Joint Participation

W. Carl Ketcherside

[Page 1]

     The original word for fellowship is majestic in its implications. It serves as an illustration of the divine assertion, "My thoughts are not your thoughts." Only the mind of God could have conceived of a community composed of ransomed slaves in which the dignity of each individual is preserved while each esteems others better than himself. Such a society whose members are together not because they are bound to like one another, but are bound together because they all mutually love another person, never entered the most fanciful dreams of the philosophers of ancient Greece or Rome. It could not have been the creation of sinful man. It stands as a monument to the new creation wrought by the Spirit of God.

     But it is a sad commentary on man that he tends to corrupt what he touches. This is as true in the spiritual as in any other realm. The thoughts of God are as high above our thoughts as the heavens are above the earth. Even when they are revealed we frequently find it easier to drag those thoughts down to our level than to exert the effort to attain unto them. It is not that we lack inspiration but we are victims of frustration. Our heads may be in the clouds but our feet still stumble over clods. We admire the beauty of heaven but we are caught in the mire of the earth. "The spirit is willing but the flesh is weak." In our human littleness we reduce that which is sublime to the realm of pettiness. We turn beauty into ashes. In no case is this more obvious than in the current views of many on fellowship.

     Fellowship is the English word used to translate the Greek koinonia, but it is not equivalent to the original. The two are not exact synonyms. The truth is that koinonia is manifested in so many different aspects that no single English word or phrase is adequate to express them. The translators working under the authority of King James faced this difficulty and it accounts for the different words they employed for the original. In the light of this fact it is tragic to see men in our day who pose as scholars and teachers fasten upon some facet of definition and reduce everything to this common denominator in order to justify a traditional position of partisan exclusiveness. Few others are as guilty in this respect as those who are connected with the various segments growing out of the Restoration Movement sparked by the Campbells and their co-laborers. That movement which was begun to unite the Christians in all sects has ended up the most divided one in all the realm of Christendom. This shameful condition is largely the result of a misconception of the glory and greatness of the koinonia.

     It is useless to our purpose to rehearse in detail the sordid catalog of things which are credited with rending the fabric of brotherhood. The heart recoils and the blood chills when we consider the insignificance of some of those things

[Page 2]

which have been allowed to turn the dwelling place of the saints into an armed camp. The saddest feature of all is that those who have split and splintered the body have done so in the belief that they thus serve the purpose of God. They have deceived themselves into thinking that they are contending earnestly for the one faith by sinking a dagger into the one body. How far misguided zeal can lead men is witnessed by the words of Jesus to the apostles, 'The time is coming when anyone who kills you will think he is doing religious service to God" (John 16:2). It is significant that the next sentence is, "They will do this because they know not the Father or me." Thus it is possible for men to go to an extreme in the thought that they are worshipping God, when they know not God or Jesus. They know about them, but there is a great difference in knowing a person until you are identified with him, and knowing about him.

     Fellowship is the togetherness of the saints with God and each other. As relates to God it is based upon sonship, as relates to the community of saved ones it is brotherhood. Basically, it is a sharing experience, a joint participation. And it is at this juncture that many are unconsciously betrayed by the partisan spirit. Fastening upon this definition and regarding it through factional eyes they actually use their interpretation of fellowship to destroy fellowship. Any interpretation of a principle which is so restricted and limited as to destroy the functioning of that principle is subversive of the authority from which the principle originates. Any definition of brotherhood which will ultimately make brotherhood impossible is dangerous indeed.

     Let me give you an example of what I mean. Some of our brethren believe it is not in harmony with the will of God to have Bible classes for teaching of the sacred scriptures. Others think it is perfectly consistent with the will of God to employ such a method. Those who oppose classes and cannot conscientiously participate in a study so conducted are led to the conclusion that those who have classes are not in the fellowship. They do not regard them as being in "the brotherhood" for that term includes only those who do not participate in the class method of teaching. Those who draw such a line of exclusivism are honest but they are deceived by a false concept of fellowship. They conclude that because the word means "joint participation" it cannot exist where there is any difference in thought or practice.

     The same thing holds true in various other areas. Many brethren in the congregations of the saints adopted the use of instrumental music in their corporate worship; others could not conscientiously participate in such a service. The latter concluded that they could no longer regard the former as brethren. They did not consider them as being in the fellowship because they could not participate with them in the practice which they introduced. Since those who used the instruments were considered as no longer in "the brotherhood" they could not be called upon or recognized to lead a prayer or to perform any other function when they came among those who opposed instrumental music. They were looked upon as being in the same category with heathen and publicans. Actually this state exists because of a wrong view of the nature of the fellowship.

     Our English word "fellow" comes to us through the Anglo-Saxon tongue from the Old Norse felagi comrade. This is from the root felag, partnership. Since partnership is a relation between persons the nature and extent of such relation has to be determined and understood or the partnership may be dissolved over a basis utterly foreign to that upon which it was established. Two men enter into a partnership to operate a filling station for the purpose of servicing cars and thus making a livelihood. One believes that a certain type of jack is best adapted to elevating cars while the other believes that another is best. They need not dissolve partnership because of their disagreement over method, for the partnership was not founded specifically to exemplify one method or another. If

[Page 3]

they had entered into partnership to demonstrate the superiority of one type of jack and to promote the sale of that type exclusively, then there would be ground for dissolution over their difference.

     What is the nature of the koinonia of the new covenant? What is it that is shared? Of what are we partakers? Paul states that the divine secret which was not disclosed to previous generations was made known to him by revelation. The purpose of this revelation was "that the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel" (Eph. 3:6). The Good News as a universal proclamation made possible the sharing by men of all nations in the promise made to Abraham and his seed. The magnitude of this disclosure is not yet fully grasped by most of us. It involves the gathering together of all the forces of righteousness and the joint participation in this gathering constitutes the koinonia. "So richly has God lavished upon us his grace, granting us complete insight and understanding of the open secret of his will, showing us how it was the purpose of his design so to order it in the fulness of the ages that all things in heaven and earth alike should be gathered up in Christ--in the Christ in whom we have had our heritage allotted us" (Eph. 1:9-11).

     In view of the tremendous significance of the "open secret" how childish and trivial are the things over which we have striven and disrupted our relationship. It was never the purpose of the koinonia to create rigid conformists. God did not demand that a Jew become a Gentile, nor a Gentile become a Jew, in order to be fellowheirs. He allowed each of these to retain his own individuality. The Jews were still circumcised; the Gentiles remained uncircumcised. It was simply declared that there was no importance attached to circumcision in Christ. In the new relationship it was not important that everyone think alike about circumcision. "For neither circumcision nor the want of it is of any importance, but only a new creation" (Gal. 6:15).

     Obviously there are problems presented in maintaining koinonia where differences are tolerated and permitted. There is ever a tendency for one to attempt to make his fellows over "after his own image." The apostle recognized that there would be conflict of conscience because one who was in the "joint participation" of the Good News might feel that this implied he was a partaker of every divergent view or practice of those within the fellowship. Such a mistaken or warped idea would in its ultimate make partnership impossible. The difficulty was resolved by pointing Out that we seek not conformity but community, and the desired union is one of diversity.

     Different ages and cultures produce variations of the same problem. In the days of the apostles the question of eating meats was a major one and akin to it was that of observing days. We are liable to undervalue the seriousness of these matters because they do not trouble us. All of us think our own difficulties are greater than those of others. Actually these things more seriously disturbed many of the primitive saints than those modern issues which have caused us such grave concern. Paul begins his treatise of "unity in diversity" by a clear statement that brotherhood is not based upon agreement in opinion or interpretation. "Treat people who are overscrupulous in their faith like brothers; do not criticize their views" (Goodspeed). "As for the man who is weak in faith, welcome him, but not for disputes over opinions" (RSV).

     No man is a partaker in that which he disavows or does not sanction. The one who opposed eating meats was not a participant in eating meat simply because he was in the fellowship with those who ate it. The fellowship of the gospel was not conditioned upon eating meats or observing days. Brotherhood is not based upon such matters. "The kingdom of God does not mean food and drink but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit" (Rom. 14:17). By the same token the kingdom of God does not mean cups, classes, colleges, etc., for these are not righteousness or peace or joy. If a

[Page 4]

man is allied with a congregation of saints which has Bible classes he is not in "fellowship" with classes if he does not participate in them. But he is guilty of the party spirit if he presses his scruples to the place that he builds an anti-class party. The same thing is true in reverse. All parties in the religious domain are sinful because they build men around something other than Jesus. "Other foundation can no man lay than that which is laid, which is Jesus Christ" (1 Cor. 3:11).

     Differences in opinion among brethren create problems for those who are nonpartisan and whose love for the brethren is universal. It is possible for one to be free from all men, that is, to be a free man in Christ Jesus. But such a person is obligated by his love to be a slave to all. The minute he allows himself to become a partisan or factional representative he limits his love and the party standard becomes his rallying ground instead of the love of God. One does not compromise his convictions when he freely moves among all and adjusts himself to them. It is only the unbending sectarian or rigid partisan who falsely equates fellowship with endorsement and who cannot be free.

     "Though I am free from anyone's control, I have made myself everyone's slave, so as to win over all the more. To the Jews I have become like a Jew, to win Jews over; to men under the law I have become like a man under the law, though I am not myself under the law, so as to win over those who are under the law. To those who have no law I have become a man without any law--though I am not without the law of God, but under the law of Christ--so as to win over those who are without any law. To the overscrupulous I have become over-scrupulous, so as to win the overscrupulous I have become everything to everybody, so as by all means to save some of them. And I do it all for the sake of the good news, so that I may share (koinonos) in its blessings along with the rest" (1 Con 9:19-23).

     Our joint participation is in "the promise in Christ Jesus through the gospel." It is in the "blessings" of the gospel. Notice the expression "along with the rest." The hope of the gospel is not based upon the things we have allowed to separate, segregate and splinter us. We can share in the promise "along with the rest" even though they entertain ideas which we cannot endorse because of conscientious scruples. We will not be judged by their views. We need to cease to pass judgment upon brethren; we need to cease to despise them. They are brethren and we are obligated to love them. We are not obligated to agree with them but to respect them. "Why do you pass judgment on your brother? Or you, why do you despise your brother? For we shall all stand before the judgment seat of God" (Rom. 14:10).

     It is astounding how little we value our mutual relationship in Christ Jesus. We regard the tie that binds as being so frail and unimportant that it may be severed by the slightest whim of difference. We do not hesitate to "set at nought a brother." We will upon the slightest provocation "destroy the work of God" (Rom. 14: 20). By our boasted knowledge and our vaunted faithfulness we trample underfoot those who do not possess such knowledge. We base our joint participation upon equality in knowledge. The humble child of God who does not see everything as we do is driven forth without mercy. "And so by your knowledge this weak man is destroyed, the brother for whom Christ died" (1 Cor. 8:11). Jesus thought

[Page 5]

enough of him to die for him as he is. Jesus received him in spite of his limited knowledge, wrong concepts and mistaken views. We will not retain him until he is right on "all the essential points of doctrine." And we propose to be the sole judges of what is essential! We set up a standard for fellowship with ourselves which will make it impossible for us to have fellowship with God. If fellowship is based upon equality in understanding and perfection in interpretation how can we be in fellowship with God until we know as much as God? We sign our own death warrant and create our own commitment into hell when we condition fellowship upon such bases. "For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and the measure you give will be the measure you get" (Matt. 7:2).

     Ours is a fellowship (koinonia) of the Holy Spirit (2 Con 13:14; Phil. 2:1). It is a participation in the Spirit. Despite our differences nationally, socially, or otherwise we were made one by the Spirit. Despite those differences we all partake of one Spirit. "For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit" (1 Cor. 12:13). The differences were not erased but the state was changed by the Spirit. Men were still Jews and Gentiles after they were baptized, but they were Jews and Gentiles in Christ. They were still slaves or freemen, but they were slaves or freemen in Christ. They were in one body not because they were all alike but because they were all baptized. They remained in one body not because they agreed upon everything but because they all drank of the same Spirit. It was "the unity of the Spirit" they were commanded to guard in the bond of peace.

     In the body there were those who were "more feeble" (1 Cor. 12: 22), "less honorable" (verse 23), and there were parts "that lacked" (verse 24). But God tempered the body together so that there should be no schism in the body (verse 25). What God tempers together intemperate men rend asunder. God regards all of the members as necessary. Factionalists recognize no one as necessary who will not subscribe to their unwritten creeds. Men may keep the unity of the Spirit and differ on many things, they may agree on many things and not keep the unity of the Spirit. The Spirit values men above things and regards a man as more important than his ideas. It is only those who regard things as more valuable than men who create division by such carnal standards of measurement. "These are the men who split communities, for they are led by human emotions and never by the Spirit of God" (Jude 19--J. B. Phillips).

     Brotherhood is not conditioned on agreement on classes, cups, colleges, and such like things. Men may disagree upon these and remain in the fellowship of the Spirit. No one in that fellowship is a joint participant in every idea, notion, interpretation or opinion of the others in it, unless he personally avows and espouses such a position. Even then it is not a part of fellowship. The tie that binds is not one of human reasoning or of conformity. It is the love that reaches out to engulf and enfold those who are different from ourselves because "God has set them in the body as it has pleased him."

     The man who would destroy the fellowship of the Spirit by teaching that to be in that fellowship is to endorse or sanction every thing that every other person in it says or does, reveals his ignorance of the koinonia of the Spirit. He is ensnared by his fallacy, enslaved by his own pettiness, and indicted by his own admission. His position is obnoxious to reason, offensive to the fraternal heart, and obsessed with pride. Let us turn from such divisive teaching and "follow after the things which make for peace and things wherewith one may edify another."