Page images
PDF
EPUB

saith, thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn, and the laborer is worthy of his reward" (1 Tim. v. 17-18): "Let him that is taught in the word communicate unto him that teacheth in all good things" (Gal. vi. 6.) On these three passages alone does J. G. Lee build his conclusions, that the "Son of God" requires pastors to be paid; and therefore, for our present purpose, they only will require our attention. Concerning this he writes, "God never issues a prohibition against a thing that does not exist." This is not correct; but perhaps J. G. Lee means that God never issues a prohibition against a thing that could not exist. This we cheerfully admit, and therefore conclude that it was possible for persons to seek the pastor's office for the sake of lucre. J. G. Lee's next step is to conclude, that if a person sought the office for the sake of gain, there must have been a salary. Now we contend that many offices are sought from such a motive, where no salary is given or anticipated. If this declaration be true, (1 Pet. v. 2) will it not serve our Brother Lee? Pastors have great influence: this Peter knew, and learning from experience the disposition of certain teachers to become idlers, and live through this influence by imposing upon the kindness of the church, we conclude he penned the lines now under consideration. Thus also was it with Paul: he refused to receive that assistance from the churches (not a double salary) which, as an apostle, was his right, that he might not give to such selfish imposers upon the brethren the slightest shade of an example. Hence he says, "What I do, that I will do, that I might cut off occasion from them which desire occasion." He then unmasks those men who, by reason of their influence, were sponging upon the church in the keenest manner, and reproves the Corinthians for their folly in becoming their dupes: "Ye suffer fools

|

gladly, seeing ye yourselves are wise, for ye suffer if a man bring you into bondage, if a man devour you, if a man take of you, if a man exalt himself." Persons of the stamp may be found in most places, and hence Paul, in writing to the Philippians, put them upon their guard; and also at Ephesus, well knowing that "grievous wolves would enter amongst the flocks," he demands that the overseers shall labor with their own hands. We can call to mind certain positions which we should seek to fill, that would give an influence tending greatly to serve us in a pecuniary point of view, but which have no salaries attached or annexed, and which we would at once place oneself in, were we urged by the love of filthy lucre; and we are certain that the pastor's influence in the early churches could have been used by an idle being very much to his advantage, without his ever obtaining a single penny in the form of recognized payment, and that especially when we remember that the churches were composed of those who had been accustomed to do much for their priests before their conversion to Christianity. We then conclude that 1 Pet. v. 2 affords no ground whatever for the conclusion, that the payment of pastors is the law of the New Testament.

The second text for examination is 1 Tim. v. 17, "Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of DOUBLE HONOR." Brother Lee, means double payment, and affirms as proof, that did it not do so, it would contradict Gal. vi. 6. Suppose we admit for a moment that Paul teaches the Galatians that pastors must be paid, it would form no case of contradiction should the apostle teach Timothy, that pastors who rule well were to have double honor in the usual acceptation of the word. All the truth is not taught in one passage: faith saves, we read in one part, while salvation is attributed to baptism in another, no mention being

Double honor, says

made of faith. Thus, then, it is quite admissible to conclude, even should it be proved that Paul has taught in his epistle to the Galatians that elders are to receive a stated salary, that "honor" in his letter to Timothy may be taken in its common, primary, and proper signification, without forming any contradiction. As the whole of the argument from this hangs upon the word honor, we must aim at developing its true import. J. G. Lee affirms that it must mean a pecuniary recompense," while we declare that the word cannot mean anything of the sort. We shall not array all our reasons for so saying, but at once proceed to select two or three, which we feel assured will suffice.

66

1. Paul taught this very church over which he instructs Timothy to ordain elders, and to let them who rule well be counted worthy of double honour, that they (the elders) were to work with their own hands, and to give, not to receive. Yes, this command to give to the elders double honor, is sent to the very church where J. G. Lee informs us that the pastors would not require time to study, being qualified by miraculous gifts, and therefore were not to be paid.

three years, I ceased not to warn every one, night and day, with tears. And now, brethren, I commend you to God, and to the word of his grace, which is able to build you up, and to give you an inheritance among all them who are sanctified. I have coveted no man's silver, or gold, or apparel; yea, ye yourselves know that these hands have ministered unto my necessities, and to them that were with me: I have showed you all things, how that so laboring ye ought to support the weak, and to remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he said, it is more blessed to give than to receive” (Acts xx. 28-35.) That this was a command to labor given to the Ephesian church, is admitted by Brother Lee in the following words :--" Paul had nearly four years previously, imparted the Spirit to the whole church at Ephesus, consequently they who had received it, like the apostle, had no occasion for study or leisure they could, therefore, pursue their accustomed trades," &c. This, then, being admitted, Paul could not, in another passage, teach directly the opposite-that they were not to labor, but to have not only a maintenance, but a double one.

:

3. Our third reason is found in the fact, that to make "honor" mean "maintenance" is to prove too much, and to destroy the possibility of honoring men when God commands it. If Brother Lee be right as to this word, the church is called upon to give a maintenance to all pastors who rule well-to all widows who are widows indeed to the king, and to ALL MEN. We conclude that Peter's command to "honor all men, love the brotherhood, fear God, and honor the king," is proof that honor does not imply maintenance.

2. Our second reason Brother Lee very nicely expresses-"The apostle being infallible, could not contradict himself." Calling together the Ephesian elders-those elders who were to have double honor-he informs them why he labored with his own hands for three years among them: "Take heed, therefore, unto yourselves, and to all the flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God which he hath purchased with his own blood. For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter among 4. The word timè is used where a you, not sparing the flock; also, of salary is obviously not intended, but your ownselves shall men arise, speak- is, as in 1 Tim. v. 17, of the same iming perverse things to draw away dis-port as the injunction, "Know them ciples after them: therefore watch, which labor among you, and are over and remember that by the space of you in the Lord, and admonish you,

and esteem them very highly in love | (or give them double honor) for their work's sake" (2 Thes. v. 13.) The case of Epaphroditus (Phil. ii. 29) is to the point. Paul commends him to the church by affirming that he had been his companion in labor, and his fellow soldier, and had ministered to his (Paul's) wants, &c. concerning whom he continues to say, "Receive him with all gladness, and hold such in reputation." The word here translated reputation, is the same as that rendered honor in 1 Tim. v. 17, which Brother Lee cites as meaning a maintenance, but which we claim as meaning esteem or value, which idea is here expressed by the word reputation, and which might have been given as "hold such in value" - meaning in much esteem. Only suppose honor (time) to mean salary, and we have Paul in a new character, and one which would well suit a State Church man-Paul (like his would-be successor of Exeter) nominating the orthodox Epaphroditus to the vacant living at Philippi, and commanding that he should have a salary.

nor was perfect. When I became a man, my parents having more means than myself, assisted to support me; yet I honored them by the manifestation of that due love and reverence which age demands from youth-the parent from the child. Suppose, in time, a reverse in their circumstances, and I take them under my roof and sustain them. Should I refuse to maintain them, having the means, I should assuredly refuse to honor them

should I not have the means, and consequently see them die of want, yet having manifested due sympathy and reverence, I should honor them fully and perfectly—I should keep the law in its spirit and letter, "Honor thy father and thy mother." To honor, then, does not imply to maintainmaintenance is no part of its meaning, though at times it may become the means whereby we manifest that we honor. If, however, we are wrong, and time means a pecuniary recompense, then was A. Campbell wrong in his debate with Rice, and sprinkling and pouring are Christian baptism. The way in which J. G. Lee and others have attempted to get the idea of maintenance from timè, is the same as that by which Rice attempts to prove pouring to be a meaning of baptizo; and if the one case can be sustained, the other must stand. Look fairly at the two arguments.

BAPTIZO means to wash. Washing is sometimes performed by pouring, therefore baptizo means to pour.

It has been stated that "honor" must imply maintenance, seeing that the apostles command that widows shall be honored, and that children are to honor their parents, it being obvious that "honor," in these cases, must imply a pecuniary provision. Now we admit that an affluent son cannot honor an indigent mother without maintaining her; but the necessity for her maintenance does not TIME means to honor. Some persons may prove that it is one of the meanings be honored by receiving a maintenance, of the word honor, but that it grows therefore timè means a maintenance. out of their relationship. For instance, We therefore trust, that when J. G. what would honor one man would Lee gives a Christian pastor his mainnot another. It would be esteemed tenance, he will instruct him to allow an honor by one man were I to invite the subjects for baptism their choice him to my table; while another, oc- of pouring or dipping. The meaning cupying a higher station, would not of baptizo is to dip, and things are be honored thereby. Again, what washed by the process of dipping, would honor a person at one time, and therefore baptizo has sometimes would not at another. When a child, been used for washing; but though I honored my parents by obeying them washing may be performed by pour-I did not maintain them-my ho-ing, pouring never becomes a mean

ing of BAPTIZO. In like manner, "time" means to value, esteem, or honor; but while we sometimes honor a man by giving him a title, a maintenance, a medal-giving a title, a maintenance, or a medal, are never meanings of the word "timè.”

There remains now but one passage upon which our brother's massive superstructure rests; and we are certain that such a building, standing upon one Scripture only, requires not a whirlwind, but simply a gentle breeze, to raze it to the ground. "Let him that is taught in the word communicate to him that teaches in all good things" (Gal. vi. 6) So, then, the pillar of the apostacy is based upon this one Scripture, which contains neither the word pastor, its equivalents elder and bishop, nor the word maintenance. Let us see where such a declaration leads us to, if, as J. G. Lee asserts, "to communicate to him that teaches in all good tnings," is to supply a maintenance. This may do if the church is to have but one teacher, but a plurality of pastors is a divine requirement, and therefore each church will have to furnish several livings. But Brother Lee reminds us that evangelists are to teach, and as churches are to send them out and acknowledge them as teachers, they must provide a maintenance for them too. Very good but

this is not all. The order of Christ's

church is, that ALL may teach who can do so to edification; and a few Lord's days back, meeting with a certain church to break the loaf, we had six brethren engaged in teaching, each one of whom was on that occa

sion as acceptable as the pastor who addressed us: these, then, being teachers, will require it, should Mr.

and that each of these will, according to this use of this verse which we are repudiating, be entitled to a maintenance, it is at once evident that J. G. Lee has not a single Scripture to support his view.

But what does this verse teach? I answer this question by saying, not anything like that which it is cited to prove.

We should much like to enlarge upon it, and also upon 1 Tim. v. 17, but space will not allow of it. However, such of our readers as may be desirous to see a more extensive examination of these passages, may do so by reading the article published by us in the BIBLE ADVOCATE for November, 1848.

DAVID KING.

NOTE. The principal reason which induced us to express a wish that this controversy should be kept in abeyance, at least for a time, arose from the circumstance, that the commu

nity of disciples of which we form a part, have no person at present sustaining the office of pastor, or waiting for ordination to that office, who desires to be supported by the churches. We know of none such. Another order of men, there is, in connection with our community, which demands the more liberal and efficient support of the brethren at this time than the payment of pastors - the raising up and sustaining of duly qualified men to proclaim the gospel. The extensive circulation of our periodicals and tracts, and the formation of

new churches on the true foundation of the

prophets and apostles, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone, are of paramount importance, and to the accomplishment of the brethren should be mainly devoted. Many which the prayers, teachings, and energies of churches have been raised up and supported without the payment of pastors, and their number is on the increase; nor can we perceive any reason why they should not continue to

augment, until the truth of God be spread on Lee be able to retain this verse as every hand. Regarding the state of the primimeaning pecuniary recompense. And tive churches established by the apostles of the when we remember that in some few Lord and their immediate successors, it must years, when the " original order" be obvious to every student of the New Testashall have become somewhat estab- ment, as well as to those familiar with ecclesilished, there will be very many teach-astical history, that great benevolence of feeling ers in each church beside the pastors, and almost unbounded liberality were manifest

ed by the early disciples. Much of that which the Apostle Peter denominates" filthy lucre," was thrown into the treasury of the Lord every first day of the week. We have this fairly implied, though not expressed, in the apostle's

words. Now this became the means of exci

ting the eye of cupidity, and of calling into activity the ambitious feelings of those who, though professedly moved by the Holy Spirit, desired to be put in the priestly office for a morsel of bread. Many who had been priests among the Jews and Gentiles were obedient to the faith, and possessing great influence with the people, desired to blend Judaism and Heathenism with Christianity, retaining for themselves “a good berth" under the reign of Messiah, the Great King and Lord of the Universe. But it ought to be understood, that every man in the kingdom of Jesus, whether in office or not, who thinks, writes, speaks, or publishes with such views—for bread, popularity, or filthy lucre-entertaining these motives as the propeling cause, directly or indirectly, he is unworthy of discipleship in connection with the philanthropic and benevolent Son of God. The love of truth for its own sake, can alone perfect the Christian, and stand the test of the judgement seat of Christ. As to there having been men in the first churches who received a regular stipend for preaching on the Lord's day-no such idea, as appears to us, is to be found in the Book, either in express terms, or by legitimate deduction. We are not prepared to affirm, however, that there were not those in large churches whose voluntary labors were not rewarded from the bounty of the congregation. The pastors, or bishops, to whom we now refer, would not be selected to preach and administer ordinances on the first day of the week: no, indeed, every scripturally-constituted church, with her plurality of bishops, exhorters, and

teachers, could attend to those duties to the

mutual benefit and edification of all. But, in

large churches, whose members dwell at a distance from each other, it becomes a question who is to visit the sick, console the dying, bury the dead, marry the living, and teach from house to house the great things of the gospel? A bishop of this character― (not a tobacco-smoking gossip, who does infinitely more harm than good in a congregation)

ing been thus employed during the week, the first day thereof should be to him a day of rest, and joy, and peace, while the members of the church should be engaged in edifying each other in love. Where a church is small, there will not, of course, be required the onerous services of such a pastor as we have referred to. The bishop is to feed the flock of God-they are the under shepherds of the Great Shepherd. We have often thought-how far correctly we pretend not to say--that one part of the duty of the bishop is to hand to the disciples of the Good Shepherd, the emblematical loaf and cup on the day of assembly. Would it not be much more in accordance with the nature of their office, than that of the deacon, whose appointment was simply to superintend the proper application of the funds of the church? These thoughts and opinions, however, are not yet matured for practice; and how far they may meet with the approval of Brothers King and Lee, and other of our readers, we pretend not to say. J. W.

FAMILY CULTURE. CONVERSATIONS AT THE CARLTON HOUSE.-No. XXV.

THE first chapter of Luke, from the 26th verse to the end, being read, Olympas thus began :—

In our last conversation definitions, rather than deductions, occupied our attention. Some questions of fact now come before us. Who was Gabriel, William ?

William. He is called " an angel of the Lord."

Olympas. How old was he at this time, Eliza ?

Eliza. I know not how old he was.

I only know that having been sent to Daniel once or twice, he must have been at least some five hundred years old at this time.

Olympas. How often is he introduced, or how often does his name occur, Thomas, in sacred history?

Thomas. Only four times-twice in Daniel and twice in Luke.

Reuben. He is called "the man Gabriel" in Daniel; and as men are

whose whole time is devoted to the work of the Lord, could not attend to business, and therefore must be supported by the brethren. Hav-sometimes called angels, why may he

« PreviousContinue »