Chapter XX: Introduction (3)

“The Lord Jesus, both by his personal teachings and by the teachings of his Spirit, inculcated liberality. _His_ people must be a _liberal_ people. He charged them again and again to _give_; instructed them to labor, working with their hands; not that they might lay up wealth, but that they might have something to _give_ to him that needeth. He warned them not to lay up their treasures on the earth, and assured them that they could not serve God and money, (for that is the meaning of ‘Mammon.’) He told them that it was more blessed to _give_ than to receive; that the ministers of his gospel were worthy of their _hire_; that those who preached the gospel should live of the gospel; that those who ministered in spiritual things should be ministered unto in carnal things; and now, in view of all this, when I find a church that is willing to enjoy the labors and instructions of a minister of Jesus without return, or one so avaricious as to give only the _very smallest pittance_ that will secure a sermon once a month, while they are abundantly able to provide comfortably for a pastors support, I can’t help thinking _it is not his church_; and I would not like to be connected with it, either as a member or a minister.”

“It is probable that you do not yet know all the facts in regard to this matter. You have beard one side; Mr. Courtney, or some other Baptist of experience and observation, could tell you the other. As for our little church, it has but just now been organized; and you know very well it is _unable_ to do much, and so it may be with many others. Let this thought pass till you get more accurate information; and now tell me by what means you have been led to feel that you must give yourself to the ministry.”[4]

“I hardly know when or how this conviction came into my mind: but from the time I found myself trusting in Jesus as a lost and helpless sinner, and felt that I was saved by his abounding goodness and almighty power, I gave myself to him. Since then I have felt that I am not my own, but His who died to save me; I must live, not for myself, but for him; I must not do what is desirable to myself, but what is pleasing to him. When I was beginning to recover from that sickness which prostrated me so suddenly, I became conscious of an impression upon my mind that if I recovered I must give myself to the work of the ministry. At first I cast aside the thought as utterly preposterous. I had spent my youth and early manhood in preparing for another occupation, with which I had no reason to be dissatisfied, and upon which I had already entered: why should I now change all my plans? But the impression continually returned: it came with greater and greater power. I tried to reason it away, but still I _felt_ that I must preach; and at length, since I have been entirely restored, I find my highest reason taking sides with the feeling. Souls are perishing; God has instituted the ministry as one means—perhaps the chief means—of bringing them to salvation; I have the capacity to study and to teach; I can preach, and if I can I _must_ preach, and thus do what I can to make known to the lost the glorious gospel of the Son of God.

“But I had never thought until to-day of _all_ the difficulties in the way of doing so. I did not realize till now that to become a minister of the gospel was to place my ear to the door-post, and have it bored, in token of perpetual servitude. I never felt till to-day that by determining to be a minister among the Baptists I resigned all hope not only of preferment and honor—not only of wealth and ease, but of even what will to us be the comforts, almost the necessaries, of life. I never felt till to-day that to be a minister was not only to be _poor_, but to be _dependent_; to be regarded by the churches and my brethren not as a laborer worthy of his _hire_, but as a needy pensioner, not upon their bounty, but upon their parsimony; to feel that when I had abandoned wealth and fame and ease and comfort for their sake and the gospel’s, that they would but regard me as an object of their _charity_—a fit subject for their _alms_. But even this I did not shrink from till I thought of you. I could endure it for myself; but how can I see you subjected to such things?”

“O, don’t be troubled about me: our Heavenly Father will see to it that have no sorrow to endure, no hardship to bear, that is not for my good. Does he not say that all things shall work together for the good of them that love him? And what if we should suffer all these things? Has he not bidden us, having merely food and raiment, therewith to be content; and told us that these light afflictions, which are but for a moment, shall work out for us a far more exceeding and eternal _weight_ of glory? We do not need the comforts of the world when we have the joys of his salvation. We do not need the honors of the world when we have that honor which cometh from God only.”

“Well, my darling comforter, let it be so. We will enter upon this work of saving souls together: together we will labor, together we will study, together we will pray, and you shall teach me how to walk by faith and not by sight, and to endure as seeing HIM who is invisible.”

The evening of the next Sabbath had been appointed for his baptism. The crowd that gathered on the river-bank would probably have been larger than had ever assembled there on a similar occasion, but that a sudden shower of rain shut many up at home, and scattered most of those who had come out. He walked firmly and calmly into the water, was baptized, and came up out of the water, but gave no expression to his thoughts or feelings. Except the simple baptismal hymn which the brethren and sisters sang as they were going down the bank, all was silence. Some hard hands grasped his most heartily as he came up; but his formal recognition as a church member was postponed until the regular prayer-meeting on Tuesday night.

At that time, after the ordinary exercises of singing and prayer, Mr. Courtney, who had been created one of the deacons of the church when it was organized a few weeks before, requested the brethren to resolve themselves into a church meeting for the transaction of certain business. This was done by calling one of the deacons to preside, (there being no pastor,) singing a verse or two of a familiar hymn, and invoking the presence and sanction of the Master of assemblies.

Mr. Courtney then suggested that Brother Percy should now be formally recognized as a member of that church by extending to him the right hand of fellowship, which they had no good opportunity to give him at the water’s side.

Mr. Percy took his stand in a convenient place, and the deacons first, and then the brethren and the sisters, passed by in regular order, and each gave to him the hand of fellowship Nor was this a mere form. He saw tears in many eyes. He saw deep feeling upon almost every face, and could not help realizing that with their hands they gave their _hearts_ in Christian love. When this was done, Mr. Courtney arose and spoke somewhat as follows:

“Brethren and sisters:—I have learned that our young brother whom we have just received has felt himself called to the work of the ministry. It is proper for the church to give her sanction to that call, if she should think it in fact the call of God. In order that we may have an opportunity to judge in reference to this point, and learn for ourselves concerning his aptness to teach, I move you that our brother Percy be requested to exercise his gifts among us. Though but recently made one of our company, we have long known him as an upright and moral man. Some of us know that, like Timothy, he has been taught the Scriptures from a child and now that he has been taught of the Spirit, we may reasonably expect that he may be able to teach others. He is not like the ‘_novice_,’ newly converted from heathenism, for he has been thoroughly instructed in the doctrines and precepts of our holy religion; and though it will be proper for him to make further proof of his call before he can be _ordained to the ministry_, yet I conceive there will be no impropriety in his entering at once upon the work of calling sinners to repentance. Shall we invite him to proclaim the gospel in our hearing on next Sabbath, that we may have an opportunity to understand the nature of his gifts?”

As the vote was about to be taken, Mr. Percy arose and said, “Excuse me, brethren: I have indeed felt that it is my duty to preach Christ’s gospel. Nay, I feel that ‘woe is me if I preach not the gospel;’ and in my purpose I have already given myself up solely to this work. But I am not _ready_ to enter upon those duties now. I need a course of careful study. I must read some system of divinity. I acknowledge to you that, so far as I can now remember, I have never read a strictly theological book. I am, therefore, utterly unprepared at __this time to preach the glorious gospel of our blessed Lord. But by God’s mercy I hope soon to obtain the needful qualifications, if intense study and an earnest desire for knowledge can secure them.”

“Our brother,” replied Mr. Courtney, “mistakes our purpose. We do not propose now to _ordain_ him an _elder_, or, what is the same thing, a _bishop_. We need some proof of his call of God before we can do that. But we propose merely to ask and authorize him to show, by teaching us, his capacity to teach, and his qualifications for the work to which he thinks that God has called him. Let him study as diligently as he will, it will not hinder his studies to tell us from week to week what he has learned. But we trust that he will remember that _our_ book of divinity is the _Bible_, and _our_ theology is all to be found in that one comprehensive work. Our gospel is Christ, and him crucified, with those doctrines and precepts which gather of necessity around this one great centre of our faith and hope. Let him take the New Testament, and _study_ (_not merely read_) the teachings of Christ and the apostles, until his very soul is imbued with their meaning, and baptized in their spirit, and then come and tell to us what they have taught to him, and he will be just such a teacher as many of us are just now needing.”

The church invited him to speak to them on the next Sabbath; and after his previous convictions of duty, he did not dare to refuse.

This was on Tuesday night. On Thursday there was a little company of friends gathered in Mrs. Ernest’s little parlor, and Miss Theodosia Ernest became Mrs. Percy.

On Sabbath morning, with many fears, and a heart crying within him, “Who is sufficient for these things?” Mr. Percy preached his first sermon. His mind was strong, and had been thoroughly trained to close investigation and independent thought. His mother had in his childhood made him familiar with the letter of the Scriptures. And now that the Master himself had in his experience taught him their spirit and their power, it is not to be wondered at that from the very first he proved a most acceptable expounder of Christian truth to the earnest-hearted but mostly uneducated people who composed his congregations. They were without a pastor: and, by a sort of unexpressed but mutual understanding, he became from that time forth their minister, until the time had passed which was required to close up his legal business. Meantime he had been a diligent student of the mysteries of the gospel. He felt that he had not time to read through the ponderous tomes of what are called systems of divinity. By the advice of Mr. Courtney, he took a shorter, if not a surer way to learn the truth. He knew that he was to teach the things which were contained in _one_ Book. He made that Book his daily _study_. He not merely read, but _searched_ the Scriptures daily. He selected _subjects_ instead of texts as the basis of his discourses; and when he had chosen his subject, he took his concordance and gathered all the passages which were fitted to throw any light upon it. These texts he copied out upon a sheet of paper, so that he might have them all before him at a glance. He analyzed and classified them to get the distinctive meaning of each. Then he referred to several of the best commentators, and made his mind familiar with their exposition and criticisms, not on the single verse which was to be nominally the text of his discourse, but upon all the sometimes numerous passages connected with his subject. And when he felt that he had thus learned the teachings of the Holy Word, he was prepared to bring forth his treasures from an abundant storehouse, not crammed with “learned _lumber_ of the brain,” but full of things useful to the edifying of those who wished to know what the Master teaches in his Word. Thus he studied, and thus he preached; and God was pleased to bless his ministry, from the very first, to the conviction and conversion of sinners, and the comforting and building up of the saints.

About the time he closed his business, and was prepared to give himself entirely to the work of the gospel, he received a call from a church in one of the growing little cities of the South-west, and was ordained as their elder, or bishop, and pastor. In the intensity of his early zeal, he had overtasked his powers and undermined his health; and, at the earnest solicitation of his people, had left them for a few weeks, to recuperate his failing strength by a visit to the hill country of Tennessee.

THIRD DAY’S TRAVEL.

In which the precise difference which exists between the kingdom of Christ and the Church of Christ is still further developed, and some other remarkable things concerning the Church are brought to light.

WHEN the company had assembled the next morning, the Doctor introduced the conversation thus:

“I think, sir, that you made a distinction yesterday between the _Church_ of Christ and the _kingdom_ of Christ, in such a way that you considered the Church as a local organization, established for a particular purpose _within_ the kingdom—a part of the apparatus or machinery of the kingdom, if I may speak so.”

“You did not far mistake my meaning,” replied Mr. Courtney; “but as this idea is fundamental to the object which we have before us to-day, let me explain a little more particularly.

“We have seen that ‘The kingdom of Christ,’ ‘The kingdom of God,’ and ‘The kingdom of Heaven,’ as employed in the New Testament, are synonymous terms, and are used to designate that institution which was set up by Christ while he was upon the earth. It was not the Jewish kingdom, for the Jewish prophets told of it as something yet to come. It was not in being yet when Christ appeared, for he dated it from the preaching of John. It was _then_ that the time was fulfilled, and the kingdom of God was set up. _This kingdom was that economy of separation or assortment into which the penitent and the believing who trusted in Jesus as Messias the Saviour were introduced by baptism according to Christ’s appointment._

“Those coming out from the mass, (whether Jews or Gentiles,) and openly, by their own act, acknowledging him before the world in that significant rite which he had instituted for the purpose, became his _visible people_. They put on his livery; were called by his name; became obedient to his laws; and he was thus, in sight of all the world, their Lord and King. Now this kingdom was to continue to the end of time, and to extend to all the world. Whenever and wherever any one should be found repenting of sin, and trusting in Christ for salvation, he was prepared to become a subject of this kingdom. It was proper that he should be baptized, and thus become formally united with those of whom the kingdom should consist. He was already a subject in his heart, and was prepared to become one, at his own request, in fact and in form. But without some such a formal recognition of the incoming members, there would be no _visible_ distinction between _his_ people and the people of the _world_. Some form was needful, and the King appointed _this_. BAPTISM IS, THEREFORE, THE DOOR OF ENTRANCE INTO HIS VISIBLE KINGDOM. _Those who have not entered by THIS door are not members of it._ They may be _pious_: they may be _penitent_: they may be _believers_: they may be the friends of the King: they may even be favorites of the King; but until they have openly put on Christ, and _acknowledged_ him before the world, (not in such a way as _they_ may think proper, but in the way of HIS appointment,) they are not and should not be regarded as belonging _to his VISIBLE kingdom_. To be a member of the Jewish kingdom, one must not only be a man free from certain defects and blemishes, and a worshipper of Israel’s God, but he-must also be circumcised; so, to be a member of this new kingdom, one must not only repent and believe, but he must also be baptized. The condition is imperative and unconditional. There is no exception, and no room for evasion. Don’t misunderstand me. I don’t say that baptism is essential to _salvation_: THAT depends on penitence and faith: but baptism _is essential_ to membership in _Christ’s visible kingdom_ upon the earth.

“The visible kingdom of Christ, therefore, (which is that we have been talking of) _consists of all those who have openly professed their penitence for sin and faith in Christ, and have then been baptized into his name, in accordance with his appointment_. It is composed of these; and it contains no _others_, simply because, according to the laws of the King, these are _the indispensable_ requisites for membership.

“We now, I trust, understand what is meant by the kingdom, when spoken of as a _visible_ organization; and if so, we are prepared to take another step, and learn what is meant, in the Scriptures, by the ‘_Church_ of Christ.’

“Let me premise, however, that our English word church is a term of such various and doubtful meaning, as it is commonly employed, that we must define it before we use it, or else we shall soon find ourselves embarrassed and confused by it. You know that it sometimes means the _house_ where people worship, and sometimes the people who worship in the house. Sometimes it is applied to a particular congregation of professed Christians, and sometimes to all who hold to a particular set of doctrines. Sometimes it applies to all of some particular persuasion in some designated country, as the Presbyterian Church of Scotland, or of the United States. Some writers use it to signify all those of every name or order who _profess_ to believe in Christ; others limit it to the special organization in connection with which they happen to be living. It is therefore necessary for us, if we would ascertain what the _Scriptures_ mean when _they_ use the word church, to go to _them_ for its definition. Their use of it is definite, and easily understood: they clearly explain themselves. The Greek word is _ekklesia_. It occurs in the singular or plural number one hundred and fifteen times in the New Testament; and is translated ‘church,’ in our version, in every place but three. To obtain a correct conception of its scriptural meaning, we must examine the passages where it occurs; but in doing this, we must not forget that it _had a meaning_, as distinct and as well settled as any other Greek word, before it was employed by Christ and his apostles; and, consequently, they must have had regard to its original signification when they employed and appropriated it. This is as true of _ekklesia_ as it is of _baptisma_; and we must go to Greece for the fundamental idea which both the words contain. They were both purely Greek words; they originated among the Greeks, and their meaning was fixed by the usage of the Greek language.”

“Please then tell us, Mr. Courtney, what was the Grecian usage in reference to this word. What did it mean as a Greek would have employed it, in speaking or writing to the Grecians?”

“You will understand it better,” said he, “if I tell you first its origin. It was derived originally from another Greek word, ‘_ekkalein_,’ which signified _to call out from_. Now, you know the government of the ancient cities of Greece was democratic; that is, it was exercised by the qualified citizens assembled in a lawful meeting, for the transaction of business. The meetings were called together by the town-crier, and hence were named ‘_ekklesia_,’ the ‘_called out_;’ that is, the assembly of qualified citizens called out from the mass of the population. The same idea, or one very similar to it, is contained in our English word _convocation_, when applied to an assembly called together for some specific purpose. The Greek ‘_ekklesia_’ consisted of certain individuals, who, when assembled and organized, constituted an official body for the transaction of such business as might come before them. It was not merely an assembly, but an _official_ assembly, consisting of persons specifically qualified, and who had each his specific rights and duties as a member of the _ekklesia_. It was not every resident in the city who was, strictly speaking, a citizen; nor was it every citizen who was a member of the _ekklesia_ to which was intrusted the management of public business; but the _ekklesia_ were called out from the mass. The word was perhaps sometimes, though rarely, applied to ordinary and unofficial meetings. It seems to be so used in one case by Luke, (Acts xix. 32,) to designate the _irregular and riotous assembly_ which rushed into the public hall called in the Greek, the ‘theatron;’ and the most part of whom knew not why they had come together. But a careful and critical examination of the whole context in the original shows that here, as elsewhere, its common and restricted meaning is preserved; for the word _ekklesia_, rendered assembly in the thirty-second verse, is not the same that is rendered ‘_people_,’ in the twenty-sixth verse, nor that rendered ‘_the people_,’ in the thirtieth; nor did it apply to the noisy rabble whom the town clerk (the recorder or presiding officer of the _ekklesia_) at last succeeded in appeasing, after they had been for two long hours screeching the praises of Diana. But when the riot began, and the city was aroused, the ‘_ekklesia_’ probably rushed in haste, and in an _irregular manner_, to their place of meeting, the _theatron_. The populace entered with them; and the tumult was so great, that the _ekklesia_ could not be properly organized: it was therefore confused and illegal. Hence the recorder says, in the thirty-ninth verse, after explaining that the _present_ business belonged rather to the bench of Roman deputies than to them—‘But if ye inquire concerning _other_ matters, it shall be determined in a _lawful_ (_ekklesia_) assembly;’ that is, in a regularly adjourned or regularly called meeting of the _ekklesia_; and then, in the fortieth verse, when he had thus spoken, he dismissed the _ekklesia_.

“These three are the only places in which the word, as used in the New Testament, is not translated church. Here it is rendered assembly; and commonly, at that time, it signified an _official_ and _organized_ assembly.

“It would have been better translated by _assembly_ than by church, in Acts vii. 38, when Stephen is speaking of the rebellious Jews who rejected Moses and thrust him from them, and in their hearts turned back to Egypt. It was ‘an assembly in the wilderness’—perhaps an _organized_, official assembly—called together to transact the public business, or deliberate on the affairs of the nation; but it was no _Church of Christ_. Every assembly was not an _ekklesia_, nor was every _ekklesia_ an _ekklesia_ of Christ.”

“I was just going to ask,” said Mrs. Percy, “whether every religious assembly would not, according to your account of the matter, be called a Christian Church?”

“Have a little patience, madam. We have now seen the origin of the word, and the meaning which it had when Christ adopted it and applied it to his institution. It yet remains to see to what sort of an institution it was _that he applied it_. It must have been an _assembly_; and this assembly must have consisted of those chosen or _called_ to a participation in its privileges, otherwise there would be an inappropriateness in the name, which signified the _called assembly_. The _literal_ meaning, therefore, of the ‘_ekklesia_ of Christ,’ rendered in our Bible the ‘Church of Christ,’ could be no other than the official, or called _assembly of Jesus Christ_. It was an _assembly of HIS people_, meeting in HIS name, and transacting business by HIS authority. Not some invisible abstraction, but an actual business-doing _assembly_, to whom an injured brother might go and tell his grievance; and whose decision in the case should be final and conclusive. (Matt. xviii. 15–18.)

“Now, if you want to know the character and qualifications of the members of this official assembly of Jesus Christ: if you want to know whether they were converted or unconverted, baptized or unbaptized: whether they were men and women grown, or little puling babes, you have only to look at _the pattern_ which was modelled by Christ himself; and of which we have a description in the Acts of the Apostles, which, though brief, is so minute and comprehensive as not to leave any essential feature out of view.”

“Please show us that description, Mr. Courtney. It is just what I have beer looking for,” said Dr. Thinkwell.

“Here is the most of it, sir, in the first few chapters. Luke begins this history by reminding his friend Theophilus that he had previously written to him, giving an account of all that Jesus did while he _remained upon the earth_. He tells him that Christ, after his resurrection, spent some forty days with the apostles, instructing then: in the things pertaining to the kingdom of God; and then, having charged them to remain together in Jerusalem till they should receive the promised influences of the Holy Spirit, he ascended up to heaven. After this, some ten days, until the feast of Pentecost, were spent in prayer by them, and the women and the brethren of the Lord, in a large upper-room, somewhere in the city. Some time during these ten days Peter stood up in the midst of the assembly and suggested an item of business. It seems that this assembly consisted of certain specified and recognized persons, who were known by name, and, most probably, regularly enrolled; for ‘the number of the _names_ together was about one hundred and twenty.’ (15th verse.) These hundred and twenty, you will observe, were all disciples: ‘Peter stood up in the midst of the disciples.’ They had, therefore, been taught; and they were also _praying_ people. They were men and women. They had all an equal voice in the business, for ‘_they_’ (not Peter) nominated the candidates; and, after prayer for heavenly guidance, they cast their ‘lots,’ and Matthias was elected.[5]

“Here we have the first account of one of these chosen assemblies regularly organized _and doing business_ in the name of Christ. To these disciples, after the Spirit was poured out upon the day of Pentecost, three thousand more were added. How were they added? ‘_They gladly received the word, AND WERE BAPTIZED._’ After their baptism, ‘they continued steadfastly in the apostles’ doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread and in prayers;’ ‘and the Lord added daily to the _ekklesia_ such as should be saved.’ In the fifth chapter we read that at the death of Ananias and Sapphira great fear came upon all the _ekklesia_. It was _this_ _ekklesia_ that from their own number chose the deacons to attend to the distribution of the provisions for the poor. It was this _ekklesia_ in which prayer was made for Peter without ceasing when he was thrown into the prison. This _ekklesia_, in Acts viii. 1, is more specifically designated as the ‘_ekklesia_ which was at Jerusalem.’ It was, therefore, a _local_ and limited organization. It was _one_ assembly, and no more. It was the first and oldest of the many Churches which were formed during the lifetime of the apostles. It was the Church in which they had their membership; and on these accounts its advice was sought, and its decisions regarded as of peculiar value, but _it never claimed any superiority_ over the other Churches which were organized upon the same model and by the same authority.

“Here, then, is the embodiment of the scriptural idea of a Church of Jesus Christ. It is an assembly of those who have repented of sin, believed on Christ, and then have been baptized: who meet together in regular order to break the bread and drink the wine in his remembrance, and to transact business in his name.

“The Church at Jerusalem was no more a Church than was ‘the Church at Antioch,’ or the ‘Church in Ephesus,’ or ‘the church of God in Corinth,’ or ‘the Church of the Laodiceans.’ Each of these was a separate, distinct, and independent organization. We find no record of such an ‘establishment’ as the Church of Judea; but we read of the ‘Churches throughout all Judea and Galilee and Samaria:’ so we read of ‘the Churches of Macedonia,’ ‘the Churches of Galatia,’ and ‘the Churches of Asia.’ There are no _national_ Churches. There are no _provincial_ Churches. There are no _branches_ of the Church at Jerusalem, or any other Church. No Church is ever called a _part_ of any other Church. Each _ekklesia_ was complete in itself. It was the _assembly_ which Christ had called out from the world, in the place where it was located. It was, therefore, called the ‘_ekklesia_’—the assembly of Jesus Christ in such or such a place. It is this, and nothing more.”

“I wish it were possible for us,” said Mrs. Percy, “to turn at once to each place where the word is found and read it in its connection. I always feel more certain that I know the truth when I have examined into the matter _for myself_.”

“It is not only possible, but very easy to gratify your desire madam. I have a Greek concordance in my trunk, and we can in a few minutes find every single passage in which the word _ekklesia_ occurs.”

He went to his state-room, and presently returned with the convenient volume.

“Now,” said he, “take the Bible, and find the places as point them out. But first, I will remark that I have been over this ground more than once before this, and can, therefore, suggest a classification of these passages which will assist us in our endeavor to arrive at the strict and actual signification of the word, as it is used by the New Testament writers. For instance, it is used three times, Acts xix. 32, 39, 41, in reference to the assembly which gathered in the city of Ephesus, about the matter of Demetrius and his fellow-craftsmen. These places we have already seen. It means here simply a secular assembly, and has no sort of reference to a religious institution. Then it occurs twice where it refers to a _Jewish_ assembly—first in Acts vii. 38, where Stephen informs the Jews that Moses was in the ‘_ekklesia_’ in the wilderness with the angel that spake unto him in the Mount Sinai, and with our fathers, who received the lively oracles to give unto us. That ‘_ekklesia_,’ however, was not Christ’s _ekklesia_. It was composed of those ‘who would not obey:’ (verse 39:) who ‘made a calf and worshipped it:’ (verse 41:) whom ‘God turned from and gave them up to worship the hosts of heaven;’ (verse 42;) and who were just such rebels as the persecutors whom Stephen was then addressing; for in verse 51, he says: ‘Ye stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: _as your fathers did, so do ye_.’ The other passage in which it refers to a Jewish assembly is Hebrews ii. 12: ‘In the midst of the church will I sing praise of thee.’ This is merely a quotation from Psalm xxii. 22, where it is rendered _congregation_ ‘In the midst of the congregation will I praise thee.’

“We have now one hundred and ten places remaining in which the word refers in some sense to the Christian institution. In most of these you will find it signifies literally and unequivocally a _local assembly of Christ’s disciples_, such as we have seen exemplified in the ‘Church which was at Jerusalem.’ The first two of these are in Matthew xviii. 17: ‘If he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto _the Church_; but if he neglect to hear _the Church_, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.’ This was a local body. If it had not been, the aggrieved disciple could not know where to find it, or how to address it. The offender was a brother, and the two or three whom he should take for witnesses were also brethren in this Church. Here is the first and fundamental law of Church authority and discipline. The brethren were to live together in love and harmony; but if one felt himself aggrieved, he should first go and try the effect of a personal interview: if this should fail to restore a right state of feeling, take two or three of the brethren and talk the matter over in their presence. If this should fail, then he should call the matter up before the _ekklesia_—the body of disciples _assembled_ in their official capacity, to transact business in the name of Christ—and from their decision there should be no appeal. That such was the understanding of the apostles, and such the practice of the Churches founded by them, we will see before we have gone through with all these texts. It will be manifest that it was _the Church_, (‘the _ekklesia_,’) the _local_ society of Christians assembled for business, not a ‘session,’ or ‘consistory,’ or ‘presbytery,’ or ‘synod,’ or ‘conference,’ much less a ‘class-leader,’ or ‘preacher,’ ‘deacon,’ ‘elder,’ ‘priest,’ or ‘bishop,’ to whom this power was intrusted, and by whom it was exercised. But let us go on. You will find in the next place Acts ii. 47, that the first Church was already organized, and ‘the Lord was adding to it daily such as should be saved.’ This was the local body, the number of the names in which was, a few days before, about one hundred and twenty; but to which three thousand had been added on the day of Pentecost, and which continued to hold daily meetings in the temple, and from house to house, praising God, and having favor with all the people.

“In the next place, Acts v. 11, we read that when Peter had so signally punished the wicked covetousness and falsehood of Ananias and his wife, ‘Great fear came upon all the Church, and upon as many as heard these things.’ And the next time it is mentioned, Acts viii. 1, even before any other similar society is organized, as if to show at once and for ever that each _ekklesia_ was to be separate and distinct from every other as being complete within itself, this Church is specifically designated as the ‘Church which was at Jerusalem.’ At that time there was a great persecution against the ‘Church _which was at Jerusalem_.’ And then in the third verse, ‘As for Saul, he made havoc of the Church:’ that is, the Church at Jerusalem, for he had not yet gone to Damascus, or left the city of Jerusalem.

“Now turn to the next chapter, Acts ix. 31, and you will see this idea further developed. The ‘Church which was at Jerusalem’ no longer stood alone. It was no longer _the Church_. It was the _first Church_. It was the _model Church_. It was that in which the idea of Christ, when he spake of his Church, was first actually embodied and exemplified. It was the pattern after which other churches were to be fashioned and to which in every essential particular they must conform. But it was not the _only_ Church: it was one of a multitude, for here we read, ‘Then had the _Churches_ rest throughout all Judea, and Galilee, and Samaria, and were edified; and walking in the fear of the Lord, and in the comfort of the Holy Ghost, were multiplied.’

“This is remarkable. We do not read that the Church of Jerusalem had extended herself, and had become the _Church of Judea_, or the _Church of Galilee_, or the _Church of Samaria_. Neither here nor anywhere do we read of a _territorial_ or a _provincial_ Church. Nowhere is there a word about any great ‘establishment,’ comprising in its limits a multitude of local societies, and called ‘_the Church_,’ like the Episcopal Church, the Methodist Church, the Presbyterian Church, the Lutheran Church, etc. Each local organization was a Church complete within itself. Each was as much a Church as any other. Each was independent of all others. But this fact will be still more manifest as we proceed. The next place is Acts xi. 22, where the Church in Jerusalem is again specially designated: When tidings of these things came to the ears of _the Church which was in Jerusalem_, they sent forth Barnabas, that he should go as far as Antioch.

“Barnabas went first to Tarsus, Paul’s native city; and when he had found the new disciple, he brought him on to Antioch; and for a whole year you read (verse 26) that these two men ‘assembled with _the Church_ in that city, and taught much people.’ This Church appears to have been a missionary Church as well as that at Jerusalem; for after Paul and Barnabas had preached to them a year or so, they sent them away to found new churches in other places, as you may see in the thirteenth chapter. But the next place where the word Church (_ekklesia_) occurs is the first verse of the twelfth chapter, where the history returns to the ‘Church which was at Jerusalem,’ and informs us that Herod the king stretched forth his hands to vex certain of _the Church_, and killed James and imprisoned Peter; and in the fifth verse, that ‘Prayer was made without ceasing _in the Church_ unto God for him.’ This does not mean in the _building_ or edifice in which they met for worship, for history informs us that the Christians _had no such buildings_ for some two hundred years after this, but continued to meet from house to house, or in the Jewish synagogues, or wherever they might. And the word (ekklesia) is _never_ used in the New Testament, or any other Greek book written before or during the time of the apostles, to signify a house or building. Prayer was made in the _assembly of the disciples_. This was Christ’s Church which was at Jerusalem.

“The history then goes back to Antioch, and we read of ‘_the Church that was in Antioch_,’ as we have several times read of ‘the Church that was in Jerusalem.’ There were prophets in this Church, and the Church recognized their authority, and acted in accordance with their instructions, and sent out Paul and Barnabas on a missionary tour. They went as far as Derbe, and then returned over the ground they had passed, ‘confirming the souls of the disciples’ they had made, ‘exhorting them to continue in the faith;’ ‘and when they had ordained them elders (Acts xiv. 23) _in every Church_, and had prayed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord on whom they believed.’ Then after a time they came again to Antioch, and reported their work. They gathered _the Church_ together (verse 27) and rehearsed all that God had done with them, and how he had opened the door of faith unto the Gentiles.

“But when certain Jews came to Antioch and taught that the Gentile brethren must be circumcised and keep the law of Moses, Paul and Barnabas had much controversy with them, and it was determined to have the opinion of the apostles and elders, who, having the spirit of inspiration, were able to decide the question authoritatively, and that for this purpose Paul and Barnabas should go up to Jerusalem. They were brought on their way by _the Church_ at Antioch, (verse 3,) and were joyfully received by the _Church at Jerusalem_, (verse 4,) and by the apostles and elders. When the apostles and elders came together to consider of the business, it seems that it was in a great Church meeting, for (verse 12) _all the multitude_ kept silence and gave audience to Barnabas and Paul, declaring what miracles and wonders God had wrought among the Gentiles by them. And when they had finished their narrative, James made a short speech about the business in hand, and then (verse 22) we read that it pleased the apostles and elders, with _the whole_ (_ekklesia_) _Church_, to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas.

“That was a wise precaution; for as Paul and Barnabas were known to be bitter opponents of the Judaizing teachers, those men might say, in the absence of such witnesses, that they had perverted or misrepresented the decision of the apostles and elders.”

“But, my dear sir,” said Dr. Thinkwell, “do you not see in the very fact that Antioch sent to Jerusalem about this matter, a recognition of the superior authority of the Church at Jerusalem? This fact alone must for ever set aside your theory of Church independence. Antioch brethren disagree: the contention grows so strong that it is like to distract and divide the Church. They do not decide for themselves, but send to a distant city to _another_ Church, and ask it to determine for them. Now what possible necessity for this if the Church at Antioch was entirely the equal of the Church at Jerusalem, and just as competent to decide upon any question of faith or practice?”

“Read the twenty-fourth verse, Doctor, and you will see one reason, if not the only reason, why Antioch asked of why Jerusalem gave the advice: ‘Forasmuch as we have heard that certain who went out _from us_ have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, and saying that ye must be circumcised and keep the law; _to whom WE gave no such commandment_.’ These teachers had come from Jerusalem They had been members of the _Jerusalem Church_. They claimed to speak by the _authority of the apostles_, and doubtless to conform to the practice of _that Church_, which, as we have already seen, was the _model_ by which others were to be fashioned.

“Nothing could be more natural and proper, therefore, than to send to Jerusalem to inquire _if these things were so_? _had_ the apostles so decreed? _was_ this the custom of that Church? But besides this, you will observe that although the apostles and elders associated the whole Church which was at Jerusalem with them in their consultations and in their letter, yet the Church at Antioch did _not_ send to the _Church_ at Jerusalem, but to the ‘_apostles and elders_,’ (verse 2.) The apostles were everywhere recognized as speaking by Divine authority, and as fully authorized by Christ to set in order all things relating to his kingdom. The _apostles_ had the power without the elders and without the Church. Any one of them had the power without the advice or authority of the others to decide such questions as these, and it was _their_ decision that was asked for. But to show how little they were like _modern bishops_—how careful they were to shun even the appearance of lording it over God’s heritage—they called the brethren of their own Church into their council, and issued their decision not only in their own name, but in that of the brethren, taking care, however, to rest _its binding force_ upon the fact that it seemed good to the _Holy Ghost_ and to us (verse 28) to lay on you no greater burden than these necessary things, etc.”

“I see, sir, that you are correct. Go on with the texts.”

“You will find the next one, Mrs. Percy, in the last verse 41st of this same chapter: ‘He went through Syria and Cilicia, confirming the _Churches_.’ In the 4th verse of the next chapter, (xvi.,) you have some further light upon this decision of the apostles. It is there distinctly recognized, not as the decrees of the _Church_ at Jerusalem, but of the _apostles and elders_ which were at Jerusalem. In the 5th, you learn that the _Churches_ were established in the faith, and increased in number daily.

“From Acts xviii. 22, we learn that there was _a Church_ at Caesarea. Paul landed there, went up and saluted the Church, and then went on to Antioch. From Acts xx. 17, we learn that Paul sent to Ephesus while he was at Miletus, and called together the elders of _the Church_, whom he addressed in that most pathetic and sublime speech of which the 28th verse is a part: ‘Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, (literally _bishops_,) to feed _the Church of God_, which he hath purchased with his own blood.’ This Church must have been the Church at Ephesus, as that was the only flock of which they could be considered as the shepherds or overseers. There is no other place where the word occurs in the Acts of the Apostles; so you may now turn to Romans xvi., where, in the 1st verse, Phœbe is called a sister, and the servant of _the Church_ which is at Cenchrea. In the 4th verse, Paul speaks of ‘_all the Churches_ of the Gentiles.’ In the 5th, of _the Church_ that is in the house of Aquila and Priscilla. To the 10th, he says the _Churches of Christ_ give salutation to the Roman Christians; and in the 22d, he calls Gaius not only _his_ host, but that of the _whole Church_, by which I suppose he means either that his house was open to every Church member who would visit him; or, more probably, that the ‘_ekklesia_’ met at his house for worship and business.”

“Dear me,” exclaimed a lady, with a sigh, “I hope you are nearly through with this long catalogue of texts. I am getting heartily tired of hearing the same thing over and over again; and I am sure, if your object was to show that a scriptural Church was a _local and independent corporation_, you have proved it more than twenty times. Why shall we not take that point as fixed and settled, and go on to something else?”

“O no,” replied Mrs. Percy, “I am greatly interested in this. I have never before made a careful examination of what really is the scriptural idea contained in this word; and as a consequence, my mind has been confused when thinking or speaking or reading about it. It is true, we have now one of the ideas; but it yet remains to be seen if we have them _all_. The word is used in _many_ places in this sense; but is it not used in _some_ places in some _other_ sense? I cannot be _certain_ about it till we have examined _every place_; and I am sure it will save time and trouble in our future study to get this lesson perfectly while it is before us. So, Mr. Courtney, please tell us the next place.”

“It is in the 1st verse of the first chapter of First Corinthians; and as your friend seems anxious to get through with this dry business as fast as possible, we may group with this a number of others of the same sort. It is the address or direction, so to speak, of this letter to the Corinthians: ‘To the Church (_ekklesia_) of God which is at Corinth.’ The address of the second letter is in the same style. That to the Galatians is addressed to the _Churches_ of Galatia; and those to the Thessalonians are addressed to _the Church_ of the Thessalonians. This, you see, disposes of five places at a word. In the fourth chapter of First Corinthians, 17th verse, Paul says he has sent Timothy to bring to their remembrance his ways which are in Christ, as he teaches everywhere in _every_ (‘_ekklesia_’) _Church_. In the sixth chapter, 4th verse, he tells them that it would be better to set the least esteemed members of _the Church_ to arbitrate worldly matters, than to go to law before unbelievers: seventh chapter, 17th verse, is the conclusion of his directions about living with unbelieving consorts, at the close of which he says that this is what he ordains in _all the Churches_: tenth chapter, 32d verse, ‘Give no offence to the Jews or to the Gentiles, or to the _Church of God_:’ eleventh chapter, 16th verse, ‘We have no such custom, neither _the Churches_ of God;’ 18th verse, ‘When ye come together in the _Church_ (_ekklesia_) there be divisions among you;’ 22d verse, ‘What? have ye not houses to eat and drink in? or despise ye the _ekklesia_ of God, and shame them that have not?’ twelfth chapter, 28th verse, ‘God hath set in the _ekklesia_, first, apostles; secondarily, prophets,’ etc.: fourteenth chapter, 4th and 5th verses, ‘He that speaketh in an unknown tongue edifieth _himself_, but he that prophesieth edifieth _the Church_ (_ekklesia_). Greater is he that prophesieth than he that speaketh with tongues, except he interpret that the Church may receive edifying;’ 12th verse, ‘Seek ye that ye may excel, to the edifying _of the Church_:’ 19th verse, ‘In _the Church_ I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that with my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue;’ 23d verse, ‘If therefore the _whole Church_ come together, and all speak with tongues, and there come in the unlearned or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad?’ 28th verse, ‘If there be no interpreter, let him (the speaker in an unknown tongue) keep silence in the _ekklesia_; but let him speak to himself and to God;’ 33d verse, ‘For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in _all Churches_ of the saints;’ 35th verse, ‘If they (the women) will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home; for it is a shame for women to speak in the (_ekklesia_) _Church_.’ In the sixteenth chapter, 1st verse, Paul mentions the _Churches_ of Galatia; and in the nineteenth, the _Churches_ of Asia, and the _Church_ in the house of Aquila and Priscilla, before alluded to.