Editorial

One of the difficult aspects of ecclesial life is the lack of specific scriptural instruction regarding many matters; consequently we are left trying to do the best we can under the circumstances we face.

For example, some ecclesias elect arranging brethren who appoint brethren to preside, exhort and lecture while others elect the speaking brethren as well as those who perform administrative functions. Some ec­clesias have no elections at all but use a method of drawing lots. In the first century, the apostles appointed elders and the spirit bestowed special

abilities on ecclesial members. Now, however, we do the best we can hav­ing the spiritual welfare of the breth­ren and sisters as our objective.

Current Issues

In one area of the brotherhood, there is vigorous discussion about the establishment of new ecclesias. We are not told how large a geographic area should be served by one ecclesia or how large is too large for ecclesial size. Ecclesias should not be formed on the basis of following favorite teachers or along ethnic or economic lines (I Cor. 1:11-13; 4:6; Gal. 3:28). But beyond these broad guidelines, we are left considerable flexibility in making our own decisions on ecclesial size and location.

If the spirit had seen fit to specify attendance requirements for maintaining ecclesial membership, many an arranging meeting would be markedly shortened. As it is, brethren must wrestle with the situation of the individual whose attendance has slackened and consider the details of each particular case.

If we were given a statement of faith in the New Testament, discussion that now is occurring on this continent would never have arisen. We would simply accept the divinely supplied version and be pleased to do so.

Flexibility

At times, ecclesial life would be easier if divine guidance were more specific. Applying principles to cases is not easy and often results in differences of opinion amongst us. Frequently, the difference does not involve sin on the part of the differing brethren but simply two people seeing various aspects of a complex situation and arriving at different judgments. In fact, either brother’s approach may be within a range of solutions that would work and are compatible with divine principles.

The present arrangement is not accidental. The gospel is designed to go throughout the world and be applied to believers in a great variety of social, personal and cultural circumstances.

A five mile limit on ecclesial proximity may be reasonable where every one walks but would be wholly inappropriate in our highly mobile society. Selecting elders by election may work for us but may cause unnecessary tension in a patriarcal society. Attendance considerations differ for a sister whose family fought her coming to meeting and one whose husband provided an excellent spiritual environment. A pertinent summary of the one faith needs to be related to the errors propagated in dissimilar societies and historical periods. The absence of detailed rules in such cases reflects divine wisdom and is clearly deliberate. But there is a bigger issue involved.

Judging the World

“Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world?” (I Cor. 6:2).

To “judge” in this context does not mean to “condemn.” The Greek word used is KRINO which can mean “condemn” (Rom. 3:7; 14:22 “con­demneth”) but usually means “to separate, to divide, to decide” as in Lk. 7:43; Jo. 7:24; Acts 3:13 (“deter­mined”). In I Cor. 6, the brethren are urged to evaluate the facts and reach an appropriate decision. They were to apply principles of equity, mercy, faith and truth to a specific case. They were not necessarily “to condemn” but they were “to decide” an issue.

The admonition of the spirit is that if they were incapable of doing that now, how were they ever going to do the same thing on a much broader scale in the Kingdom? We might answer that in the Kingdom we will automatically be given the optimum answer to every circumstance that arises; there would then be no “judging” required of us, no decisions to be made. But if that is the case, the spirit’s admonition has no relevance to the situation addressed. The point is that what they were expected to do now was but a small taste of what the faithful will do in the future: “And if the world is to be judged by you are ye incompetent to try trivial cases?” (RSV).

An objection comes to mind that we will not sin in the Kingdom so how could we be left to make decisions? It is true we will not sin, but there are a variety of ways of handling a given case without any of them being sinful. While not sinning, the saints will evidently have the responsibility of applying principles to resolve spe­cific situations.

The design of the gospel is such that we are being exercised now in preparation for that responsibility. The very absence of a host of “rules” requires us to work things out the best we can according to godly principles.

Implications

The implications of our situation should not be overlooked. We establish ecclesial policies and procedures doing the best we can under the circumstances but they are “our” policies, not God’s. They are hopefully godly in that they are applications of His principles, but they are ours, not His.

We have summarized right Bible teaching in our statement of faith. The teachings contained therein are God’s, but the form of presentation and summary phrases are not His, but ours. In fact, the decision to have a statement of faith is our choice in the face of a variety of false doctrines presented in modern Christianity. The decision is good and wise but it is our application of divine principles to our circumstances.

“Gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance” are divine attributes of right conduct. Let us not forsake what God requires of us in the pursuit of defending one of our own policy decisions.

Applying principles to circumstances is often difficult and frustrating but the necessity of doing so is required of us because we are being prepared to rule the world. Let us not forfeit our opportunity for that ruler-ship by acting now according to the flesh and not according to the spirit.

A correspondent recently sent us an article titled “The Porno Plague,” suggesting we reprint it in the “Tidings.” Our initial reaction was negative. This publication is designed for the brotherhood, not the general public; the brothers and sisters are surely beyond the need for any exhortation about seamy books, magazines and movies.

The Porno Plague

The contributor phoned a few days ago asking what we thought of the article and wondering if we planned to use it. Upon hearing our reaction, he sighed and commented that the community is at a great disadvantage in these matters. Nobody wants to be specific in their exhortation against pornography because to do so would give the impression one had personally seen or read some wholly inappropriate material. Consequently, he said, some of our members regularly watch graphic videos and attend R-rated movies, others read play-boy type magazines and sexually explicit books partly be­cause they never hear sharp, specific exhortation on the iniquity of pornography.

Tell Me It Isn’t So!

“You are exaggerating!” we re­sponded. We can imagine some brother or sister watching such rub­bish once out of curiosity but not regularly.

“No, I mean regularly,” was the response.

We could not resist asking: “How do you know?”

“They’ve told me.” He went on to recount private conversations, comments heard by his wife and books he personally had seen in Christadel­phian homes.

“Tell me it isn’t so!” we said. But evidently it is true. A few pertinent inquiries confirmed our correspondent’s impressions.

Brothers and sisters, these things ought not to be!

The Deceitfulness of Sin

Apparently the problem has become much worse in recent years with the advent of home videos, cable television and the relaxation of censorship laws. Evidently daytime and prime time soap operas desensitize the conscience of viewers; required reading in schools exposes our youngsters to raw themes and language and allegedly “good” movies invariably include at least one vivid scene of love-making. The continual bombardment is such that many hearts are becoming hardened and insensitive to the deceitfulness of sin.

Some feel they have been good so they “treat” themselves to absorbing a little sin. Others find “harmless” release in vicarious enjoyment of uninhibited acts which they personally would never commit. Unfortunately, others seem to have become ensnared by the addictive qualities of pornographic material.

No Justification

There is no way we can justify watching or reading pornography. They “not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them” is the summary denunciation by the Spirit (Rom. 1:32).

“Have pleasure in them that do them!”

Do we know what “vicarious” means? It means feelings or emotions that are felt within ourselves through sharing imaginatively in the feelings or activities of another person. It is exactly the reaction that every writer or actor strives to elicit. They want us to enter into the experiences of the characters portrayed and feel the emotions in ourselves.

None of us assimilates pornographic material because we have to. Supposedly we enjoy it! “Have pleasure in them that do … unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness

It’s Not Pornography

We may feel what is watched does not qualify as pornographic. We may feel all that fits that category is beastiality, the most explicit pictures or child exploitation. Such an idea is self-deception: pornography includes “writings or pictures or films, etc. that are intended to stimulate erotic feelings by description or portrayal of sexual activity.” We may say that includes all kinds of things in today’s “entertainment” mediums but that is the definition given in the Oxford American Dictionary. Maybe we have become so used to pornographic material that we don’t recognize it when we see it!

It’s Real Life

It probably is! Most writers base their material on their own experiences or those of others. Lately, the media is using the tabloid approach, “this really happened, it’s a current affair,” to stretch the limits of censorship regulations. But the factuality of the material is no rationale for viewing it as if we were being enlightened.

The iniquity we are to deplore is not imaginary, it is practiced by real people. Romans 1 is not talking about Greek myths, it addresses then-current social practice.

“Let no man deceive you with vain words: for because of these things cometh the wrath of God upon the children of disobedience. Be not ye partakers with them” — either actually or vicariously (Eph. 5:6-7).

“It is a shame even to speak of those things which are done of them in secret … see then that ye walk circumspectly, not as fools, but as wise, redeeming the time, because the days are evil” (vs. 12,15-16). There is nothing new about this exhortation or the need for it.

During the last few months, we have had the opportunity of being the “overseas speaker” in some other areas of our community. On one occasion, there were at least 10 brethren in the audience who had been to North America as teachers at one or more of our Bible schools. This prompted my question: with so much talent readily available, why bring in a guest speaker from so far away?

Why Overseas Speakers?

The list of answers included: brethren from other backgrounds present the same Scriptural points in a fresh manner, the international flavor helps increase attendance, the visitor can tour local ecclesias to give “specials” which are a refreshing break from normal ec­clesial routine and local brethren who do not travel are given a better sense of the worldwide nature of the body of Christ.

From our experience on this continent, all of those points rang true. But it also became clear to the “visiting speaker” that the one benefiting most from the effort was himself.

In talking with a brother who has done many Bible schools on our behalf, our being the prime beneficiary is not unique. Brethren regularly find that developing a single topic over four to six addresses forces them to in-depth Bible study. Speaking at a Bible school or study day affords two of the few occasions when such a concentrated presentation is required.

Taking the Benefit Home

We have found the Word to be like a sphere; if one goes deeply into any part of it, one approaches the center of Divine thinking. A careful study of the Law, the Kings, the parables or some prophetic book clarifies in one’s own mind the principles and character of God and deepens one’s own relation­ship with the Father and the Son.

Therefore, when the overseas speaker boarded the plane for home, he was taking back to his own local area of activity a richer knowledge of Scripture. That knowledge would hopefully benefit him in his own handling of family matters, in his input at arranging meetings and Bible classes and in any counseling he might be called upon to provide to others in the ecclesia

The above is a point to remember for those who have the responsibility of selecting speakers for our own Bible schools, study days and fraternal weekends.

Build our Infrastructure

There are advantages to having overseas speakers at such events but there is one serious disadvantage; they take much of the greatest benefit home with them. Over the long term, our ecclesias badly need brethren who are mature in the Word. Inviting our own North American brethren to speak at special events gives them the occasion to do the study that will aid such development.

Of course, they could do it on their own without the assignment, but most of us need a specific task to provide the motivation. And the brother himself needs to sieze upon the opportunity, not simply put together six lectures he has already done under some common theme.

If the brother does his part, the Word will do its part and the study should ultimately result in a stronger local ecclesia.

Present Practice

Those responsible for running Bible schools and study events provide an excellent service to the brotherhood and clearly have the spiritual welfare of the whole community in mind. The present practice of many of our schools is to have at least one North American brother as a teacher. This is certainly better than having none at all, but we wonder if it is taking full advantage of the opportunity to develop our own infrastructure.

We recognize one of the problems is finding brethren who are sufficiently interesting as speakers to hold a large audience for six straight days or several successive sessions, as is the case with study weekends. Some have addressed this difficulty by alternating speakers, splitting a Bible school session into two three-day series or running several Bible school studies concurrently giving those attending a choice of classes to attend.

Each approach has its advantages and disadvantages. There is no reason, however, why a given event or school must use the same approach every year. Following past practice may be easier for planning but may not be as good for the overall welfare of the community.

In addition, those responsible for speaker selection need to continually inquire about the development of brethren with whom they are not personally familiar. One school has a standard practice of asking visiting speakers for recommendations of other suitable brethren. Such inquiries are good and could well be made on a broader scale by asking a similar question of recording brethren or others in distant ecclesial areas.

As a community, we need to use every opportunity to edify the body of Christ in the most effective manner “till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ.”