THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
T. FANNING, Editor
D. LIPSCOMB
VOL. VIII
NASHVILLE, OCTOBER 16, 1866
NUMBER 43
THE REVIEW ON THE POSITION OF THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
We have delayed giving this to our readers till now, having had no time for examining the subject involved, but now intending to resume the subject of our relation to the governments of the world, we give this and will address positions of others opposed to the true one.
Now, we do not deny the right of the Advocate to discuss the propriety of Christians going to war, voting, holding office, etc., till he is satisfied, though we doubt his bringing any good out of it; but we do question his right, or that of any other brother, to jumble positions as he has done in this instance and ascribe them to us, or even to say we occupy them. If he is not mistaken. If he felt an interest in giving our position to his readers, why did he not give it to our own language? Or, if he thinks we have not expressed our mind clearly, he need not have undertaken to tell that our position was, or he might simply have said that he did not know.
We have found it good and safe not to be wise above what is written, or for the servant not to be wise above his master. Our Master and his apostles lived where there were war, seditions, civil governments, voting and holding office.
Now, is it not wise, safe, and good, meekly to go back and inquire into the following:
- Where did our Master, or his ambassadors, enact a law, or ever discuss any question touching Christians going to war?
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
2. Where shall they enact a law, or ever discuss any question concerning Christians holding office in the civil government?
3. When shall they enact any law, or ever discuss any question touching Christians voting?
Now, would it not be wise for us to go where they went, and stop where they stopped? Now, brethren, we want peace, harmony and union, and these can be had in one way, and but one way, and that is, to humble ourselves as children at the feet of Jesus; be content with what he taught, and leave things alone which he left them. Let no faction be made on that which the Lord purposely left, without enacting any law concerning it. The only ground where we can stand, as it appears to us, is precisely that on which Christ and the apostles stood. What they discussed, we may discuss. What they never discussed, we may not discuss. What they never decided, we may decide.
We are aware of all the ground and all the extremes and extremists. We are in the world, and necessarily more or less connected with the world and its operations. We can enact no law deciding just how far Christian men shall go in these operations other than the Lord has enacted. We may admonish, exhort and persuade them to the course that we judge most consistent, conducive to piety and usefulness, but may not go beyond the things that the Lord has made. Nothing but confusion will arise, if we do not adhere to this strictly.
We have never written anything about the duty of Christians to vote, or legislating for them to do so, as intimated by the Advocate, nor attempted to give instructions in these matters; but it might be said that the Christian to vote, and there still not be one word in the Scriptures instructing him. To vote, is as for a Christian to teach school, raise corn, wheat, cattle, hogs, horses and mules, and no instructions in the Scriptures about these things. We have felt many times that we had much to say on these matters; but when we went to Jesus and the apostles to know what to say, we found our hands greatly tied. We have all the time, in all our religious impressions and feelings, been much inclined to the Quaker principles on war, have very seldom voted, and been quite cautious what we have written; so that the Advocate has no just ground for his allusion to us. Not only so, but we have found but few real peace men at all times and under all circumstances, from principle, peace men; consciences about bearing arms in any way. Real peace men are deserving of respect, but we have found some peace men with revolvers and others loaded weapons in their pockets; others conveying instructions to military men; or buying cattle and mules for armies, etc., etc. In these the peace principle is not deep.
What course did Jesus and the apostles pursue; what decisions did they make, and what did they teach concerning Christians bearing arms, holding office in civil government, or voting? Did they make any decisions?
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
Contents:
Discussion on Teaching and Reference:
If they did, what were they? Did they teach anything in reference to them, or discuss them at all? If they did, where shall we find the teaching or discussion? If they neither decided, taught nor discussed anything concerning these subjects, how would I do for myself to stop where they did, and try and see the wisdom of God in their examples where they did, and follow their example!
If the Advocate would accept a suggestion from us, we would kindly suggest that he would be much nearer correct and more acceptable to the brethren, instead of trying to make the impression that all our papers are political—full of word and blood—he would state that the “Gospel Advocate” is a simple journal that ever gives news; that we are all much devoted to the cause of Christ, and that we are zealous for the gospel, the whole of it, and that the war has made all new revelations to us on religion, either concerning bearing arms, holding office, or voting.
Now, that the war is over, let us be united, harmonious, and glorious in our efforts to gather up men until the precious children of God wherever they may find them.
Reflections on the War:
Let us not war (cease), nor let political desire (our) down into the general calamity. Some of them have fallen. Others have escaped with their lives. Let us receive them, encourage them, and try to have them as other brethren. Let love and grace be our bond.
In any view we can take of the subject, we feel no more difficulty in receiving them than those who send others. Thousands of men who stand at home, or out of the army, in any section of the country, have fallen carefully, many of those brethren too, during the general anarchy that has swept over the country; but it is as much to continue harping on it, or trying to tell who began it, or who was to blame; to criminalize or recriminate. The work for Christians now is to spread the Gospel, and I have all in the reach of salvation, leaving the Lord righteous to adjust that which poor, helpless man cannot.
We can say much about peace, without counting with any possibly operations of the war, or being involved in any discussions regarding politics or the brethren; but mere preaching about peace, or talking about it, is not as good as being peaceful and spreading peace.
Responses:
We intended no allusion to the Review in our remarks as to noticing papers. Certainly the Review can make no complaints as to our failings.
660
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
We gave notice of its publication before we ever received a single number, and have frequently noticed it since.
- We would much prefer to be convinced that our report of Bro. F’s position was wrong than to convince anyone that it was correct. If Bro. F. will say it is an incorrect representation of his position, we will gladly correct it. He says we “jumbled positions together,” but has failed to tell us which one of them he is opposed to. Let him tell us that he is opposed, and has opposed any one of them, and even if we should have evidence of his having occupied it, as we think we have, we will gladly give it to our readers.
- “Now would it not be wise for us to go where they went, and stop where they stopped?” Exactly, Bro. F., “for the Master and His apostles lived where there were soldiers, civil governments, voting and holding office.”
Will Bro. F. show us where one of them ever went into or took part in or instructed their followers to go into any of these? If not, let us go where they went and stop where they stopped. But, does not Christ and the apostles teach us by their example, God has been, through a period of four thousand years, teaching his children the necessity of separating themselves from human governments? Jesus Christ came and recognized all these governments and kingdoms as being of the wicked one and as enemies of God. The prince of them he distinctly declares has nothing in him. The apostles recognized the evil one as the ruler of this world. The early Christians kept aloof, for three hundred years, from all participation in human government.
- Nay, more, the dissenters from Catholicism, as a body, stood aloof for fifteen hundred years, and yet Bro. F. asks when did Christ enact a law concerning Christians engaging in those things? God had separated his people from them, would require a positive law for permitting them to engage in such.
- Now, brethren, we want peace, harmony and union, and these can be had in one way, and that one way, and that is to humble ourselves at the feet of Jesus, be content with what he taught, go where he went, and leave off where he left off. Let no faction be made in doing and engaging in those things, which the Lord purposely avoided doing. The only ground on which we can safely stand, as it appears to us, is precisely that on which Christ and the apostles stood. What they did we may do, what they never did we may never do. We are afraid of all ground between extremes and extremists—those who go beyond “where the Savior went.”
We are in the world, and necessarily more or less connected with the world and its operations, and we can enact no law deciding that Christian men can go any further than the Lord went, or enacted a law permitting them to go. We may not go, in our associations with the world, beyond the example and decisions the Lord has made known to us. Nothing but endless confusion will arise if we do not adhere to this rule strictly.
Where did he or his disciples go into politics?
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
661
5th. As to what the Review has taught, we will not controvert, Brother F. says, and has taken occasion to tell several times that he had voted a few times. He has taken pains to tell us where his sympathies were in the recent strifes. Example is full as good as precept for teaching. When he tells us he voted, he tells us by his example he believes it right for Christians to vote. When he tells us where his sympathies were in the recent strife, he tells us what system of politics he thought good, in the most terrible political conflict our country ever saw. When he voted according to his sympathies, (and of course he did not vote contrary to them,) he voted for war men and measures to prosecute the war for subduing those whom he sympathized; yet tells us he has been clinging to Quaker principles on war. This is precisely the position we assigned him.
For Brother F. to compare our untitles in reference to an important relationship and kinship, to raising mules and stock, is simply trifling with the relationship. Brother F. thinks, or seems to think, because there are but few true peace men, the principles of peace should not be urged. At least this is the only idea we can extract from his talk about peace men.
“Because there are but few honest men, the principles of honesty should not be taught!” would be of the same logical force. Because but few Christians live up to their profession, the principles of Christianity should not be taught and enforced!!
With respect to “peace men,” “carrying revolvers,” “furnishing information,” “trading with one for the government,” we do not know the idea intended to be conveyed. We can’t take hints, and have no appreciation of insinuations and innuendos. If it is mere talk to attract attention from the real point, we could let it pass without a word. If it is intended to make the impression that we are guilty of these things, which we cannot see how that could affect the merits of the position in question, we can inform Brother F. the insinuation is entirely gratuitous. We never owned, carried or fired off a pistol, revolver or single gun in our life. We never conveyed information to any military man. We never bought or sold mules, cattle or anything for, from or to the government. We had horses, mules, &c., taken by both governments in the recent strife—we never received a cent or the promise of a cent from either. The Advocate would be rejoiced to be able to tell that there is not a political paper among the brotherhood. But evidence to the contrary is too constantly present before us.
We would conclude the war had made some new revelations to Brother F. on bowing arms, as he wrote that he believed no Christian could bear them, (either voluntarily or when conscripted, at the beginning of the war, but now thinks they may do so, or that nothing is taught in reference to it. The Advocate never professed any sincere or other purity, but simply stated its position as peculiar on the duties of Christians with reference to the world governments.
So far as the last clause above published is intended or calculated…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
To convey the idea that the Advocate has been trying to “stir up sectionalism,” “partisanship,” have rejected men who had been drawn into the army, “been trying to tell ‘who began it’ or ‘who was to blame,'” to “criminates or recriminate” in reference to the difficulties through which we have passed, is simply without one word of ground for it. The Advocate has done no such work nor proposed to do it. We have received all who desired to be recognized as Christians, and have faithfully endeavored to excite a forgiving spirit on the ground that as Christians we “condemn all wrong who engage in such things,” and so far from exciting sectionalism, we have honestly tried to eradicate the very groundwork of all sectarianism and strife on political and sectional grounds.
We have endeavored to impress upon our readers such principles as will, for the future, save Christians from such difficulties and crimes as the Review proposes has seen them drawn into by war and politics. Whereas the Review proposes to let them go on in the same political paths leading to sectionalism, strife, and bloodshed, the Advocate tries to deliver them from those paths and influences. The Advocate has no faith in that Christianity which is only peaceable in peaceable times, when the world is peaceable, or while politicians are peaceable, but when the world gets warlike and blood-thirsty, does just like the world, becomes warlike and blood-thirsty. The church that acts just like the world in these matters is not a whit better than the world. I would like to see the church as God intended it should be: a work of safety, peace, and security, in which the family of God may dwell in peace and harmony, even while the world and the kingdoms of the world are engaged in fierce and bloody strife.
To this end, Bro. F., the Gospel Advocate must labor, whether it pleases men or not. It is certain it will receive the approval of God. Not to please the brethren, but to benefit man and please God we labor.
D. L.
From the American Christian Union
Germantown, C. W., Sept. 14th, 1866.
Bro. Franklin—”Beloved in the Faith”—Allow me to witness through your Review, that a number of teaching disciples in Canada are appointed to publish a small, neat, cheap hymn book, (provided there be no obstacle) about the size of the little book which served the brotherhood years ago.
The names of the brethren so chosen are thus written: A. Anderson, D. Oliphant, T. C. Nott, A. Clemmens, and N. Watnell.
Any brother bearing in his mind a little or a large objection to such a hymn book, by Faith a quorum of Disciples, will please be brotherly, and let us see the form, color, and power of his objection.
Affectionately,
D. OLIPHANT.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
663
For the Gospel Advocate
“SAVIOR BRING THE GLAD TO-MORROW.”
Savior come and bring salvation,
Chase away the lingering night,
Pour the blessings on every nation,
Bless the world with Heavenly light;
Let thy glory
Fill the earth from pole to pole,
‘Till the story
Awakens love in every soul.
Savior bring the glad to-morrow,
Bring the fullness of the day,
When shall cease the tears of sorrow,
For the mildness of your sway;
When the nation
Learn the art of war no more,
And humankind
Hug in peace from shore to shore.
Break the gloom where souls are dying,
Lost in darkness, sin and strife;
Speak the word to mourners sighing,
Show the Way, the Truth, the Life;
Wider o’er all the earth be sung,
And redemption
Kindle praise on every tongue.
Savior grant us now thy blessing!
We are children, hear our cry!
Bless us now, thy throne addressing,
Look upon us from on high;
Let thy mercy
On the children now descend—
Dear Redeemer,
Be our guardian and our friend.
F. E. HOWARD
CAMPBEL, KY.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
For the Gospel Advocate
ELDERS AND BISHOPS
Bno. Lipscomb—Dear Sir: In my communication published in the Gospel Advocate of September 11th, my object was to show that there was no divine authority for any of the church governments, church organizations or clerical establishments in the world. This I undertook to do as the shortest way in which I could do it, by showing what was the divine teaching on this subject—that the elders were appointed by the Holy Spirit to take the oversight and feed (teach) the flock. Now if this is true, and the word elders means the older persons, as you admit it does, then the order of things existing even in our boasted reformation is destitute of divine authority, because the Scriptures do not nor cannot teach two things incompatible or conflicting with each other. The apostles speaking, by the impulse of the Holy Spirit, taught the disciples that the elders who were among them should take the oversight and feed the flock. The elders evidently means all the elders. This divine arrangement is in perfect accordance with human society as God made it. The elders, the older persons, must, of necessity, teach the younger persons, and that it is proper and comely, I think no one will dispute. Moreover, this divine order makes no invidious distinctions. It places all on a level of equality, makes all to feel their responsibility, and affords a stimulus to general improvement. The common practice of selecting special persons for office has all the wicked, corrupting influences, and is attended with the same heart burnings and bickerings in the church as in the State, and would corrupt, to a greater or less extent, the purest congregations of Christians that ever existed. It was certainly borrowed from the State and stands upon the principles of human wisdom, and not upon divine authority.
You raise the question as to which of the elders of a congregation are to take the oversight. Peter answers, “The elders who are among you.” But you say, “Certain special qualifications are designated in addition to that of age.” In this I suppose you refer to the 3rd chapter of 1st Timothy. I know it has been extensively taught that Paul wrote that chapter as a directory to guide the church in selecting the proper kind of characters for office, but those qualifications, as you call them, are nothing more than Christian qualifications, and are elsewhere in the Scripture enjoined upon all Christians. They are nearly all susceptible of many degrees, and are possessed by Christians in a great variety of degrees. There is, perhaps, no man worthy of the name Christian who does not possess them to some degree. For instance, one may be apt to teach, another aptler, and a third aptest, and there is no man who knows enough to be a Christian who is not able to teach something to others more ignorant than himself. Paul nowhere even intimates that he wrote that chapter for the use that has been made of it, but he does tell us precisely who he wrote it for. He says he wrote these things.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
665
To Timothy that he might know how he ought to behave himself in the house of God, and if we can learn how Timothy ought to behave himself, we learn how we, as Christians, ought to deport ourselves. You also refer to Titus being left in Crete to ordain elders in every city. This, I think, is generally very imperfectly understood. Most certainly Titus was left in Crete to do, under the instructions of the Apostle Paul, just what he himself would have done had he been personally present, and that was to teach and make known to the disciples there that the elders among them were divinely appointed to take the oversight and feed the flock. This appointment once made was forever made, it will endure and remain the same while the word of the Lord endures. The church has not only ever had authority to select men for this purpose. In the commencement of the current reformation we repudiated the old sectarian phrase clergy and laity, but now we have men among us who are trying to introduce a phrase which I think is, if possible, still more objectionable, designating the church as officers and private; but indeed, it is the duty of the church to make for themselves officers, the rest, as a matter of course, are laity, and the application of this military phrase is only calling things by their proper names. We have in the Scriptures “the office of a bishop” and “the office of a deacon,” but they are not on that account to be called officers.
Every employment which a man follows is an office; hence, the Savior said of the woman who poured the costly ointment upon him, “Let her alone; she has done me a good office.” An officer, as we all know, is a public functionary, one who acts in a certain capacity for a whole community. Now as Christianity is a personal matter, and every one must be a Christian for himself, the idea of Christians making officers to perform the duties that are enjoined upon all alike, is to my mind ridiculous and absurd.
By the Sacred Scriptures Christians are required to “teach one another,” to “edify one another,” to “admonish one another,” and to hold forth the word of life. As a matter of course, these duties are to be discharged according to the abilities and opportunities of each. This divine and wholesome teaching, as the Apostle Paul foretold, the wisdom of men has long since rejected, and Christians have been taught to build up themselves teachers according to their own lusts, and they have turned away the people’s ears from the truth, and have themselves turned unto fables. This, I think, is sufficient proof that the Apostle Paul never taught Christians to heap up or to make themselves teachers. Among all the noted disciples mentioned by the Apostle Paul, he has never, in a single instance, either predicted or mentioned a title of honor or a name of office to a single proper name. This he could not have omitted if he taught Christians to make officers.
W. Y. SINGLETON
Springfield, Ill.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
In response to the foregoing, we must say, while we are intensely opposed to every practice or custom, to all institutions and organisms in religion that are of human origin—believe they are all subversive of pure Christianity, and will, as surely as God is true, strip the church of its vitality and power—while we believe the introduction of any order of organization or man, under or over the church of God to do the work of the church, or to aid that church in doing the work which God ordained it to do, is derogatory to the character of the church “which is the pillar and support of the truth,” and a misrepresentation of the wisdom, goodness and power of God; we are equally tenacious for that exact and perfect order of the church which God ordained.
A church directed, controlled, filled and sustained by human organizations and human expedients, is a David clad in Saul’s armor, with devices of human wisdom. A church devoid of God’s order would be a Paul fighting the Lord’s battles without the sling and stones of Heaven’s approval. In either event the conflict must be fatal to the youthful David. But when he goes forth fighting his Master’s battles, in the name of the Lord, using only the simple instrumentalities of God’s approval, though to human wisdom adapted for the work for which they are designed, he is, in such a conflict, clothed with the strength of Jehovah himself, and we would sooner expect the sun to fail in its meridian splendor and quench from the universe, than to see one thus clothed, thus strengthened, fail in his work.
So with the Church of God, keep her free from the darkness of human wisdom, the instruments, tactics and institutions of man’s invention, and let her use diligently, faithfully, transparently the Order and appointments of God, though to human wisdom they may appear weak and frail, still she stands clothed with the protection, power and strength of Jehovah himself in carrying forward his work.
So if it be true that simply the elder persons of a congregation are to direct and control the affairs of the congregation by virtue of their age, without regard to character or qualifications, though it would seem to us to introduce something of confusion, we still would say the churches must come to that order of things, or they can never be recognized or blessed of God as his churches.
But we think it possible that our brothers, perhaps, in running from the lifeless, tyrannizing principle of “officialism” in religion, run to an opposite extreme. Let us say, then, that no man can be a bishop or elder except he be a man of years and experience. We also say that while the term “office” is used in the Scripture, we do not understand it to be used in its modern acceptation as a synonym of a position that gives authority merely because a person has been elected or chosen or ordained to occupy such a position, as in the political governments of earth. But the scriptural significance of the term is “labor,” “calling” or “duty.” The “office” or a bishop is undeniably the work of a bishop, and not the authoritative position that
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
Contents:
- Introduction The most ancient of “apostolic successions” can give the power, grace, or attributes of a bishop without the work and duties of a bishop being performed daily. Every single member in the church, in this sense, is just as much an officer as the bishop. This compares the members of the body of Christ to the members of our natural body—each member having its appropriate office, work, or duty to perform. The foot is just as much an officer as an office and must perform that office.
- The Role of Members Just as much as the head, the eyes, the ear, and the Apostle Paul significantly adds, “All members have not the same office.” (Rom. 12:4) We opine that all the clergy members do not have the same office. Does the expression “the elders which are among you” necessarily imply all the clergy members of the congregation?
- Historical Context The term elder was translated from the Jewish to the Christian dispensation. Let us see the use of the term elder among the Jews. “The chief priests and elders,” “the rulers, elders, and scribes,” are expressions common among the Jews, referring to the priests, the “cloistered” and the elders of Israel. Did this expression mean all the other persons of the Jewish nation?
- Leadership in the Jewish Context The leadership of Israel seems to have originated in this way. Exodus 18:13-26 describes Jethro, Moses’ father-in-law, bringing his wife and children to him on his journey with the children of Israel from Egypt and Canaan. Jethro sees Moses overwhelmed with the difficulties of the people and suggests to him to “provide out of all the people, able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness; and place such over them to be rulers.”
- Moses and the Elders It seems that Moses did as suggested and associated with him seventy of the elders of Israel to supervise the affairs of the Jewish people. God approved of the arrangement and took of the spirit that was upon Moses and put it upon the seventy elders, and they shared the burdens of the people with Moses (Num. 11:17). This became a divinely appointed and perpetual office among the Jews.
- Clarification on Elders While it was true that all these supervising elders were old men, it is not true that every old man among the Jews was a ruling or supervising elder. The elders among the Jews then did not refer to every old person, but to those distinguished on account of their official qualifications and fitness to the work of supervising and directing the affairs of the Jews.
- Implications for the Church No matter what the expression “the elders, that are among you, that are in Rome, Corinth or Thessalonica” implies, it does not imply all elders, but if a certain portion had been separated as a body, they would be par excellence, the elders among you.
- Conclusion Let us try another position. Brother L. says the letter to Timothy was written to tell him how he should behave himself in the house of God. We believe this, but part of that behavior was to manifest itself in setting the house or temple of God in proper order, the same for which he left Titus in Crete. He gives him direction for this.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
and tells him what the characters of those should be who would take the oversight of God’s house. In doing so he lays down certain qualifications that are necessary for a bishop or deacon. To say that a bishop or deacon in a church should possess certain qualities, would imply that such should either be peculiar to them or possessed in a higher degree than would be attainable by all other members. Bro. S. says, “These qualifications, as you call them, are nothing more than Christian qualifications, and are elsewhere in the Scripture enjoined upon all Christians.”
That many of them are enjoined on all Christians is true, but as the Christian life is a growth from a very weak and imperfect Christian character to one of greater strength and proportion, to say that a bishop should possess these by way of distinction from or pre-eminence above other members, would be simply to say he should have attained a degree of excellence of character and perfection in these things that a younger, and sometimes a weaker and more unfavorably surrounded Christian would not have attained.
But while all these conditions and qualifications may be desirable to the perfection of the Christian character, they are not essential, as we understand them to be in reference to the bishops and deacons. For instance, it is desirable, truly, that every Christian man should have a wife “faithful in all things,” yet it is not essential to the Christian character. It is to the man who would do the work of the deacon acceptably. We would be understood here.
We doubt if any Christian is allowed to unequally yoke him or herself in the bonds of matrimony with an unbeliever. Yet an individual, himself an unbeliever, has married an unbeliever. He becomes a believer, his wife remains an unbeliever. The apostle Paul says emphatically, in such cases, if the believer wishes to remain with the believing husband, he must let her remain. His remaining with the unbelieving wife, while an unfavorable circumstance, is no impossible barrier to the perfection of his Christian character. It is such to his exercising the bishopric and deaconship, though he were as old as Methuselah. Again, if he have an unbelieving wife, exerting an evil influence over his children, in spite of his best efforts to “bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
and at all times, we think something more definite than an influence from the language would have been given us. Again, our Brother says, “The church has not, nor ever had, authority to select men for this purpose.” The church at Jerusalem was required to select certain men from among them, of specified character or qualifications, to take charge of a certain work or business, Acts vi; 3, yet no man in the Christian kingdom can be set apart to perform a certain work, save the character the Holy Spirit has designated as fitted to perform that work. The danger of letting men to judge their own proper position is, that men are bad judges of their own qualifications and character. The bigoted, puffed up, haughty, unholy would certainly adjudge themselves “comely members,” fitted and called to occupy responsible places, while the Bible teaches that just the opposite are the proper ones. Unfortunately knowledge of ourselves does not always come with age. It is also true that while it is proper that a bishop should desire and delight in the work of caring for, nurturing and feeding the flock of God, it is not always a good sign to see an individual think he is eminently qualified to perform that work. The apostles did not say, “You who have certain qualifications, or think you have them, take charge of this work.” But he said to the multitude of disciples, look you out among you, “seven men full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom we may appoint to this work.” It may be said, “You will see men full of the Holy Ghost take charge of this matter.” It is likely not one of the truly wise would have come forward.
The beginning of true wisdom is to doubt our own wisdom, lack a confidence in ourselves, and trust God’s guidance. While we think then that the idea of official authority and official power is not found in the Christian economy, for all authority is vested in Christ the head, yet the Holy Spirit says, “Select such men to the work as are fitted by character for the work.”
That the whole idea of ordination and separation for a work has been perverted and corrupted, and is still but slightly understood by the brotherhood professing to be disciples of the Lord Jesus, we freely admit. But in striving to come to the knowledge of the Spirit’s teaching on this and other subjects, we think that we should be cautious in taking extreme and radical ground. The danger in the whole matter is in men disregarding the divine injunction and choosing men on account of personal and family influence, not unfrequently on account of their monetary influence, which they have gained by a violation of one of the Christian obligations. Whomever are thus set apart to do such work as they are not fitted to perform, they usually neglect the work and alter the order of the world, claim the authority and sanctity of office. The bishopric is a work to be performed, not an authority to be wielded.
D. L.
Better is the sight of the eyes than the wandering of the desire: this is also vanity and vexation of spirit.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
PRAYER
If one duty or privilege of the Christian is more important than another, we would say that prayer, simple, thoughtful and earnest prayer is that most important duty and highest privilege. There is not a duty more continually enforced upon Christians, both by the Savior and the apostles, than prayer. It brings us into immediate communion and connection with God. Through this communion with God we receive strength to live the Christian life. And through prayer, too, we are enabled to prevail in our conflict with the world to bring it into subjection to the will of God.
So essential is prayer as a means of strength to the Christian, that we are told no man or woman can live the Christian life, even for one day, without earnest and devout prayer to God.
My brethren and sisters, if the apostles, with their wisdom and spiritual knowledge and deep insight through inspiration into the will of God, needed to pray themselves; and that their brothers and sisters should pray for them, how much more, if Jesus Christ our Lord, to whom God gave of His Spirit without measure, who was the only begotten and well-beloved of the Father, whom angels guarded and bore up in His sojourn in the world, felt the need of prayer, even earnest, fervent, oft-repeated, prolonged prayer through the whole night, to enable Him to withstand temptation, and with fidelity do His Father’s will, how greatly important is it to us poor, weak, frail, erring mortals to continually seek, through prayer, God’s help to withstand temptation, and His upholding and guiding power in the difficulties, trials and afflictions through which we are called to pass.
It is a naturalistic, unthought idea that causes us to think that God will bless us without prayer. It is the means through which Christians approach the Father. He who feels weak, frail, worthless, will often seek the Father in prayer. The self-sufficient, proud-spirited, self-satisfied, will refuse to pray. The humble, contrite, trusting child loves to approach the Father in prayer. But in coming to God in prayer, we must come according to His will—must come with clean hands and pure hearts—must pray, “lifting up holy hands.”
For prayers to God while living in the conscious commission of sin, can never reach with acceptance the throne of “our Father.” Hence prayer necessitates frequent, thorough self-examination. If we have wronged our brother or fellowman, let us not think our prayer will be heard until that wrong, to the extent of our ability, has been righted. If we have cheated, defrauded, overreached, taken advantage of the ignorance of our fellowman, if we have injured wrongfully and wantonly the feelings of our fellowman, even the offering of prayer that the heart would bring to the Father, must be left until we have reconciled our brother to us.
Every time we approach God in prayer, we should seriously ask ourselves, what wrong have I done to my fellowman that has not been compensated for? We should connect with our prayers confession of sins. Here I am persuaded Christians are often at fault. The requirement is not to confess…
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
that we are sin-laden by nature, or a general confession of failure to do our duty. But by a thorough self-examination we must determine what special acts of sin we have committed, to what extent any act is wrong in the light of God’s word, and that wrong we must sorrow for, we must confess, if committed against our fellowmen, we must make restitution for, we must turn from with full purpose of heart, as God is our helper to do so.
We must ask God to forgive us, and He who is faithful and righteous will forgive us our sins and cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
We must familiarize ourselves to weighing our actions in their full consequences upon ourselves and others, as they appear in the sight of God. A careless passing them over without examination, and forgetting or shunning, without discriminating the right from the wrong, and noting the wrong, will never improve our lives or command us to our Father.
Every day we will rightly determine to undo our wrongs. If, when in an environment we are tempted to cheat or steal from our fellowman, we, in our certain moment, recognize every time we thus wrong, we will soon cease to do wrong; “resist the devil and he will flee from you.” And without this system of retribution there can be no improvement of our lives and no acceptance with God.
Without this our prayers are an abomination in the sight of God. Hence, because it is right to pray according to the will of God, we conclude that to pray for something that God in His wisdom would see fit not to grant, would be a sin; hence we are deterred from prayer. We do not so learn from the Scriptures. While it is true that all prayer, while we are living in known and careless violation of God’s law, is vain, it is true that Christians may pray earnestly and sweepingly to God for things that God sees fit to withhold.
Jesus Christ himself prayed such a prayer. In the deep anguish of soul, in the Garden of Gethsemane, He prayed, “Father, let this cup pass from me.” The cup of suffering, and the determination that was placed before Him, He prayed that it might pass from Him, if in accordance with His will. The prayer was not answered. The cup, with its bitterest dregs, was drained to the bottom. Yet we are assured the Savior’s prayer was heard, and accepted by the Father.
Christian, do not be afraid to approach the Father as “your Father,” with your heart’s trials, temptations, and deep sorrows to Him, ask deliverance from the trials through which you are called to pass, and lean on Him for strength.
He may not always let the cup of trial and sorrow pass from you; may call on you to pass through them as He did His own Son, but He will give you grace to bear them and triumph over the fierce enemies of your soul, as He strengthened Him for the struggle with death, hell, and the grave. Christ is our great example in all things. As He prayed to and trusted the Father, so we must pray to and trust our Father. When we make Christ our example, God’s dealings with our Savior is the example and sure promise of His dealings.
THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
He will bear us up, protect us, strengthen us, guard us, guide us, and save us in this world of sorrow here, and give to us to reign with him and his son forever, if we will only trust him.
D. L.
For the Gospel Advocate.
Georgetown, Ky., Oct. 4th, 1866.
Elder David Lipscomb—Dear Sir and Brother: On behalf of the Church of Christ at this place, I enclose you my check for $50.00, to be distributed by you for the benefit of the suffering disciples of the Lord in the South. From information, it seems that those in Georgia and Alabama are the most needy.
Your brother in the Lord,
JAMES Y. KELLY,
Clerk and Treasurer of Church at Georgetown, Ky.
PROSPECTUS OF VOLUME VIII. OF THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE
The undersigned propose resuming the publication of “The Gospel Advocate,” as a Weekly Journal, January 1st, 1866.
Our purpose is to maintain the right of Jesus Christ to rule the world, the supremacy of the sacred Scriptures in all matters spiritual, and to encourage an investigation of every subject connected with the Church of Christ, which we may consider of practical interest. The Kingdom of God is a permanent institution, “The pillar and support of the Truth,” upon a proper appreciation of which, the welfare of the world and the happiness of man depend; her origin, organization, history, labor and mission; her relation toward worldly powers, civil, military and religious, and her final triumph, will occupy much of our attention. The education of the world for Christianity, and the training of Christians for immortality, will constitute an important part of our labor.
The work will be published at Nashville, Tennessee, in Weekly Numbers of sixteen pages, the size of the former Gospel Advocate, neatly folded and stitched, at:
- $2.50 for Single Subscribers.
- $1.25 for Five Subscribers.
- $20.00 for Ten Subscribers. (Invariably in advance.)
We would be pleased to have the cooperation of the Brethren generally, and the Preachers of the Word especially, in circulating the paper. In making remittances, send all sums of $10, and under, in registered letters by mail at our risk, and all sums over $10, by express, or in checks or Post Office drafts.
Direct all communications for the Advocate to:
T. FANNING,
D. LIPSCOMB,
Editors & Publishers, Gospel Advocate,
Nashville, Tenn.