Christian Unity

Thanks to pinakidion for pointing out a new effort towards unity in the Restoration Movement. The new site is called Connect 4 Change. The stated goal of the site is:

Connect4Change.net is devoted to providing a place on the Internet especially for Christians from different wings of the Restoration Movement to develop relationships, understanding and trust in order to help each other change and more effectively fulfill the ministry given us by Jesus.

The site founders are soliciting personal profiles from people in various segments of the Restoration Movement, as well as articles on topics such as various church cultures, stories of growth and victory, and other articles examining topics relevant to the Restoration Movement. I encourage folks to visit their site and contribute to the conversation.

General Secretary Gorbachev, if you seek peace, if you seek prosperity for the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, if you seek liberalization: Come here to this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, open this gate! Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall! — Ronald Reagan, Remarks at the Brandenburg Gate, West Berlin, Germany, June 12, 1987

For twenty-six years, the Berlin wall had stood as a symbol of the Cold War. The wall separated people from their immediate families, from their jobs, from their homes. The personal tradgedy and loss was immeasurable. While there were numerous successful escapes across the wall over the years, there were also tragedies as nearly 200 people were killed trying to cross.

On June 12, 1987, in the defining moment of his presidency, Ronald Reagan issued an historic challenge to the Soviet leader to tear that wall down. Finally, on November 9, 1989, the East German government announced that people would be permitted to pass freely between east and west. What followed was a scene of euphoria, of tearful reuninons, a mass celebration unequaled in our times. Weeks of ecstatic celebration were broadcast on television news around the world. It was indeed a great time as the entire world shared in the joy of these events.

The churches of Christ have their own “Berlin walls.” These walls are not made of concrete, steel, and barbed wire. They are not defended with machine guns, but they are tenaciously defended nonetheless. Like that other wall, these walls represent faulty ideology. These walls divide families. They are monuments to sin and folly, and they stand in the way of the mission of the church toward the world. Those walls need to come down.

Those whom God has adopted as children (Gal 3:26-27) should not be divided over sincere differences of opinion on lesser matters. Differing opinions are inevitable among fallible humans. God made us, and He knows what we are made of. God has made it abundantly clear what are the essential elements for unity (1 Cor 15:1-11, Eph 4:1-6). We have no right to erect walls of division over other issues.

What euphoria, what celebration will be seen among the children of God when these walls come down! What joyful reunions! What a great news story for the world, as the Lord’s prayer for unity finally comes to fulfilment in the church! What a great day for belief and conversion that will be!

Brothers and sisters in Christ, if you seek to do the will of God, if you seek to win the world for Christ, if you seek to show the love of Christ to those who, like yourselves, have been saved by grace, then come here to this gate. Brothers and sisters, for the sake of our Lord and his church, open the gate! Brothers and sisters, tear down those walls!

My wife and I have been travelling in Virginia and Maryland for the past few days. It was good to have dinner with my newly married daughter and son-in-law, and to visit the midweek service at the Mongomery County Church of Christ in the Baltimore area, where they will be members. We also took an opportunity to visit the Sunday services of the Timberville Church of Christ in the north Virginia mountains, about forty minutes from the condo where we were staying. Those were two very different groups culturally, but with all of the most important things in common. We had a delightful time with both congregations.

My online activities have been curtailed for the past week as a result of my travel. I hope to get some time this weekend to catch up.

Some of the most popular articles on this site are in the “Past Series” box on the right side of the screen. (You might have to scroll down a bit to see it, depending on your font settings). I thought it would be worthwhile to provide a brief introduction to these sets of articles so that people who have come along more recently will know about them.

1) Comments on the 13 Propositions of Thomas Campbell

In 1809, Thomas Campbell wrote a monumental document calling for unity among all believers in Christ. That document is known as the Declaration and Address, and is perhaps the most important man-made document in Restoration Movement history. The central points of the document are captured in thirteen propositions, or principles, all soundly based on scripture, which Campbell believed could bring about unity among the believers. As the first series on this site, the articles examine each of the thirteen propositions, with the benefit of almost 200 years of subsequent history, to see what can be learned about the way forward.

2) Comments on Restoration Hermeneutics

As the Restoration Movement became established, a definite set of rules emerged for interpretation of scripture. These rules were concerned with Commands, Examples, and Necessary Inferences (CENI), as well as understanding what is implied by the Silence of the Scriptures on various topics. This series of blog articles examines these hermeneutic rules and shows some of the strengths and pitfalls of the approach.

3) Scriptures, Creeds, and Sand Creek

As the Restoration Movement moved through its second half-century, controversies around the Silence of the Scriptures began to divide the movement. This series of articles begins with a look at Luther’s Sola Scriptura principle, which was a central concept in Campbell’s Declaration and Address. It then traces the fracturing of the Restoration Movement, essentially over controversies about how those scriptures should be understood. In many places, but very notably and especially at Sand Creek, doctrines derived from inferences and silence led to many divisions, beginning in the late 1800’s and continuing through the 1900’s. The series of blog articles concludes with an attempt to identify the cause of the problem and to suggest a better way forward, taking an approach to Sola Scriptura closer to that envisioned in the thirteen propositions of Thomas Campbell.

4) Comments on Romans

The book of Romans is a marvelous treatise on the eternal plan of God for mankind. It is rich in layers upon layers of deep truths about man’s need for salvation, God’s rich gifts to meet that need, and the appropriate way in which we should respond. Throughout the book is a thread addressing Jew vs Gentile issues, calling on the two groups to accept one another and to stop passing judgment on one another. This series is a short commentary on the book, attempting to show what God’s overall plan for salvation means for relationships and unity within the body of Christ.

If you have not had a chance to read some of these, maybe this overview has stimulated your interest. I hope the articles cause people to think unifying thoughts and perhaps even to take unifying action, promoting the unity of believers for which Jesus prayed.

An interesting series of articles and the subsequent comment threads at Mike Cope’s blog have had my attention for the past few days. Those who know me or read here regularly know that I am not a fan of the position taken by the book Mike was reviewing, a position which Mike apparently shares. Not surprisingly, I found myself almost alone supporting the opposing viewpoint in the discussion that followed each article. A few observations I take away from the experience:

1) Most of the people who posted comments, although they disagreed with me, were kind and respectful. I appreciate that.

2) It is hard to know when to stop defending a minority position and to work for peace. It is even harder actually to stop making a defense of your position. As a visitor on someone else’s blog, I don’t want to overstay my welcome. Up to a point, the opposing viewpoint makes the discussion more interesting. Beyond that point it can become obnoxious. It is hard to know when you’ve crossed that line. I hope I didn’t.

3) I don’t know Mike personally, but I doubt he would support all the positions people took based on what he wrote. A lot of the conversation seemed to go farther than Mike’s own commentary. A few gave at least some recognition to the reasonableness of the minority view, but others appeared reluctant to do so. In opposing the minority view, some were questioning the authorship and authority of scriptures. One poster was prepared to apply principles in areas that would not only give women the same roles as men, but would eliminate prohibitions against homosexuality. I suspect even more people thought things like that but did not post about it.

I hope Mike will clarify what he was advocating and what he was not advocating. This is the kind of discussion that can lead to rumors, exaggerations, and unnecessary division. If Mike does not correct some of the things said on his blog, some people might (perhaps unjustly) consider him responsible for supporting those positions. At least, he may be seen as encouraging those who go to those extremes.

As one who is zealous for taking down walls in the name of unity, I think we need to be careful not to inflame those who see things differently from us. We need to be careful not to pour gasoline on a smoldering fire. It takes a lot of work, and humility, and self control, to maintain unity amidst a diversity of strong opinions.

Thanks to Phil Spadaro at Restoration Unity for pointing out the new article titled “Travelling the Unity Road” at the Christian Standard website. The article is by Victor Knowles, founder and president of Peace On Earth Ministries (POEM). I wrote about POEM previously here.

It’s very encouraging to hear what is going on in various places to further the cause of unity among Restoration Movement groups. People are discovering that, even when we see differently on some issues, we can work together in our areas of agreement. And the areas of agreement are usually very substantial.

It was particularly encouraging to me to learn that the Providence Road Church of Christ in Charlotte is actively engaged in these efforts. I was a member of that church for five years in the late 1970’s and early 1980’s, and still have dear friends in that church. Knowing those fine Christians as I do, it is no surprise to me that they are actively working for the unity of believers.

Today was a great Father’s Day in my house. I am a very proud father of two daughters. My older daughter was married this past December, and the younger will be married by this time next weekend. The wonderful thing about today was having both daughters and my current son-in-law together to share the afternoon with my wife and me. We watched old and “incriminating” family movies, cooked steaks on the grill, and played games together. We talked about our lives now and about how each of our futures is unfolding. We laughed together as we remembered old times. This is what a Father’s Day should be.

Opportunities like today will be much less frequent from this point forward, after I give my youngest daughter away next weekend and as she continues the next phase of her life in another state. So today was a precious time in our house. We live in a culture where families are expected to scatter when the children leave the nest. I am not entirely happy about that. I am delighted with the unfolding of their adult lives, but I ache from the thought of only seeing my youngest daughter a couple of times a year for the foreseeable future.

One of the delights I find in my daughters is how much they love each other. They are two years apart in age, and have been best friends from the beginning. They are two very different people, but with so much in common. I love to see them loving each other. I pray that the distance and time will not lead them to drift apart. I hope they will make the effort to remain close. I believe they will.

God describes his church as a family. He is the Father and we are the children. I think our heavenly Father is pleased when his children love each other. I can relate to that, in a personal way. We Christians may have our differences, but we are fundamentally the same. I pray that Christians will make the necessary efforts to build tight relationships and to remain close despite our differences. We are family. Let’s love one another like a close family should.

My daughter and her husband recently brought to my attention a sermon entitled Discern Your Doctrine (available online here) . The sermon was delivered at a recent ecumenical, charismatic conference for singles and young marrieds. The speaker was Mark Dever, minister of the Capitol Hill Baptist Church in Washington, DC. He addressed a very important question for Christians who seek unity: How far can we go in extending fellowship to people with whom we have doctrinal disagreements?

I want to focus in on a few key points in the message. I think he shared some insights that can be very valuable to us in the Restoration Movement as we wrestle with our own doctrinal divisions.

Considering the boundaries of cooperation and fellowship, he asked the question, “What are we together for?” His point was that the degree of unity that is required depends on the reason for being together. Feeding the homeless together requires a different level of doctrinal unity, than getting married, for example. Or, you could pray together with someone with whom you have a doctrinal disagreement that would prevent you from being members of the same church. Agreement needs to extend to the area in which you are cooperating, but not necessarily to all other areas.

To apply this to the Restoration Movement groups, perhaps a non-instrumental church could cooperate with an instrumental church in activities that do not include instrumental music.

The central question in the message was, “What must we agree upon?” Dever acknowledged that this is a dangerous question. One might be tempted to ask, “What can I get away with?” That is the wrong approach. We need to care about what is true, and we must seek to understand truth and to respond appropriately to it. But not all errors are of equal consequence. On a few topics there must be agreement, in order to accept one another as Christians. Disagreement on some other topics may not prevent full fellowship.

Dever proposed four questions to test whether a truth is essential to Christian fellowship:

1 – How clear is it in scripture?
2 – How clear do others think it is in scripture, especially respected people?
3 – How near is it (or its implications) to the gospel?
4 – What would the effect be in practice if we allow disagreement in this area?

He gave several examples to illustrate the use of these tests.

The millennium (Rev 20:2,5). The 1000 year reign is a much debated topic among Christians.
1 – How clear is it in scripture? It is mentioned in two verses, in a context that does not answer all the disputed questions.
2 – How clear do others think it is in scripture, especially respected people? Commentators disagree. There are many differing opinions among people who have studied the subject in depth.
3 – How near is it (or its implications) to the gospel? A person can believe in the essentials of the gospel and respond appropriately without knowing the correct interpretation of the thousand years.
4 – What would the effect be in practice if we allow disagreement in this area? Many churches have members with varying understanding of this topic, with no harmful effect on the church.

Prayers for the dead (Catholic practice) Dever said that this practice contradicts salvation by faith alone, since someone else’s prayer is supposed to change the destiny of a person’s soul. I would present the argument differently, but the essence of my objection is similar. The practice of praying for the salvation of the dead suggests a fundamental error in understanding of the gospel

Egalitarianism vs complementarianism – This was new terminology for me, but basically it addresses the woman’s role in the church. Dever’s point was that accepting women in leadership of the church contradicts direct teaching of scripture, implying that the Bible is not the ultimate authority. So compromising on a topic like this would undermine the authority of scripture and thus the entire framework of Christianity. He illustrated with a comment from a paedobaptist: “If there were a teaching in 1 Tim 2 saying ‘I do not permit an infant to be baptized’ then we would not have any disagreement on the subject of infant baptism.” Dever’s point was that we do have such a teaching on the subject of women in authority. And he indicated that the history of the past 50 years does not give any reason to believe that those who compromise on the role of women would not continue to compromise on other topics until the doctrine of the church looks just like the philosophy of the world.

Cooperation in evangelism – Dever said that his congregation had been asked to perform evangelistic training for a campaign which would send new converts to whatever self-described Christian church was nearby regardless of doctrine. Dever and the other leaders of his congregation declined to provide the training because they could not in good conscience send new converts to churches where they would be taught what they consider to be false doctrine.

In the latter part of the sermon, Dever talked about how to disagree well. He described a unique type of debate in which he and his opponent each sought to write sentences on the board, with which he believed his opponent would agree. The exercise was quite effective at bringing the two to a better understanding and respect for each other. That seems to be a much better approach to dialog than the more traditional hard-hitting debate, which too often presents a caricature of the opponent and his beliefs, leading to less respect rather than more, and a poor understanding of one another.

As I listened to the sermon, I was struck by the similarity of many of his points to the message of Jack Reese in The Crux of the Matter. There are certain doctrines that are central to the gospel, on which there must be agreement in order to have Christian unity. Then there are other doctrines that are farther from the core, on which it is not essential to have complete agreement in order to have unity.

I’m sure there are some core differences between many ecumenicals and many in the Restoration Movement, which would hinder fellowship between these groups. However within the Restoration Movement, I believe we can learn some things from Dever’s message that can help us to overcome some of our division over less central issues. And perhaps through respectful dialog we can come to agreement even with those outside the Restoration Movement on topics like conversion which are so close to the core of the gospel.

opinion: a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty. (Dictionary.com)

I have a lot of opinions. I like my opinions a lot. I instinctively want to defend my opinions, and to persuade others to my point of view. I don’t like changing my opinions, and so I don’t do that very often (maybe not often enough). I will readily admit that I am probably wrong about some of my opinions. But when you pin me down on a particular opinion, I generally won’t think that opinion is one of the ones I am wrong about. After all, if I thought it was wrong, I wouldn’t hold that opinion. I am so sure of some of my opinions that I consider them to be facts.

I instinctively like people who share my opinions. The more of my opinions a person shares, the more I tend to like that person. I find it harder to be close to someone who does not share my opinions, especially on important subjects.

The church is fertile ground for forming opinions. Many of our interpretations of scripture rest on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty. These are the topics that Paul calls “disputable matters” in Romans 14:1. Perhaps these ideas are reasonable inferences from scripture, but there is enough ambiguity to leave the conclusion uncertain. We have a tough time admitting that our position is merely opinion, and not the indisputable doctrine of Christ. We need to be reminded that we are fallible.

Differing opinions in the church have led to division after division, precisely because people did not follow Paul’s instructions in Romans 14. People have not been willing to give unity with their brother priority over their opinions. People have clung to their perceived rights, to the detriment of their brothers and sisters who hold a different opinion. People have promoted their opinions, lobbying people to one side or another of some controversial issue. As a result, things that need not divide brothers have ended up dividing them.

There are times when we need to keep our opinions to ourselves (Rom 14:22) Sometimes I allow myself to be drawn into online discussions that turn into quarrels. Quarrels are not constructive, especially in public. Arguing about a controversial subject in public can be like shouting “Fire!” in a crowded theater. It feeds the unspiritual side of our nature. It tends to divide rather than to unite. These are the very times when we need to keep our opinions to ourselves.

The Restoration Movement needs to learn this lesson. We need to be full of grace and humbly to recognize that we may be wrong about a thing or two. We must live by our understanding of scripture, but we must recognize that our brothers who disagree with us must also live by their own consciences. It is before God that they stand or fall, and God is able to make them stand.

I have lived long enough to learn that I will never persuade everyone to my opinion on any subject, let alone all subjects. I have decided that my energies would be better spent bringing people together rather than promoting my opinions. May God help me to be a peacemaker rather than a debater.

We do not ask them to give up their opinions–we ask them only not to impose them upon others. Let them hold their opinions, but let them hold them as private property. The faith is public property; opinions are, and always have been private property. — Alexander Campbell

Enumerating all the doctrinal causes of division among believers in Jesus would be a colossal task. Divisions exist over conversion doctrine, communion doctrine, predestination vs free will, eschatology, church governance, and a host of other issues. More fundamentally, there are divisions rooted in differences over the authority of scripture. Intelligent discussion of unity cannot proceed until the authority question is settled.

Authority is one of the most fundamental principles in Christianity. What does it mean for Jesus to be Lord? What does he command? How are we to follow?

There are three broad categories of belief on the authority of the scriptures, found among those who profess to be Christian. First, there are those (eg. Catholics) who hold that the teachings of the church hold equal authority with the scriptures. They maintain that the church’s interpretation of scripture is correct and binding, by definition. And they hold that the average person is not capable of correctly interpreting the scripture to validate the teachings of the church.

A second category of belief holds that some parts of the scriptures are outdated and no longer apply in the modern world. They believe that modern churches have the ability and the right to judge which scriptures are outdated and which still apply.

A third category of belief holds that the scriptures carry the complete and inerrent message of God. This belief maintains that the scriptures carry divine authority over the church in all ages, including the modern day church.

I think the first two categories are seriously flawed.

The first category errs by placing the church on the same level of authority as the scriptures. In Acts 17:11, we learn that the Bereans examined the scriptures to see if what Paul was preaching was true. Even the teaching of the apostle Paul, although confirmed by great miriacles, was not above being validated by comparison to the scriptures. And the ordinary Bereans were commended for examining the scriptures to see if what Paul said was true. Those who examine the scriptures today to verify the teachings of the church, are likewise worthy of commendation. If what is being taught is not backed up by scripture, it has no authority.

The second category errs by placing human reasoning above the scriptures. By judging which scriptures still apply, and which do not, this approach makes human judgment the ultimate source of authority. Step by step, this approach will cause the church to conform to the culture around it. On many familiar and controversial topics, some churches are abandoning clear teachings of scripture to adopt instead the standards of the modern world. In effect these churches have no standard other than their own human reasoning. They will eventually lose their reason for existing, if they have not already.

The last category has to be the starting point for Christian unity. Without a common soure of truth, we will not agree on what is true, even on the most fundamental questions. Unity between Protestants and Catholics cannot occur until there is agreement on the question of authority. Likewise, lack of agreement on the standard is a barrier to unity between the latter two categories.

For those who share the third category of beliefs, there should be great hope for unity. All that is needed is to identify who has been forgiven of sin through Jesus according to the scriptures, and to embrace all such people as brothers and sisters. Then we will proceed toward complete unity, as Paul taught:

Eph 4:11-13 It was he who gave some to be apostles, some to be prophets, some to be evangelists, and some to be pastors and teachers, to prepare God’s people for works of service, so that the body of Christ may be built up until we all reach unity in the faith and in the knowledge of the Son of God and become mature, attaining to the whole measure of the fullness of Christ.

Christian unity does not require agreement or even understanding of every theological question. But it does require a common standard, and a common commitment of living under the lordship of Jesus. If those things are in place, as we are built up through the teaching of the scriptures we will all reach unity in the faith and knowledge of Jesus.