Notwithstanding the decided opposition of most of the denominations to what they call "lay" preaching, the Brethren have advocated the practice from the first, and nobly set the example to the blessing of many souls and their own rapid increase. A curious distinction is made by some between speaking and preaching out of the church. According to scripture, we speak in the church, and preach out of it. An actual instance of this distinction came before the writer many years ago, when a member of a large Presbyterian church. A young man who had been appointed a scripture reader in a low part of the city, was expected to visit from house to house, read the word, and speak to the people as he had opportunity. But on some occasions he found it convenient to collect a few of the neighbors into one kitchen, and address them standing. He was reported to the managers of the church as assuming the functions of a preacher. When brought before them he was rebuked and warned not to repeat the like again as it was out of order; " your place is to speak to the people not to preach to them." Our spiritual instincts, we well remember, were greatly offended with this decision, and we felt that it was the kirk session that was out of order and not the young man.
" The question is not," says Mr. Darby, " whether all laymen are individually qualified; but, whether as laymen they are disqualified, unless they are what is commonly called ordained.. But I confine myself to a simple question-the assertion that laymen ought not to preach without episcopal or other analogous appointment. My assertion is, that they are entitled; that they did so in scripture-were justified in doing so, God blessing them therein; and that the principles of scripture require it, assuming, of course, here, that they are qualified of God; for the question is not competency to act, but title to act if competent.
" Let us see what scripture says upon the subject. The question can only arise as to their speaking in the church or out of the church. This admitted, all anomalous cases will readily be agreed in. And first, in the church. And here I remark that the directions in 1 Corinthians 14 are entirely inconsistent with the necessity of ordination to speak. There is a line drawn there, but it is not ‘if ordained or unordained.' Let your women keep silence in the churches'-a direction which never could have had place, were the speaking confined to a definitely ordained person, but takes quite another ground; and which implies directly, not that it is right for every man to speak, but that there was preclusion of none because of their character as laymen. Women were the precluded class; there the line was drawn. If men had not the gift of speaking of course they would be silent, if they followed the directions there given. The apostle says, 'Every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation.' Does he say none ought to speak but one ordained? No; let all things be done unto edifying! that is the grand secret, the grand rule....
" We have then a distinction, not of ordained and unordained, but of those who from their character - women-are not permitted to speak, and the rest are; and directed in what order to do so, and the ground of distinction stated. And this is God's plan of decency and order. For the rest they were all to speak, that all might learn, and all be comforted; not all to speak at once, not all to speak every day, but all as God led them, according to the order there laid down, and as God was pleased to give them ability, for the edifying of the church. I apply all this simply and exclusively to lay preaching; and I assert that there was no such principle recognized as that they should not, but the contrary.
"It will be said, I know, that these were the times of extraordinary gifts of the Spirit.... But the case was not one of the prerogative of spiritual gifts, but of order; for women had spiritual gifts, as we read elsewhere, and directions are given for their exercise; but they were not to use them in the church, because it was out of order-not comely.
The first general preaching of the gospel, which the Lord blessed beyond the walls of Jerusalem, was by laymen; or, however, the church knew no such distinction. It had not entered into their minds then, that they who knew the glory of Christ were not to speak of it, where and how God enabled them. There all the Christians preached-they went everywhere preaching the word. (Acts 8:44Therefore they that were scattered abroad went every where preaching the word. (Acts 8:4).) And ‘the hand of the Lord was with them, and a great number believed and turned to the Lord.' Paul preached-without any other mission than seeing the glory of the Lord and His word-in a synagogue, too, and boasts of it. And he gives his reasons for Christians preaching elsewhere-' as it is written; I believed, and therefore have I spoken; we also believe and therefore speak.' Apollos preached, knowing only the baptism of John. At Rome many of the brethren, waxing bold by Paul's bonds, preached the word without fear. Nor is there such a thing mentioned in scripture as ordaining to preach the gospel. I call upon any one to produce any scripture positively, or on principle, forbidding laymen to preach, or requiring episcopal or other analogous ordination for the purpose....
" The times call for decision; and the only thing which will withstand evil and error is truth, and truth wielded as a common cause against error and self-will by the saints under the Spirit; and then God can be wholly with them, instead of being obliged to withdraw His countenance from them when they are opposed to their brethren and rejecting them, when lie must justify them, when it is the order of His glory, and all their blessing to do so. May He by His Spirit guide us into all truth!"
*( The Collected Writings, Ecclesiastical, vol. i., of J. N. D.)