In his epistle to the Ephesians, as perhaps nowhere else, the apostle Paul sets forth the high calling that is ours in Christ Jesus. Formerly dead in trespasses and sins, we were made alive together with Him, saved by grace through faith, made to sit with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus. Now this high calling calls for a corresponding walk. In our former condition we "walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the powers of the air, of the spirit that now worketh in the sons of disobedience"; but now we are exhorted "to walk worthily of the calling wherewith we were called." (Eph. 4:1.) And this worthy walk has certain fundamental characteristics, which the apostle proceeds to unfold in, the portion of the epistle which follows.

      First mentioned among these characteristics is lowliness. This has been described as "the esteeming of ourselves small, inasmuch as we are so." It is not for the Christian to seek to exalt himself, but rather to "walk humbly with his God." "Humble yourselves under the mighty hand of God, that He may exalt you in due time." (1 Peter 5:6.) Then comes meekness, which Mr. Fausset has defined as "that spirit in which we accept God's dealings with us without disputing and resisting; and also the accepting patiently of the injuries done us by men, out of the thought that they are permitted by God for the chastening and purifying of his people." Next the apostle enjoins the kindred qualities: "with [29] long- suffering, forbearing one another in love." Thus with his insistence upon these Christian graces he lays the ground-work for that much-needed exhortation from which is derived the subject of this address: "Giving diligence to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace."

      The unity which is contemplated here is not one which is brought about by mere effort or device of man, by means of mutual agreement, or the formation of some organization or society on a human basis. Rather, it is a unity which flows from the Spirit of God, Who has taken up His abode in the hearts of all true believers. His is the unifying presence throughout all the body of Christ. Yet it is evident that this unity is not to be maintained without conscious effort on our part. It requires earnest "endeavoring," or "giving diligence," to keep it. Such is the intent of the apostle's exhortation, that we should do this very thing. It is therefore of great importance that we give careful consideration to the principles involved.

      The exhortation is given further emphasis by the statement concerning the seven-fold oneness which follows: "There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye were called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is over all, and through all, and in all." First, there is one body. Only one body of Christ, which is His church. And each one of us is a member of this body. "For in one Spirit were we all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether bond or free, and were all made to drink of one Spirit." (1 Cor. 12:13.) The members of the body do not all [30] have the same office. (Rom. 12:4.) "And He gave some to be apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers." (Eph. 4:11.) Yet notwithstanding this diversity of gifts, the body is one in reality; and in the ministrations of these various members there is one purpose, one objective, in view: "For the perfecting of the saints, unto the work of ministering, unto the building up of the body of Christ: till we all attain unto the unity of the faith. unto a full-grown man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ." (12, 13). This unity of the faith is here spoken of as an attainment yet to come; but the unity of the Spirit is something to be maintained now.

      Second, there is one Spirit. This one Spirit God gives to them that obey Him. (Acts 5:32.) "Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit." (1 Cor. 12:4.) And when each follows the leadership of this one Spirit, unity will result. Then there is the one hope of our calling--the blessed hope of the coming of our Lord to receive us unto Himself, the common hope of us all, which is calculated to inspire us to "live soberly and righteously and godly in this present world." Next, there is one Lord, Jesus Christ our savior, the one head of this one body, the One to Whom each one of us owes allegiance. Then there is the one faith, together with the one baptism wherein we all unite in giving visible expression to that faith and thus become members of the one body. And last of all, there is the one God and Father of all. We are therefore all children in one great family; and what a family that ought to be, with all living happily together, keeping the [31] unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace!

      In appealing to the Corinthians not to have divisions among them, Paul put this question: "Is Christ divided?" The answer is clearly implied: "No, Christ is not divided." And as the one man in Christ Jesus we should exhibit this unity to the world. For this Jesus prayed--when in, the shadow of the cross He poured out His soul to the Father in behalf of all believers. "Neither for these only do I pray, but for them also that believe on me through their word; that they may all be one; even as Thou, Father, art in me, and I in Thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that Thou didst send Me." A divided state among the followers of Christ discourages belief in Him as the Savior of men. "In unity there is strength" is no less true in the spiritual realm than it is elsewhere.

      From such considerations the importance of maintaining this unity of the Spirit is evident. But there have grown up some erroneous ideas concerning its character--concerning what constitutes the true ground of fellowship among Christians. One of these which seems more or less prevalent in our day is that true unity requires uniformity at all points, that it cannot allow of any differences at all in our understanding of Bible teaching. The logical consequence of such an attitude is separation on the ground of any sort of divergence of view and the dividing of the great body of believers into numerous small groups. But those who hold to the idea that uniformity is necessary to unity are not altogether consistent; for surely among those with whom they are in fellowship there will be found, if freedom of [32] expression is permitted, some differences of opinion on scriptural questions.

      Nor did Christians see everything alike in New Testament times. Uniformity did not exist among them, nor was it required. Even Paul and Barnabas--two good men, both deeply consecrated to the Lord, full of the Holy Spirit, zealous in the preaching of the gospel--had a disagreement. The story is a familiar one: Barnabas proposed taking John Mark with them on, their second missionary journey; Paul objected. We have no doubt that each sincerely believed that he was right. Each stood his ground and earnestly contended for his judgment. Evidently the matter was argued with considerable heat; for the dispute is described by the historian as a "sharp contention." It appears that neither was willing to yield. But they found a happy solution of the difficulty. "Barnabas took Mark with him, and sailed away unto Cyprus; but Paul chose Silas, and went forth.  . . to Derbe and to Lystra." They simply divided the proposed territory between them; and it may well have worked out for the good of all concerned, turning out "rather unto the progress of the gospel."

      Now why did the Holy Spirit have this incident recorded? We may not be able to understand the reasons fully; but we can certainly see a good purpose that it serves. It shows us that good men can have their differences, even in regard to the work of the Lord. and yet find peaceable and satisfactory solutions, continuing to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. For there is nothing in the record to suggest that these men, harbored in their [33] hearts any bitterness or resentment toward one another. Indeed, in later years Paul mentioned Barnabas (1 Cor. 9:6) as a sacrificing co-worker in the preaching of the gospel. To us it is unthinkable that either of these men ever regarded the other with anything less than the highest esteem as a brother beloved in Christ. For so it should be. This truth needs to be deeply impressed upon the hearts of God's people everywhere, that brethren can, because of difference of judgment, go their separate ways without becoming alienated one from another.

      In the church at Rome a difficulty had arisen. "One man hath faith to eat all things; but he that is weak eateth herbs." Thus the apostle describes the situation. It is not easy to overcome deeply ingrained impressions of youth. The Jewish Christian had been brought up to look with abhorrence upon the eating of the flesh of unclean animals. It was expressly prohibited in the law given by Jehovah at Mt. Sinai. Upon becoming a Christian, lie might be slow to grasp the truth that "nothing is unclean of itself"--that in Christ there is no such restriction. So he would be unable to partake of such food with a clear conscience. Even Peter, some years after Pentecost, hungry on the house-top at Joppa, recoiled from the thought of eating flesh of the animals in the sheet let down from heaven. "Nothing common or unclean," he protested, "has ever entered my mouth." On the other hand, there were some who had come to a full understanding of the liberty that is in Christ Jesus. These could eat any sort of meat without pang of conscience.

      Such a situation could easily give rise to trouble. [34] The one who eats might "set at nought him that eats not." For was he not in error? Paul himself clearly gives answer to this question when he says, "I know, and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus, that nothing is unclean of itself." And should we fellowship those in error? In this instance Paul's answer is: "Receive him." And what of the non-eater's attitude toward the one who can freely eat? "Let not him that eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him." So in the discussion of this question in the fourteenth chapter of the Roman letter this point stands out clearly and emphatically: there can and should be full fellowship in spite of such a difference; the unity of the Spirit can be maintained even though there is no uniformity of judgment in regard to matters of this kind.

      The Christian life is, or should be, a life of constant growth--of continual progress in the knowledge of the word of God. The beginner, the babe in Christ, indeed has real faith in his Lord; but in most instances his knowledge of divine truth is very limited. Often there are many erroneous notions which should be laid aside, as well as many new truths to be learned. All this cannot be accomplished in a day. But as he thus advances in his study of the word he finds himself attaining new heights; he discovers that in a number of respects he has changed, for growth necessarily implies change. I am not the same man now that I was forty years ago. Much of the teaching that I then accepted as true I have been compelled to give up. Much that I now regard as precious truth I did not so much as dream of in those days. Yet I am sure that the man I now am [35] could fellowship the man I was then. Surely there are today many who are as I was at that time. Shall I turn away from them? That I must do, if uniformity in all things is essential to fellowship. The fallacy of such an attitude is apparent. Rather, I should in lowliness and meekness bear with them, patiently endeavoring to lead them to higher ground of divine truth, all the while earnestly striving to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.

      Never has there been complete uniformity among us. Differences there have always been; and where there has been unity, it has existed, not because all saw alike on every detail of Christian doctrine, but in spite of the fact that there were divergent views among them. During the early part of the past century two religious movements began, one under the leadership of Barton W. Stone, the other under the leadership of the Campbells. Although unknown to each other, these two groups had a common objective: the restoration of simple, unsectarian New Testament Christianity. But, when later they discovered each other, they learned that there were also a number of differences between them: and for some time it was a question whether they would therefore be able to unite. However, they found that they were one on fundamentals of the faith and that their differences were not such as to justify withholding fellowship from one another; and on that basis they were happily and effectively (and scripturally) united in the work of the Lord. In our day many controversies have been waged--sometimes fiercely; and that without disruption of unity. An instance of this was the controversy over the "re-baptism" [36] question, which at one time assumed rather serious proportions; but brethren have been known to work and worship together in harmony even when they did not see alike on this issue.

      Moreover, it is impossible to have uniformity except at the price of personal liberty of investigation and expression. We cannot get away from the fact that there is ever the tendency to be influenced by past teaching and experience; and these differ widely among a considerable number of people. Some are gifted with greater ability of comprehension than others. If each one studies the Bible for himself (as indeed all should do), disagreements are inevitable. The experiences of the past, as we have already seen, furnish abundant proof of this. The only way, then, to make all fit into the same groove is to surrender this liberty. There must be a dictatorship in the church--a pope or council--to decree just what is to be believed and taught. There must be no questioning of any such authoritative decision concerning the meaning of any passage of scripture. If precious truth is withheld, there is no recourse. That would indeed be a semblance of unity; but it is not the unity of the Spirit.

      It is this sort of unity that prevails in the church of Rome. Dissent from the opinions handed down by "The Church" is not to be tolerated. If the reading of the Bible is permitted, it must be done in the light of authoritative comments and explanations. During the middle ages multitudes suffered torture and death for refusing to submit. Then came the Reformation, with its appeal from pope and council to the Word of God. Protestantism gained the [37] ascendancy in many countries of Europe and was extended across the ocean. At the price of blood and suffering a considerable measure of freedom was won; men at long last obtained the right to search the scriptures for themselves as they had not been permitted to do for centuries past.

      But with the coming of this right a new problem arose: How to exercise this liberty of personal investigation and expression and at the same time maintain unity among themselves. For the most part they failed to solve the problem. Consequently Protestantism soon broke up into many conflicting groups. The same problem confronts us today. Can we have both liberty and unity? If not, which shall we choose? Without hesitation we answer: Give us freedom. For we cannot surrender our right to search for truth and to tell others what we find in the Word of God. This is vital; it must be preserved at all cost. But there should be no necessity for such a choice. There is a solution--a scriptural solution--of the problem, if we will but seek it out and apply it.

      It should perhaps be said here, in order to avoid misunderstanding, that where essential truths are involved, the acceptance of which is required for salvation, there cannot be true unity apart front uniformity. I cannot walk with one who denies the fundamental facts of the gospel: that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; that His blood, shed on the cross, takes away sin; that He was raised from the dead. Likewise if essential steps have not been taken, or if fellowship with another involves taking part in an act believed to be wrong, the proper course is separation. Nor are we considering church [38] discipline on moral grounds. (1 Cor 5.) We are speaking of differences that arise among those who have confessed their faith in the one Lord, who have obeyed the gospel, who have been bought by the blood of the Lord Jesus. Such are members of the one body; how can they keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace?

      In seeking an answer to this question, it will be well to inquire briefly into the chief cause of disunity. When difficulties arise, it is usually said that they are brought about by this or that teaching. The general impression seems to be that divisions are almost always caused by differences in regard to scriptural teaching. We believe that this is a mistake. To be sure those differences are there; but it is our conviction that in almost every case the real reason lies deeper--that if we but scratch the surface we will find selfishness, jealousy, envy, bitterness, a factional spirit. etc. Those who are moved by such propensities will naturally seek justification for their evil course; and most likely they will be able to find a pretext in some belief or teaching that they can label as false. And if the idea prevails that uniformity is always necessary to unity, to bring about the desired separation is easy.

      It is in the first epistle to the Corinthians, written by Paul to a church in which there were contentions, litigations, jealousy, disorderly conduct, that we find the answer to our question. It is the more excellent way of chapter 13. The one thing that is needful more than anything else is love--the love that is patient and kind, that is not jealous or boastful, not arrogant or rude. It is love that "does not [39] insist on its own way," that is not irritable or resentful; that "does not rejoice at wrong, but rejoices in the right"; the love that "bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things." (Vs. 4-7, Revised Standard Version.) I may be ever so gifted, ever so "orthodox," ever so liberal--speaking in tongues of men and angels, knowing all mysteries and all knowledge, bestowing all my goods to feed the poor--but if love is lacking, I am nothing. It is love that "covers a multitude of sins," that enables us to overlook a brother's faults and to bear with his infirmities, that helps us to deal kindly and gently with another in, his errors. Love is the tie that binds Christians together in the unity of the Spirit. [40]

[LM 29-40]