THE OBJECT OF MINISTRY
THE OBJECT OF MINISTRY
FHB I have thought that the object of ministry would be a good subject, as so many labouring brethren are present.
Ques What scripture do you propose?
FHB We might take up Colossians 1 and Colossians 2. I think that if we understand what God’s thought and purpose in ministry is, we should think more seriously of ministry. Is it correct to say all that is of God in us is effected by ministry, that the Spirit of God effects it by ministry?
EC-p What do you mean by ministry?
FHB The ministry of the word.
EC-p Is that always by the ministry of a servant?
FHB Not necessarily. It is the ministry of the word, but not the ministry of a servant necessarily.
DLH I thought the word of God came to us through servants — through Paul and through John, etc. — that is, primarily. Though it is the word of God we get, it is through the servants we get it.
FHB What is the ministry to effect?
WTPW What B. spoke of was more a spiritual gift.
FHB Look again at chapter 1: 28.
WTPW That is the exercise surely of a spiritual gift. What is ministry?
FHB I mean the ministry of the word — teaching specially. I was thinking more of the effect in the saint. What is to be effected by it in you and me? Paul says, “That we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus”.
WTPW Broadly speaking, would you not say ministry is the exercise of a spiritual gift? What [p. 307] you have been speaking of might take place in a soul apart from the ministry of a servant, as C. says.
FHB Take an evangelist, be has a distinct design before him, a distinct thought in his soul, namely, to get souls saved?
WTPW I would not let the evangelist stop there; that is the beginning.
FHB Have you not the ministry in this very chapter? The ministry of the gospel and the ministry of the church, for both of which Paul was specially called and fitted.
WTPW I dare say the gospel of the apostle Paul was somewhat different from what some evangelists of the present day call the gospel, and as there are a good many here today, it might do us good to get brushed up a little. Was that your desire?
FHB My desire was to get help. I think if we understood better what the design of ministry is, we should know how to do the work better.
THR I think it is an immense thing to go back to the fountain-head, because things do come to us through ministry, and Christ is the minister. I must have everything ministered to me from God, and Christ is the Apostle. Here, in a certain sense, you get what is apostolic to begin with. If I do not get a thing distinctly through apostolic ministry, I do not get it from God. It is important to get a thing properly. If I do not get the thing ministered I do not get it properly. We get it first through the apostles.
WTPW Do you mean that it must come through some spiritual gift?
THR I was not speaking of that; but I think to understand it you must go back to the beginning.
WTPW It is the revelation of God to the soul, no matter what is the channel.
THR You must be sure of the channel.
WTPW What do you mean by that?
THR I mean this — God spoke [p. 308] through Moses,
God gave communications to Israel through Moses; and it had to come through Moses, and in that dispensation Moses was the apostle by whom God spoke. It must come through a properly qualified channel.
WTPW I should like that amplified.
THR It was given from heaven through divinely commissioned men; they spoke as apostles of Jesus Christ, who is the Apostle of our profession.
HD'AC You cannot set aside the channel through which the ministry comes.
DLH In that respect is it not true that apostles are still in the church, “He gave some apostles” (Ephesians 4)?
THR Yes; we get them in the word, the apostolic office of Christ does not cease. Would you not say so, R.?
FER Yes; the only thing is that the apostles inaugurate the system — introduce it.
THR At the present moment in the history of the church — for the church goes through phases — I think we do depend upon Christ as Apostle to get the truth suited to the moment through which we are passing — all the truth brought out of late years, for instance. It is all in Scripture, but it is brought out because Christ is still the Apostle of our profession.
FER I think we distinguish between the initial ministry and ministry that goes on in detail. You could not put anything now on a level with the apostle’s ministry. The end is the same, but today’s ministry can hardly be placed beside the first; no one now could be a minister of the gospel or the church, as Paul was.
GE “We are of God: he that is of God heareth us”. That is apostolic distinctly.
FHB Ministry, as it is exercised today, is not merely explaining the truths of the Bible, but there is something to be effected in souls by it, souls are to be [p. 309] formed by it. It is not simply informing the intelligence, the object of ministry is much more.
FER I suppose it is what you get in the end of the chapter, “Whom we preach, warning every man, and teaching every man in all wisdom; that we may present every man perfect in Christ”. That was the apostle’s object, but I cannot effect anything in you, nor you in me.
FHB Yes, but it may come through you; it might be effected through your ministry by the Spirit of God.
FER Oh, yes.
GG What do you mean by the apostolic office of Christ continuing?
THR Christ is the Apostle of our profession. Of course you get the inauguration of Christianity apostolically at first; but I think also that as the church goes through the various phases of her history on earth, the church gets guidance distinctly from Christ. Christ would bring out men and qualify them, in order to bring out any particular truth suited to its state.
WHB-t Would you say any distinct resuscitation of truth would be by Christ in that way?
THR I think so, but you get Christ’s care for the church. You get nothing new, but what is in the word, but His care on high over the church would bring out at every part of her history truths that were suited for the moment. I think Christ would qualify men. Joshua had to observe all that Moses commanded, but the Lord adds, “Have not I commanded thee?”
GG He would use ministry to bring that out?
THR I think so.
FER There is one important point, the ministry is the ministry of what has been effected.
W.T.P.W. [p. 310] In what way?
FER I should say what has been effected in Christ.
FHB Is it looking for it as a present result when it says, “That we may present every man perfect in Christ Jesus”?
FER Certainly.
JP What has been effected in Christ?
FER All has been effected in Christ. If it is the ministry of reconciliation, the reconciliation has been accomplished. There would be no ministry of it if it had not been effected. Everything for God has been effected in Christ, souls have to come into it; but in Christ is displayed the measure of what has been effected. If it is the new covenant, Paul could fully minister the terms on which God was with man. You try to bring home to people the terms. The new covenant has been established in Christ.
WTPW In what sense was the apostle an able minister of the new covenant?
FER He was competent as being fully in the light of what has been effected in Christ. I think that is the character of ministry. Paul speaks of “the word of reconciliation”. If reconciliation had not been accomplished, he could not speak about “the word of reconciliation”; so as to righteousness, the righteousness must be there before it can be ministered. It is revealed in Christ.
FHB Then the object would be to bring us consciously into it?
FER The full effect here is to “Present every man perfect in Christ Jesus”, that is, full-grown in Christ — nothing lacking morally.
THR Christ is everything.
Ques As to the apprehension in the soul?
FER The verse shows the end the apostle had in view, it is not a question as to whether any could say he was perfect or not, but it was the object [p. 311] of the ministry.
FHB That is important. Not an understanding of the thing, but something morally effected in him.
FER It is not only preaching, but warning every man.
AM Is the evangelist to have the same object as the minister of the church?
FER There can be but one end before everybody with regard to what you minister. You can have but one end in view, though all may not carry souls on to the end.
FHB That is important, no matter what the gift, there is only one end.
FER You may not be able to bring the person to the full end, but you cannot have another end in view.
FHB All then are workers together to one end — helpers together?
GG Is that the meaning of the “Hope of the gospel”?
FER No; the hope of the gospel refers to heaven.
FHB You (T.H.R.) made a remark the other day which was very helpful, God has put us in Christ, but we do not always put ourselves where God has set us.
FER Ministry refers to the subjective side. To “present every man perfect in Christ Jesus” does not refer to standing, it is subjective.
WTPW I do not know if we all understand what is the subjective side.
FER It is the state effected in the believer, and the formation of the believer in a state.
JP Is not that effected by the Holy Spirit? I thought an objective ministry would produce the subjective state.
FER That may be. The purpose is subjective, though it be produced by an objective ministry.
GG Would you explain what it is to be perfect — subjectively in Christ?
FER All that I understand by it is that [p. 312] there should be no moral quality of Christ lacking in the believer.
FHB That the believer should be formed according to Christ — Christ formed in him. “Whom we preach” is objective.
FER You get the statement of it in a way in Ephesians, “We are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus”, it says; that is God’s work.
WTPW Should that object be equally before the evangelist?
FER I think it ought to be the end before all, to “present every man perfect in Christ Jesus”.
WTPW I think to put the gospel to meet the need of man only, is very sad. Christendom does it, but I hope we have another line.
FER God has sent the gospel into the world to effectuate His own purpose. His purpose at the present time is the body of Christ. God may in the gospel open the door to everyone, and has done so; but the purpose before Him is the body of Christ.
Ques The evangelist goes forth in the sense that God has a purpose gathering out sinners to complete His pleasure.
WTPW Why does the evangelist see so little result? That is what exercises me very often.
AM Some have said evangelists do not stay long enough in a place.
WTPW Paul only stayed three sabbath days at Thessalonica. I do not think that is the only reason.
Ques If the gospel is to effectuate God’s purpose, He can do without me or with me. God is very graciously pleased to use the preaching of the gospel.
WTPW I was thinking about having the truth and carrying it out. I dare say many of us are like that young man in the Old Testament. Ahimaaz ran to the king; 2 Samuel 18. He was a runner with tidings, but he had no distinct message. We are often [p. 313] like that, we have not got it distinctly enough ourselves. He had not got the tidings ready.
AP We have to get it ourselves before we can give it to others. With regard to presenting “every man perfect in Christ Jesus”, you could not present a man perfect in Christ unless you were perfect in Christ yourself?
FER I think so. I should venture to make a difference (only so many preachers are here I hardly dare say so!) between God’s purpose in the gospel and God’s purpose in the church, I mean as to ministry, not as to the end, but as to immediate result. What I understand by God’s purpose in the gospel is that God may be known, according to what He is, in the heart of man; the gospel comes in to make God known.
FHB I thought you said the gospel was to bring in another man?
FER No; that I think brings in more the church. God’s immediate end in the gospel is to make Himself known as He has revealed Himself to be.
AM Do you mean as a Saviour-God?
FER I mean to make known His love, to reveal Himself in what He is in His own nature, in what He Himself is.
Ques “God so loved the world”?
FER That is the coming out of His love, the expression of it. God is love.
Ques Would you not say God is light?
FER I would not say God is light in the same sense as He is said to be love. I would not say God is light if I wanted to express His nature, only one word describes the nature of God, that is, love. Light is presented relatively, love absolutely.
DLH We have been accustomed to say God is light and God is love.
FER I do not think we express it quite correctly if we say that two things describe the nature of God. If darkness is in question, then God is light, but when [p. 314] it is a statement of the nature of God in any absolute sense He is love. Every activity of God is originated in love, every movement of God is the fruit of it. It all originates in love. Light is spoken of relatively, “God is light, and in him is no darkness at all”. Because there is darkness it necessarily brings in the truth, “God is light”, but when it is a statement of God’s nature absolutely, He is love.
WTPW Well, but you would feel it necessary to present the truth — “God is light” in a day like this when so many press the love of God and say all will be saved, because so many are giving up the truth as to the judgment of sin, eternal punishment, and so on.
FER Yes, I would press it certainly because men are in darkness, I do not see any love in ignoring that. To my mind the great end of the gospel is that God might be known and that is in love. God has come out in Christ. “In him dwells all the fulness of the Godhead bodily”. You cannot know anything of the love of God except in the expression of it in Christ. It is the gospel of God concerning His Son.
Ques Would not that be objective?
FER Yes, but if that truth, the truth of what God is, is made known to me it must produce a great subjective effect, a revolution in me. The instant it comes home to a man that God is love it produces a momentous change.
GG I do not understand about God is light. Was He not always light?
FER Light is relative, love is substantive. Light is presented in contrast to darkness: it all comes in in reference to the state in which man is found, “God is light, and in him is no darkness at all”, but when you come to nature, what really characterised God, what originates everything in God, it is “God is love”.
JP You would not call universalism love at all?
FER No; universalism is not love, it simply reduces God to the level [p. 315] of man.
FHB Setting forth the truth of the nature of God would do away with all that; it would necessarily bring in the dealing with sin.
WTPW I quite accept all that has been said about the love, that love is absolute and light relative, I go with it fully.
DLH We are said to be light in the Lord, but never love.
FER I did not understand that for a long time, but I think I do now.
Ques What do you understand?
FER It came out in connection with the statement that love is sovereign; the statement was that it could not be so with any creature. In a creature love is response, but with God love originates. It is the sovereignty of love that originates every movement of God; all the revelation of God originates in love. You could not speak of that in regard to a creature. “We love him because he first loved us”. It is because of what He is in Himself that He loves.
WTPW Then you would connect all the purposes and counsels of God with love?
FER Yes, and the great thing is, “He will rest in his love”.
WTPW What is the difference between grace and love?
FER There is a difference. Grace is the adaptation of love in a certain sense to meet man in his responsibility. Grace is love suited to man in the state in which he is as responsible, but also to bring him into the enjoyment of what love has purposed. You cannot say God is grace, but you speak of the grace of God; you rightly say He is love. No man knows God’s love until he knows His grace.
FC Is grace love in activity?
FER Yes, it is, but it is the love of God to meet you in responsibility.
EC-p Love requires [p. 316] no motive.
FER Love is the motive. Every man learns God’s grace first, it is the adaptation of love to the state of man who needs love. Love is the spring. Love is the motive and a most powerful motive.
HD'AC Is there not this in a Christian toward a sinner?
FER Yes, if you are under the influence of God’s love you are formed in it and thus you love the sinner; but I ask under whose influence is God?
DLH You are not a source; God is.
FER The spring of everything in God is love.
GG But does not love require an object?
FER God’s love has found its object, but it does not need one in God. All the counsels and purposes of God have originated in love.
EC Love is its own object, we are not the objects of love, we are the subjects of love.
FER Love’s object, as I understand it, is to make itself known. It is a difficult thing to realise it.
AM Is that the reason why “God is love” in John’s epistle is followed by that verse “In this was manifested the love of God”?
FER Yes.
WTPW You will make us all evangelists. Every heart would like to carry that message.
FER It is very difficult to explain it.
WTPW It makes it so simple in every one’s life; if you have got to the source in your own history you cannot help carrying it on; if you are enjoying it you must pass it on. It would mould the life of every saint.
FHB Then that would be the spring of all ministry, whether to the saints or in the gospel?
WTPW Quite so.
FER Love is the true measure of every man, not gift. Gift is not a man’s measure. If a man has every gift and not love he is nothing, and you could not be less than [p. 317] nothing.
FHB Would you say a little on the difference between the ministry of the gospel and the ministry of the church?
FER The ministry of the church has more reference to our subjective state, that we may be formed in Christ. To my mind the work of the evangelist, the ministry of the gospel (if I may speak with great respect), is to make known to the heart of man what God has revealed Himself to be.
WTPW Then God’s purpose about man has more to do with the church; in connection with that is our being formed. You would not tell a sinner about the counsel of God with respect to the church?
FER Well, it would not be much use to him.
DLH In Luke 15 do you get more than what you call the ministry of the gospel?
FER I think it brings in reconciliation. The ministry of the new covenant connects itself, I think, with the gospel; the ministry of reconciliation with the church. The gospel is God’s approach to man. It is the pleasure of God to make Himself known according to what He is, to man. In virtue of the blood of Christ, God comes out to man, approaches man. Then comes out the ministry of the new covenant. Just as the first covenant was the declaration of the terms on which God was with Israel, so the new covenant [p. 318] is the declaration of the terms on which God is with the believer, through our Lord Jesus Christ.
D.L.H. Still the gospel?
FER Well, it connects itself with it very intimately.
WTPW Would you say it is in force now?
FER Not strictly, but in principle you are under the new covenant. The letter kills but we have the spirit of it. 2 Corinthians 3 brings it out, “Able ministers of the new testament [covenant]”.
Ques What are those terms?
FER The terms on which God is with us are forgiveness and divine teaching. God forgives you and then teaches you.
FHB Why do you bring in the teaching?
FER Because it is an essential part of it. It is all on the ground of the death of Christ. The terms are — God does not impute to you but imparts to you.
WTPW It is incomprehensible grace.
FER Yes, surely.
Ques What is the ministry of righteousness?
FER It is the ministry of righteousness in contrast to the ministry of condemnation, the teaching is an essential part of it. “I will put my law in their inward parts”. Those are the great points. We do not get the law written in the heart, but we have the Spirit, and we do not get forgiveness simply in an administrative way as Israel, but we get no sin imputed; the believer is completely justified in Christ.
DLH Now there is another thing. You have not spoken of the ministry of reconciliation.
FER The ministry of reconciliation is that all distance between God and man has been so completely removed in Christ that man can be brought into a new state before God, a state suitable to God, and that brings in the church; that is, it borders close on it; the state that marks you is the state that marks me.
ER Are you connecting this still with Luke 15?
FER Yes. It paves the way for the church, because it is on the ground of new creation the church comes in. “If any one be in Christ there is a new creation”. You are on that ground now and reconciliation is to that end. The distance has been removed that we might be a new creation. The prodigal had been a long way off but the distance has been removed.
WTPW Why do you always connect distance with reconciliation. Is it not more state?
FER Well, it is the alienation of the heart of [p. 319] man from God, moral distance, I mean. The prodigal is a good illustration. In the case of the prodigal he found the distance removed, but be is more than reconciled, he is clothed, he has the best robe put on him; ‘the best robe formed no part of the prodigal’s first inheritance’, J.N.D. used to say.
AH Would not the gospel include not only God coming out to man but man being brought to God?
FER Well, but then you get on to the ground of reconciliation immediately.
AH But you get God coming out in Romans 5?
FER You get God coming out in Romans at the beginning; then you come to the terms on which God is with man in chapters 4 and 5, till you get to reconciliation, and in the succeeding chapter you get the state in which you are for God, which leads up to the very verge of the church; I think it goes beyond the gospel.
FHB Would it not be included in what Paul calls the ministry of the gospel?
FER I think the ministry of reconciliation leads on to the church, and that is a different thing from the glad tidings of the grace of God. I think the great point of the gospel or glad tidings is God coming out to man. It is His pleasure to make Himself known to man.
EC That would be part of the evangelist’s work and therefore part of the gospel?
FER I think the gospel in itself ends with the love of God shed abroad in the heart by the Holy Spirit given; when a man has got that he has got the good of the gospel; you can never get more than the love of God.
FHB But when Paul speaks of “my gospel” does not that take in the thought of reconciliation, the gospel of the glory?
FER It is all included in the terms on which God can be with man. You can only learn this in [p. 320] Christ in glory, and you are to be in the state of Christ, a new creation, that is another point.
JP When the love of God is shed abroad in the heart is not that the soul brought to God?
FER I should say that is rather God brought to the soul than we brought to God, though on the Holy Spirit being given we are morally brought to God.
HD'AC When the father kissed the prodigal where does that come in?
FER That was reconciliation. The father had come out, but the prodigal had to go in.
WTPW The evangelist has not done his work till the soul has the Holy Spirit and the love of God shed abroad in his heart.
FER People know only poorly what it is to be brought to God. I think they may have the love of God shed abroad in the heart without the full sense of being brought to God. To be brought to God means to be brought to God in God’s own habitation — sharing Christ’s exaltation in heavenly places; that is the purpose of the love of God. God brought Himself to Israel in Exodus 15. In the early part of the song they prepare Him an habitation, but in the latter part they are brought into the place He has made for Himself to dwell in. In purpose brought to God in Canaan. We do not know much about the love of God, the full bearing of the love of God is that God will have us in His own habitation.
EC-p It is present to faith?
FER Yes; but it is to satisfy God’s love, “For his great love wherewith he loved us”.
FHB But they were brought to God when they were across the Red Sea. Peter says, “That he might bring us to God”.
FER In Peter it is the purpose for which Christ suffered, “that he might bring us to God”.
FHB He is brought to God morally now?
FER Yes; he is brought to God morally. A [p. 321] man is brought to God morally when he has the Spirit, but the full thought is to be brought to God perfectly suited to Him in His own habitation.
AM When the Lord sent Paul to the Gentiles it was that they should receive forgiveness of sins and inheritance among them which are sanctified.
FER That leaves a man where he is down here, but forgiven, and having inheritance.
Ques Being brought to God, in its full extent, we are waiting for?
FHB But it is very important that we are brought to God morally now?
FER Morally you are with God now, but you have to look at the thing on the divine side and you have to see what will satisfy God, that is, many sons brought to glory.
WHB-t What is the adaptation to Christianity of “I bare you on eagles’ wings, and brought you unto myself”, Exodus 19?
FER You have it now morally, but in its full extent it is the habitation. It is one thing to have Christ in us as the hope of glory and it is another thing to be in the glory, sharing all the glory and exaltation of Christ where He is; that is union. Union is not down here.
EC You cannot know it here?
FER You cannot know it here, but you can know it while you are here. Union is in heaven, not on earth. Union means to reach Christ where He is. Then we lose individual interests.
Ques Do you make the way we are brought to God everything?
FER I think you need to enter into the love of God about you. If you make being brought to God, as we are now, the full extent of grace, you do not enter into what the love of God has purposed for you. God must satisfy Himself. If it is the purpose of His love to have you there, you must be there to know [p. 322] it.
AM That verse in Peter, already quoted, is the statement of purpose?
FER Being brought to God takes in the whole scope. It does not shut out what you have now, but it takes in all. What could you have more down here than the Spirit given and the love of God shed abroad in your heart?
EC What did J.B.S. mean when he said, “So few souls know union”?
FER He means, I judge, that they have not reached Christ where Christ is. There is not the appropriation in the mass of people here of the love of God, so that it could be said they are sitting together in heavenly places in Christ, they are not willing to leave things here and join Christ where He is. God has prepared wonderful things for them that love Him. I believe He makes known those things He has prepared to them that love Him. I do not doubt God would make them known. As to loving God, it is a question of entering into His love for us.
FC Would you make any difference between being brought to God as sons, and brought to God in Christ?
FER No; I think it is in Christ that we have sonship.
JP Did you say we could not know union till glory?
FER No, I did not say that; but that we cannot know it down here. Union is to reach Christ where Christ is.
WTPW We ought to know it while we are down here?
FHB Is not ministry that which conducts the soul that way, step by step?
FER What was Ephesians 2 ministered for but to lead them into union in the [p. 323] conscious knowledge of it?
DLH Union does not set aside your individuality?
FER No; but you have a new set of interests, which are Christ’s. Individuality never is lost if once it exists. Where there is the existence of a moral being, what we call a person, that person cannot cease to be. You may get the state changed, but the person remains.
Ques Are we at the Lord’s table as individuals?
FER The idea of the Lord’s table is fellowship.
FHB Paul says to the Galatians, “Until Christ be formed in you” — does that increase?
FER Well, I doubt if every one would agree with my thought of that, but I think it refers to the company the apostle laboured for, that Christ should be formed in them as a company.
Ques But taking Isaac and Ishmael as the figure, would you still think it corporate?
FER I think so, but I am not going to be dogmatic about it.
FHB But is it not a fact that Christ is formed in the individual?
FER Christ is in the individual indisputably; you get that in Romans 8. It is the Spirit of Christ in the individual, I am not disputing that for a moment; but I think the apostle’s anxiety with regard to the Galatians was that Christ might be formed in them collectively; that they might answer, as a company, to the mind and purpose of God about them with regard to the church; it is like what you get here in Colossians.
FHB I could understand that in Colossians but not in Galatians. The Galatians were so far behind.
FER Yes, but that was what the apostle laboured for.
EC The Galatians were scarcely on Christian ground?
FER No; the apostle laboured to set them there, as to their spiritual state. There was a certain result [p. 324] of the first travail, but they had stopped, and Paul travailed in birth again. Who stopped you, the apostle says?
FC The apostle thought Christ had been formed in them, but found it was not so?
BC-p Then you think Christ formed in them is in the company?
FER Yes; at all events, in Colossians. Christ in you is collective.
EC-p Is Christ formed in the company with a view to display?
FER I think so, as it is here, “Christ in you, the hope of glory”. That is collective. It is Christ in the Gentiles. To “present every man perfect” is in view of the display.
FHB Each individual is to have Christ formed in him?
FER Yes; that is what it goes on to — to “present every man”.
DLH For whom is the display?
FER God will not have Christ displaced here. The display might be a testimony before the world, or it might be before principalities and powers. Man is not stronger than God. Christ has been here, and is not to be displaced. He is not here personally, but He is here in the body.
DLH It takes the whole body for the display of Christ.
THR And I think the hope of glory connects itself with that.
Ques. How?
THR The coming out. In chapter 3 it goes on to the appearing; but that is Christ’s manifestation. It is all to be brought out in the church.