What does it mean to be a member of Churches of Christ? This question can be answered only if we know why Churches of Christ came into being and what is their witness.

Beginnings.

      Towards the close of the 18th Century and the beginning of the 19th, independent thinkers in Methodist, Baptist and Presbyterian denominations became agitated concerning the faith and practice and the division of the church. All were moved by a desire to be free of human creeds and authority, to make the Bible their only rule, to adopt the simplicity of primitive Christianity, and to exercise the right of private judgment.

      Outstanding among these pioneers were Thomas and Alexander Campbell, father and son, who migrated from Northern Ireland to the U.S.A. early in the 19th century. In 1809 Thomas Campbell, who was a Presbyterian minister, issued a statement known as the "Declaration and Address" which really initiated the movement known as Churches of Christ, or in the U.S.A., the Disciples of Christ. It arose out of a passion for truth and unity. The original intention was to work within existing denominations, but the revolutionary implications of the movement and the human element in all parties resulted in a separate existence about 1830. The growth of Churches of Christ in Great Britain was an independent movement which largely coincided with the development in the U.S.A. and early contacts were made. It was through British migrants that Churches of Christ were planted in Australia in 1846.

The Church is Essentially One.

      The pioneers protested against the division and sectarian bitterness of the church. In the "Declaration and Address" Thos. Campbell asserted that the church is essentially one. This has ever been held among Churches of Christ, not as a matter of opinion but as the clear teaching of the New Testament.

      Christ said: "I will build my church." (Matt. 16:18). In the New Testament the plural word "churches" is used in the congregational sense, that is, of congregations regarded as churches, never in the denominational sense in which it is used today.

      The New Testament figures used concerning the church all imply oneness. The church is the body of Christ. There can no more be two bodies than two Christs. It is also spoken of as the bride of Christ. He is the foundation and head of the church.

      Paul said: "There is one body." (Ephes. 4:4). In 1 Cor. 3 he deplores divisions in the local church at Corinth. What is wrong locally is wrong at any level.

      Our Lord prayed for the oneness of His followers. (John 17:21). Unity is the divine will.

      Unity does not mean uniformity. There may be a diversity of gifts, but the one Spirit. (1 Cor. 12:4). Diversities or differences should not lead to division.

      The New Testament picture of the church in Apostolic times discloses a visible unity. The outside world looking on did not see churches with different names, with different kinds of ministry or practising the ordinances in different ways. This

was in accord with Christ's prayer. When He prayed that they all may be one He went on to say, "that the world may believe that thou hast sent me." The world was to be impressed and led to believe by what it saw - something visible and obvious, not something that had to be argued and explained. There is spiritual unity between Christians of all denominations today, but this is not enough, for the world sees obvious divisions rather than obvious unions.

      There is no question that the reason for the separate existence of Churches of Christ has been to lead in the witness for the union of all Christians. The plea is for the union of Christians, not for the union of churches or denominations as such, although it must be recognised that in practice it is difficult to keep Christians and churches apart in the consideration of matters relating to unions.

The Plan for Unity--Restoration.

      When our pioneers first protested against division and pleaded for unity theirs was a voice in the wilderness. This is no longer so. There is a wide consciousness of the sin of division and a concern far unity among Christian people of many denominations today.

      But we still have a lead to give by way of a plan for unity. We believe there is an approved pattern for unity in the New Testament. Principles, guiding practices and precepts are found in the witness of the New Testament under the approval of Christ and the Apostles. Whatever comes under the authority of this Apostolic pattern must have a place in the church and whatever is out of harmony with this authoritative pattern can have no place in it. Where there are practical matters in the development of the church on which no clear lead is given in the New Testament the law of expediency, that is of practical good sense, may be applied and practical additions, which are not contrary to New Testament principles may be added to the pattern.

      The major principle operating here is the principle of restoration. Abiding and adequate unity will only be achieved by restoring the New Testament pattern in its simple essentials.

The Purpose of Unity--Evangelism.

      Jesus said: "Ye shall be my witnesses" and it is written of the early Christians that they went everywhere preaching the word. The church is under divine imperative to preach the gospel to every creature. If it is not winning for Christ the hand of death is upon it. Thus we have placed a strong emphasis on evangelism.

      This responsibility of witnessing is not confined to a special class, for the doctrine of the priesthood of all believers commits every Christian to the task of mediating God to man.

      In the light of our Lord's prayer that His own may be one that the world may believe that the Father had sent Him, we believe that union is necessary to effective evangelism. Evangelism is the end, union is the means.

The Wholeness of Our Plea.

      As we are true to our plea we do not separate unity, restoration and evangelism.

      We do not major on evangelism to the exclusion of an emphasis on union, nor do we emphasise union to the exclusion of evangelism. We see these as definitely linked together.

      Neither do we present our plea for union without the plan of restoration. We are convinced that true union can only be achieved by restoring the simple pattern approved by the New Testament.

      While it is possible to restore features of the apostolic church in isolation, seeing that the church presented in the New Testament was united we cannot fully restore it without restoring unity. Hence

we do not seek restoration without unity.

      The wholeness of our plea is expressed in seeking unity by way of restoration unto effective evangelism.

      Furthermore, the restoration of New Testament Christianity involves the restoration of the New Testament way of life as well as the New Testament pattern of the church, ministry and ordinances. Christ summed up true religion in the words: "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart and all thy soul and all thy mind, and thy neighbour as thy self." Paul said: "If any man have not the Spirit of Christ he is none of His." "The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance," We are not only called upon to repent and be baptised, but also to take up the cross and follow Him. Correct doctrine and practice of the ordinances etc. is all in vain if we are not Christ-like in spirit and life.

      In pleading for the restoration of New Testament Christianity we commend our plea by manifesting the spirit of Christ and demonstrating the way of love.

      This requires of us that we shall believe in the sincerity of other Christians and as we have confidence in them win their confidence and friendship. It is only as we develop friendship that we can enter into a frank exchange of ideas. We must humbly listen as well as contribute.

      Our presentation should be positive. We accomplish little or nothing by negating and attacking others.

      Co-operation in practical tasks is an essential courtship as a prelude to union.

      Our agreement in vast areas with other Christians makes conference possible, and our disagreements make it necessary.

      "Till you associate, consult, and advise together; and in a friendly and Christian manner explore the subject, nothing can be done." So wrote Thomas Campbell in 1809. and thirty years later his son Alexander wrote: "I propose that a congress of all Protestant parties be convened in some central place, to be composed of delegates from each Protestant party, chosen in ratio to their entire population; and when convened, these men shall take as their rule of union in faith, in piety, and in morality only what is catholic, that is universally accepted by all the parties. That shall be the basis of union. And whatever is not universally accepted as of divine authority shall be considered as schismatical and human." A few years later he wrote again: "So let Protestant parties come together, shake hands, look at each other's warts and wens, until they become familiar with their mutual deformities and feel the need of mutual condolence and sympathy. It is good to come together in a friendly mood."

      Our pioneers are not our authority, but we may be guided by their wisdom and vision as we seek to carry out the will of our Lord. There are opportunities today for conversations and conferences and when these occur at local and wider levels, for youth and older leaders, they should be taken, when with humility, friendliness, courtesy, and tact we should present our witness for truth and unity.

The Meaning of "Catholic."

      We see how Alexander Campbell used the word "Catholic." When this word is used a Roman Catholic or the Roman Catholic Church is thought of, but this is a popularised meaning of the word rather than its true meaning.

      In the second century when Christianity was troubled with heretical sects the idea of the catholic church was stimulated. Over against the heretical sects stood the church which was universal, united, apostolic, authoritative and holy. The idea of the universal church beyond the local congregation or church is seen in

the New Testament so there was a natural and legitimate growth of the doctrine of a universal church. It held a common or universal body of truth and was universal in its extent as against sects which held sectional opinions and which were sectional in their reach. It was the keeper of the Apostolic tradition by which it was determined as against the sects which claimed private revelations.

      Under the Apostolic tradition it was authoritative as against the sects which held private and un-authoritative traditions. This was the catholic church and here we see the true meaning of "catholic."

      A true catholic is one who holds universal, uniting, apostolic and authoritative truth. A truly catholic church is one which lives by universal, uniting, apostolic, authoritative, Christian truth. Churches of Christ have always sought to be truly catholic and have stood by the principle of catholicity.

A Catholic Authority.

      There is an authority which can be and must be accepted by all.

Authority is Crucial to Unity.

      Unity in the business world depends upon all who participate being bound by the same measure of quantities and values. All must adhere to the pound weight, the foot rule and the pound note. If the grocer weighed butter by one weight and the housewife weighed it by another there would be no unity. In all fields some common ground of appeal, some final authority beyond individuals and groups, is essential to unity. It is clear that the question of authority is crucial for Christian unity. Churches of Christ have ever emphasised this point.

The Final Authority.

      All religious people find their final authority in their god. For Christians God is perfectly and finally revealed in Christ. and His mind and will are known to us with certainty and finality in the New Testament. The primary witness to the life, teaching, death, resurrection, ascension and return of Christ, and the meaning of these events is the New Testament. Christ is our final authority and the authoritative witness to Him is the New Testament. This means that our final authority is found in the New Testament.

      Back in 1816 Alexander Campbell preached a sermon on the law in which he made a clear distinction between the covenants. He maintained that Christians are not under the law of the old covenant, but are under the new covenant of grace which was sealed in Christ.

      We do not reject, discard or undervalue the Old Testament, but as the book of the old covenant it is not our final authority. We value it and use it, but we do not accept its conceptions and standards as final. Rather do we turn to the words of the Master: "Ye have heard it was said by them of old time . . . But I say unto you." When we wish to know the way of life, the way of salvation, the doctrine and constitution of the church, the nature of the ordinances, the nature of the ministry etc., we turn to the New Testament and not the Old Testament.

      The authority of the New Testament or the Bible as a whole is not tied up with any particular theory of inspiration. We accept the fact of inspiration because such is claimed and taught by the Bible. However, there is no definite Biblical teaching as to how the whole of the Bible is inspired and different theories have been and are held by members of Churches of Christ. What is common to all is a belief in the fact of inspiration and an acceptance of final authority in the New Testament.

A Catholic Creed.

      "No creed but Christ" is a well-known watchword among Churches of Christ. Our emphasis is on the Person. Christianity is essentially the response of a person to a Person. It is not so much what we

believe but in whom we believe. We do not begin with theories and opinions concerning Him, we begin with Him as a Person, Our emphasis is on devotion rather than definition, on life rather than logic. It is not that we are not quite definite in what we believe about Christ, or that we are without definitions in our general teaching and faith, but when it is a matter of creedal confession we accept Peter's confession "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God" (Matt. 16:16). We cannot accept less than this, we do not require more as a basis of church membership and fellowship, or as a confession of faith unto salvation.

      The Christ of this confession is universal. In spite of many differences as Christians we have this Christ in common.

      We have rejected the use of historical creeds and confessions, not so much because we reject their contents, though we may reject some things in some of them, but because they often contain theological definitions or human explanations which may divide rather than unite. We have also feared the danger that the use of historical creeds may lead to the false notion that intellectual assent to a doctrinal statement may be a substitute for personal allegiance to the Person as divine Saviour and Lord.

A Catholic Name.

      Christ gave Himself for the church; He is the foundation of the church and the head of the church. It is His body and bride. None would deny that the church is Christ's. It is properly described as the Church of Christ. This is the appropriate and scriptural name for the universal church.

      We do not claim to be the Church of Christ. It is a mistake for us so to be described either by our members or others. Often this mistake is made. In the New Testament a local congregation is described as a church. (Cf. Rom. 16:5; 1 Cor. 16:19; Col. 4:15; Philemon 2; Acts 14:23; 15:41.) Congregations or churches are spoken of collectively as churches of Christ or churches of God. (Cf. Rom. 16:16, 1 Cor, 11:16; 1 Thess. 2:14.)

      With the desire to honour Christ, to use a divine name, to follow scriptural usage and to maintain a catholic name we refer to each congregation as a church of Christ. We would regard any congregation of sincere followers of the Lord as a church of Christ whether they call themselves Methodists, Presbyterians or any other name. We know that each of these prides itself on being a church of Christ and would urge them to call themselves explicitly by His name. Other names are sectional and denominational and cannot be used by all. Only Christ's name is catholic. It is universal, unifying, apostolic and authoritative.

      We repeat that we never claim to be the Church of Christ. Each congregation is a church of Christ and when these group together for voluntary co-operation, or when we describe ourselves for the satisfaction of government authorities and others we are collectively known simply as Churches of Christ. In the New Testament when there were no other churches beyond those referred to a small "c" was used for churches. Some among us believe we should use the small "c" when describing our movement today. Others of us believe that seeing there are other churches beyond those specifically referred to as Churches of Christ we should use a capital "C."

Catholic Ordinances.

      With minor exceptions Christians in all ages and in all areas have accepted the Lord's Supper and Baptism as divinely ordained rites. However, there is much division concerning the doctrine and practice of these ordinances. Baptism is very much a source of division.

      In relation to baptism in particular Churches of Christ have appealed

to the principle of catholicity. We would point out that all Christians who practise baptism recognise that immersion has the sanction of the New Testament and all accept the validity of immersion. Here we are on catholic ground. Difficulty arises when some accept alternative acts such as pouring and sprinkling as valid. This constitutes a departure from what is catholic for it is sectional and divisive. We urge that we stay on catholic ground for there we are united. The same is true concerning the candidate for baptism. All Christians admit that there is New Testament authority for believers as subjects for baptism. The immersion of believers is valid. Once more we have a catholic position. When subjects other than believers are accepted for baptism there is a departure from the catholic and an acceptance of the sectional and divisive.

A Catholic Priesthood.

      When Paul provided a list of those who functioned in the work of the ministry he did not include priests in the list. (Cf. Ephes. 4:11-15). In other places those who fulfilled special functions in the church are described as elders or bishops, deacons and evangelists. Christian history for the first two centuries is silent about priests as a separate class in the church. The New Testament indicates that all Christians are priests (Cf. 1 Peter 2:9; Rev. 1:6). The Christian priesthood is catholic, not particular.

A Catholic Spirit.

      In the "Declaration and Address" Thomas Campbell spoke of our brethren of all denominations.

      We do not claim to be the only Christians, but Christians only. Other Christians who are our brethren are to be found in all denominations.

      Our plea for the union of Christians presupposes that there are Christians who are divided from one another and we desire their union in Christ.

      As reformers we are reformed from other Christians, not against them. While the spirit of Christ excludes unbelievers it does not exclude believers. (Cf. Luke 9:45-50.)

      Undoubtedly there are believers of imperfect obedience and we dare not say all the imperfect obedience is outside ourselves. We are committed to share whatever light we have and to receive any light that others may bring to us.

      Meetings, fellowship in worship, witness and work and conferences may, in the words of Alexander Campbell, "tend a little to the cultivation of that Christian and catholic spirit which must precede any union of Christians."

Authority Alone is not Enough.

      The acceptance of a common authority is no guarantee of unity. Many people who walk in different ways and organise themselves in different bodies all own the authority of Christ as found in the New Testament. Differences arise through different interpretations and emphases. These differences result in division unless there is an application of the principle of liberty. Divisions that arise through the acceptance of different authorities can be resolved only by bowing to a common authority, but divisions that arise through different interpretations and emphases based on the one authority can be resolved only by allowing liberty.

In What Things Can There be Liberty?

      If one thinks there can be liberty on a certain point and another does not think there can be, the principle of liberty will divide rather than unite. This means that we must agree on the area of liberty. That is, we must find some way of determining which things can be matters of liberty.

      Within our movement attempts have been made to define the area of liberty in various ways. We have caught up the watchword: "In things essential unity; in things non-essential liberty." We have

also talked about fact and theory, and faith and opinion with the suggestion that there may be liberty in matters of theory and opinion. The difficulty is to know just where to draw the line between essentials and non-essentials, between fact and theory, and between faith and opinion. Probably the best suggestion which guides us in the use of these watchwords and helps us to determine the area of liberty is that when a fact clearly given through the witness of the New Testament is given as a commandment or with the force of a commandment, or when the fact is connected with salvation such is not in the area of liberty. We are commanded to love God and our neighbour; to meet and remember our Saviour. We are called to believe in Christ, to repent, confess and be baptised unto salvation. On these matters there cannot be liberty. There are other matters, however, commonly accepted as facts by Christians but which do not come to us with the force of commandments or are not connected with salvation. Moreover, there are different opinions among Christian as to their importance. Still further, there are many matters on which there are no clearly given facts and Christians are left to theories and opinions. On all these matters there must be liberty.

      There are various Biblical questions on which there are honest differences of opinion. When were certain books written? Who wrote them? What is the nature of certain books? For example, when were the first five books of the Bible written? Did Moses write them or were they compiled later out of material that came down from Moses? Is the garden of Eden story literal or allegorical? Is the book of Jonah literal or allegorical? The Bible claims the fact of inspiration, but how is it inspired?

      There is no clear statement of fact on these matters; neither are they matters connected with salvation nor is there any commandment concerning them. These then must be matters in which there is liberty of opinion.

      Different theories are held in connection with the fact of the Lord's return. Some believe the Scripture teaches that the gospel will usher in a thousand year period of righteousness and peace after which the Lord will return. Others believe the Lord will return and reign on the earth for a thousand year period. Others do not believe the Scripture teaches the doctrine of any thousand year period in connection with the Lord's final advent.

      There are moral and social questions on which we differ. Some Christians believe that it is their duty to participate in certain wars: others believe that as Christians they should not participate in any wars. On both sides there is an honest desire to do the will of Christ. There is no commandment such as, Thou shalt not take part in any war m vice versa. This is not a matter connected with salvation. Hence there must be liberty. We differ but do not divide.

      We find practical matters on which we differ, such as methods of evangelism and making our witness. For instance some believe we should be affiliated with the World Council of Churches, while others think we should not. We have no commandment on such matters. We simply have to exercise our judgment as to how we may best make our witness and promote Christ's cause. Our salvation does not depend upon such matters. We should not then make issues of them. Such differences should never be a cause of division. By the exercise of the principle of liberty we maintain our fellowship in spite of differences.

E. L. WILLIAMS,

is Principal of the College of the Bible, Glen Iris. Author of a recently published book: "A Biblical Approach to Unity."