Earlier text: SHALL ALL MEN VOTE?SEVERAL communications like the following have been received:— “Some of the members of our school are troubled, not seeing how to harmonize the notes in the Review of Mar. 31, which state that Abram married his brother Haran’s daughter Ischa or Sarai (i. e., his niece), with Gen. 20:12, where Abraham says that she was the daughter of his father, but not of his mother.” I hope no one has understood the “notes” to teach positively that Sarai and Ischa were the same person. They do not so teach. They stated that the Jews universally believed such to have been the case, that Josephus assumes it to have been a fact, and that most modern scholars so accept it. With this explanation, let us see if the supposition that Sarah was Abraham’s niece can be reconciled with Abraham’s statement in Gen. 20:12, that she was the daughter of his father, or, in other words, his half-sister. Of course the two statements can never be reconciled, if Abraham’s language must be taken in its most common sense, that in which we would now understand it; but Abraham having stated unqualifiedly that she was his sister, when according to his own explanation she was only his half-sister, it is not difficult to believe that when he said, “She is the daughter of my father,” he meant simply that she was the descendant or granddaughter of his father. Indeed, this way of speaking is entirely in accordance with ancient usage, as, for example, in Dan. 5:2, where Nebuchadnezzar is called the father of Belshazzar. In this connection read the following from Prof. Bush’s notes upon Genesis, Vol. I., p. 343:— “Yet indeed she is my sister,” etc. In what sense this was true is not perfectly apparent from the Scriptures. The prevailing opinion of the Jews, which seems as probable as any, is, that the term ‘sister’ here is to be understood in the same latitude as ‘brother’ in other connections; viz., to denote a niece, and that Sarah was the granddaughter of Terah, the daughter of Haran, and consequently the sister of Lot, being, in fact, no other than the Iscah mentioned in Gen. 11:29. Terah, it seems, had two wives, by one of whom he had Haran, the father of Lot and Sarah, and by the other Abraham, so that he might truly say of his wife that she was the daughter (i. e., descendant or granddaughter) of his father, but not of his mother; and it is entirely accordant with Scriptural usage to denominate such a relative a sister. ” A Holy Life in Communion with God
—A holy life spent in the service of God and in communion with him, is without doubt the most pleasant and comfortable life that any live in this world.—Melanchthon. Neglect and Abuse of Christianity by Professors
—It is the neglect and abuse of Christianity by those who profess it, more than any real outside opposition to it, that hinders its progress, and prevents its speedy and complete triumph in the world. HOW EASY IT IS!
By The Watchman
How easy it is to spoil a day!
The thoughtless word of a cherished friend,
The selfish act of a child at play,
The strength of a will that will not bend,
The slight of a comrade, the scorn of a foe,
The smile that is full of bitter things—
They all can tarnish its golden glow,
And take the grace from its airy wings. How easy it is to spoil a day
By the force of a thought we did not check;
By little we mold the clay,
And little flaws may the vessel wreck;
A careless waste of a white-winged hour,
That held the blessings we long had sought,
A sudden failure of wealth or power,
And, lo! the day is with ill inwrought. How easy it is to spoil a life—
And many are spoilt ere well begun—
Some light darkened by sin and strife,
Or downward course of a cherished one;
A toll that robs the form of its grace,
And undermines till health gives way;
The peevish temper, the frowning face,
The hopes that go and the cares that stay. Life is too long to be spent in vain;
Some good should come as the hours go by;
The tangled maze may be made more plain,
Some lowered glance may be raised on high.
If life is too short to spoil like this;
If only a prelude, it may be sweet;
Let us bind together its thread of bliss,
And nourish the flowers around our feet. Conflicts Which Are Inevitable.
Three great questions, involving social, political, and religious revolutions of untold magnitude, and startling in their apparent nearness, are looming up in the mists of the future. Hardly, however, can we speak of them as involved in mist; for they are rapidly assuming a wonderful and unmistakable distinctness. 1. The Eastern Question. England holds possession of India. Russia is determined at least to share in so rich a prize. The great highway from Russia to India lies through the Asiatic provinces of Toorkistan and Afghanistan in a south-easterly direction. Toorkistan being already secured, Russia is now engaged in crushing in the north-western boundary of Afghanistan. Her objective point is India. This all the world understands. Before this is reached, however, these two nations, England and Russia, must come into conflict. This is just as inevitable as that two trains starting from opposite ends of a single line of railroad, and each seeking at a continuous rate of speed to make the other end, must somewhere come into collision. However much parleying and quibbling there may be, temporarily postponing the issue, it is only temporarily postponed; and the crisis is sure to come. Whoever knew a greedy and unscrupulous nation to become bankrupt in pretexts for carrying out its own ends? And the conflict which must come involves the fate of Turkey and all the East in the near future. If men would now turn the glass of prophecy upon the situation—that only glass that carries the vision beyond earthly scenes—right there they would behold coming into the field of view, the coronation of the Lord Jesus over all the kings of the earth, and the all-conquering and everlasting kingdom of our God. 2. The Labor Question. By this is meant the conflict that is approaching between the laboring classes and capitalists. The rich are doing just what the apostle James said they would do in the last days—heaping up treasures. And laborers are largely in the condition he describes also; that is, with wages “kept back by fraud.” Too largely capital is concentrated in the hands of monopolies—monopolies which systematically oppress and rob the working-men. When they consider that the enormous wealth of many capitalists is accumulated at their expense, and see themselves growing poorer and the rich richer, and when they are themselves goaded by the gnawings of hunger and frenzied by the sight of suffering wives and children, it is not unaccountably strange that they, being human, should determine to meet fraud by violence, and recover some of that wealth which they consider justly their own. But this means plunder, robbery, mob-law, riot, and ruin. David Gregg, a minister, in a paper read before the Philothean Society, New York, March 14, 1885, said:— “There is unusual discontent among the laboring classes. . . . The hard times have reduced or taken away the wages of the laboring classes, and they feel their helplessness; they recognize how little there is between them and starvation. Thrown out of work, they have time to think and talk of their helplessness, and of the treatment which they have received from society and from capitalists and from monopolies, and to discuss their rights and their grievances. . . . These times of idleness are used by the working classes for the purpose of effecting labor organizations. . . . These organizations are growing. They are the index of a coming revolution.” He further states that “the laboring classes have a cause and a case.” “Powerful monopolies,” he continues, “are ‘grinding them down without a single compunction of conscience. The most conscienceless, godless thing on the earth, is a rich monopoly. The ancient demons cast out of priestcraft and kingcraft, have entered into the herd of monopolies, and are incarnated in them. Thus incarnated, they are ready for every devilish thing. The oppressing monopolies, like kingcraft of old, call for a revolution that will result in putting monopolies into bonds. Oppressing monopolies must go.” The Christian Union, in an article on the same subject, says:— “The whole of society is virtually preparing for war. A marshaling of forces is going on; the parties being those determined to maintain the industrial system as it is, and those determined to abolish it.” The significance of all these things is that they are evidently to be prominent elements in the closing time of trouble, which must therefore be close at hand. 3. The Sunday Question. It is coming to be recognized more and more that a settled contest is springing up throughout the length and breadth of the land over the Sunday-Sabbath question; the effort being, on the one hand to maintain it as a social and civil institution in the United States, and on the other hand to overthrow it as such. We may rejoice in the coming agitation on one account; and that is that a wide spread interest will be created on the subject, and thus a golden opportunity be offered to present the teaching of the Scriptures on the Sabbath question, with the prospect that many will listen. Will the public mind ever become so enlightened on this question that at least influential and supposed to be intelligent public journals will be ashamed to make such assertions as the following? One of our religious exchanges, speaking of certain congressmen who encroached upon Sunday time in their congressional work, and arguing that they were therefore not fit to be entrusted with public duties, says:— “The forbearance of God will be exhausted, as it has been in the past, and the men who abuse his Sabbaths will be given up to the folly of their own hearts.” And this, by one who is every week trampling into the very dust the only divine Sabbath which God ever gave, or man has ever had, and trying to bolster up in its place, a foul usurper, which God abhors, and which he has most severely denounced in his word. Brethren, there lies before us an ocean of ignorance on this question, only agitated here and there by a whirlpool of dishonesty. The circumstances call upon every man, woman, and child who has an understanding of the teaching of God’s word on this question, to cry aloud and spare not. MUSTN'T INSULT THE DOCTORS.
THE apostles of our Lord faithfully warn men against being wise in their own eyes, being puffed up with vain conceit, thinking more highly of themselves than they ought to think, leaning to their own understanding, and choosing the wisdom of this world instead of that which cometh from above. And Paul plainly intimates that those who do this are very likely to make fools of themselves. In view of these scriptures, what must we think of ministers who seem to consider that they have a monopoly of divine truth, and regard it as an insult to them if the Lord sees fit to bring out new light from his word through other agencies? for there are some who betray themselves as occupying this very position. Sr. E. P. N. sends us the following sketch of her experience while learning the truth as presented by some of our brethren in a tent-meeting at Mt. Vernon, Illinois:— “As I read the query of D. M. C. in the REVIEW of Feb. 24, 1885, in regard to the meaning of 1 Cor. 1: 27, 28, it at once reminded me of a similar query which was actually addressed to me by a minister while I was investigating the present truth. Anxious to know if the S. D. A. doctrines were true, especially their position upon the commandments of God, I attended some meetings, held at the time of which I speak, in a tent in Mt. Vernon, Ill. In order, I suppose, to disabuse my poor, befogged mind of the ideas I was then drinking in, two good men, Presbyterian ministers, one an evangelist from Scotland, made me a visit. “When I saw them at the gate, I knew instinctively their errand, and being very desirous of being delivered from my doubts and fears by knowing the truth, but without intending to argue for or against it, I put up an earnest petition to the Lord to so entirely confound the one in error that he could say nothing. I awaited the opening of the interview with much interest, believing that God would vindicate his cause, and that I would have reason to abide the issue of that afternoon. “After talking for nearly two hours and a half, the Lord, as I believe, putting scriptures into my mind, so that they were obliged to shift constantly from one position to another, the Scotch D. D. finally said to me: ‘Well, now, Mrs. ——, do you candidly think that the Almighty would insult his learned doctors and divines, by picking up such ignorant men as those at the tent to preach that which he had concealed from them in their profound research after his truth?’ “Instantly—and the thought at once decided me— these words came to my mind, and I answered: ‘Aside from being able, or caring, to prove, prove your statement in regard to their being ignorant, by which you doubtless mean uneducated, you should say that God might and would, if he saw the necessity, do again as he has done in the past. You will acknowledge that the Jewish priests and learned divines of Christ’s day, must have thought themselves insulted, when, after they had rejected him, he went and picked up some unlettered fishermen from the Sea of Galilee to preach the truth for to-day. Yes, I certainly believe God would do so again, if there was the same necessity for it. We know he says that he will “confound the wise and prudent,” and that out of the mouths of “babes and sucklings” he has “perfected praise.”’ “‘And they answered never a word.’ So 1 Cor. 1: 27, 28, is literally true, themselves being judges.” THE LATTER RAIN AND THE REFRESHING
A CORRESPONDENT writes that he understands the position taken in the article on “The Judgment of the Great Day,” in the REVIEW of April 7, is that the latter rain is not poured out upon the church till probation is ended for all; and he asks a further explanation of the subject. The article referred to did not undertake to discuss particularly the time and nature of the latter rain. The position taken, however, in regard to the time of probation, was that both righteous and wicked stand at that point together. We do not see that the probation of one class can end before that of the other. This seems evident from the nature of the work in the heavenly sanctuary. The end of probation is the close of the ministry of Christ as mediator in the sanctuary. And when that work is done all cases are decided. When the righteous are accepted, the wicked are rejected, and then there is no more work of mercy to be done for them. As set forth in the article referred to, the close of this line marks a new era in the experience of both the righteous and the wicked, the former receiving special blessings, to which such passages as Acts 3:19; 2 Pet. 1:19; Rev. 2:28; 3:20; and 22:16 apply, and the latter (the wicked) receiving special judgments as embodied in the seven last plagues. At the same time we understand that at an indefinite period before the close of probation is reached, the latter rain, or a special outpouring of the Spirit, commences upon the church, and the time of trouble commences upon the wicked. The latter rain continues with the church till Christ comes, culminating after the close of probation, in the blessing of Acts 3:19, and the other texts referred to; the time of trouble continues upon the wicked till Christ comes, culminating, in their cases, after probation ends, in the seven last plagues. This distinction seems to be necessary from the fact that there are evidently some blessings promised which cannot come upon the church till they are sealed and placed beyond the danger of falling, just as there are some judgments which cannot fall upon the wicked till their probation is ended, and mercy is clean withdrawn. The passage in Acts 3:19 locates very clearly the time of this special blessing for the people of God. “Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out [Gr. ὅπως, so that] the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord.” This clearly teaches this special refreshing after the blotting out of the sins of the people of God, and as a consequence of that work in their behalf. But when this refreshing has once been received by the saints, it would seem impossible for them to lose it. When the day dawns to them and the morning star has arisen in their hearts (2 Pet. 1:19; Rev. 22:16), they can no more fall into darkness. When they have opened the door so that Christ comes in to sup with them, and they with him (Rev. 3:20), they can no more lose his presence. But before they reach this state, before their probation ends, they receive a great outpouring of the Spirit, the beginning of the latter rain, by which they are enabled to close up their final work for the world. Under the influence of this blessing we understand they will go forth proclaiming the Sabbath more fully, and setting forth all the truth with mighty power. This will be the loud cry of the closing stage of the third angel’s message; when this is done, and probation ends, then they receive that final measure of blessing, as set forth in the texts referred to, which fits them up to pass through the time of trouble without a mediator. According to this view, the term “latter297 rain” embraces all that is mentioned in the texts above, as Acts 3:19, etc., begins to apply at a later point of time, covers a longer period, and includes more; just as the expression, “the time of trouble,” while it includes the seven last plagues, begins before the plagues commence, and embraces more than they contain. The relation of these divisions of the work may be clearly understood by grouping together the principal facts and dates, as in the following arrangement. Latter Rain. Hos. 6:3. |
|
|
|---|
| Loud cry of the message. |
Probation ends. Saints sealed. Refreshing. Acts 3:19. Day Star arises, and Day dawns. 2 Pet. 1:19; Rev. 3:20. |
Christ comes. |
Time of Trouble. Dan. 12:1. |
|
|
|---|
| World hears and rejects message. |
Probation ends. Seven last plagues. |
Christ comes. |
It will be seen from this arrangement that the latter rain and the time of trouble cover the same period. The first part of the time is devoted to the closing up of the last message of mercy to the world, during which, under the first outpourings of the latter rain, the saints utter the proclamation in great power; and the wicked, under the infliction of those judgments which constitute the first division of the time of trouble, hear and reject the message. Probation ends, and the latter rain culminates in a final blessing upon the church, and the time of trouble culminates in the seven last plagues upon the wicked. This view of blessing to come upon the saints as they receive the seal of God at the close of probation, does not in any wise conflict with the position that the saints are to pass through an experience represented by “Jacob’s trouble” (tsarah, distress), just before their translation. susceptible of the clearest proof that the claim of Sunday by the papal power into the position of the Sabbath in place of the day which God blessed in the beginning, constitutes what in the Scriptures is called the “mark” of that power. It is the point on which it first attempted to dictate laws to the Christian world. It is an institution for which it only acknowledges that there is no authority so far as God has made known his will in the Scriptures. It claims that their church has been clothed with power to make such changes—a claim which no Protestant will admit. They say that in this they are directed by the Holy Spirit; but the Lord says that the Spirit and the word agree; hence any change that is in religious institutions contrary to the word, is not from above but from beneath. Papists claim further that the Sunday institution is the grand symbol of their power to legislate in spiritual things independently of the Scriptures, and the almost universal adoption of the institution at their hands is the tacit testimony of Christendom to the correctness of their claim. The Sunday Sabbath thus stands forth as the great monument of the presumptive character of the Romish church. It is a fitting “mark” of that power. But as this has been the situation for centuries, the query very naturally arises whether all those who have ever kept the Sunday, or are keeping it now, have not had, or do not now have, the mark of the beast. The conclusion seems inevitable to some that they have; and our enemies try persistently to prejudice the public against our work by representing the position we teach. Let us therefore try to look at the matter with that fairness and regard for the naked truth which all will feel constrained to maintain at the Judgment seat of Christ. If it should be admitted that in a certain abstract sense Sunday-keepers have the mark of the beast, that would not affect the question before us; for the prophecy does not deal with abstractions, but with great practical questions. The third message of Revelation 14, addressed, as all evidence shows, to the present generation, is sent to nations of Sunday-keepers, and warns them against a position not yet taken, a sin not yet committed. “If any man worship the beast or his image, or receive his mark,” etc. Therefore, notwithstanding they are keeping the Sunday already, the message warns them not to receive the mark of the beast. They are not, therefore, considered as having the mark when the message is addressed to them. And it seems very reasonable that this should be so. Consider the circumstances. The prophet says of this apostate papal power that she has made all nations drink of the wine of the wrath of her fornication; that is, she has corrupted all nations by her false doctrines. Among the most notable of these false doctrines is the Sunday Sabbath. But men have lost sight of the origin of that institution. Renouncing the papacy, they have unconsciously brought away with them many of its unscriptural figments. They have even come to think that this matter of Sunday-keeping is enjoined in the Bible. They are thus led to misapprehend the meaning of the fourth commandment, and deviate from its requirements, while still recognizing its authority. They observe the first day of the week without any reference to the anti-Christian power which has tried to change the Sabbath to that day, without any thought of doing it homage. It is a sin of ignorance, and therefore not to be laid to their charge. But this condition of things cannot continue to the end. No rag of papal error and superstition must be found clinging to the garments of that church which is to be translated. Their robes of truth must be without spot or wrinkle or any such thing. Hence a special message is sent forth, presenting to the world the real situation in reference to the Sunday question, restoring to its place the Sabbath of the fourth commandment, and calling upon men, as they regard the authority of Jehovah, to renounce the false and return to the true. Meanwhile the enemy of all righteousness, intent on making his deceptions the most effectual at the last, is fostering influences and directing movements so as to bring everywhere the strong arm of the civil power to compel men to bow to the usurpation. When this issue is reached the question will at once assume a very different aspect. Then a crisis will be presented. Then men will show their position by the choice they make. Paul says that we are servants to him to whom we yield ourselves to obey. Rom. 6:16. There must be an intelligent and voluntary yielding to the requirements of some power for the very purpose of acknowledging its authority. And until a person is brought to this issue in his Sunday observance, it is impossible to determine by his course of action what power he intends to honor; and until he does keep the day for the purpose of showing whose authority he does acknowledge, it cannot be, in his case, a “mark” of anything. When, however, he does keep the day for the purpose of showing that in this matter he yields to the demands of the papal power, then it becomes in his case a mark of that power; for he then, and thereby, shows himself to be a follower of that power, but not before. Even if a person with all the facts before him should step forth and say, I know God demands the observance of the seventh day; I know that the Roman church has substituted in its place the first day of the week; but I reject the authority of Jehovah and bow to that of the pope, and I therefore keep this day to show this—would that person even then have the mark of the beast? That would depend on his answer to certain questions to the following intent: “Is there any issue pressed upon you in this matter by any earthly power?”—“No.” “Are there any pains and penalties you now subject yourself to by refusing to keep Sunday?”—“No.” “Has any power said to you, If you will keep this day you will show that you yield to my authority, and will thereby escape the penalty threatened against all those who do not comply?”—“No.” “Then how are you ‘marked’ by keeping the day? We have, to be sure, your words in the matter; but they are as yet only so much empty air; for the circumstances do not yet exist to which they can apply. One might as well in the days of Julius Cæsar have set up to be a Guelph or Ghibelline.” When, then, will a person receive the mark of the beast? Answer: When, with the clear truth and the claims of God before him, and the question brought to an issue under the enactment of civil penalties, he deliberately decides against the divine in favor of the human, and regulates his practice accordingly to avoid the penalty, then such a practice will become to him a “mark” in the sense of the prophecy; for in the eyes of the law it will distinguish him as occupying a position in accordance with its claims. The mark of the beast, in the prophecy of Revelation, is set over against the seal of the living God—the true Sabbath with which the saints of God are to be sealed. But when a person receives the seal of God, his destiny is decided for everlasting life. Just so we understand when a person receives the mark of the beast in the prophetic issue of Rev. 13 and 14, his destiny is also decided and his portion appointed among the reprobate. The same reasoning will apply, we apprehend, largely, if not to the same extent, to the communicants of the Romish church itself. They, of course, understand better than Protestants, the foundation on which the institution rests. But they have been persuaded that the Church has rightfully made the change it has. But when the light of truth and the claims of God are brought to bear upon them, they also can show themselves choosers between the authority of God and that of the pope, and choosing the wrong side, receive the mark the same as other classes will be caused to receive it. QUALIFICATIONS OF ELDERS
By J. H. W.
QUALIFICATIONS OF ELDERS.
No person is naturally qualified to render acceptable service to God. Converting grace alone can renew our fallen natures so that we can yield that loving obedience which God justly requires. “The carnal mind [the fleshly or natural mind] is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.” Rom. 8:7. There is only one means whereby this enmity can be removed, and its opposites, love and peace, be made to take its place. “Being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ.” Rom. 5:1. But a complete willingness to serve God may be accompanied by a very limited ability to serve him. A man who is thoroughly converted may be perfectly willing to preach the gospel, and yet not have any of the qualifications necessary for an acceptable preacher. He has yet very many things to learn before he is competent to instruct others. He may have laid a good foundation for a Christian character by obtaining the “precious faith,” but to this he must add the Christian graces. 2 Peter 1:1, 5–7. The graces have to be cultivated; the work of overcoming is yet before him. A man may be truly converted who is yet quite ignorant of the general teachings of the Scriptures; ignorant in regard to duty, and to what constitutes true Christian character. To a certain degree this is the case with all young Christians. For this reason we are exhorted to “grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.” 2 Peter 3:18. If this be true (and no one will dispute it), then it must be evident to all that any and every person needs instruction and experience to be fitted to exercise the duties of an officer in the church. And the Scriptures show this to be true, and prove themselves adapted to our wants in this respect, by pointing out the qualifications of church officers, and laying down rules whereby one may become fitted to discharge the duties of his office. And in this is also seen that it is a vain excuse for any one to plead exemption from the responsibilities of an office because he is not qualified to discharge its duties. If there be first the ability to acquire knowledge, and the power and disposition for self-culture, and faith to trust in the promises of God that we may receive grace to help in time of need, and a spirit of consecration to the cause and work of God, no prerequisite is lacking for becoming an efficient officer in the church. We say these are the prerequisites; the requisites are a knowledge of and conformity to the rules laid down in the Scriptures. But it is objected that the servant of God should not depend upon learning or study; he should be fitted up by the Holy Ghost as the disciples were on the day of Pentecost. Well, if the objector has been three and a half years in the service, under the immediate personal instruction and direction of the Lord Jesus, and only needs the illuminating influence of the Holy Spirit to bring the words of the Lord to his remembrance (John 14:26), as was the case with the apostles, then we may allow that he has but little need of any further education. At first view it may be thought that the experience of Paul was not at all parallel to that of the other apostles, as he was converted by revelation of the298 Lord. But (1) Paul had a thorough knowledge of the Scriptures before his conversion. He was an educated man. It needed only that he should be enlightened in regard to the application of the words of Moses and the prophets,—that he should become convinced that Jesus whom he persecuted was the Messiah,—and he could readily preach the gospel in a manner to confound the opposers. (2) Although he did boldly proclaim in Damascus that Jesus was the Messiah, he retired into Arabia and remained there three years before he fully entered upon the work of his ministry. This time he probably spent in study and in communion with his divine Master. Timothy knew the Scriptures from his childhood; yet Paul exhorted him to study to show himself approved unto God, a workman that need not be ashamed; and in furtherance of this object, he said to him: “Meditate upon these things; give thyself wholly to them; that thy profiting may appear to all.” While general education is not by any means to be depreciated, and some knowledge of books is absolutely necessary to doing efficient service in the cause of God, our chief study must be of the holy Scriptures, which only are able to make us wise unto salvation; and our chief reliance upon the Spirit of God, not only to impress the word of truth forcibly upon our understandings, but to shed abroad the love of God in our hearts (Rom. 5:5), without which we ourselves shall be nothing, and in our profession and our labors will be as sounding brass or a tinkling cymbal. The apostle Paul, to whom “the care of all the churches” (2 Cor. 11:28) seemed to be specially committed, gave to Timothy a complete list of the points which qualify an elder to fill his office. The term used in our version is “bishop” (1 Tim. 3:2). Dr. Schaff, Bible Dictionary, says: “The original Greek word means overseer. . . . In the N. T. the term is synonymous with presbyter or elder.” The shade of difference which is sometimes claimed is of no practical importance. Dr. Smith, Dictionary of the Bible, says the Greek word had been used as a title of office before the time of the New Testament. He also says that the term episkopos, bishop, is equivalent to presbuteros, elder. It is conceded that in 1 Tim. 3:1–7 are given the qualifications of the officer that by us is known as the elder of the church. The apostle says that he who desires the office of a bishop desires a good work. The word rendered good has also the signification of honorable; worthy, in James 2:7. Let the elders bear in mind that it is the work, not the honor, which they should desire. It is not said that the office is honorable, but the work; it is the work that gives honor to the office. The position or office can bring honor to no one if the work is neglected, or if it is not faithfully discharged. The rendering in Acts 20:28, overseer (compare 1 Pet. 5:2), is correct and very suggestive. An overseer is one who takes charge of a work or of laborers, whose duty it is to see that the work is done in a proper manner, and that the laborers are faithful in the performance of their work. No less than this is required of an elder. It is evident, then, that an elder should be so related to the church that he can take the oversight of its work and its members. He must of necessity know how the work ought to be performed. He must understand the plan of the work, the ability of the workers, and be always ready to judge between that which is done well and that which is poorly done. A great responsibility rests upon him. And this leads to the notice of a question. Members of a certain church asked advice concerning the following, as the state of their church: The elder moved away, to such a distance that he could have no personal knowledge of the condition of the church or the walk of its members. He could not attend their regular meetings; perhaps could attend the quarterly meetings, but seldom at other times. But they had been unable to elect another, as he refused to resign his office, and had obtained that influence over certain members which prevented the church’s taking any action in the case. What was to be done? Our advice was, Appeal to your Conference for help. The person who does as is stated above is walking disorderly, and should be dealt with accordingly. He is not doing the work assigned to him; he is not feeding the flock (Acts 20:28; 1 Peter 5:2), and he stands in the way of others’ doing the work. He is not seeking the welfare of the church and the upbuilding of the cause, but is seeking self-exaltation at the expense of the work. Such a course is calculated to distract and divide, and is every way worthy of censure. We presume that this is an extreme case, and we hope that there are very few cases where the strength of our language will apply. But we have spoken decidedly and in strong terms that all may avoid the approach to such an evil. We have said, and we believe, that an elder ought to have as watchful oversight of his church as a teacher has of his school. If a teacher should habitually absent himself from his school, and neglect his scholars, steps should be taken to put a more faithful one in his place. If he cannot attend to the duties of his position, he should promptly give notice, that the want may be supplied. But if he cannot attend to his duties, and takes a course to prevent another from attending to them, we readily conclude that he is an enemy to the school, and takes no interest in the welfare of the scholars. To this all must agree; and the application to our subject is evident. Besides the important suggestion contained in the title overseer, we find no less than sixteen specifications in 1 Tim. 3:1–7 of the qualifications of an elder. And it is worthy of remark that in every case where we have called the attention of elders to this fact, surprise has been expressed that there are so many, which shows that the points in this enumeration have not been as generally and thoroughly studied as they should be. On the occasion of an election we almost always hear the officer elect express his sense of unfitness, of a lack of qualifications for the office and the work. But few could tell in just what that unfitness consists, and what are the requisites in a fitting up to the work. Why not, then, carefully study this enumeration, and learn wisdom from the word, and try to bring themselves into conformity to its requirements? We will next briefly consider the points in their order.