ON THE FORMATION OF LOCAL CHURCHES AND THE RECEPTION OF MEMBERS
By George I. Butler
Thoughts on Church Government.—No. 4.
ON THE FORMATION OF LOCAL CHURCHES AND THE RECEPTION OF MEMBERS.
As the whole is but the sum of its parts, so the body of the church is composed of local churches and members. The prosperity of the whole will therefore depend upon the condition of these parts. It becomes then most important to consider how these parts should be made up, that the whole body may be kept in the best condition possible. Among our own people, local churches are usually formed after courses of lectures have been given in new fields and a number have embraced the present truth. Sometimes old Sabbath-keepers are living in such communities, and sometimes not. Oftentimes individuals thus come out and commence to associate together as Sabbath-keepers who have previously held the most discordant religious views. We have among our churches individuals from almost every church in Christendom: Those who have been Methodists, Baptists, Presbyterians, Congregationalists, Episcopalians, Disciples, Universalists, Roman Catholics, infidels, and worldlings in general, are found associating together in church capacity, in the most friendly manner possible. And it is no small evidence of the power of this truth that it can take such discordant elements and mold them into a harmonious whole. Nothing short of divine power can do it. Under such circumstances, wisdom should be used in organizing local churches, for of course their prosperity will depend largely upon their proper formation. In the first place those who will become members should be instructed as thoroughly as possible in all the leading doctrines of our people. This is attempted in the preliminary course of lectures. That course should embrace those doctrines which are thought to be most objectionable in our belief, as well as others. I hold that no course of lectures should be finished, where quite a number come out and receive the truth, without embracing our views of prophecy, the law and Sabbath, the life and death question, Bible repentance, faith and baptism, the perpetuity of spiritual gifts, visions, systematic benevolence, and as much of health reform as to include instruction upon alcohol, tobacco, tea, coffee and pork. I would advise this, not because we make all these a test of fellowship, for we do not; but because it is right that the people should know why we believe as we do on these subjects, and because it is far better as a matter of policy for us to present our views on these subjects, and our reasons for so believing, when we have the ears of the people, than it is to have our enemies come in and present their perverted views of the subject, and prejudice the minds of the people. But few will find any objection to our views on these subjects, when properly presented before them when their minds are unprejudiced; but when our enemies get up some highly colored picture of these things, untruthful in part, if not wholly, they may so prejudice the mind that years cannot efface it. Besides, the people are made suspicious if we leave such subjects and go away and do not speak of them, and our enemies come in and give their version of the matter. They are liable to think we are ashamed to speak of them. Some of these subjects the people are prejudiced against. And it requires some nerve and moral courage to stand up before a prejudiced audience and speak things they do not like to hear. But the manly and honorable course is to tell the people what we believe and why we believe it, and it is by far the wisest course in the end, when properly done. And it is not merely in theory, that the people should be instructed previous to the formation of the local church. In all the great principles of vital piety and godliness, in honesty, virtue and righteousness, they should receive the most thorough instruction. They should know what it is to be a Christian. They should be taught that to follow Christ means something more than a mere profession. They should learn that it is to deny self, take up the cross, and exhibit a spirit of sacrifice. They should learn that the responsibility of church fellowship is an important matter, and that they are to watch over each other for their mutual good. To have such instruction given, at proper length, will require time. And this brings us to another point. At what time should a church be organized? For one I am opposed to a hasty organization immediately after a course of lectures. When a number of persons embrace the truth during a course of lectures, the one instructing them should get them to work at once, i. e., social and prayer meetings and Bible-classes, should be held, especially Sabbaths, as soon as there are those who have commenced to keep it. Here lay brethren and sisters living in the community, or in surrounding churches, can work to good advantage, if they are devoted and in the work of the Lord. Get those embracing the truth to praying in their families and in the church, talking in meeting, and performing religious duties generally. The Spirit of the Lord will come in, and souls will receive great strength and courage, as they move out in obedience to God, in keeping his commandments. Thus they will learn to have confidence in the work as they feel its power and spirit in their own hearts. Some may say, Why should not the church be organized at this very point, right at the close of a course of lectures, while the hearts of all are stirred, and before the cooling influence of time is felt?77There is no doubt but far greater numbers could then be taken in, if no very close examination was conducted. There is no doubt but that the courage of some would be higher than ever afterward. But I think there are many reasons why some delay is generally preferable. Delay affords time for necessary instruction. At the close of a course of lectures, the mind is crowded with theories and new ideas, more or less vague, according as the mind of the hearer has ability to comprehend and arrange them into order and system. The mind then is full of theory. It dwells upon it and feasts upon it. It is impossible to realize, all at once, the duties, obligations, and spiritual experiences, of the Christian. It is better that the mind be left to settle for a while under the ordinary influences and associations of life. During the course of lectures, new subjects were constantly before the mind; the personal influence of the preacher, and the excited state of the public mind, caused by the agitation of these peculiar themes, left the mind scarcely in its normal condition. It was pressed to decision either for or against, and nothing short of a miracle could prepare it so suddenly to see all things in a proper light. Now if there is any subject upon which calmness, reason, and the sober second thought should be used, it is religion. What God wants is the sober, intelligent judgment of the human being. It is not an excited frenzy—it is not the mind goaded into a state of fear and worked out of its natural condition of health that he desires. I know very well how modern revivals are conducted, and how the steam is gotten up. But I have no faith in any kind of religious service but that which expresses the intelligent, reasonable convictions of the heart—intelligent, but earnest and devoted. We think, therefore, that it is better to wait awhile for the froth and excitement to subside before a permanent organization is effected. We often see an illustration of our Saviour's parable of the sower. The four classes described there exist in almost every community. As long as it is the case that stony-ground hearers exist, and as long as their being in a church is no benefit to it, we think there better be some little time for them to develop, and perhaps there will be less hay, wood, and stubble, in the edifice than there would be otherwise. The turning out of such is always unpleasant and discouraging; so if waiting a reasonable length of time will obviate the difficulty, we better wait. The interim between the close of a course of lectures and the permanent organization is one of great importance. Regular Sabbath and prayer-meetings should be held when practicable. Some one should be chosen (perhaps generally by the minister) to lead the meetings, and then let things develop. During the meantime as the excitement dies away, they should be often visited by those of experience who can give practical instruction in Christian duty. Errors and wrong courses of action should be pointed out in wisdom. Systematic benevolence should have been organized, if possible, before leaving these believers, and they should be taught the study of making religion the main business of life. In this way, things will develop quite rapidly. There will be a growth among some; others will likely lose their zeal and give up the truth. Gifts will be developed, and generally it will be seen by all who are best fitted to act a leading part in the future church. It is impossible to tell how long a time should elapse in every case before a permanent church should be formed. This will depend upon the nature of the elements existing in the particular community, the faithfulness of the one laboring in their midst, and a variety of other circumstances. Much depends upon the character of the labor bestowed during this interim. If the minister is all theory, and goes all round the plain, practical duties of religion, the whole work will be superficial. It is far easier to make impressions upon those just starting out than upon those who have formed wrong habits. Converts usually think the one that brings them out must know about all there is to know. They are apt to think there is no other one equal to him. Now he can, if a man of experience, effect very much in touching practical godliness, if he shuns not to declare the whole counsel of God. Here is where workmen are needed. Here is where our young preachers are in special danger of failing. They must be men of God, and understand practical religion themselves, before they can teach it to others. They must all gain an experience here for themselves. And their faithfulness in doing it will be shown in the fruits of their work, whether their building is composed of hay, wood, and stubble, or gold, silver, and precious stones. In the former case, they will suffer a fearful loss themselves, when they see their building burned up in the fires of the last day, and may think themselves very lucky if they themselves are saved, so as by fire, while in the latter case they may rejoice through all eternity in seeing those saved through their instrumentality. Our work will all be examined by a faithful inspector. We will now suppose the time has come for the formation of the church. What steps shall be taken? What course shall be pursued? Possibly before this point is reached, it has been found necessary to baptize some. But generally most are baptized when the permanent organization takes place. But in either case the same general course is pursued, and about the same questions should be asked the candidate for baptism and for admission into the church. Previous to the formation of the church, the objects and mode of organization should be faithfully set before the believers. They should realize the obligations they are taking upon themselves, in regard to church fellowship, and the watchcare they are to exercise over each other, for their mutual good. What the Bible says concerning the duty of members should be taught, as far as practicable, and all should be made to feel that it is solemn and important business they are doing. We will suppose all are assembled for the purpose of entering upon a permanent organization. The minister officiating will ascertain the number present who desire to enter into it. Then comes the examination of candidates. It is a well-understood principle among S. D. Adventists that no one is to be admitted, when any member objects. A unanimous vote is expected in every case of admission to the church. The design of this is to secure perfect fellowship between members. To pursue an opposite course would certainly result in disunion, confusion, and lack of fellowship. For one, I believe in a moderately thorough examination of those going forward in baptism, or uniting in church fellowship. Many cases are perfectly clear to all, and no doubt exists of the person's being worthy of reception. There are others where great doubt exists. What shall be done in such a case? Many pass over every delicate point, lest somebody shall be offended, or lest embarrassment may ensue. But this is simply cowardice. While the lawyer spirit of examining a witness should ever be avoided in church examinations, yet a free and frank inquiry into the purposes and views of candidates, desiring admission into the church, is proper, and demanded by the circumstances of the case. The person in question desires the fellowship of the church. The church desires the fellowship of the individual. It should ever desire to help such in every way possible. Never can there be a time when a mutual understanding is more proper than when admission is requested. How can it be obtained except by asking such questions as will be likely to elucidate the candidate's condition? Neither do we think that the person officiating should necessarily confine his questions to those things which are a test of fellowship. But any question concerning which the Scriptures speak, about which there is doubt concerning the candidate's position, are proper to be asked, that there may be a mutual understanding between all parties; for oftentimes in such cases members are at a loss how to vote when a few words might make all clear and satisfactory. And if there is a difference of opinion on important questions it is much better to be known before admission than afterwards. That is the very time when it should be known, above all others. And the officiating elder is the man who should be most anxious to know, though it is perfectly proper for others to ask questions if in need of light, and no candidate is justified in feeling tried at any respectful questions. If there are difficulties existing between the candidate and any member of the church, these things should be talked over and settled previous to the admission of the candidate. Faithfulness is required, and no delicacy should stand in the way of it. Eternal things are at stake, and things concerning the salvation of souls and the prosperity of God's cause. Questions concerning taking part in religious meetings, family prayer, fashion and vanity in dress, the use of tobacco, tea, or coffee, and others, are eminently proper in the examination of candidates for baptism, or admission into the church, as well as in regard to faith, repentance, and the keeping of God's commandments. These are not all made a test of fellowship, but it is right that members have a mutual understanding of each others' position, and oftentimes remarks of instruction may be interspersed which have a good effect upon many in attendance. The interests at stake in the formation of a church are of too important a character to be passed over with laxity. A church made up of incongruous elements, not in harmony with Christ, always disgrace religion. Hence, those who organize churches should move with care and judgment in the reception of members. But on the other hand great care should be used lest humble, honest, conscientious souls be shut out. Such will make no efforts to appear better than they really are, and discernment is required to distinguish between the genuine and spurious. These general principles are perhaps sufficient in reference to the examination of candidates. Much will of course be left to the tact and faithfulness of the officiating minister to so conduct matters that those receiving members may be able to act understandingly. It is always a matter of some little delicacy in the formation of a church to first bring a special number together to whom others may unite. Any one can see at a glance that those applying must be voted in by somebody. Who shall be those to receive others where all stand on an equality and no church exists. It would be hardly practicable to consider all in a lump members, and have no one received by vote. A very proper course to pursue in such a case is for the officiating minister to name a number of persons of the company to form a nucleus to which others may unite. When there are those present who may have belonged to other S. D. Adventist churches, having letters showing they are in good standing, they are very proper ones to choose, as their cases are clear any way, and they are to be received without question. In selecting such persons, those should be named against whom there will likely be no objection. From four to six is a convenient number to select to form such a starting point. It should then be ascertained if those named are all in union with each other; then if there are any objections to their acting in this capacity, on the part of any proposing to join, or present at the meeting, or if any one knows of any objection against them on any account; if there is, they should wait and others be selected. If not, this number may be considered the church, and then all others can be voted in by the minister after proper examination as before spoken of. When all are thus received, the church is formed. Those of course who have not been baptized are received subject to baptism, that is, they are members when baptized, as baptism is the door into the church. Then comes the election of officers, which will be noticed in the next number. A name should then be selected, which should generally be the nearest post-office. A record of course should be kept of the organization, a clerk of the meeting having been selected, at the opening of the meeting, to serve till the regular election of the clerk after the formation of the church. It is believed that the course indicated above is an orderly and proper course to pursue, and one which will be found safe and efficient. Probably some of those commencing to labor will find some suggestions which will help them to work with wisdom in this important matter. These are merely suggestions which the experience of the writer has proved to himself to work well. Others can try them unless they have other plans which they think are superior. Uniformity, however, as far as reason will bear out, is beneficial. In our next we will speak of officers and their duties. GEO. I. BUTLER