It could hardly escape the reader of the Bible that Christ built his church; that that church certainly existed during the days of the apostles, and was known as "the church of God," "the church of the Lord"; that Christ never built or acknowledged any other; and the conclusion lies near that men can and may and should and must now belong to it. These things, I say, are plain. Nor is it any harder to see that with the New Testament in his hand any man can mark the kind of preaching that led men into the church at the first, and the steps they took to become members then; and that a man can render the same obedience of faith today in the same way, and thus become a member of the same body.

      But it is not such a simple, easy thing, after all. A Babel of opinions, creeds, prejudices, party sentiments, plausible arguments, objections, human considerations, drown out the clear note of the word of God, until it seems next to impossible to pick it out and follow it amid [133] the hubbub and contention which surrounds us. "One church is as good as another," and "There are good people in all churches," and "Just so a man is honest," and "We can't all see alike"--and so forth; we have heard all these things over and over. But if we ignore them, and set our faces to the light, to find and to do the will of God, what then? The world, more particularly the religious world, would find means to make the way pretty bitter for us.

      Let us suppose that a congregation of the church of God of the apostolic days--one begun by the apostles themselves, and in every way meeting God's pattern, and whose name and claim as the church of God is not open to dispute--were carried across the gulf of the eighteen hundred intervening years and set down in our midst, unchanged, except as far as the language, dress and social manners of the members are concerned. Now, if God would thunder from heaven and say, "This is my church," or would write words to that effect in blazing letters upon the sky, there might be no trouble about it. But missing such miraculous evidence--just what would people say about it? They would call it another sect, of course; and in that they would be utterly wrong. A "sect" is a faction or party "cut off." But this is the church of God. It is not, as someone once expressed it, "a chip off the old block"--it is the old block itself, the one concerning which God has protested emphatically that he did not want it chipped up (John 17:20; 1 Cor. 1:10). They would call it a "denomination." But it is not a denomination of anything, but simply the church--the one and only church of the Lord. They would call it a "strange" thing and its ways "odd"; but, in fact, the denominations round about it are "strange" and their ways are foreign to the word of God.

      This little church would--if, indeed, it received any [134] notice at all--get no end of sneers from the pious and scholarly gentlemen who are leaders of the various denominations. Preachers would hate it--partly because it would have the impudence (as they would count it) to wear the New Testament name and to claim a position higher than the denominations; partly because it would be busily engaged in that abominable practice of "proselyting," than which naturally nothing disgusts the average "pastor" more. For surely these members of the body of Christ would miss no opportunity to invite and persuade all other professed believers of the Lord to lay down party name and creed and haul down partisan flags and stand in faith and love with them on the word of God alone.

      So (and it is a severe comment on present religious conditions) the church of God, if it came among us, would not be recognized, but rather opposed, hated, ridiculed, sneered at, and that most especially by the religious people of the day, as formerly its Lord was abominated by the religious leaders of his day. And that is not saying that among the sects there are no true, good souls--far from it. But such would be the blind partisanship of the many, most particularly the leaders of the sects, that it would set them to fighting even against God. But to the persecuted church of Christ there would be this consolation: "The firm foundation of God standeth, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his."

      The difficult position of this church of God would be made the harder if in its rank and file dissension should arise. If before that she had been the target for the shafts of its enemies, she would now become a laughing-stock and an object of contempt unto them. "But," you would object, "the true church surely would have no internal difficulties!" And why not? Did not the apostolic churches have them? In that church transferred to us [135] from the days of the apostles as supposed above, would there not be found so much as one man who would grow self-willed? Or among its converts would there be no false brethren that crept in unawares? Has the enemy ceased to sow tares? It is a common mistake to assume that the true church of God would have no trouble maintaining its ground, and that her power and vitality would be extraordinary. The case is not so, however. Things tend downward. Light is maintained at a constant expenditure of energy, but darkness comes of itself. Philosophers prate about the "necessary progress of mankind"--as if things necessarily must tend upward. But "necessary degeneration" would strike nearer the facts; for light and truth and growth and progress are maintained only through a constant exertion and interference on the part of God. The gravitation of evil would carry everything along its path if it were not for God's providences, and his word, and his instruments who carry the word forth in speech and life. Every farmer knows that the finest apple tree suffers most quickly from drought or insects; the finest pear tree most readily takes the blight; the finest hogs are the most susceptible to cholera and other diseases; and weeds grow and flourish without care, while corn must be cultivated. What do I mean to say? Simply this: The false churches are hardier than the true church.

      The true church stands on delicate foundation. It walks by faith--like Peter walking on the water, which, to human eyes, looks precarious enough. It depends every moment on God. It is held together by the bond of love, which, humanly speaking, is a slender enough tie. I am not saying that when faith and love are there she is not invincible; for then indeed, as Israel when God was among them, she stands victorious and secure. But faith and love must be maintained; and the price of her life and strength is eternal vigilance. [136]

      See, for instance, how Paul pleads with the church at Philippi to "be of the same mind" (Phil. 2:1, 2). The success and continuance of the church depended on their heeding this plea. Now in the Roman Catholic Church, for example, it does not matter so much whether they all be of the same mind or not. In fact, they have no mind. There is just one mind in the whole organization, and that is the pope's. If aught occurs or is taught that displeases you, you have to swallow your displeasures (for you have no voice in the matter) or else get out. If you do not get out of your own accord, you may be assisted. You could not create trouble in that most perfect of ecclesiastical machines. And the "practicalness" of its arrangements for its ends is very evident. But it is neither God's church nor God's ends that they are after, nor God's way of attaining ends. Not by subjugation, but by loving submission; not by holding bodies together by ecclesiastic sway, but by knitting hearts one to another and to himself through faith and love, does God hold his people in the "one body." When one or more of those hearts grow worldly, self-willed, or in any way faithless and loveless, there will be trouble. But even then the firm foundation stands, and the Lord knows them that are his.

      So the church of God would have its troubles. Men would arise of their own number, speaking perverse things to draw away the disciples after them. In one way or another--by offending against the consciences of brethren through the introduction of things not required by the word of God (as has been done in these days by the bringing in of instrumental music; on account of private difficulties; by the self-exaltation of elders who have overlooked the charge not to lord it over God's heritage; by the coldness of some and the ignorance of others--factions and divisions would occur, even as they did in [137] apostolic times. Which would indeed throw discredit upon God's true church in the eyes of men, but not in God's sight. For she is not to be blamed.

      Now it is not necessary to suppose a church bodily transferred from Paul's day to the present; but such a church can be constituted among us today. If a man will read Acts 2:14-42, giving every word its fair value, as he would if he were reading a letter from a dear father; if he will accept the directions given in verse 38, and obey as the sinners of Jerusalem did (verses 41, 42), then by the same word, the same rule, the same God, will he and all that do likewise be added to the same church; and other name they need not wear, other claim they need not make, other constitution and by-laws they need not seek. But know this, that when you do so, all the opposition, sneers, persecution, troubles and difficulties to which the true church is liable you may then surely expect to fall to your lot. But there is a sure reward.

[TAG 133-138]