(2 Tim. 2:19-22.)

It has often been noticed that the first epistle to Timothy instructs the man of God as to the conduct that becomes him as belonging to the house of God; while the second epistle is instruction that is to govern him in respect to the confusion and disorder that have resulted from not heeding the apostle's exhortation as to the responsibility of those who had received from him the foundation which, as a wise master builder, under divine guidance and sanction, he had laid. For those who assent to this, I do not need to say the second epistle to Timothy has special importance in connection with the times in which our lot has been cast. But I have sometimes wondered if we have fully seized the mind of the Spirit in the wisdom He has provided for us, in order that we may cope with the difficulties that confront us, and find faith's path-God's path-in the midst of them.

I desire to offer a few thoughts as to it. And, first, I think we need to get a clearer understanding of what the apostle means when he says, "According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise master builder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth thereon" (i Cor. 3:10). Was his thought that he, in the first century of the Christian era, had laid the foundation; that the second-century builders would add a story to it; and that in each succeeding century another story would be built, until now we are building the twentieth-century story ? If such has been our conception, we have wholly missed his idea, or, rather, the idea of the Spirit in him. What the apostle really expressed is this:"I have given form to the Church fundamentally. I have, by the truth given me to administer,-the wisdom we speak among the perfect (i Cor. 2:6),-formed the Church in its internal character and its external order. I have ordained its government and discipline; I have appointed its internal arrangements. The form and character which I have given to it by the entire range of the truth, of which I have been made minister, abides. No man can lay a different foundation. Others are to carry it on in the form I have given it. They are not to modify either its internal character or external order. They are not to make any change in any of its arrangements. To do this is to add excrescences to it. I have formed it to be 'the epistle of Christ' (2 Cor. 3:3). Any addition to my foundation-to that character and form I have given to the Church-will be a display of man, not of Christ. It will be work that will be in vain, for only what is of Christ will abide. Let those, then, who are charged with the responsibility of carrying on my foundation ' take heed' how they build in connection with it." This is plainly the apostle's meaning.

In this understanding of the statement, " I have laid the foundation," I affirm that the truth of God with respect to the Church abides; and when we speak of "ruins," we are not to be understood as meaning that the Church, either in its internal character or external order, has passed away. What we mean is this:the not minding the exhortation, to take heed to build in connection with the apostle's foundation, has brought in results which make it difficult to recognize the Church amid all the excrescences that have been built on to it. Paul's ecclesiastical system abides; it has not broken down. Additions have been built on to it. These additions have made confusion. They are disorder. This disorder is what we mean when we speak of "ruins."

We hear it said sometimes that the one body of Christ is a fact subsisting all the time, no matter what human confusion there may be as to it. So, too, it is said the house of God as built by the Spirit is ever a subsisting fact, in spite of the human confusion. Both statements are true, but it is not all the truth. It is equally true, and necessary also to affirm, that the Church's external order-that order given to it by the apostle under divine guidance and sanction-is ever a subsisting fact. Its divine government and discipline is always a fact-a fact always subsisting. This is true even though it is not always recognized-as true as that the one body is ever a fact, recognized or not.

We may now turn to 2 Tim. 2:19-22. In this epistle we find, as has been already said, the wisdom of the Spirit for our guidance in circumstances which are the result of failure in building in connection with Paul's foundation. Innumerable excrescences have been built on to it. There is difficulty in recognizing the original pattern and form, yet we are told the foundation of God is "firm," and "stands." The house of God abides, is a subsisting fact. It exists, and can have no other internal character and external form than God gave to it at the beginning. Its government-its discipline-abides. All the human additions to it have not altered this. The difficulty of recognizing it is great; still, faith will do it, and especially as it has here the apostolic guarantee that it abides, that it remains firm. What a comfort to be assured the foundation of God is firm, and stands! It has not given way, it has not settled, it is intact. The Lord knows His own, and sees them not only as in Christ, but in the collective relationship He has given to them. He knows them as His Church, and as under the internal character and external order He originally established for them. Again I say, What a comfort!

Surely God has not given up His people. He has not abandoned the truth He gave to Paul. He is owning it still. Faith then may do so. But if God still holds to the truth as He gave it at the beginning, and faith finds in this fact its justification for holding with Him, are there any responsibilities growing out of this ? If the fact that the foundation of God still abides guarantees that the Lord knows His people, and owns them as still having the original internal character and external order He gave them, does that fact make any demands upon us ? If it does, what are they ? The apostle must tell us. He says, "Let every one that nameth the name of the Lord depart from iniquity."If the foundation of God remains, if the foundation laid in apostolic times still abides, its claim on us is that we should be still carrying it on. We are responsible still to hold and carry out apostolic truth, to act on the truth of the Church as given by the apostles at the first.

But to do this we must depart from iniquity. We must turn away from all the human excrescences
that have been added to the original foundation. We must "cease to do evil" and "learn to do well.'' Let us seek to realize what is here pressed upon us. If apostolic truth assures us of the faithfulness of the Lord, it demands faithfulness from us. Are we, then, prepared to be faithful to the truth God gave at the beginning ?Are we ready to carry out that truth practically ?Let us own it is our responsibility. May God give us the purpose of heart to honestly respond to the claims the truth has upon us. But suppose now we start in to put into practice the truth of God as it was revealed at the first. We are resolved to own the Church in its internal character and external order as this was delivered to the saints by the apostle. We have formed the purpose to maintain the government and discipline the apostle ordained for the Church. Well, will we find any peculiar difficulties-difficulties special to the circumstances in which we are ?We surely will, Alas, how much has come in since apostolic times! Not only have unregenerate men been recognized as belonging to Paul's foundation, not only has world-lines been allowed, but clerisy, legality, formalism, ecclesiasticism, individualism, sectarianism, and a host of such-like things, which I need not delay to mention. In the great house-the house as man has built it-there is a great mixture:the saved and the unsaved are associated together; scripture doctrines and the doctrines of men commingle. There are in it, both in persons and things, vessels to honor and vessels to dishonor. "Let everyone that nameth the name of the Lord depart from iniquity"

-demands of me to separate myself from things as well as persons. It is not alone from unsaved per
sons I must separate, but also from sectarianism, formalism, ecclesiasticism, individualism and all such-like things, that are not of the Spirit of God, are not a part of Paul's foundation.

Suppose, then, I start in to separate myself from clerisy, shall I find any beside unregenerate persons identified with it ? Are there any real saints connected with it ? Alas, how many! But must I separate myself from them ? Ah, here is a difficulty peculiar to the circumstances in which we are. Here is an excrescence that has been added on to Paul's foundation, and there are not only unsaved persons, but real saints, involved in it. It has been asked, Where is there any scripture for separation from saints ? There is no scripture for separation from saints simply as saints; but if saints are involved in evils, separation from the evils involves separation from them. If this is not so, then one's hands are hopelessly tied to what is evil, to iniquity; and here is a scripture, which the Spirit of God has given us for our guidance, that it is impossible for us to obey. If then there are iniquities that saints are linked with, I must separate from them if I obey " Let every one that nameth the name of the Lord depart from iniquity."

But we are told the word "purge," in the expression " If a man therefore purge himself from these," both here and in the one only case of its use elsewhere in this form (i Cor. 5:7), is "a divine call to self-judgment, not to judge others." An assertion is not proof. All the facts are against the assertion. In i Cor. 5:7 the word is in the plural, not singular. Then too the apostle is not addressing saints as individuals, he is writing to a company. He is addressing them in their collective capacity. Again, the word "lump" refers to the company, not the individual. The leaven is to be purged out of the company. The lump, looked at according to what it has been divinely constituted, is holy, therefore it is responsible to see to it that its practical fellowship be holy. The company, divinely constituted holy, in or-der to preserve itself in its holy character, must not allow unholy ways in those who form the company. Hence they are told to purge out the leaven, to put away the wicked person from among themselves. However necessary self-judgment is, that is not purging the leaven out of the lump:it is not put-ting away from among ourselves the wicked person. Let us look now at the use of the term "purge " in 2 Tim. 2:19-22. It is clear the thought of association is in the apostle's mind. Vessels to honor and vessels to dishonor are associated together in the great house; and this is true whether we speak of persons or things, as we have already seen. Now he says, " Let every one that nameth the name of the Lord depart from iniquity." We are gravely told that we must not make iniquity mean the children of God. Who does ? Who ever did ?Is it denied that any children of God are involved in iniquity ?If they are, how can I depart from iniquity in such cases unless I purge myself from them ? Are they then vessels to dishonor ?According to what they have been divinely constituted, they are vessels to honor, but according to their practice they are vessels to dishonor. Their participation in iniquity makes them practically vessels to dishonor. Obedience to "Let every one that nameth the name of the Lord depart from iniquity" requires that we should purge ourselves from them. And only so is it possible to preserve the foundation, laid by the apostle, from human excrescences.

Let us illustrate by taking the matter of Church government and discipline. Has not the apostle ordained this ? Are we not responsible to own the government and discipline that he ordained ? Have not other systems of government been devised? As to this part of the apostle's foundation, have not many additions, many human excrescences, been introduced ? Are there no children of God involved in this ? Well, what is our judgment of it! Is it not rebellion ? Is not rebellion iniquity ? Scripture at least so declares. "Rebellion is as the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness is as iniquity and idolatry" (i Sam. 15:23). If then humanly-devised systems of government and discipline for the Church are iniquity, are they to be departed from ? Surely. Does not this involve separation from saints if they are participating in these systems of men ? It does.

But to return to the term "purge." "If a man purge himself from these." Here it is in the singular, because the apostle is speaking of an individual. But does he mean, If a man judge himself? The context shows he does not. Not that self-judgment is not necessary. Of course it is, but the individual is to purge himself from others The vessels from which he is to purge himself are not simply in himself:they are those he is associated with. Further, it is a serious mistake to make this separation merely external separation:that is not all the apostle is calling for. " Depart from iniquity " means more than that; and so, " If a man purge himself from these" means more than that. But external separation is included. Inward submission to "depart from iniquity " may be seriously questioned if it is not accompanied with the external separation. It is not a mere formal separation:it is an actual separation. But it is unreal if it does not include the external separation. It must be both inward and outward separation from unholy associations.

If now I have submitted to " Depart from iniquity," if I have "purged myself from the vessels to dishonor," have I met my full responsibility? Is my path now to be an individual one ? No. Individualism is a vessel to dishonor. If I am to be a vessel serviceable to the Master, I must separate from this also. I must look for and find those who "call on the Lord out of a pure heart." I must return to apostolic associations. I must assemble with those who hold to and practice apostolic truth.

But two questions are asked us. First, Are only separated brethren used in ministry ? The question is thought to be unanswerable, but the answer to it is simple. Those brethren who have separated themselves from all false systems of teaching on justification, and who teach only the doctrine of Scripture on that subject, are serviceable to the Master in ministry as regards that doctrine; but if they have not separated themselves from false systems of teaching on church government and discipline, they cannot be serviceable to the Master in ministry on this subject. Do we not want to be serviceable to the Master in ministry on every truth ? Ought we not to be ready to minister the whole truth-all that God has revealed; every part of that which constitutes the faith He has given us ? To be at the Master's disposal in this way, we need to get back to the foundation laid in apostolic times. We need to free ourselves from-all the human excrescences that have been added to it. Again, it has been asked,"Do not all saints equally call on the name of the Lord out of a pure heart?" As is well known, the word is, "unmixed,"or "unadulterated." We should read, then, "unmixed," or, "undivided"heart. Have all saints equally an undivided heart ?Alas, how many saints have hearts divided between Christ and Romanism! between Christ and Protestantism! How many hearts are divided between Christianity and some ecclesiastical system! how many between Scripture and theology !No, it is not true that all saints equally call on the Lord out of a pure heart. The human additions to the apostle's foundation have a large place in the hearts of many. It is this that constitutes them in practice "vessels to dishonor."It is this that makes it necessary to separate from them, if we desire to own and practice only apostolic truth.

May God teach us to value His truth! May He work in our hearts the sense of the claims which the truth He has given us has upon our obedience. May it displace in our hearts every other object, every other interest, so that we shall indeed call upon the Lord with single hearts-undivided hearts!

C. Crain