1. Christ The True Centre Of Gathering
1. CHRIST THE TRUE CENTRE OF GATHERING
Blackheath, August, 1876.
My Dear Brother,
The last time we met you asked if I could direct you to some pamphlet that would explain why those believers who are gathered only to the Name of Christ will not meet with other Christians for ‘worship’, and why they do not associate with them in service .
The question is very important; and I will answer it, for I believe there are many at this special time, like yourself, who are seeking the truth regarding this subject. As the Lord enables me I will give you a few simple but conclusive reasons that to act otherwise would be to lose sight altogether of what is due to the Lord. Many speak of our Pharisaism and the like, but I hope to show you that in the course we adopt we are acting according to God’s revealed will. It is simply a question of what the Lord would have us to do.
1. The Honour of Christ
The first reason is a due regard to the honour of Christ. I am sure you will admit, as indeed every believer will profess to hold, that obedience to Christ as Lord is the first responsibility of a Christian. The Lord Himself commands it continually, John 8: 31; John 14: 15, 21-23; John 15: 7, 10; etc. You will also admit that Christ is the Head of the Church, Eph 5: 23; Col 1: 18, and hence that He should absolutely control the Church; i.e. all its individual members, whether singly or in their collective capacity, as the Assembly. The apostle Paul says, “Therefore as the Church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in everything”, Eph 5: 24. Admitting this, when I am asked to meet with other Christians in their ‘churches’ or chapels, I have to inquire whether their arrangements are in subjection to Christ. If they are, I can meet with them, but if they are not, I then will have fellowship with their disobedience if I associate with them, 1 Cor 10.
The Ministry
Let me apply a test or two. Take first the ministry, as practised in the denominations, whether in the establishment or in dissent. Is there a single Scripture which justifies the appointment - in whatever way - of one man ‘to conduct their worship’? As you know, I have shown conclusively in The Step I Have Taken that the theory of ‘one-man ministry’ is utterly unknown in the Word of God. It is true that we find elders, but never one by himself in an assembly. Their office was primarily to rule - or, lead - though some might also possess the gift of teaching, for we read of those who labour in word and doctrine. What we contend for is, that there is no class of men in the Scriptures that corresponds in the remotest way with ministers in the establishment or in dissent.
Allow me one simple question: By whom are these ministers appointed? It is by man in every case; in dissent, by the people - who elect their minister by vote; in the establishment, generally by the patron of the ‘living’ and the bishop. It is by man, without any divine authority or sanction, for where can the Scripture be found which authorises the people, or the patron and bishop, to take such a solemn step? Paul, an apostle, with Barnabas, appointed elders, Acts 14: 23, and Paul directed Titus to do so. Titus 1: 5. Nowhere can it be found that the authority to even appoint elders, much less ministers, has been vested in the local assembly or in the patron of a ‘living’.
Such being the case, ministers so appointed derive their office, not from the Head of the Church, Christ, but from man - I do not deny that in many cases they have real gift.
Hence if I recognise them, I recognize the authority of man in opposition to the authority of Christ.
The ‘Service’
This fact alone would keep me out of a church or chapel, but I would apply another test. Take the ‘service’, as it is termed. By whom is this arranged? The order, the number of hymns, of Scriptures read, of prayers, etc.? Again the answer is, by man. The whole thing, indeed, has this underlying principle: that man has liberty in the Church of God to do what is right in his own eyes. We maintain, on the contrary, that our sole responsibility is to be in obedience to Christ: therefore, we have no liberty to originate anything, but in all things we have to be subject to the Word.
Jealousy therefore for the honour of Christ, as the Head of the Church, will keep me outside of everything where His authority is disregarded. It will be said that we must forget about our little differences and show love one to another. No, I answer: I must not let go a single thing which Christ commands, nor must I tolerate a single thing which does not have His sanction. Therefore, while owning my responsibility to love all the children of God, I also own my responsibility to obey Christ as my Lord; and it is written, “By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep His commandments”, 1 John 5: 2.
2. The Presence and Leading of the Holy Spirit
Now I ask you to consider that if I meet with other believers of whatever denomination, I would be a party to the practical denial of the presence of the Holy Spirit in the Church of God. The characteristic of this Christian dispensation is the presence on earth of the Holy Spirit. What makes a Christian, according to the Scriptures, is having the indwelling Spirit (Rom 8: 9): the Church was constituted by the baptism of the Holy Spirit, Acts 2; 1 Cor 12: 13. The importance of this truth is seen from the emphasis laid upon it by our blessed Lord in John 14-16. The point to which I call your attention is, that, because of the presence of the Holy Spirit, He claims the right in the assembly of the saints to use whom He will for ministry or service, 1 Cor 12-14.
If therefore I assent to the human arrangement and participate in it by my presence, of a one-man ministry, I am clearly acting as if I did not believe in the presence and leading of the Spirit. If I do believe in it, then, by my presence, I am wilfully opposing His action and thereby infringing on His sovereign rights. This would be a solemn position indeed to take. J.N.D. said, ‘As to funerals, I would not go to any where the clerical system is kept up, I did not to my father’s. If it gives offence, you cannot expect other than the offence of the cross’, Letters vol 3 p479, 1881.
I do not insinuate that the beloved Christians who are in the denominations wilfully take such a position. I know they do not. The fact is, many are in ignorance of this blessed truth. As a proof of it in one quarter, I will cite from a publication of the denomination with which you are connected. It is an exposition of the dedication of the temple by Solomon. One of the lessons is ‘the reverence we should feel in worship should be as deep as though an emblem - referring to the cloud that filled the house of the Lord - of God’s presence was with us. He is as surely near”, Gen 28: 16. What can more clearly demonstrate that the truth of the presence of the Holy Spirit is almost unknown? But if we know it, are we to act as if we did not?
It is therefore impossible for me to be present at a ‘service’ where this truth is ignored, and where, by human arrangements, the Spirit of God has no liberty to act through the members of the body of Christ there present. In this way the Holy Spirit is quenched, 1 Thess 5: 19. Surely you would not have me oppose the Spirit of God. Jealousy therefore for His sovereign rights keeps me apart from believers in such a position as I have described.
3. The Priesthood of All Believers
One of the plainest teachings of Scripture is, that all believers are brought into the same position, the same place of perfect acceptance before God, and that all have the same privileges in Christ. Peter is thus able to say to all to whom he writes, “Ye also, as living stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ” and again, “Ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood”, 1 Peter 2: 5, 9. John, in like manner writes, “Unto Him who loved us, and washed us from our sins in His own blood, and hath made us kings and priests unto God and His Father”, Rev 1: 5-6.
In Hebrews we have the same truth everywhere implied. Christ as the one Priest is seated at the right hand of God; the veil is rent, and all are exhorted to draw near, “having boldness to enter the holiest by the blood of Jesus”, Heb 10: 19-22. The consequence is that there cannot be an earthly priesthood now, except indeed in the sense that all believers are priests. The appointment therefore of a special class of men, by whatever name they are termed, whether ‘priests’ or ‘ministers’ to ‘conduct worship’, is inconsistent with the privileges of all believers and is practically a denial of our common priesthood. Is it not a great shame, with the light we have from the Scriptures, that we should have acquiesced in these things so long. For if we all are priests, what folly to appoint another to pray for all assembled, and to do this whatever may be the state of his own soul at the time! Every Lord’s day, at the same time, he must stand before God to pray the same number of prayers as the appointed minister of the congregation, or to read the same prayers from the same book.
My beloved brother, as you have been sitting or kneeling in your pew, has it not often been that your own heart has been filled by the power of the Spirit, and you have yearned to pour out your thanksgiving and praise before God? But you would not be permitted to do this, for there is one in the pulpit whose office it is to pray and praise for you, and the effect is as if he only were the priest, and that you were not in the same place of nearness and privilege. Can you be content with such a system? Jealousy for the privileges of my fellow-believers hinders my being present at such a meeting.
4. Lack of Discipline
There is another reason I would mention. I would be in danger of becoming a partaker of evil deeds, 2 John 10-11, in many a church and chapel to which I might be urged to go for ‘worship’ or sermon. It is well known that in most of these there is no discipline whatsoever. Gross immoralities would in some cases be dealt with, but evil doctrines are seldom regarded as requiring discipline. Take your own denomination. Only the other day I observed that a well-known minister was present at a Bible conference, where he avowed his belief in the doctrine of the annihilation of unbelievers. This, however, neither affects his standing nor his fellowship with the ‘churches’ of the same denomination.
I could point out several cases of the same kind, such as, for example, where ministers holding the non-eternity doctrine are freely admitted to preach in the different chapels and are members of the same associations with those who are, as to this, sound in the faith. Indeed, in denominational systems, discipline cannot be exercised, for if you exclude a believer from one chapel he will find ready access into another. And, as you know, it has been recently decided by the ecclesiastical courts that a clergyman cannot refuse the ‘sacrament’ to one who denies the eternity of punishments, the personality of Satan, and who even casts a slur upon many portions of the Word of God.
Should I have fellowship with evil like this? I do have fellowship with it if I meet with those, be it only occasionally, who tolerate these things. A little leaven leavens the whole lump; a house suspected of leprosy had to be shut up and avoided, 1 Cor 5: 6; Lev 14: 34-53. Thus separation from evil is God’s principle, and I dare not depart from it under the false plea of love; for He is a holy God, and we by His grace are holy. Hence the exhortation, “Be ye holy, for I am holy”, 1 Peter 1: 15-16.
The reason we so often overlook our responsibility in this respect is we think more of one another than we do of the Lord. God’s glory does not occupy the first place in our souls. It is precisely here that we are all liable to fail. These perplexing questions, indeed, could scarcely arise if the Lord had His due place with us, but once my eye is diverted from Him and is directed to my fellow-believers, I am plunged into uncertainty. It is not too much to say that most believers have fallen into this error of putting the saints before the Lord. As an example of this, at a recent ‘convention’ of believers of all denominations, a principal member of it, in closing the proceedings, summed up the objects for which they had met. The first, he said, was union; the second, brotherly love; and the third, the exaltation of Christ. Far be it from me to insinuate that the speaker meant to put the saints before the Lord. He did so, however, and thus was unconsciously supplying an illustration of the wrong indicated.
Now, dear brother, I have given you some of the reasons that forbid my meeting with other believers in their ‘churches’ and chapels. More might be added, but those given are sufficient to show you why we think we have the Lord’s mind for the course we adopt; that it is not from an overcritical spirit or Pharisaism; that it is not from bigotry; but solely a question with us of what is due to the Lord. We have separated and remain apart from the meetings of other believers, because we are convinced it is the path in which the Lord would have us walk. It is outside of everything devised by man; in a word, outside the camp with the Lord, Heb 13. To act otherwise, therefore, would make us unfaithful to our convictions, give us a bad conscience, and cause us to lose communion with our blessed Lord.
Commending the whole subject to your prayerful consideration,
Yours affectionately in Christ,
E.D.
____________________