INDIVIDUALITY IN THE SERVANT
INDIVIDUALITY IN THE SERVANT
FER It is helpful to remember that these two epistles and the epistle to Titus were written to individuals; so that what comes out in them has reference to individual conduct pretty much. What comes out in epistles addressed to churches is more general. Both Timothy and Titus were servants, and a great deal is brought out in these epistles which is intended to govern the conduct of the servant. Nothing can be more important at the present day than that the sense of individuality should be maintained with us — everything depends on that. One’s position is that one stands apart from the great organizations into which christianity has involved itself. In doing that, however, we have to be uncommonly careful that we do not constitute ourselves another organization. This would only add to the confusion. Two or three of us may be able to walk together, but it does not necessarily follow that we form a kind of community or body.
FWT I suppose it would be necessary to have learned what was written to the churches, before the conduct here could be carried out?
FER Yes. In the first few chapters the apostle gives the position, and proper order of the church of God — “These things write I ... that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God” (verses 14, 15). The apostle has tarried long, and it leaves a long interval in which a man ought to know how to behave himself in the house of God. That is the great point in the first epistle; in the second epistle the point is that we should not be ashamed of the testimony. The one comes before the other; before he can take up the testimony, a man needs to know how to behave himself in the [p. 2] house of God. That should be the principle governing a true servant of God today.
The first few chapters present what marks the house of God; you cannot get any representation of that in christendom today. The truth is the agreement for walking with one another. The first obligation of the servant, and of everybody, is to endeavour to keep the unity of the Spirit. The servant shows other people what is right by practising it himself; the apostle said to Timothy, “Be thou an example of the believers”. The servant takes the humblest place, “I am among you as he that serveth” the Lord said.
The servant knows what is right, and not only so, but he sets the example of what is right. Clergy and ministers take the place of servants, but there are a great number among them whom it would be very undesirable to copy. They preach one thing, but do not exactly practise what they preach. The servant should practise what is right and we should follow those who are servants. It is a very important point for everyone of us to take care what company we keep — whom we follow.
In chapters 2 and 3 there is nothing which answers to what you get in christendom. Where can you find any allusion to clergy? Yet they are a very important item in christendom. The position of the church is intercessory, and the men are to “pray every where”. The woman is not to usurp authority over the man (chapter 2). Then in chapter 3 there is no idea of gifts. The elder people should take oversight of people’s souls and deacons should take care of their bodies.
Rem We often find those who are not qualified according to the third chapter, acting in the position of bishop, etc.
FER But where are you to find the house of God? That is the great difficulty at the present day;
[p. 3] but if you cannot find the house of God in the concrete form, one ought to know how to behave oneself there. So long as the Spirit of God is abiding here, every one of us is under obligation to know how to behave himself in the house of God. All those who are baptized by the Spirit form the house of God.
The great value of these epistles is not simply to mark out the path of the servants, but they lay great stress upon individual fidelity when the church has failed. The great organizations around do not answer to the church of God at all. When you see that and stand apart from them, then it is you seek to know how a man should behave himself in the house of God. What marks those in the house of God is lowliness, meekness, forbearing one another in love, and so on.
The common idea of ruin is a broken down thing — and all around us is that which is great in the eyes of men — the mustard tree. Men have adapted christianity to the world as it is, but that is corruption and not outside of the system of this world. People come into the house of God through the figure of baptism — it was never meant at all to be accommodated to this world. Just think of what christianity as adapted to this world will be in the end. It will be that all christianity is lost, the form and shadow only left. The harlot rides the beast. Then take Sardis — what christianity is left there? The world has accommodated christianity to itself and in result all christianity is gone. The mystery of iniquity already works, but the end of it will be that the Lord will come in judgment — He treads the winepress of the wrath of God.
Professing christianity has assumed the form of a great house. Your obligation is to depart from unrighteousness and to purge yourself from vessels to dishonour. Hence you will certainly have to leave [p. 4] a great deal that is round about you in christendom. Wherever you get the refusal or non-admission of the rights of God in Christ, that is what I should call unrighteousness. In Corinthians we get “purge out”, but we cannot purge out at the present day. We talk about putting out of fellowship, but now what it speaks to my mind is, that we say, I am not going to walk with that man. If a case turns up of a person who by his conduct shows that he is entirely unfit for christian company anywhere, under any circumstances, we put that person out; and that simply means to me that I will no longer walk with that man. In the existing state of things it is very much more a question of purging yourself from those who are going on unrighteously. ‘Purging out’ was connected with the power of the Spirit of God in the assembly. They put out the leaven; but now I purge myself from the leaven. The principle at the bottom is the same, but it is the altered condition of things that makes it necessary.
The idea has been abroad that the Spirit has a special gathering in these days, but the only gathering point to my mind is Christ. The eyes of a great many have been opened to discern the true state of things around, but as to any special gathering on the part of the Spirit of God, I do not believe in it a bit. If you stand apart from what is around and you give place to the Spirit of God, you begin to get light. It is an activity on the part of God to maintain truth in the church. It is an immense mercy to get your eyes opened, so as to have some discernment of the reality of things as they are in the eyes of God. There is another thing too — you get the sense brought home to you of the presence of the Spirit of God. It is His working for the benefit of the whole church, for such a one is “serviceable to the Master, prepared for every good work”. These principles always hold good. Everything [p. 5] in the early days was held together in the power of the Spirit. The only qualification that men had to carry out any function, was the Holy Spirit. Human organization has taken the place of the Holy Spirit, and in connection with human organization, you get the rule of man, and that is unrighteousness, it usurps the place of God.
Ques Do you believe at all in a remnant?
FER No, I do not. I am very much afraid of any particular few people, arrogating to themselves the idea of a remnant. In Israel you get the idea of a remnant all through the prophets, but the remnant included all that was of God. There could be no remnant character to the church strictly speaking — the church must be the complete thing.
I do not think we ought to have anything which in any way constitutes us a party. Take the House of Commons as an illustration. You must look upon it as a whole, but suppose you have got a few members who decline to belong to any one party and these people walk together, I do not think you could call them necessarily a party. It depends on whether they have some particular point or line of things which holds them together.
There are two things which come out in the house of God here: the mystery of piety (verse 16), and the warning of the Spirit (chapter 4). In the house of God you put everything together in regard to Christ. God has been “manifest in the flesh ... glory”. That is the mystery. The initiated are able to put it together. It is only what is known in the house of God. It is a wonderful thing to think that “God has been manifested in flesh, has been justified in the Spirit [resurrection], has appeared to angels, has been preached among the nations, has been believed on in the world, has been received up in glory”. That is what is known to the initiated; it is not a [p. 6] creed or a statement of doctrine, but it is a certainty known in regard to Christ.
Then you get the warning of the Spirit — “The Spirit speaks expressly”, and you get certain principles which attach to man. Asceticism is one thing, and then you get the importance which riches attach to man. In high churches and all that kind of thing, it is a peculiar kind of fleshly sanctity which gives importance to man. That is what comes out in chapter 4. Verse 16 of chapter 3 is your sheet anchor, your mainstay, and by it you have pretty good safeguard against what you get in chapter 4. People will hold one part of it often, but the great point is to put the whole together. That is the mystery of godliness, and that it is known in the house. The last clause, “received up in glory”, carries you out of the world and you do not care to attach importance to man, as alluded to in chapter 4. It is amazing to me what an influence the clergy have over man.
It is a great thing to get a divinely given idea of the house of God; you cannot get it from christendom. It helps you to understand how a man should behave himself in the house of God. However small and limited your circle, you would endeavour to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.