Questions
One Remaining Elder Again
Dear Brother Douthitt:
Just read some of the Guardian, and among the "some" was your answer to the question concerning one elder being left in a congregation — when others die or apostatize or move away — whether he should continue to rule or should he resign.
I have nearly always agreed with you in your answers, but here I am bound to disagree. I am sure that will shock you no end as you are not accustomed to having people disagree with you. But, seriously, I fail to see the difference between a man's being "left" in the eldership alone, and his being "put" in alone. The Lord evidently had some reason for having "elders" in the New Testament churches. I agree that we might better think of the elders' duty as a work rather than an office to hold, but can he do this work alone without running into difficulty? He would have to be a very unusual man methinks not to get into trouble trying to "elder" in a congregation all alone.
I think I have enjoyed your answers about as much as one department of the Guardian. Sincerely __________
Answer
Dear Brother ______
Your letter has come to me and I appreciate everything you say. As far as we know, elders (plural) were appointed in every church where any appointment of bishops was made at all, and of course, that is the way it should be now. But the Bible does not say anything at all as to what one elder should do, if all the others are removed by death, apostasy or any other cause. Therefore the only way I would know how to advise in the very rare cases that this condition exists is by determining the work which the one elder should stop doing when left alone. I do not know of any work, which he is qualified to do, that he should cease to perform, if left alone. Others may know what that work is, which he should stop; but I do not. To "resign" the work of an elder is to stop doing the work of an elder.
Elders cannot do the work assigned to them "without running into difficulties," regardless of their number. One elder working alone might run into more difficulties than a plurality; but I am not sure the Lord wants any man to quit the work he is qualified to do just because he runs into difficulties.
The Lord appointed apostles (plural), but he did not say whether or not John ought to resign when all the others died. I do not know of any apostolic work that John should have stopped performing, when all the other apostles died. However, if there is no "difference between a man's being 'left' in" an office alone, "and his being 'put' in alone," as you say in your letter, then of course, John should have resigned his bishopric (Acts 1:20) when the others died, for she certainly was not "put in alone."
No, it does not "shock" me too much when people "disagree with" me on these controversial points. However, when I get a letter from a brother whose judgment I appreciate and esteem as I do yours, I always give his views serious consideration and study. Then if I am convinced that I am wrong, I change my views; if not convinced, I do not change. As you know, there are some who never will have any use for you again, if they find out that you differ from them on anything at all. I regret that that is so, but when I encounter that kind, I am not shocked severely; I just trust more in the Lord and try to get along without them. The willingness and the ability of the Gospel Guardian to discuss controversial subjects without getting ugly about it is one of the many reasons why I like the manner so well.