We have spoken of two great resources that we have to guide us in these last days when the Christian testimony is in confusion – “God and the Word of His grace” – prayer and the Word of God. They are the two things the church has had for its guidance from its inception. But there is another great resource that we must not overlook – the Holy Spirit. Let us not forget that there is a divine Person dwelling in us Who is seeking to lead us in the path. The Lord said, “Howbeit when He, the Spirit of truth, is come, He will guide you into all truth” (Jn. 16:1313Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will show you things to come. (John 16:13)). The first inference in the New Testament to the Holy Spirit guiding believers to the place of God’s gathering center is Matthew 18:2020For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them. (Matthew 18:20). Since God has one fellowship to which all Christians are called (1 Cor. 1:99God is faithful, by whom ye were called unto the fellowship of his Son Jesus Christ our Lord. (1 Corinthians 1:9)), the Spirit of God would only lead to that one ground of gathering where Christ is the center.
If 2 Timothy 2:19-2219Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity. 20But in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and of silver, but also of wood and of earth; and some to honor, and some to dishonor. 21If a man therefore purge himself from these, he shall be a vessel unto honor, sanctified, and meet for the master's use, and prepared unto every good work. 22Flee also youthful lusts: but follow righteousness, faith, charity, peace, with them that call on the Lord out of a pure heart. (2 Timothy 2:19‑22) tells us of the process of exercise through which we must go to find and be identified with the remnant testimony today, Matthew 18:18-2018Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. 19Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven. 20For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them. (Matthew 18:18‑20), outlines the great principles of gathering upon which those connected with the remnant testimony are to meet. It is none other than the ground of gathering that the Lord originally intended for the whole church to meet on for worship and ministry. This means that it is still possible for us to practice all the truth of Scripture with regard to how Christians are to meet together (i.e. the truth of the “one body”), even though we are in a day of ruin and most Christians do not have that exercise.
Someone has aptly called these verses, “the Magna Carta of the church.” In the early days of the church, the Spirit of God gathered all Christians on this one ground of gathering, but that was before the scattering in Christendom had taken place. Today, we can expect that only a remnant of believers will be interested in meeting on these principles.
If this passage truly marks out the great principles of gathering for Christians meeting together for worship and ministry, we can expect that our adversary, the devil, will throw much dust in the air as to its interpretation in order to confuse as many as he can. We can be sure that what God is most set for, Satan is most set against. The devil is not happy to see Christians gathered together on God’s principles, and will attempt to scatter them at all costs. He is not happy that we should meet and walk together as one (Jn. 17:11, 2111And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are. (John 17:11)
21That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. (John 17:21)). This enemy has a particular hatred for the truth of gathering, because he knows that if it were practiced it would unite the Lord’s people. It’s the reason Matthew 18:2020For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them. (Matthew 18:20), and the subject of the Lord’s Table, have been so often under attack. The devil knows that the most effective way to accomplish his purposes of dividing and scattering God’s people is to attack the very keystone truth upon which God would have them gathered. His plan is simple; if he can take away from the saints the truth of the one divine gathering center, they will surely be scattered.
It was the case in Israel. As we have already seen, behind Jeroboam’s plan of building alternate centers in Bethel and Dan lay the obvious design of the devil to divide the children of Israel (1 Ki. 12). The enemy’s designs to divide the saints in Christianity have been no different. As mentioned, he is seeking to undermine the foundation truths having to do with being gathered together unto the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ (which is God’s center for Christians meeting for worship, ministry, and administrative actions) with the intent to scatter Christians. The many hundreds of denominations in Christendom and the various divisions among those who seek to practice the principles of gathering are a testament to how great his inroads have been.
The enemy’s work has been so effective that most Christians are not even aware of the great principles that are before us in this passage! For those who have been gathered unto His Name, there is always a danger of being led away from that ground by the wiles of the devil. And when this happens, they usually become the bitterest opponents to its truth. J. N. Darby said, “The great part of the collective conflict is with the willful misunderstanding of the truth of Christ as the one gathering center. No one is a more bitter opponent of this truth than the one who knows it, but doesn’t walk in it.” Since we are told to be on guard against such attacks from the enemy (Acts 20:29-3129For I know this, that after my departing shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not sparing the flock. 30Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them. 31Therefore watch, and remember, that by the space of three years I ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears. (Acts 20:29‑31), 2 Cor. 2:1111Lest Satan should get an advantage of us: for we are not ignorant of his devices. (2 Corinthians 2:11), 1 Pet. 5:88Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour: (1 Peter 5:8)), as we proceed with the great principles of gathering, in this passage, we will address some of the divergent ideas that have confused the minds of some and have led them astray. We will see that almost every phrase in these verses has been attacked, undermined, and twisted in some way.
The Assembly Vouchsafed With Authority, But Not Infallibility
If we look at the context of the passage we will see that the Lord was announcing that He was going to confer His authority upon “the assembly” to act for Himself during His absence. This was a new departure in the ways of God. Israel was going to be set aside on account of their failure, and Christ was about to “build” His assembly (Matt. 16:1818And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. (Matthew 16:18)). The assembly was going to be the new divine administrative center on earth that God would recognize. If difficulties were to arise among the saints, they were no longer to bring them to the judges at Jerusalem, as when He gave His authority to Israel to act for Himself in Judaism (Deut. 17:8-138If there arise a matter too hard for thee in judgment, between blood and blood, between plea and plea, and between stroke and stroke, being matters of controversy within thy gates: then shalt thou arise, and get thee up into the place which the Lord thy God shall choose; 9And thou shalt come unto the priests the Levites, and unto the judge that shall be in those days, and inquire; and they shall show thee the sentence of judgment: 10And thou shalt do according to the sentence, which they of that place which the Lord shall choose shall show thee; and thou shalt observe to do according to all that they inform thee: 11According to the sentence of the law which they shall teach thee, and according to the judgment which they shall tell thee, thou shalt do: thou shalt not decline from the sentence which they shall show thee, to the right hand, nor to the left. 12And the man that will do presumptuously, and will not hearken unto the priest that standeth to minister there before the Lord thy God, or unto the judge, even that man shall die: and thou shalt put away the evil from Israel. 13And all the people shall hear, and fear, and do no more presumptuously. (Deuteronomy 17:8‑13)); they were now to bring it to the assembly. He said, “Tell it to the assembly.” Then, He went on to say that the assembly would have authority to act in His Name administratively, if need be, saying, “Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” An example of the assembly binding would be in 1 Corinthians 5:11-1311But now I have written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is called a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner; with such an one no not to eat. 12For what have I to do to judge them also that are without? do not ye judge them that are within? 13But them that are without God judgeth. Therefore put away from among yourselves that wicked person. (1 Corinthians 5:11‑13). An example of the assembly loosing is in 2 Corinthians 2:6-116Sufficient to such a man is this punishment, which was inflicted of many. 7So that contrariwise ye ought rather to forgive him, and comfort him, lest perhaps such a one should be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow. 8Wherefore I beseech you that ye would confirm your love toward him. 9For to this end also did I write, that I might know the proof of you, whether ye be obedient in all things. 10To whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive also: for if I forgave any thing, to whom I forgave it, for your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ; 11Lest Satan should get an advantage of us: for we are not ignorant of his devices. (2 Corinthians 2:6‑11). Thus, the assembly has been vouchsafed with the Lord’s authority to act in His Name during the time of His absence, and its acts are to be submitted to as the final authority. This authority was not given to the apostles (though a special apostolic authority was given to them), but to the assembly. This is the first reference (Matt. 18:18-2018Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. 19Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven. 20For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them. (Matthew 18:18‑20)) to the local assembly in the Bible: Prior to this, the Lord spoke of building His assembly in its universal aspect (Matt. 16:1818And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. (Matthew 16:18)).
However, because the assembly has been given authority, it does not mean that it is infallible in its acts. J. N. Darby has written a helpful article on this subject entitled, “Confounding Authority With Infallibility.” He shows that it’s possible that the things the assembly may bind on earth may be in error, but it does not change the fact that the Lord’s authority is vested in the assembly. Many people have been confused on this point. They can’t understand how an action that is wrong could be “bound.” They conclude that if it is wrong, then it couldn’t be bound in heaven. However, it is a mistake to think that “bound in heaven” means that it is necessarily approved by heaven. It simply means that heaven recognizes it. Heaven may not be happy with a decision the assembly makes; yet it stands by it. The thing is still bound. It is because the assembly has been vested with the Lord’s authority to act for Him representatively. It is an extension of His authority.
We can well understand this principle within a household. In Darby’s article on “Confounding Authority with Infallibility” he makes mention of the fact that parents have a divinely given authority in their household, yet they are not infallible. Acquiescence is the duty of all in the household. A father might discipline a child in mistake, but it still stands, and the duty of all in the household is to acquiesce. This is the way order in the household is maintained. When it comes to light that he has made a mistake, under normal conditions, he will correct his mistake with humble apologies, and make the necessary amends. Also, in the case of a police magistrate: he has authority to arrest someone, but since he is not infallible, it is possible that he could make a mistake. But his action still stands, and the individual has no choice but to accept it, until it is shown to be wrong. If the civil authorities were not run that way, there would be no order in government at all, and we would be living in a state of anarchy. Heaven may not be pleased with a decision the assembly makes, yet it stands by it. In this way, order is maintained in the house of God.
It should solemnize us greatly when we think that we could use that authority mistakenly and identify heaven with something that is not right; and thus, incur His governmental judgment. This is the very reason the Lord has outwardly dissociated Himself from the mass of the Christian profession, and is presently dealing with a remnant. If that remnant should carry on in a low state and fail in its responsibility before the Lord, He will bring His hand of governmental judgment upon those identified with that testimony, and reduce its size and numbers by sifting and scattering some, to the end that they may be humbled. This has happened, as witnessed in the various divisions and scatterings that have taken place in history. If those connected with the remnant testimony continue to act in a way that is not pleasing to the Lord, He will close up the church’s history on earth altogether and take it home to glory. This is hinted at in following the downward course of the church’s testimony recorded in the seven churches of Revelation 2-3. When the obnoxious state of Laodicea is reached, the only escape is upward. A “door” in heaven is opened, and John is called up into heaven; this hints at the fact that believers will be called away at the Lord’s coming – the rapture. (Rev. 4:11After this I looked, and, behold, a door was opened in heaven: and the first voice which I heard was as it were of a trumpet talking with me; which said, Come up hither, and I will show thee things which must be hereafter. (Revelation 4:1)).
The Case of an Unrighteous Assembly Decision
If such a thing would happen that an assembly makes an unrighteous decision, there is recourse. Firstly, we can take the matter in prayer directly to the Lord, the Head of the church. He can exercise the consciences of those in that locality to the end that they will set the action right. Secondly, the Lord will raise up prophets among them locally, or send some from other assemblies, to arouse the conscience of that assembly so that it might be rectified (2 Cor. 2:44For out of much affliction and anguish of heart I wrote unto you with many tears; not that ye should be grieved, but that ye might know the love which I have more abundantly unto you. (2 Corinthians 2:4), Rev. 2:1313I know thy works, and where thou dwellest, even where Satan's seat is: and thou holdest fast my name, and hast not denied my faith, even in those days wherein Antipas was my faithful martyr, who was slain among you, where Satan dwelleth. (Revelation 2:13), 2 Chron. 24:19-2219Yet he sent prophets to them, to bring them again unto the Lord; and they testified against them: but they would not give ear. 20And the Spirit of God came upon Zechariah the son of Jehoiada the priest, which stood above the people, and said unto them, Thus saith God, Why transgress ye the commandments of the Lord, that ye cannot prosper? because ye have forsaken the Lord, he hath also forsaken you. 21And they conspired against him, and stoned him with stones at the commandment of the king in the court of the house of the Lord. 22Thus Joash the king remembered not the kindness which Jehoiada his father had done to him, but slew his son. And when he died, he said, The Lord look upon it, and require it. (2 Chronicles 24:19‑22), Jud. 9:5-21). Thirdly, if that local assembly refuses to deal with its wrongs after they have been shown to them conclusively, then that local assembly would be disowned by the binding action of another assembly who would act on behalf of the body at large. They would simply recognize the fact that the assembly in error is no longer on the true ground of the church of God. The whole (local) assembly in question is dealt with because it has defended the evil in its midst and has become a partner in it. If things reach this point, it is no longer a question of certain individuals in its midst being involved in the evil, but of the whole (local) assembly that has refused to judge it. This is the sad but orderly and Scriptural way of dealing with a mistaken assembly action, or inaction – should they fail to act to put away evil (Deut. 13, Jud. 21, 2 Sam. 20:14-2214And he went through all the tribes of Israel unto Abel, and to Beth-maachah, and all the Berites: and they were gathered together, and went also after him. 15And they came and besieged him in Abel of Beth-maachah, and they cast up a bank against the city, and it stood in the trench: and all the people that were with Joab battered the wall, to throw it down. 16Then cried a wise woman out of the city, Hear, hear; say, I pray you, unto Joab, Come near hither, that I may speak with thee. 17And when he was come near unto her, the woman said, Art thou Joab? And he answered, I am he. Then she said unto him, Hear the words of thine handmaid. And he answered, I do hear. 18Then she spake, saying, They were wont to speak in old time, saying, They shall surely ask counsel at Abel: and so they ended the matter. 19I am one of them that are peaceable and faithful in Israel: thou seekest to destroy a city and a mother in Israel: why wilt thou swallow up the inheritance of the Lord? 20And Joab answered and said, Far be it, far be it from me, that I should swallow up or destroy. 21The matter is not so: but a man of mount Ephraim, Sheba the son of Bichri by name, hath lifted up his hand against the king, even against David: deliver him only, and I will depart from the city. And the woman said unto Joab, Behold, his head shall be thrown to thee over the wall. 22Then the woman went unto all the people in her wisdom. And they cut off the head of Sheba the son of Bichri, and cast it out to Joab. And he blew a trumpet, and they retired from the city, every man to his tent. And Joab returned to Jerusalem unto the king. (2 Samuel 20:14‑22)).
However, the removing of a candlestick, locally, is something that the Lord does not do quickly. (In Revelation 2:55Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will remove thy candlestick out of his place, except thou repent. (Revelation 2:5), in J. N. Darby’s Translation, the word “quickly” is left out.) It is only after much remonstrance and space for repentance that the Lord will raise up another assembly on behalf of all the assemblies at large to disown that particular assembly in the wrong. Then, of course, the erroneous action that that local assembly has bound would no longer stand. In the interim, until an assembly comes in and acts for God’s glory in the matter (in disowning the unrighteous assembly in question), we are to bow and wait on God. We mention this to show that there is recourse against the abuse of authority in administrative affairs.
Let us note that Scripture never instructs us to take matters into our own hands as individuals and to act independently in what seems to be a wrong assembly action. The independent action of individuals in such collective matters is always decried in Scripture (Deut. 17:1212And the man that will do presumptuously, and will not hearken unto the priest that standeth to minister there before the Lord thy God, or unto the judge, even that man shall die: and thou shalt put away the evil from Israel. (Deuteronomy 17:12), Num. 15:30-3130But the soul that doeth ought presumptuously, whether he be born in the land, or a stranger, the same reproacheth the Lord; and that soul shall be cut off from among his people. 31Because he hath despised the word of the Lord, and hath broken his commandment, that soul shall utterly be cut off; his iniquity shall be upon him. (Numbers 15:30‑31)). It only opens the door to the enemy. God has His way in which such problems are to be dealt with, and we must follow it if order is to be maintained. Unfortunately, this is where many Christians get into error. They think that they can’t submit to something they believe is unrighteous and not according to Scripture. They think that they will be compromising a good conscience. Some will say, “I have to obey the Lord first, not the brethren.” But whether they realize it or not, they are really saying that they are more holy than the Lord Himself. If He can stand by the decision until it is rectified, why can’t we? An assembly that makes an error in its administrative responsibilities still has the Lord in its midst until it is disowned as being no longer on the true ground of the church of God. J. N. Darby said, “Why speak of obeying the Lord first, then the church? But supposing that the Lord is in the church? It is merely setting up private judgment against the judgment of the assembly meeting in Christ’s Name with His promise (if they are not, I have nothing to say to them); it is simply saying, ‘I count myself wiser than those who are.’ I reject entirely as unscriptural the saying, ‘First Christ, then the Church.’” He also said, “The question therefore is a mere and poor sophistry which betrays the desire to have the will free, and a confidence that the person’s judgment is superior to all that has been already judged.”
Satan often likes to work under the guise of righteousness in such situations. He and his ministers will transform themselves into “ministers of righteousness” in order to deceive the unprincipled or “unsuspecting” soul into acting independently (2 Cor. 11:14-1514And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light. 15Therefore it is no great thing if his ministers also be transformed as the ministers of righteousness; whose end shall be according to their works. (2 Corinthians 11:14‑15), Rom. 16:1818For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple. (Romans 16:18)). He will make a thing look like we must stand for righteousness sake by taking the matter into our own hands; but we will not have the blessing of God if we do. Independent action is not the answer; it is not keeping “the unity of the Spirit.” As we have said, if we think that an assembly has made a mistake, we can take it to the Head of the church. He hears, understands, and cares about it far more than we do. And if we have faith that He will rectify it as He sees fit, we can leave all with Him to deal with it. But if we don’t have that confidence in Him, and can’t trust Him to look after it, we’ll find ourselves trying to get it done in our own strength—which is no more than the energy of the flesh.
“Whatsoever”
W. Potter has a short paper on assembly actions in which he says that the “whatsoever” of Matthew 18:1919Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven. (Matthew 18:19), is an “unconditional” whatsoever. An assembly may bind something wrongly, and our place is to submit until it is rectified in an orderly way. Regardless of what Potter says, making the “whatsoever” unconditional, to some, is akin to Popery. They believe that that would be making the assembly infallible in its administrative actions, which is not true. Such persons argue that if “whatsoever” is unconditional, then the assembly could bind anything that it wanted to, and that it would be automatically bound in heaven. In their minds, it would be making heaven subject to the actions of the church on earth; and should the assembly make a mistake, then heaven would be putting itself in fellowship with the evil, which is something God would never do. On the surface, this argument seems quite logical, but behind it is the enemy’s attempt to bring confusion into the assembly and an overthrowing of its actions. All anyone has to do is declare that an action of the assembly was an unrighteous action, and conclude that heaven has not bound it. And if heaven has not accepted it, then they should reject it too. Therefore, they do not have to bow to it. It is a convenient way of setting aside assembly actions that we don’t like. If the assembly’s administrative acts were to be only submitted to under the condition that they are righteous acts, then all order would soon be lost.
The great problem with this erroneous idea is that assembly judgments become subject to our private judgment. The assembly is no longer the highest court of authority in these matters; our personal judgment is. In this, all order is gone. Everyone is left to do “that which was right in his own eyes” (Jud. 21:25). Where many have been sadly misled is in the idea that unless an assembly action bears the hallmark of God’s Word, it binds no one on earth and is not ratified in heaven. In other words, the decision is only a bonafide binding action of the assembly when it is a right decision. Now, if we were to only bow to an assembly decision when we thought it was right, the sad outcome each time the assembly acted would be that some would end up submitting to the decision, and others would not, simply because their private judgments differ. In these days when the state of the church is generally low, we are bound to have some who will think that they are wiser than their brethren, and whose private judgment will differ from the assembly. The enemy would soon make use of it in dividing the saints; and thus, disrupt the unity. It’s surely not God’s way of maintaining order in His house. No, we are enjoined to submit, even if we thought the action to be wrong, and wait on the Lord to correct it. Thus, order is maintained. J. N. Darby said, “A judgment of an assembly, even if I thought it a mistake, I should in the first instance accept and act upon.”
In an effort to negate the force of the “whatsoever” in Matthew 18:1818Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. (Matthew 18:18), and to try to prove that it could not be unconditional, some have mistakenly assumed that verse 19 is a prayer meeting; and thus, they reason that if the “anything” in the assembly’s prayers is subject to heaven’s qualifying (for God only answers our prayers when they are according to His will), then their “whatsoever” in binding decisions must also be subject to heaven’s qualifying. But they are mistaken in thinking that verses 19-20 refer to the prayer meeting, strictly speaking. The context indicates that it is a meeting for discipline, though the principle laid down in these verses is broad enough to include all assembly meetings in a secondary application. (This is why Matthew 18:2020For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them. (Matthew 18:20) is sometimes read in the breaking of bread.) Paul speaks of this same meeting for discipline in 1 Corinthians 5:4-54In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, 5To deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus. (1 Corinthians 5:4‑5). If it was speaking of the prayer meeting, then the Lord changed His subject right in the middle of His dissertation on the assembly’s administrative actions; and then switched back again in verse 20, and in the following verses, having to do with having a forgiving spirit toward a repentant brother who has sinned (Vs. 21-35). It would not be orderly. The point of verse 19 is that the assembly comes together with the Lord in the midst (Vs. 20) to invoke God to ratify their binding decision. The promise is sure, “It shall be done for them of My Father which is in heaven.”
For those who might question whether “whatsoever” is referring to anything that the assembly might pass judgment on, we would point them to 2 Corinthians 2:1010To whom ye forgive any thing, I forgive also: for if I forgave any thing, to whom I forgave it, for your sakes forgave I it in the person of Christ; (2 Corinthians 2:10). We find there that when it comes to loosing a binding action, Paul says, “To whom ye forgive anything ... ” If they are seen forgiving “anything” they must necessarily have bound anything. This should not be difficult to understand if someone has a willing mind. But that’s the great question. Do we really want the Lord’s mind? The truth is for those that want it (Jn. 7:1717If any man will do his will, he shall know of the doctrine, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself. (John 7:17)). People sometimes make such a big fuss about the assembly perhaps making a wrong decision, that you wonder what they are driving at. But really, how often has that happened? Rarely. Mr. Potter also said in that same article, that in 50 years he had not known of an action that was made among the brethren that couldn’t be submitted to.
C. D. Maynard said, “An assembly, when gathered to the Name of Christ, has Him in its midst, and has His authority for acting in binding or loosing the sins of an offending brother. (Matt. 18:18-2018Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. 19Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven. 20For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them. (Matthew 18:18‑20)) Such an act is ratified in heaven. From this decision there is no appeal, save to Christ in glory; as Jesus 'committed [His cause] to Him that judgeth righteously.' (1 Pet. 2:2323Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously: (1 Peter 2:23)) ...It might occur to some that if a local assembly judged, as they thought, wrongly, an appeal might be made to another local assembly. For example, to restore a person wrongly put out. This has no more Scriptural authority for it than any Romish corruption. On the face of it, it denies the practical oneness of the two meetings. To entertain the question refuses that there is one body and one Spirit. If the Lord's Table be one, both meetings are bound when one acts, so that appeal is impossible. If they can revise one another's judgments, the unity of the Spirit does not exist there, they are but independent meetings.” The misunderstanding of this important principle in assembly matters is behind all the sad divisions that have occurred among those gathered to the Lord’s Name down through the years. We do well, therefore, to ponder these things carefully.
Another erroneous idea that some have is that if the assembly makes a wrong decision (and it may be only so in their eyes), then it can no longer be regarded as an assembly owned by God; and, therefore, they should leave it. This may be an excuse for them to act in self-will, and perhaps go elsewhere. However, it is a mistake to think that an assembly loses its standing as an assembly, Scripturally gathered to the Lord’s Name, if it should make a binding action in error. This idea betrays an ignorance of confounding authority with infallibility. The fact that an assembly has authority but not infallibility is to assume the possibility that it could make a mistake. In making a mistake, the assembly does not lose its status as being a Scripturally gathered assembly, any more than parents in a household cease to be parents because they make a mistake in disciplining their child. Corinth was still recognized by the apostle as the church at Corinth, and was addressed as such by the apostle, even though there were serious evils there. If such an assembly refused to correct the evils in its midst, after much patient remonstrance, it could potentially be cut off or disowned by the binding action of another assembly on behalf of all assemblies at large on the true ground of the church.
An example of this misunderstanding would be in what happened at Tunbridge Wells in 1908-9. Some who know of this incident believe that the actions the assembly took, first in silencing (1903), and then later by putting away C. Strange (1908), were unrighteous. Believing that Tunbridge’s dealings with C. Strange were unjust and unscriptural, they thought that Tunbridge Wells thereby lost its status as an assembly truly gathered to the Lord’s Name. This being the case, some felt its actions could not be recognized as bonafide actions bound in heaven. Consequently, they would not bow to the decision.
Now, it is clear from the facts of the case that the Tunbridge assembly did act in somewhat of a confusing way. Also, subsequent interaction between various ones at Tunbridge Wells manifested somewhat of a harsh spirit that certainly could not be condoned. But the great question is, “Was it an assembly decision?” Both sides agree that it was; only that the Lowe party in London believed it to be an unrighteous assembly decision, and therefore, would not bow to it. However, just because some of the London brethren (the Lowe party) thought that the action was unrighteous and unscriptural, didn’t change or nullify the action. The other question is, “Did the assembly at Tunbridge Wells have authority to act in the Lord’s Name or not?” If not, when did it lose its authority to act? We have seen in the preceding pages that an assembly doesn’t lose its standing as being Scripturally gathered to the Lord’s Name because we (individuals) think it has made an unrighteous action! Let us remember, the action was made in the Name of the Lord by an assembly gathered to His Name, and thus, vested with authority to act in administrative matters. The assembly at Tunbridge definitely had authority to act in the Lord’s Name. Therefore, their action was bound in heaven and all should have bowed to it. This would have prevented the division.
Since the action at Tunbridge Wells did not seem, to the Lowe party (and those on the continent), to bear the stamp of grace, they didn’t consider it to be a bonafide assembly decision. The great mistake here is thinking that one only submits to a decision of an assembly when it is a correct one, and has been carried out in a gracious way. The idea of submitting, even if we think the decision is wrong, was not even considered. This was surely a departure from the Scriptural truth that earlier brethren taught. It is making assembly decisions contingent upon the moral condition of the assembly – that the assembly must be in a good state before its decisions can be binding, and therefore, submitted to. Again, this is confounding authority with infallibility. A good moral state, of course, is desirable, but that is not what gives the assembly its authority. As we have already stated, it is the Lord being in its midst that gives an assembly its authority to act. If the Lowe party thought that the assembly at Tunbridge was in error, they should have bowed to the decision “prima facie,” at least for the time being; then sought to raise the conscience of that assembly as to its wrong. This would have preserved order and unity.
While some did address the brethren at Tunbridge as to this, it was not in the spirit of inquiry, but to condemn. Among many in London there was no acquiescence in the fact that the local brethren usually know the person’s ways best, and their judgment should be submitted to. Regardless of this, N. Noel, in his “History of the Brethren,” notes that the brethren in London. and around the country, judged that the decision was unscriptural, and therefore, unrighteous. So they disregarded it! They allowed C. Strange to continue breaking bread among them! This was an act of utter contempt toward the action taken in the Tunbridge assembly where the Lord was in the midst. The Lowe party manifested a spirit that assumed that they were above the authority of the Lord as vested in the assembly in Tunbridge – a very serious thing indeed. It was an affront to the Lord. It was only after the London meetings (that followed Mr. Lowe) had broken “the unity of the Spirit” by receiving C. Strange, who had been put out in Tunbridge, that the assembly in Tunbridge issued its statement (1909) to no longer continue in fellowship with those who would not recognize the action they had taken in the Name of the Lord. This was also an action of an assembly gathered to the Lord’s Name and should have been bowed to by all other assemblies.
In conclusion, we would say that what was at the bottom of the whole issue to do with the Tunbridge Wells decision was the gross misunderstanding that an assembly action should be bowed to only when it is correct. Again, it is a simple matter of confounding authority with infallibility. A large part of the brethren from Europe got off track by attempting to discern the right path by assessing the moral state of both sides. They thought that the Lowe party was more humble, and therefore in the right. Hence, they made moral state the criteria upon which to judge the action, rather than the Lord’s authority in the midst of those He had gathered. Those that went with the Lowe party acted on this false assumption, and it took them into division.
Scripture teaches that the moral state may be low in those on divine ground, and they may act churlish in matters, but it doesn’t change the ground of gathering that they are on and the authority of the Lord in their midst. This is seen in the case with Rehoboam (1 Ki. 12). He acted in a very poor way towards those of the ten tribes, against the advice of the elders; and his actions precipitated division in the kingdom. While we do not justify his actions, it didn’t change the fact that He and all Judah were still at the divine center for Israel (Jerusalem) where God’s authority was vested. If moral state were the criteria for deciding where the Lord was in that matter, we would have to say that He was with Jeroboam and the ten tribes, and would set up His divine center in a place among them. We have already noted that the Lord would not do that: He was not with the northern tribes of Israel thereafter (2 Chron. 25:77But there came a man of God to him, saying, O king, let not the army of Israel go with thee; for the Lord is not with Israel, to wit, with all the children of Ephraim. (2 Chronicles 25:7)).
What happened at Tunbridge Wells brought to light that a departure from the truth of assembly principles had been growing among brethren for a number of years. It took this incident to manifest it. Mr. Sibthorpe spoke of it as a “system.” After the action had been taken by Tunbridge Wells to excommunicate C. Strange (1908), and then their subsequent action to no longer continue in fellowship with those assemblies that challenged the authority of the Lord by receiving C. Strange (1909), many were under the idea that they needed to decide for themselves in the matter. This too is a false principle. It was not necessary for assemblies all over England and the continent of Europe to decide, for the decision was already made in Tunbridge Wells on behalf of the assemblies at large. What was needed was submission to the action taken in the Name of the Lord. It honors God and also shows that we recognize the Lord’s authority as vested in the (local) assembly. This would have prevented division.
In fact, every division has happened when an assembly has taken an action against someone, in excommunicating them, and a party of sympathizers would not bow to the action, claiming it was not a bonafide assembly decision. Behind each case, this one thing has been evident – the failure to recognize an assembly action as having the authority of the Lord.
As the case is, behind all of the divisions that have occurred among brethren, the Lord was sifting out those who had departed from Scriptural principles having to do with the assembly.
Ulterior Motives With Some
We would like to think that those who refuse to bow to an assembly action are honestly deceived as to these assembly principles, but sometimes, it’s because people have ulterior motives. Let us remember that our natural hearts are “deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked” (Jer. 17:99The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it? (Jeremiah 17:9)). And, “He that trusteth in his own heart is a fool” (Prov. 28:2626He that trusteth in his own heart is a fool: but whoso walketh wisely, he shall be delivered. (Proverbs 28:26)). There may be hidden motives in our hearts that we have not detected. This seems to have been the case with Absalom. When his brother Amnon had committed incest in the kingdom, the Levitical law stated that he should be executed (Lev. 18:9, 299The nakedness of thy sister, the daughter of thy father, or daughter of thy mother, whether she be born at home, or born abroad, even their nakedness thou shalt not uncover. (Leviticus 18:9)
29For whosoever shall commit any of these abominations, even the souls that commit them shall be cut off from among their people. (Leviticus 18:29)). When King David did nothing about it, Absalom decided to take matters into his own hands and led out a company of men to kill Amnon. To the simple and “unsuspecting” ones (Rom. 16:1818For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple. (Romans 16:18), 2 Sam. 15:1111And with Absalom went two hundred men out of Jerusalem, that were called; and they went in their simplicity, and they knew not any thing. (2 Samuel 15:11)) this act of hatred was probably viewed as an act of justice, righteousness, and godliness. In their eyes Absalom probably appeared to be a faithful man acting for God’s glory, not sparing even his own half-brother. But Absalom had no care for the Lord’s glory or hatred for that sin, and proved it by turning around and committing incest with his father’s concubines – ten times more than Amnon (2 Sam. 15:16, 16:22). A deeper reason as to why Absalom had Amnon killed, aside from his obvious hatred for what Amnon did to his sister Tamar, was his thirst for power. He wanted to reign on the throne in Israel, and His brother Amnon, who was older and first in line to the throne, had to be removed. Amnon’s sin simply became his opportunity to take him out of the picture. Similarly, in assembly matters, some might have ulterior motives for the side they take in a case.
Sometimes, a person might act against his better judgment in a case. As you look at the situation on the surface you might wonder why he would ever take such a position on that issue. It might come out later that there was an unforgiving spirit toward the person in question that he had hidden, maybe for years, and had never really judged. And when that person whom he has had feelings against is charged with something, his root of bitterness springs up and he takes sides against that person. An example of this is seen in Ahithophel (2 Sam. 15:1212And Absalom sent for Ahithophel the Gilonite, David's counsellor, from his city, even from Giloh, while he offered sacrifices. And the conspiracy was strong; for the people increased continually with Absalom. (2 Samuel 15:12)). He was Bathsheba’s grandfather; and though he suppressed it, he felt that David never got his due punishment for his adultery with her and his murder of her husband (2 Sam. 11). When an uprising from within the kingdom challenged David’s throne, this ugly spirit in Ahithophel arose and he took sides against David. In reading the history of this revolt, you might wonder why he would ever take such a position, but it turns out that he had never judged his unforgiving spirit toward David.
The Administrative “Care” Meeting
When problems arise, and an administrative judgment/action needs to be taken in a case that comes before the assembly, the responsible brothers should meet apart from the assembly to get an understanding of the facts of the case and seek light from the Scriptures as to what the assembly should do. Simply put; the purpose of the “care” meeting is to look after the cares of the assembly.
There are three main occasions in the book of Acts where the brothers came together apart from the whole assembly to consider matters (Acts 15:66And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter. (Acts 15:6), 20:18, 21:18). They were apostolic councils. Though they were not exactly local administrative “care” meetings, as we know them—for these were gatherings of brothers from a number of different localities—but they do lay down a principle for us by indicating that matters can be looked into by brothers apart from the assembly. It says, “The apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter” (Acts 15:66And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter. (Acts 15:6)). Note: the sisters, younger brethren, and new converts are not mentioned as being there. Things are not to be hashed out before the assembly, because there may be some disputing (Acts 15:77And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe. (Acts 15:7)), which would not be orderly for a public forum; and also, things that might be addressed could be defiling, which would not be appropriate in such a setting (1 Cor. 14:4040Let all things be done decently and in order. (1 Corinthians 14:40)).
When the brothers feel they have discerned the mind of the Lord from the Scriptures as to what the assembly should do, they bring the facts (not necessarily the details, because they could be defiling) and the Scriptural conclusions before the assembly so that the conscience of all can be engaged in the matter (Acts 15:2222Then pleased it the apostles and elders, with the whole church, to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas; namely, Judas surnamed Barsabas, and Silas, chief men among the brethren: (Acts 15:22)). Then it becomes a ratified binding decision (Matt. 18:18-2018Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven. 19Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven. 20For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them. (Matthew 18:18‑20)).
An idea that some have, is that the brothers are to simply formulate a proposal to the assembly; and when they bring it to the assembly, the assembly as a whole then decides. While there is truth to this, the brothers who take the lead are responsible to see to it that the assembly is guided in a Scriptural course of action, regardless of whether all agree or not. If it were not so, then the older responsible brothers (who understand the principles and know what should be done) could have their godly Scriptural judgment forestalled by the sisters and novices, or partisans, if they don’t agree. It would mean that a Scriptural judgment would become subject to those that have little experience, or intelligence, or perhaps have a bias in assembly matters. Surely this could not be right. Some seem to have the idea that the brethren cannot act until they get the OK from these persons. This equates to the people controlling their leaders, which is the principle of democracy. Many have stumbled over this very thing when the elders have sought to carry out a Scriptural judgment, but some have disagreed with the action.
This does not mean that the elders make the administrative decisions in the assembly, and that the rest have no input. Nothing can be officially decided apart from the assembly having opportunity to have its conscience engaged in the matter (Acts 15:2222Then pleased it the apostles and elders, with the whole church, to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch with Paul and Barnabas; namely, Judas surnamed Barsabas, and Silas, chief men among the brethren: (Acts 15:22)); and this is why the elders are to seek the conscience of all in the assembly by bringing it before them. The leading brethren should be sensitive to any legitimate objection that ones in the assembly may have, be it a sister or a brother. But in the end, they are ultimately responsible as “the angel” of the church to act for the glory of God (Rev. 2:11Unto the angel of the church of Ephesus write; These things saith he that holdeth the seven stars in his right hand, who walketh in the midst of the seven golden candlesticks; (Revelation 2:1), etc.). It is not a binding decision of the assembly until it is done in the assembly, in what is sometimes called a meeting for discipline (Matt. 18:19-2019Again I say unto you, That if two of you shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven. 20For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them. (Matthew 18:19‑20), 1 Cor. 5:44In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, (1 Corinthians 5:4)).
Unanimity is Not Necessary in Assembly Decisions
While the local assembly should attempt to get, or reach, the consciences of all in that assembly when making a binding decision, Scripture does not demand that there be a satisfying of all in the assembly before it can be called a bonafide decision. We cannot expect in these last days, when the will of man is evident in asserting itself in the church more than ever, to get unanimity in assembly judgments. This was the case in the judgment at Corinth. 2 Corinthians 2:55But if any have caused grief, he hath not grieved me, but in part: that I may not overcharge you all. (2 Corinthians 2:5) says, "If any have caused grief, he hath not grieved me, but in part...all of you." (Quoted without the parenthesis, as in J. N. Darby Trans.) Apparently, there were some among the Corinthians who were not grieved about the sin in their midst. Though this was the case, the assembly still carried out the action for the glory of God. The apostle Paul used the words, "in part," in a similar way when he referred to a faction among the Corinthians. He said, "ye have acknowledged us in part, that we are your rejoicing, even as ye also are ours in the day of the Lord Jesus." (2 Cor. 1:1414As also ye have acknowledged us in part, that we are your rejoicing, even as ye also are ours in the day of the Lord Jesus. (2 Corinthians 1:14)) This was because not all at Corinth would acknowledge him as an apostle sent from God.
Judges 20-21 illustrates this point. When evil had to be judged in Israel, it says, "all the children of Israel went out, and the congregation was gathered together as one man." Yet the men from Jabesh-gilead did not come up to join in with their brethren in dealing with it (Jud. 21:9). Apparently they were not exercised about the matter, but that did not hinder the Spirit of God from stating that "all" Israel dealt with the evil (Jud. 20:1, 26). This illustrates, by way of type, that unanimity is not necessary in binding assembly decisions. After all, in a heretical situation you would rarely get the approval of the one whom the assembly judgment is against, and perhaps his family and supporters wouldn’t approve, so there is usually not going to be unanimity.
The Assembly is Not a Democracy
Democracy is a form of government wherein the people rule by majority vote. The assembly, however, is not a democratic institution that reaches its decisions by a show of hands, with every person having an equal say in matters. We once heard an ignorant and worldly younger brother say, “I’ve got just as much a say around here as he does (referring to a grave and godly older brother who had addicted himself to the care of the assembly for 50 years)!” In fact, there could be a case where 6 or 7 younger brethren want to do a particular thing, but 4 or 5 grave older brethren feel otherwise. Since the older brethren’s judgment is to be respected, having the moral weight in the assembly, the younger brethren are to acquiesce in their judgment of the matter. They should be glad to follow the spiritual lead of their older brethren.
Now, we are not saying that a couple of older brothers can force an assembly into a decision with which it does not agree; which would be acting in the spirit of Diotrephes (3 Jn. 9-109I wrote unto the church: but Diotrephes, who loveth to have the preeminence among them, receiveth us not. 10Wherefore, if I come, I will remember his deeds which he doeth, prating against us with malicious words: and not content therewith, neither doth he himself receive the brethren, and forbiddeth them that would, and casteth them out of the church. (3 John 9‑10)). Things to do with binding and loosing are not to be done apart from the assembly. And it is possible that younger brethren may have the mind of the Lord in a matter where the older brethren have perhaps missed it (Job 33). In such a case, the older brethren should be glad to accept light on a matter that they may have overlooked. But in normal assembly life, it is the older godly and experienced brethren who have the moral weight in assembly matters. This is God’s order.
Some seem to think that "getting the consciences of all" means, “to get the consensus of all” – a kind of getting the opinion of all. However, that is not the way in which the assembly is to arrive at a course of action in its administrative affairs. The elders do not bring the matter to the assembly to get their opinion, but to give them the facts of the case and to present the Scriptural course of action that must be taken, so that the consciences of all can be engaged. It is not the opinions of sincere people that are to guide the assembly; it is the Word of God. We are warned by king David who looked to the opinions of the people, and not to the Lord, when deciding the course of action that he should take to bring the ark of God to Jerusalem. He was sadly misguided (1 Chron. 13:1-41And David consulted with the captains of thousands and hundreds, and with every leader. 2And David said unto all the congregation of Israel, If it seem good unto you, and that it be of the Lord our God, let us send abroad unto our brethren every where, that are left in all the land of Israel, and with them also to the priests and Levites which are in their cities and suburbs, that they may gather themselves unto us: 3And let us bring again the ark of our God to us: for we inquired not at it in the days of Saul. 4And all the congregation said that they would do so: for the thing was right in the eyes of all the people. (1 Chronicles 13:1‑4)). Going by mere human sentiment and feelings is not what is needed when deciding the course of action that the assembly should take in a matter.
It has been asked, “Who decides for the assembly?” Our answer is, the Lord. He is the Head of the church, and it is to take its direction from Him (Col. 2:1818Let no man beguile you of your reward in a voluntary humility and worshipping of angels, intruding into those things which he hath not seen, vainly puffed up by his fleshly mind, (Colossians 2:18)). It is to look to Him for guidance, and He will do so through the principles of the Word of God. In assembly decisions we should seek to get, or reach, the conscience of all in the local assembly so that all might be exercised in the matter; but the assembly, oftentimes, cannot follow the conscience of some. This is because they may be young in the faith and their consciences may not be sufficiently enlightened in Scriptural principles to be able to form an accurate judgment; or they might be worldly and don’t have the spiritual discernment; or they might be biased in the matter. In any case their judgment must be disregarded.
Occasionally, actions have been taken by the assembly when a few brothers were not at the local care meeting, or at the assembly meeting where the action was taken, and this has led some to think that it could not be a bonafide assembly decision ratified in heaven. They cry, “But all the brothers weren’t there to decide!” Again, this is a democratic idea. The assembly acting in its administrative capacity, without all present, is not uncommon in Scripture. We see the principle of it in 1 Corinthians 15:5, in connection with the office of apostleship. It says, "He was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve." When we compare this with Luke 24:34-4834Saying, The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to Simon. 35And they told what things were done in the way, and how he was known of them in breaking of bread. 36And as they thus spake, Jesus himself stood in the midst of them, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you. 37But they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit. 38And he said unto them, Why are ye troubled? and why do thoughts arise in your hearts? 39Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself: handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me have. 40And when he had thus spoken, he showed them his hands and his feet. 41And while they yet believed not for joy, and wondered, he said unto them, Have ye here any meat? 42And they gave him a piece of a broiled fish, and of an honeycomb. 43And he took it, and did eat before them. 44And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me. 45Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures, 46And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: 47And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. 48And ye are witnesses of these things. (Luke 24:34‑48) and John 20:19-2419Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you. 20And when he had so said, he showed unto them his hands and his side. Then were the disciples glad, when they saw the Lord. 21Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you. 22And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost: 23Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained. 24But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came. (John 20:19‑24), we find that there were only ten of the apostles present when the Lord appeared to them, yet they are called "the twelve!" Judas had hung himself and Thomas was not there. According to Acts 1, Matthias had not yet been chosen. His election didn't happen until after the Lord had completed all His resurrection appearances (in 40 days) and had ascended into heaven. It is clear, therefore, that Matthias was not yet part of “the twelve.” Yet those assembled are still called “the twelve.” Why would Scripture use the term in this way? It is because it is not necessarily designating a specific number of persons gathered together (for Christianity is never occupied with literal numbers – see Acts 1:15, 2:41, 4:4, 19:7 – “about”); but rather, it is speaking of the administrative office that they held and the authority they had to act as such. In the Corinthian epistles, where assembly function and order is unfolded, it is consistent that this would come in there. (It is also noteworthy that the Lord's appearances to the women are not given in First Corinthians 15, because assembly administration is committed to the responsible brothers.) The assembly, acting in its administrative capacity, does not need all present before its actions are bound.
Moral Weight Lies With The Leaders in the Assembly
The Lord's normal means of guiding the local assembly is through those whom He has raised up to "take the lead" (1 Thess. 5:12-1312And we beseech you, brethren, to know them which labor among you, and are over you in the Lord, and admonish you; 13And to esteem them very highly in love for their work's sake. And be at peace among yourselves. (1 Thessalonians 5:12‑13), Heb. 13:7, 17, 247Remember them which have the rule over you, who have spoken unto you the word of God: whose faith follow, considering the end of their conversation. (Hebrews 13:7)
17Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you. (Hebrews 13:17)
24Salute all them that have the rule over you, and all the saints. They of Italy salute you. (Hebrews 13:24), 1 Cor. 16:15-1815I beseech you, brethren, (ye know the house of Stephanas, that it is the firstfruits of Achaia, and that they have addicted themselves to the ministry of the saints,) 16That ye submit yourselves unto such, and to every one that helpeth with us, and laboreth. 17I am glad of the coming of Stephanas and Fortunatus and Achaicus: for that which was lacking on your part they have supplied. 18For they have refreshed my spirit and yours: therefore acknowledge ye them that are such. (1 Corinthians 16:15‑18), 1 Tim. 5:1717Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honor, especially they who labor in the word and doctrine. (1 Timothy 5:17) JND Trans.). These men should know the principles of the Word of God and be able to lay them out, so that the assembly might understand the course of action God would have them to take in a particular matter (Tit. 1:99Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers. (Titus 1:9)). These men do not appoint themselves to the role of leadership, nor does Scripture teach that the assembly should appoint its elders, as is the case in most denominations in Christendom. The Spirit of God raises them up as He sees fit (Acts 20:2828Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood. (Acts 20:28)). "Taking the lead among you," does not necessarily refer to leading in public teaching or preaching, but to the administrative affairs of the assembly. To confuse these two distinct things is to misunderstand the difference between gift and office. Some of those that "take the lead" may not teach publicly at all, but it is very good and helpful when they can (1 Tim. 5:1717Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honor, especially they who labor in the word and doctrine. (1 Timothy 5:17)). They are those who have addicted themselves to the care of the saints—whose knowledge of principles, experience and judgment having proved to be sound—that carry the bulk of the weight in the assembly in its administrative affairs.
There are three words used in the epistles to describe the responsible leaders in the local assembly. Firstly, "elders" (Presbuteroi) refers to those advanced in age: it implies maturity and experience. However, not all aged men in the assembly necessarily function in the role of leaders (1 Tim. 5:11Rebuke not an elder, but entreat him as a father; and the younger men as brethren; (1 Timothy 5:1), Tit. 2:1-21But speak thou the things which become sound doctrine: 2That the aged men be sober, grave, temperate, sound in faith, in charity, in patience. (Titus 2:1‑2)). Secondly, "bishops" or "overseers" (Episkopoi), refers to the work that they do; shepherding the flock (Acts 20:2828Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood. (Acts 20:28)), watching over souls (Heb. 13:1717Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you. (Hebrews 13:17)), giving admonition (1 Thess. 5:1212And we beseech you, brethren, to know them which labor among you, and are over you in the Lord, and admonish you; (1 Thessalonians 5:12)) etc. Thirdly, they are called "guides," or "leaders" (Hegoumenos), referring to their spiritual capacity of leading the saints.
In the book of Revelation, those in this role of responsibility are referred to as "stars," and also as "the angel of the [local] church" (Rev. 1-3). As "stars" they are to bear witness to the truth of God (the principles of His Word); as light bearers in the local assembly, they provide light on various subjects that it may be confronted with. This is illustrated in Acts 15. While it is not exactly to do with binding and loosing, we learn valuable principles of administrative function in the church. After hearing the problem that was troubling the assembly, Peter and James as "stars" gave light on the matter. James applied a principle from the Word of God and gave his judgment as to what he believed the Lord would have them do (Acts 15:15-2115And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written, 16After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up: 17That the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all the Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things. 18Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world. 19Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God: 20But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood. 21For Moses of old time hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day. (Acts 15:15‑21)). As "the angel of the church," those in this role are to act as messengers to carry out the mind of God in the assembly in the performance of the thing. This is also illustrated in Acts 15:23-2923And they wrote letters by them after this manner; The apostles and elders and brethren send greeting unto the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia: 24Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no such commandment: 25It seemed good unto us, being assembled with one accord, to send chosen men unto you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, 26Men that have hazarded their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. 27We have sent therefore Judas and Silas, who shall also tell you the same things by mouth. 28For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things; 29That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well. (Acts 15:23‑29).
The Voice of Dissenters
There may be, however, those in the assembly that do not agree with the course of action that the assembly believes it should take. If it were experienced grave men who carry moral weight, the assembly should wait, but if it were friends and supporters of the individual or individuals in question, they are not to be regarded. In fact, those people should be rebuked. They shouldn’t hinder the assembly from carrying out its responsibility before the Lord. William Kelly said, "In peculiar cases there might be relatives or friends, perhaps even partisans or accomplices more or less, whose opinions ought not to be given, and if given, ought to be rebuked rather than heeded."
An example of this happened in the Nepean assembly judgment (1991). The leaders, and many in the Nepean assembly, saw a course of action they believed the assembly must take and a party of supporters and sympathizers of the brother in question objected. This element of supporters did all they could to forestall the action; in care meetings, in the sending of a letter to Perth for help (where they knew they could get sympathy), and even in the actual assembly meeting when the action was made. The Nepean assembly did not regard the voice of these dissenters and the action was carried out.
Many stumble over the procedure of a particular assembly judgment, rather than looking at the facts of the case, and what is needed to be done for God’s glory. The enemy would seek to throw dust in the air, clouding the real issues; and thus, getting people confused. There may be some history of personal problems between brethren that we bring into the picture that affects our judgment. However, we are to let things be decided by divine principles, not by the weaknesses and shortcomings of those involved. Sometimes, people will point to something they believe was handled poorly and base their judgment on that, forgetting there is a human element in assembly administration that may not do everything perfectly. But the fact remains: are those in leadership in the assembly acting for the glory of God in the matter? Our spirituality is tested by these side issues.
In the case of a division in a local assembly on a particular issue (usually a disciplinary matter), how many brethren are on each side have little to do with it. There may be more persons that side with the guilty person than those that make the judgment, but the action is still taken and the person is dealt with accordingly. Some have cried, “How could it be an assembly decision, when the majority of the assembly does not agree with it?” It is so because the older leading brethren, who have addicted themselves to caring for and guiding the assembly and who stand on the principles of the Word of God, carry the bulk of the conscience of the assembly. Though they may be fewer in number, they carry the moral weight in the assembly decisions. They are directly responsible to the Lord to see that a Scriptural course of action is taken by the assembly (Heb. 13:1717Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves: for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy, and not with grief: for that is unprofitable for you. (Hebrews 13:17)). The others should acquiesce in their judgment in the matter, even though they may not see it as the elders do. This preserves the unity of the assembly.
We see this principle borne out in the Old Testament types, from which we can gather important principles. In the Absalom revolt, he had all the tribes of Israel with him (2 Sam. 16:1515And Absalom, and all the people the men of Israel, came to Jerusalem, and Ahithophel with him. (2 Samuel 16:15))—the majority—but God was not with him. The Lord stood with king David (the leadership in Israel) and Judah, even though their numbers were inferior. Those that identified with David were on the Lord’s side. In the end, God caused Absalom to be defeated. Again, in the days of the cleavage of the two tribes from the ten tribes, we see the same thing. Jeroboam had the ten tribes on his side – the majority of Israel, but he was still in the wrong, and the Lord would not identify with him (1 Ki. 11:3131And he said to Jeroboam, Take thee ten pieces: for thus saith the Lord, the God of Israel, Behold, I will rend the kingdom out of the hand of Solomon, and will give ten tribes to thee: (1 Kings 11:31)). Rehoboam, who was the rightful king and leader in Israel, had but one tribe with him, yet God stood with him (1 Ki. 11:3636And unto his son will I give one tribe, that David my servant may have a light alway before me in Jerusalem, the city which I have chosen me to put my name there. (1 Kings 11:36)). Those who stayed with Rehoboam were preserved at the divine center. These are important lessons that we do well to learn.
The great question is, “Where do the leaders in the assembly stand in the matter?” We do not say older men, but those that take the administrative lead in the assembly; for there are older ones who do not involve themselves in the affairs of the assembly regularly, or who have not carried themselves well in the past, and consequently, do not have the confidence of the saints as those who have faithfully addicted themselves to the care of the assembly. It is to the Lord Jesus, the Head of the church, that the assembly is to look to in all matters; but in the normal course of things, He uses these faithful men whom He has raised up by the Spirit of God, who have knowledge of the principles of the Word, to show the assembly God’s mind in a matter. In formulating difficult assembly decisions, the assembly should submit to their judgment (1 Cor. 16:15-1615I beseech you, brethren, (ye know the house of Stephanas, that it is the firstfruits of Achaia, and that they have addicted themselves to the ministry of the saints,) 16That ye submit yourselves unto such, and to every one that helpeth with us, and laboreth. (1 Corinthians 16:15‑16)). When there appears to be a division among the older leading brethren in an assembly, discernment is needed to know those who truly have the moral weight. As mentioned, some older ones may not necessarily have the confidence of the saints as others do, or they may be biased. First Thessalonians 5:12-13 says, “We beg you, brethren, to know those who labour among you, and take the lead among you in the Lord, and admonish you, and to regard them exceedingly in love on account of their work. Be in peace among yourselves.” This is God’s formula for a happy peaceful assembly.
A True Impasse Among the Responsible (Local) Brethren
When there is a true division among the elders, the assembly should wait until God makes it clear as to what they should do. If they come to an impasse, it may be that they should call for brethren from another assembly to advise them of the Scriptural course they should take in the matter. J. N. Darby said, "If the assembly does not feel itself in a state to do it, that places the brothers on their own responsibility, and if they call in other experienced brothers to help, it is all right, for the body is one; but it is the assembly that cuts off in order to purify itself, and this is of all importance." He also said, "The voices of brethren in other localities have liberty equally with those of the local brethren, to make themselves heard in their midst, when discussing the affairs of a meeting of the saints, although they are not locally members of that meeting. To deny this would, indeed, be a serious denial of the unity of the body of Christ. ...When such is the case, it is a real blessing that spiritual and wise men [individuals] from other meetings should step in and seek to awaken the conscience of the assembly, as also, if they come at the request of the gathering or of those to whom the matter is the chief difficulty at the time. In such a case their stepping in, far from being looked upon as an intrusion, ought to be received and acknowledged in the Name of the Lord. To act in any other way would surely be to sanction independency and to deny the unity of the body of Christ."
Godly exercised brothers who know the situation, can go to, or write to those in responsibility in that assembly and bring before them Scriptural principles regarding the difficulty. The brethren who voice their concerns and give their judgment in the matter could be called in by that assembly, or could approach that assembly on account of their concerns about the situation. In either case, they should be welcomed by the local assembly where the concern lies, for they are all one body and what affects one affects all. But they go in as brothers, not as an assembly with authority to re-judge the case in question! A. Roach said, "Brethren called in by an assembly to help it have no authority to judge the matter, as this rests entirely with the assembly. These brothers form no part of the 'judge' and when they have given their advice their work is done.” He also said, “Some time ago the writer and another brother were called in to help a gathering in a local matter. At our final meeting with responsible brothers from that gathering, the brother with me made a statement to this effect – ‘We can only advise you as brothers, and if you feel that our advice should be acted on, you must submit it to the assembly for approval, as the authority is there.’”
We do not find any Scripture that would indicate that one assembly should intervene upon another assembly’s action and re-judge the case. It would be a denial of the Lord’s authority in the midst of the first assembly, and in essence, is the erroneous principle of Bethesdaism (Open Brethren). Many years ago, during general meetings held at St. Louis, Missouri, the question was asked, “Is it right for one assembly to interfere with another assembly’s action in a case?” The answer was, “Not unless invited Scripturally to do so. Trouble has been caused by one assembly taking up the business of another, uninvited. To do this is a mistake.”