully constituted authority, as well as a violation of voluntarily accepted covenant obligations when admitted to its fellowship.
Note 14. We have, in this language of our Lord, the only time and place where He is recorded to have spoken of Church action, a clear and explicit recognition of the authority and independency of the local Church. The case was not to be appealed to any priest or hierarch, to any bishop or presbytery, to any council or conference or any other representative body; but to "the Church," whose decree was to be final in the case.
Observe. It should be solemnly impressed on the minds of pastors, deacons, and every member of every Church that the preceding course for the treatment of personal difficulties in Church relations was prescribed by Christ as a positive law for His churches, always and everywhere; and that it abides invested with all the sanctions of divine authority; that it cannot be abrogated, nor departed from with impunity. If every Church would require a strict and invariable compliance with its requirements, it would greatly lessen the number of personal difficulties, and make less harmful those which are inevitable. On pastors, as the teachers and leaders of the churches, largely rests the responsibility of seeing that these positive, wise, and salutary provisions are complied with.
Note 15. Let it be repeated with emphasis that to effect its best, its true results, all discipline is to be administered in love and meekness – in the spirit of the Master, with the desire and the manifest design to win an erring brother rather than to punish an offending member.
Note 16. Although the divine law requires that the offended shall first seek the offender, yet any one who is at all aware that he has grieved or offended another, should without delay seek the aggrieved, and by such efforts as he may be able to make – explanations and acknowledgments – remove, if possible, the cause of grief. Let him first be reconciled to his brother, then offer his gift. Even though he may claim that he has not injured his brother, yet if that brother believes he has, let him be sure to remove, if possible, such an impression.
Note 17. If a member attempts to bring before the Church, or in any other way make public, any matter of private grief or offense, before he has fully pursued the above course, according to the Gospel rule, he makes himself an offender thereby – subject to labor and discipline.
Note 18. If members become involved in personal difficulties, and make no effort to settle or remove them, or if they take any other than the scriptural course, they become themselves offenders against the Church, and subject to its discipline.
Note 19. When personal difficulties are known to exist, which the parties themselves cannot, or will not settle, the officers or other members should use their best endeavors to reconcile them privately, and avoid, if possible, the publicity of bringing them before the Church.
Note 20. But if all private endeavor fails to heal such difficulties the case should be taken before the Church, and treated as a public offense. The continuance of such disturbing elements is greatly injurious to the prosperity of the body. The old leaven should be purged out that the body of Christ may be wholly a new lump.
Note 21. There may be instances where wrongs are perpetrated, but the member who is wronged is unwilling to pursue any course of labor with the offender, or to make any complaint, or take any notice of it, yet the Church, knowing the facts and considering its own character compromised or its welfare periled by the case, may find it necessary to take it up and act upon it.
Note 22. When a member refers any private difficulty to the Church, which he is unable to settle, he should then leave it entirely in their hands, and be satisfied with such disposition as they may think wise to make of it; neither complaining of the result, nor attempting to prosecute it further.
Note 23. Nothing can properly be considered a reasonable cause of offense or just ground for discipline, but what is manifestly contrary to the Scriptures. Members may see many things in others which they dislike – personal idiosyncrasies perhaps offensive, but which cannot be justly considered subjects for complaint, or ecclesiastical censure . They are matters for Christian forbearance, to be endured, if they cannot be corrected in some other way.
Note 24. And yet should one, on uniting with the Church, understandingly agree to covenant pledges, or administrative regulations, which afterward he may come to regard as extra-scriptural and unpleasant, he must still submit to them according to the promise, or bear the discipline which their violation imposes.
Note 25. Nothing can be considered a just and reasonable cause for the withdrawal of fellowship, and exclusion from the Church, except it be clearly forbidden in, or manifestly contrary to, the Scriptures, and what would have prevented the reception of the individual into the Church had it existed at the time and been persisted in. Even these do not usually lead to disfellowship, providing they be confessed and forsaken.
A public offense is one claimed to be a breach of Christian morals, or a violation of covenant faith or duty. It is not an offensive act committed against an individual, of which that individual might complain. It is an injury to the cause of piety, a scandal to the Christian name and profession.
In such a case, one member is no more interested in or wronged by it than another. The whole body is equally concerned and equally responsible, And while the "steps of private labor" taken by any member in such a case would be appropriate, and might be effective, yet it is obligatory on no one more than another to take them. And since there is a natural indisposition to do it, such personal effort usually goes undone, and it is left to the Church, or its official members, to move in the matter. For instance, if it be credibly reported that a member is addicted to intemperance, or profanity, or dishonesty, or if he have departed from the faith, or violated the order of the Church in some grave matter, these are considered general, or public offenses, since in no sense are they personal or private in their commission or bearing.
It would be impracticable to attempt to specify all possible occasions when labor might be called for in this line of irregular Christian conduct. The Church must judge each individual case on its merits, and decide whether discipline be needed, and if so, to what extent. But in the Epistolary writings we have not only a watchful disciplinary supervision of the Church enjoined, but various occasions for the exercise of discipline specified. The following may here be mentioned as prominent:
Holding and teaching doctrines fundamentally false, contrary to the law of God, as understood by the body, and subversive of their accepted faith. "... If any man preach any other Gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed." – Gal 1:9. "If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed." – II John :10.
When a member refuses to submit to the requirements of the Church, and thus becomes insubordinate to lawfully constituted authority. "... but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as a heathen man and a publican." – Matt. 18:17.
"Now we exhort you, brethren, warn them that are unruly..." – I Thess 5:14.
Where a member is factious, foments discord stirs up strife and becomes a leader of party, disturbing or destroying the peace and harmony of the body. "... I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrines which ye have learned; and avoid them." – Rom. 16:17. "But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the churches of God." – I Cor 11:16
This takes a wide range and embraces many particulars. Such acts and practices as are inconsistent with the honor, rectitude and purity which the Gospel inculcates and requires. It is on the theory that the Christian Church must have a higher standard of moral virtue than the world holds essential. Otherwise how can it be the light of the world and the salt of the earth? "But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat." – I Cor 5:11.
Such a course of conduct and habit of life as brings the Christian profession into disrepute, and becomes subversive of the established faith and good order of the Church. It does not necessarily imply immorality of conduct. "... withdraw yourselves from every brother that walketh disorderly, and not after the tradition which he received of us." – II Thess 3:6. "... there are some which walk among you disorderly, working not at all..." – II Thess 3:11.
Cases where members will not contribute of their means, according to their evident ability for the support of the gospel, or for other Christian work; throwing heavy burdens on others, of which they refuse to bear their proportion. For while the Church cannot compel liberality, nor dictate what its members shall give, but leaves all offerings to be free-will, yet liberality is required, and any one who refuses to share an equality of responsibility while enjoying an equality of benefits, exposes himself to reproof and discipline. "For this ye know, that no... covetous man, who is an idolater, hath any inheritance in the kingdom of Christ." – Eph. 5:5. "If any man that is called a brother be... covetous... with such an one no not to eat." – I Cor 5:11.
When a member, in a spirit of arrogance and pride, assumes authority, and affects superiority, undertaking to domineer and rule the Church. "I wrote unto the Church: but Diotrephes, who loveth to have the preeminence among them, receiveth us not. Wherefore, if I come, I will remember his deeds..." – 3 John 9, 10.
The going to law with brethren "before unbelievers," and the prosecution of fellow-members at civil tribunals instead of private and peaceable arbitration " before the saints." This was severely censured by the Apostle, and deserves to be made a cause of discipline in every Church where it takes place. "I speak to your shame... brother goeth to law with brother, and that before the unbelievers. Now therefore there is utterly a fault among you, because ye go to law with one another. Why do ye not rather take wrong? Why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded?" – I Cor 6:5–7.
Note 1. Observe: where in these Epistolary citations, the churches are enjoined, with disorderly walkers, and evil persons, "not to eat," the evident meaning is not to eat with them in the celebration of the Supper. Not to commune with them. And when it is said, "from such withdraw yourselves," reference is evidently had to Church fellowship, and not to social intercourse.
Note 2. The Apostle manifestly did not purpose to give a list of disciplinable offenses, and those cited above are only such incidental cases as occurred in the churches, with respect to which he had occasion to give instruction. But they show conclusively two things. First: that purity of faith and doctrine, and virtue and good order in the management of Church affairs, were matters of importance, which they needed to understand. Second: that each Church was to be held responsible for a faithful and earnest administration of its government, so as to keep itself true to the law and the kingdom of Christ.
Note 3. Whatever may be thought of the relative importance of some of the faults of Christian character mentioned above, as compared with others, and still others that might be named, they are all blemishes and defects which should, by a judicious treatment, be corrected; they constitute stumbling-blocks to unbelievers, and a dangerous example for other disciples. They be all evils. Therefore put away the evils, or the evildoers.
In the treatment of public offenses, the proper course of labor and discipline would be substantially as follows: It must, however, be borne in mind that various cases have some peculiar features, and require peculiar treatments. The treatment of the case will therefore vary somewhat with the circumstances. Those who have the direction of them must be familiar with the general principles which apply; if beyond these some way-marks can be given, wise and prudent men need not go far astray in their arrangements.
1. The first member who has knowledge of the offense should, the same as in private cases, seek the offender, and, if possible, remove the difficulty. True, he is under no special obligation to do this simply because he chanced to be the first to learn the fact. But if he can win a brother from his evil way, and remove a reproach from the Church, such would be a work of faith and a labor of love, with which any Christian might feel greatly satisfied. This personal labor should be undertaken because each member of the body suffers in any wrong inflicted on the body, and because such personal efforts are often the most effectual. Should there be many individual efforts, by many members at the same time, aiming at the same end, so much the more effectual would it be.2. But if no one can or will pursue this course of personal private labor, or if such a course should prove unsuccessful, then should the one who has knowledge of it consult the pastor and deacons – or if, as in some churches, there be a prudential committee for such purposes, refer it to them – and leave it to their judgment as to what further course should be taken. If they will not notice the matter, this brother could bring it up at the next business Church meeting. But even then it would be well not to give names and facts, but say a case deserved attention, and ask that a committee be appointed, to which facts would be referred. All such cases should be kept out of the Church, and managed privately, so long as there seems hope of an effectual settlement by that means.
3. The Church, having formal knowledge of the matter, would, perhaps, as the most kindly fraternal "first step" in their movement, visit him, hear his explanation and excuse, and ascertain his purpose in the case. They might, indeed, without transcending the limits of propriety, at once cite him before the body to answer for himself, disprove the charges, or make his defense.
But this course at the beginning seems a little more judicial and harsh than the visit of a committee, and a brother "out of the way" might not accept it too readily. But the case should ultimately come before the Church, where the offender shall know the charges, hear the witnesses, and be allowed to answer for himself.
4. If a committee act in the case, they should act in the name of the Church, and with their authority, but they should go in the spirit of meekness and love, with the desire uppermost to win a brother. If the offender will not appear before the Church, by that refusal he sets its authority at defiance, and the body must decide how long they will bear with his insubordination. If he be so situated that he cannot appear before them, they must depend on the report of a committee, and act according to their best judgment in the matter.
5. If, in any case of discipline, and at any stage of the proceedings, the accused brother disproves the charges, or, in any ordinary case, if he admits them, confesses the wrong, makes suitable acknowledgment and reparation, so far as possible, together with promise of amendment, this should be deemed sufficient, and the case be dismissed. The purity of the Church is vindicated, its authority sustained, and an erring brother is won back to Christ, and to the fellowship of His people.
6. But if, after patient, deliberate and prayerful labor, all efforts fail to reclaim the offender, then, however painful the necessity, they must withdraw from him their fellowship. He has refused to hear them, and must be put away. With such a one, "no, not to eat." Better to lose many members than that the government and good order of the Church should be prostrated and trampled on and its good name become a by-word. When a course of discipline has been inaugurated, it must be carried on till the offender is reclaimed, or excluded.
Note 4. Any one tried by a Church should be allowed every opportunity, both as to time, place and circumstance, to vindicate himself. The very justice of Christ's house should incline to mercy. It should be made manifest that the object is not to punish, but to reclaim.
Note 5. Every person so tried has a right to demand and receive copies of all charges against him, the names of the accusers and witnesses, both of whom he shall have the privilege of meeting face to face, hearing their statements, bringing witness on his side, and answering for himself before the Church itself as the ultimate and authoritative tribunal.
Note 6. All persons on trial, or having been excluded, have a right to receive authenticated copies of the records of all proceedings held by the Church in their cases.
Note 7. It would not be proper for a member on trial to bring any person as his advocate who was not a member of the body to plead his case, without special permission from the Church to do so. The whole matter pertains to the Church alone, and outside parties have no right of interference. Moreover, it would be strange if the entire body should be so swayed from right and justice as not to give any member under accusation a reasonable hearing and an equitable treatment. Such a case might be possible, but would not be likely to occur.
Note 8. In every case of exclusion the charges against the member, and the reasons for his exclusion, should be carefully and accurately written out, and entered on the records of the Church, the excluded member to receive an authentic copy if he desires it.
Note 9. It is customary, also, to notify the individual that fellowship is withdrawn from him by sending him a copy of the reasons for the final action in the case, or otherwise, at the option of the clerk, as directed by the body.
Note 10. The Church should not commence disciplinary proceedings, nor even entertain a charge against a member, unless the evidence be such as to make the truth of the charge highly probable, if not absolutely certain.
Note 11. Offenses may, and not unfrequently do, occur, of such an aggravated character as to require, when confessed or fully proven, immediate exclusion, without the need of further labor, and notwithstanding confessions, penitence and promises; though not without a hearing. No temporizing or delay should be allowed, but the Church of Christ should show the world that it will not shelter in its bosom, nor hold in its fellowship, gross transgressors.
Note 12. Should the Church at any time find that it has dealt unjustly with a member, or excluded him without sufficient cause, it should at once proceed, of its own accord, without waiting for solicitation, to repair, so far as they may be able, the wrong done, and by concession and restoration make it apparent that they are as ready to reverse their action when they see it was wrong, as they were to take it when they believed it was right.
Note 13. The members of the Church should be impressed that they still owe a duty and a service of love to those "cut off" They have once been among them, members of the family and brethren beloved, now, though wayward and unworthy of fellowship because of their errors, yet may it not be hoped that, through their prayers and kindly treatment, they may come to themselves, repent of their errors and seek again their Father's house. Follow them with blessing; they may be saved.
Note 14. The Church should at any time be willing to grant a rehearing of his case, if requested by an excluded member, providing he gives assurance and makes it appear probable that be can establish his innocence, show their mistake or satisfy them by his acknowledgments.
Note 15. The Church should restore to its fellowship, at his request, any excluded member whenever his confession and reparation for the past are satisfactory and his present walk according to godliness.
Note 16. Pastors, deacons, and all officers are subject to the same discipline, administered in the same way, as other Church members; except that unusual caution should be had in giving credence to charges that lead to discipline, according to apostolic injunction: "Against an elder receive not an accusation, but before two or three witnesses." – I Tim. 5:19. And also it may be added, that considering the prominent position they occupy and considering the fact that disciplinary proceedings in their case may have a more serious effect, both on themselves and on the cause, than in ordinary cases, therefore unusual caution should be used and perhaps a Council, or the advice of wise brethren be called in aid.*
* The discipline of accused ministers is treated at length in the chapters on Councils.
Note 17. In all things not contrary to his conscience, the member should submit to the Church, but in all questions of faith and conscience he should do what he honestly believes to be right, whether the Church, in the exercise of administrative function should commend, or condemn him.
Note 18. While on the contrary, the Church as an executive body must not fail to exercise its legitimate and rightful authority, and discipline its members for what it regards as sufficient cause, even though such members may think the discipline unjust, and believe themselves injured by it.
Note 19. No one, while on trial before the Church, can properly accuse or bring charges against another member as a vindication of his own cause, or a palliation of his offense. His own case must be first decided on its merits. If his offense be proven, or confessed, no accusation of others can justify it, or should be allowed. But any legitimate evidence can be adduced in his own favor, even though such evidence may implicate others.
Note 20. The relation of the pastor to persons accused, and to processes of trial before the body, is delicate and important. He is not to act the partisan for or against the accused, much less is to be the prosecutor of his erring brethren. He is to be judge and expounder of law and evidence; and whatever may be his private opinion, he is to maintain fairness and equity on all sides and to all parties. As moderator of the meeting, he is to keep all parties to good order, and just measures. It is important that he be familiar with parliamentary rules, and with the principles of scriptural discipline, so that the results reached shall commend themselves to the reasonable approval of all.
Note 21. The pastor, by virtue of his office, is moderator of all business meetings. But in cases where he may himself be personally involved in the difficulty, or charged with complicity in it, he should not preside, but resign the chair and allow the meeting to elect some one else.
Note 22. The pastor, by virtue of his office, is moderator of all church business meetings, but not of society business meetings, which meetings are held according to statute law, for the election of trustees and for other matters pertaining to temporalities. These meetings, even though composed of the same individuals, yet are not the same official bodies. The moderator is elected on nomination. The pastor is eligible to election the same as any other member of the society, but cannot assume the chair by right of his office.
Note 23. Nothing can be considered a just and reasonable cause for the withdrawal of fellowship, and exclusion from the Church, except it be clearly forbidden in, or manifestly contrary to, the Scriptures, and what would have prevented the reception of the individual into the Church had it existed at the time and been persisted in. Even these do not usually lead to disfellowship, providing they be confessed and forsaken.
STOP HERE and TAKE TEST!
Should the test fail to open properly, please use F5 to reload or click the refresh symbol on the top of your browser page.
If you failed the test,
then restudy this lesson and retake the test on or after the next day.
Once you have passed the test, do not take it
again.
If you missed any questions
on the test, then restudy the section and find all of the correct answers to any
questions that you missed. A copy of your test was sent to you with the
correct answers on it. You may use that for comparison purposes to make
sure you have found the correct answers.
You may begin the next Section the day after you passed the test for this
Section.
In the maintenance of good order, and the administration of equitable discipline in a Church, there will at times arise cases of unusual difficulty; cases which require more than ordinary wisdom and prudence to manage justly, not to say satisfactorily; not so much, perhaps, because of the gravity of the offense, as because of the persistency of those concerned, the complications which arise in the progress of the case, the party spirit which may be engendered, and possibly, worst of all, the mistakes which the Church itself may make in the treatment of the matter. These mistakes thus give the culpable parties occasion to complain at the course pursued, even when they would not have condemned the Final issue itself.
It is probably safe to say that two-thirds of such vexatious cases grow out of misjudged or mismanaged discipline. A wiser course pursued would, in most instances, have reached a just and a peaceful termination. But prejudice, self-will, and heated passion, make partisans contend for the mastery, and rend the body of Christ. Our churches do not have too much discipline – indeed, they have too little – but it is often so unwisely administered as to produce more evil by the method than is removed by the act. It may be too much influenced by personal animosities, by a party spirit engendered, or by ignorance of the principles according to which all true discipline should be exercised. Such proceedings, even when instigated by sufficient provocation, may degenerate into a mere party or personal conflict for supremacy, in which leading members and related families become identified, and the pastor himself, possibly, involved. Alienations are produced, bitter feelings engendered, and discord rends the Church. The example becomes a reproach, bad men rejoice, and the good are grieved. Injustice has most likely been done to some one, if not by the final act, yet by some of the passionate and ill-advised proceedings leading to it. Unable to harmonize their difficulties, advice from outside is sought, a Council is called to extricate them from the difficulty.* Each party of course believes itself to be right, and as firmly holds the other to be wrong.
* [Ed. Note: This council has, of course, no authority whatsoever. It is merely a council to give counsel to the Church that requests it. One possible, in fact, not too uncommon obstruction to seeking such wise advice will be the attitude of some pastors who believe they "have to be right because they are God's man!" It is true that they are God's man, called to be the pastor, and probably the founder, of that Local Church by proper authority from a "mother" Church that sent him out. However, in some cases, far too many in fact, this attitude may have deteriorated into a dictatorial attitude and demeanor which will allow no outside counsel to be sought for any reason- other than from one or two close friends of the pastor himself. Which, being his friends, may be biased toward the pastor and, thus, biased toward his assessment of the situation.
When the pastor becomes a dictator instead of a servant, then a multitude of problems will surface like icebergs in the ocean and it will eventually rip an unfixable hole in the hull and sink the Old Ship of Zion. In this current question, the pastor needs to be careful that his objections to an outside council called strictly for counsel are not based upon his personal reluctance to give up dictatorial control over the Church. Biblically, if wise counsel is needed, then seek it!
Pro 11:14 Where no counsel is, the people fall: but in the multitude of counsellors there is safety.
Pro 15:22 Without counsel purposes are disappointed: but in the multitude of counsellors they are established.
We are at war with the devil and his minions and problems of Church discipline are one of his favorite weapons with which he attacks us. Let us be wise and follow biblical precepts because with them, and only with them, we can protect ourselves from the devil's attacks and through them we can defeat his purposes amongst us by the power of God given to us when we are obedient to Him and His Word.Pro 24:6 For by wise counsel thou shalt make thy war: and in multitude of counsellors there is safety.
It is true that it is best to keep matters of discipline within the local Church; however, if it cannot be settled within the Church in a scriptural and conciliatory manner, then outside advice of a council of godly men may have to be sought to prevent the destruction of the Church by opposing and even warring factions.
Gal
5:15 But if ye bite and devour one another, take heed that ye be not consumed
one of another.
Pro 13:10 Only by pride cometh contention: but with the well
advised is wisdom.
If counsel is needed, then get wise counsel. Not to dictate or usurp authority over the Church that called for advise but simply to suggest a godly course of action in the matter.
End of Ed. Note]
All that a Council can do is to hear patiently the statements of all parties, corroborate, or disprove confused assertions, so far as possible, by collateral testimony; sift the mass of excited personalities from the vital facts and the underlying principles involved; make a careful digest of the substance of the case, what and where they judge the mistakes and the wrong to be, and advise what course they think the parties concerned should pursue. The Council has, of course, no power to enforce its decisions, to impose penalties, or to compel the performance of its recommendations. But if the advice is carefully and kindly given, and seems reasonable and wise in itself, public sentiment will sustain it, and bear with a heavy moral force against those who reject it.
One very common and very serious difficulty is, that Councils, when called for such purposes, do not usually take sufficient time to thoroughly understand the case, and to put in proper form their findings. The members have little time to devote to other people's troubles, and but little patience to unravel the confused tangle of personal contentions which have run through months and years of conflict. Hence they are likely to hurry through the examination, make a hasty and not too well-considered report, dismiss the case, and return to their homes. The report, which was kindly meant to be equitable to all parties, very likely will not be acceptable to any, and the conflict will continue. True, a similar fruitless issue may follow the most patient and considerate action, owing to the perversity of the contestants; yet a Council, when called for advice, should give all the time and care which the gravity of the case demands. If the petty squabbles of misguided good men and women do not deserve so much, yet the peace of the Church, the cultivation of Christian virtue, and the honor of the Christian name, are worthy of such labor for their maintenance.
When such difficult cases are to be investigated by the aid of a Council, the order of proceedings would be substantially as follows:
1. The Council is to be organized the same as for other purposes by the election of a moderator and clerk; by prayer for divine guidance and a right spirit; by the preparation of a list of messengers, showing how many messengers are present, and from how many and what churches they come; and then by a distinct statement of the object for which they are convened. This statement may be made by the moderator or by those who have called the Council. Usually it is enough to read a copy of the letter missive, which should set forth the object of the call. This object must be kept in view, and not departed from during the proceedings. No foreign or extraneous matters should be admitted; nothing beyond what may be presented as evidence or for the elucidation of the main question. Of the relevancy of such matter the moderator must judge; and if his decisions be doubted, the Council must decide by a vote.
2. Those who have called the Council will then present their case as they wish it to stand before the body. In doing this they will pursue their own course and make such a presentation as they choose, embracing statements, documentary evidence, and the testimony of witnesses. In doing which they should not be interrupted, except that questions may be asked for explanation of matters not understood.
3. If it be a mutual Council (both parties present) the party which considers itself aggrieved and seeks redress, will present its case first; a full statement of all the facts bearing on it, with the testimony of witnesses if desired, and documentary evidence.
4. Following such a presentation, the other party will make their statements with such collateral evidence as they desire to offer, and with such reply to the other side as they may wish to give.
5. To this, a rejoinder of the first party may be made, with explanations, refutations, and new evidence, if any be had. And to this a rejoinder by the second party is allowed.
6. If it be an ex parte Council, in which no second party appears, there will of course be no rejoinders, but the chairman or members will ask such questions as may elicit the fullest information, and present the whole case clearly to the minds of the members of the body.
7. The discussion should close when the Council is satisfied that all the facts, in their proper relations are before them, so that they fully understand the case on which they are to express an opinion.
8. No discussion, crimination, or contradiction between the parties themselves should be permitted. No other interruption than asking or answering questions for information should be allowed by the moderator; otherwise irritation will be increased rather than allayed. The moderator should protect all parties in the exercise of their rights, that the simple truth may be reached.
9. It would not be in accordance with usage, nor consistent with the principles on which such references proceed, for parties in difficulty to procure the services of lawyers, the more skillfully to present and defend their course. It is not a contest before a civil tribunal for a judgment, but a confidential reference to brethren for advice. There could, however, be no objection, if parties deemed themselves unable to do themselves justice in the presentation of their case, to have some member of the Council act for them in the matter. Or, did the Council agree and no party to the difficulty object, have some brother outside, whether layman, lawyer, or minister, perform this service. No person, however, outside the Council and the parties in dispute, could have any right to appear before the body in advocacy. If they so appear at all it would be only by permission of the Council and of the parties calling it.
10. As the single object in statement and discussion should be the attainment of truth, by the ascertainment of facts, therefore the technicalities of legal proceedings in secular courts need not be regarded, but parliamentary rules should be observed, and good order strictly maintained through all the proceedings.
11. When all the evidence is in, and all the facts are supposed to be understood, it is voted that the case be closed, the parties retire – spectators too, if such be present – and the Council goes into private session for deliberation. Or the Council itself may retire to some convenient place for deliberation, all others remaining if they so desire.
12. In private session there is a free and full discussion of the subject;
perhaps the moderator sums up the case by presenting in condensed form the
various points which constitute its substance. If there be any forgetfulness of
facts, the parties can be recalled to repeat their statements. Then a committee
may be appointed to embody the results of their deliberations in certain
resolutions. This expression of opinion is sometimes called the findings of the
Council, and is twofold, as containing:
1. The substance or result of the investigation as they understand it;
2. The opinion expressed as to the merits of the case, embracing the advice given to the parties asking counsel.
13. It would seem proper that in making up these endings, no statement or resolution should be adopted except by a unanimous vote, though of course a majority vote would carry any question.
14. When the work is completed the parties are called in and the moderator announces the result by reading the statement. This statement, when once made on the basis of facts as presented, is understood not to be subject to revision or change. And yet it is supposable that a case might occur where facts or evidence had clearly been misapprehended, and the findings might and should, by unanimous consent, be modified accordingly. But this could not be done after the Council had finally adjourned. A Council ceases to exist on final adjournment.
15. It is usual to give the parties calling a Council authenticated copies of the proceedings and the results reached; and also, if desired, to order their publication.
16. If the proceedings be in the nature of a trial of some person or party before the Council, who may be called on to answer to an accusation, or to refute charges made, then the accused, as in all other cases of trial, must have copies of all charges, with specifications, including times and places and names of witnesses, served on him sufficiently long before the trial to allow him full opportunity for preparation to answer for and defend himself before the body. The foregoing statements cover the ground for the treatment of difficult cases of discipline in all ordinary circumstances where outside help becomes needful. Extraordinary cases develop peculiar features, which must be judged by general principles and the good sense of advisers called to consult. It must be presumed that those called upon for advice, whether Council or Reference, are impartially disposed to ascertain the facts, and to act in kindness and equity toward all concerned.
Now, while the presumption is, that in such cases the Church was right in its action, and the individual was justly disfellowshiped, the fact may be, and sometimes evidently is, that the action of the Church has been ill-judged and unjust, and the individual has good cause for complaint. This is most likely to occur where the exclusion is the issue of a protracted dissension between contending factions, maintained by headstrong leaders and partisan adherents. Moreover, it is sometimes true that, while the individual justly deserved discipline, and possibly exclusion even, on the merits of his case, yet the manner in which the case was managed, and the method by which the result was reached, were improper, ill-considered, and unjust to him.
*What has been already said in the preceding pages might apply to the case of excluded members as treated in this section. But in this case there arise some peculiar features not presented in the other.
For these reasons, if for no others, an excluded member has a right at least to lay his grievance before a Council, and ask such relief as their opinion and advice may afford. If it were not so, and if, as some have absurdly claimed, an excluded person should not be allowed the right of calling a Council, then such prohibition must be urged on the ground either that the Church could do no wrong, or else that an excluded member should have no redress for wrongs inflicted by unjust Church action; both of which suppositions are monstrous.
Church independency and personal liberty are both to be conceded and defended. If any man believes himself to have been wronged, he has the inalienable and unquestioned right to lay his grievances before any man or any number of men; and ask their opinion and advice. When a Church has excluded a member, their connection with him and control over him ceases. They have no further right to say what he shall or shall not do, nor what others shall or shall not do respecting him. And for churches or ministers to enter into a compact, formal or implied, that, because he is an excluded man, they will not even hear his statement, nor give advice, would be the most intolerable religious tyranny – especially for liberty loving Baptists. Such a proscription would approach the anathema of papal excommunication. A Church may exscind a member judged unworthy of further fellowship, after due process of disciplinary law; but having cut him off, they cannot continue to hold the rod in terror over him, and bar him from the counsel, and even from the sympathy of others, simply on the ground of their action. And they ought to be ashamed of themselves if in any wise they attempt to follow him with maledictions after they have cast him out.
While, therefore, the presumption is, that the action of the Church in his exclusion has been just and right, the possibility is that it may have been unjust and oppressive. And such a possibility entitles the individual to a hearing before unprejudiced brethren, should he so desire – not being able to find relief in any other way.
Since a Church may err, and invalidate its action of exclusion by irregular and unjust methods of procedure in discipline, as well as for insufficient cause in exclusion; we may inquire, what are the more common mistakes in processes of discipline, which would invalidate such action and give a member, thus disfellowshiped, good reason to complain of injustice done to himself?
1. He might complain that his exclusion was for insufficient cause, even though the proceedings in the case were orderly and fair. The Church, of course, would hold a different opinion; therefore, those who undertook to advise him would need to know the facts as the Church understood them, in order to advise discreetly.
2. It might be claimed that no first steps had been taken by those whom he had offended, in case his offense was a personal one. No matter of personal difficulty should be brought before the Church until the aggrieved member, who brings the charge, shall first have faithfully pursued the course prescribed by our Saviour in the eighteenth of Matthew. Whoever fails to follow this direction, makes himself an offender and subject to discipline for so doing.
3. The Church may have acted on his case without having furnished him with a copy of the charges or having allowed him opportunity to hear the witnesses against him, or sufficient opportunity to defend himself. All this would be unfair.
4. Final action on his case may have been taken on some unusual occasion, at some other than the proper meeting for hearing such cases, and without due notice to him that his case would be then acted on and decided.
5. There may have been refusal or failure to give full opportunity for defense before the Church, as a body, rather than before the officers or some committee, privately. It is the right of each member, when accused, to defend himself in the presence of the whole Church before he is condemned by it.
Other irregularities might occur, but the above named are such as are most likely to take place.
It would be a piece of very great folly for every excluded member, exasperated at what he thinks unfair treatment, to undertake immediately to precipitate a Council in the hope that they will right his wrongs, and antagonize the Church on his behalf. There are certain preliminary steps which good order requires him to take to justify the calling of a Council for his relief.
1. He should, after a little time, and when the heat of excitement has died down, make an appeal to the Church for a re-hearing of his case. In doing this he should give his reasons for claiming that he did not have a fair trial, and that he was unjustly judged. If a new hearing should be granted, with the opportunities he claims, then he must submit to the results. If the new hearing should be granted, but with similar irregularities as at first, then he is left in the same attitude as at the end of the first trial. If a re-hearing be refused, then:
2. He should request them to unite with him in calling a mutual Council to which the case may be submitted. If this request be granted, he will have the selection of one-half of the Council. Whatever the result of such a reference may be, it would be unwise for him to prosecute the matter any further. At any rate, the action of a Council so convened must be very extraordinary to justify him in any further attempts at self-vindication. If this request for a mutual Council be declined by the Church, then;
3. He might present himself to some other Church and request to be received to its fellowship on his experience, as an excluded member, giving them all the facts. The Church thus appealed to might think it wise to call a Council to advise them as to the propriety of receiving a member excluded from a sister Church. Should they, however, see fit to receive him – as they would have an undoubted right to do without a Council – that would dispose of the case, giving him Church standing and fellowship again, and he would have no occasion to pursue the matter further. And should this be done, the Church which excluded him could have no just ground for complaint. One Church has the same right to take a man in as another has to put him out. But should the Church appealed to, for any reason, decline to receive him or to call a Council, then;
4. He might with propriety – and it would be his undoubted right to do so, as the only further step toward redress – call an ex parte Council, before which the whole case could be laid; both as to his trial and exclusion and as to his subsequent efforts for reconciliation. Of course he should be ready to place before the Council, when convened, all the facts and evidence needed to justify his course in having called them together.
5. Any one thus calling a Council should have a clear and definite idea of what it can and what it cannot do. Otherwise he may be much disappointed in the result. He must not expect a Council to right all his wrongs, fancied or real, to redress all his grievances, or to punish the Church for what he believes, or even they may think, misjudged and unjust action in his case. The functions of a Council not being judicial, but advisory only, they can, at most, only express an opinion on the merits of the case, and give him advice. Even the expression of an opinion on the merits of the case they may withhold, but some advice they are bound to give; it was for that purpose they were called, and accepted the invitation to sit as counselors. The moral effect of their opinion and advice constitutes the only vindication or condemnation they have the power to pronounce.
One of the most grave and difficult cases of discipline which is likely to arise to vex, and possibly to divide a Church, is that of a minister who has lost public confidence, and who, by unchristian or unministerial conduct, is believed to be unfit to discharge the functions of; or to remain in, the sacred office. No case occurs where churches more need the wise and prudent advice of others, or where a Council finds a more legitimate field for its friendly offices than this. Great caution should be exercised, even in giving heed to unfavorable reports against a minister of the gospel. Christ's anointed ones should not be touched with unholy hands. The Apostle wisely decreed that, "Against an elder, receive not an accusation except at the mouth of two or three witnesses." – 1 Tim. 5:19. Charges which implicate their moral or ministerial character should not be entertained, only on very strong evidence. Their position is a very delicate one. Called by professional duties into almost all sorts of company, and placed in well nigh all kinds of positions, evil minded persons can, if disposed, excite suspicions against them on the most trivial occasions. They themselves are bound to exercise perpetual vigilance and care, while their reputation and good character, on which their comfort and usefulness so much depend, should be sacredly guarded and defended. But their sins should not be covered when they deserve exposure, nor should they escape discipline when they merit it.
First Of the high position and wide influence of a minister, and the fact that he stands before the public as an example of godliness, a religious teacher and leader of the people. If he proves himself an unworthy man his case becomes more a reproach and scandal to religion, and more an obstacle to the progress of truth than if he were a private member of the Church. The purity of the ministerial character and the honor of the Christian profession must be vindicated.
Second A minister's character and good name must be held sacredly and dealt with tenderly, since they are his richest possessions, and usually all he has as a means of usefulness, for the maintenance of a respectable position in society, or the continued support of himself and family with the ordinary comforts of life. When these are gone, all of worldly worth is gone. They must not be trifled with.
In dealing with such a case, therefore, unusual caution should be exercised; and there are few churches so strong, so wise, so well-balanced and self-contained that it would be prudent to proceed to extremities without calling a Council, or in some way securing outside aid and advice. In the calling of such a Council the following facts are to be kept in mind:
1. As in all other cases, it must be accepted that Baptist Councils are advisory only, and never authoritative. They are called to give advice to those who have called them – advice based on their knowledge of the merits of the case, after having carefully examined it.
2. Neither ministers nor others can organize themselves into a Council, nor can they, self-moved and unasked, call one for the trial of a minister whose presence may be unwelcome to them, and in whose character they may have no confidence. Such cases have occurred; but such an act is a gross outrage on personal rights and Church independency, as well as a violation of Baptist polity, by an unlawful assumption of authority.
3. A Council called to advise in matters relating to the trial of an accused minister can only be called by a Church; and by that Church of which such minister is a member. Any other Church could call a Council to advise them what course they ought to take in respect to the fellowship of a Church which persisted in sustaining a pastor whom they believed unworthy. A party in a Church – even a very small party – might call a Council to advise them as to their duty, if their Church were sustaining a minister in whom they had no confidence; but in neither of these cases could a Council try or pronounce judgment on the character of the man himself. They were not convened for that purpose. They could only advise those who called them, as to their duty in the premises.
4. A Council, having no ecclesiastical authority, cannot be called to try, and, if found guilty, to depose a minister. Judicial acts belong to a Church, and not to a Council; nor can a Church transfer its authority for the exercise of judicial functions to any other body. A Council, in order to express an opinion and give advice, is asked to examine all the facts, consider all the circumstances, sift and weigh the evidence on all sides, the accused having full opportunity to defend himself. In a modified, but not in a judicial sense, it may be called a trial of the accused: because it is a search for the merits of the case, by an investigation of all the facts, and a sifting of all the evidence.
5. The minister on whose case his Church may call a Council, is not obliged, and cannot be compelled, to appear before such a Council, or in any way submit his case to them. He is amenable to the Church alone. But it is his right to appear before them, have copies of all charges, hear all testimony, examine witnesses, and answer for himself. And usually it is better for him to take this course than to stand upon his reserved rights, and treat a Council with disregard. The presumption is, that a company of Christian men will judge impartially on the evidence placed before them. And though this presumption may not always be justified, it is better for one to meet all charges frankly, and all accusers face to face, than to seem to evade an investigation of matters laid against him.
6. There is no absolute necessity inherent in the case itself, for the calling of a Council in the discipline or trial of a minister. If done at all, it is done for expediency, and not from necessity; for order and safety, and not for authority. But because many churches are weak as to numbers, and inexperienced in the treatment of difficult matters, because, in serious and complicated disciplinary proceedings, there is likely to be much irritation and impetuosity, when even good men are too much influenced by party zeal and prejudice – therefore it is wise to call in the experienced, prudent and impartial, for advice. Such advice will invest the Church's final action with weight, and give the public greater assurance of its equity and justice.
7. In most cases of the kind, where a Council is resorted to, it is best to make it a mutual Council, by agreement between the Church and the accused. He would then have the privilege of selecting one-half the members. If this be not done, and the result be unfavorable to him, he will be almost sure, with the advice of friends – for he will have friends – to call another to counteract the influence of the first, and to place his case in a more favorable light before the public.
8. After the investigation has closed, and the Council rendered its opinion and advice, the Church will take such action as, in view of all the facts, may be deemed wise and right. They are not obliged to follow the advice given. The Council has no power to enforce its recommendations, and should have no desire to do it. The responsibility of the final action lies with the Church. But the advice given would naturally constitute an important factor in their final decision. It would require very weighty reasons to justify a Church in disregarding the judgment and advice of a Council of its own selection, Such a case would seldom occur.
9. The final action of a Church, as to an accused minister, may take any one of the following forms:
a. That of an acquittal; where no fault worthy of further consideration was proven against him; the charges were not sustained, and he is pronounced innocent.
b. That of admonition; indiscretions which caused reproach and hindered his usefulness, having been shown; suspicions being excited, the enemies of religion had occasion to magnify his faults to the injury of the cause of truth. To caution and admonish him to greater circumspection may be all which the case requires.
c. That of a withdrawal of fellowship from him as a minister of the Gospel, with a declaration, that in their opinion he is unworthy of, and unfit to continue in, the ministerial office. This may be done, and the man still be retained in the fellowship of the Church as a private member. There may be faults which would disqualify him for the exercise of a public ministry, which might not unfit him for private membership. Such an act of disfellowship as a minister, would virtually be an act of deposition from the sacred office, so far as any act of Church or Council could depose him.
d. That of the withdrawal of fellowship from him as a Church member; thus excluding him from the body. This, accompanied with a declaration of his unworthiness as a minister of the Gospel, constitutes the final and utmost act of the Church's disciplinary power, in such a case. They can do no more. This puts him out, and deposes him from the ministry, so far as any human power can depose him. It also clears the Church from any further responsibility as to his character or conduct. His disfellowship as a member adds emphasis to his disfellowship as a minister.
To the above-named acts a Council may advise; but the acts themselves, to be valid and of any force, must be the acts of the Church and not of the Council. It would be an impertinent assumption for a Council to attempt such an exercise of ecclesiastical authority.
10. If the final action of the Church – based on the advice of a Council – be unfavorable to the minister on trial, and result in his degradation, or exclusion, he will very likely think that still greater injustice has been done him, and seek relief by calling another Council. If the former was a mutual Council, in the calling of which he had part, and to which he consented to commit the case, it would be extremely unwise for him to prosecute the matter further – except, indeed, in very extraordinary circumstances. If the former were an ex parte Council, called by the Church without his concurrence, there would be more occasion for him to call another, especially if so advised by wise and prudent friends. It certainly would be his right to do so, should he be disposed. But the fewer Councils the better. It is quite as well to suffer for want of them as to suffer by means of them.
a. He should invite the Church to unite with him, and make it a mutual Council, in whose judgment all parties might acquiesce. Nor should he hesitate to do this, because the Church had hitherto refused similar requests from him. To repeat the request would put his case in a better attitude before those who might be called to consider it.
b. Have the Council larger than the previous one, and, if possible, more marked for wisdom and experience. Some would advise that such a Council should be composed of new men entirely, since those on the previous Council had already judged the case, and could hardly re-judge it with impartiality. Others would advise that it be composed largely of the same members, with such additions as might counteract any local or personal prejudice that might previously have existed. And this would seem a wise course.
c. Such new Council, when convened, should confine its action strictly to the object for which it was called. It should not attempt to traverse the action, either of the Church, or of the previous Council, and should consider them only so far as to obtain information, in order that they may justly and wisely form an opinion and impart advice. By such a course the action of councils will, so far as practicable, prove conservative and salutary, vindicating the right, and giving furtherance to equity and truth.
Note 1. — A Council possessing no ecclesiastical authority can neither make nor unmake a minister. No Council therefore, can put a man out of the ministry. All it can do is to declare him, in their opinion, unfit for, and disqualified to remain in, the ministry, and that they cannot fellowship him as a minister; and they can add the advice, that the Church exclude and depose him.
Note 2. Though all ecclesiastical authority resides in a Church, yet a Church cannot, in any absolute sense, depose, and put a man out of the ministry, except so far as that ministry relates to themselves. They can depose him from being their minister, and declare him, in their opinion, unworthy to fill the sacred office. But any other Church can have him for their minister, if they so desire, since each Church is entirely independent as to the choice of its pastor and the management of its internal affairs.
Note 3. Such action, however, on the part of councils and of churches, through having no power to compel silence, or to enforce penalties, substantially effects the same end, through the force of public sentiment. This will, sooner or later, lead an unworthy man to retire from the ministerial calling.
Note 4. A Church might declare a man unfit for the ministry, and depose him from the office, and yet retain him in its fellowship as a private member. His ministerial rather than his Christian character being involved in the discipline
Note 5. - If a minister be excluded from the fellowship of a Church, such exclusion is equivalent to a deposition, so far as Church action can effect a deposition. For if he be not worthy of Church fellowship, he surely is not worthy to hold the office and discharge the functions of a Gospel minister.
STOP HERE and TAKE TEST!
Should the test fail to open properly, please use F5 to reload or click the refresh symbol on the top of your browser page.
If you failed the test,
then restudy this lesson and retake the test on or after the next day.
Once you have passed the test, do not take it
again.
If you missed any questions
on the test, then restudy the section and find all of the correct answers to any
questions that you missed. A copy of your test was sent to you with the
correct answers on it. You may use that for comparison purposes to make
sure you have found the correct answers.
You may begin the next Section the day after you passed the test for this
Section.
Religious faith expresses itself both in worship and in work. In such acts of religious service as may declare the soul's devotion to the Deity, and in such works as are believed to be pleasing to Him, and such as naturally grow out of the faith cherished, and correspond to the worship offered.
Worship, properly speaking, is adoration and praise offered to God. The emotion is instinctive in a devout soul and tends to exalt and magnify Him to whom all honor and glory are due. It is offered in view of the glorious excellency of the divine character; and also because of what God has done for men. Both for what He is, and for what He does. Worship is usually attended with confession for sin and with supplication for pardon and needed grace. It is an important duty and a gracious privilege, But no act of devotion can be acceptable to Him, unless it be spontaneous and sincere. If it be such, He delights in it and accepts it with pleasure from His creatures. Its influence on individual piety, on the Church's spiritual life, and on the moral sense of the community, is not sufficiently understood nor highly enough valued.
While, strictly speaking, it is defined within narrow bounds, yet in ordinary language all religious service is spoken of as worship. All recognize the Divine Presence as the inspiration of devotion and the object of veneration. The various parts of public and social worship claim brief attention.
[Ed. Note: In the following sections, many different types of meetings are mentioned. Some were in vogue in brother Hiscox's day and some are still common today. They are all left here in the text but are to be treated as merely suggestions and explanations of the many different possible types of meetings.]
As public religious service is usually arranged by evangelical Churches generally, preaching holds a foremost place and the service is secondary. With a liturgical Church it is different. There the service rules, and preaching is largely subordinate. Preaching, strictly speaking, is not worship, though calculated to inspire and assist worship. Preaching is a proclamation of truth, not an address to the Deity, The preacher is a herald (kerux) a proclaimer, and his address (kerugma), a message delivered to an audience.
The true object and design of preaching is the salvation of sinners and the edification of the saints by means of instruction and persuasion. Instruction may properly be said to be the first object of preaching. Most emphatically it is not to entertain or recreate an audience; nor to crowd the house with hearers, nor to build up wealthy and fashionable congregations; nor to rent pews and replenish the treasury; nor to teach literature, science, or art; but to save and sanctify souls by an exhibition of Christ crucified. All preaching which fails of this, fails of its chief design. For this purpose our Lord gave some to be "... pastors and teachers; for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:" – Eph 4:11, 12. And the Apostle's ministry was, "... warning every man, and teaching every man in all wisdom; that we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus:" – Col 1:28. There are occasions which press the minister of the cross very sorely to diverge from, if not altogether to forget, this high aim of his calling, and adapt his efforts to draw admiring and curious crowds to his ministry. And for this purpose, themes not Gospel and not even strictly religious, may be resorted to. But viewed from the low ground of expediency even, this is a mistake, Preachers who hold, longest and strongest, the consciences and the confidence of the community, and who command the most respectful attention of the people, are those who are loyal to the truth as it is in Jesus.
All preaching to be profitable should be plain and simple in style, spiritual in tone, experimental and practical in substance. The very basis and foundation of every sermon should be instruction. In the arrangement of the matter, order should be so manifest that the parts will follow each other by a natural sequence, so that the minds of the hearers will easily comprehend their relations. As to the style, clearness is of the first importance. The speaker is not preaching in an unknown tongue, and every sentence and word should be so transparent in its meaning that none can misunderstand. A mere jumble of words, a heap of figures and of flowers are as chaff compared with these qualities. All the arts of oratory and the adornments of rhetoric poorly compensate for the absence of transparent clearness.
Nevertheless, with these qualities possessed, the more interesting and attractive the preaching, in style, matter, and manner, the more welcome and useful it is likely to prove. And every preacher should strive to become as attractive and useful to the people as possible. There would be poor comfort in saying a sermon was good, if the style were such as to make it incomprehensible, or the manner of its delivery such as to make it repulsive. With these drawbacks it certainly would not be good for its purpose. Every preacher should "study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed..." – 2 Tim 2:15. Many sermons, in themselves really good, would be far more effective were the manner of their delivery more intelligible, animated, and impressive.
According to established customs in religious society, it is expected that in our places of public worship, two sermons will be regularly preached on each Sunday. Formerly it was customary to have a lecture – a somewhat informal sermon – on some evening during the week.
[Ed. Note: It is lax, to say the least, to not have some sort of mid-week service. The members are assailed mercilessly during the week with work, the devil, the world, the flesh, and a multitude of other devices used by the devil to wear them down. The mid-week service, whether a sermon is preached or the service is given over to an old-fashioned prayer meeting or, as is more common, a combination of both takes place, will help soothe, comfort, strengthen, and generally prepare the members to face the rest of the week on through to the Sunday morning meeting. This edification of the saints is much needed and is generally a sign of dedication when the members come out for this service. There is an old saying that "People come on Sunday morning for duty, and Sunday night because they love the preacher, but they come on Wednesday night because they love the Lord." Whether this is true or not does not really matter. What does matter is the Church that has midweek service is a Church serious about the things of God. Many churches today have Sunday morning only services. This smacks of "playing church" instead of "having Church." It smacks of "pacifying God and conscience" rather than "praising God with a clear conscience." And in the end it manifests a lackadaisical attitude instead of an attitude of true love for God. Laziness and coldness can be the unavoidable end result of stopping the Sunday night service and the mid-week service; but, most often it is the other way around. The elimination of the Sunday night and mid-week services is usually the culmination of a process. It usually is the eventual and unavoidable manifestation of the impending death of the church. Once a true church of God actively spreading the Gospel and promoting the Kingdom- once a bright light set on a hill, now, a dying ember soon to be dark and completely without light or heat. The elimination of the Sunday night and mid-week services is a clear indicator that the church is now nearing the end of the road and on a nearly unstopped slide down the slope of laziness and coldness, over a period of some years, into a final Laodicean state of apathy. Only an act of God that would shake the church to its core could now stop this process. And if God chooses not to do so, or He does and the Church decides to resist with stiff-necked resolve, then He will write Ichabod over the door.]
Special and protracted preaching services, daily or nightly, are often held during seasons of unusual religious interest or to produce unusual interest.
In primitive times, as now on mission fields, preaching was less formal and more pervasive. It was" daily, from house to house," "instant in season and out of season," that people might by any means hear the glad tidings of salvation. Now, congregations ordinarily require too much preaching in proportion to the more social services of religion. So far as the Church members and the stated congregation are concerned, it is questionable if any better arrangement for Sunday service than the following could be devised; viz., a sermon in the morning, the very best the preacher is able to produce; a Bible class, and Sunday school service in the afternoon,* and a prayer and conference meeting in the evening, so arranged as to be animated and attractive.
* [Ed. Note: It is more common today to have Sunday School preceding the morning worship service rather than in the afternoon as seems to have been more common in brother Hiscox's day in the Baptist group to which he had affiliation.]
In our cities, towns, and larger villages, the Sunday evening congregation is largely different from that of the morning, consisting to a great extent, of a floating population, with but few of the Church families, and to a considerable extent made up of young people. Of course it is not thought best to abandon preaching for that service. To meet this tendency, not a few preachers have held very loosely the evangelical character of their evening services, and instead of Gospel themes, have treated semi-secular and otherwise alien subjects to catch the drifting current. This is a great mistake; for no subjects can be so attractive in a Church service as simple Gospel themes, if rightly presented. It would seem that music should have a larger place in evening than in morning worship.*
* [Ed. Note: This is another area where things have changed dramatically since brother Hiscox's day. The Sunday evening service today (2009) is usually made up of the core families of the Church rather than a "floating population" and "to a considerable extent made up of young people," as he put it.]
Considering the necessities of the world, and that men perish perpetually without the gospel, those called to that sacred work should "Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine." – II Tim 4:2.
Note 1.– Though no fixed rule can be adopted for the length of sermons, yet when the Sunday is crowded with services, as it usually is, that should not be protracted. Ministers are not usually complained of for long sermons unless they be uniformly long. If it be only occasional it is borne. Some discourses require more time than others, and some will be listened to with more interest and patience than others. Seldom, however, should one consume more than forty minutes, and the entire service should be something less than an hour and a half on all ordinary occasions.
Note 2.– Very unreasonable objections are at times made to doctrinal preaching. It is a little doubtful whether those who object really know what doctrinal preaching is. In fact, doctrine is the very essence and marrow of the Gospel, and little instruction in godliness can he imparted without doctrine. It is the framework of the building where edification – upbuilding – is enjoined as the special duty of the religious teacher. No doubt doctrine can be preached so abstractly and uninterestingly as to be a burden to the hearers.
Note 3.- Should manuscripts be used in the pulpit, or should sermons be extemporaneous in manner, are questions which the preacher must decide for himself. Opinions differ. The excellency or usefulness of a sermon does not largely depend on either method. Some subjects cannot be accurately treated without writing. Moreover, writing is an important aid, and an invaluable mental discipline to the preacher. It helps him to think systematically and to express himself concisely and forcibly. But for all ordinary occasions of preaching it cannot be doubted that an extemporaneous style of address is most in accordance with the spirit of the Gospel, and more agreeable, forcible, and profitable to the congregation.
Note 4.– The great temptation, however, to extemporaneous preachers – especially if they have large facility in the use of language – is to neglect the preparation of their sermons and depend on the inspiration of the occasion. This temptation, if yielded to, becomes fatal to both the reputation and the usefulness of the preacher,
Note 5.– Sermons need not be read even though they be written. Nor, if a manuscript be used, need the manner of address be servile and lifeless. Some ministers are as free, animated, and vigorous in using a written sermon as others are who never wrote one. The trouble is not with the manuscript, but with the manner of using it.
Note 6.– Perhaps no better advice could be given on this subject than that one written and one extemporaneous sermon should be prepared and preached each Sunday. Two well prepared and well written sermons each week, with the many pastoral duties and the many interruptions incident to a minister's position, will prove a severe tax on his time and energies, or an utter impossibility.
Note 7.- Probably no more effective method could be adopted than for the preacher to write his sermon carefully, then make a brief abstract or skeleton for use in the pulpit, leaving his manuscript at home. He would thus largely combine the advantages of a written style with the freedom and force of an extemporaneous delivery.
Note 8.– Above all things, let the preacher have something to say; know what it is; be thoroughly penetrated with the importance and the spirit of it; then say it earnestly and devoutly as an ambassador of Christ, to do the people good. The Spirit will help his infirmities.
Prayer is an important element in all religious service. Not only is it vital to the individual Christian life, its importance in social religion is scarcely less important. "Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you:" was the positive declaration of our Lord to His disciples.– Matt 7:7.
There are special blessings promised to united prayer, as well as to personal prayer. "... if two of you shall agree on earth, as touching anything that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven." – Matt. 18:19. Secret prayer, and personal communion alone with God, is essential to the soul's spiritual life, and is encouraged by the promise of special blessing. "But thou, when thou prayest, enter into thy closet, and when thou hast shut thy door, pray to thy Father which is in secret; and thy Father which seeth in secret shall reward thee openly." – Matt 6:6.
Prayer adjusts itself in form to the various occasions which demand its exercise, but in spirit it is essentially everywhere the same. The pastor's prayer before his congregation would speak for them as well as for himself and would be different from his prayer in his own study, at the family altar, in the sickroom, with a penitent sinner, or with a dying saint. An intelligent faith will adjust its form to the peculiar circumstances in which it is called forth. The prayer before the sermon would naturally be somewhat different from that at its close. If the petitioner have the true spirit of supplication, the petition will take on suitable language for its expression. The form will need to give no anxiety.
1. The motive of prayer – Prayer includes worship in its strictest sense. He who prays is supposed to shut out the world, and become insensible to aught else, while he communes with God. It includes adoration, confession, thanksgiving and petition. In its narrower sense prayer is supplication (precari – to beseech, to supplicate)* ; making request for needed blessings on behalf of the worshiper, and other objects of divine clemency. The intercession of Christ must evermore be recognized as the only prevailing influence with, and cause of blessing from, the Father. "... Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my name, He will give it you." – John 16:23. While the office of the Holy Spirit must be relied on as the only means of communication with the Throne of Grace by the merits of Christ. "... for we know not what we should pray for as we ought: but the Spirit itself maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered." – Rom 8:26.
*[Ed. Note: The more common Greek word for prayer is proseucomai proseuchomai, from proseuch, to pray to God, that is, supplicate, worship]
– There needs to be a preparation for prayer, in order to lead profitably the devotions of others in addresses to the mercy seat. Not a preparation of words, but of the heart; not a forethought of phrases for that particular occasion, but a spirit in harmony with the divine fullness and a felt necessity for the blessings sought. He who would have the preparation, when in the pulpit, must obtain it before he goes there. "... he that cometh to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of them that diligently seek Him." – Heb 11:6. "But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering..." – James I: 6. "... praying in the Holy Ghost," – Jude 20.
To make prayers and to pray, are very different things. Anyone can make a prayer, who can command the use of language; but to pray, the soul must commune with God. There is constant danger that prayers offered in the pulpit will become stereotyped and monotonous, so constantly are they repeated, and under circumstances so almost exactly similar. The best preventive is a fervent spirit, and a deep sense of the need of divine assistance.
– While prayer is not to be measured and meted out by mechanical rules, nor subjected to the rigid canons of logic or rhetoric, yet the petitioner is not – ordinarily, at least – beyond a self-conscious sense of certain proprieties, which even prayer, as a public or social exercise, should not transgress. Nor need it dampen the spirit, or interrupt the flow of devotion, to regard those proprieties. Prayer should be simple, direct, and brief. It should be so simple in style that all in the assembly can intelligently unite in it. It should be direct as to what is prayed for, and not wander over all possible subjects, seeking nothing in particular, and expecting nothing in particular. It often seems as if prayer was offered in public worship, not because there was a felt need of it, but because it is the prevailing custom to pray in that particular part of the service.
Prayers should be brief: of course, in some cases more so than in others. There is no excuse for the painful length of what is called "the long prayer" preceding the sermon in the case of many clergymen. In fact, the " long prayer" is a calamity, to both the minister and the people. It is often difficult to perform it, and painful to endure it. Very largely it is not prayer at all, but a religious address, the rather, discursive in style and promiscuous in matter. If it could be confined to three or five minutes, the "long prayer" would be no more, and public worship would gain immensely. But the tyranny of established usage still preserves and inflicts it on preacher and people alike without compensation. Prayers should be distinctly uttered, so that all can understand and unite in them; nor should there be anything, in manner or expression, so peculiar as to divert the thoughts of hearers from the devotion. Especially should not the petitioner "... use vain repetition, as the heathen do: for they think they shall be heard for their much speaking." – Matt 6:7. Besides which, the whole style and manner of address should be penitential, reverential, and dignified withal, savoring of meekness and humility, as is becoming in sinful, helpless creatures when approaching a holy God. All flippant familiarity with the sacred names, which seems an affectation of unusual piety, should be avoided, as most offensive to sensible minds.
– It may seem a most ungracious thing to criticize so sacred an exercise as prayer ought to be, and point out defects which not unfrequently mar its excellencies. The one prevailing defect, no doubt, is want of faith, spirituality, and the influences of the Holy Spirit. But these attach to all Christian exercises. There are, however, certain defects in the drift of prayer – more particularly prayers in the social meetings – into which the pious sometimes unconsciously fall, which deserve attention and correction.
Preaching Prayers, in which Scripture is explained, doctrine expounded, and instruction offered to the audience.
Exhorting Prayers, where warnings, rebukes, and exhortations seem addressed to classes, or individuals, and possibly personal sins are pointed out.
Historical Prayers, in which facts and incidents are related, from which inferences and arguments are adduced. Not to be commended, though David, Solomon, and Ezra indulged in them on very special occasions.
Oratorical Prayers, which seem framed with special regard to the language, as if intended for critical ears.
Complimentary Prayers, where the excellencies of persons present or absent are effectively dwelt on, as if individuals were flattered, rather than the Deity worshipped. Clergymen in praying for each other, on public occasions, often use flattering speech.
Fault-finding Prayers, which make prominent the real or fancied faults of the Church or of individuals, existing difficulties deplored, advice given, remedies suggested, or rebukes administered. All such things should be avoided.
The Prayer meeting is emphatically a Christian institution. For while prayer, as a religious exercise, or form of religious service, is by no means confined to Christian assemblies, nor indeed to Christian life, yet gatherings for social worship, chiefly for thanksgiving, supplication and song, are peculiarly the outgrowth of the Gospel of Christ. In saying this, the fact is not overlooked that among idolatrous and barbarous races, even, there are assemblies for worship constantly recurring, largely and enthusiastically attended. But the prayer meeting idea does not enter into the purpose or conception of such assemblies. The disposition to pray, to petition the Supreme Being for benefits needed, and for defense against impending evils, is instinct in the human mind. But the idea of worship, in its strict sense, of fellowship with the spiritual, and communion with the unseen, seems never to have entered into the idea of prayer, except to those illuminated by a divine revelation.
The teachings of Jesus revealed to men the fact that God is a father interested in human affairs caring for the welfare of His creatures, and that He is pleased to have them approach Him and make known their requests with prayer and supplication. Indeed, under the old dispensation, God declared Himself to be a, praying-hearing, and a prayer-answering God. Rut Jesus brought the divine presence nearer to believing souls, and gave assurance of the Eternal Father's loving care, which even a weak faith could not question. "Ask, and ye shall receive; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened." And He further assured His disciples, that God was more willing to give the Spirit to those who asked, than parents were to give good things to their children.
In the Old Testament much is said of prayer, many remarkable instances of which are narrated, with equally remarkable answers to them. But nothing is said of prayer meetings for worship. The temple services contained nothing equivalent to it. During the captivity the Jews had their assemblies for mourning and lamentation over the desolations of Zion. They may have mingled prayers for the promised restoration. Of this we do not know. It is certain that the jubilant spirit of social worship could not have inspired their assemblies without song, for they hanged their harps on the willows, and refused to sing the Lord's songs in a strange land. In the triumphs of a Christian faith, Paul and Silas beguiled the midnight hours, in the Philippian jail, with prayer and singing, though their feet were held fast in the stocks of the innermost prison. After the captivity it appears that the synagogue service, in some cases at least, did approach the social worship of the prayer meeting. Pious Jews, not numerous enough, or not rich enough to build and sustain a synagogue in heathen cities, were accustomed to have oratories, places of prayer, cheap and temporary resorts for worship. In one of these the Apostle found Lydia and her associates, out of the city of Philippi, by the riverside, where they were accustomed to pray.
It does not appear that even Jesus and His disciples held seasons of social prayer together. He prayed much, and taught them how to pray, as John also taught his disciples. But immediately after the ascension, the spirit of the new life took possession of the disciples, even before the baptism of the Pentecost, and they resorted to "an upper room," where "these all continued, with one accord in prayer and supplication, with the women, and Mary, the mother of Jesus, and His brethren." There was born the prayer meeting of the Christian dispensation, which has, through all the generations continued, with non-liturgical churches, a component, and a most important part of Christian worship – in theory at least, however much it may be neglected in practice.
As the services of evangelical churches generally are arranged, the principal prayer meeting, or, as it is sometimes distinguished, "the Church prayer meeting," comes in the middle of the week. As a rule it is not numerously attended. But the most spiritual and devout members attend; and those who do habitually attend become the devout and spiritually minded, if they were not such before. This service not only reveals, but nourishes and develops the religious vitality of the Church, and the importance of the service as a spiritual force cannot well be overestimated. The pastor who is wise unto righteousness for the good of his people, will cultivate this part of worship with the most painstaking assiduity. Those pastors who have been most successful in edifying their churches, have most magnified the prayer meeting. Those ministers who have been most successful in winning souls, have most magnified the functions and the efficacy of prayer. And those churches which most devoutly pray for the success of the gospel among them, are the most likely to realize that their work is not in vain in the Lord.
[Ed.
Note: There are almost
an infinite variety of ways the Prayer Meeting could be orchestrated.
Brother Hiscox gives but one possible pattern for the service. As he calls
them, they are suggestions for the order of the service- the key word he uses
here is the word "suggestions."
The pattern may have to be adjusted to fit your congregation
and even the locale in which the Church is situated.]
Doubtless every pastor believes himself fully capable of so ordering this service as to produce the best results, without advice from any one. And yet it is probably safe to say, that not one minister in ten knows how to make a prayer meeting efficient, and about one in twenty would kill the best one that could be put into his hands. By many it is considered a very unimportant affair, that will care for itself, or, if not cared for at all, it matters little.
No wise pastor will make such a mistake.
The following suggestions – a few out of many – may be helpful to some.*
* For a more extended discussion of the subject see " The Star Book on Prayer Meetings," published by Ward 8; Drummond, New York
1. The success and utility of the prayer meeting depends on the leader, more than on any other one thing, save the presence of the Holy Spirit. The leader will presumably be the pastor. He certainly ought not to commit the management of so important a matter to other hands, as a rule. And he ought to give diligence and prayerful study to bring this department of worship to the highest possible state of interest and efficiency.
2. The success of the service does not depend on the numbers who attend. Though a full meeting is desirable, yet a very full meeting may be a very poor one, and a very small meeting may be a very good one. And all attempts to crowd the service by introducing other than legitimate topics, is a mistake. The prayer-meeting has its special mission. Diverted from that, it ceases to be the true prayer meeting, though it may prove an interesting service of some other kind.
3. The prayer meeting is not a "teaching service." Though its exercises will convey instruction, yet instruction is not its special function. That belongs to the pulpit, the Bible class, and other similar exercises. This is for the heart rather than for the intellect. To feed the spiritual hunger of the soul. To cheer, inspire, comfort. Many keep silent because they say they cannot instruct. But that is not the secular vocation of the service. They can console, sympathize, encourage.
4. The opening exercises should be brief. So should they all. Many pastors talk to death the service, by long, dull, dreary harangues, just to "start the meeting!" Give a desultory discourse, a kind of pointless lecture, of a promiscuous character, confusing rather than illuminating the minds of the people, giving them nothing in particular to think about, to speak on, or to pray for. Then the leader sits down, telling them to occupy the time and be very brief! Is it a wonder that no one feels like moving, and that the meeting expires after a few ineffectual struggles for animation?
5. Singing should have a large place in the prayer meeting. Not so much as to absorb and cover up, or exclude prayer and exhortation, or degenerate into a singing school. The hymns should be wisely adjusted to the service and the temper of the occasion. After the meeting is fairly opened, one stanza at a time is all that should ordinarily be used. The hymns should be so familiar that all can use them. At the opening and closing of the service an instrument is of special use. But during the progress of the meeting, it is rather preferable, as being more free and less formal, for some one to strike a familiar verse, without waiting to look it up in the book, or for the instrument to lead.
6. Begin the meeting on time. That will help the attendants to be prompt. If the leader waits for the people, the people will be all the later. Train them to habits of punctuality. Close on time, except that, on occasion, the interest may justify protracting the exercises somewhat. But do not continue so long as to exhaust the interest, and have to stop on a falling tide.
7. Have the place of meeting pleasant and attractive. This can be done, however plain and poor it may be, by those little arts of handicraft and good taste which people anywhere can exercise. By the use of flowers inexpensive pictures and mottoes, you can make a barn look pretty. Worshipers, especially the young, should associate beauty, purity and good order with religion.
8. Be sure to have a plenty of pure air and good light in the prayer room. Few buildings are so badly ventilated as our church buildings. On Sunday people can better bear to be poisoned with a noxious atmosphere, when they have nothing to do but listen to the preacher – or not listen, as the case may be. But in the conference meeting, where they are expected to take some part, it is absolutely essential that they shall not be put to sleep, made drowsy, or given a headache by vitiated air.
9. As the chief value and potency of the social meeting lies in its spiritual unction and power, therefore one of the chief subjects of prayer should be the implored presence and aid of the Holy Spirit. And those persons are best prepared for it, and the most useful in it, who do the most to live in and walk by the Spirit. No intellectual or literary qualifications can meet this demand. Here, the spiritually minded bear the palm, though in all else they may be quite behind.
10. As the fabric of the prayer and conference meeting consists of this threefold texture, prayer, exhortation and song, does not assume the functions of teaching, and relates largely to personal Christian experience, therefore all, old and young, male and female, learned and unlearned, can take part in its service, be benefited, and benefit others. All who leave a personal experience of divine grace in their own hearts and lives, are fitted to do good and to receive a blessing in this sacred service.
Besides the mid-week general prayer meeting of the Church, many other occasions for special or stated prayer are observed by most Christian congregations.
In very many churches Christian women have a weekly service of this sort, conducted by themselves, where they can feel more freedom than in the general meetings. These services, sometimes inaptly called "female prayer meeting," give occasion for those to exercise their gifts who lack the courage, or possibly doubt the propriety of females speaking in promiscuous assemblies, as in some communities they do.
Within recent years, the organization of classes, especially women and young people, for religious and benevolent work, has assumed proportions not formerly dreamed of. Great good has resulted, and greater good, we may hope, will yet result, notwithstanding some doubts and drawbacks as to the evils of class divisions in Church life and work, as imperiling the unity of the body. The young people's prayer meeting is now almost everywhere in the churches. The only objection that seems valid, as against them, is, that having done their part in their own prayer meeting, they may either feel at liberty to absent themselves from the Church prayer meeting, or, if present, to take no part. Where this does happen it is a serious misfortune, and overbalances any good their separate service may produce. The Church should not be broken up into sections and segments of old people and young people, male and female, but be as one family, a sacred unity, as the body of Christ. But these unfortunate results do not always follow.
The concert of prayer for missionaries, and the success of the Gospel in heathen lands, held once each month, seems falling into neglect. Formerly it was generally observed by all Evangelical churches. "The week of prayer," for the same object, and for the universal revival of religion, is still generally observed on the first week in the year. Usually very gracious results follow in the churches which observe it. They that water others shall themselves be watered.
The temperance prayer meeting.
This is not so generally observed as it should be. For if there be anything that appeals to Christian faith, and which should lead Christian people to appeal to God, the righteous judge, for help, it is this cause,– that the gigantic iniquity of the saloon, and the drink habit, which cause more suffering than war, pestilence and famine combined, may be checked and destroyed. With churches so apathetic, and good people on every hand so indifferent the rum power rides riot over all that is fairest and best in society, destroying homes, impoverishing nations, and invading the sacred altars of our holy religion. Appeals need to be made to Him who is able to hear and save, for who else can avail?
The mother's prayer-meeting.
There is fitness in the gatherings of mothers for special prayer for their children, that they may escape the snares of sin and the temptations of the world, be early converted, and make honorable and useful Christians. Such meetings, persisted in, have often been followed by the most manifest blessing of God in answers to prayer. But mothers who pray for the conversion of their children must constantly strive to answer their own prayers, by training them in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.
The Sunday-school prayer-meeting.
It is quite natural for Christian workers in any department of service to feel specially interested in that department, and to implore the divine favor to attend and give success to their endeavors. Sunday-school work has become so wide spread, so vital as a religious agency, and so efficient among the young, that it rightly holds a large place in the sympathies and the prayers of the churches. It is most commendable, therefore, that special prayer, and special seasons of prayer be designated for the success of this line of Christian endeavor.
For colleges and schools of learning.
An annual "week of prayer" is now generally observed for educational institutions, especially schools for higher learning, that they may be made subservient to virtue, truth and piety. For the conversion of students, and the sanctification of all intellectual acquisitions to the best interest of true religion. This is a matter of the gravest importance, especially as nearly all of our colleges and high schools were founded, and are largely supported by the benevolence of Christian men and women.
The power and influence of sacred song in worship are not understood and appreciated as they ought to be.
Even where music is highly cultivated in Christian congregations, it is rather for aesthetic effect and popular attraction, than for spiritual uses; rather as an appeal to the intellect than to the heart; rather to gratify the taste than to answer the cravings of a devout spirit. Music may become high art in the house of God, but that does not make it worship. Of course it should be artistic in the best sense of that term, but only that it may be the more devout. In the old temple service of the Hebrews, music, conjoined with sacrifices and offerings constitutes almost their only worship.
Indeed in our less pretentious Christian services, singing constitutes almost the only act that can be called worship in the strictest sense. Like prayer, the service of song may express adoration, confession, supplication and praise. But, unlike prayer, all can vocally unite in this act of worship. Now, as in the primitive churches, the saints can mitigate their sorrows, beguile their griefs, elevate their affections, and gird themselves with strength, "Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord." – Eph 5:19.
Being performed in concert, where many unite, it prevents an unpleasant sense of individual responsibility, and becomes a pleasant privilege, instead of a burdensome duty. It animates the dull, and soothes the agitated spirit. While it comforts and inspires the saints, it, more than any other part of religious service, attracts the unconverted and the unbelieving. It is the act of worship in which all occupy a common attitude, and mutually bear a part. It is not, therefore, strange that sacred song has occupied so large a place in the history of Christian worship, and that the affections of the renewed heart cherish it so fondly, and resort to it so constantly. Christianity has sung its triumphs through the ages, and around the world.
It should be the united expression of the assembly – the worship of all uttered in song. It is not to be a performance by a company of musicians, for the entertainment of the congregation, but an act of worship by the congregation itself. It is not to be an act of worship, performed by others, to which the people are to listen, but an act of worship which they themselves are to offer. "Let the people praise thee, 0 God; let all the people praise thee." – Ps. 67:5. *
Therefore singing should be congregational; that is, the people should sing; all the assembly should praise God in song. Singing is the people's worship. The chant, the anthem, the oratorio are rather for the cathedral and the temple. Though beautiful and grand, and potent with a savor of worship, they should be sparingly used in the Christian congregation. They may incite an audience to worship, but the assembly does not to any considerable extent worship in them. The genius of the Gospel requires chiefly the chorus, where the people shall not simply listen, and have devotion excited, but where they shall sing, and express devotion.
*[Ed. Note: There is a place for the solo or musical group performance, but it should not be used to excess. A special song or two does much to focus the minds and hearts of the congregation upon the Lord and the things of God. However, brother Hiscox is correct, congregational singing should be the bulk of the music service.]
Since the true idea of sacred song is that the people shall worship, not witness a performance, therefore the style of music should be such as the people can perform. But the mass of worshipers can never go beyond the simplest elements of any art or science; therefore the music for Christian service should be of the simplest kind, in structure and execution, and limited to a small number of tunes. Music more complicated in structure, and more artistic in execution, a few could perform, and perhaps more highly enjoy; but it could not express the devotion of the great majority of worshipers because they could not unite in it. Devotion seeks plain choral harmonies in which to utter its worship.
The leaders of Church music will be constantly endeavoring to treat the congregation to a greater variety in style and execution; but this will be a departure from the true idea of worship. As our religious services are usually arranged it may be very well to introduce them with an anthem, a chant, or a sentence by the choir; and possibly a short set piece somewhere before the sermon; perhaps immediately following the "long prayer," before the notices, and the second hymn. But the hymns – and prevailing custom calls for three – should be sung to simple music, so familiar that the people can sing them, without an effort to remember the tune, and without danger of losing it, all thought being given to the sentiment and spirit of the words.
It makes little difference whether the leader be an organ, or a single voice, a quartette, or a choir.
Either of these would harmonize with the spirit and design of worship, so long as it be simply a leader, and not a performer. If the singing is to be done for the people, and they take no part in it, it matters little whether that part be performed by an instrument, a single voice, or several voices. But a Christian congregation should not omit so important a duty, nor deprive itself of so sacred a privilege as that of singing the praises of God in His house of worship.
Note 1.– The too common custom, in our large and wealthy congregations, in cities and towns, of hiring a company of professional musicians, operatic or otherwise, carnal, worldly minded, and irreverent persons, destitute of religious sentiment, to perform this important part of religious service for the Church, is a shameful perversion, which outrages every sentiment of a pure spiritual worship, violates the proprieties of a simple Gospel service, and ought not to be tolerated by a Christian assembly. For while it is proper for unconverted persons to sing in worship, and even to be members of the choir if reverent,* and while it is proper for persons who devote valuable time and service to music to receive appropriate compensation, yet to give up to a company of paid performers the most important part of worship, simply because they possess musical taste and culture, is an offense to the spirit of devotion, and it must seem to the Spirit of grace as well.
*[Ed. Note: Many lost people sing in Church when they are in the congregation. At least we hope there are lost people visiting the Church as guests of friends, neighbors, and saved family members who bring them to Church. But on the other hand, the choir is to be representative of the Church and, thus, it needs to made up of members of it. Since it represents the Church, it would, therefore, not be wise to let a lost person be a member of the choir. The choir has to be a group operating together to worship God in song. How can a lost person ever worship in the same way that a saved person worships. Thus there could never be a harmony of purpose in a choir of made up of believers and non-believers. Although it would be proper to let someone not a member of the congregation sing a special with the choir or to sing or perform a solo number, or even bring a special concert of music for the Lord, it is hoped, in fact it is required, that even in that case it would be some believer from another church and not just a lost person who likes to perform Christian music. It would behoove the church music director and the pastor to at least check the references and past history of the guest performer to try to ascertain if they are or are not a believer worshipping God in song or if they are just a secular performer that likes to perform Christian music.]
Note 2.– While it is as proper for unconverted persons to sing, as it is for them to read the Scriptures, or to pray, yet it is altogether inconsistent for one not truly a Christian to lead, have charge of and control the music for a Church service; as inconsistent as it would be for an unconverted man to take charge of the prayer-meeting. The choir leader should be a thoroughly Christian man.
Note 3. - Since the music is a part of Church service, and a principal part of its worship, the right and obligation to engage, dismiss and manage those connected with it, belongs to the Church distinctively, as pertaining to its spiritualities, and not to the trustees, whose duties are confined to the temporalities though so far as the payment of salaries is concerned, that falls to the trustees. Sometimes the Church by a special act gives up the entire management of this department to the trustees, to the deacons, to a music committee, or places it in the hands of the chorister, making him responsible. Either of these courses the Church has the right to take, judging for itself which is the wisest and best way.
Note 4.– It must be remembered that Church music is a part of worship, and since the conducting of worship devolves on the pastor, and is his by right, so the management of the singing should be only on consultation with him, and with his approval. And while he has not the right to over-rule or reverse the action of the Church, they should not attempt to force on him musical adjustments which are unwelcome or repugnant to his sense of propriety. The pulpit and the orchestra must be in accord, if worship is to be pleasant and profitable.
Note 5. - All levity and irreverence on the part of singers during the time of service should be strictly avoided, and if need be, absolutely forbidden and prohibited. All whispering, trifling, leaving the gallery during the sermon, returning in time for the closing hymn, with all other marks of indifference and disrespect, are painfully incongruous in scenes of devotion, especially on the part of those who occupy so prominent a place in worship as do the musicians. The same respectful attention to all the services should be demanded from them, as is expected from others of the congregation.
Note 6.– In order to realize the full advantage of congregational singing as an aid to worship, some churches have weekly meetings, especially of the young people, for the purpose of practicing, and becoming familiar with the hymns and tunes used on the Lord's Day.
Note 7.– Every Church should provide for the instruction of the young in the congregation and Sunday-school, in the elements of vocal music. Such instruction, during six, or at least three months of the year, with a weekly exercise, would soon make congregational singing practicable and successful,
Note 8.– It certainly would seem that every Christian congregation should be able to recruit a volunteer chorus choir from its own members, without the necessity of hiring professional artists from abroad. This would better harmonize with the true idea of devotion. And if Church music were sustained purely for worship, as it should be, and not as a special entertainment or attraction, this might be realized more frequently than it now is.
Whether the gift of exhortation were one of the special charisms bestowed by the Spirit on the primitive Church, as many believe, and as would seem to be implied in the eighth of Romans, where it is mentioned as one of the gifts and classed with prophecy, the ministry, teaching and ruling, we do not undertake to decide. Certain it is that it has always been developed among the spiritually minded as a powerful auxiliary to the preaching of the Gospel, and other means of grace, It constitutes a considerable part of worship in social religious meetings, where God's people "exhort one another daily," and each "suffer the word of exhortation." – Heb. 3:13; 13:22. The meaning of the original word (parakaleite, parakalayteh, from parakalew, parakaleo) is significant of the importance of the exercise. It means to call for, or upon, and especially to call upon in the sense of cheering, encouraging, comforting, inspiring, those addressed.
There are persons in every Church who have a depth and richness of Christian experience far beyond the common average, whose remarks are attended by a peculiar unction and power unknown to the ordinary Christian life. This is, doubtless, largely owing to their closer fellowship and more intimate communion with God. But, aside from such special cases, every saint can speak of his experience in the life of faith, and by a recital of both his sorrows and his joys, exhort and encourage others. They are not called upon to expound the Scriptures, nor to conduct public meetings, but they can tell of the love of God and the grace of Christ as revealed to them.
The exhortations of God's children form one of the most effectual means of spiritual improvement and edification to the churches, "Or he that exhorteth on exhortation..." – Rom 12:8
All who have the spirit. It is the privilege, and, doubtless, at times, the duty of all who know the grace of God, without distinction of age, sex or condition, to speak of their experience in the divine life, and thus encourage others. This is an exercise specially fitted for the social meetings. There, where the greater freedom of "the household of faith " prevails, they should be "exhorting one another: and so much the more, as ye see the day approaching." – Heb 10:25.
- Whether there be a special gift for this exercise, and whether some are called to it as others are called to preach, it is clear that some are specially gifted in it, as some are in prayer and some in the ministry of the word. But every one who has an experience in godliness can speak to edification, and the deeper and more constant is that experience the more gracious and edifying will be the exhortation. Ordinary abilities, sanctified by the Spirit, cannot fail to be profitable. Those who speak the most fluently and the most eloquently do not always speak the most profitably; but those who speak with the Spirit never fail to edify those who walk in the Spirit.
Christians sometimes fall unconsciously into faulty habits in this exercise, which hinder their usefulness and mar the pleasure of spiritual fellowship.
Gloomy and despondent expressions should be avoided. Comforting, inspiring, stimulating utterances befit the meaning of the word and the wants of the saints.
A preaching style should be avoided, though passages of Scripture will often be mentioned, suggesting reflections of great interest and profit.
Prolix exhortations should never be indulged in, since they become wearisome and unprofitable, and deprive others of their privileges.
One's self should not be too often mentioned, lest it might appear boastful and egotistic.
Fault-finding and complaining should be most carefully shunned. It closes the ears and hearts of the hearers, and casts a pall over the spirit of the meeting.
Denunciation and a censorious spirit is, if possible, still worse. It exhibits a spirit opposed to the Gospel, and never fails to do harm.
Hobbies are unprofitable. Some dwell on hackneyed themes until both themselves and their subjects are distasteful to the audience.
Foreign subjects should not be often introduced, except as illustrations, or from which to draw lessons of instruction. Experimental religion furnishes the fittest themes for exhortations.
Adulation and excessive praise of individuals are as unwise and offensive as harsh criticism and denunciation; though commendation and approval, when called for, are praiseworthy.
Confessing one's self a very great sinner, parading his shortcomings, will be understood as an affectation of unusual piety. This is not wise exhortation.
[Ed. Note: This type of meeting is not much in vogue today. Although some groups may still practice it. In many Baptist Churches and other New Testament Churches it has been absorbed into the regular Sunday night or Wednesday night meetings in the form of the pastor asking for people to "give a testimony" of what the Lord has done for them. This testimony could be in the form of telling their Salvation experience, or recounting a blessing from the Lord during the previous week, or recounting how the Lord used them in leading someone to Christ during the previous week, or planting the seed of the Gospel in family, friend, stranger, or enemy, or any one of many other spiritually uplifting testimonies to the glory of God.]
The Covenant Meeting is an order of religious service, very generally, though not universally observed among Baptists. Its observance, however, is extending, and becoming more general. In form, it is a usage peculiar to our people, but in spirit and purpose, it has its counterpart in some of the other denominations. Somewhat like the "class meeting," it aims to secure some expression of Christian experience from each Church member present; and somewhat like the "preparatory lecture," it proposes to become a fitting preparation for the communion of the Lord's Supper, to be observed on the following Sunday. The origin of this service, in its present form, is not known. It was peculiarly valued by the old New England Baptists, and traveled West and Northwest with the tide of their emigration, more than South and Southwest. Its spirit is instinct in the fellowship of the Gospel, and the spiritual sympathy of the Christian brotherhood. The saint, at conversion, enters into joyous covenant with Christ, and with His people. Whether formally expressed or not, every Christian does, on being baptized and received to the fellowship of the Church, covenant to walk together with the other members, in all sincerity and godliness, as common heirs of the grace of life. This pledge, to love, pray for, and help each other, shunning all ungodliness, and living soberly and righteously before the world, is the renewed assurance of fellowship, in the bonds of a common faith, and the love of a common Saviour, from time to time renewed. These covenants of mutual sympathy and help, had a significancy amidst the persecutions of the early martyr age of Christianity, which they have not now. The same may be said as to the times of persecution, when the early Baptists of New England endured much cruel opposition and suffering inflicted by their fellow Christians, for conscience' sake, and for Christ's sake patiently borne. The renewal of this covenant is with both Christ as the Head of the Church, and with the members of the body.
In favor of the covenant meeting, as a means of spiritual help and culture, much may be said. If a member could attend but one service of the Church during the month, that one should undoubtedly be the Communion of the Lord's Supper. This is the highest expression of piety, and brings the soul into most immediate fellowship with its exalted and living Lord. If there be but one other service which the member can attend, that other one should be the covenant meeting, which anticipates the near approach of the commemorative Supper, and reviews the vital relationship of the disciple to His Saviour on the one hand, and to his fellow disciples on the other. And where the service is so conducted as to realize its true ideal, it becomes the most endeared to those who attend, and the most spiritually stimulating and helpful of all occasions of social worship. But the covenant meeting, in order to realize its benefits, must be made distinctive, and kept true to its purpose. The service is unique. It is not a prayer meeting, it is not a lecture service, it is not a teacher's meeting. It is for each member. So far as all are willing – for there is no compulsion – to speak briefly of his religious estate and experience, especially during the past month, and in view of the approaching Communion. After the usual opening exercises, and brief remarks from the pastor, along the special line of the meeting's purpose, "to speak to their covenant," or in more common phrase, "to renew their covenant." This is done in few words by each in turn, by a renewed declaration of their interest in, and fellowship with, the Church and the Christian life with mention of any peculiar experience of joy or sorrow, during the previous month. The whole area of Christian experience comes under review, as each one's meditations may be led.
It is not always an easy task to induce an assembly of Christian people to speak readily and freely concerning their own religious experiences. Some have so little experience in godliness; some are so little accustomed to speaking before others; some shrink with such timidity from speaking of themselves, that there is probably more difficulty in reaching a satisfactory attainment in this service, than in any other social meeting. No one is called on personally. But some pastors, to save so large a loss of time, and to secure a larger number of testimonies, have the speaking begin at a particular part of the room, and go in order through one row of seats after another, till the whole is completed. Each one speaks, or declines, as he chooses, when the turn reaches him. This plan is a little more formal, but a much larger number of testimonies will in this way be secured, and usually the effect of the meeting is better. Many will have something to say when their turn comes, and others immediately about them have spoken, who otherwise would remain silent. And those who are thus induced to bear their part in the service find themselves to have enjoyed it vastly more on that account. The covenant meeting is held monthly, on the week preceding the communion Sunday. In cities, towns and villages, it usually takes the place of the prayer meeting for that week, notice being given on Sunday, that it may be kept in mind. In frontier districts, and sparsely settled country neighborhoods, it is common to hold it on Saturday afternoon, as more convenient for attendance. In such cases it is usual for them, in addition to the covenant service, to transact any Church business, needful to be done.
Note 1.– To the Articles of Faith, which the churches use, there is generally attached a form of Church Covenant. This, some pastors are accustomed to read to the Church when assembled at the Supper, and to which they give assent by standing while it is being read, Some read it at the Covenant Meeting, as a partial substitute for, or supplement to, the meeting.
Note 2.– It will be understood that with our churches no formal pledge, creed or covenant is made compulsory on members, either on being received to their fellowship or subsequently. On making application for membership, copies of the articles of faith and covenant are put into their hands – or should be – and they are asked to examine them carefully. A general concurrence in these is expected, but no pledged conformity is ever exacted.
STOP HERE and TAKE TEST!
Should the test fail to open properly, please use F5 to reload or click the refresh symbol on the top of your browser page.
If you failed the test,
then restudy this lesson and retake the test on or after the next day.
Once you have passed the test, do not take it
again.
If you missed any questions
on the test, then restudy the section and find all of the correct answers to any
questions that you missed. A copy of your test was sent to you with the
correct answers on it. You may use that for comparison purposes to make
sure you have found the correct answers.
You may begin the next Section the day after you passed the test for this
Section.
Churches are Heaven's appointed agencies for the salvation of men. For, though it would be false and profane to say that men could not be saved outside the churches, and without their aid, yet, as a matter of fact, but few are converted and saved aside from associated Christian effort, as represented by the churches, or the zeal of personal piety, as nourished and stimulated by them.
The mission of a Christian Church, therefore, is to a "world lying in wickedness," to men "dead in trespasses and sins," as the bearer of glad tidings to "prisoners of hope," and herald of the great salvation to lost men. In order to accomplish this, the Church must sustain a suitable spiritual condition, and maintain itself in the faith and discipline, the order and ordinances of the Gospel. Indeed, for this cause Christ gave Himself for the Church, "That He might present it to Himself a glorious Church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish." – Eph 5:27. A carnal, selfish, worldly minded Church can never perform this holy mission; indeed, is neither worthy of it, nor fitted for it.
The responsibility of a Church is both corporate and personal. As a body it is bound to make its influence felt far and near. But the body is what the individual units which compose it make it to be. Each member, therefore, should strive to be and to do what the entire Church ought to be and to do, " the light of the world and the salt of the earth," "a city set on a hill, that cannot be hid." There is work for all, and work adapted to the condition and ability and capacity of each, however weak and humble. Old and young, great and small, male and female, have something to do, and something that each can do – if there be a heart to do it. The efficiency and usefulness of a Church depend on each member's filling his own place, and doing his own work, so as neither to attempt the work of others, nor yet to stand idly by while others serve. In nothing, perhaps, are the wisdom and skill of the pastor and officers more apparent than in finding work for all, and giving something fit and adapted for each to do.
It is a sad and somewhat humiliating reflection that so many churches
clustered together in communities with all the appointments and means of grace
at their command, and yet that they exert so small an influence on these
communities – make such trifling inroads on the domain of sin, and win so few
trophies for the truth. The moral influence of these institutions of
Christianity ought to do more to repress iniquity, and to increase
righteousness. The results of Church life and action are often more apparent in
heathen than in Christian lands. Doubtless the explanation of this is to be
found in a lack of vital godliness, and for want of a higher standard of
Christian living among us. The common and ordinary means of doing good, and the
methods of Christian work as now usually organized, are as follows:
The preaching of the Gospel, the proclamation of pardon and eternal life through faith in Christ, is the foremost and the most effective instrumentality for the salvation of the world. It is divinely ordained, and divinely sanctioned and sustained. The command is, "... Go ye into all the world, and preach the Gospel to every creature." "... and Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world." – Mark 16:15; Matt 28:20. The promise is, "... my word... it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it." – Isaiah 55:11. Though an apparently feeble, even an obnoxious agency, yet it is "mighty to the pulling down of strongholds." "But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumbling block, and unto the Greeks foolishness; but unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God." – I Cor 1:23, 24.
1. It is taken for granted, as a matter of course, that every Church will support a faithful and an evangelical ministry among them, for ordinary service in the house of God. This is for the edification of the Church itself, and for the instruction and conversion of all, old and young, who may be attracted to it. A home ministry should be able and faithful, and generously sustained. If the nations are to be fed, the family at home must be built up and instructed in the purposes of grace. The more the saints know and taste of the word of life, the more liberally and earnestly will they send living bread to the perishing nations.
2. But there come times in the history of every Church, when extraordinary services seem demanded, special occasions indicated by the Spirit's movement, and an unusual disposition on the part of the people to give heed to spiritual and eternal concerns. While all times are times of favor from the Lord, and truly times of need with men, yet it is clearly manifest that there are times which are more hopeful for sowing, and more abundant in reaping than others. Such should be specially improved.
3. Within the range of every Church, and within the parish lines of every pastor's field, there are certain peculiarly destitute places, which are generally very much neglected, and to which few, if any, means of grace are furnished. The people cannot, or do not attend the churches. If they have the Gospel it must be carried to them. And often they are more ready and eager hearers of the word than stated congregations, surfeited with its abundance. Under faithful spiritual cultivation such destitute communities often become fruitful as the garden of the Lord.
But the world is the field, whose bounds extend beyond home, and country and kindred. Begin at Jerusalem, but do not stop till all nations are reached, and every creature taught the way of life through Christ crucified. Each Church and each individual should feel his obligation to aid in sending the Gospel to the destitute the world over. That was Christ's purpose and design. For that He died. And those who have His spirit will strive to carry forward the work He began; and "if any man have not the spirit of Christ, he is none of His."
Note 1.– In some of these destitute fields, pastors will find some of their most pleasant hours of labor, and some of their richest rewards. In such services there will be a sincerity and a simplicity hardly expected in the more formal, and often perfunctory services of the sanctuary. The hearty welcome given to simple truth, instead of cool reserve, or critical hesitancy, is quite refreshing to the spirit of a true minister of Christ.
Note 2.– Some churches do, and many more might – and ought – sustain a colporteur, or missionary, to labor a part, or all of the time in such destitute neighborhoods. Not a few able churches support a pastor's assistant to aid in work too large and laborious for one man to do in addition to pulpit ministrations. Most churches could accomplish tenfold more in such ways than they do,
Note 3. - Great good has been effected by a few churches, in developing and putting to use lay preaching. In almost every Church are brethren who possess more than ordinary gifts for exhortation, expounding the Scriptures, addressing congregations, and conducting religious meetings. Why should such abilities lie dormant, and find no appropriate exercise? They will not push themselves to the front; but they can be encouraged to assume responsibilities. It would be a great blessing to the churches themselves if such capable members should be called into requisition for holding meetings in destitute places, and bearing the gospel to those beyond the ordinary means of grace.
In their spirit and purpose, Sunday schools are in harmony with gospel methods of doing good; though, unlike the Church, there is no scriptural precept or precedent for their separate and independent organization.
The churches should provide religious instruction for the children and youth of their own families, and for the children and youth of other families who may be disposed to avail themselves of the privilege, quite as much. Particularly should this instruction make prominent a study of the Bible. This is the one textbook for, and the one purpose of, Sunday school and Bible class study. It is likely that, so far as the local congregation is concerned, next to the preaching of the Gospel, the Sunday school is to be ranked in importance as an evangelical agency. To what extent its object is realized depends largely on the course pursued by the superintendent, officers and teachers.
The influence of Sunday school work is threefold:
- The direct influence on the
pupils in storing their minds with religious knowledge, forming their characters
to virtue and molding their hearts to good morals.
- The indirect influence on
the homes of the pupils, to which they carry their impressions from the school;
their books and papers to be read and the songs they had learned to sing, to be
repeated in their own families.
- The reflex influence on officers and teachers,
and all who are interested in, and work or make effort for, the school. Those
who are engaged in doing good are benefited as much by the effort as those to
whom the good is done. Hence, those who stand aloof from any Christian service
are the chief losers.*
* [Ed. Note: A fourth influence might be added here. The influence of the teaching on the souls of the attenders who may be lost which prayerfully brings them to Salvation in Christ. Although this should be so intertwined with the three mentioned by brother Hiscox that he may have not deemed it necessary to mention it.]
The religious training of the young, both in the household and in the Church, is undervalued, and too much neglected. The character of men and women, and their influence for good or evil in subsequent life, depend largely on their moral and religious training in childhood. Divine wisdom has foreseen and provided for this, and has enjoined that: "These words which I command thee this day shall be in thine heart; and thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest in the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up." – Deut. 6; 6, 7. Aside from the direct beneficial influence on the young themselves, no greater boon can be conferred on posterity than to train the rising generation to virtue, honor and integrity; and this is most effectually done by Christian culture. In accomplishing this, the Sunday school is a potent agency.
There are in the main three prevailing theories of Sunday school control, somewhat diverse, and not a little at variance with each other, each of which for the greater part works smoothly, because of the good disposition of those concerned in the work.
First – That the school is created by, dependent on, and controlled by the Church, as a part of its legitimate work. In this case the Church appoints its officers, with or without instructions, as it would appoint a committee for any other service. Of course these appointments would be on consultation with the workers, and not in an arbitrary manner. The Church is responsible for all expenses incurred, and for the general management of the body. The pastor is the official head of this, as of all other Church work, even though not practically engaged in its details. Undoubtedly this is the true normal relation of the school to the Church.
Second – That the school is a benevolent association, like any other organized for a specific purpose, not created by, dependent on, or subject to the authority of the Church. On this theory, individuals interested in the work, from the same or from different churches, form themselves into a society, appoint their own officers, make their own laws, meet their own expenses, and manage their own affairs. The Church sympathizes in the work, aids it, if so disposed, but assumes no responsibility in connection with it.
Third – That the school adopt its methods, appoint its officers, and administer its government, subject to the approval of the Church, which holds a veto power, and the right of ultimate control in all matters of authority. The school is allowed independence with non-interference, so long as its management meets the approval of the Church, but when they differ, the Church rules. This method is a modification of the two preceding.
Note 1.– In the case of a "home school "– that is, one growing out of a given Church, and occupying the Church's premises for its service, the first of these plans is the only consistent one; although many home schools are organized on the second plan, where the pastor and Church have no more authority or control than if it were a temperance society or a literary club. This is all wrong, and the wonder is that troubles do not more frequently arise.
Note 2.– Where schools are organized in destitute regions, and sustained by persons from different churches, constituting distinctively mission schools, the second method is perhaps the only practicable one, since they are the outgrowth not of Church activity, but of individual zeal.
Note 3. - Every Church should feel obligated to provide religious instruction, under its own inspection, for its own children [Ed. Note: and for all children of the community who the Church should actively seek and encourage to come to the Sunday School], and should know what kind of instructors they have, and what kind of instructions they receive, in this most important part of their education. In such a service the pastor should lead the way, and insist on its being done, and being properly done.
In city schools, formerly, two sessions were commonly or frequently held on Sunday. In a few instances this practice is continued, but is of doubtful expediency. Certainly it is of doubtful expediency in home schools, whatever may be said of mission schools. In many thinly populated neighborhoods and frontier settlements school exercises are wholly intermitted during the rigors of winter weather. In not a few this is inevitable, but in many others, no doubt, with a little more energy and perseverance, they might be continued throughout the year, though possibly with a diminished attendance.
A Sunday-school cannot be governed quite like other schools. The government must be paternal and kind Corporal punishments and ordinary penalties are not resorted to, but moral forces and the power of love must rule. Neither should the promise of rewards be too freely used. Presents, picnics and festivals, held out to the pupils as an inducement to attend, present a wrong. and selfish motive. Once in a while these have a good effect, not as a promise beforehand made, but as a pleasant enjoyment afterward granted.
The exercises should be greatly diversified, in which singing should have a large place. Singing pleases children, and they readily learn to unite in it. It instructs and elevates the sentiments, while it softens and subdues the ruder traits and rougher passions. Children soon weary of protracted application, therefore the exercises should not be long continued in any one direction. It requires all the versatility of superintendent and teachers to sustain the interest of the school and the classes, Of course this should not be carried to any such an extent as to dissipate serious interest, and make the school seem a play resort instead of a place for learning.
The books furnished for the children to read and take to their homes deserve very special attention. It is no easy task to make a judicious selection of books for such a use. Good books are one of the best appliances for Sunday-school work. But the practice of admitting to these libraries so large a portion of fiction, even if it have a weak flavor of religion, is to be severely condemned. The sickly, sentimental love stories, with a little prayer-meeting talk interspersed, fifth or sixth rate in literary quality, will counteract a large part of the good the school will otherwise accomplish. But good books are greatly to be commended. For some years past periodicals adapted to this use have come largely into vogue, and to a considerable extent have displaced the libraries. Papers are cheap, and being pictorial, are attractive and pleasing. Good, sound books will, however, hold their places.
This is a similar, not a separate, department of religious instruction. These classes contain the older and more advanced portions of the youth, together with adults, associated for mutual study of the Word of God. The formation and support of such classes should be encouraged for the great advantage to those who compose them, and also as a place for the members of lower classes when they suppose they have outgrown the proper dimensions of their own. As this is not a manual on methods of study and plans of management, the subject need here be no further pursued.
Note 4.– Since the study of the word of God is the one specific object of Bible-school work, the one thing which justifies its existence and gives it importance, therefore nothing should be allowed to obscure that one thing, or interfere with its successful prosecution. All the arrangements of the school should make prominent the lesson, illustrate its meaning, and enforce its teaching.
Note 5. - Nor is it enough that the letter of the lesson be comprehended. Teachers should never be satisfied until the spirit and power of the truth shall savingly affect the hearts of the pupils. An intellectual mastery of the Bible will effect but little unless the salvation of the soul be secured. To this result should all the labor tend.
Note 6.– In this field of Christian endeavor the pastor has great responsibility and great opportunity. He should exercise a constant, watchful care and guardianship over it. He may, or he may not, become statedly identified with its exercises, but he should often visit it, speaking such words of cheer and making such suggestions as may seem wise. It will make him familiar with the children, and give him influence with all.
Note 7.– Very little should be said in the school, even by way of notices, calculated to divert the minds from the one purpose for which they are assembled. And the custom in some schools, of circulating tickets for fairs, festivals, picnics, suppers, with elaborate notices and explanations, cannot be too severely condemned. All religious impressions are prevented or obliterated by these captivating devices. They should not be permitted; other opportunities may be allowed for them.
Note 8.– It. is to be feared that the Bible itself is becoming too much a stranger in the Sunday-school classes. So much dependence is had on "lesson leaves" and other "helps," while the Bible is overlooked as the constant hand-book and text-book of the service. In a study of the Scriptures there is a vast advantage in each teacher and each pupil having his own Bible, in searching that, and becoming familiar with it. It serves a purpose, but not the same purpose nor one equally important, to read a text or a lesson from a slip of paper as from the book itself.
Note 9.– The school deserves and should receive the prayers, sympathies, and sustaining help of the entire Church. Parents and other members, not engaged in it, should often visit it, and thereby show their interest. It is the least they can do, and workers will be cheered by their presence.
Note 10. - A school may be full of vital activity, while all the Church besides may be very dull or very dead. And yet it is very foolish and very absurd to say the school is as important as the Church, and doing more good. A Church may be degenerate, and false to its mission, but still it is a divine institution. Even the life of the school is the Church's life transferred to, and centered in, that particular department of service. Unreasoning enthusiasts make a great mistake when they exalt the school at the expense of the Church.
Religious visitation is an effective means by which the churches can further their mission among the families of their own immediate field of Christian work; at least, such families as are supposed to have no Church relations, and to be under no definite religious influence.
It is presumed the minister will visit such households, and afford them religious instruction and consolation. But the point here is, that the Church, under the leadership of the pastor, should adopt some plan for systematic religious visitation carried on by private members. The purpose is to hold religious conversation with the inmates (residents of the household), read the Scriptures, and have prayer; invite them to the house of God, and bring the children into the Sunday-school. If in sickness, want, or other misfortune, report them to the Church, and furnish such relief as may be practicable; especially, as in more needy homes, suitable raiment may not be possessed, to furnish it. And in any other way that may be open, to relieve temporal necessities to those found to be really deserving.
In no other way can Christians more effectually imitate their Lord and Master, who "went about doing good," mitigating and removing the temporal sufferings of men, that He might the more effectually reach their souls with spiritual food. There is no more Christly mission for the churches than this, and every member can bear some part in it, if there only be a willing and ready mind. Hearts oppressed with sorrow hunger for sympathy, and welcome the counsels of those who will give it.
This ministry of Christian faith and love cannot well be overestimated in its value, both to those who perform it, and to those who receive it. James was right: "Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world." – James 1:27. And yet how few of God's people appreciate this work, or are anxious to imitate this most notable feature of the life and character of Jesus.
1. Let the whole field, which the Church is supposed to occupy, be divided into districts, and a certain number of families be apportioned to each member, male or female, who is willing to undertake the service; or, let them go "two and two," which is better, and according to the apostolic plan. Let these visitors report the results of their mission, from time to time, in the social meetings of the Church, or at specially designated times, and at the end of the year make a full report of the work done, and the realized results. Such reports will not only be interesting, but cannot fail to stimulate Christian activity through the entire body.
2. But if the Church as a whole cannot be moved to such a service, then let the few who are willing, agree among themselves to attempt it. The Lord will bless the endeavor, and their success will stimulate others. Should there be but one or two who are willing to make so noble an endeavor, let them try the blessed service, and spread the result before the Church. The Lord can work by few, as well as by many, "And he that reapeth receiveth wages, and gathereth fruit unto life eternal..." – John 4:36.
Note 1.– Such visits, to serve their purpose, should be strictly religious, and not merely social and friendly. Conversation should be had, so far as practicable, with the various members of the family, as to their personal religious welfare, with reading a brief portion of the Scriptures, and prayer, unless circumstances make these exercises inconsistent or impracticable.
[Ed. Note: It should be noted here that a certain amount of social and friendly interaction is absolutely necessary, especially at the outset, to set the minds of the people being visited at ease and make them more acceptable of the later "religious" part of the visit, as brother Hiscox calls it. But maintain a balance between the two and do not neglect either. See the "Soul-winning Practicum" course for elaboration on this necessary part of visitation and general soul-winning.]
Note 2. - The distribution of tracts and other religious reading should accompany such visits, and will prove greatly beneficial, providing such reading be wisely selected, and adapted to their conditions. Bibles should be furnished for homes destitute of them. A tract or book left at one visit, to be replaced by another at the next, will both interest and profit those disposed to read. This is substantially the work which tract missionaries, Bible readers, and colporteurs perform with so much success.
Note 3.– The most needy and the most hopeful subjects for such a ministry are the afflicted – the sick, the bereaved, those in want, and otherwise the children of misfortune. To such, sympathy and help are no empty compliments, but blessed realities, and those who bring them will be welcomed as ministers of mercy. Temporal mercies bestowed open the heart for the reception of spiritual grace to be welcomed.
Note 4.– Since so large a part of poverty, affliction, and distress in social life arises directly or indirectly from intemperance, constant endeavors should be made in all Christian work to suppress this fearful evil, and to promote temperance; to win the inebriate from his destructive habits, and save his home and household from this terrible curse – a curse which falls on women and children with fearful and appalling severity.
Note 5.- Cases of sickness and want should be reported to the Church, both to stir them to sympathetic cooperation, and to secure the means of relief, and the Church should, according to its ability, furnish temporal aid and relief, thus conferring blessings on both the bodies and souls of the unfortunate.
Note 6.– Such visitation should aim to secure the habitual attendance of adults on Church services, and of the children at Sunday-school, wherever the preferences of the people may lead them; most naturally, though not necessarily, where the visitors themselves worship.
Note 7.– These visits are most profitable if made statedly , usually once each month. Then they will be expected, and probably will be more impressive. In cases of sickness, destitution, or religious seriousness, or for other reasons, where special need demands, or special good is promised, more frequent calls will be required. When Christians with devout spirits become interested in such a work, they will find great pleasure, and an abundant reward in it.
IV. CHRISTIAN LITERATURE
Another practicable and effective means for bringing religious truth in contact with human minds is in the use of the printed page; by disseminating a sound and salutary Christian literature in the houses of the people. Both for the quickening and edification of Christians, and for the profiting of the unconverted, religious reading is of the greatest importance. Every good book or periodical put into circulation is a personal and a public blessing. And this means of grace is so accessible that none need be without it. Aside from the periodical religious press, there are numerous societies with abundant capital for the purpose, whose only business is the publication and circulation of religious reading; and that, too, at prices so low as to bring it within the reach of all. Our own, as well as other Christian denominations,* has its 'publication' society, doing nobly and well this work, and deserving the utmost confidence and the largest patronage.
*[Ed. Note: Remember that brother Hiscox is of the type of Baptist that belongs to a denomination. Many tens of thousands of Baptist Churches are Independent of any denominational ties. Historically this has been true of the majority of Baptist Churches.]
1. A few good books should be in every home. Many are not needed, and a few can be obtained. A few, read over and over until the mind is thoroughly imbued with their spirit, are better than many carelessly read, or not read at all. Many families, and many Christian families, it is a pity to say, have masses of romances, novels, light and injurious reading, to pervert the taste and poison the minds of the children, and few or none of an instructive and devotional character.
2. Church libraries, composed of sound and substantial works of general as well as of religious literature, are an excellent means for intellectual and religious instruction. These serve for adults what Sunday-school libraries do for the young. They can be entirely free to the congregation, or used at a trifling fee, which may go to replenish the list.
3. Religious periodicals are, if possible, still more important than books, not in their intrinsic worth, indeed, but because they are so much more easily obtained, and so much more likely to be read. The cost of a weekly religious paper is so small that few are too poor to obtain one, while its value in the family is very great. Few things could become so efficient an auxiliary to a pastor in his pulpit and pastoral work as a really good religious paper in every family. And a wise pastor will see to it that his people are well supplied with such helpers; helpers both for them and him. A reliable denominational paper should be in the home of every Church family. It is certainly a shame for Baptists not to know what is going on among their own people.
Note 1.– An easy and effective method of scattering religious truth in a community is by lending good books and periodicals from house to house, among those destitute of them. Few persons would refuse, or neglect to read what was kindly loaned, though they did not care to purchase, or even to read, if it were their own.
Note 2.– If churches, or benevolent individuals would pay for copies of papers to be sent gratuitously to those unable to buy – as some do – they would do a good service, and one becoming Christian philanthropy. A small fund could be raised for this purpose. Such seed-sowing would be blessed.
Note 3.– Denominational periodicals should be generously sustained, and widely circulated. They are maintained as the advocates of evangelical truth in general, but especially of those distinctive truths, which are denominationally cherished, and held as vitally important, and which in this way are effectually defended and propagated.
Christianity is the most emphatic missionary force in the world, and every Christian Church is a divinely appointed missionary society, of the primitive type. If every Church were instinct with the life of its Divine Head, and true to the purpose for which it was instituted, no other missionary organizations would be needed to send the Gospel of the blessed God to the ends of the earth. In apostolic history, no others were known, and yet they went everywhere preaching Christ, and filled the world with the Gospel of His salvation.
What has thus far been said as to the mission of the churches, has had principal reference to their specific but limited work, in the fields where they are located. Every Church and every disciple, however, is under bonds to Christ to aid in carrying out, and fulfilling the great commission, "Go ye into all the world, and preach the Gospel to every creature." No Church can hope for prosperity at home unless it strives to give the means of salvation to all men. He that waters others shall himself be watered. And they that withhold more than is meet will find it tending to poverty. It is a fallacy with which many curse themselves, to say that they have hard work to sustain their own Church, and therefore cannot help others. They that withhold from others who need, dry up the fountains of their benevolence, and have less for themselves, instead of more. He who alone can give the increase, prospers those who trust and honor Him. The churches that do not sympathize with, and aid missionary endeavor, are never very flourishing or prosperous. The missionary churches are uniformly the most honored and useful, whether rich or poor, large or small. We have our missionary societies, for both home and foreign Christian service, in their various departments doing grand and most effective work, having a long and honorable history of good deeds, and noble successes. They possess all the appliances for the most effective and economical prosecution of their gracious enterprises. Their service commands our confidence, and we know their work is in harmony with gospel purposes. The churches are bound to give these societies their sympathies, their prayers, and their generous pecuniary support. Thereby they help to give the knowledge of salvation to those beyond the reach of their individual endeavors. The success which has attended the missionary work of American Baptists, through these societies, both in our own country, and in foreign lands, is most amazing, and testifies unmistakably to God's blessing on the work, and the favor with which He regards the methods pursued.
In all that is said or may be said it must be constantly borne in mind that a very large responsibility does and necessarily must rest on the pastors. For such purposes is the pastor made overseer of the flock, to instruct in duty as well as in privilege, and lead on to the discharge of every obligation. Few churches will be missionary churches if the pastors feel no interest in such work, and do not stimulate them, propose plans, impart information, and lead the people forward. With a pastor to do this faithfully, few churches would fail or fall short of a good degree of effectiveness.
Note I.– In most of our churches there are missionary and other benevolent societies of various kinds, acting in concert with larger external societies. The wisdom and expediency of this course may well be questioned. Indeed, it is a humiliating confession that it is the apathy of the churches touching the objects contemplated, which at all justifies the existence of such organization within them. They, at times, accomplish great good, and their intention is always good. But the Church was instituted by Divine Wisdom for these very purposes, and is an organization better fitted for their accomplishment than any other can be.
Note 2.– It is to be feared that the churches find relief from a sense of their legitimate obligation, and throw the responsibility of benevolent action on supplementary organizations. This should not be done. In such a case, "let every man bear his own burden." A Church cannot alienate its duties any more than its privileges, nor transfer to others its obligations, and still be guiltless.
Note 3.– In some churches there are so many interior organizations that the Church proper is well-nigh lost sight of, covered up and submerged by these secondary circles. This cannot be wise, nor according to the Founder's plan. They abstract the vitality of the parent body, and concentrate the active energy of the whole around their specific parts; they, therefore, leave the remainder of the Church in apathetic inactivity, as but the segments of a circle, of which these societies are the vital centre.
Note 4.– Another difficulty, possible in such circumstances, is that these specific circles tend to restrict and localize benevolence, by confining all their endeavors each to one special department, overlooking for the time all others. It makes specialists in good works of the members of each separate society. No doubt more work is done, and more money is raised for that one object by making it special. But whether that is the best training, particularly for young Christians, is a question. The benevolence of the gospel, and the impulses of the new life are as broad and varied as the wants of humanity, and the opportunities offered for doing good. The including whole should be regarded, while the included parts may be held in special remembrance.
Note 5.– Is there not, for all this energy and working power – which certainly should not be repressed nor discouraged – a better way? If a Church will do nothing for missions, or any other Christian work, except poorly to sustain its own languid life, let those who feel impelled to do more, instead of forming a separate organization for the purpose, labor to inspire the pastor and other members with their own enthusiasm, and if they cannot be moved, then let them go to work personally, with agreement but without organization; do what they can to stimulate others; raise what money they can for the purpose; make a report of their doings, at the close of a prayer-meeting; seek the cooperation of others, and continue this course for a while. It would not be long before the whole body, instead of a fraction of it, would be interested and moved to recognize the need, and work for it.
What relation does a Church sustain to the various reformatory movements, supported by organizations which contemplate the suppression of specific vices, and the confirmation of specific virtues, but which are not expressly religious in their purpose? Such societies exist for the suppression of intemperance, Sabbath breaking, gambling, licentiousness, and other vicious and corrupting practices.
A Church is a society emphatically for the suppression of all vice and for the encouragement of all virtue. And no person should be admitted to, or retained in, its fellowship who will not both agree to, and walk by, this rule. If the churches were loyal to their duty, and true to their mission, they could do more for the suppression of immoralities than any other organization. But, as it is, no doubt some forms of moral evil can be better antagonized by distinct organizations, where all are of one mind concerning the object to be accomplished. The confession must be made, however mortifying, that in some churches there are members, who, for personal reasons, do not like to hear much said on the temperance question, and some ministers there are who lack courage to say much on it; while the souls of others burn with zeal to do something to suppress the fearful evils of intemperance.
Since churches, as such, cannot identify themselves organically with other societies, they should in every consistent way give their moral support to encourage such endeavors, as well as pray for their success. All that any moral society professes, the Church professes; and the Church professes more – not only to conserve the morals of society, but to save the souls of men. Only let them be true to their profession. They can well give their "God speed " to every individual, and to every organization which honestly strives to do good in the world.
Note 1.– It is often a serious question, how far a Church member may consistently identify himself with societies whose object is the suppression of prevailing moral evils. Certain it is that every Christian should encourage, and, so far as practicable, aid every good enterprise. It is equally certain that no Church member should favor any alliance with outside associations, however good their intent, which will interfere with his most faithful performance of duty in the Church. There his first service is due. The claims of the Church are paramount and imperative. The man who can be false to his Church, while he is faithful to other fraternities, shows how unworthy he is to bear the Christian name.
Note 2.– The moral reform societies are not inimical to Christianity or to the churches; certainly not so far as their objects are concerned, whatever unwise and fanatical members may sometimes affect to be. With many mistakes they have done great good, and will do much more. With the prevailing indifference, on the part of churches, to these moral issues, Christian men can often work more hopefully through them, than in any other way.
Note 3.– As to the propriety of Church members connecting themselves with secret societies, this is to be said: that whether such societies be good or bad in themselves, all the advantages they propose can be obtained in less objectionable ways, since on the part of many there are strong objections to them. It is not a Christian act to grieve brethren for the sake of some slight personal gratification. To ministers of Christ this reason applies with double force. Why they should wish to be identified with secret organizations it is impossible to see. Such a step seems quite beneath the dignity of the high office of the heralds of salvation. Their company is, of course, earnestly sought for to grace these secret conclaves, but why should men in such positions desire to hold offices with high sounding titles though with empty honors, or with childish vanity wish to be decked out with tinsel and showy trappings? Christian ministers should possess a holier ambition. Oath-bound societies of all kinds should be greatly deprecated by Christian men.
STOP HERE and TAKE TEST!
Should the test fail to open properly, please use F5 to reload or click the refresh symbol on the top of your browser page.
If you failed the test,
then restudy this lesson and retake the test on or after the next day.
Once you have passed the test, do not take it
again.
If you missed any questions
on the test, then restudy the section and find all of the correct answers to any
questions that you missed. A copy of your test was sent to you with the
correct answers on it. You may use that for comparison purposes to make
sure you have found the correct answers.
You may begin the next Section the day after you passed the test for this
Section.