Conscience 1 Gathering data, defining it

Our subject today is the conscience and I want to look at it in three sessions. First, I want us to consider what the Bible says about conscience and work out a definition of what it is.

Gathering data

We're all familiar with the idea of conscience. Everybody, it seems, has one. Your conscience speaks to you. It gives you a hard time maybe. Many different writers in many different fields have written many different things about it. We must get our ideas from God's Word.

Old Testament

There are no Old Testament references to conscience, not if you use an old or original version. Modern versions often introduce the word where the idea is present, though the word is not. It appears that the ancient Hebrews had no use for the term, perhaps because they received direct revelation so were, in some ways, less immediately aware of conscience. OT believers spoke more readily of their hearts reflecting on revelation. So, David says (Ps 16:7) I will praise the Lord, who counsels me; even at night my heart instructs me. Cf Ps 40:8 (your law is in my heart).

Adam The idea of conscience is certainly in the Old Testament almost from the beginning. When, after their sin, Adam and Eve hide in fear at the sound of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day (Gen 3:8, 10) that is surely the earliest example of conscience at work.

Puritan William Bates says Adam's “conscience began an early hell within him”. “Paradise with all its pleasures could not secure him from that sting in his breast, and that sharpened by the hand of God”. Adam's soul was racked “with the certain and fearful expectation of judgement.”

Conscience is still at work a little later when Adam then Eve try to put the blame for their sin elsewhere (Gen 3:11-13). Even today our first instinct when sin is discovered is often the same. First - try to cover it up; if that fails, try blaming others.

Jn 3:20 Everyone who does evil hates the light, and will not come into the light for fear that their deeds will be exposed Gen 4:14 Cain says he will be a restless wanderer on the earth, and whoever finds me will kill me which sounds suspiciously like the terror of a guilty conscience, as several commentators notice.

Joseph and his brothers At the other end of Genesis you have the story of Joseph and his brothers. Several writers single it out as a story where conscience plays an important role.

Gen 37: first Reuben, then Judah, appeal to the consciences of the brothers. Reuben argues against killing Joseph, saying Let us not take his life … Shed no blood; throw him into this pit here in the wilderness, but do not lay a hand on him. Judah says they will gain nothing by killing their brother and hiding the fact. He suggests they sell him to the Ishmaelites instead, adding a direct appeal to conscience, for he is our brother, our own flesh.

Joseph's brothers act on a common fallacy. They figure it will be enough simply to take suitable precautions against their crime being discovered. What they forget is the conscience.

John King wrote "the one witness whose eyes they could not blind, the one informant whose voice they could not silence, the one judge whom they could not bribe." People tend to make no “careful provision against the subsequent remonstrances” of the monitor conscience foolishly thinking that if they can overcome its protests at the beginning all will be well in the end. They don't expect it to come haunting them after the event, as it so often does.

Despite great efforts to hide their sin, even wickedly brazening it out before their father, the truth eventually comes out. It is a striking story full of interesting twists and turns and it reminds us how dramatic God's providence can sometimes be. Their guilty consciences seem to sleep for many years but it is like a ticking time bomb waiting to explode. When they are unexpectedly forced to return to the very land into which they had sold Joseph and stand before him, unrecognised at first, their consciences suddenly awake again and began to speak at a volume they cannot ignore and with an authority they cannot resist.

Gen 42:21 tells us the very mention of youngest brother Benjamin stirred their consciences so that they said to each other surely we are being punished because of our brother. We saw how distressed he was when he pleaded with us for his life, but we would not listen; that’s why this distress has come upon us. Matthew Henry: Guilty consciences are apt to take good providences in a bad sense; to put wrong meanings even upon things that make for them.

Suddenly, the brothers vividly recollect the all but forgotten scene of yesteryear. Now it is as if it had happened the day before. A long time has passed but suddenly one event, one that took up just one day, looms exceedingly large on the horizon. They are forced to watch the replay in high definition and hear it in surround sound, the button set to replay. “The imperishable records of conscience” are unexpectedly and unwillingly brought into the light of day. A bolt of lightning illuminates the sky as conscience abruptly breaks through the dark clouds of suppression and denial.

Conscience is often active before any other informant, witness or judge speaks. It has the power to connect events in its own unique way, combining things otherwise distant, dissimilar and apparently detached from each other.

Later, a cup is found in Benjamin's sack and they say What can we say? How can we prove our innocence? God has uncovered your servants' guilt. (Gen 44:16). The reaction is prompted not by guilt for having stolen anything but guilt over what they'd done to Joseph.

When Joseph finally reveals himself, they are terrified, a terror again borne of a guilty conscience (Gen 45:3). Even after reconciliation, Jacob's departure again stirs conscience and they are fearful (Gen 50:15). As one writer puts it, a guilty conscience casts a long shadow.

Joseph suffered a great deal after being sold into Egypt but one burden he never had to carry was the burden of a guilty conscience. He knew that he did not deserve to be suffering as he was. Under God, this no doubt gave him a good deal of peace and consolation. In contrast, what a sense of condemnation his brothers laboured under. When Joseph himself was faced with temptation at one point, he stood firm because he kept conscience on the throne. He wisely traced the likely consequences of sin and responded to Potiphar's wife and her advances with a sincere and wise how then could I do such a wicked thing and sin against God? (Gen 39:9b).

The pain of sin's sting consists very much in the recollections of an awakening conscience. Suddenly, the enchantment is broken, the illusion over. Conscience wakes, like a giant from slumber, and the individual is forced to hear accusations he can't answer, charges he can't counter, reproofs he can't repel.

Other examples There are many other places in the Old Testament where the idea of conscience surfaces. Job (27:6) - ... my heart does not reproach me for any of my days. Gen 20:5, 6 Abimelech tells God he has acted with a clear conscience and innocent hands (NET) and God agrees. The hardening of Pharaoh's heart can be related to the subject of conscience. Moses' own conscience is seen to be at work (Ex 2) when, after killing an Egyptian, he is distraught to find he has been observed. On at least two occasions we see David’s conscience at work. 1 Sam 24:5 he is conscience-stricken for having cut off a corner of Saul's robe. 1 Sam 24:10 after he counted the fighting men. In 1 Sam 25:31 Abigail's words.

In the Psalms conscience is seen to be active. Ps 32:3, 4 is highly descriptive of the pangs of a bad conscience. Ps 38:3-5 is similar. Ps 51:10 expresses David’s desire for a good conscience. On the basis that everyone has a conscience the Law was given and the prophets preached. A striking example is how Nathan dealt with David following his adultery with Bathsheba (1 Sam 12).

The idea of conscience is in many places in the Old Testament then. How it may have operated in man as originally created in God’s image is debatable. What was the significance for conscience of the knowledge of good and evil? Puritan Richard Bernard asserts that conscience was in Adam before the fall but did not function as it later would. Instead, it witnessed to his goodness and bore sway so that he was obedient and able to know joy in God's presence. He suggests that conscience will function in a similar way in the glory of heaven.

New Testament

Gospels Turning to the New Testament, we find that the Gospels again make no direct reference to conscience, though the idea again there in the story found in John 8:1-9. In the Gospels, as in the OT, even when the term is not used, there is again reason to believe that Jesus has conscience in mind in some places. Eg Lk 12:57, Mark 3:5.

Paul and also Peter Most New Testament references to conscience are made by Paul. In fact, of the 30 or so that exist, around 21 are in his letters (3 in Romans, 12 in Corinthians, 6 in Timothy) 2 others are in sermons of his in Acts and 5 are in Hebrews [9:9, 14; 10:2, 22; 13:8], which if not by Paul reflects his style. The only other person to use the word is Peter (1 Pet 3:16, 21).

It is very much Paul’s word, then. Where did he get it? Some suggest it was a specialist word taken over from the Stoic philosophers but it has been demonstrated to have been an everyday word among the Greeks, going back, in one form or another, to at least the sixth century BC.

In a 1955 study, Conscience in the New Testament, C A Pierce suggests it was a catchword in the Corinthian church, a popular word used to encapsulate an idea. Paul, it seems, took up the word and used it first in correspondence with them and, subsequently, as part of his usual Christian vocabulary. Certainly Paul and other NT writers took up other Greek words and fill them with Christian meaning. Eg Saviour.

The New Testament, like the Old, is perfectly able to speak about conscience without using the word.

Gal 6:4 Each one should test their own actions. Then they can take pride in themselves alone, without comparing themselves to someone else. Conscience is not named but how else does one test one's own actions without making comparisons? 1 Jn 3:19-21 heart is used where conscience would fit equally well. This is how we know that we belong to the truth and how we set our hearts at rest in his presence: If our hearts condemn us, we know that God is greater than our hearts, and he knows everything. Dear friends, if our hearts do not condemn us, we have confidence before God.

As we shall see, when we speak of conscience, we're really speaking of the heart or soul. The word is useful, however, for speaking of a specific function of the soul, namely its moral workings.

Romans 2:14, 15

The nearest the New Testament comes to a definition of conscience is Rom 2:14,15. For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do what the law requires, they are a law to themselves, even though they do not have the law. They show that the work of the law is written on their hearts, while their conscience also bears witness, and their conflicting thoughts accuse or even excuse them.

A number of things emerge from this statement.

1. That everyone has a conscience, even pagans. The conscience belongs to man as man.

2. These verses help us to distinguish the various elements involved in making a moral decision. Although we use the word conscience in a general way to refer to the whole business of making moral decisions, there are, in fact, at least three clearly identifiable strands in the process.

(1) The requirements of the Law of God, which are written on every man’s heart.

(2) The conscience itself, which makes its judgements on the basis of the preceding element.

(3) There are a person’s thoughts or opinions. These come as he makes a decision on the basis of the mediation of conscience proper.

The Puritans and others noticed the correspondence between this threefold distinction and the practical syllogism, a way of reasoning found in the writings of Aristotle. The practical syllogism is an argument in three propositions.

1. A major premise stating some universal truth

2. A minor premise stating some particular truth

3. A conclusion derived from the two premises

So it may be that a man

1. From his moral record, learns the fact lying is wrong (maj)

2. His conscience, therefore, tells him that to make up a story about why he'd not completed the task he was required to complete would be a lie (min)

3. In his thinking or opinion, therefore, he decides to tell a lie would be wrong (conc)

Similarly, he may have

1. In his moral record he may know that bank robbers deserve punishment (maj)

2. His conscience acknowledges that he has robbed a bank (min)

3. In his thinking or opinion, therefore, he has to see he deserves to be punished (conc)

We will need to say more about Rom 2;14, 15 in a moment but first we simply note the significance of the verses and the fact there is a good deal of material on conscience in the Bible, more perhaps than we expect. This serves to underline the importance of the subject that we are considering.

Definition

Philosophers, psychologists and theologians down the ages have wrestled with the problem of conscience and have arrived at divergent conclusions. It is important to get a clear and accurate definition of what conscience is early on.

Confusion We have noted already that people are fairly familiar with the idea of conscience. They say “my conscience is bothering me”; “my conscience pricked me” or claim to have acted “in good conscience”. They know what it is to have something “on their conscience”. They know about a bad or a guilty conscience and, hopefully, a good one too.

Pierce has pointed out, however, that “of the number that make use of the word 19 in 20 perhaps may be ignorant of its true meaning”. This is no exaggeration. Think how other Bible words are employed in everyday language. People still speak, for example, of a thing being “as ugly as sin” or of being “more sinned against than sinning” but how often is the word understood in its biblical sense? It is similar with the word conscience.

Confusion over what exactly conscience may be is not something new. In the 17th century several authors remark on this. Westminster Divines John Jackson and Robert Harris it has “a thousand definitions and descriptions” is “a word of infinite latitude and great dispute” and “much talked of, but little known”. Other Puritans make similar observations.

There is evidence to suggest that the word has often been given such a wide range of meaning in everyday language that, though familiar with it, people rarely gave it an accurate biblical definition. Writers on conscience disagree, for example, on whether to think of it primarily as a human faculty or power, an act or habit or a created quality.

If it is found in the human soul, where is it found? The understanding, the will, where? Surely it is distinct from these. Not only do we tend to distinguish it from them but so does the NT. 1 Tim 1:5 distinguishes conscience from the heart; Tit 1:15 distinguishes it from the mind. In experience too, conscience demonstrates an independence not observed in those other faculties

.

Clarification – Etymology

New Testament Greek word syneidesis, which appears to be made up of two parts.

1. syn/sun suggests with/together. Synchronised swimmers co-ordinate their movements with each other, a symphony is performed by a number of instruments playing together at the same time.

2. The second part, eidesis, is from one of the Greek words for to know.

Conscience enables a certain knowledge – not the usual sort found in the understanding but a reflective knowledge over and above mere head knowledge.

Richard Bernard "A certain, particular, applicatory knowledge in man’s soul, reflecting upon himself, concerning matters between God and him."

The root meaning, then, seems to be to know together, joint knowledge or knowledge shared (with another). The Anglo-Saxon word for conscience inwit suggests inward knowledge but the Latin based word that superseded it, as in the romance languages, is from con-scientia, made up in exactly the same way as the Greek. Other European languages, though not all, are similar. Eg, Welsh cydwybod, Swedish samvete, Russian sovest.

This does not bring us directly to a biblical definition as there has been much debate over who shares the joint knowledge. Obviously, on one side is the person himself, but who is on the other? Many assume it must be God, a teaching often attributed to Augustine and taught by many others, including several Puritans, nineteenth century Romantic poets and Roman Catholic writers old and new. Eg American philosopher and convert to Rome, Peter Kreeft "the voice of God in the soul". The only biblical arguments advanced for this view are dubious references to Elijah's still small voice and appeals to 1 Pet 2:19, it is commendable if a man bears up under the pain of unjust suffering because he is conscious of God. However, Peter clearly has in mind only Christians.

Some suggest the word's etymology proves conscience must reveal a knowledge shared with God. Thus we have definitions such as Ole Hallesby (1933) “that knowledge or consciousness by which man knows he is conforming to the moral law or will of God”. While not without merit, such definitions are premature and potentially misleading.

Clarification – Usage

Salaman Rushdie (Satanic Verses) "Names, once they are in common use, quickly become mere sounds, their etymology being buried, like so many of the earth's marvels, beneath the dust of habit. It is unwise to define a word in light only of etymology. How a word is used is far more important."

There is some disagreement about usage of the word synedeisis and related words but it is clear that these terms were not always in the context of moral judgements.

Christian Maurer (Kittel's Theological Dictionary of the NT) cites a famous example where Socrates' young disciple Alcibiades speaks of being conscious that he could put up no resistance to the power of his teacher’s arguments. There is no moral element involved. Least of all, in Greek thought, is there any necessary connection between conscience and God.

Even in the New Testament we find a related word being used in a context where conscience is clearly not intended. Acts 5:2 tells us Ananias with his wife’s full knowledge kept back money from the Apostles, while claiming it had been handed over. The word is synoida, “to know with another”. Ananias knew what he was doing and his wife knew too.

Then Acts 12:12, 14:6 (ESV) Peter realised and Paul and Barnabas learned a thing (NIV has the thing dawning on Peter, being found out by Paul and Barnabas). Words from the same family are again used. At their most basic, then, such words mean “to become conscious of”, “to realise”.

Heb 10:2 is very interesting. ASV speaks of worshippers who would have had no more consciousness of sins. The word used is the same as that found in verse 22 having our hearts sprinkled to save us from a guilty conscience (NIV. TCNT … purified by the sprinkled blood from all consciousness of wrong). It is only the added words for their sins that brings in the moral element.

Concise Definitions

Several Puritans, tending to lean to a greater or lesser extent on Medieval theologian Thomas Aquinas, attempted to define conscience concisely. Eg

• William Ames A man’s judgement of himself, according to the judgement of God of him.
• Samuel Ward (following Perkins) A part of the understanding in all reasonable creatures determining of their particular actions either with them or against them.
• William Fenner. The judgement of man upon himself as he is subject to God’s judgement. Like Ames, Fenner refers to 1 Cor 11:31, which he uses more simply to say, harking back to Perkins, that conscience is “a man’s true judgement of himself”.
• Jim Packer A rational faculty, a power of moral self-knowledge and judgement, dealing with questions of right and wrong, duty and desert, and dealing with them authoritatively, as God’s voice

From what we have already said, however, it is clear that we must not think of the conscience as a department of man’s personality or a faculty of his soul. It can be useful to speak in such terms for the purpose of study but it is important to realise that, in reality, conscience is simply one aspect of man’s personality, one function of his soul.

We have also seen that the “joint knowledge” is not necessarily shared with God himself. In fact, put simply, the conscience is man’s power of self-reflection and, particularly, self-criticism. Rehwinkel noted that the English word consciousness is made up in the same way as the word conscience. Consciousness is “awareness of”; conscience is narrower in meaning and refers to “a moral or ethical awareness”. “Conscience” he suggests “is a moral consciousness accompanied by a feeling of obligation and duty.”

Kenneth Kirk (The conscience and its problems 1933) reminds us that though we may write of conscience as a distinct entity we must recall that it “is myself so far as I am a moral man”.

Milton L Rudnick The self in the process of ethical deliberation and evaluation .... It is not someone or something else working in or upon man, but he moral self at work, involving all of a man’s rational and emotional faculties.

Conscience is an amazing thing, one of the elements in our make-up that distinguishes us from animals, mere brute beasts. Hallesby “very remarkable”, Bernard the principal part of God's image in man and what most resembles God in every man.

Conscience in Romans 2:14, 15 again

Given the threefold division that we saw in Rom 2:14, 15, it is clear that when we use the word conscience, we should really restrict it to the second aspect of making moral decisions, the making of judgements on the basis of what is in the moral record.

Some would suppose that conscience only acts in a negative, condemning way.

Emil Brunner (Divine Imperative) a “sinister thing” that “attacks man like an alien, dark, hostile power”.

Pushkin (Play Miserly Knight) “a sharp clawed animal, which scrapes the heart … an uninvited guest, annoying discourser, a rude creditor; and a witch, which dims the moon and graves.”

This may have been the Greek view but Paul points out that there are times when even the Gentile conscience can provoke thoughts that excuse as well as accuse. The Pagan can have a bad or a good conscience. Strictly speaking, of course, it is not conscience that is good or bad. We do not say a barometer is bad if it correctly predicts stormy weather; we merely say it is accurate. Certainly the Christian can have a good conscience (see 2 Cor 1:12, 1 Tim 1:19). Rom 2:14, 15 teaches the moral responsibility of all men.

Complexity

It is important not to think of conscience simplistically. Perkins talks of mind and memory assisting it, one is the storehouse and the keeper of rules and principles, the other the recaller of omissions and commissions. Bernard A Director or Judge in the understanding, a Register and Secret Witness in the memory. It also works in the will, heart and affections. All the other faculties work with it “as it commands the whole man in the execution of its offices”. Many Puritans pictured it as a court with the roles of registrar, witnesses, prosecutor, judge, executioner all carried out by conscience.

Such pictures are fine, provided that we remember the mysteries involved. The workings of conscience include the whole process of perceiving the requirements of God’s Law, assessing them, then deciding how to proceed or what judgement to give. The over-riding impression is one of “ought” or “ought not” but includes a whole host of mental perceptions and emotional feelings - comprehension of right and wrong; use of memory, mind and will; complacency or disquiet; shame or pride; delight or pain; anticipation of reward or punishment.

The sheer breadth of mental and emotional interplay involved can be gauged from the array of legitimate illustrations employed by different writers trying to bring out the varied character of conscience. Eg spy, watchdog, bloodhound, window, mirror, sundial, compass, barometer, plumbline, sail, lash, sword, alarm bell, GPS system, flight recorder or black box and sense of taste.

Characteristics

Christopher Ash (Pure Joy) helpfully singles out five features of conscience.

1. It speaks with a voice independent of us. It enables us to stand outside of ourselves and look at ourselves objectively. Hallesby “a sort of doubling of our personality”. We are, in a sense, able to stand outside self and pronounce judgement. We can to some extent offer unbiased judgement.

2. It speaks with a voice that looks backward and forward. Indeed, its judgements can concern past, present or future. In this latter role conscience acts more like a guide than a judge. Hallesby it is generally at its weakest during sin, in the present, but at its strongest after the event is past.

3. Other people can appeal to my conscience, as Paul does (Rom 13:5) when he tells believers they must submit to the powers that be, not only not to be punished but also for the sake of conscience.

4. God can appeal to my conscience. Ash's example Isa 5:3, 4 where God, referring to Israel as a vineyard, says And now, O inhabitants of Jerusalem and men of Judah, judge between me and my vineyard. What more was there to do for my vineyard, that I have not done in it? When I looked for it to yield grapes, why did it yield wild grapes?

5. One does not need a Bible to hear the voice of conscience. Ash notes how Joseph rejected the invitations to her bed extended by Potiphar's wife in Egypt (Gen 39). Even before the law, Joseph knew adultery was wrong. Another example - the opening chapters of Amos where the surrounding nations are declared guilty not on the basis of the law but accepted morality.

Conclusion

Richard Sibbes (2 Corinthians) what is conscience, but the soul itself reflecting upon itself? He says it is “the property of the reasonable soul and the excellency of it, that it can return upon itself.” Samuel Rutherford (Catechism) “the principal part of the soul”. When we speak of the workings of conscience, then, we are speaking, clearly, of the moral workings of the soul itself.

Despite what rationalists may have us believe, the conscience is not the result of evolution or a mere interiorisation of cultural norms or social mores. It undoubtedly bears witness to the culture and morality around us but this in no way explains its origin or function. It is not “the divine spark” or “the voice of God” as such. Spurgeon There is no more atrocious mistake made by divines than to tell people conscience is God's representative in the soul.

Having said this, we must say that it is important to hear it. Raymond Opperwall “the internalised voice of those whose judgement of a person counts with him. It is the inner voice that testifies for the moral authorities that we recognise.” It is not the voice of God but the person's own voice.

Rehwinkel “man himself speaking as a moral being to himself”.

God given, it cannot be removed. God himself has ordained and fixed it as a monitor within. We don't always like its witness. Sometimes we disagree with it. It is important to see, however, that the voice of conscience must not be ignored. We must learn to listen to our soul within.

Ministers’ Fraternals

When I agreed to lead this session on ‘ministers’ fraternals’ last month, I assumed that there would be an abundance of material for me to turn to with which to furnish you with a helpful introduction to the subject. What I have discovered is that there is in fact a great paucity of material. Very little seems to have been written on this subject at all. The standard Reformed and evangelical books dealing with the Christian ministry and related subjects have nothing to say on the subject, it seems, and there do not appear to have been any articles on the topic in currently existing magazines aimed at ministers.

This seems a rather strange phenomenon to me as, since entering the Christian ministry, I have often been encouraged to belong to a ministers’ fraternal and I have often heard older men speak of the benefits of such fraternals.

Over the years I have belonged to two or three of these bodies, including this one. Among the seniors and peers I most respect it is generally accepted that fraternals are a good thing and the only people I am aware of who reject that idea have either belonged to a large church or have joined themselves to what is only an alternative form of fraternal or have sadly run into some sort of moral or doctrinal trouble.

There is a widespread acceptance, then, that fraternals are or can be a good thing but no-one seems to have established a biblical case for them, traced their history or gone into print at any length advocating their beneficial nature. Despite the non-existence of such materials I will endeavour to do something along those lines in this paper trusting that it will be of some use as we consider this matter.

1. What is a ministers’ fraternal?

The word fraternal, of course, refers to brotherliness and is the most widely used word to describe what we are considering. In Scotland, I believe, the fraternals started by Willie Still are known as the Crieff Brotherhood and here in London we have the Westminster Fellowship. American pastor and author Arturo G Azurdia III leads what is known as The Whitefield Fraternal. He describes it as ‘a fellowship of men in gospel ministry who meet regularly for the purpose of promoting the cause of reformation and revival in the local church.’ He states that the sessions they organise have been shaped by three basic objectives

1. To stimulate a more complete comprehension of the gospel of grace

2. To promote a clearer vision regarding the ministries of Christ’s church

3. To rekindle a fresh devotion to faithful Christian ministry

He sees the fraternal then as having educational, clarificational and devotional ends. It seeks to increase comprehension, clarify vision and rekindle devotion.

All these, a fraternal should seek to provide.

The Founders Fraternals among Southern Baptists go into a little more detail but are quite similar in many ways. They are intended to promote

• Personal holiness in the lives of those who pastor the churches
• Sincere prayer for the pastors and the work of God in the region
• Warm fellowship and lasting friendships among like-minded spiritual leaders
• Understanding of the great biblical doctrines once espoused and proclaimed freely by our forebears (ie the doctrines of grace)
• Encouragement in the proclamation of the gospel in the region and around the world
• Interest in the lives of our early leaders and the lessons we can learn from them
• Obedience to the standards and practices of church life prescribed by the Bible (ie expositional preaching, church discipline, Scriptural leadership patterns, Word-regulated worship, biblical evangelism, regenerate church membership, etc.)

2. Who convenes a ministers’ fraternal?

Fraternals can be convened by three or four different possible agencies.

An individual minister who invites likeminded friends to join him in fraternal. This seems to be the origin of the Westminster fraternal, although it has moved well beyond that. I believe that Michael Harley had something of this sort when he was in Finchley and I know that J Keith Davies did something similar in the brief period that he was at St John’s Wood Road.

A local church that organises meetings for ministers to attend. A current example would be the Spurgeon fraternal organised by the Metropolitan Tabernacle.

A denomination making use of its networking to organise fraternals in more than one place. This fraternal is officially of that nature – an FIEC fraternal. The EMW fraternals in Wales are well known and have been going for some time. I have attended fraternals organised by the Association of Grace Baptist Churches (South East).

A separate organisation that serves as an umbrella chiefly for the ministers’ fraternal. This is the current status of the Westminister Fellowship. I believe the same is true of the Whitefield Fraternal that meets down in Sussex. I have also spoken at fraternals in Bedfordshire and Kent that seem to meet on this sort of basis.

3. A biblical case for ministers’ fraternals?

There is, of course, no New Testament verse advocating that ministers of churches gather together every month or two and seek fellowship one with the other. The exact nature of church government has been an area for much contention over the years and until agreement can be obtained in those matters it is highly likely that there will be a consensus on the much more loosely structured idea of ministerial fraternals.

In this early period of the church’s history one sees little evidence of formal meetings for ministerial fellowship but one does get the impression from Paul’s letters of a great deal of interaction between Paul and the others – people like Peter, John, Barnabas, Luke, John Mark, Timothy, Titus, Apollos, Aquila and a host of others. Their fraternal attitude is summed up in the words of Peter in 1 Peter 5:1, 2 To the elders among you, I appeal as a fellow-elder, a witness of Christ's sufferings and one who also will share in the glory to be revealed: Be shepherds of God's flock that is under your care, serving as overseers - not because you must, but because you are willing, as God wants you to be.

Fraternals are not a matter of Law or of ecclesiastical church government but a matter of wisdom and perhaps the best place to turn in Scripture for guidance on this matter is to the Book of Proverbs, so full of good advice on all sorts of matters.

An obvious place to begin is in Proverbs 27. There we have two verses that touch on this topic. Firstly, verse 9 Perfume and incense bring joy to the heart, and the pleasantness of one’s friend springs from his earnest counsel. The simile is drawn from the enjoyment that perfume and incense give by means of their penetrating aroma, especially in a hot climate. One of the advantages of friendship or fraternity is that a friend and fellow can tell you your faults and passionately urge you in the right direction in a way that an enemy cannot and in a way that even a family member cannot do so well. This is a part of fraternity.

Secondly, verse 17 As iron sharpens iron, so one man sharpens another. This simile is from the kitchen and is drawn from knife sharpening, which is often done by means of rubbing the knife up and down another piece of metal. Presumably the point is that friendly debate can be tremendously stimulating as scholars and artists and others will testify. Peer criticism brings many advantages. Loners can be very dull and boring. They can often lack penetration in a way that the man who has debated with others does not. In friendship sometimes the sparks fly but that is part of it. Certainly this is part of the reason for fraternals.

Similar to these is Proverbs 16:24 Pleasant words are a honeycomb, sweet to the soul and healing to the bones. The simile highlights two properties of honey – its sweetness and its healing properties. The pleasant words that are in mind are those that are both sweet to the soul and likely to heal the bones. We instinctively think of pleasant words as being sweet to the body rather than healing the soul but this form of expression means all aspects are covered. The right words can heal relationships and restore well-being. Interestingly the only other place that mentions a honeycomb is Psalm 19:11 where it illustrates the sweetness of God’s Word. Think of the way that in a fraternal ministers can do good to each other through Word centred conversation.

Other more general proverbs regarding speech are also, of course, relevant.

12:18 Reckless words pierce like a sword, but the tongue of the wise brings healing.

15:23 A man finds joy in giving an apt reply - and how good is a timely word!

15:26 The LORD detests the thoughts of the wicked, but those of the pure are pleasing to him.

25:11 A word aptly spoken is like apples of gold in settings of silver.

25:12 Like an ear-ring of gold or an ornament of fine gold is a wise man’s rebuke to a listening ear.

These fit in with similar general New Testament exhortations to holy speech and to fellowship among believers. Together all this serves to underline the wisdom of ministers, as those who fear the LORD, meeting together and talking with each other, with the hope that the LORD will listen and hear (Malachi 3:16). In Hebrews 10:24 the writer says And let us consider how we may spur one another on towards love and good deeds and immediately goes on to talk about the importance of meeting together. Surely a ministers’ fraternal is one way of obeying such a verse.

4. A brief history of ministers’ fraternals

So, given that Scripture spells nothing out about ministers’ fraternals, where did the idea come from? Who first decided that this would be a good way of spurring one another on?

From the little research I have been able to do, I would guess that, as with the whole idea of societies in general, the eighteenth century is the place to look. From the end of the seventeenth century right through into the nineteenth century there was something of a craze for forming societies of all sorts. The Methodist revival was marked by the use of societies for prayer and mutual edification. Towards the end of the eighteenth century, societies for ministers were beginning to be popular.

As early as 1714 the Baptists had a fraternal in London. This was despite the break down of the churches association and according to some authorities, coincided with an increasingly high view of the responsibility, privilege and dignity of ministers. It was reconstituted on strictly Calvinist lines in 1724 and became known as The Baptist Board, taking on several functions normally assumed by associations, including giving advice to ministers and churches located both in and beyond London. The Northamptonshire Association of Particular Baptists began in 1763 and included a ministers’ fraternal. One of its meetings in 1787 is the one where Carey was famously put down regarding his crazy ideas about missions to the heathen. It was eventually the cradle, of course, for the Particular Baptist Mission to the heathen whose first missionary was Carey himself. In the same period, there was also a successful Baptist fraternal in the Bristol area.

Perhaps it was what he saw of this association when he was in Olney that led John Newton, at the age of 73 and then ministering in London, to form The Eclectic Society, a fraternal of ministers that has become more widely known through the Banner book The thought of the evangelical leaders which contains notes of their discussions in the years 1798-1814.

The society actually began in 1783 without a name. D Bruce Hindmarsh (in his biography of John Newton, p 312) describes it as ‘a regular, informal synod of evangelical ministers and leading laymen’. John H Pratt states that it was ‘for mutual religious intercourse and improvement, and for the investigation of religious truth.’ It first met at the Castle and Falcon Inn, Aldersgate, on January 16 and was attended by Newton and three fellow ministers, his later biographer Richard Cecil and Rev Henry Foster and one Eli Bates, esquire. It slowly increased to around a dozen and began to meet fortnightly in the vestry of St John’s Chapel, Bedford Row. Most were Anglican ministers but there were always one or two dissenters and ‘laymen’. It too was a cradle for mission, the Church Missionary Society in this case. Josiah Pratt whose notes are preserved in the Banner book became secretary also to the CMS.

The pattern was to meet for tea at four and then after a brief prayer to discuss a pre-arranged subject for around three hours. Hindmarsh interestingly says that it embodied Newton’s ideals – ‘A non-partisan group of evangelical believers, gathered in a spirit of friendship for ‘improving’ spiritual conversation.’ He quotes Newton himself, saying in a letter, ‘I am not fond either of assemblies, consistories, synods, councils, benches, or boards. ... [Ministers’] associations, in my judgment, should always be voluntary and free. Thus there are ten or a dozen of us in London, who frequently meet; we deliberate, ask, and give advice as occasions arise; but the sentiment of one, or even of the whole body is not binding on any.’

If we skip forward to the twentieth and twenty first centuries, the fraternal best known to people like ourselves is, of course, The Westminster Fellowship. According to Iain Murray, this began as a quarterly Tuesday morning meeting at Westminster Chapel. Attendance was, as with the Eclectic Society, by invitation. Dr Lloyd-Jones had had a similar meeting when he was in Aberavon and, encouraged by Douglas Johnson, he began something on similar lines here in the capital. There were about a dozen at first but then in 1942 Oakhill Principal Alan Stibbs invited the Doctor to speak on the subject of original sin in a small IVF study group. This led to Stibbs, P E Hughes and others joining the Westminster Fellowship too.

From October 1942 Stibbs became secretary and they began to meet at 1.30-4.15 pm. The first half of the afternoon was given over to sharing. (The fellowship got the name ‘The confession’ due to that. It was also known as the black hole of Calcutta as it met in the downstairs parlour where no natural light entered.) The Doctor was keen to discuss things rather than hear papers and was insistent that it should be only for ministers not students or others.

By 1955 the fraternal had outgrown the parlour and was meeting in the Institute Hall (now the Dr Lloyd-Jones Memorial Hall) and by 1958 a ‘large group’ was gathering there. A tradition developed of an away day in June when the Doctor would speak in the morning and discussion would follow in the afternoon. Towards the end of the fifties these meetings began to be at Guessens in Welwyn (now the EMF HQ). Murray says that over a hundred were present in 1959. He says that the standard of debate was often high with men like Ernest Kevan able to challenge the Doctor at times. He also remarks on the humour that was even then an essential part of the fellowship. In January 1960 the meeting day changed from Tuesday to Monday (to suit the ladies who made the tea and also met on Tuesdays). From 1963 the meetings also began to include morning sessions when speakers would usually address matters pertaining to church polity and evangelical unity.

On November 29, 1966 the Fellowship met for the last time in its initial form, the Doctor announcing at the end of the morning session ‘The present Westminster Fraternal must be considered as disbanded’ (Murray, p 532). The fraternal was, of course, reconstituted as a separatist grouping, and continues to this day. Dr Lloyd-Jones continued to chair it, even though latterly hampered by a measure of deafness, after his retirement form the Chapel, led discussion being the norm. Murray gives an example of debate on pp 703f of the biography. The Doctor chaired his last Westminster Fellowship in June 1980. Since that time it has been in the hands of a committee with various chairmen. Numbers have dwindled from over a hundred to a present attendance of around 20-40. It is now back downstairs again in the refurbished church parlour. Innovations include many more addresses and occasional preaching sessions. Its strength lies beyond what goes on in meetings and extends to the fellowship that it fosters beyond the four walls of the meeting place.

Some other fraternals are similar to the Westminster Fellowship but many more are like our own, meeting over the lunch period to hear papers or to discuss.

5. The strengths and weaknesses of ministers’ fraternals

Finally, I want to say something about the strengths and weaknesses of a ministers’ fraternal. I have already quoted from Arturo G Azurdia III regarding the fraternals that he runs. He also says

The challenges of Christian ministry are unique and consuming. Church leaders are expected to provide spiritual motivation, pastoral care, theological insight, evangelistic vision, and forward-looking leadership. But to this end ministers themselves need resources. They need practical tools and continuing education. They need collegial fellowship and intellectual stimulation. They need spiritual refreshment and personal encouragement.

It was with the aim of providing such resources for church leaders and ministers that the fraternals he leads were begun.

In November, 1807 the Eclectic Society discussed the subject of the chief duties of Christian ministers to one another. Some of the duties they mention are to

• Love one another
• Maintain spiritual unity
• Pray for one another
• Guard against envy and mutual jealousy
• Rejoice in one another’s success
• Honour and defend one another, being jealous each for the other’s character
• Admonish and exhort one another in love
• Enlighten one another
• Tenderly help any who are in trouble
• Forgive one another
• Think the best of one another rejecting prejudice and intolerance
• Avoid emphasising minor differences and allow the right of private judgement
• Avoid gossiping about one another
• Avoid flattering one another

I would be willing to argue that most of these duties can best be promoted through the means of ministers’ fraternals.

On the other hand, it is right that we recognise the limitations of fraternals. In a series of articles for Rutherford House Dr Montagu Barker has been quite critical of fraternals. In an article on The Minister as a member of the fellowship he argues for pastor’s pastor’s pastors.

He says that for most ministers

Their sustenance has been the company of other clergy, with fraternals, retreats and conferences. How inadequate they prove; they are the very worst places for ministers to be pastored! Ministers meet and discuss their work, with banal generalities about recent encouragements. I myself have spoken to ministers’ fraternals and seen how little real sharing goes on.

He continues

How can you say you are depressed and feel a failure, that the work is going badly and you feel responsible? How can you share that your home life is in chaos, with your wife having gone off you sexually, and the children acting up mercilessly? All you can share is vague generalities, and exaggerate the spiritual growth of the work.

Clergy do not care well for other clergy, doctors care very badly for other doctors and lawyers give terrible advice to fellow lawyers because they identify too closely with the other person. In medicine, we are well aware of this, if a little ashamed of ourselves. When I see a doctor as one of my patients, I have to remind myself that while in my clinic, he is just someone who has problems. I may meet him later in committees, and see many issues in him that I recognise in myself; yet I must regard him as a person who is depressed. I know that my heart is beating faster and my blood pressure rising, but if I make concessions simply because he is a doctor, I will eventually run into trouble. Some doctors find this easier than others; but we do not care well for our kith and kin because we identify in this way.

In an article for Selwyn Hughes’ CWR organisation Allan Cox, in an article entitled ‘Ministerial survival kit’ argues in a similar way.

As I meet with other ministers and leaders I am continually struck by how all-consuming the job is. There are so many fraternals, ministers’ meetings and the like that it is so easy to slip into a nodding acquaintance or be business-like with each other. In truth, many of us are lonely. Although we may be accountable in an official sense, unofficially it is all too easy to have no one to whom we can turn with our personal struggles.

Perhaps the FIEC strike the right balance when they say on their website that although most men find fraternals an adequate means of finding the support they need, others need more.

I suppose there are two factors at work here. Firstly, how helpful the fraternal that you attend is and, secondly, the extent to which you take advantage of what is on offer. The voluntary principle is at the same time both the great strength and the great weakness of fraternals. The freedom is much appreciated but it means, as we know, that some never join one and others drift off and there is little that can be done to draw them back.

In conclusion, we would say then that the idea of a ministers’ fraternal is perfectly consequent with the Bible, one with much historical and contemporary backing and a potential means under God of great good. However, as with other things, it is not a panacea or an automatic means of blessing. A successful fraternal needs to keep itself under regular review and none if us should suppose that in and of itself a fraternal can prevent all the problems that we know can arise in the Christian ministry. It is only as we look to the Lord that disaster can be avoided and good promoted.

This paper was read at a local FIEC fraternal

Where are all the preachers? An Introduction

Our subject is not an easy one to tackle but having given some thought to the matter, it seems to me that there are a large number of factors that may well explain, at least in part, why there is an apparent lack of preachers in the churches typical of our circle at the present time. We were asked to consider the questions both of the shortage of preachers and of good preaching. This list chiefly looks at the matter of the fewness of preachers but I think has something to say to the other question too.

I would like to begin with three caveats.

1. We do not know for a fact that there is a shortage of preachers or of good preaching. We may be mistaken in either or both perceptions.

2. It may be that it is the Lord's will that there is such a shortage. It may well be the case that we are better off with too few rather than with too many, as the story of Gideon teaches us. Whereas in the past some became preachers who weren't called that is less likely now.

3. Many years ago I read a book by the late Leonard Ravenhill called Why revival tarries. Sadly, the only thing I remember about it was a chapter lamenting what was then the widespread practice of lobotomy! My fear is that someone will remember just one thing I say and come away with the false impression that I believe that we would have more preachers if we could only get rid of Christianity Explored or if only there were less assistant pastors. It would be unfair to caricature what I want to say in that way.

So 12 factors that may explain, at least in part, why there is an apparent lack of preachers.

1. The lack of conversions

It would be difficult to demonstrate that a lack of conversions leads to a lack of preachers but common sense would suggest that a shortage of conversions is likely to lead to a dearth of preachers.

2. The lack of revival

Again, proving such a thesis is almost impossible but it would seem that ministers are often called to the ministry in times of revival or at least when a measure of awakening is known, something very rare amongst us.

3. A lack of agreement on what constitutes a call

I have just spoken about being called to the ministry. Most men here will be aware that not everyone today would accept that there is even such a thing as a call to the ministry. If we accept, at least for a moment, that there is such a thing, it cannot be denied that any confusion over the matter is going to make it difficult for those who are called to know that they are called.

4. The existence of so many assistantships and similar roles

When I began my ministry back in the eighties I would love to have begun with an assistant pastorate. Sadly, there were hardly any to be had. That has now changed to some extent and it is more common for men to begin that way. While that is probably a good thing in itself, it means that more men are tied up in assistant pastorates and so less are out leading churches and preaching. There has probably been a growth too in joint pastorates and perhaps parachurch roles too.

5. The easy availability of vast numbers of sermons in recorded form

While this is probably a good thing in itself, it may well be that it has put some off attending churches, discouraged preachers who cannot preach as well as the Internet giants and generally skewed a right understanding of what good preaching is.

6. Trust in group work

Both in evangelical circles and in our own narrower Reformed ones there has been something of an epidemic of aids for small group evangelistic Bible studies. Whatever view we may take of this phenomenon it is not difficult to see the inevitable danger of it detracting from pulpit work and from preaching of a more conventional sort.

7. The rejection of the one man ministry

I am using a popular but emotive phrase for the sake of brevity. However we understand the changes that have taken place in the last few decades that can be placed under this heading and whatever we may make of such changes, the knock on effect is surely to discourage men from entering the Christian ministry as traditionally understood.

8. The growth of eldership

Again, this is not something that we want to decry necessarily. It can be argued, however, that some who might have gone into the ministry have settled for an eldership position supposing they can be just as effective while not entering full time ministry.

9. The growth of evangelical theology

There was a time when the study of theology was largely written off by evangelicals due to the incursions of liberalism. There has been a welcome resurgence of evangelical theology in more recent years which, while a good thing, has meant that some young men have such a high regard for good theologians that the ministry can appear a rather unattractive role in some ways.

10. The ubiquity of the entertainment culture

We are a society where entertainment has a top heavy visibility and influence. Whereas the ministry once had a certain attraction as a role that draws crowds, that is now very limited and no doubt there are some busily contemplating a career in sport or sports journalism, in acting or in music who in another time or place would be giving much more consideration to preaching. At the same time, the entertainment culture can encourage preaching that is not necessarily the best for men's souls.

11. The demise of the idea of a life career

Various changes have led to the current situation where a life career in one area is increasingly unusual. It is tempting to think then of the ministry as one of several options to pursue in life rather than giving one's whole life to such work as was once more common.

12. The downplaying of the idea of an educated ministry

While education itself can never improve preaching, this phenomenon has probably led not only to poorer preaching but also to a lower view of what a minister is in general so again making the ministry a less attractive calling.

No doubt other factors could be highlighted such as prayer, secret sin and the increase in educational opportunities outside the ministry but these twelve should be enough to be chewing on for now.

This paper was given at a Banner of Truth Ministers Conference as an introduction to the subject 

Encouragement from Ecclesiastes Part 2

 ... We can say five things

1. Consider this leading principle for life and three balancing considerations

1 Consider this leading principle – the principle of action. Overarching principles can be very helpful. This is what Solomon gives us here – a general rule for life and for the Christian ministry in particular. 10 Whatever your hand finds to do, do it with all your might, for in the grave, where you are going, there is neither working nor planning nor knowledge nor wisdom. It doesn’t tell us everything, of course, but when it comes to practical every day living then

• If a thing isn’t worth doing thoroughly it isn’t worth doing at all. The devil tempts you to, say, commit adultery or to steal. What is his aim? He wants to take you as far in that sin as possible. But we are compromisers. We don’t want to go as far as the devil wants we just want to think about these things. Forget thinking about adultery, about stealing. Put them behind you.
• Whatever you do, do you do it with all the zeal and enthusiasm you can muster? Really pray, really study the Bible, really live it out. That’s how the commandments speak – not love God a little bit but with all your heart, etc. No pussyfooting, no half measures. Nothing lackadaisical. Throw yourself into it. Be thorough.
• Now is the time. Very soon we’ll be in the grave. There’s no planning, etc, there. Cf 6:9ff. We don’t know how long we will live but it won’t be long. Life goes by so quickly. When we’re young we have all sorts of ambitions but by my age you realise you are, more or less, what you are. Cf John 9:4 As long as it is day, we must do the work of him who sent me. Night is coming when no-one can work.

Is this principle part of your thinking? How you approach ministry? When you wake up? Through the day?

2 Consider these three balancing considerations to keep in mind.

Now if this principle is going to be of any use to us we need to balance it with other considerations.

• God’s sometimes surprising providence. Verse 11 I have seen something else under the sun: The race is not to the swift or the battle to the strong, nor does food come to the wise or wealth to the brilliant or favour to the learned; but time and chance happen to them all. It is tempting to think that the person who does things with all his might is going to be the most successful. However, things are not quite so simple. My father was a great fan of horse racing and I remember him taking me to Chepstow racecourse once or twice and him teaching me how betting works with its system of odds long or short. It seemed to me at first that you should always bet on the favourite. But, as my father would point out, ‘Sometimes the favourite doesn’t win’. You know the story of the hare and the tortoise.  Think of boxing matches or of battles in history. Significant changes in history have come when there have been surprise turn arounds. Life is full of turnabouts. It is one of the things that makes it so unpredictable and interesting. They say that Vincent Van Gogh never sold a painting while he lived. Yet his paintings now sell for millions. The Jamaican bobsleigh team in the 1992 Olympics beat USA, Italy, France and Russia in the four man bob and were ahead of Sweden in the two man event. In 2000 they took gold at the World Push Championships in Monte Carlo. Sometimes the least likely people rise to power – Abraham Lincoln born in a log cabin for example. Time and chance happen to them all – this is not a denial of providence but an assertion of it. There are various ways of understanding this phrase but God is in control of all. In 2006 England lost to Northern Ireland (ranked 116th in the world) after 78 years of winning. If we knew that 10 in every hundred we spoke to were converted, wonderful but there is no simple formula – such as, pray for an hour a day and revival will come, etc. In 1 Corinthians 3 Paul says I planted the seed, etc …. But God made it grow. Parents say ‘Work hard at school and you will do well’ – but it is not always true. There is plenty of variety. It is a great mystery that we live with.
• Our general ignorance. 12 Moreover, no man knows when his hour will come: As fish are caught in a cruel net, or birds are taken in a snare, so men are trapped by evil times that fall unexpectedly upon them. We don’t know when we will die. Arthur Conan Doyle was born on May 22 1859 and died July 7 1930 – I was born exactly a hundred years later but whether I will die exactly one hundred years later I do not know. I can’t know - not yet. Think of fish caught in a net or a bird in a snare. Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans last year very unexpectedly. There are always disasters - hurricanes, floods, terrorism. Everything can change in a moment. The man driving the 31 bus in London last summer couldn’t have known what would happen. Situations can change very quickly. We have to say ‘If it is God’s will …’.
• The public’s scorn and amnesia. We don’t tend to think of this. Solomon starts on what we expect to be a story of heroism but that’s not what it is about as we see. 13-15 I also saw under the sun this example of wisdom that greatly impressed me: There was once a small city with only a few people in it. And a powerful king came against it, surrounded it and built huge siege works against it. Now there lived in that city a man poor but wise, and he saved the city by his wisdom. You think to yourself – I wish I’d been that man. No, says Solomon, it wasn’t like that at all. But nobody remembered that poor man. After they’d got over the shock, he was forgotten. A few years passed and people couldn’t even remember his name. I read an article on Northumbrian Cuthbert Collingwood the man who fired the first shot at Trafalgar and took over command after Nelson’s death. He is forgotten. Andrew Griffin wrote ‘The history books tend to give all the glory to Nelson. In fact they were equal partners.’16 So I said, Wisdom is better than strength. But the poor man’s wisdom is despised, and his words are no longer heeded. Wisdom is a truly great thing no question – it teaches you what to do - but it doesn’t solve every problem. It is no good thinking that if we were wise all our problems would be over. We are in God’s hands and we must look to him. People’s memories are very short – politicians bank on this. People forget. Otherwise we would all be increasingly wise but sadly things are forgotten and wisdom is scorned and despised. ‘Nobody likes a smart Alec’.

2. Further principles to keep in mind

• A Proportion principle. Keep in mind foolishness’s disproportionate influence. 9:17 The quiet words of the wise are more to be heeded than the shouts of a ruler of fools. All around us the world is shouting at us – media, advertising, etc. It’s loud and brash. We hear a noise – we are drawn. What’s going on? It’s very easy to be drawn after foolishness. But, Solomon says, don’t listen to the noisy man raging at the front but to the quiet man at the back speaking words of wisdom. See 18 Wisdom is better than weapons of war. It’s not a matter of these things. But one sinner destroys much good. He uses a proverb to illustrate (10:1) As dead flies give perfume a bad smell, so a little folly outweighs wisdom and honour. You buy Chanel No 5 for your wife and it is a great hit. She loves the smell. Then it starts to lose its attraction and stinks. You look and you see that a fly has got in and is putrefying.

The point is not so much that one foolish act can spoil a life of wisdom but rather that one fool or just a few can undo all the good that wise men have brought about. Make no mistake – at all levels there is a struggle going on between the wise and the foolish. Verse 2 The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left. The right stands for strength. There’s strength in wisdom but the heart of the fool is all in the wrong place. What a mess it makes. Verse 3 Even as he walks along the road, the fool lacks sense and shows everyone how stupid he is. You only have to look at a fool – but so often we don’t and we don’t see. So fools can be very influential indeed. No matter how many wise you have one fool can make a terrible mess – in a company, a government, a family, a church. What a disproportionate impact a fool can have. In a nation. It is clear from Scripture that it is wrong. Only a tiny number are actually homosexual and yet what a disproportionate influence they have. or think of how movements like Saddleback or Toronto can so influence the churches. 

• A Patience principle. Keep in mind wisdom’s power to strengthen. Solomon goes on with an example of wisdom in action. Verse 4 If a ruler’s anger rises against you, you’re in trouble with someone further up the chain do not leave your post; calmness can lay great errors to rest. Again we are being called to heavenly wisdom. Wisdom demands diligence, demands that we are faithful, that we press on. We mustn’t panic. Paul says to Timothy Keep your head in every situation. Here calmness can lay great errors to rest. If we panic every time the truth is under attack we’re not going to make much progress. Think of all the things that have been thrown at the gospel – Modernism, Marxism, Freudianism, WCC ecumenism. They have come and they have gone. Cf Marxism, psychiatry. It is so easy to panic – some did. They ran around like headless chickens. We need to stay calm. When people attack - stay calm. However, at the other extreme, we mustn’t become complacent. Charles Hodge was famous for the boast that nothing new was ever taught at Princeton Seminary – that can have a good meaning or a bad one. How many Carey Conference Ministers to change a light bulb? Change?

• A Perversity principle. Then in verses 5-7 we read There is an evil I have seen under the sun, the sort of error that arises from a ruler: Fools are put in many high positions, while the rich occupy the low ones. I have seen slaves on horseback, while princes go on foot like slaves. Let’s be patient and faithful but realise that patience and faithfulness isn’t going to solve all our problems. We must be realistic – patience and faithfulness doesn’t guarantee success in this world. Cf 1 Cor 7:16 and Paul’s comment How do you know, wife, whether you will save your husband? Or, how do you know, husband, …. How realistic Paul is. All sorts of anomalies will exist. When Jesus came – think of those in leadership then. Or think of the way the media turn to the Archbishop of Canterbury for religious comment, etc. A sense of reality is so important. Be soberly faithful and cry out to God. We feel so powerless and frustrated sometimes. We want a revolution. But we must stay calm.

• Proportion principle. Keep in mind the need for a balanced approach. In verses 8, 9 we have a series of activities where a danger is involved. Whoever digs a pit may fall into it; whoever breaks through a wall may be bitten by a snake. Whoever quarries stones may be injured by them; whoever splits logs may be endangered by them. The wise person doesn’t say I’m never going to dig a pit, etc, because it is too dangerous. Rather he recognises that there is danger in these activities and so he takes care. An example would be spending time with unbelievers. Somehow we need a balance between telling them and yet not being influenced by them so that we go astray. Or think of local church/wider church; public/private; work/leisure balance. Praying, reading the Bible/Everything else. Bringing up children – not ramming it down their throats. Giving – physical/ spiritual.

• A Preparation principle. Keep in mind the advantage of thorough preparation. Verse 10 If the axe is dull and its edge unsharpened, more strength is needed but skill will bring success. ‘Do it with all your might’ it says so he hacks and hacks. He would be wiser to stop and sharpen the axe. Doing it with all your might involves preparation not just rushing into things. Examples include preparation for ministry or sermon preparation.

• A Procrastination principle. Keep in mind the dangers of procrastination. The other side of it. 11 If a snake bites before it is charmed, there is no profit for the charmer. ‘I’m going to ...’. Think of perpetual students for the ministry, pastoral problems.

3. Common errors to avoid

As Solomon develops this idea of doing everything with all your might he goes on to warn against five particular errors.

• Inaction. Wise words are kind words. Back in Chapter 4 Solomon has a great deal to say about the wise and the foolish. In 12a he says Words from a wise man’s mouth are gracious. As one writer says we never go very far reading about wisdom before the subject of how we use our tongues comes up. If you are wise you will take care how you speak. What you say will be gracious, pleasant and kind. There is something attractive about wise speech. By commending action, doing things with all your might, Solomon is not speaking against words altogether. Endeavour always to speak graciously. However, some people are all talk. The full verse is Words from a wise man’s mouth are gracious but a fool is consumed by his own lips. There is such a thing as favourable speech but there is also harmful speech and the fool is one who is all talk and no action. 13, 14 At the beginning his words are folly; at the end they are wicked madness – and the fool multiplies words.
• There is something destructive about the fool’s words a fool is consumed by his own lips. Unlike the wise man the fool speaks not in a way that builds up and edifies but one that tears down and consumes. You remember how James calls the tongue a fire. That fire destroys people’s reputations and in the end burns up the fool himself. Think of the way a fool will lie and lie and in the end he says something that incriminates him and he is found out.
• There is something unreasonable about the fool’s words. At the beginning his words are folly. If you listen to what a fool says you will see how unreasonable and stupid he is. It can sound pretty impressive if you don’t know any better but it’s not.
• There is something wild about the fool’s words at the end they are wicked madness and the fool multiplies words. The fool doesn’t know when to stop. On and on and on he goes causing more and more problems. He makes great boasts but he never does anything. Oh what dangers there are in letting our tongues run away with us. Words can be a great blessing to others but we must act not merely talk. Are you all talk and no action? Let me quote Spurgeon

‘Oh, my brothers and sisters in Christ, if sinners will be damned, at least let them leap to hell over our bodies. And if they will perish, let them perish with our arms about their knees, imploring them to stop, and not madly to destroy themselves. If hell must be filled, at least let it be filled in the teeth of our exertions, and let not one go there unwarned and unprayed for.

Surely it is an intolerable disgrace to anyone to profess to be a Christian, and have no concern about the souls of others, while they are perishing by millions.

Etiquette nowadays often demands of a Christian that he should not ‘intrude’ his religion on company. Out with such etiquette! It is the etiquette of hell! True courtesy to my fellow’s soul makes me speak to him, if I believe that his soul is in danger.

Brethren, DO something, DO something, DO something! While societies and unions make constitutions, let us win souls. I pray you, be men of action all of you. Get to work and quit yourselves like men. Old Suvarov’s idea of war is mine: ‘Forward and strike! No theory! Attack! Form a column! Charge bayonets! Plunge into the centre of the enemy!’ Our one aim is to win souls; and this we are not to talk about, but do in the power of God!

We must school and train ourselves to deal personally with the unconverted. We must not excuse ourselves, but force ourselves to the irksome task until it becomes easy.

• Ignoring your ignorance. It is difficult to be sure how what comes next should be taken. The note is again sounded, however, that we are ignorant. No-one knows what is coming - who can tell him what will happen after him? Even a wise person has to admit his ignorance. Indeed, it is part of wisdom to do so. Nevertheless, just because we do not know certain things that is no excuse for simply sitting down and doing nothing or not trying to do something. Rather we need to get ourselves organised.
• Indolence and incompetence 15 A fool’s work wearies him; he does not know the way to town. There are some people who have a distaste for all hard work. Sometimes it is because they are very intelligent and because some things come easy to them they want everything to be like that. For whatever reason we have a disinclination towards hard work we need to turn from it. We need to be ready to work hard and serve the Lord in whatever way he requires. Some are simply incompetent. They do not know the way to town as it were. It is well signposted but they get lost anyway. Again there are some who find the simplest things difficult. Their mind is really not on the job in hand. Such a person needs to buy a map or to walk out the route for himself until he does know it. There can be no excuses. Is your incompetence letting you down? Get it sorted out.
• Immaturity and indulgence 16, 17 Woe to you, O land whose king was a servant and whose princes feast in the morning. Blessed are you, O land whose king is of noble birth and whose princes eat at a proper time - for strength and not for drunkenness. Here we see a situation where a country is going to rack and ruin. Why? In one case it is because the person on the throne has not been trained up for the task. He lacks maturity. Sometimes this can be the problem with someone who is unwilling to work hard. Certain jobs are for those who are up to it. If we try and press ourselves into something beyond our capabilities then it will not work. Parkinson’s Law speaks of everyone rising to their own level of incompetence. Better that we work hard and successfully at some task that we can handle than that we take on something and then make a mess of it. Others are simply indulgent. Instead of hard work they throw themselves into every indulgence. It’s a constant round of parties and festivities. This is not how it should be. Is that what is letting you down? Is that why you are not more competent in the Lord’s service?
• Idleness. 18 If a man is lazy, the rafters sag; if his hands are idle, the house leaks. ILL Here is a house with sagging rafters and a leaky roof. Why? Because the owner is too lazy to do anything about fixing it. Here is a small church with little activity. Why? Are the people simply lazy? How many problems, how many things are not done just because people are too lazy.

4. Important approaches to cultivate

Further cautions come in verses 19, 20. Again there is some dispute over their meaning.

• Cultivate a practical approach. 19 A feast is made for laughter, and wine makes life merry, but money is the answer for everything. It sounds a strange verse to be in the Bible. Some are convinced it must be the sentiment of an unbeliever or spoken with heavy sarcasm. It is much more likely that this is simply Solomon getting us to face up to reality once again. You can imagine some people getting hold of verses like this Whatever your hand finds to do, do it with all your might. Sow your seed in the morning, and at evening let not your hands be idle and really pushing for the most active and vigorous sort of Christian program imaginable. Great plans could be hatched for leafleting the whole of London, etc. When people come back to you and say ‘Yes, but who’s going to pay for all this?’ you dismiss them as unspiritual and lacking in vision. But no, says Solomon, we must be practical about things. He gives two examples and then his third over-arching point.
• A feast is made for laughter. That is the point of a feast. It is to be enjoyed.
• Similarly wine makes life merry. That is a fact of life, as it were.
• But money is the answer for everything. Without money there will be no feast and no wine either. Some people would describe such an attitude as unspiritual but Solomon would not agree. We need to be practical about things. Be diligent but be practical. I recall my own attitude as a youngster – what shall we do with the harvest offering? ‘give it all to missionaries’. That’s one of the great things about William Carey. Yes, a real dreamer with his ideas for bringing the gospel to India but very practical too. Being zealous for God is not a matter of being impractical.
• Cultivate a respectful approach. 20 Do not revile the king even in your thoughts, or curse the rich in your bedroom, because a bird of the air may carry your words, and a bird on the wing may report what you say. Here is a warning too against being disrespectful. Again Carey is a model. You know how for very many years he spoke to other ministers about the needs of the heathen and was largely ignored. There is the story of the man who said to him ‘When God decides to save the heathen he will do so without your help or mine’. It is probably not accurate but it sums up the sort of attitudes that did exist. In such a situation it is easy to show disrespect for those who are holding things back. Here we are warned not to say anything even in the privacy of our own rooms against such people. Be full of respect. Again I recall my won lack as a youngster. I wrote a letter to my minister complaining about fellow members. He reminded me it is Christ's church.
• Cultivate an enterprising approach.
• Be enterprising despite your ignorance. 6:1, 2 Cast your bread upon the waters, for after many days you will find it again. Give portions to seven, yes to eight, for you do not know what disaster may come upon the land. This verse makes you think of throwing bread on a pond for ducks, perhaps. You may think of doling out portions to people around a table. It is much more likely that we are thinking of trading ships here, something Solomon knew all about. Whatever we do we must enter into with an enterprising attitude. A certain amount of risk taking is involved. You knock people’s doors to tell them about Jesus. They may be nasty to you but you will see results eventually it may be. You want to pass on the good news to others. Don’t stick to just one or two. Give to many. Whatever you do, do it with this spirit, a generous open-hearted and hopeful one.
• Do not make providence an excuse for inactivity. 3,4 If clouds are full of water, they pour rain upon the earth. Whether a tree falls to the south or to the north, in the place where it falls, there will it lie. Whoever watches the wind will not plant; whoever looks at the clouds will not reap. Think first of a gathering storm. You see the rain clouds gather and then down comes the rain. Then think of a very strong wind. It is so strong it brings down a tree. Where that tree lands it lands. Now if you think to yourself ‘I want to plant my seeds where the trees will not fall’ and so you try and figure out which way one might fall in a storm then you will never get around to sowing. Or if at harvest time you keep looking at the clouds and thinking it’s no good harvesting now as it might rain after I’ve started then you may never get the harvest in! God’s providence must not be made an excuse for inactivity, for not doing anything. If you say we can’t try and plant a church here it might not work, it might never be planted. If you say we may not be able to afford to pay a pastor so we can’t go ahead with trying – you may never get one. It’s no good thinking ‘I won’t speak to him/her they might not be converted’.
• Recognise life’s mystery but still be active in doing good. Verse 5 follows on As you do not know the path of the wind, or how the body is formed in a mother’s womb, so you cannot understand the work of God, the Maker of all things. Yes, we are in tremendous ignorance as we have said several times. As competent as weather forecasters are they cannot get it exactly right. We cannot be sure which way the wind will be blowing tomorrow. We now have photographs of babies in the womb and we understand better than ever what happens but we don’t understand it. In a similar way we cannot predict the work of the Spirit or who will be born again when or how. And so Solomon exhorts (6) Sow your seed in the morning, and at evening let not your hands be idle, for you do not know which will succeed, whether this or that, or whether both will do equally well. We have no way of knowing the future. We do not, therefore, simply forget about doing anything. Rather we pray and we witness and we work with all our might at sharing the truth and in everything else we do we work with great fervour knowing that we are entirely in God’s hands. 2 Cor 9:6 Remember this: Whoever sows sparingly will also reap sparingly and whoever sows generously will also reap generously.

Encouragement from Ecclesiastes Part 1

Encouragement. We probably all make the mistake of underestimating its importance. When we’re discouraged and downcast we know how bad we feel and how it can affect us detrimentally in all sorts of ways. One of the great purposes of Scripture is to encourage us. It is there to give us heart, to be our help and support and give us confidence in God. I believe this can be demonstrated from every book of the Bible.

In particular. I want to assert that it is especially true of what are often referred to as the wisdom books (Proverbs, Song of Solomon, Ecclesiastes, etc). This fairly extensive body of writing will in different ways encourage us and build us up and give us confidence in these dark days. In particular, I want to focus today on Ecclesiastes. Now I’m very aware that the title ‘Encouragement from Ecclesiastes’ may be greeted with scepticism by some. That’s one reason why I chose it. Encouraging? Surely it’s quite the opposite! What is encouraging about words like these? See 1:1-3,8,9,11,13,14,18; 2:14-16, 17-23; etc, etc.!!!!

Yes, ‘Encouragement from Ecclesiastes’ does seem a little ambitious on the face of it. However, I want to assure you, if you have any doubts at all, that it is a very encouraging book in fact and one that we can really gain help and support from in all sorts of ways. I think that despite what do seem to be quite gloomy passages the very fact that the Jews traditionally read the book at the Feast of Tabernacles (Shavuot), a very joyful feast, should encourage us to look a little harder at what is here.

Introductory Remarks

Obviously we can’t look at the whole of the book, rather we’ll narrow down to one particular section for our study. But first, let me make some general remarks by way of introduction to the book as a whole.

1. Author

1:1 says The words of the Teacher, son of David, king of Jerusalem. (Cf 1:12 I, the Teacher, was king over Israel in Jerusalem.) He has two descriptions then

1. The Teacher. Qoholeth. This title occurs here in the beginning and at the end. It’s also in 7:27. The word really means ‘one who assembles’ (hence Ecclesiastes), a title very much associated with Solomon when he brought the ark into the newly built temple and spoke to the people, praying for them and blessing them at that great assembly. More generally, the assembly (or church) is God’s people and so the Teacher is their leader ‘the assembler of God’s people’. Ultimately this is a title of Christ.

2. Son of David, king of Jerusalem. This title speaks even more clearly of Solomon (and of Messiah), as do several other phrases in the book. Those who argue against the idea suggest the Hebrew is late but others are willing to vouch for Solomon, saying that the apparently late Hebrew is in fact Hebrew influenced by the Phoenician dialect, no surprise for a man who knew Phoenician king Hiram so well!

Clearly the work is by a man of unrivalled wisdom, great wealth, a builder and a compiler and arranger of proverbs. Who could this be but Solomon? I see no reason for rejecting the ancient view that he wrote it near the end of his life following his fall into idolatry. This would clearly suggest that he did come back to the Lord. One modern writer notes that ‘There is in the book an air of repentance and humility’.

So here’s an encouragement already. Here is a book written by a wise man, the wisest ever. More, it is the considered opinion of a man who knows what it is to fall and fail. We can be sure not only of his wisdom but also of his sympathy.

2. Approach

Among the more common approaches to the book are those that take it as a sort of pre-evangelistic tract, a piece of apologetic helping unbelievers see how empty and useless life without God is. I think that back in the sixties a lot of people noticed how the writer sounds a bit like Jean Paul Sartre in places and so assumed that his scepticism should be understood in this way. That, I suggest, was a mistake. Older commentators also often saw it as chiefly a warning to backsliders and the unconverted, which is again rather limiting.

Others see it as a deeply sceptical, even cynical or nihilistic book or one advocating asceticism and abstinence from life’s pleasures. Some feel that the theology is so pessimistic that without the important epilogue it wouldn’t even be in the Bible. It is there chiefly as a foil to the rest of Scripture. This is surely wrong. The book can possibly be taken in this way but it is better to see it firstly, like Job, as a wisdom book that warns against taking the very positive wisdom of Proverbs in a superficial and simplistic way and failing to see how complex and difficult life can be. Here is life in the raw, life as it is. The writer is not looking at life without God in the strict sense but at life as it is even though there is a God – something much more demanding and profound. The book is firstly for God’s people - to help them in their daily toils and struggles. It is not only hard-nosed but uses many words of encouragement, calls on us to fear God and frequently draws attention to the coming judgement.

Having said that, the fact that it does not mention the Law (though there is a call to keep the commandments) or facts from Israel’s history and refers to God without using the covenant name (LORD) argues for a wide audience being in view. Solomon had a large empire and many international contacts. No doubt he had them in mind.

Further, whenever we turn to Scripture we should expect to see Christ there. That’s what the Bible is about. Here, I would suggest to you, because the writer causes us to get real and to see life as it is, we are encouraged to long for a better world, the world to come, the world of the resurrection. That resurrection has begun, of course, with Jesus Christ. If we trust in him – the one who has known all the frustrations and difficulties of life and death in this fallen world and yet has triumphed over them by rising and ascending to the glory – then we too can share in his glory and even now we can understand why life is so often difficult and frustrating. We can get Paul’s perspective, as given in Romans 8:18-23,

I consider that our present sufferings are not worth comparing with the glory that will be revealed in us.

The creation waits in eager expectation for the sons of God to be revealed. For the creation was subjected to frustration (Abel), not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it, in hope that the creation itself will be liberated from its bondage to decay and brought into the glorious freedom of the children of God. We know that the whole creation has been groaning as in the pains of childbirth right up to the present time. Not only so, but we ourselves, who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies

3. Opening

I say ‘opening text’ as although the book begins with one text, one repeated near the end - 12:8, it actually ends with another - Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the whole duty of man (12:13). But it does begin (2) Meaningless! Meaningless! says the Teacher. Utterly meaningless! Everything is meaningless. Here we come to another problem with this book – how to translate the Hebrew word meaningless (NIV). It occurs some 36 times altogether and is a key word. We need to get it right then. It is the Hebrew word Abel (cf Adam and Eve’s son) and means something like ‘breath’ or ‘vapour’. Older translations use the word vanity. The NIV has meaningless, GNB useless. The word is used not so much to describe meaninglessness as what is fleeting, ephemeral, elusive. Here is a fallen, cursed world in all its stark reality and yet not missing the beauty and the grandeur and recognising that God is in control. One writer translates the text, very helpfully, Subject to the Fall! Subject to the Fall! says the Teacher. Everything is subject to the Fall. The truth is that the word has a wide semantic range and so a number of words really need to be used to translate it.

Further, when the writer says that everything is meaningless or vain/empty/transitory we mustn’t absolutise that everything. It obviously doesn’t include God or heaven or a whole lot of other things. He clearly has in mind only what is fallen. He is echoing the curse of Genesis 3 where mankind is told how God will

greatly increase your pains in childbearing; with pain you will give birth to children. … and … through painful toil you will eat of the ground all the days of your life. It will produce thorns and thistles for you,… By the sweat of your brow you will eat your food until you return to the ground, since from it you were taken; for dust you are and to dust you will return.

We are loathe to do it sometimes but we must confront this brute fact – the essential fallenness of this world, its emptiness and vanity. Remember James words to those over-confident businessmen bragging abut how they are going to do this and that next year? Why, he says you do not even know what will happen tomorrow. What is your life? You are a mist that appears for a little while and then vanishes. (James 4:14). The Bible reminds us of this fact in many places. Eg Isa 40:6-8

A voice says, Cry out. And I said, What shall I cry? All men are like grass, and all their glory is like the flowers of the field. The grass withers and the flowers fall, because the breath of the LORD blows on them. Surely the people are grass. The grass withers and the flowers fall, but the word of our God stands forever.

4. Overview

The whole book can probably be divided into some four parts. The first three main sections are – 1:12-2:26;3:1-5:20 and 6:1-8:15. To summarise

1. True contentment is found in God alone. It is not found in man but in God and so we must look to him for wisdom, knowledge and happiness, refusing to go on any longer in our sins.

2. God wants us to live in a way that is good and proper. It is a satisfying way. Indeed to know how to enjoy life and to be content is a gift of God. Such people are so taken up with God that they have no time to worry about death or such things.

3. Prosperity is not always a good thing nor is adversity necessarily a bad thing. Rather we must avoid running to unwise extremes, thinking too highly of human power or giving up seeking wisdom because it is so difficult. We should recognise the importance of obedience to the powers that be and the good it does while recognising their undoubted weakness. We should also consider both the judgement of God and the unfairness of life now. He concludes (15) So I commend the enjoyment of life, because nothing is better for a man under the sun than to eat and drink and be glad.

4. The final section is found in 8:16 to the end.

One feature of these different sections is that they basically say the same thing. Repetition is another feature of scripture that we ought to recognise as fundamental. And so in the final section (where we will be focusing today) Solomon doesn’t really open up new arguments but confirms and enlarges upon what has gone before. Here he comes to the practical exhortations.

Ecclesiastes 9:10-11:6

What I want us to do today is to focus on 9:10-11:6. In 8:16-9:9 three points are made

1. Recognise that life is full of mystery

2. Recognise, however, that we do know two things

We know that we will all soon die

We know that it is good to be alive.

3. Therefore aim to enjoy life despite its emptiness and toil

Chapter 9 verse 10-Chapter 1 verse :6 covers many different points and it may be difficult to see quite what ties the verses together. However, you notice that the section begins (9:10) with the words Whatever your hand finds to do, do it with all your might, for in the grave, where you are going, there is neither working nor planning nor knowledge nor wisdom. Now if you go down to 11:6 you see that it says Sow your seed in the morning, and at evening let not your hands be idle, for you do not know which will succeed, whether this or that, or whether both will do equally well. The words are not identical but the command is pretty much the same. The reason given is in both cases our ignorance. You may also notice that there are other correspondences. Eg 9:12/11:5 (ignorance) – 9:11/11:3,4 (providence). I haven’t been able to work it out completely but the pivot is probably between 10:15 and 16. We begin with Whatever your hand finds to do, do it with all your might and end with Sow your seed in the morning, and at evening let not your hands be idle.

...

This paper was given at the Carey Conference