Memoir of Rev. Joseph Badger / Fourth Edition

by E. G. Holland

Mr. Badger said, that there was partial truth in all the new things of the day, in Mesmerism, Phrenology, Fourierism, Abolitionism, Non-resistance, Adventism; but that neither of these is what its partisans make it. He thought there was something superficial in each offered remedy of modern time for the cure of human evils; that the Gospel, with its divine persuasions, is alone able to rectify the condition of man on earth. He thought there were heads in the world that would puzzle and confound phrenology, though in the main it might have the perception of a great truth. The spirit of his views would say—Why get infatuated with your new idea? Why make it everything? Why lose your balance in the circle of your Christian duty, and grow dizzy-headed on your one idea, your darling ultraism? He held that the world's real progress is plain and slow; that God's kingdom does not come in coruscations of lightning, or in the sport of whirlwinds. "Oh! foolish Galations, who hath bewitched you that ye should not obey the truth?" was the text of a very impressive sermon delivered to a great concourse of people in June, 1845,[56] in which he particularized on the extremes of the day, on the infatuation which temporarily seizes a certain class of men, and causes them to substitute a fragmentary truth for the whole Gospel, and for the whole platform of human duty.

Church Polity. "We have noticed for more than twenty years," said Mr. B., "that the first ground assumed by disorganizers is, that 'the church is the highest tribunal on earth.' Recently, Mr. Campbell and some others have urged this doctrine in a manner and with explanations which are calculated to produce the worst of consequences.

"1st. We object to the term tribunal, when applied to the church. We not only regard it unscriptural, but in the general acceptation of the term it implies too much. It carries with it not only the authority to constitute a judgment seat, but the power to reward and punish; the church has no such power. God is a sovereign. His government is monarchical—he has given his Son all authority in his church, and the whole government is upon his shoulder. The church has no authority to alter one of Christ's institutions, nor make the least law for the government of his spiritual body. The business of the church is to learn of Christ, to know his laws and institutions, and to walk by them; to fear God and keep his commandments is the whole duty of man. The church has no power to bestow rewards nor to inflict punishments; this alone is the prerogative of the Great Head of the church. Christians on earth have less authority over each other than some imagine. We have little to do with each other's private opinions: in these matters each stands or falls, or is accountable to his own master. To be sure, we are authorized to form an opinion of men from the fruits they bring forth—from the spirit they manifest; and we have power to fellowship or disfellowship according to the fruits brought forth; but we can inflict no other punishment, and this should be regarded as a Christian duty rather than in the light of punishment. As far as the church can exert a Christian influence in reclaiming men from the error of their ways, and as long as they, under guidance of the spirit of Christ, can labor for each other's advancement in the divine life, so long they can be useful. But the moment they feel that they have authority to punish, and begin to labor under that impression, they do mischief in the flock of Christ. Thus we object to the application of the term 'tribunal' to the church, and the anti-Christian authority it seems to impart.

"The error is not so much in the term used as in the explanations, opinions, and practice connected with its use. We have seen it fully carried out in practice. The doctrine is this. Each little band of brethren scattered abroad is the church, and are the highest tribunal on earth. There is no appeal from their decisions; they have power to try and exclude a minister of the Gospel, and all councils or conferences composed of ministers and brethren are unscriptural, arbitrary and anti-Christian. But the error lies at the starting-point—in the very foundation. Those little bands of brethren are only parts of the great family on earth. They can attend to their own internal affairs; their work is small, and in a very limited circle. From such little decisions we ask no appeal. They can extend fellowship to whom they please, and withdraw from the disorderly; but they cannot act for other branches of Zion who live fifty or a thousand miles from them. They can hear, encourage, or abandon such ministers as they choose, so far as their ministry with them is concerned; but it would be folly for them to attempt to make or destroy ministers for others. Now ministers are not the property of one little branch of the church; they belong to the whole—are accountable to the whole. Any branch of the church has a right to present a trial or grief against a minister. But the question will arise, Who shall decide on a trial thus presented by a church against a minister? Surely not the church who present the trial, for they are the accusing party. He is a public man, all the churches are interested in his prosperity and in his impeachment. The common error says, the accusing party must accuse and condemn, for it is the highest tribunal on earth. But common sense and common justice say, Let a council of ministers and brethren from other churches be called to investigate and decide this matter. Let the man have a hearing before a council, equal in numbers and authority to that which received or ordained him, and by which he was inducted into his holy work in the church. We care not whether this assemblage of ministers and church members is called a council or a conference; if it possesses the talent, the wisdom and light of the body, if a board is formed whose just, fair, and impartial decisions shall receive the sanction, respect, and confidence of all the churches for whom they act.

"Within three years past we have known two instances in which ministers had fallen into disrepute with a part of the churches of their charge. When trials were presented they immediately assumed the ground that the church was the highest tribunal; they would have no council, nor ministers in the case, unless they could bring in some partial friend of theirs who was prepared to cover up and defend their iniquitous proceedings; they would be tried by the church, and immediately set themselves to work to secure the majority, whose first business it was to exclude the minority. Those ministers, we presume, could not be induced to have their conduct examined by a wise, impartial, and judicious conference of elders and brethren; yet they have good and clean letters of commend and justification from the churches to which they belong. Such ministers as are not willing to throw themselves open to the investigation of all the churches and all their brethren in the ministry, ought to confine their labors to the church or party who has commended them, and by whom they are willing to be judged.

"We do not believe there is a church in the land who shall undertake to exclude their pastor, let him be ever so bad, that can do it without rending their own body asunder. A minister, in ever so great errors, or ever so much fallen in morality, will have his adherents and his party, and frequently by his management will secure the majority of the church of his charge. How many churches have thus been rent asunder; how many wicked ministers have thus endeavored to screen themselves from justice. "Where no counsel is, the people fall; but in the multitude of counsellors there is safety." Prov. 11:14.

"Having discarded the idea that one little branch of Zion possesses the whole authority, we shall now state that the term Church is sometimes applied to a very small band of believers, and in other cases it is applied to the whole body of Christians in the world. The church, in the general use of the word, embraces all the ministers, gifts, and members of Christ's body. When people have separated the ministers from the congregations, or the congregations from the ministers, and undertaken to do business in their separate capacities, independent of each other, when the business transacted was of a public or general character, they have both materially erred. The Gospel recognizes ministers and people as one body, united and coöperating in one work, advancing the same interests, and promoting the same cause. Their talents may be different, their calling and gifts various, but no one member can say to another, 'I have no need of you.' To take the church as a whole, if it were proper to use the term 'tribunal,' we should have no objection to saying it was the highest tribunal on earth, that is, there is no earthly court that has a right to control its decisions, and there is no earthly court to which it can appeal. But Christ and his revealed will are still higher than any decision of the church; to it the whole church must bow with humble reverence, and say, 'Thy will be done.'

"Nothing is plainer and more clearly taught in the word of God than that it is the design of the Gospel that God's people should act in union as one family, and be the light of the world. Under the old dispensation, when the congregations stood in the counsel of the Lord and walked in his statutes, they were of one heart and of one mind; all acted for the public good; the different tribes often consulted together, and all marshalled under the same banner. But when they departed from the Lord, each one did what was right in his own eyes, and every one went to his own tent. The entire history of God's people under the law, shows that when they consulted and acted in union they were blessed and prospered; and when they separated and acted in their individual capacities, they proved the Scripture true, which says, 'Where no counsel is, the people fall.'