It may be noticed by the way that no vote was taken, nor any equivalent measure. For it was no question of the will of man but of God, Who wrought by the Spirit to give holy wisdom and general concurrence.
“Then it seemed good to the apostles and elders with the whole assembly, having chosen from among them to send men, with Paul and Barnabas to Antioch, Judas called Barnabas, leading men among the brethren, having written by their hand, The apostles and the elder brethren to the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia greeting. Whereas we heard that some who went out from us troubled you with words, upsetting tour souls; to whom we gave no commandment; it seemed good to us, having been of one accord, to choose and send men unto you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, men that have given up their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. We have sent therefore Judas and Silas themselves also announcing by word the same things. For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit and to us to lay on you no greater burden than these necessary things: to abstain from things sacrificed to idols, and blood, and things strangled, and fornication; from which if ye keep yourselves ye shall do well. Farewell” (ver. 22-29).
It will be observed that the most ancient authorities open with a reading which is now accepted by almost all critics. This yields a sense rather more remote from ecclesiastical tradition than the ordinary text, where “the elders” are distinguished sharply from “the brethren” immediately following. The “elder brethren,” however, is a formula which exactly agrees with the state of things which was obtaining at Jerusalem. No doubt they were “the elders” there, as we find them called in chap. 11: 30, as well as in chap. 15:2, 6. They were the local authorities; but they appear not to have been chosen formally, as the elders undoubtedly were in the Gentile assemblies by apostolic authority, direct or indirect; they seem rather to have acted simply from their experience and moral weight, as was usual among the Jews. This falls in remarkably with the peculiar expression employed here, “the elder brethren,” and harmonizes with the tone of Peter's address in chap. v. of his first Epistle.
But there is another remark to make of still more immediate and important application practically. Judas, Barnabas, and Silas were sent with Paul and Barnabas, characterized as “leading men among the brethren.” They were neither apostles on the one hand, nor were they elders or elder brethren on the other, but were chosen by the council, for their fitness, to visit Antioch. It is the same expression which we find three times in Heb. 13 The Revised version like the Authorized, translates it “chief” in Acts 15; but “those that had (or, “have") the rule” in Hebrews: “had” for the departed chiefs, “have” for such as still lived and labored. They are not spoken of as elders, but seem to have been identified with the ministration of the word (ver. 7), rather than with oversight or presiding like the elders. This fact gives us clear insight, when duly recognized, into the far greater liberty as well as variety of gift, exercised in the apostolic church, as compared with the straitness of modern Christendom. I do not speak of sign-gifts, such as miracles and tongues, but of spiritual endowments given of Christ for the perfecting of the saints. Denominational arrangements on the worldly system of a salary, with the claims of an exclusive position, directly interferes with the Lord's will in this respect and destroys the beautiful liberty of the Spirit, to the famishing (not the edification) of the body of Christ.
Yet it will be found by the attentive reader not only of the Acts of the Apostles but of their Epistles, that the principle and the practice of this free ministration in the assemblies is easily vouched for apart from local authority or official rank throughout the New Testament. Rom. 12 is plain. “Teaching” and “exhorting,” and “ruling,” or “leading,” are spoken of as “gifts differing according to the grace that is given to us” distinct from “prophecy,” as well as one from another. In the church or assembly according to God's word there was and ought to be room for them all. It were the sheerest unbelief to assume that they are now extinct. Woe be to the adversaries of the Holy Ghost who affirm such a falsehood to justify their system!
The reader can Compare also 1 Cor. 12 and 14 throughout, as well as chap. 15:1-16, Gal. 6:6, Eph. 4:7-16, Phil. 1:14, Col. 2:19, 1 Thess. 5:12, 13, 2 Tim. 2:2, 1 Peter 4:10, 11, 3 John 7, 8, which prove in the clearest manner the full opening in the assembly as well as towards the world for those suitably gifted which scripture maintains, and only persons like Diotrephes; as far as God's word speaks, dare to oppose and neutralize.
It is in vain to plead, as unbelief blindly does, that such largeness and liberty were only suited to the apostolic day. For this really gives the highest sanction to such free action of the Holy Ghost. If inspired men, if the highest gifts that God ever set in the church, did not hinder but help on every form of gracious ministry, how can men in avowedly inferior position now-a-days justify their opposition? None but the most prejudiced will contend that the ordinary gifts of edification fail. None but enthusiasts will deny that the sign-gifts, which ushered in the present economy, are extinct. Not so those, thank God, that are given by the ascended Christ unto the work of ministering, save such as were for laying the foundation (Eph. 2:20) which once laid was laid forever.
We may remark in the letter of the council that the order is “Barnabas and Paul” (ver. 25) as in ver. 12, whereas earlier in the chap. as in ver. 2, and later as in ver. 35, etc., it is “Paul and Barnabas.” The feeling of the saints in Jerusalem expressed itself in the former way, as was the feeling elsewhere in the early days of the great apostle's testimony. Compare Acts 11:30; 12:25; 13:2, 7. But chap. 13: 13, marks a great change, as we see in verses 43, 46, 50 (but not 14:14). The reader of the Old Testament may find a similar principle in Ex. 6:13, 20, 26, and 27. In the order of nature it is “Aaron and Moses;” in sovereign grace it becomes “Moses and Aaron.” The author of the Old and the New is, the same and can only be God Himself, working in man through His unerring Spirit.
This was the only council which was entitled to say, “It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us.” If others have imitated the language, it is but profanity. Yet it was not an ecumenical assembly at all, but simply the assembly at Jerusalem where the apostles and local elders met together to consider the matter. The decision was most rightly taken there, whence the evil had sprung; and where the apostles were, Paul and Barnabas going up for the purpose. It was they with the whole assembly at Jerusalem who decided for the liberty of the Gentile converts. How different and disastrous it must have been had it been a council at Antioch, even though the decision had been the same! It is of all consequence that the way as well as the end be of the Holy Spirit and in accordance with the word of God. So it was with this council, and we hear no more of the much discussion or questioning which had agitated the brethren before the council. Judas and Silas were sent as the most unequivocal witnesses of the decision at Jerusalem, that Barnabas and Paul might thence have a support above all question. The power of divine grace had thus wrought in truth and righteousness for the name of Jesus; and there was a great calm.
There was no such portentous error as a portion of the assembly (though in Jerusalem exceedingly numerous) deciding for itself alone; then the other portions following suit; and lastly all who objected to the fraud and force of the transaction justled and declared outside in the city, with the like course pursued throughout the country. No wonder that breaches must be created by so gross a departure from the word, even if the object had not been partiality to a favorite preceded by unrighteous oppression. At the council at Jerusalem, as love wrought for Christ's glory, so righteousness was the result, and unity throughout was maintained. Nobody thought of another judgment of the question, either in other parts of Jerusalem or anywhere else. God honored His own principles in His word, grace triumphed, and the saints at large, however previously alienated, owned and rejoiced in the blessing, where appearances had threatened a storm of evil omen to all who valued the gospel.
But the ecumenical councils anathematized individuals and forced divisions far and wide. In this they succeeded; for nothing is so easy as to scatter the saints. To allay fleshly violence, to conciliate the alienated, to repress party, needs grace and truth wielded by the Lord: what was so rare at these councils? Will and passion reigned more humblingly and bitterly than in the political sphere.
Even the first and most important of these “general councils” was convened by the Emperor Constantine, though an unbaptized man! to be held at Nicea. The number of western delegates was ridiculously small, as indeed it ever was at all the councils in the East. Later when the popes exercised the power of the emperors, the eastern bishops were wholly absent. Thus the claim to be “ecumenical” was a nullity, and most evidently after the west quarreled with the east, for thenceforward only the Latin party attended. Thus God took care that; as the departure became complete and evil was enforced by man's will, unity should be manifestly at an end, though none were so loud and arrogant in their claim of it as those who in their blind zeal had done most to destroy the testimony to it.