A Little Leaven - Glenn Conjurske

A Little Leaven

by Glenn Conjurske

“A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.” (I Cor. 5:6, Gal. 5:9).

When we leaven a lump of dough, we mix the leaven throughout, to ensure that it works the more quickly, but this is not strictly necessary. Just put a little leaven anywhere in the lump, and it will eventually work its way throughout, and leaven the whole. Leaven is evil, whether practical or doctrinal, and a little of it pollutes the whole mass. “A little leaven leavens the whole lump”—-a little leaven which is allowed, that is. Allow a little leaven in the church, and it will infect the whole congregation, or the whole denomination. The one thing which we are to learn from the fact that “a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump” is the absolute necessity of discipline. It is an absolute necessity to have standards in the church, and to enforce them, by excluding every person who will not submit to them. This is discipline, and wherever men are soft and lax about enforcing standards and excluding offenders, the leaven will work—-and work—-and work—-and work—-until the whole mass is leavened. The only thing which will stop the working of leaven is the fire, and the only thing which stops the working of leaven in the church is judgement.

Now there are two kinds of leaven. There is moral evil, and there is doctrinal evil, and the principles set forth here apply to both of them. In the first scripture in which Paul says “A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump,” the leaven is moral evil. There was a man in the church living in fornication with his father’s wife, and the church was doing nothing about it. That is, they were doing nothing effectual about it. They were no doubt praying about it. Some of the bolder spirits among them had likely reproved the offenders. There were probably some intentional references to fornication in some of the sermons preached among them. But none of this was anything to the purpose. The leaven was still working, and Paul is so bold as to inform them that it would leaven the whole lump.

Not necessarily that they would all become fornicators, though some of them doubtless would. An evil example always bears evil fruit, and when an evil example is allowed in the church—-winked at by the good and the godly—-its evil fruit will be so much the greater. But even those who never would become fornicators themselves were yet defiled by allowing a fornicator among them. “Ye are puffed up,” says Paul. Though not fornicators themselves, they were yet in no very good state of soul, and the longer the leaven was allowed unchecked among them, the worse the state of their own souls must necessarily become—-the more of principle they must sacrifice, and the more insensitive they must become to evil.

Paul therefore comes forward with one simple and radical cure—-discipline. “Purge out therefore the old leaven.” (Verse 7). “Put away from among yourselves that wicked person.” (Verse 13).

Now, that we may understand the nature of leaven, mark who it is we are to put out. “That wicked person.” We are not to put out good men if they happen to displease us. We are not to be putting people out of the church for every little offense—-or for things which are no offense. To put a man out of the church for shaving off his beard—-or for not shaving off his beard, depending upon whether you are a Baptist or an Anabaptist—-is discipline gone to seed. Evil is to be put away, not innocence, nor even ignorance. Any real wrong done becomes a matter of discipline if the perpetrator will not repent. “If thy brother shall trespass against thee,” and “if he will not hear thee,” “tell it unto the church, but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican.” (Matt. 18:15-17). The nature of the trespass is immaterial—-only it is presumed that it is a real trespass, and such as the whole church will recognize as a real trespass. The seriousness of the sin is not in question, but the impenitence of the sinner. The man who refuses to repent of a small sin is just as impenitent as he that refuses to repent of a great one. No leaven is to be allowed in the church. “A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.” We are not to expect perfection of anybody, but we are to expect holiness, and a right spirit in the pursuit of it. A little root of bitterness springing up will defile many. I have seen gossiping tongues all but destroy the work of God in a whole congregation, spreading suspicions and bitterness among all who would hear them. The tongue of the slanderer is no more to be allowed in the church than the thief or the adulterer.

But here I must address one popular misconception. Whenever we use the term “church discipline,” people immediately think of putting out offenders, but discipline does not consist merely of excommunicating the incorrigible, any more than law enforcement consists solely of hanging murderers. Discipline consists of setting standards and enforcing them. Putting out offenders is the least of our business. Discipline begins at the other end, with keeping out the unholy and the insubordinate. It is a great deal easier to keep leaven out, than to purge it out. In this day when every disgruntled soul who dislikes the discipline in one church—-or dislikes some little quirk in the preacher—-is accustomed to leave that church and find another, we ought to be extremely careful about whom we receive. Most of those disgruntled souls are trouble-makers. They ought to be met at the door with a rebuff. But most of the churches are more concerned about increasing their numbers than they are about maintaining their purity, and they take them in with open arms. They are taking in leaven, and making bitter work for themselves for the future.

Now if it is the lack of discipline in the other church that brings the discontented soul to your doors, there may be more hope of him. But still a careful inquiry ought to be made, and made of the other church, which he has left. These trouble-makers will of course profess that the other church was unspiritual, false in doctrine, weak in morals, etc., etc., but wounded pride or personal bitterness may be the actual reasons for their leaving. Yet it is often by speaking against the other church, and praising your own, that such a trouble-maker wins his way. He thus begins his leavening work before he gets inside the door, by appealing to your personal or sectarian pride. Yet you give him the right hand of fellowship, only to find that in another year it will be your church which he has left, your church of which he is speaking evil, and another which he is praising. Well, let him go, and be glad he is gone, and you may count yourself very fortunate if he has not left the leaven at work behind him—-if he has planted no roots of bitterness among you, which will yet defile many.

Now I would guess that only the ignorant and the trouble-makers will dissent from these things. Most Christians have little difficulty about purging out moral evil. At the same time, many of them are strangely soft when it comes to doctrinal evil. Yet Paul’s statement that “A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump certainly applies to doctrine in Galatians 5. “This persuasion,” he says, “cometh not of him that calleth you. A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.” And when the Lord charged his disciples to “Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees,” he gave them to understand “that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.” (Matt. 16:6 & 12). The leaven of evil doctrine will work as surely, and do as much hurt, as the leaven of moral evil. Are we then to tolerate doctrinal leaven, while we purge out practical leaven?

Certainly not. There is every bit as much need to purge out evil doctrine as there is evil living. But how is this to be done? Certainly, in the first place, by teaching the people better. But what if that is ineffectual? What if, in spite of all of your teaching, certain persons remain unconvinced, and hold their evil doctrines still? Then put them out of the church. The Lord explicitly takes to task the angel of the church at Pergamos for failing to do so. “But I have a few things against thee, because thou hast them there that hold the doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balac to cast a stumblingblock before the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed unto idols, and to commit fornication. So hast thou also them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hate.” (Rev. 2:14-15). The angel’s sin is that he has them there who hold these doctrines. He has them in the church. The Lord does not say he has any who are guilty of these practices, but he has those who hold these doctrines. He calls upon him to repent, and of what? Of having them there who hold these doctrines. It is taken for granted that to repent of this will mean to put them out.

Meanwhile it is plain enough that the leaven had already begun to work. “Thou hast there them that hold the doctrine of Balaam.” This is plural. “So hast thou also them that hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans.” What, then? Had they received all of these heretics into the church in a body? Hardly. The evil doctrines had no doubt begun with one man, but they had spread like leaven. Others now held them also, and were no doubt zealously propagating them, as their founder had done.

But suppose they should agree to hold their peace, and keep their doctrines to themselves, should they then be tolerated in the church? Most assuredly not. The Lord does not take this angel to task because the people either taught or practiced those doctrines, but because they held them. The evil of which he was charged to repent is that he had them there who held such doctrines. This was enough to constitute them leaven, and any leaven will do its work. No leaven is to be tolerated. “A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump.”

Leaven, however, must be understood to be doctrine which is actually evil. We are not to exclude from the church every man who cannot pronounce our “Shibboleth.” We grant that every false doctrine contains something of evil. I see a great deal of evil in post-millennialism, in Calvinism, in hyperspirituality, in much of the prevailing form of dispensationalism, and in the very gospel which is commonly preached by Evangelicals. Yet all of these things have been held by good men with good hearts, and surely they are not meant to be put out of the church. It seems to me there is something of another sort in leaven. It does not consist of the mistakes of good men, but of the perverseness of evil men. It is such doctrine as those whose hearts are pure ought to be able to recognize as evil.

Not that very many of the sheep are likely, of their own accord, to do so. This is precisely why it must be purged out, because the sheep will not recognize its evil, but will be carried away by it. But the shepherds and teachers are presumed to have sharper eyes. And mark well, the whole responsibility to purge out this leaven rests upon the angel of the congregation. The Lord charges him with the fault. “I have a few things against thee, because thou hast there them that hold the doctrine of Balaam.” The Lord charges the angel to repent of this. No doubt he is to lead the whole congregation to act with him in it—-and purge out those who will not do so—-but the responsibility lies upon him. Some will dispense with this, and fall back upon their notions about “the action of the Holy Spirit in the assembly.” No doubt the Holy Ghost knows what leaven is, but for all that the assembly may not. The Holy Spirit was present in the assembly at Corinth, and yet there was no action at all, until Paul initiated it from abroad. The situation called for a man of God, to lead the rest of the people, to call them to action, to purge out the leaven. God lays that burden upon the angels of the churches.

But we live in a day in which softness is the rule, a day in which softness is counted a virtue, and in which firm standards are counted “legalism,” or bigotry. Some of the Fundamentalist schools have firm standards, and exercise firm discipline, but a church which does so is an extreme rarity. Certain churches, indeed, pride themselves upon their “high standards.” They preach against television, against immodest dress, and against numerous other forms of worldliness, but they require nothing. They enforce nothing. The spiritual and right-hearted souls in the church submit to the standards which are preached, while the rest of the people ignore them. Spiritually-minded pastors and elders deeply lament such a situation, but they do nothing about it. Their hands are tied, their arms paralyzed. Meanwhile the leaven works. It may not work in a day, or a year. It commonly takes a generation for the whole lump to be leavened. But where will your church or denomination be in twenty years, if the best men among you are powerless to put out the leaven now? The leaven will not die out of its own accord. It will work and grow, until the whole is leavened. “Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump?” This is not a theory, but a fact. “Know ye not?”

Alas, leaven will work and grow even when we are unconscious of its existence. Evil will do its work whether we are able to recognize it as evil or not. In that case we may bear little responsibility for it. But surely we are responsible for the evils which we recognize and yet allow.

The soft churches of this soft age need a baptism with the doughty stuff that Peter Cartwright was made of. Every Fundamentalist preacher ought to read his autobiography, and note well how he handles matters of discipline. He saw its neglect, and knew too well what the inevitable result would be. Indeed, so did a host of the old Methodist stalwarts. They foresaw that a little leaven would leaven the whole lump, and so it did. It was not modernism which destroyed Methodism, but neglect of discipline. It was neglect of discipline which produced the soil in which modernism could take root. It is neglect of discipline which has destroyed churches, schools, and denominations, and it is neglect of discipline which is destroying Fundamentalism before our eyes. The leaven has done so much of its work already that there are few Fundamentalists left who have any proper Biblical standards. Proper standards are commonly regarded as old-fashioned, or “legalistic”—-a mindless term which generally betrays only the wrong-heartedness of him who uses it. But much worse is the fact that the standards which are held are usually not enforced. It is for just such a soft and liberal day as this that Scripture speaks, “Know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the whole lump?”

Glenn Conjurske