The Common Life
W. Carl Ketcherside
[Page 8] |
There is no better example of what we mean than the current use of the word "fellowship" by members of "The Church of Christ." The Greek koinonia is a term of such grandeur that no single English word is adequate to express its varied aspects. The Holy Spirit selected the word which always involves the idea of sharing and employed it to designate our participation in the divine nature and in the redemptive society composed of the ransomed ones. In either case, whether in its divine or human relationship, this fellowship is the sharing of a common life made possible by the atoning sacrifice of Jesus Christ our Lord.
The very idea of this fellowship was the hidden purpose of God. "He has made known to us his hidden purpose namely, that the universe, all in heaven and on earth, might be brought into a unity in Christ" (Eph. 1:10). The apostle calls this "the secret of Christ" and identifies the secret as the fact that "through the Gospel the Gentiles are joint heirs with the Jews, part of the same body, sharers together in the promise made in Christ Jesus" (Eph. 3:6). Notice the words "joint heirs" and "sharers together." These are terms descriptive of fellowship and they are applicable to those who are "part of the same body."
What makes us "joint heirs?" Is it that we hold the same opinions or have the same views as to the implementation of the apostles' doctrine? Not at all! "The Spirit of God joins with our Spirit in testifying that we are God's children; and if children, then heirs. We are God's heirs and Christ's fellow-heirs, if we share his sufferings now in order to share his splendour hereafter" (Rom. 8:17). "If children, then heirs!" That which makes us a child of God makes us an heir. What is the condition upon which we continue as such? It is the sharing of a life. On this earth we share a life of suffering; in the hereafter we shall share a life of splendour In whatever state we are with him, here or hereafter, we share in his life. This is fellowship!
It is obvious that those who share the common life, who are in association with each other because of attachment unto him, will constantly seek to harmonize their opinions and interpretations. But such harmony is an ideal toward which those who are in the fellowship ardently strive. It is not fellowship and should never be confused with it. We share in the common life before we understand everything alike. We share in it though we shall never understand everything alike in our human imperfection. No apostle ever exhorted any congregation of brethren to achieve unity in order to be in the fellowship. Every such command was given to those in the fellowship and because they were in that state.
The family of God is like our physical family. We become sharers of the common life by coming into the family. That which brings us into the family brings us into the common life, makes us sharers of the family relationship. We enter that relationship by birth. Those of us who enter it do not have the same opinions about everything when we enter it nor is it necessary that we ever do in order to remain in it. The family relationship is not contingent upon that. Anyone who predicates fellowship upon unanimity of opinion or understanding lays the foundation for the dissolution of
[Page 9] |
If you want to see how much harmony is produced by basing fellowship upon conformity all you need to do is to examine the status of those who do so. You will find them splintered and rent, challenging and debating each other, refusing to recognize one another as brethren, and generally presenting a disgraceful spectacle to the religious world. If a philosophy is to be judged like a tree, by the fruit it bears, here is one which needs to be cut down, refused and rejected by all thoughtful persons. It breeds exclusiveness and arrogance, it confuses party allegiance with faithfulness to God, it confounds human tradition with divine truth. It makes absolutely impossible the harmony which it demands.
Our fellowship has both a divine and human aspect. On the divine side it is a mystical union and participation in the life of the Lord Jesus Christ through the gift of the Spirit. On the human side it is a fellowship of brethren whose mutual relations are transformed through the gift of the Spirit which they receive. This state is described as one in which "men have been once enlightened, when they have had a taste of the heavenly gift and a share in the Holy Spirit, when they have experienced the goodness of God's word and the spiritual energies of the age to come" (Heb. 6:4,5). The fellowship in the Holy Spirit is directly linked with the grace of Christ and love of God. "The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and fellowship in the Holy Spirit, be with you all" (2 Cor 13:14). Our relationship with the Godhood is established by grace through love and it is a divine fellowship.
Out of the common life in Christ and the sharing in the Spirit comes the urge for thinking and feeling alike. The shared life creates a mutual concern for unity. "If then our common life in Christ yields anything to stir the heart, any loving consolation, any sharing of the Spirit, any warmth of affection or compassion, fill up my cup of happiness by thinking and feeling alike, with the same love for one another, the same turn of mind, and a common care for unity" (Phil. 2:1, 2). The Holy Spirit is not bestowed on a factional basis. He is not a sectarian gift or possession. He will not be confined or restricted by the party walls which men erect about themselves. For that reason the fellowship in Christ Jesus transcends all partisan barriers and embraces and encompasses all of the children of God.
It is regrettable that God's sheep are still a scattered flock. It is saddening to think of the parties and sects which men have created. But wherever there is a sincere child of God, whether in this faction or that, the Spirit of God dwells in that child and he is in the fellowship because the Spirit is in him. And all such Spirit-filled persons are members of the one body. There is only one church now, there never was but one, there never can be but one. It is the ekklesia of God composed of the "called out" saints. Whoever has heard the call and responded to it is a part of the ekklesia. No splinter, segment or section of our currently divided religious world represents the church of God in its fulness. The sheep have not all been gathered into one partisan corral. While our task is to "unite the Christians in all the sects" it is not to bring them into the fellowship. They are already in it. The fellowship is a divine creation like the ekklesia, indeed it is the ekklesia. It is the fellowship of the called out ones, the saints! It is precisely because they are already in the fellowship that we should seek to bring about a united witness so the members of the one body may be able to function harmoniously that the world may believe that God has sent Jesus!
William Temple said on August 3, 1937, "The church is not an association of men, each of whom has chosen Christ as his Lord; it is a fellowship of men, each of whom Christ has united with himself." This eminent theologian saw
[Page 10] |
We have been deluded and deceived by the Arch-foe into equating that divine state called fellowship with our petty arguments over cups, classes, colleges, fermented wine, orphan homes, music, and a score of other things. In a world where men are distraught, disturbed and dying, where the fiery maw of hell is being furnished fuel by the death of untold, unsaved millions, we have taken the time to turn the sword of the Spirit against God's children and slash and shiver them to bits over how to break the bread or pass the emblems. While the gray wolves of atheistic communism surround the camp of the saints with their slavering jaws dripping in readiness for the crunching kill, we are indulging in the reckless folly of fratricidal strife. The wolves are united and the sheep are at the throats of one another. Is there more power for unity in a godless ideology than in the crimson tide which streamed down the side of Jesus?
What have we contributed to the world by our philosophy of unity by separation and fusion by fission? Have we restored the church of God? Does someone answer that we have established "The Church of Christ"? We have done more than that. In the United States we have created more than two dozen "Churches of Christ" each of which is the loyal church in the eyes of its partisan adherents who will not even recognize the members of the others. Have you ever watched or listened to a preacher as he was forced to admit reluctantly that one in another faction "may be a brother in error"? Have you noticed how much more emphasis is placed on "error" than on "brother"? While we are separated, segregated, strife-torn, and self-willed, we are all "brothers in error" and those who say they are not make the biggest error of all!
Where was "The Church of Christ" when Thomas Campbell wrote and read his "Declaration and Address" in 1809? There was not a congregation of people on the face of the earth who worshipped under that title. Had the church of Christ become extinct? Was Jesus a king without a subject, a shepherd without a sheep, or a head without a body? To what did the faithful martyrs belong who died during "The Dark Ages" and who are clothed in white raiment, having palm branches in their hands? They were not members of a "local Church of Christ" for there was no such thing known among them. Is it possible that a man can be a member of the one body without holding "membership" in a "Church of Christ"?
When did the Restoration movement become "the Lord's church"? On what date did the last Christian in the sectarian world desert his sect to become a member of "the faithful church"? In what year was the last wandering sheep gathered in? When did God's people at last become identified with one American movement or party, so that henceforth all others were sectarians and there were no sectarians left in "The Church of Christ"? When did baptism into Christ become the exclusive right of the party adopting the name "The Church of Christ" and to whom did this sacred rite belong prior to this time so that someone could administer it to one who replanted "The Church of Christ?" Or, should we ask, when was it transferred from the ekklesia of God, catholic and universal, to become the sole possession of an indigenous American party which grew out of a nineteenth century restoration attempt?
It will not be necessary for you to warn me of the consequences of asking such questions. I know what partisan hate and animosity can do. But these things must
[Page 11] |
"The Church of Christ" today occupies the same relationship to the church of God as did the "Christ party" in Corinth (1 Cor. 11:12). While others were saying, "I am of Paul" or "I am of Apollos" or "I follow Cephas," a member of this party would say, "I am Christ's." But he did it for the same reason that the others said they belonged to various men, to draw a line of demarkation between his party and others in the church of God. Perhaps it was to this arrogant group who sought to make Jesus a party chieftain that the apostle addresses his first question, "Is Christ divided?" It certainly must have been to this faction he wrote, "Look facts in the face. Someone is convinced, is he, that he belongs to Christ? Let him think again, and reflect that we belong to Christ as much as he does" (2 Cor. 10:7). Perhaps this could well be said to many of us by thousands of God's dear children in the world today.
Fellowship in Christ Jesus is not joint participation in the Lord's Supper conditioned on either leavened or unleavened bread, fermented or unfermented wine, one container or individual cups, with the bread broken before distribution or broken in turn by each one to whom it is passed. Fellowship in Christ Jesus is not joint participation in Bible study, either in classes or one group, with or without uninspired literature. Fellowship in Christ Jesus is not joint participation in this or that program of preaching or charitable work. It is not joint participation in the song service with or without instrumental accompaniment. All of these things have created problems among those who are in the fellowship and they have been approached and resolved in various and divergent ways. All of them, in view of the orthodox philosophy of maintaining purity of doctrine by separating from brethren, have been allowed to become divisive. This is a shameful tragedy in our history.
But fellowship is infinitely greater and more wonderful than all of these. It is sharing in a life, in the divine nature. It is joint participation in the Holy Spirit the gift of God to all of his children. We must not conclude that the Holy Spirit enters us only when we recognize and confess error and leaves us when we make a mistake. The Holy Spirit is our assurance of life and our Father in heaven no more kills his children when they make a mistake than I would kill one of my children for the same reason.
The indwelling Spirit is not an indication that one is free from error or he would dwell in none of us. The Spirit is a testimonial to the fact that we are sons of God. "The Spirit bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God." We may grieve the Spirit and often do; we may quench the spirit and no doubt we do so, but the Spirit does not leave us when grieved any more than a father deserts his children when they aggravate him.
Let us grant that brethren are wrong in their reasoning when they adopt individual cups, Bible classes, uninspired literature, instrumental music, etc., still these do not destroy the fellowship for it is not based upon any of them, nor upon all of them put together. Those who adopt them are still brethren if they were before. Fellowship is not something we can extend or withdraw. It is a divine relationship which God has created. It is brotherhood! A mistaken idea at this juncture causes many to plaintively ask, "How can I be in the fellowship with someone who uses instrumental music in the worship?" They
[Page 12] |
Like the apostle I shall use a human example. There were six children in my father's family. Suppose that two of them played cards for recreation and I was opposed to the practice. Would my recognition of them as my brothers mean that I jointly participated in their card game? No one would be so foolish as to say it did. Would our honest difference over this form of activity negate the family relationship? Would I be unable to cooperate with them in anything at all seeing that I could not do so in this one particular? Would I be unable to jointly participate with them in painting the house on Tuesday seeing that I could not jointly participate with them in their game on Monday? The fact is we did not become brothers because we played cards or did not, but because we had the same parents. We were sharers in the family life although we could not in good conscience all jointly participate in the same activities. The fellowship in Christ is the sharing in a life and not in an opinion or interpretation!
We need to mature in our thinking and exhibit that moral and spiritual stature which will enable us to see and speak of fellowship in its true and majestic magnitude. Let us cease to equate it with endorsement or subservient conformity and recognize it for what it is--the mutual sharing in the life of our Lord through the gift of grace. As for me, I regard every sincere baptized believer in the Lord Jesus as in the fellowship. While distressed by the differences which plague us and the divisions which beset us, I shall allow none of these to dissolve the divine relationship. I could not do so if I would for it is not in my power to do so. Jesus is greater than the church and the church is greater than any faction or sect. It is greater than all of them together. It is the redemptive society composed of all of the redeemed. It is the fellowship of the holy ones, the brotherhood of the saved.