The house is to be kept clean. The Father's care over the family is one thing; the Son's over “His own house” another. The Son commits the disciples to the care of the Holy Father (John 17); this is distinct from having the house in order. In John 15 He says, “I am the vine, ye are the branches, my Father is the husbandman,” &c.; it is all the Father's care. The Father purges the branches, to the end that they bear as much fruit as possible. But in the case of the Son over His own house, it is not the individual, but the house kept clean. “If we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged,” &c.
There are then these three kinds of discipline:
1st, That of brotherly relationship. Here I go as a person wronged, but it must be with grace.
2nd, That of fatherly care. The father exercising it with loving-kindness and tenderness, as over an erring child.
3rd, Where the Son is over His own House, and, where we have to act in the responsibility of keeping the house clean, that people should have their consciences according to the house in which they are. Not only the individual, but the house, the body, the conscience of the body must act. The effect may he, graciously, that the individual is restored, but that is a collateral thing; when you come to that point, there is something besides restoring, there is the responsibility of keeping the house clean—the conscience of all there; and that may sometimes give a good deal of trouble.
As to the nature of all this, the spirit in which it should be conducted, it is priestly; and the priests ate the sin-offering within the holy place (Leviticus 10). I do not think any person, or body of Christians, can exercise discipline, unless as having the conscience clear, as having felt the power of the evil and sin before God, as if he had himself committed it. Then he does it as needful to purge himself. It will all be for positive mischief, the dealing with it, if not so. What character of position does Jesus hold now? That of priestly service. And we are associated with Him. If there were more of that priestly intercession implied by eating of the sin-offering within the holy place, there would be no such abomination as that of the church assuming a mere judicial character. Suppose the case of a family, in which a brother had committed something disgraceful; would it not be for bitterness and anguish to the whole family? what common anxiety and pain of heart it would occasion! Does Christ not feed upon the sin-offering? does He not feel the sorrow? does He not charge Himself with it? He is the Head of His body the church—is He not wounded and pained in a member? Yes, it is so. If it be a case of individual remonstrance with a brother for a fault, I am not fit to rebuke him, unless my soul has been in priestly exercise and service about it, as though I had been in the sin myself. How does Christ act? He bears it on His heart, and pleads about it, to draw out the grace that will remedy it. So with the child of God; he carries the sin upon his own heart into the presence of God; he pleads with the Father, as a priest, that the dishonor done to Christ's body, of which he is a member, may be remedied. This I believe to be the spirit in which discipline should be exercised. But here we fail. We have not grace to eat the sin-offering. I come to church-action, and there I find yet more. It should go humble itself, until it has cleared itself. That is the force, to me, of “ye have not mourned,” &c.; there was not sufficient spirituality at Corinth to take and bear the sin at all; “You ought to have been bowed down there, broken-hearted, and broken in spirit, at such a thing not being put out-concerned as to the cleanness of Christ's house.”
It is another part of priestly service to separate between clean and unclean. The priests were not to drink wine nor strong drink, that they might keep themselves in a spiritual state, by the habits of the sanctuary, being able to discern between clean, &e. This is always true. We must take as our object in dealing with evil God's object. God's house is the scene and place of God's order. If it be said that the woman must “have power (a covering) on her head because of the angels” (1 Corinthians 11:1010For this cause ought the woman to have power on her head because of the angels. (1 Corinthians 11:10)), it is as the exhibition of God's order. Nothing should be permitted in the house that angels could not come in and approve. All is in thorough ruin. The full glory of the house will be manifested when Christ comes in glory, and not till then; but we should desire that, as far as possible, by the energy of the Holy Ghost there should be correspondence in spirit and manner with what shall be hereafter. When Israel returned from the captivity, after Lo-ammi had been written upon them, and the glory had departed from the house, the public manifestation was gone, but Nehemiah and Ezra could find that in which to act according to God's mind. That is our present condition. But we have now what they had not. We were always a remnant; we began at the end: “Where two or three are gathered to my name, there am I in the midst of them” (Matthew 18:2020For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them. (Matthew 18:20)). If the whole corporate system has come to naught, I get back to certain unchangeable, blessed principles, from which all is derived. The very thing from which all springs, to which Christ has attached, not only His name, but His discipline-the power of binding and loosing—is the gathering together of the “two or three.” This is of the greatest possible comfort. The great principle remains true amidst all the failure.
If we turn to John's Gospel, chap. 20, we find that when He sent forth His disciples, He breathed on them and said, “Receive ye the Holy Ghost; whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained.” There is nothing like a corporate church system here, but the energy of the Holy Ghost in spiritual discernment in the disciples as sent from Christ, and acting on behalf of Christ. Discipline is a question of the energy of the Spirit. If that which is done is not done in the power of the Holy Ghost, it is nothing.
In principle what was needed has been said. I do not see any difference, whether it be in the hands of a remnant or anything else, because then we get into the structure of a judicial process at once-sinners judging sinners. It is, first of all, a question what the energy of the Spirit is for ministry in God's house. The unanimity is a unanimity of having consciences exercised and forced into discipline. It is a terrible thing to hear sinners talking about judging another sinner, but a blessed thing to see them exercised in conscience about sin come in among themselves. It must be in grace. I no more dare act, save in grace, than I could wish judgment to myself. “Judge not, that ye be not judged: for with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again” (Matthew 7:1, 21Judge not, that ye be not judged. 2For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again. (Matthew 7:1‑2)). If we go to exercise judgment, we shall get it. I speak of the spirit in which it is to be done; for we have to judge them that are within.
As to the difficulty of saints meeting together where there is not pastorship, my prayer is that God would raise up pastors; but, I believe, where there were brethren meeting together, and walking together on brotherly principles, provided they kept to their real position, and did not set about making churches, they would be just as happy as others in different circumstances. One thing I would pray for, because I love the Lord's sheep, is that there might be shepherds. I know nothing, next to personal communion with the Lord, so blessed as the pastor feeding the Lord's sheep, the Lord's flock; but it is the Lord's flock. I see nothing about a pastor and his flock; that changes the whole aspect of things. When it is felt to be the Lord's flock a man has to look over, what thoughts of responsibility, what care, what zeal, what watchfulness! I do not see anything so lovely. “Lovest thou me? Feed my sheep. Feed my lambs.” I know nothing like it upon earth—the care of a true-hearted pastor—one who can bear the whole burden of grief and care of any soul, and deal with God about it. I believe it is the happiest, most blessed relationship that can subsist in this world. But we are not to suppose that the “Great Shepherd” cannot take care of His own sheep because there are no under-shepherds. If there were those who met together and hung on the Lord, if they did not pretend to be what they were not, though there were no pastors among them, there would be no danger; they would infallibly have the care of that Shepherd. We must not impute our failure to God, as though He could not take care of us. The moment power in the Spirit is gone, power in the flesh comes in.
J. N. D.
(Concluded from page 172)