|
 "What,
have ye not houses to eat and to drink in? Or despise ye the
church of God, and put them to shame that have not? What shall I
say to you? Shall I praise you? In this I praise you not"
(1 Cor. 11:22).
After
reading many articles, discussions and comments on the context
of 1 Cor. 11:17-34, it seems to me that a basic principle is
being overlooked. Some say the problem was that the
Corinthians were confusing their common meal or "love
feast" with the memorial of Christ's death. Other brethren
argue that the error involved was that of making their meeting
place into a place to eat. But the basic problem was that
they had perverted their purpose in coming together. The
Corinthians had "despised the church of God" by
replacing their spiritual purpose with a material and social
emphasis.
God,
through His word, has given the church the authority to do
certain things. The church is authorized to assemble and worship
(1 Cor. 11:20; 14:23; Acts 20:7) and to pool its resources (1
Cor. 16:1,2) in order to accomplish certain ends (such as
assisting saints in need, Rom. 15:25-f). The church is to
"sound out the word" (1 Thess. 1:8) and to accomplish
this; the church in Philippi assisted Paul in his efforts (Phil.
4:15). It is clearly pointed out in the New Testament that the
church's assigned duties are of a spiritual nature. When
we forget that t- the church has a distinctive and peculiar
purpose and function, and begin operating in some other area, we
have "despised the church of God."
| |
When
brethren see to it that the emphasis of the church's activities
is kept where God put it, many misapplications of 1 Cor. 11
would be eliminated. It is rightly argued that Paul was
correcting a perversion of the Lord's Supper. But to claim
"as long as the 'love feast' (common meal) is kept separate
from the worship the church can build and equip 'fellowship
halls''' is to misplace and pervert the spiritual function of
the church. One brother wrote, "I'm not only 'agin' it
(church financing of recreation and/or dining halls- ko), but I
want to see book, chapter and verse where such is
authorized." An honest look at 1 Cor. 11, 2 Pet. 2:13 and
Jude 12 does not warrant the conclusion that
"love feasts" are a function of the church.
Nor,
on the other hand, can we say that 1 Cor. 11:22,34 forbids the
use of the meeting place for any but spiritual activities.
"Incidental uses of church property do not
invalidate the basic scriptural principle by which the church
remains a spiritual institution to administer to spiritual
needs... In times of disaster (tornado, flood, etc.) a
well-built, centrally located building may be the only shelter
available to refugees. The use is temporary and incidental; we
did not build for that purpose; and I do not believe such use
would authorize anything" (R.F. Turner, P.T. 11-3).
The
church has a purpose that is different from the local YMCA and
any other civic or service organization. When we go beyond that
assigned spiritual function, we "despise the church of
God." Kevan O'Banion
[Previous
Article] [Next
Article]
|
