Let us suppose that an influential portion of an assembly have put away a brother as a "heretic," without just grounds. Some seem to hold that under such circumstances they must submit to the " action; " apparently upon the following considerations:
The action was unscriptural and unrighteous, but those who have so erred are not wicked persons. It was the Lord's table before:is it not so still ? They were on scriptural ground before:are they not so now ? Can one refuse their action, and become separated from them, without departing from scriptural ground, and from the Lord's table ?
The answer to this is, Is it not raising a question, or making a difficulty, where none exists in Scripture ? Nowhere in Scripture am I called upon to decide the standing of those from whom I may become in this way separated. I am only bound for myself to "follow righteousness," as surely in Church relationship as in private affairs. Those who adhere to an unrighteous action are, so far, on wrong ground:they are no longer where they were, and I am by no means bound to follow them in their departure, whether it be ten feet or a hundred feet from the true path-to use a physical figure. I am not left to my own will or choice:it is not rebellion to refuse to follow them, but submission to the Word-a sure guide, but one calling for a sense of responsibility and true exercise of soul, each for himself, before the Lord.
We are to "follow righteousness, faith, love, peace, with them that call on the Lord out of a pure heart." The one who does that, will be in the way of obedience and on right Church ground, no matter whom or what he is separated from. To conclude that my only safety is to cleave to an assembly that has been on right ground, though they commit unrighteousness, is, in measure, the spirit of a Romanist, and weakens our sense of responsibility to the Lord and our confidence in the Word as our guide. It opens the way for subjection to human tradition and creed and error. Error tends to become enthroned; and the truth, and liberty to inquire into it, is in measure shut out.
These issues are involved in such a crisis in the Church's history, and our eyes should be open to discern the enemy's devices, and how and when we are exposed to danger. If we are in bondage to the idea of following good men-and who is free from this danger ?-where may we not drift ? It is to the Lord and to His Word we are to cleave at all times, and at all cost; and in this path, with trials, we shall find the vigor of spiritual health. "I found myself," said one who had been entrapped in the way I speak of, and had revolted from it, "I found myself bound to identify the name of the Lord with unrighteousness.
We need to take to us the " whole armor of God against the wiles of the devil ;" and the first part of the armor is,' "having the loins girt about with truth," not error. Is it not plainly enough error to plead for subjection to unrighteousness ? No unrighteous judgment is bound in heaven.
" There is a principle at work which puts external unity before righteousness-uses unity to hinder righteousness. Now, to me, righteousness goes first. I find that in Rom. 11:, let grace be what it may in sovereign goodness, it never sets aside righteousness. … I do not think that any Church theory, however true and blessed when walking in the Spirit, can go before practical righteousness."* *Letters, J. N. D., Vol. III., page 184.*
Huss, the martyr of Bohemia, "caused a writing to be fixed upon the church of Bethlehem, charging the clergy with six errors, among which was, ' that every excommunication, just or unjust, binds the excommunicated." He declared that an excommunication which is groundless ' hath no effect.' " Thus, with our open Bible, we have to learn from a devout Roman Catholic of the year 1400 so plain a truth.
It is not for us to decide such questions as "Where is the Lord's Table ?" It might lead to perplexity, or to arrogant assumption, in our conclusions. What we have to consider is, "What is right?" That leads to true exercise before God, in the light of the Word.
To be subject, for the sake of unity, to unrighteousness in an act of excommunication, what can it be but wrong ? Because done in the Lord's name, does wrong become right ? We should have patience, and grace, but also have the "senses exercised to discern between good and evil." E. S. L.