No Creed But Christ

W. Carl Ketcherside

[Page 7]

     The power of a slogan has often been demonstrated. A pithy statement, easily remembered, and frequently repeated may become the watchword of a political or religious party. But it is often true that "familiarity breeds contempt." Rabid partisans may shout words which they cannot define, and the implications of which they reject by their own actions. Circumstances alter cases. It is one thing for a patriot opposing foreign tyranny to cry, "Give me liberty or give me death." It is wholly different thing for a criminal incarcerated behind penitentiary bars to shout these words, punctuated by the angry shaking of his cell door.

     It is no uncommon thing for me to receive letters with our title used at the top of the page as a printed slogan. It should be pointed out, however, that these words may mean different things to different persons. Some, confusing Jesus with the entire gamut of new covenant writings, hide behind the statement to impose their peculiar interpretations upon all and sundry, and demand rigid conformity to their legalistic code as a means of sharing in their "fellowship." Others, who reject the view that the apostles were inspired of God and were divine revelators of His will, employ the same words to assert their utter freedom from any regulation by divine fiat. Indeed, the so-called ultra conservative and the so-called ultra liberal have this in common, that both make the claim of having "no creed but Christ."

     The truth is, however, that both of these operate under false pretence. Strangely enough, though they are poles apart in their philosophies, they are both guilty of the same error, they dethrone the very One whom they profess to place at the apex of their respective systems, and both assume the prerogatives which they contend belong only to Him. The first accomplishes this unenviable end by exalting human interpretation to the level of divine revelation; the second by denying that the divine mind has been revealed unto men by men who were chosen for the task. The first achieves by dilution what the other does by denial. Both are destructive forces in the religious domain, because, in essence, both assume the prerogatives of Jesus, one by becoming a law unto all, the other by becoming a law unto himself.

     The legalist falsifies when he contends he has "no creed but Christ," and the modernist falsifies when he affirms he has "no creed but Christ." The legalist does have another creed; the modernist does not have Christ. Lest we be falsely accused with reference to this last, we hasten to say there is a difference between acknowledging the historicity of Jesus, and the recognition of the Nazarene as the Messiah, or Christ. This latter entails an acceptance of the fact that "what God foretold by the mouth of all the prophets, that his Christ should suffer, he thus fulfilled" (Acts 3:18). The modernist dare not give acquiescence to this in simple faith, so he attempts to explain it away, really explaining himself away from the Christ. P      However, it is toward the other group we propose to direct the burden of this brief essay. Many of our brethren fall into this category, most of them unwittingly. This causes them to deny vehemently the justice of our charge as relates to them. In no sense do we wish to be-

[Page 8]

come unduly censorious. Our strictures upon our present state are made with full appreciation of the difficulty of adhering to a non-sectarian policy amidst the complexities of our current divisions and schisms. The great majority of the brethren are sincere in their anxiety to please the Lord. They have been betrayed by the party spirit. They are victims of inherited feuds which they did not start. But reliance for salvation upon a slogan which we mouth but do not mind, will produce nothing but trouble and despair.

     I do not argue against the validity of the slogan. If by "creed" we mean a basis, or foundation, for unity, then surely we should have no creed but Christ. The apostle says, "For other foundation can no man lay, than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ." The setting, or context, of this majestic principle should be noted. It is contained in that section of First Corinthians in which the holy ambassador is dealing with "the dissensions among you." It represents the answer to the problem of schisms. Paul and Apollos are servants. He who plants and he who waters are equal. They are merely fellow workmen for God. Jesus Christ is the foundation. He is not divided. There is no other basis of unity.

     Jesus Christ is a person. He is a who not a what. We are divided. All must admit this is so. Yet all of us steadfastly claim to be building upon this foundation. There is not a party among us, even the most exclusive and uncharitable, but the adherents will contend that they are building upon this one foundation. All make this boast, yet the more than two dozen warring factions which have grown out of the restoration movement bear eloquent witness to the fallacy of our claims. If we are sincere in asserting that we are building upon this one foundation which was laid for unity, yet we are torn by strife and disunity, it is evident that we are confused as to the identity of the foundation. Here lies the crux of our difficulty. We cannot identify Christ!

     We are not divided over a person. We are divided over things. This is apparent to the most casual thinker. The restoration movement heirs are divided over societies, institutions, instrumental music, individual cups, the state of the fruit of the vine, the nature of the bread, the method of breaking it, classes, literature, and a host of other things. All upon every side of these divisive issues claim to be building upon Christ. But it is not belief in Christ that is the basis of their fellowship at all. It is a position on one or more of the above list of things.

     Regardless of what you believe about Jesus Christ, you must agree with them upon these things, or you are not regarded as a brother. "The brotherhood" in each case is limited to the conformists on the partisan test. Thus we must have as many "brotherhoods" as we have parties. The reason is that we have substituted orthodoxy as to things, for belief in Jesus, as our foundation. We have elevated the what above the who, and by doing so we create a new party and add to the confusion in the religious world every time an honest dissenter arises among us. No one is regarded more of a heretic by the various parties than he who dares to build on the one foundation, Jesus Christ, and upon him alone. Such a man is not "sound" for he will not parrot the party line.

     Whatever is required as a term of admission to your fellowship, or to recognition as a member of your "brotherhood" constitutes your creed. It makes no difference whether it is written down in formal terminology, or if it is simply understood and enforced by mutual consent, it is a creed if a man must subscribe to it to be in good standing with the party. For example, if you refuse to regard and love as your brethren those who have been immersed into the Lord Jesus, but who condone the use of instrumental music in their public worship, then you have another creed than Jesus Christ. One must not only be right about Jesus--the only foundation--but he must concur with you on this other matter. Conversely, if you refuse to regard and love as your brethren those who oppose

[Page 9]

the use of the instrument, that is, if you hate the "antis" as you may slightingly refer to them, then you have another creed than Jesus Christ.

     If you refuse to regard as your brethren those who have classes, and if you un-Christianize all who do not conform to your view on this matter, you have another creed than Jesus. If you have classes but sneer at those who cannot conscientiously have them, if you eliminate them from your "brotherhood" you are laying another foundation. You have another creed than Jesus. You constitute a sect. If you do not regard as a part of "the brotherhood" those earnest children of God who worship where individual cups are used in the Lord's Supper; or if you use such cups and disenfranchise those who feel they must use but one container, then you have another creed than Jesus Christ, and you are an exclusive sect.

     A candid examination of our profession and practice in the past, and a true evaluation of it, would reveal that the expression "No creed but Christ" has become an empty slogan, and those who use it are sounding brass and a tinkling cymbal. We have used the phrase to decoy a creed-bound, weary and tired religious world into a state where they merely substitute a formal creed for an informal one, a written one for an oral one, established and sanctified by partisan tradition. There is a basic error in our present course of thinking. Unless it is corrected we are doomed to continue on the sordid street of strife, and perpetuate contention and confusion.

     We have confused the new covenant writings with the Living Word. We have substituted interpretation of scripture for faith in Jesus. We have made opinions about things, not belief in Him, our foundation of hope and unity. Revelation is divine in origin. It is what God said. Interpretation is human. It is what men think God meant by what He said. The first is an uncovering of the thoughts of the infinite mind. The second is an application of the finite mind to what is revealed, to determine its requirements for ourselves.

     Revelation is infallible, but we have no infallible interpretation. When any man, or any group of men in collaboration, set up their views, opinions or interpretations as the basis of fellowship, they create a human creed. It is useless to condemn the Roman Catholics for claiming to have an infallible interpreter, then proceed as if we have an infallible interpretation. The Roman Catholic believes that when the pope speaks ex cathedra, he cannot err; many of our brethren believe that when they speak they do not err. Editors are no more infallible than the pope. Being in America does not make the difference!

     We should be grateful that God has not made our salvation from sin contingent upon orthodoxy, nor upon conformity to any set of opinions announced as essential by well-meaning, but partisan men. Our salvation is hinged upon faith in Jesus as the Messiah, the Son of God. This is the foundation that has been laid. Other foundation can no man lay as a basis of Christian unity. The folly of attempting it is evidenced by the factions and sects which men have created while making a vain plea for unity. Few indeed can live up to the majestic implications and the tremendous responsibilities entailed in the statement, "No creed but Christ." To do so, one must crucify every inclination toward the party spirit, and must rise above every humanly conceived limiting factor which retards or restricts fellowship in the Spirit. More of us should lift this motto from our letterheads, and transfer it to our hearts.

     It is here that the fearful will ask the inevitable question. Does this mean that one must swallow everything or anything, to secure peace at any price? And it is here the partisan, unable to grasp the significance of the plea we make, will utter such vain charges. But does this mean, for example, that the man whose conscience forces him to oppose individual cups and classes, should stifle his convictions, and as a display of charity, attend worship services and participate in

[Page 10]

that which violates his scruples? Certainly not! Those who affirm this is what we mean or imply, have a veil over their hearts when they read what I write. We are obligated to be true to conscience and conviction. Not for anything would I encourage the humblest one of God's servants to go against his conscience. Then what is meant by my thesis?

It is just this. Regardless of personal views, opinions and interpretations as to the things which divide us, we shall allow none of these to be greater than our relationship in the Son of God. The unifying power of his blood must be superior to the walls men have erected. We must differ as brethren, not as enemies. We must love each other as kindred, not regard each other as aliens. Others are not separated from us, but we are separated from each other. But not one thing which divides is as great as the One who died to unite! Let us really have "no creed but Christ!"