事奉类 › 工作的再思 › 第七章　工人之间

第七章　工人之间

工作的再思

📖 研读 📊 汇集 🇬🇧 English 📋 对照
　　圣经中的众教会是顶地方的，从来没有众教会联合的事。我们是和各地所有的弟兄联合，我们虽多，仍是一个身体。我们的联合，是以信徒为单位。普遍的教会，是以信徒为单位，非以地方教会为单位。我们是基督身上的肢体，不是一个个地方的教会作为基督的肢体。这个单位是信徒，不是地方教会。地方的教会，是教会在地上最大的组织了，所以没有法子把她们联合起来。
　　关于工人方面，圣经所给我们看见的就不是这样。使徒有联合。使徒可以合在一起，或是不合在一起。有的人因为从前在人的制度里很深，就有一个反应的错误思想，以为众教会没有联合，所以，众工人也不该有一点联合。
　　因为不明白教会间的组织，和使徒间的制度不同的缘故，许多人就以为教会和教会间既没有联合，是非常独立的，就神的工人和神的工人间，也应该是没有联合，也是非常独立的。但这和圣经的教训是完全相反的。众教会是没有联合的，但工人间是有联合的。教会因为要保守地方的性质，就不能和其他地方的教会联合为一个团体。因为教会和教会一联合，就立刻逾越地方的范围，就立刻改变地方的性质，就立刻打破地方的限制，所以圣经就不许可教会间的联合。但是，圣经里却有使徒们的联合。不过这并非说，所有的使徒都联合作一个团体。所有的使徒都联合在一起，管理所有的工作，也是圣经所无的。圣经中的工人并没有联合作一个中央的团体。那一个的办法是罗马的，不是圣经的。但是圣经中的使徒是有联合的，并且是联合成功作一班一班的。我们明明看见，保罗和同他在一起的路加、西拉、亚波罗、提摩太、提多是合成一班。彼得和同他在一起的约翰、雅各等又是一班。从安提阿出来的是一班，从耶路撒冷出来的又是一班。虽然他们这些人，不是各自组成一个差会，但是，他们各人是有各人的“同人”（徒二十34）的。我们如果追究他们的历史，在使徒行传里我们就能看见，起初是在耶路撒冷有几个使徒作工，是他们到撒玛利亚，是他们到该撒利亚，虽然我们不知道与他们同行的人有多少人。后来（十三章）在安提阿就另起一个头。头一次保罗和巴拿巴同工，后来有西拉、有路加、有亚波罗、提摩太等同行。我们看见有一班和保罗同行的人，虽然不知道有多少人。在使徒行传之外，我们还看见另有一班的人，乃是因着结党，因着嫉妒分争而作工的（腓一）。他们这一班人明明不是保罗这一班人，也不是彼得那一班人。虽然他们的存心不是可师的，但是这证明神的工人在当日是有一班一班的。换一句话来说，神的工作和神的工人，在圣经中是有团体的。众教会是没有团体的。众教会一有团体，就成了公会。
　　有的弟兄以为，我们既然没有公会的组织，作工的人就当像散沙一样，我跑我的路，你跑你的路。每一个都随着己意，各走己路。每一个都是自己的教皇，每一个都是自己的神父。地方的教会是单个的，是没有问题的。地方教会应当你不干涉我，我不干涉你。但工作是有团体的，虽然不是组织的团体。教会的办法是一种，工作的办法又是一种。在工作中，是有团体、有按手、有分派的；也是有安排、有调动、有打发的。但在地方教会间，就在上海的，一点不能管南京的事。南京也不能管上海的事。一个地方遭遇灾难，别的地方可以帮助，表示彼此的交通。至于各个地方教会的行政，就各不相干，各自为政。工作就不同，工作是有计划、有打算的。他们的范围也不只一个地方，乃是许多地方的。所以教会是没有几个联合在一起的，使徒却是有几个人联在一起的，不过没有像今天所谓的差会、布道团等名称而已。
　
　　我们要看圣经中，在工作中所发生的事情，以证明工作是有团体的，是有支配的，同时也是超越地方的。
　　“保罗对巴拿巴说，我们可以回到从前宣传主道的各城，看望弟兄们景况如何。巴拿巴有意，要带称呼马可的约翰同去；但保罗，因为马可从前在旁非利亚离开他们，不和他们同去作工，就以为不可带他去。于是二人起了争论，甚至彼此分开；巴拿巴带着马可，坐船往居比路去；保罗拣选了西拉，也出去，蒙弟兄们把他交于主的恩中。”（徒十五36~40）
　　“保罗要带他（提摩太）同去。”（十六3）
　　“保罗既看见这（马其顿的）异象，我们随即想要往马其顿去，断定神召我们传福音给那里的人听。”（10，原文）
　　“送保罗的人带他到了雅典：既领了保罗的命，叫西拉和提摩太速速到他这里来，就回去了。”（十七15）
　　“他（保罗）…定意从马其顿回去。同他到亚西亚去的，有庇哩亚人毕罗斯的儿子所巴特，帖撒罗尼迦人亚里达古，和西公都，还有特庇人该犹，并提摩太，又有亚西亚人推基古，和特罗非摩。这些人先走在特罗亚等候我们。”（二十3~5）
　　“我们先上船开往亚朔去，意思要在那里接保罗；因为他是这样安排的，他自己打算要步行。他既在亚朔与我们相会，我们就接他上船，来到米推利尼。”（13~14）
　　“若是提摩太来到，你们要留心，叫他在你们那里无所惧怕；因为他劳力作主的工，像我一样；…至于兄弟亚波罗，我再三地劝他，同弟兄们到你们那里去；但这时他绝不愿意去；几时有了机会他必去。”（林前十六10~12）
　　“因此我劝提多，既然在你们中间开办这慈惠的事，就当办成了。”（林后八6）
　　“多谢神，感动提多的心，叫他待你们殷勤，…他固然是听了我的劝；但自己更是热心，情愿往你们那里去。我们还打发一位兄弟和他同去。”（16~18）
　　“我们又打发一位兄弟同去；这人的热心，我们在许多事上，屡次试验过，现在他因为深信你们，就更加热心了。论到提多，他是我的同伴，一同为你们劳碌的；论到那两位兄弟，他们是众教会的使者，是基督的荣耀。”（22~23）
　　“今有所亲爱忠心事奉主的兄弟推基古，他要把我的事情并我的景况如何，全告诉你们叫你们知道。我特意打发他到你们那里去，好叫你们知道我们的光景，又叫他安慰你们的心。”（弗六21~22）
　　“我靠主耶稣指望快打发提摩太去见你们，叫我知道你们的事，心里就得着安慰。”（腓二19）
　　“然而我想必须打发以巴弗提到你们那里去；他是我的兄弟，与我一同作工，一同当兵，是你们所差遣的，也是供给我需用的。”（25）
　　“有我亲爱的兄弟推基古要将我一切的事都告诉你们；他是忠心的执事，和我一同作主的仆人。”（西四7）
　　“所亲爱的医生路加，和底马问你们安。”（14）
　　“要对亚基布说，务要谨慎，尽你从主所受的职分。”（17）
　　“我们既不能再忍，就愿意独自等在雅典；打发我们的兄弟在基督福音上作神执事的提摩太前去，坚固你们，并在你们所信的道上劝慰你们。”（帖前三1~2）
　　“你要赶紧地到我这里来。因为底马贪爱现今的世界，就离弃我往帖撒罗尼迦去了；革勒士往加拉太去；提多往挞马太去；独有路加在我这里。你来的时候要把马可带来；因为他在传道的事上于我有益处。我已经打发推基古往以弗所去。我在特罗亚留于加布的那件外衣，你来的时候可以带来；那些书也要带来；更要紧的是那些皮卷。”（提后四9~13）
　　“以拉都在哥林多住下了。特罗非摩病了，我就留他在米利都。你要赶紧在冬天以前到我这里来。”（20~21）
　　“我从前留你在革哩底，是要你将那没有办完的事都办整齐了，又照我所吩咐你的，在各城设立长老。”（多一5）
　　“我打发亚提马，或是推基古，到你那里去的时候，你要赶紧往尼哥波立去见我；因为我已经定意在那里过冬。你要赶紧给律师西纳，和亚波罗送行，叫他们没有缺乏。”（三12~13）
　
　　综读以上的圣经，我们看见三个事实：（一）工作是有团体的，（二）工作团体中是有支配的，（三）工作的范围是不只一地的。
　　我们看使徒行传和书信中人物的记载，就知道神的工人是有团体的，是大家合在一起同工的，并非尔为尔，我为我那样的各行其是。住在耶路撒冷那一班的工人就是如此的。耶路撒冷的几个同工是我们所顶熟识的。其中彼得、约翰和雅各特别是我们所知道的。他们并没有单独的作什么。在五旬节的时候，我们是看见“彼得和十一个使徒，站起；”（徒二14）在美门作工的时候，乃是彼得和约翰；去撒玛利亚也是他们二人；到哥尼流家里是彼得和六位弟兄。他们在耶路撒冷是有一个工人团体的，虽然不一定每一次都是其中那几个人一同出去。他们的工作并非个人的，乃是团体的。他们是有同工去作工的。至于安提阿保罗这边，可惜，我们注重保罗这个人，却不大注重保罗的同工。
　　我们看见如何在特罗亚的时候，路加加入他们工作的团体，断定马其顿的呼声是应当接受的。后来如何从马其顿回来的时候，带了所巴特、亚里达古、西公都、该犹、提摩太、推基古、特罗非摩等同工同走。后来又有亚波罗、百基拉、亚居拉加入同工。后来保罗又如何打发提摩太、劝亚波罗、勉提多去哥林多，后来如何又得了以巴弗提作同工。我顶喜欢读书信的头一句，“保罗，同兄弟所提尼；”（林前一1）“保罗，和兄弟提摩太；”（西一1）“保罗、西拉、提摩太”（帖前一1）等。圣经给我们看见，不只有工人，并且有同工的人。我们不要误会了，以为因为不可有人的组织的缘故，不可有人立的差会的缘故，就以为作工的人都不可有结合，这就错了。不错，教会是不可以几个组织合在一起的，但是，神的工人是可以有结合的。许多人误会，以为我们没有公会，所以作神的工人的，为神作使徒的，就可以自由行动，匹马单枪的去作他自己所以为好的工作。不。教会是不应当联合为公会的，但是神的工人虽然不是成功作一个布道的中央机构，但是神的工人是有同工的，是和他的同工结合成一班而同去作工的。
　　但是，一件事是必须注意的，就是他们固然是有团体，他们的团体可不是一种组织的团体，乃是一个属灵的团体。这里头的分别，差得太多了。他们乃是一班志同道合的人，因着同爱一位主，同喜欢事奉祂，同受祂的呼召和差遣的缘故，就合在一起作工。有的也许从起头就来了的，有的也许是随后加入的。他们的确是一个团体，是一个作工的团体。但是，他们却没有组织，没有地位的分配，和职分的分当。加入的人，也不是招募而来的，或者训练而来的；乃是在使徒出外旅程中所遇见的。因着神的安排，就能彼此见面，就能彼此倾心，就能彼此同工。并无所谓考试，也无所谓条件，或是其他的手续。一切都是神在那里作主，人不过是赞成的人而已。到了这个团体里，谁也没有一定的地位，一定的职分。没有“团长”，没有“主席”，也没有“会督。”其他更不必说了。他们的职分乃是从主分派得来的。主给他们这个职分，他们就守住这个地位。这个团体并没有给他们什么职分，什么地位。他们彼此间的关系乃是属灵的，而非地位的。他们的结合乃是属灵的结合，而非人为的组织。
　　这些圣经节也给我们看见，神的工人中间，也不是因为谁都不受谁的供给，所以就谁也不受谁的调动。并不是因为我是直接靠神的，所以，就没有人可以干涉我的前途。反之，我们乃是看见保罗将提多“留在革哩底”（多一5），去继续所未了的工；后来又“打发亚提马，或是推基古”去替他，而又叫他“赶紧往尼哥波立”（三12）。至于他如何多次的打发提摩太、以巴弗提、推基古出去作工，和他如何劝提多和亚波罗往哥林多，都是我们所顶熟的。在神的工作中，工人不只是有团体的，并且，在这个团体中是有比我们更属灵者的指挥的。同工是能受打发、被留、听劝的。
　　所以，在这里我们必须明了地位的权柄，和属灵的权柄的不同。在一个组织的团体中，所有的权柄都是地位的，而非属灵的。在一个好的组织里，一个有权柄的人，有地位的权柄也有属灵的权柄；在一个不好的组织里，一个有权柄的人，就只有地位的权柄而没有属灵的权柄。在一个组织里，不管其人自己有没有属灵的权柄，他在那组织里所有的权柄，总是地位的。什么是地位的权柄呢？地位的权柄就是因着有了这个地位，所以就有了这个权柄。就是在位谋政的意思。什么时候，一不在其位，就不谋其政，也是不能谋。地位的权柄乃是在有这权柄者的身外的，和他本人是无关的。乃是有了这个地位，就有了这个权柄。一切都是地位给他的。组织的团体就是以这一个权柄来支配别人的路程。谁是主席，谁是委员，谁就指挥别人的工作。组织团体的中心就是地位。地位就是一个组织团体的生命，人是以地位来执行他的权柄。但是，圣经中工人的团体是没有组织的。其中也有权柄，但是那权柄不是地位的、正式的，乃是属灵的。乃是因为灵性的长进，能力的充满，交通的亲密，所以有那一个权柄。使徒保罗之所以能指挥别人，不是因为他的地位比别人高，乃是因为他的灵性比别人深。什么人在灵性上是深进的，什么人就有权柄；什么时候，一个人灵性一失败，他就失去他的权柄。在一个组织里，有那个灵性的，不一定有那个地位；有那个地位的，又不一定有那个灵性。但是在圣经中工人的团体，却不是组织的团体。在其中灵性高超的人，就可指挥；灵力充满的人，就能监督。属灵的人就要听从，就要顺服。在组织的团体中，你若不顺服是不可以的，但是在属灵的团体中，你若不听从乃是可以的。不过你在正式方面虽然不是错的，你在灵性方面却是错了。
　　但是除属灵的权柄之外，还有各种职事的问题。主的每一个仆人虽然都是在那职事之中，但是，在主面前都有他们个人所特有的职事，这些的职事不是一样的。在组织中只有人所定的地位，在属灵的工作中却有主所分的职事。因为职事不同的缘故，所以，一面是顺服主，另一面却是彼此顺服。他们所以顺服别的弟兄，不是因为别的弟兄有比自己更高的地位，乃是因为主所分派给他们的职事，和主所分派给自己的职事乃是彼此相关，而又不同的。这完全是属灵的，不是地位的。
　　今天人也看见这一个，所以人也学习这一个，就组织一个团体，举出一个首领来指挥别的工人。但今天许多的指挥，是出于组织里的地位的，不是出于属灵的职事的。保罗所以这样作，是出于他的职事。提多、提摩太、推基古的受支配，也是出于他们的职事。今天许多的支配，是以人的地位来支配，不是由于属灵的经历多，也不是由于职事的地位大。今天人一有了人定的地位，不管他的灵性如何，就可以支配人。一有那个地位，就有那个权柄，这是不合乎圣经的。圣经里是以属灵为根据。圣经里有权柄，但这权柄是属灵的，不是地位的。圣经里是人要有属灵的能力，人要有属灵的受托、属灵的经历、和属灵的使命。但今天人是因他的地位而使用权柄，这是何等的不同！
　　我们看提摩太他是何等的爱主、亲近主、忠心事奉主。他真是神所特别拣选的一个器皿。但是，他还多次受保罗的差遣。他并没有说，难道我自己还不会作工，难道我自己还不会传福音，难道我自己还不会建立教会么？难道我自己还不知道如何作么？感谢神，他会。但是，提摩太是受保罗的命令去作的。在属灵的工作上，是有这一个受那一个支配的事。有保罗的地位，也有提摩太的地位。
　　我们今天要学习，一面和同工发生正当的关系，一面个人受圣灵的引导。这两面都该维持，都该平均才可以。提摩太前后书，有够多的地方叫我们看见，同工是如何同法；也给我们看见，一个年少的同工，是如何顺服年长的同工。一个年少的工人，一面是该听从圣灵的命令，一面也该听从年长的保罗的话。保罗曾打发提摩太出去，曾劝提摩太留在以弗所，而提摩太却在主里听从。这是少年作工的榜样。这一种工作的合一，是顶宝贝的，一面受圣灵的引导，一面还能和同工不至于格格不相入。在这里头，我们不能把完全的责任，都推在提摩太身上；我们也不能把完全的责任，都推在保罗身上。因为劝人的人，应该知道如何劝人。一切劝人的、留人的、打发人的，如果都是凭着天然作的，随着己意作的，就叫人不能顺服。提摩太固然要学习和保罗同工，但是，保罗也得学习如何和提摩太同工。这样就免得叫作提摩太的，只能随从圣灵，不能听从保罗；也叫作保罗的，不至于代替主来说话。不然，就不免有太多的难题了。
　　神的工人应当结合，但是有一种的结合是可惧怕的，就是一种人的组织，使神的仆人不能受圣灵的引导，只不过受人的支配，作人的仆人。这叫他们作某种工的时候，并不是因个人在神面前有什么负担，乃是因比他更大更高的人在那里指挥。有的人以为圣灵在地上需要经理，殊不知圣灵在地上，已经就是主基督的经理了。祂并用不着经理。我们今天的难处，乃是有一地位更高的人来支配别的人，好像是借着他来明白神的旨意。但按圣经看来，人不能合起来成功一个组织机关，人不能借着一个机关来发号施令，而不管个人在神面前有没有负担。
　　在另一方面，另有一个难处，就是有一班人，他明白神的旨意；他得了神的呼召；他得了神的供给；他得了神的引导；他就想，我可以走我自己的路，作我自己的工了。
　　圣经一面不许我们有一种人的组织，来支配神的工人；另一面又给我们看见许多榜样，工人之间应该因着属灵的职事，而顺服属灵的权柄，来同心合意作主的工。没有组织是事实，但不能说，在工作里，使徒和使徒一点联合和合一都没有。在属灵的工作里，个人单独行动主义，和在公会里团体组织的差会，都不是神的旨意。我们需要个人明白神的旨意，也需要几个人一同在神面前明白神的旨意。保罗和巴拿巴的蒙召便是此例。在神面前的不是二个先知和教师，乃是五个先知和教师。徒十三章，已经留下一个好榜样：工作是有团体的。不是大小地位联合的团体，乃是大小职事联合的团体。我们一同作工的人，是有互相的关系的。我们所得的引导，要和别的弟兄的引导互相印证。我们要有在安提阿几个先知和教师那一种彼此的联络，叫我们过激的停止一下，太慢的推进一下。彼此虽没有组织的关系，但是却有生命上属灵的关系。
　　另一面我们看见他们工作的范围是很广的。有的打发到以弗所去，有的要到保罗这里来，有的在哥林多住下了，有的留在米利都，有的留在革哩底，有的从帖撒罗尼迦回来，有的往加拉太去，有的往挞马太去。这是工作。这种种的活动，不是教会里的事，因为教会只管一个地方范围内的事。以弗所只管以弗所的事，歌罗西只管歌罗西的事，罗马只管罗马的事。地方范围内的事，是教会该作的。以弗所不必留人在歌罗西，歌罗西不需要打发人到罗马。但工作是超地方的。以弗所、歌罗西、罗马，都在作工的人的心目之中。神的工人是把主所分给他们的地，作为他们的“教区”的。这些地方，是需要工人在一起商量，有所调动、有所安排的。地方的教会，就不能这样，她只能管理地方范围之内的事。在工作里，凡主所差遣的人，是彼此负各地所有工作责任的。
　
　　圣经里，工人是有团体的。但是，圣经里并没有所有的使徒们，合成一个团体，受统一的支配，服在一个中央的权柄之下。虽然保罗有保罗一班的“同人”，彼得有彼得一班的“同人”，但他们不过是众使徒中的若干人，并非所有的使徒所集合的团体。把所有的使徒都集合在一起，是圣经里所没有的。凭着圣经的教训，乃是其一种的工作，和某几个工人特别发生关系；所以他们就集合在一起。或者几个人，或者几十个人，或者几百个人，因同受神某种的托付，就可以集合在一起。圣经里从来没有中央集权，来支配所有使徒的事。团体是有的，但团体从来没有大到把所有的使徒都集合在一起。如果有的话，那是天主教的制度，并非圣经的作法。
　　在腓立比一章说，有的传基督，是出于嫉妒分争；也有的是出于好意。有一等人传福音是出于爱心，有一等人传福音是出于结党。肉体没有受过对付，自然就有嫉妒的事发生。腓立比书给我们看见有这样事实的存在，就是证明当日工作并没有统一的事。因为如果有统一的办法，就不致有这班人的存在了。就是有了这班人，也早就可以加以取缔了。但是，保罗对于这个的态度是“无论怎样，基督究竟被传开了；为此我就欢喜，并且还要欢喜”（18）。这几句话，显出“使徒”时代的事实，是有一班一班的工人的。虽然有的一班作工是出于好意，有的竟然走出于嫉妒；但是，保罗和其他的大使徒并没有取缔谁、禁止谁，因为当时没有统一支配工人的事。
　　有几个事实，是我们该注意的。第一，地方教会是不应当和其他教会结成一个大团体的，因为地方教会已经是一个最大的信徒团体了。第二，工人是可以联合的，使徒们是可以联合的。使徒不管是在安提阿也好，不管是住在彼西底的安提阿也好，但是他们可以有联合。第三，圣经里并没有把所有的工人都联合成为一个大团体，不只腓立比一章是这样的明显，就是哥林多书也有同样的启示。
　　林后十一12~13：“我现在所作的，后来还要作，为要断绝那些寻机会人的机会，使他们在所夸的事上，也不过与我们一样。那等人是假使徒，行事诡诈，装作基督使徒的模样。”又22~23：“他们是希伯来人么？我也是。他们是以色列人么？我也是。他们是亚伯拉罕的后裔么？我也是。他们是基督的仆人么？（我说句狂话）我更是。”在这一里，我们看见在哥林多有一班假的使徒，迷惑在哥林多的信徒说，保罗不是使徒。他们自以为比保罗更好。我们看见，保罗在行政上并没有法子对付他们。因为为神作工的人是没有行政上统一的组织的。如果属灵的工作有一个统一的组织，就谁没有执照，谁就不能传道。每一个都要有执照才能出去，就没有这个难处了。但使徒的结合是属灵的，所以有另外一班的人出来作假使徒。神不愿意所有的使徒合成一个团体。因这种集合所发生的弊病，要比假使徒多几千倍。所以，神只许可若干祂所差遣的工人，因受有相同的托付，而集合成一个个的团体。
　　加四17：“那些人热心待你们，却不是好意，是要离间你们，叫你们热心待他们。”又六章十七节：“从今以后，人都不要搅扰我；因为我身上带着耶稣的印记。”你们看见这两节圣经相合的地方么？有人跑到加拉太，用尽手段牢笼那里的信徒，盼望从他们身上得到一本万利的收获。但保罗的态度如何呢？保罗是说，我真是作主工的，你们不要在我身上弄这些手段。他并没有什么政权可以对付这一个。
　　圣经里为什么没有普遍的组织和支配呢？就是因为神不愿意用人组织的力量，来代替圣灵的能力。在没有统一支配的时候，人若都顺服圣灵的引导，就什么都作得好。什么时候人不随从圣灵，什么时候人凭着血气作事，工作就失败了。严密的组织，许多的时候，能代替属灵的能力。因为里面生命的能力虽然没有了，但是因为有外面组织的架子把它撑住，工作还是不会倒塌的。什么时候组织仍然存在，就什么时候那个工作仍然不会失败。但是，神不要人这样作。什么时候属灵的能力一失，神就愿意那个工作倒塌，愿意那个工作不存在。什么时候神的荣耀离开了圣殿，什么时候神就宁可一块石头不留在石头上。多少的时候，里面都干枯了，只因着外面有组织的架子，就叫人不觉得里面实在的情形。但是，神却要人外面和里面一样，要人看见祂所看见的。祂宁可工作倒塌，不愿有假的支持，好叫我们在倒塌之后，能谦卑的再来寻求祂的面。并且统一支配的弊病，不知有多少。统一支配的组织，能叫不是神仆人的也混在内，也容易弄到今天教皇的地位。有统一的组织，就叫工作在世界上成功一大势力，同时也叫神的仆人不必受圣灵的引导了。所以，工人有团体是事实，但是工人不能组织一个统一的团体，也是事实。
　
　　现在有一个问题发生，就是工人和工人团体中彼此应当如何合作呢？有一班人，有神给他们特别的工作；另有一班人，也有神给他们特别的使命。这二班人应当如何合作呢？像彼得有彼得一班的同人，保罗有保罗一班的同人。神又没有把这二班人合在一起作工。那么当他们彼此有衔接的时候，应当如何合作呢？统一是不对的，团体是一个个的。这些的工人，这些的团体，彼此应当怎样合作呢？
　　我们现在来看，工人工作的要点：
　　第一，每一个人（团体在内）不管神给他的职事是什么，他所特别要作的是什么工作，他到一个没有地方教会的地方，第一件事，就是先设立在那地方的教会。
　　第二，他到一个已有地方教会的地方，他就只能供献他的道理，叫教会得他的益处，他却不能叫那个教会成功他的教会，或者他团体的教会。
　　如果一个工人或几个工人，到一个没有教会的地方，去设立维持他道理的“教会”，你和他就无合作的可能，因他在那里是建立宗派。如果一个工人或几个工人，到一个有地方教会的地方，不是光供献他的道理，乃是想改变别人，成为他团体的支会，你和他也无合作的可能，因为他也是在那里建立宗派。作工的人，最大的忌讳，就是不设立地方教会，或者不造就地方教会，想改变地方的团体成为自己的团体。这两种的作法，都是圣经所不许可的。
　　保罗到了哥林多，他是从安提阿来的。他在哥林多传了福音，有人得了救，有一个信徒的团体出来了。保罗在哥林多所设立的团体是什么团体呢？是在哥林多的教会。他不是在哥林多设立安提阿教会的支会。他这样作是对的。等一等，彼得也到了哥林多，也传了福音，也得了一班人。彼得能不能说，你保罗是从安提阿来的，我彼得是从耶路撒冷来的，所以我要另立一个团体呢？或者要另立一个耶路撒冷教会的支会呢？不能。彼得只能说，保罗所建立的，是在哥林多的教会，所以我所得的人，也只能放在这个教会里。不只彼得是这样作，后来亚波罗来了，也是这样作。他们都是把人救来了，就放在地方教会里。这样，在哥林多就只有一个神的教会，没有什么分门别类的宗派了。如果保罗在哥林多传了福音，救了人，就说，我是从安提阿出来的，所以当在哥林多设立一个安提阿教会的支会，或者设立一个保罗的支会。彼得来了，他要怎么说？他要说，你保罗既然设立了安提阿教会的支会，我又和安提阿教会是没有关系的，我犯不着把人放在你的支会里，我也得在这里来一个耶路撒冷教会的支会。等一等，亚波罗来了，也设立一个亚波罗的支会。你设立一个支会，我设立一个支会，宗派就由此成立了。这样，他们来，不是设立当地的地方教会，乃是设立他们自己所来自团体的支会。他们不是设立教会，乃是扩充他们自己所来自的团体。这样，就无合作的可能。
　　所以工人或者工人团体，作工最要紧的原则，就是我出去作工乃是要设立我所到地的地方教会，不是在我所到地，去设立我从前所在地的教会。不是扩充我所出自他的教会于我的所到地，乃是我到了什么地方就设立那一个地方的教会。耶路撒冷和安提阿是没有支会的。所有的教会都是地方的。我们不能扩充一个地方教会到别的地方去，我们只能在别的地方设立它那一个地方的教会。使徒到了以弗所设立的，乃是在以弗所的教会；到了腓立比所设立的，乃是在腓立比的教会。他们在其他百十的地方，所设立的都是在那些地方的教会。我们从来没看见他们设立其他的团体。扩充神的教会是可以的，扩充我所在地的神的教会就不可。我们所到的是什么地方，我们所设立的教会，也就是什么地方的教会。
　　布道工作的目的，本来光是为着拯救罪人，但是结果却是叫我们的所到地有了教会。目的是拯救世人，结局却设立了教会。但是，就在这里有一个危险，就是人喜欢将其所救的人编成作他团体的支会，而不将其成为当地的教会。结局就因着神的工人彼此所归属的团体不一样的缘故，就在一个地方设立许多不一样团体的分会，因而生了许多的纠纷。在工作中，神的工人们对于作工的目的是从来不会冲突的。谁传福音是不想救人的呢？谁不想让主能多得几个人呢？但是对于工作的结果却是少有一样的。有的，感谢神，乃是为着设立当地的教会。但是可惜，另有许多若不是为着扩充自己的公会，就是为着扩充自己的差会。对于这一点，就是我和我的同工，同一班的朋友所争执的点。
　　我们从心里感谢神，因为在过去这百年中，打发了许多忠心的仆人来到中国传福音，使许多坐在黑暗里的中国人有机会可以听见，能以相信。他们的牺牲、受苦、敬虔、和殷勤，真是我们的榜样。多少的时候，当我们仰起我们的眼，看从内地中出来西教士受苦的脸的时候，叫我们心中不能不受感，祷告说，“求主使我也能像他”。但愿主祝福他们！报答他们！
　　对于我们的弟兄在传福音方面的工作，我们实在无可批评，只有羡慕。我们这一班的人，原是未到期的胎产，原不配在神的工作上有分，但是，因着自己是身受神恩典的人，又蒙了祂的恩召来作祂的工，就不能不在祂面前追求忠心。因此，我们就不能不觉得，对于我们在主里年长的弟兄传福音的工作真可钦佩；但是对于他们处置福音的果子，就是得救的人的办法，表示疑惑。因为在这过去百年的工作中，我们在主里年长的弟兄，不是设立他们所到地的教会，却是设立他们差会的支会！按着我们看，这实在是与圣经的道理不合的。圣经中只有设立所到地的地方教会，而没有设立其他任何公会的事。我若说错了，求神饶恕我！
　
　　请你们饶恕我提起一件个人的事。去年我在上海遇见一位基督××会的教士，他问我说，我能不能和××会合作？当时，我因为不知道如何答复，就没有立时答复。今年我在云南昆明，又遇见他。他又向我谈到，我能不能和××会合作？我因有更清楚地光，就答说，××会这个差会，我不敢反对。我知道你们这个“会”字是指差会说的。你们蒙神的引导，设立××会这个差会，叫一班西国爱主的弟兄容易到中国来传福音作工。关乎这一个，我一点都不敢批评。对于你们这个差会的团体，我一点不敢非议。因为圣经中的工作是有团体的。你们觉得应当有组织、有名称，这是你们在神面前应当负责的。我是谁，怎敢批评主的仆人呢？不过我自己不敢如此作，因为神没有这样引导我。所以，对××会这个差会，我是没有问题的。并且我承认，我读贵会发起人的传记，所得的属灵帮助他不知道有多少。我的心和你们早是合而为一的，但是我对××会这个教会却有问题。
　　对于你们─一班布道者，我们是毫无问题的。但是，你们布道所得的果子，你们把他们怎么办？这是所有的问题。我们对于××会不敢说什么，但是我们要问，××会的果子到底是如何？如果××会光是一个差会，我们就不敢批评什么，但是××会如果变作教会，那问题就不一样。你们自己是××会，你们所救的人是什么呢？是叫他们成为××会的教会呢？还是叫他们成为他们所在地的教会呢？××差会乃是你们这一班来中国传福音的“教士，”你们没有圣经的权柄，在各地得了果子之后，将这些果子编作××教会。你们自己作××差会是可以，你们若叫他们变作××教会就不可。圣经没有禁止××差会的设立，可是圣经曾禁止××教会的设立！
　　然后我就指明使徒的榜样给他看。他们无论在哪里作工，都是将他们的果子作为他们所在那个地方的教会。他们从来没有将各地的果子化作他们自己团体的支会。不然，就当日的教会早已四分五裂了。试想看：许多的使徒，他们到了一个地方，不是设立一个在那地方的教会，却扩充他们所出来的教会，那个地方要变成功什么种的情形？
　　我又对他说，大理的工作，是你们在那里作的。我们感谢神！但你们××会在大理所拯救的人，他们是什么？如果他们是在大理的教会，就我到了大理，也必投身其中。我不管她灵性的光景如何，里面的组织如何，我心投身其中。不然，我就是宗派。但如果你们是将他们作为××教会，就你们不是设立在大理的教会，乃是设立在大理××的教会。对不起，我就不能加入这个“教会，”我就只能在大理另行作工，盼望能有在大理（不是我们的）的教会的出现。
　　圣经里所有布道的团体，都是设立地方的教会，从来没有设立他们团体的支会的。如果我们都走出去设立地方教会，就有完全合作的可能。设立××差会是可以的，设立××教会就不合乎圣经。你试想看：如果你们××会到了大理，就设立××教会，五旬节会到了大理，就设立五旬节教会，圣公会到了大理，就设立圣公会，大家都是设立他们原来团体的支会。这样作，好像保罗设立他的一个支会，彼得也设立他的一个支会，就不是我们所能合作的。因为我们清楚地知道，神要我们按着祂在圣经里所留的榜样，去设立各地地方的教会。
　　我们如果到一个地方设立教会，就要非常地方的，什么色彩都没有才可以。你来到大理，是建立在大理的教会；我来到大理，也是建立在大理的教会；五旬节会来到大理，也是建立在大理的教会；圣公会来到大理，也是设立在大理的教会，不管他们所属的差会是什么，但目的都是建立在大理的教会，这样，宗派就无产生的可能了。如果说××会的差会是错，我不敢，因为他们是神的仆人。但他们如果到各处是设立××会的支会，就他们不只传福音，也是扩充他们的团体了。我们能和一切传福音的人同工，但我们不能和扩充自己范围的人合作。所以，一个人是不是到各处设立地方的教会，断定我们彼此能不能合作。如果他们一面传福音，一面建立他们自己的团体，我们和他们就无合作的可能。我们不肯照着人的目的，来扩充人的团体。不管他们是什么差会的人，只要他们到一个地方，不设立自己的“教会，”是设立地方的教会，就和我们都有合作的可能。
　　求神施恩给我们，叫我们看透了，教会是地方的。求神拯救我们脱离分门别类的错误，好叫神的教会，在各地得以建立。
　　圣经中的众教会是顶地方的，从来没有众教会联合的事。我们是和各地所有的弟兄联合，我们虽多，仍是一个身体。我们的联合，是以信徒为单位。普遍的教会，是以信徒为单位，非以地方教会为单位。我们是基督身上的肢体，不是一个个地方的教会作为基督的肢体。这个单位是信徒，不是地方教会。地方的教会，是教会在地上最大的组织了，所以没有法子把她们联合起来。　　关于工人方面，圣经所给我们看见的就不是这样。使徒有联合。使徒可以合在一起，或是不合在一起。有的人因为从前在人的制度里很深，就有一个反应的错误思想，以为众教会没有联合，所以，众工人也不该有一点联合。　　因为不明白教会间的组织，和使徒间的制度不同的缘故，许多人就以为教会和教会间既没有联合，是非常独立的，就神的工人和神的工人间，也应该是没有联合，也是非常独立的。但这和圣经的教训是完全相反的。众教会是没有联合的，但工人间是有联合的。教会因为要保守地方的性质，就不能和其他地方的教会联合为一个团体。因为教会和教会一联合，就立刻逾越地方的范围，就立刻改变地方的性质，就立刻打破地方的限制，所以圣经就不许可教会间的联合。但是，圣经里却有使徒们的联合。不过这并非说，所有的使徒都联合作一个团体。所有的使徒都联合在一起，管理所有的工作，也是圣经所无的。圣经中的工人并没有联合作一个中央的团体。那一个的办法是罗马的，不是圣经的。但是圣经中的使徒是有联合的，并且是联合成功作一班一班的。我们明明看见，保罗和同他在一起的路加、西拉、亚波罗、提摩太、提多是合成一班。彼得和同他在一起的约翰、雅各等又是一班。从安提阿出来的是一班，从耶路撒冷出来的又是一班。虽然他们这些人，不是各自组成一个差会，但是，他们各人是有各人的“同人”（徒二十34）的。我们如果追究他们的历史，在使徒行传里我们就能看见，起初是在耶路撒冷有几个使徒作工，是他们到撒玛利亚，是他们到该撒利亚，虽然我们不知道与他们同行的人有多少人。后来（十三章）在安提阿就另起一个头。头一次保罗和巴拿巴同工，后来有西拉、有路加、有亚波罗、提摩太等同行。我们看见有一班和保罗同行的人，虽然不知道有多少人。在使徒行传之外，我们还看见另有一班的人，乃是因着结党，因着嫉妒分争而作工的（腓一）。他们这一班人明明不是保罗这一班人，也不是彼得那一班人。虽然他们的存心不是可师的，但是这证明神的工人在当日是有一班一班的。换一句话来说，神的工作和神的工人，在圣经中是有团体的。众教会是没有团体的。众教会一有团体，就成了公会。
--------本段经节汇集--------
徒20:34  
我这两只手常供给我和同伴的需用，这是你们自己知道的。
使徒行传十三章（略，若需要被汇集，请勾选“不忽略整章”）
------------------------
　　有的弟兄以为，我们既然没有公会的组织，作工的人就当像散沙一样，我跑我的路，你跑你的路。每一个都随着己意，各走己路。每一个都是自己的教皇，每一个都是自己的神父。地方的教会是单个的，是没有问题的。地方教会应当你不干涉我，我不干涉你。但工作是有团体的，虽然不是组织的团体。教会的办法是一种，工作的办法又是一种。在工作中，是有团体、有按手、有分派的；也是有安排、有调动、有打发的。但在地方教会间，就在上海的，一点不能管南京的事。南京也不能管上海的事。一个地方遭遇灾难，别的地方可以帮助，表示彼此的交通。至于各个地方教会的行政，就各不相干，各自为政。工作就不同，工作是有计划、有打算的。他们的范围也不只一个地方，乃是许多地方的。所以教会是没有几个联合在一起的，使徒却是有几个人联在一起的，不过没有像今天所谓的差会、布道团等名称而已。
　
　　我们要看圣经中，在工作中所发生的事情，以证明工作是有团体的，是有支配的，同时也是超越地方的。　　“保罗对巴拿巴说，我们可以回到从前宣传主道的各城，看望弟兄们景况如何。巴拿巴有意，要带称呼马可的约翰同去；但保罗，因为马可从前在旁非利亚离开他们，不和他们同去作工，就以为不可带他去。于是二人起了争论，甚至彼此分开；巴拿巴带着马可，坐船往居比路去；保罗拣选了西拉，也出去，蒙弟兄们把他交于主的恩中。”（徒十五36~40）
--------本段经节汇集--------
徒15:36  
过了些日子，保罗对巴拿巴说，我们要回到从前宣传主话的各城，看望弟兄们的景况如何。
徒15:37  
巴拿巴定意也带着称呼马可的约翰同去，
徒15:38  
但保罗以为不带他同去是适宜的，因为马可从前曾在旁非利亚离开他们，不和他们同去作工。
徒15:39  
于是二人起了争执，甚至彼此分开；巴拿巴带着马可，坐船往居比路去；
徒15:40  
保罗却拣选了西拉，也出去，蒙弟兄们把他交与主的恩典。
------------------------
　　“保罗要带他（提摩太）同去。”（十六3）　　“保罗既看见这（马其顿的）异象，我们随即想要往马其顿去，断定神召我们传福音给那里的人听。”（10，原文）
--------本段经节汇集--------
此处经节“10”没能在最近的文本中找到章数，请检查。
 ------------------------
　　“送保罗的人带他到了雅典：既领了保罗的命，叫西拉和提摩太速速到他这里来，就回去了。”（十七15）　　“他（保罗）…定意从马其顿回去。同他到亚西亚去的，有庇哩亚人毕罗斯的儿子所巴特，帖撒罗尼迦人亚里达古，和西公都，还有特庇人该犹，并提摩太，又有亚西亚人推基古，和特罗非摩。这些人先走在特罗亚等候我们。”（二十3~5）　　“我们先上船开往亚朔去，意思要在那里接保罗；因为他是这样安排的，他自己打算要步行。他既在亚朔与我们相会，我们就接他上船，来到米推利尼。”（13~14）　　“若是提摩太来到，你们要留心，叫他在你们那里无所惧怕；因为他劳力作主的工，像我一样；…至于兄弟亚波罗，我再三地劝他，同弟兄们到你们那里去；但这时他绝不愿意去；几时有了机会他必去。”（林前十六10~12）
--------本段经节汇集--------
林前16:10  
若是提摩太来到，你们要留心，叫他在你们那里无所惧怕，因为他作主的工像我一样。
林前16:11  
所以无论谁，都不可藐视他。但你们要送他平安前行，使他可以到我这里来，因我正等待他和弟兄们同来。
林前16:12  
至于亚波罗弟兄，我再三地劝他，要同弟兄们到你们那里去；但现在他绝不愿意去，几时有了机会他必去。
------------------------
　　“因此我劝提多，既然在你们中间开办这慈惠的事，就当办成了。”（林后八6）
--------本段经节汇集--------
林后8:6  
以致我们劝提多，他怎样开始了，也当照样为你们完成这恩典，像完成其他的事一样。
------------------------
　　“多谢神，感动提多的心，叫他待你们殷勤，…他固然是听了我的劝；但自己更是热心，情愿往你们那里去。我们还打发一位兄弟和他同去。”（16~18）　　“我们又打发一位兄弟同去；这人的热心，我们在许多事上，屡次试验过，现在他因为深信你们，就更加热心了。论到提多，他是我的同伴，一同为你们劳碌的；论到那两位兄弟，他们是众教会的使者，是基督的荣耀。”（22~23）　　“今有所亲爱忠心事奉主的兄弟推基古，他要把我的事情并我的景况如何，全告诉你们叫你们知道。我特意打发他到你们那里去，好叫你们知道我们的光景，又叫他安慰你们的心。”（弗六21~22）
--------本段经节汇集--------
弗6:21  
但为叫你们知道关于我的事，我的景况如何，有亲爱的弟兄，在主里忠信的执事推基古，要将一切全告诉你们，
弗6:22  
我特为这事，打发他到你们那里去，好叫你们知道关于我们的事，并叫他安慰你们的心。
------------------------
　　“我靠主耶稣指望快打发提摩太去见你们，叫我知道你们的事，心里就得着安慰。”（腓二19）
--------本段经节汇集--------
腓2:19  
我在主耶稣里，盼望快打发提摩太到你们那里去，叫我知道关于你们的事，也可魂中快慰。
------------------------
　　“然而我想必须打发以巴弗提到你们那里去；他是我的兄弟，与我一同作工，一同当兵，是你们所差遣的，也是供给我需用的。”（25）　　“有我亲爱的兄弟推基古要将我一切的事都告诉你们；他是忠心的执事，和我一同作主的仆人。”（西四7）
--------本段经节汇集--------
西4:7  
一切关于我的事，有亲爱的弟兄，忠信的执事，在主里同作奴仆的推基古，要告诉你们。
------------------------
　　“所亲爱的医生路加，和底马问你们安。”（14）　　“要对亚基布说，务要谨慎，尽你从主所受的职分。”（17）　　“我们既不能再忍，就愿意独自等在雅典；打发我们的兄弟在基督福音上作神执事的提摩太前去，坚固你们，并在你们所信的道上劝慰你们。”（帖前三1~2）
--------本段经节汇集--------
帖前3:1  
所以，我们既不能再忍受，就乐意独自留在雅典，
帖前3:2  
打发我们的弟兄，在基督福音上作神同工的提摩太去，为着你们的信心，坚固并鼓励你们，
------------------------
　　“你要赶紧地到我这里来。因为底马贪爱现今的世界，就离弃我往帖撒罗尼迦去了；革勒士往加拉太去；提多往挞马太去；独有路加在我这里。你来的时候要把马可带来；因为他在传道的事上于我有益处。我已经打发推基古往以弗所去。我在特罗亚留于加布的那件外衣，你来的时候可以带来；那些书也要带来；更要紧的是那些皮卷。”（提后四9~13）
--------本段经节汇集--------
提后4:9  
你要尽快地到我这里来；
提后4:10  
因为底马爱了现今的世代，就离弃我往帖撒罗尼迦去了；革勒士往加拉太去，提多往挞马太去。
提后4:11  
独有路加同我在一起。你要接得马可，带他同来，因为他在服事上对我有用处。
提后4:12  
我已经打发推基古往以弗所去。
提后4:13  
我在特罗亚留于加布的那件外衣，你来的时候要带来，还有那些书卷，尤其是那些皮卷。
------------------------
　　“以拉都在哥林多住下了。特罗非摩病了，我就留他在米利都。你要赶紧在冬天以前到我这里来。”（20~21）　　“我从前留你在革哩底，是要你将那没有办完的事都办整齐了，又照我所吩咐你的，在各城设立长老。”（多一5）
--------本段经节汇集--------
多1:5  
我从前留你在革哩底，是要你将我所未办完的事办理妥当，又照我所吩咐你的，在各城设立长老。
------------------------
　　“我打发亚提马，或是推基古，到你那里去的时候，你要赶紧往尼哥波立去见我；因为我已经定意在那里过冬。你要赶紧给律师西纳，和亚波罗送行，叫他们没有缺乏。”（三12~13）
　
　　综读以上的圣经，我们看见三个事实：（一）工作是有团体的，（二）工作团体中是有支配的，（三）工作的范围是不只一地的。　　我们看使徒行传和书信中人物的记载，就知道神的工人是有团体的，是大家合在一起同工的，并非尔为尔，我为我那样的各行其是。住在耶路撒冷那一班的工人就是如此的。耶路撒冷的几个同工是我们所顶熟识的。其中彼得、约翰和雅各特别是我们所知道的。他们并没有单独的作什么。在五旬节的时候，我们是看见“彼得和十一个使徒，站起；”（徒二14）在美门作工的时候，乃是彼得和约翰；去撒玛利亚也是他们二人；到哥尼流家里是彼得和六位弟兄。他们在耶路撒冷是有一个工人团体的，虽然不一定每一次都是其中那几个人一同出去。他们的工作并非个人的，乃是团体的。他们是有同工去作工的。至于安提阿保罗这边，可惜，我们注重保罗这个人，却不大注重保罗的同工。
--------本段经节汇集--------
徒2:14  
彼得同十一位使徒站起来，高声对众人说，诸位，犹太人和一切住在耶路撒冷的人哪，这件事你们当知道，也当侧耳听我的话。
使徒行传六章（略，若需要被汇集，请勾选“不忽略整章”）
------------------------
　　我们看见如何在特罗亚的时候，路加加入他们工作的团体，断定马其顿的呼声是应当接受的。后来如何从马其顿回来的时候，带了所巴特、亚里达古、西公都、该犹、提摩太、推基古、特罗非摩等同工同走。后来又有亚波罗、百基拉、亚居拉加入同工。后来保罗又如何打发提摩太、劝亚波罗、勉提多去哥林多，后来如何又得了以巴弗提作同工。我顶喜欢读书信的头一句，“保罗，同兄弟所提尼；”（林前一1）“保罗，和兄弟提摩太；”（西一1）“保罗、西拉、提摩太”（帖前一1）等。圣经给我们看见，不只有工人，并且有同工的人。我们不要误会了，以为因为不可有人的组织的缘故，不可有人立的差会的缘故，就以为作工的人都不可有结合，这就错了。不错，教会是不可以几个组织合在一起的，但是，神的工人是可以有结合的。许多人误会，以为我们没有公会，所以作神的工人的，为神作使徒的，就可以自由行动，匹马单枪的去作他自己所以为好的工作。不。教会是不应当联合为公会的，但是神的工人虽然不是成功作一个布道的中央机构，但是神的工人是有同工的，是和他的同工结合成一班而同去作工的。
--------本段经节汇集--------
林前1:1  
凭神旨意，蒙召作基督耶稣使徒的保罗，和弟兄所提尼，
西1:1  
凭神旨意，作基督耶稣使徒的保罗，和弟兄提摩太，
帖前1:1  
保罗、西拉和提摩太，写信给在父神和主耶稣基督里，帖撒罗尼迦人的召会：愿恩典与平安归与你们。
帖撒罗尼迦前书一章（略，若需要被汇集，请勾选“不忽略整章”）
------------------------
　　但是，一件事是必须注意的，就是他们固然是有团体，他们的团体可不是一种组织的团体，乃是一个属灵的团体。这里头的分别，差得太多了。他们乃是一班志同道合的人，因着同爱一位主，同喜欢事奉祂，同受祂的呼召和差遣的缘故，就合在一起作工。有的也许从起头就来了的，有的也许是随后加入的。他们的确是一个团体，是一个作工的团体。但是，他们却没有组织，没有地位的分配，和职分的分当。加入的人，也不是招募而来的，或者训练而来的；乃是在使徒出外旅程中所遇见的。因着神的安排，就能彼此见面，就能彼此倾心，就能彼此同工。并无所谓考试，也无所谓条件，或是其他的手续。一切都是神在那里作主，人不过是赞成的人而已。到了这个团体里，谁也没有一定的地位，一定的职分。没有“团长”，没有“主席”，也没有“会督。”其他更不必说了。他们的职分乃是从主分派得来的。主给他们这个职分，他们就守住这个地位。这个团体并没有给他们什么职分，什么地位。他们彼此间的关系乃是属灵的，而非地位的。他们的结合乃是属灵的结合，而非人为的组织。　　这些圣经节也给我们看见，神的工人中间，也不是因为谁都不受谁的供给，所以就谁也不受谁的调动。并不是因为我是直接靠神的，所以，就没有人可以干涉我的前途。反之，我们乃是看见保罗将提多“留在革哩底”（多一5），去继续所未了的工；后来又“打发亚提马，或是推基古”去替他，而又叫他“赶紧往尼哥波立”（三12）。至于他如何多次的打发提摩太、以巴弗提、推基古出去作工，和他如何劝提多和亚波罗往哥林多，都是我们所顶熟的。在神的工作中，工人不只是有团体的，并且，在这个团体中是有比我们更属灵者的指挥的。同工是能受打发、被留、听劝的。
--------本段经节汇集--------
多1:5  
我从前留你在革哩底，是要你将我所未办完的事办理妥当，又照我所吩咐你的，在各城设立长老。
多3:12  
我打发亚提马或推基古到你那里去的时候，你要赶紧往尼哥波立去见我，因为我已经定意在那里过冬。
------------------------
　　所以，在这里我们必须明了地位的权柄，和属灵的权柄的不同。在一个组织的团体中，所有的权柄都是地位的，而非属灵的。在一个好的组织里，一个有权柄的人，有地位的权柄也有属灵的权柄；在一个不好的组织里，一个有权柄的人，就只有地位的权柄而没有属灵的权柄。在一个组织里，不管其人自己有没有属灵的权柄，他在那组织里所有的权柄，总是地位的。什么是地位的权柄呢？地位的权柄就是因着有了这个地位，所以就有了这个权柄。就是在位谋政的意思。什么时候，一不在其位，就不谋其政，也是不能谋。地位的权柄乃是在有这权柄者的身外的，和他本人是无关的。乃是有了这个地位，就有了这个权柄。一切都是地位给他的。组织的团体就是以这一个权柄来支配别人的路程。谁是主席，谁是委员，谁就指挥别人的工作。组织团体的中心就是地位。地位就是一个组织团体的生命，人是以地位来执行他的权柄。但是，圣经中工人的团体是没有组织的。其中也有权柄，但是那权柄不是地位的、正式的，乃是属灵的。乃是因为灵性的长进，能力的充满，交通的亲密，所以有那一个权柄。使徒保罗之所以能指挥别人，不是因为他的地位比别人高，乃是因为他的灵性比别人深。什么人在灵性上是深进的，什么人就有权柄；什么时候，一个人灵性一失败，他就失去他的权柄。在一个组织里，有那个灵性的，不一定有那个地位；有那个地位的，又不一定有那个灵性。但是在圣经中工人的团体，却不是组织的团体。在其中灵性高超的人，就可指挥；灵力充满的人，就能监督。属灵的人就要听从，就要顺服。在组织的团体中，你若不顺服是不可以的，但是在属灵的团体中，你若不听从乃是可以的。不过你在正式方面虽然不是错的，你在灵性方面却是错了。　　但是除属灵的权柄之外，还有各种职事的问题。主的每一个仆人虽然都是在那职事之中，但是，在主面前都有他们个人所特有的职事，这些的职事不是一样的。在组织中只有人所定的地位，在属灵的工作中却有主所分的职事。因为职事不同的缘故，所以，一面是顺服主，另一面却是彼此顺服。他们所以顺服别的弟兄，不是因为别的弟兄有比自己更高的地位，乃是因为主所分派给他们的职事，和主所分派给自己的职事乃是彼此相关，而又不同的。这完全是属灵的，不是地位的。　　今天人也看见这一个，所以人也学习这一个，就组织一个团体，举出一个首领来指挥别的工人。但今天许多的指挥，是出于组织里的地位的，不是出于属灵的职事的。保罗所以这样作，是出于他的职事。提多、提摩太、推基古的受支配，也是出于他们的职事。今天许多的支配，是以人的地位来支配，不是由于属灵的经历多，也不是由于职事的地位大。今天人一有了人定的地位，不管他的灵性如何，就可以支配人。一有那个地位，就有那个权柄，这是不合乎圣经的。圣经里是以属灵为根据。圣经里有权柄，但这权柄是属灵的，不是地位的。圣经里是人要有属灵的能力，人要有属灵的受托、属灵的经历、和属灵的使命。但今天人是因他的地位而使用权柄，这是何等的不同！
--------本段经节汇集--------
出埃及记一章（略，若需要被汇集，请勾选“不忽略整章”）
------------------------
　　我们看提摩太他是何等的爱主、亲近主、忠心事奉主。他真是神所特别拣选的一个器皿。但是，他还多次受保罗的差遣。他并没有说，难道我自己还不会作工，难道我自己还不会传福音，难道我自己还不会建立教会么？难道我自己还不知道如何作么？感谢神，他会。但是，提摩太是受保罗的命令去作的。在属灵的工作上，是有这一个受那一个支配的事。有保罗的地位，也有提摩太的地位。　　我们今天要学习，一面和同工发生正当的关系，一面个人受圣灵的引导。这两面都该维持，都该平均才可以。提摩太前后书，有够多的地方叫我们看见，同工是如何同法；也给我们看见，一个年少的同工，是如何顺服年长的同工。一个年少的工人，一面是该听从圣灵的命令，一面也该听从年长的保罗的话。保罗曾打发提摩太出去，曾劝提摩太留在以弗所，而提摩太却在主里听从。这是少年作工的榜样。这一种工作的合一，是顶宝贝的，一面受圣灵的引导，一面还能和同工不至于格格不相入。在这里头，我们不能把完全的责任，都推在提摩太身上；我们也不能把完全的责任，都推在保罗身上。因为劝人的人，应该知道如何劝人。一切劝人的、留人的、打发人的，如果都是凭着天然作的，随着己意作的，就叫人不能顺服。提摩太固然要学习和保罗同工，但是，保罗也得学习如何和提摩太同工。这样就免得叫作提摩太的，只能随从圣灵，不能听从保罗；也叫作保罗的，不至于代替主来说话。不然，就不免有太多的难题了。　　神的工人应当结合，但是有一种的结合是可惧怕的，就是一种人的组织，使神的仆人不能受圣灵的引导，只不过受人的支配，作人的仆人。这叫他们作某种工的时候，并不是因个人在神面前有什么负担，乃是因比他更大更高的人在那里指挥。有的人以为圣灵在地上需要经理，殊不知圣灵在地上，已经就是主基督的经理了。祂并用不着经理。我们今天的难处，乃是有一地位更高的人来支配别的人，好像是借着他来明白神的旨意。但按圣经看来，人不能合起来成功一个组织机关，人不能借着一个机关来发号施令，而不管个人在神面前有没有负担。　　在另一方面，另有一个难处，就是有一班人，他明白神的旨意；他得了神的呼召；他得了神的供给；他得了神的引导；他就想，我可以走我自己的路，作我自己的工了。　　圣经一面不许我们有一种人的组织，来支配神的工人；另一面又给我们看见许多榜样，工人之间应该因着属灵的职事，而顺服属灵的权柄，来同心合意作主的工。没有组织是事实，但不能说，在工作里，使徒和使徒一点联合和合一都没有。在属灵的工作里，个人单独行动主义，和在公会里团体组织的差会，都不是神的旨意。我们需要个人明白神的旨意，也需要几个人一同在神面前明白神的旨意。保罗和巴拿巴的蒙召便是此例。在神面前的不是二个先知和教师，乃是五个先知和教师。行传十三章，已经留下一个好榜样：工作是有团体的。不是大小地位联合的团体，乃是大小职事联合的团体。我们一同作工的人，是有互相的关系的。我们所得的引导，要和别的弟兄的引导互相印证。我们要有在安提阿几个先知和教师那一种彼此的联络，叫我们过激的停止一下，太慢的推进一下。彼此虽没有组织的关系，但是却有生命上属灵的关系。
--------本段经节汇集--------
使徒行传五章（略，若需要被汇集，请勾选“不忽略整章”）
使徒行传十三章（略，若需要被汇集，请勾选“不忽略整章”）
------------------------
　　另一面我们看见他们工作的范围是很广的。有的打发到以弗所去，有的要到保罗这里来，有的在哥林多住下了，有的留在米利都，有的留在革哩底，有的从帖撒罗尼迦回来，有的往加拉太去，有的往挞马太去。这是工作。这种种的活动，不是教会里的事，因为教会只管一个地方范围内的事。以弗所只管以弗所的事，歌罗西只管歌罗西的事，罗马只管罗马的事。地方范围内的事，是教会该作的。以弗所不必留人在歌罗西，歌罗西不需要打发人到罗马。但工作是超地方的。以弗所、歌罗西、罗马，都在作工的人的心目之中。神的工人是把主所分给他们的地，作为他们的“教区”的。这些地方，是需要工人在一起商量，有所调动、有所安排的。地方的教会，就不能这样，她只能管理地方范围之内的事。在工作里，凡主所差遣的人，是彼此负各地所有工作责任的。
　
　　圣经里，工人是有团体的。但是，圣经里并没有所有的使徒们，合成一个团体，受统一的支配，服在一个中央的权柄之下。虽然保罗有保罗一班的“同人”，彼得有彼得一班的“同人”，但他们不过是众使徒中的若干人，并非所有的使徒所集合的团体。把所有的使徒都集合在一起，是圣经里所没有的。凭着圣经的教训，乃是其一种的工作，和某几个工人特别发生关系；所以他们就集合在一起。或者几个人，或者几十个人，或者几百个人，因同受神某种的托付，就可以集合在一起。圣经里从来没有中央集权，来支配所有使徒的事。团体是有的，但团体从来没有大到把所有的使徒都集合在一起。如果有的话，那是天主教的制度，并非圣经的作法。
--------本段经节汇集--------
罗马书一章（略，若需要被汇集，请勾选“不忽略整章”）
罗马书一章（略，若需要被汇集，请勾选“不忽略整章”）
罗马书一章（略，若需要被汇集，请勾选“不忽略整章”）
罗马书一章（略，若需要被汇集，请勾选“不忽略整章”）
------------------------
　　在腓立比一章说，有的传基督，是出于嫉妒分争；也有的是出于好意。有一等人传福音是出于爱心，有一等人传福音是出于结党。肉体没有受过对付，自然就有嫉妒的事发生。腓立比书给我们看见有这样事实的存在，就是证明当日工作并没有统一的事。因为如果有统一的办法，就不致有这班人的存在了。就是有了这班人，也早就可以加以取缔了。但是，保罗对于这个的态度是“无论怎样，基督究竟被传开了；为此我就欢喜，并且还要欢喜”（18）。这几句话，显出“使徒”时代的事实，是有一班一班的工人的。虽然有的一班作工是出于好意，有的竟然走出于嫉妒；但是，保罗和其他的大使徒并没有取缔谁、禁止谁，因为当时没有统一支配工人的事。
--------本段经节汇集--------
腓立比书一章（略，若需要被汇集，请勾选“不忽略整章”）
------------------------
　　有几个事实，是我们该注意的。第一，地方教会是不应当和其他教会结成一个大团体的，因为地方教会已经是一个最大的信徒团体了。第二，工人是可以联合的，使徒们是可以联合的。使徒不管是在安提阿也好，不管是住在彼西底的安提阿也好，但是他们可以有联合。第三，圣经里并没有把所有的工人都联合成为一个大团体，不只腓立比一章是这样的明显，就是哥林多书也有同样的启示。
--------本段经节汇集--------
腓立比书一章（略，若需要被汇集，请勾选“不忽略整章”）
------------------------
　　林后十一章十二至十三节：“我现在所作的，后来还要作，为要断绝那些寻机会人的机会，使他们在所夸的事上，也不过与我们一样。那等人是假使徒，行事诡诈，装作基督使徒的模样。”又二十二至二十三节：“他们是希伯来人么？我也是。他们是以色列人么？我也是。他们是亚伯拉罕的后裔么？我也是。他们是基督的仆人么？（我说句狂话）我更是。”在这一里，我们看见在哥林多有一班假的使徒，迷惑在哥林多的信徒说，保罗不是使徒。他们自以为比保罗更好。我们看见，保罗在行政上并没有法子对付他们。因为为神作工的人是没有行政上统一的组织的。如果属灵的工作有一个统一的组织，就谁没有执照，谁就不能传道。每一个都要有执照才能出去，就没有这个难处了。但使徒的结合是属灵的，所以有另外一班的人出来作假使徒。神不愿意所有的使徒合成一个团体。因这种集合所发生的弊病，要比假使徒多几千倍。所以，神只许可若干祂所差遣的工人，因受有相同的托付，而集合成一个个的团体。
--------本段经节汇集--------
林后11:12  
我现在所作的，将来还要作，为要断绝那些要得机会者的机会，使他们在所夸的事上，给人看出也不过与我们一样。
林后11:13  
那等人是假使徒，是诡诈的工人，装作基督的使徒。
------------------------
　　加拉太四章十七节：“那些人热心待你们，却不是好意，是要离间你们，叫你们热心待他们。”又六章十七节：“从今以后，人都不要搅扰我；因为我身上带着耶稣的印记。”你们看见这两节圣经相合的地方么？有人跑到加拉太，用尽手段牢笼那里的信徒，盼望从他们身上得到一本万利的收获。但保罗的态度如何呢？保罗是说，我真是作主工的，你们不要在我身上弄这些手段。他并没有什么政权可以对付这一个。
--------本段经节汇集--------
加4:17  
那些人热心待你们，不是好意，乃是要离间你们，叫你们热心待他们。
------------------------
　　圣经里为什么没有普遍的组织和支配呢？就是因为神不愿意用人组织的力量，来代替圣灵的能力。在没有统一支配的时候，人若都顺服圣灵的引导，就什么都作得好。什么时候人不随从圣灵，什么时候人凭着血气作事，工作就失败了。严密的组织，许多的时候，能代替属灵的能力。因为里面生命的能力虽然没有了，但是因为有外面组织的架子把它撑住，工作还是不会倒塌的。什么时候组织仍然存在，就什么时候那个工作仍然不会失败。但是，神不要人这样作。什么时候属灵的能力一失，神就愿意那个工作倒塌，愿意那个工作不存在。什么时候神的荣耀离开了圣殿，什么时候神就宁可一块石头不留在石头上。多少的时候，里面都干枯了，只因着外面有组织的架子，就叫人不觉得里面实在的情形。但是，神却要人外面和里面一样，要人看见祂所看见的。祂宁可工作倒塌，不愿有假的支持，好叫我们在倒塌之后，能谦卑的再来寻求祂的面。并且统一支配的弊病，不知有多少。统一支配的组织，能叫不是神仆人的也混在内，也容易弄到今天教皇的地位。有统一的组织，就叫工作在世界上成功一大势力，同时也叫神的仆人不必受圣灵的引导了。所以，工人有团体是事实，但是工人不能组织一个统一的团体，也是事实。
　
　　现在有一个问题发生，就是工人和工人团体中彼此应当如何合作呢？有一班人，有神给他们特别的工作；另有一班人，也有神给他们特别的使命。这二班人应当如何合作呢？像彼得有彼得一班的同人，保罗有保罗一班的同人。神又没有把这二班人合在一起作工。那么当他们彼此有衔接的时候，应当如何合作呢？统一是不对的，团体是一个个的。这些的工人，这些的团体，彼此应当怎样合作呢？
--------本段经节汇集--------
路得记一章（略，若需要被汇集，请勾选“不忽略整章”）
------------------------
　　我们现在来看，工人工作的要点：　　第一，每一个人（团体在内）不管神给他的职事是什么，他所特别要作的是什么工作，他到一个没有地方教会的地方，第一件事，就是先设立在那地方的教会。　　第二，他到一个已有地方教会的地方，他就只能供献他的道理，叫教会得他的益处，他却不能叫那个教会成功他的教会，或者他团体的教会。　　如果一个工人或几个工人，到一个没有教会的地方，去设立维持他道理的“教会”，你和他就无合作的可能，因他在那里是建立宗派。如果一个工人或几个工人，到一个有地方教会的地方，不是光供献他的道理，乃是想改变别人，成为他团体的支会，你和他也无合作的可能，因为他也是在那里建立宗派。作工的人，最大的忌讳，就是不设立地方教会，或者不造就地方教会，想改变地方的团体成为自己的团体。这两种的作法，都是圣经所不许可的。　　保罗到了哥林多，他是从安提阿来的。他在哥林多传了福音，有人得了救，有一个信徒的团体出来了。保罗在哥林多所设立的团体是什么团体呢？是在哥林多的教会。他不是在哥林多设立安提阿教会的支会。他这样作是对的。等一等，彼得也到了哥林多，也传了福音，也得了一班人。彼得能不能说，你保罗是从安提阿来的，我彼得是从耶路撒冷来的，所以我要另立一个团体呢？或者要另立一个耶路撒冷教会的支会呢？不能。彼得只能说，保罗所建立的，是在哥林多的教会，所以我所得的人，也只能放在这个教会里。不只彼得是这样作，后来亚波罗来了，也是这样作。他们都是把人救来了，就放在地方教会里。这样，在哥林多就只有一个神的教会，没有什么分门别类的宗派了。如果保罗在哥林多传了福音，救了人，就说，我是从安提阿出来的，所以当在哥林多设立一个安提阿教会的支会，或者设立一个保罗的支会。彼得来了，他要怎么说？他要说，你保罗既然设立了安提阿教会的支会，我又和安提阿教会是没有关系的，我犯不着把人放在你的支会里，我也得在这里来一个耶路撒冷教会的支会。等一等，亚波罗来了，也设立一个亚波罗的支会。你设立一个支会，我设立一个支会，宗派就由此成立了。这样，他们来，不是设立当地的地方教会，乃是设立他们自己所来自团体的支会。他们不是设立教会，乃是扩充他们自己所来自的团体。这样，就无合作的可能。　　所以工人或者工人团体，作工最要紧的原则，就是我出去作工乃是要设立我所到地的地方教会，不是在我所到地，去设立我从前所在地的教会。不是扩充我所出自他的教会于我的所到地，乃是我到了什么地方就设立那一个地方的教会。耶路撒冷和安提阿是没有支会的。所有的教会都是地方的。我们不能扩充一个地方教会到别的地方去，我们只能在别的地方设立它那一个地方的教会。使徒到了以弗所设立的，乃是在以弗所的教会；到了腓立比所设立的，乃是在腓立比的教会。他们在其他百十的地方，所设立的都是在那些地方的教会。我们从来没看见他们设立其他的团体。扩充神的教会是可以的，扩充我所在地的神的教会就不可。我们所到的是什么地方，我们所设立的教会，也就是什么地方的教会。　　布道工作的目的，本来光是为着拯救罪人，但是结果却是叫我们的所到地有了教会。目的是拯救世人，结局却设立了教会。但是，就在这里有一个危险，就是人喜欢将其所救的人编成作他团体的支会，而不将其成为当地的教会。结局就因着神的工人彼此所归属的团体不一样的缘故，就在一个地方设立许多不一样团体的分会，因而生了许多的纠纷。在工作中，神的工人们对于作工的目的是从来不会冲突的。谁传福音是不想救人的呢？谁不想让主能多得几个人呢？但是对于工作的结果却是少有一样的。有的，感谢神，乃是为着设立当地的教会。但是可惜，另有许多若不是为着扩充自己的公会，就是为着扩充自己的差会。对于这一点，就是我和我的同工，同一班的朋友所争执的点。　　我们从心里感谢神，因为在过去这百年中，打发了许多忠心的仆人来到中国传福音，使许多坐在黑暗里的中国人有机会可以听见，能以相信。他们的牺牲、受苦、敬虔、和殷勤，真是我们的榜样。多少的时候，当我们仰起我们的眼，看从内地中出来西教士受苦的脸的时候，叫我们心中不能不受感，祷告说，“求主使我也能像他”。但愿主祝福他们！报答他们！　　对于我们的弟兄在传福音方面的工作，我们实在无可批评，只有羡慕。我们这一班的人，原是未到期的胎产，原不配在神的工作上有分，但是，因着自己是身受神恩典的人，又蒙了祂的恩召来作祂的工，就不能不在祂面前追求忠心。因此，我们就不能不觉得，对于我们在主里年长的弟兄传福音的工作真可钦佩；但是对于他们处置福音的果子，就是得救的人的办法，表示疑惑。因为在这过去百年的工作中，我们在主里年长的弟兄，不是设立他们所到地的教会，却是设立他们差会的支会！按着我们看，这实在是与圣经的道理不合的。圣经中只有设立所到地的地方教会，而没有设立其他任何公会的事。我若说错了，求神饶恕我！
　
　　请你们饶恕我提起一件个人的事。去年我在上海遇见一位基督××会的教士，他问我说，我能不能和××会合作？当时，我因为不知道如何答复，就没有立时答复。今年我在云南昆明，又遇见他。他又向我谈到，我能不能和××会合作？我因有更清楚地光，就答说，××会这个差会，我不敢反对。我知道你们这个“会”字是指差会说的。你们蒙神的引导，设立××会这个差会，叫一班西国爱主的弟兄容易到中国来传福音作工。关乎这一个，我一点都不敢批评。对于你们这个差会的团体，我一点不敢非议。因为圣经中的工作是有团体的。你们觉得应当有组织、有名称，这是你们在神面前应当负责的。我是谁，怎敢批评主的仆人呢？不过我自己不敢如此作，因为神没有这样引导我。所以，对××会这个差会，我是没有问题的。并且我承认，我读贵会发起人的传记，所得的属灵帮助他不知道有多少。我的心和你们早是合而为一的，但是我对××会这个教会却有问题。　　对于你们─一班布道者，我们是毫无问题的。但是，你们布道所得的果子，你们把他们怎么办？这是所有的问题。我们对于××会不敢说什么，但是我们要问，××会的果子到底是如何？如果××会光是一个差会，我们就不敢批评什么，但是××会如果变作教会，那问题就不一样。你们自己是××会，你们所救的人是什么呢？是叫他们成为××会的教会呢？还是叫他们成为他们所在地的教会呢？××差会乃是你们这一班来中国传福音的“教士，”你们没有圣经的权柄，在各地得了果子之后，将这些果子编作××教会。你们自己作××差会是可以，你们若叫他们变作××教会就不可。圣经没有禁止××差会的设立，可是圣经曾禁止××教会的设立！　　然后我就指明使徒的榜样给他看。他们无论在哪里作工，都是将他们的果子作为他们所在那个地方的教会。他们从来没有将各地的果子化作他们自己团体的支会。不然，就当日的教会早已四分五裂了。试想看：许多的使徒，他们到了一个地方，不是设立一个在那地方的教会，却扩充他们所出来的教会，那个地方要变成功什么种的情形？　　我又对他说，大理的工作，是你们在那里作的。我们感谢神！但你们××会在大理所拯救的人，他们是什么？如果他们是在大理的教会，就我到了大理，也必投身其中。我不管她灵性的光景如何，里面的组织如何，我心投身其中。不然，我就是宗派。但如果你们是将他们作为××教会，就你们不是设立在大理的教会，乃是设立在大理××的教会。对不起，我就不能加入这个“教会，”我就只能在大理另行作工，盼望能有在大理（不是我们的）的教会的出现。　　圣经里所有布道的团体，都是设立地方的教会，从来没有设立他们团体的支会的。如果我们都走出去设立地方教会，就有完全合作的可能。设立××差会是可以的，设立××教会就不合乎圣经。你试想看：如果你们××会到了大理，就设立××教会，五旬节会到了大理，就设立五旬节教会，圣公会到了大理，就设立圣公会，大家都是设立他们原来团体的支会。这样作，好像保罗设立他的一个支会，彼得也设立他的一个支会，就不是我们所能合作的。因为我们清楚地知道，神要我们按着祂在圣经里所留的榜样，去设立各地地方的教会。　　我们如果到一个地方设立教会，就要非常地方的，什么色彩都没有才可以。你来到大理，是建立在大理的教会；我来到大理，也是建立在大理的教会；五旬节会来到大理，也是建立在大理的教会；圣公会来到大理，也是设立在大理的教会，不管他们所属的差会是什么，但目的都是建立在大理的教会，这样，宗派就无产生的可能了。如果说××会的差会是错，我不敢，因为他们是神的仆人。但他们如果到各处是设立××会的支会，就他们不只传福音，也是扩充他们的团体了。我们能和一切传福音的人同工，但我们不能和扩充自己范围的人合作。所以，一个人是不是到各处设立地方的教会，断定我们彼此能不能合作。如果他们一面传福音，一面建立他们自己的团体，我们和他们就无合作的可能。我们不肯照着人的目的，来扩充人的团体。不管他们是什么差会的人，只要他们到一个地方，不设立自己的“教会，”是设立地方的教会，就和我们都有合作的可能。　　求神施恩给我们，叫我们看透了，教会是地方的。求神拯救我们脱离分门别类的错误，好叫神的教会，在各地得以建立。
　The churches in Scripture are intensely local. We never find any federation of churches there; they are all independent units. The position is quite otherwise as regards the workers. Among them we find a certain amount of association; we see here a little group, and there another, linked together for the work. Paul and those with him—as for instance Luke, Silas, Timothy, Titus, and Apollos—formed one group. Peter, James, John, and those with them formed another. One group came out from Antioch, another from Jerusalem. Paul refers to those who were with him (Acts 20:34), which indicates that while there was no organization of the workers into different missions, still they had their own special associates in the work. Even in the beginning, when our Lord chose the twelve, He sent them out two by two. All were fellow workers, but each had his special fellow worker. Such grouping of workers was ordained and ordered by the Lord.
　These apostolic companies were not formed along partisan or doctrinal lines; they were formed under the sovereignty of the Spirit, who so ordered the circumstances of the different workers as to link them together in the work. It was not that they were really divided from other workers, but merely that in the Spirit’s ordering of their ways, they had not been led into special association with them. It was the Holy Spirit, not men, who said, “Set apart for Me now Barnabas and Saul.” Everything hinged on the sovereignty of the Spirit. The apostolic companies were subject to the will and ordering of the Lord. As we have seen, the twelve were divided into pairs, but it was not left to their personal discretion to choose their associates; it was the Lord who coupled them together and sent them forth. Each had a special fellow worker, but that fellow worker was of the Lord’s appointing, not of their choosing. It was not because of natural affinity that they associated specially with some, nor was it because of difference in doctrine or practice that they did not associate specially with others. The deciding factor was always the ordering of the Lord.
　We recognize that the Lord is the Head of the Church, and that the apostles were the first order “placed” by the Lord in the Church (1 Cor. 12:28). Although they were formed into associations, having their special fellow workers appointed by the Lord, still they had no special name, system, or organization. They did not make a company smaller than the Body to be the basis of their work; all was on the ground of the Body. Therefore, although on account of difference of locality and the providential ordering of their ways, they formed different groups, still they had no organization outside the Body; their work was always an expression of the ministry of the Body. They were constituted into separate companies, but each company stood on the ground of the Body, expressing the ministry of the Body.
　The Lord is the Head of the Body and not the Head of any organization; therefore, whenever we work for a society, a mission, or an institution, and not for the Body alone, we lose the headship of the Lord. We must see clearly that the work is the work of the Body of Christ and that, while the Lord did divide His workers into different companies (not different organizations), their work was always on the ground of the Body. And we must recognize that every individual worker and every company represents the ministry of the Body of Christ, each office held being held in the Body, and for the furtherance of the work of God. Then, and only then, can we have one ministry—the up-building of the Body of Christ. If we recognized clearly the oneness of the Body, what blessed results we should see! Wherever the principle of the oneness of the Body operates, all possibility of rivalry is ruled out. It does not matter if I decrease and you increase; there will neither be jealousy on my part, nor pride on yours. Once we see that all the work and all its fruits are for the increase of the Body of Christ, then no man will be counted yours and no man mine; it will not matter then whether you are used or I. All carnal strife among the workers of God will be at an end once the Body is clearly seen as the principle of the work. But life and work in the Body necessitate drastic dealings with the flesh, and that in turn necessitates a deep knowledge of the cross of Christ.
　The early apostles were never free lances; they worked together. In the story of Pentecost we read of “Peter, standing with the eleven” (Acts 2:14). At the Beautiful Gate we see Peter and John working together, and again they were the two who visited Samaria. When Peter went to the house of Cornelius, six other brothers accompanied him. When the apostles went out, it was always in companies, or at least by twos, never alone. Their work was not individual, but corporate. As to those with Paul at Antioch and elsewhere, it is unfortunate that so much emphasis has been placed upon Paul as an individual, with the result that his fellow workers are almost lost sight of. We see that at Troas, Luke joined their company and was of one mind with Paul in considering that the Macedonian cry should be responded to. Later on when they returned from Macedonia, they brought with them as fellow workers Sopater, Aristarchus, Secundus, Gaius, Timothy, Tychicus, and Trophimus. Later on we find Apollos, Priscilla, and Aquila joining them. Still later we find Paul sending Timothy to Corinth and encouraging Apollos and Titus to go there; and some time afterwards we see Epaphroditus joining them as a fellow worker. And it is good to read at the head of Paul’s Epistles words like these: “Paul…and Sosthenes the brother,” “Paul…and Timothy the brother,” “Paul…Silas and Timothy.”
　So we see no trace of organized missions in Scripture on the one hand, nor do we see any workers going out on individual lines on the other hand, each being a law to himself. They are formed into companies, but such companies are on a spiritual basis, not on the basis of organization. Scripture gives no warrant for an organized mission on the one hand, nor does it sanction free-lance work on the other hand; the one is as far from the thought of God as the other. Therefore, while we must guard against the snare of man-made organizations, we must also guard against the danger of being too individualistic. We must not be organized into a mission and thus become schismatic; at the same time we must have associates in the work with whom we cooperate on a spiritual basis, and thus maintain the testimony of the Body.
　We need to emphasize this fact, that the apostles worked in association with others, but their companies were not organized. Their relationship one to another was only spiritual. They loved and served the same Lord, they had one call and one commission, and they were of one mind. The Lord united them; therefore, they became fellow workers. Some were together from the outset; others joined at a later date. They were one company, yet they had no organization, and there was no distribution of offices or positions. Those who joined them did not come in response to some “Help Wanted” advertisement, nor did they come because they were equipped by a special course of training. On their journeys the Lord so ordered circumstances that they met; He drew them one to another, and being of one mind and one spirit, linked together by the Lord, they spontaneously became fellow workers. In order to join such a company there was no need of first passing an examination, or of fulfilling some special conditions, or of going through certain forms or ceremonies. The Lord was the One who determined everything. He ordered; man only concurred. In such groups none held special positions or offices; there was no director, or chairman, or superintendent. Whatever ministry the Lord had given them, that constituted their position. They received no appointments from the association. The relationship which existed between its members was purely spiritual, not official. They were constituted fellow workers, not by a human organization, but by a spiritual bond.
　
SPIRITUAL AUTHORITY
　Before considering the question of spiritual authority, let us read a few passages of Scripture bearing on the relationship between the workers, as they throw considerable light on our subject. “Timothy…Paul wanted this one to go forth with him” (Acts 16:1-3). “When he [Paul] had seen the vision, we immediately endeavored to go forth into Macedonia, concluding that God had called us to announce the gospel to them” (Acts 16:10). “And those who conducted Paul brought him as far as Athens; and receiving a command for Silas and Timothy to come to him as quickly as possible, they went off” (Acts 17:15). Paul “resolved to return through Macedonia. And Sopater of Berea, the son of Pyrrhus, accompanied him” (Acts 20:3-4). “We, going ahead onto the ship, set sail for Assos, from there intending to pick up Paul, for so he had arranged” (Acts 20:13). “If Timothy comes, see that he is with you without fear.…Send him forward in peace that he may come to me.… And concerning our brother Apollos, I urged him many times to come to you” (1 Cor. 16:10-12). “We entreated Titus” (2 Cor. 8:6). “Titus…received the entreaty.…And we sent together with him the brother” (2 Cor. 8:16-18). “We sent with them our brother” (2 Cor. 8:22). “Tychicus, the beloved brother…I have sent to you” (Eph. 6:21-22). “But I considered it necessary to send to you Epaphroditus” (Phil. 2:25). “All the things concerning me, Tychicus…will make known to you” (Col. 4:7). “Luke, the beloved physician, greets you, as well as Demas” (Col. 4:14). “And say to Archippus, Take heed to the ministry” (Col. 4:17). “We sent Timothy” (1 Thes. 3:1-2). “Be diligent to come to me quickly.…Take Mark and bring him with you.…But Tychicus I have sent to Ephesus” (2 Tim. 4:9-12). “Trophimus I left at Miletus sick. Be diligent to come before winter” (2 Tim. 4:20-21). “For this cause I left you in Crete, that you might set in order the things which I have begun that remain and appoint elders in every city, as I directed you” (Titus 1:5). “When I send Artemas to you or Tychicus, be diligent to come to me at Nicopolis, for I have decided to spend the winter there. Zenas the lawyer and Apollos send forward diligently that nothing may be lacking to them” (Titus 3:12-13).
　The above Scriptures show us that among the workers of God dependence upon Him does not render us independent of one another. We saw that Paul left Titus in Crete to complete the work he himself had left unfinished, and that he afterwards sent Artemas and Tychicus to replace him when he instructed him to proceed to Nicopolis. On various occasions he appointed Timothy and Tychicus to do certain work, and we read that he persuaded Titus and Apollos to remain in Corinth. We observe that these workers not only learned to work in teams, but the less experienced learned to submit to the direction of the more spiritual. God’s workers must learn to be left, to be sent, and to be persuaded.
　It is important to recognize the difference between official and spiritual authority. In an organization all authority is official, not spiritual. In a good organization the one who holds office has both official and spiritual authority; in a bad organization the authority wielded is only official. But in any organization, no matter whether the office-bearer himself has spiritual authority or not, the authority he holds in the organization is actually only official. What is the meaning of official authority? It means that because a man holds office, therefore, he exercises authority. The authority is exercised solely on account of the office he holds. As long as the office-bearer retains his position, just so long can he exert his authority; as soon as he resigns office, his authority ceases. Such authority is altogether objective; it is not inherent in the man himself. It is connected not with the person, but merely with his position. If he holds the office of superintendent, it follows as a matter of course that he superintends affairs, no matter whether he is spiritually qualified to do so or not. If he holds the office of director, then automatically he directs, even if lack of spirituality should really disqualify him from exercising control over other lives. The life of an organization is position; it is position that determines authority.
　But in divinely constituted companies of workers there is no organization. Authority is exercised among them, but such authority is spiritual, not official. It is an authority based upon spirituality, an authority which is the outcome of a deep knowledge of the Lord, and intimate fellowship with Him. Spiritual life is the source of such authority. The reason Paul could direct others was not because of his superior position, but because of his greater spirituality. If he had lost his spirituality, he would have lost his authority. In an organization those who are spiritual do not necessarily hold any office, and those who hold office are not necessarily spiritual; but in Scripture it is otherwise. There it is those who know the Lord who superintend affairs. It is those who are spiritual that direct others, and if those others are spiritual, they will recognize spiritual authority and will submit to it. In an organization its workers are obliged to obey, but in a spiritual association they are not, and from an official point of view no fault can be found with them if they do not obey. In a spiritual association there is no compulsion; direction and submission alike are on the ground of spirituality.
　Apart from the question of spiritual authority there is also the question of different ministries. All servants of the Lord are in the ministry, and each has his own special ministry. In an organization, positions are allotted by man, but in spiritual work ministries are appointed by the Lord. Because of difference of ministry, we must on the one hand obey the Lord, and on the other we must obey the brethren. Such obedience is not on the ground of their superior position, but because their ministry differs from ours, and yet both are intimately related. If the head is moving the tips of my fingers, the muscles of my arms cannot take an independent attitude and refuse to move with them. The principle of being in one Body necessitates the closely related members to move with one another. In moving with the other members, we are not really obeying them; we are obeying the Head. In many things we can claim a direct guidance from the Head, but in just as many things the Head moves others and we simply move with them. Their movement is reason enough for us to fall in. It is most important to recognize this relatedness of various ministries in the Body of Christ. We have to know our ministry and to recognize the ministry of others, so that we can move as one obeying those who have a greater ministry. Since our ministry is interrelated in such a way, we dare not take an individual or independent attitude.
　All positions held by God’s ministers are spiritual, not official. Alas! men have only seen half the truth, so they try to organize the work and appoint a director to superintend the service of others, but their directing is based upon their position in the organization, not upon their position in the ministry. The reason Paul could direct others was that the ministry committed to him by the Lord put him in a position of authority over them; and the reason Titus, Timothy, and Tychicus could submit to being directed was that the ministry committed to them by the Lord put them in a position under his authority. Unfortunately, the directing of today is based upon neither depth of spirituality nor greatness of ministry.
　Timothy was a man of God. He lived close to the Lord, obeying and serving Him faithfully; yet many a time he was sent here or there by Paul. He did not say, Do you think I am incapable of working by myself? Do you think I do not know how to preach the gospel and how to found churches? Do you think I do not know how to go about things? Although Timothy knew a lot, he was willing to obey Paul. In spiritual work there is such a thing as being directed by others; there is the position of a Paul, and there is also the position of a Timothy, but these are spiritual, not official, positions.
　Today we must learn on the one hand to maintain a right relationship with our fellow workers, and on the other hand to be guided by the Holy Spirit. We must maintain both relationships and also maintain the balance between the two. In the first and second Epistles to Timothy there are many passages which illustrate how fellow workers should cooperate, and how a younger worker should submit to an older one. A young Timothy ought to obey the commands of the Holy Spirit, but he ought also to receive the instructions of an elderly Paul. Timothy was sent out by Paul, Timothy was left by Paul at Ephesus, and Timothy obeyed Paul in the Lord. Here is an example for young servants of God. It is most important in His work to learn how to be led by the Spirit and how, at the same time, to cooperate with our fellow workers. The responsibility must not be wholly upon Timothy; neither must it rest wholly upon Paul. In the work Timothy must learn to fit in with Paul, and Paul must also learn to fit in with Timothy. Not only must the younger learn to submit to the instructions of the elder, but the elder must learn how to instruct the younger. The one who is in a position to leave, send, or persuade must learn not to follow the dictates of his own nature, acting according to personal inclination or desire, for in that case he will make it difficult for those under his authority. Paul must direct Timothy in such a way that he will not find it hard to obey both the Holy Spirit and the apostle.
　God’s servants must work together in companies, but there is a kind of co-working which is to be avoided, that is, co-working in a man-made organization which restricts its members so that they cannot really respond to the leading of the Spirit. When workers are entirely subject to the direction of men, then their work is not the outcome of a spiritual burden placed on them by God, but merely the doing of a piece of work in response to the dictates of those holding higher positions than they. The trouble today is that men are taking the place of the Holy Spirit, and the will of men in official position is taking the place of the will of God. Workers have no direct knowledge of the divine will, but simply do the will of those in authority over them, without bearing any personal burden from the Lord for His work.
　There are others again who know the mind of God, have a call from Him, and depend entirely upon Him for the meeting of all their needs; but while they know what it is to be led of Him individually, they fancy they can just go their own way and do their own work in independence of others.
　The teaching of God’s Word is that, on the one hand, human organizations must not control the servants of God; on the other hand, His servants must learn to submit to a spiritual authority which is based on the difference of ministry. There is no organized cooperation, yet there is a spiritual fellowship and a spiritual oneness. Individualism and human organization alike are out of line with the will of God. We should seek to know His will, not independently, but in conjunction with the other ministering members of the Body. The call of Paul and Barnabas was on this principle. It was not a case of two prophets and teachers only, but of five, waiting upon God to know His will. Acts 13 gives us a good example of a working company, all the workers being mutually related, and the guidance of one confirmed by the others.
　
THE SPHERE OF THE WORK
　The sphere of the work, unlike the sphere of the local church, is very wide. Some of the workers are sent to Ephesus, some go to Paul at Nicopolis, some stay on in Corinth, some are left in Miletus, some remain in Crete, some return to Thessalonica, and others go on to Galatia. Such is the work! We see here not the movements of the local church but of the work, for the movements of the local church are always confined to one locality. Ephesus only manages the affairs of Ephesus, and Rome the affairs of Rome. The church confines herself to matters in her own locality. There is no need for the church in Ephesus to send a man to Corinth, or for the church in Corinth to leave a man in Rome. The church here is local, the work extra-local. Ephesus, Corinth, and Rome are all the concern of the workers. The church only manages the affairs in any given locality, but the workers of God regard as their “parish” the sphere which the Lord has measured out to them.
　
NO CENTRAL CONTROL, BUT FELLOWSHIP
　In Scripture the workers were formed into companies, but that does not imply that all the apostles formed themselves into one company and placed everything under one central control. Although Paul had “those with him,” and Peter his associates, they comprised only a number of apostles, not all the apostles. That all the apostles should combine into one company is not shown in the Word of God. It is quite in order for scores of men, or even hundreds, who have received the same trust from God, to join together in the same work; but in the Scriptures we find no centralization of authority for the control of all the apostles. There is a company of apostles, but it is not great enough to include all the apostles. That is Romish, not scriptural.
　The parties referred to in Philippians 1:15-17, 2 Corinthians 11:12-13, 22-23, and Galatians 4:17 all indicate that the work in the early days was not centralized. Had it been centralized, those groups could not have remained in existence, for they could have been dealt with effectively. The Scriptures show that in divine work there is no universal organization or central control, which accounts for the fact that the apostle had no authority to deal with those groups of people who were creating such difficulty in the churches.
　The explanation is this: God does not wish the power of organization to take the place of the power of the Holy Spirit. Even though there is no central control, provided all the workers follow the leading of the Spirit, everything will run smoothly and satisfactorily, and there will be the coordination of a body. Whenever people cease to obey the Spirit and labor in the power of the flesh, then it is best if the work is simply allowed to fall to pieces. A good organization often serves as a bad substitute for the power of the Holy Spirit, by holding a work together even after all its vitality is gone. When life has departed from the work and the scaffolding of organization still supports it, its collapse is prevented; but that is doubtful gain, for a splendid outward organization may be blinding God’s servants to a deep inward need. God would rather His work be discontinued than that it go on with such a counterfeit for spiritual power. When the glory of God had departed from the temple, He himself left it to utter ruin. God desires that the outward and inward conditions should correspond, so that if death invades a work, His workers may awaken at once to their need and in humility of heart seek His face.
　Central control has many evils. It makes it easy for God’s servants to disregard the leading of the Spirit, and readily develops into a popish system, becoming a great worldly power. It is a scriptural fact that God’s servants are formed into companies, but they are not formed into one single company.
　However, that does not mean that every company could just go on independently, knowing no relatedness or fellowship with other companies. The principle of the oneness of the Body holds good here as in all other relationships between the children of God. In Scripture we not only see the principle of “the laying on of hands,” but also that of giving “the right hand” (Gal. 2:9). The former speaks of identification; the latter of fellowship. In Antioch hands were laid on Paul and Barnabas; in Jerusalem there was no laying on of hands, but the right hand of fellowship given them by James, Cephas, and John. In Antioch the sphere in view was one apostolic company, and the point emphasized was identification; consequently, hands were laid on them. But in Jerusalem the sphere in view was the relationship between different apostolic companies, and the point emphasized was fellowship; consequently, the right hand was extended to them.
　Many are called to work for the Lord, but their sphere of service is not the same, so it follows that their associates cannot be the same. But the various companies must all be identified with the Body, coming under the headship of the Lord, and having fellowship among themselves. There is no laying on of hands between Antioch and Jerusalem, but there is the giving of the right hand of fellowship. So the Word of God does not warrant the forming of one central company; neither does it warrant the forming of various scattered, unrelated, and isolated companies. There is no one central place for the laying on of hands, nor is there merely the laying on of hands and nothing else in any one of the various groups; but among them there is also the giving of the right hand of fellowship one to the other. Each company should recognize what God is doing with the other companies and should extend fellowship to them, acknowledging that they are also ministers in the Body. Under the ordering of God they may work in different companies, but all must work as one Body. The extending of the right hand of fellowship implies a recognition that other people are in the Body and we are in fellowship with them, working together in a related way, as becomes functioning members of the same Body. “Seeing that I had been entrusted with the gospel to the uncircumcision… and perceiving the grace given to me, James and Cephas and John, who were reputed to be pillars, gave to me and to Barnabas the right hand of fellowship that we should go to the Gentiles, and they, to the circumcision” (Gal. 2:7-9). The unrelated, scattered, disrupted, and conflicting organizations in Christendom, which do not recognize the principle of the Body and do not come under the sovereignty and headship of Christ, are never according to the mind of the Lord.
　
COOPERATION AMONG THE WORKERS
　The question naturally arises, how should workers and working associations cooperate? To one company God gives one kind of ministry, and to another an altogether different form of ministry. How should the various groups work together? Peter and his associates, and Paul and those with him, were appointed to different spheres, but in the event of their work overlapping, how should they act? Since there is no centralization of work, yet at the same time there are various groups of workers, how should these different groups cooperate? We must note two fundamental points in regard to the work:
　(1)The first responsibility of every worker—no matter what his ministry or what his special line of work—whenever he comes to a place where there is no local church, is to establish one in the locality. (What applies to the individual worker applies also to any group of workers.)
　(2)Should he come to a place where a local church already exists, then all his teaching and all his experience must be contributed to that church, that it may be strengthened and edified, and no attempt should be made to attach that church to himself or to the society he represents.
　If a worker goes to a place where there is no church and founds one there for the propagation of his particular doctrine, then we cannot cooperate with him because he is building up a sect, and not a church. On the other hand, should a worker go to a place where there is already a local church, and instead of contributing his teaching and experience to its upbuilding, seek to make it a branch-church of the society to which he belongs, then again it is impossible for us to cooperate, because he is building up a denomination. The basis of fellowship in the church is the common possession of life in Christ and living in the same locality. The basis of cooperation in the work is the common aim of the founding and building up of local churches. Denominational affiliations do not hinder us from reckoning anyone as belonging to the Body, but the aim of denominational extension will certainly keep us from any cooperation in the service of God. The greatest harm a worker can do is, instead of establishing and edifying the local churches, to attach to his society the believers he finds in a place, or to form those brought to the Lord through his labors into a branch of his particular denomination. Both these procedures are condemned by the Word of God.
　Paul came from Antioch to Corinth and there he preached the gospel. People believed and were saved, and soon there was a group of saints in Corinth. Into what kind of church did Paul form them? Into the church in Corinth. Paul did not establish an Anitochian church in Corinth. He did not form a branch-church of Antioch in Corinth, but simply established a church in Corinth. Thereafter Peter came to Corinth and preached the gospel, with the result that another group of people believed. Did Peter say, “Paul came from Antioch, but I am come from Jerusalem, so I must set up another church: I will establish a Jerusalemic church in Corinth, or, I will form a branch-church of Jerusalem here in Corinth”? No, he contributed all those he led to the Lord to the already existing local church in Corinth. After a while Apollos came along. Again people were saved, and again all the saved ones were added to the local church. So in Corinth there was only one church of God; there were no schismatic denominations. Had Paul established the precedent of founding a church in Corinth to enlarge the sphere of the church from which he went out, calling it the Antiochian church in Corinth, then when Peter came to Corinth he might well have argued, “It is all right for Paul to found an Antiochian church in Corinth since he came from Antioch, but I have nothing to do with Antioch; my church is in Jerusalem, so I must establish a Jerusalemic church here.” Apollos coming to Corinth would in turn follow their example and establish another church as a branch of the one from which he came out. If every worker tried to form a branch of the church he represented, then sects and denominations would be utterly inevitable. If the aim of a worker in any place is not to establish a local church there, but to enlarge the church from which he has gone out, then he is not establishing a church of God in that locality, but only building up his own society. Under such circumstances there is no possibility of cooperation.
　Conditions have greatly changed since the days of the early apostles. Christianity has lost its original purity, and everything connected with it is in a false and confused state. Despite that fact, our work today is still the same as in the days of the early apostles—to found and build up local churches, the local expressions of the Body of Christ. So if we are in a place where there is no church, we should seek the Lord’s face that He may enable us to win souls for Himself and form them into a local church. If we are in a place where there are missions, or churches, standing on sectarian or denominational ground, but no church standing on the ground of the Body and the locality, then our duty is just the same, that is, to found and build a local church. Many will still persist in their old ways; hence, the persons standing on clear church ground may be far fewer than the total number of Christians in the locality. But the area of the ground on which they stand is just as wide as that on which the church ought to stand, so it is still our duty to maintain that ground. We can only cooperate with those who are building up the Body of Christ as expressed in local churches, and not with those who are building up something else. Denominational connection does not hinder us from fellowship in the Lord, but denominational extension does hinder us from cooperation in the work of God.
　Here is the most important principle in the work of God— a worker must not seek to establish a branch of the church from which he goes out, but to establish a church in the locality to which he comes. He does not make the church in the place to which he goes to be an extension of the church in the place from which he comes, but he founds a church in that locality. Wherever he goes, he establishes a church in that place. He does not extend the church of his place of origin, but establishes the church in the place of his adoption. Since in Scripture all churches are local, Jerusalem and Antioch can have no branch-churches. We cannot extend one local church to another locality; we can only form a new church in that locality. The church which the apostles established in Ephesus is the church in Ephesus; the church which they established in Philippi is the church in Philippi; the churches which they established in other places are the churches of those different places. There is no precedent in Scripture for establishing any other than local churches. It is all right to extend the Church of God, but it is all wrong to extend a local church of God. What is the place in which I intend to work? It is the church in that place I must seek to establish.
　Now there are two kinds of workers, namely, those who stand on scriptural ground, and those who stand on denominational or mission ground. But even with those who stand on denominational or mission ground, the principle of cooperation is just the same—the one aim of founding and building up the local church.
　The work of evangelization is primarily for the salvation of sinners, but its spontaneous result is a church in the place where such work is done. The immediate object is the salvation of men, but the ultimate result is the formation of churches. The danger which confronts the missionary is to form those he has led to the Lord into a branch of the society he represents. Since workers represent different societies, they naturally form different branches of their respective societies, and the consequence is great confusion in the work and churches of God. The immediate aim of the various workers is no doubt the same—what preacher does not hope that many souls will be won to the Lord?—but there is a lack of clarity and definiteness regarding the ultimate issue. Some workers, praise God, are out to establish local churches; others, alas! are out to extend their own denomination or to form mission churches.
　This is a point on which my fellow workers and I cannot see eye to eye with many of God’s children. From the depths of our hearts we thank God that in the past century He has sent so many of His faithful servants to China, so that those who were sitting in darkness should hear the gospel and believe in the Lord. Their self-sacrifice, their diligence, and their godliness have truly been an example to us. Many a time, as we looked at the faces of missionaries suffering for the gospel’s sake, we have been moved to pray, “Lord, make us to live like them.” May God bless and reward them! We acknowledge that we are utterly unworthy to have any part in the work of God, but by the grace of God we are what we are, and since God in His grace has called us to His service, we cannot but seek to be faithful. We have nothing to criticize, and much to admire, as far as the gospel work of our missionary brethren is concerned; yet we cannot but question their methods in dealing with the fruits of such work. For in the past hundred years it has not resulted in the building up of local churches but in the forming of missionary churches, or of branch churches of the various denominations which the missionaries represented. In our opinion this is contrary to the Word of God. There is no such thing in Scripture as the building up of denominations; we only find local churches there. May God forgive me if I am wrong!
　
LOCAL CHURCHES AND MISSION CHURCHES
　Permit me to mention a personal incident. Some time ago I met a certain missionary in Shanghai who asked me if it would not be possible for me to cooperate with his mission. Not knowing quite what to say, I did not commit myself. Later on I came across him in another part of the country, and again he repeated his question and asked if I had anything against the mission. I answered, “I dare not criticize your mission, though I do not believe it is according to the full thought of God. I believe it was God’s will to establish it so that the servants of God in Western lands could come to China to preach the gospel. I have nothing to say regarding the mission as a body, for the Scriptures speak of companies of workers, and if you feel it should be organized, should have officers, and should bear a specific name, you must answer to God and not to man for that. Who am I that I should criticize the servants of the Lord? But while I do not criticize, I cannot copy, because God has not revealed that as His will and way for me. Regarding the mission as a mission, I have nothing to say, but I have serious questions regarding the churches formed by the mission. To illustrate, you represent the ‘X’ Mission. Now, do those saved by your instrumentality become the ‘X’ Church, or do they become the church of the particular locality in which they live? It may be all right for missionaries to belong to the ‘X’ Mission, but it is all wrong for them to form the fruits of the mission into the ‘X’ Church. The Word of God has not definitely forbidden the forming of an ‘X’ Mission, but it clearly does not sanction the founding of other than local churches.”
　Then I mentioned the apostolic examples, pointing out that they always sought to found or build up churches in the locality of their labors with the fruit of such labors. They never used such fruit to form branches of the companies in which they worked; otherwise, the Church of God would have been rent by numerous factions from its very inception.
　I then took as an illustration the work at T——. “There at T——,” I said, “God has used you to win many souls. If the people saved by your instrumentality are the church in T——, then if I come to T—— I shall certainly join them, no matter what their spiritual state, or what their form of organization; otherwise, I should be guilty of sectarianism. But if you build up an ‘X’ Church in T—— with the people saved there, then you are not building the Church of God in T——, and such a ‘church’ I regret to say I cannot join. I shall be obliged to work separately in T—— unless there is a church there standing on the scriptural ground of locality.
　“If we are all out to establish local churches, then there is every possibility of cooperation. It is permissible to establish an ‘X’ Mission, but it is not scriptural to establish an ‘X’ Church. Suppose your ‘X’ Mission coming to T—— establishes an ‘X’ Church; thereafter, various other missions come to T——, each establishing a separate mission ‘church.’ That would be the same as Paul establishing an Antiochian church in Corinth, and Peter coming along shortly after and establishing a Jerusalemic church there. On such a basis cooperation is impossible, for we should be disregarding the pattern which God has clearly shown us in His Word—the establishment of local churches.
　“If we come to a place to found a church, then it must be local, intensely local, without anything extraneous to rob it in the slightest of its local character. If you come to T—— with the establishing of the church in T—— as your one aim, and I come to T—— with the establishing of the church in T—— as my one aim, then cooperation will be no problem. Even if a hundred and one missionaries, representing a hundred and one missions, all come to T—— with this as their one aim, to establish the church in T——, then there will be no possibility of sectarianism, and cooperation will be a matter of course. If the aim of the ‘X’ Mission is only to preach the gospel, then it is possible for us to work together; but if there is a twofold aim—the preaching of the gospel and the extension of the mission—then cooperation is not possible. If a worker seeks on the one hand to preach the gospel, and on the other hand to extend his own society, it is impossible for us to work together.” Whether or not a man is out to establish local churches determines whether or not we can cooperate with him. No matter to what mission a man may belong, if he comes to a place not seeking to establish his own “church,” but a church in the locality, then we are perfectly willing to work with him. Although we are not a mission, we are quite prepared to cooperate with any mission if they have no private end in view, but only the one end which God has shown as His will regarding His work.
　May God grant us grace to see that His churches are all local churches.
 
　　圣经中的众教会是顶地方的，从来没有众教会联合的事。我们是和各地所有的弟兄联合，我们虽多，仍是一个身体。我们的联合，是以信徒为单位。普遍的教会，是以信徒为单位，非以地方教会为单位。我们是基督身上的肢体，不是一个个地方的教会作为基督的肢体。这个单位是信徒，不是地方教会。地方的教会，是教会在地上最大的组织了，所以没有法子把她们联合起来。

　　关于工人方面，圣经所给我们看见的就不是这样。使徒有联合。使徒可以合在一起，或是不合在一起。有的人因为从前在人的制度里很深，就有一个反应的错误思想，以为众教会没有联合，所以，众工人也不该有一点联合。

　　因为不明白教会间的组织，和使徒间的制度不同的缘故，许多人就以为教会和教会间既没有联合，是非常独立的，就神的工人和神的工人间，也应该是没有联合，也是非常独立的。但这和圣经的教训是完全相反的。众教会是没有联合的，但工人间是有联合的。教会因为要保守地方的性质，就不能和其他地方的教会联合为一个团体。因为教会和教会一联合，就立刻逾越地方的范围，就立刻改变地方的性质，就立刻打破地方的限制，所以圣经就不许可教会间的联合。但是，圣经里却有使徒们的联合。不过这并非说，所有的使徒都联合作一个团体。所有的使徒都联合在一起，管理所有的工作，也是圣经所无的。圣经中的工人并没有联合作一个中央的团体。那一个的办法是罗马的，不是圣经的。但是圣经中的使徒是有联合的，并且是联合成功作一班一班的。我们明明看见，保罗和同他在一起的路加、西拉、亚波罗、提摩太、提多是合成一班。彼得和同他在一起的约翰、雅各等又是一班。从安提阿出来的是一班，从耶路撒冷出来的又是一班。虽然他们这些人，不是各自组成一个差会，但是，他们各人是有各人的“同人”（徒二十34）的。我们如果追究他们的历史，在使徒行传里我们就能看见，起初是在耶路撒冷有几个使徒作工，是他们到撒玛利亚，是他们到该撒利亚，虽然我们不知道与他们同行的人有多少人。后来（十三章）在安提阿就另起一个头。头一次保罗和巴拿巴同工，后来有西拉、有路加、有亚波罗、提摩太等同行。我们看见有一班和保罗同行的人，虽然不知道有多少人。在使徒行传之外，我们还看见另有一班的人，乃是因着结党，因着嫉妒分争而作工的（腓一）。他们这一班人明明不是保罗这一班人，也不是彼得那一班人。虽然他们的存心不是可师的，但是这证明神的工人在当日是有一班一班的。换一句话来说，神的工作和神的工人，在圣经中是有团体的。众教会是没有团体的。众教会一有团体，就成了公会。

　　有的弟兄以为，我们既然没有公会的组织，作工的人就当像散沙一样，我跑我的路，你跑你的路。每一个都随着己意，各走己路。每一个都是自己的教皇，每一个都是自己的神父。地方的教会是单个的，是没有问题的。地方教会应当你不干涉我，我不干涉你。但工作是有团体的，虽然不是组织的团体。教会的办法是一种，工作的办法又是一种。在工作中，是有团体、有按手、有分派的；也是有安排、有调动、有打发的。但在地方教会间，就在上海的，一点不能管南京的事。南京也不能管上海的事。一个地方遭遇灾难，别的地方可以帮助，表示彼此的交通。至于各个地方教会的行政，就各不相干，各自为政。工作就不同，工作是有计划、有打算的。他们的范围也不只一个地方，乃是许多地方的。所以教会是没有几个联合在一起的，使徒却是有几个人联在一起的，不过没有像今天所谓的差会、布道团等名称而已。
 
　The churches in Scripture are intensely local. We never find any federation of churches there; they are all independent units. The position is quite otherwise as regards the workers. Among them we find a certain amount of association; we see here a little group, and there another, linked together for the work. Paul and those with him—as for instance Luke, Silas, Timothy, Titus, and Apollos—formed one group. Peter, James, John, and those with them formed another. One group came out from Antioch, another from Jerusalem. Paul refers to those who were with him (Acts 20:34), which indicates that while there was no organization of the workers into different missions, still they had their own special associates in the work. Even in the beginning, when our Lord chose the twelve, He sent them out two by two. All were fellow workers, but each had his special fellow worker. Such grouping of workers was ordained and ordered by the Lord.

　These apostolic companies were not formed along partisan or doctrinal lines; they were formed under the sovereignty of the Spirit, who so ordered the circumstances of the different workers as to link them together in the work. It was not that they were really divided from other workers, but merely that in the Spirit’s ordering of their ways, they had not been led into special association with them. It was the Holy Spirit, not men, who said, “Set apart for Me now Barnabas and Saul.” Everything hinged on the sovereignty of the Spirit. The apostolic companies were subject to the will and ordering of the Lord. As we have seen, the twelve were divided into pairs, but it was not left to their personal discretion to choose their associates; it was the Lord who coupled them together and sent them forth. Each had a special fellow worker, but that fellow worker was of the Lord’s appointing, not of their choosing. It was not because of natural affinity that they associated specially with some, nor was it because of difference in doctrine or practice that they did not associate specially with others. The deciding factor was always the ordering of the Lord.

　We recognize that the Lord is the Head of the Church, and that the apostles were the first order “placed” by the Lord in the Church (1 Cor. 12:28). Although they were formed into associations, having their special fellow workers appointed by the Lord, still they had no special name, system, or organization. They did not make a company smaller than the Body to be the basis of their work; all was on the ground of the Body. Therefore, although on account of difference of locality and the providential ordering of their ways, they formed different groups, still they had no organization outside the Body; their work was always an expression of the ministry of the Body. They were constituted into separate companies, but each company stood on the ground of the Body, expressing the ministry of the Body.

　The Lord is the Head of the Body and not the Head of any organization; therefore, whenever we work for a society, a mission, or an institution, and not for the Body alone, we lose the headship of the Lord. We must see clearly that the work is the work of the Body of Christ and that, while the Lord did divide His workers into different companies (not different organizations), their work was always on the ground of the Body. And we must recognize that every individual worker and every company represents the ministry of the Body of Christ, each office held being held in the Body, and for the furtherance of the work of God. Then, and only then, can we have one ministry—the up-building of the Body of Christ. If we recognized clearly the oneness of the Body, what blessed results we should see! Wherever the principle of the oneness of the Body operates, all possibility of rivalry is ruled out. It does not matter if I decrease and you increase; there will neither be jealousy on my part, nor pride on yours. Once we see that all the work and all its fruits are for the increase of the Body of Christ, then no man will be counted yours and no man mine; it will not matter then whether you are used or I. All carnal strife among the workers of God will be at an end once the Body is clearly seen as the principle of the work. But life and work in the Body necessitate drastic dealings with the flesh, and that in turn necessitates a deep knowledge of the cross of Christ.

　The early apostles were never free lances; they worked together. In the story of Pentecost we read of “Peter, standing with the eleven” (Acts 2:14). At the Beautiful Gate we see Peter and John working together, and again they were the two who visited Samaria. When Peter went to the house of Cornelius, six other brothers accompanied him. When the apostles went out, it was always in companies, or at least by twos, never alone. Their work was not individual, but corporate. As to those with Paul at Antioch and elsewhere, it is unfortunate that so much emphasis has been placed upon Paul as an individual, with the result that his fellow workers are almost lost sight of. We see that at Troas, Luke joined their company and was of one mind with Paul in considering that the Macedonian cry should be responded to. Later on when they returned from Macedonia, they brought with them as fellow workers Sopater, Aristarchus, Secundus, Gaius, Timothy, Tychicus, and Trophimus. Later on we find Apollos, Priscilla, and Aquila joining them. Still later we find Paul sending Timothy to Corinth and encouraging Apollos and Titus to go there; and some time afterwards we see Epaphroditus joining them as a fellow worker. And it is good to read at the head of Paul’s Epistles words like these: “Paul…and Sosthenes the brother,” “Paul…and Timothy the brother,” “Paul…Silas and Timothy.”

　So we see no trace of organized missions in Scripture on the one hand, nor do we see any workers going out on individual lines on the other hand, each being a law to himself. They are formed into companies, but such companies are on a spiritual basis, not on the basis of organization. Scripture gives no warrant for an organized mission on the one hand, nor does it sanction free-lance work on the other hand; the one is as far from the thought of God as the other. Therefore, while we must guard against the snare of man-made organizations, we must also guard against the danger of being too individualistic. We must not be organized into a mission and thus become schismatic; at the same time we must have associates in the work with whom we cooperate on a spiritual basis, and thus maintain the testimony of the Body.

　We need to emphasize this fact, that the apostles worked in association with others, but their companies were not organized. Their relationship one to another was only spiritual. They loved and served the same Lord, they had one call and one commission, and they were of one mind. The Lord united them; therefore, they became fellow workers. Some were together from the outset; others joined at a later date. They were one company, yet they had no organization, and there was no distribution of offices or positions. Those who joined them did not come in response to some “Help Wanted” advertisement, nor did they come because they were equipped by a special course of training. On their journeys the Lord so ordered circumstances that they met; He drew them one to another, and being of one mind and one spirit, linked together by the Lord, they spontaneously became fellow workers. In order to join such a company there was no need of first passing an examination, or of fulfilling some special conditions, or of going through certain forms or ceremonies. The Lord was the One who determined everything. He ordered; man only concurred. In such groups none held special positions or offices; there was no director, or chairman, or superintendent. Whatever ministry the Lord had given them, that constituted their position. They received no appointments from the association. The relationship which existed between its members was purely spiritual, not official. They were constituted fellow workers, not by a human organization, but by a spiritual bond.
　　我们要看圣经中，在工作中所发生的事情，以证明工作是有团体的，是有支配的，同时也是超越地方的。

　　“保罗对巴拿巴说，我们可以回到从前宣传主道的各城，看望弟兄们景况如何。巴拿巴有意，要带称呼马可的约翰同去；但保罗，因为马可从前在旁非利亚离开他们，不和他们同去作工，就以为不可带他去。于是二人起了争论，甚至彼此分开；巴拿巴带着马可，坐船往居比路去；保罗拣选了西拉，也出去，蒙弟兄们把他交于主的恩中。”（徒十五36~40）

　　“保罗要带他（提摩太）同去。”（十六3）

　　“保罗既看见这（马其顿的）异象，我们随即想要往马其顿去，断定神召我们传福音给那里的人听。”（10，原文）

　　“送保罗的人带他到了雅典：既领了保罗的命，叫西拉和提摩太速速到他这里来，就回去了。”（十七15）

　　“他（保罗）…定意从马其顿回去。同他到亚西亚去的，有庇哩亚人毕罗斯的儿子所巴特，帖撒罗尼迦人亚里达古，和西公都，还有特庇人该犹，并提摩太，又有亚西亚人推基古，和特罗非摩。这些人先走在特罗亚等候我们。”（二十3~5）

　　“我们先上船开往亚朔去，意思要在那里接保罗；因为他是这样安排的，他自己打算要步行。他既在亚朔与我们相会，我们就接他上船，来到米推利尼。”（13~14）

　　“若是提摩太来到，你们要留心，叫他在你们那里无所惧怕；因为他劳力作主的工，像我一样；…至于兄弟亚波罗，我再三地劝他，同弟兄们到你们那里去；但这时他绝不愿意去；几时有了机会他必去。”（林前十六10~12）

　　“因此我劝提多，既然在你们中间开办这慈惠的事，就当办成了。”（林后八6）

　　“多谢神，感动提多的心，叫他待你们殷勤，…他固然是听了我的劝；但自己更是热心，情愿往你们那里去。我们还打发一位兄弟和他同去。”（16~18）

　　“我们又打发一位兄弟同去；这人的热心，我们在许多事上，屡次试验过，现在他因为深信你们，就更加热心了。论到提多，他是我的同伴，一同为你们劳碌的；论到那两位兄弟，他们是众教会的使者，是基督的荣耀。”（22~23）

　　“今有所亲爱忠心事奉主的兄弟推基古，他要把我的事情并我的景况如何，全告诉你们叫你们知道。我特意打发他到你们那里去，好叫你们知道我们的光景，又叫他安慰你们的心。”（弗六21~22）

　　“我靠主耶稣指望快打发提摩太去见你们，叫我知道你们的事，心里就得着安慰。”（腓二19）

　　“然而我想必须打发以巴弗提到你们那里去；他是我的兄弟，与我一同作工，一同当兵，是你们所差遣的，也是供给我需用的。”（25）

　　“有我亲爱的兄弟推基古要将我一切的事都告诉你们；他是忠心的执事，和我一同作主的仆人。”（西四7）

　　“所亲爱的医生路加，和底马问你们安。”（14）

　　“要对亚基布说，务要谨慎，尽你从主所受的职分。”（17）

　　“我们既不能再忍，就愿意独自等在雅典；打发我们的兄弟在基督福音上作神执事的提摩太前去，坚固你们，并在你们所信的道上劝慰你们。”（帖前三1~2）

　　“你要赶紧地到我这里来。因为底马贪爱现今的世界，就离弃我往帖撒罗尼迦去了；革勒士往加拉太去；提多往挞马太去；独有路加在我这里。你来的时候要把马可带来；因为他在传道的事上于我有益处。我已经打发推基古往以弗所去。我在特罗亚留于加布的那件外衣，你来的时候可以带来；那些书也要带来；更要紧的是那些皮卷。”（提后四9~13）

　　“以拉都在哥林多住下了。特罗非摩病了，我就留他在米利都。你要赶紧在冬天以前到我这里来。”（20~21）

　　“我从前留你在革哩底，是要你将那没有办完的事都办整齐了，又照我所吩咐你的，在各城设立长老。”（多一5）

　　“我打发亚提马，或是推基古，到你那里去的时候，你要赶紧往尼哥波立去见我；因为我已经定意在那里过冬。你要赶紧给律师西纳，和亚波罗送行，叫他们没有缺乏。”（三12~13）
 
　Before considering the question of spiritual authority, let us read a few passages of Scripture bearing on the relationship between the workers, as they throw considerable light on our subject. “Timothy…Paul wanted this one to go forth with him” (Acts 16:1-3). “When he [Paul] had seen the vision, we immediately endeavored to go forth into Macedonia, concluding that God had called us to announce the gospel to them” (Acts 16:10). “And those who conducted Paul brought him as far as Athens; and receiving a command for Silas and Timothy to come to him as quickly as possible, they went off” (Acts 17:15). Paul “resolved to return through Macedonia. And Sopater of Berea, the son of Pyrrhus, accompanied him” (Acts 20:3-4). “We, going ahead onto the ship, set sail for Assos, from there intending to pick up Paul, for so he had arranged” (Acts 20:13). “If Timothy comes, see that he is with you without fear.…Send him forward in peace that he may come to me.… And concerning our brother Apollos, I urged him many times to come to you” (1 Cor. 16:10-12). “We entreated Titus” (2 Cor. 8:6). “Titus…received the entreaty.…And we sent together with him the brother” (2 Cor. 8:16-18). “We sent with them our brother” (2 Cor. 8:22). “Tychicus, the beloved brother…I have sent to you” (Eph. 6:21-22). “But I considered it necessary to send to you Epaphroditus” (Phil. 2:25). “All the things concerning me, Tychicus…will make known to you” (Col. 4:7). “Luke, the beloved physician, greets you, as well as Demas” (Col. 4:14). “And say to Archippus, Take heed to the ministry” (Col. 4:17). “We sent Timothy” (1 Thes. 3:1-2). “Be diligent to come to me quickly.…Take Mark and bring him with you.…But Tychicus I have sent to Ephesus” (2 Tim. 4:9-12). “Trophimus I left at Miletus sick. Be diligent to come before winter” (2 Tim. 4:20-21). “For this cause I left you in Crete, that you might set in order the things which I have begun that remain and appoint elders in every city, as I directed you” (Titus 1:5). “When I send Artemas to you or Tychicus, be diligent to come to me at Nicopolis, for I have decided to spend the winter there. Zenas the lawyer and Apollos send forward diligently that nothing may be lacking to them” (Titus 3:12-13).

　The above Scriptures show us that among the workers of God dependence upon Him does not render us independent of one another. We saw that Paul left Titus in Crete to complete the work he himself had left unfinished, and that he afterwards sent Artemas and Tychicus to replace him when he instructed him to proceed to Nicopolis. On various occasions he appointed Timothy and Tychicus to do certain work, and we read that he persuaded Titus and Apollos to remain in Corinth. We observe that these workers not only learned to work in teams, but the less experienced learned to submit to the direction of the more spiritual. God’s workers must learn to be left, to be sent, and to be persuaded.

　It is important to recognize the difference between official and spiritual authority. In an organization all authority is official, not spiritual. In a good organization the one who holds office has both official and spiritual authority; in a bad organization the authority wielded is only official. But in any organization, no matter whether the office-bearer himself has spiritual authority or not, the authority he holds in the organization is actually only official. What is the meaning of official authority? It means that because a man holds office, therefore, he exercises authority. The authority is exercised solely on account of the office he holds. As long as the office-bearer retains his position, just so long can he exert his authority; as soon as he resigns office, his authority ceases. Such authority is altogether objective; it is not inherent in the man himself. It is connected not with the person, but merely with his position. If he holds the office of superintendent, it follows as a matter of course that he superintends affairs, no matter whether he is spiritually qualified to do so or not. If he holds the office of director, then automatically he directs, even if lack of spirituality should really disqualify him from exercising control over other lives. The life of an organization is position; it is position that determines authority.

　But in divinely constituted companies of workers there is no organization. Authority is exercised among them, but such authority is spiritual, not official. It is an authority based upon spirituality, an authority which is the outcome of a deep knowledge of the Lord, and intimate fellowship with Him. Spiritual life is the source of such authority. The reason Paul could direct others was not because of his superior position, but because of his greater spirituality. If he had lost his spirituality, he would have lost his authority. In an organization those who are spiritual do not necessarily hold any office, and those who hold office are not necessarily spiritual; but in Scripture it is otherwise. There it is those who know the Lord who superintend affairs. It is those who are spiritual that direct others, and if those others are spiritual, they will recognize spiritual authority and will submit to it. In an organization its workers are obliged to obey, but in a spiritual association they are not, and from an official point of view no fault can be found with them if they do not obey. In a spiritual association there is no compulsion; direction and submission alike are on the ground of spirituality.

　Apart from the question of spiritual authority there is also the question of different ministries. All servants of the Lord are in the ministry, and each has his own special ministry. In an organization, positions are allotted by man, but in spiritual work ministries are appointed by the Lord. Because of difference of ministry, we must on the one hand obey the Lord, and on the other we must obey the brethren. Such obedience is not on the ground of their superior position, but because their ministry differs from ours, and yet both are intimately related. If the head is moving the tips of my fingers, the muscles of my arms cannot take an independent attitude and refuse to move with them. The principle of being in one Body necessitates the closely related members to move with one another. In moving with the other members, we are not really obeying them; we are obeying the Head. In many things we can claim a direct guidance from the Head, but in just as many things the Head moves others and we simply move with them. Their movement is reason enough for us to fall in. It is most important to recognize this relatedness of various ministries in the Body of Christ. We have to know our ministry and to recognize the ministry of others, so that we can move as one obeying those who have a greater ministry. Since our ministry is interrelated in such a way, we dare not take an individual or independent attitude.

　All positions held by God’s ministers are spiritual, not official. Alas! men have only seen half the truth, so they try to organize the work and appoint a director to superintend the service of others, but their directing is based upon their position in the organization, not upon their position in the ministry. The reason Paul could direct others was that the ministry committed to him by the Lord put him in a position of authority over them; and the reason Titus, Timothy, and Tychicus could submit to being directed was that the ministry committed to them by the Lord put them in a position under his authority. Unfortunately, the directing of today is based upon neither depth of spirituality nor greatness of ministry.

　Timothy was a man of God. He lived close to the Lord, obeying and serving Him faithfully; yet many a time he was sent here or there by Paul. He did not say, Do you think I am incapable of working by myself? Do you think I do not know how to preach the gospel and how to found churches? Do you think I do not know how to go about things? Although Timothy knew a lot, he was willing to obey Paul. In spiritual work there is such a thing as being directed by others; there is the position of a Paul, and there is also the position of a Timothy, but these are spiritual, not official, positions.

　Today we must learn on the one hand to maintain a right relationship with our fellow workers, and on the other hand to be guided by the Holy Spirit. We must maintain both relationships and also maintain the balance between the two. In the first and second Epistles to Timothy there are many passages which illustrate how fellow workers should cooperate, and how a younger worker should submit to an older one. A young Timothy ought to obey the commands of the Holy Spirit, but he ought also to receive the instructions of an elderly Paul. Timothy was sent out by Paul, Timothy was left by Paul at Ephesus, and Timothy obeyed Paul in the Lord. Here is an example for young servants of God. It is most important in His work to learn how to be led by the Spirit and how, at the same time, to cooperate with our fellow workers. The responsibility must not be wholly upon Timothy; neither must it rest wholly upon Paul. In the work Timothy must learn to fit in with Paul, and Paul must also learn to fit in with Timothy. Not only must the younger learn to submit to the instructions of the elder, but the elder must learn how to instruct the younger. The one who is in a position to leave, send, or persuade must learn not to follow the dictates of his own nature, acting according to personal inclination or desire, for in that case he will make it difficult for those under his authority. Paul must direct Timothy in such a way that he will not find it hard to obey both the Holy Spirit and the apostle.

　God’s servants must work together in companies, but there is a kind of co-working which is to be avoided, that is, co-working in a man-made organization which restricts its members so that they cannot really respond to the leading of the Spirit. When workers are entirely subject to the direction of men, then their work is not the outcome of a spiritual burden placed on them by God, but merely the doing of a piece of work in response to the dictates of those holding higher positions than they. The trouble today is that men are taking the place of the Holy Spirit, and the will of men in official position is taking the place of the will of God. Workers have no direct knowledge of the divine will, but simply do the will of those in authority over them, without bearing any personal burden from the Lord for His work.

　There are others again who know the mind of God, have a call from Him, and depend entirely upon Him for the meeting of all their needs; but while they know what it is to be led of Him individually, they fancy they can just go their own way and do their own work in independence of others.

　The teaching of God’s Word is that, on the one hand, human organizations must not control the servants of God; on the other hand, His servants must learn to submit to a spiritual authority which is based on the difference of ministry. There is no organized cooperation, yet there is a spiritual fellowship and a spiritual oneness. Individualism and human organization alike are out of line with the will of God. We should seek to know His will, not independently, but in conjunction with the other ministering members of the Body. The call of Paul and Barnabas was on this principle. It was not a case of two prophets and teachers only, but of five, waiting upon God to know His will. Acts 13 gives us a good example of a working company, all the workers being mutually related, and the guidance of one confirmed by the others.
　　综读以上的圣经，我们看见三个事实：（一）工作是有团体的，（二）工作团体中是有支配的，（三）工作的范围是不只一地的。

　　我们看使徒行传和书信中人物的记载，就知道神的工人是有团体的，是大家合在一起同工的，并非尔为尔，我为我那样的各行其是。住在耶路撒冷那一班的工人就是如此的。耶路撒冷的几个同工是我们所顶熟识的。其中彼得、约翰和雅各特别是我们所知道的。他们并没有单独的作什么。在五旬节的时候，我们是看见“彼得和十一个使徒，站起；”（徒二14）在美门作工的时候，乃是彼得和约翰；去撒玛利亚也是他们二人；到哥尼流家里是彼得和六位弟兄。他们在耶路撒冷是有一个工人团体的，虽然不一定每一次都是其中那几个人一同出去。他们的工作并非个人的，乃是团体的。他们是有同工去作工的。至于安提阿保罗这边，可惜，我们注重保罗这个人，却不大注重保罗的同工。

　　我们看见如何在特罗亚的时候，路加加入他们工作的团体，断定马其顿的呼声是应当接受的。后来如何从马其顿回来的时候，带了所巴特、亚里达古、西公都、该犹、提摩太、推基古、特罗非摩等同工同走。后来又有亚波罗、百基拉、亚居拉加入同工。后来保罗又如何打发提摩太、劝亚波罗、勉提多去哥林多，后来如何又得了以巴弗提作同工。我顶喜欢读书信的头一句，“保罗，同兄弟所提尼；”（林前一1）“保罗，和兄弟提摩太；”（西一1）“保罗、西拉、提摩太”（帖前一1）等。圣经给我们看见，不只有工人，并且有同工的人。我们不要误会了，以为因为不可有人的组织的缘故，不可有人立的差会的缘故，就以为作工的人都不可有结合，这就错了。不错，教会是不可以几个组织合在一起的，但是，神的工人是可以有结合的。许多人误会，以为我们没有公会，所以作神的工人的，为神作使徒的，就可以自由行动，匹马单枪的去作他自己所以为好的工作。不。教会是不应当联合为公会的，但是神的工人虽然不是成功作一个布道的中央机构，但是神的工人是有同工的，是和他的同工结合成一班而同去作工的。

　　但是，一件事是必须注意的，就是他们固然是有团体，他们的团体可不是一种组织的团体，乃是一个属灵的团体。这里头的分别，差得太多了。他们乃是一班志同道合的人，因着同爱一位主，同喜欢事奉祂，同受祂的呼召和差遣的缘故，就合在一起作工。有的也许从起头就来了的，有的也许是随后加入的。他们的确是一个团体，是一个作工的团体。但是，他们却没有组织，没有地位的分配，和职分的分当。加入的人，也不是招募而来的，或者训练而来的；乃是在使徒出外旅程中所遇见的。因着神的安排，就能彼此见面，就能彼此倾心，就能彼此同工。并无所谓考试，也无所谓条件，或是其他的手续。一切都是神在那里作主，人不过是赞成的人而已。到了这个团体里，谁也没有一定的地位，一定的职分。没有“团长”，没有“主席”，也没有“会督。”其他更不必说了。他们的职分乃是从主分派得来的。主给他们这个职分，他们就守住这个地位。这个团体并没有给他们什么职分，什么地位。他们彼此间的关系乃是属灵的，而非地位的。他们的结合乃是属灵的结合，而非人为的组织。

　　这些圣经节也给我们看见，神的工人中间，也不是因为谁都不受谁的供给，所以就谁也不受谁的调动。并不是因为我是直接靠神的，所以，就没有人可以干涉我的前途。反之，我们乃是看见保罗将提多“留在革哩底”（多一5），去继续所未了的工；后来又“打发亚提马，或是推基古”去替他，而又叫他“赶紧往尼哥波立”（三12）。至于他如何多次的打发提摩太、以巴弗提、推基古出去作工，和他如何劝提多和亚波罗往哥林多，都是我们所顶熟的。在神的工作中，工人不只是有团体的，并且，在这个团体中是有比我们更属灵者的指挥的。同工是能受打发、被留、听劝的。

　　所以，在这里我们必须明了地位的权柄，和属灵的权柄的不同。在一个组织的团体中，所有的权柄都是地位的，而非属灵的。在一个好的组织里，一个有权柄的人，有地位的权柄也有属灵的权柄；在一个不好的组织里，一个有权柄的人，就只有地位的权柄而没有属灵的权柄。在一个组织里，不管其人自己有没有属灵的权柄，他在那组织里所有的权柄，总是地位的。什么是地位的权柄呢？地位的权柄就是因着有了这个地位，所以就有了这个权柄。就是在位谋政的意思。什么时候，一不在其位，就不谋其政，也是不能谋。地位的权柄乃是在有这权柄者的身外的，和他本人是无关的。乃是有了这个地位，就有了这个权柄。一切都是地位给他的。组织的团体就是以这一个权柄来支配别人的路程。谁是主席，谁是委员，谁就指挥别人的工作。组织团体的中心就是地位。地位就是一个组织团体的生命，人是以地位来执行他的权柄。但是，圣经中工人的团体是没有组织的。其中也有权柄，但是那权柄不是地位的、正式的，乃是属灵的。乃是因为灵性的长进，能力的充满，交通的亲密，所以有那一个权柄。使徒保罗之所以能指挥别人，不是因为他的地位比别人高，乃是因为他的灵性比别人深。什么人在灵性上是深进的，什么人就有权柄；什么时候，一个人灵性一失败，他就失去他的权柄。在一个组织里，有那个灵性的，不一定有那个地位；有那个地位的，又不一定有那个灵性。但是在圣经中工人的团体，却不是组织的团体。在其中灵性高超的人，就可指挥；灵力充满的人，就能监督。属灵的人就要听从，就要顺服。在组织的团体中，你若不顺服是不可以的，但是在属灵的团体中，你若不听从乃是可以的。不过你在正式方面虽然不是错的，你在灵性方面却是错了。

　　但是除属灵的权柄之外，还有各种职事的问题。主的每一个仆人虽然都是在那职事之中，但是，在主面前都有他们个人所特有的职事，这些的职事不是一样的。在组织中只有人所定的地位，在属灵的工作中却有主所分的职事。因为职事不同的缘故，所以，一面是顺服主，另一面却是彼此顺服。他们所以顺服别的弟兄，不是因为别的弟兄有比自己更高的地位，乃是因为主所分派给他们的职事，和主所分派给自己的职事乃是彼此相关，而又不同的。这完全是属灵的，不是地位的。

　　今天人也看见这一个，所以人也学习这一个，就组织一个团体，举出一个首领来指挥别的工人。但今天许多的指挥，是出于组织里的地位的，不是出于属灵的职事的。保罗所以这样作，是出于他的职事。提多、提摩太、推基古的受支配，也是出于他们的职事。今天许多的支配，是以人的地位来支配，不是由于属灵的经历多，也不是由于职事的地位大。今天人一有了人定的地位，不管他的灵性如何，就可以支配人。一有那个地位，就有那个权柄，这是不合乎圣经的。圣经里是以属灵为根据。圣经里有权柄，但这权柄是属灵的，不是地位的。圣经里是人要有属灵的能力，人要有属灵的受托、属灵的经历、和属灵的使命。但今天人是因他的地位而使用权柄，这是何等的不同！

　　我们看提摩太他是何等的爱主、亲近主、忠心事奉主。他真是神所特别拣选的一个器皿。但是，他还多次受保罗的差遣。他并没有说，难道我自己还不会作工，难道我自己还不会传福音，难道我自己还不会建立教会么？难道我自己还不知道如何作么？感谢神，他会。但是，提摩太是受保罗的命令去作的。在属灵的工作上，是有这一个受那一个支配的事。有保罗的地位，也有提摩太的地位。

　　我们今天要学习，一面和同工发生正当的关系，一面个人受圣灵的引导。这两面都该维持，都该平均才可以。提摩太前后书，有够多的地方叫我们看见，同工是如何同法；也给我们看见，一个年少的同工，是如何顺服年长的同工。一个年少的工人，一面是该听从圣灵的命令，一面也该听从年长的保罗的话。保罗曾打发提摩太出去，曾劝提摩太留在以弗所，而提摩太却在主里听从。这是少年作工的榜样。这一种工作的合一，是顶宝贝的，一面受圣灵的引导，一面还能和同工不至于格格不相入。在这里头，我们不能把完全的责任，都推在提摩太身上；我们也不能把完全的责任，都推在保罗身上。因为劝人的人，应该知道如何劝人。一切劝人的、留人的、打发人的，如果都是凭着天然作的，随着己意作的，就叫人不能顺服。提摩太固然要学习和保罗同工，但是，保罗也得学习如何和提摩太同工。这样就免得叫作提摩太的，只能随从圣灵，不能听从保罗；也叫作保罗的，不至于代替主来说话。不然，就不免有太多的难题了。

　　神的工人应当结合，但是有一种的结合是可惧怕的，就是一种人的组织，使神的仆人不能受圣灵的引导，只不过受人的支配，作人的仆人。这叫他们作某种工的时候，并不是因个人在神面前有什么负担，乃是因比他更大更高的人在那里指挥。有的人以为圣灵在地上需要经理，殊不知圣灵在地上，已经就是主基督的经理了。祂并用不着经理。我们今天的难处，乃是有一地位更高的人来支配别的人，好像是借着他来明白神的旨意。但按圣经看来，人不能合起来成功一个组织机关，人不能借着一个机关来发号施令，而不管个人在神面前有没有负担。

　　在另一方面，另有一个难处，就是有一班人，他明白神的旨意；他得了神的呼召；他得了神的供给；他得了神的引导；他就想，我可以走我自己的路，作我自己的工了。

　　圣经一面不许我们有一种人的组织，来支配神的工人；另一面又给我们看见许多榜样，工人之间应该因着属灵的职事，而顺服属灵的权柄，来同心合意作主的工。没有组织是事实，但不能说，在工作里，使徒和使徒一点联合和合一都没有。在属灵的工作里，个人单独行动主义，和在公会里团体组织的差会，都不是神的旨意。我们需要个人明白神的旨意，也需要几个人一同在神面前明白神的旨意。保罗和巴拿巴的蒙召便是此例。在神面前的不是二个先知和教师，乃是五个先知和教师。行传十三章，已经留下一个好榜样：工作是有团体的。不是大小地位联合的团体，乃是大小职事联合的团体。我们一同作工的人，是有互相的关系的。我们所得的引导，要和别的弟兄的引导互相印证。我们要有在安提阿几个先知和教师那一种彼此的联络，叫我们过激的停止一下，太慢的推进一下。彼此虽没有组织的关系，但是却有生命上属灵的关系。

　　另一面我们看见他们工作的范围是很广的。有的打发到以弗所去，有的要到保罗这里来，有的在哥林多住下了，有的留在米利都，有的留在革哩底，有的从帖撒罗尼迦回来，有的往加拉太去，有的往挞马太去。这是工作。这种种的活动，不是教会里的事，因为教会只管一个地方范围内的事。以弗所只管以弗所的事，歌罗西只管歌罗西的事，罗马只管罗马的事。地方范围内的事，是教会该作的。以弗所不必留人在歌罗西，歌罗西不需要打发人到罗马。但工作是超地方的。以弗所、歌罗西、罗马，都在作工的人的心目之中。神的工人是把主所分给他们的地，作为他们的“教区”的。这些地方，是需要工人在一起商量，有所调动、有所安排的。地方的教会，就不能这样，她只能管理地方范围之内的事。在工作里，凡主所差遣的人，是彼此负各地所有工作责任的。
 
　The sphere of the work, unlike the sphere of the local church, is very wide. Some of the workers are sent to Ephesus, some go to Paul at Nicopolis, some stay on in Corinth, some are left in Miletus, some remain in Crete, some return to Thessalonica, and others go on to Galatia. Such is the work! We see here not the movements of the local church but of the work, for the movements of the local church are always confined to one locality. Ephesus only manages the affairs of Ephesus, and Rome the affairs of Rome. The church confines herself to matters in her own locality. There is no need for the church in Ephesus to send a man to Corinth, or for the church in Corinth to leave a man in Rome. The church here is local, the work extra-local. Ephesus, Corinth, and Rome are all the concern of the workers. The church only manages the affairs in any given locality, but the workers of God regard as their “parish” the sphere which the Lord has measured out to them.
　　圣经里，工人是有团体的。但是，圣经里并没有所有的使徒们，合成一个团体，受统一的支配，服在一个中央的权柄之下。虽然保罗有保罗一班的“同人”，彼得有彼得一班的“同人”，但他们不过是众使徒中的若干人，并非所有的使徒所集合的团体。把所有的使徒都集合在一起，是圣经里所没有的。凭着圣经的教训，乃是其一种的工作，和某几个工人特别发生关系；所以他们就集合在一起。或者几个人，或者几十个人，或者几百个人，因同受神某种的托付，就可以集合在一起。圣经里从来没有中央集权，来支配所有使徒的事。团体是有的，但团体从来没有大到把所有的使徒都集合在一起。如果有的话，那是天主教的制度，并非圣经的作法。

　　在腓立比一章说，有的传基督，是出于嫉妒分争；也有的是出于好意。有一等人传福音是出于爱心，有一等人传福音是出于结党。肉体没有受过对付，自然就有嫉妒的事发生。腓立比书给我们看见有这样事实的存在，就是证明当日工作并没有统一的事。因为如果有统一的办法，就不致有这班人的存在了。就是有了这班人，也早就可以加以取缔了。但是，保罗对于这个的态度是“无论怎样，基督究竟被传开了；为此我就欢喜，并且还要欢喜”（18）。这几句话，显出“使徒”时代的事实，是有一班一班的工人的。虽然有的一班作工是出于好意，有的竟然走出于嫉妒；但是，保罗和其他的大使徒并没有取缔谁、禁止谁，因为当时没有统一支配工人的事。

　　有几个事实，是我们该注意的。第一，地方教会是不应当和其他教会结成一个大团体的，因为地方教会已经是一个最大的信徒团体了。第二，工人是可以联合的，使徒们是可以联合的。使徒不管是在安提阿也好，不管是住在彼西底的安提阿也好，但是他们可以有联合。第三，圣经里并没有把所有的工人都联合成为一个大团体，不只腓立比一章是这样的明显，就是哥林多书也有同样的启示。

　　林后十一章十二至十三节：“我现在所作的，后来还要作，为要断绝那些寻机会人的机会，使他们在所夸的事上，也不过与我们一样。那等人是假使徒，行事诡诈，装作基督使徒的模样。”又二十二至二十三节：“他们是希伯来人么？我也是。他们是以色列人么？我也是。他们是亚伯拉罕的后裔么？我也是。他们是基督的仆人么？（我说句狂话）我更是。”在这一里，我们看见在哥林多有一班假的使徒，迷惑在哥林多的信徒说，保罗不是使徒。他们自以为比保罗更好。我们看见，保罗在行政上并没有法子对付他们。因为为神作工的人是没有行政上统一的组织的。如果属灵的工作有一个统一的组织，就谁没有执照，谁就不能传道。每一个都要有执照才能出去，就没有这个难处了。但使徒的结合是属灵的，所以有另外一班的人出来作假使徒。神不愿意所有的使徒合成一个团体。因这种集合所发生的弊病，要比假使徒多几千倍。所以，神只许可若干祂所差遣的工人，因受有相同的托付，而集合成一个个的团体。

　　加拉太四章十七节：“那些人热心待你们，却不是好意，是要离间你们，叫你们热心待他们。”又六章十七节：“从今以后，人都不要搅扰我；因为我身上带着耶稣的印记。”你们看见这两节圣经相合的地方么？有人跑到加拉太，用尽手段牢笼那里的信徒，盼望从他们身上得到一本万利的收获。但保罗的态度如何呢？保罗是说，我真是作主工的，你们不要在我身上弄这些手段。他并没有什么政权可以对付这一个。

　　圣经里为什么没有普遍的组织和支配呢？就是因为神不愿意用人组织的力量，来代替圣灵的能力。在没有统一支配的时候，人若都顺服圣灵的引导，就什么都作得好。什么时候人不随从圣灵，什么时候人凭着血气作事，工作就失败了。严密的组织，许多的时候，能代替属灵的能力。因为里面生命的能力虽然没有了，但是因为有外面组织的架子把它撑住，工作还是不会倒塌的。什么时候组织仍然存在，就什么时候那个工作仍然不会失败。但是，神不要人这样作。什么时候属灵的能力一失，神就愿意那个工作倒塌，愿意那个工作不存在。什么时候神的荣耀离开了圣殿，什么时候神就宁可一块石头不留在石头上。多少的时候，里面都干枯了，只因着外面有组织的架子，就叫人不觉得里面实在的情形。但是，神却要人外面和里面一样，要人看见祂所看见的。祂宁可工作倒塌，不愿有假的支持，好叫我们在倒塌之后，能谦卑的再来寻求祂的面。并且统一支配的弊病，不知有多少。统一支配的组织，能叫不是神仆人的也混在内，也容易弄到今天教皇的地位。有统一的组织，就叫工作在世界上成功一大势力，同时也叫神的仆人不必受圣灵的引导了。所以，工人有团体是事实，但是工人不能组织一个统一的团体，也是事实。
 
　In Scripture the workers were formed into companies, but that does not imply that all the apostles formed themselves into one company and placed everything under one central control. Although Paul had “those with him,” and Peter his associates, they comprised only a number of apostles, not all the apostles. That all the apostles should combine into one company is not shown in the Word of God. It is quite in order for scores of men, or even hundreds, who have received the same trust from God, to join together in the same work; but in the Scriptures we find no centralization of authority for the control of all the apostles. There is a company of apostles, but it is not great enough to include all the apostles. That is Romish, not scriptural.

　The parties referred to in Philippians 1:15-17, 2 Corinthians 11:12-13, 22-23, and Galatians 4:17 all indicate that the work in the early days was not centralized. Had it been centralized, those groups could not have remained in existence, for they could have been dealt with effectively. The Scriptures show that in divine work there is no universal organization or central control, which accounts for the fact that the apostle had no authority to deal with those groups of people who were creating such difficulty in the churches.

　The explanation is this: God does not wish the power of organization to take the place of the power of the Holy Spirit. Even though there is no central control, provided all the workers follow the leading of the Spirit, everything will run smoothly and satisfactorily, and there will be the coordination of a body. Whenever people cease to obey the Spirit and labor in the power of the flesh, then it is best if the work is simply allowed to fall to pieces. A good organization often serves as a bad substitute for the power of the Holy Spirit, by holding a work together even after all its vitality is gone. When life has departed from the work and the scaffolding of organization still supports it, its collapse is prevented; but that is doubtful gain, for a splendid outward organization may be blinding God’s servants to a deep inward need. God would rather His work be discontinued than that it go on with such a counterfeit for spiritual power. When the glory of God had departed from the temple, He himself left it to utter ruin. God desires that the outward and inward conditions should correspond, so that if death invades a work, His workers may awaken at once to their need and in humility of heart seek His face.

　Central control has many evils. It makes it easy for God’s servants to disregard the leading of the Spirit, and readily develops into a popish system, becoming a great worldly power. It is a scriptural fact that God’s servants are formed into companies, but they are not formed into one single company.

　However, that does not mean that every company could just go on independently, knowing no relatedness or fellowship with other companies. The principle of the oneness of the Body holds good here as in all other relationships between the children of God. In Scripture we not only see the principle of “the laying on of hands,” but also that of giving “the right hand” (Gal. 2:9). The former speaks of identification; the latter of fellowship. In Antioch hands were laid on Paul and Barnabas; in Jerusalem there was no laying on of hands, but the right hand of fellowship given them by James, Cephas, and John. In Antioch the sphere in view was one apostolic company, and the point emphasized was identification; consequently, hands were laid on them. But in Jerusalem the sphere in view was the relationship between different apostolic companies, and the point emphasized was fellowship; consequently, the right hand was extended to them.

　Many are called to work for the Lord, but their sphere of service is not the same, so it follows that their associates cannot be the same. But the various companies must all be identified with the Body, coming under the headship of the Lord, and having fellowship among themselves. There is no laying on of hands between Antioch and Jerusalem, but there is the giving of the right hand of fellowship. So the Word of God does not warrant the forming of one central company; neither does it warrant the forming of various scattered, unrelated, and isolated companies. There is no one central place for the laying on of hands, nor is there merely the laying on of hands and nothing else in any one of the various groups; but among them there is also the giving of the right hand of fellowship one to the other. Each company should recognize what God is doing with the other companies and should extend fellowship to them, acknowledging that they are also ministers in the Body. Under the ordering of God they may work in different companies, but all must work as one Body. The extending of the right hand of fellowship implies a recognition that other people are in the Body and we are in fellowship with them, working together in a related way, as becomes functioning members of the same Body. “Seeing that I had been entrusted with the gospel to the uncircumcision… and perceiving the grace given to me, James and Cephas and John, who were reputed to be pillars, gave to me and to Barnabas the right hand of fellowship that we should go to the Gentiles, and they, to the circumcision” (Gal. 2:7-9). The unrelated, scattered, disrupted, and conflicting organizations in Christendom, which do not recognize the principle of the Body and do not come under the sovereignty and headship of Christ, are never according to the mind of the Lord.
　　现在有一个问题发生，就是工人和工人团体中彼此应当如何合作呢？有一班人，有神给他们特别的工作；另有一班人，也有神给他们特别的使命。这二班人应当如何合作呢？像彼得有彼得一班的同人，保罗有保罗一班的同人。神又没有把这二班人合在一起作工。那么当他们彼此有衔接的时候，应当如何合作呢？统一是不对的，团体是一个个的。这些的工人，这些的团体，彼此应当怎样合作呢？

　　我们现在来看，工人工作的要点：

　　第一，每一个人（团体在内）不管神给他的职事是什么，他所特别要作的是什么工作，他到一个没有地方教会的地方，第一件事，就是先设立在那地方的教会。

　　第二，他到一个已有地方教会的地方，他就只能供献他的道理，叫教会得他的益处，他却不能叫那个教会成功他的教会，或者他团体的教会。

　　如果一个工人或几个工人，到一个没有教会的地方，去设立维持他道理的“教会”，你和他就无合作的可能，因他在那里是建立宗派。如果一个工人或几个工人，到一个有地方教会的地方，不是光供献他的道理，乃是想改变别人，成为他团体的支会，你和他也无合作的可能，因为他也是在那里建立宗派。作工的人，最大的忌讳，就是不设立地方教会，或者不造就地方教会，想改变地方的团体成为自己的团体。这两种的作法，都是圣经所不许可的。

　　保罗到了哥林多，他是从安提阿来的。他在哥林多传了福音，有人得了救，有一个信徒的团体出来了。保罗在哥林多所设立的团体是什么团体呢？是在哥林多的教会。他不是在哥林多设立安提阿教会的支会。他这样作是对的。等一等，彼得也到了哥林多，也传了福音，也得了一班人。彼得能不能说，你保罗是从安提阿来的，我彼得是从耶路撒冷来的，所以我要另立一个团体呢？或者要另立一个耶路撒冷教会的支会呢？不能。彼得只能说，保罗所建立的，是在哥林多的教会，所以我所得的人，也只能放在这个教会里。不只彼得是这样作，后来亚波罗来了，也是这样作。他们都是把人救来了，就放在地方教会里。这样，在哥林多就只有一个神的教会，没有什么分门别类的宗派了。如果保罗在哥林多传了福音，救了人，就说，我是从安提阿出来的，所以当在哥林多设立一个安提阿教会的支会，或者设立一个保罗的支会。彼得来了，他要怎么说？他要说，你保罗既然设立了安提阿教会的支会，我又和安提阿教会是没有关系的，我犯不着把人放在你的支会里，我也得在这里来一个耶路撒冷教会的支会。等一等，亚波罗来了，也设立一个亚波罗的支会。你设立一个支会，我设立一个支会，宗派就由此成立了。这样，他们来，不是设立当地的地方教会，乃是设立他们自己所来自团体的支会。他们不是设立教会，乃是扩充他们自己所来自的团体。这样，就无合作的可能。

　　所以工人或者工人团体，作工最要紧的原则，就是我出去作工乃是要设立我所到地的地方教会，不是在我所到地，去设立我从前所在地的教会。不是扩充我所出自他的教会于我的所到地，乃是我到了什么地方就设立那一个地方的教会。耶路撒冷和安提阿是没有支会的。所有的教会都是地方的。我们不能扩充一个地方教会到别的地方去，我们只能在别的地方设立它那一个地方的教会。使徒到了以弗所设立的，乃是在以弗所的教会；到了腓立比所设立的，乃是在腓立比的教会。他们在其他百十的地方，所设立的都是在那些地方的教会。我们从来没看见他们设立其他的团体。扩充神的教会是可以的，扩充我所在地的神的教会就不可。我们所到的是什么地方，我们所设立的教会，也就是什么地方的教会。

　　布道工作的目的，本来光是为着拯救罪人，但是结果却是叫我们的所到地有了教会。目的是拯救世人，结局却设立了教会。但是，就在这里有一个危险，就是人喜欢将其所救的人编成作他团体的支会，而不将其成为当地的教会。结局就因着神的工人彼此所归属的团体不一样的缘故，就在一个地方设立许多不一样团体的分会，因而生了许多的纠纷。在工作中，神的工人们对于作工的目的是从来不会冲突的。谁传福音是不想救人的呢？谁不想让主能多得几个人呢？但是对于工作的结果却是少有一样的。有的，感谢神，乃是为着设立当地的教会。但是可惜，另有许多若不是为着扩充自己的公会，就是为着扩充自己的差会。对于这一点，就是我和我的同工，同一班的朋友所争执的点。

　　我们从心里感谢神，因为在过去这百年中，打发了许多忠心的仆人来到中国传福音，使许多坐在黑暗里的中国人有机会可以听见，能以相信。他们的牺牲、受苦、敬虔、和殷勤，真是我们的榜样。多少的时候，当我们仰起我们的眼，看从内地中出来西教士受苦的脸的时候，叫我们心中不能不受感，祷告说，“求主使我也能像他”。但愿主祝福他们！报答他们！

　　对于我们的弟兄在传福音方面的工作，我们实在无可批评，只有羡慕。我们这一班的人，原是未到期的胎产，原不配在神的工作上有分，但是，因着自己是身受神恩典的人，又蒙了祂的恩召来作祂的工，就不能不在祂面前追求忠心。因此，我们就不能不觉得，对于我们在主里年长的弟兄传福音的工作真可钦佩；但是对于他们处置福音的果子，就是得救的人的办法，表示疑惑。因为在这过去百年的工作中，我们在主里年长的弟兄，不是设立他们所到地的教会，却是设立他们差会的支会！按着我们看，这实在是与圣经的道理不合的。圣经中只有设立所到地的地方教会，而没有设立其他任何公会的事。我若说错了，求神饶恕我！
 
　The question naturally arises, how should workers and working associations cooperate? To one company God gives one kind of ministry, and to another an altogether different form of ministry. How should the various groups work together? Peter and his associates, and Paul and those with him, were appointed to different spheres, but in the event of their work overlapping, how should they act? Since there is no centralization of work, yet at the same time there are various groups of workers, how should these different groups cooperate? We must note two fundamental points in regard to the work:

　(1)The first responsibility of every worker—no matter what his ministry or what his special line of work—whenever he comes to a place where there is no local church, is to establish one in the locality. (What applies to the individual worker applies also to any group of workers.)

　(2)Should he come to a place where a local church already exists, then all his teaching and all his experience must be contributed to that church, that it may be strengthened and edified, and no attempt should be made to attach that church to himself or to the society he represents.

　If a worker goes to a place where there is no church and founds one there for the propagation of his particular doctrine, then we cannot cooperate with him because he is building up a sect, and not a church. On the other hand, should a worker go to a place where there is already a local church, and instead of contributing his teaching and experience to its upbuilding, seek to make it a branch-church of the society to which he belongs, then again it is impossible for us to cooperate, because he is building up a denomination. The basis of fellowship in the church is the common possession of life in Christ and living in the same locality. The basis of cooperation in the work is the common aim of the founding and building up of local churches. Denominational affiliations do not hinder us from reckoning anyone as belonging to the Body, but the aim of denominational extension will certainly keep us from any cooperation in the service of God. The greatest harm a worker can do is, instead of establishing and edifying the local churches, to attach to his society the believers he finds in a place, or to form those brought to the Lord through his labors into a branch of his particular denomination. Both these procedures are condemned by the Word of God.

　Paul came from Antioch to Corinth and there he preached the gospel. People believed and were saved, and soon there was a group of saints in Corinth. Into what kind of church did Paul form them? Into the church in Corinth. Paul did not establish an Anitochian church in Corinth. He did not form a branch-church of Antioch in Corinth, but simply established a church in Corinth. Thereafter Peter came to Corinth and preached the gospel, with the result that another group of people believed. Did Peter say, “Paul came from Antioch, but I am come from Jerusalem, so I must set up another church: I will establish a Jerusalemic church in Corinth, or, I will form a branch-church of Jerusalem here in Corinth”? No, he contributed all those he led to the Lord to the already existing local church in Corinth. After a while Apollos came along. Again people were saved, and again all the saved ones were added to the local church. So in Corinth there was only one church of God; there were no schismatic denominations. Had Paul established the precedent of founding a church in Corinth to enlarge the sphere of the church from which he went out, calling it the Antiochian church in Corinth, then when Peter came to Corinth he might well have argued, “It is all right for Paul to found an Antiochian church in Corinth since he came from Antioch, but I have nothing to do with Antioch; my church is in Jerusalem, so I must establish a Jerusalemic church here.” Apollos coming to Corinth would in turn follow their example and establish another church as a branch of the one from which he came out. If every worker tried to form a branch of the church he represented, then sects and denominations would be utterly inevitable. If the aim of a worker in any place is not to establish a local church there, but to enlarge the church from which he has gone out, then he is not establishing a church of God in that locality, but only building up his own society. Under such circumstances there is no possibility of cooperation.

　Conditions have greatly changed since the days of the early apostles. Christianity has lost its original purity, and everything connected with it is in a false and confused state. Despite that fact, our work today is still the same as in the days of the early apostles—to found and build up local churches, the local expressions of the Body of Christ. So if we are in a place where there is no church, we should seek the Lord’s face that He may enable us to win souls for Himself and form them into a local church. If we are in a place where there are missions, or churches, standing on sectarian or denominational ground, but no church standing on the ground of the Body and the locality, then our duty is just the same, that is, to found and build a local church. Many will still persist in their old ways; hence, the persons standing on clear church ground may be far fewer than the total number of Christians in the locality. But the area of the ground on which they stand is just as wide as that on which the church ought to stand, so it is still our duty to maintain that ground. We can only cooperate with those who are building up the Body of Christ as expressed in local churches, and not with those who are building up something else. Denominational connection does not hinder us from fellowship in the Lord, but denominational extension does hinder us from cooperation in the work of God.

　Here is the most important principle in the work of God— a worker must not seek to establish a branch of the church from which he goes out, but to establish a church in the locality to which he comes. He does not make the church in the place to which he goes to be an extension of the church in the place from which he comes, but he founds a church in that locality. Wherever he goes, he establishes a church in that place. He does not extend the church of his place of origin, but establishes the church in the place of his adoption. Since in Scripture all churches are local, Jerusalem and Antioch can have no branch-churches. We cannot extend one local church to another locality; we can only form a new church in that locality. The church which the apostles established in Ephesus is the church in Ephesus; the church which they established in Philippi is the church in Philippi; the churches which they established in other places are the churches of those different places. There is no precedent in Scripture for establishing any other than local churches. It is all right to extend the Church of God, but it is all wrong to extend a local church of God. What is the place in which I intend to work? It is the church in that place I must seek to establish.

　Now there are two kinds of workers, namely, those who stand on scriptural ground, and those who stand on denominational or mission ground. But even with those who stand on denominational or mission ground, the principle of cooperation is just the same—the one aim of founding and building up the local church.

　The work of evangelization is primarily for the salvation of sinners, but its spontaneous result is a church in the place where such work is done. The immediate object is the salvation of men, but the ultimate result is the formation of churches. The danger which confronts the missionary is to form those he has led to the Lord into a branch of the society he represents. Since workers represent different societies, they naturally form different branches of their respective societies, and the consequence is great confusion in the work and churches of God. The immediate aim of the various workers is no doubt the same—what preacher does not hope that many souls will be won to the Lord?—but there is a lack of clarity and definiteness regarding the ultimate issue. Some workers, praise God, are out to establish local churches; others, alas! are out to extend their own denomination or to form mission churches.

　This is a point on which my fellow workers and I cannot see eye to eye with many of God’s children. From the depths of our hearts we thank God that in the past century He has sent so many of His faithful servants to China, so that those who were sitting in darkness should hear the gospel and believe in the Lord. Their self-sacrifice, their diligence, and their godliness have truly been an example to us. Many a time, as we looked at the faces of missionaries suffering for the gospel’s sake, we have been moved to pray, “Lord, make us to live like them.” May God bless and reward them! We acknowledge that we are utterly unworthy to have any part in the work of God, but by the grace of God we are what we are, and since God in His grace has called us to His service, we cannot but seek to be faithful. We have nothing to criticize, and much to admire, as far as the gospel work of our missionary brethren is concerned; yet we cannot but question their methods in dealing with the fruits of such work. For in the past hundred years it has not resulted in the building up of local churches but in the forming of missionary churches, or of branch churches of the various denominations which the missionaries represented. In our opinion this is contrary to the Word of God. There is no such thing in Scripture as the building up of denominations; we only find local churches there. May God forgive me if I am wrong!
　　请你们饶恕我提起一件个人的事。去年我在上海遇见一位基督××会的教士，他问我说，我能不能和××会合作？当时，我因为不知道如何答复，就没有立时答复。今年我在云南昆明，又遇见他。他又向我谈到，我能不能和××会合作？我因有更清楚地光，就答说，××会这个差会，我不敢反对。我知道你们这个“会”字是指差会说的。你们蒙神的引导，设立××会这个差会，叫一班西国爱主的弟兄容易到中国来传福音作工。关乎这一个，我一点都不敢批评。对于你们这个差会的团体，我一点不敢非议。因为圣经中的工作是有团体的。你们觉得应当有组织、有名称，这是你们在神面前应当负责的。我是谁，怎敢批评主的仆人呢？不过我自己不敢如此作，因为神没有这样引导我。所以，对××会这个差会，我是没有问题的。并且我承认，我读贵会发起人的传记，所得的属灵帮助他不知道有多少。我的心和你们早是合而为一的，但是我对××会这个教会却有问题。

　　对于你们─一班布道者，我们是毫无问题的。但是，你们布道所得的果子，你们把他们怎么办？这是所有的问题。我们对于××会不敢说什么，但是我们要问，××会的果子到底是如何？如果××会光是一个差会，我们就不敢批评什么，但是××会如果变作教会，那问题就不一样。你们自己是××会，你们所救的人是什么呢？是叫他们成为××会的教会呢？还是叫他们成为他们所在地的教会呢？××差会乃是你们这一班来中国传福音的“教士，”你们没有圣经的权柄，在各地得了果子之后，将这些果子编作××教会。你们自己作××差会是可以，你们若叫他们变作××教会就不可。圣经没有禁止××差会的设立，可是圣经曾禁止××教会的设立！

　　然后我就指明使徒的榜样给他看。他们无论在哪里作工，都是将他们的果子作为他们所在那个地方的教会。他们从来没有将各地的果子化作他们自己团体的支会。不然，就当日的教会早已四分五裂了。试想看：许多的使徒，他们到了一个地方，不是设立一个在那地方的教会，却扩充他们所出来的教会，那个地方要变成功什么种的情形？

　　我又对他说，大理的工作，是你们在那里作的。我们感谢神！但你们××会在大理所拯救的人，他们是什么？如果他们是在大理的教会，就我到了大理，也必投身其中。我不管她灵性的光景如何，里面的组织如何，我心投身其中。不然，我就是宗派。但如果你们是将他们作为××教会，就你们不是设立在大理的教会，乃是设立在大理××的教会。对不起，我就不能加入这个“教会，”我就只能在大理另行作工，盼望能有在大理（不是我们的）的教会的出现。

　　圣经里所有布道的团体，都是设立地方的教会，从来没有设立他们团体的支会的。如果我们都走出去设立地方教会，就有完全合作的可能。设立××差会是可以的，设立××教会就不合乎圣经。你试想看：如果你们××会到了大理，就设立××教会，五旬节会到了大理，就设立五旬节教会，圣公会到了大理，就设立圣公会，大家都是设立他们原来团体的支会。这样作，好像保罗设立他的一个支会，彼得也设立他的一个支会，就不是我们所能合作的。因为我们清楚地知道，神要我们按着祂在圣经里所留的榜样，去设立各地地方的教会。

　　我们如果到一个地方设立教会，就要非常地方的，什么色彩都没有才可以。你来到大理，是建立在大理的教会；我来到大理，也是建立在大理的教会；五旬节会来到大理，也是建立在大理的教会；圣公会来到大理，也是设立在大理的教会，不管他们所属的差会是什么，但目的都是建立在大理的教会，这样，宗派就无产生的可能了。如果说××会的差会是错，我不敢，因为他们是神的仆人。但他们如果到各处是设立××会的支会，就他们不只传福音，也是扩充他们的团体了。我们能和一切传福音的人同工，但我们不能和扩充自己范围的人合作。所以，一个人是不是到各处设立地方的教会，断定我们彼此能不能合作。如果他们一面传福音，一面建立他们自己的团体，我们和他们就无合作的可能。我们不肯照着人的目的，来扩充人的团体。不管他们是什么差会的人，只要他们到一个地方，不设立自己的“教会，”是设立地方的教会，就和我们都有合作的可能。

　　求神施恩给我们，叫我们看透了，教会是地方的。求神拯救我们脱离分门别类的错误，好叫神的教会，在各地得以建立。
 
　Permit me to mention a personal incident. Some time ago I met a certain missionary in Shanghai who asked me if it would not be possible for me to cooperate with his mission. Not knowing quite what to say, I did not commit myself. Later on I came across him in another part of the country, and again he repeated his question and asked if I had anything against the mission. I answered, “I dare not criticize your mission, though I do not believe it is according to the full thought of God. I believe it was God’s will to establish it so that the servants of God in Western lands could come to China to preach the gospel. I have nothing to say regarding the mission as a body, for the Scriptures speak of companies of workers, and if you feel it should be organized, should have officers, and should bear a specific name, you must answer to God and not to man for that. Who am I that I should criticize the servants of the Lord? But while I do not criticize, I cannot copy, because God has not revealed that as His will and way for me. Regarding the mission as a mission, I have nothing to say, but I have serious questions regarding the churches formed by the mission. To illustrate, you represent the ‘X’ Mission. Now, do those saved by your instrumentality become the ‘X’ Church, or do they become the church of the particular locality in which they live? It may be all right for missionaries to belong to the ‘X’ Mission, but it is all wrong for them to form the fruits of the mission into the ‘X’ Church. The Word of God has not definitely forbidden the forming of an ‘X’ Mission, but it clearly does not sanction the founding of other than local churches.”

　Then I mentioned the apostolic examples, pointing out that they always sought to found or build up churches in the locality of their labors with the fruit of such labors. They never used such fruit to form branches of the companies in which they worked; otherwise, the Church of God would have been rent by numerous factions from its very inception.

　I then took as an illustration the work at T——. “There at T——,” I said, “God has used you to win many souls. If the people saved by your instrumentality are the church in T——, then if I come to T—— I shall certainly join them, no matter what their spiritual state, or what their form of organization; otherwise, I should be guilty of sectarianism. But if you build up an ‘X’ Church in T—— with the people saved there, then you are not building the Church of God in T——, and such a ‘church’ I regret to say I cannot join. I shall be obliged to work separately in T—— unless there is a church there standing on the scriptural ground of locality.

　“If we are all out to establish local churches, then there is every possibility of cooperation. It is permissible to establish an ‘X’ Mission, but it is not scriptural to establish an ‘X’ Church. Suppose your ‘X’ Mission coming to T—— establishes an ‘X’ Church; thereafter, various other missions come to T——, each establishing a separate mission ‘church.’ That would be the same as Paul establishing an Antiochian church in Corinth, and Peter coming along shortly after and establishing a Jerusalemic church there. On such a basis cooperation is impossible, for we should be disregarding the pattern which God has clearly shown us in His Word—the establishment of local churches.

　“If we come to a place to found a church, then it must be local, intensely local, without anything extraneous to rob it in the slightest of its local character. If you come to T—— with the establishing of the church in T—— as your one aim, and I come to T—— with the establishing of the church in T—— as my one aim, then cooperation will be no problem. Even if a hundred and one missionaries, representing a hundred and one missions, all come to T—— with this as their one aim, to establish the church in T——, then there will be no possibility of sectarianism, and cooperation will be a matter of course. If the aim of the ‘X’ Mission is only to preach the gospel, then it is possible for us to work together; but if there is a twofold aim—the preaching of the gospel and the extension of the mission—then cooperation is not possible. If a worker seeks on the one hand to preach the gospel, and on the other hand to extend his own society, it is impossible for us to work together.” Whether or not a man is out to establish local churches determines whether or not we can cooperate with him. No matter to what mission a man may belong, if he comes to a place not seeking to establish his own “church,” but a church in the locality, then we are perfectly willing to work with him. Although we are not a mission, we are quite prepared to cooperate with any mission if they have no private end in view, but only the one end which God has shown as His will regarding His work.

　May God grant us grace to see that His churches are all local churches.

返回工作的再思 ｜ 返回事奉类首页