A Book of Gems, or, Choice selections from the writings of Benjamin Franklin. Бенджамин ФранклинЧитать онлайн книгу.
members as sheep. Could we not say flock’s office, sheep’s office? The Lord has no such office as shepherd, or, in Latin, pastor. There is no such office as pastorate, nor officer as pastor. There is not one word in the New Covenant about the qualifications of a pastor, the election of one, the calling of one, or the installation of one. As the correlative of the word flock, when the church is figuratively called flock, the Lord who cares for the flock and has the oversight of it is figuratively called Shepherd, or, when the followers of the Lord are figuratively called sheep, the Lord is figuratively called “the Shepherd of the sheep.” When the Lord is called “the Chief-Shepherd,” or “Arch-Shepherd,” the church is in view as the flock of which he is Shepherd, and the overseers in the church are under shepherds, but there is no shepherd’s office, nor flock’s office. The bishops or overseers are as certainly bishops or overseers, when figuratively called shepherds, as if literally called overseers. No other office or work is meant.
Coming now to the practical matter, we desire Bible things and Bible names for them. We desire to preserve the church and everything in it as the Lord gave it. We desire, in the matter in hand, to prevent the creation of any new office in the church. There is nothing new or unscriptural in the idea of an overseer who devotes himself wholly to the word and teaching. There may be other overseers who do not give themselves wholly to the word and teaching. Then there is nothing unscriptural in an evangelist remaining with a church one, two or more years, to set in order things that are wanting, assist in qualifying the church to take care of itself, and preach the gospel to the community. In this capacity he is not a church officer at all, but doing the work of an evangelist. He is not with the church to “perform divine service” for it, to lord it over it, or as a ruler, nor permanently, but assisting the church in her infancy and enabling her to take care of herself.
Every preacher connected with any church is laboring in one of these two senses: as an overseer who labors in the word and teaching, or as an evangelist. In the former capacity he may be there permanently. In the latter capacity he is not there permanently, but setting in order the things wanting, with a view to qualifying themselves to every good word and work; to instruct and edify one another in love, but intending to go on to another place as soon as he has finished his work where he is. But the overseer who labors in the word and teaching is not to assume any airs of authority, or any great chair with his subordinates on more humble seats by his side. We abominate all these great chairs, pulpits and preferences for public men. If they are good men they do not want them, and if they are bad men they certainly should not be honored with them. Really great and good men are plain men—want no great chair nor great titles. They need no priestly robes, clerical coats nor titles. They make a record that tells the story for them. They do the work. Let us do the work, seek the simplicity of Jesus and the humility of children. While we sing, “Nearer, my God, to thee,” let us strive to live nearer to God and do our utmost to excel in understanding and practicing precisely what the Lord has laid before us in the Scriptures.
CALL NO MAN REVEREND.
WE will call no man Reverend. We make this a matter of conscience. There is no more reason or gospel for addressing a preacher differently from other men than there is for a preacher to be attired differently. If a man is not preacher enough to be known as a preacher, without the white necktie or the priestly coat, let him pass without being known. We like to treat a preacher, or even a Roman priest, with common civility, but we do all that when we treat him as any other gentleman. We want no preacher’s garb nor titles, and will recognize none of them. Many have those who have never been “born again;” who are not in the kingdom of God—not Christians.
PREACHER DID NOT SUIT.
WE must say a few things in the way of generals before we come to particulars. We visited a church some years since, and there was quite a general impression among the members that their preacher did not suit them—that he was not “the right man in the right place,” etc. Many fine things were said, as to the kind of a man they needed, etc., and the idea prevailed that they had better turn their preacher off and get another. We suggested to them in a circle one day that possibly they had not at all discovered the real malady; that possibly the main difficulty was not at all in reference to the kind of a preacher they needed, but to the kind of a church they needed; that possibly the change they needed could be effected by turning off the church and getting another and a better one.
THE OLD AND NEW TESTAMENTS.
WE need a vast amount of instruction in regard to both the Old Testament and the New, not only in the sunday-school, but in the church, the family, and to individuals. We need some thorough work in this matter. Much of what is now passing for teaching both the Old Testament and New is in no proper sense teaching either the Old or New Testament. The general idea is, that the Old Testament embraces all the sacred writings or the books of the Bible, beginning with Genesis and ending with Malachi, and that the New Testament embraces all the sacred writings or books of the Bible, beginning with Matthew and ending with Revelation. Such is the sense in which these terms are now used. When it is said, the Old Testament is abolished, the idea generally received is that all the sacred writings, or the books of the Bible, from the beginning of Genesis to the end of Malachi, are set aside, of no use, and not to be studied. This is a very superficial view, and one that in no sense comprehends the matter.
The word “testament” means covenant, and the Old Testament is simply in the Bible sense the Old Covenant. This was made with the seed of Abraham, or fleshly Israel, and includes what Paul calls “the law.” This is what he calls “our pedagogue to bring us to Christ.” It is not “school-master” as the common version has it, but pedagogue. His office was different from that of school-teacher. It was to take charge of the children from the time they started from their homes till they reached the school-room and put under the teacher. This was the office of the law of Moses, to take charge of the seed of Abraham, Israel according to the flesh, and bring them to Christ the School-teacher. Paul does not say, as some quote him, “The law is our school-master to bring us to Christ,” but being a Jew, and speaking as such, he says, “The law was our pedagogue to bring us to Christ,” the School-teacher. This law, containing a full development of all that was in the covenant with the seed of Abraham, or fleshly Israel, is what was abolished, had waxed old, and was ready to vanish away in Paul’s day. This most certainly did not include the history in the five books of Moses, or any other history in the Old Book, commonly called the “Old Testament,” the book of Job, the Psalms, Proverbs, or the Prophecies. None of these are abolished, but are all of as much value to those under Christ, and as legitimate books for study, as they ever were to any people in any age of the world. They are not included in the law, or the covenant, or in what was abolished, but have a relation to the gospel, to those in the kingdom of Christ, and are of immense value.
By making ourselves well acquainted with the sacred writings, the dealings of God with man, and the portions of revelation given in various manners and at sundry times, we can see as we can in nature now that we have revelation through which to read it, that there was one Divine Mind before the beginning of