Has the Church any Protection From Inward Foes? by G. I. BUTLER

Review and Herald Publishing Association · Tacoma Park Station, Washington, D. C. · Oct 8, 1908

Has the Church any Protection From Inward Foes?

By G. I. BUTLER

G. I. BUTLER

INWARD foes are the most dangerous of any. Civil wars are the worst kind of wars. Inward foes of the family, church, or nation, by the advantage they possess of being in the closest relations with each, can make the most trouble of any kind of enemies. Has the church any means of protecting itself against troublesome elements in its own bosom? When the nation has conspirators, secret enemies, it can banish, arrest, and imprison, or even put to death such dangerous foes. In the family relation, in extreme cases, the troublesome member can be ousted, and the disturber can be driven out. Must the church always tolerate mischief-makers, and hold in its bosom, and fellowship, destructive elements which tear down that which others are building up?

The church of God is an institution of heavenly origin. What is a church?—“A formally organized body of Christian believers worshiping together.” “A body of Christian believers holding the same creed,” “observing the same rites, acknowledging the same ecclesiastical authority; a denomination,” etc.—Webster.

God has had a church in all ages. We read of the “church in the wilderness.” Acts 7:38. So God certainly had a church in Old Testament times. A host of scriptures speak of the Christian church.

Does the Bible give any information as to how to get rid of unworthy, disorderly, or rebellious characters? Or does it teach that such elements should always be tolerated, or held in fellowship?—Abundant provision is made in each dispensation for getting rid of such elements. In the Old Testament the expression is used “be cut off from his people.” See Ex. 30:33, 38; 31:14; Lev. 17:9. It is well known that excommunication for certain causes was practised in the Jewish economy in the Saviour’s time. Excommunication is “to put out of communion; especially to cut off or shut out from communion with the church by an ecclesiastical sentence.”—Webster. It is in substance to do exactly what those scriptures just referred to state; namely, to cut them off from among the people of God for doing things forbidden by the Word of God; in common parlance, it is to turn them out of the church, as unworthy of fellowship. Communion and fellowship are very nearly the same thing. When one’s conduct is wicked, contrary to the principles of true religion, the church labors with the person to show him the wrong. If he still persists in it, and does not admit or confess that wrong, but justifies himself in it, what can the church do? They can not justify the wrong. There comes a conflict of opinion. There must be a giving up of the standard of right on the part of the church or fellowship must be withdrawn.

We have an illustration in the Saviour’s time of the method in use among the Jews,—methods existing for ages among that people,—in the case of the man born blind whom Jesus healed on the Sabbath: John 9. “The Jews had agreed already, that if any man did confess that he [Jesus] was Christ, he should be put out of the synagogue. Therefore said his parents, He is of age; ask him.” Verses 22, 23. “And they cast him out.” These words, no doubt, refer to his excommunication. Our Lord warns his disciples that they will have to suffer excommunication at the hands of their countrymen (John 16:2), and the fear of it was such that people of good repute were prevented from acknowledging Christ. When we come into the Christian dispensation, we are instructed by Christ himself and by the apostles in reference to this subject of excommunication; how and when people should be cut off from the fellowship of the church. Our Saviour in Matthew 18 gives us a lengthy lesson concerning it. We can not in this brief article enter into all the particulars. Our object in writing is being mainly to establish the fact beyond question that it is a feature of the great scheme of the gospel designed of God to keep his church pure in doctrine and practise, and to exclude from it influences leading to confusion and corruption.

In the scripture referred to, verses 15-18, our Saviour teaches us what steps should be taken in cases of trespass, where the rights of a member have been violated. The person injured should show to the trespasser the injury done him; lay his fault before him. If he would not listen, he should take with him one or two others as witnesses. If he would not hear them, the matter should be laid before the church. “If he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.” He further states that if these steps have been taken in the proper manner, that decision of the church will be ratified in heaven. All such matters are of deep moment to the one trespassing and not repenting. They affect his eternal destiny. It must be evident to every fair mind that when one becomes to the church “as an heathen man and a publican,” he has ceased to be a member of the church. He stands, in fact, on the same ground as one who has never been a member, but not to be hated or treated unkindly. When one will not hear the church, the church can no longer be of benefit to him or he to the church. The only relation he can then sustain to the church is that of one who is to repent and confess his sins. Union and fellowship must be restored before he can sustain any closer relationship. These are the personal directions of our divine Lord, designed to keep the church pure and its members in peace with one another.

Bowling Green, Fla.

(To be concluded)